Major Ferguson's Rifle

[82Rigger]

Always been fascinated with Ferguson's breech-loading rifle. His death at King's Mountain bought him a little fame, but I think his rifle should have bought him more.

How many of his rifles were made? How many survive? Is anyone making quality replicas?

[revwardoc]

Rigger,

While the rifle was called the Ferguson, he wasn't the only designer. He worked on it with an English gunsmith (whose name escapes me at the moment). While the rifles proved to be extremely accurate up to 200 yards (by 18th century standards) and faster loading than smoothbore muskets, they were very expensive to manufacture. Only 100 originals were made and today only 2 exist. One is owned by a private collector and the other is in a museum in London.

Several years ago there was a limited run of them being made complete with bayonet, sling and display stand for about $2500. I know of 2 guys who bought them. If you like, I could do some research to see if they're still available.

One story about Ferguson and his rifle is, towards the end of the Brandywine Creek battle, he saw an American general and another officer within easy range of his weapon. He called out to them to surrender but they turned their backs on him and rode off. He decided that it would be ungentlemanly of him to shoot another officer in the back so he let him go. The next day he was told it was George Washington. Ferguson said that, had he known, he still wouldn't have fired.

However, Ferguson's second-in-command, Capt John de Lancey (whose daughter married American author James Fenimore Cooper) said that Ferguson had never met Washington but that he, de Lancey, had and claimed that it was not Washington but was, instead, Count Pulaski. But de Lancey also admitted that he wasn't sure what Pulaski looked like. Also he told this to Cooper when he was at an advanced age so his memory could've been somewhat off.

The way I look at Ferguson's side is, if it ain't the truth, it oughta be!

[Andy]

The history channel did a neat program on weapons of the Rev. War. Ferguson's rifles were not only mentioned but shown. They looked to be at least a generation ahead of anything else on the battlefield. Expensive but if the Brits were not married to the Brown Bess, things may have turned out differently.

Dan, I know I speak for Casimir Pulaski when I say he would have been happy to have been shot in the back and killed. It would have been a lot better than the way he died. As I'm sure you know he took frags to the groin and the wound got infected. Die of gangrene in the groin, that's some really bad juju.

Stay healthy,
Andy, member 142 of the Easthampton Pulaski Club

[revwardoc]

Andy,

Those were the days before disinfectants and anesthesia...and X-rays. If you were to receive multiple frag wounds, it would be easy for a surgeon to miss some which would become infected. Despite what you may have seen in movies, they did not use alcohol as an anesthesia. Whiskey did 3 things, all of which were bad:
1. it increased the heart rate
2. it thinned out the blood
3. it dilated the blood vessels
If you were to have an arm or leg amputated, you'd bleed to death. With any luck, you would go into shock at which point you heart rate slowed, your blood vessels contracted and you were quiet and still as opposed to being fully awake while someone you hoped like hell had some sort of training before he sawed off your limb. It was only after the operation that you would be given whiskey or, if you were lucky, laudanum (half brandy, half opium). They way they figured it, if lived for about 4 days after that kind of amputation, you'd probably make it. If you didn't survive, you simple weren't strong enough. If the frags or bullets were lodged in a muscle mass, the surgeon would probably just leave it there as opposed to doing more damage in trying to dig it out. The body's natural defenses would take over and a calcified layer would form around the obstruction. This was also the time period where they would bleed you if you had a common cold and treat you with mercury for veneral disease!

Is there really an Easthampton Pulaski Club?

[revwardoc]

Andy II,

One of the major causes of the Revolution was the fact that the Royal Treasury had run quite low because of the various wars England fought in, around, and over North America in the early 18th century. So the expense of new weapons and the distrust of large standing armies (dating back to Cromwell's dictatorship) dampened any enthusiasm for additional military spending. Besides, the Bess was an excellent weapon and was used for over 100 years, even being converted to percussion.

[Andy]

Tis true the Brits didn?t want to spend more money on their army than necessary and there was a deficit from the time of the French and Indian War (Seven Years War) through the end of the Napoleonic Wars but that was due to their obsession with having several fleets more powerful than all other navy's. Just look at Trafalgar, Nelson wasn?t using a single ship from the Home Fleet. Yes, Great Britain is an island nation but the army was always the navy?s little brother.
*****************

Around 1900 lots of ships were landing in Boston and New York with a cargo of Eastern Europeans, including lots of Pols.including my Dad's parents. Many of new factories were being built on the Connecticut River. They would actually have men with signs (written in Polish) on the docks, saying get on these wagons, we have jobs. There are Pulaski Clubs in numerous towns around here. The Town Common in Easthampton was officially named Pulaski Park in the 1970?s when Selectmen Walazek and Baceski made the motion.

Stay healthy,
Andy

[82Rigger]

While the Ferguson was possibly somewhat faster to reload than a muzzle loader, the primary advantage of a breech-loader in combat is the capability of being able to reload without standing up (or kneeling) and exposing yourself.

But with the Brits' fixation on formal by-the-numbers fighting I'm wondering if that advantage would have been utilized.

[Desdichado]

Interesting topic, and I'll chime in if'n I might.

The Fergie would never have superseded the Brown Bess, but the Brits (and everyone else) had been experimenting with light troops who fought in open order since at least the Seven Years' War. Such a weapon would have been ideal for such skirmishers and would have greatly increased their effectiveness. One wonders, however, if it was even possible to make them in the required numbers, regardless of cost. Given the foundry techniques of the day, I think a certain amount of technical skill was required. Even by the Napoleonic wars, only some lights were getting the (muzzle loading) Baker rifle - the rest still got the Bess.

[revwardoc]

Back then, when two armies approached each other in the field, they would begin firing their muskets at about 100 yards. Of course, due to the inaccuracy of military loads, the odds of hitting someone at 80-100 yards was only about 28%. The object was to throw as much lead as possible in the shortest amount of time thereby cutting down as many of the enemy as possible, dissolving their morale so that they would withdraw (hopefully in confusion) then finish them off with the bayonet or a cavalry charge. An army armed with all Ferguson rifles could begin firing, with accurary, at 200 yards, twice the distance of the average musket. Can you image the physical and psychological effect of knowing that your weapons are useless against such an enemy? It would've been devastating! But, like Des said, the manufacturing technology of the day wouldn't have been able to keep up with the demand anyway but would've made a helluva light infantry weapon.

Ironically, history repeated itself in (I believe) 1860 when the Henry repeating rifle was offered to the US Army but was refused on the ridiculous grounds that the men would forget about marksmanship and waste ammo. And these guys made the rank of general?

[revwardoc]

By the way, on this day in 1851, David Kennison, who was believed to be the last surviving soldier of the American Revolution and who took part in the Boston Tea Party, died at the age of 115.

[82Rigger]

I had the fortune while in one of the firearms forums to chat with an owner of a replica Ferguson.
The info he provided sheds some new light on what we have discussed here.

The replica was manufactured by Narragansett Arms Inc of Indianapolis. It is of high quality and manufacture is accurate to the originals.

The breech screw has multiple fine threads and is lowered into loading position by one complete (360 degree) turn of the trigger guard. Greased ball is placed in the chamber, followed by the powder charge. Powder charging need not be precise since any excess is carried away by raising the breech screw. Breech screw is raised and pan is primed. She's ready to shoot.

Upon firing there is some powder gas leakage at the breech screw, both top and bottom. Loading (and reloading) can be accomplished in about 9 seconds on the average.
Accuracy is about 4 inches at 100 yards, with good accuracy out to 200-250 yards.

After the 3rd shot arises a problem. The breech screw becomes difficult to operate due to build-up of powder fouling. Water poured on the open screw will soften the fouling enough to get off another shot. After the 4th shot the rifle is essentially out of commission until the breech screw is removed and cleaned.

Putting grease on the breech screw doesn't help very much, and too much grease risks contaminating the powder charge.

In my reading on the Ferguson rifle I never saw this problem mentioned.

So, where does that leave us as far as the advantages of this rifle?

[revwardoc]

Steve,

The only greased patch I had ever heard about regarding a military weapon during the Rev War was by American riflemen using the longrifle. The additional step of adding a greased patch would add time to the British loading/firing drill that was designed to decrease time, not add to it. British musket balls were machined for uniformity and smoothness to facilitate loading and the Ferguson's used the same ammo. But I did read that there was a fouling problem in the screw mechanism. I'm not sure how the German Jaegers loaded their weapons.

[colmurph]

The greatest advantage of the Furgeson Rifle was the fact that it could be loaded with the gunner lying prone. 3 shots from a prone position is a lot safer than taking one shot while standing.
The US didn't come up with a breech loading rifle until 32 years later with the advent of the Hall Mod. 1819 Breechloading Flintlock Rifle. (I have an original one of these with it's 13 groove rifling in .54 cal.)
The odd thing about Fergueson's death at Kings Mountain. His unit was not equipped with his invention, had they been so, Fergueson might not have died that day

[revwardoc]

At King's Mountain, Ferguson commanded local loyalist militia (he was the only commissioned British officer at that battle). While he was the only one armed with his namesake firearm, all the men on both sides were armed with Dickert rifles (The Dickert is also known as the Kentucky, Pennsylvania or Virginia long rifle, depending upon who bought it and where). Since the men (both sides) were all Appalachian Mountain men, it was natural for them to have a rifle rather than a musket. It was probably the only battle of that conflict that was fought entirely with rifles. Some of the opposing men were also related to each other giving the fight an early Civil War atmosphere.

[colmurph]

The Dickert Rifle was made by Jacob Dickert of Bucks County in Pennsylvania.