Show Your US 1851-57 Imperforate Stamps

Thanks for that. Really the only reason I selected this one to plate was that feature. Now I see it isn't uncommon. Learning slowly.

This is a Scott #8A, Pos 17R1E, paying the single circular rate not over 500 miles from Aug 27, 1851.




The new postal regulations went into effect on July 1, 1851, coincident with the issuance of the new stamps. So this is a second-month use of the 1c stamp.

1c stamps used in July or August of 1851 on clean, presentable covers are surprisingly difficult to find. They are out there, but not as common as one might think. 1c covers from this period are not nearly as common as 3c orange browns from the same time frame.

I should mention that this cover is docketed on the back -
C.J. Sinton
7 Aug 1851

So its another example of a circular mailed weeks later than it was initially printed & processed. That's why you need a postmark, typically, to establish actual date of mailing.

I go into more detail on the stamp on this cover here:
https://goscf.com/t/56958&whichpage=12#792057

Greetings all. I'm seeking confirmation that my stamp is from position 79R3. I also think that the Lund-O'doherty plating has the incorrect stamps for positions 79R3 and 73L3. I believe 73L3(not) is actually 79R3. I have not yet tried to plate the 79R3(not). Confused? I've gone round and round with this one. Any help on confirming my findings is appreciated.

Regards,
Harper1249

My Specimen:

Hi Harper —

I agree with you that the Lund copy of 79R3 is wrong. I plated it to 72L1L. Take a look and see what you think.

I have not yet looked at Lund's 73L3 (NOT) — but will try to do so over the next few days and let you know what I can discern.

Regards // ioagoa

Hi Harper --

Further our email exchange -- I wanted to also post here for the benefit of anybody else following.

Regarding the stamp you posted yesterday -- the one with the black DEC xxxFALLS cds cancel -- I agree that your stamp is position 79R3.

I also agree with you that the Lund copy currently slotted on stampplating.com as 73L3-(NOT) -- is actually 79R3.

Regards // ioagoa

Thanks for all the help Ioagoa.

I'm a neophyte in identifying classic U.S. stamps - this appears to be a Scott 8 - 1c blue Franklin (type III), but I can't rule out that it might be a cropped Scott 24 (type V)? Anything I should be looking out for?

Thanks!

Cam.

Top row #24 Ty V with perforations clipped.

https://stampsmarter.org/features/S...Plating.html

Here is a link where you can read a bit about 1c stamps.

Here's an 11A from position 58L1L that is overwiped, which makes the recuts clearer, including one horizontal line recut on top of the upper-left diamond block (recut #37).

As far as I can tell, recut #37 hasn't been associated with this position.  Recut #37 is only attributed to eight or so total positions, but this total likely is under-counted by quite a bit.

This stamp appears to have a blue Wiscassett, Maine CDS, according to a Siegel power search, which turned up only one example on the 1851-57 3-cent issue.

Hi Classic --

Nice find -- and that over-wiped stamp is a really nice copy to boot! I love over-wiped stamps because the impression is often very crisp with every fine line standing out.

For example -- on your stamp -- the recut line across the top of the TLB above the TAGE of POSTAGE -- and also the extension of the recut into the white space between the TLB and URDB -- really stands out. Very nice!!!

Regarding Chase's classification of recut varieties -- on plate 1L there is so much going on at the top with the DB's and the label block -- and the plate was in use for such a long time -- exhibiting significant plate wear in the later period of its use -- that I think Chase probably missed a lot of the recutting variety classifications.

Likewise -- McDaniel was working from Chase photos -- and to the other extreme -- he (McDaniel) seemed to see recutting varieties that were not there at times -- most notably his classification of the LIL up too far (i.e., recut variety #23).

In any event -- there surely is a recut single straight line recut across the top of the ULDB on your 58L1L -- so another recut #37 has been born!

Regards // ioagoa

The recuts on that stamp are almost freakishly detailed ; more so even for Plate 1L which so often does not exhibit that level of detail. Neat stamp and good eye to catch this.

Cam, txstamp was able to identify your stamp as a top-row Type V with perfs trimmed because of the characteristic (of Type V plates) guide mark at upper left (green arrow in attached photo), but even if you don't posess this special knowledge the incomplete ornaments along the right side of the design (red arrows) are the giveaway that the stamp is Type V.

ioagoa, Thanks for your insightful comments on the stamp from position 58L1L. Very interesting.

Sorry for the poor quality image. I don't have a scanner.
Is this a short transfer?
Would the TFL have been recut on top of the short transfer?