Watermarks On 1894/95

I just received a 15c dark blue Clay that I won on ebay last week. It was listed as a 274 which means it should have the double line watermark. But I can't see it (using fluid and tray). I have other 1895s from the series and with the acception of the 1c, the watermark is very visible. Are some of them more difficult to see than others? or did the seller mislabel the stamp.

Note-I'm happy either way, since I had neither one, and the unwatermarked is more valuable, but I'm really just curious. I want to be able to put it on the correct album page.

Hi, I sure wished I knew what stamp you are speaking of...
I am clueless. I don't know what a dark blue Clay is or what a double line watermark is. I am curious though. Do you have a photo?

I hope you get your answer soon!
SueStamps

Technically, because of the spacing between watermark letters, there will be certain positions from the sheet in which the watermark will be at the edge or corner of the stamp. If so, then the watermark can be hard to detect (especially if a heavy cancel should coincide at that spot). There should be an illustration in the Scott catalog showing the full pane layout of the watermark, so you can get a rough idea of what I am talking about.

Check your stamp again, focusing on the edges and corners, and see if you can detect any part of a letter.

Henry Clay, one of your American guys. Can't show the watermark because, of course, I can't see it.

Sue, below is an illustration of the double-line watermark known as #191 in the Scott catalogs.

James, there are 3 major factors that influence the visability of DL watermarks.

First, many of the matermarks were lightly impressed by the dandy roll making them more difficult to see.

Second, as pointed out by khj, the quarter sheets will have 9 horizontal row of 10 characters. With this spacing some stamps will have just a small amount of the watermark.

Third, if the stamp has a heavy cancel it can mask parts/all of the watermark.

Below is the quarter sheet layou, as you can see the stamps at teh top and bottom of this example show complete or mostly complete letters. Some of the stamps in the center of the pane show just a small portion of multiple letters. The letteres are approx 16mm high.



Below is the actual watermark on a block of 6

James,

I think you can't see the watermark because there very likely isn't one. As you suggested, your stamp was probably misidentified by the seller and, in reality, is the more expensive, unwatermarked 15c of 1894 (Scott 259).

If you haven't been able to detect the watermark after several attempts in fluid, then I think you can safely conclude it belongs on the 1894 album page.

Had the distinguishing characteristic been a single line watermark then I would have recommended a much more extensive examination as the size and spacing of that watermark can often make it much more difficult to detect.

Steve

Now why can't I ever have luck like that? lol Hey James you can always just send it to me for proper disposal...

Well I just dipped it again, for I think the fourth time, and I still can't see anything. I think old Henry is getting tired of holding his breath.
Even held it up to the light wet and couldn't make out a watermark. So I guess I'll call it a 259 (1894) and leave it at that. Could be worse I suppose.
ILS, if it really continues to bug me, I'll let you know.
thanks everybody.