Longbranch No4 Mk1* grip mark

[desperatedan]

From what I've read elsewhere the requirement to mark goods imported to the USA with country of origin has its roots in the McKinley Tariff Act of 1890. The Act was a misguided attempt to protect US industry from foreign competitors and products which were finding their way into the US domestic market. Ultimately the whole concept proved flawed and became widely unpopular, resulting in the act lasting little more than four years. However one feature which survived the ending of tariffs was the requirement that goods made outside of the USA had to be prominently marked with their country of origin prior to their entry into the United States. An example of this can be seen on the many Fairbairn Sykes commando knives surplused by the British Government after WW2 and imported into the US. These are typically stamped "ENGLAND" on the crossguard. Similar examples can be seen with imported ceramics, e.g. marked "JAPAN".

Firearms would not have escaped this mandated compulsory origin marking and indeed there are discussions elsewhere about it in the context of English gun makers at the end of the 19th century.

[Brian Dick]

I'm no exspurt but I'm also not unsure at all of what these stamps are. I've been studying this stuff for 40+ years and a licensed importer for 26 years but I digress. Desperatedan lays it out in detail. I've asked Doug to add a picture I sent him to this post when he gets to it. I found the Australian stock in my spares and took a picture of it for you. These country stamps are country of origin stamps required for import to the USA and were applied to firearms prior to 1968 when the rules and marking requirements changed as we've told you. If you think they're all stamped on perfectly straight, you'd be sadly mistaken as that simply isn't the real world. Brian

---------- Post added at 03:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:45 PM ----------

Just for clarification: The pre 1968 country of origin stamps were stamped on metal, wood, webbing, Inglis shoulder stocks, etc. I've seen Canada, England, Australia and probably a few others I can't remember. Post 1968 import marks are required by law to be stamped on the metal and what's required is outlined in my earlier posts.

[Brian Dick]

I found the Australian stock in my spares and took a picture of it for you.

Attachment 121251
(Click to Enlarge)

[Alan de Enfield]

Its not that I’m not accepting it, it’s that you seem to think its a 68+ US import for some reason.

I think you are confusing the pre 68 and post 68 import markings.

Pre 68 (which is the ones I;ve been refering to) ONLY required the county of origin / country it was being shipped from.

Post 68 (which you seem to be asking about as you keep asking for the 'rest of the import marks') required the Importers name, address, calibre country of origin and to ensure it had a readable serial number.

The Lee Enfields shown, marked CANADA / ENGLAND / Australia are all pre GCA68 imports and meet the requirements of the period, BUT, they do NOT meet the post CGA requirements, hence they can only be PRE 68.

I'll leave it at that.

[Brian Dick]

Country of ORIGIN was a pre-1968 requirement. Country of MANUFACTURE is a post-1968/GCA68 requirement along with the other marks you mention. It can be a bit confusing for we mere mortals.

[Alan de Enfield]

Country of ORIGIN was a pre-1968 requirement. Country of MANUFACTURE is a post-1968/GCA68 requirement along with the other marks you mention. It can be a bit confusing for we mere mortals.

it is certainly confusing using English.
The country of Origin, is the country of Manufacture.


The work ORIGIN means where it originated from, the Dictionary definition being : the point or place where something begins, arises, or is derived. hence the country of origin of a Savage rifle would be the USA, A BSA rifle would be ENGLAND, and a Lithgow would be Australia.

This is not what we are seeing, with the example above of the BSA rifle marked AUSTRALIA.

I therefore suggest that either the word ORIGIN is being incorrectly applied, or ORIGIN means (irrespective of any dictionary definition) "country shipped" from on the last leg of its journey before landing in the USA

[Brian Dick]

Alan, you’re trying too hard to put sense where there isn’t any. These rules and regulations are written by clueless legal types. Just think of all the crime we’re stopping. Comforting eh? Brian

PS, The BSA from Australian service shown is marked post 1968. Since it was imported from Australian stores, it got the same stamp which is technically incorrect. The rule as written is country of manufacture.

[30Three]

I think we would all like like the opportunity to read your sources for this new information; as a first post, that's quite an important piece!

The fact that Longbranch were only making No4Mk2 sniper rifles for the Brtisih during WW2 is incredible! That they had access to a redesign 5 years before the Brit's who invented it.
None of that is the " The Lee Enfield" book by Mr Skennerton; which, at around 600 pages; is as definitive a history of the Lee Enfield as you are likely to find!


After taking a few minutes to look at "Skennerton" book; page 319 has the production figures for Long Branch wartime listed, as noted by the Inspectorate.

No4Mk1 and Mk1* = 910,368
No4 T sniper rifle = 992
Sten 9mm = 128,238

[doca]

Definitely a lot of confusion here. Doesn’t matter much. Due to the receiver etched rack number, I moved on from the otherwise beautiful one I’d scoped (almost bought it anyway and regret skipping it).

Just a few last calls before I abandon this.

1. I wasn’t confusing pre and post 68’ requirements: for some reason it just keeps being brought up. Constantly telling me there’s a difference does no good, because it does not apply to this. It does not apply to this because, since before post #1, I knew it wasn’t 68+ import because…. See posts #6 and #20.

2. Thanks for editing your post about LB production; here’s a very slim read about it: Long Branch Lee Enfield Sniper Rifles - Calibremag.ca

3. @Roger Payne and @Alan de Enfield: The English export stamp is a real thing. Ref: British Enfield Rifles, Volume 2 2nd Edition Revised, Lee-Enfield No* 4 and No* 5 Rifles, Stratton, 2003

“BRITISH EXPORT MARKS
On many No. 4 rifles (and conversions) and No. 5 rifles, one finds the word "ENGLAND" stamped in letters 0.08-inch high on the top of the receiver ring or on the left side of the buttstock socket. This indicates that the rifle was approved for export. Such rifles also generally carry the British Nitro-Proof stamp—a crown with the letters "BNP" beneath—on the barrel, the receiver ring, or both.”

My take away from this point is that the reason we don’t see Canada marked on all those English imports is because they’re not marked for import. They were marked by the Brits before they got in the boat. That must have complied enough with the sporadically adhered to US import law, I guess.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see that Australia, being a commonwealth, had something similar. Us? We destroyed what we didn’t keep or sell to other governments (NZ, India and Pakistan for sure). The next known batch of wartime produced No.4s wouldn’t have left Canadian military depots until 1954.

4. At least I now know that NZ got a pile of LB No.4s. Don’t know if AUS did, but it’s no stretch to imagine that a good chunk of the 50,000ish they imported for the NZ military (LBs are reportedly the most common still found in NZ, 2012) probably went to AUS when they retired from service in 1954, when they bought the same rifle as Canada. http://www.armsregister.com/arms_reg...field_no_4.pdf
Attachment 121738

5. @desperatrdan: Thanks, I’ll read up on the McKinley Tariff Act, but I’m still suspicious that that stamp is in fact a US import mark. However @Brian Dick, thanks for the example of a one piece Australia’s stamp, but I’m still suspicious (mainly because of above #3, last para and, random guy’s PowerPoint and unvetted internet claims mean nothing to a fact based individual).


I’m currently chasing one in England, one with a CDN out of service mark and , one with a War Assets Corp. stamp on the Knox (still researching, be kind).

[desperatedan]

Just a few last calls before I abandon this.............

3. @Roger Payne and @Alan de Enfield: The English export stamp is a real thing. Ref: British Enfield Rifles, Volume 2 2nd Edition Revised, Lee-Enfield No* 4 and No* 5 Rifles, Stratton, 2003

“BRITISH EXPORT MARKS
On many No. 4 rifles (and conversions) and No. 5 rifles, one finds the word "ENGLAND" stamped in letters 0.08-inch high on the top of the receiver ring or on the left side of the buttstock socket. This indicates that the rifle was approved for export. Such rifles also generally carry the British Nitro-Proof stamp—a crown with the letters "BNP" beneath—on the barrel, the receiver ring, or both.”

My take away from this point is that the reason we don’t see Canada marked on all those English imports is because they’re not marked for import. They were marked by the Brits before they got in the boat. That must have complied enough with the sporadically adhered to US import law, I guess.

doca,

No disrespect but with me being a Brit in the UK I would suggest that whilst he has compiled a lot of good material, Stratton shouldn't be taken as a definitive source. It was written some years ago and in particular he is a US author referencing British/UK proof marks.

It is the law in the UK (The Gun Barrel Proof Act dating back to 1868) that any firearm offered for sale in the UK must have valid proof marks. This also applies to any firearm imported for sale. It also applies to any firearm prior to EXPORT from the UK. So all those "BNP" proof marks you see are a legal requirement before those typically British firearms you will come across over there have left these shores.

Any other marks, in particular "ENGLAND" stamps, are marks applied by the IMPORTER in the USA as required under US law. Other than proof marks, there is no British/UK legislation that requires/required the UK (England/Scotland, etc) as country of origin to be marked on firearms prior to export. It may be that within the 'no-mans land' of a bonded warehouse the marks required by the importing nation are added but there wouldn't have been any need for them to be applied by the UK exporter.

Good luck with your continuing researches.