Pattern 14 Rifle Stock Identification

[wattsm]

Hello to one and all. I am newly registered member of this forum but not new to its content. Over the past couple of years I have been directed to threads on this site from Google searches on topics involving arms and equipment of the period I was doing research on. I have always been impressed with its use of primary source material as the basis of discussion. I am hopeful someone has such information and can answer my question(s). Or barring that, perhaps can direct me to where said answers can be found.

I recently purchased a Eddystone P14 that came in a very nice, very clean stock. My problem is that it has asymetrical finger grooves. The first question then is did this manufacturer ever use them on completed rifles or were they all in the so called "fat boy" wood? If the answer is yes, were their use consistent with a rifle in the 300000 serial number range. If the answer is finger groove stocks were never used on Eddystone production, is there any way to identify which other manufacturer made this stock save for the markings on the side of the butt forward of the brass disc. Sadly, as required by WRS , it has the wood insert where the disc should be and butt around it has been sanded to the extent that no trace of the original markings remain. In fact it appears the entire butt has been "thinned", perhaps mostly by use, as the buttplate itself has sharp ridges at the juncture with the wood from it having it's edges ground, aparently while mounted, to match the former's contour. It does, however, have a proliferation of other markings, most of which are legible to one degree or another. Can the maker/user of this wood be identified based on these markings? If so, can anyone assist in deciphering the them. It came with WRA buttplate assembly, an unmarked rear swivel assembly and a Remington volley sight base/arm so the attachments are of no help. Any assistance or comments would be appreciated.

Pig6

[TonyE]

Chris is the man to give you more details on stocks, but I can tell you that your ERA rifle was made no earlier than Marh 1917. If you care to give a more precise serial number I can date the manufacture to within a week or so.

The fact that your rifle has a Winchester butt plate and a Remington volley sight suggests a "parts" gun, as if it has been through Weedon WRS then it would not have the volley sights. I believe some Eddystone rifles were fitted with Remington stocks, but again Chris has wider experience than I on these.

Regards

TonyE

[Lancashire Fusilier]

I recently purchased a Eddystone P14 that came in a very nice, very clean stock. Any assistance or comments would be appreciated.

Pig6

Wildpig6,

Welcome to the Forum.

I own a 1916 Eddystone Mk.1 P14 rifle, serial No. 14***.

With regard to the stock and butt, my P14 Mk.1 has the " Fat Boy " or " Fatso " one piece stock made from American Black Walnut ( Juglans Nigra ), and on the butt is a distinctive impressed roundal consisting of a circle below a War Department Broad Arrow. Within that circle is a Roman Numeral " I " alongside a " E " for Eddystone Mark 1. below the circle in 0.18 inch lettering is the model designation " PATT 14 " for Pattern 1914.

Eddystone parts are usually marked with the letter " E ".

Is it possible that you can post some good photographs of your rifle, and then myself and other members will do their best to assist you with your questions.

Regards,

LF

[TonyE]

Lancashire Fusilier - before you tell me I am wrong, read my post more carefully. I said HIS P.'14, i.e. an Eddystone with a serial number in the 300,000 series, was not made before March 1917. By 24 February 1917 280,760 Pattern '14 rifles had been accepted by British inspectors at Eddystone and by 3 March 1917 the number was 301,810. Ergo, a serial number in the 300,000 series was not made before March.

My M.A. Dissertation was on the supply of rifles to Britain's expanding armies in WWI and I made an extensive study of the P.'14 serial numbers based on records at the National Archives, Kew, including the Ministry of Munitions weekly production reports. I have the serial number range for each of the three manufacturers for every week that the P.14 was made and accepted by British inspectors.

Instead of just quoting secondary sources at me, do what I have done and use the primary sources.

The first ten P.'14 rifles were respectively accepted from Winchester in W/E 15 February 1916, from Remington in W/E 29 February 1916 and from Eddystone in W/E 31 March 1916. References are TNA:MUN 4/2406 and TNA: MUN 5/189/1400/21.

..and I received a Distinction for the dissertation too!

Regards

TonyE

[TonyE]

Hmmm... I see LF has pulled his post now...

Regards

TonyE

[wattsm]

Chris is the man to give you more details on stocks, but I can tell you that your ERA rifle was made no earlier than Marh 1917. If you care to give a more precise serial number I can date the manufacture to within a week or so.

The fact that your rifle has a Winchester butt plate and a Remington volley sight suggests a "parts" gun, as if it has been through Weedon WRS then it would not have the volley sights. I believe some Eddystone rifles were fitted with Remington stocks, but again Chris has wider experience than I on these.

Regards

TonyE

Thanks for the comment. The gun is sn 303582, the chamber is dated "16". I have to agree that the stock has certainly been put together to add to the rest of the metal. As you say, the fact that the arm and peep, also Remington, are with the gun even though the stock has gone through WRS point to the fact that they have been added back to the package at some time after it left HM service. Indeed, I was pleasantly surprised when they were on the gun as all the pictures of it were from the other side.

The bolt, barrel and receiver all carry the quoted sn; all have the * stamped on them as well. The front and rear sight were both WRA, the rear sight spring Remington; all changed out for the correctly marked components. Otherwise, the metal was/is all Eddystone, including the barrel bands, and, I believe, in is still carried its original factory bluing.

More information than you wanted, I am sure.

Pig6

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Widpig6,

Here is a photograph to show the difference in the stocking on the early Eddystone ( top ) and below, the Remington and Winchester.

LF

[TonyE]

According to the records, your rifle was accepted by British inspectors at the factory in W/E 10 March 1917. Of course, there may have been a delay between manufacture and acceptance so it may have been made a week or so earlier.

When you say the breech is marked "16" I presume you mean the barrel rather than the receiver? That would be quite possible as barrel production seemed to be ahead of assembly and it is not the first rifle I have come across made in the early part of the year with the previous year's date on the barrel.

Regards

TonyE

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Hmmm... I see LF has pulled his post now...

Regards

TonyE

You are certainly correct, having re-read the post with my reading glasses on, I spotted the critical word " your ", and realized my post was inaccurate, and needed to be withdrawn.

The facts regarding the 1916 Eddystone were however correct, and I shall repost them with the proper text.

My sources were credible reference books, and an extensive paper on the Eddystone P14 rifle written by Americans Roy Marcot and Joe Poyer, plus of course my own Eddystone P14 Mk.1 1916 rifle, which is in superb all original condition.

regards,

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

The bolt, barrel and receiver all carry the quoted sn; all have the * stamped on them as well. The front and rear sight were both WRA, the rear sight spring Remington; all changed out for the correctly marked components. Otherwise, the metal was/is all Eddystone, including the barrel bands, and, I believe, in is still carried its original factory bluing.

Pig6

The * marking on your bolt, barrel and receiver, is important, as the * mark relates to the designation that was given to the new specifications for the P14 rifle which were approved on 21st December, 1916. I do not know how quickly those new specifications were applied to production, and possibly for the last 10 days of December, 1916 ( or even earlier ), rifles could have been manufactured with the new specifications, and marked with the additional * mark, giving a Mk.1* rifle manufactured in 1916, hence your rifle having a 1916 date stamped on it.

We know from TonyE's quoted records, the rifle was accepted by the Inspector's at the factory in early March 1917, and was manufactured before that date, just how much before early March 1917, is the question, as the dates on which a rifle was inspected is probably different to the date it was manufactured. Presumably, those changes in specification were discussed well before December 21st 1916, and would have been known to the factory posssibly months earlier, and no doubt they had made production arrangements for those changes in specification. None of us know what was in the minds of the Eddystone factory almost 100 years ago, so we have to go by the facts, and what I find interesting is the 1916 date stamped on your rifle.

You could in fact have a very late 1916 manufactured and dated 1916 Eddystone P14 Mk.1* rifle, inspected in early 1917.

LF.

[truthergw]

I am just a kibitzer on these threads but as a sometime machinist whose wages depended to a large extent on acceptance by inspectors, I am interested in your last sentence. Did the inspectors not stamp the pieces with the date inspected? Who stamped the 1916 on Pig6's rifle?

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Did the inspectors not stamp the pieces with the date inspected? Who stamped the 1916 on Pig6's rifle?

My understanding, is that the factory stamped production/manufacture dates, and the Inspectors stamped inspection marks?

This stamping system applying to both rifles and bayonets.

On rifles and bayonets, the dates of manufacture/production are precise and machine applied ( by the factory ), whereas the Inspector's marks are applied by hand stamps in a random manner, with the exact positioning of the inspection stamps varying from item to item ?

[wattsm]

Wildpig6,

Welcome to the Forum.

I own a 1916 Eddystone Mk.1 P14 rifle, serial No. 14***.

With regard to the stock and butt, my P14 Mk.1 has the " Fat Boy " or " Fatso " one piece stock made from American Black Walnut ( Juglans Nigra ), and on the butt is a distinctive impressed roundal consisting of a circle below a War Department Broad Arrow. Within that circle is a Roman Numeral " I " alongside a " E " for Eddystone Mark 1. below the circle in 0.18 inch lettering is the model designation " PATT 14 " for Pattern 1914.

Eddystone parts are usually marked with the letter " E ".

Is it possible that you can post some good photographs of your rifle, and then myself and other members will do their best to assist you with your questions.

Regards,

LF

Lancashire Fusilier. Thank you for your comments. The information you mention is on my other two P14s so I have first hand reference as to what should be there and where. Unfortunately it was scrubbed clean from the stock of this newest acquisition during the WRS process for whatever metal it was attached to at the time hence my questions about alternate methods of identification. As to posting pictures, that is beyond my skill and capability at the present time.

TonyE. Thank you for the born on date information on the gun, always good to know. The other two Eddystones are 627466 and 163026 if I can impose one you once more when you have a moment. You, Sir, are braver than I electing to write for your MA. I opted to do a project for mine.

Pig6

[TonyE]

TonyE. Thank you for the born on date information on the gun, always good to know. The other two Eddystones are 627466 and 163026 if I can impose one you once more when you have a moment. You, Sir, are braver than I electing to write for your MA. I opted to do a project for mine.

Pig6

Your ERA 163026 was accepted during W/E 13 January 1917.

Your ERA 627466 is much more interesting. According to records at the NA, the last Eddystone rifles were accepted on 24 June 1917 and the highest number is 604941. (Skennerton uses this figure in his "American Enfield" book). However, serial numbers higher than the "official" last number are known from all three manufacturers. I suspect that the answer is that these latter rifles were not inspected as they came off the assembly line but were probably assembled from parts on hand when production formally stopped, and inspected later. Do the inspection marks on your 627466 have an "A" code? By that I mean a crown over a number over "A". That will tell us whther the rifle was inspected in America or perhaps here in the UK.

An alternative possibility is that in the course of producing 600,000 rifles at Eddystonne some 25-30,000 were rejected and so although 604941 rifles were accepted, serial numbers went into the 625-630,000 range. I think that unlikely as it would mean a rejection rate of 5% and I have seen nothing in the records to suggest this was the case. The mystery remains!

As for being brave to do a written M.A., I have about 18 months left to complete my Ph.D thesis on the development of British small arms ammo in WWI! Hey, it is only 80,000 words!

Regards

Tonye

[4thGordons]

Tony

off the wall guess -- how about the rifles shipped directly to India?

Any chance these (if destined for the Indian Army) were not inspected by British inspectors and therefore are not included in the numbers? This might account for a chunk of the "gap."

I don't have much to add to the original discussion of the stock.

My two Eddystone rifles have fatso stocks. I have read on other forums about exchanges of stocks between manufacturers as a result of shortages in production....however I have not seen any documentation of this. I do not see any obvious markings that definitively identify a stock as originating from a particular manufacturer on my rifles.

Lots of the P14s that have come into the US in the past couple of years seem to have come out of India. These are a mixed bag - some were DP'd (with a big hole cut through the chamber and furniture) others not. The functional ones appear to have been modified to what is essentially WRS (volley peep cut off and sometimes volley sight pointer removed - but often not, usually stock disc inletting filled in) but I assume that this was done in India.

The three or four of these I have looked at seem to have a mixed bag of parts on them.

I need to look out the serial numbers of my P14s and get the dates from you!

Chris

[truthergw]

My understanding, is that the factory stamped production/manufacture dates, and the Inspectors stamped inspection marks?

This stamping system applying to both rifles and bayonets.

On rifles and bayonets, the dates of manufacture/production are precise and machine applied ( by the factory ), whereas the Inspector's marks are applied by hand stamps in a random manner, with the exact positioning of the inspection stamps varying from item to item ?

Thank you. So a piece could be made and stamped then rejected?

[TonyE]

In the case of the P.'14 the main markings of manufacturer and serial number were machine stamped on the rifle in the course of manufacture. Subsequent markings for Proof and inspection were then hand stamped along the way. If a rifle was rejected but could have some component replaced then that took place, but if say the receiver was out of spec. for some reason then the whole thing would probably be scrapped. It would depend at what stage of manufacture the fault was found.

It is an interesting area, as little has been written in detail about the inspection procedures, either here or in America and it is something I want to research in the future.

In the attached pictures you can see the machine stamped serial number and the"W" which in this case identifies a Winchester made rifle. The other picture shows the hand stamped crossed pennants indicating it passed proof and the broad Arrow of British government ownership.

REgards

TonyE

[TonyE]

Chris - I think the Indian rifles were accepted by British inspectors and came from the 1.2 million shown in the records as manufactured. The numbers do not add up otherwise.

The final total manufactured was 1,243,565 rifles, given in TNA: PRO MUN 5/189/1400/21. There are discrepancies between this figure and others published even within Ministry records. (Skennerton uses 1,233,075) The number manufactured were reduced by the number rejected by British inspectors at the factory, to give the number accepted. This was again reduced by losses in transit due to U-Boats etc. to give the number delivered. Ministry records show 1,117,850 received in the UK and the discrepancy is accounted for by 100,000 sent direct to India from America and losses at sea of about 25,000.

Incidentally, this also suggests that the overall reject rate between rifles manufactured and accepted was very low, confirming my point in my earlier post that I have not seen any comments about the reject rate once production finaly got started in quantity.

Regards

TonyE

[wattsm]

Your ERA 163026 was accepted during W/E 13 January 1917.

Your ERA 627466 is much more interesting. According to records at the NA, the last Eddystone rifles were accepted on 24 June 1917 and the highest number is 604941. (Skennerton uses this figure in his "American Enfield" book). However, serial numbers higher than the "official" last number are known from all three manufacturers. I suspect that the answer is that these latter rifles were not inspected as they came off the assembly line but were probably assembled from parts on hand when production formally stopped, and inspected later. Do the inspection marks on your 627466 have an "A" code? By that I mean a crown over a number over "A". That will tell us whther the rifle was inspected in America or perhaps here in the UK.

An alternative possibility is that in the course of producing 600,000 rifles at Eddystonne some 25-30,000 were rejected and so although 604941 rifles were accepted, serial numbers went into the 625-630,000 range. I think that unlikely as it would mean a rejection rate of 5% and I have seen nothing in the records to suggest this was the case. The mystery remains!

As for being brave to do a written M.A., I have about 18 months left to complete my Ph.D thesis on the development of British small arms ammo in WWI! Hey, it is only 80,000 words!

Regards

Tonye

TonyE.

Right next to the proof mark on the breech of the barrel is a small crown over 2K over A. I can to verify the serial munber reported is correct and applied to barrel, receiver and sight blade all of which are Eddystone marked. I would be loath to try to explain why it is outside documented serial number ranges, especially 22K+ rifles so. Not knowing what the daily/weekly output was up to 24 June, it is impossible to estimate what 22K+ rifle represents in terms of production time; i.e. how many days/weeks on the calendar. It is my understanding that transition to production of the U.S Model of 1917 occurred pretty quickly after that of the P14 ceased. They could have assembled rifles concurrently but the sense of urgency inspired by the events of the previous April would seem to mitigate against it. It would be an interesting exercise to see when M1917 production "officially" started in earnest at Eddystone and compare that to how long it would take to manufacture/assemble 22.5K P14 rifles, assuming mine was the very last SN which I seriously doubt, to see if such a feat were even physically possible.

This unfortunate rifle came to me as a completely Eddystone piece, even has a well worn E stock with E hardware and volley sights in place. The only mismatched piece is the bolt which an early type, small left lug, and all Winchester. I say unfortunate because apparently somebody shot it with the barrel obstructed at the muzzle. What remains of the muzzle is split to the end of the key way for the front sight. The front sight base is cracked though the thick part under the blade. Must of been a good jolt for whomever set it off. I am not sure how much to trust this receiver any more so I am going to install DP barrel that has been restored to blank firing only capability. Then it will be a true "parts" piece as almost everything will have its own serial number.

Congradulations on the PHD aspiration and progress. That many words takes a level of stamina I lack.

Pig6

[TonyE]

The proof mark at least confirms that the rifle was inspected and accepted in America.

With regards to production numbers, for most of 1917 Eddystone were producing about 20,000 rifles per week, by far the highest production of the three manufacturers.Winchester were producing 5-6,000 and Remington 10-12,000 per week at their height.

Prototype M1917 rifles had been sent to Springfield Armoury in May 1917 before production of the P.'14 finished around July and it is stated that finalised draings were with the contractors on 18 August 1917, so production would have started fairly shortly after that. I have not of course researched the production figures for the M1917.

Your rifle seems to have led a hard life, but the P.'14 receiver is immensely strong. Towards the end of the war when a new rifle was being considered, the Director of Artillery asked that a P.'14 be tested to assess the maximum pressure it could bear. The result of the tests proved it could withstand a pressure of 50 tons/sq. in. without bursting. .303 pressure was about 18 tons for normal rounds and proof pressure was 24 tons.

Thanks for the good wishes on the writing!

Regards

Tonye

[wattsm]

Tony

off the wall guess -- how about the rifles shipped directly to India?

Any chance these (if destined for the Indian Army) were not inspected by British inspectors and therefore are not included in the numbers? This might account for a chunk of the "gap."

I don't have much to add to the original discussion of the stock.

My two Eddystone rifles have fatso stocks. I have read on other forums about exchanges of stocks between manufacturers as a result of shortages in production....however I have not seen any documentation of this. I do not see any obvious markings that definitively identify a stock as originating from a particular manufacturer on my rifles.

Lots of the P14s that have come into the US in the past couple of years seem to have come out of India. These are a mixed bag - some were DP'd (with a big hole cut through the chamber and furniture) others not. The functional ones appear to have been modified to what is essentially WRS (volley peep cut off and sometimes volley sight pointer removed - but often not, usually stock disc inletting filled in) but I assume that this was done in India.

The three or four of these I have looked at seem to have a mixed bag of parts on them.

I need to look out the serial numbers of my P14s and get the dates from you!

Chris

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I was hoping agains hope that all the numbers and symbology stamped in the wood meant something in terms of who made and/or used it. For instance, it has an "X" with serifs, or a Roman numeral 10, stamped in it between the butt swivel and grip as well as just forward of the trigger guard assembly, was this peculiar to one manufacturer. It is clearly not on my other two stocks, one a WRA, the other an Eddystone. Neither of these pieces of wood, however, are in anything like the same condition as this new one; both having seen considerably more wear and tear as well as cleaning.

One more question, since the process was mentioned above. Can somebody direct me to a source, preferably primary, that has the WRS on display for all to see and read. The word "standard" implies written instructions and/or specifications. I have yet to find anything but the typical passing reference that seems to assume that all understand what it means for a weapon to have undergone it.

Pig6

[4thGordons]

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I was hoping agains hope that all the numbers and symbology stamped in the wood meant something in terms of who made and/or used it. For instance, it has an "X" with serifs, or a Roman numeral 10, stamped in it between the butt swivel and grip as well as just forward of the trigger guard assembly, was this peculiar to one manufacturer. It is clearly not on my other two stocks, one a WRA, the other an Eddystone. Neither of these pieces of wood, however, are in anything like the same condition as this new one; both having seen considerably more wear and tear as well as cleaning.

One more question, since the process was mentioned above. Can somebody direct me to a source, preferably primary, that has the WRS on display for all to see and read. The word "standard" implies written instructions and/or specifications. I have yet to find anything but the typical passing reference that seems to assume that all understand what it means for a weapon to have undergone it.

Pig6

I am not sure it is what you are describing but a six pointed star over a letter (including an X) stamped on the bottom of the buttstock is a WRS mark

The X (with a 6 point star over it) indicates the WRS subcontractor Cogswell and Harrison who did 14,323 WRS rifles according to Stratton (Vol 4 p25)

other letters used were E, J, O, P, Q, R, U, V, X and Z (each for a different subcontractor)

This same volume describes the WRS as "having come to be known as the Weedon Repair Standard" and describes it as consisting of "unpacking and degreasing the rifles, removing the dial site pointer and cutting the arm off the volley aperture. Some 677, 324 P14 rifles are reported as having undergone WRS reconditioning - about 55% of the total production"

Somewhere I have seen a more detailed description on (I think) an original document but I will have to look. My interest at the time was whether WRS included bringing MkI rifles up to MkI* standard. I do not think it did as it referred to No3MkI* rifles (ie assuming they had already been converted) -- I will see if I can rediscover this!

Chris

Edit: this may have been what I was thinking of: Skennerton's British Small Arms of WWII puts the WRS contract date as 24/6/39 and describes it as "conversion of No3 MkI* rifles to WRS:"

The description of WRS in this work is identical to Stratton's with the exception that it adds "replacement of any defective or broken parts" (p 10)

Edited 28 March , 2012 by 4thGordons

[wattsm]

I am not sure it is what you are describing but a six pointed star over a letter (including an X) stamped on the bottom of the buttstock is a WRS mark

The X (with a 6 point star over it) indicates the WRS subcontractor Cogswell and Harrison who did 14,323 WRS rifles according to Stratton (Vol 4 p25)

other letters used were E, J, O, P, Q, R, U, V, X and Z (each for a different subcontractor)

This same volume describes the WRS as "having come to be known as the Weedon Repair Standard" and describes it as consisting of "unpacking and degreasing the rifles, removing the dial site pointer and cutting the arm off the volley aperture. Some 677, 324 P14 rifles are reported as having undergone WRS reconditioning - about 55% of the total production"

Somewhere I have seen a more detailed description on (I think) an original document but I will have to look. My interest at the time was whether WRS included bringing MkI rifles up to MkI* standard. I do not think it did as it referred to No3MkI* rifles (ie assuming they had already been converted) -- I will see if I can rediscover this!

Chris

Edit: this may have been what I was thinking of: Skennerton's British Small Arms of WWII puts the WRS contract date as 24/6/39 and describes it as "conversion of No3 MkI* rifles to WRS:"

The description of WRS in this work is identical to Stratton's with the exception that it adds "replacement of any defective or broken parts" (p 10)

Thanks for you persistence. The six pointed star has an "E" north of it as the stock stands upright. I believe this means Enfield did the WRS compliance on this wood and whatever metal was assembled to it at the time. The other marking I mentioned, and here I made a mistake before, is in the curvature of the pistol grip and then again, as perviously reported, just above the inletting for the trigger guard, both are transverse to the centerline. There is also an illegible stamp just to the rear of the trigger guard as well as other numbers, letters and symbols in other locations. I believe all these are part of the original manufacturing/assembly process; perhaps some are inspectors stamps. If such is the case they would/may be specific to a manufacturer. I think there is detailed information in primary sources on who used what inspector stamp when it comes to the metal. I thought maybe that information was also capture for the wood and could possibly identify who used this piece of lumber through the back door. Regardless, I do not have access to any of it.

Pig6

[TonyE]

I know of no record of which gives names to British inspectors' numbers, either for metal or wood.

For example, Lord Reith, later to become the Chairman of the BBC, was an inspector in America during WWI but there is no record of which number he was.

It would be great if you have any reference to any information on numbers to names.

Regards

TonyE

[Lancashire Fusilier]

I know of no record of which gives names to British inspectors' numbers, either for metal or wood.

For example, Lord Reith, later to become the Chairman of the BBC, was an inspector in America during WWI but there is no record of which number he was.

It would be great if you have any reference to any information on numbers to names.

Regards

TonyE

There could be two additional names for Inspectors, as in Skennerton's book The U.S. Enfield page 59, he refers to " Difficulties were still being experienced with the standards required by the British Inspectorate... Two " trouble shooters " Col. F.J. Byrne and a Mr. E.W. Phillips, left England on 21st October 1916 ( for the Eddystone plant ) as representatives of the British Government....Phillips stayed on in America until the contracts were completed. "

I also know you have a strong interest in ammunition and firearms, and another interesting aside, is that in 1915 Colonel John T. Thompson, who later became famous for developing the Thompson sub-machine gun, resigned from the U.S. Army to become Chief Engineer and oversee the construction of the new Remmington facility in Eddystone. This vast manufacturing complex soon became one of the largest arms factories in the world. Colonel Thompson remained in management as Works Supervisor at Eddystone until he re-entered Military Service, eventually being promoted to Brigadier-General and Chief of Small Arms Division of the Office of the U.S. Army Chief of Ordnance. He was appointed Director in Charge of Arsenals, and was responsible for all small arms production.

Regards,

LF