Jump to content


Photo

Odd WWII overcoat


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Gavin D.

Gavin D.
  • Members
    • Member ID: 158,043
  • 266 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 October 2019 - 02:56 PM

Here is a really interesting overcoat. The overcoat itself is normal, but the tag makes it interesting. It is marked Segregation Camp on the tag. Could this be a uniform possibly worn in a Japanese internment Camp or by an African American service member in WWII? I have never seen a tag with that marked on it before. I appreciate all input.

Attached Images

  • IMG_20191025_174508677.jpg
  • IMG_20191025_174525993.jpg


#2 cagedfalcon

cagedfalcon
  • Members
    • Member ID: 181,478
  • 431 posts

Posted 25 October 2019 - 04:42 PM

Interesting

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk



#3 McDermut99

McDermut99
  • Members
    • Member ID: 153,059
  • 1,479 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Lone Star State

Posted 25 October 2019 - 05:59 PM

Very interesting, you usually see those tags stamped to a specific camp or instillation. Here's an older thread with some more info about the tags:

http://www.usmilitar...erviceable-tag/

 

It could certainly be possible that the coat was reissued to a segregated African-American, Hispanic, or Japanese unit, or even as you mentioned sent to an internment or POW camp.



#4 patches

patches
  • Members
    • Member ID: 34,986
  • 24,331 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens N.Y.C.

Posted 25 October 2019 - 07:01 PM

Interesting. Was U.S. Army uniforms given to Japanese in interment camps? That's the question, like would they? I always was under the impression clothing if needed was gotten from local sources near the camps like churches etc.. And I don't believe there were Army Posts that were strictly Segregated, there was always units of both White and Black, IE Camp Hood Fort Huachuca, Ft Benning

 etc etc etc.

 

I might be inclined to think that there may, that's a big MAY, been in the war, areas of a post that were "Segregated" from the rest of a post, to be called a specifically a Segregated Camp, but that needs to be seen. the Black personnel, yes we know did not mix to any great extent stateside, but was their unit areas segregated, to the point of being totally off limits to anyone White as to give these that title. Plus like this tag, if this was true then the tag to my mind would read Segregation Camp, Camp Claiborne, Segregation Camp, Ft Knox, Segregation Camp Ft Devens, Segregation Camp, Camp Gruber, Segregation Camp, Ft Dix etc etc.



#5 cagedfalcon

cagedfalcon
  • Members
    • Member ID: 181,478
  • 431 posts

Posted 25 October 2019 - 07:33 PM

Maybe thinking to big.....

Maybe just used by colored soldiers it would be labeled "segregated" as not to be used by whites?

Just a theory.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk



#6 Gavin D.

Gavin D.
  • Members
    • Member ID: 158,043
  • 266 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 October 2019 - 04:39 AM

The photos online that I've seen of Japanese in the Internment Camps never have military issued clothing on, that is why I was thinking it could have possibly been worn by one of the guards at one of the camps if it would have been issued to them and not an African American unit.



#7 Justin B.

Justin B.
  • Members
    • Member ID: 3,982
  • 1,484 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Salt Lake City, UT, USA

Posted 26 October 2019 - 08:33 AM

I knew I had seen "segregation camp" somewhere, and a little Googling turns up that it was a term used in the WW1 AEF for camps where soldiers with signs of venereal disease were sent for observation and treatment if needed. It sounds like they were a lot like prisoner camps. It doesn't look like this system was used in WW2, though.

I have seen a lot of information about Japanese internment camps, and my grandfather taught school at one before he was drafted. I've never seen photos of interees in anything but civilian clothes.

#8 mikie

mikie
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,687
  • 2,365 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Jose, Ca

Posted 26 October 2019 - 10:03 AM

No idea about the label, but I don't think it would be a good idea to have internees or prisoners wearing clothes that could get them confused with the camp garrison.

Mikie

#9 patches

patches
  • Members
    • Member ID: 34,986
  • 24,331 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens N.Y.C.

Posted 26 October 2019 - 04:42 PM

No idea about the label, but I don't think it would be a good idea to have internees or prisoners wearing clothes that could get them confused with the camp garrison.

Mikie

Excellent point, puts in mind  for some reason of Charles Bronson and James Coburn in the Great Escape :lol:

 

hqdefault.jpg



#10 themick

themick
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,105
  • 864 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate California

Posted 26 October 2019 - 07:11 PM

We know for a fact that some US uniform items were given to PWs, I owned at one time an M-41 field jacket with PW stenciled on the back, and I've seen other similar items offered for sale or discussion here on this forum, including a dress Army blouse.  It, too, had PW stenciled on the back.  What it did not have were the original buttons with the US Army eagle on it.  My thought is that when such uniform items were issued to PWs, that any insignia, such as buttons, were removed/replaced.  Thus, where ever the OP's overcoat went, it wasn't to POWs.  

 

Steve



#11 kammo-man

kammo-man
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,009
  • 12,805 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:weirdville

Posted 26 October 2019 - 09:17 PM

Isn’t it a recycled uniform label


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#12 Wake1941

Wake1941
  • Members
    • Member ID: 151,850
  • 3,252 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 October 2019 - 09:24 PM

I was going to say recycle or repro. Can you post a new pic of the jacket

Edited by Wake1941, 26 October 2019 - 09:24 PM.


#13 patches

patches
  • Members
    • Member ID: 34,986
  • 24,331 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens N.Y.C.

Posted 26 October 2019 - 10:15 PM

Combat Sevicable

 

http://www.usmilitar...erviceable-tag/



#14 Gavin D.

Gavin D.
  • Members
    • Member ID: 158,043
  • 266 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 October 2019 - 11:17 AM

Here is a better photo of the tag as well as the size stampings on the inside of the overcoat. 

Attached Images

  • IMG_20191027_150541608.jpg
  • IMG_20191027_150553302.jpg


#15 cagedfalcon

cagedfalcon
  • Members
    • Member ID: 181,478
  • 431 posts

Posted 27 October 2019 - 11:40 AM

Can anyone make out what camp it was from?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk



#16 Gavin D.

Gavin D.
  • Members
    • Member ID: 158,043
  • 266 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 October 2019 - 11:59 AM

Oh wow after closer look the name of the camp is there. Ashame it was stapled over it. The first letter is either a C or a G and it is 4 to 5 letters long. I know that isn't much to go off of.



#17 patches

patches
  • Members
    • Member ID: 34,986
  • 24,331 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens N.Y.C.

Posted 27 October 2019 - 04:52 PM

Oh wow after closer look the name of the camp is there. a shame it was stapled over it. The first letter is either a C or a G and it is 4 to 5 letters long. I know that isn't much to go off.

Not many. But here's Camps with the Cs and G's that might work.

 

Cooke

 

Croft

 

Grant

 

And just in case, Camps with C's and G's with six letters.

 

Carson

 

Callan

 

Gordon



#18 Allan H.

Allan H.
  • Members
    • Member ID: 151
  • 5,792 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Topeka, Kansas

Posted 27 October 2019 - 06:55 PM

Very interesting, you usually see those tags stamped to a specific camp or instillation. Here's an older thread with some more info about the tags:

http://www.usmilitar...erviceable-tag/

 

It could certainly be possible that the coat was reissued to a segregated African-American, Hispanic, or Japanese unit, or even as you mentioned sent to an internment or POW camp.

Just for clarification's sake, at no time in the 20th century have Hispanics ben segregated in US military service. In fact, Military census figures don't differentiate between white and Hispanic. 

 

As for the Combat Serviceable label, I believe that in this case, the segregation is referring to segregating uniforms and running them through renovation activities. You can clearly see that the coat has shrunk and had to be resized due to the shrinkage. This was the result of the wool uniforms being washed in boiling water, which was done to kill lice and other larvae and to thoroughly clean the garments. 

 

My two cents,

 

Allan



#19 patches

patches
  • Members
    • Member ID: 34,986
  • 24,331 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens N.Y.C.

Posted 27 October 2019 - 07:45 PM

Just for clarification's sake, at no time in the 20th century have Hispanics ben segregated in US military service. In fact, Military census figures don't differentiate between white and Hispanic. 

 

As for the Combat Serviceable label, I believe that in this case, the segregation is referring to segregating uniforms and running them through renovation activities. You can clearly see that the coat has shrunk and had to be resized due to the shrinkage. This was the result of the wool uniforms being washed in boiling water, which was done to kill lice and other larvae and to thoroughly clean the garments. 

 

My two cents,

 

Allan

That,s a good point Allan, note the stamps, we can gather it Used To Be a 36 R, and now is a 34 S with a bump up to 34 R.post-158043-0-89020800-1572203758.jpg



#20 McDermut99

McDermut99
  • Members
    • Member ID: 153,059
  • 1,479 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Lone Star State

Posted 28 October 2019 - 12:48 PM

Just for clarification's sake, at no time in the 20th century have Hispanics ben segregated in US military service. In fact, Military census figures don't differentiate between white and Hispanic. 

 

As for the Combat Serviceable label, I believe that in this case, the segregation is referring to segregating uniforms and running them through renovation activities. You can clearly see that the coat has shrunk and had to be resized due to the shrinkage. This was the result of the wool uniforms being washed in boiling water, which was done to kill lice and other larvae and to thoroughly clean the garments. 

 

My two cents,

 

Allan

 

Allan,

 

Good point on the coat, especially the size being relabeled. There happens to be a rusting staple right where another word is, and segregation referring to the equipment makes sense given the other markings on the coat. 

 

In regards to Hispanics in the military service, I neglected to be more specific. I was referring to Hispanics from Puerto Rico who enlisted. My grandfather was a native, enlisted before the U.S. entered, and served in a segregated Puerto Rican non-combatant unit during the war. 


Edited by McDermut99, 28 October 2019 - 12:48 PM.


#21 Gavin D.

Gavin D.
  • Members
    • Member ID: 158,043
  • 266 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 October 2019 - 07:18 AM

Not many. But here's Camps with the Cs and G's that might work.

 

Cooke

 

Croft

 

Grant

 

And just in case, Camps with C's and G's with six letters.

 

Carson

 

Callan

 

Gordon

Thank you for the names of the camps. And that definitely makes more sense with the uniform being resized and altered that they segragated the uniform.



#22 patches

patches
  • Members
    • Member ID: 34,986
  • 24,331 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens N.Y.C.

Posted 29 October 2019 - 09:17 AM

Thank you for the names of the camps. And that definitely makes more sense with the uniform being resized and altered that they segragated the uniform.

Kinda an Odd choice of a word if you asked me :lol: I think better choices would of been RESIZE, TO BE RESIZED, WAS RESIZED or just RESIZED.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users