Show Your US 1851-57 Imperforate Stamps

#11A (unplated) on a Dec 16, 1853 folded letter from Providence, Rhode Island. The contents are a nicely-printed notice of dissolution of the business partnership of Burroughs & Lewis on December 8, 1853.

Classic - I respectfully tender you my opinion...32L3.

Caper, Thank you for taking the time to plate the stamp on the Providence cover! I fully agree with 32L3!

I've generally neglected plating the stamps in my cover collection, although in the process of preparing cover images for posting in this thread, I have plated several of them.

I didn't take the time to plate this stamp before posting, but when I reviewed it after you plated it, I saw for the first time that it has recut variety #24 – Left inner line runs down too far. In fact, the LIL runs well into the lower left triangle, and I don't recall seeing a left inner line run down that far before. Very interesting, I think!

Following up on the 32L3 left inner line runs down too far (variety #24) example above, here is a left inner line runs up too far variety (#23); position 12L3.

At this position, the left inner line goes as far as the top of the UL triangle, but runs left of the triangle, not into it, as the left side of the triangle is aligned with the left side of the diamond block. 12L3 is not attributed with having any lines recut in the UL triangle:

#10A position 37L2e on a Sep 24 1851 folded letter from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia PA. The letter is a bill for $100.70 (for what, I'm not sure):

#11A printed in the 1857 medium claret colour with a well-placed blue Fishers Ville New Hampshire CDS:

That 37L2E is a gorgeous stamp Classic!

Thanks, Caper!

Just plated this damaged 29L2L that I acquired in a bulk lot three years ago. While confirming it against images in the Stamp Smarter 3-cent plating database, I saw a note for the position stating that it had a dot under the button (presumably from plate damage). This position in the early state doesn't show the dot.

Dr. Chase didn't mention the flaw in his book.

I didn't know about this flaw before today. While plating it I had thoughts about selling it, but now I think I'll hang on to it for a while.

Thanks to whoever added the note about the flaw in the Stamp Smarter database.

Gary, my initial reaction was to say "your welcome"... but I got all my data from the USPCS charts and Chase's book, so I think someone else may have added that excellent little tidbit.

Ttreen or txstamp perhaps.?

Sorting through unplated 3-cent 1851 imperforates today and stumbled upon this interesting piece of "off cover" postal history -- a Scott #11A (unplated) cancelled with an enclosed arc British North America exchange office marking (U. STATES with an integral shield). Tracing is from Simpsons U.S. Postal Markings 1851 – 1857, Second Edition, by Thomas J. Alexander -- reference tracing #23 on page 317 -- attributed to the exchange office in Rouse's Pt., NY. Simpsons rarity factor is 6.

ioagoa, That's a really interesting marking! I've never seen a U. STATES marking on a 3-cent imperforate before, and I never even knew there was one with an integral shield. Thanks for showing it!

I'm surprised that doesn't have a higher rarity number. That's a nice one.

Ioagoa - what was above that stamp?

Hi Caper —

My Scott #11A with the enclosed arc BNA exchange office cancel is an "off cover" stamp. After I matched it to the tracing in Simpson's, I made a copy of the Simpson's page with the tracing and laid the stamp on top to make the scan. A small portion of the tracing above shows in the scan. See Simpsons U.S. Postal Markings 1851 – 1857, Second Edition, by Thomas J. Alexander -- reference tracing #23 on page 317 — and you will see that tracing #19 is directly above tracing #23. Apologies for any confusion this may have caused.

Regards // ioagoa