Rare Imperforate Medicine Stamp Discovery! (Not)

In Kelleher's mail sale auction 5015 there is an interesting lot.

http://db.kelleherauctions.com/php/...=1&sale=5015

Lot 6470 has a previously unknown imperforate variety of a medicine stamp. It is described as follows:

Henry, John F., 1¢ black, watermarked USIR, imperforate (Scott RS114d var.), unused without gum, large margins all around; small, very minor abrasion in center, otherwise Very Fine, rare, .
Suggested Bid $300 .

Current Bid $150





This stamp has a current Scott catalog value of $1.75. This means that the stamp is extremely common, despite being 150+ years old. As one might imagine, there are surely many large-margined examples to be found. For example, this stamp is from Eric's website:




So, what is the likelihood that the unique discovery example of this rare imperforate variety surfaces in this venue (without a certificate of course) and is entirely genuine, versus someone taking a few minutes with some scissors and a jumbo-margined copy of a very common stamp?

And do you see tiny perforation residual indents at the bottom left and right margins like I do?

Even worse is the stamp in lot 6466, described as:

Proprietary, 1914, 4-3/8¢ black (Scott RB59), o.g., heavy hinge remnant; light gum bends, small thin spots and pulled perforation, otherwise Fine. Scott $20 .
Suggested Bid $10




I'm all for someone trying to make a buck, but when a top-tier auction house offers obviously fake stamps and common but faulty stamps that any collector would be embarrassed to save even as a duplicate, I mean, c'mon...

Jim

Obviously trimmed stamp.

Ugh. You started seeing this more and more beginning a few years ago when Kelleher got in bed with Michael Aldrich and started offering his retreads in their Internet sales. His inventory screams "caveat emptor" when it comes to imperfs and part perfs. This very well could be a leftover piece from that arrangement.

I wonder how many individuals were tempted over the years to take this 40 cent value stamp and make it into a $350 stamp just by trimming off the top and bottom margins.

Kind of makes it a more rare stamp than a normally margined stamp.

Jim

People have done so for decades; fortunately the paper, shade, and impression are sufficiently different from genuine part perfs that they get caught if put in for a cert. However many collectors over the decades have been fooled.

When you get right down to it, the only way to be 100% sure on many part perfs and imperfs is to obtain them in multiples. Even on document there's no way to be absolutely certain how they originated. Even when the cancel, paper, ink color, and impression look good, for those types where the same attributes can be found on the perforated versions, you can't know for certain. Sure, if the stamp is is oversized in certain directions or includes parts of adjoining stamps, that is a very positive indicator, but given the apalling perforation tolerances of the era, even that isn't 100% certain.

Here's an example I posted several years ago, a seemingly good R3b:





Great margins, good cancel date. I'd be willing to bet that 90% of collectors would deem it legit...

The only problem is that I cropped that image in Photoshop from the stamp below, an R3c with jumbo margins.

The shade is a bit dark on my screen because it is partly oxidized; this stamp might or might not pass a serious study. Yes, many collectors would accept it.

The trimmed John F. Henry stamp sold for $180.