Identifying E101 and E102 purely by the front (E8, E78 tie in)

[G1911]

Thank you guys. Very cool run of Young's

The only thing I would bet on is that the Magee and the Young are from the same set and are thus not E102 or E90.

I would think it most likely these were run through a different sheet's back by accident, rather than E78 being on the same sheet and appearing on these because it was run upside down. E78 is markedly scarcer than than most of the options here, to the extent that it wouldn't make sense to be on the same sheet. At the same time, the same is true for E79 and E80 that clearly did, for at least some of production, share sheet space with E95 and E96.

I believe American Caramel is the only one of these caramel companies possibly involved for which a printer is known.

[RCMcKenzie]

I think I own that Magee. DJ may have a better memory than me. I can look later.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

I think I own that Magee. DJ may have a better memory than me. I can look later.

If you come across it and under close examination find a message written in invisible ink on the back detailing the production of the card, please let me know

[RCMcKenzie]

The boxing backs have the stair-step style of e102, but Young is not in e102.

What if Dockman, or it's printer, made e101, e102, and e92 Dockman, and also the e78. Back is a mistake. My Magee and DJ's Young are from the same mistake sheet.

[gabrinus]

Had a card with a Menagerie back that was designated as E92...memory fails me who it was but if I remember it I will post...Jerry

[gabrinus]

It was a Red Kleinow I bought from FKW...Jerry

[x2drich2000]

Originally Posted by gabrinus

It was a Red Kleinow I bought from FKW...Jerry

Jerry, here it is. Still appreciate you letting me get it. And my Lobert labeled as an e102.

Rob, no idea if you have the Magee. From memory I think it last sold in LOTG years ago.

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by gabrinus

Had a card with a Menagerie back that was designated as E92...memory fails me who it was but if I remember it I will post...Jerry

Here is the Wagner batting -- OOPS, I see it was already posted. Sorry for the double post

I love this issue -- E90-1 (sometimes) through E106 and T216. DJ knows more about these than anyone. I wish we had the general knowledge on these cards that exist for T206

[G1911]

It seems to me that the likeliest scenario is that all of the sets discussed here were done by a single printer. It doesn't make much sense otherwise; one printing firm gets the artwork done, designs the cards and captions, and then others... what, pirate the set by getting their hands on the cards, recreating the images perfectly and setting up to reprint them? It doesn't make sense that way, hard to see the profit in going to so much effort at the time. E90, E92, E101, E102, these sets are all very likely the same printer. The wrong sheets tell us E78, E26 and E8 had to be done by the same team.

We do know the name of a printer used by American Caramel, who issued E90. The E125 die cut stands from mid 1910 tell us P.R. Warren made both series of them. I have been diving into Peter R. Warren's printing and paper goods making firm of Lowell, Warrensville, Boston and NYC because of this connection in an effort to tie their NY office to American Caramel to resolve some lingering mysteries from the V153 research.

We should not assume and make the deductive leap that because Peter Warren's firm did the E125's that they did all of American Caramel's cards (and thus likely this grouping of sets discussed in this thread). It forms the solitary real clue I have at present though, and may lead to a real resolution. P.R. Warren was in some serious financial trouble in late 1910, but were big enough to have at least 4 offices and locations. I have always thought it probable the caramel sets were not authorized unlike the tobacco issues, but if Warren had an NY office and did do American Caramel's cards, these issues may have been authorized by the players after all, in accord with the 1904 NY State law.