Oilcloth overcoats

[mootpoint]

I saw one civilian oilcloth overcoat while at Between the Rivers this year. I know that oilcloth coats were quite prevalent in the 18th century, and oilcloth was used for ground cloths. But I cannot find much information on mid-19th oilcloth. I really like the look and the durability. And I love my Australian drover in Colorado weather. Thoughts or help is greatly appreciated. I am hoping to find an image that is appropriate or perhaps someone who can tailor an appropriate garment.

Bill W.

[Elaine Kessinger]

Much of the need for oil and wax treated coats was replaced with vulcanized rubber treated cloth coats in the 1850s and 1860s. This is not to say wax treated cloth coats (similar to your Australian drover's coat) weren't still produced, they were, but for a market that was becoming specialized. As you said, the weather in the western mountains makes such garments ideal; as does weather in much of Britain. Here's two copies of rubber goods catalogs, so you can see what sorts of rubber treated cloth coats were available. http://www.archive.org/stream/manual...ge/n1/mode/2up and http://books.google.com/books?id=ZTQ...page&q&f=false

If you would care to continue with a wax or oil treated cloth coat, several fabric merchants specializing in 18th cent. fabrics carry them in several weights and colors.

[mootpoint]

@Elaine - Thank you for the information. I will look at the rubberized options. I am a little dubious on some of the western stylized coats since many are probably based on movies and not on facts. I think I will head to the Denver libraries and see what I can find. Being from Colorado and looking for early war civilian items, I am hoping to find something appropriate as I travel west to events.

[Pvt Schnapps]

There's a useful discussion of the subject in Hints For Pedestrians(London, 1862): http://books.google.com/books?id=_hU...0cloth&f=false

The hiker in the mid-19th century had a number of options, including oilcloth, oiled silk, rubber, and gutta percha, but all waterproof garments had the same problems then as now as far as retaining moisture. As "Medicus" put it:

"44. Waterproof dresses have called forth considerable attention latterly, from the elaborate eulogies of various interested patentees, and the frequently trumped up authentications as to their impervious qualities. We do not mean to deny that these may be more or less what they profess, but we do assert that a great oversight has occurred on the part of both patentees, experimenters, and the public, regarding the point, or points rather, to be kept in view.... If any one has possession of such an inestimable coat, let him enjoy it; until he does get it, let him take our word for it, that mere waterproof garments are prejudicial, for any length of wear; they may do for a short time, as during a passing shower, hut not for a long walk in a settled rain. The perspiration freely generated, under strong exercise, though in an insensible form in its nascent state, is retained by the waterproof clothing, and being thereupon condensed, not only actually communicates a chill to the body, from the water so condensed inside the waterproof, but moreover presents a source of danger to the constitution, from the fact of this condensed perspiration being a real and energetic virus, the poisonous nature of which, in developing the worst types of fever, has long been known to the medical profession. It is so subtle an agent that, although refractory as yet to the tests of the chemist, it is so active as to be detected in the short space of a few hours by our nervous system— whose precursory monitions of alarm at the self-born foe most readers may have had more or less occasion to observe, in their own personal experience of headache, languor, faintness, &c. after wearing a close-fastened waterproof coat or cloak ; compared with the evil results of which, a simple good wetting, from the penetrating rain, would be an evil almost to be dignified with the name of good ! ..."

In other words, sometimes the cure is worse than the disease. But he later qualifies the statement regarding cloaks:

"53. Next, a cloak, for protection in wet weather, requires a word or two. Col. Shaw's advice runs on from the wallet thus:—" When provided with a knapsack, get a wide cloak (so wide as to go over the knapBack) of the very best oil-silk, long enough to reach to the middle of the thigh ; likewise an oil-skin for the hat. The oil-skin cloak can be used either for sitting or laying on the ground." A very light and portable article of this kind has been imported lately from France, termed, from these qualifications, the " Zephyr " cloak: it is composed of some very fine material, with a very thin layer of caoutchouc between two folds: the weight of a cloak runs about 20 oz. Our remarks on the prejudicial effects of waterproof garments in general, seems to be here conflicting with Col. Shaw's advice. We can only qualify our own statement by admitting that a light cloak of oil-silk or India-rubber cloth, of the dimensions of a cape rather than of a full-grown cloak, makes this difference, that it does not stick to the figure like a coat, and so allows of ventilation being carried on underneath, and still more so when worn over the knapsack, a body of air being thus always preserved about the shoulders: again, its protection as a sitting cushion is manifest and unobjectionable...."

The army seems to have drawn a similar conclusion during the war. While the talma appears on clothing and camp and garrison equipage price lists for 1861 and 1862, it dropped off in 1863, by which time the issuance of rubber or painted blankets and ponchos was well underway.

For what it's worth, the rubber garments might have been state of the art, but painted articles remained cheaper. In G.O. 220 of July 1, 1864 (covering prices for the last fiscal year of the war), rubber ponchos and blankets cost, respectively, $3.10 and $2.55, while the painted equivalents went for $2.10 and $1.70.

[mootpoint]

Fantastic information! Thank you. The cloak information is extremely helpful. "Zephyr" cloak should be easy enough to look up and research. Agreed that a cloak is probably a more utilitarian garment.

[Pvt Schnapps]

I forgot to mention they're cheaper, too. Talmas cost $5 apiece and since they were camp and garrison equipage the army couldn't deduct the cost from a soldier's clothing allowance.