Black Jack Plating Work

I am reading Maurice Cole's 'The Black Jacks of 1863-1867' in which he writes "In correspondence with Mr. Herbert B. Atherton, the noted Black Jack authority, he lamented the fact that the Black Jack had never been plated..." Cole also notes that with 1400 separate positions such a task would be 'arduous.'

The book was published in 1950. I am wondering if in the intervening years, work on plating the Black Jack has been undertaken by anyone? There have been some substantial collections - Metzger, Allen, Ray, Rorke, Russo - but I see no mention of plating in catalogs for same.

Not that I know of.

I would expect to see notification of such a project in the USPCS Chronicle if it had been underway.

If there is enough interest, I'd be willing to setup a community Black Jack Plating database (using high resolution images) on Stamp Smarter.
Don
APS #094826

Put me down, Don! When I collected early in life I had a decent Black Jack collection but, along with the rest, sold when I married in 1982.

Curious there is not more literature? Aside from the catalogs all I find are the Cole book, Black Jack in Vermont, Black Jacks by Lane (on the Allen collection) and the four Rorke exhibits. Per chance you know of others?

You might try this search engine, it can search across many of the best philatelic libraries.
http://catalog.stamplibrary.org/Inm...ie/opac.aspx
Don
APS #094826

Maryette B. Lane's book on the Black Jack's, based upon the Harry Allen collection, is usually considered the definitive work. However, I do not know of any attempt to plate the issue.

The theft of the Allen collection seems an interesting story. From Lane's Preface, "Tragedy struck again on the evening of March 26, 1966, when nearly the entire collection was stolen from the author's home where it was waiting for final photography the next morning."

Apparently most of it was recovered in 1971, although I do not know details. If someone does, please share.

The system is not allowing me to send an email. Perhaps you can shoot one to me?

There's a pretty good reason why the 1861 issue hasn't been plated - they figured out what they were doing by then.

The 1847 and 51 issues where rife with corrections, erasures, marks, dots, and other imperfections that allowed people to work out which stamp came from which position on which plate. By 1861, they had worked out most of the early glitches and the stamps were far more uniform. That is not to say that there weren't any printing varieties - there's the dot on the 1c from some imperfection picked up on the transfer roller and some burrs that weren't burnished out on the 12c. By an large, however, the stamps will probably defy plating.

Good luck to anyone who wants to prove me wrong.

Chip

Hi -

I don't see your direct email in your Profile...the message I get informs me that new members aren't allowed to email. Let me see if I can change my settings...or perhaps you could email me from ... elsewhere ...?

Try now Al. It still will not let me send. (Sorry for messing up the tread...)

Chip,

With the 10c 1861 my father gave up after realizing that there were too many absolutely identical positions.

I have, rather stupidly, attempted to plate the 24c. I'm not convinced as of yet that it can't be done, but it is extremely tedious work and I'd say that there's a 30-40% chance that it can be done without question and that's with a stamp with no known re-entries and printed from only one plate. Basically I'm working off of plating dots and minute transfer variations.

Bill

What Chip says certainly makes sense; thank you for the explanation. Yet, I wonder what both Cole and Atherton were thinking about the plating possibilities? Between the lines it seems they must have thought it possible? Lane doesn't mention plating per se.