page 67

Type Standards.

Our former articles have embodied a good deal of information as to the various standards, which we have taken from authoritative sources. The necessity for such data may be realized when the loose manner in which statements arc commonly made is considered. It was recently stated in the London. It was recently stated in the London Printer' Register that the picas of the Sheffield Foundry and the Johnson Foundry were the same, and were exactly ⅙-inch! Any printer with the types before him can satisfy himself in a moment that they do not correspond, and by careful measurement can prove that neither of them is ⅙-inch. A. correspondent of the same paper published the results of his own mesurements as follow:—

These are not correct, actually or relatively. Austin Wood's table (p. 43), which, as far as we have tested it, is accurate, shows that all these measurements should be over instead of under, the inch. MacKellar's (·0996), on the other hand, is under. Recognizing this fact soon afterwards, the Register found fault with Messrs Caslon for introducing the inch as their basis of measurement, arguing that the standard being now practically settled by the American founders, the English houses should follow suit, and adopt it as an « international » system. More surprising still, the head of the Caslon Foundry wrote in reply: « To settle the matter, I have written to Mr Johnson for a steel standard of his pica, which I assert is the same as the [new] Caslon pica, making 72 to the foot. » This notwithstanding the assertion of the Johnson Foundry that their standard pica is equal to ⅜⅝ centimeters, or as otherwise authoritatively stated, 1 pica =·166 inch; 6 picas =·996. Mr Smith (Caslon & Co.), disputing the accuracy of the figures of the correspondent of the Register, says that measurements not based on steel standards are fallacious. As we have already said, these figures contain manifest errors, as, for example, Caslon's and Miller & Richard's picas being made to agree. M. & R. cast the largest English pica, 71 lines to the foot; according to Wood's table, Figgins, Reed, and Wood (71¼) correspond, Caslon (71¾) follows, and the Sheffield Foundry, as all printers are aware, casts a smaller pica than any other English house = 71⅞ lines to the foot. The Typefounding Company claim that their pica is exactly 72 to the foot; and Caslon's new standard is on the same basis. This is the only possible common « international » ground recognized by the English-speaking peoples, as the convenient inch and foot measurement is the sole standard in practical use in Great Britain, the Colonies, and the United States, and will not give place to any outlandish modern system. MacKellar's pica is smaller still, being 72-2892 lines. Of all the approximations, that of Stephenson & Blake comes nearest to the national standard. The difference in a foot being only ⅛-pica or 1/48-inch +, a single pica em exceeds ⅙-inch only by the infinitesimal fraction of 1/3456-inch. MacKellar's varies by ·2892 of an em (minus) in a foot. Our own measurement, with an ordinary foot-rule, shows a difference as nearly as possible of ⅙-pica, which would make a single em 1/2592 inch less than ⅙-inch. It is of little consequence to printers what results the steel standards may give, if the types are not trustworthy; and how high authorities can assert that varying standards agree when a difference is perceptible to the touch in three or four ems, and to the eye in six or eight, it is difficult to understand. One thing, however, is clear: that an exceedingly minute change would bring every varying body to the one rational—and measurable—scale. Even in Miller & Richard's pica—the farthest from the national standard, the excess in a single em is only 1/432 in.

A common source of error is measuring quads. Careful printers know this, and set their measures by single types set sidewise, thus: come out right at the foot. On this point, the following, from Golding's Printers' Review, is worthy of study:—

Recently we opened a package of pica spaces and quads sent out with a fount of border by the Johnson Typefoundry, for the purpose of testing their accuracy. Using a Brown & Sharpe micrometer— one of the most delicate measuring instruments made in this country —we found that, in twelve quads taken at random, only four were absolutely accurate bodywise, and only one lengthwise. The standard pica is ·166-inch. The measurements hereunder show the variations by ten-thousandths of an inch, those too small being marked—, and those too large +:—

In our opinion, the Johnson Typefoundry cannot be excelled for accurate typemaking, and the above test goes to prove that it is practically impossible to cast quads accurately. The printer who wishes for accuracy must abandon quads as a standard.

We have not found the Johnson foundry type in any respect more accurate than that of the other large houses. The only accurate quads we know of are the border quads cast by Miller & Richard; and those of our readers who have them in stock will have noticed not only their unusual height, but the peculiarity that none are supplied larger than one em of 2-line emerald. If they looked closely into their invoice, they would probably note also that the quads were charged border price. We have no doubt that they are cast with special regard to accuracy: at all events it is a pleasure to use them, notwithstanding that their great height is sometimes inconvenient.

Before taking leave of the old bodies, we copy the following table of American standards, also from Golding's Review. We have given some of the facts in general terms already (p. 51), but we prefer precise figures, which, as type of the old make is in use in some New Zealand offices, will be of interest. The table is significantly headed: «Why a new standard is needed, » and bears out our former observation, that the variation in height, which in England does not amount to the thickness of a sheet of tissue-paper, is very perceptible in the United States:

Standard Height of American Types.

(The dimensions are stated in decimals of an inch. The letters attached to the names in the table of height, indicate the same foundries in the table of bodies.)

It would be unfair to the typefounders to impute to them all the blame for irregular bodies. Printers have insisted on alteration of moulds to bastard sizes for no better reason than to gratify the whim of customers who required a given number of lines to fill a certain length of page or column; and, according to Austin Wood, « one of the largest bygone printers commenced this confusion of bodies and height-to-paper by ordering his foundry to make moulds of every size considerably below the then acknowledged standard, the professed object of which was to avoid borrowing or lending sorts. This plan considerably increased, so that founders are continually put to the inconvenience of altering their moulds, both as to height to paper and depth of body, in order to accommodate their customers. »

page 68