Wednesday, October 1, 2014

166. A Ricketts-Style Binding?

In 1909 John Lane published a play by the German writer and journalist Hermann Sudermann (1857-1928): Johannes was first performed in 1898 and had been reprinted many times. The English translation was published as John the Baptist.  

Hermann Sudermann, John the Baptist (1909): title page
Recently, the green cloth binding with gilt decorations and lettering, was called 'attractive' by a book dealer. Another copy was priced as a 'Ricketts-style binding'.

The lettering on the front cover is not in Ricketts's style, but the flame-like ornament is close to his mode of design, which is self-evident if one knows that the ornament was designed by Charles Shannon.

Hermann Sudermann, John the Baptist (1909): front cover
The design of the front cover of John the Baptist, however is not at all reminiscent of Shannon's careful designs for Oscar Wilde's plays, nor of Ricketts's balanced cover designs. 

Ornament for Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere's Fan (top)
and Hermann Sudermann, John the Baptist
However, it is clear that the original ornament was re-used for the Sudermann binding. Shannon had designed it for the first edition of Oscar Wilde's play Lady Windermere's Fan that was published by John Lane in 1893. The design was repeated three times on the front and back cover.

Oscar Wilde, Lady Windermere's Fan (1893) (a copy on E-Bay 2014)
Shannon designed the ornament for a horizontal use, pointing to the left or right, and used a mirrored image to reach (with a minimum of expense) a lively and pleasing effect. For John the Baptist the ornament was used (certainly without Shannon's knowledge) vertically only, without the subtle variation in the repetition, and placing the designs too close to the title and author's name.

Hermann Sudermann, John the Baptist (1909): front cover (detail)
The circled dots were used as a separate stamp to decorate the spine title of John the Baptist. Shannon had not made use of these dots as a separate ornament. And the spine decoration was not a replica, as we can deduct from the central dot, which was as large as the others, while in Shannon's design it had been a very small and subtle central dot.
Hermann Sudermann, John the Baptist (1909): spine (detail)
Without the assistance of the original artist, most re-used book designs are employed in a less subtle, usually cheap, arbitrary, and less convincing way. 

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

165. The Great War, an Exhibition in Wales

In 1919, the National Museum Wales (Amgueddfa Cymry) was presented with a set of sixty-six lithographs that had been issued by the Bureau of Propaganda in 1917: The Great War. Britain's Efforts and Ideals. From 2 August 2014 to 7 January 2015 the Cardiff museum shows the whole series. A catalogue has been issued in English and in Welsh.

The Great War: Britain's Efforts and Ideals (catalogue issued by National Museum of Wales, 2014)
The catalogue has a (rather short) introduction on this war time publication, however, all sixty-six prints have been reproduced. The price is only £5.

Ricketts and Shannon were invited to contribute a colour lithograph for the series of 'Ideals', as were Frank Brangwyn, Augustus John, Edmund Dulac, and others. The project was carried out under the direction of Shannon's and Ricketts's friend F. Ernest Jackson (1872-1945), and the lithographs were printed by Avenue Press in London.

Charles Ricketts, 'Italia Redenta' (1917)
The artists were paid handsomely for their prints, each receiving £210. The subjects were selected by the project management and the images had to pass censorship regulations. The complete series was first exhibited in July 1917, in the Fine Art Society of London, and toured the country afterwards. The prints were also on exhibition in France and in the United States.

Charles Shannon, 'The Re-birth of the Arts' (1917)
All prints are reproduced on the website of the National Museum of Wales. The site also contains more background information than the catalogue. Although the prints were shown all over the place, sales were not as hoped for, and in the end a loss was made on the project. 

The museum's set of prints had been in its original mounts for over a hundred years, but now they have been taken out, and restored. Research established that the lithographs were printed on paper with a 'Holbein' watermark. This paper was produced by Spalding and Hodge in Kent.

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

164. Only A Picture

Charles Shannon, 'A Portrait of the Artist' (1905): lithograph (Dallas Museum of Art)

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

163. A New Biography of Oscar Wilde's Bibliographer

Recently a second biographical sketch of Oscar Wilde's bibliographer, Christopher Sclater Millard (also known as Stuart Mason), appeared. It is written and self-published by Maria Roberts through Publishing: Yours Loyally

Maria Roberts, Yours Loyally. A Life of Christopher Sclater Millard (2014)
Frankly, the book has all the faults of self-published books: darkly reproduced and mostly unnecessary photographs of buildings (not people), page numbers on title page and blank pages, occasional lapses in the outlining of paragraphs, the absence of a proof reader who might have corrected the misspelling of (Dutch) names (such as Gerrit Groenewergen), and the more annoying references to people's given names, in many places forcing the reader to go back ten or more pages to find out that Charley, Charles, and Alfred, are in fact Charles Garrett, Charles Kenneth Scott Moncrieff, and Lord Alfred Douglas. Robert Ross, of course, is called Robbie all the time.

Anyway, the only reason to talk about the book is that it includes new information about Millard, who not only compiled Wilde's bibliography, and worked for the Burlington Magazine, acted as Ross's secretary, and became an antiquarian book dealer out of necessity, but pursued the life of a Catholic, a Jacobite, and a homosexual. He was convicted twice for homosexual conduct, and spent six, and later twelve, months in jail.

H. Montgomery Hyde, Christopher Sclater Millard (Stuart Mason). Bibliographer & Antiquarian Book Dealer (1989)
H. Montgomery Hyde's earlier, brief biography concentrated on the bookish side of Millard's life, while Roberts does not seem to know a lot about bibliography, Wilde, or the 1890s in general. She quotes extensively from two sources: letters from Millard to the Wilde collector Walter Ledger, and the correspondence and statements of the Metropolitan Police Officer. These new sources portray the ongoings of Millard in a gay literary circle in London, and are most welcome for the study of the period - I enjoyed reading these gossipy pages. However, they take much more space than Millard's other activities, distorting the picture of a man whose chief merit was his bibliography and other publications about Oscar Wilde. Also, 'could have' and 'perhaps' occur too many times in the book that despite a lack of information fills in the blanks.

Stuart Mason (C.S. Millard), Bibliography of Oscar Wilde (1914)
Roberts talks about 'Charles de Soury [for Soucy] Ricketts on page 106 [and in the index], but seven lines later shortens it to 'Charles'. Charles Ricketts's and Charles Shannon's names are listed among the acknowledgements in Millard's bibliography. Millard visited Ricketts in order to find out more about Wilde's books that he and Shannon had designed for Wilde. On 15 November 1912 Millard wrote to Walter Ledger: 'I am going to see him one day soon [...] And will let you know if I can get any information out of him.' Millard thought that he knew more about Ricketts's drawings 'than he knows himself!' (p. 105-106). The outcome of the meeting remains unrecorded, although the bibliography contains details that Millard could only have heard from Ricketts and Shannon. 

On 2 January 1919 Millard wrote to Ledger that the bibliography should have been produced in a limited edition of five hundred copies, as the publisher - after selling most copies - used the unsold gatherings as packing paper. For the binding Millard reproduced the three roundels that Ricketts had designed for Wilde's collected works that were published in 1908. Roberts does not mention this. She seems to think that only 80 copies of these works were published (page 88); of course, besides 80 deluxe copies in vellum bindings, 1000 copies in buckram were issued.

The information on the personalities from the nineties is shallow and full of mistakes. It is suggested, for instance, that Alexander Teixeiro de Mattos was introduced into a circle of former friends of Oscar Wilde after his 1900 marriage to Lily Wilde. Of course, he had known them as early as 1891 (when he co-translated with John Gray a novel by the Dutch writer Louis Couperus, Ecstasy), and Wilde himself wrote him a letter in May 1893 (see The Complete Letters). 

Roberts later suggests that John Gray and AndrĂ© Raffalovich were living together in Edinburgh in 1916 when Millard attended mass at Gray's church, but Gray only lived with Raffalovich at No. 9, Whitehouse Terrace in Edinburgh while, nearby, St. Peter's Church and his house were built for him (1905-1907). Another nineties personality, the actor and stage manager Jack Thomas Grein is misnamed John. This kind of errors in a book always makes me nervous: can we trust the quotations from the Ledger letters or the police reports that Maria Roberts presents us in her biography of Millard? Surely, they are revealing and entertaining and absolutely need to be quoted - even though the police reports must be full of biased views and outright lies, - as we now have been presented with a more rounded picture of Wilde's bibliographer. 

Wednesday, September 3, 2014

162. Ricketts's and Shannon's Collector's Mark

The art historian Frits Lugt (1884-1970) compiled an overview of collector's marks of public and private art collectors, dealers, and printers. The 1956 Supplement to his reference work Les Marques de collections contains two marks for Ricketts and Shannon. A digitized version is available on Delpher, a Dutch website that also contains hundreds of newspapers, and magazines.

Collector's mark of Ricketts and Shannon
One collector's mark of Ricketts and Shannon was used for drawings by Tiepolo, Rubens, Van Dijck, Delacroix, and others left to the Fitzwilliam Museum - these names were mentioned by Frits Lugt who had personally seen the mark on them. The design is of two interlocked 'C's, referring to Ricketts's and Shannon's identical Christian names. The design is similar to that of the binding of Hero and Leander (1894), although the intertwined initials for this book probably stood for the initials of the authors Christopher Marlowe and George Chapman: 'C' and 'G'.

Intertwined 'C' and 'G' on the binding of Hero and Leander (1894)
Another collector's mark - an R and S in a circle - was used for the drawings that were left to the British Museum. This mark was designed by Laurence Binyon when the drawings arrived there.

Laurence Binyon, Collector's mark designed for Ricketts and Shannon

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

161. From the Collection of Messrs Ricketts and Shannon

An advertisement for Old Master Drawings. A Quarterly Magazine for Students and Collectors mentioned that Charles Ricketts was among the collaborators. 

 The Print Collectors's Quarterly, October 1926
Ricketts never wrote an essay for the magazine. However, some of the old master drawings from the collection of Ricketts and Shannon were reproduced in it, and although this must have been the sort of contributions that the magazine solicited from certain collectors, the editor probably expected more from Ricketts's and Shannon's well-known art collection, and may have hoped for a critical essay by Ricketts. Several art works from their collection were reproduced in Old Master Drawings, but the comments were written by other art connoisseurs.

Peter Paul Rubens, 'A Path Bordered by Trees' (from the collection of Ricketts and Shannon)
Plate 12 in volume 2 (June 1927-March 1928) reproduced a drawing by the Flemish artist Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640) with a commentary by Campbell Dodgson:

The path, bordered by trees and bushes, divides two plots of ground enclosed by a fence loosely built of branches of trees. Narrower paths, opening out of it to left and right, admit to an enclosure which the elaborately pruned fruit-tree on the extreme left proves to be an orchard, and to a corresponding space on the right which is left much more vague. A fresh and charming sketch from nature, masterly in perspective and in the suggestion of atmosphere.

The drawing was on show during an exhibition of Flemish and Belgian Art at the Royal Academy in 1927. Before it came to Ricketts and Shannon, it had been owned by the reverend Thomas Kerrich (1748-1828). In their wills, the artists left the Rubens drawing to the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge.

The catalogue of the Ricketts and Shannon collection of the Fitzwilliam Museum, All for Art (1979), written by Joseph Darracott, suggests on the authority of Michael Jaffé, that Rubens may have been inspired for this drawing by Federico Barocci [Il Baroccio] (c. 1526-1612). Rubens owned drawings by Barocci which he had acquired around 1616.

The collection of Ricketts and Shannon contained two Barocci drawings, both figure studies. They owned five drawings and studies by Rubens, all now at the Fitzwilliam Museum. Darracott remarked (in The World of Charles Ricketts, 1980) that their collection contained almost no landscapes, but that the Rubens drawing was a beautiful exception.

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

160. One Hundred Remaindered Copies of The Dial

In October 1931 Charles Ricketts died, and the mentally ill Shannon had to be cared for.

Christie's, auction catalogue, 4 December 1933, page 35
Thomas Lowinsky and Ernest Jackson, the executors of Ricketts's will, took a series of difficult decisions. Townshend House was sold in 1933 and Shannon was moved to Kew Gardens Road (where he would die in 1937). Valuable pieces from their art collections were sent to the museums to which they had been left in Ricketts's and Shannon's wills. And in December 1933 books and prints were sold at auction.

Christie's, auction catalogue, 4 December 1933
Dedication copies of Oscar Wilde, Michael Field, Gordon Bottomley, and W.B. Yeats were thus dispersed, as were sets of Eragny and Vale Press books, art books, a collection of 77 lithographs by Shannon, and a complete set of the five issues of The Dial, their own magazine. The Christie's catalogue is a record of that sale.

Christie's, auction catalogue, 4 December 1933, lot 403
Lot 403 contained Ricketts's and Shannon's stock of The Dial. Almost 40 years after publication, ten copies of No. 3, seven copies of No. 4, and no less than eighty-three copies of No. 5 were remaindered. Eighty-three copies! A pile of almost one meter!

Of the first issue (1889) 200 copies had been printed, thirteen of which were still available in 1892. The second issue, also 200 copies, apparently sold out. Then the number of copies was raised to 250 for the third issue, and 270 for the last two issues.

Title on the wrapper of The Dial (No. 4, 1896)
In October 1893, the prospectus for the third issue announced that the first two issues had been sold out. In 1898 copies of the third and fourth issue could still be obtained from the publishers, who mentioned that of No. 4 'A few copies still remain'. The phrase was not used in regard to number 5 (A List of Books, 1898), of which many more copies had remained unsold. In 1901, John Lane could still offer his American customers copies of Nos. 3 to 5. Apparently, copies of the third and fourth issues were sold eventually, while of the fifth and last number almost a third of the edition remained unsold. 

An explanation for this failure is not easy to give. Perhaps Ricketts did not care enough when the last number was published in 1897, as he was occupied by the more demanding task of The Vale Press that had issued its first book in 1896. He no longer was in need of a magazine to publish his wood-engravings, and kept them for the Vale Press books.

In 1933, eighty-three copies of the last number of The Dial flooded the market, or were they kept by a bookseller who, every now and then, would sell off a copy? The word 'scarce' usually found its way into descriptions of The Dial in bookseller's and auction catalogues, although the fifth number never had been scarce. Only if all copies that were auctioned in 1933 would have been destroyed (on purpose, or, during the War) the fifth number would have become really 'scarce': with 187 previously sold copies the issue would have been more scarce than the first number that was issued in no more than 200 copies.

However, today, two copies of number 5 are offered for sale online, and none of the others. That, perhaps, is an indication.

 Publisher's name on the wrapper of The Dial (No. 4, 1896)

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

159. A Flow Chart of the Reprint of The Picture of Dorian Gray

Last week's blog, The Puzzling Reprint of The Picture of Dorian Grayand its perhaps confusing chronology, asks for a sort of flow chart of events. Below one finds the information on the publication of The Picture of Dorian Gray in 1891 and the reprint of 1895, along with some biographical dates from Wilde's life, and the sources for assumptions or facts. Assumptions that could not be corroborated are given in red.

Oscar Wilde
Published evidence

April 1891

The Picture of Dorian Gray
Published April 1891 (Ward, Lock & Co)
Deluxe edition: July 1891

Mason, Art & Morality (1912), p. 282
Mason, Bibliography (1914), p. 343
Mentioned as published in The Publishers’ Circular, 18 April 1891
July 1891
The Picture of Dorian Gray
Deluxe edition published: July 1891

Mason, Art & Morality (1912), p. 282
Mason, Bibliography (1914), p. 345 [British Library copy dated 4 July 1891]
October 1894
New PDG edition published

Mentioned in a letter to Walter Ledger (1904)
End of 1894

New edition PDG in preparation
Mason, Art & Morality (1912), p. 282
The PC did not mention a reprint of PDG in the notes on 'Books reduced in price', or 'New editions'; there was no announcement of it by Ward, Lock, Bowden & Co.
March 1895

New edition is ready
Mason, Art & Morality (1912), p. 283
Mason, Bibliography, p. 347.
5 April 1895
Wilde is arrested

27 April 1895
Edward Baker, Birmingham, advertises his wish to buy copies of Wilde’s books, incl. PDG
Publishers’ Circular, 27 April 1895, advertisement by Edward Baker (‘Books wanted to purchase’): ‘Oscar Wilde's Dorian Gray. Any edit[ion]
------ ------- The Happy Prince
------ ------- The Sphinx
------ ------- Any books by’.
25 May 1895

Wilde is sentenced to prison

14 September 1895
Edward Baker wants to buy 'Wilde's Chameleon'.
The Publishers' Circular, 14 September 1895: Edward Baker published a list of books he wanted to buy, including 'Wilde's Chameleon'.
12 October 1895

New edition of PDG published
The Publishers' Circular, 12 October 1895: announcement as published: ‘The Picture of Dorian Gray. Cr.8vo. p.334, Ward & L.'

English Catalogue (1896):
October 1895
Mason, Art & Morality (1912), p. 282.
12 and 19 October 1895
Copies of PDG offered for sale by Edward Baker

The Publishers' Circular, 12 October 1895: advertisement by Edward Baker, offering for sale: 'Oscar Wilde's "Dorian Gray." […] The book which was much talked about in the trial Wilde v. Queensberry. Suppressed by the publishers. Few remaining copies, 6s. each; 10 copies, 5s. each; 25 copies, 4s.6d. each.'

Also published: 19 October 1895

26 October – 28 December 1895

Copies offered for sale by
Edward Baker (incl. large paper copies of first ed.)

Adv. Republished: 2, 9, 16, 23 and 30 November, 7, 14, 21 and 28 December 1895.

The Publishers’ Circular, 26 October 1895

Also published: 2, 9, 16, 23 and 30 November, 7, 14, 21 and 28 December 1895.

9 November 1895

Edward Baker wants to buy copies of 'Wilde's (Oscar) Poems. 1892'.
The Publishers’ Circular, 9 November 1895 ('Books wanted to purchase')
September 1896

New edition of PDG remaindered, after Bowden retired from Ward, Lock, Bowden & Co.

Mason, Bibliography, p. 347
Mason, Art & Morality (1912), p. 283

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

158. The Puzzling Reprint of Dorian Gray

Sorting out a pile of books and magazines, I came across the February 2014 issue of Intentions, the news journal of The Oscar Wilde Society. For some reason, I had put it aside; now, reading some of the announcements again, I remembered why. There was an unsigned piece by the editor, Michael Seeney, about 'A Bibliographical Puzzle', and I had wanted to consult my Ricketts files for a possible answer.

Charles Ricketts, design for Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray,ordinary edition (1891) [detail]
Michael Seeney wrote about Oscar Wilde's The Picture of Dorian Gray that was published by Ward, Lock & Co in 1891 in a large paper edition and an ordinary edition. Ricketts designed covers for both issues. But there was also a second edition, said to be published in 1895, a year that saw Wilde's arrest and conviction. After a libel trial, Wilde was arrested on 5 April, and on 25 May he was sentenced to two years' imprisonment. The Picture of Dorian Gray was used to underline the charges made against him. After the trial, publishers and stage managers avoided to mention Wilde's name.

Seeney quotes a passage from Stuart Mason's Oscar Wilde, Art & Morality (London 1912). Mason (is Christopher Millard) was to become Wilde's bibliographer, and this book contained a first glimpse into his sense for detail. However, his 'facts' about the second edition of The Picture of Dorian Gray are confusing.

Mason argued that 'the [new] edition seems to have been prepared for publication towards the end of 1894. The date of publication, according to the English Catalogue, is October 1895.' He added that it was probable that this new edition - the publishers had changed their name and the title page had to undergo a small alteration - 'was not ready till March 1895, and that Wilde's arrest a few weeks later made it inadvisable to bring it out, though the demand for the book at that time was considerable.' He then concluded that the book was remaindered in September 1896.

Advertisement in The Publishers' Circular, 26 October 1895
The year 1896 in his conclusion is unlikely. Edward Baker of Birmingham, in an advertisement of 26 October 1895, offered remaindered copies for sale a year earlier. Baker asserted: 'This book [...] was suppressed by the publishers, who declined to sell another copy, although they were inundated with orders [...]. It is now entirely out-of-print at the publishers [...] I have now purchased the whole of the few existing copies that were left on sale.'

The advertisement can not be taken for granted entirely. Edward Baker was not as knowledgeable about the book, as was Mason, and he argued that 'the binding is half parchment [correct], and it is ornamented and lettered after an aesthetic and curious design [correct] by the author [incorrect].' Clearly, he was speaking about the edition designed by Ricketts.

However, this advert is confusing. Is Baker speaking about the first or the second edition? Or both? He included his terms: 'cash - 4 copies, 5s each; 25 copies, 4s. 6d. each. Large Paper copies (signed by the author himself) 21s'. These large paper copies must have been from the first edition.  

Seeney supposes that Edward Baker had acquired 'the second edition immediately on publication'. He then introduces another possibility, coming from more confusing information in a letter from Mason/Millard to Walter Ledger (December 1904) in which the second edition is dated 'Oct 1st 1894'. One of the keys to the puzzle must be the publication date of the second edition. There is no date in the book.

Edward Baker was a second-hand book dealer from Birmingham, who issued catalogues on several subjects (topography, theology, poetry, etc.), and advertised 'out-of-print books', maintaining that his firm was 'patronised by the nobility'. The Edward Baker Great Book Shop was located at 14 & 16 John Bright Street.  

Book label of Edward Baker
The date of October 1894 - mentioned in the letter to Ledger - must be wrong. It can not be corroborated by factual information. 

There are no advertisements for Wilde's novel after he was sent to jail. However, there is a unique announcement that was published prior to Baker's advertisement.

On 12 October 1895 The Publishers' Circular announced the publication of 'The Picture of Dorian Gray. Cr.8vo. p.334, Ward & L[ock].' (The description in the English Catalogue - mentioned by Mason - was based on The Publishers' Circular).

The Publishers' Circular, 12 October 1895
This must have been the new edition, and its date of publication was 12 October 1895. Perhaps Baker jumped to the occasion and bought up all copies, knowing that the publishers were glad to be rid of them. Mason was right, the book was reprinted in 1895.

Still, there are many puzzles left: what is the source for Mason's assumption that the book was prepared in 1894? Why did he assume it had been ready by March? Did he assume that the publication date - 1895 according to the English Catalogue - should imply a date prior to Wilde's arrest, as he probably could not imagine that the publishers would endeavour to publish the book after Wilde had been convicted?

What if Baker and Ward, Lock & Bowden had struck a deal? Although the reprint had already been produced, the publishers did not sell any copies of the new edition, because they no longer wanted to be associated with Wilde. Baker, presumably, had heard about their unwanted ballast in the warehouse, and he proposed to buy the lot, along with unsold copies of the first (large paper) edition. 

In that case, the second edition needed to be officially published, otherwise it could not be remaindered. And so, on 12 October an announcement of the publication appeared. But then, why was 'New' or 'Second' edition not part of the 12 October announcement, and why should Baker imply that he sold copies of the original edition?

Baker was a regular advertiser in the Publishers' Circular. His announcements appeared in the section for 'Books wanted to purchase'; bookshops and antiquarian firms all over the country asked for out-of-print books for which they had customers. In 1894 and 1895 Baker published many (short and longer) lists of books. Several of these requests were for erotic books, such as Perfumed Garden (12 January 1895), or Zola's infamous novels (2 February 1895).

The Publishers' Circular, 12 January 1895
The Publishers' Circular, 2 February 1895
The Publishers' Circular remained silent about the Oscar Wilde scandal. Not a word was wasted on the libel case, or Wilde's arrest. (In the past, the PC had reported about Wilde, see for example The Publishers' Circular of 29 September 1894). In 1895, mentioning Wilde's name was eschewed. But then, after Wilde's arrest on 5 April, Baker placed another advertisement, in which he asked for copies of:

Oscar Wilde's Dorian Gray. Any edit[ion]
------ ------- The Happy Prince

------ ------- The Sphinx
------ ------- Any books by

The Wilde scandal might, to his mind, have been a great opportunity to sell books. Like his erotic works and the controversial novels of Zola, Wilde's stories and poems suddenly had become notorious, and an infamous book was exactly what he needed to satisfy part of his clientele. His range, should be said, was wide, from books on freemasonry and botany, to 'Latham's Sanitary Engineering'. But Baker went to great length to earn some money with Wilde's book. He had not asked for any of Wilde's books earlier.

Meanwhile, The Publishers' Circular went on to notify commercial news - 'Mr. William Morris' new Kelmscott Press edition of "Sir Percyville of Galles" is now at the binder's, and will be ready shortly. It will have a frontispiece designed by Sir E. Burne-Jones.' (27 April 1895), or: 'His Royal Highness the Duke of York has been pleased to accept a copy of Mr. C. Raymond Beazley's volume, entitled "Prince Henry the Navigator, the Hero of Portugal and of Modern Discovery," published by Messrs. G.P. Putnam's Sons' (11 May 1895). In the 11 May 1895 issue Baker advertised his publication of 'A Supplement' to The Railway Handbook. In a short review, The Publishers' Circular described it as 'a most useful list of publications relating to railways', and added: 'Much of the information is curious, and it is admirably arranged' (18 May 1895).

In Baker's lists of 'books wanted to purchase', Wilde was not mentioned again for a time.

Wilde's name turned up in an announcement of D. Young's Apologia pro Oscar Wilde, published by W. Reeves in the week of 29 June 1895 - but a review of it was not published by the PC. 

The firm of Ward, Lock & Bowden held an annual dinner for its employees on Saturday 29 June 1895 (reported a week later, on 6 July 1895 in The Publishers' Circular). Wilde's editor, Coulson Kernahan had not been present, nor was mr Bowden (who was in America at the time). Toasts were given by J.H. Lock, G. Ernest Lock, and others. Wilde was not mentioned. However, a year earlier, an article about the firm in the 'Publishers of To-Day' series, had not mentioned his name either.

On 14 September 1895 Baker again published a long list of books he wanted to buy. Among them was 'Wilde's Chameleon'. This was The Chameleon of December 1894 (the only issue that was to appear) in which Wilde had published his 'Phrases and Philosophies for the Use of the Young'. (It had been noted in the PC on 8 December 1894.)

The Publishers' Circular, 14 September 1895
The 'Announcements of the Season' (28 September 1895) did not mention a reprint of The Picture of Dorian Gray, but - as illustrated above - the publication of the 1895 edition was duly announced in the issue of 12 October 1895. The very same issue also contained a special advertisement by Edward Baker.

The Publishers' Circular, 12 October 1895
In bold capitals the name of Oscar Wilde was followed by the title of his infamous novel: 'Oscar Wilde's "Dorian Gray."'. Baker wrote: 'The book which was much talked about in the trial Wilde v. Queensberry. Suppressed by the publishers. Few remaining copies, 6s. each; 10 copies, 5s. each; 25 copies, 4s.6d. each.'

The simultaneous publication of Ward, Lock & Bowden's reissue of The Picture of Dorian Gray and Baker's advertisements for remaindered copies is almost certainly no coincidence. Since he had vented his interest for copies of Wilde's books in April, the publisher may have considered selling the remaindered copies - including the complete new edition - to him. They did not want to advertise it, and the short notice in 'Publications of the week' was as concealed as possible. A few lines only to get rid of a troublesome book. If Baker would not have placed his conspicuous advertisements, the new edition would not have been known to contemporary readers. 

Baker was not shy about his purchase, and regularly republished his advertisement (starting 19 October 1895), attracting attention with the boldly printed name of Oscar Wilde. An expanded version was published for the first time on 26 October 1895, and subsequently on 2 and 9 November (on 9 November Baker also placed 'Wilde's (Oscar) Poems. 1892' in the 'Books wanted to purchase' section), 16, 23 and 30 November, 7, 14, 21 and 28 December 1895.

Were these copies sold, or was Baker's invention unsuccessful? Did he, in turn, have to get rid of hundreds of copies in 1896? Was it Baker who remaindered the book in 1896 - the year mentioned by Mason? (I can not check that now, as I have no access to the 1896 issues of the PC.) Or were superfluous copies destroyed, making the second edition more rare than the first?

Mason's assumption that the reprint of The Picture of Dorian Gray had been prepared a year earlier, in 1894, can not be confirmed. The PC did not mention it in their notes on 'Books reduced in price', or 'New editions', and there was no announcement of it by Ward, Lock & Bowden that year.

The puzzle may not have been solved completely, yet, but the story is more complete than it was. And it proves that second editions can be - bibliographically at least - as intriguing as first editions.