The George Todd Revolver

I am looking for additional information on this gun. George Todd was a small gunmaker in Austin TX from 1856-1861 and produced copies of the Colt 1851 Navy .36 prior to the ACW. My information about him and his guns is relegated to Flayderman's Guide and "Confederate Handguns" (Albaugh, et al, 1963).

Accordingly, Todd produced both octagonal and part round/part octagonal barrel models.

Flayderman scan:




I believe this one could possibly be a real Todd revolver, but I cannot find any reference to it after the 2007 auction, where it did not sell.

The Most Rare Confederate Revolver Ever Made, A
The Most Rare Confederate Revolver Ever Made, A - Old Heritage Auctions




I believe this one to be a spurious Italian defarbed repro, mainly because of the incorrect stamping on the right side of the frame and the stop slot approaches.

Gary Hendershott The Finest Historical Items in the World
garyhendershott.net




Any info would be well appreciated!

Jim

To all:

First, let me be clear about my intentions with my post. The Todd revolver is possibly more scarce than the three known documented specimens of the Schneider & Glassick revolver. I want to create a replica of a Todd for display purposes only. I want to use a new Uberti Leech & Rigdon (with the part round/part octagonal barrel) as it does not have all of the Pietta billboards on the barrel. Uberti stamps their name and "BP Only" rollmark on the underside of the barrel, hidden until one drops the load lever, which will not be removed so as to not be confused with an original. Their date stamp, serial number, and Italian proof marks are primarily confined to the bottom of the frame/barrel lug which can be easily removed. I can defarb/antique it to look like a very close facsimile of the real deal.

My problem is that there are very few photos of the originals.The biggest stumbling block is the correct wording/location/orientation/font of an original, on both the frame and top of the barrel.

This is from William A. Albaugh's book "Confederate Arms" (1957) and is the best photo I have:



Carroll C. Holloway was very well respected member of the Texas Gun Collectors Association.

I do not want to rely upon any unsubstantiated revolver.

Again, any information/photos/links will be much appreciated.

Regards,

Jim

LonesomePigeon said:

I saw a fake one on gunbroker a while ago. It had GEO TODD stamped on it instead of GEORGE TODD. If I remember the seller did identify it as a repro.

Click to expand...

If it looked like the last photo in my first post, it is for sale for $37,500.

Jim

Eyrie G. Dogg said:

The round barrel Todd's look just like a Leech & Rigdon.

Click to expand...

L&R used a pin type front sight. Two of the three Todd revolvers pictured have a blade type front sight, and the third appears to have no front sight.

indy1919a4 said:

Now let me ask... On the "Geo Todd" example.. You guys say fake.. But considering the Hectic days as the war approached could it have been a new stamping because the old one broke??? Considering how few were made and how badly the records were kept... It could be a legit "George Todd" could it not???

Click to expand...

I suppose it could be a new stamp, but both Flayderman and Albaugh state that the stamp was either "George Todd" or "George Todd, Austin", with no mention of a "Geo. Todd" stamp.

Could it not have been some scallywag counterfeiter who was making guns in the day and wanted to infringe on the "George Todd" name brand?? Just like an original Deringer was copied and marketed by Derringer.

Click to expand...

I suppose, but I don't think there would be any reason to copy the pre-ACW Todd revolver (of which very few were made) but someone could more easily use the much more readily available Colt 1851 Navy as an example to use. That said, if someone had the wherewithall to manufacture one in the CSA I would think they would have put their name on it and would have made more than one due to the tooling necessary to do so.

Also, the name "Derringer" (2 R's) was used so as not to run afoul of any of Henry Deringer's patents, and were made by many smaller gunsmiths in many versions.

Thanks for the replies to my thread!

Regards,

Jim