SERIES PUBLICATIONS OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Emphasis upon publication as a means of "diffusing knowledge" was expressed by the first Secretary of the Smithsonian. In his formal plan for the Institution, Joseph Henry outlined a program that included the following statement: "It is proposed to publish a series of reports, giving an account of the new discoveries in science, and of the changes made from year to year in all branches of knowledge." This theme of basic research has been adhered to through the years by thousands of titles issued in series publications under the Smithsonian imprint, commencing with Sm/thsonian Contributions to Knowledge in 1848 and continuing with the following active series: Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropo/ogy Smitlisonian Contributions to Astrophysics Smithsonian Contributions to Botany Smithsonian Contributions to the Earth Sciences Smithsonian Contributions to the Marine Sciences Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology Smithsonian Studies in Air and Space Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology In these series, the Institution publishes small papers and full-scale monographs that report the research and collections of its various museums and bureaux or of professional colleagues in the world of science and scholarship. The publications are distributed by mailing lists to libraries, universities, and similar institutions throughout the world. Papers or monographs submitted for series publication are received by the Smithsonian Institution Press, subject to its own review for format and style, only through departments of the various Smithsonian museums or bureaux, where the manuscripts are given sub- stantive review. Press requirements for manuscript and art preparation are outlined on the inside back cover. S. Dillon Ripley Secretary Smithsonian Institution FRONTISPIECE. Drafting a bodice to measure, from Charles Hecklinger's 1886 text book subtitled How to Cut and Make Ladies' Garments. (Library of Congress.) "To that great army ofBread-Winners who fashion their own garments, as well as those of others, this book is respectfully dedicated." — Mallison, 1886. SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY • NUMBER 42 cct(m^ DRESSMAKERS' DRAFTING SYSTEMS IN THE UNITED STATES Claudia B. Kidwell Smithsonian Institution Press City of Washington 1979 ABSTRACT Kidwell, Claudia B. Cutting a Fashionable Fit: Dressmakers' Drafting Systems in the United States. Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology, number 42, 163 pages, 70 figures, 4 tables, 1979.—The first dressmakers' drafting system was created m the United States before 1838. This innovation provided a tool to draft stylish, fitted garments and appealed to women who were forced to make their own clothes. The concept behmd the first generation of drafting systems was used as the basis for the sizing systems in the paper pattern industry and the women's ready-made clothing inciustry. In the last quarter of the 19th century, hundreds of drafting systems were invented to help the professional dressmaker cut the complex patterns of the fashionable dress of the period. A wide variety of chang- ing economic, social, and technological factors determined the methods that were created at specific times, how the systems were sold, and who used them. Dressmakers' drafting systems with specialized tools became obsolete in the 20th century after simpler, less fitted dress styles became popular. These less compli- cated fashions encouraged the widespread acceptance of ready-made clothes and the use of paper patterns by dressmakers and home sewers. OFFICIAL PUBLICATION DATE is handstamped in a limited number of initial copies and is recorded in the Institution's annual report, Smithsonian Year. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Kidwell, Claudia B. Cutting a fashionable fit. (Smithsonian studies in history and technology ; no. 42) Bibliography: p. Includes maex. 1. Dressmaking—Pattern design—History. I. Title. 11. Series: Smithsonian Institution. Smith- sonian studies in history and technology ; no. 42. TT520.K4 646.4'3'04 78-606020 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 Stock Number 047-000-00353-9 Page Preface vii Introduction 1 Before Dressmakers' Drafting Systems 3 Tailors 4 Tailors' Drafting Systems 7 Mantua-Makers 11 A 19th Century Invention 13 Earliest Evidence of Dressmakers' Drafting Systems 20 Proportional Systems 25 Hybrid Systems 31 Direct-Measure Systems 45 Squares 50 Adjustable » 53 Conforming 68 Selling the Systems 74 The Users 80 Amateur Dressmakers 80 Paper Pattern Industry 81 Professional Dressmakers and Cutters 90 Ladies' Tailors 93 Ready-made Clothing Industry 94 Conclusions 98 Appendix I: Pre-1920 Publications at Library of Congress Containing Drafting Systems for Women's Garments 105 Chronological Index to Authors 127 Appendix II: Dressmakers' Drafting Tools at Library of Congress 129 Appendix III: Patents for Drafting Systems for Assorted Clothing 129 Index to Patentees 150 Appendix IV: Tables of Geographic Distribution 155 Literature Cited 157 Index 160 In 1968 I started the research on what I intended to be a small article discussing the importance of the late 19th century McDowell Garment Machine. My efforts were prompted as much by my interest in the manufacture of clothing as by the occasional public inquiries I had received. Typically, these letters said, "I have a McDowell Garment Drafting Machine ... I have written several places to find out any information on this and so far no one has any information to send me, and found out you have information on about everything . . . ." Staggered by the faith some people have in the Smithsonian Institution, I hoped to be able at least to answer some of the questions raised about the popular, late-19th-century McDowell machines. The scope of my work broad- ened as I gradually perceived the significance of the number of instruction books at the Library of Congress and the hundreds of patents filed in the U.S. Patent Office. As the project grew I benefitted from the association with and the assistance of Charles E. Brush as I gathered the basic data from the pre-1900 publications and patents related to drafting systems. This is but one of the many ways he has helped the National Museum of History and Technology as a volunteer. My study of the earliest patents was facilitated by the gracious assistance given by James Paulauskas, archivist in the Industrial and Social Branch of the National Archives. Anne W. Murray, curator emeritus, Division of Costume, learned of my project during this early stage and encouraged me by her belief in the value of this work. My research, however, was interrupted several times, as my energies were diverted to other major projects. I am grateful to Rodris Roth, then supervisor in the Division of Costume and Furnishings, for encouraging me to return again and again to this study. In 1972, I thought that my work was nearly completed when I stopped again, this time to assist with the museum's bicentennial exhibits and in particular to coordinate the preparation of the exhibit "Suiting Everyone" and its related publication. In the fall of 1976, I was able to return to my data on dressmakers' drafting systems. Facing this research after having ignored it for four years was made a little easier by the interest expressed at this time by Al Ruffin, managing editor of the Smithsonian's series publications. Getting into this material again, how- ever, I realized that the study had to be broadened once more. I needed to extend my work another 20 years to 1919 in order to document what had happened to these systems. To finish this work before something else intervened I relied upon the assistance of a number of individuals. I am personally grateful to the staff of the Division of Costume: Barbara Dickstein, collaborator; Karyn Harris, museum specialist; Shelly Foote, museum technician; and Valerie Goddard, secretary. By their energetic and imaginative handling of much of the ongoing as well as the unusual collecting, public service, and research activities of our division, I was Vll viii SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY able to take the time needed to conclude this study. As I reconsidered the relationship between tailors' systems and dressmakers' drafting techniques, I found the sources provided by Betty Kramer to be of great help. Several years earlier she had obtained for our costume library copies of the early tailors' instruction booklets at the Library of Congress. Carol Kregloh arranged the collected appendix data into the desired format and obtained the data needed for the 1900 to 1919 period. Not only did she accomplish this with a high degree of accuracy and completeness, but she contributed to this paper in many ways with her insightful observations. Dorothy Pouquet assisted with the French translations with her usual competency. As I worked further on the manuscript, many questions came to mind concerning the relationship between innovations in the tailoring and dressmak- ing trades vis-a-vis other crafts and concerning the social significance associated with these technological changes. These concerns highlighted my appreciation for being a part of a museum encompassing so many varied fields. I was generously helped by Silvio Bedini, then deputy director; Anne Golovin, then associate curator of the Division of Pre-Industrial Cultural History; Howard Hoffman, museum specialist, Division of Naval History; Peter Marzio, then curator, Division of Graphic Arts; Edith Mayo, assistant curator, Division of Political History; Uta Merzbach, then mathematician, the Section of Mathemat- ics; and Robert Vogel, curator. Division of Mechanical and Civil Engineering. I am especially grateful for the assistance of John Hoffman, curator in charge of the Warshaw Collection of Business Americana of the National Museum of History and Technology. I also benefitted from the good advice of Bob Post who graciously read the manuscript at various stages. I am grateful to Sydney Brooks, theatrical costume designer, for loaning for study two sets of drafting tools from her collection. I am also most appreciative of the opportunities I have had to examine the resources in the Butterick Patterns Archives/Library. Illustrated items noted as belonging to the Smithso- nian Institution are in the collections of the Division of Costume unless otherwise specified. In the last months of my work, Nancy Martin, Lynne Conlee, and Priscilla Bloom served as volunteer research assistants as they helped me track down the answers to some last minute questions. Nearing the end of the project, I was gratified by the interest and extra concern for accuracy exercised by Lynne Conlee and Valerie Goddard as they typed the final manuscript. Also, I am most appreciative of the contributions of Edna Luginbuhl who drew the bar graphs to illustrate some of my conclusions. Adele Filene, researcher and writer, studied this manuscript closely in its final form. It was possible to take into account some of her suggestions even though this paper was "in press." I am most grateful to have had this opportunity to benefit from her considerable knowledge of couture dressmaking technique and mass production drafting procedures acquired from her exceptional experience in Germany and England. Throughout the final stages, the Smithsonian Press was most helpful. Al Ruffin's continued interest was gratifying. Barbara Spann applied her editorial skills as well as her particular expertise in the subject matter to make this paper more readable and precise. Stephen Kraft in addition to designing the book supplied the creative art work for the cover. attm^ mmmM a DRESSMAKERS' DRAFTING SYSTEMS IN THE UNITED STATES Claudia B. Kidwell Introduction In the 19th century, dressmakers' drafting systems were heralded as a solution to the plight of downtrodden working women. A writer in 1885 described them as "the wings which will waft the sewing woman from the gloom and despondency of an over-wrought and under-paid laborer to the dignity and independence always the due of pa- tient, persistent industry" (Cornwell, 1885:20). Yet, in less than 90 years since the period of their greatest popularity, these drafting systems are all but forgotten. Today, 19th century drafting tools that were once touted as "magical devices" are seldom even recognized for what they are. If they are identified, they are generally dismissed as merely another of those gadgets of which 19th century Americans were so fond. Drafting systems were, nevertheless, a significant technological and economic breakthrough. They reduced the amount of time and skill required to cut a fashionable garment that fit well. Amateur Claudia B. Kidwell, Department of Cultural History, National Museum of History and Technology, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560. home sewers could produce better garments for themselves and their families. Aspiring dressmak- ers with little training could make salable clothing. And experienced professional dressmakers could improve their business by reducing cutting errors and fitting time. Nineteenth century drafting sys- tems with specialized tools enabled every maker of dresses to cut a fashionable fit. The creators of these devices contributed to the democratization of clothing.* The final result was not, however, what they intended. Drafting sys- tems became the basis for the sizing systems of the paper pattern industry and the ready-to-wear in- dustry. The success of these industries gave the majority of Americans the opportunity to be fash- ionably dressed in clothes that fit. It also di- minished the importance of the custom dressmak- ing trade. This paper is not an exhaustive treatise on dressmakers' drafting systems. The evidence is not 'See Kidwell and Christman (1974) for a general discussion of the many factors that contributed to the democratization of clothing in America. SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY sufficient for that kind of study. Dressmaking was usually an anonymous occupation carried on by individuals working in a limited area. Rarely was the work of these women recorded in print. Their trade depended for the most part upon word of mouth recommendations. Unlike popular women's magazines such as Godey's Lady's Book, which can be found in many libraries, the more specialized American periodicals for dressmakers have largely disappeared. The fate of S. T. Taylor's L^ Bo7i Ton is typical: it was published as early as 1857 and as late as 1919, but in spite of its longevity, extant issues are rare. This is a common phenomenon that inhibits any investigation concerning 19th cen- tury dressmaking techniques. Instead of attempting to be an exhaustive dis- cussion of drafting tools, this paper is a general overview intended to accomplish three purposes. First of all, there is exposition of the theme that dressmakers' drafting tools were a product of their time. A long tradition of tailoring and "mantua- making' preceded the creation of drafting systems. Tailors were first provoked by economic exigencies into creating efficient, systematic methods for their own use—probably in the late 18th century. Roughly 40 years later the conditions existed to foster dressmakers' drafting techniques. A wide variety of changing economic, social, and technological factors determined the methods created at specific times, the manner of selling the systems, and the composition of the market for them. Circumstances as disparate as the economic opportunities open to women and the limited availability of inch tape measures in the first half of the 19th century had an impact. (I was surprised to discover the major extent to which dress fashions affected the growth of clothing related industries.) The second purpose is to provide the reader with the knowledge necessary for identifying sys- tems other than those discussed here. Nineteenth century drafting systems for both tailors and dressmakers were based on proportional, hybrid, or direct-measure principles. Unlike tailors' meth- ods which often did not require unique drafting tools, dressmakers' drafting systems usually de- pended upon highly specialized devices. This dif- ference is explained by the disparate levels of skill and experience on the part of the presumed users. Techniques for cutting men's suits were created for professional tailors. No suggestion was ever made that a man not engaged in this trade could use such a system to cut his own clothes. Dressmak- ers' systems, on the other hand, were initially in- tended for the amateur's use in making apparel for herself and her family. Even in the late 19th cen- tury, when these techniques were most frequently created for professionals, the users, whether pro- fessional or amateur were still women. As a whole, women were neither as well educated as men nor were they thought capable of assimilating as much knowledge. For all of these reasons tools designed to simpHfy the drafting process were considered essential for the majority of amateur and profes- sional dressmakers, the vast majority of whom in the first half of the 19th century were women. Dressmakers' drafting tools existed in great va- riety. They were manufactured in diverse forms, out of various materials. They were made of paper, cardboard, wood, metal, or some combination of these. They were in the form of nearly square rectangles, rectangular strips, squares (similar to a carpenter's square), irregular curves, or a compos- ite of forms. They could be perforated, adjustable, and/or conforming. Some used apportioning scales, some distributed circumferential dimen- sions by other means. The systems discussed in this paper were selected to demonstrate how the three drafting principles were applied and to suggest the variety of tools that were made. The third purpose is to encourage research on drafting systems and related industries by provid- ing previously unpublished compilation of data such as the appendices listing the instruction book- lets at the Library of Congress and relevant U.S. patents. Instruction booklets for dressmaking sys- tems are the most important resource for informa- tion about these techniques. These booklets were usually published by the author with a limited printing. And, because of the local distribution of the majority of these works, many are now rare or known only through secondary sources. Probably many have disappeared without a trace. It may be years before all of the extant examples of these obscure publications can be found, examined, and evaluated.^ Because of its role in the copyright '^ Ms. Pat Trautman, assistant professor and curator, Historic Costume and Textile Collection, Colorado State University, is working on a locator index for dressmakers' drafting tools and instruction booklets. She would like to hear from individuals who have relevant items. NUMBER 42 process, the Library of Congress holds the largest known collection of these booklets. Patent drawings and specifications are almost as important as the instruction booklets. Patent draw- ings showing a tool are especially important when the device is not extant and when the booklet does not illustrate it. The patents provide a fuller his- tory of the development of some systems than is revealed in any other source. And when instruc- tions do not accompany an extant tool, the patent may provide information concerning the drafting process. Of course, many tools that were manufac- tured were not patented and many that were pat- ented were never manufactured. The numbers of individuals who applied for patents and their var- ied locations do, however, reflect the widespread creative effort that was underway. The fashion terminology of the era covered by this paper is sometimes confusing. "Bodice," "waist," "basque," and "polonaise" are but a few of the terms that have been used at one time or another in the general sense of designating the upper part of a dress as opposed to the lower part, the skirt. Some of these terms have more specifi- cally indicated a particular style for this portion of a dress. For example, the term "basque" was some- times used in the 1870s and 1880s to refer to a bodice or "waist" that extended several inches below the waistline to fit smoothly over the hips on top of the skirt. Occasionally "basque" denoted simply the extension itself. Certainly this append- age added to the difficulties of cutting a bodice of the period—making the "basque" a garment to remember by name. Before Dressmakers' Drafting Systems Since the time man first began to wear shaped garments made of more than one piece of material, he has been faced with two tasks—forming the separate pieces of the garment and sewing them together. As garments became more elaborate and as fashion requirements for a specific line became more exacting, greater skill was required for both tasks. Of the two, cutting was by far the more difficult. "Cutting" the parts of a garment histori- cally refers to the mental process of determining the shape of the pieces as well as the physical act of cutting.^ In 1807, The Book of Trades observed that to be a good cutter, an individual's "hand and head must go together" (Johnson, 1807:73). The craftsman whose work required the greatest cut- ting skill was called a tailor. The Old French word "tailleur" meant literally "one that cuts." In con- trast, while sewing the seams of a garment with needle and thread might require more time than cutting, it demanded much less knowledge and training. Thus, those whose principal occupation was the relatively unskilled labor of sewing were called at various times sempters, seamsters, semptresses, or seamstresses. ^ Throughout this paper the term "cutting" is used in the broader sense. This division of labor became institutionalized by custom and by trade guilds. Laws governing guilds protected the distinctions between the skilled craft of the cutter and the labor of the sewer. They gave tailors the exclusive right to cut garments fo'^ women as well as for men. In France, where the laws were more strict than in England, women were not permitted to make most feminine gar- ments until 1675 (Garsault, 1769:48). This radical departure from medieval precedent occurred when Louis XIV agreed to the establishment of a separate guild for women who were to be called maltresses couturieres. This was the first of several laws that allowed women to produce a wider range of garments. A similar change in custom occurred at about the same time in England. By the 18th century English women cut most of the more complicated feminine apparel, including the mantua,^ from which they took their name, ■* A mantua was the dress that was popular in England for most of the 18th century. In the mantua, the back pleats were stitched down to the waist to make the gown fit the upper torso. In contrast, the back pleats in the sack (Figure 9), also worn at the same time, were not stitched down to the waist. English women preferred the mantua, which led the French to distin- guish between the two styles by calling the mantua a "robe a I'Anglaise" and the sack a "robe a I'Frangaise" (Waugh, 1969:68-69). SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY "mantua-makers." The distincdons between cut- ting and sewing continued. Seamsters and seamstresses were primarily sewers while master tailors and mantua-makers were the skilled work- ers who cut the more complicated garments. Tailors A \747 Description of All Trades observed that for tailors "the most dextrous Part is Cutting-out, on which depend the Fitting and Shape, the principal Articles that give Ease and Pleasure to the Wearers, and obtain Customers; therefore a Man is not properly qualified to set up for himself who has not got a pretty good Knack at it" (Waller, 1747:206). The method for "cutting-out" was de- FIGURE 1. Tailor measuring a customer for a coat, 1736 print from unidentified source. (New York Public Library.) ceptively simple.^ A tailor measured his customer with a long strip of paper or parchment, recording the pertinent dimensions by cutting notches in this strip (Figure 1). To make a suit coat the tailor noted as many as 14 measurements (Figure 2). Each cutter had his own particular way of marking his "measure," as the notched strip was called, and thus one cutter would have found it difficult to understand another cutter's measure. A tailor usually kept paper patterns in different sizes to help him determine the shapes of the garment pieces (Figure 3). He developed the di- mensions and the outlines of his patterns through experimentation—their form was his trade secret. These patterns were so important that in England tailors sometimes referred to them as "Gods." In- dentures sometimes stipulated that the master was to give a copy to his apprentice on the condition of strict secrecy and patterns were mentioned in wills as a significant legacy from father to son (Giles, 1887:89). When preparing to cut a garment for a customer the tailor selected a pattern of about the right size. He laid it on the fabric and traced around it lightly with chalk. Next, using the customer's measure he checked the dimensions of the outline, marking the necessary corrections in chalk and redrawing the draft accordingly. The tailor then cut the material. Using the measure both to record the dimen- sions of a customer and to draft a garment may date from the time when units of measurement were not standardized. This would have been a useful technique when few were literate. When he had the "measure of a man," a bright apprentice did not need to know how to read, write, or use numbers in order to learn the art of cutting. He learned to think in spatial distances rather than in measurements coded into abstract units, such as inches. Mastery of the art of cutting was achieved after years of training and experience. Cutting was an individualized intuitive art that could not be quickly communicated to another. Only the stubborn force of tradition adequately ^ This method was first described by the Frenchman M. de Garsault for "L'Art du Tailleur" in Descriptions des Arts et Metiers, (1769, volume 31). Garsault's work was used by Diderot in his Supplement a VEncyclopedie (1776-77). Portions of Garsault's de- scriptions have been translated or paraphrased in several mod- ern histories, e.g., Arnold (1964) and Waugh (1964, 1969). FIGURE 2. Measurements needed to draft the coat, waistcoat, and breeches of a man's suit, 1769, from Garsault, "L'Art du tailleur," plate 4. (Smithsonian Institution.) FIGURE 3. Parts of the three garments in a man's suit, from Garsault, "L'Art du tailleur," plate 5. Coat: A, front; B, back; C, sleeve; D, cuff; E, pocket flap; CC, reinforcement for back pleat. Waistcoat: a, front with pocket flap; b, back; c, sleeve. Breeches: d, front, e, back, f, waistband. (Smithsonian Institution.) FIGURE 4. Man's suit, 1769, from Garsault, "L'Art du tailleur," plate 4. (Smithsonian Institution.) SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY explains why the notched measure was used through the end of the 18th century. This is espe- cially remarkable as yardsticks and squares marked in inches were in general use, most noticeably by carpenters (Hummel, 1968:118, 143). As late as 1796 in England and 1809 in the United States a published drafting method required the use of the measure while following a series of directions which sometimes involved distances reported in inches (Society of Adepts, 1796, and Queen and Lapsley, 1809). The 1809 American publication even advised tailors to determine the amount of material needed for a suit coat by measuring "by your yardstick, the length of your coat, as you have taken it from your measure, to which add the length of your sleeve" (Queen and Lapsley, 1809:23). Curiously, tailors did not see any merit in translating the measure into inches, not even to record these vital statistics in their order books. Taking the measure of a man was so much a part of the art and mystery of tailoring that the mere presence of the yardstick was not enough to effect a change in practice. More powerful forces were needed to break the strength of tradition. Throughout the 18th century the fashionable cut of men's clothing evolved slowly, mutating slightly in one feature then in another. The net result was a persistent trend toward a closer and closer fit and narrower proportions. In the last decades of the 18th century the suit coat became so fitted that even the simplest movement of the arm caused a wrinkle to appear across the front of the shoulder (Kidwell, 1976). By the early 19th cen- tury, men's suit coats had become sculptural forms created more by their cut than by the drape of the textile (Figure 5). Increasingly, a gentleman's fig- ure was the product of his tailor's art rather than his parents' genes. The precisely cut, closely fitting fashions demanded the best efforts of skilled and experienced tailors. Some tailors found that tradi- tional cutting methods were not adequate to meet the demands of changing fashions and the chang- ing times. The 18th century has been called the "Age of Enlightenment" because men regarded experience and reason as more important than divine revela- tion. It was this optimistic belief in the individual's ability to observe, experiment, and solve problems that fostered the inventive activity that revolu- tionized the production of textiles. The time was right for individuals to set aside traditional prac- FiGURE 5. Fashionable full dress costume for gentlemen, from the April 1810 issue of the English magazine, Ackermann's Repository of Arts. (Courtesy of Karyn Harris.) tices and devise new solutions to old problems. Change was in the air at the end of the century, the industrial revolution with all its ramifications was under way. New factories drew rural populations to urban production centers. Those wanting "respectable" city clothes rather than laboring garb were increas- ing in number, but they could not afford the exclusive prices of traditional made-to-order work. Tailors were faced by the difficulties of cutting more closely fitted garments in line with the chang- ing styles. At the same time, they were subjected to consumer pressures to keep their prices down. Tailors, especially those wanting to take advantage NUMBER 42 of the new market opportunities, were in a position to welcome any new technique that would solve their cutting problems. Technological develop- ment was essential if clothing manufacture was to be shifted from custom tailoring to mass production—that is, producing for the masses. Tailors' Drafting Systems In 1809, Queen and Lapsley described for the benefit of other tailors a methodical utilization of the traditional measure in the producing of custom work. In their preface, however, they refered to a system that many tailors had adopted. There are many who work by patterns, and this method of working, we are afraid, is too much followed by the Trade. There is one maxim with us, working by lengths and following nature in every existing circumstance. In which case, patterns can be of but little use to any but Slop makers, where they may have them from the smallest size up to the largest Figure, upon proportionable scales. But where Nature has sported a little with the formation of a figure, a person would look quite awkward in one of those slop made coats (1809:vi). Note that the authors matter-of-factly said "pro- portionable scales" (the technique of projecting all the dimensions of a garment in proportion to one body measurement). Use of these scales was not reported as an innovation but was cited as a com- mon practice to be abhorred by the professional custom tailor. Significantly, this citation appeared in an 1809 book published in the United States. At this time, American tailors relied upon their En- glish counterparts for almost every innovation. Thus it is reasonable to assume that "proportion- able scales" were used well before 1809 by the cheaper trade in England. One historian, Norah Waugh, proposes that the development of proportional drafting systems was the result of the introduction of the inch tape mea- sure. She argues that its use "drew attention to the comparative relations that exist between the various parts of the body" (Waugh, 1964:130). Singling out the tape measure as sole catalyst for this revolu- tionary departure from traditional methods seems to me too limited an explanation. It does not take into account the more generalized forces that could have affected the tailor's thinking. Tailors were not the first to consider the human body in proportional terms. In ancient Athens the human body was studied as a natural phenomenon with a proportional form that could be analyzed and codified into geometric laws. The differences between one person and the next were overlooked by sculptors who concentrated on the representa- tion of "ideal" forms. These were seen to be more representative of nature than the irregularities that existed in any particular individual. Again and again artists turned away from the apparent chaos and haphazard appearances of na- ture to rediscover classical mathematical order. Leonardo da Vinci's "Man of Perfect Proportion" is representative of this movement in Renaissance Italy. In the I7th century the efforts of Louis XIV in France to make the classical style official had a significant effect on French artists of the period. And in England the conservative rules of classicism continued to have great appeal in the 18th century. There, one school of academic theory, exemplified by Sir Joshua Reynolds' Discourses on the Fine Arts (1769-1790), delivered before the Royal Academy in London, continued to define the essence of beauty in terms of the ideal classical forms (Marzio, 1976:26). The discoveries at Pompeii and Herculaneum in the 1740s had a profound effect on the decorative arts throughout Europe. In the mid-18th-century "Roman ruins" initially were used merely as an alternative to "Chinese" pagodas in the romantic decorations of the period, from the motifs on printed fabrics to the reproduction of "scenic" embellishments of landscaping projects. In time, the order and simplicity of the ancient Greek and Roman sources were seen as a welcome relief to the involuted complications of the rococo designs which had overlaid the classical Renaissance heri- tage. By 1785, a wave of popular neoclassicism was sweeping over France and through Europe. Once again the "true" rules of human proportions were being set forth as artisdc laws of nature (Marzio, 1976:38). I do not believe that the proportional theories of artists were the initial basis of tailors' proportional drafting systems. After all, most artistic theories dealt with two-dimensional proportions based on the length of the human head while tailors' systems were concerned with three-dimensional propor- tions relative to the circumference of the "breast." I do propose that the widely discussed "geometric" theories that were inherently a part of the neoclas- sical movement reinforced or made more credible the discoveries that tailors were probably making on their own. 8 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY It seems reasonable to expect a tailor, trained to think in terms of spatial distances, to notice how consistently the notches on his measure were aligned in a similar relationship to each other. Certainly he might have observed how regularly the length from neck to waist was half the man's breast measure and the chest width one-third (Waugh, 1964:130). He could have used these ob- servations when he modified the patterns that he used as a guide to drafting garments cut with his customer's measure. The tailor who manufactured ready-made coats, however, used only his set pat- terns. He mass produced garments for unknown customers, hoping to fit as many as possible "from the smallest size up to the largest Figure." Even though the "slop maker's" customers could not afford to be very particular about the fit of their clothes, the tailor-entrepreneur would have had an economic interest in applying proportionate ob- servations to the creation of his master patterns. Waugh's reasoning concerning the significance of the tape measure may have been influenced by the fact that the first outpouring of published drafting systems (mostly of a proportional type) occurred in the early 19th century at the same time that the inch tape measure was coming into use. I n my opinion this co-occurrence does not reflect a causal relationship between inch tape measures and proportional the- ories. Instead, I believe both developments reveal an increased literacy among tailors and a significant break with the code of secrecy inherent to the indi- vidualized procedures of the past. While I would agree that the ability to think and write in terms of inches altered the form in which proportional theories were conceived, I do not see the lack of this facility as precluding the development of them. It is perhaps more significant that this new literacy (in both words and numbers) provided for the first time a way to communicate propordonal theories easily. If a tailor developed a propordonal method before the introducdon of the inch tape measure, he based it on his direct observations of actual spadal distances rather than on dimensions abstractly coded into inches. His ability to communicate his method by wridng was inhibited. He probably would have had to be satisfied with teaching his apprendces—the tradi- donal way for a tailor to share his knowledge. He would, thus, have left no record of his innovadons. It is my opinion that in response to the historical changes already presented, tailors began to exper- iment with proportional methods before the inch tape measure was widely used, at least by the last decade of the 18th century. The rising literacy of the ensuing era brought these innovations to light and also sdmulated the udhzadon of the inch tape measure. The 1809 reference to "propordonable scales" suggests that propordonal theories were already widely used by the manufacturers of ready-made clothes and by some custom tailors as well. Propor- tional systems were those cutting methods based on the assumpdon that all human bodies are formed according to common geometric or proportional rules. It was assumed that with only one critical measurement (usually the circumference of the "breast" or chest) it was possible to predict all other dimensions. The acceptance of this presupposition led to the creation of numerous systems. They varied from each other according to the creator's opinion as to what the critical measurement was, how it should be taken, what measurement tool should be used, what the "true" proportions were, the drafting tool to be used, the location of critical drafting points, and the sequence of drafting pro- cedures. It does not take much imagination to realize how many different systems could be created, based on the proportional assumption. What these first systems all had in common was the fallacy of their basic assumption. For while, in general, the human form has an established pro- portional configuration, tailors found that very few individual customers were shaped exactly accord- ing to any set formula. Purely proportional sys- tems, nevertheless, continued to be used in spite of this weakness. The need for technological break- throughs was so great that even a flawed system was better than no system at all. The tailors who were concerned for quahty exercised considerable personal judgement and used many "proof measures to double check their work. Some were inchned to add more body mea- surements as an integral part of "improved" sys- tems. Usually these extra measurements were used to draft that pordon of the garment directly af- fected by the particular measurement. Thus "hy- brid" systems'^ developed—methods combining «The term "hybrid" was not used by 18th or 19th century tailors or dressmakers. 1 have adopted it to describe systems that are neither purely proportional nor completely direct-measure methods but constitute a blend of the two. NUMBER 42 both proportionally determined dimensions and direct measurements. An important step was the recognition that the height of a man did not neces- sarily have anything to do with his breadth. Thus the direct measurements were frequently vertical dimensions. In 1818 the Englishman Mr. Hearn described his system. Even at this early date he added a direct measurement for the height of the neck (cf. Figure 5) to his proportional system based on the "breast" measure (Giles, 1887:93). Mr. Hearn's experience reflects the reasoning that many later tailors were to follow. By the fifth edition of his system, in 1832, he had completely rejected proportional theories even when they were modified into hybrid forms. He acknowl- edged that "most modern cutters amongst us have divided the breast measure into equal proportions for many years." But he was convinced that "the proportions of the breast have nothing to do with the various points of a coat," and that "there can be no certainty in the fit of coats without taking the make of the person" (Giles, 1887:100). His answer to the problem was a direct-measure system. In contrast to previously published instructions, Hearn's precise language and more carefully de- scribed procedures, leaving much less to individual judgement, are what make this a "system." For example, the publication of The Society of Adepts, 1796, reflected in Queen and Lapsley, 1809, con- stitutes only the vague directions of experienced tailors accustomed to solving cutting problems in- tuitively. To identify a drafting method as a system is to say it is a definable, repeatable, systematic pro- cedure. Hearn was advanced in his thinking. Others were to agree with him, but direct-measure systems never completely replaced either proportional or hybrid methods. During the period that concerns dressmakers' systems, the second quarter of the 19th century, there were proponents of all three kinds of tailors' drafting methods—proportional, hybrid, and direct-measure. The tools used by tailors also set important prec- edents for dressmakers to follow. The inch tape measure was the first and most significant im- provement upon the strip of notched parchment used by generations of tailors. The square was probably the next to become common. Many sys- tems required no more than these tools. Hearn's 1818 hybrid method and his 1832 direct-measure technique used only the tape measure. Some tailors' systems, however, required special- ized tools. On 28 February 1827 J. G. Wilson was granted a patent (4,687X) for a "Square for Cut- ting Garments" (Figure 6). This represented an improvement to a system first described in an 1820 Enghsh publication by Edward Minister. As Wilson explained in his manual, copyrighted a month before his patent was granted, the reports of Minister being only in the possession of a few and unaccompanied with drafts or rules, I was induced to believe that 1 should perform an acceptable service by improving, republishing, and combining with them a concise treatise on the art of cutting, which I have now the honor of presenting to the trade (1827: Preface). Wilson's is the earliest restored ^ U.S. patent re- lated to tailoring drafting techniques. Of the seven earlier, unrestored patents (see Appendix III), Madison's "Ruler for Cutting Out Garments" and Starr's "Scale for Draughting Garments" could have been issued for devices intended for propor- tional or hybrid systems. Tools for accurately measuring the body were patented in significant numbers. These devices usually provided particular measurements needed by a specific direct-measure system. Less frequent- ly, the measurements obtained were to be used with one of the generally known methods. The measuring instruments were basically linear in form. They ranged from simple to fantastic com- binations of the square and tape measure (Figure 7). Some had a level or plumb line as an important feature. Still others were designed to support a portion of the body or conform to it. By the time dressmakers' drafting systems were needed, tailors had given up traditional drafting methods. Many had broken the code of secrecy and were publishing descriptions of their own sys- tems. The relative merits of proportional versus direct-measure techniques were discussed and a variety of tools had been created. Tailors set new precedents for 19th century dressmakers to follow, if it suited them. ^ In December 1836 a fire destroyed all the records and patent models dating from the first patent act of 10 April 1790. In 1837 the Patent Office embarked upon a program to "restore" these lost documents, largely from information and drawings supplied by the patentees. / ' APPAHEL. "^ - cJlj IWloriag, 6^-^ ^.:-. ) C-' ^ / Tmp' 771 che Rule let CullJnq Ciarinencs ft: ^.i^^X. <',-..' . ^/,uJ,.,.'f"/Sy' ■f3 3 in ■'Hi 0 ^1^=3 J^L. XiliZ ? /P.r^^^j£k^ ^rar.MEASURINGINSTmiMENTS: \\ [38J railoTs'Meaaorw. ^^ _r^ /s-'- JflfBWKBia.B^jpjjjgj >i;,,l!JtJi;i,l,J„tj@tJtuE '''''''''^''■'^■rmm.mjtj^ ?, _,,| X^^dl^ gJl^Ajf^jrlituiiJii .Jit,/!b,x?i|i;,i;2,35a„-!,tu:!;ffl;tttrafca,Ea±J ''^ LI I I I , ,-'7 7" r' ! ^. * _^ -^_^_^*^ Jt^ ■'.'."-C.-C,/^' _ 1 / / - . / ■'■J L. / _iiLu.«l_. NUMBER 42 11 FIGURE 6 (left top). Restored drawing of a tool devised by James G. Wilson for his hybrid drafting system for tailors. The wood or metal square was made with a recessed channel on the outer edges of both arms. Strips or "gauges" were laid into the spaces and kept in place by "springs." Each strip was marked with the divisions of a specific "breast" measure and could be changed according to the size of the customer. Wilson was granted a U.S. patent (4,687X) for the form of this tool on 28 February 1827. (National Archives.) FIGURE 7 (left bottom). Drawing for a measuring device created by W. J. Lemmond as part of his direct-measure draft- ing system for tailors. Strips of "spring steel," leather, and wood—all marked in inches—were combined with six tape measures. This instrument was designed to hook to the cus- tomer precisely over the "socket" bone of the neck and to buckle around each shoulder and around the "breast" close up under the arms. Lemmond received a U.S. patent (1,556) for the form and use of this tool on 18 April 1840. (National Archives.) FIGURE 8 (below left). Details for cutting and assembling a woman's pleated gown or sack (similar to Figure 9), 1769, from Garsault, "L'Art du tailleur," plate 15. Cut shape of material: Fig. 1, back; Fig. 2, hont. Detail of pleating: Fig. 3, back; Fig. 4, front. Cut shape of material: Fig. 5, sleeve ruffles; Fig. 6, sleeve and "compere" or buttoned front. (Smithsonian Insdtution.) Mantua-Makers In 1747 the Description ofAllTrades remarked that for the mantua-makers' trade "there is litde else wanting than a clever Knack at cutUng out and fitUng, handsome Carriage, and a good set of Acquain- tences" (Waller, 1747:134). No contemporary En- glish or American description exists to reveal the procedure followed by the mantua-maker. A 1769 French source,^ however, describes the techniques followed by a ma'itresse couturiere when she con- structed a sack. The mantua-maker probably fol- lowed a similar method, although it seems likely that the final dimensions and locadon of the back pleats ^ in the mantua were determined during a fitting when the dress was on the customer. Like the tailor, the 18th century maUresse couturiere recorded her customers' measurements by cutting notches on a strip of parchment or paper. As many as 16 measurements were taken for one gown. She followed, however, a cutting procedure different from that used by tailors. She did not use patterns. Instead she used the measure to determine the correct length of the pieces of fabric needed to make the gown (Figure 8). The maltresse couturiere condnued to use the measure as a guide as she progressively sewed and cut her way to a finished garment (Figure 9). Inches were FIGURE 9 (below right). Back and front views of a woman's pleated gown or sack, 1769, from Garsault, "L'Art du tailleur,' plate 3. (Smithsonian Institution.) * Garsault (1769, vol. 31) and other derivative sources anno- tated in footnote 5. " See footnote 4. 12 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY M:: '" 'U(iT!ff((imMmiTniintiimTij(i:" ■" -^JJ■>'t!g'»S^ FIGURE 10. Fashionable evening dress from the July 1814 issue oi Repository of Arts. (Smithsonian Institution.) used on the rare occasions when a specific direc- tion was given concerning a dimension. For example, the 1769 French source stated that the four pieces of the back and the two for the front "should be cut a little longer" than the measure "by several inches" (Garsault, 1769:49). For most of the 18th century, women's fashions developed in accord with men's fashions—evolving toward a closer and closer fit. By the early 1780s the mantua was so fitted that the stitched pleats, which had become reduced in depth and moved far to the center back, were finally replaced by seams. The subtle shaping of the top of the gown was achieved through complex cutting as demand- ing as any required of a tailor. If this style had remained fashionable for any length of time mantua-makers would have been forced to develop their own drafting systems. Instead, the simultane- NUMBER 42 13 ous emergence of another, less fitted fashion was to postpone the mantua-makers' need for systemat- ic cutting techniques. This new style first came to popular attention when Vigee Le Brun's portrait of Marie An- toinette, wearing a gown of gathered sheer cotton, was exhibited at the Paris Salon in 1783 (Waugh, 1969:73). The dress—later called "chemise de la reine"—created a sensation. It was an extraordi- nary shock to see the queen of France dressed not in the precious jewels, laces, and silks befitting her station but in a gown so simple that it reminded the viewer of the common feminine undergarment called a "chemise."^*^ Because of its informality and unassuming character this garb suited the roman- tic longing for the uncomplicated rustic life that was popularly effected by the French nobility just before the revolution. The neoclassical movement that swept over Europe a few years later reshaped this garment into the style now generally known as "Empire" (Figure 10). These high waisted dresses of the late 18th and early 19th centuries were mostly unfitted skirt and thus they required more of a draping technique than drafting. The patterns for the bodices of this garment were cut directly on the customer (Figure 11). This accurate but time-consuming technique was probably first adopted by mantua-makers in the 18th century when gowns became precisely fitted and subtly curved creations. Those who could afford fine gowns had the leisure to spend long hours in the fitting room. This "pin-to-the- form" technique was then easily adapted for cut- ting the simple short-waisted "Empire" styles of the 19th century and it continued to be used long after ^° A slip is the closest modern equivalent to the 18th century chemise. FIGURE 11. Cutting a dress according to the pin-to-the-form technique, from Tabart & Co., The Book of Trades, London, 1804. (Library of Congress.) fashions changed once again, requiring more complex cutting. The amateur dressmaker usually followed another time-honored custom, that of taking a pattern from an existing dress or lining. A 19th Century Invention As long as fashions evolved slowly or called for simply cut dresses, and as long as the market for fashionable clothes was limited to a relatively small leisure class of women, traditional cutting methods were satisfactory. But coupled with the rise of the middle class and the urban society was the fact that fashions continued to change and at an increasing rate as the 19th century progressed. These new fashions called for more fitted garments of more complicated cut. To keep informed of the latest innovations customers and dressmakers eagerly sought European magazines with fashion illustra- tions. When American magazines such as Godey's Lady's Book and Peterson's Magazine were established in the second quarter of the 19th century, they included fashion plates that were copied from 14 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY FiruRE 12 luly 1834 fashion plate dramatically showing the broad-shouldered, normal-waisted styles popular in Europe and the United States, from the English periodical The Lady's Magazine. (Smithsonian Institution.) NUMBER 42 15 FIGURE 13. May 1839 fashion plate illustrating the sloping-shouldered, small-waisted styles shown in the Philadelphia magazine The Lady's Book, published by Louis A. Godey. (Smithsonian Institu- tion.) 16 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY European illustrations. These widely distributed publications gave women, even in remote areas of the United States, the opportunity to learn about fashionable styles. The fashion plates, however, did not show the viewer how to cut a pattern that would produce a similar garment. This difficulty was partially alle- viated when, in 1853, Godey's Lady's Book started to supplement the fashion illustrations with simple diagrams.'^ \^henPeterson's Magazine also began to include pattern diagrams in 1855, inch measure- ments were added to clarify the dimensions of the pieces. Petersons stated that a tape measure was indispensable when using these miniature pat- terns. "Where it is difficult to buy such a measure, one can be made, in half an hour, out of a piece of tape, with the assistance of a foot rule borrowed from a carpenter, or the aid of a yards-stick" (1855:247). When Godey's began to include inch measurements on its pattern diagrams the reader was told that the pattern would fit "a lady of middle height and youthful proportion" (Figure 14) (Jul 1855:65). Full-size "patterns," of one size only, were also produced. As early as 1854, Godey's was selling these models constructed of paper, which they de- scribed as "facsimilies of the originals in color, trimming etc. At a distance, they would be taken for the garment itself. They could be worn in a tableau without being detected" (Feb 1854:467). Godey's continually pointed out that these were not simply unmarked flat pieces made out of tissue or old paper! This was an important distinction as the Godey patterns were very expensive, ranging in cost from $0.31 for a sleeve pattern to $1.37V2 for a full dress pattern (Feb 1855:183). In comparison, a dressmaker who stayed with a family until she had completed her work earned only $0.75 a day {Godey's, Sep 1851:192). Much simpler full-size tis- sue patterns could be ordered from a number of shops and were even included in certain publica- tions such as Mme. Demorest's Quarterly Mirror of Fashion (Figure 15fl). In this magazine the patterns were cut pieces of tissue paper, generally for dress accessories or sleeve details. It should be remem- bered that these full-size patterns were not offered in a range of sizes. Fitting sdll had to be done by " Fashion plates, diagrams, and unsized patterns were avail- able in England (Arnold, 1964, and Waugh, 1969) before they were produced in the United States. FIGURE 14. A woman's garment elegantly called "Coraco Eugenie,' from July 1855 issue oi Godey's Lady's Book. Above: small diagram of pattern. Right: fashion illustration. (Smithso- nian Institution.) the "pin-to-the-form" method. Despite the availability of such patterns, cutting a dress that fit well became more difficult as fashions called for more closely fitted garments. To be successful, a dressmaker had to solve a number of problems. Like the modern naval architect who designs the covering for a complexly curved form—a ship's hull—the dressmaker had to cut the sheathing for a complexly curved figure—a fash- ionable female shape. (As will be described later, the drafting curves used by these two trades are also similar.) But by comparison, a modern naval architect has a less demanding task when he is planning the layout of the plating required to cover the outside of a ship's hull. A ship's hull, particularly below the waterline, may have both convex and concave curvature. When the naval architect designs the shapes of the metal plates needed to cover a hull, his prime concern is the most efficient use of the standard sized sheets of metal. Efficiency, however, was not the chief de- NUMBER 42 17 II SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY terminant of the way the 19th century dress cutter used her materials to cover the curved form of her customer. To be successful, the dressmaker had to follow the dictates of fashion that were beyond her control. If she had a thorough understanding of anatomy, her tasks might be made easier, but most fashions of the 19th century prescribed dress shapes that had litde relationship to the natural form of a woman's body. The naval architect deals with a rigid, stadc form. In contrast, the 19th century dressmaker dealt with the ever moving human body which could assume a variety of postures. Her customer might stoop natu- rally or lean slightly to one side or the other. Yet, many individuals have a tendency to stand more erect than usual when being measured, thus making the dressmaker's calculations incorrect. Once the naval architect designs the most effi- cient manner of covering a hull there is no need for modification each dme an additional ship of the same class is built as the hull shapes are the same. The dressmaker, however, did not have this advantage. Each customer had different propor- tions and different shapes occasioned by variadons of the anatomical structures common to all human females. She could not even assume that she was dealing with a symmetrical form, as the left half of many individuals measures differently from the right. And the ultimate frustration for a dressmaker was that her customer could change size between dresses by losing or, more likely, gaining weight. Even worse, the customer might change her shape between fitdngs, having violated the unspoken rule by wearing a different corset for the final fitting than she wore for the first. When fashion dictated closely fitted garments of a specific form, individual variadons became criti- cal. The fashion plates, diagrams, and single-size patterns only helped the dressmaker keep in- formed as to the latest fashionable silhouettes and pattern shapes. They did not help her cut a gar- ment that fit. Only a dressmaker with extensive experience could quickly make a fashionable fit- ting garment by the old "pin-to-the-form' tech- nique. A more efficient method was needed. In the 18th century the sparse population in America created a labor shortage and a more open society than existed in England. A widow could respectably continue the work of her husband whether it was managing the family plantation, newspaper, or tavern. By the 1840s however, in- FlGURE \5a,b. Full-size cut patterns included in the Summer 1864 issue oi Mme. Demorest's Quarterly Mirror of Fashion. (Smith- sonian Institution.) FIGURE 15a (above). Three-piece tissue pattern for a girl's apron. FIGURE I5b (right). Pictorial and descriptive presentation of several sets of patterns (girl's apron shown in upper left). creases in population and affluence contributed to the reassertion of strictly defined, limited roles for women (Lerner, 1973:90). There were impressive exceptions, but, on the whole, for a 19th century woman to be a wage-earner was for her to lose caste. If a spinster or a widow in the 1840s did not have family with which to live nor an exceptional talent, she had little choice as to how she would support herself. Other than becoming a street walker, her opportunities were restricted to tradi- tional feminine activities of child care, housekeep- ing, cooking, and sewing. If a woman had some education but no children, she might become a governess. Later in the century, teaching in public schools was to become an important alternative for the educated woman, but neither educating women nor recognizing women as educators was NUMBER 42 19 ^. i^\ l^i%iP hlK?3I LINEN CUFF. Ilccpnirr. iininli'd in llio b.irk. wlipre u but- TEAV£LINO CLOAK GIRL 3 APRON. The fhort round cloak on Ihc |.rliiclpal rn:;ic...n of oni' of lio.-^ tl.e cal pa cr.-. Ill lli.B number, •nd 1-tlic-i/..' or omii jior«. ' liultnnh..!.'i-dc scoll... ed «nd Hitched, printed pr.'rcrrcd nhen m.ide rn ../,,v. Ti.e iriMiin.i :: i- 8LEE7Z. lino ruuLiir, ln:d on as lllunlrnlij, and ^tn. IK .1 This pattern coni-IMi of tho body of »le dal »lM'b la cut in baT. both Kideii IIMII^ eia BOY'S JACKET. alike, and a narrow band wl cuniierla This If ,, , BODICE, Th.a paltern is al-o ; nulid full ■ ",".','n"™ ','-' i "'"■"'"' "' "'" ''""'' "'"' " »»'■'• III"I--, "ot ' p„„,,llBboel,andcon-lal.nnhrecplcc...:l.ack, .I iiiiii.ru I" I ^ir:i|...ht: two of the.,, alike ur.. put Ob, braided, ' ' ' ' ' IV'i'r/l'av'j ""' lii'-hed to c.,rr..-|,.,nd Miihlhere.t of the «liiehii) Ibe la;;,"!.; «cc,.nd pnrr-lbird and alien, wbleh Ip tbc iSPW^w "^!JS;N*-S«- 1? 20 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY popular in the 1840s (Melder, 1972:19-32). For the many women with little formal education, the main choices were limited to being a cook, laundress, household servant, or seamstress.^^ The flood of European immigrants in the last half of the 19th century added great numbers of men and women to the labor population. Imbued with democratic principles of equality, Americans, whether they were first, second, or third genera- tion, had a growing distaste (if not hostility) for accepting the subserviant status of domestic work. Being a seamstress was not a promising alterna- tive to employment as a household servant. In 1854 Godey's related that a widow supporting two children by sewing garments cut by a tailor was paid seven cents for common shirts, twelve cents for common trousers, twenty cents for finer ones, and thirty cents for cloth jackets. The most she could earn doing hand sewing for a full day and half a night was twenty-five cents. Yet she paid three dollars a month rent for one room (May 1854:467). The working conditions of this seamstress were harmful to her health, and her labor did not provide the income to sustain her and her two children. This occupation was to be avoided if possible. A woman with sewing skills saw dressmaking, however, as an avenue by which to escape the degrad- ing alternatives. This trade offered the hope of being successful enough to have one's own shop. There was the potential for a respectable place within the com- mercial world. But success required considerable skill, particularly in cutting, not normally a part of a '^ Working in a textile mill was respectable employment for some women. This opportunity, however, was only available in New England and only for about two decades. By the late 1830s the influx of immigrants supplied a strongly competitive work force wilHng to work for subsistence wages (Lerner, 1973:97). housewife's training and experience. A long ap- prenticeship, the usual method for acquiring such skill, was not possible for the widow with children to support. And, with the limited aids available, it was unlikely that an untrained woman could learn the trade quickly enough to support herself. Drafting systems that worked and that also could be learned easily became an important key in the efforts of women to unlock the doors to dignified economic independence. The final incentive for the commercial develop- ment of workable drafting systems was added by the advent of the sewing machine, which became available in the early 1850s. By dramatically re- ducing the sewing time spent on a dress it em- phasized the amount of time and skill required to cut a dress successfully. Only three years after Isaac M. Singer was granted his first patent, Godey's wistfully exclaimed, "If some ingenious 'Singer' would invent a machine that would cut and fit our own . . . dresses . . . the agony of weeks would be over in a few days" (Jun 1854:570). By 1868 the general adoption of the sewing machine by "pri- vate families" created "an absolute and pressing demand for ... a system for cutting garments as will enable every family to cut all kinds and sizes, in the most perfect and fashionable style" (Powell &: Kohler, 1868:1). The pressures created by changing fashions, more fitted styles, rising middle-class markets, and the financial needs of untrained women provoked the creation of dressmakers' drafting systems in the 19th century. The availability of a workable sewing machine when added to the interacdng combination of these social pressures, provided an impetus that significandy increased the momen- tum of this creative activity as the century pro- gressed. Technology filled a dramatic role as a necessary component of social change. Earliest Evidence of Dressmakers' Drafting Systems Although my speculadons place the creadon of the earliest dressmakers' drafting systems between 1820 and 1838, it may never be possible to idendfy exactly when the first was devised. Nor is it certain who created the earliest of these methods. Possibly tailors devised the first systematic tech- niques used for making dresses. After all, some tailors cut women's riding habits as a regular part of their trade. The heavy materials and tradidonal masculine styling of these habits required the strength and the specialized cutdng, sewing, and pressing skills that were essendal to the tailoring craft. Nevertheless, as the 1809 Philadelphia publi- cation pointed out, habit-making was quite differ- NUMBER 42 21 ent from the rest of the trade, "as different as that of a cabinetmaker and a carpenter" (Queen and Lapsley, 1809:53). Thus this feminine apparel was only occasionally considered in tailors' manuals. Nineteenth century tailors delicately avoided saying that the greatest problem with ladies' habits was that women were shaped differently from men. Already the average tailor was having diffi- culty covering the variedes of masculine figures that stood before him in different postures. When faced with the unpredictable size of women's breasts, many tailors gave up. James G. Wilson, however, was one tailor-inventor who attempted a solution to this prominent problem. In 1827 his hybrid system used divisions of half the "breast" measurement to draft men's coats (Figure 6). For ladies' habits and pelisses, however, he advised his readers to use half the waist measurement (1827:14). Wilson's innovation could be viewed as support for the speculation that a tailor devised the first dressmakers' drafting system. But I have found evidence that has convinced me that another type of person created the method that spawned generations of these systems. The earliest system that I have found that was specifically designed for cutting dresses was a pro- portional method using a perforated tool. This drafting device was illustrated (Figure 16a) and discussed as background in the application for the first U.S. patent granted for a dress cutting system. This patent was issued to Aaron A. Tentler of Philadelphia, on 23 January 1841. Tender based his system on this earlier work by persons un- specified, which he described in order to demon- strate "all that has been attempted in this way prior to the invention of my improvements" (U.S. Patent 1,944). The latest date for the creation of the pre- Tentler system can be established by considering when Tentler began developing his method. Al- though Tentler applied for his patent on 18 June 1840, the internal evidence of the patent applica- tion shows that he must have started his work significantly prior to this date. His system was designed to cut a bodice with a round, slightly raised waistline, full leg-o-mutton sleeves, and a wide cape collar (Figure I6b,c). Dresses that em- phasized a broad shoulderline in this manner started becoming popular in the late 1820s. The expansive sleeves and cape collar evolved to their greatest breadth in the early 1830s (Figure 12) and remained popular to 1836. After this date the sleeves quickly collapsed and the collar shrunk. Publications originating from Tentler's home city in 1839 showed dresses cut without the cape collar and with sleeves that fitted closely to the upper arm (Figure 13). Tentler probably started working out his method when dress fashions dictated that a woman should have shoulders so broad that they would have impressed a 20th century football player. At the latest, he must have started his modifications by about 1838 when some Philadel- phia women were still wearing the older styles. This hne of reasoning projects a date prior to 1838 for the earlier system. The next question to be answered is, who created this pre-Tentler system? Since all the pre- viously discussed tailoring and dressmaking tech- niques and aids were used earlier in England, it would be reasonable to expect that the pre-Tentler system also had a European origin. But I have found nothing to support this expectation. To the contrary, there are no English or French patents for any dressmaking drafting system dating as early as the Tentler patent. And, the two individu- als who have done research on this subject in England conclude that 19th century dressmakers either did not use "scientific systems" at all (Waugh, 1969:185) or else that they began using them very late, in the 1870s (Arnold, 1973:124). Thus it seems likely that the pre-Tentler system originated in the United States. But can the creator be identified? I have found several isolated references suggest- ing an individual named Fowler as an early creator of a drafting system for dresses which stimulated the development of many others. The earliest ref- erence appears in an 1857 instruction book for a dressmaking system published in Cincinnati by a physician. Dr. E. P. Minier. In the middle of a vitriolic criticism of his rivals, Dr. Minier qualified his statements by remarking, "I do not desire to detract from the credit due Mr. Fowler and others in the benefits they have conferred upon the ladies through their models and card plans of cutting. They are vastly better than no plans . . . but they have now had their day" (Minier, 1857:7). A year later in New York City, Samuel T. Taylor described in his monthly periodical Le Bon Ton how he exposed the flim-flam practices of an al- leged creator of a system. "I told her it was nothing but a duplicate of Fowler's model . . ." (1858:182). z/^ ' J»lr j*-*" 'T''^. ^Y^M/Tt»^tt^eri4 uuua»ty^f7*rtirm«/it»^!;'' I' "h --•4 ■3>* ^ ,J 1 9- . ^ h - ■*'T^ i^ft - ^ ^-ir y^ ^■.f- jf0 11/ k iB ^l^ . NUMBER 42 23 FIGURE I6a-c. Set of three drawings submitted by Aaron A. Tentler as part of his patent application for a perforated paper tool for a dressmakers' proportional drafting system (U.S. Patent 1,944, 23 January 1841). (National Archives.) FIGURE 16a (left top). First sheet, 52.3 x 67.9 cm. Tender's drawing of a tool (for drafdng a bodice front and back) predating his own and which he judged to be "all that has been attempted in this way prior to the in-ention on my improvements." FIGURE I6b (left bottom). Second sheet, 58.4 x 68.0 cm, Tentler's tool for drafting: Figs. 1, 2, bodice front and back with variations: Fig. 3, sleeves of two categories of sizes. FIGURE 16c (above). Third sheet, 51.4 x 47.8 cm, showing the use of the basic front and back bodice pieces (second sheet) in drafting: Fig. 4, cape-collar (cf. Figure 12 this study); Fig. 5, cape (probably for outer wear); Fig. 6, collar or yoke; Figs. 7, 8, front and back of corset (this last technique not covered by the patent). Date on this sheet, "June23, 1841,"appears to be a copying error (cf. second sheet). 24 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY In 1861, Taylor was bemoaning the money wasted on worthless charts and models when he referred to Fowler as "the beginner ... of this great hum- bug" (1861:247). These references show that Fowler's fame (or infamy, in the opinion of those who were selling another type of system) extended at least from Cincinnati to New York City. Fowler was still known years later in New York. An 1885 instruction booklet extolling the virtues of Cornwell's system stated that "the invention of the first chart, (Fowler's Theorem, erroneously called Fowler 8c Wells') occured some 40 years ago" (Cornwell, 1885:8). Although Fowler's contributions were widely ac- knowledged, I have yet to discover anything more specific about the identity of this person. Workingon the possibility that Fowler was a tailor, I examined city directories and census reports for the period 1820 to 1845 for Cincinnad, New York City, and Philadelphia. I discovered too many Fowlers rather than too few. Fowler was not an uncommon name. In Cincinnati, James Fowler was listed as a tailor in an 1836-1837 directory and William Fowler in 1842. In New York City one John Fowler was cited as a tailor until 1822 while another practiced this trade throughout the 1820 to 1845 period. Abraham Fowler was listed from 1827, Simeon L. Fowler from 1832, and Henry Fowler from 1835 to 1840. And in Philadelphia Mahlon Fowler was listed as a tailor from 1840 to 1845 and Rennels Fowler appeared in 1844 and 1845. Without a first name or initial to narrow down the possibilities exposed by this search, we are not any closer to identifying the creator of a drafting system. An additional problem is that the unidentified "Fowler" may not have been a tailor. This possibility becomes more plausible once the pre-Tentler tool is examined and its use is understood. The pre-Tentler system required a perforated tool, a heavy sheet of paper with a series of holes through which the drafting points were marked (Figure 16a). Eight series of perforations were used for the bodice front and seven were provided for the back. The specific perforation in each series needed to draft a bodice for an individual was idendfied according to half the "girth of the body." This measurement was "taken around the body of the person to be fitted, immediately under the arms and over the breast" (U.S. Patent 1,944:1). The pre-Tentler system was a proportional method based on a measurement similar to the dimension required in the many earlier tailors' propordonal methods. The drafdng tool, however, was not hke any device used by tailors. I have found no precedents in the tailor's trade for a perforated tool nor any evidence of a device made from a flat, rectangular sheet of paper. The simplicity of the pre-Tentler procedure also makes this system exceptional. Apparently, it was assumed that the dressmaker would not have a tape measure, as a strip of paper was used for measuring. The dressmaker folded the strip in half and held it up to the inch scale printed at the bottom of the sheet. If the breast measurement was 36, she marked the fabric through the perforations numbered 18. Then she removed the tool and drew the appropriate lines between the drafting marks. The dressmaker followed five mechanical steps, none of which required any "figuring." I have discovered no prior garment drafting system that used a tool like this. No other method was so simple. It was easy enough for an untrained person to use. The uniqueness of this pre-1838, pre-Tentler system prompts me to speculate that this method was not created by a tailor for use in the tailor's trade. It seems most likely to have been devised by someone who was enough removed from the inbred intricacies of the tailor's craft to put together a method that would appeal to poten- tial women users. It was suggested to me that this individual could have been Orson Squire Fowler (1809-1887) who is now most admired as a proponent for octagon shaped dwellings. In the 19th century, however, this Fowler was widely known as an energetic pro- ponent and practitioner of phrenology, the field of study which alleged that the character and future development of an individual could be determined by studying the shape and conformation of the skull. Orson Fowler was a prolific writer of maga- zine articles and books published mostly by his own firm. The majority of his work was concerned with phrenology, physiology, and subjects related to human health. With his preoccupation with the human body, which led him into specific studies of "female" topics, Fowler is most possibly the creator of 'Towler's Theorem." He was, however, sur- rounded by relatives who were also active in the same fields: brother Lorenzo Niles Fowler (1811- 1896), sister-in-law Lydia Folger Fowler (1823- NUMBER 42 25 1879), sister Charlotte Fowler Wells (1814-?), and brother-in-law Samuel Roberts Wells (1820-1875). All were active lecturers and writers, individually and with Orson Fowler. Most of them were in- volved at one time or another with Orson's publish- ing firm. I have not located, however, any writings of this proUfic group that could have become known as "Fowler's Theorem." The following clues, however, suggest that an intensive perusal of these many publications would turn up the hard evidence that is needed. In the previously cited 1885 instrucdon book it was stated that "Fowler's Theorem" was sometimes, although "erroneously," called "Fowler and Wells'." In 1844 the name of the publishing firm of O.S. & L.N. Fowler was changed to Fowler and Wells. Thus, the earliest system that I have found for drafting dresses is the pre-Tentler system dating before 1838. It was probably created in the United States, possibly by a person named Fowler, who might have been Orson Squire Fowler or one of his related colleagues. Setting these speculations aside, it is important to recall the two unique characteristics of this pre- Tentler system: fixed drafting points delineating one style of dress and the use of perforations in marking these points. These features spawned a new breed of drafting systems. Of special signifi- cance is the fact that these were systems specifically for cutting dresses. Proportional Systems In 1842 Aaron A. Tentler observed that "the learn- ing of the trade [dressmaking] requires a long time, and is . . . expensive and difficult.' With his system, however, "every lady may learn to make any kind of dress herself, in a short time" (1842:3). Tentler's system was a modification of the earliest dressmakers' drafting system so far discovered. He projected it for the woman who was not an experi- enced dress cutter. Unfortunately, little has been learned about him. Tentler's address on his patent application was the "S.E. corner of Coats and Budd Street, Philadelphia." He was listed in the 1840 census as living at 13th and Budd Street and he was described as being between the ages of 20 and 30 and engaged in a manufacturing trade. Also in his household were a woman of similar age, another female between 15 and 20, and a child under five. Tentler was not, however, included in any of the Philadelphia city directories. Thus no clue has been found as to his occupation or what led him to create a drafting system intended to help the un- trained dressmaker. Whatever his background, Tentler was not guilty of plagiarism. In his patent specification he stated that he did not invent the "principle or plan" of the scale by which he made his drafts. Instead he "improved and extended" an earlier technique (Figure 16a) "so as not only to render it correct in its results, but also to make it applicable to a num- ber of purposes ... to which it could not be applied in its original form" (U.S. Patent 1,944:1). Tentler was granted a patent on 23 January 1841, for two claims. The first was for "the apply- ing of the measure of the half girth of the body . . . to the drafting of the sleeve, by the aid of the lines of punctures, or perforations" (U.S. Patent 1,944:3). His method for drafting the sleeve was actually a hybrid system (Figure 16b). Three draft- ing points for the sleeve were determined by the half girth measure, but the direct measurements of the arm length and the wrist circumference were also used. Tentler also suggested a form of sleeve appropriate for the normally proportioned arm and another for the short and fat arm. Tentler's second claim concerned a more sophisticated application of the tool. He claimed recognition for his method of drafting capes, yokes, and collars by using the bodice fronts and backs after they had been defined by the propor- tional method (Figure 16c). These deep collars and capes, cut to fit over the exaggerated breadth of the leg-o-mutton sleeves, were an important ele- ment in the atdre of a fashionable Philadelphia lady before 1838. Tentler also discussed and illus- trated how to cut corsets using the draft of the dress as a guide (Figure 16c). But this technique was not included as one of the claims for which he was granted a patent. According to his patent specifications, Tentler's procedure for drafting the front and back of a dress was the same as the earlier method (Figure 16a,^) already described; Tentler only altered the 26 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY placement of the lines of perforations. His instruc- tion booklet, however, directed the dressmaker to adjust the proportional draft according to two proof measurements. Half the front breast mea- surement was used. Also, the direct measurement of the underarm length "from where the sleeve is sewed in . . . down as far as the waist may require" (1842:5) was used to adjust this dimension on the pattern. Tentler realized that the height of a woman had little to do with her breadth. Or as he put it, 'one person is tall and thin, and another stout and small" (1842:8). Half the actual waist circumference was used to determine how much of the waist of the pattern would be assigned to the "breast plaits" or bust darts. All of the measure- ments were taken with a strip of paper one and a quarter yards long and one and a half inches wide. They were recorded on the strip by notches and identified by numbers. The salient features of propordonal drafdng systems with perforated tools were used long after Tentler's modificadons. Only fragments remain of a perforated proportional system published in 1859 (Figure 17). Justin Clave, describing himself as a "Professor of Mathematics," claimed to be the creator of this "New Geometrical Method." Both the chart and the instructions were lithographed on a single sheet of paper by P. S. Duval and Son of Philadelphia. The perforations for marking the drafting points were not punched during the manufacture of the chart. Instead the holes would have been made during its use. Unfortunately, the FIGURE 17. The instructions and tool (intended to be perforated) for Justin Clave's 1859 propor- tional system printed in Philadelphia on a sheet of paper, originally 61x91 cm, which was sold for $2. (Library of Congress,) [Portion of original tool missing] NUMBER 42 27 major portion of the instructions were printed on the section that has been lost. After comparing the measurements, however, I believe that this system was a proportional method with the drafting points designated by the circumference of the waist. Clave's chart drafted dresses with waists measuring from 12 to 30 inches. Considering the stylishly tight corseting of the day, this drafting device did accommodate most of the ladies who would be hkely to own a fashionable dress. The inch scale at the bottom of the tool suggests that the waist mea- surement was taken with an unmarked strip of paper or a string. "The American Delineator" was the confident name given to a system that had a tool of cruder appearance than Clave's chart (Figure 18). Accord- ing to the printing on the tissue paper, Mrs. H. McMillen, of Clyde, Ohio, secured a copyright for FIGURE 18. Tool printed on tissue paper (intended to be perforated) that was required for the 1864 proportional system offered by Mrs. H. McMillen of Clyde, Ohio. (Warshaw Collection, Smithsonian Institution.) 28 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY this chart in 1864. In this system it was assumed that the user owned an inch measure of some type. The locations of the drafting points were deter- mined according to the "measurement in inches around the chest, close under the arms" (McMillen, 1864). Patterns could be drafted for women rang- ing in chest measurement from 24 to 39 inches. This type of measurement was very similar to that used in the pre-Tentler system. Despite the modifications that each creator of a perforated proportional system devised, these methods had similar advantages and disadvan- tages. The significant advantage of this type of system was that it was easy to use. It required no calculations, there were no complicated steps, and a garment could be drafted quickly. It was the ease with which these systems could be apphed that encouraged their continued use. The two common weaknesses of these methods, however, encouraged the development of other techniques. First, the perforated proportional sys- tem worked well only for a few women. Because they were based on proportional presumptions, these methods could draft garments which would fit well only the few ladies who conformed to the creator's notions regarding proportional figures. The obvious remedy for this problem was to incor- porate some direct measurements producing hy- brid systems using perforated tools. Tender was ahead of his dme when he advised correcdng the pattern drafted with his tool according to the underarm length and half the front "breast" mea- surements. But these modifications were merely added corrections rather than a true integration of direct measurements with proportional proce- dures. The second fundamental weakness of the perfo- rated proportional systems is found in the form of the tool. The series of perforations provided fixed points for drafting one style of dress—only one. Thus, when fashions changed and required a bodice of a different cut, the system became obso- lete. In the preface of his 1842 publication, Tentler declared that he had "not the least doubt that this little book [would] realize his expectations" (1842:3). I suspect that he was sadly disappointed. FIGURE I9a,b. Powell & Kohler's proportional system as pre- sented in their 1868 instruction book published in Cincinnati, Ohio. (Library of Congress.) FIGURE 19a (below). Strip scales printed on a single sheet of paper included in the instruction book. FIGURE I9b (right). Illustration showing how to use the strip tool to place critical drafting points. c? rl?^— 1} h IJ k ti (1f===" u>-:\'. j^ /I' if It I) It (T---'i,M,- I'l rnrj': r M'! I I I I i''! r—n I'l ,''. i i ."T-T-. r'; »| /j J :,U . il li/ yyp>:r "»k''^*'-\ 'OP^ I'lMJ.l^ I ' J ' j M ■ j ' ' I I IJ 'J I r ! '' I ' ' ' I ' I ' I M ' i ' ' I ' ' , ■' ' ''I ' '' , ■ '•—■ 1 ■ - ■ ' - I : — — ,.' 'T 1 1 i *! 1 1 111 h ti tf tf » ts le ti In h> !,' il il » .■» A.- m .v .v a .* // .^ .« M ji K ji .v ,.-, ,,• // ?■ ,j „ >, ,<, ,, ., ,, I. .ire. ll Jl:ljl|^ ljl|i.|l| I.JSM ; ' l!.l V|".'| r-fn ^-- ,'i i' ; . : —. -^ ^—, ,_J V f M I I I I I M I !'l I'l I'' I'l I I : I I'' ' > I '' ; i . ! ! I I ! ,' ' , . i ! I I' > - '. ' ;' ' .', I' I' ^ , . , i . -^-^—, -, , , ^ L ' M' IJ''I M I I M Ij'' I i|'r-'rr'| i t ,■'; i , i ; n ('';■; | r, i' , . ■:'■'-,' ^ .', i' i' ^ , . i i . . , ', , , ^ K—J 1 1 1 H 1 1 'i 1 r T r r ^i' ' y 'M' 11 t f r 1' y * " r f.»: ^^ ^ ^ -^ M jf s, J, » ,. ,i y, ,, „ „ ,„. „ „ „ j, .tLv.,v. \^. ! ' (i 'ij' I I r I'M' r I'i I'l |i| I'i I i ih M I - I I 'i ^1 i' i' I'l I'l ■! i| , ii|-,-ip^.... l,t r) ) hi' .,^^-rr; 11 '. .1, , ,-,,', : , . , \ ' '. * i i '' 's \ ■', k k >> 1^ >f " >f ti If If. k >i h -J h V If tr M -r ir Jl If t k k it il M it i il H ^: K 'I >.' r< \ .yir.U iri-fl pr.Yrfi;'!!'.; i" :'i ;" ! /; j| t[ jj ^ )( j; « ^' * * /(r /» fl'iT'i ^T'T'-f ' 11 '' ••: I' i'I :'';''' r 'i ' :'^ 1 '. p ' . ,' ,' ,; !■ 1^ I ; I I I . ^ ' ■'.■■■I 'M'I '. ,' .. , ., • •' ' f ll il Ij » /i /( h tf If ir II !f b il if H ii /> ' I'l l'' ■'!! ' ;h-vr--f. ,1 .^^1. r ■ ' ,. ,., ,.i . , tt' ^ HI fiy » li TCTII -* » j ' J] 1 >! ■« ll -f 'r f '? t 4' f " 'I' '!• *»' ■'•' -^ '!< ■•' 1' f " « ^ -V ■* T V J» Js » jv /K » (t< /.y « V « "i. i> w bw* ]■ .t/.v-J-/: POWELL & KOHLER'S PRACTICAL SYSTEM FOR CUTTING. *JT iJiyniri'riij'iiriiji.M- I'rn i i i iTtr'Tni'li':''i'TM iTi' ru; i', i' ,'i : .i, '.:.:. ^i ,'i.-, ■■ ■';'.^ i.tn,;,,—,■.., 1 -> , \ '.'■..\. ■ V| -^ 'T t t ? t '■' f -•f f » f ^ " >■'/' V '> <' -f V-^' -11 ■? » ■» « .*/».« JP *■?,« v i!> «.» « w v \ .yi-j/ii ' i*^-i'Ti'.ji f'-rV[^'"-j^T'■■['i nii-ri-ftTtiri ■" I'-M'. II !■-Iii,; r .i , . .,..-, ,'MI'' ' r ■ ' i' iirii M'I ^ ,->/. ; -l '*i'-'M ll ' tl'^l'f'i'Tf*'*' ■''"'■' "'I'"'"'!''''!"' ••'*■'■''' ^^*•'!'*»'^<||•7J'lirl).•i•^^^*.i ■VvJ'.i; ■*jin''''wpr']nT"''^''Ti'^!'^r'''Ln^'''|'V''1''V' :'i' ' '''V: M:'I'I iM/Mfn ■.■ >. I'lii'ii'iv '—^ A^i '■'■;|J,'||'|JI!|IM'. :.ri|l||l., |.|'i|l||l||l|l||l|| 'III '||l.l . . '.ll .,fi|i|ri,';..l|,.',-,.r-i.,t.,f.i ,■', .' .^, f , fJ, . . ' T , ' '!M''I| I I'l'!' i'l'IMI ' ■ ill M'll'iril'l I'l I 'Iji '|l' ' I ''■. M 'MM I'l n ;';il|-,■<,->■,., ,..p I .-liV. I I'l I'l I', 11 ■ ' / t ^ , .^ ^. « 4 I v H It 1 ■> if It i/ 1.1 If V ll ti :, » N .t ti !■< If J, n 1, n! M js M J, J) „ V » ^ II If il if If if I, I .'HzeSll. ^jr'"7"''7n"j'!'j'M'MM''lT!i'l'^'l]';'l"^'^n'' ,:'■'■'" IT''ri;'-^'!]'li'M, I'll': I'liilVi -Vll, I'lr.i'nv',,;!! 1 , ' ' '' II ;'^i""'', .!.';• '-'- - ' ' ' I • ■ A^ o^iL<.u. "^ Vi'T^i'l' 'I I'. I'l y, ft if if It A f ll il if .y if .^ f .1 i If i- w f jf i .. i; i V\'i\)'\ iif!nii.i'i'ri'ii'irii-it|.|!i;ii,nr|l|jiM , J, I Jl d i h tllf IJ ll If i^ il if I, : • -I. ^ .1 /A It II ^ j ^ : i 3 !j 7 « i ti) IB il|njsi)ll31«isail>.t a :|IB »»?!)!»».II lilJ^ISBljjJJBWO HtLUe It It fill JD ,*»(•.'.' j NUMBER 42 29 ^29i />>/ i 'T''*r'n n*i 7. ^ J* I ^ A f M ! //if jjit 50*- B # // /-/ .« 30 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY His system had become obsolete even before his patent was granted or his book copyrighted. Changing fashions condnued to affect the longev- ity of individual drafting systems. In 1868 Powell & Kohler published in Cincinna- ti, Ohio, a proportional method with a different type of tool. This system used a series of numbered strips, one for each size based on "breast" mea- surement (22 to 48 inches). These 27 strips, each divided into 50 equal parts, were printed on a single sheet of paper folded into the back of the instruction booklet (Figure 19a). The user was to have pasted this paper onto a stiff pasteboard and then cut the strip-scales apart. The scale to be used was selected according to the breast measurement. The drafting process with this strip tool was not as simple as using a perforated chart. Nevertheless Pow- ell & Kohler were probably right when they claimed that anyone of ordinary intelligence could learn this system in 15 to 30 minutes. In the authors' example (Figure 19^) the individual had a 34 inch breast mea- surement. Thus, the scale marked "Size 34" was selected. To start, a verdcal base line (A to B) and a shorter horizontal line (A to C) were drawn using the two arms of a common square as a guide. The strip scale was placed next to the vertical base line and dots were then made on this line next to specified numbers on the scale. In the case of the back of a lady's dress, dots were placed at numbers 1, 6, 10, 14V2, 19V2, 23, 25!/2, 35V2, 45, and 46V2. A horizontal line was drawn from each of these dots perpendicular to the vertical base line. The scale was then placed on each horizontal line and a dot marked on this line next to a specified number on the scale. For example, the horizontal line at point one was dotted at six on the scale. The next horizontal line at point six was dotted at 14y2. The third horizontal line at point 10 was dotted at 20V2 and so on until the outline of the bodice piece was formed by a series of dots. The drafter connected the dots free hand. The numbers of the dots re- mained the same vertically and horizontally for each pattern piece no matter what the size of the individual. The eventual size of the garment de- pended upon the scale that was used, which in turn was determined by the breast measurement. Powell 8c Kohler's method had disadvantages similar to the perforated proportional systems. namely, not being very successful in drafdng gar- ments that fit well and becoming obsolete as fash- ions changed. The authors attempted to eliminate these disadvantages through two strategies. To draft a more accurately fitted garment, the Powell & Kohler method instructed the dressmaker to take two more measurements in addition to the breast measurement. These extra measurements (waist and underarm length) were not an intrinsic part of these systems but were to be used to "proof or check the pattern once it was drafted. If there was a discrepancy between these direct measure- ments and the pattern, the pattern was to be al- tered. Powell 8c Kohler also attempted to prevent their method from becoming obsolete due to fash- ion changes. They intended to publish annual supplementary editions which would guide the subscriber in the art of cutting the most current styles with their system. As they told their readers, this will enable all to keep up with, or rather in advance of the most popular styles, at a much less expense than by taking costly magazines, which after all do not teach you how to cut, but leave you to work out the problem for yourselves or to go to a professional cutter, at an annual cost of perhaps twice the price of our "system" (1868:20). Powell &: Kohler's proportional system utilizing strips and the proportional methods using perfo- rated charts may have had a common origin. It is obvious to me that the concept behind the gradu- ated strips, used to mark points on perpendicular base lines in the draft, was derived from the di- vided strips integral to Wilson's 1827 tailors' system (Figure 6). As reported before, this was a modifi- cation of the tailors' system published in England by Minister in 1822. It has occurred to me that the perforated propordonal tools might also have the same lineage. For if the Powell 8c Kohler strips were used to mark the drafdng points for all the possible sizes on the same sheet of paper the spread of drafdng points would look very much like the perforated tools we have been examining. Thus it is my opinion that it was the perforated form of this kind of tool that was uniquely an American creadon. It was the simplest to use and its simplicity ensured its continuance in future hybrid systems. P^<-ig>U7 " 18-2 1.; .. 19 «« 20 2',^ " 21 " 22 — 2^ " CENTER BACK. I Draft lines A a""^ B ^ inch from the edge and end of cloth, a Measure the distance given in the neck table according to size of neck under dot 2, down line A from line B ""d place dot 2- NECK TABLE. Dot ^ A X ! ^ y^ H Neck Size 7 1 « r 10 I'A II '2 j 13 '54 '34 16 '7 2 iS Dot 3 H 1 '/^ 2jfl 3 Measure '.he distance given in the neck tabic under dot 3 on line B ^'om line A i>"*( ^^ \.i!o\c gives for the width of cen- ter back and place dot 6. 9 Draft line £ beginning 4 inches below line B »1<1 nd place dot 10, I 5 Place letter A on dot 3, the edge of curve on dot 10 and draft line H the proportionate length of shoulder and place dot ) 1. See table on curve. 16 Meas'ire Z inches straight down from dot 11 and place dot 12, 17 Place the point of curve on dot 11 and draft line J to dot 12. 18 Place leitiT L on dot 12 and draft line K to dot Q. 19 Draft lint Q J inches straight down from dot 8. For high or low shoulder, change the position of dot 10 up or down. For very high shoulder dot IQ should be only from 2 to 3 inchet from dot 9. SIDE FORM. 1 Place the long arm of square on line A in the back drafting the (hort arm on dot 12 and draft line If straight out from dor 12. 2 Measure z^^ inches out from dot 12 and place dot 2 on line %, 3 Measure 2|^ inches from dot 6 on line D 'nd place dot 3. 4 Place letter L on dot 2 and draft line A to dot 3. 5 Measure tha distance given in the table for the width of side body from dot 3 *nn 1 2 Plaee letter A on dot 4 and draft line £ to dot 8. I 3 Measure 1 inch in from dot 3 and place dot 9< 14 Measure 5 inches straight down from dot 9 and place dot 10. I 5 Draft line P from dot 3 to dot 10- UNDER ARM FORM. 1 Measure 3 inches from dot 4 (>" s'dc form) and place dot 2. 2 Measure out from dot 2 the width of the under arm form as given in the table and place dot 3' 3 Measure the distance between dots 4 and 6 «n the side form and then measure that distance straight up from dot 2 and place dot 4. 4 Measure 1 14' inches straight out from dot 4 and place dot 5. 5 Measure straight out from dot 4 the width of under arm form and place dot Q. 6 Place the corner of square on dot 3, the edge on dot 6 and measure up from dot 3 the length oi under arm measure and place dot 7- 7 Place letter Q on dot 5 and draft line A to dot 2. 8 Place letter M on dot 7 and draft line B to dot 3. 9 Place the point of curve on dot 5 and draft line C to dot 7. I o Measure I i^ inches in from dot 2 and place dot 8. I I Measure 5 inches straight down from dot 8 and place dot 9. I 2 Place letter A on dot 2 and draft line £ to dot 9, '3 '4 Measure one inch out from dot 3 and place dot IQ. Measure 5 inches straight down from dot 10 and place dot H, Place letter A on dot 3 and draft line P to dot H. FIGURE 21h. Instructions for drafting back, side-back, and underarm pattern pieces. NUMBER 42 43 ■5k."%.C Far long ahouU dert draft line f ^ inch more than the propor- tionate shoulder mesiure and pkce dot 22. Meatore i)( inchet ia from dot 23 and place dot 24. To Locate Dot lo from D jt 8. WAIST MEASVRR. »8 to 20 , jnpi, ai to 23 ,!• „ nto27 jiy .. »7& ?8 ,G „ »9&3a 2 •' 3' & 3*.; «^ ♦. Above 32 inches the same proportion. To place Dot 12 from Dot 11. WAIST MEASDRB 19, 20 and 2t--J inch MEASURE. 32. 23 and 24—f " Bust ,. 25, 26 lad 27^1 " Waist "'„ 28, 39and 30—ij " Front '.'..'.'.'.'. 15 Back ■■■,, Above 30 inches in fame pm- Under Ann... '"« !»'*«>»• Neck .■.■.■!;;:ii Ann'aEye !.,... 16 FRONT. I Draft Hne A > H inches from the edge uf good*, z Draft line B one inch from the end of goodi. 3 Measure the distance given in the neck table (accurdiDg to size of neck) under dot 2 on line A from line B and place dot 2. NECK TABLE. Dot 2 ' ^% 9110 11 1% 12 >3 2% i3. _4 '5 3 4^ 16 3>6 '7 ^a Neck 7 8 18 Dot 3 2 2>& 1% 3^ 4 Measure the distance given in the neck table under dot 3 on line B irom line A ind place dot 3, ) Measure ^ inch straight out from dot 2 and place dot X. 6 Place letter Q on dot X and draft line C to dot 8. 7 Measure ^ of the arm's eye meaiure down Une A &om line B and place dot 4- 8 Measure ^ of the arm's eye meaiure down line A ^"x ^Bt B and place dot 5. 9 Draft f om dot X to dot 5. 10 Place the corner of square on dot 6 'nd draft line 0 straight out be pnning 6 inchet from dot §. 11 Measure out line D f't^i dot 9 the distance given in the table (ar Butt number and place dot 8. 11 Measure the length of nader arm meaiure ttraight down from dot 8 and (la<^e dot 7. IJ Pl>4< e letter A on dot 7 d draft fine B to dot 8> 14 Measure the length of front measure down Hue A ^'on dot 8 and puce dot 8. 11 Place letter ■ on dot 8 and draft tine F to dot 7- 16 Measure a inchet down tine B from dot 8 wd place dot 8- 17 Place the corner of t<)ttare on dot 4, the edge on dot 8 'od draft line Q out 4 inches beginning z inchea from dot 4< 18 Measure 1 ^ incliet on line f from dot 8 ud place dot IQ. 19 Measure ^ the width of the daru Mgiptn in tkt Uilt, from dot 10 and place dot H. 20 Measure ^ inch from dot H and place dot I8. 31 Measure ^ the width of the dam from dot 12 *^ pl*c« dot %%, 2S Meaiure the dlttance between dot 8 uid tin center of the ftrttdvt, and MJJ }i iKch, then measure that dittanee oa ]be0 fi«m dot 4 ood place dot 14, 23 Measure the distance between dot 9 Md die center of the aecend dan and add ^ inch, then measure that disunce on Hue % from dot 4 and place dot IB, 25 26 a7 a8 29 30 3« 3» 33 34 35 36 24 Place the ^ mark on dot IQ and draft fine B to dot 14. Turn the curve over and draft line {^ uung the ^ mark. Draft linct J and X in like manner. Meature $ inchet straight down from dot 18 and place dot 18. Measure ^ inch in from dot 18 and place dot 17. Draft line If from dot 10 to dot 17. Draft lines M, If and Q parallel with Iin« ||. Meature t% inchet ttraight out from dot 7 and place dot 18, Meature ; inchet ttndght down from dot |8 and place dot 19. Place letter A on dot 7 and draft line P to dot 18. Meature 6yi inchet from dot 8 on line B and place dot 80. Measure i ^ inchet straight down from dot 80 ai>d place dot 21. Place letter A on dot 8| the edge of curve on dot 81 and draft Une Q ^ inch less than the proportionate length of shoulder and place dot 28 [*" f'^ft m furvtifor difUnit). 37 Draft line X straight down from dot 82 to line ]). 3« 39 40 4' Meature 1 ^ inches up line R from bne Q and place dot 83. Meaiure \^ inch itraight in from dot 28 and place dot 84. Place letter Q on dot 84 and draft line 8 to dot 8. Place letter K on dot 24 and extend line 8 to dot 82. The front can be curved if desired. Place letter E on dot X and draft a curved line f to meet line Ki% inchet below dot 4. Place tetter H on the end of line f and draft to meet line A 3 inchet below dot 8- ^f' dotted linti. For a low-cut cortet draft n new line Q i ^ inchet below line 0< ^** dotted linei. IMPORTANT—The front ihoulder it drafted ^ inch thorter than the back and mutt bc ttretched to meet the back. FIGURE 27C. Instructions for drafting front pattern piece. 44 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY And by changing the drafting process as fashions changed, Taylor was able to keep his system up to date.^^ His technique did not become obsolete as did so many other hybrid methods. Nevertheless, Taylor's system for cutting dresses could not have survived for so long without the support of his diversified enterprises. He de- scribed his latest drafting techniques in his monthly magazines.^^ In 1857 each number of L^ '^ In 1868, Powell & Kohler reported that they intended to keep their clients up to date with yearly supplements. They may have been copying Taylor's example. '* Taylor published as many as five magazines at one time; apparently he never had fewer than two. Bon Ton included a fashion report from Paris, four steel engraved fashion plates executed and colored in Paris, and two full-size imported patterns. Also included was a liberal dose of Taylor's advice, observations, and vitriolic criticisms of his com- petitors. His other publication at the time was Le Petit Messager with a similar format. During the same period he also had a dressmaking establish- ment at 407 Broadway, New York. Although he warned against their "injurious effect," Taylor also sold patterns, trimmed as they were to be made, in a set with a plain duplicate. He later explained that he must sell them "as long as you are determined to have them, for it would be mortifying to see my subscribers compelled to get patterns from others who never import, but change and fix up their Centennial Medal of Highest Merit Av\arded overall Competitors to S. T. Taylor's System for Cutting Ladies' Dresses. MEDALS AWARDED TO S. T. TAYLOR For hiy Sy.^^tein of Cutting Ladies' Dresses, at the Fair of the Maryland Institute for the Promotion of the Mct-hanic Arts, held in Baltimore, in 1851, and at the World's Fair, hold in New York, in 1853. FIGURE 28. Flamboyant promotion for S. T. Taylor's system that appeared in his 1877 instrucdon booklet. The system had been given a medal at the 1876 International Exhibidon in Philadelphia for individual merit, but not, however, a prize "over all competitors" as stated in this notice. As pictured here, a complete S. T. Taylor system consisted of an instruction book, a square, a set of scales, and a measure book, each item (according to his 1875 instruction booklet) priced separately: $3.00, $3.00, $2.50, and $1.50, respectively. (Library of Congress.) NUMBER 42 45 SHORT ARM. styles from my importations" {Le Bon Ton, 1860:182). Samuel T. Taylor was a flamboyant entrepre- neur and promoter, whose efforts to proselydze sometimes strained the truth. This trait continued to be reflected by his successors after he ceased being active in the company in the 1870s. An example of the double talk that was sometimes used to sell Taylor's system appeared in an 1896 instruction booklet. By this time proportional and hybrid systems had fallen into disrepute among many professional dressmakers who preferred direct-measure methods. It was reported: S. T. Taylor's System of Dresscutting . . . does not require any special and complicated tool for making its shapes and patterns; a square and tape measure are sufficient. It ... is a system of actual measurement... to however facilitate matters for the dressmaker, and save her a great deal of figuring, diset of scales have been added, two of which are attached to the square in order to make drafting easy, and relieve the mind of the dressmaker from figuring, which sometimes is not much to her taste (Taylor, 1896:24). The tailors' system that Samuel T. Taylor had converted into a hybrid method for dress cutting was thus, in 1896, blithely called a direct-measure system. FIGURE 29. Detail of tool for Samuel T. Taylor's hybrid system showing how two proportional paper strips, one for a 32-inch bust and the other for a 24-inch waist, were placed on the square, from the 1911 instruction booklet. (Library of Congress.) Direct-Measure Systems Dress fashions in the last quarter of the 19th cen- tury (Figures 30, 31) created cutting difficulties that could best be solved by the most accurate techniques. Thus, professional dressmakers pre- ferred direct-measure systems to proportional or hybrid methods. In 1884, Mrs. Elizabeth Gartland, creator of a direct-measure technique, observed: Dressmaking is not what it was ten years ago, for within the last few years the tendency of the times has called forth the most artistic skill. The close-skin-fitting busts and sleeves of to-day require scientific cutting and fitting. A fault at once shows itself, and disfigures the wearer; consequently, it is more essential to ladies to have perfect-fitting garments now than it has been at any previous dme (1884:12). The whimsy of fashion not only changed the fit of women's dresses, it radically changed the appar- ent shape of women. To be considered fashionably correct, a woman must have compressed and pad- ded herself to the "right" form by the time she had finished dressing. In particular, the fashions of the moment dictated a sensuous double reverse curve starting at the back of the neck, becoming concave at the waist, and projecting outward to create that astonishing protuberance called a bustle. Since no woman was formed that way, dressmakers had to create a new shape for their fashion conscious customers. Women's torsos became solid, artificial, multicurvilinear structures over which the outer dress fabric must fit like a second skin. To create this extraordinary style, dressmakers had to cut subtly curved, complex patterns with many pieces (Figure 31). This period, more than any other before or since, required professional dressmakers to be skilled at drafdng. Thus they preferred the most accurate type of system, the direct-measure. In 1896 the Samuel T. Taylor Co. faced this crisis obliquely. Taylor's hybrid system was simply called a direct-measure system. Others, such as 46 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY .^i»ate tsC j*«iCwi^ir /W^v.^^/w 4037 FIGURE 30. September 1876 fashion plate showing latest Paris costumes with draped skirts and carefully cut bodices shaped to fit smoothly over the hips, irom Journal des Demoiselles. (Smithsonian Institution.) NUMBER 42 47 Mrs. Louisa L, Jackson of Richmond, Indiana, dealt with the problem more directly. When Mrs. Jackson was granted a patent, 25 May 1869, her method was a hybrid system using six direct mea- surements. The curved perforated tool was made of sheet metal or cardboard (Figure 32). When she published the 1876 edition of her instruction book- let, Mrs. Jackson's system had become a direct- measure method. Under the new system nine measurements were required. The curved, perforated tool used inch scales for linear dimensions such as length of cen- ter front or width of shoulders and apportioning scales for circumferential measurements such as waist or "arm size" [armscye] (Figure 33). The 1876 Jackson system produced a more accurate draft than the earlier method but the drafting process was not easily learned and remembered. It was not that there were any calculations to be made—the apportioning scales eliminated that complica- tion—but the many steps that had to be followed in a specific order meant that it took a lot of practice to use this procedure with any speed. A miniature tool, along with the full-size version, was enclosed in the instruction booklet for the beginner to use for practice. Probably the most serious problem for the 1876 Jackson system was that the tool looked too much like the old proportional and hybrid "charts" and "models." It was not similar in principle, but the curved perforated tool was superficially similar in form. Apparently Mrs. Jackson was able to dem- onstrate the real value of her system as she pub- lished at least one later edition of her instruction book. But the mood of the current dressmaking trade was against anything that appeared to be based on proportional dressmaking methods. The search for "new scientific" techniques took innovators in two different directions. Both were efforts to develop the best possible direct-measure system. One approach reverted to using the simplest of tools while the other developed more specialized drafting devices. Some dressmakers had become so disillusioned with charts and models, finding them useful only in giving the shape of a piece but not in giving the correct dimensions, that they gave up all special- ized tools. Instead, they used just the tape measure to take their measurements and to draft their pat- terns or linings. These most basic of methods dif- fered from the 18th century ways only in that the 19th century techniques were repeatable, systemat- ic procedures instead of intuitive, individualistic processes. In 1886 the formidable looking Madame E. W. Mallison (Figure 34) published her direct-measure system in Washington, D.C. Thirteen measure- FicURE 31. The close fitting basque worn in 1886 with a draped skirt distended by a large bustle. The precisely defined shape of the basque (above) required a subtly curved pattern of sophisticated cut (below), from Mme. Mallison, The Eclectic Lady-Tailor System of Dress Cutting. (Library of Congress.) z.z.y^L Zf^^ 'z%^Z^/^. yT<'9g363. /v. NUMBER 42 49 FIGURE 33. The full-size, six-piece curved, perforated tool for Louisa L. Jackson's direct-measure system, which was printed on a single sheet of paper, 76.2 x 86.4 cm, and bound into the back of her 1876 instruction booklet. The printed paper tool was to have been glued onto a piece of cardboard or thin wood and then cut out and the holes punched or drilled. (Library of Congress.) ments were required to draft a "basque' (two of these measurements were the "height of hip" and the circumference of the hip). Another eight mea- FIGURE 32. Curved perforated tool for a hybrid drafting sys- tem for which Louisa L. Jackson of Richmond, Indiana, ob- tained a patent in 1869. (U.S. Patent Office.) surements were used to draft the sleeves. The only tools needed for measuring and drafting were a tape measure and a common square. The square, however, was not absolutely essential. Mme. Malli- son reported that one lady, who did not have a square handy, successfully used the Mallison method by improvising with a broom handle and a 50 FIGURE 34. Madame E. W. Mallison, as she was pictured in the booklet she published in Washington, D.C, in 1886, presenting her direct-measure system that required no specialized tools. Her drafting method could be followed with only a tape mea- sure and a square. (Library of Congress.) measuring tape (1886:6). Mallison, however, thought of her technique as a modern scientific system. She called her instruction booklet. Dress Making Reduced to a Science; the Eclectic Lady-Tailor System of Dress Cutting. While direct-measure systems using the simplest of tools may have been accurate, the drafting pro- cesses were complicated. A good understanding of SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY the endre procedure was necessary before an in- dividual could be successful. This requirement was not compatible with the popular demand for an easy-to-use method. A creator of a tailors' hybrid system, Joseph H. Noland, observed in 1861 that "things that are slow to go will soon be no go in the great market of the world—this busy, MONEY- making world, where lightning and steam are har- nessed up and driven as the wheel-horses of the new creation" (Noland, 1861). By the last quarter of the 19th century, social, economic, and technological pressure made speed, efficiency, and ease of learning a system critical characteristics for a drafting method. Thus, the majority of systems that were described in print during this period required unique tools or devices thought to simplify the application of direct- measure principles of drafdng. Each innovator struggled with what he hoped would be the solu- tion to the interrelated problems of efficiency and reliability. The most important types of these direct-measure systems may be divided into three groups according to the common characterisdcs of the tools—square, adjustable, and conforming. Squares The first group used the form of the common tailor s square. To this were added apportioning scales and sometimes curves. James A. Wilson's tool, copyrighted in 1880, added a reverse curve to a square with apportioning scales (Figure 35). Nine measurements including hip circumference were needed to draft a "basque." Another two measure- ments were needed for the sleeve. Although his tool was printed on paper and attached to a small instruction booklet, Wilson intended that it be applied to wood to make it durable enough to last a lifetime. Mr. B. T. Phelps of Bellows Falls, Vermont, was granted a patent on 26 June 1883 for a square-type tool he and his wife had been selling for several years (Figure 36). Although the long arm was curved slightly as an aid to drawing curved lines, this device retained the original form of the tailor's square. Eleven measurements (including hip cir- cumference) were used with the apportioning scales to draft a tight fitting "basque." Four more measurements were used to draft the sleeves. J. R. Bayne's tool, shown in his 1883 instruction NUMBER 42 51 FIGURE 35. James A. Wilson's square tool with curves, which was printed on paper and attached to his 1880 instruction booklet describing a direct-measure system. (Library of Congress.) (Ho Model.) No. 279,979. B. T. PHELPS. DRESS SQUARE. Patented Jnne 26, 188a. Tiy ./. ^vy .£. F IHHrtjaH^WTBTTlTW r« la a79,07B. OUarNOAU ltoiuaT.Piiw>,UlniNhTi I nuiuftim (K.B.M.) Ci*im,—TW dRH-.qaw« bnvjiij; . lMi).i:r anil •borm wm, UK fctMW kivbig th. oonvel curve a 6 .1 iln und mt th. inner iide for nliout WI^MHA at iu Ifiigtli, UM ui4 .^lura licinK pravitlnl widi tbe urdinvy Md. .f fc.1 iW iadiet uid UK vuioui wal.. for meaKUrin^ Uie diftr- Mt put. of dw (HWflt, U Ml follll. FnirerUoi Briaham Fkoina^ £helps. qd^y. fy/2jU^ NUMBER 42 53 ^RAHISSCALE"% ■ FlUNCH GLOVK FnTINC ^ — TniLoir SrsrrM »^ 'X]RESSQJTTlNa ii booklet (Figure 37), used more curves than the Wilson device. Ten measurements (including hip circumference) were needed to draft a basque with the apportioning scales. Another six measure- ments were needed to draft sleeves. The Wilson, Phelps, and Bayne systems required constant shifting of the respective tools as drafting points and lines were established to define the pattern pieces. The drafting processes required close attention to the step by step instructions. The major advantage of this type of method over those requiring no specialized tools was that the appor- tioning scales saved the dressmaker from having to make any calculations. But many felt that this was not enough to recommend these systems utilizing squares. In 1891 it was stated that "the time re- quired to learn [systems with squares], the many things to be kept in mind, and their slowness to use after they are understood" convinced many dressmakers "that something more rapid and practical is required for their work" (McDowell Garment Drafting Machine Co., 1891 :i). Adjustable Adjustable drafting tools were a solution that cer- tain inventors proposed. The best known of this type was the "McDowell Garment Drafting Ma- chine" produced in New York City. Before invent- ing his adjustable tool, however, Albert McDowell developed a system using a square (Figure 4M) that, minus its sliding arm, was very similar to the Phelps device (Figure 36). The placement and con- tent of the scales were different, but the form was the same. Later the McDowell Company admitted that this system based on a square "was about as slow as the others and required good judgement to use correctly" (1891 :i). To emphasize this point further, a McDowell advertising leaflet referred to squares as being useful only as an ornament to hang on the wall (Figure 38). The preferred McDowell system was a direct- measure method requiring an adjustable tool. In FIGURE 36. The "Excelsior Square" (U.S. Patent 279,979) with apportioning scales, required for Brigham Thomas Phelps' direct-measure system. According to the 1883 instruction book published in Bellows Falls, Vermont, the complete Phelps system—the tool, the instruction book, and a measure book— cost $15. (U.S. Patent Office.) FIGURE 37. Drafting tool illustradon included by J. Reid Bayne in the 1883 instruction booklet for his direct-measure system. (Library of Congress.) this system the prescribed measurements were taken from the customer with an inch tape mea- sure or sometimes with the inch scale on the obso- lete McDowell square with sliding arm. The plates of each piece of this metal "machine" were ad- justed in a set sequence so that the gauge at each adjustment point was set at the body measurement for that portion of the garment. For example, if the waist measurement was 24 inches, then the waist gauge was eased to the number 24 at each adjustment point. It was not necessary for the dressmaker to figure out how much of the 24 inch waist was to be apportioned to the front, how much to the side, and how much to the back. McDowell's machine did the apportioning for her. Once all adjustments had been made on one of the ma- 54 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY FIGURE 38. According to the dressmaker pictured in this c.1892 McDowell advertisement, her tailor's square hangs on the wall as an ornament since she started using the McDowell Garment Machine. (Smithsonian Insdtudon.) chine's pieces, a pattern was drawn by following the outline established by the tool. McDowell proposed or made at least five differ- ent forms of his machine. These variations were reflected in the drawings that accompanied McDowell patent specifications and the illustra- tions included in McDowell instruction booklets. Three U.S. patents were granted to Albert McDowell: 213,436 on 18 March 1879, 310,297 on 6 January 1885, and 342,216 on 18 May 1886. (The innovations covered by the last U.S. patent had been patented earlier in England on 10 Au- gust 1885.) I have also examined instruction book- lets for the McDowell system with copyright dates ranging from 1883 to 1891. There were subde differences between McDowell tools such as re- finements intended "to remove non-essential and extraneous parts which only add to the weight and cumbersome character of the pattern" (U.S. Patent 342,216:1). There were also minor developments such as an extension for prescribing the facing with a longitudinal slot indicating the location of the line of buttons and buttonholes. This was intro- duced in the 1885 patent (Figure 41a) but was not shown in the 1886 patent (Figure 42a). The most significant differences between the various forms of the machine, however, were caused by fashion changes. The 1879 patent speci- fications submitted on 18 May 1878 showed a device for drafting a bodice requiring three differ- ent pattern pieces (Figure 39). The front piece of the machine was used to draft two darts for fitting NUMBER 42 55 the bodice over the bust to the waist. This piece also provided for a third, but optional dart which permitted closer fitting of the bodice under the arm to the waist. Dress styles of the 1860s and early 70s had no need for this dart. By the mid-70s however, tighter corseting and closer fitting, longer waisted dress styles required an underarm dart for better fit. Additional fashion changes, however, necessitated the modifications in the ma- chine that were covered by the 1885 patent (applied for on II December 1883). The front piece of this version made the underarm dart, which McDowell called a hip dart, much more important (Figure 4la). The back piece provided for the fashionable curvature of the back by incor- porating an offset drafting point on the inner edge of the center back plate (Figure 416). And both the back and side pieces were designed for drafting a closely fitting extension about four inches or more over the hips. With these modifications a basque could be drafted with a closely fitted waist. Despite his efforts, fashions changed before McDowell could complete any new version of his machine and protect it with a patent. The dress that could have been drafted by the tool covered by his first patent, 1879, had already become old fashioned by that date. Thus McDowell did not wait for patent protection before marketing his next modification. The machine shown in the in- struction booklet with a copyright date of 1883 (Figure 40) had the "hip dart," which was not covered by a patent until 6 January 1885 (Figure 41). By that date his machine was again obsolete. On 30 July 1885, Albert McDowell applied for his third and last American patent which was granted on 18 May 1886. The McDowell machine for draft- ing basques had expanded to four pieces (Figure 42a,b). As McDowell put it, "By separating the front-body pattern from the pattern for the underarm piece I am better enabled to follow the usual division of the waist as now made ..." (U.S. Patent 342,216:4). It seems apparent that Albert McDowell was tired of pushing to keep the pat- ented form of his machine up to date with the latest fashions. In this, the last of his patents, he stated, "I do not wish to limit myself to the precise construction of the pattern herein described, as this may be varied to some extent without depart- ing from my invention . , . "(U.S. Patent 342,216:4). Modish dress styles condnued to change but, fortunately for the McDowell enterprises, dame fashion concentrated on the sleeves and skirt for most of her alterations until the century ended. Thus, the two McDowell machines in the Smithso- nian Institution's collections, which were pur- chased by their original owners Lillian Duncan (Figure 43a) about 1891 and Emma Eckhart about 1892, are basically the same type of machine as that shown in the 1886 patent. Eleven measurements (including hip circumference) were needed to draft a basque. Five more measurements were needed for sleeves. This two-piece appendage could be drafted by another McDowell machine (Figure 436) which was also included in McDowell's last patent (Figure 42c). The "McDowell Sleeve Machine" was not, however, absolutely essential. The instruction booklet for the garment machine included a section describing how to use the McDowell square to draft sleeves. In 1883 Albert McDowell stated that his machine was far superior to any of the other systems he had been experimenting with since about 1871. "It requires no guess-work, and almost entirely dis- cards figuring ..." (McDowell Garment Drafting Machine Co., 1883:3). It is refreshing to find that, for once, the boasts of a drafting system promoter were well founded. The "McDowell Garment Drafting Machine" was easy to understand and simple to use. Its value was acknowledged in its own time. And today more examples of the McDowell tool are extant than of any other dressmakers' drafting device. The "Buddington Dress Cutting Machine" (Fig- ure 44) was a contemporary competitor of the McDowell machine. Mr. and Mrs. F. E. Bud- dington probably produced their first system in 1880 (Buddington, 1887:1). The first of four pat- ents was granted to F. E. Buddington on 13 Febru- ary 1883 (U.S. Patent 272,204) and the last was granted on 31 January 1899 (U.S. Patent 618,319). Both the McDowell and the Buddington methods were direct-measure systems requiring adjustable tools. The Buddington procedure, however, was not as easy to follow as the McDowell process. To draft the front and underarm pattern pieces of a four-pattern-piece bodice four adjustments were intitally made to the front piece of the Buddington tool in 1887. The dressmaker then carefully fol- lowed 36 steps, which included moving the tool 12 56 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY FIGURE 39a,b. Diagrams of Albert McDowell's first patented adjustable metal tool (U.S. Patent 213,436) for his direct-measure system. (U.S. Patent Office.) FIGURE 39a. Front. 2 SbeetS'Sheet I. A. MCDOWELL. ^ Adjustable Pattern-Plates for Drafting Q-arments. No. 213.436 Patented Mar. t8, 1879. titneesrs: Jnbtntor: l£'iUi..i. ATTORNEY. NUMBER 42 57 FIGURE 396. Back, side-back. 2 Sheets—Sheet 2. A. MCDOWELL. Adjustable Pattern-Plates for Drafting Garments. No. 213.436 Patented Mar. 18, 1879. OOlttitessf s: Jnbcntor: ATTO[\NEY. 58 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY FIGURE 40 The three-piece adjustable tool shown on this 1883 McDowell instrucdon booklet cover closely resembles the tool covered by the second McDowell patent issued about two years later. The complete system-including a brass tool, instrucdon book, measure book, square, diagram for setting machine, diagram for measuring, tracing wheel, tape line, and box-cost $17.50. The complete system with a tool made of nickel instead of brass cost $20.00 (Library of Congress.) INSTEUCTION BOOK DRAFTING AND CUTTING DRESSES, BASQUES, ^ACKS, COATS, E TC. —BY THE— 6;q^PEP D^^FTIP M^CPINE AS INVENTED AND PATENTED THE MCDOWELL GARMENT mmm MACHINE CO., No. 6 W. 14TH STREET, NEW YORK, U. S. A. The Garment Drafting Machine being secured by Letters Patent, all parties found infringing on our rights will be dealt with aceording to law. AGENCIES WILL BE GIVEN TO RELIABLE PARTIES. NUMBER 42 59 FIGURE 4la,6. Diagrams for the second patented form of Albert McDoweirs tool (U.S. Patent 310,297) for direct-measure drafting, patent applied for on 11 December 1883. (U.S. Patent Office.) FIGURE 41a. Front (statement of claims partially obscured in reproduction). (No Model.) A. MCDOWELL. 3 Sheets—Sheet L ADJUSTABLE PATTERN FOR DRAFTING DRESSES. No. 310,297. ,'«*' Patented Jan. 6, 1885. a m 397 ADJCffTABLE PATTBM fOt I Ai«BMcDowm,MnrT.AII.T. FtW D^ C'/aim.—I. All odjuaUble pkliern for drifUni whole uf H ^inioii »f ihe ed^. fornied of platet of ranged ihnl the iiHirr edge eorre»poodj to lb« t»m od|[« lu llie ruuing-liiit, M> ibftt boUl lioM cui tw Mil- operaiiofi. »ll •ab«iiuili.ll> a* htfoin .pMifiMl. 'I. Ill All odjuiuble pau«ni for drafting the fr fmiil tHt compound uf iwn or more MpanU pUtM uid-firuvidfd with loiijfitudiful IIMJ l.ooiTMpoodi tojii and hulloii-hotel, ix\ ed|.'e. 'I, oofTMpondin| and an edge. -1, curmputiding lo lb. eattiog-lin«, 0 ■0 ihal all lbre« litie> may be drafUd at a ilngk a teni. all sub^taiilially u hereio aDecifiwI. 3. ID an adjuiuble palUrii for drafting tbe 1 meiil, iwu or inorv dart-cuai haviuq their lo»«r < vuft-gagr al adJHtable dnlanc«« apart, in oMnb brace, K, pivuteil RL ndjuilable heighU lu tlie froD oiher end i* fpw to wJJQ-t luelf on the bort-gage I 4. In ail adjosUhle (latbeni f'tr drafling ihe froi tbe exienMble platen '" (n. in c«n)hmatioii wilh « •uitAblfl frnitt-line gugr nild t^u or mori- rxtcniibl Z». ainl j>iv..i-piiif .-'. .-'. r". m-d .-' o*- herein iipwi U. Ill HnadJukUtili i.aiujiD fur drafting tlie froi ihe horizoiitiil plau- W. in t-mnbinaltoii wilh tbe lira }>latf. n^ provtLlc-d «ilh suitable gaiding and adji jofliiig-Mrew i", coDnecting tbe armfaoWgage Q' 1 and tbe bifMlart gages Z^ Z". and aide-Mam ga| ion for adjoiiing tbeir pfnitioiii, all a4Aple 4ft6WeitrSt ^==2-1::^^^^^^:^ €^ JS^^^^^^ ^ '' -^ ^ yy^^^^ '^._189Z r ^ (^i^/^t^ P 5^ ^ -P 6 C5 4 Sheets—Sheet 1. ^^"^"•^^'•^ W. B. POLLOCK, GARMENT MEASURINa AND FITTING DEVICE. PatentedJune 23, 1885, No. 320,496. ^ t >INVENTOR c^>^a:^^^ rjj-iran ESSES I ^\ ^^^^Znd fiuioK •Ivricc mnimund t •pnr* . I M'parebU- rrtn.M at MCUM*. cub cunipn^ uf wt>«r»<«ly und marprnH , ontJy ti^uiUhto Qevibla ^irnp* pivni^ r, uJ compoMd of wpM«L*lj AQ4 lod«peo4«fitl>-«(yM«bk itnfw. all pivoted ODO wilh UM mHer, UHI b«r. Lni otMnlnci UMI ■taHb uid bMcniu dflrbii iWefor H utd for tb* [■ 'f- t 74 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY submitted by Edward P. Follett in 1901 as being "adapted to taking measures and locating all the cardinal points necessary in laying out waist-fitting garments" (U.S. Patent 692,510:1). This was an overstatement. The Zenith System also required a "neck band" and a "waist band" (Figure 48a) to take these two critical body measurements and an ordinary tape measure to detennine the fullest part of the bust. The drafting process for this system used the conforming "measurer" to establish the placement of 12 critical drafting points on the pattern paper as well as one line defining the height and slope of the bust darts. Four other tools, however, were needed to locate other drafting points or to draw the subtly curved lines defining the outlines of the pattern pieces. An "indicator" helped to apportion waist and bust dimensions (Figure 48c). Follett was granted a patent for this tool on 11 August 1903 (U.S. Patent 735,738). A "curve scale" (Figure 48c) was used to draw shoulder and bust dart curves, while a "sliding spring rule" (Figure 48c) was an aid to drawing the neck and armhole curves and a "combination ratchet and skirt rule" (Figure 48c) helped to establish the long graceful curves needed for the sides of the four pattern pieces—front. underarm, side-back, and back. The patent granted Edward Follett in 1902 for the "measurer" (Figure 48a,b) and another in 1903 for the "indicator" (Figure 48c) were the last in a series of seven patents granted to Follett. (He as- signed the last one to the Zenith Manufacturing Company.) He had applied for his first two patents in 1886. The first was for a perforated tool used in a direct-measure system for drafting sleeves (U.S. Patent 389,376). The second was for an adjustable, perforated tool for a direct-measure method of cutting basques (U.S. Patent 389,377). I doubt if Follett was aware that the perforations in his tools were probably first used by the creator of the pre-Tentler proportional dressmakers' drafting system (Figure 16a). Nor do I think Follett realized, when he abandoned perforated tools in favor of his conforming "measurer," that he created a tool similar to many early 19th century tailors' measur- ing apparatus (Figure 7). Follett's inventions illus- trate that the basic principles behind drafting sys- tems and the specific characteristics of the tools were reapplied independently in new ways as each succeeding generation of dressmakers and tailors attempted to create the ultimate system for cutting a fashionable fit. Selling the Systems The manufacturers of drafting systems used every means available to sell their methods. These efforts were directed toward two major objectives—the first to establish the credentials of the system and the second to recruit agents. If one were to believe the rhetoric of the proponents of dressmakers' drafting systems, one would think that these in- novators were all professors, mathematicians, med- ical doctors, or highly experienced French dressmakers. The condescending tone of some of their instruction books implied that the novice dressmaker should be gratefully eager to spend her money for such expert knowledge. Many of these "professional" identities were as- sumed in order to sell products to untutored 19th century Americans who were very much in awe of anything scientific or French. The increasing numbers of late 19th century instruction booklets that made no such claims cast aspersions on the credibility of their more presumptuous competitors. A McDowell advertising leaflet accurately ex- plained that the French cut dresses by the old method of pinning the lining on the customer. This source observed, "How few people in the country know how the French fit dresses . . . but here every old chart is called a French system. They use the word Trench' to catch the ignorant" (A. McDowell 8c Co., 1892?). One example of this practice was "Madame Demorest." The suc- cessfully diversified "fashion emporium" known as Madame Demorest's was, in fact, established by Mr. William J. Demorest (as he was always called) and his wife, the former Margaret Willamina Poole. When she died in 1857 the name "Madame Demorest" did not. About 14 months later, Mr. Demorest married Ellen Louise Curtis, who then gracefully personified the title. Another example is Mrs. E. E. Palmer who in 1886 published an in- struction booklet in Baraboo, Wisconsin. Five years and a move to Chicago transformed this NUMBER 42 75 Barabooian into Madame Ellsworth Palmer (Palmer, 1892: cover). The McDowell advertising leaflet also observed that "the word Professor is just as bad in this line of business. It is almost invariably used by frauds, cheeky people, both men and women, who place it before their own names to make the innocent public think they know something" (A. McDowell, & Co., 1892?). In reality, the majority of inventors of dress- maker's drafting systems were either dressmakers or tailors who initially created a cutting method for their own use. Then on their own, or with the encouragement of someone else, their systems were refined and made available to the public. The 1885 instruction book for Cornwell's "Self- Fitting System" gives a believable if chauvinistic de- scription of how this hybrid system with a curved perforated tool was developed. As was true of C. E. Mosher's "Bon Ton Dress Chart," the Cornwell draft- ing procedure involved a series of steps requiring the tool to be moved a number of times. The principles of this drafting system were first thought of by Miss Elmira Harroun when she was 16 years old. Her first chart was a rough piece of pasteboard on which the method of fitting the shoulder and determining the size of the darts was marked with pen and ink. It was "a puzzle which no one could figure out until Mr. Cornwell, a practical business man full of inventive faculties, discerning the great value ... in his wife's cherished pasteboard, undertook to make it so plain that 'he who runs may read' " (Cornwell, 1885:4). After six months of study a few charts were printed from a wood cut and after this version was tested, additional improvements were made. Finally in 1870 the first charts were manufactured using a cop- perplate obtained in New York. In 1876 the first set of improved, colored, nickel engravings of the chart were made (Figure 49a). Between 1876 and the publication of the 1885 instruction book, additional changes were made. The latest alteration was making the darts smaller and allowing for an underarm dart, "thus meeting the wants of the prevailing style" (Cornwell, 1885:4). Also during this period a "New Improved Sleeve System" was developed (Figure 49b). Four patents and nearly a score of copyrights were claimed.2° The 1885 Cornwell publication also ^•^ I have located only one patent issued to Willett Cornwell, this one on 22 October 1878 (U.S. Patent 209,111). boasted that, since its modest beginning, over a quarter of a million systems had been sold. Not every drafting system was the original crea- tion of its proponent; the pirating of systems was a chronic problem from the beginning. Neverthe- less, the ostentatious way that the inventors dis- cussed this hazard suggests that they were trying to use it to their advantage. The descriptions of their methods for protecting their creations seemed to have been aimed as much at impressing the reader concerning the value of the system as they were intended to serve as a warning to unscrupulous entrepreneurs. Thus, trading on the old adage "imitation is the highest form of praise," the seller of a system might try to establish the special value of his technique by dire warnings directed at sup- posed or would-be plagiarizers. In 1857 Dr. E. P. Minier even went so far as to give the names of some individuals who had "stolen" his system. His way of helping the buyer be sure she had the real "Minier" was by adding his signature to each copy of his tool (Minier, 1857:24). Justin Clave in 1859 (Figure 17) also followed this practice. Patenting the tool or, less commonly, the pro- cess, increasingly became an accepted practice as shown by the list included in Appendix III. Some individuals, however, found the protection af- forded by a copyright to be an attractive alternative because it was less expensive and easier to acquire. Also, some inventors whose tools could be printed on paper included their devices as part of their instruction book which was then copyrighted. This was done even when it was felt that the tool would be more useful if it were made of durable materi- als. Published instructions for systems such as those of Powell 8c Kohler (Figure 19a), Mrs. Louisa L. Jackson (Figure 33), and James A. Wilson (Figure 35) recommended that the user remove the paper tool from the book and apply it to stiff cardboard or wood. Apparently, Nancy and George Norman found their copyright to be effective protection. In 1880 the United States Circuit Court, District of Indiana, awarded them the gains and profits received by several defendants found guilty of unlawful manu- facture and sale of copies of their charts and dia- grams. A copy of the court's order and decree was even included in Mrs. Norman's 1881 instruction booklet. No doubt the readers were impressed. A more direct way to gain special attention for a system was by entering it in a trade exhibition. It |lliiii|iiipDiiiiiiiii OUR CHART As it appealed before '\S wide. Send Stamp for circular. THIS ,s A PHOTO ENGRAVING z^r^iTa".?'""''''^"" *'''"''^''"' ^m , OUR NEW TMPROYED SLEEVE SYSTEM ;:iL*if.e?rnTis'ktl^c4\Vtte^-i for cuttinq- sleeves of all sizes, without refitting-, and works perfectly in connection with the Cornwell Chart and Dres-^- Cutting, Send Stamp for circuhir. NUMBER 42 77 would be seen by the visitors and there was always a good chance of its being given an award, usually in the form of a medal. This distinction could be advantageously reported by including drawings of the handsome medal in the instruction booklet (Figure 28). Sometimes a facsimile of the award statement was included as well (Figure 50). The sellers of these systems recognized that it is a part of human nature to be impressed by awards. The fact that these were usually given in recognition of individual merit but not of superiority over an- other system was never mentioned—or was mis- represented (Figure 28). Twelve dressmakers' drafting systems were exhibited at the greatest U.S. fair of all, the 1876 International Exhibition at Philadelphia. Of those mentioned before, Willett Cornwell, Madame Demorest (Figure 51), and Samuel T. Taylor were exhibitors. Although magazine advertising was not a fully developed selling medium, it was still used. The earliest ads which appeared in Harper's Bazar dur- ing the last quarter of the 19th century consisted of a few lines of text and perhaps a small illustration. The later advertisements for the McDowell ma- chine (Figure 52) were by far the most effective. They not only extolled the virtures of the system but they offered special inducements to individuals buying directly from them as well as a "come on" for potential agents. McDowell's offer of a free trial period for mail orders was unusual. It is ample proof that the McDowell machine could be easily understood and used. Most systems had to be actively sold. Most techniques had to be demon- strated and the potential buyer offered special cutting lessons before any money changed hands. Thus, in addition to establishing a distinctive name for itself the manufacturer of each drafting system made a major effort to recruit a network of agents. Frequently the system's instruction book- FiGURE49a,t. Cornwell's "Self-Fitting System'' as presented in his 1885 instruction booklet. (Library of Congress.) FIGURE 49a (left, above). An obsolete variadon of Corn- well's perforated, curved, two-piece tool for a hybrid draft- ing system. Mr. Cornwell's picture is shown on the front piece above the tide "W. Cornwell's Chart." Mrs. Cornwell, whose picture is shown on the back piece without any identification, was the original creator of this system. FIGURE 496 (left, below). Advertisement for perforated tool for cutdng sleeves by Cornwell's improved hybrid sys- tem. INTERNATIONAL liXHIBITION. PHILADELPHIA, 1876. The United Slates Cenltiinial C(>iiiini-.>i()n has cxainincd the report of the Judges, and ncceplcd the following reasons, and decreed an award in conformity therewitii. PJiiladclphia, Dec. 21st, i8j6. RHIXJRT ON AWARDS. Product, Graduated Chart for Ures.s Cutting. Name and address uf Exhibitor, IVUlett Comtve/l, No. 153 North Eighth St.^ PhiladelpJiia^ Pa. The undersigned, having examined the product herein de- scribed, respectfully recommends the same to the United States Centennial Commission for Award, for llie following reasons, \i/: lA& purpose' irUondooi^ Oy/ul &oo7h07rbioayl i/h cosi. ^V'. 0. LinthicLcm, Signature of the Judge. APPBOVAL. OF GROUP JUDGES. Dietz Monnin, Modest Kittary, M- P. Empey, Kanitz, B. F. BrittoTh, Geo. Hewston, W- H. Chandler, E. J{. Horsford. A true Copy of the record. Francis A. Walker, Chief of the Bureau of Awards. Given liy authority of the United States Centennial Commission. H^ A. T. GOSHORN, ]. R. HAWLEY. /^resident. J. L. CAMPBELL, Secretary. FIGURE 50. Facsimile of award given to Willett Cornwell for the drafting system he exhibited in Philadelphia at the 1876 Centennial Exhibition, from Cornwell's 1885 instruction book- let. (Library of Congress.) lets themselves became an important means for converting the home sewer and dressmaker into an agent. Dr. Minier seemed to suggest a new idea in his 1857 publication when he declared that "both ladies and gendemen will be privileged with agen- cies. Ladies shall have the preference and it is hoped on the part of the inventor that they will claim and maintain the entire monopoly" (1857:2). He also reported that Cincinnati would be the "Depot" for his sales to the West and New York City would serve the East. Mrs. D. A. Inwood did not mince words in her 1863 instruction book when she announced, "I want 500 smart and 78 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY FIGURE 51. Mme. Demorest's exhibit in the main building ot the 1876 Centennial Exhibition in Philadelphia, which dis- played items reflecting the diverse enterprises of her "Em- porium of Fashions,' including a large assortment of sized paper patterns shown in the black walnut octagonal case on the left and the perforated drafdng tool, called a "Dress Model," mounted on a large easel of walnut and gilt; from June 1876 issue of Demorest's Monthly Magazine. (Smithsonian Insdtution.) energetic ladies to act as local and traveling Agents throughout the U.S. They can easily clear 6 hundred dollars a year, if diligent to business" (1863:1). She followed up with trade cards an- nouncing "agents wanted" and with a magazine advertisement {Harper's, 1873:126). To entice an individual to sign up as an agent and to give present agents more motivation, a FIGURE 52. McDowell's adverdsement, 5.2 x 7.1 cm, from 19 January 1884 issue of Harper's Bazar. (Smithsonian Institution.) Tlie Greatest Mention of tie Ap. THE MCDOWELL D Garment Drafting ^^ MACHINE, .y^ 6 W. 14th St., N.Y. Dressmakers.—This Wo7iderftil Maehine drafts perfect garments of every description from Actual Mca.sure, tits all shoulders, and prevents /iilw.'iis at bottom of front darts. You may send NOW and tc.'it Mnchine at your own home free of chavye. Extra in- diuements to jir.\Y- EM. G.AHMENT DISAFTING MACHINE CO., <•» >V('xt llth St., N(MV York City. lA)r S.df at i:»*.> »asliiii;rt<>ii St., Uoslon: I'lH'^ t'hostiiut St., I'hilu.; and UK) » uUasli Aveiiuo, ChicagOa NUMBER 42 79 ^g MRg*T* E. MEEKER, ^^ |P2^ rHENCH 2vSi""or"DRES2-lIAKIN5„4- roc E. Water gtrcct, y«% M,8sej'. aud lufants' Pattern*, Ladies' Sacks, Sleeves, Night-Dresses, Uii(l»*r-5i>>Kv:^i7:>?;;>;i^;^-;w'-J-'-': ^;-;^f i: SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY FIGURE 61. "The Royal Chart," a perforated, cardboard tool (47.0 x 62.2 cm) for a hybrid system, copyright by James McCall of Glasgow, Scotland. The illustrated medals represented awards given to Elias Howe, Jr., inventor and manufacturer of sewing machines. For a short period of time McCall's "Royal Chart" was given to every purchaser of a Howe sewing machine. (Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress.) same measurements {The Elite Dressmaker, 1878:35). Smith advised her readers that after obtaining a waist pattern custom cut to fit, they could order any other patterns by bust measure- ment only, "as the pattern that fits can always be used to the waistline, no matter what shape is desired for the skirt portion of the basque or polonaise" (Smith, 1877-1878:2). This was a rea- sonable solution as the basic fashionable cut of the dress bodice was essentially the same. Variations between costumes appeared principally in differ- ent designs for the basque or polonaise—upper torso garments having skirt-like appendages ex- tending below the waistline. Similar alternatives NUMBER 42 89 1807. — Lady's Cos- tume. T) sizes, 32 to 40 ins, 10 yds. 35 cts. 1833.—r.ndvV Polon- aise. 5 -izes, •« to 40 Ins. 8 yds. Mcts. ea. 170I.—Lady's Coat. 6sizes.'«to 40 ins. 4>^ yda. 3u cents each. a 178— Lady's Prin cess Prpss. 5 sizes. 3; lto40iiis. lej^yds. 30c aB12.-Lady- Ces< Iiros 5 sizes, y,-. to-loiub. 13>iyd3.30c 179ft.-I..idy"s l\^^ 2023.-Lady's Redin- pote. 5 sizes, 32 to 40 IUS. 9 yds. 20 cts. ea. 2010. —Lady's Prin- cess Dress. 5 sizes. 32 to 40 ius. 13 yds. 20c. 21 G5.-Ladv's Mother IJiil.l.ai-d M raiiper. 5 6i/:es,32to40,11 yds 30c. l«5-t Lii.lv's Pi.lon- ai.se. 5 sizi'S, ."32 tn 40 Ins. 83-i- yds. 35 uts. 2179. —Lady's Red- Ineote. 5 sizes, 32 to 40 ins. 5?.i yds. 30 cts. 1920,-Ladv'sPrincess Dress. 6-izev. 3Jto 40 lub. 15 yds. 30 cti. ea. 2015. —Lady's Wrap- I>er .5 sizesj 3',> to iO ius. 0>o yds. 25 cts. .—T.adv's Polon- r)si/.'V, :^;! to 40 75-4 yds. ~5 cts. 2009.-Ladv'. si/es. .12 to 40 ius. 7 Nd.>, 'JO cts. ruch. l«09._.r,ad"s Cos'me. 5 sizes, .32 to" 40 ins. 18 V(L3. 35oonfcseacli. 1066.—Lady'.s Shirred M'rapper. 5 sizes. 32 to 2001.—Lady's Wrap- 40 ins. 8>ayds. 25 cts. per. 0 sizes, 3'- to 40 ius. 11 yds. 20 cts. mH6.—t,adv's Polon- aise. .'•, .-ij/rs, .T,' to 40 ius. 03^yii-j. SOeeuts. 1G12 KOte. —Lady's I?edin- 5 sizes. 32 to 40 \iis .i"j (ts ea. I618.-Lady's Walk- ins Cos'me. 5sizes,32 to 40 ins. 14 yds. 35 c. 1611.-Lady's Walk- InfrDress. 5sizos.32to 40 ins. ll>4yas. 35 cts. FIGURE 62. A selection of McCall's patterns for ladies' polonaises, coats, redingotes, dresses, costumes, and wrappers, which were usually offered in five sizes from 32- to 40-inch bust measure- ment. Customers were advised to take this measurement by passing a "tape measure around the breast, just under the arms, and above the bust. . . draw it one inch tighter than the dress is to fit." From the 1884-1885 Fall and Winter Catalog, McCall's Bazar Glove-Fitting Patterns. (Warshaw Collection, Smithsonian Institution.) 90 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY were offered by some others during the last quar- ter of the century. Despite the common occurrence of fitting problems which such alternatives re- flected, the majority of commercially made pat- terns were mass produced with proportionally de- termined sizes. Even with their limitations, sized paper patterns were popular. Butterick boasted that he was selling four million patterns in the United States in 1871 {Metropolitan, May 1872:333). In 1876 De- morest claimed that "one ton of these patterns were recently shipped to London to fill a single order, and 25,000 is not an unusual number to sell at the retail house, 17 East Fourteenth Street, of one style alone during the season" {Demorest's Monthly, Dec 1876:643). The wide range of styles offered in the numerous pattern catalogues pro- vided the amateur sewer with a varied choice. If she were clever and if her fitting problems were not severe, she could adjust the waist pattern to fit her. The shapes and arrangements of fashionably trimmed and draped skirts were already calculated for her. She still had to sew the garment. She did not have to know how to draft it. Professional Dressmakers and Cutters In the last quarter of the 19th century, drafting systems were used most frequently by professional dressmakers. In 1886 Mme. Mallison said that amateur dressmakers could use her system to cut dresses without "bought patterns." She made a stronger appeal to "young ladies" to whom the Mallison system would be "the royal road to excel- lence in dressmaking, without having to serve their time with a professional dressmaker to learn the trade." But she promised professional dressmakers that the system would be "what 'they long have sought, and mourned because they found it not,' a simple method of Dress-cutting that will not re- quire re-fitting or alteration of any kind" (Mallison, 1886:6-7). A woman could be employed as a dressmaker in several ways. She could work in her customer's home or in her own domicile. She could be the head of her own small business employing several other women or she could be a cutter in a major dressmaking establishment. Emma Eckhart and Marie E. Duval exemplified the work of many rural dressmakers. Emma Eckhart bought a "McDowell Garment Drafting Machine" and a "McDowell Sleeve Ma- chine," about 1890, when she was 19. She lived and worked in a rural area north of Allentown, Penn- sylvania. The villages that are mendoned in her measure book and that can be located on a modern map—Carbon, Little Gap, Aquaschicola, Bow- manstown, and Lehighton—are clustered in an area with a five mile radius. Occasionally she traveled about 15 miles to work for relatives in Allentown, the closest large town. Customers fre- quently picked her up, provided her with room and board while she worked and took her home again when she finished. Emma Eckhart did much less dressmaking after 1909 when her sister-in-law died. At that time she moved in with her brother to help raise his family.^"^ Miss Eckhart's measure book contains 213 undated entries (Figure 63). Marie E. Duval bought a variety of Professor J. B. Plant's specialized systems (Figures 24-26) about 1902 when she was 26. She lived in Ludlow and later in Indian Orchard, Massachusetts. She worked in her home making clothes for herself, her five daughters, and for her customers. One daughter recalls her saying that a well dressed woman would have two ensembles made a year, one winter and one summer. Each costume con- sisted of a coat, hat, and dress.^^ Mrs. Duval could make the entire ensemble. Many women in cities worked independently as dressmakers as did Miss Eckhart and Mrs. Duval. In densely populated areas, however, there was a greater chance of being successful enough to es- tablish a business. In 1894 The Women's Book re- ported nearly four hundred dressmakers in New York City who worked in their own "flats" and employed from two to ten assistants. These women did not make fortunes, it was said, but "they ap- pear to make a comfortable living" (Hubert, 1894:62). The individual dressmaker working for herself performed all the manufacturing tasks. When a dressmaker could afford to hire assistants she con- tinued to do the cutting and fitting while relegating the more routine tasks of basting, sewing, and trimming to her employees. The larger the estab- lishment the greater the degree of specialization. "I am grateful to Mrs. Helen O. George for obtaining background information on Emma Eckhart. ^^ I am grateful to Annette J, Gibbs for providing background information concerning her mother, Marie E. Duval. 91 NUMBER 42 In the largest custom shops there was no one called a "dressmaker." Instead the critical tasks of dealing with the customer and drafdng the pattern were assigned to two different people. The sales- woman waited on the customer, helping her to select the style of garment, the fabric and trim- ming. This saleswoman also measured the cus- tomer and sometimes worked with her during the fittings. Drafting the pattern from the measurements taken by the saleswoman was the work of a special- ist, the cutter. Samuel T. Taylor wrote in 1867 that "the increasing demand for good cutters by the system are without parallel in the history of na- tions." The demand for them was so great that they were being paid from $15 to $20 per week {Le Petit Messager, 1867:153). Twenty-nine years later, the instruction booklet for Taylor's dress cutting sys- tem included 67 testimonial letters from dressmakers, cutters, and employers of cutters. Annie C. Zaun, a cutter and fitter, thanked S. T. Taylor for recommending her to the Washington, B.C., department store Woodward and Lothrop: "Of all the several posidons I have had, this is by far the most excellent. The pay be $35.00 per week and the firm don't fail to make everything agree- able and pleasant for me" (1896:50). Mrs. H. L. Frazier of Montgomery, Alabama, expressed her appreciadon to S. T. Taylor for sending her a good cutter: "Have tried her now for quite a few weeks and find she used the system perfecdy. I must say there is no system gives such entire satisfacdon as the S. T. Taylor. Having used it now for twelve years, would not exchange for any other, neither would I engage any in my workrooms but what use it" (1896:51). On 25 November 1891, Albert McDowell, president of the McDowell Garment Drafting Machine Company, cerdfied that Miss Lillian Duncan had completed a course of instruc- tion in cutting ladies' garments in New York City (Figure 43^:). He wrote that, with practice, she "should be fully competent to do first class work as a dressmaker or to take a good position as a cut- ter." Employment as a cutter was available to women with training. The cutter did not deal directly with the cus- tomer. She worked only with the customer's mea- surements. This is particularly apparent in mail- order custom work in which most of the depart- ment stores were engaged. The catalog frequently did not illustrate the style of the garment the store FIGURE 63. Two customers' measurements recorded in a McDowell measure book by Emma Eckhart. (Smithsonian In- stitution.) 92 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTIONS FOR MEASURING. Tak4 the following measures over the dress., rather closely. I Around the bust, at the largest part, under the arms, A A A A. 3 From sleeve-seam to sleeve-seam across chest, being the width between shoulders across chest, B B. 3 From sleeve-seam to sleeve-seam across the back, being width between shoulders across back, C C. 4 From sleeve-seam under arm straight down to waist-seam, D D. 5 Length of s eeve on the lu.sitle seiiiM, E E. i length of sleeve outside, viz.: from junction of sleeve-seam with .shoulder-seam, at back of shoulder, to •point of elbow thence to wrist, K F F. 7 Around waist, G N G G G G. 8 Around neck at collar-seam, H N H H N. 9 Around hips at the largest part, R R R R. ID Length of shoulder-seam from collar-seam to sleeve-seam, H K. 11 From neck to waist-seam in front, N N. 12 From neck to waist-seam at the back, N G. 13 Length of skirt in front, not including the band, NP. 14 Length of skirt at back, not including the band, G Q. ... 15 Size of arm where sleeve joms waist. 16 Size of arm just above elbow. If the bust measure is taken too high in front and too low behind, or otherwise than as directed, an error of one or two inches will result. If you stoop, when measured for length of skirt, the measure will be two inches short. A ivaist'lining^ made to fit as you -would like it., ivould be pre/erred. NUMBER 42 93 offered to make. Instead detailed desciptions were provided and swatches of the materials were sent on request, sometimes with illustrations of the style. The catalog, however, always gave the cus- tomer detailed, illustrated instructions as to how to take the measurements she was to send in (Figure 64). The cutter's draft was only as good as the measurements she was given. Since the customer provided the measurements in the mail-order business rather than a trained saleswoman, the client was also frequently asked to send in an old lining or "waist" that fit well. During most of the last quarter of the 19th century, direct-measure systems were popularly used by dressmakers and cutters. The extraordi- narily close fit of fashionable "waists," "basques," and polonaises demanded more precise and com- plex cutting than in any other period. American women would not tolerate either the cost or the time required to create a garment by the "pin-to- the-form" technique. And proportional and hybrid systems, which, in the form of sized paper patterns, met the needs and abilities of home sewers), did not work well enough to satisfy the requirements of either the dressmaker or her customer. Hybrids, however, did not disappear; they were disguised. McDowell's 1883 instruction booklet accurately re- ported that "while most of these systems and charts claimed to give actual measures, nine out of ten were merely proportional scales, some on paste- board ... and others on tapes and squares ..." (1883:4). By the early 1890s the elaborately draped skirts of previous decades had evolved into a gored skirt. This style was simpler in appearance but more difficult to cut. Skirt drafting systems were created to solve this cutting problem. Fashions of the early 20th century called for skirts that were even more precisely fitted over the hips to emphasize the roundness of the wearer's derriere. Numerous drafting systems for skirts were then created. FIGURE 64. Detailed instructions to customers for taking the measurements they were to send in when they ordered custom-made costumes by mail from Lord and Taylor. Because of the uncertain accuracy of measurements taken by their customers, the store requested to be sent, "a waisdining, made to fit as you would like it." From Lord and Taylor Catalog, Spring and Summer 1883. (Warshaw Collection, Smithsonian Institu- tion.) Much has been written about shifdng erogenous zones. The theory holds that women's clothing fashions focus sexual attendon on a specific part of the body. When fashions change, this sexual atten- tion shifts to another part of the body. The major changes in the late 1890s illustrate this phenome- non. As the hips were delineated by the cut of the skirt, the bust became obscured, although still prominent, beneath gathered and loosely draped light weight materials (Figure 60). Appearances are sometimes deceiving. The outer fabric of this dress bodice was actually draped over a closely fitted lining. Drafting sys- tems were needed to cut the lining and they were used for cutting the outer fabric. The tight fitting lining, however, did not have to be cut as precisely as was required by earlier styles because it was covered by the loosely arranged outer fabric. Hy- brid drafting systems emerged again. Because of the new fashions, hybrid methods as well as direct-measure techniques were used by dressmak- ers and cutters in the early 20th century. Ladies' Tailors Drafting systems for women's garments were also used by a comparatively new professional, the ladies' tailor. Charles J. Stone wrote in his instruc- tion booklet of 1901, "This century is opening with the outlook for business brighter than ever before, and especially is this true in regard to Ladies' Tailoring. In these days of progress this depart- ment of the trade is making an earnest bid for its share of recognition in the sartorial art" (1901 :vii). Women's tailored suits appeared in the well dressed woman's wardrobe in the 1880s. The early history of their use is obscured by the widespread application of the term "suit" to refer to other types of apparel. The department store catalogues showed two-piece garments that were made by dressmakers. These garments might be called cos- tumes, ensembles, or dresses, but frequendy they were referred to as suits. The term was used to mean an outfit consisdng of more than one piece but with all parts made of the same material. By the 1890s tailored suits were disdncdy different from dresses. Like the riding habit, they exhibited some design elements derived from men's wear and they were made using materials and techniques that were better known to the tailoring trade than to the dressmaking business. Ladies' tailors were usually 94 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY XiADZSS' DZISSSSS (B.EAt)?-MABS). The dresses ilhiBtrated on this page are made in proportionato sizes, and can only accept the following measurements: bust, waist and skirt length in front. No samples accepted or sent. Four to six days' time will be required to fill orders. Fig. 93. Plain and striped euiting In combinatiou, gobelin blue, navy blue or green $ltf.60 Fig. 91. Caslimero, In all colors aud black $20.00 Fig. 95. Gray, brown or blue suiting, plain and siripe $21.00 Fig. 96. Black, brown, blue, green or gray serge, trimmed with gilt or Mack gimp $22.50 FIGURE 65. A selection of women's ready-made dresses offered in B. Altman & Co.'s fall and winter 1888-1889 mail-order catalog. The "basques" of these costumes were cut with a simple hybrid system using the bust and waist measurements. A lady had to be properly proportioned in order to have one of these ready-made dresses fit. (Warshaw Collection, Smithsonian Institution.) men who were trained in the art of tailoring and who chose to specialize in this branch of the trade. The tailored suit became so popular as street or business attire in the early 20th century that it diminished the importance of daytime dresses in a woman's wardrobe. By the 20th century a number of systems created for drafting women's garments were devised as much for ladies' tailors as they were intended for dressmakers. Ready-made Clothing Industry Fashions changed, hybrid systems were again openly proselytized, and there were shifts in the importance of one kind of custom work relative to another. These were minor changes in comparison to the effect which the "ready-made" industry was having on the custom trade. By the 1850s a wide choice of ready-made cloth- ing was available to men but not to women (Kidwell FIGURE 66a,i. Excerpts from Stem Brother's Catalogue, Spring and Summer 1898. (Warshaw Collection, Smithsonian Insdtu- tion.) FIGURE 66a. Four ready-made costumes (Nos. 33, 35, 37, 39) were offered in five bust sizes from 34 to 42 inches with skirts varying in front length from 38 to 43 inches. These ready-made outfits ranged in price from $19.75 to $38.50, while two made-to-order costumes (styles L, M) cost from $65.00 to $90.00. Ladies^ CostMnnes, Reaidy Made aod Made to Order, .\o 39 Style L. Madetoorder. Ladles'Walking Coatume, new blue, tan, navy brown gray or black; nuns veiling or canvas cloth, lined throughout with taffet^' slllr CO lar. yoke and belt of 8ilk in contrasting color, finished with no^^ mentene ornamenttj •7.,/u. Same, of etanrine, in tan, new blue, navy or gray.' lin^'throughout with ■"'' 65 00 No. .33. Bean over eorwetTsilk colorfngg, navy blue, green, brown, heliotrope or black and white 34 sO No 39, Stylish Readv-Made Changeable Taffeta Silk Costmrie skirt and «le^vc.« trlinmed with narrow black lace, velvet yoke and 1^ I* flnished at neck with (Yepe de chine l>ow, all the newest coloring... . .^. . 38 50 Style M Made to order. Black Fish Net Costume, made over black or color..d taffeta silk. trlmiue,l with rows of block iitin i-ibt^n vSke 7t spanKlen. yoke of "^"m: yoU^.?f {^■;y'c"n.W:n U^;**.*:""':":'»". •"■ •'"^'^ •""• *hit^ flgure^-foulard- "^^^ 96 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY TERN BROTHER: PRING AND SUMMER TALOGUE, 18 NO. 92 Memtaoin NMimber of this Catalogye. MEASUREMENTS AND DIRECTIONS FOR COSTUMES MADE TO ORDER ONLY. -1. Around the. neck. 1 t<< 2, upck and waist. :i t<> 5. bust, to be taken all around under arms. .T to 6, len^h of sleeve inside. Side <^f neck. 0 to 7. length of shoulder. 3 to 11. from under arm to waist. 11. size of waist ail around. A.- Arouii'! hips. BACK.—12 to 13, length of back to waist. 8 to 14, across back. 16 to 9, shoulder to elbow. 9 to 10, elbow to wrist. SKIRT.—Length in front from waist. Length in back from waist. Length at side from waist. By follovvinK above nieasurements. we will iosurfi a perfect fit. We would prefer, however, that our patrons will send a well-fltting waist- as guide (thus (loinK away nith any possibility of a misfit^ which can be sent h.v mail at a trifling expense, ufritino your name und adtlremm only OM inttsidr of paekaff, to avoid letter poatnt/e, giving nteaaureg and all other eafplanation* by letter (•eparate). See directions, page 109. A DEP0S3T REQUIRED ON ALL GARMENTS MADE TO ORDER. We will s«'iitj>xtly ij y^u s, nJ irj imaMimUiHls KIIIIJ },>r on m.r uiJ,r bhiitk DRESSES OF NEW AND CHARMING STYLE (SIZES.—nrennrs ran be fur* ttLihvd In two proportions, rrsu- lar sixes 33 to 44 buKt niid skirt l4>nRth 37 to 4.1 Inrhcs. iilso pro- portioned to (It miH.sos or Nninil women, sixeti 'H'i to :(M biiNt and skirt length ;i7 to \tt Inrhes. The skirts arc nnlshed with dp«p baHted hpin and can be riiMily altered by customer It nerivtsary. Samples of Velvet and Cloth dresNes furnl.Hhed on request. !»> do not send samples of chiffon dress 3AK«I0. 3AK610. A handsome sown Of llncst hnportcil ChlHon, made over a fouaUatlon of lustrous Satht Messaliue. TUIs sup«rb creation is beautifully embroidered as Illus- trated with fancy silk cord, com- bined with embroidery In con- tni.r. Sleeves are piped kt armholes with sattai and the niffg are tinished with dainty Loub XVI frUls of lace. The set-In vest In the front b of satin mrsmllne trbnmcd with velvet buttons, vest b conthtued down front of Jklrt as pfctured. Wabt and skirt ire Joined by a cru.ihed girdle of itttin inesgaline. Skirt In the hack tas two stitched plaits down entire wigth fbrmtng an inverted panel Jflcct, while m front the stitched >laft« admit a V shaped in.iort »f satin mt^saltne at the bottom *hlcn ta trimmed with velvet wttons. Dress fastens Invblbly n the ftont. Body of watot b ln«l. Colors: bUek. navy blue w brown with revers, vest and cuffs w cootrasUag color 916.0(1 SI«K«J«. A Keat and Stvlish Bress, made of extra irood quality lu-wonued .StTirc. Dress Is de ugned in Russian Coat effect and Ma larsre Dlrectoirc revi-rs and level pointed cullfi made of fanry itrlped velvet. Yoke and collar »re of Oriental lace, collar »*e- Wf llnlsbed with satin piping, [he panel effect hi front b trbnineil *»n mxuHis bavine velvet rims, sack of wabt b plain. Skirt b hade with a deep ppplum effect J nvmg the appearatKc of » coat, . KJ5^ Jotaing of wabt and skirt ?rf.^f?J^*'»*'» * rwtcnt leather «uXt!r'''K'i ^*n« with ft handsome 2* ••'"J. »« plain, both back and lieLv»i*''^ fft«eo8 invblbly in i^iiHaH^S ^ 'J5K6I0 Vl^si^A^r^^ ^35K6I2 21 98 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY All types of underwear as well as nightclothes, wrappers, and sports clothes were also available and popular. In the 1880s ready-made dresses were produced and offered to a wide ranging population through mail-order catalogs. But the manufacture of such dresses did not reach any level comparable to the production of other kinds of ready-made gar- ments. Historians have advanced a number of theories (none of them adequate in my judgment) to account for this lag. My explanation for this slow development of the dress industry is the close fitdng, intricate styles that were fashionable. Upper body garments including wraps and underwear such as chemises and corset covers were sold satisfactorily simply by bust measurements. The patterns used to cut these garments were drafted with proportional systems. The extraordi- narily close cut of women's dress bodices, however, could not be proportionally sized to fit many women. Lord 8c Taylor tried in 1881. Their catalog advised, however, "The bust measure and skirt length only are guaranteed, the other measures are in proportion; if other measures are necessary to insure a fit, the garment will need to be made to order" (1881:30). Apparently, Lord 8c Taylor and many other department stores found that with the fashions of the 1880s, only a limited percentage of women could wear dresses cut by proportionally sized patterns. It was not profitable to mass pro- duce dresses sized this way. Most ready-made dresses in the 1880s were cut from patterns drafted with a simple hybrid system which incorporated the waist measurement (Figure 65). In the fall and winter catalog of 1888-1889, B. Altman 8c Co. announced, "The dresses illustrated on this page are made in proportionate sizes and can only accept the following measurements: bust, waist and skirt length in front" (1888-1889:4). If Altman's produced one style of dress in the five usual bust sizes (34 to 42) they would have had to make garments in a variety of waist dimensions for each bust size. If only a range of three waist mea- surements were cut there would have been 15 different sizes for one style of dress. On the other hand, the less fitted kinds of garments could be offered successfully in only five sizes. Ready-made dresses required a huge inventory and a major risk. Even providing this extraordinary range of sizes cut by a hybrid system did not insure a good fit for many women. Professional dressmakers in the 1880s had already abandoned such simple hybrid systems. Advertisements for ready-made dresses reflected these difficulties. Special reminders were included pointing out that these garments were not made to order, but were manufactured in large quantities in order to offer them at attractive prices. The store could only "vouch for" the bust, waist, and front skirt length measurements. Given the fashion dictates of the day, a large propordon of the female population still needed custom cutting. With the more draped waist styles of the late 1890s, ready-made dresses were successfully sold by the bust measurement and skirt length only. Proportional systems were used to cut the master patterns. Stern Brothers in 1898 could offer just five sizes for each style (Figure 66a). This was a manageable inventory that a number of women could wear because of the looser styles. The risk of producing these garments was reduced to an ac- ceptable level and the mass production of ready- made dresses expanded. The manufacture of women's dresses finally achieved a major position in the clothing industry in the second decade of the 20th century when fashions called for one-piece loosely fitted dresses (Figure 67). Conclusions The creation of the first tailors' drafting systems in Europe was a technological revolution against the individualistic, secretive practices of the past. By systematizing the drafting process into specific, clearly defined steps, cutting was transformed from an intuitive art into a more easily learned craft. With the publicadon of drafting systems the traditional code of secrecy was broken and the trade was opened to aspiring tailors. Drafting sys- tems democratized this trade. Dressmakers' drafting systems, however, were to have an even broader democratizing effect. The earliest I found was created in the United States before 1838 (Figure 16fl). Significandy, this was an NUMBER 42 99 American invention and not an imported Euro- pean innovation. When the pre-Tentler system was being devised, an egalitarian spirit was building momentum in the United States. It challenged the aristocratic domination of American politics with the election of Andrew Jackson as president in 1828. This spirit created pressure for equality in all phases of life. The individual demanding political and economic rights equal to his "betters" also wanted to look equal. In my opinion this Ameri- can, egalitarian movement encouraged the crea- tion of the pre-Tentler system—an attempt to offer the woman, forced to make her own clothes, the technique for cutting a better fitting garment. The sized paper pattern industry was also estab- lished first in the United States rather than in Europe. Unsized paper patterns were sold to pro- fessional dressmakers in England as early as the mid-1820s (Arnold, 1973:121). Thirty years later unsized paper patterns were sold in the United States {Godey's, Feb 1854:467). In the States, how- ever, proportional systems with perforated tools were also available. By the 1860s these propor- tional systems were used to grade mass-produced, sized patterns. E. Butterick 8c Co. and Mme. Dem- orest's were prospering international businesses by 1876, supplying women in the United States and Europe with the patterns for their home-made fashions. In 1919, fifteen companies in New York City produced patterns worth almost a million and a half dollars (U.S. Census, 1923, 9:1065). Dressmakers' proportional drafting systems with the resulting sized pattern industry helped to place better fitting, more fashionable attire within reach of amateur dressmakers who had to make their own clothes. The old saying "Necessity is the mother of in- vention" is well illustrated by drafting systems created for professional dressmakers. In the mid- 1870s fashion dictated that the upper part of a woman's body be encased by a closely fitting basque. Although fashion exhibited some change in the 1880s, the basque continued to be a com- plexly cut challenge to the most experienced dressmaker's skill. Inventors responded to their need by creating more drafting systems. In the Library of Congress collection of dressmakers' instruction books there are three from the 1860s, 22 from the 1870s, and 106 from the 1880s (Figure 68). The numbers of patents granted for drafting systems also reflect the inven- tive responses to the crisis caused by fashion. From the 1820s through the 1870s more patents were issued for techniques related to cutting men's gar- ments than for women's apparel. But the number of patents granted for cutting women's attire jumped from 20 in the 70s to 59 in the 1880s— almost twice as many as were granted for men's garments (Figure 69). The relationship between need and creative ac- tivity is not as clearly documented for the 1890s and 1900s. The Library of Congress holdings de- crease from 106 for the 1880s to 57 for the 1890s, to 22 for the first decade of the 1900s (Figure 68). On the other hand, the number of patents granted for women's garments increased from 59 in the 1880s to 70 in the 1890s and only decreased by four in the early 1900s (Figure 69). Since the Library of Congress collection is but a sampling of all the instruction booklets that were printed, there is the possibility that this collection is not totally representative of the systems that were produced. On the other hand, the data from the U.S. Patent Office are a complete record of the state of the art represented by patents. Thus it could be argued that the number of patents issued in each decade is a truer reflection of the use of dressmakers' drafting systems than the Library of Congress collection. I do not agree. The patent data are a complete record, but of what? They represent the creative activity of individuals who chose to obtain a patent. This activity, spread across the country (Appendix IV), reveals that the need for drafting systems was a general concern and not just limited to the four major cities— Boston, Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia. The patents are not, however, a true repre- sentation of the systems which were produced and used. Anyone could obtain a patent if he could prove his claims were unique. He did not need to prove that his invention was useful or commer- cially practical. Many patented innovations were never produced or, if they were manufactured, they were not financially successful (Figures 45 and 46). It is not possible to determine how many of the patented claims were actually used in the dressmaking trade. The number of patents granted in the 1890s and 1900s may be inflated in part by the length of dme required to obtain a patent. After developing what he thought was a new invention, an individual 140 100 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTION BOOKS 1800-09 1810-19 1820-29 1830-39 1840-49 1850-59 1860-69 1870-79 1880-89 1890-99 1900-09 1910-19 FIGURE 68. Number of Library of Congress instruction books (excluding periodicals) published each decade, from Appendix I. consulted a patent attorney. The application and drawings had to be drawn up to conform with the requirements of the U.S. Patent Office. If they were not, his application would be sent back. If the form of the inventor's application was in order it was exposed to the scrutiny of a patent examiner. This specialist was charged with the responsibility of determining that the claims were truly unique. The Patent Office correspondence files reveal fre- quent lengthy correspondence between examiners and the inventors' attorneys as claims were denied, modified, resubmitted, and denied again. This pro- cess took time. Albert McDowell filed an applica- tion on 11 December 1883 but he was not given his Letters Patent until 6 January 1885 (U.S. Patent 310,297). The style of garment cut by the tool illustrated in the patent drawing (Figure 41) was no longer fashionable. Many otherwise practical in- ventions may have also been made obsolete by changing fashions by the time the patent was granted. A number of patents granted for drafting systems in the 1890s, 1900s, and 1910s were intended to be used for drafting and grading patterns for ready- made clothing. Unfortunately, the inventions in- tended for this growing industry cannot be sepa- rated with any certainty from those designed for the custom trade. The patent data include many inven- tions that were not produced or that were created specifically for cutters of ready-made clothing. Since it is not possible to separate these patents from those useful to cutters of custom-made garments the pat- NUMBER 42 101 140 PATENTS 130 120 110 100 90 « 80 c «i ■Jo a. •S 70 E = 60 50 40 30 20 10 Total Women's garments Men's garments 26 21 M »» 32 29 ^ 3 wi 15 '••v. ^s3s:£ 18 12 30 37 20 64 33 59 108 126 1800-09 1810-19 1820-29 1830-39 1840-^9 1850-59 1860-69 1870-79 1880-89 1890-99 FIGURE 69. Number of U.S. Patents related to drafting systems granted each decade, from Appendix III. 1900-09 1910-19 ent data are not a reliable indication of the use of dressmakers' drafting systems. The instruction books in the Library of Con- gress, however, were all printed for systems that were offered for sale. Some were not commercially successful, others, like the McDowell machine, were used widely. The number of books acces- sioned by the Library does not, however, reflect the relative popularity of these systems. There are also some obvious gaps in this collection. For example, there are four McDowell instruction books in the Library dating from the 1880s, but none from the 1890s. Nevertheless, of the eight extant McDowell systems brought to my attention, all have instruction books copyrighted in the early 1890s. Thus with only the heterogeneous patent data and the incomplete Library of Congress holdings to work from, many of my conclusions are specu- lations. Certainly the complexly cut fashions, coupled with the growing middle class demand for fashionable clothing, created a necessity for accu- rate drafting systems in the last half of the 1870s. To meet this continuing need many more systems were offered for sale in the 1880s than were pro- duced ten years earlier. I speculate that the num- ber of dressmakers using drafting systems in the 1890s remained almost as high as in the 1880s. The number of different systems that were used, how- ever, declined. I suspect that after ten years of trying a wide variety of hybrid and direct-measure systems, dressmakers settled on those few that 102 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY TABLE 1.—Numbers of women's clothing factory establishments and the value of their products in four cities, arranged by decade (developed from U.S. Bureau of Census reports: 1883; 1895; 1902, volume 8; 1913, volume 10; 1923, volume 8) Year of census Boston Chicago New York Philadelphia Number of establishments Value of products ($) Number of establishments Value of products ($) Number of establishments Value of products ($) Number of establishments Value of products ($) 1879 24 1,808,520 19 1,585,990 255 19,641,802 49 2,466,410 1889 35 1,506,212 71 6,422,431 777 43,815,553 74 3,335,746 1899 88 3,258,483 151 9,208,454 1,604 102,697,854 191 9,452,259 1909 139 8,748,500 204 15,676,925 3,058 270,646,086 355 30,193,475 1919 173 20,655,935 374 64,203,000 5,089 866,243,561 537 69,183,831were most effective. I believe that by 1900 dressmakers' drafting sys- tems had begun a rapid decline in importance. The changing fashions, the growing ready-made cloth- ing industry, and the increasingly cheaper and more widely available paper patterns contributed to the conversion of the dressmakers' drafting tool from a vital piece of equipment to an obsolete artifact of the past. In the late 1890s fashionable dress became a more loosely fitted garment. This trend continued with the widespread use of the one-piece dress by 1910. With easier fitting fashions the ready-made clothing industry could successfully sell dresses and suits and shirtwaists to more women. This success encouraged the rapid increase in the num- ber of manufacturing establishments. This re- markable growth is verified by census statistics gathered in four major cities—Boston, Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia (Table I). The devel- opment of the women's clothing industry becomes even more dramatic when viewed in relation to the men's wear industry (Table 2). In 1879 almost 11 times the number of establishments were produc- ing men's apparel as were manufacturing women's garb. In each succeeding decade, however, the relative size of these two industries changed. By 1919 the women's clothing industry exceeded the men's industry both as to the number of establish- ments and the value of products. Unfortunately no comparable census statistics exist to document continuously the decline of the custom trade in relation to the growth of the ready-made industry from 1879 to 1919. Some TABLE 2.—Comparative growth rate of the industries for men's and women's factory-made clothing, measured by number of establishments and value of products, arranged by decade (developed from U.S. Bureau of Census reports: 1883; 1895; 1902, volume 8; 1913, volume 8; 1923, volume 8) Year of census Men's cloth mg Women's clothing Number of establishments Value of products ($) Number of establishments Value of products ($) 1879 (based on 100 cities) 6,166 209,548,460 562 32,004,794 1889 (based on 165 cities) 4,867 251,019,609 1,224 68,164,019 1899 (based on 209 cities) 5,729 276,717,357 2,701 159,339,539 1909 5,584 485,677,493 4,558 384,751,649 1919 5,258 1,162,985,633 7,711 1,208,543,128NUMBER 42 103 scattered evidence does exist, however, to suggest the trend of events. The 10th Census, conducted in 1879, excluded the gathering of data concerning all custom work. Nevertheless, the disparity be- tween the well established ready-made men's wear industry and the small women's industry provoked the following observation in the final census re- port: "It is significant of the habits of people that while the production of men's clothing in distinct establishments is reported in 43 states and ter- ritories, that of women's clothing is reported for only 25, domestic manufacture or custom dress- making taking the place of the shop or factory in supplying the demand in 22 states or territories" (U.S. Census, 1883:xviii). The llth and 12th Censuses (conducted in 1889 and 1899) did consider custom work as well as factory production. In 1889 there were 16 times as many dressmaking estabhshments as there were manufacturers of ready-made clothing. The value of the custom-made products, however, was 84% of the value of ready-made garb (U.S. Census, 1902, 9:302). Apparently even the hard to fit ready-made dresses of 1889 were being bought by women who could not afford custom-made dresses but who, for a variety of reasons, chose not to make their own clothes. One of the reasons for this change may have been the growing number of employed women who had need for attractive, durable clothing but who had little time to make it themselves. By 1899, the number of dressmaking establish- ments had dropped while the number of factories had increased. There were only five times as many dressmaking establishments as manufacturers of ready-made garb. And the value of custom-made costume had dropped to only 30% of the value of ready-made clothing (U.S. Census, 1902, 9:302). In 1899, the looser, fashionable styles increased the probability of finding a ready-made garment that fit. Thus even women who could occasionally af- ford dressmaker-made costumes were more often choosing to buy less expensive ready-mades (Fig- ure 66 a). Census statistics show that in the last year of the 19th century the margin by which women's ready-made clothing exceeded custom-made was greater than at any previous time. The importance of the professional dressmaker was most certainly declining. Before going further with this line of reasoning it is necessary to take a second look at the census statistics. No data were gathered in 1889 or 1899 on dressmakers earning less than $500.00 a year. This excluded group would include a majority of the small town dressmakers, particularly those who received bed and board as part of their payment. Thus I must modify my previous statements. The dressmaker rapidly declined in importance in urban centers where rack after rack of ready-made clothing appeared in specialty and department stores. In small towns and villages, however, the significance of the local dressmaker probably de- creased each year but at a slower rate than among her urban sisters. The net result was the same. Dressmakers became less important. The significance of the dressmaker's role de- clined even faster in the 20th century. The fash- ions of the first two decades of the 1900s, even less fitted than those near the end of the previous century, made it possible for "respectable" middle class women to buy the cheaper ready-made gar- ments for every-day use. Dressmakers' drafting systems, however, di- minished in importance at an even faster rate than did the custom trade itself. The simpler fashions of the 20th century required fewer and less compli- cated pattern pieces. Sized paper patterns could be mass produced at a lower cost with the savings passed on to the client. Fewer alterations were required to make the commercial pattern fit a particular woman. A pattern for the radically new, one-piece dress fashions of the 1910s (Figure 67) could not be drafted, in one step, with a specialized tool for a system produced only ten years earlier. A fashion- able pattern could be developed from the draft made with an obsolete tool, but the dressmaker had to know how to proceed with this extra step. Since the purpose for using a drafting system with a specialized tool was to be able to cut a pattern in the most direct way with a minimum of "figuring,'' it seems likely that the majority of dressmakers dependent on these tools discarded them in favor of paper patterns. Dressmakers who used systems requiring only a tape measure and a square could have continued their trade without resorting to paper patterns. The first generation of drafting systems was created, in the first half of the 19th century, to appeal to the market composed of women on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder who sought a chance to uplift their appearance. The 104 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY inventors of these systems succeeded beyond their wildest expectations. The first fruit that their ef- forts bore was the uniquely American version of the craft of dressmaking. In addition, their ideas were used as the basis of the sizing systems in the paper pattern industry and the women's ready- made clothing industry. Ironically, these industries grew, until, in the 20th century, their employees were the only individuals drafting women's gar- ments with specialized tools. The creation of 19th century dressmakers' draft- ing systems was part of a sociological and technological revolution against the exclusive, in- dividualistic practices of the past, in this case, in the area of fashion. Although the American dressmak- er's craft, which flourished in the 19th century largely because of such technological devel- opments, has long since waned, the other two fruits of that revolution have persisted with contempo- rary economic and social significance. Q^pfimdkl Pre-1920 Publications at Library of Congress Containing Drafting Systems for Women's Garments Pre-1920 publications containing any directions for drafting women's garments are included in this listing. Texts written for tailors have been added if they contained instructions for cutting women's garments, such as riding habits. Periodicals that regularly described drafting systems are incorpo- rated as well as instruction books for specific sys- tems. The dates given for periodicals designate the issues, published before 1920, which are in the possession of the Library of Congress. The dates do not necessarily indicate the complete run of a magazine. Titles that are repeated (in the same or different years) represent publications that are significantly different. Asterisks designate the few publications that have not been examined. Bibliographic informa- tion for these unlocated volumes has been taken from the Library of Congress shelf list. The "state of origin" reflects the author's resi- dence if it is known to differ from the place of printing (publishing). (Most were privately printed in the author's home town.) Where the printing press was located is of less importance to this study than where the system was developed and used. A drafting system that required a specialized tool is more easily understood if the device is at hand. If it is not available, an illustration of the tool is helpful. The fact that the drafting tool was "included" in the publication or that it was "illus- trated" is indicated in the column under the head- ing "Drafting tool." The absence of any remark in this column, however, does not necessarily mean that the systems described required no specialized device. Each citation is annotated with abbreviations for men's, women's, or children's garments (M, W, C) to indicate the relative coverage of these kinds of apparel in each publication. Lowercase letters indi- cate that the discussion of the specified kind of apparel was of minor importance. The number of any U.S. Patent granted to an individual associated with a publication is also listed. The patentee was the author unless an anno- tation specifies otherwise. No attempt has been made to verify that the patented claim was incor- porated into the system described in the publica- tion. The only assured connection between a publi- cation and a patent is the name of the individual associated with both. This listing of Library of Congress acquisitions should be used with discretion. Since the Library's holdings on the subject are the largest in the coun- try, the techniques discovered from this source should give a good survey of the dressmaking practices in the United States before 1920. There are, however, copyrighted publications that have not been catalogued by this library. And there are undoubtedly many which have neither been copyrighted nor acquired by this institution. A nation-wide search is needed to assemble a truly comprehensive listing of extant materials. Publication Abercrombie, Emma 1889. Garment Cutting Self-Taught, A Book Containing In- structions and Diagrams, Showing How to Use the Aber- crombie Scale .... Coal Centre, Washington Co.: Pri- vately printed. The American Fashion Review. See The Sartorial Artfoumal. State of origin Pennsylvania Drafting tool Clothing U.S. Patent type m W C 105 106 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Publication The American Ladies' Tailor (1903 — 1919). New York: Ihejno. J. Mitchell Co. [Published monthly except May and November. The tool was included in the issues for January and February, 1903.] The American Modiste: Published in Connection with the American Garment Cutter (Jan 1903, 1904-1913). Chicago: Jonathan Nelson & Co. [Published quarterly. Patent issued to Jonathan Nelson.] Barnes, A. L. 1892. Dress Fitting Made Easy. Philadelphia: Privately printed. Baughman, Mr. and Mrs. J. S. 1892. Baughman's Advanced Hints on Dress Cutting .... Bur- lington: Privately printed. Bayne, J. Reid 1883. Bayne's Self-Instruction Book for Dress Cutting by the French Glove-Fitting Tailor System, by Exact Measure: A Manual for the Use of Bayne's Paris Scale. New York: Privately printed. Bearrie, A. E., & Co. 1890. ... The Perfect Dress Fitter ...Complete Instructions in the Art of Cutting All Kinds of Garments. St. Louis: A. E. Bearrie &: Co. Bell, Mattie M. 1893. ... Cutting and Fitting Made Simple and Easy. Troy: Privately printed. Bennett, Ella Alvira 1914. The Perfect Dressmaking System. Des Moines: Privately printed. Berkowich, Louis I., editor 1904? A Complete Grading Manual of All Kinds of Garments Worn by Ladies' [sic]. Misses' [sic] and Children. New York: Berkowich Designing Academy. Bisbee, F. S. 1895. Instruction Book of Bisbee's American Tailor System of Dress Cutting. Boston: American System Co. Blackburn, Juditha 1917. The Textbook for the Use and Application of the Blackburn Adjustable Drafting Device. Los Angeles: The Blackburn Company. Blair, Margaret J. 1897. Margaret Blair System of Garment Drafting, Used in School for Girls, Agriculture Department of State Univer- sity of Minnesota, and fames Industrial Training Institute, Minneapolis, Minn. ... Minneapolis: H. L. Collins Co. 1904. Margaret f. Blair's System of Sewing and Garment Draft- ing. 3rd edition revised. St. Paul: Webb Publishing Co. Blakely, Elizabeth, and Frances Patton 1907. The Practical System for Drafting Ladies and Children's Clothing, Designed for Use in the Public Schools. 2 vol- umes. New York: Hinds, Noble & Eldredge. Blaney. See Carman &c Blaney. Briggs, D. B. 1889. Directions for Using the New York Self-Instructing System and Chart for Cutting Ladies' and Misses' Dresses, Bas- ques, and Other Garments. Albany: The Briggs Chart Company. Drafting tool mcluded State of origin New York Illinois Pennsylvania Iowa New York illustrated Missouri Alabama Iowa New York Massachusetts illustrated California illustrated Minnesota Minnesota New York New York illustrated U.S. Patent Clothing type W W 717,253 W W 422,282 430,059 675,537 W m W C W W C 1,183,845 W C w W 985,971 1,276,316 W C w c w c w Illinois Wisconsin NUMBER 42 Publication Brown, Harriet A[delaid] 1902. Scientific Dress Cutting and Making: "The Harriet A. Broxvn System" Simplified and Improved. Boston: Pri- vately printed. Buddington, Mr. and Mrs. F. E. 1887. Supplement Studies for Those Using the Buddington Dress Cutting Machine. Chicago: Privately printed. 1896. Instruction Book for Using the Buddington Improved Dress Cutting Machine udth Dart Attachment for Cutting French Bias Basque, Enlarging Darts, etc. 1st edition. Chicago: Privately printed. Byrnes, T[homas] W. 1882. T. W. Byrnes' New and Improved System, with the Dress- Maker's Model Measure Sheet.. Manitowoc: Privately printed. Carlstrom, Jno. A. 1905. Carlstrom's Proportions of the Human Form: A Scientific Treatise on Proportions as They Apply to Garment Con- struction. New York: The Jno. J. Mitchell Co. Carman & Blaney 1884. The American Metrical System for Cutting Ladies' and Children's Dresses and All Close Fitting Garments with a Table of Calculations for All Sizes .... Steubenville: Privately printed. Clave, Justin 1859. To the Ladies: New Geometrical Method; or. Easy and Infallible Manner of Taking the Measure, Drafting and Cutting Dresses of Ladies. . . According to a System of Proportions Adapted to the Human Body. Philadelphia: Privately printed. [This single sheet of paper is a perforated tool for a proportional system.] Clute, J. Redfield 1891. Clute's Actual Measurement System and Key to Scientific Dress Making. Minneapolis: Privately printed. Coleman, M[ary] V[irginia] 1887. The Science of Gynametry. Atlanta: Byrd & Pattillo. Cornwell, Willett 1883. Cornwell's Improved Self-Fitting System for Dress Cutting: Instruction Sheet Chicago: Privately printed. 1885. Cornwell's New Improved Self-Fitting Chart and Sleeve System for Cutting Ladies', Misses', and Children's Dresses, Cloaks, Basques, and Postillions. Chicago: Privately printed. 1888. Cornwell's New Instruction Book, for Learning Their New Improved Self-Fitting Chart and Sleeve System for Cutting Ladies', Misses', and Children's Dresses, Cloaks, Basques, Dolmans, Postillions, and Many Other Useful Garments. Chicago: Privately printed. Custom Cutter (1890-1897). Chicago: The Robert Phillips Co. [A monthly publication which occasionally showed drafting systems for women's garments.] Davis, Myra A. 1888. Directions for Cutting Garments with the Davis Improved Square. Portland: Privately printed. Davis, Mrs. M. E. 1882. Mrs. M. E. Davis' Dress Chart and Self-Instructor. St. Joseph: Privately printed. 107 State of Drafting Clothing U.S. Patent origin tool type ssachusetts W C Illinois W C illustrated W 272,204 440,692 541,311 618,392 272,204 440,692 541,311 618,392 W 282,842 M w c New York 918,279 Ohio W illustrated W Pennsylvania included Minnesota W Georgia illustrated m W C 357,762 Illinois Illinois partially illustrated illustrated W W C C 209,111 209,111 Illinois W C 209,111 Illinois M w W 365,800 Maine W c Missouri illustrated 108 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Clothing U.S. Patent type Publication deLamorton, O. H. 1892. Prof. O. H. deLamorton's Self-Teaching Instruction Book for the Parisian Champion Scientific Tailor System. New York: Privately printed. [Published bi-monthly.] Denieffe, Joseph 1900. The Geometric: A System of Cutting Garments for Ladies and Gentlemen on Geometrical Lines and Principles. Chicago: Privately printed. Denny, Mrs. L. 1891. The Perfection Taylor System by Actual Measurement for Ladies' and Children's Garments. David City: Privately printed. Devereaux, C. A. 1883. Devereaux's Actual Measure System, The Science and Geometry of Dress. St. Paul: Privately printed. Diamond Garment Cutter Correspondence School 1903. Instruction Book. Volume 1. Chicago: Diamond Gar- ment Cutter Co. 1905. Supplement to the Diamond Garment Cutter Instruction Book. Volume 2. Chicago: Diamond Garment Cutter Co. Dilday, E. 1856. E. Dilday's Plain and Concise Method of Garment Cutting so as to Fit All Possible Forms of Persons, with Directions for Putting the Work Together, Ready for Sewing. St. Louis: Privately printed. Dittmar & Sheifer 1888. The Self-Balancing System, or The Cutters' Guide. New York: Dittmar & Sheifer. 1891. The Self-Balancing System of Cutting Ladies' Garments', by Dittmar & Sheifer, Including Scales of the Self- Balancing System for Cutting. New York: Dittmar & Sheifer. Doolittle, Oliver Taylor 1901. Straight Shoulder Rules, Systems and Methods of the Pres- ent Day: Women's Garment Cutting. Philadelphia: Oliver T. Doolittle. Doran. See Goldsberry & Doran. Doughty & Co. 1887. Doughty s New Work on Dressmaking, by the New Im- proved and Perfect Tailor System, of Square Measurement. Cincinnati: Doughty 8c Co. Eggleston, Lillian A. See Frank O. Tappan. EUiss, Amelia B. 1883. The "London Tailor" System of French Cutting, for Cut- ting Ladies' and Children's Garments, Dresses, Cloaks, Coats, Wraps, Mantles, and Riding Habits, Part First: Dresscutting and Dressmaking. Philadelphia: Privately printed. Elmes, B. S. 1888. Irutructions and Diagrams for Using the New Complete Tailor System of Dress Cutting. New Edition. Springfield: Privately printed. Engelmann, Gustav 1904. The American Garment Cutter for Women. New York: American Fashion Company. 1913. The American Garment Cutter for Women's Garments. 2nd edition. New York: American Fashion Com- pany. Drafting tool State of origin W C New York M w Illinois Nebraska W Minnesota illustrated W Illinois W C Illinois W C M w Missouri M w c W New York New York included W Pennsylvania illustrated M W C Ohio W C Pennsylvania W W C W C Massachusetts New York New York NUMBER 42 109 Publication State of origin Drafting tool Clothing U.S. Patent type Evan, H. P., Co. 1896. Instruction Book for the Standard Tailor System: A Self- Instructor with Object Lessons in the Ari of Cutting all Styles of Garments, for Ladies, Gentlemen, Children, and Infants. Chicago: H. P. Evan Co. Ewing, Sarah C. 1869. The Tailor System: Dress Cutting Made Perfect by Mrs. Ewing's Delineation of Scales, the Tailor System Simplified, the Knowledge of Which Was Gained by Mrs. S. C. Ewing, after Fifteen Years' Practical Cutting from the Same .... Indianapolis: Privately printed. 1871. The Tailor System: Dress-Cutting Made Perfect by Mrs. Ewing's Delineation of Scales, the Tailor System Simplified, the Knowledge of Which Was Gained by Mrs. S. C. Ewing, after Fifteen Years' Practical Cutting from the Same .... Indianapolis: Privately printed. 1888. The Tailor System: Dress-Cutting Made Perfect by Mrs. Ewing's Delineation of Scales, the Tailor System Simplified, the Knowledge of Which Was Gained by Mrs. S. C. Ewing, after Twenty Years' Practical Cutting from the Same .... Indianapolis: Privately printed. The Fashionable Woman's Tailor (1912 — 1918). New York: New- man Fashion Company. [Published monthly.] Ferguson, Albert Edwin 1915. The New Era Pattern Cutting System: Ten Complete Les- sons for Cut-To-Measure Foundation Patterns, Embracing aThoro [s\c\ and Accurate System of Measuring. Atlanta: The Blosser Company. Flenner, Lewis. See Kromer & Flenner. Fitch, Morris 1883. M. Fitch's Square, True, Tailor System, for Cutting Ladies' and Children's Garments .... Chicago: Privately printed. Fountain, J. H. 1883. Instructions for Using Fountain's Tailor System of Dress Cutting, Which Makes a Perfect Fit for Ladies and Chil- dren without Alteration. St. Louis: J. H. Fountain & Co. 1883. Instructions for Using Fountain's Tailor System of Dress Cutting, Which Makes a Perfect Fit for Ladies and Chil- dren without Alteration. 2nd edition. St. Louis: J. H. Fountain & Co.. 1883. Instructions for Using Fountain's Tailor System of Dress Cutting, Which Makes a Perfect Fit for Ladies and Chil- dren without Alteration. 3rd edition. St. Louis: J. H. Fountain & Co. 1890. Instructions for Using Fountain's Tailor System of Dress Cutting, Which Makes a Perfect Fit for Ladies and Chil- dren mthout Alteration. 5th edition. St. Louis: J. H. Fountain & Co. Fourier, P. A. 1895. The Parisian Tailor Complete Instructor and Practical Guide to Ladies' Tailoring. Philadelphia: Privately printed. The French Dressmaker, Formerly La Couturiere (1894-1895). New York: A. McDowell & Co. [Published monthly. Pat- ents issued to Albert McDowell.] Ganzhorn, William 1885. A Geometrical System Revised and Enlarged, for Measur- ing, Draughting, and Cutting Dresses, Cloaks, Perelines, Illinois Indiana Indiana Indiana New York Georgia Illinois Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Pennsylvania New York illustrated Massachusetts m W C 628,083 W C 112,024 W C 112,024 W C 112,024 W w W C W C W C W C W C W W 213,436 310,297 342,216 263,779 w 110 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Publication State of origin Drafting tool Clothing U.S. Patent type Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Michigan New York New York Wraps, Dolmans, Pelisses, Shoulder Capes, and Riding Habits, (sfc. Boston: Privately printed. Gartland, Elizabeth 1884. The American Lady-Tailor Glove-Fitting System of Dress-Making, from Experience and Practice. Philadel- phia: Privately printed. 1884. The Original American Lady Tailor System. Philadel- phia: Privately printed. Gingles, Mae Milbourne 1907. Garment Drafting by Simple Rule Method: A Student's Manual for Home and School Garment Cutting. Saginaw: Seemann &• Peters. Glickstein, Philip 1909. Glickstein s System: Ladies', Misses', and Children's Gar- ments, Practical Methods of Designing According to Pro- portions. New York: Privately printed. *1909. Glickstein's System of Designing and Cutting for Men's, Boys', and Children's Garments and Novelties. New York: Privately printed. Goldsberry 8c Doran. 5^^ W. H. Goldsberry. Goldsberry, Doran & Nelson. See W. H. Goldsberry Goldsberry, W. H. 1884. The National Garment Cutter. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran 8c Nelson. 1885. The National Garment Cutter. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran &: Nelson. 1886. The National Garment Cutter. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran & Nelson. 1887. The National Garment Cutter Instruction Book. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran & Nelson. 1887. The National Garment Cutter Instruction Book. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran & Nelson. 1888. The National Garment Cutter Book of Diagrams. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran & Nelson. 1888. The Naticmal Garment Cutter Instruction Book. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran & Nelson. 1889. The National Garment Cutter Book of Diagrams. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran & Nelson. 1889. The National Garment Cutter Book of Diagrams. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran & Nelson. 1890. The National Garment Cutter Book of Diagrams. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran 8c Nelson. 1890. The National Garment Cutter Instruction Book. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran & Nelson. 1891. The National Garment Cutter Book of Diagrams. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran 8c Nelson. 1891. The National Garment Cutter Instruction Book. Chicago: Goldsberry, Doran 8c Nelson. 1892. The National Garment Cutter Book of Diagrams. Chicago: Goldsberry & Doran. 1893. The National Garment Cutter Book of Diagrams. Chicago: Goldsberry 8c Doran. 1895. The Diamond Garment Cutter Book of Diagrams. Chicago: Goldsberry & Doran. 1895. The Diamond Garment Cutter Instruction Book. Chicago: Goldsberry & Doran. 1895. The National Garment Cutter Book of Diagrams. Chicago: Goldsberry &: Doran. W C 355,160 illustrated W 355,160 W W C M Illinois illustrated m W c 247,339 Illinois illustrated m W c 247,339 Illinois illustrated m w c 247,339 Illinois illustrated m w c 247,339 Illinois illustrated m w c 247,339 Illinois m w c 247,339 Illinois m w c 247,399 Illinois m w c 247,399 Illinois m w c 247,399 lUinois m w c 247,399 Illinois m w c 247,399 Illinois m w c 247,399 Illinois m w c 247,399 Illinois m w c 247,399 Illinois m w c 247,399 Illinois m w c 247,399 Illinois m w c 247,399 Illinois m w c 247,399NUMBER 42 Publication 1895. The National Garment Cutter Instruction Book. Chicago: Goldsberry 8c Doran. 1896. The Diamond Garment Cutter Book of Diagrams. Chicago: W. H. Goldsberry. 1896. The Diamond Garment Cutter Instruction Book. Chicago: W. H. Goldsberry. 1897. The Diamond Garment Cutter Instruction Book. Chicago: W. H. Goldsberry. [For clarity, the series of books above has been credited to W. H. Goldsberry. The actual "author' was the firm, shown here as the pub- lisher. The patent was issued to W. H. Goldsberry.] Goldsberry, W. H. See also Thompson & Goldsberry, and The Voice of Fashion. Gordon, Seldon Smith *1901. The "Standard" Work on Cutting Ladies' Tailor-Made Garments: A Complete Treatise on the Art and Science of Delineating All Garments for Women Made by Tailors. New York: The Jno. J. Mitchell Co. 1908. The "Standard" Work on Cutting Ladies' Tailor-Made Garments: A Complete Treatise on the Art and Science of Delineating All Garments for Women Made by Tailors. Revised edition. New York: The Jno. J. Mitchell Co. Gottschalg, William 1876. The Art of Measuring, Drawing, and Cutting of Patterns for Ladies' and Children's Dresses .... Brooklyn: Pri- vately printed. Le Grand Chic Parisien Fashion Company 1919. Instruction Book with Diagrams to the Le Grand Chic Parisien System of Cutting Ladies [sic] and Misses [sic] Tailleurs. Custom edition. New York: Le Grand Chic Parisien Fashion Company. Greenwood, G. M., &: Co. 1884. The Improved Fraruo-American Form ... an Adjust- able Instrument and Perfected Method for Draughting, Cutting, and Fitting Dresses and All Inside and Outside Garments: Instruction in Its Use. Boston: G. M. Greenwood & Co. Greenwood, George M. 1890. Points on Dress Cutting and Fitting, Embracing the Latest Ideas Carried Out in the Leading Emporiums of Fashion of Paris, London, and New York .... Boston: G. M. Greenwood & Co. Griffin, Caleb H. 1879. "The Challenge" Dress Cutting System. Boston: C. H. Griffin & L. F. Wise. 1879. The King of Squares: Caleb H. Griffin's Last and Great Improvement in Cutting Ladies' &" Children's Garments. Boston: Privately printed. 1879. Self-Teaching, Perfect Fitting French System for Cutting Ladies' and Children's Garments. Boston: Privately printed. 111 State of Drafting Clothing U.S. Patent origin tool type Illinois m W c 247,399 Illinois m W c 247,399 Illinois m W C 247,399 Illinois m W C 247,399 W New York W New York illustrated W New York W New York W Massachusetts illustrated W Massachusetts included Massachusetts W W C Massachusetts W C Massachusetts 194,086 195,925 195,926 206,315 228,527 234,273 194,086 195,925 195,926 206,315 228,527 234,273 194,086 195,925 195,926 112 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Publication 1883. Measure and Instruction Book for the United States Stan- dard Dress-Cutting System. Boston: Privately printed. Griffin, Caleb H., and David Knox 1873. The Science and Art of Cutting and Making Ladies' Gar- ments, as Demonstrated by Griffin ^ Knox's Great Ameri- can Draughting Machine. Lynn: Privately printed. [Patents issued to Caleb H. Griffin.] Gurney, Edmund 1917. Efficiency, Simplicity, Economy In Cutting and Making Ladies' Garments. Portland: Privately printed. Hale, L. B. 1885. Simplified Directions for Using L. B. Hale's New Tailor System of French Dress Cutting. Buffalo: Baker, Jones & Co. Hamilton, Nellie 1894. The Scientific System of Dress Cutting Invented by Nellie Hamilton .... Algona: Privately printed. Hanover, John C, & Co. .1885. TheHanover Dressmaker: A New Work on Drafting, Trac- ing, Cutting, Basting, Stitching, Draping, and Finishing Ladies', Misses', Children's, Boys', and Men's Garments. 1st edition. Cincinnati: John C. Hanover 8c Co. 1886. Hanover's Dressmaker: A New Work on Drafting, Trac- ing, Cutting, Basting, Stitching, Draping, and Finishing Ladies', Misses', Children's, Boys', and Men's Garments. 2nd edition. Cincinnati: John C. Hanover 8c Co. 1886. Hanover's New and Improved Work on Dressmaking, by the Merchant Tailor System. Cincinnati: John C. Hanover & Co. 1888. Hanover's Self-Teaching Garment Cutter, by Merchant Tailor System .... Cincinnati: John C. Hanover. Harvey, S. B. 1885. Measure and Instruction Book for the Ladies' Delight Dress-Cutting System. Boston: Privately printed. Head, Leola M. 1888. Instruction on Leola M. Head's Self Teaching System of Cutting. Haw Ridge: Privately printed. Hecklinger, Charles 1881. The Dress and Cloak Cutter: A Treatise on the Theory and Practice of Cutting Dresses and Overgarments for Ladies, Especially Designed and Adapted for Tailors' Use. Bur- lington: Privately printed. 1884. Handbook on Dress and Cloak Cutting. New York: Pri- vately printed. 1886. Hecklinger's Ladies' Garments, a Text Book: How to Cut and Make Ladies'Garments .... New York: Privately printed. 1891. The "Keystone" System: A Text-Book on Cutting and De- signing Ladies' Garments. New York: The West Pub- lishing Co. State of origin Massachusetts Massachusetts Oregon New York Iowa Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Massachusetts Alabama Vermont New York New York New York Drafting tool Clothing U.S. Patent type 206,315 228,527 234,273 W C 194,086 195,925 195,926 206,315 228,527 234,273 W 194,086 195,925 195,926 206,315 228,527 234,273 W w W m W C m W C m W C m W C W M W C W W w w M W C Illinois NUMBER 42 Publication 1895. The "Keystone" facket and Dress Cutter: A Treatise on fackets, Dresses, and Other Garments for Women, Specially Designed for Self-Instruction. New York: The Herald of Fashion Co. The Herald of Fashion and foumal of Tailoring . . . (1896). New York: The Herald of Fashion Co. [Published monthly, women's wear included in the semiannual supplement.] Herbert, Mrs. Charles 1897. Mrs. Herbert's Scientific System of Dress Cutting for Self- Instruction. New York: The Dressmakers' Trade School. Holmes, Nelson 1894. The Holmes Cutter: A Practical System for Garment Cut- ting That Is Based on Self varying Principles for Block Patterns and the Most Complete for Measurement. Chicago: Privately printed. Hughes & Storey 1892. The Ladies' Tailor Complete Instructor. St. Louis: Pri- vately printed. [Patents issued to James R. Storey.] Hunter, A.J. 1853. The Garment Cutter and Ladies [sic] Guide: Being a Complete System for Cutting Gentlemen's Wear, Coats of All Fashions, Vests and Pantaloons, Also a Complete Guide for Cutting Ladies [sic] Dressing [sic], with Plain and Practical Rules for Varying and Changing the Same, Ac- cording to the Change in Fashion, with Plain, Easy, and Practical Method for Teaching the Same by Familiar Ques- tions and Answers, with Explanation on Measure, Press- ing, and Finishing Off Clothing. Glasgow: Privately printed. Hurwitz, George 1910. New Teacher of Ladies' Home Tailoring. Mason City: Privately printed. Inwood, Mrs. D. A. 1863. Mrs. D. A. Inwood's Book of Instructions for Her Five Measure System of Dress Cutting, for Cutting Ladies' and Children's Dresses, Basques, Boy's Clothing, and Gentle- men's Shirts. Boston: Privately printed. 1871. Mrs. D. A. Inwood's Book of Instructions for Her Cele- brated Diagram of Dress Cutting, for Cutting Ladies' and Children's Dresses, Basques, Boys' Clothing, ^ c, i^ c. Boston: Privately printed. 1875. Livre instructeur de Madame D. A. Inwood, pour expliquer la maniere de tailleur les robes a I'aide de son celebre diagramme pour tailler robes de dames et d'enfants basques, vetements de garfons, etc. Boston: Privately printed. Jackson, H. Ayers 1879. Franco-Prussian Mode. Des Moines: Privately printed. 1882. Franco-Prussian Mode. Chicago: Privately printed. 1884. H. Ayers fackson's Scientifically Graduated Waist, Hip Rule, and Sleeve Methods for Ladies', Gentlemen's, and Children's Tailoring, Mathematically Demonstrated and Practically Illustrated. Chicago: Privately printed. State of Drafting origin tool New York New York New York Illinois Missouri illustrated Kentucky Illinois Massachusetts Massachusetts Massachusetts Iowa Illinois included 113 Clothing U.S. Patent type W m W W M w c m W c 537,132 552,976 M W W m W C W C W C W W 259,162 327,172 361,292 259,162 327,172 361,292 259,162 327,172 361,292 114 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Washington, D.C. Michigan Michigan Publication State of origin 1884. Scientific Dress Cutting, Practically Illustrated, andMath- Illinois ematically Demonstrated. The Franco-Prussian Mode "Method" . . . 4th edition. Chicago: Privately printed. 1888. Scientific Dress-Cutting Practically Illustrated, andMath- Illinois ematically Demonstrated. The Franco-Prussian Mode "Method"... 6th edition. Chicago: Privately printed. Jackson, Louisa L. *1871. Self-Teaching System of Garment Cutting: The Family Indiana Dress Guide, or, the Art of Drafting and Measuring Simplified and Perfected.... 8th edition, revised and enlarged. Indianapolis: Privately printed. 1876. The Science and Geometry of Dress: Being a Complete Indiana Manual of hutruction in the Art of Designing, Drafting, and Cutting Ladies' and Children's Wearing Apparel. . . . Indianapolis: Privately printed. 1876. The Science and Geometry of Dress: Being a Complete Indiana Manual of Instruction in the Art of Designing, Drafting, and Cutting Ladies' and Children's Wearing Afyparel.... Indianapolis: Privately printed. 1889. The Science and Geometry of Dress: Being a Complete Indiana Manual of hutruction in the Art of Designing, Drafting, and Cutting Ladies' and Children's Wearing Apparel.... Indianapolis: Privately printed. Jester, R. E., & Co. 1893. The Merchant Tailor Unabridged Instructor in the Science Illinois of Dress Cutting and the Art of Dress Making. Chicago: R. E. Jester 8c Co. Jones, M. O. 1891. Instruction Book, Giving Full Information for Using the New York Self-Adjusting Tailor System, of Garment Cutting. 4th issue. Rochester: Privately printed. The fournal of Fashion and Tailoring. . . (1893—1894). New New York York: The West Publishing Co. [Published monthly; included approximately one draft for a woman's garment per issue.] Kaphan,M. 1890. Prof. M. Kaphan's Kid Glove-Fitting System for Ladies', Misses', Childreyfs, and Gents' Garments. . . . Wash- ington, D. C: Privately printed. Kellogg, Mrs. F.J. 1880. Mrs. F. J. Kellogg's Tailor System for Cutting Ladies' Garments of Every Description. Flint: Privately printed. 1888. Instruction Book for the Kellogg French Tailor System for Cutting Every Description of Ladies' Garments. Battle Creek: Privately printed. 1889. Instruction Book for the Kellogg French Tailor System for Michigan Cutting Every Description of Ladies' Garments. Battle Creek: Review & Herald Pub. Co. 1892. Instruction Book for the Kellogg French Tailor System for Michigan Cutting Every Description of Ladies' Garments. Battle Creek: Privately printed. King, E. 1884. E. King's Scientific Square System of Dress and Cloak New York Cutting. New York: Privately printed. Kinslow, Mrs. J. G. 1888. The Improved Diagram System of Ladies' and Children's Massachusetts Drafting tool included included illustrated included illustrated illustrated Clothing type U.S. Patent W 259,162 327,172 361.292 m W C 259,162 327,172 361,292 90,363 W C 90,J W C 90,363 W C 90,363 w c w c M w m W C W C 235,776 W 235,776 W 235,776 W w W C 235,776 NUMBER 42 115 Publication State cf ori^n Drafting tool Clothing U.S. Patent type Pennsylvania W Pennsylvania California Kentucky California Pennsylvania illustrated New York New York Dress and Garment Cutting. Lynn: Privately printed. Kintzel, A. G. 1896. The Kintzel Dress Cutting System. Philadelphia: Pri- vately printed. Knox, David. See Caleb H. Griffin. Kohler. See Powell & Kohler. Kromer 8c Flenner * 1845. Graduating System, for Drafting Coats, Vests, Pantaloons, Cloaks, &f Ladies' Habits. 2nd edition. Philadelphia. [Patent issued to Lewis Flenner.] Lapsley, William. See James Queen. Leake, Mrs. H. A. 1883. A System for Cutting Ladies' Garments (Invented by Mrs. H. A. Leake), a Complete and Reliable Guide for Dress Makers: Instructions for Its Use. Oakland: Privately printed. Legendre [sic], Madame M. A. 1889. Madame Legendre's [sic] Perfect Fitting System for Cut- ting Ladies' Garments. Louisville: Privately printed. Levis, D. 1. 1890. The Parisian Tailor System of Dress Cutting .... Chi- cago: Privately printed. Lewis, S. T. 1885. Instructions for Drafting by the Combination Tailor Sys- tem. Watertown: Privately printed. Linthicum, W[illiam] O. 1876. Divisional and Exact Measurement Systems for Garment Cutting .... New York: Privately printed. Livingston, J. W. 1880. French Combination Instruction Book. New York: Pri- vately printed. 1884. French Combination of Squares: Instruction Book. New York: Privately printed. McCall, James 1881. Instruction Book for the French and English Systems of Cutting, Fitting, and Basting. New York. [Final third of book devoted to an explanation of one system used by Moschcowitz Bros.' dressmaking firm.] McClure, N. C. 1880. Practical Dress Cutting with the Square, McClure's Meth- od: Inch Measurement and Square Drafting by the Old Mechanical Rule. Oakland: Pacific Press Publishing House. McDermott, L. M. 1896. McDermott's New Tapeline Tailor System. Pittsburg: Pri- vately printed. McDowell, Albert. See The French Dressmaker and La Mode de Paris. McDowell Garment Drafting Machine Co. 1883. Instruction Book for Drafting and Cutting Dresses, Basques, Sacks, Coats, etc., by the Garment Drafting Ma- chine, As Invented and Patented by A. McDowell. New York: Privately printed. [Patents issued to Albert McDowell.] 1884. Instruction Book for Drafting and Cutting Dresses, Basques, Sacks, Coats, &c., by the Garment Drafting Ma- chine, As Invented and Patented by A. McDowell. New York: Privately printed. M w W 2,341 W illustrated W C Illinois New York W c 321,986 New York M w New York W c 307,664 New York illustrated w c 307,664 New York w m W C w c W illustrated 213,436 310,297 342,216 W illustrated 213,436 310,297 342,216 116 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Publication 1885. Instruction Book for Drafting and Cutting Dresses, Basques, Sacks, Coats, is'c, by the Garment Drafting Ma- chine, As Invented and Patented by A. McDowell. 7th edition. New York: Privately printed. 1887. Instruction Book for Drafting and Cutting Dresses, Basques, Sacks, Coats, i£c., by the Garment Drafting Ma- chine, As Invented and Patented by A. McDowell. 11th edition. New York: Privately printed. McDowell, William. See Pictorial Review. Madison, J. O. 1878. Elements of Garment Cutting, Together with Practical Hints to Cutters . Hartford: The Case, Lockwood & Brainard Company. Mahan, Francis Mahan's Protractor and Proof Systems of Garment Cut- ting, Published and Taught by Francis Mahan, Practical Tailor and Fashioner {18S9-1841, 1843-1844, 1854). Philadelphia: Privately printed. [All issues were semi-annual except for 1854, which was quarterly.] Mallison, Mme. E. W. 1886. Dress Making Reduced to a Science; the Eclectic Lady- Tailor System of Dress Cutting. Washington, D.C: Pri- vately printed. Martin, G. N. 1887. Instructions for Using G. N. Martin's New System of French Dress Cutting. Boston: Privately printed. Martin, James A. 1888. Martin's Tailor System for Dress and Cloak or Cutting Dressmaking Self-Taught . . . Peoria: Privately printed. Mason, Ida V. 1897. The Independent Cutter: A Scientific Work on Cutting Garments According to a Simple Method. Privately printed. Miegel, Albert Henry 1896. Miegel's Manual of Garment Cutting and Double Measure Systems. Augusta: Privately printed. Mignogna, Antonio 1896. The Tailor's Vade Mecum; or. The Treasure of Experience Converted into Theory on the Art of Cutting Gentlemen's and Ladies' Garments. New York: Privately printed. Minier, E. P. 1857. A Self-Teaching Dress Making System: Science Applied to Dress Cutting, the Art Perfected, Simplified and Reduced, in the Process of Drafting, to Mathematical Precision, Accompanied with Copious Illustrations and Examples, with Full and Perfect Directions for Self-Instruction. 2nd edition. Cincinnati: Privately printed. Mitchell, Jno. J., Co. See: The American Ladies' Tailor; Jno. A. Carlstrom; S. S. Gordon; The Sartorial Art foumal; and The Sartorial Art fournal: Ladies' Tailor Edition. La Mode de Paris: A fournal of the Latest Fashions for Ladies and Dress-Makers (1891-1895). American Edition. New York and Paris: A. McDowell 8c Co. [Published monthly. Patents were issued to Albert McDowell.] La Mode Universelle: A Book of Pattern Designs with Thompson's Universal System of Garment Cutting (1910). Hartford: Mme. H.J. Hall. [Published semi-annually.] State of origin Drafting tool Clothing type U.S. Patent New York W 213,436 310,297 342,216 New York W 213,436 310,297 342,216 M w Connecticut M Pennsylvania W Washington, illustrated D.C. W C Massachusetts W W Illinois M w Georgia M W New York W C Ohio New York W w 213,436 310,297 342,216 Connecticut NUMBER 42 117 Publication State of Drafting origin tool Clothing U.S. Patent type Molpoer, Louis 1886. Every Lady Her Own Dressmaker: The Eureka Lady Tailor System, for Cutting Ladies' Dresses and Coats, No Fitting to Do, Improved and Simplified. Baltimore: Privately printed. 1891. Every Lady Her Own Dressmaker: The Scientific Lady Tailor System for Cutting Ladies [sic] Dresses and Coats, No Fitting to Do, Improved and Simplified. Washington, D.C: Prof. Lewis [sic] Molpoer. 1895? Every Lady Her Own Dressmaker: The Scientific Lady Tailor System for Cutting Ladies' Dresses and Coats; No Fitting to Do; Improved and Simplified. 2nd edition. Washington, D.C: Privately printed. 1897. Every Lady Her Own Dressmaker: The Scientific Lady Tailor System for Cutting Ladies' Dresses and Coats, No Fitting to Do, Improved and Simplified. 3rd edition. Washington, D.C: Privately printed. Montie, Mme. 1883. Parisian Method of Cutting without Chart or Scale. Paris: Privately printed. Moody, D. W. 1879. New Instructions for Cutting Children's Clothing by D. W. Moody's Celebrated Star System of Square Measurement New York: Privately printed. 1885. Prof D. W. Moody's New Book, Giving Complete and Elaborate Instructions in All Branches of Dress Cutting, Dress Making, Sewing, and Basting. 3rd edition. Cin- cinnati: Privately printed. 1885. Prof. D. W. Moody's New Book, Giving Complete and Elaborate Instructions in All Branches of Dress Cutting, Dress Making, Sewing, and Basting. 4th edition. Cin- cinnati: Privately printed. Moore, C E. 1892. The Self-Instructor. Atlanta: The Atlanta Cutting School. Moschcowitz. See James McCall. Moschcowitz Bros. 1884. Instructions in Dressmaking, Basting, and Fitting, as Set Forth by the Moschcowitz Model Waist Lining. New York: Privately printed. [Patents were issued to Herman and Shamu Moschcowitz.] MuUer, Ed. 1892? A Symposium on Cutting. San Francisco: Privately printed. Myer, Mary C. 1884. Instruction Book for the Paragon Chart Nelson. See Goldsberry, Doran &: Nelson. Nelson, Jonathan. See The American Modiste. The New York Fashion Bazar (1979-1889). New York: George Munro. [Published weekly, with serial article entitled "Cutting-Out and Dressmaking," which gave draft- ing instructions for one garment per issue.] Nickerson, S. A. 1888. Instruction Book for the Correct Use of Miss S. A. Nicker- son's New, Improved, and Scientific Tailor System of Sqxmre Measurement for Cutting Ladies' and Children's Garments. Providence: Privately printed. Maryland Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. New York Ohio Ohio Georgia New York illustrated California New York Rhode Island illustrated W W W W w w c w c w c M W W M w W C W C 246,536 350,073 111,236 327,961 118 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Illinois New York Illinois Illinois Louisiana Louisiana Louisiana Vermont Vermont Publication Norman, Mrs. N. R. 1878. Lessoyis on Centennial Patterns No. 2: Norman System Improved .... St. Louis: Privately printed. 1880. Lessons on Centennial Patterns No. 2: Norman System Improved .... St. Louis: Privately printed. 1881. Lessons on Centennial Patteriis No. 4: Norman System Improved .... St. Louis: Privately printed. 1887. Lessons on Normayi Tailor Square by Diagram with Expla- nation. St. Louis: Privately printed. 1896. Lessons on Centennial Patterns: Norman Tailor System by Diagram with Explanation. St. Louis: Privately printed. Olson, Jennie S. 1887. Self-Instructor in the Olson New Tailorist System for the Cutting and Making of Garments. Houston: Mrs. Jennie S. Olson. Palmer, Mrs. E. E. 1886. Instructions in Dress Cutting Complete, with Diagrams Explaining Every Pattern, to Be Used Expressly for the Gem Tailor System .... Baraboo: Privately printed. [Patent was issued to E. Ellsworth Palmer.] 1892. Instructions in Dress Cutting with Diagrams, etc.. Com- plete, to Be Used Expressly for the Gem Tailor's System of Cutting. Revised edition. Chicago: Privately printed. Les Parisiennes (1906—1919). New York: American Fashion Company. [Published ten times per year (June and July omitted).] Pecori, Eugene 1912. Eugene Pecori's Perfect System of Cutting Ladies [sic] Garments. Chicago: Eugene Pecori. Penrose, O. E. 1893. Directions for Using the World's Fair Pattern Chart. Springfield: Privately printed. Peyry, Jean B. * 1896. Prof, fean B. Peyry's Instruction Book with Diagram and Measure Book Giving Full and Complete Instructions for Using Prof, fean B. Peyry's "Systeme Metrique" Invented for Cutting Ladies', Children's, ^ Gentlemen's Garments of Every Description-Seam and Seamless: Edition 1896 for Ladies' Garments. New Orleans: Privately printed. 1896. Livre d'instructions avec diagramme et livre de mesure; traite complet de la coupe et la maniere de .se servir du "Systeme Metrique" du Prof, fean B. Peyry . . . .: Ed. 1896 pour habillements de dames et d'enfants. Nouvelle-Orleans: Privately printed. 1904. Instructions [sic] Book with Diagrams and Designs for the Conformateur and Systeme Metrique for Cutting Ladies', Children's, and Gentlemen's Garments: New Edition for Ladies' and Children's Garments. New Orleans: Pri- vately printed. Phelps, Mr. and Mrs. B. T. 1883. Instructions for Using the Excelsior Square. A Glove- Fitting System for Ladies' and Children's Garments. 2nd edition. Bellows Falls: Privately printed. [Patent was issued to Brigham T. Phelps.] 1890. Instructions for Using the Excelsior Square, A Glove- Fitting System for Cutting Ladies' and Children's Gar- ments. 5th edition. Bellows Falls: Privately printed. State of Drafting Clothing U.S. Patent origin tool type Missouri M W c Missouri M W c Missouri M w c Missouri M w c Missouri M w c Minnesota illustrated m w c 325,358 252,507 W c Wisconsin W 252,507 W w w w 626,795 626,795 illustrated W C 626,795 W C 279,979 W C 279,979 illustrated NUMBER 42 119 Ohio Publication Phelps, E. L. 1904. The Scientific Tailor Based on Geometry: A Method of Designing and Drafting Patterns for All Classes of Gar- ments for Men, Women, and Children, to Actual and Com- posite Measures .... Volume 1 (Women's Gar- ments). New York?: Privately printed. [The author, who stated that he had taught his system in the United States and Canada, may have been Ernest Leslie Phelps of Toronto, Canada, holder of U.S. Patent 812,874.] Pictorial Review (1899—1919). New York: American Fashion Company, Inc. [Published monthly; edited by Wil- liam McDowell after Dec 1899; featured advertise- ments of A. McDowell 8c Co.'s drafting tool. Patents were issued to William McDowell.] Potter, H. M. 1881. Directions for Measuring and Drafting by H. M. Potter's Practical and Positive Method of Cutting and Designing Ladies', Misses', and Children's Garments. Providence: Privately printed. Powell & Kohler 1868. Powell y Kohler's Practical System for Cutting All Kinds of Garments, Especially Designed for the Use of Dressmak- ers and Private Families. Cincinnati: Powell & Kohler. The Practical Cutter and Tailor (1893-1897). Chicago: The C J. Stone Co. [Published monthly.] Queen, James, and William Lapsley 1809. The Taylors' Instructor; or, A Comprehensive Analysis, of the Elements of Cutting Garments, of Every Kind .... Philadelphia: Privately printed. Ramsay, John 1888. Ramsay's System of Drafting and Cutting Garments in Manual Training Schools. New York: Privately printed. Ratner, Henry Way 1908. Ratner's Up-To-Date Method of Designing: School of De- signing, Cutting, Grading, and Fitting for Ladies', Gen- tlemen's, and Children's Garments .... Chicago: Pri- vately printed. Robbins, L. E. 1875. The Measurement System of Cutting Dresses. Boston: Pri- vately printed. Rontey, P. 1877. The Shoulder and Breast Combination: A New System for Drafting Ladies' Waists, Basques, etc., etc. New York: Privately printed. 1879. The Shoulder and Breast Combination: Ffench Graduated System for Drafting Ladies' Waists, Basques, etc., etc. 2nd edition. New York: Privately printed. Rood, Will C 1878. Instructions for Using the Dressmaker's Magic Scale, for Cutting Patterns for Ladie's [sic] and Children's Wearing Apparel: A Perfect Fit Without Change of Seam. San Francisco: Privately printed. 1879. Instructions for Using the Dressmakers' Magic Scale, Im- proved and Simplified, for Cutting Ladies' and Children's Wearing Apparel: A Perfect Fit Without Change of Seam. St. Louis: Privately printed. Drafting tool State of origin New York illustrated New York illustrated Rhode Island included Illinois Pennsylvania New York Illinois Massachusetts New York illustrated New York illustrated California Missouri Clothing U.S. Patent type W W C 689,685 787,533 803,778 W C M W M W M w m W C m W C W W w w c w c 120 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Publication State of origin 1881. Advanced Studies for Those Using the Dressmakers' Magic Illinois Scale . . Designed for Those Who Have Already Learned to Use the Magic Scale, and Wish to Study Deeper in the Science of Garment Cutting. Quincy: Privately printed. 1882. Advanced Studies for Those Using the Dressmakers' Magic Illinois Scale . . Designed for Those Who Have Already Learned to Use the Magic Scale and Wish to Study Deeper in the Science of Garment Cutting. 2nd edition. Quincy: Rood 8c Hayden. 1889. Supplement No. 2 to Advanced Studies of Those Using the Illinois Dressmakers' Magic Scale, by Will C. Rood. Quincy: The Rood Magic Scale Co. 1892. Deutsche Anweisungen fiir den Gebrauch der Magic Scale Illinois fiir Kleidermacherinnen .... Chicago: The Rood Magic Scale Co. Rosenbleet, Joel 1911. Rosenbleet's Perfect System of Ladies' Garment Cutting California Specially Designedfor Self Instruction. Los Angeles: Joel Rosenbleet. Rosenfeld, Isidor 1911. The Practical Designer for Women's, Misses', funiors', ^ New York Children's Cloaks ^ Suits, Shirt Waist Suits, and Dresses with Grading and Special Measurements According to the Most Approved is? Up-To-Date Method .... New York: Privately printed. 1918. The Practical Designer: An Encyclopedia to Designers and New York Cutters for Women's, Misses', Juniors', Children's, and Infants' Jackets, Coats, Capes, Waists, Skirts, Riding Habits, Dresses, and Underwear. 11 volumes. Revised edition. New York: The Leading Pattern Co. Ross, Mrs. H. A. 1882. Irutructions for Using Mrs. Ross' Tailor System, for Cut- Michigan ting Ladies' and Children's Garments of All Kinds. Battle Creek: Privately printed. 1887. The Ross Tailor System of Garment Cutting by Actual Michigan Measurements. 2nd edition. Battle Creek: Privately printed. Rouwel 8c Co. * 1874. Rouwel isf Co. 's Geometrical and Scientific Work on the Art New York of Cutting Gentlemen [sic] and Ladies' Garments. New York: Rouwel 8c Co. Royal Pattern Co. 1896. Instruction Book of the Royal System for Cutting Ladies' New York Garments. New York: The Royal Pattern Co. Rude, A. D., 8c Son 1900. Text Book of the Great Modern System for Designing and New York Cutting Ladies' Garments .... New York: Privately printed. Russell, Maude W[esterman] 1917. The Maude Russell System of Garment Cutting: Text Oklahoma Book .... Oklahoma City: Maude Russell Garment Cutting Co. The Sartorial Art fournal: The American Fashion Review (Jul New York 1884-Mar 1885, 1889-1919). New York. [Issued monthly; 1889-1919 issues published by The Jno J. Mitchell Co., New York; originally published as The American Fashion Review. ] Drafting tool illustrated, included illustrated illustrated, illustrated illustrated Clothing U.S. Patent type W C w c w c w c W W C W C W C W C M W W W W M w 1,149,468 Illinois Illinois Ohio NUMBER 42 Publication The Sartorial Art Journal: Ladies' Tailor Edition (1900-1903). New York: The Jno. J. Mitchell Co. [Published quarterly. Tool included in some issues.] Schoenfelder, H. 1879. H. Schoenfelder's New and Improved Method of Cutting All Kinds of Ladies [sic] Garments. New York: Privately printed. Schorr, Saul 1915. The A merican Designer and Cutter: A Complete, Practical and Up-To-Date Work on the Art of Designing, Cutting, Grading, Fitting, Sketching, andPracticalTailoringofAll Kinds ofWomens' [sic]. Misses',funiors, Childrens' [sic], and Infants' Garments. New York: American Pattern Co. *1917. The Expert Designer: A Practical and Up-To-Date Work on the Art of Designing and Pattern-Making of Women's Cloaks, Suits, Waists, Dresses, and Skirts .... New York: American Pattern Co. Sheifer, N. S. 1908. A^. S. Sheifer's System of Designing and Grading Ladies', Misses' y Children's Garments .... New York: Pri- vately printed. Sheifer, N. S. See also Louis Dittmar. Sipe, Mrs. T. E. 1887. Self-Irutructor to the Independent Tailor System. Privately printed. [Patent granted to Thalia E. Sipe, New York, New York.] Smith, A[lfred] E. 1885. The Triangular Method for Cutting Ladies', Children's, and Men's Garments. Detroit: L. A. Smith & Co. Snow, Lester J. 1912. Instruction Book: Snow's Success System of Garment Cut- ting, a Tailor System Based upon the Latest Accepted Theories of Dress Cutting. 6th edition. Rockford: Pri- vately printed. 1917. Instruction Book: Snow's Success System of Garment Cut- ting, a Tailor System Based upon the Latest Accepted Theories of Dress Cutting. 8th edition. Rockford: Pri- vately printed. Spikman, Frins 1918. The U.S.A. System of Ladies [sic] (sf Gentlemen's Garments [sic] Cutting. Buffalo: Frins Spikman. Stearns, Mrs. B. A. 1892. A System for Cutting Ladies' and Children's Garments by Tailor's Method with Steams' Improved Diagram. Bos- ton: Privately printed. Steuernagel, C 1885. The New Practical Cutter: A Treatise on the Science and Practice of Cutting Ladies' Garments, Containing New, Systematic and Practical Irutructions .... Cleveland: Lauer & Yost. Stinemets, William H. * 1844. A Complete and Permanent System of Cutting A ll Kinds of Garments, to Fit the Human Form, on a New and Scientific Principle, with Copious Remarks on the Admeasure- ments .... New York: Privately printed. Stone, Charles J[ohn] 1897. Superlative System of Cutting Ladies' Garments Based Drafting tool included State of origin New York included New York New York New York New York Michigan illustrated illustrated New York Massachusetts illustrated illustrated New York Illinois Clothing type W W W C W W C W m W C W C W C M w W W W 121 U.S. Patent 497,503 122 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Publication State of origin Drafting tool Clothing type U.S. Patent Upon a Scientific, Sure, and Simple Method Giving the Correct Proportions for Each Type of Form of Every Size .... Chicago: Chas. J. Stone Co. Cutting School. 1901. New Superlative System of Cutting Ladies' Garments Based upon a Scientific, Sure, and Simple Method Giving the Correct Proportions for Each Type of Form of Every Size, with Variations for All Kinds of Disproportionate Shapes and Forms. Chicago: Chas. J. Stone Co. Cutting School. Storey [James R.]. See Hughes & Storey. Studabecker, J. A. 1881? Dress and Cloak Fitting Made Easy: Instructions for Draft- ing, by Studabecker's Tailors' Square for Cutting Ladies' and Childreru' [sic] Clothing. San Francisco: Privately printed. Swarz, Maurice 1889. Maurice's System of Dress Cutting. New York: Privately printed. The Tailor's Review . . . (1883-1903). London and New York: The Butterick Publishing Co. [Published monthly. Drafts for women's garments were included in the magazine after 1898.] Tappan, Frank O., and Lillian A. Eggleston 1896. Directions for Taking Measures. Toledo: Privately printed. Taylor, Mary A. 1893. The Bona Fide A merican Dress Cutting System, Coruisting of 65 Illustrations. Passaic: Privately printed. Taylor, S. T. *1869. A System for Cutting Ladies' Garments. New York: S. T. Taylor. 1871. A System for Cutting Ladies' Garments, Invented by S. T. Taylor .... New York: S. T. Taylor. 1873. A System for Cutting Ladies' Garments, Invented by S. T. Taylor .... New York: S. T. Taylor. 1875. A System for Cutting Ladies' Dresses, Invented by S. T. Taylor .... New York: Sarah E. Taylor. 1877. A System for Cutting Ladies' Garments, Invented by S. T. Taylor .... New York: Sarah E. Taylor. 1879. A System for Cutting Ladies' Garments Invented by S. T. Taylor .... Revised edition. New York: Sarah E. Taylor. 1879. A System for Cutting Ladies' Garments Invented by S. T. Taylor . . . . New edition. New York: Sarah E. Taylor. 1880. A System for Cutting Ladies' Garments, Invented by S. T. Taylor.... New edition. New York: Sarah E. Taylor. 1881. A System for Cutting Ladies' Garments Invented by S. T. Taylor.... New edition. New York: Sarah E. Taylor. 1881. A System for Cutting Ladies' Garments, Invented by S. T. Taylor .... New edition. New York: S. T. Taylor. 1883. A System for Cutting Ladies Garments Invented by S. T. Taylor.... Revised edition. New York: S. T. Taylor. 1896. 5. T. Taylor's System of Dress Cutting. New York: S. T. Taylor Co. Illinois California New York New York Ohio New Jersey New York New York New York New York New York New York New York New York New York New York New York New York included included illustrated illustrated illustrated partially illustrated partially illustrated partially illustrated illustrated partially illustrated illustrated partially illustrated illustrated W m W C W M W M W C W W W W W W W W W W w w 234,821 NUMBER 42 123 Publication Taylor, S. T., Co. 1911. Instruction Book with Diagrams for S. T. Taylor's System of Cutting Ladies' Garments. New York: S. T. Taylor Co. 1913. Instruction Book with Diagrams for S. T. Taylor's System of Cutting Ladies' Garments. New York: S. T. Taylor Co. 1915. Instruction Book with Diagramsfor S. T. Taylor's System of Cutting Ladies' Garments. New York: S. T. Taylor Co. 1919. Instruction Book with Diagramsfor S. T. Taylor's System of Cutting Ladies' Garments. New York: S. T. Taylor Co. Teague, Louisa 1895. Complete Instructions for Mrs. Louisa Teague's Self- Teaching Dress Chart. Goldthwaite: Mrs. Louisa Teague. Tentler, Aaron A. 1842. A New System for Measuring and Cutting Ladies' Dresses, Cloaks, Collars, Capes, Yokes, i^c, with an Arithmetical Table, for Which the Author Received a Patent from the United States, January 23, 1841. Philadelphia: Pri- vately printed. Tessmer, A. 1889. Das Buch zum Gelbstunterrichten im Schnittmuster- zeichnen und Zuschneiden .... New York: Privately printed. 1890. Das Buch zum Gelbstunterrichten im Schnittmuster- Beichnen und Zuschneiden. New York: Privately printed. Thompson, F. E. 1881. Thompson's Universal Garment Cutter. Webster City: Privately printed. 1884. Thompson's Universal Garment Cutter. Kansas City: Pri- vately printed, 1884. Thompson's Universal Garment Cutter. Kansas City: Pri- vately printed. 1884. Thomspon's Universal Garment Cutter. Kansas City: Pri- vately printed. 1888. Thompson's Universal Garment Cutter. Kansas City: Pri- vately printed. 1891. Thompson's Universal Garment Cutter. Kansas City: Hudson-Kimberly Pub. Co. Thompson, Mrs. F. E. [Bertha] 1887. Thompson's New Improved Garment Cutter. Kansas City: Mr. and Mrs. F. E. Thompson. 1892. Thompson's Universal Garment Cutter. Kansas City: Hudson-Kimberly Pub. Co. 1895. Thompson's Universal Garment Cutter. Kansas City: Hudson-Kimberly Publishing Co. 1895. Thompson's Universal Garment Cutter Fashion Magazine. Kansas City: Privately printed. Thompson & Goldsberry 1880. Thompson 6f Goldsberry's Self-Fitting Garment Cutters. Webster City: Privately printed. [Patent was issued to W. H. Goldsberry.] Thorp, Theodore 1882. Thorp's New York System of Dress Cutting: A System for Cutting Basques, Ulsters, Jackets, Circular Cloaks, and Dolmans .... Rochester: Privately printed. 1884. Thorp's New York System of Dress Cutting. New York: Privately printed. State of Drafting origin tool New York illustrated New York illustrated New York illustrated New York illustrated Texas Pennsylvania illustrated New York New York Iowa Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri included Iowa New York New York Clothing U.S. Patent type W W W W W W 1,944 W w M W C m W c m W c m W c m W c m W c m W c m W c m W c m W c 247,339 M W W W 124 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Publication State of origin Drafting Clothing U.S. Patent tool type W W C W W C W C W C W C W W C 46,409 46,409 46,409 46,409 46,409 46,409 M w c W C 247,339 illustrated M W C W C 452,090 1886. Thorp's New York System of Dress Cutting. New York: New York Privately printed. Tobey, Madame 1889? Directions for Drafting by Madame Tobey's Improved Maine Glove-Fitting System for Dress Cutting. Augusta: Pri- vately printed. [Filed at the Library of Congress in 1889.] Treadway, E. P. Pennsylvania illustrated Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio 1882. The Franco-American Form: A Variable Diagram for Fit- ting Dresses and Other Garments .... Philadelphia: Privately printed. Turner, Milo M. 1882. Turner's Improved Self-Ins true ting System for Drafting Ladies', Misses', and Children's Clothing. Book I. Cin- cinnati: Privately printed. 1883. Turner's Improved Tailor System for Drafting Ladies [sic], Misses [sic] and Children's Clothing. Book II. Cincinna- ti: Privately printed. 1883. Turner's Improved Sleeve System for Drafting Ladies [sic], Misses [sic], and Children's Coat, Plain, Gathered, and Puffed Sleeves. Book III. Cincinnati: Privately printed. 1884. Milo M. Turner's Improved Tailor System, by Mrs. N. f. Turner's Form: Wrought Patterns, for Drafting Ladies [sic]. Misses [sic], and Children's Clothing. Cincinnati: Privately printed. 1885. Milo M. Turner's Improved System of Drafting, by Inch Rule and Tape Measure. Cincinnati: Privately printed. 1889. Milo M. Turner's Improved Tailor System, by Mrs. N. f. Turner's Form: Wrought Patterns, for Drafting Ladies [sic], Misses [sic], and Children's Clothing. Books I and II in one volume. Cincinnati: Privately printed. Vienna Ladies' Tailoring Institute New York illustrated W c New York illustrated W c New York M w c 1896? Artistic Ladies' Tailor System. New York: Vienna Ladies' Tailoring Institute. 1898. Artistic Ladies' Tailor System. New York: Vienna Ladies' Tailoring Institute. 1902. Twentieth Century Instruction Book: Artistic Ladies' Tailor System. New York: Vienna Ladies' Tailoring Insti- tute. Vogel, Franz Otto 1883. Practical Hand-Bookfor Tailors ^ Seamstresses for Self- Missouri Instruction .... St. Louis: Privately printed. The Voice of Fashion (1890-1896, 1901-1905). Chicago. [Pub- Illinois lished quarterly by Goldsberry, Doran 8c Nelson (1890-1892) and by Goldsberry & Doran (1892-1836); semi-annually by C A. DeGryse (1901-1904) and by Voice of Fashion Pub. Co. (1904-1905). Tool illustrated 1901-1905. Patent issued to W. H. Goldsberry.] Walker, Mrs. H. M., and W. A. Work 1885. Madam Walker's Champion Fitter, a Self-Irutructor in the Illinois Science of Cutting and Fitting All the Garments Worn by Ladies, Gentlemen, and Children. Chicago: Privately printed. Walkie, Madame [Jennie] 1888. Irutruction Book for the Celebrated Worth Tailor System. Illinois Chicago: Privately printed. NUMBER 42 125 Publication Wallace, William 1881. Dress-Fitting without a Teacher. Oakland: Pacific Press Publishing House. Walsh, James J. 1915. Fit-U-First Dress-Making & Tailoring Schools, Kansas City, Mo. Kansas City: Privately printed. Weidel,J[oseph] A[nton] 1910. Weidel's Instruction Book for Those Using Weidel's Com- bined Tailor Square and Curves: A Complete Treatise on Drafting Ladies' and Children's Garments by the Square and Curves Combined. St. Louis: Weidel 8c Webster. 1914 Weidel's Irutruction Book for Those Using Weidel's Com- bined Tailor Square and Curves: A Complete Treatise on Drafting Ladies' and Children's Garments by the Square and Curves Combined. St. Louis: Weidel Ladies' Tailor- ing College Co. Weiler, S. G. 1915. The Weiler Ladies [sic] Tailor-Dressmaker Designer, Cut- ter, and Fitter Book. Milwaukee: S. G. Weiler Designer. Weinberg, Benjamin 1900. Weinberg's Cloak, Skirt, and Cape Cutter: A Simple and Perfect Method for Self Irutruction on the Art of Cutting Ladies' Cloaks, Skirts, and Capes. New York: Privately printed. Welander, A. W. 1896. Welander's Perfected Combination System Based upon Practical, Sure, and Simple Methods, Giving the Exact Balance and Proportions for Each and Every Type and Form. Chicago: A. W. Welander. 1898. Welander's Perfected Tailor System for Dress Cutting: For Use of Dressmakers, Ladies [sic] Tailors, and Furriers. Chicago: A. W. Welander. Wendorf, William 1913. Wendorf s Practical Cutting Method: A New System Which Enables One to Take Correct Measurements and Draft Patterns for Ladies' and Men's Garments. Chicago: Pri- vately printed. Wetterhall, O. L. 1890. Devereaux's French System of Actual Measure for Scien- tific Dress and Sleeve Cutting. Oconomowoc: Privately printed. Wheeler, E[lla] C 1885. Instructions for Draughting Garments by the Improved Scientific Method. Boston: Privately printed. Wheeler 8c Wilson 1881. The New Science of Dress Cutting by the Wilson Method of Inch Measurement San Jose: [E. W.] Wheeler & Q. A.] Wilson. [Although the authors, E. W. Wheeler and James A. Wilson, possibly hoped to be confused with the east-coast sewing machine firm headed by A. B. Wilson and Nathaniel Wheeler, there was no appar- ent connection between the two companies.] Whitmore, Thomas H. 1852. T. H. Whitmore's Systems for Cutting Garments, Contain- ing Directions and Illustrations for Measuring and Draughting, to Cut All Kinds of Gentlemen's Garments, Including Dress, Frock, Sack, and Over Coats, Pantaloons, State of Drafting Clothing U.S. PaterU origin tool type California illustrated W 284,783 Missouri illustrated W W C 981,043 Missouri illustrated Missouri W C 981,043 illustrated 1,163,874 W Wisconsin illustrated New York W M w Illinois W Illinois illustrated, included M W 1,042,063 Illinois illustrated W C Wisconsin W w c Massachusetts California included M W Ohio 126 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Publication State of Drafting origin tool Vests, Cloaks, and Ladies' Dresses. Deerfield: Privately printed. Williams, W. R. 1889. W. R. Williams'New Irutruction Book, Giving Full and Kansas illustrated Complete Irutructions for Using the Perfection Tailor Sys- tem of Dress Cutting. Lawrence: Privately printed. 1893. W. R. Williams'New Instruction Book Giving Full and Kansas illustrated Complete Irutructions for Using the New Perfection System of Dress Cutting. Lawrence: Privately printed. Wilson, J. A. See E. W. Wheeler. Wilson, J. A., &Co. 1883. Instructions for Drafting by Wilson's New Tailor-System of Illinois Dress Cutting. Chicago: J. A. Wilson 8c Co. Wilson, Mrs. J. A., & Co. 1885. Wilson's New Tailor-System of Dress Cutting. San Jose: California J.A. Wilson 8c Co. Wilson, James A. 1880. The Science of Dress Cutting by the Wilson Method of Inch California included Measurement. San Jose: Privately printed. Wilson, James G. 1827. Report of the Present Fashions, with the Square Rules and New York Variations to Fit the Human Shape. New York: Privately printed. Wing, Mona H. 1895. The Nineteenth Century Cutting System. Chicago: Pri- Illinois vately printed. Woolman, H[ester] A[nn] S[harp] 1913. Metoda "Acme" (moda cientifica) para el arte de cortar y New York illustrated confeccionar toda close de ropa sin necesidad de maestro contiene dibujos de prendas de vestir para serloras, cabal- leros,yninos. Volume 2. New York: The Clover Press. [Patent was issued to Edwin Z. Lesh and Hester A. Woolman, who were United States citizens residing in Guadalajara, Mexico.] Work, W. A. See Mrs. H. M. Walker.. Work, W[illiam] A[lbert] 1914. Work's Ladies' Tailor System: A Self Instructor in the Art Pennsylvania of Cutting and Fitting Ladies' Garments. Harrisburg: Privately printed. [Published quarterly.] Wuerfel, Augusta J. 1889. Mrs. A. f. Wuerfel's Tailor's Rules and Diagrams, Irutru- Wisconsin ments Patented, fune 7th, 1887 .... Milwaukee: Pri- vately printed. 1900. Mrs. A. f. Wuerfel's Tailor's Rules and Diagrams, Irutru- Wisconsin ments Patented June 7th, 1887 .... Milwaukee: Pri- vately printed. Zeisler, Alexander Z. 1917. Parisian Ladies'Tailoring System for Designing, Pattern Illinois Cutting, Fitting, and Making Waists, Skirts, Dresses, Suits, and All Outer Garments. Chicago?: The Excelsior Dry Goods Co.? Zenith Manufacturing Co. 1904. Instructioru for Using Zenith Impression System of Gar- New York illustrated ment Drafting. Rochester: Zenith Manufacturing Co. [Patents issued to Edward P. Follett, the last one assigned by him to the Zenith Manufacturing Co.] Clothing U.S. Patent type W C 660,175 W C 660,175 W W W 4,687X 7,566X M w c W C m W c 825,915 W w c 364,620 w c w w 364,620 389,376 389,377 566,158 583,858 611,995 692,510 735,738 NUMBER 42 127 Chronological Index to Authors 1809. Queen, James, and William Taylor, S. T. Lapsley Thompson, F. E. 1827. Wilson, James G. Wallace, William 1839- 1841. Mahan, Francis Wheeler & Wilson 1842. Tentler, Aaron A. 1881? Studabecker, J. A. 1843- 1844. Mahan, Francis 1882. Byrnes, T[homas] W. 1844. Stinements, William H. Davis, Mrs. M. E. 1845. Kromer &: Flenner Jackson, H. Ayers 1852. Whitmore, Thomas H. Rood, Will C 1853. Hunter, A.J. Ross, Mrs. H. A. 1854. Mahan, Francis Thorp, Theodore 1856. Dilday, E. Treadway, E. P. 1857. Minier, E. P. Turner, Milo M. 1859. Clave, Justin 1883. Bayne, J. Reid 1863. Inwood, Mrs. D. A. Cornwell, Willett 1868. Powell 8c Kohler Devereaux, C A. 1869. Ewing, Sarah C EUiss, Amelia B. Taylor, S. T. Fitch, Morris 1871. Ewing, Sarah C Fountain, J. H. Inwood, Mrs. D. A. Griffin, Caleb H. Jackson, Louisa L. Leake, Mrs. H. A. Taylor, S. T. McDowell Garment Drafting 1873. Griffin, Caleb H., and David Machine Co. Knox Montie, Mme. Taylor, S. T. Phelps, Mr. and Mrs. B. T. 1874. Rouwel & Co. Taylor, S. T. 1875. Inwood, Mrs. D. A. Turner, Milo M. Robbins, L. E. Vogel, Franz Otto Taylor, S. T. Wilson,J. A., &:Co. 1876. Gottschalg, William 1883 -1903. The Tailor's Review Jackson, Louisa L. 1884. Carman & Blaney Linthicum, W[illiam] O. Gartland, Elizabeth 1877. Rontey, P. Goldsberry, W. H. Taylor, S. T. Greenwood, G. M., 8c Co. 1878. Madison, J. O. Hecklinger, Charles Norman, Mrs. N. R. Jackson, H. Ayers Rood, Will C King, E. 1879. Griffin, Caleb H. Livingston, J. W. Jackson, H. Ayers McDowell Garment Drafting Moody, D. W. Machine Co. Rontey, P. Moschcowitz Bros. Rood, Will C Myer, Mary C Schoenfelder, H. Thompson, F. E. Taylor, S. T. Thorp, Theodore 1879- 1889. The New York Fashion Turner, Milo M. Bazar 1884-1885. The Sartorial Artfoumal: 1880. Kellogg, Mrs. F.J. The American Fashion Livingston, J. W. Review McClure, N. C 1885. Cornwell, Willett Norman, Mrs. N. R. Ganzhorn, William Taylor, S. T. Goldsberry, W. H. Thompson, 8c Goldsberry Hale, L. B. Wilson, James A. Hanover, John C, 8c Co. 1881. Hecklinger, Charles Harvey, S. B. McCall, James Lewis, S. T. Norman, Mrs. N. R. McDowell Garment Drafting Potter, H. M. Machine Co. Rood, Will C Moody, D. W.Smith, A[lfred] E. Steuernagel, C Turner, Milo M. Walker, Mrs. H. M., and W. A. Work Wheeler, E[lla] C Wilson, Mrs. J. A., & Co. 1886. Goldsberry, W. H. Hanover, John C, 8c Co. Hecklinger, Charles Mallison, Mme. E. W. Molpoer, Louis Palmer, Mrs. E. E. Thorp, Theodore 1887. Buddington, Mr. and Mrs. F. E. Coleman, Mrs. M[ary] V[irginia] Doughty & Co. Goldsberry, W. H. McDowell Garment Drafting Machine Co. Mardn, G. N. Norman, Mrs. N. R. Olson, Jennie S. Ross, Mrs. H. A. Sipe, Mrs. T. E. Thompson, Mrs. F. E. [Bertha] 1888. Cornwell, Willett Davis, Myra A. Dittmar & Sheifer Elmes, B. S. Ewing, Sarah C Goldsberry, W. H. Hanover, John C, &: Co. Head, Leola M. Jackson, H. Ayers Kellogg, Mrs. F. J. Kinslow, Mrs. J. G. Martin, James A. Nickerson, S. A. Ramsay, John Thompson, F. E Walkie, Madame [Jennie] 1889. Abercrombie, Emma Briggs, D. B. Goldsberry, W. H. Jackson, Mrs. Louisa L. Kellogg, Mrs. F. J. Legendre [sic], Madame M. A. Rood, Will C Swarz, Maurice Tessmer, A. Turner, Milo M. Williams, W. R. Wuerfel, Mrs. Augusta J. 1889- 1919. The Sartorial Artfoumal: The American Fashion Review n.d. (c. 1889). Tobey, Madame 128 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Thompson, Mrs. F. E. [Bertha] Wing, Mona H. Molpoer, Louis Buddington, Mr. and Mrs. F. E. Evan, H. P., Co. Goldsberry, W. H. The Herald of Fashion and Journal of Tailoring Kintzel, A. G. McDermott, L. M. Miegel, Albert Henry Mignogna, Antonio Norman, Mrs. N. R. Peyry, Jean B. Royal Pattern Co. Tappan, Frank O., and Lillian A. Eggleston Taylor, S. T. Welander, A. W. Vienna Ladies' Tailoring Institute Blair, Margaret J. Goldsberry, W. H. Herbert, Mrs. Charles Mason, Ida V. Molpoer, Louis Stone, Charles J[ohn] Vienna Ladies' Tailoring Institute Welander, A. W. 1919. Pictorial Review Denieffe, Joseph Rude, A. D., 8c Son Weinberg, Benjamin Wuerfel, Augusta J. 1903. The Sartorial Art Journal: Ladies' Tailor Edition Doolittle, Oliver Taylor Gordon, Seldon Smith Stone, Charles J[ohn] • 1904. The Voice of Fashion Brown, Harriet A[delaid] Vienna Ladies' Tailoring Institute The American Modiste Diamond Garment Cutter Correspondence School 1919. The American Ladies'Tailor Blair, Margaret J. Engelmann, Gustav Peyry, Jean B. 1890. Bearrie, A. E., 8c Co. Fountain, J. H. Levis, D. I. 1895? Goldsberry, W. H. 1896. Greenwood, George M. Kaphan, M. Phelps, Mr. and Mrs. B. T. Tessmer, A. Wetterhall, O. L. 1890- -1892. The Voice of Fashion 1890- -1897. Custom Cutter 1891. Clute, J. Redfield Denny, Mrs. L. Dittmar 8c Sheifer Goldsberry, W. H. Hecklinger, Charles Jones, M. O. Molpoer, Louis Thompson, F. E. 1891- -1895. La Mode de Paris 1896? 1892. Barnes, A. L. Baughman, Mr. and Mrs. J. S. 1897. deLamorton, O. H. Goldsberry, W. H. Hughes & Storey Kellogg, Mrs. F. J. Moore, C E. Palmer, Mrs. E. E. 1898. Rood, Will C Stearns, Mrs. B. A. Thompson, Mrs. F. E. [Bertha] 1899- 1892? Muller, Ed. 1900. 1892- -1896. The Voice of Fashion 1893. Bell, Mattie M. Goldsberry, W. H. Jester, R. E., & Co. 1900- Penrose, O. E. Taylor, Mary A. 1901. Williams, W. R. 1893- 1894. The Journal of Fashion and Tailoring 1901- 1893- 1897. The Practical Cutter and Tailor 1902. 1894. Hamilton, Nellie Holmes, Nelson 1903. 1894- 1895. The French Dressmaker 1895. Bisbee, F. S. Fourier, P.A. 1903- Goldsberry, W. H. 1904. Hecklinger, Charles Teague, Louisa Phelps, E. L. Zenith Manufacturing Co. 1904? Berkowich, Louis I., editor 1904 - 1905. The Voice of Fashion 1904 -1913. The A merican Modiste 1905. Carlstrom, Jno. A. Diamond Garment Cutter Correspondence School 1906 -1919. Les Parisiennes 1907. Blakely, Elizabeth, and Frances Patton Gingles, Mae Milbourne 1908. Gordon, Seldon Smith Ratner, Henry Way Sheifer, N. S. 1909. Glickstein, Philip 1910. Hurwitz, George La Mode Universelle Weidel, J[oseph] A[nton] 1911. Rosenbleet, Joel Rosenfeld, Isidor Taylor, S. T., Co. 1912. Pecori, Eugene Snow, Lester J. 1912-1918. The Fashionable Woman's Tailor 1913. Engelmann, Gustav Taylor, S. T., Co. Wendorf, William Woolman, H[ester] A[nn] S[harp] 1914. Bennett, Ella Alvira Weidel, J[oseph] A[nton] Work, W[illiam] A[lbert] 1915. Ferguson, Albert Edwin Schorr, Saul Taylor, S. T., Co. Walsh, James J. Weiler, S. G. 1917. Blackburn, Juditha Gurney, Edmund Russell, Maude W[esterman] Schorr, Saul Snow, Lester J. Zeisler, Alexander Z. 1918. Rosenfeld, Isidor Spikman, Frins 1919. Le Grand Chic Parisien Fashion Company Taylor, S. T., Co. NUMBER 42 129 Q^fi/?mdm:If Dressmakers' Drafting Tools at Library of Congress (Uncatalogued, in the collection of the Prints and Photographs Division) Copyright Residence Year of Size holder copyright Chappell, James H. Pennsylvania 1853 57.2 X 57.2 cm Cox 8c Minton Danville, Indiana 1868 66.2 X 57.0 cm Holbrook & Co. Massachusetts 1870 78.1 X 63.2 cm McCall, James New York 1867 62.2 X 46.0 cm McKim 8c Noel St. Louis, Missouri 1867 71.8 X 52.7 cm (MfifimdmM Patents for Drafting Systems for Assorted Clothing Patents related to drafting patterns for women's garments are included in this listing. Most of these were for drafting garments for the upper torso. Sometimes methods for cutting sleeves were in- cluded; there were a few patents which were specif- ically for this purpose. Before the 1890s, skirts were not drafted. In the first half of the century skirts were simply gathered or pleated at the waist; in the 1860s they were cut with side gores but were still gathered or pleated in back to fit the waist; during the last quarter of the century they were draped on the» customer, on an assistant, or on ^ dress form. In the last decade of the 19th century, however, skirts were sometimes included in dress cutting systems. Patents were also granted for sep- arate skirt cutting systems. These patents are des- ignated by the word "skirts" in brackets when the titles do not clearly identify them. Many patents for tailors' systems are also in- cluded in this list. As reflected by the patents, tailors were responsible for the original develop- ment of, and the earliest improvements to, drafting systems. Sometimes these systems included tech- niques for cutting women's apparel such as ladies' riding habits. Occasionally it is not obvious whether a technique was intended to be used for drafting specifically men's or women's garments. This ap- pendix lists, however, only those patented tailors' techniques that could be related to the technology of drafting women's garments. Therefore, tech- niques for drafting closely fitting men's upper torso garments such as suit coats and vests are considered as well as sleeve cutting methods. Draft- ing systems for shirts (loosely fitting garments re- quiring no special cutting or fitting skill) and for trousers are excluded. Several categories of patents related to drafting men's and women's garments are also excluded. Not considered are methods limited to the cutting or applying of trim, collars, cuffs, or lapels. There is no inclusion of methods for marking fabric from a pattern prior to cutting, if the patentee did not claim a technique for making the pattern as well. Also outside the scope of this study are methods 130 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY limited to perforating, notching, printing, or mark- ing seam allowances or instructions on paper patterns. The patents are listed in chronological order. This arrangement also places the patents issued after 1836 in numerical order by patent number. There are two kinds of exceptions to this post-1836 chronological-numerical order. A separate num- bering system preceded by "Al" was established by the Patent Office for "Additional Improvements" granted on earlier patents. Another system pre- ceded by "RE" designated "Reissued" patents. These two kinds of patent actions are listed within the chronological order. The original patent num- ber is shown in brackets below the Al or RE series number. In December 1836 a fire destroyed most of the patent records. Patents "restored" by the patentees were numbered on an independent system iden- tified by the suffix "X". No numbers were assigned to the unrestored patents. The data for the lost patents have been obtained from Edmund Burke's 1847 index, List of Patents, Inventions and Designs Issued by the United States from 1790 to 1847. A patentee could assign all or part of his patent rights to an individual or firm. Assignees of par- ticular interest are listed beneath the patentees' names. These assignees include authors of drafting system instruction booklets, patentees or co- patentees for other patents, and individuals as- signed a patent by other patentees. Firms assigned patents are also indicated when the company could have had a role in applying or marketing the invention. The asterisks preceding certain patentees, co- patentees, or assignees designate individuals who are also listed in Appendix I as the author, co- author, editor, or publisher of an instruction book or trade periodical. Each patent for which there are extant specif- ications is annotated with an abbreviation (M, W, C) indicating the kinds of apparel the patented invention could draft (men's, women's, or chil- dren's). A question mark is used with an abbrevia- tion when the apparel cannot be positively iden- tified. "U" indicates patents that neither specify nor contain internal evidence suggesting the kinds of garments to be cut. U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title (16Jun 1821) Ward, Allen Alabama (Huntsville) Cutting Garments (8 Feb 1822) Kenrick, Charles New York Art of Tailoring (18 Aug 1823) Madison, Otis New York (Troy) Ruler for Cutting Out Garments (6 Nov 1823) Campbell, Ethan Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Cutting Garments (15 Mar 1826) Severson, Stephen Maryland (Baltimore) Marking Out and Cutting Garments (5 Apr 1826) Ross, Greenberry Kentucky (Carlisle) Art of Tailoring (lOJul 1826) Starr, N. B. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Scale for Draughting Garments 4,687X (28 Feb 1827) *Wilson, James G. New York (New York) Square for Cutting Garments M (23 Oct 1827) Allen, William W. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Draughting and Cutting Garments 5,234X (11 Oct 1828) Ward, Allen Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Tailoring M 5,327X (9 Jan 1829) Lemont, Levi Peterson Maine (Bath) Tailor's Measure M (3 Sep 1831) Pudney, John New York (Waterford) Measuring and Cutting Garments 6,807X (22 Oct 1831) Henderson, James, and Cooper K. Watson Ohio (Zanesville) Tailors' Measure M 7,112X (7 Jun 1832) Wiswell, Andrew New Hampshire (Exeter) Square M (16 Apr 1833) Mendenhall, James Pennsylvania (Westchester) Measuring for Garments (20 Apr 1833) Bacon, G. W. M. New York (New York) Measuring for Garments 7,566X (3 May 1833) *Wilson, James G. New York (New York) Tailors' Measure MClothing type NUMBER 42 U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title Clothing type 7,591X (22 May 1833) Williams, Daniel New York (New York) Improvement in the Art of Tailoring M (5 Aug 1833) Beard, George, Jr. Pennsylvania (W. Whiteland) Marking Out and Cutting Garments 7,817X (19 Nov 1833) Lewis, Benjamin J. Ohio (Mount Vernon) Tailoring M 7,962X (18 Jan 1834) Chappell, James H. Ohio (Chillicothe) Tailoring M (7 Jan 1835) Ward, Allen Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Measuring and Marking Out Coats 9,1 lOX (18 Sep 1835) Rockafellow, John S. New Jersey (Flemington) Tailor's Measure M 9,219X (31 Oct 1835) Fairchild, Frederick A. Georgia (Columbus) Tailor's Measure M 9,860X (IJul 1836) Zwisler, James, Jr. Maryland (Hagerstown) Tailoring M 179 (26 Apr 1837) Bishop, William C New York (Ovid) Geometrical Transfer Measurer for Measuring and Drafting Prepara- tory to Cutting Coats, Vests, & c. M 256 (11 Jul 1837) Wiswell, Andrew New Hampshire (Exeter) Tailoring M 283 (17 Jul 1837) Sherman, Amos New Jersey (Newark) System of Tailoring M 415 (28 Sep 1837) Ward, Allen Pennsylvania (Moyamensing) Draughting Forepart of Coats M 435 (23 Oct 1837) Allen, William W. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Mode of Measuring, Drafting and Cutting Out Garments M 539 (26 Dec 1837) Barber, Erastus Massachusetts (Boston) Standard Measurer for Taking Measure for Coats M 574 (20 Jan 1838) Kahler, William, and Charles Pennsylvania (Bloomsburg) Art of Measuring and Cutting Garments M 1,113 (30 Mar 1839) Axford, Edward I. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Tailor's Drafting Instrument for Drafting Garments M 1,119 (10 Apr 1839) Wiswell, William M. Maine (Portland) Tailoring M 1,136 (26 Apr 1839) Williams, Daniel New York (New York) Instrument for Measuring the Human Body Preparatory to Cutting Garments M REll (31 Aug 1839) Williams, Daniel New York (New York) Tailors' Measure M [7,591X] 1,406 (12 Nov 1839) Barnett, John P., and Francis Story New York (Catskill) Tailor's Measuring Instrument M AI31 (18 Feb 1840) Williams, Daniel New York (New York) Tailor's Measure M [1,136] 1,556 (18 Apr 1840) Lemmond, William J. South Carolina (Lancasterville) Tailor's Measuring Instrument M 1,557 (18 Apr 1840) Hendryx, Isaiah J. New York (Troy) Mode of Measuring and Drafting Garments M 1,584 (8 May 1840) Dame, Richard New Hampshire (Hanover) Construction of Tailors' Measures M 1,880 (5 Dec 1840) Tilden, Thomas E. Maryland (Baltimore) Mode of Measuring the Human Body for the Drafting and Cutting of Coats M 1,944 (23 Jan 1841) *Tentler, Aaron A. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Manner of Taking Measures and Drafting for the W Cutting Out of Ladies' Dresses Including Habits, 131 132 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title Cloaks, and Other Similar Articles Clothing type 2,106 (29 May 1841) Miller, Lyman B., and EUery New York (Middletown) Tailor's Measure M 2,341 (10 Nov 1841) *Flenner, Lewis Pennsylvania (Philadelphia Co.) Tailor's Instrument and the Mode of Measuring Garments M 2,450 (7 Feb 1842) Brundage, Henry C New York (Middletown) Construction of Instruments for Measuring Garments M 2,590 (29 Apr 1842) Seger, Hiram Georgia (Macon) Tailoring M 2,640 (26 May 1842) Veret, Peter F. L. Georgia (Warrentown) Instrument for Measuring Garments M 2,730 (20 Jul 1842) Knowland, Joseph, and Kentucky (Brownsboro) Instrument for M Jacob F. Measuring Garments 3,024 (30 Mar 1843) Oliver, Thomas New York (New York) Tailor's Measure M 3,130 (14 Jun 1843) Pendell, David L. New York (Gilboa) Measuring and Cutting Garments M 3,160 (8 Jul 1843) Sipperly, David N. New York (Troy) Cutting Garments M 3,161 (8 Jul 1843) Morey, Cyrus, and David Hummer Ohio (McArthurstown) Tailor's Measure M 3,286 (28 Sep 1843) Eckler, George, and S. X. Ball New York (Flint Creek) Tailor's Measure M 3,522 (4 Apr 1844) Richardson, Samuel S. Maine (Baldwin) Fitting Ladies' Dresses W 3,603 (30 May 1844) Isham, Henry Vermont (Montpelier) Tailor's Measure M 3,820 (9 Nov 1844) Combs, John P. New Jersey (Trenton) Tailor's Measure M 4,083 (20 Jun 1845) Stillwell, S. B. New York (Brooklyn) Tailoring M 4,294 (29 Nov 1845) Bogardus, Abraham A. New York (Newburg) Tailor's Measure M 4,327 (26 Dec 1845) Ward, Allen Maryland (Baltimore) Tailor's Measure M 4,367 (28 Jan 1846) Seger, Hiram Georgia (Macon) Cutting Ladies' Dresses W 4,477 (25 Apr 1846) Donges, Henry Pennsylvania (Newport) Improvement in Tailors' Measures M 4,596 (27 Jun 1846) Kile, Conrad Ohio (Nashville) Tailor's Measure M 4,742 (5 Sep 1846) Acton, William R. Virginia (Richmond) Tailor's Measure M 4,831 (29 Oct 1846) Martin, Benjamin G. Virginia (Richmond) Tailor's Measure M 4,923 (7 Jan 1847) Simril, Miles G. South Carolina (Chesterville) Tailor's Measure M 4,975 (20 Feb 1847) Watt, Thomas Ohio (Hubbard Township) Tailor's Measure M 5,635 (13 Jun 1848) Lucas, Charles Virginia (Charlottesville) Drafting and Measuring Garments M 6,286 (10 Apr 1849) Carpenter, John Pennsylvania (Uniontown) Tailor's Measure M 7,402 (8 May 1850) Stoker, Amos ' New York (Ogdensburg) Tailor's Measure M AI95 (3 Sep 1850) Stoker, Amos New York Tailors' Measure M [7,402] (Ogdensburg) 7,641 (10 Sep 1850) Allen, William W. New Jersey (Bordentown) Tailor's Measure M 8,566 (2 Dec 1851) Maginnis, James New York (Lockport) Tailor's Measure M 8,600 (16 Dec 1851) Virtue, Edward Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Tailor's Measure M 8,895 (20 Apr 1852) Wells, William T. Tennessee (Shelbyville) Tailoring M 10,779 (18 Apr 1854) Rowlands, Mosses [sic] T. Pennsylvania (Pittstown Ferry) Tailor's Measure M 11,339 (18 Jul 1854) Spilman, Peter Virginia (Richmond) Apparatus for Laying Off the Scye in Cutting Garments M NUMBER 42 U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title 11,866 (31 Oct 1854) Krider, John M. Virginia (Newtown Stephensburg) Tailor's Measuring Instrument M 11,868 (31 Oct 1854) Lillibridge, Warren, and Charles F. Ohio (Zanesville) Tailor's Measure 15,824 (30 Sep 1856) Stocker, Amos New York (Rome) Tailor's Measure M 16,472 (27 Jan 1857) Derby, Lyman New York (New York) Tailor's Measure M 18,958 (29 Dec 1857) Corley, Simeon South Carolina (Lexington) Instrument for Drafting Coats M 19,271 (2 Feb 1858) Weston, James M. New York (Chesterfield) Improvement in Machines for Draughting Garments 20,826 (6 Jul 1858) Stace, W. R. New York (Rochester) Tailor's Measure M 35,226 (13 May 1862) Fowler, Henry A. New York (Afton) Instrument for Drafting Ladies' Dresses 38,757 (2 Jun 1863) Osier, H. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Tailoring M 45,780 (3 Jan 1865) West, J. B. New York (New York) Tailoring M 46,409 (14 Feb 1865) *Turner, M. M. Ohio (North Fairfield) Chart for Cutting Dresses 48,644 (11 Jul 1865) Beard, G. Ohio (Salineville) Tailor's Measure M 52,566 (13 Feb 1866) Harley, G.W.T. Maryland (Frederick) Tailor's Measure M 52,950 (6 Mar 1866) Beard, George Ohio (Salineville) Tailor's Measure M 56,383 (17 Jul 1866) Dittenhafer, Catherine Ohio (Canton) System of Cutting Dresses 56,892 (7 Aug 1866) Brigham, S. O. California (San Francisco) Improvement in Body- Conformators 57,254 (14 Aug 1866) La Ment, P. A. New York (New York) Dress Fitting Apparatus 57,837 (4 Sep 1866) Carpenter, H. M. Michigan (Grand Rapids) Chart for Cutting Dresses 60,028 (27 Nov 1866) McDonald, Curran E. Indiana (Indianapolis) Tailoring—Improvement in Apparatus for Obtaining the Measures for Ladies' Dresses 61,349 (22 Jan 1867) Mengel, Herrmann Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Improvement in Instruments for Guiding Tailors in Cutting Out Coats and Vests M 67,774 (13 Aug 1867) Krider, J. M. Virginia (Madison Court-House) Improvement in Tailors' Measuring Instruments M 70,621 (5 Nov 1867) Roseen, E. New York (New York) Improvement in Conformators M 71,192 (19 Nov 1867) Malnight, John Michigan (Grass Lake) Measuring and Cutting Out Dresses 71,520 (26 Nov 1867) Lemley, Jacob, Jr. Virginia (Newtown) Improvement in Means for Measuring and Laying Out Garments M 72,432 (17 Dec 1867) Vandoren, Theodore, Sr. Washington, D. C Improvement in Taking the Form and Measure of Gentlemen to Cut Coats and Vests M 76,128 (31 Mar 1868) Windle, Susan R. Ohio (Chillicothe) Improvement of Measures for Cutting Dresses 77,704 (5 May 1868) Mengel, Herman [sic] Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Measuring and Laying Out Garments M 78,338 (26 May 1868) Tierney, D. New York (New York) Tailor's Square M 78,726 (9 Jun 1868) Dolan, Patrick W. New Jersey (Jersey City) Improvement in Tailors' Rules M 79,083 (23 Jun 1868) Sinnott, W., and J. McNaughton New York (Brooklyn) Improvements in Tailor's Measure M 86,829 (9 Feb 1869) Flores, Alonzo Hernandez New York (New York) Improvement in the Compound Scale for Tailors' Use MClothing type W W w w w w w w w w 133 134 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY U.S. Patent Patentee 89,091 (20 Apr 1869) Sweezy, George P. 89,735 (4 May 1869) Burrows, H. M. "Jackson, Louisa L. Lent, J. M. Mueller, Fritz, and Hermann Koeller Michael, W. M. Ordway, Ira J 101,052 (22 Mar 1870) Shawcross, Samuel M 90,363 (25 May 1869) 91,642 (22 Jun 1869) 92,873 (20 Jul 1869) 97,672 (7 Dec 1869) 98,618 (4 Jan 1870) 101,390 (29 Mar 1870) 102,505 (3 May 1870) 103,487 (24 May 1870) 105,355 (12 Jul 1870) 105,486 (19Jul 1870) 107,068 (6 Sep 1870) 109,076 (8 Nov 1870) 110,097 (13 Dec 1870) 111,236 (24 Jan 1871) 112,024 (21 Feb 1871) 115,180 (23 May 1871) 121,642 (5 Dec 1871) 123,170 (30 Jan 1872) 124.602 (12 Mar 1872) 126,825 (14 May 1872) 129.603 (16Jull872) 130,161 (6 Aug 1872) 137,967 (15 Apr 1873) 140,507 (1 Jul 1873) Smith, William E. Cummins, W. G. Moses, Isaac Miller, Jonathan J. Palmer, Moses, and E. Willoughby Anderson Lette, Ursula L. Sweezy, George P. Wetmore, Fannie * Moschcowitz, Schamu *Ewing, Sarah C DuBois, Ithamar Mayer, William H. Harley, George W. T. Matheson, Hugh Millwee, Sarah A. Schreckengaust, Julia A. Smith, John Smith, Mrs. E. P. Johnston, J. R. Residence New York (Riverhead) New York (Norwich) Indiana (Richmond) New York (Schuyler's Lake) New York (New York) Pennsylvania (Indiana) New York (West Edmeston) Illinois (Freeport) Illinois (Chicago) Tennessee (District No. 10) New York (New York) Pennsylvania (McAlvey's Fort) Massachusetts (Boston) Washington, D. C New York (Owego) New York (Riverhead) Illinois (Chicago) New York (New York) Indiana (Indianapolis) New York (Brooklyn) New Jersey (Newark) Maryland (Frederick) Canada (Toronto) South Carolina (Greenwood) Ohio (Chillicothe) Ohio (Burton) Illinois (Chicago) Canada (Montreal) Title M Improvement in Patterns for Measuring, Laying Out, and Cutting Garments Cutting and Fitting Ladies' Dresses Ladies' Dress Guide Improvements in Patterns for Measuring and Cutting-Out Dress- Waists M Tailors' Measuring Apparatus M Improvement in Patterns for Laying Out Garments M Improvement in Devices for Measuring and Laying Out Garments M Improvement in Adjustable Garment-Patterns Model for Cutting Dresses Tailor's Measure M Improvement in Tailors' M Measures Cutting Out Garments M M Improved Pattern for Measuring the Body for Garments Instrument for Draughting M Garments Improvement in Adjustable Coat-Patterns Pattern for Measuring and Laying Out Garments Improvement in Body- Lining for Ladies' Dresses Pattern for Cutting M Garments Improvement in Tailors' M Measures Improvement in Apparatus for Fitting and Laying M Out Garments Improvement in Tailors' M Measures Improvement in Tailors' Scales Patterns for Cutting Garments System of Laying Out M Garments Device for Taking Tailors' Measurements Dress Patterns Improvement in Tailor's Measures Clothing type W W w w w w w w c w w w Residence Canada (Montreal) Improvement in Tailors' Measures New York (New York) Tailor's Measure 165,383 (6 Jul 1875) Tilney, William DeCaux (3 Aug 1875) (21 Sep 1875) (19 Oct 1875) 169,402 (2 Nov 1875) Bellamy, John NUMBER 42 U.S. Patent 143,556 150,853 155,073 155,287 155,322 156,086 158,194 163,911 164,343 (14 Oct 1873) (12 May 1874) (15 Sep 1874) (22 Sep 1874) (22 Sep 1874) (20 Oct 1874) (29 Dec 1874) (1 Jun 1875) (8 Jun 1875) 164,943 165,026 166,257 167,957 168,936 (29 Jun 1875) (29 Jun 1875) 169,468 169,564 (2 Nov 1875) (2 Nov 1875) 169,744 (9 Nov 1875) 170,157 (23 Nov 1875) 174,443 (7 Mar 1876) 177,702 (23 May 1876) 179,046 (20 Jun 1876) 179,808 (11 Jul 1876) 182,968 (3 Oct 1876) 185,352 (12 Dec 1876) 185,412 (19 Dec 1876) 185,842 (2 Jan 1877) 187,587 (20 Feb 1877) 188,896 (27 Mar 1877) 190,686 (15 May 1877) 194,086 (14 Aug 1877) 195,308 (18 Sep 1877) Patentee Beaudry, Joseph Falk, Adolph, and J. Finkenstein Eager, George R. Carpenter, Mary F. Lemley, Jacob Henville, Amanda M. Bauer, Zachaeus Bauer, Zachaeus Tiffany, G. E. Charch, John S. Ullrich, Friedrich H. Ten Eyck, M. C Smith, F. B. Richey, Albert H. Nichols, James H. Melcher, Michael A., and Lewis A. Ullrich, Friedrich H. Charch, John S. Rondel, Pierre Ender, Richard Nichols, J. H. McLellan, Robert G. Steiner, Carl A. Rich, Ellen P. Venner, William Subera, Harry W. Bixby, Lucy J. Harrison, Margaret Lasar, Godfrey H. *Griffin, Caleb Henry Reeves, Edward H. Massachusetts (Boston) Minnesota (Northfield) Virginia (Newtown) Massachusetts (Chelsea) Missouri (St. Louis) Missouri (St. Louis) Indiana (Indianapolis) Washington, D. C Pennsylvania (Lebanon) Indiana (Crawfordsville) Ohio (Dayton) New York (New York) Minnesota (St. Paul) New York (New York) Massachusetts (Boston) Michigan (Constantine) New York (New York) Ohio (Dayton) France (Paris) Maryland (Baltimore) Massachusetts (Boston) Canada (Woodstock, Ontario) Missouri (St. Louis) Massachusetts (Boston) New York (Hamburg) Iowa (Lyons City) New York (Binghamton) Illinois (Rock Island) Missouri (St. Louis) Massachusetts (Lynn) Maine (West Farmington) Title Clothing type M M Improvement in Tables M for Cloth-Cutting Improvement in Dress- W Pattern Charts Improvement in Guides M for Cutting Patterns Dress-Charts W Devices of Laying Out M Vests Apparatus for Laying M Out Coat-Patterns Improvement in Tailors' M Devices for Laying Out Garments Tailors' Measures M Tailors' Measuring M Apparatus Tailors' Measures M Tailors' Measures M Tailors' Measures M Tailor's Drafting M Apparatus Tailor's Apparatus for M Drafting Patterns Tailor's Patterns M Pattern-Charts for M Drafting Patterns Improvement in M Apparatus Drafting Tailors' Patterns Tailors' Coat-Measurers M Tailor's Drafting M Apparatus Tailors' Measures M Method and Apparatus for M Laying Out Coat Patterns Tailors' Measures M Apparatus for Drafting M Patterns Patterns for Garments Tailors' Measures M W W Pattern Chart Improvement in Pattern- Charts for Cutting Garments W Improvement in Dress Charts Improvement in Tailors' M Measures W Instruments for Drafting Patterns Pattern Charts for Cutting Garments 135 U 136 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title Clothing type 195.925 (9 Oct 1877) 195.926 (9 Oct 1877) 196,615 (30 Oct 1877) 200,234 (12 Feb 1878) 204,120 (21 May 1878) 206,315 (23 Jul 1878) 207,880 (10 Sep 1878) 212,587 (25 Feb 1879) 213,436 (18 Mar 1879) 215,310 (13 May 1879) 215,613 (20 May 1879) 216,257 (lOJun 1879) 223,543 (13 Jan 1880) 224,832 (24 Feb 1880) 225,678 (16 Mar 1880) 226,605 (20 Apr 1880) 228,527 (8 Jun 1880) 229,088 (22 Jun 1880) 233,441 (19 Oct 1880) 234,273 (9 Nov 1880) 234,821 (23 Nov 1880) 235,776 (21 Dec 1880) 242,240 (31 May 1881) 242,542 (7 Jun 1881) 242,696 (7 Jun 1881) 245,654 (16 Aug 1881) 245,717 (16 Aug 1881) 246,536 (30 Aug 1881) 247,339 (20 Sep 1881) 251,963 (3 Jan 1882) 252,388 (17 Jan 1882) M W Missouri (St. Louis) 195,332 (18 Sep 1877) Bauer, Zachaeus Apparatus for Drafting Patterns for Dresses and Coats W W Massachusetts (Maiden) Massachusetts (Lynn) *Griffin, Caleb H. *Griffin, Caleb Henry Dress-Makers' Squares Improvement of Drafting Apparatus for Ladies' Dresses W w Michigan (Sheboygan) Connecticut (New Haven) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Massachusetts (Boston) Massachusetts (Maiden) West Virginia (Wheeling) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) New York (Rochester) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Indiana (South Bend) Kentucky (Covington) Wuerfel, Mrs. Julia Webster, Ursula L. Dress-Pattern Chart Adjustable Patterns for Garments M 200,779 (26 Feb 1878) Thompson, Ethan O. Tailors' Measuring- Tools W w Wingate, Julia P. *Griffin, Caleb H. Lingen, Hermann Dress Makers' Square Drafting Square for Garments M Improvement in Measuring-Jackets w 209,111 (22 Oct 1878) *Cornwell, Willett Improvement in Dress- Charts Boone, Thomas R. *McDowell, Albert M w Tailors' Measures Adjustable Pattern- Plates for Drafting Garments Adams, Margaret E. Heaford, Edwin V. w w Dress-Maker's Chart Adjustable Pattern- Plates for Drafting Garments Brooke, John A. Ohio (Cincinnati) Pattern for Garments M Riley, Marsha E. Oregon (Harrisburg) Dress-Makers' Chart W Linck, Emil J. Maryland (Baltimore) Pattern Chart for Drafting Garments W Woolson, H. H. Vermont (Montpelier) Tailor's Measuring Device M Emery, John A. Massachusetts (Boston) Dress-Maker's Squares W *Griffin, Caleb H. Massachusetts (Boston) Dressmaker's Chart W Bruce, Mary E. New York (New York) Pattern Charts for Use in Cutting Dresses w Scanlan, John Illinois (Chicago) Tailor's Measuring Device M *Griffin, Caleb H. Massachusetts (Boston) Dress-Maker's Square w *Taylor, Mary A. New York (New York) Sleeve Pattern w *Kellogg, F.J. Michigan (Flint) Apparatus for Drafting Patterns w Wickersham, Angeline Pennsylvania Pattern Marker w P. (Philadelphia) Kinker, Ellen K. Oregon (Corvallis) Dress-Chart w Robinson, Lucie New York (Oswego) Pattern Chart and Square for Measuring and Drafting Dresses w Peyser, Abraham Massachusetts (Gloucester) Coat M Hartung, C Pennsylvania (Enon Valley) Tailor's Measure M *Moschcowitz, Herman New York (New York) Goods for Dress-Linings Having Pattern Printed Thereon w *Goldsberry, William H. Iowa (Nevada) Tailor's Square M Start, May A. Iowa (Cherokee) Chart for Drafting Ladies' and Children's Garments w Linck, E.J. Maryland (Baltimore) Chart for Drafting Garments M NUMBER 42 i: U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title Clothing type 252,507 (17 Jan 1882) *Palmer, E. Ellsworth Wisconsin (Baraboo) Dress-Chart W 254,074 (21 Feb 1882) Walker, Kate Indiana (Indianapolis) Dress Cutting and Fitting Mold W 259,162 (6 Jun 1882) *Jackson, H. Ayers Iowa (Des Moines) Method of and Means for Drafting and Cutdng Clothing w 263,779 (5 Sep 1882) *Ganzhorn, Willbm Massachusetts (Boston) Dress-Maker's Measure w 265,628 (10 Oct 1882) Parkhill, Joseph H. Iowa (Mount Pleasant) Tailor's Measure M 266,137 (17 Oct 1882) Groves, John Larue New Jersey (Elizabeth) Pattern-Draft M 266,919 (31 Oct 1882) Taylor, David Jackson Iowa (Grinnell) Dress Chart W C 269,652 (26 Dec 1882) Ferguson, Mary A. Indiana (Indianapolis) Dress Maker's Chart w c 270,933 (23 Jan 1883) Chandler, Mary B. New Hampshire (Concord) Instrument for Drafting Patterns w 272,204 (13 Feb 1883) *Buddington, Frank E. Minnesota (Stillwater) Dressmakers' Measure for Cutting Dresses and Other Articles of Clothing w 272,611 (20 Feb 1883) Abrahart, William Ohio (Cincinnati) Apparatus for Measuring and Cutting Out Garments M 276,032 (17 Apr 1883) Hamilton, Doria C New York (New York) Dress Maker's Measure w 277,453 (15 May 1883) Brolly, Hugh New York (Albany) Tailor's Measure M 278,180 (22 May 1883) Propach, Henry New York (New York) Dress Chart w 279,979 (26 Jun 1883) *Phelps, Brigham T. Vermont (Bellows Falls) Dress Square w 281,056 (lOJul 1883) Griswold, Alice L. B. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Adjustable Pattern for Garments w 281,530 (17 Jul 1883) Lennards, Nicholas Illinois (Harvard) Measuring Device for Tailors' & c. M 281,666 (24 Jul 1883) Call, Libbie A. Wisconsin (Oshkosh) Dress Chart w 282,670 (7 Aug 1883) Rugland, Samuel C California (San Francisco) Tailor's Measure M 282,842 (7 Aug 1883) *Byrnes, T. W. Wisconsin (Manitowoc) Apparatus for Drafting Garments M w 283,638 (21 Aug 1883) Monjou, Jean France (Paris) Device for Measuring and Fitting Dresses w 284,783 (11 Sep 1883) ♦Wallace, William California (Oakland) Dress Maker's Rule w 287,731 (30 Oct 1883) Schafer, May S. Illinois (Chicago) Pattern for Cutdng Dress Patterns w 296,426 (8 Apr 1884) McCartin, William J. Missouri (St. Louis) Coat-Pattern M 297,570 (29 Apr 1884) Chenivesse, Jean M. Claudius France (Bourg St. Andeol) Pattern for Undergarments w 299,383 (27 May 1884) Hand, John S. California (San Francisco) Tailor's Measuring Device M 305,501 (23 Sep 1884) Bechtel, John R. Pennsylvania (Reading) Tailor's Measure M 305,849 (30 Sep 1884) Rugland, Samuel C California (San Francisco) Tailor's Square M 307,664 (4 Nov 1884) ♦Livingston, James W. New York (New York) Method and Apparatus for Cutdng Patterns for Dresses w 310,297 (6 Jan 1885) ♦McDowell, Albert New York (New York) Adjustable Pattern for Drafting Dresses w 310,666 (13 Jan 1885) Gates, George Shattuck Massachusetts (Athol) Apparatus for Drafting the Arm-Size of Garments M 312,211 (10 Feb 1885) Lingen, Hermann West Virginia (Wheeling) Measuring-Jacket M 314,526 (24 Mar 1885) Frega,G. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Mode of Cutung and Fitting Garments M 138 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY U.S Patent Patentee 317,332 320,496 (5 May (23 Jun 1885) 1885) Freeman, Ann M. Pollock, William Bloomer 321,986 322,402 (14 Jul (14 Jul 1885) 1885) ♦Lewis, Sophronia T. Tierney, Catharine A. 324,022 (11 Aug 1885) Hand, John S. 324,472 (18 Aug 1885) Jacobsen, Martha 325,216 325,358 (25 Aug (I Sep 1885) 1885) Northen, Mary E. ♦Olson, Jennie S. 325,409 (ISep 1885) Hendrick, Susan M. 327,172 (29 Sep 1885) ♦Jackson, H. Ayers 327,725 (6 Oct 1885) Schmidt, John J. G. C 327,961 (6 Oct 1885) ♦Moschcowitz, Schamu M. 332,783 334,457 (22 Dec (19Jan 1885) 1886) Chambers, G. J., & E. McCann, James D. 337,016 341,572 (2 Mar (11 May 1886) 1886) Penley, Julia Hand, J. S. M W c W c M w M w w w c w w w c w w Clothing type W W w w w w c w M w 886) 886) 886) 886) 886) 886) 886) 887) 887) 887) 887) 887) 887) 887) 887) 887) 887) 887) 887) (15 Jun (17 Aug w w w w w w M M w M 342,216 (18 May 343,859 347,760 347,888 (24 Aug 349,198 350,073 353,508 355,160 355,583 357,762 358,903 361,292 362,378 362,579 363,237 364,620 365,385 365,800 367,455 369,080 375,972 (14 Sep (28 Sep (30 Nov (28 Dec (4 Jan (15 Feb (8 Mar (19 Apr (3 May (10 May (17 May (7 Jun (28 Jun (5 Jul (2 Aug (30 Aug (3 Jan 886) *McDowell, Albert Schad, Anton Frega, Giuseppe Pusey, Caroline S. Baker, Elvira ♦Moschcowitz, Herman Schumacher, Jacob ♦Gartland, Elizabeth Brooke, Emily ♦Coleman, Mary V. Weir, John ♦Jackson, H. Ayers Hawkins, Thomas Frega, Guiseppe [sic] Hood, Eunice ♦Wuerfel, Augusta J. Johnson, Frank G. ♦Davis, Myra A. Smith, William See, James W. Wilson, Josephine Sarah Residence Missouri (Kansas City) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) New York (Watertown) Illinois (Chicago) California (San Francisco) Iowa (Lyons) Texas (Lanier) Minnesota (Houston) New York (New York) Illinois (Chicago) New York (New York) New York (New York) Illinois (Springfield) Nebraska (Falls City) Maine (Bangor) California (San Francisco) New York (New York) Kentucky (Louisville) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Indiana (Mitchell) New York (New York) New Jersey (Camden) Pennsylvania (Philadel- phia) New York (Brooklyn) Georgia (Atlanta) Ohio (Dayton) Illinois (Chicago) California (San Francisco) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Pennsylvania (Bradford) Wisconsin (Milwaukee) New York (Brooklyn) Maine (Portland) Canada (Ontario) Ohio (Hamilton) California (San Jose) Title Dress Cutdng Rule Garment Measuring and Fitdng Device Dress Chart Guide for Use in M Cutting Garments Tailor's Measuring Device Adjustable Pattern for Drafting Garments Dress Chart Tailor's Chart for Cutting Garments System and Device for Measuring Garments System of Measuring for Garments Chart for Laying Out Patterns Combined Pattern and Fabric Tailor's Measure Measure for Drafting M Garments Dress Chart Tailor's Outline Measuring Device Adjustable Pattern M M for Drafting Garments Tailor's Measure Curve-Scriber for Tailors' Use Pattern for Garment Dress-Maker's Chart Pattern for Garments Pattern Sheet M Chart for Drafting Garments Method of Fitting Garments Method of Cutting and Fitting Garments Measuring-Jacket Tailor's Measure Dress-Cutting Chart M Tailor's Measure Apparatus for Cutting Garments Tailor's Rule Conformator Dress Maker's Guide Tailor's and Dress Maker's Square Dress Fitdng Model Dress Chart u U 139 u NUMBER 42 1 U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title Clothing type 376,558 (17 Jan 1888) Stahl, E. Arizona Territory Method of and Device for Fitting Garments W 379,384 (13 Mar 1888) Fels, F. 8c Simon D. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Dress Chart W 381,563 (24 Apr 1888) Mandelbaum, Solomon Illinois (Chicago) Adjustable Pattern Chart M 383,926 (5 Jun 1888) Wachter, Anton Germany (Berlin) Adjustable Device for Outlining Patterns for Garments w 385,637 (3 Jul 1888) Ledoux, Francis New York (New York) Method of Making Patterns for Garments w 385,944 (10 Jul 1888) Noar, F. C England (Lancaster) Apparatus for Marking Out Patterns for Garments M 389,287 (11 Sep 1888) Christner, David C Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Method of Obtaining the Measurement of the Human Form w 389,327 (11 Sep 1888) Sens, Herman A. Ohio (Cincinnad) Tailor's Square M 389,376 (11 Sep 1888) Follett, Edward P. New York (Rochester) Chart for Drafting Sleeves of Garments M w 389,377 (11 Sep 1888) Follett, E[dward] P. New York (Rochester) Chart for Drafting Garments w 390,291 (2 Oct 1888) Garnier, Martin J. Pennsylvania (Sharpsburg) Measure for Drafting Garments M w c 392,263 (6 Nov 1888) Frega, Giuseppe Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Tailor's Square M 393,552 (27 Nov 1888) Goldsmith, Edwin M. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Garment-Chart 394,524 (11 Dec 1888) Tripp, Frances A. Massachusetts (Boston) Dress Maker's Square w 395,566 (1 Jan 1889) Hurdle, Rebecca Washington, D. C Dress Cutter's Scale w 396,396 (22 Jan 1889) Faut, P. Illinois (Wilmington) Tailor's and Dress Maker's Square M w 400,504 (2 Apr 1889) Stockman, Terissa 1. Iowa (Council Bluffs) Dress Cutter's Rule w 403,404 (14 May 1889) Yates, S. W. Illinois (Wilmington) Tailor's Square M 405,464 (18 Jun 1889) Cook, W. New York (New York) Scale Measure M 405,614 (18 Jun 1889) Stearns, Elvira Rhode Island (Providence) Garment Measuring Device and Cutting Guide w 406,197 (2 Jul 1889) Couteau, Jules France (Beziers, Herault) Adjustable Garment- Pattern M 408,594 (6 Aug 1889) de Caracena, Joseph ON. Fike, Henry P. New York (New York) Dress Waist w 409,184 (20 Aug 1889) Indiana (Chili) Chart for Drafting Garments w 410,383 (3 Sep 1889) Stahl, Edward Arizona (Prescott) Method of Producing Garment Patterns and Models w 410,695 (10 Sep 1889) Penley, Julia Maine (Portland) Dress Chart w 411,686 (24 Sep 1889) Schubert, Carl Germany (Dresden, Saxony) System of Laying Out Patterns for Garments M w 419,452 (14 Jan 1890) Johum, Francis P. New York (Brooklyn) Tailor's Measure M 420,448 (4 Feb 1890) Gothard, James lUinois (Chicago) Tailor's Measure M 422,067 (25 Feb 1890) Bernheim, Matthew New York (New York) Tailor's Conformating Measure M 422,282 (25 Feb 1890) ♦Baughman, Jacob S., and Melvina E. Iowa (Burlington) Adjustable Pattern Plate for Garments w 430,059 (lOJun 1890) ♦Baughman, J. S., and M. E. O'Halloran, E. E. Iowa (Burlington) Chart for Drafting Garments w 431,781 (8 Jul 1890) New Zealand (Waipawa) Apparatus for Drafting M Patterns for Garments 432,322 (15 Jul 1890) Moriarty, John H. Washington, D. C Adjustable Garment Pattern M 433,203 (29 Jul 1890) Hout, Emma M. Maine (Lewiston) Dress Skirt Chart w140 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY M M M U.S. Patent Patentee 433,711 (5 Aug 1890) Berry, Ellen A. Residence Massachusetts (Cambridge) Kellogg, Martha E. Hall, Martha E. Scully, Harry Francis Curry, Harriet A. Garcelon, Jennie Lee 435,182 (26 Aug 1890 435,301 (26 Aug 1890 435,714 (20 Sep 1890 438,607 (21 Oct 1890 439,500 (28 Oct 1890 Michigan (Battle Creek) Indiana (Crawfordsville) Illinois (Chicago) South Dakota (Dakota Territory) Illinois (Chicago) 439,747 (4 Nov 1890) Hawley, DeWitt New York (Rochester) 440,692 (18 Nov 1890) ♦Buddington, Frank E. Illinois (Chicago) 441,369 (25 Nov 1890) Lennart, M. Wisconsin (Milwaukee) 441,675 (2 Dec 1890) Lewis, Richard R. Pennsylvania (Union City) 441,684 (2 Dec 1890) Moriarty, John H. Washington, D. C. 447,554 (3 Mar 1891) Berry, Ellen A. Massachusetts (Boston) 447,932 (10 Mar 1891) Bishe, Salvatore, and S. Bisceglia Illinois (Chicago) 451,247 (28 Apr 1891) Kennedy, H. G. Canada (Berlin) 451,553 (5 May 1891) Drummond, George Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) 451,979 (12 May 1891) Shane, Carrie Iowa (Vinton) 452,090 (12 May 1891) ♦Walkie, Jennie Illinois (Chicago) 453,923 (9 Jun 1891) Stevenson, J. W. Ohio (Ravenna) 455,159 (30 Jun 1891) Broadnax,John T. Louisiana (New Orleans) 455,338 (7 Jul 1891) Kelly, Mark L. Massachusetts (Boston) 455,749 (14 Jul 1891) Hood, Eunice Illinois (Chicago) 455,811 (14 Jul 1891) Bisceglia, Salvatore Illinois (Chicago) 456,184 (21 Jul 1891) Wolff, Rudolph G. Illinois (Chicago) 457,124 (4 Aug 1891) Liebl, Andrew New York (Breslow) 457,591 (11 Aug 1891) Schafer, May S. Illinois (Chicago) 458,263 (25 Aug 1891) Venner, William G. New York (Buffalo) 460,132 (29 Sep 1891) Havender, Joseph Massachusetts (Springfield) 460,282 (29 Sep 1891) Smith, Prudence A. New York (New York) 465,252 (15 Dec 1891) Ericson, Lars G. New York (New York) 466,111 (29 Dec 1891) Amelang, Charles A. Maryland (Baltimore) 467,045 (12 Jan 1892) Musse, Bertha New York (New York) 470,809 (15 Mar 1892) Long, Flora Indiana (Fort Wayne) 479,548 (26 Jul 1892) Blizzard, Jennie Ohio (Ft. Recovery) 480,036 (2 Aug 1892) Rensen, John Henry Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) 480,453 (9 Aug 1892) Crow, Samuel G. Canada (Toronto) 480,579 (28 Apr 1892) Geraci, Ignatius Maryland (Baltimore) 482,748 (20 Sep 1892) Mannebach, Caspar Michigan (Detroit) 483,271 (27 Sep 1892) Trochu, Athanase France (Redon)Title Apparatus for Marking Patterns for Dress Waists Tailor's Measure Device for Fitting and Drafting Garments Tailor's Measure Adjustable Pattern for Drafting Garments Dress Maker's Fitting Apparatus Tailor's Measure Adjustable Sleeve Drafting Apparatus Adjustable Pattern for Drafting Garments Tailor's Measure M M Adjustable Sleeve-Pattern Jacket for Making Garment Patterns Adjustable Pattern M for Drafting Garments Chart for Drafting Garments M Chart for Drafting Patterns for Garments Dress Fitting Apparatus Tailor's Measure Dress Chart Pattern for Vests and M Shirts Pattern for Marking Cloth Dress Chart Sleeve-Pattern M Tailor's Measuring Apparatus M Tailor's Measure M Multiflex Dress Chart Garment Measuring Jacket Pattern for Cutting Conical Skirt Bonds Tailor's Measure Tailor's Measuring M Implement Method of Cutting M Patterns for Garments Adjustable Pattern for Drafting Garments Dress Maker's Square and Rule Dress Chart Tailor's Measuring Apparatus M Chart for Drafting Garments Tailor's Measure M Measuring and Drafting Device for Garments Tailor's Measuring M Apparatus Clothing type W w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w c w w U UMBER 42 U.S. Patent 1^ Patentee Residence Title Clothing type 483,521 (4 Oct 1892) Arvidson, Pier N. Michigan (Kalamazoo) Tailor's Measuring- Square M 484,138 (11 Oct 1892) Choquette, Joseph H. Massachusetts (Fall River) Pattern for Drafting Garments W 486,670 (22 Nov 1892) Gunkel, Caspar Iowa (Jefferson) Tailor's Measure M 487,237 (29 Nov 1892) Cupler, Jacob C Illinois (Chicago) Adjustable Pattern for Drafting Garments W 487,760 (13 Dec 1892) Musse, Bertha New York (New York) Adjustable Pattern W 487,801 (13 Dec 1892) Viau, Benjamin New York (New York) Dress Chart w 489,793 (10 Jan 1893) Christiansen, S. New York (New York) Garment-Fitting Pattern w 490,022 (17 Jan 1893) Horn, Henrietta New York (Newark) Adjustable Pattern for Drafting Garments w 490,606 (24 Jan 1893) Campbell, John R. Massachusetts (Arlington) Measuring-Jacket M 492,670 (28 Feb 1893) Frenot, Louis Desire, and Jules Frangois Eyboulet New Jersey (Newark) Adjustable Pattern for Drafting Garments M 497,165 (9 May 1893) Cone, Abraham M. Massachusetts (Lee) Tailor's Measure M 497,503 (16 May 1893) Sipe, Thalia E. New York (New York) Tailor's Measure w c 501,337 (11 Jul 1893) Goodwin, Terence J. New York (Syracuse) Pattern for Drafting Sleeves M 503,741 (22 Aug 1893) Faestel, A. L. Wisconsin (Milwaukee) Tailor's Drafting Device M 507,054 (17 Oct 1893) Wiggins, Thomas H. Illinois (Pecatonica) Tailor's Measure M 509,080 (21 Nov 1893) Gunkel, Caspar Iowa (Jefferson) Tailor's Measure M 510,364 (5 Dec 1893) Poulin, Hedwidge Maine (Augusta) Dress Chart w 510,942 (19 Dec 1893) Start, S. S., and Mary A. S. Johnson Minnesota (Luverne) Garment Pattern M w c 510,994 (19 Dec 1893) Schafer, Theodore Illinois (Maroa) Extensible Measuring- Stick Measure for Laying M 514,063 (6 Feb 1894) Call, Libbie A. Wisconsin (Oshkosh) w Off Dress Charts 514,622 (13 Feb 1894) Horn, Henrietta New York (Newark) Adjustable Pattern for Drafting Garments w 515,511 (27 Feb 1894) Aim, Janos A. Illinois (Chicago) Tailor's Measure M 516,449 (13 Mar 1894) Ryan, Della Michigan (Owasso) Pattern for Drafting Garments w 516,828 (20 Mar 1894) Lutz, Matthaus Germany (Stuttgart) Pattern for Drafting Garments w 517,079 (27 Mar 1894) Veitch, William Missouri (Kansas City) Tailor's Adjustable Measure M 518,947 (I May 1894) Hawley, DeWitt New York (Rochester) Tailor's Measuring Implement M 519,090 (I May 1894) Newcomb, Abner S. Massachusetts (Worcester) Device for Measuring Dress Skirts w 522,800 (lOJul 1894) Osse, Charles Maryland (Baltimore) Adjustable Garment- Pattern M 524,966 (21 Aug 1894) Lambright, Hamilton Ohio (Akron) Adjustable Garment Pattern w 525,019 (28 Aug 1894) Horn, Marie Germany (Berlin) Garment Measuring and Drafting Apparatus w 526,378 (25 Sep 1894) Chrisdansen, Simon New York (New York) Garment Fitting Pattern w 526,379 (25 Sep 1894) Chrisdansen, Simon New York (New York) Sleeve-Pattern w 526,380 (25 Sep 1894) Chrisdansen, Simon New York (New York) Garment Fitdng Pattern w 532,613 (15 Jan 1895) Tucek, Marie New York (New York) Method of Producing Garment Patterns w 534,347 (19 Feb 1895) Olsen.JohnR. Illinois (Chicago) Tailor's Square M 534,387 (19 Feb 1895) Brown, Daniel L. New York (New York) Measure for Drafting Dress Skirts w 535,378 (12 Mar 1895) Kelley, Mary C Delaware (Wilmington) Dressmaker's Measure w142 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Residence Patentee U.S. Patent Minnesota (Minneapolis) Massachusetts (Lynn) Missouri (St. Louis) New Jersey (Paterson) Georgia (Winder) Illinois (Chicago) Washington (Walla Walla) Minnesota (Luverne) Pennsylvania (Bloomsburg) 535,843 (19 Mar 1895) Marshall, William J. 537,127 (9 Apr 1895) 537,132 (9 Apr 1895) 537,285 (9 Apr 1895) 540,985 (11 Jun 1895) 541,311 (18Jun 1895) 543,253 (23 Jul 1895) 545,139 (27 Aug 1895) 546,199 (10 Sep 1895) Scott, Herman W. ♦Storey, James R. Griffen, Stephen M. Hodges, Estell J., and Carrie R. Mathews ♦Buddington, Frank E. Kantorovitz, Harris Start, Sampson S., and Mary A. Start Johnson Snyder, Charles W. 552,976 (14 Jan 1896) ♦Storey, James R. Missouri (St. Louis) 554,710 (18 Feb 1896) Moon, Edwin L. Ohio (Columbus) 556,856 (24 Mar 1896) Livingston, Annie New York (New York) 558,780 (21 Apr 1896) Crakauer, Felix Germany (Wiesbaden) 559,045 (28 Apr 1896) Schindler, Franz Germany (Prussia) 560,593 (19 May 1896) Mathews, W. A. Ohio (Gratis) 566,158 (18 Aug 1896) Follett, Edward P. Minnesota (Duluth) 568,263 (22 Sep 1896) Moccia, Raffaele New York (New York) 570,834 (3 Nov 1896) Baasel, William Illinois (Chicago) 570,835 (3 Nov 1896) Baasel, William Illinois (Chicago) 573,408 (15 Dec 1896) Hall, Martha E. Indiana (New Market) 579,491 (23 Mar 1897) Meas, Augustus New York (Niagara Falls) 582,101 (4 May 1897) Schell, Natalie California (San Francisco) 583,858 (1 Jun 1897) Follett, Edward P. Minnesota (Duluth) 584,413 (ISJun 1897) Scott, Charles H. Illinois (Bloomington) 586,406 (13 Jul 1897) Vaughn, Archer Missouri (Carrollton) 590,495 (21 Sep 1897) Hancock, Abram O. Louisiana (New Orleans) 593,555 (9 Nov 1897) Van Derworp, Anna M. Michigan (Detroit) 594,443 (30 Nov 1897) Taylor, Hiram H. New Hampshire 595,239 (7 Dec 1897) Leu, Mary D. Ohio (Wauseon) 599,247 (15 Feb 1898) Ormsby, Albertha A. Michigan (Detroit) 600,050 (1 Mar 1898) Tucek, Marie New York (New York) 602,117 (12 Apr 1898) William, I. Kansas (Wichita) 602,471 (19 Apr 1898) Pinkham, Almeda A. Massachusetts (North Adams) 606,706 (5 Jul 1898) Collins, Mary C Minnesota (Minneapolis) 611,995 (4 Oct 1898) Follett, Edward P. Illinois (Chicago) 613,095 (25 Oct 1898) Van Dame, J. R. Michigan (Grand Rapids) 613,988 (8 Nov 1898) Goodhue, Melissa New Hampshire (Keene) 614,703 (22 Nov 1898) Delory.Jean Louis France (Blois, Loir et Cher) 616,493 (27 Dec 1898) Richardson, E. M., and J. L. Indiana (Hundngton) Title Clothing type Dress Chart W Tailor's Measure M Tailor's Measure w Tailor's Measure M Garment Drafting Pattern Apparatus for Drafting w w Garments Device for Measuring M Garments Garment Measure W Adjustable Pattern W 'Tailor's Drafting-Plate M Tailor's Measure M Adjustable Garment Pattern W Apparatus for Producing M W Patterns Tailor's Measure M Adjustable Pattern W Tailor's Measure M Tailor's Square M Tailor's Cutting Chart M Sleeve Chart M Pattern or Chart W Adjustable Garment- M Pattern Bust Form W Instrument for Drafting M Garment-Patterns Tailor's Measure M Tailor's Measure M Adjustable Garment Pattern W Dressmaker's Measure w Pattern Drafting Device W Dress Chart W Adjustable Dress Chart W Garment Drafting Pattern w Dress Chart w Adjustable Skirt Pattern w Skirt Cutting Rule w Instrument for Laying w Out Gores for Skirts Tailor's Square w System for Drafting Dresses w W Combined Square and Curve M for Cutting Garments for Tailoring Purposes Adjustable Chart W NUMBER 42 1^ U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title Clothing type 618,387 (24 Jan 1899) Van Dame, John R. Michigan (Grand Rapids) Sleeve Pattern M W 618,392 (31 Jan 1899) ♦Buddington, Frank E. Illinois (Chicago) Adjustable Pattern Drafting Apparatus W 622,092 (28 Mar 1899) Tucek, Marie New York (New York) Chart for Drafting Garment Patterns w 622,419 (4 Apr 1899) Cunningham, Emma E. Massachusetts (West Newton) Garment Drafting Apparatus w 622,900 (11 Apr 1899) Nicholas, Eliza New Jersey (Plainfield) Measure for Drafting Dress Skirts w 626,258 (6 Jun 1899) White, J. H. New York (New York) Tailor's Square w 626,795 (13 Jun 1899) ♦Peyry, J. B. Louisiana (New Orleans) Garment Fitter w 628,083 (4 Jul 1899) ♦Evan, H. P. Wisconsin (Winneconne) Garment Cutting Scale w c 628,296 (4 Jul 1899) Atwell, Fred A. Pennsylvania (Potter) Adjustable Garment Drafting Chart w 628,475 (11 Jul 1899) Kirk, Benjamin H. Illinois (Chicago) Tape-Measure M 629,025 (18 Jul 1899) Bluthenthal, Herbert Clay Arkansas (Pine Bluff) Tailor's Measure M 632,361 (5 Sep 1899) O'Loughlin, Robert S. New York (Glen Falls) Pattern for Garments w 633,654 (26 Sep 1899) Melick, James T. New Jersey (Rahway) Garment-Fitter M 641,411 (16Jan 1900) Shelton, Zelda G. Colorado (Rockyford) Dress-Chart W C 646,498 (3 Apr 1900) Leciejewski, Johann Germany (Posen) Tailor's Measuring Device M 648,023 (24 Apr 1900) Donaldson, George MacKay Canada (Kentville, Nova Scotia) Adjustable Dress-Chart W 648,714 (1 May 1900) Taylor, Anna Bell Indiana (Goshen) Skirt-Stick W 649,988 (22 May 1900) Kohn, Samuel Illinois (Chicago) Garment-Measuring Apparatus W 651,208 (5 Jun 1900) Sebastiano, Domenico New York (New York) Tailor's Square w 655,960 (14 Aug 1900) Cunningham, Emma E. Massachusetts (Newton ) Skirt-Measuring Device w 658,038 (18 Sep 1900) Frega, Giuseppe Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Tailor's Measure 660,175 (23 Oct 1900) ♦Williams, William R. Kansas (Lawrence) Adjustable Chart [Skirts] w 660,397 (23 Oct 1900) Rosenbloom, Abe N. Massachusetts (Boston) Tailor's Drafting Implement M W C 661,537 (13 Nov 1900) Kirk, Harry D., and Walter I. Illinois (Chicago) Tailor's Tape-Measure 662,620 (27 Nov 1900) Goff, Vina Hildebrand Missouri (El Dorado Springs) Dress-Cutdng Measure W 662,817 (27 Nov 1900) Plant, John B. Rhode Island (Paw- tucket) [Residence] Maine (Biddeford) [P. O. Address] Dress-Chart w 664,700 (25 Dec 1900) Wilson, Harry C New York (Manhattan) Adjustable Dress-Chart w 667,739 (12 Feb 1901) Schierbaum, Clara Ohio (Cleveland) Dressmaker's Rule w 670,762 (26 Mar 1901) Bowman, Viola Pennsylvania (Dubois) Chart w 673,579 (7 May 1901) Kleinberger, Markus New York (New York) Measuring Slide-Ruler 674,442 (21 May 1901) Hockersmith, Alfred P. Illinois (Chicago) Tailor's Measurer M? W 675,537 (4 Jun 1901) ♦Baughman, Jacob Schrock Iowa (Burlington) Adjustable Chart [Skirts] w 678,515 (I6Jul 1901) Rencher, Dora Utah (Salt Lake City) Garment-Fitter w 688,300 (10 Dec 1901) Goodwin, Terence J. New York (Syracuse) Adjustable Chart w 688,303 689,361 (10 Dec 1901) (17 Dec 1901) Griffen, Stephen M. Moe, Gerhard New Jersey (Summit) Wisconsin (Rhinelander) Tailor's Measure Method of Taking Photo- graphic Measurements M M W? New York (New York) 689,685 (24 Dec 1901) ♦McDowell, William U U 144 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 708,754 (9 Sep 1902) Chandler, Helen S. 718,320 (13 Jan 1903) Curran, Edward 760,966 (24 May 1904) D'Alessio, Agostino U.S. Patent 690,214 (31 Dec 1901) 692,510 (4 Feb 1902) 700,739 (27 May 1902) 705,194 (22 Jul 1902) 708,506 (2 Sep 1902) 709,776 (23 Sep 1902) 710,399 (7 Oct 1902) 711,479 711,611 716,613 717,253 717,284 (21 Oct 1902) (21 Oct 1902) (23 Dec 1902) (30 Dec 1902) (30 Dec 1902) 719,924 722,221 731,115 734,279 (3 Feb 1903) (10 Mar 1903) (16 Jun 1903) (21 Jul 1903) 735,738 (11 Aug 1903) 736,052 (II Aug 1903) 739,178 740,172 (15 Sep 1903) (29 Sep 1903) 743,436 (10 Nov 1903) 744,475 744,826 745,841 748,792 750,975 753,680 754,765 758,826 (17 Nov 1903) (24 Nov 1903) (1 Dec 1903) (5 Jan 1904) (2 Feb 1904) (1 Mar 1904) (15 Mar 1904) (3 May 1904) 761,901 765,407 765,691 765,837 777,913 (7 Jun 1904) (19 Jul 1904) (26 Jul 1904) (26 Jul 1904) (20 Dec 1904) Patentee Wilson, Harry C Follett, Edward P. Choquette, Joseph H. Avery, Mary Lucinda Valentine, Gustaf V. Kelley, Mary C Adamo, Giuseppe Curran, Edward James Adelberg, Abraham Anderson, Charles ♦Nelson, Jonathan Ryan, Catherine Westcott, Benjamin F. Freeman, Sarah Sophia Morgan, Lucy W. O'Donnell, Mary F., and Emma V. Follett, Edward P., ♦ assigned to Zenith Manufacturing Company Adamson, James M. Hillman, Otto Parker, George F., and Marie E. M. Whiting Boone, Thomas R. Buckley, John P. Wakefield, Ernest Hilder, Henry William Robbert, Jane Home, Rowlan G. Davis, Loyola Griffen, Stephen M. Curran, Edward James Northen, Mary Eva Wakefield, Ernest Ulrich, Jean Hirsch, Phillip O. Obermeier, Ludwig Residence New York (New York) Illinois (Chicago) Massachusetts (Fall River) California (Oakland) Illinois (Chicago) New Hampshire (Dover) Delaware (Wilmington) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Australia (Sydney) New York (Rochester) Illinois (Chicago) Indiana (Warsaw) Canada (Ottawa) Illinois (Chicago) Maryland (Baltimore) Nebraska (Lincoln) Maine (Auburn) New York (Syracuse) New York (Rochester) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Missouri (St. Louis) Massachusetts (Boston) New York (Rochester) Washington, D. C Pennsylvania (Mount Pleasant) England (Brighton) California (San Francisco) Illinois (Chicago) Nebraska (Omaha) New Jersey (Summit) Australia (Bathurst) New York (Manhattan) Texas (Denton) Pennsylvania (Mount Pleasant) New York (New York) Nebraska (Norfolk) Germany (Munich) Title Clothing type Adjustable Sleeve-Chart W Garment-Fitter W Adjustable Dress-Chart w Dress-Chart [Skirts] W Dress-Cutting Instrument w for Drafting Garments Adjustable Chart w w m W W c M M w w C Drafting-Rule Tailor's Square Method of Drafting Garment-Patterns Measuring and Drafting Device for Garments Garment-Fitting Device Garment-Scale Garment Measuring and W W W W w w Drafting Device Device for Drafting Skirt-Patterns Measuring Instrument Dressmaker's Ruler Dressmaker's Guide Skirt-Pattern Device for Drafting Patterns for Garments Tailor's Tape Measure w w Garment-Drafting Chart Pattern-Chart M? w Tailor's Measuring- Square Garment-Drafting Rule M Tailor's Attitude- Measure Appliances for Taking w Measurements for Garments Appliance for Drafting Garments M M M Tailor's Measure w w? Skirt-Chart Tailor's Measure Method of Drafting Garment-Patterns M W Measuring Device for Garments M M? w w w Pattern-Chart Tailor's Measure M M Dress-Chart Tailor's Measure Tape-Measure NUMBER 42 U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title Clothing type W 782,339 (14 Feb 1905) Hosford, Frank Texas (Paris) Tailor's or Dressmaker's M Measuring Device 782,415 (14 Feb 1905) Plant, Harry N. Maine (Biddeford) Adjustable Dress-Chart w 787,533 (18 Apr 1905) ♦McDowell, William New York (New York) Chart w 790,333 (23 May 1905) Van Dame, John R. Michigan (Grand Rapids) Tailor's Chart w 790,568 (23 May 1905) Freeman, William New York (New York) Printed Dress-Pattern [Skirts] Tailor's Measuring Device w 794,506 (11 Jul 1905) Kaiser, George B. Ohio (Cincinnad) 797,176 (15 Aug 1905) Colosimo, Giuseppe Washington, D. C Tailor's Measure or Square M 798,223 (29 Aug 1905) Sole, Frank D. New Jersey (Newark) Tape-Measure M w 803,778 (7 Nov 1905) ♦McDowell, William New York (New York) Chart for Drafting Women's Skirts w 809,836 (9 Jan 1906) Nordstrom, Fred New York (New York) Tailor's Measure M 811,770 (6 Feb 1906) Freeman, William New York (New York) Printed Dress-Pattern w 812,874 (20 Feb 1906) ♦Phelps, Ernest Leslie Canada (Toronto) Garment-Designing Curve-Rule M w c 813,415 (27 Feb 1906) Geraci, Ignatius Washington, D. C Tailor's Measure M 815,467 (20 Mar 1906) Plant, Harry N. Maine (Biddeford) Dress-Chart w 819,438 (1 May 1906) Jones, Mrs. Minnie, now by remarriage Mrs. Minnie Franklin Colorado (Denver) Drafting Implement w 822,874 (5 Jun 1906) Tight, Jennie C Iowa (St. Anthony) Skirt Measurer and Pattern w 823,738 (19 Jun 1906) Parker, George F., and Marie E. M. Whidng Massachusetts (Boston) Pattern-Chart w 824,784 (3 Jul 1906) Goff, Vina Hildebrand, assigned to Goff Designer Company Kansas (lola) Adjustable Skirt-Pattern w 825,915 (17 Jul 1906) Lesh, Edwin Zachariah, Mexico (Guadalajara) Tailor's Measure M w c ♦ and Hester A. Woolman 826,651 (24 Jul 1906) D'Elia, Louis Washington (Seattle) Tailor's Measuring Apparatus M 830,850 (11 Sep 1906) Roland, Arthur Malaska Hawaii (Honolulu) Tailor's Measuring Device M 831,826 (25 Sep 1906) Buccola, Joseph Illinois (Chicago) Dress-Chart w 834,762 (30 Oct 1906) Schrader, August F., and Ophelia McCuUough Iowa (Rake) Skirt-Drafting Chart w 843,378 (5 Feb 1907) Waterman, Albert New York (New York) Marker for Bust-Forms w 843,862 (12 Feb 1907) Blackburn, Richard H. New York (New York) Chart for Drafting Garments [Skirts] w 845,319 (26 Feb 1907) Ricciardi, Bartolomeo New York (New York) Tailor's Square M c 847,844 (19 Mar 1907) Stillman, Millicent M. New York (New York) Garment-Pattern w 850,340 (16 Apr 1907) Brosnahan, Michael J. Missouri (St. Louis) Tailor's Appliance M 851,279 (23 Apr 1907) Dobbs, Edwin Eugene Minnesota (Minneapolis) Dress-Chart [Skirts] w 851,374 (23 Apr 1907) Peterson, Erick H. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Adjustable Chart M 851,391 (23 Apr 1907) Anderman, Goldie L. Illinois (Chicago) Method of Duplicating Forms w 852,151 (30 Apr 1907) Ahnelt, William P. New York (New York) Chart for Garment- Patterns w 852,332 (30 Apr 1907) Laub, George M., New York (New York) Paper Pattern w assigned to May Manton Pattern Company 852,771 (7 May 1907) Christoph, Emil A. Illinois (Chicago) Tape-Measure M w 855,272 (28 May 1907) Barnett, Jacob New York (New York) Tailor's Measuring Apparatus M 860,773 (23 Jul 1907) Thompson, Reinard Massachusetts (Somerville) Tailor's Measure M 145 146 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Patentee Carrara, Marie Louise Fhnt, Charles Ernest U.S. Patent 865,418 (10 Sep 1907) Moe, Gerhard 865,761 (10 Sep 1907) 869,169 (22 Oct 1907) Clothing type W Wu Pattern Company Terry, Reed A. Tiffany, George S. Bogushefsky, Moses 869,264 (29 Oct 1907) Ricciardi, Bartolomeo New York (New York) Tailor's Tape-Measure M W 871,814 (26 Nov 1907) Newtown, Charles Willard Missouri (Kansas City) Measure 873,266 (10 Dec 1907) Phoebus, Virginia A. New York (New York) Machine or Device to be Used in Measuring and Cutting Skirts W 874,997 (31 Dec 1907) Schoeppl, Joseph F. Maryland (Baltimore) Tailor's Templet for Making Patterns M 875,554 (31 Dec 1907) Pelton, Marie C Nebraska (Beatrice) Garment Measuring and Drafting Device w 882,111 (17 Mar 1908) Horeischi, Wenzel Switzerland (Zurich) Adjustable Chart 885,167 (21 Apr 1908) Maxwell, Alice Audley New York (New York) Guide-Chart for Garment-Patterns w 887,890 (19 May 1908) Valentine, Gustaf V. Illinois (Chicago) Instrument for Drafting Garment-Patterns w 890,472 (9 Jun 1908) Truhan, Michael Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Adjustable Pattern for Coats M 890,969 (16Jun 1908) Dufault, John U. Massachusetts (Spencer ) Adjustable Pattern for Garments M 894,207 (28 Jul 1908) Jacobson, Hamlet Peter New York (Brooklyn) Pattern Draft or Chart M 899,802 (29 Sep 1908) Pohle, Jenny Pennsylvania (Lansdale) Measuring Devices for w Dressmakers and the Like 900,568 (6 Oct 1908) Miles, Nancie E. Indiana (Indianapolis) Skirt-Measuring Device w 902,704 (3 Nov 1908) Anderson, Samuel Massachusetts (Brockton) Tailor's Measuring Device M 906,524 (15 Dec 1908) Goerigk, Franz Germany (Berlin) Apparatus for Taking Tailors' Measurements M w 909,023 (5 Jan 1909) ♦Ratner, Henry W. Illinois (Chicago) Tailor's Square M? 909,046 (5 Jan 1909) Woolson, Harry H. Massachusetts (Medford) Tailor's Indicator M 910,203 (19 Jan 1909) Johnson, Jennie A. South Dakota (Huron) Dress-Chart M? w 911,045 (2 Feb 1909) Johnson, Mary M. Colorado (Denver) Garment-Fitting Device w 911,046 (2 Feb 1909) Johnson, Mary M. Colorado (Denver) Garment-Fitting Device w 913,408 (23 Feb 1909) Ma Loney, Mato Fitzmaurice Illinois (Chicago) Tailor's Cutting-Chart M 915,835 (23 Mar 1909) Di Domenico, Nicola Rhode Island (Providence) Tailor's Measure M w? 918,279 (13 Apr 1909) ♦Carlstrom, John A., assigned to the Jno. J. Mitchell Company New York (New York) Tailor's Square M 926,322 (29 Jun 1909) Dubinsky, Moses Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Pattern-Former w 927,845 (13 Jul 1909) Evangelista, Vincenzo Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Method of Laying Out Patterns M w 927,948 (13Jul 1909) Ciervo, Michael New York (New York) Tailor's Measure M 928,691 (20 Jul 1909) Peterson, Erick H., assigned to Sartorial Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Block-Pattern for Garments M w? Nebraska (Omaha) Kansas (Hutchinson) New York (New York) 931,896 (24 Aug 1909) 932,649 (31 Aug 1909) 933.523 (7 Sep 1909) Adjustable Chart for W Dressmaking Tailor's Measuring Device Adjustable Pattern M U U U NUMBER 42 U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title 147 Clothing type Michigan (Battle Creek) Apparel-Cutdng Apparatus to David H. Ackerman New York (New York) 937,214 (19 Oct 1909) 938,280 (26 Oct 1909) 941,936 (30 Nov 1909) 942,338 (7 Dec 1909) 943,130 (14 Dec 1909) 943,770 (21 Dec 1909) Kellogg, Martha E. Sexton, Edith Ray Mongelli, Giuseppe A. Morrison, Margaret E. Webster, Frank D. Curran, Edward James, assigned one-half Illinois (Chicago) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Nebraska (Bartley) Missouri (St. Louis) Australia (Sydney) Form-Gage Rule Skirt-Measurer Adjustable Chart Apparatus for Drafting Garment-Patterns M W W W W W M M W W W M M W M W M W? M w M w 945,814 (11 Jan 1910) Schulze, Charles F. Pennsylvania (Pottsville) Method of Laying Out Patterns Tailor's Fitting Apparatus Measuring-Harness M m W M W W M M? w 967,504 (16 Aug 1910) Eden, Edward Samuel w w w 986,041 (7 Mar 1911) Bond, Ida M. w 1,009,427 (21 Nov 1911) Luongo, Aniello w w 1,037,058 (27 Aug 1912) Schmidt, Frank M. 946,191 (I I Jan 1910) 947,542 (25 Jan 1910) 956,370 (26 Apr 1910) 957,150 (3 May 1910) 959,972 (31 May 1910) 972,705 (11 Oct 1910) 977,177 (29 Nov 1910) 979,866 (27 Dec 1910) 981,043 (10 Jan 1911) 985,971 (7 Mar 1911) 988,459 (4 Apr 1911) 988,683 (4 Apr 1911) 991,103 (2 May 1911) 996,281 (27 Jun 1911) 998,039 998,258 999,359 999,425 1,000,151 1,001,142 1,002,613 1,003,318 1,004,593 (18 Jul 1911) (18 Jul 1911) (1 Aug 1911) (1 Aug 1911) (1 Apr 1911) (22 Aug 1911) (5 Sep 1911) (12 Sep 1911) (3 Oct 1911) 1,011,628 (12 Dec 1911) 1,011,915 (19 Dec 1911) 1,014,542 (9 Jan I9I2) 1,014,885 (I6Jan 1912) 1,033,061 (16Jul I9I2) Augsten, Josef De Feo, Frank Komura, Sanemon Erickson, Anton Tomaselli, Antonio Moritz, Samuel S. Fellowes, Harry L. Little, James E. ♦Weidel, Joseph A. ♦Blackburn, Juditha Gordon, Henry H. Wurtzel, Abraham Titchell, Joseph Rubin, Constantino Guerra Rose, Joseph Osborne, Gertrude Bauernfeind, John Zaino, Adolph Contenti, Filiberto Hanrath, Theodore W. Ward, Ada Bartlett, Irene Merrill Ryan, Catherine Klein, Jacob Carbonara, Paolo Walquist, Andrew N. Lee, Harriet Cane, Pietro Connecticut (Rockville) Connecticut (Waterbury) California (San Jose) Oregon (Portland) Ohio (Cleveland) Canada (Eastwood, Ontario) Washington (Dayton) Illinois (Chicago) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Missouri (St. Louis) California (Los Angeles) New Jersey (Forest Hill) New York (Huntington) New York (New York) Illinois (Chicago) Mexico (Mexico [City]) Ohio (Cleveland) Illinois (Neoga) Wisconsin (Medford) New York (New York) New Jersey (Newark) Illinois (Chicago) Oklahoma (Enid) New York (Manhattan) Canada (Ottawa) New York (New York) New York (New York) New York (Brooklyn) Washington (Seattle) Missouri (Kansas City) New York (Coney Island) Maryland (Havre de Grace) Dress Chart and Templet Tailor's Level Measuring-Rule for Tailors Skirt-Drafting Quadrant Tailor's Measuring Apparatus M Measuring Device M Tailor's Measure M Drafting-Plate Skirt-Pattern Garment-Fitter M Tailor's Measuring Device Measuring Appliance [Skirts] Tape-Measure Attachment Device for Taking Garment Measurements Pattern-Blank Tailoring Instrument Tailor's Square Measuring-Tool Measuring Device Tape-Measure Attachment Tailoring Device Garment-Fitter Measuring Device for Cutting Garments Tailor's Measuring Instrument Tape-Measure Combined Tailor's Drafting Chart and Square Tailor's Measure Garment-Fitter for Waists Clip for Measuring Appliances Tailor's Measuring Apparatus M U 148 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Residence New Jersey (Oradell) Illinois (Chicago) New York (New York) New Jersey (Newark) California (Oakland) England (Wingan, Lancaster) Missouri (St. Charles) Pennsylvania (Reading) Adjustable Garment- Pattern U.S. Patent 1,041,611 (15 Oct 1912 1,042,063 (22 Oct 1912 1,045,440 (26 Nov 1912 1,045,449 (26 Nov 1912 1,046,674 (10 Dec 1912 1,047,823 (17 Dec 1912 1,048,929 (31 Dec 1912 1,049,536 (7 Jan 1913 1,053,323 1,068,143 1,069,086 1,072,908 1,078,087 1,078,576 1,079,333 1,081,649 1,087,992 1,090,024 1,092,737 1,096,975 1,098,736 (18 Feb 1913 (22 Jul 1913 (29 Jul 1913 (9 Sep 1913 (11 Nov 1913 (11 Nov 1913 (25 Nov 1913 (16 Dec 1913 (24 Feb 1914 (10 Mar 1914 (7 Apr 1914 (19 May 1914 (2 Jun 1914 1,098,737 (2 Jun 1914 1,101.140 1,105,439 1,108,040 1,113,612 1,114,658 1.121.410 1,123,031 1,124,836 1,136,055 1,142,298 1,144,071 1,148,135 1,149,434 (23 Jun 1914 (28 Jul 1914 (18 Aug 1914 (13 Oct 1914 (20 Oct 1914 (15 Dec 1914 (29 Dec 1914 (12Jan 1915 (20 Apr 1915 (8 Jun 1915 (22 Jun 1915 (27 Jul 1915 (10 Aug 1915 Patentee Farr, Eugene M. ♦Wendorf, William Rogati, Agostino, and Leonardo Montilli Sobotker. Paul E., and David H. Ackerman Suzuki, George K. Marsden, James Baird, Jennie D. Rothenberger, George W., and William Hayden Skrell, Joseph La Maida, Thomas Johnson, Peter Buda, Pasquale d'Orsogna, Louis S., and Pietro Cane d'Orsogna, Louis S., and Pietro Cane Goldberger, Max Alfano, Louis Smoot, Charles Head Carroll, Morris Mennis, May, and William A. Mead Watters, Edward C Kramer. Harry J. Kramer, Harry J. Morrison, Margaret E. Jensen, Albert J. Watters, Edward C Glassman, Rubin Watters, Edward C Scribante, Joseph Spevacek, Vaclav Bell, Edward De Los Smith, Annesley Breirly, Felix Semonof, Wolf Agnes, Barthel Ford, Hannah Maria Washington (Seattle) New York (New York) New York (Brooklyn) New York (Manhattan) New York (Coney Island) Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Illinois (Chicago) Connecticut (Southington) New York (New York) New York (Manhattan) Colorado (Denver) Missouri (Kansas City) Massachusetts (Boston) Massachusetts (Dorchester) Nebraska (Bartley) Canada (Vancouver) Missouri (Kansas City) Maryland (Baltimore) Missouri (Kansas City) Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh) Michigan (Traverse City) Louisiana (New Orleans) New York (Mount Vernon) Massachusetts (New Bedford) Rhode Island (Providence) Illinois (Chicago) England (Bath) Title Clothing type Skirt-Measurer Tailor's Measuring Device Dressmaker's Measuring Apparatus Garment-Fitter M M W W W W Tailor's Adjustable Chart Process of Marking Cloth M? M by Perforated Lays or Templets Skeleton Skirt-Marker W M W M M W W M W M M M? W M W W W W w w Measuring Device Chart for Cutting Garments [Skirts] Tailor's Measure Method and Apparatus for Making Patterns Pattern for Drafting and Fitting Garments Pattern for Drafting Garments Tailor's Measuring Device Tailor's Measure Garment-Fitting Device Tailor's Rule Tailor's Measuring Apparatus Skirt-Measuring Tape Method of Charting Dress-Patterns Method of Laying Out A Skirt-Pattern Waist-Measuring Device Measure Dressmaker's Rule M M M Measure for Garment- Cutters W Skirt-Rule Trial or Fitting Garment Tailor's Square Garment-Fitting Device w w Chart for Garment- Patterns Skirt-Drafting Instrument Tailor's Grading System M? W and Device Therefor [sic] Tailor's Measuring Appliance M Device for Measuring, w Correcting, and Trimming Skirts and the Like U NUMBER 42 U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title 149 Clothing type 1,149,468 (10 Aug 1915) ♦Russell, Maude W., assigned to Maude W. Russell New Method Dress Tailoring and Garment Cutting Company, Inc. Missouri (Carterville) Missouri (Joplin) Garment-Templet W 1,155,690 (5 Oct 1915) Taylor, Mary C, assigned one-half to Samuel Taylor New Jersey (Perth Amboy) New Jersey (Jersey City) Skirt-Measuring Device W 1,157,085 (19 Oct 1915) Cohen. Isaac Massachusetts (Gloucester) Garment-Fitter M w 1,158,425 (2 Nov 1915) Barnes, Leonora E. Nebraska (Lincoln) Tailor's Rule M w 1,160,863 (16 Nov 1915) de Girard. Emma Miot California (Los Angeles ) Dress-Cutdng Square w 1,163,874 (14 Dec 1915) ♦Weiler, Sigmond G. Wisconsin (Milwaukee) Cutting-Chart w 1,168,431 (18 Jan 1916) Schuman, Julius California (San Francisco) Measuring Instruments M w 1,168,803 (18Jan 1916) Havrilla. Geza J. Pennsylvania (Erie) Tailor's Drafting-Chart w 1,171,623 (15 Feb 1916) Monaghan, David J. New York (Rochester) Garment-Pattern M 1,173,226 (29 Feb 1916) Taylor, Hiram H. Massachusetts (Worcester) Pattern-Drafting Device M w c 1,173,301 (29 Feb 1916) Murphy, Mary Caroline, and Mary Caroline, Jr. Massachusetts (Haverhill) Chart for Use in Cutting Garments M w 1,175,996 (21 Mar 1916) Rothenberger, George W., and William Hayden Pennsylvania (Reading) Adjustable Garment- Pattern M 1,177,901 (4 Apr 1916) Schuman, Julius California (Los Angeles) Measuring Instrument M w 1,183,845 (23 May 1916) ♦Bennett, Ella A. Iowa (Dexter) Dressmaking System w c 1,183,942 (23 May 1916) Yunkers. Edward H. Illinois (Wilmette) Tailor's Measuring Device M 1,186,552 (13 Jun 1916) Cohen, David, and Forest W. Weesner Indiana (Wabash) Shoulder-Measuring Device M 1,187,128 (13 Jun 1916) Bernhardt, Josiah D. Pennsylvania (Reading) Tailor's Measuring Device M 1,198,499 (19 Sep 1916) Widland, Theodore New Jersey (Arlington) Tailor's Adjustable Measure M 1,199,591 (26 Sep 1916) Melara, Lorenzo New York (Orlean) Tailor's Square M w 1,200.035 (3 Oct 1916) Schmit, Cellestine Leontine Wisconsin (Milwaukee) Drafting Instrument w 1,201,217 (10 Oct 1916) Miyamoto, Aki California (San Francisco) Tailor's Measure w 1.204.900 (14 Nov 1916) Picken. Mary B. Pennsylvania (Scranton) 1 Garment-Maker's Square M w c 1.205.240 (21 Nov 1916) May, Jacob New York (Richmond Hill) Skirt-Measure w 1,214,296 (30 Jan 1917) Gorton, Josephine S. Illinois (Chicago) Instrument for Drafting Patterns for Garments w 1,215,193 (6 Feb 1917) Reed, Charles E. Missouri (Warrensburg) < Tailor's Measuring Instrument M? 1,218.435 (6 Mar 1917) McLaren, Kate C Washington, D. C Chart or Master-Pattern w c 1.218,565 (6 Mar 1917) Kaeser, Robert Wisconsin (Milwaukee) Tailor's Measuring Device M 1,219,234 (13 Mar I9I7) Brainerd, Lura S. Connecdcut (Meriden) Dress-Waist Pattern w 1,221,302 (3 Apr 1917) Fischer, Joseph W. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Tailor's Measuring or Fitting Coat M 1,222,012 tlOApr 1917) Meas, Augustus New York (Niagara Falls) Garment-Balancing Device M? 1,236,272 (7 Aug 1917) Costley, Emery E. Maryland (Walkersville) Measuring Device M 1,237,958 (21 Aug 1917) Reed. Charles E. Missouri (Warrensburg) Tailor's Measurmg Instrument M? 1,248,510 (4 Dec 1917) Levi, Ernst Germany (Stuttgart) Measuring-Jacket for Ready-Made Clothing M 1,254,197 (22 Jan 1918) Berriman, Edward C Illinois (Chicago) Measuring Instrument M w?150 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY U.S. Patent Patentee Residence Title Clothing type 1,2.55.734 (5 Feb 1918) Galowitz. Joseph New York (Manhattan) Method of Making Special Patterns for Garments M W 1,260,849 (26 Mar 1918) Zech. Dorothy Indiana (Lawrenceburg) Garment-Templet W 1,261,452 (2 Apr 1918) Sorenson, Rasmus A. Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh) Apparatus for Measurmg Garments M 1.262.376 (9 Apr 1918) Moyer, Anna E. Pennsylvania (Schwenkville) Dressmaking Appliance w 1,267,054 (21 May 1918) Carboni, Augusto California (San Francisco) Measuring Device M w c 1,268,084 (4 Jun 1918) Berriman. Edward C Illinois (Chicago) Shoulder-Yoke M 1,271.486 (2 Jul 1918) Orvold, OlufL. Minnesota (St. Paul) Measuring Device M 1,272.729 (16Jul 1918) Towsley, Kathryn, and Irving S. Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) Profile-Recorder M? w 1,276.316 (20 Aug 1918) ♦Blackburn, Juditha California (Los Angeles ) Dress-Pattern w 1.278.107 (10 Sep 1918) Cherrie, Etta, and Fannie Porter Oklahoma (Enid) Measuring Device M? w 1,278.683 (10 Sep 1918) Kramer, Harry J. Massachusetts (Boston) Garment-Making-Pattern Guide 1,283.076 (29 Oct 1918) Clemens, Mattie M. L. Illinois (Chicago) Marking Device for Dressmakers w 1,288,279 (17 Dec 1918) Takahashi, Tsutomu California (San Francisco) Tailor's Measuring Instrument M 1,292,056 (21 Jan 1919) Remy, Jeanne Louisiana (New Orleans) Skirt-Measure w 1,307.232 (I7jun 1919) Barody,Jean Algeria (Constantine) Guiding and Controlling M Instrument for Cutting Clothes Index to Patentees (In the absence of a patent number, reference is by date) Abrahart, William 272,611 Ackerman. David H. See Edward James Curran; Paul E. Sobotker. Acton, William R. 4,742 Adamo, Giuseppe 710,399 Adams, Margaret E. 215,310 Adamson. James M. 736,052 Adelberg. Abraham 711,611 Agnes, Barthel 1,148,135 Ahneh. William P. 852,151 Alfano. Louis 1,081,649 Allen. William W. (23 Oct 1827) Allen. William W. 435 Allen. William W. 7,641 Aim, Janos A. 515.511 Amelang, Charles A. 466.111 Anderman. Goldie L. 851,391 Anderson. Charles 716,613 Anderson. E. Willoughby. See Moses Palmer. Anderson, Samuel 902,704 Arvidson, Pier N. 483.521Atwell, Fred A. Augsten, Josef Avery, Mary Lucinda Axford, Edward I. Baasel, William Bacon, G.W.M. Baird, Jennie D. Baker, Elvira Ball, S. X. See George Eckler. Barber, Erastus Barnes. Leonora E. Barnett, Jacob Barnett, John P., and Francis Story Barody, Jean Bartlett, Irene Merrill Bauer, Zachaeus Bauernfeind, John Baughman, J. S., and M. E. 628,296 946,191 705,194 1,113 570,834 570,835 (20 Apr 1833) 1,048.929 349,198 539 1,158,425 855,272 1,406 1,307,232 1,003,318 158,194 163.911 195,332 999,359 430,059 Baughman, Jacob S., and Melvina E. 422,282 Baughman, Jacob Schrock 675,537 Beard, G. 48,644 Beard, George 52,950 Beard, George, Jr. (5 Aug 1833) Beaudry. Joseph 143.556 Bechtel. John R. 305,501 Bell, Edward 1.124,836 Bellamy. John 169.402 Bennett, Ella A. 1,183,845 Bernhardt, Josiah D. 1.187,128 Bernheim, Matthew 422,067 Berriman. Edward C 1,254,197 1,268,084 Berry, Ellen A. 433,711 447,554 Bisceglia, S. See Salvatore Bishe. Bisceglia, Salvatore 455,811 Bishe, Salvatore, and S. Bisceglia 447,932 Bishop, William C 179 Bixby, Lucy J. 187,587NUMBER 42 15 Blackburn, Juditha 985,971 Christner, David C 389.287 Emery, John A. 226,605 1,276,316 Christoph, Emil A. 852.771 Ender, Richard 177.702 Blackburn, Richard H. 843,862 Choquette, Joseph H. 484,138 Erickson, Anton 957.150 Blizzard, Jennie 479,548 700,739 Ericson, Lars G. 465,262 Bluthenthal, Herbert Clay 629,025 Ciervo, Michael 927,948 Evan, H. P. 628,083 Bogardus, Abraham A. 4.294 Clemens, Mattie M. L. 1,283,076 Evangelista, Vincenzo 927,845 Bogushefsky, Moses 933.523 Cohen, David, and Ewing, Sarah C 112,024 Bond,Ida M. 986,041 Forest W. Weesner 1,186,552 Eyboulet, Jules Boone, Thomas R. 212,587 Cohen, Isaac 1,157.085 Francois. See Louis 743,436 Coleman. Mary V. 357,762 Desire Frenot. Bowman, Viola 670,762 Collins, Mary C 606,706 Faestel, A. L. 503,741 Brainerd, Lura S. 1,219,234 Colosimo, Giuseppe 797,176 Fairchild, Frederick A. 9,219X Breirly, Felix 1,142,298 Combs, John P. 3,820 Falk, Adolph. and Brigham, S. O. 56,892 Cone, Abraham M. 497.165 J. Finkenstein 150,853 Broadnax. John T. 455,159 Contenti, Filiberto 1,000,151 Farr, Eugene M. 1,041,611 Brolly, Hugh 277.453 Cook, W. 405,464 Faut, P. 396,396 Brooke. Emily 355,583 Corley, Simeon 18,958 Fellowes, Harry L. 977,177 Brooke, John A. 216,257 Cornwell, Willett 209,111 Fels, F., and Simon D. 379,384 Brosnahan, Michael J. 850,340 Costley, Emery E. 1,236.272 Ferguson, Mary A. 269,652 Brown, Daniel L. 534,387 Couteau, Jules 406.197 Fike, Henry P. 409,184 Bruce, Mary E. 229,088 Crakauer. Felix 558.780 Finkenstein, J. See Brundage, Henry C 2,450 Crow, Samuel G. 480,453 Adolph Falk. Buccola, Joseph 831,826 Cummins, W. G. 102,505 Fischer, Joseph W. 1,221,302 Buckley, John P. 744.475 Cunningham, Emma E. 622,419 Flenner, Lewis 2,341 Buda, Pasquale 1,072,908 655,960 Flint, Charles Ernest 869,169 Buddington, Frank E. 272,204 Cupler, Jacob C 487,237 Flores, Alonzo 440,692 Curran. Edward 718,320 Hernandez 86,829 541,311 Curran, Edward James 711,479 Follett, Edward P. 389.376 618,392 758,826 389,377 Burrows, H. M. 89,735 Curran, Edward James. 566,158 Byrnes, T. W. 282,842 assigned one-half to 583,858 Call, Libbie A. 281,666 David H. Ackerman 943,770 611,995 514.063 Curry, Harriet A. 438,607 692,510 Campbell, Ethan (6 Nov 1823) D'Alessio, Agostino 760,966 Follett, Edward P., Campbell, John R. 490,606 Dame, Richard 1.584 assigned to Zenith Cane, Pietro 1,033,061 Davis, Loyola 753,680 Manufacturing Cane, Pietro. See also Davis, Myra A. 365,800 Company 735,738 Louis S. d'Orsogna. de Caracena, Joseph O'N. 408,594 Ford, Hannah Maria 1.149,434 Carbonara, Paolo 1,011,915 De Feo, Frank 947,542 Fowler. Henry A. 35,226 Carboni, Augusto 1,267,054 de Girard, Emma Miot 1,160,863 Franklin, Mrs. Minnie. Carlstrom. John A., D'Elia, Louis 826.651 See Mrs. Minnie Jones. assigned to the Jno. Delory, Jean Louis 614,703 Freeman, Ann M. 317,332 J. Mitchell Company 918,279 De Los Smith. Annesley 1,136,055 Freeman, Sarah Sophia 722.221 Carpenter, H. M. 57,837 Derby, Lyman 16,472 Freeman. William 790,568 Carpenter, John 6.286 Di Domenico, Nicola 915,835 811,770 Carpenter, Mary F. 155.287 Dittenhafer, Catherine 56,383 Frega, G. 314,526 Carrara, Marie Louise 865,761 Dobbs, Edwin Eugene 851,279 Frega, Giuseppe 347,760 Carroll, Morris 1,090,024 Dolan, Patrick W. 78,726 362.579 Chambers, G. J., & E. 332,783 Donaldson. George 392,263 Chandler, Helen S. 708,754 MacKay 648,023 658,038 Chandler, Mary B. 270,933 Donges, Henry 4,477 Frenot, Louis Desire. Chappell, James H. 7,962X d'Orsogna, Louis S., and Jules Franf ois Charch, John S. 166,257 and Pietro Cane 1,078,087 Eyboulet 492.670 170.157 1,078.576 Galowitz, Joseph 1,255,734 Chenivesse, Jean M. Drummond, George 451.553 Ganzhorn, William 263,779 Claudius 297,570 Dubinsky, Moses 926.322 Garcelon, Jennie Lee 439,500 Cherrie, Etta, and DuBois, Ithamar 115.180 Garnier, Mardn J. 390,291 Fannie Porter 1,278,107 Dufault, John U. 890,969 Gardand. Elizabeth 355,160 Chrisdansen, S. 489,793 Eager, George R. 155,073 Gates, George Christiansen, Simon 526.378 Eckler, George, and Shattuck 310.666 526,379 S. X. Ball 3.286 Geraci, Ignatius 480,579 526,380 Eden, Edward Samuel 967.504 813,415152 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Glassman, Rubin 1,113,612 Hodges, Estell J., 1,098,737 Goerigk, Franz 906,524 and Carrie R. Mathews 540,985 1,278,683 Goff Designer Company. Hood, Eunice 363,237 Krider, J. M. 67,774 See Vina Hildebrand 455,749 Krider, John M. 11,866 Goff. Horeischi, Wenzel 882.111 La Maida. Thomas 1,068,143 Goff, Vina Hildebrand 662,620 Horn, Henrietta 490.022 Lambright, Hamilton 524,966 Goff, Vina Hildebrand, 514,622 La Ment, P. A. 57,254 assigned to Goff Horn, Marie 525.019 Lasar, Godfrey H. 190,686 Designer Company 824,784 Home. Rowlan G. 750.975 Laub, George M., Goldberger, Max 1,079,333 Hosford, Frank 782,339 assigned to May Manton Goldsberry, William H. 247.339 Hout, Emma M. 433,203 Pattern Company 825.332 Goldsmith, Edwin M. 393,552 Hummer, David. 5^^ Leciejewski, Johann 646,498 Goodhue. Melissa 613.988 Cyrus Morey. Ledoux, Francis 385,637 Goodwin, Terence J. 501,337 Hurdle, Rebecca 395,566 Lee, Harriet 1.014.885 688,300 Isham, Henry 3,603 Lemley, Jacob .155.322 Gordon, Henry H. 988,459 Jackson, H. Ayers 259,162 Lemley. Jacob, Jr. 71.520 Gorton, Josephine S. 1,214,296 327,172 Lemmond. William J. 1,556 Gothard, James 420,448 361,292 Lemont, Levi Peterson 5,327X Griffen. Stephen M. 537,285 Jackson. Louisa L. 90,363 Lennards. Nicholas 281,530 688,303 Jacobsen, Martha 324.472 Lennart. M. 441,369 754.765 Jacobson. Hamlet Peter 894.207 Lent, J. M. 91,642 Griffin. Caleb H. 195,925 Jensen, Albert J. 1.105,439 Lesh. Edwin Zachariah, 206,315 Johnson, Frank G. 365,385 and Hester 228,527 Johnson, Jennie A. 910,203 A. Woolman 825,915 234.273 Johnson, Mary A. Start. Lette. Ursula L. 107,068 Griffin, Caleb Henry 194,086 See Sampson S. Start. Leu, Mary D. 595,239 195,926 Johnson. Mary M. 911.045 Levi, Ernst 1,248,510 Griswold, Alice L. B. 281,056 911,046 Lewis, Benjamin J. 7,817X Groves, John Larue 266,137 Johnson. Peter 1,069.086 Lewis, Richard R. 441,675 Gunkel, Caspar 486,670 Johnston, J. R. 140.507 Lewis, Sophronia T. 321,986 509,080 Johum. Francis P. 419,452 Liebl, Andrew 457,124 Hall, Martha E. 435,301 Jones, Mrs. Minnie, Lillibridge, Warren 573,408 now by remarriage and Charles F. 11.868 Hamilton, Doria C 276,032 Mrs. Minnie Franklin 819.438 Linck. E.J. 252,388 Hancock, Abram O. 590,495 Kaeser. Robert 1,218.565 Linck. Emil J. 224,832 Hand. J. S. 341,572 Kahler. William, and Lingen, Hermann 207,880 Hand. John S. 299,383 Charles 574 312,211 324.022 Kaiser, George B. 794,506 Little. James E. 979,866 Hanrath. Theodore W. 1,001.142 Kantorovitz. Harris 543,253 Livingston, Annie 556,856 Harley, G.W.T. 52,566 Kelley, Mary C 535.378 Livingston. James W. 307,664 Harley, George W. T. 123,170 709.776 Long, Flora 470,809 Harrison, Margaret 188,896 Kellogg. F.J. 235,776 Lucas, Charles 5,635 Hartung, C 245,717 Kellogg, Martha E. 435.182 Luongo. Aniello 1.009,427 Havender, Joseph 460,132 937,214 Lutz, Matthaus 516,828 Havrilla. Geza J. 1.168,803 Kelly, Mark L. 455,338 McCann, James D. 334,457 Hawkins, Thomas 362.378 Kennedy, H. G. 451,247 McCardn, William J. 296,426 Hawley, DeWitt 439.747 Kenrick, Charles (8 Feb 1822) McCullough, Ophelia. 518.947 Kile, Conrad 4,596 See August F. Schrader. Hayden, William. See Kinker, Ellen K. 242,542 McDonald, Curran E. 60,028 George W. Kirk. Benjamin H. 628.475 McDowell. Albert 213,436 Rothenberger. Kirk. Harry D., 310,297 Heaford, Edwin V. 215,613 and Walter I. 661,537 342,216 Henderson, James, and Klein, Jacob 1,011,628 McDowell, William 689,685 Cooper K. Watson 6,807X Kleinberger, Markus 673,579 787,533 Hendrick. Susan M. 325,409 Knowland, Joseph, 803,778 Hendryx, Isaiah J. 1,557 and Jacob F. 2,730 McLaren, Kate C 1,218,435 Henville, Amanda M. 156,086 Koeller. Hermann. See McLellan. Robert G. 179,808 Hilder, Henry William 745,841 Fritz Mueller. McNaughton, J. See Hillman, Otto 739,178 Kohn, Samuel 649,988 A. Sinnott. Hirsch, Phillip O. 765,837 Komura, Sanemon 956.370 Madison, Ods (18 Aug 1823) Hockersmith, Alfred P. 674.442 Kramer, Harry J. 1,098,736 Malnight. John 71,192NUMBER 42 152 Maginnis, James 8,566 Moschcowitz, Schamu M. 327,961 Porter, Fannie. See Ma Loney, Mato Moses, Isaac 103.487 Etta Cherrie. Fitzmaurice 913,408 Moyer, Anna E. 1,262.376 Poulin, Hedwidge 510.364 Mandelbaum. Solomon 381,563 Mueller, Fritz, and Propach, Henry 278.180 Mannebach, Caspar 482,748 Hermann Koeller 92.873 Pudney. John (3 Sep 1831) Manton, May, Pattern Murphy, Mary Caroline, Pusey, Caroline S. 347,888 Co. See George M. and Mary Caroline, Jr. 1,173,301 Ratner, Henry W. 909,023 Laub. Musse. Bertha 467,045 Reed, Charles E. 1.215,193 Marsden, James 1,047,823 487,760 1.237,958 Marshall, William J 535,843 Nelson, Jonathan 717.253 Reeves. Edward H. 195,308 Martin, Benjamin G. 4,831 Newcomb, Abner S. 519.090 Remy, Jeanne 1.292,056 Matheson, Hugh 124,602 Newtown, Charles Rencher, Dora 678,515 Mathews, Carrie R. See Willard 871,814 Rensen, John Henry 480,036 Estell J. Hodges. Nicholas, Eliza 622,900 Ricciardi, Bartolomeo 845,319 Mathews, W. A. 560,593 Nichols, J. H. 179,046 869.264 Maxwell, Alice Audley 885.167 Nichols, James H. 169,468 Rich. Ellen P. 185,352 May, Jacob 1,205,240 Noar, F. C 385,944 Richardson. E.. M., Mayer, William H. 121.642 Nordstrom, Fred 809,836 and J. L. 616,493 Mead, William A. See Northen, Mary E. 325,216 Richardson. Samuel S. 3,522 May Mennis. Northen, Mary Eva 761,901 Richey, Albert H. 165,026 Meas, Agustus 579,491 Obermeier, Ludwig 777,913 Riley, Marsha E. 223,543 1,222,012 O'Donnell, Mary F., Robbert, Jane 748,792 Melara, Lorenzo 1.199.591 and Emma V. 734,279 Robinson. Lucie 242.696 Melcher, Michael A., O'Halloran, E. E. 431,781 Rockafellow. John S. 9,1 lOX and Lewis A. 169,564 Oliver, Thomas 3,024 Rogati. Agostino. and Melick, James T. 633,654 O'Loughlin, Robert S. 632,361 Leonardo Montilli 1,045,440 Mendenhall, James (16 Apr 1833) Olsen, John R. 534,347 Roland, Arthur Malaska 830,850 Mengel, Herman [sic] 77,704 Olson, Jennie S. 325,358 Rondel, Pierre 174,443 Mengel, Herrmann 61,349 Ordway, Ira J. 98,618 Rose, Joseph 998,039 Mennis, May, and Ormsby, Albertha A. 599,247 Roseen. E. 70,621 William A. Mead 1,092,737 Orvold. OlufL. 1,271.486 Rosenbloom. Abe N. 660,397 Michael, W. M. 97,672 Osborne, Gertrude 998.258 Ross. Greenberry (5 Apr 1826) Miles, Nancie E. 900,568 Osier, H. 38,757 Rothenberger, George W., Miller, Jonathan J. 105,355 Osse, Charles 522,800 and William Hayden 1,049,536 Miller, Lyman B., Palmer, E. Ellsworth 252,507 1,175,996 and Ellery 2,106 Palmer, Moses, and E. Rowlands, Mosses [sic] T. 10.779 Millwee, Sarah A. 126,825 Willoughby Anderson 105,486 Rubin. Constantino Guerra 996,281 Mitchell, Jno. J. Parker, George F., and Rugland, Samuel C 282.670 Company. See John Marie E. M. Whiting 740,172 305,849 A. Carlstrom. 823,738 Russell, Maude W., Miyamoto, Aki 1,201,217 Parkhill, Joseph H. 265,628 assigned to Maude Moccia, Raffaele 568,263 Pelton, Marie C 875,554 W. Russell New Moe, Gerhard 689,361 Pendell, David L. 3,130 Method Dress 865,418 Penley. Julia 337.016 Tailoring and Garment Monaghan, David J. 1,171,623 410,695 Cutting Company, Inc. 1,149,468 Mongelli, Giuseppe A. 941,936 Peterson, Erick H. 851.374 Ryan, Catherine 717.284 Monjou, Jean 283,638 Peterson, Erick H., 1,004,593 Montilli, Leonardo. assigned to Sartorial Ryan, Della 516,449 See Agostino Rogati. Pattern Company 928.691 Sartorial Pattern Moon, Edwin L. 554,710 Peyry, J. B. 626.795 Company. See Erick H. Morey, Cyrus, and Peyser, Abraham 245.654 Peterson. David Hummer 3,161 Phelps. Brigham T. 279.979 Scanlan, John 233.441 Morgan, Lucy W. 731,115 Phelps. Ernest Leslie 812.874 Schad, Anton 343,859 Moriarty, John H. 432,322 Phoebus. Virginia A. 873,266 Schafer. May S. 287.731 441,684 Picken, Mary B. 1.204,900 457,591 Moritz, Samuel S. 972,705 Pinkham. Almeda A. 602,471 Schafer. Theodore 510,994 Morrison, Margaret E. 942,338 Plant, Harry N. 782,415 Schell, Natalie 582,101 1,101,140 815,467 Schierbaum, Clara 667,739 Moschcowitz, Herman 246,536 Plant, John B. 662.817 Schindler, Franz 559,045 350,073 Pohle, Jenny 899.802 Schmidt, Frank M. 1,037,058 Moschcowitz, Schamu 111,236 Pollock, William Bloomer 320,496 Schmidt, John J.G.C 327,725154 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Schmit, Celesdne Stillwell, S. B. 4,083 Venner, William G. 458,263 Leontine 1,200,035 Stocker. Amos 15,824 Veret, Peter F. L. 2,640 Schoeppl. Joseph F. 874,997 Stockman, Terissa I. 400.504 Viau, Benjamin 487,801 Schrader, August F., Stoker, Amos 7,402 Virtue, Edward 8,600 and Ophelia AI95 Wachter. Anton 383,926 McCullough 834,762 [7402] Wakefield, Ernest 744,826 Schreckengaust, Julia A. 129,603 Storey, James R. 537.132 765,407 Schubert. Carl 411,686 552.976 Walker, Kate 254,074 Schulze. Charles F. 945,814 Story, Francis. See Walkie, Jennie 452,090 Schumacher, Jacob 353,508 John P. Barnett. Wallace, William 284,783 Schuman, Julius 1,168,431 Subera, Harry W. 185,842 Walquist, Andrew N. 1,014,542 1,177,901 Suzuki, George K. 1,046,674 Ward, Ada 1,002,613 Scott, Charles H. 584,413 Sweezy, George P. 89,091 Ward, Allen (16Jun 1821) Scott. Herman W. 537,127 109,076 5,234X Scribante, Joseph 1,121,410 Takahashi. Tsutomu 1,288,279 (7 Jan 1835) Scully, Harry Francis 435,714 Taylor, Anna Bell 648.714 415 Sebastiano, Domenico 651,208 Taylor. David Jackson 266.919 4,327 See, James W. 369.080 Taylor, Hiram H. 594.443 Waterman, Albert 843,378 Seger, Hiram 2,590 1,173.226 Watson, Cooper K. See 4,367 Taylor, Mary A. 234,821 James Henderson. Semonof, Wolf 1,144.071 Taylor, Mary C, assigned Watters, Edward C 1,096,975 Sens. Herman A. 389,327 one-half to Samuel 1,108,040 Severson, Stephen (15 Mar 1826) Taylor 1,155,690 1,114,658 Sexton, Edith Ray 938,280 Taylor, Samuel. See Watt, Thomas 4,975 Shane. Carrie 451,979 Mary C Taylor. Webster, Frank D. 943.130 Shawcross, Samuel 101,052 Ten Eyck, M. C 168,936 Webster, Ursula L. 200,234 Shelton, Zelda G. 641,411 Tentler, Aaron A. 1,944 Weesner, Forest W. See Sherman, Amos 283 Terry. Reed A. 931,896 David Cohen. Simril, Miles G. 4,923 Thompson, Ethan O. 200,779 Weidel. Joseph A. 981,043 Sinnott, W., and Thompson. Reinard 860,773 Weiler. Sigmond G. 1,163,874 J. McNaughton 79,083 Tierney, Catharine A. 322,402 Weir. John 358,903 Sipe, Thalia E. 497,503 Tierney.D. 78,338 Wells, William T. 8,895 Sipperly, David N. 3,160 Tiffany. G. E. 164,343 Wendorf, William 1.042,063 Skrell. Joseph 1,053,323 Tiffany. George S. 932,649 West, J. B. 45,780 Smith, Mrs. E. P. 137,967 Tight, Jennie C 822,874 Westcott, Benjamin F. 719,924 Smith, F. B. 164,943 Tilden, Thomas E. 1,880 Weston, James M. 19,271 Smith, John 130,161 Tilney, William DeCaux 165.383 Wetmore. Fannie 110,097 Smith, Prudence A. 460.282 Titchell, Joseph 991,103 White. J. H. 626,258 Smith, William 367.455 Tomaselli, Antonio 959,972 Whiting, Marie E.M. See Smith. William E. 101,390 Towsley, Kathryn, and George F. Parker. Smoot, Charles Head 1,087,992 Irving S. 1.272.729 Wickersham, Angeline P. 242,240 Snyder. Charles W. 546,199 Tripp, Frances A. 394.524 Widland, Theodore 1,198,499 Sobotker, Paul E., and Trochu. Athanase 483.271 Wiggins, Thomas H. 507,054 David H. Ackerman 1,045,449 Truhan, Michael 890.472 William. I. 602,117 Sole, Frank D. 798,223 Tucek, Marie 532.613 Williams, Daniel 7,591X Sorenson, Rasmus A. 1,261,452 600,050 1,136 Spevacek, Vaclav 1,123,031 622.092 REll Spilman. Peter 11,339 Turner, M. M. 46,409 [7,591X] Stace. W. R. 20.826 Ullrich, Friedrich H. 167.957 AI31 Stahl, E. 376,558 169,744 [1.136] Stahl, Edward 410.383 Ulrich, Jean 765,691 Williams, William R. 660,175 Starr, N. B. (10 July 1826) Valentine, Gustaf V. 708,506 Wilson, Harry C 664,700 Start, May A. 251,963 887,890 690,214 Start, S. S., and Mary Van Dame, J. R. 613.095 Wilson, James G. 4,687X A. S.Johnson 510.942 Van Dame, John R. 618.387 7,566X Start. Sampson S., and 790,333 Wilson, Josephine Sarah 375,972 Mary A. Start Johnson 545,139 Van Derworp. Anna M. 593,555 Windle. Susan R. 76,128 Stearns, Elvira 405,614 Vandoren, Theodore, Sr. 72,432 Wingate, Julia P. 204,120 Steiner, Carl A. 182,968 Vaughn, Archer 586,406 Wiswell, Andrew 7,112X Stevenson, J. W. 453,923 Veitch, William 517,079 256 Stillman. Millicent M. 847,844 Venner, William 185,412 Wiswell, William M. 1,119NUMBER 42 155 Wolff, Rudolph G. Woolman, Hester A. See Edwin Zachariah Lesh. Woolson, H. H. Woolson, Harry H. 456,184 225,678 909,046 Wuerfel, Julia Wurtzel, Abraham Yates, S. W. Yunkers, Edward H. 196,615 988,683 403,404 1,183,942 Zech. Dorothy Zenith Manufacturing Company. See Edward P. Follett. 1,260.849 Wuerfel, Augusta J. 364,620 Zaino, Adolph 999,425 Zwisler, James. Jr. 9,860X (Mfifimdm^JF Tables of Geographic Distribution TABLE A.—Distribution by state of instruction books at Library of Congress, arranged by decade (cities considered separately are not included in state data; sequence of data shows number of publications giving instructions for women's garments followed, in parentheses, by a total that includes booklets concerned with, but not predominantly for. women's attire; data derived from Appendix I, periodicals excluded) State 1800-09 1810-19 1820-29 1830-39 1840-49 1850-59 1860-69 1870-79 1880-89 1890-99 1900-09 1910-19 Alabama California Connecticut Georgia Illinois Chicago Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Boston Michigan Minnesota Missouri Nebraska New Jersey New York State New York City Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Philadelphia Rhode Island Texas Vermont Washington, D.C. Wisconsin (1) (1) 1(2) (1) (1) 1(2) 1(1) 1(1) 1(1) (1) (1) 1(1) - - 1(1) 7(7) (1) - 2(2) (1) - - - - 1(1) (1) - 1(1) 4(4) 1(1) 1(1) 2(2) 16(18) 15(17) 4(5) 2(3) 2(2) 2(2) - - - 1(1) (2) 1(1) - 2(2) 1(1) 1(1) - - 1(1) - - - - 1(1) 1(1) - 1(1) - - - 1(1) - - - 1(1) 2(2) - - - 6(6) 6(6) 3(3) 1(1) - 6(6) 1(1) 1(1) - 2(2) 2(2) 1(1) - 1(2) 5(9) 6(7) - 3(3) - 1(1) - - - 1(1) - - 4(4) 1(1) 1(1) (1) (12) 20(21) 10(11) 10(13) 11(11) 12(13) (1) - - - - - 1(1) - - - 1(1) 1(1) 1(1) - 1(1) 4(4) 3(3) 1(1) - 2(2) - - - - 1(1) - - 2(2) 1(1) - - 1(1) 4(4) - - 3(3) 1(1) 1(1) 1(1)156 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY TABLE B.—Distribution by state of U.S. patents that are related to drafdng systems for assorted clothing, arranged by decade (cities considered separately are not included in state data; sequence of data shows, first, the number of patents related to systems designed for drafdng exclusively men's garments, second, the number for women's garments, and finally, in parentheses, a total of these two categories plus patents not classified under either of them; data from Appendix III) State 1820-29 1830-39 1840-49 1850-59 1860-69 1870-79 1880-89 1890-99 1900-09 1910-19 Alabama 0,0(1) - - - - - - - - - Arizona - - - - - - 0.2(2) - - - Arkansas - - - - - - - 1,0(1) - - California - - - - 0,1(1) - 5,3(8) 0,1(1) 0,1(2) 1,5(10) Colorado - - - - - - - - 0,3(4) 0,1(1) Connecticut - - - - - 0,1(1) - - - 1,1(4) Delaware - - - - - - - 0,1(1) 0,0(1) - Georgia - 1,0(1) 2,1(3) - - - 0.1(1) 0,1(1) - - Hawaii - - - - - - - - 1.0(1) - Illinois - - - - - 1,0(2) 3,0(5) 3,0(3) - 1,1(2) Chicago - - - - - 0,3(3) 3,2(5) 10,8(19) 3,8(15) 5.2(10) Indiana - - - - 1,2(3) 2,1(4) 0,3(4) 0,3(4) 0,2(3) 1,1(2) Iowa - - - - - 0,0(1) 2,3(7) 2,3(5) 0.3(3) 0,0(1) Kansas - - - - - - - 0.1(1) 0,2(3) - Kentucky 0.0(1) - 1,0(1) - - 0,1(1) 1,0(1) - - - Louisiana - - - - - - - 1.2(3) - 1,1(2) Maine 1,0(1) 1.0(1) 0.1(1) - - 0.0(1) 0,3(3) 0,2(2) 0,4(4) - Maryland 0.0(1) 1,0(1) 2.0(2) - 1,0(1) 2,0(2) 1,1(2) 2,0(3) 1.1(2) 1,0(3) Massachusetts - - - - - 0,5(5) 1.0(2) 3,6(9) 4,2(6) 0,2(5) Boston - 1,0(1) - - - 4,1(6) 1,4(5) 0,1(2) 0,2(3) 0,1(2) Michigan - - - - 0,2(2) 1,1(2) 0,1(1) 1,5(8) 0.2(2) 1.0(1) Minnesota - - - - - 1,1(2) 0,2(2) 2,3(6) 0,1(1) 1,0(1) Missouri - - - - - 4,0(5) 1,1(2) 3,1(4) 1,3(5) 0,6(9) Nebraska - - - - - - 0,1(1) - 1,5(6) 0,1(2) New Hampshire - 2,0(2) 1,0(1) - - - 0,1(1) 0,2(2) 0.1(1) - New Jersey - 2,0(2) 1,0(1) 1,0(1) 1,0(1) 1,0(1) 2,0(2) 3.1(4) 1,0(3) 1,3(6) New York State 0,0(1) 2,0(3) 7,0(7) 5,1(6) 1,3(4) 4,1(6) 1.3(6) 5,4(9) 0,4(6) 2,1(9) New York City 1,0(2) 4.0(5) 3,0(3) 1,0(1) 6.1(7) 6,1(7) 1,13(16) 4.14(19) 6,16(25) 4,5(12) Ohio - 3.0(3) 3,0(3) 0,0(1) 2,3(5) 4,1(5) 3,1(4) 1,5(6) 0,1(2) 0,1(2) Oklahoma - - - - - - - - - 0,0(2) Oregon - - - - - - 0,2(2) - - 1,0(1) Pennsylvania - 3.0(5) 2,0(2) 1,0(1) - 2,0(2) 2,0(4) 1,2(3) 1,2(4) 6,2(9) Philadelphia 1.0(4) 1,0(2) 1.1(2) 1.0(1) 3,0(3) 1.2(3) 4,7(12) 1,1(2) 3,2(9) 2,0(4) Rhode Island - - - - - - 0,1(1) - 0.0(1) 0,0(1) South Carolina - - 2,0(2) 1,0(1) - 0,1(1) - - - - South Dakota - - - - - - - 0.1(1) 0,0(1) - Tennessee - - - 1,0(1) - 1.0(1) - - - - Texas - - - - - - 0,0(1) - 0.0(2) - Utah - - - - - - - - 0,1(1) - Vermont - - 1,0(1) - - - 1.1(2) - - — Virginia - - 3,0(3) 2,0(2) 2,0(2) 1,0(1) - - - - Washington - - - - - - - 1,0(1) 1,0(1) 2,0(3) Washington, D.C. - - - - 1,0(1) 2,0(2) 0,1(1) 2,0(2) 2,0(3) 0,0(1) West Virginia - - - - - 1,0(1) 1.0(1) - - Wisconsin - - - - - - 0,2(4) 1.2(4) 0,0(2) 2,2(4)JjteMtmeiAted A. McDowell & Co. See McDowell & Co.. A. Ackermann, R. See Repository of Arts .... Altman & Co., B. See B. Altman &: Co. "American Lady' 1844 The Ladies' Hand-book of Millinery and Dressmaking, with Plain Instructions for Making the Most Useful Arti- cles of Dress and Attire. New York: J. S. Redfield. Arnold, Janet 1964. Patterns of Fashion: Englishwomen's Dresses and Their Construction c.1660—1860. London: Wace and Company. 1973. A Handbook of Costume. London: MacMillan. B. Altman & Co Catalogue (Fall and Winter 1888-1889), num- ber 58. Bayne, J. Reid 1883. Bayne's Self-Instruction Book for Dress Cutting by the French Glove-fitting Tailor System, by Exact Measure: A Manual for the Use of Bayne's Paris Scale. New York: Privately printed. Bellas Hess 6f Co. Catalogue (Fall and Winter 1912-1913). Le Bon Ton (Jul 1857); (Dec 1858); (Nov 1860); (Nov 1861). Buddington, Mr. and Mrs. F. E. 1887. Supplement Studies for Those Using the Buddington Dress Cutting Machine. Chicago: Privately printed. 1896. Irutruction Book for Using the Buddington Improved Dress Cutting Machine with Dart Attachment for Cutting French Bias Basque, Enlarging Darts, etc. 1st edition. Chicago: Privately printed. Burke, Edmund. See U.S. Patent Office. Butterick & Co., E. See E. Butterick & Co. Butterick's Quarterly Advertiser (Fall 1867). Chappell, James H. 1839. The Patent Transfer System of Measuring and Delineat- ing Garments, with the Transfer Ellipsis. Philadelphia: Privately printed. 1853. The Graduated Delineator. Pennsylvania: Privately printed. [Uncatalogued sheet of paper. 57.2 x 57.2 cm, in Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress.] Chapelle. Howard I. 1967. The Search for Speed under Sail 1700-1855. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Clave, Jusdn 1859. To the Ladies: New Geometrical Method; or, Easy and Infallible Manner of Taking the Measure, Drafting and Cutting Dresses of Ladies . . . According to a System of Proportions Adapted to the Human Body. Philadelphia: Privately printed. [The Library of Congress catalogued this single sheet of paper as a book; it is, in fact, a perforated tool for a proportional system.] Cornwell, Willett 1885. Cornwell's New Improved Self Fitting Chart and Sleeve System for Cutting Ladies', Misses', and Children's Dresses Cloaks, Basques, and Postillions. Chicago: Privately printed. The Delineator (Aug 1901), volume 58(2). Demorest's . . ., Mme. See Mme. Demorest's . . . Demorest's Monthly Magazine (Jun 1872), volume 8(6); (Jun 1876), volume 12(6); (Dec 1876), volume 12(12); (Aug 1876), volume 12(8). [Issued under various titles in- cluding Demorest's Illustrated Monthly. ] Diderot. Denis 1776—1777. Supplement a I'Encyclopedie, ou Dictionnaire Raisonne des Sciences, des Arts et des Metiers .... Amsterdam: M. M. Rey E. Butterick Ssf Co. 's Celebrated Patterns of Garments for Ladies, Misses, Boys, Little Children of Both Sexes, and for Gentlemen's Shirts (1869?). E. Butterick & Co. 's Illustrated Catalogue of Patterns (Spring and Summer 1876). The Elite Dressmaker and Milliner (Mar 1878), volume 2(8). Garsault, M. de 1769. L'Art du tailleur. Descriptions des arts et metiers, volume 31. Paris: Academie des Sciences. Gartland. Elizabeth 1884. The Original American Lady Tailor System. Philadel- phia: Privately printed. Giles. Edward B. 1887. The History of the Ari of Cutting in England, Preceded by a Sketch of the History of English Costumes. London: F.T. Prewett. Messers. Kent 8c Co., and Jno. J. Mitchell & Co. [An important publication used in preparing this monograph not only for quotations for cited sources (Hearn, 1818 and 1823; Minister. 1820; and Society of Adepts, 1796) which were not available otherwise, but for much general informa- tion about the art of tailoring in England in the early 19th century.] Godey's Lady's Book (Sep 1851), volume 43; (Feb 1854), volume 48(16); (May 1854), volume 48(19); (Jun 1854), vol- ume 48(20); (Feb 1855), volume 50; (Jul 1855), vol- ume 51. Harper's Bazar (2 Nov 1867). volume 1(1); (12 Dec 1868), vol- ume 1(59); (7 May 1870). volume 3(19); (21 Oct 1871). volume 4(42); (22 Feb 1873), volume 6(8); (19 Jan 1884). volume 17(3); (5 Jul 1884). volume 17(27). Hearn. Mr. 1818. Rudiments of Cutting, with an Easy Guide to the Use of the Tape Inch Measure. England. [Reported in Giles, 1887:92-99.] 1823. Rudiments of Cutting with an Easy Guide to the Use of the Tape Inch Measure. 5th edition. England. [Reported in Giles, 1887:100-117.] 157 158 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY Hecklinger. Charles 1886. Hecklinger's Ladies' Garments, a Text Book: How to Cut and Make Ladies' Garments .... New York: Pri- vately printed. Holbrook 8c Co. 1870. Zebina Holbrook's Universal Dress Cutting Chart for Cut- ting Ladies' Dresses tsf Children's Clothes. Massachusetts: Privately printed. [Uncatalogued sheet of heavy pa- per, 78.1 X 63.2 cm, in Prints and Photographs Divi- sion, Library of Congress.] Hubert, Philip C, Jr. 1894. Occupations for Women. The Woman's Book, volume 1. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. Hummel, Charles F. 1968. With Hammer in Hand: The Dominy Craftsmen of East Hampton, New York. Charlottesville: The University Press of Virginia. [Published for The Henry Francis du Pont Winterthur Museum.] Inwood, Mrs. D. A. 1863. Mrs. D. A. Inwood's Book of Irutructions for Her Five Measure System of Dress Cutting, for Cutting Ladies' and Children's Dresses, Basques, Boy's Clothing, and Gentle- men's Shirts. Boston: Privately printed. Jackson, Louisa L. 1876. The Science and Geometry of Dress: Being a Complete Manual of Irutruction in the Art of Designing, Drafting and Cutting Ladies' and Children's Wearing Apparel.... Indianapolis: Privately printed. Johnson. Jacob 1807. The Book of Trades or Library of the Useful Arts, First American Edition. Volume 3. Philadelphia and Richmond: Jacob Johnson. Jones, Amanda 1822. The Taylor's Assistant and Family's Director Comprising Rules and Directions for Cutting Men's Clothes by the Square Rule. Middlebury: Privately printed. fournal des Demoiselles (Sep 1876), volume 44. Kidwell, Claudia B. 1976. Bicentennial Outlook: Riches, Rags, and In- between. Historic Preservation, 28(3):28—33. Kidwell, Claudia B., and Margaret C Christman 1974. Suiting Everyone: The Democratization of Clothing in America. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press. The Lady's Book (May 1839). The Lady's Magazine (Jul 1834), series 4, volume 6. Lerner, Gerda 1973. The Lady and die Mill Girl: Changes in the Status of Women in the Age of Jackson. Women and Wom- anhood in America, pages 90-102. Lexington. Mas- sachusetts: D.C. Heath and Company. Lord & Taylor Catalogue (1881) number 26 [reprinted in 1971 as Clothing and Furnishings, Lord & Taylor 1881, Princeton: The Pyne Press]; (Spring and Summer 1883), number 30. McAllister & Brother 1855. Illustrated Catalogue of Optical, Mathematical, and Philosophical Instruments, for Sale by McAllister i^ Brother, Opticians .... Philadelphia: Privately printed. McCall, James 1882. Irutruction Book for the French and English Systems of Cutting, Fitting, and Basting. New York: Privately printed. [Three secdons ("Series") with separate pagination were issued in one volume.] McCall's Bazar Glove Fitting Patterns (Fall and Winter 1884-1885). McDowell & Co., A. 1892? Madame Dorvaux's Experience: How She Became an Ex- pert in Cutting and Fitting. New York: A. McDowell & Co. [Advertising leaflet.] McDowell Garment Drafting Machine Co. 1883. Instruction Book for Drafting and Cutting Dresses, Basques, Sacks, Coats, etc. by the Garment Drafting Ma- chine, As Invented and Patented by A. McDowell. New York: Privately printed. 1891. Instruction Book for Drafting and Cutting Dresses, Basques, Sacques, Coats, etc., by the Garment Drafting Machine, As Invented and Patented by A. McDowell. [Revised.] New York: Privately printed. McMillen. Mrs. H. 1864. The American Delineator. Clyde, Ohio: Privately printed. [Perforated drafting tool.] Mallison, Mme. E. W. 1886. Dress Making Reduced to a Science: The Eclectic Lady- Tailor System of Dress Cutting. Washington, D.C: Pri- vately printed. Marzio. Peter C 1976. The Art Crusade: An Analysis of American Drawing Manuals, 1820—1860. Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology, 34: 94 pages. Melder, Keith E. 1972. Woman's High Calling: The Teaching Profession in America, 1830-1860. American Studies, 13:19-32. The Metropolitan (Feb 1872); (May 1872). Minier. Dr. E. P. 1857. Self-Teaching Dress Making System: Science Applied to Dress Cutting, the Art Perfected, Simplified and Reduced, in the Process of Drafting, to Mathematical Precision, Accompanied with Copious Illustratioru and Examples, with Full and Perfect Directions for Self-Irutruction. 2nd edidon. Cincinnati: Privately printed. Minister, Edward 1820. System of the Art of Cutting. [Reported in Giles, 1887:131-133.] Mirror of Fashion (Feb 1849), volume 11. Moschcowitz Bros. 1884. Instructioru in Dressmaking, Basting, and Fitting, as Set Forth by the Moschcoudtz Model Waist Lining. New York: Privately printed. Mme. Demorest's What to Wear (Fall and Winter 1877-78). Mme. Demorest's Quarterly Mirror of Fashion (Fall 1861); (Summer 1864). Noland, Joseph H. 1861. The Scye and Anatomical Survey System of Delineating the Human Form. Privately printed. [Uncatalogued sheet of paper, 95.2 x 63.5 cm, in Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress.] Norman, Mrs. N. R. 1881. Lessons on Centennial Patterns No. 4: Norman System Improved 1881. St. Louis: Privately printed. Palmer, Mrs. E. E. 1886. Irutructions in Dress Cutting Complete, with Diagrams NUMBER 42 159 Explaining Every Pattern, toBe Used Expressly for the Gem Tailor System .... Baraboo, Wisconsin: Privately printed. 1892. Instructioru in Dress Cutting with Diagrams, etc.. Com- plete, to Be Used Expressly for the Gem Tailor's System of Cutting. Revised edition. Chicago: Privately printed. Peterson's Magazine (Mar 1855), volume 27(31); (May 1876), vol- ume 69(5). Le Petit Messager, Modes de Paris (Feb 1867), volume 2(2). Peyry, Jean B. 1904. Irutructions [sic] Book with Diagrarru and Designs for the Conformateur and Systeme Metrique for Cutting Ladies', Children's and Gentlemen's Garments, New Edition for Ladies' and Children's Garments. New Orleans: Pri- vately printed. Phelps, Mr. and Mrs. B. T. 1883. Instructioru for Using the Excelsior Square, a Glove Fitting System for Ladies' and Children's Garments. 2nd edition. Bellows Falls, Vermont: Privately printed. Powell & Kohler 1868. Powell & Kohler's Practical System for Cutting A ll Kinds of Garments, Especially Designedfor the Use of Dressmak- ers and Private Families. Cincinnati: Powell & Kohler. Queen, James, and William Lapsley 1809. The Taylors' Instructor, or A Comprehensive Analysis, of the Elements of Cutting Garments, of Every Kind .... Philadelphia: Privately printed. [The au- thors' revision of the 1796 London publication by the Society of Adepts.] Repository of Arts, Literature, Commerce, Manufactures, Fashions and Politics (Apr 1810), volume 3(17); (Jul 1814), volume 12(67). [Published by R. Ackermann.] S. T. Taylor Co. See Taylor, S. T., Co. Smith, A. Burdette 1877—1888. Catalogue of A. Burdette Smith's Patterns (Fall and Winter). New York: Privately printed. Society of Adepts in the Profession 1796. The Taylor's Complete Guide, or a Comprehensive Analysis of Beauty and Elegance in Dress, Containing Rules for Cutting All Garments of Every Kind.... London: Society of Adepts in the Profession. [Reported in Giles (1887:79-87), who felt this was the first work on a cutting technique for tailors to be published in England. No evidence to refute his opinion has been found. Although the unorganized and vague charac- teristics of the directions disqualify this 1796 method from being called a system, the publication serves as proof that there was a desire or need for precise cutting procedures. This work was used by Queen and Lapsley as the basis for their 1809 Philadelphia publication.] Stem Brothers' Catalogue (Spring and Summer 1898), number 92. Stone, Charles J. 1901. New Superlative System of Cutting Ladies' Garments Based upon a Scientific, Sure, and Simple Method. Chicago: The Chas. J. Stone Co. Cutting School. Tabart & Co. 1804. The Book of Trades. London: Tabart 8c Co. [First American edition published by Jacob Johnson. Philadelphia, 1807.] Taylor, S. T. 1875. A System for Cutting Ladies' Dresses, Invented by S. T. Taylor.... New York: Sarah E. Taylor. 1877. A System for Cutting Ladies' Garments, Invented by S. T. Taylor .... New York: Sarah E. Taylor. 1896. 5. T. Taylor's System of Dress Cutting. New York: S. T. Taylor Co. Taylor, S. T. Co. 1911. Irutruction Book with DiagramsJor S. T. Taylor's System of Cutting Ladies' Garments. New York: S. T. Taylor Co. Tentler, Aaron 1842. A New System for Measuring and Cutting Ladies' Dresses, Cloaks, Collars, Capes, Yokes, ^c, with an Arithmetical Table, for Which the Author Received a Patent from the United States, fanuary 23, 1841. Philadelphia: Pri- vately printed. U.S. Bureau of Census 1883. Report on the Manufactures of the United States. 10th Census, 1880, volume 2. 1895. Report on Manufacturing Industries in the United States, llth Census, 1890, volume 6, part 2. 1902. Manufactures. 12th Census, 1900, volumes 8, 9. 1913. Manufactures, 1909. Thirteenth Decennial Census: 1910, volumes 8, 10. 1923. Manufactures, 1919. Fourteenth Decennial Census: 1920, volumes 8, 9. U.S. Patent Office [All U.S. patents cited herein are listed in Appendix III.] 1847. List of Patents for Inventioru and Designs Issued by the United States from 1770 to 1847 . . . Compiled and Published under the Direction of Edmund Burke, Commis- sioner of Patents. Washington: Printed by J. & G. S. Gideon. [Known popularly as "Burke's 1847 Index"; microfilm copy in U.S. Archives.] Vienna Ladies' Tailoring Institute 1905? Artistic Ladies' Tailor System. New York: Vienna Ladies' Tailoring Institute. Waller, T. 1747. A General Description of A ll Trades Digested in A Iphabeti- cal Order: by Which Parent, Guardians, and Trustees, May with Greater Ease and Certainty, Make Choice of Trades Agreeable to the Capacity, Education, Inclination, Strength, and Fortune of the Youth under Their Care. London: T. Waller. Waugh, Norah 1964. The Cut of Men's Clothes 1600-1900. London: Faber and Faber. 1969. The Cut of Women's Clothes 1600-1930. New York: Theatre Arts Books. Williams, D. 1842. The Columbian System, for Cutdng Garments, Regulated Stricdy by Measurement, &c. The Tailors' Magazine, 4:37—57. Wilson, James A. 1880. The Science of Dress Cutting by the Wilson Method of Inch Measurement San Jose: Privately printed. Wilson, James G. 1827. Report of the Present Fashions, with the Square Rules and Variations to Fit the Human Shape. New York: Privately printed. Zenith Manufacturing Co. 1904. Instructioru for Using Zenith Impression System of Gar- ment Drafting. Rochester: Zenith Manufacturing Co. (References to figure numbers in italics) Ackermann's Repository of Arts. See Repository of Arts Adjustable drafting tools for dressmakers, 2, 35, 53-68. 24a, 25, 26, 39a,b, 40, 44 Agents for dressmakers' drafdng systems: discussed. 77-80, 52, 54; mendoned, 74, 85 "Age of Enlightenment," 6 Alabama, Montgomery, 91 Amateur sewer. See Dressmaker, amateur "The American Delineator," 27 "The American Dress Chart," 31 Antoinette, Marie, 13 Apportioning. 74 Appordoning scale: discussed. 33, 35, 39, 47, 50. 53. 36, 48c; mentioned, 2 Apprentice: tailor's, 4, 8; dressmaker's. 20 "L'Art du tailleur," 2, 4, 8, 9 B. Altman & Co., 9, 65 Basques: defined, 3; mentioned, 49. 50. 53. 55, 71. 81. 88. 99, 31, 55, 59, 65 Bayne. J. Reid, 50-53. 37 Bazar Cut Paper Patterns, 85-86. 62. See also McCall, James Bellas Hess is' Co. Catalogue, 67 Bias scales. 33 Le Bon Ton, 2, 21, 44. See also Taylor, S. T. "Bon Ton Dress Chart," 33 The Book of Trades, 3. 11 Buddington, Mr. and Mrs. F. E.. 55-68. 44 "Buddington Dress Cutting Machine,' 55 Butterick, Ebenezer, 83. See also E. Butterick & Company Canada: country, 35, 68; Montreal. 68; Fennels, 79 Canvassers, 79 Carpenter's tools. 2. 6, 16, 21 Chappell. James H., 33 "Chemise de la Reine," 13 Clave, Jusdn, 26, 80, 17 Compass. 31 "Conformateur and System Metrique," 47 Copyright. 2-3, 75 "Coraco Eugenie," 14 Cornwell. Willett, 1, 24. 75, 77. 79-80, 49a,b, 50 Couturiere, mautresse. 3. 11- 12, S, 9. See also Measure, used by maitresse couturiere Covert. 5^^ Russel 8c Covert Cox 8c Minton, publishers of "American Dress Chart," 31, 20 Curtis, Ellen Louise, 74. See also Demorest, Madame Curved edged dressmaker's drafdng tools, 2, 31, 33. 35, 39, 47. 50, 53, 54, 65, 75. 21, 22a,b, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 39a,b, 40, 41a,b, 42a-c, 43a-d, 44, 48c, 49a,b Curved ruler, 32 Curves: aids for drawing, 31-32; French, 31 Curve scale, 74 "Curve Scale," 48c Cutter, 3, 4. 30, 91-93, 100, 43c Cutdng, 3 da Vinci. Leonardo. See Vinci. Leonardo da Demorest, Madame: person, 74, 51, 55; drafting system, 77. 80-81, 83; patterns, 81-83, 90. 99. 56, 57. See also De- morest's Monthly Magazine; Mme. Demorest's Quarterly Mirror of Fashion; Mme. Demorest's What to Wear Demorest, William J., 74. See Demorest, Madame Demorest's Illustrated Monthly. See Demorest's Monthly Magazine Demorest's Monthly Magazine, 8\, 51 Description of All Trades, 4. 11 "Developing Pattern," 32 Discourses on the Fine Arts, 7 "Dress Chart." 35 "Dress Cutdng Machine," 35. 24a,b. See also Plant, John B. Dressmaker: discussed. 74, 77. 79, 80,34, 38, 43c, 52c; male, 85. See also Apprentice; Carpenter's tools; Couturiere, mait- resse; Dressmaking; Mantua-maker; Seamstress Dressmaking. See also Couturiere, maitresse; Dressmaker —amateur, 1. 2, 80-81. 90. 93, 103 —professional: trade. 1, 2, 16-20. 45, 74, \03, Frontispiece, 11, 31, 38, 55, see also Dressmaker, Fashion changes. Pin-to-the- form; use of drafting system, 1, 20, 25, 45, 80, 81. 90-93, 101-102, 103; tools other than specialized drafdng tools, see Curves, Patterns, Tape measure, Tracing wheel, Yardstick Dress Making Reduced to a Science; The Eclectic Lady-Tailor System of Dress Cutting, 50 "Dress Model," 51 Duncan. Lillian, 55, 91, 43a—d. See also "McDowell Garment Drafdng Machine" Duval, Marie E., 90. See also "Dress Cutting Machine'' E. Butterick 8c Company, 83-85. 90. 99, 58, 59, 60 Eckhart. Emma, 55, 90. 63 The Eclectic Lady-Tailor System of Dress Cutting, 31. See also Malli- son, Mme. E. W. 1876 Internadonal Exhibition, 77, 83, 28, 50, 51 Elliptic Sewing Machines, 85 Empire style, 13 "Emporium of Fashions." 51, 55. See also Demorest, Madame England: country, 3, 4, 6. 7. 18, 21, 30; London, 7, 85; Man- chester. 85 "Excelsior Square.' 36. See also Phelps, Brigham Thomas Fashion changes: effects on tailor's trade, 6. 41; effects on dressmaking trade. 12, 13, 16-18, 45. 93; creadngneed for dressmakers' drafdng systems, 20, 35, 99, 101; effects on dressmakers' drafdng systems, 28-30, 35, 44, 54, 55, 75, 80, 81, 100, 102, 103; effects on ready-made industry, 98, 67 Fashion plates, 13-16, 18, 5, 10, 12, 13, 30 Fitter, 68 160 NUMBER 42 161 Follett, Edward P., 74. See also Zenith Manufacturing Company Fowler, creator of early system. 21 — 24, 25 Fowler, Abraham, 24 Fowler, Henry, 24 Fowler, James, 24 Fowler, John, 24 Fowler, Lorenzo Niles. 24 Fowler, Lydia Folger, 24 Fowler, Mahlon, 24 Fowler, O.S. & L.N.. 25 Fowler, Orson Squire, 24-25 Fowler, Rennels, 24 Fowler, Simeon L., 24 Fowler, William, 24 Fowler and Wells, 24, 25 Fowler's Theorem. 24, 25 France: country, 7, 68; Paris, 13. 44, 68. 85, 30 Frazier, Mrs. H. L., 91 French curves. 31. See also Curves French dressmakers. 74 Garsault, M. de, 3, 12. 2, 4, 8, 9 Gardand. Elizabeth, 45 Giles, Edward B., 31 Godey, Louis A., 13 Godey's Lady's Book, 2, 13, 16. 20, 80-81, 13, 14 Greece, Athens, 7 Guilds, 3 Hand tailor's tool, 31 Harper's Bazar, 77, 85, 52 Harroun, Elmira, 75. See also Cornwell. Willett Hearn. Mr., creator of early tailors' drafdng systems, 9 Hecklinger, Charles, Frontispiece Herculaneum, 7 Home sewer. See Dressmaking, amateur Horse shoes, 31 Howe, Elias, Jr., 61. See also Sewing machine How to Cut and Make Ladies' Garments, Frontispiece Illinois, Chicago, 74, 99, 102 Immigrants, 20 "Impression System.' 48a—c "Improved Dress Cutting Machine," 68. See also Buddington, Mr. and Mrs. F. E. Indentures, 4 Indiana: Danville, 31, 20; Richmond, 47, 32 Inwood, Mrs. D. A., 77-78 Italy, 7 Jackson, Andrew, 99 Jackson, Louisa L., 47, 75, 32, 33 Kansas, Topeka, 33, 22a,b Kohler. See Powell & Kohler The Ladies' Hand Book, 80 Ladies' Report of New York Fashions, 83 The Lady's Book. See Godey's Lady's Book The Lady's Magazine, 12 Lapsley, William. See Queen, James, and William Lapsley Le Brun. Vigee. 13 Lemmond. William J., 7 Library of Congress, v, vi. 2-3, 33, 99, 101, 68 Lindsay, James, 57 Lord 8c Taylor, 98, 64 Louis XIV, 3, 7 Louisiana. New Orleans, 68 McCall. James, 85-86, 61, 62 McDowell. Albert, 53. 54-55, 91, 100,39a,b, 41a,b, 42a-c, 43c. See also McDowell 8c Co., A.; "McDowell Garment Drafdng Machine"; "McDowell Sleeve Machine' McDowell & Co., A., 53, 65, 66. 74, 75, 77, 91, 101,38, 47, 52, 63. See also McDowell, Albert; "McDowell Garment Drafdng Machine"; "McDowell Sleeve Machine" "McDowell Garment Drafdng Machine," v, 53-55. 66, 71, 77, 90, 101, 38, 42a,b, 43a,d, 52. See also McDowell, Albert; McDowell & Co., A. McDowell Garment Drafdng Machine Co. See McDowell 8c Co.. A. "McDowell Sleeve Machine,' 55. 90, 42c, 43b McMillen. Mrs. H., 27-28, 18 Madison, Otis, 9 Mail order: custom made clothing, 91-93; ready-made cloth- ing, 98 Maine, Biddeford. 35, 39. 24a,b Maiitresse couturiere. See couturiere, maitresse Mallison, Mme. E. W., 47-49. 90, Frontispiece, 31, 34 "Man of Perfect Proportion.' 7 Mantua: defined. 3—4; mentioned. 12 Mantua-maker. 3-4, 12, 13. See also Dressmaker; Mantua- making trade Mantua-making trade, 2, 11 — 13. See also Dressmaking, profes- sional; Mantua-maker Markley & Son. manufacturer of dressmakers' drafdng system, 33-35. 22a,b, 23 Massachusetts: Lawrence, 33. 21; Leominster, 83; Sterling. 83; Indian Orchard. 90; Boston, 99, 102, 55 Measure: used by tailor, 4 — 6, 7. 8; used by maitresse couturiere. 11. See also Strips; Tape measure Measure book, 90, 28, 36, 40, 63 "Measurer," 71. 48a Measuring tape. See Tape measure The Metropolitan, 83. See also E. Butterick & Co. Milliners. 79 Minier. Dr. E. P., 21. 41. 77 Minister, Edward, 9, 30 Minton. See Cox 8c Minton Mirror of Fashion, 32 Mme. Demorest's Quarterly Mirror of Fashion, 16, 81,15a,b. See also Demorest, Madame Mme. Demorest's What to Wear, 83. See also Demorest, Madame Moschcowitz, Herman, 85—86 Moschcowitz, Schamu. 85-86 Mosher. C E.. 33. 35. 75, 21 Naval architect, compared to dressmaker, 16-18 New England states. 68 "New Geometrical Method," 26 New Jersey, Jersey City. 57 New York: New York, 21, 24, 39, 44. 53, 75. 77. 83. 85. 99. 102, 162 SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY 27a-c; Rochester, n\,48a-c, 54; Brooklyn,-^irf; Elmira,5i Noland, Joseph H., 32. 50 Norman, Nancy and George, 75 Ohio: Cincinnad, 21, 30, 77, 19a,b; Clyde, 27, 18 P. S. Duval &: Son, 26 Palmer, Mrs. E. E., 74-75 Patents. See United States Patent Office The Patent Transfer System, 33 Pattern diagrams, 16, 18 "Pattern Marker." 68, 45 Patterns: used by tailors, 4, 7. 8, 31; used to cut ready-made clothing. 8, 100; not used by Maitresse couturiere, 11; made by pin-to-form technique, 13; made from used lining, 13, unsized, 16, 18, 44-45. 81. 99, 15a,b, 54, 55; drafted by dressmakers' system, 26, 28, 30, 31. 35, 54, 55, 68. 71. 74. 81, 86-88,91,57,55; massproduced sized. 81-90, 93, 99, 102, 103, 104, 51. 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 62 Pennsylvania: Philadelphia, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 77. 99. 102, 17, 45, 46, 51; Allentown, 90, 63; Aquaschicola, 90; Bow- manstown, 90; Carbon, 90; Lehighton, 90; Litde Gap, 90 Perforated drafdng tools. 2, 24, 26, 28, 30, 31. 33, 35, 39, 47, 74, 75, 80, 83, 85,16a-c, 17, 18, 20, 22a,b, 23, 24a,b, 32, 33, 49a,b, 51 Peterson's Magazine, 13. 16, 86 Le Petit Messager, 44. See also Taylor, S. T. Peyry, Jean B., 68-71. 47 Phelps, Brigham Thomas, 50, 53, 36 Phrenology. 24 Pin-to-the-form, 13. 16. 18, 93. 11 Pingat, E., 85 Plant, Harry N., 39 Plant, John B., 35-39. 90, 24a,b, 25, 26 Pollard, A. W., 83. See also E. Butterick 8c Co. Pollock, William Bloomer, 68. 46 Pompeii, 7 Poole. Margaret Willamina, 74. See also Demorest, Madame Powell &: Kohler, creators and manufacturers of dressmakers' drafdng systems, 20, 30. 31, 41, 75, 19a,b Pre-Tentler system, 21 — 25, 28. See also Tentler. Aaron A. Proof measurements, 8, 26, 30 Proportionable scale. 7, 8 Proportional theories: used by tailors, 7—9; used in drafdng systems for dressmakers, 21, 24, 28. 30. 31; applied to ready-made clothing for women, 98 Queen, James, and William Lapsley, 6, 7, 9 Ready-made clothing: discussed, 100; men's. 8, 94. 102, 1()3; women's. 80, 94-98. 102- 103, 104,65, 66a, 67; mentioned, 83, 57 Repository of Arts, 5, 10 Reynolds, Sir Joshua, 7 Rhode Island, Pawtucket, 35 Roorbach, O. A., 85 Royal Academy, 7 "The Royal Chart." 85. 61. See also McCall, James "Ruler for Cutdng Out Garmets.' 9 Russell, partner of Moschcowitz brothers, 85 Russell 8c Covert, seller of McCall's drafdng system, 85 S. T. Taylor Company, 41, 45. See also Taylor, S. T. "S. T. Taylor's System of Dresscutting," 45. See also Taylor, S. T. "Scale for Draughting Garments," 9 School teachers, 79 Scodand, Glasgow, 85, 61 Seamstress, 1, 3, 4. 20, 81 "Self-Fitting System." 75, 49a,b. See also Cornwell. Willett Semi-Annual Report of Gentlemens' Fashions, 83. 5^^ also E. Butterick &: Co. Sewing machine, 20, 79, 80, 85, 31, 53, 61 Singer, Isaac M., 20. See also Sewing machine Sizing systems, I. 104 Skirt drafdng systems, 35, 71, 93, 25 Sleeve drafting systems, 25, 35, 49, 50-53, 55, 71, 75, 23, 26, 42c Slop makers. 7, 8 Smith, A. Burdette, 86-88 Society of Adepts, 6, 9 Squares: incorporated into dressmaker's drafting systems, 2, 39, 41. 49, 50-53. 103, 28, 29, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 40, 43d; tailor's, 9, 6, 7. See also Carpenter's tools Starr, N. B., 9 Stern Brother's Catalogue, 66a,b Stone, Charles J[ohn], 93 Strips: used as part of drafting tool, 2. 30, 41,19a,b, 28, 29; used for measuring, 24, 27. See also Measure; Tape measure Suits, women's, 93 Tabart 8c Co., 11 Tailleur, 3 Tailor: ladies, 93; mentioned, 83. See also Apprentice; Tailoring Tailoring: trade, 2, 3, 4-6, 7-8, 9, 20-21, 31, 33, 93,1, 2,3, 4, see also Propordonal theories; drafting systems, 2. 7—9, 74, 98, 6, 7; effect of drafdng systems on dressmaker's drafdng systems. 9, 20-21, 24, 41. 45; tools other than specialized drafting tools, see Compass, Curves, Hand tailor's tool. Horse shoes. Measure. Patterns, Squares, Tape measure, Yardstick Tape measure: used by tailor, 2, 7, 8, 9, 7; used by dressmakers 16, 24, 86. 62; used by dressmaker as part of a drafting system, 47-49, 53. 68. 71, 74, 86, 101, 24b, 34 Taper scale, 35 Taylor, S. T., 2, 21, 39-45, 77, 80, 91, 28, 29, 54. See also Le Bon Ton; Le Petit Messager; S. T. Taylor Co.; "S. T. Taylor's System of Dressmaking" Tentler, Aaron A., 21, 25-26, 28, 31, 16a-c. See also Pre- Tender Tracing wheel, 43d Trade cards, 78, 80, 53, 54, 55, 57 Trade exhibitions, lb—11 United States Circuit Court, District of Indiana, 75 United States Patent Office: patents for drafdng systems, 2, 3, 75. 99- 101,6, 7, 16a-c, 32, 36, 39a,b, 41a,b, 42a-c, 45, 46, 69; mentioned, v Vermont, Bellows Falls, 50. 36 Vienna Ladies Tailoring Institute, 39, 27a-c Vinci, Leonardo da, 7 "W. Cornwell's Chart," 49a. See also Cornwell, Willett NUMBER 42 Washington, D.C, 47, 91, 34 Wells, Charlotte Fowler, 25 Wells, Samuel Roberts, 25 Wickersham, Angeline P., 68, 45 Wilder, J. W., 83. See also E. Butterick & Co. Wilson, James A., 50, 53, 75, 35 Wilson, James G., 9, 21, 30, 6 Wisconsin, Baraboo, 74 Women: education, 2; employment, 18-20, 77-78, 79, 81. See also Agents for dressmaker's drafting systems; Dressmaker; 163 Couturiere maitresse; Canvasser; Mantua-maker; Milliners; School teachers; Seamstress The Women's Book, 90 Woodward and Lothrop, 91 Worth, Charles Frederick, 85 Yardstick, 6, 16 Zaun, Annie C, 91 Zenith Manufacturing Company, 71-74, 48a-c *U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 O—275-876 REQUIREMENTS FOR SMITHSONIAN SERIES PUBLICATION Manuscripts intended for series publication receive substantive review within their originating Smithsonian museums or offices and are submitted to the Smithsonian Institution Press with approval of the appropriate museum authority on Form SI-36. Requests for special treatment—use of color, foldouts, casebound covers, etc.—require, on the same form, the added approval of designated committees or museum directors. Review of manuscripts and art by the Press for requirements of series format and style, completeness and clarity of copy, and arrangement of all material, as outlined below, will govern, within the judgment of the Press, acceptance or rejection of the manuscripts and art. Copy must be typewritten, double-spaced, on one side of standard white bond paper, with IVi" margins, submitted as ribbon copy (not carbon or xerox), in loose sheets (not stapled or bound), and accompanied by original art. Minimum acceptable length is 30 pages. Front matter (preceding the text) should include: title page with only title and author and no other information, abstract page with author/title/series/etc, following the establish- ed format, table of contents with indents reflecting the heads and structure of the paper. First page of text should carry the title and author at the top of the page and an unnum- bered footnote at the bottom consisting of author's name and professional mailing address. Center heads of whatever level should be typed with initial caps of major words, with extra space above and below the head, but with no other preparation (such as all caps or underline). Run-in paragraph heads should use peridd/dashes or colons as necessary. Tabulations within text (lists of data, often in parallel columns) can be typed on the text page where they occur, but they should not contain rules or formal, numbered table heads. Formal tables (numbered, with table heads, boxheads, stubs, rules) should be sub- mitted as camera copy, but the author must contact the series section of the Press for edito- rial attention and preparation assistance before final typing of this matter. Taxonomic l^eys in natural history papers should use the alined-couplet form in the zoology and paleobiology series and the multi-level indent form in the botany series. If cross-referencing is required between key and text, do not include page references within the key, but number the keyed-out taxa with their corresponding heads in the text. Synonymy in the zoology and paleobiology series must use the short form (taxon, author, yearpage), with a full reference at the end of the paper under "Literature Cited." For the botany series, the long form (taxon, author, abbreviated journal or book title, volume, page, year, with no reference in the "Literature Cited") is optional. Footnotes, when few in number, whether annotative or bibliographic, should be typed at the bottom of the text page on which the reference occurs. Extensive notes must appear at the end of the text in a notes section. If bibliographic footnotes are required, use the short form (author/brief title/page) with the full reference in the bibliography. Text-reference system (author/year/page within the text, with the full reference in a "Literature Cited" at the end of the text) must be used in place of bibliographic footnotes in all scientific series and is strongly recommended in the history and technology series: "(Jones, 1910:122)" or ". . . Jones (1910:122)." Bibliography, depending upon use, is termed "References," "Selected References," or "Literature Cited." Spell out book, journal, and article titles, using initial caps in all major words. For capitalization of titles in foreign languages, follow the national practice of each language. Underline (for italics) book and journal titles. Use the colon-parentheses system for volume/number/page citations: "10(2):5-9." For alinement and arrangement of elements, follow the format of the series for which the manuscript is intended. Legends for illustrations must not be attached to the art nor included within the text but must be submitted at the end of the manuscript—^with as many legends typed, double- spaced, to a page as convenient. Illustrations must not be included within the manuscript but must be submitted sepa- rately as original art (not copies). All illustrations (photographs, line drawings, maps, etc.) can be intermixed throughout the printed text. They should be termed Figures and should be numbered consecutively. If several "figures" are treated as components of a single larger figure, they should be designated by lowercase italic letters (underlined in copy) on the illus- tration, in the legend, and in text references: "Figure 9b.." If illustrations are intended to be printed separately on coated stock following the text, they should be termed Plates and any components should be lettered as in figures: "Plate 9^." Keys to any symbols within an illustration should appear on the art and not in the legend. A few points of style: (1) Do not use periods after such abbreviations as "mm, ft yds, USNM, NNE, AM, BC." (2) Use hyphens in spelled-out fractions: "two-thirds." (3) Spell out numbers "one" through "nine" in expository text, but use numerals in all other cases if possible. (4) Use the metric system of measurement, where possible, instead of the English system. (5) Use the decimal system, where possible, in place of fractions (6) Use day/month/year sequence for dates: "9 April 1976." (7) For months in tabular list- ings or data sections, use three-letter abbreviations with no periods: "Jan, Mar, Jun," etc. Arrange and paginate sequentially EVERY sheet of manuscript—including ALL front matter and ALL legends, etc., at the back of the text—in the following order: (1) title page (2) abstract, (3) table of contents, (4) foreword and/or preface, (5) text, (6) appendixes' (7) notes, (8) glossary, (9) bibliography, (10) index, (11) legends. ■'MS''*^^ *■ ' i.%f«k^]