Mason, William

Name	Town	State	From	To
Mason, William	Taunton	Massachusetts	1862
Mason, William	Illion, Herkimer county	New York	1865
Mason, William	Hartford	Connecticut	1870s
Mason, William	New Haven	Connecticut		1883

Patent	Date	Remarks
51,117	November 21, 1865	Improvement in revolving Fire-Arms, assigned to E. Remington & Sons, Ilion, New York view patent
53,539	Mars 27, 1866	Improvement in revolving Fire-Arms, assigned to E. Remington & Sons, Ilion, New York Patent drawing Claims Claims 2nd page
128,644	July 2, 1872	Improvement in Revolving Fire-Arms. assigned to Colts Patent Fire-Arms Manufacturing Company Patent drawing Claims
158,957	January 19, 1875	Improvement in Revolving Fire-Arms, assigned to Colts Patent Fire-Arms Manufacturing Company Patent drawing Claims Claims, 2nd page
511,631	December 26, 1893	Breech-Loading Firearm, assigned to Winchester Repeating Arms Company Patent drawing Claims Claims 2nd page Claims 3rd page
511,632	December 26, 1893	Breech-Loading Gun, assigned to Winchester Repeating Arms Company Patent drawing Claims Claims 2nd page
511,633	December 26, 1893	Breech-Loading Firearm, assigned to Winchester Repeating Arms Company Patent drawing Patent drawing Claims Claims 2nd page Claims 3nd page

Contract	for
War Department Brig. General Riply, January 7th, 1862	50,000 Model 1 rifle muskets at $20 piece an "50,000 if they were to be manufactured in your own establishment"
War Department, June 25th, 1862	30,000 Model 1 rifle muskets. The first contract was amended and redused.

Product
William Mason was born in Mystic, Connecticut on September 2, 1808. He died on May 21, 1883. His tombstone can be find in Mount Pleasant Cemetery, Taunton, Massachusetts. William Mason learned blacksmith and manufacturing trades and installed in Taunton, Massachusetts where he set up a factory. He was able to visualizin an object and designing and then manufacturing it. He Desired to learn to play the violin, obtained blueprints and isntructions and made his own one and mastered the instrument. Mason made textile machinery and other machinery. During the Civil War he produced over 30 locomotives for the U.S. Military Rail Road Service. Four of them were named after U.S. Genrals, Burnside, Haupt, Robinson and Sickles. Mason had his own proving house in Mason Machine Works. Several barrel inspectors have worked at Taunton, e.g. Major Peter V. Hagner, U.S. Ordnance worked in early 1863 to prove 500 of Mason's barrels. To meet this obligation with the U.S. government, Mason modified and retoold his factory and contracted with other manufacturere for smaller part as locks, bayonets and barrels. On March 18, 1862, Judge Joseph Holt and arms agent Robert Owen were commissioned by Secretary of War Edwin Stanton to examine, audit, and adjust all arms and accoutrement contracts, and to limit the size of contracts to reduce waste and expenditures by the U.S. government. In dissecting Mason's contract, "manufactured at your own establishment in Taunton"appeared to them to exclude any and all sub-contracting, and that the entire musket should have been produced at Mason Machine works. Mason travelled to Washington, D.C. in June, 1862 to argue his case with the Holt-Owen commission. Despite having expended approximately $589,000 in anticipation of producing the full 100,000 rifle muskets, the commission struck down the number to 25,000 stands of arms only. This astonishing reduction would serve to nearly bankrupt Mason. Despite Mason's passionate arguments, he could not improve his contract, with the exception of a token upgrade to 30,000. Mason knew that he could not afford the total annulment of his contract with subsequent severe financial loss. He also knew that muskets were urgently needed by the army, and the outlook for the country at this time, early in the war, was very uncertain. Thus, he grudgingly submitted to the commission's requirements and signed the amended contract for 30,000 stands of arms on June 25, 1862. For perspective, Mason's contract was reduced (perhaps arbitrarily) by 70,000 guns, but at this time period and later, the U.S. government contracted with multiple other manufacturers (many of them relatively unknown) for approximately 612,730 muskets costing approximately $12,254,600. Mason Musket Delivery: May/June 1863 500 shipped to Watertown, Massachusetts June 1863 1,000 shipped to Watertown, Massachusetts July 1863 1,000 shipped to Watertown, Massachusetts August 1863 1,000 shipped to Watertown, Massachusetts September 19, 1863 2,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York October 1863 1,500 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York November 1863 1,500 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York December 1863 2,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York January 1864 1,500 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York February 1,500 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York March 1864 2,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York April 1864 2,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York May 1864 3,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York June 1864 3,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York July 1864 3,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York August 1864 3,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York Total = 30,000 Muskets delivered. The majority of Mason muskets from mid 1863 untill end of production in 1864 are inspected "F.C.S" which was very likely C. Sevard who was ordered to the Mason factory on June 23, 1863. Contrary to this possible problem piece, the majority of Mason's muskets were of high quality. Inspected muskets were reimbursed according to classifications: Class 1 = $20, Class 2 = $19.90, Class 21/2 = $19.00, Class 3 = $18.00, Class 4 = $16.00. Ordnance reports indicated that Mason received an average of $19.89 per musket. Mason's total reported receipts from the Ordnance Department were $596,316.90. Post war, Mason sued the federal government in the Court of Claims for $500,000 for losses incurred by the U.S. Department of Ordnance's abrogation of the initial contract for 100,000 stands of muskets. Secretary of War Simon Cameron testified for Mason: "Up to the time I left the War Office, we never had arms enough, and there was scarcely a day that President Lincoln did not send urgent appeals to me for arms. I was con- vinced that we needed a million muskets, for the million men I was preparing for the field, and another million to be ready to put into their hands fast as they were lost or destroyed ..." Mason lost his case at the Court of Claims based upon the fact that he ultimately signed the reduced contract for 30,000 under "free will". If he had refused this amended contract, failed to produce the sorely needed muskets for the Union during the early days of the war at such a critical time of national defense, and then sued the U.S. government, he undoubtedly would have won! Mason appealed to the U.S. Supreme COurt in 1872. Unfortunately, this court upheld the ruling of the previous one. However, Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase held a powerfully dissenting opinion: "I am unable to concur in the opinion just read. The original contract was honestly and fairly made without taint of fraud. This is not disputed. Large preparation at great expense was made by the claimant (Mason) for the fulfillment of it on his part. It was violated by the United States without reasonable cause, as I think, as expressly found by the Court of Claims, without the consent, and against the remonstrances of the claimant. A modified contract, so called, but really a second contract, was then made between the parties, which was ful- filled on both sides: but there is nothing to show that this con- tract was freely made, or made at all by the claimant in place of the first, or that payment of the sums due under it from the U.S. was accepted by him in satisfaction of damages for the breach of the first. I think that the Unites States are not absolved in their dealings with citizens from the obligations of honesty by which individuals are usually controlled, and that the claimant is entitled to damages." Despite of these setbacks, William Mason and his Mason Machine Works continued into the 1880s. Machinery and locomotives were produced. The physical plant passed to several owners and finally burned down as Grossmanßs Luber Co. in 1970. .58 caliber percussion, Model 1861 rifle muskets during the Civil War marked US/WM MASON/TAUNTON and with production date. The barrels may have barrel inspecotr marks. marking, on the right side right side

Product

William Mason was born in Mystic, Connecticut on September 2, 1808. He died on May 21, 1883. His tombstone can be find in Mount Pleasant Cemetery, Taunton, Massachusetts. William Mason learned blacksmith and manufacturing trades and installed in Taunton, Massachusetts where he set up a factory. He was able to visualizin an object and designing and then manufacturing it. He Desired to learn to play the violin, obtained blueprints and isntructions and made his own one and mastered the instrument.

Mason made textile machinery and other machinery. During the Civil War he produced over 30 locomotives for the U.S. Military Rail Road Service. Four of them were named after U.S. Genrals, Burnside, Haupt, Robinson and Sickles.

Mason had his own proving house in Mason Machine Works. Several barrel inspectors have worked at Taunton, e.g. Major Peter V. Hagner, U.S. Ordnance worked in early 1863 to prove 500 of Mason's barrels.

To meet this obligation with the U.S. government, Mason modified and retoold his factory and contracted with other manufacturere for smaller part as locks, bayonets and barrels.

On March 18, 1862, Judge Joseph Holt and arms agent Robert Owen were commissioned by Secretary of War Edwin Stanton to examine, audit, and adjust all arms and accoutrement contracts, and to limit the size of contracts to reduce waste and expenditures by the U.S. government. In dissecting Mason's contract, "manufactured at your own establishment in Taunton"appeared to them to exclude any and all sub-contracting, and that the entire musket should have been produced at Mason Machine works. Mason travelled to Washington, D.C. in June, 1862 to argue his case with the Holt-Owen commission. Despite having expended approximately $589,000 in anticipation of producing the full 100,000 rifle muskets, the commission struck down the number to 25,000 stands of arms only. This astonishing reduction would serve to nearly bankrupt Mason. Despite Mason's passionate arguments, he could not improve his contract, with the exception of a token upgrade to 30,000. Mason knew that he could not afford the total annulment of his contract with subsequent severe financial loss. He also knew that muskets were urgently needed by the army, and the outlook for the country at this time, early in the war, was very uncertain. Thus, he grudgingly submitted to the commission's requirements and signed the amended contract for 30,000 stands of arms on June 25, 1862. For perspective, Mason's contract was reduced (perhaps arbitrarily) by 70,000 guns, but at this time period and later, the U.S. government contracted with multiple other manufacturers (many of them relatively unknown) for approximately 612,730 muskets costing approximately $12,254,600.

Mason Musket Delivery:

May/June 1863 500 shipped to Watertown, Massachusetts
June 1863 1,000 shipped to Watertown, Massachusetts
July 1863 1,000 shipped to Watertown, Massachusetts
August 1863 1,000 shipped to Watertown, Massachusetts
September 19, 1863 2,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
October 1863 1,500 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
November 1863 1,500 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
December 1863 2,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
January 1864 1,500 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
February 1,500 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
March 1864 2,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
April 1864 2,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
May 1864 3,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
June 1864 3,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
July 1864 3,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
August 1864 3,000 shipped to Watervliet Arsenal, New York
Total = 30,000 Muskets delivered.

The majority of Mason muskets from mid 1863 untill end of production in 1864 are inspected "F.C.S" which was very likely C. Sevard who was ordered to the Mason factory on June 23, 1863.

Contrary to this possible problem piece, the majority of Mason's muskets were of high quality. Inspected muskets were reimbursed according to classifications:
Class 1 = $20,
Class 2 = $19.90,
Class 21/2 = $19.00,
Class 3 = $18.00,
Class 4 = $16.00.
Ordnance reports indicated that Mason received an average of $19.89 per musket. Mason's total reported receipts from the Ordnance Department were $596,316.90.

Post war, Mason sued the federal government in the Court of Claims for $500,000 for losses incurred by the U.S. Department of Ordnance's abrogation of the initial contract for 100,000 stands of muskets. Secretary of War Simon Cameron testified for Mason:

"Up to the time I left the War Office, we never had
arms enough, and there was scarcely a day that President
Lincoln did not send urgent appeals to me for arms. I was con-
vinced that we needed a million muskets, for the million men
I was preparing for the field, and another million to be ready
to put into their hands fast as they were lost or destroyed ..."

Mason lost his case at the Court of Claims based upon the fact that he ultimately signed the reduced contract for 30,000 under "free will". If he had refused this amended contract, failed to produce the sorely needed muskets for the Union during the early days of the war at such a critical time of national defense, and then sued the U.S. government, he undoubtedly would have won!

Mason appealed to the U.S. Supreme COurt in 1872. Unfortunately, this court upheld the ruling of the previous one. However, Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase held a powerfully dissenting opinion:

"I am unable to concur in the opinion just read. The original
contract was honestly and fairly made without taint of fraud.
This is not disputed. Large preparation at great expense was
made by the claimant (Mason) for the fulfillment of it on his
part. It was violated by the United States without reasonable
cause, as I think, as expressly found by the Court of Claims,
without the consent, and against the remonstrances of the
claimant. A modified contract, so called, but really a second
contract, was then made between the parties, which was ful-
filled on both sides: but there is nothing to show that this con-
tract was freely made, or made at all by the claimant in place
of the first, or that payment of the sums due under it from the
U.S. was accepted by him in satisfaction of damages for the
breach of the first. I think that the Unites States are not
absolved in their dealings with citizens from the obligations
of honesty by which individuals are usually controlled, and
that the claimant is entitled to damages."

Despite of these setbacks, William Mason and his Mason Machine Works continued into the 1880s. Machinery and locomotives were produced. The physical plant passed to several owners and finally burned down as Grossmanßs Luber Co. in 1970.

.58 caliber percussion, Model 1861 rifle muskets during the Civil War marked US/WM MASON/TAUNTON and with production date. The barrels may have barrel inspecotr marks.

marking, on the right side
right side