Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [WarOf1812] Uniform alterations - bastion loops

Expand Messages
  • spikeyj@crosslink.net
    Am I missing something, or isn t the fact that the guy in question is seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty obviously no matter what
    Message 1 of 24 , Feb 1, 2001
      Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
      seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
      obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
      tunic? Even if his loops are the same size as everyone else's, won't
      the fact that the bottom loop on his coatee is even with the middle
      loops of the guys standing on either side of him going to run the
      effect anyway?

      Spike Y Jones
    • Bateman, Andrew
      ... You re not missing a thing - you see the situation more clearly than a lot of people. Wait until you see the coat, then judge... :-) Andrew Bateman,
      Message 2 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: spikeyj@...
        >
        > Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
        > seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
        > obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
        > tunic?

        You're not missing a thing - you see the situation more clearly than a lot
        of people. Wait until you see the coat, then judge... :-)

        Andrew Bateman, 1/41st
      • BritcomHMP@aol.com
        In a message dated 2/2/2001 4:06:27 AM Central Standard Time, spikeyj@crosslink.net writes:
        Message 3 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
          In a message dated 2/2/2001 4:06:27 AM Central Standard Time,
          spikeyj@... writes:

          << Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
          seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
          obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
          tunic? Even if his loops are the same size as everyone else's, won't
          the fact that the bottom loop on his coatee is even with the middle
          loops of the guys standing on either side of him going to run the
          effect anyway? >>

          Sort of but his coat should still look like the others.
          For that very reason such men at the time usually ended up as drum Majors or
          fluglemen (you can see them easier). Obviously with that height he would HAVE
          to be a marker from the start! :-)

          Cheers

          Tim
        • Kevin Windsor
          What is the PRO?
          Message 4 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
            What is the PRO?

            > Jim comments:
            > archives, including the PRO in London,
          • Kevin Windsor
            I think you are right. People are going to say holy @#$% he s a big one! I don t think people will notice he has a tunic on! Unless he takes it off. What I
            Message 5 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
              I think you are right. People are going to say holy @#$% he's a big one! I don't think people will notice he has a tunic on! Unless he takes it off. What I think the
              big concern with is accuracy, not for the sake of the public, but for pride in our kits. Not too many of us on this list would wear a tunic that we know is inaccurate.
              In fact I am in the process of taking mine apart for some resizing and fixing. We want to look good, and although many times I say it is for the public, it is mostly to
              please myself and my peers.
              I am also very interested in this thread b/c we have a new member that is larger than all of us. My double breasted great coat didn't even do up on him so we will no
              doubt run into these problems.

              With regards to double spaced square lacing, would the distance between the pairs be increased or an extra row?
              Jim, Sue, Mike?

              spikeyj@... wrote:

              > Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
              > seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
              > obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
              > tunic?
            • John Williamson
              Hi All, I don t post often, lurking is my specialty, it is the best way to learn, by listening. I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the
              Message 6 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                Hi All,

                I don't post often, lurking is my specialty, it is the best way to learn, by
                listening. I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the 41st,
                and hope that some sort of explanation can be offered for this obvious
                oversight.

                I saw the 41st in action at Ft. Malden a year or so ago, and after speaking
                to a couple of members, I noticed that their cuffs were done incorrectly,
                the seams being uppermost in line with the top sleeve seam, not the bottom,
                as I had seen on several coats in the museum here in Ottawa, including
                Brocks last coat, and a couple in my own private collection. I want to
                state right now that I am not the most knowledgeable in that regard, but
                like all I strive to become more so. I asked a couple of members at the
                encampment and received the same reply, that the person who made the coats
                had said that it was done because it was easier, something about it being
                too hard to lace the cuffs. I mention this now not to cause a flame war,
                but because with the 41st and its constant desire to be as accurate as
                possible, perhaps Jim should look into who does the coats, in particular the
                cuffs and correct what is otherwise an excellent impression.

                Thanks and I do not mean to offend, just point out an error on an otherwise
                good impresion.

                John
                _________________________________________________________________________
                Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
              • John Williamson
                Hi All, I don t post often, lurking is my specialty, it is the best way to learn, by listening. I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the
                Message 7 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                  Hi All,

                  I don't post often, lurking is my specialty, it is the best way to learn, by
                  listening. I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the 41st,
                  and hope that some sort of explanation can be offered for this obvious
                  oversight.

                  I saw the 41st in action at Ft. Malden a year or so ago, and after speaking
                  to a couple of members, I noticed that their cuffs were done incorrectly,
                  the seams being uppermost in line with the top sleeve seam, not the bottom,
                  as I had seen on several coats in the museum here in Ottawa, including
                  Brocks last coat, and a couple in my own private collection. I want to
                  state right now that I am not the most knowledgeable in that regard, but
                  like all I strive to become more so. I asked a couple of members at the
                  encampment and received the same reply, that the person who made the coats
                  had said that it was done because it was easier, something about it being
                  too hard to lace the cuffs. I mention this now not to cause a flame war,
                  but because with the 41st and its constant desire to be as accurate as
                  possible, perhaps Jim should look into who does the coats, in particular the
                  cuffs and correct what is otherwise an excellent impression.

                  Thanks and I do not mean to offend, just point out an error on an otherwise
                  good impresion.

                  John
                  _________________________________________________________________________
                  Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
                • yawors1@uwindsor.ca
                  Public Record Office, in London, England, where the original army records are stored. Jim Kevin Windsor
                  Message 8 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                    Public Record Office, in London, England, where the original army records
                    are stored.

                    Jim




                    Kevin Windsor
                    <kevin.windsor@sym To:
                    patico.ca> WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
                    cc:
                    02/02/01 12:21 PM Subject: Re: [WarOf1812]
                    Please respond to Uniform alterations - bastion
                    WarOf1812 loops






                    What is the PRO?

                    > Jim comments:
                    > archives, including the PRO in London,





                    The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of hundreds of
                    square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the fate of THOUSANDS
                    of square miles...
                  • BritcomHMP@aol.com
                    In a message dated 2/2/2001 1:00:04 PM Central Standard Time, kevin.windsor@sympatico.ca writes:
                    Message 9 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                      In a message dated 2/2/2001 1:00:04 PM Central Standard Time,
                      kevin.windsor@... writes:

                      << What is the PRO?

                      > Jim comments:
                      > archives, including the PRO in London,
                      >>

                      The Public Records Office
                    • yawors1@uwindsor.ca
                      [snip] I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the 41st, and hope that some sort of explanation can be offered for this obvious oversight. I
                      Message 10 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                        "[snip] I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the 41st, and
                        hope that some sort of explanation can be offered for this obvious
                        oversight."

                        "I saw the 41st in action [snip] I noticed that their cuffs were done
                        incorrectly, the seams being uppermost in line with the top sleeve seam,
                        not the bottom, [snip] "

                        "Thanks and I do not mean to offend, just point out an error on an
                        otherwise good impresion."

                        "John"

                        Jim writes:
                        No offence taken, it's a very fair question - and very observant of you!
                        As I am probably the fabricator of most of the coats John observed, I would
                        say first off that the difficulty with the bastion shape on a 41st coat is
                        that the points of the sides and base of each loop must come as close as
                        possible to touching each other.
                        This fact, coupled with the fact that the lace is hand-sewn on while the
                        cuff is still off the sleeve, leaves the fabricator with two options:
                        1) work the loops on in a position where the cuff seam will line up with
                        the 'bottom' arm seam (where it is on Brock's coat), which I will call the
                        "normal" position, and which will require some fiddling with the bastion
                        loop shape as described below;
                        2) work the loops on in the position John observed on some of the 41st
                        repro coats he saw - which means one "regular" "symmetrical" loop on one
                        side of the cuff piece (cuff seam still not sewn together) and three
                        "regular" loops on the other.

                        Option #1: The cuff piece has a slight angle to it in its mid point, this
                        is the point that should lie on the seam line of one side of the arm; the
                        other seam of the arm is where the cuff's own seam lies.
                        The slight angle in the mid-point of the cuff forces the two bastion loops
                        on either side of it in to a "collision" on their side points (the base
                        points of course present no problem). There is just the one loop on one
                        side of this mid-point line; the other side has three loops.
                        Altering the two loops that abut the mid-point line is complicated because
                        of the other two loops - you either put all the alteration in to the
                        'abutting' loops and leave the other two as symmetrical and regular, or you
                        try and spread the alteration out a bit over all 4. Neither option is
                        entirely visually satisfactory: one results in two "symmetrical" loops with
                        two distorted ones in obvious proximity; the other alters all 4 but to a
                        lesser extent...

                        option #2: you sew the symmetrical loops on, then sew the cuff seam
                        together. This is easier to do and the individual symmetrical loops look
                        better. You have the cuff seam to fiddle with in matching the abutting
                        loops - somehow, it just seems to work out.

                        However, either option is certainly 'do-able' from a practical point of
                        view. I have in fact done both, and while I personally prefer option #2 it
                        is of course *not* an "option" if it is historically incorrect.

                        Although I do not have them in front of me and therefore can't indicate
                        exact pages & illustrations (I'm at my office, they're at home) my memory
                        is that a careful study of the Steppler uniform articles showed cuffs with
                        the seam in either position i.e lying on the top or bottom seam of the
                        arms. On that basis, I've most often used "option #2"...

                        Hope this answers John's question...

                        Jim
                        1/41
                      • HQ93rd@aol.com
                        Message 11 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                          << << Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
                          seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
                          obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
                          tunic? Even if his loops are the same size as everyone else's, won't
                          the fact that the bottom loop on his coatee is even with the middle
                          loops of the guys standing on either side of him going to run the
                          effect anyway? >>
                          >>

                          I will have to dig it out, and I don't feel like it right now (nyaaaa) but I
                          recall there being something on the 93rd whilst on station in South Africa
                          being noted by one IG that some of the mens coats were cut too short in the
                          front and could only take 8 or 9 loops and buttons instead of the required
                          ten. That's what comes of being waaaaaaay down under I suppose....

                          B
                          93rd SHRoFLHU
                          THE Thin Red Line
                          www.93rdhighlanders.com
                        • fullerfamily@sprintmail.com
                          ... Kevin and List, the PRO is on line. http://catalogue.pro.gov.uk/ListInt/default.asp You can search for records from our time period of interest, as well as
                          Message 12 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                            --- In WarOf1812@y..., Kevin Windsor <kevin.windsor@s...> wrote:
                            > What is the PRO?

                            Kevin and List, the PRO is on line.

                            http://catalogue.pro.gov.uk/ListInt/default.asp

                            You can search for records from our time period of interest, as well
                            as of many others, but beware, the military records weren't
                            rationalised until much later (1850s?), so many things are quite hard
                            to find, and may not be catalogued properly, necessitating a visit
                            there to find it yourself, preferably with a laptop to transcribe
                            what you read, as there is not much chance to photocopy original
                            documents, due to fragility and concerns about fading.

                            Still, it's quite a thrill to open a book nobody else has looked at
                            in almost 200 years!

                            Roger
                            3/95th (Rifles)

                            TODAY IN RIFLE BRIGADE HISTORY:
                            2 February 1814.-4 Cos. 1st, 2nd and 3rd Bns. at assault and capture
                            of MERXEM; 3 Riflemen killed, 4 officers and 6 Riflemen wounded.
                          • mike dollinger
                            ... _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
                            Message 13 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                              >From: spikeyj@...
                              >Reply-To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
                              >To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
                              >Subject: Re: [WarOf1812] Uniform alterations - bastion loops
                              >Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 00:28:44 -0500 (EST)
                              >
                              >Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
                              >seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
                              >obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
                              >tunic? Even if his loops are the same size as everyone else's, won't
                              >the fact that the bottom loop on his coatee is even with the middle
                              >loops of the guys standing on either side of him going to run the
                              >effect anyway?
                              >
                              >Spike Y Jones
                              >He'll need to find a red deer or something to lead around. :) what do you
                              >say Mcdonald?
                              >

                              _________________________________________________________________
                              Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
                            • mike dollinger
                              ... _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
                              Message 14 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                                >From: spikeyj@...
                                >Reply-To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
                                >To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
                                >Subject: Re: [WarOf1812] Uniform alterations - bastion loops
                                >Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 00:28:44 -0500 (EST)
                                >
                                >Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
                                >seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
                                >obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
                                >tunic? Even if his loops are the same size as everyone else's, won't
                                >the fact that the bottom loop on his coatee is even with the middle
                                >loops of the guys standing on either side of him going to run the
                                >effect anyway?
                                >
                                >Spike Y Jones
                                >He'll need to find a red deer or something to lead around. :) what do you
                                >say Mcdonald? LOL Mike
                                >

                                _________________________________________________________________
                                Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
                              • Sue Draper
                                Mr. Yaworsky: Your email raises several issues, only two of which I choose to address. First, construction, accuracy and interpretation of tailoring: I have it
                                Message 15 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                                  Mr. Yaworsky:

                                  Your email raises several issues, only two of which I choose to address.

                                  First, construction, accuracy and interpretation of tailoring: I have it on the authority of Peter Twist that the maximum number of loops allowed on a coatee was 10, with a minimum of 8. So, as Tim Pickles pointed out, I stand corrected that there was some slight variation in the uniforms. Peter notes that the minimum of 8 was a provision for smaller men, and 10 for larger. Apparently, variations in numbers of buttons and loops stopped altogether by the Rev war, excepting that which is noted above.

                                  According to Steppler, modern military lacing assigns only 3 shapes for lacing: square-ended, pointed and bastion. Early 19th century lacing recognizes at least 5 (possibly more) patterns: Bastion (2 types entitled flowerpot and Jew's Harp, Straight lacing had 2 variations: the common straightpoint and what he terms a rarer Coldstream loop. "There may also have been another variation to the pointed loop...the square ended loops were also referred to as double-headed loops" (Steppler, Military Illustrated, 1989/90 (22):39). Steppler also outlines irregularities/concessions made for bastion-looped regiments.

                                  Further, he notes that on the 1802 clothing regulations review, "the infantry were to use 10 loops on each side of the front of the coat...Highland regiments...8 loops". "Alone, the 3rd foot guards had nine loops, set in threes" (ibid).

                                  According to Pearse c.1803 as quoted by Steppler (ibid, p.44), Hamilton Smith's Chart of Colours 1812 (p.22) and Koke (NY Hist Quarterly, 1961(55) 1: p.172), the looping on the 41st coats is bastion, Steppler goes further to note it as flowerpot shape.

                                  I've done a quick draft of the coatee pattern, adjusted for your large man. I've used bastion loops in a flowerpot shape and which conform to the graduation in size from 3.5" to 4.5" in length, and are approximately 2 inches in width at the medial (lapel) edge. A coatee with a measurement of 30 inches from shoulder to waist takes 10 bastion-flowerpot loops of lace, with less than 1/4" between loops at the medial edge. At 27" from the shoulder, it takes 9, with the medial loops touching (ie no space between loops). Perhaps the problem lies with the template for the bastion loops not being wide enough at the lapel edge. When straight edge looping is what the tailor is familiar with, it's not unusual to try to get the two inside edges of the lacing to touch and flange outward only at the lateral edges, or to attempt to alter the looping via the internal edges.

                                  The regulations make allowance for 8 to 10 loops, but no more. Practical experimentation verifies that the maximum of 10 is possible on a coat of this size.

                                  The point is not whether it's possible to fit more loops on a coat. The point is whether or not it's correct and accurate. Clearly, it isn't. I refer to my original point: when we have so little to hold up as concrete examples, it doesn't make sense to alter the detailed representation we have. Surely there is enough conjecture and debate over details in our period as it is, without dabbling with primary sources.

                                  To your points regarding tailoring:
                                  *increase the width of the loop excessively vertically
                                  {sue}: No, I speak of marginally increasing the distance between the medial points of the loop, not the interior edges. Someone with experience with bastion looping will, as you point out, know better than to adjust the interior width.

                                  *Your suggestion, of fooling around with the shape and spacing of the loops
                                  {sue}: No, my suggestion was to minutely alter the spacing of the loops evenly across the face of the tunic. My suggestion did not include alteration of the bastion shape.

                                  Second, to your personal comments:
                                  *you are speaking from the viewpoint of someone who is familiar with square looping
                                  {sue}: No, I am speaking from the viewpoint of someone who's constructed many coats, for different regiments, based on research and practical experience.

                                  * because I was somewhat put off by the fact that someone who obviously knows nothing of the special considerations involved in lacing bastion-looped regiments nevertheless could make such dogmatic statements, which seemed to be based on experience she may or may not have had with square-looped regiments.

                                  {sue}: As you yourself have pointed out, this egroup is a forum for the exchange of ideas and information, and not for personal digs, slander or maligning. I take exception not only to the tone of your missives, but to the attacks contained therein. I have, contrary to your opinion, rather a lot of experience in the research and construction of British military and non-military clothing, as many on this list will attest. This includes construction using bastion loops. Should you be desirous of a portfolio, you may contact me offline.

                                  We are all on a learning curve, and make adjustments to our methods and presentation as we acquire knowledge and experience. Sometimes the transition from the not-known to the now-known is difficult. I appreciate the position from which you are arguing. However, personal attacks launched by near strangers who have little background upon which to base their assertions is unkind and unproductive and does indeed, enocurage a (to use your term) flame-war. None of this is necessary in an educational, discussion-based forum such as this e-group. Please do not credit me with less experience and fewer years than I've earned.

                                  *she is choosing to play in my ball-park...
                                  {sue}: Forgive me, Mr. Yaworsky. When I paid my admission to this game in 1982, I wasn't aware it was you who owned the playing field.

                                  The field is yours, sir. Do as you will.


                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • BritcomHMP@aol.com
                                  Ooooo Sue, You have got me all confused now. I dug out what I was thinking of (the 1802 regulations) as re-printed in full in the JSAHR within an article by
                                  Message 16 of 24 , Feb 3, 2001
                                    Ooooo Sue,

                                    You have got me all confused now. I dug out what I was thinking of (the 1802
                                    regulations) as re-printed in full in the JSAHR within an article by Bill
                                    Carman. Bill is a stickler but some of his illustrations of officers coats
                                    are strange, he shows a Lt. Company officers jacket with 10 buttons in pairs
                                    but a Lt. Company officers COAT with 12! I confess I cannot find a reference
                                    for this in the text, 10 being the most mentioned (I have however found a
                                    reference to reducing the number as mentioned by Robert but not a reference
                                    for increasing the number). I suppose I will have to drop Bill a line and see
                                    if he can enlighten me.

                                    I am going to be all frustrated until I nail this one down now!

                                    Cheers

                                    Tim
                                  • Sue Draper
                                    Oh, ummmmm. I was talking only about OR coats. Everything I ve read says something akin to this is how it was, blah, blah, blah, and then goes on to say
                                    Message 17 of 24 , Feb 3, 2001
                                      Oh, ummmmm. I was talking only about OR coats. Everything I've read says something akin to this is how it was, blah, blah, blah, and then goes on to say *with the exception of Officer's coats, which* blah, blah, blah.

                                      Does this shed any light?

                                      -sue
                                      -----Original Message-----
                                      From: BritcomHMP@... <BritcomHMP@...>
                                      To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com <WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com>
                                      Date: February 3, 2001 12:28 PM
                                      Subject: Re: [WarOf1812] Uniform alterations - bastion loops


                                      Ooooo Sue,

                                      You have got me all confused now. I dug out what I was thinking of (the 1802
                                      regulations) as re-printed in full in the JSAHR within an article by Bill
                                      Carman. Bill is a stickler but some of his illustrations of officers coats
                                      are strange, he shows a Lt. Company officers jacket with 10 buttons in pairs
                                      but a Lt. Company officers COAT with 12! I confess I cannot find a reference
                                      for this in the text, 10 being the most mentioned (I have however found a
                                      reference to reducing the number as mentioned by Robert but not a reference
                                      for increasing the number). I suppose I will have to drop Bill a line and see
                                      if he can enlighten me.

                                      I am going to be all frustrated until I nail this one down now!

                                      Cheers

                                      Tim

                                      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

                                      www. .com




                                      The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of hundreds of square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the fate of THOUSANDS of square miles...



                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • BritcomHMP@aol.com
                                      In a message dated 2/3/2001 11:57:47 AM Central Standard Time, suedraper@sympatico.ca writes:
                                      Message 18 of 24 , Feb 3, 2001
                                        In a message dated 2/3/2001 11:57:47 AM Central Standard Time,
                                        suedraper@... writes:

                                        << Oh, ummmmm. I was talking only about OR coats. Everything I've read says
                                        something akin to this is how it was, blah, blah, blah, and then goes on to
                                        say *with the exception of Officer's coats, which* blah, blah, blah.

                                        Does this shed any light? >>

                                        Not necessarily. Basically regulations are written in such a way that you are
                                        supposed to refer back up the line for stuff so they don't have to keep
                                        repeating it. I mean one quite often comes across instructions for privates
                                        that will say for example 'as for sergeant but coat in red not scarlet' in
                                        other words if a regulation is laid down and not mentioned again, it is
                                        supposed to carry through for all ranks. So if there is a reference to tall
                                        officers having increased the numbers of buttons and this is NOT qualified
                                        later in the text, privates would logically follow the same regs.
                                        However, as I said before, the ONLY reason for doing this is to make the
                                        coats look the same.

                                        Cheers

                                        Tim
                                      • Craig Williams
                                        Tread carefully Jimmy, Ms. Draper is well versed in the construction of 1812 soldiers clothing. Craig when it comes to matters relating to bastion loops as
                                        Message 19 of 24 , Feb 5, 2001
                                          Tread carefully Jimmy, Ms. Draper is well versed in the construction of 1812
                                          soldiers clothing.

                                          Craig

                                          when it comes to matters relating to bastion loops as placed
                                          >on a regimental coat of the 41st Regiment of Foot, she is choosing to play
                                          >in my ball-park...
                                          >
                                          >regards,
                                          >
                                          >Jim
                                          >1/41st
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of hundreds of
                                          square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the fate of THOUSANDS of
                                          square miles...
                                        • Maxine Trottier
                                          Someone was telling me about a piece in The Beaver recently. I quote: It appears as if gun registration is not a new issue in Canada. I was particularly
                                          Message 20 of 24 , Feb 5, 2001
                                            Someone was telling me about a piece in ""The Beaver" recently. I quote: "It
                                            appears as if gun registration is not a new issue in Canada. I was
                                            particularly interested in the fact that in the mid-19th century gun
                                            ownership was quite tightly controlled, however, with the Americans in
                                            ferment to the south, the government did not want all of us disarmed. They
                                            introduced something called <Certificates of Exemption>. In order to get
                                            one, you had to apply to a local Justice of the Peace in person, complete
                                            with references and sponsors. The certificate, once issued, exempted you
                                            from, I gather, most of the regulations."

                                            Comments? Is this still on the books?



                                            Max



                                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.