The Velocity Race
When I was a kid just learning the shooting sports in the Seventies, all the major rifle manufacturers, ammo companies and wildcatters were engaged in a race for velocity. Roy Weatherby contributed heavily, with his proprietary line of 3,000fps+ rifle cartridges, but he wasn’t alone. The gun companies were daily bringing out new variations on the Eargesplitten Loudenboomer Magnum with muzzle velocities approaching relativistic speeds. The trend continued into the next couple of decades; back in the Nineties when I was running a little email newsletter on Mauser bolt guns, one of my regular readers used to regale us with tales of his wildcatter buddies Aimo and Delbert. Those worthies once supposedly came up with a .17/50BMG wildcat which had a muzzle velocity so high that the bullet arrived on target before the shooter even uncased the rifle.
But there was one man who anticipated the trend, and indeed predated them all; so much so, in fact, as to have been well ahead of his time. His name? Charles Newton.
The Man
Surprisingly little is known about Charles Newton. We know he was born in Delevan, New York, in 1868; we know he was a lawyer and firearms aficionado with an ambition to become a gunmaker. He had some pretty good ideas about big game rifles, was conversant in bolt guns and was obviously a student of Paul Mauser’s designs.
We also know he was a couple of decades ahead of his time.
The Plan
When Newton first set out to market his own ideas in bolt-action game rifles in 1914, the American outdoor scene was dominated by lever-actions. But several events were happening around the world that would change that.
First: Sixteen years earlier, Paul Mauser, working in his factory in Oberndorf am Neckar in Bavaria, created what would be the pattern for the vast majority of bolt guns thereafter: The 1898 Mauser. Unlike the previous designs from Mauser-Werke, the 98 had a robust reinforcing ring in the beefier forward receiver ring; the ’98 also had a third “safety” locking lug, an improved gas shield in the bolt shroud to vent hot gases away from the shooter in the event of a case failure, and it cocked on opening, using the leverage of the bolt handle to cock the striker rather than making the shooter push the bolt closed against the striker spring.
This set the 98 apart from previous bolt guns in several ways. First, the action was tougher, allowing the use of high-pressure, high-performance cartridges. Second, the cock-on-open action made for faster, more certain cycling of the action. Third, the gas shield made the ’98 safer for the shooter in the case a high-performance round blew a case head.
Second: In June of 1914, when a Serb Yugoslav nationalist named Gavrilo Princip rubbed out the Austro-Hungarian royal heir Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo, triggering a conflict which eventually exploded into the Great War. Why is this relevant to the American sporting rifle picture?
Because three years later, in 1917, the United States entered that conflict. In all 2.8 million American servicemen volunteered or were conscripted for that conflict (my grandfather among the first group). Those who were hunters and shooters had, like most American sportsmen, favored lever guns prior to this, but their service time made them intimately familiar with the Pattern 17 Enfields and the excellent 1903 Springfield rifles they were issued; both rifles were essentially clones of the 98 Mauser. When they returned home, the American doughboys led the slow but inevitable rise of the bolt gun as the go-to American sporting rifle.
Charles Newton was poised to capitalize on that trend.
The Cartridges
A rifle is a device for launching bullets. Knowing that to be true, Newton began his forays into ammunition before he began building rifles. Of all his cutting-edge (for the time) cartridges, only his first is still in use today.
In or around 1912, Charles Newton designed a new cartridge for a company that had a great property, a cutting-edge lever gun; that company being Savage, the gun being the Model 99, and the cartridge Newton developed became the .22 Savage Hi-Power. It wasn’t a complicated piece of engineering; he merely took the .25-35 WCF case and necked it down to take an oddball .228 bullet. But the combination of high velocity and the slightly over-bore .22 round firing a 70-grain soft point bullet yielded a round that punched well outside its weight class by the standards of the time. The round became popular in Europe for hunting red deer, Europe’s slightly smaller variation on North American elk; no lesser a man than W.D.M. “Karamojo” Bell, demonstrating once again the advantages gifted by an enormous set of brass balls, successfully used a .22 Savage Hi-Power rifle to hunt Cape buffalo. Newton’s ideas of high velocity and high penetrating power were beginning to earn some respect in the game fields.
The .22 Savage Hi-Power, in the European guise of the 5.6x52R, is, in fact, the only one of Newton’s cartridge designs still in common use, although only in Europe – and only in those jurisdictions where the peasants are still allowed to own rifles.
The following year, 1913, saw Newton bringing out another new cartridge. The .256 Newton was another adaptation of an existing round – Newton took the famous .30-06 case and necked it down to take a .25 caliber bullet. Sound familiar? Of course – many years later Remington legitimized the popular wildcat round that originally came out as the .256 Newton, calling it the .25-06 Remington. For Newton, the .256 round was a breakthrough. Western Cartridge Company loaded the case with a 123-grain pill at a tad over 3100 fps, a blazing-hot round for the time.
Then, that same year, Newton brought out one of the first real magnum rifle cartridges, the .30 Newton, which fired a 150-grain bullet at over 3,200fps. This was a rip-roaring .30 caliber round for this pre-Great War market. Newton achieved this by necking down the big German 11.2×72 Schuler case. This was a big, beefy case; the original 11.2×72 (firing a .44 caliber bullet, more or less) round was a popular round in German rifles made for the African safari market at the time.
This case was roomy enough to be adapted for larger bullets, and Newton took advantage of that, bringing in the .33 and 35 Newton in 1915, launching 225 and 250-grain bullet at 2800fps, and finishing up with the .40 Newton, which never saw full production (as we’ll explore here in a moment) but which theoretically could propel a 300-grain slug at over 3,000fps.
But a cutting-edge cartridge is of little use unless you have a rifle that can handle it. It was in the development of those rifles that Newton showed his prescience.
The Guns
While a rifle may be a device for launching bullets, the bullets are nothing without the rifle; and it is in the rifle that a designer has a chance to achieve some real artistry.
The first Newton rifle wasn’t made by Newton. In 1914, the Model A Newton hit the market, sold only in the .256 Newton caliber. It’s unclear how many Model A Newtons were imported, but the number is likely under a hundred. The rifles were made under contract in Germany; one shipment of 24 rifles, built on 98 Mauser actions, is confirmed to have been received and sold by Newton. Other shipments were prepared but not sent, and it is unknown what happened to those guns, as the beginning of the Great War interfered with shipments across the Atlantic.
Undeterred, Newton decided to build his own guns. In 1916 re-formed the Newton Arms Co., Inc. and enlisted the assistance of legendary gunsmith and barrel-maker Harry Pope. In due time, The Newton Arms Co. introduced the first American-made Newton, the First Model 1916.
This was a solid bolt gun that departed from the Mauser in having not one two large locking lugs but six smaller ones, making for a shorter bolt throw. The 1916 was, at last, the culmination of Newton’s intentions for a modern bolt-action sporting rifle. About 4,000 were made, chambered for the .22 Savage Hi-Power, the .256, .30, .33, .35 Newton calibers as well as the .30 U.S.G., better known nowadays as the .30-06. .40 Newton rifles were advertised but it’s unclear if any were actually built. The 1916 also featured a variety of wood grades, barrel lengths up to thirty inches, scope mounts, and a double-set trigger.
But not all those 4,000 rifles were made by Newton.
Newton was a man ahead of his time, but his timing was poor in other respects as well. He was trying to build an market an innovative new sporting rifle while most of Western civilization was involved in a horrible war of attrition on the European continent, making it very difficult to obtain steel and components for ammunition; since Newton’s rifles used (mostly) proprietary ammo, there was no pre-war inventory to rely on. Newton was able to produce the 1916 rifles for about 16 months, building 2,400 or so rifles in that time. But then ongoing financial troubles threatened to sink the New Arms Company, which was forced into receivership for a little over three months; the receiver sold the company’s assets to a third party, who formed the Newton Arms Corporation in New York City and continued building the Model 1916 rifles, cranking out about 1,600 before Newton sued to get his design back. No more Model 1916 Newtons were built after that.
Still, in due time, the Great War ended. Lots of American doughboys came home, and many of them returned to their pre-war pastimes, which included hunting and shooting; suddenly there was a market for bolt-action sporting rifles. Such firms as Remington and Winchester were already stepping into the market, and so in 1922, Charles Newton, having once more re-organized his business as the Chas. Newton Rifle Company, arranged with Germany’s J.P. Sauer to import Mauser-based rifles in .256 Newton as the Model 1922. This was not a good business model; only around a hundred rifles were imported before the whole thing fell through. So, Newton shifted gears yet again, moved his operation to New Haven, Connecticut, and formed the Buffalo Newton Rifle Company. Once again Newton was manufacturing.
Between 1924 and 1930, the Buffalo Newton Rifle Company put out about 1,000 Second Model 1924 Buffalo Newton rifles, chambered in .256, .30, .35 and .40 Newton calibers as well as the .30-06. The Buffalo Newton, like the Model 1916, was available in a variety of trims and barrel lengths and featured a double-set trigger designed and patented by Newton himself.
But the Newtons were something of a premium rifle. Take note of the years of manufacture; after the crash of 1929 and during the resulting Great Depression, there wasn’t a great market for top-end guns. The Buffalo Newton Rifle Company folded in 1930.
Charles Newton wasn’t quite finished. In 1929 Newton had come up with a prototype for what he called the “Leverbolt” rifle, a fast-actioned, straight-pull bolt gun that looked like the illegitimate child of a 98 Mauser and a 99 Savage lever gun. The gun was never manufactured, and while there have been a couple of attempts to revive the design over the years, nothing has ever come of it.
A while back I had the chance to handle and shoot a Model 1916 Newton rifle in .30-06. It was a great rifle, well-made and beautiful, with a premium walnut stock and good sights. The rifle impressed me enough that I asked the owner, who had inherited the rifle from his grandfather, if it might be for sale; he replied, “not at any price,” which is understandable. The stock had rather more drop than a modern rifle, but the action was smooth, and the double-set trigger clean and crisp. I’d like to have one like it one day.
The Legacy
Charles Newton passed away at his home in New Haven, Connecticut, in 1932, aged 64. While he never saw much commercial success as a gun builder, in his development of fine bolt-action rifles and high-velocity magnum rifle cartridges firing tough, heavy slugs resulting in high shock effect and great penetration, Charles Newton foretold what the American sportsman would be looking for in a game rifle – he just saw it about twenty years too soon. I look today at my favorite big-game rifle, my own Thunder Speaker, based on a ’98 Mauser action, using the .338 Winchester Magnum cartridge to fire a tough 250-grain bullet at around 2800 fps; this is a rifle that will let daylight in both ends of a moose, the long way.
That’s a rifle Charles Newton would have approved of.
It’s a difficult thing, sometimes, to be too far ahead of the wave. Had Charles Newton brought out his rifles and cartridges in the years leading up to the second world war instead of the first, he may well have taken his place along John Browning and Sam Colt as a great American gun designer. As it is, he’s a footnote; few people today know of Newton rifles, and the guns themselves are relegated to ranks of collectors, too few and too valuable to see much use in the game fields.
And that’s too bad. I’ve long watched the online auctions for a Newton rifle, and when I do find one to take an honored place in the gun rack at the Casa de Animal, it will certainly be taken out to the range and the field, shot and hunted with. That’s what a rifle is made for; that’s why Charles Newton designed his rifles and cartridges.
When you get right down to it, there are plenty of worse legacies a man could leave behind him.
Never heard of him before, great article.
That 1916 looks sweet.
Great as usual, Animal. I love stories of creative entrepreneurs, even if their timing was off.
Can you explain the double-set triggers?
+1 Thanks for the article!
I was wondering about that too. I don’t understand how to fire a rifle with a backwards trigger.
Double-set triggers aren’t seen much today, but on black-powder guns and cartridge guns up through the very early 20th century you saw them. The main trigger could be squeezed as normal to set the rifle off with a slightly heavier than normal pull, or you could “set” the trigger by pulling the set trigger until it clicked. The set trigger was usually the rear trigger in normal setups, like the 1916 Newton; in the later Newton using his patent, the forward reversed trigger was pushed to set. Then the regular trigger became a hair trigger, requiring generally less than a pound of pull. The set trigger cocked a spring-loaded striker than hit the sear when the regular trigger was pulled.
Set triggers were popular until machining techniques and metal hardening made it easier to get a really good pull out of a regular trigger. The set trigger gave you a very light pull but increased lock time by a few milliseconds.
Thanks, Animal!
Eargesplitten Loudenboomer Magnum
Nice.
I can’t take credit for it. I think it was H.M. Pope that coined that term.
Thanks Animal. Good article.
I have heard both sides of this argument.
1) by making an entrance wound and an exit wound you have two places to let the blood out
2) the best case for damage is for the bullet to come to a stop just inside the hide on the far side
The second case makes more sense to me because it is the greatest transfer of energy. You don’t want to make it bleed, you want to make hydrostatic shock.
What say ye Glibs?
Great article, Animal.
Ideally, the bullet should miss the target, but the shock wave from its passing rupture the moose’s organs and stun the nervous system.
+1 bowling ball at orbital escape velocities.
Great history lesson for us, things we need to know and didn’t , before today. Thanks Animal.
While never having shot a moose my experience with deer is bullet placement. I’ve chased deer 75 yards to find they were heart shot, had many drop where they were standing. Last fall a yearling doe was looking at me head on. A 30-30 round never exited but the deer did a complete backwards somersault. DOA. Some times there is a lot of blood, other times I’ve seen very little.
^This^
I’ve had deer run off like I didn’t even hit them only to find them a hundred yards off stone dead with no heart, or lungs completely obliterated. Others just fall right there and never twitch.
The most perplexing was the “Jesus Deer”. I shot a white tail doe at about 50 yds one year and she jumped straight in the air, fell down, got up and ran for about 50 more yards and then lay down. I figured she was bleeding out and stayed in my stand watching her. After about 15 minutes, she put her head down and I figured that was it. Gave it about 10 more minutes and unloaded my rife and started to get down from my stand. At that point she leapt up and ran over the ridge like she was training for the Olympics.
I spent an hour looking for blood or hair and never found a trace. My theory that she was Jesus and had been killed by me and then risen from the dead has not caught on with the people I hunt with. They have an alternative theory that I actually missed so badly that she felt safe enough to take a nap.
SHE WAS PUNKING YOU?
My sons both love to bring up my humiliation at the hands of Jesus Deer every year when we gather up for another hunt.
The most perplexing was the “Jesus Deer”.
I had a Jesus Deer experience, only this was a deer who apparently ascended directly into heaven, because he walked behind a clump of grass in an open meadow and never emerged from the other side. Just . . . poof. Gone.
Ever hunt rabbits? They are masters at that. Run one way, get out of sight for a fraction of a second and change direction.
*Poof*
Dad and his hunting buddies used shot rabbits with .22s to practice for big game hunting. Their standard was to never shoot at a stopped target, only moving ones. Must have worked; Dad was deadly accurate into his 80’s.
Pater Dean used to spend his summers wandering the New Mexico ranchlands with a .22.
He was a good enough shot when he joined the Marines they wanted him on their competition team. He declined; said it looked boring.
He still drops coyotes occasionally at over 100 yards with iron sights. You can’t beat all that repetition at an early age.
Pheasants are worse. How can a bird with a bright green head and long fancy feathers simply crouch down behind one weed and disappear.
At least rabbits are brown and sort of built to blend in.
Snowshoes in winter
Black eyes and black tips of their ears.
Luckily the beagle I grew up with was always hot on their tails, so you had a chance.
The best way to make sure #2 happens all of the time is for #1 to happen a fair percentage of the time. You’d have to do some math to figure out which one dumped more energy. Obviously #2 in the case that both rounds had the same energy at initial contact, but I don’t know enough ballistics to know how much energy transfer you can get before it goes out the back.
In case #1 only some of the energy from the bullet is transferred to the animal, the remainder into the dirt after exit. In case #2 100% of the energy is transferred inside.
I guess maybe it is not a true apple/apple comparison. If Animal’s .338 Magnum has, say, twice the energy as my 7×57 and transfers 50% of its energy in case #1 then it’s the same amount of my 7 in case #2.
My mother killed a moose in 1980 with a .270 Remington. She hit it right in the neck and it went through the spine and dropped it in its tracks.
There has been a family argument since then about whether she meant to shoot it in the neck or jerked the trigger when she was aiming behind the shoulder. She claims she went for the neck shot because “it was huge, how could you miss it?” Other family members (who may be jealous) have argued for the jerk theory. In fairness to her, she is a good shot and it isn’t possible to rule out that she really was going for the neck.
My ex-BIL killed a 1200 pounder with his brand new Ford 350. He was pissed the insurance company totaled it and he lost some $25K in the transaction.
by making an entrance wound and an exit wound you have two places to let the blood out
I changed my bullets for deer hunting because I was using those polymer-tipped ones that were supposedly super accurate (a pointy tip rather than a flattish one) and had great terminal ballistics (the polymer tip would make the bullet expand when it hit).
They were accurate (but nearly everything is through my .300), but they were drilling perfect round .30 caliber holes through the deer, leaving me some long and iffy blood trails. When I went with your more standard soft-point, the deer would either hit the ground where they were standing or make it less than 50 yards, on account of their insides getting blowed up real good.
I like a substantial exit wound. I like having the animal bleed out, and I like having an ample blood trail to follow if I need to track.
“Use enough gun” applies, or maybe “too much is better than too little.” Last year’s 125-pound meat buck ran in about a thirty-yard semicircle and collapsed. When I dressed it out, loyal sidekick Rat let out a low, reverent whistle at the damage done to that little buck by a 225-grain .338 Barnes XLC at about eighty yards; that buck’s lungs and the top of his heart were liquified. He shoots a .30-06 and put his buck down right hard, but it didn’t make the spectacular mess Thunder Speaker did.
But then, he didn’t ruin an entire front quarter with the exit wound, either.
I like a substantial exit wound. I like having the animal bleed out, and I like having an ample blood trail to follow if I need to track.
Same here. My beef with the polymer tips was zero expansion after impact. The .300 has left an exit wound in every animal I’ve hit, including some pretty significant hogs. With the soft points, it leaves an ample exit wound.
My black-powder elk (.50 caliber round) took the bullet through his shoulder blade, no exit wound (no surprise, given it was black powder and the first thing it hit was a major chunk of bone – we didn’t find the bullet, but it was probably mashed against the other shoulder blade). No blood trail beyond a few drops, and we were in a willow hell in the Rockies. The only way we found him was the guide recalled a couple of his cows milling around about fifty yards from where we shot him, and when we checked where they were, there he was.
Speaking of Science:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqejXs7XgsU
Biggest scam in human history.
W.D.M. “Karamojo” Bell, demonstrating once again the advantages gifted by an enormous set of brass balls, successfully used a .22 Savage Hi-Power rifle to hunt Cape buffalo.
Correction – an incredibly gigantic set of solid titanium balls. Cape Buffalo with a .22? I don’t care what the velocity is, that’s insane.
Great chapter on Bell in Death in Silent Places which should be required reading for young boys in Jr. High.
Wore out 20 pairs of boots one year hunting elephants. The bastard would walk up into the middle of a herd and start shooting. No long range shooting them like a pussy.
That’s not so crazy. Solids at 3000+ fps even in .22 caliber will kill anything like a lightning strike. Of course, facing such a beast, I would prefer my .458 winchester spitting a 500 grain solid.
Solids at 3000+ fps even in .22 caliber will kill anything like a lightning strike.
Even with the tough hide and bones of a Cape Buffalo? I mean, he did it, so its obviously possible, but c’mon, man. Stop making the rest us look like we have lace on our panties, already.
Here is a great article about him. I couldn’t find mention in the article but I understand that his technique for killing elephants was a brain shot through the eye.
As mentioned above, shot placement is critical in hunting. My hunting buddy and I would carefully select the best rounds for our rifles by shooting hundreds of targets. We’d shake our heads when we’d see some guy picking up ammo the day before his hunt. “Which one do you want?” “I don’t know, give me the cheap shit”
I did put a disclaimer in there. I am gonna go with my .458. I will let someone else try the .22 and report back.
*My father had a friend back in the 1970’s that hunted buffalo using a 375H&H. He claimed it would kill them on the spot but he said that would only happen if they were on the receiving end of the rifle.
On one occasion the buffalo caught on, looped back around and stalked him. The bastard snuck up on him, knocked him down and then jumped up and down on him with all fours half a dozen times. Miraculously he survived but he lost the use of his legs.
Cape buffalo are very dangerous beasts.
Roy Weatherby supposedly took Cape Buffalo with his .257 Mag.
https://www.africahunting.com/threads/257-weatherby-mag.22903/
I have a .270 Weatherby but I’ll keep it restricted to whitetails and porcupine. Seems to be adequate
Fantastic article Animal. Being an avid shooter of the 25-06 (sometimes called the rifleman’s rifle) I do know of Newton and like you I would give my eye teeth for a Newton.
Was Newton the guy that had some crazy idea when that apple dropped on his head while napping under a tree sa very long time ago?
I thought he was the guy who baked Fig cakes.
Nah, you’re thinking of the guy who invented a delicious cookie after a fig hit him.
Cant a guy invent physics, rifles and cookies?
That would be a man’s man!
I’ve often thought about buying a .25-06 just to mess with the round. In fact I’m surprised I’m not surfing Gunbroker for a .25-06 right now.
The bastard would walk up into the middle of a herd and start shooting. No long range shooting them like a pussy.
Leave no witnesses.
No tales around the elephant campfire about, “If you see one of them crazy monkeys point a stick at you, grab him by the neck and throw him over the horizon.”
Animal,
Flashing back to your lever gun articles, I visited my FIL and checked out his dad’s 1893 Marlin in .32-40. It was in great shape with no corrosion. He used it as his whitetail rifle until the 1980’s.
I hope to have this gem in the future. It has a a hexagonal heavy barrel with the square block.
You can have your silly hunting rifles because they aren’t high-powered murder devices like AK-15s.
tHe ThInG tHaT gOeS uP!!!!!11!!11eleventy!!
Chinks (RACIST!) in the armor?
https://qz.com/1598345/microsoft-staff-are-openly-questioning-the-value-of-diversity/
The whole point of useful idiocy is to create incompetence. At some point food stops going into your mouth and paychecks stop going into your bank account.
If you dont stop hitting yourself in the head with a hammer the headache is not going to go away.
a fast-actioned, straight-pull bolt gun that looked like the illegitimate child of a 98 Mauser and a 99 Savage lever gun. The gun was never manufactured, and while there have been a couple of attempts to revive the design over the years, nothing has ever come of it.
I swear I thought I some a major gun maker with a straight-pull bolt action. Sig, maybe? Obviously hasn’t caught on in a big way, but I think they are out there.
Browning makes a straight pull bolt in .22 rimfire today. I think the swiss used a straight pull Mannlicher as their standard issue battle rifle. They are more of a European thing than an American thing.
They are more of a European thing than an American thing.
Makes sense. When I saw it, I remember thinking it was kinda faggy.
Heym? just a subject of a Forgotten Weapons video
The Swiss used straight-pull bolt actions (the Schmidt-Rubin series), the most recent being the K31. Tack drivers.
Blaser currently makes straight-pull bolt actions (Blaser R8)
If you ever get a chance, pick up a K31 and the Swiss GP11 mil-surplus ammo.
I think it was the Blaser that I saw.
Ah yes, the K31. That’s it.
I passed one up and a ridiculously low price (I thought ammo would be expensive and hard to find).
I still kick myself.
Ditto on most of the cheap imports over the past 10-20 years ago. I used to snicker at the Big 5 sales flyers. No way could something that cheap be any good.
Do those olympic biathalon rifles qualify as a “straight pull” action? They appear to be operated by a flick of the finger or thumb. I have never seen one in real life.
looks like the bolt carrier has bearings on the side to help with the sliding.. or something. not sure what those are.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3cN3wtbOko
The Anschutz Fourtner action is a straight pull.
When you pull back on the bolt lever (in the center) it unlocks the ball bearings, That then allows the entire bolt to retract.
Then you push back on the rear with your thumb with the final action locking up the ball bearings and setting the striker.
This allows the one handed operation with minimal trigger hand movement.
In the video you can see that they can’t insert the bolt unless you are holding the lever rearward to keep the bearings unlocked.
Another superb article, Animal!
OT: Florida Bunny
https://www.foxnews.com/us/easter-bunny-florida-brawl
The question is, was Brett giving, or receiving?
I’m betting on Brett either way. No way a few cotton balls to the chin is going to knock him out of commission.
Not me, not then. I did see Santa in the gym on Friday. Big white beard, gut like a bowlful of jelly, RDL’ing 335. So he can haul plenty of coal for all y’all.
DOH!
You just beat me to it.
“Just” == 39 minutes. :-p
That was in the morning links. Narrowed gazeyincoming in 3…2…1…
Florida man celebrating Easter by showing punk that the Easter bunny shouldn’t be messed with.
HAH HAH HAH! Don’t marry when high and drunk man…
EDIT FAIRY BLESSES YOU
HEPL edit fairy!
Don’t marry when
high and drunk manNicolas Cage…^^^
You’d think he could just act like he loves her.
Oh, shit. Nicolas Cage… never mind.
They both sound crazy.
Your articles always come out when I’m lights out, but I read and enjoy them. Good stuff, Animal.