Found: Churchills Tommy Gun

[m3bobby]

Interesting article but I don't know how they can be so sure.

 

Anyone know the serial numbers of the first contract for 400 guns?

 

http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad51/m3bobby/Churchill_zps15a9d2e2.jpg

[765 21D]

I believe that the Savage 1928 Thompsons serial numbers carried on where Colts stopped at 15040 so the range for the first 400 Savage 1928 Thompson guns is not hard to work out. If the so called Churchill 1928 falls into that range it could turn out to be a very interesting find.

 

 

I myself have serious doubts about these claims, but I believe it would be very interesting to find out something about the 1928 Thompson that is in the newspaper article above and in the photo I have posted.

 

I have found another photo and I think I can see early Savage patent numbers and not dates? If I am right this story is finished right now, but maybe someone else can see better than me?

 

 

 

Early Savage 1922 Patent dates Early Savage Patent numbers

 

Edited December 24, 2014 by 765 21D

[TD.]

I would not want to cast doubt on this story without knowing more. However, if the right side of the receiver does not have patent dates, then any discussions about this Thompson gun being the one in the picture with Churchill are probably moot. In July 1940, Savage Arms was still manufacturing Thompson guns with patent dates; patent numbers would come later.

 

I would also guess there was more than one Thompson gun at this coastal defense facility visited by Churchill. Unless someone could have foreseen this undeveloped photograph by an army photographer was going to become an iconic symbol of Churchill and Great Britain during World War II and recorded the serial number, I doubt anyone could say for certain which gun Churchill handled by the time the film was developed and distributed. I would also assume this Thompson gun went right back to guard duty after Churchill left the facility. I do have an open mind. Perhaps more information will be forthcoming. The serial number would be very helpful.

[dalbert]

Looks to me like we've disproved the theory presented in today's Daily Mail article within 3 posts...

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

[bug]

Did you see the rest of the pics in the album? Some cool stuff...

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

The only Thompson that can be said without equivocation to have been with Churchill throughout WWII is his bodyguard Walter H. Thompson.

[buzz]

I would suggest emailing Clive McPherson and asking about the gun.

 

I don't know if he's a Thompson expert but he seems like a serious-minded guy to me.

[Mk VII]

The on-line version can be found here

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2885687/Found-74-years-Tommy-Gun-Churchill-used-rally-British-troops-1940-Hitler-prepared-invade.html

 

The same gun was photographed by me some years ago (not very well)

 

http://www.fototime.com/04CBE3E5AA29CA4/standard.jpg

 

I don't know how they came to this conclusion although it has the swivel on the butt transferred to the top in the British style.

 

It is not No.17359, which they also have.

 

http://www.fototime.com/3A4F4AF8DA648F4/standard.jpg

 

http://www.fototime.com/C8631F0FD7A65B1/standard.jpg

Edited December 24, 2014 by Mk VII

[jim c 351]

I agree with Alan David's comment on the gangster forum. This story is much to do about nothing.

Churchill probably held the Thompson in the picture just long enough for the camera to snap the photo, then handed the gun back to corporal Jones.

No matter what Thompson is in the picture, I hardly think it would qualify as Churchill's Thompson.

Therefore its a waste of time worrying about whether its a Colt or a Savage.

If you really want to see a picture of Winston's Thompson, then here's a photo. At least he shot this gun. Take note the gun is equipped with a Sarco vertical fore end.

Jim C

If some of you like this type of exercise, see my next post. It will give our English members a real challenge.

Jim C

Edited December 24, 2014 by jim c 351

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

@MK VII

 

The TSMG in your first photo does not appear to be the same one Clive McPherson is holding in the Daily Mail photo.

[m3bobby]

Looking at the wood markings on the rear grip, they look the same to me. It also looks like it has the early Patent markings but I don't see how anyone could say if this is the same gun as Churchill is holding.

 

What I am more surprised at is the fact the 700 guns from the Donnington collection were donated to what is stated as a museum with an owner. In my dealings with the MOD and the DSA, only recognised national museums are donated items. Museums with a single owner may purchase items from the MOD but may not be donated. I've also seen some Donnington marked guns for sale in recent years, they must have been surplus.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

@m3bobby

 

The vertical line on the frame grips are not identical in position. Buttstocks are different as well.

Edited December 24, 2014 by Arthur Fliegenheimer

[765 21D]

m3bobby, on 24 Dec 2014 - 14:36, said:

Looking at the wood markings on the rear grip, they look the same to me. It also looks like it has the early Patent markings but I don't see how anyone could say if this is the same gun as Churchill is holding.

 

What I am more surprised at is the fact the 700 guns from the Donnington collection were donated to what is stated as a museum with an owner. In my dealings with the MOD and the DSA, only recognised national museums are donated items. Museums with a single owner may purchase items from the MOD but may not be donated. I've also seen some Donnington marked guns for sale in recent years, they must have been surplus.

m3bobby,

 

The photos of gun number 17359 and the so caled Churchill Savage 1928 Thompson are not the same gun, they are just in the same museum and to say the patent dates are the early type in the newspaper article pictures without viewing good close ups is a mistake in my opinion.

Edited January 1, 2015 by dalbert

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

@765 21D

 

The first picture in Mk VII post is not #17358. Those are the 2nd and third photos. MK VIII believes that that the TSMG McPherson is holding is the same one in his first picture. It is fairly clear that the TSMG McPherson is holding has patent numbers not patent dates.

[765 21D]

@765 21D

 

The first picture in Mk VII post is not #17358. Those are the 2nd and third photos. MK VIII believes that that the TSMG McPherson is holding is the same one in his first picture. It is fairly clear that the TSMG McPherson is holding has patent numbers not patent dates.

It's Ok Arthur I know that and I was only pointing out the fact that the so called Churchill Thompson gun does not look like it has early patent dates on it and based on the photos I have seen it has early patent numbers and could never have been held by Mr Churchill

[Mk VII]

The firearms were part of an unofficial museum which the staff t COD Donington had created from items due for destruction. Most of it had been deactivated to a greater or lesser degree, with varying degrees of reversibility. About 2009 the collection was ordered to be disposed of. Originally the CSMM was promised them, but a new broom at Donington rescinded the promise and told them, "some are going to museum X, and some are earmarked for museum Y, and the rest will go into auction at Bonhams and you will have to bid for them if you want them". Eventually, after the matter went up as far as Under-Secretary Of State level, the collection was just given to them. They arrived in twenty boxes, with inventory labelling that was frequently missing or just plain wrong. Some of the labelling is still wrong, and as people offer corrections they are gradually being made.

 

I think the scars on the grip match pretty well with the Mail's photo. I don't know what their chain of reasoning is as to the Churchill connection.

 

http://www.fototime.com/327811BA5EC358B/standard.jpg

[buzz]

Does anyone have any decent pictures of 17359?

 

My savage is only about 300 numbers away, but the only pics I have of 17359 are just blurry cell phone jobs.

Edited December 25, 2014 by buzz

[Mk VII]

Most of what I've got has already appeared here in the last few years.

 

http://www.fototime.com/7B4EB595E840449/standard.jpg

[buzz]

Any closeups of the barrel? Is the barrel shiny blue or dulite?

[Mk VII]

hard to recall after all this time.

[AlanDavid]

@m3bobby

 

The vertical line on the frame grips are not identical in position. Buttstocks are different as well.

They look the same to me if you take into account the slight change in perspective.

Regards

AlanD

Sydney

[AlanDavid]

It would be nice to get the actual serial number, with this an approximate date could be worked out when it arrived in the UK. Before or after July 31st 1940.

 

As others have comented, at the time the photo was taken none knew this would become an iconic photo of Churchill.

 

Regards

 

AlanD

Sydney

[buzz]

I think the stock and grips look very similar.

 

The lighter photo is washed out and overexposed. Also, it's tilted away from the camera about maybe 30 degrees

 

But the grain and handling marks are a match.

 

You'll never find two grips that match that well.

Edited December 25, 2014 by buzz

[buzz]

How was it determined to be the one in Churchill's hands?

Edited December 25, 2014 by buzz

[dalbert]

@m3bobby

 

The vertical line on the frame grips are not identical in position. Buttstocks are different as well.

 

• 
• 
• 
• 

 

Arthur,

 

Those photos show the same grip and buttstock. It's just different lighting, and angle.

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com