Stamp Community Family of Web Sites
Thousands of stamps, consistently graded, competitively priced and hundreds of in-depth blog posts to read








Stamp Community Forum
 
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!

Walcott, Ark. (?)

 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 2 / Views: 1,216Next Topic  
Valued Member

United States
184 Posts
Posted 03/09/2011   11:13 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this topic Add frankie to your friends list Get a Link to this Message
Can anyone positively ID this? It looks like 492 as listed, but with double lines.

Frankie

Send note to Staff

Pillar Of The Community
United States
2545 Posts
Posted 03/10/2011   11:38 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add chasa to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Very good question - I checked in with a real expert and got this unexpected answer:
"Walcott? I consider these to be late impressions of the 492. I show two very distorted copies. This condition also exists on Gentry, AR 490. I show a block of twenty-five. It has double lines over subjects 1, 2, 6 and 7 and double lines at the bottom on subjects 19 and 20. The picture does not show all of the bottom row of stamps so subjects 21 to 25 could also have doubles at the bottom. I do not have any (that I remember) from any other state, but few of these devices lasted that long."
quoted from Bill Cummings who is writing the authoritative book on precancel gooks.
I have no idea how extra lines get put on a rubber device but it happened. Sometimes they are cut apart and reassembled. These are old devices - they were supposedly recalled and replaced in 1932!
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
184 Posts
Posted 03/10/2011   12:33 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add frankie to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Thanks Chasa for doing some extra detective work. For now I'll attribute this as a 492 but with an * to denote that this is a late impression.

As for the editors, since this is a major difference, why isn't this denoted in the catalog?

Frankie
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by frankie - 03/10/2011 5:57 pm
  Previous TopicReplies: 2 / Views: 1,216Next Topic  
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.

Go to Top of Page

Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Stamp Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Stamp Community Family - All rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Stamp Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use    Advertise Here
Stamp Community Forum © 2007 - 2026 Stamp Community Forums
It took 0.12 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05