Lewis & Clark "Short" 1792

[Dphar]

The only convincing, and interesting record that apparently exists, is the one that indicates that 4,000 rifles of the 1803 model were ordered, but the Arsenal made 4015, the extra number being just exactly the same number of guns ordered for the Expedition in secret. The fact that the expedition was done in secret- both the planning, and the leaving, further suggests why no written records were made.

Paul,

Unless you can provide a period citation for the 4015 number, I think its time we turned off the manure spreader on this topic. There's already more on the field right now than can be broken down prior to spring planting. The speculation meter is up to chest wader depth already.

Sean

Sean

Keller-Cowan claim or at least infer that the 4015 number is in the official records.
Then we have a plaque describing an 1803 in the Cody Museum that states they made 4013 of the type 1 ??? I just found this in looking for photos concerning something else. But Museums are not always correct.
While I have been a devils advocate in stating a case for a rifle other than the Contract rifles. We have to remember that the case for the "1800" or prototype is unprovable as well and is built on a poor foundation. I am SURE the man who owned Keller-Cowan's "1800" was THRILLED they thought it was a L&C rifle. Dollar signs certainly danced before his eyes.

Nor are the articles concerning the rifles under discussion 100% correct or 100% believable I think all the writers over look alternative possibilities in making a case for their ideas. Finding a 1803 type trigger guard and similar buttstock configuration on a Contract rifle might simply mean it had been restocked post 1803.
In the end, while speculating and discussion can increase knowledge and can lead to interesting discussions and the unearthing of more information, in all probability the shortened 1792 with HF locks are what was carried. Probably... Its *probably* the best of the the *assumptions*.
I really think that Dearborn had a short rifle to comment on when he sent the letter with the changes he wanted made.
It could easily have been returned with the letter. Lewis could have easily have seen it and liked the short barrel. It is possible to create almost and scenario since there is no documentation.
It is easy to assume things, and documentation is sparse to non-existant. Even worse the there are only 4 known journals and IIRC 7 people kept journals of the expedition. Shame they were not all preserved.
As Sean has stated we have pretty well thrashed this. And it has been interesting but in the end it has proved nothing. Since there is no proof to be found.
Just stating "Lewis & Clark carried short rifles" is enough to start a "discussion" though I never considered this to be a point of contention. They said they had short rifles, so they had short rifles. But this simple statement, pretty well documented in 3 journals, will run up some peoples blood pressure.
What short rifles they had will cause an even greater broo-ha-ha as has been demonstrated here.
But learning other peoples ideas on such things can be a learning experience in itself.

But I have wasted far too much time on this already. Being chest deep in cold water is not fun and one does NOT want his waders overflowed. :grin:

Dan

 

[rabjr]

Well said Dan.

I'm a stickler for the trueth and would like to know what they carried for sure but unfortunately we will never know. When I embarked on my L&C Tribute I built both guns in question and used both to cover all the bases. I really don't care which was used but do prefer to look at what evidence we do have about this subject and make a best guess, than assume what was/must have been written down and lost in the fire at Harpers.

 

[redwing]

This was one of those incidents that was not listed in the original reports. They did report the incident where the NDNs were awed by the air rifle. I think it was an air rifle if the account of shooting the goose was true.
But my point remains the same then as now. When feeding in reports a lot of bending of the truth takes place. I have often read and read again the incident of the Hip Wound. It sounds like what we called a "Fragging" in years gone by. I am sure not everyone loved their officers even then. :hmm: