314A ? ~ What Say You...

I'm talking to a gentleman holding this piece... there's a couple of things that bother me about it, from the tie to the piece, the date, and the top and bottom edges...

It is not 314A.

314A has Shermack Slots not perfs and was issued 5-27-1908.
The top edge is too blurry to look for perf holes left from a recut.
The top left corner of the stamp concerns me. The postmark is darker and wider on the envelope than the higher level stamp. Nowhere else does the postmark touch the stamp. But I am no expert, just MHO.

That was my understanding as well... Shermack III's... however this gentleman has been involved in a debate with APS and the PF over it... and he believes what he has is real.

I think it was a bottom row stamp cut at top and that is why it is blurry there. Put another bottom edge stamp like it next to it to compare size.

Then there is the issue date that is way past the cancel date. Explain that.
I would pass on it.

I'm not considering buying it... the stamp does not exist... the owner who is an ebay seller isn't even offering it for sale... he's trying to get info on it... I told him to join SCF and ask about it, but, since he hasn't done so, I'm doing it...

His name is Kenith Dargis, ebay ID : krdantiques

Feel free to contact him...

Don't like it at all. That bottom edge looks like it is wandering all over the dang place. If he's absolutely sure it's legit, tell him to send it to the PF for a cert.

Me, I wouldn't touch it with someone else's money...

It was also posted on a philatelic facebook page where he got the same info.

You didn't input any constructive comment (there), so what's your motivation for the above comment, also without any constructive input?

The constructive info was already posted there, so no I had no additional comments to make. As for here, I was simply pointing it out. Not sure what your problem is.

3 guesses... first 2 don't count...

Since the stamp is clearly a trimmed perforated example, I can't imagine. The bottom margin was clearly sliced with a razor and the top margin appears to show evidence of perforations. This stamp was never issued in a coil format nor was there any postal reason for doing so at the time.
If you had the full cover it would probably have been sent by either a dealer or a collector, possibly just having some fun.

Ok, I'll admit, I'm baffled. What's your beef with revcollector? I see nothing that he posted that has been anything but helpful.

Like I said on Facebook, this is a faked stamp IMO.

"... however this gentleman has been involved in a debate with APS and the PF over it... and he believes what he has is real."

I think we need to know the nature of his debate with the APS and PF in order to have a real conversation. What information was brought forth to either organization to even have that debate?

Because as pictured, it's not a #314A, nor is it any Schermack or any government coil. The entire order of 10,000 imperforate 4 cent 1902 went to the Schermack Mailing machine Company at their request, according to Belasco and others, in 1909. The earliest privately-perforated coil is November of 1907 and the vertically-perforated Bureau coils weren't issued until summer of 1908, in limited quantities, and without the 4-cent denomination. And the early Schermacks were used in Detroit and Chicago, while the 1902 series Bureau coils were sold in Washington DC and Indianapolis.

I am by no means an apologist for the various expertizing committees, but having struck out by issue, date, perforation and cancellation, what is/was the arguement presented to the APS & PF by the owner whereby this artifact being a genuine issue could possibly have any legs?

Tipzi... send me an email, and I'll forward his documents back to you. which he sent to me to look over... I don't think I'd be able to oopy/paste them into this discussion... perhaps you might be able to...

His name is Kenith Dargis, ebay ID : krdantiques... here's his email if you want to contact him directly...

*** Private information removed by Staff. Please do not post your address/email/phone number etc. ***

I am the owner of this stamp so I'd like to share some input. The stamp was submitted to both APS & PF...result they claimed it was a trimmed #303 due to the indents on the edges. I was surprised by this as coil stamps separated by sharp but stationary blades of that era had rough edges. Look at Schermack/Mail O Meter coils of that era they have rough edges. I would think the experts from APS & PF would know something this basic.

In the 3 research papers that have been published on this subject I challenged the experts to disprove the N.Y. Collectors Club's (The Real McCoy) study indicating that a coil over 25mm in height(like mine) was generated from an imperforated stamp. After 5 years, the experts finally found a world class # 303 large enough to be trimmed and achieve 25 mm height. Every indication shows the source of the stamp to be from the Smithsonian's Collection.

This brings the next interesting point that the experts are suggesting. In 1907 some forger found a world class stamp ( today's value by Scott's $2000-3000) destroyed the stamp by trimming the edges & then used it on a 4 cent advertising circular. This defies all logic since coils were not even available in the USA at that time.

The experts are claiming only 10,000 4 cent Imperfs were ever produced. Their proof source is a post office distribution memo May 1908 showing a shipment of 10,000 imperfs being sent to Detroit. We know for a certainty that 10,000 stamps were sent to Detroit BUT the experts have not provided any BEP production records.

Koslowski's article in the Oct 1910 Philadelphia Stamp News states that the actual number of these stamps produced was unknown. This information, that actual production numbers do not exist, has been confirmed by 2 sources at the National Archives.

We also know from the Congressional Record that the Post Office Dept. (Travers group) was conducting private vending machine tests on coil stamps with 6 test machines prior to Oct. 1907. Documents presented to Congress stated the tests were not going well as the stamps were being damaged.

In 1911, Travers was dismissed from service for postal fraud. In April 1911, he & Joseph Steinmetz, Philadelphia Stamp Co. with offices near the West Phila. Post Office, were indicted for postal fraud. Everyone believes it was only for the rag stamps...that is not accurate as there was a shopping list of test stamps in the indictment.

Three philatelic sources have confirmed that my 1907 coil stamp has private perforations. I believe it is difficult to trim a # 303 & have private perfs since all # 303's have government perforations.

There was a question about the post mark ink & the ink cancelling the coil stamp. We utilized a CVS 6000 to compare ink types to ensure that some clever forger didn't trim a # 303 at a later date & then attach it to this piece. The results from the CVS 6000 study shows that the post mark ink & cancellation ink on the stamp are the same.

There are a number of other facts that the experts at APS & PF are dismissing. This brings into question the capability of their experts along with a question about their willingness to review all pertinent facts related to a potential philatelic find.

For the record, I had offered to both organizations a willingness to travel to their locations to review all the facts I have uncovered in my research. They have shown no interest in my offer!!

This was a quick summary of 3 research papers. If there are additional questions or comments I would be happy to address them.