Interesting Historical Find

[Fox Creek Kid]

http://www.antiquearmsinc.com/rogers-spencer-revolver.htm

[will52100]

Very nice, now the real question is whether or not the solder bought this gun and used it during the civil war or bought it long after as a memento.  I thought that no roger's and spencers were used in the civil war, but they were made around that time and anything is posible.

[St. George]

This one came up awhile back on a different forum.

There were numerous opinions - but since this soldier was an Infantryman, it's highly unlikely he'd even have heard of the gun - especially given the late-war service of Lambert, and the appearance of the Rogers and Spencer on the Ordnance Department's screen.

He probably bought it at the turn of the century from Bannerman's - as a 'memento of service'.

A lot of Civil War guns were bought to commemorate that sort of thing.

As was mentioned in the earlier thread - 'provenance' is key - this purveyor doesn't supply any, and he's had that revolver a long time.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

[Halfway Creek Charlie]

Well he certainly didn't carry it in 1861, 1862, 1863, or even in 1864, As R & S produced these beginning in 1864, they produced the Pettengill revolvers first! If you check it out you'll see that the barrel and rammer off the Pettengil is the exact same one used on the R & S. R & S Army contract began to be filled in January 1865. Finished in Sept. 1865.
I am of the firm belief that a very, very, few R & S's may(and that is a big MAY) have gotten put into use in the last few months of the Civil War. I base this on the information that Bannerman bought 4, 8XX from the army, per Ordnance records in 1901, These were put up for sale before as surplus. Rogers & Spencer total MFg numbers are 5,800. 5000 went to the army and were supposedly warehoused. but bannerman did not buy 5000. There were some 198-200 not accounted for in the Bannerman deal.
What happened to the 198-200 that were missing? No one knows. One thought is that Shulyer, Hartley and Graham bought a few at the first Surplus sale, but it is not documented by the Ordinance Dept.

I have an original R &S s/n 5365 that was converted to 46 Rem. R.F. (I first thought it was 44 Henry, but the chambers were to big a dia for that, but they were just right for the 46 Rem. R.F. Large Dia rim and all.) This pistol was found in Del Rio TX and is thought to have gone through the Mexican Revolution. R.F. arms were big during this time in Mexico and other places south of the border.

[St. George]

This one's dual-posted on the 'Historical Society Forum' - where it appeared some time back.

*********

Re: Question about the Rogers & Spencer revolver
« Reply #7 on: March 09, 2006, 05:00:57 PM »     

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rogers and Spencer produced the Pettingill...

They did have their own design and in September of 1864 submitted two revolvers to Ordnance as samples - requesting a Contract of 5000 revolvers @ $12 each.

They were turned down on September 17.

Applying again on November 29, 1864 - the Chief of Ordnance - Brigadier General Dyer - accepted the initial offer.

Deliveries were set for January 1865 - with 500 being the initial shipment, followed by 500 per month.

The initial delivery was received on the 30th of January, 1865 - and the contract completed on September 26, 1865.

They were delivered too late for issue during actual wartime use and were kept in storage - with some being sold off to Bannerman in 1901 when he purchased almost 30,000 Civil War era revolvers from the New York State Arsenal - including 4,982 Rogers and Spencers revolvers @ .25.27 cents each.

That said - the provenance of the one in the ad would need to seriously be looked at, since it was not uncommon at all for veteran soldiers - late in life - to buy a souvenir of their Service and inscribe/scratch their dates or unit or any other thing that struck their fancy.

Given that it's got a three-digit number - and the first 500 were made and sold to the Government in January of 1865 - gives one pause to marvel at the actuality of 'that' piece being available for sale -  since it was securely in Uncle Sam's hands - newly-accepted and inventoried.

But - Hope Springs Eternal - and for some would-be collectors who subscribe to the policy of 'Woulda if They Coulda' - 'provenance' means nothing.

Until they try to sell it...

Scouts Out!

[Halfway Creek Charlie]

Well I guess that 198-200 dwindled to 18. Ok so where is the missing 18? Wonder if they failed inspection and were returned to R & S??

That's what I get for not checking before i wrote my post.
But I did know for sure that Bannerman's did not purchase the full 5000.

St. George,
Do you know anything of the R & S's being used in the Moro Uprising. I have read that they were used then to replace the sidearm that was found to be NOT effective against the Moro. Were they Cap and Ball or were they conversions? Enquiring minds want to know.

[St. George]

From all acounts - no Rogers & Spencers were ever 'issued' - certainly not for the Moro Uprising, when the Model 1894 Colt was the revolver then current.

Those Rogers & Spencers sold by Bannerman were percussion.

The Army gave 'that' up as soon as the self-contained cartridge appeared.

When the .38 Long Colt round was deemed an insufficient manstopper - they brought out those old Colt Single Action Armys that had been in Ordnance storage, refurbished some with 5 1/2" barrels and left the 7 1/2" barrels on others, and sent them forward as requested.

I 'have' seen converted Rogers & Spencers associated with the Mexican Revolution of 1910 - originating from Bannerman's warehouse, no doubt.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

[Halfway Creek Charlie]

Well, whom ever converted mine did one fantastic job of engineering and in metal workmanship. Before this one I have never seen a R.F. conversion that used a rebounding firing pin to fire the cartridges. I have been looking at , handling, and sometimes buying Conversions for almost 30 years and this one was a first for me.

[Steel Horse Bailey]

It sure would be an interesting piece if it could talk and tell all ...

I'd be happy to take it off the seller's hands, for sure.  Provenance? What provenance?!  I wonder what the price would be (on request) - 'specially since the writer actually states that it WAS actually used in the War. 

Now, let's see ... Private Snuffy, er ... Lambert, was on a work detail in late 1864 ... no, wait - January 1865 and he helped unload the first delivered order of 500 revolvers and as a reward, the NCOIC of the detail rewarded him with a pilfered pistol.  Or perhaps the Rogers & Spencer rep. gave Pvt. Lambert one of the 2 pistols used for the acceptance trials (serial numbered later, of course) because Pvt. Lambert was on the firing detail and Brig. General Dyer didn't want them.

Yeah - THAT'S the ticket.


Well, now that I'm done being a smarta.. , it IS a nice looking pistol I'd happily own! 

[Dr. Bob]

SHB,

Much like ME, you will never be done being a smarta**!   Keep up the great work.  Some day you will bee as good at it as I am!   Only an age advantage, talent is about equal.  If ya live long ya may catch up!

[Tubac]

St George,

Is there documentation the the the 500 R&S's delivered in Jan. 1865 were numbered 1-500?
I'm asking as the 5800 mfg vs. 5000 bought by government leaves 800 unaccounted for.
Is there proof that the first shipment was not numbered 801-1300?

Tubac

[St. George]

The first shipment of January 1865 was the first shipment of the Rogers & Spencer.

Prior - they built Pettingills.

Serialling them beginning at '1' would seem appropriate, since that Contract belonged to the Ordnance Department.

The revolver in question has been on the market for quite some time.

Were there truth to the allegation of originality - an advanced Civil War collector would've purchased it by this time.

The seller's had it long enough to've done research - and should have done so, since provenance adds quite a bit to the value - and the asking price.

He hasn't...

Also - there's quite a bit of doubt about the so-called 'civilian sales' guns reaching 800 - if they were made at all.

There's no corroborating documentation.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

[Halfway Creek Charlie]

Well My R & S does not have ANY martial Markings what so ever. There is an "O" on the cylinder face and an "O" on the rear of the recoil shield and I take these as Conversion markings. BBL, Cylinder Frame and back strap all have matching S/N of 5365. Grips probably replaced at time of conversion.

I had Tubac's Here for some work and I don't remember if his has Martial marks(sub inspector) or not, but his is a very clean piece with a very different conversion system as the recoil shield drives the cylinder by way or the brass rims of the cartridges and it is a center fire with an elongated firing pin made from the hammer face. A very, very nice piece.

I have handled a few Commercial R & S's, one was in a gun shop in Simi Valley CA  in 2000. I almost bought that one.

[Tubac]

Charlie,
My R&S has "B" stamped on the major parts, I believe they're sub inspector marks.
It also has a shield stamped in front of the trigger guard, has anybody else seen this stamping?
Tubac

[Halfway Creek Charlie]

If you google Rogers and Spencer you will get a page full of stuff. From one Collector's site you get an article about the R &S and the Pettengill. The R & S shown has the shield, but they don't elaborate on the meaning. If your B's(same guy as on the Remy's) is in the same spots as the Remy's are then they are Sub-inspector marks. Check your cylinder and the recoil shield for other markings as those will probably be the Conversion numbers. That page shows the locations of the Sub Inspector markings too.