New Zealand: Chalons - 1855-1873

Rather the opposite of the lovely detail of the Richardson prints, I have a couple of later Chalons that are extremely blurred.  One collector told me these are "wet prints", which I presume means the paper was wet when the ink was applied?  I only have a couple of these and was wondering how common they are?  And, while not particularly attractive, why are these not listed as a variety? 

NZ Chalons : Richardson SG10 V Davies SG36






However, Davies did improve slightly on his production quality as can be seen on later SG36 printings :

SG36 pair :




Of course, within 2 years of his contract commencing the 2d plate started to show signs of wear, and this wear got worse quite quickly during the course of 1864.



Dave

I can't remember where I read it, but I remember one of the challenges for Davies was he didn't have access to a press that could compress the paper enough to reduce the water content of the paper. Maybe it was Tom Lee and John Watts book or Odenweller's - but can't remember. At Perkins, Bacon they would soak the paper in tubs but then press the paper in reams to reduce water content and then stack - at times needing to wet the edges again as they dried while waiting for printing. Sometimes they forgot or didn't do a good job and you can find 'dry' print copies of some stamps on the edges of sheets (not necessarily NZ stamps) where the ink didn't 'stick' at all so look faded. Let me look for that reference because maybe I misunderstood.

Neil

Yes. That is an interesting line of thought Neil.

Perkins Bacon did send out, with the initial supply of Postage Stamps, all the required items that would be needed to produce more labels locally.
This included a 'Printing Press' for printing of the labels.

But, if as you say, that Perkins Bacon also wet the paper in their printing process prior to printing using the 'Recess' method, and then had to squeeze the paper of excess moisture prior to printing, then how did they achieve this?
There has never been any mention of a paper moisture press being sent for that purpose! Not that I have seen anyways.

I always imagined that the paper may have been 'dampened' via a 'mist' sprayer on a per sheet basis and then the 'Printing Press' supplied by PB applied the pressure and transferred the ink onto a damp sheet of paper - but perhaps in my naivety I am wrong on this!

I have never read previously how the 'dampening' process may have worked.

Further research is needed.



Dave

A lot of work! Thanks for this, michael

There is not a lot known about Richardson's approach.  I wonder then if, because of his process, that maybe the Large Star paper wasn't conducive to being printed without being damp and allowing the paper fibres to mellow before accepting ink, and then closing again during drying? Maybe this is the reason for using other papers?

Thanks for that Michael.

It seems that neilmac, Neil, is near the truth then when he said that :

"I wonder then if, because of his process, (maybe the Large Star paper wasn't conducive to being printed without being damp and allowing the paper fibres to mellow before accepting ink, and then closing again during drying?), so that was the reason for using other papers".

and your snippet from the London Philatelist, 1928, vol 37 by B. Goodfellow that :




Richardson was not supplied a 'hydraulic press' as none had been sent out with the original supplies in 1854 by PB.
And no instructions from PB as to how the 'star' paper should be treated!

Richardson had a press of his own already, one he had sent out to him after receiving an inheritence.

A 'double demy press' rings in my head (possibly not correct but that is my initial thought). Need to look that up.

So Richardson trialed the 'star' paper on his own press and wasn't happy with the results, so found his own paper that did produce satisfactory results.


Davies used the supplied government supplies which included the 'star' paper & the PB printing press. Davies had also been employed by PB and came highly recommended by them and therefore knew how PB went about their business printing in the 'Recess' method on 'star' paper - which included 'wetting' the paper prior to printing. A minor detail Richardson wasn't aware of!

Thanks goodness for Richardson is my thought on this. His stamps are by far the best produced of the 3 printers used in printing 'Chalons' for this new colony.



Dave

A couple of fairly important snippets from Odenwellers book, Chapter 3 - The Richardson Prints - The Blue Paper Prints pp35-52 :

'When the 'Board to Consider Postage Stamps' sent its report to the Colonial Secretary on 1 June 1855, the report included a recommendation for further supplies of stamps. It stated
As it is important that a continuous supply of stamps should be maintained and as difficulty exists in working the press here ...'

and

'There is but one person in the town competent to print the postage stamps. He can print them on a press of his own, without the necessity of setting up the press belonging to the government'.

and

'Nevertheless, all was not well. Richardson considered the effort in printing this first supply to have been so difficult that he requested an additional 1/- per 1,000 for a total of 4/- per 1,000 to do the work'.

It is clear that Richardson was able to dictate terms.



Dave

Is that piece in your collection Dave?

On 9th and 10th of May two quotes from michael refer to "reams" . The first to Ream of "1000 sheets" , the second to "six reams ie 3000 sheets" which makes a each ream 500 sheets.


Reference is also made in the first item to sheets "cut to size" for printing so is it possible it was a ream of 500 large size which had to be cut in half to provide the 1000 sheets for printing ?

Incidentally the Internet refers to an earlier "Short Ream" of 480 sheets .
In the good old pre-decimal days we British did tend to count in 12s or Dozens ,  eg eggs,  bakery buns,  pennies in the shilling . Stamps were printed in multiples of 12 , 240 to the sheet .  For division into fractions Twelve is a more convenient number than 10 so maybe we should all have adopted a duodecimal system rather than decimal .



Meantime this has turned up in a junior collection I have to sell for a neighbour. Large star watermark with Rough perfs which are hard to measure, but I believe 12 1/2 

So I'm guessing SG 132a brown shade with some plate wear 

We have discussed fiscal usage of the Chalon previously in this thread.

Here are 5 more examples of fiscal usage following the Stamp Act of 1866 :


Won at the recently concluded Alan Craig Auction of Revenues by ACS





Dave

A shame it is only a description of his exhibit.

No pictures of anything, which is disappointing especially as the title says "Display of New Zealand Chalon Heads by Marcel Stanley".

Are there any pictures anywhere of this Mark? Or is it just that document?



Dave

I did not find any pictures, but that does not mean they don't exist.

Specimen overprints. Grant and I are accumulating images of specimen overprints on chalons with the aim of evaluating the relative scarcity of the different types on the various denominations and printings. The 3 main types are shown below, known as type A, B and C













If anyone has examples they would be willing to share or knows anyone that may be able to help it would be much appreciated.

Philip