Commutation Jackets

[BishopLynch]

Fellas,
I just picked up a commutation jacket, trimmed in navy blue for my early war confederate impression. Ive been debating on which events to wear it to. Obviously early war events, but I was wondering how late into the war would this jacket be accurate. I know that clothing from home was sent to the troops, but would the blue trim and Goodyear rubber buttons be appropriate for the jacket for an event say summer 1863? I found this quote:
W. P. Chambers
March 4, 1864
"Yesterday we were paid up- wages to Jany. 1, 1864 and commutation for clothing for the year ending Oct. 8, 1863."
So I see here that clothes were being sent from home pretty late, but would they still be trimmed in tape and what not?

[Gallo de Cielo]

Re: Commutation Jackets

Greg,

I'm not a ranking expert on commutation clothing but I'll take a stab at answering your question.

To begin, commutation clothing, be it jackets, trousers, vests, shirts, or one of the many other needs of the men, differed in many respects. Since you're asking about jackets, that's where I'll stay. The ways that a jacket could be varried are multitudinous. For instance: how many pieces were used in the construction of the body and sleeves, number of buttons, size of buttons, type of buttons, belt loops, epaulets, exterior and/or interior pockets, branch of service trim, trim tape, length, cut, style, type of cloth used. I think the more PEC approach is to go with "less rather than more." Basically, don't have a jacket tricked out to the hilt that is supposed to represent an item sent to an average, common soldier at the mid-point in the war. From what you've described, your particular coat doesn't sound outlandish.

Your Chalmers quote illustrates that commutation clothing saw use even late into the war. From what I've read in the course of my own research, commutation issuance varied by theater quite a bit. For example, the 9th Texas Infantry, an AOT unit that I've done a good deal of work on, has several surviving accounts of commutation clothing arriving and being used up to late 1862, just before Murfreesboro when the first issuance of CS uniforms occured. I would venture that units on the far flung reaches of the empire were dependent on such means for much longer.

So, to turn your question back to you a bit, yes I don't think your example is atypical but you will need to do as much research as possible to see if the unit you are attempting to portray was dependent on commutation clothing at that point in the war, checking as many surviving written and photographic sources as possible to ascertain just what those garments may have looked like.

Hopefully Ethan Rogers will happen across this thread as he has a wealth of information regarding commutation garments and makes a convincing arguement that the commutation system was alive and well even late in the war.

Cordially,

Fred Baker

[Yellowhammer]

Re: Commutation Jackets

The communtation system is quite misunderstood. What follows is my attempt to explain it a bit.

One of the best and clearest descriptions of the way the system worked was written by Leslie D. Jensen:

"The volunteers of the Provisional Army were to provide their own clothing, for the use of which the government would pay each man equivalent of the cost of clothing for an NCO or private in the Regular Army, generally $25.00 for each six months. This was the Commutation System. Initially it seems to have been intended to provide a means of clothing the troops without having to build government facilities to do it, to take advantage of the easiest way to clothe the army, and to avoid the risk of stockpiling mountains of material that might become useless surplus if there was no war."

In the earliest days of the war, only the embryonic Confederate Regular Army were to be issued clothing from the Confederate Quartermaster. Due to the changing conditions of war and the growth of the Confederate Provisional Army, the Commutation System was supplemented by the Depot System run by the Central QM. However, it is important to note that the Depots never completely replaced the Commutation System and privately acquired garments were in the field, to lesser or greater degrees throughout the war.

A "commutation jacket" could have been almost anything. A "commutation jacket" or "commutation coat" would be any jacket or coat supplied acquired from outside the Central QM for which the soldier was reimbursed (or should have been reimbursed.) Civilian clothing sent from home, store-bought garments, or even tailor-made copies of issue items all qualify as communtation garments. It should also be noted that garments provided by aid societies and the like do not qualify as Commutation garments.

To help clarify, here are some good examples of commutation garments.

An excellent example of a tailor-made copy of an issue garment (though of higher grade materials) the jacket of Sgt E.C.N. Green of the 47th NC.



As you can see, Sgt Green's jacket is a close copy the first style of jacket manufactured by the Richmond Clothing Manufactury. (Richmond Depot Type I in the Jensen typology.)

The jacket of Courtney Jenkins, manufactured by Kent, Paine and Co of Richmond is a good example of store bought uniform. Several companies of Maryland troops purchased jackets and trousers from this supplier and there is solid evidence to suggest that troops from other states also purchased them. For these purchases, soldiers would have been reimbursed by the CS govt under the Commutation System.

Here is a good example of a typical jacket of that pattern:



Of course, as we already mentioned, civilian clothing would also have qualified for reimbursement under the Commutation System. This is especially true of expendable items and items that wore out quickly.

So, getting to the original question: Is your blue trimmed jacket appropriate for later war scenarios? I don't know. Is it possible a store or person back home scrounged some blue trim and applied it to a jacket? Certainly. Would it have been typical? I would say not.

As the war progressed, the supply system got better and better and we see more and more uniformity of pattern in Confederate armies. Types of cloth and color might be significantly different, but jacket and trouser patterns evident in photos become more and more standardized.

As a rule of thumb, the better the central system of supply, the less frequently the Commutation System was relied upon. Keep that in mind when wearing "one of a kind" commutation items at mid and later war events.

For an excellent breakdown of the development of the "depot system" and a basic timeline for implementation of issue jackets, read "A SURVEY OF CONFEDERATE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT QUARTERMASTER ISSUE JACKETS" by Leslie D. Jensen. Part I focuses on the period applicable to this thread.

https://www.military-historians.org/company/journal/confederate/confederate-1.htm

[Cracker Line]

Re: Commutation Jackets

Fred,

Ethan's a pard of mine and if I can get ahold of him before he comes across the thread I will make him aware that it's here. Actually, he has a very strong argument that the commutation system lasted till the end of the war, as he found in some records an account of a soldier getting commutation pay in the early months of 1865. That's not all he has, but thats the Official record on it. Outside of that, I think you are right in regards to theaters dictating the PEC of commutation clothing. Here in Florida, the uniforms were largely commutation stuff. In pictures of enlisted men from the mid to late war period down here, you see mainly generic homemade shell jackets on the troops. For Early war, the jackets run the gammot. But anyway, I'll see if I can get a hold of Ethan as he is more knowledgeable than I on this topic. However, I would be very wary on saying that the commutation system is JUST early war, as more and more research is coming to light it has shown that homemade/homespun articles were more and more common even late in the war. Some theaters more than others.

Cheers,
Adam Cripps

[Cracker Line]

Re: Commutation Jackets

Mr. Stillwagon,

I don't think the rule of thumb works. Well, not at least for ALL theaters. As stated in my other post (which I was in the process of typing when you posted yours) here in the Deep South you see more and more commutation clothing on soldiers compared to just wearing civilian clothing. Of course there was a lot of wearing civilian clothing articles, just that there is more commutation clothing in the photographs. All I'm saying is that your rule of thumb is good, but I don't think it works in all theaters/periods/situations. I don't mean to start anything, just am of the opinion that it's not a "fool proof" method. However, you did a wonderful job in answering the guys question.

Cheers,
Adam Cripps

[Yellowhammer]

Re: Commutation Jackets

Adam,

A "rule of thumb" is just that. If it were all things to all situations, it would be a law. :wink_smil

However, I respectfully disagree. Please allow me to expound on my original post. Here's my comment for our reference:

"As a rule of thumb, the better the central system of supply, the less frequently the Commutation System was relied upon."

If a department, region or army was not being adequately supplied, they would be more dependant on the Commutation System than the Depot System. Using the ANV as an example, soldiers were most dependent on alternative sources when clothing from the Central QM was in short supply (1862 Maryland Campaign) or when they were away from the base of supply (Longstreet's men in East Tennessee.)

I'm not sure what you mean by "Deep South" but using Florida as an example, troops in that region/department had less access to issued clothing from the depots and, as such were more dependant on the Commutation System and alternative sources.

In fact, I can't think of a situation where a soldier would be reimbursed by government for store bought clothing or clothing sent from home if he were already adequately supplied by the Central QM.

Does that clarification help you?

[Cracker Line]

Re: Commutation Jackets

Mr. Stillwagon,

I apologize. I read the statement wrong. In fact we're on the same page now and I agree with exactly what you said. Sorry for the confusion.

Cheers,
Adam Cripps

[Yellowhammer]

Re: Commutation Jackets

No need to apologize. If you got that impression, I'm sure others did as well.

[Huck]

Re: Commutation Jackets

Simply, the commutation system would be any jacket or coat trousers, shirt, and or drawers "acquired from outside the Central QM" for which the soldier was reimbursed. So if you only spent $45 on government clothing, you were supposed to be reimbursed. Same goes for the military today, ever year after like your second year of enlistment, you receive a clothing allowance. Lets say I only purchased only $200 worth of new uniforms, out the $250 I receive in my Dec paycheck, I pocket the difference.

[DougCooper]

Re: Commutation Jackets

Commutation was also blurred in some theatres when the Depot system was unable to get uniforms to the troops. Florida is a good example - the home guard troops were getting uniforms from many sources, least of which was the Columbus Depot or Mobile. This clothing was generally homespun by the families or by organized home town/county groups and was normally reimbursed. This continued through the end of the war.

In the TMD, troops often were much closer to home than the depots that supplied most of the uniforms...such as the Louisiana troops. Some times this was reimbursed, sometimes it is hard to find records on that. In any case, it was often outside the depot system. This also continued through the end of the war. Even more confusing are some jackets for instance where the jury is out on depot vs homespun. Talk about a subject area that is ripe for more research.