United States Army Headgear 1855-1902 - Libreria Militare Ares

56SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY•'::Ml^^iLM:i-^^FIGURE 39.—Army personnel wearing 1872 campaign hat.(Idaho Historical Society.)one of the hats be sent to Warnock & Co. for theiropinion on the material, as they had originally furnishedthe sample approved by the board. Warnockreplied to the effect that while the hat submittedcontained the same material as the sampleoriginally furnished and in the correct proportions,they had discovered that they had made a mistakein the stock used. They proposed to substitute anew combination of materials to remedy the defect,which would result in a new hat somewhat moreexpensive but one which they would guarantee.All this Meigs reported to the Secretary of War ina brief"" and asked for instructions as to how toproceed. The Secretary replied that in his opinionit was poor economy to buy something cheap simplybecause it was cheap, and directed Meigs to haveWarnock make up a dozen sample hats of differentquality and pattern, but of the recommended material,and subject them to trial.The Philadelphia Depot was instructed to procurethe hats from Warnock, as well as samplesfrom other manufacturers and send them to Washington.Philadelphia found the Warnock hats tobe "stiff and ungainly" and unsuited to field wearand sent only one on to Meigs together with threemade by P. Herst of Philadelphia, indicating strongpreference for one of the Herst models. Meigs inturn forwarded the preferred Herst hat along withthe Warnock pattern and an issue model to theSecretary with the recommendation that 100 of theHerst be purchased and sent to the Department ofArizona for trial by the same troops that were thenrunning tests on cork helmets. The suggestion wasapproved 18 September and the hats procured andsent West.On 2 October, Meigs wrote the Adjutant Generalrequesting that a board of officers be set up to consideramong other things "the best pattern of a