walruskid1
54 Cal.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2005
- Messages
- 1,891
- Reaction score
- 8
and man enough to admit it. hats off to you runner. :hatsoff:So I am guilty of being wrong
and man enough to admit it. hats off to you runner. :hatsoff:So I am guilty of being wrong
Zonie said:Ken: Welcome to the forum.
You say. "...So far, I've not authenticated a single example of a Kendall rifle that has a serial number the predates 1837..." which is interesting.
It does bring up the question, have you seen any authenticated documentation of percussion underhammers which were made and sold by a gunsmith prior to that date?
zonie
Dear Glenn:
>
> Thank you for your inquiry to the National Firearms Museum.
>
> Yes, we do have a serialed N. Kendall underhammer rifle in the
> NFM collection - serial #44. Probably the best show to run into these guns
> would be the Maryland Arms Collectors Show coming up in mid-March. At a
> past show, I believe part of Hershel Logan's collection was being offered
> for sale through a collector and you might be able to track this collection
> or parts of it if you were to attend this next year's show.
>
> We have no details on any Texas sales of underhammers.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Doug Wicklund
> Senior Curator
> National Firearms Museum
Dear Glenn,
Serial number 44 would place its manufacture in the year 1836 or
1837. Without a month and day for the filing of Smith's Patent, I
can't be certain as to the exact date. I've not found any surviving
specifics for Smith's patent for an improved stud lock -- probably
because of the patent office fire and the resulting loss of tens of
thousands of documents and models. It appears that Smith never
bothered filing after the fire (many inventors didn't). Since Smith's
personal rifle is marked as serial number 1, all serial number can be
assummed to follow sequentially from late 1836 or early 1837.
Could you please provide me with some additional information
about your rifle for my files? Thank you. Ken
Enter your email address to join: