Parker by Peter Johnson

[Peter Harris]

I know nothing about Parkers, never seen one.
But I found a book Parker by Peter Johnson is it a good read?

[Bill Murphy]

It's fine and sort of required for learning about the history of the family and company and basics about the guns. It is not the definitive book on identifying, buying, or collecting Parkers. It is a bit of a piece of history for Parker collectors, though. Consider that it was written fifty some years ago, by a researcher who did not go out of the house to conduct his extensive and interesting research. Twenty years before the book, you could have bought an A-1 Special .410 from the factory for $800.00. Today it would have a value of a half a million dollars. Don't pay much for the book. They are all over the place out there. Try ebay or amazon. Ten bucks will buy one on amazon.

[Peter Harris]

Thank you Bill.

[Bill Murphy]

I feel like Peter Johnson started this entire Parker phenomenon, naive as he was about the future of Parker collection and study. I knew Peter Johnson well, from the time I was maybe fifteen or sixteen years old. He would have blossomed under the interest of the PGCA, but he was limited by the number of books he sold, not too many hundreds to individuals, only a few thousand to liquidators. His exposure to serious Parker dealers and collectors was very limited. He didn't travel and he didn't write checks, so he was not "in the loop". That concept is unbelievable today, but that's the way it was in the sixties. I met and talked to Peter several times a year in those years, and his knowledge of Parkers was absolutely static after the publishing of the "book". In fact, his "bucket of facts" became lighter as the years went by. I liked Peter a lot, but he was not what we as PGCA types thought he was, or should be. The Parker book was a very short lived project for him, not the love of his life as it is for us. We at PGCA honored him one year at the Baltimore Show, took him to dinner at a nice seafood place out on York Road, and has a great night with him. My long time friend and Baltimore show partner, Peter Zinsser, drove him home to Silver Spring, and we never saw or heard from him again until Jim Hall and Ed Muderlak befriended him and interviewed him for the benefit of PGCA members. Jim and Ed should be commended for their efforts. Another PGCA member, please help me remember, assisted in collecting the manuscripts and research materials for our benefit. Oh, forgive me, we have not been given the benefit of sharing those manuscripts, yet. Maybe sometime in the future, we will be privileged to share in the "Johnson Research Materials". Ten minutes after the secret PGCA research materials are "outed", I will share my Parker research material. Of course, I have made this offer before and it has been ignored. Please buy the Johnson book and enjoy. It is a great book written by a great man. Please let me know what is the deal with PGCA members who conduct great research at great personal expense and then bury it in their bosums and don't share it with others. Some of these great researchers will be honored by PGCA over the years, but will not be worthy or the honors bestowed them. Yup, that's the story.

[Bruce Day]

Don't make the boxes of Johnson scribblings more than they are. Elsa was well paid for the little that they are by a private collector, not by the PGCA. There are no hidden gems. Others who befriended Peter could have stepped up and paid, but others wanted the material for free.

The major item of value was the Colt 1911 engraved with his name, and I have posted photos of that.

Bruce Day, Parker beginning apprentice collector.

[Bill Murphy]

What exactly is Bruce talking about when he mentions a box of scribblings? Bruce is famous for deleting his posts to make comments about his posts seem confusing, but his last post is really "confusing". I don't know what the business is about the 1911, but what added value is there with a Peter Johnson signature?

[Bruce Day]

I was present when the Johnson story was unfolding and i heard about it frequently, about there were those who tried to get Elsa to give them the materials for free. I also know the collector who paid what Elsa asked and didn't poormouth. The payment should be viewed as substantially a gift to a widow.

I've seen the materials, they are scribbled notes in the private collection. They are not much. He bought them when nobody else stepped up. Why should he make them public when others hemmed and hawed and sat on their wallets? Others were trying to take the stuff off the widow's hands without giving her anything.

As I said , the Colt is the only item of intrinsic value. I doubt that the Johnson inscription adds any value. in fact it may detract from value. Look for yourself, I posted photos.

[Christopher Lien]

.


............................ :corn:


.

[Bruce Day]

Well some may find this amusing or even entertaining, but I was trying to set the record straight from one who frequently heard what was happening as Johnson was failing and after his passing.

[Jim Williams]

Peter, I agree that the Johnson book is probably responsible for the Parker phenomenon, and is probably the best place to start for someone looking to learn about Parkers. However, keep in mind that much has come to light since Peter wrote his book, and be prepared to revise any impressions you gain from the book as you continue your research through more updated sources (i.e. some of the "facts" in the book have been outdated by more recent research). For the current state-of-the-art in Parker history, consult The Parker Story.

Jim

[Peter Harris]

Thank you Gentlemen, I certainly did not want to prod a hornets nest.
I bought the book, which is in good condition, complete with dust jacket at a car boot sale yesterday for the princely sum of 50 pence (about 75 cents). I will settle down one evening and give it a read.
But moving on, and possibly giving the hornets nest a purposeful prod.
Why on Earth would anyone buy or obtain facts or literature about anything especially a collectors item or enthusiasts information and yet not share it? Seems very narrow minded to me. Surely knowledge is the food of invention and improvement?

[Bruce Day]

Why... would anyone buy or obtain facts or literature about anything especially a collectors item or enthusiasts information and yet not share it? Seems very narrow minded to me. Surely knowledge is the food of invention and improvement?


That's a very good question to ask Bill Murphy.

As relating to the Johnson research materials and manuscript documents, as I said, I've seen them and they are not very illuminating. Moreover, the materials in several notebooks were sent to Austin Hogan and were in his possession for over a year for his examination. They were sent to Austin for his freedom to publish, use, write an article, whatever would be helpful, about the Johnson research.

So, when Bill Murphy talks about these Johnson materials as "secret PGCA research materials" nothing could be further from the truth. They are neither secret nor PGCA materials....he just hasn't seen them and isn't likely to get to see them. Moreover, they have been "outed", to use his phrase, to a responsible Parker researcher and writer.

Finally, Bill creates an improbable fictional character when he asks "Please let me know what is the deal with PGCA members who conduct great research at great personal expense and then bury it in their bosums and don't share it with others." I have no idea who he is talking about and others that I have talked to about his post have no idea either. I hope he is not talking about the renowned collector who stepped up to the plate and paid for the Johnson materials while others sat on their hands and fidgeted, because if he is, he is grossly in error.

[Bill Murphy]

My objections to PGCA sitting on interesting research material are well documented in comments made on this forum in the past. The "Black Hole of Curatorship" is alive and well in PGCA. The original poster is correct in his inquiry about why anyone would sit on good research material. Yes, why would one do that? I have never charged a dime for or have I held back any information that would assist another collector. When I had access to the records of a great gun company, not Parker, gun provenance was offered for a reasonable price. Fortunately for the gun owners, the information was relayed over the telephone and payment was never requested. I just couldn't bring myself to charge someone a fee for information that didn't cost me anything and was of great interest to the owner of the gun. And, in answer to Bruce's last post, I was not referring to the Peter Johnson material when I was mentioning PGCA research material locked in the "Black Hole of Curatorship". I am well aware that the Johnson material is in private hands. My offer to share my "stuff" refers to ten minutes after PGCA shares their "stuff".

[Bruce Day]

OK , I think I have it now. So when you were responding to a post about the Johnson book and specifically mentioning quote "the Johnson Research Materials" , you weren't really specifically talking about the Johnson materials, but rather continued grousing about you not being given access to the Parker gun records kept by the PGCA .

The so called "Black Hole of Curatorship" as relating to the PGCA is a figment of imagination and bears no resemblance to fact. You just haven't been given the access you want. Others, even including Muderlak, benefitted in legitimate research done by Mark Conrad for publication purposes. The Muderlak President Harrison gun article and the Hogan Czars gun articles come readily to mind. Those involved extensive PGCA records research. The PGCA shares their "stuff" all the time with legitimate writers and researchers who publish articles for the benefit of the Parker collecting community.

[Bill Murphy]

I think Peter Harris' statement is short and to the point. My statement is not short, but it is also to the point and I am sticking with it. Not too long ago, you replied to me with a similar statement, attempting to trap me into placing blame for the Black Hole on Mark Conrad. As I replied to you then, Mark Conrad has been nothing but extremely helpful to me for many years.

[Peter Harris]

Far be it for me to comment being a newcomer.
But Bill & Bruce are you not being as bad as the 'Curator of the Black Hole' if you have information that needs to be shared and yet you withhold it? Life is far too short to be petty.
As an interesting aside I was born and raised and trained in the gunmaking quarter of Birmingham England UK. This area was flattened in the 1960's to make way for 'progress' and many of the gunmakers retired rather than move to high rent new workshops. It was thought that their knowledge died with them, but fortunately thanks to the skills of people like David Dryhurst, Richard Tandy, Mike Smart, Tony White etc., and the bloody mindedness of myself to dig out secrets and deflate egos, the art of fine gunmaking lives on for us all to enjoy.
A note to everyone whenever a tradesman as told me they could not divulge their secret it made me all the more determined to find out.
In every case, when I discovered the secret I found it was more BS than skill, and there wasn't anything to be secretive about.

[Bruce Day]

There is no "Black Hole of Curatorship" in the PGCA. Its simply a self serving statement by a single person who doesn't get the access he desires while others get help. That's why I have been so out front in countering Murphy's comment. I think the PGCA is a fine organization, I have a lot of friends in it and we help keep alive collecting and user interest in an exemplary American article. There are always those who want to tear down an organization and its key people for their own reasons, and those people may collect a few cheerleaders along the way from those who don't know any better.

I personally don't keep any Parker collector information of general interest secret. I write, publish and give oral presentations several times a year.

[Bill Murphy]

My research material has always been freely shared, much of it on this forum, much of it on several other forums. Away from this forum, I will share with Bruce some examples of sharing and refusing to share research material over the years.

[Dave Noreen]

Come on Murphy!! You've never scanned in a single page of any of your gun catalogues or research materials and posted it on the internet. We've yet to see a single picture of any of your guns on the internet.

Dave

[Bill Murphy]

Dave, of all people, you realize that I couldn't post a picture if my life depended on it. You know from personal experience that my guns are open for inspection at my house and on the skeet field. Next time you are at my home, how about giving me a block of instruction on picture posting. I will pay you back by giving you pigeon killing lessons.:rotf::rotf::rotf:

[Bruce Day]

[quote=Bill Murphy;47492].... how about giving me a block of instruction on picture posting...."


Bill, its so easy a caveman could do it.

[Christopher Lien]

Come on Murphy!! You've never scanned in a single page of any of your gun catalogues or research materials and posted it on the internet. We've yet to see a single picture of any of your guns on the internet.

Dave
________________________________________

Researcher, You have entered dangerous ground... I became convinced a long time ago that Murphy would happily go to his maker without ever having posted a double gun related image on the internet... You would think a guy that spends so much time requesting and enjoying other peoples photos on-line would want to reciprocate in kind, but sadly Murph has fallen short of that mark... I will donate $5.00 towards eightbore's photo posting lessons and education...;)

Best, CSL
_____________________

[Peter Harris]

Aaaw shucks, I only asked if the book was any good!

[Bruce Day]

There was a picture of Murphy's gold bordello gun posted, but the photos were taken and posted by somebody else.

So, Bill:
1. Take photo of gun related item.
2. Download photo into computer photo library by either cord or inserting chip from camera.
3. Click on photos from photo library and email to yourself. This correctly sizes the photos for the PGCA forum.
4. Save the photos from email into your photo library.
5. Go to PGCA forum , write your lines in "advanced ' and follow instructions in the drop down photo posting box.
6. Click upload and post.

Chris, send the $5 to a deserving Idaho charity.

[tom leshinsky]

So Bruce just please be clear WHY hasn't Bill been able to get the information he asks for from the people in charge? If other so called priveleged people can.

[Bruce Day]

Well Tom, I am not able to personally tell you why on the basis of first hand experience; I have only second hand knowledge. I am quite frankly very uncomfortable with airing dirty laundry publicly blow by blow and won't do it.

In any community there are those who get help when they ask and others who are avoided and not helped and they never understand why people don't want to help them. Being privileged has nothing to do with it.

[Bill Murphy]

Tom, I have always been a bit vague about the situation you allude to. Explaining it would mean naming names and making charges. Even Bruce is not aware of the details. There are a few living members who know the stories, and have also been directly or indirectly affected by the misbehavior of some who will not be named. Unless we discuss this face to face, you will probably not get an answer to your question. In the meantime, please be aware that the verbal sparring between me and Bruce is quite benign. I may even figure out a way to send him some interesting C Grade pictures for his presentation.

[Peter Harris]

Wow, only been a member for a day and I find that the first person who greeted me ( Bill) is a Bad Bad Boy . Sorry Bill.

[greg conomos]

Bill is right, Bruce is wrong...what else is new?

[Bill Murphy]

Peter, the terminology used in place of "Bad Bad Boy" is "mugwump". Google it and see what the history of the word is. I recently defined it for a forum member, a definition you will find if you search for it. I'm really not so bad and provide research information at such a rate as to be accused of having ill gotten material, which is not a correct assumption. I have an immense collection of Parker research material acquired over a fifty year period, none of which was acquired by theft from the Remington archives or PGCA research files, both of which accusations have been made by officers of PGCA. I have never been accused to my face, but have been provided with evidence of those behind the back accusations by officers who did not approve of the behavior of those making the accusations, and who knew that those accusations were false, or, better said, "untrue". This is as close as I have ever come to naming names, making charges, and presenting evidence. I don't want to get to that point, but from time to time, Bruce Day pushes me closer to the brink.

[Bill Murphy]

Greg, watch out. You may get on the list.

[Bruce Day]

Look, I have always admired Bill's Parker knowlege. I've always felt he knows what he is talking about. This thing about Black Hole of Curatorship, well he just lifted that from somebody else who didn't get his way with the PGCA , also for damn good reasons.

So enough is enough. I've received emails from friends about not wrestling with pigs, not getting into pissing contests with skunks, etc. and they are right; I've said enough and will sign off.

[Peter Harris]

Enough is enough, why fall out and call people names when we all have a common interest. Lets all kiss and make up and find out about our treasures and share that knowledge with friends and enthusiasts.
I have no enemies because I only have friends.

[Bill Murphy]

Bruce, I have a collection of the same emails. I also have a bit more respect than you do for the person you correctly credit with the title "Black Hole of Curatorship". Regardless of how much a loose cannon he may have been for the PGCA, especially through this forum, his accusations of mistreatment by the leadership of PGCA were well founded and well documented. If you want to identify yourself as the guy who "Doesn't like Ed Muderlak" and/or "Doesn't like Bill Murphy". You may find a few who don't fully agree with you. My material is honestly acquired and freely shared. What the hell don't you like about that. Check out the article about the "Gold Hearts" gun. No, I don't know how to do pictures, but my guns and I are available for questions. Chris likes to tease me, but he has pictures of the Dupont Shooting School try gun that I provided to him. He, in turn, provided me with pictures of pro shooter Jack Fanning holding the gun. I am actually pretty cooperative with other members, including Bruce Day. In reply to Bruce's last post, I have received more PGCA member and officer emails about Bruce Day than I have on any other subject. I'm kind of glad that Bruce has promised not to reply to me and my posts. I have the last word by default. By the way, I'm also trying to share my Annie Oakley research material with the original poster. It isn't much, but it's the thought that counts.

[Christopher Lien]

Yes, I do tease Murph occasionally, and yes, we have exchanged some very interesting research over the years, but more importantly, I like O'l eightbore, I respect his gun knowledge, and the Parker world would be a less interesting place without him...

Bill, you might want to check that old Try-Gun photo again, yes the immortal Jack Fanning is in the image, but the guy actually holding the Try-Gun (standing next to Jack) is Louis III Parker's GrandDad, Lou Parker Sr... It doesn't get much better than that when it comes to great historical provenance...

Whoever it was that sent Bruce those e-mails suggesting he was a Pig or a Skunk should be ashamed of themselves..... Nuff said...

Best, CSL
___________________________
.

[Bill Murphy]

Chris, oh heck, even Bruce, I'm really disappointed that the Louis Parker/Curtis/Fanning/Dupont try gun isn't a C Grade so I could bring it to Louisville for the show and tell. I guess that gun, my research material, and Chris' research material and photos need to be made into a PP article.

[George Lander]

Sadley, Peter and Ed are no longer with us, but getting back to Peter Johnson (I bought his book back sometime in the 60's) he is the one who really got me interested in Parkers and I do have a few nice ones IMHO. To give Peter proper credit I believe that he was, perhaps, the only writer on the subject who was able to personally interview former Parker employees and transcribe their knowledge and memories. Or am I wrong?

Best Regards, George

[Bill Murphy]

You are correct, George. However, Mr. Johnson admits to conducting all his research from home. He worked without the advantage of email and computer and did not drive as far as I know. To confirm my statements, refer to Parker Pages articles. Sorry, I don't know the issues.

[King Brown]

When I was given a 16ga hammer 0 grade under extraordinary circumstances---Destry heard the story and saw it while gunning our Eastern Shore---I bought the Johnson book and expressed my disappointment here. I rightly got my ears clipped by members who knew Peter Johnson as a friend and Parker enthusiast. Mr. Johnson apparently did the best with what he had. I mention this now because I would have felt differently about Johnson and his book if I had read what Bill disclosed above. It all comes out over time.

[Jim Williams]

You are correct, George. However, Mr. Johnson admits to conducting all his research from home. He worked without the advantage of email and computer and did not drive as far as I know. To confirm my statements, refer to Parker Pages articles. Sorry, I don't know the issues.

Not only "from home," but didn't he say strictly by mail correspondence - not even so much as a phone conversation? (At least that's what I remember...)

Jim

[Bill Murphy]

Yes, Jim, that is the way I remember it, but was afraid to spread my praise for my friend, Peter, that far without reviewing the articles. Mr. Johnson and I did not discuss "the book" that much when we would meet. I was not much of a Parker researcher in those pre-PGCA days. Mostly we would discuss guns we would see at shows. I did not own many Parkers in those days and finding more Parkers was more important to me than the history of the company. Mr. Johnson seemed similarly inclined. He was eager to learn more about the guns, having little experience with them beyond doing research for the book. I wish I had persuaded him to do what I was doing, shooting and hunting with Parkers on a weekly, sometimes daily basis.

[Destry L. Hoffard]

Bruce,

There is some interesting information in that box of papers actually, I know because I've seen photocopies of it. Some letters between Charles Parker and Johnson come to mind specifically. To say it's a bunch of scribbled notes is kinda stupid knowing that sort of thing is in there to be looked over. There's also letters from former employees and letters from family members of dead employees too. Maybe we're talking about a different batch of papers here, but I know what I saw copies of and read had come from Johnson at least. Maybe that's not what your "friend" bought after Johnson died, I just know what I saw several years ago.


Destry

[Bruce Day]

Feel free to call Charlie Herzog and discuss the matter.

[Destry L. Hoffard]

[Edited (see below)...]

I like Charlie, he's a fine fella.

[Edited...]

Destry

[Brian Dudley]

I am sure this thread was started speaking about the P. Johnson book entitled "Parker: America's Finiest Shotgun".

I have a copy of that book. Picked it up pretty cheap on Ebay. It is a good read, and has very good information. One thing that I found is that being it was writen so long ago that there is some informaiton that is not 100% accurate. One that really caught my attention was that it says that only 2 invincibles were produced, and we know now that the figure is 3.
And I think that the production figures by Grade may be off in spots, but Johnson states that fact clearly.