doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com My first double - 16g Lefaucheux pinfire!

two dates on that shotgun 1846 on the breech, 1844 on the barrels, all together signed by Casimir Lefaucheux.

On the barrels LB in an oval, for L�opold Bernard, page 66 in the book of Casimir by Gerard Lautissier

Just for the sake of sanity and somehow arrived at impressions about Parisian gun makers in this era, are there any Parisian proof marks? Y a t'il des poin�ons d'�preuve Parisian?

Alright. I was able to get the barrel off and found 2 more marks!



16.8



EL? Liege proof?

Lovely case indeed. Belgian proofmarks.

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

Ahhh Belgian proofs...no Paris proof house mark. So the sickness goes back that far? Time to post the translation of that 1878 Didier-Drevet letter to the Haut Loire newspaper again. Here was my (poor) translation of the relevant parts of M. Didier-Drevet's letter:

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=484199&page=3

Exposition Belgian: I have not analyzed the exposition of M. Leopold Bernard. This house is known throughout the world and It�s necessary to agree that it is successfully supporting its old reputation. However, when one compares this work with that of St-Etienne, one quickly recognizes that the gap is of little importance; that in reality the contrast which exists between the two expositions is more about the abundance of products and the richness of the display than in the superiority of execution. The only thing missing from our body of barrel work, which would equal that of Paris, is some additional installations; of better rolling mills, better made and more appropriate to the work of the barrel making, ovens to braze and polishers. Our methods of production are far too primative and our products suffer from the lack of means; but it is not a question of organization which might be solve this, and allow us to be able to deliver our production across the board.

For everything which touches the area of the barrel making, our infrastructure possesses all the elements; our forges, our dressers without boasting one can say have little comparison in the whole world.

Without wanting to diminish the merits of the house of Leopold Bernard, one must recognize that he is operating at an advantage because of his location.

For a long time his manufactures were encourgesd and supported by the Parisian gunmakers, who needed to have a prestigious barrel from Paris in order to have the rest of the gun which was made abroad accepted.

It�s true that the beautiful movement of egos was close to being extinguished because most of the long guns which I was given to look at in the display cases of the Parisian exposition were mounted with Belgian barrels and even barrels that were decidedly mediocre.

I examed in detail two of the display cases. I will abstain from citing the name of the two exhibiters, but I picked up ours and the brand names of the barrels and I could, if necessary, justify what i�m going to say in advance.

In spite of the long guns which were in the two display cases, I only found one barrel legally proof-marked and it was from Liege.

All the others were without a brand name, and of such of those I figure that six of the barrels were Belgian made.

It�s true to say that there is not a proof house in Paris. The government has not judged it necessary to establish one because there is not a single maker of barrels in Paris. It is this state of affairs which facilitates fraud and which I brought to the attention of the Paris Exposition. One can bring in barrels from Liege which have not been proofed; One can decorate them with a proper mark/name and one can then babtise them as Paris barrels. I know very well that M. Leopold Bernard, who is careful about his reputation and who, decidedly sells very expensive products, but without submitting his barrels to a serious proof test.

But as for the gun makers who buy these barrels without a proof mark abroad why would they do it differently?

In any case it�s not legal neither for one method or another. There cannot be two laws in France, one for Paris, the other for St-Etienne.

Here is the decree of 22 April 1868 applied to us.

The decree says:

�The barrel makers, merchants and workers cannot sell any barrel without it having been proofed and stamped by the accepted proof mark, a fine of 330 fr for the first time and a penalty of double that for each case after and the confiscation of the barrels which are put on sale."

The terms of the law are clear. How then can one allow to be spread out in the middle of the Exposition products which would be seized if they were in our city, at the frontier as always, by agents richly rewarded to make the law respected?

The jury of the Exposition could recompense, with their eyes closed, the gun-makers of Paris and shower gold medals on these barrels breaking the proof house decree. But the government cannot have two weights and two measures.

It is not admissible that the Stephanoise barrel makers are stringent in their proofing when their competition can spare the allowance and the risks that they bring.

It is sufficient to signal this state of affairs to the Government so that the law will apply everywhere. And in closing I recall, in conclusion, that the Americans and the English do not have special expositions for barrel makers, that the Belgians don�t produce anything but mediocre products and that Paris and Saint-Etienne alone are left standing

.....Our production of die cast tooling involves every facet of barrel production and in the near future, will surely be top ranked.

.....I have the honor, sir editor, to be your devoted constituent.

Didier Drevet
Master barrel maker, member of the com-
mission for oversight of the proof-
house of Saint-Etienne.

l�gionnaire �tranger fran�ais Argo44, it really wasn't really a sickness but a teat from which they just could not be weaned. An addiction or a vice, if you will, that they couldn't shake. Why reinvent the wheel when the Liege mechanics could roll out an upper rung offering one day & a price-point the next?

Cheers,

Raimey
rse

Ah mon cher Raimey......C'est dommage...Waterloo... The problem would have been solved.

Excuse, J'ai oublie: Roulez la Mar�e

Too bad indeed: Able was I ere I saw Elba(palindrome).


Cheers,

Raimey
rse

Yes Li�ge made barrels, so what .....we can't remake history.
The belgium barrel makers had a good reputation....

End of the controversy and get back to basics: when was this rifle made?
______________________________________________________

The EL enterlaced was in use from Juin 1853 until today ... and is a exportation stamp.
Casimir Lefaucheux died on the 9th of august 1852.
so he did not physically work on this weapon....
These barrels where not approuved in Li�ge and only made for exportation, because the ELG marking doesn't apprears, neither the inspector stamp...
So my conclusion is: shotgun assembled in the workshops of Lefaucheux at 37 Rue Vivienne with belgium FASSIN made barrels, after June 1853 but before the 29th of November 1865.
JLR is probably the black-smith, working for Fassin who fashioned the barrels

Interesting deduction. Have you knowledge of the mechanic Fassin? I'm not sold on the JLR. Either a poor stamping effort or possibly JLF??

Cheers,

Raimey
rse