I dunno. That Wickliffe looks to give it a run for the money. Just has no "lines" to it, to my eye.

Cheers
  Trev

From what I can find out, Joseph Manton was born in Birmingham, England on March 10, 1830. He moved to Montreal, Quebec sometime in 1859. He had a brother, William Shakespeare Manton, born December 17, 1816 who moved to Kingston, Ontario sometime before 1844. Both men made firearms in Canada, but I believe Joseph was the only one to hold a patent for firearms.

The rifle has JOSEPH MANTON MONTREAL engraved on the top of the barrel. The right side of the receiver has engraved(faint and does not show up well in the photos) JOSEPH MANTON PATENT. The barrel has stamped on the left side: Birmingham Provisional Proof Mark, Birmingham View Mark, 25, Birmingham Definitive Proof Mark. Stamped on the bottom of the barrel: 5,  C H or possibly G H inside an oval, stamped over part of the ( C H inside the oval ) is  A & T .2, there is also stamped E. P , and  1.  Stamped on the left side of the receiver is the Birmingham view mark.
   
I knew Austin Moorcroft and saw many of his fine British single shot rifles before he sold them. I foolishly bought none. Many of the rifles pictured in Kirton's book were from Austin's collection. Austin refused to buy a copy of Kirton's book as he felt a complimentary copy was in order for the large amount of material supplied to Mr. Kirten gratis. I am not aware if the rifle I have was at one time in his collection.

I cannot help but think this rifle was made for the Canadian market where some of the game animals are on the large size and in many places winter lasts 6 months or better and people wear gloves for comfort and not a fashion statement. Despite the appearance, the lever comes to hand naturally and the loop at the rear acts and feels like a pistol grip when the rifle is shouldered. The rifle as pictured (unloaded and no sling) weighs 8 lbs. 

Regards,
Powderman

Thanks for the info Powderman. The Proof Marks are typical of the time for BP rifles proved in Birmingham England, and as Canada was under 'British Law' at the time the rifle was made, and firearms couldn't be 'Proved' in Canada (they didn't have a Proof House then) any firearms would have had to be sent to England for the necessary testing.

I would agree the loop on the lever is designed with gloved hands in mind. At 8lbs weight it's light enough for carrying, and a hunter wouldn't be firing a lot of rounds out of it on any one day (unless he was a rotten shot)

I don't think you would find the recoil from a .577 Snider round at all heavy for such work, but 50 rounds off a bench rest may give you a slight headache.   The Snider was far from being a highly accurate round, but it certainly could take any 'Game Animal' found in Canada, provided you were within the 'working range' of the cartridge.

I really think your rifle deserves the courtesy of being allowed to belch forth the occasional cloud of BP smoke and to be able to send some lead downrange. Dammit, it it was mine, it would be sending lead and smoke down range frequently. 

Manton isn't exactly a common surname in England, so it could be that the two Joseph Mantons were distantly related, and of course Birmingham, England, was a large producer of firearms, and gunsmiths/Gunmakers. More research required here, I think. Congratulations on being the owner of what appears to be a quite rare single shot rifle.

Harry

Gunsmith, 

I'm working under the presumption that your post is in reply to my comment on the Wickliffe's looks.

I'd start out by saying that no parent ever thought that they had a homely child. But some of them do.

Hell-for-strong, or not, that gun's lines, to me are like a badly put together woman. Just not attractive.  It seems, to my eye, that the design took all the places where the Stevens 14 1/2 started to bulge away from having really nice lines, and expanded outwards on the worst bulges. It reminds me of the Spencer repeater in that respect. A little too much, in a couple of the wrong places, to make  the lines look "right".

Don't take it to heart. I feel the same way about British airplanes from after WW2, and an awful pile of British guns. And an awful pile of really expensive modern single shot rifles.

They just don't do it for me.

When the time comes that I spend a pocketful of bills on a gun, it is going to be on a firearm that is able to please my eye as well as please me at the range. I don't mind owning a homely gun, I just want it to be an affordable homely gun.
 
I wish you nothing but success in your venture. The world needs more fine shooting rifles. 

Me, I want a good shooting rifle, that looks and feels right, to me. So far the Win 1885 seems it. Rolling blocks are affordable, and a Favorite is a pretty nice little plinking gun, but neither of them feels quite right to me.

If you make accurate rifles, it won't matter if they look like they were hogged off a block with a torch, you'll sell all you can make! But they will have to prove themselves on the range, rather than on the ad copy!

Good thing we don't all have the same tastes. It'd be a rough go for all the guys that "didn't" get the one perfect .....

Cheers
  Trev
 

trev, I have to agree with you about post WW2 aircraft. I did a search.

It wasnt perty.   


                                                                            Joe.

Quote:


Best-looking? What Trev said.

Most accurate? Show me the match records and the record-making groups and I might start believing.

Way back when I wuz just a chap, My Daddy showed me by his example (and whupped it into me) that any person who is worth hearing will never brag or make claims before the actual accomplishment.
But I wish you luck anyway, Joe

wow