William Glaze of Columbia, SC entered the arms business through the same somewhat circuitous route as several other famous antebellum southern entrepreneurs, most notably Hyde & Goodrich of New Orleans. Both were dealers in a variety of items from jewelry to fancy goods and also imported similar items for sale. The firms had little or no experience with arms or weapons initially. Glaze entered the jewelry business in the late 1830s and by 1848 had partnered with Thomas Radcliffe of Columbia for a joint venture. Radcliffe was also a jeweler, silversmith and fancy goods dealer who also dabbled in firearms sales. Antebellum examples of Thomas Radcliffe imported, English-made Tranter revolvers are known to exist, as are other arms that bear his retailer mark. In 1849, the pair entered into an arrangement to sell arms to the state of South Carolina for the use of the state’s militia. That year the state acquired 100 muskets and 274 rifles from the partners, all of which they simply purchased from northern makers and resold to the state at a profit. The rifles were of the US Model 1841 pattern and were made by Whitney, although modified with barrels that would accept a socket bayonet. The muskets appear to have been US Model 1842 percussion muskets that were procured from Asa Waters, who would play a pivotal role in the soon to be formed Palmetto Armory of William Glaze. The following year the Glaze & Radcliffe partnership sold an additional 640 Model 1842 muskets to the state of South Carolina, this time they were obtained from Benjamin Flagg, who had previously worked as the foreman in the Waters operation and who was attempting to strike out on his own.

By March of 1851 the partnership between Glaze and Radcliffe had dissolved, with Radcliffe returning to his pre-partnership business of general line and fancy good sale sales, while Glaze pursued a new career as an “arms maker”. Glaze partnered with Benjamin Flagg and James Boatwright in the establishment of what would be known to history as the Palmetto Armory, which was originally named the Palmetto Iron Works. Boatwright, however, would not remain with the firm for long. Both partners were instrumental in the initial success of the venture, as Glaze had neither manufacturing experience nor any real experience in the arms trade, other than the small group of weapons that had been sold by Radcliffe and himself in 1849 and 1850. As previously mentioned, Flagg had served as Water’s foreman before venturing out on his own. Flagg had all the required knowledge to establish a functional armory, all the contacts to acquire the necessary machinery to make arms, as well as to obtain already manufactured arms components. Boatwright was an old friend of the Glaze family who was well-connected  politically, with the necessary contacts to obtain further state contracts for arms.

The looming crisis between the slave holding states of the south and the free states of the north was clearly in forefront of the minds of the South Carolina government as they sought to establish the ability to manufacture arms within their own state, rather than rely upon arms from northern factories. This path had been successfully followed by the state of Virginia during the first two decades of the 19^th century and likely served as a model for the new South Carolina operation that the government sought to establish via Glaze and his partners. In April of 1851 the new company had a factory “facility” but was as of yet unlikely capable of producing much of anything. However, they entered into an agreement with the state of South Carolina to provide the following arms: 6,000 percussion muskets, 2,000 percussion pistols (1,000 pairs) and 1,000 each of rifles, dragoon, and artillery sabers. The items ordered, and their relative ratios of production, three times as many muskets as pistols, half the number of dragoon sabers as pistols, etc., looked quite oddly like the products and output ratios of the Virginia Manufactory. The contract specified that the arms were to be delivered during the calendar year 1852 and were to be of the current US patterns then in use. In others words the arms were to be US Model 1842 pattern muskets, US Model 1842 pattern pistols, US Model 1841 pattern rifles and US Model 1840 cavalry and light artillery sabers. However, the most important contract requirement noted that “These arms and their component parts, to be manufactured within the State of South Carolina, of the best material and workmanship and as far as practicable, of material and by mechanics obtained in the state foresaid.” From this contractual clause it is clear that the State of South Carolina was trying to establish a Virginia Manufactory type facility and wanted to be completely independent of any reliance upon the industrial north for the manufacture of the arms. This contractual clause would be Glaze’s undoing in the end.

It appears that even though Glaze built a factory and acquired some machinery, he never intended to actually fabricate arms in the facility. Rather he intended, at the most, to acquire finished components and assemble them into complete arms. As noted by collector, researcher, and author Lew Southard in his excellent article The Origin of the Palmetto Pistols (American Society of Arms Collectors Bulletin 81:29-42) the “economy of scale” clearly indicated that Glaze had no intention to manufacture complete arms. The very cost of the tooling and machinery to manufacture muskets, rifles, pistols and two patterns of sabers would have been so enormous that only large contracts, in excess of at least 10,000 units of each item, would have justified such a substantial capital outlay. By comparison, Southard notes that the initial Henry Aston contract for US Model 1842 pistols was for 30,000 handguns, thus justifying the capital investment. It also took Aston nearly two years from the date of the contract acceptance to the deliver his first pistols. Clearly Glaze’s contract for 2,000 pistols, to be delivered within a year, was only possible if he were to rely upon a source of completed parts, if not completed pistols themselves. The later US contract with Ira Johnson was for 10,000 Model 1842 pistols, but this was only economically feasible because Johnson was a partner of Aston’s and had access to the Aston tooling and machinery to manufacture the guns, rather than having to tool up from scratch. So, it was clearly upon the Aston-Johnson partnership that Glaze was relying in order to deliver pistols when he accepted the South Carolina contract. Correspondence exists that proves out this point, that via Glaze’s partner Flagg, as well as the earlier Glaze relationship with Waters, a deal was struck to supply finished components to the Palmetto Armory for assembly into complete pistols. Similar arrangements were made to “manufacture” and deliver the other items contained in the contract, muskets, rifles and sabers. In the case of the sabers, Glaze relied upon imported swords from Solingen (Germany), which he marked to suggest he had made them, to fill that portion of the contract.

It is less clear how Glaze managed to deliver the socket bayonets that he was required to deliver with the rifles and muskets specified in the contract. During the period long arms were typically contracted for as a “stand of arms” which at the least included an accompanying bayonet for the gun, and often some other accessories, such as spare percussion cones, gun tools and bullet molds, based upon a specific ratio that was normally pre-established. For example, bullet molds were usually delivered at the rate of one mold for every ten to twenty muskets during the period, while standard combination gun tools were typically delivered with every gun. The source for the Glaze delivered bayonets is not clear, but the fact that there is some variation in the socket bayonets that he delivered is evidence of both the use of a variety of parts from differing sources to make the guns and the fact that the bayonets themselves probably came from multiple sources.

Robert Rielly, in his seminal work American Socket Bayonets and Scabbards shows the three primary variants of the socket bayonets that Glaze delivered with his Palmetto Muskets. These appear as Figures B85, B86 (with B86A as detail) and B87 and are pictured on page 69 and described on pages 58-59. The example that probably best known to collectors it the B86 variant. This was simply a US Model 1816 type socket bayonet that was likely obtained as surplus and had the letters SC over WG stamped over the original inspection marks on the ricasso. They were simply re-marked regulation Model 1816 style bayonets with 16” blades, and friction fit sockets with the traditional T-shaped mortise, which was mortised for a top mounted bayonet stud. Examples B85 and B87 more closely conformed to the current production US Model 1835 socket bayonet of the period. They had 18” blades with scalloped shoulders like the standard Model 1835 socket bayonet, but both were equipped with friction fit sockets as well, without a locking ring. These 18” Glaze delivered bayonets were simply stamped SC on the ricasso. Example B85 had an L-shaped, rather than a T-shaped mortise and was mortised for a bottom mounting stud. Example B87 had a rudimentary T-shaped mortise but was mortised for a top mounting stud. The fact that Glaze had to deliver bayonets mortised for both top and bottom bayonet mounting studs underscores his use of parts from a variety of sources to make the muskets, including surplus Model 1816 type musket barrels. It appears that the 18” bladed bayonets were likely newly made for the Glaze contracts, but the maker is not known. The examples mortised for a bottom stud (Figure 85) were for the guns with Model 1842 type barrels and studs. Interestingly, these bayonets appear to have been delivered with lacquer browned finishes, as when fine condition examples are encountered, they invariably show evidence of having been browned.

Offered here is a Very Fine condition example of a Rare William Glaze Palmetto Armory Musket Socket Bayonet that of the Reilly B85 type. The bayonet is essentially a US Model 1835 socket bayonet made without a locking ring. The bayonet is marked with a clear SC on the ricasso and shows no other markings. It has the standard 1835 type 18” blade with scalloped shoulders, a 16 ¼” face flute, and a 2 ⁵/₈” socket with an L-mortise that is cut for a bottom stud. As noted, the socket is made without a locking ring. The muzzle diameter of the bayonet is nominally .835”. These bayonets appear with muzzle diameters that appear to vary between about .82” and .84”. The muzzle to stud distance is 1.06”. The bayonet is finished with a National Armory Brown style lacquered brown finish. 

As noted, the bayonet remains in Very Fine condition. The bayonet retains about 70%+ of  its original browned finish, with a somewhat streaky appearance as some areas of the brown have worn and flaked. The areas where the brighter surface lacquer brown is gone, the metal has a duller, thinned and faded brown base color. As is so common on socket bayonets that saw any real use, there are a number of scattered dings, dents and impact marks on the bayonet. There are some around both the front and rear of the socket, but they do not appear to affect the ability of the bayonet to be mounted on a musket. There are also a number of impact marks along the reverse side of the upper edge of the bayonet’s blade, with about 4” worth of dings and nicks that start about 5 ½” from the shoulder. The metal of the bayonet is mostly smooth, with some scattered areas of minor oxidized surface roughness and scattered surface oxidation shot through the remaining finish. The socket remains appropriately round with no obvious compression or deformation. Other than the fact that these bayonets and muskets were not made to the same level of interchangeability as US arsenal produced examples, the bayonet will likely fit on a bottom stud Palmetto Musket, but as they are not truly interchangeable parts arms, this is the possibility that it will not fit.

Overall, this is a really wonderful example of a rather rear, Antebellum South Carolina socket bayonet by William Glaze. It is worth noting that in addition to delivering the original bayonets with the 6,000 Palmetto muskets that Glaze sold to South Carolina, he did have a few “spare” bayonets available for sale when the Civil War erupted. He offered to sell the state “50 or 60 eighteen inch bayonets and 140-150 sixteen inch” bayonets at the beginning of the war, which were obviously left over from the contract and likely retained by Glaze in case the state needed any replacements for bayonets that were lost or damaged. Even adding these “spare” bayonets to the production totals, it appears unlikely that Glaze “produced” more than about 6,200 socket bayonets for muskets, in three variations. Realistically it seems unlikely that no more than about half of those bayonets were of the 18” bladed, bottom stud type. This would be a fantastic addition to your display of a fine Palmetto Musket with a bottom stud or to any advanced bayonet collection, particularly one that concentrates on Confederate bayonets.

ON HOLD