Needing help with a Men's 50s Palm Beach Company Jacket Please

Needing help with a Men\'s 50s Palm Beach Company Jacket Please

I just got several men's suits yesterday. This jacket is a Palm Beach Company Jacket. I have found that the men's suits were fairly easy to research. I have found several archives, advertisements, and chat rooms with people discussing the brand however most were about 60s and 70s jackets or suits.

The union label on this one tells me that this one dates between 1949-1962. I learned that the Palm Beach Company Jackets from this time were Linen and Mohair.

I also understand that this was a brand for young men or mature men who were tall and slender, that it was a well respected brand until changing ownership in the 60s to 70s.

I have not learned anything about the figure on the pocket and the buttons though and would like to.

Is that a fox, dog, a wolf, a deer, a ? Can you tell?

Could this be a hunt club jacket?

Do you know anything else about this jacket or brand?











The true color of this blazer is more of a dark teal. My camera's battery was dying and the color balance was off.

Thank you, Caryn

 

I was thinking the same thing hence the thought that it might have been used as a hunt club jacket.

I looked at the Lowenbrau lion and the animals are different but the posing of the animals and the design looks so similiar.

Caryn

 

Hi,

Bataya weave is actually a faux linen - it isnt linen but was made to have the look of linen. The term Bataya Weave was registered with US Patent Office in 1960 with a first use in 1959.

The text below is from a 1966 advert and you can see they are calling Bataya Weave "so new." So even though it was used earlier, I wonder if Palm Beach really started to push at this time. I know your union label doesn't have the registration mark in the lower left side but I have found that the 1962 date isn't always hard and fast.

Feather light texture . . . the look of
linen! It's Palm Beach® Bataya® weave
fabric, so new, so right for summer.
Available in a host of fine colors.
$

I wonder if the pocket logo was added? It looks like a patch - I would think that if original it would have been embroidered directly on pocket - unless I am seeing it wrong. It is possible that buttons were also changed out - although I can't see them well in photos. Do they match the pocket patch in some way? This could have been altered for a club of some sort - just a thought.

I love menswear - this is a great jacket.

Maureen

 

sorry cross posted with others.

Also there is a date on your tailors tag - it is faint red - I see May something but cannot see year. This will answer your dating question if you can read.

 

Ok, I am going to try to get that patch off. I am concerned that it may have been glued on and may have residue underneath. I have not found a dry cleaner that I trust in my area but I am definitely going to steam for sure. It is going to be quite a bit of work. I have 15 suits and 3 blazers to steam.

I was confused on the dating because of the union label. The care label definitely suggests 60s to me too though. I guess it would be early 60s then?

Thanks, Caryn

 

may 24, 196? - I think that is what I am seeing

 

Hi, So much can happen in such a short period of time.

I was already able to take the patch off. It was threaded and was as easy to remove as a cub scout hand sewn patch.

Looking at the date stamp in person it looks like May 24th, 195? but it is really faded and hard to read. It could also say 196?. :/

Edited to say: I have concurred with 6 other people in my house young and not so young, haha and they all say the third number is a 5. We cannot make out the last number. You can't tell from the photo but in person you can see the square formation of the top of the 5 and the break at the left bottom that the number six does not have.

It must be 1959 then right?

Thanks, Caryn

 

I have been messing with it a little in photoshop...I am seeing a 5 also but cannot get that last #.

 

duh to me - yes, 1959 would make most sense given that is what USPTO says for first use...missed that one!

 

This had to be made before the date of first use stated within the USPTO because the date says May 24th, 195? and even if it were May 24th, 1959 the first date of use in the USPTO says August 10, 1959.

I have read and seen ads reflecting that Palm Beach Company history go back to the 20s. I also read that Palm Beach fabric "Bataya Weave" was originally created by a company called Goodall but that it later sold to another company and became lower quality in the 60s and 70s.

I wonder if Bataya Weave was actually created by Goodall earlier than 08/1959 and when the new company took over they changed Bataya Weave to some synthetic blend, patented it, and labeled the date of their first use.

Caryn

 

you have a registration symbol on your Bataya Weave label - that means PB made it after they applied for patent application so perhaps it does not say 195?

Good luck with your mystery.

 

Thanks Maureen. I have to just describe it with the information I have. It was registered. You are right about that so it had to be after the patent was applied for. With the union label I can determine that the suit was made prior to the end of 1962. I believe that number is a 5 and the only possibility if it is a 5 is that the first use date was entered elctronically incorrectly or was filed incorrectly.

I will just state late 50s to early 60s between 1959-1962.

Thanks again, Caryn

 

I believe the figure is supposed to be a heraldic figure--a "rampant" (or standing) lion.

Heraldic motifs (and heraldic lions in particular!) show up all the time in the 50s/60s menswear I've seen--everything from ties and cufflinks to shirts and PJs--so your dating sounds correct to me!

 

So I took the patch off and took a few more photos. I wanted to share what the jacket looks like without the patch but my daughter wanted to take a picture with the jacket so here are two photos; one with my beautiful daughter holding the hand of the jacket, lol, and a closer photo. I might try to steam the pocket a little more.





Caryn