Spencer Model 1854 Carbine

[kap142]

Oops already, Spencer Model 1865 (not 1854)

Untill I can figure out where my jpg's are hiding I'll get this posted and see if I can elicit some feed back.

First please understand thet: 1) I am a newby, 2) I am doing this for a law enforcement agency who is hoping to get this gun to a museum as it cannot be allowed to go to a private collection and 3) it's secured in a Property/Evidence facility so I have limited access.

With that said and until I can get my jpg's out of hiding......

Stampted on the forward receiver is the following:
Model 1865 (this is stamped perpendicular to stamps below)
Spencer Repeating Rifle
Pat d March 6, 1860
Manu d at I V F T (the last four letters are very hard to see but not R.I.)
By Burnside Rifle

Weapon has a 20" barrel and an approx 36" overall length. Barrel has few lands and groves poss 3 each but not sure.Gun has a saddle ring and a functions check show the weapon to be fully operational.

SN is 265XX

It would appear this is a post CW Calvery gun but I know little else. There are no stamps on the stock at all.

Can anyone help with unit to which this weapon might have been issued or where it saw service.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Ken

 

[Jim Watson]

I fear I am not much help.
You describe a Burnside contract Spencer carbine, one of about 34,000 made right after war's end. A three groove barrel is correct, used by Burnside and Springfield Armory instead of Spencer's own six groove. Sounds like the markings are pretty worn and dinged, Burnside was indeed in R.I.

Spencers were used into the 1870s until lack of spares for guns made by defunct companies and desire for standardization on the Trapdoor got them withdrawn from service. Custer's Seventh had Spencers until rearmed with Springfields before the LBH.

There is a book, 'Spencer Repeating Firearms' by Roy Marcott, maybe you could contact somebody with it.

There is a Spencer Shooting Society on the CAS City board. The moderator, Two Flints, has such serial number information as remains.
http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php?www;board=35

 

[kap142]

Thanks Jim. All information is of great help. Kinda like pieces of a puzzle. I'll follow the contact direction and attempt to make contact with "Two Flints" and see where that leads. Again, thanks.

Ken

 

[rick spencer]

I just want to say thanks to you for not destroying the rifle!! I do work at my local sheriffs dept and i see weapons destroyed all the time, even historic muzzleloaders and antiques that should be appreciated. It pains my heart to see these works of art destroyed. Thanks Again and good luck on your endeavors!!

 

[COK]

What was said above, I hope it can end up at a museum.

 

[Jim Watson]

A museum will be better than a manhole foundry, but what is the urgency of keeping this 145 year old assault weapon out of private hands? Was it used in a capital crime? Is its ownership too clouded to get it back to a legitimate owner? Could the department not use a couple thousand dollars worth of equipment and supplies that this antique could bring in?

 

[Jim K]

That line reads "MANUF'D AT PROV. R.I." Apparently some of the letters are rusty or worn off.

Jim Watson, some states have laws that prohibit police from selling or transferring any seized firearm to anyone other than a government entity. That began when the leftwing press reported that police were "selling murder weapons back on the streets" and similar nonsense. Of course the sales were to dealers who had to resell the guns in accordance with the law, but the press never lets facts never get in the way of a good anti-gun diatribe.

Jim

 

[Jim Watson]

Yes, Jim Keenan, I am aware of such repressive laws and policies. I just wanted to emphasize how stupid they are in such a case.

 

[Jim K]

I know. A perfect example of the stupidity of legislators who have a kneejerk response to press hysteria instead of trusting sworn officers to use common sense. Had the gun been a 15th century wheel lock or a Revolutionary War musket, the situation would have been the same.

Jim

 

[kap142]

Jim and Jim, you are both correct. It is a near crime to distroy such history but that will be the fate of this gun as things stand now. The Dept has General Orders (poss based on Fl law) that prohibit the gun going into anyones individual possession.

The gun was found thrown on the side of a road about 5 years ago. No owner was ever traced through FDLE or ATF and no one attempted to claim it. Whether it was ever used in the commission of a crime will probably never be known.

And in addition to the afore mentioned information (typically) the upper admin of a law enforcement is SELDOM a gun person. Law enforcement yes but gun people no.

And guys you are so right in so many ways. Had I been the officer who stumbled upon the gun on the side of the road...........................I would have done some serious soul searching.

Thanks very much for the time and the help.

Ken