Western Fed Torusers

[JohnnyReb42k]

Does anyone have any documentation or pictures of Western Fed Units/Soldiers wearing Confederate or Civilian Trousers instead of the reagular issue?

[ewtaylor]

Re: Western Fed Torusers

Does anyone have any documentation or pictures of Western Fed Units/Soldiers wearing Confederate or Civilian Trousers instead of the reagular issue?

I'm sure someone somewhere has the info you seek. This falls along with the same question asked a month or so ago about Fed Cav wearing non-issue pants. The real question is why do you want to know? Is it so you can wear your CS pants to galvinze with? Remember, this is the "AUTHENTIC-CAMPAIGNER website, a website for the authentic Civil war living historian". The consensus here is to keep it PEC. Which means issue trousers, unless you are performing a 1st person impression of a soldier wearing non-issue gear.
hope this helps,
ewtaylor
Bluegrass rifles

[hardtack1864]

Re: Western Fed Torusers

At the end of Shermans march I have heard of this type of thing happening, but it was when they found wherehouse full of clothing I think in Savanah and/or Alanata. I also heard of a soldier in the 55th Ohio wearing Cive pants, but when the Col. heard about that he punished the soldier, though this was in Feb.-March 1864 too & not on campaign.

[whaler]

Re: Western Fed Torusers

This may be a bit esoteric, but the First Colorado on their trip south to fight at Glorieta Pass was not outfitted until their arrival at Ft. Union, whereupon they were issued the dark blues of the regular infantry. This probably doesn't shed any light in the direction you are looking in, but it is one instance of duly enlisted yankee troops in non issue uniforms when on campaign.....

Joel Kelley

[Yellowhammer]

Re: Western Fed Torusers

Joshua,

Ask yourself this: why would soldiers wear trousers other than the ones they were getting for free from the government?

There are two possible answers:
-First is stylishness or comfort. However, soldiers were, as rule, expected to be in uniform and wear the uniform items.
-Second is need. If issue trousers were unavailable, and trousers were needed, other means what have to be used to remain clothed.

Did Civil War soldiers sometimes wear non-issue items? Yes. However, as with the issue shirt thread, most Union soldiers wore boring old issue trousers.

[Matthew.Rector]

Re: Western Fed Torusers

I'm sure someone somewhere has the info you seek. This falls along with the same question asked a month or so ago about Fed Cav wearing non-issue pants. The real question is why do you want to know? Is it so you can wear your CS pants to galvinze with? Remember, this is the "AUTHENTIC-CAMPAIGNER website, a website for the authentic Civil war living historian".

If this was the case-a quarter of the threads on here should be removed. This site is also a forum to discuss Civil War history, equipment, personalities, etc. Of course all this information helps with living history.
Joshua Thomas Knudson-I believe you asked a legitimate question about Civil War history. I don't think it should be assumed what the reasons are behind the question, until you state it.
I believe "Western Fed Units" wearing civilian clothing may not have been so unusual in the very first days of enlistment, when State budgets were so tight. Most certainly it probably was not the norm. How frequent would it have been seen afterwards? I cannot say, but I submit an example of non issue trousers being issued in the first days of The War.

In Richard Moe's history of the First Minnesota Volunteers, The Last Full Measure , he states:

"The problem of inadequate clothing and equipment was not as easily remedied. In addition to the blanket, shirt, and pair of socks each man was given on arrival to Fort Snelling, he later received a pair of black pants and a slouch hat. Only the men from Company K had anything resembling a uniform; they wore light gray suits made by the patriotic women of Winona."

page 22
The Last Full Measure: The Life and Death of the First Minnesota Volunteers
by Richard Moe
Minnesota Historical Society Press (2001)
1993
ISBN 0-87351-406-8
Originally published by Henry Holt and Co., Inc. 1993

Although these black pants were issued, I would think they may have been of a civilian cut and style and not made for military use. These soldiers traveled out east before they were issued any "regular issue" uniforms.

[hireddutchcutthroat]

Re: Western Fed Torusers

It has already been said that Shermans men worn CS trousers in the Carolinas, and alot of other really odd things as well. Keep in mind this is an Army DEEP inside enemy country totally cut off from supply. (Do not try this at home!)

"There were a sprinklíng of Rebel uniforms, and thousands were in civilian cloths, battered silk tophats cutaway coats and tight legged breaches from the Revolutionary area."

As for any other US impression even in the Trans Mississippi, unless you can document definitvely other wise. The standard US Army uniform should be the rule of the day.

[ewtaylor]

Re: Western Fed Torusers

[QUOTE=Matthew Rector]If this was the case-a quarter of the threads on here should be removed. This site is also a forum to discuss Civil War history, equipment, personalities, etc. Of course all this information helps with living history.
Joshua Thomas Knudson-I believe you asked a legitimate question about Civil War history. I don't think it should be assumed what the reasons are behind the question, until you state it. [QUOTE]
Mr Rector,
I live in Ky where "historically challenged" units abound. They come to this site not to learn, but to ask a question like this to justify wearing civie or cs pants at reenactments. I assumed this post was just another one. Maybe my answer was harsh and Mr. Knudson if you were truly trying to find info then I apoligize. Either way it was rude of me to chastise you in public, so I am sorry.
ewtaylor

[st. tammany guards]

Re: Western Fed Torusers

On page 241 of Burke Davis' Sherman's March, he states: " It was an absurd caricature of an army, with hardly a complete uniform in it's ranks. Half the men were barefoot or wore wrappings of old blankets or quilts. Socks had disappeared months before. There was a sprinkling of rebel uniforms, and thousands were in civilian clothes- battered silk top hats, cutaway coats and tightlegged breeches of the Revolutionary War era. Some wore women's bonnets. Trousers were tattered: many wore only breechclouts. Sleeves had been torn from coats to make patches for trousers, crudely stitched with white cotton twine."
This quote refers to the state of Sherman's Army after it's infamous "March to the Sea", which is why the army was in such disarray. This campaign may be one of the only acceptions to Federal troops not being adequately supplied clothing. I just want to rienterate that this is an acception to one campaign, not the whole war.
jay faucheux

[JohnnyReb42k]

Intentions

One of my pards has the belief that it was prevelant that some Western Fed troops wore Reb Issue clothing, namely pants. For a while I did not believe this, and I am currently looking for documentation (since he has not backed it up with any). So I came to these forums for help on this topic.

I should have posted my intentions along with this thread when I started it.

[County Militia]

Re: Intentions

Out in the Trans-Miss, a large portion of the Kansas, Iowa and Missouri Fed troops wore civie stuff. I've seen a few photos of Fed units wearing all civie hats and all civie pants. The only thing of the them that was regular issue were their jackets and their accoutrements. I'll try and find a pic of a Missouri regiment marching in the street with all civie stuff. A lot of the Kansas and Iowa boys went on campaign without any military stuff except for their rifle and equipment. A Kansas regiment went into battle at Wilson's creek wearing an assortment of civie hats -- mostly straw, wearing their civie vests, frocks and civie pants. Many of these troops wore civie stuff until 1862. As for later war, still many Missouri regiments chose to wear civie things.