Author Topic: Early American made gun barrels  (Read 2784 times)

Offline Bob Gerard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1345
    • Powder Horns and Such
Early American made gun barrels
« on: November 23, 2022, 07:41:06 PM »
Someone was looking at an old flintlock pistol I recently acquired and raised the consideration that perhaps it was an American Made pistol, partially because of the lack of visible proofing marks on the top of the barrel (I haven’t removed the barrel to inspect it due to my lack of any experience with old guns.
My question is this- were American gun barrels required to be proof marked in the  civilian market of the 18th and early 19th century?

Offline WESTbury

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1548
  • Marble Mountain central I Corps May 1969
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #1 on: November 23, 2022, 07:57:51 PM »
This is an excellent question.

In my experience, the only American made barrels that required proving and marking were those made under contract to the Federal Govt or states.
"We are not about to send American Boys 9 to 10 thousand miles away from home to do what Asian Boys ought to be doing for themselves."
President Lyndon B. Johnson October 21, 1964

Offline Bob Gerard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1345
    • Powder Horns and Such
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #2 on: November 24, 2022, 12:25:59 AM »
Thanks for replying WESTbury- good information to know. I haven't noticed them in pics of old American longrifles, though I wasn't looking for a proof mark, either. I am curious that maybe this is why this pistol has no barrel maker or proof markings at all (except for a small index line at the breech and tang).
« Last Edit: November 24, 2022, 02:14:26 AM by Bob Gerard »

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 935
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #3 on: November 24, 2022, 08:09:39 PM »
To the best of my knowledge there is only one American proof law, adopted in Massachusetts around 1804 (I've forgotten the exact date). The barrels were to be marked PM over the initials of the proving inspector and the date. The most common mark is that of Luke Harrington who apparently worked in Milbury where the Waters factory was located. Waters had barrel rolling machines imported from England and provided many barrels used on the generic "New England Militia Muskets." I wrote an article on the Massachusetts proof law that was published in Man at Arms in the March/April, 1985 issue.

The law was worded in such a manner that it apparently only applied to barrels made in Massachusetts. From surviving examples (at one time I had about 60 of them) barrels with federal proofs, sold as surplus from Springfield or by Federal contractors did not get the Mass. proof. Thus far I have never seen a NE rifle with such a proof and I've seen exactly one pistol...an underhammer made by the Ruggles brothers.

But...lack of proof does not prove American manufacture. The biggest source of gun parts in the Federal period was England and British law did not require the proof of export guns or parts. If it was not going to be sold at retail in England, proof was not mandatory. In fact, the British proof law of 1813 only applied to England and Wales...it wasn't extended to Scotland and Ireland until later. Prior to 1813, proof was only required in London and the surrounding Middlesex county. MOST barrels were proved because the customers expected it, not because it was the law.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2022, 08:11:41 PM by JV Puleo »

Offline Bob Gerard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1345
    • Powder Horns and Such
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #4 on: November 24, 2022, 09:18:03 PM »
JV Puelo, thank you- that is really interesting info! I had seen only one other reference to British barrels not requiring proof mark if made for export.  It's good to learn the American proofing requirement (or lack thereof) of this as well.
Were barrels of any continental European countries also free from Proofing mark laws?

« Last Edit: November 25, 2022, 03:51:17 AM by Bob Gerard »

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 935
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #5 on: November 25, 2022, 06:30:28 AM »
I don't know. By the time the Mass law went into effect I'd guess that about 98% of the imported gun parts came from England. Keep in mind that what we now call Belgium (which didn't exist as a country until 1830) was incorporated into France in 1794 and the French needed all of their arms production for the next 20 years. They effectively banned all exports. From 1814 to 1830 Belgium was part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and it's in this period that I believe most of the so-called "Belgian" imports became a factor in the American trade.

Also, no other state had a proof law for privately owned arms and virtually all militia arms were privately owned so unproved arms are not rare, nor is the lack of proof marks much of an indicator. So, while the presence of proof marks tells us something, their absence tell us nothing.

Further to my first post...the Ruggles brothers, who made a very distinctive underhammer percussion pistol, are know to have made their own barrels but of all the surviving specimens I know of only one that was proofed.

If you post a photo of the pistol in question we can probably give you an idea where it came from.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2022, 06:37:06 AM by JV Puleo »

Offline Bob Gerard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1345
    • Powder Horns and Such
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #6 on: November 25, 2022, 08:38:30 AM »
Hi JV Puelo. I am learning much from this conversation and I really appreciate it.
The pistol I have is a recent aquisition. The seller has no info about it other than it came from an estate sale in Texas.
The brass furniture is really unique, particularly how the acorn finial is made so asymmetrically. The side plate and the butt cap are styles I have never seen before.
It is 62 caliber.
Thanks for any thoughts on it.




free online image hosting







Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 935
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #7 on: November 25, 2022, 06:59:43 PM »
Yes...I've seen these pictures before. I think it's continental European, probably from the last 10 or 15 years of the 18th century. The only thing that is obviously of a British pattern is the trigger guard and I don't feel an attribution can be made on such a weak link. Lots of them were made...the British traded all over the world and their "styles" were widely copied (though not as much as the French in military arms). The lock clearly isn't British while the butt cap is so generic it could have come from anywhere. The sideplate certainly looks to be continental. This is a pure guess, but I'd look towards one of the many countries and small German principalities that were in contact with Britain in the period 1790 to 1805.

Offline Bob Gerard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1345
    • Powder Horns and Such
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #8 on: November 25, 2022, 08:34:21 PM »
You have been really generous in your assessing of this pistol and I'm glad to have your educated guess on it.  It shouldn't be a surprise that firearms of the day would have been copied from the various styles that were around. I suppose this may have been an example of "Some from column A and some from column B" type of pistol  ;D.
It's still cool to see how they were built and actually get to handle it. It's the only original flintlock that I've ever owned and have actually held in my hands. Already I am getting ideas from it.
You've been so helpful in determining as much as is possible of any history of the gun and I appreciate it!
~Bob

Offline Glory007

  • Starting Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Early American made Luke Harrington rifles (?)
« Reply #9 on: February 17, 2023, 03:50:39 PM »
To the best of my knowledge there is only one American proof law, adopted in Massachusetts around 1804 (I've forgotten the exact date). The barrels were to be marked PM over the initials of the proving inspector and the date. The most common mark is that of Luke Harrington who apparently worked in Milbury where the Waters factory was located. Waters had barrel rolling machines imported from England and provided many barrels used on the generic "New England Militia Muskets." I wrote an article on the Massachusetts proof law that was published in Man at Arms in the March/April, 1985 issue.

The law was worded in such a manner that it apparently only applied to barrels made in Massachusetts. From surviving examples (at one time I had about 60 of them) barrels with federal proofs, sold as surplus from Springfield or by Federal contractors did not get the Mass. proof. Thus far I have never seen a NE rifle with such a proof and I've seen exactly one pistol...an underhammer made by the Ruggles brothers.

But...lack of proof does not prove American manufacture. The biggest source of gun parts in the Federal period was England and British law did not require the proof of export guns or parts. If it was not going to be sold at retail in England, proof was not mandatory. In fact, the British proof law of 1813 only applied to England and Wales...it wasn't extended to Scotland and Ireland until later. Prior to 1813, proof was only required in London and the surrounding Middlesex county. MOST barrels were proved because the customers expected it, not because it was the law.


Are Luke Harrington rifles relatively rare/ valuable? Anyone have knowledge of this particular maker?

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 935
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #10 on: February 17, 2023, 07:23:51 PM »
I've no idea if he was a gunmaker. It isn't impossible but he's best remembered (if remembered at all) as the most prolific Massachusetts "prover of firearms". If he was a gunmaker, he's relatively unknown but that doesn't make his products more desirable. In fact, it probably makes them less so.

Offline Glory007

  • Starting Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2023, 12:28:21 AM »

Thanks JV; my ignorance would have had me thinking the opposite as far as desirability (being the fact of rarity); but I do know in other ears of collectibles rarity doesn't equate to true value. I found your earlier comments on this subject interesting because you mentioned the fact that you ran across a larger caliber; I recently ran across a Harrington with a .74-caliber; interesting (?).

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 935
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2023, 01:21:19 AM »
How is your gun marked? I'm curious to know if Harrington was a gunmaker. The "provers of firearms" were listed in the register of civil commissions along with justices of the peace etc. At least one, Silas Allen, was a well known gunmaker but with all the Allen guns I've seen, I have never seen his mark as a prover. The list can be found in my Man at Arms article and in George Moller's book Massachusetts Military shoulder Arms. There may have been others that were gunmakers. I don't have the list in front of me and I wrote that article about 30 years ago.

As I said, the wording of the law suggests that it only applied to barrels made in Massachusetts. The implication then is that none of the barrels Worcester County NE rifles were made there...The Ruggles pistol I've seen has a barrel that definitely was made in Massachusetts...which may be why it was marked although the Ruggles brothers made all their own barrels and, so far, I only know of one that has Mass. proof marks.

Offline Glory007

  • Starting Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #13 on: February 20, 2023, 01:03:19 AM »
JV,

Thanks for your ongoing discussion; its all a rather very interesting topic to me. you mentioned a Silas Allen- I recently came across a silas Allen proof rifle that was listed online for sale, but when I contacted the seller- they stated its currently pending a sale; I can't remember the date on it; but it had the standard proof marks that we know of. If I can find the listing I will post it here for your review. As far as mine.... here goes:




Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 935
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #14 on: February 20, 2023, 02:21:55 AM »
That is a perfectly conventional Luke Harrington proof on a militia musket. They aren't rare...in fact, his mark is far and away the most commonly seen.

Offline Glory007

  • Starting Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #15 on: February 20, 2023, 02:27:55 AM »
Thanks for sharing your knowledge; much appreciated!

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 935
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #16 on: February 21, 2023, 01:46:01 AM »
The civil list that includes the "provers of firearms" also lists the county they were located in. Harrington was in Worcester County and I strongly suspect he was in Millbury. I say that because Waters was there and with is barrel rolling machines was probably the source of more than half the barrels actually made in Massachusetts. I took a quick look at the list in Moller's book and I see that, in addition to Silas Allen Jr, Alvin Pratt (also a prominent gunmaker) had a commission as well. At one point I had about 40 Massachusetts militia muskets but was never able to find all the inspectors.

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9920
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Early American made gun barrels
« Reply #17 on: February 21, 2023, 05:13:21 AM »
Someone was looking at an old flintlock pistol I recently acquired and raised the consideration that perhaps it was an American Made pistol, partially because of the lack of visible proofing marks on the top of the barrel (I haven’t removed the barrel to inspect it due to my lack of any experience with old guns.
My question is this- were American gun barrels required to be proof marked in the  civilian market of the 18th and early 19th century?
Military barrels in the 19th c.
Civilian arms? Never,  though modern stuff is proved. Suspect this started in the early smokeless era. Maybe before. But MLs? Nope.
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine