Decatur's squadron, with Guerriere flying his pennant, departed for Algiers on May 20, 1815, capturing the 44-gun frigate Meshuda, flagship of the Algerian fleet, and the 22-gun brig Estedio along the way. Bainbridge's squadron did not get under way until July 1, and by the time he reached Algiers Decatur had negotiated a treaty with the dey, returning his two ships in exchange for the release of all American and European captives along with a $10,000 indemnity and a pledge of tribute-free passage for all American ships plying the Mediterranean Sea. The dey would later renege on the deal, and the war would continue, but that's another story.

Outgunned?
Regarding the January/February "Perspectives" article by Jon Grinspan about Israel's dependence on U.S. military hardware: The author states that the Israeli army "didn't even have a decent rifle" when it fought for independence in 1948 and won the Six-Day War in 1967.

I personally knew a New York arms dealer who sent army halftracks and other equipment to Israel listed on the shipping manifest as farm equipment. He also sent weapons, including U.S. Army rifles firing the .30-06 round. He must have sent a lot, as he was wealthy enough to afford a luxurious apartment overlooking Central Park.

When I was stationed in Germany, I had two Arabs in my company. One told me that when they were defending their village against Irgun, their weapons didn't have the knockdown power that Irgun weapons had. When one of their fellow villagers was hit, they were out of the fight, because Irgun had U.S. Army rifles. On the other hand, they weren't as successful in taking Irgun riflemen out of the fight.

Wells B. Lange
Lafayette, Colo.

In Defense of the Trapdoor
I read Roger Pinckney's "Weaponry" article, about the Springfield Trapdoor rifle, in the March issue with great interest. I reloaded and fired my 10,000th .45-70 cartridge about 10 years ago. Since then, I have certainly surpassed the 20,000 mark. A considerable number were fired with several original Springfield Trapdoor rifles.

The general thrust of your article seems to be that the trapdoor was inaccurate and ineffective. In my experience, I have found them to be extremely well made, reliable, easy to use and very accurate.

I have never had to replace a single part on any of my Trapdoors, each of which is over 100 years old. Pinckney stated the Trapdoor drew enemy fire due to the use of black powder ammunition. The obvious retort is that the ammunition was the problem, not the rifle. The problem was the Army's failure to use smokeless powder earlier.

There was nothing about the design of the rifle that resulted in problems at Little Bighorn. The problem was the copper cartridges, which were softer than brass and more prone to getting stuck in the chamber during combat. If there was a problem with accuracy, the fault lies with the marksmanship skills of the soldier, not the rifle. Marksmanship was not a priority in the Army until the 1870s.

I concede that a lever gun might have been a better choice for horse-mounted cavalry. However, I will put the Trapdoor up against any of its contemporary arms in terms of quality of construction, accuracy, reliability, simplicity of operation and overall utility.

Joseph G. Sciascia
Juneau, Wis.

Sizing up the Troops
In "Outfoxed and Outfought" by Jason K. Foster, in the January/February issue, there is a statement that Persian King Darius I was the ruler with the biggest army in the world. No one now knows about how big armies were then. The figures may be highly inflated, as there is always the doubt of how to supply such huge armies. Were states dur­ing China's Warring Period at about the same time reporting similarly huge armies? Has Military History done any size comparisons? All of the figures may have been highly inflated, but then Darius could not be said to have the largest army in the world without being challenged.

Help HistoryNet by bookmarking to