This collection centers around modified leather accoutrements, but includes canteens, some experimental equipments & some later adopted by the Ordnance Dept. (such as the Palmer Brace System), and new patented items not adopted by the army. Also items made at remote posts use for campaign or scoutings such as leather/ canvas sugar and flour sacks.
Contact Us About This Product
Description
Ammunition and Accoutrements at the Wagon Box Fight
By James Mountain
This article will be largely void of the usual historical information about the Wagon Box Fight and its participants, but will confine itself to discussing the cartridge box used on the day of the fight; the method of packing used by Frankford Arsenal with the new .50/70 ammunition, and other pertinent details relating to the arms and the ammunition used by Captain Powell’s detachment.
The standard issue cartridge box used by the infantry on the Bozeman Trail in early August of 1867 was the Model 1861. Up until July of that year, the box was used in conjunction with the M1863 Springfield Rifled Musket; it having been issued from mid-way during of the Civil War and continually issued to all replacements sent west to the plains. The box was designed to hold forty rounds of .58 caliber paper cartridges. Contained within the body of the box are two tins, each with a lower compartment to hold a full pack of ten paper cartridges, and two upper divisions intended to hold twenty more loose rounds to facilitate the accessibility of cartridges when needed. [i]
With the arrival of seven hundred Model 1866 2nd Allin Springfield Breech Loading Rifles and 100,000 rounds of the .50/70 Martin Bar Anvil self-primed cartridges on the J.R. Porter supply train on July 3, 1867 it appears that no new accoutrements accompanied the shipment. [ii]
Correspondence between General Dyer, Chief of Ordnance and General Hoffman at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, dated July 9, 1867 discussed the development of one box in particular that would hold two, twenty round cardboard boxes, one placed on top of the other within the cavity of the cartridge box once the tins had been removed. [iii] This box had been sent to Fort Leavenworth for trial. Dyer mentions that several cartridge boxes, altered from the musket cartridge box had been issued to troops in the Department of the Platte. [iv] I have not as yet found any reference to these cartridge boxes issued to the Twenty Seventh Infantry on the Bozeman Trail around the July shipment date. The other question is, how were the cartridges packed at Frankford Arsenal that arrived on July 3rd?
A few years ago I came across a great Internet site relating to cartridges. The site contained an informative article with photographs of a great find; a full crate of Frankford Arsenal .50/70 ammunition sent from the Arsenal in April of 1867, forwarded on the chief ordnance officer, Department of the Platte at Omaha, and finally received by Major Lewis (detachment of 36th Infantry, the old 3rd Battalion of the 18th Infantry), commanding Camp Douglas, Utah. [v]
I firmly believe this shipment is part of the same received by the chief of ordnance at Omaha, and forwarded on to the various posts in the Department of the Platte. The railroad ended at Omaha at this time and all supplies would have been sent out by civilian contract freight trains. I submit that the cartridges received on July 3, at Fort Phil Kearny, are from this same shipment from Frankford Arsenal sent the past April of 1867, via Omaha, and distributed to the many posts within the department.
Now the most interesting revelation gleaned from the Cartridge Collector’s site, was how the cartridges were packed at the arsenal. The crate contained twenty-five bundles of forty rounds with each bundle containing eight separate, 5 round packs. [vi] We know from General Dyer’s July 9 (1867), letter that twenty round boxes were being made at that time, yet there is no mention of the 5 round packs. By the time the letter was written, comments and recommendations may have been received from the field as to the poorly thought-out design of the 5 round packs. The twenty round cardboard boxes are dated at the earliest “1867,” as well as the 5 round packs. The packaging of the twenty round boxes continued until 1873. [vii] The 5 round packs have been observed with the “1867” date only, and by the general’s letter of the 9th, this packaging was probably discontinued, making them the earliest method of packaging employed by the arsenal for .50/70 ammunition. Just a thought here; I have not encountered documentation regarding the packing of ammunition crates with 1000 loose rounds.
If we now accept that the ammunition received at Fort Phil in July of ’67 to be the same as that received by Major Lewis at Camp Douglas, then the cartridge boxes used with this ammunition has to be the un-modified M1861 musket cartridge box. General Dyer in the same July 9 letter to General Hoffman, mentions that although he (Dyer) has no experience using the box (the box with tins removed to hold 2 twenty round cardboard boxes), he felt it was the “most economical” of all the plans he had seen.[viii] It seems that economical was more important than practical to the head of the Ordnance, and I believe this prevailing thought within the army at that time was the contributing factor as to why the first packaging of cartridges came to be. If all you are doing is replacing paper cartridges with copper cased types, then the present cartridge box is suitable for use with the new breechloader. It would not be very long before real tests in the field would prove this first packaging, flawed, as well as the original conception. The major factor not initially realized by the Ordnance Department, was the great expenditure of ammunition with the new service rifle, with twenty loose rounds expended rapidly, and difficulty getting to the remaining cartridges in the lower compartment in the tins. Remember, that the average soldier could fire 2 to 3 rounds per minute during the Civil War, making the musket cartridge box suited to handle that demand. Difficulty would ensue in a heated fight using the new cartridges for the 2nd Allin Conversion in the old pattern box, as now the average shots fired per minute rose to around 15. Another not so critical problem, but most irritating was the issue with the upper compartments holding ten rounds easily, and without something used to stabilize the rounds, they would noisily rattle about freely within the box on the march.
During the Wagon Box Fight, Captain Powell had strategically placed ammunition crates within the corral of wagon boxes for easier access by the beleaguered band within.[ix] With the many attacks made by the Lakota and Cheyenne that day, the rounds in the cartridge boxes must have become depleted rapidly, thus the use of forage caps to retrieve more ammunition quickly.[x] The forage caps were far more beneficial than the cartridge boxes, as it would be much easier to break down the packs into the caps versus refilling the boxes.
Another observation that comes into play here is the contention that no shoulder slings were used with the cartridge boxes. The increase weight of the copper cartridges and the discomfort derived from the slings would have “interfered materially with free respiration,” as referenced by a captain at Fort Sedgwick, CT (Colorado Territory) in a letter to General Dyer, in January of 1868.[xi] H. Charles McBarron, Jr’s painting, “Good Marksmanship and Guts” is quite probably accurate in portraying the use of the cartridge box worn on the waist belt.[xii] Although the shoulder sling would continue to be used by the army into the early 1870’s, its use would be relegated to parade and inspection purposes. If my assumption is incorrect concerning the shoulder slings, and that they were used in conjunction with the cartridge boxes that day, it would have contributed to a greater burden physically on the soldiers in the Wagon Box corral, as well as reducing the rate of fire shortly after the engagement began.
The inadequacy of the M1861 cartridge box used with the 2nd Allin breechloaders, would quickly see many ideas put forth although most were for new modifications of the old ‘61 cartridge box. It would be another fifteen years or so until a reliable, and wholly accepted method for carrying cartridges would find its way to the troops.
Once the new Treaty of 1868 came into being, and the army abandoned its posts on the highly contested Bozeman Trail, the army posts were quickly torched by the Lakota and Cheyenne. With lessons learned, and time now permitted, several of the officers who had endured those two long years in Absaraka (Home of the Crows) developed and submitted their own versions of accouterments for field trails, incorporating their experiences with inadequate accoutrements. into practical ideas that would far exceed lesser “economical” patterns emanating from an out of touch Ordnance Department. Surprisingly, new ideas still held to utilizing the old ’61 box, and it was not until the field trials of 1870 through 1872, that significant change came forth for the cartridge box.
I hope this has been enlightening, yet I feel that much is still to be uncovered. I welcome your thoughts and comments.
[i] Civil War Cartridge Boxes of the Union Infantryman, by Paul D. Johnson, Mowbray Publishing, 1998, pg. 157. [ii] The Wagon Box Fight: An Episode of Red Cloud’s War, by Jerry Keenan, Savas Publishing Co., 2000, pg. 19. [iii] Civil War Cartridge Boxes of the Union Infantryman, by Paul D. Johnson, Mowbray Pub. 1998, pg. 295-297. [iv] Ibid.
[v] The Cartridge Collector’s Exchange, http://www.oldammo.com/february06.htm.
[vi] Ibid.
[vii][vii] Civil War Cartridge Boxes of the Union Infantryman, by Paul D. Johnson.
[viii] Civil War Cartridge Boxes of the Union Infantryman, by Paul D. Johnson, pg. 297 [ix] The Wagon Box Fight: An Episode of Red Cloud’s War, by Jerry Keenan, pg. 39-40 [x] Ibid.
[xi] Civil War Cartridge Boxes of the Union Infantryman, pg. 297-300.
[xii] U.S. Army Center of Military History, Publications, “Good Marksmanship and Guts” by H. Charles McBarron, Jr.,
http://wwwhistory.army/mil/catalog/pubs/21/daposters/21-45.html.
[xiii] My Story, by Anson Mills, Brigadier General, U.S.A., Press of Byron S. Adams, Washington, D.C., 1918.
Painting; Cheyenne Burning of Fort Phil Kearny, by Z.S. Liang.
No portion, pictures, or information from this article can be reproduced unless you have gained permission from the author .