Author Topic: Unknown maker on Indian trade gun  (Read 6472 times)

mstriebel

  • Guest
Unknown maker on Indian trade gun
« on: June 11, 2014, 03:46:04 AM »
Hi All,

In my search for an authentic Indian trade gun I came across a gun that looks and feels legitimate to me.  The problem is it so beat to $#*! that I am having a tough time determining the origins on this old gun.

I thought some of the experts on the American Longrifles forum might have some ideas on the origins of this old gun or be able to point me in the right direction for further research.

Here are the basic details:
1) Around 0.60 caliber
2) 41.25" barrel length
3) The barrel marks are pretty difficult to read, but I believe they are the post-1813 Birmingham proof and view marks.
4) There is a fox in circle with some letters below it, but it is unlike any "fox in circle" mark I have seen on a trade gun Charles Hanson’s, The Northwest Gun; Gale’s For Trade and Treaty; or James Hanson’s Firearms of the Fur Trade.
5) Unfortunately, the markings on the lock are so worn that it is very difficult make out what they are. There is an SC on the lock that is clear but little else I am able to make out with my lousy eyesight. 

My initial guess was that this may have been a trade gun made by some Belgian gunmaker and exported to America in the 1820s-1840s for use by the American Fur Co., the Chouteau Co. of St. Louis, Ewing Brothers or some other fur company of that time.  However, there do not seem to be any Belgian proof marks on the gun, so now I am leaning towards the idea that this gun was made one of the many Birmingham firms that exported guns to America during that era.

I sure would feel a lot better about purchasing a gun like this if I felt I had a true feel for when or who made it rather than just my guess.

Any thoughts from any of the experts on the forum may have or ideas on where I might go to research this further would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Matt




















Offline JTR

  • member 2
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4223
Re: Unknown maker on Indian trade gun
« Reply #1 on: June 11, 2014, 06:42:26 PM »
The lettering below the SC on the lock might be St. Etienne.

John
John Robbins

Offline Steve Collward

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
Re: Unknown maker on Indian trade gun
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2014, 07:45:51 PM »
Matt:
  It certainly is a bit of a relic but still very interesting.   I believe Mr. Hanson wrote that for every 100 Trade Guns made, one survived.  
   I am not exactly certain of the proofs on the barrel, although the one on the left looks perhaps, to be Birmingham, as you point out.
  With regards to the lock, with little doubt, it is an ancient conversion to percussion.  The letters under the "SC" to me looks to be "E Stillman".  Ethan Stillman was from Connecticut and was a contractor for the Model 1808 musket.  He marked the lock plate with "E Stillman" in a slight curve.  The "SC" is a puzzle as the Stillman marked locks had an eagle above his name. There also was a date behind the cock.
  The rest of the piece has the characteristics of a Trade Gun (trigger guard, side plate, stock architecture). Also, the barrel does not appear to have been cut down.
   For what it's worth, you are certainly taking the right steps before making an offer by going slow and doing as much homework as possible.
   Hope this is of some help.

  
  
« Last Edit: June 12, 2014, 03:06:32 PM by Steve Collward »

Offline Shreckmeister

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3755
  • GGGG Grandpa Schrecengost Gunsmith/Miller
Re: Unknown maker on Indian trade gun
« Reply #3 on: June 11, 2014, 08:11:14 PM »
Definitely Stillman.  Being that the S C is not centered about his name and
the metal to the right of the S C is degraded, I'm thinking there was a third
letter there that is now obliterated.
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.

mstriebel

  • Guest
Re: Unknown maker on Indian trade gun
« Reply #4 on: June 12, 2014, 12:38:27 AM »
Mr. Collward and Herr Schrecengost,

Many thanks for the clarification of the lock being by Stillman.  I came across on Gunbroker.com an ad for a current auction on a M1808 US Contract Flintlock Musket by Ethan Stillman, Burlington, Connecticut, .69 cal smoothbore, mfg. 1808-1812.  The S.C. apparently stands for “State Contract” as the guns were made for the state of Connecticut.  Confirming exactly what Shreckmeister speculated, there was indeed some of the stamping to the right of the C that was obliterated over time.  It was a small diamond shape.  There was also an ES stamped on the barrel of the guns that Stillman made for the Connecticut contract.  Please see the first three photos attached below for reference.

I then found a 1977 Burlington, Connecticut newspaper article that gave some good background information on Ethan Stillman, which I have listed below.  It appears that he started operations in the 1790's with his brother and then continued to operate until sometime during the War of 1812 or soon thereafter because his diary stated in reference to his War of 1812 era contract with Connecticut "I completed my contract and discharged my debts but it took my farm to do it."

As the 1977 article states, Ethan Stillman had a contract for some 2,500 muskets, but the only confirmed shipment was for the 825 he delivered in 1812.  The author of the article speculated that because his diary entry said he “completed my contract” that perhaps he shipped all 2,500 muskets but the record of those other shipments was lost.

If Ethan Stillman had made the barrel of this trade gun, I would have to believe that he would have stamped it with an “ES” just as he did on the muskets he made for the state contract.  After looking at the stamps on the barrel till my eyes glazed over, I feel they are most likely the 1813 and later proof and view marks for Birmingham as show on page 56 of Hanson’s the Northwest Gun.  The fourth photo attached below shows the marks as listed in Hanson's book and the last photo shows the best image I could get of the proof marks.

If my speculation is right on the barrel, then we have an 1812 +/- Ethan Stillman lock with an 1813 or later Birmingham made barrel.    I have never come across any documentation of Ethan Stillman making any trade rifles.  However, if I was Mr. Stillman -- who was apparently struggling to keep his business afloat and who possibly had a bunch of extra locks for the contract with the state of Connecticut on his hands -- I would being trying to sell anything I could make, with whatever parts I could scrounge up. to whoever would buy. 

The only problem is that if Ethan Stillman’s business did actually go under sometime during or soon after the War of 1812, that would not seem to offer much of an opportunity for Stillman to purchase 1813 or later gun barrels from our friends across the Atlantic that were was busily at work burning down Washington DC at the time.  However, it is my understanding that the War of 1812 was none too popular among large segments of the population in New England and smuggling in the area was not uncommon, so I suppose it is not entirely impossible that the barrel was imported before the end of the war.

It seems to me we have two possibilities on this musket (although I certainly welcome any additional thoughts) 

Possibility #1 – Stillman made the trade gun in a period very soon after the close of the War of 1812 with a Birmingham made barrel.  (I suppose it also possible another unknown gunmaker in the area may have purchased the extra locks after Stillman’s business closed and married those locks with some Birmingham barrels to make trade guns at some time circa 1815-1820.
Possibility #2 – Perhaps there were spare locks sold off when Stillman closed his business, and those locks where eventually used as replacements on the gun.


Have any of the folks on the forum ever heard of a Stillman trade gun or have any thoughts on the most likely scenario for the story behind this old gun?











mstriebel

  • Guest
Re: Unknown maker on Indian trade gun
« Reply #5 on: June 12, 2014, 12:50:07 AM »
Below is the newspaper article on Stillman that I failed to attach to my last post.


HISTORICAL SOCIETY SEEKS TO PURCHASE RARE MUSKET
Bristol Press, pages 8-10[/b]
-
1977, by James Klaneski
21
BURLINGTON: The Burlington Historical Society has organized a special drive to raise money for the purchase of a rare flintlock musket manufactured here between 1808 and 1812. Members of the Society and community are being asked for their support in the purchase of the musket manufactured by Ethan Stillman. Stillman was one of the seventeen children, he came to Burlington in 1803 belonging to the Seventh Day Baptists community which settled in the vicinity of Covey and Lyon Road.
(He came to Farmington first with his brother Amos and had a contract for guns before 1803) Society President Lois Humphrey first became acquainted with the Stillman Musket manufacturing firm through Surveyor Merton Hodge of Unionville. According to Hodge, she said, the shop was located along the Old Turnpike Road (Route 4) just west of Lyons Road. The shop was built on the south side of the road, she said, near Bunnell Brook, and the Stillman house across the road to the north.

Burlington land records show, Mrs. Humphrey said, that Stillman owned 25 acres and a house on the north side of the road, with nine acres and a shop on the south. The old timers of Burlington, she added, remember that as recently as 50 or 60 years ago the remains of the Stillman dam were visible on Bunnell Brook where the shop once stood.
Proof that Ethan and his brother Amos belonged to the seventh Day Baptist church came from an old record book of that church dated 1796 and now in the possession of a Burlington resident.

According to those records, she added, both brothers helped with the building of the Baptist church on Covey Road which was the first church ever to be organized within the Burlington town lines.  Additional proof, Mrs. Humphrey added, came from the Stillman descendants, with whom she has corresponded seeking additional information. According to family genealogical records, Mrs. Humphrey said, the Stillman's were born in and came to Burlington from Westerly Rhode Island as did the rest of the Baptist community. Ironically, however, Humphrey noted, the Stillman family was unaware that Ethan and Amos had been gun manufacturers until she told them.

During his life Ethan was married three times and had nine children. His first wife was
Polly Lewis of Burlington. They were married in 1794 and had six children. Polly died in 1813 and is buried in the Seventh Day Baptist cemetery on Upson Road. In 1814 Stillman married Mehitable Teft who was born in Rhode Island. She bore him three children before her death in 1821.

BUILT GUN SHOP
In 1803 Ethan built a gun shop in Burlington for the making and repairing of muskets. His first contract with the federal government had already been in 1798.
Through her own research in the National Archives, Mrs. Humphrey learned that Ethan and Amos had contracted to provide arms for the militia, and that the contract was completed with the Stillman's delivering 525 Charlesville pattern muskets at a cost of $13.75 each.
A second contract with the federal government was made by Ethan alone on September 14, 1808 following the death of his brother. At this time a new government program provided for contracts leading to the manufacture of 74,000 muskets in all.  Under this second contract Stillman agreed to supply 2,500 muskets, to be delivered to the receiver of public arms in New Haven at the rate of 500 per year for five years. Some 825
muskets are recorded to have been delivered by October 7, 1812. Mrs. Humphrey said, at a price of $10.75 each. Those muskets were all marked on the lock plate "E.STILLMAN."

By the time of the second contract, the federal government had begun requiring all private contractors of the musket to stamp their identification mark on the lock plate in an attempt to eliminate possible manufacturing problems. According to gun expert Arcadi Gluckman, Mrs. Humphrey said, some of the muskets made under the 1798 contracts were of poor workmanship and quality. The government took steps, she added, to insure identification of the manufacturer and to also standardize the muskets for general use.
While working to complete the second contract, Stillman encountered financial difficulty and was forced to mortgage everything he owned, Mrs. Humphrey said, including his tools and materials.

All records show that Stillman only delivered 825 muskets of the 2500 for which he had
contracted. (The first delivery) But Mrs. Humphrey believes that the entire contract may have eventually been filled since in 1812 Ethan was able to pay off his entire mortgage. (Later information from Mr. Stillman's diary, "I completed my contract and discharged my debts but it took my farm to do it.")

Very few of the Stillman muskets are known to have survived in their original
condition, Mrs. Humphrey said. The musket on which the Historical Society now has an option is the property of a gun dealer in Cornwall, Connecticut. It has been inspected by members of the Society and was found to be in very good condition. Unlike many m
uskets, it has never been converted from a flintlock to percussion firing and, according to the Society president, only the ramrod and a single screw appear to have been replaced making the gun a particularly valuable piece.  The Society first learned of the musket through a gun collector in Harwinton. Robert Dailey approached Mrs. Humphrey recently inquiring about the Stillman gun shop and Mrs. Humphrey reportedly told him what she knew of the Stillman brothers and of their operations before casually mentioning that the Historical Society would be very interested in acquiring one of the muskets that had been manufactured in Burlington.
If purchased, Mrs. Humphrey said, the Stillman musket will be placed on permanent display at the Brown Elton Tavern as part of the tavern acquisition program. (The musket was purchased, and is now in the town vault, cost $750.00.L.R.A.)

doug

  • Guest
Re: Unknown maker on Indian trade gun
« Reply #6 on: June 15, 2014, 07:49:03 PM »
Definitely Stillman.  Being that the S C is not centered about his name and
the metal to the right of the S C is degraded, I'm thinking there was a third
letter there that is now obliterated.

    I find myself wondering if Stillman salvaged the parts from a Birmingham made gun and rebuilt it using his own lock.  Unless I am mistaken the circle fox was used on guns made for the North West Company (which merged with the HBC in 1821).  Also slightly strange that the serpent appears to have been broken completely off at some later day then fastened back on in a somewhat haywire way

cheers Doug

Offline JTR

  • member 2
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4223
Re: Unknown maker on Indian trade gun
« Reply #7 on: June 15, 2014, 08:26:49 PM »
I'm curious, see the link below;
http://www.johnjhayeshistoricalcollectibles.com/products.asp?cat=2

Are you considering buying a gun from that website, or are you the person selling the guns on that website?

John
John Robbins

Offline jdm

  • member 2
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Unknown maker on Indian trade gun
« Reply #8 on: June 17, 2014, 11:25:59 PM »
John,
Maybe you hit a nerve!
JIM

mstriebel

  • Guest
Re: Unknown maker on Indian trade gun
« Reply #9 on: June 18, 2014, 01:36:56 AM »
Jim,

John did not hit a nerve in the slightest with his question.  I have just been buried at work for the past week and not checking this site.

The gun is indeed the one the John mentioned.  After the information that was provided by the good folks on the site and with some further research I did on my own, I decided with the lock being changed out, questions on the serpent side plate, and post 1813 barrel markings it was just not a fit for the War of 1812 era or prior trade musket I have been seeking.

I am beginning to wonder if there are trade muskets out there on the market from the early 1800s that are not cobbled together from parts from several different guns because I sure am having a tough time finding them. 

Thanks again to all on the forum for their help.

Best,

Matt

mstriebel

  • Guest
Re: Unknown maker on Indian trade gun
« Reply #10 on: June 18, 2014, 01:46:14 AM »
Doug --

I just saw your idea on the possibility that Stillman may have taken a Birmingham barrel and matched with his own lock to make this musket.  I was wondering just the same thing.  However, when I found out that the Stillman locks were most likely made pre-1813 and that Stillman was out of business by the end of the War of 1812 that cast some doubt on him using an 1813 or later Birmingham barrel to make the gun himself.

I think talked to a local historian in Burlington, Connecticut where Stillman once had his shop.  He told me that Stillman made no other guns because he could barely get the funds to keep up with government contract.  The historian also told me that he doubted there were hardly any spare locks left at the time Stillman closed his business. 

That lead me to conclude that the most likely scenario is that someone at sometime took a lock off of a Model 1808 that was perhaps beat up and damaged and put it on this trade musket.

Thanks,

Matt