FREMONT MODEL, M1842

[Southron Sr.]

I have consulted several references, and they seem to be rather VAGUE on exactly what configuration the Fremont Model 1842's were when they were first manufactured at Springfield.

I have a suspiction that they were made up originally as smoothbores, with several hundred being issued to General Fremont's men for his WEstern explorations. The rest of the Fremont Model's remained in storage until sometimes after 1855 they were rifled and the long range rear sights added. Is this correct?

THANKS!

[Johan Steele]

I don't think so, only because of a reference I read of Fremont requesting rifles in greater than .54. It would appear he didn't think the .54 was enough to more than irritate a grizzly.

I've spoken w/ the owner of an original and he told me that the rifling was quite deep, considerably deeper than my relined original. Which, to me at least, would indicate it was intended for a patched round ball

IIRC he was offered M1817's and promised new production M1841's but he wanted .69 and the man had pull w/ the president.

I'm not certain which book referenced this, I've been reading quite a lot on Fremont of late. I'll take a look see but I fear I may have dropped the book back to the library.

But if the 3200 rifled arms manufactured @ Springfield were not the Fremont the question becomes what were they, the elusive Springfield M1841?

For what it's worth if I hadn't spoken to the owner of an original I was beginning to believe the "Special model 1842" was a figment of Fuller & Reillly's imagination. I've been trying to find evidence of their issue in the ACW and found only that "...several hundred short .69 rifles were shipped to Minnesota from the St Louis Arsenal in the fall of 1861." If these were Fremont's or not I don't know.

The particulars of their existance seems very sketchy to me, but that said there are many mysteries in US military arms of the day.

If anyone has more info I'd love to see it, it's an interesting arm.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

I’m sorry Shane, but I don’t seem to find any mention of anything in the ordnance returns that could be the "...several hundred short .69 rifles were shipped to Minnesota from the St Louis Arsenal in the fall of 1861," unless they were altered arms or even flintlock muskets?

http://www.civilwarstlouis.com/arsenal/

It's difficult to determine just what arms were left in the arsenal in the fall of 1861 after Gen. Nathaniel Lyon seized the armory and shipped 'all but 10,000 rifles and muslets' to Illinois on 29 April 1861? I believe that after Wilson's Creek (10 August 1861), where Lyon was killed, the 3rd Texas Cavalry, for example, re-armed themselves, discarding their old flintlock muskets for new percussion muskets captured from Siegel's Germans.

Richard McAuley, 3014V
37th GA