The Stamps of Canada. Bertram W. H. Poole
difficult to distinguish between the laid and the wove papers”, while Mr. Howes states, “It happens sometimes that it is quite difficult to distinguish the laid paper, a very careful scrutiny or even the extreme resort to the benzine cup being necessary to bring out the watermarked lines, and perhaps then only in a half suspicious way.” Writing in the Canada Stamp Sheet (Vol. IV, page 142), concerning the 12d value, Mr. John N. Luff stated, “It is my opinion that both the wove and laid papers are quite genuine and I think it is possible that both varieties might occur though there was only one lot sent out by the printers. It does not, of course, follow that the entire batch was printed on the same day or that two varieties of paper may not have been used. The early printers were not always very particular about their paper, provided it was somewhat alike in a general way. Some collectors claim that laid paper is often of such nature that the lines do not show in some parts of the sheet, and I believe there is evidence to support this theory.”
It is quite within the bounds of possibility that the paper generally used for these stamps was intended to be what is known as “wove” to the trade, and that the “laid lines” originated in a purely accidental manner and are rather on the order of the “laid paper” varieties found in connection with the first 8c and 12c stamps of Sarawak. In short, it is probable that in some sheets at any rate the laid lines showed only in part. At best, therefore, it would appear that the “wove” is but a minor variety of the “laid” or vice versa, and while both varieties, as well as other varieties easily distinguished, such as the very thin and very thick, are of interest to specialists, they throw no light whatsoever on the history of the stamps, and do not, from all the available facts, represent separate printings, so that their philatelic importance (aside from comparative rarity as minor varieties, with its accompanying variation in monetary worth) is not of a particularly high order.
One peculiarity resulting from the use of papers of such varying quality is an apparent difference in the size of stamps of the same denomination. For instance, the stamps on the thinner kinds of paper generally measure 22 × 18 mm., while those on thicker paper measure 22¾ × 17½ mm. and papers of other thicknesses provide still other measurements. These differences in size (fairly considerable in relation to the comparatively small area of a postage stamp) proved very puzzling to collectors of twenty years or so ago for, though it was felt that the stamps came from the same plates, it was at the same time found impossible to account for such varieties, except on the hypothesis that all the impressions of the plate were not all applied alike or that the hardening of the plates before printing resulted in contraction in parts with a consequent variation in the size of different impressions. The same sorts of varieties have been noticed in many other stamps printed by the line engraved process, notably in such stamps as the “pence” Ceylons, and proper investigation finally proved beyond a shadow of doubt that these differences in size were due to nothing more than uneven contraction of the paper after printing. It must be understood that in printing stamps by the line-engraved method the paper usually has to be slightly wetted (this was an invariable rule at the time these early Canada stamps were printed) and it can be easily seen that the wetting would have quite different results on different qualities of paper. Some would be more absorbent than others and would stretch while damp and contract again when drying. The amount of wetting administered would, also, result in differences even in the same qualify of paper. These variations in the size of the design, therefore, while interesting in themselves as examples of paper vagaries, are of little, if any, philatelic importance.
Bi-sected stamps were not used in Canada to anything like the same extent that similar varieties were used in the other British North American provinces. The 6d is catalogued as having been divided diagonally and the halves used as 3d stamps, though there can have been no real necessity for such bi-section. A bi-sected stamp of quite another character was mentioned in the Monthly Journal for April, 1898, as follows:—
The Post Office describes a so-called “split provisional” of the early 3d stamp, which is described as consisting of one and a half of the unperforated 3d on wove, upon an entire envelope postmarked “Port Hope, July 16th, 1855, Canada, Paid 10c.” Our contemporary does not appear to perceive that the postmark plainly indicates that the supposed half stamp is really only a badly cut copy; the 3d of Canada passed for 5 cents, and as this letter is plainly marked “Paid 10c”, the stamps upon it evidently passed as two 3d, not as one and a half, which would have corresponded to no rate of postage.
The same journal, two months later, made more extended reference to this variety and while its bona-fides as a “split” is established its use as a half stamp is as much a mystery as ever. We cannot do better than give the paragraph in full:—
In the New Issues column of our number for April, we called in question the character of a supposed “split” three pence stamp of Canada, which had been chronicled in the Post Office, New York. In reply to our criticism, Messrs. Morgenthau & Co., the publishers of that magazine, have most kindly forwarded to us the letter bearing the divided stamp, and have requested our opinion upon it. The specimen is such a curious one and presents, we think, such a puzzle for philatelists, that we have taken the liberty—which we hope its owner will pardon—of having a photographic block made from it, and we give a full size illustration, showing both the stamps and the postmarks, herewith. As our readers may perceive, we were quite wrong in suggesting that the “split” stamp was merely a badly cut copy, as it appears to have been carefully bi-sected diagonally and to have been intended to pass as a half stamp, making up, with the entire stamp to which it is attached, a rate of 4½d. If this were all, though the specimen would be a great rarity—indeed, we believe it to be unique—it would not be necessarily a great puzzle to us. It is true that we do not know of any 4½d rate in Canada, and there never was a 4½d stamp in use there; but still, such a rate might have existed, although there was no possible means of making it up except by the use of at least three ½d stamps; but the puzzling part about this letter is that it is addressed from Port Hope in Canada to New York, the single rate from Canada to the United States was 10 cents; the letter is marked “CANADA—PAID 10 Cts.” by the side of the stamps, and that rate was sixpence in Canadian currency. The whole document appears to us to be perfectly genuine and bona-fide; we have examined it with a skeptical mind and a powerful magnifying glass, and we can only say that if it is a “fake” it is wonderfully well done. On the other hand, if it is genuine, the half stamp must have done duty as a whole one, because it certainly took two 3d stamps to make up the 10 cents rate. The puzzle remains a puzzle to us, but we are grateful to Messrs. Morgenthau for their courteous reply to what may have appeared a captious criticism.
Reference List.
1851. Engraved and printed by Rawdon, Wright, Hatch & Edson, New York, on laid or wove paper. Imperforate.
1. 3d vermilion, Scott's No. 1 or No. 4.
2. 6d violet, Scott's No. 2 or No. 5.
3. 12d black, Scott's No. 3 or No. 6.
Chapter IV.—The Second Issue.
Top
The third report of the Postmaster-General for Canada, dated March 31st, 1854, refers to a change in the rates of postage on single letters sent abroad and also mentions the possibility of additions to the meagre set of three values then current, viz.:—
In March, 1854, the charge on packet letters between Canada and the United Kingdom and most foreign countries was reduced by the Imperial Government from 1s. 2d. sterling to 8d sterling the ½ oz., when sent in the closed mails through the United States, and from 1s sterling to 6d when sent from a provincial port—Quebec and Halifax. Should no further changes be likely soon to take place in the charges on the correspondence with England, it would promote the public convenience to procure postage stamps of the value of 10d and 7½d respectively, to correspond with the present packet charges.
In the Postmaster-General's fourth annual report, issued in the