For whatever it's worth, a knowledgeable Ballard collector once told me that Marlin was running its factory at full capacity making repeating rifles, other firearms and implements. There was still a demand for Ballard rifles but production had become a small part of the overall business. By redirecting the resources (material and manpower) from making Ballards to other production areas, Marlin could get a better return on investment (ROI = resources spent vs return on those resources). In short, it cost more for Marlin to produce Ballards than it cost to produce repeaters. Marlin could still run at full production capacity and they were able to increase profit without investing more money in the company. It was a simple business decision. 
IMO, if there had been large demand for Ballards, Marlin would have continued to make them.
I'm sure this is an oversimplification of the situation but I hope you get my drift.

Does anyone know what year they stopped making them? Antique classification starts at Pre 1899. Fitz. OLD TUCK

It goes a little further than profits being small because of the cost to produce the Marlin Ballard. If you recall John Marlin did not own the patent rights for the Ballard rifles. So he was given 5% of the ownership when he agreed to make the Ballard for Schoverling and Daly. Along with his 5% partnership, he sold each rifle to Schoverling & Daly for a small profit. But that profit was not equal to the profit margins he marked up his own repeating rifles. So he made less money building Ballard rifles for S&D than he did building repeaters for himself to sell.
At the time he had the Model 1881, 1888, and 1889 rifles all in production. Plus Remington had filed bankruptcy and John Marlin quickly snatched up LL Hepburn as his superintendent. Hepburn was busy designing the 1889 Marlin, which was Marlin's first side eject rifle. But he was also working on Marlin's first .22 lever action, and numerous other designs. 
Marlin repeaters were selling like hotcakes, for big profits. And John Marlin saw the various designs LL Hepburn had waiting to add to production, and simply made a great financial decision to stop making the Ballard, and put all his efforts into getting Hepburn's new designs into production. A sad thing then, and for decades afterwards. But good for Marlin.

PS-One other note. John Marlin was well known for not liking to ramp up production by hiring employees or expanding his factory if sales increased. He simply made people wait longer to get their orders, and only gradually increased his factory, and employees. So this habit of stunting growth was another reason he chose to eliminate the Ballard rifle from his production schedule.

.Just curious but why has.no manufacturer other than the Cody crowd taken up making Ballards again ? . The design seems no more complicated to make than say a Hi Wall or a Sharps and there are plenty of copies of those being produced.
I have handled a.friends Cody Ballard and it seemed to be well made, like I said, just curious.
Mike.

I agree with your "business reality" point. Randy.  But at least for me it doesn't explain why Model 1885, Sharps, Hepburn, Stevens, and a few other single shot reproductions have done well enough to remain in production while the Ballard, beloved by so many of us, has not.  In particular, I've never understood why at least one of the Italian firms, especially Uberti or Pedersoli, hasn't taken it up.  Any thoughts?

Bill Lawrence

Mick B.  - "The design seems no more complicated to make than say a Hi Wall or a Sharps"

The Ballard is a whole 'nother animal...  Even making parts near identical on my CNC's still require considerable fitting and then parts don't interchange and "feel" right.  
The strength in the design as mentioned isn't there either, unlike the modern make of the low walls, the few changes they made changed it's characteristics considerably.  I don't feel that option is in the Ballards design without changing it considerably.

I don't think you'll see anyone making Ballards anytime soon.  I know if I had to put together a business plan and begin manufacturing Ballards, the economics aren't there - desires and passions won't cut it.  
Cody's are truly works of art and from a business standpoint I can't see how they sold them so cheap.   
Greg

*edited the rambling  it was too late when I replied initially

Hey Val
I wonder if the Direct Metal Laser Sintering (DMLS) process could be used to make Ballard actions and parts? That would be directly 3D printing the parts in metal. It would likely be pricey and I'm not sure what sorts of metals are compatible with that process but all that would be needed is a really good 3D CAD model of the end parts.
I like your idea of casting the parts but that normally requires large setup costs, UNLESS the wax masters for lost wax casting could be 3D printed?
Just throwing out some ideas . . .