THE MATTER OF ENGRAVING
Engraving is placed upon a gun purely as an ornament to satisfy the
esthetic taste of the sportsman. It adds not one iota to the soundness
of the arm, its shooting qualities, ease of manipulation, fit, or
balance. It is a luxury on a footing with our preference for broadcloth
in place of jeans, silver knives and chinaware where steel and tin
platters would do as well, pictures upon the wall, that without them
would afford us as much shelter and creature comfort. The civilized
man has developed a taste for the beautiful, otherwise he would not be
civilized, and while he could return to barbarous ways and still exist,
why should he?
[Illustration: WEALTH OF ORNAMENTATION ON THE SAUER GUN]
The engraving upon a shotgun costs from five dollars to two hundred
and fifty. The plainest style of engraving and the cheapest is known
as line engraving. It consists of a simple line about the borders of
the locks and frame with a bit of etching around the screw heads. The
next higher grade would comprise some scrolls cut into the locks and
possibly the outline of a bird. Then we have scroll engraving, scroll
engraving in relief, scroll work inlaid with gold, picture and game
engraving surrounded with scroll as a frame, and picture engraving to
individual order.
Tastes differ in the ornamentation of guns. One man prefers a wealth of
ornamentation, another is pleased with the simplest style, while others
may like none at all. Gunmakers are partial to different designs also,
one being noted for handsome scroll work in relief, and another for the
artistic spirit displayed in his game scenes.
Engraving upon respectable arms is supposed to be done by hand. If this
is true the average gunbuilder makes a mere machine out of his artists,
for gun after gun is cut exactly alike to the line. Neither will the
manufacturer vary his design to order. Should you purchase a hundred
dollar grade gun it will have just so much engraving upon it, and there
will be ten thousand more cut like it to the last dot.
I knew an army officer who ordered a high priced arm of one of our
builders; he wished it left as plain in locks and frame as one of his
army rifles, but could not secure what he desired and was obliged to
accept the usual engraving that went with the grade. Just why this
should have been the case is something for the manufacturers to explain.
A word of advice might be given to our gunmakers here at which they
should take no offense. We are noted for the excellence of our sound,
well balanced arms in the cheaper and medium grades, but many hesitate
to purchase the finer weapons because they do not believe they are
getting value in ornamentation and appearance. The gentleman of means
who buys a high grade gun feels a trifle as did the man who would only
drink coffee that cost fifty cents a pound. The country merchant had
no grade of the berry higher priced than twenty-five cents, but it was
either fifty cents or no sale so he sold--one pound.
I may not be forgiven for here venturing to criticize the scroll
engravings so popular in this and other countries, but in plain
truth I consider it nothing more nor less than ornamental penmanship
transferred to the frame of a gun. It consists of a lot of curved
lines, beautiful in themselves, perhaps, but senseless and meaningless
as a whole or as a composition. I am no better satisfied with
ornamental penmanship on my gun than I would be to have such flourishes
take the place of my paintings which tell a story with life and fire
and beauty. A certain amount of scroll is all right as a relief to the
plain steel, as a setting to a picture, but other things being equal
I should prefer the simple scrolls that are placed upon the medium
guns to the elaborate curls and curleycues with which the steel is so
thoroughly scratched on our fine guns. I fancy there are others who
feel just as I do about this and hence the reluctance to pay good
money for engraving or to buy the higher grades of weapons.
[Illustration: THIS IS THE BEST STYLE OF ENGRAVING AND WOOD
ORNAMENTATION USED BY THE WINCHESTER COMPANY. FLORID BUT BEAUTIFUL. THE
COST IS ABOUT $200]
The man who is willing to pay for it should have his tastes consulted
in the engraving of his gun. If he has a preference for scroll
engraving, all well and good, but if he desires pictures on his piece
in keeping with the use to which the arm is to be devoted, then he
should have them. Above all he is entitled to have his weapon an
individual arm in appearance and ornamentation and not an exact
duplicate of a thousand others. The builder of one of the most popular
imported guns recognizes this, and every one of his higher grade guns
is engraved with a distinct design of its own.
Not only is this desirable, but the purchaser should be consulted
with regard to what he wishes reproduced. I should prefer an old
hawk sitting on the dead limb of a tree, a bevy of quail roosting in
the grass, a mallard dropping into the marsh, the head of a favorite
setter, to all the flourishes that could be cut into the steel. I
regard gold inlaying, gold plating, gold triggers, etc., as on a par
with nickel plating the barrels and would as soon have one as the other.
In the matter of ornamentation it seems that we will be obliged, willy
nilly, to take what the manufacturers give us. Moreover we have no
distinctive style of engraving in this country but have copied after
England. If you are satisfied with the English style of gun engraving
it can be obtained just as perfectly here. But the writer is forced
reluctantly to admit that Continental gun engravers, in his humble
opinion, are more artistic than either those of England or America. The
sole excuse that an American could have for preferring an arm built in
Germany, France, or Belgium is that the ornamentation is more to his
liking. He pays well for this, and sacrifices something in sterling
lasting and wearing qualities, but if the appearance of the piece
gives him the most pleasure he is entitled to gratify his own tastes.
It only remains for our builders to meet the demand for arms that are
ornamented by artists rather than mechanics.
AMERICAN AND FOREIGN SHOTGUNS COMPARED
Prejudice and local pride are likely to make any American, other than
an Anglo-maniac, a biased judge when it comes to comparing our arms
with those made in Europe. I make no denial of having a preference for
home built weapons, yet I shall attempt to treat all as fairly as I may.
In the first place it is not to be expected that there will be any
wonderful difference in the output of the various countries. The same
barrels are in common use, the systems of boring are alike in practical
results, the stocks are the same and the quality of steel, while the
constructive machinery differs little. It follows that weapons can
diverge only in minor particulars, such as locks and bolts, cocking
mechanism, and finish. It would not be worth while to dwell upon
features that are common to all, so I will confine myself to pointing
out briefly wherein they differ.
[Illustration: The Diamond Daly; beautiful German style of engraving]
Any close observer would be quick to note that the frames of nearly
all American arms are longer and heavier than those built across the
water. These long frames are a very positive advantage when considering
strength alone, for a gun with long frame _must_ outlast the one with
short frame, other things being equal. This is for the reason that
there will be less leverage against the locking bolts. It is true,
however, that this rule works both ways, and if a short-framed gun
gives more leverage against its fastenings, it also exerts greater
lever power in cocking both the main lock and the ejector. The
increased leverage in the short-framed gun comes from giving the locks
a shorter end of the lever and because the barrels turn farther on the
joint in opening the gun. If need be, this point could be absolutely
proved by lengthening the frame to such an extent that the piece could
not be cocked by hand at all in the usual way. It follows that while
American arms are the strongest, as a rule they function harder than
those made in Europe. Of course there might be exceptions but this is
the rule; what we gain in strength we lose in ease of manipulation.
In locking bolts and fastenings I am glad to vote the American ticket
straight. As noted, our long frames give us the advantage in the first
place, and besides our weapons are mechanically superior in this
respect. England and the Continent have tended steadily to multiplicity
of fastenings, America to simplicity. While they have developed a
quintuple locking action we have invented a single rotary bolt that is
emphatically stronger than all of their five. Locking bolts, length of
frames, and cocking mechanisms constitute the only really essential
differences between American and foreign arms, and in these assuredly
America scores. I am not considering the cheap output of Europe, for
with such arms we have nothing worthless enough to compare.
Engraving has been sufficiently treated. I can only repeat here
that England and America have practically the same style of gun
ornamentation, in which they are excelled by both Germany and France.
In weights of arms there is perhaps a greater variation in those of
Europe. They build lighter arms than we find serviceable and also
construct weapons for heavier charges than any listed by our ammunition
houses.
The English game gun is a very light arm, weighing in twelve gauge
from 5½ to 6¾ pounds. It is used with reduced charges upon driven
and hand raised game. We have never found featherweights adapted to
American shooting though they became a short lived fad a few years
since. The English pigeon gun, balancing at from seven to eight pounds,
is practically the same as our all-service arm. The European wildfowl
gun with its heavy charge has had but a limited demand in this country
since the ten bore went out of fashion. All nations are alike devoting
a good deal of consideration to the small bores at the present time;
neither do the dimensions of the narrow gauges vary greatly whether
made in America or Europe.
It is probable that the cost of building a shotgun in this country and
Europe is about the same. Doubtless their handworkmen receive a trifle
less wages than ours, but on the other hand our gunmaking machinery is
better and we have more of it.
Every imported arm pays an import duty amounting to about one-third
of its value which must be added to the cost of the arm. It follows
that we should expect an American arm costing one hundred dollars
to be of like value with a foreign gun at one hundred and fifty; a
three hundred dollar European piece grading with ours at two hundred.
These figures will apply approximately to weapons of all grades. The
conclusion is logical that where the sportsman has but a limited amount
of money to be placed in his weapon he will do well to purchase from a
home builder. Where money is not a consideration an elegant arm can be
obtained either at home or abroad.