#114 That I Can't Find The Grill- Need Your Eyes Please?

This stamp is a Scott 114 with the grill pressed out. The pressing of the grill was probably not an attempt to produce a 114a but simply to press the numerous creases.

There are 2 important production factors to note pertaining to printing and grill embossing.

1) The 1869 series was printed with flat plates on a hand operated spider press with cotton batting used between the paper and the impression roll to ensure an acceptable impression.

2) The 1869 series was known for partial and lightly embossed grills. Very early in the production of this series of stamps the Post Office Dept notified National Bank Note that a new series would be issued and National did little to maintain the embossing rolls. Later printings were known to have some very poorly impressed grills.

The real smoking gun on this stamp is the impression offsetting on the back of the stamp. The "POSTAGE" label and the numeral "3", "CENTS" and the frame ornaments are all clearly heavily embossed on the back. The use of the batting material would have forced the paper into the plate for the impression but would not have produced the heavy impression offset. This offset was made by pressing the wet paper after printing and is simply the difference in the thickness of the ink from the printing.

This is a common sign that engraved stamps have been heavily pressed.

Russ, where did you get the information on the printing of the 1869 series? I'd love to learn more about the process and the "smoking gun".

Let's see - there are no known copies of a used 114a. For that reason, no expert will certify a used 114a - the experts say there is no used 114a. Why do they say there is no used 114a? Because no one has ever found one. Why hasn't anyone found one? Because the experts say they don't exist. Why do the experts say they don't exist? Because no on has ever found one. Why hasn't anyone found one? Because the experts say they don't exist. Why do the experts say they don't exist? Because no one has ever found one.

Talk about a self-fulfilling argument.

I also took my software qwyddion and could not detect anything..

Alan... (and others)... the experts long stated the 164 didn't exist,
yet, one has been certified... and I'm sure most experts to this day
stand behind the non-existent belief, even (with) a known certified
copy...

This does (not) surmise the suspect 114a in this discussion (is) or
(can be) certed as 114a... the above is only stated for comparative
purposes...

The 164 was strongly promoted, and BIG MONEY was spent in the 'doing'
with the involvement of 'credible' using the term loosely) individuals
within the field... (not mentioning names)...

Hence, we're talking money and politics... so, in conclusion, if there
was strong enough belief in this (or any other) suspected 114a, there
would most certainly be one or more advocates to push the issue...

Edit : Scott number corrected to 164...

Don't be too quick to toss aside these no grill 114s. It is beginning to look like there may be a third alternative to understanding them.


@disi123, do you mean #164 the 24c Continental? Your impugning of the experts is rather harsh. What is behind that? Back in the 30s and 40s, Y Souren claimed he could identify a 24c Continental, and although he did not reveal his technique he hinted that it was paper not printing or color that held the key. Could he have been on to something? The study is not new.

But why do you say that "most experts" would deny the existence of a 164?

As for promotional hoopla, to what are you referring (for those of us who no longer subscribe to Linn's)?

@Alan B - welcome to the SCF forum, I think. But you seem to be shooting from the hip and don't have your facts straight. WHICH experts say that 114a does not exist when Scott not only lists and prices them for used and unused but also devotes a footnote to the discovery copies? Your circle of reasoning does not reflect what experts really do say. Could you perhaps clean that up for us?

Essayk... I have corrected my post to 164...
I typed it right before my nap and was not
all there, so to speak...

The prolonged, brief "in denial" commentary
of the 164 in Scott speaks for itself...
I personally know the promoter whom made the
164 *finally* see the light of day, resulting
it being listed in Scott, whose persistence
in doing so made (him) alot of enemies in the
stamp world, with no credit being given to the
accomplishment, nor mention (within) Scott...

You obviously know more about it than I do. I feel sorry for that guy, he needs the support of those who appreciate what he has done. If you can get his permission, please share his name with us. Was he the author of the article in the PF Opinions volume that introduced 164 to the world?

But that story notwithstanding, to lump "the majority" of experts into that camp seems to be a bit of overstatement. Perhaps the real problem is that the conflict was kept under wraps. That said, the matter of ribbed paper, what it really is, how it is produced, how diverse its forms may be, and the extent to which it was used and by whom, these things have not much been investigated. They are getting some attention now, and some of the findings are going to prove disconcerting - that is not a guess, that is nearly certain.

Sometimes I wonder at the confluence of catalogs and our human nature. One sure fire way to get stamps to appear out of the woodwork is to list a stamp as rare; we all run to check our stock books and inventory. Finding a striking error or extremely rare variety is usually, at best, a once in a life time thing. But our nature seems to drive us to believe that we will stumble upon one every week or so; the heart races and hope springs eternal. It's great fun but at the end of the day one thing remains the same; extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Don

One of the great things about the human nature (spirit) is the ability to keep reaching for the improbable in spite of the odds and especially the naysayers. If we did not possess this spirit of curiosity, stock books would remain untouched, and great rarities unrealized.

Some of the best stories in philately didn't happen by accident. Whether it was William T Roby's discovery of the inverted Jenny - he wrote to a friend just days before the release of the stamp "It would pay to be on the lookout for inverts" - or the discovery of the third known copy of Canada #32, these discoveries were the result of dedicated collectors actively looking for rarities.

Q: Why did the man climb the mountain?

Whether the protagonist does it for the thrill, notoriety, money or just to prove the naysayers wrong is not the point - the human spirit is all about doing the improbable.

Brian

Guys,

ONE copy of the 114 without grill has been certified by the PF. Brian Bleckwenn himself told me that the stamp came off of a cover with a substantial amount of OG still on it.

I have seen DOZENS of used 114's without grills. They are very common, it was the most used stamp, the grill was not always very strong, they were tossed around the mails, soaked and pressed off the covers, flattened in albums, and otherwise spent 150 years going through who knows what. A serious search would probably find many thousands. NONE of them will ever be considered as issued without grill.
The VSC6000 can magnify the paper 60 times or more until it just shows the fibers, so some trace of the grill would be found eventually even if the naked eye cannot see it. To my knowledge each of the expertizing groups have one, although I cannot imagine them spending the time to examine all the used 114's with pressed out grills around.

The Steel patent for grilling required that the stamps be pressed flat after the grill was applied, and this was routinely done as part of manufacture. So of course they will find evidence that the stamps were pressed after grilling.

However, there is reason to believe that in some cases stamps that went through the grilling process did not actually receive a grill, and not just individually but whole rows at a time. These need to be systematically pursued to see just how prevalent they are. The problem that causes the general skepticism is that as long as the condition can be faked, collectors are wary of ALL examples. But, as I said, there is a condition with the 1869s that can give rise to ungrilled stamps even after the grilling process has been done. So we should not assume that all have been faked or had their grills pressed out. The work goes on. Just don't jump to any conclusions about these grill-less stamps one way or the other.

For the record here- I only ever stated that I couldn't find it not implying that it was a 126 or 114a. Sorry for that and BTW this post is 3 years old now but good reading-no? lol

For a 3c 1869 to be considered a USED reissue (#125) aside from having no evidence of a grill, it must possess the charateristics of the reissue including bolder, richer color than the regular issue AND the cancel must be one that is identifyable as a post-1875 cancel. They rarely meet all of the criteria.

For it to be considered a #114a is another story, and while essayk is correct in his general statement that some stamps received no grill, this is a very rare occurance on the 1869 issue. It wasn't until the 1870 issues that this became a common occurance.