Sewing project...

[Pritchett Ball]

I’m about to undertake a sewing project.
Having my Wife, & others make my Confederate Uniform clothing, I will embark on hand sewing a shirt, myself!

OK, I have little info on PERIOD CORRECT sewing techniques; my Wife can help me on piecing the shirt together. One problem is knowing how they did their inside seams, we have modern day surging to keep the seam edges from unraveling. Did they use a Flat-fell seam, French seam, leave seams raw edged…I have done topstitching, and buttonhole stitches, but nothing more.

I hope to use this first time project as a beginning, working into other projects like Jackets, & Trousers latter. Advice will be appreciated!

Respectfully:

Kevin Dally

"Can such a fiend as Gen. Sherman be called a human being? He is certainly devoid of human instincts." Diary of William E. Sloan, Co.D, 5th Tennessee Cav.

[JohnTaylorCW]

Re: Sewing project...

There's a good discussion on seams here:

http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/forum/showthread.php?t=230&highlight=felling+seams

Have a look, and you should be off to a good start.

John T

[Pritchett Ball]

Re: Sewing project...

Boy, that discussion slipped by me! I'm saving that info to file! Thanks to all of you for the shared information.

OK, for future reference, those of you who may have had the honor of looking at original Confederate trousers/uniforms, how were the inside seams done? Did they short cut production by leaving raw edges on the seams? Did they put quality work in all their uniforms, no matter the extra time it took? (Flat felled seams, French type seams) I guess I’m asking how did they do it back then, with a full scale war going on?
Respectfully:

Kevin Dally
"Can such a fiend as Gen. Sherman be called a human being? He is certainly devoid of human instincts." Diary of William E. Sloan, Co.D, 5th Tennessee Cav.

[KarinTimour]

Re: Sewing project...

Dear Mr. Dally:

I've not examined a lot of original garments -- at least not by the standards of some of the people who post here. But I was struck by a few of your questions about "did they just leave the raw edges......given that there was a war on...."

In this question you've put your finger on one of the major differences between the 19th century, especially the 19th century Confederacy and the present day. In our present time, materials are comparatively cheap -- the cost of labor is the major component of the cost of a garment. This is entirely opposite in the 19th century. In the 19th century the cost of materials was the major expense, the labor was comparatively cheap.

Part of the reason that we have the number of specialized sewing machines in the present day is that makers of 21st century clothing are trying to cut down on the hours of labor involved in putting together a garment. If you develop a power saw capable of cutting out 45 coat pieces each time you cut, it takes less time than cutting 45 individual coat pieces one at a time.

In our time period it's not unusual for the average person to have so many clothes that they don't all fit in his or her closet. In the 19th century the average woman had two or may be three dresses, total, and those would have to last for years. I don't know enough about men's clothing to tell you just how many pants and coats they had, but I suspect that for most it was less than three coats, and those might each have been expected to be worn for several years. I remember reading at least twice in memoirs of soldiers from very humble beginnings saying that their uniforms were the best made quality garments they'd ever had in their lives (at the age of 25,30, 35).

The Confederate Government had a monumental task on it's hands -- to outfit an entire army from scratch and keep that army outfitted in working order for years. The blockade made it difficult to get materials from outside the country, and at the start of the war there were few areas in the South that were major wool producers. Hence the emphasis on home industry to lessen the civilian competition for the wool or even the fabric that could be procuded. If home production could augment factory production of cloth, so much the better. Farmers were encouraged to raise sheep, cattle for hides, etc. Factories that had the machinery that could be easily converted to weaving or spinning materials for military use were highly valued. Every step of the process, from getting the sheep shorn, processing the wool into thread, weaving the thread, finishing the fabric and then shipping it to the supply depots to be cut into uniforms was fraught with shortages, transportation headaches and all sorts of problems.

Uniforms were intended to last as long as possible, given the difficulties in even obtaining the basic supplies to make them. On top of that, there was a fairly strong emphasis that the best materials, food, etc. should go to the army, the only possible competition in public sentiment for this would be to send the very best food to the hospitals, with the next best going to the army. Those who worked in the actual supply depots took pride in their work, and also had to be able to sew a certain standard to even get the job, let alone hold it. Inspectors were passing or condemning uniforms based on the quality of their manufacture and whether they fit a certain standard. There was a thread just recently discussing "what is shoddy construction in their eyes and what is shoddy construction in our eyes?"

Given that unfinished edges will fray and weaken the garment, it will be able to perform for a shorter period, and necessitate replacement much sooner.
If you are sewing with coarser cloth that is not as finely woven and finished, my understanding is that it's even more important for the finishing to be thorough and professional, because the more inferior quality of the cloth will cause it to ravel and shred more quickly under stress.

Keep in mind that material will perform in the field in the same way today -- unfinished edges are going to ravel and shred more quickly than finished ones. Isn't it better to put the time in to craft a better quality garment once than to have to spend the time to construct another one much sooner?

Again, my personal examination of uniform coats and pants is much more limited that that of many people on this forum, but my understanding of the 19th century mindset leads me to believe that the more finished edge would be the norm, the unfinished the rareity.

Sincerely,
Karin Timour
Atlantic Guard Soldiers' Aid Society
Email: Ktimour@aol.com

[tmdreb]

Re: Sewing project...

I know better than to contradict with someone who has much better knowledge than I do, but I will have to say that high quality was not always to be expected from CS government manufactured clothing:

MOBILE REGISTER AND ADVERTISER, March 11, 1864, p. 2, c, 3
A Hint for Those Who Make Soldiers' Clothing.—
A soldier writing to the Statesville Express, alludes to the bad manner in which soldiers' clothing is made, and says:
Our pants, jackets and under-clothing invariably rip, after a few weeks service, into the original pieces. Then comes a little swearing and sweating, and a week's darning and stitching before we are fit to appear in public, unless we have lost all decency, and come out with a "flag of truce" flying in the rear. I would be glad if some of the women who do sewing for the soldiers would pay us a visit. I have not a doubt but they would return with many good resolutions, as well as with a pretty good knowledge of anatomy, and with the conviction that our clothing is "wonderfully" if not "fearfully" made.


This excerpt brought to you from Vicki Betts' newspaper site.

There is another account, which I do not have handy, of a Trans-Mississippi command that was issued cloth, and took it to a tailor in Louisiana of French background and good repute to be made into uniforms. True to his promise, the uniforms were beautiful, but the sleeves ended at the elbows, and only the largest of the jackets would fit the smallest soldiers.

So, quality was not always the norm, but as you say, stories like these were likely the exception rather than the rule.

[KarinTimour]

Re: Sewing project...

Dear Phil:

OK! Mercy! You're right, I should know better than to ever say "always" and "never" in this hobby.

But I do think that the issue of "poorly made" is a pretty broad definition, and that different people will define it differently. This was discussed at much greater length by people who know much more about sewing and uniform manufacture than I do on this thread:

http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/forum/showthread.php?t=733&referrerid=70

On that note, I'll throw in my cards on this one -- hope it's food for thought,
Karin Timour
Atlantic Guard Soldiers' Aid Soceity
Email: Ktimour@aol.com

[Clark Badgett]

Re: Sewing project...

Kevin, I've never gotten to look at an original pair of CS trowsers, but have looked a quite a few jackets and one frock. The jackets and frock were sewn decently, kinda rough in the quality department, but sturdy made none the less. On the subject of the interior seems of CS pants I contacted Charlie Childs and got details about that aspect, and per him the seams were back stitched and then normally just pressed open and that was about it. Could be the reason pants were requested more than jackets in QM records I've seen.

[Pritchett Ball]

Re: Sewing project...

Everyone!

Thanks for the information, the other discussions listed were a great help.
Karin: Your posting made for great reading, a good lesson on attitudes, then & now. Quality VS Production must be a battle as old as Good & Evil!
Phil: Like several of your past postings, had good documentation to back up your point.
I will approach my project with the best quality I know how.

Kevin Dally

"Can such a fiend as Gen. Sherman be called a human being? He is certainly devoid of human instincts." Diary of William E. Sloan, Co.D, 5th Tennessee Cav.