| Author |
 Replies: 44 / Views: 6,194 |
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3514 Posts |
|
|
https://siegelauctions.com/lots.php...6&page_no=10It looks to me like Siegel just goofed on their descriptions. I made the mistake of taking them at face value. Actually looking at the sale ... Sale 1006, Lot 1053 is the Chicago Perf. This stamp was plated as 63L2 at that time. There is a horizontal dash between ornaments P & Q which certainly agrees with that position. |
Send note to Staff 
|
| Edited by txstamp - 04/03/2019 12:26 pm |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3514 Posts |
|
|
While I'm thinking about it I thought I'd just document in this thread about private perfs, that there are really at least two fundamentally different "Chicago" perfs that Hadley made.
In mid 1855, Hadley had a prototype machine, from which "Sample A" was made, and sent to the third assistant PM general for evaluation. These were rough, but gauged around perf 11. They were 3c stamps, from Plate 2L. They are unused, and an example of one of these is in RAS 1199 Lot 1053. The 3c #11A variety. This was part of the sample multiple that he sent.
It wasn't until around April or so, of 1856, that his final machine was ready to go. That machine produced all known postally used copies of 1c and 3c Chicago perfs, like those we have previously been discussing.
Siegel mostly got that right in their description of Lot 1053, but I thought it was worth clarifying here, since we've been discussing it. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3514 Posts |
|
|
The plot thickens a bit. Slightly. The 3c Chicago Perf essay, I'll call it, since its from the prototype perforator, which is sale 1199, lot 1053 is not plated correctly in the description. https://siegelauctions.com/lots.php...199-lot-1053It is referred to as 98R2L, but that's not correct. 98R2L is a bottom row B relief with no guide dot. This stamp doesn't have a guide dot, but its clearly an A relief. The correct plating for this is: 80R2L. Here is the real 98R2L, from Wagshal Sale 996 lot 3178 - https://siegelauctions.com/lots.php...996-lot-3178Lot 3177 from sale 996 is also a Sample A item. I haven't exhaustively looked for the current item in prior sales, but this also goes back to our discussion about ex-Wagshal, but not in his sale. I don't "think" this was in his sale, but I haven't scrubbed it enough yet to say for sure. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
3860 Posts |
|
|
Did Hadley and Swift only approach the U.S. Post Office with their invention? Did they ever approach the stamp printers Toppan Carpenter? If not then this may have been their mistake. Is there a U.S. patent for their perforator? Here is some interesting information on George C. Howard who perforated the first U.S. stamps:
GEORGE C. HOWARD-MECHANICIAN AND MACHINE MANUFACTURER, 1771 LUDLOW STREET, PHILA. (Fibre and Fabric, No. 695, June 25, 1898, page 224, Vol. XXVII)
....When postage stamps were required to be perforated in 1857, he was selected to make the machines, and operated them for the contractors, Toppan Carpenter & Co....
|
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by jogil - 04/04/2019 7:56 pm |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3514 Posts |
|
|
Swift did contact Toppan Carpenter, and promised to provide them with a "model" of the machine in a couple of weeks. This is from a letter from Samuel Carpenter replying to the 3rd Asst PMG about the machine and mentioning this.
Reading this letter, it is clear that Swift/Hadley never had a chance, since Toppan Carpenter were clearly interested in the Archer machine which already was working, albeit not without limitations.
Furthermore, there was a close family relationship between Toppan Carpenter and Perkins Bacon & Co. Charles Toppan was Jacob Perkins nephew. Perkins Bacon steered Toppan Carpenter over to Bemrose and Sons to explore their perforator, which is what TC&C eventually bought.
It does not appear that they took Swift & Hadley too seriously.
Hadley applied for a patent, but apparently it was never granted. Wilson Hulme looked all over for the application but was unable to locate it. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3514 Posts |
|
|
I wonder if Howard was the guy who modified the Bemrose perforator to become an actual perforating machine, instead of a rouletter. When TC&C got the Bemrose machine, it wasn't good enough, and was extensively modified prior to being put into use. Referencing the other thread from here: https://goscf.com/t/67240 |
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by txstamp - 04/05/2019 10:13 am |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3514 Posts |
|
|
Continuing the saga of Siegel Sale 1199, Lot 1053, which is a Chicago Perf Sample A 3c stamp. It is position 80R2L, not the position that Siegel states.
This matters in particular towards authenticating these. Its hard to say exactly how many stamps were in the original Sample A. Likely no more than 100 - aka the entire right pane of Plate 2L, but at least 21 - the size of the original Chase block.
Unfortunately looking at this led straight into another mistake. Wilson Hulme's article in Chronicle 174 on page 112, Figure 9 has a caption error. This Siegel stamp is the top right stamp in Figure 9. The caption calls it 79R2L, and the stamp beneath it 80R2L. Clearly the top right stamp is 80R2L. The picture of the stamp beneath it is too fuzzy to plate, but is likely 79R2L, and the caption just inverted them. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
3860 Posts |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3514 Posts |
|
|
Its interesting that we are having this discussion, and lot 1318 in Rumsey's Westpex sale appears to be from Tom Alexander's estate, and is Toppan Carpenter Correspondence, some about early perforations. Quote:
1853-59, Toppan Carpenter Casilear & Co. Stamp Contract Letters to J. Marron, 3rd Assist. Postmaster General. Remarkable group of approximately. 112 contemporary original and duplicate letters mostly concerning deliveries of 1¢ and 3¢ stamps, perforations and the new 1857 issue,...
...the Chicago, Apr. 3rd 1856 letter from E.W. Hedley, the inventor of Chicago Perfs enclosing a 3¢ sheet perforated using his machine: "…Some months since my attention was called by Col. R.K. Swift, Banker of this City to want said to be felt by the Post Office Department as well as the commercial community, of proper simple Machinery for the division of Postage Stamps. I have since then experimented to some extent on various plans for effecting this object and have very recently completed a chine, the results of which seem to correspond precisely with the English mode of separation…I have this day filed a Caveat in the Patent Office…Enclosed I send a Sample of three cent Stamps as perforated…" (This letter was missing but mentioned in Wagshal's article on Chicago Perfs), letters concerning acquiring a perforation machine April 7th 1856: "We have advice of the shipment of the "Perforator" which we ordered made for us several months since in England July 1st 1856: "…We are anxious to get possession of our perforating machine and put it in operation within the next week…" and July 7th 1856: "…Our object in getting possession of the machine was that we might by experimenting test its power and capacity, and thus be prepared to make our proposals….....
...Oct 22nd 1856: "…I have completed experiments with your punching & Slitting machine & will give you the results…", Nov. 4th 1856: "…We have the honor to submit for your consideration the following proposals to contract for furnishing Postage Stamps (as heretofore) with the addition of perforation of each sheet (as per samples submitted by us)…", Jan. 5th 1857 concerning the perforation proposal: "…You say - 'It has been determined not to act upon any subject which can be properly considered as belonging to the succeeding administration' "
|
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2555 Posts |
|
|
If anybody listens to the the Gross sale today, I would like to know if they still say my cover is not accounted for. Lot 211 is one of the 1c Chicago perf covers. I just am not available to listen to the sale. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by sinclair2010 - 10/29/2019 11:00 am |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3514 Posts |
|
|
I noticed that very omission in the catalog, when I was studying it.
I probably won't be on this afternoon, though. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
3860 Posts |
|
|
Do the Chicago perforations gauge as follows?:
A) 14 perforations per inch = 11.02 (11) perforations per 2 cm
B) 16 perforations per inch = 12.60 (12.5) perforations per 2 cm |
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by jogil - 06/28/2020 12:29 pm |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2555 Posts |
|
|
They can be found both ways. Right off the top of my head, I don't recall seeing a used perf 11. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3514 Posts |
|
|
Replies: 44 / Views: 6,194 |
|
Posted 04/03/2019 12:21 pm
