A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

[Johan Steele]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

Curt, or anyone else for that matter, I am curious if you have ever seen or handled one of those Good & Servicable Whitney M1841's? I saw one a couple years ago that through me for quite a loop. No patchbox, Sharps carbine rear sight, M1842 style butplate there was something else odd about her as well but I can't recall what. I was told it was one of the cobbled together from spare parts Whitney was selling to anybody w/ coin. Fool that I am I didn't get a photo of her. IMO the quality was as good as the standard M1841 and was assured by the owner that the parts were all interchangeable w/ his other M1841.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

Hallo!

Yes. Once in a while.

There was a fair-to-good condition Whitney contract M1841 for sale about 2-3 years ago at the local BP shop here for, IIRC, over priced a bit at $2400.
(it was as it should be.)

But y3es, Whitney also had a knack for purchasing parts outsdie of his own factory such as M1861's with English made barrels. Or M1861 made with Enfield bayonets. Or the "Whitney Enfield." Etc., most likely for less fussy state contracts...)

Curt

[adamandnicole]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

While we're all talking about quality 1841 de-farbs, I'd like to give credit where it's due to Mark Hartman from James River Armory. He did a Harper's Ferry conversion for me inn '08 and it is a thing of beauty. For sure an under represented arm in the field. It gets comments every time I take it out. Sadly, it appears he no longer does these projects...too bad.

Adam Dickerson

[Craig L Barry]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

While we're all talking about quality 1841 de-farbs, I'd like to give credit where it's due to Mark Hartman from James River Armory. He did a Harper's Ferry conversion for me inn '08 and it is a thing of beauty. For sure an under represented arm in the field. It gets comments every time I take it out. Sadly, it appears he no longer does these projects...too bad.

Adam Dickerson

Yeah, I was going to say...it has been a few years since I have seen Mark's name associated with anything
but WW II rifles. He did fine work and I have had the privilege of owning a few of his rifles and muskets
or at least come through my hands. His website says: "Our supplier, Euroarms, is going out of business and
any replacement parts will not be available. We apologize for any inconvenience this may bring..."

He does (or did) a Whitney Militia rifle that I have always liked. Sign o' the times.

[Nighthawk]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

A pard of mine had Andy Addoms convert a repro '41 into the Benton rear sight model with the Snell bayonet cut out. What a thing of beauty!
Regards,

[Craig L Barry]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

For those that appreciate the aesthetics of percussion military gun-design, there is nothing quite like the
US 1841 "Mississippi" rifle. The US 1842 was also a beautiful looking military arm, but the brass
patchbox and furniture along with the lines and proportions just puts the US 1841 in a class by itself.

Like the 1842, the 1841s are not "too bad" right out of the box. The availablilty of 1841s is really the only thing
about Euroarms selling to Pedersoli that I will miss. There will be no more reasonably priced 41s, and no more new 41s
for a couple years at best. Since they were some of the first repros produced, going back to the 1960s,
there are still quite a few Zoils and Bernadellis floating around in decent shape. You just have to keep your eyes open.
Two comrades-in-arms of mine out at STRI picked up 1841 rifles recently. They were both Navy Arms (Zoli), one paid
$450 and the other got his for $350. Todd Watts has 'em at the moment. I think his Mississippi rifle is equal to or
better than his Enfield and that is high praise indeed.

[ajroscoe]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

I just got my M1841 (and my M1842) back from Todd yesterday, and he did a beautiful job on them both. He took an old Zoli that I bought second hand from someone that clearly hadn't been used or maintained for a while and remade it into a gorgeous Whitney contract with a 1852 lock plate. It had a high gloss varnish that was either from its original manufacture or put on by a previous owner, which is now replaced with the far more appealing natural finish. He really remade the rifle, and I could not be happier with it. When I get back from base this afternoon, I'll dig out my camera and chords and put up some pictures. I wish I had made some before ones to compare them with! Thanks again Todd. He really is a master and THE man to do a defarb.

[ezra parker]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

anyone know what type of alterations st louis arsenal issued out?

Sir, sign your first and last name when posting on the forum. It is one of the rules. Thank! Herb Coats, Moderator.

[Dbackfed]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

Just to bump on what Ezra asked. Does anyone know the type the St. Louis Arsenal issued out in the fall of 1861 or more specifically, the 36th Illinois? I know it's been written they had sabre bayonets.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

Hallo!

It is rare that one can know any detail, as makers or variations were not important to Ordnance people beyond type of arm say musket or rifle, followed by calibre- say percussion versus flint, or flint altered to percussion, or .54, or .58, or .69 etc.

However, St. Louis is an exception.

In the 1859 survey, they inventoried a mere 236 "made as percussion, .54 rifles" which were unaltered M1841 Rifles.

Plus, as part of Colt's contract to alter and upgrade old M1841's Colt in 1861/1862 sent 8,400 to the St. Louis Arsenal for arming Trans-Missippi troops. Colt used M1841's made by Robbins & Lawrence, Eli Whitney, and Harpers Ferry for the contract. By number, the most were Whitney's, followed by Robbins & Lawrence, and then Harpers Ferry. There are a few Remingtons in there, but it is believed they were used for Colt's side-deal with the State of Connecticut.

I don't know what the 36th IL were issued, but assuming/guessing they were armed from the St. Louis Arsenal (units were not always armed from the closest arsenal to their home, but sometimes were...) then it is likely could/would have been a Colt alteration.

Curt

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

Hallo!

Yeah, I looked it up... ;) :)

Regarding the 36th Illinois infantry.... (I won't get into their cavalry unit):

As is sometimes the case, all of the accounts do not agree.

Lyman Bennett wrote in his 1876 history of the 36th that in September 1861 Companies A and B received Enfield rifles, whil ethe rest of the regiemtn received "remodeled " old pattern Springfield muskets.

One "Scalpel" wrote on September 1861 that teh right company received Enfield rifles, while the left received "the minnie rifle with sword bayonet." Six otehr companies received bright "Austrian rifle muskets." And that two companies were to receive similar rifle muskets to the Austrian, but 'bronzed" and refused them.

Fred White wrote in October 1861 that eight companies were arms, and refers to the two companies mentioned by Scalpel as the Wayne Rifles and the Morris Guards. He said that Company B and C received "rifles" the rest "rifled muskets." And that Company B received "rifles with sword bayonets" and Company C "Enfield rifles."

A letter signed as "H" from October 1861 said they had received their arms as being "the Springfiled pattern made in 1841. but recently rifled;..."

The Official Records says for October 1862 they had:

Company A: "Enfield" rifles
Company B: "The U.S. Rifle"
Company C: "U.S. altered musket rifled"
Companies D, E, F, H, I: "U.S. altered musket rifled"
Companies G and K: "U.S. Springfield rifled musket"

An aside... "U.S. Rifle" could mean the M1841 or the M1855. St. Louis Arsenal in the 1859ish inventory did have 483 M1855 R's, and 236 M1841 R's. Before the batch of Colt M1841 alterations arrived. The October 1861 reference to sword bayonets would tend to make them M1855 R's.

It would appear that the 36th IL followed a common practice where the two flank companies were rifle armed, and the other eight musket armed. And that as rifle muskets became available they were upgraded.

Quartermaster Office returns for 1st Quarter 1863:

151 U.S. RM M1855-1863,
1 U.S. M M1816 altered to percussion

Quartermaster Office returns for 2nd Quarter 1863:

136 U.S. RM M1855-1863
239 Enfield RM

Quartermaster Office returns for 3rd Quarter 1863:

50 U.S. RM M1855-1863
137 Enfield RM

Quartermaster Office returns for 4th Quarter 1863:

55 U.S. RM M1855-1863
135 Enfield RM

Quartermaster Office returns for 1st Quarter 1864:

46 U.S. RM M1855-1863
153 Enfield RM

Quartermaster Office returns for 2nd Quarter 1864:

29 U.S. RM M1855-1863
108 Enfield RM

Quartermaster Office returns for 3rd Quarter 1864:

39 U.S. RM M1855-1863
84 Enfield RM

Quartermaster Office returns for 4th Quarter 1864:

31 U.S. RM M1855-1863
125 Enfield RM

Quartermaster Office returns for 1st Quarter 1865:

30 U.S. RM M1855-1863
170 Enfield RM

I am slightly suspicious of the M1855-1863 listing suspecting that it might be a modern writers/editors inclusion trying to extend .58 arms to possibly have been M1855's, M1861's, or M1863 which cannot be broken down beyond their .58 Ordnance notions. May be. May be not. Dunno...

As an aside, I find it interesting that they maintained a number of Enfield RM's all the way through the War, their not being replaced by Springfields.

Curt

[Dbackfed]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

Quick question with the conversations. Does anyone know if any of the Eli Whitney m1841s were converted by Harpers Ferry arsenal and rebored to .58 caliber before the Colt contract in 1861? I have seen plenty of E.W. 1841s with Colt's conversion in .58, but I am curious to know if Harpers Ferry had any Whitney made rifles in their stockpile that they would have done a conversion to and rebored to .58.

It would seem logical that Harpers Ferry would have had some of the 27,000+ made Whitney's in their stockpile, BUT I know it's better to ask than assume.
(P.S. I have used the search function and looked around on relic sites)

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

Hallo!

I have not seen any rearch or documentaiton on it.

It would stand to reason that various M1841's in storage at other arsenals were shipped to HF for the circa 1854-1855ish work.

But I can say there was at least... one.
Two or three years ago, I almost bought a HF altered Whitney.

Curt

[Dbackfed]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

Thanks Curt. Any chance you remember which conversion it was by Harpers Ferry? Thanks,

[stump]

Re: A Mississippi Rifle by Todd Watts

Hello,
I have done extensive research on Harpers Ferry Mississippi and the arsenal.I have found no evidence that they altered any rifles other than there manufacture. There are basically 4 types of alterations which include sights and bayonet attachments. Type 1 benton screw sight, snell bayonet, Type ll Slide pattern sight(soldered on) with stud with guide key and short front band, Type lll slide pattern(screwed to barrel) sight stud with no guide wth short front band (this is basically the 55 brass mounted set up) and the final is Type lV is 1858 rifle sight stud and short front band(55 steel mounted set up). There are sub alterations with slight changes. Whitney did produce 600 long range rifles with short band, stud, and sights sent from Harpers Ferry. There are a some state alterations with additions of sights and bayonet attachements. I have examained many mississippi"s and have found alot of put togethers that are a mixture of parts. I am always interested in seeing more rifles and learning more. This is the information I have put together over the years, if you have any information to share I would appreciate it.


Jim Fedorko
13th Confederate Inf.
N-SSA