Garment cutting in the twentieth century

by Günther F. Hertzer

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.

2d. The center line of the angle of 10 deg. would not run on and along the center of the leg, and consequently would be useless for the crease line.

3d. The center line would not be a reliable point from which to establish the center of the front, at a distance of ⅛ waist, close measure.

4th. The center line would not be the center line for the knee for all widths.

5th. The center line, being used for the running of a stripe, would not run with sufficient correctness, at least not on the back.

All the positions of the lines, angles and bases are placed as indicated, because years of trial have convinced me that they give the best results. There is no way conceivable, that I have not tried, to adjust the angle of 7½ deg. in order to bring the lines in harmony with the body—and the result is here given. What difficulties I have had, to obtain this result, it is not necessary for me to say, neither would anyone believe me, I suppose. But I do say, however, that I spent 8 years in the work of alteration, to adjust this angle of 7½ deg. To some it may seem improbable that I would possess the patience and determination to succeed in solving the problem, and would stick to that determination for 8 long years—but I did.

Now, I will give a description of the seat and compare it with the front, and follow it with a description of the slope of the back, by which the seat is to be fitted. From the crotch forward the front tapers up, and forward, and the normal form can be fitted on a straight line, or with a straight piece of material, by simply turning the crotch backward, but it is not so with the back, or the seat (see Dia. [XV]). The seat turns in a different way, and from the crotch backward; downward first, say 1 to 1½ inches, then backward, and then upward and forward again. A sheet of paper wrapped around the body will fit well in to the body of the normal form all around the front (see Dia. [XV]). At the side it will do the same all the way up to the thigh-bone, or the largest part of the seat. But on the back the sheet will not meet the body below, or above the seat, nor will the sheet touch the top of the side; and in order to bring the back to the body, below the seat, the back must be cut through crosswise, when the lower portion can be pushed in, and thus brought in contact with the back of the thigh. Thus cutting the sheet crosswise and below the seat will cause an opening of about 2½ inches directly under the seat, running out to nothing at the side of the thigh, which opening, if minutely examined, will show an angle of 15 deg. This must be closed again by inserting a wedge by some means. This inserted wedge forms a sack for the seat, and is thrown downward and backward just as the seat itself.

But it will not do to cut pants with a piece across the seat, so we must create an artificial wedge by using the surplus cloth on the top of the side, and dipping it backward and downward over the seat, and inward to the back of the thigh. By so doing, the original back center is thrown over the line, and is cut off as back slope; and whatever the back has been thrown downward, and, has lost in length, is allowed again on the top, and is usually termed “extra length of back.”

When the pants are on the body, both front and back are alike in length as far as the fit is concerned, but we may make the back an inch longer for nice appearance, and it is usually so done. That portion which stands off on, or around the back, on such a sheet, is reduced by one or two gores in the back. The extra length of the back is taken up by winding around the seat, and well-adjusted or well-balanced pants will always fit there. I claim that the angle of 7½ deg., with an artificial wedge across the seat, will produce this result every time, as shown in Dia. [XIV].

With the help of Dia. [XIX], [XX] and [XXI], there should be no difficulty in cutting a pair of pants that will be a pleasure to wear; but, as in all things, there must also be harmony between the cutting and making, and for this purpose I will add, that all diagrams and patterns issued by a reliable publisher of fashions are calculated to be cut from nice material, which requires small seams. Their pants are to be made up without lining, which allows them to give in every direction; and they are also calculated to be worn over nice-fitting under-clothing. In fact, they are calculated for fine trade, and they are made by tailors, who receive about $3.00 pay per pair for making. Therefore, when such a pattern is sent out, and pants are made from cheap goods with large seams, and in all probability lined with heavy muslin, the result is, that the customer cannot wear them. Then, again, one cutter may perhaps allow a little extra here, and another allow a little there, and the pants in the end may be large enough—but where is the city style and the neat fit?

The same is true as to coats and vests. Reports of fashions are intended for fine work, and all that this term implies; and a cutter who uses such patterns to make a pair of pants for a man who works in a ditch must allow more fork and more seat length as well as more width for the upper body—all allowed on the side. Extra looseness for the upper body is best provided by allowing all at the side, where it may hang loose but smooth; but if the extra width is allowed in the fork, it will remain there on a twist, and it may even cut the seat, if only allowed above the fork. Allowing extra width above the fork is almost as bad as to allow extra width at the front of the armhole, which allowance would really make the hole smaller.

From the crotch downward the whole leg must conform to the slope of the angle of 7½ deg., because the relation of the crotch and the ankles change very little except on deformed persons. Some persons may throw their feet a little further apart than others when walking, and the center of the body may be considered at the inside ankles, or one inch from each inside ankle, just as a person may place his feet while standing naturally. But when walking, the center of each half body is in the center of each leg, for by each step one leg makes the whole body must throw itself upon the center of the other leg, or else the body would tumble over. This can be best observed in slow walking, while by fast running it is not noticed. Any person who walks slowly throws his upper body more to a position of standing on one leg, than a fast runner, hence the slow walker is seen wabbling his head from one side to the other by every step, the same as a goose.

In this work the pants are calculated each leg for itself, and each leg has its own base; and they are so adjusted, that a person can stand, walk, jump, run, sit, etc., and it must be understood that when a pants is on the body the base goes with the leg, so that the base runs straight down when the person makes a step, or when he stands on one leg; but when he stands on both legs the base will naturally run a trifle sidewise at the ankles, and consequently a true plumb line pant base can not be found, except for one position of the leg only, and the position of the bases, as given in this work, are as near correct as any can be established, and from which any particular shape of pants may be shaped. As for instance: Riding pants require more fork, so that the rider can spread his legs sidewise. Sailor pants require more width at the bottom, and that width must be allowed on the outside, or else such pants would strike each other at every step. For all such and other changes we have a base to work from, and after all such changes are made we must see that provision is made to sew the parts correctly together, by carefully nicking the seams.

The center of gravitation in a pair of pants may be considered to exist at the points of the angles, which are eighty numbers below the top of the waist, hence a sweep from the point will make a true connection at any point of the leg, and such sweeps can be depended upon no matter how narrow the fore part, or how wide the back is cut, and especially so when laid out like Diagrams [XIV] and [XV]. Now, to make a draft from that point for every pants or pattern we cut, would be inconvenient, neither is it required that it should be done, except for practice; but when a cutter knows a center which is infallible, he is certainly better off than if he knows no such center. A sensible person, if he cannot do just as he wants to, will do the best he can; and, so in this case, there are several ways open for operations.

1st. Cut both the front and back of equal width at the knee, and notch there; then measure upward and downward.

2d. Run the inside and the outside lines of the angle of 10 deg. down as far as the cloth or the table allows, and sweep the inside seam from the inside line and the outside from the outside line, each seam separately, from a point as far down as you can reach.

3d. Fold the broader back over to the smaller front, so that both will lay smooth and without twisting, then cut the nicks.

4th. Square from each line of the angle of 10 deg., and at the knee only, because, at the knees, the front and the back are the nearest together, then measure up and down and cut the nicks, and in all cases be careful that the back is not held full behind the knee and upward on either seam....

If the distance between the smaller front and wider back were miles, or rods, even, the result would not be very satisfactory, but in this case the space is never more than 1 inch, and the variations in the several ways are not perceptible. The diagrams in this work are the best illustration of the sweeps from point 80, as well as of the cutting of all seams on a nice slope.

The medium sizes require the top of forepart about ¼ of the whole waist measure, but smaller sizes require the side seam further back and the larger ones more forward on account of the pockets. Another point should be observed: It has been stated that the center line of the angle of 10 deg. is a line to square from for a level bottom as well as for a level top, all of which is true, but the waist of the normal form runs downward in front, and the top of the normal waist should be run in the same direction, and for this reason should be squared from the front base line, and for extremely small waists it may be squared from the front line of the angle of 10 deg. Taking Dia. [XIV] as a model, we may sink the front of waist ½ inch and raise the back ½, to 1 inch from that top square line.

In conclusion of this article, I will say that, perhaps, I have gone too many times over the same ground, and perhaps I will go over it again and again, but it is always from a different standpoint and connected with something else.