Monday, August 5, 2019

1893 Harvard Leather Uniform Having Belonged to Edgar Wrightington








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.