New Zealand: Chalons - 1855-1873

Thanks Dave and Grant for the lozenge and Invicta watermark examples. My current understanding is that the word Invicta reads correctly when looking from the front of the stamp and can be found reading up, Grants example, or down, Dave and my examples. If this is correct then the position that you have both shown on the watermark image needs to be adjusted accordingly.

Grant in the R20 No8 example can you measure the distance from the point of the lozenge to the edge and can you confirm that there is no indication of the start of another lozenge and is it possible to plate the lower example.

Philip

Here is another unallocated cancellation from Vol.7 p231. I believe it may be the 7th item shown.





Dave

Totally agree with you Philip. It does seem to fit there perfectly. :-)

Dave

Well here's an interesting "Study Stamp", hope this shows people how stamps are manipulated to try and enhance the appearance and value of some stamps. This was brought from a seller on "eBay" this buyer buys a lot of older collections from auction houses and then breaks them down to on-sell. Most of these seller's are not experts on all country's and especially the more sort after printings (I am not saying I am an expert). When I messaged the seller he refunded immediately and without question. I have suggested I pay something for the stamp as I do not want to return it for it to be on-sold or destroyed as it is a fine example of manipulation on an early New Zealand Chalon.

Lets have a good look at this stamp - it caught my eye on eBay as it had the look of a printing error and it was a SG.5 Blue on Blue paper. I was not prepared to pay a lot but always keen to collect unusual varieties to add to the website. It was a lovely "4" margin copy.



First up I had a look at it with lighter fluid to check watermarks and any other defects. I have used retro reveal to scan the back of the wet stamp (lighter fluid) and it clearly shows an altered and opaque paper with the outline of the original stamp.


The next two images of the front shows the limits of the re-backing and the retouching I believe?



The last two images of the back show the limits of the original stamp and thinning of the original to either remove the watermark or help blend the stamp to the new backing?




I am interested in in other features that are seen by others....?

Regards Andrew

Here is another one I have that looks like an added margin and probably redrawn.

A great example of a 'major' repair to the top of that 1d dull orange SG8 Mark ..

Dave

Grant the images of the lozenge postmark you posted have resulted in me studying the images of the complete pattern more closely and I have noted a discrepancy between Dave's image, which I used, and the image in Bob Odenweller's book which is from an unprinted pane shown here:




Looking closely you can see that the vertical lines in the lozenge patterns are not evenly spaced with some hitting the point of the lozenge and some not. So looking closely at your watermark images this is where I think your example sits:




I can also see a small dot on the edge, opposite the point of the lozenge which could?? be the point of the lozenge on the first pattern. Your example may actually fit even better further up, level with the VI of Invicta and there was an example sold in the Hackmey sale from R20 No9 which shows part of the VI so it is possible.

This paper was used by The Union Bank in Wellington for printing bank drafts and it has been suggested that the size of the pattern fitted each draft but the number of drafts per sheet and the size of the sheet are not known. Finding plateable examples of stamps from the bottom left of the sheet would certainly help.

Philip

Thanks Philip

Yes. The 'possessor' of that canceller had a high old time with it.
He must have 'self' cancelled thousands of items that he had cleaned fiscal markings from. An 'old school' rogue for sure !!

I have a side collection of them actually, including a very nice 5/- Mt Cook. I shall not derail this thread with them but perhaps will start a new thread, devoted to it, at some point.
It would be great to see how many different examples we can accumulate there :-)

I note that David Smitham included that Cunninghams 'fake' cancel in a recent book (name escapes me).

And yes, I do have some 'Province of Auckland' cancel examples. Not that great but examples none the less.
I will get some pics up tomorrow night.

Gerald Ellot had a PDF on the 'Province of Auckland' cancels story, but I note that the server is down currently. I have a downloaded copy of it somewhere if anybody would like a copy of it.
Just PM me.




Dave

Some nice items there Andrew. That Tokomairiro piece would have been a great cover. I guess destination would have been somewhere in Europe. I like the 1d brown pair, sharp printing and nice clear cancel. The lack of wear on the penny plate is quite amazing given the number printer before the change of colour.

Philip

Geoff Rickards published a note in the NZ Stamp Collector 99/2 on the Obliterators with vertical bars. They are also listed in PSNZ Vol III. There are only six of them. The 21 here is Invercargill.

Here are some interesting watermarks with the star paper. I think the four lines are the edge of the paper as can be seen by the wide margins. The one in the middle is interesting since it appears to have a border, but not the four lines. It also has wide margins, but not as wide as the others. Where there two types of large star paper, one with four lines and one with just a single line?  

The perforations look fake, but why fake this stamp? 

Update: the wide margins in the middle stamp are on the wrong side of the watermark "border"

Nice additional info on the P-o-A postmarks Philip - and nice examples shown too :-)

Just going back to your interest previously on the INVICTA-lozenge bank draft paper, I have just seen Andrew Murphys (murfz1 ) web pages on this subject. May be of interest to you Philip :


INVICTA wmk examples




Dave

Here are my 2d Chalons that have little plate wear and could be London prints. The first is certified.

Certified





Color a bit deeper. Not much bluing on back. 




Color looks good, but back is unclear.




Color looks good, but overinking may cover wear. Not really any bluing on back (already posted and suggested it is not London Print)




Color looks good, but no bluing on back.




Color looks good, but back is unclear. There is bluing of a frame line. Unusual color in the corners