At the present time, the style of pants is loose at the knee, tapering
smaller toward the bottom. Pants which are cut wide at the knee must
start with extra width at the seat line, and said extra width must be
well divided on both seams. All pants must fit the same at the seat line
and above, and fashionable width at the knee must be started from the
seat line downward. Dia. XIX represents a pants of the present style, and
is made over a pattern of 38 seat, actual waist measure 33, and waist
made up 34½; about 19½ knee, 18 bottom, and is for a rather small waist.
Dia. XX represents a large waist, of about 50 inches, made up; but actual
waist measure 47, and seat measure 46 inches; knee 22½, bottom 20½.
For extremely large waists, Dia. XX may be used, and that extra width
allowed equal in front and on the side. On all large waists, the seat
measure must be taken close, and the fork cut accordingly, no matter what
the hip and the waist measure may be. The seat measure is the standard
for the scale, and the large waist must be fitted according to the
measure, the same as the length of the legs, or the width of the knee.
Dia. XXI represents a pants of 39 seat, with a very high waist. The top
of waist is made up 37 inches, but at the hollow of the waist it is only
36 inches.
The angle of 7½ deg. has the proper width for all pants, at the seat
line, and in no case is a reduction, or an addition required there. Above
the seat line, the hip and waist must be made according to the measure,
and below, it must be made according to style and measure. As to the top
of the side, it may be proper to remark here, that if the top of the side
is too small for any pants, the fork balance will be destroyed, because
the sides of the body will draw the fork upward, and will cause it to
cut the crotch somewhere. The waist is one continuous surface all around
and may feel tight all around, but if the crotch is pulled up by a small
waist at the top of side, that will saw the crotch on one spot. Therefore
I will repeat the true balance for the waist, on the angle of 7½ deg.
Reduce the angle of 7½ deg.—from 6¾ upward, 15 deg. for back slope—from
the top of the center line of the angle of 10 deg. go forward ⅛ of whole
waist circumference, close measure; cut a gore of 1 inch in the center
of the back; measure from the front to the side and from the back to the
side, and if that gives too much waist, cut another small gore between
the forepart and the back. But if the waist requires more than that,
divide the addition required into 3 parts, and place 2 parts at the sides
and 1 part in front. If the waist is higher than ¼ whole seat measure,
run the gore in the back, out to nothing on top, as in Dia. XXI, and the
higher the waist is cut upward the more it must be cut like Dia. XIII,
both at the side and at the front. Working pants with the front cut clear
up to the neck, must have the upper part of the front cut like Dia. XIII,
that is, sloped backward 15 deg. from the waist.
Dia. XX has 2 numbers thrown out in front and top of waist, and at line
8 it is 1⅞ while the double dress fork point has 4¼, which produces a
good open cut for such pants. The point of the fork may be made ½ inch
more or less for the same person, providing allowance or reduction at
the point of the fork is run up and down, running out about 5 inches
above the fork, and at, or below the knee. I know it is contended that
a large-waisted form requires a larger fork in proportion to the seat
measure, but this is not the case, as long as the hips and sides of waist
have sufficient cloth. The thigh may grow in proportion to a larger seat,
but it does not grow in proportion to a larger waist. Large-waisted
persons have small seats in proportion to the normal form, and the
proportion of the scale of the seat measure is large enough for all
forms. That same result may be observed at the knee, and at the bottom;
and to better express my ideas, I will say something about the diameter
of the thigh, as well as the diameter of the knee and the ankle.
For the purpose of cutting pants, the leg may be considered a straight
and round pole, but tapering at the lower end to about ½ of what it is
on top. The thigh can be covered and fitted for modern pants, all seams
included, if we allow it 4 times its diameter, close measure of the
thigh, without compressing it. The circumference of a circle is equal
to three and one thousand four hundred and sixteen ten thousandths
(3.1416) times its diameter, which is so near to 3½ that we may call it
so, at least for the purpose of cutting and fitting pants. Now, if 3½
diameters of the thigh will constitute the circle for the thigh, then
that circle will fit the thigh skin tight, but if we allow 4 diameters,
we have enough cloth to sew seams and a few inches beside for straddle
and general looseness. If the diameter of the thigh were only 1 inch, 4
diameters, or 4 inches, would not give cloth enough to go all around,
after 1 inch is used up for seams.
In cutting pants, we may say that a seat size of 36 inches is a medium
size; and for the purpose of fitting such a thigh with a modern pants, we
will call its actual diameter 6 inches; and its skin-tight circumference
just 21 inches, and close investigation will show that this is a fair
average. If we give such a pants 4 times 6 inches, and deduct 1 inch for
all seams, we have 23 inches left to cover the thigh, which only measures
21 inches, and this would be plenty for the undress side. I do not say
that a close-fitting undress side can not stand more than this, but I say
it should have that much, and that 1 to 1½ inches more, evenly divided,
will not make it too large for a fit, at least not for the present
conception of a fit.
At the side of thigh, the angle of 7½ deg. is just ¼ of the whole net
seat measure, which may be taken for a medium loose leg, but for a quite
close fit, ⅛ to ¼ inch may be deducted, and for a quite loose fit,
anything may be allowed there, which will make a nice slope for the
seams. For a size 36 the angle of 2½ deg. has a width of 3 inches at the
fork, and the double angle of 10 deg. requires double the amount of 4
times 3 inches, making in all 24 inches, to which is added 1¼ inches for
the undress side, for extra straddle, and the bridge from one leg to the
other, making it 13¼ inches in all for the half undress side.
The above calculation is here given for the purpose of showing how close
the diameter and the circumference of the thigh correspond to the angle
of 7½ deg. as used in this work. It also shows that a larger thigh, say
of 7 inches diameter, produces more cloth in proportion to a smaller
thigh of say 5 inches diameter, and that the addition of 2½ inches to
each and all half seat measures will give a good balance for all sizes.
But for reasons explained elsewhere, boys should have plenty fork, and
when we come below size 28, we should give all that is consistent with a
very open cut of the fork. The largest sizes may be cut according to the
scale and to Dia. XX.
At the knee the same proportion of 4 diameters will hold good. Let us
accept the diameter of the knee of a seat size of 36 as 4½ in., and
allowing 4 times 4½ in., we have 18 in., from which is to be taken off 1
in. for seams, and we have 17 in. left, which is enough to cover the leg.
But we find that for a 30 size the knee would not be large enough for the
purpose, and an addition must be made according to the measure, and the
contrary is the case on larger sizes, as shown in Dia. XX.
At the bottoms we find the same calculation to be true, for if we take
the diameter of the ankle to be 3 in. for size 36, the 4 times 3 in.
will give us 12 in., and after 1 in. is used up for seams, we have about
the actual circumference of the bare ankle, and whatever boot, style or
notion requires more, is allowed equally on both sides, except on sailor
pants, which must have more on the outside, and the inside must have a
reasonable allowance only.
Dia. XIX is made from a pattern of 38 seat size, and 33 actual waist
measure, but the waist made up will be 34½ to 35 in., and which may be
called a normal waist. The back seam must be cut on a gentle curve on
and over the seat lines, because the curved edge over the seat seam will
become straight while winding around the seat. That portion of the side
seam between the calf and the seat line, must be regulated according to
the measure of the knee. Whenever the style requires a large knee, the
side of the thigh must have more width, starting at the seat line and
running down to below the knee, so that it can spread in such a manner
that both front and back will possess a smooth even slope. Extra width
there will not show, but will hang there as though the body would fill it
out. When a person assumes a sitting posture the width from the outside
will go backward just as easily as the width from the inseam will go
backward, and the extra width will not interfere with the side of the
thigh; but extra width at the back curve, at line 8, will do harm,—in
fact it will interfere with the seat, unless it can be spread also.
To be successful in cutting pants, a cutter must be able to produce a
close-fitting one, and when he can do that he must be able to use the
close-fitting pants as a base for a loose-fitting one without losing the
balance. After a cutter can do this he is not yet done, for then comes
those tasty touches, which consist in his ability to harmonize thigh and
knee and bottom for each particular customer, and which cannot be learned
from the books, but must gradually come to him through experience and
attention to business.
A narrow leg must be shaped according to the shape of the knee, and
should be held a trifle full over the knee, say about 4 in. above and 4
in. below the center; but that “fulling” must be equal on both sides and
carefully notched, so that the maker cannot throw the leg out of shape.
The best way to notch the seams is to notch equally about 5 in. above and
the same distance below the knee, and then measure down equally to within
5 or 6 in. of the bottom, and notch again. Within these 5 or 6 in. above
the bottom all stretching of the side of the fore part must be done for
spring-bottom pants. These may seem quite too many trifles to attend to,
but a few notches are soon made, and if a leg twists it will perhaps take
hours to alter it,—often it will become worse in altering. A small leg
should also have a trifle curve or spread at the outside seam, over the
side of the calf, while the inside is perfectly straight, except what is
required for the shoe or boot or style, and a close-fitting pants must
also be stretched at the back crease line over the calf. Cutters, and
tailors as well, must study the form of the body from neck to ankle, and
their ideas must harmonize as to what that form requires.
A line may be struck anywhere on a pattern and used as a base to work
from. A line may be struck from the top of the side to the inside ankle,
and the same thing can be produced on a larger or smaller scale. But such
a line is only an imaginary base. A line to be worthy of the name “Base”
must correspond to certain angles, or certain edges or slopes of the
body, and for this reason I claim that the angles of 7½ or 15 deg. are
perfect bases for cutting pants, because they correspond to the slope of
the sides of the legs. Now, when we receive a new work, or a new diagram,
or a new pattern, from our latest fashion reports, we find a line here
on one, and a line there on the other, which they use as bases, and
both may be right; but unless they show distinctly why it is a certain
distance from one point to another, and why the lines are just so and not
otherwise, all parts and points must remain uncertain quantities with the
uninitiated when the pants is to be made either larger or smaller at the
waist or at the knee.
In using the angle of 7½ or 10 deg. for cutting pants, the base is
clearly indicated, and either line of its different divisions may be used
as a base. As a proof that the angle of 7½ deg. is a true base for all
pants, is the fact, that after the pants pattern is marked out, as in
Dia. XIX, XX and XXI, and the sweeps for notches are made from the point
of the angles, the point of the angle may be used as a pivot, and the
forepart may be thrown forward so that more back slope will be observed,
or the forepart may be thrown sidewise so that less or no back slope may
be the result; and in both cases all points will change their relation,
except the sweeps from the point. What one side loses the other side
gains. If all other points are correctly balanced it matters not how
large or how small the back slope or the fork of the pants may be made,
or where the seams are located. (See Dia. XXII and XXIII.)
If a cutter goes to the trouble to mark a line for every degree or
fraction thereof, and draw stitches in them, he will find that the legs
will fold, or can be pressed into shape, on any of these lines, and on
no other. When such a pants leg is sewed together, it may be turned in
almost any position, with or without back slope, and will always turn
from the point of the angle, though cut off at the ankles; and the sweeps
at the knee, or at other points, swept from the point of the angle, will
always fit together. And when the garment is upon the body, such sweeps
will be horizontal lines all around the form, and no horizontal line can
be produced from any other point, either by square or by sweeps.
The above reasoning ought to settle the question of back slope, which
has been the great conundrum for the last century. I have gone through a
great many tribulations in cutting pants, and other garments, and it may
be that I have killed more garments than anyone else, but I determined
to solve the question if life permitted, and I claim that I have been
rewarded. Looking back over a forty-year struggle, I feel that kind
Providence has treated me very kindly, though in disguise, by refusing to
let me succeed years ago; for in that case, I suppose, I would never have
thought of trying to discover anything better.
I will here mention one difficulty I have had to contend with, and I have
no doubt but that others have experienced the same trouble, and that
a great many more will have the same vexation after this, unless they
understand the principle of their work. Sometimes my pants turned out to
be too long, and at other times too short; and no matter how long or how
short I took the measures they would turn out to be just the opposite.
Without going into details, I will give the reasons for such defects as I
have learned to understand them.
Pants may be too long or too short without any other fault; and such must
simply be made shorter or longer. No cutter need expect to be exempt from
the necessity of such alteration, and such alteration I do not speak of
as meaning faulty pants. I speak of too long or too short pants which are
too long or too short because the misconstructed leg twists somewhere,
and produces folds or wrinkles, and consequently draws the bottom up or
down. Pants may be too long because the fork is not large enough from
some cause, and cannot be drawn up into the crotch, and must be let down
and cut off below; but such a garment will draw up at every step, and
when the wearer assumes the sitting position the bottom will crawl half
way to the knee.
Pants which have too much cloth in the front of the waist will be pulled
backward under the buckle-straps, and in so doing the whole back will
wrinkle and work downward, and will crawl under the heel at every step,
unless made quite short; while walking, each step will draw a wrinkle
from the bottom of the inner seam forward and upward to the knee. Many a
garment of this kind we see every day upon the streets of every city and
town.
Now comes the opposite. Pants which have too much back slope form extra
large seats, and consequently they can be drawn as tightly as possible
without cutting the wearer. Such must be cut extremely long at the
bottom, and it will be found that it is not much of a trick to cut two
pairs of pants for the same person of which one is to be an inch longer
than the other. Pants that are cut away too much in front and back, and
spread sidewise, will also become too short at the bottom, because in
bringing the side to the body the whole front and inner seam are laid
in wrinkles, which take up length. Such may be made long enough by
opening the side seam and giving the whole side seam at the thigh a good
stretching, extending backward and forward as far as possible.
Another cause for shortness of pants at the bottom is when the fork is
not cut deep enough, for if the point of the fork is too high for the
front and back curve, the extra height will fold up, and, of course,
being within the measure, will be missing below. In this connection it
is perhaps the proper place to point out the way in which to treat the
crotch, as regards the depth of the fork point. From the front base
line of the angle of 7½ deg., mark at 6¾ for the seat line, and square
to the side; mark lines 8 and 10, make the division of the angle of 7½
deg. on line 8 as 3 and 9 sidewise and 3 forward; then square from the
inside line of the angle of 10 deg. through 10 in front of the thigh. And
observe, that squaring through point 10 from the front line of the angle
of 10 deg., as directed in this work, will locate the fork point ½ inch
lower than if the squaring was done from the center of the angle of 10
deg. through point 10.
If the back is made 4¾ wide, the point of the back must sink about ¼ inch
lower than that square line through point 10, but a sweep from point 80
would bring all points on the same sweep. At the angle of 10 deg., the
undress fork is about ⅛ to ¼ higher than the sweep or the square line,
while the dress fork and back are about ⅜ above the sweep. All of which
must be observed in shaping the crotch.
The width of the knee should in all cases be measured, but in the absence
of a positive measurement, it should be observed that the half-seat
measure gives a good width for the knee for size 36, but size 48 is large
enough with 22 in., or 2 in. less than half seat, while size 24 requires
a knee of at least 14 in., or 2 in. more than half seat, and it should
be easy for every cutter to grade the sizes between. The same variations
must be made at the bottoms.
The points of the fork must be considered unchangeable, except for style,
and all changes, as to the backward or forward leaning waists, must be
made upward. The fact is, that the fork and the seat are the only parts
of the pants which can be obtained satisfactorily by the scale; all other
widths and all lengths must be obtained by the measure.
By observing Dia. XV it will be seen that a certain hole is cut out of a
certain sheet which the body is expected to fill out, and whenever the
front is made larger it must be made that much smaller in the back, and
_vice versa_. On top of waist, the body shifts backward and forward,
and the pants must follow, while both body and pants must be considered
stationary at the fork. Dia. XV was intended to represent a large waist,
and also a forward-leaning waist, hence the front of the body is in front
of the base, showing that the front of the pants requires additional
cloth. The position of Fig. and Dia. XV must be considered as a person
split in two from back to front, and a sheet of paper applied as shown by
the diagram.
One of the most common faults of otherwise well-fitting pants is a fold
or a crease forming at the bottom of the in-seam, and running forward and
upward to the centre of the leg in front anywhere below the knee. It may
be observed when a person stands still, or when he walks, but it becomes
worse when walking; the kink forms at every step. This monstrosity can
even be seen on the fashion plates, the publisher of which may contend
that this is a natural fault, or that it is so because of a person’s
peculiar position, or the way he walks, all of which is bosh, because
a good-fitting pants does not do that, and a customer who leaves his
order does not expect such fits, and he would not leave his order for any
price, if he were assured in advance that his pants would cut such snouts
when done.
The fact that a great many pants cut such sorrowful faces when on the
street is no excuse for any cutter to follow suit. Pants can be cut to
hang straight, for we see them right along on the street, and we may see
a nice looking pants to-morrow on a person who wore a gimlet yesterday.
Pants with the above named faults usually set straight if the wearer
spreads his legs, say about two feet at the ankles, which shows that
such pants would fit on a person who should walk in that position. If
the upper body fits, the change must be made from the crotch down, by
starting there and giving more width at the bottom of the in-seam, and
taking it off at the outside, which gives the leg a different slope, the
amount of which must depend upon the judgment of the cutter, but I will
say that one inch goes a great ways.
If a cutter is troubled with this fault, the best thing he can do is to
pin up the fold on and along the in-seam, and anywhere below the crotch,
until the leg hangs straight, then fold the pattern the same way and
change the draft accordingly. The same effect can be obtained by cutting
the pattern through at the outside. But to imitate this cutting through
on a pants which is made already, the side-seam should be opened and
both sides, back and front, pretty well stretched at and below the side
of thigh. Stretching both outsides as far over as possible is equal to
shrinking both insides. Shrinking the inside would come back again, and
make the pants too short, but if the outside is well stretched, that will
remain.
This fault may also be altered by opening the whole in-seam and by
dropping all the nicks of the forepart ¼ to ⅜ inches below those of the
back, and cutting top of back fork that much lower. Changing the sides
in a contrary way will accomplish the same thing. Dropping the forepart
in-seam ¼ inch below the back in-seam nick will throw the center of foot
at least 1 in. sidewise. My experience with such pants is this: Rip the
whole pants, every seam of it, cut a new pattern and stretch or shrink
all parts of the pants, until they conform to the pattern. It is better
to lose the making of the pants than to alter blindly and spoil the whole
of it. Pants which have faults contrary to the above description must be
altered contrary to the above alteration, all of which must be done by
a mechanic who knows his business, and one who feels an interest in the
work to be done. It takes a good tailor to be a good bushelman.
The normal form requires the height above the crotch ¼ of the whole net
seat measure, that is about 9 in. for a seat of 36, which is long enough
for the body, and for a pants that is intended to fit close at the waist.
But a great many persons require their pants higher up, and 10 or more
numbers of the scale may be used. Pants which are cut higher than ¼ net
waist measure must be sprung out on top, and on both the side seam and
on the gore, as shown in Dia. XIII, and such pants should be as large as
possible at the top, because a pants must not strike the short ribs at
the side. But for such high pants the buckle-straps should be entirely
omitted, or placed low, so as to draw at the actual hollow of the waist.
If it were not for the pockets, waist bands would be useless, and no
pants require waist bands over the back. If waist bands are cut over the
back, they should be sewed on loose over the back, especially on high
waists. A great many hold the backs full on the waist band, but this is
not good, for if the waist is to be smaller, the gore in the back may be
cut larger. Sewing on the waist band tight, is just as bad as sewing the
collar of a coat tight over the side of the neck. Where the waist band is
to be, or at least where it ought to be, the body turns larger upward and
the waist band should be loose, unless the waist is quite short.
Hip pockets are an abomination, but somehow, men want and tailors must
make them; but all such pants should be cut high in the waist in order to
bring such pockets high up, and for this reason the buckle strap should
be omitted, or they may be sewed on the outside of the hip pockets, so
that the pocket is above the strap, and the sides should be cut as in
Dia. XIII and XXI.
Some cutters require that the pants maker hold the back full on the top
of the in-seam, and others again I have seen who require the fore part
stretched, and others stretch both back and front crotch, while again
others have a stay put in the whole length of the crotch seam to keep
it from stretching, and all may be right providing the pants are cut
accordingly.
As far as this work is concerned I have adopted the middle way, and say
that the seams should be sewed up even. But here I must caution any one
not to stretch the in-seam unless he has a good reason to do so. The
in-seam stretches so much easier than the outside seam, and if stretched,
without it is required, throws the pants legs into a different
direction; that is, too far apart at the bottom, and such pants will only
fit when the person spreads his legs apart, say 10 or 12 in., or if he
stands on one leg only. Such pants usually throw a fold from the instep,
up and forward, to the knee at every step, and there are plenty such
pants seen all over the country.
The ready-made clothing manufacturers are always up to the times, and
catch on to such things, and to-day we see a great many ready-made pants
with a stay tape in the in-seam.
Some of these days pants will again be made with welted side seam, which
double stitching will make the outside stiff and draw that seam together,
while the in-seam stretches, and the above fault will show still worse.
This is one of the points which should be studied carefully by every
cutter and tailor, but which is not considered by a great many, hence by
observing the “hang” of pants on persons on any street in any city, we
find only a few perfect hanging pants, while the great majority flap in
all directions. There are certainly more mis-fitting pants to be observed
than any other garment. I consider the cause of it in the greater length
of the parts of pants, and also in the fact that they are sewed up all
around. A frock coat has a chance to go backward or forward by an open
front and open back skirt, without showing wrinkles, but pants are sewed
up all around, and the least misconstruction will show. But there is
another reason. The waist and skirt of a coat is all outside of the body,
while the pants may be said to have a partition in the shape of a crotch
seam, and which crotch seam is affected by every step. I do not like the
idea of putting a stay tape in the crotch seams, because all such seams
should be made up thin and neat, and again, pants makers may go to the
other extreme and draw the stay too close.
If pants seem to have the above described faults, I would advise cutters
to give the inside of the bottom ⅝ more on the double, that is, locating
the center of heel and foot ⅝ more toward the inside without disturbing
the angle of 10 deg. This taking off at the outside and putting it on the
inside must start at the thigh, and amounts to about ½ at the knee, than
what it is at the bottom.
In cutting and making pants, or any other garment, a cutter must know
whom he is trying to fit, and for what occupation the garment is to be
used. It wants to be considered as to whether the person mostly stands or
sits. A person who wants a suit for a wedding requires a different thing
entirely than a person who hitches up horses or who works in the field,
or digs in a trench. A tailor requires a larger pants waist than a clerk,
and any tailor who ignores this fact is mostly found squatting down with
the top button of his pants open. Now, if a person who writes all day
wants to sit down comfortable when he works he must have a pants which is
loose, and even too loose when he stands or walks, but that can not be
helped, and a customer should be so told when he orders his pants, and
he can have his choice. But it must be observed that persons who sit a
good deal and want a loose waist require the allowance in front and side
and the back slope should be made liberally large, in order to obtain
a longer seat, even if the seat shows surplus cloth when standing. A
long back slope prevents the pants from pulling up from the bottom, when
sitting down, and we find that pants which fit very neat at the seat when
standing, are more apt to crawl up when the person sits down, than such
pants which show surplus length of seat when standing. But right here let
me warn of an error into which many cutters fall:
A pants cut on certain lines or angles, like Dia. XIX, XX and XXI,
requires a certain amount for fork and a certain amount for back slope,
or length for the seat. Each has a certain function to perform. Not
enough fork, and too much back slope, will allow a man to wear such a
pants, but the seat will wrinkle too much. Contrary, too much fork may be
drawn backward to supply a short seat, but such a pants will never hang
or feel comfortable, unless the surplus, whatever or wherever it is, is
thrown to where it is wanted by stretching certain parts, as described
elsewhere. The same may be said about allowing cloth for a large waist,
which requires a certain part to be allowed in front and a certain part
at the top of side. Surplus cloth on the top of side, which ought to be
in front, will be thrown forward, and form a fold, starting at the side
of thigh, running forward, and when a person sits down, he will have his
whole lap full of cloth.
Such are points which nobody will ever be able to teach to a certainty,
or to learn from the books. All that can be done by a teacher is to
point out causes and effects and approximate amounts for alteration; and
a cutter must use his brains to pass judgment as to the amount taken
off here, and given there, in each individual case, and that the ever
varying forms of men will require an ever watchful cutter to fit it
with such garments as a changeable fashion from time to time requires.
Learning rules or going to cutting schools and hanging up a diploma near
the cutting board don’t make successful cutters. After receiving certain
instructions, a cutter must get the “_right hang_” of it by experience,
and if he is a “_natural born_” cutter, he can use a horse shoe or a boot
jack for his rule, and he will succeed as easily as a fish learns to
swim, but if he is not a natural born cutter, or it may be better said, a
natural born Fitter, he must acquire the “_Art_” by hard study.
[Illustration]