Cartridge Box Question

[Pvt. McNutt]

I have been curious with this question for some time now. I had found through personal experience at events that I can hold substantially more rounds in my cartridge box if I remove the tins. So far I haven't had any issues with rounds breaking due to rough use of the cartridge box, but I was curious if there was any evidence that this was done by the soldiers (ever looking to carry more rounds into an engagement)? I have found the tins to be useless weight, as they haven't made much of a difference in protection of rounds vs without the tins, but again I was wondering if anyone had any evidence or opinion one way or the other on this issue.

And while we're on the topic, I was also wondering if there is any evidence that the cartridge box breastplate or US plate was discarded by the Federal soldiers in attempts to lighten the loads? I had heard that the breastplate was quickly tossed, as it made for a better target for Johnny to aim at, but was there any evidence of this being done with the cartridge box plate as well? IMO, it just adds useless weight, but in all the pictures I have seen, US plates still adorned their cartridge boxes.

This may very well be opinion based, so all opinions are welcome!

Thank you for your time,

[jake.koch]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

I have never looked into this as to whether or not it was done during the war or not. However I will say that you will not find the tins to be "useless weight" if a spark ever lands in amongst your rounds. Those tins are there so that a huge chunk of your hip isn't blown off if something were to set those rounds off. I believe this to be an issue where safety takes precedence. That little bit of extra weight is a small price to pay in exchange for protection against a pretty debilitating injury. If rounds are rolled and packaged like the originals were anyway then one shouldn't be able to fit much more in there. In my opinion you should not be allowed to field without tins.

Extra rounds were carried in arsenal packs in either pockets or knapsacks. This may not be your intention but your question is phrased as if you are asking how to burn powder the fastest.

As far as box plates, part of their function is to hold down the leather flap on the box, however they were starting to be replaced by an embossed leather US by the end of the war so I don't know how much weight (pun intended) that concept holds.

[Brian Baird]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

Tins & plates were issued to soldiers and if they were "lost" through neglect, soldiers would have been "charged" for them. Remember when not on campaign, Sunday's where for inspections and things like missing plates or tins would have been noted and the soldier made to pay for his neglect. Somewhere I have a report about an inspecting officer complaining that soldiers had thrown away the tins during a battle and he was inspecting and condemning them for not have tins.
Brian Baird

[Pvt. McNutt]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

I really hadn't taken into consideration the safety advantages with the tins. That makes a little more sense, I had thought they were purely for protection of the rounds, not protection of the wearer.

And no, my intention is not meant to be "how can I burn powder the fastest", but more along the lines of "how can I store more rounds safely". I have found that even with the period correct size rounds (minnie ball wadding included), that I can still store a good bit more rounds in the cartridge box in the manner described. Anytime I have ever tried to store rounds in a knapsack, pockets, etc. the rounds package always comes out to be a wad of paper-powder mess after a nice march, and I'm left with half of the rounds I started with. So I'll re-phrase that question a bit; has anyone come across a good way to store their extra rounds without crushing them?

As far as holding down the leather flap, that thought had crossed my mind. I had found that it does save the hassle of picking up your rounds scattered around you after a good death, but in any other scenario, my flaps haven't been too resistant on folding down to their proper place without the plate. I guess it's not that much extra though, so I'll go with every picture I've examined and keep the cartridge box plate on.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

Hallo!

Although there are exceptions, NUG (normally, usually, generally) the military did things for reasons. But some reenactors do things for other reasons.
IMHO, it is never a good idea to base anything upon what one sees being done at a reenactment.

For example, the cartridge box tins also served to protect fragile cartridges from breakage. This is a greater consideration "for real" than reenacting because a cartridge with a heavy lead bullet on one end behaves differently than a blank cartridge. Plus, a Civil War soldier had his arsenal bundles that did not fit into the loose "ready-round" portion of the open upper tin or in the arsenal bundle that fit underneath somewhere on his person whether say pockets or knapsack.
And contrary to some reenactors, 100 rounds of CW ammunition does not occupy the same amount of space as 100 blanks rolled like pencils.

And last, 40 rounds of actual ammunition brought the cartridge box up to something near five pounds which is a factro few reenactors experience with blank rounds except for a few radicals who add teh 4.5ish pounds of lead to the boxes to get the "historical feel" of a fully loaded box.

Concerns about weight seemed to have been focused on the Period discussions as to waistbelts versus shoulder belt suspension and effects of fully loaded boxes on soldiers' bodies. None of the discussions ever looked to the "useless weight" of the breastplate and cartridge box flap plates. In May of 1864 Major Theodore Rodman
wrote about his views of the new March 26, 1864 pattern accoutrements echoing some views presented as early as 1858 that the two plates were useless. Plus, Rodman's views coincided with a desire to cut costs, as the costs of accoutrements sets at 19 cents for the two would save the government $190 per thousand (or $19,000 for the 100,000 sets aboiut to ordered).

And historically last.... soldiers were issued their accoutrements, could be, were, fined for losing them. (However, there are Period photographs of companies where most lads have them and some lads are missing them.)

Curt

[Marine Mike]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

Speaking from a Marine impression, the accoutrements were gumint propity and returned to the gumint with your dress epualets at termination of your enlistment. There were penalties of extra duty if your tins were not in your cartridge box at inspection any time during your enlistment. You were expected to keep the government equipment complete and in good repair while you were in posession. That seems to be consistent with what I've read about Army regular. Some of the things I've read of Federal volunteers seems to be all over the map.
I carry 20 above and 20 below so I can get the experience as well as the safety factor though I know you can easlily pack 60 lady fingers in the top bunk without a lot of work.
Mike Stein

[Brandon]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

You mentioned soldiers being able to carry more rounds into an engagement. Why would you need to carry more rounds into battle, ammunition was delivered to the front as needed. Where would get all of the excess ammunition anyways?

[Brian Baird]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

Brandon,
There are numerous times when more than 40 rounds were carried. If my memory is correct, the federals carried 100 rounds at the start of the Hooker's Chancellorsville campaign.
Brian Baird

[Brandon]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

If your memory serves you right then I stand corrected. I had not heard of 100 rounds being carried by each man before. No wonder Lee out maneuvered Hooker's army as bad as he did, The Federals could hardly carry themselves because of the 13 pounds of ammunition they had been lugging around for weeks. Really how common was it for troops to carry a surplus of ammunition while on campaign?

[luthhaning]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

In addition to some of the other reasons mentioned why not to remove the tins is that in doing so you may compromise the durability of the box. Tins are the backbone so to speak that keep everything together. Sure boxes were used with out tins I suppose due to being lost etc. but the life of the box would have been diminished in my opinnion. Boxes are built from the inside out beginning with the prism that the rounds will occupy.

Tim Welch

[ktulu983]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

Not to get too much off topic but does anyone know of a decent way to simulate the weight of line ammo in the cartridge box? I believe it would be an interesting experience on a march to burden the true weight on your hip.

[itz3r1k]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

brandon,

the way they could have gotten it is if they had extra rounds after a battle when they got issued more rounds. and and it would have taken a little while to get the ammunition taken to the front and distributed to the soldier's i read one account that it took over and hour to get rounds to all the men.

[jake.koch]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

I may be mistaken, and if there is somebody that is more knowledgeable in this area please correct me, but were not "extra rounds" collected after a battle. I have been led to believe that the only times Civil War soldiers would be carrying live rounds were on campaign, on guard, or those unfortunately rare cases of target practice. The Chancelorsville case of Hooker ordering his men to march with a hundred rounds was rare. Most accounts I have read speak of soldiers on campaign being issued their 40 rounds that went into their box. If action was apparent they would be issued more. Other then if you were about to go into battle you should have at most 40 rounds. If you were issued more cartridges beforehand it is unlikely that you have have a plethora of rounds after the battle because you would have used them.

[Pvt_Sullivan]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

Not to get too much off topic but does anyone know of a decent way to simulate the weight of line ammo in the cartridge box? I believe it would be an interesting experience on a march to burden the true weight on your hip.

Bob,

I haven't done this personnally, but I have seen a set of cartidge box tins another fellow had where he took 20 shot, melted them and then reformed them as a plate in the bottom of the tin to replicate the weight of the shot. Twenty blank rounds of powder added and you've come as close to the actual weight as loading it with complete live rounds as is possible.

[robert-m]

Re: Cartridge Box Question

There are also accounts during the Atlanta campaign that the 13th corps were issued 20 to 40 extra rounds. There was no mention of the rounds being replaced back in the arsenal boxes. But contrary to belief the fighting in the Atlanta campaign never really stopped for any period of time. Thus the reason there are so many engagements of the campaign with in the months of May and June. Pretty much form Resaca in mid may to Kennesaw Mountain in mid June the armies covered the whole of Northwest Georgia, that's 75 to 80 miles covered in a short time frame. This is why I believe that the rounds would have staid on their person and not place back to the arsenal boxes.

And as far as the real time weight of a fully loaded box I took a molded 4 lbs of lead into a block and placed it in the bottom of my box under my tins.