Another Southern (?) rifle. Comments welcomed

[Molly]

It seem the group does enjoy seeing and commenting so how about this one.  Certainly has southern characteristics and is in excellent condition.  In fact we have actually fired this one a few times.  The groves are rather dirty but the rifling is in fair condition and actually has some shine to it. 

data data data

Barrel is about 48 inches and overall it's just over 59 inches.  Lock and triggers function like new.  Single lever trigger.  Barrel is about 1 inch with flats of about 3/8ths.  It is a slightly swamped barrel.  Stock is excellent with no evidence of repairs as I recall.  Walnut, and looks like the original finish.  It has a pewter nose cap but not figured.  Silver inlay on the top of the barrel for a signature but no evidence that it was ever signed.  It does have a plain toe plate with a forward facing "V".  Probably about a 38 to 40 cal.  Shot a .380 ball as I did not want to load it too tightly. Certainly always a cap lock and in stellar condition.  This is a real "makes me happy" sort of rifle even though it is rather ordinary.

Comments welcomed.

[oldtravler61]

  Molly I like the no frills guns.
  Oldtravler

[Tanselman]

Can you tell us which mounts are brass, and which are iron, on this rifle? The butt plate and pipes "seem" to be iron in the photos, but can't tell about the guard.

At first blush, I'd place this rifle in the far southeastern Kentucky Cumberland Plateau region near the Tennessee border, perhaps Harlan, Letcher or Leslie Counties or thereabouts. The more conventional rear pipe and butt plate with shorter return, extended tang, silver barrel plate, tight side facings, simple cheekpiece with single molding line, pinned butt plate tail, etc., all are characteristics of guns from that area. The strongly pointed toe on the butt seems more Tennessee in style, but some rifles in far southeastern KY used nearby TN details such as the exaggerated toe in later years. This should prove to be another interesting rifle to discuss and try to locate. Thanks for posting.
Shelby Gallien

[Molly]

Everything, including the guard, is iron.  There are some areas of the guard that have a luster but it is not plating.  Being able to pin point the area would be great and any conclusions that one may make as to the builder would be super great.  Since it does not "pop", visually, I think a lot of people overlooked it and I'm not sure the seller even recognized the swamped barrel.  It is most noticeable when you are looking down the barrel to aim and then.... OH!  It's swamped!!

I am not holding back anything on this.  No specific data although I do have a theory about it but not where or by whom it was made.  I would like to see more comments to see if anyone picks up on my theory before I let it be known. 

[Tanselman]

The triggers appear to be of good quality, better than the average southern mountain rifle... so, I'm wondering if someone is going to try to place this rifle out in the western Piedmont region of North Carolina, where some clean, slim looking rifles had a distinctive TN flavor to them.  Shelby Gallien

[oldtravler61]

Ok I'm really going to stick my lack of expertise here. I don't think this gun is as old as some think. I'm almost willing to bet that it is a gun that was made in or around the 1940s or fiftys.
But then like I said I'm no expert.
  Oldtravler

[Molly]

You know what they say about opinions and other parts of the anatomy.  So tell us why you think that.  For what it's worth I do not agree and I have my own theory about the maker.

But I don't know and we probably never will.

[Molly]

Here are additional pics.  As to my view that this is an "older" rifle this is what makes me feel that way.

The condition at the barrel where the drum is located reflects a good deal of use with pitting/corrosion.
The inside of the lock also has more than a little rust/corrosion.  Cannot get a good shot of the interior trigger parts.
Swamped barrel and the barrel, while it is is great shape is nicely turned color and does have several areas with more corrosion that other places so it is uneven.
The lock "bolt/screw" has the look of being hand made as the area from the head down to near the threads has a filed look.  Actually, it is almost square in some places.
The side flats where the wood meets the barrel show evidence of filing.

But mostly the little voices in my head say, "I'm and old rifle."  And I never argue or disagree with those little voices.

[AZshot]

Isn't this a chronological oddity, every rifle has a 50 year date range? 

I was at my cousin's mountain cabin where he lives in the upstate Georgia Appalachians 3 weeks ago.  He pulled out a rifle he's had in the family for 40 years.  It looked pretty modern to me, just guessing from the wood condition (decent).  But the bore and barrel were rough, he'd played with it as a kid, loaded it with firecrackers, etc.  It's here: https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=66353.0 I figured it could be a mid 20th century gun because it said "Warrented" on the barrel...sounded modern to me, and the wood was not dinged much for a 170 year old gun.  I passed on it.  But then this forum ID'd it as an 1840s H.E. Lehman.  So you can never tell.  Super worn can mean it was in a leaking basement.  Super nice can mean several generations kept it in a dry house with oil on it. 

To me, it looks to be percussion period, not something made post.

[Molly]

Pretty good shot, AZ.

I noted to another member that I have a Lawing that looks better that this one and it is shot often, has been well cared for by all who have owned it since it was new.

[Tanselman]

This rifle looks very much like an original rifle to me in both metal surfaces and wood surfaces. If someone is questioning it, how about providing some specifics or comments on what makes you think that way, so we can all learn from it. Shelby Gallien

[Sequatchie Rifle]

I agree with Shelby. I’ve seen hundreds of originals and this certainly displays all the attributes of an original. There are some distinctive features on the rifle that stand out, but nothing I see pinpoints it to a specific maker.

[Molly]

oldtravler and I are "buds".  No offense taken by the comments and we have exchanged a PM or two on it.  I know what he's up to and it is GOOD!  Sometime we all spar with others a bit.

But yes, if there are those out there who feel it is not that old tells us why.

[bama]

Molly, I too think this to be an old rifle. I also think that it may have been used in the 20th century. I base this on the few minor repairs that have been done to the rifle. There is a small patch of wood that has been replaced at the breech on the lock side which is very well done and almost un-noticeable. To me the the main spring and the sear spring look to be replacements, without holding the lock in hand it is hard to tell. I do find it unusual that the front of the lock bolster was not fit flush up to the barrel. It is hard for me to believe an experienced gunsmith would do this but at the same time many southern guns were built with what was at hand and again not having the rifle in hand the smith may have had a good reason for doing this. Certainly the rest of the rifle shows an experienced gunsmith built it. It is a nice old gun and one of the things I enjoy doing is looking at how they were built, how they were used, repaired and used some more and then "fixed" by the modern collecting world. I don't think this one has been "fixed" just used and taken care of. Nice old rifle, no clue on who, when or where.

[oldtravler61]

  Well here's why I said what I said. For nye on to fifty years I have been friends with Jack Duprey. Seen work by other's. Who can make anything look two hundred years old.
 So I am more than cautious. The first time I attended the Tennessee show I watched two expert's debatting when a certain Soddy was made. Each figured 1850 ish. A friend of mine thus pointed out to them that the maker was standing over at the table..! If jaws could dent floors. The marks would still be their. Jack has fooled other's.
 Last but not least I never trust pictures on making a final decision. But that's just me.
 I only wished I could find more rifles like Molly has done.
 Oldtravler
 

[bama]

Molly after taking a closer look at the lock mortice I realized that the whole lock bolster is not inlet flush with the barrel. This is most unusual and leads me to say that the gun may not be as old as I thought. The little sliver of wood between the lock and the barrel in my opinion would have much more deterioration from the percussion cap if it was an a mid to late 1800's rifle. Again without holding it in hand it is hard to say.

[Molly]

Sure have some heavy weights views and I really appreciate that.  I'm into the learning phase and these opinions are meaningful to me (and hubby too).

First a comment about the repair Mr. Parker mentions.  Actually while there is some compression of the wood at that point and it might look like a repair but my view is that it is not. The point where the wood is "dented" tends to look like a repair line but with the lock removed I see no evidence to support that conclusion but it is a good observation.  I can post pics if you like.  As to the wood between the barrel and the lock just forward of the drum.  Would you believe that I have a Lawing with a similar feature although the wood on it is much smaller and more forward of the drum.  Now, that being said I have not taken the lock out recently to examine it completely but once again I can post pics if anyone wishes to see.  I would say that if the in-letting were done to remove that wood then the lock plate would not fit flush on the outside and that would be a most undesirable feature not to mention the need to adjust the hammer's alignment with the nipple.  So yes, they did what that had to to make it look good AND function.

Here is my view.  It was made by an apprentice under the less that watchful eye of a better builder or maybe as that apprentices' first solo builds OR maybe after he left and went out on his own.  Why say this?  There are several other features that are of a lesser quality but yet there are many features which speak to an "expert".  Look at the butt plate, lower screw hole.  No way to use a screw there without risk of cracking the toe.  There has never been a screw in that hole.  Look at the "sloppy" way the front sight is set in the barrel...as if it took multiple tries.  Why a pewter nose cap that is not in the form of the typical poured pewter nose caps seen on these rifles.  Lastly I think the cheek rail (just learned that term recently) appears somewhat unfinished...needs a little more wood removed.  The stock, as viewed from the right side looks very professional, esp from the entry pipe back.  But forward of that it seems a little "chubby" to me.  As to who made it...we'll never know.  As to when...that's a pure guess so mine is 1875, give or take 20 years.  As to where, geographically, I don't have a clue.

Back to the condition briefly.  I simply think it has been well cared for an not used a lot.  The corrosion on the barrel at the drum is not excessive but it is present and that suggests lightly used and may also account for why more wood has not burned away at that point.  And then there is the silver on the top of the barrel.  I don't think it was ever signed.  Maybe the master did not want to put his name on it?

Oh what fun!  Thanks to all.

[WadePatton]

Molly after taking a closer look at the lock mortice I realized that the whole lock bolster is not inlet flush with the barrel. This is most unusual and leads me to say that the gun may not be as old as I thought. The little sliver of wood between the lock and the barrel in my opinion would have much more deterioration from the percussion cap if it was an a mid to late 1800's rifle. Again without holding it in hand it is hard to say.

My most local mentor, John Anderson, would not let me inlet the bolster clear to the wood on my first rifle. He warned that with less than a perfect fit, and with wear/shrinkage/damage over time that contamination of the lock could become a problem. I didn't argue and took it down really thin, but left some maple there for a sure seal. I've since taken out a sliver more.  We didn't discuss whether or not old-time makers ever did this (or I don't recall that part), but he impressed upon me to do leave some wood. He's likely forgotten more than I will ever know. I mentioned it here as I was building it and got no replies on that detail as I recall.  THIS is the first time I've seen it on an old gun.

Also the shape of the guard reminds me of the maker/family edit:Bearden from Lincoln County/Fayetteville (Southern Middle TN bordering Alabama, a few counties West of the Soddy-Daisy area) but that he/they often used some brass furnishings.

[bama]

Hi Molly

I am glad to hear that there is not a repair at the breech, like I said it is hard to tell if you are not holding in your hands. Please note that I am not knocking the gun at all, I actually like it. It is just that I have done enough restoration work to know that a rifle from the late 1800's should have more wood deterioration from the fulminate of the percussion cap in the breech area. The area around the drum and nipple shows considerable erosion of the metal. I would think that the wood would show the same at the breech and just in front of the drum. Now it may be that this barrel was reused to build this rifle and can account for the difference in the amount of ware. I could be all wrong about this, just going from past experience. It is still a nice rifle and I would not pass it up if I had a chance at it.   

[jdm]

Molly,
I was looking at some of  Jerry Nobles books  and read these comments  in the foreword of Vol.2. It made me think of your master /apprentice idea.   and the swamped barrel.
       " The later period of the muzzle-loading era in the south was the time nearly eyeryone thought he was a gunsmith. The products of these people were usually centered on re-cycled parts. I've seen these rifles with an early hand forged barrel,crude forged mountings and cheap hardware store locks.all mounted on roughly  whittled stock.   They shot well enough for a proud owner."

It doesn't always matter how these old guns got here . They're history and we still love em.

Re reading my comments it looks like I'm implying your guns is crude I'm not so  Please don't take it that way .

[Molly]

No offense taken.  That's a very appropriate comment thinking the way I do about this rifle.  I think it represents a high level of skill in some ways but falls short in others.  Boy, don't we wish we could talk to the builder or the first owners!  I'll agree this is from the "late" muzzle loading period and also "southern".

Thanks,

MAS

[Craig Wilcox]

Molly, thank you so much for showing us this rifle.  It seems to be a very interesting piece, and well worth studying.

I, too, was of the opinion that it was made in TN, not sure if before or after the war years.

Color me "envious"!

[Bob Roller]

Ok I'm really going to stick my lack of expertise here. I don't think this gun is as old as some think. I'm almost willing to bet that it is a gun that was made in or around the 1940s or fiftys.
But then like I said I'm no expert.
  Oldtravler

In the early 1960's or maybe as early as 1958 I restocked a rifle using the parts from a damaged antique rifle for a man who I think was named Leroy Hoosier.This rifle is very similar and if it is my work it's the only such job I ever did.Most of it was
done on a bench in an enclosed back porch that is now our laundry room.
Bob Roller

[cshirsch]

Stock shape reminds me of Samuel Lafayette Click's work.

[Molly]

So tell me more about SLC.