CHAT: The US Newspaper Stamps, or: The Headaches of a Philatelist

27 July 2017
Being slightly bored before I retired, I went onto the ebay website and typed in 'signed die proof', just to see what would come up. And something came up all right! A signed die proof of one of those beautiful US Newspaper stamps from the late 19th century.


I remembered having seen it before, but never followed it up. All I knew was that the stamps are not mentioned in Gene Hessler's The Engraver's Line, and that I would therefore have a hard time finding out who engraved them. So I thought I had better take another look in the morning. And with that happy thought I retired.

28 July 2017
Okay, so I started looking again at this die proof. It was of the $2 value, issued in 1895, and it was signed by both Lyman F Ellis and George FC Smillie. Ellis was a letter engraver and Smillie a vignette engraver, so the two signatures made sense. There being no third signature I'm just assuming for the moment that Ellis did both frame and lettering, though it has been known, of course, for US stamps to have different engravers for frame and lettering.

A quick look at the stamp catalogue shows that the newspaper stamps have quite a long history with various printings and printers involved. My immediate concern is that the vignette of this $2 stamp was used in 1875 for a $3 value. The $2 stamp was printed by the Bureau for Engraving and Printing (BEP), but the $3 by the Continental bank Note Co (CBNC), later to become the American Bank Note Co (ABNC). This does not concern the Ellis bit because he signed off the frame/lettering, which is for the $2 only so that's firmly done in 1895. But what if the vignettes of the 1875 and 1895 stamp are the same one? Could the BEP have made use of the original CBNC dies? If so, does that mean that Smillie actually engraved the 1875 vignette?

Gene Hessler's book, which I had hoped would bring some clarification, unhelpfully stated that Smillie worked for the CBNC/ABNC from 1871 to 1887, and for the BEP from 1894 to 1922. So he could have been responsible for the 1875 CBNC die.

I figured that the only way to find out was to sollicit the help of some American philatelists, and so I started a topic on the stampcommunity.org website. Most helpfully, this soon yielded a scan made by YeaPolska of the two engravings:


Having studied them well, I would come to the conclusion that it seems probable that the 1895 vignette was a copy of the 1875 die, with some enhancements here and there. After all, they look pretty identical with just some minor alterations. These would then most probably have been done by Smillie, as he signed them off on the 1985 die proof.

Then I suddenly remembered that Smillie did not just sign this die proof, but there was something written in front of his name as well. I tried to scan it and enhance the contrast as best as I could, and came up with this:


I would swear, though maybe just to corroborate my theory, that it says: worked over by GFC Smillie.

Remains to be seen, though, who engraved the original die.

While doing this little research on the $2 stamp, I bumped into two other signed die proofs, which, thankfully, were less of a headache. First up there was this signed die proof of the 1c value, again from 1895.


Although the vignette is the same allegorical figure as that of the low value stamps from 1875, they're anything but identical so they're easy to tell apart. This proof was signed by James Kennedy who was a letter engraver, so he will have done the lettering and probably the frame as well.

The second proof I found was featured on aforementioned stampcommunity website and it was of the $60 value from 1875.

It was signed by Charles Skinner, who was a vignette engraver, so he will have done the allegorical figure of the 'Indian Maiden'. A similar vignette is used for the $100 stamp of 1895, but as I have no copies at all of anything at this moment, I cannot compare them yet to see if they're identical or not.

Finally, as if it wasn't enough for a single day, I bumped into a website on these stamps by D, who had also written handbooks on them. So I fired off an email to him as well.

29 July 2017
Heard back from D. While he thought he couldn't help me much, he did say that he believed that the BEP could make use of dies / plates from the ABNC. But then he started beating me around the ears with PR numbers, so I was at a complete loss. Until I remembered I had this old Scott catalogue (from 1957!), and yes there they were: the Newspaper stamps in all their glory and with all their PR catalogue numbers. So I figured that I had better first study the general issues, before delving in at the deep end. I spent a lovely evening making lists, reading catalogues and dreaming of wonderful collections...

What helped a lot was that I was able to identify three main sections within the 25 years of issues. There are loads of special printings but they do not really impinge on my collecting habits, so for me the main themes would be:

Phase 1: 1875/1893: eleven designs engraved for the CBNC, later called the ABNC. This will be rather straightforward and I just need to patiently await any signed proofs to pass me by.

Phase 2: 1894: four ABNC designs printed by the BEP. This is trickier for I need to find out whether the ABNC engravings were used or whether the BEP had them re-engraved or modified in any way.

Phase 3: 1895 onwards: eight BEP designs. Again, a slightly tricky area where I will need to determine whether these are new engravings or (like that $2) modifications of existing ABNC engravings.

31 July 2017
Another email from D. He sent some scans of items from auction catalogues and what have you. They're stunning! Of special interest was a die proof of the BEP $20 value, which was signed by Smillie.


Whilst his signature does not particularly look like the one on the $2 proof, there is a G hidden in the S, and other Smillies don't seem to fit time-wise, so I'm still confident that this is the GFC Smillie we've been talking about and will continue to be so until I get proof showing otherwise.


The other important item was a progressive proof of the BEP 10c value, which is signed by Lyman F Ellis, who, as we know by now, has also done the frame of the $2. This immediately gives rise to the following question: if Ellis did the frame/lettering of the 10c, and James Kennedy that of the 1c, which parts may then be identical and may we indeed have the beginnings of proof here that maybe frame and lettering were done by different people? Again, I'll need to get copies in so I can compare the frames more closely.


Another Ellis item was a progressive proof of the frame of the $2, which does not yield any new information, but is lovely anyway.


The final scan was that of a die proof of the BEP 1894 $6. This is interesting because it covers the phase 2 printings of the BEP. My Scott catalogue joyfully lists proofs for almost every newspaper stamp around, but it mentions no proof at all for any 1894 issue whatsoever. This proof here, dated December 15, 1894, must be of the 1894 set, because the 1895 set no longer includes a $6 value. So die proofs of the 1894 issue do exist! Pity it isn't signed. And it still does not answer the question whether the BEP used ABNC material or whether they had new dies made...

1 August 2017
My task for the day is to go through the Essay Proof Journals I have, and see if I can find anything of interest. Now, I have PDFs and hard copies, but I'm doing this after having worked in front of a computer all morning, so I don't feel like reading all the PDFs on a computer screen, and therefore opt for the hard copies.

Needless to say I do find two references which are important to developing the story. The EPJ of July 1947 includes a paragraph stating that the dies were sent by the ABNC to the BEP. These were used as the foundation for the new 1895 issue. The vignettes of the original issues were transferred to a new die. This was done by taking them up on a transfer roll and then cutting away the frame and lettering. So this would imply that all the new vignettes have the old engraving as their foundation, which corroborates the theory that GFC Smillie 'worked over' the die of the old $3 vignette.


The second find dates from the EPJ of January 1952. It deals with a then forthcoming auction of unique newspaper stamp material, including the die essay of the $24, which is signed by Charles Skinner. Now, Skinner was a vignette engraver, so it would make sense that even though he is mentioned here as one of the designers, he will also have engraved the vignette of this particular value. So that's another name added to the list.

I also found an intriguing and maybe slightly worrying feature on GFC Smillie. The feature includes what is claimed to be an exhaustive list of Smillie's engravings, based on his own meticulous records. And they do not include the newspaper stamps! But my theory is that since he 'only' worked over the old dies, he may not have regarded them as proper engravings. But his signature would imply his involvement, so I'm still soldiering on with him on the list.

2 August 2017
In wades my philatelic buddy G, with a range of mentions in various philatelic publications. They're all interesting with regard to the general story, especially giving background to why they were issued, which may come in handy if I decide to try and write a full-length feature on these stamps for one of the magazines. But of particular interest is John N Luff's The Postage Stamps of the United States, published in 1902.

Whilst it gives no information on individual engravers, it does clarify the transitional phase. Apparently, it had always been the idea that the BEP would come with a new series, but because of teething problems they had to print a few of the old stamps because stock was running low. The 1894 printings were done from the old plates of the ABNC. They were re-entered, which makes for clear and sharp impressions, but that all means that the engravings were still the original. So they can be grouped under the engravers of the original dies.

3 August 2017
Things are hotting up tremendously! I wake up to another email from D. He sent me a clipping from the 'United States Specialist' which lists the engravers of the 1875 issue! I've seen that Braceland name before and gather he is quite the expert in this field.


Not only do I now have the names, the snippet also confirms that the frame and lettering of the 1875 was done by a single engraver, even though not all of those are known yet. But the list yields yet another problem to sort. As frame/letter engraver for the two lowest dollar values, we find the name C A Kochler. His name is not yet in my database so I grab my trusted Hessler book, only to find that he spells the name as Kohler! Another spell on the world wide web is needed, in search of an engraver named either Kohler or Kochler.


Luck seems to be on my side today for within minutes I find an old auction lot which includes various ABNC items, among which Happy New Year cards by C A Kochler! So that settles it, as far as I'm concerned, and I can continue adding this new engraver to my database, together with James S KingCharles H Smith and Atwood Porter.

I start adding the engravers to my research cum want list, I bump into Charles Skinner's name again, on the $24 value. I had put him there after finding the EPJ snippet with the proof. Today's list names King as the engraver, so the image shown in the EPJ must have been of a drawn essay after all, with Skinner signing as one of the designers rather than the engraver. So that's another minor point sorted.

4 August 2017
The sun shines on the righteous! Or is it The devil looks after his own? Whatever way, yet another email arrives from D with what seems to be the final piece of the puzzle. That wonderful Essay Proof Journal, which should never have been allowed to be discontinued, is disclosing another of it splendours: a two part feature on the engravers of the 1895 issue! With in-depth information on how the dies were engraved, how the original 1875 dies were used, and transformed into the new 1895 issue. With loads of progressive proofs to illustrate. Too wonderful for words!

The feature states that Smillie did indeed engrave and or upgrade all the vignettes, whereas both Ellis and Kennedy are known to have done some of the lettering and frames. Not all frame and lettering engravers were known at that time (1957), but the feature is so authoritative that I'll gladly accept I'll never get to know this. But at least I now know all the vignette engravers, which is what I had hoped for.

So in that way my quest rather abruptly ends, with 99% of my questions answered! And all that while realising that most of the hard work had already been done by others! All I need to do now is actually collect all these beautiful items and keep my eyes peeled for (progressive) proofs to come up in auctions. For at the moment of writing I still do not own a single stamp or proof from this issue, and I can't wait to see them in real life!

15 August 2017
Although the research project as such has come to an abrupt end, I still need to figure out what and how to collect these stamps. Thankfully, I received D's handbook on the proofs of these items today, which, by the way, you can order here, as well as his other handbooks.


The amount of information is a bit overwhelming to begin with, especially because there are not only the regular progressive die proofs, large die proofs, plate proofs and colour proofs (usually 14 for each value) to be found, but there is also a multitude of reprinted dies on the market. I like it how the author optimistically states that one needs a micrometer (check) and an overactive imagination (uncheck) to collect these and determine what they are exactly. I have long since drawn the line at shades and paper thickness, being rather hopeless at especially the first.

Having read the handbook twice, it becomes clear that the situation with regard to the proofs is much more simple if you just look at the 1895 series, by the BEP. Those are the ones engraved by GFC Smillie. There are only the regular large die proofs to collect and only a handful (12 I believe) of colour proofs.

To sum it all up:
1875: a myriad of proofs to try and make sense of, several vignette engravers involved.
1895: a finite and manageable number of proofs to find, just the one vignette engraver involved.


The fact that I am now the proud owner of my first Newspaper stamp, the $2 of the 1895 set, "worked over" by Smillie, makes my choice rather easy: I will concentrate first solely on the 1895 set, just to see how far I will get and what will come my way, and then after that I may or may not decide to go down the advanced 1875 route.

And with that happy thought I put in an offer for the $50 value currently on sale...