The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Black Powder and Cowboy Action Shooting

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 10, 2011, 01:23 AM   #51
DG45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2009
Posts: 904
Sorry to have misrepresented your views Fingers. I've checked some sources myself and may have to strech this to several postings in order not to be timed out.

1. In the Index to the Memphis Appeal, an ad is shown to have run for Schneider & Glassick Gunsmiths on May 19, 1855 page 3; column 5. So this firm had been in business as gunsmiths in Memphis for at least 5 years before the Civil War began.

2. In the Tennessee state gazeteer and business directory for 1860-61, in which the Preface was written buy the publisher John L. Mitchell on March 1, 1860 there are two separate listing for Schneider & Glassick. On page 429 under the listing for Gunsmiths, Schneider & Glassick are listed, and on page 430 under Guns, Pistols, etc. the firm of Schneider & Glassick is listed again.

So, it seems obvious that this company was in the business of making pistols for a minimum of two full years, ie., from no later than March 1, 1860 until whatever date Memphis fell in March 1862. In fact they may have been manufacturing them for a lot longer than that but the March 1, 1860 date is the earliest date that is in print anywhere.

3. A Dec. 8, 1861 article in the Memphis Daily Appeal reads exactly as follows:

"Memphis manufacture. We were yesterday shown by Msesrs:Schneider & Glassick of Jefferson Street, between Front and Main Streets, a six-shooter Navy pistol of their manufacture. The finish of the whole, the accuracy of the parts, and the excellent workings of the mechanism are admirable. Iron, brasswork and woodwork are all specimens of skill. We are proud that memphis can turn out such splendid worksmanship."

Nowhere is it mentioned that this was a prototype revolver. I don't see how anybody can add all this up and come to that conclusion. I take it that the firm had been manufacturing revolvers for two years, without much demand, and then suddenly, the Civil War is looming, and everyone is interested in who's doing what. The operative fact here is this was a general interest article and not an ad. If Schneider & Glassick had been trying to promote a prototype revolver, they'd have had to pay for the ad.

4. Anyfact.com website shows that a Schneider & Glassick revolver was sold at auction in 2005 by the auction house of Wallis & Wallis (Lot 445). It was said to be a composite copy of a .36 Colt Navy. It had a New York USA America address, London proofs, and was stamped on the left side Schneider & Glassick Memphis Tn. Interestingly. its barrel was only 6.25 inches. (The Pietta copy I have has a 7 1/2 inch barrel).

5. American Firearms website says Schneider & Glassick made .41 cal. Deringer type pistols and a .36 cal. percussion Confederate copy of the Colt 1851 Navy, with a production of 50 or less of the latter. "Only number 6, 12, and 23 are known." No source for their claim of a production of less than 50 was given.

6. In a Question and Answer section on a website called Antiqueguns.com a person identified as Tom Lopiano, who was the expert, was asked a question about a Schneider & Glassick pistol that was .36 cal. and had a brass frame STEEL TRIGGERGUARD, and a "shortened Colt barrel" that was marked Schneider & Glassick, Memphis Tennessee. On the left side of the barrel above the wedge was marked B28, with a W inspection mark on the left of the frame. The bottom of the grip was marked 2 Va. Cav. It was mentioned that the rammer was stouter than a Colt. The answer that was given to the questioner was "Regarding the Schneider & Glassick it seems like it may be a 'composite' revolver, but again, I would have to inspect it. A brass frame may denote a Griswold and Gunnison manufacture. The steel triggerguard may come from another imitation Colt or a Colt. The barrel may be a Colt barrel."

Wow, got it all in without being timed out.

Last edited by DG45; July 10, 2011 at 02:02 AM.
DG45 is offline  
Old July 10, 2011, 07:26 AM   #52
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,943
Quote:
2. In the Tennessee state gazeteer and business directory for 1860-61, in which the Preface was written buy the publisher John L. Mitchell on March 1, 1860 there are two separate listing for Schneider & Glassick. On page 429 under the listing for Gunsmiths, Schneider & Glassick are listed, and on page 430 under Guns, Pistols, etc. the firm of Schneider & Glassick is listed again.

So, it seems obvious that this company was in the business of making pistols for a minimum of two full years, ie., from no later than March 1, 1860 until whatever date Memphis fell in March 1862.
That doesn't say they were manufacturers but gunsmiths and dealers.


Quote:
3. A Dec. 8, 1861 article in the Memphis Daily Appeal reads exactly as follows:

"Memphis manufacture. We were yesterday shown by Msesrs:Schneider & Glassick of Jefferson Street, between Front and Main Streets, a six-shooter Navy pistol of their manufacture. The finish of the whole, the accuracy of the parts, and the excellent workings of the mechanism are admirable. Iron, brasswork and woodwork are all specimens of skill. We are proud that memphis can turn out such splendid worksmanship."

Nowhere is it mentioned that this was a prototype revolver. I don't see how anybody can add all this up and come to that conclusion. I take it that the firm had been manufacturing revolvers for two years, without much demand, and then suddenly, the Civil War is looming, and everyone is interested in who's doing what. The operative fact here is this was a general interest article and not an ad. If Schneider & Glassick had been trying to promote a prototype revolver, they'd have had to pay for the ad.
It says they were shown a revolver. My take is that after the war broke out they tried their hand at manufacturing. If they had been manufacturing for two years I doubt they would have gotten free praise. My take on it is it was a prototype and was given a glowing revue because Memphis was proud of her native sons and for helping with the war effort. I don't see any way you can subjugate any of that into they were manufacturing since 1860.
Hawg is offline  
Old July 10, 2011, 10:45 AM   #53
DG45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2009
Posts: 904
First, I didn't understand what the New York address meant on the one that was supposedly auctioned by Wallis and Wallis in 2005 indicated. Did anyone understand the significance of that? I get what the the London proofs meant.

2nd, I've been thinking since I made my last post that as long as Tennessee was still part of the Union, Colt would have still been protected by a patent on their 1851 Navy revolver, wouldn't they?

If so, it may be that the the timeline that controlled what date Schneider & Glassick could begin making Colt clone Navy revolvers was the date that Tennessee voters ratified secession on 6 June 1861.

The differing configurations reported for S&G revolvers seems to me to indicate a small time special order manufacturer, who could build a .36 cal. "composite" Colt type Navy revolver however the customer wanted it built, just like there are companies in business today that can assemble a clone PC type computer according whatever what features you want or don't want.

HH says one of the three known examples of S&G had an iron frame - and what may have been either a 4th known example (or a fraud) was the subject of the Question & Answer mentioned in my last post. It suposedly had an iron triggerguard, and "a shortened Colt barrel"; and the one reportedly auctioned by Wallis and Wallis in 2005 also had a short 6 1/2 inch barrel. Pietta apparently based heir S&G replica on a 7 1/2 inch barrel model.

So S&G may have been a low production special order gun that you could order with several variables.

I sure wish I could find more info on the gun mentioned in the Quesion & Answer on my last post. It may have been a fraud, but if that gun was legit, and if the B27 indicated a serial number 27, that would have been a 4th known model, and the 2 VA Cav, if legit, would have been a very interesting marking. It may not have been legit though.

HH you may be right about it being a prototype. I can't prove otherwise, but I don't think it was. I think it was just a gun they'd just made that they showed the writer when he walked in the door.

I also saw a photo of a short barreled rabbit eared shotgun (coach gun?) on line that was marked Schneider & Glassick. If they also manufactured or had their name stamped on .41 deringer types as has been claimed, then they made or at least had their name stamped on at least 3 different kinds of guns out of this very small firm, so I doubt if they were pumping anything out in Henry Ford assembly line fashion.

I no longer question anyones low production estimates for the S&G Colt clone. I agree that they probably weren't manufacturing that particular gun for even a year before they were out of business, and there were probably very few of them ever made.

However, they seem to have been reasonably well made guns, and to have been considered quality guns for that day and time, and I'm guessing they could be customized to fit the individual customers taste.

Those that were made were probably individually ordered by people who could afford customized quality, for example, perhaps someone in the 2nd Va. Cav. ordered one.

Their overall impact on the war was obviously miniscule, but it seems very likely that most if not all those that were made were used by Confederate personnel in the war, and some of them probably wound up killing or wounding Feds. Their impact on the war would have seemed pretty big to the victims.

Last edited by DG45; July 10, 2011 at 12:37 PM.
DG45 is offline  
Old July 11, 2011, 06:31 PM   #54
Hardy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 6, 2009
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 709
Fingers,

I think awhile back I told you a reanactor said he had his ancestors 44 Rem style that was made by Richmond Arms during the war. You said that did not happen. Bill, our shop keeper keeps in touch w/ some guy in NY that's all into this and he said they did and to find out about them you have to search thru Conneticut Arms. I haven't tried. I do not know. I do not know about that Glassick--but I ordered 2 for the store today since they are economical and come in a GREAT PIETTA BOX LOL I think I can sell them Bill said they only had few left.

WBH
Hardy is offline  
Old July 11, 2011, 07:01 PM   #55
Fingers McGee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 19, 2008
Location: High & Dry in Missouri Ozarks
Posts: 2,101
Richmond Arms, or Richmond Armory made musket and Carbines for the Confederacy. They did not make any revolvers.
__________________
Fingers (Show Me MO smoke) McGee - AKA Man of Many Colts - Alter ego of Diabolical Ken; SASS Regulator 28564-L-TG; Rangemaster and stage writer extraordinaire; Frontiersman, Pistoleer, NRA Endowment Life, NMLRA, SAF, CCRKBA, STORM 327, SV115; Charter member, Central Ozarks Western Shooters
Cynic: A blackguard whose faulty vision see things as they are, not as they should be. Ambrose Bierce
Fingers McGee is offline  
Old July 11, 2011, 07:07 PM   #56
Hardy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 6, 2009
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 709
Ok Fingers- good info- You're the Captain

WBH
Hardy is offline  
Old July 12, 2011, 02:49 AM   #57
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,943
Connecticut Arms(not CVA) made Hammond bulldog pistols from 1863-1869 and what would that have to do with a Southern manufacturer of rifles and carbines?
Hawg is offline  
Old July 12, 2011, 09:09 AM   #58
madcratebuilder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2007
Location: Northern Orygun
Posts: 4,923
In addition to the books Fingers posted two more that offer insight to these Confederate Colts are "The Confederate Brass-framed Colt & Whitney" by WA Albaugh and "The Original Confederate Colt" by WA Albaugh.

As you dig deeper in to the history of the Confederate manufacturers you well find that they were receiving large amounts of money from the CS of A on the promise of producing hand guns. They often sold positions in the company as these positions were exempt from the draft. Plenty of shenanigans.
madcratebuilder is offline  
Old July 13, 2011, 03:31 PM   #59
Hardy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 6, 2009
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 709
Ok after reading TomKay---and everything else on thread--Our store ordered 2 after carefull consideration and I'm glad I did because there are only a few left. We have customers that don't have alot of money and this is something we can offer for less than 200 that they can see and feel and hopefully buy necessary accessories. But--I have not seen them up personal but the last Pietta 1851 tradional navy (steel) w/ spare cylinder was prisine---and it came in PIETTA BOX Sold quickly--I called Taylors to get more and they were discontinued. Let you guys know what they look, feel, and action, balance etc----That is if you want me to.

WBH
Hardy is offline  
Old July 13, 2011, 04:05 PM   #60
Hardy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 6, 2009
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 709
I'm BACK!

The rems on Cabela site are good. In fact we buy them just like you do but we order 44 Pietta conversion cylinders from Taylors. The Rems on Taylors -retail- are 295 and up but they are Uberti. I haven't had a problem yet w/ pietta rems from Cabella which are a lot cheaper and the conversion cylinders fit great! But, these are the only cabella guns I order. All others are thru Taylors. Or Ellett Bros and individuals-- if you have some junkers that you want to get rid of--like old CVA whatever--let me know. If you need a Uberti, I order wholesale and as promised befor for only members on this thread--a 10% markup. Fair?
Hardy is offline  
Old July 13, 2011, 11:57 PM   #61
DG45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2009
Posts: 904
correction

I need to correct my post #28 above in which I said Memphis fell to Federal forces in March 1862. I don't know where I got that but I'd like to blame it on somebody else.

Actually Memphis fell to federal forces on June 6, 1862, exactly one year to the day after Tennessee voters ratified secession on June 6, 1861.

The importance of this is in the likely length of the Schneider & Glassick revolvers production run.

S&G should have been free of US patent constraints after June 6, 1861.

Even if they didn't produce their first revolver until Dec. 8, 1861, when one of them was exhibited to a Memphis Daily Appeal newspaperman, they had a six month period in which to produce their Colt pattern revolvers.
DG45 is offline  
Old July 14, 2011, 10:00 AM   #62
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,943
Even if they didn't produce their first revolver until Dec. 8, 1861, when one of them was exhibited to a Memphis Daily Appeal newspaperman, they had a six month period in which to produce their Colt pattern revolvers.




Last edited by Hawg; July 14, 2011 at 10:06 AM.
Hawg is offline  
Old July 14, 2011, 10:43 AM   #63
Fingers McGee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 19, 2008
Location: High & Dry in Missouri Ozarks
Posts: 2,101
__________________
Fingers (Show Me MO smoke) McGee - AKA Man of Many Colts - Alter ego of Diabolical Ken; SASS Regulator 28564-L-TG; Rangemaster and stage writer extraordinaire; Frontiersman, Pistoleer, NRA Endowment Life, NMLRA, SAF, CCRKBA, STORM 327, SV115; Charter member, Central Ozarks Western Shooters
Cynic: A blackguard whose faulty vision see things as they are, not as they should be. Ambrose Bierce
Fingers McGee is offline  
Old July 14, 2011, 11:44 AM   #64
DG45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2009
Posts: 904
I have to admit that's funny Hawg, although before you sent the video I'd have sworn you were a dude.

Lawyers say, when the facts are on your side pound the facts, when the law is on your side, pound the law. When neither the facts nor the law is on your side, pound the desk. I'm savvy enough to know that that video is your way of pounding on your desk.

Anyway, glad you chimed in, because they've closed our other favorite thread, but most of the same cast of characters is on this one too, so I thought this would be as good a place as any to point out to you that I've discovered since they closed that other thread, that you can type the words "1858 Remington" into a Yahoo Search Engine, and ALL of the first four listings that come up, if you pull them up and read them, including Wekipedia, the free encyclopedia, say that one of the things that contributed to the Remington 1858 revolvers popularity was THE RELATIVE EASE WITH WHICH A SOLDIER COULD RELOAD USING AN EXTRA LOADED CYLINDER.

Just wanted to let you guys in the "it never happened" (and the world is flat, and they never landed on the moon) cult know that there is another point of view out there in the great world outside.

Not saying you were wrong on the facts (although I believe you were wrong), just saying there's a h*ll of a lot of people who don't agree with you, not just DG45.

Last edited by DG45; July 15, 2011 at 10:58 AM.
DG45 is offline  
Old July 14, 2011, 11:49 AM   #65
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,943
Quote:
Not saying you were wrong on the facts (although I believe you were wrong), just saying there's a h*ll of a lot of people who don't agree with you, not just DG45.
They're misinformed just like DG45.
BTW I am a dude that was just the best rolleyes gif I found.
Hawg is offline  
Old July 14, 2011, 02:10 PM   #66
mykeal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 8, 2006
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 2,772
Just for the record, on this question I'm with HH, if that matters.

As for 'the rest of the world', well, Wilkipedia's record for factual reporting of history is probably the best example of how reliance on the internet for truth is foolhardy. Anyone who's had to deal with the Wilkipedia jury knows full well that it's a completely political game and the facts be damned. Wilkepedia's opinion (NOT fact) that the alleged popularity of the Remington New Army was due to the speed with which loaded cylinders could be swapped is hardly proof of that position; in fact, many, like me, will see that as refutation of the claim simply because Wilkepedia said so.

And the other three sources are simply repeating Wilkepedia's falsehoods, a very common internet phenomenon.

I have to admit I'm amused by DG45's glib dismissal of the lack of physical evidence of his position. According to his logic, the fact that we've never found physical evidence of unicorns or mermaids is not sufficient to say they don't exist.
mykeal is offline  
Old July 14, 2011, 04:38 PM   #67
DG45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2009
Posts: 904
mykeal , there are things like Unicorns and Mermaids that there is no physical evidence of that probably didn't exist and things like Santa Claus coming down the chimney that probably didn't happen. On the other hand there are some things of which there are no written records that probably did happen.

Let's say you are E. Remington, and you're going before whatever committee you have to go through to get your pistol approved for use by the US Army. Your major competitor is Colt, whose guns almost have a monopoly with the US military. He may even be paying off Secretary of War Cameron. How do you sell your revolver?

Well first, you better have a hell of a gun. It better be so far superior to everything else like it that anyone who opposes its purchase will be instantly seen as a person more interested in lining his own pockets that in the good of the nation. (Remember, the Spencer repeating rifle was not approved for the Union Army until President Lincoln himself demanded its adoption.)

Well the Remington revolver had a war-winning feature that could be grasped by anyone with half a brain. It could be reloaded easily, by swapping cylinders, thereby increasing its firepower over a Colt 1860 by 100%. Certainly the inventor (Beals?) intended this feature. It wasn't an accident. And surely whoever sold the gun to the army on behalf of rRemington hammered home this great advantage to the military brass as a big selling point.

Now perhaps the Union commanders in the field were too stupid to grasp what they had once they got it. I don't know. Certainly there were stupid officers, like the one mentioned on the other thread who told his troops to go with the sabre instead of their powerful .44 cal. easily reloadable six-shooter revolvers. (Can you imagine any one in a combat setting today preferring a sword to a modern 45 ACP revolver? No, of course not, and a .44 cal. Remington was just about as powerful as a modern 45, not quite, but nearly.)

But Hawg and Co. says that soldiers didn't use this war-winning feature. You agree. My opinion is they did. And many other peoples opinion is that they did. I was just pointing out to Hawg that while his opinion on the subject is obviously the majority opinion among the TFL blackpowder C&B cult, they are probably in the minority when it comes to what people in in the real world outside believe. I mentioned the sources that make me think so. I wanted to point this out because they (Hawg & Co.) had come at me like I was the Lone Ranger for that point of view, and I wasn't ,and I'm not. That is all. The question of whether Wikipedia is right or wrong doesn't really enter into it, other than it obviously satisfied the standards and reflected the views of whoever the people were who agreed to allow the Wikipedia posting. But like I said, my granddad believed the same thing and that was well over 50 years ago. I'm sure most people who'd had ancestors in the Civil War believed it. I can only conclude it was what had been passed down to them as truth. But the guys on this forum think they are the DAR of C&B pistolry. (You know in the DAR, no matter that every citizen between the ages of about 18 and 50 were subject to militia service in the Revolution, and almost all the militia, at least in the South, saw some military service during the long 7 years of war, a woman can't be a member of the DAR today unless there is documentary evidence to prove an ancestors service, no matter how much her great graddad seems to remember his greatgrand dad telling him about his great granddad. None of which means the old guy way back there didn't serve, he almost certainly did, because almost everyone did, it's just that in many cases their military service can't now be proven.)

Last edited by DG45; July 15, 2011 at 11:12 AM.
DG45 is offline  
Old July 14, 2011, 05:33 PM   #68
junebug_01
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2011
Posts: 37
DG,

You are entirely wrong about how Remington got his revolver approved by Army Ordnance. He told them he could sell them to the Army at half what Colt was selling his revolver to them for, in fact, he could produce the Colt for half the price too, if that's what they wanted. It had nothing at all to do with how quickly one could swap cylinders, as I'm certain that the common soldier was not allowed to remove the cylinder anyway because he might loose it or get it mixed up with his buddy's cylinder. It's no different than today's Army. Tear-down is limited at the organizational level.
junebug_01 is offline  
Old July 14, 2011, 07:02 PM   #69
DG45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2009
Posts: 904
Well, that's why I put in the caveat that Colt may have been paying Cameron off - or paying somebody off - because on that point you are correct. Remington could and did cost less, AT FIRST; however, it was not because they could be produced for less, it was because Colt was price gouging.The proof of it is that as soon as Remington became a threat, Colt dropped the price of his guns to a competitive level. But he was price gouging long before that. The Confederates certainly knew it. They were manufacturing guns to his pattern so they would have known about what it cost to produce them. It can't have been a secret in the north. That's why some people think Colt was paying Cameron off.

None of which bears on the fact that if all else had been equal, Colt would have had a nearly unsurpassable competitive advantage in that they already had the government business and there was a war going on. Any salesman knows that it is nearly impossible to replace a company who already has the market, has all the established personal relationships,etc. and produces a well regarded product, unless you have a near revolutionary product to offer yourself. The Remington revolver was stronger, it was a little less expensive, it was accurate and it was rugged, but it was a near-revolutionary product in only one respect. Due to its easily removable and replacable cylinder, it gave a tremendous firepower advantage over a Colt 1860, and that was it's real advantage and why it became so popular. At least that's my opinion of why it became so popular, and if thats a misconception, it's apparently a widely held one, regardless of the fact that the soldiers apparently didn't throw them away in campsites, etc.. Theres a lot been said about there being no records of sales of cylinders, a contention that may or may not be true. Perhaps there are simply no records surviving. I don't know. I don't have the sales records for Remington. Presumably the people who make this claim that they didn't sell any cylinders do. Surely they would not make such a claim just based on the fact that no such records have survived. Would they??? Surely they have records that specifically back up that claim. Don't they? If they do have those sales figures, I ask them step up and provide them.

Last edited by DG45; July 15, 2011 at 11:19 AM.
DG45 is offline  
Old July 14, 2011, 07:03 PM   #70
Fingers McGee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 19, 2008
Location: High & Dry in Missouri Ozarks
Posts: 2,101
Mykeal & Junebug1 +1.

It's beyond me how anyone can believe that Remington users carried extra cylinders when there is not one shred of evidence, either written or physical, that it happened. There is no mention in patent records that the ease of replacement of a preloaded cylinder was an improvement. There is no first hand contemporary written record by users of Remington revolvers that they used preloaded spare sylinders. There are no "spare cylinder pouches" that carried preloaded spare cylinders to examine. There are no sales records indicating spare cylinders were sold. There are no Government records to indicate that spare cylinders were bought. Nothing, Nada, Zip, Zero, Zilch. But, it's such a simple thing, it had to be the way they did it back then.

Give Me A Break.
__________________
Fingers (Show Me MO smoke) McGee - AKA Man of Many Colts - Alter ego of Diabolical Ken; SASS Regulator 28564-L-TG; Rangemaster and stage writer extraordinaire; Frontiersman, Pistoleer, NRA Endowment Life, NMLRA, SAF, CCRKBA, STORM 327, SV115; Charter member, Central Ozarks Western Shooters
Cynic: A blackguard whose faulty vision see things as they are, not as they should be. Ambrose Bierce
Fingers McGee is offline  
Old July 14, 2011, 07:35 PM   #71
DG45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2009
Posts: 904
Well, the gangs all here.

Last edited by DG45; July 14, 2011 at 07:43 PM.
DG45 is offline  
Old July 15, 2011, 12:03 AM   #72
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,943
Quote:
I have to admit that's funny Hog,
Ummm, that's Hawg.
Hawg is offline  
Old July 15, 2011, 12:33 PM   #73
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,943
Well you know his grandpa "heard" it was done. He must have watched The Outlaw Josie Wales, after all Hollyweird wouldn't possibly lie.
Hawg is offline  
Old July 15, 2011, 01:14 PM   #74
DG45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2009
Posts: 904
Sorry Hawg, I've gone back and edited to change spellings.

It's been tough trying to enlighten all you guys at once. Just got too intent on my message at the expense of my spelling.

However, I've learned to appreciate my grandad more thanks to you guys.

When I was a toddler during WWII, my grandad gave my parents a building lot on his farm, where after the war, my dad, who served 3 1/2 years in the Pacific (10th Seabee Battalion; Johnson Island, and 72nd Seabee Battalion; Guam) built with his own hands, the house where I grew up.

Growing up there next door to my grandad,was an experience. He considered that he had been especially blessed that neither one of his two sons nor his son in law (my dad), all of whom had served in combat during WWII had even received a scratch, while the son of his nearest neighbor was killed in France.

Ever after, he saw it as his Christian duty to to defend the Faith. Everyone else I knew didn't answer the door or disappeared when Jehovah's Wittnesses and Mormons visited the farming community where we lived, but my grandad lived for these people to show up. If he knew they were in the neighborhood, there would be no farming that day. He dropped whatever he was doing and got his Bible out. He knew that Bible backwards and forwards and could quote Chapter and verse of it, and if they questioned his version of things, he would prove what he said with the Bible itself. When these unsuspecting chirpy young folks came around, trying to convert him, he saw it as a call to duty to try to save them from Hell, and this great struggle would go on in his living room between God, who he was representing, on the one hand, and the unseen Devil on the other, for control of these hapless young folks minds and souls. He converted at least a few of them, I think, or at least they were agreeing with him as they backed warily out the door.

PS Thought you might be interested in something that I ran accross today: an ebay auction sale in May of this year of an item that was identified as:

"Remington Army Revolver Cylinder ,Very Nice Dug Relic!!!" on an on-line auction that ended May 31, 2011 at 18:23:40 PDT. I'm not sure if I would be breaking the TFL rules by posting a hyperlink to it, but I have it."

So,, there is at least this one "dug relic" loose Remington cylinder that's been found. So far as I know, it's the only one that's been auctioned off on e-bay.
DG45 is offline  
Old July 15, 2011, 02:20 PM   #75
Art Eatman
Staff Lead
 
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA
Posts: 24,740
Giggle-snort. I thought I was bad about wandering off-topic.
__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!
Art Eatman is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09520 seconds with 8 queries