The McClellan Military Saddle

http://www.militaryhorse.org/studies/mcclellan/

As has been recounted in numerous other works, George B. McClellan developed this saddle over a number of years. This saddle has its beginnings in the Crimean War, where Capt. McClellan was sent, like many officers, to
observe the activities of the combatants. During this time it is surmised that he was able to observe, and perhaps test for himself, a great variety of foreign military equipment. This seems to have been the case, as he was spurred to suggest a wide range of changes to the equipment then in use by the U.S. Army.

For the first time, the U.S. Army (pushed by the dynamic and capable Secretary of War Jefferson Davis) was conducting a number of trial evaluations with the purpose of determining the most efficient and practical equipment for its mounted troops through the use of large scale testing. This was particularly true of the newly formed cavalry regiments. Equipment was acquired in sufficient numbers to allow two to three cavalry squadrons - about 250 to 300 troopers - to subject each pattern to the most rigorous conditions that early frontier service had to offer.

In the evaluation of saddles, there were quite a number of styles tested. The Jones adjustable tree saddle, the Hope, the standard service Grimsley, the flexible Campbell, and the new style offered by Capt. McClellan. In the evaluation of these saddles, it was no doubt difficult to choose a positively superior saddle, as all of these saddles (except perhaps the Jones) had their vociferous supporters. Style and habitual preference would have had as much to do with the decision-making as with the suitability of the saddle for military service.

What would be the deciding factors in saddle selection then? It is rather difficult to say, unless it is made clear that the military of the 19th century had almost nothing in common with the current military purchasing structures, where cost may be a minor concern. In the end, it became apparent that cost cutting, in addition to serviceability, were the deciding factors in the adoption of the McClellan saddle. Indeed, budget "frugality" is reflected throughout the life of the McClellan saddle, and was the main reason for its longevity. It was recommended for replacement a number of times - with all recommendations failing in the face of huge stockpiles of saddles from the Civil War, and later, from WWI contracts.

Examination of the Hope saddle reveals that it had most of the prerequisites for a contender in this sort of competition. It had been in wide use since before the Mexican War, and was quite popular with military officers. Indeed, the Hope may be considered as the only close competition that the McClellan design had. Its rawhide cover gave great strength to the tree, while the leather cover (of the field trial version) would have contributed to the longevity and serviceability of the saddle. The one undesirable feature would appear to have been the "horn" of the saddle. This would have been a detrimental addition to the military saddle, as the wide cap would have made the use of the common saddle roll method of packing equipment on the pommel very awkward. On Hope trees, it has been noticed that the horn cap is a separate piece, and therefore would lack the strength of many other types of "horned" saddles that were common at this time.

In examining the reasons for the discontinuance of the Grimsley saddle, and the non-acceptance of the Campbell (flexible) saddle, cost would have been a deciding factor. The Grimsley is known to have been an expensive, although excellent, saddle. Its construction shows a product that used a significant amount of leather and brass fixtures (increasing its weight and cost). The Campbell was very similar to the Grimsley, and despite later changes, the saddle still retained some of the same "problems" of the Grimsley. Both had numerous and sometimes complicated accessories (especially the Campbell) which would have only driven the cost up, as well as increasing the risk of unserviceable equipment in the field. Design complexity also increased the labor costs involved in producing these saddles. The McClellan, on the other hand, was a much simpler and stronger design. In its first incarnation, the Model 1857 trial saddle, it resembled the Grimsley and Campbell saddles to some degree. Rather innovative steps were taken, however, to gain some advantage over these other styles.

The First McClellan - the Model 1857

		The M1857 McClellan is very different from the M1859 that was finally adopted as the "winner" of the cavalry equipment field trials of 1857-58. It shared the same tree shape, although many other differences can be seen. Instead of a rawhide cover, the metal reinforced- wooden tree was covered with an thin black varnished leather cover. The rigging was very similar to the Hope's, and was essentially the same as the later M1859. The cinch was somewhat different, but was operated in the same manner as the M1859. The side skirts, screwed to the sidebars, were a common feature between the M1857 and the M1859 McClellans. Saddle bags were not used with the M1857, in their place was a rather overly-efficient pair of small pouches, rectangular in shape, joined at an angle to a short 'seat'. This seat fitted behind the cantle much like the later style saddlebags, although the pouches were fitted snugly up against the rear face of the cantle. Straps were provided for securing a cantle roll over these pouches. Visually, these pouches are very much like the pommel pockets used on the M1912 service and M1917 officer saddles. The stirrup arrangement was essentially the same as the M1859, with the exception that the hoodless stirrups themselves were covered with the same thin black varnished leather. No hoods were used, although the stirrup straps and sweats were present. All hardware, including buckles, were made of polished brass. The first year of the trial showed a particularly bothersome problem for the McClellan saddle, which was to plague the design for the next fifteen years. The thin varnished leather was prone to cracking and splitting along the edges of the pommel and cantle; these areas being high stress areas for cover material. All McClellan trial saddles built in 1858 were fitted with brass moldings, similar to the Grimsleys, in an effort to reduce the incidence of seam splitting. The later rawhide cover of the 1859 saddle was to eventually show this same defect, with the same "solution" being applied. It was not until 1871-2 that a widespread use of leather over rawhide saddles put an end to this recurrent problem. All trial model McClellans (310 sets) made in 1857 were built built by Messr. Lacey & Phillips, a saddlery firm in Philadelphia, Pa. They constructed the very first prototype saddle for Cpt. McClellan, which was submitted the War Dept., prompting the acceptance for evaluation. The saddle shown at left was the last of the trial model type saddles, as all afterwards incorporated recommended changes that make up the M1859 specifications. This was sent with a large group of military equipment as part of an exchange with the Danish government. This saddle has been kept in the Royal Arsenal Museum in Copenhagen ever since - it has never been used. An unknown number of additional M1857's were made (with brass moldings) between August and November 1859, by the three companies that were contracted with for saddles.  These companies (350 sets contracted from each) were:   Lacey & Phillips, Knorr & Nece of Philadelphia; and Robert Hartley & Company of Pittsburgh.  In November, this contract was amended by Brevet Major Peter V. Hagner, commanding officer of Frankford Arsenal, so that all remaining saddles would conform to the M1859 specs. - most significantly the rawhide cover. Pardon the rough images - they are scans of photocopies of a photocopy of an original poorly printed b&w academic Danish publication circa 1970...personally, I'm surprised you can see anything at all!  The Royal Arsenal Museum isn't particularly easy to work with, and there are apparently no existing photographs or images available.   So, next time anyone's in Copenhagen...
The Model 1859 McClellan saddle The final recommendation of the selection board was to have the production saddles covered with rawhide instead of the impractical thin varnished leather. Changes from the M1857 saddle include small saddlebags, iron hardware, hooded bare-wood stirrups, as well as changes in related equipment, and a  three buckle bridle instead of the six (brass) buckle bridle of the 1857 equipments.  These changes occurred after the 1857 model contracts of August 1859 were modified by  Brevet Major Peter V. Hagner, commanding officer of Frankford Arsenal in November, 1859.   The first contracts were made with the following companies (350 sets contracted from each) were:  Lacey & Phillips, Knorr & Nece of Philadelphia; and Robert Hartley & Company of Pittsburgh.   The adoption of the McClellan saddle in 1859 is useful in showing the role economics has played in the evolution of this piece of equipment. With the tremendous need for all kinds of military equipment in 1861, there started a huge acquisition program for these items, including horse equipment. Early contracted equipment tended to be hastily constructed, many times to the point that the defrauded government was stuck with unacceptable goods. This practice of shoddy workmanship was not to last throughout the duration of the war. After some delay in getting a grasp on the procurement and inspection process, there was an upheaval in the procurement process, initiated by the (Quartermasters Dept.). In fact, there also was a little known modification of the specifications for saddle construction that shows an improved and tightly controlled relationship between contractors and the government.  My documentation on this is still a little light, so I'll be developing this more at a later time.  The saddle in the image above is one of these improved late-war saddles, showing increased use of rivets, rigging dees with tabs (top of ring to keep it from rotating). Still looking for total production numbers for this model saddle between 1861 and 1866 - but apparently was close to half a million. I've never seen or heard of  "blued iron" hardware as called for in 1861 Ordnance Manual specifications - nearly all seems to have been jappaned. Jappaning is a type of heavy durable varnish coating similar to paint.  The trees were all hand-made, and can show  variations in dimensions. They were held together with nails and iron rivets, although I've seen at least one that used cut nails everywhere. Stirrup loop attachment straps were also supposed to be attached with iron rivets. The cantle and pommel were each made from two pieces of ash, morticed with a dovetail joint running vertically through the centerline.  This could also be a straight morticed joint - this seemed to depend on the contractors preferred method... 1859 Cavalry Equipment Measurements Specifications - from 1861 Ordnance Manual

Saddle

1859 Cavalry Equipment Measurements Specifications

All the leather is black bridle or harness leather, and the buckles are malleable iron blued.
The SADDLE is composed of 1 tree, 2 saddle-skirts, 2 stirrups, 2 stirrup leathers, 1 girth and girth-strap, 1 surcingle, 1 crupper.

SADDLE-TREE.-WOOD, (beech.)-1 pommel, made of 2 pieces framed together at top and glued; 1 cantle, formed of 2 pieces, like the pommel; 2 side bars, (poplar,) each made of 3 pieces glued together: they are glued to the pommel and cantle, and fastened by 2 rivets No. 1, 2 burrs, and 4 nails,--the burrs let in on the under side; 1 strap-mortise in the pommel; 8 strap-mortises in the cantle.
There are three sizes of trees, varying in the length of the seat:
No. 1, 11 inches length of seat, 15 per cent.,
No. 2 11 1/2" 50% to be marked on the  pommel-ornament.
No. 3 12 35%

IRON.--1 pommel-arc, .1 inch thick, with 3 small holes on top, fastened to the side bars by 4 rivets No. 1; 1 pommel-plate, .1 inch thick, semi-circular, fastened to the front of the pommel by 4 rivets No. 1; 1 cantle-arc, .1 inch thick, with 3 small holes on top, fastened to the side bars by 4 rivets No. 1; 1 cantle-plate .1 inch thick, fastened to the rear of the cantle by 4 rivets No. 1; 2 stirrup-loops, hinged in 2 iron strap., which are fastened to the side bars by 6 rivets No. 1.
The tree is painted with one coat of white lead. It is covered with raw hide, put on wet and sewed with thongs of the same, and held in place by stitches through the wood along the junction of the pommel and cantle with the side bars. The seams are made on the edges of the side bars, where they will not chafe the horse nor rider.
2 rings, held by staples driven into the front ends of side bars; 2 footstaples for coat-straps, fastened to the front of the pommel by 4 brass screws No. 6, inch; 2 crupper-rings, (japanned black,) fastened by staples driven into the rear ends of side bars; 2 foot-staples, fastened to the rear of cantle by 4 brass screws No. 6, inch; 1 guard-plate; 1 pommel-ornament, shieldshaped, (sheet brass,) fastened to the pommel, each by 8 brass screw-pins; 6 guard-plates, fastened to the cantle by 12 screw-pins; 2 foot-staples, fastened on the back strap by 4 brass screws No. 6, inch; 1 saddle-bag stud, fastened on the back strap to the cantle-arc by 2 copper rivets No. 4 C.

2 SADDLE-SKIRTS, (thick harness-leather,) fastened to the side bars by
38 brass screws No. 6, 3/4 inch; 2 stay-loops for the saddle-bag straps, sewed to the rear edge of the skirts.

2 STIRRUPs, (hickory or oak,) made of one piece bent, the ends separated by 1 transom and fastened by 2 iron rivets No. 2 B, 4 burrs each; 2 leather hoods, (thick harness-leather,) fastened to the stirrups by 12 copper rivets No. 4 and burrs,--distance of hood from rear of stirrup, 6 inches; 2 stirrup-straps-2 buckles No. 5 A; 2 sliding-loops--pass through the stirruploops and through a hole cut in the skirt; 2 stirrup-leathers, (thick harnessleather;) 2 standing-loops.

GIRTH.--2 girth-straps pass over the pommel and cantle-arcs, to which they are fastened by 4 copper rivets No. 4 C and 4 burrs: they are fastened to the side bars by 4 brass screws No. 6, inch: the ends are sewed into 2 D-rings No. 1 A; 2 girth-billets, sewed to the straight side of the D-rings;
1 girth, 4.5 inches, (blue woollen webbing;) 1 chape, 1 buckle No. 2 A, 1 standing-loop and 1 safe on the off end, and 1 chape, 1 buckle No. 4 A, 1 D-ring No. 1 A, 1 standing-loop, and 1 safe on the near end; 1 standing-loop on the middle.

The Model 1872 McClellan Saddle

After the war the military was left holding vast quantities of military equipment. Saddles alone numbered in the tens of thousands. They would be a major consideration in the years to come in any decisions to upgrade horse equipment.

After the war, the McClellan again confronted the western frontier environment, and again was found wanting. The problems that had faced the earlier M1857 trial version were noted with the M1859/64 saddle. These problems were further exacerbated by the difficulty in resupply and repair for a more widely scattered body of troops, which had not been the case (in most situations) during the war. The first solution was to try the same tactic that was used with the M1857 trial saddle, to install brass moldings on the pommel and cantle to cover and reduce wear and tear on these stress spots. However, the rawhide cover of saddles is prone to expansion and contraction induced by the wetting and drying of the material. With exposed rawhide, rapid fluctuations in humidity alone cause this action. The rawhide cover required a buffering material to reduce the rapid change in moisture levels in the rawhide.

The most suitable material for this purpose was leather. While the leather is also adversely affected by repeated wetting and drying, it does not dry out in the rapid, self-destructive manner of rawhide. With care, a rainsoaked leather covered McClellan could be returned to essentially the same condition as before. Assuming the rawhide was also soaked, the slow drying leather cover would allow this moisture to gradually dissipate. This gradual dissipation does not have the destructive action to the rawhide that a rapid drying of the exposed material would have. In many cases, a leather cover would absorb most of the moisture, leaving the rawhide fairly dry and unaffected, in this way acting as a buffer for the rawhide. This can be seen in many relic saddles that have been subjected to years of neglect. The leather coverings may be cracked and shrunken from repeated wetting and drying, while the rawhide cover underneath remains fairly stable and intact. 'Course it also helps when the rawhide was slathered with shellac before being covered...

This was well known to the military authorities of the time, who were also faced with strict budgetary constraints. These constraints were such that they made the repeated issuing of war surplus saddles every six months or so easier than obtaining monies to make new saddles. A happy medium was reached in the M1872 model saddle. After many experiments and trials with various cavalry companies, in which leather covers had been made for saddles by company saddlers, the Army began the issue of the M1872 McClellan, the first (arsenal made) leather covered McClellan.

The M1872 was essentially a rebuilt civil war surplus saddle, using as many parts of the old saddle as possible. The skirts were removed, and dee ring safes were  attached to the rigging. The trees themselves were covered in black collar leather, with all the original hardware being returned to the proper positions. New cinches were obtained. Essentially an interim solution, the M1872 saddle would serve into the late 1870s.

There is some debate as to the shape of the rigging dee safes on the 1872 saddle, which has been further confused by Randy Steffen's illustrations which are basically pure conjecture. Extent specimens of the 1872 are EXTREMELY rare, nearly to the point of legend, so it is difficult to say with any degree of certainty exactly what this model's details looked like.

The Model 1874 McClellan saddle

The M1874 was a slightly more ambitious change in the McClellan series, coming on the heels of an intensive examination of horse equipment by a specially convened board of officers. This saddle used the civil war surplus tree, with some qualification. The board finally addressed a problem well known to cavalry officers, that a significant number of civil war period contract saddletrees where defective. This was addressed by requiring that all surplus trees to be used in making M1874 saddles be inspected with prepared jigs. If they did not meet a certain range of dimensional requirements, they were to be condemned.

The 1874 saddles are kind of an oddball in the McClellan lineage, as they seem to fall into the mix of the 1870s, where so much variation and trial gear was being used. M1872 saddles and old Civil War surplus equipment was still very prominent, and the use of horsehair cord cinchas was becoming more common by the end of that decade (with many of these cinchas being provide to units by the Benecia Arsenal in California). Any "absolute" statements about equipment in this time frame should certainly be taken with a grain or two (or handful) of salt.

These civil war saddles were stripped of all hardware and leather parts (with the exception of the rawhide). New black collar leather covers were installed, followed by the rigging assembly. This rigging assembly consisted of the usual two quarter straps, attached to the rigging rings. The off-side ring was the 1864 dee ring with the tab. The near-side ring was to be a round, 2 1/2" iron ring. Both rings were backed with heart-shaped leather safes. These safes where not just decorative in shape, as this shape was also the best fitted to back the three strap connection point. The rounded sides, unlike the square safe of the M1872, would be much less likely to rub and dig into a horse's side.

The cinch was similar in attachment method as the M1857/59/72 cinches, but was made of slightly wider material (7.5" wide linen). The stirrups of the M1874 were essentially the same as civil war issue, with the exception that the hoods were stamped with a US cartouche. All the saddle fittings (with the exception of the stirrup loops and rigging hardware) were now of polished brass. Considering that there must have been considerable chemical reactions with the leather covers and iron civil war hardware on the M1872, this is only to be expected.

This model was made, as were most other Ordnance Dept. harness items at the Watervliet Arsenal, in Watervliet, N.Y.   This function was later transferred to the Rock Island Arsenal @ 1880, although some items may have been made previous to this date.

The M1874 was the first McClellan to be officially adapted for use by the field artillery.  This configuration was first conceived and tested @ 1881-2 at Ft. Leavenworth, with the first Ordnance Dept.-approved and RIA-produced equipment being delivered in Sept. 1883.   These may also have been the first production McClellans to be supplied with the strand horsehair girth (original correspondence is not clear on this point).   The image to the right is taken directly from an original in the RIA Museum collection, which shows the manner in which the trace lines were attached to the saddle rigging.  (As far as I know, this is the first time this drawing has been reproduced in any published media.)

The First Artillery McClellan 1883 All text between the lines following is directly transcribed from the original document.  Any clarifying comments are colored in blue, between brackets, [as an example].

U.S. Infantry and Cavalry School
Light Battery "F", 2d Artillery
Fort Leavenworth, Kas. August 10, 1883

To the
Chief of Ordnance, U.S.A.
Washington, D.C.

General:
In making the request herein contained, I respectfully state that I have always been of the opinion that our present artillery harness, which proved so satisfactory during the hard service rendered during our late war requires but slight modification to adapt it to what is deemed necessary now.

I have devoted no little attention to this subject particularly since the Light Artillery Board adjourned and have made our changes which, after months of trial, I consider a perfect success viz. the substitution of the hair girth for the leather belly band. Until the present time I have not felt justified in asking for authority for further change, but now I respectfully request authority, to change all of my artillery harness saddles for the McClellan saddles.

Among the principal advantages to be gained by this changes are

1st That the McClellan gives the driver a more secure seat and is easier for man and horse;

2nd That these will be the same saddle all through the battery for near and off horses, and all mounted men;

3rd That cannoneers can be carried on the off horses - a position necessity now that we are to have breech loaders, and the range and precision of modern guns forbid bringing the caissons on the ground with the guns.

I am particularly anxious to make this change as I have machine guns and frequently drill the battery as a six gun horse battery, using these guns, but I cannot drill as a mounted battery, with them, as I have no caissons and in consequence cannot carry the cannoneers.

In case the proposed change is made I can carry a cannoneer on each of the off horses and the other three on the limber and in consequence drill the battery as a mounted battery, when using machine guns.

This request has been deferred because the saddles belonging to my harness, although old, when issued, were in fair condition but now they are considerably worn, on account of continous use.

I would like to have these saddles furnished from the Rock Island Arsenal and moreover I would ask to confer with Col. Flagler [then commanding RIA - th] regarding the modifications as required to adapt the McClellan saddle to the harness.

Finally I respectfully ask that in case my request is granted that authority for the change be given as soon as practicable for the next course of this school commences on the 1st proximo, and being a member of the School Staff, I shall be too busy to attend to this matter for some weeks, after that date.

Very respectfully,
Your obdt. Servt.
(sgd) E. B. Williston
Captain 2nd Artillery
Commanding

 

[Annotations to back of original letter, in order of chronology:]

[1st annotation]

#390 1883
OO
4226
Fort Leavenworth, Kas.
August 10, 1883

Capt E. B. Williston

Requests authority to change all his artillery harness saddles for the McClellan Saddles, re.

[2nd annotation]

First Endorsement
O.O. Washington, Aug 17/83

Respectfully referred to the Comdg. Officer of Rock Island Arsenal approved.
Confer with Capt. Williston regarding the modifications re., sending to this office a detailed report with drawings of same,
Capt. Williston has been requested to communicate with him.

(sgd.) Jas. M. Whittenson
Acting Chief of Ordnance

[3rd annotation]

Second Endorsement

Rock Island Arsenal, Ills.
September 21, 1883
Respectfully returned to the Chief of Ordnance, U.S. Army
Washington, D.C.

The alterations of the McClellan saddles to adapt them for use with artillery harness has been completed and the saddles were shipped to Capt. Williston on the 18 past.
The detailed report and drawings required are transmitted here with.

(sgd) D. W. Flagler
Lt. Colonel of Ordnance
Commanding

Detailed drawings attached to this document show the modified fittings for attaching trace lines to saddle, and loops to be riveted to the cantle and pommel arches for attaching harness to saddle.

Trace holder attachment for McClellan saddle - modified M1874 would have had off-side D-ring replaced with round ring.   With hair girth, this would have been essetially an M1885 saddle, with unmodified tree.

The Model 1885 McClellan saddle

The next variant to appear in the McClellan series was the 1885 model McClellan. This is the first change to the McClellan tree used since 1857. To the interested observer, regulations and actual practice in the modifying of the tree for the M1885 version seem to have been two different things in most cases. The 1885 Ordnance Memoranda schematic clearly shows little difference from the acceptable dimensional drawings shown in the 1874 specifications. The seat is slightly hollowed, with little significant change for the tree. In practice however, these seats had extensive portions of the wood removed. The reasons for this difference appear to have been rooted to some degree in the construction of the saddletree.

The civil war trees were made with two sidebars, and a cantle and pommel made of two pieces each. The cantle and pommel pieces were joined with a single dovetail joint, that would rise vertical through the center of the finished pieces when mounted on the saddle. The cantle had a somewhat hollowed, or shaped, section facing the front or seat of the saddle. Arsenal woodworkers removed a considerable mass of wood from the outer edges of the sidebars, between the pommel and cantle. These saddles would have (in riders language) a very narrow twist. Of all the McClellan series, the M1885 was probably the lightest and simplest saddle made, although it had the weakest tree construction. The stirrup loop was also changed, in that the original rectangular loop was (usually) reformed and welded so that the bottom edge (where the stirrup strap rested) was angled high end to the front and low end to the rear. Set into the narrow twist seat, this new hanger allowed the lower edge to remain horizontal so the stirrup strap would hang normally.

After this seat modification was made, the saddle was recovered in rawhide, covered in black collar leather, and had new rigging installed.

This rigging differed from the (Ordnance Memoranda   No. 18 defined) 1874 model in that it was designed for use of a horsehair cord cinch.   This type of cinch had been tested and used for several years before, and is likely to have already been adapted and issued with the new field artillery McClellan that was being issued in 1883. Various arsenal sources refer to "California" horsehair cinchas being supplied, one referring to cinchas supplied by the Benecia Arsenal.

The rigging looked much the same with the main difference being in the rings and cinch straps. The off-side dee ring of the '74 saddle was replaced with a 2 1/2" iron ring. From each of the two rings, a plain tapered leather strap descended, which was run through the rings of the cinch, and returned to be "knotted" at the rigging rings. The cinch itself was made up of two 4" iron rings, horsehair cord, and two leather safes to protect the horse's side and the cinch knots of the horsehair cord. This cinch was to be standard McClellan issue until the mid-1920s, for the cavalry; the artillery used this until they were de-horsed in the 1930s.

Hardware for the M1885 was essentially the same as the M1874, although the rear saddle rings were moved from staples on the rear ends of the sidebars to being held by the cantle loops. Sometime around 1887-8, the brass staples holding the front saddle rings were replaced with semicircular footman loops, held by screws.

To see Ordnance Memoranda No. 29, which describes and shows all the M1885 pattern horse equipment and cavalry accoutrements. 

NA ODDZIELNYCH RYS

Reports to the Chief of Ordnance, Appendix 41 1887 Improved Artillery Harness All text between the lines following is directly transcribed from the original document.  Any clarifying comments are colored in blue, between brackets, [as an example].

APPENDIX 41.

IMPROVED ARTILLERY HARNESS

(1 plate.)

To the CHIEF OF ORDNANCE. U. S. ARMY,

Washington, D. C.:

GENERAL: Artillery harness has not thus far been improved in our service to meet the requirements of the present or prospective service.

Some suggestions have been made tending to modernize the present regulation harness, and some of them have been given a practical trial, but the idea to simply modernize the harness does not appear to be all that is or may be desirable.

At this time, when the light artillery is about to be equipped with new guns and carriages, it seems to be proper to submit some suggestions regarding a more suitable harness. Serious defects are known to exist in the present regulation harness, as well as in the method of attachment to the carriage. The modern armament of field artillery and its tactics, the introduction of machine guns and small arms of long range and increased accuracy, the mobility required, and the welfare of the horse, seem to require a radical change in harness and attachments. The life and well-being of the horses should be matters of the greatest solicitude, as on their condition depends the efficiency of the arm to a great degree. Simplicity in construction and interchangeability should receive due consideration.

The equipment of the cavalry and light artillery should be as nearly alike as possible consistent with their different duties. It is not understood why the field artillery should have a different saddle, bridle, halter, etc., from those used in the cavalry service.

There are many good reasons why the equipment should be the same, and in future constructions the saddles, bridles, bits, halters, saddle cloths, girths, etc., should be the same for the field artillery as may be prescribed for the cavalry at the time.

The harness should be as similar to the draft harness in use by civilians as the requirements of the field artillery will permit. Not only will the best principles of draft be applied, but in wars of sufficient magnitude to require the services of volunteer light artillery the harness and attachments will be familiar to the drivers. This will only reduce the period of necessary instruction but will promote the welfare of the horses, for the men from previous experience will understand the proper use and adjustments. The use of attachments similar to those in use in civil life will prove advantageous in many ways. With such attachments harness need not be issued with machine-gun batteries turned over to the National Guard, for every village, town, and city will have in it draft harness that can be used with the carriages. A close study of foreign systems of harness and means of attachment does not appear to warrant the introduction of any one of them into our service..

There should be but one model of harness for field artillery and machine-gun batteries. So far as possible the use of bright metal-work should be avoided, for in action it serves to attract the attention of the enemy while at other times it causes unnecessary work and a waste of time that might be more profitably employed. Brass is not deemed necessary for ornamentation, for nothing can be handsomer than a perfectly plain black harness, in proper condition.

Means must be provided to increase the celerity and ease with which the teams or single horses can be attached to, or detached from, the carriages.

Under existing battle conditions it becomes very desirable at times to detach or attach the teams with great quickness.

The pole-yoke is heavy and expensive, and is not the device best suited to carry out practically the idea upon which it is constructed.

The pole has been changed by removing the pole-yoke and attaching an iron stop near the end, and underneath, which prevents the ring of the neck-yoke from passing it.

This arrangement is manifestly superior to the present one.

It is not known that there exists one good reason for attachment to the splinter bar, or why a barbaric and antiquated method should be longer adhered to.

The objections are many and serious

• Being a rigid attachment the draft is unequally distributed among the horses, no play possible, and in consequence they are strained and galled.

• Unless every horse moves directly to the front and each trace is exactly the correct length the bearing of the collars is uneven.

• In changing direction the wheel team is obliged to pull nearly the whole load, the swing and lead teams pulling enough to throw their collars out of adjustment.

• The traces on the side toward which the change is being made "sag," while those on the other side "ride up."

• By the use of the double-tree and single-trees the required play is secured, and the objections to the splinter-bar attachment overcome.

• Double-trees should be placed above or underneath the pole, according to the equipment

• If the equipment is heavy, and power but not great speed is desirable, they should be placed underneath; when mobility is required, they should be placed above.

Double and single trees should be used on all field and machine gun carriages. They are not experimental; all kinds of transportation intended for horse or mule draught in civil life are supplied with them. No citizen owning horses or mules would allow of the use of a splinterbar attachment for them. Single-trees not only assist in giving the necessary play and case required, but they are arranged so as to greatly facilitate the attachment and detachment of the teams.

They are provided with an eye by means of which they are hooked to the double-tree hooks: by unhooking the two single-trees the whole team is detached from the carriage, the ring of the neck-yoke slipping over the pole-pad at time end of the pole. The single-trees can be hooked behind the saddles of wheel-horses on to the cantle-hooks provided for that purpose. They are provided with a spring-hook, which greatly facilitates the hitching and unhitching of the traces.

With the regulation equipment the wheel-horses are obliged to support a. varying load at times excessive, by their necks, causing very objectionable results.

The practical solution of the problem of a hinged pole not having been made, and appearing to be remote, it is necessary until that desirable improvement is effected to adopt the next best device. which appears to be to reduce the weight at the end of the pole to a minimum.

In holding back the tendency is to pull down on the collar, and this causes at times great strain on the neck and fore-legs, resulting occasionally in throwing the horse.

Another result following the checking of the wheel team is equally objectionable caused by the present method of attachment to the end of the pole. As soon as the horses commence to hold back their heads are brought closer together, they are forced into an unnatural position, and one that prevents their doing what is required with a minimum expenditure of labor and strength.

It is proposed to overcome these objections and others arising from the same cause by means of a direct front attachment for the wheel horses, and by reducing the weight at the end of the pole to a minimum.

The neck-yoke takes the place of the pole-yoke. It is a construction unlike the pole-yoke and it, with its attachments, are of the simplest kind. The ends are attached to the collars by means of breast-straps, furnished with double hooks. It can be easily repaired in the field, or a new one can be made in any battery. There is nothing about it to get out of order, even with such rough usage as would ruin a pole-yoke.

The neck-yoke should belong to the limber, and be considered as forming a part of it as much as the double and single trees.

The gun detachments must often be carried under fire by the pieces alone, the caissons remaining under cover; consequently it may be advantageous to have the off horses available for riding purposes. If so, it follows that all of the saddles of a battery should be alike, and all riding saddles. Simplicity and interchangeability in the mounted equipment of the Army requires that they be of the regulation cavalry pattern. whatever that may be.

In the new harness the regulation cavalry saddle has replaced the Grimsley riding and valise saddles. Valises on off-horse saddles would prevent the use of the saddles for riding purposes. Saddle-bags are better for the use of the men and do not interfere with the riders. They should be of regulation cavalry pattern, and carried on all team horses. The cavalry bridle with the California (lash) reins is used. The Shoemaker bit is made use of, as well as the hair girth issued to the cavalry. The cantle-hooks are securely fastened to the rear part of wheel-horse saddles but can be removed and attached to another saddle, if necessary, in the field. These serve to hold time single-trees when detached from the double tree. They do not interfere with the saddlebags or prevent articles from being attached to the saddle as usual.

Whitman stirrups are used. Experience in the field has proved that brass wears better than iron, steel, or nickel plate. The rubber pads prevent the feet from slipping; stirrups on off horses should be kept crossed when the horses are not ridden. The Whitman safety-bar is employed.  Not only does this device appear to lessen danger at times but it facilitates the cleaning of the stirrup-strap and sweat-leather

The stirrup-strap has been modified so as to dispense with the buckle and permit of a convenient manner of removing the stirrup when desired.

The latigo straps are made of a very strong, pliable, oiled leather of a kind much better adapted to the purpose for which they are intended than the black leather now used. This oiled leather resembles the material used by the Mexicans for latigo straps, viz, rawhide, softened by hand-rubbing with tallow, and which are the most durable and best known.

Ever since two horses have been conducted abreast with a rider on the near one, the fact has been obvious that in checking the off horse by means of the lead-line he simply turns his head to the left and slackens his pace, but does not assist his mate but slightly if any. The result of this want of proper control makes the near horse do all of the work in holding back. To overcome this difficulty a roller has been devised. It is a light but strong construction, intended to be attached to the saddle of the off horse: the rein of the bridle passes through it, the end (lash) tailing on the left side of the horse, convenient to the driver's hand: desiring to check the horse, the driver pulls on the rein, and as it acts equally on each side of the bit, the result is that the horse is forced back without turning his head from the direction in which he is going. Trials have shown that the results from the use of the roller are as stated, and that the off horse soon becomes so educated that he holds back of his own accord as soon as he sees the driver reach for the rein.

The lead-line is arranged so that it can be made longer or shorter as desired. and has a snap-hook for attaching the end to a ring on the near horse saddle when desireable

Tests made at the Watertown Arsenal to determine the tensile strength of traces disclosed some curious facts. The samples sent were made of new material, of dimensions prescribed for wheel traces of the present harness. The tests show that tensile strength varies from 1,590 pounds to 5,970 pounds, showing lack of strength in some places amid excess in others. The strength of a trace, like that of a chain, is only that of its weakest part. Traces should be equally strong in all parts; they should be wider, and there should be as few thicknesses of leather as consistent with the necessary strength. A wide trace will not twist easily; it call be kept in good condition, as the thinness insures complete permeation by the oil, thereby keeping it pliable and prepared to resist moisture. The oil never properly permeates our present trace, as an examination of old ones shows conclusively, the inside thickness being found to be stiff and dry. With traces made of more than two thicknesses of leather, frauds are possible the "filling" not being of the best leather, but generally scraps. An examination of traces made during the late war by contract proves this to be the fact. It is almost impossible for the inspector to detect this cheat. Thick traces are more expensive to manufacture than the ones proposed. Wide traces are not as liable to chafe as narrow ones. Trace chains are made 24 inches long, with a ring at one end and a double hook at the other. The ring can be attached to the front end of traces or to the single-tree The double hook can be fastened in to any link of the chain which passes through the D ring at the rear end of traces, making a rapid and correct adjustment of the trace easy. Several of these chains can be fastened together if desired.

The galling of artillery horses in the field is a very great evil, and one that causes great expense and decrease of efficiency

Among other causes may be mentioned

1. The collar.

2. The splinter-bar attachment.

3. Excess of weight at the end of the pole.

4. Improper adjustment.

5. Method of attachment.

The regulation collar is very objectionable; it fastens by means straps at the top, just the place where it should be firm; consequently is not always properly closed ; the straps stretch, and the holes for the buckle-tongues become enlarged. Frequently the collar is not properly closed because circumstances prevent, or the horse objects. Under favorable circumstances it is hard work for a short man to buckle the strap of a collar properly, and if the horse is galled and restive or the harnessing is done at night, it is almost impossible to do so. It is not uncommon to resort to the objectionable method of putting the closed collar over the head, and then reversing the ends. It is almost as difficult to take the collar off as to put it on. It does not seem to be necessary or desireable to have the hames separate from the collar. It is almost impossible to keep the hames properly adjusted to the collar; straps are continually stretching, and buckle tongues cutting the leather.

It is believed that the best collar for artillery service is one hinged firmly at the top and fastening at the bottom with a spring-catch, the hames to be permanently attached thereto; it appears to overcome the manifest objections to the present collar and hames. The collars made for this harness are of the kind described. Two of a similar kind have been in constant use in one of the light batteries since 1881, and have given complete satisfaction.

The collar-hoods arc made large enough to cover the hinge of the collar and protect the back of the neck. They give a smooth, solid bearing on the neck, and do not interfere with the proper working of: the collar.

The collar-pads are small, and made of solid leather. They are intended to shorten the interior length of the collar 1 inch, and when used, are placed under the hood between it and the hinge. The hood holds the pad firmly in place. Martingales and side-straps are utilized in this harness. These articles form, in effect, one construction. The principal advantage claimed is, that by the use of these articles the horse exercises his maximum power naturally and to the best advantage when holding back.

The martingale is a heavy leather strap with folded edges, one end or which fastens to the neck-yoke, passing thence between the fore legs to the girth. It through a standing loop on the girth, and is attached to the hooks of the side straps, which, at the other ends, buckle into rings at the ends of the breeching. The horse when checked holds back from a point directly in his front; hence there exists no tendency to throw him down or out from his natural position, and the force exerted being equally and evenly distributed to the breeching, he acts naturally and with his greatest power. The martingale prevents strain on the collar, for it should be so adjusted by means of the side straps that when holding back there will he no tightening of the breast straps. When holding back the horse also gets the advantage derived from his own weight.

The martingale and side straps being under his body and connected with the breeching and neck-yoke have the effect of holding him up, and the more sudden the check or the more the load pushes him the greater the effect. Instead of being pulled down on his nose he is held up and assisted in being surefooted. The action of the martingale and side straps prevents the end of the pole front flying up or about. This is accomplished simply by the weight of the horse without effort on his part. By using this harness the weight at the end of the pole can be reduced to a minimum, and the necessity for a pole-lift obviated. The hair-pad manufactured at the Rock Island Arsenal and issued to some of the batteries seems to give satisfaction and to be far superior to the blanket. Hair is practically indestructible, and the pads are easily kept clean. They allow of free ventilation, and do not when wet act as a poultice on the back of the horse. It might be an improvement to make the strands looser, if practicable. In the long run these pads are cheaper than blankets. They should be made of black hair, and should not have anything attached to them or stamped on them.

For parade purposes scarlet saddle-cloths have been provided. It is intended to have these used on each team-horse and saddle-horse ridden by the enlisted men of a battery. They are made of heavy cotton canvas, a very durable material, dyed bright scarlet. At present, owing to the fact that the color of our blankets is not fast, little uniformity exits as to color, which greatly detracts from the appearance of the battery. This will be avoided by the use of the saddle-cloths, the color not being affected by moisture or light.

The lead harness has been made to conform as nearly as possible with the wheel, and some changes suggested by field experience have been made.

A very simple cannoneer harness has been made, intended for use with horse artillery, but especially with machine guns. It can be used on any horse having a saddle on, and when not in use does not in any way interfere with the rider.

A very decided improvement in the new harness is its lightness, as compared with the regulation harness, and the consequent facility in handling. It is nor uncommon for drivers to be severely strained and injured while harnessing and unharnessing, caused by the weight of the present equipment This proposed harness can be manufactured more cheaply than that now in use.

Two of the light batteries have had this harness on trial over a year, and the reports received warrant the assertion that it has proved to be satisfactory and worthy of further and more exhaustive trial.

respectfully submitted.

EDW'D B. WILLISTON,

Major, Third Artillery.

The Model 1893 McClellan saddle

In 1893, a little known version of the McClellan was tested and issued by the Rock Island Arsenal. This model used the M1885 saddle, with a new rigging system invented by Capt. Godfrey. This Godfrey rigging consisted of an interlocking arrangement of quarter straps which allowed the rigging ring to move freely, instead of being sewn in laps. The tightening of the cinch and rigging would hold the ring firmly in place. This allowed the saddle to be more easily fitted to the horse, making the whole design much more adjustable. The M1893 version used the M1885 rings and a shield shaped safe (squared top and rounded bottom). The safe was held with two riveted loops attached near the top corners. The two inside quarterstraps passed through these loops. In all other ways, the saddle is an M1885.

This rigging arrangement appeared to have been quite satisfactory as it was adopted. However, the supplies of civil war surplus saddletrees had finally become extremely small (thirty year later!) and something had to be done. Instead of merely reproducing the same design of the past forty years, which was not all that strong to begin with, the thoroughly modern Ordnance Department followed another track.

This system of rigging was undoubtedly used for some time previous to 1893, with some testing by Capt. Godfrey's troop very likely, as well as some additional test units. The Rock Island Arsenal reported that this new rigging was adopted and started manufacture in 1893, based on "extensive testing" previous to that.

The Model 1896 McClellan saddle

Lt. Odus Horney (Ordnance Dept, US Army)  is credited with developing what was essentially an entirely new saddle, although dimensionally very similar to the McClellan. Indeed, it retained the McClellan name despite the many changes, as it obviously was so close in appearance to the earlier models.[click here to see his 1897 report]

Lt. Horney's task was to mechanize the saddle production process. Prior to this time (mid-1890s), all saddletrees were civil war surplus, which had been hand made with resulting variances in dimensions. The time to produce a saddletree would also be quite long, even for an experienced saddletree craftsman. To accomplish the mechanization of the saddletree making process, Lt. Horney had to make some changes in the tree itself.

First, the wood used was changed with the poplar sidebars and beechwood pommels and cantles of the civil war saddles being replaced with basswood bars and ash pommels and cantles. The metal reinforcing plates of the earlier varieties were replaced with a one piece stamped metal bracket, which was riveted to both the pommels and the cantles to the sidebars. This strengthened the tree enormously. Iron rivets were used throughout instead of the screws of the 1859/64 version. The old cantle, previously more  oval-shaped, was changed. The outer cantle edge was now a section of a circle (semicircular), with a flat face on the front, or seat, side. This was to facilitate the turning of this part. The sidebars were turned on copying lathes so that each was identical to the others produced. There were no extensions as noted on the civil war version, the joining parts connected at flattened areas on the sidebar. The pommels were the least changed, dimensionally speaking, with a slightly larger, thicker appearance.

The method of rawhiding these trees appears to be different from a majority of the saddles done before this. Most civil war saddles showed that only stitches were used in the seat side of the cantle and pommel. A few exceptions show the use of the external lace that was run under these stitches on the cantle seat side, as in the cantle seat rear and pommel front edges. In the 1896 variant, all these top side pommel and cantle edges used an external lace, over which the lace "holddown" stitches were passed. This served to reinforce the rawhide around the stitch, spreading the strain evenly. If the rawhide cover under the stitch broke or ripped, the lace would serve to hold the rawhide in place. Before this time, the rawhide would have been free to lift away from the saddletree had a stitch pulled through.

The stirrup loops were also changed somewhat, to aid in the ease of mechanical production, as well as strengthen them. Civil war varieties invariably positioned two of three screws or rivets, through the squared folded strap holding the loop, in a straight line parallel to the wood grain. This tended to promote splitting of the wood along the grain, thus weakening the attachment of the hardware. Since this was also a straight metal strap, cut and wrapped around the loop, it necessarily had to be inletted by hand because of the square corners. The new design used a rounded end stirrup loop strap (to facilitate use of routers to inlet the sidebar for it) and offset rivet holes, so that no two rivets passed through the same plane in the wood grain.

The wooden parts of the cantle and pommel, instead of a weak dovetail joint, were formed with an interlocking mortice joint. These pieces were glued together before being shaped, and then screwed to the sidebars.

The rest of the saddle was completed in much the same way as the 1893, with the exception of a small refinement in the rigging safes. These safes were more rectangular in shape (long side vertical) with rounded corners. These were attached by loops around the rigging rings, which were the same as the 4" cinch rings. Hardware was also refined somewhat, with the saddle fittings being substantially heavier than previous ones.   During the summer of 1898, 3,000 sets of cavalry equipment were made at the San Antonio Arsenal - these have the earlier M1893 style ring safes, although they were riveted to the ring ala M1896 pattern.  All San Antonio made saddles used Rock Island Arsenal made trees and hardware. 

 

Improved stirrup and stirrup details
(GIF format, 21K)
w pliku mcc1896stirrups

This was also used by the artillery, with the addition of iron dees at the top of the pommel and cantle, under the quarterstraps. These were attached to the pommel and cantle arches by metal straps, with brass rivets passing through the leather cover, arch, dee strap, and quarterstrap (the rivet burr was placed on top of the quarterstrap).  These saddles utilized the old Civil War pattern brass stirrups. 

The First Model M1904 McClellan saddle

Around 1905, the M1896 saddle changed in a significant way. This was the change from black leather to russet, which was an Army wide phenomenon for all leather equipments. The saddle and it's construction remained essentially the same. With the first model 1904 [hereafter referred to as M1904(I)] saddle,  there were changes in the stirrups and stirrup straps. Instead of the one thickness of heavy leather used to form the hood, held by brass rivets and burrs, the new stirrup hood was formed of two medium thicknesses of russet leather, held by black tubular rivets and caps.

The rigging safes were also doubled in the same manner. All metal hardware was also finished in brown jappan for enlisted men, and bronze for officer equipments. This only lasted for a few years until it was replaced by a more durable black chemical finish.

The stirrup straps continued to be constructed with reversed buckles and reinforced sections where the stirrup transom would rest  (same as M1896) . The reversed buckle allowed the stirrup strap to be twisted when assembled. Depending on the direction of the twist, the openings of the stirrups on both sides could be made to naturally face the rear, reducing the stress on the rider's legs. A reason for this can be seen in the increasingly heavy weight of strap leather that was being used for stirrup straps. The stiff 14-15 oz. leather used in the earlier models tended to turn the stirrup foot openings outward. The rider, if they dropped their foot from the stirrup, would have difficulty in returning it to a outward facing stirrup, especially in the flurry of mounted action.  

Many of the M1904(I)'s were later converted to the new M1904 specification still hunting down concrete documentation on this, but it may be the case that actual new M1904 tree construction was delayed several years (until 1908) as these earlier models were "recycled". Most of these recycles were unaltered Type I seats, with the later adjustable rigging added.

Here are some pics of a nice M1904(I) seat and pommel plate (lettering style is typical of M1904(I)'s)

Note the squared rigging ring safes and intertwined quarterstraps.

The Model 1904 McClellan saddle

In the mysterious workings of the military bureaucracy, the next version of the McClellan to appear is known as the 1904 model McClellan, although the first ones produced were not made until 1908, and they did not completely replace the previous pattern until WWI. Even then, these first M1904's were M1904(I) saddles (russet) that were altered to the new specifications, before true production of the new model began.   Click here to see larger image of chart at right (67Kb)

w pliku mcc04plate300

The M1904 McClellan represents the last of the McClellans to use the "quarterstrap" or "centerfire" rigging. This was again altered to provide even more adjustability, and further increasing the bulk between the rider's leg and the horse. The quarterstraps were terminated near the edges of the saddletree, and had halter squares sewn into the ends. The cantle square hung slightly below the edge of the saddletree, while the pommel square rested just above the edge. A long strap, with a roller buckle and several loops, was run through these squares and the rigging ring in such a way as to duplicate the arrangement of the M1896. Adjusting the length of the strap could raise or lower the rigging ring, which could not be done with the M1896 Godfrey-style rigging. The rigging ring safe was now cut in a circle slightly larger than the ring, held to the ring by the usual riveted loops.

There were a number of other small changes made as well. The stirrup loop was moved forward on the tree to a position one inch from the rear edge of the pommel. The entire undersurface of the saddle was covered with one-half inch thickness sheepskin. This was first sewn to the bottom covers, after which the outer lower edge was sewn into the cover seam when that was closed.  This is by the regulation description of the saddle - actual specimens show that many were made without this sheepskin.  The rigging ring safes were universally lined with sheepskin.  The artillery version also used sweat leathers, as shown here.

At this point, it is necessary to see that there had been quite a bit of change in the McClellan, although the basic design is essentially the same. It would take an experienced rider to tell any difference between the various models if they were to ride each. This was the problem in many cavalry officers eyes, as the McClellan and its 1850s 'technology' was being surpassed by superior designs, and changes in riding theory. The McClellan, with its high cantle and pommel, promoted a rigid deep seat with little movement by the rider. The rider was also forced to sit quite vertically, somewhat to the rear of the horses center of motion. While not terribly bad, it was not nearly as preferable as the riding techniques and it's related equipment being developed in Europe. To rectify this situation, a new model was developed and tested, the Model 1912. Very much along the lines of the British Universal Pattern service saddle, the 1912 represented a tremendously bold experiment for the American cavalry equipments. Despite its thoroughly modern design and construction it suffered from a technological problem that was unforeseen, namely that the sheet metal seat frame tended to break.  A new and relatively unorthodox experimental  version, referred to as the M1917 Enlisted saddle, was developed and tested. Reviews and evaluations of this saddle were glowing and it appeared destined to become the next service saddle.

The WWI War Contract Model 1904 McClellan saddles

In 1917 you find a distinct change in M1904 series, attributable to the re-allotment of steel and iron resources to other war production. The steel tubular rivets and caps disappear, as well as the iron/steel wire stirrup loops, replaced by brass rivets and burrs, and cast brass stirrup loops. On a majority of the trees made, the fine profile of the pommel is lost, with war production trees having much heavier, blockier looking pommel profile. These seems to reflect a time savings in shaping the pommel. I've seen a few where the shaping was so rudimentary that you can feel a hard angled edge under the cover.  

These 1917 and 1918 production saddles are the ONLY McClellans to have the brass stirrup loops, which is a key identification detail. For the same reason, all (or nearly all) M1928 McClellans will have brass stirrup loops as well, since they were constructed using WWI surplus saddle seats. For those that rebuild and/or restore these saddle to use, these stirrup loops are safety concern - the hard brass straps that hold these to the tree tend to cut into the softer cast brass loops with use, and will eventually need replacement in order to prevent a potentially disasterous failure.  

The Model 1913 McClellan Packer's Saddle

This odd saddle was made as a saddle for packers ("wranglers" of supply pack trains) who needed the horn for lead ropes, etc.  Quite a number of other personnel in cavalry organizations were also issued packer saddles instead of the regular McClellan service saddle. Many packers relied on commercial western-type saddles, which were later made by the contractors such as R.T. Frazier, and K.C. Saddlery Company for a short time during WWI. These McClellan packers were totally different in dimensions from the cavalry/artillery McClellans, as they were generally used with mules. The saddles featured a bare brass horn, and four brass rigging rings, and two horsehair or mohair cinchas. These generally had steel knife-edge stirrups.

The WWI War Contract Model 1904 McClellan saddles

In 1917 you find a distinct change in M1904 series, attributable to the re-allotment of steel and iron resources to other war production. The steel tubular rivets and caps disappear, as well as the iron/steel wire stirrup loops, replaced by brass rivets and burrs, and cast brass stirrup loops. On a majority of the trees made, the fine profile of the pommel is lost, with war production trees having much heavier, blockier looking pommel profile. These seems to reflect a time savings in shaping the pommel. I've seen a few where the shaping was so rudimentary that you can feel a hard angled edge under the cover.  

These 1917 and 1918 production saddles are the ONLY McClellans to have the brass stirrup loops, which is a key identification detail. For the same reason, all (or nearly all) M1928 McClellans will have brass stirrup loops as well, since they were constructed using WWI surplus saddle seats. For those that rebuild and/or restore these saddle to use, these stirrup loops are safety concern - the hard brass straps that hold these to the tree tend to cut into the softer cast brass loops with use, and will eventually need replacement in order to prevent a potentially disasterous failure.  

The Model 1928 McClellan saddle

The aftermath of massive wars has usually been followed by a time of adaptation and modification of previous equipment, in order to utilize the existing massive surplus stocks. In the 1920s, as in the years following the Civil War, there were official modifications to military saddlery that were performed by company and regimental saddlers. The testing for the proposed improvements to the M1904 McClellan began in 1923-4 and resulted in the adoption of the modification known as the Model 1928 McClellan. This saddle reflects the changes in the theory of horsemanship that took the military world by storm before the war. Based on the work done by Caprilli of Italy, the method was taught to many officers attending the Saumur riding school in France before, during and after the war. This theory, basically stated, emphasized a closer relationship between the movement and action of the rider and horse. In terms of equipment changes to the McClellan, it would require increased leg contact with the animal, which had never been very good to begin with, and shorter, lighter stirrups.

The actual changes in the saddle are quite noticeable. The old rigging was cut away at the edges of the saddle, with the quarter straps nailed down and sewn into the edge. The old stirrup straps were discarded and replaced with lighter weight straps, usually equipped with roller buckles.

The hooded wooden stirrups had their hoods removed, and a large section of the stirrup was band sawed off, so that the tread would measure about 2", instead of 4.5".   Unaltered hooded stirrups were used as well.

The greatest change was the addition of a saddle skirt and "english" type girth webbing and straps. To accomplish this, the seams on the outer edges of the saddle were opened. The skirt was nailed to the surface of the tree, after which the girth webbing was nailed down. The straps, three in number, were usually sewn and riveted to this webbing. At this point the cover seam was resewn. This may have been done to retain the strength in the seam and save time. Later modifications also replaced the sheepskin linings with hard felt pads, sewn on as were the previous sheepskin linings. The girth was also changed during the 1930's, with the olive webbing being supplemented by a mohair cord girth. This latter girth was also issued with the M1936 Phillips officers saddle.

The first M1928 "kits" were furnished to organizational saddlers in 1931, so the M1928 designation is somewhat of a misnomer.

The McClellan Saddle and Its Proposed Modifications By Lieut. Colonel Edgar M. Whiting, Cavalry The horse equipment of the cavalry trooper has been improved in a number of ways during the past twenty-five years, but its improvement has not kept pace with the improvement of weapons and other articles of equipment. Although a better saddle than the McClellan might be devised, the large number on hand precludes any change of saddle other than modification of those on hand.              We have done away with quarterstraps, spider rings and hair cinches and substituted a girth, which, buckling to leather billets, reduces the weight and reduced the time needed in saddling. The long cylindrical cantle roll, so difficult to make and attach to the saddle and so difficult to climb over, has been changed to a broken roll, which is lashed down by coat straps and lies close to the horse. The old nosebag, so wasteful of grain, has been replaced by a very practical and efficient grain bag. The picket pin and lariat have served their purpose and departed. The bridoon came to relieve tortured jaws of the curb, and now the curb is disappearing from most troops, and the horses are bettered mannered in consequence. The bit and bridoon is the ideal thing in the hands of a good rider, but we do not get many good riders in war. Horsemanship was not taken account of on the qualification cards of the last war. Taking account of it might have saved us some money. Leather flaps have been attached to the tree, and woven felt attached to the panels. The first gives more comfort to the rider, the second reduced slipping of saddle blankets.              But the McClellan saddle in its present form, and packed according to existing regulations, leaves much to be desired in comfort. I am going to enumerate the faults as I see them. 1. A great many men have tried a great many ways of carrying a rifle under one leg and a saber under the other, but not one has found a way that is comfortable. The most fervent advocates of carrying these weapons on the pommel are those who do not have to carry them. 2. The present regulation pack is nearly ten pounds heavier on the near side than on the off side. This is especially disadvantageous, as the trooper is very apt to pull the saddle toward the near side in mounting, and the excess increases the harm done by the disarrangement in mounting. 3. When the raincoat is folded the long way, inside out, the collar hangs down to be spattered with mud, and the coat being folded inside out, all the dust of the road accumulates on the inside of the coat, and when worn by the friction of coat straps and saddle, the coat leaks in places where leaks are least wanted. And, for some unknown reason, when grain is carried, it is carried on top of the raincoat. When a rain begins, the column must halt that men may unpack, repack and put on their coats. Many officers and men have asked me the reason of this arrangement, but I could not give it, because no one could ever give it to me. 5. The stirrup leathers are too heavy and clumsy, and their great size does not confer appropriate strength. The buckles appear to have been designed for duty as trace buckles. After shins and saddle blankets had been sufficiently rubbed over a period of about forty years, a means was found of holding these buckles down to the stirrup post, but this arrangement causes the loose end of the stirrup leather to dangle down from the hood like a cow's tail, marring the appearance of the most perfectly groomed horse and polished equipment. 6. The McClellan hooded stirrup is heavy, bulky and clumsy. The weight of the hood causes the tread of the stirrup to fall forward, so that the trooper cannot depress the heel as prescribed without lifting the whole weight of the hood. The width of the stirrup at the top causes acute discomfort to the ankle when the foot is thrust home. After more than twenty-seven years' service, mostly with troops, in colder climates and in hot climates, in fair weather and foul weather, the only possible virtue that I can attribute to it is its protection to feet stuck out too far in close order drill. As a matter of fact, such feet occupy the same relative position as heads thrust out of car windows; they need bumping. 7. The two lower slots mortised in the cantle were intended for use with the now obsolete cylindrical roll. In order to lash down the present broken roll, it is prescribed that the coat strap have one of its turns brought down as near the end of the roll as possible. This sounds easy, but is not as easy as might be supposed, and it is therefore not generally done, resulting in the roll flapping about and eventually coming open. The lack of uniformity of rolls due to this feature is not pleasing to the eye, to say the least. Since the pommel roll is smaller than the cantle roll, the cantle straps and pommel straps are of different lengths; a complication of manufacture. 8. The leather flaps are unnecessarily wide at the top. It is difficult to attach saddle flaps by sewing to such a long wavy line as the McClellan tree. The extra width in rear serves no purpose and is really a cause of weakness, as it causes a wrinkle in the flap. 9. The stitches attaching the leather billets to the linen strips which are in turn attached to the tree are worn rather rapidly by the friction of the flaps over them, and must be countersunk to last. This item is too often overlooked by saddlers. 10. The weight of the saddle blanket is out of proportion to its efficiency. Its size is so great that it must be folded in six thicknesses. In this folding, we have what might seem a simple operation, but a look at any mounted organization will reveal a great many badly folded saddle blankets. unless one estimates the thirds correctly in one phase of the folding, he will have one of two results. Either the inner fold will be too short and form a ridge on the withers, or the inner fold will be too long and double back, also forming a ridge over the withers. What will happen to the withers is a foregone conclusion. It takes a keen and experienced eye to spot these irregularities of folding at the inspection that should precede the march. Too few officers look for these things, and they wonder why there are so many sore withers. I believe that this folding is responsible for nearly as many sore withers as failure to push the blanket off the withers before girthing. 11. The bed blanket looks to the inexperienced like a saddle blanket, but though its quality is equally poor it is not exactly like the saddle blanket, being smaller and often thinner. It is too small to be folded in the same way as a saddle blanket and too large and too thin to be folded in any other way for use under the saddle, and under the saddle it must go, over the saddle blanket, as soon as troops go in a campaign. It is surprising how many bed blankets get mistaken for saddle blankets among partly trained troops, and their suffering horses pay for the error. 12. The rifle scabbard is too small for the rifle and is not properly shaped. This was true also of the old carbine scabbard. Much damage is done to both front and rear sights by jamming the rifle in the scabbard too small in the first place. 13. The surcingle is not needed in the field. One of a pair of double reins will perform its only function, which is to hold a cold compress on a bunch that would otherwise develop into a sore. The surcingle belongs in garrison, where if used with the saddle blanket judiciously and frequently instead of the saddle in the first months of would-be cavalrymen's service, the young men would learn the correct military seat. Recruits would thus sit up straight in their saddles and avoid many of the faults caused by putting men on saddles before they learn to ride. I am aware that this is a digression but I do not intend by any means to belittle the surcingle in its proper sphere. It is the best assistant instructor of equitation that any man can have, modern doctrines notwithstanding. The Cavalry Board has developed a modified McClellan saddle that when packed for the field will eliminate some of the undesirable features of the present saddle and pack. The purpose of these modifications is to reduce the weight, improve the balance, simplify and speed up packing and make horse and rider more comfortable.  There is nothing new to cavalrymen in these modifications except their application to the McClellan saddle. All wool bed and saddle blankets, identical in size, weight and quality, 75" by 60", weight 2 lbs. 4 oz. less than the present bed and saddle blankets.  They cost less than the present combination of saddle and bed blanket.  The saddle blanket is folded in four thicknesses in precisely the same manner as the present bed blanket when placed on the shelter half preparatory to rolling up. This method of folding is simple and avoids the possibility of a ridge over the withers. It is realized that we have enough of our present bed and saddle blankets to last our little army for a great many years to come, but it is not a bad plan to have better replacements in view. While on the subject of saddle blankets, there is no blanket made that can compare with the mohair pad as a protector of the back of the horse. Light olive drab in color, it is attractive in appearance, it lasts for years, and its only disadvantage is that it cannot be used as cover for horse or man in cold weather. But if the trooper has a warm overcoats and puts his bed blanket over his horse, which none of them ever does, he can sleep on his mohair pad with some degree of comfort. The weight is further reduces by the use of metal stirrups and the same kind of leathers used on officers' saddles; these save 2 lbs. 13oz. Omitting the surcingle saves 6 oz., and a metal scabbard instead of a fibre scabbard saves 8 oz. The total saving in weight is 5 lbs., 15oz. Not a startling amount, but every bit of saving helps. In order to speed up packing and unpacking, saddlebag straps have been substituted for the cantle and pommel straps. These cantle and pommel straps are of different lengths, complicating manufacture, and it takes time to wind each twice around the cantle and pommel rolls, and going around twice adds nothing to pommel rolls, and going around twice adds nothing to strength or security. The saddlebag straps are shorter, wider and stronger than the present coat straps, and they go only once around the rolls. Two slots are mortised about an inch and a half below the lower cantle slots__these slots that were intended for the cylindrical roll--so that when the straps are buckles around the roll, the roll is tied down snugly in the place where it belongs. Five of these straps are used on the pommel. One through the center slot on top secures the center of the pommel wallets, the feed bag and the raincoat keeping them clear of the withers; two, one on each side, pass through staples fixed to the front of the tree and slots in the top piece of leather joining the wallets, securing them to the tree; and two more, one on each side, pass through leather staples on the under sides of the wallets and the front part of the flaps, around the wallets, making them still more secure. The upper pair of these straps pass around and secure the feed bag and raincot[sic]. The raincoat is folded in rectangular form, and then rolled up on the principle of folding a pyramidal tent--only the outside of the bottom of the skirt is exposed to wear. Instead of the linen strips on the present saddle, to which the billets are sewn, staples are attached to the tree, and the billets attached to the staples, secured by thong lacing. This permits replacement by the trooper of a broken billet and eliminates linen from materials used. The saddle bags were converted into pommel wallets--a very simple matter after we found out how to do it--lighter than the saddle bags and holding all the articles carried in the saddle bags except the underclothing. They will hold the underclothing also, but it was thought best not to require too nice a fit, so the underclothing is placed in the cantle roll. Most saddling in campaign is done in darkness, and one purpose of this modified pack is to make it simple and easy to put on quickly. I have always believed that when transportation is available all the pack except arms, ammunition, the feed bag with grain and the raincoat should be taken off the horses. I thing that an officer does not fully appreciate the difference made by weight until he has raced a little. you will never see an officer or trooper, for that matter, who has raced putting any more weight on his horse than he can help nor will you see him sitting on his horse when there is no reason for it. The issue rifle scabbard was remodeled by wetting and stretching over a wooden form, so that it is shaped for the rifle, and it permits the rifle to be drawn and returned with ease and without damage to the sights. In order to hold the rifle steady at all gaits and shift some of its weight from the cantle, a stiff leather brace, reinforced by a piece of spring steel (actually a piece of an old phonograph spring) within is attached to the scabbard and secured to the girth by means of the rear billet, made long for the purpose and buckled to the girth. Carried in this way, the rifle is entirely out of the way of the trooper's leg, and the stiffness of the brace holds it steady, even over obstacles. The brace was copied from an old British rifle scabbard. The rifle is placed in the scabbard before mounting and presents no difficulty in mounting or in withdrawing after mounting. The careless trooper will crack his shin only once on the butt plate. The saber carrier is a modification of the British carrier and carries spare horse shoes and nails where they are readily accessible on the march. This carrier may be used on any saddle and the modification permits carrying any type of saber or scabbard. As we now have three different types of scabbard, the carrier had to accommodate any of them. The carrier is suspended by a stout strap from a staple on the cantle bar and secured by a light strap that snaps into a ring near the center of the girth. In the photograph, the shoes were unfortunately not placed in the carrier, which lowered the position of the saber until it is too near the end of the cantle roll. However, there is no difficulty in drawing it, even in this position. It must be remembered that to ride steadily and not interfere with one's own horse or others, the saber must be in a vertical plane, and the thickness of the two shoes acts in the same way as the small block of wood placed on a German saber carrier that one of my regiment picked up on a battlefield. Four of these saddles were ridden by student officers on the recent 100-mile forced march. All four preferred them to the regulation pack. Upon their recommendation, the rifle was raised higher on the saddle and the steel spring added to the leather brace. Two of the saddles will shortly be turned over to the Second Cavalry and two to the Thirteenth Cavalry for a test covering several months, after which they will be submitted to the Cavalry Board. The intelligent testing and criticism by Capt. Harrison and the skilled work of Sergt. Phillips of the Cavalry School Detachment made the development of this modified saddle and pack a fact instead of a theory. The only way of finding out about equipment is by trying it. Use of the Modified McClellan Saddle Pack by other than members of the Rifle Platoon. By Gyles Merrill, Captain, Cavalry. If the modified saddle pack is adopted, all troop commanders will at once be confronted with the problem of preserving its balance when used by those soldiers whose equipment is not identical with that of the private in a rifle platoon. There are many of these men, for example: members of the machines rifle platoons who carry no sabers, first sergeants and buglers, who carry no rifles and certain members of the machine rifle platoons and machine gun and headquarters troops, who carry neither rifles nor sabers. The new saddle pack lends itself readily to the solution of this problem if one but takes the trouble to prescribe standard methods of packing the equipment of the soldier who falls in one of the groups mentioned above. The following tables have been prepared on the assumption that the weight on the pommel should always exceed the weight on the cantle and that the weight on one side should balance within two or three pounds of the weight on the other side. It is believed that the preservation of this balance is more important than the lack of uniformity arising when some men of the troop carry the saber on the near side and others on the off side. The tables offered are by no means the only solution and possibly not the best, but they serve to illustrate the flexibility of the modified saddle pack.   If the saber and scabbard are not carried, the equipment is distributed in the experimental pack as follows Near Pommel lbs. oz.   Off Pommel lbs. oz. Feed bag, heavier end 1 10 Feed bag, lighter end 0 4 One-half feed of grain 2 0 One-half feed of grain 2 0 One-half alligator rain coat 1 6 One-half alligator rain coat 1 6 Stirrup iron and leather 1 9 1/2 Stirrup iron and leather 1 9 1/2 Underclothing 0 12 Grooming kit 1 1 Toilet articles 1 4 Saddle soap and sponge 1 0 Mess kit and lunch 1 10 Rifle and scabbard, part 3 0 Coat straps 0 3 Coat straps 0 3 Pommel wallets 1 14 Pommel wallets 1 14 Total 12 4 1/2 Total   12  5 1/2   Total weight on pommel, 24 lbs. 10 oz. Excess on near pommel,  3 oz Excess on off pommel, 1 oz.  Near Cantle lbs. oz.   Off Cantle lbs. oz. Horse shoes, nails and carrier 3 1 Rifle and scabbard 9 0 Canteen, filled 3 7 Shelter half and rope, part 1 4 Shelter half and pole, part 1 14 Tent pins 0 12 Tent pole 0 15 Bed blanket, part 1 14 Bed blanket, part 1 14 Coat straps 0 3 Coat straps 0 3       Total 11 6 Total   13 1     Excess off cantle,  1 lb., 11 oz Total Excess off side, 1 lb. 12 oz.  If neither rifle nor saber is carried, the equipment is distributed in the experimental pack as follows Near Pommel lbs. oz.   Off Pommel lbs. oz. Feed bag, lighter end 0 4 Feed bag, heavier end 1 10 One-half feed of grain 2 0 One-half feed of grain 2 0 One-half alligator rain coat 1 6 One-half alligator rain coat 1 6 Stirrup iron and leather 1 9 1/2 Stirrup iron and leather 1 9 1/2 Saddle soap and sponge 1 0 Grooming kit 1 1 Toilet articles 1 4 Mess kit and lunch 1 10 Canteen, filled 3 7 Coat straps 0 3 Coat straps 0 3 Pommel wallets 1 14 Pommel wallets 1 14       Total 12 15 1/2 Total   11 5 1/2   Total weight on pommel, 24 lbs. 5 oz. Excess on near pommel,   1 lb., 10 oz Total Excess on pommel, 11 lbs., 9 oz.  Near Cantle lbs. oz.   Off Cantle lbs. oz. Shelter half and pole, part 1 14 Horse shoes, nails and carrier 3 1 Tent pole 0 15 Shelter half and rope, part 1 4 Bed blanket, part 1 14 Tent pins 0 12 Coat straps 0 3 Bed blanket, part 1 14 Underclothing, summer 0 6 Coat straps 0 3       Underclothing, summer 0 6 Total 5 4 Total   7 8   Total weight on cantle, 12 lbs., 12 oz. Excess on off cantle,  2 lb., 4 oz Total Excess off side, 10 oz.  If the rifle and scabbard are not carried, the equipment is distributed in the experimental pack as follows Near Pommel lbs. oz.   Off Pommel lbs. oz. Feed bag, heavier end 1 10 Feed bag, lighter end 0 4 One-half feed of grain 2 0 One-half feed of grain 2 0 One-half alligator rain coat 1 6 One-half alligator rain coat 1 6 Stirrup iron and leather 1 9 1/2 Stirrup iron and leather 1 9 1/2 Saddle soap and sponge 1 0 Grooming kit 1 1 Toilet articles 1 4 Mess kit and lunch 1 10 Underclothing 0 12 Coat straps 0 3 Coat straps 0 3 Pommel wallets 1 14 Pommel wallets 1 14       Total 11 10 1/2 Total   9 15 1/2   Total weight on pommel, 21 lbs. 10 oz. Excess on near pommel,   1 lb., 11 oz Total Excess on pommel, 2 lbs., 3 oz.  Near Cantle lbs. oz.   Off Cantle lbs. oz. Canteen, filled 3 1 Saber and carrier 4 14 Shelter half and pole, part 1 14 Horse shoes, nails and carrier 3 1 Tent pole 0 15 Shelter half and rope, part 1 4 Bed blanket, part 1 14 Tent pins 0 12 Coat straps 0 3 Bed blanket, part 1 14       Coat straps 0 3 Total 8 5 Total   11 2   Total weight on cantle, 19 lbs., 7 oz. Excess off cantle,  2 lb., 13 oz

1857 1859 1872 1874 1883 1885 1887 1893 1896 1904 (I) 1904 (II) 1904 (III) 1913 WWI 1928 Whiting Modif.

---