doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com W. Richards (Crescent?) SxS info?

Early T. Barker New York Crescent



American Gun Co. New York for Sears



Later conical balls. Hartford Fire Arms Co. for Simmons Hdw. and Shapleigh Hdw., St. Louis





Last conical balls. Vulcan Arms for Tryon

I found a picture of a gun which looks identical to my Birmingham proofed W Richards. This is an early gun prior to the chamber mark being placed. It only has the bore diameter at time of proof. Mine is stamped 14 & amazingly the one pictured was also. This would date it earlier than 1887 I believe. Mine has a left side opening lever. This was my Grandfather's gun & I truly wish it was in shootable condition even for black powder, but unfortunately is not. The pictured gun was stated to be a "Clabrough" built gun & was it seems imported by Folsom, though not built by either them or Crescent.

Prior to 1887 the "Tween" sizes were not used, bores were stamped only with whole numbers. The bores on mine currently are Just under a 13 gauge. If this is original size if a later gun it would have been marked as a 14/1 rather than just 14. The question arises was it originally a 14 gauge gun which was subsequently re-chambered to 12 or was it just built with undersize bores. I tend to think the later, but could be wrong. It does not have very heavy breeches, but this is not at all unusual for an early Black Powder gun.

Here's a top lever W. Richards, Birmingham

Drew;
If you open the Picture Trail from the link you posted, down the page a bit is a W Richards marked gun with left side lever which looks just like mine. Another picture shows the top rib marked Laminated Steel which mine also has, though it does appear to be plain twist. Then the picture with proof marks which looks to be the one you posted in this last posting.

Above the picture of the side lever W Richards is the following;

W. Richards
The 1886 catalog from John P. Moore's Sons in New York listed "Clabrough's Make" W. Richards.

Note that the proof marks shown predate 1887 which I believe is too early to have a Crescent connection, though it does seem to have been imported by Folsom. This appears to be the exact gun I have. I have no idea as to when my Grandfather acquired it. He had it as long as my Dad could remember, but he was not born until 1910. He later bought another W Richards gun but it has Belgian proof marks. Although neither was taken care of over the ensuing years it is obvious the Birmingham gun was originally of higher quality than the Belgian one.

While the bores on mine are heavily pitted they currently measure just under a 13 (.710"). I seriously doubt they have ever been honed. My Dad's older brother, a bachelor farmer, had possession of both these guns for many years & he simply did not take care of them. He used the Birmingham gun until the stock cracked & it became un-shootable then switched to the Belgian one. He was not a hunter or shooter as such, kept them for predator control on his farm. Which ever one he was using at the time was always loaded with "High Brass" #4's IE 3 3/4-1 1/4 loads. I tried to tell him these loads were simply too heavy for these old guns but I might as well have been "Dribbling" water on a duck's back for all the good it did.

He had the Belgian one out with him one day & saw a section of fence which needed mending so laid the gun on the ground. When he finished with the fence he forgot he had the gun & left it. When he did miss it he thought someone had come in his house & stolen it so it went undiscovered for about a year. Needless to say it was a total rust heap & ruined. I now have both the Birmingham gun as well as the rust pile of the other.

In my Uncles own words he was "As Independent as a Hog on Ice" & I will have to say he did a very good job of describing himself, but I loved him anyway, in spite of his faults. When he spoke of things in which he was truly interested, as Tractors, their equipment & use it paid to listen to him. Guns were simply a tool with him & not needed often so didn''t get much of his attention.

Thanks for posting Drew. That's the one, just like mine. I can only assume that the rib picture shown with "Laminated Steel" & the pic with the pre-1887 proof marks are for this same gun as they also are identical to my gun. My gun does not have the "Not For Ball" mark as it is Cylinder bored in both barrels.