The Point System

We use the term point’ today with­out wor­ry­ing just how big it is. We all know that a point is rough­ly 1/72nd of an inch, but at the turn of the cen­tu­ry the point was any­thing but stan­dard. I look here at just how big a point is and how we arrived at this fig­ure. When type­founders were small and spread over the UK it was nat­ur­al that print­ers would use a local foundry. Founders used their own names — and not point sizes — to describe how big their type was. Names like Bre­vi­er (c. 8pt), Eng­lish (c. 14pt) or Great Primer (c. 18pt) were used but the sizes were not stan­dard­ised between founders. You might buy 40lbs of Bre­vi­er type from Miller and Richards in Edin­burgh and find that it would not be the same size as Bre­vi­er type from Stephen­son, Blake in Sheffield. While print­ers used local founders this did not mat­ter too much, but at the turn of the cen­tu­ry when print­ers want­ed to use Amer­i­can types or con­ti­nen­tal types dif­fi­cul­ties arose. At the same time the Met­ric sys­tem was tak­ing hold in con­ti­nen­tal Europe: British founders had to do some­thing. The British Print­er from 1901 ran a series of arti­cles cov­er­ing the dis­cus­sion; and it gives a good insight into the atti­tudes of the dif­fer­ent foundries. The ques­tion was sim­ple: why do British founders not stan­dard­ise on the Amer­i­can Point? The Amer­i­can Point had come into being because the Mackel­lar, Smiths and Jor­dan foundry in the US had joined the Amer­i­can Type­founders Com­pa­ny and they had the largest stock of type and matri­ces. Their point was adopt­ed by the whole group and was embod­ied by a piece of steel with a flat, over­hang­ing strip bolt­ed to the top and bot­tom. This piece of steel was 288pt at 62° and the gap between the two over­hangs meant that the base piece would not wear. The size of one point was defined as 0.01387” or 0.035146cm. The man­ag­er, Mr. Ben­ton, made the remark that the British Stan­dard Point (remem­ber that type was sold by name and not point size) at 1/72nd of an inch was so close to the Amer­i­can Stan­dard that a lit­tle accu­mu­la­tion of dirt would bring the two sizes togeth­er. The feel­ing of the British Print­er was that we should all use the Amer­i­can point. This would mean type, mate­ri­als and oth­er print­ers’ req­ui­sites could all be used inter­change­ably: no doubt that this would be good for the print­er in the long-run. The British Print­er can­vassed opin­ion from the UK founders, and their respons­es illus­trate the per­spec­tives of those firms –

  • Messrs. V & J Fig­gins said: ‘…in our opin­ion there is no prospect of the print­ers adopt­ing any point sys­tem what­ev­er, and those doing so will only add to their dif­fi­cul­ties.’ The BP com­ment­ed only that this quote served a pur­pose by ‘…shew­ing the atti­tude of the foundry’.
  • Stephen­son, Blake said that they were mov­ing to the Amer­i­can Point sys­tem and would — for a time — be run­ning both named sizes and the point sys­tem
  • H. W. Caslon were not­ed as a pro­gres­sive firm’, and said that adopt­ing the sys­tem would be a ‘…great advan­tage’, and they had got this in hand in 1886

The gen­er­al view was that most UK foundries had adopt­ed a point sys­tem; and most used the Amer­i­can Point. Once all founders moved to the sys­tem, Caslon had said they would ‘…rejoice to know that a great reform has been accom­plished.’