My 1863 Pattern 1861 Springfield

[Guest TankerHC]

First, sorry about the long read, thought it worth it to go into detail.

Have been looking for one of these for years. Came across a guy with three, but two of them were manufactured post 1865. This is an original Pattern 1861 Springfield, Norfolk Contract rifle, manufactured in 1863. The manufacturer W.W. Welch got a contract in 1861 to build these in his shop in Norfolk, CT. First batch went out between 1861 and late 1862. Second batch went out in 1863. A total of 18,000 were manufactured (Out of 700,000 made during the war). Story behind it is after Welch manufactured the very first batch the War Department didnt want to pay him because they couldnt find the contract, he had to go in front of Congress and get with Sec. Of War to find the Contract. They did, then later, the War Department didnt want to pay again, because they said the guns manufactured between 1861 and 1862 were inferior and graded them a 4 (Out of 4). But the reason wasnt because the guns didnt work, it was because they found out that Welch didnt have the manufacturing capability to make the entire gun and sub contracted out the lock and stock. Well the subcontractor didnt have the ability to manufacture the stocks so he subcontracted those out. Of the 18,000 all but 100 were issued to the troops. There are two butt plate marks, one has an number, those were issued to Militias, the other has US stamped on bottom of plate, this one has the US. This one is all correct. Has the V (Visually inspected) and P (Proven-Actually Fired) marks on the left side of the barrel with the eagle. All three bands stamped U. Has the Eagle on the Lock. Has original ramrod (proven by shape and no weld mark like a repro). So far I have found three units that carried them. Found a letter from the Confederate Master Armorer to General Josiah Gorgas that had a list of 18 different types of Contract rifles captured at Gettysburg, one of them was the Norfolk Contracts. He noted that the contract rifles lock spring did not fit the Springfields but with over 30 Contractors working for the Union Army putting out 5000 rifles a day, that was to be expected and they would still issue them. So far I have identified the 100th Pennsylvania, and 6th Alabama and the Mississippi Rifles as having been issued the Norfolk Contract rifles.

I almost (Almost) got totally bummed out because I walked into a Gun Shop in Chattanooga and saw one that looked exactly like it, except a Richmond Contract and it was a Repro. After looking over the repro I was convinced I had bought a repro. I had talked to someone who knows a lot about these and got some info earlier in the day, that changed my mind slightly, but what convnced me was what I was told after showing it to a real Antique Firearms Master Armorer (Collects CW originals, has over 100) First thing he said was "Uhh yea, this is a reproduction, thats if they were making reproductions in 1863". Then he went over everything. Front to back. First, everything is original to the gun except the stock. That doesnt decrease value, stocks were broken all the time, mine is marked with an S, its an original Arsenal issued Springfield stock, thats good. Next its not JUST a Pattern 1861 Springfield Norfolk. Its a Pattern 1861, Model 1863, Type II. The made improvements to the design of the lock and spring and added some kind of spring under the bands and some other things. He then told me by the butt plate mark and no 2 to 4 digit number (Which I already knew) that this wasnt a militia gun, this was a field gun. And being that it is also rare (More on that in a second), if it were a militia gun chances are it never saw combat, but being issued in the field, with the replacement stock with an arsenal stock chances are good that this gun saw combat. No way to tell who or were but it more than likely did. The thing with the Richmond Contract repro is that they make those guns (Specifically the Richmonds) because Confederate Re-enactors want them. I asked about the bands, the repro and this one had the same bands and I have always been told the bands on the repros were incorrect. Well, my bands are correct, what I saw (Probably) was a defarbed repro that someone had replaced the incorrect bands with correct reproductions. Also on the repro's, the V and P marks are larger than the real ones and I also asked about the date stamp on the top of the barrel, I didnt think they would date it in two different places. Well, the date and V P stamp on top of the repros is not correct, the stamp on this one is actually the inspectors stamp, and the reason it is worn is because of the way they were carried a lot, if it were a new original I would see not only the date, but the inspectors stamp in front of the date. On the repros the date is father forward of the barrel and instead of an inspectors mark they have the company that manufactured the rifle, Armi or whoever it is and some other company info. Another way he knew the stock wasnt a repro is because the repro's have a lower drop to the butt. The original stocks were almost straight, and uncomfortable to shoot for long periods. There was more, but anyway, the gun is 100% original with an Arsenal replaced stock, and more than likely saw Civil War Combat. On the rarity, 18000 were manufactured, 1000 went to militias, 4000 were destroyed by the Army on delivery, reason was they were considered substandard (They werent, the Army just didnt want to pay), That left 12000, 100 of those were used for testing, so only 11,900 of these went to the field. Thats out of 700,000 Springfields and contracts manufactured during the war. That makes it pretty rare. In the condition its in he estimated the value to be smewhere between $2000 and $2500, about double what I paid and told me if I keep it in this condition, its only going to go up in value. 61 Springfields were 100 dollar guns 30 years ago, today, they are up to 7000 dollar guns. You can find these particular contracts as low as $600-$800, but nowhere near this condition, which is something I also asked about. Nothing unusual about a CW Springfield in this condition (I have seen hundreds of original Springfields that looked Arsenal new, the Armory in Gettysburg has 70 of them), he pointed out that most of the Union Rifles were turned in after the war, and that when you see a re-enactor with a rusty 3 Band, its incorrect, CW soldiers didnt fight with rusty rifles. (Yes, I knew that). lol

[img]http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc56/tankerhc/Guns/DSC_0279.jpg[/img]


[img]http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc56/tankerhc/Guns/DSC_0282.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc56/tankerhc/Guns/DSC_0288.jpg[/img][img]http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc56/tankerhc/Guns/DSC_0286.jpg[/img] Edited November 25, 2012 by TankerHC

[peejman]

Nice!

[gregintenn]

Very interesting piece of history. I'm glad to see things like this end up in the hands of people who appreciate them. I agree with you that it is a very good investment.

[NRA]

very nice! I need more 1861 porn

[Moped]

Amazing purchase!!! Congratulations!!!