[G1911]

Please feel free to move this, but as the subject is a new type and the set most known for the baseball cards, the sports these initial subjects played doesn't seem to matter much, so I'm including here to start.



N184's come in two known varieties, one with and one without the curvy text above the subjects portrait picture. All 50 subjects come without the curvy captioning, and 25 of them come without it, for a master set of 75 cards. McPherson and Muldoon are both among the subjects that only come without the top text, just as they are shown here.

In addition, there are cuts from the related album (A42) and poster (absent from Burdick's recording and no G#) that sometimes appear, both thin and blank backed. The poster includes 24 subjects. McPherson and Muldoon are not subjects included on the poster. In the album, cards are reproduced in a way that often cuts off a corner or changes the border. McPherson has the bottom right corner cut off by a laurel wreath, for example. Thus, we can immediately tell these 2 copies can not possibly be album cuts or poster cuts, even before looking at the backs.

These two cards are also not normal production cards. They are on thin stock, unlike the thick N184 Kimball's commonly seen. They are thicker than a poster cut typical of 19th century tobacco items though, pretty close to, say, a 1980's Donruss card. The back of McPherson is upside-down and significantly miscut. Muldoon’s back is correctly oriented. The backs also reveal a very thin black bordering around the text, just like the normally issued cards. These two copies have indications that they were handcut. The front borders are a crisper white than is normal, and the coloring is a bit bolder than is usually seen.

On examination and magnification in hand, they are clearly period. The seller noted they “submitted the Muldoon to SGC a few years back and came back too thin to holder . so they were puzzled as well” and kindly shared some further background, including that they had them for 30 years and never been able to find much of an explanation beyond chalking them up to be an error. I have not previously encountered a card like this. Has anyone else? Any knowledge or deductions about what these might be?