Spencer markings 1st Cavalry

[twogunpete]

I have a M1865 s/n 12008 with the markings "L Troop" 1st Cavalry clearly stamped on the very top of the butt stock directly in front of the butt plate itself. My question to this forum is whether this was common practice and whether anyone has observed  similar markings?  Or, is it possible someone  added to maybe enhance the value? The marks look period correct but I'm no expert.  The other cartouches EAW and DAT are present also. I did a little research about L Troop 1st Cavalry and it seems they were involved in a few skirmishes with the Indians post civil war up and down the western US. Also read somewhere that the US changed from "Company" to "Troop" in either 1881 or 1883 so if true it wouldn't have been stamped until then or afterward   Thanks - twogunpete

[FrontierWest]

My two cents...

Most all cavalry units were using Sharps at least in mid 1869 until mid 1874 when all cavalry switched to m1873 Springfields.

Troop was use in the 1880's and later.  I ahve a spoon marked Co. "E" 1st U.S. Cav.  I have seen other dug relics with similar markings, and yours I'm afraid Bubba has got a hold of her... I'd bet on it!

john

[Jobe Holiday]

A good photo of the markings would help to possibly determine authenticity of the markings.

J.

[twogunpete]

Here is the best photo I have for now. I appreciate the feedback and help.


                                                                         (Photo Posted by Two Flints)

[FrontierWest]

at least it was done a long time ago!  I still cannot see that the 1st cav, would have marked that at the time "troop" was being used as they were outfitted with m1873 Springfields then.  That time frame they were in AZ and MT and in Montana sites, I've never found any number of Spencer casings on that period of site.  I've done a lot of the sites too with a metal detector.  I cannot speak for AZ, but really doubt they would have still had Spencer's on the rack and in the rolls of inventory.

Nice markings though.

John

[Jobe Holiday]

I have been collecting for over 50 years and have looked at a lot of marked arms, both real and spurious. In my opinion, without having the arm in my hands, the stock markings in the photo are legitimate. I would like to add that marked arms containing full unit designations are exceedingly rare.

Even though it has been pointed out about the time period for the use of the word "Troop", we must remember that on the frontier many older arms were kept in stores as reserve emergency issue arms in a time of need. Throughout the mid 1870's the Spencer was a second class arm, as was the Sharps .50-70 Carbine.

Congrat's on a nice addition to any collection!

J.

[twogunpete]

I can't thank you folks enough for your responses. If nothing else it makes for great discussion and speculation.

Twogunpete

[Trailrider]

A couple of other possibilities in regard to the forward-anachronistic use of "Troop":  It is possible that the Spencer was in use by a state militia or national guard unit (as some state military organizations were designated even as early as the 1870's). It may be that the Spencer was kept on hand by a regular Cavalry unit to arm civilian QM Dept. employees (teamsters, packers, scouts, interpreters, etc.) in the field with the troops, even after the M1873 Springfield Carbines were standard issue. Another thing is that while the use of the word "troop" did not come into official use until the mid-1880's, it was in some instances used informally at frontier posts prior to the official adoption of the term, and may have been used with the knowledge of the company commander of Co. L, 1st Cav., at some point in the later 1870's or early '80's.  If only these guns could talk! 

[twogunpete]

Thanks Trailrider!  I know not everyone who owns a Spencer looks at this site (they should) but wouldn't you think at least one other person would say - "I have one marked like that too"  if this was a somewhat common practice.  That's why I'm a little skeptical but definitely appreciate your comments and opinion. Twogunpete

[Fox Creek Kid]

My two cents...

Most all cavalry units were using Sharps at least in mid 1869 until mid 1874 when all cavalry switched to m1873 Springfields...

Actually, the switch over to the Sharps conversion carbine in 50-70 had begun in full swing by 1871 and by the Spring of 1874 when the Trapdoor 45-70 was first issued few Spencers were on the line.

To the best of my knowledge only the 4th Cav. marked their weapons and that was but for a short period.

[FrontierWest]

Well in my neighborhood, the 2nd cavalry (say in 1866) was using Spencers and Starrs).  Now in 1869 when Cos. F,G,H,& L arrived at Fort Ellis Montana on July 2nd 1869, they were armed with Sharps.  No mention of any Spencers being with them in records or relics.  (Civilians yes) Now in 1876, the same Companies still had in their arms room Sharps though for the unit they carried the m1873 Springfield.  The Indians and others while preforming duty as Scouts early on, were issued the Sharps, but by 1877, both the Sharps and Springfields saw issue to others other than the military.  I have the records by serial number too.

Spencers, have not see one account that they were in the arms room as of July 1869 with the 2nd cavalry.   Other units I cannot speak for.  I can speak of the 13 infantry and 18th, 7th and 3rd.. even the 10 cav and 25th infy.  I've been following them for over 35 years and know what kinds of arms they were using and when.

[twogunpete]

Again - I'm grateful for everyone's input. I will keep investigating.  If anyone knows how to find out where M1865 s/n 12008 might have been originally shipped or a range of s/n on either side and where they went or more feedback it will be appreciated. Twogunpete

[Trailrider]

twogunpete-
Not to throw a wet blanket, because in some instance you can brcket an unknown s/n with two known ones andthe unknown one might be "right", but guns were NOT always shipped in the same series to the same outfit. Serial numbers were mainly a means of the factory tracking production quantities, and the military only started recording the numbers of arms turned in after issue, and then not always recording the number and a unit. 

[twogunpete]

 Also read somewhere that the US changed from "Company" to "Troop" in either 1881 or 1883 so if true, it wouldn't have been stamped until then or afterward.  (from the original post)

Then I'm reading in Roy Marcot's book a copy of letter written by a J. R. Dunkelberger, Lt. Col. 1st Cavalry sent to Chief of Ordanance in Washington DC  on April 14, 1870 from Headquaters Troop - 1st Cavalry, Camp Grant.

On that same page there's another  letter sent from Headquarters, Troop C, 3rd US Cavalry, Fort Bascom, July 30th, 1869 from F. Van Vliet, Captain, 3rd US Cavalry, Bvt. Lt Colonel USA to M.S.G. of Ordinance at Fort Union.   

My point is it seems they were maybe using the word "Troop" instead of "Company" a dozen or more years before it was "officially"  used by the US government.  I'm guessing there are other examples of same elsewhere. 

If you want a good laugh I can post the letter from Dunkelberger (as long as I'm not breaking copyright rules).  He has nothing good to say about Spencers.  Twogunpete

[FrontierWest]

Post it.  I too have see the usage of Troop, and I think it was used during the dragoon era.  Officially though???  I have 1st cav. marked items from said period and they say Co. 1st US Cav.

John

[Two Flints]

TwoGunPete,

Here are the two letters you referenced from the Marcot book with the use of the military term "TROOP".





                                    (Photos Posted by Two Flints)

Maybe of some interest: "In the United States Army, in the cavalry branch, a troop is the equivalent unit to the infantry company, commanded by a captain and consisting of three or four platoons, and subordinate to a squadron (battalion). . . . "Companies were renamed troops in 1883"

In 1883 the War Department redesignated all cavalry companies as troops. The designation squadron was given to a group of four troops and the cavalry no longer used the designation battalion. . . . Since 1862 the U.S. Cavalry had used guidons similar in appearance to the United States flag to better distinguish Union from Confederate cavalry. On 4 February 1885 the War Department ordered a return to the traditional red and white cavalry guidon used before the Civil War with one specific change. On the upper red half instead of displaying U.S. in white the regimental numeral would be displayed and as before the troop letter would be displayed in red on the white lower half.

Two Flints

[Ibgreen]

Dang, after reading that report, I may just have to throw my spencer in the dumpster

[FrontierWest]

Pretty good evidence they were using Sharps prior to 1871.  Goes along with what I know of the 2nd. cavalry.

Thanks for posting.

John

[Fox Creek Kid]

Pretty good evidence they were using Sharps prior to 1871.  Goes along with what I know of the 2nd. cavalry...

Unfortunately, my copy of Carbines of the U.S. Cavalry, 1861-1905 by John D. McAulay is in another state in storage. He lists the changeover by unit and quantities as well. I want to say that some of the Sharps 50-70 conversion carbines started to be issued in 1869. Note however that they were not well received as those that were not relined had wretched accuracy and due to logistical issues they often had to shoot the Infantry's 50-70-450 ctg. and not the 50-55 carbine load which caused complaints of excessive recoil.

[FrontierWest]

"Note however that they were not well received as those that were not relined had wretched accuracy and due to logistical issues they often had to shoot the Infantry's 50-70-450 ctg. and not the 50-55 carbine load which caused complaints of excessive recoil."

No ARGUMENT HERE AS TO WHAT ROUND WAS BEING USED.  I'm quite sure that the same cartridge was used in rifle and carbine to begin with.  I also was not aware there was a difference, in the 50/70 caliber as to grians for carbine and rifle.  I guess I'd have to see a picture of the bar/anvil marked boxes or the martin primed boxes.  Not one marked in the 1880's either.

I've been fortunate to have detected certian military sites that are very specific in time, and some even the exact date, and know the arms used.  Fortunately too, I own all these arms and shoot them myself.  I've not heard of a complaint in primiary source documents on the sites I've researched as to poor accuracy of the Sharps.  Mine shoots quite well even today.. but zero is about 200 yards.  My Spencer is also about that too, but it still likes to shoot to the right!  It's consistant though.

john