Military Use of Rifles in the Revolutionary War

[Bob Smalser]

Shortages of guns of any type weren’t limited to Northampton County, but anywhere where Palatine settlers predominated.

In Berks County, Conrad Weiser (1696-1760), Pennsylvania’s most qualified diplomat to the tribes and Benjamin Franklin’s fellow commissioner tasked to establish frontier forts, writes to Deputy Governor Morris Nov 19, 1755.  Emphasis mine.

"Honored Sir:

   On my return from Philadelphia I met in the township of Amity, in Berks County, the first news of our cruel enemy having invaded the country this side of the Blue Mountain, to wit, Bethel and Tulpenhacon. I left the papers as they were in the messengers hands, and [hastened] to Reading, where the alarm and confusion was very great. I was obliged to stay that night and part of the next day, to wit, the 17th of this instant, and set out for Heidleberg, where I arrived that evening. Soon after, my sons Philip and Frederick arrived from the pursuit of the Indians, and gave me the following relation, to wit, that on Saturday last about 4 o'clock in the afternoon, as some men from Tulpenhacon were going to Dietrich Six's place under the hill on Shamokin Road to be on the watch appointed there, they were fired upon by the Indians but none hurt nor killed. (Our people were but six in number, the rest being behind.) Upon which our people ran towards the watch-house which was about one-half a mile off, and the Indians pursued then, and killed and scalped several of them. A bold, stout Indian came up with one Christopher Ury, who turned about and shot the Indian right through his breast. The Indian dropped down dead, but was dragged out of the way by his own companions. (He was found next day and scalped by our people.) The Indians divided themselves in two parties. Some came this way to meet the rest that was going to the watch, and killed some of them, so that six of our men were killed that day, and a few wounded.

   The night following the enemy attacked the house of Thomas Bower, on Swatara Creek. They came to the house in the dark night, and one of them put his firearm through the window and shot a shoemaker (that was at work) dead upon the spot. The people being extremely surprised at this sudden attack, defended themselves by firing out of the windows at the Indians. The fire alarmed a neighbor who came with two or three more men; they fired by the way and made a great noise, scared the Indians away from Bower's house, after they had set fire to it, but by Thomas Bower's diligence and conduct was timely put out again, so Thomas Bower, with his family, went off that night to his neighbor Daniel Schneider, who came to his assistance. By 8 of the clock parties came up from Tulpenhacon and Heidleberg. The first party saw four Indians running off. They had some prisoners whom they scalped immediately, three children lay scalped yet alive, one died since, the other two are like to do well. Another party found a woman just expired, with a male child on her side, both killed and scalped. The woman lay upon her face, my son Frederick turned her about to see who she might have been and to his and his companion's surprise they found a baby of about 14 days old under her, wrapped up in a little cushion, his nose quite flat, which was set right by Frederick, and life was yet in it, and recovered again.

   Our people came up with two parties of Indians that day, but they hardly got sight of then. The Indians ran off immediately. Either our people did not care to fight them if they could avoid it, or (which is most likely) the Indians were alarmed first by the loud noise of our people coming, because no order was observed. Upon the whole, there is about 15 killed of our people, including men, women and children, and the enemy not beat but scared off. Several houses and barns are burned; I have no true account how many. We are in a dismal situation, some of this murder has been committed in Tulpenhacon Township. The people left their plantation to within six or seven miles from my house (located at the present town of Womelsdorf) against another attack.

Guns and ammunition [are] very much wanted here, my sons have been obliged to part with most of that, that was sent up for the use of the Indians. I pray your Honor will be pleased, if it lies in your power, to send us up a quantity upon any condition. I must stand my ground or my neighbors will all go away, and leave their habitations to be destroyed by the enemy or our own people. This is enough of such melancholy account for this time. I beg leave to conclude, who am,

Your very obedient,
CONRAD WEISER.

And Frenchmen?  There were plenty of Frenchmen.

Oct 16, 1767

"Honored Sir:

According to my last I went up to John Harris's Ferry to visit Capt. Busse… he informed me that on the 12th instant, a French deserter or spy came down the hill near Fort Henry, and made towards Dietrich Six's house, which the sentry of the fort observing, acquainted the commanding officer of the fort thereof, who sent an officer and two soldiers to seize and bring him into the fort, which was accordingly done. I ordered, by express, my son Samuel, who commanded at the fort on Sweetara (Swatara), to march with a ranging party with all possible speed and care and take the said prisoner and convey him safe down to my house in Heidelberg, where he arrived safe with the prisoner about noon yesterday. I examined the prisoner by such an interpreter as I could get, but thought fit to bring him down hither to have a more full examination by the assistance of Capt. Oswald and Mr. James Read, and accordingly came here with him last night. The paper enclosed and a fuse were found in his possession. The examination I left to Capt. Oswald and Mr. Read, who will transmit a fair copy to your Honor. As I've no men to spare in this dangerous time, and Capt. Oswald hath been so kind as to offer a party of the Regulars under his command here to guard the prisoner to Philadelphia, I have accepted his offer, and accordingly put him into custody of the guards appointed by the Captain, which I hope will not be disagreeable to your Honor.

I am, Honored Sir,
Your most humble servant,
CONRAD WEISER."
(Penn. Arch., iii, p. 293.)

We have then recorded the examination of the prisoner at Reading… his name was Michael La Chauviguerie Junior, and his age seventeen. His father was a lieutenant of French Marines and Commandant of Fort Machault, just building, which was 72 leagues up the Allegheny River from Fort Du Quesne (Pittsburgh) and near the Lakes. The son had been given command of a party of 33 Indians, principally Delawares, who were sent out on a marauding expedition. As they neared the Blue Mountains he tells the sad tale of prisoners taken and numerous deserted homesteads. By accident one day he dropped a piece of bread and whilst looking for it his party of Indians became separated from him and he found he was lost. After wandering around for seven days he was forced to surrender at Fort Henry to save himself from starvation.

[Dphariss]

I cannot speak to the Moravians and how communism worked for them.
But communism really does not work very well, this has been repeatedly proven.

This is fair enough--and there is no way we can know whether the Moravian experiment in Bethlehem would have similarly collapsed due to problems inherent to communal organizations had it not been dissolved, for other reasons, by the European church after about twenty years. It may very well have.

It's worth noting several things in this regard. First, every resident of Bethlehem was asked, when the matter of dissolving the communal economy arose in the early 1760s, what they wanted. Everybody wanted it to continue; their written responses survive. This is not surprising. The communal arrangement guaranteed all residents housing, clothing, care when they were sick or old; it freed them from the "competitive" world. They had to work hard, and the profits--the surplus value--of an individual's labor did not remain with him (or her). It went to the church and, through the church, to the mission work that underlay the founding of Bethlehem itself. We might not want to live under such a system in which we would not keep the profits of our labor. But the residents of Bethlehem chose this system and chose to continue to live under it. They recognized their place within a larger missionary project that seemed, to them, of crucial importance. Not just important: necessary.

Of course this sample of residents who responded is skewed: those who had no liking for what they called communal "housekeeping" could leave the community. Which is to say: living in Bethlehem was voluntary. They received many, many more applications to join the communal economy than the church authorities accepted.

And, finally, what seems most important to say is that they worked hard, and worked well, because they believed that they were working for "the Savior." They were not compelled to live in, or work in, this social arrangement; they willingly chose it and wrote extensively about how rich their lives were in it. Some may treat this as a ridiculous false ideology; but it seems fair, no matter what we may believe, to recognize that they did believe.

Scott

It must be taken into account that until 1760 they were financially supported from Europe.
The funding dried up after 1760. So they were then forced to privatize more and more as the life style probably degraded. It was also basically a religious cult raising the children communally and indoctrinating them I am sure. Some were likely afraid to be on their own.

Dan

[rich pierce]

Moravian Christianity is and has been mainstream and is not considered a cult.  But let's stick to longrifles.

[Shreckmeister]

Bob,   This is the first I have heard of Christopher Ury being involved in the
Moravian attack.    I believe that my ggggg grandfather Christopher Stophel Oury
1742-1824 who was married to Catherina Rupp, may have been the nephew of
this Christopher Ury.  My Christopher had a brother
Adam.  Their father was Nicolas "Peter" Ury.  This Oury family moved from Berks
County, later split off as Northumberland, to Armstrong County along with the
Rupp, Frantz and Schrecongost families and established the first Lutheran church
here.  Interestingly Christopher Ury is said to have been married to the daughter
of a full blooded indian.  Unverified, but in several written histories.
     Great research on your part and much appreciated.  

[Bob Smalser]

It's all right here, Rob...and easy to get at:

http://www.usgwarchives.org/pa/1pa/1picts/frontierforts/frontierforts.htm

I had bits and pieces of it, but HIB's tip provided this clean copy.  Careful trying to print more than you need....it's huge.

[Bob Smalser]

Putting wood in boiling water is going to greatly increase to time needed to stock a gun since the wood is going to have to be allowed to normalize again, weeks at least, before doing any thing further. At least I would never trust it until I was sure it had normalized again.

Gunstocks need not be wet to bend BTW.  I have seen finished high grade shotgun stocks bent for cast off and drop with a jig and a couple of heat lamps.

OK.  Here’s an aside from my trade that does relate to 18th-Century gunmaking techniques:

Once wood is fully airdried to equilibrium with the outside air, it can be boiled or steamed for an hour or so without absorbing any serious moisture at all.  Once the inside of all those cellulose cells are dry, it takes a lot more than a short stint in a cauldron or steambox to put that water back.  Try it using a good moisture meter before and after to see for yourself.  A week at the most resting under the workbench, and the blank could be inletted.



For example, here are air-dried Doug Fir laminations @ 12% MC being boiled in a bucket for 40 minutes, then clamped in place as boat knees overnight to take a set before gluing, shaping and installing.  They are still 12% after boiling...otherwise there’d be problems gluing, priming and painting.









And Douglas Fir is extremely stiff and difficult to bend compared to maple and walnut, which are quite easy.  (That's why these knees are being laminated instead of bent whole)  Once you get the core of the wood up to 180 degrees or so, those woods bend like wet noodles.  But like in service, the more grain runout there is at the wrist, the greater the risk of cracking and the weaker the resulting product.

I also occasionally bend gunstocks using heat in the manner you mention…and those 18th-Century smiths certainly could have used hot oil instead of boiling water.  I’ve just never heard of anyone back then trying – steam or boiling were the techniques used, although for stockmaking oil is a superior method.

[Dphariss]

Putting wood in boiling water is going to greatly increase to time needed to stock a gun since the wood is going to have to be allowed to normalize again, weeks at least, before doing any thing further. At least I would never trust it until I was sure it had normalized again.

Gunstocks need not be wet to bend BTW.  I have seen finished high grade shotgun stocks bent for cast off and drop with a jig and a couple of heat lamps.

OK.  Here’s an aside from my trade that does relate to 18th-Century building techniques:

Once wood is fully airdried to equilibrium with the outside air, it can be boiled or steamed for an hour or so without absorbing any serious moisture at all.  Once the inside of all those cellulose cells are dry, it takes a lot more than a short stint in a cauldron or steambox to put that water back.  Try it using a good moisture meter before and after to see for yourself.  A week at the most resting under the workbench, and the blank can be inletted.



For example, here are air-dried Doug Fir laminations @ 12% MC being boiled in a bucket for 40 minutes, then clamped in place as boat knees overnight to take a set before gluing, shaping and installing.  They are still 12% after boiling...otherwise there’d be problems gluing, priming and painting.









And Douglas Fir is extremely stiff and difficult to bend compared to maple and walnut, which are quite easy.  Once you get the core of the wood up to 180 degrees or so, those woods bend like wet noodles.  But like in service, the more grain runout there is at the wrist, the greater the risk of cracking and the weaker the resulting product.

I also occasionally bend gunstocks using heat in the manner you mention…and those 18th-Century smiths certainly could have used hot oil instead of boiling water.  I’ve just never heard of anyone back then trying – steam or boiling were the techniques used.

I understand this. Bowyers steam bow staves and bows cannot be made from wet wood. But bows and boats and chairs are not gunstocks there is little need for tight fits. It possible to build a house with wet wood and it was routinely done in the past and not too distant past. There are a lot of houses in the Anchorage AK area made with fresh cut studs (hemlock?). Came up from Seward rough cut so it could be stacked, I off loaded it of the cars and it went into the stud mill. This stuff was so wet the top layer of the studs would sometimes cork screw in 24-48 hours.
I will not put the time and energy into a piece of wood I am not reasonably sure is stable. I have been down this road to my sorrow before.
It is possible to moisture test a stock as "good" and stock a gun with it and have it shrink away from the metal.
BTDT.
So moisture meters are just a guide. They tell you when the stock is too wet but will not assure the wood is ready to stock. Minor instability is not going to ruin a bow or a chair back and wood boats are usually wet anyway. But, again, gunstocks are not chairs. Having the buttplate or patchbox "grow" larger than the wood in 3 months (or even before the stock is finished) and the fits become sloppy or fingers catch on metal edges is simply not acceptable unless building aged guns.
A dry piece of wood is not necessarily stable and dunking it in boiling water for an hour is not likely to enhance stability.

If you live on the west coast dry wood is only relative, like living in the humid east. We routinely see temps of 100+- and humidity in the teens in summer. As I previously mentioned "dry" stocks can warp and check here. Even precarves need some rest time and these are, supposedly, dry when cut.
Do you have historical documentation for boiling or steaming being used to bend gunstocks?
One must remember that good wood was easier to get back in the day so bending stock blanks before their use was probably not needed it make not have been on the "radar". Until the advent of sport wing shooting gun fits were less important so bending the stock to correct the pointing of the gun was less important.

Dan

[spgordon]

It must be taken into account that until 1760 they were financially supported from Europe.
The funding dried up after 1760.

Dan

It's taken me a few days to get back to this. (The discussion below stems from Kate Engel's Religion and Profit: Moravians in Early America [Penn State UP, 2009] and the page numbers refer to it.)

I am honestly not sure whether Bethlehem did depend on financial support from Europe, but I do not think it did. Engel writes about Bethlehem as if it were self-sufficient (and making sufficient profit to fund missionary work).

In 1770, by John Ettwein's accounting, Bethlehem itself had spent £18,700 on missionary work during the period of the General Economy: the point of his accounting was to show how much the community had contributed--that is, independent of European support. Engel notes that "the trades were the main source of revenue for the Oeconomy" (54) and itemizes the profits of each. In 1752, for instance, Bethlehem's trades made a profit of £1,036. Between Dec 1753 to July 1755, the trades brought in £1,022 of profit--that is, over and above (a) what had been invested in them (supplies, building upkeep, etc.) and (b) the work they had performed for the community itself (which was quantified at £2,500 worth of work). This last is a crucial factor: each tradesman would do work for the community itself and also work for outsiders, the tailor, for instance, producing the clothes that community members received instead of wages, or the butcher producing the necessary meat that the community needed to eat. Other tradesmen contributed most if not all of the other necessaries of life. So the "profits" Engel mentions identify what the trades produced after these trades supplied what the community needed to survive, including, of course, the lumber and stones necessary to build the community itself. The labor was "freely" contributed in exchange for clothing, food, housing, health care, etc.

After Zinzendorf's death, the trades remained profitable: "every year between 1763 and 1771," Engel writes, "the Diacony saw returns of greater than £900" and the profits increased throughout the 1770s (204).

From reading Engel, one is led to think that Bethlehem did not depend on financial support from Europe.

Scott

[Bob Smalser]

1)  Do you have historical documentation for boiling or steaming being used to bend gunstocks?

2)  I will not put the time and energy into a piece of wood I am not reasonably sure is stable. I have been down this road to my sorrow before.

1)  I have historical docuemtation that they used tree crotches, which convinces me they understood the disastrous grain runout I'm talking about very well.  But human nature what it is, I'm also sure that just like today, many builders didn't give a hoot how well their work held up across fifty or more years providing the attractiveness of of a figured buttstock garmered them more money today.  I'm only suggesting that with bending, you can have both.

2)  I've grown, harvested, milled and seasoned dozens of acres of Bigleaf Maple bottomland for profitable music wood since 1975, and the problem with maple is besides being heavier, less stable, and with a weaker strength-to-weight ratio than walnut, is that the figure is largely limited to the sapwood, and the sapwood beneath the limbs or at the butt at that.  There is little figure above the crotch.  So if you can't use walnut heartwood (a superior wood  for gunstocks in every respect), then you'll achieve best results by bending your figured maple blanks so the preponderence of fracture lines are parallel to both the barrel channel and the stock's comb, and then letting the wood rest for at least a week after every major cut or inletting operation.  Remember that in figured maple you're working largely is sugar-laden sapwood, which is even less stable and prone to unpleasant surprises.

Further, maple is difficult to season properly...for best results figured maple should be airdried to outdoor equilibrium at the rate of a year to an inch of thickness and then gently vacuum-kilned down to to 7% prior to inletting.  From listening to you I suspect you're dealing with wood that's gone from green sapwood@ 100%+ MC to 7% in a mere two or three weeks of oven kilning.  Profitable for the mill....but at your expense.

Otherwise notions that the old masters had significantly better wood than you do are probably mistaken concerning sugar maple, a relatively short-lived tree that begins deteriorating at 80 or so years.  They simply had more of them to choose from.

[dannybb55]

Time for a new thread. Bob, here are some of the projects that I have been involved in.

 www.woodenboatrepair
 Or google: Moores Marine Yacht Center Beaufort, NC

                                                                                   Danny

[Jim Kibler]

Surviving examples show us that crotch wood was rarely used in the 18th century or before for gunstocks.  It became fashionable well into the 19th century.  

The best trees with curl will have the figure throughout most all of the tree.  Even the small branches will have the wavy grain.  Lesser quality trees will have curl in fewer areas.  Curl in wood is a genetic condition.   Stocks from the root flare often have figure from wood compression.  Stocks cut from low on the trunk that take advantage of the root flare (stump cut) are often the best in terms of figure and grain through the wrist.  Stump cut stocks were commonly used throughout the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries and still are today when recreating guns from this era.

Maple may be heavier, have a lower strength to weigh ratio and less stable than American Walnut, but it is in my view, positively a superior stock wood for longrifles.  Make some longrifles and you will realize this.

In my limited experience with vacuum kiln dried wood, I have found it to be poor to work with as compared to good air dried wood.  I've experience very few stability issues with proper air dried wood.  I'm pretty picky about such things as well.

Bending a stock prior to shaping may seem like a good idea, but I don't think it's very practical or necessary.  As long as the grain is decent and your not using the gun as a club, there will likely be few no problems.  I like perfect grain through the wrist and sometimes my guns have this, but sometimes they don't .  As long as the grain isn't at a severe angle to the the wrist, I don't consider it to be problematic.

Ideas and thoughts about a subject are one thing, but experience sorts it all out.

[Eric Kettenburg]

I'll leave the stockwood issue alone as it's fairly off topic, isn't it?  

Bob, not to be pedantic, but I suppose I shall be nevertheless:

"This is like making the argument that 16 workers were sufficient to service 12,000 stands of arms turning over every few months at the "Allentown Factory" after Philadelphia was evacuated in 1777 and armory operations shifted to Lancaster, Harrisburg and Allentown.  Please.  Sixteen workers were barely enough just to load and unload the wagons."

I have no idea from where you are deriving the number of 12,000 stands of arms relative to the Allentown facility.  In October of 1777, following the evacuation of Philadelphia and the establishment of *one of many such repair operations* in Allentown, John Tyler was begging the council to send along arms for repair:  "As we have no very large Quantity of arms here I hope we may receive such a supply from time to time as will keep the people in Employ."  Further, the return of December 4, 1777 specifically states that between October 15 and December 4, the operation at Allentown under the direction of Cowell and Tyler received 810 muskets, 36 rifles and 5 carbines for repair.  They did not need to stock this many new arms but rather they were diverted to the armory for repair.  Cowell directly stated on more than one occasion that he was employing 16 armorers and as late as March of 1778 reinforced this notion within a letter to the Council as he stated that he had constructed a shop suitable for the employment of 16 hands.  The numbers indicate a far cry from 12,000:  this particular facility was not servicing the entire American army.  In Northampton County alone, arms have been shown (via period documents) to have been sent to Bethlehem and Easton for repair likewise.  This does not take under consideration the likelihood that individuals were also receiving contracts for smaller repair operations in exactly the same manner as individuals had been in the city of Philadelphia prior to its evacuation (I use the term likelihood as I have seen scant reference to such private contracts in NH County, although scant does not indicate none i.e. the Berlins in Easton, Mathias Muller, Christian Oerter etc.; contrarily, there are numerous surviving advertisements and reference to private hands being employed by the state within the city of Philadelphia).  In short, Cowell and Tyler referred to 16 men in their employ as pertaining to the operation under their direction between Sept/Oct 1777 and January 1779.  James Carter, apparently sent as some sort of "hall monitor," found the two overseers completely competent to handle the operation/operations on their own.  Frederick Hagner's letter of May 20, 1778, also indicates that all was well in NH county and that he had a decent number of arms on hand - @ 800 - and that Tyler and Cowell would shortly have available another 150 apiece. 

[Bob Smalser]

   Here you go (Moravians):

  Main text:

   John Moll’s arrival in Allentown was only months after the colonial assembly approved generous funding for raising and arming provincial militia companies after the October, 1763 massacre of 23 people, most of them defenseless women and children, in neighboring Whitehall and Allen Townships, arms being described in desperately short supply.   

                                 
                                                  "NORTHAMPTON TOWN, the 10th, this instant, October, 1763.

To the Honorable JAMES HAMILTON (1710-1783),    Esq., Lieutenant Governor and Commander in Chief of the Province of Pennsylvania,

…  we found the inhabitants that had neither Guns, Powder nor Lead, to defend themselves, and that Colonel Burd  (James Burd 1726-1793) …would assist them with guns and ammunition, and he requested of me to write to your Honor, because the inhabitants of the town had not chose their officers at the time he set off, so we, the inhabitants of the said town hath unanimous chose George Wolf, the bearer hereof, to be Captain, and Abraham Rinker (1741-1820, later brother-in-law to John Moll I) to be Lieutenant; we whose names are underwritten, promise to obey to this mentioned Captain and Lieutenant, and so we hope his Honor will be so good and send us 50 guns, 100 pound of powder, and 400 pound lead, 150 stands for the guns… JOSEPH ROTH, Minister (Mickley 30)”

Perhaps someone in Allentown knew John Moll and asked him to come.  Fifty guns provided by the province would only accommodate the militia company, and probably every family who didn’t own a gun wanted one or more.  There were no other gunmakers in the immediate area then except the Moravians at Christian Springs, but despite the 1757 expansion of their enterprise mentioned previously, a record dated 1759 (Figure 20 below) lists only one part-time gunmaker there.  The Moravians had to import weapons from New York to supply their own needs in 1755, and by 1759 their weapons output likely remained insufficient to service others, as the population of their local communities was 886 and growing.  Meanwhile, the general Indian uprising of Pontiac’s Rebellion with all its terror raged throughout the frontier region in 1763 and 1764, with the well-publicized July, 1764 massacre of a schoolmaster and 11 children in Franklin County adding urgency to the community effort to arm themselves.  Moll’s primary interest was paid work; the demand for weapons in the Allentown area was immediate and well-funded, and Moll probably sought outside labor to assist.  Nineteen-year-old Peter Newhard, talented and ambitious but destined to remain subordinate to an older brother and father in a farming operation long on land but short on cash, could easily have been one of those assistants, bartering training for labor (Busch 184-224; Klees 100; Moravian Historical Society; Silver 66). (Note 18)

                           Christian Springs’ 1759 “Distribution of Trades”
      Andreas Albrecht is listed as the sole Buechsen Schaefter (gunmaker) at #11 between four nail makers
      and three wood turners.  As Albrecht also taught music at their school two miles away at Nazareth
                  during this period, the Moravians were producing more sets of chairs than they were rifles.

End Notes:

Note 18:  Sources conflict.  Dennis Kastens states the 1764 tax rolls list a married person (or widower) named Moll rather than single gunmaker John Moll I, who was first listed in 1772.  Brent Wade Moll states the 1764 Moll was described as a gunsmith.  Some students don’t believe much gunmaking was occurring in the Lehigh Valley outside the Moravian enclaves in the early 1760’s, which favors Kasten’s version.  I’ve used Moll’s version because it coincides with a John Moll’s Sep 1763 sale of his Berks County land and gunsmith shop a few months before appearing in Allentown in 1764.   This was land either he or his father perhaps acquired circa 1750, the date a John Moll appears on neighboring land warrants (Berks County courthouse in the Recorder of Deeds Office for Rockland Twp). The Indian uprisings throughout the summer of 1763 culminating in attacks in Northampton County in October mentioned in the first paragraph also support the Moll version, because the result was an urgent request for arms and ammunition, which were described as being in short supply, and 24,000 English pounds were soon appropriated by the Colonial Assembly for raising and equipping an 800-man defense force.  Local gunmakers and merchants selling guns were clearly busy and well-funded by 1764, albeit with workaday muskets, fowlers or trade-gun types rather than the works of art most likely to survive.  Further, Joseph Mickley also mentions Abraham Rinker (1741-1820) as the lieutenant of the local volunteer defense company in October 1763.  Rinker was the older brother of Lydia Rinker (1749-unk) who married John Moll I in 1772.  The newly-arrived stranger Moll couldn’t have married into the Rinker family without a close, longstanding relationship that probably began with Moll servicing Rinker’s defense company with weaponry in 1764.  Strings of coincidences usually aren’t.

References:

Busch, Clarence M. Report of the Commission to Locate the Site of the Frontier Forts of Pennsylvania, Vol 1.  State Printer of Pennsylvania, 1896. Print.

Klees, Frederic.  The Pennsylvania Dutch.  New York:  The MacMillan Company, 1950.  Print.

Mickley, Joseph J.  Brief account of murders by the Indians, and the cause thereof, in Northampton County, Penn'a., October 8th, 1763 [database on-line]. Provo, UT: The Generations Network, Inc., 2005.   Original data:,. Brief account of murders by the Indians, and the cause thereof, in Northampton County, Penn'a., October 8th, 1763. unknown: unknown, 1875. Web.

Moll, Brent Wade, The Moll Family in Pennsylvania, http://www.angelfire.com/pa5/mollpa/.  Web.

Moravian Historical Society, 214 East Center Street Nazareth, Pennsylvania 18064, http://www.moravianhistoricalsociety.org/index.html.  Web.

Silver, Peter Rhoads. Our Savage Neighbors. New York: WW Norton and Company, 2008. Print.

Sipe, C Hale.  The Indian Wars of Pennsylvania. 2 vols. 1929: Bowie, Md; Heritage Books, 2000. Web

[Bob Smalser]

I have no idea from where you are deriving the number of 12,000 stands of arms relative to the Allentown facility.  

Here’s two specific references:

http://www.lehighvalleyhistory.com/lehigh/allentowncity.html
http://www.angelfire.com/pa5/mollpa/revwar.html   

A report about the activities of the factory was sent to Thomas Wharten, President of the Supreme Council of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia on May 1lth, 1778:
Your Excellency receives herewith an accurate report about the weapons to be found in my posession ... and how many can be properly repaired until the 20th of this month:

(in my possession in stock)

800 Muskets and bayonets, scabbards 550 Bayonet belts
750 Cartridge pockets
45 Shot bags and 18 Powderhorns 400 Knapsacks
75 Blankets
25 Tent covers
140 Camp kettles
(In John Tyler's possession) 31 rifles
(Ready by the 20th of May)
150 Muskets and bayonets by John Tyler
150 Muskets and bayonets by E. Cowell
These weapons etc, are positively in good condition and we will do our best to finish still more and to serve our country.

Frederick Hagner, Second Lieutenant

July 20th, 1778
It was reported to the War Office that the government still has at least 12,000 stands of arms at Allentown, which can be delivered to militia on the order of the Council.

[DaveM]

Bob, my understanding has always been that arms were removed from Phila (and maybe NY?) since the major cities were under british threat and existing arms were relocated to these more remote facilities.  This reference does not mean 12,000 stand were made in Allentown, they were just stored there. 

Regarding Moll - note also that even though published secondary sources may not list Moll in the Lehigh Valley between 1764 (where he shows up) and 1772 (where he shows up again) he was likely there.  Some tax lists did not survive, others were incomplete, and in many cases past research for published lists was not very comprehensive.  In many other cases, names on original lists was so distorted as to be almost unrecognizable ("Noll" instead of Moll as a possible example) - they seemed more interested in collecting the money than name spelling accuracy.   Sometimes such ommissions or errors can be tracked by reviewing previous and subsequent lists.  It would be interesting for someone in the area, with interest in the subject, to track down all available original tax lists in this timeframe for this vicinity (various municipalities in the area) to review them to see if he shows up on any intermediate lists - he could have lived in several areas around Allentown before settling at one spot permanently.

[Eric Kettenburg]

Hagner's letter is exactly that to which I was referring.  He indicates 800 muskets, 31 rifles and that Tyler and Cowell would be able to provide another 150 apiece very shortly.  These were repaired arms - a repair may have constituted a cleaning and a snapped frizzen screw, or more, or less.  Furthermore, the letters of Hagner, Cowell, Tyler and Carter are all direct from the horse's mouth; the sources you note above are unreferenced and are rehashing rehashed information.  Now that I see the text you mention, I do recall reference to Styles - will have to try to find it again - but it is only referring to arms in storage which quite possibly(likely?) never left the proverbial wagons; there has never been any primary reference or indication that arms in that quantity were being serviced, repaired or otherwise addressed by armorers.   Allentown certainly did become something of a crossroads for men, materials and munitions ca. late 1777-early 1779, but every primary reference which I have found points towards something of a specialization when it came to repair work - I may be wrong, and I have no problem admitting that, but I do not believe Cowell and Tylers armorers were working on leather, kettles or tent covers.  There are a few brief references to a cooper factory in Allentown during the same period as well as contracted saddlers, possibly a hideworks or a 'leather factory' of sorts, although I'm not sure that it was centralized to the extent that Cowell's armory was.  I'll go through my paperwork and find Styles' letter as well as a few other things and get back to this shortly...

  

[spgordon]

July 20th, 1778
It was reported to the War Office that the government still has at least 12,000 stands of arms at Allentown, which can be delivered to militia on the order of the Council.

Here's the document that Bob quotes above (slightly different wording in the original):



(from Pennsylvania Archives, Ser. 1, Vol. 6, p. 655)


Nothing about there being this many arms "turning over every few months" at Allentown--which would indeed be a prodigious amount of arms!!

Scott

[Eric Kettenburg]

You beat me to it - I just got back in and took some time to find it.  Should have checked here first!

After the British pushed on to Philadelphia and the Committee had an "oh $#@*" moment, they ordered a LOT of things up to Northampton Co. for safekeeping, and in prodigious quantities.  The minutes of the committee illustrate this very clearly and descriptively.  For example, they sent hundreds - if not thousands - of books belonging to the state upriver to Easton for safekeeping, but I don't believe that this indicates they were all rebound in the process.   

[Bob Smalser]

My purpose is not to detail the comings and goings of the "Allentown Factory", but to suggest that, given Allentown at the time only had around a hundred adults living there, that the large quantities of arms involved meant that considerable work was probably farmed out to local smiths and joiners.  Here’s all I have to say about it:

Main Text:

   “Later, John Moll I’s Allentown gunshop was undoubtedly busy with wartime work at a time when he, Peter, and other local gunsmiths also had militia duties between 1777 and 1783.  As Philadelphia was about to fall to the British in September 1777, Congress moved federal armory operations to Lancaster, Harrisburg and Allentown.  The archived reports from the “Allentown Factory”  (Note 21)  show it to be a large operation -- “300 muskets will be ready by” …“800 muskets on hand”… “12,000 stands of arms” -- are impressive quantities even today, especially in a town with only 54 buildings and a population of 300, two-thirds of them children.  The factory probably used as many skilled workers and subcontractors as it could find, including militiamen Moll, Peter Newhard, and probably also the joinery shop just blocks away owned by a fellow militiaman, Peter Newhard’s younger brother George “Jacob” Neuhard (1752-1835).  That may be the explanation for the references in old gun collector’s handbooks to “Allentown gunsmith Jacob Newhardt producing rifles circa 1770-1780”, because besides the armory work, if he were provided with locks and barrels, Jacob could easily have built and signed several rifles in his lifetime (Kastens Vol IV 111, 113, 246, 248; PA Archives Series 5 Vol II, Vol VIII; Kettenburg; Sipple; Brent Wade Moll)

   …Family notes tell us that during the Revolutionary War, Peter was kept busy making guns, but he also served in the militia.   Northampton County Militia rosters of May, 1778, show a “Peter Neihart” in Captain John Morritz’s 4th Company of the 2d Battalion, a company that fought at the Battle of Brandywine the previous September. (Note 23)  Privates Peter Newhard, Jacob Neuhard and John Moll probably spent their militia drill and active-service days working on guns rather than serving as line infantry, regardless of the presence of an armory locally.  Militiamen initially supplied their own firelocks, and it would be a foolish company commander indeed to have skilled gunsmiths performing close-order drill when he also had dozens of fragile, farmer-owned flintlocks of various makes, vintages and conditions to rely on for survival, not to mention his government-owned equipment.  Last, patriotism and resolve weren’t in short supply among these early Pennsylvania Germans.  Peter’s 63-year-old father Michael also served as a private in the 1st Battalion of the Pennsylvania Militia during the war, when the usual age range was 18 to 53 (Gabel on Neihart 25; Kastens Vol IV 111; LDS Genealogical Library; PA Archives Series 5 Vol II, Vol VIII 48).


End Notes:

   Note 21:  The Kettenburg Pages, combining original, unedited archival records with commentary, is the best reference for studying the “Allentown Factory,” the temporary armory established after British forces forced the evacuation of arms-making and repair facilities from Philadelphia.  Surviving archives mention that 16 workers accompanied the evacuated arms and equipment, and from extensive personal professional experience with manpower requirements for modern prepositioned equipment stocks, my (and Kasten’s) view is that the quantities involved were too large for only 16 workers, and that every qualified gunsmith, blacksmith and joiner in the Allentown area were employed along with their workshops at one time or another to repair and maintain these relatively fragile flintlocks (Kastens Vol IV 54).

   Note 23:  Peter Newhard had a cousin close in age with the same name who was also a militiaman; one of 1737 immigrant Frederick’s sons.  Both have early militia records dated 14 May, 1778.  From the surname spellings associated with each at the time, “Peter Neihart” serving in the 4th Company, 2d Battalion, 8th Militia Class was probably the gunsmith, and “Peter Neyhard” serving in the 6th Company, 2d Battalion, 7th Militia Class was probably the farmer.  Gunsmith “Peter Newhard” also served later in the 8th Company, 2d Battalion, 8th Militia Class under Captain Ritz from 1780-83.  In turn, John Moll I served in Captain Wagner’s Company of the 4th Battalion during the war(LDS Genealogical Library; PA Archives Abstract File).

      Note 25:  Cabinetmaker, occasional gunmaker and later politician George “Jacob” Neuhard (Newhardt) served as a private in brother-in-law Captain George Graff's militia company, and is found in the surviving record of 14 May, 1778.  Later he was serving in Captain Shriver’s 3rd Company on 23 April, 1782, and is found as a Captain commanding the 4th Company, 5th Battalion from 1786 to 1789 (LDS Genealogical Library; PA Archives Abstract File).

[Eric Kettenburg]

"...and that every qualified gunsmith, blacksmith and joiner in the Allentown area were employed along with their workshops at one time or another..."

Absolutely, would agree with you there 100% when you put it that way!

Hair splitting, right?

[Dphariss]

A friend believes that the number of poorly trained "gunsmiths" that  the musket stocking of the American Revolution, and this took place ever where gunmaking was going on, produced was the reason the Golden Age rifles evolved.
We see a lot of rifles that were obviously made by people who did not know what they were doing and the people who could do good work displayed it to show the divide.

I would also point out, and I have not read the entire thread, that there were other places making guns other than Allentown.
Dan

[Bob Smalser]

Almost every published reference on the early “Northampton-Lehigh-Allentown School” talks to Andreas Albrecht being a major player, with many suggesting he could have trained Peter Newhard.  I don’t talk to artifacts as that’s not my lane….but from the context and perspective of time, place, events and people, no evidence points to Albrecht.  No records exist of any non-Moravian apprentices, the Newhards had no cash to pay for schooling and the Moravians then needed cash more than labor.  And only one part-time gunsmith as late as 1759 servicing a Moravian community numbering a thousand following a history of Indian attacks since 1755…because of which Bethlehem had to import guns from New York?  The Moravians of the early 1760’s were probably the boutique gunmakers of their day.  A tiny operation with little or no impact on the surrounding communities. Whatever contributions they made probably came later.

The evidence strongly points to John Moll I, instead.  Brutal Indian attacks for which the Allentown area was badly unprepared occur by surprise in Oct 1763, 24,000 English Pounds are finally appropriated to pay, arm and equip a serious provincial militia, and Moll is in place in Allentown making guns within months, if not weeks.  At the exact same time Moll is probably looking for assistants to help him reap some of that money by exchanging training for labor, Peter Newhard is a talented and ambitious but frustrated 19-year-old farmer destined to spend the next 30 years subordinate to a father and older brother in a farming operation long on land but short on cash.  Later, the newcomer Moll marries the younger sister of the 1763 local militia company lieutenant.  And later still, Moll’s #1 gunmaker son and grandson both marry Newhard women.  Whether you characterize it as wild-eyed speculation or logical deduction, strings of coincidences usually aren’t.

And here’s one of several references to Allentown jointer Jacob Newhard making guns:

[Bob Smalser]

PS....just like there are problems sorting out gunmaker Peter Newhard from his farmer cousins with the same name, there were also at least three John Molls.

http://www.digitalarchives.state.pa.us/archive.asp?view=ArchiveIndexes&ArchiveID=13

Revolutionary War militia records are badly incomplete and most only begin in 1778, but they list John Molls in Northampton, Berks and Northumberland Counties.

So there is still a Berks John Moll existing at the same time Allentown John Moll is.

[spgordon]

Bob,

I agree that anything that suggests that Albrecht might have trained Newhard is pure speculation and the suggestion itself is unlikely, unless Newhard was Moravian? The Moravians accepted many non-Moravians into their schools but not (I think) into their apprentice systems. And I think you're right that there seems not to have been substantial gun production from the Moravians in the period right after 1755. So if "major players" mean "producers of large amounts of rifles," you're surely right. If "major players" means "having a significant influence on styles," amount of production isn't necessarily a factor. Others more skilled in tracing the transmission of regional styles would have to weigh in on that one.

When the gunshop opened in Christian's Spring in 1762, however, the "investment" (for lack of a better word) of the Moravians in gunmaking and the volume of their production may have altered significantly. Bob Lienemann's introduction to MGMAR notes that there were over 300 gunstock blanks in the 1762 Christian's Spring inventory; in the 1764 inventory there were 233 gunstock blanks (which could mean that some 70 or more had been used since the 1762 inventory?) along with 15 English made barrels. We know, too, that Albrecht had apprentices working under him, including Oerter in 1763 and after. So, by 1762, the Moravians seem to have committed to an master/apprentice system with regards to gunsmithing that was expected to produce significant amounts of product.

I don't know why it needs to be either Moll or the Moravians. By the early 1760s, it seems like there could have been varied sites of significant gun production in the area.

If I am drawing unwarranted conclusions from the information in these inventories, I hope somebody will let me know.

Scott

[Bob Smalser]

The Moravians accepted many non-Moravians into their schools but not (I think) into their apprentice systems.

When the gunshop opened in Christian's Spring in 1762, however, the "investment" (for lack of a better word) of the Moravians in gunmaking and the volume of their production may have altered significantly. Bob Lienemann's introduction to MGMAR notes that there were over 300 gunstock blanks in the 1762 Christian's Spring inventory; in the 1764 inventory there were 233 gunstock blanks (which could mean that some 70 or more had been used since the 1762 inventory?) along with 15 English made barrels. We know, too, that Albrecht had apprentices working under him, including Oerter in 1763 and after. So, by 1762, the Moravians seem to have committed to an master/apprentice system with regards to gunsmithing that was expected to produce significant amounts of product.

Moravians didn't open up pay schools to outsiders until almost 30 years later.  And that was the general academy at Nazareth.  There is no record of any non-Moravian apprentices in their trade schools, and they kept meticulous records.

I don't dispute anything in MGMAR…in fact those records of gunstock use track nicely with my own conclusions based on the outside demand and funding available.  I’m saying that the evidence of a Moll-Newhard link occurring completely outside of the (then) insular Moravian sphere is vastly stronger.  While I don’t write about it, that Albrecht was only a part-time gunmaker before 1762 and was married and gone by 1766 is significant to how great or small his contributions there.

But given all the evidence pointing to less than half the Palatine families being armed even as late as 1763, the total demand in Northamption was likely  in hundreds if not thousands of guns, not scores.