Before continuing, a brief explanation of fractional plate numbers is necessary. When fractional sheets were made, a single plate number was engraved onto the obverse and reverse plates on the 1st, 2nd and 3rd issues. On 4th issue obverse notes, the plate number was added as a standalone process and not engraved into the actual plate. That would explain why the placement of plate numbers on the obverse of 4th issue notes can vary; while on the first 3 issues, their position is static. Plate numbers on 4th issue reverses and on 5th issues obverses and reverses was most likely in the selvedge portion of the sheet. The only known example of a plate number on a 4th issue reverse is an FR1301 and is only there because the top selvedge of the note was not trimmed off (see the SPMC article for a photo).
The plate number was usually engraved into the margin of the notes and their existence was for accounting purposes only. Since not part of the note’s design element, they are frequently partially or wholly trimmed off. Still whole plate numbers on a note are not uncommon. But since only two plate numbers notes are possible per sheet (one obverse, one reverse) they are still pretty scarce. Much rarer is a plate number engraved inverted or in mirrored image. Since the mundane task of plate accounting was most likely performed by an apprentice engraver, the existence of inverted and mirrored plate numbers was either due careless engraving or a whimsical attempt by the engravers for some humor.
It’s not a far stretch to imagine an apprentice or two, in a fit of boredom or horseplay, to engrave the plate number inverted or in mirrored image. Since their existence was not meant for the general public to see, I think it can be reasonably assumed that some inappropriate actions were possible. I base this theory on several observations:
Since the plate number on specimen notes were engraved on the very edge; finding an untrimmed example with the plate number (and the deckled edge) is very, very rare. The only research on 2nd issue wide margin specimen notes with plate numbers is confined to these 3 examples...and all 3 are mirrored! One can wonder if 3 of the 8 plates have mirrored plate numbers, do the other 5 plates have mirrors? Again if such a high percentage is mirrored, is this a case of an engraver purposely engraving the plate numbers incorrectly? One would think so. Any additional information on other wide margin specimens with plate numbers would be greatly appreciated (please email me at riconio@yahoo.com).
I think the evidence presented makes a convincing case that these notes were printed with the inverted/mirrored plate numbers with a wink and nod among the engraving community. Maybe all the engravers were in on the joke and not just the apprentices. One would think that the master engravers proofed the plates and while design elements were never compromised, all could share the inside joke when it came to plate numbers. And why not? How many times, in the name of anti-counterfeiting protection, were the designs changed, or surcharges added, or the paper was changed (thick fiber, fine fibers, watermarked, un-watermarked, etc.). The government must have been making the engravers crazy with different requests. To add insult to injury along comes Spencer Clark, whose inappropriate behavior got him in lots of hot water. He had the audacity to make the engravers put his portrait on a note. Oh, I’m sure the engravers had a few unkind words behind Clark’s back. They got even in their small inconsequential way…an inverted plate number here, and mirrored plate number there. By the 3rd issue they snuck a few in and by the 4th issue they were going hog wild.
I think the evidence presented makes a convincing case that these notes were printed with the inverted/mirrored plate numbers with a wink and nod among the engraving community. Maybe all the engravers were in on the joke and not just the apprentices. One would think that the master engravers proofed the plates and while design elements were never compromised, all could share the inside joke when it came to plate numbers. And why not? How many times, in the name of anti-counterfeiting protection, were the designs changed, or surcharges added, or the paper was changed (thick fiber, fine fibers, watermarked, un-watermarked, etc.). The government must have been making the engravers crazy with different requests. To add insult to injury along comes Spencer Clark, whose inappropriate behavior got him in lots of hot water. He had the audacity to make the engravers put his portrait on a note. Oh, I’m sure the engravers had a few unkind words behind Clark’s back. They got even in their small inconsequential way…an inverted plate number here, and mirrored plate number there. By the 3rd issue they snuck a few in and by the 4th issue they were going hog wild.
I think the evidence presented makes a convincing case that these notes were printed with the inverted/mirrored plate numbers with a wink and nod among the engraving community. Maybe all the engravers were in on the joke and not just the apprentices. One would think that the master engravers proofed the plates and while design elements were never compromised, all could share the inside joke when it came to plate numbers. And why not? How many times, in the name of anti-counterfeiting protection, were the designs changed, or surcharges added, or the paper was changed (thick fiber, fine fibers, watermarked, un-watermarked, etc.). The government must have been making the engravers crazy with different requests. To add insult to injury along comes Spencer Clark, whose inappropriate behavior got him in lots of hot water. He had the audacity to make the engravers put his portrait on a note. Oh, I’m sure the engravers had a few unkind words behind Clark’s back. They got even in their small inconsequential way…an inverted plate number here, and mirrored plate number there. By the 3rd issue they snuck a few in and by the 4th issue they were going hog wild.
In conclusion, since no previous research was ever attempted, the list of examples will continue to grow and will probably never be completed. I have to extend many thanks for all my fractional buddies who have shared my enthusiasm and contributed to the ongoing research. They have been scanning bourse floors, bidding for me in auctions that I cannot attend and generally keeping their eyes open for new examples. Every time a new example is discovered, I dutifully add it to the list. In the end collecting is a passion we all share…if we can contribute a little bit of information to the hobby, then we have distinguished ourselves not as collectors, but enthusiasts who appreciate the history of our hobby and how it relates to the history of our great country. Always remember, we never really own the notes in our collection…we’re just holding them for the next guy.
In no special order, and certainly not limited to, I want to thank Benny Bolin, Bob Laub, Mike Marchioni, Tom Denly, Martin Gengerke, Rob Kravitz, Tom O’Mara, Bruce Hagen, David Treter, Jerry Fochtman, Len Glazer and Milt Friedberg.