HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

[Eric Tipton]

HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED
By Craig L Barry

Five soldiers in Union frock coats of the 6th Regiment Massachusetts Volunteers all outfitted with Enfield P53 rifle-muskets. This image was taken as early as September 1862 or possibly as late as June 1863. In the image it appears all five of the soldiers have English cartridge boxes and scabbards as well, which is unusual. (Image courtesy Library of Congress)


“Some of our boys got Austrian rifles, some Enfield, and others Springfield. I got the Enfield, and Bob got the finest arm of the whole lot, a fine United States Springfield rifle. Training in the use of these weapons was startlingly belated and haphazard." [1]

- Diary of Pvt. Orrin W. Cook, Company B. 22nd Regt. Massachusetts Volunteers, November 1863.

He later worked as a billing clerk for alumber yard. Cook avoided volunteering for military service until he wasdrafted in July 1863, and although his father offered to pay for a replacement,Cook declined and mustered in to the 22nd MassachusettsBattle Springfield, Massachusetts] Republican newspaperand someone has seen it. Anyhow they will begin to apprehend something after atime, hearing nothing from me and knowing of the battles."

Cook was also lucky in that he was paroled in one of the last prisoner exchanges during 1864 before General Grant stopped the practice. Pvt. Cook got a surprise though when he learned upon his return that “…the authorities are sending to the field all men that are fit to go.” Cook notes in his diary with a sense of relief that the Assistant Surgeon at the hospital ruled that “my legs were hardly fit for field duty.” Pvt Cook served out the remainder of the Civil War as a clerk at the Navy Annapolis, Maryland.[2]

What is known about the 22nd Massachusetts Regiment is that they entered the war in 1861 as 90 day recruits. They were assigned to the AoP and fought in the Peninsula Campaign including Gaines Mills, Second Manassas, Antietam, Fredericksburg (including an ill-fated charge at Marye’s Heights) and those remaining were at Chancellorsville although largely held in reserve. Whatever the case by the battle of Gettysburg in July 1863, the 22nd Massachusetts Regiment was down to 127 actives. Rather than creating entirely new regiments compromised of all new recruits, the AoP command structure instead began refilling existing regiments. This was in effect by the time Orrin Cook and his fellow recruits arrived in November 1863. The theory was that by mixing in new recruits with seasoned veterans, the learning curve for the newer soldiers would be greatly reduced. Instead, Cook found the veterans were resentful and largely dismissive of the “fresh fish.” He notes in his diary that he felt somewhat “ill at ease” among them and wonders why he is “so generally regarded with aversion.” [3] It is another good observation recorded by Pvt. Cook and a worthwhile subject for another day.

As far as what Pvt. Cook notes about arms issuance in the 22nd Massachusetts, U.S.and C.S. units had which particular rifles and muskets as of 1864. [4] The appendix was compiled with the help of collector and professional historical researcher William O. Adams, who is extremely reliable. [5] Here is a graphical representation of the totals to summarize the distribution of Union arms in the ranks by 1864:

Firearm # Regts Percent of Total

Firearm ..............................# Regts ...........................Percent

Enfield P53 ........................... 431 ................................ 39%
US Model .............................. 255 ................................ 23%
Austrian Rifle (Lorenz) ..............9 .................................. 9%
US 1842 musket .......................69 ...................................7%
Mixed P53 and US 1861.......... 59 ...................................6%
US 1841 rifle ..............................4 ...................................3%
Enfield short rifle .....................13 ...................................1%

The chart paints a surprising picture, particularly the large number of Union regiments still outfitted entirely with the imported Enfield P53 as late as 1864, about a year after the US government contracts with Birmingham Small Arms Trade were canceled because (in theory) newly manufactured US 1861s were available in sufficient quantities to replace them. If many still harbor the impression that 1861s were issued en masse to Union troops as replacements during 1863, it appears this is not the case. This chart also supports the observations of Pvt. Cook in terms of the variety of rifled arms potentially issued to the 22nd Mass Regt in late 1863.

Certainly early in the Civil War(due to shortages), most small arms were issued as they became available. For example, the US Ordnance Department shipped 114 cases to Michigan units,which arrived in on November 4, 1861. If the records are to be trusted, 30 of these cases contained new Enfield P53 rifle-muskets and the remainder held what was broadly described as “Prussian muskets.” ^[6] In all likelihood these“Prussian muskets” were older, large caliber, smoothbore weapons from a numberof sources, including . Hence, the regiments armed on or after November 4, 1861 received a mix of infantry arms consisting of some modern Enfield rifle-muskets, and some clunkers. However, by mid-February 1863, the US Ordnance department re-issued to these same Michigan units 50,000 new model 1861 rifle-muskets. Asmight be expected, those still armed with the obsolete second (or third) class“Prussian muskets” received the new US 1861s and those previously issued Enfield P53 rifle-muskets would have retained them if they were stillserviceable. ^[7] These regiments are no doubt included on the above chart listed among the 6% armed with “mixed P53 and US 1861s.” Also, depending on availability, the replacements were not always model rifle-muskets until well into the year 1864.

In Petersburg, Va, 1864 US 1861 rifle-muskets stacked against each other (image Library of Congress). It is important to note that by 1864 the Union Ordnance Department was able to replace a variety of obsolete models of infantry muskets with the newer models of US pattern rifle-muskets as needs dictated. By 1864 brand new US 1861 and US 1863 rifle-muskets were becoming available in large quantities due to the high output of Springfield Armory and about 20 independent contractors manufacturing US 1861 rifle-muskets. However, this was not always the case.

According to Pvt. Cook, the 22nd Massachusetts Company B was issued a mixture of various type rifled arms including the much maligned Austrian Rifle model 1854 (Lorenz), US 1861s and P53 Enfield long rifles in November 1863. The only attempt at standardization if there is any, appears to be with a rifled bore diameter of the US standard .58 (or the close approximate.577) caliber. While the Lorenz could be found in a multitude of bore diameters, most US contracts by 1863 specified .58. At least the same size ammunition would work (in theory) for all these arms, which was something the Confederacy struggled with for the entire war.

It is important to consider the system in place for issuance of small arms during the US Civil War, and it appears to be virtually the same system for both US and CS Ordnance. When a soldier was killed or injured, he did not retain his weapon or accoutrements or have them buried with him. These items were government property and returned to the Ordnance Department for reissue. If an injured soldier recovered and subsequently returned to a line unit, he would be issued another stand of arms at that time. In modern parlance, Ordnance was “recycled. ”The decision to re-issue arms was based on two factors. First, the field command had to complete the requisition to the Ordnance Department for replacements. This is the opposite of the Quartermaster Department where items such as jackets, coats, trousers, socks, boots, tents and rations were issued on a semi-regular basis. The Ordnance Department did not automatically issue new modern arms or accoutrements as replacements on a regular basis. Second, the Ordnance Department had to determine whether or not they could fill the requisition and to what extent. An order for new US model 1861s which had been previously promised as an inducement to a group of new recruits was filled with whatever was on hand. Note the following:

Oct. 21st, muskets were delivered to the men, and this furnished another excuse for a hearty growl from the 1st Mainers. "Had we not been promised new blue uniforms and new (US 1861) Springfield muskets…look at these Enfield muskets with their blued barrels and wood no man can name." [8]

In another such instance, an order for new US model 1861s from General Irvin McDowell received the following response from Chief of Ordnance General James Ripley:

“Have no Springfield arms but will send the best of what is in the Washington Arsenal in fifty-eight calibre…the best foreign arms in depot and in New York have been ordered to you.” [9]

Accoutrements were also filled through the Ordnance Department and there are many recorded instances of mismatched sets. For example, a soldier that turned in his .69 caliber smoothbore musket for a newer model .58 caliber rifle-musket would not simultaneously receive a new matching set of .58 size US accoutrements. He was expected to keep his old set until it was no longer serviceable, never mind if the smaller size ammunition fit in the box and different bayonet fit properly in the scabbard or not.

Hence, we don’t know if new US model rifle-muskets were requisitioned for the 22nd Massachusetts recruits in late 1863, but most likely it would not have mattered. Orrin Cook and his comrades ended up with whatever mixture of serviceable weapons were available, many of which would have likely seen some action already and been (possibly) refurbished. Only after the existing stockpiles of returned serviceable small arms were back in the ranks, do the recruits in the 22nd Massachusetts receive new arms, the coveted prize which Pvt. Cook refers to as the best arms of the whole lot, “a fine United States Springfield rifle.”


NOTES

[1] Orrin Cook, Civil War Diary of Private Orrin Cook, (original manuscript), Connecticut River Valley Historical Archives, Springfield Massachusetts. See also, Jeff Lawrence, Orrin Cook and the Fairy Tale Lost (www.temporaryhero.com).
[2] Ibid, Lawrence.
[3] Ibid, Lawrence.
[4] Earl Coates & Dean Thomas, An Introduction to Civil War Small Arms, Thomas Publications (Gettysburg, PA) 1996, see appendix pp 91-96. Bill Adams is pictured several times and most of the photographs of the various original arms in the book are from his private collection.
[5] The remainder of the list in the appendix of An Introduction to Civil War Small Arms includes quite a few additional weapons most of which were less common by 1864, such as Colt Revolving Rifles, various big bore imported Belgian & Austrian muskets, French rifle-muskets, Henry repeating rifles, Spencers, Sharps, etc…and these models each made up 1% or less of thetotal arms in service by Regt.
[6] “Arms at the Milwaukee Depot”, Detroit Free Press, November 14 1861, p.1, col.3.
[7] Annual report of the Adjutant General of the State ofMichigan for the Year 1862, John A. Kerr & Co.,( Lansing, MI) 1863, p. 11.
[8] John M. Gould; "History of the First-Tenth-Twenty-ninthMaine Regiment," Stephen Berry publisher, (Portland, Maine) 1871, page 89. The Maine in fit and finish.”
[9] George Moller, American Shoulder Arms Volume III, University of New MexicoPress, (Sante Fe, NM), 2011, p. 257.

[JerseyMutt]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

Thanks to Craig for a great read. The first photo is quite interesting. Besides the Enfields and matching cartridge boxes, it appears that all 5 are wearing snake buckle belts. I know that is something we typically think of with Confederate units, so it is interesting (and pretty cool) to see Federal troops outfitted with them.

[Craig L Barry]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

Chart got a little misformated, here is how it is supposed to read:

Firearm ..............................# Regts ...............................Percent
Enfield P53 ........................... 431 ................................ 39%
US Model .............................. 255 ................................ 23%
Austrian Rifle (Lorenz) .............9 ................................... 9%
US 1842 musket ........................69 .................................7%
Mixed P53 and US 1861........... 59 ..................................6%
US 1841 rifle ................................4 ...................................3%
Enfield short rifle ........................13 .................................1%

The broader point here being the distribution and variety of arms in the Union ranks as well as the number of Regiments still armed with the P53 Enfield as late as 1864. We tend to assume that US model 1861s were ubquitous in the Union Army or nearly so, and it was not the case.

[Eric Tipton]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

Got it Craig. Better?

[Craig L Barry]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

Got it Craig. Better?

Great! Not sure why it does that, but thanks. Makes it more readable.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

Hallo!

Dunno.

But "it" is a nuisance of posting "chart" type info that one spends time on setting up and arranging, only to have the "word processing' aspect of sites blow it all up.
I have never been able to beat it, but I have found that filling open or dead spaces with periods keeps the programing from slamming every thing to the left trying to format it.

Curt

[Marine Mike]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

Firearm ..............................# Regts ...............................Percent
Enfield P53 ........................... 431 ................................ 39%
US Model .............................. 255 ................................ 23%
Austrian Rifle (Lorenz) ..................9 ................................. 9%
US 1842 musket ..........................69 ..................................7%
Mixed P53 and US 1861................... 59 ..................................6%
US 1841 rifle ............................4 ..................................3%
Enfield short rifle .....................13 ..................................1%

WYSIWYG mode with Courier New

[DBURT]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

Tommy, all five Massachusetts men are wearing the full British accoutrement set, including the 'old' type ball bag, frog, scabbard, pouch (cartridge box) and the snake belt. Massachusetts had their own agents Francis Crowninshield and Thomas McFarland in London in 1861, who arrived a week before Confederate buyers. New York also had buyers in London scouring the market for arms and accoutrements.
Of course the major buyers were the Confederates, with Captain Caleb Huse and Major E.C. Anderson, who worked closely with S. Isaac Campbell & Co. Huse and SIC & Co were wise enough to contract for the very latest equipment, including a new pattern ball bag. The brand new style P1861 variant. Massachusetts obviously bought the now out-dated old pattern.

Dave Burt

[thomas aagaard]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

Firearm ..............................# Regts ...............................Percent
Enfield P53 ........................... 431 ................................ 39%
US Model .............................. 255 ................................ 23%
Austrian Rifle (Lorenz) ..................9 ................................. 9%
US 1842 musket ..........................69 ..................................7%
Mixed P53 and US 1861................... 59 ..................................6%
US 1841 rifle ............................4 ..................................3%
Enfield short rifle .....................13 ..................................1%

WYSIWYG mode with Courier New

Was just reading this topic again. and the numbers didn't make any sense to me.
If 9 regiments = 9% of the total, then surly the total should be about 100 regiments. (but there is 840 on the list)
4 regs with US1841 = 3%
But 13 regs with enfield short rifles = only 1%

So for it to make sense The Lorenz i 0,9% not 9% And the US 1841 is 0,3%
Or is the some fact that I have missed?

---

This offcause do not change your point. The Enfield P53 was is much more wide use in US forces than often said.

[Craig L Barry]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

You are right. It appears some numbers were not typed correctly onto the chart (by me). I took a quick glance at the listing in Coates & Thomas "Intro to Civil War Small Arms" and the numbers outfitted with the Austrian Rifle (Lorenz) is over 80, not 9. So obviously '9' can't be right. 9 is 9%. The Mississippi Rifle is probably .4 not 4%, etc.

You are also right that besides the fact that I can't transcribe figures into a chart, the point is the same re: the Enfield being in much wider use than we tend to think in the Federal ranks.

[thomas aagaard]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

Thanks.

I love topics where someone do proper research and show that what is common known facts... are actually not correct at all. :-)

[JeffLawrence]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

Terrific post!
One minor quibble, if I may: The Springfield Armory actually misattributed the “Some of our boys..." quote to Cook.
In researching Cook, I was befuddled that I couldn't find that comment anywhere in his writings. I found the original source is actually Walter Carter, published in Four Brothers in Blue by his brother Robert Goldthwaite Carter, page 95. I'm not sure why SPAR blew the attribution, but I advised them of the error a few years back-- no word.

But Walter Carter it is!

[Ian M.]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

In addition to a full complement of English leather kit in the first photo, the darkness and buckle on the P53 slings, while difficult to make out, suggest black English leather Enfield slings. Such small arms probably would have been shipped with their slings together, or no?

[Craig L Barry]

Re: HOW SMALL ARMS WERE ISSUED - By Craig L. Barry

Interesting because the P53 sometimes shipped with the black rifle sling (the rifle-musket sling was buff white) and sometimes with no sling. It all depended on the specifics of the individual contract with the commission house or the gun-maker.