Grimsley, a name continually found in researching horse equipment for the US dragoon regiments prior to the Civil War.
In most cases, this reference will be to a particular style of saddle and it’s related equipment, rather than to the man who created this equipment, Thornton Grimsley. A very successful long-established owner of a large saddlery and harness business in St. Louis, Grimsley was a savvy businessman and local politician who knew opportunities when he saw them, and was uniquely placed to make the most of serendipitous coincidences.
Supplying horse and mule equipment to the government was familiar territory for Grimsley, as he had provided the first saddles issued to the dragoon regiment in 1834 and likely some replacement purchases afterwards. His company is found in numerous records of congressional expenditures in the 1830s, supplying riding and pack saddles to various government agents. With his location in the great mercantile river city of St. Louis, T. Grimsley & Co. was very busy providing saddlery and harness for the many travelers heading west on Oregon and Sante Fe trails, as well as the fur trading companies and their ‘mountain men’. It was this familiarity with the equipment that was most suitable to the frontier, and his proximity to Jefferson Barracks, that allowed him to successfully obtain the contract for the first saddles used by the dragoons.
The fickle nature of military fashions and sensibilities being what it was, the utilitarian spanish saddle of the dragoons lacked the sartorial appeal of widely admired European styles. This, combined with the effects of the devastating recession that began with the Panic of 1837, allowed a certain officer, Samuel Ringgold, to successfully lobby for his own design that captured the visual nature of the European hussar saddles. With the eventual recovery of the national economy and government budgets, the Ringgold was finally approved and purchased for issue in 1845.
It would be difficult to overestimate the importance of events that occurred in 1845 — it was truly one of the great turning point years in US history, and those same events also played a critical role in the creation and adoption of Grimsley’s horse equipment. The primary event was the initiation of the conflict that became known as the Mexican-American War, following the annexation of the Republic of Texas as a new US state.
Existing dragoon companies from both the First Dragoon Regiment, and the newly reconstituted Second Dragoon Regiment were rushed to the Texas frontier and soon after the declaration of war was made, a third mounted regiment was authorized. This would be the Regiment of Mounted Rifles, mustered at Jefferson Barracks, just south of St. Louis. As with the old First Dragoons in 1834, recruits from around the nation would travel to Jefferson Barracks to form the new regiment, with officers, recruits, supplies, uniforms, weapons, horses, and equipment.
The young United States may have boldly declared war, but was quickly to find out that waging war was quite another task. After years of cutbacks, reductions in forces, frozen spending, and a military force that was widely scattered across a vast landscape, the US faced a massive challenge in supplying the logistical requirements for this sudden conflict. Reading the letters of quartermaster officers and government purchasing officials in those early months vividly shows a true panic that gripped their actions. Any available boats, barges, ships, steamers that could carry supplies were snapped up. Wagons and wagon harness was in dire need, with pleadings to contracting officers usually containing terms such as “anything” and “whatever means necessary” being commonplace.
Thornton’s Opportunity
A prime opportunity for Thornton Grimsley, who quickly seized his chance and managed to acquire a contract to provide the horse equipment for the Mounted Rifles – not to mention providing equipment to the numerous officers that were passing through St. Louis and Jefferson Barracks. Being a canny businessman he took this opportunity to leverage his strengths and, much as he did 10 years previously, utilizing his production experiences to his advantage.
Instead of trying to tool up to make Ringgold pattern saddles, he clearly saw the resemblance of the faux-hussar Ringgold saddletree shape to one of his own very popular products, the Grimsley pack saddle. A few minor changes to this pack saddletree enhanced it for a human rider, furnished with leather coverings, hardware and related attachments, and Grimsley had a product that was (visually speaking) nearly identical to the Ringgold pattern. The modified pack saddle also provided very real improvements over the Ringgold — sidebars shaped to better fit the equine back and no heavy reinforcing ironwork, this being replaced with a lightweight rawhide cover.
Immediate need by the Army and the benefit of location gave Grimsley his opportunity, with a contract to supply his ‘improved’ horse equipment for the new Regiment of Mounted Rifles. Additional orders for Grimsley gear were contracted and delivered to several of the other dragoon regiments as well.
A number of officers acquired these new Grimsley pattern saddles for use during the war, and found them quite good, especially in comparison to the tragic mess that was the Ringgold pattern. With the loss of Major Samuel Ringgold at Palo Alto, the primary advocate for the old pattern saddle was no more, and certainly there would be no conflict over the adoption of a near lookalike saddle.
So positive was the response to Grimsley’s that a board of officers met at the very end of the war and formally adopted his dragoon saddle pattern as the new Army standard.
Members of the 1847 board that approved the Grimsley design:
BG S.W. Kearny
QM Thomas Swords
Maj P. St. George Cooke, 2nd D.
Bvt. Lt. Col. C.A. May, 2nd D.
Cpt. H. L. Turner, 1st D.
Design Patent and Related Drama
Around the time of this military approval, Grimsley applied for a patent of his design so that he could be able to require a license fee from anyone making his pattern. No doubt with visions of how he had let this opportunity pass him by with the old spanish dragoon saddle, he quickly moved to prepare and submit his patent application. Certain political connections to the Secretary of War, William L. Marcy, led to a request letter from Marcy to the Patent Office commissioner, who fast-tracked Grimsley’s patent through final acceptance in near record time. The patent is worth reading for the large amount of information Grimsley used to describe his dragoon design, as well as the usual amount of bloviating salesmanship that was so much a part of his character. The main details that he was actually claiming patent to were ably and succinctly stated in the last paragraph:
“What I claim therefore as my invention and desire to secure by Letters Patent, is–The form of my improved side bars, the under side of which are adapted to the form of a horse, and the upper side and edges to the seat of the rider, as herein described and represented ;-and the combining and securing the same to a high pommel and cantle by means of a raw hide covering substantially as herein set forth. “
Riding Saddle, T. Grimsley No 5396, Patented Dec. 11, 1847.
The special treatment accorded Grimsley would come back to bite the Patent Office. An interesting gadfly inventor by the name of Hezekiah L. Thistle had a saddle patent in the queue that he claimed covered the key elements of Grimsley’s design and should have been considered before Grimsley’s as he had submitted some months earlier. It took nearly 10 years for this complaint to be resolved, and not in Thistle’s favor. It is an interesting case, and set some precedent for not allowing the government to be liable for the mistakes or errors of a government official. It probably didn’t help Thistle’s case that he was a contentious character, prone to complaints of patent infringements and other various governmental outrages.
Grimsley Pack Saddle
Grimsley’s pack saddle was not forgotten in this feeding frenzy either — it was adopted as the standard Army mule pack saddle, although I’ve not yet determined exactly when — it was clearly shown as the Army standard by 1851, and would be used for a number of years, perhaps even to the beginning of the Civil War.
Randolph B. Marcy, in his popular 1857 guidebook, “The Prairie Traveler”, states about the Grimsley pack saddle:
“A pack saddle is made by T Grimsley No 41 Main Street St Louis Mo. It is open at the top, with a light, compact, and strong tree which fits the animal’s back well and is covered with rawhide put on green and drawn tight by the contraction in drying. It has a leathern breast strap breeching and lash strap with a broad hair girth fastened in the Mexican fashion. Of sixty five of these saddles that I used in crossing the Rocky Mountains over an exceedingly rough and broken section not one of them wounded a mule’s back, and I regard them as the best saddles I have ever seen “
No known specimens of the Grimsley pack saddle exist, but here are images of contemporary illustrations, and one likely candidate for a new-old-stock pack saddle tree quite similar in appearance.
Disillusion and Dismissal – the End of the Road for the Grimsley
Thornton Grimsley was riding high with the adoption of so many of his designs. But like all great rises, there will inevitably come a fall, and that certainly happened quite quickly for the dragoon saddle. While Grimsley held the patent, and was entitled to a fee for each of his pattern saddles produced, he did not have exclusive rights to their production. More significantly, he had no rights or ability to maintain quality control over the contracted production of his designs.
At this time (late 1840’s, early 1850’s) horse equipment for the dragoon regiments was the responsibility of the Quartermaster Department. The Quartermaster Department provided all sorts of equipment and uniform items to troops, as well as material and funding for lodging, food, and forage, and all manner of expendable resources for sustaining the troops.
The problem that arose comes from the nature of the Quartermaster Dept — they were more about shipping the necessary material, and less about quality control and rigidly established specifications and inspections of the product, most of which they did not produce. In the case of saddles, where the critical aspects of construction are usually hidden, it became obvious pretty quickly that the quartermasters were more concerned with the contractor delivering the item on time and at the agreed upon price.
It appears that T. Grimsley & Co. in St. Louis was not making a majority of the saddles being issued, just as happened in the 1830s when local contractors in Philadelphia were used to replenish the regiments. While Grimsley collected license fees, the contractor’s substandard product dragged his name through the mud. Quality control was abysmal, and the troops and officers in the field were quick to start complaining.
As early as 1851, officers were noting the issues with the Grimsley’s — easily broken, deformed quickly under prolonged use, pommel/cantle openings too shallow. Where once officers gave glowing reviews and stories of horses without sore backs after long marches, the opposite became the norm. Interspersed with these voluminous complaints, there were still diehard officers that claimed the Grimsley was the best — likely these officers were speaking of equipment purchased from T. Grimsley in St. Louis.
With the arrival of Jefferson Davis as the new Secretary of War in 1854, positive changes were quickly initiated. The Ordnance Department took over the acquisition of horse equipment, and almost immediately began a search for the Grimsley’s replacement. It would take five long years, ending with the adoption of the McClellan pattern in early 1859.
The Grimsley dragoon pattern held on for some time, as it took a while for the new McClellan pattern to be produced in numbers to replace those in the six cavalry regiments. Even in the first year or two of the civil war, certain volunteer regiments were found using the old Grimsley’s. It was still a favorite among older officers that had been familiar with it, and its undeniable military flair.
Thornton Grimsley, no wilting lily he, did not give up without a fight — even though he and his design were clearly being shunned by the cavalry board meeting in early 1859. Tipped off that the new cavalry equipment was being finalized and selected, and hearing that his initial samples submitted to the board had inexplicably gone missing, Grimsley had new samples and variations quickly fabricated and express shipped to the board’s attention. The letter that he sent to accompany this submission has been preserved and is available here, and it suggests that he made some visual alterations to the existing design and even a new design. Of course, nothing came from this — Mr. Grimsley’s reputation had lost its luster, and his boisterous commentaries swayed no one.
Various Notes and Tidbits
Design Weaknesses and Deficiencies of the Grimsley Saddle
There were certain design characteristics of the Grimsley saddletree that were the root cause of many of the later complaints about the pattern.
Primary of these were the poorly shaped parts, in both the sidebars and the pommel and cantle. However, the reader must understand that MOST of the Grimsley’s made after its adoption were made by contractors other than T. Grimsley & Co. Since there were no specification drawings and patterns, much less on-site inspectors to approve the very basic element of the saddle (the tree), contractors were free to make what they found to be ‘close enough’.
And close enough was good enough for most of these contractors The height and width of pommel and cantle openings on many of these substandard saddles were narrower, and more importantly, vertically much shallower. These dimensions were critical to a saddle to be used on long campaigns where horses backs lost muscle substance and shape, with withers and spines becoming prominent.
The Grimsley tree was promoted as being ‘stronger’ and ‘lighter’ than the previous Ringgold — and only truly met that claim in that they were a bit lighter in weight. The claim of ‘strength’ was rooted in a rather mythological depiction of the rawhide cover as a magical treatment capable of providing protection and preservation of the wooden tree, and the strength to hold all the wooden pieces in perfect alignment.
The primary value of this cover is that it allowed Grimsley to achieve his small degree of weight savings by avoiding the use of iron screws, rivets, and reinforcing angles, straps, and fittings. A tree made with good dry hardwood, formed to the T. G. & Co. dimensions and shape, covered with a quality rawhide cover — this was clearly an excellent step forward from the horrid Ringgold design.
However, on the long campaigns, soaked in high plains rains, alternating humidity and dryness, heat and cold — held together only by thin rawhide and some cut nails — the trees were never going to hold their original shape. Those contractor-made trees with low/constricted pommel and cantle gullets/arches — their failings would be discovered even faster as saddles began bearing down on withers and spines.
A design flaw that likely resulted in many complaints about ‘breakage’ was the stirrup iron. In all Grimsley saddles made until the advent of the improved New Model artillery drivers saddle in 1863, the stirrup iron was a simple ‘L’ shaped piece of iron rod, with the tips hammered into blunt-pointed flat ends. These ends were then riveted to the sidebar in such a way as to use the ‘notch’ in the sidebar as the location of the stirrup leather. Nice and clean and efficient, and a good placement for the stirrup leather in relation to the tree — it looked ‘right’.
The problem was that the front rivet was placed through a thin section of wood, where the line of the wood grain was not very long. This area of the tree was subject to widely varied pressures from the horses movement as well as the stress from the weight of the rider on the stirrup iron. Splits and breaks through that rivet, and the subsequent lack of integrity concerning the stirrup iron would be highly troubling to the rider.
Grimsley artillery driver seats had the same issue, where you find this “L” design on all “Old Model” examples. Improvements made to the artillery horse equipment in 1863 finally addressed this old flaw.
