The New Die

The Ailing Die

The first die for the penny black as completed by Heath was by many standards a thing of beauty. It was and still is a credit to the engraver's art with it's delicate lines probably being one of the features that draws philatelists to collect those black and dull red bits of paper. Unfortunately, those same delicate lines that we find so attractive were also a weakness in the design. The expected demand for the postage stamp was grossly under estimated, as it was expected that the Mulready sheet would meet most of the supply. As it turned out, it was the postage stamp that proved more popular with the paying public. That original die had to produce many more transfer rollers than they could have initially anticipated, and the die started to wear out.

Perkins Bacon wrote to the Inland Revenue requesting permission to prepare a new die (link here). This was about the time when they were preparing the transfer rollers for plate 194 onwards. These later plates were much more deeply engraved than the plates that immediately proceeded them, which wore very badly. I get the feeling that the view was that 'the old die is just about done, lets see what we can get out of her'. Perhaps they had spoken to Hill and received his verbal agreement, though this is just a guess.

Here are two examples from plate 185 that have seen some use and therefore a fair bit of wear. What they do show is just how shallow the impression on the printing plate was. On both, the facial features have all but disappeared. In addition, on SH the base line has worn away and on TE the background latticework is wearing thin at bottom right.

Here are two examples from 194. Both are reasonably early prints showing most of the facial features well. Perkins Bacon also appear to have darkened the pigment slightly when compared to the more orange shades found before hand. This is even more noticeable because of the deeper engraving, which allows more pigment to be retained on the plate and therefore on the stamp. Even given all this, there are still signs that all is not well. The left sides of both stamps are still weak. There is a significant weakness in the north west corner of NG, and the top of NJ looks to have been re-cut .

Things got worse. These next two stamps are from plate 199, which was at press for only three weeks due to the plate developing a crack. JF has evidence of a slight blur down the left side of the stamp which is just evident on the imprimatur but will normally wear away fairly quickly. Even though this is a fairly early impression the lines on the face and temple are wearing and the background latticework is very weak. The next stamp, TK, shows a remarkable amount of wear for a stamp that has been at press for only three weeks.

Granzow's view

In his book, Granzow (p124 on) ignores the state of the stamps being produced at this time, and I believe misinterpreted the correspondence between the printers and the Commissioners of the Inland Revenue. Perkins Bacon asked for permission to prepare a new die as the old one had become too worn to be used any further. Granzow states "The written letter by the firm conveying the proofs from each die is quite instructive as it reveals Perkins, Bacon's lack of understanding of the problem of plate wear and their inventive explanation to the Commissioners for the need to replace Die 1." Well, Perkins Bacon may have been scratching their heads about why the plates were wearing out quicker, but despite Mr Granzow's protestations the shallow impression left on the old die was a major consideration. Mr Granzow shows a scan of a print pulled from the old die in it's current condition (shown below) and states "However, as can be seen... an enlarged image of the die as it appears today, the die is not worn."

Copyright Royal Mail Group 2010. British National Postal Museum & Archive

Firstly, ignoring the signs of corrosion, he is incorrect. There are signs of wear. The background latticework especially that below the E of Postage is showing much more white than it should. This amply explains why so many of the impressions from the later plates appear weak. I would guess that Mr Granzow has forgotten that the die is a three dimensional object, not a print. And to prove the point, one just has to compare the new impressions of die 2 with the last die one plates.

Just to hammer the point home, Bacon in his supplement of 1929 (p30) asked the then current chief engraver of Messrs. Perkins, Bacon & Co., Limited of his opinion of this die. He stated that the original die showed marked signs of wear.

The Die is Dead - Long Live the Die.

The correspondence held in the Perkins Bacon archive and reproduced in Bacon or De Worms give us a firm sequence of events. On the 5^th September 1854 PB wrote to the Inland Revenue asking permission to prepare a new die. Permission was granted and communicated in a letter dated 13^th September. A new unhardened flat die with an impression from the old die would have been forwarded to Will Humphries for him to re-engrave it. About this time PB started work on plates 194 onward. With the green light having been given, PB made that transfer roller as deep as they could. 25^Th September 1854, PB submitted impressions pulled from the new die to the IR for approval. This was not forthcoming, the rejection letter from the IR dated 3^rd October being almost brutal. Work on die 2 (take 2) was ongoing as evidenced by a letter from Humphries dated 10^th October. A letter dated 3^rd November from PB to Ormond Hill is evidence that he probably stepped in to act as mediator between the main parties involved. That letter to Ormond enclosed the letter addressed to the Inland Revenue dated the same day with impressions from the new die. On the 11th November 1854, the Inland Revenue replied with an acceptance of the new die. This would almost certainly have been a massive relief to Perkins. Since the time when they had received initial permission to prepare a new die in September, they had just about squeezed two transfer rollers out of the old girl ending with plate 204. It is interesting to speculate what would have happened if the Commissioners had not have given their agreement to the new die, and Perkins had been obliged to continue with die 1. Reminds me of the song 'Four wheels on my wagon'.

Die 2, Plate 1 Imprimatur AA.

"A die to last for centuries."

That phrase can be found in a letter dated 19th May 1855 from Bacon to one of the Crown Agents which tried to explain why they were late in fulfilling their contact with him. It would be fair to say that Perkins were not above hyperbole to help dig themselves out of a hole, but that letter contains quite a claim. Considering that die 1 had lasted 15 years, under normal circumstances even with the deeper engraving of the new die, the most that could be expected would have been twice that amount of time. The key however can be found within the letter.

“...we obtained permission to prepare another original die similar to the first, from which we have now secured a sufficient number of flat dies to last for centuries, & these we could easily have done in the former instance had we supposed it would prove necessary.”

( I have found another letter in De Worms p77, dated 13^th December 1856 which states the same thing. There may be others.)

A common sense interpretation of this letter leads to the understanding that Perkins Bacon used the new die 2 to produce a new transfer roller. Once this roller had been hardened, it was used to produce intermediate flat dies from which any number of new transfer rollers could be produced. This would have made the boast that the new die would outlast any demand made upon it reasonable. ED Bacon drew attention to this letter and the above mentioned understanding in his Supplement to the Line-Engraved Postage Stamps of Great Britain printed in 1929, but since then the idea seems to have been lost in the mists of time. Perhaps the reason for this is that “Mr Gill's Destruction Book” which is the source of the key information does not form part of the Perkins Bacon records, but those of the Stamping Department of the Inland Revenue.

Bacon became aware of these dies by looking at the records of the dies that were destroyed by the Stamping Department at Somerset House as supplied by a Mr Longley. At the time he wrote, Bacon had no idea what these dies looked like as he had not seen any proofs, but he assumed that the majority were made in connection with the preparation of the new penny red with letters in all four corners., Through no fault of his own, it turns out that he was wrong on that particular point, but much of the following description is as he described.

A review of the dies.

The contract for the supply of Penny Reds ended in 1880, and the suggestion from the IR was that all plates and dies were to be “absolutely given up” and destroyed. Perkins Bacon objected to this, pointing out that not only were all the dies, rollers etc were their property, but also that the Queens Head used was a work of art. A compromise was reached where some of the material was destroyed, but other parts were kept under dual control of the Stamping Department and Perkins Bacon in a safe at Somerset House. Here is the relevant entry in the Destruction Book (Bacon Sup, p11):

1880

October 26 Postage plates sent to Dewsnap's to be ground off & thoroughly destroyed also Flat dies & Rollers.

4 Postage plates Thick 2, 2d & 2, l 1/2d

10 Halfpenny postage plates

16 Rollers

19 Flat dies

D.Gill Duly returned

26/10/80 D.G.

It should be remembered that the steel that these items were made of was valuable in its own right, which is why the (blank) items were “duly returned”. A full inventory of what was kept in the safe at Somerset house can be gained by looking at the list itemised when the safe was opened in 1890 in order to pull some proofs for the Jubilee Celebration of Penny Postage at the Guildhall held that year (Bacon Sup, p11):

1890

April 23 Postage stamps home Queens Head. The safe at Somerset House opened 23 April 1890 by D. Gill and contained:

Two 1/2d flat dies

Three 1d flat dies (one the old original die & Nos. 2 & 3)

One 1 1/2d flat die No. 35

One 2d flat die No. 1

1 Soft roller containing 8 impressions of 1/2d die.

1 soft Roller containing 5 impressions 1d die 1 of 1 1/2 die and 1 of 2d die.

26 plates in all 25 being 1d plates & 1 being 1/2d plate (No. 9)

(Signed) D. G. 23.4.90.

After the death of Queen Victoria, the authorities communicated that it would be as well to arrange for the destruction of the plates and dies. This appears to have been done in part on the 20^th June 1904, though it was understood at the time that the dies would be kept as “Souvenirs”. Some souvenir! It did mean however that the dies were kept intact and eventually found their way into the hands of the General Post Office in 1923.

[More to come]

AP March/April 2015