In the 1890s
there was a push for innovation in football, each team hoping to get the edge
on the competition. This usually consisted of new types of plays on offense,
such as mass plays like the Flying Wedge, which was introduced in 1892. In 1893 however, Harvard showed up for their
contest with Yale wearing leather suits, rather than the expected canvas vest
and canvas or moleskin pants. These suits consisted of leather vests and pants,
joined by an elastic waistband, and although three distinct parts, are often
referred to as a one piece uniform.
The suits
were made in Boston by Sommers tailors, at a cost of $125.00 per suit; twelve uniforms
were made in total. There was a public controversy (in the papers) concerning payment for the uniforms between
team Manager White and Captain Waters, resolved when an alumni stepped in to
pay the tailor in full out of his own pocket in January of 1894.
The theory behind
the leather uniform in contemporary accounts was twofold. The first was that
leather would be harder to grab a hold of in order to tackle a player, and the second
would be the surprise factor of a leather uniform.
Relative to
the uniform’s surprise factor, the following was published in the Daily Inter
Ocean, November 26, 1893, titled, “Yale Rosin Did It/Leather Suits Could Not
Save Harvard the Game”.
“The fact
that Harvard was to wear these suits had been kept a secret and it only leaked
out an hour before the game was called. This was too late for the crowd to
catch on, but the Yale eleven were quick to act. An order was sent out for a
big supply of rosin and when the sons of Eli went on the field they were covered
with rosin. This was done with the hope that they would stick to their rivals,
and that they did so is proved by the score. “ Yale beat Harvard 6 – 0.
Before the
start of the game Frank Hinkey of Yale argued that he believed the leather uniforms should
not be allowed, but since nothing in the rule book specifically prohibited
them, they were allowed to be worn.
The
following excerpt is taken from “The History of Football at Harvard, 1874 –
1948”, Morris Bealle, 1948, and gives a most accurate accounting of
the first appearance of this uniform, as William H. Lewis contributed materials
to this book and had direct input into this commentary.
“William H.
Lewis, Harvard’s All-American center on the team, disagrees with what the
University Magazine said about these suits. He says ‘I do not think the suits
surprised or dismayed Yale at all. I was informed that the Yale team procured
some resin which they used on their hands so that they could hold on to the
Harvard players when they tackled them’. I recall that the suits were made by a
fashionable tailor of that day – Sommers on Park Street in Boston – at a cost of
$125.00 a suit. Most of the team did not like these suits. I did, and used mine
quite a while when I was coaching for some years afterward”.
The
following is also from Bealle’s book, that has "borrowed" heavily in content and
wording from “The H Book of Harvard Athletics, 1852 – 1922, published in 1923.
“One of the
principal reasons for equipping the team with these suits was said to be to
lessen the weight a player would have to carry in case it rained. Harvard had
played Cornell at Manhattan Field in New York earlier in the season on a muddy
field with rain falling throughout the game. Someone hit upon the bright idea
of weighing the players in uniform before they went on the field and again
after the game. It was found that there was an average increase of weight of
some twenty-five pounds, in contrast of an average loss of five to eight pounds
on a dry day, depending on whether the day was warm or cold. This meant that
the heavily-padded moleskin trousers and canvas jackets in vogue in those days
had absorbed about thirty to thirty-five pounds of water and mud.
Immediate
steps were taken to avoid this increase in weight and it was found that a high
grade of thin leather, hand finishes but containing no oil, grease or other
sticky substance, would meet the situation. On a later test these suits were
found to absorb only a pound of water and weighed only five pounds.”
These suits
were not popular with the Harvard players and fell out of favor with them almost
immediately. Manufacturers of sporting equipment tried to capitalize on these
uniforms by offering them in their catalogs as custom-made articles starting in 1894,
and for roughly 3 years after. The advertised cost of these vests and pants were
exorbitant, and any potential benefits were questionable. The 1894 Spalding catalog
lists canvas jackets/vests for between $1.00 and $1.50 depending on quality.
Canvas pants were priced between $1.00 and $2.50. This, compared to a leather
suit (vest and pants with the elastic belt) priced at $30.00. This alone would
account for the absolute dearth of sales. Consider $30.00, when the average
salary in major cities in the mid to late 1890s was $12.50 a week.
Edgar
Wrightington devised his own innovation and had swatches of leather adhered/glued
to his vest that would pull away from the uniform when grasped by opponents.
These swatches attached to his leather vest are visible in the 1893 Harvard
team photo. The glue marks from the swatches are still visible on the front of
the vest today. An example pictured in this posting below.
Marks from where a leather swatch was attached
Wrightington,
a halfback, played for Harvard from 1893 through 1896, Captaining the team in 1896 and being named an
All-American that same year. He is featured as one of the Harvard players in the 1894
Mayo Cut Plug football card set. He lived his entire life in Massachusetts.
Wrightington was involved in the most controversial of the
injuries sustained in the 1894 Harvard - Yale game, referred to in many sources
as the “Bloodbath in Hampden Park” (Springfield, Massachusetts). The game is
well known for its violent play and extensive injury list, and was the direct
cause for Harvard and Yale not playing each other for the next two years (see related
blog posting of March 24, 2015). Period accounts of the game generally suggest that Frank Hinkey
was overly aggressive and landed knees first on an already downed Wrightington,
breaking his collarbone. Yet, there are other accounts that have Frank Hinkey
at least fifteen yards away from the play when it ended. After sifting through
all of the contemporary accounts and evidence, including Jim Rodger's (Yale player) first hand account, it's clear that it was Louis
Hinkey, Frank’s younger brother who kneed Wrightington in the chest and that
Frank did the brotherly thing and covered for him.
My favorite
photo of an injured Wrightington, mounted on linen. Possibly six weeks to a month before the Harvard – Yale game in 1894. He was sidelined with knee injuries at the time.
This is the
only leather uniform known to the hobby.
