An interesting point. I have speculated that the movement away from integral liner/bolsters was the result of changes in manufacturing processes by companies like Russell to produce the parts by machine. There was an article from an early 1900's catalogue of theirs I have seen posted that mentions swaged parts, which I assumed would include the bolsters. Other makers would have stayed with more traditional methods until it made economic sense for them to change, and the military at the time was often very conservative.Nice additions all ... I really find it interesting that all the examples of post-1860 integral liners so far are Barlows or military knives as Neal pointed out... hmnn - is that based on the design and the possibility it was easier to make these with integral liners? or perhaps it added durability to these knives having a solid liner/bolster?.. I imagine there are more hawkbill pruners post-1860 with integral liners as well...