With the adoption of the percussion ignition system in 1841, the United States Ordnance undertook a process of evaluating the flintlock arms currently in inventory and began to plan for the alteration of these arms to percussion. In 1842 a team of US Ordnance Inspectors undertook to inspect and evaluate the 700,00+ flintlock muskets in storage at the various US arsenals in the United States. The team worked in 1845 to complete this task, by which time the Ordnance Department had settled upon the use of the “Belgian” or “cone-in-barrel” system to alter the muskets from flint to percussion. Over the next few years, the majority of the arms classified as “1^st Class,” those in good condition manufactured in 1831 or later, and “2^nd Class,” those in good condition manufactured between 1821 and 1830. Those guns were to be altered to percussion system by the “Belgian” method (aka “cone in barrel”) at the various primary arsenals around the country. 

During the late 1840s, the Ordnance Department began to think about using the “tape primer” ignition system developed by Dr. Edward Maynard. The system utilized a two-ply roll of varnished, laminated paper with the percussion fulminated of mercury sandwiched between the layers. The primer tapes looked very much like a modern roll of caps used in a child’s cap gun. Maynard patented his tape and a mechanical advancing system for it in 1845, and that same year the US Board of Ordnance paid Dr. Maynard a royalty of $4,000 for the right to use his patented system in the alteration of 4,000 muskets. The board then proceeded to experiment with various mechanical systems to utilize the primer tapes. 

The first arms to incorporate the system were 2,000 US Model 1835/40 contract muskets that has been produced by Daniel Nippes. Of these arms 300 were newly made with the “Nippes-Maynard” locks and the other 1,700 were previously delivered flintlock muskets altered to the Nippes-Maynard system. Although the system worked well enough on these altered muskets, it was determined that a better system could be developed, and during fiscal year 1853-54 a new Maynard tape primer lock was developed at Springfield Arsenal. 

This lock would become the basis for the US Model 1855 series of arms. The Ordnance Department foresaw that this new lock would be quite useful and might be produced in significant quantities. So, in February of 1854, rather than continuing to pay the $1.00 per lock royalty that they had originally negotiated with Dr. Maynard, the Ordnance Department purchased the right to use his system in perpetuity on any arms produced for the US military, for the princely sum of $50,000. With the rights to the system secured, the Ordnance Department undertook to alter 20,000 US flintlock muskets to the system. The locks and patent breeches were produced by the Remington Arms Company of Ilion, NY and cost the US government $3.15 each and the alterations were performed at the Frankford Arsenal. These “Remington-Maynard” alterations are the most commonly encountered US muskets with mechanical tape primers. 

The ever-parsimonious government continued to seek other, more cost-effective ways to affect the mechanical primer alteration of muskets, based upon the Maynard system. With the adoption of the US Model 1855 series of arms, the Maynard system was firmly entrenched with the US military, and it was considered expedient to look at a system to alter some of the previously converted flintlock muskets to mechanical priming systems as well. 

A system that attracted the attention of the Board of Ordnance was that developed by Lt. James N. Ward of the US Army. Ward was a West Point graduate (class of 1845) and had served in the Mexican War and had also fought Native-Americans on the frontier. In 1856 he received a patent for a mechanical tape priming system that was contained within the hammer of the musket. As this system negated the need to replace an entire lock with a new one, and the cost per hammer was roughly half of the cost of a Remington made lock, the Ordnance Department found Lt. Ward’s system to be very attractive. According to Ordnance Department documents, 100 US muskets were altered to Lt. Ward’s “Magazine Hammer” system at the New York Arsenal during 1858, and these muskets were also rifled and sighted. None of these 100 altered muskets are known to have survived to this day, and no example has ever been identified. It is generally believed that most of the muskets were issued for field trials, were found unsatisfactory and were either re-altered to standard percussion or simply sold as surplus. 

However, documents do reveal that on 7 April 1857, a single Ward altered musket was issued from New York Arsenal to the state of New York. It appears that this single musket impressed the state of New York sufficiently for them to order that 1,200 of the muskets in the state’s arsenals be altered to the Ward mechanical priming hammer system. The state contracted with Ward, who had recently been promoted to Captain and was on sick leave from the Army. The contract called for Ward to modify the provided muskets with his “magazine hammer” and to further modify “the weapon to the use of the Minié cartridge”. The contract also called for Ward to apply his “patent clasp” to the bayonets for these rifles. This last stipulation may explain the rarely encountered US 1855 pattern socket bayonets that are found with locking rings, but with sockets sized and mortised to fit US Model 1816 muskets. The state of New York sent their 1,200 percussion altered muskets to Ward late in 1857 and he began the alteration work. It is not clear if Ward performed any of the work himself, or if he hired a company to perform it. As the state was paying $4.00 per musket and the work only involved the addition of the hammer and the application of a new percussion bolster, this seems like more than enough money for Ward to hire a gun maker to perform the work and still allow him a reasonable profit. As Ward had previously sold his “magazine hammers” to the government at the rate of $1.50 each, and he had contracted to have them made, there was certainly enough room in the negotiated price for Ward to have the work done by an outside company and probably still realize at least $1.00 per gun profit himself, if not more. However, it appears that only about 300 of the muskets were altered and returned to the state of New York. Ward died in December of 1858, and it appears that the contract was never completed. 

While his death may have played a factor, the poor performance of the first guns delivered resulted in the contract being cancelled by the state. Many of the guns supplied by New York had previously been altered to percussion by the Belgian or “cone-in-barrel” system, and the cones had to be removed from the upper right quadrant of the breech, and the old threaded hole filled. This explains the strangely shaped brazed-on bolster that was applied to Ward hammer-altered muskets. The large sides of the bolster extend to cover the old cone seat hole in the musket barrel and also cover the original flintlock touchhole. That made the bolster equally useful on previously altered muskets or flintlocks that were yet to be converted. The guns supplied by New York were older contract arms of varying age and quality, with some being as old and obsolete as US Model 1812 contract muskets. Extant examples include Whitney Model 1812 muskets, as well as Pomeroy and Waters Model 1816 and 1822 muskets, often called US Model 1816 Muskets Type I, II muskets, respectively. As the quality, age and condition of the muskets varied, it appears that Ward decided not to rifle the barrels, even though the contract implied that this work would be performed. To date, no rifled example of a Ward “magazine hammer” musket has been found. He did, however, add a strange, “squirrel ear” shaped elevating rear sight the muskets, as well as tall brass cone front sight. These rear sights appear to have been old, surplus Sharps Model 1851-1852 rear sights. 

The first of the Ward altered muskets were issued to the 12^th New York Militia Regiment in 1858 and were found lacking. The biggest complaint was that the hinged door that covered the primer magazine on the hammer was fragile, and that nearly half of the issued muskets were soon missing their primer doors. The fragile mechanism in the hammers also performed poorly, and in 1858, the state of New York cancelled the contract with Ward. The initial issue of muskets was removed from the field, and it is probably that those missing their priming doors were subsequently re-altered to regular percussion hammers.  A number of muskets exist with the Ward bolster and sights, but with regular hammers that do not have the primer magazine. These are likely some of the failed muskets from the field issue. The arms remained in the New York state arsenal through the Civil War, with 40 of the guns being issued to the 50^th New York in 1864. In 1867, the 167 Ward altered muskets in New York state inventory were sold as surplus, and the story of the strange mechanical tape primer hammer alteration came to an end. Today, the Ward Magazine Hammer muskets are rarely encountered, and when they are they are usually missing parts from the hammer mechanism, as well as their rear sights and front sights. Complete examples are extremely scarce and examples with complete and functional hammer mechanisms can probably be counted on one hand.

This example of a Ward Magazine Hammer Alteration Musket is in about VERY GOOD+ to NEAR FINE condition. The gun remains essentially complete and correct, with only the “squirrel ear” rear sight being an extremely high-quality reproduction part. The alteration was performed on an Asa Waters contract US Model 1822 musket, aka the US Model 1816 Type II. Like all known surviving examples that I am aware of, it remains smoothbore and has not been rifled. 

The lock of the musket is clearly marked A. WATERS in a single horizontal line forward of the hammer. The tail of the lock is marked in two vertical lines, reading MILLBURY over 1827. The breech plug tang has a clear matching 1827 date on it. The breech is marked in three lines with a US over the inspection initials ET for arsenal sub-inspector Elisha Tobey, over a raised P proof in a depressed sunburst. The reverse of the Ward magazine hammer is marked in two lines:  

J.N. WARD, U.S.A.

PATENTED JULY 1, 1856

The marking clearly stamped and remains fully. The interior of the primer tape magazine recess  is stamped with the “assembly” number 48 with the mismatched assembly number 65 on the reverse of the primer magazine cover door and the number 138 inside the mechanism’s cover plate. According to George Moller’s research  about Ward alterations published in American Military Shoulder Arms – Volume III, these assembly numbers are never known to match. My guess would be the numbers were simply applied to count how many of each part was made. Unlike most surviving Ward Alterations, the hammer mechanism is complete and fully functional. The action of the musket operates correctly on all positions, and amazingly, the hammer mechanism that advances the primer tape operates correctly as well. Cocking the hammer causes the small, spoked wheel in the front of the hammer's head to advance, which would pull the tape from the magazine compartment forward to feed it out the opening in the lower face of the hammer nose. The musket has been lightly cleaned at some point in the past, and the result is that the gun has a mottled lightly oxidized and pewter gray patina, with scattered freckles and patches of scattered oxidized surface roughness and age discoloration over the entire gun. The appearance is fairly even. The metal is lightly and evenly pinpricked over most of the barrel, with some pitting around the breech and bolster area. The musket’s bore is in about GOOD condition. The bore is moderately and evenly oxidized with some evenly scattered roughness and some scattered pitting. The thinness of the barrel makes it obvious that Ward’s choice not to rifle these muskets was certainly the “better part of valor”.  The musket is mounted with a museum grade replica “squirrel ear” shaped adjustable rear sight. These sights are almost always missing or broken and the quality of this reproduction displays far better than the empty dovetail. However, the equally fragile, original tall, tapered brass cone front sight that was added during the alteration process remains in place. The rear sight leaf adjusts smoothly and operates as it should. The musket also retains an original, full-length button head ramrod that is complete with threads on the end. Both original sling swivels are also present, another uncommon feature on a musket of this age, considering the gun was about some two decades old when it was converted to the Ward system. The stock of the musket is in about VERY GOOD+ to NEAR FINE condition. The stock remains solid and complete and is full length with no breaks or repairs noted. The stock still retains relatively sharp lines and edges. The counterpane of the stock, opposite the lock retains clear and legible script ET cartouche, the mark of US arsenal sub-inspector Elisha Tobey, matching Tobey’s mark on the breech of the gun. The counterpane also retains a clear script JPC over the number 3 rating cartouche. This mark was applied by when arsenal sub-inspector James P Champman was inspecting flintlock muskets in storage during the 1840s as part of the Major Hager inspection party. Chapman worked with that team during the years 1842-1845. A small vertical capital V inspection mark is stamped near the tail of the counterpane as well. Although the stock shows the usual bumps, dings and mars from service and use that would be expected in a musket that is 200 years old, the stock does not appear to have been sanded. 

Overall, this is a very nice example of a very scarce Ward Magazine Hammer Alteration Musket. Amazingly the gun is complete and correct in every way, with the exception of the high quality replaced rear sight. With only about 300 of the guns altered by the Ward system for New York, these are extremely scarce on today’s collector’s market. When you do find these guns, they are often in rough condition, missing parts like the rear sight or primer magazine cover, and rarely is the feed mechanism complete and fully functional as it is in this example.  For any collector of percussion conversion and alteration muskets, this is one of the very scarce “must have” guns, to go along with your Remington-Maynard conversion and your Nippes-Maynard conversion, and if you are really lucky your Butterfield conversion. While certainly not pristine, the gun is far better than most of the survivors, has a nice look to it and is one of the harder mechanical primer alterations to find for sale.