Musket

[Nate McKenzie]

Does anyone have a Civil War P-53 Enfield type musket marked WINDSOR and a crown? They are US made type I rifles made by Robbins and Lawrence of Windsor, VT. I need to know if the have British proofmarks of either London or Birmingham style. I'm trying to re-create one.  Thanks.

[TPH]

The majority of the Windsor-made P53 Rifle Muskets were sent to England in fulfillment of the contract with the British Government, but some did stay here as they became surplus to British needs at the end of the Crimean War. They were proofed here in the US in order to assure that they would pass proof in England but those getting to England did have to pass proof there there as well. What proof marks were applied here, if any, I have no idea. I think, but I may be wrong, that they were proofed in the London proof house  for British Government acceptance. For resources, you might try:

The British Soldier's Firearm - From Smoothbore to Smallbore 1850-1864 by Dr. C.H. Roads
(Published by R&R Books, 1994 (first edition 1964), ISBN: 1 884849 13 X)

The best online source will be David Minshall's "Research Press" at:

http://www.researchpress.co.uk/

Particularly:

http://www.researchpress.co.uk/firearms/british/enfield/index.htm

and this in particular:

http://www.researchpress.co.uk/firearms/british/enfield/markings_p53.htm

The above link has a short explanation of the lock markings on the Windsor made P53 Rifle Muskets but you will need to go deeper for an explanation of the proof marks on the barrel.

Out of curiosity, are you doing this for a reenactor? Be careful with how far you go, many in the so called "authentic campaigner" movement will try to insist on authenticity of markings to the point of downright counterfeiting in the opinion of firearms collectors and historians.  Nothing wrong with it in my personal opinion, only those who are minimally informed and do not do their research before buying will get taken in by a reproduction, but it can reflect badly on you. They tend to look at firearms as props, not collectors items and have no concern with the collector community. Harmless really, just a different way of looking at things.

An interesting fact, the British felt these were arms of the Second Class though they were well made and passed all of their inspections.

[TPH]

Despite what Rhoads wrote, there is the Robbins + Lawrence side of it which holds that the British took very few, the Crimean War having ended suddenly. I owned one which definitely had only US proof marks, not British. I doubt this dispute will ever be settled. I have never seen any evidence that the Windsor muskets were sold as surplus or sold to either side in the Civil War.

You may very well be right, personally I have seen very few Windsor marked P53s, the last was about 30 or so years ago. The contracts were stopped so suddenly that the company went under IIRC. At any rate, I defer to your expertise.

[scooter]

What really did Robbins & Lawrence in was getting in the business of making railroad cars! Robbins was a lumber magnate who pushed in that direction. As it was they owed the British government some big money when they went bankrupt. Lawrence left behind a memoir to this effect. You might wish to read my long recent article in Gun Report on this.

[Nate McKenzie]

Thank you all. Interesting reading TPH.  Of interest- Colt and Lambson.Goodnow and Yale bought the Robbins and Lawrence equipment for making Enfields and used it to manufacture the 61 Special model musket.

Scooter- did your Windsor have the heavy front barrel band and all bands held by American style retaining springs like first model Enfields rather than the later  type split bands?

[TPH]

The Second Pattern had the solid bands/band springs IIRC. The First Pattern and Third Pattern had clamping bands but each had a different configuration. The US produced Windsor was a Second Pattern.