16ga.com ~ View topic - 19th century hunting and shooting literature

In an adjacent thread, I used the antiquated term "laquered trash" in regard to any shotgun that is dressed up with fancy trappings to hide obvious flaws. I found this term in the writings of one Frank Forester, a 19th Century English sportsman and writer. Some of his passages on shotguns, dogs, and hunting have been collected and editted by A.R Beverley-Giddings and published in the book, Frank Forester On upland Hunting, and published in 1951 by William Morrow and Company, New York.

In the editor's forward, Beverley-Giddings writes a brief biography and background about Frank Forester, the pen name for Henry William Herbert, born April 7, 1807, in London, England. according to the editor, Herbert was widely read in his time here in the States and has had a "profound influence" on sport hunting that has lasted into our times.

In the first chapter, Herbert instructs us how to choose a gun. In the second paragraph of page 29, he refers to the the imported hardware trade offering of cheaply made but richly appointed shotguns from the early 19th century Birmingham wholesale manufacturies as well as those of Belgium and Germany, as "laquered trash". Herbert instructs the folks of his day to do business only with proper makers or "houses" with good reputations to protect, like Lancaster, Lang, Moore, and Purdey. He also stipulates that it is better to buy a plainly appointed, but properly made "gamekeeper's" model, rather than a richly appointed but cheaply made "piece of rubbish" from the unscrupulous hardware trade of his day. He also warns his readers to beware of fakes that have been fraudulantly stamped with a "name" gun.

So it seems little has changed from his time to ours. We shooters, shotgun fans, and prospective customers are just as likely to face the same problems today as the folks of Herbert's day also faced when shopping for a new or used gun. It is up to anyone who might be considering a shotgun purchase to learn first what a well made gun is, then look carefully to make sure he is getting his money's worth.

In today's market, we often see cheaply made guns under an old, honored name that has been licenced for its good reputation. The practice is all too common nowadays. This does not mean that those new guns under that old name have the same quality as the old originals. Some do, but many do not--not by half.

We also have seen far too many imported lines of cheaply made guns sold by "here today, gone tommorow" importers and trade name firms with no intention of backing their overblown claims of quality and so called warranty promises.

So now as then, learn what a good gun looks and feels like, then do not settle for less. Leave the "laquered trash" and "rubbish on the racks for others. Pick a solidly made, well backed gun from a company with a fine, well established reputation of some decent period. There are enough adventurous buyers who will take the risk and prove the true worth of the newly imported products for those wise enough to wait a bit before jumping in. Buyer beware still applies just as much today as in the mid-19th Century.

Guest

16GG you have a cunning awareness of the obvious.

Member Joined: 26 Apr 2005 Posts: 743

Guy, I thought you said something about "laquered trash" being a common term in the ENGLISH trade. You might want to look at Forester's writings a bit harder. Although he was born in England, he lived most of his life in this country, and for the most part (maybe exclusively?) wrote about hunting in the States and the "British Provinces of North America" (Canada). In fact, he's regarded as one of the earliest (if not the earliest) American writers on wingshooting. Didn't think the phrase rang a bell with me from 19th century Brit writers, like Greener for example.

As for the advice concerning hardware store guns, etc . . . very different situation, then and now. At that time--before the Civil War (and even for a couple decades after)--there wasn't much of a domestic American shotgun industry. Most of our guns came from England or the Continent. Back then, the Belgians in particular had a bad reputation for knocking off famous British names and sending us cheap guns, marked for example "W. Richards", in imitation of Westley Richards. Some of those guns, even back when they were new, were terribly unreliable and unsafe. Not just a case of crooked vs straight barrels. Very different situation from what we have today . . . although I guess people confusing W. Richards with Westley Richards is somewhat like someone confusing the various Rizzinis.

But bash on, if you wish . . . and let us know when you've actually SHOT a Rizzini to evaluate POI.

Larry Brown
Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 4:22 pm

Member

Joined: 26 Apr 2005
Posts: 671

Guy, I thought you said something about "laquered trash" being a common term in the ENGLISH trade. You might want to look at Forester's writings a bit harder. Although he was born in England, he lived most of his life in this country, and for the most part (maybe exclusively?) wrote about hunting in the States and the "British Provinces of North America" (Canada). In fact, he's regarded as one of the earliest (if not the earliest) American writers on wingshooting. Didn't think the phrase rang a bell with me from 19th century Brit writers, like Greener for example.

As for the advice concerning hardware store guns, etc . . . very different situation, then and now. At that time--before the Civil War (and even for a couple decades after)--there wasn't much of a domestic American shotgun industry. Most of our guns came from England or the Continent. Back then, the Belgians in particular had a bad reputation for knocking off famous British names and sending us cheap guns, marked for example "W. Richards", in imitation of Westley Richards. Some of those guns, even back when they were new, were terribly unreliable and unsafe. Not just a case of crooked vs straight barrels. Very different situation from what we have today . . . although I guess people confusing W. Richards with Westley Richards is somewhat like someone confusing the various Rizzinis.

But bash on, if you wish . . . and let us know when you've actually SHOT a Rizzini to evaluate POI.

Back to top

Larry,

I have a 12 bore side lever Damascus Hammer gun on my wall. It is a Belgian proofed "J.Manton". I would never shoot that thing, but I think it is just the coolest piece of memorabilia. Kind of like a 135 year old version of a Chinatown Rolex. Never noticed any laquer on it though.

I never checked the barrels either. My bad.

Joined: 21 Jan 2007 Posts: 23

"There are enough adventurous buyers who will take the risk and prove the true worth of the newly imported products for those wise enough to wait a bit before jumping in."

I always get a kick out of hearing folks suggest that when it comes to purchasing a weapon that one should "wait and see" or "buy only the tried and true."

If everyone heeded that narrow minded advice from the begining of time, we might all still be hunting with our hands.

Doug

*Last edited by 16gaugeguy on Wed Apr 04, 2007 8:14 am; edited 4 times in total*

Larry, Forester did not only warn us about the Belqian or German guns of his time. He also refered to the "rubbish" being made in the Birmingham manufacturies for the imported hardware trade. I believe he was referring to Birmingham, England.

Forester's point is not where shoddy guns are from. Its about avoiding shoddy guns made anywhere. Its about buying from a gun maker with a long standing solid reputation to protect earned through making a great product and for fair dealing. His advice still applies today IMO.

The domestic shotgun market has pretty much been overtaken by foreign makers. You very well know this yourself. We now depend on firms of businessmen who buy guns in bulk to import here after examining a few samples of the manufacturer's wares.

Some of these importers are staffed with folks who do know how and why a shotgun performs well or not. Browning America, Kreighoff/Dupont, Perazzi USA, GSI-Merkel, SKB USA, and Beretta USA are pretty good examples of some of the good ones.

However, many of these businessmen/importers are simply money men who would not know a good gun from a bad one, nor do they really care as long as certain basic safety issues are met and they are clear of any blatant liability issues. The actual performance of those guns is not high on the list of many of these men. They know that shiny and pretty wrapped in fancy trappings sells guns to folks who believe shiny and pretty equals good performance. You and I have been around long enough to know shiny and pretty do not gaurantee accuracy and good performance. You and I also know that high price does not always gaurantee accuracy and performance either.

The buying public has little control over how well those imported guns are made or how well they perform. The only control we consumers have is whether we buy or not buy. However, that is pretty powerful stuff if applied right. So it is up to the buying public to learn the basics of what makes one shotgun perform better than another. It always has been, but now, even more so. In simple terms, it is better to be armed with sound knowledge than rely on the kindness and integrity of strangers. It has always been buyer beware. This was Forester's point and mine.

Larry, I know you have been around long enough to know the truth of the matter. Playing the dumb fox and trying to side track the matter with minor details won't cut it here anymore my friend. you've pulled this old trick long enough. You very well know Forester was speaking truth, and you also know the circumstances of the shotgun market today. Lets stick to thwe heart of the matter shall we.

16gg, If a long standing tradition is all that matters, how come you don't sing the praises of Beretta, a firm that has been around since the 1500's? And that includes, during 2 (count em...2) World Wars???

*Last edited by 16gaugeguy on Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:55 am; edited 1 time in total*

MDNWATR.

Joined: 17 Jun 2004 Posts: 265

16GG,

you are clearly suffering from O.J. Simpson syndrome.

Your mind is closed to learning anything new. When a man knows everything he is truley dead.

Good Luck
Brian

*Last edited by 16gaugeguy on Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:56 am; edited 1 time in total*

MDNWATR

Joined: 17 Jun 2004 Posts: 265

16gg,
I already have told you what I know about Rizzini shotguns. To further discuss what you think is "lacquered trash would be a waste of time.

Member Joined: 26 Apr 2005 Posts: 743

Guy, Brian has owned and shot Rizzinis. You have not. I have. You have not. Experience talks. BS walks.

As for any comparison between "the trade" when Forester was writing and the gun business now . . . Guy, tell me, how many European countries do not have proof houses (and quite strictly enforced proof laws) now. When Forester was writing, "caveat emptor" meant a whole lot more than it does now, because the wrong gun--even new--might blow up upon firing. Proof houses did not even exist in some countries; laws were much less strictly enforced.

And anyone who knows much about the British gun business in the 19th century would also know that a lot of reputable firms took severe criticism from other reputable firms in England. Simply a way to promote your guns while knocking the other guy's. Breechloaders were terribly unsafe . . . or so the muzzleloader people said, when they first appeared. Fluid steel was weaker than Damascus--and in fact, in some early tests, Damascus fared better. The hammerless gun was a dangerous development, or so said the people who built hammerguns. The boxlock was a piece of junk, or so said the people who built sidelocks. Greener said bad things about the A&D boxlock compared to his own "facile princeps" action . . . and then, very quietly, bought an outfit called Needham so he could make and sell A&D guns without putting his name on them.

Prose often got pretty purple in the 1800's. Sometimes the targets of the defamation were makers of junk guns, like some Belgian firms; sometimes they were perfectly reputable competitors, down the street and around the corner in Birmingham. Taking their criticisms as literal truth is dangerous and misleading; comparing the gun industry then to the gun industry now is likewise misleading, although somewhat less dangerous.

Browning's Cynergy had some pre-production issues that we writers caught, when we tested the guns a few years back. But we did not catch the problem that resulted in a Cynergy recall--which goes to show that even Miroku/Browning can screw up. And of course Browning had one of the classic screw-ups of all time, with their "salt wood" Superposeds--although they did stand behind the guns.

Buying a gun is a bit like buying a car. You trust the maker to a certain degree, but you also trust the dealer. If the dealer's been in business for some time, and if you've done business with him for some time, you have a certain feeling of confidence, even if the car has problems. Pretty much the same deal with guns. Sure, I'd look over a Rizzini I bought, just like I'd look over a Browning or a Beretta. But I wouldn't worry much about any of them if I bought them from a dealer with a reputation of standing behind what they sell.

Once again 16GG has decided to start yet another urination for distance contest with anyone willing to lower their fly and yet again has been called on the carpet of misinformation or miss-stating/mis-communicating his point.

Too many fawking "mis"'s in my few sentences for this topic - I've read all of them, understood most of them and gleaned information from all of them.

recently several folks have resurfaced to inform/remind those of us here as to why they left - it does not bode well for most here. Sure we all disagree on points but I'm sure there's more than one point we can agree on weather it be gauge, orientation of barrels or quantity of triggers...

16GG - please take some time and seriously and objectively look at the criticisms pointed your way - mostly it has to do with perceived tone and attitude of presented material, followed by content. I think if you focus on the former first, you may find changes in the latter.

Sometimes the chip you wear on your shoulder, for whatever reason, is the size of a 32" trap gun...

Oh yes it is!

Larry, you basically have confirmed my message, Buy a brand you trust, from a dealer you trust, but look the purchase over before you buy. Looking the gun over carefully will help the purchaser indentify any problems before he buys it.

You also have confirmed that Browning does stand behind their products every time and is worthy of our trust when we buy a Browning. This is true for a number of companies. There are many companies that had problematic guns leave the factory and get sold to the public. Those that fixed these problems gained our trust and our respect for doing so. It shows integrity. This goes for cars or any manufactured goods too. Its just plain common sense.

However, guns that have born the Rizzini name in the not too distant past were not backed up. They were orphaned like other lesser known Italian and Spanish shotguns from the '60s through the mid 90's that I am familiar with.

I shot some of these older Rizzini guns. I said as much. I was most fortunate not to have actually bought one. They were not well made as a whole. They were safe to shoot. All new guns are as you have pointed out. They have to be to avoid liability issues. However being safe to shoot does not necessarily mean those older Rizzini guns were functionally reliable or accurate. Some were. Some were not. This could be true of any brand gun not held to a high standard of quality control. The warranties these older Rizzini guns came with were worthless. So the poor shooting ones were never fixed. Many of them are still out there somewhere haunting the used gun racks. The good thing is, not too many were brought in--just enough to ruin the name. That ruined name is the price paid for poor integrity.

Perhaps if some of the folks who bought them had been able to identify any obviuos flaws in the barrels, or had known the guns were going to be abandoned by the importers, they would not have bought them. Perhaps if the dealers who trusted the businessmen who imported this older Rizzini line of guns had known they were about to be stuck with a line of guns they had to eat, they would not have bought in.

Unfortunately, neither the buyers, nor the dealers were able to foresee the problems they were getting into. Nor were the dealers able to get any of the stinkers fixed. I do know many of these guns were traded back to the dealers as used. But the owners took the financial hit on those trades.

I do not know of any of these guns being traded back for more than 40% of the new price--which was high enough to begin with. These guns were not bargain priced originally. The retail price should have indicated quality.

However, price is not a good indicator of quality. Never has been, in guns or cars. The Japanese tought my generation that with theri inexpensive cars that lasted far longer than their overpriced, tricked out, but far less reliable American counterparts.

however, guns and cars is not that good a comparison because of their relative value to our society. The big difference here, is that if a car company dumped a bunch of bad cars on the market, and did not back up the warranty on them, there would be hell to pay both legally and politically. This does not happen with guns. Aside from the fact that guns and gun owners have a number of highly placed political enemies, guns are just not that important in our society anymore. We rely on our cars. Shotguns, especially double guns, are now recreational sports equipment. If they do not blow up and kill or maim folks, nobody cares wether they shoot well or not--except the folks who like them.

So today, because of what a handful of unscrupoulus busnessmen did a while back the Rizzini name has a tough row to hoe in overcoming it's questiionable past with the folks who got burned before. I know a few dealers in my area that snort every time they hear the name Rizzini. Same goes for some folks I know who owned one. They do not trust the name. I can't blame them. I don't either for the same reason. I saw what happened to others. I do not have to fall into a trap I have seen others fall into to reckognise the danger. there is an old saying. Once burned, twice wise.

So perhaps these new Rizzini guns are mostly good ones. I've seen some with good barrels. I said this. I also saw some with bad barrels. I will wait and see how well these new problematic individual guns are handled under the new firms' warranties--both I and B Rizzini. I will watch carefully. If I see that these guns are being properly fixed and backed up, then I might even buy one or two. I've already said this too. But for now, I will watch and see. My own trust have not been gained back yet. That is going to take a while. Based on my own experience and the experience of othwer folks I know, I will advise others to go very cautiously about buying any gun with the Rizzini name.

You and everyone here will not change my mind on this matter of trust. So perhaps its best if we just let the matter drop now. I think I've made my position and my beliefs plain enough. I'm done here. Thank you.