Goodwin Auction is open + Peck & Snyder Discussion

[GaryPassamonte]

Barry, I'm trying to determine if the biography on the back was originally associated with the card. The Peck and Snyder reference at the bottom of the biography could just be a coincidence. Maybe the biography was written in one of Peck an Snyder's catalogs, the P&S reference was just there, and the biography was later affixed. The possibility exists that this is not a P&S issue at all. Along those lines, it could have been issued any time after 1862.

[barrysloate]

Gary- what I'm thinking, and this could change, is that Peck and Snyder had the Creighton image glued to a blank card, and then affixed a pre-printed ad to the back themselves. I think the chances of finding a biography in a newspaper, for example, that fit the exact height and width of the card, and fortuitously included the company name and street address at the bottom, is remote at best. If that biography was not part of the original mount, as has been suggested, then I believe P & S had it specially made to fit onto the back. I admit it makes little sense to have constructed this card in two steps, but I don't believe that back was randomly found at a later date.

[GaryPassamonte]

The thing that bothers me is that if this is a P&S issue, why isn't it listed on the 1871 sales list. It would have to have been made after 1868 because of the P&S reference. Why doesn't the back display an ad similar to the team cards? If this is a P&S issue, it is an anomaly. Is everyone reading this still convinced the Creighton is a P&S issue?

[benjulmag]

Jay, I don't have the card in front of me to inspect the verso.

Given the fact that the biography perfectly matches the card's dimensions, it seems just too amazing that the biography as currently printed was not meant to affix to the card. If in fact it was pasted on, that would mean P&S was in the infancy of its collaboration, or that they were a duo under a different form of collaboration than they subsequently became, and did not have a business card.

I have learned from experience not to be too taken by first-published references to a business. Records then, especially during and in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War, are simply one, albeit an important one, part of the evidence. When we first began discussing what the verso might say, we were hoping that it might contain clues to the dating of the card. Well it has, in regard to the Flaney reference and the current existence of the Excelsiors. This information too is relevant and should not be summarily dismissed.

As has been noted, if the card was produced during the run of the other known P&S's, strange that it would not be advertised along with the others. And as to whether it would have predated or postdated that run, given what the verso says, the lack of advertising, and the diminishing interest in Creighton the further away from his death, I simply do not see how anyone can at this point make a definitive statement that the card cannot predate 1868.

[19cbb]

Maybe my question about the clipped top left corner got lost with all the P&S discussion...

From Rucker's Cartes (1988) & Wong's Smithsonian (2005)

[barrysloate]

I see conflicting facts here. On one hand the address of 126 Nassau Street suggests the card was issued later than we originally thought, perhaps in the 1868 to 1870 range, maybe even later. But the physical appearance of it looks much older than any of the team cards, kind of the same way a CdV made in the 1860's looks older than one made in the 1870's. Right now I'm thinking we are still missing some crucial information.

[benjulmag]

I don't have the card in front of me to examine if it has been restored. I doubt it though and can say I never had anything done to it. When Mark Rucker published it in his Cdv book, I seem to recall that he first had the images shot in black and white, then put a sepia overtone on them. If in fact this is what was done, the resultant images could create misleading impressions as to what might have been done to them.

[19cbb]

Thanks Corey.

Added scan from Alvarez' The Old Ball Game (1992) - (Center)

[oldjudge]

Andrew Peck was a Mason. The Masons published a book of biographies of their prominent members which can be found via Google. Andrew Peck's bio states that he started his sporting goods business in 1866 and joined with Snyder in 1868. No confusion here. Anything that says Peck & Snyder is 1868 or later.
Corey--It should be obvious if there was a second layer glued to a pre-existing trade card. Is the card one or two layers thick?