NY Times/Athletic Story - newly discovered 1916 Ruth Morehouse RC

[nolemmings]

As Jay and others noted the article is good for the hobby but is less than precise, including the statement that “In 1916, children didn’t go to department stores for baseball cards, then mainly a product for men in tobacco packages”. I also just shook my head at this tidbit:

Unlike today’s rookies, who can ebb and flow for years before their career paths stabilize, the owner of the Ruth card knew within two seasons that he was not a mere star but a superstar. So it’s no surprise that versions of this card remain so relatively well preserved with an 8 (Near Mint-Mint) and three 7s in the graded population. They soon became cherished icons of the nation’s greatest hero.

No surprise–as if kids back in 1916 placed it in a penny sleeve and then a topholder to preserve what would no doubt be a valuable asset some day. Beats dragging it to school in your pocket with marbles and coins to show off to your friends or toss in the shoebox with the rest of the cards. Again though I am glad the author took the time to call attention to the card.

Trying to claim which 1916 Mendelsohn sponsor contains the Ruth “rookie” is a dicey proposition, which is why I believe all are treated as qualifying. Much depends on whether you look to the date of printing or the date of distribution, and of course things are complicated by the fact that Ruth bears the same card #151 in both m101-4 and m101-5. If forced to choose, I would say that the Standard Biscuit was the first one available, although even that would be matched by the earliest release of the m101-5 blank backs. Then you need to choose which Ruth was issued with m101-5 and not m101-4, since he appears in both with Standard Biscuit (Morehouse too). The accepted feature that points to m101-5 is the faint print line off Babe’s left hip, which is not found on cards from advertisers exclusive to m101-4. Because the Morehouse Ruth shown has this print line and both the Jackson and Thorpe cards shown from the same grouping line up with m101-5, I believe it is fair to call this a rookie card by at least some folks’ definition.