PHILATELY FROM AUSTRALIA SEPTEMBER 1995
QUEENSLAND 1897-1907 1d PERFORATED 12 x 9½: AN ANALYSIS OF THE LITERATURE
By DAVID J. COLLYER
A.J. Griffiths, in the Australian States Study Group Newsletter of December 1994, pages 66-67, describes the 1897-1907 1d of Queensland perforated 12 x 9½ as "another Queensland mystery". A search of the available literature has brought up additional areas which develop a very complex story. Some of the queries raised include what is the meaning of the note after Queensland SG 254?; do the "staple like" holes in the margin indicate a booklet origin or possibly some other source?; what was the involvement of the stamp trade? The latter period of Queensland still contains a number of mysteries but the results of this paper may assist in removing some of the mystery of this period and this item in particular.
THE FIRST OCCURRENCE
J.H. Smyth in the Australian Journal of Philately, September 1901, page 14 notes "we have just received on an envelope through the post a specimen of the current 1d (Queensland) perf. 12 x 9½". The current Queensland 1d in 1901 would have been the 1897 issue with figures in all four corners. This report is mentioned by J.H. Chapman's view of paper and perforation in Vol. 1 of Bassett Hull's work on Queensland, page 42: "we find the D (perforator) machine giving a 9½ perforation in the "faked" variety, 1d 1897, perforated 12 x 9½, chronicled in the Australian Journal of Philately, Vol. II page 14, September 1901.
One of the earliest records of the item appears in Stanley Gibbons Monthly Journal of October 1901, page 64, which notes that "Ewen's Weekly reports that the current 1d (Queensland) stamp exists perf. 12 x 9½". As the Gibbons journal was published on the last day of the month so Ewen's Weekly Stamp News, published in England, would have received its information in September or early October 1901, but the data would have been available. somewhat earlier in Australia, possibly July or August.
In their July 1902 issue, page 5, Gibbons notes that they have been informed by Ewen's Weekly that
the 9½ perforation is unofficial. The story goes that "the 9½ machine was sent to New Guinea for commercial purposes, and that someone who had access to it passed some of the 1d stamps of 1882, perf 12 through this machine. It is said that the original perforation can be traced along the edges of the perf 9½. But when did this happen?" Is there any confusion with the 1d (Queensland) of 1882 perf. 9 x 12, or is that the variety the ingenious faker was trying to make?
The story was taken up by Frederick Hagen, Australian Philatelist, September 1902, page 4, who wrote:
Last month when we questioned the genuineness of the Id (Queensland) current 9 x 12, we were right, vide Mr. A.A. Greens' letter to a London contemporary the current 1d Queensland, perf. 9½ x 12 recently notified in London papers was not an official issue. The 9½ machine was sent to New Guinea for commercial purposes Some of the perf. 12 'spot' 1d of 1882 were passed through the machine unofficially ere (before?) it left for New Guinea. Careful examination will show traces of the original perforation in the fakes.
A check of the August 1902 issue of the Australian Philatelist has not produced any reference to the item mentioned in the September issue.
More detail was disclosed in the December 1902 issue of the Australian Philatelist, page 43, under a warning about forged perforations of the stamps of Queensland, Victoria, Van Diemen's Land/Tasmania, New South Wales, South Australia and Fiji. Queensland perf 9½ x 12 1d, 2d, 1/-;
These stamps are very close imitations of the originals, being, of course, genuine specimens of the ordinary stamps, perf. 12, with the horizontal perforations removed, and a larger gauge substituted. The larger holes of the 9½ gauge are somewhat irregular in shape, there are also other variations from the genuine article
In the Australian Philatelist of January 1903, pages 57-61 Hagen gave a detailed report on the activities of F. W. Reid, a Sydney stamp dealer of Queen Victoria Markets. Reid had been in the stamp trade in Brisbane in 1898:
Mr Reid shortly afterwards came to Sydney, and in November 98 advertised a Queensland 1/- perf. 9 x 12, for sale, which, my informant states, was a fake, and which Mr Reid later on referred to as such" This report was reprinted in Stanley Gibbons Monthly Journal of February 1903 and also mentioned in Vol. 12 of the London Philatelist
Stanley Gibbons Monthly Journal of January 1903, page 133, quotes a Brisbane correspondent on the topic of the fraudulently perforated 9½ x 12 stamps:
The 9½ machine has been sent to New Guinea for commercial purposes, and a party who had access to it put through some of the current sheets, imperf, hence the 9½ part of it, but I never saw a specimen so do not know if they were perf. 12 or 13 on the sides. Anyway, they were never issued to the public, as the affair, to put it charitably, was an experiment of the above mentioned party. Perhaps he was too scared to try to sell any outside. In addition to the above there have been various experiments with old sheets of the stamps of 1882, perf. 12 and some fairly successful fakes got about. I have seen a specimen of the 1/- perf. 12, worked up with a fine chisel into a very passable imitation of a 9½ x 12, but this was quite an innocent affair compared with another that was engineered on a sewing machine. I wish I could have got hold of some to send to you, but the owners wanted big prices for them on account of their artistic merit
In 1902-1903 the basis for stating that the 1d Queensland of 1897-1907 perforated 12 x 9½ was a fake was that the gauge 9½ perforator had been sent sometime earlier to New Guinea. Gibbons in July 1902 and again in January 1903 along with the Australian Philatelist of September 1902, make this point. It will later be shown that this perforator was still in Brisbane during the time in question and that the perforator which went to Port Moresby was actually the line 12½ (13) gauge machine of 1863.
This does not negate the point that Queensland stamps with faked perforations were offered in Sydney in the period from around late 1898 to late 1902. In this case the items were re-perforated and traces of the original perforation were identifiable.
As regards the Sydney forgeries there is confusion as regards the actual gauge. Smyth's report of September 1901, lists the item as 1897 1d perf. 12 x 9½ whereas Hagen, a year later, records it as 1897 1d perf. 9 x 12, which is subsequently recorded in the same note as 9½ x 12. Hagen's report on the activities of F. W. Reid mentions a gauge 9 perforator, but it is unclear if the stamps he referred to are the issue of 1882-83 or a later issue. The Gibbons report of January 1903 mentions both the 1882 issue and current sheets, which implies the 1897-1907 issue. Both Australian and British writers of the time regarded these items as forged perforations.
A SECOND OCCURRENCE?
This section deals with material first recorded in 1910 but for which the most detailed account stems from 1912. Postally used copies date from the period 1905 to 1906. This item was once catalogued by Stanley Gibbons (S.G.) and its subsequent removal from listing has caused a range of notes in the catalogue.
Which Stamp?
In the current edition of S.G. Part 1 under Queensland SG 254, the following note appears: "The 1d perf. 12 x 9½ was not an authorised issue". The note first appeared in this form in 1979 and it was an edited version of a note which had first appeared in the 28th edition of S. G. Part 1, 1919, which read: "The 1d formerly catalogued perf. 12 x 9½ is now omitted, as later information shows that it was printed outside the Government Printing Office, and was not an official issue". In the period 1974 to 1978 the note read: "the 1d (Queensland) perf. 12 x 9½ was privately printed".
The stamp was first catalogued by S.G in the 24th edition of Part 1, 1913, on page 248 as Queensland S.G. 192a and remained so up until the 27th edition of 1917. The stamp listed, in fact, was the 1896 1d in lower corners, not the 1897-1907 1d in four corners.
The stamp in this perforation appears in the London Philatelist of November 1910 in a paper entitled "The Colonial perforations of Queensland" by L.L.R. Hausburg. On page 261 he notes "With figures in all corners, watermark Q & Crown, perf. 12 x 9½ 1d, vermilion" This is a clear description of the 1897-1907 issue rather than the 1896 issue with figures in lower corners only. Equally it is not the 1907 to 1911 issue which was watermarked Crown over A
Stanley Gibbons listed the item in their Monthly Journal for May 1911, page 181:
Queensland-Our publishers have shown us the 1d of 1896 with a compound perforation which is quite new to them for this stamp. It is 12 x 9½, the same combination as occurred in the case of the 2d of 1887- 1889
Type 19. Wmk. Crown & Q. Type 6a perf 12 x 9½. 192a/ 1d Vermilion
The Gibbons description is also carried in the June 1911 issue of the London Philatelist, page 167, even though they had a different description in their November 1910 issue. The last sentence in the description is not accurate, as the 1887-1889 2d still listed as S.G. 183, has a perforation given as 9½x 12. One could also consider S.G. 176-178 which also carries this combination of perforation.
A query on the description in Stanley Gibbons Monthly Journal first appears in the Australian Philatelist of September 1911, page 5:
We notice that Stanley Gibbons Monthly Journal chronicles the 1896 1d (Queensland), with figures in lower comers only, as perf. 12 x 9½, We have seen copies of the 1d with four figures perforated in this manner. Mr Hausburg also mentions them in his article "On the perforations of Queensland" It is possible that our friends have, by an oversight, chronicled the wrong 1d
The Australian Stamp Journal of February 1912, page 56, follows in a similar vein and asks the question "Have Messrs Gibbons chronicled the wrong stamp?"
To support the item listed in Stanley Gibbons Part 1 catalogue from 1913-1917, one needs to show the existence of the 1896 1d in lower corners perforated 12 x 9½ and so far, no such stamp has been sighted. The stamp listed by Hausburg was the 1d in four corners of 1897-1907, confirmation
of the existence of this item occurs in the Australian Philatelist of September 1911 and the Australian Stamp Journal of February 1912. Mr Griffiths has subsequently turned up this stamp in 1994. It is most likely that the stamp referred to in the note under Queensland SG 254 in the 1994 SG Part 1, is the 1d in four corners of 1897-1907, not the 1d in lower corners of 1896.
The Catalogue Notes
The note as read in its original form states that the item previously listed has been withdrawn because of evidence that shows that it was printed outside the Government Printing Office and was not an official issue. Unfortunately there is little indication of where this printing may have been.
By using the term printed outside the original note implies that the plates were taken out of the Queensland Government Printing Office and stamps produced. This seems unlikely, and more likely could have been that unperforated sheets were perforated by commercial printers outside the Government Printing Office.
Robson Lowe in Vol. IV of The Encyclopaedia of British Empire Postage Stamps 1788- 1952, page 118, may be closer to the answer in his note on the subject: "The 1d (SG 232/3) is known perf 9½ x 12. This was produced outside the Printing Office and was unofficial". This implies that the perforation was not done in the Government Printing Office. The note in the 1994 S.G. Part 1 follows this line by implying the perforation was not an authorised issue.
Besides being a stamp dealer, Frederick Hagen also published a philatelic journal from 1894 to 1923. In addition Hagen, from around 1902, published a catalogue of Australian stamps which concentrated on Colonial issues. The item in question is not listed in the 1912 catalogue, the last before the start of World War 1, or in the 1919 edition, the first after the end of the War.
In each of the catalogue notes the term "official issue" is used, but what does this mean? Up to Federation the stamps of Queensland were produced, since 1867, by the Government Printer in Brisbane. From March 1901 until 1913 this situation continued even though the stamps were being produced for the Commonwealth Postmaster-General's Department. Studies of perforators available to the Queensland Government Printer at the time, show that a number of machines could be used at any one time. The printing staff, themselves, were not particular about which perforator was used. One could make the case that a perforator used within the premises of the Queensland Government Printer would be an authorised machine, that is one belonging to the Government. It would be difficult to ascertain if properly authorised use was made of the perforator which would make it an "official issue".
The original catalogue note in S.G. Part 1, is quite detailed and implies that the stamps were both printed and perforated outside the Queensland Government Printing Office. In the 76th edition of S.G. Part 1 (1974), the note was revised to read "the 1d perf. 12 x 9½ was privately printed". This was subsequently revised in the 87th edition of 1979 to its current form. The second revision of the Gibbons note and the note in the Robson Lowe Encyclopaedia imply that the perforation was done outside the Queensland Government Printing Office and that it was not authorised by the correct authorities.
CENSUS
Material included in this census covers that noted after 1904 and is not related to the material of the 1901-1902 episode.
Griffiths, 1994, lists the following:
- a mint, left perforated marginal block of four, with a pair of "staple like" holes in the margin
- a used block of four postmarked at Kilkivan in 1905. The month on the illustration looks like "DE" (December).
The Australian Stamp Journal, edited by J.H. Smyth of Castlereagh Street, Sydney, lists the following in its February 1912 issue
- a mint pair
- a used pair postmarked Kangaroo Point (a suburb of Brisbane)
- a used pair with imperforate margin, postmarked Aug 13 with year and town unreadable
- a used block of four postmarked Kilkivan DEC 19.06.
- a block of 8, no indication whether mint or used
It should be noted that Smyth gives a date of 1906 for his Kilkivan block whereas Griffiths gives a date of 1905 for his. It may well be that one of the dates has been misread due to poor inking or over inking of the postmark. Frederick Hagen in the Australian Philatelist of September 1911 notes that he has seen copies of the stamp, as does Hausburg in the London Philatelist of November 1910.
DISCUSSION
The Perforators
Students of the postage stamps of Queensland will be aware that line perforators gauging 12 and 9½ were used on the issues of 1882-83 and 1887-89. It needs to be shown that these perforators were available in the early Commonwealth period (1901-1913). There have been three major studies concerning the perforators of Queensland, Hausburg 1910, Dalby 1913, and J.H. Chapman, in Basset Hull, 1930.
Chapman gives the most detailed analysis of perforators used by the Queensland Government Printer for postage stamp production from 1862:
A 1862 single line hand machine gauging 12½to 13½ (1862 to 1866)
B 1862 single line treadle gauging 12½ to 12½ (1863 to 1878) BI 1890 vertical comb treadle gauging 12½ x 12½ (1890 to 1913)
C 1874 single line treadle gauging 12 to 12½ (1874 to 1906)
D 1883 single line rotary gauging 9½ (1884 to 1887)
E 1889 vertical comb treadle gauging 12½ x 12½ (not used, converted to E1)
E1 1900 single line treadle gauging 12½ irregular (1900 to 1913)
Other machines are listed, but they do not relate to the period under investigation. The Queensland Government Printer commenced perforating stamps in Brisbane in 1862 using a single line, hand machine made by Messrs Partridge and Son of Birmingham. (Machine A). A second machine, also a line perforator, was purchased later that year and first used in 1863 (Machine B) and used on stamps until around 1878. The Kimber and Hughes machine gauge 12 (Machine C), was purchased in 1874 and continued in use to around 1906. In 1883 a gauge 9½ machine was purchased. Chapman notes that this was rarely used on postage stamps. In 1889 a comb perforator was purchased. (Machine E), but was found to be unsuitable for perforating Queensland postage stamps. In 1890 to overcome this difficulty, Machine B was converted by J. Buncle & Co of Melbourne, from a line perforator to a comb perforator (Machine B1) and remained in use on postage stamps until 1913. Machine E was converted to a line perforator (Machine El) around 1900 and remained in use until 1913.
Dalby claims that the 9½ line perforator was sent from Brisbane to Port Moresby when the Papuan Government Printer was established, Hausburg and Chapman in Basset Hull contend this view, saying the 9½ line perforator was in Brisbane in 1901. It was the 1862 13 line perforator which was sent to Port Moresby in October 1901 where it was used to perforate items such as registration receipts.
Chapman notes that the line 9½ perforator was acquired in 1883 by the Government Printing Office as distinct from the Lithographic Office. In October 1901 it was transferred to the book binding department of the Queensland Government Printer. Hausburg in Gibbons Stamp Weekly of 18 November 1905, page 346, supports Chapman: "When in Brisbane early this year I went over the Government Stamp Printing Office, and there saw the 9½ machine (perforator), and obtained a pull from it". Hausburg does not differentiate between the Queensland Government Printer and the section that printed postage stamps. He also notes that he was able to obtain a pull, sometime later, from the machine that had been sent to Papua.
Both Smyth, 1912, and Griffiths, 1994, note that the stamps were perforated 12 horizontally and 9½ vertically. It can be seen that perforators of these gauges were most probably used by the Queensland Government Printer in the period 1900 to 1910.
Some thought should be given to the hypothetical situation of Government Printer checkers, or postal staff, finding imperforate sheets. Such items could have been destroyed or these could have been sent back for re-perforating. In such a scenario the existence of blocks of four would imply sheets with more than two vertical rows imperforate, which seems unlikely.
Postal Rates
Most postage stamps exist because they prepay a postage rate. In Queensland during the period 1901 to 1911, the 1d rate prepaid postcards, printed matter and commercial papers. The 1d value would have been in reasonable demand but not as high as the letter stamp of 2d.
Smyth, September 1901, notes that he received a copy of the Queensland 1d in four corners on cover. The cost of a letter from Queensland to Sydney in the period June to September 1901, should have been 2d. What other stamp(s) were on the envelope addressed to Mr Smyth or was it underpaid?
The Trade
Griffiths, 1994, page 67, notes that "I believe that a stamp dealer operated from Kilkivan in this period and I am earnestly searching for information on this man". Considering the geographic location of Kilkivan it seems unlikely that a stamp dealer would have operated from the town. However, there is evidence to show otherwise.
Kilkivan is now a small town midway on the railway line between the main north coast line and Kingaroy. From the 1890's to the start of World War I it was a gold mining town. which had a population well in excess of that of today.
The person Mr Griffiths may be looking for is J.E. Newell Bull who moved about the Gympie goldfields from the 1890's to around 1901. In August 1894 the minutes of the Sydney Philatelic Club show J.E. Newell Bull writing from Gunalda as editor of Australian Stamp News, offering the journal to the members at a halfpenny per copy per month. The offer was declined.
Smyth, writing in Australian Journal of Philately October 1904, page 3, showed that this journal first appeared in July 1893 and ran through to August 1894, with Gunalda as the address of the publication. This information was repeated by R. Lloyd-Smith in Philately From Australia, March 1968, page 61.
In 1895 and 1896 Bull was connected with the Gympie Stamp Club. There is no information currently known of his whereabouts for 1897. In April 1898, Bull recommenced. the Australian Stamp News with the publication address at Kilkivan Junction. This second series ran through to December of 1898. In January 1899 the Australian Philatelist, page 61, notes that "the publishers have acquired the only other philatelic paper in the colonies the Australian Stamp News, conducted by Mr Newell Bull of Queensland". After the purchase of his journal Bull advertised in the Australian Philatelist of April 1899, giving a postal address of Mount Pleasant, Gympie. This is the last trace of this early Australian stamp dealer.
Queensland Post Offices 1842-1980, Receiving Offices 1869-1927 by Joan Frew is an excellent source on Post & Telegraph Offices in Queensland. Frew notes, page 317, that the first town to be called Kilkivan was on West Coast Creek, 2.5 miles south east of the present site. This office operated between 1868 and 1876. The present Kilkivan was opened as Neureum in 1876 and changed its name to Kilkivan in 1880. The railway came to the town in 1886 and from 1891 to 1907 the post office was conducted from the railway station.
The railway reached Kilkivan Junction in August 1881 and a post office opened at the railway station in October 1885, having previously been at Kanyan about one mile away. The office changed its name to Theebine in May 1910 and continued operations until June 1977.
Newell Bull was at Kilkivan Junction in 1898 but not at Kilkivan which is some distance away. Between 1884 and 1901 Bull, who traded in stamps and who was connected with organised philately in Gympie, moved about the goldfields. There currently is no evidence that he was active in 1905.
To get a better understanding of the relationship of the stamp trade and collectors at the end of the nineteenth century, one should also look at the major population centres. Brisbane is a more likely place for the involvement of the stamp trade. Unfortunately, very little about the stamp trade in Brisbane at the turn of the century was recorded. The best evidence is advertisements in the journals of the period. The difficulty is both the Australian Philatelist, the Australian Journal of Philately and the Australian Stamp Journal were connected to dealers. On some occasions advertising was accepted and at other times it was not. One also has to hope that those who bound the journals kept the covers which contained the advertising.
A correspondent in contemporary Australian philatelic journals was W.H. Robinson. Robinson, who in a 1914 hand-out, stated that he started in the stamp trade around 1902. In the Australian Philatelist for October 1898 there is an advertisement for W.H. Robinson with the address given as "Swan Hill", Brisbane. At this point it is not sure if the address is the name of a house or the name of a suburb which was subsequently renamed. No suburb of that name currently exists in Brisbane. In September 1905, Robinson's address was given as 213 Queen Street, Brisbane, the street number varied from 211 to 213. In March 1914 he advertised the Queensland 6d in lower corners, only giving his business address as 282 Queen Street, Brisbane. W.E. Johnson, writing in the Australian Philatelist of August 1912, page 162, noted that W.H. Robinson was the only stamp dealer in Brisbane at that time. At this point in time there is no information on his private address which could tie him to the Kangaroo Point area or Kilkivan.
F.W. Reid came from Brisbane in late 1898. Hagen's article on Reid does not go into detail as to where he operated in Queensland, but he was in the stamp trade during the time in question, as well as trading in Sydney, and he had been connected to the episode of November 1902. Reid left Sydney quickly in November 1902 for America. Some time later he returned to Sydney and traded until May 1921.
Two Sydney dealers connected with the recording of both the 1902 episode and the second episode of 1910-1912, are Frederick Hagen and J.H. Smyth. Frederick Hagen was born at Rushcutters Bay, Sydney in 1860. He apprenticed as a lithographic plate maker and printer with S.T. Leigh and Co., who printed the Samoa Express issue. Between 1881 and 1886 he was trading in New Caledonia with his brother. He bought out the stamp dealer Dawson Vindin in October 1893, and remained in business until 1921, although the company name was retained for longer. From 1900 to 1905 his business address was given as Elizabeth Street, Sydney. From 1905 to 1914 the company traded from 182 Pitt Street. Hagen was publisher of the Australian Philatelist from 1893 to 1921. During the period we are considering, the editor of the Australian Philatelist was E.D.E. Van Weenen, who had developed several major collections of Queensland.
James Hodgens Smyth was born in Belfast in 1856 and migrated to Australia in 1890. In 1893 he became a stamp dealer in partnership with T.H. Nicolle. This was dissolved in 1902. From 1900 to 1905 Smyth was the editor of the Australian Journal of Philately, in which publication the earliest record of the Queensland Id of 1897-1907 perf. 12 x 9½ occurs. Smyth joined Fred Hagen's business in 1905 as company secretary, and was editor of the Australian Philatelist from 1905 to 1910. In late 1910 Smyth set up his own company dealing out of 50 Castlereagh Street. After Smyth died in 1923, his company name continued until the 1950's under Romney Gibbons.
In light of the 1901 occurrence being recorded, apparently soon after it happened, it is reasonable to ask why the 1905-6 occurrence was not mentioned until 1910, and not fully recorded until 1912. In the case of the Australian journals, the people in positions of editor were involved on both occasions. The first is quickly shown to be a fabrication whilst the second is regarded as possibly a production experiment. Most new issue items from Queensland and the other States in the period 1901 to 1913 were recorded very soon after happening. It is unusual for something not to be recorded for 4-5 years.
There is evidence of a stamp dealer in the Gympie area in the 1890's. However, the trail peters out in 1899 and there is thus no evidence to show a stamp dealer operating in the Kilkivan area in 1905. Is it a coincidence that both recorded blocks are postmarked at Kilkivan? There was only one stamp dealer recorded in Brisbane prior to World War I. Both Hagen & Smyth were instrumental in recording the major philatelic happenings in the early decades of this century.
The Collectors
Very little of the early philatelic history of Queensland seems to have survived. There are a few references to the Brisbane Philatelic Club, which seems to have been formed in May 1906, and lasted for a little over 12 months. Hagen attended a meeting of the club in June 1906 whilst on holidays in Brisbane, at which time he saw the collections of Dr Lucas and Mr Appleby.
The minutes of the Sydney Philatelic Club recorded that W. Russell Wilkins of Brisbane displayed a "magnificent collection of Queensland" in February 1905, which he had purchased from an artist. Wilkins sold this collection to L.L.R. Hausburg when he visited Australia in 1905.
W.E. Appleby is regularly quoted by J.H. Smyth in Hagen's Australian Philatelist from 1906 onwards. He was described as a "close student of all philatelic technicalities". Appleby became the second president of the Brisbane Philatelic Club in May 1907, although the club ceased soon afterwards.
W.E. Johnson, writing in the Australian Philatelist August 1912, page 162, concerning a business trip to Brisbane, noted that the Reverend James Mursell FRPS1 was a leading Brisbane philatelist. T.F. Illidge and J. Smith also had impressive collections of Queensland colonial issues. As regards organised philatelic clubs, Johnson noted: "Generally speaking, I found that Brisbane stamp-lovers suffered by the absence of a live healthy philatelic club, such as is possessed by the other three principal cities of the Commonwealth, most of the collectors being on intimate terms with only two or three others, and their opportunities for comparing notes and discussing matters of philatelic interest were therefore very limited".
The Queensland Philatelic Society was formed in June 1921 (see the Australian Philatelist, July 1921, page 161). A contemporary report in the Victorian Philatelic Record, published by the Philatelic Society of Victoria, mentions that the Queensland Philatelic Society was formed on the same night as the dissolution of the Australian and Foreign Stamp Club which had been formed in Brisbane in 1912. A check of the Australian Philatelist and the Australian Philatelic Journal for the period 1912 to 1921 brings to light no reference to this club. As Johnson makes no mention of it in his article in July 1912, it appears to have been formed after that date. The club is important as it shows that there was a stamp club in Brisbane around the time the second occurrence of the Id 1897-1907, perf. 12 x 9½ was recorded.
Smyth, 1912, notes that the item was drawn to his attention by "one of our Brisbane friends who is now on a visit to this city". This person is also described as "He does not pretend to be an advanced philatelist". Such a description would not seem to fit W.H. Robinson who was involved in the stamp trade. In 1916 Smyth mentions W. Russell Wilkins as a correspondent, but at this point the firm identity of Smyth's correspondent is yet to be determined.
Although little has been recorded about the early philatelic history of Queensland there is evidence to show that the hobby had many adherents in south-eastern Queensland prior to World War I. As well there were collectors of Queensland at the time in other States as well as overseas.
Booklet Origin?
Griffiths, 1994, suggests that the staple like holes in his marginal block of four may indicate that these stamps came from a booklet. This would be the £1 booklets which were on sale from 1904 to 1913. A check of Commonwealth booklet material prior to the George VI issues shows that the binding was always by staple.
J.H. Smyth in Australian Journal of Philately, March 1904, page 71, notes that on page 204 of Commonwealth Postal Guide of January 1904, there is an announcement stating: "Booklets of one penny or two penny postage stamps are sold at one pound each, the face value of the stamps contained therein". In the Australian Journal of Philately, April 1904 issue, page 82, Smyth noted "The Victoria postal authorities are selling halfpenny, one penny and two pence stamps in small books with a ruled off account form at the end". Kellow's Index of the Philatelic Literature of the Commonwealth does not list anything on the Commonwealth £1 booklet until the March 1950 issue of Philately from Australia, pages 6-9, which merely acknowledges its existence in the content of other Commonwealth booklets. The March 1956 issue of Philately from Australia, page 3, gives more detail on the make up of these booklets, but records nothing as regards perforation and layout.
The first account based on archival sources of the early Commonwealth booklets was written by Phil Collas in the April 1954 issue of the Philatelic Bulletin who notes that because of poor sales some States removed the covers from their booklet stocks and sold the remainders as sheet stamps. This was the basis for the account which appeared in the Brusden-White column of Stamp News in April 1995, page 24.
The Australian Commonwealth Specialist Catalogue, Brusden-White, 1995 records the following in regards the 1904 £1 booklet:
Booklets of stamps were introduced as an experiment following the suggestion of Mr. Frank Nixon of Rockhampton, Queensland made in June 1903. The Commonwealth Stamp Printer, Mr J. B. Cooke agreed to the manufacture of the books for each of the six States, and each Deputy Postmaster-General was requested to despatch to Adelaide sufficient stamps to make up 200 books for the 1d and 26 stamps to be sold at £1. Production of the £1 booklets containing 240 1d stamps was continued up to the introduction of the Kangaroo stamps in 1913. From 1909 booklet production was located in Melbourne following J. B. Cooke's relocation to Melbourne to establish the Commonwealth Stamp Printing office … No attempt was made to match the contents of a booklet with the back cover illustration. Stamps for insertion in the booklets were taken from current stock and most, if not all, watermark and perforation combinations current between 1904 and 1912 are theoretically possible
Make-up: Front cover in black on thin red surfaced-card, white inside, as illustrated. Inside front and back covers are printed with a grid of rectangles for recording use of stamps
Back cover showing illustrations of State G.PO
Two sheets of 120 1d stamps were folded in quarters and affixed by two staples to covers, the folds were not severed. Tissue paper was inserted between the opposing gummed sides.
Griffiths, 1994, suggests that a coarser perforation would make it easier to separate into pairs, which could be used for the then current inland rate. It should be noted that the census records pairs and blocks of four, but no singles. To make up a booklet of value one pound, 240 1d stamps would be required. Considering the then current sheet make up of Queensland issues, each booklet would require four panes each consisting of ten stamps across and six stamps deep. The illustration of a 1904 booklet cover in Kellow's Stamps of Victoria shows two staples were required to bind the stamps between the covers. Staple holes are thus likely to occur in the left margin next to rows 2 and 5 on the top half, and next to rows 8 and 11 on the bottom half. It would be useful if either of these positions contained "plateable" flaws.
The case for the item coming from a booklet is based on the "staple like holes" and the coarse vertical perforations which could be used to separate the stamps into pairs. Such a case would gain support if plateable flaws could be located in the stamps next to the "staple like holes".
Sheet Stamp?
J.H. Smyth in 1912 suggests that the stamp may have come from sheets. Smyth notes that in 1905 the 12 x 13 comb perforator broke down and that a line perforator(s) was is used in its place. Gibbons and Robson Lowe contend that the date is 1903, but all agree that the line perforator was used.
Most catalogues list the Queensland 1897-1907 issue as comb perforation 12½, 13. A line perforation 12 is listed, but there is some contention as to the date of issue and the catalogues give only a year of issue, not a month. Stanley Gibbons Part 1 and Robson Lowe Encyclopaedia Vol. 4 give 1903 as the date for the line perforation 12. The Australian Philatelist, July 1906, page 133, noted that "the 1d (Queensland) perf. 12 was issued some time previously". Hagen's 1919 edition, gives a date of 1905, which ties in with Smyth's comment of 1912 that the issue came out on the later date.
Chapman, in Basset Hull, goes some way to explaining this difficulty. On page 50 Chapman notes
1903-1904. This use of El machine indicates that the B1 machine may have been under repair, and supports the statement, in the description of the B1 machine, that about 1984 it was fitted with smaller pins and a new bed plate
Following on:
1905. At this dare it is evident that there was a stress of work on the B1 comb machine, as we find the current ½ d, 1d, and 2d perforated by the C machine, and no doubt some sheets of the former were passed through the E1 machine
On page 47 he notes that the Hughes & Kimber perforator (Machine C) was used on "the current ½1d, 1d & 2d issued in 1905"
It seems that line perforation occurred in both 1903 and 1905 of the three low values, and that as the catalogues have been unable to differentiate between the different perforation heads, the earliest date was used. It is interesting to note that both line perforators may have been used in 1905, which could be seen as support for Smyth's contention that the Id perf. 12 x 9½ was an experiment from which trial sheets were inadvertently issued.
Line perforation is a tedious job. All the vertical designs of the Queensland 1897-1907 issue consisted of sheets of 120 (10 across x 12 down) which would have required 11 separate vertical strokes and 13 separate horizontal strokes of a line perforator, making a total of 24 operations to perforate a single sheet. A comb perforator would need either 11 or 13 operations depending on how the sheet was fed, cutting the production time in half. If the printer had to use a line perforator, then the ability to use two different perforation machines, even of different gauge, would have cut production time.
To be considered a sheet stamp, one needs to look at how the standard 1897-1907 Queensland stamps were perforated and what line perforators would have been available to the Queensland Government Printer in event of a mechanical failure.
If these stamps did come from an issued sheet, one needs to consider the "staple like holes". It would therefore be useful to record any marginal inclusions of the Queensland issues of 1897 to 1912. If the characteristics of the perforators "Machine C" and "Machine E1" were known, it may be possible to determine patterns of use in the period 1903 to 1906.
Coil Stamp?
If the issue was authorised, that is produced by the Queensland Government Printer, it is most likely that it was a booklet, or an unaccepted trial perforation of sheet stamps. We should, however, consider any other possibilities
When considering coil issues, stamp collectors normally envisage a vending machine. Collas when writing on the subject in the Philatelic Bulletin, follows this line, but also mentions that coils were prepared for stamp affixing devices. Little, if any, has been recorded about the use of coil fed stamp affixing machines in Australia. Most of the Commonwealth OS coil production was used in such machines, and it is likely that there were also machines with private companies. For such a system to work the Post Office would be required to supply made up coil rolls.
The use of large perforations to assist in separation of coils is documented with the George VI recess issues of 1937-38. Kellow's index lists 1908 as the earliest trial of postal vending machines in Australia for which stamps are known. The lack of a written record does not necessarily mean something did not exist; compare the £1 booklet issue of 1904 not being recorded in the literature until 1950.
As the perf. 9½ lines are vertical, if a coil is to be considered then it would have to be a horizontal strip to take advantage of the coarse perforation.
Security
One of the tenets of stamp printing is security. The workers are dealing with something akin to legal tender. A.R. Butler, in a paper on Queensland 6d in lower corners, Australian States Study Group Newsletter, April 1993, page 14, notes "Security in the (Queensland) Government Printing Office was lax and there can be no doubt that employees were well aware that collectors were always looking for varieties". In relation to the 6d in lower corners, Butler lists the proof material which has survived. Butler, page 10, notes "at this time there were those in the (Queensland) Government Printing Office, who officially or unofficially, had experience in the preparation of 'Funny' coloured composite proofs and several varieties of these are available to Queensland collectors".
Hooper, whilst researching in the Australian Archives, Melbourne (MP 341/1/06/5778) noted an Auditor-General's report dated November 1905, covering the period November 1904 to April 1905, relating to the removal of revenue stamps from the Queensland Government Printer. L.L.R Hausburg is mentioned, as well as K. Voller, who is listed as Officer in Charge of the branch. It may be coincidental that a new Queensland Government Printer was appointed in 1906
Johnson, in the Australian Stamp Journal, August 1912, page 162, lists the following in the Queensland section of the collection of T.F. Illidge:
1882 2d imperforate pair, serrated stamps in the shape of a pair with plain serrate and perforations, but without the serrate down the middle of the pair, and a block perforated properly but serrated at side only.
Chapman, page 48, describes Illidge as "at one time custodian of Queensland plates and stamps". Samuel Dalby, in the Philatelic Journal of Great Britain, March 1916 page 95, whilst discussing the Queensland 6d in lower corners, mentions "conversing last year with a veteran official, who twenty years back, handled most of the (Queensland) stamps for distribution". Such a description could fit Illidge. There are sufficient accounts that some unusual things happened during the latter period of stamp production by the Queensland Government Printer.
CONCLUSION
A review of the literature shows that the Queensland 1d of 1897 to 1907 perforation 12. x 9½ weaves an intriguing story. The first recorded occurrence was 1901 and the stamp was subsequently dismissed as a forgery because the 9½ perforator had been sent to Papua. The literature, in fact, shows that another perforator went to Papua and that the 9½ perforator remained in Brisbane.
The stamp was recorded again from 1910-1912. Contemporary recorders imply this item was produced on the premises of the Queensland Government Printer. Stanley Gibbons listed it in their catalogue between 1912 and 1917 but they recorded the wrong design, the 1d in lower corners instead of the 1d in four corners. If anything can be said about this item it is that confusion occurred throughout its record.
The "staple like holes" may indicate a booklet origin, equally there are other possibilities as to what the item may have been, such as a sheet stamp, or a coil stamp for stamp affixing machines.
The evidence for involvement of the stamp trade seems to be indirect. The Gympie goldfields did have a stamp dealer in the 1890's and one of the addresses he used in 1898 was Kilkivan Junction. At present there is no evidence to show that there was a stamp dealer in the area in 1905. Brisbane prior to World War I had only one stamp dealer who was aware of what was coming on the market. There were plenty of collectors who were interested in collecting the stamps of their Colony/State.
A.J. Griffiths has raised an interesting item. A search of the literature shows a complex story for which parts of the mystery may have been solved. As with the conclusion of Mr Griffiths article, one asks collectors with issues from the later period of Queensland to look at their holdings in the hope that some of the points raised may be dealt with and the period demystified.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
From the gathering of the data through the assembly to the apocalypse of punctuation, there was a small group who kept this project going. My thanks to Bill Wilson, Ben Palmer and John Crowsley for opening up a number of leads and providing access to the literature. Thanks also to those who read the various drafts and made comments, Richard Peck, Ken Sparks, Bernard Beston and Geoffrey Kellow. To Joan Orr and Marc Jennison who carried out the proof reading my sincere thanks in refining this project.
No comments:
Post a Comment