R191: Varnish Bands, not Squares, and a Quadruple Surcharge

Like last Sunday, this post covers the final set of 1898 dollar value revenue stamps, but this time only quirks involving the $2 value.  In particular, quirks regarding the nature of the varnish applied to the stamps that received the wrong overprint, the overprint for the "gray" $2 stamp, #R185.  

What I'm calling a varnish band appears to occur across versions of R191 that have R185's numeral overprint, including R191a (single overprint) and R191d (triple overprint), and an unlisted R191 with  a quadruple overprint.  Examples of these 3 stamps are featured below.  As you may know, some, if not most examples of the normal versions of R190 to R194 have a square of varnish in the center of the stamps that underlays a numeral overprint to help foil cancel washing and reuse.

The post last Sunday on the tendency of these stamps to change color toward the hue of the R184 to R189 raised the prospect that the varnish square might be responsible for the color changes.  Whether that is the case or not, the question prompted David Thompson's inspection of his copy of R191a, a version of R191 with a single R185 type overprint.  He noted that the stamp does not have a varnish square but a varnish rectangle or band across the center of the stamp, and despite appearing unused, has no gum.  A scan of his stamp follows, along with a version that helps highlight the varnish "band":

So after Dave told me about his stamp, I looked at the only R191 I have that has the R185 overprint.  The stamp has the same varnish band, not square, appears unused, and has no gum.  It also happens to have a quadruple overprint, with a strong image to the upper north of the main overprint, a slightly weaker one on the right, and very weak image slightly above the main 2:

So with access to both my stamp and Dave's, I figured that despite the listing in Scott that these must really be printer's waste, produced in trials to sort out the application and the use of varnish.  That the BEP used the R185 overprint (maybe the R191 version wasn't ready yet) seemed to help me rationalize such a thought, 

But with a bit of extra digging, an example of R191d can be found for sale on Ebay by the seller buystamps.  In addition to the varnish "band", no gum, and an unused appearance, the stamp has what appears to be George Sloane's signature on the back, which for me speaks to the legitimacy of the oddly overprinted stamps.  Somewhere I have a copy George Sloane's book with his collected columns and with all my moves I can't locate it at the moment.  I'm wondering if he might have written about these stamps.  It would be good to know if he confirmed that they were regularly issued.

I have a few dozen stamps from this series in my collection which I'll need to scrutinize.  Meanwhile, this column has prompted me to examine the Scott listing for R191 and I have a couple of questions:

• Except for David's copy of R191a, I've never seen this stamp.  Scott has them priced at only $150 unused.  Where are they?  R192 missing its overprint seems very common in comparison.
• I've never seen R192b, a stamp with the R185 overprint that is printed in violet.  Where is this stamp?  By comparison to R191a it must be quite rare given its Scott value.

Color Changelings and Scott R190 to R194

Examples of Scott R190 showing color changeling progression. Stamp #1 is a normal stamp for reference. Stamp #s  2 & 4 are unused with original gum.

The post from October 9 explored fugitive ink on R183.  The unusual quality of that ink returned my attention to the R190 to R194 series of dollar values, which also seem to have an unusual type of ink, but unlike R183, there is no term or explanation like "fugitive" to explain this quality.  To the casual eye, these stamps were printed in green, with a black ornamental overprint corresponding to the value of the stamp.  Underlying the overprint, and not always noticed by the casual observer, is a small square of varnish (Scott notes that the varnish is on "some" stamps), added to show evidence of cancel "washing" -- the varnish is water soluble and washes off, taking with it the center of the ornamental overprint as well as any overlaying cancel.  

The green R190-R194 set of documentary dollar values is less common than the other sets as they were issued only months before the expiration of the tax period.  Production required three passes through the presses to create the final product - from original stamp impression to varnish to overprint/surcharge.

Occasionally a collector of these stamps may come across a color changeling -- a stamp in which the green has begun to change, and in some extreme cases change to a color that nearly matches the so-called "gray" color of the R184 to R189 series of stamps (the color of these stamps is a warm, sepia-like tone, not a cold gray in any way). An unused copy of R191 demonstrates this phenomenon (stamp #7 below):

The back of the stamp is marked in pencil by a previous collector as a copy of R185 with an R191 overprint.  The collection that it came from (I believe a different collector than the one that wrote the pencil note on the back of the stamp) also had a note from the collector on the side as an R185 with an error.  The color change on this stamp is extreme and seems rare according to my limited experience.  But the ink changeling phenomenon on these stamps exists, is capable of fooling relatively advanced collectors, and doesn't seem to have a clear explanation by my limited research.  More common are stamps that show lesser hints of color change, like those in examples 2-5 above.

I've never seen ink change like this on any other US issues, revenue or postage.  What is certainly unique about these stamps among US issues is the varnish square.  Richard Friedberg figures that the varnish is somehow responsible for the color changes, and it might have been, but the evidence doesn't lend itself neatly to thinking that varnish contact made the difference.  Consider stamps 3 and 4 below, where the stamps remain somewhat green closer to the varnish.  And, if the varnish was the cause of a change like that in stamp #7 below, why don't we see more of these changelings?

Another question is the timing of the color changes.  Did the changeling occur soon after printing?  I discount washing as a cause since some of the changelings I possess are unused stamps.  I've often wondered whether or not I've got slow changes happening to these stamps as they sit in my collection.  But I haven't noticed any color changes in the years that I've held some of them.  

Examples of Scott R191 showing color changeling progression. Stamp #1 is a normal stamp for reference.  Stamp #s 5 & 7 are unused with original gum.

Lastly, the $5 stamp, R192, provides an interesting opportunity to test varnish as a cause, as some of the stamps were issued without the varnish square or the overprint.

Examples of R192a, without overprint, and, apparently, without a varnish square. The left stamp is normal and provided for reference.  The right stamp is a color changeling.

The R192a on the right never had varnish applied.  Yet its color is clearly yellowing like many of the examples of R190 and R191 above.  In this case the explanation must involve the nature of the green ink itself.  The knowledge is likely long-gone from the BEP regarding the ink on these stamps.  But I suspect the right sort of chemist could help tell us what is happening.

I have a couple of non-changeling related questions, both involving how Scott lists these issues:  

• Scott refers to these overprints as surcharges, though the overprint does not revalue the stamp.  Why does Scott call these surcharges?
• In the "Warning" section below the image of R190 in the catalog, Scott tells us that the varnish was only applied to some stamps.  This needs to be unpacked a bit doesn't it?  First, most stamps appear to have the varnish, not "some".  Second, if cut cancels are sublisted for the 1898 dollar values, why isn't the presence of a clear overprint on used copies of R190-R194 sublisted?  And why isn't the presence of varnish sublisted?  I recognize that dealers and collectors don't seem to discriminate here and that is almost certainly the reason that varnish presence isn't listed.  But even without collector interest, the varnish clearly has an effect on these stamps, certainly with regard to how used, soaked stamps appear.  Used copies that have been soaked but retain the overprint are much more collectable to me, a bit like the lack of a cut cancel on these stamps.

New York Stock Brokers: Zimmerman & Forshay

In the membership lists of the New York Stock Exchange from 1898 through 1902, the firm of Zimmerman and Forshay come last, the usual fate of anyone whose name begins with a "Z".  There are few Zs in the lists of firms and members of the NYSE during the 1898 tax period, making cancel identification for Zimmerman and Forshay rather simple.  This is but one of 100s of firms identified as users of the 1898 series revenue stamps.

Over the past few months, David Thompson and I have been working on a comprehensive list of NYSE members that could have used stamps during the 1898 tax period.  There is still much work to do, as each list has 1100 individual members (many fewer firms though) and there are 5 relevant lists to include: 98, 99, 00, 01 and 02.  Conveniently for collectors of 1898 revenues, the membership of the NYSE ran mid-year to mid-year, coinciding with the initial use of the stamps in 1898.  Once the comprehensive list is more complete, we'll publish the document for the use of others.  

Meanwhile, I'll keep posting firms that we've identified along the way, through the use of the NYSE membership lists and King's Views of the New York Stock Exchange.

So far, we've only been able to identify Zimmerman and Forshay by their "Z. & F." cancel.  

Z. & F.

NOV

23

1901

New York Stock Brokers: William Salomon & Company

William Salomon was born in Mobile, Alabama before the Civil War.  He found his way to New York where he would eventually establish a brokerage house with one of Wall Street's best known names.  He began in the brokerage business with Speyer & Company, but would open his own shop in early 1902.

WILLIAM SALOMON & CO.

JUN

13

1902

NEW YORK.

Document fragment for taxes of $2.44.

New York Stock Brokers: John Bianchi

OCT 28 1898

JNO.  BIANCHI.

Thompson scan

JUN 3  1902

JNO. BIANCHI

Langlois scan

R192 Color Changelings?

Following my post from this past week on the so-called varnish square on the green dollar commerce stamps, Dave Thompson sent in a scan of the $2 dollar stamp below.  The stamp has the surcharged numeral of R191, but the stamp is not green.  The color is more like that of R185, the $2 gray.  The varnish square,or the lack of it, is not the issue here.  The big question here is one of color.  How did this stamp get this way?  I might have dismissed Dave's stamp as a one-off chemically induced changeling, with little philatelic significance.  But then I recalled that I might have a similar stamp in my own collection.

Dave Thompson's R191

My R191:

My stamp clearly had the varnish spot.  It appears Dave's did not.  But why are these stamps this color?  I never gave too much thought to the stamp above; it has been in my collection for years.  But now that there are two, this is a bigger deal begging for an answer.