Would WWII/Pre-WWII Army Officer Whites ever have pleated pants?

[BigBrother]

I have in my possession a gorgeous 4 pocket tunic and two pairs of white pants, all Palm Beach. The pants, I strongly suspect, are not military. They look correct except for the facts that I see what looks like a civilian sale tag on one and that they're pleated. But I'm not sure. I know the whites were a formal dress uniform, so for all I know pre-wartime and pre-material shortages, they did allow for pleats to get that sharp look. Or am I dreaming? I'm attaching here pics of all labels. Mind you even if the pants aren't military, if you have proof pleats existed, I'd consider these totally usable (and heck, I'll probably use them regardless!) Would love to get your input on all this...

 

 

[Justin B.]

Circular No. 48, 1936, says "Cut on the lines of civilian trousers, without cuff." AR-600-38, 1938, says "Cut on the lines of civilian trousers, without stripe, welt, or cuff." Nothing about pleats.

[BigBrother]

Thank you!

[BigBrother]

@Justin B.:
 

Oh wait, I figured at first that explicitly meant no pleat, but then I saw what I think you’re implying- it’s not explicitly prohibited. Would you happen to have any references later, perhaps wartime, that do prohibit them?

[BigBrother]

Well this certainly makes things more interesting! I was looking for other references, as you can imagine, and came across this old sale page (I’d actually seen it too back when it was available):

 

https://www.etsy.com/listing/799397049/ww2-pre-officers-dress-whites-palm-beach

 

A few things of note: while you can’t explicitly see a pleat vs no pleat, what’s interesting is that the care label is identical to mine (now maybe those were standard in the late 30s on all PBC pants, but who knows.) That’s interesting to me because I was nearly certain the different typeface from the jacket care label meant mine were from a different era. But here you have the exact same thing. Secondly, up above the back pocket you see an interesting seam that extends up to the waistband. Mine have those too! They were a bit suspicious to me but here they are, present yet again in what I assume are correct ones.

 

The plot thickens. I’m going to contact the seller and see if she remembers pleats and/or has any other photos!

[BigBrother]

Nope, no pleats
 

[Justin B.]

2 hours ago, BigBrother said:

Thank you!

 

You're welcome!

 

2 hours ago, BigBrother said:

Would you happen to have any references later, perhaps wartime, that do prohibit them?

 

 

Pleats (or plaits as the regulations called them) were definitely prohibited for service trousers.

 

In general I think pleats are not likely on uniform pants of that era, but... It's hard to duplicate exact shades of white; I'd say if the material looks like a close match to the coat it's possible that the trousers do go with the uniform. Pleats were popular for men's trousers at the time, and somebody may have had a tailor do up a pair that would also work for civvies. The top of the trousers would be covered by the coat for dress whites. Also, I think a single pleat would be more likely than two pleats.

 

 

[BigBrother]

Yeah, they’re close enough and looking at the pair linked above in the Etsy listing, they are identical besides the pleat. Since the jacket will be covering it, you really won’t be able to tell. Will work till I find the right item!