Brogans Smooth out vs Rough Out

[rmilstead]

Re: Brogans Smooth out vs Rough Out

Shaun,
Thanks for the lead. Looking at their site I didn't see a mention of that type of material but I will contact them by email to investigate. I knew "Pete" in several contexts from the late 60's through until sometime before his death. He was a serious historian, a great "cordwainer" and craftsman, and most important a true gentleman. It was my honor to have been acquainted with him

Bob,
That's the one. However, re reading it it seems General Lee thinks flesh side out is unnatural, strange. Maybe he didn't know how waxed leather was made! Smooth (hair) side was to be inside to prevent foot irritation. The flesh side is the rough side and which in waxed calf that has been "stuffed" is out. With properly tanned waxed leather, as Shaun points out, it is difficult to tell that it isn't the smooth side so maybe Marse Robert was confused. I'm not sure how much of the CS domestic tanning actually was devoted to production of waxed leather but Jarnagin in some of his research published in the Journal of the Company of Military Historians a couple of years ago indicates it was produced in Northern tanneries in the War period and commonly used in applications other than foot wear. Hopefully someone at the Richmond Clothing Bureau (who made the shoes) straightened him out.

Dick Milstead

[J.H.Berger]

Re: Brogans Smooth out vs Rough Out

Shaun,
how do Dickens call this leather. I am interested in having a look at it too.

[Shaun Pekar]

Re: Brogans Smooth out vs Rough Out

When we contact Dickens for a quote they typically refer to it as "waxy calf", though I don't think they list it on there website. Be sure to inform them you want it blackened on the flesh only as well. They have number of options for the waxed calf, but many of them are no good for our purposes.

I find that their 2.0-2.2 thickness is good for boot and bootee uppers, and as of late I've been making some great accoutrement stuff out of their 2.2-2.4.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Brogans Smooth out vs Rough Out

Hallo!

Just a quick aside...

In theory, the advantage to "rough" side out was that unlike "smooth" it did not show wear and scratches as badly as does "smooth" and takes blacking well.

IMHO, a problem that still persists in the Hobby is that the first reproduction bootees in the 1970's and 1980's appear to have been the result of misunderstandings and then demand for really fuzzy, or "hairy" looking leather that looked more like winter cow fur (which some of the 'Hardcore' lads in that day sanded or burned off).

And the other side of the coin around this discussion of leather lies in its thickness and strength as most all modern bootees and boots (and belts, cartridge boxes,. etc) are made with modern tannage which is NUG thicker (and weaker).

Curt

[David Jarnagin]

Re: Brogans Smooth out vs Rough Out

I have included a few quotes from several period books to help answer the question. I have not provided sources since I am still writing on shoe manufacturing in the US and this material will be cited in the finial articles. The date of publication is listed after each book.

If you are going to study leather tanning it is worthwhile to note at one time back in England history the tannery existed as found in the US but fears of political pressures from the industry caused the King to split the tanneries into two pieces. You had tanner that turned raw leather into a stable non decaying pieces but it was hard like a board. Then there was currieries who took the board like leather and turned it into a final product for the maker. For this reason I never studied the English tanning system very closely since the American one was a complete operation under one roof. More understanding will be gained from the study of the American tanneries as to what the final products were like at the time of the Civil War.

“Cow-hides, when dressed for upper leather, are called neat’s leather, and the shoes made from it are course. Common shoes are in general made from calf-skins, which is prepared in the same manner. The uppers of boots are all made from calf-skin, the best part for this purpose being the back and flank. This also applies to cow-skin leather. A considerable quantity of shoes are made from a description of leather called kip, which is prepared from the hides of young cattle. It is neither so fine nor so soft as that made from calf-skin, but is superior to the leather of full-grown cow-hides.” (1853)

“After the graining process, the leather is in a good condition for storing and keeping until wanted for sale; or, after delicately shaving the flesh side with a very sharp knife, it may be immediately submitted to the process of waxing. A color composed of oil and lampblack is well rubbed in on the flesh side with a hard brush till the surface is thoroughly black; upon this is applied with a brush or sponge a coat of stiff size and tallow , and when dry is rubbed with a broad smooth lump of glass. The sizing and rubbing are then repeated. Leather thus treated is distinguished either by the name “waxed,” or “black on the flesh,” and is used for the uppers of men’s boots and shoes. If curried on the other side, it is called “black on the grain,” and this sort is used for the uppers of ladies’ shoes. The treatment is the same for both up to the waxing.” (1867)

“Unblacked side of common shoe leather. This operation is performed by the currier, who, after the colouring, gives a gloss to the leather with a solution of gum-arabic and size made in vinegar. Where the previous astringent impregnation … (note here the first part talked about dyeing black on the grain side) the blackness ivory or lampblack are used. A mixture of either of these with linseed oil makes a common blacking. For a shining blacking, small beer or water are taken instead of oil, in the quantity of about a pint to an ounce of brown sugar and as much gum-arabic. The white of an egg, substituted to the gum, makes the black more shining, but is supposed to hurt the leather and make it apt to crack. It is obvious, that all these kinds of compositions admit of many variations: it is sufficient here to have given a general idea of them.” (1760 all spelling is straight from the book)

David Jarnagin
djarnagin@bellsouth.net

[ACo.]

Re: Brogans Smooth out vs Rough Out

Thank you for the excellent post David.

And thanks Shaun for the link.

[David Jarnagin]

Re: Brogans Smooth out vs Rough Out

Having a little time to look through my research and I came up with some information on Confederate leather problems. This is period information from the south and gives some different insight into the problems faced by the south. You will notice in the second one the fact that raw hides were lying around rotting instead of sent to the tanneries. The second problem that could not be fixed simple and that was a shortage of trained labor with the skill to tan leather. The years between 1850 to 1860 the number of tanneries shrank in south and along with the number of trained tanners. There was a large amount of leather imported into the south due to these issues but where it came from is the real mystery.

A correspondent of the Charleston Courier, writing from Richmond on third of January, says:
“Some large shoe manufacturers form the south have just gone home from Richmond, impressed with the idea that “shoes won’t sell.”So great an impetus was given to the manufacture months ago by the knowledge that the supply was giving out, that the market is now overstocked. The confederate government has six hundred cases of army shoes on hand, over and above the demand, and the government contractors are furnishing it with a constant supply of two hundred additional pairs per diem. The same plethora is observed in the article of clothing. In the clothing bureau of the war department are one hundred thousand suits of clothing on hand. The donations of individual States to their own volunteers, have materially lessened the demand on the confederate government. The blanket brought by the Fungal are being transformed into handsome and comfortable overcoats.”
This is from early 1862.

“Next we went to the shoemaker’s. Poor man! What with his workmen all enlisted, and his materials so scarce, it was a slow process to get shoes, or even to have them repaired. He said he has been waiting, I forgot how long, for shoe-thread. “That stuff they make here is on no use at all; our people have not got into the way of it yet.” He said that a British brig had just come into a port in North Carolina with a cargo almost entirely of shoe-thread, and that it had all been “bought up” by one man, who had given so many dollars a pound for it-three, if I remember rightly. However, the captain had clear $9000 on his cargo. I felt rather ashamed of my captain countryman who drove such unmerciful bargains with an oppressed and striving country. A soldier came into the store while we were there, and took up a pair of boots, asking the price. “Thirteen dollars! Cap’n,” said the shoemaker. The “cap’n” was a poor private, to judge by his appearance. “Thirteen dollars!” he muttered to himself, with a wistful look at the boots; “that is just my month’s pay.” And the boots were replaced with a sigh. Great inducement were being made to persuade people to collect and tan the hides that had been allowed to lie about the fields in the vicinity of camps. We had passed repulsive heaps of them, engendering disease where health was so indispensable. For a long time it was nobody’s business, and the Southerners were untrained to saving anything. Then persons were appointed to collect them, and so many country people commenced the operation of tanning, that after a time the army became abundantly supplied with shoes, not perhaps of so excellent a form and finish as they had been accustomed to wear: still they served the purpose.”
Life in the south 1860-1862

Records from New York State during the war show how much was exported to the South through several different island and of course Mexico.
For the year of 1860 here is the amount exported to Mexico 29 cases (totals on cases that I have seen were between 40 to 50 pairs) with a total value of $1,344.00
Now for the year 1863 Mexico received 2,283 cases and a total value of $222,324.00.

That was quite change in amounts imported and it drops off as the war ends. Two other countries had large growth in imports and that was Cuba and British West Indies. This also was the same with tanned leather. I have a report of a ship captured off the North Carolina coast with load of shoes with the NY records on board that listed them as being sold to Nova Scotia.

David Jarnagin
djarnagin@bellsouth.net