#241 & #242 Columbian US Find

Hi all,

Wanted to share a find.

I have what seems to be an unused #241 that's got some staining and a used #242. While the condition is always a little rough it's fascinating to rediscover someone's collection and see how they've classified something probably before I was even born.

Yes, that writing is 55+ years old.

Nice find Skyonline123!
Regards
DavidR

You have two nice looking stamps there.

The 241 is used.

Do you think? It was marked as mint on the paper, it seems more like black smears or stains as the paper was folded into the #242 perhaps, but happy to be wrong :)

At least, it has more than "some" staining. At right are the outlines of another stamp. It could be used, but it could just be badly soiled.

Does it have gum on the back?

It may, I will do some investigating I'd like to keep them both hinged there

I wonder how long ago the Stanley Gibbons catalogue price for the $1 stamp in mint condition was twelve shillings? It was £1300 in my 2005 SG USA catalogue. Yours isn't in mint condition, of course, and I agree with rogdcam that it's almost certainly postally used.

The pen used for the updated prices 37/6 and 23/6 is different from the pen used for the original prices, but the handwriting looks similar.

Beautiful stamps with an interesting history!

I believe you are all likely right on it being used. I do have a 1940 Stanley Gibbons catalogue, image below. It lists the $1 at 80 shillings mint...I have no idea when it could have been 12. Probably a good time to buy a house when it was xD

It doesn't matter if it was actually used or not as the stains are bad enough the market will treat it as used either way.

Judging by the rust stains on the drawing-pin imprint the dealer had it pinned up in his shop for some time. The revised prices are in a different hand- note the '7' doesn't have an angle- and also look like they've been written with some kind of fibre-tip, not a fountain pen. Rounded tips to the strokes. Dealers 'cos there's a CV and an offer price.

The original writer was thinking about W. G. Grace while he was writing.

Looking again, I agree that there are two different writers. But I think the later prices must have been written with a fountain pen, because the ink is darker at the end of the stroke than at the beginning. It's a broader and less flexible nib, and probably cheaper ink.

Now we need somebody to identify the manufacturer of the drawing-pin.

I'm afraid even my research skills may not be good enough for that pjr xD I'm enjoying the great insights from everyone though on the history and context of the paper.