Posted By:
Jon CanfieldScott,
I, too, am certainly open to new suggestions and all theories, but Drum tobacco pouches containing cards is against the weight of all current evidence.
Your statement regarding Piedmont 12-count packs has a glaring ommission. There is, absolutely no way possible, that a 12 count cigarette pack was issued in 1909, 1910, 1911, 1912 - or any year prior to 1917. This is pure fact simply because it was illegal to issue a cigarette pack in a 12 count configuration before 1917. However, I, as well as other hear, recognized that there have been claims that cards were pulled from 12 count cigarette packs, so we offered other possible arguments for how this could be so. Certainly the most obvious is that the pack was tampered with. However, the other argument put forth was that T206s were in some instances inserted into packs in later years after 1911. Certainly our evidence and arguments must have been strong enough that Rob edited the REA description last auction.
Do I consider myself to be very knowledgeable on baseball related cigarette packs? Absolutely. I've spent years collecting these packs, reading ATC records, researching configuration and countless hours on the phone with long-time cigarette pack collectors outside of the hobby. However, one thing I am not is someone who is unwilling to listen to new theories or new ideas. But, just because Drum pouches have 1910 tax stamps and could fit a card inside does not mean it is a credible theory. Sweet Caporal made "little cigars" (similar to Recruit) in 1910. Does that mean we should automatically assume that T206s with SC backs came in those as well. If you look at the weight of the evidence regarding Drum cigarettes, I think the evidence falls greatly in the favor of my "thoery"...
1.) The back of the Drum cards say "Drum CIGARETTES", not "Drum Tobacco." Note that Polar Bear backed cards, which were packaged in scrap tobacco, say "Polar Bear - The Best SCRAP TOBACCO." They do not say "Polar Bear Cigarettes."
2.) It would have been against the law to package cards advertising cigarettes in a tobacco product. Considering the ATC was already knee deep in trust issues at this point, I seriously doubt the ATC would have willingly brake the law in such an obvious manor.
3.) Drum tobacco pouches were note even produced in the plants that carry the same factory and district codes of the Drum backed T206s.
4.) According to the American Tobacco Companies own distribution records, Drum Cigarettes WERE produced in the same factories as the cards designate on its back.
5.) We have a pre-Drummond merger Drum cigarette box which has been recently discovered.
6.) We have never discovered a Drum cigarette card that exhibits tobacco stains even somewhat similar to Polar Bear cards which were packaged in tobacco pouches
Edited to add: Scott, you also call out us so-called "experts" by stating we are unwilling to listen to new "theories" and just repaeat the same thing over and over again. However, I want you to note that we have provided evidence in government tax codes, a scan of the only known Drum cigarette pack that PRE-dates Drummond's merger to the ATC, federal law, ATC factory records on distribution, etc to support our "theory." Yet, all we get in response to the evidence we have given is a statement from NYhighlanderfan that until he sees a Drum Cigarette pack dating to 1910, he's not buying it and all he repeats is his same statement that Drum tobacco pouches could fit a card inside. If anyone is not willing to listen to a new theory here, it certainly isn't the so-called "experts." I truly wish I had a 1910 Drum cigarette pack to share. Maybe someday I will discover one. Heck, until July of 2008, we didn't even have a pre-1910 Drum cigarette pack to share.
As Jamie noted above, I'm certainly willing to listen to any and all new ideas that come forward. However, give us some evidence - anything.