Sinclair Hamilton Enfield Marking

[John V]

It is clear that Sinclair Hamilton was a major supplier to the Confederacy of Model 1853 Enfields among others models. There are apparently different styles of cartouches/inspection stamps from Sinclair Hamilton to be found on surviving examples. I understand that after the first 30,00 they had no serial numbers and the lack of a CONFEDERATE inspection stamp does not mean it was not procured for the South.

A few questions:

1. Did the South post 1861 procure Sinclair Hamilton Enfields inspection stamped/cartouche in lieu of Confederate inspection stamped rifles? I have seen SHC inspection stamps with and without Confederate inspection stamps.

2. Did the North ever directly buy from Sinclair Hamilton? If yes, would they carry inspection stamps from Sinclair Hamilton (of course, I am not referring to Union captures pre or post arrival to North America)?

3. The cartouche from Sinclair Hamilton Enfields appear to have three different styles. If an Enfield had the "SHC" surrounded by an oval, would this be from a later shipment (1862-1865) rather than 1861? Or, were the different cartouche styles used concurrently?


I would love to here your thoughts and ruminations.....

John

 

[Ralph Heinz]

There are several qualified persons that can answer your questions but it will take an extensive explanation -- or you can order a copy of The English Connection or two books by Craig Barry and David Burt, Suppliers to the Confederacy Volumes I and II.

Buying books is by far the best way to learn and answer your questions. Read those three books and you will have a very clear understanding of what you seek to know and a great deal more!

 

[John V]

Actually I have read them and these questions are not specifically addressed. I figured since some of the authors are on this website they may know the answer immediately.

Before I invest a lot of money I would like to be sure of these facts.

 

[UCVRelics]

Your best bet to answer these questions is as @Ralph Heinz says, reference books and the one below is the best when it comes to the markings of an imported CS enfield. But then if all else fails paging @Lanyard Puller and @johan_steele

The Confederate Enfield by Captain Steven W. Knott, USN (ret).

 

[johan_steele]

Craig Barry & Lanyard Puller are I think the best bet for these answers. My own suggestion are the books that have already been mentioned.

 

[Lanyard Puller]

JohnV,

Your questions first;
1. "SHC" although a contractor used Confederate Government viewers. EC pages 77, 106. 111-112,116, 143, cover all of this.

2. I specialize in CS and CS State Enfields, and don't have any references to what was purchased by the US or Northern states, but doubt if Sinclair Hamilton had any capacity to supply both CS and US, except the LAC P53s which Hamilton contracted with the US very early in the War. Archibald Hamilton of SHC was on the BOD of the London Armory.

3. Actually there are 8 different Sinclair Hamilton marks known at this time. The SHC oval, and SHC circle are found in different places on the P53s usually on 1861 and 1862 dated guns.

There are also many receipts, contracts, inspector payment and travel vouchers, and correspondence to and from Caleb Huse, and his {CS Govn't} suppliers. There documents are owned by The Confederate Relic Room & Military Museum in Columbia, SC, and became copyrighted with their purchase. I can't post any photos of them.

 

[Craig L Barry]

Interesting questions. There is a chapter on the commission house of Sinclair, Hamilton & Co in the Suppliers books. While the Union had an early contract with LAC (remember Caleb Huse notes the Union buyers were leaving when he was waiting there), and this contract would have been entered with Archibald Hamilton since he was the Supt of LAC, there is no evidence that the Union did business through the commission house of Sinclair, Hamilton & Co per se. It is kind of a fine point but commission houses offer a variety of services in filling their military equipment contracts which are somewhat distinct from buying arms direct from one particular gun maker. I am not sure if that is what you are asking? As Lanyard Puller points out, Sinclair, Hamilton had a few different stamps.

The main thing to keep in mind is that the commercial English gun makers were in business to make a profit and sell to whomever it was legal to do business with. There was also evidence (covered in the Suppliers books) that LAC did not sell their entire production capacity to the Confederates after filling the existing War Dept and early Union contracts as they were advertising military arms for sale in 1863. It would be a strange business practice to pay for advertisements if you had no products to sell, wouldn't it?

 

[UCVRelics]

You are spot on with the Ad's. Thanks for your learned input.

 

[Craig L Barry]

Post script on the LAC ad:

I looked it up in Suppliers to the Confederacy Volume II, on page 196 is a copy of the London Armoury advertisement from 1863. They were in their new premises on King William Street at that time or at least that is the address given in the ad. It says they offer for sale "the regulation interchangeable long Enfield rifle."

The source is Grace's Guide to British Industrial History.

 

[ResearchPress]

The following advert (or similar) ran in the Volunteer Service Gazette, on a quick search, 1863-1865. As the advert that Craig cites, note the inclusion of "Long Enfield Rifle, Regulation Pattern, Machine-made, and Interchangeable".

The upper part of the advert relates to Volunteers competing at NRA(UK) rifle competitions and being able to demonstrate that their rifle was of bona fide Pattern. Note they also advise that London Armoury rifles can be had "through any Gunmaker"

David

 

[John V]

Interesting questions. There is a chapter on the commission house of Sinclair, Hamilton & Co in the Suppliers books. While the Union had an early contract with LAC (remember Caleb Huse notes the Union buyers were leaving when he was waiting there), and this contract would have been entered with Archibald Hamilton since he was the Supt of LAC, there is no evidence that the Union did business through the commission house of Sinclair, Hamilton & Co per se. It is kind of a fine point but commission houses offer a variety of services in filling their military equipment contracts which are somewhat distinct from buying arms direct from one particular gun maker. I am not sure if that is what you are asking? As Lanyard Puller points out, Sinclair, Hamilton had a few different stamps.

The main thing to keep in mind is that the commercial English gun makers were in business to make a profit and sell to whomever it was legal to do business with. There was also evidence (covered in the Suppliers books) that LAC did not sell their entire production capacity to the Confederates after filling the existing War Dept and early Union contracts as they were advertising military arms for sale in 1863. It would be a strange business practice to pay for advertisements if you had no products to sell, wouldn't it?

Thanks for your reply to my questions. I see two separate things here, Enfields made and sold by LAC and arms supplied by the firm SHC (Sinclair Hamilton) and made by others. I have your great book as well as a number of others and I have been trying to fully understand if an SHC marked Enfield could have actually been procured directly from SHC by Northern buyers.

From the book "The Confederate Enfield" by Capt. Steven W. Knott:

Page 4......"firms of Sinclair Hamilton & Company and S. Isaac Campbell & Company quickly established and exclusive relationship with Southern clients, and dominated the market on military arms and equipment sales to the Confederacy." He goes on to state the Archibald Hamilton was an ardent Southern sympathizer and provided viewers to ensure quality arms were supplied to the South.

Notice that the author stated "exclusive" (italics are mine) with the South so it is as I now read it that SHC ONLY did business with the South according to this author.

However, to your point they were all about making money. From your book we learned that the South lost a shipment of LAC rifles to the Northern buyer due to funding issues so I was wondering if the same could have happened to an SHC marked rifle shipment. Would Archibald Hamilton have selective values or principles to honor the South or would he direct SHC to sell to the Union if it yielded the highest profit? Allegiance to the South or the bottom line?

For sure the North bought huge quantities of British Enfields, they had to come from the same manufacturers....maybe from SHC and Isaac Campbell as agents as well?

 

[Lanyard Puller]

Rather than direct imports to the North, there is also the source of US Navy Prize Courts in which captured Confederate cargoes were sold at auction. There are known minty condition Confederate inspected Enfields in collections. The Prize Courts are the very likely source.

 

[John V]

Rather than direct imports to the North, there is also the source of US Navy Prize Courts in which captured Confederate cargoes were sold at auction. There are known minty condition Confederate inspected Enfields in collections. The Prize Courts are the very likely source.

True enough. I am thinking that a Confederate procured, delivered, and then used by Confederates would show signs of a hard life for the most part. Enfields with Southern markings that are near perfect or very good shape may be in fact bhave been captured in transit and sold in prize courts as you had indicated.

I would still be very interested if there were any direct sales. Do you know if any of the first 30,000 marked/serialized Enfields were captured in a similar fashion? I am thinking less chance of that vs. an SHC marked Enfield (sans Confederate inspection markings) that are known to be later shipments when the Union blockade was far more effective and more likely to be intercepted.

 

[Lanyard Puller]

Barry & Burt, authors of Suppliers to the Confederacy, Vol II, present a summary of the magnitude of the blockade runners in numbers and captures on page 258. They calculate about 136 were captured and 85 destroyed from 1861 to early 1865.
This is well supported by their footnotes and sources, with detailed lists of the cargoes and distribution. It is an essential reference on the subject.

Yes some of the first shipments were captured.

"SHC" {in any of it's variations} is one of the Confederate viewers/inspection marks, so paid to mark them that way on behalf of the CS Government, and State buyers.

 

[Ralph Heinz]

Looking at the LAC ad points to why Confederate agents bought Kerr revolvers perhaps as their first choice while private parties bought Adams revolvers (when Kerr revolvers weren't available) to be resold for a profit once they were back in the South -- based on the prices stated. The single action Kerr was 4 Pounds while the double action Adams was 5 1/2 Pounds. The rarity of double action Kerr revolvers may also be due to the additional Pound in price. With only one maker of the Kerr revolver, the Beaumont-Adams was available in larger numbers due to various makers licensed by Adams.

The Kerr from LAC simply was "more bang for the bucks!"

 

[Package4]

Barry & Burt, authors of Suppliers to the Confederacy, Vol II, present a summary of the magnitude of the blockade runners in numbers and captures on page 258. They calculate about 136 were captured and 85 destroyed from 1861 to early 1865.
This is well supported by their footnotes and sources, with detailed lists of the cargoes and distribution. It is an essential reference on the subject.

Yes some of the first shipments were captured.

"SHC" {in any of it's variations} is one of the Confederate viewers/inspection marks, so paid to mark them that way on behalf of the CS Government, and State buyers.

Hey Puller, your favorite attorney just purchased a Sinclair Hamilton with CHI and IC marks, he thinks he found the missing link, but Timmy disabused him of that notion, still a cool gun. ('62 Tower, Middleton)