Federal Fatigue Blouse - Lined vs Unlined

[kfrankl3]

I have often heard it said that more federal fatigue blouse were issued lined (or at least survive in such a manner). I am curious as to why this would be the case when the "Uniform Regulations for the Army of the United States: 1861" state the following:

"1457. For Fatigue Purposes--a sack coat of dark blue flannel extending half-way down the thigh, and made loose, without sleeve or body lining, falling collar, inside pocket on the left side, four coat buttons down the front.
1458. For Recruits--the sack coat will be made with sleeve and body lining, the later of flannel."

Would this be because so much of the army would be entering in as fresh recruits and therefore were issued a lined fatigue blouse? Also I assume in this case the pre-existing units such as the regular army would be issued the unlined?

Furthermore what was the logic in issuing the recruits a lined fatigue blouse?

I apologize if this question has been asked before, but I was unable to find it via either Google, the forum search, or a Google site search. I thank you all in advance.

[24thVOL]

Re: Federal Fatigue Blouse - Lined vs Unlined

Dailey gives a good chart of numbers if your question is "which is more appropriate", along with some good info, as well as Wedewards website.

here is a link: http://www.cjdaley.com/sackcoatcontracts.htm

I've always heard that unlined was more a rarity.

[24thVOL]

Re: Federal Fatigue Blouse - Lined vs Unlined

Also, I think the idea behind the issuing of the lined blouse was durability. In personal experience I know that the W&W lined coat has outlasted a few unlined in my possession.

[kfrankl3]

Re: Federal Fatigue Blouse - Lined vs Unlined

Dailey gives a good chart of numbers if your question is "which is more appropriate", along with some good info, as well as Wedewards website.

here is a link: http://www.cjdaley.com/sackcoatcontracts.htm

I've always heard that unlined was more a rarity.

Ah thank you, that is good data. The heart of my question isn't what is appropriate, as clearly it's a lined fatigue blouse. My question is if there is a known explantation as to the discrepency between regulation and reality (yes I know this happens all the time in the DoD world, but generally it is for some sort of reason).

Also, thank you, I didn't consider that the lined would last longer.

[24thVOL]

Re: Federal Fatigue Blouse - Lined vs Unlined

I've read many an article wear the federal government has a lot of extra stuff and need some way to get rid of it. The change in fatigue regulation could be a way they purged scraps. A "we have all this leftover material that we need to use" idea. Sort of waste not want not. I've seen lining that looks like it could have been from leftover blanket material, leftover issue shirts, etc. Just another theory.

But, like you mentioned, in modern day military, DoD, there is always a changing standard. There was probably some staff officer who thought it better to have a lined fatigue blouse, and for no particular reason. It's like all the changing head gear and accouterments at the time as well, even the trousers. Just cause they can.

[ScottCross]

Re: Federal Fatigue Blouse - Lined vs Unlined

The total number of fatigue blouses purchased at the three major clothing depots (Philadelphia, New York, & Cincinnatti) were:
Lined: 3,685,755
Unlined: 1, 809,270
Knit: 530,144

The numbers pretty much speak for themselves.

[usmcskipper]

Re: Federal Fatigue Blouse - Lined vs Unlined

I have been reviewing regulations and can't find a specific answer yet. However, I believe that the answer as to why recruits were issued a lined garment is fairly simple. Since the official uniform coat was the frock and recruits were not issued uniform coats. The sack coat is a "fatigue" uniform which means it is for work. The unlined version was for soldiers to wear while performing labor or dirty jobs and their frock coat was for the rest of the time. Recruits did not have the uniform coat so they would have a lined sack coat for all activities. The lining is so the coat would keep them warm since they did not have another coat to wear.

I am still searching to find this in the orders, but another explanation comes from the fact that frocks had branch of service colors (mounted personnel had a mounted service jacket instead of a frock) while recruits were unassigned. I did find General Order No. 13, dated November 30, 1858 giving a similar explanation for the new forage caps and their issue at that time. It reads,
"For fatigue purposes Forage Caps, of the pattern in the Quartermaster General's Office, will be issued, in addition to hats, at the rate of one a year. Dark blue cloth, with a cord or welt around the crown, of the colors used to distinguish the several arms of service, and yellow metal letters in front to designate companies. The unassigned recruits dark blue cord or welt around the crown and without distinctive badge."

To back up my point about recruits not getting the frock coat, here is a quote from The Horse Soldier 1776-1943 The United States Cavalryman: His Uniforms, Arms, Accoutrements, and Equipments Volume II The Frontier, the Mexican War, the Civil War, the Indian Wars 1851-1880 by Randy Steffen. He lists General Order No. 13 and then goes on after the order to state, "On the same day General Order No. 13 was published, Quartermaster General Jesup wrote the Clothing Bureau in Philadelphia that the Secretary of War had approved the new cap for issue to recruits of general service and the mounted service, with the dark blue welt and no colored band. He also directed that no hats or uniform coats were to be issued to recruits-only forage caps and sack coats." (Steffen, pg. 42)

Chris

[CompanyWag]

Re: Federal Fatigue Blouse - Lined vs Unlined

In my years of researching sack coats, I've never encountered a primary source that explains the reasoning behind why a recruit should receive a lined blouse and unlined be issued for fatigue. I can only speculate. Perhaps the more finished lined blouse was considered an inticement for recruits and instill a sense of pride in uniform while in training, reserving the less expensive unlined blouse for field wear. The previous comments regarding the dress coat and branch of service colors not applying to recruits does sound plausible.

What I do know is that some uniform items were drawn for purposes other than what the regulations originally called for. Examples that come to mind are mounted services jackets being drawn by Illinois infantrymen when state-issued jackets were no longer available...infantry drawing mounted trousers as they were more durable. There is documentation that at least in some departments there was an uptick in the number of lined sack coats drawn during cooler weather than unlined.

Why do so many more lined sack coats exist today? I've only handled two unlined sack coats as opposed to the fifteen lined ones I examined back in the 1990's. However, trying to judge what was considered the norm in the 1860's by counting those existing today can be misleading. Perhaps the unlined sack coats were indeed more popular and all existing stocks issued out until exhausted. Perhaps the lined version was considered more worthy of preserving. Perhaps at the end of their enlistments many soldiers drew the lined version as a final uniform before being mustered out and returning home. All speculation, of course.

[kfrankl3]

Re: Federal Fatigue Blouse - Lined vs Unlined

In my years of researching sack coats, I've never encountered a primary source that explains the reasoning behind why a recruit should receive a lined blouse and unlined be issued for fatigue. I can only speculate. Perhaps the more finished lined blouse was considered an inticement for recruits and instill a sense of pride in uniform while in training, reserving the less expensive unlined blouse for field wear. The previous comments regarding the dress coat and branch of service colors not applying to recruits does sound plausible.

What I do know is that some uniform items were drawn for purposes other than what the regulations originally called for. Examples that come to mind are mounted services jackets being drawn by Illinois infantrymen when state-issued jackets were no longer available...infantry drawing mounted trousers as they were more durable. There is documentation that at least in some departments there was an uptick in the number of lined sack coats drawn during cooler weather than unlined.

Why do so many more lined sack coats exist today? I've only handled two unlined sack coats as opposed to the fifteen lined ones I examined back in the 1990's. However, trying to judge what was considered the norm in the 1860's by counting those existing today can be misleading. Perhaps the unlined sack coats were indeed more popular and all existing stocks issued out until exhausted. Perhaps the lined version was considered more worthy of preserving. Perhaps at the end of their enlistments many soldiers drew the lined version as a final uniform before being mustered out and returning home. All speculation, of course.

Thank you all. I had not cosidered the fact that recuits were not issued the frock coat, but that does make sense. I know that I would be prouder to wear the lined jacket versus the unlined. I am trying some reaserch on the subject and hoping I can shed some light on the matter with a first-order source.

[Mutt]

Re: Federal Fatigue Blouse - Lined vs Unlined

Well, I think I'll take a stab at it, or I guess speculate with others. :)

In the "Reports of the Heads of Departments to the Governor of Pennsylvania" in the Quartermaster General's (of PA) Report, there are several statements of clothing, equipment, etc issuance during the period of April 18th through December 31st 1861. Statements and portions of statements are noted for "Pennsylvania volunteers" and for "Reserve Volunteer Corps". Within the statements for the Volunteers it notes "Issues to 3 mos. troops" and "issues not including 3 mos. troops". The three months received over 5,000 UNlined and only 16 lined, those not 3 months (I'm assuming those taken into FEderal service) received ONLY lined, almost 15,000, NO UNlined.

When you look at the numbers, the straight out volunteers received more lined than unlined and the Reserve Corps received more UNlined than lined. The Reserves were also issued the smaller blankets, receiving TWO per man in order to compensate for the fact that there weren't enough "army standard blankets" to go around at the organization of the Corps. It is noted that they were "re-supplied before leaving the state".

Makes perfect sense to me; give those who aren't out in the field the cheaper alternative until they really needed the better quality, more expensive to make equipment. The Reserve Corps, not in the field, had better living conditions, more likely to be in buildings (barracks are noted to have been built). It is also mentioned several times in the Reports of not having enough due to the influx of volunteers, even asking that the Federal Government supply any new troops going directly into Federal service; kind of a "do not pass GO, do not collect PA issued equipment".

Here's the link: http://books.google.com/books?id=_Rz...master&f=false

You'll probably have to search the document. Look for "quartermaster" to get to his report. Or type in "blouse". Easy enough to figure out.

While it might feel "prouder" to wear a lined blouse, it really, at least for PA volunteers early in the war, all dependent on when and where you enlisted for what you got.

Regards,