Sharing this pair today. Including my writeup from a facebook post earlier today:
What a beautiful pair! Scott #10A - Orange Brown. The scan doesn't do the color justice.
Positions 13-14R5E Horizontal Pair with "SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF." CDS
This pair provides a great comparison for this double (or shifted) transfer evident on the right stamp (14R5E).
Notice the stray ink that is inside the "THREE CENTS" lettering on the bottom of the right stamp. Also notice how clean the left stamp is in those same areas.
Now look inside the lettering "U.S.POSTAGE" at the top of each stamp. Clearly evident doubling inside these letters as well. The lettering on the top of the left stamp, 13R5E, isn't as clear as the bottom, but it appears as if only edge smears have encroached on the white portion of the letter. That is more of an inking issue than a transfer issue.
How about the margins? They are mostly Jumbo - especially for these orange brown stamps. Margins like this generally demand a large premium.
Both stamps are "A" Relief, with both inner lines recut, and no guide dots.
These jumbo examples show a good portion of the bottom of the stamps above. Being from the second horizontal row, they show the bottom of the stamps above - which are from the top row. As is often (always?) the case, the guide dots on the top row stamps are in the upper right corner.
Often, with A-relief stamps and jumbo top margins, you can use the guide dot of the B-relief stamp above it to assist in plating it. In this case, it is the absence of a guide dot from the stamps above that hints that they are second row stamps.
On plate 5E, Chase says:
"The following shifted transfers all slight are found on the left pane: 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 11, and 21L5(E). The shifts on the right pane are 4, 7, 14, 24, 68, and 96R5(E). These, too, are all very faint, excepting 4, 14, and 24, which are strong.
"Generally speaking, none of the re-cut lines on this plate are very heavy, the work being rather delicately done. The normal recutting consisted of going over the four frame lines, both inner lines (except in the instances mentioned), the top of the upper label block and the top of the upper right diamond block."
Chase also says this about Plate 5 Early - "The plate showed no evidence of wear."
This example looks almost proof-like, and yet the CDS appears to be MAY 3 - even if 1852, this would be a very late usage of a plate 5E stamp - but the imprint looks like it was printed in July of 1851.
I briefly looked through my other 5 Early stamps and I do not see any wear on any of them. I was looking for a worn one to scan for comparison, but it was not to be. Maybe Chase was right. #128578;
Enjoy!
Stan Shepp
Posted 01/12/2023 07:42 am
