1792 Contract Rifle in Original Flintlock

[4575wcf]

Hey All
New forum member here, long term black powder shooter. In the Air Force Academy McDermott Library, Colorado Springs CO. there exists in the collection of General Albert P. Clark what appears to be a 1792 US Contract musket. It is marked as a Martin Fry. The gun has been shortened, sling swivels installed, and has been fitted with what I would guess is a Confederate D guard Bowie bayonette. Since no other 1792 musket in the original flint exists, how has this rifle been overlooked as a possible Lewis and Clark weapon maybe Confederate modified? Is any one familiar with it? You can view it online by scooting around in the friends of the library website, but the picture is very grainy. It is included with, among others, an 1803 rifle heavily modified dated 1804 attributed to Lewis and Clark, which it most certainly is not. Thoughts?

 

[4575wcf]

Hey All
Make that contract rifle, not musket. Geez, getting old I guess.

 

[Grayrock Volunteer]

Can you post a link to the photo? I'm not having any luck finding it on the website.


Thanks,
Garrett

 

[4575wcf]

USAFA Library Guides>c.php>p=6336832

This should take you there but it takes some doing to find the online brochure.

 

[4575wcf]

okay go to USAFA Library Guides: Special Collections: Clark, Albert P. (SMS 329) and then click on the firearms brochure

 

[hawkeye2]

https://usafa.libguides.com/ld.php?content_id=44726327

 

[4575wcf]

Thank you for the link that goes right to the brochure. I found this by accident one day, and I have struggled getting back there every since : ). It sure as heck looks like the rifle that inspired the 1803.

 

[Artificer]

Thank you for the link that goes right to the brochure. I found this by accident one day, and I have struggled getting back there every since : ). It sure as heck looks like the rifle that inspired the 1803.

Thank you for providing the information and thanks to hawkeye2 for making it easy to find/see it. That is a MOST interesting piece!

However, when estimating age of an "ensemble" like this, we have to go with the most recent part or modification to the rifle. In this case it is the Sword Bayonet.

To my knowledge, Sword Bayonets did not become common on U.S. Model Rifles (even if they were contracted to be made by private civilian contractors) until many M 1841 "Mississippi" Rifles were modified in 1855 for Sword Bayonets and then Sword Bayonets were made for M1855 (2 Band) Rifles a couple three years later.

So it is most probable this rifle wasn't shortened and had the Sword Bayonet added until at least a few years after 1855. My best guess is this was done shortly before, or more likely, shortly after the UnCivil War began during the period both sides were desperately trying to arm their Troops.

I have a fairly large number of books on Federal and especially Confederate Arms, including such modified pieces, but I've never seen this rifle listed in them. So I can't offer any information on who may have modified this rifle.

Bottom line, I can't see this rifle having been shortened anywhere near early enough to have influenced the M1803 Rifles. HOWEVER, it was a real treat to see it and I'm saving the link in my files.

Again, thanks to both of you!

Gus

 

[dave_person]

Hi Gus,
Read the description in the brochure about the Brown Bess. It will make you cringe.

dave

 

[4575wcf]

There are a few more "disturbing" facts about this particular rifle. It was apparently removed to the south. We know that Captain Lewis had sling swivels installed at Harper's Ferry. We know the rifles were larger bore, and shorter, probably freshed out. Too many times we read of the poor quality of the contract rifles, and Lewis would have rejected them. True with the $10 1807 Contract rifle, not true with the $12 1792 Contract rifle. He would have had personal prior experience with the Model of 1792, the full equal of anybody else's $12 basic rifle. New Ketland contract locks were at Harper's Ferry when he got there. I think he had these locks fitted to selected rifles, and he took spares and parts. Upon the return of the Corp of Discovery in 1806, the expedition's rifles were auctioned off in Westport MO. They would have been much used low end guns, some fitted with swivels, larger bore and shortened. and If purchased by a layman farmer and well cared for they easily could have survived the 50 years till the start up of southern hostilities. The first main concern is to positively identify the rifle as a Contract 1792. There is only one other, converted to caplock with an original Martin Fry barrel. The barrel works burned in 1800, so no Fry barrels found on the 1807 models so far. Any bells ringing?

 

[Artificer]

Hi Gus,
Read the description in the brochure about the Brown Bess. It will make you cringe.

dave

Thanks Dave,

Good Heavens, I missed that because I really didn't look at that section until you mentioned it.

Not sure when that Bess was donated, but Bailey had books out in the 70's with much more correct info than that.

Gus

 

[4575wcf]

Okay, I will bite. What is it you guys are seeing with the Bess description?

 

[excess650]

from eslewhere:

"Using Gunsmiths of York County by James Whisker as a reference, I'd consider the rifle pictured by Jacob Doll on page 145. It is a good example of a govt. contract rifle of which I consider to be called a "short rifle" coinciding with Lewis & Clark time period a a little later as well. According to info provided, Doll, Jacob Leather, Henry Pickel and Martin Fry received a contract for 100 rifles. The pictured example scales out to be at close to 36"s, has sling attachments,...."

I thought I had that York County book here, but apparently not. Look up Martin Fry in that book, and the contract rifle mentioned above and see if that does anything for you

 

[4575wcf]

So you are saying the short rifles may have already been at Harper's Ferry when Lewis arrived? That is a take I had not heard before, but I am only a casual student of the Corp of Discovery.

 

[Artificer]

There are a few more "disturbing" facts about this particular rifle. It was apparently removed to the south. We know that Captain Lewis had sling swivels installed at Harper's Ferry. We know the rifles were larger bore, and shorter, probably freshed out. Too many times we read of the poor quality of the contract rifles, and Lewis would have rejected them. True with the $10 1807 Contract rifle, not true with the $12 1792 Contract rifle. He would have had personal prior experience with the Model of 1792, the full equal of anybody else's $12 basic rifle. New Ketland contract locks were at Harper's Ferry when he got there. I think he had these locks fitted to selected rifles, and he took spares and parts. Upon the return of the Corp of Discovery in 1806, the expedition's rifles were auctioned off in Westport MO. They would have been much used low end guns, some fitted with swivels, larger bore and shortened. and If purchased by a layman farmer and well cared for they easily could have survived the 50 years till the start up of southern hostilities. The first main concern is to positively identify the rifle as a Contract 1792. There is only one other, converted to caplock with an original Martin Fry barrel. The barrel works burned in 1800, so no Fry barrels found on the 1807 models so far. Any bells ringing?

First of all, my apologies for not mentioning this earlier. So..... WELCOME to the forum!!!!

The areas I've studied don't include the U.S. Contract rifles to anywhere near the degree I've studied other arms. So I can't be of any help identifying this rifle as an original M 1792 or not.

I must admit I'm a bit confused about this post of yours, so my apology for that as well.

Are you suggesting Contract Rifles were actually used by Lewis and Clark rather than early M1803 rifles?

Gus

 

[4575wcf]

Yes I am absolutely suggesting that. The infamous #15 1803 prototype that is getting the press right now is a mocked up shop model. Lewis may have handled it. But 1803 production was a few months out there would have been no rifles ready to go. I think he did what I would have done. He took 15 selected 1792 rifles with sound wood from the 300 available, had new Ketland contract locks fitted, shortened them and fitted with swivels, and had them freshed out to get new larger bores. They each came with their own mold, the rifling guide was still a wooden one. The idea worked. He arrived back with plenty of lead and powder and guns that were still working.

 

[Grenadier1758]

The supposition that existing Contract Rifles were refurbished with new locks and bored to a larger caliber has been speculated for some time. A few things we know. Lewis was authorized 15 rifles and 15 extra locks were included. The 1803 was not authorized for production of the initial run of 4000 rifles until several months after Lewis left Harper's Ferry. Harper's Ferry was paid for 4015 rifles.

 

[4575wcf]

Lewis was an odd duck, let us not forget that fact. He was also pretty darned smart. Dearborn was suitably impressed with the rifles Lewis wound up with. If you look closely at the gun in the Air Force Academy Collection, and you disregard the sword bayonette, you begin to see, at least I do, the beginnings of the M1803. Dunno, there is just something about this rifle, and the time frame and geography sort of fit. Too bad that Lewis was consumed with that failed collapsible boat, and did not give us more information about the rifles. I like that payment for the extra fifteen rifles, that would have nicely covered the modifications and workmen's time on the 1792's, a job forced on them when they were already busy. I am not sure there was enough time to scratch build fifteen new rifles and get them right ahead of production.

 

[Artificer]

Yes I am absolutely suggesting that. The infamous #15 1803 prototype that is getting the press right now is a mocked up shop model. Lewis may have handled it. But 1803 production was a few months out there would have been no rifles ready to go. I think he did what I would have done. He took 15 selected 1792 rifles with sound wood from the 300 available, had new Ketland contract locks fitted, shortened them and fitted with swivels, and had them freshed out to get new larger bores. They each came with their own mold, the rifling guide was still a wooden one. The idea worked. He arrived back with plenty of lead and powder and guns that were still working.

We had a long discussion on this five years ago on this forum. So I don't have to re-type or or do major cut and pastes, here is the link:

1803 Harper's Ferry Rifle | The Muzzleloading Forum

I have more information/thoughts since that time, but since it's late, will have to type it out later.

Gus

 

[4575wcf]

I do not think we can ignore the efforts of Hall, but he rarely gets mentioned. He enjoyed the benefits of a full time paid gig at Harper's Ferry while he developed his breech loader, specifically dedicated to developing interchangeable parts. The rifle was a bit of a dog, but the interchangeable parts idea changed the way the armory approached things forever. No such interchangeability of parts existed during Lewis's time, the 1800 contract Ketland locks on hand were as close as you were going to get. It is true that Whitney had achieved some success along these lines, but his guns only interchanged in lots of ten. I will contend, until proven otherwise, that Lewis well knew what he was up against in the way of supply problems, and would never have accepted unproven prototype weapons. His rearward most extremity was on the line, and he was directly responsible for many others.