|
Post by Ted Talks Stamps on Nov 1, 2023 15:41:03 GMT
Talk about falling down a rabbit hole, last night I started out looking up expertizing fees for APEX, PF, and BPP, which led me here and there and everywhere, and winding up on a page showing and telling about this unissued US $5,000 Documentary Revenue stamp proof, Scott R133ATC My interest was piqued by the left margin inscription, "Willcox's Chameleon Paper," which prompted a deeper dive down the rabbit hole. Created originally for use with proprietary revenue stamps, C-paper had blue and red fibers embedded in it which would change colors from any attempt to clean the cancel off. Sounds a lot like litmus paper, right? My question is, how did this work, in practice, with these stamps. Litmus paper turns red or blue in the presence of acid or alkali. If the fibers already start out red and blue, how do you detect any change? Or is this some other mechanism involved here? Inquiring minds want to know. Anybody . . . ? Anybody . . . ?
|
|
|
Post by khj on Nov 1, 2023 23:10:54 GMT
I believe the silk fibers are technically violet and pink(?). I'm really bad at distinguishing silk fibers (seriously, someone can tell the difference between emerald silk fibers and green silk fibers?!?). So don't hold me to the colors, I'm just passing along what I've read previously.
I don't think the silk fibers are related to the color change. My understanding is that the presence of silk fibers is merely a security paper identification mechanism. The fibers aren't intended to change in any way -- the mere presence of the specific colored fibers is a requirement to determine authenticity (so equivalent security function of a watermark).
Something else is added to the paper pulp to make it turn color. For this, a bit of history. Willcox paper was previously used for US currency, and later used for US revenues (2nd/3rd documentary, and some tobacco stamps which Scott does not list). Hahn of New York Stamp Club mentions a little about Chameleon Paper in his good overview article on early US stamp paper.
Willcox's patents (initial one in 1866 and then subsequent ones as he tweaked/refined the process) tell a little more, but as far as I know, don't actually give the specific components used -- I'm pretty sure I didn't read them all. But Chameleon paper works by removing color, not by re-dyeing the paper!!! So the paper is colored to begin with. In the presence of an acid, red leaches out, leaving the paper a shade of green-blue. I have seen examples of Chameleon Paper currency that has large bluish spot. When exposed to weak bases, blue leaches out, leaving a reddish tint (this, I have not seen an example of). If a strong base is used, both colors will leach out, leaving a whitish paper.
So, not quite the same as normal litmus paper (actually, the opposite). Furthermore, litmus paper color change is reversible, but not Chameleon Paper (because the dye has already leached out).
There are more details to be found in some of the specialized currency books, but all I have are the general currency catalogs.
|
|
|
Post by Ted Talks Stamps on Nov 2, 2023 14:00:20 GMT
Thanks, k. I did run across a currency forum thread where someone was comparing two ostensibly identical bills made with c-paper. One had a large area of blue tint on the left side, while the other had no blue (though, one member replied that he could see some blue in the "blank" one). It didn't seem like the board reached any consensus on what was what with the two bills.
This, then, begs the question -- what's up with the proof shown above. Did the now solid cream (buff?) colored paper begin life with a colored tint, with the color leaching out over time?
There are 25 more of these proofs extant (10 of them in the National Postal Museum). Would like to see what these all look like.
|
|
|
Post by Ted Talks Stamps on Nov 2, 2023 14:09:48 GMT
Another question comes to mind: This paper was developed for use with proprietary revenue stamps. I wonder if it might be possible to find 2 copies of the same stamp -- one mint or cancelled and one that has undergone the chameleon effect from cleaning the cancel off.
|
|
|
Post by Ted Talks Stamps on Nov 2, 2023 14:31:55 GMT
For anyone wondering about the use of a $5,000 revenue stamp, there was an auction, some years back (1949, in fact), by the Hugh Barr auction firm, that included a mortgage document for the Morris and Essex Rail Road Co. Affixed to it were 10 of the $500 Persian Rugs and a 25c 2nd issue revenue.
I have found conflicting information on the tax rates involved. In an article on the Stamporama web site, the author says the $500 stamps would be needed for a $5-million transaction, meaning the $5,000 stamp would be for a $50-million deal. However another reference I came across says the tax rate at the time was 50c per $1,000, which means it would have been needed for a $10-million deal.
At any rate, even 10 million dollar transactions were rare enough, at that time, that no need was found to print such a large-denomination stamp.
|
|
|
Post by ClassicPhilatelist on Nov 4, 2023 5:15:33 GMT
Hi Ted, You're kind of on the right path here. To clarify a few things, the image you are showing is actually a die proof on India paper, so it is not on the "chameleon paper" mentioned in the inscription at left. You hit on another point here, in that all 2nd and 3rd issue revenues are printed on "chameleon paper", and all are with silk threads. It is the paper itself that is either "pinkish or violet" in nature, the threads are the same as that found in the other issues, blue, and usually quite large on both front and back of the stamp, without magnification. (This is not to be confused with "Experimental Silk" which was used in early 1st issue revenues, and some Private Die stamps). These are typically a scant few, often only one fiber identifiable, under magnification as either blue (primarily) or red (sometimes hotly contested as contamination). There's also been a great deal of debate over the fiber itself, in that many specialist assert that the fibers are not silk, and instead linen. In my view, it makes little difference what the actual make is, it's meant to be a security measure in the paper itself, as fiber embedded papers are highly controlled in their manufacture and distribution.
Now, back to chameleon paper, this change is much more subtle than you might imagine desirable, compare it say to the Loewenberg patents, with paper treated with prussiate of potash, which turns a dark blue when subject to water.
The "chameleon" paper in the 2nd and 3rd issues isn't really considered much an identifier, other than color (pinkish violet for 1st issue and violet for 2nd issue) but because the images are different for all denominations, it's not needed to identify the difference between a 2nd and 3rd issue. There are no tracked premiums for a more "pink" versus more "violet" version of the 2nd issues. Because it's not really used to ID the issues, there is little focus put on these "chameleon papers". From my experience with 2nd and 3rd issue bureaus, when wet they lose their color (at least some of it). It's not a strong identifier of used versus unused, in reality.
|
|
|
Post by ClassicPhilatelist on Nov 5, 2023 14:27:04 GMT
Hi Ted, Here is one more item of import in this discussion. This is an actual R133 ($500) with full imprint at right and left. Note the heavy presence of the blue fibers throughout the stamp, including in the margins. This is true "chameleon paper" issue of the $500 stamp. The nice thing about this example is the wide selvage gives you the sense of what the paper actually looks like. And this example: Illustrates the "pinkish violet" paper variety of the chameleon paper also used in 2nd Issue Revenues. Again, compare selvage and you can easily see the color difference (to the ability that a photo and a computer monitor will represent such variation. Your monitor calibration may vary).
|
|
|
Post by Ted Talks Stamps on Nov 6, 2023 5:43:00 GMT
Very good. Thanks a lot, Scott.
|
|
|
Post by Ted Talks Stamps on Nov 11, 2023 11:23:10 GMT
One more thing. Can you clarify the size of the transaction this would have been used for? The NPM site says $5 million, while another site (I don't recall which) said the tax rate at that time was 50c per $1,000, which means this would have covered a $10 million transaction. I need to know because there's a railroad I've got my eyes on.
|
|
|
Post by ClassicPhilatelist on Nov 12, 2023 8:17:44 GMT
Hi Ted, Well, that's a little complicated, and not really a straight forward calculation. First, let's look at the numbers compared to today. $1 in 1871 is equal to $25.23 today. So at $5mm equivalent would be $126,150,000. Even the stamp itself at $5k would have been equal to buying a stamp today $12,615. And this is the "documentary" tax.
I think the site you refer to is the Smithsonian site, which is a reasonably credible account that $5,000,000 would be the rate, considering the $5k stamp is equal to .1% (5,000,000 x .001) is $5k, this is a likely reasonable documentary rate for the time, for a land purchase documentary. Note also that unlike the other documentary stamps of the time, the $5,000 includes a space for an issuance number (similar to later documentary stamp).
|
|