SMLE found by an author researching the fighting and retreat to Dunkirk

Here are a selection of self explanatory photos of a SMLE found very recently by an author researching the fighting and retreat to Dunkirk. The rifle was found on a farm, jammed into the now rotten wall frame of a large pockmarked or riddled barn, about 8 miles from the town. He had free access to the farms in the area and having a French wife helped! Other items including rotten webbing found in the floor and floor of the hay loft indicate that the place was occupied and abandoned by Royal Engineers and RASC (Service Corps) troops.

NO names - no pack drill, but the down side was that he brought the rifle back in all innocence believing that as it was rusty, woodwormed and with a bore that is barely see-through, it was nothing more than a harmless souvenir. Alas, this isn't how the Police here see things so it was given to us at Warminster after being documented. Incidentally, some of the webbing bears an identifiable soldiers service number (from the RAOC).


The UP side is that a quick glance shows that the is a Mk1 type SMLE without the bridge charger and closed eared nosecap. The bolt and magazine have been removed and hidden presumably within throwing distance!

That's all I know about it but is there any other documentary evidence that such an early Lee Enfield will have been used as late as 1940. Can anyone out there identify the exact mark of the rifle from the photos. No markings are visible and I'm loath to bead blast it to try to identify any marks

You should have open a new post for your SMLE, the subject worth it. Unfortunately, it's hidden at the 4th page of the thread.
But what I noticed, is that finally this SMLE finally went back in England 72 years after the events:clap:

Could it be that Engineers and RASC troops had second line rifles instead of the first line Mk.III and III*'s that would have been issued to Infantry and such in 1940? Just a thought.

I would be more inclined to think it was in Beligium since WWI or at least was out of the U.K. military system in the WWI time period for the following reasons:

1) It has the magazine cut-off, that was pulled for land service in what, 1915/1916? If it was in the British Army or RAF in 1939/1940, why would it have the cut-off still in place? That seems to imply to me it was lost relatively early in WWI

2) It has the lobbing sights. Now a lot of the SMLE rifles sold off in the US of A between 1958 and 1968 came out of the big British surplus sales and most of the SMLE MK III with 1914, 1915, and early 1916 dates seem to have been reworked, and so marked on the rear wood. All of these rifles have the lobbing sights removed that I have seen that also have the commercial proofs applied (i.e. they came out of British UK stocks and not from some other source such a Belgium, Portugal or Ireland). The rework mark I refer to is the Star and E on the underside of the buttstock.

3) I have never seen a picture of any British troops in the 1939/40 time frame equipped with SMLE MK I variants. Also I doubt that there were sufficient spares for these rifle in the system in 1940, as when the Irish requested parts to update their rifles in 1940/41, no MK I spares were supplied, at least according the limited documentation I have found relating to forends and safeties supplied to the Irish in late 1941/early 1942.

None of the above is in any way proof positive, but the alternative is that a SMLE MK I with WWI features (lobbing sites, magazine cut-off) was never put through the WWI/ post WWI rework but managed to remain in circa 1915 issue features, issued in WWII and lost. The number of 1914 and 1915 SMLE MK III rifles in the US of A that are in original shape is truly small, as in virtually unknown. 1916, 1917 and 1918 yes, but not the early dates. It makes a lot more sense that it left the British military system sometime in the WWI period.

So you ask why would it be placed in a barn around 1940? Well one of the first things the Germans did in 1940 was to publish a number of flyers that anyone found in the possession of arms would be shot. That part of Belgium was not occupied by the Germans in WWI; it was in the area where the British armies were stationed. A fellow that had found the arm around WWI might have thought it was prudent to stash it someplace other than his house once the Germans arrived.

Hi Peter,
What an incredible find. Looks a lot like my Mk 1***....has the curved-in front sight protector ears on the nosecap....the mag cut off, of course....and the rounded receiver wall....perhaps never had the charger bridge update.

I'm only telling you what the finder told me and as a well known author (and I'm reading one of his books as we speak.........)but I would imagine that Brian has hit the nail on the head. There's usually a simple explanation for these things.........

Amazing your police wouldn't let someone keep an artifact like that, Mr. Laidler. Come to think of it I have no idea what the law here in Canada would say about a gun in this state. Mr. Cypher- assuming you weren't going to slap the rifle in the old drill press and attempt to do the work to install the mounting pads for the H & H style mount (ie. assuming you hire a gunsmith), why not find an old shot out #4 Mk1 or Mk 2, have a new barrel installed, throw on a new stock, and have the body drilled for the pads/ mounts? You'll have restored a rifle that might have been headed for the scrap-yard and preserved your recently discovered good condition rifle. Just a thought generated by having attended a small gun show recently where clapped out Lee Enfields were in abundance (I snagged what appears to be an authentic Savage #4 Mk1*T).

Ridolpho

Well I checked Skennerton's reference book on British contacts from 1935 through 1945 and found the following:

1) Contract in 5 March 1942 for 372 SMLE MK I*** EY, recondition to Grenade launcher condition

2) Contract let to Parker Hale to make rear handguard and rear sight protector for SMLE MK1, no quantity or date listed

3) Contract let to Enfield to make (front) handguard for SMLE MKI***, SMLE MKII**, no quantity or date listed

4) 4 April 1940, contract let to Wilkinson Sword for 3000 scabbards for pattern 88 bayonet, which is also the pattern of scabbard used with the M1903 bayonet (which was used with the SMLE MKI)


So it would appear that the SMLE MKI was in some manner still seeing use in 1940~1942. That relic MK I SMLE rifle sure raises some interesting questions, which I doubt at this late date could be answered by any soldiers of the phony war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frederick303

1) It has the magazine cut-off, that was pulled for land service in what, 1915/1916? If it was in the British Army or RAF in 1939/1940, why would it have the cut-off still in place? That seems to imply to me it was lost relatively early in WWI.

---

The magazine cut-off was restored between the wars so there is no reason why it could not have been with RE or RASC soldiers in France in 1940. Thge volley sights are another matter of course.

Having said that, I go along with Brian here, soldiers like RASC rarely needed their personal weapon and so it makes sense to issue them older kit. That goes double if they were also TA.

Amazing.......... Who'd have thought that this would have attracted so much attention? If no-one mnds, I'll pass on this gen to the finder. I mentioned it in an earlier PM but at another nearby farm, the farmer (the son of the 1940 farmer) is still using the chassis of an old Bedford 3 ton lorry as a tractor trailer and also the WD1940 marked tow chains and hawsers.

Added later. I'll pass this thread on and ask him to comment on what everyones said. Regarding the use of old obsolescent kit reminds me of the move into Afghanistan with the later SA80A2 upgraded rifle. Lo and behold, within a month or so, some reservists and small units arrived with the original A1 rifles. But these things sort themselves out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ridolpho

Come to think of it I have no idea what the law here in Canada would say about a gun in this state

---

Ridolpho, I think it would still be considered a firearm even in its detoriated condition so as long as you had a PAL you could own it. Seeing as the Long Gun Registry is gone the hassle of trying to register it does not exist any longer so trying to find the serial number would no longer be required.

Can you imagine before the LGR ended trying to convince someone from the CFC youi can't find the serial number as the condition of the gun makes it impossible. I had enough trouble trying to register a Lee Enfield that according to the person at the registry should have had a letter prefix which it didn't.

I would love to have a gun like that, just think of the nights you could sit before your fireplace trying to imagine the stories it could tell if it could speak, or for that matter who carried it.

For those of us that enjoy history, it's endlessly interesting that items like that Sht. Mk.1 are still being found. It makes me want to get over there again so badly. My days with DRP and friends in France a few years ago were one of the highlights of my life!! My relatives fought there. My Great Grandfather was RCAMC during WW1 and two of my distant cousins in WWII. Both are still there. One at Dieppe and the other in Antwerp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beerhunter

The magazine cut-off was restored between the wars so there is no reason why it could not have been with RE or RASC soldiers in France in 1940. Thge volley sights are another matter of course.

Having said that, I go along with Brian here, soldiers like RASC rarely needed their personal weapon and so it makes sense to issue them older kit. That goes double if they were also TA.

---

There are pictures of mark III's with the front volley sights intact taken during the 1940-1943 period, so a few were still intact.

I've tried to stay out of this but here's two things. My father's tales of fighting in Italy give me reason to believe he carried a No1Mk3 in his time in battle. He joined the Canadian army in 1939 and fought until '45. I don't know if or when he was re-equipped as the troops in Italy supposedly were. He also went ashore in Normandy so...

With so many M1 rifles supposedly making it into theater with early features, why would it not be possible for this rifle to do the same? We talked here about M1s that were sent for rebuild from gas trap condition to gas port condition in what...1958??? How late is that? With two wars behind them. They had come from a N/G armoury. I know personally of Reserve units here in Canada holding outdated and un-modified equipment for ages after rebuild time. I just think it's neat that it finally came to light.

I'm just curious what Peter found out about the name in the marked equipment...I'm sure he researched it...

Hang it on the wall where it can be seen. I used to have a trapdoor Springfield in 45-70 that we found out in the desert not far from where I live. In the late 1800s it was the scene of many Indian and cavalry fights. Took a year of fooling with it but we got it firing again. No stock left but we put another one on it. Hard times came and I sold it - but I still can see it in my mind's eye -

Beautiful old rifle you have there - -

I didn't see it mentioned above, but the rifle seems to have retained it's original sights for MkVI ammunition too. From what I can see the rear sight bed has not been reduced in ramp height for MkVII and it still looks to have the early front blade. LOC entry 15638 dated July 1911 called for the sighting mods to be made to "Rifles in the hands of troops and in store". This would mean the rifle had dodged workshop work of any kind from then!

I cannot find the pics I have here comparing the two ramps, but I will do a fresh pic shortly and stick it up for comment.

Adding a pic of two MkI rear sights, top has had the LoC15638 mod for MkVII ammunition, compared to the original shape for MkVI on the rifle below.
For anyone not familiar with this, due to the increased velocity of MkVII ball, the trajectory ramp under the sight slider has been reduced to keep POA and POI consistant at the marked ranges.

Good observation! I noticed the front sight too. A Barleycorn.

Very likely that it was lost in WWI then....

Were the rifle and the webbing found together or just in the same building? could be 2 different stashes separated by 20 odd years

Lads............. you can take my word for it that with the other stuff in and around the area and the circumstances of its location, other stuff, missing bolt and magazine, that it was abandoned in 1940. The circumstantial evidence to substantiate this is overwhelming and while I hear the theorising from far and wide, the theoretical evidence against this fact is underwhelming.

But, I am only repeating what was told to me in a 10 minute visit where I sat, listened and saw, eyes agog!

Could they have started to equip those rear echelon support troops like the RASC drivers and Engineers with rifles pulled in from the trade or private owners. They did it with a third of the 'military' transport and 90 percent of the staff cars!

As I said, I'll pass this info on if no one objects

I guess it's another case of "never say never". I think the contract info brought up earlier in the thread shows the intent to at least support these weapons into WW2.
They were just ordered stored against possible future need in 1926. LoC entry A1635, which was part of the standardisation of small arms and accoutrements, states several rifles including the MkI series were "Omitted from Vocabulary" (meaning their name was not changed to No1 rifle) "But retained in store for possible future requirements" I suppose WW2 qualified as a "future requirement".

Peter, was the webbing kit the old 1908 patt that was still in issue during 1939 and 1940?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norton1

Hang it on the wall where it can be seen.

---

In this country, even in its current state, it is s Section 1 firearm and therefore must be kept under lock and key.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by P-07ShortLee

Peter, was the webbing kit the old 1908 patt that was still in issue during 1939 and 1940?

---

There are numerous pictures/movies of members of the BEF wearing it - and the pre-battledress service dress uniform.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beerhunter

Peter, was the webbing kit the old 1908 patt that was still in issue during 1939 and 1940?

There are numerous pictures/movies of members of the BEF wearing it - and the pre-battledress service dress uniform

---

Yes, just thought Peter might have seen the webbing that was found.

So it seems the evidence indicates this rifle was lost in 1940, not 20 years earlier.

Well, checking the info I have indicates that the cut-off was never reintroduced for Land service use post-WWI. It is true that India and Australia reintroduced the cut-off slot MKIII production between WWI and WWII, I can find no documentation that indicates any rifles were to be issued issued in the land service with the cut-off installed in this period. All the references I see in Skennerton refer to the use of the cut-off as being a Naval issue item exclusivity since before WWI. Even in WWI all rifles sent over to the army were supposed to be sighted for the MKVII cartridge, at least after 1915.

The barleycorn front sight with a MKVI rear sight leaf seems to be something one would find on SMLE MKI, MKI*, MKII, MKII*. The Navy rifles pulled from service and sent to the BEF Army in 1915 should have all been updated to MKI*** form. Not so for those rifles that remained in Naval service. It is known that some Navy rifles did not get updated to MKVII sighting in WWI, every one of the SMLE MKI rifles in US collections that is still set up for MK VI seem to be naval issue, at least the ones I have heard of that were not restorations (excluding the Australian police rifles).

The fact is the rifle described seems to be in Naval issue form that would predate the SMLE MKI*** modification. So is it possible that there was some naval personnel in the area? I know that the BEF had a naval division in WWI, I find no similar reference to such in WWII, but perhaps some experts on the BEF in 1939~1940 could comment on this.

The only reference similar in US service is it is my understanding that there are still some pre M16 adoption green furniture AR-15 rifles in US Air-force stocks. Some time ago a picture of one put out at an Air-force small arms display was shown, compete with all the early features, such a rifle would date from between 1962 and pre March 1964. The rifle shown was part of the first 8,500 rifles produced to Air force contract. Prior to this posed picture I had heard this from a fellow high power competitor, who claimed there were still some stocks of green furniture AR-15 marked M16 rifles with the early features in Air-force stocks. The M16/M16A1 configuration has been obsolete even in National Guard service since 1998, or I am so told be reservists. The regular Army last used M16A1 rifles in the mid 1990s. Most of the Air-force M16 rifles were supposed to be updated to M16A2 configuration in the 1990s, M193 ball is no longer procured for US services, yet apparently some of the these rifles still exist in the system in the Air-force.

So if a serious crisis occurred, and the Air force had to go in to some land-locked nation to evacuate the Army, it might come to pass in the emergency that Air-force personnel would be issued such rifles prior to being sent out to coordinate/support the evacuation. Such things occur in an emergency, those chaps would not be expected to use the rifles unless in a last ditch stand (M16 rifles can be used with M855 up to ~91 meters and hit a man sized target). If the US was facing a possible loss of an entire army corps, small details such as that would not be sweated, any rifle that was in stock would be issued. The last 10 days in Dunkirk were such an emergency.

Of course the above is all supposition, but it is very had for me to accept that any such rifles would still be on issue to the army, in a configuration that was not standard to the Army even in WWI, sighted for a cartridge that had not been on issue for 30 years. Naval support or supply personnel might explain that.

The MkIII with cutoff was produced by BSA up to & including 1941, it was in 1940 the cutoff became obsolete, you have to remember the MkV, No1 MkVI & the trials No4 were all fitted with cutoffs.
Pretty much the introduction of the No4 Mk1 meant the end of the cutoff, piling swivel & the butt disc.

Very good Point 5th Battalion.

That said, since arms were intended for adoption by the Naval service, Land service and the Air Ministry, prototype arms would have such features. That such arms have the provision do not mean the Land services issued such arms. Perhaps some arms assembled with cut-offs were hastily issued to the Land services. It is also possible that arms that at one time had cut-offs never had them removed.

Lets review the history of the cut-off issue:

On the MLM and MLE it was always issued.

As a result of the SMLE MK I trials, the cut off is said to be assembled for Naval issue only (page 86 of Major Reynolds Book, The Lee Enfield Rifle). This order dates from December of 1902

Feedback from officers from regiments utilizing Native troops objected, nonetheless when the SMLE MKI was reintroduced in 12 August 1903, the Cut off was only approved for Naval issues once again. (same source page 98).

Because of objections in India, on 17 August 1906 the cut-off was reintroduced and was to be fitted to all SMLE rifles in the British army, including overseas forces (page 107)

Skennerton (2007) notes an order for all rifles to be so equipped on 25 October 1906 (page 132)

Both Reynolds and Skennerton agree that when introduced in 26 January 1907 all SMLE MKIII rifles were equipped with cut-offs.

A new pattern of cut-off was introduced for service on 5 March 1909, to be applied to all rifles

Now when the removal of the cut off was approved for the army is not quite certain. The order for transfer of the SMLE MKI*** rifles to the army was in August of 1915 (all had to be sited for the MKVII ammunition), and it predates the first reference to the Land servcie removal of the cut-off, at least that I know of. The approval of deletion of the cut-off and the cut-off slot to BSA is dated from September of 1915. The formal date for approval of the SMLE MKII* is 2 January 1916 (Reynolds page 120).

After that date, every reference to the Land services contain no requirement for a cut off. In fact Skennerton references that the only service requiring post this date was the Navy, and rifles dated 1917 had the * canceled and were issued with the cut-off (for naval issue only).

Of course it is possible that I have missed a reference someplace, but every reference I can find on the trails rifles refers to the cut-off requirement being a Navy requirement alone, both on the No 1 MK V and No 1 MK VI. If I am in error on this, please feel free to correct me, though I would very much appreciate a source. Not because I do not trust you, but because I would like to read it and fully understand it.

regards
Frederick303

Fred........ There's no other way I can explain this because I wasn't there when it was found but we can see it, in the flesh and it has its pedigree/provenance written all over it - even to the missing magazine and bolt that has quite clearly and most obviously been removed at the same time the rifle was rammed into the framework of the hayloft. But, like the mystery rifle, in the world of aerodynamicists, bumble bees CANNOT fly, even using brute force but they do. We know they do, because we see them and they've been doing it happily for many years. There will be an answer of course but us mere mortals who only understand engineering won't ever grasp the reason

It's just like this rifle. In theory, according to the books, it shouldn't have been there. But guess what............, just like the bumble bee that does indeed fly, it WAS there and we can see it with our own eyes. If this was a Court of Law, they'd say that the evidence was beyoned all reasonable doubt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 5thBatt

The MkIII with cutoff was produced by BSA up to & including 1941,.

---

Indeed, I have one and it has a butt disc and windage rear sight too.

Frederick303,

The Daily Mail photo archive in UK contains many classic 1939-40 war photos (including, incidentally, a series of rifle refurb activity at Weedon or similar); several of the photos clearly show line infantry (ie not TA or support corps) carrying No1 MkIIIs complete with cut-off and volleys. Clearly unmodified MkIIIs were in common usage at the time.



This rifle was recovered from an attic in UK; its a completely original WW2-issue rifle marked to a regiment local to the place it was found. It has a cut-off:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...85382701-1.jpg


....and an unpinned windage-adjustable rearsight....

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...85382704-1.jpg

Gentlemen,

I do not doubt it was found as described and that all the evidence indicates it is of 1940 vintage. Not in any way. My posts were all just musings on it, as it seems rather an uncommon configuration for the period. I was, and am hoping that this most unusual relic will open up some someones memory or knowledge base and we Enfield fans will be able to pick their brains. My posts were just attempts to keep the discussion going. I have already learned that unmodified SMLE MKIII rifles are more common then I thought, at least in England. They are not common here, though one does see them on occasion. Most though seem to be restorations, at least here on this side of the pond.

One of the things I have wondered about is the near complete lack of SMLE MKI rifles in existence today. Here in the US other then a very few SMLE MKI rifles of various configurations, the only SMLE MKI rifles one sees are the MKI*** Irish rifles, of which 4,105 were imported into the US of A in February of 1962. Even in Australia, from what I have seen, the only common MK I configuration is the pre-war police rifles. Other versions of the rifle just are not around except for a very rare example here and there. For example I have never seen a barleycorn sighted SMLE MKI in the flesh, only pictures of one and have never seen on for sale on this side of the pond..

Yet the 1924 UK inventory shows ~90,000 on hand, what happened to them? I have always assumed that the UK sent them to India, to be broken down and rebuilt into some sort of MKIII configuration. This relic seems to indicate there might be another explanation and that they may have seen some use far past when anyone thought they saw service. It is all very interesting and I hope more informations is ultimately forthcoming.

regards

Peter Laidler
If the pictures were posted without the story my reaction would be "how sad". The pictures with the story "magnificent"! Thank you for sharing.
P.S.
Could you share the title of the book you are reading?

The missing safety and the heavily damaged wood suggest to me that a generation or two of children may have played with it. The missing marking disc and the tape around the butt wrist as well. Someone has recently broken the head off the rear guard screw I see.

I'm not very up on early SMLE's; is that the correct foresight blade?

Kids, playing Surpmil? Obviously a jestful comment........ It's a ring of oily stuff around the butt. The butt marking disc has recent fallen out as can be seen by the dust free recess and verdegres, caused by the screw just falling out of the dry-rotten wood. It just looks to me that the change lever/safety screw has been removed to further disable the rifle by throwing the safety mechanism away. Obviously done at the same time

Can't answer the sheared off screw but it's recent. The rifle is what it is and been where it's been

G'Day all, I must say I am enjoying the thread.
A bit off topic but anyway.
My neighbors father is 96 years old, he fought in Greece in WW2 when the Germans invaded.
He narrowly escaped with a few others by requisitioning a small boat, rowing to where they were randomly picked up by an allied destroyer.
Before this they ditched the rifles minus mag and bolt.
He told me about 6 months ago that when he reached home questions were asked about the his rifle, he told me he was going to be charged for the rifle until he produced the mag and bolt which he still had.
The sharp old bugger still remembers the rifles serial no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rusty.303

My neighbors father is 96 years old, he fought in Greece in WW2 when the Germans invaded.

---

Even further OT (perhaps) there is an old boy (at least there was a few years back) who lives in the centre of Crete. IIRC he was about nine years old when the Germans invaded in 1941. Being that kind of boy, he started "picking stuff up" and has been doing so ever since. So he now owns one of the best collections of German and British Commonwealth kit on the island. (Bits of Ju52, gliders & tanks, guns, radios, etc.) It's mostly in a dreadful state but it is worth a visit.

BTW, if you visit his "museum" and you have a British or antipodean accent you will be treated like a king, I was. Many Cretans believe that the Greek Government left them in the lurch and the British Commonwealth soldiers did their best to protect them from the Germans. Additionally, the Cretans felt that they did not have the means to defend themselves and so after the war, lots of German weapons were "picked up" by the locals and secreted away "for the next time".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

I'm not very up on early SMLE's; is that the correct foresight blade?

---

Correct blade, here is a photo of my two 1904 Mk1 SMLEs
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...mk1smle8-1.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rusty.303

when he reached home questions were asked about the his rifle, he told me he was going to be charged for the rifle until he produced the mag and bolt which he still had.

---

That's very interesting. And makes perfect sence as to why no bolt and mag in the found rifle.

Greece...... with the state of the Greek currency, it reminds me of a joke doing the rounds. Angela Merkel went to Greece to see the Greek PM and was stopped at Athens airport.
'Name' said the customs man
'Angela Merkel' she replied
'Reason for your visit' the man snapped
'To see the PM about the economy' she snapped back
'Occupation' he snapped
'Not this time......., just a word of advice and we'll see what happens....'

Ho, ho, ho....., the old ones are the best!

Good one!

Regarding the origins of the Sht. Mk.1. I think some want to make the explanation much more difficult than it is. I stick to my original opinion. It's a second line rifle that was issued to rear echelon troops and disposed of before the withdrawal at Dunkirk. Those folks who've never experienced the supply system in any Army just don't understand that with limited resources, especially during peacetime, the militaries of the world generally don't throw away anything that's still useful or in the case of rifles, gauge up correctly and still shoot! The USA was probably the biggest offender in throwing away perfectly good equipment because the supply of new stuff was/is fairly endless. Of course, my friends working at Anniston will tell you that it's not quite that way anymore with over 10 years of war in various deserts wrecking all of the pertinent equipment and an unfriendly government more willing to give money to everything but the military. However, when I was in an arms room working in the 1980's, we still had 81mm mortars that I couldn't help but wonder were in new condition during WWII! The tubes were so thin it was amazing and they still worked fine. Almost all of our weapons were left over from the Vietnam War with just the start of an infusion of new stuff like the M249 SAW which still had many bugs to iron out and 60mm Airborne mortars which were things of beauty and perfection. My point is: forget the list of changes and all that's been written in books by various authors. Reality is that weapons that were serviceable were issued and used even if the books say they weren't.

I appeared to me that the bolt is gone. That would lend credence to Dunkirk, and not wanting the Germans to have access to an operating SMLE.

Was there an effort to destroy any of the equipment left behind.

Soldiers would remove the bolt and take it with them or throw it away, the magazine too thus rendering the weapon useless to the enemy.

Hi Beerhunter,
Yes, I know the fellow. Have been see him two or three times. Can't remember his name now (George???), but his museum (on the patio/garden of his house) & inside it, is, IIRC in the village of Askifou (not sure if I've spelt it correctly but I've spelt it phonetically). It's on the road that leads to Sfakia off the main arterial highway that runs across the North of the island - I think somewhere a little to the West of Rethymnon. It's signed & off to the left (or it is if it still exists; he was ancient the last time I called about 8 years ago) as you drive into the village. I seem to recall he had a substantial part of a Stuka cockpit on his patio, many smallarms including SMLE's, Brens, Carcano's etc., a fallschirmjager helmet complete with bullet hole etc etc. Chaotic, but well worth a visit!

ATB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Kids, playing Surpmil? Obviously a jestful comment........ It's a ring of oily stuff around the butt. The butt marking disc has recent fallen out as can be seen by the dust free recess and verdegres, caused by the screw just falling out of the dry-rotten wood. It just looks to me that the change lever/safety screw has been removed to further disable the rifle by throwing the safety mechanism away. Obviously done at the same time

Can't answer the sheared off screw but it's recent. The rifle is what it is and been where it's been

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Kids, playing Surpmil? Obviously a jestful comment........ It's a ring of oily stuff around the butt. The butt marking disc has recent fallen out as can be seen by the dust free recess and verdegres, caused by the screw just falling out of the dry-rotten wood. It just looks to me that the change lever/safety screw has been removed to further disable the rifle by throwing the safety mechanism away. Obviously done at the same time

Can't answer the sheared off screw but it's recent. The rifle is what it is and been where it's been

---

No jest Peter, that's just how the photos look to me. I suppose a soldier could remove the safety screw with a coin as the slot is wide enough, but if done to disable the rifle, why bother to put the screw back? Would make more sense just to hide or throw it away with the lever and spring.

Looks like there's a large chunk missing out of the wrist of the butt and from here it looks like there was tape holding it on until fairly recently.

But you can see it better than I can.;)

"..it was nothing more than a harmless souvenir. Alas, this isn't how the Police here see things.."
______________________

I'd be more afraid of someone with half a brain that can simply go to a hardware store and purchase all the items necessary to manufacture a functional (albeit extremely crude) firearm. It may not be pretty but it will get the evil deed done. Just my 2¢.

Relic guns (such as the one discussed here) are somewhat of a grey area under UK law as they may - or may not - still legally be firearms. 'Incapable of firing' is not the same thing as legally deactivated. A deactivated firearm is formally defined as one that 'has been rendered incapable of discharging any shot, bullet or other weapon and has consequently ceased to be a firearm within the meaning of the (Firearms) Act'. If a relic gun hasn't been formally certified as deactivated by a Proof House, then the owner runs the risk of prosecution and having to establish in court whether or not the gun has ceased to be a firearm.

I assume in this case the individual who imported it from France was threatened with prosecution by the Police and decided not to take his chances in court.