1800-18?? US barrel marks, dating - Kent?

[Eric Kettenburg]

OK so this piece is a restock, more on that later as I get a chance to take real photos.  At the moment, I'm trying to assign a date.  My guess is a restock possibly in the 1830s but it's still flint, appears to have always been flint.  I'm not particularly knowledgeable about western stuff but I can say for sure it has not been reconverted and dare I say, I suspect it may have been stocked by a native or at the very least *for* a native.  It's exceptionally rough and crude.

ANYWAY what I am trying to identify initially are some markings.  The chopped barrel is clearly some kind of US musket barrel, I'm guessing from an 1816 but I don't know enough about the markings to be sure and the barrel can not be removed from the stock to see what may be underneath.  I can remove the lock and there is only a very large "L" stamp, very deep, on the inside of the lock.  The lock was cleaned up a bit inside for function, again more on that later.  There is faint "XIII" marking on the inside of the bolster which is surely for assembly.  The lock to me looks like some kind of trade gun lock but again, not my area or period of specialization.  The frizzen is a very old replacement with a brazed sole, and the cock is a replacement from the 1970s or 1980s because initially the gun was found with only a broken cock and the original piece is no longer at hand.  But, the rest is definitely original and again, it has not been reconverted.

You can see that the "JM" stamp on top of the barrel is also repeated on the underside, visible inside the lock mortise.  The barrel was at some point heavily filed around the breech area and there is no readable date on the breech tang although I do think there is a remnant of a date there.  I simply can't read it, again vise and file marks.

How easy would it have been for someone to get a US musket barrel in the 1830s give or take 10 years?  And by that point, I would expect percussion as a restock but I can not find any evidence of any reconversion, ever, so it appears to have been restocked in flint.

Very curious piece, musketoon or 'buffalo runner' gun since it's a real shorty but I will post more pictures sometime this week.  I am told it was brought back east from Oklahoma in the late 1940s or early 1950s.

[mr. no gold]

Eric, show us the whole gun if you would. If it is a 'blanket gun' or cut down for chasing buffalo from horseback, we would like to see it and any other features associated with it, eg brass tacks, wood carving or other details, some of us might be able shed some light on the matter. But, even so, thank you for bringing it here. The Indians were not purists when it came to working guns. Everything was 'fair-game,' (pun intended.)
Dick

[WESTbury]

Eric--Dick,

The barrel is from one of the Model 1816 Contractors and the "JM" initials are those of Inspector Justin Murphy. Murphy was assigned to Springfield Armory but he spent most of his time at various contractors for the M1816, mostly in New England but his initials do appear on Model 1816 muskets made by Wickham in Philadelphia. He inspected barrels at proof as well as completed muskets.
Below is the front page of the Springfield Armory Payroll for September 1840. Murphy is #13 on the list.

[Eric Kettenburg]

Thanks Kent!  Is there a way to put this barrel in a certain range of dates based upon the markings?  I don't see a "V" stamp anywhere and the "P" in the little star circle is different than the simple "P" I've seen in many of your photos, or a "P" in a simple oval.  This circle definitely has little points.

I think the barrel was probably not very old when it was restocked, so that's another question:  how would someone have gotten their hands on a US military arm to cannibalize prior to the Civil War?  When 1816s were initially converted to percussion, were many of them potentially deemed unsuitable and sold, trashed, or otherwise recycled somehow?

[WESTbury]

Eric---The inspector stamps on the barrels of contractor produced Model 1816 muskets all had the form and location at the barrel breech as those on the barrel you have.

The "V  P Eaglehead" stamps show below were only used at Springfield Armory through the whole production period of the M1816 at Springfield and nowhere else.



Harpers Ferry used a different form through out the complete production period of the M1816.



I do not believe it is possible to narrow down a date for the barrel you have. Murphy was listed on the payroll as an inspector until 1842.  His initials appear on the stock flat opposite the lock on Model 1840 Springfield Flintlock Muskets beginning in late 1840 So I would say that your contractor barrel was manufactured between 1817 and 1840.

In Jan 1842 a new superintendent arrived at Springfield and to show his appreciation for the many years of service of Murphy and another long time Inspector, Luther Sage, both were demoted and put to work in production. The Jan 1842 Payroll has Murphy "Assembling Guards" and Sage "Filing Mainsprings".

[Eric Kettenburg]

Thanks for the education Kent.  Knowing that it "could have" been made as early as 1817 makes a lot more sense, now if only I could figure how between ca. 1817 and probably the 1830s the barrel was separated from the rest of the musket, chopped and recycled.

[rich pierce]

Lurking on this one. Could it be such guns were used in conflicts with Native Americans?

[WESTbury]

Could it be such guns were used in conflicts with Native Americans?

If Regular U.S. Army troops, rather than state militia units, participated in the 1823 campaign against the Blackfeet and Arickaree in the upper Missouri River area, M1816 Flintlock Muskets would have been used. Those muskets would have been from one of the national armories, Springfield or Harpers Ferry. Contractor muskets were issued to the states.

[WESTbury]

1825 Report of the troops in the Western Department.

Top entry Ft Atkinson, Council Bluffs, Missouri four companies of the 1st Infantry, 10 companies of the 6th Infantry.

All Regular Army, possibly involved in the 1823 Upper Missouri campaign in 1823. These troops would have been issued M1816 Springfield or Harpers Ferry muskets.
 

[mr. no gold]

Kent, are there any indications that Harpers Ferry 1803 model rifles were sent with any of those companies ordered to the upper Missouri campaigns? Seems like a waste of production and funds to have made a good number of those arms and to have never used them much. I have never seen much about it other than some were perhaps sent to the St. Louis Depot in the 1820s, which year I don't know and then sold off as surplus. The latest date I have seen on one has been 1819. Did they make any after that time? A large percentage seem to have been converted to percussion and bored smooth. Do you know who did the work and when? Any ideas as to purchasers?
Dick

[WESTbury]

Kent, are there any indications that Harpers Ferry 1803 model rifles were sent with any of those companies ordered to the upper Missouri campaigns? Dick

Dick,
I would imagine that there had to a rifle company in each Infantry Regiment, but I do not know where that info would be. Both versions of the Harpers Ferry rifle would have been available as well as the Model 1814 & 1817 rifles by Deringer, Johnson, etc. I believe that 1819/1820 was the end of production for the HF rifle as they were tooling up for the Hall Rifle.

From what I've read in Moller's 3rd Vol, some flint rifles, 8365 in number, were altered at Federal Arsenals. The M1814 and M 1817 rifles were altered with the Belgium Alteration.
Kent

[mr. no gold]

Good information! Thank you, Kent. One further question has come to mind, All of the converted 1803 rifles I have seen were also smooth bored. I can't recall having seen any original flint rifles that were Smooth bored although some have been reconverted to flint, (I have one such, dated 1819). Most of the percussion conversions I have seen were done by drum and nipple and on some the work was a bit sloppy. What is your take on these observations?
Dick

[WESTbury]

Dick,

Found some more info on the M1803 Type I & II. Per Moller Vol 3 pg 17 "Except for one small lot of 50 Model 1803 Harpers Ferry rifles believed to have been altered at Saint Louis in 1861 for the State of Kentucky, no rifles of this model are known to have been altered by this method at federal facilities."

The method of alteration for those 50 rifles, per Moller, was the Belgium plan.

The drum & nipple conversions may have been done by the states or civilian gunsmiths.

[johngross]

how would someone have gotten their hands on a US military arm to cannibalize prior to the Civil War?

There were numerous ways military arms could fall into civilian hands.

From 1825 to 1848 the government sold over 100,000 muskets and a lesser number of rifles, carbines and pistols which were unserviceable.

In March of 1849 the government began to give arms to settlers going west.

Arms were lost or stolen, or captured in battle.

Private makers made muskets for sale. (See George Moller's sub-chapter in Volume 2 titled "Model 1816 Muskets Made For Private Sale").

[Eric Kettenburg]

From 1825 to 1848 the government sold over 100,000 muskets and a lesser number of rifles, carbines and pistols which were unserviceable.

This fits in with my suspicions, but given that it's not an area I'm typically researching, I wasn't sure if there were records of such activities or not.  The date range you mention actually falls in somewhat perfectly with what I suspect, stocked probably ca. 1830s.