+- Lincoln Discussion Symposium (https://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussionSymposium)
+-- Forum: Lincoln Discussion Symposium (/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Other (/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: Brooks Brothers! (/thread-646.html)
Brooks Brothers! - Jim Page - 01-29-2013 07:05 PM
This is for ReignetteC: What does one do with a favorite Brooks Brothers necktie once it's too worn to wear?!?!?!
![[Image: photo-6_zps68988000.jpg]](http://i906.photobucket.com/albums/ac264/jimpage601/photo-6_zps68988000.jpg)
Tug of war with Murphy!!!
--Jim
RE: Brooks Brothers! - BettyO - 01-29-2013 08:26 PM
Adorable! I love Bostons.....
RE: Brooks Brothers! - ReignetteC - 01-29-2013 11:01 PM
(01-29-2013 07:05 PM)Jim Page Wrote: This is for ReignetteC: What does one do with a favorite Brooks Brothers necktie once it's too worn to wear?!?!?!
Tug of war with Murphy!!!
--Jim
Jim,
Murphy has impeccable taste!
RC
RE: Brooks Brothers! - LincolnMan - 01-30-2013 03:03 PM
Yes, fit for President Lincoln-no less.
RE: Brooks Brothers! - ReignetteC - 01-30-2013 11:06 PM
On display at Brooks Brothers' flagship store- 346 Madison Avenue, New York, NY- is a replica of the overcoat it made for President Lincoln's second inauguration.
![[Image: img0867hc.jpg]](http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/94/img0867hc.jpg/)
RE: Brooks Brothers! - LincolnMan - 01-31-2013 08:42 AM
Very nice. This Forum is so great. Where else could there be such a variety of people who bring this much to the study of Lincoln?
RE: Brooks Brothers! - ReignetteC - 02-06-2013 12:35 AM
Greetings,
A friend, knowing of my long tenure with Brooks Brothers, sent me a blog that takes Brooks Brothers to task about its contract with the state of New York regarding its making of uniforms during the Civil War: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/09/the-unions-shoddy-aristocracy/
I was a bit taken back by these allegations, as my research shows that the Brooks Brothers - honorable men - made good for their mistake. Here's a quick summary:
In 1861, just two weeks after the fall of Fort Sumter, the government awarded Brooks Brothers a contract to produce 12,000 Union uniforms each consisting of a jacket, trousers, and overcoat at $19.50 per uniform. Time was of the essence and the demand to produce the uniforms quickly was great. Remember, we were a nation that was going to war.
Unfortunately, Brooks Brothers quickly ran out of material - namely the regulation army woolen cloth. So it requested and obtained permission from the Military Board to substitute other available materials - some of which was of inferior quality. The lower-grade material was known in the garment industry as “shoddy,” but only a trained eye could tell it from superior goods.
As a result, some of the uniforms were ill-fitting with missing button-holes, etc. This became a great embarrassment to the recruits, many of whom thought the Civil War would amount to little more than a dress parade.
There was a hearing into this matter and BB agreed to replace 2350 uniforms and absorb the replacement cost of $45,000.
And the matter may have gone away if not for the New York Herald, which grossly exaggerated the admitted mistake. Its editor, James Gordon Bennett, had a strong dislike for Abraham Lincoln, the merchant classes of New York City, and republicans. “The Herald implied that shoddy was synonymous with the Lincoln wing of the GOP and that Lincoln was a “shoddy candidate.” Thus our clothing mistake gave Bennett his ammunition to forge his attack on the merchant classes; because of shoddy uniforms, New York troops were “half-naked.” New York brownstones, with its shoddy aristocracy, contained shoddy carpets, shoddy portraits and shoddy toys. The shoddy aristocracy employed shoddy cooks, served shoddy wines, and drove shoddy horses. Indeed, there were few limits to the Herald’s scorn.
Now, back to the blog . . .
When I checked the allegations set forth, I found several glaring errors, such as:
“The New York State Legislature eventually spent $45,000 - about $10.8 million in current dollars - to replace the uniforms.”
Yet if the writer had queried his own paper, he would have found that the CORRECT fact was published on September 5, 1861:
THE STATE ARMY CONTRACTS.; THE ALLEGED CLOTHING FRAUD. Statement of the Military Board The Evidence Taken Before Them.
http://www.nytimes.com/1861/09/05/news/state-army-contracts-alleged-clothing-fraud-statement-military-board-evidence.html?scp=1&sq=%22brooks+brothers%22&st=p&pagewanted=print
“They [Brooks Brothers} have furnished the State, without additional pay, 2,350 full suits of Army-cloth uniforms, worth at the contract price $45,825.”
“That the Messrs. BROOKS, in compromise of their default, have paid over $45,000 . . . .”
I'd appreciate any commentary about this.
Thank you.