Garland, 15 Jan. 1833, Cloth. Bur., LR, tray 61, RG 

 92, NA. 



™ Garland to Irvine, 1 1 July 1832, Cloth. Bur., LS, RG 

 92, NA. This "uniform cap"' referred to the dress cap, 

 not the forage cap, for the latter was mentioned separately 

 several lines below in the same letter. See also Lt. A. B. 

 Eaton, 2d Inf., to Cloth. Bur., 8 Aug. 1833, Cloth. Bur., 

 LR, tray61,RG92,NA. 



"■ Contract with Henry Cressman, Philadelphia, 26 

 Mar. 1833, CCF (Cressman), RG 92, NA. 



■'■"G.O. 53, H.Q. of the Army, 26 July 1834, RG 94, 

 NA; Garland to Inine, 21 Oct. 1833, Cloth. Bur., LS, 

 RG 92, NA; Irvine to Fayssoux, 16 June 1834, CG of P, 

 LS, RG 92, NA. 



'-"' Until the 1832 regulations only company grade offi- 

 cers of the line corps were required to wear the cap, while 

 those above the rank of captain wore the chapeau. Now 

 field grade officers of the line were to wear the cap wliile 

 on duty with troops but were granted the privilege of 

 wearing a cocked hat on other occasions. This change 

 upset some senior officers. See Garland to Col. D. Baker, 

 6th Inf., 20 Mar. 1833, Cloth. Bur. LS, RG 92, NA. 



'"" On this insignia see Campbell and Howell, op. cit., 

 pp. 26-27. 



'"^ General Regulations for the Army (Washington. 

 1834), pp. 218-230. 



^°- Ibid., p. 210. These appear in the cost of clothing 

 list. 



"'^G.O. 36, H.Q. of the Army, 21 June 1839, RG 

 94, NA. 



'"^ G.O. 54, H.Q. of the Anny, 15 Dec. 1845. The cap 

 on which these were \voin may have been a modification 

 of the dragoon cap as recommended by the 1 844 Uniform 

 Board. In any case, the ])rice was higher than that of the 

 foot artillery cap. 



^"' Detmar H. Finke and Frederick P. Todd, "French 



Influence on Early Uniforms of the United-States Army," 



Revue Historique de I'Armee (special issue, 1957) , p. 58. 



"'^ H. Malibran, Guide a I'usage des artistes et des 



costumiers . . . (Paris, 1904) ; J. Margerand, "Les coif- 



fures de I'armee francaise," op. cit.; Knotel, op. cit., p. 

 177. 



'"' Ii^vine described this material as "coney fur or wool" 

 imported from South America. See Irvine to Wm. Silk- 

 man, Whitlocksville, N.Y., 26 Dec. 1836, CG of P, LS, 

 RG92,NA. 



"'^ Although the officers' visors were prescribed as "pat- 

 ent" leather, those on the enlisted model were of "stout 

 well prepared leather." See ibid. 

 '"^ See Appendix. 



'i°G.O. 18, H.Q. of the Army, 4 June 1846, RG 94, 

 NA. On the insignia see Campbell and Howell, op cit., 

 pp. 27-28. 



"1 Cap worn by Lt. David E. Hale, 1st Arty., USMA 

 class of 1833 in West Point Museum collections. 



''- See J. Watts De Peyster, Personal and Military His- 

 tory of Philip Kearny (New York, 1869), pp. 57-58. 

 Kearny attended the French Cavaliy School at Saumur 

 in 1839-1840. 



"^ Francis Paul Prucha, ed., Army Life on the Western 

 Frontier . . . (Norman, Okla., 1958), p. 62; Jesup to 

 Sec. of War, 12 Nov. 1830, Cloth. Bk., LS, RG 92, NA. 



'" On these difficulties see Garland to Irvine, 10 Dec. 

 1832, Cloth. Bur., LS; A. Russell Jr. and Co. to Garland, 

 28 Feb. 1833, Cloth. Bur., LR— both in RG 92, NA. 



"■'' Contract with Cressman, 7 Jan. 1835, CCF (Cress- 

 man) , RG 92, NA; cost of clothing list in G.O. 42, H.Q. 

 of the Army, 6 Oct. 1840, RG 94, NA. 



"" Ibid. One of the early suppliers of metal insignia 

 for this cap was Anson Baker of New York, while W. H. 

 Horstmann of Philadelphia supplied ]3ompons. William 

 Pinchin of Philadelphia also supplied metal insignia. See 

 contract with Anson Baker, 16 Jan. 1835, in CCF (caps), 

 RG 92, NA. There are numerous references to Pinchin 

 and Horstmann in CG of P letter books for this period. 

 See also "Statement of Cost of Clothing for the Army, 

 1834," in General Regulations for the Army (Washing- 

 ton, 1835), p. 210. 



"■ G.O. 67, H.Q. of the Amiy, 31 July 1832; G.O. 56, 

 H.Q. of the Army, 4 Dec. 1838— both RG 94, NA. 



30 



