WHICH FEDERAL SACK COAT?

by

K. C. MacDonald

Over the past year I have been sewing Federal Sack coats, reading more about them, seeing some originals, and consulting with experts on the subject. This has led me to reconsider some of the opinions I originally voiced in an article on this subject, and to reinforce others. What follows are some general specifications for the single most important element of our Federal impression: the homely sackcoat.

The Problem with J.T. Martins...

These days, if you wish to purchase a sack coat from a reputable sutler, it will most likely be a copy of the J.T. Martin Contract. In particular, I am thinking of the work of Mr. Daley and Mr, Sekela. These are good coats, and what follows in no way detracts from their quality, but I believe there are both historical and economic reasons influencing the preponderance of this sack coat style, which are not necessarily in the best interests of accurate Living History.

J.T. Martin, as a contractor, was active between August 1862 and January 1865. However the extant examples upon which reproductions are based come from a late-war contract run made between October 1864 and January 1865 (marked "J.T. Martin OCT 18.64"). The fact that this was a large run, 250,000 of the circa 1,000,000 J.T. Martin Sackcoats ever produced, accounts for the great number of surviving 'late J.T. Martin sackcoats' and their popularity with collectors and living historians (in fact, many were retained as unused surplus...) (McKee 1995). I have not yet seen any reference to earlier surviving J.T. Martin contract issues, however if the output of other Federal arsenals and contractors is anything to go by they may have been very different from this late war product. Indeed, even if we assume that late and early J.T. Martin Sack Coats were exactly the same, we must still deal with the problem that they differ significantly from other more common Union Sack Coats. McKee (1995: 57) notes that the US government purchased a total of over 6,000,000 sackcoats from contractors during the war, that means that only 1 in 6 of Federal sack coats was a 'J.T. Martin'.

A second factor influencing the wide availability of J.T. Martin reproductions today is their relative ease of assembly: the lined version is entirely machine sewn, except for the buttonholes. For anyone with sewing experience it should be clear that even the amount of time needed to entirely machine sew (except buttonholes) compared to the time needed to machine sew main seams only and handstitch the rest, is about two orders of time magnitude difference. Even at 'minimum wage' hourly rates, it would be difficult to find customers willing to pay the price of a 100% handsewn jacket today. The costs of combined hand and machine methods should be clear from the prices of most good 'hardcore' tailors. Replicating the machine sewn J.T. Martin thus allows the manufacture of an accurate reproduction at an affordable price. But do the aforesaid justifications justify complacency?

Below I have made a tabular comparison of the characteristics of surviving Schuykill, Western Depot (e.g. Cincinnati) and J.T. Martin Sack Coats. This data comes from predominantly from the work of Paul McKee on sackcoats in the collections of the Smithsonian, with some additional points drawn from the recent re-evaluation of Federal Sackcoats by Patrick Brown in the Watchdog (Winter & Spring 2000 issues):

Now some have argued with me, not unreasonably, that detailed typologies of Federal Sackcoats just don't work, there is too much variation in any category. Besides, at 50 yards how different do some of the known variations really look? Perhaps I am just a uniform fetishist, but to me there are some broad patterns of difference over space and time and, in any event, I can pick out the difference at 10 yards (while in camp) and that matters to me and the overall 'time warp' experience.

So what are the difficulties posed by wearing a J.T. Martin Sack Coat? First of all, as you can see, they are readily distinguishable from other coats by exterior features. Second, while being similar to Western Depot jackets in many ways, they are very unlike the typical Schuykill coats. Since J.T. Martin started production in August 1862, allowing a typical 4 month lag from contract to delivery, we could expect to see the first coats reaching the troops no earlier than December 1862. Additionally, we know that they become more numerous as the war goes on, particularly in late 1864, early 1865. So.., they would be optimal for late war campaigns (e.g. Petersburg & Nashville), perfectly acceptable for mid war campaigns (Chancellorsville & Vicksburg onwards), but unacceptable for 1861 and 1862 campaigns (e.g. Antietam, Stones River, Shiloh, etc...). In other words, we are still fine for mid to late war with J.T. Martin jackets. However, they are not right for the entire war, Schuykill would be a much safer 'generic' choice. Additionally, do we really want the 'Campaigner community' to be clothed en masse in a sack coat style that less than 20% of the Federal Army wore?

Other considerations...

Cut is not everything. There is also the question of materials. McKee (1995:54) wrote: "None of the [original] garments were of the dark navy blue shade, but were of a deep and rich blue with a very slight greenish cast common to indigo dying. Several coats (one, a Schuykill marked specimen) exhibited a lighter shade bordering on a medium blue." Thus any material with a purplish cast, for instance, is incorrect AND one should expect variation in shade between sack coats not due to fading. The variation in shade (from dark to medium blue) is attributable to different dying times or number of dips. After all, the same indigo dye used on Federal trousers was used on Federal Sack Coats, just fewer dips. Also beware that the fabric used in these coats was on the thin side (you should be able to see some light through it. Flannels of this weight, and with these variations in shade, are well represented by the best two reproduction fabrics available to us today: County Cloth's dark blue flannel, and Family Heirloom Weaver's more medium Blue flannel.

For sleeves what is wanted is muslin (NOT osnaburg). For linings there is room for great variation (usually fairly nasty grey, blue green and light brown flannels (no thicker than the outer flannel!) and striped linsey-woolseys (Family Heirloom Weavers sell two varieties of these that are spot on. Finally, do not forget that makers of reproductions leave out interlinings for the collar. Ever notice how your sack coat collar always tend to 'pop-up' (quite unlike those nice flat sack coat collars in the period photos)? Its because they lack the stiffening of an interlining as used in the originals. Here you want to use linen toe (available from Family Heirloom Weavers), or if unable to attain that, use buckram. The result is a collar that lies flat!

Regarding thread. It seems that both indigo and logwood dyed threads were used, sometimes both on the same garment (you can even see this on Federal garments displayed in the NPS Gettysburg Visitors Centre). The logwood thread seems to have gone more often for the hand-finished bits (pocket bags and buttonholes), but there is no real pattern. You would be equally correct to use only one type of thread throughout the coat.

There are also some stylistic questions. Civil War tailors and seamstresses were not putting together APOLLO rockets, they were knocking together mass-produced garments to be worn-out by dusty and lice-infested Grunts inside of a few months. Most of the original coats were not works of art. Stitch counts are known to vary between as much as 5 and 14 per inch on a given line in some examples! Indeed the comment 'looks to have been sewn by a drunk' has been made by several investigators who have scrutinised original garments. So don't be afraid of irregularities or a semblance of 'hasty work' in a finished garment, that's what you should be striving for!

So where do I get this ultimate sack coat?

Sadly the time of the admirable "Sackcoat Project' run on the Campaigner website last year is past. This was an effort by a single individual to mass produce 30 sackcoats in the spirit of the I 860s with proper materials and procedures and standard quartermaster sizes. Until someone else decides to make this great self-sacrifice again another solution must be sought. So, if you want something done properly, do it yourself (or convince a pard with tailoring skills to do it for you). County Cloth have recently produced a Schuykill Arsenal pattern, all necessary materials can be obtained from either County Cloth or Family Heirloom Weavers (except the muslin, which can be obtained from most modern fabric dealers; nb. sometimes muslin is called 'sheeting' in England). Alternatively a good pattern to use as a starting point is the Past Patterns M002 Lined Federal Sackcoat Pattern (available through Fall Creek Sutlers, and other establishments). This is based on a probable 4-piece 'Western Depot Style' jacket owned originally by George Bartow of the 15th NJ Veteran Reserve Corps. Its a good starting point and can (by varying pocket shape and other parameters) also serve as the basis for a Schuykill. Beware that sizing tends to run rather small and short with this pattern so take this into account and make a size larger than your normal.

Return to Article Index