First Issue Revenues - 2c Orange Partial Perfs - Do They Really Exists?

Yep, I overlooked the R13a. Amazingly enough, Scott values a pair at $800. I wonder how they are coming up with that number.

The R53a I can agree with you on. The one known pair is a little fishy looking.

There are lots of "R53a" pairs. They are all fakes, trimmed from part perfs. In 47 years of studying and collecting revenues, I have never seen a single or pair I thought looked genuine, or even one that shows part of the next stamp on both vertical sides. The best single I have ever seen resides in a major collection and is still not so good that it cannot have been trimmed.
The listings of R13a in pairs and blocks goes back to at least 1945, so my assumption is that the editors saw them at some point previous to then. Where any are now is anyone's guess. Joyce did not have any multiples.

BTW, in 1945 an R13a block of four catalogued $300. The equates to $4000 in today's money; the cat value of a block today is only $2000 so it is actually worth only half of what did then, at least according to the catalog. Of course if a nice block ever showed up at auction today it would probably bring considerably more then catalog.

Anyone remember the R15b single - just wondering why the dash in Scott is not reviewed here or the pair of R60b from the Joyce sale.

Is there a link to the Joyce sale?

I seriously doubt that a R15b (or R15a) exists no matter how big the margins. The stamps were issued well after the time imperfs and partial perf. were released. Some of the regular perforated stamps of this issue have margins that are pretty wide, especially those along the outer border. Like Jim, I have a couple of R15b that are definitely trimmed despite the fact the margins are descent.

Is it possible that they are true copies out there? Yes.....Is it likely? No.

Any genuine R15a or R15b examples would have to be from an error sheet.

Yep, like R69e. It's an EFO, not a part perf.

I've emailed Jim Kloetzel to see if he can determine when R15a and R15b were added, and also what expertized examples were used to justify the addition. I'm unaware of any examples of either.

PF Cert 115761 says that the R15b are genuine, but the orientation is all wrong. Likely a margin misperf.

Got a reply from Jim, which seems like an eminently reasonable solution:

The PF has an old cert for a pair of R15b, and what was R15a in the Joyce sale is now proven to be a trail color.

Frankly the R69e is very questionable as well. All the certified examples have one wide sheet margin and one narrow margin. As I have stated before, the outer sheet margin was not always perforated, so having one does not really prove anything.

Sorry I was thinking of the R34be.

I just opened the 2018 edition of the Scott catalogue and see that the footnote seeking certified examples has been added.

All,

Sadly, I have no part perfs but I do have a few with 1862 canx dates.

In case they are of any use, here they are:

30 October 1862



8 November 1862



10 - 11 November 1862



13 December 1862



22 December 1862