UMC New Club Shot Shell Headstamp Question

Maybe I am unknowing, but I do not see how you could bunter this head after assembly of the hull, especially if primed. It has a paper base wad. How could one exert enough machine pressure to empress the brass without distorting the base wad made of compressed paper? I personally feel it is a late 1891 shell loaded with the “S S” powder and so stamped on the head. The bunter was obviously made to stamp all information of manufacturer and the “S S” (possibly powder type) in oval all at once. Just my novice opinion.

joe

Joe, yes, you are right, it seems that this may have concurred with the introduction of the “Smokeless” shell (1) and certainly decided before the publication of the July 1, 1892 price list. In this regard, in an article dated June 30, 1892 it is mentioned that the company printed a circular accompanying their price list indicating that hereafter they will load “New Club” shells with black powder only, and “Smokeless” and “Trap” shells with smokeless or black powder. Also, the last ad I have found mentioning “New Club” shells loaded with smokeless powder (E. C., S. S. and Schultze) was published in May, 1892.

(1) According to the trademark registration it was first used on March 1, 1892.

Regards,

Fede

Hi all,
A very nice topic!!

Maybe I am completly wrong here.
But since the SS stands for the SS powder ( at least we think )
How about the possibillity that other headstamps also exist??
With Schultze, E.C. Or other powder names.

Just an idea.

Regards rené

polman - That would be interesting to find out. In the one ad that Fede, UMC seemed to be pushing the SS powder. I know that UMC sold the “Walsrode” line of shells too. That was also a brand of powder was it not?

Doug

This is from Jim Buchanan:

The Smokeless Powder Co. 1888 to 1898 produced a number of smokeless powders including, S.R. for rifles - S.V. for revolvers and S.S. for shotshells. I understand that Winchester, the UMC and the USCCo. all loaded shells with S.S.

The attached ad showing Wiebusch & Hilger as sole agents is from a circa 1900s “Forest and Stream” magazine.

This same question was answered some years ago in one of Windy K’s. Shotshell Reviews.

Joe
Personally I don’t really believe or put much faith in catalogs as a reference, too much stuff is wrong. We have probably all heard of the Winchester 3 ga brass shell, but it is not in any Winchester catalog. However Winchester did make and headstamp them. One knowledgeable collector says at least three runs/lots were made at different times. Another old time employee says more that three runs/lots were made.

Doug
Yes Walsrode is / was a powder brand, as you are most likely are aware, sometimes the powder was noted on the topwad / over shot card and most of my New Club shells either just give the load in drams, or say “loaded by U.M.C.CO.” on the TW but I have two which state the powder, one is “Hazard”, and the other “Lafland & Rand” and both have the TW also marked “U.M.C.CO.”.

Rene
The SS marking is very, very rare, “hens teeth” comes to mind. Other than the Walsrode shell brand Doug mentions no other UMC brand comes easily to me, for whatever that’s worth.

[quote]This is from Jim Buchanan:

The Smokeless Powder Co. 1888 to 1898 produced a number of smokeless powders including, S.R. for rifles - S.V. for revolvers and S.S. for shotshells. I understand that Winchester, the UMC and the USCCo. all loaded shells with S.S.

The attached ad showing Wiebusch & Hilger as sole agents is from a circa 1900s “Forest and Stream” magazine.

This same question was answered some years ago in one of Windy K’s. Shotshell Reviews.[/quote]

Hi Chris, great ad and shotshell pictures, thanks for sharing. This company acted as the agent of this powder only during 1895 and 1896, or at least this is what is deducted from advertisements. The rare ad that you are showing was published on June 27, 1896.

Below is a picture of their exhibit at the NY 1895 Exposition that was held at the Madison Square Garden. The three brands represented were: J. Stevens Arms & Tool Co., F. Dumoulin & Co., and The Smokeless Powder Co.

Regards,

Fede

Pete,

Thanks for the info, sounds enlightening to me as I am still learning.
One thing I do not understand is how a completed hull can be headstamped by the loader with a compressed paper base wad inside? I just do not see the feasibility without making a abnormality in the hull as manufactured.

Joe

Note that the July 1, 1892 “black powder only” ad states at the bottom “For Sale by/ John P. Lovell Arms Co./Boston, Mass.”

Could this be a Lovell produced ad based on older UMC [originally typed Remington which is incorrect] data, perhaps several years old and mostly reused from earlier Lovell ads, rather than an ad directly from UMC with their latest information? I believe that Lovell may have been a distributor or wholesaler in addition to a retail dealer.

Hi Joe
You bring up a good point about the wad vs the stamp & I have no answer. as WAG’s Perhaps done by UMC at the time of manufacture? After loading as it’s a small & light stamp in a fixture, or on a mandrel . Last two methods above done by hand?
I just don’t know, but they were very clever & resourceful.

[quote=“JohnS”]Note that the July 1, 1892 “black powder only” ad states at the bottom “For Sale by/ John P. Lovell Arms Co./Boston, Mass.”

Could this be a Lovell produced ad based on older Remington data, perhaps several years old and mostly reused from earlier Lovell ads, rather than an ad directly from UMC with their latest information? I believe that Lovell may have been a distributor or wholesaler in addition to a retail dealer.[/quote]

John,

Well the way I read it, it is as a UMC publication mentioning John P. Lovell Arms Co. as there distributor. Correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand, they were the sole distributor for UMC at the time. As far as a Remington connection, Remington I do not believe combined forces until late 1911 and I do know the merger was not officially finalised until 1916. There is evidence of them working together as early as the 1909 catalog.

No, I feel strongly it is a copy of the original UMC price list published by UMC, mentioning to contact John P. Lovell Arms Co. as there distributor, in July of 1892.

Joe

The booklet titled “New Chapter in an Old History” describing the merger of Remington and UMC is from 1912.

Sorry, I meant UMC, not Remington, and have edited the original comment to reflect that.

Union Metallic Cartridge Co. was formed by Marcellus Hartley and a few other men in 1867. Schuyler, Hartley and Graham were, at that time, one of the largest, if not the largest, distributor of firearms and related accoutrements in the United States, located in NYC. In the late 1880’s, when Remington was bankrupt and went into receivership, Hartley bought half and W.R.A.Co. the other half. In 1896, Winchester sold their share to M. Hartley. By this time, Marcellus Hartley had become sole owner of U.M.C., the other partners having sold out to him over the years. U.M.C. and Remington were officially merged on Feb. 1, 1911, and became Remington Arms - Union Metallic Cartridge Company. In 1916, the venture was incorporated, becoming The Remington Arms Union Metallic Cartridge Company, Inc. Lovell may have been a distributor for UMC products, but certainly not solely. The biggest distributor of UMC products was M. Hartley & Co.

Corrections welcome…

Randy

Also, in my opinion, with a properly constructed shotshell, like those made by UMC, we have a very thin brass “head” completely supported by an interior fiber board “wad”. It would be quite easy to construct a steel mandrel with its upper end shaped to conform to the interior shape of the shotshell, which would enable, whether by mechanical means or by hand, the SS in oval to be impressed into the brass quite readily with no ill effects upon the shell.

Randy

[quote]Note that the July 1, 1892 “black powder only” ad states at the bottom “For Sale by/ John P. Lovell Arms Co./Boston, Mass.”

Could this be a Lovell produced ad based on older UMC [originally typed Remington which is incorrect] data, perhaps several years old and mostly reused from earlier Lovell ads, rather than an ad directly from UMC with their latest information? I believe that Lovell may have been a distributor or wholesaler in addition to a retail dealer.[/quote]
John, this list had up to date information, because before its publication a partial copy of the same was submitted by UMC to Forest and Stream magazine and published on June 30, 1892.

[quote]
The booklet titled “New Chapter in an Old History” describing the merger of Remington and UMC is from 1912.[/quote]
Jochem, these companies combined their names on February 1, 1911 as the “Remington Arms-Union Metallic Cartridge Co.”, but the formal merge didn’t ocurred until January 15, 1916, when the company was incorporated as “The Remington Arms Union Metallic Cartridge Co., Inc.”

I have read in various sources that these two companies combined their marketing as early as 1908 -based on their combined price lists-, or that combined advertisement was rare until about 1910, but this depends on the sources you are looking at. For example, there are correlative one-page ads in sources as early as 1894, and combined ads already published in 1897. After this date, you can find combined ads every single month until 1911.

Also, there is a rare ad that list the company name as “Remington Arms Company-Union Metallic Cartridge Company” (merged and in the same line). It is not only unique because of the designation used, but because it was published on May 16, 1908!

Another overlooked fact is that a combined but alternated “UMC-Remington” designation was used in ads as early as 1909. It seems that this was the original form in which their names were meant to be combined, and if history had been different we would be collecting UMC-REM headstamps today…

Regards,

Fede

I want to thank everyone for all of their responses. I truly appreciate all of the help that you have given me on this headstamp. I have so much to learn when it comes to shot shell headstamps.

Doug