Show Your US 1851-57 Imperforate Stamps

3rd row left pane?

Excellent clue! It looks like 26L1L. Guide dot looks right and the marking in the letter O of One Cent looks just right.

My thought as well. Matches the Doporto example also

The Steamer Magnolia cover is a nice item.

The Watt and DeSaulles correspondence produced quite a few really nice Steamboat covers. It was John Watt and Louis DeSaulles who were business partners. This particular correspondence, as you correctly note, originated at Rodney, from a cotton plantation.

I have three of these covers, from Rodney, and all are from October - December, of 1851. Yours, being Sep 1851, is probably about a month earlier than the earliest one I have.

Mine all have 3c orange browns, and/or plate 1E 1c stamps on them, so these covers are even of further interest, in that they are often franked with early-use 1851-issue stamps.

edit: I should have noted, that all three of the covers I have were carried on the Steamboat Glendy Burke, while yours was on the Magnolia. The Magnolia packet marking is really nice.

Thanks stallzer - always appreciated

Thanks, txstamp!

Here is another one that is on my desk right now.
I plated it as a 2R2L (Early - Thanks Ioagoa!) - If anyone would care to double check, I would appreciate it.

It is part of a collection of covers to and from the same people. (20-ish #10A's and 90-ish #11/A's)

Here's the rub - This is on a letter dated JAN 5 (apparently, 1852) and Chase says,
"The alterations which led to the second state of this plate were probably made
about the first of January, 1852. The earliest use of a copy from this plate (late
state) of which I have a record is January 14, 1852, and I doubt if one will be
found much earlier."

The main question would be - Is this a Plate 2L stamp? And if so, it is 2R2L?

I will share the balance of the #10A's that I found from this collection and post them all in a single post for your enjoyment.

It is a very nice collection of matching covers, with matching addresses, in matching handwriting, and mostly matching CDS's.

Stan Shepp

Here are the images of the 20-ish Orange-Brown suspects - (as identified by the seller)
and a Plate 1 Late example at the end.

I only plated a couple. I am thinking to scan the 90-ish #11/A's so that I can scroll through them easier and see if there is anything noteworthy.

Your thoughts and opinions are welcome.

Stan Shepp

July 24

AUG 9

AUG 9

AUG 22
9
AUG 28

DEC 2, 4R2E

September 5

September 11

September 25

October 2

October 16

October 23

November 7 - At first, I thought that the PAID was part of the CDS, but I think that it is a separate marking.

December 8

December 22

December 29

January 5 (This is the stamp shown on my previous post)

January 12 (2 stamps on the same cover)

January 12 (2 stamps on the same cover)

January 19

February 2

Dec 21, 1852 - 98L1L


*****
DONE

Considering all the Bridge Port (??) cancels, it looks like most of these came from one correspondence. You may end up with lots of examples from the same plate. Maybe even a few adjacent. Also, nice range of sheet margins in the lot!

Hey Stan --

Your stamp with the Jan 5, 1852 cds cancel is position 2R2E.

The determination as to the "Early" state of the plate is certain -- as the stamp is a C relief -- and when plate 2E was re-entered to become plate 2L -- position 2R2 was re-entered with a B relief. There are other indicators as to the state of the plate being "Early" -- but the relief ID alone nails this one.

As an aside -- the EKU for plate 2L is January 7, 1852 -- (reference Jim Allen's article in the May 2020 issue of the USPCS Chronicle (i.e., Chronicle #266).

Regards // ioagoa

Ioagoa,
The assistance is much appreciated!

Mootermutt987,
Just over 100 covers. Matching in almost every way - except for the 3c stamp on the corner.

Stan Shepp

Hey all!

I don't know that I have ever heard any discussion on the base of the ovals on position 65L5E.

I received this #10A today and was plating it and as I looked very closely at it, I saw what appears to be recuts around the base of the portrait oval.

I have included an image without any markings, an image with an oval around the suspect area, & Lund's copy of the same position.

In the left half of the oval, both the outer oval (lower line) & the inner oval (upper line) seem a little heavier - and the first line of so above that is a little heavier.

In the right half of the oval, the outer oval (bottom line) apprears to have a +/-2mm recut that is a quarter of a mm up into the white space. The inner oval (upper line) appears a lttle heavier as well.

There is a gap in the outer oval at just after 3:00.
The lines at the thin opening in the outer line at 12:00 look suspect.
At 11:00. the white space seems crunched.

Overall, the ovals look to have been re-touched snd the thickness of the white space is very inconsistent.

I am interested in the thoughts of the community.

That little drip of a vertical outside frame line at the lower right corner is also pretty cool. This stamp is a fine example of that mark.
The left inner frame line appears to go up too far - or one might argue it does - but it is not a listed characteristic of this position.

65L5L continues with these characteristics at the bottom, but the others around the ovals seem better.

I might have guessed 65L5L, but the right side of the top frame line comes through doubled on the late state of the position.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts on this!

Stan Shepp

Hi Stan. My theory is that you have a very clear impression showing the details associated with the B relief. The Celler-Omiya article (A Detailed Study of the 3 cent 1851 Relief Characteristics) in the Chronicle goes into great detail about this area. I think you are seeing remnants of the tesselation impingement that was burnished out. The gap in the outer oval is a feature associated with the B relief as well.

Figure 7 from Celler's article:



Just my thoughts. Hopefully the experts can chime in. As usual you have some beautiful specimens.

Harper1249

Hey Stan --

Regarding your 65L5E -- I agree with Harper's assessment.

More specifically, in my opinion -- and this is just my opinion -- I see no evidence of recutting anywhere around the medallion oval. The relief looks like a classic B7 in all regard (i.e., 7th row B relief) -- meaning that there might be, albeit ever so slight, if at all, in this position -- a trace of guide relief influence from the C relief caused by over-rocking (all as discussed in the Sesqui article previously referenced by Harper). Likewise -- there could also be the barest trace of a shifted transfer that is impacting the narrowing of the white space in the medallion oval at the 11:00 position. All of that said -- after close study -- my opinion (and again -- this is just my opinion) is that the features you are asking about are the collective result of differences in inking, impression, and plate wear.

I attach 4 additional copies of position 65L5E for you to look at -- and as you will see -- under very close "fly-speck" examination -- each of them differs ever so subtly in the areas you noted -- again -- in my opinion -- all due to differences in inking, impression, and plate wear.

Take a look and see what you think?

Regards // ioagoa

FYI -- all 4 of the stamps below have been plated and confirmed as position 65L5E:

Thanks Harper1249 & ioagoa!

After you responded, I looked at quite a few "B" reliefs and while I found this area to be inconsistent, it is easily within the deviations that could be caused by inking.

So, I concur.

I will go find something else cool to share. :)

PS - I picked up that lot with twenty #10/A covers and eighty (or so) #11/A covers.
All in the same correspondence. Covers only, no contents.

Stan Shepp

I recently acquired this #11 from MOMEN stamps and am less than pleased with the undescribed horizontal crease through George's eyes. I am also thinking that the tear coming up from the bottom of the stamp - through the second E should have maybe been mentioned.

Otherwise, George's shoulder took an axe on this one. "C" relief, Gash on shoulder. Top row, upper right guide dot. Most likely a 10th colum stamp - 101L8? That is as far as I got and now I have to go do work. :(

Thoughts on MOMEN stamps and on plating this guy.
I am keeping it. I am $28 invested in it, but it is hardly worth my time to pack it up and send it back.

Stan Shepp