" An Addendum #2 to
E. H. MITCHELL "
Biography

 

NOTE: This added E. H. MITCHELL information was in the Postcard Collector News

             January, 10 1959, No. 21 BY: J. R. Burdick of Syracuse, N.Y.,


 

            EARLY DETROIT and MITCHELL Cards

 

     Several times during the past few years collectors have wondered about early

Detroit and early Mitchell cards of the same general design. One pair recently

found seem identical and the owner thought they were from the same plate. That isn't

quite correct, but the two plates certainly were made from two photographs that

were made from the same negative. The similarity is especially noticeable when

the printing in the same projection and coloring. There probably is no

explanation for this that can be conclusively proven, as no records are known

and the principals of both firms at that time are all believed to be dead.

Mr. Livingstone of the Detroit firm is said to have "carried his office in his

pocket," and almost nothing has been written about Mr. Mitchell.

     To arbitrarily accuse either side of copying or illegal actions seems unfair

as long as there are other possible explanations, in some letters on file at the

Detroit Public Library, Mr. Livingstone does infer that some of their photos had

been improperly used by others but apparently no action was taken. Quite likely

anything of that nature that may have been accidental and done in the belief that

it was entirely proper at the time.

     Mitchell seems to have obtained his early card designs in various ways. The

The Survey for the Pioneer Post Card book discussed that in some manner he acquired

the earlier Albert Kayser designs and that he seems to have purchased the remainder

of the Patriographic cards, reprinting entirely the local San Francisco series of

that group. How he got his other early designs is not known, but unless he had his

own photographer, he must have purchased them from someone who sold photographs.

     There is no uncertainty on this point about the Detroit Photograph Co. as they

had been suppliers of photographs for at least ten years prior to 1898 and in that

year the great outdoor photographer, William Henry Jackson, joined the firm

bringing with him his huge stock of negatives.

     The first numbered Detroit cards were brought out early in 1900, it would

seem, as the earliest postmark reported in March 9, 1900. Old employees of the firm

state that the number on these first cards was really the negative number and

appeared on the photographs along with the title. These could very likely be the

negatives that Mr Jackson had brought with him. It happens that the first lot

of these numbered cards to be printed (probably 3 or 4 large sheets with the

cards numbered 1-84) included a goodly number of San Francisco views.

     Therein lies the core of the whole matter, because at some time Mitchell

had acquired these same San Francisco views. He could have purchased them from

Detroit Co., but more likely they were obtained from Mr. Jackson before he joined

the Company. There is even the possibility that a third party may be involved,

such as a local dealer or photographer who acted as middleman on the deal.

The exact manner or date in immaterial.

    One pair of cards recently seen shows the Ferry Building in San Francisco

and is numbered 32 by both firms. This may only be a coincidence but it seems

to show in one case, at least, that the number and title had been reproduced

along with the picture by both firms, perhaps inadvertently by Mitchell. Some

of these designs were used by Mitchell with two back types--the familiar

ribbon and quill and another with PMC in heavy manuscript writing. A few are

Unnumbered.

     It this shows the correct explanation, it may explain why these early

Detroit numbers are so extremely scarce. Whether or not the early Mitchell

corresponding views are similarly scarce is not known. The dual use of the

pictures would be soon discovered, and the Detroit Co., apparently destroyed

these Detroit plates and remaining cards.

     It is doubtful that some of the Detroit views ever got into circulation.

The scarcity of group is too marked to be regarded as a slight duplication

of a few pictures. Actually, the major checklist shows that only 12 designs

have been reported in the original printing of this 1-84 group, although

a few more undoubtedly exist. Another seven views are known in reprint form

but all non San Francisco views. It is not likely that more than a third

of these titles will ever be found. Everything indicates that something

queered this group in the eyes of the Company. While many of the numbers

immediately following No. 84 are also scarce, the first of them (85-122)

are a different group, being reprints of an unnumbered series; and the

remaining low numbers (through 522) are mostly known either in the original

printing or as reprinted in the 5000 series at later dates.

     This theory would absolve both firms of any intentional wrong doing.

While competition among post card publishers had begun to show, it is

doubtful that Detroit and Mitchell were competitors to any great extent.

They were located far apart and there was room enough for both without

crowding. It was nothing like the local competition of the many publishers

in New York City or the German competition in the greeting card field.

There undoubtedly was some confusion and misunderstanding of laws and

ethics among all the new publishers of the time. It is only charitable

to believe that all thought they were right in what they did.

     Detroit had published two of unnumbered cards previous to the ones

in question, and it is believed that Mitchell also had some earlier

publication. Like many others both apparently began making post cards

as soon as possible after postal restrictions were eased by the Act of

May 19, 1898. Just which one was actually first in the field is not

important, as is also the matter which first used these San Francisco

views under discussion. Neither probably planned it that way. This

also applies to some later duplication which seems to have no

connection with the earliest numbers. A view of Rooster Rock on the

Columbia, for instance, appears as Detroit No. 220 and Mitchell

No. 96. Items like that are liable to happen accidentally among all

publishers. There probably is n law broken by such duplication, but

publishers normally prefer to bring out original views and not

appear to be copiers of someone else, even if no copyright law is

broken. Surely, no really big firm would knowingly be a copy-cat.

 

                                THE END

 

"SPECIAL INFORMATION"
NOTICE: This Reference list for E.  H.  MITCHELL is for individual personal use "ONLY" Use & Reproduction (Including scans) of this listing for business purposes will require Walt's written permission. ANY Links to this page will also require Walt's Permission


CREDITS: Walter R. .Kransky(SJPCC/SFBAPCC), and many others with allot of information. NOTE: For those of you who download these Listings for your PERSONAL USE - A donation of $15.00 USD would be appreciated by the
San Jose Postcard Club, and the Bay Area Postcard Club, P. O. Box 32042, San Jose, California, 95152 (The above have put many days/hours into this effort!)
Make Checks Payable to: SJPCC-Mary Ann Stanfield. Viewers/Users are also invited to join these two fine Postcard Clubs, based on your location. PS: If it is imperative (emergency) that you contact Walt-Call: 408-251-8304 after
7pm. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank You, Walt


If you have information/corrections to add to this Checklist, for MITCHELL cards/material-Contact Walt: wrsky@att.net

Back To EHM Home Page

Copyright: Walt's Postcards