AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Antique Gun Collecting => Topic started by: debnal on January 17, 2022, 05:51:19 PM
-
This gun was on a small Florida auction site. The estimate was $50-150. it went for over 12Kwith the auction juice.
(https://i.ibb.co/BqmRyTM/thumbnail-1.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
(https://i.ibb.co/dmZrmPb/thumbnail-2.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
Al
(https://i.ibb.co/WGB6P3k/thumbnail.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
-
It was signed J. Ferree.
-
Sweet!
-
What an incredible find!
-
Wow, hope we get to see more photos of this one!
-
Great find. Love that carving.
-
I'll bet that was some spirited bidding!
So, is the gun in two pieces? I can't open anything beyond what I see on this page.
So, who bought it??? ;D ;D ;D
-
Heck of a buy when compared with the 'Monmouth rifle' which sold not so long ago for 300K and change. They are both in about the same condition too,
though the lock is not shown and may be gone. Small matter! This will restore beautifully. Good find, thanks for bringing it in.
Dick
-
The lock is with it, converted to percussion and the rifle is in two pieces although pretty much all there. Should be an easy restoration.
Al
-
I was that lucky bidder (No meat on the dinner table for a while...who needs food anyhow?). You'll be seeing plenty of this rifle in the immediate future once I get it and then someday down the road once some proper restoration work has been done. This rifle will NOT disappear into the woodwork and I will make it accessible to interested parties. Stay tuned.
-
Oh...and since I got skunked on the Rochester rifle last year to the tune of well over $200k, I looked at this win as a bit of consolation prize. Not a bad prize, eh? Attached are some slightly better versions of the photos from the auction site including one showing the lock in place. I'll post much better photos once the rifle is in my hands.
(https://i.ibb.co/djxMphF/Ferree1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mbgTyxk)
(https://i.ibb.co/zhK0tTH/Ferree2.jpg) (https://ibb.co/bgp8GMR)
(https://i.ibb.co/gdN6xwG/Ferree3.jpg) (https://ibb.co/G9yFqkX)
(https://i.ibb.co/4TTDLtY/Ferree4.jpg) (https://ibb.co/hWWnN9Z)
(https://i.ibb.co/BLnCxbH/Ferree5.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Jn3s4VW)
-
What a Great find! Thanks for the additional pictures.
John
-
Any relation to you? Or just one you wanted? Either way always nice to find something hidden away.
-
Brian,
You got a well-deserved break with this win, congratulations. Looking forward to your pictures.
Kent
-
In response to Jacob_S_P, nope...no relation. My Irish and German ancestors pretty much all came over to America on the same late 19th-early 20th century banana boats as everyone else. I just love the subject matter and this one really caught my attention. I'm really looking forward to the upcoming research and restoration efforts. All I know about the background of this rifle is what the auctioneer told me. It was in the family for a "long time". I'm hoping to hear from the consigner shortly with some information that might prove interesting - or not. We'll see.
-
Wonderful find and from my neck of the woods. Congratulations
-
Still trying to figure out why people keep referring to the Monmouth Rifle as the Rochester gun. It is plainly marked on the inside of the wood (original to the gun) "...taken at the Battle of Monmouth...", but happened to become property of the Museum of Arts and Sciences in Rochester a century or two after the battle. And Yeah, I chased it too for a few calls, but could see where it was going. It gaveled down in the high 200s and with the house vigorish, it came to
306K. And don't ask if I know who the final bidder was. Sooooo, in my strange opinion, the Ferree is a dandy 'consolation prize!' Should restore very nicely and be a real treasure. If anyone dissents from this perspective, they should go find another in better condition
Dick.
-
I presume because that's where the rifle surfaced and has resided for a good number of years - at least that's how I look at it. At least that much is a certainty. The Monmouth association - that's an unknown. The attribution on the inside of the patchbox lid, is presently without any supporting evidence. It could just be old family legend and lore which we've seen time and time again can be mistaken or embellished. Or...maybe the attribution is right on the money but we'll likely never know for sure.
-
I'd like to know more about why it's so valuable, hope that's not vulgar sounding, it's meant in the spirit of being an antiques and history collector my entire life. But I am only looking for Southern rifles, and know little about these beautiful other styles. I know auction estimates are often wrong, they don't know what they have. But If I saw it at a flea market, It'd assume more, maybe $300-$500 just for the history, carvings, that it's signed, etc. What would make a rifle like this worth 5 figures, vs 3? Just so I know the long rifle market better. Thanks.
-
My thoughts on this rifle and it’s value: only a few J Feree rifles are known and this is the earliest by appearance. It could be 1770s by guess based on buttplate style and wooden box. So, an important maker whose work is rare, early gun, possibly Rev War era, checks the boxes. Also, no need to worry that any embellishments are not original. I don’t know what restoration will cost but regardless, when done, will be sorry double what’s been invested, at a minimum.
-
This is a good early rifle. Joel Ferree was killed just a stones throw downhill from where the KRA holds their annual meeting outside of Pittsburgh, in 1801, so that makes this a 1700s gun. Made where, who knows? Could be Lancaster since most of his work was done there. Probably his best work is shown in the early KRA books; it has a long barrel, a daisy patch box and very fine raised carving. I seem to recall that it sold in the last four or five years for 50 K which is still a good buy in my world. While this gun has rather simple, but excellent carving, and a wood box, it is probably one of his less expensive guns adding to the early date. The "Miller's Blockhouse" rifle is probably the same age, but has a brass,. daisy finial, box.
As to the Monmouth rifle, it makes more much sense to refer to as that, than it does to call Pennsylvania Rifles, by the name of Kentucky since we know that most were made in the former state and most likely never went to the latter state. No proof for provenience on the Monmouth gun, but the writing was done in an old hand using a quill pen a long time ago and is more than most of us ever get with most early items. Out of dozens of pieces, I have just one with some history. Not a very good record is it? And, The American origin of the latter gun turns on the maple stock and not much else. Could still be German made using American wood, though I doubt it.
Dick
-
Well there you go. Thanks for having me and this proves just how much of a rookie I am. I had that one saved on my watch list and planned to be a player in the estimated $50-$150 range...
-
Congratulations @120RIR. I am looking forward to seeing photos of the restoration.
-
Might be able to research if the battle was called “Battle of Monmouth” at the time or named that later. Or if it was known as the Battle *at* Monmouth.
Or investigate how it could have been “taken”. Taken from Patriot by British or a tory, then left in America? Or taken by a Patriot from a tory? Were there tory militia at the battle? If not, since we know it wasn’t taken from a British regular, then it would have been taken from a patriot, marked by a British, then abandoned in America.
-
Here we go. Whomever coined the phrase "Anticipation is half the fun" clearly wasn't an obsessed collector waiting for that next piece to arrive. It turns out this is a smooth rifle...very slender and graceful but with a honkin 61-ish caliber bore. I had no idea the sideplate survived but here it is and in all respects this very much exceeded my most optimistic expectations once it was in-hand. Had this been listed on a more prominent auction site (e.g., Morphy's, RIA, etc.), I suspect the gavel would have come down on a far higher price and I'd once again be a-singin' the blues. Thanks Turkey Creek Auctions! For your analytical pleasure (in inches)...
Length of pull: 13 1/2
Buttplate width: 1 3/4
Buttplate height: 4 13/16
Barrel length: 41 7/8
Barrel width at breech: 13/16
Barrel width at muzzle: 15/16
Wrist height: 1 3/8
Write width: 1 1/4
Lockplate length: 5 5/8
Lockplate width: 15/16
Triggerguard bow width: just shy of 7/8
(https://i.ibb.co/bFt6YyJ/20220201-172740.jpg) (https://ibb.co/KDn5BQw)
(https://i.ibb.co/JQjx60v/20220201-172814.jpg) (https://ibb.co/bJ5Hwqs)
(https://i.ibb.co/SJ2b12t/20220201-172910.jpg) (https://ibb.co/V3dRhdg)
(https://i.ibb.co/gMwHvjh/20220201-172924.jpg) (https://ibb.co/VWDrHj5)
(https://i.ibb.co/7RyNpsd/20220201-173121.jpg) (https://ibb.co/D8KgM0H)
(https://i.ibb.co/ZWrJRXG/20220201-173246.jpg) (https://ibb.co/LnyPDRY)
(https://i.ibb.co/PcGk1R7/20220201-173332.jpg) (https://ibb.co/R3T8Q1x)
(https://i.ibb.co/MZZpvy8/20220201-174312.jpg) (https://ibb.co/5GGv0XY)
(https://i.ibb.co/48zX3bH/20220202-093548.jpg) (https://ibb.co/N95Jb0M)
(https://i.ibb.co/b2pvyWx/20220202-093633.jpg) (https://ibb.co/vQ2drwb)
-
Absolutely incredible that the former owners kept it all there. Congratulations again, a collector’s dream come true.
-
Whoops...I almost forgot about this minor detail!
(https://i.ibb.co/bgHcYs6/20220201-173934.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gMvkQSr)
-
Thanks so much. Some early construction details on this one. Like the muzzle cap fastened by a screw to the barrel. The carving is superbly designed and executed.
-
Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful. Thanks for posting.
-
Beautiful, great lines and masterful carvings!!!!! I hope the restoration includes returning it to flint, but either way it will be stunning.
Robby
-
I'm reaching out to the notable restorers in this field...it may be a while though. I'm sure they're in high demand!
I would be interested in opinions on the signature. I don't think there's going to be any debate over the "J" and "Ferree" but what about the apparent "oel" in the middle? I understand that full signed rifles (first and last names) are extraordinary if not downright non-existent. One exception that I can think of would be, interestingly, that Jacob Ferree rifle where he stamped his full name in the sideplate. To me the "oel" on this rifle appears to be roughly contemporaneous with the rest of the engraving and while clearly done by a practiced hand, it's lighter (or more heavily worn).
Thoughts on that? Done by Joel Ferree himself to distinguish his work from later family members? We'll never know for sure of course but it's an interesting feature nonetheless.
-
Very nice! Thank you for sharing it.
James
-
Well, you certainly got a deal on that one!
Beautiful rifle, and looks like most of the parts are there.
I wouldn't be surprised that this is the Find of the decade!
As for the name on the barrel. If, the signature was originally J Ferree, you might expect the two capital letters to be a bit closer together. As is, there is room for the full first name between the J and the F. Also, there is a tail coming off the bottom of the l in Joel, very similar to the tail coming off the e in the last name.
Also, if someone else added the oel, you'd have to ask yourself why? An original owner probably wouldn't see the need, as he knew who made the gun. If a more recent owner added it, it would had to have been a Kentucky rifle collector, as Joel and Jacob Ferree rifles are few and far between, and that owner would have known the gun was worth big bucks, and likely not left it in its two piece condition.
I wonder if there is any way to contact the consigner from the auction, to ask how he came to own the gun?
And lastly, I'll be looking forward to seeing this gun once it's fixed up a bit and put back together again!
Thanks for posting the pictures,
John
-
I'm going to urinate in the punch bowl here and state that - personally - I would leave this spectacular piece alone and instead create a quality display using the original rifle remnants along with a new-stocked "bench copy." There is a LOT of missing wood and a LOT of damage, and there are so humpty dumptys already extant that have been 'restored' from this condition (or even worse) that they're probably in the majority and frankly have devalued the entire market. Although on the other hand, they've really boosted the value of those pieces that have not been diddled. Again, JMHO.
Also it's clearly signed "Joel" Ferree and just judging by the clear photo I'd see no reason to doubt the originality of this at all. Sure, many used simply a first initial, but there are various men who signed their entire name also. John Schreit. John Moll. Herman Rupp. John Rupp. Christian Oerter. Peter Neihart. etc etc etc.
Sincerely, Moe.
-
Joel Ferree is absolutely correct. I haven’t done the research and I forget the relationship between Joel and Jacob . Joel may have been a generation older
-
Eric - thanks for the input! I can definitely see the point of leaving this one alone and while I am inclined towards restoration, I certainly haven't made a final decision. Either way, it does appear to be a great piece and I'm more than happy to share it with anyone who might like to see and play with it in its present state. At least for me, a big part of the enjoyment I get out of this field is the research and sharing of knowledge, perspectives, and theories. I will not, however, urinate in any punch bowls. Pools, maybe. ;)
As for Joel vs. Jacob Ferree, I believe Joel was born in 1731 and Jacob was his nephew...born circa 1758. Someone will correct me if I mis-remembered that little bit of genealogy.
-
I think that the temptation to have this rifle restored may be overwhelming. From the photos it does look to have some significant damage but perhaps taking some more detailed photos of the damaged areas to get an evaluation from a good restorer would be appropriate.
At least this rifle probably has its original lock and sideplate in contrast to other celebrated rifles that have been restored.
However, I would also consider Eris's points as well.
It is going to be a tough decision, but I would get some more input.
-
I would like to add, that in some cases, rifles with rare signatures on the barrel has had a direct bearing on whether to restore a particular rifle. RCA No.46 is a prime example. I know that there are Ferree rifles signed in script "J FERREE" but how many exist with "JOEL FERREE" signed in script?
-
Just a thought regarding the damage, and amount of wood missing. From the pics, and having done a number of these, if you align the front half with the back half, I think you'll see that not much wood is actually missing. On the exterior, some on the lock side of the tang, yes. But that area is an easy area to replace wood unnoticeably while adding strength to the repair. On the interior area of the break in the lock mortice area, no doubt some will need to be replaced there, but new wood there will also add strength to the repair.
You don't show the barrel, but from your measurements, and being percussion now, it makes me think some has been looped off from at least the breech. Have you looked for extra dovetail locations on the bottom of the barrel, or extra pin hole locations on the forearm which will show how much the barrel has been set back?
Just me being curious, John
-
How about a middle-of-the-road option? Just enough "restoration" could be done to re-attach the buttstock, perhaps put in a rear lock bolt to anchor the end of the side plate and solidify the wrist area, and put in a new pin to re-attach the barrel to the remaining forestock? That way it could be examined whole but still pretty much remain in its as-found state? It would kinda' be a "stabilized ruin" like Fort Crown Point on Lake Champlain or the ghost town of Bodie in southern California. Just a thought.
As for the possibility the barrel was shortened, there are no extra dovetails on the bottom of the barrel and the only remaining lug corresponds with the fitted location in the stock. However, looking at the breech, I suspect someone did indeed try to get the plug out at one point or another - maybe with the intent to shorten the barrel? You can see the tang is all buggered up top and bottom and clearly someone was banging on a corner or two of the breech opposite the lock side.
(https://i.ibb.co/mhbJ0TY/20220204-083944.jpg) (https://ibb.co/BTcLG37)
(https://i.ibb.co/8gNYDGk/20220204-084004.jpg) (https://ibb.co/m5bNCdp)
(https://i.ibb.co/TY98x39/20220204-084021.jpg) (https://ibb.co/KbTqpvT)
-
Likely unbreeched when converted to percussion, and possibly to have the rifling freshed. If there are no extra dovetails on the underside then it’s not been shortened at the breech.
-
A middle-of-the-road restoration; Sure, why not. You could have the gun put back together into one piece, replace the missing wood around the lock/tang to strengthen the area, and leave it as a percussion. Just my opinion, but a couple reasons to do at least that is to keep it from deteriorating even more if left in pieces, As one piece, it'll look better, and yes, be worth more. What it's worth is important. You saw the $50/$150 estimate at the auction, and if you and whomever else hadn't bid on it, it might well have sold for around the price. And then what might its fate be? But if you get a bit of work done on it, and get the value up to 15/20K, it'll for sure be around for many long years to come. Just my .02 here, and I'm sure not everyone will agree.
From a couple pics, it looks like the forward part of the forearm is missing. Could you post a couple pictures of what's left of the forearm, with the barrel in it. I'm curious as to where the rear sight and the Ferree name are, in relation to their position in the forearm.
Also, is the 13/16" measurement you posted for the breech measurement correct, or a typo?
Congratulations again on a great buy!
John
-
I'll try to get some better photos but if you want to see the position of the signature, take a look at the first couple sets of photos at the very beginning of this discussion. The J in "Joel" is right at the forward most point of the lock plate, behind the rear sight. As for that barrel dimension at the breech, that's no typo although now that I look further, it varies. Depending on exactly where you measure, it ranges from 13/16 to just shy of an inch. The bottom-most flat flares slightly making that measurement at the very edge of the breech more like an inch but just forward of that it's 13/16 across but just over 3/4 "top" to "bottom". In other words, it's very inconsistent even within a very short distance forward of the breech.
-
Congratulations on a great find! The 1-3/4 butt plate width goes to show that all rev war era rifles are not 2-inches wide at the butt.
-
An antique dealer I was talking to in Ocala Florida, mentioned a broken in half gun that brought that price.
Well, here it is! I am glad I can see pictures of it. Would like to see it back in one piece
Thanks for sharing it! What about the bore?
-
I think a lot of people were surprised with this one. I have been in touch with the original owner who had a clue based on past conversations with dealers so he wasn't quite so shocked but still pleasantly surprised. The rifle had been in his wife's family since the turn-ish of the last century. Her grandparents (Ukrainian Immigrants) bought a house and contents in the town of Correy and one of those contents was apparently this piece. It's about 61 cal. and appears to be a smooth rifle. However, I haven't dropped a bore light down there yet so perhaps that will show some rifling. More to come as research progresses.
-
120RIR, Drop a rod down that barrel, measure the depth of the rod against the length of the barrel, to be sure it's not still loaded!
-
A rod drops all the way down to the level of the percussion drum...not loaded!
-
120rir, congratulations Mister. That’s one heck of an artifact. Most collectors only dream of finding one as untouched as that one. Get professional photos of it in its as found condition, and quality photos of the restoration as it progresses. Keep those with the restored rifle, and there should never be a question about the piece. Also if you can get a letter from the previous owner, and a copy of the auction catalog. That would be great to past that on with the rifle.
Again Congratulations, great find...!
Bob
-
In Gunsmiths of York county by James Whisker there is a rifle on page 46 that is a attributed to Isaac Berlin .The buttstock looks very similar to this rifle here .The carving is nearly the same. What are your thoughts gentleman.Curt
-
Any chance you could add a photo in here (with the proper attribution of course)? I don't have that reference and I'd love to see it.
Thanks!
-
This may be the rifle to which Curt Lyles referred
(https://i.ibb.co/mvbYB9N/A24304-CD-E416-4-F11-AA5-F-34-B8-E3-A9-FFCE.jpg) (https://ibb.co/6vrpZHX)
-
Yes that's the one That's a handsome rifle, I wish it was signed so we knew who it was that made it. Thanks for posting the picture.curt
-
Hi,
As rlm wrote previously, it is amazing that all the pieces survived together. Perhaps that argues strongly to have it restored and assembled. You could make a nice "artifact pieces" display but what about the next owner and the next? Eventually separated parts might get lost forever.
dave
-
That Isaac Berlin stock design and carving is certainly close.
The signed gun by Andres Albrect shown on Pg. 62 of Whiskers book "Gunsmiths of Lancaster County Pa., is a close example as well.
I would think the Albrect rifle would have more in common with the Ferree, as those guys were about the same age and working about the same time, whereas Berlin was some 20 years younger.
However, given the time period they worked, all three of these guys were working early on when designs and styles were still developing.
John
-
Since the attributed 'Berlin' rifle is unsigned, there is a possibility that it may have been made by Ferree instead. As I recall, the Berlin attribution was an educated conjecture by Kindig.
Dick
-
Since the attributed 'Berlin' rifle is unsigned, there is a possibility that it may have been made by Ferree instead. As I recall, the Berlin attribution was an educated conjecture by Kindig.
Dick
Good point! I wonder what other Ferree traits this gun might have?
John
-
The attribution to Berlin was largely promoted by George Shumway who pictured the signed rifle (extremely similar to this unsigned rifle, Kindig 17) in RCA 1. Kindig also pictured the signed rifle I believe. Viewing the signed rifle and the unsigned rifle, it would require a fairly substantial stretch to not view them as being by the same man who was using alternating box designs but almost identical everything else designs.
Berlin appears to have been an extremely talented, adaptable and creative individual.
-
Also take a peek at RCA 55. The carving forward of and rear of the cheek is very, very similar to both of the Berlin/maybe Berlin rifles noted. As to the restoration, after much consideration and input from many on this form, that's the route I decided to take and is ongoing as we speak - I'll let the gentleman in whose hands this piece now rests reveal himself if/when he chooses to do so.
-
Sorry...RCA 55 is signed Berlin, I meant the Berlin-attributed rifle pictured here.
-
How then do we account for the signed Berlin rifle(s) that have the Kunz like 'wreath carving' behind the cheek piece? This ia about as far
as you can get from the scroll carving on the rifles under discussion here. It stretches my credulity that the same early maker could do both and carry each off very well.
Dick
-
I thought there is only one signed Isaac Berlin rifle?
-
The rifle I refer to was a Berlin rifle that was in the possession of Dick Zeschske and though it was now a long time ago since I saw it, I recall that it was a signed gun. It had been converted to percussion and was missing the wood lid from the patch box, but it had the 'wreath' type of carving and all in all it was a splendid rifle and early. Not sure where it is today, but it was not the only one like that.
Berlin had the habit of engraving chevron lines in the surface of the rear sight platform which indicates however loosely that a rifle was from his hand.
Dick
-
Dick Zeschske's rifle has been well photographed and is stamped on the barrel "Made by Isaac Berlin Easton." This is the rifle w/ the cast side opener w/ piercings. The barbequed wood box rifle at the beginning of RCA 2 (forget the number) is clearly carved by the same guy, whether Berlin or someone else (did Berlin carve the rifles in old-school Euro tradition? did he stock them and someone else carve them?).
RCA 1 no. 55 and Kindig 160 are the same rifle and seemingly made after Berlin's move to York Co. It is signed in script 'Isaac Berlin.' Kindig 17 is unsigned but is clearly carved and stocked by the same guy. While the stocking styles and eras of both sets of rifles are very different, the carving on both is of extremely high quality. Frankly I see the carving design on both assumed-Abbottstown rifles to be very reminiscent of the designs assumed used at CS and by others in NH county and the execution is superb, easily the equal of the carving on the first set of rifles despite being of different design.