Some info I received from the SXS Charles Daly, that it's an HA Lindner, built sometime around 1891-1892? The marking show this may be correct...
Any help would be greatly appreciated, as well what this piece may be worth...There is a small insert missing out of the top portion of the fore end...Inside the barrels are shiney and no damage at all...

Anything on the standing breech? How 'bout an image of the characters between the ejector rod well & the forend hanger?

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

I have a couple of more photos below...I will post more photos over the weekend...This is all I have a the moment.

"JTZ06," congratulations on your ownership of this Prussian Charles Daly gun. I would posit your gun is post-1892 based on the fact that (1) the action's water-table is stamped with the country of origin, i.e. "Prussia," in accordance to the requirement for imported products with the enactment of the 1890 McKinley Tariff Act that came in to provisional effect in the summer of 1891, together with (2) the German proof marks of 1891, and (3) the use of "HAL" [i.e. Heinrich August Lindner] over crossed pistols that replaced the earlier crown over crossed pistols that was Lindner's previous trademark stamp [The German government purloined the crown for its own use as a proof stamp.], and (4) the use of the Scott [square in cross-section although rectangular in overall shape] improved cross-bolt introduced in 1892 and later adapted for use by H. A. Lindner, which is that shown incorporated in this gun.

After the introduction of new gun proof laws and associated regulations, the German authorities wisely allowed some months for an adjustment period, in order for its domestic gunmakers to gradually come in to compliance. As well, the Scott cross-bolt was just 'introduced' in 1892 and likely took time to become known to and accepted by European gunmakers, and to be adapted for their respective uses. None of this occurred overnight, or even over the immediately ensuing months.

We do not espy an inverted Anson & Deeley brevette or patent / use number stamp on the breech face, which basic British patent for the boxlock action expired worldwide in 1889. We also see telltale ejector 'eyes' staring from the forearm. I believe the Charles Daly ejector gun was first introduced as a separate model in 1888. From informative discussions earlier read here, I believe that damascus barrels were not offered in the Charles Daly model line in the Schoverling, Daly & Gales catalogues after the mid- to late 1890's. These indicia and associated dates provide a sort of floor for the foregoing and as such help support our posited post-1892 date.

As to value, the missing horn-tip for the forearm and the resultant chip damage reduce the gun's value (and collector value) somewhat, although the condition of the rest of the gun as shown in the limited number of photographs suggest that it is in excellent condition otherwise. Unfortunately, I do not see a spectrum of revealing photographs of the wood, in order to better judge its quality and condition, and particularly have no views where wood and metal are met other than the scalloped action back. The fine damascus barrels look to be and are reportedly in very good condition.

Based solely on what I can discern from the limited photographs, owner reportage, and on recent personal experiences of buying Lindner / Daly guns in similar condition, I would put the subject gun's present market value at $4,000-4,500. If this gun were mine, by the way, I would have a replacement horn-tip fashioned and affixed, and the wood sensibly and sensitively refinished by a recognized professional. The damascus barrels would be next. These beautiful pattern-welded barrels should be re-'browned' black and white, exactly as they were finished originally. This is a first quality antique gun that is deserving of restoration and preservation.


Regards,

Edwardian

Thank you so much Edwardian for the great explanation and history of the gun...The stock is in great condition...I will post additional pics over the weekend...I will start the search for someone to restore this piece...
Regards, John

The initials look to be KS & yes it lies within the 2nd serialization set of H.A. Lindner. Georgi should be by shortly with a date guesstimate.

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

Neat gun. My estimate is that this Daly was produced circa-1895, maybe 1896.

I agree with the data points Edwardian and Raimey provided earlier in the thread. The 1891 German proof and 1892 country of origin stamp ("PRUSSIA") peg the bottom end of the range estimate (along with some stylistic/mechanical details such as the presence of ejectors, shape of the arcade on the action, etc.)

Two items that help peg the upper end of the range are the lack of sideclips and the damascus barrels. Sideclips show up in the higher grades by approximately 1902. Damascus barrels disappeared as a standard catalog offering about 1903, but were available as a special request.

Taken together, the serial number of your gun, along with some reasonable assumptions on yearly production figures, as well as sales information on specific guns during this period, gets us to the 1895/1896 production estimate.

BTW, mechanically speaking, your gun was produced during an interesting time for Daly/Lindner. My assumption is that the Scott rectangular crossbolt protrudes from the left fence when you open the gun. Correct? How about the barrels lugs - do they protrude through he bottom of the action?

I agree with Edwardian's value estimate. Get the horn forend tip corrected by a qualified smith. You might consider a refinish of the barrels at some point as the gorgeous pattern looks to be mostly worn and hidden. Otherwise, from what we can see the screws look good and a fair amount of case-coloring remaining. And it is a Lindner Daly which makes it cool :-).

Good luck,
Ken

Thanks so much for all the info to all of you...I appreciate the wealth of knowledge!...

Correct me if I am wrong, but if the gun was not manufactured for export, but rather domestic sale, would the word Prussia be required on the watertable?

"Austin," as I understand your question, it asks if a foreign maker manufacturing or finishing a gun solely intended for its domestic market would be required to stamp the domestic gun with the name of the country of origin, in accordance with the 1890 McKinley Tariff Act requiring the stamping of the country of origin on imported products coming into the United States from abroad. If that is your question, then the answer is "no," should the product not have been imported into the United States.

However, if the original intention of the foreign maker was not to export his productions to the United States yet he did in fact do so, then, "yes," the country of origin stamp would have needed to be applied in compliance with the legal requirements of the day for lawful importation. It depends on what eventuates and necessitates the setting aside of initial intentions as the basis for the determination.

With respect to the Lindner-produced or finished Prussian Charles Daly-branded gun, it was specifically intended for the American sportsman, as specified and marketed by New York importers Schoverling, Daly & Gales. In the second half of the 19th century, American tastes in a game or hunting gun were more British than Germanic or European. Thus Prussian-Daly guns are purposefully British in appearance, slender though weightier, and certainly the equal of competing British productions in terms of quality and perfection of design and execution. Exported guns meant for the United States were stamped to comply with the tariff laws and regulations in effect at the time.


Regards,

Edwardian

Thanks Edwardian,
The reason for the question is I have a gun whose maker is unknown. It does, however have " OTTO BOCK in BERLIN " inscribed in gold on the rib of the Bernard damascus barrels. As I understand it, Otto Bock was a supplier/outfitter rather than a builder. There is no serial number on the barrels or frame, but there is one on the fore end iron. Can you, or anyone else here, explain the lack of serial numbers? Pictures of this gun have been posted on the PGCA website back in June, 2015.

"Austin," an educated guess for a lack of serial numbers might be explained by the supposition that (1) serial numbers were not required for guns by the lawful governing authority where they were built or assembled; (2) the private label name of the presumed 'maker' was not truly that of the manufacturer but a 'maker' that bought in the gun's constituent parts from another for later assemblage and wanted to mask this by using his own limited proprietary numbering system, which number series was intentionally placed obscurely; (3) complete masking was thought necessary and the actual manufacturer's numbers were removed altogether, as well as any other identifiers; (4) the gun did not use another person's / company's patented mechanism to build the gun, thus the 'maker' owed no custom to the patentee who might otherwise want to be apprised of how many of the 'maker's' products were made to the specifications of his patent, which absence of payment to a patent holder provided no practical or legal reason for the presence of serial-ed numbers; or (5) the 'maker,' for whatever individual or commercial reason, just did not want to have serial numbers stamped on his guns.

Respecting Mr. Bock, below are two links to earlier discussions (and associated photographs) here that are very informative and entertaining at one, and were engaged by some of the leading authorities on the instant subject, who thankfully visit and give their informed comments on this website, to wit:

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=159483&page=1

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=276756

Simply click on either of the above links or, in the alternative, cut-and-paste the links onto your browser line, press enter, and the linked pages should appear before you. Thank you for the interesting questions. Best of luck with your research! Researching the history of a gun and its era and / or its provenance can become a very pleasurable, educational and rewarding pastime or advocation, by the way.


Regards,

Edwardian