doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com So how's my analysis? J Braddell & Son 12 boxlock

The A. Blair is a non-ejector gun.

The Braddell is a non-ejector and the Bentley & Playfair is also non-ejector.

Providing there are no further proof marks since the pre 1887
not for ball then your gun remains in proof.Marked as 12b/14 means it could have been up to .740" at time of Proof. 1954 General Rules of Proof state:-
#7 ( Barrels enlarged in the bore) unproved if 9"/diameter....."is .010 or more of an inch greater than the nominal diameter marked on the occasion of the last proof or re-proof."

Thus .740 t0 .749 in proof, .750" out of proof (only if latest proof is 1887)
Hope this helps, I'm still betting on WR as action manufacturer

Thanks, Hugh!

Hugh, I'm taken aback by your statement. If a 12 bore was proved before 1887 and "marked on the occasion" as 12 then it will be out of proof when it measures .741. I believe the operative word is marked. If the gun measured .739 at the pre 1887 proof it would not have the .010 to go because it was marked 12.
Please show me where I'm wrong.

Justin, that was the crux of my initial question. But look at it this way: There were no fractional bore sizes prior to 1887. 12 was .729; 11 was .751. Thus, a gun that measured .740 from the factory would have been marked 12; couldn't have been marked anything else. And it would have been in proof. IF there had been a later reproof, then it would have been marked 12/1 if it measured from .740-.750.

I'm not sure here. I think that would apply until the proof laws were changed. The 1954 law that Hugh quotes puts the gun out of proof when the bore diameter passes .010" from the designated size which is .729. If this were 1880 Paddy's gun would be in proof. If Paddy wants to sell this gun now as in proof it must be reproved.