I think Philip has this right. The book being described is a 'facsimile reprint of the first edition' or a 'reprint issue' rather than either a 'second edition' or a 'second issue'.
Philip A. Metzger wrote ...It is, however, wrong, because confusing, to refer to a photographic facsimile as a new edition, because it obfuscates its relationship to the edition from which it derives. And it's hard to argue that there's much chance of textual change in a photographic reprint. Why not just say, "photographic facsimile of the first edition"?