• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

an interesting gun order

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

George

Cannon
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
7,913
Reaction score
1,968
I have an interesting reference which gives a fair bit of information about some 18th-century guns and gear, maybe some would be interested in discussing it. It’s from the Maryland State Archives, detailing an order for guns made in 1772.

Frederick Green P Letter, 26 November 1771, Wallace, Davidson & Johnson Order Book 1771-1774, Chancery Papers Exhibits 1773-1776, MSA no. 528-27, Maryland State Archives, Annapolis, Maryland, 47.

In 1772, Charles Carroll ordered:

1 neat cocking Gun 3 feet 1 In & ½ in the Barrell with brass mounting to be bot of Wm
Turvey - Stanton or Wilson, or a good as one as can be made may be got for four Guineas.
6 Steel spring charges for do to contain in each charger a load of powder & shot & no
more of each than the proper load of the gun.
1 neat small gun well fortified 1 Foot 8 Inches & ½ long in the barrell, the Barrel an Inch
& 3/15 of an Inch wide the Stock proportioned to the Barrall neatly mounted with Brass.
6 Steel Spring charges for do each to contain a full finger of powder & shot, & no more.
Direct the head of all the screw pins to each gun to be substantial and the channel in them to be cut deep that the turn Screw may take a good hold.
Direct the stocks near the muzles to be neatly capped with Brass (that part of the
stock being very apt to split) and Screws neatly & strongly fixed with the end of
each gun stick to draw the gunns. A bullet mold to each gun.(8)

I see mentions in the literature of fowling pieces, cocking pieces, squirrel pieces, but I don’t know what distinguishes between them. Are they really different guns or just being called by different names? I’ve seen, for example, a description of a fowling piece “charged with small shot” and hunting squirrels.

These two guns both have short barrels, 37 1/2” and 20 1/2”. I first thought the 20 1/2” one was probably a boy’s gun, but notice that it is to be “well fortified”, which I take to mean strongly built, and that the barrel is required to be 1.2” wide, a thick one. Is that at the breech of a tapered barrel, or is it straight? Why specifically that extra 1/2 inch?

No bore size is specified.

Spring steel chargers ordered for each gun, but for the longer gun the amount of powder and shot is to be whatever the builder determines to be best. The chargers would hold only that amount. Sounds as though he didn’t intend to try different loads. For the shorter gun a “full finger” of powder and shot is specified. A full finger in which way, long or wide, and in what container? The bore? Is a full finger more or less than the load which is “proper for the gun” as specified for the longer gun? Is he loading up or down?

The “charges” might be something like this, although I don't know the date on such:

Charger.jpg


He speaks of screws permanently fixed to the gun stick to draw the gun, but is that to draw wadding or balls?

I assume that these guns are to be used both for shot and ball, since both chargers for shot and powder and molds are specified for each gun. We can’t be certain, though, that the mold wasn’t for swan or buck shot, both commonly loaded at that time either for hunting or war. Since nothing was specified, I assume a plain round ball proper for the gun.

Spence
 
The short barreled one "well fortified" sounds more like a blunderbuss type weapon than anything given the short barrel and diameter specified.

The tin charger in the picture is interesting,any info on them?
 
The tin charger in your photo use to be quite common here in England (now there quite rare) thay where intend fore double guns shot charge ONLY left and right barrel, Kept in pocket with poweder flask. DONOT use these fore powder two pieces of steel and a spring could spell disaster with gunpowder plus the sulphur in unburnt powder will rot them.
 
Scots Jim said:
The tin charger in the picture is interesting,any info on them?
Not really. I have always assumed they were in use during the double-barrel percussion era, middle two quarters of the 19th century. Another picture:

charger3.jpg


Spence
 
Thanks for the information.Interesting piece of gunning paraphenalia,never seen one before. :hatsoff:
 
I have always enjoyed studying that gun order.

While I am sure those spring chargers were used for shot only for doubles at times, they were used for both shot AND powder. They go back into the period of that quote Spence posted and someP can be connected with 18th century makers. Some of the 18 th century examples are engraved for shot on one end and powder on the other. There are fancy combination shot/ powder flasks dating back to the circa 1700 era.
 
All of the original fowling pieces and smooth pistols I have examined with original or old rods with "screw" attached were worms for pulling wads. No real need to pull a ball when you can just pull the wad in front of it and let it roll out.
 
Capt. Jas. said:
They go back into the period of that quote Spence posted and some can be connected with 18th century makers.
That's very good to know, Capt. Jas. It's an ingenious device.

No real need to pull a ball when you can just pull the wad in front of it and let it roll out.
I like the way you think. :thumbsup:

Spence
 
If I get a chance, I will try to photo the original rod with worm I have pm my Doncaster made piece.

I hunt with spring chargers as pictured. Wonderful accoutrements.
 
Spence, you can see an engraved 18th century specimen in Great British Gunmakers, Twig and the Packington guns by Keith Jealously.
 
Mike Lea, gunmaker, used to have them avaialable. He made some and I think he had a supplier also.
Mark
 
Scots Jim said:
The short barreled one "well fortified" sounds more like a blunderbuss type weapon than anything given the short barrel and diameter specified.
I had that thought, but I'm not sure. The charger for powder and shot and the mold seem the same as for the other gun which is obviously a hunting gun. Also, the term blunderbuss was frequently used, just like all the other terms used to describe guns, so if it were a blunderbuss, why would't it be called that? Maybe a short, stout gun for defense, but with a straight, unflared barrel? Or a gun with some other special purpose?

The other gun seems easier, a short, handy gun for hunting woodcock in the thick cover they favor. This is the type described by Cleator, writing in England in 1789, but this one in the colonies and 20 years earlier.

The term 'neat" is one they frequently used to describe an item of high quality, well made, good workmanship, so these both were to be higher price guns.

Thanks to all for the info on the chargers.

Spence
 
The longer gun sounds like a very common length birding/cocking gun of the period. The shorter gun sounds like a large bore coaching carbine. I have seen quite a few orders of the period and most NUG the size given is for the bore diameter.I assume he is giving the same here as the measurement is not excessive for a breech in that time. It would also mean a very large breech to be had which would justify the comment about the stock proportions.
 
Maybe so, but it doesn't make sense to me that he would direct the stock to be made proportional to the bore.

Spence
 
Back
Top