Plate 165 - BB

I recently located a imperforate state 2 example of this unit.
A very interesting stamp.

There is an illustration of a perforated vertical pair lettered AB-BB in GBJ Vol 3 No 4 Pg 58 (Oct 1961).
The text mentions duplication of the outer line of the SE corner on both stamps (more apparent on stamp BB), but doesn't mention that this is in the second state only.

The original state of this stamp displays very weak and broken left and right sidelines.
The lower half of the right side has been recut in an attempt to mitigate this.
However it is apparent that this recut does not follow the original line, and that it 'cuts in' resulting in the SE corner not being square.

In state 2, there is no apparent strengthening of the left side despite there being a weak TRL in the upper left margin.
The repair has restored the right side though, and the outer line of the second B square is duplicated.
It is apparent that the inner of these two lines is the original recut-out-of-plumb line of state 1.
This corner is now square.
The operation results in the second B being in a different postion than in state 1 - appearing more centrally placed - but it is in fact in exactly the same position relative to the original recut line.
There is some weakening of the checkletters, especially the lower part of the second B.

In Statham's description of this repair he says 'original recut of lower part of right frame line is no longer obvious'.
I would agree it's not obvious, however the line is still discernable in the outer side network, coming down to meet the innermost of the two lines on the outside of the SE square.
Statham also says 'TRL in right margin', but this is clearly not so in this stamp and nor is it in the illustration of the AB-BB pair mentioned above.

Plate 176 and 155 - RJ

Here is an interesting case.

Stamp RJ of plate 176 is one that has special mention in Statham.
He notes a non-coincident repair by re-entry, and illustrates the duplication of the outer line of the R square and of the major SW pointing ray of the right star.
Part of the commentary is 'R is closer to the right side of the square'.
What an understatement!

The illustration shows state 1 next to two repaired stamps.
The duplication is clear, especially on the example scanned larger.
The position of the checkletter R is significantly altered, and its tail is a completely different shape.
The checkletter J is also different.
It seems clear that both letters have been recut.
I am confident the allocation of these stamps to plate 176 is correct.

This unit is apparently known to have been repaired a second time.
For this reason I am unsure at this stage whether the two examples are state 2 or 3.
An interesting stamp - one to look out for.

Interestingly, I found both the scans of repaired stamps in places where they were described as plate 155.
Stamp RJ is missing from the 155 Imprimatur sheet, which doesn't help in identifying examples, but for the record I have included in the image above three examples of RJ from plate 155.
I suspect they are all state 3 prints, but the letter positions can be made out fairly well despite all three having cancels on top of them.

That two same stamps have been misplated as 155 makes me wonder if this is an error carried forward from another source.
Possibly the Gardner-Hill reconstructions had this wrong?

Plate 8 of twopence blue - RK

Stamp RK of this plate is not listed by Osborne among the units to have had its plate number/s recut, that had become very broadened due to wear.
The many dated pieces Osborne lists as showing the recut are all dated from 13 November 1860.
This clearly dates the recutting operation to October or November 1860.

I have had this cover for about three years, dated July 1860.
The left plate number 8 displays as extremely broadened due to wear.
In my view this item proves that RK must also have been subject to hand retouch to thin the left plate number.
It would seem unusual for them have operated on other units around this area of the plate and leave RK, and I'm sure that they didn't.

I just need to find a later print to confirm this beyond doubt.

Plate 81 - TI

I have had a great deal of trouble finding examples of this stamp, despite it being quite a common plate.
I have had the crappy state 1 print for a couple of years, and have just located a state 2 example.

The repair to this stamp has been known for some time.
The repair is non-coincident resulting in duplication across its top, including the top line of the right star.
The major NE pointing ray in the NE square is clearly duplicated, and POSTAGE is compressed.
Duplication in the left star is also reported, but the cancel impedes in this example.
The checkletters display some weakening in comparison to state 1 prints.
There is a new TRL of medium strength running for virtually the full length of the left margin.

Originally I had thought this cover was dated 1848, but now to hand realise it's July 1849.
This is a couple of months after Statham's estimate of plate 81s withdrawal from press, and so this cover offers no clue as to when the re-entry may have been carried out.

This is the only example I have seen.

Plate 155 - GD and HF

These two stamps arrived yesterday.
Stamp GD was described by the seller as plate 162.
HF was described as (of all things) plate 60.
In fact both are from plate 155, and GD is in the second state (weaker checkletters and stronger right sideline).

The misplating of GD can be forgiven as the letter position of plates 155 and 162 is similarish.
HF should not - the stamp clearly has alphabet 2 checkletters, so how it was plated as an alphabet 1 plate is anyones guess.

This isn't a complaint - these would have sold for significantly higher than I paid if they were correctly plated.
HF is a large stamp, and a great bargain at £1.70!

Moral of the story: if you're looking for specific plates, always check everything.

Plate 150 - T row

Received today was the above strip from plate 150.
A strip I'm very happy to have, despite its faults.
I'm quite lucky to have recognised it since the scan in the ebay listing was small; but fortunately the grossly misplaced checkletter T on stamp TE is pretty much unique on TEs of this range of plates, so I was fairly confident what plate it was even though I couldn't see it very well.

The first four stamps show extreme wear, with the wear tapering off in intensity in the remaining three stamps.
TE, TF and TG are all known to have been repaired, but it seems from this strip that TH must also have been repaired.
Additional evidence of this is a state 2 print of stamp TG showing two TRLs in the right margin, that I am aware of.

It is possible TI may also have been repaired - they just need to be found!

Plate 71 - TH new discovery

In my entry about stamp TG of this plate, I concluded that other repairs from this plate are possible based upon a strip I had seen showing TG in state 1 with other T row stamps in a worn state.
This strip is shown in the image above.
Although the scan is small and the strip in bad condition, it is apparent that it is a state 1 print due to the patch of extreme wear above Y of PENNY on stamp TG.

Richard Gray of First Class Stamps has now shown me the TG-TH pair that is also in the image above.
In this TG is clearly in the repaired state, showing the duplicated upper line of the right star.
Stamp TH is also repaired, I am sure.
There is a new TRL at left, and although also a worn print there is some apparent strengthening of engraved lines in comparison to the earlier print.

It seems possible that the repair to these units was not entirely successful in restoring the engraved background.
This could be a reason why a repair to TH has been identified until now.
I don't think these units were repaired at different times, and accordingly examples of TH must be out there and just as plentiful as state 2s of TG.