I am going to write about some questions that have bugged me for years. According to some writings the powers to be in England outlawed the importation of rifles and ammunition into the Sudan and India in the early years after 1900, of .450 calibers due to “political unrest†of the locals. This affected such calibers as the .500x450 x 3.25 and .450 x 3.25, whether Nitro or BP and the .450 #2.

Therefore, the gun makers came out with others such as the .470, .475 #2 Eley and Jeffrey, .476 WR, and .465 Holland at various dates between then and say 1910.

Now, consider the rifle #19109, in .500/450 completed in Dec. of 1908 for President Roosevelt. According to Teddy’s writing this rifle went with him on the big safari that started in Kenya and ended in Khartoum, Sudan. At that date, why would H & H make the rifle in .500/450 or the President order that caliber when it was banned where he was going? Selective enforcement of the ban?

Now going a step further, during the ‘70’s I owned (and regret selling!) and hunted with rifle #19108, in .450 #2, a Royal Deluxe made in 1907, for the Maharajah Pretab Bahadur in India. ( Also inlaid in gold on the barrels.) That rifle came to me out of India through H &H through one of their American directors at the time. How did that happen? Selective enforcement of the ban?

Both are great rifles and mine was a joy to use, but I just wonder how tight the ban really was. Any theories anyone has, I would like to hear.

I was sure hoping that you would get someone knowledgeable to respond. You cetainly asked a MOST interesting question!

African Hunter,

The subject is covered quite well in chapter 7 of Wal Winfers book "British Single Shot Rifles" volume 3.

It was the Indian government that issued the caliber ban starting in 1899, the ban included 303, 450 and 577 ammunition and guns for them.

There were some exceptions made, one allowed military target shooters to bring in a 303 target rifle and up to 1000 rounds of ammunition. And another one was made in 1907 that stated that if you could show that a restricted arm was ordered and under construction on 09/11/06 it was allowed in.

Hope this helps.

AH,
Unfortunatly the one person who would have an answer is no longer posting on this forum! And that is 400 Nitro Express!

quote:

Originally posted by Doc52:
AH,
Unfortunatly the one person who would have an answer is no longer posting on this forum! And that is 400 Nitro Express!

Why is he no longer posting here?

The way I saw it was that he made many declarative statements but never wanted to substantiate them.

So when I questioned this he got all upset and started taking pot shots at me and others.

I've learned to live without it!

If 400 Nitro Express is truely not posting here anymore..... I will miss his input/viewpoint.

Looks like I missed all the excitement. Again.

By Doc52

Posted Thu Sep 18 2008 21:38
"AH,
Unfortunately the one person who would have an answer is no
longer posting on this forum! And that is 400 Nitro Express!"

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Nobody's perfect. I'd submit that 400NitroExpress

helped me personally to make a decision about which

rifle to buy. He contributed much sound info here.

Was he "Mr. Congeniality"? No. But he was far, far

from the most difficult guy HERE. He once "plastered"

me with an answer about the velocity of a 470 NE. I

clearly saw that he was just having a little sport at

my expense, and I got a good laugh from his colorful

response and posted that. No one took offense and on

we all went enjoying this site. I hope things can be
ironed out and that he'll return.

Here is what 400 Nitro had to say when we first did this topic back in May of this year.

Regards, Tim
----------------------------------

"The .450 Nitros were never banned, but the order gradually came to be erroneously interpreted that way over time by many bureaucrats

That version [that the .450 Nitros were entirely banned] has been parroted endlessly, but that doesn't make it true.

The hotspot in India at the end of the 19th century was the Northwest Frontier, the border between British India and Afghanistan, as the same border between Pakistan and Afghanistan remains a hotspot today. At the time, the Afridi tribesmen were raiding military stockpiles for rifles and ammunition, and using them to shoot up the place. Like bureaucrats today, The Right Honourable The Governor in Council for the Bombay Presidency had a typical bureaucrat's solution. In March, 1899, he issued an order banning the importation of rifles and ammunition in .303 British, .577/.450 Martini Henry, and .577 Snider - the three military rifles and cartridges then stockpiled in India - in a misguided attempt to deny arms and ammunition to the rebels. Further, residents of India of British and European descent, whether British subjects or not, were specifically exempted from the order. Such residents were permitted to import rifles in the banned calibers, together with a quantity of ammunition suitable for personal use. The reference to the Foreign Office in the link above is simply fluff, as the Foreign Office had no authority over India. British authority over India was exercised directly through the crown's Viceregal, and the Secretary of State for India, Lord Hamilton, neither of which chose to meddle in this affair.

The ban was aimed at the native Indian population, but the Maharajas were a huge source of revenue to the British gun trade. The trade didn't care much about the other two, but the .303 ban was a huge problem. The .303 was then to the British what the .30-06 has been to us for the last 100 years. They got busy introducing replacement cartridges for it for the Indian market. The .400/.350, .350 No. 2, the four .400/.360s, and Holland's .375 2 1/2" Flanged Nitro Express were all introduced as .303 replacements between 1899 and 1901. BSA also picked up the 8mm BSA, also called the .315 Mauser, for the previously .303 caliber Lee-Enfield sporting rifles that they manufactured for the Indian market.

With the .303 issue then resolved, that should have been the end of it. Unfortunately, Indian civil service bureaucrats gradually began to interpret the order as prohibiting ALL .303, .450, and .577 bore rifles. This interpretation was clearly illegal, as the Governor's order was very specific, but the trade couldn't get in front of the problem for some reason. Because the import of most of the .450 sporting ammunition was gradually being strangled due to misinterpretation of the order, a crisis in the availability of ammunition for them in India resulted, which peaked in 1906. To the trade, the only way to cut the Gordian knot seemed to be what was done with the .303.

Eley Brothers first drew the .500/.465 NE, .475 3 1/4" NE, and the .475 No. 2 NE in January, 1907. In February, the original version of the .475 No. 2 was discarded, and a new version drawn, which Eley retained for proprietary purposes, and another version of it was drawn for Jeffery's proprietary use. By that time, Holland had picked up the .500/.465 as proprietary, and Cogswell & Harrison the .475 3 1/4". Westley Richards introduced their .476 somewhat later.

It's true that the .450 bore was banned in the Sudan, but it certainly never was in the remainder of British Africa. In fact, the three .450 Nitros remained very popular throughout the remainder of British territory in Africa for a long time after. Theodore Roosevelt used a Holland .450 on his famous safari in 1910, and Kermit used a Rigby .450. Many famous East African professionals continued to use .450s for as long as Kynoch continued to make the ammunition, including Philip Percival, who ordered a new pair of Lang .450 No. 2s in 1927.

For the British gun trade, the Indian rifle market was huge. In comparison, the African market was never more than a small sideshow, and the Sudan a tiny segment of that. The ban in the Sundan was too insignificant to matter to them."

Thanks Tim, I missed his posting in May.

You're welcome. Must say I miss 400 Nitro's knowledgeable posts....

Regards

The way I saw it was that he made many declarative statements but never wanted to substantiate them.

So when I questioned this he got all upset and started taking pot shots at me and others.

I've learned to live without it!

------------------------------------------------
WILL,

And what were the statements that he could not substanciate? What a BIG EGO!! You Sir are a legend in your own mind!

Gentlemen, the departure of 400 Nitro Express is a loss for all concerned here! Mark can be a hand full at times, but I have known him, personally, for many years, and though I know many who are very knowledgeable about the British firearms makers, and the history of the rifles they made, not one here, IMO, can hold a light for Mark to type by on that subject. There are many things that I disagree with Mark on, but these things are mostly that of utility, rather than the finer aspects of the British gun trade. He simply cannot abide a double rifle that is not made un the UK, while I have found favor with many makes of European doubles that he very reluctantly admits are fine but are simply not British, so are inferior.

That being said, and knowing Mark very well, I can tell you he doesn't suffer ignorance, or the questioning his information well, and sees no reason to research his information for anyone, and is of the opinion that if a person doesn't believe what he tells them they can do their own research, and learn something in the process! I for one agree with him in that respect, and many here could learn a lot by simply doing the research he has spent several decades doing for his own learning process!

It was my assumption that these forums were a place where no question was too silly to be asked, and that all answers to those questions were equal in their importance as a whole package for the questioner to glean his answer from! Maybe not it seems, because there have been many very knowledgeable posters here who were simply drummed out, because some disagreed with them on some subject! SAD, don't you think?

..................Just a simple observation from the peanut gallery, that everyone is free to disagree with!

quote:

Originally posted by Doc52:
The way I saw it was that he made many declarative statements but never wanted to substantiate them.

So when I questioned this he got all upset and started taking pot shots at me and others.

I've learned to live without it!


WILL,

And what were the statements that he could not substanciate? What a BIG EGO!! You Sir are a legend in your own mind!

Ding dong. All I did was ask to substantiate his contentions about this subject and he got all huffy. Who has the big ego?

Will,
Explain to me where Mark didn't substantiate his argument????????? Maybe I missed something! If so, I apologize! From what I can tell , He made a very informative argument ! Am I wrong? Is Mark wrong? Let Me know where the indescretions are and we will make amends! Since You Are the one throwing stones, Cast the first!!!!!!!!!!!