British Belt & "Ball Pouch"?

[Pritchett Ball]

Back on line again...Thanks Paul!

OK, in the EOG, Arms & Equip of the Union book, on page 203 they have a British Snake buckle Belt with that "Ball Pouch"...
What was the idea behind that Ball pouch? Was this a throw back from the Brunswick Rifle?

I have a Enfield Cartridge Box and cartridges (Enfield style OK, US style too short), and they are not easy to reach for when loading.
US./CS. style cartridge boxes are handier to pull ammo from. Someone told me they thought you transfered the Pritchett Ball ammo in Arsenal Packs, from the Enfield box, (unbundled) to the Ball Pouch. That way the cartridges were loose, and easy to reach when loading.
Any answers to all this?

Kevin Dally

[1stMaine]

Comrade,
You are correct. The ball pouch would be known in later parlance as the "expense pouch" among other nomenclature. You might note that not all British pattern cartridge boxes had the same layout of tins. The NCO pattern, for example, had several compartments of identical size, each designed to hold a single package of ten cartridges. Many patterns of the boxes, as well, had the cap pouch sewn directly to the outside face of the box, resting to one side and under the outer flap. This was the pattern that Massachusetts purchased. Their own arsenal workers removed the pouches and reworked them to be worn as cap boxes in the US system.
There are extant images of Massachusetts soldiers wearing the snake buckle with the "ball Pouch" as a cap pouch...lots of room for caps in that thing, you lnow?
Respects,

[Clark Badgett]

The ball pouch was a 'ready' pouch that held 10 rounds I think. I loved the old Enfield stuff I used to have, but the US/CS style cartridges are unpractical in them.

[1stMaine]

Comrade Clark,
Yup...he idea was to take the package/bundle of ten rounds, unwrap it, and place the rounds into the pouch. Use them up, then open up the next package.
There's a lot to be said for the efficiency of the British system, with the exception of their knapsacks. Overengineered, yes, much like their tompion, but nice looking and relatively well-thought out (all except the knapsack).
The earlier pattern knapsack was a real back-killer, and several regimental surgeons commented that they believed that more injuries and dibilitations were caused by the older style pack than any other cause save disease. The pattern imported into this country was an improvement, to be certain, but i believe that the American pattern knapsacks were of a much better pattern and certainly more effective both in ease of use/capacity, and cost per item.
Respects,

[Clark Badgett]

Tim, I used to have all those reports about the English stuff. Had quite a large pile of it in fact. I used to get a good laugh about the Brits complaining about their pack when it was a lot more comfortable that the US doublebag. At least to me anyway. I need to locate all that neat info (copied from original stuff)