Fantasy Dr. Kilmer Cancel

The return to ebay of the infamous fantasy (no such cancel ever existed) Dr. Kilmer cancel. And on a very nice rouletted RB13c. We were treated to a whole exhibit of such fantasy material at the APS Stamp Show in Hartford about a decade ago. Eric Jackson, Richard Friedberg, Mike Morrissey, and I approached the jury debunking this cancel (actually debunking the whole exhibit!). Morrissey, I think, first encountered these on ebay just prior to the unveiling of the exhibit and it was Morrissey who was the first to raise suspicions. The current offerer on ebay was not responsible for the making of any of these fantasy cancels. The forger should be hung up by his thumbs for ruining a perfectly good and desirable stamp.

Ron Lesher

My heart skipped a beat when I saw the RB13c with the alleged Kilmer overprint, since I have watched and collected proprietary revenue cancels for about forty years, RB13cs are pretty unusual and I have never seen Kilmer overprints on first or second proprietary issues. Yet this forgery is pretty damn sly, since Kilmer did begin selling his medicines in 1878 and at the time they were advertised as Kilmer's S.H.R. (Standard Herbal Remedies), so it is at least plausible that Kilmer might have made use of second issue proprietary revenues, even if the odds would have militated against his encountering the c varieties. I don't doubt that the cancel is a forgery because objects that resemble golden goose eggs aren't, but can you share the information or particular observations of this RB13c which led you, Richard, Eric and others to definitively label the cancel a forgery.

I would be interested as well, knowing what draws the forgery card.

I am not convinced this roulette is genuine either.
I do not know what methods were used at the time, but although Kilmer started in time to use these issues, it took a few years for the business to grow to the point where he would be likely to use a printed cancel. And this stamp was (presumably) originally cancelled by a straight line manuscript which was always done in the sheet. This would not have been needed with a printed cancel. Also the printed cancel is at an angle, which no reputable printer would have done, and the reverse side shows no sign of actually having been printed. I am fairly sure from the scans that a close examination of the stamp would show that the cancel was not printed but was applied by handstamp.

For those who wish to see the reverse:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/RB13c-w-RAR...AOSwP~tW3J0P

There are a few salient facts that should be reported. These cancels all emanated about ten years ago from one individual. There is no historical record of any of these cancels before that. A large multiple of the 4¢ proprietary of the same issue (the size was a block of 16 or 20 if memory serves me correctly) with this cancel was in the exhibit in Hartford. Multiples of that size are memorable and at least one person seemed to recall having previously seen this same multiple without the cancel. Note that in my original posting I said that this cancel is a fantasy. The cancel never existed until the 21st century. Further suspicion is that if Kilmer were marketing a package that required a 3¢ stamp they would not likely have marketed a package that required a 4¢ stamp.

I should add that the same exhibitor had Binghamton, NY covers with the "added" corner card of Dr. Kilmer. During that same Hartford show the exhibitor was spotted at a dealer's booth asking for Binghamton covers, presumably to manufacture more Kilmer covers.

Prior to the Harford show the same exhibitor had a one frame exhibit of Kilmer at the AmeriStamp (the APS winter show) in Charlotte, NC. There were a lot of Binghamton postal precancels in the exhibit. When asked to evaluate the exhibit Arnold Selengut rated these postal precancels as forgeries.

Enough of a pattern?

Although I agree with you completely, it should be noted that Kilmer had proprietary articles priced from 25 cents to one dollar, so in theory he would have needed 1,2,3 and 4 cent stamps.

The presence of the straight line canx was odd to me. Thanks for the explanations.

Those straight line manuscript cancels are actually fairly common on both first issues and proprietaries in horizontal, vertical and combined forms. It was a quick, easy (though not strictly legal) way of cancelling a lot of stamps at once.

revenuermd, thanks for this thread and for providing the back story. I find this kind of stuff fascinating, especially when it concerns revenues.