British Made Coats for the AEF

[jgawne]

Due to the shortage of wool uniforms in France, over the winter of 17-18 the US Army bought a number of uniform " sets" from the UK. I am assuming sets mean coat, trousers, hat

 

I found a mention in (of all things) a congressional hearing on military spending in which it is clearly stated that 100,000 sets of British Army uniforms were purchased which were already on hand (and of course we've all heard the stories of Yanks being issued British uniforms).

 

But then it says the second 100,000 was actually the purchase of enough wool cloth in the UK to make up the 100K .

 

So I am trying to figure out if this second 100,000 purchase was the same British army style, or if these are the Britiswh Made uniforms (or the first of a larger run). It seems that if you are buying fabric, it would not be all that hard to tell the firms to make this new design rather than the old one.

 

Anyone ever see anything on this, or a total number of British made uniforms? 100,000 is far too low a number for very many to have survived.

[GIl Sanow]

So far as I know, there are only 2 types of Brit-made coats made for US EMs -- both are unlined and have the typical broad arrow stamping. One has outside "patch" pockets and the other has inside hung with the pocket itself made of cotton, presumably to save wool. Both can be spotted from the outside by a line of stitching above the pocket flaps -- this secures a strip of cotton tape on the inside to shich the pocket flaps are sewn.

 

Take a look back in the reference section for the thread I started last spring showing all of the variations I know of, including Brit-made.

 

If there were 2 contracts, this might account for the two patterns.

 

These are not real common, but they are not impossible to ontain by any means. I cannot say though that I have ever encountered any Brit-made breeches, but overseas caps are not all that uncommon. They are fairly easy to spot with a reverse angle to the back of the curtain.

 

G

[jgawne]

The first contract was definatly for purchasing off the shelf British Army uniforms. There was some flack by Congress about that so the Army had to explain why.

(Uh, Mr. Congressman, we didn't have enough ships and uniforms, and we had the choice of letting the men freeze that winter, or buying something to keep them warm.")

 

But the second part of the spending was for "the cloth to make 100,00 uniforms." So I'm wondering if the second purchase was the first of what we now think of as British made. MAkes sesne that the pattern might change slightly before 11 Nov.

 

 

So I guess what I would look for fist is anyone have any British manufactured US WW1 Uniforms that have a date on them?

[GIl Sanow]

Take a look at this from last summer. http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/ind...=6489&st=20

(It's parked in the uniform reference sorting area.)

 

It doesn't appear that Brit-made EM coats were dated, but I think it is a fair guess that these are the 100,000 you mention. Why the two types? Certainly the idea of saving wool had to be the reason.

 

"Quartermaster Support of the Army" mentions the fact that the US bought the last remaining supply of wool in the world in 1917 from either Australia or New Zealand and had to send the ships there to get it! We need to realize (also from the same source) that for each soldier overseas there were at least 3 uniforms -- the ones they wore, the ones ready for immediate issue and another on the way. If we had 1.3 million overseas, that means nearly 4 million uniforms! WOW! Another 100,000 wouldn't help much, but it was something.

 

G

[Pointedcuffs]

Thought I would post another British coat for reference. I got the coat stripped like this. Will be restored soon.




Mario

[HOLZI]

Here's mine from an earlier post:

 

Brit made WWI Tunic

 

I can post additional pics if interested

 

BTW: This tunic does not display the extra horzontal stitching above the pocket flaps as noped above.

[GIl Sanow]

Interesting -- can we see the inside where the pocket flaps are sewn? (I assume it is unlined.)

 

G

[HOLZI]

Interesting -- can we see the inside where the pocket flaps are sewn? (I assume it is unlined.)

 

G

 

Yes, it is unlined

 

I'd be happy to post additional pics when I get home this evening.

[HOLZI]

Here's the 1st pair of interior pics. The middle image is of the lower right pocket. Notice the stitch lines for attachment of the pocket flap.

[HOLZI]

Top pic is of the upper right pocket and bottom pic is interview of upper left pocket

[HOLZI]

Last 2 images. top is of upper left pocket and bottom is of lower left pocket. As you can see, this tunic does not display the tell tale "British made" horizontal stitching above the pocket flaps. Maybe I'm not seeing the extra row of threads....

[HOLZI]

Gil,

 

I looked at the information that your link directs to and cannot dispute the fact that this tunic matches the 1917 pattern in your collection right down the the contractor stamp. I see that the construction is the same but cannot see any stitching above the pockets corresponding to the line of stitching clearly displayed on the inside. Seems as though the wool has all but absorbed the stitches on the outside due to wear/age?

[GIl Sanow]

Well, from the inside it does appear to be there. Not sure why it disappeared on the outside, but it is there, period.

 

Any thoughts on the 100,000 contract issue?

 

G

[New Romantic]

I have two variations of the British made coat, one of which was on Gil's excellent topic on service coats.

 

This coat has plain cuffs like some US 1917 pattern coats.

[New Romantic]

View of the inside as seen in Gil's Coat Topic.

[New Romantic]

WD and Broad Arrow stamp on the cotton drill along the inside reinforcing a lower pocket- also from Gil's Topic.

[New Romantic]

This coat seems to be made from British Khaki cloth, though the colours in the photo may be off a bit. I tried to get the colour a close as possible to the actual coat.

[New Romantic]

View of the cuff showing three rows of stitching.

[New Romantic]

View of the inside of the coat showing typical British made construction. No WD marking can be found, it may have worn off.