Longbranch No4 Mk1* grip mark

[doca]

Hi; first post and I'm at work so it'll be a quick one.

I'm looking at a 43 Long Branch No4 Mk1* and the picture he sent has "CANADA" stamped on the underside wrist. I can't find any info, or discussion, about this marking, but I have found it on an auction site

"303 British caliber., 25" barrel, S/N 36L6101. Parkerized finish, walnut stock, 1943 dated receiver. Spike bayonet. Original sling. Stock marked "CANADA" on the bottom of the wrist."

I don't suppose somebody here knows anything about it?

Attachment 121185

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Alan de Enfield]

Typically Canada / England / Australia was marked on the rifles as a pre 1968 import mark (imported into the USA).

Any indication in its history of cross border travel ?

[doca]

None suggested, but I've also read that import marks were stamped on metal, not wood. I'm also a little curious as to why an importer would stamp it, if there was no requirement to do so until 1968. It couldn't have been stamped 68+ because it's missing the mandated data.

[Brian Dick]

I've seen them stamped on both wood and metal.

[Brian Dick]

It may have British commercial proofs on the barrel but I doubt a post 1968 US import mark. The requirement was a county of "origin" stamp and not country of "manufacture" like post 1968. That's why you see Canadian and US made No.4 rifles with
"England" stamped on. Many No.4's were culled from the military and sold off as surplus before 1968. Some went back and forth across borders too after being surplused. I've actually bought and imported rifles from both the UK and Canada in years past that had US import marks on them so they've been around a bit.

[doca]

It's an old auction in Cowan's in USA so there was some cross border. I'd be interested to see the barrel at muzzle but that pic isn't present. ** Canadian Longbranch No. 4 Mk. I Rifle - Auktionen Preisarchiv

Yeah, that Cowan listing is the sole example I’ve found of CANADA marked on one, but that does not suggest it’s an import mark. Also, that is not the rifle in question.

@Brian Dick, it’s not British so there won’t be Brit proofs. It’s also not marked as a factory refurb. Still haven’t seen a wood stamped, US import mark. I’d like to learn, I don’t suppose you have a link?

I have seen many pre-68 US imports being stamped ENGLAND, even though they’re Long Branch. I haven’t yet seen a single US imported Long Branch marked as Canadian. Early research has suggested that is because pre-68, it was about origin of design, not manufacture. Doesn’t mean the stamper got it right and it doesn’t mean that my early research is correct either, lol. still don’t understand why a pre-68 importer would stamp it, other than boredom, and why they’d have a Canada stamp in an age where there was no firearm import controls.

I’ve requested a few more detailed pics, should be in tomorrow, but here’s what I have of the muzzle.

Attachment 121187

[Brian Dick]

Sorry for the confusion. I never said it was British. I said it "may have". Nothing definite. Does it have an ownership mark from Canada, New Zealand, South Africa or other Commonwealth nation? That means it was probably British issue and if surplused from England prior to it's arrival back in Canada post service, it will sport British commercial proofs. They could be under the handguards but will be on the barrel providing that's the case. The majority of Long Branch rifles went to British not Canadian service. If it was culled and surplused directly from Canadian military stores, the "Canada" stamp makes it a pre 1968 import because that was the only required country of origin mark. I've even seen it on P'37 web gear, Inglis shoulder stocks, etc.. It has nothing to do with country of design. It's simply country of origin meaning it was imported to the USA directly from Canada prior to 1968.

[doca]

I learned a little more since my last; specifically about contracting.

Long Branch didn’t produce regular Enfields for the British. They only made the Sten and No4 mk2 sniper for them. I never specified that it wasn’t a sniper rifle. No mount holes. Saying that, there’s should have been none for their commercial market, less theft/loss. The exception is post-war UK factory parts bin refurbs. However, there no refurb mark. This British thought only complicates the matter because if it went to the US, it would have, or still would have, been marked ENGLAND, just like the rest I’ve found. If it came back to Canada from England, it wouldn’t need a stamp and why stamp it Canada?

I’ve only seen the broad arrow and LB, nothing that looks like a British mark. Still, I’ll note if the incoming pics show something different. I’ll have to ask for a specific shot or two.

I’m actually running down a theory. Every small arms in the Canadian Armed Forces identifies itself as being Canadian issue, in one form or another. We’ve been doing that for decades. Our Rangers had been using the surplus military No4’s until they got the C19, in 2018.

If we didn’t stamp CANADA on during production to battlefield identify our Enfield’s from the other nations’, or if it wasn’t some on-again-off-again wartime production thing and, the facts (thus far) are that we’ve only been able to find two of these on the internet (2019 and 2121), there’s a sketchy sounding import mark theory and, there’s no talking about or posting images of either; I’m willing to invest some time to investigate wether or not the Ranger’s rifles we’re stamped before issue.

Of course, that’s the one place that’s very hard to find a clear and close picture of, and a recently ex-neighbor would have known; bah.

[Brian Dick]

You're making this way too complicated. I'm not sure where you're learning from. Wartime Long Branch No.4 Mk.1 and No.4Mk.1* service rifle production was mostly for the British. Again, the "Canada" stamp is a marking that was a requirement for shipment to the USA prior to 1968 and after the rifle left military service regardless of where. It's not a military mark. That's all it is. These stamps have been discussed extensively over the years on this forum and probably others. This stuff isn't theory, it's fact. If it has a "C-Broad Arrow" stamped on the breech or even the stock, sometimes both, it's definitely a Canadian owned and issued rifle. If not, chances are 90%+ that it was a British contract rifle. New Zealand and South Africa also had distinct ownership marks stamped on. N^Z or "U-Broad Arrow" respectively. New Zealand had their own serial number system too so that number will also be either engraved or stamped on the butt socket and sometimes top of the breech. Many rifles were culled from service post war and sold as surplus. They had to be stamped with the country of origin before being shipped to the USA pre 1968. Probably to Interarmco in Alexandria, Virginia since they bought direct from the MoD and warehoused them in Manchester, England before shipment to Virginia. There were no imports, (legal), of military surplus rifles into the USA from 1968 until 1986 when the restriction was removed by the Reagan administration so post 1968 imports will have the abbreviated name and address of the importer along with the caliber and country of MANUFACTURE stamps.

[doca]

I don’t know where your getting your information from. You complicated it with some grassy knoll Brit thing and a repetitive, yet unsubstantiated insistence of import.

You’d think that if it was a common thing, there’d be easily found pictures, documentation or references online. There isn’t. There’s just you (so far). I already asked for a link, do you have one or, any pics to show me a verified pre-68 US imported rifle with a CANADA, one piece, stamp on it? I can’t even find where US legislation specifies that a country has to be stamped, pre-68; I have found third-party reference stating that there were no requirements to mark pre-68. If you have that piece, educate me, please.

I’d also like to see your reference for No4, non-sniper, wartime contracts to the UK. I’ve found none and all my sources cite wartime production specifically excludes the standard rifle. I also haven’t seen anything other than the submachine gun and MkII sniper in company or government documentation. I’m not saying your wrong, I’m asking you to prove it.

Regardless, my theory was correct. It was a Ranger rifle.

FWIW, the very first picture I posted has the Canadian acceptance mark, but that alone proves nothing. I’ve seen a British post-war pistol with a CDN broad arrow and a British proof on a bolt head.

Making friends the quick way, here on Milsurps. ��