Send us your own comments about this object.

Title:	SABER -  U.S. SABER MODEL 1860 CAVALRY
Maker/Manufacturer:	MANSFIELD-LAMB
Date of Manufacture:	1864
Eminent Figure:
Catalog Number:	SPAR 6656
Measurements:	OL:104.1CM 41" BL: 87.6CM 34 1/2"

Object Description:

U.S. SABER MODEL 1860 CAVALRY
Manufactured by Mansfield & Lamb, Forestdale, R.I. in 1864. - Standard Model 1860 cavalry saber. Brass hilt with two branches, brass pommel cap. Wood grip with leather covering, wire-wrapped with 11 turns around grip. Blemishes on blade.

Markings:
Ricasso: U.S./J.M./2/1864. JM = Justin Murphy.
Reverse: MANSFIELD & LAMB FORESTDALE in oval.
Hilt: 61.

Notes: "THE COMPANY - This company was a very successful manufacturing firm in the decades preceding the Civil War, but during that time none of their production was devoted to sword making. Newton Darling began making scythes at Forestdale, Rhode Island (a small village in the rural town of North Smithfield) in about 1824. H.S. Mansfield joined the company shortly thereafter, and in 1839 Ansel Hollman joined the firm. In 1841, when Darling sold out, it became Mansfield and Holman, and later became Mansfield and Lamb when Mr. Estus Lamb became a partner.
The firm of Mansfield and Lamb owned the entire village of Forestdale (61 houses) including all public buildings. This system of literally creating a town from scratch in order to support a mill became known as the 'New England System of Manufacture,' and the very first example of this system was Slatersville, another village that is literally a stone's throw down the road from the Mansfield and Lamb works. As was mentioned above, they had the scythe manufactory and in 1860 they added a cotton mill.
It is stated in an old Rhode Island history, in the section on the Town of Smithfield, that the firm employed 250 workers, used 3 tons of steel, 100 grindstones and 1,400 bales of cotton. Prior to 1860, the scythe works manufactured 10,000 dozen scythes annually - a number that would decrease to 8,000 dozen annually by 1870. It would have been a logical move for the firm to manufacture swords if there was a profit to be made. In 1861, the company sought a United States Ordnance Department contract for arms and was awarded one on August 28, 1861, for 10,000 cavalry sabers. All 10,000 were required to be inspected and delivered by February of 1862. However, as of April 5, 1862, the firm had delivered only 6,500 light cavalry sabers. The pace of deliveries did not meet the conditions in the original contract, making it void. Therefore, Henry Mansfield traveled to Washington to appear before the U.S. Commission investigating ordnance contracts. This Commission created by Congress was a vehicle for weeding out poorly performing contractors and those contracts that were overcharging the government for goods.
In this case, Mansfield and Lamb was an American manufacturer that was making all of the saber parts on site and had finally worked out the usual problems inherent with manufacturing a new product. Hearing out Henry Mansfield, the Commission ruled in his favor and allowed the company to continue delivery of 2,000 completed sabers that had initially been rejected. These sabers were not up to U.S. standards because the scabbards were made of malleable iron suspension ring bands, and the regulation required hardened steel scabbards and mounts. Notwithstanding this defect, they were accepted at a reduced price. Many other contractors did not have the same luck with this Commission, having their contracts terminated and on-hand sabers not accepted. It is speculated that the Ordnance Department and the Commission favored domestic manufacturers over contractors that were primarily parts assemblers or importers.
During the remainder of the Civil War, the company was able to secure additional contracts with the Ordnance Department, eventually delivering 37,508 sabers." - Thillmann

"A couple of days ago, my wife and I took a walk around Forestdale, Rhode Island. Forestdale is a typical New England mill village, and the old premises of Mansfield and Lamb, who made almost 38,000 sabres for the Union cavalry during the Civil War.
There really isn't much left to look at - a stone post office that may have once also served as a company store, a wooden gatehouse that was the entrance to the facWe walked down a path along the shore of the mill pond and found a large granite rock sticking out of the water, just big enough to support a small picnic. The rock was covered with ten or twelve carved squares, diamonds and triangles, each containing the initials of a pair of lovers and a date. The dates ranged from the late 1830s up through the Civil War. All in all, it is a picturesque spot, and quite enjoyable despite the fact that few signs remain of its sword-making past.
The reason why I have indulged in this little description is that while I was out in Forestdale, I started thinking about our neighborhoods and how they influence us as arms collectors. You see, the Mansfield and Lamb site is less that four miles from my house, but until now, I had never even bothered to drive out there and take a look. Old arms factories are pretty common in my part of the world - I drive by them all of the time and think nothing of it. B.& B.M. Darling pepperboxes were made right down my street. The Providence Tool Company location (manufacturers of the Peabody-Martini rifles) is 15 minutes away, and Asa Waters made his early martial weapons 15 minutes in the other direction. The whole of central Massachusetts (Worcester, etc) is within a half-hour's drive north, and I won't bother to list the countless gun makers who worked up there.
My point is that I am very lucky in this regard. In many areas of the United States you can drive for days without finding even a single building where guns or swords were manufactured. You will, perhaps, find more places where the weapons were used - battlefields, mining towns, ranches or hunting grounds.
Does this difference in 'home turf' effect how we look at our collections and pursue our research? I'm sure it must. When I buy an interesting pistol or sword, the first thing I do is visit the factory site and look up information in local histories and archives. My focus is upon the men and machines that produced the artifact, and I tend to go right for the primary sources. If I lived in Texas, for instance, this would probably be impossible without serious travel and expense. However, I might be in much better position to research how these artifacts were distributed, sold and used. Perhaps this would make be less interested in the mechanical aspects of my collection and more interested in tracing my pieces to specific military units and where they served. I am not sure if this pans out in real life; it's just something to think about." - Stuart C. Mowbray, MAN AT ARMS, February, 1988.

References:
Crouch, Howard R. HISTORIC AMERICAN SWORDS. SCS Publications. Fairfax, Va. 1999.
Furr, Clegg Donald. AMERICAN SWORDS & MAKERS' MARKS. The Paragon Agency. Orange, Ca. 1999.
Thillmann, John H. CIVIL WAR CAVALRY & ARTILLERY SABERS. Andrew Mowbray Publishers. Lincoln, R.I. 2001.

See Civil War Arms Makers, pg. 253. Case # 63.

See, Ordnance Manual of 1862.