Looking For Info. On A Possible Error Stamp. Please.

I received a large stamp collection several years ago through family.
Because im an avid coin collector I just got around to research & inventorying what I have.
I came across this particular stamp & after much searching I came up empty??
I will post pictures but please be patient I am new to using this forum & unsure of how to download photos.





*** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum. ***

Hi

What you have is an official seal. These were used to repair mail that was damaged in handling, or to reseal mail that was opened by mistake.

The seals were also used in the dead letter office.

The value of this particular seal is minimal, as many millions were produced, over many decades.

The additional line of vertical perforations however makes this seal a little unusual.

So instead of it being a ten cent item you may be able to sell it for a dollar or two; the additional perforations can be found fairly easily on these seals.

Jim

Welcome! Yes, the extra vertical row of perforations down the center is definitely an error. Value is fairly modest due to the official seals being less collected than traditional postage stamps. As you can see, the staff moved your post to the "Back of the Book" section - referring to the back portion of the catalog which lists the more specialty and esoteric items like these seals.

Hi superpoacher74, attractive Post Office Department Official Sealed.

Sometimes you can find these on damaged letters.

Your scan is marked OX 39, but this is incorrect! There 17 possibilities for your example, along with 2 watermarks, of the 17 possibilities, there are more subset possible. OX 39 is a Hyphen Hole, yours is perforated, impossible to determine which of the 17 possibilities your example is. Some of the 17 possibilities are not valued in the Scott Catalog!

I suggest you find a stamp collector who can identity your stamp, and determine if it is watermarked or not, and what watermark it is.

While I respect the two previous posters, I would think it well work your effort to get it properly identified. You never know, it could be worth more than "minimal" or "vale is fairly modest", I think the posters did not try to really identify your example.

Hope my information was of some help to you!

Stampmaster

Ah, yes, I just took the OX39 as correct and went forward without a cross-check. In fact the listings for the Official Seals have been greatly expanded and renumbered several times in the past few decades, so the number may have been correct when it was written there and is now outdated by the more detailed lists. Time to start over in figuring out the current catalog number.

Stampmaster, I must be missing something in my catalog, which Scott #s of this design are watermarked?

Hi John Becker, you may send me an off line request if you require help, perhaps we should stay on topic for Superpoacher74.

I've scanned both examples, one with hyphen hole, and the other one for perforations in order to help you, and the other posters if they also do not know the differences.

If I can be of any other help let me know.


Stampmaster

Stampmaster, I understand perforations perfectly - that was not the question at all. You had stated:



and I replied:

Hi all I'm resonding to John Beckers questions about watermarks.

John do you know how to watermark? Its easy to do.

The answer to your question is, first off lets look at Scott illustration number which is POS6, hope you understand the importance of the scott illustration number, very important when identifying some stamps and in this case this illustration number.

John do you have a Scott catalog available, find your way to the "Post Office Seals" section, then find the Scott Illustrations number POS6!

Anyway here is the information you request, oh by the way glad you were able to see my scans of hyphen hole and round hole perforation. Do you know how to determine the hyphen hole gauge, is very simple!

John you should of sent me an off line request.

OX21f Eagle and star
OX21j certificate bond

OX22c eagle and star

OX23a eagle and star

OX25a eagle and star

Do you know how to watermark?

Now lets stay on topic!

Stampmaster

To me it may be worth $4, that is what makes collecting stamps fun

Stampmaster's post does not dignify a reply and I will cease to respond to ANY and ALL of his posts from now and urge all others to do so.

I think we should let the moderators be the topic police. Sometimes I find the expanded discussion of a topic interesting. Topics can be like conversations and stray occasionally into a related subject. In this instance, the original poster didn't limit his question to perforations, and I didn't find John Becker's question about watermarks to be so off the mark, especially when it was in response to a specific comment about watermarks on these stamps.

Thank you all for your quick responses I appreciate your information and input. I will have it looked at as soon as I can get out to the next Coin and Stamp show. Thanks again

stampmaster
Your snarky replies have no place here. I already privately communicated with you once before but the drama has continued to follow you. No more warnings.
Don

Edit: The watermark issue with this stamp is that not all stamps in the pane showed the watermark. So if a stamp does not have one, you aren't any closer to a ID.