PF Certifies "Continental" After Feb 3RD 1879

Actually, he kind of already did that with 1500 dpi scans, but not in a single image, which I agree would be better. Still...

I have cropped and rearranged the pics he posted way back to facilitate the comparison, but these are his pics from when this first came up long ago.

The corners showing date of use"


The stamps:






If I take a pair of stamps from a sheet, separate them and apply them separately to an envelope, one on each side perhaps, is there a scientific test or method that can establish that these stamps came from the same sheet? If not, then that level of science cannot always lead us to the truth. In that case, the only proper critique is of the method, not the material.

New methods of analysis available today allow us to make comparisons which heretofore were not possible. Machinery now exists which allow us to discriminate and associate paper and ink characterisitcs with enough precision to allow us to associate the elements of a disrupted multiple from a sheet. If that is so, then I think we may be at a point where it is no longer correct to apply the "only" you used in your sentence.

Whether or not the PF applied such tests to these two stamps I do not know. Do you?

Yes. You would have to be able to positively link the stamp to a pre-merger printing. The opportunity was there with RLM's two covers but it failed for the reasons that I have already given. I strongly disagree that we now have or probably ever will have the technology to confirm that two stamps came from the same sheet by tests such as X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy. All of the technology in the world cannot overcome the following simple but obligatory question: Is it possible to have two stamps from separate printings with effectively identical ink chemistry signatures? The answer has to be yes and it might even be easy to encounter such a condition. Conversely, is it reasonable to expect that the printing inks were always so well mixed that some variation across the sheet would not be encountered?

I disagree that we have the technology to do what you are suggesting. I think for the PF to do any such advanced testing, it would have required the stamps to be lifted. I don't think that was done. We also have RLM's statement: "I was told that this was a first and that if the later cover was not so close in proximity to the earlier cover, and not from the same correspondence, this would not have been possible."




The stamp images are not of the quality of a 1500dpi scan. I am still hoping that RLM will post what I asked for.

"Machinery now exists which allow us to discriminate and associate paper and ink characterisitcs with enough precision to allow us to associate the elements of a disrupted multiple from a sheet:

Not true.

Winston, the truth is that the covers are out of town at this time.
They are visiting with friends. I can not offer a side by side scan at this time. I was happy and thankful to see that essayk posted my scans from long ago! Stay tuned for the rest of the story.

As always, thank you all for your interest.

The two covers will be offered by Robert A. Siegel Auction Galleries,
in their United States and CSA Postal History sale # 1191, October 25th,
2018. lot # 2333.

I don't know at what dpi Seigel's scans their lots, but for all those that want an 'up close and personal' view of these covers, they can do so now. Siegel's has estimated this lot at $400-500. Curiosity: RLM, are you happy and/or surprised by this estimate? I hope you get what you want for these. That being said, I can imagine many scenarios where someone would run out of their current stamp supply, and go out and buy more of the (seemingly, at least to a non-philatelist) same stamp to replenish their supply, sometime over a 3 week period. Especially back in the day when letter writing was probably the easiest way to keep in contact. AND... especially for a person that likely had a lot of friends with which to keep in contact. Until a foolproof test can be made to prove that two stamps are from the same sheet, I would lean towards the requirement of showing that two stamps were at one time adjacent to each other by comparing perfs and tear patterns. Although not in the market to buy, I will be keeping an eye on this lot to see how it performs.

Okay, devil's advocate here.

This thread brings up another related question that I hope someone can clear-up for me.

When the postal rates changed to 8-cents in 1971 the USPO (U.S. Post Office) issued a new regular postage stamp (SCN 1394 on right).

Then, on July 1, 1971 the USPO was disbanded and incorporated into the USPS (U.S. Postal Service).

My question is; If I have this 8-cent stamp on cover from July 1, 1971, can I get it certified as first day of USPS issue?

Or, is the stamp still considered a USPO issue?

I'm confused. How do I tell which stamp is which since the catalog only lists one such item?

Scott 1394 was issued May 10, 1971 and therefore only can be "a USPO issue". That said, the legal status of the issuing agency has been insignificant to the catalog editors and collectors. A change in the legal identity of the postal agency doesn't change the stamp. There's only one Eisenhower stamp issued May 10, 1971, and there always will be, so only one catalog listing is needed. Note that this thread on Continental Bank Note issues has focused on printers, not agencies.

"First Day of the USPS" covers abound on ebay and are cheap, but feature Scott 1396, not 1394. 1396 was issued July 1, 1971 and is the only stamp that could be "the first USPS issue". I don't think any of the certifying agencies will give you that on a cert, but even if they did, it's not worth the price; Scott 1396 on cover or off is a cheap stamp and always will be because 16 million were printed. Furthermore, Scott 1394 (Eisenhower) used on cover on July 1, 1971 merely would be one of millions of stamps first canceled by USPS on that day; hundreds of other issues were valid and could have been used and canceled that day. So I don't think you have a pot of gold in a cover with 1394 on cover on July 1, 1971.

Very good CJ. You are correct. The stamp is determined by the issuing authority at time of release. If the issuing authority later changes, as in this case, the stamp is not re-classified.

The 3-cent green of 1878 (SCN 184) was first issued around May or June of 1878. Again, the stamp is determined by the issuing authority at time of release, in this case the Continental Banknote Co. (under auspices of the USPO). Even if the issuing authority later changes, as in this case reorganization of several firms under the banner of the American Banknote Co., the stamp is not re-classified.

No, you're still not getting it right, Alan. None of the Bank Note companies was the issuing authority for US stamps. They only did production. The POD was always the issuing authority for US postage stamps in the 19th century, under the authority of the Postmaster General. The POD was NOT the issuing authority for most (any?) revenues, but that is another subject entirely (different cabinet post too).

All revenue stamps came under the authority of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.