Frock Coats vs. Sack Coats for USCT's

[Mgreer]

USCT had all the same uniforms white units did. The only way to really tell if they wore frocks, fatigue, or shell jackets are to pull the quarter master report, journals, unit histories, ect.

[Canton Zouave]

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/ppmsca.36454/

Unfortunately it is an unidentified Soldier and his family, but a nice image from the LOC.

[jake.koch]

Would it be possible that the commanders of some of the various U.S.C.T. units, despite the fact their men recieved less pay, would have purposely made sure that their men were dressed as close to the regs as possible (i.e. Dress Coats) due to the fact that it would present the smartest military appearance? Remember there were many whites within the Union army that fought tooth and nail against even allowing these men in uniform, much less bearing arms and going into combat. Any way their officers could present these men in the most orderly way was readily taken advantage of, from promotion of battlefield deeds to appearance in camp. I don't think they should be viewed in the same light as white troops, which is unfair, but there is certainly more to their story than what first meets the eye in matters such as this.

[Pvt Schnapps]

Would it be possible that the commanders of some of the various U.S.C.T. units, despite the fact their men recieved less pay, would have purposely made sure that their men were dressed as close to the regs as possible (i.e. Dress Coats) due to the fact that it would present the smartest military appearance? Remember there were many whites within the Union army that fought tooth and nail against even allowing these men in uniform, much less bearing arms and going into combat. Any way their officers could present these men in the most orderly way was readily taken advantage of, from promotion of battlefield deeds to appearance in camp. I don't think they should be viewed in the same light as white troops, which is unfair, but there is certainly more to their story than what first meets the eye in matters such as this.

Yes, commanders could have ordered their men to draw specific items to enhance their soldierly appearance. William Armstrong's wartime book Red Tape and Pigeon-Hole Generals documents the "frock coat mutiny" that resulted when a 9 month volunteer regiment (the 129th PVI) in A. A. Humphreys' division tried to refuse to draw uniform coats a few weeks before the end of their enlistment. The coats would set them back half a month's pay just as they'd balanced their clothing accounts. After Humphreys initiated court martial proceedings against the field officers, the volunteers drew the coats.

So it's possible, but the 129th PVI at least had their full pay available.

It's also possible that the commanders could help their men out -- W. S. Lincoln's book on the 34th Mass. documents the purchase of white gloves and other items from the regimental fund, which in their case was augmented by a tithe on the officers.

But I don't know that this happened with the USCT -- I've read of regiments whose officers refused to draw their pay until their men received justice, but not cases where they paid for uniforms from their own pocket. It would have taken most or all of a captain's pay for a year to buy frock coats for a company, and I don't think that many were independently wealthy.

But this isn't to say it didn't or couldn't happen. It could happen, and the most certain way to discover that it did would be for me to claim it didn't ever.

[Mgreer]

It would have taken most or all of a captain's pay for a year to buy frock coats for a company, and I don't think that many were independently wealthy.

A large group of officers in USCT regiments, especially from New England, came from some of the wealthiest families in the nation. The best example is Robert Gould Shaw they talks about his parents wealth in this article http://danielharper.org/yauu/2011/07...gious-patriot/

or http://www.cwbr.com/index.php?q=1447...&Submit=Search

so it is not unlikely that the wealthy officers or states governments outfitted Units.

[Mgreer]

State govs or at least Mass. were in the business of trying to pay for their men. But most units turned down pay completely.

Folly Island S.C.
Jan. 5th 1863

Gov. Andrews,
Sir begging you to excuse the presumption. I want to send you a few lines. concerning the fifty fifth. Major Sturges was here and presented to us the money offered by the patriotic people of Mass. Sir we dont consider the state of Mass. under any obligations to us whatever. Therefore we refused the money so generously offered by your excellency. we will if it is your desire go home or stay in the field 3 years before we touch a cent of $10 dollars. That is the general feeling throughout the Regt. Your name Sir will always be held immortal by the soldiers of the 55th. I am only a priv-ate but Sir I am in communication with some of the leading men of the day the Regt is now in a state of great anxiety reports are numerous. The sooner they are relieved the better condition the Regt

[1]

will be in. I wrote to Gov. Parker concerning colored troops and his heroic answer was when I want nigger soldiers I will call on you. if the united States dont accept of us as soldiers I dont know where she will get soldiers that ought to be accepted. Our trust is entirely with you and we know you will do what is right by us. no more

your obedient servant
Andrew Sinclair Co. G.
55th Regt. Mass. Vols
Folly Island, S.C.

[2]
http://www.sec.state.ma.us/mus/exhib...airletter.html

[Pvt Schnapps]

A large group of officers in USCT regiments, especially from New England, came from some of the wealthiest families in the nation. The best example is Robert Gould Shaw they talks about his parents wealth in this article http://danielharper.org/yauu/2011/07...gious-patriot/

or http://www.cwbr.com/index.php?q=1447...&Submit=Search

so it is not unlikely that the wealthy officers or states governments outfitted Units.

I'd re-phrase that to say "theoretically possible" rather than "not unlikely" as it relates to officer purchases. While Shaw might have had money, I haven't heard that he equipped the 54th from his own pocket (that's not definitive, of course -- I can't prove a negative). But many of the officers of the USCT came from the ranks -- the same book I cited earlier on the 34th Mass. proudly refers at several points to enlisted men who successfully passed their exams to become officers of black regiments. And an officer had to equip himself from his pay, which might prove costly enough.

The letter you quote provides another perspective on this issue: if USCT officers and enlisted personnel considered equality a major issue, and refused charity, then they faced an additional burden in paying for their clothes until the matter got set right. I'm not saying they couldn't pay for frock coats at all, just that it argues against the idea that the USCT all had to take frock coats that white troops wouldn't draw.

[jake.koch]

This is a question more than a reply, but it is well documented that the 54th Mass refused pay until it was made equal to that of white troops, with that being the case - even if troops refused to recieve their pay, could uniform charges still be made upon them from the government? Was it still taken out of what they refused to recieve? I am guessing so but wanted to throw that out to someone more knowledgable with red tape.

I agree with what Schnapps said and will go a bit further - I think there is a big east/west divide as far as USCTs were concerned. The ones in the east, especially the earlier formed units seemed to have the most idealistic officers from wealthy New England families - Robert Gould Shaw, Charles Francis Adams, etc.etc. - I think the later eastern units, and the ones formed in the Mississippi Valley were mostly officered by former enlisted men non-coms and junior officers from the white units - I believe by that time they had the officer exams, so they were probably decent officers, but perhaps not as idealistic as their New England counterparts.

[Pvt Schnapps]

The decision of an individual soldier to refuse his pay would not affect the rest of the bureaucratic process. The Quartermaster Department still had to get money for the clothes it issued, and when the clothing allowance ran out the amount would have to come from the soldier's pay. The Ordnance Department would still have to account for lost or damaged arms, and any amount not charged to the soldier would come out of his captain's pay. Same goes for Camp and Garrison Equipage issued to the men. The army assigned paymasters to black regiments as it did to whites (T. W. Higginson singles out Major Wood for praise), and officers still had to prepare pay rolls or risk being cashiered.

There's a good discussion in A History of the Negro Troops in the War of the Rebellion by George Washington Williams: http://books.google.com/books?id=eTA...&q=pay&f=false

It looks like the pay issue arose because an act of July 17, 1862 amending the Militia Act of 1795 allowed the president to call up "persons of African descent" at $10 a month less $3 for clothing to dig trenches, perform camp dutes, or perform other services. This got interpreted (I think by the appropriate Comptroller but I don't have a cite) to cover black soldiers as well, a situation not remedied at all until the Army Appropriation Act of June 15, 1864, which mandated equality, though with some confusing caveats.

As a side note, by June 1864 a greenback was worth more than eight and a half Confederate dollars, so even at the lower rate of pay black soldiers were a bit better off than their enemies, at least to the extent they had any money left after paying for their clothes. But they and their officers weren't looking at Johnny -- they were looking at white troops making twice the pay and, by 1864, getting huge enlistment or re-enlistment bounties.

[Andrew Jarvi]

Shane,

I forgot about the image of the 127th OVI/5th USCI in Delaware, OH. I looked back through my notes and used this as my argument with said 1st Sgt when I was the captain that the fellas needed to concentrate on good fatigue blouses and not worry about frocks. As Marvin said at this point in the war they were receiving the same thing white troops were. The other thing you have to remember Col. Conine was not as zealous about this fine regiment as Col. Shurtleff.

The only other two war time images of the 5th were posed images of Sgt. Milton Holland and Sgt. Powhatan Beatty in which they were wearing their frocks, but again note these were planned, posed images where the image in Delaware, OH was from 1863 where the only visible frocks are those of the commissioned officers, even the musicians were wearing fatigue jackets. The other thing to remember about this image was the regiment did not receive weapons until the fall so this had to have occurred between September 1863 and November 1863 when the regiment was sent to Norfolk, Virginia. Another thing to note was from Eagles on their Buttons page 33 Holland's December 1863 account of the men doing hard campaigning in the Tidewater area of Virginia and swamps of NC hunting guerrillas without overcoats or blankets.