If You Step on a Man’s Corns He Will Howl.
This seems to be the case with the editor of the AMERICAN
TAILOR. The November number, 1886, of that journal contains
over a column of red hot shot against our townsman, G. F.
Hertzer, for having an opinion of his own, and claiming that
he has spent more “brains” over the science of gentlemen’s and
boys’ garment cutting than any other cutter. If the AMERICAN
TAILOR wants to prove that G. F. Hertzer is “silly” and with
“not much brains left,” he ought to come out and accept his
challenge for a cutting match, and beat him on his own ground.
Ridiculing him will not amount to anything as long as Mr.
Hertzer turns out such nice fitting garments as he does at
present.
A copy of which was sent to the editor of the AMERICAN TAILOR, and later
I have enclosed a clipping of it, in every letter which I have sent to
that office, but the editor being so far above my intellectual level,
never answered, so far as I know.
Now I have a Christian spirit in me, even if I do not come up to be a
good Christian, for it is my misfortune to be always below the level, but
having received enough slaps to make one cheek sore, I do now, as a true
Christian, offer the other side, by asking more questions.
1st. Why did you use a poor frock coat pattern, for illustration, as you
indicate, by saying: “If a cutter drafts a sack as we explained by a poor
frock coat pattern,” etc.?
2d. Will not the diagram on page 77 in the October number of 1886, to
which I alluded, produce the half sack coat nearly ½ inch larger than the
frock, by sewing one seam less on the sack?
3d. Will not the sack coat armhole be nearly ½ inch longer over the back
for the same cause?
4th. Will not the whole side of the back of the sack coat be nearly ½
inch longer than the frock for the same reason again?
[Illustration: SEAMLESS BODY.
The coat, as represented by the above front and back views, I have
on hand and intend to keep it, and anyone can examine it and satisfy
himself that it is not misrepresented. My intention of making it, and
representing it in this book, was to illustrate what a hot iron and a
skilfull workman can do with a straight piece of woolen.]
5th. Will not nearly ½ inch more width, and nearly ½ inch more length, in
a sack coat back, produce the sack coat too large over the blade?
6th. Will not the extra length of nearly ½ inch in the sack back armhole
produce too much under sleeve behind?
7th. Must not all armholes of both frock and sack coats be the same, if
one is to fit as good as the other?
8th. When was Miss Scye born? In what dictionary did she live in 1886?
Where is her headquarters now? Is she single, or is she married to Mr.
Arm?
NOTE.—Fig. I and Fig. and Dia. XV, and Dia. II, X, XIV, XV,
XIX, XX, XXI, XXII, XXIII, were drawn and finished in ink by
myself, and they are in my own writing. All others were made
by regular artists, as they claimed to be, after my pencil
drawings. But the above mentioned had so many mistakes that
I had to throw them away and make new drawings. All Dia. in
the Supplement are my own drawing. It may be that my lines
and figures are not so nicely drawn, but I know that they are
correct and that they are plain. It may also be, that in the
opinion of some, I have drawn too many lines and put on too
many numbers, but this book is not written for professors
alone, but for students and new beginners in cutting, as well
as for tailors, and can not be made too plain.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]