My 73rd Birthday Gift question

[AndyUSMC1107]

Good folks, I’ve been researching this H&A XL and find it was actually made by Merwin Hulbert. My 2019 Standard Catalog of Firearms only shows this Model XL to have been produced (for the .32) with a 5 round cylInder...mine holds 6 rounds of .32 S&W Long! Anyone out there have a little clarity RE: the 6-round cylinder? A Google search only alludes to 5 round capacity. As an interesting aside, some internet pics/print ads show the XL w/a lanyard ring....

 

[Dave T]

My understanding has always been that there was no "Merwin & Hulbert" factory and the revolvers by that name were actually made by someone else. Perhaps Hopkins & Allen or Iver Johnson, don't remember which right now.

Dave

 

[AndyUSMC1107]

My understanding has always been that there was no "Merwin & Hulbert" factory and the revolvers by that name were actually made by someone else. Perhaps Hopkins & Allen or Iver Johnson, don't remember which right now.

Dave

Dave T, mine is roll marked Hopkins & Allen XL8. It is in .32 S&W Long. My research indicates they were “5 Beaner’s. Mine holds 6 Beans...ALL the auction houses list the .32 S&W L by H&A as “5-shooters. It’s not an I-J for sure, but Merwin Hubert held the patent (Jan. 27, ‘85 for the folding hammer spur.

 

[ontarget]

You might want to ask the mods to move this to the research forum. Sounds like a real mystery to me.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

ALL Merwin Hulbert revolvers were manufactured by Hopkins and Allen in Norwich Conn. Merwin Hulbert owned a significant percentage of Hopkins and Allen. Although Merwin Hulbert was its own entity, all revolvers with the Merwin Hulbert name were manufactured by Hopkins and Allen.

I have a copy of Art Phelps' book, The Story of Merwin Hulbert & Co. Firearms, which is the most authoritative book ever published about Merwin Hulbert.






Sorry for the poor quality of these photos, I took them with my phone on the kitchen counter. The first photo is of a John P. Lovell Arms Company catalog from 1890. The second photo is from a Hartley and Graham catalog from 1891. If you can read the fine print, these revolvers were chambered for 32 S&W, not 32 S&W Long. The 32 S&W Long cartridge did not come into being until 1896, along with the the first S&W revolver with a swing out cylinder, the Model of 1896. They were chambered for 38 S&W as five shot revolvers, and also for 32 M&H, which was a proprietary cartridge. That may be why a 32 S&W Long cartridge fits into your chambers. This states the 38s were available as 5 shot revolvers and the 32 were available as five shot revolvers and a seven shot target version. I don't see any mention of a six shot 32.








Interestingly enough, the patent for the hammer with the folding spur was held by Hopkins and Allen, not Merwin Hulbert.







I have a Merwin Hulbert five shot 38 with a folding hammer. It was actually chambered for the 38 MH cartridge, but as near as I can tell that cartridge was dimensionally very similar to the 38 S&W cartridge. Notice all it says on the frame is 38 CAL, nothing further.









Here is a close up of the patent date on the hammer spur.






I have a feeling your revolver is not a true Merwin Hulbert, I see no sign of the characteristic joints on the frame and barrel that allowed the barrel to rotate and be pulled forward for loading. Like this. Also, I am unclear what the knob is near the hammer on your revolver. I have never seen that on a Merwin Hulbert revolver. Also, the locking slots on the cylinder do not look like the locking slots Merwin Hulbert used. Notice in the photo above, the slots have a hard edge on the top and bottom to capture both sides of the bolt. The slots on your revolver only have one hard edge, the hand is what prevents the cylinder from rolling backwards.









Merwin Hulbert was very proud of their revolvers. A Merwin Hulbert revolver should have Merwin Hulbert stamped on it someplace. This is what is stamped on the top of the barrel rib on my little 38:






I have a few large frame Merwin Hulbert revolvers too.






They have Merwin Hulbert stamped on the top of the barrel.






This one also has Hopkins and Allen stamped on the side of the barrel.






I don't intend to rain on your parade, but Hopkins and Allen revolvers were known to be inexpensive revolvers. Although Merwin Hulbert revolvers were made on the same equipment in the same factory, they were a higher priced revolver in their day.

It would be helpful if you could provide a few photos of your entire revolver.

 

[AndyUSMC1107]

Howdy

ALL Merwin Hulbert revolvers were manufactured by Hopkins and Allen in Norwich Conn. Merwin Hulbert owned a significant percentage of Hopkins and Allen. Although Merwin Hulbert was its own entity, all revolvers with the Merwin Hulbert name were manufactured by Hopkins and Allen.

I have a copy of Art Phelps' book, The Story of Merwin Hulbert & Co. Firearms, which is the most authoritative book ever published about Merwin Hulbert.

View attachment 1012259




Sorry for the poor quality of these photos, I took them with my phone on the kitchen counter. The first photo is of a John P. Lovell Arms Company catalog from 1890. The second photo is from a Hartley and Graham catalog from 1891. If you can read the fine print, these revolvers were chambered for 32 S&W, not 32 S&W Long. The 32 S&W Long cartridge did not come into being until 1896, along with the the first S&W revolver with a swing out cylinder, the Model of 1896. They were chambered for 38 S&W as five shot revolvers, and also for 32 M&H, which was a proprietary cartridge. That may be why a 32 S&W Long cartridge fits into your chambers. This states the 38s were available as 5 shot revolvers and the 32 were available as five shot revolvers and a seven shot target version. I don't see any mention of a six shot 32.

View attachment 1012260

View attachment 1012261




Interestingly enough, the patent for the hammer with the folding spur was held by Hopkins and Allen, not Merwin Hulbert.

View attachment 1012262





I have a Merwin Hulbert five shot 38 with a folding hammer. It was actually chambered for the 38 MH cartridge, but as near as I can tell that cartridge was dimensionally very similar to the 38 S&W cartridge. Notice all it says on the frame is 38 CAL, nothing further.

View attachment 1012263


View attachment 1012264




Here is a close up of the patent date on the hammer spur.

View attachment 1012265




I have a feeling your revolver is not a true Merwin Hulbert, I see no sign of the characteristic joints on the frame and barrel that allowed the barrel to rotate and be pulled forward for loading. Like this. Also, I am unclear what the knob is near the hammer on your revolver. I have never seen that on a Merwin Hulbert revolver. Also, the locking slots on the cylinder do not look like the locking slots Merwin Hulbert used. Notice in the photo above, the slots have a hard edge on the top and bottom to capture both sides of the bolt. The slots on your revolver only have one hard edge, the hand is what prevents the cylinder from rolling backwards.

View attachment 1012266


View attachment 1012267




Merwin Hulbert was very proud of their revolvers. A Merwin Hulbert revolver should have Merwin Hulbert stamped on it someplace. This is what is stamped on the top of the barrel rib on my little 38:

View attachment 1012268




I have a few large frame Merwin Hulbert revolvers too.

View attachment 1012269




They have Merwin Hulbert stamped on the top of the barrel.

View attachment 1012270




This one also has Hopkins and Allen stamped on the side of the barrel.

View attachment 1012271




I don't intend to rain on your parade, but Hopkins and Allen revolvers were known to be inexpensive revolvers. Although Merwin Hulbert revolvers were made on the same equipment in the same factory, they were a higher priced revolver in their day.

It would be helpful if you could provide a few photos of your entire revolver.

Nope, no rain on my parade! I’m tickled to have this no matter it’s perceived value to a professional (or otherwise) appraiser’s mindset. The workmanship and Nickel finish would (in my opinion) rival modern computer-aided machine work. This .32...whatever is beautifully rendered by 19th C machinists.

The button in front of the folding hammer spur is the loading gate knob.

The piece is clearly roll marked Hopkins & Allen XL8 or a deeply marked 3.

DWJ, I merely hoped fo a little provenance...and there are indeed 6 holes for 6 bullets...

Original pics accompanied my initial post before a suggestion that I try the research forum.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Thanks for the photos. Definitely not a Merwin Hulbert, although produced on the same equipment, for a lower price point.

 

[Pat Riot]

Some interesting info I found.

http://american-firearms.com/american-firearms/z-html/company-H/Hopkins & Allen/Hopkins & Allen.html

Scroll down to “XL Bulldog” on this page. Could this be yours?
http://www.american-firearms.com/american-firearms/Manufacturers/START.html

This is the Hone Page for the two links above. Lots of interesting information.
http://www.american-firearms.com/

 

[AndyUSMC1107]

Thanks for the photos. Definitely not a Merwin Hulbert, although produced on the same equipment, for a lower price point.

DWJ, Thanx, that explains a lot. Under my initial query, “Hopkins & Allen XL8 (3?), I got a response from Jim Watson that included an 1887 catalog ad for the EXACT revolver wearing a M H & Co. name under the description “Merwin Hulbert & Co. X. L. Double Action 3 1/2” with Folding Hammer and Side Ejector” Identical right down to the front sight profile. Chambered in .32 &.38 MH. ?, being a BP cartridge, with the solid frame could one shoot .32 S&W L. In it.

 

[Geldarr]

Forgotten Weapons has a few videos about the Hopkins & Allen XL line of revolvers that you might find interesting... The comments section can be a treasure trove sometimes. It does not appear to cover your particular revolver, but the information might be helpful nonetheless...

Link: https://www.forgottenweapons.com/?s=hopkins+&+Allen+XL

That's a beauty, by the way!