doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Huh? H&R A&D, belgian proor marks??

ed good
Sidelock
*
E
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 10,158
Likes: 12nh mostly
"also, read recently that Schaefer, who among others, was licensed by Westley Richards to make A&D actioned guns...

See "Birth Of The Boxlock Shotgun", by John Campbell...?""

Ed, I think you are wrong about Schaefer and others "licensed by Westley Richards to make A and D actioned guns" in the U.S. Richards did supply guns at least started in their British plant, to various U.S. concerns, but H and R had the sole License to make the A and D guns in the U.S. Did you read your info somewhere ? If so, where did you do your "research"? I am pretty sure John Campbell did not say what you have suggested.

info re multiple licensees is from Campbell's book..

h&r's exclusive license expired in 1885...

OK Ed, so you're saying that maybe Shaefer built this gun under license from A&D after 1885, but for some reason, he decided to top it off with a Harrington & Richardson buttplate?

If it wasn't for that little detail, I'd say perhaps your theory is a possibility. Something like the Lefever clones built on Lefever frames by J.A. Prechtel. But Prechtel didn't use buttplates with the Lefever logo. The guns he built had no Lefever markings. The frames had Prechtel's name. And he built more than one.
So it would bolster your thought if you could show multiple A&D actions with Scheafer's name.


Your idea about the origin of this gun is interesting, but very unlikely. The idea isn't nearly as irrational as Princess SKB's imaginary top lever cocking SxS hammergun. And there is no shame in selling a scarce H&R double that was rebarreled to 12 gauge. It's still interesting to examine and theorize how it came to be.

Don't have a dog in the fight except for historical accuracy. And in this respect Raimey is right:

"I believe the Patent Protection Period for Britain was 14 years in 1875;
U.S of A. was 17 years;
And Germany was 15 years, but commencing in 1877....."

The last Reilly A&D with a publicized PUN according to my chart is December 1888. The patent should have expired in 1889.

30782 - E.M. Reilly & Co., 16, New Oxford Street, London. 10 cal SxS rifle. U-L, hammer gun. pistol grip.
30791 - E.M. Reilly & Co., 16, New Oxford Street, London. .380 BPE. SxS rifle. Box lock. A&D boxlock pat use #????. (A&D Patent expired sep 1889)
30842 - E.M. Reilly & Co., (29” sleeved nitro barrels). 12 bore, SxS Shotgun, Top lever, BLE
30843 - E.M. Reilly & Co., 16, New Oxford Street, London. 12 bore, SxS Shotgun. U-L, hammer gun.
30846 - E.M. Reilly & Co., (address not mentioned. 450 BPE. SxS rifle. BLE. Steel barrels.
30875 - E.M. Reilly & Co., (28” sleeved nitro barrels by Scott). 12 bore, SxS Shotgun, BLE. A&D boxlock pat use 8953.

1889: 30941 - 31840. - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900
31111 - E.M. Reilly & Co., 277, Oxford street, London. ,410 bore, Shotgun single brl; T-L, Hammer gun; converted rook rifle. Octagonal barrel; (Original # x7330?}
31130 - E.M. Reilly & Co., Oxford Street, London. .380 rook rifle. Trantor patent; singleshot.
31253 - E.M. Reilly & Co., 277, Oxford street, London. 12 bore, SxS Shotgun; Top lever, S-L, non ejector
31300 - E.M. Reilly & Co., (address not mentioned). 16 bore SxS Shotgun. Push-forward U-L, Hammer gun.
31681?- E.M. Reilly & Co., (address not mentioned). 13 bore SxS Shotgun. Top lever, extractor, Hammer gun. Brum proofs.

1890: 31841 - 32650. - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810
. .++Jul 1890 - EM Reilly dies.
32xxx - E.M. Reilly & Co., (address not mentioned). 12 bore (chamber sleeved to 16) SxS Shotgun, top lever, hammer gun.
32286 - E.M. Reilly & Co. (address not mentioned). 12 Bore SxS Shotgun. BLE. #1 of Pair
32287 - E.M. Reilly & Co. (address not mentioned). 12 Bore SxS Shotgun. BLE. #2 of Pair
32501 - E.M. Reilly & Co. (address not mentioned). .450 SxS BPE riffle. U-L, Hammer gu. Deeley forend

Yes, no shame, but, as ed is always reminding us “let the buyer beware”.

You did notice ‘ole ed has this beater priced at $2K, right Keith? I would suggest the heavy damage to the stock practically screams in your face the original barrels were destroyed and somebody made a valiant attempt to pick up the pieces, find a usable set of tubes, and try to put it back into service.

They got about half way.

Best,
Ted

so ted, have read campbell's book yet?

Actually Ted, I didn't look at the price or even read the ad copy. I took a quick look at the pics, and noted that it wasn't anything like the H&R A Grade I foolishly passed up back around 1992.

I saw the damage at the head of the stock, and the probable bolt repair through the stock cheeks, and the replacement barrels of course. I agree that $2000.00 is on the high side, even though these H&R doubles are very scarce in any condition. But Ed's price isn't nearly as outrageous as many guns I see on the internet. Here's one that caught my eye... a real overpriced roach:

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1133955257

It is advertised as a Lefever D Grade, but is clearly stamped "E" on the water table. I messaged the seller to inform him it isn't a D Grade, but the listing has not changed. The forend is missing. It is heavily pitted externally. We don't know about the bores because the seller says he can't find a rod to run a patch through the bores. Light won't even pass through the left tube. And the buttstock is badly damaged and filthy. The stock is a fine example of how lead shot oxidizes and swells up when used to add weight to a buttstock. It keeps getting relisted at $1279.95 (plus $75 shipping) without so much as a nibble. I'd say it might be worth a gamble of $150.00 max as a parts gun.

Then there is the guy who recently dumped on Lloyd3's For Sale ad for his L.C. Smith here. He took it upon himself to give his own appraisal of value, which was much lower than Lloyd's asking price. Lloyd had factored his original purchase price, along with the costs he incurred having the gun serviced by a gunsmith, into his asking price. I confronted that guy about ruining and intruding into Lloyd's attempt to sell his gun, and I also noted that the same guy has several rather overpriced doubles lingering on Gunbroker. He defended himself saying he felt his own crazy high prices were realistic. But those same guns have been relisted without any bidding activity many times since, and he has not lowered his reserve prices a nickel. There are many other sellers who list their guns at full blown retail or higher, and there are also buyers who will foolishly pay sticker price for overpriced guns. I notice that Ed will negotiate, and he does seem to pay Dave when one of his guns is sold to someone who saw it here.

Having gone back to the Guns Int'l. ad for this H&R makes me even more convinced that Schaefer didn't build it, and probably only made a spare or replacement set of barrels for it. Actually Ed himself makes that case when he notes that this gun has a low serial number of 25 (along with that nice old H&R buttplate), and therefore was likely built in 1882. But then he notes that H&R held the U.S. license to build this A&D gun until 1885. So if it was built in 1882, then Schaefer could not have built it unless he was violating and infringing upon H&R's licensing rights... and also using H&R buttplates! Possible, but very unlikely. I guess I don't need to read Campbell's book after all.

I know how this will make Ed feel. I have a .300 Weatherby Mag. barreled action built on a commercial Mauser action that came from the estate of a gunsmith who died in 1963. The gunsmith's son told me it came from the early 1950's, a time when Roy Weatherby was in Southgate, Calif., and would barrel any action he felt was strong enough for his high intensity cartridges, including these Interarms Mausers. The barrel caliber stamp is in the correct Weatherby script, not simple block letters and numbers. I'm almost certain it is an original Southgate Weatherby, but I don't know how to prove that. If I could, it would almost certainly add to the value. But at this juncture, all I have is circumstantial evidence and wishful thinking.

note that in addition to being a gun maker and skilled gunsmith, Schaefer was also sales agent for h&r an others, including Charles daly, who was also associated with Francotte and linder...

anybody else besides me, raimey an Campbell, getting the European licensee connection yet...

once h&r's exclusive license expired, then the American market was open to other licensees located in europe and America...

lots of buying, selling an trading goin on once h&r was out of the picture...

Ed, you need to read your own description before sticking to the idea that this gun was built by Schaefer. Once again, you said it had a low serial number of 25 which would make it built around 1882... three years before H&R's license expired. The dates aren't adding up to support the notion that Schaefer built this gun. You'll also need some evidence that Schaefer used H&R buttplates on guns he built, which is rather unlikely even if he was a sales agent for H&R.

If I was you, and this gun is a consignment, I'd contact the owner to check on the possibility that the original 10 ga. H&R barrels are still in existence. Then you'd have a complete H&R 10 gauge with a spare set of sub-gauge barrels.

It could be worse... From Argo44's post, you could get the idea that the European licensee connection indicates it was built by Reilly and his 300 or so imaginary gunmakers, using a Schaefer sourced rib, Belgian tubes, and an H&R buttplate. We all love wild speculation and conjecture here! Good luck with your sale.

>>Comme ci, comme ça<<, that's Life... The platform is a snapshot in time, of the Life & Times of William R. Schäfer. If the platform is post 1883, the top rib should read >>& Son<<. Not sure exactly how much heavy lifting & Son did but William R Schäfer was riding the last wave, a bit past production & doing repairs, ect. & probably fine tuning Ballard rifles¿ So some Waterfowl Hunter came to him & had gotten mud in the end of his 10/12 Bore and it resembled that of those on Looney Toons Cartons, whatever & he or his heirs & assigns wanted a new tubeset. William R Schäfer probably said 10s are on their way out & 12s are the new fad. Then Schäfer either ordered a Belgian tube set or pull one from his stock. Barrel sourcing rode piggyback on Nail sourcing lines. @ one time, Nails were a very expensive product & developed stout sourcing lines to the areas that had ore, water transport & streams for hydrologic power. Actually early on when weapons mechanics couldn't build locks to a desired quality, the mechanics would task the Nail makers. Brits sourced Styria, Austria for high quality metals and the phrase >>Lymbrickes Stuff<<, which was a bastardization of Leoben-Bruck, referring to quality goods being sourced. Anyway, I digress into the minutiae of history, which is for another thread & another day.

I wouldn't consider the wares of Schaefer above those of Josef Jakob, but he was not slouch either.


Hochachtungsvoll,
Raimey
rse