HUDSON BAY COMPANY IMPERIAL SHOTGUNS

[HURON]

Can anyone tell me when HBC 's line of Imperial Shotguns started?  The ones that are without made in England..I am told are pre 1890...does anyone know very much about them?

[redheart]

The best reference I could find was that HBC introduced it's "House Brand" Imperial line of shotguns after 1895. The date is not certain because the company records for this period no longer exist.

[HURON]

I only collect Antique guns...pre 1898...the shot gun I have is in percussion and it is a muzzle loader...I took the barrel off and the only markings are the “VBP” surmounted by a crown. Provisional proof for barrels in definitive proof state as well as "26" for 26 gauge...I live in Canada and don't have a PAL...this marking was used from 1868 to 1925...I like the gun and want to keep it...there is noway to say if it was sold to HBC between 1895 and 1898..required by law as an antique..or after this date...I have been told its a slight grey area but most likely regarded as an antique and I shouldn't have a problem...the only words on it is Hudson Bay Company.  I have to make my mind up by tomorrow...so anyone who can help out on its date would be welcomed..asap

[redheart]

I found mention of an 1896 HB catalog that showed cartridge shotguns had been introduced by that date, so they may have quit contracting for muzzleloaders by then. I tried to find a PDF of that catlaog and failed to locate one. I regret not being able to help you.

[Steve Collward]

Huron,
  In Gooding's "Trade Guns of the Hudson's Bay Co. 1670-1970", there is a short section covering the Imperial line of percussion guns.

  He cites that "Shipping records indicate that after 1910, most Imperial muzzle loaders were of 26 bore with 2 1/2 foot barrels although a 1914 shipment included two fo 3 feet and a 1922 shipment (as far as this survey was taken) included 24 inch barrels."

  You mention you don't have a "PAL".  Not sure what that is?

[Pukka Bundook]

Steve,
PAL is "Position and Acquisition Licence".... Required in Canada for non- restricted modern firearms.

Being a M-loader, and not a modern repro, I think you will be fine with it, Huron.

Richard.

[redheart]

They would sure have a hard time proving that it's later than 1896.

[HURON]

Thanks for your replies guys...I had another one as well but returned it...it had barrel proof markings that dated it from 1904 to 1925.....the one pictured above has barrel proof markings used much earlier as well as later and conforms to 1887 barrel marking law in England at the time.....HBC put their catalogue  out in 1896 that had these guns for sale in it so we know they had them at least that early...HBC records are vague.....I kept this one because everything points to this shot gun being earlier (1898).  I also know they had old stock and the demand was there until 1920's for muzzle loaders, although "Shipping records indicate that after 1910, most Imperial muzzle loaders were of 26 bore with 2 1/2 foot barrels although a 1914 shipment included two for 3 feet and a 1922 shipment (as far as this survey was taken) included 24 inch barrels." I know they made these prior to that date as well... I feel that this one could fall into the antique category based on design and markings and what records exist.  I have tried and can't prove either way....what are your thoughts...is my thinking flawed?

[Dennis Glazener]

Thanks for your replies guys...I had another one as well but returned it...it had barrel proof markings that dated it from 1904 to 1925.....the one pictured above has barrel proof markings used much earlier as well as later and conforms to 1887 barrel marking law in England at the time.....HBC put their catalogue  out in 1896 that had these guns for sale in it so we know they had them at least that early...HBC records are vague.....I kept this one because everything points to this shot gun being earlier (1896).  I also know they had old stock and the demand was there until 1920's for muzzle loaders, although "Shipping records indicate that after 1910, most Imperial muzzle loaders were of 26 bore with 2 1/2 foot barrels although a 1914 shipment included two for 3 feet and a 1922 shipment (as far as this survey was taken) included 24 inch barrels." I know they made these prior to that date as well... I feel that this one could fall into the antique category based on design and markings and what records exist.  I have tried and can't prove either way....what are your thoughts...is my thinking flawed?

I would keep it, wouldn't think twice about doing so. If you can not tell I am sure no one would spend time trying to prove otherwise. Especially after hearing your description of why you think its prior to 1896.
Dennis

[HURON]

Thanks Denis for your thoughts..I appreciate it....I meant earlier than 1898....perhaps 1896 or earlier to 1898.