Remington Army and Navy Revolvers 1861-1888

REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS 1861 –1888

REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY

REVOLVERS 1861–1888

Donald L. Ware

University of New Mexico Press ALBUQUERQUE

© 2007 by the University of New Mexico Press All rights reserved. Published 2007 Printed in the United States of America

13 12 11 10 09 08 07

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Ware, Donald L., 1927– Remington army and navy revolvers, 1861–1888 / Donald L. Ware. p. cm. ISBN 978-0-8263-4280-5 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Remington pistols—History—19th century. 2. E. Remington & Sons—History— 19th century. 3. United States—Armed Forces—Firearms—History—19th century. 4. United States—History—Civil War, 1861–1865—Equipment and supplies. I. Title. UD413.W37 2007 623.4'436097309034—dc22 2007002884

Book design and composition by Damien Shay Body type is Minion 10.5/14 Display is Toussant and Impact

TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE

vii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

ix

PROLOGUE

xi

INTRODUCTION Remington Historical Background CHAPTER ONE Remington Navy Revolvers Purchased by the Army Ordnance Department

xxvii

1

CHAPTER TWO Remington’s First Revolver Contracts

31

CHAPTER THREE Remington’s Second Army Revolver Contract

73

CHAPTER FOUR Remington’s Third Army Revolver Contract

91

CHAPTER FIVE Remington’s Fourth Army Revolver Contract

123

CHAPTER SIX Remington Navy Revolvers Purchased by the Bureau of Ordnance, U.S. Navy

133

CHAPTER SEVEN Remington’s Civil War Rifle and Carbine Contracts

191

CHAPTER EIGHT Metallic Cartridge Alterations

225

CHAPTER NINE Metallic Cartridge Alterations for the Bureau of Ordnance

273

CHAPTER TEN Identifying Remington Army and Navy Revolvers

329

EPILOGUE

363

APPENDIX A The Owen-Holt Commission

367

APPENDIX B Remington–Ordnance Department’s Civil War Contracts

381

APPENDIX C Serial Number–Production Date Tables

399

NOTES

403

INDEX

419

PREFACE he original concept for this volume came about some twenty-odd years ago. Jerry Landskron had just published his Remington Rolling Block Pistols. Jerry and I had devoted many evenings in the den of my home, disassembling and studying the construction of dozens of Rolling Block Pistols. Jack Daniels usually participated in these meetings but did not interfere with the proceedings. Jerry’s diligent research at the National Archives, combined with our hands-on studies of the pistols, provided him with the nucleus for his volume on the Rolling Block Pistols. When his book came off the press, I was duly impressed. This was the kind of research a collector could rely on when looking for answers to questions about arms in his collection. Faron “Slim” Kohler, another of my gun show buddies, raised the possibility of doing research in the National Archives for information on Remington’s Army and Navy Revolvers. We concluded that if there were enough information available, we too might undertake a writing project. Due to the constraints of my employment, I sat on the sidelines while Slim and his wife, Lois, made their first foray into the massive records of the archives. Being novices at this type of research, they were overwhelmed by the sheer volume of material offered but managed to retrieve enough to convince us that such a project was possible. The following year, Slim and I both made the pilgrimage. We decided before embarking that no information concerning any type of firearm would be ignored. We copied and tabbed (the method of identifying a source, which is then microfilmed) several hundred letters and reports to and from the Ordnance Department and Bureau of Ordnance. We devoted two weeks to this trip, working every available hour the archives were open to the public. Then came the waiting. It seemed as if the microfilm would never arrive. When it did, there came another rash of processing the microfilm, making duplicate copies, and sorting all this information into files. We were elated as the story of the development and procurement of the Remington revolvers began to take form. There were still pieces of the puzzle missing however. These mandated further visits to the archives, and after each trip, more of the pieces fell into place. We originally opted to relate the story in two volumes. The first would deal with the Remington Navy Revolvers, as they had been the first produced. This was proceeding quite well when subsequent thinking prevailed. Both Slim and I were well into our golden years, and the possibility that the second volume would never be completed arose. Changing course, we decided that we could study both the army and navy revolvers in one volume. In retrospect, this seems to have been a good decision as the stories are entwined. A decision was made early on that Slim would provide the photography and I would write the text. I do not remember the reason for this, but considering that I had had a limited education (through the ninth grade), I was biting off a mighty big chew.

T

vii

PREFACE

Fate took a hand in the development of this project when Slim became so ill he could no longer participate. This put another burden on me, as I then had to search for the many photographs needed to illustrate the book. These came from many sources; a great many I took myself. To all my many friends who have questioned me so many times about the publication date of this volume, here it is, and I hope it meets your expectations. One final remark: I have heard it said that no book is better than its editor. A profound truth! Mr. Drury Williford has provided the substance to hold this story together. An accomplished arms researcher and author in his own right, he has spent many hours editing and reediting these pages. Were it not for his constant encouragement, this project would have been abandoned long ago. I also owe a profound thanks to my daughter, Susan L. Wrye-Jaramillo, who did the final edit and rectified the many errors that occurred in converting to the Microsoft Word processing program. Even my grandson got into the act. He converted all of my tables, which had originally been processed in WordPerfect, to the MSWord format. Thank you, Matthew Wrye.

DON WARE Russellville, Arkansas August 10, 2006

viii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS very author realizes that the final product of his labors would not have come to fruition without the generous help and assistance of others. Any literary work, whether fact or fiction, is the accumulation of the efforts of many people. The following all have my gratitude. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, during whose presidential tenure the National Archives and Records Administration were initiated and early records cataloged and filed by the Works Project Administration. Faron “Slim” Kohler, who devoted many hours of time researching National Archives records with the author. His assistance was sorely missed during the final preparation of this volume. Slim’s death on March 26, 2006, was sad news to the gun collecting fraternity and particularly to his many friends in the Remington Society of America (RSA). He was an avid Remington collector, and his vast collection of Remington handguns is at present on exhibit at the Cody Firearms Museum. Jerry Landskron, who provided the initial impetus for conducting the research for this volume. Jerry’s book on Rolling Block Pistols is still the most informative book available on the subject. Jay Huber, for providing copies of documents and pictures from his collection and for sharing results of his research on the Beals Army and Navy Models. Roy Marcot, for sharing pictures from his vast collection of Remington memorabilia. Roy is also an accomplished author and researcher. He currently has two books on Remington history and products in print and is currently working on two more. He is perhaps better known to members of the RSA as editor of the Remington Society of America Journal. Edward Hull, for providing research materials and valuable insights to the U.S. Army’s Ordnance Department. Ed is also an avid researcher and has published many articles on antique rifles and carbines in various periodicals. Charles Pate also provided some missing research documents and photos. He too is a great researcher and is the author of two firearms books and has a third one on the way. Charlie is doing great work in continuing the Springfield Research Service started by Frank Mallory several years ago. Drury Williford, for donating precious time away from his own many literary endeavors to carefully edit my manuscript. Drury’s field of interest is combustible cartridges. He has authored several works on that subject for gun-related periodicals. Fred Ream, for always being there when I need to explore some aspect of Remington history or discuss a Remington revolver. A very good gun show buddy. All the great people at the University of New Mexico Press who were instrumental in the final preparation and printing of this volume. There are others too numerous to mention who have made minor contributions to this work. I heartily thank them, each and every one.

E

ix

PROLOGUE he majority of the research material referenced in this book was located in the records of the National Archives of the United States, Washington, D.C. This was not simply a matter of choice but was dictated by necessity. Inquiries to the Remington Arms Company and public libraries in Ilion and Utica, New York, yielded little information on arms produced by E. Remington & Sons during the Civil War era. I have studied other works on the Remington firm and arms and I now realize that some of these are little more than fiction. The production figures and dates quoted therein are not reliable. Many of the daily business records of both the Army Ordnance Department and the Navy Bureau of Ordnance have been preserved in the archives, and these records must be searched to gain an accurate picture of the relations between the military and E. Remington & Sons. I have spent considerable time perusing these records. For the past two decades, I have studied, analyzed, and cross-referenced the results of my labors. I now feel competent to tell the story of Remington’s Army and Navy Revolvers with a respectable degree of accuracy.

T

ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT, U.S. ARMY The records of the Ordnance Department are found in the “Textual Records of the Office of the Chief of Ordnance.” I feel it appropriate to present a brief history of this department, and to do so, I have taken the liberty of using the introduction from the National Archives’ inventory of these same records: The Ordnance Department was established as an independent bureau of the Department of War by an act of Congress approved May 14, 1812. Before that time ordnance had been procured for the most part by the Board of War and a secret committee during the Revolution and, after 1794, by an officer appointed by the President under the Department of War and in charge of military stores. The Ordnance Department lost its independent status under an act of March 2, 1821, when it was “merged in the artillery,” but regained it under an act of April 15, 1832. Thereafter it retained its independent footing in the War Department or Department of the Army until 1962. With the reorganization of the Department of the Army in that year, the Ordnance Department was disestablished on August 1, 1962, and its functions were transferred to the United States Materiel Command. In spite of several reorganizations of the Ordnance Department during its history, its functions remained the procurement of ordnance and equipment and the distribution of them to the Army, the maintenance and repair of equipment, and the development and testing of new types of ordnance materiel. xi

PROLOGUE

The first head of the Ordnance Department was a colonel to whom the title “Commissary-General of Ordnance” was given. In 1815 this title was dropped, and for many years the commanding officer was designated “Colonel of Ordnance” (or, for the 1821–1832 interval, “Colonel on Ordnance Service” or “Colonel on Ordnance Duty”). An act of August 3, 1861, was the first to provide that “there shall be added to the Ordnance Department of the United States Army as now organized, one Chief of Ordnance.”

Chiefs of Ordnance Through 1900 Col. Decius Wadsworth Col. George Bomford Col. George Talcott Col. Henry K. Craig Brig. Gen. James W. Ripley Brig. Gen. George D. Ramsey Brig. Gen. Alexander B. Dyer Brig. Gen. Stephen V. Benet Brig. Gen. Daniel Flagler Brig. Gen. Adelbert R. Buffington

July 2, 1812–June 1, 1821 May 30, 1832–March 24, 1848 March 25, 1848–July 10, 1851 July 10, 1851–April 23, 1861 April 23, 1861–September 15, 1863 September 15, 1863–September 12, 1864 September 12, 1864–May 20, 1874 June 23, 1874–January 22, 1891 January 23, 1891–March 20, 1899 April 5, 1899–November 22, 1900

For the purpose of this study, we shall become intimate with only three of these personages, Ripley, Ramsey, and Dyer. I have relied on Ezra J. Warner’s monumental work, Generals in Blue, for a brief biography of these three.1 James Wolfe Ripley was born in Connecticut, December 10, 1794. In 1814 he enrolled at West Point, where his studies were cut short by his early commission into the army to satisfy the need for officers during the War of 1812. Serving the next eighteen years as an artillery officer, he transferred to the Ordnance Department in 1832, and the following year he took command of the Kennebec Arsenal, where he remained until 1842. He was then appointed superintendent of the Springfield Armory, which he commanded until 1854. After departing this duty, he was assigned to various duties as inspector of arsenals; he was on this duty abroad when Southern states began seceding from the Union. He was ordered to return and, shortly after his arrival, was appointed colonel on ordnance duty, relieving Col. Henry K. Craig. When the act of August 3, 1861, became law Ripley was promoted to brigadier general and assumed the newly created post “Chief of Ordnance” (figure 1). He held this post for almost two and a half years, after which he was replaced by George D. Ramsey. At this time, there was no retirement system in the army. President Lincoln created a special post for Ripley, “Inspector of Armament and Forts on the New England Coast.” In 1865 he was brevetted major general and continued to serve as inspector until a year before his death in 1870. Warner notes that Ripley’s ethics were unquestionable. I should point out that although Ripley escaped unscathed in the Owen-Holt Commission’s investigations into arms purchases in xii

PROLOGUE

Figure 1 Chief of ordnance, Gen. James Wolfe Ripley. (Courtesy: National Archives)

1862, the postwar congressional investigations of 1867 found that the chief of ordnance had destroyed Ordnance Department documents. Ripley alleged that they were his personal papers. George Douglas Ramsey was born in Virginia, February 21, 1802. He graduated from West Point in 1820 and served as an artillery officer until 1835, when he transferred to the Ordnance Department. As a captain, he served as commander of several arsenals until the start of the Civil War, when he was promoted to major. On August 3, 1861, the same day Ripley was promoted to brigadier general, Ramsey was promoted to lieutenant colonel. He commanded the Washington Arsenal from 1861 to 1863 and was promoted to full colonel on June 1, 1863. A logical successor to Ripley, he was promoted to brigadier general and made chief of ordnance on September 15, 1863 (figure 2). Ramsey’s tenure in that position was very short; he retired from active duty on September 12, 1864. On Dyer’s recommendation, Lincoln created a special post and Ramsey was assigned as “Inspector of Forts and Seacoast Defenses on the Atlantic and Lake Coasts.” He was brevetted major general in 1865 and continued his inspection duties until 1870. Ramsey lived to the age of eighty and died on May 23, 1882. Alexander Brydie Dyer was born in Virginia on January 10, 1815. He graduated from West Point in 1837 and served as an artillery officer for only a year before transferring to the Ordnance Department. He later served as chief of ordnance for the American forces during the Mexican War. After this duty, he commanded several arsenals and in August 1861 became superintendent of the Springfield Armory. xiii

PROLOGUE

Figure 2 Chief of ordnance, Gen. George Douglas Ramsey. (Courtesy: National Archives)

Upon Ramsey’s retirement, Dyer was promoted to brigadier general and became chief of ordnance (figure 3). Shortly after the war, Dyer was brevetted major general and continued to command the department until his death on May 20, 1874. A contradiction between Warner’s research and my own has been noted. Warner credits Dyer as chief of ordnance for American forces during the Mexican War. In a letter to the secretary of war, dated August 8, 1864, Ramsey took credit for serving in this same post at the same time, thereby presenting a conflict that I have not resolved. Warner noted that the Civil War was a young man’s war. The average age of the 132 major generals in 1861 was thirty-nine, while that of the 450 brigadiers was thirty-seven. Senior officers of the Ordnance Department were an exception; many were gray-bearded veterans of the regular army, with years of service commanding armories, arsenals, and performing inspection duties on arms and other ordnance equipment. There were no generals and very few colonels serving in the Ordnance Department prior to the Civil War. This did not change until the act of August 3, 1861, that stated: “There shall be added to the Ordnance Department of the United States as now organized, one Chief of Ordnance.” When Ripley assumed this post, he was commissioned brigadier general to rank from the day the act was passed and was the first general to serve in the Ordnance Department. In the decade before the Civil War, two companies dominated the revolver manufacturing industry; these were the Smith & Wesson and Colt Patent Fire Arms Manufacturing companies. The former firm, having the rights to Rollin White’s patent, was primarily involved in the manufacture of small caliber metallic cartridge revolvers; therefore, the reader will find little xiv

PROLOGUE

Figure 3 Chief of ordnance, Gen. Alexander Brydie Dyer. (Courtesy: National Archives)

mention of their arms in this volume. I should note, however, that their control and use of White’s patent for the bored-through cylinder was detrimental to the government during the war (see chapter 8). Some large caliber metallic cartridge revolvers were developed prior to and during the early part of the war; these were futile efforts, as most were patent infringements. When White sought to extend his patent in the late 1860s, the military vigorously opposed his efforts, and the patent subsequently expired. Samuel Colt was issued his first revolver patents in 1836; his ensuing efforts to produce revolvers have been documented many times. By the late 1840s, he had established his own armory in Hartford, Connecticut, and was soon manufacturing a variety of these arms. The War Department had made minor purchases of Colt’s revolvers in the early 1840s, but the first serious consideration of Colt’s arms as a military weapon occurred when the War Department approved the purchase of one thousand revolvers for the use of the “Regiment of Mounted Riflemen” during the Mexican War. These were the Whitneyville-Walker models, large six-shot .44 caliber revolvers with a nine-inch barrel, weighing four pounds, nine ounces (figure 4). Their very size and weight precluded their use as a sidearm. They were issued in pairs and carried abreast in holsters mounted across the saddle or horse’s neck. First issued in 1847, they received favorable attention, which led to requisitions from officers of other mounted units. Colt received further orders, but by this time he had redesigned his revolvers and was turning out a xv

PROLOGUE

Figure 4 Colt Whitneyville-Walker Army Revolver. (Courtesy: Greg Martin Auctions)

Figure 5 Colt Dragoon Army Revolver. (Author’s photograph)

Figure 6 Colt Model 1851 Navy Revolver. (Author’s photograph) xvi

PROLOGUE

Figure 7 Colt Model 1860 Army Revolver. (Author’s photograph)

smaller version, designated the Dragoon model (figure 5). The new model was still in .44 caliber, but the size and weight were trimmed. The revolver now weighed four pounds, two ounces, still a massive weapon. The department took delivery of seven thousand of these from 1848 to 1853. In 1855 Congress authorized the army to organize two new cavalry units. Their commanding officers insisted that their troops be armed with Colt Model 1851 Navy Revolvers (figure 6). The navy model was .36 caliber and weighed only two pounds, ten ounces, making it a practical weapon to be carried in a belt holster. Accordingly, the revolver was easily accessible to the trooper, whether mounted or on foot. In army parlance, the navy model became known as a “belt pistol” in order to differentiate it from the larger Dragoon or “holster pistol.” This terminology remained in use well after the army adopted the use of smaller .44 caliber revolvers that were also capable of use as belt revolvers. For the next five years, the .36 caliber “belt pistols” became the standard revolver of the army. From 1855 to 1859, the department ordered approximately seventeen thousand Colt Model 1851 Navies. In 1860 Colt introduced a smaller model of army revolver. The size was once again trimmed, making it ideal for use as a holster pistol. Shortly into the Civil War, the Ordnance Department gave Colt their first order for the 1860 army models, later they received contracts for the same revolvers and eventually delivered over one hundred thousand before losing their contracts. There was no serious competition for the army’s revolver needs during this period; consequently, Colt was able to price his goods at whatever the market would bear. The price paid for the first five thousand Walker and Dragoon models was $25.00. In 1851, after receiving no orders for a nine-month period, Colt solicited an order from the department, offering to furnish revolvers at $24.00, which was the prevailing price until the expiration of his basic patents. When Colt learned that the department had ordered a small lot of the North-Savage revolvers for $20.00 each in 1857, he lowered the price to $18.00 per revolver for the Model 1851 Navies. The 1860 Armies purchased early in the war were again priced at $25.00 (figure 7), but after the Owen-Holt Commission decisions in 1862, Colt accepted $14.50, and the second contract again lowered the price to $14.00. xvii

PROLOGUE

Figure 8 Johnson Model 1842 Percussion Army Pistol. (Courtesy: Greg Martin Auctions)

Figure 9 Savage Navy Model Revolver. (Author’s photograph)

Figure 10 Adams Patent Navy Revolver. (Author’s photograph) xviii

PROLOGUE

The introduction of revolvers into the army was not without some resistance from the “old guard,” that is, military officers still willing to rely on large caliber single-shot percussion pistols (figure 8). The department was still receiving these from private contractors and from 1846 to 1855 took delivery of approximately forty-three thousand. A large part of these were then issued to states for militia use. Officers, who disparaged the use of revolvers, had some minor justification for their complaints. They cited the numerous incidents of multiple discharges, occasions when more than one chamber would fire at the same time. This was a common occurrence before the advent of combustible cartridges in the late 1850s. Another benefit derived from the adoption of combustible cartridges was the discontinuance of powder flasks and bulk powder. Flasks were not requisite accoutrements in early Civil War revolver orders, and by 1863, bullet molds had also been recognized as superfluous and were no longer required. Prior to the outbreak of the war, the department made only minor purchases of revolvers other than Colts. However, the department was anxious to place other revolvers in the field, primarily for evaluation and comparison with the Colts. In 1857–58, the department ordered small lots of Savage and Adams revolvers (figures 9 and 10). None of these were in production when ordered; the time lapse between placing an order and taking delivery was, in some cases, as much as two years. With no urgency in receiving these arms, the department was very lenient in granting leeway in the delivery time. The difficulties facing a manufacturing firm attempting to mass produce revolvers were formidable; by comparison, producing a muzzle-loading rifle, musket, or carbine was quite simple. Manufacturing a revolver required more sophisticated machinery, and even with the use of this machinery, problems were plentiful and complex. Alignment of cylinder chambers to barrel, alignment of rammer to cylinder, and indexing the cylinders mandated skills not required when assembling a single-shot, muzzle-loading arm. The ultimate goal was machine-produced interchangeable parts, which required little or no hand fitting. Even though Remington began manufacturing revolvers in 1856, they had difficulties with these aspects of production well into the war. Colt had been producing revolvers for a sufficient length of time to have surmounted most of these, but other revolver manufacturers faced the same difficulties as Remington. In 1860 an army board recommended that service revolvers be .44 caliber and have an eightinch barrel. The unprecedented demand for revolvers at the start of hostilities made it impossible for the department to immediately comply with this prerequisite, but by 1863, .44 caliber was the requirement on all future Civil War contract revolvers. Fortunately for the government, Colt’s patents on revolvers expired in 1856. During Colt’s lifetime, E. K. Root had the opportunity to study the inventor’s attempts at manipulating the government, and early in the war, he continued to use these shady practices after Colt’s death. We can only imagine the consequences had Colt’s patents remained in effect during the war. While Colt seems to have been a mechanical genius and adroit at influencing highly placed people, he certainly was no patriot. The department’s early procurement practices were to create problems in supplying ammunition for revolvers. One of the first of these that I noted was in providing percussion caps for Colt’s revolvers. The nipples of the Colt 1851 Navy Revolvers were not the same size as those of xix

PROLOGUE

the large frame Army Dragoon. This subject did not arise until March 10, 1860, when Colonel of Ordnance H. K. Craig sent the following letter to Maj. P. V. Hagner, then commander of the Frankford Arsenal: Sir: In reply to your letter of 22nd ult., I have to say that I have requested the President of the Sharps Rifle Man: Co. to inform me whether there are any legal obstacles in the way of our fabricating the Sharps primers for the Carbines the Company is making for this Department. I have in the meanwhile directed Maj. Thornton to purchase 250 M for present issue. Until Mr. Palmer’s answer is received, it will not be advisable [to prepare?] in advance for them in your preparations for the manufacture of these primers. Major Mordecai has found some serious difficulties in making up ammunition for Revolver pistols, which I suppose has grown out of the fact that there are two sizes of cones as well as two sizes of Pistols. When the so called “Navy” or Belt Pistol was at the instance, as understood of Dragoon and Cavalry Officers was introduced, it was thought that no more Pistols of the larger size would be procured, therefore, no precaution was used to obviate the difficulty at first, though subsequently some proposition was made to introduce uniformity in the size and form of the tops of the cones, but was not it seems, carried into effect. The 2 cones alluded to in your letter of the 6th inst. appear to belong to the two sizes of pistols. The small size being the Belt, the large size being the Dragoon Pistol, which is the kind now most in demand. The two cones are herewith returned.2 Craig also contacted Maj. A. Mordecai, commander of Watervliet Arsenal, on the same day: Sir: Your letter of the 7th inst. is received. The pistol caps which have been made at Frankford Arsenal are of the size to fit the belt pistol, which has a smaller cone than the holster pistol. When the making of these caps at Frankford Arsenal was commenced, the belt pistol had been adopted for use in the army, at the instance of Officers of the mounted regiments, and it was supposed that the holster pistols would be superseded, and soon have none in service. Since then, the holster pistol has been restored, and none but that kind are to be procured, hereafter for issue. Majors Thornton and Hagner have arranged or will arrange a uniform cone for all revolver pistols hereafter to be made for the Government, and the caps will be made to suit it. In the meantime we must have as heretofore, two sizes of caps. Those for the belt pistols will be of the kind made at Frankford Arsenal; and those for the holster pistol of a larger size, of which Major Thornton has on hand nearly two million.3 Although the department recognized a problem in supplying the correct percussion caps, the matter was not seriously addressed until two years later, after it had purchased several different types of revolvers. Ripley, who had replaced Craig as chief of ordnance, sent the following to Maj. R. H. K. Whiteley, commander of the New York Arsenal, on July 12, 1862: xx

PROLOGUE

Sir: The defects mentioned in your letter of the 5th inst. regarding the several kinds of revolvers now in service and the difficulty of using the same percussion caps for all, have been referred to Maj. Thornton, Inspector of Contract Arms, with instructions to have them corrected hereafter.4 This was one of the more minor problems facing the department as the war continued. The multitude of different types of patented arms that the department eventually purchased created a logistical nightmare in supplying the correct ammunition. Shortly before the war, some members of Congress became alarmed at the procurement practices of the War Department and enacted a law that forbade the purchase of patented arms without authority of law; this law essentially prohibited the purchase of any repeating arm. It also forbade the purchase of arms without advertising for bids. This act was passed on June 23, 1860, but the department did not advise ordnance officers of its passage until September 14 when the following circular was sent from the Ordnance Office to the commanders of all arsenals: (Circular) The accompanying Extract from the Act of 23rd June, 1860, in relation to purchases and contracts, and prohibiting the purchase of arms and military supplies is communicated for your information and government. Respectfully &c. H. K. Craig, Col. of Ordnance

Extract From “an act making appropriations for the legislative, executive, and judicial expenses of Government for the year ending the thirtieth of June, Eighteen hundred and sixty one.” “Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, that all purchases and contracts for supplies and services in any of the departments of the Government, except for personal services, when the public exigencies do not require the immediate delivery of the article or articles, or performance of the services; shall be made by advertising, a sufficient time previously, for proposals respecting the same. When immediate delivery or performance is required by the exigency, the articles or services required may be procured by open purchase or contract at the places and in the manner in which such articles are usually bought and sold, or such services engaged between individuals. No contract or purchase shall hereafter be made unless the same be authorized by law, or under an appropriation adequate to its fulfillment, except in the War and Navy Departments, for clothing, subsistence, forage, fuel, quarters or transportation, which however, shall not exceed the necessities of the current year. No arms nor military supplies whatever which are of a patented invention, shall be purchased, nor the right of using or applying any patented invention, unless the same shall be authorized by law, and the appropriation therefore explicitly set forth that it is for such patented invention.” Approved June 23rd, 18605 xxi

PROLOGUE

The prohibition against purchasing patented arms would seem to have been directed at Samuel Colt, from whom both the army and navy had been purchasing revolvers for several years. Colt would later allege that this was the case and also asserted that the provision had been motivated by (then) Senator Jefferson Davis. As early as February 1861 various parties had urged the department to consider the services’ adoption of more repeating firearms. Henry K. Craig, then colonel of ordnance, took a dim view of this suggestion. On February 6, he expressed his opinion in the following correspondence to Secretary of War Joseph Holt: I have the honor to acknowledge the reference to this office, of a letter from the Honorable S. R. Curtis in behalf of the Commissioner on Military affairs of the House of Representatives, submitting a report thereon, a memorial asking Congress to make an appropriation to secure the purchase or manufacture of Revolving firearms, so as to arm our Soldiers with them, as far as possible; upon which subject I respectfully report. It is not believed that what are called repeating arms are desirable for Infantry of the line or riflemen. They are complicated in their mechanism, more liable to get out of order, and more difficult to repair than the muzzle musket and rifle of the present model, which are unsurpassed for Military purposes. The revolving repeater, by the rapidity with which five or six discharges can be made, then leaves the soldier with an empty weapon, which requires considerable time to replenish even under favorable circumstances, rendering it quite practicable in time of action, for a soldier to discharge a muzzle loading gun seven times in as short as a space of time as the same number of discharges could be made from a six chambered revolver. Excessive rapidity of fire is not the great desideratum for military guns. The soldier can carry only a certain weight of ammunition, which to be used with effect, should be expended with deliberation. Revolvers have been known to discharge several of their charges at the same time (by accident), thus rendering them unfit weapons for troops formed in two ranks, for the reason that the front rank men would be more in dread of those behind them than of the enemy. Repeating arms are more costly than muzzle loading guns that discharge balls of equal weight of metal with equal force besides being necessarily heavier. The principal of the repeating arms is suitable for pistols and should, in my opinion, be restricted to that weapon, and is already adopted into our service to as great an extent as is deemed useful. The proviso to the Act of 23rd June 1860, prohibits the purchase of arms of a patented character and will prevent the purchase of Revolving Pistols, without special authority of law: and it would be advisable that such discretionary authority be given, in case the demands of the service should render it necessary to purchase such arms. The letter of the Honorable Mr. Curtis, with its enclosures is herewith returned.6 Craig was quite vocal in his adverse opinions concerning repeating arms but was also wise enough to foresee that preparations should be made to make further purchases of the same. His advice was heeded on March 2, when Congress acted to repeal this stipulation. Subsequent xxii

PROLOGUE

events were to prove Craig correct, and patented arms, both revolvers and carbines, were soon to be a top priority with the Ordnance Department.

BUREAU OF ORDNANCE, U.S. NAVY I now present a brief description of the Bureau of Ordnance, the navy’s counterpart of the army’s Ordnance Department: The Bureau of Ordnance and Hydrography was established by an Act of Congress, August 31, 1842, which abolished the Board of Navy Commissioners and directed the Secretary of the Navy to apportion the Board’s functions appropriately among the five Navy Department “Bureaus” authorized by the Act. On July 5, 1862, the Bureau’s hydrographic functions were transferred to the newly formed Bureau of Navigation, and its title was changed to the Bureau of Ordnance. The functions of the Bureau have varied from time to time. It is now responsible for the design, manufacture, procurement, issue, maintenance, and efficiency of all offensive and defensive naval arms and armament, including net appliances, depth charges, mines, torpedoes, armor, pyrotechnics, and buoys, and, except as specifically assigned to other authority, optical and other devices and material for the control of guns, torpedoes, and bombs. It also provides for the upkeep, repair, and operation of naval gun factories, ordnance plants, torpedo stations, proving grounds, powder factories, ammunition depots, and mine depots. In connection with the procurement of reliable ordnance material, the practice was early adopted of assigning Naval Officers as Inspectors of Ordnance to foundries, factories, and Navy yards to test and prove articles manufactured under contract.7

Chiefs of the Bureau of Ordnance Through 1900 Capt. William Montgomery Crane Capt. Lewis Warrington Capt. Charles Morris Capt. Duncan Nathaniel Ingraham Capt. George A. Magruder Commodore Andrew Allen Harwood Rear Adm. John Adolphus Dahlgren Capt. Henry Augustus Wise Rear Adm. John Adolphus Dahlgren Rear Adm. Augustus Ludlow Case Commodore William Nicholson Jeffers Commodore Montgomery Sicard Commodore William Mayhew Folger

September 1, 1842–May 18, 1846 May 25, 1846–November 12, 1851 November 13, 1851–March 20, 1856 March 21, 1856–September 23, 1860 September 24, 1860–April 23, 1861 April 24, 1861–July 22, 1862 July 23, 1862–June 24, 1863 June 25, 1863–June 1, 1868 August 22, 1868–July 23, 1869 August 10, 1869–April 9, 1873 April 10, 1873–June 7, 1881 July 1, 1881–January 13, 1890 February 12, 1890–January 2, 1893 xxiii

PROLOGUE

Commodore William Thomas Samson Rear Adm. Charles O’Neil

January 28, 1893–May 31, 1897 June 1, 1897–March 14, 1904

As noted above, the Bureau of Ordnance and Hydrography, first established in 1842, was responsible for supplying the U.S. Navy with all manner of ordnance equipment. In addition to these duties, the bureau supplied navigational charts and equipment to the navy’s vessels. In July 1862, these functions were separated, and thereafter, the department was known as the Bureau of Ordnance. After 1849 the bureau maintained ledgers to record daily payments for purchases and services received. These ledgers, “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment,” are invaluable for the purpose of verifying deliveries of arms under letter orders and contracts. I could not locate the first volume of these ledgers, 1849 to mid-1862, in the National Archives; therefore, all arms purchases prior to mid-1862 have to be verified from other archival files. I now realize that the final entry dates of the missing ledgers and the separation of duties of the Bureau of Ordnance from the Bureau of Navigation coincided; it is possible that the ledger was mistakenly transferred with other records to the newly formed Bureau of Navigation. I have not had the opportunity to explore this possibility. The ledgers that are available are not infallible and contain numerous errors and omissions. The U.S. Navy, like the army, relied on Colt to supply their revolver needs for the better part of the 1850s. There is some evidence that the navy acquired a small number of Colt’s Paterson models in 1841, but they were not obtained from Samuel Colt. Rather, they were purchased from John Ehlers, the principal creditor of the defunct Patent Arms Manufacturing Company. The first documented orders of revolvers by the bureau from Colt occurred in 1852 and were delivered to Commodore Matthew Perry for use during his famous expedition to Japan. The order was for one hundred revolvers, that is, twenty-five army-size (Dragoons), fifty 1851 Navies, and twenty-five 1849 Pocket Models of four-, five-, and six-inch barrel lengths. There were no further orders from the bureau to Colt until 1857, when five thousand 1851 Navy Revolvers were ordered, that is, three thousand for the army and two thousand for the navy. Another two years passed before the bureau sent another revolver order to Colt, this time for six hundred 1851 Navies. The next orders did not occur until shortly after the start of the Civil War. The bureau sent numerous small orders to Colt during the remainder of 1861 and the first eight months of 1862; Model 1861 Navies and some Model 1860 Army Revolvers were delivered on these orders. Colt lost their navy business in August 1862, after refusing to deliver revolvers at a competitive price. Remington and Whitney soon filled this void and supplied revolvers to the navy for the remainder of the war. In 1858 the bureau ordered three hundred Savage revolvers. There was a considerable delay in their delivery, and they were not received until late 1859. Shortly after the start of the war, the bureau ordered an additional eight hundred Savage, one hundred Joslyn, and one hundred Starr revolvers. Navy inspectors rejected forty of the Starrs and returned them to the company. Both prior to and during the war, the navy also extensively used military-style single-shot percussion pistols. Those in use during the war consisted of arms previously ordered by the bureau from arms contractors, as well as a great many requisitioned from the Army Ordnance xxiv

PROLOGUE

Department (see figure 7). These were known as “boarding pistols” and were issued only to “jacks” (seamen). The navy had two methods of procuring small arms during this era: letter orders and contracts. The most common that I noted were letter orders. The awarding of contracts seems to have been limited to those arms that were procured in large numbers. Prior to and during the war, the navy ordered revolvers in small numbers; orders exceeding five hundred arms were rare. The meager navy budget allocation for small arms seems to have necessitated this procurement method.


In the following narrative, I have functioned more as an editor than as author, presenting original letters and documents from the National Archives as I found them, in chronological order, adding comments where appropriate. Not all of the original correspondence has been located; accordingly, in many instances, I have had to read between the lines. In order to retain the reader’s interest, I have taken the liberty of deleting the dates, addresses, salutations, and closures of most correspondence, except in instances where I felt these were necessary to complete the story.

xxv

INTRODUCTION

Remington Historical Background ny study of the arms of E. Remington & Sons would not be complete without some history of the Remington family. After due consideration, I have decided to present an address given by Albert N. Russell before the Herkimer County Historical Society over one hundred years ago. When my good friend and author Jerry Landskron was preparing the publication of Remington Rolling Block Pistols in 1979, I encouraged him to consider inclusion of this address in his book. He heeded my advice, and the address was first presented there. Russell was first hired as a Remington employee in 1861, shortly after the death of the founder. His employment continued throughout the postwar years, as he served in several responsible positions. In his roles as resident of Ilion and Remington employee, he came to be personally acquainted with the Remington brothers and their business associates, as well as with most of the residents of the small village. He was one of the court-appointed administrators of the Remington firm during their bankruptcy and subsequent sale in 1888. The astute reader will note that Russell made some errors in dates and figures in his presentation. I attribute much of this to his faded memory. Overall, his address gave an excellent history of the village of Ilion and the Remington family.

A

“ILION AND THE REMINGTONS” An Address by Albert N. Russell Delivered to the Herkimer County Historical Society, September 14, 1897 This history of Ilion as a village, both as to its origin and growth up to the present decade, is so intimately connected with the lives and achievements of the Remingtons as to warrant the combination in the title to this paper, as well as to forbid any attempt at a treatment of the first independent of the last. The proper limits to a paper to be read at a meeting of this society, however, confine me to the statements of such historical facts regarding the growth of the village as are coincident with, and inseparable from, the progress of the Remington works. In referring to the various enterprises and industries, which comprise in part—the history of “the Remingtons,” I shall not treat each in its regular sequence, nor in detail, but shall endeavor to make a brief record, informally, of that which may xxvii

INTRODUCTION

be interesting to those who may consult the archives of this society in years to come, and with a consciousness that my paper will afford but slight entertainment to the audience. The appellation, “the Remingtons,” is used here as applying to the members of that family who originated and conducted the manufacturing enterprises, the development of which have been the potent factor in the establishment and growth of the village, with its great industries, viz: Eliphalet Remington (the second bearing that name) and his three sons, Philo, Samuel and Eliphalet Jr. The father of the Eliphalet Remington referred to, also named Eliphalet, was born in Suffield, Hartford County, Connecticut, October 13, 1768, and his wife, Elizabeth Kilbourn, in Sandersfield in the same state, August 20, 1770. They were married March 3, 1791. Their children were Elizabeth, born February 2, 1792; Eliphalet, born October 28, 1793; Aphia, born May 13, 1800, and Samuel, born January 11, 1808, who died in infancy. Elizabeth married Alanson Merry and was the mother of Mrs. Aphia Chismore, now living in Ilion, aged 82 years; John, living in Placerville, California; Eliphalet, who was one of the many passengers lost in the wreck of the steamer “Central America” in 1857, on a return voyage from California; Edward, Charles and Welthy, deceased. Eliphalet Remington, the founder of the Ilion works, married Abigail Paddock, who was killed by being thrown from a buggy by a runaway horse on August 21, 1841. Besides his three sons his children were: Mary Ann, now living and widow of Reverend Charles Austen, and Maria, who became the wife of the late Lawrence L. Merry, and mother of Seward, now living in Ilion, and two daughters, Carrie and Addie, now living in Streator, Illinois. Mrs. Merry died March 30, 1876. Susanna, another daughter died at the age of 21, unmarried. Aphia P., his sister, became the wife of the late John S. Avery of Litchfield and mother of four sons: William, now deceased; Sanford, now living on part of the homestead in Litchfield; Samuel, living in Council Bluffs, Iowa; Alanson, deceased; and four daughters, viz: Thetis, wife of Lorin True, both of whom are deceased; Elizabeth, now living in Ilion; Mary M., who married Thomas Davis and is deceased; and Lucy, the wife of James Leveck, now living at or near the old homestead. I have stated that the first Eliphalet Remington and Elizabeth Kilbourn, his wife, were natives of Connecticut and have given the date of their marriage [March 3, 1791]. Their first three children were born in that state. In 1800 they immigrated to Herkimer County, first making their home in Cranes Corners, where Mr. Remington worked at his trade, that of carpenter and, as Mrs. Chismore informs me, built there what is known now as the “Old Union church.” Previous to moving here, viz, March 22, 1799, he purchased from James Smith of Litchfield 50 acres of land, the deed for which is of record in 1804, in the first book of records made after the fire, which destroyed all records of previous date. His subsequent purchases, as indicated by the records, gave him a holding of about 300 acres of land covering the territory where the Columbia Springs Hotel now stands in the Gulph, about three miles south from Ilion, and sufficient land along Steele’s Creek at that point to make its waters available as a power for industrial purposes. At that date, there was no continuous road leading through the Gulph to Cedarville from where Ilion now is, but instead, one crossing Steele’s Creek to the west near the present residence of Dennis H. Dygert and following near the creek to where the Harrington Road now turns west and by that route up to the old Remington farm, then down the hill as now, to the sulphur springs in the Gulph xxviii

REMINGTON HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

and along the creek for some distance, then again taking to the hills on the west and back to the creek at Cedarville. This made the senior Remington’s property on the creek a suitable place for a blacksmith’s shop and gave such control of the stream as to enable him to utilize it as a water power for propelling machinery. The foregoing is written as prefatory to the formal introduction of Eliphalet Remington the second, as the founder of Ilion and its industries and to enable me to correct some errors in tradition and written history. The first relates to his birthplace, which has been given as Litchfield, while in fact he was 7 years old when his parents emigrated to that place from Connecticut. Other errors will be manifest as I proceed. The initiatory step to his mechanical and business career was the forging of a gun barrel for his own use, which was done in the blacksmith shop referred to. In Beer’s History of Herkimer County, it is stated that this occurred in 1816 and when he was 19 years old. If that was his age, it must have been in 1812. If in 1816, his age was 23, for he was 7 years old in 1800. From all the information attainable, I am led to the conclusion that the blacksmith shop referred to was in fact a forge having power furnished by a waterwheel, and that the welding of scrap iron into bars and forging the bars into crowbars, pickaxes, sleigh-shoes, plowshares and points was carried on there as well as horse-shoeing and general repair work for farmers, and that the industry was installed by Eliphalet Remington 1st, who as we have seen was a mechanic, and who doubtless was well aware of the mechanical genius of his son and wisely provided for his establishment in a congenial business. The association of the father with the son, and his active participation in his enterprises continued till the property, where the great manufactory in Ilion now is, was purchased in 1828, and his life was sacrificed in the birth of that establishment. On the 22nd day of June in that year, while engaged in hauling the timbers which entered into the construction of the first shop, he [Eliphalet Remington I] was thrown from the load by the canting of one of them and fell in such a position that the wheel of the wagon ran over him and injured his spine so seriously that death resulted after 5 days—on the 27th. Whether young Eliphalet Remington forged his first gun barrel and with his own hands produced the finished gun because of his father’s unwillingness to buy him one, as stated in existing histories, or because of an ambition to achieve such a mechanical success is a question of minor interest, but as the initiatory to an immense manufacturing business sending its products to the ends of the earth, and the founding of a village ranking among the first in the valley of the Mohawk, it becomes of great interest and a striking illustration of the wonderful developments of this age or of our locality. The quality of this first gun was such as to create in the neighborhood a demand for others of like efficiency. In response to this demand, barrels both for rifles and shotguns were forged, and appliances devised and put into use finishing exterior and interior, ready for stocking and completion. In those days, no factories for the manufacture of guns were in existence, but in every important village or town was to be found a gunsmith, whose business was by primitive methods to make and repair firearms for those living in the vicinity, the barrels for the same being imported from England xxix

INTRODUCTION

and Belgium by hardware merchants. Morgan James was the leading smith in Utica, and to him, Mr. Remington took his first rifle barrels to be rifled, often taking, as I am told, as many as he could carry on his back and making the journey of 15 miles on foot, returning with a like load of those left on the previous trip. This was, however, but a temporary expedient. He soon had a rifling machine of his own in operation and was producing more effective barrels than could be obtained elsewhere. Ponderous grindstones were quarried from a ledge of red sandstone a short distance up the creek from the forge and used to grind the exteriors true and to the desired form, being driven by water power. The reputation of the Remington barrels soon became so great and extended so far, that the gunsmiths were obliged to use and the hardware merchants to handle them in order to retain their customers. Thus the merits of these products became known throughout our whole country, and the little forge assumed the dignity of a factory. An examination of an account book commencing in 1823 shows that, while the making of gun barrels became a prominent part of the industry, the other branches of work were kept up, and that the prevalent method of paying workmen in part with “store goods” obtained with them. Among other articles manufactured, there was one, the use of which is little known by the present generation, the cow bell. The work was carried on at this point till 1828, when 100 acres of the John A. Clappsadle property was purchased and removal made to the site of the now village of Ilion. To this purchase, several additions were subsequently made. The firm of Hawes and Haines succeeded in the occupancy of the Gulph establishment, where they manufactured carpenter’s squares and edged tools. They, in turn, sold to John F. Brown, who conducted the same business till about 1855 and then sold out to a firm who removed the works to North Bennington, Vt. This Mr. Brown conceived the idea of making a watering place by the sulphur spring found there and built the brick house known as the Columbia Springs Hotel. The enterprise was unsuccessful, and the establishment is at this writing in a seriously dilapidated condition. Following Mr. Remington to his new location, we find at “London,” now the west part of Main Street, two hotels for the accommodation of teamsters and canal men and a third near the site of the present gas works, a small store on the site of the new Heacock-Walker block, a canal warehouse, where the recently built brick Hoteling block now stands, and perhaps a half dozen dwellings, mostly farm houses. The first structure erected by Mr. Remington was a dwelling on the ground, now occupied by O. B. Rudd’s jewelry store. Following this, came the wooden shop directly in the rear of the office building, in the tower of which is the town clock. In this building was installed the machinery for forging bar iron and converting the same into the various utensils previously made in the Gulph establishment, and for making and finishing ready for market barrels for rifles and shot guns, comprising in part a large trip hammer, several light trip hammers, a large tub bellows, and grindstones, with the necessary boring and rifling machines. To furnish power, water was brought from Steele’s Creek, by what is known as the “lower race,” and utilized for driving the several water wheels, the waste from which was by an arrangement with the local authorities, discharged into the Erie [C]anal as a feeder. Increasing business demanded increased facilities; a stone building near the canal was built the following year and xxx

REMINGTON HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

equipped with water wheels and trip hammers, to be used especially for welding and forging gun barrels. This has always been known as the “Stone Forge.” The demand for the Remington gun barrels had, by this time, become so extended that an organized shipping department became necessary, where a supply of locks, rough gun stocks, butt plates, patch boxes, and other trimmings were kept, so that the gunsmith could obtain his complete outfit. For many years and till the making of guns passed from the gunsmith to the factory, this department was in charge of Mr. A. C. Seamans, father of C. W. Seamans of typewriter fame. In this manner, the business was conducted by Mr. Remington with such changes and improvements as experience suggested, till in 1839, he entered into a partnership with Benj. Harrington for the purpose of making the manufacture of iron and such articles as were not properly connected with the gun business, a separate enterprise. For this purpose, they built a dam on Steele’s Creek and diverted the water into a pond or reservoir on the land now owned by the heirs of John Beihn, near the present residence of William Harrington, and about a mile south of the Ilion works, erected thereby the necessary buildings and equipments for making bar iron from scrap and, from the iron produced, made the utensils commonly used by the farmers in those days, also mill spindles and such other irons as were used in grist and sawmills. To furnish the scrap iron used, teams were employed to traverse the surrounding country and gather it in. The field of supply embraced all the surrounding counties, including Oswego. Iron ore was also drawn from the Clinton ore beds in Oneida County. To furnish the fuel, the timber was cut from the surrounding hills and burned into charcoal. The firm also built and operated the saw mill known as “Harrington’s Mill,” the ruins of which were burned about three years since. This forge was operated until the manufacture on a large scale and in proximity to the supplies of ore and coal rendered it unprofitable, and today, nothing remains to mark the spot but a remnant of the diverting dam and the bands of the pond, the bed of which is a productive market garden. In the meantime, the sons of Mr. Remington were attaining maturity. Philo, who was born October 31, 1816, became of age in 1837; Samuel, born April 11, 1818, in 1839; and Eliphalet, born November 12, 1828, in 1849. Philo was educated in the common schools and at Cazenovia Seminary, Samuel at common schools and at Wilbraham Academy. Eliphalet attended Little Falls academy and Cazenovia Seminary, in addition to the home schools. Philo remained with his father and became master of all branches of the mechanical work, while Samuel tried his fortunes for a time in railroad construction in the West, meeting with so little success that he soon returned to Ilion, where, for a time, he conducted business by himself, opening a store on the canal bank in 1845. In 1845, war with Mexico being imminent, our government entered into contract with Ames and Co., of Springfield, Mass., for the construction of several thousand carbines, the invention of one William Jenks. For some reason, this company desired to be relieved of their job after having commenced to execute it, and Mr. Remington purchased the contract, together with such machinery as they had adapted to the work. The equipment was meager, but combined with his own facilities, enabled him to execute the work to the satisfaction of the government. Mr. Jenks, the inventor, came on to supervise the work and afterwards built the brick house on the north side of the canal, now known as the John A. Rasbach homestead. xxxi

INTRODUCTION

The building on the hill, now called the old armory, was built to enable Mr. Remington to carry out this first contract, and what is called the upper race constructed to bring water to the wheel by which the machinery was driven. Thus equipped, Mr. Remington was ready to undertake other contracts, and before he had finished the carbine work, he had an order for 5,000 “Harpers Ferry” rifles, and before they were delivered, a further order of 5,000 was received, and later an additional one for 2,500 of the same; 5,000 Maynard self-priming musket locks were also made during the years 1857 and 1858. I summarize this as embracing most of the military work executed up to the advent of the War of the Rebellion in 1861, but about 1857, one Fordyce Beals invented a revolver, which Mr. Remington manufactured under the inventor’s supervision, and the making of pistols of various models became an important branch of the work carried on. Meanwhile Samuel had, in connection with others, engaged in the manufacture of broom handles and brooms and in 1851 or 1852, in one of the buildings, which is now about in the center of the group, had commenced the manufacture of Yale’s patent locks, the father of Louis Diss, now assistant superintendent of the typewriter works, having charge of the work. After a year or so he also undertook the manufacture of safes and vault doors for banks, John F. Thomas being foreman in this department. Among the establishments equipped by him was the U.S. Mint at Philadelphia. In 1855, he also manufactured 200 breech-loading guns of a model patented by one Merrill, but the system did not prove practicable, and no more were made. The separate enterprises, which Samuel had inaugurated, were abandoned in 1856, and thereafter all the business was conducted by E. Remington & Sons, the three sons being partners. About that time Mr. Charles Sayre, of Utica, invented a cultivator tooth, which they commenced to manufacture on the premises where the safe and lock work had been done, and Mr. David D. Devoe became foreman of that work. This may be considered as the beginning of the agricultural works, which later became so extensive. During the period between 1828 and 1861, a thrifty little village with about 800 inhabitants had grown up around the Remington works. A Post Office was established in 1845, first named after Mr. Remington but, at his urgent request, changed to Ilion, a name suggested by D. D. Devoe, who was the first postmaster. Mr. Remington had built himself a substantial residence, the brick building on Main street now occupied by the Remington Arms Co., as an office, the bank block, and the Osgood Hotel. Philo and Eliphalet Jr. had each become established in homes built on Otsego Street, directly opposite the first armory buildings, and on the corner of Otsego and Second streets, where the present brick Baptist Church stands, a Union Church had been erected. The stone school house on Morgan Street provided accommodation for educational purposes. The village was incorporated under the general laws in 1852, but subsequently, a special act of incorporation was obtained which, with various amendments and substitutions, remains in force. In August of that year the Ilion Bank was incorporated with a capital of $100,000 with Eliphalet Remington as president, he holding that office until his death. With the advent of the Civil War, a new impetus was given to the work of the “Armory,” the new name now applied to the works. Orders were given by our Government for army and navy revolvers. For the manufacture of these many new and special machines were purchased and tools adapted to the work made. Additional room was provided by building, and steam engines [were] installed as xxxii

REMINGTON HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

auxiliary to the water power. Work was pushed night and day, but the requirements of the Government could not be met in full, and a building was rented in Utica and equipped for pistol work, which was carried on there for a short time and then brought to Ilion. Orders were also received for large numbers of the regulation U.S. Springfield musket, which could only be made after the erection of several large buildings, with corresponding increase of expensive machinery and the necessary tools and fixtures. Under the pressure of these new demands upon his energies, the elder Mr. Remington was prostrated and on August 12, 1861, his remarkable career was ended, the second sacrifice to an enterprise of which communities and nations were to be the beneficiaries. [The actual date of death has been established as July 12, 1861. At the time of his death, the Ordnance Department had not conveyed any orders or contracts to the Remingtons.] His burial place was in the village cemetery, in a spot selected by him while surveying the land first purchased in Ilion. I cannot speak of the personalities of Mr. Remington from the standpoint of an acquaintance, his death occurring a few weeks before I became a resident of Ilion, but as gathered from others only. In stature he was tall, of muscular build and capable of great endurance. His manners were gentle and kindly, but his resolutions were firm, and obedience was enforced in the execution of his plans. His education was such as was afforded by the local schools, but he was a careful reader and became a well informed man. His habits were strictly temperate, his morals pure. As a neighbor he was always kind and obliging. In every movement to promote the interests of the village, he was a leader and coworker. He was a man of sterling integrity and had the implicit confidence of his employees, who always sought his advice and counsel. In politics, he was an old line Whig until the advent of the Republican Party, with which he early identified himself. In his religious views, he was liberal rather than sectarian, and he contributed generously for building a Union Church to be free for the use of all denominations, regarding that the best way to promote the religious interests of a community as small as Ilion then was. A strict economist, he wasted neither time nor money, but I am persuaded that he was not greedy, and that an ambition to be rich was far from being his impelling motive. With men of his type, it seems to be an impulse to do, to develop, to produce and improve, which has no need for avarice as a motive power or selfishness as an incentive to economy. He evidently had but little taste for business as conducted by office machinery. It has been said of him that “he carried his office in his hat.” This saying was doubtless inspired in part by his custom of carrying his current letters and papers in the tall hat, which he commonly wore, instead of in the inside pocket as many of us do. In looking over his books, I find none of those special accounts now so generally kept, such as construction, repair, tools and machinery, etc., nor of interest or expense accounts, bills receivable and payable, and other entries serving in any way to indicate his financial condition or business profits. An unusually retentive memory seems to have enabled him to carry under his hat a greater part of that which is usually confided to the keeping of the ledger. I am able to pronounce no greater eulogy upon his character than by saying that during the 36 years I have lived in Herkimer County, I have never heard him spoken of except in terms of respect and commendation. The management of the manufacturing department was devolved upon Philo, the oldest son, while Samuel, the second, assumed a position corresponding with that of general agent, which made xxxiii

INTRODUCTION

him the negotiator of contracts with the Government, purchaser of machinery materials, etc., a work which required him to spend much of his time at the Capitol or in the business centers of the country. To Eliphalet was left the general supervision of the office and particularly the correspondence, for which he was especially qualified by reason of superior penmanship and great felicity in the use of language. The firm name “E. Remington & Sons” was retained until 1865, at which date the business was capitalized, an incorporation being effected under the same name with a nominal capital of $1,000,000, and a plant valued at about $1,500,000. This organization covered only the arms business and properties, other interests being retained under the name of Remington Brothers or by the brothers individually. The work was pushed with unremitting energy until the preparations were complete, and they were able to make regular deliveries of muskets to the War Department. On the 12th day of April 1865, immediately after the surrender of the Confederate Army by General Lee, an order was issued from the War Department stopping all further purchase of arms and munitions, and the Remingtons were notified to discontinue the production of guns and revolvers for Government use. [This was an error on Russell’s part. Although Remington’s final revolver contract had been fulfilled the previous month, the company was granted extensions and allowed to complete their musket and carbine contracts.] This doubtless was a necessary act on account of the impoverished condition of the Treasury but none the less cruel in its effects upon the company, which had incurred a large indebtedness depending upon the profits of Government work for its liquidation. With resources thus cut off, the struggle for life became intense. The Ilion Bank, which was a large creditor, was so deeply involved as to cause its suspension, and Thomas Richardson, Esq., as receiver, wound up its affairs. In this connection, it is a pleasure to record that afterwards, when returning prosperity enabled them to do so, the Remingtons paid the stockholders and all persons holding claims against the bank in full with interest. During the progress of the War, it had been clearly demonstrated that the future infantry arm must be breech-loading, and in anticipation of this change, the company had already availed itself of the inventive genius of Mr. John [sic] Rider [Rider’s given name was Joseph], a German by birth and a resident of Newark, Ohio, and placed under his direction a corps of skilled mechanics, John V. Schmidt and others, who were working for the production of a breech-loading rifle with the qualifications necessary to secure its adoption by military authorities. The company possessed the confidence of the public to such a degree that creditors willingly granted extensions of time, during which their running expenses were met by the proceeds of the other branches of work, and in due time, they were prepared to offer the governments of the world the simplest, most effective and durable firearm the inventive genius of the age had produced. It should be stated, in this connection, that some parts of the mechanism of these guns were the invention of parties outside of the Remington works, the use of which was obtained by license, with payment of royalty. The manufacture of this new model of gun required the construction of a complete set of tools and fixtures, of such accuracy that all the parts would be interchangeable, that is, that each piece of a given gun would fit perfectly into any or all the others. The cost of these tools and the additional machinery required a further outlay of many thousands of dollars, but with a faith and perseverance xxxiv

REMINGTON HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

that yielded to no discouragements, they worked on till in 1867 the government of Denmark adopted the gun and entered into a contract for 42,000 stands of arms. Mr. Samuel Remington had now become the representative of the house in foreign lands, where he remained till 1877. The works were run night and day, and the contract successfully executed. In 1867, an order was also received from the Naval Department of our Government for 12,000 rifles, which were duly delivered. Spain came in the same year for 85,000. Next, in 1868, came Sweden with an order for 30,000, followed in 1867 [sic] by Egypt, with a call for 50,000. In 1870, France and Germany being engaged in a war for which France was ill prepared; that government came to Ilion for help. Unlimited orders for arms were given. Neither buildings, machinery, nor tools had sufficient capacity to meet the demands. Large additions were made to every department and the working force increased till 1,300 to 1,400 men were employed, a large number of whom were skillful mechanics. The regular output of rifles was 800 to 1,000 per day, besides great numbers of pistols. So excellent was the management and so perfect the equipment and organization that the product per day for each man employed was largely in excess of that attained in the Springfield Armory during the Civil War or of any other arms factory in the world. A most marvelous exhibition of capacity and skillfully directed energy was made during the latter period of this undertaking, when the output of completed rifles was 1,200 to 1,300 per day and of revolvers about 200. The record of such achievements needs no commentary to establish the reputation of Philo Remington as one of the most capable manufacturers our country has produced. The work was done under the contract system, being divided among 30 or more capable contractors, under the direction of a superintendent and the necessary foremen. The aggregate number of arms furnished France was 145,000. The execution of these contracts had resulted in large profits by which the debts of the corporation were liquidated, and the termination of the transactions with France left them with a surplus, which was deemed sufficiently large to warrant a dividend which was made approximating $2,000,000.00, to which smaller sums were subsequently added. Previous to this, Col. Watson C. Squire married a daughter of Philo Remington and became prominently connected with the business management, occupying the position of Secretary and Treasurer and by virtue of his position, the financial executive. He also acquired the ownership of a portion of the stock of the company, which he retained for a time and then exchanged with Philo Remington for real estate in Seattle, Washington. He was succeeded by Eliphalet Remington in the office of Treasurer. Incidentally it may be stated that by appointment of President Arthur, Col. Squire became Governor of the Territory of Washington and later by election, U.S. Senator from the new state, which position he held for two consecutive terms. In 1872, the State of New York, having adopted the Remington rifle for use by the National Guard, made a contract for 21,000 which were duly furnished. I think it is to be recorded, at this point, that in the spring of 1870, a board of Army officers appointed to test the various arms, which had been invented and were seeking adoption by our Government, met at St. Louis, Major General Scofield being chairman. About 50 different models of rifles were submitted to the most severe tests, in which the Remington was victorious and the commission reported decidedly in its favor. This report was fully endorsed by General Sherman, the head of the Army. This was supposed to have been conclusive and to have established the Remington as xxxv

INTRODUCTION

the national arm, but by methods, which are not subject to discussion here, interested parties finally procured the adoption of what is known as the “Allin Gun,” which our Government has wasted millions in manufacturing, and now, strange to tell, our state legislature has committed the folly of providing for the exchange of her Remingtons for these inferior arms. Following the completion of the French requisition, came in quick succession an order from Puerto Rico in 1874 for 10,000, from Cuba the same year for 63,000, followed by Spain for 130,000, Egypt for 55,000, and another from Cuba for 26,500. Subsequent orders executed for the government of Mexico aggregated 50,000, and for Chile 12,000, and sales were made from time to time from the New York office and by Messrs. Hartley and Graham aggregating 114,500. The dates given above are of the first deliveries on the several orders. For work executed subsequent to 1875, I have not secured accurate statistics, but I am informed by Mr. Frederick Armstrong, who for a long time was bookkeeper for the company and who had kindly furnished me the foregoing data, that sales to the United States, and Colombia, Honduras, China, and other governments will swell the number to considerable above one million arms manufactured and delivered. The introduction of the breech-loading rifle was accompanied with great improvement in the range and effectiveness of military firearms, and one of the qualifications of the good soldier must be expert marksmanship, the ability to pick his man at a distance of 1,000 yards or more. Both in this and foreign countries “ranges” were established where both soldiers and “teams” of men from private callings engaged in practice and contests for superiority. The Remington “Creedmore Rifle,” of which many were manufactured on account of its great accuracy and projectile force, became a favorite in these matches, and with it victories were won in both national and international matches. If any evidence were lacking to prove the excellence of the products of the Ilion works, these contests furnished all that was needed. The conduct of a business of such magnitude, and so intricate in its details, required the employment of numerous assistants in both financial and mechanical departments. Prominent in the Department of Finance was Floyd C. Shepard, who retained his connection with the company till its dissolution. Thomas Richardson Esq., was their legal counselor and, as such, crossed the ocean several times in their interests. From the time of the enlargement of the works in the sixties and until 1877, when he was succeeded by W. S. Smoot, J. M. Clough was Superintendent of the Manufacturing Department. Mr. Smoot was succeeded by John Hoefler, who continued to occupy the position until the business passed into other hands. For several years John F. Thomas was in charge of the machine and repair shop. He was succeeded by Charles E. Pettee. From 1861 to 1877, the writer was in charge of a department covering freight and transportation, buildings, fixed machinery and millwright work, coal, lumber and supplies of a general nature, a department outside of the manufacturing line, but intimately associated therewith as an auxiliary. In this position, a general knowledge was acquired, which was doubtless the basis of an appointment to which reference will be made hereafter. Mr. Samuel Remington with his family made their home in London, while abroad, and remained there till 1877 as stated, when they returned and resided in New York City till the time of his death, which occurred December 1, 1882. His family consisted of wife, now deceased, formerly xxxvi

REMINGTON HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Miss Flora, daughter of Benjamin Carver; three sons, Carver, Eliphalet and Frank, now of Chicago, and one daughter, Jennie, now Mrs. Prettyman, and also, I believe, is residing in Chicago. My acquaintance with Samuel Remington was less thorough than with his brothers but sufficient to enable me to estimate with some degree of correctness his qualities. In stature he was of medium height, with an inclination to corpulency. His complexion was fair, his hair dark, and a pleasant expression of the eye made his presence agreeable. I think he was an ambitious man, and that he had a greater desire to make money for personal ends than either of his brothers. He taxed his physical and mental powers to the point of utmost endurance and chafed and worried over delays, whether unavoidable or the result of negligence on the part of others. His integrity was unquestioned, and his success in negotiating contracts with foreign potentates testifies to his ability in that line. During the Franco-German War, France not only gave him unlimited orders for arms of his own company’s make, but made him purchasing agent of all the arms and munitions which he could procure in this country, a commission of great responsibility, involving transactions amounting to many millions. He was not in harmony with his brothers in their religious convictions and seemed but little interested in church or social affairs. He was a friend of the common school and a liberal supporter of all schools to improve the village schools. In politics, he was a Republican but was too busy a man to devote his time to political work. In the settlement of his estate, his administrators sold his stock and all his interest in the business of the corporation to his brother Philo, who then became chief owner as well as manager of the business. Following the adoption of the breech-loading rifle as an infantry arm and the systematic manufacture of machinery with interchangeable parts, all the first class governments of the world, and some of the lesser ones, made haste not only to equip their armies with breech loaders, but to establish plants for their manufacture. Some adopted the Remington, others models devised by their own inventors. All sought to make themselves independent of foreign countries in time of war, as well as to promote manufacturing industries within their own domains. The Turkish government while not included in the first class is among the most warlike but too near barbarous and destitute of skill in the mechanical arts to be competent to manufacture her own arms, remained an open field for their sale. At one time, after protracted negotiations, the Remingtons were at the point of closing a contract with that government for 400,000 rifles when a party, nonofficial but occupying a position of great influence with the Sultan, stepped in with a demand for a bonus of 50 cents per gun, which the company refused to pay, with the result that they lost the job. Another effort to secure an order, the failure of which was of great effect in determining the future of the company, will be referred to hereafter. One of the principal and most embarrassing features of negotiations for government contracts was the almost universal existence of corrupt and secret influences, which never could be measured nor dealt with in the daylight. With the corruptionist; the merits of things to be bought or the price to be paid by the governments are secondary to private plunder. The refusal of the Remingtons to pay tribute to these scoundrels should ever be given honorable mention in the review of their business career. The limitations thus put upon the sale of their products made the continued residence of Samuel abroad unnecessary and led to his return as before stated. It had also made patent the fact that new xxxvii

INTRODUCTION

lines of manufacture must be adopted or their vast establishment be reduced to comparative idleness. Sporting rifles, shotguns, and pistols would employ but a fraction of their facilities. Machinery and appliances for making metallic cartridges were added, but this afforded but a slight reinforcement to their work. One source of relief, to which I have not referred, was however thought possible. The great success of the breech-loading arm had intensely stimulated inventive genius in the line of improvement of firearms, and the magazine rifle gave promise of being the quick successor of the breech loader. The Winchester and other arms manufacturers were quickly in the field with successful sporting rifles of that type, and the Remingtons gave inventors in this line employment and mechanical facilities, hoping thereby to secure for themselves a position in this field, which would command the patronage at least of the minor South American governments and possibly some of those of the old world. Among the first of this class of inventors was one John W. Keene, who produced a magazine rifle which was deemed of sufficient merit to warrant the construction of tools for its manufacture. Numbers of guns were made both for military and sporting purposes, but they proved to lack the elements of practicability and safety, and their manufacture was abandoned leaving a lot of unsalable guns on hand with a large amount charged to profit and loss account. Another and more successful inventor in this line was James P. Lee, who brought out a practical and meritorious military arm. Mr. Lee spent several years in the Remington works utilizing their facilities for experimenting and model making. This arm was what is known in military parlance as a bolt gun, common so far as this feature is concerned in various forms in Europe; the distinguishing feature of his gun being a detachable magazine or case carrying five or more cartridges, a number of which could be carried on the soldier’s belt and, when required, instantly attached to the gun, the case being detached when the cartridges were exhausted. After securing United States and foreign patents covering his invention, Mr. Lee conveyed his rights to a joint stock company organized in Connecticut known as The Lee Arms Co., who undertook the manufacture of the arm at Bridgeport in that state. That company was unsuccessful in its attempt to manufacture and introduce the gun and, closing their works, entered into an agreement with the Remingtons, by which they were to manufacture and sell under license with payment of royalty. This undertaking involved the investment of a large sum in tools and fixtures, with a capacity for the production of 200 or more arms per day. It is not my purpose to discuss the wisdom of this or other ventures made by the Remingtons, but it is proper to say in this connection that the fact that the government of Great Britain has since adopted the Lee gun, with some minor modifications, demonstrates that in this case their estimate of the merits of the arm were not in error. Believing this arm would find favor with the governments of the world, they proceeded to manufacture several thousand stands, but military authorities seemed to be in a waiting rather than a buying mood, induced in part by an unusual state of peace among the South American nations, and the result of the whole undertaking was disappointing with a serious drain upon their resources. The limited and imperfect review I have made of the Remington industry from its incipiency to its greatest development is sufficient to demonstrate to the candid critic of the management, that from first to last, conditions new and untried had to be dealt with, decisions of vast importance to be promptly made. xxxviii

REMINGTON HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Nations had confided their destinies to keep their keeping, resting [the] powers of their armies for offense and defense upon the effectiveness and durability of their arms, thus making them responsible for much to be recorded in the current history of the world. In the conduct of this great business, the Remingtons were without the light of experience, were not schooled in finance or diplomacy, and, intensely burdened with the cares and responsibilities of the present, were unable clearly to solve the extremely difficult problems which the future presented. During the sojourn of Samuel abroad, as well as after his demise, the burden of care and responsibility rested principally upon the shoulders of Philo, Eliphalet being led by his tastes, as well as convictions, of duty to devote much of his time and energies to religious and philanthropic enterprises. That serious mistakes were made will not be denied, but those who indulge in uncharitable criticism will do well to ask themselves if, under such conditions, they could have made as creditable a record. In making a statement of the motives which actuated Mr. Philo Remington during the later years of his business career, I write from the standpoint of a personal friend and confidant and without the necessity for resorting to theory or conjecture. After the point was reached when the debts of corporation were liquidated and an ample surplus was in hand, he told me that every selfish impulse prompted him to throw off the cares and responsibilities of business and spend the remainder of life in restful retirement, and that but one consideration prevented him from yielding to this impulse. A large village had grown up around their works, the habitants of which were dependent upon them for a livelihood, having invested their savings in homes there. In an endeavor to ensure the future prosperity of these, he felt compelled by a sense of duty to labor on and, if need be, to die in the harness. Anticipating a decline in the demand for military arms, he could see no way for the accomplishment of that for which he felt in duty bound to labor, except through a change from the manufacture of the implements of war to those of peace. The effort to accomplish his noble purposes was marked by the introduction of the manufacture of various utensils to be used for domestic and business purposes, to which reference will be made hereafter. Some of these essays proved slightly remunerative, others disastrously unprofitable. One, eminently successful, failed to attain full fruition during his life and serve as a reward for his persistent self sacrifice. But it cannot be said that his efforts were in vain. The great Typewriter Works, the offspring of his endeavors, the finest manufacturing plant in Central New York and the pride of Ilion, has given to her people that for which he wrought and to them a legacy of prosperity. I have referred to the Agricultural Works, which was a prominent industry in the village but was installed previous to the period just considered. The installation of this business and the erection of the plant was by a joint stock company incorporated August 12, 1864, the first trustees being Philo Remington, Eliphalet Remington, D. D. Devoe, James Sayre, Henry H. Fish, and Francis Kernan, the last three of Utica. The business of this company was to manufacture farm implements. The plant erected was extensive and the equipment elaborate—making horse-plows, the invention of Stewart Perry of Newport, and mowing machines under license from the Walter A. Wood Co., and the Sayre Cultivator Tooth, constitute the principal work during the first years with plows, etc., a minor department. xxxix

INTRODUCTION

In 1865, Mr. Sayre resigned his position as trustee and was followed in 1866 by Secretary Fish. At the annual election on Jan. 24, 1866, John Dagwell, R. S. Williams, Francis Kernan, and F. T. Woodford, of Utica, and Samuel and Philo Remington were elected, thus continuing the management largely in the hands of Utica parties. From the first, results were disappointing and the business a losing one. The causes I shall not discuss further than to say that the rapid development of agriculture in the West carried with it the establishment thereof factories with advantages as to freight and supplies of raw material so great as to place eastern manufacturers almost outside the range of successful competition. The Utica stockholders seeing little chance for escape from greater losses conveyed their interests to the Remington Brothers, who assumed the indebtedness of the corporation and operated the works thereafter. The reputation of the standard implements, such as plows, cultivators, hoes, shovels, etc., which they made was always good and they doubtless afforded some profit but efforts in the line of new inventions, which they were induced to make, more than offset them and carried the profit and loss account to the bad. Notable among these was the so-called reversible mower, the offspring of one J. F. Crawford, who succeeded in securing the confidence of the Remingtons in himself and his machine to an extent that probably $350,000 would not cover their losses. The Scattergood Cotton Gin, an invention with apparent merits, failed to realize expectations and helped swell the losses. The manufacture of iron bridges was also carried on, and many fine structures erected, prominent among which were the one crossing the Mohawk river at Schenectady, which is 800 feet long, and locally, those crossing the river at Fort Herkimer and at Mohawk and Ilion. The works were kept in operation with continued efforts to introduce new and profitable lines of manufacture until April, 1886, when an assignment was made to Charles Harter, by whom the plant was sold, and subsequently passed into the possession of the present owners, Wyckoff, Seamans, and Benedict. During most of the time, A. M. Ross had general charge of the manufacturing department, assisted at times by D. D. Devoe, John F. Thomas, Harrison Brand and others. The financial management during the Utica regime was by John C. Devereaux as Treasurer and after by F. C. Shepard and others at the office of Remington & Sons. Among the first and most important attempts to convert the armory into a manufactory of articles for domestic use was in the line of sewing machines. J. T. Jones, a successful inventor and former employee of the Singer Sewing Machine Company, was employed, and the tools and goodwill of a company operating elsewhere purchased. At that time the basic patents embraced in practical sewing machines were owned by a few companies in combination, and from these licenses bearing large royalties were obtained. Combining the invention of Jones with those acquired by license, a machine was produced supposed to be practical and placed on the market through an elaborate system of agencies. The machine failed to justify the expectations of its projectors and, until in later times after expensive changes and improvements, obtained no standing in the market. At one time, under the leadership of a man by the name of W. H. Hooper, a corporation was organized called “The Remington Sewing Machine Company of North America” for the purpose of exploiting and selling the machine. The Remingtons were the principal stockholders in this concern, but at their solicitation, blocks of stock were also taken by many of the businessmen of the village and by others outside. Hooper proved to be a visionary and impracticable man, and after an extravagant expenditure in the equipment of offices and agencies, the project fell through, the Remingtons xl

REMINGTON HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

shouldering the losses and refunding the subscriptions of outside stockholders. The manufacture of sewing machines, however, was not abandoned. Mr. Jones was relieved from his position and the work placed under the supervision of John Hoefler. Under his direction, improvements were made which placed it in the list of first-class machines. In the meantime, the basic patents on sewing machines had expired, and the field was opened for an almost ruinous competition, which quickly followed, rendering the chances for profits exceedingly meager. In 1882, Messrs. Charles Harter, Addison Brill, John Hoefler, John V. Schmidt, and O. B. Rudd formed a company called the “Remington Sewing Machine Agency,” with Mr. Brill as manager, and from that time, all sales were made through their agency. This proved to be a practicable arrangement, and one that, if earlier adopted, might have averted heavy losses. In investigating the causes leading to the ultimate failure of the company, I found $734,000.00 charged to profit and loss, and I have reason to believe other items, not included, make the loss on account of sewing machines a round sum of $1,000,000. The wonderful discoveries of the use of electricity, for lighting the streets of cities and villages, seemed to open a field in which their facilities for manufacturing could be profitably employed, and electricians were employed, who devised dynamos and lamps together with the other appliances necessary to an equipment, and the required patterns and tools were made. The village of Ilion was partly lighted by an experimental plant within their works, with such effectiveness as to induce its adoption in Schenectady, Rome, and Oswego, and in some villages, but in this, as in the attempt to introduce their sewing machines, they were confronted with the opposition of the powerful rush, Edison and other competitors, and no permanent success rewarded their efforts. Profit and loss account again registered to the bad. Omitting reference to other minor essays, the typewriter now engages our attention. In the year 1873, Mr. James Densmore, with whom George N. Yost was associated in some manner, came to Ilion to induce the Remingtons to enter into the manufacture of an instrument by that name, of which Densmore was in part inventor and also controlled other patents used in the device. The typewriter he brought with him was crude in its construction, with its parts so disproportionate and poorly made that it barely served as the basis for a model, which could be manufactured by machinery. But it would write and embodied the fundamental characteristics of the machine now of worldwide fame and utility. By many, it was regarded as a plaything, with little prospect of ever becoming a necessity in the conduct of business correspondence or for engrossing legal documents. The Remingtons, after careful deliberation, concluded that the merits of the invention warranted them in embarking in its manufacture and entered into a contract giving them the right to make and sell exclusively. The work of remodeling and putting the machine into a practical and symmetrical form and adapting machinery and tools to its manufacture required much time and large expenditures. This work was confided largely to W. K. Jenne, who has superintended the manufacture to this date and to whose practical genius it is indebted for many of its most meritorious features. With this, as with other products, the most difficult problem was how to sell. The public must be convinced of its practicability and educated in its use. Liberal sums must be paid for advertising and agencies established and maintained at great cost. To be a good manufacturer is one thing, xli

INTRODUCTION

to be a good salesman, another, and very different qualifications. Philo Remington, preeminently a manufacturer, was without skill as a vendor, and his brother, whose health was not good and whose wife was an invalid, had neither the time nor endowment for an undertaking so difficult and extended. After a period, during which some machines were marketed through the agency of Fairbanks & Co. of New York, and the New York office of E. Remington & Sons, Clarence W. Seamans, son of A. C. Seamans of Ilion, and at one time a bookkeeper in their office, associated with himself W. O. Wyckoff of Ithaca, N.Y. and H. H. Benedict, then engaged in the Ilion office of the company, forming a partnership under the name of Wyckoff, Seamans, and Benedict. This company entered into an agreement with the Remingtons, by which they became the purchasers and sole vendors of the Remington typewriter. These gentlemen proved to be well fitted for such an undertaking and readily disposed of the then-limited product of the works. This arrangement continued till spring of 1886, when Wyckoff, Seamans & Benedict purchased the entire interests of E. Remington & Sons in the typewriter business. As a part of the history of Ilion, it is to be added that under the management of these enterprising men, the typewriter has been introduced into every part of the civilized world and has become a necessity in conducting every department of public, professional, and business affairs. This company manufactured typewriters for three years in buildings leased from E. Remington & Sons and then removed to the plant of the former agricultural works on the north side of the canal, which they purchased and equipped with a complete outfit of machinery and tools, especially adapted to their wants. To the already extensive plant, they have added an imposing brick factory, seven stories in height, together with several auxiliary structures. This added space is not yet fully occupied, but the equipment is most elaborate and convenient, and, when complete, will be second to no manufacturing establishment in the world. In every department, great care has been taken to promote the comfort and well being of the employees while at work, and the sanitary arrangements are both elaborate and scientific. Notable in this department is an equipment of free baths for the use of the workmen. Sixteen spacious bathrooms (enclosed with polished cypress, furnished with porcelain tubs with nickeled fixtures, and supplied with hot and cold water) are under the care of a special attendant, whose duty is to see that they are kept scrupulously clean. Here the workmen may cultivate the Godly virtue of cleanliness at their pleasure. Other sanitary conveniences of corresponding completeness are properly distributed through the works. In response to the generous efforts of the proprietors to promote the interests of the workmen, a cheerful compliance is given to the rules requiring neatness and decorum on their part. B. B. VanDeusen, the general manager, has displayed great ability in executing the wishes of the proprietors in these regards and in organizing the various departments in such manner as to produce perfect harmony and efficiency. The present output is 100 improved typewriters per day with a working force of about 800 men. With the business of the country now rapidly improving, I risk little in promising that the coming year will witness a swelling in the number of employees to 1000. With a full and hearty recognition of the great achievements of this company, let us not forget that none of these things were possible but for the beneficent purposes and efforts of the Remingtons. xlii

REMINGTON HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Happily, the privilege to be noble and generous is not exclusive. Clarence W. Seamans, with a liberality prompted by his patriotic regard for his native village, in 1893, presented it with a beautiful “Free Public Library” building, erected at an expense of $30,000. As the result of public subscriptions, supplemented by generous gifts of books by Mrs. Seamans and others, the library now contains about 10,000 volumes with a yearly circulation of 42,000 volumes. The management is by a board of trustees appointed by the village authorities. The present incumbents being Mr. and Mrs. C. W. Seamans, James Conkling, B. B. VanDeusen, John A. Giblin and Misses Cornelia Seamans and Harriet E. Russell. Mr. Seamans also gives generous aid to other public institutions in the village. Mr. Benedict, without the inspiration of nativity, has won the gratitude of the people of Ilion by large gifts of money, notably to the Presbyterian and Baptist Churches, enabling both to own fine churches free from debt. But regard for your patience bids me hasten to close this paper, with a record of events relating to the waning career of the Remingtons. The undertakings, to which I have referred, rapidly depleted their treasury and reduced them to the ranks of debtors. Various schemes were resorted to in order to bridge them over what was hoped to be temporary difficulties. Among them were the issuance of bonds as security for loans. Another and more hurtful expedient was the introduction of what was known as “the order system” by which employees were permitted to purchase their supplies of the merchants, giving in payment orders on the company, who, in return, issued their notes payable in one, two or three months. This, like all other unsound financial methods, simply wrought confusion and financial disorder. Not anticipating such a reversal of conditions, both Philo and Eliphalet had felt at liberty to make disposition of the large sums received from the dividends referred to, much of what was devoted to educational, philanthropic and religious institutions (notably to the Syracuse University). Some large investments were also made, which brought no returns. Philo was also seriously embarrassed by yielding to the solicitations of W. S. King of Minneapolis for financial aid involving large amounts, just at the time when he most needed all his available resources for the protection of his own interests. The reward he received for his self-sacrifice was an illustration of selfish ingratitude, which my pen is incompetent to depict. With their private resources thus depleted, they were not in a condition to relieve the situation by the use of personal means. Apparently bewildered by their environment, they entrusted their financial management to John Brown, who, less competent than themselves, led them in a kiting downhill race. Just then, hopes were revived by the appearance of Turkey in the market as a negotiator for 600,000 stands of infantry arms. Her experts had reported favorably upon the Remington Lee magazine rifle, and hopes were indulged that the contract could be obtained, and thereby the company extricated from its financial stress. Seeking thereby to liquidate the most pressing demands and gain time for obtaining more permanent relief, early in March, 1886, they sold all their interest in the typewriter business to Wyckoff, Seamans, & Benedict as heretofore stated, receiving therefore, I think, $186,000. This move failed in its purposes. Some creditors were paid from this fund; all wanted to be. At the juncture, Mr. John J. Hannas came to the front with a scheme for an extension. While his scheme was deemed chimerical by some and of doubtful practicability by others, the company determined to try it, and in pursuance thereof, conveyed a majority of their capitol [sic] stock to a committee consisting of Addison Brill, John L. McMillan and myself, who were to assume the xliii

INTRODUCTION

management of the business, while Mr. Hannas was to secure assent from the creditors to an extension. A few days sufficed to terminate that essay. Creditors refused to be put off, demanding immediate payment, and failing to realize this, they resorted to legal methods. But one course remained, and this was promptly taken. Mr. Brill and myself, by the choice of Mr. Remington, were by Justice Pardon C. Williams of the Supreme Court made temporary and later permanent receivers of the estate, with Thomas Richardson as counsel. Creditors were restrained from further proceedings, and after a careful survey of the existing conditions, the court was asked to order the receivers to operate the works and to make and execute contracts. Arrangements were made with Hartley & Graham of New York, by which they took a leading part in the negotiations with Turkey, which at times gave promise of success. The cooperation of the party, who controlled the previous contract to the discomfort of the Remingtons, was secured and success seemed at hand. At this juncture, German influences became active in the interests of the German manufacturer Mauser. The German minister at that court actively engaged in Mauser’s behalf, while owing to the vacancy caused by the death of the United States Minister S. S. Cox, we had no counteracting influences. So Mauser carried off the prize. Thence nothing was left for the receivers but to execute such minor orders as might be secured, complete work in progress, realize on assets, and wind up the business of the company. Two years elapsed before the plant was sold and, owing to vexatious litigation, four more, before the final closing of the work and discharge of the receivers. The works were sold at auction to Hartley & Graham in March, 1888, for the sum of $200,000. Since that time, they have operated them under the corporate name of the “Remington Arms Co.,” and have continued the manufacture of small arms, but have never secured large governmental contracts. They have, however, made bicycles in large numbers and have employed a force varying from 500 to 1000 men. The assets of the corporation, as shown by an inventory based upon cost with liberal deductions for supposed depreciation, were $1,711,783.94 (with liabilities amounting to $1,255,703.27, about $450,000 of which was secured by hypothecated goods and $65,000 was due for labor) leaving an apparent surplus of $456,080.67. From such an exhibit the natural conclusion would be that all liabilities could be met. But here comes the difficulty; guns and pistols were not staple commodities like cotton cloth or pig iron. The market was limited and purchasers could fix their own prices. So also with the plant; there were no anxious competitors of its purchase, and it had to be sold for a nominal sum. The receivers were able to pay the labor accounts in full and, in the main, the secured creditors from the goods pledged. Upon all unsecured claims the payment was 36%. Thus, after nearly 70 years of life, closed a business which has seldom been paralleled as to the period of its existence or the magnitude of its operations. Let not the clouds of misfortune, or mistakes of the past, obscure the vision from the masterly achievements of former days. Philo Remington saw the control of the great business pass into other hands without a murmur and cheerfully rendered the receivers all the aid in his power in their endeavors to administer the estate in the interest of creditors and of the people, with whom, and for whom, he had labored so incessantly. But the sudden relaxation was more damaging to an overtaxed system than continued activity. In the winter of 1888–89 accompanied by his wife, he visited Florida hoping that a milder climate would aid in the recovery of waning health. For a time, it was thought that this would be realized, but on the 4th day of April at Silver Springs and without premonition, his generous heart xliv

REMINGTON HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

ceased to beat. His stricken companion, with his remains, made her cheerless journey to their home, where impressive funeral services were held conducted by the pastor of his church, assisted by former pastors and those of other denominations in the village. The house and spacious grounds were crowded with the people of his own and surrounding villages, who joined the sad procession as he was carried by former employees to his last resting place in the village cemetery. Never was man more sincerely respected in life or mourned in death. The personality of Philo Remington was peculiarly attractive. In stature, he was above the medium with every physical feature well developed. A massive head crowned with a luxuriant growth of waving black hair, which lost none of its beauty as time tinged it with silvery gray and white, gave harmony to the physical endowment. A sympathetic nature beamed through kindly expressive eyes, with which every facial delineation was in harmony. Modest and unassuming in his manners, he led without pomp and controlled without force. With wonderful equipoise and self-control, he maintained alike in prosperity and adversity an unruffled temper and the bearing of the true gentleman. In politics, Mr. Remington, like his father, was first a Whig and afterwards a Republican. For many years, he was President of the Village, but aside from this, he neither sought nor held office. His life was an exemplification of consistent Christian character, with a membership in the Methodist Episcopal Church, to the interests of which he contributed with unstinted generosity. On December 28, 1841, Philo Remington married Miss Caroline A. Lathrop, who survives him and resides in Ilion. Their children were Ida, wife of Watson C. Squire, and Ella, now the wife of Howard C. Furman of New York City. Mr. and Mrs. Squire have two sons, Philo R. of New York City and Shirley of Seattle, Wash., and two daughters, Aldine and Marjorie, at present residing with their grandmother at Ilion. Ella has been twice married, first to E. P. Greene of Amsterdam, N.Y., who died in December, 1876, leaving three sons, Frederick Remington, William Kimball and Harry P., now deceased. Eliphalet, the only surviving member of the family whose business history I have so imperfectly sketched, still resides in his native village. As has been seen, he was less prominent than his brothers in the management of the business. A zealous Christian, he has devoted much of his time and means to the advancement of the cause of education and of temperance and religion. Like his brother, he possesses a fine physique and pleasing manners. He enjoys, to an unusual degree, the respect and esteem of all who know him. If I am privileged to name his greatest fault, it is that in his zeal in behalf of others he is too forgetful of his own interests. His marriage was to Catharine, daughter of Louis Stevens of Ilion. They have two daughters, Jessie, now Mrs. Wm. I. Calder of Harrisburg, and Bertha, wife of T. Elliott Patterson of Philadelphia, Pa., and one son, Philo, married and living in New York City. I have already made this paper so voluminous as to forbid an attempt to bring the history of the Village of Ilion up to date. Suffice it to say that the present population is about 5,000 and is slowly increasing. The proximity of the villages of Frankfort, Mohawk, and Herkimer, which are connected with it by an electric street railroad, enables many of the workmen employed to reside in those places and to that extent retards the growth of Ilion, which, if isolated, would doubtless have attained a 50% larger growth. xlv

CHAPTER ONE

Remington Navy Revolvers Purchased by the Army Ordnance Department he year of 1861 began with the nation in turmoil; by January 12, four states had seceded from the Union and rumors of war were rampant. The Union had a standing army of less than fifteen thousand men, and the officer ranks had been decimated by the resignation of many whose loyalties were south of the Mason-Dixon Line. The federal government had made only token preparations for war, as officials still nurtured hope of avoiding outright hostilities. This was the situation when rebel forces fired on Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861. President Lincoln issued a call for seventy-five thousand volunteers on April 15; initially, manpower was not a problem, as enlistment offices were swamped with volunteers. Arming the troops proved to be a more difficult task, as the arsenals remaining in Union hands were poorly stocked. After the loss of Fort Sumter, the War Department made little immediate effort to secure additional arms. During May and June 1861, the Ordnance Department ordered only 6,000 carbines from Sharps, 32,500 sabers from Ames, and 7,300 revolvers from Colt, who at that time was the only arms manufacturer with facilities capable of mass producing military-sized revolvers. This lax attitude was engendered by the common misconception in the North that the rebel forces would soon be brought to bay. It was not until the Confederate victory at Bull Run on July 21, 1861, that the department began to purchase arms in volume. Eleven days after the war began; Ripley replaced seventy-year-old Craig as head of the department. On July 31, Ripley advised Secretary of War Simon Cameron of arms the department was in the process of procuring. The following is an excerpt from the report:

T

Statement of Arms recently Purchased, Ordered and Contracted. July 5th, 11th, & 13th, 4 Contracts July 21st Howland & Aspinwall July 22nd Maj. Hagner—Purchase July 25th T. Poultney

100,000 17,000 1,400 12,400

U.S. Rifle Muskets Enfield Rifle Muskets Enfield Rifle Muskets foreign Rifle Muskets 1

CHAPTER ONE

July 25th C. K. Garrison July 26th Mitchell & Jones July 27th Merwin & Bray July 27th John Pounder July 30th E. Remington & Son Total

10,000 50,000 6,500 10,000 10,000 217,300

French Rifle Muskets Enfield Rifle Muskets Enfield Rifle Muskets foreign Rifle Muskets U.S. Rifles Contract Inf. & Riflemens arms

Total

6,000 6,000 800 5,000 17,800

Revolvers order Carbines order Carbines order Revolvers order Calvary small arms

32,500 10,000 3,500

swords and sabers swords and sabers swords and sabers

June 12th S. Colt June 29th Sharps Arms Co. July 16th Burnside Arms Co. July 29th Remington & Son

June 11th J. T. Ames July 18th Capt. Whiteley—purchase July 25th Lt. Treadwell—purchase

Major Hagner at New York, and Lieut. Treadwell, at Philadelphia have orders to purchase all the small arms, swords and sabers they can find, of satisfactory quality, and at reasonable prices. In addition to the foregoing, 30,000 muskets have been ordered to New York from California, and General Fremont has purchased 2,000 rifles and 500 revolving pistols—making the following totals of arms recently purchased, ordered, and contracted for, viz: 249,000 Infantry & Riflemen’s arms 18,300 Calvary arms 47,000 Swords & Sabers1 The early history of the Remington firm is well documented in Albert Russell’s address, presented earlier in this volume. By the mid-1850s, the firm was well established as a maker of rifle barrels and other iron products associated with farming (figure 11). They had also completed small arms contracts for the Ordnance Department. The company had grown to the point where the Remingtons found it expedient to build their own barges for use on the Erie Canal as a method for importing raw goods and other necessities for the production of rifle barrels, iron tools, and utensils (figure 12). In 1857 E. Remington & Sons introduced the first of a series of .31 caliber pocket revolvers based on patents issued to Fordyce Beals in 1856–57. On September 14, 1858, the U.S. Patent Office issued Beals patent number 21,478 for the arrangement of the arbor pin (cylinder arbor) and loading lever, whereby the pin was retained in the frame by the lever (figure 13). Remington’s Third Pocket Model Revolver, introduced in 1859, was the first to utilize Beals’s 1858 patent (figure 14). The Beals Pocket Models were not big sellers, with a total production of all three models estimated at seventy-five hundred to eight thousand. Ultimately, Beals’s patent proved so successful that Remington would use it on all of their percussion revolvers employing 2

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

Figure 11 Remington Armory circa 1854. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

a loading lever, with two notable exceptions: the army and navy models with William Elliot’s illfated loading lever and arbor pin system. In October 1860, Remington published a price list announcing the introduction of a navy-size revolver “which will be in the market next spring” (figure 15). Perhaps Remington anticipated the demand for a larger caliber revolver in the event of war. If so, their timing could not have been better, as the Beals Navy Revolver first appeared shortly after the war began (figure 16). The exact date of introduction is difficult to ascertain, but after reviewing related correspondence, I feel comfortable in estimating that Remington’s Navy Revolvers were first produced in April or May 1861. Remington’s first attempts at utilizing Beals’s patent on the navy models proved to be impractical. They had used it successfully on the Third Model Pocket Revolvers, but when adapted to the larger frame and longer barrel of the navy revolvers, there were difficulties in retaining the arbor pin in the frame when the loading lever was lowered. This error was evidently not discovered until the revolvers were in the final stages of assembly, and after parts for approximately two hundred revolvers had been milled. Even though this lot of revolvers was somewhat less than perfect, Remington assembled the parts and sold the revolvers to the trade. Unwittingly, Remington had produced one of the true rarities in the Remington collecting field; the highest serial number reported for this variation is 174. The most notable feature of this revolver is the cylinder arbor pin, which has only one “ear” or “wing” to facilitate extraction. When identifying this variant, collectors refer to these revolvers as the “Single Wing Beals Navy” (figure 17). With an estimated production of less than two hundred, this revolver is extremely rare and examples are seldom seen in dealers’ inventories. A change in design was mandated; this was accomplished by enlarging the diameter of the arbor pin, adding a second wing, and milling a flat section on the bottom of the forward end of 3

CHAPTER ONE

Figure 12 Remington barges under construction for use on the Erie Canal. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

Figure 13 Fordyce Beals’s patent, number 21,478. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) 4

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

Figure 14 Remington-Beals Third Model Pocket Revolver. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

the pin for approximately two-thirds of the pin’s length. This created a shoulder near the rear of the pin, which engaged a corresponding shoulder on the rear of the loading lever when the lever was in the lowered position. This combination of parts effectively prevented the complete removal of the arbor pin from the frame, unless the loading lever was first removed (figure 18). There has been some debate among students of Remington design concerning Fordyce Beals’s involvement in this new design. It is the author’s opinion that he was not, as this arrangement was not patented until 1863, after the firm had reverted from the Elliot to the Beals system. It was apparently an afterthought, and the patent was assigned to Samuel Remington. There were other simultaneous minor changes in design; I shall discuss these elsewhere in this volume. Once Remington had perfected this new arbor-locking system, they renumbered the Navies again starting at serial number 1. This created a duplication of serial numbers in the early navy models. Duplication of serial numbers has been noted in later production Remington percussion revolvers, but these numbers were usually assigned to revolvers that received some special attention, such as being cased, engraved, or both. The serial numbers assigned to these latter revolvers are usually one, two, or three digits, and in a few rare instances, a letter of the alphabet was used instead of a number. Remington now had a large frame revolver for which there was an unprecedented demand from commercial arms dealers (figure 19). The Remingtons thought that they could be of better service by furnishing their arms to the government, and they immediately took steps to invite the military’s interest. In late June or early July, a representative from Ilion made a personal visit to the commander of Watervliet Arsenal, which is near Troy, New York. This resulted in the following letter, in which is found the first mention of Remington revolvers in the department’s files: 5

CHAPTER ONE

Figure 15 E. Remington & Sons, 1860 broadside. (Author’s collection)

Figure 16 Sketch of very early Beals Navy Revolver. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot–RSA Archives) 6

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

Figure 17 Remington-Beals Single Wing Navy Revolver, serial number 147. (Author’s collection)

Watervliet Arsenal July 2, 1861 Colonel J. W. Ripley United States Corps of Ordnance. Sir, Mr. J. [sic] Remington, of the firm of E. Remington & Son, of Ilion, New York, has shown me a pistol of their make, which I think deserves the consideration of the ordnance department, and I have therefore advised him to present the pistol in person to you for examination. Its combination of parts is very simple. I am Sir, Respectfully, Your Obt. Servant W. A. Thornton Brevet Major U.S. Army, Com’g Arsenal2 William Anderson Thornton’s name will be readily recognized by collectors of martial arms (figure 20). Thornton was a career army officer with many years of service as commander of armories and arsenals, during which he also served as an inspector of small arms for the department. His cartouche is found on many arms purchased by the government prior to the Civil War. On Wednesday, July 17, the Herkimer Democrat published an account of the recent death of Eliphalet Remington Jr.: Death of Eliphalet Remington This highly respected gentleman, and head of the extensive manufactory of fire arms, at Ilion, in this county, died at his residence on Friday last. At a meeting of the employees of the Armory, a Series of resolutions of respect were adopted, and a badge of mourning is to be worn for the usual time. His age was upwards of sixty years.3 7

CHAPTER ONE

Figure 18 Remington-Beals Transition Revolver. Inset shows second type of cylinder arbor. (Author’s collection)

His age was, in fact, sixty-seven; his sixty-eighth birthday would have occurred on October 28. Some Remington historians have attributed his death, in part, to exhaustion caused by the strain of supervising efforts to produce arms for the Union Army. The fallacy of this observation is apparent; the firm had yet to receive their first order for arms from the War Department. Thornton’s letter of July 2 was closely followed by another endorsement: New York July 18, 1861 General Ripley Chief of Ordnance, Washington. General, Mr. Remington takes on to you one of his revolvers. I am procuring all of them I can for the Western army, and hope to hear that I can get all I may need. I have seen no revolver I like as well, and the price is nearer the cost than with some others. As Messrs. Remington have done much good work under my superintendence, I take pleasure in mentioning them to you. P. V. Hagner, Brevet Major4 Maj. Peter Valentine Hagner was also an experienced ordnance officer with twenty-five years of service in the army after graduating from West Point in 1836 (figure 21). The department had assigned Hagner, Capt. Silas Crispin, and Lt. T. J. Treadwell to locate and purchase arms for the Union Army. I cannot explain Hagner’s reference to procuring Remington revolvers. Department records indicate that no Remington revolvers were purchased from either Remington or commercial arms dealers until almost a full month later. Hagner may have been negotiating for some of these revolvers prior to writing his letter. Another more 8

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

Figure 19 Remington-Beals Second Variation Revolver. Inset depicts large lever latch post. (Author’s collection)

Figure 20 Col. William A. Thornton, inspector of contract arms. (Courtesy: National Archives)

Figure 21 Col. Peter V. Hagner, inspector of contract arms. (Courtesy: National Archives) 9

CHAPTER ONE

likely possibility is that some early Remington revolver purchases were never correctly entered into the department’s ledgers. The department was desperate for all goods necessary for waging war. On July 9, 1861, Ripley sent the following to Captain Whiteley, then commander of the New York Arsenal, stressing the necessity for constant perseverance in acquiring arms from contractors: Sir, It is necessary that the contract sub inspectors should be impressed with the necessity of using every exertion to hasten the delivery of arms &c and on no account to allow any delay to arise from any neglect or fault of theirs. They must work ten hours a day, or more if necessary to keep up with the work to be inspected. If there are any delinquents report them and take measures to correct the delinquencies, and if, as I am informed was the case of Mr. Taylor at Binghampton, the contractors do not furnish enough work to keep them employed, withdraw them, and put them on duty where their services are wanted.5 Ripley again contacted Whiteley on July 19: Sir, The calls for swords and sabres are so urgent, that it is necessary that everything possible should be done to obtain supplies. We must avail ourselves of all serviceable arms of the kind, which may be offered, whether they come up or not to the exact standard of times when we could await deliveries without inconvenience. Therefore slight blemishes; or departure from the exact gauge dimensions, which do not injure the serviceableness of the arms, will not be considered causes for rejection. Under present circumstances, we must overlook all but real defects. Your own good judgement will enable you to act properly in the matter, and give the requisite instructions to your inspectors.6 On July 29, a representative from Remington made a personal visit to the Ordnance Department seeking government orders for Remington revolvers and rifles. This visit resulted in immediate orders for both; the revolver order was tendered by Ripley on the same day: Messrs. E. Remington & Sons, Please make for this department, with the greatest possible dispatch, 5,000 revolver pistols, of the same description as the sample you showed here, but of the calibre of the army pistol, .44 inch. Send a sample of the pistol, calibre .44 inch such as you are to deliver, for examination at this office and to serve as a guide in the inspections. There will be allowed for these pistols fifteen dollars ($15.) each, including appendages; to be paid, as usual, on certificates of inspection and receipt. Please signify your acceptance or non-acceptance of this order.7 The acceptance of this order was penned at Washington on the same day. It was signed E. Remington & Sons, making it impossible to identify the Remington representative, but I 10

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

suspect that it was Samuel Remington, who was the firm’s envoy and negotiator after the death of Eliphalet Remington Jr. The other two sons had assumed different positions in the company—Philo managed plant operations, and Eliphalet III assumed the clerical duties. Sir, We have the honor to inform you that we will accept of your order to furnish your department with five thousand revolver pistols similar to sample shown you, but of the army size of calibre, at $15. each.8 Ripley tendered the second order on the following day: Gentlemen, You will please make for this department, and deliver with all possible dispatch, ten thousand rifles with sword bayonets, and appendages complete. These rifles are to be .58 inch calibre, and to have a three leaf rear sight, and a cupped ramrod, with sword bayonet stud similar to those of the Harpers Ferry rifle model of 1855, in other respects of the pattern of the rifles without bayonets heretofore made by you for this department. Please send a sample rifle to this office as soon as possible for examination, and to serve as a guide in the inspection of the 10,000 to be delivered by you. These rifles are to be subject to the regular inspection, and to be paid for on certificates of inspection and receipt, at twenty dollars each, appendages and sword bayonets included. Please signify your acceptance or non-acceptance of this order, and in case of acceptance lose no time in preparing and delivering the arms.9 On August 6, the company sent a response to the above order, indicating that Remington’s representative had returned to Ilion. Doubtless, this was done to obtain home office concurrence before acceptance: Sir: We have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of 30th ultimo, and to say that we accept the order contained therein for ten thousand rifles, model of 1855, with sword bayonets and appendages complete.10 From later testimony before the Owen-Holt Commission, I gathered that the Remingtons were disappointed in the limited quantities of these orders and took no immediate attempts to comply with either. Neither the revolver nor rifle orders were contracts, and neither were fulfilled as specified. Both were later modified by the Owen-Holt Commission on Ordnance, substituting contracts for the original letter orders. Although several thousand navy revolvers would be delivered to the Ordnance Department, ten months would pass before Remington furnished the first lot of 850 .44 caliber Beals Army Revolvers (figure 22). The reason Remington delivered navy revolvers in lieu of army models becomes quite apparent when all the facts are examined. In 1861 their armory was still fairly small, and they 11

CHAPTER ONE

Figure 22 Remington-Beals Army Revolver, serial number 1,028. (Author’s collection)

were not tooled up for the manufacture of army revolvers. It appears that the Remingtons were reluctant to make major investments in new machinery for the small revolver order that they had received from the department. Their navy revolvers were selling quite briskly, both on the open market and to the army. Remington evidently saw no reason to make major investments in machinery to produce army revolvers as long as the department was willing to accept Navies. Samuel Remington, when testifying before the Owen-Holt Commission on April 4, 1862, stated, “We can now deliver pistols, could have delivered army pistols heretofore, but was [sic] delayed on account of the delivery of navy pistols to Major Hagner.”11 While the original order specified the delivery of 5,000 army revolvers, the department’s records disclosed purchases of 7,250 navy and 850 army revolvers between August 17, 1861, and May 31, 1862. The order had instructed Remington to deliver a sample revolver in caliber .44 to serve as a guide in the inspections. It had also called for the revolvers to be inspected. With respect to this order for five thousand Armies, Remington never delivered the sample revolver, and the department never assigned inspectors to the armory. The navy revolvers that were accepted by Crispin and Hagner received no formal inspection and, therefore, do not have an inspector’s cartouche on the grips. On August 2, Ripley began a series of letters and telegrams to ordnance officers, conveying again the urgency of early deliveries of arms and other related stores. The first went to Lt. George T. Balch, then stationed at the Washington Arsenal: Sir: It being necessary that Maj. Hagner should devote his whole time to procuring arms and accouterments, horse equipments &c in New York and its immediate vicinity, you will have to relieve him from the other duties which have been assigned to him. For this purpose you will proceed to New York and confer with Maj. Hagner, and ascertain the character and extent of his duties, in addition to those in New York and its vicinity, and 12

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

how far they have been executed. You will then proceed to complete them, and will for this purpose, visit Springfield, Mass. and such other places as may be necessary to enable you to attend to the execution of the orders Maj. Hagner has given, of the instructions you have received here, and of those which may hereafter be sent to you. Your station while engaged on these duties, will be Springfield, Mass., where you will take post.12 On the following day, Ripley notified Hagner of his new duties: Sir: It is necessary that you should be at New York, or its immediate vicinity, at all times, so as to take advantage of every arrival of arms, and be able to purchase from first parties. For this reason Lt. Balch has been ordered to proceed to New York to confer with you in relation to the character and extent of your duties other than those at New York and Newark, and to relieve you from their further execution. You will please give him all the information necessary to enable him to perform the service to which he has been assigned. On August 6, Ripley telegraphed the following to Hagner: Buy all the swords, pistols and carbines suitable for Cavalry and all arms suitable for infantry that you can find and send them here at once. Urge all the contractors for carriages, equipments, and artillery harness and to increase exertions, and send everything here as soon as it is finished. At the same instance, he sent a second telegram to Thornton at Watervliet Arsenal: Push work on 12 pdr. and other field carriages, and harness; and send them here as soon as possible. The need is most urgent! He also dispatched a third telegram to Balch, now at the Springfield Armory: Urge all the contractors forward. Work nights, and put on more hands. The need is most urgent!13 Remington made their first delivery of navy revolvers to the department on August 17, 1861. The following provide examples of correspondence concerning the deliveries of October 5 and 12, 1861. On October 11, Remington billed the department for four hundred Navies: Sir, We beg leave to hand you herewith our account for 400 revolvers (Navy size) forwarded to Lt. Col. G. D. Ramsey, Comdg. Washington Arsenal (ordered by Major P. V. Hagner). We shall be glad to receive returns for same as soon as practicable.14 13

CHAPTER ONE

On October 19, Ripley requested the military storekeeper at the Washington Arsenal to confirm the delivery: E. N. Stebbins, Esq., M.S.K. To enable me to settle the account of Remington’s & Sons for 400 Revolvers Navy size, you will please send a receipt for them to this office.15 Again, on October 24, Remington billed the department for another lot of four hundred Navies: Sir, We have the honor to enclose herewith our account for 400 revolvers (Navy size) forwarded under order received from Major P. V. Hagner, to Lt. Col. G. D. Ramsey, Comdg. Washington Arsenal. Hoping to receive returns for the same as early as practicable.16 Although Remington was delivering revolvers to the army, they were reluctant to abandon the commercial dealers who were essential to their wholesale trade and continued to supply them with revolvers. The majority of these arms were, in turn, purchased by the Ordnance Department. I found that this was not an isolated case; dealers regularly acquired arms that were later purchased by the department. During the early months of the war, thousands of revolvers changed hands in this manner, many at exorbitant prices. The department recorded its first purchase of three hundred Remington Navies from Remington in their ledger: “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms,” on August 17, 1861.17 Nine days after Hagner took delivery of these, the department purchased fifty from New York arms dealer Schuyler, Hartley, and Graham. Department records reveal purchases of twenty-three hundred Remington Navy Revolvers from commercial dealers in the remaining months of 1861, at prices ranging from $16.00 to $22.50. Remington also supplied dealers with an unknown number of revolvers that were resold to the civilian trade. During this same period, the company furnished only sixteen hundred revolvers on the department’s order of July 29, 1861. This practice continued until the early weeks of 1862, when the department urged Remington to deliver more revolvers. On February 4, Ripley contacted Remington with the following: Telegram How many pistols per week can this Dept. depend on receiving from you? Please answer at once.18 Remington was not singled out for this query, as the department sent the same message to many arms contractors. Remington, perceiving the urgency of this message, discontinued, at least temporarily, supplying revolvers to commercial dealers and simultaneously increased navy revolver production. On the following day, the Herkimer Democrat published the following article on the increased activities at Ilion: 14

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

The Remington Armory at Ilion The armory at Ilion, with its large number of employees, is the source of great prosperity to that thriving village. About 150 arms are now being turned out. A new addition will soon turn out 100 more, and a branch at Utica another 100, making the daily production of rifles, pistols, and carbines about three hundred and fifty. A writer describing these works says the machinery is kept in constant operation, except on Sundays, by relays of hands. The system which prevails throughout is admirable. Division of labor is carried to the ultimate. Scores of machines are at work, each upon a single process. Not only are the distinct parts of the weapon made by separate machines, but each process upon each distinct part is the result of a machine designed for that particular work. As the parts pass through the long array of operations, they take form and polish and beauty, and, gathered into the assembling room, they unite in the perfect weapon. For it is the beauty of this system, that all the parts of the weapons of the same class, are interchangeable; so accurate is the workmanship and so perfectly does the machinery repeat, day after day, its delicate manipulations. Here are the three gentlemen—Messrs Samuel, Philo, and Eliphalet Remington— bred to the manufacture of arms, from boyhood, under a father himself skilled to the work. They have gathered the best labor for leading positions that the country affords, and find that no more of thoroughly skilled artisans can be obtained for love or money. Whatever forty years of experience could devise in the way of machinery, they have built and procured. Their army and navy pistols are commended by the ordnance bureau at Washington, and are largely used by the Union Forces. The elder Mr. Remington, now deceased, was the inventor of steel barreled guns, first adopted by the United States Government when Jeff Davis was Secretary of War. They are now manufacturing large carbines for the Government, and have a contract of some magnitude for rifles.19 This article is typical of newspaper reporting in this era. The author has distorted the facts, grossly exaggerating the present and anticipated production of the Ilion Armory. Remington was producing approximately fifty revolvers a day, or twelve hundred a month. The company was not making rifles or carbines at that time; they did not deliver their first rifles until April 1863. The only information of importance was mention of impending construction of an armory in Utica. During the latter part of 1861, the War Department came under public scrutiny for awarding contracts and orders for goods and services in violation of the Act of June 23, 1860. Secretary of War Simon Cameron resigned in January 1862 (figure 23), and Edwin M. Stanton succeeded him (figure 24). On March 10, Stanton issued a General Order that suspended deliveries on all arms orders and contracts that had been granted by the department. He also established the Commission on Ordnance and Ordnance Stores to “audit and adjust all contracts, orders and claims on the War Department in respect to Ordnance, Arms and Ammunition.”20 Stanton appointed Robert Dale Owen and Joseph Holt as commissioners, vesting with them the authority to rescind, modify, and renegotiate contracts to protect the interests of the government. Shortly after the commissioners convened, they requested the services of an ordnance officer to 15

CHAPTER ONE

Figure 23 Secretary of war, Simon Cameron. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

Figure 24 Secretary of war, Edwin M. Stanton. (Courtesy: Library of Congress) 16

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

Figure 25 Pettingill Army Revolver. (Author’s photograph)

assist them in their investigations, and the department assigned Hagner to this duty. Thereafter, Crispin received Remington’s revolvers for the department. On April 7, Hagner sent an inquiry to Ripley on behalf of the commission. On the following day Ripley replied as follows: Sir, In answer to your letter of the 7th inst. asking for certain information on behalf of the “Commissioner on Ordnance and Ordnance Stores,” I have to say that no trial of the revolver made by Messrs. Rodgers Spencer & Co. has ever been made at the directions of this Dept. Nor is there any information in the files of this office regarding the merits of the weapon. Neither has there ever been a trial of the Remington pistol, as far as I am aware, been made by this Dept. From the examination which I have been able to make of the samples of these two pistols, I am not aware that the first named possesses any advantages over the latter as a military weapon. I enclose herewith, a report of a Board of Officers that established the pattern of the present Colt’s Army pistol, for the perusal of the Commission.21 The first revolver, described by Ripley, was actually a Pettingill, then being manufactured by Rogers and Spencer (figure 25). The department later acquired a small quantity of these. In this reply, Ripley also forwarded the following report of a board of officers convened in 1860 to examine Colt’s Improved Army Revolver (Model 1860). Washington Arsenal, D.C., May 19, 1860 The Board of Officers appointed by Special Order No. 94, “to examine and report on certain improvements recently made in Colt’s Revolving firearms,” having made the examination as directed, submit the following Report: The improvement, as claimed by Mr. Colt, consists in diminishing the weight of his Revolver known as the Dragoon or Holster Pistol, and retaining the same calibre, thereby 17

CHAPTER ONE

securing as great efficiency of fire, without the disadvantages heretofore found in carrying and handling the heavier pistol of that description. The Board first made a careful examination of the Improved Revolver, from which they are convinced that it possesses decided advantages over that which it is designed to supercede, not only from its reduced weight, but also from its superior model, which is apparent at first view. There were two Revolvers of this model presented for examination, differing only in the length of the barrel; one being 7 1/2 inches long, the exact length of the old model; the other half an inch longer, or eight inches in the barrel. The following are the results of trials made by the Board, for the purpose of ascertaining the comparative practical efficiency of the present and Improved Revolvers, and also of the improved 7 1/2 and 8 inch barrels, as compared with each other:

Old Model, 7 1/2 inch Barrel Imp. Model, 7 1/2 inch Barrel Imp. Model, 8 inch Barrel

Ratio of Penetration 1.000 1.133 1.333

Ratio of Accuracy 1.000 0.950 1.050

Weight 4 lbs 2 oz. 2 lbs 8 oz. 2 lbs 8.5 oz.

The same kind cartridges, loaded in the same way, were used; the targets and distances were the same for all the firings by which these ratios were determined. It may be proper to remark, that the circumstances attending the firing, for accuracy, were rather more favorable for the old than the new model, the former having been fired with a cloudy sky, and in a calm, while the latter was fired in a strong light, and with a smart breeze across the line of fire. To ascertain the strength of the New Model Pistols, the chambers of each were each loaded with Government powder to their utmost capacity, so as to admit the insertion of an elongated ball, which was rammed firmly over the charge. They were fired with these proof charges, without any injury resulting. In order to ascertain whether any injury might result from using, either accidently, [sic] or from necessity, the carbine cartridges (for a different arm of the same calibre), in the new model pistols, they were loaded with such cartridges and fired without any injury to the arms; the only difference being an increased ratio of penetration. The arms were loaded and capped, and then loose powder was scattered around the percussion caps, and also around the balls, when they were so fired without producing any premature discharge, or communication of fire from one chamber to another. The results of all the examinations and trials by the Board, leave no doubt in their minds of the decided advantages which Mr. Colt has gained for his pistol by the introduction of his recent improvements. The superiority of Colt’s Revolvers, as an arm for cavalry service, which has been so well established, is now finally confirmed by the production of the new model with the eight inch barrel. There are a few minor points requiring modification, to which the manufacturer’s notice has been called, and to which he should be required to attend in any arms he may furnish for the Government use. 18

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

With these modifications, the Board are satisfied that the New Model Revolver, with the eight inch barrel, will make the most superior cavalry arm we have ever had, and they recommend the adoption of this New Model, and its issue to all the mounted troops. The Board having concluded the duty to which it was ordered, adjourned “without delay.” J. E. Johnston, Acting Inspector General W. H. Emory, Major First Cavalry Wm. Maynadier, Captain of Ordnance J. W. Davidson, Captain First Dragoons22 The Commission on Ordnance was in session for almost three months hearing testimony regarding arms contracts and orders that had been approved during Cameron’s tenure. Samuel Remington testified before the commission several times; statements made during his final appearance before the commission are of particular interest: Before the Commission, April 24, 1862 Mr. E. [sic] Remington appeared before the commission, and being examined under oath, says: I am engaged in the manufacture of arms, rifles and revolvers. Our revolvers are made after a patent; those heretofore delivered are upon Beals’ patent; those we propose to make in the future are in accordance with Elliot’s patent. The patented part in both cases, is the mode of releasing the cylinder from its position and the plan of holding in the base pin or axle of cylinder. I have examined the various revolvers now in use—our arm, the Savage, Starr, and Colt’s, and as a mechanic familiar with the mode of such work as is required upon these arms, I should say that the Colt’s and our own would cost about the same to make, with equal economy in the management; and the same may be said of the Savage and Starr. (The Savage and Starr would cost about the same.) As to the Colt’s arm, we have examined it with care, and have decided that we could make it quite as cheap or cheaper than our own; but we do not think the plan as good as ours. I have not examined either of the others (Savage or Starr) with a view to compare the amount of work, but have handled them frequently, and have formed the opinion expressed upon my general knowledge and experience. I think that the difference of cost between our own and Colt’s and the others (Savage and Starr) would not be far from one dollar. In regard to the actual cost of our revolver, I wish to state that we have to pay for two patents. Our profits must therefore be proportionately larger in this, considering the patents, than we would require on rifle or musket work. I will say that should we be dealt with as others have been, receiving a large order for pistols, we would be glad to make them at $12; I mean, by a large order, about 30,000 to 40,000. We can, if the government wish it, turn out 200 to 250 per day by stopping the manufacture of navy size. Knowing positively that we have a certain large number to make, we can do it at the least cost.23 19

CHAPTER ONE

In his testimony, Remington referenced large revolver orders granted to other manufacturers (read Colt), whereas his armory had been able to secure only an order for five thousand revolvers. Between June 1, 1861, and April 15, 1862, sans contract, Colt delivered thirty-five thousand revolvers to the department, at an average price of $25.00 per arm. After the commission’s recommendations, Colt accepted a contract for these same revolvers at $14.50 each, and in August 1862, the price was further reduced to $14.00. Subsequent events will show that Samuel Remington was overly optimistic in his assessment of the armory’s production capacity. However, his oral and written statements made singular contributions in establishing fair market prices for small arms for the remainder of the war. The chief of ordnance escaped unscathed by the commission’s investigations; however, during a later congressional inquiry into the department’s early wartime practices, the Joint Select Committee on Ordnance (39th and 40th Congress, 1867–68) found that “certain correspondence between the Chief of Ordnance and his principal subordinates at arsenals and armories under investigation had been destroyed under the pretense that the whole of such correspondence was private and confidential.” It was further discovered that “for evident purposes of concealment, the Chief of Ordnance kept no record in his office of any of these transactions, and that the correspondence thus destroyed was the only written memoranda of the many official acts to which it was related, and that these destroyed documents were in fact, in form, and in substance, official documents, under which the public business at said armories and arsenals was influenced and controlled.”24 The commission’s final report to Stanton and Samuel Remington’s testimony before the commission are presented in appendix A. After Stanton’s “General Order” of March 10, Ripley realized the disastrous consequences this edict could have on his department’s efforts to arm Union troops and immediately took steps to minimize the effects by requesting exemptions. Stanton granted Ripley’s request, and on March 22, the Ordnance Department sent the following circular to all personnel involved in arms inspections: Circular The following copy of a letter from this office to the Secretary of War, in relation to the reception of arms, from certain Manufacturers, with the Secretary’s order thereon is communicated for your information and government in procuring. Ordnance Office Washington, March 15, 1862 Hon. E. M. Stanton Secretary of War The under mentioned are regular Manufacturers of arms for this Department, and I recommend that special authority, under your order of the 10th March 1862 be given for receiving from them arms that may be presented, under existing orders to them, and as may be prepared on inspection, for the next three months unless sooner revoked: viz, E. K. Root, Colt’s Arms Co., Hartford, Conn., J. C. Palmer, Sharps Arms Co., Hartford, Conn., 20

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

James T. Ames, Mass. Arms Co., Chicopee, Mass., Knapp Rudd & Co., Penn. Foundry, Pittsburg, Pa., R. P. Parrott, West Point Foundry, Cold Spring, N.Y., A. Alger & Co., South Boston, Mass. Respectfully &c. (Signed) James W. Ripley, Brig. Gen. War Department, March 19th, 1862 The Chief of Ordnance is authorized to receive as within recommended such arms as may be manufactured by the within named parties under existing orders approved by the Secretary of War. (Signed) P. H. Watson, Asst. Secy. of War Respectfully &c., Jas. W. Ripley, Brig. Gen.25 Two days later on March 24, Ripley sent another inspection directive to Whiteley at the New York Arsenal: Sir, The order of the 10th March, 1862 directing that no arms be hereafter purchased or received without special authority from the Secretary of War, does not suspend the inspection of arms of any kind, ready for delivery by parties making them under orders or contract, but only their receipt.26 Remington was not included on the list of manufacturers that were authorized to maintain deliveries. The firm continued to manufacture and soon had an excess of revolvers. In early April, Remington contacted Hagner to inquire when the department would resume accepting revolvers. Hagner, in turn, contacted Ripley with a request that the department be allowed to receive their revolvers. Hagner’s request, with an affirmative endorsement, was forwarded up the chain of command. Stanton granted Hagner’s request, and on April 15, Ripley immediately notified Crispin: Sir, You are authorized, until further orders, to receive from time to time, from Messrs E. Remington & Sons such of their Navy revolvers as they may have ready to deliver under existing orders. It may be well to add in the certificate you may give for the Revolvers, that they are received under special authority of the Secretary of War of 15th April 1862.27 Remington was also advised of this decision on the same day: Gentlemen, I have to acknowledge the reference to me of your letter to Major Hagner of 4th, inst. & to inform you that Capt. Crispin has been instructed to receive from time to time, until 21

CHAPTER ONE

further orders, such of your Navy Revolvers as you may have ready for delivery under existing orders.28 Three days later, Crispin requested further instructions concerning the Remington revolvers. Ripley replied on the twenty-second: Sir, I have to acknowledge your letter of the 18th inst. asking for instructions in relation to the reception of Remington & Sons, Navy Revolvers, and in reply have to state that you are authorized to receive from them such number as they may have ready for inspection. When these are received the order given by Maj. Hagner will be considered as closed. If after disposing of those to be thus received you should require further supplies of these Revolvers, to issue an order from this office, you will procure them by open purchase, on the best terms, reporting the facts in such case.29 Ripley anticipated the increased demands that would soon be placed on the department once the new arms contracts were in place and took steps to ensure the rapid acceptance and delivery of contract arms. On May 9, he sent the following letter to Thornton at Watervliet Arsenal: Sir, You are hereby designated as the Inspector of Contract Arms and Accouterments. As there is already much business connected with this inspection service, which demands immediate attention, you will enter upon your duties forthwith. The duty will probably be very onerous and demand your whole time, it will therefore be necessary to relieve you from your present command, which will be done as soon as your successor is appointed. The officers at present engaged on this duty will be instructed to furnish you with lists of inspections of this nature, with which they are charged, to turn over to you all books and papers connected with them, and to give you the information necessary to a full understanding of their several duties in this particular. You will obtain the services of such sub-inspectors as you may need, as has been usual heretofore. The superintendent of the Springfield Armory will be notified of your assignment to the inspection duty and requested to comply with your applications for such service. While engaged on this duty you are directed to visit such places where arms and accouterments are to be inspected as will enable you to carry out these instructions or such as may hereafter sent you.30 Thornton responded on the eleventh and apparently expressed concerns about his new duties. Ripley replied May 13: Sir, I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 11th inst. The reception of my order of the 11th inst. has probably corrected the erroneous impression created by my telegram of 22

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

the 10th inst. Your duties in the contract service will probably be of so responsible and onerous a character, as to preclude the devotion of any of your time to other duties, and you will therefore have no official connexion whatever with the Armory. In view of the wide extent of your business, it is deemed a matter of importance that you should be stationed in as central a location as possible and Springfield or its vicinity will probably afford the most conveniences for the discharge of the duty. It may be necessary however to order you to this place in a few days, on duty connected with the proposals for small arms to be opened at this office on the 16th inst., and shall then have the opportunity of instructing you further on this subject.31 Thornton’s appointment as inspector of contract arms initiated a new concept for the department. The inspection and acceptance of contract arms had previously been delegated to several ordnance officers who were usually commanders of ordnance posts or arsenals based near the contractors. These duties required the accepting officer to be absent from his regular post for various periods of time, and such interruptions were proving to have a disruptive influence on the officer’s regular duties. Thornton’s appointment to this designated post would now relieve him of all other duties, leaving him free to devote his full attention to supervise the inspection and acceptance of arms for the department. Very few arms were actually inspected by ordnance officers for the remainder of the war; this duty was relegated to civilian personnel assigned from the Springfield Armory. After the original suspension of revolver deliveries, Remington sold fifteen hundred Navies to Tyler, Davidson & Company, who, in turn, sold them to the department. The date of this purchase was not entered into the department’s ledgers until May 19. On the same day, Remington advised Ripley: With regards to the revolvers .44 & .36 Calibre we can now furnish with some 125 to 150 per day same as sample left at Ordnance Department. We expect to be able to substitute the wrought iron frame in place of the present (malleable) in the course of sixty days or sooner if possible. Our increased facilities are such as will enable us to double our present product of revolvers.32 We shall see that the Remingtons were still overly optimistic about the amount of arms that they could supply to the government. The department had evidently objected to the type of iron Remington was using to manufacture revolver frames; Remington was assuring Ripley that wrought iron would soon replace malleable iron. Also on May 19, Ripley sent the following letter to Crispin: Sir, I send you today by mail some blank certificates of inspection, to be issued for all kinds of Ordnance Stores except cannon and powder, for which special forms are provided. These certificates will be exclusively used in all cases where stores are received on contracts or orders covering prospective deliveries, whether given by this office or yourself for all that 23

CHAPTER ONE

class of arms which require inspection before being received by the Dept. They are designed to supersede the use of Form No. 13 in all cases except for ordinary open purchases in the market, and must be exclusively used for arms of all kinds even when so purchased. Your attention is especially called to this matter. Originals, duplicates and triplicates are sent, in filling up the certificates to use one of each kind, and caution the party receiving them to retain the triplicate only, sending the original and duplicate to this office. 33 After the department received authority from Stanton to resume accepting Remington’s production on April 15, Crispin again began receiving their revolvers. In addition to taking those that had accumulated, he was now being offered recent production. Crispin accepted revolvers until May 24, when he received the following orders from Ripley, dated May 22: Sir, Major W. A. Thornton, Inspector of Contract arms, having been directed to take up the inspection of all arms manufactured by Remington & Sons of Ilion, N.Y., you will suspend all further inspections and receipt of their pistols. All these pistols will be forwarded by Maj. Thornton to Maj. R. H. K. Whiteley, of N.Y. Arsenal, N.Y. 34 Crispin received 3,050 Beals Navy and 850 Beals Army Revolvers from Remington in the period from April 15 to May 24. Departmental ledgers list the delivery date of these revolvers as March 31. This was an obvious error by bureau clerks, as authority to resume receiving revolvers was not granted until April 15. Since Crispin had not received the new certificates of inspection until after May 18, the logical date for this entry should be May 31. The 850 Beals Armies received by Crispin were the first produced and were the only army-size revolvers delivered on the original order of July 29, 1861. At this point I should address a fallacy that has been propagated for many years. In Remington Handguns, Charles Lee Karr made an error in stating that one thousand Remington Beals Army Revolvers had been purchased by the State of South Carolina in 1860. 35 Unfortunately, this has been quoted in several publications, but as I have pointed out, the Beals Army Revolver was not in production until 1862. Karr could not have confused the Beals Navy with the Army, since the Navy was not in production until the spring of 1861. On June 4, the Herkimer Democrat reported the recent contract negotiations between Remington and the government: Ilion: The Remingtons, of Ilion have just concluded negotiations with the Government at Washington, by which they have secured an additional contract for the manufacture of rifles and pistols, to the amount in round numbers of one million dollars. Great activity prevails in the work shops of the extensive armory at Ilion. 36 24

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

Once again, we see the press’s propensity for exaggeration. Had all four contracts awarded to Remington (two for revolvers and two for rifles) been filled as specified, they would have totaled only $630,000. On June 14, one day after the new revolver contracts were executed, Remington contacted Ripley about the navy revolvers that had been delivered to Crispin prior to the contract date: Sir, We have the honor to hand you herewith Certificates of Inspection received from Capt. Crispin for 100 Revolvers delivered in March last, also Certificates for 3,900 Revolvers since delivered, the price for which Capt. Crispin omits to mention in the Certificates, as the instructions received by him when the order was given us to resume the delivery of the Revolvers did not state the price and in the absence of any definite instructions respecting the same, he does not feel at liberty to insert the price. It is, we presume, understood by the Department that the price of the arms, delivered prior to the final suspension of the order (notice of which we received from Capt. Crispin under date of 24th May), is to be the same as for those previously ordered. If approved, please have the Certificates filled up accordingly. We shall be glad to receive returns for the same, as early as practicable. 37 Ripley responded to this on June 21: Gentlemen, Your letter of the 14th inst. including two sets of certificates is received. Your attention is called to the necessity of sending to this office the Original and Duplicate Certificates. I enclose herewith the Triplicate for the 100 Navy revolvers received prior to the 10th of March, 1862, for which please return the duplicate to this office and this account can be settled. A careful reading of the note on the 2nd page of the Certificate will prevent such mistakes. With regard to the Certificate for 3050 Navy Revolvers and 850 Army Revolvers, purchased by Capt. Crispin under authority from this office dated April 15th, 1862, Capt. Crispin has been directed to give you the price which he or Major Hagner had agreed to pay for such articles prior to the General Order of the Secretary of War of March 10th, 1862, those arms being considered as purchased in the open market at their market value. I return herewith both Certificates for you to return with the third to him. You will observe that you have sent the duplicate and triplicate. 38 On this same day, Ripley again contacted Crispin, advising him of the price to be paid for these revolvers: 25

CHAPTER ONE

Sir, Messrs. E. Remington have recently sent to this office your certificate No.—for 3050 Navy revolvers and 850 Army Revolvers purchased by you of them under authority from this office dated April 15, 1862. It was understood that the pistols as purchased were to be considered purchased on the open market at such prices as Maj. Hagner and yourself had been paying prior to the order from the Secretary of War, dated March 10th suspending all purchases. Messrs. R. and Sons have been directed to return the certificates to you, and you will certify to this bill at such prices as under similar circumstances you have paid for the pistol previously. 39 The astute reader will have noticed that Remington was issued a certificate of inspection for these revolvers. I refer again to Ripley’s letter to Crispin of May 19. Ripley made it very plain that a certificate of inspection was to be issued for small arms, regardless of the type of purchase. To avoid confusion, I will elaborate further on my previous statement that the revolvers delivered to Hagner and Crispin received no formal inspection. To those readers familiar with the department’s arms inspection procedures during this era, the term “formal inspection” will be no mystery. To those not so initiated, I shall explain. Prior to the beginning of the Civil War and after the Owen-Holt Commission’s decisions on arms contracts (many of which were awarded in the early days of June 1862), all of the arms received by the department under contract received a rigorous inspection at the individual manufacturer’s production facility. Assembled revolvers were submitted to an ordnance inspector and his assistants. The arm was proofed (test fired), then completely disassembled, and then each component part inspected. As the major parts passed inspection, they were stamped with the sub-inspector’s initial; a part that failed to pass inspection was stamped with a large letter “C” to indicate that it was condemned (figure 26). If all of the parts passed inspection, the revolver was reassembled and the inspector evidenced his acceptance of the arm by stamping his cartouche on the left grip (occasionally, both grips bear cartouches; also occasionally, by the same inspector). After the Civil War began and the department began ordering arms from several sources, some of these normal inspection procedures were all but abandoned as the ordnance inspectors found themselves undermanned and overworked. We may never know what type of inspection these Beals Navies received; they do not bear any inspection marks. I therefore reiterate that the revolvers under discussion received no formal inspection. It may be appropriate to state that I have examined some of the early Beals revolvers that carry bogus cartouches, which have been applied to enhance the value of the piece as a martial arm. In one classic case of overkill, I have observed a Beals Navy with dual Ordnance Department cartouches, plus an anchor on the top of the barrel and the letters “U.S.N.” stamped on the butt. The saddest part of all this fakery is that the revolver has since been identified by serial number as one of those issued early in the Civil War to Ohio troops. This concludes the discussion of purchases of Remington revolvers ordered by the Ordnance Department on July 29, 1861. Although the original order called for only 5,000 26

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

Figure 26 Condemned barrel. Marking has been enhanced for clarity. (Author’s collection)

army revolvers, some 7,250 navy and 850 army revolvers were delivered. In addition to the revolvers received from Remington, the department simultaneously purchased 4,586 Remington Navy Revolvers from commercial arms dealers for a total of 11,836 Beals Model Navies. In my examination of ordnance records of revolvers issued to Union troops, I found a reference to Beals Navy Revolver, Serial No. 549. This indicates that the government was acquiring the Beals revolvers shortly after their introduction. I have examined the “Report of the Quartermaster General of the State of Ohio” for 1862 and find Remington Navy Revolvers recorded as follows: Remington Navy Revolvers on hand Jan. 1st Remington Navy Revolvers issued by U.S. Remington Navy Revolvers purchased

455 721 600

These navy revolvers would have been Beals models with the possible exception of the 721 issued by the Ordnance Department. With a total production of approximately fifteen thousand Beals Navies, well over thirteen thousand were purchased by the army, navy, or state militias. After Remington completed the 1861 revolver orders, they immediately focused on fulfilling their new contracts for five thousand navy and twenty thousand army revolvers. Sources other than the Ordnance Department files have been examined in my efforts to verify early purchases of Remington Navy Revolvers. Most of these consist of figures furnished to congressional investigating committees. These sources are not consistent with the original records and, therefore, not reliable. I have used the department’s ledgers to compile the Remington Navy Revolvers purchased by the Army Ordnance Department. The contractor or sellers were listed in alphabetical order in the original ledgers. I have taken the liberty of condensing these entries and arranging dealer purchases in chronological, rather than alphabetical, order. Also the deliveries of Remington have been separated from those of commercial dealers. All of these revolvers were considered “open market” purchases. 27

CONTRACTOR’S NAME

DATE OF PURCHASE

QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

PRICE

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

W. J. Syms & Brother

1861

Aug.

26

500

Remington Revolvers

Schuyler, Hartley, Graham

1861

Aug.

26

50

Remington Navy Revolvers

$16

00

$800

00

Purchase

Schuyler, Hartley, Graham

1861

Aug.

28

50

Remington Navy Revolvers

16

00

800

00

Purchase

Schuyler, Hartley, Graham

1861

Aug.

31

50

Remington Navy Revolvers

16

00

800

00

Purchase

Schuyler, Hartley, Graham

1861

Sep.

3

50

Remington Navy Revolvers

16

00

800

00

Purchase

Schuyler, Hartley, Graham

1861

Sep.

6

50

Remington Navy Revolvers

16

00

800

00

Purchase

Schuyler, Hartley, Graham

1861

Sep.

9

50

Remington Navy Revolvers

16

00

800

00

Purchase

Schuyler, Hartley, Graham

1861

Sep.

14

50

Remington Navy Revolvers

16

00

800

00

Purchase

Schuyler, Hartley, Graham

1861

Oct.

14

50

Remington Navy Revolvers

16

00

800

00

Purchase

Cooper & Pond, New York

1861

Oct.

18

50

Beals Navy Pistols

16

50

825

00

Purchase

Schuyler, Hartley, Graham

1861

Nov.

7

50

Remington Navy Revolvers

16

00

800

00

Purchase

Tyler, Davidson & Co.

1861

Nov.

30

290

Remington Navy Revolvers

16

50

4,785

00

Purchase

Schuyler, Hartley, Graham

1861

Dec.

4

100

Remington Pistols

16

50

1,650

00

Purchase

Cooper & Pond, New York

1861

Dec.

10

50

Beals Navy Revolvers

16

50

825

00

Purchase

Tyler, Davidson & Co.

1861

Dec.

12

500

Beals Navy Pistols

22

50

11,250

00

Purchase

Cooper & Pond, New York

1861

Dec.

17

100

Beals Navy Revolvers

16

50

1,650

00

Purchase

Contracta

CHAPTER ONE

28

Open Market Purchases of Remington Revolvers by Ordnance Department, 1861–62 PURCHASES of “‘Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms,’ since April 13, 1861, by the Ordnance Department: from whom purchased, and to whom paid for: price; total amount; date of contract or order, and date of payment”

1861

Dec.

31

100

Remington Navy Revolvers

18

50

1,850

00

Purchase

Tyler, Davidson & Co.

1861

Dec.

31

246

Beals Navy Revolvers

22

50

5,535

00

Purchaseb

Schuyler, Hartley, Graham

1862

Jan.

8

300

Remington Navy Revolvers

16

50

4,950

00

Purchase

Cooper & Pond, New York

1862

Jan.

10

400

Beals Navy Revolvers

16

50

6,600

00

Purchase

Tyler, Davidson & Co.

1862

May

19

1,500

Remington Pistols

16

61

24,915

00

Purchasec

E. Remington & Sons

1861

Aug.

17

300

Navy Revolvers

15

00

4,500

00

Purchase

E. Remington & Sons

1861

Oct.

5

400

Navy Revolvers

15

00

6,000

00

Purchase

E. Remington & Sons

1861

Oct.

12

400

Navy Revolvers

15

00

6,000

00

Purchase

E. Remington & Sons

1861

Dec.

18

500

Navy Revolvers & Appendages

15

0368

7,518

40

Purchased

E. Remington & Sons

1862

Jan.

3

500

Navy Revolvers & Appendages

15

0368

7,518

40

Purchase

E. Remington & Sons

1862

Jan.

25

500

Navy Revolvers & Appendages

15

0368

7,518

00

Purchase

E. Remington & Sons

1862

Feb.

18

500

Navy Revolvers & Appendages

15

0368

7,518

40

Purchase

E. Remington & Sons

1862

Mar.

7

500

Navy Revolvers & Appendages

15

0368

7,518

40

Purchase

E. Remington & Sons

1862

Mar.

15

500

Navy Revolvers & Appendages

15

0368

7,518

40

Purchase

E. Remington & Sons

1862

Mar.

18

100

Navy Revolvers & Appendages

15

0368

1,503

68

Purchase

E. Remington & Sons

1862

Mar.

31

3,050

Navy Revolvers & Appendages

15

0368

45,862

24

Purchasee

E. Remington & Sons

1862

Mar.

31

850

Army Revolvers & Appendages

15

0368

12,781

28

Purchase

29

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles and Small Arms.” a This order submitted to the Owen-Holt Commission as a contract. Price paid is unknown. bThis number not confirmed. Ledger entry lists this purchase as 549 Beals and Colt pistols. cTotal of 4,586 Beals Navy Revolvers purchased from commercial dealers. dUnit price reflects price of revolver and appendages. eFinal deliveries on Ordnance Department’s order of July 29, 1861. Date of these entries was March 31, but this date was a clerical error. Authority to resume taking deliveries was not granted until April 15. Correct date was May 31.

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE ARMY

Palmer, Batchelders, Boston

CHAPTER TWO

Remington’s First Revolver Contracts n this chapter I shall discuss Remington’s difficulties fulfilling the first two revolver contracts awarded them by the Ordnance Department on June 13, 1862. The Remingtons would discover that there was a world of difference between producing revolvers for the open market and delivering inspected revolvers to the government. The company had previous experience delivering contract arms to the department, but this had occurred during peacetime and when the armory was under the supervision of the senior Eliphalet. After Ripley had relieved Crispin from accepting Remington revolvers on May 22, 1862, he also notified Thornton on the same day of the company’s impending deliveries on the new contract:

I

Sir, The Messrs. Remington & Sons of Ilion, N.Y. has been awarded a contract for Army pistols in addition to what they are already making for this Dept. As the rapid delivery of these pistols is of the utmost importance, you will take immediate measures to have the inspection commenced at as early a day as possible. As fast as the arms are inspected they will be forwarded to Maj. R. H. K. Whiteley, New York Arsenal.1 Ripley apparently concurred with Remington’s statements regarding their production capacity. However, they would not deliver the first lot of contract army revolvers until early July and did not make additional deliveries of the Navies until August 11. Having accepted Remington’s bids, on May 31 the department sent the contracts to the firm for signature: Gentlemen, I transmit a copy of the decision of the Commission on Contracts in reference to the orders given you in July last for Revolvers and Rifles. I also transmit herewith four lots of quadruplicate Contracts and Bonds to be executed by you and these must be returned to this office within fifteen days from the day this letter should reach you in the due course of mail. These Contracts are, one set for 40,000 Rifle Muskets, one for 10,000 Harpers Ferry Rifles with sword bayonets, one for 20,000 Army revolvers and one for 5,000 Navy revolvers and are intended to embrace the 31

CHAPTER TWO

Figure 27 CGC cartouche on left grip panel of Beals Navy Revolver. (Author’s collection)

said orders of July 1861 as well as the arms awarded to you under your recent proposals made in pursuance of the advertisement from this office of the 29th ultimo. Please acknowledge the receipt of these papers.2 A careful study of the contract for navy revolvers (made by the chief of ordnance with E. Remington & Sons of Ilion, New York, dated June 13, 1862) discloses that all five thousand revolvers “will be in all respects identical with a pattern to be deposited by the party of the first part and approved by the Chief of Ordnance, and are to interchange in all their parts.” Subsequently, both Beals and Elliot models were delivered on this contract. The department required one pattern arm to be deposited on these early contracts; on later arms contracts, it required two. There is some evidence to suggest that Remington submitted as many as four pattern revolvers to the chief of ordnance in preparation for these contracts and that he was not only aware of, but also responsible for, the delivery of both Beals and Elliot models. Remington responded on June 4: Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your communication of 31st ult. with accompanying contracts which will be duly executed and returned to you within the time specified.3 Remington executed and returned the revolver contracts to Ripley, who signed them on June 13. He then forwarded them to Stanton for his approval. There was a delay in returning the rifle contracts, and these were not completed until August 11. On June 2, Remington requested that the department furnish inspectors to start accepting revolvers. In response, the commandant of the Springfield Armory dispatched Inspector C. G. Curtis and a team of assistants to the Remington Armory. Curtis’s title was principal sub-inspector, and among his other duties, he stamped his cartouche (initials) into the left grip of each revolver upon its acceptance (figure 27). On June 17, Remington wrote to Ripley concerning the inspection procedures and also inquired about the appendages required for revolvers: 32

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Sir: We are informed by Major Thornton (through Mr. Curtis, one of the Inspectors who is now inspecting the Army Revolver) that he has no instructions from your Department relative to inspection of the 5,000 Pistols 36/100 Calibre under our Contract. We now have ready for inspection about 2,000 of that size and 1,000 of the Army, which can be delivered agreeable to our Contract, if they can be inspected in time. Will you also inform us as to the appendages for Revolvers? Our Contract calls for the “usual appendages.” We have heretofore furnished with our Revolver one Bullet Mould and one Wiper for each. Please mention the number and kind of appendages to be furnished.4 Assistant Secretary of War P. H. Watson notified Ripley of the secretary’s approval on June 24: General, Herewith enclosed I transmit to your Bureau two contracts, viz: Burnside Rifle Co. for 5,000 Burnside Breechloading Carbines at $30. each. E. Remington & Sons for 5,000 Navy Revolvers at $12. each. These contracts are made on the recommendations of the Ordnance Commissioners, the Hon. Joseph Holt and Hon. Robert Dale Owen after a full investigation, as substitutes for the informal order for the purchase of the same arms, given to the same parties, by the late Secretary of War, the Hon. Simon Cameron, have been approved by the Secretary of War, as the best available means now remaining to protect the interests of the Government.5 Ripley advised Remington of the approval on June 26: Gentlemen: One of the four contracts entered into by you for the manufacture of Arms for the U. States, Viz: the one for 5,000 Navy Revolvers, having been returned to this office approved by the Secretary of War. The original has been filed in the office of the 2nd Comptroller and the duplicate is transmitted to be kept by you. Maj. Thornton will be immediately informed of the Contract, that he may give the necessary instructions for the inspections to be made under it.6 On the same day, Ripley also notified Thornton that the contract had been approved: Sir, A contract recently made with Messrs. E. Remington & Sons of Ilion N.Y. for the delivery of 5000 Revolvers, Navy Size at $12. each has been approved by the Secretary of War; and this notice is now given that you may take measures for the inspection of the Revolvers, in advance of sending you a copy of the contract, which will be done in a few days. 33

CHAPTER TWO

The contract requires 2000 to be delivered in June, 1000 monthly afterwards. The arms are to be provided with the regular appendages, and to be packed. Price of boxes to be fixed by you.7 Having received no reply to their inquiry of June 17, Remington sent a telegram to Ripley on June 25, again inquiring about appendages. Ripley responded on the same day: Sirs: In reply to your telegram of today I have to state that the following are the appendages required for each box of fifty pistols. Fifty Screwdrivers & cone Wrenches One for each. Fifty extra Cones do. Twenty five Bullet Moulds casting two balls ea 1/2 do. One Bullet Mould casting six balls 1/50 do.8 The department had not required Remington to furnish six-cavity gang molds with prior deliveries, and the company was evidently unfamiliar with this accoutrement. When they brought this to Ripley’s attention, he advised them that gang molds would not be required. He also notified Thornton on June 28: Sir, In receiving Army and Navy size pistols from the Messrs. Remington & Sons, the bullet mould for Six balls will not be required with each box of fifty pistols at present, but the right will be reserved to require these moulds at any future time when needed.9 After searching futilely for a Remington six-ball gang mold for over twenty-five years, I had concluded that few, if any, had been delivered, even though the first two contracts for army and navy revolvers had called for them. This recently discovered letter seems to explain this anomaly. Major Hagner had recently completed his duties as aide to the Owen-Holt Commission on arms and arms contracts. His precommission assignment had been to locate and purchase arms from open market sources. Now that the department had arms contracts in place and open market purchases were prohibited, he was without a post. The department had recently appointed Thornton to the post of inspector of contract arms and accouterments. When the department began construction of new buildings at the Watervliet Arsenal, it had also appointed Thornton to supervise this work, and these duties were consuming a large part of his time. To alleviate this situation, Ripley proposed a personnel change to the secretary of war on June 28: Sir: The amount and importance of the duties connected with the inspection of contract arms and accouterments require, for their proper performance, the entire time and exclusive attention of an Officer of experience and ability. 34

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

These duties are now in charge of Major Thornton who is also in command of the Arsenal of construction at West Troy. It is impossible for any officer to attend to both duties properly, and I propose to assign the inspections to Major P. V. Hagner; with directions to relieve Major Thornton, to receive from him all the books and papers, in his possession, relating to inspections, with any information he may have relating to them, and to take post at New York, a central position, whence he can visit readily, the different places where arms and accouterments are to be inspected, and make suitable arrangements to attending to inspections promptly, at each. In view of the intimate knowledge Major Hagner has acquired from his association with the Commission on Ordnance, of the state and condition of various contracts and orders as finally determined, his appointment to the inspection service will secure their execution more satisfactorily, both to the Government and to the contractors, as well as the true interpretation of any questions that may arise concerning the obligations of all parties. I, therefore, respectfully request your sanction of the foregoing proposition. Jas. W Ripley, Brig. Gen’l., Chief of Ordnance Approved by Order of the Secretary of War P. H. Watson, Asst. Secy. Of War10 There was some delay in getting this request approved. The personnel change was not executed until the following month. Near the end of June, Remington complained to Ripley that the inspectors were lax in their duties by not inspecting revolvers as fast as possible. Ripley contacted Thornton on June 27, asking him to investigate: Sir, The Messrs. Remington & Sons report that they have several thousand pistols awaiting inspection, and that the sub-inspectors do not keep up with the work. As these pistols are greatly needed, it is of the utmost importance that the inspectors keep fully up to the manufacturer. It is understood that the sub-inspectors now at Ilion, do not work as industriously as the government has a right to expect, if this is the cause of the delay, you will take the necessary steps to correct this, and if more inspectors are wanted you will detail them at once, your attention is particularly called to this matter.11 In early July, Thornton investigated Remington’s allegations against the inspectors at the Ilion Armory. He immediately made a detailed report to Ripley: July 7th, 1862 Sir: I have the honor to enclose Statements “A & B,” by C. G. Curtis and Mr. Remington’s foreman, in answer to the charge of neglect of duty on the part of the sub-inspectors at Mr. Remington’s Armory. 35

CHAPTER TWO

By these statements it will be seen, that Mr. Remington has no grounds for the charges he made, that the sub-inspectors worked faithfully to obtain the Arms he has to make for the United States, and that the delay was on the part of Mr. Remington in not producing arms for the inspectors to examine. I will make the final inspection of Mr. Remington’s 650 Army pistols when I am advised that he has the packing boxes, and if I find the conditions of things at his Armory as I have reason to believe they are, I will order the sub-inspectors from his Armory until I have information that he can keep them faithfully to work. I will not take for granted, that he can and will produce 100 pistols per day, and on his promises assign inspectors to his Armory to be idle. I will require him to have the pistols to a certain extent finished and then I will assign the same workmen to his Armory to secure the pistols, and I can assure you that Mr. Remington’s pistols are well made. I will obtain all he has with more dispatch than he has furnished the 650 Army size pistols.12 Thornton included the statements from Inspector Curtis and Remington’s pistol foreman, R. R. Bennett, and made additional comments at the conclusion of each statement: July 3d, 1862 Major W. A. Thornton Sir: I have the pleasure to inform you of the receipt of yours of July 1st in which is a copy of a letter from General Ripley. I must state that had General Ripley been with the inspectors, while they have been at Ilion, we could not have been more faithful to duty. Mr. Remington spoke to me this morning and desired to know if I had heard from Major Thornton in relation to a change in the inspection of pistols. He stated that he had been in Washington and had seen General Ripley. That the General said that the department was much in want of pistols and that he, Mr. Remington, thought I would (that is the sub-inspector, Mr. Curtis) receive orders not to give the pistols the regular inspection, because they were so much in want of them that they could not wait to go through with an inspection. I have ready for your inspection 650 of the Army pistols with all the appendages, and I am waiting for the packing boxes to make the delivery, and I hope Messrs. Remington will have the boxes made with dispatch. If I had more inspectors we could not turn out the pistols any faster. The work is inspected as fast as it is furnished to us. I will send you a statement from the foreman of the pistol department, on whom we have to depend for the pistols to be made ready for inspection. He says the pistols were not made with the expectation that the Government would have them inspected. He has a good deal to do to get them ready for us. He cannot have more than one half the number reported to the department ready for inspection. I wish you would try and be with us in a few days at the final inspection of the 650 Army size revolvers. Respectfully, I am Sir, Your Obt. Servant C. G. Curtis, Principal Sub-Inspector13 36

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Thornton continued: By the foregoing it will be seen that there has been no lack of faithfulness on the part of the sub-inspectors, to inspect the pistols as fast as offered by Mr. Remington, but on the contrary, the United States have just grounds as of complaints of the delay on the part of Mr. Remington in furnishing the arms to inspect and in not providing packing boxes to remove the arms which have been received by inspectors from his Armory. Further, Mr. Remington is desirous of having his Navy size pistols received without the usual and regular course of inspection. When the sub-inspectors have been a month at his Armory, and they have obtained from him only 650 Army size pistols, and that Mr. Remington has not the packing boxes made to remove the inspected pistols from his Armory. W. A. Thornton, Major of Ordnance14 Remington’s pistol foreman offered the following: Ilion, N.Y. July 3d, 1862 On hand and presented for inspection. Navy pistols—1500 Army pistols—200 Of these Navy pistols about 500 are short barrels, and out of range, and other difficulties, which unfit them for rigid inspection although they are serviceable pistols and shoot all right. The Navy pistols were none of them made for Government use exclusively but were made for trade sales, consequently they are not altogether interchangeable. Nearly all of them were assembled before we expected to deliver the pistols on contract. Nearly all of them are varnished stocks, and plated guards, and the work on them was all finished before the contract was made. Of the Army pistols, a part of them are just assembled and are supposed to be all right. The balance are retained in our hands and not presented for inspection, as others like them which have been presented have been rejected. Immediately after we made our statement and gave the number we could furnish per week our engine gave out and caused a delay of a week or more, and then a mistake in machining some of the work made it necessary to go over it again, and has kept us doing comparatively nothing, and now we are only where we expected to be at the time mentioned. We can see no cause now why we cannot get out after this week from one hundred to one hundred and twenty five per day. The boxes will be made in Utica at once, and will be ready to receive the work next Tuesday in all probability. R. R. Bennett Foreman of Pistol Department15 Thornton’s closing statement read: 37

CHAPTER TWO

Figure 28 WAT cartouche on right grip panel of Beals Army Revolver. (Author’s collection)

Watervliet Arsenal July 5th, 1862 It will be seen by the foregoing Statements, that in place of thousands, as reported by Mr. Remington, he can only offer 1500 of the Navy size Pistols for inspection, and of that number 500 must be rejective, for the causes stated by Mr. Bennett, Remington’s foreman; that the barrels are too short, that they do not range with the cylinders, and there are other defects, which are evidently of importance or they would not be alluded to by him. Further, Mr. Remington specified on the 2nd of June, when he requested the service of Inspectors, that he would furnish from 100 to 150 pistols for inspectors per day. It now appears that his machinery failed him, and by bad workmanship after he got his machinery in order, he is now in the same position that he was on the 2nd of June: that is he has not furnished the work he promised—that by the statement of his foreman, these pistols are known to have short barrels, which do not range with the cylinders, besides other defects; and in answer to which, I most respectfully recommend, that there should be no departure from the regular inspection, for at best the Arms furnished by contracts are poor enough. W. A. Thornton, Major of Ordnance Commanding Arsenal16 At the time these reports were submitted, Remington’s revolver manufacture was in transition from the Beals to the Elliot models. The fifteen hundred navy revolvers mentioned in Bennett’s report were Beals Navy Models, assembled after the final deliveries in May and prior to the June 13 contract. Bennett mentioned that the cylinders were out of range, that is, the chambers of the cylinder were not aligned with the bore of the barrel. Remington seemed to have had this problem throughout the war. In later navy inspection reports on New Model Navy Revolvers, there were complaints about the alignment of the cylinder and the plunger of the loading lever. Shortly after Thornton forwarded the above reports to Ripley, he visited the Remington Armory to personally supervise the final inspection of 750 army revolvers. Curtis joined the 38

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Figure 29 Beals Army Revolver, serial number 1,842. CGC cartouche on left grip panel. (Author’s collection)

inspection, and these revolvers usually have two cartouches, Thornton’s on one grip and Curtis’s on the other. I have noted exceptions, such as “CGC” on one or both grips, and in another instance, “WC” on one grip and “WAT” on the other (figures 28, 29, 30). I have also observed several of these revolvers with the 1861 barrel address. Those bearing Thornton’s cartouche are the only Remington revolvers known to have been inspected by an ordnance officer, as opposed to an ordnance sub-inspector. On finishing the inspection and returning to Watervliet Arsenal, Thornton reported to Ripley on July 14: Sir: I have the honor to inform you, that on the 12th inst. I inspected 750 of Mr. Remington’s Army Revolver Pistols, and I caused them to be forwarded to Major R. H. K. Whiteley, Comdg. New York Arsenal. While at his Armory, Mr. Remington informed me that he had upwards of 1500 Navy Size pistols, which he offered for inspection. He states that they were in kind and quality, the same in every respect as have been received by inspectors in New York, by Majors Hagner and Crispin. He stated further that the sub-inspectors have found an error in workmanship, which in his opinion did not materially injure the pistols for service, and of course he was desirous to have the pistols accepted. The sub-inspectors informed me that they have proven about 500 of them, which is the first action taken in the inspection. That when they commenced the verification of the workmanship they found that the axis of the cylinder and the barrel are not in continuation of each other, and that the bolt in passing from the former into the latter, must be shaved or compressed on one side, as much as the bores of the two differ from each in their true prolongations. 39

CHAPTER TWO

Figure 30 Martially inspected Beals Navy Revolver with CGC cartouche on left grip panel. (Author’s collection)

This error is so gross, and there is so many of them defective, that I have declined their inspection. Owing to this circumstance and as Mr. Remington cannot for the present keep more than three sub-inspectors faithfully employed, I have relieved the other sub-inspectors from duty at his Armory.17 The navy revolvers referred to in Thornton’s report were Beals models, also mentioned in Pistol Foreman Bennett’s report of July 3. Most of these were in the 13,500–15,500 serial number range, and less than a third were eventually accepted by inspectors, which explains the scarcity of inspected models. At approximately the same time that Thornton inspected the 750 army revolvers, Remington began production of the Elliot model, also known to collectors as the Model 1861 or Old Model, in both army and navy sizes (figures 31 and 32). The majority of navy revolvers delivered under contract were Elliot models. The first 850 Beals Army Revolvers assembled were delivered to Crispin in May, before Remington received a contract, and were never formally inspected; the 750 inspected by Thornton on July 12 were from the end of the Beals production. All available evidence suggests that the Beals Army was in production for less than three months, that is, April–June 1862. The author estimates total production of this model at approximately eighteen to nineteen hundred; this figure would also include some transition revolvers. On July 22, Ripley relieved Thornton of his inspection duties and assigned Hagner as his replacement. Ripley advised Thornton as follows: Sir, Maj. P. V. Hagner has been assigned to duty as Inspector of Contract Arms and Accouterments, and directed to relieve you from that duty. On his arrival at Watervliet Arsenal for that purpose you will please turn over to him all the books, papers and other 40

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Figure 31 Elliot First Variation Navy Revolver, serial number 15,867. (Author’s collection)

Figure 32 Elliot First Variation Army Revolver, serial number 4,586. (Author’s collection)

things in your possession, relating to the inspection service, and give him any information you may have respecting it.18 Ripley informed Hagner of his new duties on the same day: Sir, You are hereby assigned to duty as Inspector of Contract Arms and Accouterments, you will therefore proceed as soon as practicable to the Watervliet Arsenal and relieve Maj. W. A. Thornton from that duty; receiving from him all the books and papers in his possession, relating to such inspections, with any information he may have thereto. You will then take post at New York City which will be your station while engaged on this 41

CHAPTER TWO

duty, and make proper arrangements for attending the inspections at the different places where arms and accouterments are made for this Dept. You will obtain the services of such sub-inspectors as you may need by application to the Superintendent of the Springfield Armory, who will be directed to comply therewith. While on this duty you are directed to visit such places where arms or accouterments are to be inspected as will enable you to carry out these instructions or such as may be hereafter sent to you.19 Also on July 22, Ripley advised Capt. Alexander B. Dyer, then the commanding officer of the Springfield Armory, of this change of assignments: Sir, Maj. P. V. Hagner having been directed to relieve Maj. Thornton as Inspector of Contract Arms and Accouterments, you will please comply with any application which Maj. Hagner may make to you for sub-inspectors to assist him in this service.20 Hagner would serve as inspector of contract arms through 1863. In the final days of December 1863, Thornton would reassume this post. On July 25, Ripley advised Remington that their contract for army revolvers had been approved: Sir, The Contract entered into by you for the manufacture and delivery of 20,000 Army size Revolvers has this day been returned to this office duly approved by the Secretary of War and the duplicate copy is returned to you.21 There was no change in inspection procedures under Hagner, and the second lot of five hundred army revolvers was not accepted until August 2, with the first lot of five hundred Navies being accepted on August 11. I attribute the delay in accepting the Navies to the many faults found by Thornton during his July visit to Ilion. There is no available evidence with which to verify the number of Beals Navies delivered in these lots; I place it at less than five hundred. After the second delivery of Navies on August 19, Remington realized that they were in danger of forfeiture under their navy contract, which called for five thousand navy revolvers to be delivered by the end of September. They requested an extension from the Ordnance Department, which was forwarded to the secretary of war with Ripley’s affirmative endorsement. After receiving Stanton’s approval, the department granted the extension, with the proviso that the revolvers be delivered by year’s end. In August 1862, Colt had refused to furnish revolvers to the navy for the same price as those to the army. Capt. John A. Dahlgren, then chief of the navy’s Bureau of Ordnance, requested Remington to submit a revolver for evaluation. Remington forwarded a Beals Navy Revolver, serial number 14,741. In a companion letter, Remington advised Dahlgren, “Our engagements are such that we could only give you at present about 1,000 of the navy size, (like sample).”22 I can only assume that the one thousand Beals Navy Revolvers offered to the navy were those rejected 42

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Figure 33 Union cavalry man with Elliot Army Revolver. (Courtesy: Jay Huber)

by the army. The necessity for Remington to seek a contract extension would seem to verify this; otherwise, these revolvers would have been delivered to the army. After Remington received the extension, deliveries of army and navy revolvers continued steadily, and Curtis accepted the final lot of 701 Elliot Navies on December 22, 1862. Curtis placed his “CGC” cartouche on almost all five thousand Remington Navies delivered to the Ordnance Department under the contract of June 13, 1862. My survey of the serial numbers of both types puts the quantities delivered at approximately 400–500 Beals and 4,500–4,600 Elliot models. The serial number range of the navy revolvers delivered on this contract is 13,500–20,000. The reason for qualifying my statement in regard to Curtis inspecting “almost all” five thousand Navies is simple. Although I have never seen or heard of a Beals or Elliot Navy Revolver with an authentic cartouche, other than Curtis’s, I am aware that such a specimen may exist. This may have occurred when the principal sub-inspector became too ill to report for work, and his duties were delegated to one of his subordinates. I have examined specimens of army revolvers that have cartouches applied by inspectors other than the principal sub-inspector (figure 33). There was one major change in design that occurred during the production of the Elliot Navy and Army models (figure 34). Metal was removed from the frame where the breech of the 43

CHAPTER TWO

Figure 34 Elliot Second Variation Army Revolver. (Author’s collection)

barrel met the cylinder. This helped to reduce powder fouling between the cylinder and the frame and exposed the barrel threads. This change is first observed in the late 16,000 serial number range on navy models, and in the mid-6,000 serial number range of the Armies. I estimate the period of redesign to have been October–November 1862. Hagner accepted deliveries of Remington revolvers in lots that usually consisted of five hundred revolvers. After his acceptance, he shipped them to various arsenals where they were, in turn, sent to fulfill requisitions from the field. Two letters from Ripley give a hint of some of the difficulties facing the department in satisfying these requests: Washington, Oct. 20, 1862 Maj. P. V. Hagner Sir, I have to acknowledge your letter of the 18th inst. in relation to Revolvers and Muskets, contents of which have been duly noted. The first 1000 Colt’s revolvers you receive will be sent by fast transportation to Maj. Callender at St. Louis Arsenal. The next 1000 Colt’s and the first 1000 Remington’s will be sent to New York Arsenal, and after these the next 1000 Colt’s will be sent to Gen. Baker of Iowa, as you suggest. The 500 Pettingill Revolvers now on hand will be sent, as directed by telegraph, to St. Louis Arsenal, to which you will also send the next 500 of the same kind, and the first 1000 Colt’s or Remington’s which you may receive after filling the order from New York Arsenal and for Gen. Baker. If, pending the execution of these orders, you should receive Starr revolvers sufficient to fill the order from Gen. Baker, send those to him and the first named to the St. Louis Arsenal. This will make the orders stated thus, to St. Louis Arsenal 1000 Colt’s, 1000 Remington’s & 1000 Pettingill revolvers. To New York Arsenal 1000 Colt’s & 1000 Remington’s. To Gen. Baker 1200 Colt’s or Starr revolvers. 44

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Orders for the issue of the 2nd thousand Pettingill’s will be given when you report them on hand. Report when any of the foregoing issues, not already covered are made, that orders for supply may be given. Washington, Oct. 20, 1862 Maj. F. D. Callender U.S. Arsenal, St. Louis Mo. Sir, On the 14th inst. 1000 Army revolvers were ordered to be sent to you by Maj. P. V. Hagner at New York, either Remington’s or Colt’s according to which was first received and Maj. Hagner was also directed on the 20th inst. to send you 500 Pettingill pistols which he had on hand. Genl. Rosecrans having telegraphed urgently for revolvers, you will keep these 1500 subject to such requisitions as he may make for troops in his command, which will be honored accordingly, and reported to this office, that orders for supplies may be drawn to cover them.23 Remington had started making plans to add another revolver manufactory in Utica, New York, as early as February 1862. I have not discovered the reason for this expansion to another community. All available evidence suggests it was necessary because of a shortage of available labor in Ilion. The Utica Evening Telegraph reported on the construction of the manufactory on October 18, 1862: Manufactory for Army Pistols. Remington & Sons Pistol Contract. We visited yesterday the building formerly occupied by the Utica Screw Factory and now metamorphosed into a manufactory for army pistols by Messrs. Remington & Sons of Ilion, who have a contract for 25,000 rifled pistols. For two or three months past, the necessary machinery has been in the process of manufacture, and setting up, and now it is nearly ready for the manufacture of arms. When fairly in operation, the pistols will be furnished at the rate of 100 a day, it taking 20 hours for each hundred. To do this, it is necessary to employ two sets of skilled workmen, the whole number 150, and the most competent of Superintendents. The gentleman who has the management of this immense establishment, is Mr. C. C. Plaisted, of the firm of Plaisted & Whitehouse, who are sub-contractors under Remington & Sons. Mr. Plaisted has been connected with the Ilion establishment, for about a year, coming to it from the National Armory at Springfield, Mass. He is not only a theoretical, but a practical mechanic and inventor. He invented much of the machinery of the Remington lock, and pistol, and now he has invented and caused to be manufactured some of the most important of the machinery to be used in the Utica establishment. In March last, the tools for the manufacture of the Beal pistol, with the Elliot improvement, (such as the present contract of 25,000 pistols calls for), were commenced, and since that time, until now, a large number of workmen have been constantly employed making tools 45

CHAPTER TWO

and machinery for these pistols, and months will still be employed, before all is completed, so that not until about the 1st of January next, will the establishment be in complete operation. Such delicate machinery so nicely adjusted, and such complicated and finely finished tools, it would seem were never before made. As Mr. P. remarked, the tools and machinery for watch and clock making, have no business to be mentioned in the same connection with tools for these pistols. We certainly never saw any handsomer or better finished tools. Everything connected with pistol making, must be constructed in unison with gauges of the utmost accuracy, and in fact so well are means adapted to ends in the tools and machinery in question, that with their aid, “wooden men” could almost make pistols. To get a proper understanding of the operations of the concern, the inquirer should enter upon the ground floor, with Mr. Church, the competent financial and business manager, who would conduct him first to the engine room, where the fine, large, and powerful engine of 60 horsepower is at work, and there admire the silence and precision with which it furnishes motive power for the complex operations of the manufactory. He would then proceed to the large room where the forged work is turned out. This room you would be told is supervised by Mr. Billings, of Billings and West, subcontractors for the forged part of the labor. Here would be seen forges of improved construction, an immense trip hammer and two massive Compound Drops, which tower far up in the air, not unlike pile drivers. These drops are used for forging the frames of the pistols, and each of them have four distinct drops, or drivers, which, by the operations of machinery, let fall with the crushing weight of 620 pounds, drops, in which the steel faced dies, fall upon other dies, which together, mould the shapeless mass of steel wrought iron, into the necessary form for the frame of the pistol. These frames, before being fully formed, pass under four of these drops. Then in another part of the room, will be seen a spring drop, in which the springs are fashioned. These are the principal operations of this shop. You then pass through still further to the rear, the Stocking room, where the wooden stock is made, then the Polishing and Blueing room, and then you retrace your steps and enter the machine shop, where the tool making and repairing is done. From this shop the second story is reached, where is the Barrel and Frame room, in which the barrel is bored, shaped, rifled, and finished, and where the frame also receives the finishing touches. To perform these diverse and delicate operations, a great variety of complex machinery is requisite, which it would take hours to describe. The barrel goes from one to another, through seven different kinds of machines, of which the Rifling machine is most curious and complicated. The process of rifling with this machine was invented by Mr. Plaisted, and the machine itself was made by Mr. P. C. Curtis, of this city. By it, four barrels are rifled at the same time, it is a very curious and beautiful machine. But we cannot dwell longer in this story, as there are yet two above it. We enter the third story, where the Cylinder is made, and the bullet and the inside work of the pistol is performed. Here is also found very curious machinery for boring, 46

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

and otherwise finishing, the chambers of the cylinder, and other inside parts of the economy of the pistol. In the fourth and last story, are found the Filing room, the Assembling room, and the Inspecting room, where the Government Inspector narrowly and critically examines every part and parcel of the pistol, and where, after this process is gone through with, the pistol passes examination. If it does, it is packed and forwarded to the Government arsenals. In the “Assembling” room, the different pieces composing the pistol, from the frame to the minutest spring and screw, are brought, or assembled, and the pistol is put together, ready for the Inspector. We have thus been from cellar to garret of this immense establishment, and yet have given but a feeble idea of the modus operandi of pistol making. To properly appreciate the various processes, the building should be visited, and hours spent therein; then the magnitude and nicety of the operation would be more plainly discernable. We are glad this manufactory has been located among us, as it will prove of invaluable benefit to our city, and after the present contract is completed, it will doubtless be continued for similar operations. It brings among us a large number of workmen, and it will add to the material prosperity of the city. It is an old saying, that “it is an ill wind that blows nobody any good,” and it is proved true in this case; for, although the war is an “ill wind,” it blows some good to us, in the shape of this and other contracts, by means of which money is brought to our doors. We hope that Remington & Son will reap substantial benefits from this pistol contract, and we heartily thank them, in behalf of our whole people, for allowing us to share with them in the benefits to be derived. Fortunately for us, the reporter who filed this story seems to have been fascinated by machinery, and he gives us an excellent picture of the operations at the Utica plant. The account implies that revolvers were in partial production at the time of his visit and that the facility was expected to be in full production by the first of 1863. I have no way of verifying when the Utica Armory actually went on line, delivering revolvers to ordnance inspectors. Subsequent events were to prove that this armory would not be able to turn out the number of revolvers expected during the first few months of operation. The department’s records reveal that the highest number of revolvers delivered in any one month in 1862 was twenty-two hundred. Deliveries during the first six months of 1863 averaged twenty-five hundred per month; in the final six months of 1863, the average per month was three thousand. Production increased month by month, and during the first three months of 1865, Remington delivered twenty thousand revolvers. These figures do not reflect the entire production, as the reject rate was very high. It should also be emphasized that all of the delivery figures were the combined production of both the Ilion and Utica armories. These combined deliveries raised some questions that I have pondered, and I have to admit that they still perplex me. Were separate serial number ranges assigned to each armory? It would seem that this would be the only solution to keeping records of production at each facility. Were separate teams of inspectors assigned to each? Both of these are valid questions that deserve 47

CHAPTER TWO

answers. Perhaps the future will disclose documentation to shed more light on these subjects; for the present, I can only respond that I do not know. The expansion of revolver manufacturing to Utica also raises other questions concerning production activities at Remington’s Ilion Armory during the war. In 1861 Remington received an order for ten thousand Harpers Ferry Rifles but made no deliveries on it. The order was duplicated in the contract for ten thousand Harpers Ferry Rifles in August 1862, but no deliveries were made until March 1863. The department granted two extensions, but the company had delivered only seventy-five hundred rifles when the contract expired in December 1863. On December 13, 1863, the department awarded the firm a new contract for the deficit twenty-five hundred rifles. On the following day, the department also allowed them a new contract for forty thousand rifled muskets. This latter contract replaced a similar one Remington had received in August 1862, which had been abrogated because Remington had made no deliveries. Remington made final delivery of the twenty-five hundred Harpers Ferry Rifles in January 1864 but made no deliveries on the rifled musket contract until May 1864. This latter contract expired on December 31, 1864, but once again, the War Department granted an extension. By war’s end, Remington had delivered only seventeen thousand muskets, but the department allowed Remington to continue deliveries through March 1866, when the contract was finally fulfilled. While pursuing ordnance inspectors’ reports in the National Archives, I was fortunate to find one tidbit of information that could possibly explain the seeming lack of production at the Ilion Armory during the war. The inspectors’ reports have not been located, but the Register of Inspectors’ Reports had a terse one-line entry dated May 27, 1864, that stated simply: “Col. Thornton states the facts of the case in proving Ballard Carbine barrels at the Ilion works.”24 This would imply that Remington had manufactured the Ballard barrels. Quite frankly, I had questioned the sparse production at Ilion during the Civil War but had never suspected that Remington had been the subcontractor for barrels for other ordnance contractors. In hindsight, this seems perfectly logical. Prior to the war, Remington’s main arms production had consisted of rifle barrels; they had, in fact, introduced cast steel barrels to the American arms trade in the mid-1840s. Further research may reveal that other makers of Civil War small arms relied on Remington as a subcontractor to manufacture their barrels. In the latter part of 1862, the department received adverse reports from field officers, which prompted Remington to redesign their revolvers a second time. Ripley forwarded one such report to Hagner on October 28. Although this report mentions Beals revolvers, later complaints concerned the Elliot models: Headquarters, Anderson Calvary Camp Alabama, Carlisle Penna. October 23, 1862 It having become necessary to call a board of Officers for the purpose of examining the arms issued to the Anderson Cavalry (160th Reg’t., Penna. Vol.), Capt. Alfred Vezin, Co. C., Capt. Braden Hurst, Co. H. and Lieut. John J. Jackson, Co. E. respectfully submit the following report. The carbines which are of Sharps pattern are found to be perfect. 48

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

The pistols, Beals patent, manufactured by the Remington’s in Ilion N.Y. are useless and unsafe weapons. 1st: There being no safety notch, as in the Colt pattern, the hammer rests on the cap, when the pistol is loaded, causing the pistol to be liable to be accidentally discharged. 2nd: The rammer is so short, that it will not drive the cartridges home, and the adjustment is so poor, that it has to be guided in many cases, by the fingers. Some of the rammers are too large so that the pistol cannot be loaded at all. 3rd: The locks on some of the pistols were broken, or out of order when received. Although but few rounds have as yet been fired from them, the number of broken locks has largely increased. Many of the hammers cannot be raised, and in some cases the triggers have no effect on the hammer after the piece is cocked. 4th: The cones or nipples were so poor, that a number of them were broken when the pieces were fired. 5th: Some of the cylinders will not revolve and others again can be turned either way when the piece is cocked. The sabres are of an ordinary kind, and will not compare with those made by the Ames Manufactory at Chicopee Falls, Mass. 1st: The steel of which the blade is made is good, but some of the blades are cracked. 2nd: The grips are poor, being badly shaped, and too short. The brass wire on the grips, has, in many cases worked loose. Some of the grips have already come off the Sabres. 3rd: The scabbards are badly made. In finishing them, they have been filed down to obliterate the marks made by the hammer in forging. The metal of some of the scabbards has become so thin by this operation that the sabres have pierced them. The sabre belts are not uniform, some being made of Buffalo and others of common leather. A large number of those made of Buffalo leather are old ones, having been re-issued, and are constantly needing repairs. We would therefore recommend, that our pistols and sabres be returned, and that we receive in exchange, Colt’s revolvers and Ames’ sabres or weapons of a similar pattern, also that the second hand belts issued to us be exchanged for new ones. Respectfully Submitted Alfred Vezin, Capt. Co. C. Braden Hurst, Capt. Co. H. John W. Jackson, 1st. Lieut. Co. E.25 A short time after receiving this report, Hagner sent the following inquiry to Ripley. General, Please inform me whether the Remington Revolvers complained of by Board of Survey of “Andersons Cavalry” were of Army or Navy size, also who was the Maker of the Sabers?26 Hagner forwarded this report to Remington, via Inspector Curtis, for their comments. A short time later the company sent the following letter to Hagner. Remington did not date 49

CHAPTER TWO

their rebuttal, but allowing time for the exchange of correspondence, I estimate the date as mid-November: Sir, Mr. C. G. Curtis, Sub-inspector at this Armory has handed us a report made by a Board of Officers of the 160th Regt., Pa. Vol. on our pistols, also your letter to him accompanying the Report, with a request that we reply to same. Before taking up the objections as set forth in the report (numbered 1 to 5 inclusive), we would respectfully state that this is the first instance (brought to our notice) of any complaint respecting our pistols, on any of the points named in this Report, either on the part of Officers in the service who are using them, or by individuals to whom we have sold many thousands. From the character and tenor of the report we are forced to believe the same to have emanated from other than disinterested persons, and for other than pure motives. The form and construction of our Pistol in most of the points complained of are essentially the same as in the Colt Arms and if properly made (as we believe them to be), are no more liable to fail or become deranged in the one than in the other. Besides, the pistols pronounced by this board as “useless and unsafe weapons” have all been proved and subjected, (we think) to a rigid inspection on the part of your inspectors here, and had we been disposed to offer for inspection, work of inferior quality as represented in this Report, we do but simple justice to your Inspectors to say that they would never have received or passed such work. The only modification of the pistol as now constructed which we would deem advisable to make, (save the notch in the cylinder) would be to give a little more room for the Cartridge or Ball when inserted in the chamber of the cylinder, to pass under the frame. This is not essential however, as the cartridge is readily inserted and as readily driven home, (without the aid of the fingers to guide the same, as represented in this Report). We will now consider the objections in detail as set forth in this Report. 1st: “There being no safety notch as in the Colt pattern the hammer rests on the Cap, when the pistol is loaded, causing the pistol to be liable to be accidentally discharged.” In regard to this we would say the sample pistol or model furnished the Department has no notch in the Cylinder and we have never placed it in those of our make not considering it very essential. The fluted cylinder as shown in the sample pistol or model deposited by us at the Ordnance Department, entirely supersedes the necessity for a notch for the hammer to rest in, as it is held securely by the groove in place of the notch. The notch however can be readily made hereafter in the cylinders if you so desire it, without any additional expense, and with but little delay. 2nd: “The rammer is so short that it will not drive the cartridge home, and the adjustment is so poor that it has to be guided in many cases by the fingers. Some of the rammers are too large so the pistol cannot be loaded at all.” We cannot understand what is meant to be conveyed by saying “the rammer is so short it will not drive the cartridge home.” If it is intended to convey the impression that 50

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

the Cartridge is not rammed down sufficiently to ensure certainty of fire or that the penetration is deficient in consequence thereof; we have only to say that the report is incorrect on both these points. The rammer is of sufficient length to drive home the service charge, (or even Colt’s Cartridge) which we believe is less than the service charge, so as to secure the greatest degree of penetration and certainty of fire. (See letter of Mr. Curtis touching this point). The other portion of the complaint under this head we cannot credit, as we know that no rammer has been put into a pistol, that would not enter the cylinder. The form and construction of the pistol would not permit and further, were it possible that any such should have been offered by us, your inspectors could not possibly have overlooked a fault, so apparent. 3rd: “The locks on some of the pistols were broken or out of order when received although but few rounds have yet been fired from them, the number of broken locks has largely increased, many of the hammers cannot be raised and in some cases the triggers have no effect on the hammers after the piece is cocked.” We would not deny that the locks in our pistols (as in every other) may sometimes be broken or deranged by repeated firing, that they are more liable to fail in this respect than others we cannot believe. The parts in question are essentially the same in our pistol as in Colt’s. We believe them to have been well made, and faithfully examined in detail by your Inspectors. That any of them were broken when received, we cannot for a moment credit unless the pistols had been used or injured before they were received by the Officers who made this Report. 4th: “The Cones or Nipples were so poor that a number were broken when the pieces were fired.” We can only say so far as this charge is concerned, that we believe the cones made at our Armory are equal to any made elsewhere and that all cones put in our pistols for Government Service were duly inspected by Government Inspectors and that we cannot believe they are more liable to break than in Colt’s pistol, as the hammer does not strike full upon the cone, but against the shoulder of the frame. 5th: “Some of the Cylinders will not revolve and others again can be turned either way when the piece is full cocked.” In this case as in some others there is no essential difference in the form or construction of the pawl or bolt, (which are the only parts acting on the cylinder), and they operate on the same cylinder, preventing it from revolving or not depending on their condition. If as they say, some of the cylinders will not revolve while others will revolve both ways, it is simply because one or both the spring of the pawl and the spring of the bolt are broken. This is a difficulty that seldom occurs. We will again remark that these parts are in detail inspected and tested, and we have no reason to doubt that the Board could find cause for similar complaint, (if they so desired) with reference to Colt’s or any other revolver having similar parts. Before closing this report, permit us to ask at your hands, a trial of our pistol with Colt’s or any other in case you have doubts as to the efficiency and durability of the whole or any part of the pistol. We present herewith 51

CHAPTER TWO

samples of the pistols together with component parts of the same. These parts are alike in all of our pistols and the same as we have furnished the Government, and we believe will be found as serviceable and as durable as those received from any other source. Hoping the subject may receive your careful attention in making up your report.27 I suspect, but have not been able to verify, that the revolvers mentioned in the report from Camp Alabama were Beals Navies received by the Ordnance Department prior to the contracts of June 13 and therefore had not been subjected to a formal inspection. Unfortunately, I have been unable to locate the report of Inspector Curtis mentioned in Remington’s letter. An interesting aside in Remington’s rebuttal was the mention of a sample revolver deposited at the department that featured a fluted cylinder. This variation was evidently rejected by the department and never reached the production line. A Beals Navy Revolver recently surfaced that could very well be the sample to which Remington referred (figure 35). This specimen, serial number 11,352, is in somewhat less than good condition, all metal surfaces being deeply pitted. The matching condition of the fluted cylinder would seem to authenticate its originality. On November 26, Ripley again contacted Hagner with further complaints; these concerned the Remington Elliot model revolvers: Sir, Since I informed you on the 28 ult., the proceeding of a Board of Survey, held on arms issued to the 160 Regt. Penn. Vols. particularly as regards Remington Revolvers, further complaints have reached this office, from Col. J. Irwin Gregg, 16 Pa. Cavalry at Camp McClellan, Harrisburg, Pa. in relation to Remington Revolvers. In view of these complaints, I desire that you will proceed to Harrisburg and Carlisle and make a personal inspection of the arms complained of, and report the results to this office. I transmit herewith, all the papers on the subject, which please return with your report.28 As directed, Hagner made his inspection and reported to Ripley. Office of Inspector of Contract Arms New York, Dec. 3rd, 1862 General, I have the honor to report my actions from Harrisburg, where I went in compliance with your instructions of the 26th and 27th of Nov. I find that the equipments referred to were sent to Gov. Curtain’s address and were transferred from the State Arsenal to Camp McClellan by A. Q. M. Wilson stationed at Harrisburg. 2150 sets were subsequently turned over by Lt. M. Knight of the 16th Pa. Cavalry. to Lt. Bean of the 17th Pa. Cavalry with the statement that they were “Condemned by Col. Gregg.” I found the greater portion piled up without cover at the Camp and about 52

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Figure 35 Beals Navy Revolver with fluted cylinder, serial number 11,352. (Author’s photograph)

100 boxes in the Q. M’s Store House in Harrisburg—Lt. Bean having been ordered by Col. Kellogg to turn them in. The Equipments are marked “Sets of Ranger Equipments,” and although marked as being sent from Saint Louis, Watervliet and Frankford Arsenals were all made by Wilstach & Co. of Phila. or Sproulls Meecham & Co. of New York. and probably procured under your orders to me of last year to purchase this kind of Equipment. I found that some of Wilstach’s Stamp, were made up with the Tree formerly at Frankford Arsenal, (received by the Ordnance from the Quartermaster’s Department when the supply of the Cavalry was turned over to Ordnance and) styled, the “Ringgold Tree.” There cannot be many of these—They are iron bound, with high cantle and not covered with rawhide, but merely varnished. All the other Trees are within (nearly) of the McClellan pattern, or of the Texas pattern—all are covered with rawhide and all (including the Ringgold) are fitted up like the McClellan, having uniform saddlebags &c—and packed with all the prescribed additional items. The surcingles are of mixed colored webbing, but otherwise like pattern. Halters, stirrups, back-straps are all as prescribed. I consider these Equipments as perfectly serviceable, and that there is no reason for condemning them. The Colonel of the 18th Regt. Pa. Vol. not yet supplied, will need 1000 sets, and Col. Kellogg has ordered that number to be issued to him. I recommend that all should be of the rawhide covered Tree—and that the balance should be removed to the Quartermaster’s tin storehouse. Captain Wilson promised that this would be done at once. Ought they not be removed from Harrisburg and put into service or returned to an Arsenal where they can be properly cared for? I examined the 813 Remington Revolvers, opening every box and having every pistol carefully examined except in a few boxes evidently untouched since their inspection. Not one pistol was broken, or out of order, except one cone removed from one. In the inspection 2 mainsprings broke, and the combs of 2 hammers flew off—the weather being 53

CHAPTER TWO

Figure 36 Corporal Nailer, 13th Pennsylvania Cavalry. He appears to have a Remington revolver tucked into his belt. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

cold and the boxes unsheltered. I discovered however the cause for the complaint and there is cause for it, although it is removed at once as soon as it is explained. The Remingtons have followed two plans of securing the Cylinder Bolts—in the first used (Beales [sic]) the head of the bolt is square on top and is secured by the ramrod fitting above it when the ramrod is in its place, at rest. The Bolt cannot move until the Ramrod is loosened from its spring and lowered. The other plan (Elliots) has been introduced as an improvement and at considerable additional cost—it permits the Bolt to be moved and the cylinder to be taken out without touching the Ramrod—a slight spring bearing in a notch in the bolt is intended to keep it usually in place, but to be overcome by a moderate pull. If the Bolt is in place, both kinds of pistols work well, and are in good order, as I found them—if the bolt is partly raised, the hammer will not revolver the cylinder, but sticks fast at half cock, because the pawl does not fall into its proper notch. In the “Beale” [sic] pattern there is no risk, because no one would pull the trigger with the Ramrod unfastened, but in the other the bolt may have slipped, or have been pulled out a little, and escape unnoticed—and this was no doubt the case with those examined by the officers at Carlisle & Harrisburg. As soon as attention is drawn to it, the correction is immediate. I do not know that Messrs. Remington had any authority to change, or indeed, whether their present sample is not of the Elliot’s pattern, but it is evident that they should return at once to the other, and I recommend that I be authorized to require it. Col. Kellogg was 54

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Figure 37 Cylinder arbor retaining spring on an Elliot Navy Revolver. (Author’s collection)

present at the Inspection and understands the trouble and is perfectly satisfied to receive them for his regiment. They are therefore in his charge. I applied to the Adjt.[sic] General of the State to know about the Anderson Cavalry, but was informed that it had been ordered away. I then telegraphed Capt. Hastings asking if any pistols remained at Carlisle, but received no reply up to the time of departure of the train. As the cause of the trouble is now certain and no corrections could be made by visiting Carlisle (even if there be any pistols there) I thought it best to return from the Inspection to our duties.29 The revolvers referred to in this report had been issued to the 16th Regiment, Pennsylvania Volunteer Cavalry (figure 36). In a reply dated three days later, Ripley explained why the department had adopted the Elliot system. Dec. 6, 1862 Sir, In answer to your letter of Dec. 3, I have to say that Messrs. Remington & Sons were authorized to adopt the “Elliott” [sic] patent as the sample, as it was supposed to be better and more convenient, if you are satisfied however, that the “Beal” patent is the better and safer model, you are authorized to direct them to return to that pattern. Please send to this office samples of all the contract arms that you are inspecting except the contract Springfield rifle musket.30 This was the beginning of the end for the Elliot model. Hagner’s concerns about the design were well justified. The Elliot patent had seemed to be the perfect model when the department selected it from the pattern revolvers submitted by Remington. In the field, however, many of these revolvers developed a disturbing fault. When some of the revolvers were fired, the arbor pin would work forward from the recoil. If this went unnoticed by the user, the action would lock up. I have examined many of the Elliot models, paying particular attention to the mechanics of Elliot’s patent. On many I have found the small spring that was designed to retain the arbor pin in place missing. On others, the spring did not provide sufficient tension to adequately secure the pin (figure 37). Many, however, still function perfectly. 55

CHAPTER TWO

Figure 38 Top of Elliot loading lever with fillister screw installed in channel. (Author’s collection)

Figure 39 Elliot–New Model Navy Transition Revolver. Note the New Model cylinder arbor and the Elliot loading lever. (Author’s collection)

I have duplicated the conditions described in Hagner’s report and found the true cause for the action locking up. When the rear end of the arbor pin is not seated in the frame, cocking the hammer exerts pressure through the pawl to the rear of the cylinder, raising the rear of the cylinder enough that the front of the cylinder binds on the forward face of the barrel. I found this to be true of any of the Remington models, although the chances of this occurring are remote on the Beals or New Models. Hagner seems to have had no difficulty in convincing Remington management to revert to the Beals system, but many parts for the Elliot models were already in the works. The company adopted a simple solution to make use of these parts. A small fillister screw was threaded into the arbor channel of the loading lever; this secured the arbor pin in position (figure 38). In order to slide the arbor pin forward, the loading lever now had to be lowered. When the stock of Elliot arbor pins was exhausted, Remington still had some Elliot loading levers on hand. These were adapted for use with the New Model arbor pins by milling off the rails at the top rear of the lever. These temporary solutions satisfied the ordnance inspectors and allowed Remington to use these parts to their advantage with very little additional expense (figure 39). Once the Elliot parts were exhausted, newly designed parts were adopted to once again employ the system that had been so successful on the Beals models. 56

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Figure 40 From left to right, an early Beals cylinder, a late Beals cylinder, and a New Model cylinder. Note small arbor hole on cylinder on left. (Author’s collection)

Hagner’s recommendations did not end with the lever and arbor system. Safety notches were soon a standard feature on all the cylinders of army and navy revolvers, and the hammers were redesigned to avoid the breakage of the fragile high spur that had been a feature of the Beals and Elliot models. The lower spur of the newly designed hammer could better withstand a blow if the revolver was accidentally dropped. These changes in design took place during January–March 1863. In this period of transition, Remington also used barrels remaining from Elliot production bearing the 1861 patent date. The revolver that evolved from these design changes was basically the pattern used for the remainder of production (figures 40 and 41). During this transition period, it was realized that the original method of retaining the arbor pin in the Beals models had not been protected by patent. Samuel Remington took steps to correct this oversight by making the appropriate application and was issued patent number 37,921 on March 17, 1863 (figure 42). This date is not found in the barrel address of the New Model Revolvers manufactured during the Civil War but is seen on some of the Remington New Model Navy, Belt, Police, and Pocket Model revolvers manufactured after the war. In his patent, Remington also described a set screw that also served to lock the arbor pin in place, but this feature was never utilized. Once the initial improvements were in place, Remington designated the revolver as their “New Model” and eventually added these words to the barrel address. These improvements came too late to be included on any of the navy revolvers received by the department, as their final 57

CHAPTER TWO

Figure 41 New Model hammer on left, Beals on right. (Author’s collection)

Figure 42 Samuel Remington’s patent, number 37,921. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) 58

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Figure 43 Early cone front sight at top, late pinched sight on bottom. (Author’s collection)

delivery was in December 1862. Near the end of 1863, there was one more change; this was a new front sight, also adopted at the department’s insistence (figures 43 and 44). The year of 1863 began with Remington facing many problems. In addition to redesigning their revolvers to satisfy the ordnance inspectors, there were deficits in deliveries on their contract of June 13, 1862, for twenty thousand army revolvers. This contract had specified that one thousand revolvers be delivered in June, two thousand each in July and August, one thousand in September, and three thousand per month thereafter until the contract was completed. By the end of 1862, Remington had delivered only fifty-one hundred army revolvers; this was far below the original estimates given to the department. When the final delivery of navy revolvers was made on December 22, Remington cut production of navy models to approximately five hundred a month, producing only enough to satisfy orders from the navy’s Bureau of Ordnance. Remington was able to increase production of the army model by using labor and machinery formerly used for Navies, and with the limited output from Utica, delivered twenty-five hundred in January 1863 (figure 45). Hagner, well aware of Remington’s delinquencies, requested instructions as to the reception of revolvers after the contract expired. On February 16, Ripley sent the following to the secretary of war: Endorsement on letter of Maj. P. V. Hagner, Inspector of Small Arms, requesting information as to the reception of Remington Pistols. Respectfully referred to the War Dept. In view of the wants of the service, the low price, and the high character of these pistols, it is recommended that the time of delivery be extended to allow Messrs. Remington & Sons to complete their contract. Nine thousand (about) Pistols (Army size) remain to be delivered.31 Ripley’s request was granted, and four days later he notified Hagner: 59

CHAPTER TWO

Figure 44 Confederate soldier displaying an Elliot Army Revolver. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

Figure 45 Union soldier displaying an Elliot Army Revolver. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot) 60

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Sir, Your letter of the 14th having been submitted to the Secretary of War, He has authorized the reception of the revolvers forfeited by the Messrs. Remington for non delivery within the time specified in their contract. You will therefore receive from them the whole number of revolvers, specified in their contract of 13 June, 1862.32 This was a rather unusual extension, inasmuch as no time limitation was specified. Remington proceeded to deliver revolvers at approximately twenty-five hundred per month until the contract was fulfilled the following June. The secretary of war received a letter in March containing allegations that Remington was continuing to use malleable iron to manufacture their frames, instead of wrought iron, as required by the department. This matter was investigated by Hagner, who found the allegations unfounded. Ripley reported to Stanton on March 18: Sir, I have the honor to report that in compliance with your endorsement on the letter of Messrs. Michael Groshean and A. T. Freeman, stating that the Messrs. Remington were making frames of their revolvers of malleable iron, copies of those letters were referred to Maj. Hagner with instructions to investigate the matter and report, and that the result of his examination is contained in the accompanying letter received from him. The letters of Messrs. Groshean and Freeman are herewith returned.33 The author is not acquainted with Groshean. Austin T. Freeman was the inventor of the revolver of the same name and had been seeking a government contract (figure 46). This episode reeks of sour grapes. By the end of March, Remington had completed all of the department’s suggested modifications. They once again adopted the 1858 barrel address, omitting Beals’s name. The Remingtons were proud of their new revolver. On April 20, they sent samples to Ripley, simultaneously soliciting an additional contract: Sir, We forwarded to you on the 18th inst. per express, a case containing one of our improved Army Pistols, with appendages complete; together with samples of the material used in the construction of the arm and the forged and machined state. We would remark that we shall be able to close the delivery of our present contract in about 30 days, and we desire to know at as early a date as convenient, if it is the wish of your Department that we should continue to furnish the arms after the expiration of our present contract. On taking this contract, we had largely to increase our capacity in the way of machinery, tools, buildings, &c to enable us to complete the pistols as rapidly as they were required, and although unexpected difficulties in procuring workmen, and suitable and 61

CHAPTER TWO

Figure 46 Freeman Army Revolver. (Courtesy: Greg Martin Auctions)

efficient machinery and material, have prevented us from fulfilling our engagements in all respects, as we would have desired, we assure you that it has been our earnest purpose to comply strictly with our contract, and we have only been prevented from doing so, by circumstances we could not control. Owing to the greatly enhanced cost of manufacturing at the present time, and the reduced price at which we contracted to make the arms, should your department give us no more to make, it would result in a heavy loss to us, as we have invested much more than we have thus far received on the pistols delivered; in machinery, tools, buildings &c adapted to a great measure to the manufacturing of this arm, and which would be mainly unavailable for other purposes. We are now turning out 100 Army Pistols a day at our Armory in this place and within the next 30 days expect to deliver them at the same rate from our branch Armory in Utica. We would therefore respectfully ask that an order be given us for forty or fifty thousand Army Revolvers like sample in case sent you, at the same price at which we are now furnishing the arms viz: $12. each including appendages.34 Recently, while delving into the bowels of the Smithsonian, Mr. Charlie Pate came upon a unique Remington item. It has all of the features described in Remington’s letter above. The case is cataloged as being donated to the museum in 1903 by the U.S. Army, with no reference to its origins. The assembled revolver and accoutrements are missing, but enough of the contents remain to convince me that this is the very same case described in the letter above. The individual responsible for labeling the contents seems to have had very little knowledge about revolvers, note that the caliber is given as .45 (figure 47). 62

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Figure 47 Remington sample case sent to the chief of ordnance. (Courtesy: Charles W. Pate photograph, Smithsonian Collection)

I have noticed that surviving letters from Remington to the department seem to be scarce. I attribute this to the more mundane correspondence being sent to the inspector of contract arms. I feel extremely fortunate to have this piece of correspondence. Remington’s statements about their production capabilities indicate that the Utica facility had been unable to manufacture revolvers to the extent anticipated. Remington offered that Ilion revolver production was one hundred units a day; at that time, they were delivering only twenty-five hundred per month. With the output from Utica, they expected to double their capacity by May. However, this was not to be the case, as they never delivered more than thirty-seven hundred revolvers during any month in 1863. Some confusion ensued on receiving the above request. Ripley had evidently forgotten that the department had already given Remington permission to complete their 1862 contract. On April 25, he submitted their request to the secretary of war as an extension of their present contract: Endorsement on letter of E. Remington & Son, relative to their pistol, asking that they may be directed to furnish these arms to the Government. Respectfully returned: The Army pistol of Remington within referred to is an arm of good quality. A contract was made, 13th June 1862, for 20,000 of these pistols at $12. each including appendages, deliverable at specified periods, so as to complete the entire delivery in February 1863. That contract stipulated that any failure in the delivery due at any time should forfeit the right to deliver the number thus deficient, and that any default in delivering any or all of the articles mentioned, the Contractors should forfeit and pay the United States fifteen thousand dollars. The deliveries up to this time, amount to 9,090 pistols, leaving 10,910 deficient. In consideration of the deliveries already made by the Messrs. Remington, of the quality of these pistols, and of their being more prepared to deliver more rapidly, it is recommended that the forfeitures under the contract be 63

CHAPTER TWO

Figure 48 Condemned barrel. (Author’s collection)

remitted, and that they be allowed to go on and complete the delivery of the 20,000 pistols, provided they do so in four months, or less, from the first of May next.35 Once again, Stanton granted Ripley’s request, and on April 28, Ripley advised Hagner: Sir, I transmit herewith for your information and government a copy of a letter from E. Remington & Sons to the Secretary of War with the endorsement made thereon at this office, and the decision of the Secretary of War in the case, directing that Messrs. Remington & Sons be authorized to deliver the whole number of revolvers embraced in their contract of 13 June 1862, which decision you will be pleased to communicate to these gentlemen.36 There must have been some dismay in Ilion when Hagner conveyed this message. Remington lost no time in reacting and notified Ripley of the error on May 2, again requesting a new contract. Ripley replied on May 8: Gentlemen, I have to inform you that the Secretary of War by endorsement on your letter of the 2nd inst. has directed that a new contract be entered into with you, for as many revolvers, not exceeding 20,000 as you can manufacture from the expiration of your present Contract, till the first of January, 1864, on the same terms as under the present one, and that such Contract will be prepared and sent to you for execution in the course of a few days.37 During that same week, Ripley returned one of Hagner’s accounts for correction: May 6, 1863 Sir, The account of E. Remington & Son is again herewith returned, five hundred bullet moulds casting two balls should have been delivered with the 1,000 pistols as in all previous accounts. If only 250 have been delivered, the cost of 250 should be deducted.38 64

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

In June of 1862, the department had excused Remington from delivering the six-ball gang mold. The contract still called for delivery of a combination nipple-wrench screwdriver with each revolver and one mold casting two balls for every two revolvers. This was the first instance that I have located in which Remington did not furnish the molds. The two final deliveries on this first contract were made on June 18 and 24. When Hagner accepted five hundred revolvers on June 18, Remington offered the department seven hundred rejected revolvers at a reduced price. Hagner advised Remington to put this proposition into writing, which he, in turn, submitted to the department. Ripley responded on July 1: Inspector Col. P. V. Hagner Sir, The letter to you from Messrs. Remington & Sons of the 18th ultimo, which you sent to this office, was referred to the Secretary of War endorsed as follows: Ordnance Office June 22, 1863 Respectfully submitted to the Secretary of War. These are good pistols, the price very moderate, and we want them. It is therefore recommended that they be purchased. Jas. W. Ripley, Br. Genl., Ch. Of Ord. This recommendation having been approved, you are now authorized to receive the said pistols at the price of eleven dollars each.39 I note in this letter that Hagner had recently been promoted. The revolvers that he was authorized to receive were second-class serviceable arms with minor blemishes that would not pass the rigorous inspection procedure for contract arms. They were not credited to a contract. I shall later offer more about the second-class revolvers. I will point out that the rejection rate for Remington’s revolvers was very high, and although the army revolver serial numbers reached 149,000 for the final deliveries in 1865, the department accepted only 116,763 Armies. Ordnance inspectors used a large “C” to stamp condemned parts (figure 48). Revolvers with these marks were tainted goods and were difficult to sell on the commercial market. To avoid this, Remington soon learned to preinspect their revolvers prior to submission to ordnance inspectors; this kept the percentage of marked condemned parts much lower. Based on the overall serial number range of Remington Army Revolvers manufactured during the Civil War, I estimate the range of serial numbers delivered on this first contract to be approximately 850–25,000. When completed, Remington had delivered all three of their models to the army. They, like other arms manufacturers of this era, seldom made a clean break between the manufacture of prior and succeeding models. When it was feasible, Remington used all of the remaining parts on the newer models. I have examined many army and navy revolvers that seem to defy classification. Collectors describe these arms as “transitions,” and there are several types available to the Remington collector. These practices also created an overlap in the serial numbers between some models. An example of this is found in the change from the Beals to the Elliot Model Navies. Serial number 65

CHAPTER TWO

Figure 49 Starr Double Action Navy Revolver. (Author’s photograph)

Figure 50 Starr Single Action Army Revolver. (Author’s photograph)

14,332 was reported to be an Elliot model with a Beals barrel address; serial number 15,694 was reported to be a true Beals Model Navy. I shall further discuss these transitions, variations, and serial number overlaps in a later chapter. When it was possible, both the Union and Confederate armies recovered abandoned arms from battlefield sites and forwarded them to an arsenal for inspection and repair. Broken or malfunctioning arms turned in by troops were also sent to an arsenal. Salvageable parts from malfunctioning arms were employed to restore other arms to serviceable condition for reissue. The Ordnance Department regularly ordered spare parts from arms manufacturers for this same purpose. This practice also created some revolvers that do not conform to the standard models. Many of the very early production revolvers that I have examined have parts that were not consistent with the standard model, for example, Beals or Elliot models with New Model cylinders (identified by the safety 66

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Figure 51 Remington Armory, circa 1862. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

notches) or with cylinders that did not have matching serial numbers. I have found that some very desirable arms are often passed over by the “purist” collector, who insists that all of the component parts be original to the arm. This is especially true of Civil War arms. The original concept for Remington’s Army and Navy Revolvers was conceived by Beals. However, the army ordnance inspectors seem to have had a crucial role in redesigning these revolvers to their final development. Remington was not the only contractor whose arms benefited from the input of the department. Starr had also received a revolver contract in 1862. When the contract expired, the department had refused to extend it or award a new one. Starr’s original revolver design, a double-action or self-cocking model, proved to be too complicated and expensive for the Ordnance Department (figure 49). Starr redesigned it as a single-action model and received an additional contract (figure 50). When Colt first introduced their 1860 Model Army Revolver, considerable difficulty was experienced with exploding cylinders when proofing the revolvers. The problem was alleviated by boring the cylinder chambers smaller at the bottom, therefore providing a thicker wall at the rear of the cylinder. Ordnance inspectors had some input in this new design. Colt also would have been required to redesign their revolvers to a solid frame model when their contract for these revolvers expired in November 1863. This was averted by Colt’s reluctance to furnish revolvers at a competitive price (see letter in chapter 3, Balch to Hagner, November 6, 1863). I have reformatted the Army Ordnance Department’s original records to reflect the types of revolvers received on deliveries and also present copies of the original “Memorandum of Receipts.”40 The reader will note that the entry dates from these different records do not always coincide. The “Memorandum of Receipts” reflects a true copy of the ordnance inspector’s receipts; the ledger containing “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms” was made by department clerks.41 Many errors occurred when making entries, and many deliveries were never entered into these ledgers: 67

CONTRACTOR

DATE OF PURCHASE QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

PRICE

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

Remington & Sons

1862

Jul.

12

750

Beals Army Revolvers

$12

00

$9,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Aug.

3

500

Beals & 1861 Army Revolvers

12

00

6,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Aug.

11

500

Beals & 1861 Navy Revolvers

12

00

6,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Aug.

19

500

Beals & 1861 Navy Revolvers

12

00

6,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Sep.

11

900

1861 Navy Revolvers

12

00

9,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Sep.

26

500

1861 Army Revolvers

12

00

6,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Oct.

8

549

1861 Army Revolvers

12

00

6,588

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Oct.

17

500

1861 Navy Revolvers

12

00

6,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Oct.

22

500

1861 Army Revolvers

12

00

6,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Oct.

29

500

1861 Army Revolvers

12

00

6,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Nov.

8

500

1861 Navy Revolvers

12

00

6,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Nov.

15

600

1861 Army Revolvers

12

00

7,200

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Nov.

21

600

1861 Navy Revolvers

11

00

6,600

00

June 13, 1862a

Remington & Sons

1862

Nov.

26

500

1861 Army Revolvers

12

00

6,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Dec.

3

500

1861 Navy Revolvers

12

00

6,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1862

Dec.

22

1,001

1861 Navy Revolvers

12

00

12,012

00

June 13, 1862b

Remington & Sons

1862

Dec.

23

200

1861 Army Revolvers

12

00

2,400

00

June 13, 1862c

CHAPTER TWO

68

Remington Revolvers Delivered on Contracts of June 13, 1862 PURCHASES of “‘Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms,’ since April 13, 1861, by the Ordnance Department: from whom purchased, and to whom paid for; price; total amount; date of contract or order; and date of payment”

1862

Dec.

31

502

1861 Army Revolvers

12

00

6,024

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Jan.

5

1,000

1861–New Model Army Transition

12

00

12,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Jan.

16

1,000

1861–New Model Army Transition

12

00

12,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Jan.

28

1,000

1861–New Model Army Transition

12

00

12,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Feb.

10

1,000

1861–New Model Army Transition

12

00

12,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Feb.

23

1,000

1861–New Model Army Transition

12

00

12,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Mar.

6

1,000

1861–New Model Army Transition

12

00

12,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Mar.

17

1,000

1861–New Model Army Transition

12

00

12,000

40

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Mar.

21

1,000

1861–New Model Army Transition

12

00

12,000

40

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Apr.

9

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Apr.

18

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

40

June 13, 1862d

Remington & Sons

1863

Apr.

29

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

40

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

May

9

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

40

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

May

21

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

68

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Jun.

2

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

24

June 13, 1862

Remington & Sons

1863

Jun.

22

900

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

10,800

28

June 13, 1862e

69

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles and Small Arms.” a This lot of second-class revolvers was accepted by the Ordnance Department at reduced price. They were credited to contract. bRemington delivered 5,001 Beals and Elliot (1861) Navy Revolvers under the contract of June 13, 1862, after the Ordnance Department granted an extension. cThis delivery was omitted from entries in original ledger of “Purchases” by clerical error. Delivery confirmed by entries in “Memorandum of Receipts,” Certificate No. 8. dThis delivery was omitted from entries in original ledger of “Purchases” by clerical error. Delivery confirmed by entries in “Memorandum of Receipts,” Certificate No. 18. eThis was the final delivery of army revolvers under the contract of June 13, 1862. A total of 20,001 army revolvers was delivered after Remington received extensions on the contract. These included Beals, Elliot (1861), and New Models.

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Remington & Sons

DATE OF EACH DELIVERY 1862

REGISTER OF REPORT Book No.

TAKEN UP ON CERTIFICATE NO.

RECEIVING OFFICER

WHERE SHIPPED

NO.

DESCRIPTION

Jul.

12

32

—

1

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

750

Army Revolvers

Aug.

2

32

—

2

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Sep.

16

32

191

3

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Oct.

3

32

206

4

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

549

Army Revolvers

Oct.

22

32

206

5

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Oct.

29

32

244

6

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Nov.

15

32

244

7

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

600

Army Revolvers

Nov.

26

32

244

8

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Dec.

23

32

283

8

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

200

Army Revolversa

Dec.

29

32

283

9

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

502

Army Revolvers

Jan.

5

33

—

10

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Jan.

10

—

—

10

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Jan.

16

—

—

11

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Jan.

22

—

—

12

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Jan.

28

—

—

12

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Feb.

5

—

—

13

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Feb.

10

—

—

13

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Feb.

17

—

—

14

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

1863

CHAPTER TWO

70

Ordnance Inspector’s “Memorandum of Receipts” for Army Revolvers “Memorandum of Receipts of 20,000 ARMY REVOLVERS from E. REMINGTON & SONS under their CONTRACTS from CHIEF OF ORDNANCE dated JUNE 13th, 1862”

25

—

—

14

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Feb.

28

—

—

15

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Mar.

9

—

—

15

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Mar.

13

—

—

16

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Mar.

19

—

—

16

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Mar.

24

—

—

17

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Mar.

30

—

—

17

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Apr.

3

—

—

18

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolversa

Apr.

9

—

—

18

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolversa

Apr.

15

—

—

19

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Apr.

22

—

—

19

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Apr.

25

—

—

20

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

May

1

—

—

20

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

May

7

—

—

21

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

May

12

—

—

21

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

May

19

—

—

22

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

May

23

—

—

22

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

May

29

—

—

23

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Jun.

4

—

—

23

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Jun.

11

—

—

24

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Jun.

18

—

—

24

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Jun.

24

—

—

24

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

400

Army Revolvers

TOTAL 20,001 71

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 80, “Memorandum of Receipts.” a These three lots of revolvers were never entered into Ordnance Ledger, Record Group 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms.”

REMINGTON’S FIRST REVOLVER CONTRACTS

Feb.

DATE OF EACH DELIVERY 1862

REGISTER OF REPORT Book No.

TAKEN UP ON CERTIFICATE NO.

RECEIVING OFFICER

WHERE SHIPPED

NO.

DESCRIPTION

Aug.

11

32

—

1

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Navy Revolvers

Aug.

19

32

—

2

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Navy Revolvers

Sep.

11

32

183

3

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

900

Navy Revolvers

Oct.

17

32

206

4

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Navy Revolvers

Nov.

8

32

244

5

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Navy Revolvers

Nov.

20

32

244

6

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

600

Navy Revolvers

Dec.

3

32

283

7

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Navy Revolvers

Dec.

16

32

283

8

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

300

Navy Revolvers

Dec.

22

32

283

8

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

700

Navy Revolvers

Dec.

22

32

283

8

Major Hagner

New York Arsenal

1

Navy Revolvers

TOTAL 5,001 Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 80, “Memorandum of Receipts.” Entry 80 is the most reliable of the Archives’ records for verifying deliveries. Errors or omissions have been noted in others of the Archives’ records.

CHAPTER TWO

72

Ordnance Inspector’s “Memorandum of Receipts” for Navy Revolvers “Memorandum of Receipts of 5,000 NAVY REVOLVERS from E. REMINGTON & SONS under their CONTRACTS from CHIEF OF ORDNANCE dated JUNE 13th, 1862”

CHAPTER THREE

Remington’s Second Army Revolver Contract emington made the final delivery on their first contract for army revolvers on June 22, 1863. This chapter will address the events that occurred between July 1 and December 31. Brig. Gen. James W. Ripley advised Lt. Col. P. V. Hagner of Remington’s new contract on July 1:

R

Sir, In reply to that portion of your letter of the 19th ult. which refers to a new contract for Remington pistols, I have to state that one has been authorized “for all they can supply the present year not exceeding 20,000,” on the same terms and conditions as their last contract, with the exception of the sear screw, suggested in your letter of the 1st May, 1863. Contracts will be prepared and sent to the parties & this is communicated that the inspection not be delayed. Jas. W. Ripley, Br. Genl., Ch. Ord. Copies for Messrs. Remington & Sons. Orders have been sent to Mr. Hannis to proceed without delay with the inspection.1 Benjamin Hannis was the principal sub-inspector at the Remington Armory at this time, having replaced C. G. Curtis early in 1863. The department required civilian inspectors to be on duty at armories away from home and family for extended periods; it granted, from time to time, leaves of absence and replacement by another inspector. On returning to duty, they were not necessarily assigned to the same armory where they had served their previous tour; consequently, several different inspectors served at the Remington facilities during the Civil War. Ripley forwarded the contract to Remington on July 2: Gentlemen, I transmit herewith Quadruplicates of a Contract, for all the Revolvers you can deliver during the current year not exceeding 20,000, which contract has been authorized, by the Secretary of War on your application of 20th April last. Be pleased to execute and return the same as soon as convenient. In executing the four copies you will be careful to see that each is provided with the number of stamps as required by law, which is one stamp of five cents for the sheet on which written and one 73

CHAPTER THREE

Figure 52 A Civil War veteran displaying his Remington revolver. (Courtesy: Jay Huber)

stamp of ten cents for each affidavit and certificate. If there be two sureties three ten cent stamps will be required for each copy and if there be more than two sureties then one ten cent stamp will be required for each additional surety.2 On July 4, Ripley conveyed further information to Hagner about the contract: Sir, In reply to your letter of the 2nd inst. I have to state that in the new contract sent to Messrs. Remington for execution a proviso has been inserted requiring them to make such modifications and alterations to the pistol as you may deem necessary or important.3 On July 8, Hagner accepted the first one thousand revolvers on the new contract. Simultaneously, he also received the seven hundred second-class revolvers authorized in Ripley’s letter of June 22. He accepted a total of twenty-seven hundred army revolvers in July and with an increase in production in August, another thirty-five hundred. Remington’s deliveries in the final half of 1863 averaged three thousand revolvers per month. 74

REMINGTON’S SECOND ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

On September 15, Ripley retired “for age.” Some researchers contend that, in reality, he was removed because of his unyielding attitude concerning the adoption of breechloaders into the service. George Douglas Ramsey, a twenty-eight-year veteran of the Ordnance Department, replaced Ripley. A captain before the war, he received a rapid series of promotions, from major to lieutenant colonel in August 1861, to colonel in June 1863. He had served as commander of the Washington Arsenal from 1861 until his appointment as brigadier general and chief of ordnance. In the fall of 1863, bullet molds once again became the subject of correspondence between the department and ordnance officers. On September 16, Ramsey sent the following to Lieutenant Shaff, ordnance officer at Bealton Station, Virginia: Sir; I have to acknowledge your letter of the 11th inst. recommending that no further issue be made of Pistol Bullet Moulds to the Cavalry, and to state that such issues hereafter will be made only on Special requisition for them. This matter has been heretofore considered and no bullet moulds are furnished with the revolvers now being furnished under contract. You should take measures to collect and send to the Arsenal in this city all such bullet moulds in the hands of troops, which are not required.4 Ramsey was in error in stating that no molds were being delivered with revolvers. At the request of Hagner, Remington had suspended deliveries of this appendage in June; Colt either had a large stock of molds on hand or had an ongoing contract with the supplier and had refused to halt deliveries. Ramsey learned of this the following month and sent the following letter to Hagner on October 26: Sir, You will be pleased to see if any arrangements cannot be made with the principal Pistol manufacturers to stop the furnishing (of) bullet moulds with the Pistol. The moulds are accumulating very fast, are very seldom issued, or if issued are lost or thrown away by the soldiers as useless. Be pleased to give this subject your early attention.5 Hagner replied two days later: General, In reply to your letter of the 26th relative to the receipt of Bullet Moulds with pistols, I have the honor to state, that I made arrangements with the Messrs. Remington to cease their manufacture—deducting 18 cents per pistol—and have not received any Bullet Moulds since June 22nd from them—nor are we to receive moulds from Mr. Hoard or the Starr Arms Co. under like arrangement. 75

CHAPTER THREE

Figure 53 Martially marked Remington army and navy bullet molds. (Author’s collection)

The Colt’s Company declined to consider the matter at the time, and as their contract specified their delivery, I could not stop their receipt. I do not see any necessity for Moulds for Carbines and recommend that these likewise be stopped.6 Martially marked Remington bullet molds are quite scarce in comparison to the revolvers (figure 53). Hagner’s letter explains this. I have already discussed the six-cavity gang molds (see letter in chapter 2, Ripley to Thornton, June 28, 1862). There were 2,500 .36 caliber and 9,750 .44 caliber two-cavity molds delivered with the revolvers on the contracts of June 13, 1862 (see letter in chapter 2, Ripley to Hagner, May 6, 1863). None were delivered on the contract of July 6, 1863. The arrangement between Remington and Hagner dispensed with their delivery, and the department deducted eighteen cents from the price of each revolver. The final two contracts for revolvers made no mention of this appendage. Early in the war, the department had adopted combustible cartridges; their use made bullet molds and powder flasks obsolete. It was the practice of the army to periodically appoint officers to serve on an ordnance board. These officers would examine submitted arms and make recommendations to the War Department for improvements and modifications. On October 3, Ramsey forwarded one of their revolver recommendations to Hagner: Sir, The following recommendations of the Ordnance Board at its recent meeting, having been approved by the Secretary of War, they are communicated for your information and government. “The Board recommended that .44 inch be adopted as the caliber of revolvers, and seven and a half inches for the length of the barrel.” “The Board recommended that the question of modifying the compound appendage and adapting a combined wiper and ball screw be submitted to Lt. Col. Hagner and Maj. Dyer.”7 76

REMINGTON’S SECOND ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

There seems to be some contradiction in this board’s recommendations and those of a prewar board that had established the pattern of the 1860 Colt Army Revolvers. The barrel length recommended at that time was eight inches. This recommendation had no effect on the Remington Army Revolvers; their barrel lengths had been and would remain eight inches. With Colt and Remington the only suppliers of revolvers, the department was in dire need. When Starr’s revolver contract expired in April 1863, the department declined an extension, citing the expense and delicate mechanism of the double-action or self-cocking models. After Starr perfected a single-action model, the department awarded them a new contract on September 22; however, none would be delivered until December. On October 15, Ramsey telegraphed Remington concerning their revolver production: Telegram Please report immediately by telegraph how fast you can supply Army size Revolvers on your order, and what you are delivering.8 I perceive this query to be a signal to Remington to hasten deliveries. The information requested was available from Hagner and was, no doubt, reported by him on a weekly basis. Requisitions for all types of ordnance equipment were arriving daily at the department, far faster than they could be filled. On October 30, Ramsey again echoed the urgency to Hagner for more revolvers: Sir, Major Wainwright needs Colts and Remington pistols very much, and I have to request that you will admonish the manufacturers to furnish them as rapidly as possible.9 About this time, a series of events were put in motion that would have a profound effect on both the Ordnance Department and Remington. It began with the department’s request on October 10 for Hagner to evaluate Colt’s Model 1860 Army Revolvers: Sir; Respectfully referred to Col. Hagner, Inspector of Small Arms for report as to whether any change in the present model of Colts pistol should be made, and if so what delay if any, such a change would cause, or how much it would reduce the quantity the Company is now capable of delivering monthly.10 I have not located Hagner’s reply, but further correspondence indicates that he was critical of the Colt’s revolvers then being delivered. Ramsey had evidently made similar requests of other ordnance officers. He sent this letter to Hagner on October 23: Sir, I transmit, herewith, for your information a copy of a report made to Captain Benton, by the Master Armorer of Washington Arsenal, of the defects observed by him repairing Revolver pistols at that post, particularly Colts as compared to Remingtons.11 77

CHAPTER THREE

Figure 54 An artist’s rendering of the Washington Arsenal, circa 1880. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

Ramsey included the following report: Washington Arsenal October 20, 1863 Captain J. G. Benton Commanding Washington Arsenal Sir, Agreeable to your order, to report in regard to the “Remington” Army & Navy Pistols, compared with the Colt’s, of the same class, I respectfully submit the following. Colts Army & Navy Pistols (new Model) In a great many of these Pistols turned in here, I have found the “Base pin” (on which the cylinder revolves) to be bent, and badly strained, in some. So much as to leave an opening between the barrel and cylinder of .05 inch. The Base pin is the principal support for holding the barrel firm in its place, in many cases the slot in the base pin becomes so much elongated by the wear of the Key, as to require a new pin. The spaces between the ratchet holes, or countersinks, in the Barrel, (in which the lever works) I have found to be torn out and in many cases had to substitute a new Barrel, where the old Barrel would have answered, but for the cause named, very often the nibs or jogs, on the lever are broken off. The arrangement of the Lever and Rammer in the old Model, seems to stand the wear of service much better than the new Model. The other parts of these pistols seem to stand better. The interchanging of the different parts is better in these pistols, than in others we have. Remington Army & Navy Pistols These pistols seem to stand the test of service very well. The arrangement of the Lockframe and Topstrap is better calculated to give strength, and render them less liable to get out of order, than pistols of other makes. I have found very few of the frames disabled by being bent or strained. The arrangement of the lever and rammer is simple, and I have found them broken less, in proportion to the number we have repaired than those of any other make. I have 78

REMINGTON’S SECOND ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

also found the Barrel to stand much better than any others, but few of them cracked or bursted. The parts of these pistols do not interchange well, the trouble being principally with the Barrel which will only work to the frame it has been fitted to. The front sight is dovetailed in the barrel, many of them work out and are lost. If a better system of interchanging of parts was adopted, these pistols would be much better adapted to the public service. In my judgment Pistols made on the “Remington” plan, with Lockframe, Topstrap, and Backstrap in one piece, are better calculated to stand the wear of service, than pistols made on the Colts plan, where the Base pin is the principal dependence to keep the Barrel firm and operate against the recoil and slugging of the Ball. Very Respectfully, Your Obt. Servant Jno. G. Dudley12 The loading lever ratchet teeth and the corresponding ratchet holes in the underside of the barrel were used on the Colt 1860 Army and 1861 Navy models. Once the ratchet teeth were damaged or corresponding holes stripped from the barrel, the cylinder could not be loaded. A loading lever or barrel, thus damaged, could not be repaired and required replacement. The department did not ignore these adverse reports. Colt was delivering Model 1860 Army Revolvers on a May 25, 1863, contract and was to make final deliveries in November. Colt was seeking a new contract, and negotiations were in progress when the department received this report. Armed with both Hagner’s recommendations and Dudley’s report, the department insisted that Colt redesign their revolver to eliminate the reported faults. Colt evidently had no objection to redesigning their revolvers; however, when the department insisted that the revolvers be delivered at a competitive price, Colt balked, and negotiations came to an impasse. The price of revolvers was not the only bone of contention between Colt and the department. There had been previous disagreements, for example, when Colt had refused to furnish parts for their revolvers at the accumulated price and also when they had billed the department for the full retail price of ammunition to prove their revolvers. Needless to say, Colt’s self-interest mandated a resolution. I have mentioned elsewhere that Colt management lost their navy revolver orders to Remington in 1862 by refusing to adopt competitive pricing. It would appear that they had learned little from this earlier mistake. The department was resolute in their determination that all revolvers received on contract be furnished at a competitive price, and this was the price that Remington had established when bidding on their first contracts, that is, twelve dollars. Capt. George T. Balch, Ramsey’s aide, informed Hagner of the situation concerning Colt on November 6: Confidential Sir, In communicating a few days past to the Colt company, the decision of the War Department on their application for a new contract for revolvers, which decision approved the recommendation of this office, that only $12. should be paid, that they should furnish parts at the accumulated price of whole arms, and that in future orders 79

CHAPTER THREE

they should be required to furnish arms of a new pattern, the price was accidently omitted to be mentioned. The company accepted the order for 15,000 on the supposition that the price was to be the same as under previous orders, viz: $14., but now upon being made aware of the difference in price they decline the offer, evidently with the view of forcing us into their terms, knowing how urgently we are pressed. It is the intention of this department to so manage its affairs that we shall not be compelled to yield to the extortion, or caprice of any contractor or company and in this part of the progression the Department is satisfied of your hearty cooperation. With the view, therefore, of cutting loose from this monopoly, you are requested to urge upon all contractors for revolvers the absolute necessity of increasing their deliveries to the extent of their ability. Remington should increase his deliveries to at least 300 per day and the Starr Co. should furnish not less than 100 daily. Hoard and Rogers should be urged to hasten their deliveries as rapidly as possible. To accomplish the object in view, it may be advisable and perhaps necessary to relax the severity of your inspections, and in that want you are authorized to do so to such an extent as you should deem proper.13 The events described in the above document will come as a revelation to many. I have read more than one account attributing Colt’s lack of revolver production during the final months of the war to the fire that partially destroyed their armory in February 1864. I was also aware that such was not the case but until unearthing the letter above, had no verification of the facts behind the department’s denial of an additional revolver contract. Colt management seems to have finally lost all credibility with the department; confidence in the firm would not return until the early 1870s, after Gen. W. B. Franklin had assumed the position of vice president and general agent of the firm. Hagner responded to Balch’s confidential memo on November 9: My Dear Balch, It will be hard to get along for a little while without Colt, unless you can help yourself by using repaired pistols. There must be an immense number repaired or requiring repairs. I have sent many large lots of spare parts to various officers. The worst point will be that the pistol requires such constant repair that you will have to think how you are to provide parts except through the Company & at their prices. There is no doubt that this pistol is the least serviceable of any we now get and that it costs more to keep in repair. I have been arguing this for two years upon Genl. R. I think Remington can be brought up to 300 per day in a month or so, and Starr to 100 or 150. Hoard (the Freeman revolver) cannot be relied upon I fear. Their shop is the “dummiest,” as the English say, of any ever known. We can get no product from them with regularity, as when all seems to be doing well, a sudden stop comes, that throws all out of kilter and poor Hoard is at his wit’s end to start again. The Inspectors complain very much. 80

REMINGTON’S SECOND ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Figure 55 Rogers & Spencer Army Revolver. (Author’s photograph)

The condemnation is very little on pistol work, not enough to make it worth while to relax the Inspection in order to increase the quantity. I will see what I can get from Remington of the 2nd quality, possibly a few hundred. I will close the Inspection at Colt’s as soon as Col. Lord is supplied. This order requires 155 over the contract which I must buy at old rates I suppose.14 Hagner was quite candid in this response to Balch’s memo, and he expresses his contempt for Colt and their business practices quite openly. His assessment of Hoard’s armory is also a revelation; this explains why the Freeman revolver never achieved its full potential. Other ordnance officers were advised to fill requisitions for Colt’s revolvers with Remingtons. Ramsey so notified Maj. R. A. Wainwright, commander of the New York Arsenal, on October 30: Sir, I have to acknowledge your letter of the 28th inst. including a list of Starr’s needed to fill existing orders for supplies, and in reply, to state that both Col. Hagner and Maj. Laidley have been advised to hurry up deliveries to you of pistols and powder. I would also state that you are authorized to fill your orders for Colts pistols with those of the Remington manufacture.15 Colt made their final revolver delivery to the department on November 24, 1863. During the remainder of the war, Remington and Starr supplied all of the Union’s revolver needs. The department awarded Rogers & Spencer Company a contract for five thousand army revolvers on November 29, 1864, but these were delivered too late in the war to be issued (figure 55). 81

CHAPTER THREE

On the same day that he sent the above letter, Ramsey again contacted Hagner: Sir, Major Wainwright needs Colts and Remington pistols very much, and I have to request that you will admonish the manufacturers to furnish them as rapidly as possible.16 Remington had recently solicited a new contract from the department; the existing agreement was due to expire at year’s end. The secretary of war had approved a new contract for twenty-five thousand revolvers, and Ramsey forwarded it to Remington for signature on November 3: Gentlemen, I transmit herewith quintuplicate copies of a Contract for 25,000 Revolvers, which Contract you will be pleased to execute and return immediately to this office. The Contract is dated Nov. 8th and unless it is returned to this office by the 16th inst. it will be considered as null and void, and that you do not accept the same.17 It would appear that Remington had heard rumors of the department’s difficulties with Colt. Realizing that they were now in an excellent bargaining position, Remington, rather than accept the contract that was proffered, sent a negotiator to Washington to make a counter proposal to furnish seventy-five thousand revolvers. This was submitted by Ramsey to the secretary of war on November 17: Endorsement on letter from E. Remington & Sons offering to furnish 75,000 Army Revolvers at $12. Respectfully submitted to the Secretary of War. Messrs. E. Remington & Sons offer to contract with the Government for Army Revolvers to be delivered as follows Viz: 6,500 in January, 7,800 in February, 9,000 in March, 10,400 in April, 10,400 in May, 10,400 in June, 10,400 in July including appendages at $12. each. As there are but some 42,000 pistols due and outstanding and in view of the large number that will be required for the military service within the time specified, it is deemed judicious to make provisions for the same and as the Army revolver of Messrs. Remington is of well established character and the price is deemed altogether reasonable, the acceptance of this offer in whole or in part is respectfully recommended. 18 The astute reader will have noticed a discrepancy between the total number of revolvers specified at the top of this proposal and the total of the monthly deliveries. I suspect that the final delivery figure of 10,100 for August was inadvertently omitted from the above proposal. The secretary’s office used the monthly figures to approve the contract; therefore, we arrive at an odd number of 64,900 revolvers. Approval was granted immediately and Remington instantly accepted the offer. Please note that the acceptance was penned at Washington on the same day: 82

REMINGTON’S SECOND ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Washington, Nov. 17, 1863 Brig. Genl. Geo. D. Ramsey Sir, We have the honor to inform you that we accept your offer made us this day to furnish the Government with Sixty four thousand, nine hundred (64,900) Army Revolvers.19 The department mailed copies of the contract to Remington on November 18; two days later, Remington acknowledged its acceptance, signing and returning it to Ramsey. He signed the contract on November 21 but did not submit it to Stanton until the twenty-fourth. The contract was then approved and Ramsey notified Remington on November 27: Gentlemen, Your contract for 64,900 Revolvers having been completed by my signature and approved by the Secretary of War, I enclose duplicate for your use.20 Ramsey also notified Hagner on the same day: Sir, For your information and government in the inspection and receipt of the articles ordered, I enclose copy of contract with the Messrs. Remington & Sons for 64,900 revolvers.21 While these contract negotiations were in progress, Ramsey ordered spare parts for revolvers already in the field. On November 16, he sent the following to Remington: Gentlemen, Be pleased to furnish for the use of the Department and deliver to Lt. Col. Hagner the following spare parts pertaining to your revolvers. 20 main springs 20 sear springs 10 pawls 10 bolts 10 guard screws 10 bolts and triggers 5 front sights 5 hammers 100 spare cones 5 lever catch springs 5 center pins These are to be subject to the usual inspection and you will be paid the same rate as heretofore.22 On the same day, Ramsey advised Hagner of the order: Sir, I enclose for your information and government in the inspection and receipt of the articles ordered, copy of our order to Messrs. Remington & Sons for spare parts for revolvers.23 83

CHAPTER THREE

Figure 56 Remington New Model Army Revolver, serial number 91,152. (Author’s collection)

On the following day, Ramsey ordered additional spare parts: Gentlemen, Be pleased to furnish for the use of the Department and deliver to Lt. Col. Hagner spare parts for 5,000 Remington Pistols, cal. .44 for one year in the field. Please deliver as soon as possible.24 Ramsey again notified Hagner of the order on the same day: Sir, For your information and government in the inspection and receipt of the articles ordered, I enclose a copy of an order to Messrs. Remington & Sons for spare parts for 5,000 Remington Pistols cal. .44 for one year in the field, also copy of an order to the Colt’s Arms Co., for spare parts for 2,500 Colts pistols, cal. .44, for one year in the field.25 The wording in these orders provides little insight into the number of parts required to repair a given number of revolvers. Remington delivered only 18,208 army revolvers on the contract of July 6, 1863. Based on the overall number of Remington Army Revolvers made during the war, I estimate the serial numbers had reached 48,000–50,000 when this contract was fulfilled (figure 56). During this contract, the only significant change to the army revolvers was a new front sight. There had been complaints about the dovetailed front sights coming loose and being lost (see in chapter 3 report of Master Armorer Dudley, October 20, 1863). Remington designed a threaded sight, and soon thereafter, it became the standard for the remainder of the army and navy models (figure 57). This was the last wartime design change on the New Models. 84

REMINGTON’S SECOND ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Figure 57 Remington Army and Navy Revolver front sights. (Author’s collection)

Thornton, who had been supervising additional construction at the Watervliet Arsenal, completed these duties in December. The department then reassigned him to the post of inspector of contract arms. Ramsey advised Hagner of this change on December 23: Sir, I have to acknowledge your letter of 19th inst. In reply I have to state that Special Orders No. 558 directs you “immediately” to relieve Col. Thornton in Command of Watervliet Arsenal, you will therefore proceed to execute that order. After having assumed command of Watervliet Arsenal, if it shall be necessary, you are authorized to proceed from that post to New York and back to Watervliet for the purpose of turning over to Col. Thornton the Inspection duty and closing your accountability in that connection.26 Hagner would remain in command of Watervliet Arsenal for the remainder of the war. Ordnance inspectors accepted the final lot of five hundred Remington Armies under this contract on January 2, 1864. I present the Ordnance Department records for the delivery of Remington Army Revolvers on the July 6, 1863, contract and also the inspector’s memorandum of receipts for the same.

85

CONTRACTOR’S NAME

DATE OF PURCHASE

QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

PRICE

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

Remington & Sons

1863

Jul.

9

700

New Model Army Revolvers

$10

82

$7,574

00

July 1, 1963a

Remington & Sons

1863

Jul.

8

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Jul.

23

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Jul.

31

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Aug.

7

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Aug.

25

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Sep.

1

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Sep.

17

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Oct.

8

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Oct.

12

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Oct.

24

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Oct.

29

1,208

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

14,278

56

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Nov.

6

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Nov.

10

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Nov.

23

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Nov.

28

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1863

Dec.

14

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

CHAPTER THREE

86

Remington Army Revolver Deliveries, July 6, 1863, Contract PURCHASES of “‘Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms,’ since April 13, 1861, by the Ordnance Department: from whom purchased, and to whom paid for: price; total amount; date of contract or order, and date of payment”

Remington & Sons

1863

Dec.

26

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

Remington & Sons

1864

Jan.

2

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,280

00

July 6, 1863b

TOTAL

18,208

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles and Small Arms.” a This lot of seven hundred revolvers was ordered as second class and was paid for at a reduced price. It was not credited to deliveries on contract. bFirst delivery on July 6, 1863, contract. Bullet molds were not delivered under an agreement between Remington and the department; eighteen cents per revolver was deducted from payment. Note that delivery dates do not coincide with records in “Memorandum of Receipts.”

DATE OF DELIVERY 1863 July 11

REGISTER OF REPORT Book No. 3

1. A.

TAKEN UP ON CERTIFICATE NO.

RECEIVING OFFICER

WHERE SHIPPED

NO.

DESCRIPTION

1

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

700

Army Revolvers

Total

700

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 80, “Memorandum of Receipts.”

Ordnance Inspector’s “Memorandum of Receipts” “Memorandum of Receipts of 20,000 ARMY REVOLVERS from E. REMINGTON & SONS under their CONTRACTS from CHIEF OF ORDNANCE dated JULY 6th, 1863” DATE OF DELIVERY 1863

REGISTER OF REPORT Book No.

TAKEN UP ON CERTIFICATE NO.

RECEIVING OFFICER

WHERE SHIPPED

NO.

DESCRIPTION

87

Jul. 11

3

I. A.

1

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jul. 20

6

I. A.

2

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

REMINGTON’S SECOND ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Ordnance Inspector’s “Memorandum of Receipts” “Memorandum of Receipts of 700 ARMY REVOLVERS from E. REMINGTON & SONS under their CONTRACTS from CHIEF OF ORDNANCE dated JUNE 13th, 1862”

1863

REGISTER OF REPORT Book No.

TAKEN UP ON CERTIFICATE NO.

RECEIVING OFFICER

WHERE SHIPPED

NO.

DESCRIPTION

Jul. 27

8

I. A.

2

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Aug. 3

10

I. A.

3

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Aug. 7

10

I. A.

3

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Aug. 7

11

I. A.

4

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Aug. 10

12

I. A.

4

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Aug. 14

13

I. A.

5

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Aug. 19

14

I. A.

5

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Aug. 28

17

I. A.

6

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Sep. 1

19

I. A.

6

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Sep. 7

21

I. A.

7

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Sep. 17

23

I. A.

7

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Sep. 25

26

I. A.

8

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Sep. 29

27

I. A.

8

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Oct. 8

29

I. A.

9

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Oct. 12

30

I. A.

9

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Oct. 17

32

I. A.

13

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Oct. 20

33

I. A.

10

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Oct. 24

34

I. A.

11

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Oct. 29

35

I. A.

11

Lt. Col. Hagner

Lt. R. Skinner

708

Army Revolvers

Oct. 31

36

I. A.

12

Lt. Col. Hagner

Washington Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

CHAPTER THREE

88

DATE OF DELIVERY

37

I. A.

12

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Nov. 7

38

I. A.

13

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Nov. 10

39

I. A.

13

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Nov. 17

41

I. A.

14

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Nov. 18

41

I. A.

14

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Nov. 23

42

I. A.

15

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Nov. 28

45

I. A.

15

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Dec. 4

46

I. A.

16

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Dec. 9

48

I. A.

16

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Dec. 14

48

I. A.

17

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Dec. 26

52

I. A.

17

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Dec. 26

1

I. A.

18

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

2

I. A.

18

Lt. Col. Hagner

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

1864 Jan. 2

Total 18,208 Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 80, “Memorandum of Receipts.” Note: This contract specified that Remington would furnish “all the revolvers you can deliver during the present year, not to exceed 20,000.” Before the contract expired, 18,208 New Model Army Revolvers were delivered.

89

REMINGTON’S SECOND ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Nov. 4

CHAPTER FOUR

Remington’s Third Army Revolver Contract n January 2, 1864, ordnance inspectors accepted the final delivery of Remington revolvers on the contract of July 6, 1863. Remington was now armed with a new contract for 64,900 army revolvers, the largest contract for small arms granted by the department during the war. Remington’s success in negotiating such a large order was facilitated by the department’s difficulties in concluding an agreement with Colt the previous October. With the new modifications incorporated during the previous year, the department now recognized Remington revolvers as the finest available. The accolades received by the Remington New Models were not lost on the military establishments of foreign governments. Near the end of 1863, the Swiss government requested a sample revolver from the Ordnance Department. George D. Ramsey, chief of ordnance, ordered a revolver from Remington to satisfy that request; on January 16, he acknowledged its receipt:

O

Gentlemen, Your letter of the 7th inst. stating that you forwarded the Pistol for the Government of Switzerland, enclosing invoice and bill of lading for same, is received. The pistol itself came duly to hand today in good order and condition.1 On January 11, Ramsey contacted both Remington and the inspector of contract arms, William A. Thornton, concerning the sample revolvers the former was required to furnish for their new contract: Gentlemen, Your letter of the 8th inst. is received as well as the model Pistol mentioned therein. The Pistol you sent to Col. Thornton in New York should first have been sent to this office and forwarded from here to Col. Thornton.2 Sir, Messrs. E. Remington & Sons in a letter dated the 8th inst. state that they had forwarded to you on that day a model pistol. This pistol should first have been sent to this office, and transmitted since to you. 91

CHAPTER FOUR

Figure 58 Portrait of boy soldier, Morris Gallery of Cumberland, Nashville, Tennessee. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

You will be pleased to examine this new arm and if it meets with your approval, forward it to this office at earliest convenience.3 Three days later, Ramsey urged both Remington and Thornton to hasten revolver deliveries: Gentlemen, I have to request that you will expedite as much as possible your deliveries of Revolvers. You have 6,500 due on your Contract for 64,750 [sic] this month. Revolvers are urgently needed. Please report what your deliveries will be.4 Sir, I have to request that you will urge on as rapidly as possible the manufacture of the revolvers due from E. Remington & Sons and from the Starr Arms Co. as they are urgently needed.5 On January 20, Remington responded to Ramsey’s letter of the fourteenth: Sir, In reply to your communication of the 14th we would respectfully state that since the 1st of Jany. we have delivered to the Government 1,800 Army Revolvers and will be able, we believe to deliver 2,000 to 2,500 more by the last of the month. 92

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Figure 59 Federal soldier with his musket and Remington revolver. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

We have been greatly interrupted and retarded in our work in consequence of stock used for the frame of the Revolver having been lost at sea with the vessel on which it was shipt [sic] from England. But for this we would have been able to have delivered the number our contract calls for this month. We believe that in the future we will be able to furnish the requisite number called for by the contract.6 Remington was either inordinately optimistic about the number of revolvers that its armories could produce or was becoming more adept at prevarication to pacify the department. At the time that this letter was penned, the company had delivered only thirteen hundred revolvers and would deliver only twelve hundred more in January; revolver production for this month was down one thousand from the previous month. On January 22, Ramsey again contacted both Thornton and Remington to advise them that they had received erroneous advice in the department’s previous communications of January 11: Sir, The letter of the 11th inst from this office in reference to the model pistol furnished to you by Mr. Remington & Sons, was by a clerical error, and made to convey an erroneous idea. The words “charges you” should be inserted after the word “this office” in the fifth line. I would state for your information the following facts with regard to the inspection of small Arms. The regulations of this office now require that two samples be furnished under any contract. 93

CHAPTER FOUR

These are to be forwarded to this office for final approval. They will then be labeled and receive the Seal of this office, after which one sample will be retained and the other will be sent to you for your information and guidance. It is desirable that this plan should be strictly adhered to. The Messrs. Remington have been informed of the fact.7 Gentlemen, The letter of the 11th inst. acknowledging yours of the 8th inst was by a clerical misapprehension written erroneously, with the intention of correcting the ideas which you must necessarily have formed. I would state the rule of this office with regard to samples of small arms. The two samples to be furnished under every Contract are first to be sent to the Inspector, Col. Thornton and transmitted through him to this office for final approval. It is requisite to prevent confusion that this rule be complied with and that the foregoing is furnished for your guidance.8 It would seem that Ramsey, recently installed as chief of ordnance, had received some erroneous advice concerning the sample arms required. After three attempts, he finally got it right. On previous contracts only one sample arm had been submitted. Two specimens were now required, one for the inspector and another for deposit in the Ordnance Office. On January 23, Ramsey responded to an inquiry from Maj. F. D. Callender, commander of the St. Louis Arsenal: Telegram Telegram received. Issue no carbines or pistols except upon requisitions approved at this office.9 This was followed on February 5, with a letter to Callender: Sir, In reply to your requisition of the 1st inst., I have to say, Revolvers are so scarce that they can be issued only on actual requisitions from the Regiments requiring them.10 In February, Remington increased deliveries to an unprecedented four thousand revolvers. They repeated this figure again in March, but in April deliveries again fell to three thousand. The department issued these to satisfy requisitions from the field as fast as they were delivered. The department’s unyielding attitude to the demands of Colt management the previous October was having telling effects on supplying troops with revolvers; they were now relying solely on those offered by Remington and Starr. The latter company was furnishing about two thousand revolvers per month, but this number did not offset the loss of production from Colt, who had been delivering approximately five thousand per month when their contract expired the previous November. The cessation of deliveries by Colt did not go unnoticed by other contractors. On January 4, 1864, the department sent the following to Thornton: 94

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Sir, A letter has been delivered to this office from Eli Whitney, dated December 23, 1863, stating that he has two Army size revolvers cal .44/100 which he wishes to furnish to the Government. Mr. Whitney has been directed to present these pistols to you. You will please, therefore, examine them, and report the results at your earliest convenience.11 The revolvers were delivered to Thornton, who made a favorable report to the department. I have not located Thornton’s report, but on January 19, Ramsey sent the following to Whitney: Sir: I transmit Quintuplicate copies of a contract for 1,000 pistols, which contract please execute and immediately return. The certificate as to the liability of the sureties must be signed by a judge of the U.S. Court. By direction of the Secretary of War, I have to inform you that if you fulfill the contract for 1,000 pistols and they shall on trial in the field prove satisfactory, that this department will then receive from you nine thousand (9,000) more of the pistols at twelve dollars ($12.) each, provided they shall be delivered at the rate of not less than 2,000 per month after notice that they are of approved quality.12 The limited order for only one thousand revolvers was in keeping with the recommendations of the Owen-Holt Commission; new types of arms were to be tried in the field before large orders were offered. Whitney was not pleased with the terms of the contract; I suspect that his objections related to the small number of revolvers specified in the initial order. In a letter to Ramsey dated January 30, he requested that the contract be modified. Ramsey responded on the fourth of February: Sir: Your letter of the 30th ult. has been received. Your contract for 1,000 pistols was made out in accordance with instructions received from the Secretary of War, and none of its terms and conditions can be altered. The contract is herewith returned for immediate execution. This Department cannot send the two Remington Pistols you ask for.13 Whitney’s objections to the contract were evidently sufficient to warrant his refusal to execute the same. There is no record that this contract was executed or evidence that Whitney produced more than the two army-size revolvers submitted to Thornton. Whitney’s record in delivering serviceable navy-size revolvers to the department seems to validate his objections (figure 60). Tooling up for a new size revolver with a potential contract limit of one thousand revolvers was a risky venture. I have previously mentioned second-class revolvers but have not elaborated on the subject. This term was coined by the department to describe those arms that were functional, yet did not measure up to the department’s exacting standards. The department had accepted two previous deliveries of these revolvers from Remington, the first consisting of six hundred Navies on 95

CHAPTER FOUR

Figure 60 Whitney Navy Revolver. (Author’s photograph)

November 21, 1862; these were accepted on the navy contract of June 13, 1862. The second lot of seven hundred Armies was purchased from Remington on July 6, 1863, at the conclusion of the first army revolver contract. In the early months of the war, there was an unprecedented demand for revolvers of any type, and this demand was not limited to the military. Arms dealers were also seeking revolvers; most of these were, in turn, sold to agents of the government, many at a tidy profit. There was also a demand from the public; Union volunteers often purchased their own sidearms, while others were presented revolvers as gifts by friends, family, fraternal organizations, and business associates. There was a third market for revolvers, created by brokers or agents of the Confederacy seeking arms for illegal trade to the South. There seems to be a paucity of information on this subject, but it was a fact of life. Newspapers of the day ran more than one article describing the seizure of arms destined for Jefferson Davis’s troops. There were many other shipments that were not apprehended and made the successful transition to the Confederacy. By early 1862, the department’s practice of purchasing revolvers on the open market for Union troops had all but ceased. By mid-1864, the Union Army was on the offensive, and the department had successfully satisfied the more pressing requisitions for small arms. The demand for revolvers by the public had also subsided, and Remington was faced with disposing of several thousand second-class revolvers that had not been accepted by the department. The company placed advertisements in newspapers and magazines, touting their wares to the public, but this evidently did not produce the desired results (figure 61). The firm took note of the practice of Samuel Colt, before his death, of bestowing lavishly embellished revolvers on high-ranking army officers and government officials. They decided that this strategy might be useful in bringing their revolvers to the attention of the various Federal states, all of which had their militia groups actively engaged in the war. They were probably unaware that most state militia requisitions were now being satisfied by the War Department. A small lot of New Model Army Revolvers were selected from Remington’s assembly room and given special attention as to fit and finish. They were serially numbered in a separate range, 96

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Figure 61 Remington advertisement from Harper’s Weekly magazine, August 22, 1863. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

beginning with the number 1. When assembled, they were sent to a custom shop in New York City, where they were fitted with ivory grips carved with the individual state coat of arms on the left grip and the Federal eagle on the right. This was all of the embellishment that the revolvers received; there was no engraving or plating. The revolver and its appendages were then fitted to a handsome partitioned hardwood case. When the shop making the enhancements returned the revolvers to Remington, they were shipped, together with a standard New Model Army Revolver, to the various recipients, with a cover letter soliciting orders for revolvers and muskets. The dates mentioned in the letters below, acknowledging receipt of the revolvers, indicate that the arms were sent on different dates, the first lot in March and the second in June. I was fortunate to locate ten letters of acknowledgment for these revolvers but assume that more than ten revolvers were dispatched, as other revolvers (not represented by letters) are extant. I have reproduced the letters received for the March shipments: State of Rhode Island Executive Department Providence, Mar. 15, 1864 Messrs. E. Remington & Sons Ilion, New York Gentlemen: Your favor of the 8th inst. has been received, as also the two revolvers for which you will please accept our thanks. The ivory stocked one is a beautiful piece of workmanship and has attracted much attention from our citizens. Indeed, both are considered admirable weapons, and should the State at any time be in need of arms of this description, I am confident that it could not do better than purchase those of your manufacture. I am Very Truly Yours James Y. Smith, Gov. 97

CHAPTER FOUR

State of Wisconsin Executive Department Madison, Mar. 16, 1864 Messrs. E. Remington & Sons Ilion, New York Gents, Yours of the 7th inst. has been received, and also sample Revolvers per express. The Revolvers are very fine ones and reflect much credit upon your establishment. Our State does not contemplate purchasing any arms at present, but should this be determined on at any future time, I should be pleased to recommend the Arms manufactured by your firm. What disposal do you wish to have made of the Revolvers sent? Respectfully, James T. Lewis Commonwealth of Kentucky Executive Department Frankfort, Mar. 18, 1864 E. Remington & Sons Ilion, New York Gents, I acknowledge the receipt per express of a box with specimen of your Army Revolver (Ivory Stocked) having on one side the Coat of Arms of my State & the National Eagle on the other, also box with revolver in plain style. Having had the opportunity of witnessing in the field the excellence of your manufacture of arms, I appreciate highly the specimen sent me. Should we have occasion to make further purchases for use of Kentucky Troops in the field, an order will be given to purchase of your manufacture. Respectfully, Tho. E. Brasselette State of Vermont Executive Chamber St. Albans, Mar. 23, 1864 Messrs. E. Remington & Sons Gents: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the exceedingly beautiful revolvers sent by you by express to my address. I cannot too highly compliment the style of workmanship of the one with Ivory stock bearing upon one side the Coat of Arms of this State and upon the other the National Emblem. The whole is exquisitely wrought, and for the compliment thus paid to the State please accept my warm thanks. 98

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

In the event our State Legislature at its next session should pass an act to reorganize the Militia of this State as I have strong hopes they will, it will be necessary for us to purchase a quantity of Arms, and it will give me great pleasure to examine your manufacture with a view to a purchase. I am Gents, Very Truly Your Obedient Servant J. Gregory Smith State of Ohio Executive Department Columbus, Apr. 4, 1864 E. Remington & Sons Ilion, New York Gentlemen, Your favor of March 8th came duly to hand and with it the two cases of pistols. For the one you have so beautifully embellished with the State Coat of Arms, I tender you my most cordial thanks. I have delayed replying to your note for the passage of our appropriation bill. At present I desire to order for the use of our penitentiary one dozen of the Revolvers similar to the plain specimen sent me, as which you may regard that as one of the order. I am not prepared at present to make further orders, but shall probably do so hereafter. How soon and at what price will the present order be filled? The officials at the prison are anxious to get them as soon as practicable. Very Respectfully Jno. Brough P.S. For the account accompanying the above order, please send the bills in duplicate, either receipted, or by express with authority to receipt here. If receipted we will send draft on New York without charges.14 A few years ago, I was privileged to correspond with a descendant of the Civil War governor of Vermont. I was delighted to find that the ivory-stocked revolver sent to his great-great-grandfather was still in his possession. The case and accoutrements had been misplaced many years before, and the revolver showed the ravages of three generations of children playing “cowboys and Indians.” Surprisingly, the ivory grips were intact, and the Vermont coat of arms and Federal eagle are still discernable (figure 62). J. Gregory Smith, governor of Vermont, had maintained a family residence in St. Albans. The astute reader will notice that his letter to Remington was written from that location rather than the capital, Montpelier. Smith’s descendant, John G. Smith, was kind enough to share a copy of a letter written to the governor by his wife, shortly after the St. Albans Raid. This was the northernmost skirmish of the Civil War and occurred on October 19, 1864. Twenty-two Southern sympathizers crossed the international border from Canada, robbed three banks of approximately two hundred thousand dollars, and fled back over the border. On the following 99

CHAPTER FOUR

Figure 62 Ivory grip panels on Vermont State Seal Remington Army Revolver, serial number 10. (Author’s photograph, John G. Smith collection)

day the governor’s wife wrote a letter to her husband detailing her account of the raid. She stated that she had “ordered the house shut and locked, hunting myself for weapons, but nothing could be found but your carved pistol empty.” The serial number of the Vermont revolver is 10. I have examined the Missouri revolver, with serial number 19 (figure 63). The Illinois state seal specimen is in a private collection and carries serial number 4 (figure 64). No letters have surfaced for the latter two specimens. The Remington Army Revolver came to the attention of some high-ranking army officers without Remington’s promotion. In April 1864 Ramsey responded to a letter from Quarter Master General Montgomery C. Meigs. Ordnance Office Washington, April 7, 1864 Genl. M. C. Meigs Q. M. Genl. Washington City Sir, I have to acknowledge your letter of the 5th inst. and to inform you that you can pay for the two Remington Army size Revolvers and Belt Holsters in your charge to Mr. E. W. 100

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Figure 63 Missouri State Seal Remington Army Revolver, in original case with appendages. (Author’s photograph)

Stebbins P.M. and Mil. Storekeeper at Washington Arsenal the cost price of the articles being twelve ($12.) dollars each for the revolvers and one dollar each for the Holsters. Respectfully Geo D. Ramsey Bv. General. Chief of Ord15 It would seem that Meigs was a two-gun general, or more possibly had ordered a second revolver for one of his subordinates. This letter confirms my previous statement that revolvers were issued only to enlisted army personnel. Officers, whatever their rank, were responsible for supplying their own arms. In May, Remington offered five thousand second-class revolvers to the Ordnance Department. They sent two samples to the department; these were referred to Thornton for his inspection. He made his report on June 6: EXPERIMENTS ON SMALL ARMS, (CLASS 6.) Office of the Inspector of Contract Arms June 6, 1864 General G. D. Ramsey Chief of Ordnance Sir I have the honor to inform you that I have inspected the Army pistols, comprised of seconds and defective parts, presented by Messrs. E. Remington & Sons of Ilion, N.Y., pursuant to their proposal of May 13, 1864 to supply 5,000 like pistols at $12. and respecting which I have to report. 101

CHAPTER FOUR

Figure 64 Ivory grip panels on Illinois State Seal Remington Army Revolver, serial number 4. (Author’s photograph, J. D. Hofer Collection).

Barrel No. 70,321 has no indicative marks to indicate it has been proven. Its front sight orifice has been drilled so deep, that it shows through into the bore. This defect in workmanship is a just cause for rejection, and it is supposed that for said cause it was not submitted for inspection and proof. Frame No. 70,321 is not sound in material around center pin hole and in the hammer mortises, and it is presumed that for said cause it was not offered for inspection. The lever plug is roughly finished, its catch is slit one sided, the center pin is milled uneven in thickness. The hammer is soft as is shown by the batter of its face, and stock is season checked at butts. In a regular inspection the said causes would justify the rejection of the parts so defective. Barrel No. 64,620 has been proven. Its front sight orifice has been drilled so deep as to show through into the bore. It is also torn in the rifling, and for this reason it was rejected in the regular inspection and stamped with the letter “C”—condemned. Frame No. 66,042 has slag in its materials and has been torn in milling at its base. It is roughly finished in its cylinder mortise, which defects caused its rejection in regular inspection and the marking of it with the letter “C.” The cylinder is not numbered. It is cut in its bore in tapping the cone orifices. It has a seam in its materials near one of the bolt notches, and from said causes it was rejected in regular inspection and marked “C.” The lever plug is rough in finish, its catch is slit one sided and is roughly finished. The hammer is scant in material at shoulder, the sear spring hole is one sided. The stock is of soft timber and rough in finish. Which causes would justify rejections of the parts in a regular inspection. The remaining components of the samples are of good materials and 102

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

workmanship. They have been combined with the defective parts to furnish a pistol for sale in the market. The good of the Service demands that so far as is possible, none but first class arms shall be supplied, and I cannot therefore recommend the acceptance of such pistols, for by so doing, I would be virtually recommending abandonment of the Inspection of small arms. Respecting the price, Messrs. Remington claims that because of the late increase of duty on materials, they should be allowed the full contract price of $12. each for the pistols, and if the Government will not pay said price, but would allow exportations, they can get $15. each. As to the claim, I believe the greater portion of the 5,000 pistols were manufactured before the increased duty was imposed, and if they had been of good materials and workmanship, they would have been accepted, and thereby the makers would have accrued their contract value, and the present wants of the Government would have been reduced. If it is imperative to accept arms comprised of defective parts assembled with good parts, then as the rejected pieces cost the contractors less for workmanship, a reduction in price should be such as to offer no inducements in manufacturing such arms. I think Ten dollars would be a fair valuation for the pistols, with the usual appendages and in their acceptance they should be inspected to determine that the parts are sound & that the barrels have been proven. Respectfully, I am Sir, Your Obedient Servant W. A. Thornton, Col. of Ord.16 This report is very informative, as it contains serial numbers. The highest of these, 70,321, is especially important as it is indicative of the number of army revolvers manufactured by Remington prior to submitting these two samples to the department. Thornton seems to have transposed numbers on the second revolver; I can assume that it was either 66,042 or 64,620. Either of these serial numbers can be used to show evidence of the high percentage of rejects, or as Thornton pointed out with number 70,321, the revolver had not been submitted for inspection to avoid being condemned. The number of revolvers delivered on contract at this time was approximately fifty-one thousand, with total production over seventy thousand. It is a simple matter to judge the high number of flawed revolvers (figure 65). Thornton forwarded the report to Ramsey; he, in turn, recommended their purchase to the War Department. The approval was forthcoming, but Ramsey did not notify Remington until July 8: Gentlemen, Be pleased to furnish for the use of this Department arms delivered at your Armory, 5,000 2nd class Army Revolvers similar to sample which accompanied your letter of May 13th. They are to be subject to such inspection as Col. Thornton may deem necessary. You will be paid at the rate of Ten dollars ($10.) for each Revolver including Appendages upon the usual Certificates of Inspection and receipt in such funds as the Treasury Department may furnish.17 103

CHAPTER FOUR

Figure 65 Remington Army Revolver condemned barrel, cylinder, and frame. (Author’s collection)

Figure 66 Maine State Seal Remington Army Revolver in original case. Powder flask and bullet mold are replacement appendages. (Author’s photograph) 104

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Shortly thereafter, Remington again contacted Ramsey and requested that the order be revoked. Their request was forwarded by Ramsey to the secretary of war with the following endorsement: Endorsement. Remington & Son acknowledge letter of the 8th with order for 5,000 revolvers, and request that said order be canceled. Ordnance Office July 19, 1864 Respectfully submitted to the Secretary of War. On the 6th July inst., I recommended to the Secretary on their offer, to purchase of Remington & Son 5,000 Revolvers at $10. each, including appendages. This was approved. The conditions were that the Revolvers be inspected by Col. Thornton. Remington & Son now state that such an inspection would interfere with or retard the inspection of pistols under their contract, and ask that the order be canceled. As these pistols are not first class, I recommend that the order be canceled.18 On July 23, Ramsey sent the following to Remington: Gentlemen, I have to acknowledge the receipt of you letter of the 10th inst., and inform you that in compliance with your request, the order to you from this office of July 8th is hereby canceled.19 The excuse Remington offered in withdrawing from this order was that the inspection would delay the delivery of contract arms; but I suspect they were disappointed in the low price offered and also wanted to avoid the critical inspection by Thornton. Near the end of June, Remington began receiving replies from governors to whom they had presented the embellished revolvers earlier in the month. The first was from Pennsylvania, closely followed by replies from Maryland, Delaware, and Maine (figure 66). The reply from California did not arrive until August. The responses all expressed gratitude for the revolvers received but also conveyed regrets that the states were not now purchasing arms. I am aware of only two orders that resulted from these solicitations. The first was the insignificant twelve revolvers for the state penal system of Ohio. The second was more substantial. In August, they received the following from the quartermaster general of the State of New Jersey: Office of the Quartermaster General Trenton, August 8, 1864 E. Remington, Esq. Ilion, Herkimer Co., N.Y. Sir,—I hereby offer you an order to furnish the State of New Jersey with one thousand (1,000) Remington army pistols, calibre .44, each to be accompanied with a screwdriver and cone wrench. These arms are to be in all respects equal in quality of material, finish 105

CHAPTER FOUR

Figure 67 Civil War trooper with his New Model Army Revolver. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

and workmanship to the sample pistol deposited by you at this office on the 2d instant. They are to be subject to inspection by State inspectors, and none will be received or paid for but such as pass inspection and are passed by the State Inspectors. These 1,000 pistols are to be delivered at the State Arsenal, Trenton, within thirty days from the date hereof. Payments will be made in United States certificates of indebtedness at par, at the rate of twelve dollars for each pistol, including the screwdriver and cone wrench. Please signify in writing your acceptance or non-acceptance of the above order, on the terms and conditions herein specified. Very respectfully, Your ob’t servant, [signed] L. Perrine, Q. M. Gen’l. N. J. The above order was declined, and accepted by a verbal agreement that the pistols would be paid for at the rate of $12.68 each. [signed] L. Perrine, Q. M. Gen’l. N. J.20 Further examination of the records of the quartermaster general reveals that New Jersey had also purchased 976 navy revolvers from Eli Whitney in 1863. All but 128 of these were later sold to the Ordnance Department. The quartermaster general’s report for 1865 for ordnance and ordnance stores in inventory shows the following: 106

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Figure 68 Remington Army Revolver with first variation New Jersey stamps on barrel and frame. (Author’s collection)

Ordnance and Ordnance Stores, in State Arsenal, Nov. 30, 1865 128 pistols, Whitney’s revolvers, calibre .36 1,000 pistols, Remington’s revolvers, calibre .44 1,900 sets pistol appendages21 This information indicates that none of the Remington revolvers purchased by the State of New Jersey during the war were issued. I have had the opportunity to examine many specimens, most of which are in very good to fine condition. We are fortunate that the armorer at the state arsenal in Trenton saw fit to mark these revolvers with the letters “NJ” to identify them as state property. There were two set of dies used for this purpose, one quite larger than the other. Revolvers stamped with a 1/16-inch die are usually marked in two locations, on the left side of the frame below the cylinder and on the left barrel flat (figure 68). The larger 1/8-inch die stamps were applied only to the left barrel flat (figure 69). Most of these revolvers have partial sub-inspectors’ markings but are without cartouches. The serial numbers are usually in the 58,000–75,000 range, but it is possible that there are lower numbers. There is no mention of bullet molds as part of the appendages. As of this writing, a Remington mold with NJ marks has not been brought to my attention, but I have observed Whitney molds so marked. In examining these revolvers, I have seen obvious reasons why some were not submitted to ordnance inspectors; on others, there are no visible signs to indicate why they were not inspected. The New Jersey quartermaster general had indicated in his order that these were to be inspected by state inspectors. I suspect that Remington culled the best of their second-class revolvers to fill this order. These revolvers were in inventory at the New Jersey state arsenal for many years before being sold to arms dealers. Some were later nickel plated before being sold to the public. 107

CHAPTER FOUR

Figure 69 Remington Army Revolver with second variation New Jersey stamp only on barrel. (Author’s collection)

Remington’s current revolver contract with the department was due to expire on July 31. It specified a total of 64,900 revolvers; the company had delivered only 25,000 by July 7. On July 9, they requested an extension, and on July 13, Ramsey responded with the following telegram: Telegram Your letter of the 9th received. How long an extension of time will you require to complete Contract for Pistols?22 Remington answered the following day: Office of U.S. Military Telegraph The following Telegram received at Washington 2 P.M. July 14, 1864 Brig. Genl. Ramsey Five months but hope to complete the contract sooner.23 Remington followed this with a letter to Ramsey on the fifteenth: Sir, We beg leave to acknowledge receipt of your telegram under date of 13th inst. inquiring how long an extension we will require to complete contract for pistols. We replied to your inquiry by telegraph, that we would require five months, but we would respectfully state, that if we meet no unlooked for interruption in the prosecution of our work, we shall endeavor to complete the contract in a shorter time, and shall spare no effort in our power to expedite the delivery of the arms.24 On the following day, Ramsey submitted Remington’s request to Stanton’s office: Endorsement on application of Remington & Son for an extension of time on their contract for pistols. 108

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Ordnance Office July 16, 1864 Respectfully returned to the Secretary of War. Remington & Sons ask for an extension of five months on their contract for revolvers. This contract was awarded on the 21st Nov. 1863, for 64,900 revolvers and expires by limitation on the 31st inst. Twenty four thousand have been delivered, thirty thousand five hundred forfeited, and ten thousand four hundred are due. Among other causes of delay, as represented by the parties, was the loss of a shipment of iron from Liverpool, and the great difficulty of procuring the requisite skilled laborers has been another source of disappointment and delay. The first reason assigned, would in my judgment, be sufficient cause for an extension to the extent to which the parties were retarded by the loss of the iron. The other reason alleged would seem to be common to all contractors, and if admitted as valid in this case must be in all similar cases. On the other hand, the reason for granting the request may be found in the fact that the pistols will be required and could not be obtained at probably so cheap a rate—nor the same amount within the time specified, provided the deliveries are promptly up to time. Pending this contract, that is to say, on the 8th inst. Remington & Sons offered to this Department 5,000 revolvers which have been accepted subject to inspection.25 Stanton approved the extension, and Ramsey notified Remington on July 20: Gentlemen, Your letter of the 9th inst. requesting an extension of time for the delivery of the pistols called for by your Contract of Nov. 23rd, 1863, was received, duly considered, and submitted to the Secretary of War, with the recommendation that the forfeiture be waived and the time of delivery be extended so as to expire January 1st 1865—which recommendation has been approved. Col. Thornton has been notified to this effect.26 Approximately two weeks after receiving this extension on their existing contract, Remington sought a new contract from the department. Ramsey submitted their proposal to the secretary of war on August 8: Endorsement. E. Remington & Sons will complete their contract in a short time and desire to know whether a further contract is needed. Ordnance Office August 8, 1864 Respectfully returned to the Secretary of War. There are due from Remington & Sons, on their contract for 64,900 revolvers 35,900, from Starr Arms Co. 6,000, from C. B. Hoard 3,000 and 26,000 on hand, for which the contract price is $12. The proposition of Remington & Sons to furnish 50,000 Revolvers with usual appendages at $17. each—the deliveries at the rate of 1,000 per month to commence on completion of present contract, say 15th Sept. From the foregoing it will be seen that we 109

CHAPTER FOUR

have on hand and under contract 70,900 revolvers. The present effective force of the cavalry may be set down at 115,000 and allowing but two weapons to each man, one a sabre, we shall have on hand a sufficient number of revolvers with the 89,000 carbines with metallic cartridges to be furnished between 1st Nov. 1864 and 1st May 1865, to give one revolver or one carbine, or rather enough to effectively equip 160,000 men—45,000 in excess of the present cavalry force. My opinion is that the supply of revolvers has been entirely too lavish—they have been issued to everybody, and without corresponding benefit. The artillery has little or no use for revolvers—and no instance can be cited that I am aware of where the artillery has been called upon to use them. In like manner their use with the cavalry is in some degree doubtful—the carbine is their proper arm, and to use it effectively, is to use it on foot. I made it a particular subject of inquiry when Chief of Ordnance to the Army of Occupation in Mexico, and I could not find or hear of a single instance in which either cavalry or artillery had used the pistol in battle. It is very difficult on horseback to load a revolver, and when the horse is in motion, quite impossible. For personal defense, for scouting and such purposes, the revolver is undoubtedly a valuable and desirable weapon; but for the general service, I have no doubt the issue of revolvers could be most advantageously curtailed. In the case before me involving an increase in cost of three dollars each on so large a proportion (50,000) I am not prepared, as I have no data before me, except the increased value of everything, to give an opinion. The only proper test is that of open proposals in the market, and which I am constrained to recommend. Since the beginning of the War up to the 1st July, there have been purchased some 290,000 revolvers. Please see summary of reports on the Remington Revolver herewith27 There appear to be some discrepancies in this report. Ramsey stated that Remington was seeking seventeen dollars for their revolvers and offered that this was a price increase of three dollars. There also seems to be some confusion about the contract expiration date. Regardless, this was a very inopportune time for Remington to request an increase in price, as the department had finally managed to accumulate an excess of revolvers (twenty-six thousand by Ramsey’s account) and the department advised Remington that no further revolvers would be needed. Remington was disappointed at the recent rate of inflation and the new duties (taxes) that had been imposed by the government on imported materials. Shortly after being advised that there would be no more revolver contracts, they sought an increase in price for their current contract. On August 15, their request was submitted to Stanton’s office: Endorsement, on request of Remington and Son, that in view of increased price of materials, $14. instead of $12. be allowed them on their contract for 64,900 Army Pistols. Ordnance Office August 15, 1864 Respectfully returned to the Secretary of War. Messrs. Remington & Sons ask that in view of the increased price of labor and materials that the price of the revolvers to be delivered under their contract to expire in Sept. next, be increased from $12. to $14. 110

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

This contract was entered into the 21st, Nov. 1863 and was for the large number of 64,900 Army size Pistols—they having at the same time a contract for 40,000 rifle muskets, which they took at $16. each, which was increased to $18. on the 4th December, before any deliveries had been made. Their failure to come up to the conditions of their contract was as follows; their first delivery was to be, in January 6,000, when they delivered 2,500. In January they forfeited 3,500, in February 4,000, in March, 5,500, in April 6,400, in May 6,400, in June 4,000, and in July 4,400—equal to 34,200—having delivered in that time less than half of what they undertook to do. The contract will expire next month and there are still due thereon 34,900 pistols. It will thus be seen how far the contract has been complied with. It has been in existence eight months, during which time the market has gradually undergone a great advance—but as Messrs. R. & Sons might have easily anticipated this advance, and as they knew the quantity of material necessary to complete their contract, which was ample security to authorize them to make due provisions for its fulfillment. Their want of foresight must necessarily fall upon themselves. In view of these facts, I cannot see how their request can be granted, without at the same time diminishing in the same ratio, all other contracts now in existence, and cannot therefore recommend it. Geo. D. Ramsey, Brig. Genl., Chf. Ord.28 There is no doubt that inflation had diminished the profits Remington had anticipated on their contract. Prices had nearly doubled since the war had begun. Ramsey stated that Remington should have anticipated the stock of materials needed to complete the revolvers and purchased them when the contract was let. He failed to take into consideration the challenge facing all contractors when seeking raw gun materials. There were acute shortages, and gun iron and steel were at a premium. Prices for these goods would probably have soared higher, if not constrained by the limits that contractors could afford to reasonably pay and still make a profit. Needless to say, the government did not acquiesce, and all of the revolvers accepted in 1864 were delivered at twelve dollars. A few days later, on August 18, Remington sent a letter of complaint to the department: Sir, We regret to say that our work is being retarded at present in consequence of the effect of the anticipated draft, upon our workmen, some of whom have already enlisted, under the inducements now being offered volunteers, and others having left with the view of enlisting for the purpose of evading the draft (about 75 in all) from our works here and in Utica. We cannot yet determine how much further we may be interrupted or retarded from this cause, but from present indications, apprehend that we may lose many more of our workmen before 1st Sept. Among those who leave us are some whose places we cannot supply without more or less delay. We shall use our best endeavors to retain as far as possible those whose services are most essential in the prosecution of the work, and hope we may so far succeed as to avoid any serious interruption and delay. We have thought it proper however to apprise you of our present situation, and of the difficulties under which we are now laboring, and in this connection, would 111

CHAPTER FOUR

Figure 70 Provost Marshall James B. Fry. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

respectfully beg leave to call your attention to the enclosed circular of Provost Marshall Genl. Fry, which will, we think, in its operation effect very injuriously the interests of private contractors, employed upon Government work and indirectly the interests of the Government also. Several of our workmen, having observed this circular, issued by General Fry, have given intimation that they should seek employment in the U.S. Armory, expecting thus to secure exemption from the draft. If the circular should remain unmodified it would appear to make an unjust discrimination between mechanics and operators employed in the National Armory and Arsenals and the same class of mechanics employed upon Government work in private armories. If it should be deemed improper or inexpedient to make any change or modification of the order referred to, at this time, we hope as a simple matter of justice to contractors, that workmen leaving their employ, will not for the present, be permitted to obtain employment in the Government Armory or Arsenals. The following circular was included with the above correspondence (figure 70): 112

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Figure 71 Chief of ordnance, Gen. Alexander B. Dyer. (Courtesy: National Archives)

Circular GOVERNMENT MECHANICS AND OPERATORS EXEMPTED The following circular of the Provost-Marshal-General has been promulgated. Provost Marshal General’s Office Washington, July 26, 1864 “Circular No. 28. Skilled mechanics and operatives employed in the armories, arsenals and navy yards of the United States, who shall be drafted, and on examination held to service, will not be required to report for duty under such draft so long as they remain in the aforesaid service; provided the officer in charge shall certify that their labor as mechanics or operatives is necessary for the naval or military service.” James B. Fry, Provost Marshal General29 I have not been able to ascertain if any steps were taken to alleviate the difficulties of which Remington complained. Acquiring and keeping skilled mechanics was a problem common to all arms contractors. On September 12, 1864, after serving forty-four years in the army, Ramsey, then sixty-two, retired from active duty. His successor was the commander of the Springfield Armory, Maj. Alexander B. Dyer. Dyer was promoted to brigadier general and appointed to the post of chief of ordnance on the same day that Ramsey retired (figure 71). With a new chief of ordnance installed in Washington, Remington decided to again test the environment for an additional revolver contract. After reviewing the facts, Dyer sent the following letter to Stanton on September 23: 113

CHAPTER FOUR

Sir, I have the honor to acknowledge the report to this office of a letter from E. Remington & Sons in relation to their contract for Revolvers and asking for an additional contract; and on the subject have to report: On the 21st of November 1863, a contract was made by this Department with these gentlemen for the delivery of 64,900 Revolvers and appendages at $12. On the 6th August 1864, the firm addresses to you a letter in which they stated that owing to the great advance in materials and labor over what existed at the time the contract was made, and which was not anticipated, the cost of the pistols was so much increased as to compel them to request that they might be allowed $14. each for those remaining to be delivered on their contract (32,700). The Chief of Ordnance, in view of the fact that Remington & Sons were largely behind hand [sic] in making their Carbines and for other reasons, declined to make an increase in price. Subsequently the application for a new contract for 40 to 50,000 Revolvers at $17. each was made, Messrs. R & Sons stating that it was highly important and necessary for them to know immediately whether more work would be required of them, in order that they might provide stock and make arrangements for forging the parts &c. The application was referred to the Chief of Ordnance, who reported that the Revolvers were not required, and therefore ought not to be purchased. After a full consideration of the subject, I am decidedly of opinion that it is not expedient to give Messrs. Remington & Sons an order for 40,000 pistols at $17. but in view of the fact that they have endeavored faithfully, as I believe, to comply with all the terms of the contract; that they furnished their pistols at so much lower prices than the Government have previously obtained revolvers of like quality and finish, thereby aiding the Government in reducing the cost price of these arms, and that it is in the interest of Government that they should not cease to manufacture Revolvers. I therefore recommend that a contract be given them for 20,000 revolvers and appendages at $15.50 each ($15.50); and I further recommend that a contract for 15,000 of their breech loaders be given to them at ($23.) twenty three dollars each. I have seen the carbine thoroughly tested, and am convinced that it is one of the best breech loaders which was brought to the notice of the Department, and that the price named is lower than is now paid by the Department for inferior arms.30 Dyer was much more lenient with Remington than his predecessor. His recent tenure as commander of the Springfield Armory made him much more aware of the difficulties faced by arms manufacturers. His high regard for Remington’s carbines also probably influenced his decision. Dyer’s recommendations were immediately approved, and on the same day he notified Remington: Sirs: I have to inform you that the Secretary of War has approved the recommendation of this office to give you a contract for 20,000 revolvers at $15.50 each; and for 15,000 of your 114

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

breech-loading carbines at $23. each; contracts for which will be prepared and forwarded to you without delay.31 Later on the same day, Dyer again contacted Remington with an inquiry: Sirs: In accordance with authority received from the Secretary of War, I am now ready to enter into a contract with you for 20,000 revolvers for at $15.50 each; and for 15,000 of your breech-loading carbines at $23. each. Be pleased to state at once the rate at which you feel confidant of delivering them.32 Dyer was extremely busy on September 23. In addition to the above letters, he also sent a recommendation to Stanton concerning duties for Ramsey subsequent to his retirement: Sir, For the purpose of extending the duty assigned to Brig. Genl. Ripley, by direction of the President, in Special Orders No. 434, of 1863, of inspecting the armaments of the forts and other sea coast defenses of the New England States, so as to include the armaments of such Forts and defenses, I respectfully suggest and recommend that a similar order be issued assigning Brig. Gen. Geo. D. Ramsey to the same duty in regard to permanent fortifications and other sea coast defenses on the Atlantic and Lake coasts from the Harbor of New York to Fort Monroe, Beaufort Harbor inclusive. I would further recommend that each of these officers be directed to make their report of the condition of the armaments of the various works, and of the quantity, quality and condition of the ammunition therein, with such suggestions in relation thereto, as the public service may require, to the Secretary of War, through the Ordnance Office.33 In present times, we may not comprehend that retirement from the military did not equate to a pension. The duties suggested by Dyer would allow Ramsey to receive a monthly stipend without the rigors and day-to-day pressures of active duty. Dyer’s recommendations were adopted, and President Lincoln appointed Ramsey to the post suggested. Both Ripley and Ramsey were later promoted to brevet major general in 1865; Ripley served as inspector of armament and forts until 1869, while Ramsey similarly served until 1870. Although Remington had been advised that new contracts were being prepared, Dyer did not forward them for signature until October 13: Gentlemen, I transmit copies in quintuplicate of two contracts as follows: One for 20,000 Revolvers and one for 15,000 Carbines, which you will please execute and return.34 The new revolver contract specified that deliveries were to be made in January, February, and March 1865 (figure 72). This was more than six thousand revolvers a month, an increase of at least one thousand a month over their current deliveries. 115

CHAPTER FOUR

Figure 72 Large frame Remington SplitBreech Carbine. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

Remington returned the contracts to the department on October 25: Sir, We have the honor to return herewith quintuplicate copies of contracts for 15,000 Remington Carbines and 20,000 Army Revolvers, duly executed.35 On November 2, these contracts were submitted to Stanton for his approval: Sir, I have the honor to transmit for approval the following contracts. Norwich Arms Co. 15,000 Rifle Muskets Edward Robinson 7,000 Rifle Muskets Mr. G. D. Mann 20,000 Sets Cavalry Accts. Moores & Co. 6,000 Sets Horse Equip’ts E. Remington & Sons 15,000 Remington Carbines E. Remington & Sons 20,000 Revolvers36 The two Remington contracts were approved and signed on November 21. The company completed their current contract, delivering nine thousand revolvers to Thornton in December, surpassing all previous efforts. A total of 57,005 army revolvers were delivered in 1864. When this contract was concluded, I estimate the serial numbers reached approximately 123,000. All of the revolvers were of the same pattern with no improvements. Remington had delivered 9,850 army revolvers in 1862 and 29,908 in 1863; adding the 1864 deliveries, the total was now 96,763. This figure included the 850 Beals Armies, under the order of 1861, and the 700 second-class revolvers accepted in July 1863. I have compiled the department’s records to show each delivery of revolvers in 1864 and include a record of Thornton’s receipts: 116

Remington Army Revolver Deliveries, November 21, 1863, Contract PURCHASES of “‘Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms,’ since April 13, 1861, by the Ordnance Department: from whom purchased, and to whom paid for: price; total amount; date of contract or order, and date of payment” CONTRACTOR’S NAME

DATE OF PURCHASE

QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

PRICE

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

1864

Jan.

8

1

New Model Army Revolvers

$11

82

$11

82

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jan.

21

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

11

82

11,082

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jan.

28

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Feb.

6

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Feb.

15

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Feb.

20

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Feb.

29

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Mar.

5

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Mar.

17

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Mar.

18

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Mar.

29

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Apr.

2

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Apr.

8

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Apr.

20

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

May

4

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

May

4

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

May

16

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

117

Remington & Sons

DATE OF PURCHASE

QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

PRICE

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

Remington & Sons

1864

May

27

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

May

31

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jun.

4

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jun.

11

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jun.

15

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jun.

18

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jun.

28

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jun.

28

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jul.

7

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jul.

14

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jul.

15

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jul.

21

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Jul.

27

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

4

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

9

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

15

1,002

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,024

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

22

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

25

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Sep.

3

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Sep.

14

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

CHAPTER FOUR

118

CONTRACTOR’S NAME

1864

Sep.

14

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Sep.

23

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

4

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

11

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

22

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

25

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Nov.

3

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Nov.

14

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Nov.

16

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Nov.

24

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Nov.

26

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

3

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

8

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

12

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

16

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

20

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

26

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

26

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

31

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

31

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

12

00

12,000

00

Nov. 21, 1863

TOTAL

57,003

119

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles and Small Arms.”

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Remington & Sons

DATE OF DELIVERY 1864

REGISTER OF REPORT Book No.

TAKEN UP ON CERTIFICATE NO.

RECEIVING OFFICER

WHERE SHIPPED

NO.

DESCRIPTION

Jan. 1

—

—

—

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

3

Army Revolvers

Jan. 8

4

I. A.

1

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Jan. 9

4

I. A.

1

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Jan. 20

7

I. A.

2

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

300

Army Revolvers

Jan. 21

7

I. A.

2

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Jan. 28

10

I. A.

2

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

200

Army Revolvers

Jan. 29

10

I. A.

3

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Feb. 6

12

I. A.

3

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Feb. 15

15

I. A.

4

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Feb. 20

17

I. A.

5

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Feb. 22

17

I. A.

4

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Feb. 29

19

I. A.

6

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Mar. 5

20

I. A.

7

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Mar. 7

22

I. A.

7

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

500

Army Revolvers

Mar. 17

23

I. A.

8

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Mar. 18

24

I. A.

9

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Mar. 29

27

I. A.

10

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Apr. 2

28

I. A.

11

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

CHAPTER FOUR

120

Ordnance Inspector’s “Memorandum of Receipts” “Memorandum of Receipts of 64,900 ARMY REVOLVERS from E. REMINGTON & SONS under their CONTRACTS from CHIEF OF ORDNANCE dated November 21, 1863”

31

I. A.

12

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Apr. 19

33

I. A.

13

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

May 4

37

I. A.

14 & 15

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

2,000

Army Revolvers

May 16

40

I. A.

16

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

May 27

44

I. A.

17

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

May 31

45

I. A.

18

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jun. 4

46

I. A.

19

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jun. 11

48

I. A.

20

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jun. 15

49

I. A.

21

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jun. 18

50

I. A.

22

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jun. 28

53

I. A.

23 & 24

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

2,000

Army Revolvers

Jul. 7

54

I. A.

25

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jul. 14

54

I. A.

26

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jul. 15

59

I. A.

27

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jul. 26

61

I. A.

28

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jul. 27

61

I. A.

29

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Aug. 4

63

I. A.

30

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Aug. 9

64

I. A.

31

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Aug. 15

66

I. A.

32

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,002

Army Revolvers

Aug. 22

68

I. A.

33

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Aug. 25

71

I. A.

34

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Sep. 3

72

I. A.

35

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Sep. 14

74

I. A.

36

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

REMINGTON’S THIRD ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

121

Apr. 8

1864

REGISTER OF REPORT Book No.

TAKEN UP ON CERTIFICATE NO.

RECEIVING OFFICER

WHERE SHIPPED

NO.

DESCRIPTION

Sep. 14

74

I. A.

37

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Sep. 23

79

I. A.

38

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Oct. 1

80

I. A.

39

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Oct. 4

81

I. A.

40

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Oct. 11

81

I. A.

41

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Oct. 22

86

I. A.

42

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Oct. 28

88

I. A.

43

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Nov. 3

90

I. A.

44

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Nov. 14

92

I. A.

45

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Nov. 16

93

I. A.

46

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Nov. 24

95

I. A.

47

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Nov. 26

96

I. A.

48

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Dec. 3

98

I. A.

49

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Dec. 8

100

I. A.

50

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Dec. 12

102

I. A.

51

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Dec. 16

102

I. A.

52

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Dec. 20

103

I. A.

53

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Dec. 26

104

I. A.

54 & 55

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

2,000

Army Revolvers

Dec. 30

104

I. A.

56

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Dec. 31

104

I. A.

57

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Total 57,005 Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 80, “Memorandum of Receipts.”

CHAPTER FOUR

122

DATE OF DELIVERY

CHAPTER FIVE

Remington’s Fourth Army Revolver Contract n this brief chapter, I shall discuss the revolvers delivered on Remington’s final revolver contract signed October 24, 1864. The contract called for twenty thousand army revolvers to be delivered in the first three months of 1865 at the rate of not less than seven thousand per month. I shall also give a brief summary of all Remington revolvers delivered to the Ordnance Department during the war (figure 73). Remington entered into this final contract with determination. There was an additional incentive of $3.50 for each revolver delivered, which would accrue an extra $70,000. Some manufacturers would have found this temptation irresistible and held back deliveries on the contract just expired. This would have permitted the luxury of delivering the withheld revolvers at a larger profit. Apparently, this thought never occurred to Remington. Although their profit margin was minimal, they made a heroic effort to supply all of the revolvers possible on their old contract and delivered a record nine thousand to Thornton in December 1864. They evidently scraped the bottom of the barrel in doing this, as they did not deliver the first two lots of revolvers on the new contract until January 12, 1865. On the day they delivered these lots, Col. William Maynadier, the acting head of the department during Dyer’s temporary absence, made a request of Remington:

I

Gentlemen, I have to request that you will make and forward to this office as soon as practicable a complete list of the component parts of the Remington Carbine and Revolver with the relative value of each. The price of each part should be adjusted that their total amounts will equal the price paid for the complete arms under your last contract. 1 Three days later, Dyer forwarded certificates of release to Remington: Gentlemen, I transmit herewith, duly signed Certificates of Release, in duplicate for Rifle Muskets and Revolving Pistols delivered in the months of October, November, & December 1864 under your contracts dated prior to July 1st, 1864. 2 123

CHAPTER FIVE

Figure 73 Last variation New Model Army Revolver. (Author’s collection)

These certificates were necessary for Remington to submit their claims for payment. After submission to the government auditor, there would still be a lapse before the monies were deposited to the company’s credit. Accordingly, we can comprehend the many complaints to the department over delinquent payments. Remington delivered sixty-five hundred revolvers to Thornton in January, five hundred short of the specified number. This tardiness would create problems for them upon the contract’s completion. Although not pertinent to the Remington story, the following letter elaborates on the then current wage rate: Springfield Armory Feb. 1, 1865 Mr. Geo. Burdick Bridesburg, Pa. Sir, In reply to your application of the 29th ulto, I have to say that I can employ good tool makers at $3.00 to $3.50 per day according to capabilities. Very Respectfully Yours &c T. T. S. Laidley, Major of Ord. Comdg.3 Laidley had been appointed commander of Springfield Armory, replacing Dyer on his appointment to chief of ordnance. The wages stated by Laidley also reflected inflation, as the position referred to would have paid less than two dollars per day in 1861. On February 22, Remington responded to the department’s request of January 12: Sir, We have the honor to hand you herewith, list of component parts of the Harper Ferry 124

REMINGTON’S FOURTH ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Rifle and Remington Army Revolver with prices therefore, agreeable to your request. A similar list of parts of our Breechloading Carbine with prices for same will be sent forward so soon as it can be obtained from the parties who are at present manufacturing the Carbines for us. We should have transmitted the enclosed lists before, but have deferred sending them expecting to have received the one for the Carbine ere this, the completion of which, for some cause, unknown to us, had been temporarily delayed. 4 The following list of parts was included:

Price of Component Parts of Remington’s Army Pistols. January 1865 Frame 4.25 Cylinder 2.65 Barrel 2.35 Guard .65 Lever 1.00 Lever Plunger .14 Lever Link Lever Complete $1.35 .08 Lever Catch .08 Lever Catch Spring .05 Center Pin .14 Center Pin Spring .05 Hammer .65 Hammer Cam Hammer Complete $.77 .06 Hammer Roll .06 Trigger .30 Bolt .36 Main Spring .30 Sear Spring .08 Pawl .22 Pawl Spring .02 Barrel Stud .08 Front Sight .08 7 Cones 10 cents each .70 8 Screws 25 cents each .20 Stock .45 Screw Driver .20 Total $15.505 The Remington employee responsible for making this list did not verify his figures. My total for the combined parts is $15.20. Remington included a parts list for the carbines but did not provide their individual prices. 125

CHAPTER FIVE

By February 20, Remington had delivered twelve thousand revolvers. With no foreseeable problems precluding completion of their contract by the end of March, they requested an additional contract on February 24. Dyer responded on the twenty-seventh: Gentlemen, Your offer of the 24th inst. to furnish 20,000 Pistols for $14. each is declined, the department having sufficient supply on hand.6 The war was winding to a close, with no need for additional revolvers. Many of the Remington revolvers accepted in the final months of the conflict would remain unissued in government arsenals for several years. The company continued revolver deliveries until March 24. On this day, Thornton, accepting the last lot of revolvers at their armory, received five hundred of the one thousand revolvers offered but refused the second five hundred on the grounds that they had been forfeited by nondelivery the previous January. This caveat had been a condition of all previous contracts between the department and Remington, but this was the first instance in which the receiving officer had invoked the option. Thornton’s actions perturbed Remington, who immediately telegraphed Dyer: Office U.S. Military Telegraph War Department The following telegram received at Washington, 10:40 P.M. Mch 24, 1865 From Ilion N.Y. Brig. Genl. A. B. Dyer Chf. Ord. Col. Thornton objects to taking (500) of the Twenty thousand (20,000) pistols now completed. Is that right?7 On the following day, Remington sent additional details to the department: Sir, Col. Thornton does [not] feel at liberty to receive 500 of the Army Pistols completed under our present contract, upon the ground that 500 were forfeited for nondelivery in the month of January last as stipulated in the contract. In regard to this we beg leave to say that, although but 6,500 pistols were delivered during that month, the requisite number (7,000) were completed and would have been delivered but for the temporary delay occasioned by want of a sufficient number of Inspectors to examine and receive the work promptly at our Utica Armory during the month of Jany. Even as it was, the 500 Pistols required to complete the January installment were all finished, inspected in detail and assembled the second time, ready for the final examination and delivery before the expiration of the month, and were delivered upon the 3rd day of February. Under these circumstances we trust that you will feel warranted in authorizing Col. Thornton to receive the 500 pistols in question, completing the 20,000 as per contract.8 126

REMINGTON’S FOURTH ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

It appears that Dyer was not on duty when Remington’s letter arrived. Col. William Maynadier, Dyer’s assistant, forwarded Remington’s letter to Thornton on March 27, soliciting his comments: Respectfully referred to Col. Thornton for his information. Please report facts in the case. W. Maynadier, Col. & Chief Asst. of Ord9 Thornton responded on March 28: On the 13th of January, during my absence on duty at Washington, the Remington Company made application for an additional inspector to examine their pistols at Utica N.Y. When I returned here the 27th of January, I immediately assigned the desired help. It appears, by reports in this office, that the said company caused the sub-inspectors to lose five days work during the week ending January 28th, 1865 by not furnishing them pistols to inspect, and if the help desired had been present, the loss of time to the United States would have been still greater. From these facts, I think it is evident that the failure to deliver the 500 pistols in January 1865 was not due to the want of Inspectors to examine the work.10 On receiving this reply, Maynadier sent the following to Remington on March 29: Sirs, I have to acknowledge your letter of 25th inst. stating that Col. Thornton did not feel at liberty to receive 500 Army Pistols completed under Contract, on the ground that they were forfeited for nondelivery in the month of January. I deemed it proper before taking any further action in the matter to refer your letter to Col. Thornton for remarks. Herewith I have sent his endorsement on your letter from which you will perceive that he differs from you as to the cause of non-reception. In view of his statement I do not deem it advisable to instruct him to receive the 500 Pistols, as you request.11 There was no resolution of this matter until it was brought to Dyer’s attention on his return to duty. On April 11, Dyer contacted Remington: Gentlemen, Referring to your letter of the 4th inst. I have to say that Col. Thornton has this day been directed to inspect and receive the five hundred Revolvers, the delivery of which was forfeited in the month of January last.12 Reading between the lines, I have formed the opinion that Thornton resented the preferential treatment the department afforded Remington. I suspect he anticipated that his decision would be overturned, arriving at this conclusion from the fact that the five hundred revolvers 127

CHAPTER FIVE

that he had accepted on March 24 and the five hundred that he had refused to accept were all entered on the same receipt, which was dated the following day, April 12. Thornton also invoked other sanctions against Remington that had not been previously advanced. When making the final settlement of Remington’s revolver account, he made deductions for the ammunition furnished by the government for proving the revolvers accepted in 1864 and later made charges for the ammunition used in proving the twenty thousand revolvers just delivered. He also deducted charges for the labor used in inspecting revolvers that were not accepted by the department. Remington evidently did not protest these reductions. The charges are itemized in the department’s ledgers and may be viewed at the end of the current chapter. I estimate the serial number range of these final deliveries to be slightly over 149,000. It is interesting to note that some of these bear the same sub-inspector’s cartouche (RPB) as the Rogers & Spencer revolvers concurrently being delivered in Utica, New York. During the war, the total numbers of Remington Army Revolvers delivered to the department were as follows: 850 Beals models on order of July 29, 1861 20,001 Beals, Elliot, and New Models on contract June 13, 1862 700 Second-class New Models purchased July 11, 1863 18,208 New Models on contract of July 6, 1863 57,005 New Models on contract of November 21, 1863 20,002 New Models on contract of October 24, 1864 116,766 Total

delivered May 31, 1862 delivered July 1861–June 1862 delivered July 1863 delivered July–December 1863 delivered January–December 1864 delivered January–March 1865

In addition to the army revolvers, Remington delivered 12,251 navy revolvers, that is, 7,250 Beals models on the order of July 29, 1861, delivered from August 1861 to May 1862, and 5,001 Beals and Elliot models on the contract of June 13, 1862. These were delivered from August to December 1862. Approximately 4,600 Beals Navies were also purchased on the open market from commercial dealers during the early months of the war. Using the department’s records, I have determined that Remington received $1,641,411 for 129,017 revolvers, an average of $12.72 per revolver. By contrast, Colt delivered 130,000 revolvers during the war and received $2,212,000, for an average price of $17 per revolver. I have investigated production costs for this period but have not been able to determine Remington’s profits. There were many factors that decimated them: new machinery, new buildings, and, of course, inflation. While the machinery was an asset that would serve the firm for many years, the investment in remodeling at the Utica armory came directly out of revolver profits. That facility was abandoned shortly after the final revolver contract was concluded. I once again present the department’s account records and Thornton’s receipts for the final twenty thousand Remington revolvers accepted by the department: 128

Remington Army Revolver Deliveries, October 24, 1864, Contract PURCHASES of “‘Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms,’ since April 13, 1861, by the Ordnance Department: From whom purchased, and to whom paid for: price; total amount; date of contract or order, and date of payment” CONTRACTOR’S NAME

DATE OF PURCHASE

QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

PRICE

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

1865

Jan.

2

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

$15

50

$15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Jan.

12

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Jan.

12

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Jan.

20

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Jan.

28

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Jan.

30

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

4

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

6

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

11

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

13

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

18

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

20

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

27

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

28

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Mar.

7

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Mar.

8

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Mar.

14

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

REMINGTON’S FOURTH ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

129

Remington & Sons

DATE OF PURCHASE

QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

PRICE

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

Remington & Sons

1865

Mar.

14

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Mar.

21

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Mar.

23

1,000

New Model Army Revolvers

15

50

15,500

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Mar.

14

—

Ammunition used in proving 57,000 revolvers

—

—

1,031

69

Nov. 21, 1863

Remington & Sons

1865

Jun.

10

—

Ammunition used in proving 20,000 revolvers

—

—

1,308

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Remington & Sons

1865

Jun.

10

1,191

65

Oct. 24, 1864

Total

Labor in inspection of pistols not taken by government 20,000

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles and Small Arms.”

Ordnance Inspector’s “Memorandum of Receipts” “Memorandum of Receipts of 20,000 ARMY REVOLVERS from E. REMINGTON & SONS under their CONTRACTS from CHIEF OF ORDNANCE dated October 24, 1864” DATE OF DELIVERY 1865

REGISTER OF REPORT Book No.

TAKEN UP ON CERTIFICATE NO.

RECEIVING OFFICER

WHERE SHIPPED

NO.

DESCRIPTION

Jan. 12

4

11

1

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jan. 12

4

11

2

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jan. 20

7

11

3

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jan. 20

7

11

4

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Jan. 28

9

11

5

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

CHAPTER FIVE

130

CONTRACTOR’S NAME

10

11

6

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Feb. 4

11

11

7

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Feb. 6

12

11

8

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Feb. 13

14

11

9

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Feb. 11

13

11

10

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Feb. 16

15

11

11

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Feb. 20

16

11

12

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Feb. 27

18

11

13

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Feb. 28

18

11

14

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Mar. 7

20

11

15

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Mar. 7

20

11

16

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Mar. 14

22

11

17

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Mar. 15

22

11

18

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Mar. 21

24

11

19

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Apr. 12

30

11

20

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Army Revolvers

Total Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 80, “Memorandum of Receipts.”

20,000

131

REMINGTON’S FOURTH ARMY REVOLVER CONTRACT

Jan. 30

CHAPTER SIX

Remington Navy Revolvers Purchased by the Bureau of Ordnance, U.S. Navy n this chapter I present the results of my studies concerning the Civil War purchases of Remington Navy Revolvers by the Bureau of Ordnance for the use of the U.S. Navy. The Remington Navy Revolvers were not actually developed for the navy; they are referred to as “navy revolvers” because they were .36 caliber, the navy’s caliber of choice. The U.S. Army had purchased and contracted for several thousand Remington Navy Revolvers before the navy’s Bureau of Ordnance took notice of their existence. I introduced the reader to the navy’s Bureau of Ordnance in the prologue to this volume. My introduction notes that navy officers were assigned to test and prove articles purchased under contract. In my research, I found but one instance where percussion revolvers were inspected for the bureau at the point of manufacture; this happenstance occurred only because an inspector, sent to accept and receive long arms from Eli Whitney, was present when the revolvers were delivered. After conducting an extensive search for pre–Civil War correspondence or agreements between the bureau and E. Remington & Sons, I found only two items. The earliest correspondence located was a reply to an inquiry made by Samuel Remington while he was in Washington, D.C.:

I

Bureau of Ordn. & Hydro. February 24th, 1854 Mr. Sam’l. Remington Washington Sir, In reply to letter of this date you are informed that the only information that can be found in the files of this Bureau in relation to cast steel barrels introduced by you for the Navy, is contained in the enclosed copy of a report from Lieut. Joseph Ianman, Asst. Inspector of Ordnance U.S.N., dated June 23rd, 1846. It appears by the correspondence 133

CHAPTER SIX

that Mr. Wm. Jenks was authorized to have the barrels of 1,000 Carbines of his patent, made of cast steel instead of iron, and that said 1,000 Carbines with cast steel barrels were made and inspected at the establishment of E. Remington & Son, Ilion, Herkimer County New York. Respectfully, Your Obt. Servant C. Morris, Chief of the Bureau1 Some three years later, in April 1857, Remington received an order from the bureau for 150 musket barrels of decarbonized steel. I located no further correspondence between the bureau and Remington from 1857 to 1862.

THE YEAR OF 1862 While Samuel Remington was in Washington testifying before the Owen-Holt Commission on Ordnance, he made the following request of the bureau: Washington, April 22, 1862 Capt. A. A. Harwood Chief of Bureau of Ord. & Hydro. Washington, D.C. Sir, Being desirous of bringing our Navy Revolver favorable before your Department— We would respectfully ask that you grant a trial to be made with the same.2 Remington had a large inventory of Beals Navy Revolvers, which had accumulated after Secretary of War Stanton’s general order of March 10 that suspended all arms deliveries to the Army Ordnance Department. Although this department temporarily accepted revolvers again on April 15, Remington was seeking another market. To this end, he deposited a Beals Navy Revolver with the bureau for evaluation. I have not located further correspondence between Remington and the bureau regarding this request, but the bureau conducted a trial on May 3, 1862 (figure 74): Report on Beal’s Revolver is resp. submitted to the Bureau of Ordnance. May 3, 1862 Capt. Jno A. Dahlgren, Commdt. Navy Yard, Washington Sir, In relation to Beals patent revolving pistols presented for trial by Mr. Remington we have to report as follows. The pistol differs from Colt’s Navy pistol chiefly in the manner in which the cylinder is held in place, and the arrangement of the frame which with the barrel is in one piece. The cylinder is kept in place by a sliding base pin under the barrel, which can only be 134

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

withdrawn by lowering the rammer. By this means the cylinder may be removed and replaced with great rapidity and ease. The pistol complete weighs 17,670 grs. “ cylinder “ “ 3,760 grs. “ cartridge “ “ 135 grs. “ charge “ “ 14 grs. “ ball “ “ 120 grs. Six hundred shots were fired, five hundred of which were fired at a target of three thicknesses of 1 1/2 in. pine boards, 30 inches square at a distance of 100 ft. Every charge but one exploded at the first fall of the hammer. One hundred and ninety five shots struck the target, all of which went through the first board and penetrated the second, only four went through the second and penetrated the third. For comparison, thirty of the same cartridges were fired at the target from Colt’s Navy revolver, six of the ten that hit the target penetrated the third board. At the 150th shot, the cylinder, revolving with some difficulty, it was cleaned. At the 582nd round, it would not revolve until it was cleaned. Both interruptions were caused by the escape of gas between the cylinder and the barrel, which fouled the piece considerably. As it is claimed by the inventor that the pistol can be fired with much greater rapidity by removing the cylinder to load, one hundred and twenty shots were fired in this manner in 28 min. 36 sec. One hundred and twenty by the usual process in 29 min. 3 sec. It is thought that in cleaning, there is an advantage in the simplicity with which the frame and cylinder are arranged consisting of but two pieces, one movement of the hand takes it apart. The connection of the barrel and stock by a strap over the cylinder gives additional strength. In penetration under the same circumstances, it will be observed that Colt’s is eminently superior, while accuracy appears slightly in favor of Beals. Very Respectfully, Foxhall A. Parker, Lt. & Ex. Offc. Wm. Mitchell, Lieut. 3 The inventor’s claim that the revolver could be loaded faster by removing the cylinder is interesting. This comment may have been intended to disparage Colt revolvers, in which the removal of the cylinder was a more intricate operation. Beals’s method of loading would have required an extra appendage to seat the ball or cartridge, similar to the tool furnished with the first and second models of the Beals Pocket Revolvers. This appendage is not normally associated with the Beals Navy Revolver, but I am aware of one factory-boxed navy revolver containing this tool. At the time the above ordnance report was submitted, Colt was supplying revolvers to the navy, with which they seemed quite pleased. In August 1862, Capt. John A. Dahlgren (figure 75), who had recently succeeded Harwood as chief of the bureau, ordered army revolvers from the Army Ordnance Department: 135

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 74 Lt. Foxhall A. Parker, U.S. Navy. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

Figure 75 Adm. John A. Dahlgren, chief of the Bureau of Ordnance. (Courtesy: Library of Congress) 136

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Bureau of Ordnance, Navy Department Aug. 5th, 1862 Brig. Genl. J. W. Ripley U.S.A. Chief of Ordnance, Washington, D.C. Sir, I have the honor to request that you will direct to be forwarded to Ordnance Officer at the New York Navy Yard, (250) Two Hundred and Fifty Army revolvers. I am Very Respectfully, Your Obdt. Servant J. A. Dahlgren, Chief of Bureau4 Ripley furnished Colt Armies, and in the process of approving the receipts, Dahlgren evidently discovered that Colt was delivering revolvers to the army at a lower price than to the navy. On becoming aware of this price discrimination, on August 23 he contacted Colt with the following inquiry: Telegram To Colt’s Arms Co. Hartford, Conn. Will you supply Navy Revolvers at the same rate as to the Army? If so, state the price. Aug. 23d, 11.10 A.M. J. A. Dahlgren5 The reply to this telegram has not been located, but it appears that Colt refused to lower their price. On the same day that he telegraphed Colt, Dahlgren wired the Remington armory: Telegram E. Remington & Sons Ilion, N.Y. Please forward a sample of your revolver to this Bureau, together with a small quantity of ammunition. Note caliber and price. 23 Aug. J. A. Dahlgren6 Remington responded to this request on August 25: Sir, We telegraphed you today in answer to your dispatch of Saturday, Aug. 23. We are now furnishing the Government with both the Army & Navy size Revolver, 44/100 & 36/100 calibre, the latter same as sample sent you. Our engagements are such that we could only give you at present about 1,000 of the Navy size .36 calibre, (like sample). Can supply your Department (after completing our present Contract, which will require about 60 days) at the rate of 50 per day. The price would be the same as we are receiving from the Government, $12. each, 137

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 76 Beals Navy Revolver, fourth variation. (Author’s collection)

with the usual appendages, viz.: 1 screwdriver & cone wrench & 1 bullet mould to each Revolver. The cartridges we send are not what we propose furnishing with our Revolver (not having any on hand at this time). Will send some in a few days more suitable for the pistol & securing better penetration.7 Remington shipped a Beals Navy Revolver (figure 76), serial number 14,741, to the bureau who, in turn, forwarded it to the Ordnance Department, Washington Navy Yard, with the following endorsements: This accompanies sample Remmington [sic] Revolver of same caliber as Colt’s Navy .36 at $12. which the Captain wishes tried and reported upon. H. A. Wise, Asst. to Bureau Received the revolver and cartridges Aug. 30, & sent them to Lab’y. A. B. M.8 Lt. Cdr. W. W. Queen tested the revolver, using a Colt Navy Revolver for comparison, and made the following report on September 5: Beals patent revolving Pistol Sir, In obedience to your order, I have fired Beals patent revolving pistol No. 14,741, furnished by Messrs. E. Remington & Sons as follows: With the ammunition furnished 342 rounds “ Colt’s ammunition 158 do Total 500 do 138

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

At the 180th & 342nd rounds, the pistol working rather stiffly, it was taken apart and wiped. The penetration was tested with each kind of ammunition by firing 20 shots, at a target made of 1 in. pine boards consisting of 9 boards, so placed as to leave a space of one inch between each. It was two feet square, and set at a distance of 73 ft. 5. of Colt’s ammunition: 16 struck and penetrated the 1st and 2nd boards. 12 penetrated the 3rd board & 4 more embedded in it. 1 was embedded in the 4th board, and there were 10 indentations in it. of Remington’s ammunition: 17 struck the target and penetrated the 1st and 2nd board 16 penetrated & 1 was embedded in the 3rd “ 4 penetrated, & 4 were embedded in the 4th “ and there were 6 indentations in it. 2 were embedded, and there were 2 indentations in the 5th board To test the escape of gas at the joint between the cylinder and the barrel, pieces of white paper and cotton waste were bound closely around the joint, each during 5 shots. They were slightly discolored and considerably torn. The same number of shots were then fired from Colt’s Navy Pistol, under the same circumstance, the relative escape of gas appearing to be slightly in favor of the Remington arm. The pistol was examined before and after firing by a competent workman, who reported it on each occasion in good order. The pistol complete weighs 18,162 grains “ Cylinder “ “ 4,395 grs. A mean of the weight of 3 cartridges taken at random is as follows. Powder 15 grs. Ball 137 grs. Total 152 grs. They were of the manufacture of Messrs. Johnson [sic] and Dow and did not fit the pistol well, though in other respects serviceable.9 Three days later, Lieutenant Commander Mitchell forwarded another report to Dahlgren: Sir, In relation to the relative merits of Colt’s and Beal’s [sic] (Remingtons) revolving pistols, I have to report that judging from the results of the examination by Lieut. (now Comdr.) Parker and myself, as per report of May 3, 1862 and from that of Lieut. Comdr. Queen of the 5th instant, I am of the opinion that the Beal’s [sic] is fully equal to that of the Colt. For accuracy it has proved superior in both trials. In the first instance the penetration was in favor of the Colts but in the latter trial, that of the Beal’s [sic] was the greater. 139

CHAPTER SIX

It endured 500 shots, by Lieut. Comdr. Queen without difficulty, the pistol working as well after as before the trial. The mechanical arrangement is much more simple than that of the Colts, a simple movement of the hand takes it apart and it is put together with equal ease. The strap over the barrel gives it additional strength and is so arranged as not to interfere with the working of the pistol. It varies slightly in weight from that first tried, but in other respects the same.10 Shortly after receiving these reports, Dahlgren ordered the navy’s first lot of revolvers and ammunition from Remington on September 15: Sirs, You will please deliver to the Asst. Insp. Of Ordnance, Navy Yard, Portsmouth N.H. One Hundred and Twenty (120) Beal’s [sic] Revolvers with ammunition, spare parts etc. for do.11 Remington shipped this order on September 18 and advised Dahlgren on the following day: Sir, We beg to enclose herewith Invoice of 120 Revolvers (navy size) with appendages as forwarded agreeable to your order of the 15th inst. received yesterday. We are a little in doubt as to the proper amount of ammunition to forward with the pistols and telegraphed you in regard to same. Receiving no reply, we have concluded to send the pistols forward with one box cartridges, (1200). If more are wanted, we will forward them as soon as advised. The cartridges are accompanied with percussion caps. We send with the pistols, 1 Bullet mould, 1 Screwdriver & cone wrench and 1 extra cone to each pistol, as usual. Have also added a few main springs extra.12 On the twentieth, the bureau advised Remington by telegram, “Send one hundred and twenty (120) rounds with each pistol.”13 Remington did not ship the cartridges until September 25 and advised the bureau on that day: Sir, We have the honor to hand you herewith Invoice of Cartridges this day forwarded to Ass’t. Insp. Ordnance, Navy Yard, Portsmouth, N.H., completing the requisite number for the pistols furnished, (120 Rounds to each). We have been delayed in forwarding the Cartridges a few days, in consequence of not having a sufficient supply on hand, when the order was received. We shall endeavor to be prepared to execute more promptly any future orders you may have occasion to send us. Hoping that the temporary delay of the Cartridges in this instance, will not cause any inconvenience.14 140

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

The bureau had not received the previous letter when they again contacted Remington on September 27: Sirs, Yours of the 19th received. You will please forward to the Ass’t. Inspector of Ordnance, Navy Yard, Portsmouth, N.H. Twelve thousand cartridges for revolvers, and let the Percussion Caps be put in separate parcels.15 Remington responded to this on the thirtieth: Sir, We are in receipt of yours of the 27th inst., containing order for 12,000 Cartridges to be forwarded to Ass’t Inspector of Ordnance, Navy Yard, Portsmouth, N.H. The Cartridges were sent forward some days since, agreeable to order received per telegraph. We notice your instructions relative to putting the Percussion Caps in parcels separate from the Cartridges, and will hereafter have them put up in that manner.16 Upon receiving this letter, the bureau advised Remington: Gentlemen, The telegraphic order from the Bureau of the 20th, inst. having been filled, the order of the 27th inst for 12,000 cartridges is annulled.17 Although the order of the nineteenth was very specific in referring to Beals revolvers, I cannot ascertain if the revolvers delivered were indeed Beals models or the newly introduced revolver with the Elliot patent lever and arbor pin. References to “Beals Revolvers” may be found in the bureau’s correspondence as late as April 1863, the approximate introduction date of the early New Model Revolvers. The test reports of May 3 and September 8, 1862, both make reference to Beals revolvers. The last line of Mitchell’s report states that other than a slight variation in weight, the revolver tested was the same as the one he had tested on May 3, before the introduction of the Elliot model (figure 77). In July, Army Ordnance Inspector Col. W. A. Thornton had refused to accept approximately fifteen hundred Beals Navy Revolvers from Remington, citing numerous defects in a report to the chief of ordnance. Remington’s letter to Dahlgren on August 25 stated, “Our engagements are such that we can give you at present about 1,000 of the Navy size .36 calibre, (like sample).”18 At that time, Remington was approximately two thousand revolvers in arrears on an army contract for five thousand navy revolvers. It seems unlikely that Remington, behind in production, could or would offer revolvers to the navy, unless the revolvers were Beals models that had been rejected by Thornton. By way of a review, the Army Ordnance Department contract for navy revolvers had been executed on June 13, 1862, but none were accepted until August 11 because of the faults mentioned in Thornton’s reports. Remington delivered a total of five thousand Beals and Elliot Navy Revolvers on 141

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 77 Elliot Navy Revolver, first variation, serial number 15,867. (Author’s collection)

this contract, most of them after Remington had requested and received a three-month extension. Those accepted by the army are easily identified by the cartouche of Ordnance Sub-Inspector C. G. Curtis, stamped on the left grip. A study of the revolvers accepted by the army reveals a serial number range of approximately 13,500–19,500. Accordingly, I assume that the early deliveries to the navy were in the same serial number range as those first delivered to the army. With few exceptions, it is impossible to identify the revolvers delivered to the navy. The navy neither subjected them to a formal inspection, nor marked them, as the army did. A few Beals Navy Revolvers that were altered to cartridge have surfaced; these appear to be part of the lot altered by Remington for the navy in 1875–76. All of these facts suggest that the early deliveries to the navy were Beals models. Johnston & Dow of New York City manufactured the cartridges that Remington furnished. The bureau initially accepted the cartridges even though the test report of Queen on September 5 was critical, saying that “the cartridges did not fit the pistol well.”19 Later, the Johnston & Dow cartridges proved to be a major embarrassment to Remington. The bureau forwarded another order to Remington on October 4: Sir: Prepare and forward to Fortress Monroe, Va. addressed to Lieut. Commander Phenix, U.S.N. Fifty-(50)-Revolvers with 120 rounds of ammunition to each.20 Remington received this order on the seventh. They advised Dahlgren that the revolvers had been shipped the following day: Sir, We have this day forwarded to the address of Lieut. Commander Phenix, U.S.N., Fortress Monroe, Va.; 50 Navy Revolvers and ammunition for the same; agreeable 142

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

to your order of 4th inst., received yesterday. We enclose herewith, invoice and Express receipt. If you have occasion to favor us with further orders for the pistols, will you be kind enough to advise us if we should send the same number of percussion caps, as of cartridges, or an additional number to cover the usual loss or waste in using.21 Capt. Henry A. Wise, Dahlgren’s assistant, sent the following order to Remington on November 4: Sirs, Prepare and forward to Fortress Monroe Va. addressed to Lieut. Commander Phenix, U.S.N., and marked “Navy Ordnance”: One Hundred (100) Revolvers and Fifty Thousand (50,000) Revolver Cartridges.22 The bureau never entered into a formal contract with Remington, but Dahlgren began placing regular revolver orders. Many were delivered to smaller naval stations such as Fortress Monroe, Virginia, and to Cairo or Mound City, Illinois, the latter for arming seamen of the Mississippi Squadron. After Remington’s first delivery, the bureau placed no further revolver orders with Colt for the duration of the war. On the same day that the previous order was sent, the bureau received the following telegram from Rear Adm. David D. Porter (figure 78), commanding officer of the Mississippi River Squadron: The American Telegraph Company Cairo, Ill. Nov. 4 1862 Capt. Dahlgren, Ord. Bureau Required, two hundred Colt’s Revolvers with ammunition. D. D. Porter, Rear Admiral 23 Answered Nov. 6 Ordered from Remington Two days later the bureau relayed the order to Remington: Sirs, The Bureau wishes you to send with all dispatch to Rear Admiral D. D. Porter, Cairo Illinois: Two hundred (200) revolvers with one hundred (100) rounds of ammunition for each Revolver. Let the boxes be distinctly marked “Navy Ordnance” and certificates of reception by the proper Officer at Cairo must accompany all your bills.24 Remington responded on the tenth: 143

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 78 Rear Adm. David D. Porter, commander of the Mississippi Squadron. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

Sirs, We have the honor to acknowledge receipt of yours of the 6th inst. with order for 200 Revolvers and 100 rounds of ammunition for each Revolver; to be forwarded to Rear Admiral D. D. Porter, Cairo, Illinois. The Pistols we forward this day. The ammunition for the same will be sent direct from New York. When we receive the proper certificates from Cairo we will transmit them to you with our account.25 In this reply, I noted that Remington again did not have the cartridges on hand; they, in turn, ordered Johnston & Dow to ship them directly to Cairo. On November 12, the bureau transmitted another order to Remington: Sirs, The Bureau desires you to send to the Boston Navy Yard, addressed to Commodore J. S. Missroon, U.S.N. and Marked “Naval Ordnance” for Navy Yard, Mare Island, California, the following articles: 144

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

50 Revolvers 15,000 Cartridges for do 25,000 Percussion Caps for do.26 Remington acknowledged this order on the fourteenth: Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge receipt of yours of 12th inst. containing order for 50 Revolvers and Ammunition which shall go forward tomorrow, addressed in accordance with instructions given. We will transmit our account when we obtain from Boston the proper receipt to accompany the same. It is now required by the American Express Company (the only Company having an office at this place), that we prepay their charges for transportation on goods that we may forward, per Express for Government Service. Unless otherwise advised we will add the amount paid by us for transportation to our bills.27 It appears that the American Express Company wanted cash for their services, as the government was notoriously slow in making payments. Wise sent the next revolver order November 29: Sirs, The Bureau desires you to send as soon as possible to the Navy Yard at New York for shipment to Pensacola. Fifty Revolvers with the usual amount of ammunition. Address the boxes to care of the Commandant, and mark them “for Pensacola.”28 Remington acknowledged this order on December 2: Sir, We are in receipt of yours of the 29th ulto. containing order for Revolvers and ammunition for the same; which will be sent forward this day, agreeable to directions given.29 On December 17, the bureau executed a different type of order: Sirs, The Bureau wishes you to send with all dispatch to Cairo, Illinois, marked “Naval Ordnance” and addressed to Rear Admiral Porter, One hundred thousand (100,000) percussion caps for revolvers.30 In a communication dated December 24, Remington made an unusual request of Dahlgren: 145

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 79 Elliot loading lever with fillister screw installed in channel. (Author’s collection)

Sir, We have the honor to hand you herewith Invoice of Revolvers and ammunition sent to Cairo, 10th Nov.; together with Certificates of their reception. If at any time the Bureau shall receive reports respecting our pistols, (either favorable or otherwise) from the Officers to whom they have been issued, we would be pleased to receive copies of the same, if consistent with the regulations of the Department. We make this request in order that we may be apprised if a modification of the pistol, in any respect is desirable. We would also be pleased to know if the waterproof Cartridges furnished with the pistols, give full satisfaction.31 In chapter 2, I related the problems the army had experienced with the Elliot models. In early December, Maj. P. V. Hagner, inspector of ordnance for the army, had requested Remington to abandon the Elliot’s patent and return to the Beals system. Remington’s purpose in writing the previous letter was to seek input from the bureau. Remington’s temporary solution to complaints concerning the Elliot model was to install a screw in the channel of the loading lever (figure 79). This prevented the withdrawal of the arbor pin, unless the loading lever was first lowered. Postwar orders (from the Mare Island yard for replacement screws for the inner groove of the loading lever) are sufficient evidence that the bureau received some of the Elliot Model Navies. The bureau ordered fifty navy revolvers for the Mare Island yard on November 12, 1862, shortly before the Elliot models were discontinued. On December 26, the bureau questioned Remington about an excess of cartridges delivered with a recent order: Gentlemen, Yours of the 24th inst. (enclosing bill and receipt from Ordnance Officer at Cairo for two hundred Revolvers, and one hundred and twenty thousand Cartridges delivered at Cairo) has been received. Your order of Nov. 6 for the above pistols and cartridges was for one hundred rounds to each revolver or 20,000 rounds. How is it that you have sent 100,000 rounds more than was ordered?32 Remington hastened to explain the circumstances with the following reply on the thirtieth: 146

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Sir, We are in receipt of your communication of the 26th instant apprising us of errors in executing the order of Nov. 6th. In explanation of the same, we beg leave to say that we understood the term “round” to mean the requisite number of Cartridges for a single full charge for the pistol, instead of a single Cartridge. We were led to this conclusion, partly by the fact, that in a previous order received from the Bureau, for 100 Revolvers, a definite number of Cartridges “50,000” were ordered to be sent with them. We supposed that for the 200 Revolvers sent to Cairo, the Cartridges would be required in about the same proportion and that the order for “100 rounds to each pistol” was intended to mean 100 full charges (of 6 Cartridges) to each pistol.33 I have discussed elsewhere the common confusion over the term “round” of ammunition, as exemplified in the above letter. The revolver orders continued on the twenty-seventh: Sir, The Bureau desires you to forward as soon as possible to the New York Navy Yard, marked “Naval Ordnance,” (121) One hundred and Twenty one Revolvers without Ammunition. Also send to Fortress Monroe addressed to Lieut. Commdr. Dawson Phenix, U.S.N. and marked “Naval Ordnance”: (100) One Hundred Revolvers without Ammunition.34 Remington acknowledged these orders on the last day of the year: Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge receipt of yours of 27th inst., containing order for One hundred and twenty one (121) Revolvers to be forwarded to the New York Navy Yard, also, One Hundred, (100) to be forwarded to Lieut. Commander Dawson Phenix U.S.N., Fortress Monroe, Va. They shall be immediately shipt, as directed.35

THE YEAR OF 1863 On January 7, 1863, the bureau requested that Remington ship twenty thousand cartridges for the revolvers recently delivered to the New York yard. Five days later, the bureau sent an additional order for revolvers: Sir, In addition to previous orders the Bureau wishes you to send as soon as possible to the Navy Yard at Boston: 300 Beale [sic] Revolvers with percussion caps and 100 cartridges for each revolver. 147

CHAPTER SIX

In sending your bills in future, please quote the order under which you have made and forwarded the arms.36 This order was quite specific in ordering Beals revolvers, but by this time, Remington had disposed of their Beals models and were in the process of developing the New Models. Revolvers, manufactured in the early months of 1863, were going through the transition cited earlier. Surviving specimens of navy revolvers in the 20,000–22,000 serial number range show evidence of this transition with many specimens having both Elliot and New Model parts. Remington acknowledged the above order on the fifteenth and shipped the revolvers the next day. On January 23, the bureau forwarded another order: Sirs, The Bureau desires you to send with all dispatch to New York, to the care of Rear Admiral H. Paulding, and marked “Navy Ordnance,” (25) Twenty-five Navy Revolver pistols with (100) One hundred rounds of ammunition for each pistol.37 On February 2, Remington sent a letter of complaint to Dahlgren concerning delinquent payments by the navy agent in New York: Sir, We have received from your Department approved bills payable by the Navy Agent at New York, for Pistols and Ammunition delivered by us at the several dates, and of the respective amounts mentioned in the memorandum annexed. The bills have been sent forward to the Navy Agent in New York, but we have as yet received payment for the first one only ($1670.40). If you can in any manner expedite the payment of the others or a portion of them, we shall be greatly obliged as we need the funds very much at this time to meet urgent business demands. E. Remington & Sons Memo 1862 Sept. 19th $1670.40 Oct. 8th 702.80 Nov. 7th 2009.68 Nov. 10th 4473.14 Nov. 17th 874.60 Dec. 2nd 874.60 Dec. 22nd 106.00 Dec. 31st 1212.7038 This complaint was to be echoed many times during the course of the war; payments by the government were often as many as five months in arrears. 148

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

In early February, Dahlgren received the following telegram from Cairo, Illinois: United States Military Telegraph Received Feb. 3 1863 From Cairo Ill. To Capt. Jno Dahlgren Please send five hundred (500) boarding pistols with fifty thousand cartridges & one hundred thousand (100,000) caps & seven hundred (700) frogs Navy pattern, five hundred (500) cutlasses with belts and frogs, three hundred (300) Colt’s Revolvers with holsters & thirty thousand Cartridges. The worms, rammers, sponges, scrappers [sic] & ladles for thirty, nine inch guns are much wanted. J. P. Sanford Ord. Officer39 In this requisition is evidence that the navy was still using smoothbore single-shot percussion pistols that had been in service well before the war. On the day he received this requisition, Dahlgren forwarded the first of many complaints to Remington concerning defective revolvers: Sir, The Bureau encloses for your information copy of a letter from Commodore Missroon in relation to the 300 Revolvers recently delivered by you at Boston and requests that you will send seventeen perfect pistols to replace those reported as defective.40 On the fourth, Dahlgren satisfied Sanford’s request of the previous day by executing the bureau’s first combination order for revolvers. The first went to Remington: Sir, The Bureau wishes you to send with the utmost dispatch to Cairo, Ill, addressed to Lieut. Sanford U.S.N., Ordnance Officer, Mississippi Squadron, and marked “Navy Ordnance” 200 Revolvers with 120 rounds of Ammunition for each pistol.41 On the same day, the bureau ordered the remaining one hundred revolvers from Whitney, the first of such orders. Remington responded to the complaints from the Boston yard on the sixth: Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge receipt of yours of the 4th inst. containing order for 200 Revolvers and Ammunition, which will be immediately forwarded agreeable to the directions given. Referring to our letter of yesterday, we beg leave to say that we have this day forwarded to Commodore Missroon seventeen pistols to replace the like number reported defective. 149

CHAPTER SIX

It is proper that we should add, that the compound parts on all the pistols which we have furnished under orders received from the Bureau have been inspected in detail and the pistols have been proved with the Government proof charge. We will have additional care exercised in the inspection of the work hereafter, and trust there will not be any occasion for future complaints. The report of Commodore Missroon mentions that the charges, (referring we presume to the Cartridges furnished with the pistols) “ . . . seem too heavy,” we believe that they do not exceed the regulation charge. If considered by the Bureau, too heavy, we will have the charge reduced whenever so requested.42 The Washington Ordnance Yard tested two types of revolvers that month. The first were Whitney’s Navies on February 4. Whitney had forwarded six revolvers instead of the usual single specimen. Unfortunately, only one of these was referred to by its serial number, 17,751, which was the prime specimen tested. The report submitted by Lt. Cdr. J. S. Skerret was lengthy and very favorable. This report and the competitive twelve-dollar price no doubt influenced the bureau to also start ordering revolvers from Whitney. This gave the bureau a secondary source for revolvers. The trial report on the second revolver has not been located, but the following letter is fully explanatory: Bureau of Ordnance, Navy Department Washington City, Feb. 28, 1863 Mr. F. W. Walker New York Sir, A trial has been made at the Ordnance Yard here of the “Joslyn Army Pistol,” and the following is an extract from the report of the examining officers: “At the 6th shot the frame around the barrel was fractured, in consequence of which the trial was discontinued.” I am Very Respectfully, Your Obedient Servant J. A. Dahlgren, Chief of Bureau43 On February 23, the bureau once again sent a double order to Remington: Sir, In addition to previous orders the Bureau wishes you to send as soon as possible to Lieut. Comdr. W. N. Jeffers, Ord. Officer, Navy Yard Phila. 200 Revolvers with the usual amount of ammunition, and: 100 Revolvers with the usual amount of ammunition to New York addressed to Commander Nicholson, the Ordnance Officer at the Navy Yard there.44 Remington did not acknowledge this order until March 4: 150

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge receipt (on yesterday) of your letter of 23d ult., containing order for Revolvers and Ammunition which will be sent forward today, in accordance with the directions given. The pistols will be charged at the usual price ($12.), although the cost of manufacturing has been materially enhanced since we proposed to furnish them at that rate, in consequence of the great advance in price of stock and labor. We also have to pay 3 per ct. national tax on the arms, which we did not take into account at the time we made our proposition. We hope therefore that the Bureau may be willing under the existing circumstances to allow us to add ($1.00) one Dollar, to the price of the pistols, hereafter.45 Remington’s delay in acknowledging this order may have had some bearing on Dahlgren’s February 28 request to the Army Ordnance Department. Please note that two of the orders were to be delivered to the same navy yards as specified in the order to Remington on February 23: Sir, The Bureau has the honor to request that you will cause to be delivered, for the use of the Navy, 400 Army pistols, as follows. 200 to Lieut. J. P. Sanford at Cairo, Illinois. 100 to Commander Nicholson, Ordnance Officer, Navy Yard, New York and 100 to Lieut. Commander Jeffers, Ordnance Officer, Navy Yard, Philadelphia.46 The bureau had, on previous occasions, ordered army revolvers from the Army Ordnance Department. I have verified that at least one of these orders was filled with Colt Army Revolvers. It has also been established that the bureau had previously ordered army revolvers from Colt. These procurement practices by the bureau could have resulted in some unusual revolvers, that is, inspected by army inspectors when first delivered and reinspected by the navy after the war. I have had difficulty in establishing whether the army pistols ordered on February 28 were revolvers or single-shot pistols, as the term “pistol” was used frequently in correspondence when referring to revolvers. The bureau had not yet received Remington’s letter requesting an advance in the price for revolvers when they forwarded the next order on March 6: Sir, In addition to previous orders, the Bureau wishes you to send, as soon as possible to the New York Navy Yard: 100 Beale [sic] Revolvers with 20,000 Cartridges and Caps. Please mark the boxes with the letters “N.O.” and inform the Bureau when you forward them.47 On the following day, Dahlgren received Remington’s letter of the fourth requesting a price increase. Remington’s timing was very inopportune, as the bureau was now purchasing Whitney Navy Revolvers for twelve dollars. On March 7, Dahlgren sent this curt response: 151

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 80 Last variation Remington New Model Navy Revolver, serial number 33,775. (Author’s collection)

Sirs, Referring to your letter of the 4th Inst. The Bureau declines to allow the advance of $1. asked for in the price of the Pistols ordered from you.48 Remington delivered the order of the sixth at the original price of twelve dollars and on the twenty-eighth, having received no further orders, sent the following to the bureau: Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge receipt of approved triplicate bills for Revolvers, Cartridges &c, amounting to Two thousand nine hundred and seventy eight dollars and fourteen cents. ($2978.14) Any further orders that the Bureau may have occasion to send us, will receive our prompt attention and will be filled at the same price as heretofore; although the cost of manufacturing is now very much increased by the advance in price of material and labor.49 On April 9, the bureau received another request for revolvers from the ordnance officer at Cairo, Illinois: Office of U.S. Military Telegraph The following Telegram received at Washington, April 9th, 1863 The time the last light draught boat is finished. Can anything be supplied instead of boarding pistols? Have not more than enough revolvers to meet light issues to the new boats. J. Sanford, Ord. Officer Miss. Squadron50 152

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

In response to Sanford’s request, Wise forwarded the following order to Remington on that same day: Sir, In addition to previous orders the Bureau desires you to send to Cairo, Illinois, addressed to the Senior Naval Officer there; 100 Beale [sic] Revolvers with 120 cartridges for each Revolver. They are wanted immediately.51 Once again, the bureau specified Beals revolvers, but by this time, Remington was delivering New Models (figure 80). Remington acknowledged receipt of this order on the fifteenth and simultaneously shipped the revolvers. The bureau continued ordering revolvers from Remington on the twenty-third: Sirs, The Bureau wishes you to send to Commodore Dornin, Commanding, Naval Station, Baltimore. Twenty Revolvers, with 120 cartridges for each pistol. Please mark for “Young River.”52 An acknowledgment for this order has not been located, but Remington forwarded the invoice and receipts to the bureau on May 2. On May 1, Dahlgren ordered revolvers for another vessel: Sir, In addition to previous orders, the Bureau wishes you to send as soon as possible to the Ordnance Officer at the New York Yard, marked “Vermont,” 30 Revolvers and 120 cartridges and Percussion caps for each.53 Remington acknowledged receipt of this order and shipped the revolvers on the fifth. Three days later the bureau sent another order: Sir, The Bureau wishes you to send as soon as possible to St. Louis, Mo. for the “U.S. Gun Boat Ozark” 14 Revolvers.54 Remington shipped the revolvers on May 12: Received Saint Louis Mo. May 18th 1863 of E. Remington & Sons, Fourteen Navy Pistols for: U.S. Gun Boat “Ozark” as per their invoice of 12th May, 1863. 14 Remington Army Pistols $168.00. Albert Badger Clerk in charge of Ordnance55 153

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 81 U.S. Gunboat Kansas at anchor on the Mississippi. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

The contradiction in receipting both army and navy pistols was apparently an error by Badger. This delivery was entered in the bureau’s ledgers “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment” as “14 Navy Revolvers at $12., Del’d. at St. Louis” (figure 81).56 On June 5, Lt. Cdr. O. C. Badger, ordnance officer at Cairo, Illinois, requisitioned both revolvers and ammunition: Sir, The following ordnance articles are required at this station. 900 24 pound Howitzer Shrapnel 900 “ “ “ Shells 540 “ “ “ Canister 300 Revolvers calibre .36 150 Holsters for same 40,000 Revolver Cartridges cal. .3657 Wise ordered the revolvers and ammunition from Remington on the ninth: Sir, The Bureau desires you send with the utmost possible dispatch to Cairo, Illinois consigned to the Senior Naval Officer there, 300 Revolvers 154

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

40,000 Revolver Cartridges Telegraph the Bureau when they will leave.58 Remington acknowledged receipt of this order on the eleventh and advised Wise that the revolvers would be shipped the next day. This shipment was over two weeks in transit; the navy receipted for them at Cairo on July 1: Received Cairo, Ill. July 1, 1863, of E. Remington & Sons, Ilion, N.Y. The following Ordnance Articles as per Invoice, dated June 11, 1863 300 Navy Pistols & appendages $12.00 3600.00 40M “ “ Cartridges 16.00 640.00 4240.00 Edwd. M. Yard Commander in charge Ordnance59 On June 17, an ordnance officer at the Washington Navy Yard forwarded the following requisition to the bureau: U.S. Navy Yard, Washington June 17, 1863 To the Bureau of Ordnance Sir, There are required for the Ordnance Department, for general service: One hundred revolvers cal. .36. Memorandum: The 25 on hand have been required by Comdr. Parker so that we have only: 5 of Norths 13 of Savages and 18 of Joslyns on hand. Very Respectfully, W. Mitchell, L. Comdr.60 The revolvers were ordered from Remington, and they acknowledged the order and shipped the revolvers on the twentieth. Mitchell’s requisition is interesting, as it shows the revolver inventory at the Washington yard. I do not understand his distinction between North’s and Savage’s revolvers. Perhaps the Norths were single-shot boarding pistols remaining from the navy’s prewar inventory. On February 7, 1863, Dahlgren was promoted to rear admiral, and on June 24, he was assigned to command the North Atlantic Blockade Squadron (figure 82). On the following day, Wise, Dahlgren’s assistant, took command of the bureau (figure 83). He continued in this post until June 1868 when Dahlgren again assumed command of the bureau. Wise continued ordering revolvers from Remington. The following was dated July 22: 155

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 82 Admiral Dahlgren aboard his flagship, U.S.S. Pawnee. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

Figure 83 Capt. Henry A. Wise, chief of the Bureau of Ordnance. (Courtesy: Library of Congress) 156

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Sir, The Bureau desires you to send with all dispatch to the Navy Yard, New York, consigned to Rear Admiral H. Paulding, (200) Two hundred Navy Revolvers, with (100) one hundred ball cartridges to each, (20,000)61 Remington’s acknowledgment was not located; however, they forwarded the appropriate invoices to the bureau on August 1. On the third, Wise sent an urgent telegram to Remington: Telegram from Bureau of Ordnance Aug. 3, 1863 To Messrs. E. Remington & Sons Ilion, Herkimer Co. N.Y. How many Revolvers have you on hand? Please answer immediately! H. A. Wise, Chief of Bureau62 Wise simultaneously sent an identical telegram to Whitney, but his response has not been located. Remington replied, “Have eight hundred on hand today.”63 The following day, the bureau responded: Telegram from Bureau of Ordnance Aug. 4, 1863 To Messrs. Remington & Sons Ilion, Herkimer Co. New York The Bureau desires you to send immediately to the New York Navy Yard marked for Admiral Dahlgren’s Squadron, Five hundred (500) Revolvers, one hundred thousand (100,000) Revolver Cartridges, and one hundred ten thousand (110,000) Revolver Caps, packed separately from the Cartridges. Please acknowledge receipt of this telegram. H. A. Wise, Chief of Bureau64 On the evening of the same day, Remington telegraphed the bureau that they had received the order and that the revolvers would be shipped immediately. Wise notified Captain Drayton, assistant inspector of ordnance at the New York yard (figure 84), of the impending shipment and cautioned him, “See that the caps are separate from the cartridges.”65 On August 17, Wise advised Remington that Drayton had found the ammunition to be “too large. The demand for these pistols is most urgent and the Bureau is exceedingly embarrassed by this.”66 Remington expressed surprise at this, advising the bureau by telegram on August 9, “Don’t understand why cartridges for the 500 revolvers too large. They are the same as heretofore furnished your Department. Will inquire into it at once.”67 Remington requested Johnston & Dow to replace the defective cartridges and advised the bureau by telegraph on August 20, “the 157

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 84 Capt. Percival Drayton, inspector of ordnance. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

ammunition for the five hundred revolvers goes by steam to Charleston tomorrow.” The response to this telegram was not located, but the bureau evidently advised Remington not to have the cartridges sent to Charleston. Johnston & Dow were instructed to deliver them directly to the New York yard. Upon their receipt, Drayton immediately notified the bureau that the cartridges “are still too large.”68 Capt. R. Aulick, who was now assistant at the bureau, queried Drayton about the cartridges on August 26: Sir, Referring to your letter of the 21st instant, No. 482, you state that “Remington’s last cartridges (for Admiral Dahlgren) still too large.” The Bureau observes, however, by your invoice that they have been put aboard the “Mary Sanford” and therefore desires to know in what way these cartridges are too large. Mr. Remington had already been written to on the subject and has assured the Bureau that every care would be taken to have these cartridges correct.69 Drayton reported the details of the cartridge problem to the bureau, and Wise relayed the information to Remington on August 31: 158

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Sirs, Referring to the Bureau’s communication concerning the Revolver Cartridges for Port Royal being too large, the following extract from a letter from Captain Drayton, the Ordnance Officer at New York, who reported the second lot you sent him as being also too large, explained the difficulty.—“The Remington Cartridges which were sent to Rear Admiral Dahlgren and which I reported as still too large. These were made by Johnson [sic] & Dow, and will answer, although they would be better if made slightly smaller at the base, so as to center the chamber more easily. As I thought they might be needed, I took them as they were but should refuse any others until the mould is rectified.” The Bureau requests your attention to this important detail.70 On October 1, 1861, the U.S. Patent Office awarded Algernon K. Johnston of Middletown, Connecticut, and Lorenzo Dow of Topeka, Kansas, patent number 33,393 for an improvement in the design of combustible cartridges. In late 1861, Johnston & Dow established a manufactory and warehouse in Manhattan, New York City. One possible explanation for the sudden deterioration in the quality of their cartridges may be found in a news item in the New York Times, dated May 13, 1863, which I quote in part: TERRIBLE GUNPOWDER EXPLOSION A Magazine Blown-Up in the Upper Part of the City Great Loss of Property—Several Persons Perilously Injured Windows Destroyed the Distance of Six Miles from the Scene One of the most terrible gunpowder explosions which ever took place in this city, occurred at a late hour on Monday night, at the foot of Seventy-eighth street, East River. The report was heard in every part of the country for a distance of fifty miles. The damage to the property is very great, and the wonder is that no lives were lost by the catastrophe. The particulars of the occurrence are as follows: For about eighteen months past there has been a cartridge manufactory and a powder magazine located at the foot of Seventy-eighth street, East River. The proprietors, Messrs. Johnston & Dow, have had contracts with the United States Government for the manufacture and delivery of cartridges. During the last year and a half, they have had on an average 300 people in their employ. There were two buildings devoted to the business—one of them between Seventy-eighth and seventy-ninth streets, the other a short distance below at the foot of Seventy-eighth and East River.71 It is believed that Johnston & Dow, temporarily suffering the loss of their manufactory and armed with their government contracts and patents, authorized Elam O. Potter, also of New York, to manufacture their cartridges. This transfer of production, and consequent loss of quality control, is the likely explanation for the cartridges delivered with the Remington revolvers being judged inferior. 159

CHAPTER SIX

Later, the bureau forwarded a copy of Drayton’s revolver inspection report to Remington. In an endorsement on the report, Wise had apparently questioned Remington about the lack of safety notches on revolvers previously delivered to the bureau. Remington responded on September 16: Sir, In regard to your inquiries endorsed on Captain P. Drayton’s report, we beg leave to say, that in the Revolvers finished prior to (about) the first of March last, the safety notch referred to was omitted, (not deeming it of much importance ourselves), since that time the notch has been made on all the Arms furnished your department. Very Respectfully, Your Obedient Servants E. Remington & Sons Copy to Drayton sent Sept. 18.72 Safety notches were first milled on cylinders of the transition Elliot–New Model Revolvers with serial numbers in the early 20,000 range of the navy models. By the time the serial numbers had reached 22,000, most, if not all, of Remington’s revolvers were equipped with cylinders with safety notches. As can be seen by the letter above, the addition of safety notches was not Remington’s idea; they were added to satisfy the Army Ordnance Department, who had received complaints from the field about their absence. In a letter to Drayton at the New York yard on September 22, the bureau, in response to his request for revolver cartridges, provided a clue to the types of revolvers on hand at that yard: Sir, The Bureau has received your weekly report of the 19th inst. and has today ordered from the Ordnance Yard here. 13,200 Cartridges for Colt’s Navy Revolver, cal. .36. 11,400 Cartridges for Colt’s Navy Pistol. You are authorized by the Bureau, to require the Colt’s Army size, Remington’s, Savage’s and Starr’s cartridges directly from the manufacturers, there being none of these on hand at the Ordnance Yard.73 This letter leaves us somewhat confused as to the difference between the Colt Navy Revolver and the Colt Navy Pistol. An examination of the bureau’s “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment” reveals an entry for the delivery of four hundred Remington pistols with appendages and sixty thousand caps to Mound City on October 22, 1863. A search through correspondence for this period has failed to disclose this order or a response by Remington. An identical letter order by the bureau dated December 18 was omitted from these records; Remington acknowledged the order on December 22. The logical conclusion is that the bureau clerks made an entry error. However, a letter from Wise to Remington on February 18, 1864, seems to verify the October order: 160

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Sirs, The Bureau has today forwarded to Mr. C. Dimond, (as per your request) your approved triplicate bills payable by Navy Agent in this city, for 400 Revolvers & 60 M caps del’d at Mound City, on order of Oct. 18, ’63. & 500 Revolvers & 40 M caps delivered at New York on order of Nov. 21, ’63 amounting in the aggregate to Eleven thousand and twelve dollars and fifty cents ($11,012.50). The Bureau has deducted the Forty thousand (40,000) cartridges from the bill of revolvers sent to Mound City, and has returned the bill for the 500 revolvers del’d at New York, which will be paid as soon as receipts have been received from the different Navy Yards and stations, of the number of condemned cartridges returned to you, the cost of which will be deducted from the bill.74 In mid-October 1863, the commander of the Baltimore Naval Station requisitioned forty revolvers. Instead of placing an order with Remington or Whitney, Wise requested that the ordnance officer at the Philadelphia Navy Yard furnish the revolvers. Lt. Cdr. John G. Corbin, ordnance officer at the Philadelphia yard, sent the invoice to the bureau on October 28: Sir, Herewith is enclosed invoice for (40) Forty Remington Revolvers, equipments and ammunition, consigned to Comdr. T. A. Dornin, Commanding Naval Station, Baltimore, Md. in compliance with instructions of Oct. 19th, for the U.S.S. “Iriquois.”75 On the following day, the bureau sent another order to Remington: Sirs, The Bureau desires you to send to the Naval Academy, Newport R.I., 30 Revolvers and 3000 revolver Cartridges together with 30 screw-drivers and cone keys.76 Remington’s acknowledgment of this order has not been located; however, they did acknowledge receipt of the approved bills for these revolvers on November 16. On November 6, the bureau sent the following telegram to Remington: Telegram from Bureau of Ordnance, Navy Dept., Nov. 6, 1863 To Messrs. Remington & Sons, Ilion, Herkimer Co. New York If you have two hundred (200) revolvers ready please send them to the Ordnance Yard in this city. Answer immediately. H. A. Wise, Chief of Bureau77 Remington responded by telegraph on the same day, “Yes and will forward tomorrow.”78 Aulick sent the next order for revolvers on the twenty-first: 161

CHAPTER SIX

Sirs, The Bureau desires you to send to the New York Navy Yard, in addition to previous orders, Five hundred (500) Revolvers with the usual amount of Cartridges. Please acknowledge receipt of this order.79 Remington acknowledged this order on the twenty-fifth and advised the bureau that the revolvers had been shipped the same day. On November 27, Wise forwarded another order to Remington: Sirs, The Bureau desires you to send, in addition to previous orders, Two Hundred (200) Revolvers to the Philadelphia Navy Yard.80 Remington acknowledged receiving this order on the thirtieth: Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your Communication of 27th inst. containing order for two hundred (200) Revolvers, which we forward this afternoon, directed to Commandant of Navy Yard, Philadelphia. We send no ammunition with the pistols, as it is not mentioned in the order. If any are wanted in the present case, you will have the kindness to apprise us by telegraph and it will be immediately sent forward.81 On December 2, the bureau notified Remington to deliver twenty-five thousand cartridges to the Philadelphia yard. An ordnance inspector’s report on the five hundred revolvers delivered to the New York yard on the order of November 21 revealed more about the flaws found in the Remington revolvers and the continuing criticism of the Johnston & Dow cartridges: Ordnance Office, Navy Yard, New York Dec. 5th, 1863 Captain Percival Drayton Inspector of Ordnance, New York Sir, I have to report that I have tested five hundred (500) Remmington [sic] Revolving Pistols lately received. Four of these Pistols were found to be unreliable, in some instances failing to explode the cap and at other times exploding the cap with so little force that it failed to pierce and ignite the charge. The defect lies in the frame of the Pistol, or the shoulder on the hammer which does not permit it to strike sufficiently close to the nipple to explode the cap: or if so, without sufficient force. After filing away a small portion of the frame which came in contact with 162

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

the hammer, these Pistols were made perfectly reliable, and fit for issue. I think that in all the Remmington [sic] Pistols, the hammers should be made to approach nearer the nipple, to allow for any wearing away of the latter. The cartridges used in testing these pistols were of Johnson [sic] & Dows patent, the powder of which, was of a very inferior quality, very dirty, and after three or four rounds, filling up the grooves of the pistol with a hard sticky substance which could not be wiped out with the ordinary wiper, turpentine and a piece of brass wire had to be used to clean the grooves. In conclusion I would add that, these pistols had been fired previous to their being sent, and were received here by us in a very filthy condition, and would have been badly rusted had they not been attended to as soon as they were. Very Respectfully, Your Obedient Servant I. Young, Lieut. Commander Approved, P. Drayton Inspector of Ordnance Send copy of report to Remington and Captain Drayton to send some of the cartridges to Ord. Yard to be tested.82 This report was closely followed by another from the Washington Ordnance Yard on the eighth: Memorandum for Bureau Of the Two Hundred (200) Revolvers furnished this Yard, by E. Remington & Sons, on Bureau order of Nov. 6, 1863: One Hundred and ninety five (195) have passed inspection and five (5) are defective as follows: No. 23878—Catch of hammer broken No. 24045—Catch of hammer broken No. 24135—Plunger does not work well No. 24137—Front sight out No. 24332—Plunger bent and broken. Shall the five defective Revolvers be sent to Remington & Sons by express to be replaced? Their bill for the 200 is in this office and will be receipted and sent to the Bureau as soon as the whole number pass inspection. It would be well to order some spare parts for these Revolvers. William N. Jeffers, Inspector of Ordnance83 On the day of the above report, Aulick sent Remington a copy of the inspection report on revolvers delivered on the order of November 21 to the New York yard (figure 85): Sirs, The Bureau regrets the necessity of enclosing for your information a copy of a Report just received from the Ordnance Office at New York on the inspection and trial of 500 Revolvers recently delivered there by you. 163

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 85 Navy-Adams receipt. (Courtesy: National Archives)

Besides the defects in the arm itself, your attention is called to the condition in which they are said to have been delivered, and of the very inferior quality of the cartridges sent with them. These latter the Bureau will subject to an analysis and the result will form the subject of another communication. You will readily appreciate the embarrassment occasioned by imperfect arms, or inferior cartridges, especially when the attention of the Ordnance Officers is occupied with more important duties than inspecting these articles which should be delivered in perfect condition.84 On December 9, Aulick forwarded Jeffers’s report to Remington: Sirs, The Bureau encloses for your information an extract from a memorandum from the Ordnance Yard here, in reference to the inspection of 200 Revolvers sent from your manufactory on the Bureau’s order of Nov. 6th, 1863. Will you please direct five other Revolvers to be forwarded in place of these five defective ones, and also send an assortment of spare parts sufficient for the repair of the whole 200 now referred to? The defective Revolvers will be returned to you by express.85 Two days later, Aulick sent Remington another revolver order: Sirs, The Bureau desires you to send as soon as possible to the New York Navy Yard. 164

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Figure 86 Johnston & Dow cartridges. (Author’s collection)

500 Remington Revolvers 50 Hands for do 50 Stop springs for do The Bureau hopes that in filling this order, its recent letters enclosing memorandums, will be kept in view.86 The bureau’s growing concern with the quality of the Johnston & Dow cartridges prompted further tests of both cartridges and revolvers. The following report was made to the inspector of ordnance at the Washington Navy Yard on December 14: Lieut. Comdr. William N. Jeffers Sir, In obedience to your order, I took two of the Remington Revolvers, and from them I fired the old ammunition of Johnson [sic] & Dow in the packages marked No. 1, from the other the new ammunition in package marked No. 2. The first revolver No. 24312 was fired forty two (42) rounds at a target 20 yards distant. The target was made of yellow pine boards, each board being one inch thick, separated from each other by a space of one inch and one eighth, the whole thickness of the target being about twenty inches The penetration was about five (5) inches—the barrel of the revolver was then examined and was not found to be more than ordinarily foul. The second revolver was fired at the same target forty eight (48) times, with the new cartridges in the packages marked No. 2—the penetration was about 4 inches. The barrel was then examined and found in good condition or little better than the first. The charges are much too heavy, making an unpleasant report and recoil. From the condition of the barrels after firing, I think the powder as good as any now used. Winfield Scott Schley, Lieut. U.S.N.87 This report was not overly critical of the Johnston & Dow cartridges (figure 86), but further inspection and tests of both the cartridges and revolvers at the New York yard prompted less 165

CHAPTER SIX

favorable reports to the bureau. Two days later, Remington advised the bureau that they had received the inspection report from the Washington Ordnance Yard and forwarded five revolvers to replace those returned. On the following day, Remington acknowledged receipt of the bureau’s order of December 11 and informed the bureau that the revolvers and spare parts had been shipped that day. On the eighteenth, Wise forwarded another order: Sirs, The Bureau desires you to send to Mound City, Illinois, consigned to Commander Tobias Stanley, Inspector of Ordnance, Four Hundred (400) Remmington [sic] Revolvers, Forty thousand (40,000) Cartridges and Sixty thousand (60,000) Percussion caps.88 Remington acknowledged receipt of this order on December 22 and notified the bureau that the arms had been forwarded that day. Two days later, Cdr. Edward M. Yard, who was now ordnance officer at the New York yard, forwarded yet another report to the bureau: Sir, For the information of the Bureau, I respectfully enclose reports made to me of defects of a lot of Remington Revolvers at this Yard on the 7th inst. Another invoice was received on the 19th inst., which have not yet been examined.89 Wise advised Remington of this report on the twenty-eighth: Sirs, The Bureau encloses for your information copies of reports received from the New York Navy Yard, upon a more extended inspection of (500) five hundred Revolvers recently delivered by you. The Bureau regrets very much the necessity of thus again calling your attention to these defects especially as in a conversation with the Bureau you assured it that all those pistols that might be ordered for the Navy would be subjected to a rigid inspection at your works before delivery. It will be necessary for you to replace such of this lot as are defective with good and reliable arms, and the cost of repairs made at New York will be deducted from future bills.90

THE YEAR OF 1864 On January 2, 1864, Wise forwarded another adverse report on the Johnston & Dow cartridges to Remington: Sirs, The Bureau encloses for your information, copies of reports received from the Ordnance Officers at New York upon the Johnson [sic] & Dow cartridges, furnished with your Revolvers. 166

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

As a result of these reports, the Bureau has directed all the Johnson & Dow [sic] cartridges now in service, and particularly in New York, to be withdrawn, and returned to you, and, of course, the value thereof to be deducted from your bills.91 On the fourth, the bureau sent a memorandum to all navy yards and ordnance depots advising them of the decision to withdraw the Johnston & Dow cartridges from service. Ordnance officers were ordered to return all such cartridges to Remington. This was followed by orders to the ordnance officer at the Washington yard to “test the Remington Revolvers with the Colt’s cartridges.”92 On January 7, this officer advised the bureau, “Colt’s revolver cartridges of .36 caliber have been fired from Remington revolvers and fit it in every way.”93 A review of the army contract records for the Civil War period reveals that the Ordnance Department also purchased Johnston & Dow cartridges. In addition to several million of their cartridges for carbines and muskets, the department contracted for or purchased approximately 7.5 million cartridges for both army- and navy-size revolvers. Over ten million Johnston & Dow cartridges were delivered to the army in 1864 after the navy discontinued their use. On January 12, 1864, Remington responded to a more extensive report on their revolvers from the New York yard. I have not located the inspector’s report; however, Remington’s response and rebuttal covers some of the faults mentioned: Sir, In reply to your communication of 28th Dec. with accompanying report of the inspection of 500 Revolvers, recently delivered by order of the Bureau at the U.S. Navy Yard, New York, We beg leave to say that all the pistols furnished by us, either for the Navy or Army are thoroughly inspected in detail. They are then assembled and proved, they are stripped, thoroughly cleaned and then reassembled. We have furnished a large number of these arms (upwards of 50,000) to the Government and the trade during the past three years, and have had but comparatively little complaint made and that mainly from the Navy Yard at New York. We do not call to mind a single instance of complaint respecting the “Navy” pistols which we have furnished outside of the New York Yard whether to the Army, Navy, or to the trade, (the same in all respects as those recently furnished your Department). We are consequently at a loss to know how it is that so much fault is found at that particular point. On receipt of the order for the last 500 Revolvers, owing to the previous complaints we had them all re-inspected as to be sure they were in every respect, not only serviceable, but were clean and in perfect order before they left our Armory. In regard to the detailed report by Mr. Angell (gunsmith) we would remark in reply to his several complaints. With reference to the hammer striking upon the shoulder in the frame in place of the cone, and weakness of the mainspring—We would say that the frame and hammer are designed and constructed so that the hammer shall not strike dead upon the cone, unless a cap is on the cone, in which case it receives the full force of the hammer. In regard to the weakness of the mainspring, we would say they are all made to conform 167

CHAPTER SIX

to a standard gauge, and are subject to the required test. The springs are the same that were in the pistols when proved by us and found to be correct. The difficulty in this case, (as we believe it will be found in most if not all the other complaints), grows out of the want of a clear and full understanding of the arm. Had Mr. Angell after he proved and stripped the pistols (as he is said to have done), have returned the set screw to the point he found it on stripping the pistols, he would have found no difficulty from the spring not being stiff enough to explode the cap. With reference to the screw used in attaching the hand to the cock or hammer. It is barely possible that there might have been some grounds for complaint at this point, yet we have had no instance that has come to our knowledge before, of a deficiency there. The report further mentions the failure of many to ignite the cartridge caused partly by the vent in the base of the nipple or cone being too small &c. In reply we should say that the cones are made in accordance with a standard and are uniform as to the size of the vent &c. They are precisely the same as those we use in our Army pistols for the Government, and when the pistol is in order we believe no difficulty will appear. Misfire is frequently caused the first time using a pistol in consequence of the cylinder and cone being surcharged with oil. Caps should be first snapped upon all the cones to clear them before loading. The report also states that the casehardening of the hammer is too hard, notches break, cannot be filed &c. It is not intended that the hammer should be soft so as to be filed. Experience has shown that if any adjustment is required with the notches of the hammer, such adjustment should be made on the point of the sear or trigger and not on the hammer. It is possible that some of the notches may break in consequence of the hammer being too hard. (That is liable to take place in all arms to a greater or less extent). It is a fault, (if it can be called one) in the right direction. It is better that the hammer should be too hard, rather than too soft. As to the alleged inequality of the cones, some screwing in easy, and others hard, we can only say this, that the cone as well as the cylinder is made so far as we are aware to conform to a fixed and permanent standard and both are subjected to a close and careful inspection. It may be true however that some slight variation may occur at this point, although not sufficient we believe in any case to impair in the least the durability of the pistol. We are unable to perceive any reason for the additional complaint, with reference to a difficulty in getting the cock or hammer to its place, as we cannot see any difficulty in inserting the hammer in its place even by an inexperienced person, as there is only one way in which it can be done and that is exceedingly simple. We have not yet received the defective pistols from the New York Navy Yard. We will replace the same as soon as they are returned or before, if informed of the exact number to be received. Should you favor us with further orders we respectfully ask that we may be notified of the time when the pistols will be proved or inspected, so that we may be present and see for ourselves such defects as may be found as it is important for us to know if the several defects complained of, do really exist. 168

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

We certainly do not desire, on our part to make, much less to furnish the Government an inferior or imperfect article.94 The navy returned the defective revolvers to Remington, who provided the replacements to Commander Yard at New York. This officer then forwarded his report on the revolvers to the chief of the bureau on February 8: Sir, In answer to the Bureaus letter of the 6th instant. I have to state that the Thirty Two (32) rejected Pistols of Remington & Sons: Invoice of 500, delivered 7th, December 1863 have been replaced with a like number which have been inspected and received. Also Twentyeight of the Invoice of 19th Dec. 63, which were rejected, have been replaced with a like number of reliable arms and the rejected Pistols are this day returned. I have receipted to Messrs. Remington & Son for the full number (500) of each invoice. I am pleased to say, the replaced arms exhibit greater care in their finish.95 After receiving these many complaints about Remington revolvers, the bureau discontinued placing such orders with Remington for several months. I have located many pieces of correspondence for this period; the primary subjects were the rejected revolvers and cartridges and settlement of financial accounts for revolvers delivered in 1863. During the interim, the bureau satisfied their revolver needs by ordering from Whitney. In early March, the bureau sent a most unusual request to Remington, especially in light of the withdrawal of Johnston & Dow cartridges from naval service, and ordered twenty-six thousand cartridges for the New York yard. They were delivered on March 11, and on March 15, Wise sent the following letter to Remington: Sirs, Your letter of the 11th inst. enclosing a bill and receipt for 26 M Cartridges delivered at New York, has been received and: The Bureau herewith returns the bill and desires that you will quote across the face of the same the date of the order under which they were delivered. The receipt is also enclosed, having quoted across the face, the date of the Bureaus order of Nov. 21st, ’63, for 500 Revolvers and the usual amount of ammunition, which would be 50 M Cartridges or 100 Cartridges to each revolver. You will therefore please inform the Bureau why the 100 M as named in the receipt were delivered.96 Remington explained that the confusion had been caused by referring to a previous order in which one hundred thousand cartridges had been delivered with an order for five hundred revolvers. On April 22, the bureau notified Remington that the cartridges delivered to the New York yard had been found defective and would be returned. Remington responded on the twenty-seventh: 169

CHAPTER SIX

Sir, We have the honor of acknowledging the receipt of your letter of 22nd inst. enclosing approved triplicate bills for Arms, furnished the Bureau amounting to $2,357.40. We notice your remarks, relative to the cartridges, returned, and have to say that, Messrs. Johnston & Dow, would no doubt prefer to replace the defective cartridges with good ones, than to have them returned. Any future bills the Bureau may have in our favor, we wish passed over to Mr. C. R. Dimond, our attorney in your city, he having been duly authorized, to “receive and receipt for them.”97 In his reply on the twenty-ninth, Wise ignored Remington’s remarks in regard to replacing the cartridges: Sirs, Your letter of the 27th inst. has just been received: As Mr. Dimond has been repeatedly requested by the Bureau to produce his license for acting as an agent, as required by the Internal Revenue Office, and has refused to do so, your bills will be forwarded direct to you.98 On May 10, Wise resumed ordering revolvers from Remington: Sir, The Bureau desires you to furnish and deliver to the Ordnance Officer at the New York Navy Yard, subject to inspection and proof by him. Five hundred (500) Remington Revolvers, without cartridges.99 The following day, Wise sent the following inquiry to Remington: Sirs, The Bureau wishes to know if you have yet taken any steps to prepare the model singlebarreled pistol suggested during a personal interview at the Bureau some time since. Such a weapon is very much needed for Naval purposes.100 This was in reference to Joseph Rider’s “Split-Breech” cartridge pistol that Remington was in the process of developing but had not yet perfected. After Wise took command of the bureau in June 1863, he encouraged both Whitney and Remington to develop a single-shot breech-loading pistol for adoption by the navy. In his annual report to the secretary of the navy for 1863, Wise first expressed his views on this subject, from which I quote in part: SMALL ARMS The same difficulties were experienced in supplying the navy with small arms at the commencement of the war as with heavy guns; for it had been customary to rely 170

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

mainly upon the army for the limited number required in the ordinary operations of a time of peace. The navy was, consequently, obliged to make use of every available description of arm in it’s [sic] possession and to buy at once what could not be obtained from the army. Hence the present stock is made up of a number of different styles and calibres, partly breech-loaders, and the want of uniformity in this respect is felt to be very embarrassing. The subject is one which the Bureau considers of much importance, and will, at no distant day, make it a matter of special investigation. The proposition will be to adopt one calibre of musket and one of carbine—the former a muzzle-loader, the latter a breech-loader, for boat service; and this it is at present believed will be best obtained by using altogether the “Plymouth” pattern of musket. (Ten thousand of which are now being delivered by Mr. Whitney, of Connecticut,) and the Sharps and Hankins breech-loading carbine. As a belt weapon for boarding and similar operations there are also several varieties of revolvers furnished to our ships. These however are objectionable in the hands of seamen, and should be restricted to the officers. For the former a large bore, singlebarrel pistol is by far the most useful; and as the stock of such arms is entirely exhausted, the Bureau has in contemplation a single-barrel breech-loader, which, it is believed, will prove very effective, and, together with the new cutlass, of which there is an ample supply on hand, will be the most suitable weapons for our boarders. This pistol, together with the carbine of the same caliber, will have the metallic cartridge, which possesses in a great degree the advantages of safety, and certainly is the proper kind for breech-loading arms.101 Again, in his annual report for 1865, Wise repeated his views on the necessity of adopting a breech-loading pistol for naval service. His efforts eventually led to the bureau’s adoption of the Remington Rolling Block Pistol. On May 16, Remington responded to the order of May 10: Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication under date of 10th inst. containing order for 500 Revolvers. Having received no orders from the Bureau for some time past, we recently disposed of our stock of Navy pistols to the trade, and the tools and machinery heretofore employed upon this arm, having been mainly adjusted to the manufacture of Army size Revolvers, we are unable at present to turn out but a limited number of the Navy pistols and should require about 20 days to execute the Bureau’s order for 500. The cost of manufacturing having very largely advanced during the past year, we presume that in view of this fact, the Bureau will allow us the same price for the pistols that we are now receiving from the trade, viz.: $14.00 should the order be confirmed. If under the existing circumstances, it is desired that we should furnish the pistols, we shall proceed to do so, with as little delay as possible.102 171

CHAPTER SIX

Wise replied on the thirty-first: Sirs, Your letter of the 16th inst. has been received and: The Bureau in consideration of the increase in price proposed by you, must rescind its order of the 10th inst. for five hundred (500) Revolvers, as they can be obtained at the old price of Twelve dollars ($12.00) each.103 Once again, the bureau was relying on Whitney to satisfy the navy’s revolver needs. On May 30, Cdr. L. Stanley, ordnance officer at Mound City, forwarded his weekly requisition to the bureau: Sir, There is required for General Issue in this Department, 300 Revolvers, cal 36. 300 Swords and Scabbards. The kind of Revolvers is left to the discretion of the Bureau.104 A notation on this requisition indicated that the revolvers were to be sent from the New York yard. On June 2, Wise sent an order for revolvers to Whitney; the latter’s response indicated that they were in arrears in making such deliveries. The bureau, concerned that Whitney’s revolver production would not be sufficient, once again contacted Remington: Telegram from Bureau of Ordnance, Navy Dept. June 4, 1864 To Messrs. E. Remington & Sons Please say at what rate you will furnish this Bureau with five hundred (500) Revolvers and how soon? R. Aulick105 Remington reconsidered their decision of the sixteenth and sent the following telegram: Office U.S. Military Telegraph Ilion June 6, 1864. R. Aulick, Asst. Chf. Bu. Ord. Can furnish five hundred in fifteen days, three hundred if desired in ten days. Price Thirteen dollars. E. Remington & Sons106 The bureau responded two days later: To E. Remington & Sons, Ilion, Herkimer Co. N.Y. 172

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Telegram in relation to revolvers received. Bureau can only give twelve (12) dollars apiece for them. If you will accept this, answer by telegram and the order will be forwarded. R. Aulick June 8, 11 am Asst., Chief of Bureau107 That same day, Remington’s representative personally visited the bureau to discuss the revolver price. Once again, Remington relented and agreed to the twelve-dollar price: Washington, June 8th, 1864 Sir, We have the honor to propose that we will furnish your Department with 500 Navy Revolvers at $12. each. We desire on delivery of the same if at the New York Navy Yard the privilege of having one of our inspectors present on the inspection and proof of the same.108 Aulick sent the bureau’s order on the following day: Sirs, The Bureau accepts the proposition contained in your letter of June 8th to furnish 500 Remington Revolvers at $12. each. Be pleased therefore to deliver them at the New York Navy Yard as soon as practicable and the Bureau has directed the Ordnance Officer to permit an Inspector from your works to be present when they are examined and proved.109 On July 15, Aulick ordered two hundred revolvers and twenty thousand cartridges to be delivered to the Washington Ordnance Yard. Remington acknowledged their receipt of this order on July 20: Sir, We are in receipt of the Bureau’s order for 200 Remington Navy Revolvers with 100 cartridges for each. We have not the revolvers on hand, finished, but will complete and forward them soon as possible. In reference to cartridges, we would remark that we have had none manufactured for our pistol excepting the Johnston & Dow Cartridge and as those heretofore furnished your Department have failed to give satisfaction, it will not be convenient for us to supply the cartridges ordered. Owing to the greatly enhanced cost of material and labor at the present time, we shall be constrained to charge $15.00 each for our Navy Revolvers in the future, should the Bureau have occasion to send us further orders, unless in the meantime the cost of material and labor should recede from the present rates, which are nearly quite double the prices formerly paid for same. The present order of the Bureau will be executed at the old price ($12.00). Referring to your communication of the 11th instant, we would say that we hope to present our Navy Carbine for trial in course of next week. We would also state that we are 173

CHAPTER SIX

now engaged in preparing the model of our single barreled Navy Pistol for metallic cartridge, and as soon as completed, we shall take pleasure in presenting it to the Bureau for examination and trial.110 Upon receipt, the bureau telegraphed the ordnance officer at the Washington yard to inquire if cartridges were required with the two hundred revolvers. After receiving assurances that they were not, Aulick again contacted Remington on July 22: Sirs, Your letter of the 20th inst. has been received: and: The Bureau under the circumstances, as named therein, rescinds that portion of it’s [sic] order of the 15th inst., to deliver one hundred cartridges with each revolver, but desires you to deliver the Revolvers as soon as practicable.111 On the twenty-eighth, Aulick forwarded the following letter to Remington: Sirs, Enclosed herewith is a report of inspection (July 27th) of the 500 Revolvers sent by you to New York under the Bureau’s order of June 9th. The twenty seven (27) rejected Revolvers you will please replace with perfect ones.112 Aulick had enclosed the applicable inspection reports: July 27th, 1864 Commander Henry A. Wise U.S.N. Sir, Messrs. Remington & Sons have offered 500 Revolvers as per Bureau’s order dated 9th June. After proof and inspection, 473 of them have been passed as good; and 27 rejected, for various defects, viz: broken main, sear and hand springs; broken half cock notch; screws loose, (sear and hammer pivot) no thread having been cut into the frame, pawl screw working out against the frame jambs and prevents action, broken cone. The countersink in the lower part of the barrel not sufficient, the lead from the ball being forced out through the joint when fired stops the revolution of the cylinder. The above objections refer particularly to the 27 rejected pistols. There are other defects besides, which characterize the pistols of Remington’s construction. 1st—The hammer often strikes on the wall surrounding the cone, and not on the cap; owing to their irregular revolution. 2nd—The hammer in striking, or, when let down, is not designed to touch the cone, but to fall short of it, say, equal to the five hundredths of an inch; owing to this peculiarity, and, perhaps to some degree, to the want of force in the spring, the caps often fail to explode. 174

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

3rd—The ramrod catch, and sight piece, being attached to the barrel by screwing into the barrel, only a large 1/16 of an inch are observed to work loose. Nothing but cone wrenches and screw drivers accompany Remington’s pistols; no spare parts of any description. H. H. Bell, Inspector of Ordnance113 In their January 12 letter to Wise, Remington had noted that most of the criticism of their revolvers was originating at the New York yard and requested that a factory representative be present when the next lot of revolvers was inspected. Upon accepting the order of June 8 for the New York yard, Remington had again requested, “We desire on delivery of the same if at the New York Navy Yard, the privilege of having one of our inspectors present on the inspection and proof of the same.”114 In their response of the next day, the bureau authorized such a procedure. The correspondence regarding this lot of revolvers gives no clue as to whether a factory representative was present or not. Shortly after receiving the report from New York, the bureau received another, this one in reference to the two hundred revolvers delivered to the Washington yard on August 9: August 17th, 1864 Lieut. Comdr. William Jeffers Inspector of Ordnance Sir, I have fired for test eighty Remington Revolvers representing a lot of 200 received at the Ordnance Office. They were fired with success, except Nos. 28382 and 28305 which had one short nipple each, so short, as to prevent the hammer from exploding the cap. No. 28400 was defective in the rammer, it being set too much towards centre of the cylinder, as to prevent its entering the barrel, consequently this Pistol could not be fired. D. E. Stanton Respectfully forwarded to the Bureau of Ordnance Thomas Poynton Ives, Lieut. U.S.N. Asst. Inspector of Ordnance115 Under separate cover, Stanton reported an interesting incident that occurred during the test of these revolvers: August 15th, 1864 Lieut. Comdr. William N. Jeffers Inspector of Ordnance Sir, On the morning of the 13th day of August, according to instructions, I proceeded to fire for test, fifty Remington Revolvers, representing a lot of two hundred received at the Ordnance Office. 175

CHAPTER SIX

I selected my position in front of the experimental battery, and placed a wood target (of the usual dimensions) on the edge of the wharf, in line with the iron target, out in the river. To the right of the line of fire about 75 feet, was the U.S.S. Bebb, on the left, the U.S.S. Ascutney, a clear space of 200 feet being allowed for my purpose. On the left of the U.S.S. Ascutney, concealed from my view, (from where I fired,) was anchored the U.S.S. Teaser 200 feet from the U.S.S. Ascutney, and 200 yards from the iron target. Previous to my firing, the Marine guard, discharged their guns as usual, after which, the crew of the Teaser commenced their drill, as I judged from the commotion and firing of their pistols. I directed the two men from the Armory to do the firing, which was then commenced. Fifteen pistols were fired with care, the balls striking in line, and hitting the target, as I observed. The firing on the U.S.S. Teaser now ceased, and was soon afterwards followed by a Cry—stops that firing!! &c which I obeyed—A Masters Mate was found wounded in the back of the head by a portion of the spent ball said to have been fired by my men. These are the facts concerning this accident. Whether a lead ball 120 grs., might on striking an iron target about 200 yards distance, and glance to the rear at an angle of 65 degrees and 200 yards distance, with sufficient force to inflict a wound, I do not know. The man wounded, was not in sight, nor did he attempt to pass the line of fire. I discontinued the firing here, and removed to the former place near the gun-carriage shop where I completed the test. D. E. Stanton Respectfully forwarded to the Bureau of Ordnance Thomas Poynton Ives Lieut. U.S.N., Asst. Inspector of Ordnance116 Stanton mentioned only three revolvers in his report but returned four to Remington. Their replacements suffered some misadventure in transit, and the Washington Ordnance Yard did not acknowledge their receipt until October 28: Navy Ordnance Yard, Washington City Oct. 28th ’64 Memorandum for Bureau of Ordnance respecting Remington Revolvers. Of the four (4) Remington Revolvers receipted to the Bureau for today, three (3) of them, No. 28582, 28730 & 28713, were found slightly defective and were repaired here. I would recommend the manufacturers attention to be called to this defect, so that it may be remedied in the future: The ramrod strikes on the cylinder and will not enter all the holes (chambers) without force when the revolver is empty. When it is being loaded the bullet guides it in without much difficulty. William N. Jeffers, Inspector of Ordnance117 176

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Figure 87 Capt. William N. Jeffers aboard the U.S.S. Monitor. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

William N. Jeffers would later be appointed chief of ordnance (figure 87). The serial numbers mentioned in these two reports are most enlightening to the arms student. From the known serial number range of the navy revolvers delivered to the army in December 1862 (19,000–20,000) and the serial numbers of the revolvers delivered to the navy in August 1864 (numbers in the mid-28,000 range), we can deduce that there were approximately nine thousand navy revolvers manufactured during this period. The known bureau orders during this time frame total only 5,750 revolvers, and as the last deliveries of the navy revolvers to the army occurred in December 1862, we can logically assume that approximately 3,000 navy revolvers were sold to the commercial trade between December 1862 and August 1864. After receiving the revolvers ordered in June and July of 1864, the bureau ordered no additional revolvers from Remington until December. During this interim, in October, Remington submitted a breech-loading pistol (split-breech action) to the bureau for examination and testing (figure 88). This pistol received very favorable reports from ordnance inspectors, but neither the army nor navy submitted orders for the pistol. On December 10, the ordnance officer for the Mississippi River Squadron in Mound City ordered five hundred revolvers. On the fifteenth, Wise ordered 250 each from Whitney and Remington: 177

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 88 Prototype Remington Split-Breech Pistol submitted to the Bureau of Ordnance for testing. (Author’s photograph)

Sirs, The Bureau desires you to send to the New York Navy Yard, as soon as possible, for inspection and shipment to Mound City, Illinois. Two hundred & fifty (250) Remington Revolvers .36.118 It is interesting to note that this order was directed to the New York yard for inspection before being shipped to Mound City. I have not located the ordnance inspector’s report. The bureau delivered the invoices and inspector’s receipt to Remington in the last week of January 1865, so I assume that this lot of revolvers passed inspection without incident.

THE YEAR OF 1865 On January 10, 1865, Wise placed the final wartime order for Remington revolvers: Sirs, The Bureau desires you to send to the Ordnance Yard in this City, (200) Two hundred Revolvers subject to the usual inspection.119 178

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

On February 1, the bureau transmitted approved bills for the 250 revolvers delivered to the New York yard and notified Remington, “The Bureau was not aware that you had increased the price of the Revolvers to Fifteen dollars ($15) each, or the order would not have been given, as they can be purchased at a lower price.”120 Remington acknowledged receipt of this letter on February 5, writing, “On the 20th of July 1864, we advised the Bureau, that any future orders, that might be given us for pistols, would be executed at fifteen dollars ($15.) each, to which we respectfully call your attention.”121 Twice during the previous two years, Remington had requested a price increase, but the bureau had strenuously objected. In August 1864, when Whitney had made the same request, the bureau had granted the increase without objection but made no effort to notify Remington of the increase allowed to Whitney. On February 20, Wise notified Remington of the inspector’s report on the last lot of revolvers delivered to the Washington yard: Sir, The Bureau encloses for your information and future guidance in supplying Navy Revolvers the report of the inspection of two hundred pistols recently received at the Ordnance Yard from your establishment.122 This letter was accompanied by the ordnance officer’s report: Navy Ordnance Yard, Washington City February 10th, 1865 Lieut. Comdr. William N. Jeffers Inspector of Ordnance Sir, In obedience to your orders we have fired and inspected (200) Two hundred “Remmington” [sic] Revolvers, 12 rounds each, and have to report as follows: The mechanical construction of these pistols shows a general carelessness in workmanship. In many cases the stop spring of the cylinder was broken. The inspection results as follows. 98 defective 102 serviceable Very Respectfully, Your Obedient Servant D. E. Stanton Respectfully forwarded to the Bureau of Ordnance with the recommendation that the 98 defective revolvers be returned to Remmington [sic] & Sons, to be made serviceable and returned at their expense. Receipts for the 200 will be forwarded to the Bureau for payment as soon as they all pass. Very Respectfully William N. Jeffers, Inspector of Ordnance Approved: and send copy of this report, 21st Feb. 1865 H. A. Wise Chief of Bureau of Ordnance Copy sent to Remmington Feb. 21.123 179

CHAPTER SIX

Remington received their copy of this report and responded on February 28: Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your communication of the 21st inst. with accompanying report of the inspection of the 200 Remington Revolvers recently delivered at the Washington Navy Yard. These pistols we suppose to have been similar in all respects to those heretofore furnished your Department and the report of the inspection differing so greatly from any heretofore received, we are wholly unable to account for it. We shall feel obliged if you will have the 98 defective pistols returned to us by express, with a memorandum accompanying the same, from the Inspector, specifying the several defects for which the pistols were rejected, that we may be able in replacing them, to send such as will be approved.124 The bureau returned the defective revolvers; three months passed before the ordnance inspector executed his report on the ninety-eight replacement revolvers. I have not ascertained the reason for the protracted delay but assume that Remington was concentrating on filling the final quota on their Ordnance Department contract for army revolvers during March. The month of April was probably chaotic at the Ilion plant as decisions were made concerning the return to peacetime production: Washington D.C., May 18th 1865 Commander William N. Jeffers Inspector of Ordnance Sirs, I have carefully examined the (98) ninety eight Remington Revolvers sent to replace that number found defective in a lot of (200) two hundred received at this yard February 4th 1865, and I have to report (16) of the (98) ninety eight, as defective in the workmanship as the barrels are badly fitted in the part that screws into the frame, it being so loose that it can be screwed past the position in which the sight had been adjusted and is liable to be thus turned in firing, by turning back the barrel one or two turns they fit very loosely in the frame. Many of the cones are very defective—it will require (42) forty two cones to replace those found defective in the (75) seventy five [sic] pistols received. Wm. Burdett, Acting Master U.S.N. Respectfully forwarded and recommend that they be returned to the manufacturers. William N. Jeffers, Inspector of Ordnance in charge Copy sent to Remington May 20, 1865.125 Burdett’s figures are incomprehensible; nevertheless, sixteen revolvers were ordered returned to Remington for replacement. Remington replied on June 9: 180

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Sir, We forwarded to the Ordnance Officer at the Navy Yard in your City 16 Navy Pistols to replace a like number returned to us as defective, B.L. of which we have the honor of transmitting. As soon as the arms are approved we should be pleased to receive the usual vouchers.126 There was a notation at the bottom of this letter: “The 16 were fired and passed inspection.” The bureau sent the approved bills for payment on June 17, 1865, almost five months after receiving the original lot of revolvers. My count of defective revolvers returned to Remington by the navy is 230, less than 4 percent of the navy’s wartime purchases. When compared to the number of army revolvers rejected or not submitted to army ordnance inspectors for fear of condemnation, this percentage is quite low. During the Civil War, Remington manufactured approximately 149,000 army revolvers; of these, the Ordnance Department accepted only 116,000. At first glance it might appear that Remington was producing more than their share of inferior arms during the war, but a close examination of all the facts reveals that their situation was not unique. I have previously discussed Remington’s difficulties in acquiring raw materials and machinery and also their problems in retaining qualified mechanics. In spite of these difficulties, the armory expanded its prewar production from a few hundred arms a year and furnished the government, either by contract or purchase, nearly 135,000 revolvers and approximately 27,000 rifles and muskets from August 1861 through March 1865. The navy ordered a total of 6,360 navy models. One order for four hundred revolvers is suspect; the “letter order” has not yet been located, although the order is registered in the bureau’s “Record of Accounts Approved for Payment.”127 The majority, over five thousand, were New Models, but the absence of any serial number information on the early orders makes it impossible to determine how many of the Beals or Elliot models were delivered. I have found no evidence to suggest that the navy received any Remington Army Revolvers from Remington or the Army Ordnance Department. I have located requisitions from the Bureau of Ordnance to the Army Ordnance Department for army revolvers but in most instances was unable to identify the type of revolvers delivered. There are several payments registered in the bureau’s “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment” to the credit of Colt Patent F. A. Company for “Holster Cartridges,” which may be further evidence that the navy was using Colt Army Revolvers.128 The bureau also offered Colt Armies for auction during the sales of surplus arms in the 1870s. Due to wartime exigencies in the early months of the conflict, the navy suspended formal inspection of revolvers. There are numerous reports on the inspection and testing of Colt, Remington, and Whitney revolvers delivered to the navy, but few of these arms were marked by inspectors as they were in the prewar years. The only known exceptions were nine hundred Whitney Navy Revolvers delivered during Frank C. Warner’s tenure at the Whitneyville Armory while inspecting Plymouth Rifles for the navy. The occasional Remington revolvers encountered with authentic naval inspector’s marks are arms that were purchased during the war and marked during postwar inspection procedures to show that they were still serviceable. 181

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 89 Powder monkey on deck of the U.S.S. New Hampshire. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

The bureau’s “Ordnance Instructions for the United States Navy,” 1866 edition, gives the instructions for “Marking Small Arms” as follows: It is directed that hereafter, all small arms, when passed by the Inspector, be stamped in the following manner: MUSKETS, CARBINES, AND PISTOLS On the top of the barrel, near the breech, with an anchor and, on the lockplate, the letter P over the initials of the Inspector, thus: A.PR. REVOLVERS On the top of the barrel, near the cylinder, with an anchor; and, on the face of the cylinder, the letter P over the initials of the Inspector, as above.129 These ordnance instructions seem to have been ignored or variously interpreted at different navy yards. Many of the Remington, Whitney, and Colt revolvers, purchased by the bureau during the war, have only an anchor stamped on the barrel. A far lesser number have the inspector’s initials stamped on the front of the cylinder, and occasionally the initials are found on the side of the cylinder. 182

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Figure 90 Postwar inspection stamps found on Colt, Remington, and Whitney revolvers. (Author’s collection)

Specimens with any inspector’s marks seem to be quite rare, suggesting that many of the navy’s Civil War revolvers received no postwar inspection (figure 90). Very few of the navy’s Remington revolvers that were altered to cartridge in 1875–76 have any naval markings. A new cylinder was installed at the time of alteration, consequently, any inspector’s marks on the cylinder would have been lost. The following are the names and ranks of the inspectors and assistant inspectors of ordnance who examined or tested Remington and Whitney revolvers delivered to the various navy yards and stations during the Civil War: O. C. Badger, lieutenant commander Jos. M. Bradford, assistant quartermaster John G. Corbin, commander Percival Drayton, captain Thomas P. Ives, lieutenant Jno H. Krisell, lieutenant commander

H. H. Bell, commodore William M. Burdett, acting master James B. Davis A. K. Hengless, commander William N. Jeffers, lieutenant commander J. S. Missroon, commodore 183

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 91 Inspector of ordnance, Capt. John Goldsborough, U.S. Navy. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

W. Mitchell, lieutenant commander A. B. Norton F. A. Parker, lieutenant commander J. H. Russell, lieutenant commander Winfield S. Schley, lieutenant Tobias Stanley, commander Edward M. Yard, commander

J. Nicholson, commander D. Phoenix, lieutenant commander W. W. Queen, lieutenant commander J. P. Sanford, lieutenant Joseph S. Skerrett, lieutenant commander D. E. Stanton J. Young, lieutenant commander

All of these inspectors have been identified from reports and letters submitted to the chief of the bureau. On those revolvers that were reinspected after the Civil War, four different inspectors’ stamps have been noted. The initials of John R. Goldsborough (figure 91), Guert Gansevoort, and Henry K. Hoff have been identified, but the fourth mark, “GMC,” has not. It is possible that there are others that have escaped my attention. I have also seen Colts and Whitneys with these same inspectors’ stamps. Surviving specimens bearing any of these marks seem to be rare. 184

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

Figure 92 Postwar inspected Remington New Model Navy Revolver, serial number 31,039. (Author’s collection)

Remington Navy Revolver serial number 31,039 has only the ordnance anchor stamp on the barrel (figure 92). The highest serial number I have recorded is 31,599, and it also has only the anchor stamp. These numbers may seem to be too high to have been included in Remington’s wartime deliveries to the navy, especially since we are aware of revolvers in the 28,000 serial number range delivered in August 1864, with the final revolver order occurring in January 1865. However, it must not be forgotten that the final replacement of the revolvers, rejected in February, did not occur until June 1865. Although Remington discontinued the manufacture of army revolvers at the end of the war, they continued to produce navy models for the commercial market. Since Remington’s percussion revolver production and sales records have either been lost or destroyed, one of my goals has been to reconstruct them when possible. I think that my investigation will now permit this for the navy models, from their introduction in 1861 to the final deliveries to the navy in May 1865. In a previous chapter I detailed Remington’s sales of navy model revolvers to the army’s Ordnance Department and commercial arms dealers; that study ended with the final deliveries of Elliot Navy Revolvers to the department in December 1862. To continue the study, we must return to the first contract deliveries to the army; the starting point here is serial number 13,484, which is the lowest martially marked Remington Beals Navy that I have encountered. The high point is serial number 31,599. By subtracting the low (13,484) from the high (31,599) and further subtracting the known navy revolver deliveries to the army (5,001) and navy (6,360), we can deduce that approximately 6,700 navy revolvers were furnished to the commercial market between June 1862 and June 1865. The Remington percussion revolvers were to remain a part of the navy’s small arms arsenal until 1875, but the navy did not issue revolvers to seamen for many years after taking delivery of the single-shot Remington Rolling Block Pistols (figure 93). In May 1869, the chief of the bureau responded to an inquiry from the ordnance inspector at the New York yard: 185

CHAPTER SIX

Figure 93 A navy artist’s sketch of an early example of a Remington Rolling Block Pistol submitted to the Bureau of Ordnance for testing. (Courtesy: National Archives)

Bureau of Ordnance, Navy Department Washington City, May 13, 1869 Rear Admiral S. W. Godon Commandant, New York Admiral: The letter of the Inspector of Ordnance of the 12th instant, No. 105, in relation to revolvers for Officers has been received. The new Navy breechloading pistol is intended to replace all other pistols in the hands of seamen. But the Bureau has no objection to supplying revolvers to the Officers upon a requisition from the Commanders of ships, approved by the Commandant. I am Sir, J. A. Dahlgren R. Admiral & Chief of Bureau130 The following November, the previous order was repeated in a circular to all the navy yards and stations by Dahlgren’s successor at the bureau, A. Ludlow Case: Nov. 23rd, 1869 “CIRCULAR” Commodore J. A. Winslow Commandant, Navy Yard, Portsmouth, N.H. Sir: The new Navy breech-loading Pistols will in the future be issued to the service, in lieu of all other pistols, for the crews of ships and revolvers will only be issued for the use of the Officers. 186

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

I am Sir, Your Obedient Servant A. Ludlow Case, Chief of Bureau131 This policy remained in effect until after Capt. Montgomery Sicard assumed command of the bureau in 1881. The bureau continued to order parts for Remington revolvers for several years. Such an order in 1872 gives a clue to the type of revolvers on hand at the Mare Island Naval Station: Office of Remingtons Armory Ilion, N.Y. 12th Mch. 1872 Bureau of Ordnance Navy Yard, Washington D.C. Gentlemen, In your order for spare parts dated 8th March, first item we read as “screws for keys,” Remington Navy Revolvers. We do not understand just what you want as we have no screw which we know as above. Please explain. Yours Truly, E. Remington & Sons132 This inquiry was referred to the ordnance officer, New York yard. He endorsed the inquiry as follows: New York Navy Yard, Ordnance Office March 15th, 1872 The within mentioned screws were required from Mare Island, and the original requisition (5) reads thus: “20 screws for the key of Remington Revolvers.” It is supposed at this office that the screw wanted is that in the inner groove of the rammer, confining the “base pin” in place when the piece is fired. Monty Sicard Comdr. & Asst. Insp. of Ord.133 The bureau chief was evidently not completely satisfied with this explanation and referred the inquiry back to Mare Island. Eventually, Mare Island responded to the bureau, and the latter to Remington: Bureau of Ordnance, Navy Department Washington City, 5th April, 1872 Messrs. E. Remington & Sons Ilion, N.Y. Sirs, 187

CHAPTER SIX

In reply to your letter of the 12th March, would state that the “screw for keys,” is in the inner groove of the rammer which confines the base pin in place. I am Sirs, Your Obedient Servant A. Ludlow Case, Chief of Bureau134 The revolvers referred to were either Elliot models or Elliot–New Model transition revolvers with the Elliot patent loading lever and arbor pin. Before concluding this chapter, a brief word about the appendages furnished with Remington Navy Revolvers seems appropriate. In early Remington correspondence, I noted that a bullet mold, a combination screwdriver–nipple wrench, and spare parts were furnished with each revolver (see letters in this chapter, Remington to Bureau of Ordnance, August 23 and September 19, 1862). Late in the war, a naval ordnance officer complained about the lack of accoutrements and spare parts being delivered with the revolvers (see inspector’s report in this chapter, July 27, 1864). These facts seem to suggest that Remington ceased furnishing molds to the navy in mid-1863, at the same time that they stopped such deliveries to the army. Bullet molds for the martial Remington revolvers are quite scarce and are recognized by the subinspector’s initial stamped on the right handle of the mold. I have yet to determine if Remington manufactured molds or relied on a subcontractor for these appendages. The bureau of ordnance orders for, and Remington’s deliveries of, navy revolvers are recorded as follows:

188

Remington Navy Revolvers Delivered to the Bureau of Ordnance, U.S. Navy, 1862–65 SHIPPED

DELIVERED TO

TOTAL

PRICE ($/revolver)

09/15/62

09/09/62

NAVY YARD, PORTSMOUTH, NH

120

12.00

10/04/62

10/08/62

FORTRESS MONROE, VA

50

12.00

11/04/62

11/07/62

FORTRESS MONROE, VA

100

12.00

11/06/62

11/10/62

ADM. D. D. PORTER, CAIRO, IL

200

12.00

11/12/62

11/15/62

NAVY YARD, BOSTON, MA, FOR MARE ISLAND, CA

50

12.00

11/29/62

12/02/62

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK, FOR PENSACOLA, FL

50

12.00

12/27/62

12/31/62

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK

121

12.00

12/27/62

12/31/62

FORTRESS MONROE, VA

100

12.00

01/12/63

01/16/63

NAVY YARD, BOSTON, MA

300

12.00

01/23/63

01/26/63

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK

25

12.00

02/04/63

02/07/63

CAIRO, IL, “MISSISSIPPI SQUADRON”

200

12.00

02/23/63

03/04/63

NAVY YARD, PHILADELPHIA, PA

200

12.00

02/23/63

03/04/63

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK

100

12.00

03/06/63

03/09/63

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK

100

12.00

04/10/63

04/14/63

CAIRO, IL, “MISSISSIPPI SQUADRON”

100

12.00

04/23/63

04/27/63

N.S. BALTIMORE, MD, FOR YOUNG RIVER

20

12.00

05/01/63

05/05/63

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK, FOR VERMONT

30

12.00

05/08/63

05/12/63

ST. LOUIS, MO, FOR GUNBOAT OZARK

14

12.00

06/09/63

06/12/63

CAIRO, IL, “MISSISSIPPI SQUADRON”

300

12.00

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS PURCHASED BY THE U.S. NAVY

189

ORDERED

SHIPPED

DELIVERED TO

TOTAL

PRICE ($/revolver)

06/18/63

06/20/63

NAVY YARD, WASHINGTON CITY

100

12.00

07/22/63

07/24/63

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK

200

12.00

08/04/63

08/06/63

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK, ADMIRAL DAHLGREN

500

12.00

10/18/63a

Unknown

MOUND CITY, IL, “MISSISSIPPI SQUADRON”

400

12.00

10/29/63

11/02/63

NAVAL ACADEMY, NEWPORT, RI

30

12.00

11/06/63

11/07/63

NAVY YARD, WASHINGTON CITY

200

12.00

11/21/63

11/25/63

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK

500

12.00

11/27/63

11/30/63

NAVY YARD, PHILADELPHIA, PA

200

12.00

12/11/63

12/17/63

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK

500

12.00

12/18/63b

12/22/63

MOUND CITY, IL, “MISSISSIPPI SQUADRON”

400

12.00

06/09/64

06/30/64

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK

500

12.00

07/15/64

08/09/64

NAVY YARD, WASHINGTON CITY

200

12.00

12/15/64

01/06/65

NAVY YARD, NEW YORK, FOR MOUND CITY, IL

250

15.00

01/10/65

01/20/65

NAVY YARD, WASHINGTON CITY

200

15.00

TOTAL

6,360

Order of 10/18/1863 is in bureau’s “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment” but not confirmed by “letter order.” bOrder of 12/18/1863 is confirmed by “letter order” but not in “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment.”

a

CHAPTER SIX

190

ORDERED

CHAPTER SEVEN

Remington’s Civil War Rifle and Carbine Contracts he primary focus of this volume is devoted to a study of Remington’s Army and Navy Revolvers. A complete understanding of the activities at Remington’s armories during the Civil War cannot be grasped without examining their contracts and deliveries of rifles, muskets, and carbines to the Ordnance Department. This brief chapter will cover those events.

T

HARPERS FERRY RIFLES In July 1861, a Remington representative traveled to Washington for a personal interview with the chief of ordnance, Brig. Gen. James W. Ripley. His goal was to secure orders for small arms; he accomplished this by obtaining an order for five thousand army revolvers on July 29, which he accepted that day. The following day, Ripley tendered the company an order for Harpers Ferry Rifles: Gentlemen, You will please make for this department, and deliver with all possible dispatch, ten thousand rifles with sword bayonets, and appendages complete. These rifles are to be .58 inch calibre, and to have a three leaf rear sight, and a cupped ramrod, with sword bayonet stud similar to those of the Harpers Ferry rifle model of 1855, in other respects of the pattern of the rifles without bayonets heretofore made by you for this department. Please send a sample rifle to this office as soon as possible for examination, and to serve as a guide in the inspection of the 10,000 to be delivered by you. These rifles are to be subject to the regular inspection, and to be paid for on certificates of inspection and receipt, at twenty dollars each, appendages and sword bayonets included. Please signify your acceptance or non-acceptance of this order, and in case of acceptance lose no time in preparing and delivering the arms.1 Ripley made reference to the type of rifle “heretofore made by you for this department.” These were the Harpers Ferry pattern Model 1841 Rifles, now more commonly known as “Mississippi Rifles” (figure 94). 191

CHAPTER SEVEN

Figure 94 Model 1841 Mississippi Rifle. (Courtesy: Greg Martin Auctions)

On August 6, Remington responded: Sir: We have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of 30th ultimo, and to say that we accept the order contained therein for ten thousand rifles, model of 1855, with sword bayonets and appendages complete.2 Although Remington had navy revolvers in limited production and also had facilities for making barrels, they had not produced any complete contract rifles for several years. Their previous contracts for long arms had been filled at a leisurely peacetime pace; the urgent demands of wartime deliveries required new buildings, machinery, and qualified mechanics. There is evidence that Remington started expanding their facilities in Ilion early on, but they had made no deliveries on this order before the Owen-Holt Commission began investigating arms contracts and orders in March 1862. This order was sustained by the commission, although the price was reduced from twenty to seventeen dollars, and a contract replaced the original order. After Remington had received assurances of contracts for arms from the commission, they made proposals for furnishing these arms to the department on May 12. On May 19, after reflection, they expressed further thoughts on the subject to Ripley: Sir, In view of the acceptance of our proposition of the 12th inst. for the manufactory of small arms for the U.S. Government—we would respectfully call your attention to the following remarks: In our proposition we proposed to manufacture either the “Harpers Ferry” Rifle or the Springfield Rifled Musket, or both. It would doubtless be for our interest to confine ourselves to one arm, and that the “Harpers Ferry” as we are more engaged upon that and desire to do so in case it is to be hereafter considered a standard arm—But in view of it being supplanted or abandoned—We would prefer to take the “Springfield Arm.” We are unsure in taking this in connection with the Harpers Ferry which we are sure upon an additional outlay of capital would be required for tools etc. We would prefer however not to incur this additional expense unless a large number of the latter arms could be assured us rather than continue on an arm soon to be abandoned. We would therefore request in consideration of the limited number of the Harpers Ferry Rifle and 192

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

the large expense incurred in preparing for the manufacturing of the same and the further considerations of the reduction we make under our proposition on arms, that it may be found consistent with the interest of the service, in addition to such numbers of the Springfield Rifled Musket as may be awarded us, to increase that of the Harpers Ferry to fifteen or twenty thousand.3 The commission sent the following report to Secretary of War Stanton on May 26: Sir: The commission have examined in part the proposals for furnishing small arms, and respectfully recommend that they be returned to the chief of ordnance, to be carried out by that department in conformity with the law and the regulations. The commission have already expressed their recommendation in favor of executing the contract for 40,000 Springfield muskets with Messrs. Remington & Son, of Ilion, New York, at $16. each, and with the same firm for 20,000 revolvers, at $12. each, and have also confirmed to this firm, in accordance with their proposition to the commission, (based upon the award to them of the above named numbers and arms at the prices named,) the orders previously given for 10,000 Harper’s Ferry rifles, at $17. each, and 5,000 army revolvers, at $12. each, being a reduction of $3. each upon each rifle and pistol from the price named in the original orders. They hope that these contracts will be at once ordered to be executed by the Secretary of War, as they look upon it as highly important to thus establish the above reasonable prices as a standard for future guidance. The commission have also recommended the award of 10,000 Springfield muskets, at $17., to J. D. Pitts, of Trenton, New Jersey, as the quantity, time of deliver, and price, combined, make it an advantageous proposal for the government. They also recommend the award to the Colt’s Arms Manufacturing Company of 15,000 army revolvers, at $14.50, (as the chief of ordnance reports the immediate need of revolvers,) promised earlier by these parties than by others, and as the price to be paid shows a reduction of $10.50 upon that heretofore paid this company for like arms. The commission would also add now to their former recommendation to meet the immediate wants of the ordnance department the acceptance of the proposal, made under the recent advertisement, by Eli Whitney & Co., of New Haven, to furnish 6,000 navy revolvers, at the price of $10., a reduction upon his proposed price which he now offers to accept. Although the commission consider that they should not make any further recommendation as to the numbers or kinds of revolvers or small arms to be now contracted for, it is proper that they should state that their investigations have shown satisfactorily that the prices paid heretofore for such arms have been unnecessarily high, as well for securing suitable and effective arms for troops as for a fair remuneration to the manufacturer. No one pattern of patent arms has been proved the best, and, as many of them are, as far as known, equally effective, the simplest and cheapest of such arms are the best for the service. The government can establish the grade of work and price when selecting the pattern, and judge very accurately of the true cost to be incurred and the proper price to 193

CHAPTER SEVEN

be paid for it. Excessive charges for special patents, and the erection of large factories to make experimental arms ought to be discouraged, and the purchase of more than a moderate number, say 1,000 at most, ought not to be made until after satisfactory trial by troops in the field. The commission respectfully urge, therefore, increased restrictions upon the multiplication of patterns of arms for use in the service: 1. That the sample arm shall be tried, by competent officers, in comparison with the best in use; that it shall be proved superior in essential qualities, or in probable cheapness of manufacture, to such. 2. That after a sample has been approved, as above, 1,000 be ordered for trial by troops, and that no larger numbers be ordered until satisfactory trial has been made by them. 3. That general orders be given requiring all captains of companies to report quarterly to the chief of ordnance the kind of arms in use by his company; his opinion of the suitableness of the arm and the general extent of service, and the number requiring repairs since last report. Such reports, if regularly and carefully made, would best check the purchase of unsuitable arms, and soonest show the best and strongest for service. J. Holt, Commissioner4 The commission’s decisions remained intact, and Remington accepted the contracts as proposed. After the department began receiving reports from ordnance inspectors assigned to accept Springfield pattern muskets from private contractors, Ripley became aware of the difficulties these contractors were having in supplying the same quality arms as those turned out at government armories. On August 8, Ripley conveyed his views on this subject to Stanton: Sir: In the cases of the contractors for furnishing rifle muskets of the Springfield pattern, it is found impossible, as I always supposed it would turn out to be, to hold the Contractors to the literal, strict fulfillment of all the conditions of their contracts. But under the present necessities for arms, and as the contractors have incurred large expenses for their preparation for their manufacture, I am disposed to be liberal to them, in not exacting so tight and close an inspection, as is required at the U. States Armory, and would be everywhere under other circumstances. I do not think that the present urgent need of arms will justify the usual minute and detailed inspection and gauging of every part, and the rejection for blemishes not impairing any serviceable quality. The main point and one to be desired is to secure arms of the prescribed calibre, of good strong barrel, stocks and locks, and in all respects serviceable, as military weapons. If it be found, on inspection, that the arms come up to full standard required by the contract, then the full price is to be paid; such as do not come up fully to that standard, but may be received as serviceable arms, to be classified according to their value. I propose to leave the matter of inspection, reception and classification, as before stated, to the judgement of the Inspector for decision in each case. 194

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

Figure 95 Harpers Ferry Rifle. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

If the foregoing meets with your approval, I propose to furnish a copy of it to the Inspector for his information and government.5 Stanton approved Ripley’s suggestion, and this practice was adhered to throughout the Civil War. Remington’s Harpers Ferry Rifles and Springfield pattern muskets were divided into classes, with the purchase price dependant upon the respective classification. The contract for ten thousand Harpers Ferry Rifles was not signed by Ripley until August 11, 1862. Remington made the first delivery of these arms on April 18, 1863, twenty-one months after the original order of July 30, 1861, and eight months after the contract had been signed. The company delivered approximately eleven hundred rifles per month between April and December of 1863. The majority of each month’s deliveries were accepted as “first class” and brought $17.00 per rifle, but to fill each lot of one thousand, the inspectors accepted some “second-class” rifles for which Remington received $16.90. The department granted Remington two extensions on this contract. The company had delivered seventy-five hundred rifles before December 1, 1863, the expiration date, when they sought a third extension. The department denied this, issuing instead a second contract for the deficit rifles. On December 9, Ramsey sent the following telegram to Hagner: The Secretary of War directs in the case of the Remington H.F. Rifle that a new contract be made for those arms to be fulfilled in five (5) weeks from end of original contract, the inspection to be continued in the same time, but no more arms to be received under the contract just expired.6 The parties signed the new contract on December 13, and Remington made the final deliveries of the ten thousand rifles on January 8, 1864. I have noted some confusion concerning the total number of rifles delivered. Several researchers have erred in concluding that all ten thousand rifles were delivered on the original contract and that the new contract for twenty-five hundred rifles was in addition to the ten thousand. Careful research has shown that this was not the case. Remington’s Harpers Ferry Rifles are unique and do not conform to any known Harpers Ferry or other government pattern rifle (figure 95). Flayderman’s Guide to Antique American Firearms describes them as “Remington 1863 Percussion Contract Rifles, a.k.a., Zouave Rifles.”7 195

CHAPTER SEVEN

He notes that the origin of the Zouave name has not been determined. Flayderman also made the common error of quoting a total production of 12,501 rifles. Individual deliveries under the two contracts are presented at the end of this chapter.

SPRINGFIELD PATTERN MUSKETS The department and Remington signed the original contract for Springfield pattern arms on August 20, 1862, but the company defaulted. The combined production of revolvers, rifles, and, quite possibly, barrels for other arms contractors was taxing the Remington armories to their limit. In December 1863, as Remington was nearing the end of their contract for the Harpers Ferry Rifles, they sought another contract for Springfield muskets. Inflation had already made them aware that they would not be able to produce the arms at the original contract price of sixteen dollars per arm. When they solicited the new contract, they requested eighteen dollars each. The War Department accepted these terms, and the parties signed a one-year contract for forty thousand Springfield muskets on December 14, 1863. Among their other difficulties, Remington’s raw material suppliers were furnishing the company with inferior iron; during inspection, this led to a large number of barrel rejections. Remington advised the department of these problems, to which Ramsey responded on March 12, 1864: Gentlemen, I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 11th inst. and to request that you will please send by express to Major A. B. Dyer, Commdt., Springfield Armory, two barrels such as have been passed by the Inspectors, two of the best of those rejected, two of the worst of those rejected, all to be made of the proper Herrit iron. Major D. will be requested to report on these barrels and the result of which you will be advised.8 Dyer sent the report to Ramsey on April 1: Sir: The six gun barrels referred to in your letter of the 12th inst. have been received from E. Remington & Sons, and in compliance with your instructions I have had them carefully inspected and compared with similar grades made at their Armory of Cooper & Herrits iron. Of the first lot, which has passed inspection at Messrs. Remington & Sons, one barrel passed the Armory inspection as first class and the other as second class, being somewhat slaggy. Both barrels of the second lot, which had been set apart at Remington’s for Col. Thornton’s examination are slaggy, but they would have passed here as second class barrels, and put into the muskets. The third lot, which would have been condemned by the Sub inspectors at Remington’s, would have been condemned here. The interior of all the barrels appeared to be good. 196

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

Figure 96 Springfield pattern musket. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

The material only was inspected. It may be proper for me to state here that in consequence of the deterioration in the quality of the Trenton gun barrel iron, I some time since directed Messrs. Cooper & Herrit & Co. to suspend their deliveries, and during the last month I have received only a few samples from them for experimental purposes. They are confidant of being able to reproduce gun barrel iron of the best quality, and the last sample received from them shows marked improvement. I had the dirtiest of the two barrels which had been condemned at Remington’s proved to extremity. It endured five rounds of 280 grs. of powder and 2 balls weighing 500 grains each, it burst at the ninth round of the second series, and no fragments were thrown off. The fractures were not through the slaggy parts of the barrel.9 Remington was not yet delivering Springfield muskets (figure 96); I suspect that the barrels tested were being prepared for these arms. Remington began deliveries of muskets in May and provided one thousand per month through October, when they increased production to two thousand per month. In December 1864, Remington sought an extension of the Springfield musket contract, as they had furnished only nine thousand. The War Department granted them a one-year extension, but Remington would request further extensions before the contract was finally completed in March 1866. When the Civil War ended in April 1865, Remington had delivered only seventeen thousand Springfield muskets. Although the Ordnance Department had little need for additional arms, they honored their agreement with Remington to extend their delivery time and continued to accept all that were offered. Remington was more fortunate than some contractors, many of whom had their contracts canceled after they fell behind in specified deliveries. In late October 1865, Remington again approached Dyer, requesting extensions on both their musket and carbine contracts. On November 2, Dyer notified Remington: “I have to inform you that the Secretary of War has authorized an extension of 60 days on your contract for the delivery of muskets.”10 On the following day, Remington proposed that the musket contract be extended for more than two months. They had delivered thirty-three thousand of these arms; seven thousand were still due on the original contract. After a brief delay, the secretary approved this request, and the department notified Remington on November 21: 197

CHAPTER SEVEN

Sirs. I have to inform you, that on your application of the 3rd instant, I recommended to the Secretary of War, that such reasonable extension, as may be considered necessary by the Inspector of Arms, to enable you to deliver the muskets contracted for, be granted; and that this recommendation has been approved. Bvt. Brig. General Thornton has been notified accordingly.11 It appears that Thornton had been brevetted to the rank of brigadier general between the second and twenty-first of November. To my knowledge, this was the first occasion in which there were two generals on active service in the Ordnance Department. In early November 1865, Dyer also made another report to the secretary of war, protesting proposed cuts in Ordnance Department personnel. I am in possession of only the final page of this document, but it contains information that sheds light on the structure of the department at the conclusion of the Civil War: [first page missing] Several of the Southern arsenals have been reoccupied, and it is intended to reoccupy them all, except that at Fayetteville, N.C. which has been destroyed. The necessary measures have been taken for preserving the powder mill at Augusta and the laboratory and unfinished armory at Macon, Georgia, which have been captured. The number of permanent U.S. arsenals and armories is twenty eight; the command and provision of these, together with the inspection services required for the arsenals, the foundries, the powder mills, and other private establishments engaged in work for the government, furnish constant employment for the whole number of Ordnance officers, (sixty four) now authorized by law. The proper discharge of these essential duties requires that number shall be continued as part of the military peace establishment of the country. The armies in the field have been amply and well supplied with arms and other stores, and the fortifications have had their armaments kept in order, and strengthened and increased, by the addition of heavy caliber guns and great efficiency. 12 Remington had delivered thirty-seven thousand Springfield muskets by the end of 1865, but for some unknown reason they were having difficulties in procuring iron for fabricating barrels. In early December, they sought to purchase barrel iron from the Ordnance Department. Dyer had reservations about making this sale and so notified Remington on the eighth of December: Sirs. I have to acknowledge your letter of the 6th inst., in which you desire to purchase from Springfield Armory, iron for 1,500 musket barrels. There are very grave objections to selling materials which have been purchased by the Government, except in the usual ways, by public auction after advertisement, and I would 198

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

prefer not to make this sale, but instead of that, to accept the parts of the 1,500 or 2,000 muskets without barrels, to close the contract.13 Remington apparently located the requisite iron and made the final delivery of one thousand muskets on March 24, 1866. Either Remington had difficulties in furnishing bayonets for the last few thousand of these arms or an agreement was made with the department that the bayonets would be furnished by the Springfield Armory. On February 24, 1866, Thornton sent the following letter to the commander at Springfield. Office of the Inspector of Contract Arms Colonel, I am informed by Messrs. E. Remington & Sons that they will require 487 more Bayonets for their muskets, and I have to request that you will forward that number to their Armory in Ilion, New York as soon as possible. W. A. Thornton.14 Ordnance Department ledger “Purchases of Small Arms” notes that $8,974 was deducted from payments for “bayonets furnished by the U.S.”15 These entries start on the fourteenth of December 1865 and continue for the remainder of the contract. I have not ascertained the unit price for these appendages and, therefore, have no way of determining the number of deficit bayonets. Prior to November 30, 1864, the department paid Remington for five grades of muskets, with prices varying from sixteen to eighteen dollars each. On that day, the department changed the procedure and accepted subsequent deliveries at the rate of eighteen dollars for first-class and fifteen dollars for second-class arms. A reexamination of the events leading to the department furnishing bayonets and the change in the method of rating muskets for payment suggests these were part of the conditions established when the two contract extensions were granted. I present the department’s records for the delivery of all forty thousand muskets at the end of this chapter.

REMINGTON-RIDER SPLIT-BREECH CARBINES The Ordnance Department’s increasing interest in breech-loading carbines was not lost on Remington. Joseph Rider (figure 97), one of Remington’s designers and inventors, began developing a single-shot breech-loading action in 1863 and was issued patent number 40,887 on December 8 (figure 98). The patent papers depict the action on a small pistol similar to the Vest Pocket models introduced by Remington in 1866. Remington immediately recognized the benefit of utilizing Rider’s action in a carbine of their own make. In early March 1864, they presented a working model of their split-breech carbine to the Ordnance Department. Ramsey forwarded the arm to the Washington Arsenal for testing, and Capt. J. G. Benton soon submitted an evaluation: 199

CHAPTER SEVEN

Figure 97 Joseph Rider. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

Figure 98 Joseph Rider’s patent, number 40,887. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) 200

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

EXPERIMENTS ON SMALL ARMS, (CLASS 6.) Report on Remington Breech Loading Carbine Cal. .44 made by Lt. G. W. McKee at Washington Arsenal: 1864. Received at Ordnance Office. March 9, 1864 Washington Arsenal March 9th, 1864 Capt J. G. Benton, Ordnance Department Commanding Sir: In accordance with your instructions I have made a trial of the Remington Breech Loading carbine Cal. .44 and I have the honor to submit the following report of the results obtained. Description of arms This carbine is composed of forty two parts, twenty four of which are screws made to replace each other. The remaining pieces consist of the Hammer, Breech piece, Main spring and swivel, Trigger and spring, Breech frame and upper tang, Trigger guard and strap, (one piece) Barrel Key to lock barrel and frame together, the front sight, the rear sight (two pieces), stock separates into two pieces when barrel is detached. Twist is increasing six feet instead of two feet terminal. Five grooves, weight 5 1/2 lbs. Length of barrel 22 inches. When breech piece is pulled back to insert the cartridge, the hammer goes with it and cannot possibly fall in this position should the trigger be accidently touched. Neither can it fall at any point between this position and the base of the cartridge (now inserted) by virtue of the attachment of the lower part of the hammer and the breech piece. So soon as the breech piece is firmly against the breech, the hammer is free to obey the trigger. The breech piece in this position is held against the breech. The different pieces of the lock when assembled constitute a very ingenious and simple piece of mechanism. Before being brought to trial at this Arsenal, the carbine had been fired 350 rounds service and two proof charges 110 grains and 2 balls each. The trial was made by Mr. J. G. Dudley, Master Armorer and myself. I first tried the piece for accuracy at 500 yards with tolerable results, which however will be exactly shown in the target records accompanying this report. Twenty shots were fired at this distance. Twenty shots were also fired at 300 Yds. distance with very good results shown in target record. The cartridge used was metallic, and on weighing the powder I found it very variable, and the average weight of three charges was 23 1/2 grains, weight of ball 208 grains. After firing 200 rounds for endurance I found the piece capable of being very easily loaded, and in fact I could not detect that the breech piece worked any harder than at first. The piece was then fired three rounds for penetration and the average obtained was 5 1/2 inch with boards. Mr. Dudley and myself are both of the opinion that this carbine might be used with advantage by the troops in our service. Respectfully Submitted Geo. W. McKee, 1st Lt. Ord. 201

CHAPTER SEVEN

Figure 99 Small frame Remington Split-Breech Carbine. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

The statements in the foregoing report are approved and respectfully forwarded to the Chief of Ordnance. The lock and breechloading apparatus of this gun are made up of the following named pieces viz: 1. Hammer, 2. Breechpiece, 3. Mainspring and swivel, 4. Trigger and spring, 5. Breech frame in which the foregoing parts work. The combination and arrangement of these parts are such as to render the arm strong, easily kept clean & little able to get out of order in the hands of the soldier. I have no hesitation in recommending it for future trial in the service. J. G. Benton, Capt. Ord., Comdg.16 This report impressed Ramsey. He immediately sought and received approval from Stanton to award Remington a contract for their new arms (figure 99). Fifteen days later, on March 24, the department signed a contract for one thousand .44 caliber carbines “for trial in the field.” The contract specified delivery in six months. The small order followed the Owen-Holt Commission recommendations cited earlier. Remington’s work in progress precluded their involvement in the actual manufacture of these arms. They subsequently granted a license to Samuel Norris to manufacture them, with Norris paying Remington three dollars for each carbine produced. Norris made arrangements with the Savage Revolving Arms Company of Middletown, Connecticut, to do the actual manufacture. On July 31, the department received another report on Remington’s new carbine, this one originating at the Springfield Armory: REPORTS ON SMALL ARMS, (CLASS 6.) Final Report on Remington Breech Loading Carbine made by Major A. B. Dyer at Springfield Armory: Received at Ordnance Office June 31, 1864 Springfield Armory June 21, 1864 Major A. B. Dyer, Commanding Sir, I have the honor to submit the following report of experiments with Remington’s Breech Loading Carbine. 202

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

Up to the date of June 22, one thousand and fifty six (1056) rounds were fired with charges varying from twenty five (25) grs. of powder and two hundred and twenty five (225) grs. ball to forty (40) grs. powder and four hundred and fifty (450) grs. ball. After firing twenty five (25) rounds with the latter charge the pivot screw on which the breech piece works, broke at commencement of screw thread. The gun was then sent to the shop and a straight pin with a washer on the outside substituted for the screw before used, after which six hundred and twenty six rounds were fired with charges varying from forty (40) grs powder and four hundred grs. of lead to fifty five grs. powder and four hundred fifty grs. lead. Five rounds were also fired 1st with 55 grs. powder and 750 grs. ball 2nd with 55 grs. powder and 1050 grs. ball 3rd with 55 grs. powder and 1050 grs. ball 4th with 55 grs. powder and 1500 grs. ball 5th with 55 grs. powder and 1850 grs. ball No damages were sustained. During the firing water was poured into the lock, soft mud thrown on, and the carbine allowed to stand sixteen (16) hours in this condition, after jarring the mud from the outside, no difficulties were experienced in firing fifteen (15) rounds in a single minute. This was not done by anyone especially skilled in the use of the weapon. One hundred (100) more rounds were fired with great rapidity and some dust or rather fine sand was then thrown in the lock while at full cock. It was found necessary to scrape enough of the dirt out of the breech piece which was done with very little trouble, and the gun then worked as well as ever, notwithstanding that it had not been cleaned since firing was commenced. The arrangement of this carbine is simple and compact, the pieces are few and appear to be sufficiently strong. It can be fired with great rapidity and would seem to be well fitted for service. Very Respectfully, Your Obedient Servant W. S. Smoot, Lt. 1st Md. Vols. Brig. Genl. G. D. Ramsey U.S.A. Chief of Ordnance, Washington, D.C. Sir: I have witnessed some of the firing and have examined Mr. Remington’s Carbine carefully. I fully concur in the opinion expressed by Lt. Smoot. Very Respectfully, Your Obedient Servant A. B. Dyer, Major Ord. Comdg17 Lt. William S. Smoot, who made this report, would resign from the army in 1870 and accept employment with Remington. He later secured patents that were used on Remington’s rifles and revolvers and would eventually become superintendent of the Ilion Armory. 203

CHAPTER SEVEN

Remington, noting that the military were deeply impressed with the carbine, lost no time soliciting a larger contract. Ramsey relayed their request to the secretary of war on July 14: Hon. E. M. Stanton Secretary of War Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the proposal made to you by Messrs. Remington & Sons to furnish 50,000 of their metallic cartridge Carbines. On this subject I have to report that in the month of March last, on the recommendation of this Department, and by your authority, 1,000 of their Carbines and appendages were ordered at the price of $18. each, for trial in actual service. The Carbines to be furnished under this contract, which expires on the 31st August, next, are now in process of manufacture. Recently an improved Carbine of Remington & Sons has been under trial at Springfield Armory—and after firing it extensively and subjecting it to other tests, Major Dyer concludes his report by stating that the arm is “seemingly well fitted for service.” Based on this report, the parties now propose to furnish the Government with 50,000 of the improved Carbines—the price to be determined by assuming $18. as the value of the arm when gold was at a premium of 60 percent, and adding thereto the difference between that price and the value of gold at the respective days of delivery— or the parties will accept any other terms predicated on values current in March last, when the Carbine was offered and accepted at $18. Thus the cost of the arm would fluctuate with the value of gold. As no estimates for funds are based on any such principle, I am not prepared to recommend the acceptance of any such uncertain terms, more particularly so, as all contracts for small arms are specific as to cost. The proposition is for 50,000 arms, the deliveries to commence with 1000 in September next, and to continue until completion in June 1865. At present we have contracted for 140,000 Carbines. Although I think favorably of the Carbine offered, as a breech loading arm, I can only repeat what I have before officially reported. Viz:—that the repeating Carbine of Spencer, meets with great favor in the Army and is, to a great extent, the only arm now asked for, and to enable us to increase the supply, you have awarded a contract for 30,000 to the Burnside Arms Company. Under the circumstances, I cannot commit the Department to such an extant as 50,000 for any arm not having the approved stamp of service—or would I enter into so large a contract for the prospective period which the proposal would involve, and which from our experience would, in all likelihood, have to be extended or in part forfeited. At present the Messrs. Remington are under contract for 24,000 Rifle Muskets and 10,400 pistols, and they are now asking for an extension on their pistol contract, under a forfeiture of $29,500, under their rifle musket contract they have forfeited 14,000 muskets. With such an amount of work in hand, it is hardly reasonable to suppose they could deliver the 50,000 Carbines, if made in their own shops and under the usual restrictions, within the time named. The proposal of Messrs. Remington is herewith returned.18 204

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

Remington’s proposition was unusual, but the concerns that prompted these terms were sufficiently real. Inflation was the culprit; prices nearly doubled between 1861 and 1864. Remington was trying to ensure that any new contracts would not leave them in a difficult financial situation. The secretary of war rejected their proposal. Savage had difficulties putting the carbines into production, prompting Remington to request an extension on the contract. Ramsey replied on the twenty-fifth of August: Gentlemen, Yours of the 15th inst. asking that an extension may be given you on your contract of Mar. 24, 1864 for 1,000 Remington Carbines so that the contract should expire on the 31st December is received, and in reply I have to say that the extension asked for is granted. The Inspector of Contract Arms has been notified to that effect.19 On September 12, Smoot forwarded another report from Springfield to the department: Twenty-eighth Report on Breech loading Carbines Sir: During the past week two hundred and fifty six (256) rounds were fired from Remington’s Breech Loading Muskets and sixty (60) rounds from Breech Loading Carbines. The Musket has been subjected to quite a severe test but thus far has stood well,— a special report will be forwarded as soon as the experiments shall be complete.20 Smoot had addressed the report to Ramsey, having no way of knowing that he had retired. On this same day, Maj. Alexander B. Dyer, commandant of the Springfield Armory, was promoted to brevet brigadier general and took command of the department (figure 100). The split-breech muskets mentioned in Smoot’s report were prototypes; no contracts had been issued for these. Beyond the specimens submitted to the department, none were manufactured, and any surviving specimens would be quite rare. Dyer’s succession to chief of the Ordnance Department was fortuitous for Remington. He had been personally involved in many of the tests performed on their carbines at Springfield and had developed a very high opinion of the arm. When Remington again sought a larger contract for carbines, his recommendation to the secretary of war on September 23 immediately secured a contract for fifteen thousand. On the same day, he notified Remington: Sirs: I have to inform you that the Secretary of War has approved the recommendation of this office to give you a contract for 20,000 revolvers at $15.50 each; and for 15,000 of your breech loading carbines at $23. each; contracts for which will be prepared and forwarded to you without delay.21 Shortly after being advised of the new contracts, Remington inquired as to the size of the chamber of the new carbines. Dyer responded by telegraph on September 26: 205

CHAPTER SEVEN

Figure 100 Gen. Alexander B. Dyer, chief of ordnance. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

Telegram Gentlemen Telegram received. Chamber of new Carbine to be fifty-two hundredths of an inch.22 The chamber size specified would later be changed. The fifteen thousand carbines of the latter contract were to be larger overall than those of the first contract to better withstand the pressures created by the larger cartridge. On the tenth of October, Smoot made another report to the department: Thirty-second Report on Breech loading Carbines Sir: During the past week two hundred and eighty five (285) rounds have been fired. Two hundred and twenty (220) from the Remington Musket and sixty five (65) from Ballard Carbine. The cartridges, one hundred (100) in number fired from the Remington Musket on the 5th October all burst, probably owing to their being made of improper metal, but the gun has worked well throughout. A table of firing is annexed.23 Reports such as this exemplify the difficulties the Ordnance Department was having with the manufacture of cartridges. Experimentation continued at Frankford Arsenal on various compositions of case alloys and also on different types of primers. It was not until the early 1870s that most of the objections were overcome. Although Dyer had advised Remington that new contracts were being prepared, he did not forward them for acceptance until the thirteenth of October: 206

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

Gentlemen, I transmit copies in quintuplicate of two contracts as follows: One for 20,000 Revolvers and one for 15,000 Carbines, which you will please execute and return.24 Remington signed the contracts on the twenty-fourth and returned them to Dyer on the following day: Sir, We have the honor to return herewith quintuplicate copies of contracts for 15,000 Remington Carbines and 20,000 Army Revolvers, duly executed.25 Dyer did not submit the contracts to the War Department for approval until the second of November: Hon. E. M. Stanton Sir, I have the honor to transmit for approval the following contracts. Norwich Arms Co. 15,000 Rifle Muskets Edward Robinson 7,000 Rifle Muskets Mr. G. D. Mann 20,000 Sets Cavalry Accts. Moores & Co. 6,000 Sets Horse Equip’ts E. Remington & Sons 15,000 Remington Carbines E. Remington & Sons 20,000 Revolvers26 The contracts were not approved until November, but arms historians recognize the date on both the revolver and carbine contracts as October 24, the date of Remington’s signature. On November 11, Dyer advised Remington of changes to be incorporated into the new carbines: Gentlemen, Recent trials at Springfield have shown that the calibre of the carbine diameter of bore may be fixed at fifty hundredths of an inch instead of forty four hundredths. I have to request that the carbines which you are to furnish this Department upon existing contracts, may be bored to this calibre. The diameter of the chamber must be fifty six hundredths of an inch. A plug gauge giving the diameter of the base and a standard cartridge will be furnished to you from the Springfield Armory as soon as they can be prepared. The rifling will be as follows: Number of grooves, three (3). Depth of grooves, uniform and .0075. Width of grooves, equal to land. Twist, uniform and one turn to thirty two inches.27 207

CHAPTER SEVEN

On November 15, the U.S. Patent Office issued Rider patent number 45,123 (figure 101). In the patent drawings, he depicted the action in a rifle or carbine configuration and described the improvement as a safety lock in which the breech piece locks both the hammer and trigger when the action is open. On the last day of December, the extension on Remington’s original contract for one thousand carbines expired. Savage had made no deliveries and was still some months away from actual production. The department awarded a new contract for five thousand .44 caliber carbines on January 19, 1865. Remington’s name was not on the new contract; it was signed by Samuel Norris, who had been licensed to manufacture these arms by Remington. On January 12, 1865, Col. William Maynadier, Dyer’s assistant, made the following request of Remington: Gentlemen, I have to request that you will make and forward to this office as soon as practicable a complete list of the component parts of the Remington Carbine and Revolver with the relative value of each. The price of each part should be adjusted [so] that their total amounts will equal the price paid for the complete arms under your last contract.28 Remington had some difficulty in getting Savage to furnish this information and did not forward the parts list of their breech-loading carbine until the first of March: Sir, We beg leave to hand you herewith, a list of the component parts of our breechloading Carbine, and prices therefore, which we were unable to send with the list of parts for Harpers Ferry Rifle and the Revolvers, transmitted some days since. Very Respectfully, Your Obt. Servants E. Remington & Sons Mar. 1, 1865 Price of Component Parts of Remington’s Patent Carbine 1. Barrel and Front Sight 6.50 2. Receiver 4.20 3. Breech Piece .04 4. Hammer 1.04 5. Stock Butt .80 6. Stock Tip .60 7. Butt Plate .50 8. Butt Plate Screws (2) 4 cents ea. .08 9. Hammer Pin .05 10. Breech Piece Pin .05 11. Screws for Pins (2) 4 cents ea. .08 12. Guard (Complete) 1.24 13. Tang .36 14. Main Spring .50 208

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

Figure 101 Joseph Rider’s patent, number 45,123. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

15. Main Spring Screw 16. Sear Spring 17. Sear Spring Screw 18. Swivel Bar and Ring (2) 19. Swivel Bar and Ring Screw 20. Stirrup 21. Stirrup Pin 22. Tang Screw 23. Side Screw (5) 24. Rear Sight 25. Rear Sight Screw 26. Rear Sight Pin 27. Escutcheon 28. Escutcheon Screw 29. Wood Screw 30. Trigger 31. Trigger Pin 32. Band 33. Band Spring 34. Appendages

.04 .24 .04 .22 .04 .12 .03 .04 .18 .78 .03 .02 .04 .04 .04 .24 .02 .24 .16 .40 $20.0029 209

CHAPTER SEVEN

Figure 102 Small frame Remington Split-Breech Carbine. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

Savage made their first delivery of the small frame .44 caliber Remington split-breech carbines on May 6 (figure 102). There seem to have been no difficulties in their manufacture or acceptance; they were all delivered by the end of June. On January 3, 1865, the patent office issued Rider patent number 45,797 for his Rolling Block action, also depicted in a rifle or carbine configuration (figure 103). Five months later, Remington advised Dyer that they were developing the new arm; Dyer responded on June 8: Gentlemen, I have to acknowledge your letter of the 6th inst., and to inform you, that Maj. Benton has, this day, been instructed to return to you, your breechloading Carbine, which you state to be at the Washington Arsenal. I shall be happy to examine the new arm, which you state you are getting up, when it is ready for exhibition.30 This is the first mention of the Remington arm utilizing Rider’s new Rolling Block action. On the twenty-third, Dyer again contacted Remington: Gentlemen, I have to call your attention to the fact, that the two model carbines, which you are required to furnish, by your contract of Oct. 24th 1864, have not yet been received at this office, and that it is necessary they should be received and approved, before any carbines can be received under the contract.31 Remington had this contract in hand for eight months; however, Savage had not delivered any arms. Three more months would pass before the first delivery of one thousand carbines on September 30. When the inspectors began their examinations, they encountered problems with bursting cartridges and scrutinized the strength of the metals used in the frame. Apprized of these difficulties, Samuel Remington met with Thornton at the Savage works in Middletown, Connecticut, to discuss them. Thornton made the following report to Dyer on October 15: 210

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

Figure 103 Joseph Rider’s patent, number 45,797. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

General, I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your instructions of the 10th inst., at which date I was by appointment with Mr. Remington at Middletown Conn., in completing the trial of his carbines by firing ball cartridges of 60 grains of quick burning powder; and respecting which, I have the honor to report as per statements herewith enclosed. The failure of Mr. Remington’s Carbines is due in my opinion to the yielding of the pin, either by springing, bending or breaking, and thereby allowing the breech piece to give back. This is shown by the battering of the shoulders of the hammer by the breech piece where it locks to resist the recoil, and by elongation of the pin hole in the breech piece, which orifice in many of the arms by firing has been changed to an elliptical shape, by the giving back of the breechpiece, the cartridge is not firmly supported in the chamber, and it consequently bursts and damages the arm. Mr. Remington is of the opinion, that the bursting of the cartridges and failure of his carbines is solely attributable to poor or thin metal forming the copper shells and in support of this opinion he produced a barrel, to which he, at the Springfield Armory had a solid breech adjusted, so that there could be no yielding or expansion of the shell base in firing the charges as was the case in the trial of his carbines. The loading of the barrel was accomplished by inserting a cartridge into its chamber and then by screwing the barrel by hand, not by wrench into the nut or solid breech so that the base of the cartridge should be in close contact & firmly sustained against the inner face of the breech; and then to 211

CHAPTER SEVEN

satisfy Mr. Remington, I had ten rounds of like cartridges fired from the barrel so charged, with the following results. Viz: 3 shells remained uninjured, 7 shells burst, one of which had the top entirely detached from its body. This test was strongly against the strength of the copper, and would be conclusive of its makeup; provided that the barrel is truly chambered, and that it can be completely assembled to the breech, without clamping it on the breech in a vise, and using a wrench. As these conditions were not established, I have not conceded that the bursting of the shells is due to the thinness of the copper, but be that as it may, I think the carbines should have withstood the proof, whether loaded with cartridge or loose powder, and my opinion therefore, respecting the cause of the failure of Mr. Remington’s carbines remains unchanged. Mr. Remington then asserted that no small arm could withstand the actions of such charges; and to satisfy myself that he was in error in such pronouncing, I took 100 cartridges and proceeded to Hartford Conn., to make a like trial of Sharps Carbines. Messrs. Palmer and Lawrence without a moments hesitation granted the privilege, and to make sure that no injury might be done to any person, I requested that the arms under trial might be boxed, as in the trial of Mr. Remington’s Carbines. The boxing of Sharps Arms was objected to by Mr. Lawrence; still a carbine was placed in position and fired, and when reloaded, before I could prevent the action, Mr. Lawrence raised it to his shoulder and fired the second shot, and so continued to fire the arm until he had expended ten rounds. Mr. Toyton then took a second carbine and fired ten rounds from the shoulder, which firing was so continued by alternating the arms, until 30 rounds were expended from each. I then expressed a desire to test a Sharps Rifle with like cartridge, which was unhesitatingly allowed, and 30 rounds were fired by Mr. Toyton and Lawrence from the shoulder, in the trial of a rifle. The results of said trial of Sharps arms are Viz: 2 Carbines taken without selection and fired 30 rounds each from the shoulder, with copper shell ball cartridges of 60 grains of quick burning or “Berdan” powder. 50 Shells uninjured by firing, all of which were easily and readily ejected form the barrel by the extractor. 10 Shells burst, none however with their tops detached from body. The dirt from the explosion fouled and stiffened the action of the breech slide, but in all cases the lever worked readily, and the shells were ejected by the extractor as if they were solid. 1 Rifle taken without selection, and proven as the carbines were with 30 rounds of like ammunition. The chamber of this rifle was above size, which allowed the cartridge to yield and burst, but not so badly, nor in so great proportions as in the Remington Carbines and extra barrels. 18 Shells uninjured by firing, all of which were readily ejected from the barrels by the extractor. 12 Shells burst, none however with the tops detached from the body, the dirt from the explosion fouled and stiffened the action of the breech slide, but in all cases the lever worked easily and the shells were ejected from the barrels as if solid, and uninjured.32 212

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

Figure 104 Large frame Remington Split-Breech Carbine. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

Deliveries of the carbines from the Savage works continued, but Thornton’s later reports reveal that the rejection rate remained high throughout production. In late October, Remington requested an extension on their large frame carbine contract (figure 104). On the first of the following month, Dyer sent the following endorsement to the secretary of war: Sir, I have the honor to submit an application from E. Remington & Sons for an extension of nine months time, to enable them to complete a contract made with this Department, on the 24th Oct. 1864, for fifteen thousand “Remington” Carbines at $23. each, which contract will expire on the first of December next, and upon which no extension has been given. Twenty dollars, was considered a fair and remunerative price for this carbine, when the contract was made with Messrs. Remington & Sons, but in consideration of the benefits which it was supposed the Government had derived from their services, in reducing the prices charged Government for arms, and in the losses they had sustained in faithfully executing a contract with the Government for pistols, at a price that was not remunerative, because of a great increase in the cost of material, and in the wages of workmen beyond what could, reasonably, have been anticipated, when they engaged to furnish the pistols; and in further consideration of the fact, that the Department was paying twenty three dollars for carbines which were not regarded as superior to the Remington, this price was allowed them. The carbine is one of the best that has been furnished, and if the Department was in want of carbines, at this time, I should not hesitate to purchase them. If you are of opinion that the extension asked for by Messrs. Remington & Sons is founded by equity, it should be granted. No embarrassment to the Government would result from a delay in the delivery of the carbines. I believe that Remington & Sons have endeavored faithfully to execute this contract, and that their failure to deliver according to the terms of contract, has not been caused by any fault or neglect on their part, and I am also satisfied that they have correctly stated the amount expended by them in the manufacture of these carbines. They will deliver about five thousand carbines within the time fixed by the contract, for the delivery of the whole number. 213

CHAPTER SEVEN

This and a contract with the same party for muskets are the only contracts for arms which are yet to be completed. During the War, it was the practice of this Department to grant an extension of time on contracts for delivery of arms, or to make new contracts for the delivery of those previously contracted for. Since May 1861, the following contracts have been given Messrs. Remington & Sons, Viz: July 29, 1861, 5,000 Pistols at $12. each all delivered June 13, 1862, 20,000 Pistols at $12. each all delivered July 1, 1863, 7,000 Pistols inferior at $11. each all delivered July 6, 1863, 20,000 Pistols at $12. each all delivered Nov. 21, 1863, 64,900 Pistols at $12. each 57,000 delivered Oct. 24, 1864, 20,000 Pistols at $15.50 each all delivered 130,900 122,700 delivered Aug. 11, 1862, 10,000 Harpers Ferry Rifles at $17. each all delivered July 30, 1862, 40,000 Muskets at $16. each This contract was subsequently annulled, and a new one was made with them, December 30, 1863 for muskets at $18. each. They have been granted an extension of time on this last contract to enable them to deliver the whole number, and up to this time they have delivered about 35,000. Oct. 30, 1864, 15,000 Remington Carbines at $23. each of which 2,000 have been delivered.33 Once again, I have noted contradictions in Ordnance Department figures. It appears that someone on Dyer’s staff furnished him with some erroneous information, and he forwarded this information in his endorsement. I caution the reader to use only dates and figures taken from the department’s ledgers, which I have reproduced in other sections of this volume. The following day, Dyer notified Remington that the extension had been approved: Gentlemen, I have to inform you that the Secretary of War has authorized an extension of 60 days on your contract for the delivery of muskets, and that on your application of 27th ultimo, for an extension of nine months time on your contract for 15,000 Remington Carbines, he has decided as follows: “In view of the reputable circumstances within stated, let the contract be extended for the delivery of nine thousand for six months—the remaining six thousand to be delivered by the time specified in the contract.” Col. Thornton will be instructed accordingly.34 By the end of 1865, the department had transferred Smoot to the Washington Arsenal, where he prepared and forwarded another report on Remington’s large frame split-breech carbines to the department: 214

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

EXPERIMENTS ON SMALL ARMS, (CLASS 6) Report on Remington Breech Loading Carbine made by. Bvt. Col. J. G. Benton at Ord. Dept. Washington Arsenal. December 21, 1865 Bvt. Col. J. G. Benton Ordnance Department Commanding Sir: I have the honor to submit the following report of experiments made with the Remington Breech loading Carbines. On the 29th of November ten of these guns caliber .50 were fired one hundred rounds each with sixty (60) grains musket powder and four hundred grains lead. At the end of thirty eight rounds, one gun marked “A” failed to explode the cartridges owing to the end of the hammer frictioning against the breech piece through which it passes. This gun was sent to the shop and the hammer dressed off after which it worked well. Another gun marked “Q” was found to have the half cock notch broken on account of the tumbler being tempered too high. This piece was therefore submitted to a more severe test. On the first of December one hundred rounds were fired from each of the ten guns with sixty grains rifle powder and four hundred grains lead, but without developing anything further. On the 2d of December one hundred rounds more with the same charge were fired from each of the guns except those marked “A” and “Q.” On the fifth the gun marked “Q” was fired as follows. First round, with sixty grains powder and four hundred grains lead and with four inches mud in the muzzle. Second round, same charge but with ten inches of mud in the muzzle. Third round, same charge and barrel full of mud. On the sixth the same gun was fired with the same charge and ten inches of mud in the muzzle. This mud had been put in there the day before and left to dry. No damage was sustained beyond a slight enlargement of the barrel.35 On December 28, Thornton submitted another report on his inspection of the Remington carbines that he was accepting from Savage. This report exemplified the high rejection rate of the arms: General, I have the honor to report that in the proof trial of 50 Remington Carbines on the 10th of October last, with sixty grains of quick burning powder, there were 29 Arms rendered unserviceable by the following causes, Viz: Barrels Extractor slots torn and elongated 29 Hammers Battered at shoulders 18 do Broken 8 215

CHAPTER SEVEN

Breech Pieces Hammer pin hole elongated 20 do do Cracked at pin hole 10 do do Cracked in rear of breech 8 Breech piece Pins broken 10 do do Pins bent 2 Stock Butt Split 1 Stock Tip Split 13 Triggers Broken 3 Friction levers Broken 4 Side screws Bent 4 All the remaining components of the 29 carbines have been accepted and used in obtaining like arms, and I therefore respectfully recommend in equity, that Mr. Remington may be allowed the 29 Barrels, 26 Hammers, 38 Breech pieces, and other components, the same as if the said parts had been obtained for repairs, and that the said parts be expended accordingly. Your Obt. Servant W. A. Thornton, Bvt. Brig. Genl. U.S.A.36 Savage delivered six thousand of the carbines by the first of the year; however, deliveries increased thereafter to approximately two thousand per month, with the final delivery on May 24, 1866. At this time the small frame split-breech carbine was designated as .44 caliber but is now recognized as .46 caliber. The large frame version was referred to as .50 caliber but is now known as the 56–50 Spencer. Both cartridges were rim fire; center fire primers had not yet been developed. It appears that very few of these carbines were ever issued to troops in the field. Ordnance Department records reveal that the department sold 14,757 of the large frame carbines to the Remington firm on October 12, 1870, while the Remingtons were acting as agents for the French government during the Franco-Prussian War.37 These new carbines, for which the department had paid twenty-three dollars, were reacquired for fifteen dollars each. Flayderman states that thirty-six hundred of the small frame carbines were also purchased by Remington for the French government in 1870.38 France eventually sent some of the large frame arms to French Indochina where they were issued to native troops. Sometime during the middle of the last century, some of these were returned to the United States by surplus arms dealers. They can be identified by the presence of Vietnamese characters stamped into the butt stock. This concludes the discussion of Remington’s Civil War contracts for long arms. The Ordnance Department records for the delivery of the arms are reproduced as follows:

216

Harpers Ferry Rifle Deliveries, August 11, 1862, Contract PURCHASES of “‘Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms,’ since April 13, 1861, by the Ordnance Department: from whom purchased, and to whom paid for: price; total amount; date of contract or order, and date of payment” CONTRACTOR’S NAME

DATE OF PURCHASE

QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

1863

Apr.

18

500

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Jun.

8

1,000

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Jul.

11

904

H.F. Rifles

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Jul.

11

96

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Aug.

11

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Aug.

E. Remington & Sons

1863

E. Remington & Sons

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

Harpers Ferry Rifles & Appendages $17

00

$8,500

00

Aug. 11, 1862

17

00

17,000

00

Aug. 11, 1862

1 st class

17

00

15,368

00

Aug. 11, 1862

H.F. Rifles

2 nd class

16

90

1,622

40

Aug. 11, 1862

918

H.F. Rifles

1 st class

17

00

15,606

00

Aug. 11, 1862

11

82

H.F. Rifles

2 nd class

16

90

1,385

80

Aug. 11, 1862

Sep.

7

945

H.F. Rifles

1 st class

17

00

16,065

00

Aug. 11, 1862

1863

Sep.

7

55

H.F. Rifles

2 nd class

16

90

929

50

Aug. 11, 1862

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Sep.

30

913

H.F. Rifles

1 st class

17

00

15,521

00

Aug. 11, 1862

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Sep.

30

87

H.F. Rifles

2 nd class

16

90

1,470

30

Aug. 11, 1862

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Oct.

23

947

H.F. Rifles

1 st class

17

00

16,006

00

Aug. 11, 1862a

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Oct.

23

53

H.F. Rifles

2 nd class

16

90

895

70

Aug. 11, 1862

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Nov.

13

913

H.F. Rifles

1 st class

17

00

15,521

00

Aug. 11, 1862

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Nov.

13

87

H.F. Rifles

2 nd class

16

90

1,417

30

Aug. 11, 1862b

Harpers Ferry Rifles & Appendages

217

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles and Small Arms.” a Entry made for total amount paid is a clerical error. Correct amount is $16,099. bEntry made for total amount paid is a clerical error. Correct amount is $1,470.30.

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

E. Remington & Sons

PRICE

CONTRACTOR’S NAME

DATE OF PURCHASE

QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

PRICE

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Dec.

23

892

Harpers Ferry Rifles

1 st class

$17

00

$15,164

00

Dec. 13, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1863

Dec.

23

108

Harpers Ferry Rifles

2 nd class

16

90

1,825

20

Dec. 13, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jan.

6

906

Harpers Ferry Rifles

1 st class

17

00

15,402

00

Dec. 13, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jan.

6

94

Harpers Ferry Rifles

2 nd class

16

90

1,588

60

Dec. 13, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jan.

8

459

Harpers Ferry Rifles

1 st class

17

00

7,803

00

Dec. 13, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jan.

8

41

Harpers Ferry Rifles

2 nd class

16

90

692

90

Dec. 13, 1863

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles and Small Arms.”

Springfield Pattern Muskets Delivered on December 14, 1863, Contract PURCHASES of “‘Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms,’ since April 13, 1861, by the Ordnance Department: from whom purchased, and to whom paid for: price; total amount; date of contract or order, and date of payment” CONTRACTOR’S NAME

DATE OF PURCHASE

QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

PRICE

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

E. Remington & Sons

1864

May

31

160

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

$18

00

$2,880

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

May

31

633

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

17

90

11,330

70

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

May

31

204

Springfield Rifle Musket 2 1/2 class

17

75

3,621

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

May

31

2

Springfield Rifle Musket 3rd class

17

00

34

00

Dec. 14, 1863

CHAPTER SEVEN

218

Harpers Ferry Rifle Deliveries, December 13, 1863, Contract PURCHASES of “‘Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms,’ since April 13, 1861, by the Ordnance Department: from whom purchased, and to whom paid for: price; total amount; date of contract or order, and date of payment”

1864

May

31

1

Springfield Rifle Musket 4th class

16

00

16

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jun.

25

4

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

72

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jun.

25

224

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

17

90

4,009

60

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jun.

25

268

Springfield Rifle Musket 2 1/2 class

17

75

4,757

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jun.

25

475

Springfield Rifle Musket 3rd class

17

00

8,075

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jun.

25

29

Springfield Rifle Musket 4th class

16

00

464

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jul.

21

125

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

2,250

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jul.

21

408

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

17

90

7,303

20

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jul.

21

291

Springfield Rifle Musket 2 1/2 class

17

75

5,165

25

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jul.

21

122

Springfield Rifle Musket 3rd class

17

00

2,074

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Jul.

21

54

Springfield Rifle Musket 4th class

16

00

864

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

6

159

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

2,862

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

6

417

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

17

90

7,464

30

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

6

259

Springfield Rifle Musket 2 1/2 class

17

75

4,597

25

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

6

110

Springfield Rifle Musket 3rd class

17

00

1,870

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

6

55

Springfield Rifle Musket 4th class

16

00

880

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

19

185

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

3,330

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

19

483

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

17

90

8,645

70

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

19

225

Springfield Rifle Musket 2 1/2 class

17

75

3,993

75

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

19

74

Springfield Rifle Musket 3rd class

17

00

1,258

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Aug.

19

33

Springfield Rifle Musket 4th class

16

00

528

00

Dec. 14, 1863

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

219

E. Remington & Sons

DATE OF PURCHASE

QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

PRICE

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Sep.

16

340

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

6,120

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Sep.

16

457

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

17

90

8,180

30

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Sep.

16

108

Springfield Rifle Musket 2 1/2 class

17

75

1,917

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Sep.

16

26

Springfield Rifle Musket 3rd class

17

00

442

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Sep.

16

69

Springfield Rifle Musket 4th class

16

00

1,104

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

4

408

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

7,344

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

4

435

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

17

90

7,786

50

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

4

75

Springfield Rifle Musket 2 1/2 class

17

75

1,331

25

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

4

11

Springfield Rifle Musket 3rd class

17

00

187

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

4

71

Springfield Rifle Musket 4th class

16

00

1,136

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

22

462

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

8,316

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

22

408

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

17

90

7,303

20

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

22

105

Springfield Rifle Musket 2 1/2 class

17

75

1,863

75

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

22

23

Springfield Rifle Musket 3rd class

17

00

391

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Oct.

22

2

Springfield Rifle Musket 4th class

16

00

32

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Nov.

10

498

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

8,964

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Nov.

10

340

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

17

90

6,086

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Nov.

10

113

Springfield Rifle Musket 2 1/2 class

17

75

2,005

75

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Nov.

10

37

Springfield Rifle Musket 3rd class

17

00

629

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Nov.

10

12

Springfield Rifle Musket 4th class

16

00

192

00

Dec. 14, 1863

CHAPTER SEVEN

220

CONTRACTOR’S NAME

1864

Nov.

30

950

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

17,100

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Nov.

30

50

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

15

00

750

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

17

940

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

16,920

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

17

60

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

15

00

900

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1864

Dec.

31

1,000

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

18,000

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Jan.

19

870

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

15,660

60

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Jan.

19

130

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

15

00

1,950

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

3

1,000

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

18,00

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

15

800

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

14,400

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

15

200

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

15

00

3,000

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

28

800

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

14,400

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Feb.

28

200

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

15

00

3,000

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Mar.

11

800

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

14,400

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Mar.

11

200

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

15

00

3,000

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Apr.

17

800

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

14,400

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Apr.

17

200

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

15

00

3,000

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Apr.

27

800

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

14,400

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Apr.

27

200

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

15

00

3,000

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

May

5

800

Springfield Rifle Musket 1st class

18

00

14,400

00

Dec. 14, 1863

E. Remington & Sons

1865

May

5

200

Springfield Rifle Musket 2nd class

15

00

3,000

00

Dec. 14, 1863

221

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles and Small Arms.”

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

E. Remington & Sons

CONTRACTOR’S NAME

DATE OF PURCHASE

QUANTITY

KIND OF STORES

PRICE

TOTAL AMOUNT

ORDER DATE

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Sep.

30

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

$23

00

$23,000 00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Oct.

25

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

82

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Nov.

4

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Nov.

18

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Nov.

30

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1865

Dec.

22

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

Jan.

5

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

Jan.

5

3

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

69

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

Jan.

5

1

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

Jan.

5

3

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

69

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

Jan.

20

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

Feb.

1

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

Feb.

17

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

Mar.

5

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

Mar.

26

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

Apr.

6

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

Apr.

27

1,000

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

E. Remington & Sons

1866

May

2

992

Carbines & Appendages

23

00

23,000

00

Oct. 24, 1864

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles and Small Arms.”

CHAPTER SEVEN

222

Split-Breech Carbines Delivered on Contract of October 24, 1864 PURCHASES of “‘Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles, and Small Arms,’ since April 13, 1861, by the Ordnance Department: from whom purchased, and to whom paid for: price; total amount; date of contract or order, and date of payment”

Memorandum of Receipts “Memorandum of Receipts of 15,000 REMINGTON CARBINES from E. REMINGTON & SONS under their CONTRACTS from CHIEF OF ORDNANCE dated OCTOBER 24, 1864” DATE OF DELIVERY 1865

REGISTER OF REPORT Book No.

TAKEN UP ON CERTIFICATE NO.

RECEIVING OFFICER

WHERE SHIPPED

NO.

DESCRIPTION

—

—

1

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Oct. 25

—

—

2

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Nov. 4

—

—

3

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Nov. 18

—

—

4

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Nov. 30

—

—

5

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Dec. 22

—

—

6

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Jan. 6

—

—

7

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,007

Rem. Carbines

Jan. 20

—

—

8

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Feb. 1

—

—

9

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Feb. 19

—

—

10

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Mar. 5

—

—

11

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Mar. 21

—

—

12

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Apr. 6

—

—

13

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Apr. 27

—

—

14

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,001

Rem. Carbines

May 24

—

—

15

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

992

Rem. Carbines

1866

Total 15,000 223

Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 80, “Memorandums of Receipts.”

REMINGTON’S CIVIL WAR RIFLE AND CARBINE CONTRACTS

Sep. 30

DATE OF DELIVERY 1865

REGISTER OF REPORT Book No.

TAKEN UP ON CERTIFICATE NO.

RECEIVING OFFICER

WHERE SHIPPED

NO.

DESCRIPTION

May 6

—

—

1

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

May 26

—

—

2

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Jun. 8

—

—

3

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Jun. 22

—

—

4

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Jun. 30

—

—

5

Colonel Thornton

New York Arsenal

1,000

Rem. Carbines

Total 5,000 Source: National Archives, Record Group 156, Entry 80, “Memorandums of Receipts.”

CHAPTER SEVEN

224

Memorandum of Receipts “Memorandum of Receipts of 5,000 REMINGTON CARBINES cal. .44 from SAMUEL NORRIS under their CONTRACT from CHIEF OF ORDNANCE dated JANUARY 19, 1865”

CHAPTER EIGHT

Metallic Cartridge Alterations he reader will note that I have taken some liberties in this and the following chapter, having previously confined my discussion to Remington’s Civil War production of arms for the Ordnance Department (U.S. Army) and Bureau of Ordnance (U.S. Navy). The majority of my research material has been gleaned from records of these two departments preserved in the National Archives. I have relied heavily on these records in defining Remington’s postwar activities in experimentation and production of cartridge alterations. My studies have revealed that the military’s dealings with Remington in the above areas were entwined with the efforts of other manufacturers, such as Smith & Wesson and Colt. I hold that some of these interrelationships deserve discussion, and I will do so as this story progresses. Following the delivery of the final lot of army revolvers from the Utica Armory in the spring of 1865, both Remington and their employees soon faced the consequences of the war’s end. The Utica Armory had been established for the sole purpose of producing revolvers for the government and had provided employment for many of the area’s breadwinners for almost four years. Census figures for 1864–65 state that the armory employed 150 men and 35 boys, with an average monthly wage of twenty-five dollars. Without government contracts, Remington could not keep the plant in operation. The company dismantled the machinery, some of which was sent to the Ilion Armory. There it would remain idle during the transition from government to commercial production. Remington quite possibly transferred some machinery and employees to an expanded endeavor within Utica. The city directory listed, for the first time in 1865–66, the “Remington Agricultural Works, corner of Fayette and Seneca Streets” (figure 105). The original Agricultural Works had been established in Ilion in 1856. This operation was a natural outgrowth of the forge operations conducted by the original Eliphalet, dating to the early 1800s, and continued in operation until the firm underwent bankruptcy proceedings in 1886. A vast array of goods was produced by these works, including, but not limited to, all manner of hand tools and farm implements, bridges, and steam cars for transit systems (figure 106). Samuel Remington had taken up residence in Utica in 1863, presumably for the purpose of overseeing operations of the new armory. The agricultural works remained listed in the 1867–68 Utica City Directory, but Samuel Remington’s residence was sold in May 1866. The company

T

225

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 105 Remington Agricultural Company. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

once again had selected him as envoy; this time, his duties required him to pursue and negotiate arms contracts with governments in Europe and the Near East, where he remained for several years. His presence in France at the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian War in August 1870 proved to be very fortuitous for the company. The new French Republic was desperate for arms, and Samuel Remington was just the man to procure them. His efforts, on behalf of the French war minister, led to the acquisition of nearly five hundred thousand arms for the French Army, many of which were purchased from the U.S. Army’s Ordnance Department, with Remington receiving a percentage of the gross. Having only two U.S. government contracts unfulfilled at war’s end, Remington scaled back production at Ilion. The first such contract was for the Springfield rifle, under which some twenty-three thousand arms remained to be delivered. The second was for fifteen thousand carbines, but these had been licensed to Samuel Norris and were being manufactured by the Savage Revolving Arms Company in Middletown, Connecticut. Remington had little to do with their actual manufacture, except as a possible supplier of barrels. In December 1864 the Ordnance Department granted a one-year extension for completion of the rifle contract, and Remington wisely decided to take full advantage of this largess. By doing so, they bought precious time to keep their most valued employees on the payroll, while also developing a line of arms for the commercial market. Remington had made some plans for postwar arms production (figure 107), as evidenced in an advertisement dated December 13, 1865, and published in the Herkimer County Citizen. It enumerated the arms the company was then offering to the public: 226

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Figure 106 Remington broadside from 1876. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

Vest Pocket Pistol. Using Metallic Cartridge No. 22. 3 inch Barrel. 1 Shot. Weight 3 1/2 oz. New Repeating Pistol. Calibre or Size of Bore 20-100ths of an inch; using Metallic Cartridge No. 22. 3 inch Barrel. 5 Shots. Weight 8 1/2 oz. New Repeating Pistol. Calibre or Size of Bore 30-100ths of an inch diameter; using Metallic Cartridge No. 32. 3 1/2 inch Barrel. 4 Shots. Weight 13 oz. Pocket Revolver. Double Action or Self Cocking. Calibre or Size of Bore 31-100ths of an inch; carrying 140 Round Balls to the Pound. 3 inch barrel, 5 Shots. Weight 10 oz. New Pocket Revolvers. Calibre or size of Bore 31-100ths of an inch diameter, carrying 92 elongated or 140 Round Balls to the Pound. 3 1/2 or 4 1/2 inch barrel, 5 shots, weight 14 and 16 oz. New Model Belt Revolver. (Navy Size Calibre.) Single Action. Calibre or Size of Bore, 36-100ths of an inch; carrying 50 Elongated or 86 Round Balls to the pound. 6 inch Barrel, 6 Shots. Weight 2 lbs. 2 oz. 227

CHAPTER EIGHT

New Model Belt Revolver. (Navy Size Calibre.) Double Action or Self Cocking. Calibre or Size of Bore, 36-100ths of an inch; carrying 50 Elongated or 86 Round Balls to the pound. 6 inch Barrel, 6 Shots. Weight 2 lbs. 2 oz. New Police Revolvers. Calibre or Size of Bore, 36-100ths of an inch. 4 1/2, 5 1/2, and 6 1/2 inch barrel. Five shots. Weight 22, 23, 24 oz. New Model Navy Revolver. (Pattern now used in the U.S. Navy.) Calibre or Size of Bore 36-100ths of an inch; carrying 50 Elongated or 86 Round Balls to the pound. 7 1/2 inch Barrel, 6 Shots. Weight 2 lbs. 10 oz. New Model Holster or Army Revolver. Approved by the Ordnance Department, and adopted for the United States Service. (More than 125,000 supplied for the Service, since 1861.) Calibre or Size of Bore 44-100ths of an inch diameter; carrying 33 elongated or 48 round Balls to the pound. 8 inch Barrel. 6 Shots. Weight 2 lbs. 14 oz. Rifle Cane. Calibre or Size of Bore 30-100ths of an inch diameter; using Metallic Cartridge Size No. 32. Barrel Steel, covered with Vulcanized Rubber. Weight 24 oz. This arm is new in construction and character, combining the advantages of a Walking Cane and Rifle. It is light and portable, but at the same time is nearly as efficient in point of Range, Accuracy, and Penetration, as a Rifle of the same length. Revolving Breech Rifles. Calibre or Size of Bore, 36-100ths of an inch diameter; carrying 44 Elongated or 86 Round Balls to the pound. 44-100ths of an inch diameter; carrying 33 Elongated or 48 Round Balls to the pound. 6 Shots. Weight 6 lbs. Carbine–New Model. (Single Breech Loading.) Pattern used in U.S. Army. Calibre or Size of Bore, 44-100ths of an inch diameter; using Metallic Cartridge—Size No. 46. 20 inch Steel Barrel. Weight 5 lbs. U.S. Rifle. Harper’s Ferry Pattern—Model of 1861. Calibre or Size of Bore, 58100ths of an inch diameter. 33 inch Steel Barrel, with Sabre Bayonet. U.S. Rifle Musket. Springfield Pattern—Model of 1862. Caliber or Size of Bore, 58100ths of an inch diameter. 37 1/2 inch Barrel, with Angular Bayonet.1 Some of the handguns offered had been introduced shortly before the war but had been temporarily discontinued when Remington had turned their full attention to filling government orders and contracts. They also offered newly designed handguns; among these were a line of smaller revolvers based on their popular New Model Army and Navy revolvers. It is interesting to note that the single-shot Vest Pocket pistols, based on Rider’s split-breech action, and Elliot’s Double Derringer pistol were not, at this time, offered to the public. The long guns were rejects and culls remaining from military contracts, namely, the Harpers Ferry and Springfield pattern muskets and the smaller version of Rider’s split-breech carbine. None of the articles offered would bring large commercial sales, but the company was developing a new patent by Rider that, once perfected, would prove to be a success beyond their wildest dreams (figure 108). It is now known to collectors as the Remington-Rider Rolling Block system; some of the first pistols using this action were manufactured for the U.S. Navy. The superiority of Rider’s system soon came to the attention of foreign governments, who inundated Remington with orders for rifles and carbines. 228

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Figure 107 Remington broadside from 1866. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

Over the next forty years, Remington used Rider’s system to produce over 1.5 million rifle variations and several thousand pistols. Although the foreign government orders made the Rolling Block a huge success, it was also very popular with American sportsmen and hunters. The simplicity and strength of Rider’s system was universally recognized, and the actions are still sought for building custom single-shot rifles. Recognizing this demand, an Italian arms company introduced a handgun based on Rider’s action several years ago, and recently the modern Remington Arms Company introduced a rifle version of this old favorite. The firm’s survival during the great depression of the 1870s can be directly attributed to this action’s success. Shortly after the end of the Civil War, Remington sent an inquiry to the secretary of war. This was referred to the Ordnance Office, with Dyer replying on April 29, 1865: Gentlemen, Yours of the 28th inst. to the Secretary of War, asking information as to the number of revolver pistols we used during the War, has been referred to this office and in reply I have to state that there has been procured from the commencement of hostilities to the present time, 466,772 pistols of which 397,877 have been issued to the troops. Your firm has furnished in that time, 128,575 Revolvers, 10,000 Harpers Ferry Rifles, 15,000 Springfield Rifle Muskets. Contracts have been given to you for 20,000 Remington Carbines, none of which have yet been delivered.2 Once again, I have difficulty with the numbers quoted in the department’s correspondence. We know that the Colt, Remington, and Starr firms were the three largest revolver contractors during the Civil War; they furnished approximately three hundred thousand revolvers to the government. Smaller contractors, such as Savage, Whitney, and Rogers & Spencer, had furnished 229

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 108 Joseph Rider’s patent, number 45,797. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

another thirty thousand revolvers. There are some one hundred thousand revolvers unaccounted for in Dyer’s figures. I have again referred to the Ordnance Department’s ledgers, where there are numerous entries for small lots of revolvers purchased on the open market during the early days of the war. These included those of the above manufacturers plus Allen & Wheelock, Joslyn, Freeman, Adams, and European arms, such as Perrin and Lefoucheaux. The combined totals of all these purchases did not total more than thirty thousand revolvers. It appears that the figures supplied to and by Dyer were not correct. On April 15, 1870, the commanding officer of the Springfield Armory ordered army revolver spare parts from Remington. Remington’s reply on the eighteenth is of particular interest: Col. J. G. Benton Springfield, Mass. Dear Sir, Your favor of 15th is at hand, we would say, we shall send order of 5th of April Tuesday 19th, and shall include the 30 levers of order made the 26th with the other parts. We had 230

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

not the levers at the time we sent the other order, it is three or four years since we made any parts of the Army pistol and we have been running short of some of them. We hope to be in condition soon to fill any orders you may send without delay.3 Remington continued to manufacture and market the percussion navy revolver into the 1870s but had discontinued the army model shortly after the war, as stated in the previous letter. The logic behind their decision may never be known, but it is reasonable to assume that a large number of army revolver parts were in various stages of manufacture at war’s end. These parts, along with a large inventory of revolvers that had failed to pass the Ordnance Department’s inspection, provided Remington with an ample inventory of army models and parts. Another consideration was the large number of revolvers acquired by the Federal government during the war, many of which would soon find their way into the commercial market. Postwar sales of Remington’s percussion navy revolver were extremely slow. A study of serial numbers indicates that less than six thousand were sold in commercial markets from the end of the war until the introduction of the navy cartridge model in the early 1870s. The large number of percussion revolvers purchased by the Ordnance Department during the Civil War drew the attention of many in the arms industry. Metallic cartridges were the ammunition of the future, as evidenced by the success of Smith & Wesson’s revolvers and various metallic cartridge carbines and rifles used during the war. The fly in the ointment, in regard to cartridge revolvers, was Rollin White’s patents number 12,648 and 12,649 (figure 109), dated April 3, 1855, which would not expire until 1869. White’s patents did not mention metallic cartridges but did depict a cylinder bored completely through. White assigned his patents to Smith & Wesson in 1856; they used his concept to produce .22 and .32 caliber rim fire metallic cartridge revolvers. White litigated successful lawsuits against patent infringers in the early 1860s. Other manufacturers sought ways to legally evade his patent, which led to many interesting, but not too successful, cartridge revolvers. Remington’s interest in altering their percussion revolvers to metallic cartridge seems to have gained momentum shortly after the war. There is evidence showing their involvement in altering their Remington Army Revolver in late 1865 or early 1866. William Mason, later credited with designing and patenting the cartridge ejector found on the Colt “Richards-Mason” alterations, had an abiding interest in methods of removing expended cartridge cases from revolver cylinders. In drawings submitted to the patent office on two of his early patents (figures 110 and 111), he depicted applications to the Remington revolver. Rider, another of Remington’s resident geniuses, also patented a cartridge extractor (figure 112). His concept appeared mounted on a Colt Model 1860 Army Revolver (figure 113), which in retrospect seems odd considering his long and successful association with Remington. All three of these patents were assigned to E. Remington & Sons. There are four known Remington Army Revolver specimens on which these two extractor systems have been applied, three with Mason’s and a single specimen with Rider’s. Except for the application of the extractor, the specimen by Rider bears striking similarities to the cartridge alteration method later used by Remington on the revolvers altered for Cincinnati, Ohio, arms dealer Benjamin Kittredge (figure 114). They all have new five-shot cylinders that chamber the 231

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 109 Rollin White’s patent, number 12,649. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

Figure 110 William Mason’s patent, number 51,117. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office) 232

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Figure 111 William Mason’s patent, number 53,539. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

.46 caliber rim fire cartridge. In the patent papers of both Mason and Rider, the alteration systems were not described; the patentees’ claims were confined to the cartridge extraction system (figures 115 and 116). The author can lay claim to being the first to identify Rider’s previously unknown specimen seen on a dealer’s table at a California gun show. When discovered, this specimen was missing Rider’s extractor. The present owner, with the aid of Rider’s original patent drawings, has restored it to its original configuration. The army’s Ordnance Department also took an early interest in altering percussion revolvers to metallic cartridge, as evidenced by the following 1865 letter from the Springfield Armory to the chief of ordnance: June 27, 1865 General, I have sent to your address by todays [sic] express a repeating pistol, Navy size, which I have altered to use the centre primed metallic cartridges. From the construction of the pistol and cartridges you will see that it is especially applicable to a revolver of any size, using any charge of powder. This is more than can be 233

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 112 Joseph Rider’s patent, number 51,269. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

Figure 113 Joseph Rider’s prototype Model 1860 Colt Army Revolver with cartridge ejector. (Courtesy: Charles W. Pate photograph, Smithsonian Collection) 234

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Figure 114 Benjamin Kittredge letterhead depicting Remington New Model Army cartridge revolver. (Courtesy: Jay Huber)

said of the revolving pistols using the metallic cartridges generally in use. The maximum charge of the French Cavalry pistol is only ten grains of powder. If revolvers are required for the Cavalry service, a pistol of this kind, using this kind of ammunition, will, I think, be found highly effective and convenient. T. T. S. Laidley Major of Ord.4 This letter leaves pertinent questions unanswered. What type of revolver had Laidley altered? More compelling, what type of center fire cartridge was used in this early alteration? All available evidence seems to indicate that the Ordnance Department had not yet begun their experiments on center fire cartridges. We may never know the answers to the above questions, as I have not found further reference to this revolver. The Ordnance Department received proposals to alter the army’s Colt and Remington revolvers as early as 1866. One of the first had come from Remington, and on February 15, 1867, 235

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 115 Remington New Model Army Revolver with Mason’s cartridge extractor. (Author’s photograph)

Figure 116 Remington New Model Army Revolver with Rider’s cartridge extractor. (Author’s photograph)

the company again approached the chief of ordnance with news of further developments in this regard: Sometime since we had the pleasure of presenting to your notice, sample of our Army Revolver, altered to adapt it to the use of the Metallic Cartridge. We have recently made a further modification or improvement in the plan referred to, by which the cylinder now used in the pistols can be retained, if desired, and a new cylinder for metallic cartridge being furnished, either one could be used as occasion might require. We will have one of the pistols altered upon the plan above mentioned, for your examination if desired, and if it be the purpose of the Government to have any considerable number of revolvers now in the Service, converted to cartridge pistols, we shall be pleased to make proposals for altering the same, should our plan be approved. 236

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

P.S. We are led to address you in regard to the above, understanding that Messrs. Smith & Wesson of Worchester Mass. had been requested to alter samples of the Army Revolver for cartridges, with reference to converting a large number of them for the Govt.5 Further insight into Remington’s reference to the Smith & Wesson firm will be gleaned as this story unfolds. Dyer responded to this on the following day: Gentlemen: I have to acknowledge your letter of the 15th inst. and in reply to state that I shall be pleased to examine your altered pistols if you think proper to send one to this office for that purpose. Several parties in the East have asked for the privilege of altering a few revolvers to present them for examination, which has been granted, but this Department has not yet taken into consideration the subject of the alteration of its revolvers. A. B. Dyer, Chief Ordnance6 One of the parties referred to in Dyer’s letter was Reuben W. Drew, superintendent of the Lowell Arms Company, Lowell, Massachusetts. This firm started in business in late 1864 as the Rollin White Arms Company. White’s involvement is not clear, but the use of his name was evidently seen as a marketing advantage by the promoters. Through his association, they secured a contract with Smith & Wesson to manufacture revolvers of that firm’s pattern, eventually delivering nearly ten thousand .22 caliber revolvers to Smith & Wesson. In the meantime, the promoters had some difficulties with White, and in 1867, the name of the firm was changed to Lowell Arms Company. Drew and Alfred B. Ely, another employee of the firm, had developed a system of altering percussion revolvers for the use of metallic cartridges. They approached the Ordnance Department, submitting an altered Remington revolver that featured a cartridge ejector designed and later patented by Drew in 1867 (figure 117). Despite Dyer’s statement that the Ordnance Department had little interest in altering their revolvers, he took an exceptional fascination in the various alteration methods presented, forwarding many prototypes to the Springfield Armory for testing. This was the case with Drew’s alteration, and the following report was submitted to the commanding officer of the armory on March 30, 1867: Bvt. Col. J. G. Benton Sir: In accordance with your instructions I have examined and fired an altered Remington Army Pistol presented for trial by Mr. Drew and have the honor to submit the following report. In Mr. Drew’s pistol the old cylinder is discarded and in its place a new one substituted of the same external dimensions but containing only five chambers. By this arrangement the walls are made thicker. 237

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 117 Reuben Drew’s patent, number 63,450. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

The chambers are bored completely through the cylinder, and the cartridges, which are Martin’s centre fire metallic are inserted at the breech. To accomplish this, a portion of the breech piece is made movable so that it may be opened when the old cases are to be extracted or new loads put in, and closed again to prevent the cartridges from dropping or jarring out of place. The old cases are ejected by a rammer fastened to the side of the barrel and moving parallel to it. (See next page.) Twenty (20) shots were fired at a target distance 100 yds. (See target record.) The mean of several shots fired into a butt composed of white pine boards 1 inch thick and intervals of 1 inch showed a penetration of 4 1/2 in. The penetration of the Remington Army Pistol (unaltered) is 4 in. 500 rounds were fired to test the endurance and general working of the arm. The cartridge used was Martin’s centre fire and contained 30 grains musket powder and 215 grs. lead. The result was satisfactory in every respect. Of the last 200 fired none missed. The first 300 were unreliable owing to a defect in manufacture. The ejector worked well and removed the shells without difficulty. No cases burst. Thirty rounds were loaded and fired in three minutes. H. Stockton 2nd Lieut. Bvt. Capt. 238

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Next page. As the rammer would be inconveniently long if arranged to act on the bottom of the shells, the head is enlarged so that in one direction its diameter is very nearly that of the chamber. The diameter in other direction is somewhat reduced to facilitate insertion. As each chamber is brought in succession to the proper position the rammer is pressed in, and the head catching the edge of the shell ejects it. A spiral spring withdraws the rammer when the head is removed.7 Drew’s alteration seems to have had several advantages over the specimen submitted by Remington. Admittedly, I have little on which to base my comparison, but if Remington’s version resembled that later produced for Kittredge, I can easily see the disadvantages. There was no loading gate to ensure capture of the cartridges. There was no cartridge ejector, but this nicety may have been vetoed by Kittredge to reduce his cost. The cartridge used in Drew’s version was Martin’s .44 center fire, whereas Remington, having developed their version before center fire cartridges were a reality, had relied on rim fire cartridges. Of course, Remington could have redesigned their revolver for center fire cartridges, but the Martin center fire cartridges were not then being commercially produced. Remington’s only but useful advantage was that the user could revert to loose powder and ball in the absence of metallic cartridges. In this, Remington’s concept was not novel. Some six years earlier, on May 20, 1861, William C. Freeman, acting as agent for Benjamin F. Joslyn, submitted a Joslyn revolver to the navy’s Bureau of Ordnance: Capt. Andrew A. Harwood Sir: I desire to call your attention to a Revolving Pistol invented by Mr. B. F. Joslyn of Worcester, Mass., for the purpose of having the same tested by your Dept. The peculiarity of this pistol consists in the means by which the cylinder is made to revolve, and the movement of the detent which holds the cylinder, and its arrangement for using the fixed ammunition similar to that used in the small pistols of Smith & Wesson, or the ordinary powder & ball. The bore of the Pistol is the same as the Army Pistol of Mr. Colt but weighs one pound less than that and about the same as the Navy pistol. Mr. Joslyn is the first inventor who has succeeded in making a Pistol to practically use fixed ammunition with a large size ball; his plan overcomes all the difficulties hitherto experienced in the use of such ammunition, of a large size, as by it, the Pistol can be fired as many times as may be desired, without the cylinder being prevented from revolving by friction or bursting of the cap of the cartridge. The following is from the opinion of a board of Army officers composed of Col. J. E. Johnson, Majors Ramsey, Maynardier, and Laidley, appointed to test the Pistol: “The Board is of opinion that the mode of revolving the cylinder and working the detent, the special peculiarity of this pistol, is preferable to those generally used in revolving pistols;

239

CHAPTER EIGHT

the mechanism by which it is operated being simpler in its construction, surer in performing its functions and less liable to get out of order.” An early trial will oblige.8 The revolver submitted to the bureau for evaluation was furnished with two .44 caliber fiveshot cylinders, that is, a conventional percussion and a second bored through for metallic cartridges. Although not identified, the author suspects that the metallic cartridge employed was the .44 Henry rim fire recently introduced for the Henry rifle. The favorable report by the Board of Army Officers was no doubt a factor in the bureau’s decision to test the revolver. The Ordnance Office, Washington Navy Yard, forwarded the following report to John A. Dahlgren, commander of the Washington Navy Yard on June 17, 1861: Joslyn’s Revolver has been fired with waterproof charges 20 rounds of 5 charges each. The first round the cylinder charged was submerged in water for 22 hours and 40 minutes before firing—at the 19th round one charge failed to explode, the only one of a hundred charges—5 rounds were loaded and fired in 3m. 18s.—At the 16th round the detent pin broke:—the pistol was repaired and the firing continued. Five rounds were afterwards fired with the plain cylinder loaded with loose powder and ball, and fired with caps which showed its capability for using either cylinder. The following are the dimensions and weights of pistol and ammunition. Length of Barrel 8 inches Depth of chamber Waterproof 1.95 “ “ “ Common 1.56 “ Diameter of the Bore .438 “ Weight of Pistol Without Cylinder 2.15 lbs. “ “ Cylinder waterproof .69 “ “ “ Common .72 “ “ “ Charge 30 grs. “ “ Ball 207 “ “ “ Metallic cylinder 47 “ “ “ Cartridge 284 “ Diameter of Ball .44 in. Length of “ .66 in. 9 R. Wainwright, Lieut. U.S. Navy On Dahlgren’s recommendation, the bureau ordered one hundred revolvers from Joslyn. I have located no further mention of the metallic cartridge cylinders and assume that the revolvers subsequently delivered to the bureau were equipped with percussion cylinders only. I suspect the prospect of litigation led Joslyn to withdraw his offer to furnish revolvers with metallic cartridge cylinders inasmuch as White’s patent was enforceable. Returning to the events of 1867, the Ordnance Department’s test on Drew’s revolver piqued interest from other sources. Approximately five weeks after the test, Benton sent the following to Drew: 240

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

May 8, 1867 Dear Sir: I am ordered to issue to Gen’l Sherman a Colt’s Army pistol altered to fire the metallic cartridge. Gen’l Dyer directed to obtain such a pistol from you if you have one. If you have not one of Colt’s pattern I presume one of Remington’s will answer. Please inform me as soon as possible if you can comply with this request, and how soon.10 I have not located Drew’s response but assume that he lost little time in supplying a revolver to the army’s second in command. Although Dyer’s interest in alterations was evident, he was also aware that Smith & Wesson still retained the rights to White’s patent on the bored-through cylinder. This patent had been a detriment to the government during the Civil War when cartridge revolvers would have been a decided advantage. The department was steadfast in its resolve not to pay royalties and, therefore, decided to play a waiting game. During the next two years, various parties submitted many variations of Colt and Remington revolvers altered to metallic cartridge for examination and testing at the Springfield Armory, while further development of center fire cartridges was pursued at the Springfield and Frankford arsenals. In the meantime, Remington’s altered but dormant revolver was about to resurface. In 1865 Remington had approached Smith & Wesson, seeking a licensing agreement for their altered revolvers and an anticipated revolving rifle, which was to be based on their New Model Revolver design. Smith & Wesson was reluctant to grant Remington any type of concession to manufacture altered revolvers, seeing this as a threat to their own revolver endeavors. However, they were willing to license Remington the right to use Rollin White’s patent on newly manufactured revolving rifles. To accomplish this, White’s consent was a requisite. At that time, relations between Smith & Wesson and White were strained, the latter feeling the partnership had not dealt fairly with him regarding some of his other patents. His refusal to accede brought an end to the negotiations. John E. Parsons describes these negotiations in detail in his excellent book, Smith & Wesson Revolvers.11 Through the intervention of a fourth party, progress was later made in brokering an agreement for Remington to use White’s patent. Kittredge, the Ohio arms dealer cited earlier, realized the demand for large caliber metallic cartridge revolvers. In February 1867, he sent a sample to Smith & Wesson inquiring if they could alter the revolver to use metallic cartridges. The firm advised him that they could not alter the revolver using existing parts because of the close proximity of the chambers. From sources unknown, Kittredge then acquired an altered Remington revolver; this specimen had a new five-shot cylinder and a cartridge extractor at the rear of the cylinder. This could have been one of the revolvers previously discussed, utilizing Mason’s or Rider’s patents. Smith & Wesson had objections to the rear placement of the extractor but felt that the revolver would work well with an ejector placed in front of the cylinder. About this same time, they advised Remington, “We will give you the right to alter your present stock of Army size revolvers (Mr. White assenting) for $1.25 for each pistol.” This right was not “to include any revolvers belonging to the Govt., as we are negotiating for the alteration of those ourselves.”12 241

CHAPTER EIGHT

Remington evidently felt that the royalty requested was excessive and did not accept the offer. However, after further negotiations between all four parties, Smith & Wesson signed a contract in February 1868, which allowed Remington to alter a lot of army revolvers for Kittredge. Kittredge was to pay Smith & Wesson $3.3625 per revolver, with that firm retaining $1.00 for royalty fees and forwarding the remainder to Remington. Following their alteration, Remington shipped the revolvers to Smith & Wesson, where they were inspected and reshipped—3,391 to Kittredge and 1,149 to J. W. Storrs in New York City. Remington altered a total of 4,540 revolvers for Kittredge; all had White’s patent date, “April 3d, 1855,” stamped on the side of the cylinder. The work began in September 1868, with the final delivery in April 1869. This was, coincidently, the same month that White’s patent on the bored-through cylinder expired. These revolvers were furnished with two cylinders; the outside of the ratchet collar on the rear of the original percussion cylinder was reduced in size to the same dimensions as that on the new cartridge cylinder. With this arrangement, both would interchange in the frame. The .46 caliber rim fire cartridge for the new cylinder was a shortened version of that used in the Remington-Rider Split-Breech Carbine delivered to the Ordnance Department in 1864–65. The revolvers altered for Kittredge can be distinguished from those later produced by Remington for their own sales by the absence of a cartridge ejector. The source of the 4,540 Kittredge revolvers is a mystery. Many still have army inspectors’ cartouches on the grips, and some appear to have been refinished at the time of alteration while others were not. Had they been procured via Ordnance Department sales, there would be no mystery, as some of the original grips may have been replaced. Also, in refinishing, other inspectors’ marks may have been obliterated. I am not aware if the Kittredge–Smith & Wesson–Remington contract discussed these fine points. Another point of contention among researchers is whether Remington altered any of their own stock of revolvers remaining from Civil War production, paying royalties to the Smith & Wesson firm concurrently with the Kittredge revolvers. There is some evidence suggesting that this was the case, as revolvers with ejectors and bearing White’s patent date are extant. Until now, it has been assumed that such revolvers were later alterations, using leftover cylinders manufactured during the Kittredge production that bore the White patent date. There are several variations of the revolver as altered by Remington. I have classified them into five types: Type 1. Smith & Wesson–Kittredge revolvers with White’s patent date stamped on the cylinder’s side but without a cartridge ejector (figure 118). Type 2. Those revolvers bearing White’s patent date and having an ejector (figure 119). Type 3. Those revolvers without White’s patent date and having an ejector (figure 120). Type 4. Those revolvers without White’s patent date and having an ejector. This variation also has the beveled lead-ins to the cylinder stop (figure 121). Type 5. Those revolvers identical to type 1 but lacking the patent date (figure 122). The relieving of the frame at the breech and the beveled lead-ins are highlighted in figure 121. The relieving of the frame was probably done to reduce the effects of powder fouling and is 242

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Figure 118 First type Remington New Model Army Revolver as altered to .46 rim fire cartridge for Kittredge. Inset shows White’s patent date. Top of barrel shows barrel address obliterated during refinishing. (Author’s collection)

Figure 119 Second type Remington army alteration. This type has White’s patent date and cartridge ejector. (Author’s collection)

found on all the revolvers altered by Remington, but it is more noticeable on the later versions. All variations produced by Remington were chambered for .46 rim fire caliber. One more feature that is less noticeable but seems to be found on all these revolvers is the rear sight groove. The groove was deepened; this would lower the point of aim when firing the revolver (figure 123). I have been informed that modern day shooters have to raise the front sights when using original percussion Remington revolvers in black powder matches. This would have the same effect as lowering the rear sight. I have seen enough of the first four types to classify them as production work, but the fifth is so scarce that it may be an anomaly, created by installing a later cylinder variation into the early type frame. These revolvers were furnished with two cylinders; the outside of the ratchet 243

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 120 Third type alteration has an ejector but no patent date. (Author’s collection)

Figure 121 Fourth type alteration has an ejector but no patent date and has cylinder bolt lead-ins on cylinder. Cylinder bolt lead-ins and frame relieving are highlighted in insets. CA markings on side of frame have never been identified. (Author’s photograph, Roger Philips collection)

Figure 122 Fifth type alteration—no patent date, no ejector. (Author’s collection) 244

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Figure 123 Top of barrel and frame of first type alteration. Note that the rear sight notch has been deepened. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

Figure 124 Close-up view of right side of first type alteration. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

collar on the rear of the original percussion cylinder was reduced in size to the same dimensions as that on the new cartridge cylinder (figures 124 and 125). With this arrangement, both would interchange in the frame. The .46 caliber rim fire cartridge for the new cylinder was a shortened version of that used in the Remington-Rider Split-Breech Carbine delivered to the Ordnance Department in 1864–65. Although the original percussion cylinders were modified at the time of alteration and furnished with the revolvers, very few existing specimens are found with both cylinders intact. Over the years, most of these cylinders have been separated from the revolver. There have been many other cartridge alterations performed on Remington Army Revolvers; some of these were executed by skilled gunsmiths, some by basement mechanics, and others by dealers, who acquired them at Ordnance Department auctions. Some of the better examples bear a marked resemblance to those done at the Remington Armory. One type is almost identical to the factory alteration, but the cylinder has six chambers that will accept many of the different types of .44 center fire cartridges manufactured from the 1870s until the turn of the 245

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 125 Comparison of cylinders, percussion, and cartridge. On the left is an original .44 percussion cylinder. In the middle is a percussion cylinder that has been modified by reducing the ratchet collar for use in an altered revolver. The cylinder on the right is .46 rim fire. (Author’s collection)

Figure 126 Remington advertisement for army model altered revolver. Revolver shown is a navy model with a hinged loading gate. (Author’s collection)

Figure 127 An altered Remington New Model Navy Revolver with loading gate open, caliber .38 rim fire. (Author’s collection) 246

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

century. I suspect that these were altered by an enterprising firm, such as Hartley & Graham or Francis Bannerman, as a sort of one size fits all approach. One example frequently encountered has a breech plate that has been forged into the frame and a cylinder adapted from the original by milling off the rear and sweating on a ring of the same dimensions and caliber. Some of these latter type cylinders have “Pat. applied for” stamped across the seam of the two parts of the cylinder, but a search of patent records has yet to explain the origin of this stamp. I suspect that the cylinders were marked in this manner to deter others from using this method of adaptation. On another less seen alteration, the cylinder has a back plate similar to those Remington used in the 1870s to convert small frame revolvers. Some of the more ambitious center fire examples have floating firing pins installed in the capping plate, while others have an elongated firing pin on the hammer that strikes through corresponding holes in the capping plate. Remington may have experimented with the capping plate alteration on their large frame revolvers; however, I have yet to encounter an example that I feel is a Remington product. The firm used this method to adapt their percussion Belt, Police, and Pocket Model revolvers and Revolving Rifles to rim fire cartridges. Remington continued to market their army alteration well into the 1870s, although their advertisements for this arm usually depicted the navy revolver with a hinged loading gate (figures 126 and 127). I surmise that the firm received more than one response from a displeased customer who thought he had ordered a cartridge revolver with a loading gate and received an arm lacking this feature. During this same transition period from percussion to metallic cartridge, the Ordnance Department pursued the development of center fire metallic cartridges. Numerous experiments were conducted on cartridges and revolver alterations at both Frankford and Springfield arsenals. On April 3, 1869, with the expiration of White’s patent, Smith & Wesson’s control of the bored-through cylinder lapsed; however, other manufacturers did not leap at the opportunity to produce metallic cartridge revolvers employing this feature. White, with Smith & Wesson’s encouragement, sought an extension from the patent office, claiming that the expense of litigating lawsuits against infringers had left him with very little profit from his patent, but the commissioner of patents, Elisha Foote, denied his appeal. After this rebuff, White carried his fight to the U.S. Senate. That body passed a bill requiring the commissioner to reconsider his extension application, and a similar bill sailed through the House of Representatives on the following day. These actions by Congress did not go unnoticed by the chief of ordnance who, on December 11, 1869, sent the following to the secretary of war, W. W. Belknap: Sir, On the ninth of April, 1869, a bill authorizing the Commissioner of Patents to reconsider the application of Rollin White for extension of his patents was introduced in the Senate and passed without debate. It passed the House without debate on the 10th of April, but failed to receive the signature of the Vice-President before Congress adjourned. It is understood that it has now been signed by that officer, but only awaits the approval of the President to become law. 247

CHAPTER EIGHT

Unless the ends of justice require the extension of this patent, it should not be renewed. So far as I have been able to ascertain, justice to the government and to the public forbids this patent from being renewed. The validity of the patent has been questioned for many years; and it is understood that it was affirmed by the Supreme Court by a tie vote; four of the justices voting affirmatively, and an equal number negatively. Its renewal is urged by Rollin White upon the ground that he has not been sufficiently compensated for his invention. Rollin White has received nearly seventy-one thousand dollars as royalty. Smith & Wesson, for the years 1862–’63–’64–’65–’66–’67 and ’68 received incomes amounting in the aggregate to about one million dollars. This was derived chiefly from the manufacture of the arms under Rollin White’s patent, that firm holding the exclusive right to manufacture under it, and being engaged almost exclusively in their manufacture. It is believed that the government suffered inconvenience and embarrassment enough during the war in consequence of the inability of manufacturers to use this patent, and its further extension will operate prejudicially to its interest by compelling it to pay, to parties already well paid, a large royalty for altering its revolvers to use metallic cartridges. For these reasons, I respectfully request that you will call the attention of the President of the United States to the subject before he acts upon the bill now before him. A. B. Dyer, Chief of Ordnance13 White’s hopes of realizing further benefits from his patent were thwarted when President Ulysses S. Grant vetoed the bill; although there was some opposition in the Senate, the veto was sustained. Subsequent bills on White’s behalf were introduced in Congress, but to no avail. After Smith & Wesson withdrew their support for White’s efforts, the matter was finally dropped in 1876. After it became public knowledge that the Ordnance Department was seriously considering a system to alter some percussion revolvers, there were other parties who submitted plans. At least three submissions came from army officers, and others arrived from various arms manufacturers. On August 6, 1869, the adjutant general of the army issued General Order No. 60, which convened a board of army officers to meet “at Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas, on or about the 15th day of September, and continue its sessions from time to time, at such places as the Board may determine, to practically test the systems of tactics heretofore adopted for the Artillery, Cavalry, and Infantry arms of service.”14 By October 23, this board had decided to make their headquarters at Jefferson Barracks, St. Louis Arsenal, Missouri. On that date, the adjutant general issued further orders in relation to the board’s duties: HEADQUARTERS OF THE ARMY GENERAL ORDERS ADJUTANT GENERAL’S OFFICE No. 72 Washington, October 23, 1869 I. The Board of Officers assembled at St. Louis, Missouri, for the revision of tactics, of which Major General J. M. Schofield is the President, will in addition to the duties assigned, also examine and report on the best small arms and accoutrements for the use of 248

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

the Army of the United States. This board will act in conjunction with a Board of Naval Officers, and endeavor, if possible, to adopt small arms of a pattern and caliber suitable in both branches of the service with common ammunition and parts interchangeable. II. The commanding officers of St. Louis Arsenal and of the Engineer Battalion at Jefferson Barracks are hereby associated with the Army Board in all of its experiments and tests, and the troops stationed at these posts, with all their resources, are hereby placed subject to the orders of this Board, with a view to make these tests as perfect as the time allowed will permit. III. The Board will embrace in its examination the arms and accoutrements now in use, and any that may be sent to it from any quarter whatever, subject to the conditions of this order. IV. Owners and patentees will not be heard in person or by attorney, and must trust to the merits of their samples; but they may send along with their samples any printed or manuscript description to facilitate the manipulation of the parts. V. In the final report, which should, if possible, be rendered by May 1, 1870, the Board will designate the six best muskets for infantry, carbines and pistols for Cavalry and Artillery, and six sets of accoutrements, knapsacks and haversacks, in the order of merit, and the War Department will purchase the same at a price fixed by the owner and approved by the Board. In making its selection, the Board will take into consideration all the elements of the problem, viz: simplicity of construction, uniformity of caliber, character of ammunition, interchangeability of parts, and the condition of the present supply on hand in the various arsenals. VI. After the Board has made its award, the arms and accoutrements not selected will be reboxed and held, in the St Louis Arsenal, subject to the order of the owner or his agent. By command of General Sherman: E. D. Townsend, Adjutant General.15 The board made their final report to Townsend, and it was subsequently published by the Ordnance Department as “Ordnance Memoranda No. 11,” under date of June 10, 1870. Under the posted list of pistols submitted for test, I found the following: 1 Remington revolver, caliber .44”, Springfield Armory. 1 National Arms Company revolver, caliber. 1 Remington single barreled pistol (modified), caliber .50”. 1 Remington single barreled pistol, caliber .50”. 4 Remington revolvers, caliber .44”, Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, respectively. 1 Smith & Wesson revolver, caliber .44”. 1 Whitney Arms Company revolver, stationary breech, caliber .44”. 1 Whitney Arms Company revolver, revolving breech, caliber .44”.16 The revolver heading this list was an example of the New Model Army altered at the Springfield Armory under the direction of Dyer. The National Arms Company revolver has not 249

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 128 Smith & Wesson No. 3 American Army Revolver. (Author’s photograph)

been identified. The two Remington single-barreled pistols were improvements on the Rolling Block Pistol that Remington had furnished to the navy three years earlier. Remington had submitted revolvers No. 2, 3, 4, and 5. The Smith & Wesson firm offered a newly developed cartridge model (figure 128). The two revolvers submitted by Eli Whitney were, in fact, altered Remington New Model Army Revolvers. Whitney requested the return of his two submissions on June 27, 1870: Brig. Gen. A. B. Dyer Sir Please return to the Whitney Arms Co. by express immediately the 2 samples of altered Remington pistol which we sent as samples of alteration.17 Dyer responded to this request on June 30: Your letter of the 27th inst. is received. The two pistols which you sent for trial by the St. Louis Board, were forwarded to St. Louis Arsenal, on the 23rd of April last, and Gen. Callander has this day been requested to send them to you by express if they are in his charge.18 The following is an excerpt of the board’s report on pistols: Of the breech loading pistols submitted, the Board have selected the following six in the order of relative merit: First.—The Remington single-barreled pistol, with guard; center fire. Second.—The Smith & Wesson revolver. Third.—The Remington revolver No. 2. Fourth.—The Remington revolver No. 5. 250

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Fifth.—The Remington revolver No. 3. Sixth.—The Remington revolver No. 4. The Remington is the only single-barreled pistol submitted. It is an excellent weapon, but should be so modified as to load at the half-cock. The Smith & Wesson is decidedly superior to any other revolver submitted. It should be modified as follows, viz: Made center fire; the cylinder lengthened so as to close the space in front of the breech-block, and countersunk to cover the rim of the cartridge; caliber increased to the standard. The mainspring of the Remington arm should be strengthened so as to increase the certainty of fire; also, the plunger should be made to strike more accurately the center of the base of the cartridge. The Board respectfully recommend that all small arms be made of the same caliber. Large caliber is regarded as even more important for pistols and revolvers than for arms of longer range. Pistols and revolvers should have the “saw handle,” so shaped that, in engaging the weapon from the holster to use, it will not be necessary to change the first grasp, or bend the wrist. The charge of powder for the pistol cartridge should be increased as much as the strength of the weapon will justify; the limit to be determined by suitable experiments. It is the opinion of the Board that cavalry armed with saber should have one or two single-barreled pistols as a substitute for the carbine; and that cavalry armed with the carbine should have a revolver as a substitute for the saber.19 The chief of ordnance did not concur with all of the board’s recommendations, but to a large extent, the department followed their advice. The Remington single-shot pistol seems to have fared as well as any of the pistols mentioned. Later that same year, W. C. Squires, acting as agent for Remington, negotiated a barter for five thousand of these in exchange for five thousand of the army’s New Model Army percussion revolvers that had never been issued; these in turn, were subsequently sold by Remington to the French government. In December 1870, Dyer acted on the trials board’s recommendations and ordered one thousand Smith & Wesson revolvers, providing the firm would adapt them to the department’s specifications. The revolver, as tested, had been chambered for the .44 Henry rim fire cartridge; the board recommended that the cartridge be changed to center fire. The company was only too happy to comply with this request, but during discussions about the design change, the Ordnance Department neglected to specify the dimensions of the cartridge to be used. Smith & Wesson redesigned the cartridge to center fire, but this later created some confusion and inconvenience for the department when it was discovered that the bore diameter for the Smith & Wesson revolvers would not accept the bullet diameter of the size necessary to engage the rifling of the Colt and Remington alterations. This required the department to manufacture .44 center fire cartridges in two sizes, the box labels of which were very specific in identifying the types of revolvers for which the cartridges were intended (figure 129). Smith & Wesson delivered one thousand revolvers to the Springfield Armory in March 1871. 251

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 129 Martin cartridges for Smith & Wesson Army Revolver. (Author’s collection)

After concluding negotiations for the Smith & Wesson revolvers, Dyer turned his attention to the alteration of the army’s percussion revolvers. He first approached Remington on January 5, 1871, inquiring as to their charge for altering one thousand New Model Army Revolvers; Remington did not respond until January 10: Your two letters of the 5th inst. are received: also the box containing the four pistols, one of which with checked handle we return today. Owing to some difficulties regarding the making of Revolvers on Plan No. 2, referred to in your letter of the 5th, we defer answering in full before our Mr. S. Remington sees you on this matter. He expects to be in Washington in course of this week.20 I assume that Samuel Remington visited Dyer in Washington and that one of the subjects of their discussions concerned the alterations, but unfortunately we will never be privy to their conversation. Remington apparently had some serious misgivings about altering the revolvers, which had sufficient merit that the subject never resurfaced. I have made a thorough search of the records; however, the letter above is the last piece of available correspondence located on this subject. The four pistols mentioned in the previous letter were probably various models of the single-shot pistol that Remington was developing for the department. None of the revolvers listed as Remington’s No. 2 through 5 in the St. Louis Trials Board’s notes has, to date, been identified. From previous correspondence, I have gathered that they would have chambered the Martin .44 caliber cartridge. Beyond that, I can only speculate as to their features and appearance. A loading gate would have been a requisite, as well as a cartridge ejector other than the pattern found on revolvers Remington altered for the commercial market. No Colt revolvers had been submitted to the trials board, as this firm had encountered difficulties in designing a revolver acceptable to the Ordnance Department. Colt had submitted an example of a design by F. Alexander Thuer to the department in 1868. The revolver was based on the Model 1860 Colt Army, and Thuer’s design was an evasion of Rollin White’s patent, as the 252

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Figure 130 F. A. Thuer’s patent, number 82,258. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

cartridges loaded from the front of the cylinder (figure 130). Although White’s patent would soon expire (in 1869), Colt’s continuing development of Thuer’s patent at this late date suggests that revolver manufacturers still had some fears that White would be successful in seeking an extension of his patent. An Ordnance Department Class 6 (Small Arms) report on the revolver was very critical of both the design and the ammunition; this led the Colt firm to seek alternatives. Colt produced and marketed some Thuer alterations to the private sector; these are now rare and desirable specimens for the Colt collector. By January 1871, Charles B. Richards, a Colt employee, had developed a working model of a new alteration. Although Richards’s design was not patented until some six months later (figure 131), Gen. W. B. Franklin, of Colt, submitted a prototype to Dyer, advising him that Colt would alter the army’s revolvers on the same plan, at the rate of $3.50 per arm. Dyer forwarded the revolver to Springfield for evaluation, and although I have not located the report that was returned with the arm, details gathered from later correspondence indicate the report was critical of certain aspects. For example, there were no safety notches, and the revolver still retained the original rear sight, located on the hammer of the percussion revolvers. On January 31, Dyer sent the following letter to Franklin: 253

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 131 C. B. Richards’s patent, number 117,461. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

Your letter of the 26th instant, proposing to alter Colt’s Army Pistols for Metallic Cartridges according to a model submitted herewith to this Bureau has been received, and with the sanction of the Secretary of War, I hereby give you an order to alter one thousand Army Colt’s Revolvers accordingly. The pistols which require cleaning and repairing to be cleaned and repaired by your company and the actual cost of doing this work to be paid for by this Department. The pistols to be inspected by a sample to be furnished to this Bureau by your company and to be sealed at this office prior to its acceptance, as standard sample. The pistols to be boxed; the necessary boxes to be furnished by your company at their actual cost. Some pistols have been ordered to be sent to you from the Springfield Armory, and the residue will be sent from other Arsenals. Of those sent from Springfield, fifty have a special safety notch which this department desires to have specially tested, and you will please have these pistols packed separately from the others, and marked “Locke’s” Attachment. 254

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Figure 132 Colt 1860 Army Revolver altered to cartridge using Richards’s patent. (Courtesy: Charles Pate photograph, Springfield Armory Museum Collection)

Please advise this office of your acceptance of this offer, and state when you will deliver the pistols.21 Franklin responded on February 2: Your letter of the 31st ult. has been received. This Company accepts the offer therein contained, and will deliver the pistols in four months. We presume that the sample to which you refer, is to be made from one of the thousand to be sent here. We will therefore furnish it as soon after they arrive as possible. We will be glad to have a copy of Maj. Maginnis’ report on the pistol.22 Events were to prove Franklin overly optimistic about the time required to alter the revolvers. The first lot of five hundred was not shipped to the Springfield Armory until August 18; the second lot of five hundred was delivered in early October (figure 132). After accepting Franklin’s alteration proposal, Dyer ordered revolvers to be forwarded to Colt from several arsenals and agencies. He did not notify Benton of these shipments until April 21: Sir: I transmit herewith for your information and guidance, a copy of an order given to the Colt’s Patent Fire Arms Co., Hartford, Ct. for the alteration of Colt’s Army pistols to use the Metallic Cartridge. The order having been accepted by them, you are charged with the inspection of the pistols. A sample will be sent to you for your guidance when approved by this Office. Colt’s Army N.M. Revolvers have been sent to them from the following posts, Viz: 255

CHAPTER EIGHT

Springfield Armory, Mass. 513 Washington Arsenal, D.C. 28 West Point Mil. Academy, N.Y. 90 Ordnance Agency, N.Y. 10 St. Louis Arsenal, Mo. 8 Leavenworth Arsenal, Kans. 377 Augusta Arsenal, Ga. 127 Total 1153 which with the fifty, to which you were directed to apply the Locke safety notch Jany. 31, 1871, will make 1203. The usual Certificates of inspection and receipt will be given. A supply of blanks therefore have been sent you this day. A. B. Dyer, Chief of Ordnance23 The Locke safety notch seems to have had a special significance to Dyer. I shall let Benton describe this modification in a quote from his report to Dyer on June 8, 1870: “Mr. N. O. Locke’s device consists of a small lug on the short arm of the sear which fits a square notch cut in the tumbler forward of the half cock notch, so arranged that when the hammer is down it is prevented from resting on the firing pin or cap, and cannot be moved in either direction without pressing the trigger hard enough to throw the lug out of the safety notch.”24 Locke’s device later evolved into the safety notch found on the hammer of revolvers such as the Colt Single Action and late production Remington 1875 cartridge models. Franklin made a personal visit to the Springfield Armory later in the month, evidently to discuss some of the finer points concerning the alterations. Benton made a report to Dyer later that day. Unfortunately, I have located only the first page of this correspondence, which is very informative: Feb. 13, 1871 Gen’l. Franklin visited the Armory today, and after consulting, we have come to the conclusion that the same cartridge cannot be made for use in the Smith & Wesson & the Colt Army pistols, without making a new hand and cylinder for the Colts which shall have less diameter of bore. It is thought that it would not be practicable to ream up the bore of the Smith & Wesson pistol to that of the Colt pistol, for the reason that it would diminish the strength of the retractor.25 After some discussion, it was evidently agreed that the department had no options but to acknowledge that the Smith & Wesson and Colt revolvers would require different size cartridges. On the first of March, Benton sent the following to Franklin: Gen’l. Dyer desires an altered revolver to test the cartridges to be made at the Frankford Arsenal. Will the one you lately sent to me answer, in your opinion, for this purpose?26 I have not located a reply to this inquiry. 256

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Franklin reported on the progress of the model revolver in early March: March 7, 1871 General The subject of the safety notch in the altered Army pistol had already been gone into by us since our attention was called to it by Capt. Maginnis’ report, and we think that we have devised something practical. The extra notch in the hammer will not answer, because it would come just by a pin which goes through the hammer, and would be therefore very weak. We have made a slot in the cylinder, between every two slots already there, so that the cylinder can be locked when the firing-pin lies between any two cartridges. The pistol can in this way be carried just as the old pistol was, with the hammer resting between two chambers, the cylinder at the same time locked. When we get another model made, we will send it to you.27 Franklin’s safety notch solution proved to be impractical. Unless the revolver action was critically tuned, it was found that if the cylinder stop should fall prematurely, it would engage the extra stop and lock the cylinder. This plan was evidently vetoed by the Ordnance Department and also abandoned by Colt, but not before some revolvers for the commercial market were altered with this feature. This has created a rare and desirable twelve-cylinder stop variation of the Richards’s alteration and has also led to some fakery, as the original six-stop cylinders can be easily altered by a skilled machinist. By the end of March, some of the army’s percussion revolvers had arrived at the Colt factory, and Franklin made another report to Dyer: March 31, 1871 In cleaning the barrels of the Army pistols which we are altering to breech loaders for the United States we find many in which the bore is so rusted that we think it may be well to replace them with new barrels. We will if you wish use our own discretion in the matter, or you might have them inspected, and the inspector can determine the number to be condemned. We will be glad to hear from you on the subject.28 This letter commenced a series of events that was to prove very costly for the department. Some of the correspondence relating to this episode has not been located, but there is sufficient information available to piece the story together. Dyer had ordered 1,203 revolvers to be forwarded from various arsenals to the Colt factory. His intent was for Colt to cull the best of these to make up the one thousand for alteration, using the remainder for parts. Lack of communication would result in 1,126 of the army’s revolvers being altered and delivered to the Springfield Armory. The model revolver being prepared by Colt was not finished until the end of May and was forwarded to Dyer with an enlightening letter: May 26, 1871 I have caused to be sent you by express today the sample altered Army pistol. 257

CHAPTER EIGHT

There are some points of difference between it and the pistol of the same kind exhibited to you in the winter. 1st. The hand or pawl has two notches in it instead of being in two pieces. 2nd. The extractor case is shorter, and is so arranged that the extractor is made to lie with its handle close to the barrel, without any care on the part of the soldier. 3rd. The new breech piece is case hardened, the rear sight forms one piece with it, and the inside of the gate which exposes the rear of the chambers is not roughened. We are ready for the inspection of this work now. W. B. Franklin29 The arrival of the model revolver at the Ordnance Department generated the only Class 6 report known to be personally executed by the chief of ordnance: REPORTS ON SMALL ARMS (CLASS 6.) Memo: Report on Model Altered Colts Revolver sent by Colts Arms Received at Ordnance Office June 7th 1871 The revolver was examined and found to receive freely the sample Martin cartridge made at Springfield and Frankford. It was then fired Sixty rounds. 24 rounds of Springfield and 36 rounds of Frankford ammunition without cleaning. The cartridges cases were frequently examined as they were ejected and no signs of weakness in any respect discovered. The ammunition, both Springfield and Frankford, appeared to be of excellent manufacture, and no failure of ignition occurred. A slight modification of the slotting in the recoil block has been made in order to facilitate the more ready ejection of the empty cartridge cases. It was observed that some nicety was required in bringing the chamber in coincidence with the slot for the purpose of ejection. This arose from the interior smallness of this slot; and to obviate it to a measure, the inner end of the ledge on which the gate closes was filed off in a line toward the axis of the cylinder, so as to present an oblique surface to the cases as they were forced from the chambers instead of the square end as it previously existed. This oblique surface serves mechanically to revolve the cylinder to a point where ready ejection can be accomplished in cases where the shells would otherwise have struck against its square end. It would be well if counter-modifications were made on the gate so as to fill up the space occasioned by the filing off of the ledge as above described. Several sharp edges were found still to exist in this model pistol and they have all been rounded off at this office. A. B. Dyer Chief of Ordnance Official copy for the information of the Commanding officer of the Springfield Armory.30 258

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

This report was also sent to Franklin, and after all the details had been worked out to Dyer’s satisfaction, the alteration work began. Colt advised Benton of the first shipment on August 18, 1871: Dear Sir: We have forwarded to your address by rail this P.M. Ten boxes containing 500 Army Revolvers altered to B/L with sundry parts, and enclose R.R. receipt for same. Lewis Sheldon31 An additional five hundred revolvers were shipped to the Springfield Armory in the first week of October. On October 26, Colt billed the department for the entire one thousand. Dear Sir: Herewith please find invoices in duplicate for altering 1000 Army Revolvers to Breech Loading Revolvers together with new parts furnished for same. The bills have been duly signed and approved by the Inspector. Please direct that this amount be remitted to us in due course and oblige. Hugh Harbison, Treasurer32 The invoice accompanying Harbison’s letter listed all of the expenses associated with the alteration: Altering 1000 N.M. Revolvers to B.L. Revolvers @ Cleaning 950 N.M. Revolvers

$ 3.50 .10

Parts furnished to complete the above. 95 N.M.A. Frames 2.50 239 “ “ “ Barrels 4.60 49 “ “ “ Guards .98 49 “ “ “ Straps .86 8400 “ “ “ Screws 1.20/C 150 “ “ “ Triggers .11 61 “ “ “ Hammers .37 37 “ “ “ Mainsprings .20 550 “ “ “ Searsprings .04 178 “ “ “ Bolts .14 950 “ “ “ Keys .14 950 “ “ “ Stocks .86 950 “ “ “ Cylinders 2.62 Extra parts furnished with the order. 100 N.M.A. Double Hands $ .13 100 “ “ “ Eject. R. Springs .05

$ 3500.00 95.00 $ 3595.00 $ 237.50 1099.40 48.02 42.14 100.80 16.50 22.57 7.40 22.00 24.92 133.00 817.00 2489.00 $ 5060.25 $ 13.00 5.00 259

CHAPTER EIGHT

200 200 200 100 1000 50 50 20

“ “ “ “ “ “ “

“ “ “ “ “ “ “

“ “ “ “ “ “ “

Firing Pins Firing Pin Nuts Firing Pin Springs Latch Catches Screwdrivers Mainsprings Trig./Bolt Springs. Packing Boxes

.045 .04 .07 .006 .22 .20 1.20/C 4.37

9.00 8.00 14.00 .60 220.00 10.00 .60 87.40 $ 367.60 $ 9022.8533

The revolvers had either been in very bad condition when delivered to Colt, or Franklin had taken advantage of the situation. There were some mitigating factors to increase the bid price of $3.50 originally quoted by Franklin. It was Franklin’s intent to re-bore and use the original percussion cylinders when the bid was proffered. Tests with cartridges produced at the Frankford Arsenal had revealed that after the cylinders were bored out to accommodate the Martin metallic cartridges, the metal at the locking notches was so thin that it was prone to breakage. This mandated the use of new cylinders, with the rebated portion made slightly larger in circumference to surmount the problem. This would have materially increased the bid price. However, from the parts list, it appears that Colt could have created some entirely new revolvers, as every conceivable part used in revolver manufacture is charged to the expense of alteration. The average price per alteration was about $9.65 per revolver, but the sum total of all the parts used in these alterations, including the milling of the frame and the new breech plate and ejector housing, comes to slightly more than $17.00. Considering that the Ordnance Department had recently taken delivery of one thousand new Smith & Wesson .44 cartridge revolvers at $14.25 each, the accumulated price of $17.00 for an altered percussion revolver seems exorbitant. Once the revolvers had been delivered and remittance made, this transaction should have been complete. But such was not the case, as Colt delivered another lot of altered revolvers to the Springfield Armory in early December. Franklin advised Benton of the shipment on December 6, 1871: The remainder of the pistols sent here for alteration were sent to you by rail this morning. Fifty of them are what were sent from Springfield with the locks altered, the triggers and hammers were taken from these and placed in fifty others. Fifty are altered and inspected. Seventy six are altered but not inspected. The above list accounts for 176 pistols, leaving 27 which could not be got together. As the 126 were altered in good faith, and with the impression that all that were sent here were sent for alteration. We will be glad if the Dept. will pay us for them at the contract rates, and request that you will present the case to it.34 Franklin’s letter is rather vague concerning the revolvers with Locke’s attachment. After studying his statements several times, it appears that the hammer and triggers (the two components of 260

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Locke’s device) were removed from the original revolvers and placed in revolvers that had been included in one of the shipments of altered revolvers. These 50 revolvers were then returned, still in percussion form, along with 126 revolvers that had been altered. I have made a point of inquiring of Colt collectors if any of these alterations are known to have Locke’s device, and all reports are negative. As the working parts (trigger and base of the hammer) of this system would be concealed within the frame, it is possible that it has not come to the attention of a present owner. It appears that someone had erred while the original negotiations were in progress. The 203 extra revolvers, which had been shipped to the factory for parts, had not been used for this purpose. I have concluded that when they arrived at the factory, someone assumed that they were also to be altered for the department, and the work had progressed to the point that 126 revolvers, over and above those ordered by Dyer, had been altered. To add insult to injury, the invoice for these 126 alterations came to the staggering sum of $1,273.84; this averages to $10.11 per arm. For a few dollars more, the department could have had new Smith & Wessons! Benton sent Franklin’s statement to Dyer on December 19: I enclose herewith an account of the Colt’s Patent Fire Arms Co. for altering 126 Army revolvers to use the metallic cartridge. These revolvers are over and above the one thousand already received from this company. It seems from Genl. Franklins letter, which is enclosed with the account, that the work was done in good faith, under the supposition that all the revolvers sent to him from the different Arsenals and this place were to be altered. The entire lot of 126 pistols have been inspected by the Government Sub-Inspector, fifty of them before they left Hartford and seventy six since received here. The last named have not been stamped—but with the exception of a few minor parts are fit to be received by the Government. It will be seen that 27 of the whole number sent to Hartford (1203) had to be condemned for defects which rendered them unfit for alteration. The account is submitted for your consideration.35 Franklin’s account read as follows: Altering 126 Army Pistols to B.L. Revolvers Spare parts for the above. 35 N.M. Lock Frames 51 “ “ Barrels 10 “ “ Guards 10 “ “ Straps 126 “ “ Keys 126 “ “ Cylinders 126 “ “ Stocks 126 “ “ Screwdrivers

@

$ 3.50

$ 441.00

@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @

2.50 4.60 .98 .86 .14 2.62 .86 .22

87.50 234.60 9.80 8.60 17.64 330.12 108.36 27.22 261

CHAPTER EIGHT

12

Packing Boxes

@

.71 8.52 $ 1273.8636

Dyer’s response to this news has not been located, but he evidently agreed to accept the revolvers, and on December 27, Benton made out the inspection report, which was also signed by O. W. Ainsworth, a civilian employee of the armory who was frequently assigned as subinspector of contract arms (figure 133). Maj. Edward Ingersoll received the revolvers into the armory’s inventory two days later. Although it appears that Samuel Remington had informed Dyer in January that his firm had no desire to pursue the course of alteration suggested by the trials board, Dyer evidently still had plans for altering some of the army’s Remingtons. Later correspondence and reports lend credibility to this theory: March 6/71 Chief of Ordnance Sir: I have to report that on the 4th inst, I issued agreeable to your instructions, the following articles to Major Treadwell Comg. Frankford Arsenal, viz: 1 Smith & Wesson Revolver (trial) 1 Colts Army do Altered 1 Remington do do 100 Martin’s cartridges for Smith & Wesson Revolver 100 do do For Colt’s and Remington Revolver J. G. Benton37 Some three months later, Treadwell, at the Frankford Arsenal, made an illuminating report on altered revolvers and the ammunition being developed for them: REPORTS ON SMALL ARMS, (CLASS 6.) Report on Colt’s and Remington’s Revolvers altered for Metallic Ammunition made by Major T. J. Treadwell at Frankford Arsenal Frankford Arsenal June 9th 1871 Maj. Gen’l. A. B. Dyer General: I have the honor to submit the following points in regard to the Colt’s and Remington’s revolvers that have suggested themselves to me in recent trials at this Arsenal, of cartridges made here for those Pistols, and which have been raised in trial of the two sample pistols sent from the Springfield Armory. I find that the chambers of the Colt and Remington revolvers are not alike, and that two of the chambers of the Remington revolvers are a little smaller than the other four, so that some of the cartridges that go 262

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Figure 133 Ordnance Department inspection certificate for altered Colt revolvers. (Courtesy National Archives)

readily into the Colt, will not go into the chambers of the Remington revolver, but project slightly, enough to prevent the revolution of the cylinder. Both pistols were sent to the factory, but it seems that the Colt was used in the daily trials of cartridges, and the reports were all favorable as to its working. My attention was constantly directed to the securing of a proper composition of pellet of priming composition to secure certainty of fire and to prevent burning of the composition in priming, and many experiments were made to this end. It is only within the last days that the differences referred to have been called to my attention. The small limits of variation of this particular cartridge have given us much trouble in its manufacture, and the development of the fact that some of the cartridges will go readily enough in the Colt, and not in the Remington, has convinced me that it is of the utmost and vital importance that the chambers of these two revolvers should be of 263

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 134 Frankford Arsenal cartridges for Colt and Remington revolvers. (Author’s collection)

uniform dimensions, and that the space between the rear face of the cylinder and the face of the recoil block should be the same in both. If the old cylinders are to be used in making up the breech loading revolvers for service trial, the two points above noticed cannot be too strongly impressed upon the Inspectors. There is generally a trifle of variation in the thickness of a lot of copper, and sometimes even in portions of the same strip, and in making cartridges by the thousand there are small variations in the exterior dimensions of the cartridge cases, due to the wear of the disc &c; and these notwithstanding the greatest care and inspection. The chamber dimensions should therefore be as fixed and invariable as it is possible to make them. Moreover, the old cylinders of the Colt and Remington revolvers were chambered for a flexible ammunition, loading at the front, and the ball pressed home. We now propose to alter them to breech loading revolvers, using an inflexible ammunition, and it is patent that no such cartridge will answer in the two pistols in question, or either of them, unless their chambers are uniform in dimensions; and this remark applies to all chambers of breech loading arms for Metallic ammunition. As there was no necessity for this nicety with the old paper, linen and skin cartridges, I presume the inspection of the chambers of the cylinders was not very close and we may expect considerable variations in them. The model of the altered Colt revolver we have here is one with the rear of the cylinder reduced, and, in boring the chambers through the cone seats, only a very thin film of metal is left at the stop recess, in fact, in the revolver before me, one chamber is quite through and all could be easily punched with a sharp point; this model of cylinder will not answer for the alteration, only full sized or new cylinders should be used. I would suggest that in future several sample Arms may be sent me for trial and manufacture of cartridges in all cases; that a more complete and thorough trial may be had, to insure uniformity, and because the constant use of a single arm in the daily trial 264

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

in the manufacture, gives rise to some wear, where thousands of rounds are required to be fired to keep trace of and check small variations in each days work. T. J. Treadwell, Major of Ord. Ordnance office, June 12, 1871 Official copy for the information of the Commanding Officer of Springfield Armory. S. V. Benet, Maj. Of Ord.38 The development and manufacture of cartridges for the altered revolvers, as described in Treadwell’s report, also supports my theory that the department still had plans to either acquire or alter some Remington revolvers. Treadwell clearly stated that Colts and Remingtons were to chamber the same cartridge. The cartridges being manufactured for these arms required packaging, and the labels identifying the contents were, no doubt, approved by Dyer. The label on an 1872 box reads “12 Cartridges for Colt’s & Remington’s Revolvers” (figure 134). This has created an enigma for collectors, and there are some who are still searching for the Remington service revolvers that will chamber the Ordnance Department rounds. To add to this confusion, there are published reports from this period praising the Ordnance Department’s “improved Remington revolvers,” while condemning the “old Models.” Some researchers have assumed that the “improved Models” were altered metallic cartridge revolvers. After exhaustive research of Remington Army and Navy revolvers, I feel safe in stating that the “improved Models” were percussion New Model Armies and the “old Models” were Elliot or 1861 Armies, which had been condemned at the end of 1862. I believe this puzzle is now solved. Sometime in the latter part of the year, Dyer apparently abandoned any plans for altering Remington revolvers. He may have concluded, considering the receipts for the altered Colts, that it was not cost effective. The 1,126 Colt Armies were the only percussion revolvers altered for the use of metallic cartridges for use by the U.S. Army.

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVER ALTERATIONS Although Remington had pursued plans for altering their percussion army model revolvers as early as 1865, it appears that little thought was given to the navy models until 1871. I have tried to establish a date for the introduction of the navy cartridge revolvers and have narrowed this to a sixteen-month period between August 1871 and January 1873. In August 1871, Remington mailed the following request to the Ordnance Department: E. Remington & Sons New York Office W. C. Squire, Secretary 193 Broadway, New York, Aug. 8, 1871 General, We left with you some time since one of our revolvers altered for the metallic cartridge on the plan shown in the accompanying sketch. Having occasion to use this sample within a time not permitting us to make another we have to request that it be returned to us. 265

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 135 Remington catalog page sent to Ordnance Department requesting return of altered revolver. (Courtesy: National Archives)

Please answer by telegram. W. S. Smoot This pistol was in the case at the southeast corner of the museum. Forward it to our New York Office, No. 193 Broadway.39 This matter seems to have been extremely urgent to Remington, for on the following morning they also sent a telegram containing the same request. Maj. Stephen V. Benet, who was now Dyer’s assistant at the department, responded by telegraph later in the day: Referring to the telegram of this date I have to state that being uncertain as to the particular pistol desired by you, I have sent the only two of your altered revolvers that were in this Bureau, except those that were before the St. Louis Board.40 An illustration extracted from an advertising broadside depicting the Remington New Model Army Revolver with modifications penciled in had been enclosed with Smoot’s letter, but this had not yet arrived (figure 135). The revolvers arrived at Remington’s New York office on the tenth, and on that same day, the company notified Benet of their receipt: The pistols spoken of in your esteemed favor of the 9th came to hand. We return one, this day by Express, not being the property of our company. The samples for the St. Louis Board, you still retain for satisfactory reasons. They can remain if necessary. Thanking you for responding so promptly.41 266

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

All the features later used on the navy cartridge models were sketched onto the illustration sent to the department, and a brief description was also penned into the margins. This alteration was evidently a one-of-a-kind prototype; otherwise, the request for its return would have been unnecessary. Remington’s interest in altering their navy revolvers was probably fueled by the fact that they had a large stock of unsold percussion navy revolvers. A study of serial numbers indicates that less than five thousand of this model had been sold since the last delivery to the navy near the war’s end. Both the military and public were now showing an interest in the larger caliber metallic cartridge revolvers, and the firm saw an opportunity to dispose of their dust collecting inventory. Although I speculated earlier about the date these revolvers first appeared on the market, I sense that it more likely occurred within a short period after Remington requested the return of the sample revolver cited previously. From all available evidence, it appears the firm made a good decision. Serial numbers indicate that navy alterations began in the 36,000-serial-number range and continued until approximately 42,000. When the stock of percussion revolvers was exhausted, Remington resumed manufacture of the revolver and produced approximately six thousand additional Navies. However, these were manufactured as cartridge models with serial numbers reaching into the 48,000 range. The alterations can be identified by Remington’s practice of stamping assembly numbers on the original percussion revolvers as they were disassembled in preparation for the various milling operations necessary for modification. This assured that when a revolver was reassembled, the original major parts could be identified. New parts used in the alteration were stamped with the same number when the revolver was reassembled. These numbers were stamped: one, on the bottom of the barrel; two, on the left side of the grip frame strap; three, on the rear of the breech plate assembly; four, on the rear of the ejector housing; five, on the left rear side of the loading lever; and six, usually on the top flat of the trigger guard tab (figure 136). I have examined several of the navy alterations performed for the navy’s Bureau of Ordnance that have new trigger guards that were installed at the time of alteration. These usually will have no numbers. Assembly numbers were unnecessary on the newly manufactured cartridge revolvers. As introduced, the Remington navy alterations were chambered for the .38 caliber rim fire cartridge. When the Bureau of Ordnance became interested in altering some of the navy’s percussion revolvers to metallic cartridge in 1873, the Union Metallic Cartridge Company developed the same cartridge to use a center fire primer, and shortly thereafter, Remington started offering their revolvers chambered for this cartridge. A large percentage of the commercial revolvers were rim fire, which is most commonly encountered today. The rim fire variation can be identified easily by the twelve notches at the rear of the cylinder for the hammer nose, although I have examined some center fire specimens in which the factory has installed a rim fire cylinder. This does not pose a problem, but if the situation were reversed, that is, a center fire cylinder in a rim fire revolver, the revolver could not be fired because the hammer nose would not reach the primer of the cartridge. The Army and Navy Journal was a weekly New York publication devoted to military interests. The issue of January 25, 1873, devoted the entire front page to an article and illustration of the “Remington Navy Revolver, with ejector; adapted to cartridges” (figure 137). There are many factual errors in this report, which I present verbatim: 267

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 136 Location of alteration numbers on Remington Navy Revolver, serial number 21,406. (Author’s collection)

The accompanying cut presents a full-size view of a recent modification of the well-known and approved Remington Navy Revolver. Of this pistol, which for years has been the recognized weapon in the U.S. Navy, more than a hundred thousand have been sold previously to the introduction of metallic ammunition. A very convenient and effective improvement, suggested by the change from loose powder and ball to brass or copper-shell charges, was made two or three years since. In this type two cylinders, easily transferable, were provided, the one adapted to loose and the other to metallic ammunition; so that, in the possible default of his cartridge supply, the possessor of a “Remington Navy” could have recourse to powder and ball in their original shapes. The popularity of this improvement has been very great. Cartridges, however, having now become as universal an item in stock as were their antecedent staples, the age of progress demands a further step—this time in the manual convenience of the pistol. The present modification, as is obvious from the cut, refers to the expulsion of the discharged shell. In this new type of the Navy, the proportions and calibre of the favorite old arm are preserved. The process of shell expulsion is performed by hand, through the always certain and easy operation of a rod, so secured in its socket as never to be lost. Simple directions for manipulation are as follows: 268

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

Figure 137 Army & Navy Journal, January 25, 1873. (Courtesy: Jay Huber)

To Load—“Grasp the stock with the left hand, half cocking; open the shield at the base of the cylinder with the thumb of the right hand and insert the cartridges, rotating the cylinder for that purpose with the thumb of the left hand. Close the shield.” To Remove Shells—“Half-cocking with same grasp as in the former operation, throw open the shield; with the right hand disengage the ejecting rod by dropping the lever which secures it in place. Then, rotating the cylinder as before, the downward plunge of the rod quickly thrusts out the shells. The arm, in a loaded condition, should be carried with the nose of the hammer engaged in a safety notch between the two cartridges.” The distinctive merits of this expedient are of a practicable nature, the only possible objection to it being credited to the casuistry which is apt to depreciate an operation on account of its simplicity. With a very little practice the natural manipulation of this easily arranged plunger expels the discharged shells as promptly as the most exactly made automatic ejector, and it will bear all kinds of usage without getting out of order, while experience shows that the elaborate mechanism of the latter device is not adequately strong for rough treatment. The addition of the shield at the rear of the cylinder furnishes both a 269

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 138 Altered Remington cylinders. On left, navy revolver cylinder as modified by the Bureau of Ordnance. Center and right are navy and army cylinders as furnished by the Remington firm. (Author’s collection)

Figure 139 Remington Navy Revolver altered to .38 rim fire caliber for the commercial market. (Author’s collection)

Figure 140 Page from 1889 Hartley & Graham catalog. (Author’s collection) 270

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS

prevention against the escape of cartridges of the occasional small gauge, and at the same time provides an extra resistance base at the moment of discharge—which is not without decided value. The Remington Navy Revolver in its design is perhaps the strongest weapon of its type, having no hinges, as its frame is constituted of a single piece of metal. The present improvement, it is worth noting, has been secured without deviating from the original strength or simplicity of the arm, so that it is now especially available for military purposes. Being a most excellent shooter and of the same chambering as the .38 rifle—a popular calibre, it is especially adapted to target practice. 42 The author of this report seems to have confused the navy model with the Remington Army alteration introduced some five years prior. The statement that the Remington Navy was the recognized weapon of the U.S. Navy is only partially true, as the navy had purchased almost equal numbers of Remington, Whitney, and Colt percussion revolvers. This article also reports that more than one hundred thousand Remington Navies had been produced. Actually, total production of all navy models, including the cartridge variations, never exceeded fifty thousand. Further, the suggestion that this revolver was adapted to use both a cartridge and a percussion cylinder is erroneous. The Remington Army alteration was offered with both cylinders (see figure 120). However, the manner in which the thick recoil shield and loading gate assembly were adapted to the frame of the navy revolver makes it impossible to insert a standard percussion cylinder into the frame (figures 138 and 139). The cartridge Remington Navy Revolvers remained on the market for much of the 1870s, and after the Remington firm declared bankruptcy in 1886, some of the altered navy revolvers were still in stock and were offered at discount prices in Lamberson, Furman & Company’s 1888 catalog and also in Hartley & Graham’s 1889 catalog (figure 140). In summation, Remington manufactured about forty-eight thousand navy revolvers. Approximately fifteen thousand were percussion Beals models, five thousand were percussion Elliot or 1861 models, and twenty-two thousand were percussion New Models. Remington altered about six thousand of the percussion New Models and manufactured an additional six thousand New Models as cartridge revolvers. These figures account for the relative scarcity of percussion navy models in comparison to Remington’s army models. Remington produced about 148,000 army models, less than 2,000 were Beals models, about 10,000 were Elliot or 1861 models, and the remainder were New Models. It is impossible to determine how many altered Armies Remington produced, because these revolvers were made from either previously condemned revolvers or from reacquisitions from the military; serial numbers on these revolvers are scattered throughout the New Model production range. A brief comment is warranted on the feasibility of private parties returning revolvers to Remington for alteration. Based on Remington’s later comments to the Bureau of Ordnance, there seems to be little chance that this ever occurred. In 1875 Remington offered to alter one thousand revolvers for the navy at a price of $3.50 each, and if the navy 271

CHAPTER EIGHT

Figure 141 Remington Armory, circa 1875. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

desired them restocked and refinished, there would be an additional charge of $.75. Considering the involved process of setting up machinery for alteration, it is unlikely that Remington would do this on a piecemeal basis, and in the unlikely event that they did agree to do so, the price would have been prohibitive. I will next discuss Remington’s alteration of the navy’s percussion revolvers.

272

CHAPTER NINE

Metallic Cartridge Alterations for the Bureau of Ordnance n this chapter I shall examine the postwar fate of the Remington percussion revolvers that the navy purchased during the Civil War. To do justice to this story, I must also examine the Bureau of Ordnance’s relations with the Colt Patent Fire Arms Company during this same period. For a complete postwar history of the Colt-Navy relationship, I recommend Colt Revolvers and the U.S. Navy, 1865–1889 by author-researcher C. Kenneth Moore.1 In 1873 Rear Adm. A. Ludlow Case, chief of the bureau, took notice of the recent introduction of large caliber cartridge revolvers by Colt, Smith & Wesson, and Remington. His interest was probably piqued by the article that appeared in the January 25 edition of the Army and Navy Journal, discussed in the previous chapter. On February 19, he sent the following letter to each company:

I

Sirs: The Bureau is desirous of examining the most recent and improved revolver that you are making to use metallic ammunition and will be much obliged if you will forward one at your earliest convenience, with bill for it.2 Remington responded to this inquiry three days later: Sir, In reply to the Bureau’s letter of Feby. 19, 1873, requesting us to send a sample of our most improved revolver for metallic cartridges. We send on such as we now have, but we contemplate getting up another, which we can send in the course of say two months. If the Bureau desires to compare the several different kinds of revolvers, we should prefer to submit an entirely new model.3 The new model revolver referred to in this letter has not been identified. I am not aware of any large caliber Remington cartridge revolver then under development. Remington would not introduce their Model 1875 Revolver until late the following year. 273

CHAPTER NINE

Figure 142 Remington New Model Navy Revolver altered to .38 rim fire. (Author’s collection)

An entry in the bureau’s “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment,” dated February 22, 1873, recorded payment for “one Remington Navy Revolver $15.”4 This revolver was based on the wartime percussion revolver. The frame had been redesigned to accept a rim fire .38 caliber metallic cartridge cylinder and a breech plate with a hinged loading gate. An ejector rod with housing and a newly designed hammer nose, capable of discharging a rim fire cartridge, completed the new design (figure 142). Gen. W. B. Franklin, vice president and general agent for the Colt firm, responded to the bureau on February 21: Admiral, Your letter of the 19th inst ordering our most recent & improved revolver has been received. Unfortunately they are in such condition that they will not be ready for a fortnight, at which time one will be sent you. Do you, or do you not require ammunition for it? In the mean time if you wish, we can send you one of our Army rev’g pistols altered to take a central-fire met. cartridge. Twelve hundred of them are now in use in the Cavalry Service, and we hear excellent reports from them. But we will send the other in a fortnight.5 Colt was in the process of developing the large frame single-action revolver that would later be synonymous with the Colt name. Colt had started development on this latter arm in 1872, and when the previous letter was written, it was near completion. Franklin forwarded a model of this revolver to the bureau on March 7. Smith and Wesson responded to the bureau’s request on February 24: Dear Sir: In compliance with your request of the 19th inst. we forward to you today by express an army revolver of our latest pattern. Knowing that a shorter pistol is usually considered 274

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

better for the Navy, than that required by the Army, we have taken the liberty to send also an extra one, one inch shorter than the army pistol.6 This letter was initialed by Walter H. Wesson, eldest son of D. B. Wesson, the cofounder of the firm. By mid-March, Case had all three revolvers in hand, and on March 12 he ordered cartridges, sending identical letters to all three manufacturers: Sirs:— Please furnish this Bureau with 1,000 metallic ball-cartridges for the revolver of your manufacture recently forwarded in compliance with its order of 19th Feb. 1873.7 The bureau’s ledger, “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment,” has an entry for March 14, 1873, to the credit of the Remington firm for “1,000 cartridges, 38 Cal. short.” The Colt firm responded to the request by telegraph on March 14, stating: “Colonel Benton writes you can get pistol cartridges at Frankford by applying to Ordnance Department.”8 Remington replied on March 17: Sir, We have the honor to enclose invoices and bills lading for cartridges forwarded to the Bureau in execution of order of 12th Mch. 1873, and for parts of the Navy pistol forwarded to the New York Navy Yard in execution of order 13th Mch. 1873. In reference to the Remington revolver furnished the Bureau upon its order of 19th Feby. 1873—the price charged is the regular price for a single pistol; but should the Bureau order a quantity of the pistols, we could make a discount depending upon the quantity ordered.9 Examination and testing of the three revolvers was not completed until the following month. On April 10, ordnance inspectors forwarded the following endorsement to Case: Admiral: In obedience to your order we have examined the three (3) best known revolvers adapted for the use of metallic-cartridges—viz: Smith and Wesson’s—Colt’s and Remington’s—and do report in favor of Smith and Wesson’s for its cheapness, facility of loading, and excellent system of extracting the empty shells. Seven hundred (700) rounds were fired from the Smith and Wesson’s without the slightest disorder which would seem to warrant the necessary perfection in the mechanism. We do recommend that these pistols if adopted for the Navy be nickel plated which can be done at an additional expense of about one dollar ($1.00) per pistol. We are Sir, Your Obedient Servants J. Nuek, Commander U.S.N. Frank Pearson, Lt. Commander U.S.N.10 275

CHAPTER NINE

Case had ordered the examination and trial of these revolvers, and the report was addressed to him. The inspectors were apparently unaware that Case had been replaced as chief of the bureau on the same day that the report was written. His successor was Capt. William N. Jeffers, who had also served as an inspector of ordnance at the Washington Navy Yard during and after the Civil War. His reports on the inspection of Remington Navy Revolvers can be found in a previous chapter. He would remain as the chief of the bureau until July 1881. Although Case had been replaced as bureau chief, he was well aware of this report, as evidenced in a letter dated May 8 from Franklin to Cdr. K. R. Breese, another inspector of ordnance at the Washington yard: My Dear Captain, Admiral Case, whom I met in New York on Tuesday, volunteered to tell me that you and Captain Pierson [sic] had been trying our Army pistol, and that you had found ours inferior to the Smith & Wesson pistol, and that you would doubtless give me the facts in the case, if I wrote you. Of course we cannot and do not intend competition with the S. & W. in the method of extraction. Not only do we not own the right to use the method of simultaneous extraction, but the fact that soldiers have not been able to assemble the pistol when it is taken apart for cleaning, as reported by the Captains of the Companies using them, deterred us from using that extractor for Military purposes. But we hope that in accuracy and penetration you found our pistol at least equal to the S & W pistol, and I thought it would turn out to be superior.11 Had Franklin been aware that the bureau had no funds with which to purchase revolvers, he may have been less perturbed. Revolvers were very low on the bureau’s priorities, due to the lack of appropriations for such amenities. The navy was going through a period of congressional neglect, and all phases of naval operations were suffering from a lack of funds at that time. As we shall see later in this chapter, Jeffers’s personal opinion of revolvers as a side arm would also have some bearing on the fact that the navy would not order new revolvers for many years. Ironically, it was Remington’s cartridge revolver that caught Jeffers’s attention. He saw in this specimen an economical method to adapt the navy’s percussion revolvers to cartridge. He first approached Remington on this subject on May 10, one month after the tests at the Washington yard: Sirs: Please state at what price you will alter two hundred (200) Remington Revolvers to the use of metallic cartridges for competitive trial.12 William S. Smoot replied for Remington on May 15: Sir, In reply to yours of May 10th asking price for alteration 200 Remington Revolvers, would say that we can alter them for four dollars each, as per sample sent to your office some time since.13 276

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Also, on the tenth of May, Breese responded to Franklin’s letter of May 8: Sir, I have just received your letter of the 8th inst. and in reply would state that the orders under which Lt. Commdr. Pearson and myself acted were to select the revolver best adapted to the use of metallic cartridges, other things not being too objectionable. This we found in the Smith and Wesson. The point referred to by you, the difficulty of assembling, was recognized by us; but as they are only intended for Officers use, we did not think that insuperable. Again, should they go into the hands of Jack we know that it is only theoretically that he is to take apart and clean his pistol &c, for practically skilled people have them in hand for such purposes. No absolute tests for accuracy and penetration was [sic], but both were taken into consideration with making up of our opinion and it was in favor of Colt’s, but for Naval purposes sufficient test was made of the accuracy and penetration of the Smith and Wesson’s which taken with its decided advantages in its extractor decided us in its favor. The adoption of the Smith and Wesson revolver has not been decided upon and Captain W. N. Jeffers of the Bureau desires me to ask the price of altering 200 revolvers of the old pattern, to receive metallic ammunition; please direct your reply to him.14 Franklin made his first contact with Jeffers on May 13: Sir, In compliance with the request contained in Captain Breese’s letter to me of the 10th inst., I would state. We are not now engaged in altering our Navy rev’g pistols to met. Cart. pistols. We however have some already altered, and if those which you desire to have altered are new, that is, have never been issued, and are in good order, we will exchange with you pistol for pistol for two hundred, at three dollars and fifty cents each. These are for rim-fire cartridges, and were made for the trade. No central fire cartridges of the calibre of the Navy rev’g pistol have been made in the U.S. except experimentally. For alteration of the pistols to central fire cartridges the price would be the same as that given above for rim-fire, were the order to cover all the Colt’s pistols in the Navy, amounting I believe to some two thousand. But we could not make the alteration for two hundred at nearly that price. Of course a good central fire .38 cal. cartridge can easily be made.15 We learn from this piece of correspondence that no .38 caliber center fire cartridges were commercially available at that time. Jeffers was apparently indecisive as to his options, considering the limited funds he had available. On June 5, he again contacted the Colt firm, this time to inquire about the price of single-action army revolvers: 277

CHAPTER NINE

Sirs: Please inform the Bureau at what rate you will furnish and deliver five hundred (500) Colt’s revolvers adapted for central fire metallic cartridges, nickel plated in all their parts, similar to the one furnished on order of 19th Feb. 1873; and also, at what rate you will exchange a like number for the old model of Colt’s revolver now on hand in store and simply cleaned. The Bureau is about changing the muzzle loading revolvers for those firing metalliccartridges and desires the quantity referred to for trial.16 I found Jeffers’s statement about the old model revolvers very enlightening. The implication seemed to be that the navy had on hand five hundred Colt revolvers that had never been issued for service. The bureau’s final order for Colt’s percussion revolvers had occurred in 1862; during the remainder of the war, the bureau had purchased approximately twelve thousand Remington and Whitney revolvers. The possibility that the navy would still have this number of unissued Colt revolvers remaining from the Civil War seems somewhat incredulous. The response to this letter advised Jeffers that Colt would furnish the cartridge revolvers at the price of $13.80 but that they did not wish to exchange that number for any of the old percussion pistols. Shortly after Jeffers had made the above inquiries of Colt and Remington, he decided to dispose of many of the older arms on hand in the navy’s arsenals. The Bureau of Ordnance had purchased over twenty thousand percussion revolvers for the navy between 1852, when Samuel Colt had received his first revolver order from the bureau, and April 1865, when Eli Whitney delivered the bureau’s final revolver order of the Civil War. Many of these were lost in engagements during the war, while others were later disposed of as surplus during the Franco-Prussian War. After the navy had taken delivery of the Remington Rolling Block Pistols in 1867–68, the percussion revolvers in navy stores were no longer issued for general use on vessels. Revolvers were issued only to officers, with the approval of their commanding officers, and it was inevitable that the bureau would seek to dispose of still more percussion revolvers. The money generated from the sale of surplus arms was credited to “Appropriations, Naval Ordnance” and could be used at the discretion of the bureau chief, precluding the necessity for seeking congressional appropriations for small purchases. Jeffers saw these funds as an ideal means to secure the alteration of some of the navy’s remaining percussion revolvers. The following advertisement was published twice weekly in several metropolitan newspapers beginning on May 20: SALE OF SMALL ARMS Bureau of Ordnance, Navy Department Washington D.C. May 20, 1873 Sealed bids in duplicate will be received at this office for the purchase in lots of 100 to 500, for about 2,000 Whitney’s, 1,800 Colt’s, and 1,200 Remington’s, (navy size, caliber .36) with 604,000 rounds of paper ammunition, to be delivered to the successful bidder or bidders at the New York or Washington navy yards. The bids will be opened at 12 M. on the 19th June, 1873 and the Department reserves the right to reject all that are not deemed satisfactory. 278

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

The bids will be addressed to “Chief of Bureau of Ordnance, Navy Department, Washington D.C.,” and indorsed “Bids for purchase of Navy Revolvers and Ammunition.” William N. Jeffers Chief of Bureau17 The bureau received several bids in response to this advertisement. One of these came from Philadelphia, dated June 17: Chief of Bureau of Ordnance I bid $2.50 each for 100 Remington Revolvers I “ $2.00 “ “ 500 “ “ I “ $1.25 “ “ 100 Whitney’s Revolvers I “ $1.00 “ “ 500 “ “ I “ $1.12 1/2 “ “ 100 Colt’s Revolvers I “ $.95 “ “ 500 “ “ 18 Respectfully, Wm. H. Thomas This letter has a notation at the bottom added at the bureau, “X Accepted, 19 June 1873,” and another “X” beside the $2.50 bid on the lot of one hundred Remingtons. On the same day, the bureau notified Thomas: Sir: The Bureau accepts your bid of two dollars and fifty cents ($2.50) each for one hundred (100) Remington revolvers, made the 17th inst. These revolvers will be delivered to you at the Philadelphia Navy Yard upon payment of the amount of sale to the Paymaster of that Yard.19 On the same day, Jeffers sent the following directive to Cdr. J. R. M. Mullaney, commandant of the Philadelphia yard: Sir: Please deliver to Mr. W. H. Thomas one hundred Remington revolvers, without spare parts, at two dollars and fifty cents ($2.50) each, upon his payment of the amount of sale to the Paymaster of the Yard, which amount is to be deposited to the credit of Appropriations “Navy Ordnance.”20 Another successful bid for revolvers was posted from Washington on June 19 by a prominent New York City arms dealer: Sir, I would offer to purchase in accordance with the terms of advertisement the following named revolvers and for which I will give the following prices. 279

CHAPTER NINE

2000 Whitney Revolvers $1.57 Ea. 1200 Remington Revolvers $2.26 Ea. 1800 Colts Revolvers $3.27 Ea. Respectfully &c J. W. Frazier I would also give for Percussion Caps Musket 26 cts. per 1000, Revolver Caps 18 cts. per 1000.21 Across the face of this bid was written “Accepted, 19 June.” On the following day, Jeffers sent directives to the Portsmouth, Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, Norfolk, and New York yards. The message to all yards, except New York, was the same: Sir: Please send to the New York Navy Yard by the “Tallapresa” on her next trip all the Remington and Whitney Revolvers, including their spare parts, now on hand, disposable or appropriated, at the Yard under your Command; also Musket and Revolver Caps, and all paper ammunition for revolvers, reserving a sufficient quantity of the latter two for issue with the Colt’s Revolvers on hand.22 The Tallapresa was the navy supply vessel that made regular scheduled trips to the various navy yards on the East Coast. Also on the twentieth, Jeffers forwarded directions to Vice Adm. S. C. Rowan, commandant of the New York yard, concerning disposal of the revolvers: Admiral, The Bureau has directed a quantity of Remington’s and Whitney’s revolvers, revolver cartridges and musket and revolver percussion caps to be sent from the Portsmouth, Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, and Norfolk Navy Yards to the Yard under your command, these articles, when received, together with those of similar kind on hand in the New York Navy Yard, excepting a sufficient quantity of cartridges and percussion caps for Colt’s Navy revolvers on hand, are to be delivered as follows, upon each of the parties depositing the value thereof with the Paymaster of the New York Navy Yard. To J. W. Frazier—23 Dey St. New York All the Whitney revolvers at $1.57 ea. “ “ Remington “ “ 2.26 “ Musket percussion caps .26 per M Revolver “ “ .18 “ “ To Cooper, Harris & Hodgekins, 177 Broadway, New York Revolver cartridges at $1.50 per M Should the spare parts of the pistols be required they may be sold at the same rate as those for the Sharps and Hankins Carbines were at a recent sale. The proceeds from the sale are to be deposited in the U.S. Treasury to the credit of Appropriations “Navy Ordnance.”23 280

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

On July 14, Jeffers again contacted the New York yard: Admiral, The Bureau has directed the Superintendent of the Naval Academy to send to the Yard under your command a quantity of Army rifled muskets, Cal .58 and Remington Navy Revolvers. The revolvers are to be sold to Mr. J. W. Frazier upon the terms mentioned in Bureau’s letter of 20th June, 1873.24 On June 27, the bureau received another bid on small arms from Pensacola, Florida: Sir, Your communication of the 24th inst. is at hand, and in reply I beg leave to state that I will take all the Rifles and Muskets, Viz 1090, now on hand at the prices specified in my letter of the 17th inst., and I will take all the Remington Revolvers at $2.50 each, but no other revolvers at that price. I am willing to pay $2.20 each for all the Whitney revolvers, and $1.75 each for the balance of the revolvers; left on hand. Jas. D. Kenney25 Jeffers did not respond to Kenney until the eleventh of August: Sir: Your letter of the 30th ult. is received. The Bureau accepts your bids therein made for revolvers at the Pensacola Navy Yard, provided that you take all of each kind bid for i.e.—Remington revolvers at $2.50 each, Whitney’s revolvers at $2.20 each and all other revolvers, excepting Colt’s which the Bureau will not sell, at $1.75 each. These articles will be delivered to you at the Pensacola Navy Yard upon the payment of the amount of sale to the Paymaster of the Yard.26 Also on the eleventh, Jeffers notified Commodore M. B. Woodsey, commandant of the Pensacola yard, of the terms of the sale: Sir: Please deliver to Mr. Jas. D. Kenny all of the following pistols, after reserving a specimen of each for the museum: Remington revolvers at $2.50 each. Whitney revolvers at $2.20 each and all other revolvers, excepting Colt’s, at $1.75 each, upon his payment of the amount of sale to the Paymaster of this Yard.27 Jeffers had evidently changed his mind about disposing of any more Colt revolvers, as they seem to have been withdrawn from sale. When these sales were completed, Jeffers had 281

CHAPTER NINE

disposed of almost all of the Remington and Whitney percussion revolvers on the Atlantic seaboard; the only ones remaining in navy stores were on vessels at sea and at the Mare Island yard in California, which amounted to approximately two thousand Colts and one thousand Remingtons. Some of the Whitney and Savage revolvers, which escaped the bureau’s disposal sales, were mentioned in later bureau correspondence, most of which originated from Mare Island. In a November 1876 informal letter to Jeffers, Amory Edwards, agent for Winchester Repeating Arms Company, queried Jeffers about the sale of Colt percussion revolvers during the Franco-Prussian War. On the twenty-seventh, Jeffers replied as follows: Sir; Your letter of the 25th inst. is received. No Colt’s revolvers were sold by the Navy Department during the French War. The only pistols disposed of at that time were the Remington’s revolvers; and as they were sold at public auction the Bureau has no information of the purchasers. Please send to the Bureau a new Winchester pistol Cal. .44 as soon as completed. Why not adopt the Army Cal. .45?28 Edwards later sent a prototype Winchester revolver to the bureau, but the revolver was never developed beyond that stage. The number of Remington revolvers sold during the FrancoPrussian War has not been verified; I have located no other correspondence or records in reference to such sales. After Jeffers had completed the revolver sales, he again turned his attention to the alteration of the navy’s Colt percussion revolvers. On the twenty-eighth of June, he contacted Franklin at the Colt Armory: Sir, I have sold all the revolvers belonging to the Navy except the Colt’s—these I propose to have altered. I am not satisfied with any of the new cartridge revolvers, but taking into consideration the use made of them in the Navy and the last reports of the Army Board I think the Colt preferable. We have 1000 available at once, the remainder being at sea or scattered at distant yards. What will be the cost of alteration to use the central fire Army cartridge (caliber .44) as in the pistols you are now supplying the Army? Also, cost to use .38 cartridge? I should wish if the cost is not too great, to have the standard calibre same as Army as it is evidently a question of how to substitute an entirely new arm.29 Jeffers was not entirely candid with Franklin. The navy still had on hand approximately one thousand Remington percussion revolvers, plus a small number of Whitney’s and Savage’s. This 282

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

letter led to a flurry of correspondence between the bureau and Colt. I present the most pertinent letters without comment: Hartford, Conn., June 30, 1873 Dear Sir, Your letter of the 28th inst has been received. It is impossible to alter Navy cal. pistols .36 cal to .44 cal. Boring out the cylinder weakens it too much in the vicinity of the slot into which the locking bolt engages. We will alter 1000 or more for .38 cal rimfire cartridge for $3.25 each. The Army had some 1200 powder & ball pistols altered to met. cart. some time ago at a fixed price. But when the work was commenced it was found that in many cases new cylinders and new barrels were required, so that when the contract was concluded, the pistols had cost nearly double the price of mere alteration. I think that you may meet with this same difficulty. We would charge for extra parts our ordinary prices. The cartridge of the pistol that we are making for the Army has a ball cal. 455, swedged [sic] in the barrel to about .45. This is a larger calibre than has yet been used in the U.S. Service for Revolving pistols, and it gives a penetration .50 percent greater than any thing we have seen.30 Washington City, July 2, 1873 Sir, Your letter of the 30th ult. offering to alter Colt’s Navy revolvers is received. The Bureau notes that you propose to alter the revolvers for rim fire cartridges whereas it is the desire to adopt central fire, and wishes to be informed whether you will alter them to central fire on the same terms;—if so 800 or more will be sent at once to your works for alteration.31 Hartford, Conn., July 8, 1873 Captain, Your letter of the 2nd inst has remained unanswered on account of my absence. We have made our .38 inch cal. altered pistols rim fire because there are no central fire cartridges of that calibre on the American market. We can, however alter yours to central fire, but the cost will be 25 cents more each, making the price per pistol $3.50 each. Of course central fire cartridges can easily be manufactured, and I think the Union Metallic Cartridge Co. of Bridgeport Conn. has already experimented in that direction with some of our pistols.32 Washington City, July 10, 1873 Sir, Your letter of the 8th inst is received. The Bureau accepts your offer to alter Colt’s Navy revolvers to fire central fire metallic cartridges at $3.50 each, and has ordered the 283

CHAPTER NINE

Commandant of the Boston, New York, and Philadelphia Navy Yards to send your manufactory 100, 400, and 300, pistols respectively, for alteration. It is desired that this order may be executed as soon as practicable and the Bureau notified when each 100 pistols are completed in order that I may direct their disposition; please send two of them when altered to the Bureau as models.33 Hartford, Conn., July 12, 1873 Captain, Your letter of the 10th inst ordering alteration of Colt’s Navy pistols to central fire Met. Cart. has been received, and the order is accepted, and the alterations put in hand at once, the price being $3.50 each. The order I notice, contemplates 800, and we will be glad to know whether you expect to order any additional number, and if yes, how many. This information will guide us as to the number of parts that we put into the works. We will have the samples ready about two weeks after we receive the first pistols, and the time for altering 800 will be about three months.34 Washington City, July 14, 1873 Sir, Your letter of the 12th inst is received. The Bureau contemplates the alteration of 1200 Colt’s Navy pistols to fire central fire metallic cartridges and will deliver the additional 400 as the alteration progresses.35 With the details of alteration established, Franklin now addressed the subject of center fire cartridges, which had previously been unavailable. On July 16, he notified Jeffers as follows: Captain, I have sent you by express a Navy pistol altered to central fire Met. Cartridges. It is not one of those belonging to the Navy, but it is sent in order that cartridges may be obtained for it. As I have already informed you, the Union Met’c. Cart. Co. of Bridgeport Conn has been experimenting in this direction and is doubtless prepared to furnish them in quantities at short notice, we ought to have some as soon as possible, for we want to be sure that pistols & cartridge go well together, and we cannot be entirely sure of that unless we have the adopted cartridge. There are nice points such as head of cartridge, length & consequently penetration of firing pin &c which can best be determined by having the very cartridge that is to be used.36 Two days later, Jeffers contacted the Union Metallic Cartridge Company in Bridgeport, Connecticut: Please inform the Bureau if you make cartridges for the Colt’s revolver Cal. .38, central fire; and if so, at what price you will agree to furnish and deliver the same at the New York and Boston Navy Yards.37 284

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

The response to this was penned on July 22 by Robert J. White, secretary of the Union Metallic Cartridge Company: Sir: We reply to your favor of the 18th inst that we make 38 Cal ammunition for the altered Colt’s revolver—and will deliver them at the New York & Boston Navy Yards at twelve and one quarter dollars ($12.25) per thousand.38 Jeffers ordered cartridges on the following day: Mr. Robert J. White Your letter of the 22nd inst is received. Please send to the Colt’s Patent Fire Arms Co. Hartford Conn., for trial, 1000 38 cal. cartridges for the altered Colt’s revolvers, at the price stated therein and forward your bill to the Bureau for settlement.39 It would seem that Jeffers was overly conservative, ordering only one thousand cartridges for testing eight hundred revolvers. He advised Franklin that the cartridges had been ordered on the same day: Sir, The Bureau has directed the Union Metallic Cartridge Co. of Bridgeport Conn. to deliver at your works, 1000 .38 cal. cartridges for the altered Colt’s revolver, for trial and adjustment of the relative parts to each other.40 On July 25, White acknowledged the cartridge order: Sir: We acknowledge receipt of your communication of July 23rd. We have sent for a pistol in conformity to that mentioned therein—as soon as that is received we will forward the cartridges for trial—as requested.41 On July 30, Franklin solicited additional work for the Colt firm: Captain, I have caused to be sent to you by Express today two of your pistols altered. One has been restocked, and the strap and guard are blued. The other has had nothing done to it, except what we do under the contract or order for altering, and it is a fair sample of the appearance of all of them. Some have brass straps and guards and others iron. If you wish, we will for .75 cents each, restock the pistols, reblue those with iron straps & guards, and replate those with plated straps, or leave the brass repolished (showing a brass finish) as you may prefer. 285

CHAPTER NINE

This will give the pistols a new appearance, and I make you the proposition because the very great improvement in appearance for the small outlay seems to me a thing worth considering. At any rate, whatever may be your decision, please return the pistols to us.42 Jeffers accepted Franklin’s proposition on the following day: Sir, Your letter of the 30th ult received. The Bureau accepts your proposition therein made to restock the pistols, reblue those with iron straps and guards, and replate those with plated straps and guards for 75 cents, and returns the pistols sent with your letter.43 On August 6, Franklin inquired about the arrival of the remainder of the revolvers: Captain, Your letter of the 1st inst accepting our proposition of the 30th ult has been rec’d. About 800 of the pistols have been received, and in one of your letters, you informed me that there would be about 1200 pistols in all. Can you give me any information as to when the others may be looked for, for it will be a convenience to us to go through the whole number without interruption, if possible. W. B. Franklin P.S. The cartridges from the U.M. Cart. Co. work exceedingly well in the altered pistols.44 Jeffers forwarded a reply to this inquiry on August 12: Sir, Your letter of the 6th Aug. 1873 is received. The Bureau has directed the Commandant of the Boston, New York and Philadelphia Navy Yards to send your manufactory 100, 100, and 200 revolvers respectively for alteration which with the others previously forwarded will make 1200. On their completion of the first 100 please send 50 to the Portsmouth and New York Navy Yards each, consigned to the Commandants thereof; this number it is desired may be finished as soon as possible in order to put the pistols into service.45 The response to this was initialed by an unknown Colt employee on August 14: Sir: Your letter of the 12th inst is at hand. Soon as 100 pistols arrive they will be placed in the works. We note your directions as to sending out the first 100 and will act accordingly. per R. C. T.46 286

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Figure 143 Colt Model 1851 Navy Revolver altered using the Richards-Mason patent method. One of the 2,098 Colt Model 1851 and 1861 Navies altered by Colt for the Bureau of Ordnance. (Author’s photograph)

On the following day, Jeffers advised Franklin of a change in the number of revolvers that he could expect from the Philadelphia yard: Sir, Referring to the Bureau’s letter of the 12th inst. 100 revolvers have been ordered from the Norfolk Navy Yard to your factory for alteration; and 100 from the Philadelphia N.Y. in lieu of 200.47 Nearly eleven weeks passed before the next correspondence in this episode. On October 30, Franklin advised Jeffers that the revolvers had all been altered and were ready for shipment (figure 143): Captain, The 1200 Navy Pistols which we have been altering are now completed and are ready for delivery in boxes of fifty. One hundred have been already sent away in compliance with your orders, and twelve more were sent you a few days ago at your request as communicated through Mr. Edgar T. Wells. The remainder are in our store room. You will notice that sundry parts are charged. The prices are our ordinary prices and although we have received no orders to furnish these things, the Pistols would not have been properly serviceable without them. Thus the keys which held the barrels to the cylinder pins were all too much worn to be used again. The old triggers would not work and were exchanged for new ones—these were not charged. Many of the screws were rusted away. The cylinders, barrels and frames that are charged replace others that are valueless, and so are the other parts. We shall be 287

CHAPTER NINE

glad to receive the amount of the bill for these parts, but if you cannot properly pay for them, we shall nevertheless be glad to receive payment for the alteration as soon as it is convenient to you. As we have had some correspondence on the subject of barrels and cylinders, it is proper to state that all of these articles that could decently be used were used, and that the defects only develop when the cylinders are bored out, and were necessarily reported to me too late to enable us to carry out the idea of replacing the worthless ones by other older ones as suggested in one of your letters.48 On November 4, Jeffers sent Franklin instructions for shipping the revolvers: Sir, Please send the altered Colt’s navy revolvers as follows: 200 to the Portsmouth Navy Yard. 200 to the Boston Navy Yard 200 to the Philadelphia Navy Yard 100 to the Washington Navy Yard 100 to the Norfolk Navy Yard and the remainder to the New York Navy Yard.49 On the sixth, Franklin acknowledged receipt of the above letter: Captain, Your letter of the 4th inst directing the disposition to be made of the altered Colt’s Navy pistols in our possession has been received, and they will be shipped today. In a former letter I reported 1088 as being on hand here. There are only 1087, one having been sent to the Bureau as a model. We note that you have sent us a receipt for $51. the cost of alteration of twelve pistols. If it be at all convenient, we shall be much obliged if you can send us the papers necessary to enable us to receive the balance due on our account of the alteration of the 1200 on or before the 15th inst which is our pay day.50 Two days later, Jeffers forwarded the approved bill for the balance of the revolvers: Sir, The Bureau encloses approved bill in your favor, amounting to $5719.50 for which acknowledge receipt.51 About this time, the bureau received a letter from Cdr. Meade, an ordnance officer at the New York yard, containing a request that ships’ officers be issued revolvers. On the fourteenth of November, Jeffers responded, his curt reply expressing his contempt of revolvers as a naval sidearm: 288

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Sir: Yes! If it will make anyone happy. There is no instance on record of a revolver having been fired. They are merely ornamental appendages.52 On the following day, Jeffers responded to a message from Rowan, commandant of the New York yard, advising the bureau of defects discovered in some of the yard’s percussion revolvers: Admiral, Referring to the letter of the Inspector of Ordnance of the 13th inst. N0.288. The defects are of no consequence and no attempt is to be made to remedy them. As revolvers are taken to sea and returned with their ammunition intact, no target practice having been had, the Bureau looks upon them as a superfluity, the good or bad qualities of which will only be discovered by the Quarter-Gunner who cleans them.53 Jeffers’s sarcasm about the use of revolvers and pistols on board ships was not yet over. On November 28, he again contacted Rowan at the New York yard: Admiral, Referring to the letter of the Inspector of Ordnance of the 25th inst. N0.388. The Bureau will see that the ammunition is delivered on time. Please reduce the allowance of Navy pistol cartridges to twenty (20) per pistol, as there is no record in this Bureau of a pistol having been fired in target practice or action.54

THE YEAR OF 1874 There was little mention of revolvers in the bureau’s correspondence for the next eleven months. During this time, percussion revolvers had been accumulating at various navy yards, as they were replaced by Colt cartridge alterations. On October 28, 1874, Jeffers again contacted Franklin in regard to altering additional revolvers: Sir, The Bureau has directed the Commandant of the New York Navy Yard to send to your works 497 Colt’s revolvers, which you will please alter to fire metallic cartridges and then return them to that station.55 Franklin did not respond until November 16: Captain, The pistols for alteration have been received from the New York Navy Yard, as you informed me (497 I think). Will you be good enough to inform me whether these are all that are to come? Before setting our machines for them we would like to know this fact, as the machines must go to 289

CHAPTER NINE

work on other things as soon as we get through the alterations, and it would be quite expensive to reset them for another lot. So if any more are to come, we prefer to wait their arrival. If however no more are to come, we will start at once on these. In fact we have already taken them apart, but have not commenced to machine them.56 Two day later, Jeffers notified Franklin of additional revolvers being forwarded for alteration: Sir, Your letter of the 16th inst. relative to altering revolvers has been received. In addition to the number sent you from New York Navy Yard there are 183 on their way from Mare Island Cal., which will be delivered to you as soon as received.57 Later the same day, Jeffers discovered more revolvers for alteration and notified Franklin: Sir, The Bureau has directed 27 Colt’s revolvers to be sent you from the Norfolk N.Y. for alteration to breech loaders.58 Four days later, on November 22, Jeffers again contacted Franklin to advise him of yet more revolvers to be altered: Sir, The Bureau has directed the Commandant of the Portsmouth N.Y. to send you for alteration 12 Navy revolvers.59

THE YEAR OF 1875 On January 22, 1875, Franklin directed the next piece of correspondence to Jeffers: Commodore, Some time ago we received notice from your Bureau that over one hundred Navy pistols were on their way here from California for alteration. They have not yet arrived, and we are keeping the others back on their account. Can you give us any information concerning them, and will you prefer us to go on and finish those now here, or wait for the California batch.60 Jeffers responded on January 26: Sir, Your letter of the 22nd inst received. The Bureau desires that the alteration of the pistols, which you have received may be delayed until those arrive from Mare Island N.Y.61 290

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

The shipment of revolvers from Mare Island did not arrive until some three months later. Jeffers notified Franklin that they were on their way on April 17: Sir, The revolvers referred to in Bureau’s letter of 18th Nov., 1874 have arrived from Mare Island Cal. and will be sent you from New York, N.Y.62 This lot of revolvers was completed by the Colt Armory approximately two months later. On June 29, Franklin requested shipping instructions: Sir: The six Nickel plated Navy Revolvers ordered in your letter of the 28th inst will be sent you in four days. The last of the altered pistols has been completed today. Please instruct as to their shipment.63 Jeffers provided this information on July 1: Sir, Please send to the New York Navy Yard the altered revolvers referred to in your letter of the 29th inst.64 Franklin forwarded a bill for the alterations on July 7: Dear Sir: Enclosed is the bill for alteration of the Navy Pistols received by us during the past year for alteration. They have been shipped to the New York Navy Yard according to your instructions. The bills for other small lots of pistols ordered by you during the year are added. I have caused to be sent to you by Express a .38 cal. (navy) pistol in external dimensions the same as the Army pistol adopted for the Cavalry. Its price will be $13. I shall be glad to have you have it tested at your convenience, believing as I do, that it is an excellent weapon. It is sighted for 25 yards. If you do have it tested, I will be glad to have a copy of the report, and be informed if you will probably require any of them. Amount of bill $4485.8765 This letter raises some questions. With the delivery of this lot of revolvers, Colt had altered 1,919 revolvers for the bureau: 1,200 in 1873 and 719 in 1875. The entry in the bureau’s “Records of Accounts Received for Payment” reads only: “July 6, 1875 For Pistols &c (altering) $4485.87.”66 The bureau had evidently ordered other models of revolvers from Colt. Using available correspondence, it is difficult to establish just how many and what types were retained by the bureau. As these were all billed together, both in Franklin’s letter and in the bureau’s “Records of Accounts Received for Payment,” it is not possible to arrive at an average price for the 719 altered revolvers. 291

CHAPTER NINE

With the bulk of the navy’s Colt revolvers altered, Jeffers now turned his attention to the alteration of the Remington revolvers still on hand. On July 20, 1875, the bureau once again approached the Remington firm: Sirs, The Bureau has on hand a lot of revolvers of your manufacture (about 1000)—old pattern—for which it has been offered a very small price; and if you would agree to alter them to breech-loaders, Cal. .38 on your present system for a moderate charge it would prefer to make the change rather than sell them as they are. Will you please, therefore, inform me at what rate you will agree to make the alterations and deliver them to the Commdt. of the New York N.Y.67 This letter was answered on July 24 by Watson C. Squires, son-in-law of Philo Remington: Sir: We have the honor to acknowledge receipt of the Bureau’s communication of the 20th instant. The writer will be pleased to have a personal interview with you, regarding the alteration of the revolvers, during the coming week, but will await reply as to your pleasure before starting. Meantime, we would request that you send us a fair specimen of the revolvers referred to, showing their condition at present. We have a number—about 2,000—of the Navy revolvers, 38 cal., of superior finish, which are already altered and could be delivered at once. We also have about 700 U.S. Navy single shot pistols on hand, which we might be willing to exchange, on suitable terms, for those revolvers belonging to your department. Furthermore we are just issuing our new Army revolver, cal. .44 center fire, of which we are making 10,000 for a foreign government, and which is believed to be superior to anything now in use. Should you desire, we will send or bring you samples of all these, and confer as to your wishes on the premises.68 I gathered from this letter that sales of Remington handguns were rather slow. The new revolvers referred to were 1875 Army Models. Remington had received a contract for ten thousand of these from the Egyptian government. Jeffers sent his reply two days later: Sirs, The Bureau is in receipt of you letter of the 24th inst. replying to its inquiry regarding the alteration of revolvers. As you request, the Bureau has ordered a sample revolver to be sent you from the New York, N.Y.; but begs to inform you that it now has no funds to make the purchases suggested in your letter, although it would be willing to have the lot of revolvers mentioned in its letter of the 20th inst. altered to breech loaders if you would do the work for a moderate price. 292

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

The Chief of the Bureau will be pleased to see you at any time you are in Washington; but he cannot assign any particular day to receive you as he will be necessarily absent at uncertain intervals on duty connected with the preparation of his annual report and estimates.69 Squires responded on July 31: Sir: We have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the communication of the Bureau dated July 26, 1875. We have also received the sample revolver referred to therein. We send you today by American Express, a sample of our present style of new altered revolver, with box of fifty cartridges for same. We propose to alter those of the Bureau on the same plan, for three dollars and fifty cents each—provided the pistols are to be left in their present condition in all respects excepting the mechanical work of alteration proper. If, however, you desire us to re-stock, polish and blue the pistols—making them appear as good as new—there would be an additional charge of seventy five cents each, making the total price four dollars and twenty five cents per pistol. We think this price as low as we can afford to accept, considering the cost of preparation, and the actual expense of the work.70 Remington’s proposal for altering the navy’s Remingtons was identical to that received of Colt two years previous. Jeffers accepted these terms on August 2: Sirs: Your proposition of 31st ult. to alter the Remington’s navy revolvers to breechloading, re-stock, polish and blue the pistols—making them appear as good as new—for $4.25 each is accepted. These pistols are to be central fire and the cylinders and barrels reamed to take the cartridges of the U.S. Cartridge Co’s make, one thousand of which have been ordered to be sent to you from said firm. The Commandant of the New York Navy Yard has been directed to send you the pistols on hand there and also a quantity on their way from Mare Island Navy Yard.71 When the bureau was first seeking a .38 caliber center fire cartridge in 1873, they had contacted the Union Metallic Cartridge Company. It was their cartridges that were used in the test of the first lot of Colt revolvers altered. Early in 1875, the bureau had also started purchasing cartridges from the United States Cartridge Company, located in Lowell, Massachusetts. On the same day he sent the previous message, Jeffers ordered cartridges from this firm for testing the Remingtons: Sirs, Please send to the Messrs. E. Remington & Sons, Ilion N.Y. for the purpose of adjusting revolvers during alteration to their gauge one thousand (1000) metallic revolver cartridges Cal. .38.72 293

CHAPTER NINE

Also on August 2, Jeffers sent two additional messages; the first was a telegram to the Mare Island yard: Send immediately to Navy Yard, New York, fast freight via Panama, all the Remington revolvers on hand. Packages not to weigh over two hundred (200) pounds.73 The recent fiasco concerning the rail shipment of Colt revolvers from the Mare Island yard seems to have been fresh in Jeffers’s mind when dispatching this message. The Remington revolvers were to come by sea. This method of shipment seems to have had little advantage over shipping by rail as Remington did not receive the revolvers until February 1876. The second message was a letter to the commandant of the New York yard: Admiral: Please send to the Messrs. E. Remington & Sons all the Remington’s Navy Revolvers on hand, and also a lot of the same make which have been ordered from Mare Island N.Y. to the yard under your command.74 On August 9, O. W. Seamans, responding for Remington, advised Jeffers that they were awaiting the arrival of the pistols: Sir: We have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your favor of the 2nd inst. Awaiting the arrival of the pistols.75 The following month, Jeffers again decided to dispose of surplus arms. On September 16, 1875, he submitted an advertisement to be published in several metropolitan newspapers: Proprietor of the Journal Boston, Mass. Please insert in your paper twice a week—on Tuesdays and Saturdays until the 9th of Oct., 1875 the enclosed advertisement of sale of small arms, ammunition and accoutrements and send bill to this office for settlement. William N. Jeffers, Chief of Bureau SALE OF SMALL ARMS BUREAU OF ORDNANCE Navy Department Washington, September 7, 1875 Bids will be received at this office until noon of October 9, 1875, for the purchase of a quantity of obsolete arms, accoutrements and ammunition at the several Navy Yards. Catalogues will be furnished on application to the Bureau or to the Commandants of the Navy Yards. 294

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Terms Cash: Twenty percent, payable on acceptance of bids, and all articles are to be removed in twenty days from close of sale or forfeited. The Government reserves the right to refuse any bid deemed unsatisfactory. Packing boxes to be paid for at a price to be determined on by the Commandant of the respective Navy Yards. William N. Jeffers Chief of Bureau76 A copy of the sale catalog has not been located, but the bids received give a fair idea of the goods offered. There were approximately 1,000 single-shot boarding pistols, 125 Savage Navy Revolvers, 296 Whitney Navy Revolvers, and 42 Colt Army Revolvers. In addition, there were muskets of every description; Sharps, Spencer, and Sharps & Hankins carbines; bullet molds; waist belts and plates; cartridge boxes; pistol frogs; bayonets; and several thousand rounds of both metallic and combustible ammunition. The bids received for the navy’s stock of obsolete flintlock pistols were larger than those made for percussion arms. Are we to assume from this that there was an interest in arms collecting at this early date? The Whitney, Savage, and Colt army revolvers had been turned into stores by ships returning from duty stations in the two-year interval since the 1873 sale. Some of the bids received seem to indicate that many of the arms had a value of little more than scrap metal. In the following month, additional revolvers were returning from sea duty. On November 8, Jeffers sent the following to Rowan at the New York yard: Sir: The report of survey of the 4th inst. upon the Ordnance and Ordnance Equipments of the U.S.S. Vermont has been received. Please send to the Colt’s Arms Co. the Colt’s revolvers, and to Messrs. E. Remington & Sons, Ilion, N.Y. the Remington’s revolvers, for alteration. The Army pistols with cartridges and frogs may be delivered to Messrs J. P. Moore’s Sons in accordance with the Bureau’s letter of the 11th ult.77 On the same day, Jeffers notified Colt that the revolvers were being shipped: Sirs: The Bureau has directed 34 Colt’s revolvers to be sent you from the New York N.Y. for alteration.78 Franklin answered on November 15: Captain, This company has received from the Commanding Officer, New York Navy Yard, thirty four Colt’s revolvers for alteration. Enclosed is a receipt for twenty five of them completing the number. They will be put into the works as soon as possible.79 295

CHAPTER NINE

One month later, on December 15, Franklin acknowledged the receipt of additional revolvers: Captain, The nine Colt’s revolvers referred to in your letter of the 6th inst., to be sent from the Boston Navy Yard for alteration have been received & placed in the works.80

THE YEAR OF 1876 With the arrival of these revolvers at the Colt factory, the bureau had begun the alteration of the third batch of Colts. Other small lots were located and shipped to Colt, and on January 29, 1876, Franklin again contacted the bureau: Captain, The Navy pistols in our hands for alteration are now about completed. Shall we send them when completed to the Navy Yards from which they came, or have you any directions to give in relation to them?81 On January 31, Jeffers sent two letters to Franklin; the first preceded the arrival of Franklin’s letter (previous) and the second came after its arrival: Sirs: The Bureau has directed 30 Colt’s revolvers to be sent you for alteration from the Norfolk N.Y. by express. Sirs: Your letter of the 29th inst. relative to the disposition of the pistols in your hands for alteration, when completed, is received. Please send 1/2 of these pistols to the New York N.Y., and the other 1/2 to the Boston N.Y. and notify the Bureau of the number sent to each yard.82 Franklin responded to these letters on February 3: Captain, Your letter of 31st ult. informing this Co. that 30 Colt’s Revolvers have been sent here for alteration from the Norfolk Navy Yard has been received. If there is hurry for them, we will put them into hand at once. If there is not, we prefer to complete them in about two months. In compliance with your instructions of the 31st ult., yesterday the 2nd inst. we made shipments of altered pistols as follows. The numbers to the two Navy Yards are not precisely the same, as we sent all of one model to one Yard & and the other to the other Yard. To New York Navy Yard 296

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

53 N.M. Navy Pistols 1 N.M. Navy Pistol Ivory stock 54 Boston Navy Yard 50 O.M. Navy Pistols83 With the delivery of this lot of revolvers, Colt had altered a total of 2,022 revolvers for the navy, and others were on hand awaiting alteration. The ivory-stocked specimen was the personal revolver of an officer who had included his with a lot shipped from New York. Several personal revolvers were altered in this manner, the officers being liable for the costs. Jeffers acknowledged receipt of Franklin’s letter on February 5: Sirs: Your letter of the 3rd inst., is received. The 30 Colt’s revolvers may be altered at your convenience. The shipment of the revolvers in compliance with the Bureau’s order of the 31st ult. is satisfactory.84 On February 16, W. S. Smoot, superintendent of the Remington works, contacted the bureau: Dear Sir: We have received from you 987 revolvers for alteration. Are there any more to be sent us? If so we should have them at once. Please send us cartridges for proving the arms already altered.85 Jeffers responded two days later: Sirs: Your letter of the 16 inst. is received. The Bureau has directed 6000 cartridges for proving the altered revolvers, to be sent you from the New York Navy Yard; the empty shells of these after firing are to be returned to the New York Navy Yard. There are no more Remington revolvers on hand at present for alteration.86 Jeffers was a little more generous in ordering cartridges in this instance. We can, however, still see the frugality of his ways in ordering the empty cartridge cases returned for reloading. On February 23 the bureau located more revolvers and advised Remington that they were being shipped for alteration. Smoot inquired about these on March 27: Sir, Referring to your favor of 23rd February, in which you advise the shipment to us of 35 Remington revolvers, we beg to say that we have received only nine of the revolvers at this date.87 297

CHAPTER NINE

Remington eventually received the remainder, but not in time to be included in the first lot altered and returned to the navy. On May 2, Smoot advised Jeffers that the first lot of revolvers was ready for shipment: Dear Sir: We have the first 500 of your revolvers ready for shipment, and would be pleased to know how they are to be forwarded, and to whom we shall send the invoice. The balance will be ready in about ten days. While we are prepared to make this alteration, could we not transform another lot for you? We should be pleased to receive any further orders in that direction you may see fit to send us.88 Jeffers sent instructions for shipment two days later: Sirs: Your letter of the 2nd inst., relative to the completion of the altered revolvers, is received. Inasmuch as the Bureau experiences great difficulty in the transfer of freight from one Pacific R.R. to the other, in consequence of the interest that the Government has therein, which difficulty you should not have, desires you to ship all the revolvers you have in hand on completion to the Mare Island Navy Yard; including the freight charges thereon in your bill for alteration.89 Also on May 4, Jeffers notified Rear Adm. John Rogers, commandant of the Mare Island yard, of the impending shipment: Admiral: The Bureau has directed the Messrs. Remington & Sons, Ilion, N.Y. to send you a quantity of Remington revolvers that have been altered to fire metallic cartridges. Inform the Bureau when they are received, and they are not to be unpacked, but to be kept in the cases until needed for issue.90 On June 13, 1876, Smoot again contacted the bureau: Dear Sir: We have completed 986 revolvers, being the first lot sent to us, and propose to forward these at once to the Mare Island Navy Yard, as requested by you. In addition to the above we have 36 revolvers received from you at a later date. The alteration of these will not be completed for some time; and, as we wish to use the money due on the large lot, we propose sending them forward as above. We trust this arrangement will be satisfactory to you, and that sending them in two lots as we propose will not cause you any inconvenience. Our reason for sending them in 298

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

this way is that owing to the difficulty in making collections in general, we are particularly desirous of having the use of all the funds that we may command. Hoping that the above will meet with your approval.91 On the same day, Franklin notified Jeffers that the remaining Colt revolvers were ready for shipment: Commodore, Forty five Navy Revolvers sent here for alteration from the New York Navy Yard Jan. 15 last, and thirty, with sundry spare parts sent here for the same purpose from the Norfolk Navy Yard Feb. 5 last are now ready for shipment. Please advise us as where to ship them.92 On the following day, Smoot notified Jeffers that the Remingtons had been shipped: Sir: Today we have forwarded to the “Commandant of the Navy Yard, Mare Island, California” 987 pistols, 985 of which have been remodeled and refinished in compliance with orders of the Bureau. The two pistols that have not been remodeled were made by other manufacturers, and we have no parts to make them the same as the others. We have the honor of transmitting herewith, invoice, and bill of lading for above, together with receipt for freight prepaid on same. We shall be pleased to receive the usual vouchers, at your earliest convenience.93 Jeffers did not acknowledge Franklin’s letter until June 22: Sirs: Please send the revolvers referred to in your letter of 13th inst. to the New York N.Y.94 This lot was the last of some 2,098 revolvers that Colt altered for the navy. Jeffers acknowledged receipt of Remington’s letter of June 14 and forwarded the approved bill on the twenty-third: Sirs: The Bureau encloses approved bill in your favor, amounting to $4283.51 for remodeling 985 Navy pistols & payable by Pay Director Geo. F. Cutter, 59 Broadway, New York. Please acknowledge receipt.95 It is interesting to compare the Colt and Remington bills. The base unit price of both bids for altering, refinishing, and restocking revolvers at $4.25 had been the same. When the work was finished, Colt had managed to escalate the price an average of approximately $.50 per revolver for spare parts such as triggers, barrel keys, barrels, cylinders, and, in some instances, new frames. The bureau had approved the use of replacement parts. Remington, on the other hand, 299

CHAPTER NINE

never broached the subject of replacement parts and had furnished these, as needed, as part of the original bid price. The bureau had still fared far better than the Ordinance Department in their dealings with Colt and had approximately twice the number of revolvers altered at about the same price. W. M. Benedict responded for Remington on June 26: Dear Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the Bureau’s communication of June 23rd, 1876, enclosing approved bills in our favor, amounting to $4283.51.96 When this shipment of revolvers arrived in California, the rail carrier advised Cdr. Fitzhugh, ordnance officer at the Mare Island yard, that there were freight charges due. Fitzhugh reported this to the bureau on August 31: Commodore: I am informed by the Agent in San Francisco, of the C.P.R.R., under date of August 24th, 1876, that twenty three (23) boxes of pistols have been in their warehouse since July 26th, 1876. These arms are what are referred to in the Bureau’s letter to the Commandant of May 4th, 1876, as having been ordered from Messrs. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, N.Y. The Pay Director in San Francisco is unable to get these packages without payment of freight charges, which amounted to, on August 24th, 1876, twenty seven dollars and ninety two cents. ($27.92) U.S. Currency and storage to that date—six and one half dollars (6.50) coin. The storage charges of the company are fifteen cents per day–per ton or a fraction thereof. The Pay Agent in San Francisco is unable to pay these charges, by the act of Congress relating to the transportation of Government freight by the Union Pacific and Central Pacific Rail Roads. The Commandant has written to the Secretary of the Navy, relating to this and other cases.97 After receiving this report, Jeffers inquired of Remington what had gone wrong with the shipment. E. Roche responded for Remington on November 4: Sir, We have the honor of enclosing herein, a communication from the agent of the transportation company, relative to the extra charges for freight on the pistols forwarded to California in August last per your order. It appears that the weight was short changed at the shipping point which is the cause of the additional charge referred to. If the Bureau desires, we will pay the sum required, charging same in our next invoice. We now have on hand some 35 pistols subject to order of the Bureau, and we shall be pleased to comply with any orders you may choose to give relative to the shipment thereof.98 Roche erred in stating the revolvers were shipped in August; they had been shipped in June. He enclosed the report from the freight agent in his letter: 300

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

International Fast Freight Line Contracting Agent for States of New York and Vermont NO.44 Railroad Street, Syracuse, N.Y. Oct. 21, 1876 E. Remington & Sons Referring to the attached letter in reference to balance due of freight charges on shipment of 23 cases of pistols to U.S. N.Y., Mare Island Cal. I have investigated this matter and find the charges of $27.92 to be just. The railway agent at your station in billing made a mistake in the weight billing them 630 lbs short of the actual weight & the Central & U.P. Railways ask for the above sum on the 630 lbs which they are justly entitled to together with the storage on the same. Yours very truly C. G. Beers99

THE YEAR OF 1877 Further references to the final lot of altered Remington revolvers were not located in the archive’s files for the year 1876. However, on January 4, 1877, J. Norton, acting for the Remington firm, billed the bureau for these alterations; his letter sheds more light on the destination of this lot: Sir, Enclosed we have the honor of sending you our Bill for remodeling the balance, (35) of pistols—Shipped to the New York Navy Yard in November last, as per your instructions 6 November, 1876. In accordance with said instructions, we have included in our bill, the additional freight paid by us on remodeled pistols sent to Navy Yard, Mare Island, 14 June, 1876.100 In November, Remington had paid the freight charge deficit on the 985 revolvers shipped to California, but there was a lack of communication between East and West, and the railroad freight agent in San Francisco was never advised that the additional charges had been paid. The revolvers were not secured until February 1877, and only after John S. Cunningham, navy paymaster in San Francisco, had pledged his word that the charges would be forthcoming. On February 9, an exasperated Cunningham sent the following letter to Admiral Rogers, commandant of the Mare Island yard: My dear Admiral: Please read Jeffers official endorsement directing to pay charges on Remington’s freight. He makes a mistake—or his clerk does in advising him. Remington did not pay enough “back charges,” by an error in the East. I wash my hands of the bill. The result of the Bureau’s refusal to pay, or to call on Remington for the whole amount, as the Bureau ought to do, will be simply this, and nothing more—Namely: 301

CHAPTER NINE

That neither you, nor Jeffers, or any other Chief of the Bureau, or the Secretary of the Navy, nor the Pay Office here will be permitted to take one ounce of freight from the Depot of the Rail Road till the charges are paid down in cash. I had to pledge my official word for the payment of this bill before the pistols could be got hold of. Jeffers does not comprehend the bill, Let it slide! We shall have no more trouble about freight bills. The Rail Road Companies will simply sell us out every time.101 An endorsement on this letter reads: “Respectfully referred to Bureau of Ordnance, with bills.” After receiving this letter, Jeffers finally approved the bills for payment, but he was very upset by the embarrassment and inconvenience that this had caused the bureau. Looking for a place to lay the blame for this fiasco, he selected Remington and took them to task for his problems. On February 19, he sent this caustic letter to the firm: Sirs: The Bureau refers to you herewith a letter relative to “back charges” on the pistols to Mare Island N.Y. showing some of the trouble and inconvenience the Department has been compelled to endure by a want of compliance on your part with its request of May 4th last, to pay freight charges to destination. It regrets exceedingly the loose manner in which this matter has been attended to, showing a want of business capacity it could least expect on the part of a house of your standing, and in consequence of which it has now to pay, in a round about way, the amount of back charges $43.06, which a strict compliance with its instructions would have rendered unnecessary after two reminders.102 Jeffers may have felt better after getting this off of his chest, but Smoot, in a response for Remington, refuted Jeffers’s allegations on February 28: Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge receipt of the Bureau’s communication of the 10th instant. While we very much regret that you have been subjected to any annoyance in receiving our freight at the Mare Island Navy Yard, we decline to accept any responsibility therefore. In compliance with your request, we directed the New York Central Railroad to forward the revolvers through to Mare Island, and charge us the freight. They afterward informed us that they had been unable to do so; and while we regret that they should have failed to do as instructed by us, we can not see that we are any more responsible for this occurrence than for the breaking down of one of their bridges, or anything else over which we have no control.103 This ended the episode concerning the freight charges, and with the revolvers finally in hand at the Mare Island yard, the bureau ordered cartridges for the revolvers from the United States Cartridge Company. They responded on February 5: 302

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Figure 144 Beals Navy Revolver, serial number 13,707. Originally delivered to the Bureau of Ordnance as percussion in 1862. One of 1,020 revolvers altered to .38 center fire by Remington for the bureau in 1875. (Author’s collection)

Sir, We have the honor to acknowledge receipt of the Bureau’s order for 5000 Cal. .38 cartridges for revolvers to be sent to Mare Island N.Y. Cal. dated Feby. 2, 1877 and to enclose invoice of those shipped this day.104 There were only two lots of Remington revolvers altered for the bureau, 985 of which were shipped to Mare Island and 35 to the New York yard. As with the Colt alterations, there was more than one model of Remington altered; Beals, Elliot, and New Models were all involved. The revolvers altered for the navy are easily distinguished from those alterations Remington performed on their stock of commercial navy revolvers in the early 1870s. The metalwork on the navy’s revolvers was re-blued during alteration; the metal polishing necessary for this operation has left many of the barrel addresses indistinct, and some have almost been obliterated. The serial number range is between 13,500 and 32,000 (figures 144, 145, and 146). In addition to the serial number, there is an assembly number under the barrel, on the right grip frame, on the rear of the breech plate, on the rear of the ejector housing, and sometimes on the loading lever and trigger guard. These parts were numbered to facilitate reassembly at the time of alteration; the alteration numbers range from 1 to 1,020, corresponding to the number of revolvers altered. The bureau apparently gave no orders for inspection, either at the Remington Armory or at the receiving navy yards. It is possible that the thirty-five alterations shipped to the New York yard were inspected. The ordnance inspectors at this location seemed to be more diligent in their duties than those at other navy yards. I must confess that I have never seen one so inspected. No inspector’s marks should be expected on the revolvers shipped to Mare Island, unless, of course, the revolver was one of the very few that had received a postwar inspection to show that the revolvers were still serviceable. As Remington furnished new cylinders for the altered revolvers, 303

CHAPTER NINE

Figure 145 Elliot–New Model Navy Transition Revolver, serial number 20,770. Originally delivered to the Bureau of Ordnance as percussion in 1863. One of 1,020 revolvers altered to .38 center fire by Remington for the bureau in 1875. (Author’s collection)

the only possible marks remaining would be the small anchor on top of the barrel. During repolishing of the barrels, even this stamp may have been obliterated. In July 1877, the U.S.S. Lackawanna arrived at Mare Island from an extended tour of duty. The ship’s gunner requested a survey of thirteen Whitney revolvers that were in the arms locker. The survey board, which was comprised of three officers appointed by the commandant of the yard, convened on July 10 and reported as follows: The revolvers were found in perfect order. They are of the old pattern. With the sanction of the Bureau of Ordnance they might be turned into stores, and their places supplied with a like number of the converted Remingtons with metallic cartridges, a quantity of which are in store, and which we respectfully recommend.105 These Whitney revolvers had twice escaped the bureau’s surplus arms sales of 1873 and 1875. The following month, Edmond R. Colhearn, who had replaced Rogers as commandant of the Mare Island yard, acknowledged orders from the bureau on August 25: Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the following communications from the Bureau,—Viz: Letter Aug. 14, 1877, directing the exchange of all revolvers other than B.L. on vessels at this station for the Remington B.L. Revolver.106 Once Jeffers’s order of August 14 had been complied with, some of the navy’s Remington revolvers had come full circle; that is, after being out of service for two years, they were once again issued to officers for sea duty. We shall later see that some of these revolvers were never 304

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Figure 146 New Model Navy Revolver, serial number 27,781. Originally delivered to the Bureau of Ordnance as percussion in 1864. One of 1,020 revolvers altered to .38 center fire by Remington for the bureau in 1875. (Author’s collection)

issued before being ordered east again in the 1880s. There is little mention of these revolvers in any of the bureau’s correspondence until 1885. Before proceeding further with this narrative, we shall examine a few events that have a bearing on the rest of our story. In 1879 the government had a revenue surplus for the first time in several years. This trend continued into the 1880s and in 1883, Congress appropriated funds to start replacing some of the navy’s outdated vessels. Money was allotted for the construction of four steel cruisers, and with this infusion of new blood, the U.S. Navy would start showing a stronger world presence. On July 1, 1881, Capt. Montgomery Sicard replaced Jeffers as chief of the bureau. Sicard would prove to have very different ideas than his predecessor about revolvers as a navy sidearm. Under Sicard’s command, revolvers were no longer regarded as ornamental appendages, and the bureau of ordnance required periodic revolver target practice by the ships’ officers and crews.

THE YEAR OF 1885 In the early months of 1885, a series of events concerning the Remington revolvers was set in motion that would span almost four years and, when examined in retrospect, seems ludicrous. It started when the bureau received reports concerning malfunctions of the Remington revolvers, first in a survey conducted on the U.S.S. Monocacy (figure 147) and in later reports from the Ossipat and the Ossipee (figure 148). Most of these reports originated from the Asiatic Squadron, as most of the revolvers had originally been shipped by Remington to the Mare Island Navy Yard. In March, the Essex, on arrival at the New York yard, reported difficulties in firing the Remington revolvers at target practice. On March 7, Sicard sent the following request to Capt. R. Chandler, commandant of the New York yard: 305

CHAPTER NINE

Figure 147 U.S.S. Monocacy. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

Figure 148 U.S.S. Ossipee. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

Figure 149 U.S.S. Essex. (Courtesy: Library of Congress) 306

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Sir: As considerable difficulty was experienced with the Remington pistols on the “Essex,” the Bureau requests that twenty (20) of those received from that vessel be sent to the Naval Ordnance Proving Ground, Annapolis, Md., for inspection.107 Sicard also notified the U.S. Naval Proving Ground of the impending arrival of the revolvers by making the following endorsement on the report from the Essex (figure 149): First Endorsement: Respectfully referred to the Naval Ord. Proving Ground. The Bureau has ordered twenty (20) Remington pistols, received from the “Essex,” to be sent you for examination and report on the probable cause of the defects, with suggestions for remedying the same.108 On March 28, Cdr. William Mayhew Folger sent the following memorandum from Annapolis: Memorandum for the Chief of Bureau of Ordnance Regarding the twenty Remington pistols recently received from New York: Has not an error been committed sending pistols instead of revolvers, as mentioned in the Survey from the Monocacy and report from the Essex? I have fired ten rounds from the pistols and find them in fair order.109 Folger would later succeed Sicard as head of the bureau in 1890. In his memo, we once again see confusion caused by use of the term “pistol” in place of “revolver.” This error was rectified, and the revolvers arrived at Annapolis during the first week in April. About this same time, the bureau was called upon to arm a naval expedition to the Isthmus of Panama. Supplying revolvers for this party proved to be a problem, inasmuch as most of the revolvers on the East Coast had already been allocated. After weighing his options, Sicard decided to purchase new revolvers for the Isthmian party. In pursuance of this end, Sicard sent the following telegram to the Colt firm on April 3: When can you deliver at New York one hundred and seventy Navy revolvers? Have you the Navy revolvers double action as well as single?110 Colt replied by telegraph on the same day: Have plenty pistols single and double action that take Navy thirty eight caliber cartridge but not Navy Model of pistol. Have Two hundred Army pistols already inspected by War Dept.111 Sicard replied to this message by telegraph on the same day: 307

CHAPTER NINE

Send immediately to the New York Navy Yard one hundred and seventy revolvers caliber thirty eight, single action, nearest navy model, subject to inspection and approval as to size. State price.112 Also on the same day, Sicard telegraphed Chandler at the New York yard advising him of the impending arrival of the revolvers: The Bureau has ordered the Colt’s Arms Co. to send you one hundred and seventy (170) revolvers, caliber .38, single action. An officer will be sent by the Bureau to inspect them before acceptance.113 Sicard again selected Folger as inspector for the Colt revolvers and advised him of his duties by telegraph: April 3, 1885 Proceed to Navy Yard, New York by first train to inspect one hundred and seventy new Colt’s revolvers for the Isthmus party. Instructions and the usual orders will await you at New York.114 Folger responded to this on the following morning: Telegram received. Orders obeyed. Please allow inspector at New York to issue six rounds cartridge per revolver for test.115 Once again on April 3, Sicard contacted the New York yard, but this time by letter: Sir: The Bureau encloses a letter to Commander Folger giving instructions in regard to the inspection of the Colt revolvers ordered to the Yard under your command. Please afford him the necessary facilities to inspect these revolvers and send such as he may accept with the seamen who may embark to the Isthmus.116 Sicard also included his instructions to Folger: Sir: The Bureau has ordered the Colt’s Arms Co. to deliver at once to the New York N.Y. 170 revolvers—single action, Cal. .38. These revolvers will not be of the exact navy size or pattern, and the Bureau being pressed for time has not been able to ascertain exactly how they differ from the regulation arm. It is thought however that they will probably be shorter and somewhat lighter otherwise. If in your opinion the action is perfect and well finished and if the revolver will take 308

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

the navy ammunition and are well adapted to naval use and otherwise in good condition, they may be accepted. The Bureau desires a few rounds fired from some of these revolvers in your inspection if there is time before their shipment becomes necessary and if ammunition is available. The object is to send them to the Isthmus with the Command who are to use them if practicable. Advise the Bureau by telegram of the number accepted.117 Colt also advised the bureau by telegraph that the revolvers had been shipped: Hartford, April 3, 1885 We send two hundred tonight in boxes of one hundred pistols each. Select one hundred and seventy and return remainder. Price eight dollars each.118 Knowing how exacting ordnance inspectors could be, Colt had evidently sent extra revolvers in case there were any rejections. On April 4, after advising the bureau that he had received his instructions, Folger boarded a train for New York and made connections to arrive at the New York yard that afternoon. On arrival, he immediately started inspecting the awaiting revolvers. To unpack, inspect, test fire, and then clean the revolvers after firing would have been an enormous undertaking for one man. Folger, no doubt, had assistance from the ordnance personnel at the New York yard to complete this task on the evening of the same day. While returning to Annapolis on the following day, Folger advised Sicard by telegraph that he had completed his inspection: Odenton, Md. April 5, 1885 Finished firing all last evening. Rejected five mechanical faults. Actions generally good, well finished. But I urge strongly against purchasing any unless unavoidable. Barrels three inches shorter than service. No trigger guard. Too light for service charge. Generally unsuited for military purposes.119 On the following day, Folger made a detailed report: Sir: Confirming my telegram of the 5th inst., from Odenton, I have the honor to report that in obedience to your telegraphic orders of the 3rd instant, I inspected on Saturday P.M., 4th instant, 200 Colt’s revolvers at the Navy Yard, New York. Of these, five, bearing factory Nos. 15999, 17023, 17200, 15647, and 14510 were rejected for faulty mechanical adjustment. The remainder—each of which was fired five rounds—were in fair condition. They were well finished and were chambered to receive the naval service ammunition. The following defective features—considering their proposed issue for service purposes are respectfully noted: 309

CHAPTER NINE

Figure 150 U.S.S. Pensacola. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

1st. The barrel is 3.3 inches shorter than that of the service arm, giving a greatly reduced effective range. 2nd. The weapon is about one half the weight of the service arm, entailing a violent recoil when using service ammunition. 3rd. The small size of the hammer and absence of the trigger guard render the piece a dangerous weapon in the hands of ill taught seamen. 4th. The grip frame is rubber covered. They are therefore unsuited for military purposes, and unless an emergency arises rendering their acquisition unavoidable, such action is not recommended.120 Sicard was faced with a dilemma. His plans to supply the Isthmian party with new Colt revolvers had developed some flaws, but he had not yet played all of his cards. On April 6, he sent three telegrams in quick succession: Commodore R. Chandler Commandant, New York Navy Yard Hold new Colt’s revolvers. They are not yet accepted. One hundred and thirty five (135) ordered from Norfolk Navy Yard by express. Commodore William T. Truxton Commandant, Norfolk Navy Yard Send immediately by express to New York Navy Yard one hundred thirty five (135) Colt’s revolvers. Others ordered from Mare Island to replace. Commodore John H. Russell Commandant, Mare Island Navy Yard 310

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Send immediately to Norfolk Navy Yard by fast freight, one hundred thirty five (135) revolvers.121 Sicard was borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. The Colt revolvers ordered from the Norfolk yard were originally allocated for the U.S.S. Pensacola, flagship of Rear Adm. S. R. Franklin, which was scheduled to depart shortly for an extended tour of European duty (figure 150). The Isthmian party would be supplied with Colt alterations, and the revolvers ordered to replace them were Remington alterations that had been on the West Coast since 1876. On April 9, Folger made his report on the Remington revolvers sent to Annapolis from the Essex for testing: Sir, The defective action in the Remington revolvers which was illustrated in but a single specimen of the twenty received from the New York Navy Yard is due to the following causes, absent in Colt’s Naval revolver from which it differs but slightly. 1. The countersinking in the cylinders for cartridge rims permits the accumulation of dirt or lubricant to such an extent that the heads are forced backward against the breech plate, producing such friction that the hammers can not be raised nor the cylinders revolved. 2. The part known as the “hand and spring” which through the movement of the hammer produces one sixth of a turn is of less power in the drift and leverage of the spring than obtained with the Colt. 3. The radius of the cylinder pinion (if this be its name) or the circular ratchet to which the power is applied to produce revolution of the cylinder, is shorter and therefore less powerful than with the Colt. 4. The Remington cylinder weighs fifty grammes [sic] heavier than that of the Colt, thus needing greater power to produce revolution. Conclusions: It does not appear to be practicable to make any alteration which will ensure a permanently satisfactory performance. The countersink face of the cylinder might however, be filed down which would obviate the difficulty regarding the accumulation of lubricant; the latter as in the Colt, being then permitted to flow outward from the cartridge rims. This being, apparently, the principal defect, it is respectfully recommended that the alteration referred to be made (at this station) on a single specimen, with subsequent tests and reports to the Bureau. The ammunition used here did not behave as described in the survey on board the U.S.S. Monocacy. It is not believed that boring the countersink deeper as recommended by the survey would obviate the difficulty in question.122 Folger enclosed a sketch of his proposed modification (figure 151). 311

CHAPTER NINE

Figure 151 Cdr. William Folger’s sketch that was included with recommendations for modification of cylinders. (Courtesy: National Archives)

Figure 152 Close-up view of frame and cylinder of an altered Remington Navy Revolver. The cylinder is one that has been altered again by the Bureau of Ordnance. Note space between rear of cylinder and breechblock. (Author’s collection) 312

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Sicard endorsed this report on the following day: Respectfully returned to Naval Ordnance Proving Ground. The Bureau authorizes the Remington revolver to be altered as herein recommended, and experimented with.123 Folger submitted a report on the modified revolver to the bureau on April 14 (figure 152): Sir: In compliance with your instructions of the 10th, instant, I have the honor to submit the results of a test of a Remington revolver after making the alteration suggested in N.O.P.G. No. 61 of the 9th, instant. The piece which showed the most marked defects in the particulars reported in service (Factory No. 312) was selected, and the rear end of the cylinder turned down until the cartridge rim recesses were removed. It was then fired 100 rounds without cleaning. Although working somewhat stiffly toward the end of the firing test, the performance was entirely satisfactory throughout, there being no failure to revolve the cylinder in any case. It is therefore respectfully recommended that all revolvers of this pattern be altered as described,—care should be exercised however not to turn down below the bottom of the recess. I will note a further defect, not mentioned in the Monocacy’s survey or the Essex report—the flimsy manner in which the ejector is secured to the barrel and would suggest that the service effectiveness of the piece might be notably improved by the adoption of the Colt spiral spring ejector and the removal of the hinged rammer, which last appears to be a superfluous relic of the weapon in its former condition as a muzzle-loader.124 The navy had not acquired any Remington revolvers with less than five-digit serial numbers. The factory number mentioned in the previous report was evidently an assembly number that Remington had stamped on various parts at the time of alteration. On May 2, the ordnance officer at the Norfolk Navy Yard sent the following to his commanding officer: Sir: Referring to the Bureau’s letter of the 30th ult. inquiring whether the “Pensacola” is ready for sea so far as Ordnance is concerned, I have the honor to inform you that she is ready except as to the revolvers ordered to be sent from the Mare Island Yard, which have not yet been received. They were shipped by “Empire Line,” Fast Freight, from Omaha, April 21st, 1885 and are daily expected to arrive. The Quartermaster, U.S.A., at Omaha stated in a letter of the 21st, April 1885, that they might be expected to reach here about May 1st, 1885. C. S. Cotton125 313

CHAPTER NINE

Sicard, having received a copy of the above letter, added the following endorsement on May 4: Returned to the Norfolk Navy Yard. Please use every effort to expedite the delivery of the shipment in order that the ship may receive the revolvers in season.126 On May 6, Sicard decided to pursue the revolvers on his own: Empire Fast Freight Line Baltimore, Md. Sirs: The Bureau is informed that a shipment of revolvers was made April 21st by the Quartermaster at Omaha, Neb. to the Norfolk Navy Yard. If your manifest shows this shipment, please look into this matter and expedite the delivery of the articles, as the vessel is awaiting their arrival.127 On May 18, the inspector of ordnance at the Norfolk yard reported that the Pensacola had departed for England, minus her allotment of revolvers: Sir: I have to report the departure of the U.S.S. Pensacola for sea on Saturday, May 16th, 1885, without her outfit of revolvers, every exertion has been made to hasten their delivery, but none has been received to date.128 The 135 Remington revolvers were eventually located and finally arrived at the Norfolk yard in the latter part of June. Norfolk notified Sicard of their arrival; he endorsed the report and forwarded it to the Washington Navy Yard on July 2, 1885: Respectfully referred to Washington Navy Yard. The Bureau has directed the Norfolk Navy Yard to send you 135 Remington revolvers, cal. 38. Please alter them in accordance with the recommendations made and send them to Comdg. Officer, U.S.S. Pensacola, care of B. F. Stevens, 4 Trafalgar Square, London England.129 The recommended alterations were those submitted to the bureau by Folger on April 14. On July 22, Sicard notified the Pensacola that the revolvers were being forwarded: Rear Admiral S. R. Franklin Sir: Referring to the revolvers (assigned to the “Pensacola”) that did not arrive at Norfolk before the sailing of the ship: 314

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

After a long time, these arms were found by the railroad company and delivered at Norfolk. They have been sent to the Washington Navy Yard for some necessary repairs, and as soon as these are completed, shipment will be made to you.130 The United States Government Agency in England acknowledged receipt of the revolvers on October 5: Commodore Montgomery Sicard, U.S. Navy Sir In reply to your letter of August 12, I have the honor to inform you of the arrival in London of the box of revolvers addressed to the U.S.S. “Pensacola” and assigned to my care. In consequence of the non-receipt of the bill of lading from New York, considerable delay has occurred in clearing and securing the box. The difficulties have now been overcome, and the box will now be sent to the “Pensacola” at Southhampton, as soon as practicable. The small box for the “Kearsarge” was received and forwarded to the ship on Sept. 11. B. F. Stevens131 The 135 Remington revolvers had finally arrived in England and would soon be delivered to the Pensacola, but the trip had been anything but uneventful. After being shipped from the Mare Island yard in April, the revolvers had been lost for over two months in transit on the railroad before being located and delivered to Norfolk in late June. After their arrival, they were forwarded to Washington for modification and again forwarded by ship to England, where they were impounded by British customs for lack of requisite documentation from New York. Sicard managed to extract some measure of satisfaction from the railroad that had lost the revolvers. The shipment had been made by express, and the railroad had the audacity to try to collect express charges after the revolvers had been delivered. Although the real reason was never stated in any of the correspondence, Sicard managed to delay payment of these charges for almost two years. Also in October, the U.S.S. Monocacy, stationed in China, sent a requisition for ordnance articles including revolvers. The cover letter again described the difficulties encountered with Remington revolvers: U.S. Str. Monocacy, (3rd Rate) Canton, China, October 26, 1885 Sir, I have the honor to transmit herewith a requisition, in triplicate, for various articles in the Ordnance Department. In relation to the revolvers, I would respectfully request that this vessel may be furnished with those of the latest pattern. Of the old revolvers, the board which condemned them, states the cylinders too close to the breech piece, so that the cartridges jam and prevent the former from 315

CHAPTER NINE

Figure 153 Navy revolver cylinders with cartridges inserted. Number 1 is an original cylinder as supplied by Remington. Number 2 was altered by the ordnance officer on a vessel in the Far East. Number 3 is a specimen altered by the Bureau of Ordnance at the Washington Navy Yard. (Author’s collection)

turning. This occurs frequently while loading and invariable after firing one or two cartridges. To remedy this, and in accordance with the board of survey of Jany 21, 1885, the rear of each cylinder was recessed to allow more room for the expansion of the base of the cartridge. This alteration did not relieve the cylinder, but reduced the power of the firing pin by allowing the cartridge to go too far forward. During a late target practice it was noted that many cartridges that did not explode were only slightly indented by the firing pin. The workmanship is poor, differing in different pistols, the sights and extractor rods being easily detached; the gate spring is weak and the gate liable to drop open. At a recent target practice in attempting to fire 300 cartridges 160 of them missed fire. The failure due, we believe, to no fault of the cartridges. There was incessant jambing [sic] of parts of the mechanism, frequent refusal of some chambers to take cartridges which others would receive—in short difficulty was experienced in loading, firing, and extracting. The revolver is obsolete in type, bad in workmanship, complicated in construction, and, in our opinion, totally unfit for issue. We recommend that they be condemned and turned into stores in the United States. 1648 revolver cartridges, in our opinion are good and fit for issue. A number taken from different boxes were fired successfully from a Colt’s revolver and caused no difficulty. The failure of nearly two hundred of them to explode at a recent target practice, we find due to the defective revolver, referred to above, in which they were tried. Frances Heggurson Comd’g U.S.S. “Monocacy”132 Particular attention should be paid to Heggurson’s description of the modifications performed on the Remington revolver in an effort to alleviate difficulties in firing. I recently located a navy revolver that had been modified in the manner described and that could very well be the revolver cited (figure 153). However, it seems that this type of modification was attempted by the 316

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Figure 154 U.S.S. Palos. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

survey boards of more than one vessel stationed in Asia, and from the information contained in reports to the bureau, more than one revolver was modified on some vessels. We may never know how many revolvers were altered in this manner; I estimate less than thirty, thereby making this type of modification extremely rare. The bureau’s next message concerning Remington revolvers was sent to the U.S.S. Palos (figure 154), also stationed in Asia: Washington City, Nov. 19, 1885 Lieut. Comdr. Thos. Nelson Commdg. U.S.S. Palos Sir, The Bureau has received your report on Gatling Guns, Small Arms, &c. for the quarter ending Sept. 30, 1885 and noted your remarks on the behavior of the Remington revolvers. You are authorized to have turned off the metal of the rear end of the chamber cylinder as far as the bottom of the recesses for the cartridge rims, care being taken not to turn below the bottom of these recesses. This course was pursued with the Remington revolvers lately furnished to the “Pensacola,” after which 100 rounds were fired from one of them, its performance being satisfactory. The part to be removed is shown in red on the appended sketch.133 The appended sketch is shown in figure 151. Compare this sketch with the cylinders in figure 153. On the following day, Sicard sent a blanket letter to the commandants of all navy yards except Washington: 317

CHAPTER NINE

To Portsmouth, Boston, New York, League Island, Norfolk, Pensacola, M.I. Navy Yards. Commandant Navy Yard, Sir: Please send all Remington revolvers cal. 38, turned in from ships, to the Washington Navy Yard, for alteration.134 On the same day, he also notified the Washington yard with a fourth endorsement on Folger’s report of April 14: Respectfully referred to the Washington Navy Yard. The Bureau has directed the Navy Yards to send you all the Remington revolvers that are turned in by vessels. Please alter them as herein recommended, and test them with two chamberfuls [sic] each, reporting results.135 Sicard’s orders of November 20 created some confusion and elicited the following response from the ordnance officer at the New York yard: New York, November 23, 1885 Memorandum for Chief of Bureau of Ordnance, Referring to the Bureau’s order of the 20th inst., No. 915. I respectfully request to be informed if it is the Bureau’s intention to have all the Remington revolvers, Cal. .38 now on hand, and which (excepting the 42 recently received from Washington) have all heretofore been turned in by ships, to be sent to the Washington Navy Yard for alteration, or only those in excess of the number appropriated for the U.S.S. “Tallapoosa.” Geo. W. Coffin136 Sicard’s endorsement on this letter was added the following day: Nov. 24/85. Respectfully returned to the N.Y. New York. All Remington revolvers cal. . 38 that have not been turned off at rear of cylinder are to be sent to the Washington N.Y.137 From the West Coast came yet another query in regard to the bureau’s order of November 20: Mare Island, Cal. Nov. 30, 1885 Sir: Referring to the Bureau’s order of Nov. 20/85. I have the honor to report that there are in store 138 Remington revolvers Cal. .38, that have never been unpacked since their arrival here, which I will retain. 318

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Also that there are 58 Remington revolvers turned in from ships, (42 from the “Adams” and 16 from different sources) which will be shipped immediately. Rich’d M. Cutts Inspector of Ordnance138 The endorsement on this letter was written one week later: Dec. 7/85 Respectfully returned to Mare Island Navy Yard. The 138 Remington revolvers herein mentioned are also to be shipped to the Washington Navy Yard.139

THE YEAR OF 1886 On January 4, 1886, the inspector of ordnance at Washington made a report on a lot of Remington revolvers recently modified at the yard: Commodore W. W. Queen, U.S. Navy Commandant Navy Yard, Washington, D.C. Sir: I have the honor to report that nine (9) Remington revolvers have been altered and tested in accordance with the Bureau’s order of November 20th 1885. There were no misfires. The cylinders revolved easily, and did not become much heated. It was found that the cylinders are not entirely interchangeable, inasmuch as they work much better in some frames than others. Cost of alteration, ten (10) cents each.140 The next episode in this narrative was stimulated by the arrival at the bureau of another report from the Asiatic Squadron: U.S.S. “Palos,” 4th Rate Chemulpo, Korea January 18, 1886 Sir, I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of the Bureau’s letter of Nov. 19/85 informing me that a tripod for short Gatling and three sets of shoes and bolts, have been ordered to be sent to this vessel. Also letter of same date (No. 915) authorizing alteration of Remington Revolvers &c enclosing diagram for same. In this connection I would respectfully state that previous to my arrival at Shanghai, in September last, the revolvers were found at target practice, to be utterly useless owing to jamming of the cylinder after first fire. A survey was held at Shanghai, dated October 10th of which a copy has been 319

CHAPTER NINE

forwarded to the Bureau, on these arms, containing the following recommendation, Viz “We recommend countersinking the rear of the cylinder for receiving cartridges so as to allow the base of the cartridges to lie close.” In pursuance of this recommendation the rear of the chambers or the recesses in the base of the cylinder were deepened so that the base of the cartridges, when in place, lay just inside the plane of the cylinder-base and the breech-block filed up true to allow the cylinder to revolve freely in front of it. This work was done by an expert, (the Foreman of the Machine shop of Farnham & Co.) and after completion was tested by firing six rounds (shots) from each revolver. After several trials of this kind, all except four, were made to fire six shots without serious jamming. Subsequently, however, when used at target practice by the officers, it was found that nearly all of them still jammed before the cylinder was emptied, some firing only 2 or 3 shots, and then so jammed it became necessary to take the piece apart in order to clear it. Occasionally one may be fired and the cylinder emptied without jamming, but there is nothing certain about its performance after reloading and my experience with these, since this work was done, proves that they are unreliable and apt to jam any time after the first shot. When I reach a place where such work can be done, I will have a couple of them altered in accordance with the Bureau’s instructions and report results. Before receipt of the Bureau’s letter, I had ordered a second survey on these arms, and I forward herewith a copy of same, & also “Quarterly Requisition” for stores, both of which are respectfully submitted for the Bureau’s action especially as regards the revolvers in question. I am very respectfully Thos. Nelson Lt. Commander, Commanding141 I invite the reader’s close attention to this report. From the details given, twenty Remington revolvers on this vessel were modified by deepening the cartridge head recesses. In addition, metal was removed from the front of the breech plates. Also, take note that the mistake made during a similar experiment on the Monocacy was not repeated, that is, countersinking the chambers so deep that the firing pin had difficulty striking the cartridge primer. This modification would have created yet a fourth variation, one that I have yet to encounter. On February 3, the bureau sent the following messages: Washington Navy Yard. Sir: Please send immediately to the Norfolk Navy Yard for “Swatara.” Fifty-two (52) Remington revolvers, cal. .38. New York Navy Yard. (Telegram) Send immediately to the Navy Yard Norfolk, Va., Seventy eight hundred (7800) revolver ball cartridges, caliber thirty eight (38), For “Swatara;” sails Saturday. 320

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Commandant, Norfolk Navy Yard. Sir: Please exchange the fifty-two (52) navy pistols, with accoutrements, in the “Swatara” for fifty two (52), Remington revolvers, which have been ordered sent you from the Washington Navy Yard. The revolver cartridge boxes and frogs are to be supplied from stock on hand. The Bureau has directed the New York Navy Yard to send you 7800 cartridges for the revolvers.142 Finally, we have a clue to explain the shortage of revolvers in the navy. It seems the bureau was replacing the Remington single-shot pistols with revolvers, and revolvers were being furnished to arm seamen as well as officers. This was in contradiction to the policies that had been in effect in the navy for many years. Also in February, the ordnance officer at Mare Island, being somewhat confused by the series of events concerning the Remington revolvers, forwarded the following letter to his commanding officer: Mare Island, Cal., Feb. 30, 1886 Commodore John H. Russell, U.S.N. Sir: Referring to the Bureau’s order of Nov. 20/85, directing that all Remington revolvers, cal. .38 turned in by ships, be sent to the Washington Navy Yard for alteration, and to the Bureau’s endorsement of Dec. 7/85, on letter No. 91, of Nov. 30/85, relating to Remington revolvers that had never been used: I have the honor to report that on Dec. 10/85, 58 Remington revolvers and on Dec. 15/85 138 Remington revolvers, were sent East, they being all the revolvers in store. Under req. No. 23 of Dec. 15/85, approved Dec. 23/85, the Inspector of Ordnance required for 138 B.L. revolvers, cal. .38 to “take the place of those sent East.” There were 90 Remington revolvers, cal. .38, of exactly the same pattern as those sent East, received in store yesterday, from the Washington Navy Yard. I respectfully request information as to the disposition to be made of these revolvers. Henry Glass Inspector of Ordnance143 Russell was apparently as much in the dark as his inspector. He forwarded Glass’s letter to the bureau, and on March 2, Sicard made the following endorsement: Respectfully returned to the Mare Island Navy Yard. The rear of the cylinder of the revolvers herein mentioned, was turned off, to prevent jamming, which has been a serious defect in all the Remington revolvers. The revolvers received from the Washington Navy Yard are to be issued to service, as required.144 321

CHAPTER NINE

The next report on Remington revolvers was dated August 11 and came from Nelson, captain of the Palos: Shanghai, China Sir, With reference to Bureau’s letter of November 19th, 1885, (No. 915) relating to Remington revolvers, I have the honor to report that in obedience to instructions therein contained, “To have turned off the metal of the rear of the cylinder as far as the recesses for the cartridge rims.” I have had two of the revolvers so altered and tested with the following results. The cylinder jammed after the first fire, and on a second trial jammed three times in six fires. I have the honor to enclose a copy of a letter of the Ord. Officer of this ship, giving particulars of the test. In view of the failure of the first two to work properly, after being altered, I have had nothing done to the remaining eighteen.145 Enclosed with Nelson’s letter was a copy of a report from the Palos’s ordnance officer. In essence, the report was the same as Nelson’s. This report raises the possibility of yet another variation in the manner in which some of the Remington cylinders were modified. Two of the twenty revolvers aboard the Palos were twice modified, that is, first having the chambers recessed more deeply than originally supplied by Remington, and then having the rear of the cylinder turned down to the bottom of the recesses. Also, on August 11, the bureau first contemplated the purchase of more modern revolvers for the navy. Sicard sent the following letter to Winchester, Colt, Remington, Smith & Wesson, and Merwin Hulbert: Sirs: The Bureau contemplates purchasing some double action revolvers, cal. .38, for the Navy, and requests that you will forward for examination, your most approved models of that kind of arm suitable for the Naval Service. Please give price and time of delivery for 580.146

THE YEAR OF 1887 Our story now moves ahead better than a year. In November 1887 the bureau received another report from Asia, this time a survey aboard the U.S.S. Mohican. This report read much like those received from the Monocacy and Palos condemning Remington revolvers and requesting replacements. Sicard responded on December 8 with the following letter to the commanding officer of the Mohican (figure 155): Sir: Referring to the report of survey, dated Oct. 27, 1887, on Remington revolvers and cartridges: The Bureau has no other revolvers available for the “Mohican” at present. 322

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Figure 155 U.S.S. Mohican. (Courtesy: Library of Congress)

You are authorized to have turned off from one revolver the metal of the rear end of the chamber cylinder as far as the bottom of the recesses for the cartridge rims, care being taken not to turn below the bottom of the recesses. The revolver so altered will then be tested by firing two hundred rounds, and if found to work freely and satisfactorily in so far as the revolution is concerned, the remainder of the revolvers aboard the “Mohican” will be altered in the same manner. This course was pursued with the revolvers furnished to the “Pensacola,” after which 100 rounds were fired from one of them, its performance being satisfactory.147

THE YEAR OF 1888 Over nine months were to pass before the bureau received a response to this letter: U.S.S. Mohican Mare Island, Cal., Sept. 18, 1888 Sir: In obedience to the Order of the Chief of the Bureau of Ordnance of December 8th, 1887, to the Commanding Officer of this vessel, I have had the metal turned off from the rear end of the cylinder chamber of one of the Remington Revolvers on board, as directed, and then had the Revolver, so altered, tested, by firing 180 rounds. I am sorry to have to report that it did not work “freely and satisfactorily in so far as the revolution of the Cylinder is concerned.” At every second or third shot the cylinder would be jammed, requiring force to assist the trigger to revolve it, when that could be done at all; but, as a general thing, the cylinder would have to be knocked out and the empty shell removed, before the next shot could be fired. On closer examination, I found that the fault lay in the Ammunition, and not in the Revolver. In every case the heads of the copper shells were found to be bulged out by the 323

CHAPTER NINE

force of the explosion, to such an extent, as to jam the Cylinder hard enough, to revolve it, when that could be done at all, with assistance of the hands; but, in most cases we found the caps blown out so hard as to fill up the hole in the breech block around the firing point of the hammer, thus completely locking the Cylinder, so that a wooden mallet, in the shape of a screw driver handle, would be required to break it out. I then took my Colt’s Revolver and fired a number of shots of the ship’s ammunition from it, and found that the same defect was observable, although not to so great an extent as with the Remingtons, when using that class of Revolver. I then substituted my own ammunition, being made by the Union Metallic Cartridge Company of Bridgeport, Conn., and found that both of the Revolvers worked admirably. The altered Remington worked so well with the latter ammunition that I took another of the ship’s Remingtons, which had not been altered, and fired 24 shots of the U.M.C. Co.’s. ammunition without the least inconvenience or trouble. I then loaded the same Revolver with the U.S. Cartridge Co.’s ammunition as furnished to the ship, and at the first fire the Cylinder was jammed so tight that we worked about five minutes clearing it. It then took about twenty minutes to fire six charges put into the chambers. This corresponds with my previous experience with the “Lowell” ammunition, that made by the U.S.C. Co., at Lowell, Mass. in the use of sporting rifles. I have even found it to be unreliable as to range, accuracy and action. Commander J. B. Coughlin Commanding U.S.S. Mohican148 The first endorsement on this letter, dated October 1, authorized Coughlin to replace the cartridges on the Mohican with cartridges manufactured by Union Metallic Cartridge Company. On the same day, Sicard also contacted the commandant of the Mare Island yard with this endorsement on Coughlin’s report: Commodore George E. Belknap Sir: Please direct the Inspector of Ordnance to fire, from a Colt and a Remington revolver, five percent of the revolver cartridges manufactured by the United States Cartridge Company, from the stock on hand, with reference to the difficulties experienced as set forth in Commander Coughlin’s letter of September 18; and report the results to the Bureau.149 The ordnance officer made his report to the commandant on October 15: Commodore George E. Belknap Sir: I have the honor to report that I have complied with the Bureau’s Order No. 3332 of October 1st 1888, to fire five percent of the revolver ball cartridges, cal. .38, on hand at this station, using both Remington and Colt Revolvers. The results of the test are as follows: 324

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

Over twenty five per cent of the cartridges tried, after firing, jammed the revolver so that it could not be fired without dismounting the cylinder and removing the bulged cases. Nearly forty percent of the cartridges tried missed fire at first, the primers being defective, although some of them exploded when a second attempt was made. The cartridges were made by the U.S. Cartridge Co., of Lowell, Mass., and were received at this station from vessels, at various times during the last six years. There was no appreciable difference in the performance of the two types of revolvers. Lieut. Edward F. Qualtrough Inspector of Ordnance150 This report was forwarded to the bureau, where Sicard made the following endorsement on October 25: Respectfully returned to the Mare Island Navy Yard. The Bureau condemns the cartridges herein mentioned.151 After almost four years, the Remington “problem” had been solved. Almost all the negative reports had originated with ordnance officers, but it took the attention of an astute commanding officer to analyze and diagnose the complaints against the Remington revolvers. Some of the previous reports had contained references to the bulging cartridge cases, but in their haste to condemn the Remington revolvers, the ordnance officers had neglected to compare the Remington with the Colt. Had they done so, they may have discovered that the Colt had slightly more head space than the Remington. This allowed the Colt cylinders to revolve freely when using the same ammunition that caused jamming in the Remingtons. The bureau had purchased cartridges from the Union Metallic Cartridge Company for the first lot of Colt alterations delivered in 1873 but had also started purchasing cartridges from the United States Cartridge Company in 1875. This practice contributed to the problem concerning the Remington alterations, as both manufacturers’ cartridges were in use at different locations. The UMC Company’s cartridge cases were made of brass; those from the USC Company were of copper and were too soft for use in the Remington revolvers. The experiments to solve the Remington “problem” have created at least five variations of cylinders; there is a definite possibility that a sixth type is extant. On the original cylinders, as supplied by Remington, the chambers were recessed for the head of the cartridges. The sketch by Folger (see figure 151) also shows that Remington had supplied some of the alterations with rim fire cylinders. As modified by the bureau at the Washington yard, the rear of the cylinders was milled off to the point where the cartridges were no longer recessed. I do not know the number of cylinders modified by the bureau, but this type seems to be fairly common (see figure 153). A fourth type has been altered in the manner as described by the ordnance officer aboard the Monocacy, that is, by recessing the chambers to the point where the firing pin was unreliable in reaching the primer. A fifth type occurred when this same type modification was performed on revolvers aboard the Palos; however, the machinist performing the work evidently had enough common sense to realize that the removal of too much metal would render 325

CHAPTER NINE

the revolvers useless. The report from the Palos also noted that metal had been removed from the face of the breech plate. A possible sixth type would be those exhibiting cylinders that were first recessed and later milled off at the rear, as described by Commander Nelson of the Palos on January 18 and August 11, 1886. In July 1887 the bureau again made overtures to Colt about purchasing cartridge revolvers. After several months of preliminary discussions on developing a revolver to meet the bureau’s exacting standards, the bureau sought permission from the secretary of the navy to purchase 6,690 double-action Colt revolvers. In May 1888 the secretary of the navy authorized the purchase of five thousand, and soon thereafter, the bureau signed a contract with Colt. Almost a full year passed before the first deliveries, but all five thousand revolvers were delivered before the end of 1889. Shortly before the first lot of the new revolvers was delivered in May 1889, Sicard instituted a new practice to record the activities during general quarters drills aboard the navy’s vessels. The following general orders were sent to all ships, along with printed forms to record the results of target practice: Bureau of Ordnance Washington D.C., April 1, 1889 It is directed that a part of the small arms allowance for the third quarter of 1889 be expended in the following manner: A target, showing to the ship (anchored) a surface 6 feet square, shall be anchored 300 yards from the ship, and the ships company being at general quarters, the first (or second) riflemen shall be called away, and shall fire at the target from points giving them suitable cover for one minute from the time the order calling them away was given. The fire shall then cease, and the number of shot holes shall be counted. This programme shall be executed by the first and second riflemen and marines, each separately and as often as may be conveniently practicable. The record of this practice shall consist of filling out the appropriate columns in the blank “Records of Practice of Boarders, Riflemen and Marines” herewith forwarded. The Gatling guns shall also be fired about 500 rounds each from their regular mount in the place allotted them in general quarters, and at the target just described. This practice shall be separate from the rest. The record of this practice shall consist of filling out the appropriate columns in the blank “Records of Practice of Boarders, Riflemen and Marines.” The first and second boarders shall also be separately exercised in firing their pistols for one minute at a target anchored 50 yards from the ship, and showing roughly the figure of a man. The record of this practice shall consist of filling out the appropriate columns in the blank “Records of Practice of Boarders, Riflemen and Marines.” These men must also be required to take more or less cover, and should be suitably disposed about the ship. During these exercises with small arms it is recommended that, when convenient, the ships company be at their stations at general quarters. 326

METALLIC CARTRIDGE ALTERATIONS FOR THE BUREAU OF ORDNANCE

The Bureau will be gratified to receive from commanding and executive officers, and from officers of divisions, their views as to how the men in cruising ships can best be trained in the use of their arms. It is the intention to endeavor to formulate in greater perfection the drill for boarders and riflemen, and it is particularly desired to enlist the services of all men in this work. Officers commanding the different bodies of small-arms men should try to elaborate a system of drill by which they may be quickly moved from point to point of the ship, while keeping under cover as much as convenient. Montgomery Sicard Chief of Bureau152 Shortly after the bureau took delivery of the new double-action Colt revolvers, the bureau disposed of the altered Colt and Remington revolvers and also the Remington Rolling Block Pistols. Hartley and Graham acquired many of the Remington single-shot pistols at auction; several of these were rebuilt at the Remington factory into cadet rifles and target pistols and were once again sold on the commercial market as new products. I have not discovered the purchasers of the Colt and Remington alterations. Some of the Colt revolvers had been in naval service for over thirty years and the Remingtons for over twenty-five years, first as percussion and then altered for metallic cartridges. Many had served in naval engagements during the Civil War in the Western Flotilla, the Mississippi Squadron, the North Atlantic Blockade Squadron, and with Farragut at New Orleans. Postwar duties included service in European and Asiatic waters. Although there were many complaints in later years about the antiquity of the revolvers, they seem to have served the navy very well. They were a credit to both the Colt and Remington armories. Collectors have finally recognized the historical significance of cartridge alterations, and these arms are now eagerly sought after. Those that can be authenticated as having martial service will bring a premium. It is easy to distinguish the revolvers altered for the U.S. Navy from those altered by Remington for commercial sales. The navy’s revolvers are all .38 center fire. Serial numbers will be below approximately 32,000. As I have mentioned before, U.S. Navy Remingtons were very seldom “postwar” inspected. Those that were will have a small anchor on top of the barrel near the frame and inspector’s initials on the front or side of the cylinder. The original percussion cylinders were replaced on the altered specimens; consequently, these markings were lost. If an altered revolver had been inspected, the only remaining inspection mark would be the anchor stamp on the barrel. Considering that the revolvers were refinished at the time of alteration, this mark might also be almost illegible, as are many of the barrel addresses I have examined. As only 1,020 of the navy’s Remington revolvers were altered to cartridge, these are a very rare and desirable addition to any martial collector’s collection.

327

CHAPTER TEN

Identifying Remington Army and Navy Revolvers n my previous text I have briefly discussed the various models of the Remington Army and Navy revolvers. I shall now scrutinize these more closely and examine the entire evolution of the arms, from the first variation of the Beals Navy Revolver to the end product, the final versions of the New Model Army and Navy revolvers. Most collectors are aware that arms activity at the Remington works during the early years was confined to the manufacture of rifle and musket barrels. There were other operations associated with the forge and smithy, but the manufacture of barrels provided a large part of the business. Eliphalet Remington’s reputation as a maker of quality barrels was well known to some of the country’s finest gunsmiths. By 1846 the armory had grown to the point where Remington was filling small government arms contracts. The company was the first American arms manufacturer to introduce cast and decarbonized steel barrels to the market. Remington’s first venture into revolver manufacturing took place in 1856. Samuel Colt had dominated the revolver manufacturing field for several years; his patents on the method of rotating and locking the cylinder led other designers to adopt ingenious methods to avoid patent infringements. Eli Whitney started manufacturing revolvers in mid-1850. Some of his early efforts required the user to rotate the cylinder by hand between discharges. Another model had a second trigger that rotated the cylinder. Later production, based on the early patents of Fordyce Beals, utilized a side cam or zigzag type mechanism to rotate the cylinder. None of these were very practical and production was limited. Beals’s association with Whitney was short lived. When he patented a new revolver design in 1856, he presented his latest concept to the Remingtons. By the end of the year, the armory was producing a small frame .31 caliber pocket revolver based on Beals’s patent number 15,167, dated June 24, 1856 (figure 156). The original patent drawing depicted a seven-shot cylinder, but the revolvers were produced with only a five-shot capacity. Cylinder rotation was accomplished by a cam and pawl that were mounted on the left side of the frame, the cam being activated by the hammer. The cylinder was locked by an ingenious spring detent that was seated, on the early revolvers, into the side of the nipple cavity. Later cylinders had a cavity milled between the nipples for this purpose. Beals was issued patent number 17,359 on May 26, 1857, describing the new arrangement (figure 157). Weighing only eleven ounces and having a three-inch barrel, the revolver was ideal for pocket use. This model is now recognized as the Remington-Beals First Model Pocket Revolver.

I

329

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 156 Fordyce Beals’s patent, number 15,167. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

A second model was introduced in 1858, based on the same patents, with a newly designed frame. The most obvious feature of this model was a sheath trigger, which eliminated the need for a trigger guard. The limited production (estimated at one thousand) of this model created a Remington handgun rarity; it is known as the Remington-Beals Second Model Pocket Revolver. In the meantime, Beals’s agile mind had been at work designing another improvement, and his next patent, number 21,478, dated September 14, 1858, was the basis for a third model revolver (figure 158). Remington referred to this model in early advertising literature as a “belt size revolver.” It hardly qualifies as such even though it has a four-inch barrel. Collectors have dubbed it the Remington-Beals Third Model Pocket. The caliber remained at .31 and the frame and lock work were similar to the preceding model. Beals’s latest patent described a loading lever and cylinder arbor system working in conjunction, where the arbor was retained in the frame when the lever was locked in position. The lever latch post limited the forward movement of the arbor when removing the cylinder from the frame, thereby retaining the arbor in the frame. When compared to the very early Beals Navy Revolvers, the similarities are unmistakable. After entering the handgun market, Remington attracted other firearms designers such as Joseph Rider and William Elliot. Both Rider and Elliot were very prolific patentees and proved to be a boon to Remington. 330

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Figure 157 Fordyce Beals’s patent, number 17,359. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

After the expiration of Colt’s basic patents in 1858, his design for the cylinder locking system was open to the public. In 1860, Remington started designing a larger caliber revolver that would incorporate a lock similar to that of Colt but had a loading lever and cylinder arbor system based on Beals’s patents. The novel feature of the Remington-Beals revolver was that the cylinder (unlike that of the Colt) could be taken from the frame without dismantling the arm. The revolver was introduced in the spring of 1861, shortly after Confederate forces fired on Fort Sumter and the start of hostilities between the North and South. The complete evolution of the Remington Army and Navy revolvers occurred in a relatively short time, with the introduction of the final version in 1863. Early design flaws were addressed by the firm as the revolvers were produced. Later improvements were brought to the company’s attention by Ordnance Department sub-inspectors and officers. One problem that seemed to persist throughout production was maintaining the close tolerances between the hammer nose and the percussion cap mounted on the nipple. Remington had designed the frame and hammer to limit hammer fall when the arm was discharged. The hammer face was never intended to strike directly on the nipple; contact was to occur only when a cap was present. Percussion caps were made with fulminate of mercury. Repeated ignition in contact with the nipples had a deteriorating effect on the metal, which was even more pronounced when the arm did not receive 331

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 158 Fordyce Beals’s patent, number 21,478. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

instant attention after use. This debilitating effect is even more pronounced when there is a hint of moisture present. When the nipples became eroded, as they were prone to do with repeated firing, the contact between hammer face and cap was apt to be lost, rendering the revolver useless. Nipple replacement was required before the arm was again an asset. This concept seemed to be lost on troops in the field; consequently, there were many complaints that the revolvers would not fire and were therefore useless. Approximately thirteen thousand Beals Navy Revolvers were manufactured prior to the introduction of the army model in the spring of 1862. The variations found on early Beals Navies are not found on the Beals Armies as they are on the Elliot and New Models. I have identified four variations of the Beals Navy: the first two involve major changes in design; the last two have minor changes that are difficult to discern. The first one is extremely rare and is seldom encountered.

REMINGTON BEALS NAVY, FIRST TYPE Regardless of the variation, all of the Beals Army and Navy revolvers have the same barrel address with one exception. This would be an extremely rare, very late Beals–Elliot transition with an 1861 barrel address. The standard Beals barrel address was used on some fifteen thousand Beals Navies and about nineteen hundred Beals Army Models (figure 159). The features that set the first type apart from succeeding revolvers are the loading lever, cylinder, cylinder arbor, and the loading lever latch post. In a design carried over from the Beals Third Model Pocket Revolver, the cylinder arbor has only one ear or thumb-piece on the exposed end. This feature has prompted collectors to refer to this variation as the “Single Wing Beals Navy.” The overall length of the arbor pin is 4 7/8 inches, and the main diameter of the 332

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Figure 159 Remington Beals barrel address. (Author’s collection)

arbor is .189, smaller than those found on subsequent variations. This precludes the possibility of interchanging either the arbor pin or cylinder with those in later revolvers (figure 160). The arbor pin has one other peculiarity not associated with later revolvers. Set into the forward end of the arbor pin head is another much smaller pin with a diameter of .014 inches and which extends nine-tenths of an inch. To understand the function of this pin, we have to once again examine the Beals lever and arbor system as originally used on the Third Model Pocket Revolver. When the arbor was withdrawn on this model, it came in contact with the lever latch post, which prevented complete removal from the frame. When this same design was adapted to the navy revolver, it was found that the latch post was so far forward that the arbor pin could be pulled completely out of the frame when removing the cylinder. To counteract this and make the loading lever long enough to be effective, the smaller pin was added to the front of the arbor. Although this seemed like a logical solution at the time, it was soon discovered that this arrangement allowed so much lateral movement at the front of the arbor that it could easily bypass the latch post (when pulled forward) and come completely out of the frame. The loading levers had a slot milled in the top, long enough to accommodate the small pin on the front of the arbor. Another feature found only on the first type, and on the transition to the second type, is the lever latch post (figure 161). The Third Model Pocket had a latch post similar to that used on Colt’s revolvers, and this too was carried over into the design of the early Remington Navies. This latch post was dovetailed into the barrel, rather than threaded, as were later versions. The hammer knurling of the early variations is hand cut in a diamond pattern; later knurling is a crosshatch design (figure 162). The screw escutcheons on the early revolvers appear to be of German silver (a white alloy of copper, nickel, and zinc). Later escutcheons of the same design were made of brass (figure 163). The brass trigger guards on the early Beals Navy Models were silver plated; this practice was abandoned when Remington started delivering revolvers under contract. On postwar-manufactured revolvers the guards were again plated, some with silver, while later production were nickel plated. Beside these obvious distinctions between the early revolvers and later variations, there are hidden features in the lock works that cannot be seen unless the revolver is completely disassembled. The cylinder locking bolt has only one tine to engage the hammer stud; the base of the hammer and the top sear portion of the trigger are wider (figure 164). These lock features remained in use until the transition to the Elliot model in mid-1862. Some of the last Beals Army and Navy revolvers can be found with the new lock system in which the locking bolt has two 333

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 160 Comparison of first and second variation Beals Navy forward parts and cylinders. (Author’s collection)

Figure 161 First type Beals Navy latch post. (Author’s collection)

Figure 162 Beals Navy early (left) and late (right) hammer knurling. (Author’s collection) 334

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Figure 163 From top to bottom, Beals, Elliot, and New Model grip panels. (Author’s collection)

tines and the base of the hammer and sear portion of the trigger are narrower. Although the later triggers will function with the early hammer and cylinder bolt, the situation cannot be reversed. Also, the early cylinder bolts must be used with a corresponding hammer. The distinctive high spur hammer was retained throughout production of the Beals and Elliot model revolvers. The cylinders of the early revolvers have no safety notches in which to engage the nose of the hammer. In early 1863, at the insistence of the Ordnance Department, safety notches appeared on both the army and navy revolvers during the transition from the Elliot models to the New Models (figure 165). The percussion nipples used on Remington’s early revolvers, starting with their Pocket Models in 1856 and continuing into their early navy production, were very distinctive. These early specimens had two slots in the base rather than the later type with shoulders. Because nipples are expendable and subject to replacement, it is impossible to determine just when the change to the standard type occurred. It is very probable that this change came about as a result of the Ordnance Department’s insistence on nipple uniformity for revolvers being accepted under contract (figure 166). I have recorded twenty-five of this first type of revolver with serial numbers ranging from 1 to 174. 335

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 164 Early (left) and late (right) type hammer, trigger, and cylinder bolt. (Author’s collection)

Figure 165 Early (left) and late (right) cylinders. (Author’s collection)

Figure 166 Early type nipples and nipple wrench. (Courtesy: Jay Huber collection) 336

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

TRANSITION FROM FIRST TO SECOND TYPE When Remington discovered the flaws in Beals’s early design, they set about rectifying this by designing an ingenious system whereby the arbor pin was increased slightly in diameter to .222 inches and milling a flat surface on the bottom of the arbor for about two-thirds of its length, while the rear portion remained round (see figure 160). This also required a larger orifice for the cylinder arbor in both the frame and cylinder. The loading lever was modified by squaring off the extreme rear shoulder. When the lever was lowered, this shoulder was almost in contact with the flat of the arbor. When the arbor was pulled forward, it could travel only as far as the shoulder between the flat and the round portion of the arbor. Although the length of the arbors varies, this was the arbor retaining system that was used for the remaining production of the Beals models, as well as all of the succeeding Remington New Model Revolvers. The first few examples of the new design retained the latch post and loading levers that were used on the first type. These are recognized as transition revolvers. I have recorded only eight examples of the transition revolver, with serial numbers from 8 to 398. This very small sampling may be due to the fact that the transition revolver is more difficult to recognize; the only external clue is the latch post. The low serial numbers recorded for the transitions are also perplexing. There seem to be two possibilities for this. The first is that Remington altered some of the first type revolvers after discovering the flaws previously discussed. This would have been a simple procedure, involving only the drilling of a larger orifice for the new arbor pin in the frame, milling the left side of the frame for the new arbor pin head, and enlarging the arbor pin hole in the cylinder. The second possibility is that Remington started a second series of serial numbers; however, in view of the very small sampling of transition revolvers that have surfaced, I prefer the theory that some of the first types were altered. No duplicate serial numbers have been recorded between the first type and the transitions. I have previously discussed this design change but think it should be reexamined. I can only speculate as to the responsible parties for the new design. Was Beals the designer? I think not. Surely he would have protected the design by patent. If it was the design of someone other than Beals, the entire succeeding production of Beals revolvers has been incorrectly identified as Beals models. The only Beals patents used on the early Navies were those of September 14, 1858, which described the loading lever–arbor retaining feature as used on the Third Model Pocket Revolvers. Apparently, the subject of a patent to protect the new design never arose at this time. When Remington reverted to this system after dropping William Elliot’s arbor retaining plan at the request of the Ordnance Department in early 1863, it evidently came to the attention of someone at the armory that it had never been patented. Samuel Remington took immediate steps to rectify this oversight and was issued patent number 37,921 on March 17, 1863 (figure 167). This patent date does not appear on any Remington revolver until after the war. Ironically, Beals’s patent date of September 14, 1858, was used on all of Remington’s New Model Revolvers, although it appears that he had little to do with the final design. 337

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 167 Samuel Remington patent, number 37,921. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

BEALS NAVY SECOND TYPE When Remington had used all the first type loading levers in inventory while producing the transition revolvers, they also redesigned the lever latch post before resuming production. I can offer no explanation for abandoning the early design; it was functional and worked very well for the Colt firm, who continued to use it on their percussion revolvers for many years. Perhaps there was some question of patent infringement, but I have failed to uncover any protection of Colt’s design. The new post was round, with a convex bottom, and screw threads on top matched corresponding threads tapped into the bottom of the barrel. This large post (.310 inches in diameter) overhangs the bottom flats of the barrel and, when examined alongside later types of Beals Navies, seems rather large and out of proportion to the rest of the revolver (figure 168). New serial numbers were started when this type entered production, and several numbers below 100 have been recorded. Many of these replicate numbers that were recorded in the first type production. Estimated serial number range is 1–4,000. 338

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Figure 168 Second type Beals Navy lever latch post. (Author’s collection)

Figure 169 Third type Beals Navy lever latch post. (Author’s collection)

Figure 170 Comparison of New Model hammer knurling. (Author’s collection)

BEALS NAVY THIRD TYPE The third type production is identified by a change in the lever latch post and knurling on the hammer. The lever latch post was reduced in diameter. This post retained a shoulder where the more rounded bottom met the sides of the post (figure 169). Knurling on the hammer, which was originally done by hand, was adapted to machinery. The early hammer knurling was a coarse diamond pattern, cut with the use of files and graving tools; the new knurling was a crosshatch design (figure 170). There is some variation in the crosshatching, indicating that although machinery was used to make the cuts, the work was probably handheld. This step saved labor, and labor was money. The estimated serial number range of the third type is 4,000–12,000.

BEALS NAVY FOURTH TYPE Once again, the type is most easily defined by the lever latch post. In a change of contour that is barely perceptible without carefully scrutinizing two examples side by side, the last type has a post very similar to the third type, except that the bottom is half round and has no shoulders 339

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 171 Fourth type Beals Navy lever latch post. (Author’s collection)

Figure 172 Late type (left) and early (right) cylinder pawls and screws. (Author’s collection)

(figure 171). The late fourth type revolver also has some transitional features that are not as apparent because of changes in the lock work that occurred during the change in design to the Elliot model, which succeeded the Beals models. The original lock work in the Beals Navy Revolvers had only one tine on the cylinder bolt; on the Elliot and New Models the cylinder bolt has two tines (see figure 164). The single tine required that the base of the hammer be wider to engage the single tine. The base of the hammer for the double-tined bolt was milled thinner to allow room for the added width. A new trigger with a narrower sear completed the design change. This can lead to some confusion when attempting to replace any of these parts, as the wide-based hammer will not function with a double-tined bolt, and vice versa. The early hammer will work with the newer trigger but the reverse will not work. A change of design in the pawl and pawl screw occurred about this same time. The threads on the early screws are cut on the head end and tapped into the pawl itself, and the screw pivots in the corresponding untapped hole drilled in the hammer. Threads on later screws are cut on the opposite end like a normal screw, and the hole in the hammer is tapped; the pawl pivots are on the screw itself (figure 172). The serial number range of the fourth type is approximately 12,000–15,700 and overlaps that of the Elliot Navy Model. While not as prevalent as in the Beals Army Models, late Beals Navies with Elliot patent barrel markings have been observed. 340

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Martially marked Beals Navy Revolvers are the fourth type. I estimate the Ordnance Department received about five hundred of these with serial numbers of approximately 13,500–15,700. Although none of the previous production was inspected and marked, Remington delivered 7,250 Beals Navies to the Ordnance Department as open market purchases. The department also purchased nearly forty-six hundred Remington Navies from commercial arms dealers. The Navy’s Bureau of Ordnance also purchased a small lot of the fourth type in 1862. This accounts for approximately 12,500 Beals Navies out of a total production of approximately 15,000. Adding the state militia purchases and private purchases from dealers for individuals entering military service, the odds are definitely in favor of almost all Beals Navy Revolvers seeing some type of military service.

BEALS ARMY REVOLVERS Remington did not produce a .44 caliber revolver until almost a year after introducing the navy model. The original order for five thousand revolvers that Remington received on July 29, 1861, called for .44 caliber, but the department continued to accept the .36 caliber navy models until May 31, 1862. On the same day that Remington delivered the last lot of navy revolvers on the original order of July 29, 1861, they also delivered the first lot of 850 Beals Army Revolvers. These Armies were not inspected, and inspectors’ cartouches are seldom found on army revolvers with serial numbers below 850. In early July 1862, Maj. William A. Thornton made a personal visit to Remington’s armory to inspect and receive 750 Beals Army Revolvers. His cartouche has been observed on many of the Beals Armies. He has the distinction of being the only ordnance officer to personally inspect any of the revolvers that Remington delivered to the military during the Civil War. The Beals Army has all the features associated with the fourth type Beals Navy Revolver. Small parts of Remington’s army models, such as lever latch posts, front sights, screws, hammer, trigger, and internal parts, are interchangeable in the navy frame; therefore, when any of these parts was changed during production of one model, there was a corresponding change in the other. The serial number range of the Beals Army Revolvers is approximately 1–1,950. The Ordnance Department received 850 of these that were not inspected, and Thornton accepted another 750 when he visited the armory. I have examined specimens that have only the cartouche of armory sub-inspector C. G. Curtis. This would seem to indicate that Curtis accepted some of these following Thornton’s visit. Like the navy models, few of these seem to have escaped military service.

BEALS-ELLIOT TRANSITION REVOLVERS The notable feature on transition Beals revolvers are barrels stamped with Elliot’s 1861 patent date; this seems to be more prevalent in the Armies than the navy models. The new lock work described above is also found in some of the late Beals models. A simple way to check whether the new lock work is installed is to cock the hammer and look at the base of the hammer. It would not be unusual to find a consecutively numbered pair of Armies, one a standard model and the second having transition features. 341

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 173 William Elliot’s patent, number 33,932. (Courtesy: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office)

ELLIOT MODEL ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS When Samuel Remington testified before the Owen-Holt Commission in the spring of 1862, he alluded that his firm was paying royalties to one patentee for revolvers and would soon be paying another. He was referring to Fordyce Beals in the first instance and William H. Elliot in the second. Elliot had designed an improvement in the loading lever–cylinder arbor arrangement. He was awarded patent number 33,932 on December 17, 1861 (figure 173). This patent date is seen in the barrel address of the Elliot models (figure 174). His patent described a loading lever with a wide mortise milled in the top that occupied approximately two-thirds of the top rear of the lever. The arbor was flat on the bottom, except for the rear portion, and had a slot milled on both sides of the head; these matched the corresponding rails on top of the lever. The Elliot arbor pin is approximately three-eighths of an inch longer than that of the Beals, as none of the head is rebated into the frame. Using this arrangement, the arbor could be withdrawn from the cylinder and frame without lowering the lever. The arbor pin was retained in the frame by a small friction spring mounted under the barrel (figures 175, 176, and 177). The spring engaged a small detent behind 342

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Figure 174 Remington Elliot Navy barrel address. (Author’s collection)

Figure 175 Elliot Navy forward parts. (Author’s collection)

the head in the top of the arbor. A new lever latch post was also designed when the Elliots were put into production. This was the fifth type latch post (see figure 175), and except for variations in size, it was used on all subsequent production of Remington Army, Navy, Belt, Police, and Pocket Model revolvers. The new design also required changes to the frame. As the entire head of the arbor pin was now exposed, there was no need for milling the frame for the head of the arbor pin. The second change seems to have been more for aesthetics, but having studied Ordnance Department reports condemning sharp projections and edges on firearms, I am convinced that this also was at the insistence of the Ordnance Department. The rear top of the frame, which had been a sharp angle, was contoured to a bevel (figure 178). 343

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 176 Elliot Navy arbor retaining spring. (Author’s collection)

Figure 177 Side view of an Elliot cylinder arbor pin. Note small notch near head that engages retaining spring. (Author’s collection)

Figure 178 Comparison of top rear of early (left) and late (right) frames. (Author’s collection)

A close examination of Elliot’s patent drawing will reveal that his location of the retaining spring was not in the same place as on the finished product (see figure 173). Elliot had placed the spring on the side of the frame, with a mounting screw near the lever hinge screw. On the production model the spring was instead placed in the bottom of the barrel. This system was very convenient. To remove the cylinder, the hammer was brought to the half cock position, the cylinder arbor was pulled to the forward position without lowering the loading lever, and the cylinder was released from the frame. This was the model selected by the Ordnance Department when Remington submitted sample revolvers for the department’s consideration prior to receiving their first revolver contracts. In the field it was discovered that if the user did not fully seat the arbor pin, the action would lock up, making it difficult to rotate the cylinder. This embarrassing situation was quickly brought to Remington’s attention, with a suggestion that they return to the Beals system. Remington once again redesigned their army and navy models, resulting in the revolver that Remington would call their New Model (figures 179, 180, and 181). When the Elliot loading lever was designed, a new lever release latch was also incorporated, providing a better grasp than the Beals-type latch. The use of the new profile latch continued throughout production of the army and navy models and was subsequently used on Remington’s smaller New Model Revolvers. Remington had used Beals’s name in the barrel address of the Beals model. The barrel address of the Elliot models does not contain Elliot’s name, only his patent date. Elliot’s name 344

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Figure 179 Side view of all types of loading levers. (Author’s collection)

has been found stamped on a few of the early Elliot Navy Models, but the loading lever must be removed from the frame to see it. On the rear hinge portion of the lever pictured in figure 175 is stamped “ELIOT’S PATENTS.” The misspelling of Elliot’s name was made by the die maker who created this stamp. There was another change in design of the Elliot models that occurred shortly into production. To relieve powder fouling, the frame was relieved directly in front of the cylinder to expose the barrel threads. This change is first observed on Navies near the 16,500 serial number range and on Armies at about 6,500 (figure 182). The Elliot models were in production for less than six months, making both the army and navy variations one of Remington’s rarest models. There were approximately forty-five hundred Navies and eight to ten thousand Armies produced. 345

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 180 Top view of all types of cylinder arbor pins. (Author’s collection)

ELLIOT–NEW MODEL TRANSITION REVOLVERS There seem to be more transition revolvers of this type, both Armies and Navies, than any other. The logical reason for this is that the abrupt change from the Elliot models had not been planned by Remington, as had the change from the Beals to the Elliot models. The Ordnance Department’s insistence on a new design had taken the firm by surprise. There were many parts in the works that had been designed for the Elliots, and it took some ingenuity to use these parts to their advantage and still satisfy the ordnance inspectors. The first adaptation of the Elliot arbor pin and loading lever was very simple. A fillister screw was placed in the channel of the lever. The head of the screw prevented the arbor pin from being pulled forward unless the lever 346

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Figure 181 Top view of all types of loading levers. (Author’s collection)

was first lowered (see figure 181). This allowed Remington to continue their delivery of revolvers with very little interruption. At this point I should address a misconception some researchers have arrived at in regard to the screw that Remington used to modify the Elliot levers. None of these were retrofitted, that is, sent back to the factory for this modification. It is possible that some of these were later modified by parties other than Remington. At the time these revolvers were made, the demand for revolvers was so great that once they left the armory they were issued in short order. Revolvers needing any type of repair were not returned to Remington. Repair work was done at an army arsenal. 347

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 182 Comparison of early (left) and late (right) frames. Exposed barrel threads relieved powder fouling. (Author’s collection)

Figure 183 Transition Elliot–New Model Navy with New Model arbor and Elliot loading lever altered by milling off rear of rails. (Author’s collection)

While Remington was using this modification to keep their production line moving, they started making changes in the frames, arbor pins, loading levers, cylinders, and hammers. The front of the frame where the cylinder arbor pin enters was milled out so that half of the arbor pin head was rebated into the frame; the other half was left exposed (figure 183). The new arbor pin and loading lever would function in the same manner as the late model Beals revolvers. These parts actually required less milling work as the rail mortises were not required. The arbor pin was also shortened one-fourth of an inch to allow for the head to be rebated into the frame. The entire head of the pin was not rebated into the frame like the Beals models; to have done so would have weakened the frame too much in the lever screw area. The new loading lever in profile appears similar to the Elliot lever. With the mortise for the arbor pin no longer necessary, the sides of the lever were contoured, eliminating the flat sides found on the Elliot lever. The round portion at the front is slightly longer but overall length is identical. When Remington started using the new frames and arbor pins, they still had some of the Elliot levers on hand. To make use of these, the rear portion of the rails was milled off oneeighth of an inch, enough to clear the protruding head of the new arbor (see figure 183). There had been complaints about the lack of safety notches on the cylinders. Remington started milling these on newly produced cylinders, and by April 1863, almost all of the revolvers leaving Ilion had this feature (see figure 165). 348

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Figure 184 Early (high spur) and late hammers. (Author’s collection)

The high spur on the hammers of the Beals and Elliot models had also been the subject of debate between Remington and the Ordnance Department. This hammer was easily broken if the revolver was dropped. A new hammer was designed with a lower spur and is first found on Elliot–New Model transition revolvers (figure 184). The transition revolvers are found in the serial number range of late 19,000–22,000 in the Navies and 10,000–12,000 for the Armies.

NEW MODEL ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS When all the new improvements were in place, Remington adopted a new barrel address for their army and navy models. They reverted to using Beals’s 1858 patent date without a mention of Beals’s name. This address was in use for a short time and is found on army revolvers with serial numbers 10,000–20,000 and on navy revolvers 22,000–23,000 (figure 185). A short time later, another change was made to the barrel address. The words “New Model” were added to the address but not where it is located on later New Model Revolvers. It was stamped between the existing address and the frame. This address was used for a very short time and has been observed on Navies in the 23,000 range and Armies in the 20,000 range. About the same time this barrel address was adopted, Remington made one more change in the frame of both the army and navy models. The top area of the rear grip strap was shortened; this also changed the top profile of the grips. This change is difficult to discern unless the two frames are side by side (figure 186). The last wartime variation of barrel address can also be seen in figure 185. This is the standard New Model address that was used on all New Model army and navy percussion revolvers from that point forward. In the early 1870s, Remington adopted a new barrel address for their other New Model Revolvers. This address has two patent dates. The second date referred to Samuel Remington’s patent of March 17, 1863. This address can also be found on the cartridge navy revolvers manufactured after Remington had exhausted their stock of percussion revolvers that they were altering for the commercial market (figure 187). The final design change to the New Models was the round, pinched threaded steel front sight that replaced the German silver cone sight that had been dovetailed into the barrel (figure 188). Most of the army revolvers with a serial number over 50,000 display the new sight. The navy revolvers usually have the new sight after serial number 27,000. 349

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 185 From top to bottom, evolution of barrel addresses. (Author’s collection)

ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT INSPECTION Some of the Ordnance Department’s inspection procedures have been discussed previously, but I will briefly recap the entire scenario to put it into focus. Prior to and during the early months of the Civil War, it was the practice of the Ordnance Department to dispatch an ordnance officer to accept arms delivered under contract or order. Usually the officer was a commandant of an arsenal or armory located near the manufacturer’s facility. Early in the war, the department realized that this procedure was impractical, as it was deterring the commanding officers from 350

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Figure 186 Early (left) and late (right) type grip straps. (Author’s collection)

Figure 187 Post–Civil War two-date address. (Author’s collection)

Figure 188 Side and top view of early dovetailed (top) and later (bottom) threaded front sights. (Author’s collection)

performing their regular duties. There were so many contractors and so many arms to be delivered that a whole new system was mandated. In 1862 William Anderson Thornton was assigned as “Inspector of Contract Arms and Accouterments.” When a supervisor for new construction at Watervliet Arsenal was required, Thornton was also selected for this post. He was replaced as inspector of contract arms by Peter Valentine Hagner (both were first majors, and later colonels) near the end of 1862. Hagner would hold the post until new construction at Watervliet Arsenal was completed near the end of 1863. Thornton was reassigned to the post and remained there for the rest of the war. Once government arms contracts were approved by the secretary of war and the manufacturer was prepared to deliver arms, Thornton or Hagner would request an inspection team to be dispatched to the manufacturer’s facility. The team consisted of civilians who had been employed at the Springfield Armory. The size of this team would depend on the expected daily 351

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 189 O. W. Ainsworth cartouche. (Author’s collection)

production by the manufacturer. The team would consist of a principal sub-inspector (who was the superintendent or foreman) and a crew of inspectors. After a revolver was assembled by Remington’s workmen, it was submitted to the inspectors for acceptance. First the revolver was proved by firing with proof loads. Proof loads were heavier (both in powder and lead) than normal loads. Once the revolver was proofed, it was dismantled, and each component part was examined. If there were no flaws, the major parts were stamped with the surname initial of the inspector and the revolver was reassembled. The principal sub-inspector then stamped his cartouche onto the left grip panel (figure 189). The revolvers were then cleaned, oiled, boxed, and shipped by Remington employees to a point designated by the inspector of contract arms (usually to the New York Arsenal). Any part that failed the inspection process was stamped with the letter “C” to denote that the part had been condemned. To avoid the stigma of having parts condemned, Remington had their own inspection process that preceded the government inspection. Revolvers that had obvious flaws were not submitted for inspection. Revolvers that had condemned parts were returned to the assembly room for a replacement part and then resubmitted to the inspectors. Many of the flawed parts were assembled into revolvers that were sold on the commercial market; some of the revolvers assembled using such parts have mixed serial numbers. Other revolvers have been examined that have only one part condemned. An estimated 150,000 Remington Army Revolvers were made during the Civil War, but only 116,000 were accepted by the Ordnance Department. This leaves about 34,000 revolvers that were either sold to the general trade or remained in stock at war’s end. There is some confusion among collectors about the inspection marks found on some New Model Navy Revolvers that were produced after the final deliveries of navy revolvers to the Ordnance Department in 1862. Remington continued manufacturing the navy model to fulfill orders from the navy’s Bureau of Ordnance. These revolvers were sent through the Ordnance Department inspection process to forestall complaints from navy inspectors, who seem to have been more critical than the army. When inspection marks are encountered on a New Model Navy Revolver, there should not also be a cartouche. An interesting incident occurred at Remington’s Utica Armory during the proof testing of revolvers. On December 30, 1864, the Utica Observer ran the following article: 352

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Bullets Flying In Utica Yesterday morning, the revolving iron kettle into which the bullets of the pistols manufactured in the Remington Armory are discharged when the pistols are tested, ceased to revolve. In consequence, a hole was soon made through the metal, and a bombardment of the First Ward began. Bullets entered the saw factory of Lennebacker & Delong, the undertaking shop of Wm. B. Monroe and the hardware establishment of J. E. Roberts. The crashing and whizzing of the leaden messengers created a sensation among those whose lives and limbs were endangered. One ball passed within six inches of a man’s head, and other persons had narrow escapes. Word was sent to the Armory in double quick time and the bombardment of Supervisor Douglas’ district speedily terminated.1 Remington’s relations with the Ordnance Department’s inspectors got off to a rocky start. The Beals revolvers that had been delivered before the first contract were treated as open market purchases and therefore had received no inspection. This led the company to believe that revolvers of the same quality would be accepted by the inspectors. When Remington offered some fifteen hundred Beals Navy Revolvers for the first inspection in June 1862, there were so many flawed that Principal Sub-Inspector C. G. Curtis declined to accept them. When the firm offered 750 Beals Army Revolvers for inspection in early July of 1862, Curtis invited Thornton, who was then the inspector of contract arms, to attend the inspection. Thornton accepted and personally stamped his cartouche on the right grip of many of these revolvers. This was the only instance in which an Ordnance Department officer inspected revolvers delivered by Remington. Curtis, as the principal sub-inspector, stamped his cartouche on the left grip, and these revolvers have the distinction of being the only lot that has two cartouches instead of the usual one. Occasionally, a revolver from later production will display two cartouches, but common practice was to cartouche only the left grip. At this time, Thornton also refused to accept the Beals Navy Revolvers, but eventually Remington did resubmit about five hundred of them and most were accepted. The serial numbers of some of the martially marked Beals Navies overlap well into the Elliot serial number range. In all fairness to Remington, we should examine the Ordnance Department’s inspection procedures more closely. The standards of inspection had been established in a peacetime environment and prewar contracts had been delivered at a more leisurely pace. Prior to accepting the government contracts, Remington had been producing about thirty-five to forty revolvers a day. Overnight, they were expected to produce 100 to 125 revolvers a day. This required hiring many new employees with little or no experience, therefore subsequent errors in milling procedures were common. During the first months of the war the inspection procedures for all inspected arms were very stringent. However, as the demand for arms became more acute the chief of ordnance advised Thornton that some of the inspection criteria might have to be relaxed in order to receive more arms in a timely fashion. I have uncovered no evidence that this suggestion was forwarded on to the inspectors receiving small arms, but a visual inspection of early revolvers versus those delivered late in the war seems to suggest that the latter have fewer sub-inspectors’ marks. 353

CHAPTER TEN

Some early contract revolvers have dual sub-inspectors’ marks on the left side of the barrel near the frame, on the frame between barrel and cylinder, and on the rear side of the cylinder. A single initial is found on the left frame above the hammer screw, on the left frame above the flat of the trigger guard, on the trigger guard bottom forward of the bow, and on the left side of the loading lever. As the inspection procedure evolved, the dual stamps were separated and a single stamp may be found on both sides of the barrel near the frame or both sides of the frame between the barrel and cylinder. The two stamps on the cylinder were separated and so one was on the forward part of the cylinder and the second near the rear. Occasionally, inspection stamps have been observed on the rear of the cylinder also. The trigger guard stamp remained in the same location throughout production. It is interesting to note that there are no inspection stamps on any of the many hammers I have examined. An exception may be noted for the very early Beals revolvers. The stamp found on the right side of the hammer is considered to be a factory inspector’s stamp, as is the stamp sometimes found on the left rear flat of the trigger guard and ahead of the lever latch post on the bottom of the barrel. Factory inspectors’ stamps have also been noted on the bottom of the frame concealed by the trigger guard and sometimes on the left side of the frame concealed by the grip panel. Ordnance inspectors’ initials are sometimes found on the bottom of the wood grip panels. Grip panels with these marks usually lack a cartouche. As this was not a common practice, these marks were probably applied to grips originally ordered as replacement parts by the Ordnance Department. Some of the inspectors that were assigned to the Remington armories are very well known and are easy to identify because of their inspection duties at other contractors’ facilities. Others are more obscure and have not been identified. I will list all of the inspectors’ cartouches that have been observed in the study of these revolvers. CGC — This cartouche has been identified as C. G. Curtis. Curtis was the first of many inspectors assigned to Remington’s two revolver facilities during the Civil War. I was fortunate to locate a copy of a letter from Curtis sent to W. A. Thornton on July 3, 1862, in which he identifies himself as principal sub-inspector. WAT — William Anderson Thornton. Inspector of contract arms for the Ordnance Department. BH — Benjamin Hannis, principal sub-inspector. GP — Giles Porter, principal sub-inspector. Porter seems to have served at Remington on more than one tour of duty during the war, as the serial number range of the revolvers bearing his cartouche are spread out from 20,000 to over 100,000. OWA — O. W. Ainsworth, principal sub-inspector. Ainsworth is better known for his postwar inspection duties at the Colt Armory. RPB — Unidentified principal sub-inspector. RPB has been incorrectly identified as Robert P. Barry, an Ordnance Department officer during the Civil War. This individual inspected at Remington very late in the war. In early 1865, 354

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

JWK — WC —

WW — AW — GRC — PS

—

he also inspected Rogers and Spencer revolvers at Utica, New York, suggesting that he was also serving at Remington’s Utica Armory. Unidentified principal sub-inspector. He has been incorrectly identified as John W. Kelly, a naval officer. Unidentified inspector. Some sources identify him as William Cadwell, but this is not confirmed. This cartouche is found on double-cartouched revolvers in conjunction with WAT or CGC. Unidentified inspector. This cartouche is found on double-cartouched revolvers in conjunction with WAT or CGC. Unidentified inspector. This cartouche is found on double-cartouched revolvers in conjunction with CGC. Unidentified inspector. This cartouche is found on double-cartouched revolvers in conjunction with OWA. Unidentified inspector. The cartouche is found in conjunction with CGC on early Beals and Elliot revolvers.

I am sure that there are other cartouches that have eluded me. Many cartouches have been misread, as cartouches with any wear are difficult to decipher. I have not been able to determine if the principal sub-inspectors divided their duties between Utica and Ilion or if one inspection team was assigned to each facility. Although these two armories were in close proximity (fifteen miles) to each other, commuting between the two during the Civil War era would have been time consuming.

SERIAL NUMBERS I have previously discussed Remington’s use of a new serial number range when they redesigned the early Beals Navy Revolvers. After designating a new serial number range to start at number 1, the numbers ran consecutively to the end of production on both the army and navy models. Serial numbers are always found in three locations on the army and navy models: on the left grip frame, on the bottom of the barrel, and on the bottom of the tab of the trigger guard. When serial numbers are encountered in other locations such as the rear of the cylinder or the hinge portion of the loading lever, it indicates to me that some hand fitting was required to make these parts function as they should, and the parts were marked to identify them to the revolver to which they were fitted. At which point was the serial number of a revolver assigned during assembly? All available evidence seems to suggest that the number was applied during final assembly. Several Beals Navy Revolvers are numbered well into the serial number range of the Elliot models. The serial number range of the Beals Army Revolver is recognized as 1–1,950. I recently acquired a true Beals Army that is numbered 3,242, which is well into the Elliot Army serial number range. This suggests that the revolver was assembled and numbered in sequence with the Elliot production. The revolver has inspection marks and the cartouche of “CGC.” There are exceptions to the sequence numbering, most notably in revolvers that received special finish. The army revolvers that Remington presented to the governors of the Union states 355

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 190 Remington Navy Revolver serial number F locations. Inset shows “F” and back strap inscription enhanced. (Author’s collection)

are the first example of this, and this practice continued after the Civil War. These revolvers were made up in batches and numbered from serial number 1 to the end of the lot. This practice was also used in postwar production of other Remington revolvers, possibly to identify special orders by dealers. Another most unusual practice used by Remington to identify a revolver was the use of letters of the alphabet. It is rare to see a specimen so marked. At the time of this writing I have two in my personal collection. One is a New Model Navy Revolver with an “F” stamped in the usual places one would expect a serial number. This revolver has a presentation inscription engraved on the back strap. There are no inspectors’ stamps and the grip panels are burl walnut, another indication of the more than ordinary attention the revolver received during manufacture (figure 190). The second revolver with an alphabetical serial is a cased New Model Army Revolver. The letter “U” is stamped in the usual serial number locations. There are no inspectors’ marks, the metal has received extra polishing, and the grip panels are burl walnut. The trigger guard is silver plated. The bullet mold in this casing is also unusual. The shape is as usual for a Remington mold, except that the sprue cutter end at the hinge has shoulders like those found on a Colt mold. The mold has a high polish and the metal is in the white (figures 191 and 192). 356

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Figure 191 Remington New Model Army Revolver, original case and appendages. Serial number U. (Author’s collection)

ACCOUTREMENTS On June 17, 1862, shortly after receiving their first government contract for revolvers, Remington sent an inquiry to the chief of ordnance asking what kind of appendages were required with the revolvers. In their inquiry, they stated that they had previously furnished a bullet mold and wiper with each revolver. Ripley replied on June 25, 1862: Sirs: In reply to your telegram of today I have to state that the following are the appendages required for each box of fifty pistols. Fifty Screwdrivers & cone wrenches One for each. Fifty extra Cones do. Twenty five Bullet Moulds casting two balls ea. 1/2 do. One Bullet Mould casting six balls 1/50 do.2 Remington was evidently unfamiliar with the gang molds that cast six balls. After some further discussion with Ripley, this accoutrement was omitted from the required items and Ripley notified Thornton on June 28: Sir, In receiving Army and Navy size pistols from the Messrs. Remington & Sons, the bullet mould for Six balls will not be required with each box of fifty pistols at present, but the right will be reserved to require these moulds at any future time when needed.3 357

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 192 Serial number U locations, with “U” enhanced. (Author’s collection)

Figure 193 Martially marked army and navy bullet molds with inspectors’ marks inset. (Author’s collection) 358

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

Figure 194 Late type Remington nipple wrench. Remington furnished one of these with each revolver. (Author’s collection)

As far as the collector is concerned, the Remington gang mold is nonexistent. A specimen does exist that has been tentatively identified as such. It is my opinion that if it has been correctly identified, it is a prototype or model that was made up in case the Ordnance Department had a change of mind and required the appendage. As noted in their letter inquiring about the appendages, Remington has previously furnished a mold and a wiper with each revolver. The type of wiper has not been established; none of these seem to be extant. The bullet molds furnished with the very early Beals Navy Revolvers are of the same pattern as those later furnished under contract but are brass with an iron sprue cutter. These are rare and seldom seen. Iron molds were required by the Ordnance Department, and these were the type furnished by Remington. Remington furnished molds and the combination nipple wrench–screwdriver with their revolvers until near the end of the first army revolver contract in mid-1863. Noting that soldiers in the field were discarding the bullet molds furnished with their revolvers, the chief of ordnance asked that the revolver manufacturers discontinue supplying them. Remington and Starr agreed to this request and one half of the price of the mold (eighteen cents) was then deducted from the purchase price of each revolver. The Colt firm refused to agree to this request and continued to deliver molds until their then current revolver contract expired in November 1863. In subsequent contracts with Remington, bullet molds were excluded as a requisite appendage. Simple arithmetic tells us that 2,500 martially marked .36 caliber navy and 9,750 .44 caliber army molds were delivered to the Ordnance Department. Martially marked molds can be identified by a single inspector’s initial stamped on the right side of the body of the mold (figure 193). The combination nipple wrench and screwdriver was furnished with all Remington contract revolvers, one for each revolver, but experience has taught me that it is a difficult tool to find. It is a very small tool, and over the years most of them were separated from the revolvers. These were inspected, but never marked, so there is no way to identify a martial specimen. The nipples and screws are the same in the army and navy revolvers, so all the tools are identical (figure 194). Some discussion of the appendages found with commercial revolvers seems warranted. Cased sets usually consist of a combination wrench, bullet mold, powder flask, cleaning rod (some cases are not fitted for the cleaning rod), small internal parts such as nipples and springs, 359

CHAPTER TEN

Figure 195 Appendages furnished with cased Remington revolvers. (Author’s collection)

Figure 196 Two types of dog pattern flask found in Remington army and navy cases. Flask on right has a rare patented screw off top to facilitate filling. (Author’s collection)

a small tin of percussion caps, and sometimes a packet or two of combustible cartridges (figure 195). Most of the boxes furnished with Remington cased sets are distinctive and are easily identified as such. Occasionally a dealer’s casing will be seen; these do not conform to the Remington cases and it is not unusual to find other manufacturers’ appendages in these sets. English and European cased Remington revolvers are also occasionally seen. These also have been noted to have other manufacturers’ appendages included. Other sets have been made up to order by the owner of a revolver to preserve and protect the revolver. Many martially marked Remingtons are seen in such settings. 360

IDENTIFYING REMINGTON ARMY AND NAVY REVOLVERS

A cased set made for the market by Remington usually has a large flask of the dog pattern and will have a slanted spout or charger that will hold the appropriate amount of powder for the revolver. There are two types of the dog pattern flask; one has a stationary top and must be filled by removing the charger, and the second type has a patented top that unscrews from the flask, making the filling process simpler (figure 196). The second type is rare and seldom seen. Percussion cap tins have been noted by a bevy of manufacturers, as have been the packets of combustible cartridges. The diversity of the makers’ labels is not unusual, as these were disposable items. Many of the molds found in the cased sets sold by Remington were polished bright and were never blued. The standard commercial versions of Remington’s Army and Navy Revolvers were sold in a cardboard box, with flask, wrench, and mold. The survival rate of the cardboard boxes for any Remington revolver is very low. Instructions for use of the revolver were sometimes printed in the lid of the box; others were furnished with a loose instruction sheet.

361

EPILOGUE t was not by chance that the Ordnance Department selected the revolvers of Remington as their final choice during the Civil War. The evolution of these revolvers resulted from a combination of ideas that came from both Remington and the inspectors of the Ordnance Department. The final product, the New Model Army and Navy revolvers, were the epitome of convenience, function, and reliability. But what became of these revolvers after General Lee surrendered at Appomattox Courthouse and the battles were over? In 1865 Chief of Ordnance Dyer, in a response to Remington, had stated that the Ordnance Department had purchased 466,772 revolvers during the conflict and that 128,575 of them were Remingtons. Dyer also stated that sixty-nine thousand revolvers of various makes had never been issued. Simple arithmetic tells us that there was an excess of four hundred thousand revolvers on hand to supply a peacetime army of less than thirty thousand men. The first disposals were the sale of personal weapons to discharged troops, but these sales barely put a dent into the Ordnance Department’s store of revolvers. Next was an order from the Ordnance Department to all arsenals and depots to ship all revolvers that did not meet the requirements established for service revolvers to the New York Arsenal. These included revolvers that had been purchased in Europe and also domestic revolvers in calibers other than .44 caliber. They were disposed of in auctions to commercial dealers at greatly reduced prices and eventually came into the hands of the civilian population. Remington’s alteration of their New Model Army Revolvers for Benjamin Kittredge in 1868 also created a demand for some of the surplus revolvers of the Ordnance Department. Remington continued altering these revolvers into the 1870s. Although manufacturing figures on the alterations are not available, I think an estimate of ten thousand is not excessive. A study of remaining specimens indicates that many of these were from the army’s arsenals as cartouches and inspectors’ marks are found on many. During the Franco-Prussian War in 1870–71, Samuel Remington was the purveyor of arms for the French War Ministry. His orders for arms were related to Remington agents in the United States, and fifteen to twenty thousand Remington New Model Army Revolvers were purchased or bartered from the Ordnance Department and found their way to France. The great migration west followed the Civil War. A sidearm was an essential piece of equipment for pioneers who were venturing into lands where there was little law and many hostiles. Many settlers carried a Remington revolver for protection. The American Indians also had their share of Remington percussion revolvers (figures 197 and 198). Some were acquired from army troops as skirmish or battle souvenirs, others by barter with illicit Indian traders. Some of the early Indian police on reservations were armed with Remingtons that had been requisitioned from local army forts or posts.

I

363

EPILOGUE

Figure 197 Ute Indian posing with Remington New Model Army Revolver. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

I have studied reports of ordnance officers who periodically inspected remote army forts and posts during the Indian wars. There were usually at least a few Remington revolvers at each of these locations. After the army adopted cartridge revolvers in the early 1870s, these revolvers were eventually sold to local hardware merchants and individuals on a piecemeal basis. The final disposal of many of the government’s surplus percussion revolvers did not come about until near the end of the century. These were acquired by many arms dealers at Ordnance Department auctions. Many were resold by the dealers “as is.” Some of the more mint revolvers were refinished and sold as “new.” Some were nickel plated; others were refinished in blue. Still others were altered to cartridge by arms dealers and gunsmiths. These have been seen in various .44 and .45 calibers. By the year 1900, all of the many percussion revolvers purchased by the Ordnance Department during the Civil War had been dispersed, most throughout the United States, but some were exported to Mexico or other locations where the use of percussion arms was still prevalent. The condition of extant examples range from mint, showing no wear and loving care, to others showing use, but no abuse, and, of course, many showing neglect and reflecting that old adage “rode hard and put away wet.” This last category includes many revolvers that have 364

EPILOGUE

Figure 198 Ute Indians posing with Remington New Model Army Revolver. (Courtesy: Roy Marcot)

been altered in some way to reflect the personal tastes of some previous owner. Shortened barrels, nonfactory sights, and grips that have been carved with initials or names of some previous owner abound. Also homemade replacement grips, many using crude screws and escutcheons, are frequently seen. The use of an old gun as a personal canvas for the frustrated artist is well documented on many gun show dealers’ tables. The reader will have gathered by now that I have a genuine love for these old pieces of iron. Every one of these revolvers has a story to tell. I sincerely hope that I have helped the reader and arms collector understand some of the larger story. I have been tempted many times to abandon this project during the twenty-five-year span it has taken to complete this volume. Assembling, translating, and understanding the many pieces of correspondence and documents have added more than one gray hair, but as I write these final lines, I feel some sense of accomplishment. Don Ware Russellville, Arkansas August 10, 2006 365

APPENDIX A

The Owen-Holt Commission have made many references to the Owen-Holt Commission on Ordnance and Ordnance Stores. To enlighten those not familiar with the commission, I shall briefly discuss how the commission came into existence. In the late months of 1861, Secretary of War Simon Cameron and the Ordnance Department came under public scrutiny for the indiscriminate purchases and awarding of contracts for weapons and other stores. This precipitated Cameron’s resignation and the subsequent appointment of Edwin M. Stanton as secretary of war in January 1862. In February, Stanton queried Brig. Gen. James W. Ripley, then chief of ordnance, about the delay in submitting the Ordnance Department’s annual report to Congress. Ripley replied as follows:

I

Ordnance Office, Washington March 7th, 1862 Hon. E. M. Stanton Secretary of War, Sir, In answer to the Senate Resolutions of the 14th February, 1862, referred to this office for report. I have to state, that the annual report of contracts and purchases, made by the War Department through this Bureau for the year 1861, has not yet been furnished, for the reason that the preparation of the very voluminous statement and correspondence, relative to contracts for arms, necessary to meet a special call of the House of Representatives, has fully occupied the time of our clerical force, and delayed the general report to Congress under the Law. That report is in process of preparation, and will be completed and submitted, as soon as practicable. Respectfully, Your Obedient Servant, J. W. Ripley, Brig. Gen’l.1 Three days later, Stanton issued a General Order suspending deliveries on all orders and contracts that had been granted by the Ordnance Department and appointed a commission to “Audit and adjust all contracts, orders and claims on the War Department in respect to Ordnance, Arms 367

APPENDIX A

and Ammunition.” Stanton appointed Robert Dale Owen and Joseph Holt as commissioners and vested in them the authority to rescind, modify, and renegotiate contracts to protect the interests of the U.S. government. Owen had served two terms in the Indiana House of Representatives and one term in Congress (1844–47). From 1853 to 1858, he was ambassador to Naples. Holt had served in the cabinet of President Buchanan with Stanton, first as postmaster general, and later as secretary of war. The commission was in session for over three months, and when they had concluded their business, submitted the following lengthy report to the secretary of war. Washington. July 1, 1862 Hon. E. M. Stanton, Secretary of War: Sir: The undersigned, commissioned by your authority “to audit and adjust all contracts, orders and claims on the War Department in respect to ordnance, arms and ammunition,” have the honor to submit the following report: They met on the 17th day of March, 1862, and, after having appointed a clerk, had publication made that they were in session, and all persons interested in the cases referred to them for examination and decision were invited to appear and offer such suggestions and proofs as they might deem advisable in support of their respective claims. To this notice your letter of appointment was appended, in order that there might be no misapprehension as to your purpose in organizing the commission, or as to the powers with which it was invested. To this appeal the parties, with a single exception, have responded, and, either verbally or in writing, we have been put in possession of their views. Most of them have been examined before us under oath, and their statements, carefully taken down and revised by themselves, accompany this report, and are submitted for your consideration in support of the action which has been taken. The cases referred to us were 104 in number, and the demands upon the Treasury which they involved amounted to about $50,000,000. All of these cases, after patient and careful investigation, have been disposed of, and special reports have been made, showing, either in terms or by reference, the grounds of the decisions rendered.2 The amount, from which the Government, by the action of this commission, will be relieved, will fall but little short of $17,000,000. This result has been reached by the rejection of some claims and contracts, by the curtailment or modification of others, and by the reduction of prices when found excessive or extravagant. We are well satisfied that no principle of law has been violated in the conclusions at which we arrived; that considerations of equity, when these existed, have not been overlooked, and that no undue advantage has been taken of the power of the Government in dealing with its citizens. In our desire to protect, as far as practicable, the public interests no private right has been infringed, nor is it believed that any one of the contractors whose engagements have been the subject of our investigations will, if provident and reasonably skillful in the execution of his contract, suffer loss, or fail to realize a fair profit. 368

THE OWEN-HOLT COMMISSION

A longer time than was anticipated has been occupied in the discharge of our duties. The magnitude of the issues submitted to us forbade that they should be determined either hastily or in the absence of a thorough scrutiny of the merits of each claim separately considered. It has been the endeavor of the commission not only to be just, but, as far as possible, to satisfy the claimants that we had been so. Accordingly, by repeated conferences with frank explanations offered to the parties, both as to the strict legality of the action proposed and to its absolute necessity from considerations of public policy, we have sought to secure their acquiescence in our decisions. Our efforts in this direction have met with even unlooked for success. It may be safely affirmed that a large majority of the claimants are content with the disposition of their cases. Many of them, public spirited citizens, having cheerfully expressed their assent; some verbally, others in writing. That amid the variety of character presented by so large a number of shrewd business men, exceptions to this should have presented themselves, will surprise no one who reflects that in every society will be found those who—setting up a distinction between honesty in public and honesty in private affairs—find it difficult to realize that the Government has any rights, or the law, which protects its treasury, any obligatory force as against their own personal interests. Such men delude themselves with the belief that however much they may be bound to respect the property of its individual citizens, the country, as a whole, is a fair subject of plunder—a belief of ready growth amid the disorders consequent upon great national convulsions. A few such men we have encountered, and while our action has left upon them an unpleasant impression, it is altogether probable that their baffled schemes against the public treasury will hereafter become the basis of appeals to Congress. As the reports made in the particular cases fully exhibit the details of our labors, a very brief resumé of their results and of the considerations suggested in the course of our investigations may here suffice. It may be stated, generally, that we have found the system under which have been issued the numerous orders and contracts for ordnance and ordnance stores that have been referred to us strongly marked with improvidence. The amount of these orders or contracts has been ascertained to be largely in excess of the public wants, and the prices fixed by many of them beyond necessity or reason. The unexampled demand for arms consequent upon the sudden breaking out of the present gigantic rebellion, and extraordinary circumstances under which the Government arsenals were drained of their best weapons before a blow was struck, afford some explanation of the excess of price referred to; yet, it must be confessed, not by any means a full and satisfactory one. It is to be traced, in a large degree, to a neglect of those common precautions which prudent men of business exercise in the conduct of their private affairs, some of which, too, had been specially provided for and required by acts of Congress. First, as to foreign arms, it was of course absolutely necessary to resort to these in equipping, within a few months, more than half a million of men, and it was impossible, in all the workshops of Europe, to have had arms manufactured as rapidly as our public necessities required. Under such circumstances prices naturally rose, and inferior (often second hand) arms had to some extent to be purchased. 369

APPENDIX A

But these difficulties were greatly aggravated by the lack of system which prevailed. The States and the General Government entered the market together as rival purchasers, and thus the members of the same national family bid directly against each other. The folly of this is the more remarkable when it is remembered that these arms bought by the States were, in fact, for the use of the General Government, and will, no doubt, in the end be paid for by it. The General Government itself employed, directly or indirectly, numerous agents not acting in unison, and often becoming, therefore, competitors of each other. A few of these made purchases directly for the Government; the greater number sprang up in the shape of “middlemen,” to whom, though not dealers in arms nor skilled in their value, contracts were awarded upon their own terms, only to be sublet to the actual importers. Under a system so ill considered, extravagance was unavoidable. It was greatly increased by many of these contracts being loosely worded and imperfectly guarded, while some were granted at prices much beyond even the highest rates which could be fairly considered as engendered by the system itself. Two examples may here be given in illustration: In the first—that of a large contract granted to a “middleman,” who had never dealt in arms and knew nothing of their value—the reduction, partly in price and partly in quantity, effected by the action of the commission, amounted to $580,000. In the second, granted to a bona fide importer— being a contract of immense amount, namely, for upward of 188,000 guns and 38,000 sabers—the reduction in price alone, as compared with the rates paid under the contract up to the time of our decision, exceeded $1,000,000. In both these examples the reductions were ordered under proposals finally made by the parties themselves after repeated conferences with them, and accepted by the commission. Other large contracts for foreign arms, of which the owners had incurred forfeiture by failure as to times of delivery, were rescinded by the commission. Yet, withal, it has been impossible for us to protect the Government against lamentable losses in these loose and irregular transactions. In regard to a considerable portion of these foreign arms, Government inspection was permitted in Europe before shipment, but so utterly inadequate and so incompetent was the force assigned to this duty that it became a mere empty form, devoid of all utility or protection. Of this and other negligences and imprudences the practical result has been that a large proportion of our troops were armed with guns of a very inferior quality; that tens of thousands of the refuse arms of Europe are at this moment in our arsenals, and thousands more still to arrive, not one of which will outlast a single campaign, while most of them will never be issued at all, being entirely unfit to be placed in the hands of civilized troops. Add to this that in many cases these unserviceable arms were paid for at rates which, under a system of vigilance and obedience to law, would have procured rifles of the first class. As regards orders or contracts for domestic arms, though the abuses in this branch are less glaring than those above referred to, yet the system here also has been essentially faulty, and the loss to the Government thence resulting very large, while evils other than excess in prices have resulted from neglect of wholesome precautions and of checks and guards strictly demanded by law. 370

THE OWEN-HOLT COMMISSION

These contracts are chiefly for the Springfield rifle musket. The quality of this weapon— the best infantry arm in the world—has been carefully and sufficiently guarded. But, first, The orders were greatly in excess of what the Ordnance Office estimated to be the wants of the service. One million one hundred and sixty four thousand Springfield muskets had been contracted for, while the Chief of Ordnance reports to this commission that half a million is the number actually needed for a year to come, beyond what the Springfield Arsenal can supply. To relieve the Government as far as, with due regard to equitable considerations, lay in our power from this excess of arms, the commission, governed as to the amount in each case by its peculiar features, have made certain reductions in a large majority of these— the total reductions thus made amounting to 473,000 guns. This leaves a margin, over and above the half million estimated to be needed, of 191,000 guns for probable or possible failures to make prompt deliveries, in part or in whole, by the contractors. The legal grounds on which the right to make these deductions rest are fully set forth in the decision in Mason’s case, No. 72.3 While actual investments, made in good faith, have, as far as the public interests would permit, been respected, the maxim has been recognized that the citizen must, in his dealings with the Government, as in his general conduct, be held to know the law and cannot be permitted to profit by its violation. The government of no civilized people has ever been administered on a different principle, nor indeed, could it be. Secondly. The price—in every instance $20 per gun, including appendages—is, the commission now believe, higher by several dollars than it need or ought to have been, at least when the contract was for a greater number than 25,000. It is true that the vast and unnecessary number of Springfield muskets contracted for, especially at such high rates, has very sensibly increased to the manufacturer the cost of the arms by causing an unexampled demand for materials (particularly of suitable iron for gun barrels, an article of which the present supply is limited) and for skilled labor; and in the early part of our investigations this consideration, together with the want of accurate and reliable information on the subject, so far weighed with us that we confirmed the first four contracts for 50,000 guns each, made with experienced manufacturers, at the price of $20, which had been fixed by the Ordnance Office. But as we proceeded in our investigations, and as additional evidence came before us, we became satisfied that, for any amount over 25,000, $16 per gun would afford a fair profit to the manufacturer. A contract for 40,000 of these muskets at that rate has been recently taken by an experienced and responsible firm, Messrs. E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, N.Y. and it should be here stated that to Mr. S. Remington, of this firm, we are indebted for the first trustworthy information received touching the actual cost to private manufacturers of this arm. His public spirit, in frankly and voluntarily making this disclosure, is worthy of all commendation, and should it result, as we believe it will, in fixing the price of this gun at not exceeding $16, his action will save millions to the public treasury. It should be added that the holder of one of the contracts for 50,000 Springfield muskets confirmed by us consented, as a part of the conditions of confirmation, that 25,000 of the guns should be paid 371

APPENDIX A

for at $16 instead of $20 each. A similar reduction to $16 was made on the proposal of another contractor for all the guns embraced in his order over 25,000. Thirdly. The neglect to obey the law of the 3d of March, 1809, and the stringent regulations founded upon it, which provide that all contracts for army supplies shall, except in cases of emergency requiring and admitting of “immediately delivery,” be preceded by public advertisement inviting proposals, has been prolific in evil results. Indeed, it is to the persistent disregard of this law, which for more than fifty years has been the guardian of the integrity of the contract service, that speculators and “middlemen” are indebted to the saturnalia of success they have enjoyed since the commencement of the war. Nor can such disregard of law and duty be excused on the plea that the pressing exigency of the case afforded no opportunity to conform to the provision in question, since in all the contracts for domestic arms the deliveries were fixed at distant periods of time. That better terms might have been obtained for the Government is conclusively shown by the fact that when, a few weeks since, under your direction, proposals for the manufacture of arms were thus invited, responsible bids for the Springfield musket were put in as low as $16, while almost all fell below the price of $20. In October [sic] last E. Remington & Sons solicited an order for the manufacture of their revolver—acknowledged to be in all respects equal to Colt’s army revolver—at $15, but could get a contract for only 5,000.4 At the same time an order was given to Colt’s company for an indefinite number of his army revolvers at $25, and under this there has since been delivered 31,000. That company, under the recent advertisement, proposed to furnish this revolver at $14.50, and a contract at that rate has been executed, thus proving that the charge made and submitted to was $10.50 in excess of the worth of the arm, and showing that in this single item of pistols alone there has been paid to that company within the time named at least $325,000 beyond the full value of the arms received. The proposals for sabers alone indicate a still more marked reduction in price—a responsible offer being made for the best cavalry sabers at $4.12, for which $8.50 has been heretofore been paid, and an offer of $5 by the very party who has been, under the private contract system, receiving $8.50. But an enforcement of the law in regard to advertising would effect more than a mere reduction in price. It would cut up by the roots an abuse which during the present war has threatened, in this branch of the administration, serious injury, alike to the interests of the service and to public morals. Contracts based on private proposals favor, and necessarily lead to, the creation of a class of “middlemen,” most of them mere speculators and adventurers, to whom, instead of to the manufacturers themselves, orders for supplying the wants of the Government have been often directly or indirectly granted To this evil we have already, in a report recently printed, accompanying case No. 72, adverted at length. The class of men referred to are generally rapacious and unscrupulous, and thrust themselves between those whose interest it is to deal, directly with each other—the government in need of arms and the manufacturer producing them. Having thus, through unavowed instrumentalities, obtained their contracts, many of them at once put them on the market for sale. A large manufacturer, who has failed to get a contract for muskets, assures us 372

THE OWEN-HOLT COMMISSION

that within a few days past such contracts to the amount of 200,000 guns have been offered to him by these traders in Government patronage. Under a system of open competition invited by public notice, as contemplated by law, no such interposition could take place and no such class of men could exist. A few illustrations of the practical workings of the system, as it has prevailed in the Ordnance Department, may be here stated. A holder of one of these orders or contracts for Springfield muskets appeared before the commission, as did a member of the United States Senate, and from their testimony we learned that the order had been obtained from the Secretary of War by the Senator, and for that service he had charged and is to receive $10,000. It seems to have been in contemplation by the principle party to pay him 5 per cent commission, being $50,000; but it was finally settled, so far as his partners were concerned, at the sum named. For this he holds the notes of the parties, who are responsible, and will no doubt make payment at the maturity of the paper in August and September next. A large manufacturing firm being anxious to secure a contract for their pistols, and being satisfied, from some cause, that their personal application would be unavailing, employed as “middleman” or agent an individual who represented that he could obtain it for them. His success as one of the partners in a heavy beef contract given out soon after the commencement of the rebellion seems to have inspired confidence in his representation, and no doubt led to his retainer. He did not overestimate his influence; for on the 16th of October, 1861, an order was issued by the Chief of Ordnance to the firm, addressed to him, for 5,000 pistols at $20 each, for which the firm paid him $10,000. Subsequently, on the 25th of October, 1861, this firm made a written application to the Secretary of War for a contract for 10,000 of the same pistols, which, having been referred to the Chief of Ordnance, was by him reported against on the 31st of October, upon the ground that the pistol was not, in his opinion, “a desirable one for the service”; and so the application failed. Sometime afterward a person well known to the country as having neither official position nor capital, but who had probably ascertained the preceding facts, visited the same manufacturers at their establishment and asked them if they did not want an additional pistol contract, to which they answered that they did. He then inquired what they were willing to give for it. As a little before they had paid $10,000 for an order of 5,000, it probably occurred to them that the same rate of compensation would be expected in this case and it was accordingly offered. The “middleman” then—evidently with other reasons, for the purpose of increasing his fee—urged that $22.50, instead of $20, should be charged the Government for the pistols. This was declined, the manufacturers stating that the pistols were not worth more than $20, and that at this rate they had previously been sold to the Government. The price to be paid him for his services was set at $2 per pistol, or $10,000 for the 5,000, for which he agreed to secure the order. He returned to Washington, and “in a week or two” the manufacturers received an order, bearing the date November 28, for the 5,000 pistols, being again the same that a few weeks before had been pronounced “unserviceable” in answer to their own personal application to manufacture them. This order, from some unexplained cause, was not submitted to Congress and is not found in House Executive Document No. 67. It was, however referred to us, 373

APPENDIX A

and was confirmed with a reduction of the price to $18, with the assent of the parties. This change in the price has given rise to a controversy between the broker in Government patronage and his employers as to where the loss occasioned should fall, or whether his influence and services shall still be estimated at $10,000, or be reduced to half that sum.5 In the first case referred to the commission was offered to the United States Senator because the manufacturer was assured that it was usual to pay for similar services, and he expressed to us under oath the opinion that the assurance was true, and that in a majority of cases he believed such compensation to have been made. The public are very sharpsighted in such matters, and when they are found employing, at high rates of compensation, the services of this class of men, there is no hazard in assuming that they have ascertained it is necessary for them to do so. One of the saddest consequences of this course of administration is the tendency of the public mind to press its imputations of demoralization beyond the mere broker in patronage, who, probably having little to lose in this way, is indifferent to criticism or reproach, so long as he is permitted to put money in his purse. Men are prone to believe that an influence which hawks itself about in the market rests on foundations which could not be safely laid bare; or, in other words, that what is thus openly sold has been possibly bought. Of course, no such reflections could arise in reference to a member of Congress who should feel himself justified in making pecuniary profit out of his position, in the manner suggested, since the origin and character of his influence over the administration of the executive branch of the Government are well understood. Whatever use may be made of it, its source is pure, springing as it does, from the genius of our institutions, which gives power everywhere to the representatives of the people, in the generous confidence that it will be loyally exercised only for their protection. For the names, dates, and other details connected with these transactions, reference is had to the written testimony which accompanies this report. Another deplorable consequence following the substitution of a system of private contracts for that based on advertisement and open competition is the indiscriminate condemnation which, in public journals and otherwise, such substitution has brought in its train upon all contractors. In many cases this is wholly undeserved, and to none will the advantage be greater than to the bona fide contractors themselves of a change of system which, once in regular operation, will relieve them from imputations of dishonesty or extortion. In no class of persons are the qualities which distinguish the best business men of our country—talent integrity, enterprise, resource, perseverance—more needed than in them. But if wholesale slurs affecting their character, because of their relations to the Government, finally render the very name of a contractor a reproach, what can be the result, except that the honest and reputable will stand back, and that their places will be filled by men careless of their good name, if only money can be made by the sacrifice? We beg, therefore, respectfully, to urge the expediency of adhering in all future contracts for ordnance and ordnance stores, to the principle of advertising, so earnestly impressed by the law and the regulations of your Department. This law and these regulations embody the wisdom which long years of experience have taught, and they rest upon a profound knowledge of human character—of the unscrupulous avarice that is to be 374

THE OWEN-HOLT COMMISSION

baffled on the one side, and of the infirmity which is to be guarded against temptation on the other. The absolute necessity of the course suggested is more powerfully illustrated by the facts which we have brought to your notice than it would be by any arguments we could employ. This course on your part would furnish a prompt and complete remedy— and it is the only one—for the evils of extravagance and alleged demoralization, of which so much and such lamentable complaint is heard. That vast interests and influences will array themselves against a restoration of this branch of the service to the basis of the law, may well be expected. Opposition to this great principle, which has so faithfully guarded the public treasury, has been signally manifested in past years, and the success of that opposition opened then a wide field for rapacity on the one hand and fraudulent collusion on the other. The abuse in a particular branch of the service assumed such proportions that Congress, feeling itself called upon to interfere, declared, by solemn enactment on the 31st of August, 1852, that “all contracts, of every description, which have been made without public notice having been given, shall be canceled.” While in dealing with illegal and irregular contracts we have sought to act in harmony with the spirit of this legislation, we have done so with a tenderness of regard for the interest of bona fide contractors which, it is believed, will protect our action from all the imputations of harshness or injustice hereafter. We cannot close this report without bearing testimony to the constant aid and support we have derived from Major Hagner, who has been associated with us as an advisory member of the commission. His labors have been arduous and incessant, and his thorough knowledge, as an accomplished ordnance officer, of the subject-matter of all the contracts submitted for our examination, has enabled him to render us invaluable assistance, alike in our investigations and in the preparations of our decisions. We are, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servants, J. Holt, Robert Dale Owen, Commissioners.6 In the preceding report, the commissioners made reference to the testimony of S. (Samuel) Remington. That testimony is presented here. The testimony presented on April 24 had been credited to E. Remington. It is the author’s opinion that this was an error by the commission’s clerks and that the testimony was given and the correspondence written by Samuel Remington in the name of E. Remington & Sons.

Before the Commission, April 4, 1862. Mr. Remington (Ilion Works, New York) came before the commission and says he has a contract for 10,000 Harper’s Ferry rifles, calibre .58, and also 5,000 army revolvers. Has expended $100,000 in preparations; has gone on with diligence twenty hours out of twenty four, and has left nothing undone. Can now deliver pistols; could have delivered army pistols heretofore, but was delayed on account of the delivery of navy pistols to Major Hagner. 375

APPENDIX A

Theirs is an established firm, which has worked for government for fifteen years. Has filled contracts for altering 20,000 smooth bore muskets to Maynard’s primer, and two contracts for guns; has declined, in every instance, to have anything to do with Springfield contracts; has been applied to take contracts to furnish barrels, make parts & c., but has refused in all cases; uses bored steel barrels; desires to make all things of American manufacture.

Before the Commission, April 7, 1862 Mr. Remington, of Ilion, New York, was again before the commission, and says that there should be no difference in price between the government rifle and the musket, except the bayonet. The sword bayonet costs twice as much as the triangular, and the difference between them should be from $1 to $1.50; would be willing to make Springfield guns for $16, if he had assurance of work longer than one year; has all that is requisite to make 100 guns per day, either rifle or musket, as ordered; will deliver the 10,000 already contracted for at $18 each, if the order is allowed to stand. His house had canvassed the question of reducing their prices, but feared that their motives might be misconstrued; says that $20 is more than the government should pay for his arms, which cost him more than the Springfield gun; will make the Springfield guns (with a contract for one year) at $16. Before the Commission, April 11, 1862 Referring to our communication of the 5th April instant, in which it was proposed to reduce the price named in the order of Gen. Ripley, of the 29th July last, for 10,000 rifles and appendages, we now propose to apply the same principle to the order for revolvers. The consideration that governed us in that proposal, it will be remembered, was that arms could be manufactured cheaper and furnished upon more favorable terms in large than in small quantities. We therefore propose to furnish the government from 40,000 to 50,000 of our army and navy revolvers (or such quantity as our facilities will enable us to make and deliver in one year after completing the order for 5,000) for $13 each, and upon receiving such additional order we will also reduce the price (the 5,000 on hand) from $15 to $13 each. All subject to government inspection. E. Remington & Sons Before the Commission, April 14, 1862 Mr. Remington stated to the commission that he would make 30,000 pistols, additional, at $13, and 10,000 at $14, and 5,000 at $14.50; reducing present order to the above prices, and including the present order. Before the Commission, April 15, 1862 Gentlemen: We remarked yesterday, in reply to Judge Holt’s inquiry, that United States rifles might be furnished for less than $20, and pay a fair manufacturing profit. Major Hagner has 376

THE OWEN-HOLT COMMISSION

suggested that some explanation of that reply might be desirable, and requested that it be made in writing, together with some proposition to furnish a further supply of arms. As to the cost of this rifle, or any other arm, several things are to be considered; such as the adaptation of the machinery to the perfect working of the several parts; systematic division of labor, so that the various pieces shall be manipulated by operatives well skilled in their respective departments; and then the whole process should be conducted under the personal supervision of a head of sufficient skill and experience to carry forward all the details to the final assembling of a perfect arm. In addition to this, the quantity to be furnished and the time for delivery have an important bearing upon the question of cost. These conditions necessarily involve the use of a large amount of capital and the employment of artisans and operatives of skill and training, which cannot well be improvised or suddenly diverted from other callings. This difficulty manufacturers have always found serious, and it is now increased by the disturbed condition of the country and the increased demand for such service at the government armories. It will be apparent, from these considerations, that a limited order could not be filled without a loss at a rate that would pay a profit when ordered in larger quantities, with more time for delivery. We are now engaged upon an order given us by the ordnance department for 10,000 United States rifles and 5,000 army revolvers, at $20 each for the rifles and $15 each for the revolvers. This order, it will be observed, is quite limited, as compared with those previously and since given for muskets and revolvers to private establishments. When this order was given we were prepared with machinery and tools for making revolvers, for which there was then a brisk merchantile demand. This enabled us to furnish that arm to the government at $15, without particular reference to the quality. At that time we could dispose of all we made to the trade, at prices considerably in advance of that paid us by the government; so that, if the orders from the government were limited, the trade demand would then save us from ruinous sacrifice of capital invested in that branch of our business. But these considerations do not apply to the rifle. The use of that arm is confined almost exclusively to the public service. It requires machinery and tools particularly adapted to its fabrication, involving the investment of capital not applicable to other branches of the trade. If therefore, the order for this arm was confined to the 10,000, there would be a loss or depreciation of capital thus invested nearly, if not quite, equal to the profit on them at $20. In view of these considerations, and the fact that the rifle with the sabre bayonet costs about $1.50 more than the musket, we thought the price of $20 each for that limited quantity was not exorbitant or unreasonable. But intending, as we do, to continue in the business of manufacturing arms permanently, it obviously would be for our interest to furnish them in such quantities as would enable us to reduce the price; and if the government would engage to take all the rifles we can make in one year after the completion of the present order for 10,000, (or say from 40,000 to 50,000,) we would furnish them, subject to inspection, at $17, and reduce the price on the 10,000 now in hand to $17 each; or, after completing the 10,000 rifles, we would make 50,000 Springfield 377

APPENDIX A

muskets with the triangular bayonet, subject to inspection of the ordnance department, at $16 each, and in that case we would also reduce the price of the 10,000 in hand from $20 to $17 each. Our house has been constantly engaged in the fabrication of arms and parts of arms for nearly forty years, and we now possess facilities for completing every part of the rifle and revolver second only to one other private establishment in this country, and we had expected such an increase of orders from the government as would place us on a footing more nearly approaching equality with other private establishments. Having business correspondence in all the principal cities of the south, we declined all orders for arms when there was the slightest ground to suspect the loyalty of the parties. As early as November, 1860, we commenced returning orders from our southern customers, and we have not furnished anyone since who was known to sympathize with the rebellion. Jefferson Davis ordered 5,000 rifles for the State of Mississippi, in November, 1860, which was peremptorily declined. In this we have only done our duty as loyal citizens. We claim no credit for performing our duty, nor do we wish to disparage others or make uncharitable comparisons; but justice to ourselves requires us to state that we have furnished the government with our army and navy revolvers at $15, while it was compelled to pay $20 and $25 for large quantities of a similar arm confessedly no better than our own; and in all our intercourse we have been governed in all respects by the usages and regulations of the service. In our dealings with the government, as with the general public, we have desired to secure such legitimate profits as the skill, experience, and capital employed in the business might fairly entitle us to, and we think we may confidently refer to our whole record with the government, and to the facts now brought to the knowledge of the commissioners, to determine whether we have or have not been mindful of the interests and welfare of the State. E. Remington & Sons

Before the Commission, April 24, 1862 Mr. E. [sic] Remington appeared before the commission, and being examined under oath, says: I am engaged in the manufacture of arms, rifles and revolvers. Our revolvers are made after a patent; those heretofore delivered are upon Beal’s [sic] patent; those we propose to make in the future are in accordance with Elliott’s [sic] patent. The patented part in both cases, is the mode of releasing the cylinder from its position and the plan of holding in the base pin or axle of cylinder. I have examined the various revolvers now in use—our arm, the Savage, Starr, and Colt’s—and as a mechanic familiar with the mode of such work as is required upon these arms, I should say that the Colt’s and our own would cost about the same to make, with equal economy in the management; and the same may be said of the Savage and Starr. (The Savage and Starr would cost about the same.) As to the Colt’s arm, we have examined it with care, and have decided that we could make it quite as cheap or cheaper than our own; but we do not think the plan as good as ours. I have 378

THE OWEN-HOLT COMMISSION

not examined either of the others (Savage or Starr) with a view to compare the amount of work, but have handled them frequently, and have formed the opinion expressed upon my general knowledge and experience. I think that the difference of cost between our own and Colt’s and the others (Savage and Starr) would not be far from one dollar. In regard to the actual cost of our revolver, I wish to state that we have to pay for two patents. Our profits must therefore be proportionately larger in this, considering the patents, than we would require on rifle or musket work. I will say that should we be dealt with as others have been, receiving a large order for pistols, we would be glad to make them at $12; I mean, by a large order, about 30,000 to 40,000. We can, if the government wish it, turn out 200 to 250 per day by stopping the manufacture of navy size. Knowing positively that we have a certain large number to make, we can do it at the least cost. E. Remington & Sons 7 Subsequent events were to prove that Samuel Remington was overly optimistic in his assessment of the production capacity of the Remington Armory. However, his oral and written statements made singular contributions in establishing fair market prices that the government was to pay for small arms for the remainder of the Civil War. The Joint Select Committee on Ordnance (39th and 40th Congress, 1867–68) investigating contracts and arms purchases found that “certain correspondence between the Chief of Ordnance and his principal subordinates at arsenals and armories under investigation had been destroyed under the pretense that the whole of such correspondence was private and confidential.” It was further discovered that “for evident purposes of concealment, the Chief of Ordnance kept no record in his office of any of these transactions, and that the correspondence thus destroyed was the only written memoranda of the many official acts to which it related, and that these destroyed documents were in fact, in form, and substance, official documents, under which the public business at said armories and arsenals was influenced and controlled.”8

379

APPENDIX B

Remington–Ordnance Department’s Civil War Contracts CONTRACT FOR FIVE THOUSAND NAVY REVOLVERS DATED JUNE 13, 1862 his contract was recommended by the Owen-Holt Commission to replace an order given by the Ordnance Department on July 29, 1861, although Remington had already delivered eight thousand revolvers on the original order. This was Remington’s only contract for navy-size revolvers; 5,001 Beals and Elliot models delivered after extensions were granted by the War Department.

T

Contract made by Chief of Ordnance with E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, New York. This Contract, made and entered into this thirteenth day of June, one thousand eight hundred and sixty two, between E. Remington & Sons of Ilion, in the State of New York, as principal, and George Tuckerman, of Ilion, in the state of New York, and Henry H. Fish, of Utica, in the State of New York, as sureties, of the first part, and the United States, by Brigadier General James W. Ripley, Chief of Ordnance, acting under the direction of the Secretary of War, for and in their behalf, of the second part, witnesseth, that the parties of the first part do hereby contract and engage with the United States to furnish five thousand navy revolvers, calibre thirty-six hundredths of an inch, on the following terms and conditions, viz: These revolvers are to be furnished with the regular appendages, and will be in all respects identical with a pattern to be deposited by the parties of the first part and approved by the Chief of Ordnance, and are to interchange in all their parts: They are to be subject to inspection by United States inspectors in the same manner that United States arms are inspected, and none are to be received and paid for but such as pass inspection and are approved by the United States inspectors. These five thousand revolvers are to be delivered at the armory where made, viz: two thousand in the month of June, 1862, and not less than one thousand per month thereafter until the whole five thousand shall have been delivered. In case of any failure to make deliveries to the extent and within the time 381

APPENDIX B

before specified, the said party is to forfeit the right to deliver whatever number may be deficient in the specified number for the month in which the failure occurs; and the said party of the first part is to have the right to deliver more rapidly than according to the number above specified if they can do so. All these arms and appendages are to be delivered by the party of the first part; and this contract, if transferred to another party, is to be thereby forfeited. Payments, in such funds as the Treasury Department may provide, for each delivery, are to be made on certificates of inspection and receipt by United States inspectors, at the rate of twelve dollars for each arm, including appendages. All these arms and their appendages are to be packed by the party of the first part in boxes of the regular pattern, with fifty revolvers and appendages in each box, for which a fair price, to be determined by the United States inspector will be allowed. It is further understood and agreed, that if any tax shall be imposed by Congress upon manufactured arms, the amount of such tax will be added to the price herein agreed to be paid for the five thousand revolvers, or for so many of them as the tax shall have been paid upon. And the said parties of the first part do further engage and contract that no member of Congress, officer of the Army, or any agent of the military service shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract or agreement or to any benefit to arise thereupon. And it is hereby expressly provided, and this contract is upon the express condition, that if any such member of Congress, officer of the army, or other person above named, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract, or to any benefit to arise under it, or in case the parties of the first part in any respect fail to perform this contract on their part, the same may be, at the option of the United States, declared null and void, without affecting their right to recover for defaults which may have occurred. It is further stipulated and agreed, that if any default shall be made by the party of the first part in delivering any or all of the articles mentioned in this contract, of the quantity and at the time and place therein provided, that then, in that case, the parties will forfeit and pay to the United States a sum of money not exceeding three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars. And the United States do hereby contract and engage the parties of the first part as follows: that for the articles herein contracted for which shall be delivered, inspected and approved as aforesaid, there shall be paid to the said E. Remington & Sons or to their attorney, on bills, in triplicate, made in approved form and duly authenticated by the proper officers of the ordnance department, the sum of twelve dollars for each revolver and appendages complete, and for each packing box a fair price, to be determined as above stated. E. Remington & Sons James W. Ripley Brigadier General, Chief of Ordnance1 382

REMINGTON–ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT’S CIVIL WAR CONTRACTS

CONTRACT FOR TWENTY THOUSAND ARMY REVOLVERS DATED JUNE 13, 1862 This contract was also recommended by the Owen-Holt Commission. Although not mentioned by name, five thousand Beals models and fifteen thousand Elliot models were called for. Actual deliveries were about one thousand Beals, eight to ten thousand Elliots, and the balance were New Models.

Contract made by Chief of Ordnance with E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, New York. This contract, made and entered into this thirteenth day of June, one thousand eighteen hundred and sixty-two, between E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, in the State of New York, as principal, and George Tuckerman, of Ilion, in the State of New York, and Henry H. Fish, of Utica, in the State of New York, as sureties, of the first part, and the United States by Brigadier General James W. Ripley, Chief of Ordnance, acting under direction of the Secretary of War, for and in their behalf, of the second part, witnesseth, that the parties of the first part do hereby contract and engage with the said United States to furnish twenty thousand army revolvers, calibre forty-four hundredths of an inch, on the following terms and conditions, viz: These revolvers are to be furnished with the regular appendages, and are to be in all respects identical with the standard patterns; five thousand after the pattern already deposited in the Ordnance Office, and fifteen thousand after a pattern to be deposited by the parties of the first part, and to be approved by the Chief of Ordnance, and all of each kind are to interchange in all their parts according to the patterns. They are to be subject to inspection by United States inspectors in the same manner that United States arms are inspected, and none are to be received and paid for but such as pass inspection and are approved by United States inspectors. These twenty thousand revolvers are to be delivered at the armory where made as follows: one thousand in the month of June, 1862; two thousand in each of the months of July and August, 1862; one thousand in the month of September, 1862, and not less than three thousand per month thereafter until the entire twenty thousand shall have been delivered. And the party of the first part is to have the right to deliver more rapidly than according to the number of arms specified if they can do so. In case of any failures to make deliveries to the extent and within the times before specified, the said party is to forfeit the right to deliver whatever number may be deficient in the specified number for the month in which the failure occurs. All these arms and appendages are to be delivered by the said party of the first part; and this contract, if transferred to another party, is to be thereby forfeited. Payments, in such funds as the Treasury Department may provide, for each delivery, are to be made on certificates of inspection and receipt by the United States inspector, at the rate of twelve dollars for each arm, including appendages. All these arms and appendages are to be packed by the party of the first part in boxes of the regular pattern, with fifty revolvers and appendages in each box, for which a 383

APPENDIX B

fair price, to be determined by the United States inspector, will be allowed. It is further understood and agreed that if any tax shall be imposed by Congress upon manufactured arms, the amount of such tax will be added to the price herein agreed to be paid for the twenty thousand revolvers, or so many of them as the tax shall have been paid upon. And the said parties of the first part do further engage and contract, that no member of Congress, officer of the army, or any agent of the military service, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract or agreement or to any benefit to arise thereupon. And it is hereby expressly provided, and this contract is upon the express condition, that if any such member of Congress, officer of the army, or other person above named, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract, or to any benefit to arise under it, or in case the party of the first part shall in any respect fail to perform this contract on their part, the same may be, at the option of the United States, declared null and void, without affecting their right to recover for defaults which may have occurred. It is further stipulated and agreed, that if any default shall be made by the parties of the first part in delivering all or any of the articles mentioned in this contract, of the quality and at the times and place therein provided, that then, in that case, the said parties will forfeit and pay to the United States a sum of money not exceeding fifteen thousand dollars. And the said United States do hereby contract and engage with the said parties of this first part as follows: that for the articles herein contracted for which shall be delivered, inspected, and approved as aforesaid, there shall be paid to the said E. Remington & Sons, or to their attorney, on bills in triplicate, made in approved form, and duly authenticated by the proper officers of the ordnance department, the sum of twelve dollars for each revolver and appendages complete, and for each packing-box a fair price, to be determined as above stated E. Remington & Sons, [Remington’s seal] Jas. W. Ripley, [Ripley’s seal] Brigadier General, Chief of Ordnance, Principals.2

CONTRACT FOR TEN THOUSAND HARPERS FERRY RIFLES DATED AUGUST 11, 1862 This was one of the original contracts recommended by the Owen-Holt Commission. Remington received extensions on this contract. When they sought another extension after delivering only seventy-five hundred rifles, the chief of ordnance instead recommended a new contract for the missing rifles.

Contract made by Chief of Ordnance with E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, New York. This contract, made and entered into this eleventh day of August, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, between E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, in the State of New 384

REMINGTON–ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT’S CIVIL WAR CONTRACTS

York, as principal, and George Tuckerman, of Ilion, in the State of New York, and Henry H. Fish, of Utica, in the State of New York, as sureties, of the first part, and the United States, by Brigadier General James W. Ripley, Chief of Ordnance, acting under direction of the Secretary of War, for and in their behalf of the second part, witnesseth, that the parties of the first part do hereby contract and engage with the said United States to furnish ten thousand Harper’s Ferry rifles with sword bayonets on the following terms and conditions, viz: These rifles are to be furnished with the regular appendages, and are to be in all respects identical with a standard model to be deposited by the parties of the first part and to be approved by the chief of Ordnance. These rifles are to be of the calibre of 58th of an inch; to have a three-leaf rear sight and a cupped ramrod; with a sword bayonet stud similar to those of the Harper’s Ferry rifles heretofore made by the said parties, and are to interchange in all their parts; they are to be subject to inspection by United States inspectors in the same manner that the Harper’s Ferry rifles were inspected, and none are to be received or paid for but such as pass inspection and are approved by the United States inspectors. These ten thousand rifles and appendages are to be delivered at the armory where made, as follows, viz: five hundred in the month of September, 1862; one thousand in the month of October, 1862; fifteen hundred in the month of November, 1862; and two thousand monthly thereafter until the entire ten thousand shall have been delivered. And the party of the first part is to have the right to deliver more rapidly than according to the number of arms before specified if they can do so. In case of any failure to make deliveries to the extent and within the time before specified, the said party are to forfeit the right to deliver whatever number may be deficient in the specified number for the month in which the failure occurs. All these rifles and appendages are to be delivered by the said party of the first part; and this contract, if transferred to another party, is to be thereby forfeited. Payments, in such funds as the Treasury Department may provide, for each delivery, are to be made on certificates of inspection and receipt by the United States inspectors, at the rate of seventeen dollars for each rifle, including appendages. All these arms and appendages are to be packed by the party of the first part in boxes of the regular pattern, with twenty rifles and appendages in each box, for which a fair price, to be determined by the United States inspector, will be allowed. It is further understood and agreed that if any tax shall be imposed by Congress upon manufactured arms, the amount of such tax will be added to the price herein agreed to be paid for the ten thousand rifles, or as many of them as the tax shall have been paid upon. And the said parties of the first part do further engage and contract, that no member of Congress, officer of the army, or any agent of the military service, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract or agreement, or to any benefit to arise thereupon. And it is hereby expressly provided, and this contract is upon the express condition, that if any such member of Congress, officer of the army, or other person above named, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract, or to any benefit to arise under it, or in case the parties of the first part shall in any respect fail to perform 385

APPENDIX B

this contract on their part, except as to the number of any monthly delivery, the same may be, at the option of the United States, declared null and void, without affecting their right to recover for defaults which may have occurred. It is further stipulated and agreed that if any default shall be made by the parties of the first part in delivering all or any of the articles mentioned in this contract, except as to the number of any monthly delivery, of the quality and at the times and place therein provided, that then, in that case, the said parties will forfeit and pay to the United States a sum of money not exceeding ten thousand dollars. And the said United states do hereby contract and engage with the said parties of the first part as follows: that for the articles herein contracted for which shall be delivered, inspected, and approved as aforesaid, there shall be paid to the said E. Remington & Sons, or to their attorney, on bills in triplicate, made in approved form, and duly authenticated by the proper officers of the ordnance department, the sum of seventeen dollars for each rifle and appendages complete, and for each packing-box a fair price, to be determined as above stated. (The words “except as to the number of any monthly delivery” having been interlined is two places before signature.) E. Remington & Sons, [Remington’s seal] James W. Ripley, [Ripley’s seal] Brigadier General, Chief of Ordnance, Principals.3

CONTRACT FOR ARMY REVOLVERS DATED JULY 6, 1863 This contract was an open-end contract. Remington had been granted extensions on the previous army revolver contract in order to fill the required number. To avoid a repetition, the contract specified that the Ordnance Department would accept all revolvers delivered by year’s end. A total of 18,208 revolvers was delivered.

Contract made by Chief of Ordnance with E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, New York. This contract, made and entered into this sixth day of July, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, between E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, in the State of New York, as principals, and George Tuckerman, of Ilion, in the State of New York, and Henry H. Fish, of Utica, in the State of New York, as sureties, of the first part, and the United States, by Brigadier General James W. Ripley, Chief of Ordnance, acting under direction of the Secretary of War, for and in their behalf, of the second part, witnesseth, that the parties of the first part do hereby contract and engage with the said United States to furnish all the army size revolvers, calibre forty-four-hundredths of an inch, which they can deliver within the present year, on the following terms and conditions, viz: These revolvers are to be furnished with the regular appendages, and are to be in all respects of materials, 386

REMINGTON–ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT’S CIVIL WAR CONTRACTS

workmanship, component parts and pattern, fully equal to those delivered under the contract of 13th June, 1862, with the exception that the sear screw shall be made stiffer, and such other changes shall be made as the inspector of contract arms shall deem requisite to improve the arm, and all the parts are to be interchangeable. They are to be subject to inspection by United States inspectors in the same manner as United States arms, and none are to be received and paid for but such as pass inspection and are approved by the inspector. All these revolvers are to be delivered at the armory where made, in parcels of not less than five hundred at a time, and as rapidly as possible provided, that the whole number to be received under this contract shall not exceed twenty thousand, and that none shall be received after the expiration of the current year 1863. All these revolvers and appendages are to be delivered by the said parties of the first part: and this contract, if transferred to another party, is to be thereby forfeited. Payment, in such funds as the Treasury Department may provide, for each payment, are to be made on certificate of inspection and receipt by United States inspectors, at the rate of twelve dollars for each revolver, including appendages. All these revolvers and appendages are to be packed by the parties of the first part in boxes of the regular pattern, with fifty revolvers and appendages in each box, for which boxes a fair price, to be determined by the inspector, will be allowed. And the said parties of the first part do further engage and contract, that no member of Congress, officer of the army, or any agent of the military service shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract or agreement, or to any benefit to arise thereupon. And it is hereby expressly provided, and this contract is upon the express condition, that if any such member of Congress, officer of the army, or other person above named, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract, or to any benefit to arise under it; or in case the parties of the first part shall in any respect fail to perform this contract on their part, the same may be, at the option of the United States, declared null and void, without affecting their right to recover for defaults which may have occurred. It is further stipulated and agreed, that if any default shall be made by the parties of the first part in delivering all or any of the articles mentioned in this contract, of the quality and at the times and place therein provided, that then, in that case, the said parties will forfeit and pay to the United States a sum of money not exceeding fifteen thousand dollars. And the said United States do hereby contract and engage with the said parties of the first part as follows: That for the articles herein contracted for which shall be delivered, inspected, and approved as aforesaid, there shall be paid to the said E. Remington & Sons, or to their attorney, on bills in triplicate, made in approved form, and duly authenticated by the proper officers of the ordnance department, the sum of twelve dollars for each revolver and appendages complete, and for each packing box a fair price, to be determined as above stated. E. Remington & Sons, [Remington’s seal] James W. Ripley, [Ripley’s seal] Brigadier General, Chief of Ordnance, Principals.4 387

APPENDIX B

CONTRACT FOR 64,900 ARMY REVOLVERS DATED NOVEMBER 21, 1863 This was the largest contract for revolvers granted during the Civil War. Remington had two armories producing revolvers at this time, but even with both the Ilion and Utica facilities concentrating on revolver production, Remington was able to produce only 57,005 revolvers during 1864.

Contract made by Chief of Ordnance with E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, New York. This contract, made and entered into this twenty-first day of November, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, between E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, in the State of New York, of the first part, and the United States, by Brigadier General Geo. D. Ramsay, Chief of Ordnance, acting under direction and by authority of the Secretary of War, for and in their behalf, of the second part, witnesseth, that the parties of the first part do hereby contract and engage the second part, witnesseth, that the parties of the first part do hereby contract and engage with the said United States to furnish sixty-four thousand nine hundred army size revolvers, calibre forty-four hundredths of an inch, on the following terms and conditions, viz: These revolvers are to be furnished with all appendages required for service, with the exception of bullet-moulds, and are to be in all respects identical with a standard pattern to be approved by the Chief of Ordnance; two models of which are to be furnished upon the execution of this contract, one to be deposited in the Ordnance Office, Washington, D.C., and the other retained by the United States inspector of smallarms. All these revolvers to be subject to inspection in the same manner that United States arms are inspected, and none are to be received or paid for but such as pass inspection and are approved by the United States inspectors. All the revolvers are to be delivered at the armory where made as follows, viz: 6,500 in the month of January, 1864; 7,800 in February; 9,000 in March, and 10,400 per month thereafter until the entire sixty-four thousand nine-hundred are delivered. All these revolvers are to interchange in all their parts with the standard revolver and with each other. In case of any failure to make deliveries to the extent and within the times before specified, the party of the first part is to forfeit the right to deliver whatever number may be deficient for the month in which the failure occurs. All these revolvers and appendages are to be delivered by the said party of the first part; and this contract, if transferred to another party, is to be thereby forfeited. Payments, in such funds as the Treasury Department may provide, for each delivery, are to be made on certificates of inspection and receipt by the United States inspectors, at the rate of twelve dollars for each revolver, including appendages. All these revolvers and appendages are to be packed by the party of the first part in good and sufficient boxes of an approved pattern, with as many in each box as the inspector shall direct, and for which a fair price, to be determined by the United States inspector, will be allowed. 388

REMINGTON–ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT’S CIVIL WAR CONTRACTS

And the said party of the first part does further engage and contract, that no member of Congress, officer of the army, or any agent of the military service, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract or agreement, or to any benefit to arise thereupon. And it is hereby expressly provided, and this contract is upon the express condition, that if any such member of Congress, officer of the army, or other person above named, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract, or to any benefit to arise under it, or in case the party of the first part shall in any respect fail to perform this contract on its part, the same may be, at the option of the United States, declared null and void, without affecting their right to recover for defaults which may have occurred. It is further stipulated and agreed, that if any default shall be made by the parties of the first part in delivering all or any of the articles mentioned in this contract, of the quality and at the times and place therein provided, that then, in that case, the said party will forfeit and pay to the United States a sum of money not exceeding sixty-five thousand dollars. And the said United States do hereby contract and engage with the said party of the first part as follows: That for each of the articles herein contracted for which shall be delivered, inspected, and approved as aforesaid, there shall be paid to the said E. Remington & Sons or to their attorney, on bills in triplicate, made in approved form, and duly authenticated by the proper officers of the ordnance department, the sum of twelve dollars ($12) for each revolver, including appendages. E. Remington & Sons. [Remington’s seal] George D. Ramsay, [Ramsay’s seal] 5 Brigadier General, Chief of Ordnance.

CONTRACT FOR TWENTY-FIVE HUNDRED HARPERS FERRY RIFLES DATED DECEMBER 13, 1863 Some researchers have erroneously concluded that this contract was in addition to the original contract that Remington had received on August 11, 1862. My research has shown that the original contract was aborted after the firm had delivered only seventy-five hundred arms. This contract was intended to allow Remington to complete deliveries of the original ten thousand arms called for.

Contract made by Chief of Ordnance with E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, New York. This contract, made and entered into this thirteenth day of December, one-thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, between E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, in the State of New York, of the first part, and the United States, by Brigadier General George D. Ramsay, Chief of Ordnance, acting under direction and by authority of the Secretary of War, for and in their behalf, of the second part, witnesseth, that the party of the first part does hereby contract and engage with the said United States to furnish two thousand five 389

APPENDIX B

hundred Harper’s Ferry rifles, with sword bayonets, on the following terms and conditions, viz: These rifles are to be furnished with the regular appendages, and are to be in all respects identical with those delivered by the party of the first part under a contract dated August 11, 1862. They are to be subject to inspection by a United States inspector, in the same manner that Harper’s Ferry rifles were inspected, and none are to be received or paid for but such as pass inspection and are approved by the United States inspector. These two thousand five hundred rifles and appendages are all to be delivered at the armory where made on or before the 8th day of January, 1864. All these rifles and appendages are to be delivered by the said party of the first part in good and sufficient boxes of an approved pattern, with twenty rifles and appendages in each box, and for which a fair price, to be determined by the United States inspector, will be allowed. And the said party of the first part does further engage and contract, that no member of Congress, officer of the army, or any agent of the military service, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract or agreement, or to any benefit to arise thereupon. And it is hereby expressly provided, and this contract is upon the express condition, that if any such member of Congress, officer of the army, or other person above named, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract, or to any benefit to arise under it, or in case the party of the first part shall in any respect fail to perform this contract on its part, the same may be, at the option of the United States, declared null and void, without affecting their right to recover for defaults which may have occurred. It is further stipulated and agreed, that if any default shall be made by the party of the first part in delivering all or any of the articles mentioned in this contract, of the quality and at the times and place therein provided, that then, in that case, the said party will forfeit and pay to the United States a sum of money not exceeding four thousand dollars. And the said United States do hereby contract and engage with the said party of the first part as follows: that for each of the articles herein contracted for which shall be delivered, inspected, and approved as aforesaid, there shall be paid to the said E. Remington & Sons, or to their attorney, on bills in triplicate, made in approved form and duly authenticated by the proper officers of the ordnance department, the sum of seventeen dollars ($17) for each rifle, including appendages. E. Remington & Sons. [Remington’s seal] George D. Ramsay, [Ramsay’s seal] Brigadier General, Chief of Ordnance.6

CONTRACT FOR FORTY THOUSAND SPRINGFIELD RIFLE MUSKETS DATED DECEMBER 14, 1863 This contract was granted to replace a contract for Springfield Muskets that Remington had received on August 11, 1863. That contract had expired when no deliveries were made. The first deliveries were made on May 31, 1864, and by the war’s end, only seventeen thousand muskets 390

REMINGTON–ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT’S CIVIL WAR CONTRACTS

had been delivered. In contrast to other contractors who lost similar contracts, Remington was granted extensions and allowed to maintain deliveries after the war’s end, and the final delivery was made on January 30, 1866.

Contract made by Chief of Ordnance with E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, New York. This contract, made and entered into this fourteenth day of December, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, between E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, in the State of New York, of the first part, and the United States, by Brigadier General George D. Ramsay, Chief of Ordnance, acting under direction and by authority of the Secretary of War, for and in their behalf, of the second part, witnesseth, that the party of the first part does hereby contract and engage with the said United States to furnish forty thousand Springfield rifle muskets and appendages of the model of 1855 as modified in 1861, to be in all respects identical with a standard pattern to be approved by the Chief of Ordnance, two models of which are to be furnished upon the execution of this contract; one to be deposited at the Ordnance Office, Washington, D.C., and the other retained by the inspector of small arms. All and each of the said 40,000 muskets are to interchange in all their parts with the pattern arm and with each other; all of which are to be subject to the same degree of inspection as the arms made for but such as pass inspection and are approved by the United States inspector. The appendages to be furnished with these 40,000 rifle muskets to consist of one extra cone, one tompion, one wiper, one screw-driver and cone wrench to each musket; and one ball-screw, one spring vice, and one tumbler and wire punch to every ten (10) muskets. These rifle muskets and appendages are to be delivered at the armory where made, as follows, viz: one thousand in January, 1864, two thousand in February, two thousand in March, three thousand in April, four thousand in May, and four thousand per month thereafter until the entire 40,000 muskets are delivered. And the party of the first part is to have the right to deliver more rapidly than according to the number specified if they can do so. In case of any failures to make deliveries to the extent and within the times before specified, the said party is to forfeit the right to deliver whatever number may be deficient in the months in which the failure occurs. This contract is given upon the express condition that the party of the first part shall furnish and keep accurate a complete set of gauges for the inspection of interchangeable work for the use of the United States inspector, and which shall be verified as he may direct. All these rifle muskets and appendages are to be delivered by the said party of the first part; and this contract, if transferred to another party, is to be thereby forfeited. Payments, in such funds as the Treasury Department may provide, for each delivery, are to be made on certificates of inspection and receipt by the United States inspectors, at the rate of eighteen dollars ($18) for each rifle musket, including appendages. All these rifle muskets and appendages are to be packed by the party of the first part in good and sufficient boxes of an approved pattern, with twenty muskets and 391

APPENDIX B

appendages in each box, for which a fair price, to be determined by the United States inspector, will be allowed. And the said party of the first part does further engage and contract that no member of Congress, officer of the army, or any agent of the military service, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract or agreement, or to any benefit to arise thereupon. And it is hereby expressly provided, and this contract is upon the express condition, that if any such member of Congress, officer of the army, or other person above named, shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract or to any benefit to arise under it, or in case the party of the first part shall in any respect fail to perform this contract on its part, the same may be, at the option of the United States, declared null and void, without affecting their right to recover for defaults which may have occurred. It is further stipulated and agreed, that if any default shall be made by the party of the first part in delivering all or any of the articles mentioned in this contract, of the quality and at the times and place therein provided, that then, in that case, the said party will forfeit and pay to the United States a sum of money not exceeding thirtyfive thousand dollars. And the said United States do hereby contract and engage with the said party of the first part as follows: That for each of the articles herein contracted for which shall be delivered, inspected, and approved as aforesaid, there shall be paid to the said E. Remington & Sons or to their attorney, on bills in triplicate, made in approved form, and duly authenticated by the proper officers of the ordnance department, the sum of eighteen dollars ($18) for each rifle musket, including appendages. E. Remington & Sons. [Remington’s seal] Geo. D. Ramsay, [Ramsay’s seal] Brigadier General, Chief of Ordnance.7

CONTRACT FOR FIFTEEN THOUSAND REMINGTON CARBINES DATED OCTOBER 24, 1864 This contract was for Rider’s patent large frame split-breech carbines. This was the precursor to Rider’s more well-known patent for the rolling block system. When this contract was granted, Remington was fully engrossed in the manufacture of army revolvers and Springfield muskets. Through an agreement with Samuel Norris, the carbines were manufactured by the Savage Revolving Arms Company. The contract was executed on October 24, 1864, but the first deliveries were not made until September 30, 1865. The final delivery of 992 carbines was made to the New York Arsenal on May 24, 1866. Many of these carbines were apparently never issued. Most of them were resold to Remington for delivery to the French government during the Franco-Prussian War in 1870.

Contract made by Chief of Ordnance with E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, New York. This contract, made and entered into this twenty-fourth day of October, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-four, between E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, in the State of 392

REMINGTON–ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT’S CIVIL WAR CONTRACTS

New York, of the first part, and the United States, by Brigadier General A. B. Dyer, Chief of Ordnance, acting under direction and by authority of the Secretary of War, for and in their behalf, of the second part, witnesseth, that the parties of the first part do hereby contract and engage with the said United States to furnish fifteen thousand Remington carbines and appendages. These carbines are to be supplied with all the appendages necessary for their use in service, and are to be identical in every respect with a standard pattern or model carbine to be approved by the Chief of Ordnance, two of which are to be furnished by the parties of the first part upon the execution of the contract, one to be forwarded to the office of the Chief of Ordnance, Washington, District of Columbia, the other to be sent to the office of the inspector of small-arms, in the city of New York. These carbines and appendages are to be delivered at the armory where fabricated, as follows, viz: one hundred on or before the first day of June, 1865, one thousand on or before the first day of July, two thousand on or before the first day of August, three thousand on or before the first day of September, 1865, and three thousand five hundred per month thereafter until the said whole number of fifteen thousand carbines and appendages are delivered; the parties of the first part to have the right to make deliveries at earlier periods and in larger quantities than above set forth. All the carbines herein contracted for are to interchange in all their parts with the two standard carbines and with each other; and the parties of the first part are to furnish such spare parts as may be required for repairs at a price for each part which shall not exceed in the aggregate the price paid for the complete carbine under contract. All these carbines and appendages are to be delivered by the said parties of the first part; and all claims under this contract, if transferred to another party, are to be by such transfer forfeited, saving the rights of the United States. Payments, in such funds as the Treasury Department may provide, for each delivery, are to be made on certificates of inspection and receipt by the United States inspectors, at the rate of twenty-three dollars ($23) for each carbine, including appendages. All these carbines and appendages are to be packed by the parties of the first part in good and sufficient boxes of an approved pattern, with as many in each box as the inspector shall direct, for which a fair price, to be determined by the United States inspector, will be allowed. And the said parties of the first part do further engage and contract, that no member of Congress, officer of the army, or any agent of the military service, or other person forbidden by law so to do, is, or shall be, admitted to any share or part of this contract or agreement, or to any benefit to arise thereupon. And it is hereby expressly provided, and this contract is upon the express condition, that if any such member of Congress, officer of the army, or other person above named, is, or shall be, admitted to any share or part of this contract, or to any benefit to arise under it, or in case the parties of the first part shall in any respect fail to perform this contract on their part, the same may be, at the option of the United States, declared null and void, without affecting their right to recover for defaults which may have occurred. 393

APPENDIX B

It is further stipulated and agreed, that if any default shall be made by the parties of the first part in delivering all or any of the articles mentioned in this contract, of the quality and at the times and place therein provided, that then, in that case, the said parties will forfeit and pay to the United States the sum of thirty-four thousand five hundred dollars, as agreed, and liquidated damages. The said E. Remington & Sons shall indemnify the United States and all persons acting under them for all liability on account of any patent rights heretofore granted by the United States; and in case of overwhelming and unforeseen accident, by fire or otherwise, the circumstances shall be taken into equitable consideration by the United States before claiming forfeiture for non-delivery at the time specified. And the said United States do hereby contract and engage with the said parties of the first part as follows: that for each of the articles herein contracted for which shall be delivered, inspected, and approved as aforesaid, there shall be paid, in the funds aforesaid, to the said E. Remington & Sons, the covenantor, their heirs, executors, or administrators, on bills in triplicate made in approved form, and duly authenticated by the proper officers of the ordnance department, the sum of twenty-three dollars ($23) for each carbine, including appendages. E. Remington & Sons [Remington’s seal] A. B. Dyer, [Dyer’s seal] 8 Brigadier General, Chief of Ordnance.

CONTRACT FOR TWENTY THOUSAND ARMY REVOLVERS DATED OCTOBER 24, 1864 This was Remington’s final Civil War revolver contract. Remington seems to have finally attained the goal of seven thousand revolvers per month, but the war ended almost simultaneously with the expiration of this contract.

Contract made by Chief of Ordnance with E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, New York. This contract, made and entered into this twenty-fourth day of October, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-four, between E. Remington & Sons, of Ilion, in the State of New York, of the first part, and the United States, by Brigadier General A. B. Dyer, Chief of Ordnance, acting under direction and by authority of the Secretary of War, for and in their behalf, of the second part, witnesseth, that the parties of the first part do hereby contract and engage with the said United States to furnish twenty thousand (20,000) army size revolvers and appendages. These revolvers and appendages are to be identical in every respect with those furnished by the parties of the first part under a contract dated November 21, 1863, for 64,900. They are to be subject to inspection in the usual manner, and none are to be received or paid for except such as pass the inspection of and are approved by the United States inspector. Deliveries are to be made at the armory where fabricated as follows: not less than 394

REMINGTON–ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT’S CIVIL WAR CONTRACTS

seven thousand revolvers and appendages in the month of January, 1865, and at a rate of not less than seven thousand per month thereafter until the entire number of twenty thousand revolvers and appendages herein contracted for is delivered. And the parties of the first part are to have the right to deliver more rapidly than above set forth if they can do so. All these revolvers and appendages are to be delivered by the said parties of the first part; and all claims under this contract, if transferred to another party, are to be by such transfer forfeited, saving the rights of the United States. Payments, in such funds as the Treasury Department may provide for each delivery, are to be made on certificates of inspection and receipt by the United States inspectors, at the rate of fifteen dollars and fifty cents ($15.50) for each revolver, including appendages. All these revolvers and appendages are to be packed by the parties of the first part in good and sufficient boxes of an approved pattern, with as many in each box as the inspector shall direct, for which a fair price, to be determined by the United States inspector, will be allowed. And the said parties of the first part do further engage and contract, that no member of Congress, officer of the army, or any agent of the military service, or other person forbidden by law so to do, is, or shall be, admitted to any share or part of this contract or agreement, or to any benefit to arise thereupon. And it is hereby expressly provided, and this contract is upon the express condition, that if any such member of Congress, officer of the army, or other person above named, is, or shall be, admitted to any share or part of this contract, or to any benefit to arise under it, or in case the parties of the first part shall in any respect fail to perform this contract on their part, the same may be, at the option of the United States, declared null and void, without affecting their right to recover for defaults which may have occurred. It is furthered stipulated and agreed, that if any default shall be made by the parties of the first part in delivering all or any of the articles mentioned in this contract, of the quality and at the times and place therein provided, that then, in that case, the said parties will forfeit and pay to the United States the sum of thirty-one thousand dollars, as agreed and liquidated damages. The said E. Remington & Sons shall indemnify the United States and all persons acting under them for all liability on account of any patent rights heretofore granted by the United States, and in case of overwhelming and unforeseen accident by fire or otherwise, the circumstances shall be taken into equitable consideration by the United States before claiming forfeiture for non-delivery at the times specified. And the said United States do hereby contract and engage with the said parties of the first part as follows: That for each of the articles herein contracted for which shall be delivered, inspected, and approved as aforesaid, there shall be paid, in the funds aforesaid, to the said E. Remington & Sons, the covenanter, their heirs, executors, or administrators, on bills in triplicate, made in approved form, and duly authenticated by the proper officers of the ordnance department, the sum of fifteen 395

APPENDIX B

dollars and fifty cents for each revolver, including appendages, delivered as hereinbefore stated. E. Remington & Sons. [Remington’s seal] A. B. Dyer, [Dyer’s seal] Brigadier General, Chief of Ordnance.9

CONTRACT FOR FIVE THOUSAND REMINGTON CARBINES DATED JANUARY 19, 1865 This contract was for five thousand of Rider’s patent small frame split-breech carbines. Remington had originally signed a contract for one thousand of these carbines on March 24, 1864. The contract expired with none of the arms delivered. A new contract was granted in January 1865, and the carbines were actually delivered prior to those of the previous contract for fifteen thousand of the large frame carbines. The contract was signed by Samuel Norris, with whom Remington had made arrangements for their manufacture. Norris had the carbines manufactured by the Savage Revolving Arms Company.

Contract made by the Chief of Ordnance and Samuel Norris of Springfield, Massachusetts. This contract, made and entered into this nineteenth day of January, one thousand eight hundred and sixty five, between Samuel Norris, of Springfield, in the State of Massachusetts, of the first part, and the United States, by Brigadier General A. B. Dyer, Chief of Ordnance, acting under direction and by authority of the Secretary of War, for and in their behalf, of the second part, witnesseth, that the party of the first part does hereby contract and engage with the said United States to furnish five thousand (5,000) Remington carbines and appendages. These carbines are to be supplied with all the appendages necessary for their use in service, and are to conform strictly in every respect with a standard pattern carbine to be approved by the Chief of Ordnance; three models of which are to be forwarded by the party of the first part as soon, after this contract is executed, as possible, to the office of the Chief of Ordnance, Washington, D.C. These carbines are to interchange with each other and with the standard patterns in all their parts. They are to be inspected at the armory where fabricated, and none are to be received and paid for except such as pass the usual inspection and are approved by the United States inspector. Deliveries, which are to be made at the place of fabrication, are to be made as follows, viz: not less than twelve hundred and fifty (1,250) carbines and appendages on or before the twenty-eighth day of February, 1865; not less than fifteen hundred (1,500) on or before the thirty-first day of March, 1865; and not less than two thousand two hundred and fifty (2,250) on or before the thirtieth day of April, 1865, and the party of the first part is to have the right to deliver more rapidly than above set forth, if he can do so, but in case of any failure to make deliveries to the extent and within the times above stated, then the said party is to forfeit the right to deliver whatever number of carbines may be deficient in 396

REMINGTON–ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT’S CIVIL WAR CONTRACTS

the specified number for the month in which the failure occurs. The party of the first part shall supply such spare parts of this carbine as may be needed for repairs, as may be ordered from time to time by the Chief of Ordnance, or an officer acting under his orders, at a price for each part which shall make the total price of all the parts comprised in this carbine equal to the price to be paid for a complete arm under this contract, until such time as a new contract may be awarded him. The relative prices of the parts to each other to be subject to the approval of the inspector of small arms. All these carbines and appendages are to be delivered by the said parties of the first part; and all claims under this contract, if transferred to another party, are to be by such transfer forfeited, saving the rights of the United States. Payments, in such funds as the Treasury Department may provide, for each delivery, are to be made on certificates of inspection and receipt by United States inspectors, at a rate of seventeen dollars ($17) for each carbine, including appendages. All these carbines and appendages are to be packed by the parties of the first part in good and sufficient boxes of an approved pattern, with as many in each box as the inspector shall direct, for which a fair price, to be determined by the United States inspector, will be allowed. And the said party of the first part does further engage and contract, that no member of Congress, officer of the army, or any agent of the military service, or other person forbidden by law to do so, is, or shall be, admitted to any share or part of this contract or agreement, or to any benefit to arise thereupon. And it is hereby expressly provided, and this contract is upon the express condition, that if any member of Congress, officer of the army, or other person above named, is, or shall be, admitted to any share or part of this contract, or to any benefit to arise under it, or in case the party of the first part in any respect fails to perform this contract on his part, the same may be, at the option of the United States, declared null and void, without affecting their right to recover for defaults which may have occurred. It is further stipulated and agreed, that if any default shall be made by the party of the first part in delivering all or any of the articles mentioned in this contract, of the quality and at the times and place therein provided, that then, in that case, the said party will forfeit and pay to the United States the sum of eight thousand and five hundred dollars, as agreed and liquidated damages. And the said United States do hereby contract and engage with the said party of the first part as follows: That for each of the articles herein contracted for which shall be delivered, inspected, and approved as aforesaid, there shall be paid, in the funds aforesaid, to the said Samuel Norris, the covenantor, his heirs, executors, or administrators, on bills in triplicate, made in approved form, and duly authenticated by the proper officers of the ordnance department, the sum as above stated. Samuel Norris [Norris’s seal] A. B. Dyer [Dyer’s seal] Brigadier General, Chief of Ordnance10

397

APPENDIX C

Serial Number–Production Date Tables

399

lthough these estimates are based on known serial numbers mentioned in correspondence and delivery figures to the Ordnance Department and the Bureau of Ordnance, they should be used as estimates only. Serial numbers of navy revolvers manufactured after the Civil War are difficult to estimate, as there are no remaining records or correspondence. Most revolvers with serial numbers between 36,000 and 42,000 (approximately) were first produced as percussion before being altered to cartridge. Serial numbers above approximately 42,000 were produced as cartridge revolvers. Navy revolver production reached approximately 49,000 before being discontinued about 1880. Months that have no serial numbers listed are periods when Remington shut down navy revolver production.

A

1861

SERIAL NUMBERS

1862

SERIAL NUMBERS

1863

SERIAL NUMBERS

1864

SERIAL NUMBERS

1865

SERIAL NUMBERS

Jan.

—

Jan.

7,201–8,500

Jan.

19,801–20,300

Jan.

25,801–26,300

Jan.

30,301–30,800

Feb.

—

Feb.

8,501–10,000

Feb.

20,301–20,800

Feb.

26,301–26,800

Feb.

30,801–31,300

Mar.

—

Mar.

10,001–11,500

Mar.

20,801–21,300

Mar.

26,801–27,300

Mar.

31,301–31,800

Apr.

1–400

Apr.

11,501–12,500

Apr.

21,301–21,800

Apr.

27,301–27,800

Apr.

31,801–32,000

May

1–500

May

12,501–14,000

May

21,801–22,300

May

—

May

32,001–32,200

Jun.

501–1,100

Jun.

14,001–15,000

Jun.

22,301–22,800

Jun.

27,801–28,300

Jun.

32,201–32,400

Jul.

1,101–1,700

Jul.

15,001–15,800

Jul.

22,801–23,300

Jul.

28,301–28,800

Jul.

32,401–32,600

Aug.

1,701–2,400

Aug.

15,801–16,600

Aug.

23,301–23,800

Aug.

28,801–29,300

Aug.

32,601–32,800

Sep.

2,401–3,200

Sep.

16,601–17,400

Sep.

23,801–24,300

Sep.

29,301–29,800

Sep.

32,801–33,000

Oct.

3,201–4,100

Oct.

17,401–18,200

Oct.

24,301–24,800

Oct.

—

Oct.

33,001–33,200

Nov.

4,101–6,000

Nov.

18,201–19,000

Nov.

24,801–25,300

Nov.

—

Nov.

33,201–33,400

Dec.

6,001–7,200

Dec.

19,001–19,800

Dec.

25,301–25,800

Dec.

29,801–30,300

Dec.

33,401–33,600

APPENDIX C

400

REMINGTON NAVY REVOLVERS’ APPROXIMATE DATE OF MANUFACTURE BY SERIAL NUMBER

REMINGTON ARMY REVOLVERS’ APPROXIMATE DATE OF MANUFACTURE BY SERIAL NUMBER hese estimates are based on monthly deliveries to the Ordnance Department plus an allowance for defective or rejected revolvers. Remington ceased production of the army revolver at the end of the Civil War but did continue to manufacture some parts for the Ordnance Department.

T

SERIAL NUMBERS

1863

SERIAL NUMBERS

1864

SERIAL NUMBERS

1865

SERIAL NUMBERS

Jan.

—

Jan.

7,586–10,885

Jan.

51,286–54,585

Jan.

124,351–132,800

Feb.

—

Feb.

10,886–14,185

Feb.

54,586–59,205

Feb.

132,801–141,290

Mar.

—

Mar.

14,186–17,490

Mar.

59,206–65,800

Mar.

141,291–148,550

Apr.

1–425

Apr.

17,491–20,795

Apr.

65,801–69,760

Apr.

—

May

426–875

May

20,796–24,755

May

69,761–75,950

May

—

Jun.

876–1,360

Jun.

24,756–27,265

Jun.

75,951–83,210

Jun.

—

Jul.

1,361–2,075

Jul.

27,266–29,905

Jul.

83,211–89,260

Jul.

—

Aug.

2,076–2,730

Aug.

29,906–34,525

Aug.

89,261–96,520

Aug.

—

Sep.

2,731–3,365

Sep.

34,526–37,825

Sep.

96,521–101,360

Sep.

—

Oct.

3,366–5,315

Oct.

37,826–42,705

Oct.

101,361–107,410

Oct.

—

Nov.

5,316–6,675

Nov.

42,706–47,325

Nov.

107,411–113,460

Nov.

—

Dec.

6,676–7,585

Dec.

47,326–51,285

Dec.

113,461–124,350

Dec.

—

401

SERIAL NUMBER–PRODUCTION DATE TABLES

1862

NOTES

PROLOGUE 1. 2.

3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Ezra J. Warner, Generals in Blue (Baton Rouge, LA: LSU Press, 1964). National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington, D.C., Record Group (RG) 156, Records of the Ordnance Department, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 74, “Preliminary Inventory of Records of the Bureau of Ordnance,” Publication No. 52-5.

CHAPTER ONE 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington, D.C., Record Group (RG) 156, Records of the Ordnance Department, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” Herkimer Democrat, courtesy of Herkimer Historical Society. NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, Senate RG 40, House RG 233, Senate Executive Document No. 72, House Executive Document No. 40, 37th Cong., 2d sess. NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. (source for previous four letters). NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 79, “Statements of Purchases of Ordnance.” NA, RG 156, Entry 13, “Letters, Telegrams, and Endorsements Sent.” Herkimer Democrat, courtesy of Herkimer Historical Society. 403

NOTES TO PAGES 14–38

20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39.

NA, Senate RG 40, House RG 233, Senate Executive Document No. 72, House Executive Document No. 40, 37th Cong., 2d sess. NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. NA, Senate RG 46, House RG 233, Senate Executive Document No. 72, House Executive Document No. 40, 37th Cong., 2d sess. NA, RG 46, Senate Executive Document No. 99, 40th Cong., 2d sess. NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. Charles Lee and Carol Robbins Karr, Remington Handguns (Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole, 1946), 151. Herkimer Democrat, courtesy of Herkimer Historical Society. NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.”

CHAPTER TWO 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 404

National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington, D.C., Record Group (RG) 156, Records of the Ordnance Department, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid.

NOTES TO PAGES 40–81

17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41.

Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers” (source for previous two letters). NA, RG 156, Entry 201, “Register of Inspector’s Reports.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 74, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 80, “Memorandum of Receipts.” NA, RG 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles and Small Arms.”

CHAPTER THREE 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington, D.C., Record Group (RG) 156, Records of the Ordnance Department, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 201, “Reports of Experiments.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 405

NOTES TO PAGES 81–110

15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid.

CHAPTER FOUR 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 406

National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington, D.C., Record Group (RG) 156, Records of the Ordnance Department, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” Ibid. Ilion Public Library, Ilion, New York (source for previous five letters). NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 201, “Reports of Experiments.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” New Jersey State Library, Trenton, “Quartermaster General’s Report, 1864–1865.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.”

NOTES TO PAGES 111–40

28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36.

Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.”

CHAPTER FIVE 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington, D.C., Record Group (RG) 156, Records of the Ordnance Department, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 1351, Springfield Armory, “Letters Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” Ibid.

CHAPTER SIX 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

National Archives of the United States, Military Records Department. Washington, D.C. Record Group 74, Records of the Bureau of Ordnance, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 145, “Correspondence Regarding the Examination of Inventions.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 145, “Correspondence Regarding the Examination of Inventions.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 407

NOTES TO PAGES 140–54

14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45 46 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 408

NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 145, “Correspondence Regarding the Examination of Inventions.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” NA, RG 74, Entry 158, “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment.” NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.”

NOTES TO PAGES 155–70

58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71.

NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” Ibid. “Terrible Gunpowder Explosion,” New York Times, 13 May 1863, page and column unknown, courtesy of Drury Williford. 72. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 73. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 74. Ibid. 75. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 76. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 77. Ibid. 78. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 79. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 80. Ibid. 81. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 82. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 83. Ibid. 84. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 85. Ibid. 86. Ibid. 87. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 88. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 89. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 90. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 91. Ibid. 92. Ibid. 93. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 94. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 95. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 96. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 97. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 98. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 99. Ibid. 100. Ibid. 409

NOTES TO PAGES 171–92

101. NA, House Executive Document 1221, 38th Cong., 2d sess., “Report of the Secretary of the Navy,” p. 851. 102. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 103. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 104. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 105. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 106. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 107. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 108. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 109. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 110. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 111. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 112. Ibid. 113. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 114. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 115. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 116. Ibid. 117. Ibid. 118. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 119. Ibid. 120. Ibid. 121. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 122. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 123. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 124. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.”. 125. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 126. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 127. NA, RG 74, Entry 158, “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment.” 128. Ibid. 129. U.S. Navy, Bureau of Ordnance, 1866, “Ordnance Instructions for the United States Navy,” part 3, p. 79, para. 258. 130 NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.” 131. NA, RG 45, Entry 464, File BH, “Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library.” 132. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” 133. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations.” 134. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent.”

CHAPTER SEVEN 1.

2. 410

National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington, D.C., Record Group 156, Records of the Ordnance Department, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.”

NOTES TO PAGES 193–216

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38.

Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.” Norm Flayderman, Guide to Antique American Arms, 6th ed. (Northbrook, IL: DBI Books, 1994), 151–52. NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 1354, Springfield Armory, “Letters and Endorsements Sent to the Chief of Ordnance.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 1354, Springfield Armory, “Letters and Endorsements Sent to the Chief of Ordnance.” NA, RG 156, Entry 83, “Purchases of Cannon, Ordnance, Projectiles and Small Arms.” NA, RG 156, Entry 201, “Reports of Experiments.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 1354, Springfield Armory, “Letters and Endorsements Sent to the Chief of Ordnance.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 1354, Springfield Armory, “Letters and Endorsements Sent to the Chief of Ordnance.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 201, “Reports of Experiments.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 124, “Registry of Sales of Ordnance and Ordnance Stores.” Norm Flayderman, Guide to Antique American Arms and Their Values, 6th ed. (Northbrook, IL: DBI Books, 1994), 151–52. 411

NOTES TO PAGES 228–62

CHAPTER EIGHT 1. 2.

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37.

412

Herkimer County Citizen, May 25, 1866, vol. 111, no. 14, 4, courtesy of Roy Marcot. National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington D.C., Record Group 156, Records of the Army Ordnance Department, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent (Miscellaneous Letters).” NA, RG 156, Entry 1362, Springfield Armory, “Letters Received (Miscellaneous).” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent (Miscellaneous Letters).” NA, RG 156, Entry 1386, Springfield Armory, “Reports of Tests of Ordnance.” NA, RG 74, Records of the Bureau of Ordnance, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 74, Entry 145, “Correspondence Regarding the Examination of Inventions.” NA, RG 156, Entry 1351, Springfield Armory, “Letters Sent.” John E. Parsons, Smith & Wesson Revolvers (New York: William Morrow & Company, 1957), 62–63. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” NA, RG 156, “Ordnance Memoranda No. 11.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent (Miscellaneous Letters).” NA, RG 156, “Ordnance Memoranda No. 11.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent (Miscellaneous Letters).” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 1365, Springfield Armory, “Letters Received from Officials and Officers of the War Department (‘Official’).” NA, RG 156, Entry 1386, Springfield Armory, “Reports of Tests of Ordnance.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 1351, Springfield Armory, “Letters Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 1365, Springfield Armory, “Letters Received from Officials and Officers of the War Department (‘Official’).” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 156, Entry 1354, Springfield Armory, “Letters and Endorsements Sent to the Chief of Ordnance.”

NOTES TO PAGES 265–83

38. 39. 40. 41. 42.

NA, RG 156, Entry 201, “Reports of Experiments.” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” NA, RG 156, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent (Miscellaneous Letters).” NA, RG 156, Entry 21, “Miscellaneous Letters Received.” Army and Navy Journal, vol. 10, no. 21 (January 25, 1873), courtesy of Jay Huber.

CHAPTER NINE 1. 2.

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32.

C. Kenneth Moore, Colt Revolvers and the U.S. Navy, 1865–1889 (Bryn Mawr, PA: Dorrance & Co., 1987). National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington, D.C., Record Group (RG) 74, Records of the Bureau of Ordnance, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 158, “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 158, “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment”; NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters Received from Navy Yards and Stations, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 3, “Letters Sent to Navy Yards and Stations, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 3, “Letters Sent to Navy Yards and Stations, 1873–1884.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 3, “Letters Sent to Navy Yards and Stations, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” 413

NOTES TO PAGES 284–95

33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 414

NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 3, “Letters Sent to Navy Yards and Stations, 1873–1884.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 158, “Records of Accounts Approved for Payment.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 3, “Letters Sent to Navy Yards and Stations, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.”

NOTES TO PAGES 295–308

77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116.

NA, RG 74, Entry 3, “Letters Sent to Navy Yards and Stations, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884” (source for previous two letters). NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884”. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 3, “Letters Sent to Navy Yards and Stations, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters and Reports Received from Navy Yards and Stations, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” Ibid. Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters and Reports Received from Navy Yards and Stations, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 5, “Miscellaneous Letters Sent, 1873–1884.” NA, RG 74, Entry 22, “Miscellaneous Letters Received, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 19, “Letters and Reports Received from Navy Yards and Stations, 1873–1884.” Ibid. NA, RG 74, Entry 25, “General Correspondence, 1885–1890.” Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. 415

NOTES TO PAGES 309–57

117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152.

Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. (source for previous three telegrams). Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. (source for previous three letters). Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid.

CHAPTER TEN 1. 2.

3. 416

“Bullets Flying in Utica,” Utica Observer, December 30, 1864, courtesy of Jay Huber. National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington, D.C., Record Group (RG) 156, Records of the Ordnance Department, Entry 3, “Letters, Endorsements, and Circulars Sent.” NA, RG 156, Entry 6, “Letters Sent to Ordnance Officers.”

NOTES TO PAGES 367–97

APPENDIX A 1.

2. 3. 4.

5. 6. 7. 8.

National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington D.C., Record Group (RG) 156, Records of the Ordnance Department, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” These special reports were published in Senate Executive Document No. 72, 37th Cong., 2d sess. Contract for fifty thousand rifle muskets awarded to William Mason on January 7, 1862. It is not known if this was the same Mason later known for his revolver patents. Remington presented their revolver to the Ordnance Department in July 1861 and an order was given for five thousand on July 29. The Ordnance Department made three purchases of Colt’s army revolvers in May and June of 1861 for a total of six thousand revolvers. In September the department placed an order with Colt for “all you can make until further orders.” Under this order, Colt delivered 25,700 army revolvers at $25.00 and two thousand navy revolvers at $22.50. Case No. 48 before the commission pertained to revolvers ordered from the Savage Revolving Firearms Company. NA, Senate Records, Senate Executive Document No. 72, 37th Cong., 2d sess. NA, Senate RG 46, House RG 233, Senate Executive Document No. 72, House Executive Document No. 40, 37th Cong., 2d sess. NA, Senate Executive Documents, 39th and 40th Cong., 1867–68.

APPENDIX B 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

National Archives (NA) of the United States, Military Records Department, Washington D.C., Record Group (RG) 156, Records of the Ordnance Department, Entry 5, “Letters, Endorsements and Reports Sent to the Secretary of War.” Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid.

417

INDEX

Numbers in italic text denote drawings. Numbers in bold text denote photographs. Act of 23rd June, 1860: purchases and contracts for arms and, xxi Adams Revolvers, xix, 230; Patent Navy, xviii Allen & Wheelock, 230 Allin Gun, xxxvi Ames and Co.: government arms contract and, xxxi, 21; sabers, 1, 49 Ammunition: pistol caps, xx; powder flasks and bulk powder, xix, 76 Ammunition for revolvers: Beals revolvers and, 143–47; Colt revolvers and, 79, 324–25; Col. Craig and, xx; Elliot revolvers and, 146–47; metallic cartridge revolvers and, 262–65; Navy Bureau of Ordnance and, 140, 143–58; problems supplying, xix–xxi, 206 (see also cartridges; metallic cartridges); Remington revolvers and, 147–58; revolver sizes and, xx (see also cartridges; metallic cartridges); Union Metallic Cartridge and, 284–85 (see also cartridges; metallic cartridges); U.S. Cartridge Co. and, 324–25 Arms brokers: altered Remingtons and, 231, 235, 242, 243, 327, 363; Army revolvers and, 363, 364; Beals revolvers and, 14, 27, 28–29; Eliot revolvers and, 185; Harpers Ferry rifles and, 228; illegal trade and, 96; Navy revolvers and, 231; public demand and, 96; sales to government and, 96; Springfield rifles and, 228 (see also Kittredge, Benjamin) Army and Navy Journal: Navy revolver review in, 267–71, 269, 273

Army and Navy Revolver appendages: bullet molds (see bullet molds); combined wiper and screw, 76, 357, 358 (see also individual revolvers) Army Ordnance Department: Act of June 23rd and, xxi–xxii; advertising for bids for arms purchases and, xxi, 14, 372–74 (see also Owen-Holt Commission); alteration of revolvers by, 233–37, 248–49; appendages and, 76; arms inspections and, 20–26, 94, 194 (see also inspection cartouches; certificates of inspection; inspection procedures); arms testing and, 248–49; barrel length and, 76–77; Beals revolvers and, 14; caliber of revolvers and, 76; cartridge problems and, 206; certificates of inspection and, 25–26 (see also certificates of inspection); Chiefs of through 1900, xii–xiv (see also individual’s names); Civil War and, xiv; Colt contracts and, 417n.4 (see also Colt); contracts for Army Revolvers (see Army revolvers; Beals Army Revolvers; Colt Army Revolvers; Elliot Army Revolvers); contracts for Navy Revolvers and, 141–42 (see also Beals Navy Revolvers; Elliot Navy Model Revolvers; Navy Revolvers); contracts with Remington by (see also Beals Army Revolvers; Elliot Army Revolvers; Remington’s first, second, third, final Army Revolver contracts); daily business records and, xi; delay of payments 419

INDEX

and, 124; Department of War and, xi (see also War Department); design changes and, 67, 247–49, 346–49; Drew’s revolver and, 237–39, 240–41; Dyer and, 205–6, 250; General Order No. 60, 248–49; history of, xi–xxii; inspection procedures for, 350–55 (see also inspection cartouches; certificates of inspection; inspection procedures); Memorandum of Receipts, 67–72 (see also Memorandum of Receipts for individual types of guns); metallic cartridges and, 233–37 (see also metallic cartridges); need for arms and, 14, 77; Ordnance Memoranda No. 11, 249–51; patented arms purchases and, xxii–xxiii; percussion revolvers and, 233–35, 250; post–Civil War arms contracts and, 226; Remington open market purchases by, 28–29; revolver nipple uniformity and, 335; safety notches and, 160; spare parts orders and, 66, 80, 83–84; Split-Breech Carbine sales and, 226 (see also Rider–Remington Split–Breech Carbines); Springfield Armory and, xii (see also Navy Bureau of Ordnance Department; Springfield Armory) A. Alger & Co.: arms inspections and, 21 Balch, Lt. George T., 12; Ripley and, 13; Springfield Armory and, 13 Beals Army Revolvers (Remington’s Army Revolvers), xix, 12, 67; accepted by Ordnance Dept., 352; amount ordered, 34, 40; appendages required for, 33–34, 357–61; arbor pin on, 346; barrel address on, 332; barrel lengths of, 76–77; cartouches on, 38, 39, 43, 341 (see also inspection cartouches); certificates of inspection for, 26 (see also certificates of inspection); commercial dealers and, 14; compared to Colt revolvers, 78–79; condemned, 65, 104; contract 420

extensions for, 59–61, 386; contracts for, xix, 25–26, 42, 383–84, 386–89, 394–96; dates of production, 24; defects in, 48–49, 53–54, 331–32; delivery of, 11–12, 43, 59, 120–22, 128, 341, 383; evolution of, 331; first contracts for, 31 (see also Remington’s first revolver contracts); gang molds for, 34 (see also bullet molds; gang molds); gifts of, 96–100, 100, 101, 102, 104; Hagner and, 8, 9; hammer spur on, 349; inspection procedures and, 24–26, 35–44, 331, 350–55 (see also inspection procedures); interchangeable parts and, 79; introduction of, xix; large caliber single-shot percussion pistols and, xix; loading levers on, 345, 347; lock system on, 333–35; manufacture of, 12; Memorandum of Receipts of, 68, 70–72, 130–31; National Archives and, vii; officers and, 100–101; price of, 25–26, 62, 65, 103, 105; requirements for, xix; second-class, 65, 95–96, 101–5, 116; serial numbers and, 65–66, 103, 341, 355–56; transition models, 65 Beals Navy Revolvers (Remington’s Navy Revolvers), 3, 6, 67; alterations to, 265–72, 270, 271–72, 276, 303, 327 (see also Navy Bureau of Ordnance and altered Remington revolvers); ammunition for, 143–47; appendages for, 359; approval of delivery of, 21–22; arbor pin on, 346; arbor retaining system on, 337; arbor-locking system, 5; Beals Third Model Pocket Revolvers and, 330 (see also Beals Third Model Pocket Revolvers); Beal’s 1858 patent and, 3, 5, 330; cartouches on, 32, 40, 43 (see also inspection cartouches); cartridges and, 51, 271 (see also ammunition; cartridges); certificates of inspection for, 26, 327 (see also certificates of inspection); Civil War and, 3; Colt Navy Revolvers compared to, 134–35, 138–40; commercial dealers and, 14, 23, 27,

INDEX

28–29; commercial trade and, 14, 341; compared to Colt revolvers, 78–79; cones in, 51; contract extensions for, 59–61; contracts for, 25–26, 381–82; Curtis and, 50; cylinder, 53, 57, 334; cylinder arbor pin and, 3, 5, 330; cylinder bolts and, 54; cylinder defects and, 38, 50, 51–52; cylinder modifications and, 303–4, 311–15, 312, 316, 319–22, 323–25; Dahlgren and, 42, 137–38, 140; defects in, 38–39, 42, 48–54, 141, 331–32, 353; delivery of, 11–12, 29, 42–43, 59, 138, 140–43; evolution of, 331; first contracts for, 31 (see also Remington’s first revolver contracts); first shipment of, 13–14; fluted cylinders and, 52, 53; fourth variation, 138; front sight on, 59; Hagner and, 21–22; hammer and, 54, 57, 58, 349, 349; hammer knurling on, 334; inspection of, 12, 23–24, 26, 37, 40, 48–52, 350–55; interchangeable parts and, 79; issued to Union troops, 27; loading levers on, 345, 347; lock system on, 5, 51, 333–35; Memorandum of Receipts of, 68; National Archives and, vii; Navy evaluation of, 42; percussion, 271; prices for, 3, 25–26, 33, 137–38; production numbers for, 27, 271, 332; purchased by Army, 27; purchased by U.S. Navy, 133; rammer and, 50, 51, 54; reloading and, 135; safety notches on, 57; sales of, 12, 271, 327; serial numbers for, 5, 27, 65–66, 185, 327, 340, 353, 354, 355–56; Single Wing Beals Navy (see Beals Single Wing Navy Revolver); Thornton and, 37–39, 42, 141 (see also Thornton) Beals Navy Revolvers, First Type, 332–36; arbor pin on, 332–33; barrel address on, 332, 333; cylinders and, 336; design flaws in, 337; distinguishing features on, 332–33; grip panels on, 335; hammer knurling on, 333, 334; hammer, trigger, and cylinder bolt, 336; lever latch post

on, 332–33, 334; lock features on, 333–34; percussion nipples on, 335, 336; 1858 patent for, 337 Beals Navy Revolvers, Fourth Type, 339–41; lever latch post on, 339, 340; pawl and pawl screw on, 340, 340; serial numbers of, 340–41 Beals Navy Revolvers, Second Type, 338, 339 Beals Navy Revolvers, Third Type, 339, 339 Beals New Model Army Revolvers, 349–50; arbor pin on, 346; barrel address and, 349, 350; frame change and, 349–50; loading lever on, 345, 347; patent dates on, 349; serial numbers and, 349 Beals New Model Navy Revolvers, 349–50; arbor pin on, 346; arbor retaining system on, 337; barrel address and, 349, 350; cylinder bolt on, 340; front sight on, 59, 349; grips on, 335; hammer on, 58; improvements in, 57–59, 332, 337, 349–50; inspection marks on, 352 (see also inspection cartouches); loading lever on, 345, 347; open market and, 128; patents used for, 337; pawl and pawl screw on, 340, 340; problems with, 38, 56–58; serial numbers and, 349 Beals Pocket Model Revolver, 227, 247, 343; Beals’ 1856 patent and, 329, 330, 331, 335; Beals’ 1858 patent and, 2–3, 330; cylinder of, 329, 331; percussion nipples on, 335; production of, 2–3 (see also Remington–Beals First Model Pocket Revolver) Beals Second Pocket Model Revolver, 330 Beals Third Pocket Model Revolvers: arbor pin and, 5, 57, 333; Beals Navy Revolvers and, 330; Beals’ 1858 patent and, 2–3, 5, 330; cylinder arbor system and, 330, 332–33; loading lever and, 330, 333, 337; patent for, 332 Beals Second Variation Revolver, 9 Beals Single Wing Navy Revolver: cylinder arbor pin and, 3, 7, 332, 346; loading lever on, 347; Remington patent for, 5 421

INDEX

Beals Transition Revolver: cylinder arbor and, 8, 57, 57, 337; latch post and, 337; serial numbers for, 337 Beals, Fordyce: 1856 patent and, 329, 330; 1858 patents, 2, 4, 19, 330, 332; Remington revolvers and, xxxii, 2, 329, 342; Whitney and, 329 Beals–Elliot Transition Revolvers. See Elliot–New Model Navy Transition Revolvers Belt pistols, xvii, 57, 247, 343 (see also Navy Belt Pistol); ammunition for, xx Boarding pistols. See single-shot percussion pistols Breech-loading revolvers, 259–60 Breech-loading rifle: foreign contracts for, xxxvii, xxxviii; John Rider and, xxxiv; manufacture of, xxxiv–xxxv; military contracts for, xxxv–xxxvi, xxxvii, 115–16; parts list for, 125 (see also Rider–Remington Split–Breech Carbines) Bullet molds (see also gang molds), xix; army and navy, 76, 358; cavalry and, 75; cased sets and, 361; Colt and, 75, 76, 359; discontinuation of supply of, 359; for Beals Navy revolvers, 359; Hagner and, 75–76; inspectors marks on, 358, 359 (see also inspection cartouches); Remington, 75, 76, 359 Burnside Rifle Co.: Burnside Breechloading Carbines, 33 Cameron, Secretary of War Simon, 15, 16; arms contracts and orders and, 19, 33 Cartouches. See Inspection cartouches Cartridge extractors, 231; Smith & Wesson and, 241; testing of, 237–39 Cartridges: caliber of, 256; center fire, 235, 241, 277–78; combustible, xix, 76, 210, 211–12; cylinders, 243; ejectors, 237–39; metallic (see metallic cartridges); percussion, 247 (see also percussion caps); postwar alterations to, 225; problems 422

with, 206; rim fire, 247, 267, 277; testing of, 258 (see also ammunition) Case, A. Ludlow: large caliber revolvers and, 273; Ordnance Chief, 186–87 Certificates of inspection, 23–24; Beals Army Revolvers and, 26; Beals Navy Revolvers and, 25–26; cartouches and, 26 (see also Inspection Cartouches); “C” stamp and, 26, 27, 64, 65; for altered Colt revolvers, 263 (see also inspection procedures) Civil War: arms purchases and War Dept., 1–2; Colt pistols and, xvii (see also Colt); end of, 197–98; E. Remington and Sons and, xxxii–xxxiii (see also E. Remington and Sons; Remington); Fort Sumter and, 1; Lincoln and, 1; Ordnance Department and, xiv (see also Army Ordnance Department; Navy Bureau of Ordnance); revolver manufacturing industry and, xiv–xv; statements of arms contracts, 1–2 Colt: Army Pistol, 17; Double-Action Revolvers, 326–27; Holster Pistols, 17–18, 160; Improved Army Revolver (Model 1860) (see Colt Model 1860 Army Revolver); Paterson models, xxiv; Single Action, 256; Whitneyville-Walker models, xv, xvi, xvii Colt Dragoon Army Revolver, xvi, xvii; ammunition for, xx; Commission on Ordnance report on, 17–19; Navy orders for, xxiv; price for, xvii Colt Model 1851 Navy Revolver, xvi, 231; cavalry units and, xvii; Navy orders for, xxiv, 160, 278; price paid for, xvii; supplying ammunition for, xix–xx Colt Model 1860 Army Revolver: alterations to, 33–37, 79, 233–37, 251–55, 255, 257–60, 262–65; ammunition for, 79; barrel length and, 77; certificates of inspection for, xvii, 263; Commission on Ordnance report on, 17–18; delivery of, 79, 81, 259–60; Dyer and, 253–56,

INDEX

257–58; Jeffers and, 277–78; loading lever on, 79; Locke safety notch and, 256–57, 260–61; metallic cartridges and, 233–37, 253–55, 262–65, 278 (see also metallic cartridges); Navy orders for, xxiv, 151, 181; new cylinder and, 260; orders for redesigned, 252–55; Ordnance testing of, 252, 258–62; price for altering, 260–62; price of, 79–80, 260, 278; problems with, 67, 77–79; unissued, 278 Colt Model 1861 Navy Revolver: alterations to (see Navy Bureau of Ordnance and altered Colt revolvers); compared to Remington Beals Navy Revolvers, 134–35, 138–40; loading lever on, 79; Navy orders for, xxiv, 135, 160; price of, 79–80, 137; problems with, 78; reloading, 135; sales of surplus, 278–82 Colt revolver patents: cylinder locking system and, 331; expiration of, xix, 331 Colt revolvers: cost of, 19, 42, 128, 378–79; delivery of, 128; distribution of, 44; large frame single-action, 274; Mexican War and, xv, xxxi; Navy orders for, xxiv; percussion caps for, xix–xx; prices of, 67; redesign of, 67; Regiment of Mounted Riflemen and, xv; War Department purchase of, xv–xvii, 1, 193 Colt’s Arms Manufacturing Co.: arms inspections and, 20; cartridge orders and, 181; Civil War and, xiv–xv; contracts, 91, 94–95, 229–30 (see individual Colt revolvers); creditors of, xxiv; Dyer and, 253–55; Franklin and, 253, 274, 276, 282–88, 296–97; manufacture of revolvers by, xix; Navy and, 273; Owens-Holt Commission and, 17–19; pricing issues and, 79–80; prohibition against purchase of patented arms and, xxii; Richard’s patent and, 255; Root, E. K. and, xix, 20 Thuer and, 252–53; White’s patent and, 252–53 (see also Rollin White’s Patent; White, Rollin)

Colt, Samuel, 96; revolver patents and, xv, 329 Commercial arms dealers. See arms brokers Commission on Ordnance and Stores. See Owen-Holt Commission on Ordnance and Stores Confederacy, The: arms sales to, 96 Confederate soldiers, 60 Cooper & Herrit & Co., 197 Cooper & Pond: Beals Navy Revolvers and, 28–29 Craig, Col. Henry K., xii; Extract from the Act of 23rd June, 1860 and, xxi; problems with ammunition and, xx; repeating firearms purchases and, xxii; War Department and, 1 Curtis, Inspector C. G.: Beals Army Revolvers and, 32–33, 35–36, 38–39, 341; Beals Navy Revolvers and, 43, 51–52, 142; cartouche of, 32, 32, 39, 40, 43, 142, 353 (see also inspection cartouches); Elliot Navy Revolvers and, 43, 142; Ilion Armory and, 35–36, 73 Dahlgren, Adm. John A., 155, 156; Beals Navy Revolvers and, 42, 137–38, 140–43; Chief of Ordnance, 136; Colt Navy revolvers and, 135, 136 Devoe, D. D., xxxix Drayton, Capt. Percival, 157, 158, 159–60 Drew, Reuben W.: Colt revolver alterations and, 253–54; Lowell Arms Co. and, 237–39; patent of, 238, 239; revolver of, 237–39, 240–41 Dyer, Brig. Gen. Alexander B., xv, 113, 206; arms inspections and, 196–97; biography of, xiii–xiv; Chief of Ordnance, xii, 113, 198; Colt revolver redesign and, 253–56, 257–58; Mexican War and, xiii, xiv; postwar arms orders and, 237; Remington third contract and, 113–16; Remington’s last contract and, 126–27; Split-Breech Carbine contract and, 204–8, 213; Springfield Armory and, 42, 114, 205; surplus revolver sales and, 363 423

INDEX

Ehlers, John: Colt and, xxiv Eli Whitney & Co.: arms contracts with Ordnance Dept. and, 95, 229–30; Beals’ patents and, 329; revolvers, 250, 329 (see also Whitney Navy revolvers) Eli Whitney & Co. and Navy arms contracts, xxiv, 169, 278; first orders, 149; prices and, 151; testing and, 150 (see also Whitney Navy revolvers); Wise and, 157, 177–78 Elliot Army Model Revolver, 40, 43, 60; alterations to, 43–44, 265, 303, 332 (see also Navy Bureau of Ordnance and altered Remington revolvers); arbor pin on, 346; barrel address on, 344; cartouches and, 43, 355; contracts for, 383–84; First Variation, 41; grips on, 335; loading lever on, 345, 347; patent for, 342; problems with, 48, 52; production of, 43–44; Second Variation, 44; serial numbers for, 345, 355 Elliot Navy Model Revolvers, 40, 333; altered, 303, 304, 340, 343 (see also Navy Bureau of Ordnance and altered Remington revolvers); arbor pin and, 55, 343, 347; barrel address on, 343, 344; cartouches and, 43 (see also inspection cartouches); commercial sales of, 185; contract extensions for, 42–43; contracts for, 42–43, 381–82; Curtis inspections and, 43 (see also Curtis; inspections procedures); cylinder arbor pin and, 55, 344; cylinder bolt on, 340; defects with, 42, 48–49, 52–56; delivery of, 42–43, 141–43, 185; features of, 56–57; first variation, 41, 142; forward parts on, 343; frame changes on, 343, 344, 345, 348; grips on, 335; hammers on, 57; lever latch post on, 343; loading lever with fillister screw, 146, 345; patent for, 342; production of, 43–44, 271; retaining spring on, 55, 344, 344; safety notches on, 57; serial numbers and, 65–66, 185, 340, 345, 355 Elliot’s Double Derringer Pistol, 228 424

Elliot, William: loading lever and arbor pin system of, 3, 5, 337, 342, 342; patent of, 19, 55, 341, 342, 342; Remington and, 330 Elliot–New Model Army Transition Revolvers, 346–49; frames on, 348; loading lever on, 347, 348, 348 Elliot–New Model Navy Transition Revolvers, 56, 346–49; ammunition for, 146–47; arbor pin adaptation and, 346–47, 348; barrel address and, 332; barrels of, 341; cylinder, 57, 348; cylinder arbor, 56; frames on, 348; grips on, 335; hammer spur and, 349, 349; loading lever with fillister screw, 56, 56, 146, 345, 346–47, 347, 348; Ordnance Dept. and, 346; problems with, 146; safety notches and, 160, 348; serial numbers on, 349; 1861 patent and, 341, 342 Ely, Alfred B., 237–39 E. Remington & Sons: army contracts and, xxxv–xxxvi, 371–79, 381–82 (see also Remington); bankruptcy of, 271; Beal’s patents and, 329 (see also Beals, Fordyce); Civil War arms and, xi, xxxii–xxxiii, 2, 5, 7; creation of, xxxii; first revolvers of, 329; foreign arms contracts and, xxxv, xxxvi, xliii, xliv, 91, 251; gun designers and, xxxvii; Johnston & Dow cartridges and, 157–59, 167, 169–70; manufacturing problems and, 181; Navy Bureau of Ordnance and, 133–34 (see also Navy Bureau of Ordnance); price list, 6; relations with military and, xi; Remington Arms Co. and, xliv (see also Remington Arms Co.); revolver contracts and, 24–25; Ripley and, 10–11 (see also Remington) Fish, Henry H., xxxix Flayderman’s guide to Antique American Firearms, 195–96 Foxhall, Lt., 136 Francis Bannerman, 247 Franco-Prussian War: Colt revolvers and, 282;

INDEX

Navy surplus revolvers and, 278, 282; Remington arms contracts and, xxxvii, 216; Remington surplus revolvers and, 282; Samuel Remington and, 226, 363; Split-Breech Carbines and, 226, 392 Frankford Arsenal, xx, 206; cartridge testing and, 258; center fire cartridges and, 241; production of cartridges by, 264 Franklin, Gen. W. B.: Colt and, 253, 255, 256–57, 260 Freeman Army Revolver, 61, 62, 230 Freeman, Austin T., 61 Freeman, William C., 239 Fry, Provost Marshall James B., 111–12, 112 Gang molds (see also bullet molds): Remington, 359; six-cavity, 34, 65, 76, 357; two-cavity, 76, 76 Gansevoort, Guert, 184 General Order No. 60, 248–49 Goldsborough, Capt. John, 184, 184 Hagner, Col. Peter V., 9; arms deliveries and, 59–61, 74, 77; as Inspector of Contract Arms, 40–42, 351; Beals patent and, 146; Colt arms contract and, 81; distribution of arms and, 44–45; 1862 contract and, 64–65; Elliot’s patent and, 146; Frankford Arsenal and, xx; Owen-Holt Commission and, 375, 376–77; Remington arms and, 8, 12, 14, 21–22, 25–26; Ripley and, 13, 44–45, 64–65; second Remington contract and, 73–77; Watervliet Arsenal and, 40–42, 85, 351 Harbison, Hugh, 259 Harpers Ferry Rifles, 195; classes of, 195; commercial sales of, 228; contracts for, 48, 195, 375, 384–86, 389–90; deliveries of, 48, 195, 217–18, 389; first contracts for, 31, 192–93 (see also Remington’s first revolver contracts); Mississippi Rifle, 191, 194; Model 1841, 191, 192; orders for, xxxii, 11, 48, 191–96; parts list and prices, 124–25, 192 195, 208–9

Hartley & Graham, 247; catalog, 270, 271; Navy surplus arms and, 327 Hoard & Rogers, 80, 109 Hoff, Henry K., 184 Holster pistols, xvii; ammunition for, xx Holt, Joseph, xxii, 15, 368 Illion Armory. See Remington Armory at Ilion Inspection cartouches (see also Certificates of Inspection): anchor stamp, 26, 182, 185, 327; AW, 355; Beals Army Revolvers and, 38, 43; Beals Navy Revolvers and, 40, 43; BH (Benjamin Harris), 354; bogus, 26; CGC (C. G. Curtis), 39, 40, 341, 353, 354; “C” stamp, 26, 27, 352; dual stamps, 26, 354; Elliot Army Revolvers and, 43, 353, 355; Elliot Navy Revolvers and, 43, 353; GMC, 184; GP (Giles Porter), 354; GRC, 355; JWK, 355; location of, 354; OWA (O. W. Ainsworth), 352, 354; postwar, 183, 183–84, 185; PS, 355; RPB, 354; sub-inspectors’ marks and, 353–55; Thornton’s, 353; unidentified, 354–55; U.S.N., 26; WAT, 38, 354; WC, 355; WW, 355 Inspection certificates. See certificates of inspection Inspection procedures, 350–55; failed arms and, 352; gun parts and, 352; inspection cartouches and, 352; milling errors and, 353; Remington Armory and, 351–53; Remington Army Revolvers accepted and, 352; Remington’s inspectors and, 352; standards and, 353 Jeffers, Lt. Cmmdr. William, 175–77, 177; altered revolvers and, 276–78, 289–92; Colt army revolvers and, 277–78; Navy Ordnance Chief, 179, 276–77; sales of surplus arms and, 276, 278–82, 292–94 Jenks, William, xxxi Jenn, W. K., xli Johnson Model 1842 Percussion Army Pistol, xviii 425

INDEX

Johnston & Dow: cartridges, 142, 144, 165; defective cartridges and, 157–59, 162–67, 169–70; withdraw from service of cartridges by, 167, 169 (see also ammunition; cartridges; metallic cartridges) Joint Select Committee on Ordnance: arms contract and, 379; Chief of Ordnance and, 20 Jones, J. T., xl Joslyn revolvers: Navy orders for, xxiv, 150, 230, 240; testing of, 239–40 Joslyn, Benjamin F., 239 Karr, Charles Lee: Remington Handguns, 24 Keene, John W.: magazine rifle and, xxxviii Kernan, Francis, xxxix–xl Kittredge, Benjamin: large caliber revolvers and, 241; Remington altered revolvers for, 231, 235, 239, 242, 243, 363; Smith & Wesson and, 242 Knapp Rudd & Co., 21 Kohler, Faron “Slim,” vii Lamberson, Furman & Co., 271 Landskron, Jerry: Remington Rolling Block Pistols, vii, xxvii Lee Arms Co.: patents and, xxxviii Lee, James P.: bolt gun and, xxxviii Lincoln, President: Civil War and, 1; Ordnance Chiefs and, xii Locke safety notch, 256–57, 260–61 Lowell Arms Co.: Drew and, 237–39 Mason, William: cartridge ejector and, 236; cartridge ejector patent and, 231, 232, 233, 233, 241; rifle musket contract awarded to, 417n.3 Maynadier, Col. William: Remington’s final contract and, 123, 127 Metallic cartridge revolvers: ammunition for, 262–65; demand for, 241; large caliber, xv, 241, 267; Ordnance report on, 258–62, 262–65; Remington, 276–77; small caliber, xiv–xv, 231 426

Metallic cartridges, 231; altered revolvers and, 262–65; center fire, 247, 267, 277–78; demand for, 241; for Colt revolvers, 253–55, 277–78, 282–84; large caliber, 241; Martin, 258, 260; Ordinance Dept. and, 233–37; percussion revolvers and, 233–35, 237–39; Remington and, 231; Smith & Wesson and, 231; White’s patent and, 240 (see also ammunition; cartridges) Mexican War: Colt revolver purchases and, xv, xxxi Mississippi Rifles. See Harpers Ferry Rifles Model 1861. See Elliot Army Model; Elliot Navy Model Moore, C. Kenneth: Colt Revolvers and the U.S. Navy, 1865-1889, 273 Mordecai, Maj. A.: Watervliet Arsenal, xx National Arms Co.: revolver, 249–50 National Arsenal and Armory: skilled workers and, 111–13 Navy Bureau of Ordnance: altered revolvers and, 267, 273–78; ammunition orders and, 143–58; anchor stamps of, 182; arms inspections and, 174–76, 179–81; arms orders and, xxiv, 133, 137–38, 140–46; Bureau of Navigation and, xxiii, xxiv; chiefs of through 1900, xxii–xxiii; Colt Arms Co. and, 137–38, 143; Colt revolvers and (see Navy Bureau of Ordnance and altered Colt revolvers); Dahlgren and, 42, 137–38, 140–46; delinquent payments by, 148; E. Remington & Sons and, xxxv, 133–34, 148; Folger and, 307; functions of, xxiii–xxiv; history of, xxxiii–xxv; Jeffers and (see Jeffers, Lt. Cmmdr. William); Ludlow and, 273; methods of procuring small arms, xxv; officers as inspectors for, xxiii; Proving Ground, 307; records of, xi, xxiv; Remington Navy Revolvers purchased by, 133, 140–43; required target practice and, 326; Rolling Block

INDEX

pistols orders and, 278; Sicard and, 305, 306, 307–8; single-shot percussion pistols and, xxiv–xxv; surplus revolvers postwar and, 278–82, 294–94; testing of arms by, 150, 181 (see also Army Ordnance Department); “Ordnance Instructions for the U.S. Navy,” 182 Navy Bureau of Ordnance and altered Colt revolvers, 137–38, 143, 273, 277–78, 299; altered 1851 Navy revolver, 287; altered 1861 Navy revolvers and, 287, 290–91; ammunition defects and, 324–25; arms testing and, 275–76; cartridges and, 275–78; Case and, 273; center-fire cartridges and, 284, 293; defects and, 289, 309–10, 324; double-action revolvers and, 326; Folger and, 308–11; Franklin and, 282–88, 289–90, 296–97; inspections and, 308–11; Isthmus of Panama expedition and, 307–11; Jeffers and, 276–78, 289–92, 296–97; metallic cartridges and, 253–55, 277–78, 282–84 (see also metallic cartridges); Norfolk Navy Yard and, 310–11; prices and, 276–78, 287, 288, 291, 299–300; purchases and, 278; refurbished revolvers and, 285–86; revolver alterations and, 272, 273; Richards-Mason patent and, 287; sales of surplus revolvers and, 278–82, 327; shipments and, 287–89; Sicard and, 307–8, 326; single-action army revolvers and, 277–78; Union Metallic Cartridge Co. and, 284–85, 286 Navy Bureau of Ordnance and altered Remington revolvers: altered Beals Navy Revolver, 303, 304–5, 312; altered Elliot model, 303, 304; altered surplus Remington revolvers, 292–93; ammunition defects and, 324–25; Case and, 273; center-fire cartridges and, 303, 305; commercial sales and, 327; cylinder modifications and, 303–4, 311–15, 312, 316, 319–22, 323–25; defects and, 305, 306–7, 311–15, 316–17, 321, 322–23; Folger

and, 311–15, 318, 325; Herggurson and, 316–17; inspections and, 303–4, 311, 319, 321–22, 323–24, 327; Jeffers and, 276, 292–94, 297–99, 302; Mare Island Navy Yard and, 298, 300–301, 301–4, 305, 313–14, 318–19, 321; metallic cartridges and, 273, 275–76, 297; modifications and, 311–15, 316–17; Navy funds and, 276, 277; New Model Navy Revolver and, 274, 305; Norfolk Navy Yard and, 313–14, 320–21; prices and, 276, 292–93, 299–300; rim-fire cartridges and, 325; sales of surplus revolvers and, 278–82, 327; serial numbers and, 303, 313, 327; shipments and, 297–301, 301–3, 313–15; Sicard and, 313–15, 317–18; Smoot and, 297–99; testing and, 275–76; U.S.S. Mohican and, 322–24; U.S.S. Monocacy and, 305, 315–19, 320, 325; U.S.S. Palos and, 317, 319–20, 322, 325–26; U.S.S. Pensacola and, 311, 313–15, 317; Washington Navy Yard and, 318–19, 319–20 Navy Bureau of Ordnance and metallic cartridge alterations: arms testing and, 275–76; cartridges and, 275–77; Case and, 273, 275; central fire cartridges and, 277; Colt and (see Navy Bureau of Ordnance and Colt Patent Firearms Co.); double action revolvers and, 322; Jeffers and, 276–82, 304; percussion revolvers surplus and, 289; Remington and (see Navy Bureau of Ordnance and altered Remington revolvers); rim-fire cartridges and, 277; sales of surplus revolvers and, 278–82; Sicard and, 313–15, 317–18, 324–25; Smith & Wesson and, 273, 274–75, 276 (see also Smith & Wesson); Union Metallic Cartridge Co. and, 284–85; U.S. Cartridge Co. ammunition and, 324–25 Navy Bureau of Ordnance arms orders for 1862, 134–47; ammunition orders from, 140, 143–47; Beals Navy Revolvers and, 427

INDEX

134–35, 138–40, 141, 142–45, 147 (see also Beals Navy Revolvers); Capt. John A. Dahlgren and, 135, 137, 140, 141–43; Colt revolvers and, 134–35, 137, 138–40, 143; competitive pricing and, 137–38; delivery of arms to, 140–42; Elliot Navy Revolvers, 141–46 (see also Elliot Navy Revolvers); New Model Revolvers and, 141–42 (see also New Model Revolvers); revolver appendages and, 135; serial numbers and, 142; Wise and, 143, 145 Navy Bureau of Ordnance arms orders for 1863, 147–66; Beals revolvers and, 148, 153 (see also Beals Navy Revolvers); Boarding pistols and, 149; cartridge orders and, 147–58, 160, 162–66; Colt revolvers and, 149, 151, 160; Dahlren and, 148–49, 153; delinquent payments and, 148; distribution of arms and, 160–62; New Model Navy Revolvers and, 148, 153–55 (see also New Model Revolvers); receipts for, 164; Remington price increases and, 151–52; Remington revolver defects and, 162–66; revolver orders and, 147–58; revolver parts and, 148; Whitney revolver orders and, 149–51, 156–57 (see also Eli Whitney & Co.); Wise and, 153–54, 155, 157, 161 Navy Bureau of Ordnance arms orders for 1864, 166–78; arms inspection and, 174–76; Colt’s cartridges and, 167; Johnston & Dow cartridge problems and, 166–67, 169–70; Remington prices and, 172–73; Remington revolver defects and, 167–69, 174; Remington revolver orders, 172–76; Remington Rolling Block Pistols and, 170–71; Remington Split-breech Pistol orders, 177–78; replacement of defect Remington revolvers, 174, 176; Whitney revolver orders, 169, 172, 177–78 (see also Eli Whitney & Co.); Wise and, 170–71, 174 Navy Bureau of Ordnance arms orders for 1865: arms inspections and, 179–81; 428

Army revolvers and, 181; Beals revolvers, 181 (see also Beals Navy Revolvers); Colt revolver orders and, 181 (see also Colt); defect Remington revolvers, 179–81; Elliot revolvers, 181 (see also Elliot revolvers); New Model revolvers, 181 (see also New Model revolvers); Remington prices and, 179; Remington revolver orders and, 178–79; replacement Remington revolvers, 179–80; Whitney revolver orders, 179, 181 (see also Eli Whitney & Co.); Wise and, 178 Navy Bureau of Ordnance arms orders post–Civil War: altered revolvers and, 276–78; arms prices and, 277–78; arms testing by, 275–76; Case and, 186–87, 275; Colt and, 274, 277 (see also Colt); final revolver order, 185; inspection stamps and, 182–85, 183, 185; limited funds and, 277–78; Remington and, 273, 275; Remington Breech-loading pistol and, 186–87; Remington cartridge revolver and, 276; Remington percussion revolvers and, 185; Remington Rolling Block Pistols and, 185–86; revolver samples and, 275; revolver spare parts and, 187–88; Sicard and, 187; single-action army revolvers and, 277–78; Smith & Wesson and, 274–75, 276–77 (see also Smith & Wesson) Navy revolvers, 266; alterations to, 265–72, 270, 271–72 (see also Navy Bureau of Ordnance and altered Remington revolvers); altered cylinders for, 270; ammunition for, 143–44; appendages furnished with, 189; assembly numbers and, 267; Beals (see Beals Navy Revolvers; Navy Bureau of Ordnance and altered Remington revolvers); caliber of, 133; commercial sales of, 231; defective, 149–50; deliveries of, 189–90; front sights on, 85; Memorandum of Receipts of, 68, 72; metallic cartridges

INDEX

an, 265–67; Navy Bureau of Ordnance purchases of, 133, 140–44; parts for, 148; percussion, 231, 267; postwar sales of, 231; production numbers for, 271; reviewed in Army and Navy Journal, 267–71; rim fire cartridges and, 267; samples for Ordnance Dept. and, 265–66; serial numbers for altered, 267, 268; testing of, 133; transition, 65; unsold stock of, 267, 271 New: Pocket Revolvers, 227; Police Revolvers, 228 (see also Police Pocket Model Revolvers); Repeating Pistol, 227 New Model: Belt Revolver, 227; Carbine, 228; Holster Revolver, 228 New Model Army Revolvers, 69, 84, 106, 246, 266, 357; alterations to, 84, 231, 233–37, 242–47, 243, 247, 249–51, 252, 265, 270, 271, 274, 363 (see also Navy Bureau of Ordnance and altered Remington revolvers); altered for metallic cartridges, 262–65; American Indians and, 363, 364, 365; Army Transition, 69; barrel address on, 349, 350, 351; Beals’ name and, 349, 350; cartridge ejectors and, 243, 244; cartridge extractor and, 236; commercial dealers and, 363, 364; delivery of, 86–87, 117–19, 126, 129–30, 383; Elliot patent lever and arbor pin, 141; extractor systems for, 231; fifth type alteration to, 244; finishes on, 355–56; first type alteration to, 243, 245; foreign contracts and, 91, 251, 292, 363, 364; fourth type alteration to, 244; frame changes on, 349; front sights on, 84, 85, 349, 351; gifts to individual states, 96–100, 100, 101, 102, 104, 355–56; grip straps on, 349, 351; introduction of, 141; last variation, 124; loading lever on, 344; Navy Ordnance Dept. and, 141; Ordnance Dept. and, 252; parts list and prices, 124; patent dates and, 349; pioneers and, 363; sales to states, 105–6; second type alteration to, 243; serial

numbers and, 349, 357; spare parts orders for, 230–31; Springfield Armory and, 249; surplus sales of, 110, 228, 363; testing of, 252; third type alteration to, 244; with Illinois State Seal, 102; with Missouri State Seal, 101; with New Jersey stamp, 107, 108; with State Seal of Maine, 104; with Vermont State Seal, 100 New Model Navy Revolvers, 152, 153, 185, 228, 246; barrel address and, 349, 350, 351; frame changes on, 349; front sight on, 349, 351; grip strap on, 349, 352; inspection marks on, 352; loading lever on, 344; patents for, 349; serial numbers for, 349, 356 New York Arsenal, 10; Wainwright and, 81–82 Nipple wrench: revolvers and, 358, 359 Norris, Samuel: carbines and, 226, 392, 396 North revolvers: orders for, 155; price paid for, xvii Old Model. See Elliot Army Model; Elliot Navy Model Ordnance Memoranda No. 11, 249–51 Owen, Robert Dale, 15, 368 Owen-Holt Commission on Ordnance and Stores, 367–79; arms contracts and, 11–12, 15, 26, 34, 192, 367, 381–85; arms contracts prices and, 369–74, 378–79; auditing of Ordnance Dept. contracts and, 367; call for bids by, 372–74; Cameron and, 367; case No. 72 and, 371, 372; Chief of Ordnance and, 20; Colt’s Improved Army Revolver and, 17–19; competitive pricing and, 19, 369–74; demand for arms and, 369; Federal and State governments and, 370; foreign arms and, 369–70; Hagner and, 375, 376–77; history of, 367; inspections of firearms and, 26, 95; investigations by, xii–xiii, 11, 367–79; law of the 3rd of March and, 372; middlemen and, 370, 372–73; open market purchases and, 34; 429

INDEX

Owen and Holt and, 15–17, 16, 368; price of Colt firearms and, xvii, 19–20, 372, 378–79; price of Remington arms and, 19, 192, 371–74, 375–79; Remington’s testimony and, 11, 12, 19–20, 134, 375–79; Stanton and, 367–68; text of report by, 368–75 Palmer, Batchelders: Beals Navy Revolvers and, 29 Parrott, R. P.: arms inspections and, 21 Parsons, John E.: Smith & Wesson Revolvers, 241 Percussion caps: for Colt revolvers, xix–xx; orders for, 145; problems with, xix–xxi Percussion cylinders, 246; alterations to, 247 Perrin and Lefoucheaux, 230 Perry, Commodore Matthew: Japan and, xxiv Perry, Stewart, xxxix Pettingill Army Revolver (Rodgers Spencer & Co.), 17, 17, 44–45 Pitts, J. D., 193 Plymouth Rifles, 181 Pocket Model Revolver. See Beals Pocket Model Revolver Police Pocket Model Revolvers, 57, 247, 343 Porter, Rear Adm. David D., 143, 144, 144 Potter, Elam O.: cartridge manufacture and, 159 Ramsey, Brig. Gen. George D., xiv; biography of, xiii–xiv; Chief of Ordnance, xii, 75, 113; Civil War and, xiii; Dyer and, 196–97; second Remington contract and, 75, 77; Split-Breech Carbines and, 204; third Remington contract and, 91–92, 94, 108–9, 115; Washington Arsenal and, xiii, 13–14 Remington: Agricultural Company, xxxix–xl, 225, 226; Army Revolver. See Beals Army Revolvers; brothers, xxvii, xxxi–xxxiv, xl, xliii; family history, xxvii–xlv; Model 1875 Revolver, 273; Navy Revolvers. See Beals Navy 430

Revolvers; Sewing Machine Company of North America, xl–xli; Typewriter Works, xxxix, xli–xliii Remington Armory, 3, 67; barges for, 2, 4; fair market prices and, 20; Hannis and, 73; inspections at, 32, 73; iron used for revolver frames at, 23, 61, 196, 198–99; manufacturing costs at, 151–52; production at, 15, 20, 31 Remington Armory at Ilion, 272; arms inspections at, 35, 73; Ballard Carbine barrels and, 48; broadside for, 227, 229; commercial market and, 226–29; C. G. Curtis and, 35–36, 73; delivery figures for, 47, 229–30; end of Civil War and, 225–29, 229–30; expansion at, 192; iron used at, 61, 196, 198–99; postwar production at, 226–29, 230–31; production at, 48, 63; R. R. Bennett and, 36, 37, 38, 40 Remington Armory at Utica, 45–47; delivery figures for, 47; end of Civil War and, 225; operations at, 45–47; production capacity of, 47, 63; proof testing at, 352–53; reject rate at, 47; retooling at, 128 Remington Arms Company, xi, xliv; bankruptcy and sale of, xxvii; E. Remington & Sons and, xliv; first government contract and, xxxi–xxxii; Fordyce Beals and, xxxii (see also Beals, Fordyce); manufacture of revolvers, xix; marketing by, 96–99, 97; Navy orders for, xxiv; William Jenks and, xxxi Remington large frame revolvers, 74; Beals Navy (see Beals Navy Revolver); commercial demand for, 5; iron used in, 61 Remington Percussion Revolvers: Beal’s 1858 patent and, 2–3; Navy Ordnance Dept. and, 185; postwar and, 273; serial numbers and, 5 Remington revolver appendages: gang molds, 34; required by military contracts, 32–34

INDEX

Remington Rifles: army orders for, xxxv–xxxvi; Creedmore Rifle, xxxvi; first contracts for, 31; Harpers Ferry (see Harpers Ferry Rifles); inspections of, 193–94; Lee magazine rifle, xliii; Mississippi Rifle, 191, 192; New York National Guard and, xxxv; Springfield Musket (see Springfield Pattern Muskets); Winchester Rifle, xxxviii; Zouave, 195–96 (see also Remington– Rider Split–Breech Carbines) Remington Rolling Block Pistols, vii, 186, 250; Navy orders for, 171–72, 185, 278, 327; price of, 171–72 Remington Split-Breech cartridge pistol: Navy orders for, 170–71, 177, 178, 178, 186 Remington’s Civil War Rifle and Carbine Contracts: Harpers Ferry Rifles, 191–96 Remington’s Final Contract (October 24, 1864): certificates of release and, 123–24; delivery and, 126–27, 129–31; Dyer and, 126–27; inspections of arms and, 127–28; Maynadier and, 123, 127; parts list and prices, 123; Thornton and, 126–28, 129–31 Remington’s First Army Revolver Contract (June 13, 1862): ammunition orders and, 143–47; appendages required for, 32–34; Beals Navy Revolvers and, 141–42; commercial sales and, 37; competitive pricing and, 79; completion of 1862 contract, 63–65; contracts for, 31–32; Curtis and, 32–33, 35–36; defects and, 38–39; distribution and, 44; Elliot Navy Revolvers and, 141–42; inspection of revolvers and, 31, 35–44; Memorandum of Receipts of, 68–72; problems fulfilling orders and, 31, 34, 36–38; Ripley and, 31; samples sent for, 63; serial numbers and, 65–66; Thornton and, 31; types of arms in contracts, 31–32; Whiteley and, 31 Remington’s Second Army Revolver

Contract, 73–74; Colt and, 82; deliveries of, 74, 85–89; Hagner and, 73–77; Memorandum of Receipts of, 87–89; negotiations for, 82–83; Ripley and, 71; spare parts and, 83–84 Remington’s Third Army Revolver Contract (November 21, 1863), 91, 94, 101; ammunition and, 147–58; Army Revolvers and, 116, 120–22; breech-loading carbines and, 115–16; contract extension, 108–9; cost of materials and, 110–11; delivery of, 92–96, 115; Dyer and, 113–16; Elliot Revolvers and, 148; foreign government contracts and, 91; Memorandum of Receipts of, 120–22; Navy revolvers and, 147–48; New Model Revolvers, 117–19, 148; number of revolvers in, 91, 147–58; pricing and, 109–11, 115; Ramsey and, 91–92, 94; sample revolvers and, 91, 94; second-class revolvers and, 95–96, 101–3, 116; serial numbers of, 103, 116; skilled workers and, 111–13; spare parts for revolvers and, 148; Thornton and, 91, 94, 101 Remington, Eliphalet, Sr., xxviii, xxix Remington, Eliphalet, Jr.: Benjamin Harrington and, xxxi; blacksmith shop of, xxix; death of, xxxiii, 7–8, 11; first gun of, xxix; founding of Ilion and, xxix; gun barrels and, xxx–xxxi, 329; Morgan James and, xxx; Stone Forge and, xxx–xxxi, 329 Remington, Eliphalet III, xxxi, xxxii, xlv; E. Remington & Sons and, xxxiv, xxxix, xlii, 11; forge operations and, 225, 329; life of, xlv Remington, Philo, xxxi, xxxii; death of, xliv; E. Remington & Sons and, xxxiii–xxxiv, xxxv, xxxvii, xxxix; personality of, xlv Remington, Samuel, xxxi, xxxii; E. Remington & Sons and, xxxiii; foreign arms sales and, xxxv, xxxvi–xxxvii xxxix, 225–26; Ordnance Dept. arms orders and, 11; Owen-Holt Commission 431

INDEX

on Ordnance and, 11, 12, 19–20, 375–79 (see also Owen–Holt Commission); revolver patent, 58, 337, 338; Thornton and, 210; Utica and, 225 Remington-Beals: Army revolvers (see Beals Army revolvers); Second Model Pocket Revolver (see Beals Second Model Pocket Revolver); Second Variation Revolver (see Beals Second Variation Revolver); Single Wing Navy Revolver (see Beals Single Wing Navy Revolver); Third Pocket Revolver (see Beals Third Pocket Revolver); Transition Revolver (see Beals Transition Revolver) Remington-Beals First Model Pocket Revolver: cylinder of, 329, 331 (see also Beals Pocket Model Revolver); 1856 patent for, 329, 330, 331 Remington-Rider Rolling Block system, 228–29 Remington-Rider Split-Breech Carbines, 116, 199–216, 202; caliber of, 216; cartridges and, 211–12, 242–43; changes to, 207; contract extensions for, 205, 208, 213–14, 226; contract for, 115–16, 204–8, 392–94, 396–97 (see also Rider Split–Breech Carbines); deliveries of, 222, 229; Dyer and, 205–8; evaluation of, 201–3, 204, 206, 211–13, 214–16; French sales of, 216; large frame, 213, 213–14; Memorandum of Receipts, 223–24; orders for, 202, 216; Ordnance Dept. and, 199; prices for, 205, 208; problems with, 211–13, 215–16; rejection rate of, 213, 215–16; small frame, 202, 210, 216, 228; Stanton and, 204 Repeating arms: Craig and, xxii–xxiii; problems with, xxii Revolver appendages: bullet molds (see bullet molds); cased sets and, 357, 359–61, 360; flasks, 360, 361; for Army and Navy revolvers, 357, 357–61, 358, 359; for commercial revolvers, 359–61 (see also Remington revolver appendages) 432

Revolvers: ammunition problems with, xix–xxi; arguments against, xxii–xxiii; cost of, 19; Craig and, xxii–xxiii; mass manufacturing problems with, xix Revolving Breech Rifles, 228, 247 Richards, Charles B.: Colt alteration and, 253, 255, 257; revolver patent of, 254, 254, 255 Rider Split-Breech Carbines. See RemingtonRider Split-Breech Carbines Rider, Joseph, 200; breech-loading rifle and, xxxiv, 199; cartridge extractor and, 231, 233, 234, 236; patents of, 200, 200, 208, 209, 209, 228, 230, 241; Remington and, 330; Rolling Block action patent, 210, 211, 228–29; Split-Breech cartridge pistol, 170, 200 Rifle Cane, 228 Ripley, Brig. Gen. James Wolfe, xiii, 75, 115; ammunition problems and, xx–xxi; arms acquisitions and, 12–13; arms distribution and, 44–45; arms inspections and, 20–26, 193–94; Beals Navy Revolvers and, 25; biography of, xii–xiii; certificates of inspection and, 23–24, 26; Crispin and, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26; 1862 contract and, 63–65; Hagner and, 13, 44–45; Harpers Ferry Rifles and, 191–96; Kennebec Arsenal and, xii; Remington arms orders and, 10–11, 23, 31–33, 35, 42, 195; second Remington contract and, 73–74; Springfield Armory and, xii; Stanton and, 19; Thornton and, 13, 22–23, 35, 39; War Department and, 1 Rodgers Spencer & Co.: arms contracts of, 81, 229–30; Pettingill Army Revolver, 17, 17, 81 Rollin White Arms Co., 237 (see also White, Rollin) Rollin White’s patent, xiv–xv, 231, 232, 240, 241–42, 247–48; Colt and, 252; extension request of, 253 (see also White, Rollin) Rolling Block Pistols. See Remington Rolling Block Pistols Russell, Albert N., xxvii, 2

INDEX

Sabers: need for, 10, 251 Savage Carbines: delivery of, 210, 213, 216; orders for, 226; production problems with, 205, 208 Savage Revolvers: cost of, 19, 378–79; delivery time of, xix; Navy Model, xviii; Navy orders for, xxiv, 155 Savage Revolving Arms Co.: carbines made by, 392, 396 Sayre Cultivator Tools, xxxix Sayre, James, xxxix–xl Schuyler, Hartley, and Graham: Beals Navy Revolvers and, 14, 28 Seamans, Clarence W., xliii Seamans, O. W., 294 Serial numbers: Army revolvers and, 65–66, 401; duplication of, 5; Elliot Navy Revolvers and, 43, 65–66; letters as, 356, 357, 358; locations of, 355–56; Navy Revolvers and, 5, 43, 65–66, 400; on Remington first contracts, 65–66; Remington armories and, 47–48; special orders and, 356 (see also individual guns and serial numbers) Sharps Arms Co.: arms inspections and, 20, 48; Palmer, J. C. and, 20 Sharps Rifle Manufacturing Company: carbines ordered from, 1; primers for carbines and, xx Single-shot percussion pistols: cavalry and, 251; changes to, 250; Navy orders for, xxiv–xxv, 149, 186–87; problems with, 149–50 Smith & Wesson: arms alterations and, 251; bored-through cylinder and, 247; cartridge ejectors and, 241, 250; Civil War and, xiv–xv; Colt Army Pistols and, 256; Kittredge and, 242 (see also Kittredge); No. 3 American Army Revolver, 250; Ordnance Dept. and, 251; postwar arms sales and, 274–75; Remington and, 241–42; small caliber metallic cartridge revolvers and, xiv, 231; White’s patent and, xiv–xv, 241

Smith & Wesson Army Revolver: changes to, 251; Martin cartridges for, 252; price of, 260 Smith, J. Gregory, 99 Smoot, Lt. William S.: Navy Bureau of Ordnance and, 297; Remington and, 203, 205, 276; Split-Breech Carbines and, 206, 214 Split-breech carbines. See Remington-Rider Split-Breech Carbines Springfield Armory, 199; altered Colts delivered to, 260–61; arms demand and, 371; Balch and, 13; bayonets and, 199; cartridge ejectors and, 237–39; center fire cartridges and, 241; Civil War and, xxxv; civilian arms inspectors and, 351–52; contract arms inspections and, 22–23, 32–33; Dyer and, 42, 114, 205; Laidley and, 124; metallic cartridges and, 233–35, 237–39; New Model Army alterations and, 249, 256; Ripley and, xii, 13; spare parts orders from, 230–31; Split-Breech Carbines and, 202 Springfield Pattern Muskets, xxxiii, 31, 192–94, 196–99, 197; barrel rejections and, 196–97; classes of, 195, 199; commercial sales of, 228; contract extension for, 197, 199, 208, 391; contracts for, 196, 371–74, 390–92; delivery of, 197–99, 218–21, 390–91; inspections of, 196; post–Civil War contracts for, 226; price of, 195, 196, 199, 371, 376–78; private contractors and, 194 Sproulls Meecham & Co., 53 Squires, Watson C., 292 Squires, W. C., 251 Stanton, Secretary of War Edwin M., 15, 16; General Order of March 10, 20, 21; Owen-Holt Commission Report and, 20; Ripley and, 20 Starr revolvers: bullet molds and, 359; contracts for, 67, 77, 81, 92, 94, 109, 229–30; cost of, 19, 378–79; distribution of, 44; Double Action Navy, 66, 77; Navy 433

INDEX

orders for, xxiv, 80; Single Action Army, 66, 77 St. Louis Arsenal: Maj. F. D. Callender and, 94 Storrs, J. W., 242 Thornton, Col. William A., 9; Beals Army Revolvers and, 37–39, 141–42; Beals Navy Revolvers and, 37–39, 42, 141; cartouche of, 39, 353; contract arms inspections and, 22–23, 24, 33–35, 38, 41, 351; delivery refusal by, 126–28, 141, 353; E. Remington & Sons and, 7, 8, 37; Ordnance Dept. and, 198; Remington’s final contract and, 129–31; Remington’s third contract and, 91, 94, 101; Ripley and, 13, 22–23, 39; Samuel Remington and, 210; Split-Breech Carbines and, 210–14; Watervliet Arsenal and, 13, 22–23, 34–35, 351 Thuer, F. Alexander: Colt and, 252; revolver patent of, 253 Tyler, Davidson & Co.: Remington Revolvers and, 28–29 Union Army, 1; boy soldier in, 92; Bull Run and, 1; cavalry, 43; soldiers in, 60, 92, 93, 106 Union Metallic Cartridge Co., 267; altered Colt revolvers and, 284–85, 286, 324–25; center-fire cartridges and, 293–94 United States Cartridge Co.: Navy Bureau of Ordnance and, 293–94, 302–3; problems with, 324–25 Utica Armory. See Remington Armory at Utica U.S.S.: Essex, 305, 306, 307; Kansas, 154; Mochican, 322–23, 323, 323–24; Monocacy, 305, 306, 315–19; New Hampshire, 182; Ossipat, 305; Ossipee, 305, 306; Palos, 317, 317; Pensacola, 310, 311, 313–15 Walter A. Wood Co., xxxix War Department, the: Act of June 23, 1860 434

and, 15; ammunition problems and, xx–xxi; arms and, 1; arms contracts and, 15; arms procurement practices of, xxi, xxxvii; Colt revolver purchases by, xv–xvii; Ordnance Department and, 1 War of 1812, xii Warner, Ezra: Generals in Blue, xii Washington Arsenal, 12, 78; Beals Navy Revolvers and, 13–14; Ramsey and, xiii, 13 Watervliet Arsenal: E. Remington & Sons and, 5, 7; Hagner and, 40–42; Thornton and, 13, 22–23, 34–35, 41, 85 Wesson, D. B., 275 Wesson, Walter H., 275 Whiteley, Maj. R. H. K., xx–xxi, 10; arms inspections and, 21, 24 White, Rollin: cartridge extractor patent, 232; Colt and, 252–53 (see also Colt’s Arms Manufacturing Co.); extension of patent of, 247–48; patents of (see Rollin White’s patent); Remington and, 241; Smith & Wesson and, xiv, 231, 241–42, 248 (see also Rollin White Arms Co.) Whitney Navy Revolvers, 96; inspections of, 181, 304; New Jersey purchases of, 106; prices of, 151, 193; testing of, 150 Whitney, Eli. See Eli Whitney & Co. Wilstach & Co., 53 Winchester Repeating Arms Co.: Edwards and, 282 Wise, Capt. Henry A., 156; Navy Ordnance orders for arms and, 153–54, 155, 157, 170–71 W. J. Syms & Brothers: Beals Navy Revolvers and, 28