(SEE DIA. X AND Xa.)
The breast measure is to be taken over the undercoat, but close. The
difference between an undercoat and an overcoat is just as much as the
difference between a vest and an undercoat, and though all three garments
pass over the same surface, and must fit the same body, each one has a
different function to perform, and each of them is used for a different
purpose. In comparing the vest and frock coat on the angle of 15 deg.,
we find that the vest has a gore under the arm at line 17½ of say 3¼,
while the frock undercoat has only about 2 numbers cut out in both gores,
and, besides, the waist seam of the frock is to be stretched from ½ to ¾
inches—all of which will make the half frock coat about 2 in. larger over
the hips than the vest. The frock overcoat requires the full angle of 15
deg. at the under arm cut and at line 17½, and a trifle lap at line 20.
Besides, there may be a trifle more width allowed in the center of the
back as well as in the gore between the sidepiece and back, say from ¼ to
⅜ at each point, all of which constitutes the difference at the side and
back of waist between the vest, undercoat and overcoat. As long as the
front of the overcoat falls straight downward ½ inch more or less such
width amounts to very little, because the coat being open in front the
buttons may be set forward or backward. If coats were open behind there
would never be any trouble to fit the back, but the cutter’s vexation
would then be found in front.
Again, in comparing the vest, under and overcoats at the neck, we find
another distinct difference. While the shoulder for a vest may be fitted
with the angle of 135 deg., and could be produced equally as well without
any shoulder seam, the undercoat requires say ½ inch spring toward the
neck. The curving of the forepart at the shoulder seam is done to throw
roundness toward the shoulder blade, for which purpose the shoulder seam
is thrown backward at the arm. If the shoulder seam was located at the
top of the shoulder, or where a vest shoulder seam is located, then that
seam would admit of no curve, but would necessarily be cut straight, or
with a spring toward the neck.
When a vest is finished, the collar will create a spring at the side of
the neck, say about 1 in. on each side, which spring is required to turn
upward and let the neck pass through. At and around the neck, there is
perhaps a tie and a shirt collar, all of which is under the vest, and
all require about ¾ spring on each side. Now, when an undercoat is worn
over that vest and anything that is under it at the neck, it follows that
the coat requires _at least_ the same spring, and it must be produced
as shown in the diagrams, and when we proceed further, and put on an
overcoat over the undercoat, we must again make our provision for a
spring at the side of the neck, particularly so when we know that the
undercoat collar takes its full share of extra bulk at and around the
neck.
The height or the top of back of the different garments must also
be observed. While the top of a vest back is placed at three and
three-fourths, the top of an undercoat back stands at three to three and
a quarter, and the top of an overcoat back is at two and three-fourths to
two and a half. The undercoat must cover the vest, say by at least half
an inch, and the overcoat must cover the undercoat the same distance, and
the nearer a garment comes to the neck the more spring is required at the
side of the neck. No spring is required at the back of the neck, but at
the side, and is put in by the aid of the shoulder seam, or by stretching
the sides of the neck.
The foregoing descriptions correspond with the body, but they will amount
to nothing if we destroy the relative balance of the front and bottom
of the armhole. It is true all coats can be cut without that spring, by
moving the fore part downward on the base until the two points meet; but
by so doing all other points are changed, and new points will form. And
while it is true that the new position of the points and parts will fit
the same, it is equally true that the balance of the armhole and sleeve
will also be destroyed, at least it will become necessary to readjust
them, when each garment will then have a balance of its own. The purpose
herein intended is to harmonize coats and vests on one base, and simply
make the changes for each garment according to the requirements of the
body at each particular point, and in all cases maintain the angle of 135
deg. and the balance of the armhole.
By saying that the balance of the armhole must be retained, I do not mean
that the overcoat armhole must be cut just like that of the undercoat;
on the contrary, an overcoat requires an armhole that is cut deeper
as well as more forward. Cutting the armhole deeper, or more forward,
does not destroy its balance as long as the sleeve follows. My reason
why the armhole of an overcoat must be cut deeper and more forward, and
consequently larger, than what will be obtained by a scale say 2 in.
larger than the undercoat, is this: The armhole of an undercoat is always
larger than the arm itself, and the body of the undercoat is also cut
larger than the body itself, even over the vest. Undercoats are made up
the heaviest at and around the armhole, and if any padding or wadding
is put in, it is at the armholes and shoulders. All of which requires
the overcoat armhole to be larger in proportion than the difference
as obtained between the measure over the vest and over the undercoat.
Besides, an overcoat to be comfortable must be looser in comparison with
the undercoat—not only in the arms, but over the hips and seat. We may
cut our armholes as large as we please, but if the coat has not enough
cloth over the hips and seat the front of the armhole will be drawn
backward, and it will strike the arm and cut it; and behind and below
the arm, the back will appear too long and too wide, all of which will
correct itself, if more width is given over the hips and seat. After
all other parts are properly balanced, the overcoat armhole ought to be
from ¼ to ⅜ deeper and more forward than that given by the scale for the
undercoat.
In this connection I will repeat, that for the undercoat the normal form
may have the armhole 2 seams back of the angle of 45 deg., and at the
bottom the armhole may be from ⅝ to 1 in. above lines 9 and 11¼. The
overcoat requires about ½ inch more, forward and downward, and in all
cases the sleeve must follow by striking a line for the sleeve base 2
seams in front of the armhole, without disturbing the center of the back
sleeve seam at 8.
All this must be observed in cutting any under or overcoat, because as
soon as the armhole is cut forward the sleeve must follow in width, which
must be started at the highest point of the top sleeve, and allowing all
around in front. All calculations backward as to the center of the sleeve
behind must be made from the same point for all, and which point is a
right angle from the center of the back through the point of the angle
of 135 deg.,—for all of which further explanation will be found in the
Article on “Armhole and Sleeves.”
To recapitulate: A three-seamed overcoat can be cut over a three-seamed
under sack, and two sizes larger, by the following changes: Top of back
½ higher; back ½ shorter, over the blade; armhole ½ more forward and ½
lower; ½ allowance at the front sleeve seam to follow the armhole; ¼ to ⅜
more spring toward the neck in the shoulder seam. At the center of back 1
inch more spring over the seat, and 1 inch more spring over the seat in
the side seam, which must be started pretty well up, so that the hollow
of waist receives about ½ inch.
In Dia. X the front of the neck is placed at 4, resting on the front line
of the angle of 135 deg., which is as low and as far forward as it ought
to be made for a short roll. Overcoats which are intended to button clear
up, should have that point ½ higher and ½ backward, and the same may
be said for the long roll. A long roll requires a smaller lapel, but a
larger gore. Reducing the top of the front by a gore under the lapel will
make a far better front than if the top of the front edge is shaved off
that much, because it produces an oval shape to the breast, and takes up
the surplus cloth in the center of the front—and more so on an overcoat
where the front may lap the distance of 3 inches.
To produce a three-seamed over sack for a larger or fuller waist, allow
say 1 in. more at line 20 and at the side seam, starting somewhere
below lines 9 and 13½ and above line 15; but this allowance should not
be more at the bottom than at the seat. It is not required, however,
behind, or in the side seam, but more forward, and in order to throw that
allowance of an inch forward to the side of the waist, the side seam of
the forepart must be stretched perhaps ⅜ of an inch at the hollow of the
waist and above, because stretching below the waist would do no good,
as the width must be thrown to the waist and hip. A three-seamed over
sack can be very much improved by judicious stretching, as well as by
shrinking, for the reason that the forepart is a very large sheet, and if
made up flat will never fit the outlines of a man. At least, if all parts
are first properly stretched or shrunk a better result can be obtained
than if made up flat. For instance, the front edge will never lap over
the center of the body 3 or 4 in., and button smoothly, if it be not
drawn in at least 1 in. all the way across the chest, unless the surplus
length is drawn upward and balanced by a gore under the lapel. Now,
although a three-seamed over sack can be made, I know that a five-seamed
one can be made better. Cutters and tailors may try ever so long to
bring a three-seamed overcoat correctly to the body without stretching
or shrinking some parts, but they will never succeed as well as with a
five-seamed one, and I refer you to Dia. X.
It must be admitted that a great deal of the spread of the body is
sidewise over the hips, or say in the middle of the forepart. On a
three-seamed garment, this must be put on either in front or at the side
seam, but on a five-seamed one this can be put just where it belongs,
by enlarging the square and cutting the surplus width out again under
the arm as the fifth seam. By so doing, the lap of the forepart and back
over the seat of a three-seamed garment is thrown sidewise, and the
back and sidepiece of the five-seamed one just meet at the largest part
of the seat. All other points are the same in either the three or the
five-seamed garment, except the length of back above the armscye, which
must be shortened ½ inch on a five-seamer, and the side seam stretched ½
upward, which stretching upward will re-balance the length of back again
over the shoulder blades.
The height of back, from line 9 upward, should be a trifle shorter on
all overcoats than on undercoats. All overcoats should be cut so that
they lean more toward the erect form, and also toward a large-waisted
form. It is a fact, which should be well understood by cutters, that a
good-fitting overcoat for the normal form will fit well, as an undercoat
for the large-waisted form, because a large waist requires a shorter
back, and again, the waist of an overcoat cannot be cut according to a
waist measure with the tape drawn tightly over the undercoat, and as
closely as the body will allow it to be drawn together, but the waist
measure must be taken over the undercoat, as loosely as it hangs on the
body, and this represents a large waist. If an overcoat be buttoned up,
it must just pass around the undercoat as it hangs loose at the waist,
and as soon as the overcoat is compelled to draw the undercoat together
at the waist, it will be too tight for the purpose.
Dia. X is intended for a loose coat, and if a close fit be desired, the
measure must be taken very close, and for such, a loose measure over the
vest may be used, and in no case should a reduction be made in one place
unless for an abnormal form. Dia. X is purposely made large, but it will
hang well on three or four different sizes, or on anybody who can put it
on, and is not of the odd forms. Furthermore, it will produce an overcoat
which goes on, or comes off almost by itself, and which will not require
the whole household to help to pull it on or off.
Dia. Xa is intended for a closer fit, but I will here warn trying to make
overcoats fit very closely, for more are spoiled in the attempt than
are made better. It is without gore under the roll, and may be used for
a soft roll, either long or short. Being without gore under the lapel
requires the coat drawn in pretty well over the front. It may be cut
with a gore, by which surplus cloth may be drawn upward from the center
of front, providing the amount used up for the gore is again allowed in
front.
I will again repeat that Dia. X is for an erect form, and will cut
a large but good-hanging coat. If this diagram be used for a more
forward-leaning form, the spring in the center of the back may be reduced
to 1¼ at line 30, starting at line 17½. All overcoats are the better off
by having plenty spring over the seat, and if there be too much spring,
it is easy to sew it in. Dia. Xa will be found to represent an overcoat
for a more forward-leaning form, but not for the stooping form. The neck
is cut pretty well upward, and besides the three-eighths spring at the
shoulder seam, the side of the neck must be stretched at least ⅜ to ½
inch on each side, or else the collar will be too tight. Stretching the
side of the neck, as directed in this work, requires that the shoulders
at and around the side of the neck must be made up thin, and that all
canvas and all padding must be cut away gradually, so that the facing
can be stretched also. Holding the collar full, and without stretching
the neck, or working the shoulders according to the shape of the body,
may result in a fit, but one coatmaker may put life in that fit, while
another makes the fit dead, or flat, or stale, or whatever it may be
called.
Now a word about the bottom of the back. It may look odd to some cutters
to see the bottom of the back shorter behind than at the side; but the
whole bottom of Dia. X may be considered correct for the normal form, and
it is the same in Dia. II. The shortness behind of any back is caused by
the back being laid out in such a position that nothing is hollowed out
at the waist behind, but a spring thrown outside of the center over the
seat. The backs are laid out in such a position, because the armhole and
the sleeve can not be connected, as they are, on either Dia. VII or X,
in any other way. But though, most all Fashion Reports have the backs
hollowed out behind, and at the hollow of the waist; still I claim that
it is a natural way, to lay out the upper parts of the backs on straight
lines. When we observe the run of the center of the back, and when a coat
fits the body well, we find that it runs down straight from the shoulder
blade, to the hollow of the waist, no matter on what lines, or bases
such backs are cut, but below the hollow of the waist, the back comes in
contact with the seat and must be sprung out gradually.
To run a line for the center of the back inside of the square, can be
done with the same result, but all other points must change, and it would
show that the draft does not conform to the natural run of the body,
which is flat behind and on straight lines. Now, right here, it might
be observed by some that the seat and the shoulder blades are on about
the same line, and which line may be called a plumb line, and that the
back should be hollow at the waist and not come outside of that plumb
line. If we observe the Fashion Reports we come to the conclusion that
all diagrams are based upon that idea, and for more than twenty years
I have labored under the same delusion. If I claim that the back of a
coat runs straight down behind, I do not mean it to run straight down
over the seat, like a shirt, but to run straight down from the shoulder
blades to the hollow of the waist, which is about 15 deg. from a plumb
line. Consequently the back of the seat is outside of that line, and the
natural run of the coat back is outside of that base, but may be divided
between the center of the back and the sidepiece of a frock coat, and
also partly between the center of the back and the side of the back on a
sack.
It is true that in Fig. II the plumb line as a base for the angle of 15
deg. is outside the body of the seat, but when the coat is on the body,
the gores which are cut sidewise cause the back to be turned about 15
deg., running along with the body from the shoulder blades to the hollow
of the waist, which is well illustrated in Dia. I.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]