10c Scott 209 - Jumbo With Plate N° 481

looks like the plate n° on lower margin?



* * * Title changed by moderator to reflect correct Scott stamp identification * * *

I am not an expert, but Durland lists 209 as printed on plate 481, I think this is a plate number stamp. Cool find.

And to add, a wide margin at an edge was not much of a production concern.

great find, thank you for sharing!

Can we change the title to reflect the correct year and add a Scott number. Scott 209 and 1887 will actually make this thread useful in the future when searching. As it stands this topic will never be seen again after it quickly fades out. Lack of specificity is a problem on the forum.

Done

Not that it matters, as this is a nice plate number stamp, but is it really considered "Jumbo"? My understanding of the term implies that it should have wide margins on all four sides.

You are correct; this is not a jumbo. It is a nice position piece with a large plate number capture, and has the kind of centering one would expect of such an item. A very nice thing to have in a collection.

I would call this a misperf, with a captured Pl#

When a stamps design is fully printed on a jumbo-mis perferation stamp but off centered. Is it worth as much or less collecting as a standard jumbo. I thought the definition for a jumbo was a stamp printed on a larger peace of paper than normally found.

This is nothing more than a poorly centered stamp. IF it were well centered it would have "jumbo" margins in the N-S direction but likely not enough margin for a jumbo in the E-W direction. In any case the value of this stamp is the plate number. Very, very hard to find with no records of a sale at Siegel that I could find and none of Siegel's plate block sales had a 481. Durland does not assign much larger of a premium for this plate number, but it is HARD to find.

"This is nothing more than a poorly centered stamp" "In any case the value of this stamp is the plate number."

The second sentence cancels the first. It is true that the value is in the capture, but any stamp with this large a capture will be a poorly centered stamp; it cannot be anything else. Of course there are no records of a sale at Siegel, it's a low catalog stamp with some faults (a small thin at the top and a crease through the plate number). It might bring $20 at retail, but not much more.

Thank you all for your knowledgeable comments. Again my horizon got a bit wider.

rogdcam advised:



I do not know how the original read, but this advice was followed. Mindlessly.

The stamp in question is indeed #209, but that stamp should not be associated with the year 1887. US #209 was issued as part of the four stamp design retouching that took place in 1881-82. Its EDU is May 4, 1882, and it was slated for delivery beginning in April 1882.

The ONLY stamp inaugurated in 1887 is the 1c US #212 (or #214 if you use a really old copy of Scott.)

Apart from this (revised number) thread is anybody getting hits on this ten cent in searches for 1887?

Wow, from the discussion and observations, the title is far off the mark. Can it be changed once again to something like "209 10c issue from 1882 with rare plate number capture", the reason being to correct the date of issue and to eliminate the incorrect Jumbo designation?
essayk, respectfully, my Scott specialized shows 3 issues from 1887. 1c 212, 2c 213, and 3c 214. Is this incorrect?