T220 Silver - Uncut Edition

[G1911]

The sheet as it stands today, with measurements. The missing Choyinski panel has the white border at left and very clearly is below Coburn, so we know there is not more to the left, and the actual measurement will be slightly greater horizontally than I can show here.

The panels are very slightly curved, and I don't press them together side by side exactly so as not to damage corners; measurements won't be 100% exact from this, but to show the scale.

[G1911]

And the sheet recreated as best I can, with production singles filling in Choyinski (extant and confirmed in that slot, but owned by someone else) and McAuliffe (unknown to exist, I doubt that it does anymore).

[steve B]

That's wonderful. Even beat it belongs with the rest of the sheet.

I finally had a close look at the image size, and did a bit of math for other sets. For T206 sized cards, going on what looks like a 50x33 inch printed area the two different layouts work out to 34x12 cards if they're vertical and 19x22 if theyre horizontal.

The 34x12 fits fewer cards, but matches pretty much perfectly with the groupings, which almost always come out to 12 or 17/34.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by steve B

That's wonderful. Even beat it belongs with the rest of the sheet.

I finally had a close look at the image size, and did a bit of math for other sets. For T206 sized cards, going on what looks like a 50x33 inch printed area the two different layouts work out to 34x12 cards if they're vertical and 19x22 if theyre horizontal.

The 34x12 fits fewer cards, but matches pretty much perfectly with the groupings, which almost always come out to 12 or 17/34.

I won't take it for granted that there is 1 sheet size for a particular issue, especially issues for which there is some deductive indications of multiple facility printing and printed over long stretches of time (T220 is probably 5-6 months with at least 3 distinct print periods in that timeframe) like T206. 34 and 12 fits a lot of the patterns and a larger sheet is more efficient from a production perspective.

One oddity here (or odd to me, as a printing novice) is the lack of extra border on the cards on the margin. On the sheets the cards measure correct on the ends, so that if there was even 1mm of miscutting the tan border would be replaced with white. I imagine in production more of the sheet margins were smeared with the silver layer to hide this, as we never see a silver border card with any hint of white cardstock on the front at an edge.

I pickup T miscuts etc. whenever possible but miscuts only take us so far in reconstructing. Different sets have different oddities, like some of the T218's being printed upside down, the smaller size cards being done in mostly vertical repeating arrangements. Can deduce a T42 (same size as T206) sheet has 25 different subjects, but who knows how many rows or if there are DP's involved to do that, it doesn't mean 25 rows across.

It's a shame that so little uncut material survives, and most of what did has been destroyed before being documented (like the alleged T206 panel Wagner and Plank came from, the T204 sheet, etc.). The T25 partial sheets above were also destroyed (I have 2 of the lower grade strips that were apparently the rejects from trimming them up) but thankfully documented first. Maybe the next find will be a T206 sheet and we can do better than make deductions. What we learn from them is often cooler than the material itself.

[G1911]

I want to correct some false assumptions I had earlier and then forgot to come update until reaching this part of editing my notes.

T225-1 is in the Fullgraff record book, with some mostly uncut proofs glued into the book. Fullgraff and his employer, Brett Lithography, the printers of this silver sheet, are the person and company who Dick Hyland signed the rights of his image use, pursuant to the NY law. The record book tells us production was between February and May of 1910 in 3 different product runs (possibly more; the records may not be complete and only encompass one facility). So we know T225-1 is printed by Brett, and we have the contract for one of the subjects permitting it.

One thing that has long been noted as odd is that the Ball letter is made out by American Lithographic, the source for the long-standing hobby belief that ALC printed all the T cards at their NY headquarters (not true).

The Hyland contract, unlike the letter to Ball (it's not the contract itself, just a letter connected with it), makes no mention of what his image is to be used for or tobacco at all. It is made out to the lithographer, not the actual issuer. This is rather odd; typically a company using a persons image in marketing material pays that person or secures their permission and then has whoever does their printing make it.

The reason for this seems to be because images were desired to be used for multiple clients. T225-1 is not an ATC release; Khedievial is firmly independent. While some firms appear to operate independently but the records suggest are shadow subsidiaries of a Monopoly in the Sherman era, the ATC was busy suing Khedivial for rolling oval cigarettes that violated a patent from 1908-1910, their executives cited Khedivial as a top competitor, and nothing I have ever been able to find suggests that Khedivial was a shadow subsidiary. Hyland's rights were given to the lithographer so they could sell his image to the Khedivial/Surbrug Co. (T225) and to the ATC (T218/T226). This did not happen often in T card land; there are very few T sets that are not done for the ATC, but even the same printers did at least some of those cards. It seems to have been the purpose though. As we have seen from E229, it may bleed into more caramel cards of the period as well that followed the exact same timeline.

It is possible T225-2 has so many obscure and insignificant subjects because someone at the ATC didn't like this and, as the much larger client, changed how the contracts worked or pressured their friends at the ALC and it's semi-independent subsidiaries, an ally of the ATC. Just a theory for the italicized portion.

[G1911]

It's been over a year, but I think I have finally made some very small progress on the mystery of the Donovan/J. Corbett short printing while reviewing the Dingley Tariff and the long-standing theory that the cards are short-printed because there was some kind of prize associated with the set, like some Gum card sets and others did.

The primary import of this tariff act is that it banned tobacco cards entirely in 1897. In 1902 it was amended by Congress to only ban those that were "immoral" - this is why the 19th century tobacco card focus on provocative images of women are about the only topic T cards stayed away from - because it was illegal to insert them.

Because I am an idiot, I only just realized that the verbiage in the act regulating coupons and prizes seems to relate to this SP problem in T220-1. The 1902 amendment also lightens regulations of coupons and prizes, but it stipulates that, in addition to the prize not being "immoral" either, shall not include in tobacco packages "any paper, certificate or instrument purporting to represent a ticket, chance, share, or interest in, or dependent upon, the event of a lottery." A short printed card inserted randomly for a winner to pull and redeem, by itself or with a set, would seem to fall under the meaning of a lottery at that time, a card as an instrument used as a chance to win a lottery. As the ATC was quite careful not to openly violate direct laws and give the government even more opportunities to come after them, I think this explanation can now be dismissed positively.

Perhaps one day a source will appear that gives us the answer as to why these two were short-printed. It looks like we can dismiss the insert/prize explanation, leaving us with the fact that the proofing stage had them printed in equal quantity as the other cards, alongside evidence that Donovan knew the man who produced the set and was anti-tobacco, but really nothing else. Not a lot to work with still. But it's something at least.

[Pat R]

Just a thought Greg but after they were printed a lot of the Donovan and Corbett cards could have been separated for some kind of promotion. I'm sure you know it was common to give out photo's/cards at movies, fights and other events back then. I'm not sure if there would have been a lower survival rate or not or possibly a lot of them were never given out and didn't survive.