Packaged Rounds for Shiloh

[pipthelimey]

Is the preference for labels printed on the wrapping paper or separate labels pasted on the packages? If pasted, should they be pasted under or over the string?

Thanks,
Andrew Jerram

[Silas]

In reviewing my copy of the Confederate Field Manual - yeah, I know it's for the gray side - I see labels under the string. Although, on one of them, it's a stamp apparently under the string.

Page 40 of Blue EoG has a pack, but it's hard to tell if it's a stamp or a label. String is over the stamp or label. Page 46 is a label. Page 48 is a label.

That's a quick look. I'm sure others will pop up with additional information from photos or from the regulations. I'd go with label under the string. If you've got a stamp, that would also pass muster. I know of someone in my neck of the woods who took a label to a stationary store. One week later, he had a stamp.

For those who have not yet gotten around to rolling those rounds, here is a link to Patrick Reardon's article about same : http://www.swcwa.com/Links/Military_...CARTRIDGES.pdf His article had been linked on my own links page, but the Lazy Jacks server keeps moving around. The link in this paragraph is good as I did a quick google search and pulled it down.

I went to Patrick's article in hopes for a more clear answer about labels verses stamps. He suggested using different colored paper for the wrappers as he declined to enter the label verses stamp discussion.

[PetePaolillo]

Andrew, here is a pic of an original from 64 with a stamped package. I do not know wat arsenal this one was from.
BOX898.JPG

[Matt Woodburn]

Andrew,

According to Todd Bemis who did the research on the St. Louis 1862 label, it was originally stamped directly onto the wrapper. So that's the super correct version I sent. Since wrapping rounds in slightly heavier printer paper which is heavier than original wrapper paper is harder than something closer to newsprint, you also have the option of using the glued label method I also sent. Put that label under the string if you go with that version. The most perfect method would be the stamped version on a newsprint weight paper. Ask me sometime about when I was the newsletter editor for my unit and tried to print on newsprint at a Kinkos. I broke about every copier in the place in the middle of the night. Never did that again.

[Resaca]

Yeah, I tried to run the newsprint stock through the printers here at work with no success. Tried to put the Westville paper on it - no way.

When we still had the offset press, I could do it. Ran a lot of the Enfield wrappers through that old press, I sure miss it.

I finally had some hand held stamps made through an office supply company to do the Enfield wrappers, one for each year,'62-'63-'64.

That might be an option for someone.

Tony Patton

[poilu1917]

All,
I have used the following newsprint in my laser printer at home with success. Though I haven't tried the kraft paper, this still maybe an option for some:

http://www.papermart.com/Product%20P...?GroupID=18941

Hope this helps!

[rpierson]

Andrew,

According to Todd Bemis who did the research on the St. Louis 1862 label, it was originally stamped directly onto the wrapper. So that's the super correct version I sent. Since wrapping rounds in slightly heavier printer paper which is heavier than original wrapper paper is harder than something closer to newsprint, you also have the option of using the glued label method I also sent. Put that label under the string if you go with that version. The most perfect method would be the stamped version on a newsprint weight paper.

Do any original St Louis wrappers feature a glued label?

Also, I note some heavy differences between the two labels. 2.jpg or this : StLouisArsenalLabelSeries.jpg

Font, font size and punctuation are totally different. Hmmmm.

-Randall Pierson

[PetePaolillo]

Gang you will find that styles and design of labels sometimes changed year to year just like advertising does today. Not to speak blasphemy but I am more concerned about people making the rounds correctly considereing the labeles and wrappers will be thrown in the fire or on the ground. I really don't think this is a detail that we should get too hung up on . Does everyone have early war leathers, Sack coat and proper Hardee hat?

Here are some labels from 63 which are similiar to the style that Mr. Woodburn posted. The other style I have seen wer on 64 labels. Here are both for your viewing.

il_fullxfull.280956190.jpg

set of four Civil War Saint Louis Arsenal Cartridge pack labels. The lables were used to mark cartridge packs for the 58 cal. US Springfield Musket. The labels are part of a group of items that were purchased from the Francis Bannerman Company in the mid 1940's.

418241_3416503656495_1387200321_3386108_1217862726_n.jpg

1864 Arsenal pack http://historical.ha.com/c/item.zx?s...lotIdNo=102054

You will aslo find some that were not pretty at all...LOL

Look at these wrapped by a kid no doubt http://www.shilohrelics.com/cgi-bin/...tem.asp?101155

[VA-Patriot'61]

If anyone has the "CRC" or Volume One of "Roundball to Rimfire" there are some very good notes in those regarding St. Louis Arsenal rounds and their packaging and operations in general there. I'm at work so I'll try and remember to dig those up tonight if someone doesn't get to it before me.

[VA-Patriot'61]

Randall,
The label on the left is the closest to the original stamped label on the arsenal packs. Having looked through "Roundball to Rimfire: A History of Civil War Small Arms Ammunition, Part One", pages 61-64 cover the St. Louis Arsenal.

The earlier arsenal packs appear to have been stamped and later in the war had the label glued on, some over, some under, the string used to tie the pack closed. The Columbia Rifles Research Compendium: 2nd Edition, page 110-111 gives very thorough details on how to make and roll a proper St. Louis elongated ball cartridge... Their research has been one of the best investments I've made when it comes to impression improvement. Sadly not enough people take an interest in it.