I read that, and what I assume they mean by "bannana grip" is the usual webley grip, kind of round cross section, not much curve, kind of like if you cut a bannana in half. What I THINK they are not allowing is the really blocky shape grip, like on some of the later .38 cal ones.
Pony Express - if I correctly understand your definition of "banana grip" - namely, that it would also allow grips shaped like those on the RIC models illustrated in the NCOWS Chambers topic I started on this issue - I suppose that would alleviate
part of the problem, so long as that indeed was either the intended meaning or the actual interpretation in practice.
However, that would
still leave a major problem with many other pre-1900 non-military Webley models which do happen to have a "blocky" grip of the sort apparently banned - such as the No. 4, No. 5 and WG models also pictured in the above-noted NCOWS Chambers thread.
In any event, since Webley
military service revolver models are apparently the
only specific examples cited in the By-Laws ("MK1, MK2, MK4, MK5") -because the term "Mark" to designate a particular variant was strictly War Department (i.e. military) terminology - such a listing would be understood by persons familiar with Webley revolvers to refer specifically to the military service revolvers only, leading in turn to the definite impression that the grip shape mandated by the rule must refer solely to the "birds-head" grip shape which
all of those military service models have, like this. -
Actually, there is even one other wee problem with the current wording (which I have intentionally avoided mentioning so far.)
Strictly speaking, there are no such 19th-century Webley revolver models as are listed in the By-Laws! When designating various "Marks" of a firearm (or any piece of military equipment) the Victorian-era British War Department invariably employed capital Roman numerals .... so the examples given would be correctly called "Mk I, Mk II, Mk IV, Mk V" ....
Nitpicking? Perhaps ..... yet when governing By-Laws are mandating what is allowed or disallowed, correct terminology is mighty important!