State marked firearms

[rogue]

I had sort of asked this question last week, but it was buried in another thread, and drew no answer.
On original shoulder weapons one frequently sees "N.J." for New Jersey, and "OHIO" for Ohio stamped in stocks and on barrels. I presume this is a mark of state ownership. If someone were to have this on a firearms, replica or original, would this show a post Civil War addition, or was the stamping done during wartime?
Steve Sullivan
46th Illinois
Co. Mil. Hist.

[Vuhginyuh]

Re: State marked firearms

I have only seen NC surcharges on 18th and early 19th Century arms. Other than standard makers marks (Fayetteville, et al), no to North Carolina. Maybe the odd mark or two on a conversion but it is doubtful.

[Pvt.CLC]

Re: State marked firearms

What type of musket would it be an older smooth bore or a rifled one???

But i do know that the govt after and arround the mexican war era (arround 1830-59 ish) sold older muskets and arms to state run militas and the such. and that the state would have stamped them like you said for the identifacation of what was state owned and what wasnt.

also many muskets such as the 1861 springfield..where contract built and extencivly massed prodused in hundreds of factories arround the contenental USA. Some companies may have stamped there name on the side or stamped the state it was built in.

considering the possable thousands or millions of muskets used by both North and south. i would beleve that at least 1 factory during, or state run arsenal, would have done somthing simmular to that.

hope this helps and excuse the spelling :tounge_sm

[Pvt.CLC]

Re: State marked firearms

sorry for this...it doubled posted and just omit this reply...sorry

[Rear Guard]

Re: State marked firearms

I have a "PENN" stamped converted smoothbore and from what I've read about it, muskets were sometimes stamped with the militia unit as part of their original contract with the gunmaker. This might suggest that a weapon identified in this way pre-dates the War. I don't know if the practice continued during the war or post-war.

Jeff Lawson

[Jerseyman]

Re: State marked firearms

I had sort of asked this question last week, but it was buried in another thread, and drew no answer.
On original shoulder weapons one frequently sees "N.J." for New Jersey, and "OHIO" for Ohio stamped in stocks and on barrels. I presume this is a mark of state ownership. If someone were to have this on a firearms, replica or original, would this show a post Civil War addition, or was the stamping done during wartime?
Steve Sullivan
46th Illinois
Co. Mil. Hist.

Steve,

A great reference book is The U.S. Model 1861 Springfield Rifel - Musket by Hartzler, Yantz and Whisker. According to this text and others I have seen, NJ for example, is a wartime stamp indicating ownership by the state of New Jersey. On pg. 134 there's a great picture of a Savage made M1861 (dated 1863). The NJ is on the top of the barrel off to the side of the viewed/proofed (VP) marking.

I have never seen an Ohio marking so I won't attempt to speak to that.

Jeff Lau

[James Brenner]

Re: State marked firearms

This is one of those subjects that I've been interested in, but haven't had a chance to research it, yet. Having said that, here are my initial impressions on Ohio marked muskets.

I own a M1842 rifled musket surcharged Ohio dated 1846 and have seen smoothbore M1842s also surcharged Ohio. At gun shows and in antique stores, I've seen M1816 conversions (P.& E. W. Blake only) stamped Ohio as well as a Liege musket with the Ohio surcharge. My assumption is that they are pre-war to early war markings because, by 1863, these Class 2 arms were pretty much out of the inventory for both active and militia units. I also kinda doubt that they were marked in the post-war period simply because Ohio and other states would not have a need for them in light of the many, more modern, surplus .58 caliber rifle muskets available.

As of right now, though, I can't prove my hunches, but that's my working hypothesis so far.

[Pvt.CLC]

Re: State marked firearms

if it is a 1842 than yes that's right. its chances are that it is a pre-war marking if not early war like opening 1861. Most older model or un-used weapons like i said where sent to private milita and there respictive state.

but that is a unique gun none the less. (is that one word? or something)

Hope i could be of any help,

The moderators of the Authentic-Campaigner forum
have noticed that you have NOT included your full name in your post(s). This is one of the requirements of the forum. This is your second warning; the first being in the rules of the Forum. Curt-Heinrich Schmidt, Moderator

[rebyank]

Re: State marked firearms

I have seen 5-6 1816's that were marked "OHIO" one was even still in flintlock. If I recall correctly, at least one was a harpers ferry '16 and one was a Pomeroy '16. but I have seen these and held them in my dirty oily hands, so I know they're real.

I almost bought one of 'em, but the nipple had been crushed by dry firing. :baring_te

hope this helps,

[Agate]

Re: State marked firearms

Hi Steve,

Have a little different take on the property marks found on Ohio arms. From my experience and point of view after reviewing these things for twenty-five odd years, my opinion is that we find two "styles" of "Ohio" marks. The first, a smaller mark "Ohio" which shows up on arms either behind/beside the tang, or on the flat opposite the lock towards the rear.

I've seen this mark on a number of different arms including the Austrian Lorenz, 1809 Austrians, Prussians, Belgians, and .69 smoothbore and rifled .69 US arms. Also saw a neat Pondir a couple of years ago offered by "Sarge" from Indiana of the NSSA, are you familiar with him? That guy is something else.

I would agree with James that it would appear these second and third class arms would quickly be surplus, and likely sold, particularly later during the conflict.

The problem however is that we find this very mark on US 45-70's, both rifles and carbines. That, IMO, might very well change things a bit.

A number of years ago I was allowed to examine a Gatling gun in a collection, owned at one time by the Ohio National Guard, that was kept at the "Old Workhouse" here in Cincinnati. The building was initially designed to hold Confederate prisoners, at least according to local legend. The building was a little late however, being finished in 1866. This Gatling had been used during the Cincinnati Court House riots during the 1870s, and had been stored in armory of the Workhouse, there not being an ONG armory here as yet.

The point is that the owner also had several early photographs of the armory inside, where the Gatlings (there were two) were kept. Hanging in racks on the walls were a number of different arms and a guard was posing in the picture holding an 1809 Austrian. These arms would have been owned by the ONG or the state of Ohio, the images dating to around 1867 when, I believe, the Gatlings were purchased.

I also believe I may know who your Southern Ohio WW1 dealer might be, if so, I would silly not to consider his opinion.

The other marks are found on arms dating back to the contract 1795s (1808s). A much larger "Ohio" which barely fits on the opposite of the lock. I've always seen these things stamped in the same place, and roughly the same location probably due the size of the stamp. Dave Taylor had a really neat 1808 in his shop that was never converted with this mark with an early date of around 1811. I believe these are earlier property marks as I haven't as yet seen a Civil War import, or anything really after the 1850s (including US arms) bearing this larger mark.

Joe Hill has an 1816 which I sold him a number of years ago that bears this mark. Will see if I can get images to post. Don't believe I've ever encountered a surcharged "3" Mexican War surplus piece with Ohio marks, probably just a fluke, or I just don't remember. All of this however, is opinion, would like to see the research done.

Would be a great topic for further research.

The "Ohio" marked stuff is getting hard to get. My interest has always been in the OVM plates. I know some of those are private purchase. Ohio marked accouterments are hard to find now too, just looked at a complete set a year back at the Camp Dennison museum, owned by a well known Ohio collector. They marked all the individual pieces of the set. Have hope to recreate the stamp just for fun, though I honestly don't think it would be appropriate, might put it on a cap "pocket."


Some stuff falls out of the woods though, such as an OVM marked blanket that surfaced a couple of years ago, although some folks were suspect.

The absolute rarest piece is the white metal 1850s enlisted shako plate. We have two bullion that survive, and one in white metal. On a scale this would be a ten and an OVM plate probably a three or four.

As a side note, used to own three "CP" marked M1808s from different contractors, this being when I was about fifteen. Always though it was neat that so many contractors had the same first initials! Raisor blew that one for me, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, whatever. :sarcastic

Regards,

John
John Sarver
Cincinnati.