…i.e. was he a member of broadly the same group of Odd Fellows that used the Action Line Cryptogram to acrostically encrypt their initiation ceremonies?

In South Australia, Odd Fellows founded their first Lodge in Adelaide in late 1840 (according to this 1843 page from their journal), at just about the same time as a Lodge was formed in Sydney: and even today, Odd Fellows in SA are apparently still going strong.

So… looking again at the Tamam Shud text, it parallels the Action Line Cryptogram: that is, it gives cryptologists a very strong impression of having been constructed as an acrostic English ciphertext, because its letter frequency distribution closely follows the same frequency distribution pattern found in English texts.

tamam-shud-closeup

All the same, pure acrostic cryptograms are relatively rare in the wild, because they are more mnemonic than cryptologic: they are there to remind the reader of something they already know rather than to communicate something unexpected to someone else. The more personal the message, the more unknowable its contents: and that’s they way it is, I guess.

So perhaps in this instance Marshall McLuhan is right, and the medium (an Odd Fellows-style acrostic cryptogram) is the message. If so, the most we are likely to infer from this is that it was written by someone who was (or had been) a member of an Odd Fellows Lodge, very probably in Adelaide itself. The Somerton Man may well have been down on his uppers (albeit very shiny uppers), but I expect those same shoes had likely been inside an Adelaide Lodge at some stage.

Now, Pete Bowes will likely take this as a cue for explaining why (in his belief) the contents of the suitcase were laid out in such a ceremonial way: and why the name link to recently-deceased Adelaide Freemason Tom Kean was never explored by the police. But… one thing at a time, Petey-boy, one thing at a time… 🙂

37 thoughts on “Was the Somerton Man an Odd Fellow?

  1. I’ve moved on Nick …. and am wondering why analyst Cowan didn’t test the slip for foreign substances. Not so much a slip of paper, but a twist of paper. Perhaps the end contained the means to the end.
    Marvellous stuff this … You should try to keep up old boy, there’s movement at the station.

  2. Pete: not the old hokey-cokey? And there’s me thinking that it was Freemasonry that floated your boat surfboard. 🙂

  3. Nick – Are you going to comment on the Morse code angle raised? Seems a bit more plausible IMO and worth pursuing…

  4. Jay: I’ve commented on Gordon Cramer’s “prosigns” hypothesis on Pete Bowes’ site, and I will probably comment on it here at some point… but the short version is that I’m not yet convinced. The explanation of (e.g.) ABAB seems a bit unwieldy: and given that the rest of the text inside the prosign “wrapper” must also be encrypted, it doesn’t really explain anything.

  5. bobthehob123 on June 30, 2014 at 5:03 pm said:

    Although I see you are fatigued in the presence of new Voynich theories, here’s one I think you should evaluate: http://www.academia.edu/7144268/Voynich_Manuscript_Roma_Sindhi_Mahajans_Reference_Book_in_Landa_Khojki_scripts

  6. Gordon on June 30, 2014 at 8:57 pm said:

    Nick, Your views are always appreciated even if we don’t always agree. The basic position is that the letters of the code that we see on the page are in fact the results of the Police or whoever else was employed to do the job, tracing over indentations that showed up under UV light. How that was done is another story.

    The Prosign hypothesis is another way of saying that on the SM code page there is a mass of code and it so happens it is covered/disguised with a layer of ‘tradecraft’ in the form of letters which in turn look to be Prosigns derived from a Radio Operators User Manual dated 1945. There is a lot of work to do with each larger letter having to be digitally taken apart to reveal its micro code content but, for larger letter read ‘line of code’ because that is what it appears to be, a line of code presented in the form and shape of a letter. A simple but proven to be a very effective way to disguise code. In tradecraft terms, the letters become ‘Carriers’.

    A quick overview of the 5 lines of letters on the code page with emphasis on the prosign meanings of the first and last letters,

    Line1. 1st . letter M meaning ‘source’ in a particular style which I will call style 1
    Last letter: D Prosign meaning deferred, the coded message within the letter D is deffered.

    Line 2. 1st Letter m a different style called style 2
    Last letter ? This line was crossed out but refer to line 4.

    Line 3. 1st letter M in style 1
    Last letter P, prosign meaning Priority: this letter contains a line of code that is a priority

    Line 4. 1st letter m in style 2
    last letter C, Prosign meaning Correct Version: this letter contains a corrected version, see line 2.

    Line 5. 1st letter V, Prosign meaning From: This letter contains details of who the message is from
    Last letter(s) AR underscored, Prosgn meaning This is my last message and no reply is expected or required.

    Standing back from the page my view is that the first 4 lines, less 1 for the crossed out line, are copies of intercepted or overheard information with the two M styles describing 2 different sources of that information.

    The last line is the message to be transmitted whether that message is for radio transmission or passed on in some other way is something we may never know.

    There is a lot of work to do on this and no doubt there will be hurdles, what I will be doing is releasing each set of information as I uncover it and then others can do the hard work of decryption. And Yes Nick, I will be working on each of the larger letters to associate them with Prosigns if at all possible. Your input especially would be greatly appreciated.

  7. Gordon: as I mentioned, I do plan to write this up in more detail before very long. I am skeptical about the suggested presence both of microwriting (the scan resolution seems too low to tell them apart from, say, JPEG artefacts) and of Prosigns (which seem to me to make the rest of the text even harder to understand) in the MLIABO text, but perhaps I’m missing something important in both of these.

  8. To catch a spy, Nick, you have to think like one … devious gentleman at the best of times, untrustworthy, duplicitous, canny and deceitful. Easy for some.

  9. Gordon on June 30, 2014 at 11:07 pm said:

    Thanks Nick, More than happy to discuss the issue of JPEG Artifacts and the Prosign issue. Big work day ahead for me but will email you later with some detail.

  10. Clay on July 1, 2014 at 9:31 pm said:

    Freemasons also use one letter cipher books to aid them in memorizing ritual, so it’s just as likely he became familiar with the idea of using first letters from the Freemasons as from the Odd Fellows. Examples can be found online by searching or similar search terms.

  11. misca on July 5, 2014 at 1:42 am said:

    Nick – Please find us a way to discuss without having to make statements! So much information is lost when faced with having to “perform”! Your comment about the Sidney HMAS…There’s a link to Joy…I have no idea what it means so I won’t post but I would love to share and discuss. Gordon – Hat’s off to you on the article that was posted but I have several objections and questions about what you have found…I won’t ask them publicly but would love to discuss them respectfully – somewhere…

    We need a way to discuss!

  12. misca on July 7, 2014 at 2:55 am said:

    Gordon – I can’t imagine (even in 1948) that the police would have written over the original sheet (with indented markings)! It makes no sense and would have basically involved the destruction of the only “code” evidence that they had.

    I’m lost. Attack me and try to bash some sense into me please. I would really like to see what you see…So much so that I have spent an inordinate amount of time blowing up everything you’ve posted and all I see is nothing. Also – please, what do YOU see? So far, you’ve posted that you see micro-writing but you’ve never described what exactly that micro-writing is…Can you spell it out? Perhaps if you’ve managed to discern specific letters/numbers we could help to decipher them?

    I always keep an open mind and will continue to do so…

  13. misca on July 7, 2014 at 3:02 am said:

    Joy was “friends” enough to have invited one of the important naval officers who died on the Sidney HMAS to dinner. It was in the papers. (Trove as usual.) He lived in the same neighbourhood as she did. Most likely, this means nothing. If there is a possibility that it could mean something, I will gladly elaborate.

  14. pete on July 7, 2014 at 10:25 am said:

    Misca: See what you can see in the letter ‘Q’ on Gordon’s post … he has lifted off the layers, so to speak.
    and he’s not a basher, and nothing needs to be attacked or blown up … we are all gentlefolk in these parts

  15. misca on July 8, 2014 at 2:03 am said:

    There is a book called “The Art of Omar Khayyam: Illustrating FitzGerald’s Rubaiyat By William Mason, Sandra Martin”. It has an illustration in it by W G Stirling that is very much in keeping with the “Boxall” Khayyam illustration (on the flyleaf with Jestyn’s signature)…Has this been investigated? If so, could someone share some info? The recent “Adelaide” article is the first time I’ve seen a complete image of the inscription page – quite exciting! Going back to earlier discussions, I am now convinced that the female with fez hat was printed and not drawn onto the page.

  16. misca on July 8, 2014 at 2:04 am said:

    Pete – I see the letter “Q” blown up. I will keep looking.

  17. misca on July 8, 2014 at 2:11 am said:

    DA, I believe, has updated his SM information page with a higher resolution image of the code page. Expanded, it looks like felt/ink marker on a glossy surface and the beginning and end points of most letters (with their tell-tale empty hole middle) make it clear that the writing is most definitely not on porous paper. So…Are we now assuming that this page was traced over a photograph/acetate equivalent and that NOT ONLY were normal letters traced but their nano-micro-writing as well?

    That’s a tough sell. Not impossible but tough.

  18. Gordon on July 8, 2014 at 4:13 am said:

    Misca, no problem, we can catch up on tamamshud.blogspot, lots more information there. I also visit Pete’s site regularly. A bit tied up this week though.

  19. Gordon on July 8, 2014 at 5:25 am said:

    Misca to respond to your questions, you are correct the Police would not have marked directly on to the surface of the page. The procedure for marking up a document would be to use acetate over a photograph of the processed document. The process can be quite involved so won’t go into that here suffice to say it very probably involved the use of Iodine which shows up almost every fibre. Iodine alone would not be sufficient and a fixative chemical solution was probably also applied to the image of the page. In other words there would have been some customisation of the image and hence the need to use a sheet of acetate to preserve the modified image. There is a lot of robust discussion right now on the code page and Verse 70, that’s a good thing because it lifts the profile of the case and creates a lot more interest.

    Apologies to you Nick, I mentioned my url in the previous comment and that’s not good practice.

  20. Gordon on July 8, 2014 at 9:03 pm said:

    Misca, You are correct I believe, acetate was used and placed over the image before marking it up.

    We need to ask why it was marked over, the process was either to use Iodine and/or to photograph the page under UV light which would show up the indentations as being white with blue tinge/grey surround, this image was turned negative which made the indentations black in colour.

    Here’s the thing, if the indentations were of full letters and they were now turned black against the greyish coloured surrounding areas, why would you need to overwrite them? You would have all the larger letters showing up in good relief. In my view there may not have been any larger letters in indentation form, just the microwritten letters shaped in the form of larger letters. Perhaps even both with larger letters acting as a predrawn carrier for the micro ones. There is an example or two of that.

    In my view the answer is you would overwrite them to cover the smaller microwritten letters/numbers and that’s what is shown in the close ups. Gerry Feltus told me of the negative image part of the process a while back and the penny didn’t drop, I must be getting old or slow or both 🙂 Then again, no one else seems to have grasped it either so I take some comfort from that.

    Can I make it clear that I am not a code person in any way and I ‘doffs me cap’ to those that are. My chosen area is tradecraft and concealment and I do profess a reasonable knowledge in that subject.

  21. His name isn’t Gordon Cameron, and for a small fee I will disclose his real identity, or send your bank details for a direct debit on an ongoing basis. I have more.
    Your trust is assured.

  22. bdid1dr on July 10, 2014 at 8:40 pm said:

    Careful, Pete; Misca might take you at your word…
    😉

  23. misca on July 11, 2014 at 9:49 pm said:

    : o

  24. B Deveson on July 11, 2014 at 9:56 pm said:

    Some laundry marks from the USA, probably New York State, have a similar format to those found on SM’s trousers that were found in the suitase.

    l have been researching laundry marks (also called laundry indicators in the USA) in the hope of possibly identifying at least the broad geographic origin of the laundry marks found on SM’s trousers. I have not had any success in locating a general treatise on the subject, or any lists of laundry marks, but there is a lot of scattered information dealing with specific matters and I have made use of these to compile the following notes and observations.

    I searched Trove (more than 1,000 refs to wade through) for any references to “laundry marks” and a summary of the laundry marks that are described is appended. I did not find any laundry marks that conform to the format of those on SMs trousers (ie four numerals slash one numeral), or anything similar (numerals slash numerals) in the Trove material.

    However, I did find find a legal case in the USA where laundry marks of the format numerals slash numerals were mentioned ie. Shirley KREMEN, Samuel Irving Coleman and Sidney Steinberg, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES of America. 353 U.S. 346 (77 S.Ct. 828, 1 L.Ed.2d 876)
    Decided: May 13, 1957.

    The clothing with these laundry marks was seized by the FBI in 1954 during a raid on a cabin in the Sierra Nevada mountains (near Twain Harte, Tuolumne County, California). Members of the American Communist Party had been hiding a fugitive, Robert George Thompson (1915-1965). The people who were in the cabin at the time were Robert George Thompson, Mrs Shirley Kremen, Samuel Irving Coleman, Carl Ross, and Sidney Steinberg. From the description of the clothes and their nature, I think that the clothes with the numerals slash numerals laundry mark probably belonged to Robert George Thompson.

    I note that Thompson was described as the “New York State Communist Party chairman.”
    Ross was from Minnesota, Kremen from Los Angeles, Steinberg and Coleman were Communist Party officials from New York/Buffalo.

    The West Australian (Perth) 5th May 1954 Page 7

    “Four Will Be Gaoled For Concealing Red SAN FRANCISCO, Tues. Four Community Party workers today received sentences ranging from one to three years’ imprisonment for having harboured Robert Thompson, a former New York State Communist Party chairman, while he was a fugitive from trial. Sidney Steinberg and Samuel Coleman, New York party officials, were sentenced to three years’ imprisonment for their part in the concealment of Thompson in a hut in the Sierra Nevada Mountains of California. Carl Ross, Minnesota Communist Party leader, received a two-year sentence, and Mrs. Shirley Kremen, of Los Angeles, was sentenced to one year.”

    So, the laundry marks on SM’s trousers could have originated in New York State, or California. Taken with the evidence of the US origin of SM’s coat (the evidence of tailor Hugh Pozza regarding the feather stitching), this suggests that, 1) either SM obtained the clothing in question (Marco brand trousers and the coat) from charity stores, or 2) SM had visited the USA post 1939.

    The photograph (Feltus page 66) showing the laundry marks also shows the following printed words on the trousers. “…arco …Strap Patent No. 29089 Supporting trousers War time model (non elastic)”. Elsewhere the trousers were identified as being “Marco” brand. I can remember Marco trousers and I owned at least one pair back in the 1950s and 60s.

    Trove shows that Marco brand Elsta-strap trousers were sold throughout Australia, but advertisements in West Australia and Tasmania were limited. Advertisements over the period 1939-1948 were: NSW 148. South Australia 65. Queensland 63. Victoria 31. Northern Territory 12. West Australia 9. Tasmania 8. Australian Capital Territory 3.

    Marco Elasta Strap trousers were manufactured by the Marco Elasta Strap Trouser Top Company. The principal of this company was Marcus Manly Isaacs who is listed in the electoral rolls as living in Maroubra 1930, then living in Coogee (1936-1963) so I presume his factory was in Sydney.

    The trousers evidently post date the outbreak of war (1939) and the patent number should further refine the earliest date for the manufacture of the trousers. I assume elastic (ie rubber) restrictions only became significant after the outbreak of war in the Pacific (December 1941).

    So, we might be looking for a man born 1898-1908) who travelled from Australia to the USA post December 1941 and who came back to Australia. SM appeared not to have any vaccination marks, so he was probably not an Australian serviceman. It was noted at the inquest that occasionally vaccination marks can fade.

    Summary of laundry mark information from Trove (1890-1949).

    The Daily News (Perth) 10th January 1938. Page 4
    area – Freemantle, WA
    Laundy mark 5803 or S803

    Goulburn Evening Penny Post 10th January 1935 Page 2
    Area New Zealand
    Laundry mark (presumably the laundry identifier) RCO

    The Courier Mail 17th September 1937 Page 19
    Area London, UK
    II H

    The Argus 29th November 1950 Page 3
    Area Melbourne
    MO36-6

    The Argus 3rd September 1934 Page 9
    Area Albury NSW
    RIW QIW RIN or QIN

    The Daily News (Perth) 17th September 1949 Page 1
    Area West Australia
    Laundry mark N. Ward

    News (Adelaide) 29th May 1950 Page 1
    Area Adelaide, SA
    Laundry mark B557

    Army News (Darwin) 16th October 1944 Page 3
    Area London
    Laundry mark P733

    Recorder (Port Pirie, SA) 5th May 1931 Page 4
    Area Surrey UK
    Laundry mark LC and DI 220

    The Argus (Melbourne) 19th August 1927 Page 16
    Area Melbourne
    Laundry mark WMA

    Western Mail (Pereth) 8th February 1902 Page 43
    Area Melbourne, Victoria
    Laundry mark 27

    The Northern Miner (Charters Towers) 16th May 1951 Page 2
    Area Brisbane
    Laundry mark Smith

    The Courier Mail (Brisbane) 9th January 1934 Page 18
    Area Brisbane
    Laundry mark CX

    The Geelong Advertiser (Victoria) 16th June 1913 Page 3
    Area Victoria
    Laundry mark CX2077X with another X below this

    The Sydney Morning Herald 4th February 1929 Page 7
    Area Sydney NSW
    Laundry mark P 10

    The Courier Mail (Brisbane) 20th October 1947 Page 3
    Area Brisbane
    Laundry mark 3587

    Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners Advocate (NSW) 28th November 1947 Page 3
    Area Sydney
    Laundry mark S9233

    Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners Advocate (NSW) 17th February 1949 Page 5
    Area Queensland
    Laundry mark 5614 and 5619

    Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners Advocate (NSW) 25th February 1924 Page 5
    Area Newcastle
    Laundry mark H/40

    The Northern Miner 4th July 1949 Page 1
    Area Queensland
    Laundry mark 16602W

    The Advertiser (SA) 23rd March 1912 Page 21
    Area Melbourne
    Laundry mark 144

    Maryborough Chronicle (Qld) 20th March 1950 Page 3
    Area Queensland
    Laundry mark Mault
    The Sydney Morning Herald 14th October 1927 Page 11

    Area Sydney
    Laundry mark John J Barr

    The Sydney Morning Herald 14th October 1927 Page 11
    Area Sydney
    Laundry mark Crowe

    Warwick Examiner and Times (Qld) 19th November 1898 Page 4
    Area New York
    Laundry mark G51

    Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners Advocate 8th January 1951 Page 2
    Area Newcastle, NSW
    Laundry mark Wright 26.441. Wed

    The Australasian (Melbourne) 16th April 1892 Page 24
    Area Victoria
    Laundry mark “like a capital F reversed”

    The Maitland Daily Mercury (NSW) 31st July 1939 Page 5
    Area New South Wales
    Laundry mark L.B.A.R.C.

    The World’s News (Sydney) 3rd August 1946 Page 4
    Area UK
    Laundry mark 599

    Frankston and Somerville Standard (Victoria) 13th March 1936 Page 3
    Area Melbourne
    Laundry mark 52

    The World’s News (Sydney) 8th May 1954 Page 16
    Area Portland, Oregon USA
    Laundry mark D431

    Mirror (Perth) 20th September 1952 Page 7
    Area UK
    Laundry mark R1009

    The Sydney Morning Herald 25th April 1932 Page 5
    Area Sydney
    Laundry mark soft S 188

    The Cessnock Eagle and South Maitland Recorder (NSW) 26th August 1930 Page 5
    Area Newcstle
    Laundry mark G. White and W166

    The World’s News (Sydney) 8th January 1949 Page 4
    Area Vermont. USA
    Laundry mark K1

    The West Australian (perth) 5th June 1947 Page 17
    Area West Australia
    Laundry mark Hobby

    The West Australian (Perth) 9th September 1936 Page 8
    Area Freemantle, WA
    Laundry mark G.P.Mc

    The World’s News 1st December 1937 Page 22
    Area London
    Laundry mark Oake

    Soldier British Army 1941
    Laundry mark RA1019 (but his name was Hill)

    RAF WW2
    Laundry mark M9 W.A.D. And S.226

    RAF WW2
    Laundry mark HLL 878

    US Army
    Laundry mark first letter of surname plus last four numbers of Service Number

  25. B Deveson on July 11, 2014 at 10:12 pm said:

    I have abstracted the descriptions of the clothing containing laundry marks with the format numerals slash numerals from the long list of clothing seized by the FBI in the following case.

    Shirley KREMEN, Samuel Irving Coleman and Sidney Steinberg, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES of America.
    353 U.S. 346 (77 S.Ct. 828, 1 L.Ed.2d 876)
    Decided: May 13, 1957.
    A copy of the F.B.I.’s inventory of the property thus taken is printed in the appendix to this opinion, 353 U.S. 349, 77 S.Ct. 830.
    …………..
    1 Brown man’s jacket, single breasted, with inside label “Witty Bros., Craft,” has the following marks: Inside breast inner pocket is tag “Witty Brothers, New York, A84630; near shoulder attached to lining of right sleeve is stapled cleaning tag 90/93371; several inches below shoulder in inside of right sleeve, written on lining are numbers 14/5. Has pipe cleaner in breast pocket and loose tobacco
    1 Man’s single-breasted blue suit coat, no label, inner lining of right sleeve contains lettering “27/99692”
    1 Pair Men’s tan or beige trousers with brown leather belt, worn and mended; left pocket has laundry mark 1/968
    1 Pair Men’s blue trousers with following marks: right pocket has laundry marks “4649” and “27/99269”
    1 Trousers-man’s-herring bone, blue-gray, laundry mark on left pocket New Man SA, right pocket 27/9969 B5 1460 6247

  26. Gordon on July 12, 2014 at 10:10 am said:

    An observation, when you look athe Police image in whch they show the laundry marks on the inside of the trousers, they are very faint and don’t stand out in view. In contrast, the ‘close up’ images of the marks are well defined and quite black in appearance, in fact uniformly black.

    A question would be that if they were untouched or not overmarked by the Police then it would be odd to say the least that all the marks had the same intensity of colour.

    Given that the trousers would have been cleaned on a number of occasions and with some quite caustic chemicals, you would think that the earlier ones would have faded. Not so.

    Then we are left with wondering did the Police trace them just like they did with the code page or were they faked? I mention the latter because laundry marks, amongst may other things, were used to conceal code and secret writing by the spying fraternity at those times. At the detail level amongst other aspects, you will notice that in the close up images that the number 3 is of quite a different style in each mark.

    Food for thought.

  27. B Deveson on July 14, 2014 at 11:31 am said:

    The use of elastic in garments was restricted by National Security Order of 24th June 1942. See:
    The West Australian 25th July 1942 page 4

    These restrictions were relaxed in January 1946. See: Northern Star (Lismore, NSW) 23rd January 1946 page 5

    So, it would appear that SM’s Marco brand Elasta Strap trousers were manufactured between July 1942, and early 1946.

  28. B Deveson: did you mean “before July 1942 or after early 1946”?

  29. B Deveson on July 15, 2014 at 10:05 am said:

    Nick: Manufactured between July 1942, and early 1946, because the trousers were branded “war time model” and “non elastic”.

  30. B Deveson: ah, my mistake, thanks – very interesting thread!

  31. B Deveson on July 16, 2014 at 1:34 am said:

    NSW police made inquiries with Marco Productions Pty. Ltd., the manufacturers of the Marco trousers found in the suitcase. The company’s records only went back to 1945, and “the number appearing on the trousers is not included in the numbers recorded since that year, indicating that the trousers were manufactured prior to 1945.” Feltus page 69.

  32. B Deveson on July 16, 2014 at 8:15 am said:

    A search of Trove revealed that the only advertisements (seven in total) for Marco Elasta Strap trousers in the period 1/7/1942 to 1/1/1945 were placed by the Palace Store, Kiama. There were seven advertisements in the period from 18th March 1944 through to 15th April 1944.

    These trousers were expensive because other brands were selling for about twenty five to thirty shillings.

    The Kiama Reporter and Illawarra Journal 5th April 1944 page 2
    B. Jenkins, Palace Store, Kiama. Men’s Tropical Grey Crusader Sergette Trousers, Marco Elasto self supporting strap 39/11 and 10 coupons.

    Just why the Kiama store was the only store in Australia advertising Marco Elasta Strap trousers over this period is not clear.

    Travel within Australia was very restricted during WW2 so it would seem that there is a significant chance that SM’s Marco trousers were bought from the Palace Store at Kiama. Which is a little strange, but I will now focus my attention on males from the Kiama district who disappeared into smoke in late 1948.

  33. …. or men passing through, a trawler, back from New Guinea.

  34. Clive on July 16, 2014 at 10:42 am said:

    Hi BD, Just a note that a business called A M Sullivan, Manning St, Kiama was advertising in the Kiama Reporter & Illawarra Journal on 17 July 1946 and stated they were a depot for dry cleaning & Nu-system laundry. Wonder if there is a any connection with the SM & his tags?

  35. misca on July 17, 2014 at 1:14 am said:

    Pete – You’ve posed a very good question and I’ve been trying to find the “Australian Publishing Co. Pty. Ltd.”! I’m looking forward to the next chapter.

  36. Gordon on July 17, 2014 at 7:12 am said:

    Byron, a couple of thoughts that you probably have already had. The seam in the trousers is ragged, it was apparently done that way by seamstresses to add greater strength. Interestingly that kind of seam was predominantly put in by contractors working from home/ away from the factory.

    Whilst the trousers were marked as ‘war time model’, you could imagine that there would have been some significant stocks left over at the end of hostilities. These may then have been moved off in bulk to Army Surplus or similar outlets.

    Last thought was the tie in with the dry cleaners marks. The trousers were apparently cleaned 3 times in all, a question would be how often would a man have his trousers laundered? Going back to the 50s and 60s we would take
    trousers/uniforms to the cleaners every 2 to 3 months especially if you didn’t have that many spare.

  37. B Deveson on July 17, 2014 at 8:26 am said:

    Misca,
    I think the company name is Australasian Publishing Company Pty. Ltd. which was situated at 55 York Street, Sydney in the 1940s.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post navigation