Lined vs. Unlined

[civilwar1966]

What is the benefit of lining a jacket vs. unlined? Historical accuracy?

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

A combination of historical accuracy, comfort, and longevity. If you're talking Federal fatigue blouses (sack coats) they were issued 4 to 1 lined versus unlined. If you're talking CS jackets, the vast majority were lined, particularly those made of wool jean or satinette, as they fray tremendously if not lined. The jacket would fall apart much faster without lining. Plus, a cotton or linen lining is an added comfort to getting the itchy material next to you. One other fact to look at , believe it or not, it takes longer to sew an unlined garment if flat-felling all the seams, so from a production standpoint, both governments looked at saving time and money, and lining a coat or jacket did both

[dogcompanylt]

Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but I believe I read somewhere that the US depots issued Unlined Bouses in the summer months. Though they were not made in great quantities as Ross stated.

[civilwar1966]

The jacket in question is a New York state issued. Thanks for your input-

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but I believe I read somewhere that the US depots issued Unlined Bouses in the summer months. Though they were not made in great quantities as Ross stated.

That isn't an absolute. There were several units and commanders who requested them in the summer months, and the system offered what they had at the time. The original intent was to issue unlined coats to recruits and lined coats to the rest. That didn't always happen either. The gyst is, depending upon what QM reports you read (and I hope Mike Shaffner or someone else will pipe in), it was either 3-1 or 4-1 lined versus unlined for the reasons I mentioned earlier. Now as to a NY state jacket, I'm not an authority on those, so I'll withhold judgement. I'll leave that for Rachel Kelly or other authorities on NY garments.

[zouavennc]

When it comes to New York State Jackets the lining on the orginals are in the front and sleeves. Polished cotton in the front and muslin in the sleeves. In 1861 the 38th NYSV felt that even that was too much and ripped out the cotton lining and the jackets began to fall apart (read shoddy workmanship). In Colonel J. Hobart Ward's papers, New York Public Library, he has an order to cease that practice and he had an order put in for unlined fatigue blouses to be issued to the regiment for the hot summer months.
Michael Zatarga
9th NYSV

[Pvt Schnapps]

The ORs (Series III, Vol. 5, p. 285) report total purchases of 3,685,755 lined sack coats, 1,809,270 unlined, and 530,144 knit. This gives us 6,025,169 overall, of which 61% were lined, 30% unlined, and about 9% knit.

Just to complicate matters, elsewhere in the Volume the sack coats issued by the Steubenville depot are described as "lined", although a surviving example examined in the journal of the Company of Military Historians is only lined in the sleeves. This raises the possibility that other sacks described as "lined" were similarly only partially lined.

I don't know of any general rule by which unlined sacks were mostly drawn in the summer months, but there might be some correspondence out there.

As far as knit, I have no idea when they would have been most comfortable or what it was like to wear one in the field.

[Regular3]

Just to complicate matters, elsewhere in the Volume the sack coats issued by the Steubenville depot are described as "lined", although a surviving example examined in the journal of the Company of Military Historians is only lined in the sleeves. This raises the possibility that other sacks described as "lined" were similarly only partially lined.

And to still further complicate matters, the Army Regulations specified that the fatigue coat was to be made without sleeve or body lining - except for those issued to recruits. Of course I realize that fine distinction went out the window when the war started and the U.S. government turned to the ready-to-wear clothing industry to supply its needs, but there it is just the same.

[Pvt Schnapps]

And to further further complexify matters, we have on p. 278 of the same volume the number of items on hand in the depots on June 30, 1865 -- 751,544 lined sack coats, 636,645 unlined, and 21,870 knit, for a total of 1,410,059.

So looking at the totals again, the relative percentage of *issued sacks (6,025,169 less 1,410,059 = 4,615,110) becomes lined (3,685,755 - 751,544 = 2,934,211/ 4,615,110) 64 %, unlined (1,809,270 - 636,645 = 1,172,625/ 4,615,110) 25%, and knit (530,144 - 21,870 = 508,274/ 4,615,110) 11%.

So, among the number of sack coats actually issued, the ratio of lined to unlined was higher than the overall numbers would indicate, nearly two and a half to one, and the number of knit sacks in actual service came to more than one out of ten.

What's also interesting is that of the three types, a much higher ratio of unlined remained in stock at the end of the war compared to lined or, especially, knit.

There are several ways to read that. Perhaps lined and knit were more popular generally, despite their greater cost. Or maybe, because the war ended in spring, the QM department got stuck with a large number of unlined sacks they expected to issue in summer. In any case, while less than a quarter of lined coats remained in stock at the end of the war, and only 4% of the knit, more than a third of the army's unlined sack coats remained unissued.

[RJSamp]

If you're talking Federal fatigue blouses (sack coats) they were issued 4 to 1 lined versus unlined.

Having fun with 5th grade math? 3.9 million linned vs 1.9 million unlinned fatigue blouses does NOT = a 4:1 ratio. Even calling 600 thousand knit blouses unlinned doesn't bring it to a 4:1 ratio.