Kate Kelly (outlaw) - Kate Kelly Revolver

Kate Kelly Revolver

In October 2006, Sydney-based auctioneer Tom Thompson exhibited a revolver that he claimed had belonged to Kate Kelly. It was further stated that it was the very revolver with which Constable Alexander Fitzpatrick had entered the Kelly house on the night of 15 April 1878, and which was wrestled off him by Kate's brother, Ned. In the ensuing struggle, Fitzpatrick was shot through the wrist. The revolver was purported to have been found preserved in lard and wrapped in leather, concealed in a wall cavity of a house in Forbes, in central NSW, where Kate Kelly had lived between 1888 and 1898.

The revolver was described as a .32 Henckell & Co., carrying the markings of the Royal Constabulary in the form of R*C marked on the right hand side of the frame. It was exhibited at the State Library of NSW prior to a proposed auction to be held on the 5 November 2006, where it was estimated to fetch $400-450,000AU. However, it was unexpectedly withdrawn from sale just prior to the auction. Mr Thompson explained that he wanted to have the gun authenticated by having it scanned under ultraviolet and infra-red light.

It reappeared for sale by Thompson through Melbourne auction house Mossgreen Auctions in November 2007. In the days leading up to the auction, the item received considerable press coverage, with Mossgreen director Paul Sumner describing the revolver's discovery as "a rare and exciting find". "In America, it would be equivalent to finding Jesse James' gun," he said. The revolver was auctioned on Tuesday, 13 November 2007, where it sold to an absentee bidder for $72,870AU.

The following day, controversy began to surround the sale when several antique firearm experts claimed to have informed Mossgreen director Paul Sumner prior to the Tuesday night auction that the revolver was incorrectly described, and dated too late to have been associated with Constable Fitzpatrick or the Kelly Gang during the years 1878-80. One expert explained that Henckell & Co., Solingen, was most likely the name of the German retailer who had sold the firearm, and not the actual manufacturer. The alleged Royal Constabulary markings of R*C had also been misread, it was claimed. The full marking depicted a crown over R*C all stamped in a vertical line. A crown over R was a common Belgian proof mark, R standing for rayé - the French term to indicate the barrel was rifled.

It was further suggested that the revolver was in fact a Belgian imitation of the highly popular British Webley "Bulldog" revolver, of which numerous imitations were made in Belgium and America in the years following the model's introduction in 1879. They were initially produced in .450, .442 and .380 calibres, however in July 1884 the smallest calibre version appeared listed in the Army and Navy Stores catalogue produced in .32 calibre. The photograph of the gun in the auction catalogue clearly shows the numerals "32" inscribed on the gun's left hand side just in front of the chamber. It was argued that, as a Belgian copy of the Webley, the earliest date of manufacture for the purported Kate Kelly gun would be late 1884 onwards: four years after Ned Kelly's execution, and six years after the Fitzpatrick Incident. This claim did not however refute the possibility that the revolver had belonged to Kate Kelly in later life.

Three days after the auction, on Friday, 16 November 2007, Age journalist Carolyn Webb noted that "since the auction, neither the auctioneer, Paul Sumner, nor the vendor's agent, Tom Thompson, has been able to provide documentary proof of the discovery." Mossgreen reacted by announcing they would launch an inquiry into the provenance of the revolver. Sumner stated that Mossgreen "will do its due diligence to protect the buyer, and we would immediately cancel a sale and refund purchase price if the sworn provenance was proven incorrect".

Thompson suggested that the Age article raising questions about the item's provenance was "aimed at tainting the sale of the item for the sake of making a good yarn". However by Friday, 16 November 2007, it had been established that a source Thompson had cited as "a researcher for Victorian Police" to support his claims of the gun's provenance was an amateur historian from Yass, New South Wales, who had never been a researcher for the Victorian police.