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?

Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some stamps?
Our stamp forum is completely free! Register Now!

Franklin Has A Funny Face. Scott #40

Previous Page
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 41 / Views: 2,631Next Topic
Page: of 3
Pillar Of The Community
674 Posts
Posted 02/18/2019   12:22 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add mdroth to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Canada
1114 Posts
Posted 02/18/2019   9:20 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add No1philatelist to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Oldrun, sorry to hear you are going through eldercare also, as many are. And I have to take a different position on this stamp after seeing the second scan.

In the first scan you can see where the "stitch line" went through the T and A of postage and in the second scan you can see where it runs through the E. As for the face, it's as if he was laughing loudly, or it is plain weird and almost freightful. The fact that it was bought in Europe where "weird" things often happen to stamps, in my opinion the stamp will have to be expertised in order to determine whether it was manipulated or altered in any way.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by No1philatelist - 02/18/2019 9:24 pm
Pillar Of The Community
673 Posts
Posted 02/20/2019   02:25 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add ClassicPhilatelist to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply



The issue is not just the face, but the area right of the face. The red line above outlines the area affected.

I superimposed another 24 over the top of this one (with an opacity of 30%), to see if the face overall is correct, and it is.




Looking at the two, I am of the view there are only 2 possibilities here.
1. The stamp has been intentionally altered, and without having it in hand, I can't determine any further.
2. Something came in contact with the stamp while it was still wet, perhaps a finger (the oval does seem to be fingerprint sized). The outer ornaments don't seem to be effected, but they are also a lot less ink, and may not have been wet at the time the stamp was touched. The heavy ink in the inner oval was still damp, and when pressed, was smeared into the design, and obscured the face. This seems to be the most likely possibility, given the oddity, and that is what I would label it... an oddity. Fun stamp, if this is the actual issue.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
New Member
United States
1 Posts
Posted 03/02/2021   12:03 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add commercenary to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I know this post was from a while ago - I hope everyone is well.
You all have seen many things that would have escaped my eye on cursory review. I'm impressed and my skepticism of the world has grown... :)

Two things, though: (1) It's clear ol' Ben is being attacked by a Dementor, and (2) what do people think about Scott #40 in general? It's unique, but also not "really" a stamp?....
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2357 Posts
Posted 03/02/2021   10:34 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Scott #40 is a back of book item since it was not a regularly issued stamp.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
655 Posts
Posted 03/02/2021   3:20 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add mootermutt987 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Scott #40 is every bit as 'valid' as any other of the Re-Prints that are listed in the Scott Catalog. Exactly where they all belong in that catalog is up for debate. That said, I have seen/owned a number of postally used 1875 Reprints of the 1869 series. So... for the 1875's of the 1869's I gotta think they belong in the front of the catalog. Since they belong in the front of the catalog, then the other re-prints (See my sentence #1) also belong in the front of the catalog. Unless, of course you want the catalog to have some 1875's in the front of the catalog (because there are postally used examples) and some other 1875's (the ones missing postally used examples) in the BOB.

ETA: I COULD imagine an argument to move ALL the 1875 RePrints to the same part of the catalog (at 1875(, rather than each series of reprints following the originals. The 1875 Reprints of the 1847 Issue are located between the 1847 Issue and the 1851 Issue (Scott's 3 and 4). I cannot imagine that happening though - it would involve renumbering most of the 19th Century part of the catalog.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by mootermutt987 - 03/02/2021 3:25 pm
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2357 Posts
Posted 03/02/2021   3:29 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
You are correct that there are a number of postally used examples.

The question I have, however, is - does it state anywhere explicitly that these were valid or invalid for postage?

I guess I had assumed that they were not valid .. but you make a good point. I don't recall seeing any statement.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
655 Posts
Posted 03/02/2021   3:40 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add mootermutt987 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
txstamp - I don't KNOW the answer to your question, but I gotta believe that the postmaster in Beaver Butt Idaho (I am sorry to beavers, butts, and Idaho...) couldn't possibly tell a #118 or #119 from a #129. I CAN imagine that the 1875 RePrints of the Pre-Civil War issues would NOT be valid for postage because NONE of the pre-Civil War issues were valid for postage because they were declared invalid due to the war. Still, I think all reprints belong in the same area of the catalog. I CAN see the foundation of my argument crumbling, though.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2357 Posts
Posted 03/02/2021   5:03 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Ok - from the Neinken book page 526:


Quote:
1875 Reprints of 1857-60 Isssue
Issued for the Centennial Exposition of 1876. These were not good for postal use.


Quote from the Chase 3c book - as quoted by Neinken:


Quote:
Strictly speaking, there are no re-issues of the 1851-1857 set because such stamps as were sold by the Government in 1875 were made long after the originals had been demonetized, and as they were not receivable for postage are therefore reprints, in contradistinction to the stamps of the later issues made at the same time which were receivable for postage and hence are re-issues.


* extra credit to Chase for: "contradistinction". That was a new word for me
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by txstamp - 03/02/2021 5:04 pm
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1464 Posts
Posted 03/03/2021   10:13 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add dudley to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
The Scott US Specialized explicitly states that #40-47 were not valid for postal use. It calls these "reprints", whereas the other 1875 issues, starting with #102, are called "re-issues."
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1742 Posts
Posted 03/03/2021   10:57 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add essayk to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
The stamps which were originally issued prior to the Civil War were demonetised at the outbreak of the war and replaced with new designs. The later printings of those designs were not valid for postage to avoid confusion with the demonetised stamps. Nothing that came later has been demonetised, so earlier designs which had been replaced with newer designs were "re-issued" while those which reproduced current designs were "special printings." From the standpoint of 1875 when this commemorative work was first done (anticipating the Centennial no doubt) only the reissues and special printings were valid for postage, and so it has remained to the present.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by essayk - 03/03/2021 11:02 am
Page: of 3 Previous TopicReplies: 41 / Views: 2,631Next Topic  
Previous Page
 
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 - 2021 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 - 2021 Stamp Community Forums
It took 0.16 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05