Leman rifle .. possible Tex Rev connections ...

[davy]

Okay ... heres the story from the current owner of this weapon ... I will let him tell it it his own words ...

"
Here's the flintlock LEMAN longrifle that friends found in a storage shed in Tehuacan, Mexico back in the 1960's. They bought the rifle from the Onyx craftsman who told him that it was with the family when they settled there in the late 1830's. They were shown documents belonging to the family dating from that time showing that the family acquired the land at that time.

The rifle reportedly came out of Texas "in the part that used to be Northern Mexico" The original ancestor who brought the rifle with his family had been an officer or a high ranking NCO in the Mexican army. Since this rifle cannot at this time be directly linked with any particular battle, it therefore cannot be labeled as coming from the Alamo or any specific battle. However, it almost certainly in my personal opinion did originate from the Texas War For Independence. Future communication with the family in Mexico might reveal additional information about the rifle. Anyway, I wanted to share this with you folks. Hope you like it. I'll take some pictures today that show the blade cuts along the top flat of the barrel

When I first received it in 1983, its about 40 caliber ... the stock was all bleached and dried out. The metal was all encrusted with rust that'd turned into a deep patina which hid the stamping of LEMAM-LANCASTER PA-WARRANTED on the top flat. The toe of the buttstock was seperated from the rest of the wood but thankfully, had been held in place by the toe plate and buttplate. The wrist was broken through and held in place with a large woodscrew and a copper wrap. I removed it and repaired the wrist. I had the missing wood on the forearm replaced, cleaned (not sanded!) the wood, and oiled it with linseed. Since the ramrod was missing I carved out another and added a jag tip. I figured that it deserved to be properly stablized and repaired for posterity.

It's integrity is still there as well as the full background concerning it's history which I'm typing up now to keep with it inside the patchbox. I even repaired the breech plug which was torn halfway through from one side to the tang screw hole when the wrist had been broken. These repairs have not compromised the original integrity of the historic relic.

F."

I am hoping you guys with all your expertise, can help furthur our quest for knowledge on this fine old weapon. :hatsoff:

Davy

 

[AeroncaTAL]

I like it Davy! It's something, isn't it when a piece of history like this crops up. Thanks for sharing it, and I'd be interested in what the other's say about it.
Scott

 

Thanks Davy,
Very interesting.

 

[kansas_volunteer]

Not that I'm knocking the rifle, I admire it, but are you sure it's PC?

 

[Swampman]

It's very interesting. The patchbox, triggerguard, and sideplate don't look anything like any Leman I've ever seen. The caliber seems very small also. I hope the experts chime in.

 

Mark, that was Leman's response to Henry producing and English style trade rifle, I think one of the companies in St Louis contracted him for one or two hundred. They were a commision trade gun. It's a comment in one of Hansen's or Bairds books. I get a chance and I'll look up the exact info. as to who the contract was with.

Bill

 

[davy]

More from Fred on the rifle ...

The rifle was made by Henry Leman as can be seen on the barrel. where the rifle maker put his name. Rifle makers very often used the services of other lock makers who stamped their names on the locks that they sold to various riflemakers. However, it was costumary for the riflemaker to stamp his name on the top flat of the barrel. Leman used the lock made by a man who made only locks for this rifle. The man's name was Henry Elwell who only made locks, never complete rifles. Leman, who ended his apprentiship under the guidence of another Lancaster golden age rifle maker in 1834, started making his own rifles in 1835. His first rifles were like those that he assisted in manufacturing for his former master. These were traditional flintlock longrilfes of Lancaster pattern. Soon however, he had started making shorter, rifles of percussion locks. The only flintlocks that he made in later years were primarily for the Indian trade and these were of trade rifle pattern of large caliber and short barrels. This flintlock Longrifle has a 47" barrel. It's caliber is around .40 , and the pattern of the stock design is known as the Lancaster County pattern, where Leman learned his trade.It's Very likely that this rifle was one of the very first of those made by Leman in 1835 by his own hands before he became successful enough to hire others who later worked for him in his factory.

F.
"

Davy

 

[Wes/Tex]

Seems like there might be a tie to Texas there. Considering all the shootings going on then and the surrender at Bahia and the storming of the Alamo it's perfectly possible the gun was picked up then. There were also the invasions by Wohl in 1842 and such that might have netted the Mexican troops guns. If it could be really documented, it'd be a candidate for the various museums.

 

[davy]

Well with the cut marks on the barrel which may well be saber marks .. it does make you wonder! :hmm: And " ...The original ancestor who brought the rifle with his family had been an officer or a high ranking NCO in the Mexican army."

Who knows?

Davy

 

Thanks for the pictures and the story on this old tool. This rifle is not much different than a lot of the rifles made by Lancaster gunsmiths in the early years of the trade. It's simply a common contract rifle which happens to be made by Leman.
Thanks for the show Davy.

 

[Donald A Drefke]

If you have the family names you might try a genealogy expert to see what military experience they had. Mexico has better records than we do thanks to the Catholic church.

 

The English style patchbox is interesting for a Leman, don't you think. Any lock markings?


.40 is not unusual for Leman or many other trade smiths. There are many Lemans out there in collections that are of a similar bore.
Sean

 

Hidy Sean, I think that box is pretty common on contract rifles regardless of the maker. These rifles were made by a bunch of Lancaster riflesmiths to government specs. There was an article in MBlast about three years ago on these rifles. I wish I had a copy of that article. It was a good 'un.

 

[Okwaho]

Hidy Sean, I think that box is pretty common on contract rifles regardless of the maker. These rifles were made by a bunch of Lancaster riflesmiths to government specs. There was an article in MBlast about three years ago on these rifles. I wish I had a copy of that article. It was a good 'un.

I have to say that I agree with Mark Lewis on this gun except that without actually handling the gun I can't comment on the caliber.

Don, I would like to see that article since the box on this gun doesn't look like any English pattern rifle box that I have ever seen.There were a number of them shown in George Shumway's article on English pattern rifles in "The Proceedings Of The 1984 Trade Gun Conference"part II Selected Papers,published by the Rochester Museum and Science Center PP.11-49 and others are shown in "British Military Flintlock Rifles 1740-1840" by De Witt bailey Ph,D.These boxes have a single large hinge in the center of the head. They also have a tab extending about 1/4" on the end of the box in the center to facilitate lifting the box lid or a slightly raised tab just foward of the end of the box. All these details are quite evident in pictures in the above cited material.The box on the subject gun,on the other hand, appears to be a fairly standard two piece Allentown style Ky box with several hinges and a release foward of the toe plate clearly visible in the pictures.This box looks much earlier than the gun and seems atypical of Leman guns.

The guard is also atypical in that the bow seems too short and rounded for the set triggers installed in the gun.The side plate is another puzzle.At first glance I thought it might be an East India pattern guard and it coulds very well be.I don't think it looks American; it really looks out of place on a gun like this.The architecture doesn't look like a Leman to me but rather a common rifle from the early to mid 19th century. The flintlock seems out of place on a gun claimed to be a Leman but not on a gun built by someone else.I admit to be being somewhat subjective here but it's hard to be otherwise when looking at a gun like this one.

This gun clearly shows why guns to be restored should be photographed in "as found condition". If I had to hazard a guess this gun was built utilizing parts recovered from other older guns.The lock is probably marked H.Elwell a lock maker from Birmingham,England in the mid 19th century. He was very prolific and I have seen hundreds of guns with his locks although flintlocks marked by him seemed fairly scarce.I will also hazard a guess and opine that this is a composite gun built around 1830-1860 utilizing recovered parts including a Leman barrel. I have seen quite a few guns utilizing Leman barrels and which never saw the Leman shop.Of course I could be wrong but that's what I think about this old gun.
As always I welcome responsible opposing opinions.
Tom Patton

 

[whitedog333]

Tom, I wonder if the early patchbox and other funiture could have been aquired by Leman while he was an aprentis and that they were used by him in making this rifle which might have been one of his very first.Any ideas? The buttplate was surely off of another rifle as even though it was fitted to this stock, it has another screw hole in it's butt that is just above the bottom screw, but there's no hole in the stock indicating that the hole was used. I thought that the side plate lookd a little like that on an 1803 Harpers Ferry. The Frizzen spring has no roller as on other possibly later Elwell locks. Unfortunately, thursday night when I bought the rifle back, I saw that the man to whom I sold the rifle eight years ago had filled the blank hole up in the buttplate with brass and some sort of silver flux. He must have thought he was improving it! One more reason that I'm glad to have gotten the rifle back. Every bit of the rifle is original as I received it except for the replaced forend cap which was missing, several inches of wood at the end of the forend which was missing, a few slivers along the forarm, the front ramrod thimble, ramrod and the silver front site which replaced the original silver sight that had been torn off leaving just a little at the base. Oh, I repaired the damaged breechplug too. The rifle in it's esential form has something to tell. Was it one of the very first that Leman assembled? Heck, I don't know. I'm no expert. I just know what I heard about it from the husband and wife from whom I received it. It's pretty neat to have though. If only it could talk. How many times have we heard that? I believe that it has a story to tell though of what was going on in some rifle shop around 170 years ago. Fred Gaarde

 

I didn't say it WAS an English box. At the risk of speaking for Sean, I don't think Sean was saying IT IS an English box. I think we were saying it looks like or reminds one of an English box. Sean and I both know what an English box looks like. The similarity here is the rounded finial.
Whether the rifle is a contract rifle or not is anybodies guess. My opinion is it looks an awful lot like a contract rifle to me. I may be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time. Certainly won't be the last. I am still a student of firearms.

 

White Dog, thanks for showing us your rifle. It is a neat thing. I too wish it could talk. :thumbsup:

 

[Okwaho]

Tom, I wonder if the early patchbox and other funiture could have been aquired by Leman while he was an aprentis and that they were used by him in making this rifle which might have been one of his very first.Any ideas? The buttplate was surely off of another rifle as even though it was fitted to this stock, it has another screw hole in it's butt that is just above the bottom screw, but there's no hole in the stock indicating that the hole was used. I thought that the side plate lookd a little like that on an 1803 Harpers Ferry. The Frizzen spring has no roller as on other possibly later Elwell locks. Unfortunately, thursday night when I bought the rifle back, I saw that the man to whom I sold the rifle eight years ago had filled the blank hole up in the buttplate with brass and some sort of silver flux. He must have thought he was improving it! One more reason that I'm glad to have gotten the rifle back. Every bit of the rifle is original as I received it except for the replaced forend cap which was missing, several inches of wood at the end of the forend which was missing, a few slivers along the forarm, the front ramrod thimble, ramrod and the silver front site which replaced the original silver sight that had been torn off leaving just a little at the base. Oh, I repaired the damaged breechplug too. The rifle in it's esential form has something to tell. Was it one of the very first that Leman assembled? Heck, I don't know. I'm no expert. I just know what I heard about it from the husband and wife from whom I received it. It's pretty neat to have though. If only it could talk. How many times have we heard that? I believe that it has a story to tell though of what was going on in some rifle shop around 170 years ago. Fred Gaarde

Fred, here is my post{below} from the Longrifle Forum for the benefit of those who aren't on it.I really think you have a great old rifle here, I just don't think it's a Leman rifle. As Don Stith commented on the other board, Leman sold both locks and barrels and as a result both {especially the barrels which were well made} turn up on other guns.I just sold a nice old {probably Virginia}smooth rifle with a 47" full octagon swamped barrel in .55 cal.It had a W. Ketland small fowler lock,an 18th century English guard and three step butt piece,all of which probably came off a mid 18th century Ketland fowler. These parts were original to the gun when it was made about Ca.1790-1810.Thatgun was also a composite gun and I think we tend to overlook them in our quest for structural perfection.Your rifle like mine was built to serve a need and lets face it the early gunsmiths made use of ANY and ALL parts available to them.They weren't concerned with "PC"{God,I hate that term}but rather producing a well built functional firearm.So again ENJOY.
Tom Patton

Posted - 06/24/2007 : 00:22:40
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whitedog, I too saw the gun illustrated by Kaufman as Plate No.230 P.285.It's not identical to your gun in that it was originally constructed for side plates which were not installed but both boxes are Kentucky style boxes not English,If anything your gun has the earlier of the two boxes. Look at P.284,Plate 229 and you'll see the box as it would have been on Plate 231 if installed as originally made. I read what you did on the gun and it sounds as if you achieved a miracle in resurrecting the gun.I don't mean to be critical in suggestion pre restoration pics,it's just that it forestalls any suggestion of faking and believe me I have seen some doozies. Somewhere I have a picture of a horn before restoration and I kept it for when I ever sell the horn and will make full disclosure.
I tried to be as frank and honest as possible in critiquing your gun. While I do think it's a composite gun, I didn't mean that as an insult. I have always been partial to the Revolutionary War composite muskets of which there were a bunch and I still have a cherry stocked Connecticut composite musket with a French{?}barrel,and a Dutch/German/American lock and brass mounts from English and French guns. It has,as does your gun, a great deal of character and charisma. Enjoy your gun,you did a great job of restoration and to quote Wes White and Earl Lanning you can close your eyes and smell the early campfires.
Enjoy
Tom Patton

 

[whitedog333]

Thanks Tom, The rifle sure does look a lot better than it did when Trapper handed it to me. I saw the picture in The Pennsylvnia Kentucky Rifle this morning after I found the book. I'd never noticed the extended hinge plate before in the photo. Since I'd only gotten the rifle back three days ago, I hadn't even thought about it. I wonder why Leman would've used the patchbox like that instead of reducing the width of the hinge and plate? I agree with you that someone might also have aquired a barrrel from Leman to use on this Longrifle. Leman was forging, grinding and boring his own barrels.Makes sense to me.I do think however, that Leman must have made some flintlock, Lancaster pattern longrifles in his early career. They were advertised somewhere in a newspaper add I once saw in one of the old newspapers that I was shown or saw. I've got several old papers from 1804 and the like, and maybe it's in one of them. Anyway Tom, thankyou for your expert assistance in figuring out this rifle. I'm just an archaeologist and though one of my hobbies has been the restoration and repair of antique firearms, I know practicaly zilch (is that a real word?)about Pennsylvania longrifles. It's pretty neat though to have one with such a long barrel without it being a fowler. What else is out there hiding in the old barnes and villages of Mexico? :hmm: Fred

 

[Okwaho]

Fred, actually I know of one and possibly two high quality rifles by Lehman/Leman made early in his career.One was published by George Shumway in Longrifles of Note in the July issue of Muzzle Blasts.It is grand rifle with a beautifully designed and engraved large box with 11 piercings. The full length engraved toeplate has 3 piercings and the two side escutcheons are are also engraved as are those surrounding the barrel keys.There is also an engraved eagle inlaid above the cheekpiece.The muzzle cap is engraved in a chevron pattern which is very close to the one on the Melchoir Fordney rifle{Kindig No.42}.The barrel is engraved H.Lehman which indicates that the rifle was built early in his career before he dropped the "H"from his name.There is also some nice incised carving under and behind the cheek piece.This gun is undoubtedly one of the finest late flintlock Lancaster guns I have ever seen. In looking at this gun and particularly the engraving one has to wonder about any connection beteeen Leman and Fordney or possibly one of the Kuntz brothers,Peter and Jacob in Philadelphia.Remember that Leman worked with Tryon in Philadelphia from 1831 through 1834. This gun and others are illustrated in "Longrifle Articles" Published in Muzzle Blasts 1965-2001 Vol.I {of two}PP.162-165.

The second gun turned up here about 20 years ago. It was a typical late flint Lancaster key hole box gun that I was asked to evaluate and identify. It was signed,as I recall,H.Leman but the lock was missing.I thought at the time that it was probably a reasonably early Leman rifle but I had nothing with which to compare the gun without the lock.As I recall I thought the gun had been converted based on barrel corrosion and the wood cut away behind the[url] lock.In[/url] looking back and without the pics that I once had I still don't know if the gun was a Leman.I don't know how much this little bit of trivia helps but you did ask.
Enjoy.
Tom Patton