Butterick 4514 - Shawl and Travelling Case

Issued May, 1892, the case also appears on page 697 of The Delineator for June, 1898.

The text that accompanies the illustration:

A case of this kind is frequently called into request at this season, when everyone is making ready for Summer journeys. A few of the necessaries may be packed in such a case for a short journey or for use until the often-belated trunk arrives. It is made of brown linen, by pattern No. 4514, price 5d. or 10 cents. The shape is oblong and figure No. 6 shows the inside, which is provided with a wide and two narrow pockets, for comb and brush and other articles of the toilet. All the free edges are bound with brown braid. The outside of the case is simply embroidered with shaded brown silks. Straps are bound with braid and secured with buttons and button-holes. A small outside pocket for change and a strap by which to carry are also braid-bound.

By the time the case appeared in the Delineator, the pattern was six years old. That's a relatively long life-span for a pattern. It may have been a popular gift to make and give.

The shawl case is a member of a whole family of soft luggage that could be made at home or at sea, in the case of ditty bags made by sailors.  The Workwoman's Guide of 1840 gives extensive instructions on making travelling dressing cases for both gentlemen and ladies,  glove cases, brush and comb bags, boot bags, housewives ("hussifs,") and watch pockets.

By the last quarter of the nineteenth century the term "shawl case" had become a generic term for a smallish case, carried by hand by women, not unlike today's ubiquitous tote bag.

The exact form of the shawl case varies.  The shawl case pattern listed in Demorest's Family Magazine for August 1879 is a standard duffel or hold-all shape.  It had to be decorated because the Victorian decorated everything.

The flat form of Butterick 4514 makes it a little easier to make.

Are you traveling over the holidays?  Don't forget your shawl case! (Just in case your trunk arrives late - some things never change.)

Originally posted August 3, 2008, entirely re-written December 20, 2014, updated on February 4th, 2023.

Butterick 2360 - Women's and Misses' Work Garment

1940s (World War II)

It's hard to think of a more generic description than "work garment." Simplicity called their similar pattern a "Slack Suit or Coverall,"  but the concept is largely the same - a shirt and trousers united at the waist.  Butterick's solution to the drop seat is to sew the belt to the top edge of the trousers, with the shirt being buttoned to the trousers only at the side back edges.

In the description, Butterick advises us to "Note the large utility pocket,"which is the very long breast pocket on the shirt, with its convenient pencil slot.

Even though Butterick's copy department thinks that the sleeveless version is "perfect for your outdoor life," the illustrator decided to show the lady holding a pipe wrench, an implement not generally required for "outdoor life." I can imagine the sleeveless version being worn over a pullover sweater during the winter.

For the photographer's visit to the plant, this young lady has layered a white shirt with her "work garment:"

This unprinted pattern does not appear to have been used.

Butterick 4258 - Ladies', Misses' and Girls' Martha Washington Costume

Probably the first half of the 1920s.

My town is too small to have a July 4th parade, but if we had one, it might feature a suitably costumed George and Martha Washington waving to the crowd from the back of an elderly pick-up truck.

This costume, which could also have been used for fancy dress balls, is a wonderfully inaccurate pastiche of eighteenth century styles.

And as an Independence Day bonus, if you're a fan of substantial fruit cakes, you might like to make Martha Washington's Great Cake.  This recipe comes from the web site for the Mt. Vernon historical site.

Take 40 eggs and divide the whites from the yolks and beat them to a froth. Then work 4 pounds of butter to a cream and put the whites of eggs to it a Spoon full at a time till it is well work'd. Then put 4 pounds of sugar finely powdered to it in the same manner then put in the Yolks of eggs and 5 pounds of flour and 5 pounds of fruit. 2 hours will bake it. Add to it half an ounce of mace and nutmeg half a pint of wine and some fresh brandy.

Forty eggs!  Lordy!

Butterick 7892 - Little Girls' Romper Dress

A few years before 1921

In a time before it was acceptable for women or girls to wear trousers, this seems to me like a humane way to dress an active little girl.  The rompers themselves aren't much different from boys' rompers.

But at lunch time, or when one of those old-fashioned, elderly relatives appears, give her hands and face a quick scrub and button on her skirt and you have your little lady (more or less.)

You could even make extra skirts so that you always had a clean one on hand.

This unprinted pattern is unused.

Interestingly, this idea of rompers-and-detachable-skirt shows up for women in the 1930s through the 1950s, when it's known as a "play suit."

Butterick 1200 - for Cutting Down and Re-footing Stockings

Nineteen-teens to early 1920s.

This one takes the Unsung Sewing Patterns award for Justly Forgotten Economies.  I can think of few sewing tasks grimmer than cutting down old stockings in order to sew them up again.   

That said, this pattern raises some interesting questions on clothing usage.  Did people re-use only stockings from their own households, or could one buy used stockings for just this purpose?  Was it considered acceptable to use single stockings and match them up as best one could (easier with black, of course, than with tan or other colors)?  Did ladies do this as part of charitable work to provide clothing to the poor, particularly for children?

According to Clothing - Choice, Care, Cost, published in 1920, the cost of hosiery in general almost quadrupled during World War I.  The "make do and mend" efforts of World War II are still well known to us,  but this pattern may be evidence of the same type of effort during the previous war.  This book also mentions that factory seconds stockings could be purchased inexpensively - these may also have been candidates for cutting down.

Although the instructions indicate that the stockings could be sewn on the machine, I think machine stitching would be heavy-looking and would be uncomfortable, particularly in the feet where the rather stiff seams might rub.

The envelope indicates that this pattern could be used for re-footing stockings, but the instructions themselves are silent on this point. 

This is an unprinted pattern.

Butterick 4972 - Misses' Jumper

1970s.

One of the interesting aspects of this pattern is the cover photo, which manages to evoke a rather romantic rural British atmosphere, with the white and red painted stone barn in the slightly misty background and the model's wellies (long before the current craze for Hunter wellies!)  This seems very much in line with some of Laura Ashley's similarly evocative designs of the period, though Butterick's design has abandoned Ashley's fondness for sprigs and flounces and is much more functional.

At first glance this looks like it might be a hoover-fronted dress or apron, but the description called it a "sandwich board jumper."

And here's how you wear it:

Although I always have very poor luck in getting wrapped garments to stay wrapped, this is on the whole a nice design.  It would make a splendid full-coverage kitchen apron.

This printed pattern has not been used.

Butterick 2209 - The American Red Cross Volunteer Special Service Outdoor Uniform

"1/14/43" is written on the flap of the envelope of this one.

Women's Red Cross uniforms had been re-designed around 1941 by Elizabeth Hawes to be more contemporary looking.  "Red Cross Lassies Get Snappy New Uniforms,"  burbled the St. Petersburg Times on May 4, 1941.  Indeed, without the epaulettes (and the cap) this is a pretty standard women's suit of the time.

Wool gabardine in blue-gray would have been used for View A, the winter uniform.  View B, the summer uniform, would have been made up in a rayon-mohair mix for summer weight or seersucker for tropical weight.

By April 1942, about 20,000 women wore some type of Red Cross uniform.  The Red Cross had to walk a fine line between complying with the overall need to economize in every possible way and to assure that its workers were properly recognized.  The New York Times reported on April 3, 1942 that the bellows pocket with flap that had previously been used on jackets was being dropped in favor of pockets using less material.  In the same article, Mrs. Dwight Davis, the Red Cross's national director of  volunteer special services stated that uniforms should be reserved for women who spent the bulk of their time performing Red Cross-related activities - particularly if this work took them out in public:  women working in chapter work rooms were not to wear uniforms.

This wool jacket offered for sale on eBay in May, 2024 is very similar to the winter uniform in view A, but still has the bellows pockets.

Even though uniforms could be purchased at department stores, making or having a uniform made might have been a good option for a woman who required special care in fitting.  This uniform pattern was available in bust sizes from 30" to 46" - a much wider range than that of patterns for civilian clothes.

While the envelope for this pattern is rough around the edges, this unprinted pattern does not appear to have been used, possibly because there was less demand for the generous size 46.

The American Red Cross was founded on May 21st, 1881.

Originally posted on 5/21/12, photo of surviving jacket added on 5/24/2024.

Butterick 1847 - Women's and Misses' Coverall, and Leggings

Mid 1940s (World War II.)

Here's the description from the back of the envelope:

A Jumper Style Coverall, designed to give the full skirt protection that much farm work and gardening requires.  Roomy pockets are conveniently placed.  The front opening makes it easy to put on and take off. Knee-length leggings are included.

One of the problems that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) had to contend with during both world wars was a shortage of agricultural labor.  Men who didn't enlist were recruited to work in industries supporting the war effort, making them unavailable to work their own farms or to work as hired hands.  Women stepped up to fill the short fall, sometimes by enlisting in the Women's Land Army, often by taking on more responsibilities on their family's or local farms.

Overalls for women started to be marketed during World War I,  and women had started wearing trousers in public in the 1930s, generally as sporty wear, so by the start of WWII the idea of women in trousers wasn't entirely new. Yet the USDA seems to have felt there was a need to offer some support for women who needed to do dirty agricultural work but weren't ready to wear trousers or overalls.  A sturdy apron and leggings were apparently seen to be a workable solution.  Here's a terrific image of women at the USDA designing work clothes for women at this period.

Many thanks to Jim Christensen for pointing out that this very ensemble was described and illustrated in Clarice Louisba Scott's book Work Clothes for Women, issued by the USDA in June, 1942.

By WWII "coverall" is a fairly common term for this type of apron.  ("Overall" seems to have been used in Great Britain.) Patterns for leggings for girls show up throughout the '30s and '40s, usually as part of a winter ensemble including a coat and hat.  This is the first time I've seen a leggings pattern for women.  The option to use 1/2" studs (snap fasteners) is uncommon.

This is an unprinted pattern and does not appear to have been used.

Originally published on 21 January 2011, updated with additional documentary evidence on 23 January, 2011.

Butterick 7031 - Boys' Windbreaker

After 1923.

I bought this pattern because I was interested in the use of the term"windbreaker" at this early date.  The earliest use of the term found on Google Books is a February 1919 review in the wonderful Outing magazine, while Boy's Life magazine for May 1928 recommends a windbreaker as part of a bicyclist's kit of gear.

The Youngstown Vindicator for November 10, 1925 contains an advertisement for "the new wind-breaker  The newest thing for boys and girls." The Montreal Gazette for September 30, 1926, shows an advertisement for suede windbreakers designed to appeal to young women.  Some more sleuthing might find a parent of the windbreaker in the leather jackets worn by aviators, who probably knew more about wind than anybody.

We've seen the banded bottom used a little earlier on Excella 1111, Men's Jumper, as well as the much earlier Working Blouse pattern put out by the Universal Fashion Company.

Recommended fabrics for the Butterick windbreaker include:

Plain or Plaid Flannel, Camel Hair, Fleece Coatings, Corduroy, Duvetyn, and Suede Coatings

Fleece in this sense means a heavily fulled wool fabric with a somewhat soft, fleecy finish (as opposed to a smooth, sheared finish.)   Duvetyn is a "soft, filling-faced fabric made in a satin or twill weave with a fine downy nap...Its appearance is similar to velvet.  Originally made of soft wool in France." (1)  The soft quality of the fabrics accords with the view expressed by the reviewer in Outing that this firm, fleecy quality is what cuts the wind.

But possibly the most intriguing aspect of this pattern is the "instructions for knitting collar, cuffs, and band for View D."

Commercially knit banding was certainly available for the 1930's, when it's called for in the DuBarry Children's Snow Suit, but a substantial wool banding may have been harder to find, so Butterick enhanced the value of their pattern by providing instructions for knitting the straight bands for the collar and cuffs as well as a slightly shaped collar.  I must admit that I find knitting 1x1 ribbing just about the most boring knitting task possible.  However, a thrifty, thoughtful maker might buy extra yarn so that frayed or badly stained ribbing could be replaced to extend the life of the windbreaker.  My recollection is that Shetland Floss is about like our fingering weight yarn.

This unprinted pattern appears to have been used and is in reasonably good condition.

(1) See Sources Consulted

Butterick 3120 - Women's and Misses' Hospital Gown

1940s.

Patterns for hospital wear still up now and again in the backs of the big pattern catalogs, but they don't stay in print very long and can be hard to find.  Really, this is just a nightgown pattern cut off short and modified to tie in the back, but wouldn't it be comforting to go into the hospital supplied with gowns that somebody who cared about you had made?  And wouldn't it also provide some measure of comfort and purpose to the maker to have done something so useful?

Butterick 6458 - Ladies' Dressing-Sack

This one can be definitely dated to 1902, when it appeared in Butterick's Delineator magazine.

We've seen the term "sack" used before for Banner Sack Apron 131 to describe a relatively unstructured garment that hangs from the shoulders.  (The French spelling of "sacque" tends to remind one less of a sack of potatoes.)

Here's a very funny discussion of the uses and abuses of dressing sacks, published in 1913 by Myrtle Reed in her book Threads of Grey and Gold:

The dressing sack is (supposed to be) a garment you wear while you dress you hair; it keeps hair off your clothing but more importantly, it's loose enough so that you can raise your arms up high enough to reach behind your head, which is not possible in most ladies' garments until the 1920's, when women's clothing lost much of its confining structure, and when, incidentally, women started bobbing their hair.

Dressing sacques don't seem to show up much past World War I.

However, notice that Reed recognized that dressing sacks are sometimes worn as bed jackets, which will start to show up in great variety in the 1930's, and are still offered now and again as an option in robe patterns, pointing right back to Reed's idea that a dressing sack is nothing more than a Mother Hubbard cut off at the hips.  Both are suitable for maternity wear.

This also strikes me as a supremely practical garment to wear when reading in bed when one has a drafty bedroom and a limited heating oil budget.

Butterick 4202 - One Piece Dress...Suitable for Nurses or for a House Dress

Mid 1930s.

The design of this uniform is very similar to Simplicity 7006.  While some nurses probably made their own uniforms, I suspect that others may have bought the pattern, material, and findings they preferred and had their uniforms made up by a local seamstress.

Advertising this pattern as also suitable for a house dress seems to me wishful thinking on Butterick's part, as there were much more attractive house dress patterns available.  Patterns for maids' uniforms were generally advertised as such.

These detachable uniform buttons date to about this period or a little later.

Butterick 1629 - Ladies' One-Piece House Dress

About 1920.

The design of the crossed collar which buttons into the waist belt is odd, particularly in a hue darker than the dress itself, but the sailor's collar is very common at this period, and is a first cousin to the collars found on middy blouses, commonly worn at this period for casual, sporting, or athletic use.

Outside of the peculiar collar, this is a nice design. The button front means that the dress can be opened out for ironing.  The tucks on either side of the front and on the back add some practical fulness as well as provide an attractive vertical line.

At this time, Butterick's instruction sheet, hasn't yet been titled "The Deltor," though Butterick has applied for a patent for it.

By 1921, Butterick was advertising the advantages of The Deltor with a full page advertisement in the February 1921 issue of Everybody's Magazine:

Butterick 2266 - Men's Robe

Late 1920's.

If you're going to provide the gentleman with a new robe for Christmas, this is a good time to settle on a pattern and fabric.

This elegant double-breasted model features two piece coat-style sleeves; both shawl and notched collars; and both welt and patch pockets.  View D shows contrasting fabric used for the collar, sleeve cuffs, pocket bands, and tie.  The robe can be lined; very brief instructions are given on the layout chart on how to use the pattern pieces to cut the lining.

Yardage is given for 72" wide cloth, with View C of the size 38 robe requiring 2 3/8th yards.  This layout means that if the blanket has a wide border, it will appear as a band around the bottom of the robe.    Notice from the layout that the front facings will need to be pieced (Personally, I'd probably cut them from a different fabric.)

In 1928 you could purchase a blanket from Montgomery Ward that measured 72" by 84", which would be just enough, though you might have to shorten the robe by an inch or two.

Instructions are given for lining and interlining the robe, making this a fairly substantial garment.

Made up in wool or satin, and lined with satin, I think this garment needs to be taken more seriously than today's casual terry bath robes, and it is certainly a far cry from today's usual "at-home" wear of sweats and a t-shirt.

Or, if this all seems like too much work, Montgomery Ward also sold Beacon blanket robes, sparing you the work. These still show up on ebay now and again.

Butterick 1057 - Women's and Young Girl's Smock

Late 1920's. Compare this to McCall 4531 and Simplicity 160 of roughly the same period, and Ladies Home Journal 1719, which is about ten years earlier.

There is a fair amount of interest in vintage workwear just now, with almost all of the discussion focussed on wonderful old jeans, overalls, jackets, and shirts -- most of which were originally made for and worn by men.

As I was working on making up this pattern, I came to realize that I was re-creating what is probably prototypical women's workwear from a time when women who had jobs outside the home would have worked primarily in retail, secretarial, or service occupations. This smock (here comes a very bad pun) has you covered.

If you're old enough to have ever re-inked a stamp pad or changed a typewriter ribbon, you'll immediately understand the practicality of this smock in the workplace.

The instructions very carefully instruct you to make felled seams, which are rarely specified in more fashionable women's clothing patterns of the period.


As an aside, making felled seams with 3/8" inch seam allowances isn't easy. I didn't even attempt to fell the gathered fronts and back into the yoke - I just bound these with lovely bright purple bias binding, which I also used to bind the collar, because it amused me.

Another interesting feature is the pocket slits in the sides - just like a man's shop or lab coat.

Even though women's styles in the late 20's called for a slender look, the amount of ease in the smock is enormous. For a stated bust measurement of 44 inches, the actual measurement under the arms is just over 64 inches. This means that you'd be able to wear this smock over a suit jacket. Skirts were very short at this time, and with a length of just 42" from the center back, the smock reflects that. The circumference of the sleeve around the bicep is about 20". The length of the sleeve from armscye to edge of cuff is 25"

In a section on house dresses and aprons, the Fall/Winter 1928/1929 Montgomery Ward catalog carried several different models of smock. This cheerful model on page 68 has hand-embroidered pockets and collar.

The catalog copy states that smocks are now becoming widely known as house coats, which gives us an interesting insight into how clothing terminology changes over time.

Another smock on page 71 of the same catalog was offered in black sateen. (1) I'd seen other smocks and house dresses offered in black sateen so I thought that's what I'd use for mine. Unfortunately, at the moment I was ready to start work, the only sateen I could find was stretchy, so instead I pulled this cotton print out of my stash.

My job requires me to roam around with my laptop, mouse, whiteboard markers, and pens. Depending on the time of year I'm also carrying tissues and cough drops, so it's not possible for me to have too many pockets. I wear this smock over jeans and a knit shirt or turtleneck and find it very successful (if it bit voluminous - it's really several sizes too big for me.)

(1) A generation earlier, the Sears catalog listed bicycling shirts in black sateen, so this seems to have been considered a utilitarian fabric.