Horace Kephart S Hawken and an unknown halfstock

[HighUintas]

I visited the Missouri History Museum today and took a couple of pictures of rifles.

I apologize for the poor quality. I only had 20 minutes and my phone camera is very subpar.

The first is an S Hawken donated by Horace Kephart.
























The second didn't have any information about it. But many aspects of the rifle seemed like it was probably a later Hawken local trade or target rifle. The bore looked on the smaller side. The finish looked like most of it had nearly turned black it was so dark. It is the top on in the photos.

Does anyone have any information on this one?














Bonus:
S Hawken Jr's fire hat

[Longknife]

If you will look a little closer top one picture, it has been converted to a breech loader. It works like a trapdoor. I have seen it there, but I don't know if it was a Hawken conversion or some other 'smith that did it.

[Daryl]

Good spotting, Ed. something about the breech area didn't look quite right to me.

[HighUintas]

Thanks, Longknife! I did see that and couldn't make out what it was. I forgot to mention that.

The stock had a "34" written on it like it may have been from the museum. I plan to call the museum to see if they have some information on it.

[HighUintas]

Update on the Kephart Hawken, the first picture. There is no barrel stamp that I can see. I really think it doesn't have a visible stamp on the top of the barrel. The rear sight is an interesting shape in that it is shaped like the upper half of a heart. The butt plate appears cast and has some visible remnants of being case hardened.

[rich pierce]

The Kephart Hawken started the craze. He wrote about it.

[JTR]

If you will look a little closer top one picture, it has been converted to a breech loader. It works like a trapdoor. I have seen it there, but I don't know if it was a Hawken conversion or some other 'smith that did it.

Well that's novel!

[HighUintas]

The Kephart Hawken started the craze. He wrote about it.

Yes I wasn't sure if it was 1 rifle he had and wrote about or if he had several. I wasn't able to find any mention of it being unstamped or having the less than common breech snail style. I saw an old post by Herb mentioning it was nearly identical to the Carson Hawken, but no mention of either of these items.

[HighUintas]

Also, I'm pretty sure that breech loader rifle mentioned above is a Gemmer. I could barely make that out on the barrel but not well enough to get a picture.

[moseswhite]

The breech loader is marked " J. P. GEMMER PAT. PENDING ". There are 3 of those rifles known . I think GEMMER was trying to keep up with the changing times. And you are correct , the Kephart rifle is unmarked .That is why Kephart took it to a local gunsmith to verify that it was truely a HAWKEN rifle.

[Bob Roller]

Gemmer did work into the cartridge gun era,My last BPCR was a spin off of a Gemmer that was featured on the cover of a magazine and owned by Scott Sibley..I had sworn off of gun making but that old Remington was too much to resist.I called Scott and told him I was mad at him for showing that gun and he told me that it looked good but the chamber had been ruined with a drill.My "Gemmer"was a 40 caliber and styled like a Hawken/Gemmer..I sold it it Dixie Gun Works and later a friend here in Huntington bought it and still has it. did not make set triggers for this one but made a bunch of them for others.Thanks for reviving a dormant memory.
Bob Roller

[moseswhite]

The breech loader is marked " J. P. GEMMER PAT. PENDING ". There are 3 of those rifles known . I think GEMMER was trying to keep up with the changing times. And you are correct , the Kephart rifle is unmarked .That is why Kephart took it to a local gunsmith to verify that it was truely a HAWKEN rifle.

The S. Hawken rifle that is dark and as new with all the bluing and case colors and this rifle is known to be the last rifle that Sam Hawken made . Herb is correct when he stated that Horace Kephart started it all and started researching the Hawken rifle !!

[JV Puleo]

If I remember correctly Kephart wrote that he showed the rifle to the last surviving Hawken workman who told him it was a Hawken...but also told him he'd made the lock himself. That raises a question in my mind since I doubt very much that the Hawken's made locks...so was the old workman just telling Keppart what he wanted to hear?

Correction...I think this story is related by Ned Roberts so it wasn't Kephart that wrote it.

[Notchy Bob]

Thanks for posting these pictures! 

I can’t really add anything with regard to makers, but I understand that some Hawkens were un-marked.  The Lacome rifle in the New Mexico State museum, is also generally believed to be a Hawken, although it is not marked as such.  In his book, Sporting Firearms, which has a chapter on Hawken rifles, Mr. Kephart wrote that he bought his Hawken from William Albright, a gunmaker and dealer in St. Louis, in 1894.  Regarding his Hawken rifle, Kephart wrote, "It lacked the maker's name on the barrel, but Albright said the Hawkens would not put their 'brand' on a gun that they made for a firm that made guns themselves....

Regarding the Kephart Hawken in the glass case, the placard states it is .58 caliber, and dates to 1845.  The rifle Kephart described in his book was .53-.54 caliber, shooting a 217 grain (half ounce, or 32 gauge) ball.  Also, I believe the rifle he used in his famous test was of very late production, from well into the 1850s.  As noted above, Kephart bought his rifle as "new old stock" in 1894, and showed it to Charles Siever, a former Hawken shop workman.  The old gunsmith reported that he had made the lock, "...more as forty year ago," which would put the date of manufacture in the 1850s. 

Kephart wrote that he donated his Hawken to the Missouri Historical Society in 1901.  While he mentioned another Hawken that was donated by another individual, that rifle also took a half-ounce ball.  Kephart only described donating one Hawken, himself.  So, I think it is likely that Mr. Kephart either owned more than one Hawken rifle, with a second one being donated after his book was published, or the information on the placard is not entirely correct.  Museum curators, bless their hearts, are rarely “gun guys,” and labeling errors occur frequently.

Again, thanks for sharing the images and starting the discussion!

Notchy Bob