I've recheck my collection and here is the tally :
1880 : 1 on cover, 2 on stamps out of 3 dated stamps found (3/3)
1881 : 2 on cover out of 3 found (2/3)
1882 : none out of 2 found (0/2)
1883 : 1 on cover, 1 on stamps out of 3 found (2/3)
1884 : 2 on stamps out of 2 found (2/2)
1885 : none out of 1 found (0/1)
1886 : none out of 1 found (0/1)
1887 : none out of 6 found (0/6)
1888 : 1 on cover out of 1 found (1/1)
I've also found a 1991.
I cannot check them using my yellow Instanta because, as I have shown previously, it is off by quite a margin and I agree with GJP that it is difficult to have meaningful measurement if we are not using the same tools.
I'm still of the opinion that some plates with LL dots were used continuously until the end of September 1888, that is, in decreasing numbers as they were slowly replaced by new ones. They were removed entirely when operations moved in the Gazette building.
Here's my reasoning, quoting from Hillson and Nixon unless specified :
Plates 1 through 7 were made in Ottawa in 1872 or before. They were single pane 1x100 subject with LL dot and imprint type III (plate 1-2) and IV (plate 3-7). They suspect that plates 6-7 could possibly have been marked type III since 1) they have never confirmed their existence through known imprinted material and 2) that's real interesting :
"One of the enduring mysteries of the value is why the most common imprint to be found, particularly on used stamps, is the type III, up to the end of the 1870s. Type V is conspicuous by its absence, and we have concluded that there must have been more than one plate with type III imprint. It could be that both plates 6 and 7 were so marked and, if so, they were used extensively." (p.127)
Plates 8-11 were made early in Montreal. They were double pane 2x100 subjects with LL dot and imprint type V. Or they should have until the end of the 1870s. (p.11-16). Strangely enough, as GJP reported from an earlier Hillson's book, no type V imprint with LL dot have been found for the three cents.
Also very interesting is this :
"Curiously, from 1873 forward, one would expect that type V would be the one most commonly found. Yet, as pointed out by the late D. Matthew Carstairs, type V is not found on used, dated stamps before about 1880, whereas the two [...]
type III and IV, are commonly found until after that date. (p.15, my italics)
There is also the fact that plates 10-11 are not confirmed by the authors through imprinted material. They are known to exist only through the plate destruction record from 1897. These two might have been type III if we follow Hillson's reasoning. Type III were laid with LL dots as other SQ plates until the end of the 1870s (p.12)
Plates 12-16 were made later in Montreal (after 1880). They are double pane 2x100 subjects with imprint type V. The dots on these plates were at 3 or 9 o'clock and their existence known through imprinted materials except plate 16.
Here is a summary :
Plate 1-7, imprint type III or IV, LL dot on 90% of stamps. Type III were used extensively into the late 1870s and early 1880s, maybe even after (p.15, 127)
Plate 8-11, imprint type V, never seen with LL dot even though it would be logical to assume they were. But, plate 10-11 could be type III and thus, might have also been used extensively into the 1880s.
Plate 12-16 imprint type V with 3 or 9 o'clock dot, replaced the worn out early LL dot progressively beginning in 1880.
Would these type III imprint plates be able to give that many impressions over that long of a period? I think they could. The two 6 cents plates gave something like 125,000 impressions each between 1872-1890, that's 25 million stamps. (p.158). Same for the 2 cents. These plates were rugged way beyond their required durability (Initial contract with the Government stated that each plate should be guaranteed for 25000 impressions before repair and 15000 thereafter, total 40000) (p.3)
Another factor to take into account is corrosion. If plates made before 1875 were stored and put back into use a decade later, they would have rusted. Given the amount of research and attention the SQs have received ever since they were released, I think that something like "pitted plate flaw(s)" would be known, with position, on some mid 1880s 3 cents stamps. It happened with the 6 cents. In 1887 a plate was laid with type V imprint but wasn't used until late 1890, "by which time it had become pitted with corrosion" (p.57-58). That's a brand new plate, stored for three years. Not a worn plate stored for 10. Here's an example that I wish was in my collection!
As for late usage, again I'm not sure. Late usage during this issue is not rare, not even uncommon, but that couldn't account for the amount Kruczynski observed in the article I referred in a previous post. Or, for that matter, the numbers I have in mine (which is a beginner's collection...with allure!). If Kruczynski is right (maybe someone could find cross references or follow ups on his report), late usage couldn't explain that between 30 and 50 percent of stamps between 1880-1888 have LL dots. Or reports from Boggs that 3 cents SQ showed LL dot until 1885, after which "[it] is not discernable in most instances" (p.282)
Anyway, that's my two cents... sorry, that's my three cents on the subject!
Posted 02/27/2016 6:45 pm
, it's 12.10 x 12.25 :
.
