Help With Great Britain Victoria Stamps Circa 1900

Some oddities are sitting in my GB collection and I am just getting around to dealing with them.
I had no issues identifying these stamps but my question is more what to do with them. I have all of them in my main collection.
All of the stamps are gummed to the paper and I am wondering if I should soak them off or if anyone knows what this is, would it better to keep it intact?

Thank you in advance for taking a look at this and for your advice.

Am I correct when I read "gummed to the paper" as stuck to it?

Since they will not have any gum, they are not considered mint, even if they actually are. Collectors of used stamps will not be very interested in them either as they have not been postally used. So, they will have little value and may even be more interesting as they are.

I would leave them together as a group. Someone starting out might like this because they are in good condition and all in one place.

My initial thought is this is the Victorian era equivalent of a baby book.

Whatever you do, keep the page intact, would be my advice.

By the notation, I'd say the stamps have been on the page since February 1901.

The only letdown is the girl's name. There must've been many hundreds of girls with the same name.

You might be correct. The bi-coloured 1/- stamp was not issued until 1 July 1900.
Interestingly, Queen Victoria died on 22 January 1901. Stamps of Edward VII, however, were not issued until 1 January 1902.

Leave them on the page. They'll be unused whether or not you soak them, but soaking this series will damage the colours.

The obviously well crafted script notes, suggest a possibility of Mary Phillips being a relation of Stanley Phillips?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Phillips

As always you folks are wonderful.

NSK: yes they are stuck to the paper.

Based on all of your feedback I will leave the sheet as is.

rod222: I love the idea that Mary Phillips could have been a relative of Stanley Phillips. If that were the case wouldn't it be just wonderful if I could find a way to return this to a member of the family alive today.
So I am off to do some internet searching to see if this kind of information regarding the family is out there somewhere.
Cheers!!

The relationship might be there. However, I think the script notes are stronger as an argument against it. From a philatelic perspective, the notes make very little sense.

The stamps, indeed, were current in February 1901. They were current when Queen Victoria died and hence the last ones of her reign, together with four high value stamps. The jubilee issue included the £1 green.

The date "Feby 1901" has no meaning in relation to the stamps other than those stamps being current at that time. Queen Victoria had already died. The jubilee stamps were issued in 1887 and the two changed colours in 1900. The 1d lilac dates from 1881 and was not a "jubilee stamp." These are strong arguments that the script dates from February 1901.

The word "stamps" in "jubileum stamps" appears to be in the same handwriting as that in the bottom inscription. If the book dates from February 1901, Stanley Phillips would have been just over 9 years old. The handwriting does not look like that of a nine-year old boy. The stamps would have cost 5/1 and the two charity labels another 3/6. 8/7 would have been a lot of money for a nine-year old boy. If this was added later, when Stanley Phillips was a clerk at Stanley Gibbons, would he have stuck the stamps on the paper?

If the notes date from February 1901, Stanley Phillips is an unlikely author. Charles James Phillips would be a better candidate: he was at an age and position to spent 8/7 on stamps and afford a folly like this.

Agree with GEOFFHA .....leave on that page and I would use it as a reference source of the original color/shade to any used stamps. Excellent piece for references.

The page has nothing do with 1901 as regard to it's production.
Don't disregard Stanley Phillips.
Dare to dream.

It is a fair argument regarding the "stuck down" on the stamps,
but this is under question as to the storage of the item over the subsequent years.

The paper indicates toning, which brings up a sensitive issue regarding husbandry.
I too, would retain as is, but without due care this lovely item
can deteriorate.

If Mr. Phillips did indeed have a daughter Mary, the value of this piece could skyrocket, there must be a huge range of material available to adjudge the writing script of Mr. Phillips, at Stanley Gibbons.

I would think that seeing as the stamps are not rare or scarce they should not be removed from the page to go in a collection consisting only of stamps. The whole page is a piece of social history showing what people did with stamps in that era and how a childs life could be recorded by parents in an era and country when=re upper class parents were supposed to have contracted out child rearing to wet nurses, nursery maids, nannys, governesses and boarding (residential) schools. What a pity the only this page has survived.

1887-1892 "Jubilee" Issue Imprimaturs.
Auction
Robson Lowe 17th December 1975
Beautiful stamps.
The 2.5d is my favourite.

If Stanley were 9 years old in 1901, Mary would be more likely a sister or cousin instead of a daughter. :)