Plate size for Tablet series (1892-1899) issue

[bill]

The plate size for the Tablet series stamps (½d to £1) has been a source of confusion
in the literature for many years. Even Basset Hull's Appendix to his handbook strays
from complete accuracy in this matter. He says at first that plates were 120-on for
the Tablet series (at least for the earliest issues ordered from De La Rue) but goes
on to say that the 5/- and £1 of 1897 were 240-on (and hence the 10d of 1899).

What really happened is that all values were charged for as 120-on. De La Rue was
clear on that as shown in Easton's De La Rue History. However, only the 2½d really
was 120-on. This value was in one colour and printed from one plate (no key plate).
All the other values (½d, 5d, 6d, 10d, 1/-, 2/6, 5/-, 10/-, £1) were printed in two
colours from keyplates in two operations but charged as only 120-on (not 240-on).
The illustration of a sheet of 240 of the ½d in Tinsley's book makes it clear that all
the bicoloured values were 240-on as stated (not the 2½d, which was in one colour).
This applies to De La Rue printings only (plus the 1½d surcharge on 5d of 1904).

De La Rue sent the plates for the Tablet series (all ten values) to Melbourne in 1901
as requested. These were listed as 120-on. What really happened is that De La Rue
divided the plates into two and sent the upper halves only to Melbourne. The plate
numbers on known pieces for the 1/- and 10/- show that they were from the upper
pane only. Indeed, Melbourne printings of the 1/- and 10/- were 120-on as Kellow
stated in the Commonwealth Specialists' Catalogue.

I wish to thank Geoff Kellow for helping to clear up this issue.