It's a bit small, but I think ITC Modern No. 216 is a safe bet.

What is it with ITC and ridiculous x-height?

My personal theory is that ITC was trying to make everything look like Helvetica, particularly its x-height. But, they weren't alone.

I do remember that the prevailing wisdom in the seventies (promoted by ITC and others) was that typefaces with large x-heights were easier to read and used space more efficiently. There is a certain amount of truth to this (for example, newspaper faces), but it was mostly just the changing winds of taste and fashion.

Hey - Who doesn't like big x-height?

- Lex

I happen to like a big x-height once in a while. But like the author of this Design Observer entry, I hate ITC Garamond.

http://www.designobserver.com/archives/000205.html

Gotham is a RARE example of a nice font with a big x-height.

ITC was all over the place when I started designing and my boss PROHIBITED us (thank god) from using them.

I think the only problem with ITC Garamond is that it isn't Garamond.

It is a right face with a wrong name. Too many people uses it as a classical face, but it doesn't look classical at all.

It's a good testimony of the Herb Lubalin typographic thought.