Wilkinson P1907 - Double Seamed?

I have in my possession a 1918 Wilkinson Pattern 1907 bayonet that has seen service in Australia, as evidenced by the Aussie ownership marks. What makes this one a relative oddity is that it comes with a double-seamed scabbard; the seller told me this is a fairly rare detail. Nonetheless, I got it for under $100. :)

This intrigues me, however, as I have seldom seen any double-seamed scabbards at all. From what I do know, the Aussies manufactured them; more-so than anyone else. My guess is that the scabbard was made by Lithgow, as it has their signature star marking. That would also indicate that the bayonet was given some kind of refurbishment, with the original scabbard being discarded in the process. (the patina pretty well matches up)

But is there any chance that the scabbard was made by Wilkinson? Unlikely, but still plausible. I'd also like to know any other interesting information regarding this, since I haven't successfully discovered much. (when were they made? how many? etc)

Australia made them up until 1920 the Uk for a much shorter period. I have one that has been reworked for Korea and the chape and locket are both phosphorised. I have never seen numbers quoted as to how many were made, but woudl assume that many of the UK ones were scrapped as they went back into the armories for refurb. my stie at BAyonet Collection Presentation has a page dedicated to the 1907 and includes pictures of mine

An immediate pre 2nd war/start of war Armourers instructional loose leaf booklet at the Small Arms School says that these 2-piece scabbards are a re-introduced and acceptable wartime expedient, used to make use of otherwise valuable resources and should be......... blah blah blah as on these things seem to go on and on

I can only presume that 'wartime expedient' means the LAST (1st) war expedient that allowed the scabbard contractors to use up the narrower left-over slices of leather to make the scabbard out of two narrow pieces instead of one wide piece. That would make sense of course, but the labour cost in 2 lots of stitching would surely outweigh that - no? Additionally, if they were a wartime relaxation, why were they still making them into the 20's. Perhaps the relaxation in standards order wasn't rescinded so production carries on

Yes th edouble stitching would take time but a larger amount of a hide could be used adn the waste from other equipment cutting could provide other pieces, utilizing more to the hide, so not a cost saver but a material saver. The Brits possibly didnt find it as effective due to the labour intensive process of the new cutting etc, while the Australians may have foudn it better to be able to utilize a smaller amount of pelts, after all they never went to Kangaroo hide as far as I know. Local markets and supply makes for a diffference.

Indeed an Australian made double-stitched model. To my knowledge these were only made at Lithgow in 1920 due to a shortage of leather hides. I note from your photos that in addition to the Lithgow proof mark on the locket, the leather is stamped along the seam. The stamping is usually Lithgow followed by the "A in Star" proof followed by the date. I would be interested if you can read the date and particularly if it is not 1920. Difference between the Australian and British scabbards centre around the frog stud with Australia only using the small round stud and for that year only using a straight top chape. British chapes that I have seen downunder are curved/rounded.

Need to check my chapes as I know I have both types but had not related them to country of origin.

Need to change my previous comment. Australian double stitched scabbards were also made in 1921. How do I know that, one just arrived on a Lithgow 1915 hook quillion bayonet.