Tweet
Question: Do any of you out there have documented information on the date that the M1861 actually began production at Springfield Armory, and when were the first finished '61s shipped?
For several years a discussion has been followed here in Missouri with regard to primary source descriptions of or implications that shiny new M1861 Springfields were in the hands of Federal troops in early August 1861 at the battles of Athens and Wilson's Creek. Primary sources are both rare and vague in terms of describing the arms present at these engagements. I know that several works on Springfields are out there, but unfortunately I do not have access to any of them. In an effort to answer the above questions I have corresponded with the park historian at Springfield and have been told the following:
"Springfield Armory ended US M1855 production with 9,002 in early 1861. 33,572 US M1861 rifle muskets are recorded for that year. I believe the date for the end of US M1855 production is the end of April or early May 1861. In a letter dated April 19, 1861, Springfield Armory Superintendent Wright requested from the Chief of Ordnance, Col. Craig, permission to modify the US M1855 by eliminating the Maynard primer and the patchbox. Permission was granted four days later. The modified weapon is known to us as the US M1861 rifle musket...I suspect that you could argue for the M1861 being present [in Missouri in August 1861], but it would be a long shot unless the troops are from the northeast US and had just arrived. I mention this because we have records of newly-raised Massachusetts volunteer infantry (10th Mass Vol Inf, etc.) being armed directly from Springfield Armory arsenals here in June & July 1861, a few months after production of the US M1861 rifle muskets began."
In The Lyon Campaign, Eugene Ware famously describes picking up a musket hastily forgotten by a U.S. Regular prior to the Battle of Wilson's Creek with a lockplate bearing the year "1861." For many this is proof that Cos. B, C or D of the 1st U.S. Inf. or Cos. B or E of the 2nd U.S. Inf. were armed with M1861s prior to August 10, 1861 in Southwest Missouri. Given the above information from Springfield, another obvious possibility is that one of the Regulars was carrying a M1855 with a lockplate produced and stamped in early 1861. Or it could simply be the faulty memory of a man writing 40 years after the events he is describing.
Similarly at Athens, we know that approximately 400 or so of the 1,000 stand of military arms entrusted to Col. Cyrus Bussey for distribution to Iowa volunteers from the St. Louis Arsenal were diverted to Col. Moore's home guard soldiers in the days before the battle, with bayonets. Again, were these modernized 1816s or 1842s, were they M1855s of new M1861s, or, as tantalizingly suggested in the new Skim Milk Yankees Fighting, could these have been M1841s, either in the original .54 or rebored to .58?
But I digress. Cutting through the clutter, this is really an effort to determine whether we can rule out the presence of M1861s in Missouri by early August 1861 based on production or shipping dates from Springfield. Any input would be appreciated.
For several years a discussion has been followed here in Missouri with regard to primary source descriptions of or implications that shiny new M1861 Springfields were in the hands of Federal troops in early August 1861 at the battles of Athens and Wilson's Creek. Primary sources are both rare and vague in terms of describing the arms present at these engagements. I know that several works on Springfields are out there, but unfortunately I do not have access to any of them. In an effort to answer the above questions I have corresponded with the park historian at Springfield and have been told the following:
"Springfield Armory ended US M1855 production with 9,002 in early 1861. 33,572 US M1861 rifle muskets are recorded for that year. I believe the date for the end of US M1855 production is the end of April or early May 1861. In a letter dated April 19, 1861, Springfield Armory Superintendent Wright requested from the Chief of Ordnance, Col. Craig, permission to modify the US M1855 by eliminating the Maynard primer and the patchbox. Permission was granted four days later. The modified weapon is known to us as the US M1861 rifle musket...I suspect that you could argue for the M1861 being present [in Missouri in August 1861], but it would be a long shot unless the troops are from the northeast US and had just arrived. I mention this because we have records of newly-raised Massachusetts volunteer infantry (10th Mass Vol Inf, etc.) being armed directly from Springfield Armory arsenals here in June & July 1861, a few months after production of the US M1861 rifle muskets began."
In The Lyon Campaign, Eugene Ware famously describes picking up a musket hastily forgotten by a U.S. Regular prior to the Battle of Wilson's Creek with a lockplate bearing the year "1861." For many this is proof that Cos. B, C or D of the 1st U.S. Inf. or Cos. B or E of the 2nd U.S. Inf. were armed with M1861s prior to August 10, 1861 in Southwest Missouri. Given the above information from Springfield, another obvious possibility is that one of the Regulars was carrying a M1855 with a lockplate produced and stamped in early 1861. Or it could simply be the faulty memory of a man writing 40 years after the events he is describing.
Similarly at Athens, we know that approximately 400 or so of the 1,000 stand of military arms entrusted to Col. Cyrus Bussey for distribution to Iowa volunteers from the St. Louis Arsenal were diverted to Col. Moore's home guard soldiers in the days before the battle, with bayonets. Again, were these modernized 1816s or 1842s, were they M1855s of new M1861s, or, as tantalizingly suggested in the new Skim Milk Yankees Fighting, could these have been M1841s, either in the original .54 or rebored to .58?
But I digress. Cutting through the clutter, this is really an effort to determine whether we can rule out the presence of M1861s in Missouri by early August 1861 based on production or shipping dates from Springfield. Any input would be appreciated.
Comment