Acquired 1c Franklin Collection

First stamp in second row is 84R1L.

The third stamp in the third row is 24L1L.
A nice double transfer at lower left.
I am on a roll tonight.

Here is one that should be easy to find tonight. It has a heavy off-set at bottom left. That should make it easy. First thought it was one on the 3 major transfers (71-81-91L1L) but it does not look like it.



I would still like opinions on the 100R1L posted earlier.

Edit: It looks like I found this stamp as pos 89R2.

I agree with the 100R1L.
The lower left plume is probably the best 'tell' on this position, and it appears to match well.

89R2 is an easy one, and always a good position to get. Good going.

I didn't check your 84R1L plating, but your stamp has a nice 'dingle' inside the lower left plume, which would tend to confirm it being a 9th row B-relief as you have identified it.

Thanks for your input, txstamp.
I really appreciate it.
I like confirmation before I post my images.

ps: That 24L1L has an experimental perf 1. As you see, it did not work well.

Oddly, the fact that the stamp is torn supports the argument that the hole may have existed on the sheet prior to separation. The question is was the hole there to facilitate separation, or was it there to hang the remainder of the sheet by a nail, on the wall, or similar? There are well-documented cases of postmasters pinning up strips of stamps on the wall. Maybe this one used a nail?

I don't think that there is enough there to make an argument that this is a private perf, but it is always an angle worth exploring. There are more of those out there than people realize, I think.

I had a good friend once who was very much into this subject, and it taught me that for this type of thing, you won't find it if you aren't looking for it.

Txstamp, it was joke .. ie perf 1.

I thought that you might be joking, but after years of looking at odd separations, I've learned that there sometimes really is a pattern and a potential explanation for some of these.

The friend whom I referenced in my last post had some pretty ugly stamps in his collection, which, when viewed in the context of private separation, made sense, but when viewed on their own, without context, just looked like damaged ugly stamps.

It often pays to give even just a little attention to this subject.

Tex,

I wish your friend could have seen this one. It may look funky but I think it is a contemporaneous usage and not a modern fabrication.

Winston - wow, what an interesting item to wake up to.

Is that a full cover or just a piece?

I went back through all of the private perfs I could find just now, and this one certainly would be characterized as a Sawtooth Perforation. Many of the known Sawtooth private perfs also have one or more sides that were either scissor-cut or rouletted. The top of yours appears scissor-cut.

If you look at when a lot of these private perforations were coming out, it seems like 1856 saw a lot of them, with a few in late 1855, and some in the first half of 1857. That is definitely the key time. The Bemrose perforator patent, I think was 1854, and Toppan Carpenter had it working sometime in 1856. The earliest known use of a US government officially perforated stamp is Feb 28,1857 (3c #25).

I believe that numerous unique items kind of like this, which are postally used on full covers have been declared genuine. Its better when there is more than one, of course, and it may have just been my friend who declared them genuine, but maybe the PF did .. I'll have to check. Of course he would have provided most of the input.

For something like your item, I'd first be concerned with establishing a date of use range. My first glance at this is where I might have a problem with your item. If you believe that 1855-1857 is the time to look at for something like this, then I'd want a stamp that looks like it was used then. Your stamp looks like a Plate 2L or 3 stamp, off-hand, which is good and definitely in favor of this being genuine. Ideally we need this to be a First Contract (of Toppan Carpenter) plate, which those would be.

Obviously I can't really tell the color from the scan, but based upon the impression, 1852 brownish carmine comes to mind. You can understand my concern. That seems to pre-date the ideal date of use range I outlined above. Its been a long time since I did 3c colors in detail, I have no reference anymore - I'm kicking myself for selling my nice color-chart. There is an 1856 Brownish carmine as well. Do we really get impressions this nice from 1856? Help me out there, as I haven't stared at a ton of these recently.

Well, there is a single off-cover Wilmington, DE sawtooth, that is a plate 1L stamp which he noted as probably 1852, and got a PFC on.

Interesting.

Obviously, the Archer perforator was 1850, and Henry Archer had been experimenting with separation for several years prior in England. To the casual reader, this matters because it means the idea of separation was on at least some people's minds as a result.

It sounds like the PF at least, is willing to acknowledge earlier dates, and even off-cover one-offs.