Just me, but I'd rather know David did it rather than wonder who had... and if I could trust the repair while not having known it had been done by a true artist.

Maybe he could have put in a copy of his old hunting license with the date of repair on it and made everyone happy rather than scratching on the underside of the plate. It doesn't bother me but where do you draw the line? This might encourage a lot of "smiths" to pull the electropencil out of the bottom drawer to sign their work.
Is the but-plate original or a replacement?
Erick

Conversely, I would rather see Doug Turnbull's, Runge-DelGrego's, Brad Batchelder's, Dale Edmond's, and a host of other artisan's names or trademarks scratched, etched, or engraved into a redone gun and know for certain who did the work than only ever be able to guess who's work it was, judging by how it "looks". A receipt may only last so long and often will not even accompany the gun the very next time it changes hands.

I thought it was kind of cool seeing his name on there. The work done is part of the guns history and now I know who did it. As to its originality I don't know how to tell but would appreciate being educated. Thank you

I bought a set of wood from Mr. Dudley for a small frame Lefever project gun of mine. When I got it and started looking, I found what I presume to be the original owners name and date scratched into the underside of the plate. Granted only the wood is all I have, but I thought it was kind of neat. Plus the gun I had came with the broken wood, and under that butt plate was a receipt for some work done in the early 80's. I enjoy the history aspect of stuff like that, and I think original owner's info scratched into the underside of a plate is fine. For restoration guys to start marking things, I'd rather see a receipt of some kind stuck somewhere I think. 1, it's not there's to mark unless they bought it, restored it and then are selling, and 2, I can start buying plates and carving whoever's name I want in it and try passing it off as having been worked on by someone better than me, if I were unscrupulous that is. People do stranger things...

Mike, I'm not qualified to judge the but-plates originality. What I would look for is does the wear on the plate match the rest of the gun. Others with more experience would know which dogs on the plate are right for the era. I didn't see a size # on yours and I don't know that a size # was used from the beginning when PB switched from metal plates. Others have said that PB chalked the sn on the inside of the plate and I've observed that this is true. Obviously in this case if the plate is original it would have been wiped off.
Erick

I too ch do under buttplates for surprise finds. The Lefever stock that Mr. Signore mentioned above was one of the few that I have personally found. Another one was finding two packs of matches in plastic wrap inside the butt of my Grandfsthers old Btowning Light Twelve.

In regards to a smith "marking" his work. I tend to lean towards the 'shoildnt do it' side. Custom work is one thing. But a restoration of repair should appear as untouched as possible when the work is done.

If I get a chance tomorrow I'll call Mr. Trevallion and see if he remembers working on the gun. This pic, if you look closely shows the gun had the stock cut off near the grip and was spliced back on. It's done so well it's barely noticeable.

I would be willing to bet that Mr. T. did not do the etching of the name and date. More likely done by the gun owner who sent the gun out to be fixed.

Odd that the splice is done there and not just behind the checkering pattern. if it was done there, it would be completely undetectable.