Smith Carbine Question

[Booner]

I have an original Smith, ser # 2315 made by Mass. Machine works. It has the correct makers marks on the barrel etc. but no cartouce (I know is scewed up that spelling-dam french) on the wrist. I thought maybe the previous owner maybe sanded them off is a stock re-finish but, no, I am now thing this was never sold to the government. Am I right in thinking this just because it has no Gov. inspection marks? (diddn't want to try and spell that word again.

In the 80's I shot with the N/SSA (loved it) and I thought the unit my gggrandaddy was in (7th ill cav) were issued Smiths -- Some companies were but as I've come to find out his company (L) were issued Sharps. But I think I'll still keep hers. She's a shooter.

Any thoughts on on my Smith not being a gov. issue would be appreciated.

Rgds,
Booner

 

[hrobalabama]

I just love the Smith Carbine. I once had one that was like new. Those which were used in the U.S. Military had two cartouches on the left wrist. I have been looking for awhile but to no result..in a book I have which quotes from Langdon Cheeves, Jr. (pronounced Chevas) of South Carolina in a letter of Jan. 1861. He had just made an order with Samuel Colt for 50 Colt revolvers.
He goes on to state that if the order was not received he can still secure a number of Gilbert Smith's breech loaders.
These arms were to be used to protect the rice plantations near Charleston , SC (C /W use.) Therefore, before the conflict began, there were Smith Carbines available for use in SC. Hence NO cartouches. The only problem with the Smith was its ammunition.
They used a Guatta percha round (often called rubber)...one with a little ingenuity could get around this. For a person on horseback it was of the best design. It could be opened just using one hand just as a single barrel shotgun.
If I find the book, I will post the quote. I just remembered, it was written to a man by the name of Gravely, a factor of Charleston, SC to which the shipment of guns was sent.

 

[Booner]

thank you, I appreciate the reply.

rgds,
Booner

 

[Craig L Barry]

Does it matter? If it makes you feel better, the inspection marks stamped into the gunstock were not intended to survive 150 years intact. Wood is porous and the material used to regularly seal the gunstock (boiled linseed oil) will "heal" small indentations with multiple applications. They are also easily rubbed or sanded off over time. I am somewhat more suspicious of the Civil War provenance of a small arm with crisp cartouches, which are easily added years later to make something appear to have been in service on one side or the other.

If you like the carbine and it fires well, consider yourself lucky to be in possession of a piece of material culture that was used in the US Civil War, whether this particular arm was or not.

 

[kevikens]

I love shooting my repro Smith. Much easier and more reliable (and lighter) than my repro Sharps. I was surprised to read somewhere where an inventory of arms was taken in the mid 1870's and Smith's were in greater numbers than I would have expected. I think it was of arms carried by some Plains Indian tribe. As far as I know none were converted to metallic rim or center fire cartridges so the originals must have been considered fairly reliable.