Thanks
Paul

Moderator: Volunteer Moderator Team
Clive, I don't believe that anything over 5/- was ever included in Specimen sets, without an appropriate overprint, apart from the error with the 10/-, £1 and £2 OS Kangaroos. This would mean that the Robes did not appear, complete, until the £1 Robes Specimen nearly 10 years after it was issued. Quite why the 10/- appeared so much later than issue, but much earlier than the £1 is one of those mysteries.clive willingham wrote:Peter,
You are likely quite right.For a 10/- (indeed, any value over 5/-) to be CTO (as opposed to per favour) indicates an error on someones part. We know it occurred when the decision was made to include OS stamps in packs, that is how the hi value bi-colours made a very temporary appearance (apart from the 10/- Third WMK which, for some unfathomable reason wasn't withdrawn along with the £1 and £2, which were). We do know the 10/- Robes was issued as a Specimen very early, well before the £1.
My reasoning is that, according to the ACSC, the ten shillings robe was issued in April 1938. It was not until more than four years later, "about August 1942", that the stamp overprinted specimen was introduced into collectors' packs.
The stated Post Office policy was to include all current postage stamps in collectors' packs. So, for a period of more than four years, the ten shilling Robes was on issue. It doesn't seem too much of a stretch, to me at least, that some of these stamps may have been so included perhaps, as you say, by error or at least inconsistent with Post Office policy.
As to the cancellations, again, you may be quite right - I am not in a ditch on that aspect, although the cancel on the ten shillings, along with another copy I have, does to me look very similar to known CTO cancels. Another aspect is that if these stamps were in fact treated in the way I theorise, the cancels could still be CTO but not one of the three shown by ACSC. Doesn't do to be too dgmatic with these cancels, I'm discovering, especially after David Potts virtually 'sealed' his theory that Sydney provided some genuine CTOs in collectors' packs.
So much yet to learn.
Clive
The £1 robes in Specimen form appeared 5½ years after issue, in April 1944, at least according to ACSC.Clive, I don't believe that anything over 5/- was ever included in Specimen sets, without an appropriate overprint, apart from the error with the 10/-, £1 and £2 OS Kangaroos. This would mean that the Robes did not appear, complete, until the £1 Robes Specimen nearly 10 years after it was issued. Quite why the 10/- appeared so much later than issue, but much earlier than the £1 is one of those mysteries.
In my experience the flat top 3 is much scarcer, but is too consistent to be an error in application of the canceller itself.clive willingham wrote:David,
Thanks so much for sharing those. That's one glorious CTO 1d roo. You may just have the best example in captivity. Wish it was mine.![]()
Did you notice that in the first of the 1d roo CTOs you posted, there is that little aberration of two different kinds of '3' on the cancel - the 3 of the date of the month has a flat top and the 3 of the year has a rounded top? This has been commented on before, but it still intrigues me as to why the PO would make a canceller with two different 3s, and perhaps other characters.
Clive
Clive/ david b. pottsclive willingham wrote:Paul,
Welcome on board this conversation.
You have a really nice 1/- ANZAC there, very well centred and nice perfs. I agree with David that it seems to be CTO.
On my screen the toning is a worry. Regardless of whether or not it has gum I'd be giving the stamp a long hot bath with a couple of drops of Palmolive Green dishwashing liquid. Some advise not to hot bath chalk-surfaced paper but I've never experienced any damage being caused to these stamps from the hot tub routine.
There are liquids specifically designed to remove toning but if it won't come off with a hot bath it's probably too far gone.
Clive
plsllvn wrote:
I didn't think I had any CTO's but after reading this tread I had another look and found this 1 shilling Anzac, it looks like a CTO - can anyone offer an opinion on if it is ?
Thanks
Paul
Nice work Paul! What brand of dishwashing soap?plsllvn wrote:
Thanks for your replies and suggestions. I did give it a bath in boiling kettle water with a little added dish soap ( didn't have any Palmolive, but it was green) and just wanted to show everyone the results.There is still some brown remaining but I was very happy with the result. maybe it will need a second wash? Could this have been nicotine stains rather than foxing/toning, the back of the stamp was spotless?
Thanks ,again
Paul
Of course the Melbourne cancel was used on the 1d engraveds.It's curious that it wasn't used on the 1913 KGV 1d red engraved issue, or the 6d engraved kooka of 1914.
They also have the flat topped 3 in 'DE 3', just to add to the rarity.clive willingham wrote:Mark,
Now that's a showstopper!!!
They sure are collector's pack CTO. I've never seen them CTO in pair before. A super item.
Maybe Glen would care to comment on rarity and maybe value.
Clive
There sure were, in the first sale by tender of 1987.Glen, I can't remember but were there multiples of the First WMK Specimens sold in Archives sales of the 1980s?
That 6d with the retouched 'E' was actually illustrated in the February 1987 APO Archives sale by tender catalogue. Had an estimate of $350.I also owned a very large CTO block of the 6d Blue CTO that had the "Retouched E".
As this single shows, a few of them must have been made in CTO -
Yes, haven't we had this conversation before? The April 1913 cancellation seems to have been used for the presentation sets given to members of parliament and other bigwigs.Some unusual dates occur with the crisp cds CTO cancel.
This pair above ex Gray had a curious INVERTED and uncharacteristically blurry strike of - AP 24 - 13 - and sold in 2007 for $A6,375.
I put a similar (but superior!) one into stock this month at a shamefully low price, that has the identical cancel. Can't say I have noticed that date on any other 1913 CTO's. Has anyone else?
I've still got both catalogues - is there any particular info you are after?A little off topic, but does anyone have listings of what was auctioned at the two APO Archives sales?
Just that I've never seen a list / images of what was auctioned off - possibly would make another great thread.clive willingham wrote:Rod,
I've still got both catalogues - is there any particular info you are after?A little off topic, but does anyone have listings of what was auctioned at the two APO Archives sales?
Clive
Clive,clive willingham wrote:Rod,
I'll have a go at scanning some of the pages tomorrow, see if they scrub up well enough to post here. If not, I'll mail you photocopies if you would like.
Clive
No, the inverted watermark doesn't add to the value of a CTO 1/-. The reason is that virtually all CTO 1/- stamps were printed with inverted watermarks. It's one of those quirks, but a CTO that isn't inverted watermark would be very valuable - can't recall ever seeing one offered for sale.Ok i can not say how much I appreciate this place. In a short period of time i have learned that this is a CTO and that the the of cancellation and cancellation date helps prove it. However this one is watermark upside down. Does that significantly add to the value?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests