Austerity Suit

[benstephens]

For a while I have been a little confused as to the Austerity and Utility regulations.

Many times I had read about the Utility suit, having no turnups, two pockets on the waistcoat etc. However, I came and still come across many suit with the Utility lable that in no way conform to this.

However, I found this today from Hansard and Millbank. An archive of parliamentary debates


AUSTERITY SUITS
HC Deb 06 April 1944 vol 398 cc2210-49 2210

Mr. Robertson (Streatham)

On 1st May, 1942, it became illegal to make or sell free style suits of the fashion that had prevailed throughout the ages. It became necessary that suits should have not more than three pockets, should not be double-breasted, that jackets should have not more than three buttons and the waistcoat not more than two pockets; the trousers could not have flaps or pleats or turn-ups and there were several other minor irritations.

On the 26th Septemeber 1944

"Mr. Robertson

I was reading from a document. It may be a little difficult for hon. Members to get this point. The infliction by the Board of Trade is one in regard to style. That is called austerity style cut. It can be made in two different grades of cloth, one utility, which is not subject to Purchase Tax, and the other non-utility, which is subject to Purchase Tax. The suits made from utility cloth are cheaper than those made in better cloths, which are non-utility cloths. That is the statement of the National Association of Outfitters, taken from several hundred retailers."

It is interesting to note that they seemed to stop the Austerity scheme as they did not feel austerity suits were appropriate for de-mobbed soldiers.

The number on the bottom of the cloth which I always thought was a garment pattern number is actually denoting the cloth quality.

 

[benstephens]

Also, the Austerity suits were very unpopular and many were left unsold. The debate was whether to send them abroad when the war toen countries were liberated.

 

[Creeping Past]

A very useful find.

I wonder whether the materials, rather than the design, were a factor in the categorisation of other utilty products.

A minor point: the daily report of parliamentary proceedings is just called "Hansard", or the Official Report to give it its proper title.

 

[benstephens]

Cheers thank you, I just took the name from the web address.

There is an awful lot about Utility and Austerity. it even states where the design for the label is. I am not sure how to get hold of those documents though?

Kindest

Ben

 

[Creeping Past]

Victoria and Albert Museum, maybe? I can recommend the National Archives for a grand day out. (You could use the Hansard references to narrow down your search.)

I'd be surprised if someone hadn't already written up some research on the relevant documentation. If you've access to a university library you'll be able to search for journal articles and theses on this subject, which will give you an 'in'.

Local history collections can be a great source of information. If you've got the name of a manufacturer and a location, contact the local record office or library for that area and see if they've got anything.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Cat leaps amongst pigeons that had quietly been feasting on a can of worms.

Interesting that Hansard should have some of this, but I guess some of these chaps were quite unchuffed at having their sartorial desires dictated from on high.

Like you, Ben, I don't think I've seen a CC41 suit that conforms, even in the barest terms, to those guidelines.

Was 'austerity' somehow outside and separate from the CC41 regs?

You do have access to University archives, btw. Just tell me what to search for!

bk