Another Great Classic Multiple Bites The Dust

Sadly, I am unable to post images right now but I didn't want to let this go without some publicity.

Lot 106 in Rumsey's upcoming Gems of Philately sale is what's left of a block of nine last sold (to my knowledge), in Siegel Sale 899, Lot 22.

I am not sure if the status as a rare block on part India paper was a factor in the calculus to create this jumbo pair, or if the egotists that drive this market even care. We may never know the complete answer to that question. Given some of the crazy assertions in the description of part India paper in the J&J Sale, and the fact that the stamps have gum, I have real concerns that the stamps have been identified correctly. I invite somebody involved in the expertizing of the pair or
the original block to tell us all how the stamps were identified. I am not asking for much and there should be a good answer.

It does match the center pair. Some people never learn that with ownership comes responsibility. All they know is greed.

Sad when the lure of having the highest numerical grade outweighs preservation of a museum quality piece of history. That is why Governments put restrictions on plundering shipwrecks and destroying historic structures. On the other hand monuments are being taken down in this Country. Preservation is a selective process.

Siegel sale 899, lot 22, Sept 27, 2005, scanned from the front cover of the catalog:



Scanned from Schuyler Rumsey Sale 83, lot 106, December 10, 2018:



I agree, the block should have remained intact.

To add some fabric to the discussion, the original Siegel sale 899 description does note the block is hinged, that a "light vertical crease affects right stamps", and there is a faint corner crease at bottom left. The two stamps in the pair above were specifically noted as appearing to be MNH. The perfect storm to "reduce it to perfection"

A bloody tragedy.

While I agree it is sad, we have had the 'private property' rights discussion before. In this country The Fifth Amendment protects the right to private property. People can do what they want with their own private property; including lighting cigars with this original block if they want.

But nothing is stopping any organization from purchasing this kind of rarity and then making sure it remains protected for perpetuity. Perhaps in the same way that The Nature Conservancy works there should be The Philatelic Conservancy. And of course folks can easily donate material to The National Postal Museum and I am sure they could specify that it remain protected there.
Don

Edit: I would add that even if we could wave a magic wand today and stop certain organizations from peddling graded stamps it is unlikely that it would stop the practice of 'making' finely centered stamps.
Obviously the organizations that are promoting graded stamps are contributing to the prevalence of this problem, but the desire for well centered stamp is something that has always existed. I know of no solution which would stop a free market from 'rewarding' nicely centered stamps.

Does anyone know if the Smithsonian Postal Museum actively seeks and adds new material, or do they just sit and wait for someone to donate? If they are not actively chasing the rare material that still occasionally comes up in today's marketplace; can anything be done to 'encourage' them to do this? Can fund raisers be started for this purpose with them? A letter writing campaign? Pressure from other sources?

A great thought Don. If a handful of the largest philatelic auction houses pledged or had as a buyer/seller selected option a percentage of each sale that would go towards such a preservation fund, $500,000 annually in revenue would not be unrealistic based upon one percent of annual sales. Of course administrative overhead would have to be very low, a selection committee could be a sticky wicket and where the materials were reposited would need to be worked out. Donation to the Smithsonian would be a good option. We can always dream.

Good eye Winston, you are clearly correct.

A nice multiple on Part India paper no less.

It is horrible to see something like this happen, but I must admit, I like the private property model that we currently have, even with its pitfalls. I cringe when someone donates their collection to a museum, because that means collectors can't have it anymore. I don't have any good answers for this kind of dilemma. Its sad.

The NPS web page states they engages in "occasional purchases". But given the entire annual budget is only $6 million to run a pretty large operation, I assume occasional means zero.

To my eye, that pair is not even philatelic anymore. It is an artificially produced multiple that I don't even look at in the auction catalogs. I skipover all of the gem 100J or 98J imperforate classic stamps as they obviously would not have been put on an envelope like that in the 1800s. No different than a cancel on a stamp that is from wrong time period

The block was still intact in the 2010 Siegel Rarities sale:

https://siegelauctions.com/lots.php...e-989-lot-61


With regard to OG Part India paper stamps, I didn't recall ever seeing one, so I looked and did not find any at Siegel. The only unused one I found had no gum:

https://siegelauctions.com/lots.php...e-937-lot-57

That is from Siegel's description of the NG Part India single.

Now they caveat the description as "when offered as a single", by implication that with more paper in a block to look at, its easier to identify...

I am a staunch advocate of private property rights but just because you have the right to do something, that doesn't mean you should. And let's be honest, the auction and expertizing companies are the ones that are really profiting. So when we point fingers we should be sure to identify all responsible parties.

I am going to come right out and say it: I don't actually think the stamps look like they are part India stamps and I am somebody that really does know what I am talking about. It could be the scan but I somehow doubt it considering the Siegel description coupled with the astonishing claim that part India paper is thick and soft! Holy Cow! I have known about the block of nine for quite some time and have always had my reservations as to the paper type. Since the identification of the stamps may have played a roll in the destruction of the block, I think it is reasonable for somebody to explain how the expertizing of the block was done.

While I personally agree that personal property rights are protected and rightfully so, what gripes me about this is that not only did the person destroy the block, they destroyed seven of the nine stamps in the block to create this trash.

Yes, some of the stamps had creases and some were hinged. That doesn't mean they were worthless, just worth less. There are many collectors who would have gladly snapped up any of those seven stamps, but now, they are truly rubbish because of the oversized margins created out of them for this pair.

I find this practice extremely offensive. If you want to do that to the National Park Reprints which were issued in the millions, okay I guess. But to do that to one of the few remaining classic multiples should not be rewarded with a catalog listing at auction.

I will NEVER buy something with out-sized margins like this.

I don't know about the Smithsonian but I tried to get a few pages copied from an old Harper's magazine housed in the Library of Congress and the Librarian there let me know that they had that magazine and many others stacked but could not move them to copy them or they might fall apart. They are losing historical sources everyday,she said, because they do not have the money to treat them. This is tragic.