2/6d St George & Dragon Forgery - "Colour Trials"??!!

[Ross Ewington]

Does anyone know the story about this particular forgery/facsimile of the
2/6d St George & Dragon postal/fiscal that is known in other than the colour of the genuine'
stamp? Here's an example in green ... I think I may have images of some others that
I will post here if I can find them in the depths of my computer.

st george forgery in green.jpg (36.8 KiB) Viewed 23598 times

[Revenuer]

Probably best if i post a page from Ron butlers Tasmania which explains all.

The green i was underbidder on in a Melbourne auction it has now popped up in a Sydney auction.

Dave

ron.jpg (124.59 KiB) Viewed 23590 times

[Ross Ewington]

Here's an image of an example that was
offered in Tasmanian Stamp Auction's July 8th 2006
postal auction (Lot 549)
[attachment=1]st george forgery in carmine.jpg[/attachment]

...and after a little more searching I found a scan of the others offered in
the TSA October 8th 2005 auction (Lot 634)
[attachment=0]jeffryes st george.jpg[/attachment]

[josto]

Hi!

Any opinions on this one would be great!? Forgery, cover forgery or real postal usage!? I have the opinion it could be real, as I marked the postmark as I see it and it seems as if the postmark fits to the stamps and the cover! What makes me thinking is the rate of 5shillings and the quite late usage in 1894. But the cover is a very hard cover and filled at the inside with some kind of mesh, I don`t know if that`s usual!? It seems as if there was no letter in it but perhaps a thicker and heavier object. This could also be as the adress is a Chemist called Marshall who lived at Dunedin at that time and made homoeopatic chemistry.





Hope to hear from you!

Greetings

[josto]

Hi!

Does anyone have any idea about this one? How could I find out if it`s authentic? Expertizing? Where?

Thanks

[Revenuer]

Josto

Can you post a close up without your overlay? Also a scan of the back please.

The way you have drawn your overlay, there should be a faint right half of the Hobart duplex showing which looks to be missing.

It may be an 1864 pair reused 30 year later the stamps are from the left side of the sheet but will need a closer look before further comments.

On the right stamp is there a tear at the top going through the S?

Have you checked the 5/- registered rate to NZ in 1894? if so what have you come up with?

[josto]

Hi!

I`ve made two further scans to show the details without my overlay! The right hand stamp has no tear, it seems to have a fold which was there before cancellation, maybe due to a thick content in the cover!? I`ve not yet checked the letter rate for registered sending at that time to NZ, but that`ll be the next.





Greetings

[Revenuer]

Had a play in photoshop and it appears to have two different inks applied possibly reuse at a later date. It looks to be par favour. Maybe others could comment.

Tasmania_cover_part3.jpg (95.51 KiB) Viewed 23523 times

[josto]

Hi!

Can anyone tell me if and of course where I could get this cover expertized!? Help would be great!

Thanks a lot

josto

[Ross Ewington]

Hi Josto

I don't think this cover would return a 'positive certificate'. Even if the packet had a small sheet of lead in it the postage to New Zealand would not have been 5sh in 1894. Also I think that it would be unlikely that an imperf pair of the original 2/6d St George & Dragon would be used for postage 30 years or so after it was first issued ..... not impossible but unlikely!

My opinion is that the stamps have been added at a later date to a previously used envelope (the 2/6d pair would easily cover up where say a 3d QV Sideface had been removed) and the light cancels forged or supplied 'per favour'.

I wouldn't fork out the £'s or €'s for an expert's opinion here unless there was a definite indication on this thread that the cover is more likely than not to be genuine
and this is yet to be forthcoming.

Are there any other TPS BB members who are willing to 'voice' an opinion on this item?

Ross

P.S. here's the info you require to obtain an expert committee's opinion in Europe:

British Philatelic Association (BPA) Expertizing Ltd.,
Administrative Office
P.O. Box 137,
Leatherhead
Surrey KT22 0RG
UNITED KINGDOM
contact: sec.bpa@tcom.co.uk

also

The Expert Committee RPSL Ltd.,
41 Devonshire Place,
London W1G 6JY
UNITED KINGDOM
Email: experts@rpsl.org.uk

[bill]

Here are two more of the forgeries attributed to Jeffryes.

Bills Forgeries.jpg (62.75 KiB) Viewed 22798 times

[Revenuer]

Unusual to see the imperf colours cancelled

[bill]

Folks

Here's a puzzle for you.

How do we really know that Jeffryes made these forgeries?
The literature sometimes attributes these forgeries to the
handiwork of Jeffryes but what is the basis for saying this?
I have not yet succeeded in locating the required evidence.

Bill

[Revenuer]

Here are another 3 attributed to ? that have come across my desk.

The brown is dated same as Bill copy above, but unusual to see the pen cancel.

TasJeff1.jpg (87.14 KiB) Viewed 21648 times

[Ross Ewington]

Just popped up in a Sydney auction (again - 6 years later ...see post above from 2010)

forgeries 2&6d St George & Dragon.jpg (111.17 KiB) Viewed 21212 times

one stamp appears to have fallen from the page though

[Revenuer]

Must have needed just the one stamp!

[josto]

Hello,

I`ve come across these three imperf. Dragon revenue stamps. can anyone tell me if they are genuine and which ones they might be? I think the 3d might be a reprint, it has thinner paper without watermark. The 5/- and 10/- examples have the double-lined 1 as watermark. All three stamps are mint, there is no trace of a fiscal cancel or pen cancel, even under UV light! Would be great if some of the experts could help me!









Greetings

josto

[bill]

Josto

The 5/- and 10/- Dragons illustrated seem to be imperf versions of the
genuine stamps and are listed as such in Craig & Ingles catalogue. The
Craig & Ingles catalogue (1978) records them under Nos. 24c and 25c.
Of course, they are watermarked double lined 1 as expected.

The 3d Dragon illustrated may come from the reprints of 1879 on thin
tough handmade paper listed under No. 11 in Craig & Ingles.

So all three items seem to be perfectly genuine. The 5/- and 10/- are
only known mint, according to Craig & Ingles.

[josto]

Hello Bill,

thank you very much for this great information! Do you have a cat. value for these examples?

Best wishes

josto

[bill]

Craig & Ingles (1978) only say R2 (a rarity rating with est. 31-100 existing)
Craig's Handbook of Tasmanian Revenue Stamps (1997) suggests values of
$45 for 5/- and $60 for 10/- but these prices are out of date. You would
have to consider values in the vicinity of a few hundred dollars at auction.

A curious note is that the 2/6 seems less common imperf as unused but we
have to recall that the 2/6 of 1863 was in nearly the same colour as found
in the 1880 issue while the 5/- and 10/- were reissued in new colours.