As previously stated this is an essay of the decalcomania process by Henry Loewenberg. Loewenberg received 2 patents for this process; 40,489 (Nov. 3, 1863) and 45,057 (Nov. 15, 1864). Both essays picture on this thread are from patent 45,057.
The original intent was that the stamp would be moistened, applied to the envelope and the facing paper removed leaving a "decal" on the envelope. However, the image was normally damaged with portions of the design still adhering to the facing paper.
Patent 40,489
The process consisted of applying a solution of "resinous gum, camphor, beeswax, benzene, and spirits of turpentine" to goldbeaters skin or onionskin paper to render it transparent. The design was printed from non-reversed plates onto the paper and the gums and wax "preventing contact of the ink with the fibrous" paper. The adhesive gum is then applied over printing and the stamps can then be perforated and are ready for use.
The stamp was applied in the usual manner by moistening the gum and pressing it onto the envelope and, after being applied, the printing will be visible through the transparent paper. However, "the transparent paper… may be removed without removing the design or characters from the surface to which they were transferred."
The only essays that I have seen from this patent are the design of the 1853-1871 1c France stamps of Napoleon III.
Patent 45,057
Henry Loewenberg of New York, New York received the patent on November 15, 1864. The object of his process was to produce a stamp that "when it has been once applied to any surface, cannot be removed therefrom without being destroyed".
The process consisted of applying a coating of "dextrine, gum-arabic, or other suitable adhesive material" to one side of transparent paper. The stamp design or image is printed on the gummed layer with the design "distinctly visible through the transparent material from the other side thereof". This printing would be done with a non-reversed image plate. The stamp is applied to the envelope by" moistening and sticking in the way commonly practiced with postage and revenue stamps".
Since the printed image is applied directly to the adhesive gum, attempts to remove the stamp using fluids will cause the water soluble gum to soften and release portions of the printed image destroying the stamp. Attempts to remove the stamp without fluids will cause the thin paper to tear with portions remaining adhered to the envelope destroying the stamp.
Henry Loewenberg held patent 40489, November 3, 1863, for the transparent paper for this process. This paper was made by applying a solution of "resinous gum, camphor, beeswax, and spirits of turpentine" to goldbeaters skin or onionskin paper.
Numerous essays of the National Bank Note Co. 1861-1866 issues and Washington design were produced for this process. Essays were also produced for the French postal service. All essays were printed by the National Bank Note Co. This patent was adopted in 1866 for the production of Prussia 10sg and 30sg (Scott 21, 22).
Henry Loewenberg also received 2 other re-use prevention patents. one for starch surface paper and one for chemical paper.
The Loewenberg was not the only decalcomania patents granted. Felix Walker also received a patent (Pat 127,663) for this process.
Patent 127,663
Felix Walker of New Orleans, Louisiana filed his application for patent in November, 1871 and received the patent on June 4, 1872. The object of his process was to produce stamps "so that once applied they become self-canceling, and cannot be used a second time".
This process is decalcomania printed on both sides. The process was to saturate transparent paper "with coal or other oil, and on one side of said paper print such letters, figures, or devices a may be required" with this being the face. The second side, or back, is gummed with mucilage, allowed to dry and then print "with any suitable kind of ink, such letters, figures, or designs as may be desired on the pasted side of the paper". The printing on the two sides of the paper should be arranged so that it does not overlap and obscure the image.
Attempts to remove the stamp for reuse would cause the mucilage, on which the second side is printed, to release from the back of the stamp.
Walker essay
Posted 03/11/2012 7:12 pm
