Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Quite often claims are made for British proofed .30WCF Model 1894 carbines that are for sale, that these were intended for and used by the British Home Guard. However, none of these show up in the monthly lists of small arms on charge to the Home guard in the UK, held at the National archives in London.
The only reference I have found to Model 1894 carbines was an order for around 18,000 (must check notes to confirm exact quantity) of them in one of the big contract record ledgers at the National Archives in London, but it has “canceled” written over it in red ink. If any of these were supplied and this would be prior to Lend Lease, I would expect to see some British ordnance markings on a few of them in addition to British commercial proofs, as seen on Model 67 and Model 69, .22’s.
The 3 examples I have documented, as below, are very close together as far as serial numbers go and they all have British commercial proofs.
1226280 DOB April 1940
1227070 DOB 27th April 1940
1227430 DOB 1st May 1940.
Does anyone else have any carbines in their collection with British markings made around this time?
Regards
AlanD
Sydney
ALAN D.
If you would be so kind as to clarify your message and extend to me any further information on this.
Highly appreciated.
Bob Renneberg
Hello Alan. I have a Model 94 carbine in 30 WCF serial #1225079 which has British Proofs on the barrel forward of the Proof Steel stampings and “Not British Made” on top of receiver and proof stamp on the bolt. The rifle also has a rack number stamped on the lower side of forearm near the receiver. The rifle has a set of sling swivels mounted on the forearm wood and lower butt stock. Condition is about 95 %. If you need pictures let me know. What are the details and stories of your three examples? Thanks, Wally
aland said
If any of these were supplied and this would be prior to Lend Lease, I would expect to see some British ordnance markings on a few of them in addition to British commercial proofs, as seen on Model 67 and Model 69, .22’s.
May have no relevance to possible contracts between Winchester & British gov’t, but S&W revolvers purchased by the British gov’t escaped the usual import markings because proofing was delegated to S&W; these have a “P” beside the ser. no. & no other markings, unless they were later refurbished.
Lend Lease guns weren’t marked at all because, technically, they were supposed to be returned after the war–HAHAHA! In fact, the whole Lend Lease program was a colossal give-away.
Sorry for stealing the thread but , ever hear or Reverse Lend Lease?
For its part, the United States government, reporting on aid received through reverse lend-lease, disclosed that “thirty-one percent of all the supplies and equipment currently required by the United States Army in the European Theater of Operations between June 1, 1942 and June 30, 1944, was supplied by the British as reverse lend-lease.
The British have built for our troops hundreds of barracks, airfields, hospitals, supply depots, roads, and other facilities. They have paid the costs of transporting our men and our supplies within the British Isles. Most American soldiers stationed in England have received supplemental food rations from British stocks. Almost all the bread eaten by our troops while training in Britain was baked with flour furnished under reverse lend-lease.
The catalogue of items placed at the disposal of United States military forces by the British government is impressive for its variety as well as for its volume. It ranges from tea kettles to hotels; from monkey wrenches to finished planes; and from eye shields to diving suits.
Some strategic commodities have been shipped to the United States by the British under reverse lend-lease. These include barrage balloons and small naval craft, tea and crude rubber from Ceylon, rope fibers, chrome, and asbestos from British Africa, and cocoa from
In the war against Japan, the Australians and New Zealanders have supplied hundreds ,of millions of dollars of reverse lend-lease aid to the United States. Up to June 30, 1944 Australia provided our forces with over a million and a quarter pounds of food, as well as blankets, socks, shoes, and other articles of GI clothing. She has built barracks, airfields, hospitals, and recreational centers and furnished landing craft, motor transport, telephone and telegraph facilities, and numerous other services. Altogether, to June 30, 1944, Australia had spent about 550 million dollars on reverse lend-lease aid.
New Zealand, which has a population of only 1,650,000, and much slenderer resources than Australia (population 7,000,000), has made available to our military personnel almost 580,000,000 pounds of food, as well as camps, warehouses, hospitals, small ships, and other equipment. New Zealand’s total expenditures on reverse lend-lease aid to the United States amounted to more than 131 million dollars on June 30, 1944.
First I have ever heard of this.
Vince
Southern Oregon
NRA member
Fraternal Order of Eagles
“There is but one answer to be made to the dynamite bomb and that can best be made by the Winchester rifle.”
Teddy Roosevelt
Erin Grivicich said
Thanks for posting that Vince. Learn something new every day…..Erin
Don’t be too sure! Sounds as phony to me as most of the wartime propaganda. What is the source of this info? The link went no where, but I’d be amazed if it didn’t originate within the bowels of the FDR administration.
clarence said
Erin Grivicich said
Thanks for posting that Vince. Learn something new every day…..Erin
Don’t be too sure! Sounds as phony to me as most of the wartime propaganda. What is the source of this info? The link went no where, but I’d be amazed if it didn’t originate within the bowels of the FDR administration.
Try this. http://www.historians.org
Vince
Southern Oregon
NRA member
Fraternal Order of Eagles
“There is but one answer to be made to the dynamite bomb and that can best be made by the Winchester rifle.”
Teddy Roosevelt
Thanks for all the replies. As my computer skills are to feeble to allow me to do multi quoting I will comment on the posts in order, as above.
Bob R. There is not much more I can clarify on the topic other than with carbine 1227430. The main reason for the post is that I had dismissed the idea of any Model 1894 carbines being purchased by the U.K. due to the entry in the large contract ledger books in the National Archives in London, having a red line through the entry and a note saying the order is cancelled. When I compared a few notes and posts on the various forums about carbines of the 1940/41 vintage with British proof marks I found that I had 3 carbines within a narrow serial number range, which seemed more than a coincidence. None of the carbines have any British ordnance markings. I have not found any record of British government purchases in any other files in the National Archives in London.
1227430 is in the UK and the current owner sent me a copy of a letter from the dealer he bought the carbine from stating that his carbine was one of 24 that the dealer purchased in 1960 from the Central Ordnance depot in Weedon, U.K. It was reported that these were from a batch that had been tested as being for issue to tank crew. However I am extremely wary of these anecdotal stories that go back 50 plus years, especially when there is no supporting documentary evidence. In fact the only documentation states that the order was cancelled. In addition to this is the fact that at this time the official Winchester agent in the UK (also agent for Colt) The London Armoury Co was almost dormant.
As to the entry in the contract ledger in the U.K. this is a bit ambiguous. The order is recorded as 13th February 1941 and being cancelled on 8th April 1941. The quantity is shown as 2,800, with an order for ammunition being in a different ledger. The confusing part is the actual entry description which is written thus;
Winchester .30/30Carbines
+ Savage Rifles
Order placed in U.S.A.
So presumably the 2,800 was a mixture of Winchester and Savage guns – your guess is as good as mine. The general heading at the top of the page is:
“Rifles .300 Various”.
Wally. Your carbine looks to be in very close proximity to the 3 I have recorded in my post. I would be very keen to get some photos from you including the rack number, this could be a clue to the number purchased, or a complete red herring of course. Also keen to look at the sling swivels, are they from a Lee Enfield for example.
Clarence. As far as Smith & Wesson revolvers are concerned. In the First World War British purchases of .455 revolvers were niether proofed or inspected in America, they were inspected and proofed upon arrival in the UK, this was a military inspection and proof.
In WW2 British inspectors did inspect and proof S&W revolvers at the S&W factory, but this may not have applied to the first off the shelf purchases in June/July 1940, but certainly did apply to later contracts, up to Lend Lease when this practice ceased, as far as British orders with S&W are concerned the last delivery of British Purchasing Commission ordered revolvers continued up to and including December 1941, a while after Lend Lease had come into force. The above information has been gleaned from my reseach visits to the S&W archive in Springfield.
Vince:/clarence: – Lend Lease: This topic is very relevant in terms of context to what we are talking about.
Most people think Lend Lease relates solely to munitions but in the case of the UL the overwhelming benefit was in the supply of foodstuffs and raw materials. In 1940 the United Kingdom was the second largest economy in the world and an industrial powerhouse. In terms of munitions the UK made between 70% and 84% of what it needed itself.These figures vary depending on which source you go with and what is counted as a munition. I have a library with about a dozen books on Lend Lease. It was well able to out produce Germany single handed, never mid the invaluable contribution from the Empire and Lend Lease. In terms of tank production Germany piped the UK in 1940 but by 1941 the UK out produced Germany. By 1944 production of tanks rifles and other similar munitions was reduced (supply of tanks Liberty Ships and airplanes from the USA increased at this point) and a huge effort made in the production of 4 engine bombers. At one point this consumed nearly 30% of British war time manufacturing, Germany paid the price in that it had to divert at one point 40% of its war effort into defending itself, something that a lot of war time historians dont seem to acknowledge.
Lend Lease was never really a complete give away, the terms of the agreement were that the UK would pay back 10% of what it received as Lend Lease, this debt attracted interest of 2%. The final payment was only made fairly recently, perhaps 10 years ago.
I have read that France defaulted on its debt in the 1950’s. The debt would be a right-off with counties such as China after 1947 and there must be a few other countries to add to this list. I doubt that Russia attempted to repay any debt once the Cold War started but it could be argued the debt was more than replayed in blood.
Reverse Lend Lease was a big thing, New Zealand punched above its weight and at the end of the war, America was in dept to NZ.
If anyone wants to send me photos or contract me my email is:
alandavid303 at optusnet dot com.
Regards
AlanD
Sydney
1 Guest(s)
