American Rifle - Alexander Rose [240]
Return to text.
39. For a typical argument along these lines, see Hartford Daily Times, September 9, 1874, in Dizard, Muth, and Andrews, Guns in America, p. 48.
Return to text.
40. Mordecai, Military Commission to Europe, p. 163.
Return to text.
41. A moderate Democrat, southern born, and an individual of robust “conservative opinions,” Mordecai himself was nonetheless unsympathetic to slavery and would be torn over which side to support. Though he was offered senior posts by both Confederacy and Union, the anguished Mordecai resigned his commission and moved to Philadelphia. Regarding the outbreak of the Civil War, and Mordecai’s thoughts on it, see S. L. Falk, “Divided Loyalties in 1861: The Decision of Major Alfred Mordecai,” Publication of the American Jewish Historical Society 48, no. 3 (1959), pp. 147–69. Mordecai was by no means the only scientist with conflicted, complex views on slavery and secession; see, on this point, R.V. Bruce, The Launching of Modern American Science, 1846–1876 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1987), pp. 271–86.
Return to text.
42. On Jackson as self-made man, see J. W. Ward, Andrew Jackson: Symbol for an Age (New York: Oxford University Press, 1955), pp. 166–80; on Jackson and democracy, see R. V. Remini, The Legacy of Andrew Jackson: Essays on Democracy, Indian Removal, and Slavery (Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1988), pp. 7–44.
Return to text.
43. Quoted in D.R. Beaver, “The U.S. War Department in the Gaslight Era: Stephen Vincent Benét at the Ordnance Department, 1870–91,” Journal of Military History, 68, no. 1 (2004), p. 111.
Return to text.
44. The Centennial of the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York (1904; reprint New York: Greenwood Press, 1969), p. 1:496.
Return to text.
45. M. Cunliffe, Soldiers and Civilians: The Martial Spirit in America, 1775–1865 (New York: Free Press, 1973), pp. 106–11. On Crockett’s hostile view of West Point, see M. J. Heale, “The Role of the Frontier in Jacksonian Politics: David Crockett and the Myth of the Self-made Man,” Western Historical Quarterly 4, no. 4 (1973), p. 417.
Return to text.
46. See “History of the Can” at www.cancentral.com/history.htm. D. Boorstin, The Americans: The Democratic Experience (New York: Random House, 1973), pp. 309–22, has an interesting section on “portable” food.
Return to text.
47. D. Westwood, Rifles: An Illustrated History of Their Impact (Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO, 2005), p. 29; Greener, Gun and Its Development, p. 114; J.G. Bilby, A Revolution in Arms: A History of the First Repeating Rifles (Yardley, Pa.: Westhome, 2006), pp. 49–50. Pauly’s cartridges were laboriously made for a specific gun and thus were not uniform; this fact alone might have doomed them.
Return to text.
48. J. M. Fenster, “Seam Stresses,” Invention and Technology Magazine 9, no. 3 (1994), has an interesting section on Hunt. Available online at www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/it/1994/3/1994_3_40.shtml.
Return to text.
49. “Loaded ball,” Patent no. 5,701, August 10, 1848, which can be seen at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Web site, www.uspto.gov.
Return to text.
50. “Combined piston-breech and firing-cock repeating-gun,” Patent no. 6,663, August 21, 1849; also Bilby, Revolution in Arms, p. 54; Edwards, Civil War Guns, p. 166.
Return to text.
51. “Improvement in breech-loading fire-arms,” Patent no. 6,973, December 25, 1849; Bilby, Revolution in Arms, pp. 54–55; H. F. Williamson, Winchester: The Gun That Won the West (Washington, D.C.: Combat Forces Press, 1952), pp.