A Pair of Overalls

August 1st, 2012

In the lists of articles of clothing which frequently appear in War Department correspondence there is an item which has a deceptively familiar name: overalls. Inventories list woolen and linen overalls for the troops, commanders write requesting additional overalls for their corps. Overalls were an important part of the suits of clothing issued to soldiers, but they did not in any way resemble the straps-over-the-shoulder coveralls people wear today.

Overalls were, very simply, trousers with a gaiter, which covered the top of the shoe. Unlike breeches, which only went to the knee, overalls covered the full length of the leg. The bottom of the leg flared out into the gaiter, with buttons on the flare for a tighter fit around the foot and sometimes a strap which went under the foot to keep the bottom of the pants from pulling up.

A 1784 engraving shows two American soldiers, a rifleman and an infantryman, in their uniforms. Both are wearing overalls, and the engraving clearly shows the straps under the boot as well as the buttons on the side.

General Washington’s New Uniform

December 1st, 2011

In late January 1799, George Washington, Commander in Chief of the Armies, wrote to James McHenry, Secretary of War, to discuss an important topic: his new uniform.

New regulations on the Uniform for the Army of the United States had been released earlier that month, approved by McHenry and President Adams. The commander in chief was to wear the following uniform: “a blue coat, with yellow buttons, and gold epaulets, each having three silver stars, with lining, cape and cuffs, of buff…. The coat to be without lappels [sic], and embroidered on the cape and cuffs and pockets.”

Washington wrote McHenry to discuss the execution of this new uniform, particularly the embroidery. The regulations specified that the waistcoat should be buff, but not whether it should be embroidered in the same manner as the coat; Washington worried that an embroidered coat with an unadorned waistcoat might give “a disjointed, and awkward, appearance.” In addition, he expressed his preference for a “light & neat” embroidery over something more ornate.

The general was also interested in the other details. He gave his opinion on the proper size of an eagle for the center of the cockade, as well as its appearance, and requested that McHenry look for a few cockades – “tasty” but “not whimsically foolish” – to send down to Virginia. There was also the question of the style of cuffs and pockets: would they be slashed or not?

Why did Washington make the effort to write to McHenry? One reason is that both McHenry and Washington’s tailor, James McAlpin, were in Philadelphia. Washington enclosed an unsealed letter to McAlpin in the one to McHenry, so that the Secretary of War could review it and pass it along if he felt it described the uniform properly. Presumably McHenry was also expected to tell McAlpin, not Washington, the preferred style of cuffs and pockets.

Washington was also very aware of the importance of a proper appearance. In the letter to McHenry he acknowledged that embroidery and cuffs may seem like “trifling matters” but it was important that the attempt at a new uniform for the Army “should take a right direction,” setting the proper example from the highest rank at the very beginning. Well-executed uniforms provided a sense of unity to the troops, and gave the army a professional appearance. If the clothes make the man, the uniform makes the army.