Chapter IV: Preface (4)

The angle of 15 deg., with a width of ½ breast, or its equivalent, as 17½ numbers for a vest, or 18 numbers for a coat, at the starting point of a garment, which is the angle of 135 deg. within the angle of 15 deg., as seen in Dia. XIII, contains the proper spread for, and around the hips and seat, as required for a coat. For waist suppression at the sides and the back, gores are cut out, according to notion or style, or according to the nature of the garment. It must be remembered that the position of the shoulders and the whole forepart is the same in all diagrams in this work, and that the change from the square of 20 to the square of 17½ is made by changing the back, or the sidepiece, or both.

Now it will be seen, that if either of the back or sidepiece is moved, but kept together on their connecting points, as on lines 9 and 14, etc., the gores must change, as well as the height of the back above the bottom of the armscye and on line 9 over the front. Thus the back or the sidepiece may be laid in any conceivable shape, and in any conceivable square, and the fit will be the same, though all points assume a different relation to the starting point. The angle of 15 deg. is here adopted because it conforms to the slope of the body and not as a pet idea, and it is also adopted for the reason that a garment can be laid out in it, without piecing the garment, or cutting out unreasonable amounts as gores.

Dia. II shows the whole coat on the angle of 15 deg., and the gores around the waist are for a normal form of a size 36, that is, the waist suppression is one-ninth part of the whole breast, or about 2 in. in both gores around the side and the back, on the half coat. This is the reduction within the angle of 15 deg., when on the flat table, but when sewed together, the garment will form like Dia. I, or nearly so, and when in that position, the seams around the back of the waist may be changed some, without destroying the balance, but as a general thing the seam between the back and sidepiece should not be tampered with, unless there are good reasons, such as style, or for erect forms, where the folding up of the sidepiece will contract the gore between the back and the front skirts or close it up altogether, or in extreme cases produce a lap over the seat. Fuller waists are usually of erect forms, and for such the under-arm cut may be reduced for the larger waist, and the gore between side and back may be reduced at and below the tack. That cut, or gore, between the back and the sidepieces will always be a difficult thing to handle, for the reason that it is a curved gore.

If we would cut the back of Dia. II 1 in. wider over the blade on one coat, and cut another one 1 in. smaller at the same point, without changing the lengths of the back above the armhole, we would spoil both of them, unless we know how to make things right again by sewing the parts together. On the broad back, with a straighter seam, the sidepiece would have to be reasonably stretched over the blade, or the back held full, which is the same, while the more narrow and more curved back must be sewed on the sidepiece rather close, though it will never do to hold the sidepiece full, or stretch the back there.

Dia. II is so calculated that both sidepiece and back must be sewed on even over the curve, above line 9, and the best of tailors will sometimes be compelled to baste them together several times more than they like, before they get them right, or the way it is intended. Here we can find the reasons why certain parts can be worked the very contrary, and both ways will fit, and for this reason a newly-arrived jour. should be thoroughly instructed by the cutter, as to how things must be put together according to his cutting, and the cutter himself should be a good tailor, or at least he should know how it is to be made, even if he can not do the sewing. A cutter who is a thorough tailor himself will always be a better cutter than the one who only knows how to cut, all other things being equal.

The angle of 15 deg., as used in this work, is calculated for the normal form of a male. Males with extra large hips require more spread toward the side of the hips, and must be placed under the head of abnormal forms. The normal form of a female is very large over the hips, and the angle of 15 deg. would not produce spread enough for a female. It is true, this work has nothing to do with the cutting of female garments, but I think it important enough to point out the above difference between the male and female form, for it may become of use to some of my readers. Soon the time will come, and, in fact, it is now and has been for some time, when men will cut and superintend the making of fine female garments, just as females now make the common garments for men. There are millions in it.

The angle of 15 deg. is taken as a standard in this work, because it is easily found by spreading two lines one-fourth of their length. It is also a common division of the square—one-sixth. It is also the twenty-fourth part of a circle. It is not an unknown quantity, but something recognized and acknowledged by the whole world. Now, if anyone contends that a larger angle, or a smaller one, is better, I will not find fault, but I would like to see the proof.

The angles, as laid down in this work, are a standard—something rational to go by—the same as a pound or a yard. Our grocer never sells an actual pound of coffee, nor does our dry goods merchant sell us an actual yard of calico, and we all know it, but we are satisfied with it because we can do no better. It serves the purpose. I claim that two angles of 15 deg., formed in funnel-like shape, and connected at the widest part like Dia. XIII, will at least come nearer to the shape of the human form than a square piece.

THE SQUARE AND THE CIRCLE.

The square is a very handy instrument for the use of men, both in squaring material for building or for squaring our actions in the intercourse with mankind; but as the Creator is greater than the creature, so is the circle greater than the square. The great majority who may read these lines will acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Architect of the Universe, no matter by whatever name it may please individuals to call him. Even the so-called radical unbeliever when cornered will acknowledge that the Universe has been made and is kept up by something which he cannot comprehend, but which he cannot deny, but he calls it Nature. Very well, let us call it Nature, and give praise to the work of Nature. But the great majority have seen fit to call it God, and this name is again spoken differently by every language of the globe, and I suppose that is the case with all intelligent beings on any heavenly body that may exist. This being the case the name is nothing.

Now, when God made the heaven and the earth, he did not use a square, for there is nothing that indicates anything like a square. The whole Universe is laid in a circle, and as far as our vision reaches we behold everything round, and, according to Genesis, when God made a covenant with Noah, He sealed his promise with the beautiful curve of the rainbow. Every star is round, so is the earth, and even its three-fourths surface of water, which constitute the mighty oceans, are in a perfect circle; and everything that grows upon the earth is more round than square. We may go anywhere, and every thing that we behold points out that the Great Architect of the Universe formed his plans within the radius of a circle.

In humble imitation of this divine principle, I have adopted the circle, and parts of the circle, within which I form my plans for the covering of men, which became necessary after Adam and Eve had tasted of the forbidden apple, which, I suppose, was round, too. (See Dia. XI and XII.) But I may have made mistakes. Making mistakes is natural to every person. The brute creation make no mistakes, but do they advance? The spider weaves his web as perfectly as his ancestors wove theirs thousands of years ago, and in all probability will do so for thousands of years to come. He makes no mistakes because it is not in his nature to do so; but neither does he improve; he can not even transmit his skill to any living being, unless of his own specia. Man alone is capable of improvement, and because of this, he is liable of making mistakes; for, what would become of him if he proved successful in all his undertakings? Making mistakes is a wise check, which the Creator has implanted in the nature of man to prevent him from getting ahead faster than what is good for him.

The wise man learns from mistakes, either from his own, or those of others, and the man who never makes a mistake, will never grasp a valuable idea. Mr. Ingersoll pitches into Moses, because that master mind has made mistakes, as he claims, in writing Genesis, but notwithstanding, the name of Moses is before the world, as a mighty pillar of truth, and no man has yet been able to improve upon the ten commandments, as laid down by that great lawgiver. If some of the old masters have made mistakes, they certainly have left us some valuable substance, from which sensible men will gather wisdom, while fools throw slurs.

VESTS.

(SEE DIA. IV.)

The square consists of 20 numbers. Height of back, 14; height of front, 9; shoulders at an angle of 135 deg.; top of back, 3¾; gore under the arm, ⅜ at line 15, ¾ at line 17½, 1 at line 20. Sink the front bottom of the forepart 15 deg. for a pretty square bottom. On the garment from the neck to the ankle the vest is on a square of 17½. On this square the height of the back remains 14, but on the front plumb line it is 11¼; the gore under the arm is 3¼, and the bottom is square, while the front has an angle of 15 deg. attached. The square of 17½, with the angle of 15 deg. in front, is virtually nothing but an angle of 15 deg., having, at the starting point of the garment, a width of 17½ numbers, according to scale. (See Dia. XII and XIII.)

Top of back is as wide as the angle of 45 deg. at the neck, but may be made 3¼. The back must be that wide, in order to bring the spring of the collar to the side of the neck, and again, in order to enable the vest maker to sew the vest back all around, and turn the whole vest through the neckhole. If that hole is too small, the back is apt to tear, while the vest is turned. The bottom of the collar band is on a straight line from 11¼, on the plumb base line, through 5 on the top square line. This collar band, as it is here cut, requires that the top and side of the back must be stretched, say ¼ inch, on each side, and close to the shoulder seam, and it is for this reason that the top of the back should be 3¼ wide, in order to bring the stretch as far forward and to the side of the neck as possible.

If this is worked right it will make a neat collar, and a neat shoulder, but if the vest maker can not be depended upon, it is better to allow ¼ inch spring, and starting said spring at the middle of the shoulder seam, which is about 2½ in. from point 5, and sew the back even on the neckband, but in no case must the back be held full. If anything is to be the fullest, it must be the neckband, which must in all cases be cut plenty long, and the vest maker must be instructed to fit the two together, as above directed. The junction of the neckband, or the so-called standing collar, is further explained in the article on “Collars.”

It will be seen that Dia. IV has the shoulder on the plain angle of 135 deg., and that there is neither lap nor gore. A trifle spring that is required for a vest must be worked in by stretching the top of the back close to the shoulder seam. Dia. IV is so represented for the following reason:

I intended that Dia. V and VI should both be represented with a perfect shoulder slope of 22½ deg., and that Dia. IX should have the perfect shoulder slope of 30 deg., all of which were made over the same pattern as was Dia. IV. But Dia. V and VI are cut ¾ of a number further sidewise at the side of the neck, because in the position of the shoulder seam of Dia. V, the neckband can not be cut on, for the reason that the spring for the side of the neck would locate too far in front. Both Dia. V and VI are for illustration only. If I had placed a spring of ¼ inch at the top of the shoulder seam, the shoulder slopes as shown in each of Dia. V and VI and IX would have to be changed, and make the angle of 135 deg. a mess of confused lines.

If the collar opens very low, and a very hollow curve is required, the upper part of the neckband must be cut higher, say one inch, at the upper end, but the same at the shoulder seam as shown in Dia. IV. This will give a chance to cut a nice curve or open front, especially for a double-breasted vest, intended for very open fronts. But cutting the neckband higher on the upper end destroys spring at the neck, and for this reason an extra spring must be given in the shoulder seam. If the neckband is raised behind, say 1 in., an extra spring of ¼ inch must be allowed at top of the shoulder seam, no matter if it is cut like Dia. IV, or if ¼ is allowed already. Forty years of tailoring has convinced me that Dia. IV is the best for all kinds of vests, because the front collar may be curved at pleasure, and the collar is simply a piece added for the turn-down part, and always fitting to the neck-hole of the vest. In order to make the top collar conform with the curve of the neck-hole, the inside part of it must be pretty well stretched at the most prominent part of the curve. Dia. IV is plain, and is cut with the neck-band on.

Dia. V is cut in a square of 10, or ¼ breast and 1¼ in.; the neck-hole is cut out at the center of the neck, or at 67½ deg., hence the back and front of the neck-hole are equal; the shoulder slope is taken out at the center of the neck, and when connected will form the same as Dia. IV, except the neck-band. Dia. VI is Dia. V simply doubled. The solid lines represent one-half of the angle of 135 deg., or an angle of 67½ deg. The dotted lines passing through the neckholes of Dia. IV and VI may be called the grand center lines, and would fit a human form decapitated; and it will be seen that the actual neck-hole, from that line, is just half the diameter of the neck.

The waist of the vest is calculated upon one-ninth less than the breast, whole measure. The under-arm cut of “one” makes a close waist, and may be reduced to three-fourths, or even to nothing, for a large waist. (See Odd Forms.) The square of 20, as for a vest, is reduced in front from the pit of the stomach down, or where the body turns backward, and whatever is taken off in front is again added behind; hence the spring over the seat, which really does not at all change the dimensions, but gives it a different direction by reducing the front and by enlarging the back, and when all this is done the waist is reduced, say 1 in., under the arm, as in Dia. IV. The turn of the front is higher up than in the back, and the front is to be even between 9 and 15 on the front base, from which points it turns backward both up and down.

Dia. IV represents a vest to close all the way up to the neck. It gives the whole front edge, and may be cut lower to satisfy notion or style. The whole front of Dia. IV is such that it can lose one seam to turn in the edge, but if the vest is otherwise well-balanced it will not injure it if the seam is allowed to remain, and the edge bound as it is. A difference will be noticed between the straight front of a coat and the straight front of a vest. On a coat usually worn by the clergy the buttons and front of button-holes may be placed one seam back of the front line of the angle of 135 deg. down, as far as line 17½, which results in the same thing as when we cut the front off on that line, and sew it up with a seam. The vest is to fit a trifle more snugly at that point, and after one seam is turned in, or cut off, there still remains one-half for lap of buttons and button-holes.

To regulate the top buttons of the vest and coat, the top coat button may be placed ½ inch lower than the top vest button, and the coat will cover the vest when buttoned, providing the coat lapel is 1 in. in front of point 9. It is of very great importance for a cutter to be able to regulate the above points, and this is one reason why I have placed all coats and vests on the same base; which is on the angle of 135 deg. The vest arm-hole touches lines 9 and 14 at the bottom, and the angle of 45 deg. in front, but may be ½ inch deeper and ½ more forward for a person who desires plenty of room.

At the breast line, a vest is plenty large enough if it is ½ breast and 2½ in. At the hip line, ½ hip and 2 in. is large enough, because vests are left open below the hollow of waist. If a vest is to be sewed up clear down over the hips, the bottom must have a width, which corresponds with the hip measure, when sitting down, after it is finished and buttoned up, or ½ hip and 2½ in., the same as the breast. At the waist, a vest must be treated on the same principle as a pants, that is, it must be made wide and comfortable enough for the waist when a person sits down. At the waist, a vest is shut up all around, and can not give, and provisions must be made for expansion when sitting. Such allowance depends upon the condition of the body at the waist, and like on pants, this measure may be taken in a sitting position. But a variation may be made between persons who are mostly standing, and those who are mostly sitting. The sitting person requires a larger waist partly allowed at the side, but mostly in front. The normal form requires the vest as large at the waist as it is over the hips, and the square of 20 gives that width, by reducing about 1 in. at the under-arm cut at the waist.

In Dia. XIII will be observed a dotted gore in the back, extending through both pants and vest, which gore is cut out on a pants, but on a vest it is usually buckled up. A vest made without buckle-straps should have that gore cut out.

At the front of the collar, the underside should be cut so that when it is sewed on it will pull the vest part over so much as to hide the under side when the top collar is finished. The inside part of the top collar must be pretty well stretched back of the curve, and if the material is not bias, and can not stretch, a “V” must be sewed in, after which the whole top collar must be shaped as it is required by the curve. This may cause some extra work for the maker, but that is the only way to produce a low opening with a hollow collar, especially on double-breasted vests. The edge of a collar should be finished about 1 in. above the shoulder seam, and the under collar cut away entirely. Over and across the back there is no need of anything but the double top collar, which is simply sewed together with a seam, which is pressed out, the top collar doubled up in shape, and the back stitched on top of the collar. On heavy goods, the top collar seam of a vest should be drawn together to make it thin.

The front and the bottom of a double-breasted vest requires especial attention, in order that the parts which lap under, or over, do not show the front corners on each side, or that the top side runs too high up. Rounding off the corners pretty well will remedy the evil to some extent, but it does not look well, or a customer may order an even bottom of front, as in fact, all such vests should be.

The following will make a good front: Sweep from the point of the angle of 135 deg. through the bottom of the front angle of 15 deg., and add say ⅛ to ¼ inch more roundness to the bottom at the center between the front edge and the buttons. That sweep _may be used for the whole_ bottom of the front. From the front line go back 2½ in. for the button line, and allow in front of line 9 1⅞ in., and on the bottom allow 1 in. in front of the front line, and draw a straight line for that front edge. If the lap is to be more or less, set the buttons that much backward or forward as the case may be. A double-breasted vest which is to button clear up to the neck must have at least a gore of 2 in. under the lapel, and the top button must be set back as far as the width of the lapel. A double-breasted vest should have a small gore under the collar, even if the collar is low down, and the depth of the collar must be made according to the measure, and the collar itself may be made straight or with a large curve the same as shown on Dia. IV.

The sweep from the point of the angle of 135 deg. will give the whole bottom of the forepart as shown on Dia. XI and XII, and the double-breasted front may be shaped just like it, but may have a trifle more in the center of the angle of 15 deg., and that trifle may be obtained complete by a sweep from 3¾ on the plumb base line through the front angle of 15 deg. only. It should be observed that each particular double-breasted vest requires particular care, in order that the bottom of the front, as well as the front itself, and the collar is correct, and that the buttons are on their places. If it is desired to sink the front down further than the sweeps, add equal distance, say ½ inch at the button line and at the front edge, and both will remain in balance. It will also be found that a double-breasted vest can be improved, by making the back 14½ long above line 9, because the front will have a better chance to settle in its proper place.

Nor should it be forgotten that a double-breasted vest, which has to lap over the oval center of front, can not set without a break somewhere, unless there is a gore cut at the waist, or under the collar; or, the front is drawn in pretty well under the collar, which is the same thing as cutting a gore. (See Supplement.)

FROCK AND SACK COATS AND VESTS.

Diagrams I and III are given for illustration only. Dia. II may be used as a model by which to cut all frock coats. A pattern of Dia. II was used to form Dias. I and III, and they should all come out the same as to the fit. It may be, that in transferring Dia. II in the different positions, a slight difference may have been made, but it must be admitted that it is rather a difficult undertaking to transfer the same pattern into different positions and always have it work out the same to the smallest fraction. Dia. II should be considered the parent pattern, and after the division of the angle of 135 deg. has been mastered, anyone who knows his A, B, C’s ought to be able to make the coat draft. But as this work is intended for beginners as well as for the old and experienced cutters, I consider it worth the while to give a minute description of its cuttings as well as of its making up.

Be it understood that the angle of 135 deg. and its divisions, as bases, are the same for all frock and sack coats as well as for vests. All must be worn over the same body, and all must have the same base. But although coat and vest surround the same form, each has a different function; hence the difference in the construction of the neck-hole, the centre of the front and other points.

Notice this fact—that the top of the back of a vest is placed at 3¾ from the point of the angle of 135 deg., or ½ lower than on a frock coat. Now, in the first place, the vest collar should be lower than the coat collar; and secondly, the front of a vest is cut nearly straight down at the waist and all surplus cloth cut away sidewise, or buckled up behind—all of which has a tendency to shove the vest backward and upward to the neck. Hence the top of the vest back is ½ lower than the top of the coat back. It should also be noticed that the vest and sack coat back, above the armscye, up to 135 deg., is shorter than the frock coat; and it is so for the reason that is set forth in the article on “Narrow and Broad Backs.”

A vest is intended to fit best in front, and the height of back should never be less than 14 above line 9 in front, because a short back over the blade is apt to cause the front to be too long around the neck. On the other hand, a coat is intended to fit best in the back, and for this reason a sack coat back should never be longer than 13½. The sack coat, being some shorter in the back and looser at the side, has a tendency to fall away from the neck; and for this reason the top of back is placed at 3. Again: The overcoat must cover the collar of the undercoat. For this reason the top of the overcoat back is placed on 2½. The side of neck, at 60 deg., should not be closer than 3½ or 3⅝, which allows the collar to be sewed on easily at the side.

Now, it is true that there can be no difference between the height of the backs of frock and sack undercoats, and I do not claim that there is any, although Dia. II has a height of back of 15, on line 9 of the front base; but according to the combination of frock and sack (see Dia. III), when the sidepiece is turned down and in at the waist, and all parts are even at the back and the under armhole, then the frock and sack backs are equal in height. The foregoing comparison, as well as what has been said in the combination of sacks and frocks, is based upon more than ten years of experience, and it is repeated here for the reason that this question has been more or less agitated in the different fashion journals for many years without any satisfactory result to cutters in general.

For the frock coat in particular see Dia. II. It may be useless to recapitulate their points, but I must again remind the student of the fact that the connection of the sidepiece and back must be made at lines 9 and 15. The back and sidepieces are on even lines at the waist, and below line 9 and 15, and it is only necessary to allow one seam at the bottom of the sidepiece, as the back is in one piece. In order to get the top of the sidepiece long enough for the back, the sidepiece must be run out into the armhole for that purpose, with a small gore of say ¼ inch at the armhole. It is important to know exactly where to make the connection, and instruct the journeyman to sew up and down evenly, or to stretch or “full” certain parts above and below, as the case may require.

The gore between the sidepiece and the back always requires careful cutting, especially over the blade. In Dia. II the gore at lines 9 and 15 is put at 1 number, and I must here state that this is as much as any coat may require, and if the gore there is made only ¾, it will not spoil the coat, but it may do good, and make the coat feel easy in the back. A coat cut out too much there will feel small in the back whenever the arms reach forward. It is true, this can be helped by cutting the armhole forward, but will be at the expense of some other point, which will be disturbed. A coat cut too tight at that point will show too much back at the point of the blade, both in length and in width, and I will here again say that if you desire a loose fitting coat, a coat that fits, too, cut the gore at that point not over ¾, running up and down, and making the same connection at the point of the blade and at the hollow of the waist as in Dia. II.

I have been particular in writing about the gore between the sidepiece and the back, and a cutter must always watch the same, because the peculiar making by this or that journeyman will draw it out into a different shape. The back may be called the face of a coat, and it requires constant watching on the part of the cutter. At lines 9 and 15 the back should not be cut less than three numbers wide, and the whole calculation in regard to the height of a frock coat back is made with a back, three numbers wide at that point, and the calculation for a sack coat back is made with seven number width at line 9. At the waist the width of the back depends a good deal upon the size of a coat. A large size may have enough with two numbers, while a small size may have two and a half numbers. A back 2½ in. wide at the tack, will not be far out of the way for almost any size.

The position of the back and sidepiece requires both to be sewed on smoothly. Never hold the back full over the blade, nor sew a large seam over the curve. A back may easily be made too full or too long by fulling it over the blade, either by doing so in basting or in sewing a deep seam over the curve, and the more curved the sidepiece is the more will be the danger of fulling the back, or going to the other extreme and stretching it.

Below the lines 9 and 15 the back and sidepieces should also be sewed on smoothly, particularly so for pretty straight forms. Should the form bend a trifle forward, without being stooping, the sidepiece may be stretched, or the back held full, say ⅛ to ³⁄₁₆ of an inch, at the hollow of the waist. Or, if your coats have a tendency to be a trifle loose behind, stretch the back sidepiece a trifle above the waist, and you will find that it will improve the coat. Or, if the coat is a trifle loose after it is made, you can improve it greatly by stretching both sidepiece and back; and if the lining is not long enough it must be opened and let out, or pieced if necessary.

It is wonderful what a different appearance you can give to the back of a coat by making the back and sidepiece lining longer or shorter. The peculiar manner of different persons in sewing the seams, or basting in the lining, will also have a decided effect upon the appearance, if not upon the fit itself, and a good cutter must understand all that; that is, he must be a good coat-maker, otherwise he will always be in trouble. In recent years the question has often been asked: “Can a cutter be a good cutter without knowing how to make a coat?” I, for my part, would answer: “Yes, certainly; but if he could make the garments he cuts, his services would be worth a hundred per cent. more.”

But right here let me put another question: “Would not a good coat-maker be a better coat-maker if he knew the principle by which the coats he makes are cut?” And, in answer, again I say: “Yes; a thousand times.” Cutting and making must go hand in hand, and whenever a cutter understands both, he is able to give positive instruction to a journeyman workman. If not, he is not “boss” over the back shop.

Over and along the hips the forepart and part of the sidepiece should be stretched, say about ½ to ¾ of an inch, and the top of the skirt should be shrunk about that much, so that the gore in the skirt, which is not cut out, is shrunk away; and the gore between the sidepiece and front, which is cut out, is stretched out again at the seam, and the skirt, forepart and sidepiece are sewed up just as shown in Dia. II. The gore between the sidepiece and forepart might be run out at the waist seam and both cut equal without stretching or shrinking either part, but it will throw the fullness over the hips too much on one point. The back skirt seam should be oval to imitate the seat. At the center of the back, and from the tack downward, the frock coat is sprung out, say 1¼ inches at line 30, but said spring is again reduced between the back and forepart. On a short sack the oval form over the seat can be partially produced by cutting the back seam oval, which, when sewed up, will produce the oval form. But on a frock coat, which is open behind, the oval center would simply produce a rounded edge at the back, but not the oval shape of the body. Now, whatever is thrown out over the base behind is again taken off or balanced between the back and front skirt, and shaped to fit the form, will remain oval when sewed up.

The width of the buck skirt depends upon notion or style, but when made up the fold and the edge of the top tack should run parallel on both sides. The shoulder seams ought to be sewed on evenly, but as the back is always more bias than the front, there is danger of stretching the back, and the seam should be so basted on that when held up without strain the back would be a trifle the most full. It is also a good idea to notch the shoulder seam in its center, and baste up and down.

In making up, the front of the arm-hole must be well stretched; then starting from the front sleeve nick up say 1 in. back of 60 deg. For this purpose the canvas and all padding should be cut into at three or four places, and fully 2 in. deep. Then about 1 or 2 in. above the front sleeve nick; the lining should be cut through and a “V” put in. All of these cuts should be so finished and again filled up, that when the coat is done no off-set will be visible on the outside.

The front of the arm-hole is guarded by three notches, and needs no further description; but I must caution against an error in regard to the under sleeve. It is frequently contended that the under sleeve should be sewed in tightly over the sidepiece, but this is a mistake. An under sleeve which is held a trifle full over the back and sidepiece will “set” far better than one that is stretched away at that point. This is on the same principle that the top sleeve will not set well if stretched at and above the front sleeve nick, or anywhere else.

When a back under sleeve drags or shows too much sleeve, it is a sign that the arm-hole has too much space somewhere over the back, and it must be reduced. Stretching the sleeve will never make it better. But by sewing in that part of the sleeve a trifle full, I do not mean that we should stretch the arm-hole _that_ trifle. It should be secured by a suitable stay, or a solid thread drawn in, which will keep it from stretching, though the sleeve is a trifle full. All linings around the back and arms must be loose and large, and may be cut bias. The back lining should be provided with a fold as well as the under arm cut.

When I use the term shrink or stretch, I mean just what I say—not to hold one side full, and sew it together, and then press it out as best you can. A seam sewed, and particularly a machine-sewed seam, cannot be stretched satisfactorily, for it will largely return and draw the other side full. But a seam stretched before sewing up will remain so. This holds good on all seams and on all garments, particularly so on pants.

GARMENT FROM NECK TO ANKLE.

(SEE DIA. XIII.)

Join two angles of 15 deg. at the front of waist and back of seat. At a point where the upper angle of 15 deg. is 17½ numbers wide, is the starting point for a coat or vest. For the reason that the diagram contains the full width of a coat, it is too wide for the pants, and the width is taken off at the side. The front turns at point 15, where the body begins to turn. The pants start at point 17½, and the pants and vest lap 2½ to 3 in., just as on the body. It is not intended for actual cutting, but simply to show the continuous form of the whole garment from neck to ankle.

This diagram can be used for night-pants, particularly for children; but for such purpose the distance from the starting point, at 135 deg., to the crotch should be made 30 numbers, so that there is no strain in the upper part and crotch. Nothing is to be cut out at the side, and may be made without a side seam. It will well repay any cutter to spoil four yards of muslin and make one for himself, just to try it.

This diagram shows the whole outside of the center of front and back, from one extreme to the other, and where both extremes have about the same circumference. The bare neck and the two bare ankles will measure about the same. The largest part of the body is in the middle and the center of front and the center of back run up and down in two angles of 15 deg. each, and the two angles are joined at their widest part. This is the side view of the body, and if the body were really flat, as it appears from a side view, the centers of front and back of a garment would have to be cut on the same curve as the center of back and front in Fig. II. But both centers are flat from side to side, and what appears a sharp edge from the side view of Fig. II is a perfect flat surface in Fig. I, and is actually flat, from side to side, but bent, as we can bend a flat piece of tin, and for which reason the centers of back and front can be fitted on straight lines, and must be fitted nearly so.

For illustration we will suppose that we take four boards each one a yard wide, and set them up in a joined angle of 15 deg., like Dia. XIII, and though we may look at its sharp edges from the side, we are compelled to use a flat piece of material if we will fit the front and back views; and the human form must be fitted just like it, that is, all cuts, or all wedges, as in Dia. I and II, must be made, or put in, from the side, and the flat centers of front and back must run parallel to each other. The centers of back and front running parallel with the body, prevents the sides of the diagram to be in the same harmony, and for this reason the hips, which are the largest and widest part of the body, show themselves as the smallest in the diagram.

Dia. XIII is one of the illustrations upon which I have worked for years, until I have brought it out as it now is. The idea of joining the two angles of 15 deg. at their widest part, came easy enough, but the true position of the two points toward each other, and the fitting points, of all the garments in detail, kept me busy for more than ten years. To be sure, I did not work at it all the time, but on each garment I cut, I had to change this and that, either at the neck or waist of a coat or vest, or at the feet or at the waist of a pants, and the alterations I had to make afterward, and other indirect losses, such as misfits, and worse, loss of customers, cost me a fortune; but I have the satisfaction of having been able to write down and record my experience, and if it does me no good, it may save some of my fellow men the trouble it has cost me.

COMBINATION OF FROCK AND SACK.

Diagrams I, II and III are the same, and are made over the same pattern. Dia. I represents the center of the back running parallel to the center of front, as it must be when the garment is on the body. Back and sidepiece are connected at the hollow of the waist, within a square of 20½ numbers. The back’s position, running parallel to the center of the back of the body, requires a spring over the seat and hip, starting at the hollow of the waist. Here it will be noticed that that square running parallel to the back of the body, meets the seat, and must spread apart to cover the seat, and the inserted spring furnishes the cloth required over the seat and hips. But what is put on behind must be taken off in front, for the run of the square brings it outside of the body in front of the waist, and must be reduced 15 deg. from the front of waist down, and the bottom of the front must be lengthened 15 deg. in order to make it level. If the center of the front and the center of the back be of any value as a base, then the base lines must run parallel to the front and back, or at least they must be so considered in order to obtain the amount which gores and wedges may require, or the location of the same.

In Dia. II we find the fore part in the same position as in Dia. I.; and, in fact, all fore parts are in the same position, and whatever change is seen is caused by the turning of the sidepiece or back, or both. But the back and sidepieces have been changed, and in place of their being 15 deg. out of plumb, we find them on a plumb line resting at the shoulder blade, and thence straight downward. Thus turning the back base 15 deg. will cause the original square of 20 to form an angle of 15 deg., or a curved line of 20½ numbers, which is the position of Dia. II. This diagram represents an angle of 15 deg. at such a width that it will cover the whole body, seams included, for a man’s coat.

In order to find the width, the starting point for a garment is at a point where the angle of 15 deg. has a width of 17½, as in Dia. XIII. Hence the square of 17½ within the angle of 15 deg. That angle of 15 deg. represents a sheet wound around the body, which body we must here consider without arms. Said sheet closes in at the breast and shoulder blade, and at the side of the thigh and the back of the seat. In this position the back of the waist must be reduced by one or two gores, as on a sack or a frock coat.

Now let me say, that the theory of deducting the actual waist measure from the breast measure, and thereby finding the amount of gores to be cut out in the back of the waist, is a delusion, because the space which is taken up by that sheet at and around the waist is never measured. It so happens that the angle of 15 deg. requires a reduction of about 2 in. in all at the back of the waist, which is equal to 2 in. less than half breast. But the angle of 15 deg. is always the same, while the waist proportion changes. But suppose that the actual waist measure is as much as, or more than, the breast measure. Would not that same sheet, wound around such a form, require a reduction in the back? By using two bases in front, as the front base of the square of 20 and the front base of the square of 17½, which are just 15 deg. apart, we are able to shift the back from one base to the other—not to uncertain points, but just 15 deg.

The general plan upon which this book treats, is to work from the corner of a square, or from the centre of a circle, or from certain other angles, such as 7½ deg., 15 deg., 45 deg., 135 deg., etc. Dia. III is made for a purpose. It is likewise drawn within the angle of 15 deg., and is intended to represent the difference between sack and frock coats. Dia. II is arranged with a view to cutting purposes, for all parts are separate on a smooth surface, not in their natural position; but, by the aid of science, we know just how much they are out of their natural positions. Dia. III has the sidepiece changed, so that it laps with the forepart at the waist seam. In so turning the sidepiece down, the back will necessarily come along, and we find that it has shortened one-half of a number, on line 9 over the front. By turning the sidepiece in at the waist, the top of the back sidepiece seam falls backward one-half, thus making the square 18 for a three-seamed sack, as it is for a five-seamed frock.

The top of the sidepiece and back lap two seams, as they must be when sewed up, and the armholes are the same for both sack and frock coats. The lap of the sidepiece and forepart, and the lap of the bottom of the sidepiece and top of the back skirt, are explained as follows: A sack coat is wider at the back of the waist and runs down straighter than a frock. A straight line from the shoulder blade down to the seat is shorter than a line running down closer and in a greater curve toward the body. The circumference which the sack coat occupies at the back of waist is larger than that of a frock. The closer the garment fits to the body of the back the narrower it must become, and at the same time it must become longer.

Now, the position of the sidepiece in Dia. III just furnishes that extra length required, as well as the greater reduction in width. When the sidepiece is drawn even with the forepart at the waist seam, the lap of the sidepiece and the top of the skirt behind will crawl inward to the more hollow part of the waist, and the extra length is thereby taken up. The spring is not used in a sack, neither is the larger gore between the back and front; but both are omitted and a gore of about 1 in. is cut out, as for a sack, thus obtaining the larger width for the shorter back. The frock coat back has lost ¾ in length, hence the frock coat back on Dia. III is 14¼, while the sack coat back is only 13½, for the reason that it is broader at the junction with line 9 over the front. When both backs are thrown down and into a square of 20½, or in the shape of Dia. I, the frock coat back reaches line 9 at a depth of 14¼, and the sack coat back reaches line 9 at a depth of 13½, but actually both have the same length from O. The extra length of the frock coat back and sidepiece above the bottom of the armhole is really a delusion, but the extra length of the sidepiece at the waist and at the back is used up, while the closer frock coat waist crawls more inward to the body.

Compare Article on “_Narrow and Broad Backs_.” For illustration, let us suppose we have before us a man with a well-fitting sack,—not one that fits skin-tight at the waist and spreads out below over the seat, but one that is just what the ideal sack should be, which is loose, yet showing the outlines of the form. Say we button it in front, and draw over the waist a tape-line. We shall find that the more we draw it together the looser and wider it will appear to be; and the bottom of the back will become too short, because the line closer to the body requires more length, which in this case will be drawn up from the bottom. It shows too much width, because the circle closest to the body requires less of it. But more of this will be said in the article on “Erect Forms.”

For particulars, it should be observed that Dia. III is in a square of 18, and that Dia. VIII, or the three-seamed sack, is in the same square. A three-seamed sack would naturally be two seams less in the square than a five-seamed frock, which would bring the square for a three-seamed sack to 17½. But the turning of the sidepiece causes the square to enlarge ½, hence the square of a three-seamed sack is the same as on a five-seamed frock, or 20½ numbers. See Dia. VIII B.

OVERCOATS.

FROCK, THREE AND FIVE-SEAMED SACKS.

(SEE DIA. X AND Xa.)