Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

[pheaur]

Some time ago I ran across a thread that briefly discussed the use of a stamp to show state ownership. I believe many of us are familiar with state stamps that are found on various weapons used during the war. I became interested with the Ohio stamp about a year ago and wanted to research this topic to discover; what weapons were available to Ohio before, during, and after the war, and when the state began to stamp its equipment to show state ownership. I just finished reviewing the annual reports to the governor from the Quarter Master General for the years 1833 to 1881. I will say that these reports provide a wealth of information on just about any topic that pertain to military affairs. After many hours of research I have come up empty. Although I found a wealth of information on muskets and rifles used before, during, and after the war, I haven't been able to indentify any document that pertains to the use of a stamp to show state ownership. I still have a pile of documents to comb when I head back to the Historical Society in Columbus, Ohio. Has anyone else attempted to research the Ohio Stamp? I am looking for primary resources, both federal and state, which may shed some light on this topic. I’m hoping that one day I will be able to separate myth from fact. Any help would greatly be appreciated.

Thanks,

Chris Warfel
51st Ohio Volunteer Regiment

[David Fox]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

As I recall Ohio placed a small shield-shaped brass "thumbpiece" on the top of the wood grip of at least some of their State-owned muskets. I've handled one many years ago...a two-band Enfield. Believe the shield contained a raised eagle motif.

[Huck]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

My original 42, has on the stock, stamp that saids OHIO.

[buckeye bear]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

My original 42 is also stamped "OHIO" opposite the lock plate and behind the tang.

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

I've seen the "OHIO" mark on Potsdams and various Belgian muskets. Usually, it is on the wrist of the stock, or just behind the barrel tang.

[jake.koch]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

I believe that just about a year ago there was a Lorenz sold on this forum that had the same OHIO marking.

[rogue]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

Mr. Fox, what you describe, the eagle bit of brass, is attached to a Belgian made two band rifle that was produced in Leige, Belgiam, for Don Carlos of Brazil but bought out from under him by Federal arms agents as they paid more for the finished arms than the Brazilian leaders agents were willing to pay.
As for the OHIO mark, hearsay and hearsay alone has it that the arms were thus marked as they were collected and warehoused at different times during the War, and at its conclusion. Weapons with that mark were not on an issue status, but rather to be stored. I too have seen many weapons so marked, but second class weapons, foreign made or older US products. Has anyone seen a '61 Springfield so marked or a P53 Enfield?
This may be the significance of the hours of going through the Ohio records, to answer what the meaning of OHIO on weapons might be. Dig Chris, dig, banish hearsay!
S.Sullivan

[David Fox]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

Thanks, Rogue. For a clear picture of an 'Ohio' marked musket, check-out www.jjmilitaryantiques.com. Then hit "Longarms muskets US". The weapon so marked is a Potsdam.

[pheaur]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

I have included a few clips from the Executive Docs. where a list of muskets appears within each year. Although these are just the tip of the iceberg it should give the reader some sort of insight of what kind of muskets were under state control when the war began and when a transfer of arms was executed in 1863. For more and detailed information please visit the library at the Ohio Historical Society. For 1863 I included a list of muskets transferred to the state by the federal government. For the past two years I've been keeping a list of identifiable muskets where I've seen the Ohio Mark. Most match the list of arms transferred in 1863 but a few have escaped me. Maybe someone out there who has more knowledge on this topic can shed some light on it.

As for how the Ohio mark found its way on various arms remains to be seen. I once heard that most of these arms had to have been stamped early in the war. From what I have seen up to this point I haven't found any conclusive evidence that even suggests that Ohio owned such a large stock pile of arms. (At least not until 1863) Most of the evidence leans towards the US Ordnance Department providing Ohio the arms it needed so it could arm its regiments in 1861-1862. Then again maybe someone else has seen an article or report that says otherwise. However, if the arms did belong to Ohio and Ohio was using the mark to identify its property than I think there should be a US M1861 Springfield Rifle or a carbine used by the cavalry with the same mark. As for the arms being collected and held in storage and marked accordingly from 1862-65 remains to be seen also. As you will see Ohio was acting as an agent for the US Ordnance Department until September 1863. According to the evidence I have seen thus far all the arms held by Ohio belonged to the Federal government... not the state. Finally, the arms transferred to Ohio in 1863 were suppose to arm the state militia. It was this transfer that would haunt Ohio until about 1876 before it would receive the new Springfield 45/70. Most of the arms that were transferred to Ohio in 1863 were still on the books until 1881. This provides a timeframe when the mark could have possibly been used. As for the mark being applied during the war... no evidence yet. Like I said before, I have a huge pile of documents to go through. Hopefully someday I will be able to report back with some kind of evidence.

Ohio Historical Society
FLM 293
Executive Documents, annual reports of Ohio 1861

Page 583
During the period of eight months, from April 15th to Decemeber 15th, there has been received from the United States, for the use of troops called into active service, the following ordnance and ordnance stores, viz:
Page 584
U.S. muskets altered to percussion 26,533
U.S. muskets new percussion, 69 calibre 15,020*
Percussion rifle muskets, 69 calibre (Pondir’s) 4,991
French rifles 69 calibre 948,
French rifles 57 calibre 1,000
Saxony rifle muskets, 71 calibre 2,680
Sword bayonet rifles 894
Enfield rifles1,480
Smooth-bore Prussian muskets 5,020

Page 584
There has been received at the State Arsenal, on account of purchases made and for the State of Ohio, from April 15th to December 15th, 1861, inclusive, the following mentioned articles:
Page 585
Infantry
Enfield rilfes 11,480
Long-range Whitney rifles 420

All the bills for purchases by the State will be charged to the United States, and the distribution of the stores reported to the United States in our property return, so that the State is acting merely as agent for, or co-operating with, the General Government.
I presume it is not expected that any of the property thus turned over to the United States troops will ever be returned directly to the State.

Ohio Historical Society
FLM 293
Executive Documents, annual reports of Ohio 1862

Page 443
Ordnance Stores Received From January 1, 1862, To December 31, 1862, Inclusive;
(From U. States Arsenals And Officers)
Page 444
Infantry
U.S. percussion muskets, smoothbore 362
U.S. altered to percussion muskets, smoothbore 1,708
U.S. Percussion muskets, 69 cal., rifled 966
U.S. rifle muskets, “Springfield,” 58 cal 12,981
Enfield rifle muskets, angular bayonet 23,032
Rifle muskets, “Pondir’s” 69 cal. 706
French rifle muskets, 69-71 cal. 7,414
Austrian rifle muskets, 54 cal. 23,956
Austrian rifle muskets, 58 cal. 9,870
Austrian rifle muskets, 69-71 cal. 10,875
French rifle muskets, saber bayonet, 58 cal. 1,200
Jager rifles, 54 cal. 400
Prussian smoothbore muskets 10,623
Prussian rifles, brown, 69 cal. 100

Page 445
Purchased by the State of Ohio Under Authority of the War Department, from January 1, to December 31, 1862, Including deliveries on contracts made in 1861.
Page 446
Infantry
Enfield rifle muskets 1,500

Ohio Historical Society
FLM 293
Executive Documents, annual reports of Ohio 1863

Page 536
About the first of August application was made to the Secretary of War to relieve the State authorities from any further charge of ordnance stores belonging to the General Government… The transfer was perfected on the first of October 1863, since which time all stores belonging to the General Government, though retained in the State Arsenal, have been under the exclusive control of the Ordnance Department at Washington, and issues therefrom made by a regular Ordnance officer of the United States… The only care and responsibility of this department, as to Ordnance, is now confined to the arms, accoutrements and ammunition received by the transfer from the General Government.

Page 613
Memorandum of stores transferred by the United States to the State of Ohio “on account of any quota due or to become due, under the law of 1808, for arming and equipping the whole body of the Militia,” with the value thereof, as appraised by Captains Todd and Treadwell of the Ordnance Department, under instructions from the Chief of Ordnance. Transfer made September 24, 1863.

320 U.S. rifles, sword bay’t, cal. 54, serviceable at $17...$5,440 00
176 U.S. rifles, sword bay’t, cal. 54, bay’ts wanting, at $12..2,112 00
329 U.S. rifles, no bayonet, cal. 54, want repairs, at $12……3,948 00
700 light French rifles, sword bayonet, new, at $18.50……..12,950 00
1,500 U.S. rifle muskets, altered, cal. 69, want repairs, at $4…6,000 00
154 U.S. rifle muskets, altered, cal. 69, irreparable……………
1,939 U.S. rifle muskets, model’42, cal. 69, serviceable, at $12……23,268 00
182 U.S. rifle muskets, model’42, cal. 69, want repairs, at $12......2,184 00
1,210 Austrian rifle muskets, cal. 58, serviceable, at $10………...12,100 00
1,661 Austrian rifle muskets, cal. 54, serviceable, at $9………….14,949 00
2,178 Austrian rifle muskets, cal. 54, want repairs, at $9…………19,602 00
632 Belgian rifle muskets, cal. 69, serviceable, at $9…………..5,688 00
38 Belgian rifle muskets, cal. 69, irreparable ………………...
2,402 French rifle-muskets, cal. 69, want repairs, at $8…………19,216 00
100 French rifle-muskets, cal. 69, irreparable………………….
2,346 French rifle-muskets, cal. 71, want repairs, at $8…………18,763 00
400 Jager rifles, sword bayonet, cal. 54, serviceable, at $10……4,000 00
567 U.S. smooth bore muskets, model’42, serviceable, at $9…5,103 00
392 U.S. smooth bore muskets, model’42, want repairs, at $9…3,523 00
4,096 U.S. smooth bore muskets, model’22, want repairs, at $4….16,384 00
549 U.S. smooth bore muskets, model’22, irreparable…………..
194 Prus. and Sax’y rifle-mus., cal. 70-71, serviceable, at $8…..1,552 00
1,454 Prus. and Sax’y smooth bore muskets, cal. 70-71, serviceable, at$7.50...10,905 00
4,212 Prus. and Sax’y smooth bore muskets, cal. 70-71, want repairs, at $5.00..21,060 00
783 Prus. and Sax’y smooth bore muskets, cal. 70-71, irreparable..............
$208,757 00
From which is deducted the sum of 75 cents each on 26,890 arms as the average cost of repairing them, equal to…………………… 20,167 50
Cost of muskets and rifles…………………………………………. $188,589 50

[James Brenner]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

While this doesn't necessarily answer your specific question about Ohio-marked muskets, here's something I posted a while ago that will give you some background on Ohio and its weaponry.

"As some of you know, I’ve had a long time interest in Ohio’s military history. While at the Archives the other day, I came across a Letter of Instruction (LOI) written to the various ordnance officers that I found interesting and I’d thought I’d not only post it, but include some initial research on Ohio’s pre-Civil war militia as well. All of this factors into Ohio’s actions in 1861. BTW, the LOI is Entry 117, RG 156, Miscellaneous Records Relating to the Arming and Equipping of the Militia, 1808-1853. While it’s not dated (1825?) or signed (Bomford) it’s a good document to understand how the government armed and equipped the pre-war militias. I have yet to find a revocation of this LOI, and I suspect it was in force until the 1860’s. Anyway, I’ve extracted the pertinent passages. I imagine that what happened in Ohio was pretty typical in other states, as well.

“The arms procured under this act consist of muskets, rifles, pistols, cavalry sabers, non-commissioned officer’s swords, and accouterments for small arms generally, with a few pieces of field artillery. The principal part of the arms procured, however, consist of muskets; therefore the apportionment had been made, and the quota due the several states have been assigned in muskets only. The whole amount of arms, which may be due to any State or Territory will be paid entirely in muskets, if desired by the State authorities, or in lieu of muskets, or arms or accouterments of equal value, will be furnished by the United States to any reasonable extent … All the arms procured under the Act were made by contractors; therefore, contract arms are to be preferred in all issues to the Militia.

White or buff belts for cavalry sabers and non-commissioned officers swords may be issued, but black belts only, are to be issued with the accouterments for muskets or rifles.

Field artillery will be furnished, when practicable, but not without special instruction from the chief of ordnance.

Arms will be transported to the States at the expense of the United States, and will be delivered at any place within the State situated upon navigable water … the United States cannot incur any expense fro transporting the arms to the interior by land.”

To put this letter into context, the Militia Act of 1808 appropriated $200,000 annually to provide arms and equipment to the state militias. Items produced or purchased under this act were distributed in proportion to the enrolled militia each state reported annually. The Ordnance Department determined that the cost of a musket was $16. Using Ohio as an example, in 1826, Ohio reported 110, 188 enrolled militia. The Ordnance Department, for 1827, apportioned the state 1,404 muskets (or the equivalent in other arms and/or accouterments) worth $22,464. Ohio took more than muskets, though. From 1 January 1816 to 1 January 1839, Ohio received 62 iron six-pounders, mounted; 10,371 muskets, complete (bayonets, wipers, tools, etc.); 3,604 common rifles; 130 carbines; 11,202 pistols; 5600 sabers; 1 sword; 2,433 infantry sets; 222 rifle sets; 2847 cavalry accouterments; and 1 sword belt. The solitary sword and belt were for evaluation.

The Act was not intended to provide every militia man with a weapon. Ohio militia laws required universal enrollment and established militia divisions, brigades, regiments, battalions, and companies to account for them. Companies were essentially administrative entities rather than combat units. For example, in Medina County, assume that Captain Curt and Captain Jim are company commanders in the same battalion. Medina is an agricultural county and, if Captain Curt’s entire company were called out for three months during the summer, crops, families, and farms would suffer or fail. To prevent this and to share the burden, the state required each company commander to divide his 64-man company into classes; usually eight. In the event of an emergency in which the federal government called out the militia, the battalion commander, Major Chip, would relay instructions from the division commander to Captains Curt and Jim and his other company commanders to each provide X number of men from the first class. If the emergency continued longer than 3 months, the next group of soldiers would come from the second class, and so on until the emergency was over. Substitutes and volunteers were allowed. The soldiers from the designated classes would assemble at a rendezvous point, elect their officers and NCOs, and draw arms from the state armories. In 1821 there were five armories in Ohio; one for each division. Arms acquired under the Militia Act of 1808 were to be used to equip this volunteer militia who would augment the regular army, would serve outside the state, and who would need the same standardized arms, ammunition, and equipment as the regulars. This was all as a result of lessons learned in the War of 1812. If the governor called out the militia for a state emergency, or even for the semi-annual musters, personal arms were acceptable.

Even though there were safeguards in place, (state-marked muskets and monetary bonds, for example) most weren’t enforced and the weapons had a habit of disappearing. Interest in the enrolled militia lagged and it wasn’t uncommon for Ohio to either not provide an annual return or to submit a return from a previous year. Consequently, in 1855, Congress based apportionment upon the number of representatives and senators, rather than enrollment rosters.

Concurrently, independent volunteer militia units appeared in the 1820’s and 1830’s that did not rely upon the state for support. Usually drawn from the “better sort” of society, these units provided their own weapons and uniforms and could control their membership. The Cleveland Grays is an example. These independent, volunteer units allowed the governor to get at least a small, trained and equipped force into the field quickly.

In the late 1850’s, Ohio tried to reorganize and re-energize the militia with marginal success. When the Civil War broke out, and Governor Dennison called out the militia in response to President Lincoln’s appeal, there were few weapons with which to arm the way-too-many volunteers. The adjutant general could only account for 5,204 muskets of the 27,967 issued since 1808. The state legislature, on 18 April, passed “An Act for the defense of the state, and the support of the federal government against rebellion” and appropriated $450,000 for the “purchase of arms and equipments for the militia of the state, to be expended under the authority and direction of the governor, and audited and paid upon account certified and allowed by him.”

Ohio sent agents out agents to purchase weapons of all kinds to arm the regiments. The state soon began receiving arms issues from the government as well. In 1863, the federal government calculated that Ohio had overdrawn its apportionment by $340,775.55.

There are some previous posts that list the types of arms issued to Ohio’s regiments. It’s interesting to consider the information contained in thos lists in this context. It helps explain the weapons shortages and provides some insight into Ohio’s lack of preparedness. It’s also interesting to see what types of arms are not included the Ohio Quarter Master Generals report: sapper muskets and long range rifles, cal.54 (Mississippi?), for example."

The American Rifleman published an article on Ohio markings in the late 1960's. It's an okay article, but it primarily discusses the various lettering styles of the marks. I'll look around to see if I can find the exact reference.

I hope this helps,

Jim

__________________

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

Hallo!

Thanks Herr Chris, Herr Jim.

Pre War rifles seem to be underrepresented, although I suspect they were not a great concern early on. Meaning there were the 3,000-some "common rifles" (which makes one wonder if they were "common rifles" or the M1817 Common Rifle, or M1814 or M1817 Contract Rifles).

For War time, the "Mississippi" rifles sneak in as altered and unaltered "U.S. Rifles" and a handful of long range rear sighted altered Whitney made
M1841's.

Captain Curt

[James Brenner]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

Hey Captain Curt,

I wonder, too, if .54 caliber jager rifles aren't really Mississippi rifles. How's Major Chip?

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

Hallo!

Yes, I believe "jaeger" rifles are M1841's.

Major Chip stopped by last month. He almost had his arm amputated last year when a bite from his dog developed necrotizing bacteria and they tried cutting a 3 X 4 inch section out first rather than sawing it off. His arm was saved.

I will e-mail you.

Cappin Curt

[pheaur]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

I just wanted to pass along my appreciation to those who responded. I’ve received some really good feed back that will assist me in my research. Thanks.

I wanted to include a list of muskets and rifles that Ohio received from 1808 to 1860. In most of the documents that I have reviewed so far most muskets are simply listed as muskets, flintlock muskets or rifles or percussion locks. Whether the flintlock rifles issued to the state were Common 1817 Rifles remains to be seen. I saw one entry that listed a 27 flintlocks as Derringer:

Series 8 GRVF 1520
Page 7
Columbus Feb. 26th 1855
Received the Following ordnance and ordnance Stores shipped by D L Wood from Carroll Co O
43 Flint Muskets 27 Deringer Rifles…
J F Veeseames

Ohio Historical Society – Series 2226 BV989

Statement of the number of small arms, Field Artillery, etc, furnished to the State of Ohio under the Law of 23rd April 1808, from its passage to the year 1849 inclusive --
Pages 1-2
1808 to 1816 – 3,155
1819 – 1,200
1823 – 5,273
1829 – 1,465
1831 – 1,217
1832 – 1,216
1839 – 2,280
1840 – 1,220
1841 – 1,180
1843 – 1,400
1844 – 550
1845 – 280
1846 – 900
1848 – 1,820
1849 – 960 Bright

Page 3
1850 – 473 Muskets and 300 Rifles
1851 – 300 Rifles
1853 – 20 Muskets

February 1, 1854
From the Watervliet Arsenal
100 Muskets Complete Percussion 1st Class Contract Bright
215 Muskets Complete Percussion 2nd Class Contract Brown
Page 8

The State of Ohio in account with the United States
Sept 19, 1856
300 Percussion Muskets
300 Percussion Rifles
Page 16

The State of Ohio in account with the United States
August 24, 1857
550 Percussion Muskets
200 Long Range Rifles
Page 18

The State of Ohio in account with the United States
August 29, 1858
700 Percussion Muskets
Page 20

The State of Ohio in account with the United States
April 29, 1859
From the Springfield Arsenal
300 Rifle Muskets (Model 1855)
1 Rifle Musket Cadet

From the New York Arsenal
Nov 16, 1859
1 Rifle Colt Patent with Appendages
Page 26

The State of Ohio in account with the United States
June 1, 1860
From the Allegheny Arsenal
600 Rifle Muskets with appendages @ $13.93 ---- $8,358.00
Page 26

Some time during in the 1850s the state was issued the M1816, M1842, M1841, and the M1855. It reported in later returns of state arms collected from the militia and turned over to the Government. The problem is being able to distinguish if the 700 muskets issued in 1859 were one of the models mentioned above etc.

As for the Jager Rifles turned over to the State of Ohio in 1863 were actually setting in the Arsenal since November 1862. I would have to disagree that they were Mississippi Rifles for the following reasons. They arrived in Ohio by two shipments. The first shipment consisted of 100 rifles and were delivered on November 6, 1862. The second shipment of 300 arrived on November 26, 1862. Both shipments came from Captain Crispin. Secondly, this term, Jager, was used in all returns for almost twenty years. It would seem to me that the arms would have been placed in the right class if they were mislabeled when they were received. Just my view on the topic.

Thanks,

[James Brenner]

Re: Ohio Surcharge - Ohio Mark

It would be interesting to compare the Ordnance Department records showing what was shipped to the state records showing what was received. I'm sure the numbers will match, but I wonder if the descriptions will. One or the other may provide more clarity on what was actually issued. For example, the Ordnance Department records for 1831 show that the USG sent 1,217 muskets to Ohio. That tracks with what Ohio's recorded. Similarly, in 1839, 2,280 muskets were sent and received, but, in addition, the USG sent 1800 "half-stocked rifles" as well. In another file, those same rifles were referred to as common rifles. Kinda makes you wonder if they were the M1803 HF rifles or the later M1817s. I wonder how the state reported/recorded them. Might be interesting. You're probably right about the jaegers not being Mississippi rifles in 1863. I have a note where Ohio received 320 HF rifles with saber bayonets, 404 HF rifles without bayonets, and 400 jaeger rifles with sword bayonets.