Part 3

On top of front, the pants diagrams are thrown forward from five-eighths to two numbers. Persons who stand very erect, and have small waists, have enough if one-half is thrown out. Large waisted persons stand naturally very erect, and a form of forty-four seat, and forty-six waist, made up, can be fitted with one and one-half, while two numbers, like Dia. XX, is enough for forty-six seat and fifty waist, made up. Forty seat, forty hip and forty waist, made up, can be fitted with one and one-fourth, and the same is true of thirty-seven seat and thirty-seven waist, made up, all such waists to have the angle of seven and one-half degrees complete at the side, or even one inch allowance, as per Dia. XX. The gore in the back is to be one inch at the top of fore-part and running out to _nothing_ at the top of back, and which may be called extra looseness, but which can not be drawn backward under the buckle strap, but will remain at the side and prevent the waistband from striking the short ribs.

Outlets on the waist of a pants would do more good if left on the top of side, running out to nothing at about line sixteen, but the outlet, if left on there, requires too much work to let out, and the outlet is usually left on behind. When such a crotch must be let out, the back crotch seam from line sixteen upward, should be stretched upward say one-quarter to one-half inch, and the whole back seam, above the crotch should be stretched, as much as possible, and that may easily be stretched one full inch, and the stretching should be done mostly at, or near, the seat line, and as far sidewise as possible, and if the seat is lined and the lining is straight, and will not stretch, a wedge must be put in the lining, as shown on the outside of Dia. XVIII. The outside can almost always be stretched any amount desired.

Stretching the back thus, the outlet, left behind, will fall sidewise, where it really belongs, but when said outlet is simply let out behind, it will remain behind, and must be pulled forward, and even if the pants feel wide enough at the waist, the wearer may not feel at home in them when sitting down. On the other hand, when pants have too much seat, but not too much waist, the best way is to rip up the side seam, from line sixteen upward, and stretch the side of the back, say one inch, and cut it off on top, all of which makes the seat shorter behind. Stretching the side of the back upward from the side of the crotch is equal to cutting a larger gore between the front and back on top of side, and allowing it behind. If the pants are lined in the seat, or all the way down, a large fold should be laid in the back lining in place of cutting it in as some do, to imitate the gore, or as others do, who baste the lining flat over the gore, whereby the effect of that gore is destroyed. In short, all linings in the pants should be put in plenty large on both back and front, both in width and in length, on the same principle, as the lining in the back of coats is put in large. The larger it is, the better it will be. The outside of a pants mostly stretches, but the lining does not, and often shrinks from the moisture of the body.

If we should cut two pairs of pants over the same pattern, and make one up with, and the other without lining, we would find that the one without lining feels the larger when on the body. All pants lining should be cut bias.

To shape the crotch seam Dia. XIV should be observed, especially when the fore part is to be cut larger and the back that much smaller, which sometimes may be done to advantage, and may enable the cutter to cut the back without much piecing. In the shape of Dia. XIV the seam may be thrown anywhere, without losing the balance.

Some years ago, Mr. J. B. West brought out what he termed a new style of pants, by cutting the front fork larger than the back fork. But that new style did not last long, for the reason, I suppose, that most of the cutters did not get the points of the forks correct. There is no question but that it can be done satisfactorily. The only objection I could make is this: When the inseam is thrown too far backward, the dress part on that seam locates too far backward, while really the dress requires to be located as far forward as possible, and for this reason I have the undress fork located, near the angle of ten degrees, and it may be made just even with that angle, and all other width allowed on the back.

If for any reason it is necessary to cut a pants with a very large fork on the front, and a small fork on the back, the pattern should be cut like Dia. XI, but the fork should be spread so that whole can be cut without piecing; whereby the crotch seam can be thrown anywhere, by the help of the sweep from point 80, without losing the balance. If the cutter is able to cut that seam anywhere, it may save him a great deal of piecing where such piecing is not desired.

[Illustration]

[Illustration]

THE ANGLE OF SEVEN AND A HALF DEGREES FOR PANTS.

This angle must be further explained. Although I am using the angles two and a half, ten, fifteen and twenty degrees for cutting pants, the angle of seven and a half degrees is the main angle, because it corresponds more nearly to the slope of the legs, at the outside, than an other angle, and the combined outside slopes form an angle of fifteen degrees. I do not claim that the outer sides of a person’s legs actually slope fifteen degrees. In fact, I know they do not, but they come near enough to that to be practical for garment-cutting. It may be fourteen or sixteen degrees, and it may be even more than that, as on short and large-waisted forms, or it may be less than that, as on tall and slim persons, but fifteen degrees is the sixth part of a square and is easily found by spreading two lines one-fourth of their length. Going up from a certain point one yard, and across one-fourth yard, will make the angle of fifteen degrees. By placing a straight edge on each side of the body, on and along the slanting side of each leg, they would form an angle of fifteen degrees. These slopes are certainly the longest and straightest lines that can be drawn on the human form, and there is no reason to contend that they are not good lines to use as bases for cutting pants. The longest and straightest lines are always the best to be used as bases to work from for almost anything. Within these two lines, representing the angle of fifteen degrees, is contained the whole pants, providing the proper circumferences are obtained to go around the entire body. Wrapping a sheet of paper around the body will give the correct idea of what I mean. There is the slope of fifteen degrees, and there is the circumference around the whole body, and represents a cover for both legs as though they were one.

Pants are cut for one side of the body, but on double cloth; so we make our calculation for half of the body only. If we shape that sheet of paper according to the form of the body, it will represent a slope, on the sides, of fifteen degrees, while a straight line in front and center of the body will divide the angle of fifteen degrees into two equal parts, or seven and a half degrees, on each side, which seven and a half degrees are used as a base for this garment, representing a cover of three-fourths of one leg, viz.: one front, one side and one back. The inside of the leg requires as its share one-third of the whole outside, and as the whole outside is the angle of seven and a half degrees, it follows that one-third equals two and a half degrees, which latter, attached to the angle of seven and a half degrees, forms one whole angle of ten degrees.

This angle of ten degrees, with its proper width, will cover a bare leg, and if it does not exactly fit it, it will at least represent the same slopes, and by these, reductions at the knee and additions to the bottom can be made. For the point of the double dress fork one and one-eighth to one and one-quarter is to be allowed, outside of the angle of ten degrees, and three-eighths less for the double undress side, and whatever the forepart is made smaller is allowed again on the back. The points of the forks must be so constructed that they all rest on the same sweep, as shown in Dia. XIV, unless the front and the back are made extremely wide or narrow, in which case the points can not rest on the sweep, but must be put as shown in Dia. XIV. The allowance of one and one-eighth to one and one-quarter for the double dress fork is simply an average quantity and one is enough for a close fit, while a very loose fit, or open cut, may have one and three-eighths allowed. That part of the pants can not be cut to fit close to the body, but must always have some loose cloth there, but it must be cut so that it will hang straight. Years of experience have taught me that one and one-eighth to one and one-quarter is a good average. The same cause, which requires the front of the waist to be thrown forward of the base on 7½ deg., requires the addition to the fork, and to the angle of 10 deg., and the normal form requires about the same amount at the waist and at the undress side. If the front base were moved forward to the front of waist, the angle of 10 deg. would also move forward to the half undress fork. The extra allowance for the dress fork must be considered independent of the body, as it is a one-sided affair.

For a close fitting leg the angle of 10 deg. may have an allowance of ¼ double at the inside of the knee, or the forepart may be placed on the base, and ½ allowed on the back, and a larger leg may have anything more, which a nice slope of the seams allows, but which in no case may be more than ⅝ to ¾ on the double. Large spring bottoms will have to be considered as close fitting at each seam, and the springs thrown forward by stretching the side seams.

The side of the knee may be hollowed out ½ on the double, and in this case may be considered as that portion which is thrown outward on the inside, in order to give the pants leg the natural slope of the body for both inside and outside. For a large leg the side of the knee may have anything more which is consistent with a nice slope of the side seam, starting at the seat line. The above description of a close fitting pants leg at the knee will hold good on a few sizes only, say from 35 to 37. Larger sizes must be reduced more and require less than the angle of 7½ deg., as seen in Dia. XX, and smaller sizes must have more width.

If a large size is to be fitted with a close-fitting leg at the knee, the best way to obtain the correct points is to take the center line of the angle of 10 deg. as a point to measure from, and give the double inside ½ more than the double outside, which will be the same as the above calculation for a medium size. As stated elsewhere, the allowance on top of front of the waist to the angle of 7½ deg., and to the fork and to the knee, is caused by the base being located ⅝ to the side of the center of the body.

In a standing position the base would locate at the supposed inside edge of the front of the leg, but it must be considered that at each step the center of the whole upper body is thrown upon the center of the standing leg, and consequently the bases of a pair of pants change at each step, and the pants is required to set reasonably well in all the different positions in which the leg may be thrown, all of which can only be accomplished by extra width in the fork, and which may be termed the balance of a pants. If said balance is not correct, the pants leg will make a kink or throw a fold somewhere upward to the knee.

This fault of pants can be seen in the muddy streets of a small town, as well as on the fashionable boulevards in large cities, and are even shown on fashion plates. Such may be in style by some reporters of fashions, but I never did like them, and I do not suppose anyone else does, but somebody must cut and make them as long as they are so shown on the fashion plates.

This question will always have to be considered by cutters, and it cannot be explained too much. Careless nicking of the seams, or carelessness in bringing the nicks together when the legs are sewed up, will also cause a twist in the legs, one way or the other. Pants legs which draw from bottom of inside, up and forward, to the knee, may be changed either by giving more width at the inside of the bottom, starting at the fork, or by reducing width at the top and front of waist, and running it out gradually below the knee. If the reduction of the front of the waist makes the waist too small, allow behind what is taken off in front.

If anybody will go to the trouble to open his own pants in front, and draw the front sidewise and the side backward, it will be seen that that twist from the inside angle to front of knee will form, and by twisting the upper portion a great deal, the twist will form all over the leg. Now, if a pants forms that twist itself, it shows that the pants must be altered contrary; that is, by reducing the front and allowing behind, or in other words, by twisting the pants waist from the side forward and from the back sideward. How far that twist is to be made depends upon the condition of the pants, also how far down it is to be made. As to the amount of changing such a pattern or system is not for me to say; I can only point out the way to alter, not the amount. Such pants, when made up, are hard to alter, but by knowing how to alter them, a cutter can, at least, change the next one.

The thigh proper would not require 1¼ addition for the dress side to the angle of 10 deg., but the legs at the fork do not join closely, but are about 1¼ inches apart, and at this point, and in front of the thigh, there is a hollow which is partly filled out with the sexual organ, which must be provided with extra cloth, commonly called “dress” in tailors’ language. The hollow itself forms a bridge from one leg to the other, and for the purpose of fitting pants, cloth to cover that bridge must be allowed for each leg, and is put down in this work as an allowance of ⅝ to the double angle of 10 deg. for the undress side. This allowance for the bridge is made on the same principle as the wedges are, which are put in between the fingers of gloves, and which allow the fingers to move in any direction.

At line 8 the dress fork is placed at 1¾, but 1½ is enough for a close fit, and the dress fork and the back should be even at line 8. The back is even with the front at line 8, and the half dress fork at line 10 is made larger or smaller according to the width at line 8, all of which constitutes the difference between the open and the close cut at that point.

Now I must say something about the 1¼ thrown forward on top of waist, as in Fig. 1. This 1¼ is for such forms which throw their front of waist, say ⅝ forward of a straight line, running parallel with the front slope of the legs, and which is forward on top, and which forms may be called forward leaning waists, but the variations are so great that no positive point can be given; but in order to have something for a standard, I have put it down as ⅝. The ⅝ forward growth of the top of waist and the ⅝ from the base to the center, make a combination of 1¼ and any waist which leans considerably forward, or any waist that is near as large as the seat, requires that amount. All that which has been said above about the amount to be thrown forward of the base for the normal form, as in Dia. XIX, is independent of any consideration for a large waist, and which is further explained in the Article on “_Pants_.” But I must add this: A large waist, though it grows forward from the back, don’t locate itself forward according to the difference of the diameter from front to back on the same person, as it might be supposed. Whenever the waist becomes larger the body will straighten up, in order to keep in balance, and we can see many large waisted forms whose front of waist is no further forward than that of a small waisted form, and consequently require not much addition to the front, but to the side. Hence 1¼ thrown forward may be plenty for even a large waist, and I find that two numbers are about the most which any pants can stand, or ought to have. It would be folly to attempt to measure the amount in any shape or form, but all this must be made by guess, and it is fortunate for cutters that a quarter or even one half inch, more or less, will not kill the fit. (See description of Fig. 1.)

The angle of 7½ deg. is formed according to the scale of the seat measure, and over that point the side of the pants may have the full width of that angle, while above (at the waist), and below (at the knee), the normal size requires a reduction. On the normal form the seat measure is the largest, and the hips are cut accordingly, and the waist and the knee are cut according to the measure, and it will be seen that whenever the waist becomes larger, the hips also increase, and if we want to cut the waist larger we cannot help cutting the hips larger also, and the hips will mostly follow the waist. It is true there are some extra large hips with small waists, and if this is the case, the hips must receive enough cloth, and to retain a nice slope of the seams, the waist should be cut down again by a larger gore in the middle of the back. Unless the hips and waist are larger than the seat, there is no need of going outside of the angle of 7½ deg., but extremely small waists and small hips require a reduction over the side, the same as extremely large waists and hips require an addition. How much that may be must be left to the cutter, but I will give a rule which works both ways: On a normal 38 seat the hip may be 30 and the waist 34, which requires the full angle of 7½ deg. at the side of line eight; and at, and above, the seat line, but a reduction of say ½ inch at the waist on single cloth, and a small gore in the back. Now, if the hips should be 38 inches too, it is but reasonable to allow over the hips, and outside of the angle of 7½ deg., the difference of such 9½ numbers, at 4 numbers below 0, which is in this case about ⅜ of an inch on both front and back. Still larger hips in proportion to the seat and still larger sizes can be calculated the same way, and though the rule would hold good in the case of quite small hips, the proportionately smaller hips are seldom found, and if found at all, will indicate a smaller waist, and the slope to the smaller waist will regulate the smaller hip, the same as a larger waist will regulate a larger hip.

Some persons are found who are very flat from back to front, and broad from side to side, but of normal circumference, and for such, the pants should be cut full at the top of side, and reduced on top of front, because they are mostly erect forms. In all such cases I would consider the backbone, at the hollow of the waist, as a permanent thing, and regulate the waist for any form at the front and side.

To obtain the correct shape for the depth of the crotch, is clearly shown in Dia. XIII and XIV, or in any diagram with a sweep from point 80, but we can not always go down to point 80, and the next best thing to be done is by squaring from the inside line of the angle of 10 deg. through point 10 on the front base, and it will result in the same thing. At the crotch all faults of the upper part of a pair of pants are recorded. If the pants are too small over the side of waist or hip, the side of the waist or hip will seldom show it, because the solid hip will draw the pants up to the side, and the soft part of the inside thigh will be pinched and sawed by every step. We find plenty of men who will always direct cutters to give them plenty fork, because they always have their pants too tight, and when we look at such persons, we will find that they are always full grown at the sides of hip and waist. True, more fork will help such pants, but they will not set as good as if they were supplied with sufficient cloth over the hips. Too much cloth over the hips will not injure the pants, it will simply make them large there, but not enough will always bring on complaint.

For the following reasons, the base, or the front line of the angle of 7½ deg., was not placed in the center of the front:

1st. The base would not run parallel with the front of the leg.