Ulzana's Raid - Scout Dress

[Delmonico]

Yep, I knew it...

Well I tend to be fair, someone even used my camera and I think I'm saying, "about 10 minutes till the snow gets here."   

[Blair]

Del,

I have never been real fond of Corned Beef.
While in the US Navy, I was waiting in the chow line (aboard ship) for it to open for serving.
Watched one of the Mess cooks open three 25 lbs. cans of Corned Beef in a row. Each of these cans had maggots corned right along with the Beef. This meat had to be maggot infested before it was corned or otherwise preserved!
This was not served to the crew! It was "Shit" canned as we called it. "Thank you Cookie!"
But, it does make the statement toward contracting out to the CHEAPEST producer for Government bids.
Shit canning such large portions of poorly preserved meats, 100 + years ago simply wasn't an option.
Few people understand what is involved with preserving meats today. Thanks for your posting.
My best,
Blair

[Delmonico]

Canned corned beef aka bully beef (Brit) or embalmed beef is not the same as corned beef brisket.

If doing a full PC military ration it does not matter if you like it or not, that is the rations and either eat it or go hungry.

Canned corned beef was not issued to the US Army till around the time of the Span/Am War and was used a lot in WWI.  WWII SPAM pretty much took it's place.

[Blair]

Del,

This canned Corned Beef, in 25 lbs. cans was, (for the most part) full Brisket of corned beef.
Once it had been canned, there was no way to inspect it other opening the can or by weight.

Still not fond of Corned Beef. However, Corned Beefed Hash with eggs on a cool morning, is something can enjoy.
My best,
Blair

[Delmonico]

Canned corner beef is made from beef graded as utility, canner and cutter and the whole carcass is deboned and coarsely chopped after brining in salt and a nitrate.   There is only as much brisket as each carcass has on it.   Most sold today in the US and Great Britain (much more popular in Great Britain)  is processed in Brazil from range cattle.  Prior to the Falklands war, most of it was processed in Argentina, but containing  tensions between the two caused the change.   

[Blair]

Okay Del,

Where do you want to go from here?

I thought I was supporting what you had said about preserved meats. Was I incorrect?
Was I incorrect in what I said, or was I incorrect in my offer to support your position on preserved meats?
None of which has anything to do with the original poster question.
My best,
Blair

[Delmonico]

We are talking about two different methods, one is with a salt/nitrate  brine and the other is canning, so take it where you want.  BTW the nitrate is not needed but it lets the beef have a pink color rather than a grey color.

The calling of the canned corn beef as corned beef brisket was not true and I explained it.   

So I don't see the problem other than you seem to be a bit offended that I made everything clear.  Why are the true facts a problem coming out?   

And I was talking about brined/salt beef as being a more suitable product to buy at the store for Civil War rations over the salted fatback people buy and call salt pork.   Canned corn beef was not on the market till 5 or more years after the Civil War.   

[Niederlander]

Returning to our regularly scheduled program.....I was just looking at the Time-Life book "The Scouts".  There are indeed some good pictures of scouts in authentic dress.  This is one case where paintings from the period might be a better source that photographs, as no one seems to have spent a lot of effort to photograph scouts as they appeared in the field.  (There aren't even a lot of pictures of the ARMY in the field from that period, either.)  While the paintings can obviously be a bit romanticized, the better painters had at least SEEN these people as they actually were, so they're not a bad source.

[Bruce W Sims]

I know this may sound silly....but with as much talk as there was earlier about diet, I'm wondering if there should be more in the way of smell and fat stains on the clothing. I'm not saying that re-enactors need go to the trouble of splashing or spattering themselves with grease to look authentic. What I am suggesting is that with as much open-fire cooking as folks did, and as much fatty foods as they were exposed to, seems like a lot of those old old sepia photo-s would reveal a kind of grimey, greasy look to the front of the shirts and jackets as well as the front of the thighs. Put another way, doesn't it seem like a lot of those photo-s show folks to be a bit tidy? I am reading "50 Years on the Trail" by Nelson and his report of living on the plains for months at a time --- and as much hunting and trapping as he did--- I'm guessing the guy should have had a pretty good build-up of stain and organic material on his front. Thoughts?

BTW: I also noticed that Lancaster seems to have laces dangling on the front of his coat as well as what appear to be buttons. I'm thinking that this might be as matter of using whatever is at hand, but it prompt a question. Are there any resources that speak to the providers that sutlers would have gotten their "dry goods" from for resale on the Frontier. I notice that in quite a few of these threads there are references to "dry goods" being sold, but little to describe what and where these goods would have been secured from. Montgomery Wards?  Sears? Did the Military have contracts with particular contractors that furnished goods for resale? Sometimes, for instance,  when I am looking at items for the Military there are things such as pistol holsters that a Service Member might have bought for themselves. I'm wondering if these were locally produced or if there were sources back East that turned such things out in numbers?  Thoughts?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[St. George]

The 'dry goods' that you ask about were supplied by the large mail order houses and wholesalers.

The two largest companies with probably the best-known catalogs were 'Sears, Roebuck & co. and Montgomery Ward & Co.' - they - and wholesalers in Omaha, Chicago and New York supplied the West - initially via steamboat and wagon - then by rail.

The military contracted for foodstuffs on the open market - their Quartermasters purchased locally what livestostock and produce the Post needed, and they were known to drive a hard bargain.

Articles of issue - such as a holster - were provided by the Quartermaster Department - through the Arsenal  - sometimes Rock Island, sometimes Benecia when talking about leather - and issued to the unit as Unit Property, and kept on the Property Books.

If lost or damaged, the soldier who was issued said item was then docked his pay and a new item then issued in place of the lost one - there was no 'store' for him to walk into to buy a replacement.

The Army did not operate a 'Quartermaster Sales' operation during the era - they did not purchase for re-sale - if a soldier wanted a spare, he stole it and hoped not to get caught, or he bought a similar item from a Sutler, who would usually overcharge him for the privilege, but it was often of better quality.

Soldiers 'could' decide to 'lose' an item, if the item had a value to them, like a rubber groundsheet or wool blanket - but money was money, and there was damned little of it in his pockets at the best of times.

Another way was to buy items from the effects of the deceased, and that was a good way to send money home to a loved one.

Soldiers of the Frontier Army weren't paid much - 'when' they were paid - and they didn't accumulate much, because there was no need - they weren't the 'gear whores' of today's Army, with footlockers crammed full of fobbit gear, Rambo knives and Wiley-X shades.

Scouts Out!

[Trailrider]

Scouts, teamsters, packers and other employees of the Quartermaster Dept., were paid more than the individual private soldier. In 1875-76, for example, a teamster was paid $30 per month, plus one meal a day! Scouts, such as Buffalo Bill Cody, the Norths, et al, were paid as much as $100 per month! Civilian employees were often in the field with the troops, and supplied with firearms and ammunition, depending on their duties and the likelihood of getting into a firefight with Indians. Sometimes, a trusted scout, such as Frank Gruard were sold a Colt's revolver, and also given another (by General Crook, in this instance). It wasn't uncommon for these people to "lose" a rifle, pistol, etc. In one case, a teamster had around $16 deducted from his pay for the loss of a Trapdoor Carbine, cal. .45, and 100 rounds of ammunition! The latter sounds a bit suspicious IMHO. Essentially, he bought the piece and ammo, since loss or expenditure of ammo in combat was not chargeable! In another case, one of the five Sharps Carbines charged against Co. G, 3rd Cavalry, probably was sold to a young civilian teamster through this process, and he carved his name in the stock to distinguish it from the other four pieces. These were issued to these employees, along with ammo (there were 50,000 rounds of .50-70 ammo a Sidney Barracks, NE, in late fall 1875)! It is probable this teamster liked the carbine so much that he "acquired" it, though the records don't confirm it. There is sufficient circumstantial evidence to confirm the theory, however.

[Charles Isaac]

Some really great info in this thread! I often wondered about those "lost" and "stolen" Indian War arms.

Each of these cans had maggots corned right along with the Beef. This meat had to be maggot infested before it was corned or otherwise preserved!
This was not served to the crew! It was "Shit" canned as we called it.

I hear of this ceremony in the old Navy and those Sailors would have had a use for that rotten corned beef.

Google  "shellback ceremony" and hit "images". It will really blow your freakin' mind.

[Blair]

Charles,

Be careful... who you antagonize.
We all, now know, that whole Beef Briskets were not corned and canned. Ever!
The "real" canned corn beef was corned, chopped, and then canned, Don't you know anything? 
My best,
Blair

[Bruce W Sims]

I guess that stuff about the beef is, in its way, the same sort of thing I am running across concerning Civilian Scout
dress. I have a lot of information about regulations for the Indian Scouts as well as the Infantry and Cavalry troopers
from 1868 to 1890. All well and good. But regarding the Civilian Scouts there just does not seem to be much. As I say, I have posed pictures such as the well-known portrait done of William ("Medicine Bill") Comstock. There are also the fanciful pictures of Buffalo Bill Cody--enbroidery and beads and all. Somewhere there must be pics of these contractors in their "work clothes" rather than their "Sunday-go-ta-meetin'"-s. I'm thinking about simple things like footgear, for instance. I'm guessing boots rather than shoes......a pretty safe guess. But then there is the question of how far up the calf, and whether they favored the cavalry boots or the lighter moccasin boots. I also discovered that belt loops didn't show up before about 1885-1890 or so, which could suggest that braces (aka"suspenders") were a lot more common until then. In the hopes of getting more insight I just finished
"Fifty Years on the Trail"--the autobiography (aka: "as told to") of John Y Nelson but except for his talk of buying store clothes to go back East and impress his family (...he never did make that trip...) there not one word about what he wore.

I'm trying to imagine how a guy who bounced from pillar to post across the great plains and transitioning from Indian village to Wagon Train to town and ranches and back agin would have kept himself covered. The easy answer was to replace whatever wore-out with what was at hand...but that doesn't quite say it, does it? Thoughts?

[Blair]

Bruce,

I am sad to say the subject of beef, in any form, ever came up.
I wish I could offer more in your search.
It does seem that some folks have given you some good leads in your quest.
My best,
Blair

[ChuckBurrows]

Scouts in less formal clothing - more later

Yellowstone Kelly


Fred Remington


Bill Cody


Yuma, AZ - BTW these coats are not buffalo hide turned inside out - the hair on section are add ons and the coats are usually made of lighter weight braintan deer or elk. Below is such a coat and you can see the inside the dark brown is due to heavy smoking for water resistance




Bill Cody wearing that coat


Custer Scouts - Black Hills expedition - California Joe Milner on the far right - the image is from R. L. Wilson's "The Peacemakers's" and the caption lists all names (my copy is on loan or I would post them). Note the gent next to Ca Joe is wearing a buckskin shirt/jacket and what appear to be angora hair on wooly chaps. A second thing to note is that three of these scouts are riding mules and not horses. Mules reportedly did not like Indians (difference in smell?) and vice a versa


Hank Wormwood in working clothes - scout for Crook on the Rosebud, etc.


Charles Stobie and Jim Baker standing.


California Joe Milner - purportedly Custer's favorite Scout

[Bruce W Sims]

BINGO!!  Great pics, Chuck!! That really gives me something to go on.
Thanks very much.

BTW: I had head that comment about mules a few times. Apparently they had
a better level of endurance than the vast numbers of Army ponies. I remember
seeing a picture of General Crook and his mount - "Apache" - from his time during the campaigns
in the Southwest. There was also a comment about Wild Bill Hickock using mules
to accomplish some of his dispatch deliveries while a scout. Probably does not cut the romantic image
that a spirited stallion might, but.....

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[ChuckBurrows]

You're welcome - the four Custer Scouts on the Black Hills Expedition are:
Will "Medicine Bill" Comstock, chief of scouts. - either this is wrong or the picture is from an earlier expedition/campaign (Washita perhaps?)since Comstock was killed in August of 1868
Ed Guerrier, a half-blood Cheyenne
Thomas Adkins, courier
Moses "California Joe" Milner

Custer in his "Life on the Plains" wrote that he first met Joe near Fort Dodge in October 1868 just prior to the Washita attack:

"He was a man about forty years of age, perhaps older, over six feet in height, and possessing a well-proportioned frame. His head was covered with a luxuriant crop of long, almost black hair, strongly inclined to curl, and so long as to fall carelessly over his shoulders. His face, at least as much of it as was not concealed by the long, waving brown beard and moustache was full of intelligence and pleasant to look upon. His eyes were undoubtedly handsome, black and lustrous, with an expression of kindness and mildness combined. On his head was generally to be seen, whether awake or asleep, a huge sombrero, or black slouch hat. A soldier's overcoat, with its large circular cape, a pair of trousers, with the legs tucked in the top of his long boots, usually constituted the make-up of the man I selected as Chief of Scouts. HE was known by the euphonious title of "California Joe"; no other name seemed ever to have been given him, and no other name appeared to be necessary."

[St. George]

Why no pant's belts in the west?
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2006, 03:14:39 pm »     

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We've covered this before and there's more in the back pages - but once more - we'll re-visit.

Though 'belts' have been around - 'trouser' belts haven't, since there were no trouser loops.

They're essentially a turn of the century invention.

Braces, galluses, or suspenders - all were used during the time - as were the high-waisted trousers.

They were effectively 'hidden' - both from view and from entanglement - by vests and coats - and 'all' men wore those as working dress.

If you didn't like wearing a pair - for reasons best known to yourself - then the adjustment belt was available at the rear and could be tightened as needed.

Many men did this - using friction to hold their pants in place.

The sewn trouser loop wouldn't become a 'staple' of men's furnishings for many years - despite what's seen in the 'John Ford Reference Library'...

I 'do' like this quote from the Dodge City Live Stock Journal:

"A fashion item says that leather belts are in favor.
They were in favor here at one time.
Perhaps there was a difference in them.
Ours were studded with cartridges, and were very popular..."

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

******

Now that said - for good examples, look at the various reprint catalogs of the big mail order houses, that you can find at both the Public Library and at Barnes & Noble's - they reprinted different pre-1900 editions of both the 'Sears, Roebuck & Co.' and the 'Montgomery Wards & Co.' catalogs, and they're a wealth of information on just what was 'really' worn at the time.

[ChuckBurrows]

re: belt loops - while not popular until after 1900 there is a pair of buckskin pants in the Museum of the Fur Trade's "Scouts, Buffalo Hunter's Sketchbook, etc." that does have some so while not common they were apparently used by some. On the other hand the belt or lace up at the back of the pants works well and with high waisted pants a belt can be worn at waist highth and will generally stay in place without loops.