Figure 52.— Cap, 1851. 



staff of dragoons to $1.42% for an infantry private. 

 The cost of the 1839 forage cap was 81^ cents in 

 1848.'''^ Based on the old issue rate of two dress caps 

 and one forage cap for each five year enlistment, it 

 cost the government $3.07^ to furnish an infantry- 

 private with all his old pattern headgear for one enlist- 

 ment exclusive of trim and insignia. The 1851 cap 

 was to be issued at the rate of seven for each five year 

 enlistment, or a total of $8.19 plus insignia and trim. 

 The goal of simphcity had been achieved, but not that 

 of economy. The cap was issued as early as September 

 1851 by the recruiting service. ^'^ 



The adoption of this cap form was a distinct im- 

 provement in several respects. There was but one form 

 of headgear for officers and enlisted personnel. It varied 

 only in quality and was authorized to serve for full 

 dress, dress, fatigue, and campaign duties. This an- 

 swered the long-standing complaints of the officers and 

 also eased the strain on their pocketbooks. The new 

 cap, with its forward sloping crown giving a rather 

 rakish appearance, was certainly more colorful and 



graceful in looks than the 1832-1833 models. It was 

 lower, measuring some 6J4 inches in front as opposed 

 to the former height of IY2 inches. The spherical 

 pompon was only 2^ inches in diameter, a great 

 change from the former plumes that in some cases 

 towered as much as 12j/> inches over the already tall 

 cap. As mentioned earlier, the 1832 cap was the first 

 of a series based on French rather than British styles. 

 The 1851 model continued to reflect this influence: it 

 was almost an exact copy of the form adopted by the 

 French in 1844.""" Serving a dual purpose, this cap 

 was a compromise, and like most compromises was not 

 a complete success. Though lower and lighter than 

 the old pattern, it was not as light or as practical for 

 active duty as the forage cap, which sat almost flush 

 with the head. The waterproof cover, however, which 

 fitted over the cap and extended down over the neck 

 and ears was a distinct improvement. 



Reactions to the new cap varied. One extreme re- 

 flecting the traditionalist point of view of some officers 

 was vividly expressed in a cartoon drawn by Lieuten- 

 ant George Derby of the Topographical Engineers 

 under the pseudonym of John Phoenix (fig. 53).""^ 

 This reaction was hardly universal, hovve\er, for one 

 periodical commented: "We think changes in dress 

 are important . . . and as to the caps as heretofore 

 worn they were disgraceful. The style of cap now 

 adopted approaches very nearly that of the French and 

 some other European Armies. . . ."' ""- In 1854 In- 

 spector General Churchill reported that since June 

 1853 at nine posts he had inspected, 14 officers ap- 

 proved of the new pattern while 36 disliked it; 14 offi- 

 cers also approved of the new pompons while 36 pre- 

 ferred short plumes; and only one of the officers who 

 disliked the cap was able to offer a better solution.""^ 

 The commanding officer of the 1st Dragoons, then at 

 Fort Union, New Mexico, requested for his unit a re- 

 version to the 1839 forage cap. He wrote the Adjutant 

 General in Washington : 



The present uniforni cap, however ornamental it may 

 be, or however suitable for the other Corps of the Army, 

 is entirely unsuitable for the Dragoon service, being 

 heavy, heating and painful to the head when used in 

 the sun, wind, or at a rapid gait. It incommodes the 

 Dragoon in the use of his arms, in the management of 

 his horse when mounted and in the care of his horse 

 in the stable, as well as in all fatigue duties.""' 



In 1854 the colored cap band of the enlisted men of 

 the line was replaced by a band of the same dark blue 



64 



