Posted 28 August 2006 - 07:55 PM
You seem to single me out as the sole entity that explodes the "unbroken chain" myth. Leaving aside the recent posters in this thread, Phil, Norm, rhlowe, and even Lancer, who do not share your conclusions, let us not forget that Gordon Herigstadt, Roger Cox, Doug Richardson and William Helmer do not support your position either. Since you have no documents to support your position, do you have any published author who you could cite that does? Using Numrich's own words in an interview are not going to carry the day.
"Follow the transfers, follow the money, follow the reason for purchase and follow what each owner did with the Thompson. The line of succession is continuous." TD
Let's examine your "chain" of owners:
Kilgore's purchase in 1949 resulted in.....0 TSMG's made. He didn't even know about the 85-100(?) complete TSMG's in the crates.
Fred Willis purchase in 1951 resulted in.....0 TSMG's made. He didn't know about the 85-100(?) complete TSMG's in the crates.
George Numrich purchase in 1951 resulted in......0 TSMG's made. He didn't know about the 85-100(?) complete TSMG's in the crates. Now in this instance, Numrich's ignorance about the existing TSMG's is puzzling since, as you claim, he bought the crates from Willis for the express purpose of manufacturing from scratch new TSMG's. Maybe he figured there were thousands of TSMG's he could import? How much money did he make from selling these crated 100 some TSMG's? $20,000? How much did he pay Willis for the crates?
Now back to your rules for unbroken chains of succession we must suspend all previously accepted laws of product succession.
1) Whether the name of the original TSMG company AOC (the one that developed, manufactured, and marketed TSMG from 1916- 1944) follows the sale of crates is immaterial since corporation names don't count.
2) For 31 years, a new TSMG made under the auspices of the original AOC did not exist until Trast made 1927A1's and smg's in 1975 under the umbrella of the brand new AOC name. By TD's law this absence of product is irrelevant because unbroken chains of lineage are not depended upon existence of newly made product to claim membership in the unbroken chain club.
"Auto-Ordnance Corporation ceased to exist before the end of World War II." TD
This is where your wires got horribly crossed. AOC did not cease to exist at that time. But it did stop having anything to do with making Thompson's after March, 1944. As stated in the previous post, AOC stayed with the Maguire family. By the time Maguire made the sale of crates in 1949, the AOC that was responsible for making TSMG's was no longer the name of the business that Maguire had renamed his firearms company. In fact, Maguire not only did not make Thompson's under the new name "Ordnance Division," he didn't make any firearms.
Had Maguire made TSMG's under the AOC name right up to the sale of the crates to Kilgore in 1949, or at least kept the AOC name for his firearm branch, then, and only then, would it be possible for Kilgore to have purchased, and Maguire to have sold, the original company that made TSMG's. Just because Maguire said I am through with making/selling/marketing TSMG's in 1944, in no way translates into Kilgore being able to state he bought the crates from AOC and, therefore, now owns the AOC that made TSMG's prior to 1945.
The more likely scenario is that Maguire told Kilgore, "Here yo go. Now have fun making Thompson's under your own business name." It sure seems that Numrich took this advice and used his Numrich Arms Corporation to sell existing TSMG's and fix broken ones.
As far as "bastard child?" Like "Big Valley's" Heath Barkley? I'm thinking more like "My Three Sons" Ernie Thompson Douglas.