Goodwin Auction is open + Peck & Snyder Discussion

[triwak]

Amazing stuff, Guys! I only wish I could acquire one - any version would do nicely!!! That's the number one card on my wish list, but I'm afraid this one in Goodwin is gonna far exceed my budget.


Edited to say: Actually, I was thinking of the rather pristine example in the upcoming REA. Hmmm.... This one has possibilities?

[barrysloate]

Well that would suggest since 1864, but "30 years" could be a round number. It would be useful to look at all the different backs on the Peck & Snyders to see what address is listed, as well as any other pertinent information. Then perhaps we could create a timeline.

It is certainly possible that each of the known teams was issued to the public in the subsequent year, so that the 1870 Athletics, Mutuals and White Stocking were first made available in 1871, etc.

[GaryPassamonte]

Is there any way we could get a scan of the reverse of the 1868 Atlantics team card? Since this is the earliest image, a 126 Nassau St reverse would further enforce the idea that all P&S team cards may have been issued in the same year, with the possible exception of the P&S Reds CdVs.

[oldjudge]

I just went to Google maps. Assuming the numbering hasn't changed on these streets, 105 Nassau is on the corner of Nassau and Ann. 22 Ann is about 50 yards up Ann Street from the intersection, and 126 Nassau is less than 100 yards from the corner of Ann and Nassau. Thus, Peck & Snyder was pretty much at the same location (within 100 yards) throughout their history, even though they shifted between buildings. Therefore, both the Times article and the move to 126 Nassau Street in 1870 could both be accurate.

[benjulmag]

Here is the verso of the Creighton P&S. The hand-written reference to Culver Service was added at a later date.

[barrysloate]

Thanks Corey, that's really interesting. First, my source who told me there is no ad on the back is wrong, and I don't know where he got that information from. Second, since this too lists the Nassau Street address, and assuming the information is correct that the company moved there in 1870, then the Creighton is considerably later than we thought. Likewise, it may be possible that the whole set was issued at the same time (with the exception of Cincinnati, which was likely the only one popular enough to be reissued to satisfy demand).

This is still a work in progress, but fascinating. And boy, did they squeeze a lot of text onto the back of that Creighton.

[GaryPassamonte]

Corey,
Is the information printed on the card back? It looks like a part of a newspaper article that was affixed. This information does point to the Creighton being issued post 1870. The question remains as to why the reverse is so different to other known P&S cards. Could the Creighton have been more of a novelty item? It would be interesting to compare this to the reverse of the Atlantics P&S.

[barrysloate]

Some observations: there is heading at the top of the bio that is missing save the lower portion of the letters. It would be great if somehow we could figure out what it says. Also, the text refers to George Flanley as the current captain of the Excelsiors, but the team last played in 1867. Flanley was a member from at least 1862 until 1867, but I don't know what year he was made captain. There appears to be a year to the right of this notation, but the last two digits are trimmed away! Finally, if this is a newspaper clipping glued to the back, why is there a Peck and Snyder ad at the bottom of it?

[benjulmag]

The verso is not a newspaper clipping but in fact is printed on the card. If Flaney's last year with the Excelsior's was 1867, then that would suggest the latest the card could date from. When did the Excelsior's disband?

Also, the fact that P&S started referencing the 126 Nassau Street address in 1870 means nothing as to whether they could have been there previously. Maybe that was their first location, then they added another down the street and then consolidated back into Nassau Street. That would hardly be the first time a business did such a thing.

[barrysloate]

Corey- that's a good point, and critical.

We really do need an accurate timeline regarding where Peck and Snyder was, and when they were there, in order to figure this out.

[oldjudge]

Peck and Snyder did not join together till 1868; this is a fact. Therefore, forget trying to date the card pre-1868. Also, the George Flanley reference as "now Captain" sounds not like he is captain when the card was issued, but rather at a point in time they are talking about in the text.
My view is that all the team cards were issued in 1870 or later and that the Creighton card was issued as a commemorative, possibly on the anniversary of Creighton's death in 1872.

[barrysloate]

That's certainly a possibility Jay...and why are only four people partaking in this discussion? We're splitting the atom here, and nobody is watching.

[GaryPassamonte]

At this point I would have to agree with Jay. There are archived threads on this forum from 2004 and 2007 discussing Peck, P&S, as well as the addresses of each chronologically. These are referenced to the Beadle Guides and the Library of Congress. On the web,19cbaseball.com gives a chronology of Peck and P&S also. The information gives 5/1/1870 as the date of P&S first being at 126 Nassau St. I realize this would need to be corroborated, but the information is there. Finally, John Thorn wrote a biography about Creighton for SABR. At its conclusion he references the Creighton card, although he calls it a CdV. He speaks about Mark Rucker and his viewing of the card's reverse in 1983 while working on the 19th century issue of the National Pastime. He states that the biographical text on the back of the card was glued on. Maybe John could come on and elaborate on that.

[barrysloate]

If it were glued on, wouldn't it have been done by Peck and Snyder contemporaneous to the issuance of the card? Where would they get a biography of Creighton that both fit the dimensions of the trade card, and had their company advertising on the bottom of it? How could they find a newspaper clipping like that? More mysteries abound.

[19cbb]

Corey, was the top left corner of the Creighton restored at some point?

[barrysloate]

On page 78 of John Kashmanian's "Baseball Treasures", there is a Peck and Snyder advertising poster that lists the business residing at 105 Nassau Street. So that is now a third address for them. The poster appears to be circa 1870, but the date can't be pinpointed.

[benjulmag]

If in fact the back was glued on, then for all we know the card could date to 1862, when Creighton died. As Barry said, given that the text perfectly matches the verso, it seems a remarkable coincidence that it would not have been intended to go with the card.

As to the date, at this point we don't know. If Flaney was no longer captain after 1867, or if the Excelsiors were not playing later in the decade, that would suggest the card does predate 1868. Likewise, published records of individuals being in business a particular year does not mean they could not have been together earlier, perhaps in a different collaberation. Perhaps the reason the verso does not have more explicit advertising is because the Peck and Snyder association then was different than it later became. We simply don't know.

EDITED for accuracy

[barrysloate]

On page 106 of the same book is a picture of Peck's New and Improved Pocket Base Ball Scorebook. The book is dated 1866, and was published by Peck & Snyder of 126 Nassau Street. But that date was "entered according to an Act of Congress" in 1866, so it could have been published later. But another useful piece of the puzzle.

[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.

[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?

[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)

[GaryPassamonte]

It seems strange that if the biography was made specifically for the card that the lettering at the top would be chopped off. I know of no other CdV, cabinet, or card from this era that has this type of adhered backing as issued. The lettering is either printed or nonexistant. It just doesn't make sense that P&S would go to all the trouble of writing a detailed biography and then glue it on. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but this card does not seem to be a P&S to me. It could very well predate the P&S issues. Is it the same size as the other P&S cards?

[19cbb]

This reminds me of the Wagner strip/proof dilemma.

Btw, I agree with Gary on this one.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte

It seems strange that if the biography was made specifically for the card that the lettering at the top would be chopped off. I know of no other CdV, cabinet, or card from this era that has this type of adhered backing as issued. The lettering is either printed or nonexistant. It just doesn't make sense that P&S would go to all the trouble of writing a detailed biography and then glue it on. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but this card does not seem to be a P&S to me. It could very well predate the P&S issues. Is it the same size as the other P&S cards?

Gary,

I'm pretty sure the card is trimmed, which is why some of the print is missing. Most trade cards extant are trimmed and that is what helped them survive--being cut down to fit into photo albums.

Also, it might have been cheaper for P&S to glue on lettering than to make a business card with a verso that can be used for only one specific front image.

[19cbb]

From John Thorn's 'Baseball in the Garden of Eden'

Page 324
Note 123

"Pete O'Brien: Creighton posed for a photographer in the backswing of his underhand motion; the image is preserved as the front of a carte de visite issued after his death. Glued to the back of the card was a tattered and torn biographical note, the source of the Pete O'Brien quotation cited. Mark Rucker and I found his card in the archives of Culver Pictures in 1983."

[oldjudge]

If in fact the card that Corey has has bio glued to the back of a photograph then we can say two things:

1. The card was issued by Peck & Snyder after 1870 (when it moved to it's 126 Nassau St address). The card is both pieces.

2. It is unlikely that Peck & Snyder went out and grabbed some old images and glued their bio/address to the back. They probably had a photographer print up some new images from old negatives. If the front picture predates the card's issuance by Peck & Snyder, then it is most likely not a Peck & Snyder product.

Now the question is why would Peck & Snyder print a Creighton card after 1870. I keep coming back to the likelihood that it was made for an anniversary. The tenth anniversary of Creighton's death would be a somewhat solemn occasion, not one where gaudy advertising on the back of a card was appropriate. Therefore, a bio of Creighton made more sense. That seems to explain the different backs.
Also, the reference to Flanley, as I noted previously, does not appear to refer to Flanley playing when the card was issued, simply playing at a time discussed in the bio.
Finally, there are several references as to when Peck & Snyder joined forces, and they all say 1868. Till I see some conflicting information I am forced to believe this to be accurate.

[benjulmag]

Jay,

If I ever need assistance on a matter to help evaluate evidence, please don't be offended if I don't call you.

[oldjudge]

Corey-I am never offended when you don't call me. Just remember, we are all just searching for the truth.

[Matthew H]

Corey, thank you for posting the back. I have been curious about it since I first saw it in the Smithsonian book.

Do you think there is a chance that P&S just pasted the bio over their ad on the back? Does it measure similarly to the team cards?

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by Matthew H

Corey, thank you for posting the back. I have been curious about it since I first saw it in the Smithsonian book.

Do you think there is a chance that P&S just pasted the bio over their ad on the back? Does it measure similarly to the team cards?

Without checking I can't be sure, but even if the bio is pasted over, I doubt there is an ad underneath. As to size, assuming it is trimmed, we can only approximate the original dimensions, but my guess is it would be in the range of other known trade cards.

[barrysloate]

This has been a very interesting discussion, but for it to proceed from here Corey would need to examine the back closely and figure out exactly what is going on. We need to know if the bio is glued on, and if so is it made of the same good quality paper stock of other P & S trade cards, or is it different paper stock and not part of the original production. I know I've suggested it is almost impossible that it could be a newspaper clipping that somehow fits the exact dimensions of the card, but we still need to know for sure. Then maybe we can develop a more cohesive theory.

[benjulmag]

Problem is card is framed and for me to inspect the back, I would have to take it out of the frame.

[barrysloate]

Well I guess we will be left to conjecture.

[barrysloate]

I just got off the phone with Mark Rucker, who was the original owner of the Creighton trade card. He said he is certain that the biography and ad on the back were not pasted on, but were part of the original trade card as issued. I asked him why John Thorn believed that the back was glued on and he said John was in error.

So we can now say with confidence that this was issued by Peck and Snyder. What is still uncertain is when it was made. Based on Gary's discovery that the company moved to Nassau Street in 1870, my guess is all the known baseball images were issued around that date. And it also appears that the first images of the Red Stockings available to the public were the CdV's with the Ann Street address. But I also recognize that this may not be entirely correct.

[oldjudge]

Barry-Based on Gary's article I'd bet the Creighton came after the team cards. Maybe for the 25th anniversary of Creighton's death (just kidding Corey).

[barrysloate]

Maybe it was made for the centennial in 1962.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Barry-Based on Gary's article I'd bet the Creighton came after the team cards. Maybe for the 25th anniversary of Creighton's death (just kidding Corey).

I dunno Jay. I saw one at Target yesterday...Right next to the Topps cards.

[oldjudge]

Yah, I bought a pack and got the Harry Wright signed telegram chase card with my Creighton.

[GaryPassamonte]

I contacted John Thorn today and he said the reverse of the Creighton was in tatters and that Mark and he struggled to read the biography. He said the back looked like it had been removed from a scrapbook. He also said he was under the impression the biography had been pasted on, but with the passing of so many years since viewing the card in 1983, he couldn't be sure.

[barrysloate]

Mark had the card in his possession for around ten years, from roughly 1985 to 1995. John Thorn may have seen it once. I am going to go with Mark's memory on this one. Yes, it is tattered, but I believe the back was printed with the card.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Mark had the card in his possession for around ten years, from roughly 1985 to 1995. John Thorn may have seen it once. I am going to go with Mark's memory on this one. Yes, it is tattered, but I believe the back was printed with the card.

Hey Barry or Corey,
Have either of ya'll, or anyone in this thread, ever seen another 19th century card with the back printed anything like that?
Great discussion, by the way.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Mark had the card in his possession for around ten years, from roughly 1985 to 1995. John Thorn may have seen it once. I am going to go with Mark's memory on this one. Yes, it is tattered, but I believe the back was printed with the card.

I am reasonably certain that is correct. The fact that I have no vivid memory of anything peculiar about the verso suggests the bio was printed onto the card. Had it instead been pasted on, that is something I believe would have stood out about the card and stayed in my memory.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by Leon

Hey Barry or Corey,
Have either of ya'll, or anyone in this thread, ever seen another 19th century card with the back printed anything like that?
Great discussion, by the way.

Leon, off the top of my head, no, at least in regard to detailed biographical info. But with exception of pirate cards, to my knowledge all trade cards, cdvs and cabinet cards have something printed on the verso. So printing a detailed biography would not be a difficult task.

[aaroncc]

Originally Posted by Leon

Hey Barry or Corey,
Have either of ya'll, or anyone in this thread, ever seen another 19th century card with the back printed anything like that?
Great discussion, by the way.

I have seen boxing trade cards similar to this back. The back of this Stevengraph of John L. Sullivan is similar as well depicting the bio on the back of the mount.