NWTG in the Colonies?

[Smokey Plainsman]

Currently deciding if I want a militia style cartridge box for my NWTG, but it’s a later style with flat faced lock etc…

I’d love to experiment with paper cartridges but won’t bother if it’s not historically accurate.

From what I’ve gathered there is 0 evidence of military-style paper cartridge use in trade guns. Especially later styled ones.

 

[Clark Badgett]

Currently deciding if I want a militia style cartridge box for my NWTG, but it’s a later style with flat faced lock etc…

I’d love to experiment with paper cartridges but won’t bother if it’s not historically accurate.

From what I’ve gathered there is 0 evidence of military-style paper cartridge use in trade guns. Especially later styled ones.

Yours has a more French/Germanic style. Not an English style.

 

[rich pierce]

Some early English locks were flat faced. The Eariy Ketland by Chambers is an example. Most later English locks were flat faced. Yes, most trade guns of the 1740-1800 period had rounded lock plates and cocks.

 

[FlinterNick]

Some early English locks were flat faced. The Eariy Ketland by Chambers is an example. Most later English locks were flat faced. Yes, most trade guns of the 1740-1800 period had rounded lock plates and cocks.

Round faced locks are much easier to cast, why there are so many more. Flat faced locks can offer some geometric advantages with screw placements, and counterbores and blind screws. I’ve I’ve seen NW guns with Kateland flat faced locks, much more rarer form of the gun.

 

[Christopher401]

it’s possible that some of them were used or adapted during the American Revolutionary War (AWI). Various technologies and tools were indeed used in the colonies at that time.
If your NWTG is something known from the 18th century, it might have been used in the colonies.

Best regands Christopher

 

[Smokey Plainsman]

Round faced locks are much easier to cast, why there are so many more. Flat faced locks can offer some geometric advantages with screw placements, and counterbores and blind screws. I’ve I’ve seen NW guns with Kateland flat faced locks, much more rarer form of the gun.

I see. I posted a photo of mine here once and someone mentioned a flat faced lock would be incorrect for my style of gun? Here it is:

 

[Rob M.]

Yes

There actually is a way of knowing, it’s called physical evidence and there is none and there is very little written evidence to suggest northwest trade guns were used by militia, most of the evidence is in exhibit form, to identify what a northwest trade gun is, not the actual pattern itself.

Your generalization of what militia used is flawed, they certainly didn’t carry what ever they had, many did not hav guns and were provided contract arms, having a bayonet was also a requirement, not an option.

There is no speculation if they were used or not, there is no physical evidence.

I suggest you give Clay Smith a call, and ask him about Revolutionary War trade guns, and ask him specifically if Northwest Trade Guns were around in the colonies and used by militia another known expert on trade guns of that era is Mike Brooks aka comfortablynumb, careful his answers are very clear and concise.

LOL !! Yes , you are correct !! I forgot ! N.W. were illegal to own in the colonies !!

 

[FlinterNick]

Yes

LOL !! Yes , you are correct !! I forgot ! N.W. were illegal to own in the colonies !!

Kind of hard for something to be illegal when it doesn’t exist.

 

[Rob M.]

Kind of hard for something to be illegal when it doesn’t exist.

Exactly !!! Thats right ! They didnt exist either ! You are so smart !! Thank you !

 

[mikesto44]

We can all debate this to death. But the fact is their has been parts recovered all over the place.

 

[Rob M.]

We can all debate this to death. But the fact is their has been parts recovered all over the place.

Yep .....

 

[Rob M.]

Kind of hard for something to be illegal when it doesn’t exist.

Huh .... Thats weird . For a gun that didnt exist they sure made and imported a bunch of light sabers , er uhm .... N.W. trade guns I mean . Just one organization too .... This is probably fake info though .....

 

[rich pierce]

Please show who ordered them and show the text indicating these were NWTGs. This looks just like many trade gun and light fowler orders of non-NWTG trade guns. I see nothing on this page describing the guns except length.

 

[FlinterNick]

Please show who ordered them and show the text indicating these were NWTGs. This looks just like many trade gun and light fowler orders of non-NWTG trade guns. I see nothing on this page describing the guns except length.

From a very good source on arms in the colonies, Clay Smith his answer was no northwest guns of that era were not trade with the colonies because of the style, the parts were simply not available because of trade restrictions, the locks, the barrel lengths, stock styles and hardware all are after the 1800’s and those styles were traded mostly in the northwest of course.

Clay referenced the trade guns of the era as cheaper style flowers or short trade guns, he also called the eastern trade guns, as they were cheaply provided to eastern farmers.

On another note, the earliest patterns of northwest trade guns would not have been traded with the 13 colonies because of certain trade regulations such as the 1763 proclamation as only the British government could trade with native Americans and Quebec colonists beyond that border.

Shipment of arms by the HBC and other small trading companies was restricted to the 13 colonies, guns shipped to North America in 1778 or 1779 certainly were not traded with the continental army.

 

[BuffaloSoldier]

I would imagine that when the militia were called out, the Quartermaster must have had a fit. How many different calibers would be carried by a company?

 

[Rob M.]

Oh !!! How silly ! Trade regulations dont pertain to guns that dont exist ! Never said the N.W . gun was sold to the Continental Army, seriously doubt that ever happened . ... A few probably slipped in to folks that lived on the fringes of the colonies . James Smith and Johnathon Alder both traded for their trade guns but they lived in the frontier where light sabers , I mean , non existing guns were in abundance . I seriously doubt they were ever wide spread , popular or even seen near the coast ...

 

[Clark Badgett]

From a very good source on arms in the colonies, Clay Smith his answer was no northwest guns of that era were not trade with the colonies because of the style, the parts were simply not available because of trade restrictions, the locks, the barrel lengths, stock styles and hardware all are after the 1800’s and those styles were traded mostly in the northwest of course.

Clay referenced the trade guns of the era as cheaper style flowers or short trade guns, he also called the eastern trade guns, as they were cheaply provided to eastern farmers.

On another note, the earliest patterns of northwest trade guns would not have been traded with the 13 colonies because of certain trade regulations such as the 1763 proclamation as only the British government could trade with native Americans and Quebec colonists beyond that border.

Shipment of arms by the HBC and other small trading companies was restricted to the 13 colonies, guns shipped to North America in 1778 or 1779 certainly were not traded with the continental army.

Clay Smith also says that Virginia snake patch box rifles were .50 caliber. When all but 1 known example is .45 caliber. Cromwell also confirms .45 in his book, as does Moller. DeWitt Bailey is the source of the information of the Northwest guns being shipped to the Iroquois in 1753.

 

[FlinterNick]

Oh !!! How silly ! Trade regulations dont pertain to guns that dont exist ! Never said the N.W . gun was sold to the Continental Army, seriously doubt that ever happened . ... A few probably slipped in to folks that lived on the fringes of the colonies . James Smith and Johnathon Alder both traded for their trade guns but they lived in the frontier where light sabers , I mean , non existing guns were in abundance . I seriously doubt they were ever wide spread , popular or even seen near the coast ...

I’m not talking about the continental army, I’m referring to colonists trading with native Americans and Canadians beyond the proclomation lines, it was considered a crime. It was just not likely that you’d find many of of those early trade guns in the hands of militias, especially early war period.

But again, these very early northwest company guns were not the same northwest trade guns that kit builders and northwest trade gun enthusiasts and rendezvouses reinactors use. The kits by pecatonica, track of the wolf are of a much later period.

 

[Rob M.]

I’m not talking about the continental army, I’m referring to colonists trading with native Americans and Canadians beyond the proclomation lines, it was considered a crime. It was just not likely that you’d find many of of those early trade guns in the hands of militias, especially early war period.

But again, these very early northwest company guns were not the same northwest trade guns that kit builders and northwest trade gun enthusiasts and rendezvouses reinactors use. The kits by pecatonica, track of the wolf are of a much later period.

Oh no , I never thought that N.W. guns would be a common thing in the colonies ... Yes , your quite right ....the kits today are the late verity ...

 

[Wncman]

I'm curious about this too. I ordered one of the Kibler fowlers and was wondering if that style of gun would have been carried by the colonials during the war

According to Jim his Fowler is of the 60 to 70’s common design period.