American Rifle - Alexander Rose [265]
Return to text.
31. See Brophy, Springfield 1903, pp. 16–17.
Return to text.
32. “Favors Rifle Practice Among Schoolboys,” New York Times, January 28, 1906, p. 8.
Return to text.
33. Roosevelt to William Howard Taft, January 4, 1905, in Morison, Letters of Roosevelt, pp. 4:1090–91.
Return to text.
34. Brophy, Springfield 1903, p. 20.
Return to text.
35. J. S. Hatcher, Hatcher’s Notebook: A Standard Reference Book for Shooters, Gunsmiths, Ballisticians, Historians, Hunters and Collectors, 2d ed. (Harrisburg, Pa.: Stackpole, 1957), p. 2.
Return to text.
36. Brophy, Springfield 1903, pp. 20, 30; Hatcher, Hatcher’s Notebook, p. 2.
Return to text.
37. Hatcher, Hatcher’s Notebook, p. 2.
Return to text.
38. “New Bullet for the Army,” New York Times, August 10, 1906, p. 5.
Return to text.
39. “A New and Deadly Bullet for the Army,” Harper’s Weekly, October 20, 1906, p. 1509.
Return to text.
40. Brophy, Springfield 1903, pp. 34, 37; Hatcher, Hatcher’s Notebook, p. 3.
Return to text.
41. “Cartridge feed pack for magazine guns,” Patent no. 402,605, May 7, 1889.
Return to text.
42. “Cartridge-holder for magazine-guns,” Patent no. 482,376, September 13, 1892; “Cartridge-pack for magazine-guns,” Patent no. 547,932, October 15, 1895.
Return to text.
43. Hallahan, Misfire, p. 274.
Return to text.
44. Ibid., pp. 274–75; J. A. Stockfisch, Plowshares in Swords: Managing the American Defense Establishment (New York: Mason & Lipscomb, 1973), p. 53; R. I. Wolf, Arms and Innovation: The United States Army and the Repeating Rifle, 1865–1900 (Unpub. Ph.D. diss., Boston University, 1981), p. 281. See also E. C. Ezell, The Search for a Lightweight Rifle: The M14 and M16 Rifles (Unpub. Ph.D. diss., Cleveland, Ohio: Case Western Reserve University, 1969), pp. 38–39n37 for additional details.
Return to text.
45. “Projectile for hand-firearms,” Patent no. 841,861, January 22, 1907; Hallahan, Misfire, p. 276.
Return to text.
46. On this point see H. G. J. Aitken, Scientific Management in Action: Taylorism at Watertown Arsenal, 1908–1915 (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1985), pp. 57–60.
Return to text.
47. Ibid., pp. 56, 61, 66, 70.
Return to text.
48. Ibid., pp. 68–108.
Return to text.
49. Ibid., pp. 135–85.
Return to text.
50. Ibid., pp. 229–34.
Return to text.
51. Hallahan, Misfire, p. 277.
Return to text.
52. S. Brown, The Story of Ordnance in the World War (Washington, D.C.: James William Bryan Press, 1920), pp. 14, 17, 35.
Return to text.
53. Aitken, Scientific Management, p. 238.
Return to text.
54. On the Enfield, see Hatcher, Hatcher’s Notebook, pp. 13–14, 16; E. C. Crossman, “Uncle Sam’s New Infantry Rifle: How the British Arm of 1914, Chambered for Our Cartridge, Compares with Our Old Springfield,” Scientific American 117, no. 22 (December 1, 1917), p. 408.
Return to text.
55. Brophy, Springfield 1903, pp. 232–37.
Return to text.
56. Hallahan, Misfire, pp. 277–78.
Return to text.
Chapter 9
1. In his 1902 report, quoted in J. S. Hatcher, The Book of the Garand (1948; reprint Highland Park, N.J.: Gun Room Press, 2000), p. 13. As early as 1663–64 an English “lawyer and virtuoso” named Dudley Palmer had (probably) originated this economical concept when he proposed a theoretical firearm that could “shoot as fast as it could be and yet be stopped at pleasure, and wherein the motion of the fire and bullet was made to charge the piece with powder and bullet, to prime it, and to pull back the cock.” Palmer had outlined his idea in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 1663–1664, quoted in M. L. Brown, Firearms in Colonial America: The Impact on History and Technology, 1492–1792 (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1980), p. 144. On Palmer, see M. Hunter, “The Social Basis and Changing Fortunes of an Early Scientific Institution: An Analysis of the Membership of the Royal Society, 1660–1685,” Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 31, no. 1 (1976), p. 84.
Return to text.
2. Hatcher, Book of Garand, p. 13.
Return to