Is this a Henry or not?

[Henry4440]

Here is a pic of Luther Sage 'Yellowstone' Kelly.
Is that a Henry Rifle on his side?
I would say YES
What do you think?

[Sean Thornton]

I am leaning toward a 1866, Improved Henry.  The barrel and magazine just doesn't look right for a Henry and it faintly looks like maybe a saddle ring on the lower receiver.  But then again all of those things are a little fuzzy and I can also see it might be a Henry.  I guess the split is 60% for 1866 and 40% for Henry.
Just my observation,
Andrew L. Bresnan  http://44henryrifle.webs.com/index.htm
National Henry Rifle Company

[Henry4440]

Three things that speaks for a Henry,imo.

1. Buttstock Swivel Attachment ?
2. Barrel Swivel Attachment ?
3. Cartridge Follower ( White spot opposite the Barrel Swivel Attachment ? )

Kelly wrote in his book: 'The trader had a few Henry carbines(?), but they were for the white trade.Before I left Fort Berthold i purchased one of these carbines(?)and.......'.
That was in 1868.
In May 1873 he wrote: ..... and the improved Henry rifle that I now carried.......
He didn't wrote Winchester, but rather improved Henry.

I also found interesting that he wrote ' a few Henry carbines'. I know of only three Henry carbines, Kelly had one, sn 6850 and the two other Henry carbines are, sn 343 with an 20" barrel and the Special Test Henry Carbine for the U.S. Army in 1864.

[Buck Stinson]

Here is an excerpt taken from page 178 of Les Quicks book "The Story of Benjamin Tyler Henry and His Famed Repeating Rifle".  Les had in his life time of collecting, owned in excess of 300 Henry Rifles.  Another collector mentioned in the book and a major contributor of historical and technical information, has owned over 500 original Henry Rifles over the years.  The passage which most hard core Henry collectors agree upon, is as follows.

   "Henry Carbines".  During the period of the Henry rifle's manufacture, many letters were written and promises made indicating that a Henry having a shorter, carbine-length barrel would at some time be made available.  
    However, our survey failed to disclose any factory original Henry longarms having barrels varying-- either shorter or longer-- from the standard twenty-four inch length.
   Written documentation exists, suggesting that a few guns having carbine-length barrels between eighteen and twenty-one inches long were made up as prototypes, for military testing.  At least one report of a Henry repeating carbine being tested by the U.S. military in 1864 is located in the records of the National Archives in Washington D.C.
    Yet, the survey revealed no evidence of company advertizing of, or any historical references to, Henry carbines ever entering standard production."

Although some short barreled Henry's do exist, they are NOT factory original guns.  When Kelly made mention of his "Henry carbine" he was most likely talking about the 1866 Winchester saddle ring carbine he purchased in 1868.   I've seen this gun and it exists today in a private collection here in Montana.  It is factory engraved and has a flowing banner on the left side plate with the name LUTHER S. KELLY engraved within it's borders.  This gun has been carried a million miles across the pommel of a saddle and has many battle scars.

 

[Henry4440]

Madis wrote: Some Henry rifles were made with shorter than standard barrels, some were shortened at the factory, and others were shortened outside of the New Haven plant.
He wrote about the Yellowstone Kelly Henry: The barrel is 19 3/16 inches long, and this is the original factory length.  

The Les Quick book is fantastic. I purchased his book directly from him. Was a very nice correspondence. A great pity that he passed away Nov. last year. I asked him a  lot of questions about a very early prototyp or pre-production Henry Rifle.Unfortunately he couldn't help me.
http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,22261.0.html

[Buck Stinson]

I had known both Les Quick and George Madis for many years.  Les was a world renouned expert on the Henry rifle and the 1866 Winchester.  George was a dear friend, but spent much time gathering information from dealers and collectors, rather than doing the indepth research on his own.  Geroge was his own critic and many times admitted mistakes in his book and would comment on how difficult it would have been to do an indepth study of every variation of every model covered in the Madis Book.  He took a lot of that information at the word of the people who provided it and simply didn't have the time to do the research, to see if it was accurate.

[Jbar4Ranch]

Looks to be a '66, as it appears to have a side plate with screws.

[Pancho Peacemaker]

We started a stimulating debate over in the NCOWS Chambers regarding the authenticity of a Henry Carbine.  I did quite a bit of research on the topic and included Quick's book (among others) as references.  Our debate thread extended 16 pages.  If you are an NCOWS member, you can view it here:  http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,27664.0.html

A few points: 

Reference One, Spencer Hoglund.  Spencer is accumulating the largest database (over 500 specimens) of currently existing Henry's.  http://www.spencerhoglund.com/HenrySurvey.html  He plans on publishing this study soon.

Here's Spencer's response: 

Hi Greg,

Sorry for the delay in responding.

I do not know much about these, but Ill tell you what I do know.
It is very difficult to shorten the barrels on Henry's because of the loading block mechanism.
That makes me think that any shortening of the barrels must have been done by the factory, a very competent gunsmith or by the military.
I have not found anything to lead me to believe that they routinely left the factory short, and the fact that they are spread out in the serial number range makes me think that they are not factory experiments or trials. This leaves either special order or military alterations. Your guess as to which is more likely is as good as mine, although for the guns to not be military marked makes be think they were special order.

Ive found 3 in the Survey with this barrel length. 343, 4513, 6850
One I know is a replaced barrel (vinchester barrel). One is the Yellowstone gun and the other is an early model.
None have military marks, nor custom factory markings.

The trading post on the frontier is a more probable explanation, assuming the post special ordered them or did the work somewhere other than at the factory.

Best,
Spencer 

REFERENCE #2, Les Quick "The Story of Benjamin Tyler Henry and His Famed Repeating Rifle"  Graphic Publishers, 2008.

. 178  "Henry Rilfe Variations"

During the period of the Henry rifle's manufacture, many letters were written and promises made indicating that a Henry having a shorter, carbine-length barrel would at some time be made available.

However, our survey* failed to disclose any factory original Henry longarms having barrels varying -either shorter or longer- from the standard, twenty-four inch length.

Written documentation exists, suggesting that a few guns having carbine-length barrels between eighteen and twenty-one inches long were made up as prototypes, for military testing.  At least one report of a Henry repeating carbine being tested by the U.S. Military in 1864 is located in the records of the National Archives in Washington, D.C.

Yet, the survey revealed no evidence of company advertising of, or any historical references to Henry carbines ever entering standard production.

*I critical note by me:  While this text is facinating in it's detail of the Henry's history, it shows flaw in it's accumulation of data.  The flaws:

1)  The author touts his conclusions are based on a "survey . . and additional information supplied by researchers, collectors, and arms dealers".  While he does detail his survey methods, he does not detail the "the additional information" data.

2)  He indicates his survey covers "several hundred Henry rifles" with no reference to an exact sample size. 

3)  He does display a blank survey in the text.  The questions under the "Barrel" section do not query barrel length.  If a Henry owner had a barrel length that varied from the norm, there is no way for them to enter that data into Mr. Quick's survey.

4)  His assumptions quoted above, make reference to carbines made as "prototypes for military testing".  Spencer Hoglund's survey disputes this as the three carbines in his survey have non-consecutive serial numbers (striking the prototype theory) and have no military markings (striking the military trial theory).  Of note, the survey that Spencer is obtaining will include 500 rifles when complete and he is quering owners to measure barrel length.

5)  At no point in this text is reference made to the Yellowstone carbine.  239 pages, and no reference.



REFERENCE #3 "Henry co. Catalogue 1865"  Reproduced by Cornell PUblications 2009

First off, Ref #3 was very dissapointing.  It was not truely a catalog of Henry's (as touted by Cornell Publications), but a collection of contemporary quotations and letters regarding the rifle's utility, along with responses from O.F. Winchester.

Quote
One quotation regarding a review of the Henry by the military:  "... I do not think it a suitable weapon for cavalry.  I consider it too heavy; the barrel is also too long for the mounted service; the coil spring used in the magazine is also liable in the cavalry to become foul with sand and mud, and this, for the time being, renders the arm unserviceable."  J.S. Baker  Maj. Com'dg Reg't  Head Quarters 1st D.C. Cavalry, 20th Jan. 1865.

Response to this letter:  "The weapon alluded to in the above report, is a sporting Rifle, 24 in. barrel and weighing 10 lbs., and the objections above alluded to (for cavalry use) are removed by an Improved carbine with an 18 in. barrel, weighing 7 1/2 lbs, and enclosing the spring in a close tube."  O.F. Winchester Pres't N.H. Arms Co.

The date of the quoted review from reference #3 is Jan, 20th 1865.   Nelson King did not begin employment at Winchester Arms until July, 1865.  As you well know he was tasked with the loading gate patent, which was granted on March 29, 1866.  Also, the Briggs patent was not issued until October 16, 1866.  So it is unlikely, but possible he is refering to George Briggs loading design.  Although no Briggs prototypes exist with carbine length barrels.  They are all 24".




REFERENCE #4 "The Henry Repeating Rifle: Victory thru rapid fire" Andrew L. Bresnan, M.S.  The National Henry Rifle Companyhttp://www.rarewinchesters.com/articles/art_hen_00.shtml

Chapter 6:  Henry Odds and Ends

There are several interesting facts about the Henry that deal with many different aspects of the Henry. These include Henry carbines, the Henry as a muzzle loader, reloading the .44 Henry cartridge, cartridge boxes, cleaning rods, slings, factory made changes, barrel markings and interest in the Henry by foreign countries.

The "Modern" Henry of Navy Arms is currently offered in a carbine version. These are offered with a 21 or 16 inch barrel length. Many feel there were no carbines made by the New Haven Arms Company. The fact of the matter is the New Haven Arms Company did make barrels shorter than the standard 24 inch barrel. Henry number 6850 is pictured in The Winchester Book and it has a 19 inch barrel. The Henry carbine was not a regular production gun, but it could be special ordered. Most Henrys left the factory with the standard 24 inch barrel and some were then sent back to have the barrel shortened to the desired length. Some of the carbine length barrels found today were the result of taking the gun to a private gunsmith and having him shorten the barrel. There were 2 main reasons for reducing the length of the barrel of the Henry. The first one is to reduce the overall weight of the gun. At over 10 pounds fully loaded, it was a heavy gun. The second reason is to make the gun balance better. The weight and the poor balance of the Henry were cited as why the cavalry did not like it as well as the Spencer.(6, 14) On March 21, 1865 there was a Henry carbine entered by the New Haven Arms Company for testing. This gun was an 8 shot Henry. That would put the barrel length at around 15 inches. In the rapid fire test this gun fired 8 shots in 10 seconds. A 16 shot Henry was also tested but no results were given.(30) . . .

The date of that carbine trial was March 21, 1865.  That is 4 months before King begins work at Winchester Arms.  That makes the likelyhood of this carbine being an "improved Henry", a "transitional model", or a '66 unlikely.  Also, multiple source indicate Henry production continued well into 1866.


This brings a few conclusions:

Henry carbines were produced by the New Haven Arms Co.

Existing Henry carbines were not prototypes.

Existing Henry carbines were not military trial guns.

A Henry could be ordered with a non-standard length barrel from the factory.


If you haven't seen Luther Kelly's Henry Carbine, here are a picture and a link:



http://www.rarewinchesters.com/gunroom/1860/M60-06850/model_60_06850.shtml

[Henry4440]

We started a stimulating debate over in the NCOWS Chambers regarding the authenticity of a Henry Carbine.  I did quite a bit of research on the topic and included Quick's book (among others) as references.  Our debate thread extended 16 pages.  If you are an NCOWS member, you can view it here:  http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,27664.0.html

I'm not a NCOWS member, so is there another possibility where i can read it?

[Pancho Peacemaker]

I'm not a NCOWS member, so is there another possibility where i can read it?

Lonesome Henry,

The "NCOWS Chambers" here on CAS citry is a non-public board for NCOWS members to discuss our organization.  We are democratically run, so all member have a say in our rules and regs.  We regularly have debates on the historic authenticity of issues like the "Henry Carbine".   If you enjoy discussing issues like this, you should think about joining.  Even if you don't have an NCOWS posse to shoot with, our bi-monthly magazine, "The Shootist" is extremely popular (Many folks join just to get the magazine).  It is full of great history based articles written by the membership.

http://www.ncows.org/join.html

[Buck Stinson]

I think it very strange that some of the prominent Henry and '66 collectors don't have a Henry "carbine" in their collections.  Les Quick didn't have one, Norm Vegley (who has owned over 500 Henry Rifles) never had one, the Winchester museum in Cody doesn't have one.  Do these short Henrys exist; of course they do, but if it came right down to it, I don't think any of them would stand a chance in a room full of hard core Henry historians, once the gun has been disassembled and examined.  Documentation is sometimes not worth the paper it is printed on.  I was born and raised in Montana.  Since I was old enough to study and learn about Montana history, I have been doing just that.  I don't know everything about Henry Rifles, but I have collected Winchesters for 45 years and on the 1866 model,  I am very well educated.  I have also collected many old Montana gun shop receipts, store ledger sheets and other related paper work, all dating from the 1865 to 1885 period.  Many of these documents mention the "Improved" Henry carbine as did Yellowstone Kelley.  This was then a common term for the 1866 "Winchester" saddle ring carbine.  The actual gun that Kelley referred to in his writing was a very early flatside '66 carbine most likely with the flat loading gate.  Remember, the 1866 Winchester didn't arrive on the frontier until 1868 and although these early 66's were definately Winchesters, they had NO markings what-so-ever to indicate that they were made by a new company calling itself Winchester.  These guns were Henry marked, NOT Winchester.  It is easy to see why everyone who saw these "new" little saddle ring carbines with the brass frame, spring cover in the sideplate and the wooden forearm would call it an "Improved Henry carbine" and after all, it fired the same ammunition.  As far as the brass guns that Kelly owned, I only know of three.  One Henry and two 1866 Winchester carbines.  The 1866 rifle up for auction with the Walter Cooper presentation inscription is a fake.  First of all, by mid December of 1878 Walter Cooper no longer owned his shop in Bozeman.  After many years of bad debt, the shop was taken over by Story and Goeway.  An ad in The Courier, a Bozeman newspaper dated December 19, 1878, stated "NEW TODAY" "Successors to Walter Cooper".  This ad ran until March 3, 1881.  By April of that year, Walter Cooper was back in business.  Another comment on the inscription on that 1866 rifle.  Not until zip codes came into the picture was the abbreviation for Montana written as Mt.   From 1864 until we became a state in November of 1889, Montana was referred to as M.T. which stood for Montana Territory.  As a friend of mine in Bozeman said, if the gun is marked Mt. it should have a zip code behind it.

[Marshall John Joseph]

I thought THIS was a Henry carbine!? 





  OK.  I'll leave now.

MJJ

[Buck Stinson]

Marshall, I think you're right.  It IS a Henry carbine.

[Will Ketchum]

I thought THIS was a Henry carbine!? 





  OK.  I'll leave now.

MJJ

That is one ugly rifle!

Will Ketchum

[Books OToole]

That is one ugly rifle!

Will Ketchum

AMEN!

Books

[Stillwater]

That is one ugly rifle!

Will Ketchum

If you were to look inside of it, it would look even more ugly.

The late Lou Imparato fooled a lot of people with that supposed to be, Henry rifle..!

Bill

[CRM]

I thought THIS was a Henry carbine!? 





  OK.  I'll leave now.

MJJ

If I owned that thing, I would trade it for a pint of Whiskey and get drunk.

[Stillwater]

If I owned that thing, I would trade it for a pint of Whiskey and get drunk.

I don't like The modern Henry company, nor did I like Lou Imparato that started it for sufficiently good reasons. And, I don't like their products in any form.

However, there are a lot of people that bought those firearms as being a real Henry, as made by the original company. But, that just isn't so.

Now, the owners  of the new Henry rifles are made the butt of many jokes, because of their inexperience with firearms. I am guilty of that myself, but, I am going to change my way of talking about their firearms.

I still don't like the new Henry firearms, by any means, or any stretch of the imagination. I am just going to tell these unfortunate firearms owners the difference between a good firearm and what they are considering, so they can judge firearms for themselves.

I think SASS allows the Big Bore henrys in their shoots. That, is something I wouldn't do... All that does is lead the unknowing amateur into making mistakes.

I wish more people would ask pertinent questions about these firearms, and pay attention to the answers they get, before they buy one.

Then, there are the terminally cheap firearms buyers, who wouldn't buy quality, even if they had the chance. These people are beyond help... There is one effective rule of thumb in this world, when it comes to firearms, quality can't be bought on the cheap.

When I was fourteen, (lo those many years ago, when it was legal) I was very young and dumb, I wanted a .45 Automatic. A neighbor had one for sale, young and inexperienced, I bought it. It was a .45 Auto all right, to my unknowing eyes, it looked exactly like a Colt 1911. The problem was, is that it was a Llama .45 automatic. What a piece of Crappola that thing was, but, it did educate me to look for quality firearms.

Fortunately, I was able to sell that thing, and get my money back. However, owning it sure taught me to look before I leaped into unknown territory, when purchasing a firearm.

Bill

[Henry4440]

The first and the second photos were made by Stanley J. Morrow.





And now we can say, it is a Henry Rifle!

[Fox Creek Kid]

...Remember, the 1866 Winchester didn't arrive on the frontier until 1868...

The purported first '66 Winchesters were two carbines sold to Lichtfield's in Omaha, NE in Aug. '67. Apart from that I agree with what you wrote Buck. 

On another note, the Henry carbine question is of little consequence to collectors. The BIG question is when and what were the first '66's.    Herbert Houze states that they were available BEFORE Aug. '67 but not as the '66 as we know it. This is interesting because the famed frontiersman Finn Burnett in his memoirs mentions an Indian dropping a WINCHESTER carbine after a fire fight BEFORE Aug. '67! He specifically mentions that it was the first he and his friends had ever seen. Now either the Indians had a well hidden & licensed Winchester factory deep in the West or something is awry with published accounts.  How did a lonely Indian in the "drop edge of yonder" get a so called "prototype" '66 carbine? The answer is that Win. had made OTHER types of "Improved Henry" rifles & carbines before 1867. This is covered to in the superb Houze book on Winchester. These were serial numbered SEPARATELY.