more on Joseph Perkin

[spgordon]

Joseph Perkin, who made the lock on Christian Oerter's griffin rifle, and his partner Samuel Coutty made and repaired guns in Philadelphia during the Revolutionary War. [This advertisement from 2 May 1781:]



I thought some of you would be interested in the range of repair work they did for the state of Pennsylvania, which is detailed in these invoices that I found this week:

[rich pierce]

That’s a lot of work! Very interesting. Thanks for sharing. Not sure brazing barrels would be approved today but shows that reclaiming a barrel with a split was cost effective compared to buying a new barrel. They were clearly refurbishing some guns in serious need of repair.

[Eric Kettenburg]

That's gold, Scott, gold! 

[DaveM]

204 barrel loops must mean french charleville style bands I guess (68 new muskets x 3).  if it was pin held there would be 204 pins listed.

[Jim Kibler]

Browning gun barrels in 1781.  Anyone know of an earlier reference?

[Mike Brooks]

I suspect those locks marked " Perkin" were made in England. I also suspect Perkin ordered them in volume with his name engraved on them by the English lock maker.

[blienemann]

Thanks Scott for this great and detailed information. Please chime in with your detailed knowledge, but Perkin was trained as a gunlock maker in England before moving here - I think he specialized in locks. Wm Henry asked Perkin to come to Christian's Spring during the Rev War to teach his shopmates to make proper locks. Perkin may have imported completed locks from Britain at times, but probably not during the Rev War embargo ca 1774 - 1784.

Perkin may have known of browning for British firearms earlier than here in the colonies, and may have helped expand that technique. It is great to learn more about an individual we knew little about until recently. Bob

[spgordon]

Yes, Perkins (a Moravian) was a gunlock maker in Bristol (UK) and was asked by William Henry II to come to Christiansbrunn to instruct him in "the Gun Lockmaking Trade." Here's that letter (6 February 1779):



One of the problems that Pennsylvania's counties had when they received their quotas for new muskets in June 1775 was that they could not find locks. The Berks County committee complained in February 1776 that “no musket Locks can be obtained” and the county “knows not where to apply.” They added (interestingly) that none were “to be had at Bethlehem.” The Committee of Safety responded to this and other similar reports by urgently contacting Benjamin Rittenhouse to “request that you will immediately remove to this City that you may carry the Lock Making business into execution.” The state factory at French Creek, supervised by Peter DeHaven, began its life as a lockmaking factory and then became a more wide-ranging repair factory.

So there was lots of local lockmaking going on in Pennsylvania during the Revolution ...

[mr. no gold]

Scott, you propose an interesting scenario here. The Oerter "Griffin" rifle is dated 1775 whereas you have Henry importuning Perkin, in 1779 to leave England and come to the colonies to show the former how to best make locks. So, that supports the idea that Perkin was a locker maker of some note, residing in England. at the time. As far as I recall, I know of only two arms bearing her name of Perkin. One was a fowler and then the famous Griffin gun. You bring a lot to the table and your effort and sharing the information is greatly appreciated!
Dick

[blienemann]

Joseph Perkin was in Philadelphia and part of the Moravian congregation there when Wm Henry wrote to him. He had left England years earlier, and immigrated to Phila. I think Scott has provided an overview with dates previously on Perkin's moves and different locations, later to head up armories. Bob

[spgordon]

Perkin lived in the Moravian community at Bristol, so his work there as a lockmaker is pretty well documented.

In Bristol in April 1766 a boy named John Waters (also a Moravian) was apprenticed to Perkin "for seven years to learn the Gun Lock Smith Trade." When the single brothers rebuilt their house in July 1766, they included a shop for Perkin; they were later going to establish a "Ironmonger's Shop," with Perkin as "workman," but they abandoned this idea in January 1767--though Perkin was allowed to continue his "traffic in the Gunlock way." Perkin's "Gunlock Trade" was doing well: the pastor reported that "their Orders increase very much" by November 1766 and by March of the next year the single brothers agreed to "enlarge the shop" because Perkin didn't have "Room enough in his shop for himself and John Waters to work."

Perkin seems to have arrived in New York in 1771. (He was in Philadelphia when Henry was asking him to trudge up to Christiansbrunn: sorry, when I re-read my post above I see that I wasn't clear.) So Perkins could have made the lock on the griffin rifle in America. But it is equally possible, as I think Mike Brooks was suggesting, that the lock on the griffin rifle was an imported lock (by Perkin). We know that the Moravians used imported locks or locks purchased from Philadelphia or elsewhere. Or, maybe he was busily making locks, as was his trade, in Philadelphia after 1771 and so the griffin rifle used one of those. Is there a way to tell?

By late 1779, by the way, our Mr. Perkin is the superintendent of the Continental Armory in Philadelphia.

OFF TOPIC: there seems to be a spell check now when we type. Is that new? It keeps correcting "Perkin" to "Perkins"! Or is this something I mistakenly turned on?

[smart dog]

Hi,
Here is a painting by Ralph Earl showing an English gentleman with his fowler dated 1784.  The barrel of the gun is clearly browned.








Note that the top jaw and some other screw heads are blued and the standing breech is either case hardened or left bright while the barrel was browned.  John George wrote that rust browning was known in Britain during most of the 18th century but it may not have been popular until barrels such as twist and stub twist barrels became popular because it showed the patterns beautifully.  I am sure browning was offered by gunsmiths in the American cities where they were familiar with the latest English fashions.

dave

[Dan Fruth]

An article by Mathew Skic about Joseph Perkin
Click on the first pic to bring to full size.

[WESTbury]

Below is a link to the article Dan Furth brought to our attention. It was  Skic's presentaton to the ASAC and can be found in Bulletin #115.

https://americansocietyofarmscollectors.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/2017-B115-Joseph-Perkin-Arms-the-Revolution.pdf

[Dennis Glazener]

OFF TOPIC: there seems to be a spell check now when we type. Is that new? It keeps correcting "Perkin" to "Perkins"! Or is this something I mistakenly turned on?

Your web browser usually does the spell check. Most have spell chek turned on by default or maybe you turned yours on accidently. Here is howcto turn it off on Chrome browsers https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/12027911?hl=en-GB
Dennis

[JV Puleo]

I suspect those locks marked " Perkin" were made in England. I also suspect Perkin ordered them in volume with his name engraved on them by the English lock maker.

I largely agree with Mike's assessment although I don't doubt that Perkin was trained as a gun lock maker and practiced that trade in America. The question, in my mind, is "what did a "gun lock maker" make? By the mid 18th century the gun lock trade was every bit as specialized as that of the gunmaker. Just as no "gunmaker" actually made all the parts of a gun, no "lockmaker" made all the parts of a lock. In most cases, a "gun lock maker" would better be referred to as a "gun lock finisher"...or perhaps a "lock filer". (Both terms were used, often for the same person.) Some of the necessary materials, notably the steel for springs, simply wasn't available domestically and had to be imported. This was the case well into the 19th century so making a lock from scratch would have been very problematical. If he didn't import the entire lock already finished, I suspect that Perkin imported lock parts and finished them, which would have been entirely in keeping with the contemporary use of the term gun lock maker.

[spgordon]

Well, I think we know that Perkins was not importing "the entire lock already finished"--at least once the Revolution began. The inability to find gunlocks in early America after 1775 frustrates nearly all the new production that the colonies attempted to foster. I've described this above in Pennsylvania's case, which I know best. (The Congress's "Secret Committee," called that because it met in private rather than in public, tried to import 20,000 gunlocks at one point.) Gunlock factories were established in Philadelphia and Trenton and I think in New York and Connecticut and elsewhere. Here is John Nicholson's plan for one of these factories:

A Shop to contain three forges for forgeing Locks, with a good sett of tools to each, and a shop or shops to contain forty Lock filers, with a good sett of tools to each, suitable to the part of the Lock they have to file, with a forge for every ten Lock filers to harden & temper the Springs, mend tools, & case harden, &c.

So it may be the case that in the gunlock factories the workers were working with/finishing imported lock parts--though it is hard to imagine how these imports would have persisted in 1776 and 1777 and 1778 and 1779 etc.

After 1777, the newly organized/consolidated continental commissary for military stores spent a lot of effort providing steel to its various factories (see Robert F. Smith, Manufacturing Independence: Industrial Innovation in the American Revolution [2016], which tells the history of the creation, after much chaos in 1775 and 1776, of the high-functioning Department of the Commissary General of Military Stores). In January 1778, for instance, Benjamin Flower took over Andover Furnace in northern New Jersey, whose owners were Loyalists, and used it to provide steel for the workmen at the Carlisle armory.

[Mike Brooks]

Before and after the war locks were being imported in vast quantities.  Labor was very expensive in America and could not compete with English and German lock makers. Perkin was making locks during the war but it would have not been financially viable otherwise.

[spgordon]

Before and after the war locks were being imported in vast quantities.  Labor was very expensive in America and could not compete with English and German lock makers. Perkin was making locks during the war but it would have not been financially viable otherwise.

Yes—when imported locks were readily available, that would be the way to go.

[backsplash75]

Well, I think we know that Perkins was not importing "the entire lock already finished"--at least once the Revolution began. The inability to find gunlocks in early America after 1775 frustrates nearly all the new production that the colonies attempted to foster. I've described this above in Pennsylvania's case, which I know best. (The Congress's "Secret Committee," called that because it met in private rather than in public, tried to import 20,000 gunlocks at one point.) Gunlock factories were established in Philadelphia and Trenton and I think in New York and Connecticut and elsewhere. Here is John Nicholson's plan for one of these factories:

A Shop to contain three forges for forgeing Locks, with a good sett of tools to each, and a shop or shops to contain forty Lock filers, with a good sett of tools to each, suitable to the part of the Lock they have to file, with a forge for every ten Lock filers to harden & temper the Springs, mend tools, & case harden, &c.

So it may be the case that in the gunlock factories the workers were working with/finishing imported lock parts--though it is hard to imagine how these imports would have persisted in 1776 and 1777 and 1778 and 1779 etc.

After 1777, the newly organized/consolidated continental commissary for military stores spent a lot of effort providing steel to its various factories (see Robert F. Smith, Manufacturing Independence: Industrial Innovation in the American Revolution [2016], which tells the history of the creation, after much chaos in 1775 and 1776, of the high-functioning Department of the Commissary General of Military Stores). In January 1778, for instance, Benjamin Flower took over Andover Furnace in northern New Jersey, whose owners were Loyalists, and used it to provide steel for the workmen at the Carlisle armory.

Before and after the war locks were being imported in vast quantities.  Labor was very expensive in America and could not compete with English and German lock makers. Perkin was making locks during the war but it would have not been financially viable otherwise.

Yes—when imported locks were readily available, that would be the way to go.

Yep, keep in mind some of the post 1776/7ish military aid from France also included large quantities of gun locks and barrels, mostly from very antiquated guns.

Franklin: Two Memos Given to John Laurens, [c. 20 March 1781]
Franklin: Two Memos Given to John Laurens4

(I) and (II) Press copy and copy: Library of Congress

[c. March 20, 1780]
N° 1 Given to Col Laurence

Not having yet received the Accounts of the Cloathing &c. Ship’d in the Marquis de la Fayette, I cannot be exact with regard to it; but I believe there are compleat Habits ready made for at least 10,000 common Soldiers; consisting of Coats, Wastecoats, Breeches, Shirts, Stockings, Shoes, Overhalls &c. and that there is Cloth sufficient for 10,000 more, Soldiers and Officers. There is also the greatest part of 2,000 Barrels of Gunpowder, & of 15,000 small Arms which were receiv’d new and good out of the Kings magazine, a small part only being already sent in the Alliance & Ariel. There is also 200 Tons of Saltpetre; and 28 Iron Cannon of 24 lb. Shot. There is also all the remainder of our Magazine of old Arms, consisting of Gun Barrels, Locks and Rammers. The Quantity very considerable, but I cannot at present give it exactly. All the above belongs to the Public.—

I hear there will also go in the same Ship, which could not be fill’d by our Goods, a large Quantity of Cloathing on private Account, but of this I know nothing certain.—
N° 2 given to Col. Laurens

Note of Arms &c. shipt to America
   Barrels 
In the Mars, Capt. Samson 78 Chests of Rampart Muskets Barrels containing each 90 Barrels—in all    7200 
   Locks 
In ditto, 63 Hogsheads of Gun-Locks, each containing 550 Locks, in all    34,3505
There will go in the Active 1 Chest more containing 90 Barrels and 14 Hogsheads contg. in all 7700 Locks,    7700 
Locks    42,050 

[JV Puleo]

Before and after the war locks were being imported in vast quantities.  Labor was very expensive in America and could not compete with English and German lock makers. Perkin was making locks during the war but it would have not been financially viable otherwise.

Precisely. One need only read the plaintive advertisements in war-time newspapers looking for anyone who might be able to make all or a part of a gun lock. I also very much doubt he was importing parts during the war. Actually, all "military stores" were embargoed by the Privy Council in 1774 and the embargo wasn't lifted, in a limited way, until 1792. That said, I'm not sure what lock parts would have been classified as and they certainly could have been smuggled both between 1774 — 1776 and 1783— 1792. I'd be surprised if this didn't happen but I've never seen any record of it (nor should we expect to see one).

I feel that collectors tend to see gunmakers as artists while they saw themselves as tradesmen making a living. It wasn't until the proliferation of machine tools in the mid-19th century that it became economically feasible to make gun locks in the US. Yes, they were made for the government but that was a decision based on the need to develop the means of supplying arms for the national defense. It was never an economical choice and was not one that tradesmen supplyng the civilian market could afford to copy.

[WESTbury]

The Springfield National Armory was using some French components during the 1795 to at least 1799, to build muskets. The 1799 dated Springfield Charleville Pattern musket which is illustrated in my book published in 2015, has a French inspected triggerguard and a mid barrel band with the Charleville "D" inspector stamp.
 

[spgordon]

Before and after the war locks were being imported in vast quantities.  Labor was very expensive in America and could not compete with English and German lock makers. Perkin was making locks during the war but it would have not been financially viable otherwise.

Precisely. One need only read the plaintive advertisements in war-time newspapers looking for anyone who might be able to make all or a part of a gun lock. I also very much doubt he was importing parts during the war. Actually, all "military stores" were embargoed by the Privy Council in 1774 and the embargo wasn't lifted, in a limited way, until 1792. That said, I'm not sure what lock parts would have been classified as and they certainly could have been smuggled both between 1774 — 1776 and 1783— 1792. I'd be surprised if this didn't happen but I've never seen any record of it (nor should we expect to see one).

I feel that collectors tend to see gunmakers as artists while they saw themselves as tradesmen making a living. It wasn't until the proliferation of machine tools in the mid-19th century that it became economically feasible to make gun locks in the US. Yes, they were made for the government but that was a decision based on the need to develop the means of supplying arms for the national defense. It was never an economical choice and was not one that tradesmen supplyng the civilian market could afford to copy.

It sounds like we're all on the same page now.

In September 1775 Congress's "Secret Committee" (called that because its minutes, unlike Congress's own minutes, weren't made public) was authorized to obtain 20,000 musket locks, along with 10,000 stand of arms. Apparently only about 2000 muskets were imported by the end of 1776 (and half of these weren't usable--or at least needed repair--and were sent to Philadelphia's repair factory); I've never seen information about whether the Secret Committee was successful in its search for gunlocks. Maybe at least the locks in the 2000 muskets could be re-used.

[Bob Roller]

Today,and speaking from DECADES of experience,a simple lock of decent quality can easily be made from common materials.
The biggest problem for most are the springs.They are a learning curve into another skill set altogether but modern materials are
available that can shorten that curve substantially.In 1957,P.I. Spence gave me a sheet of 1075 annealed spring steel and that was
my learning curve along with suggestions from Bill Large and Glen Napier and watching George Killen in his gunsmith shop.
MAKING any lock mechanism from solid bars of steel is a labor intensive thing and I did it until 2019 and then decided to make no more
of any kind and it hasn't hurt us at all. After the Fall Shoot at Friendship I did finish a Hawken lock like the one on the Peterson Hawken
shown in Bob Woodfill's new book.It was like a lot of locks found on common rifles and lacked detailing and has a single position tumbler
and springs were left whatever the tempering color was.This lock is now in a collection of my locks and triggers owned by a friend.
I used 1144 also called "Stressproof" for tumblers,0-1 oil hardening flat stock for sears and flys,12L14 for screws and 1075 for springs and
1018 for lock plates.Flintlocks were almost always made with cast plates,cocks and frizzens and when cast FRIZZEN springs became at least to a degree uniform I used them with no problems.The locks today are much better than those from the last 50 years and even if I were to resume making them it would add little to the current mix.A few triggers from time to time are about all I will do now and for the first 4 months of this year I was not in the shop and that saved a few $$ on the heating bill. .
All of the material listed to make a lock mechanism can be found @ McMaster-Carr and other supply houses all over the country.
Bob Roller

[WESTbury]

I've found a few documents in RG27 pertaining to a Gunlock Factory apparently supervised by a Peter DeHaven.

What I have not found is any document detailing the production records.