Allen's Competitors
This page provides an overview of competitors who imitated Ethan Allen’s designs during the 1840s and 1850s. Some of their models were nearly identical to Allen’s, while others incorporated minor variations. There is only few known record of Allen pursuing patent infringement lawsuits to defend his 1837 and 1845 double-action patents. This could suggest that the internal mechanisms of the competitors’ bar hammer pistols and pepperboxes were different enough to avoid infringing the patents, or perhaps Allen chose not to enforce his rights, being content with the success and profitability of his own operations.
Bacon & Co
Evidence from the 1846 daybook of Allen & Thurber confirms that Thomas K. Bacon was producing cones and trigger guards for Allen at that time. Yet their association likely predates this. In 1840, Bacon moved to Grafton, Massachusetts, where he registered as a machinist and purchased real estate from Ethan Allen. While this alone does not prove a business partnership, it strongly suggests that Bacon and Allen were acquainted. Given Bacon’s extensive real estate dealings throughout his life, this transaction might seem insignificant—but in the broader context, it hints at a shared professional orbit. Although no direct records survive to confirm Bacon’s employment by Allen during these early years, his relocation to Norwich, Connecticut, in 1842—the same year that Allen & Thurber moved their operations there—is telling. It is reasonable to suggest that Bacon was somehow involved in Allen’s firearms enterprise during his time in Grafton and followed the firm to Norwich as part of that ongoing involvement.
When Ethan Allen left Norwich in 1847, Bacon chose to remain. Seizing the opportunity to establish his own enterprise, he founded Bacon & Company around 1848. This small firm specialized in single-shot pistols and pepperboxes, operating for nearly a decade. By approximately 1857, Bacon had transitioned to a new role as superintendent of the Manhattan Firearms Company.
In the years that followed, Bacon would go on to establish two additional firearms companies, the Bacon Manufacturing Company and the Bacon Arms Company. However, these later ventures are not explored here, as their products bore no direct lineage to Allen’s designs.
Given his early work with Allen & Thurber, it is unsurprising that Bacon’s initial firearms closely mirrored Allen’s stylistic and mechanical features.
- The Under-Hammer Single-Shot Pistol
Although the frame and barrel closely resembled Allen’s single-action pistols, Bacon introduced an under-hammer firing mechanism—a feature that allowed for an unobstructed sight plane and improved aiming. This pistol was by far the most successful in the line of Bacon pistols.
- The Ring-Trigger Single-Shot Pistol
This model was nearly identical to Allen’s “shotgun hammer” boot pistol, except featuring a ring trigger instead of a traditional trigger.
- The Bar Hammer Double-Action Single-Shot Pistol
In all aspects identical in design to Allen’s bar hammer line of pistols. However, the internal mechanism differs slightly which can be noticed by the position of the set screw
- The Bar Hammer Double-Action Muff Pistol
Identical to Allen’s muff pistols; some evidence suggests Bacon may have been the originator of this model, which was later copied by other manufacturers, including Allen(1). As with the standard size pistol, the set screw position is at the bottom end of the grip.
- The Under-Hammer Pepperbox
Styled in the classic “Allen Worcester” tradition, this pepperbox featured a single-action under-hammer mechanism. Although the under-hammer pistol achieved notable success, the under-hammer single-action pepperbox failed to gain popularity, as the public favored the faster firepower of double-action designs.
Manhattan Firearms Mfg. Co
The Manhattan Firearms Manufacturing Co. was established in 1855 by a group of businessmen from New York and Newark, aiming to capitalize on the upcoming expiration of Colt’s patent for revolving firearms in 1857. The company began production around 1856 and its first firearms were single-shot pistols and pepperboxes. This initial focus may have been influenced by the involvement of Thomas Bacon, who joined the company officially in 1857 as the plant superintendent overseeing production. In addition, Bacon entered into an arrangement with the company to supply all barrels from his own production facility. The company’s early product line resembled firearms previously produced by Bacon’s own firm, suggesting a practical decision to begin manufacturing familiar designs while awaiting the expiration of Colt’s patent to begin revolver production. By 1858, Bacon left the company following a dispute and established his own enterprise, the Bacon Manufacturing Company, which went on to produce revolvers and pocket pistols, directly competing with Manhattan Firearms.
We will explore only the company’s early product line, as the later product line of revolvers bear no design lineage to Allen’s firearms designs.
We can observe that the pistols and pepperboxes produced by Manhattan are identical copies of the Allen line of products except for the internal mechanism that bears some slight differences. Typical for the Manhattan Bar hammer pistols and pepperboxes is the main spring tension screw positioned at the bottom of the grip. From this aspect, the influence from Bacon seems evident.
- The Shotgun hammer Boot Pistol
This model was in all aspects identical to Allen’s Shotgun hammer Boot pistol except for the frame engraving absent on Allen pistols.
- The Bar Hammer Double-Action Single-Shot Pistol, standard size and Muff
Besides the internal mechanism, in all aspects identical in design to Allen’s bar hammer line of pistols. Note that the marking die was too big to fit on the hammer of the small muff pistols
The resemblance to Allen’s Worcester pepperboxes is striking. Since Manhattan began producing their pepperboxes after Allen had already introduced fully fluted barrels, it seems logical that Manhattan only manufactured pepperboxes with this barrel type.
- The 6-shot pepperbox
Copy of the Allen Fluted barrel Worcester pepperbox. These were made with 3″, 4″ or 5″ barrels.
- The 5-shot pepperbox
Similar to the Allen 5-Shots pepperbox except that the Manhattan model didn’t have the integral nipple shield and was more a downsized version of the 6-shots pepperbox. Only made with 3″ barrels.
- The 3-shot pepperbox
This pepperbox was a novelty from Manhattan and has not been produced by any other manufacturer. A very compact and light pepperbox that could be easily concealed in a pocket. Although the pepperbox is double-action, the barrel cluster needed to be turned by hand. This pepperbox might have been an attempt to compete with the 4-shot pepperbox from Allen which was also extremely compact and had the same type of barrel cluster fixing eliminating the central fully bored through barrel screw.
Marston
William W. Marston was an inventive firearms designer active in mid‑19th-century New York. He began experimenting with multi-barrel pepperbox pistols in the early 1850s, capitalizing on growing civilian demand for easily-fired personal defense weapons. Marston has produced a wide variety of guns, but again, we will only concentrate on the look-alike’s of Allen pistols and pepperboxes.
Marston pistols and pepperboxes can be found with many different trade names: W.W.Marston; W.W.Marston Armory; William Marston; Marston & Knox; Sprague & Marston; The Washington Arms Co.; The Union Arms Co. and The Phenix Armory.
In the pistol product line, the most noticeable visual difference from the Allen models is the lack of a tension screw for the mainspring, which indicates a different internal mechanism.
- The Shotgun hammer Boot Pistol
This model is almost identical to Allen’s Shotgun hammer Boot pistol.
- The Bar Hammer Double-Action Single-Shot Pistol
In all aspects identical in design to Allen’s bar hammer line of pistols except for the internal mechanism.
- The Bar Hammer Double-Action Muff Pistol
Similar to Allen’s muff pistols but the Marston models have a distinctive trigger shape and different internal mechanism.
The variety of pepperboxes produced by Marston is quite impressive, so we will just show here a few examples. The majority of the pepperboxes have been produced with the flat ribs barrel type, but later production also has the fluted barrel type.
The Spraque & Marston pepperboxes are characterized by a more rounded and longer grips.
Rather classical Worcester type pepperboxes produced by The Washington Arms Co and The Union Arms Co.
Blunt & Syms
Orison Blunt and William Syms met in New York while both were apprentices in the gunsmith trade. They soon formed a partnership around 1837 and established a gunmaking business at 44 Chatham Street. As their enterprise flourished, Blunt & Syms relocated their main activity to a more prominent location at 177 Broadway while still continuing some operations from the old location. Blunt & Syms produced some of the finest firearms in New York City, but they also manufactured more affordable pistols and pepperboxes in a range of sizes and calibers. Despite their lower cost, these pieces still reflect a high standard of craftsmanship. While the specific roles of each partner remain unknown, the firearms attributed to the firm consistently exhibit exceptional workmanship.
In addition to manufacturing their own firearms, Blunt & Syms also sold imported arms as well as tools, gunsmiths’ implements, and gun materials for manufacturers.
Orison Blunt was also an innovative entrepreneur and patented a unique design of the pepperbox pistol. These under‑hammer, ring‑trigger percussion pepperbox are considered among the finest of their type and were manufactured in a variety of styles and sizes.
Although the design looks very different, the double-action mechanism used in the Blunt & Syms pepperbox appears to have infringed on the patent held by Ethan Allen. Allen filed suit against the firm, alleging infringement of his 1844 patent (a re-issue of the 1837 patent). The Massachusetts court ultimately found that Allen had been deprived of $11,700 in profits due to the patent violation.
In response, Orison Blunt challenged the court’s authority, arguing that it lacked jurisdiction because neither he nor Allen was a resident of Massachusetts, thus failing the requirement for diversity of citizenship. He also objected to the damages being assessed by a Master of the Court rather than determined by a jury of his peers. Despite these objections, the court in New York—where the case was subsequently pursued—ruled against Blunt, upholding the judgment in Allen’s favor.
Legend
(1) Thomas K. Bacon – The Arms and The Man by Lowell J. Wagner