Brittan 5 Shillings 1913/1919/1934?

Hi all, I found this one in my great-grandmother's world album and, bless her efforts, I've come to find that not all of the stamps are in the right places. Can anyone tell if this is the '13 '19 or '34 issue of this stamp? Many thanks!

In the background of the portrait, you have horizontal lines, which means 1913, 1915, or 1919. The later print has crossed lines.

Now you just have to figure out if Waterlow, De La Rue, or Bradbury printings ... (Hint: Measure the vertical design first. If 22.5 mm or wider, then you have Bradbury, Scott 180.)

Thanks for the hint Partime; the vertical distance between the thin red lines on the top and bottom is just shy of 23mm on my ruler (but well past the halfway point).

Well done. Then it's the Bradbury Wilkinson printing of 1919, Scott 180.

A couple of short perfs here, but a good-looking stamp as usually this parcel cancel is really heavily struck.

OK, Eric. Here is a quick test for you. One of these is a 180, and the other isn't. From the clues given so far, you should be able to tell me which is the 180, and also what the other one is. Good luck.

Sorry to barge in on the thread, but Eric and others might hit a brick wall with this one

I actually think that neither are 180's...

The top stamp has smaller perforation holes and the thick perforation tooth at the top of each vertical side suggests strongly that it is a 174 (De La Rue printing).

NOTE: although it does appear to have the tiny red dot in the middle of the top margin that is found on Bradbury Wilkinson plates.

Plateflaw. Thanks for your comments. This helps to point out the difficulty in identifying this stamp. The top stamp is indeed a Scott 180. It has a small dot of color in the center, as you noted:


And the vertical height is about 22.8 mm. The bottom stamp can only be Scott 223 due to the crossed lines in the background of the portrait.

But I do want to point out that I don't have a good copy of any of the De La Rue stamps which have the top right and top left perf teeth wider than the others. I would love to see a good example of this. Thanks.

Thank you all for the conversation; is there a perf difference between the 174 and 180? I ask because the stamp I have does not have the color dot up in the center margin (as far as I can tell with strong light and magnification). I did see online last night that some 180s don't have the dot [https://www.stamp-collecting-world...._1911d.html"].

No perf differences noted in Scott (both 11 x 12). All Scott's says is:

174 (Waterlow): Peforation holes are larger and evenly spaced.
174a, b, c (De La Rue): Peforation holes are smaller. The top right and left perf teeth are wider than the others.
180 (Bradbury): Perforation holes are larger and usually evenly spaced. Most examples have a small dot of color at top center. Vertical height is 22.5 to 23 mm.

There is a lot of wiggle room in these descriptions. I would start with vertical height first to eliminate or confirm 180. (The dot of color is a second validation.) If not 180, then you need to look at perforation hole sizes and upper right/left spacing and compare to known versions to figure out if Waterlow or De La Rue. Very difficult, but would look very good if you have a complete set.

I looked at some of my items, and, unfortunately, still could not confirm the existence of any De La Rue (with smaller perforation holes and top right and left perf teeth wider). Luckily, I own the 1 pound green, which was only printed by Waterlow. This is Scott 176 and is identified as Perforation holes larger and evenly spaced. What I did was use the USB microscope to compare the top perfs of the 176 with various other items.

In all of these, the known Waterlow (Scott 176) is shown on the bottom.

I first compared it to what I thought was Scott 173, the 2sh6p dark brown. I think the size and shape of the perf holes align well, so I am going to continue call this one a 173.


I flipped the same 173 to see if there was any issues with the top right and top left perf teeth. I don't see anything.



I then found one that I thought was 173a, the De La Rue. If correct, then I would expect to see something with those perf teeth. I don't think so, but I could be wrong.


Finally, for a full comparison, I checked this against 181, the Bradbury 10sh blue. This should have larger holes and evenly spaced. The hole sizes seem to match very well.


So, bottom line is that I still don't think I have a De La Rue stamp. Does anyone have a good example to post for us?

Notice the difference in width between these two perforation stubs. That's what Scott refers to in their note about the De La Rue.

Oops. I was looking at the horizontal differences in that area, not the vertical difference that you circled. That makes it a little clearer. Thanks billsey.