How did the MSM kill anybody?

[leftyhunter]

The Missouri State Militia was a unique military force. It was the only federally funded state militia. It was established per an agreement between provisional governor Gramble and President Lincoln. It had approx 7500 men. Its basic function was to provide static defense and hunt down CSA Guerrilla/bandits/insurgents/partisans what ever you want to call them. It an emergency the federal govt could use them to fight in other states has they did in the battle of Prairie Grove Ark. They also got into large scale fights with CSA cols Porter and Poindexter involving hundreds of men on both sides. The MSM's largest stand up fight was against Gen. Sterling Price when he invaded Mo in Sept 1864.
Obviously if guerrillas are equipped with horses then the only way to fight them for the most part is by horse. Most of the time the MSM fought has dismounted cavalry but sometimes if they are surprised at close range they just have to wing it by fighting mounted.

The MSM was equipped with a crazy quilt of inferior weapons vs the CSA Guerrillas who per T.J. Stiles in his biography of Jesse James were equipped for the most part with Sharps Carbines or shotguns
and up to 6 Colt revolvers.
In contrast The 1st MSM had sixteen different types of brechloaders and nine different types of muzzle loaders. Many MSM troopers were equipped with the Lorenz rifle which the Mo State Inspector criticized has being to unwieldy for cavalry service. Some units had the Hall Carbine which was an old 1811 design that spit gas into their faces. There was a scandal when some arms dealers bought the Halls carbine which the US govt had declared obsolete for $3.50 and sold five thousand of them at $22.00 a piece to Gen Fremont who was briefly the US military commander of Mo. MSM troopers also used the Wesson carbine a two triggered weapon with no stock. They also had the wacky Savage "figure 8" revolver. MSM troopers also had single shot "holster "pistols. MSM troopers tried to carry 6 handguns just like their enemies since there is no time to reload in a firefight. Like other Union ans CSA troops they received precious little rang time. One MSM trooper noted that MSM troopers were more likely to shoot their horses or each other with a handgun vs the enemy.
At least some men in the 7th MSM had by Sept 1864 had the Henry Rifle (which most likely they privately purchased) which they used against the forces of Gen. Marmaduke.

Despite having such poor weaponry somehow the MSM did manage to kill ( there was not a whole lot capturing done by either side vs conventional Union and CSA forces) enough CSA guerrillas that by the time Gen.Price left Mo the guerrilla war was essentially over. Most of the above information comes from"Guerrilla Hunter in Civil War Missouri by James W. Erwin The History Press.
Leftyhunter

 

[5th MSM]

The Missouri State Militia did have a pretty pathetic and broad assortment of weapons. Even in late '64, many of them were still carrying muzzle loading Austrian muskets.

Wish I could remember the source, but one book I read stated that around 1863, some of the Missouri State Militia began to perform sweeps for guerrillas, which became a successful tactic. The guerrillas also tended to attack only when they had the superior advantage in numbers, they were looking for a fight where the odds were in their favor. As you mentioned, they did tend to carry more revolvers than the Union, if they could.

Quite a few of the soldiers were purchasing their own weapons, about 300 of the Wesson rifles were sold to members of the 5th Missouri State Militia, sometime in 1864. At that time, the regiment was probably around 600. Other regiments were also buying these.

The book by Erwin is okay, but not great. Have read a few books on guerrilla warfare in Missouri, but haven't found any really good books on it, yet. Spent a day at the National Archives once, and plan to go back. M-1281 (the ordnance records) shows some of the variety of their weapons, but doesn't include their personal weapons.

 

[johan_steele]

A lot of people bad mouth the obsolete arms issued out by the armories of both sides. But the reality is that they had been standard issue in the premier armies in Europe a scant two decades earlier. The Lorenz Rifle musket and Austrian Jaeger were actually excellent arms if properly maintained and issued w/ the proper ammo. The "Pumpkin slingers" were outstanding when issued w/ "buck n ball" which was standard for the US. The Hall rifle and carbines are excellent arms, yes there were issues w/ gas leakage but if you knew how to use the thing it was a minor issue. Many of those complaining wouldn't have known a Flintlock rifle from a pistol and were complaining that they weren't getting the most modern wiz bang arms. A soldier is only partly measured by the arms a man carries.

To quote a soldier who knew what he was talking about: "It's only obsolete if it doesn't kill you."

 

[gary]

5 MSM - can you point out the documents showing the private acquisition of 300 Wesson arms? Thanks.

I'm interested because one First Nattalion NY Sharp Shooter had one. It belongs to the Smithsonian now.

 

[leftyhunter]

A lot of people bad mouth the obsolete arms issued out by the armories of both sides. But the reality is that they had been standard issue in the premier armies in Europe a scant two decades earlier. The Lorenz Rifle musket and Austrian Jaeger were actually excellent arms if properly maintained and issued w/ the proper ammo. The "Pumpkin slingers" were outstanding when issued w/ "buck n ball" which was standard for the US. The Hall rifle and carbines are excellent arms, yes there were issues w/ gas leakage but if you knew how to use the thing it was a minor issue. Many of those complaining wouldn't have known a Flintlock rifle from a pistol and were complaining that they weren't getting the most modern wiz bang arms. A soldier is only partly measured by the arms a man carries.

To quote a soldier who knew what he was talking about: "It's only obsolete if it doesn't kill you."

The Inspector General had a very good point when he noted that the Lorenz is not a suitable rifle for horse mounted troops. The Lorenz is simply too long and gets tangled in brush and has a ML it is to slow to reload. The Lorenz would of made a suitable infantry rifle but most of the MSM was mounted has was their foes. Th MSM would of been better served if they were all equipped with just the Henry or Spencer rifle with at least 4 Colt or Remington cap and ball revolvers. It was silly to arm one regiment with 19 different types of firearms. If the MSM had simplified their logistics by having just two or three different firearms that were suitable for horse mounted troops maybe they would have been more successful fighting CSA insurgents.
Leftyhunter

 

[johan_steele]

The Lorenz the 5th MSM was carrying was not the Lorenz Rifle Musket most people think of but the shorter Jaeger Rifle. While not ideal for Cav use it could be used very well in a Mounted Rifle role. Several Cav units used the Lorenz Jaeger with real effect. Their complaint was not that it was difficult to use while on horseback but that the rear sight was rather fragile and easily damaged or lost.

The 5th MSM and other MSM units generally sucked hind tit when it came to arms and equipment. They received their arms a couple of cases at a time, which was far more common than most liked to admit. It was not uncommon to have only half a Cav regiment armed and mounted at all. One company might have sabres, another pistols with a couple more having carbines, not necessarily of the same type.

Contrary to many re-enactors the ideal Cav soldier carrying a sword, pistol and carbine was actually rather rare even as late as 65. A Cav unit with men carrying multiple pistols each was an absolute anomoly, particularly on the CS side of the line. There were just not that many pistols, certainly not enough to go around.

 

[leftyhunter]

The Lorenz the 5th MSM was carrying was not the Lorenz Rifle Musket most people think of but the shorter Jaeger Rifle. While not ideal for Cav use it could be used very well in a Mounted Rifle role. Several Cav units used the Lorenz Jaeger with real effect. Their complaint was not that it was difficult to use while on horseback but that the rear sight was rather fragile and easily damaged or lost.

The 5th MSM and other MSM units generally sucked hind tit when it came to arms and equipment. They received their arms a couple of cases at a time, which was far more common than most liked to admit. It was not uncommon to have only half a Cav regiment armed and mounted at all. One company might have sabres, another pistols with a couple more having carbines, not necessarily of the same type.

Contrary to many re-enactors the ideal Cav soldier carrying a sword, pistol and carbine was actually rather rare even as late as 65. A Cav unit with men carrying multiple pistols each was an absolute anomoly, particularly on the CS side of the line. There were just not that many pistols, certainly not enough to go around.

Per at least two authors on the war in Mo T.J. Stiles and James Erwin CSA insurgents by hook or crook did carry multiple revolvers and Union trooper tried to so so if they could. Most MSM troopers per Erwin did not fight on horseback since they were not really that well trained to do so. I am surprised that US Cav units were not all uniformly equipped even by late in the war. The MSM had a tough and dangerous job to do. Considering the poor state of arms they had they apparently did better then expected.
Leftyhunter

 

[5th MSM]

5 MSM - can you point out the documents showing the private acquisition of 300 Wesson arms? Thanks.

I'm interested because one First Nattalion NY Sharp Shooter had one. It belongs to the Smithsonian now.

Sorry, haven't checked in here for a long time. On page 415 of the Official Records, Part 3, Vol. XLI, Chapter LIII, Louisiana and the Trans-Mississippi, Sep 27, 1864 (shortly before the battles of West Port and Mine Creek), Major O.P. Newberry writes, ''I shall try what virtue there is in Wesson's rifles'.

In the "Annual Report of the Adjutant General of Missouri for 1864", pg 226, par. 5 says ''The arms in possession of the regiment are in good condition. About 300 Smith & Wesson's rifles have been purchased by the men, which is a very effective and desirable cavalry arm"

Smith & Wesson didn't make a rifle at that time, and the writing by Major Newberry clears it up by calling them Wesson's rifles. It appears 300 of the 752 men bought their own rifles, or about 40%. I believe the rifles cost $35 each at the time.

By the way, there was another Wesson rifle, muzzle loading, percussion cap, with a gain twist and at least sometimes with a false muzzle. That may have also been the one the Smithsonian has. The ones used by the MSM would have been the .44 cartridge rifles. See http://www.berdansharpshooter.org/target_scopes.htm.

 

[gary]

Thanks for the link. The Wesson rifle that was displayed at the Smithsonian was mistakenly attributed to Berdan's Sharp Shooters. The sharpshooter (Edwin Stancliff) was actually a member of the First New York Sharp Shooters.

As for the first telescope rifle, that was made during the American Revolution for portrait painter turned lieutenant Charles Wilson Peale by Boston instrument maker David Rittenhouse.

 

[5th MSM]

Earlier, it was mentioned there were about 7,500 men in the MSM. That might be true later in the war. Initially, they recruited around 12,000, but the US government had only agreed to 10,000. The initial 5th MSM had a bad reputation, and was disbanded. The 12th regiment, and some members from the 13th formed a new 5th MSM. Other groups were consolidated, and they cut the MSM down to about 10,000. Somewhere in '64, recruiters started recruiting from the MSM for US Cavalry Regiments. The MSM wanted to recruit to get back to the 10,000, but wasn't allowed to.

Most of that is in the Official Records, or records from the State of Missouri. I realize now I didn't do a good enough job maintaining my reference list. I did get a lot of information from the Missouri Historical Society, copies of letters from the Colonel of the 5th to his superiors, related to not being allowed to recruit up to full strength. When men were recruited to the US Cavalry, they were given a bounty.

When I looked at the numbers of men he lost to recruiting, I can understand his concern.

 

[Bob Owen]

The small amount of gas leakage from the breech of the Hall rifle and carbine was less than the leakage from a revolver of the time. The leakage was not directed anywhere close into the face of the shooter. I shoot my hall rifle often and I see no problem with the small leakage of gas compared with a revolver or a revolving Colt rifle.

 

[Bob Owen]

The Hall rifle is a very accurate gun as the ball is forced directly into the rifling as it enters the bore.

 

[5th MSM]

Per http://books.google.com/books?id=qB...EAQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q="Frank Wesson" &f=false, troops in the MSM paid $40 each for Wesson rifles, or Colt Navy revolvers. (page 55, Gunsmoke and Saddle Leather: Firearms in the Nineteenth-century American West, by Charles G. Worman). I was thinking the Colts were cheaper back then. Don't remember what the troopers were paid, but I think it was less than that per month.