S&W US Army Model 1917 British Proofed

[1780inn]

Here for your perusal is Smith & Wesson .45ACP US Army model of 1917 serial number 132134 with British Birmingham proofs on cylinder, frame and barrel. I recall reading/seeing information that some 20000 of these S&W 1917s were sent to the UK in 1940; perhaps this is one of them.

 

[1780inn]

A few more photos:

 

[1780inn]

One more to show serial number etc:

 

[Wiregrassguy]

That 1917 was made in November 1918. Could have been a private purchase as I see no broad arrow or viewer's marks. Or had the UK moved on from that in 1940?

 

[Absalom]

Revolvers that the British bought in a regular fashion through the British Purchasing Commission went to RSAF Enfield for unpacking and acceptance, and got the well-known stack of stampings on the left back frame and the crossed-pennant proof until fall 1941, when revolver shipments moved under Lend-lease.

But I do not know whether the batch of M1917s that were dispatched to Britain as a stopgap emergency help received that standard treatment. This one almost certainly belongs in that batch, and I can‘t detect any markings either.

PS: A quick forum search produced a few others with pictures, British post-war proofed but not acceptance-stamped, presumed from the same batch, so that confirms it.

20,100 guns in July 1940, straight from Army depots.

 

[PALADIN85020]

i have what was evidently a lend-lease Model 1917 with British proofs on the cylinder.

John

 

[1780inn]

Thanks for the useful info; I'll send for the S&W letter to confirm shipment details.

 

[Muley Gil]

Thanks for the useful info; I'll send for the S&W letter to confirm shipment details.

The letter will only confirm the first shipment from S&W to the US Government in 1918. It won't have any info on the 1940 shipment.

 

[Absalom]

Not to appear picky, but the July 1940 shipment was not Lend-lease.

The Act was not passed until March 1941, revolvers were not included until late fall of that year.

 

[Buford57]

Not to appear picky, but the July 1940 shipment was not Lend-lease.

The Act was not passed until March 1941, revolvers were not included until late fall of that year.

I never noticed that before. Do you know how they got around the Neutrality Act?

 

[Absalom]

I never noticed that before. Do you know how they got around the Neutrality Act?

I don’t know the details, but I would think it was somehow slipped through under the cash-and-carry legislation which from 1939 had allowed FDR to bypass the Neutrality Act when it came to supplying Britain.

 

[Muley Gil]

Not to appear picky, but the July 1940 shipment was not Lend-lease.

The Act was not passed until March 1941, revolvers were not included until late fall of that year.

Picky, picky, picky!

I changed my post.

 

[StrawHat]

I have posted about the Model 1917 previously but here it is again. A Model 1917, built in 1918 that made it’s way to England at some point and acquired the appropriate stamps and such.

Kevin

 

[Mk VII]

The one I bought had no proof markings at all, and I had to point this out to the vendor, who had to get it proved and stamped.

 

[1780inn]

Can any identify this British proof mark on the side plate by the screw? Under a magnifying glass looks like a tine broad arrow at 1 o'clock.

 

[ddixie884]

I'm proud that a bunch of these made it to Britain after Dunkirk and the loss of so many arms. I'm glad that Britain was strong enough to survive WWII. I'm glad they let a few of the arms we sent them escape to make it back to the USA. I'm very disappointed that the brit government destroyed the countless arms so kindly sent because they didn't trust their own people with personal arms.............

 

[Mk VII]

Not clear enough to tell. Might be a London proof mark.

 

[Heinz]

The Neutrality Act may be a clue to the lack of British proofs on these guns. They may have been treated as a civilian purchase of surplus pistols?

 

[Absalom]

The Neutrality Act may be a clue to the lack of British proofs on these guns. They may have been treated as a civilian purchase of surplus pistols?

That is an interesting thought. However, there’s something that would suggest that this wasn‘t a worry at this point:

When these were sent in July 1940, S&W was already producing .38 S&W-chambered M&P‘s for the South African military, a belligerent along with Britain, and the South Africans did property-stamp those revolvers. Legally, the 1917s would not have been different.

 

[Mk VII]

There's no requirement to prove them commercially when they go to the government.