SC #17 Vs SC #36 Reentries

Question - the 12c design of 1851-57 has several triple transfer positions (or so says Siegel) 5R1, 17R1, and 49R1. The PF site does not have listings.

As Scott 36 uses the same design would these same positions be triple transfers on the 36? Scott has a line for triple transfers on #36 but no price for used.

Caper, if you are referring specifically to Sc #36 (produced from Plate 1) and not #36B (produced from Plate 3), then the answer is yes. James Allen, a premier student of the 12c 1851-1857 issue, has this to say: "Plate 1, which produced the imperforate 12¢ 1851 stamps of the 1851 issue, also produced a great percentage of the perforated 12¢ stamps of the 1857 issue. The plate varieties found on the 1851 imperforates are therefore repeated on the perforated stamps printed from Plate 1." (CHRONICLE 241, Feb 2014, p.45).

Thanks Dudley. I had come across what appears to be a 5R & 17R1 #36. No catalog value is given for used triple transfers in the Scott catalog, so I'll assume for now they have the same value as the double transfers.

Here are the stamps I referred to (best pictures I can provide right now). The stamp on the left (the 17's) is copied from Siegel and is listed there as a triple transfer variety. The two on the right (the 36's) are mine.

5R1



17R1

17R1 is not listed as a triple transfer in any of the standard references or by Allen in his Chronicle articles. According to Siegel there are three different frameline entries at UR in this position. Unfortunately, Caper's copy of #36 from this position does not show this area. Neinken's drawing of 17R1 does not show traces of three framelines either. It seems that a confirming copy of this position matching the Siegel item from the Wagshal sale is needed.

Trying to decide whether this stamp is real or not. I've never seen a double transfer so bold on this stamp. Best picture available...sorry.

Opinions welcomed.

Neinken doesn't record anything that looks like that.

Given the limitations of the 12c pamphlet, however, that of course, doesn't mean such a thing doesn't exist. It may.

Looking at it, I'm reminded a bit of the 10c 1847 Knapp shift, somehow. The double transfer lines are rarely found so bold. Of course, on the Knapp shift, they are bold, since they were painted in.

Its certainly an interesting item ...

Knapp Shift -
https://siegelauctions.com/lot_grd....emailflag=on

One would think something this striking would have been documented by now. Caper, can you reveal its source?

Found a cert for it, but it is a very old PF cert and merely states it's a real #17 - nothing more. PF cert #146878

Although it is not a great image, the one on the PF site does seem to show the DT.

Dudley, sorry I didn't fully answer your question. The seller is 'market maker' Momen.

Genuine #17 but the DT is utterly ridiculous. I like it as a conversation piece.

Learning the hard way Momen Stamps is not a reputable dealer. Does not respond to email messages and only provides a phone number of a mail drop in Cary, NC.

Follow-up post cert. Definitely a bogus attempt to imitate a double transfer per the PF. Seller finally refunded the sale price but is now balking about paying for the cert. Will never come close to a purchase from this seller again.

Had to chuckle at the Momen issues. Had my own with the Momen clown. Would not answer emails. Finally got his attention by leaving scathing but factual feedback.

I think somebody told you you it was a fake DT on a genuine stamp, so there was really no need to dump more money into a bad transaction. Just saying...