Does anyone have information about the Village Restorations replica of the 1792 Contract rifle?

[ljspoon]

Hello all,
I have just traded for one of these rifles that was made and signed by Brooks. It took a lot of digging to find any information about what this was. All I have come up with was a vague reference about Village Restorations and Consulting commissioning these rifles to be made for the 200th anniversary of the Corp of Discovery. There was a post in January 2020 showing one here but not much information as to maker or anything else. I emailed Village Restorations a while ago but have no response as of yet. Any help would be welcome.

 

[Grenadier1758]

The topic of the 1792 contract rifles and a link to the Corps of Discovery is one of these very speculative thought exercises.

In 1792 the US Government issued contracts with several Pennsylvania Gunsmiths to manufacture a rifle of 49 caliber to supply rifled arms to several rifle companies stationed in along the Ohio River. Other than caliber, these were to be of essentially a Pennsylvania Long rifle. By he early 1800's these rifles were well used, and a number of unserviceable returns were believed to have been in storage at Harper's Ferry at the time that Merriweather Lewis was there to get high quality technical goods such as the collapsible boat, the lead canisters for storage of powder and rifles suitable for the expected large animals to be found on the Plains that the Corps of Discovery was to cross. Lewis left with lots of goods that included 15 rifles and 15 locks to interchange with those rifles as well as the other supplies needed to maintain them.

At the same time Harper's Ferry was developing a new rifle to be made at Harper's Ferry for the US Army.

While there was lots of discussion about the collapsible boat, there was little documentation of the rifles other than the locks were built in accordance with interchangeable parts methodology. The 1792 Contract rifles were individually produced without regard to use of interchangeable parts. The 1792 contract rifles in storage were known to be unserviceable. It is possible that the bores could have been bored out to 54 caliber and the locks replaced with the interchangeable locks. It is possible that 15 of the rifles under development could have been built under the table and let out the door with the supplies that President Jefferson had given a lot of authority for Lewis to get what he wanted. The authorization for Harper's Ferry to produce the 1803 Rifle was not given until well after Lewis left Harper's Ferry. It is noted that when the US Government paid Harper's Ferry for the initial production run of rifles they were paid for 15 more rifles than was authorized.

No less a person than Don Stith believed that the 1792 rifles were modified to the larger caliber and new locks installed. There are no rifles that have real provenance as to being used by the Corps of Discovery. The Rifle Shoppe has a rifle that has some of the features of an 1803 Rifle.

The Harper's Ferry diorama of the materials supplied for the Corps of Discovery has a Pennsylvania long rifle with the Harper's Ferry Lock.

I have to admit that I do not know what specific rifle was used. Either one could possibly be the rifle used. There's no research that I am aware of that can answer that question.

 

[ljspoon]

Thank you for your informative response, I have heard that here are at least a few lines of thinking as well and am certainly not trying to open up another exhaustive conversation that has been hashed out in so many threads here and on other forums.

With Don Stith's kits and Track of the Wolf's interpretation, I am sure there are many differing ideas of what a Contract rifle even looked like. Aside from the small representative number with U.S. markings, there were so many different contracts, providing a vague set of requirements to produce these. While we may never know the true answer, we can always hope that some research in the future will dig up some substantiative information.

I am hoping to find out any information pertaining to this specific contemporary run of rifles made for the Village Restorations. I am aware that at one time there were adds placed in several of the muzzleloader and firearms magazines pertaining to options and ordering information. Other than that, I am only going off of what little information that I found on the net. Here are a couple pictures of the rifle in question. I have seen pictures of only one more but the patch box markings are a different size and there doesn't appear to be any makers mark on it.

 

[Notchy Bob]

I'm way over my head here, but I have a couple of thoughts.

Would the builder have been Mike Brooks or Jack Brooks? Both of them have websites with contact information. Maybe the builder could provide some insight.

I have a copy of Small Arms and Ammunition in the United States Service, 1776-1865, by Berkeley Lewis, first published in 1956 by the Smithsonian Institution. Plate number 11, near the back of the book, shows a "Contract [Rifle], caliber 0.52, by P. Gonter." The rifle shown had been altered to percussion, and was noted to be in the collection of one C.J. Langer. I can try to take a snapshot of the illustration and post it if it will be of any interest. I have not found anything about this rifle in the book's text yet. The head or finial of the patchbox on this original rifle appears slightly different than the Brooks rifle. The Gonter rifle does not appear to have sling swivels, but I can't determine from the photo if these might have been removed.

That Brooks rifle is a beauty.

Notchy Bob

 

[ljspoon]

The previous owner made contact with Mike Brooks who confirmed that he built it. Here was his his response to the inquiry.

“ Yep, It's one of mine. I probably built 1/2 dozen or so for Roland Cadle and Don Stith on or around the 200th anniversary of the Corps of Discovery. All of them are .49 cal. and have Ed Rayle barrels. Mike”

The previous owner stated this was all the information he had and provided this email response. I suspect since Roland Cadle is well known for his horn work and is associated with Village Restorations he had a large part to play in this. I suspect there was a lot of collaboration on this project from Don Stith.

 

[kansas_volunteer]

A very thorough discussion of 1792 rifles here.

https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/threads/1792-contract-rifle-in-original-flintlock.134359/

 

[FlinterNick]

Those early republic era contract rifles are very difficult to get accurate. The assumption is that they had 1803 styled furniture and an 1803 era lock on a Lancaster styled rifle.

I’ve seen some that were thought to have been a 1792 contract rifle with sling swivels and without, some with extra brass on the trigger guard boss and some with a steel lug for the sling swivel.

With such limited information on them, one can assume that the contracted specifications be met with a repro build. They used government locks, stocked in well seasoned maple with barrels at a minimum caliber of .49.

I think a repro with an RE Davis lock and a .54 caliber barrel is fine, and 1803 furniture, it certainly would fit into that era, as long as the locks are not dated. The only real issue with the lock is the plate. Those earlier plats had more definition on the tail, they were not as robust as an RE Davis lock and they may have been slightly smaller.

Patchbox would have been in the 1803 style, simple design, I’ve seen some without patch boxes too, this could be a restock or just that that specific contractor chose to omit the patchbox.

 

[Thagomizer]

I think Jim Klein also built a few of these commemorative guns.

 

[kansas_volunteer]

It's important to remember the rifle in question is not a representation of the true 1792 contract rifle. It's a fantasy piece dreamed up by Stith et al to represent a plausible rifle in use by L&C. I think the 12--page discussion I linked to above cast doubt on the plausibility of the Stith design, if I'm remember it correctly. The original 1792s were Lancaster pattern, largely by Dickert. It's thought the 1792s inspired the 1803 rifle to a degree

 

[ljspoon]

I think Jim Klein also built a few of these commemorative guns.

Thank you, I was wondering about other builders. The only other one of these commemorative representatives I have seen was marked differently in the patch box.

My assumption is that there were or were intended to be a production run of 200. I suspect that there were several builders involved in this project. I am hoping someone someone had further knowledge of the specific Village Restorations project.

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

Yep, it's one of mine. I built those for Don Stith and Roland cadle. There was a big controversy over this gun and the Lewis and Clark trip but I didn't get involved in it. I was just looking for a paycheck. The only difference between the stith gun and the cable was the way the rear sling swivel was attached. Otherwise they used exactly the same parts and prepared stocks.

 

[ljspoon]

Thank you for your information, the craftsmanship is top notch just like all of your work. Were you the only builder on this project? I am looking forward to shooting it as it appears unfired and used as a display.
thank you again for your response!

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

I know others were making these as they made several hundred. Klien did some. I don't recall any others but I'd guess there were probably a half dozen or more making them.
I only got on when they agreed to let me finish them in my style.

 

[Johnny Tremain]

The Rifle Shoppe, Jess Melot has decades of info on them.

 

[ljspoon]

I know others were making these as they made several hundred. Klien did some. I don't recall any others but I'd guess there were probably a half dozen or more making them.
I only got on when they agreed to let me finish them in my style.

Thank you again, I am happy to have received one of yours. Your antiquing process looks incredible.