173 AD

Comments

Folkard states:

State 1, east side weak but lower third re-cut, east network worn, the west side is weak and worn, comments – worn impression.

State 2, some weakness in east side and some compression shown in both the postage and value banners. East side of NE square double, blur E of SE square.

These comments were based on two stamps, a worn imperf and a single perf 16.

We still do not have a copy of the imprimatur, however Scott's imperf example looks to be a fairly early print. Remember RF's comments on his imperf. The most striking feature of this stamp is the very poorly re-cut right side. Both the top and the bottom have been cut at an angle. This is IMO the reason for the doubling of the E side of the NE corner in state 2. The old re-cut still shows, even though the re-entry was more successful in engraving this frame than the first entry.

Both state 2 stamps have seen some wear post repair, so that any compression of the banners and the blur SE are not so strongly evidenced. What is shown is the general weakness in the background lattice work and the progressive weakness of this and the check letters. To add to this, Ian's stamp which is probably the more worn, is dated 19 September 1854 which gives us a good signpost. It has double perforations just for good measure!

Addition: Ian Wrights strip appears to be an earlier state 2 that shows the blur outside the SE corner, and maybe some compression in the value banner.

Imprimatur

No image available

State 1

State 2

Positional piece

AP

Sept 2015