If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
please help with an overprint
http://cjoint.com/?jvrd1QgqRX
This is a British Guiana stamp with an overprint "Marine Detatchment", which neither Scott nor Stanley Gibbons know nothing about. Please help. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
In a recent message "DCP23" wrote:
http://cjoint.com/?jvrd1QgqRX This is a British Guiana stamp with an overprint "Marine Detatchment", which neither Scott nor Stanley Gibbons know nothing about. I presume you mean neither know anything... I suspect it is a private overprint used in the manner of perfins. Is it gummed? -- Tony Clayton Coins of the UK : http://www.coinsoftheuk.info Sent using RISCOS on an Acorn Strong Arm RiscPC .... A seminar on Time Travel will be held two weeks ago |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
DCP23 wrote: http://cjoint.com/?jvrd1QgqRX This is a British Guiana stamp with an overprint "Marine Detatchment", which neither Scott nor Stanley Gibbons know nothing about. Please help. Googling on "marine detachment" "british guiana" (including the quotes) finds a "presumably" explanation at http://www.dave.studd.btinternet.co....anamarine.html and several other hits (some of them broken) which provide further information and say that these stamps were prepared but not issued. Chris |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Greetings DCP23:
British Guiana 1938-1952 - Marine Detachment Overprint In the fall of 1940 Britain and the United States completed negotiations which culminated in one of the most extraordinary military deals in history. Britain, holding numerous Caribbean possessions, desperately needed additional convoy vessels to protect her vital Atlantic supply line against submarine depredations; the U.S., possessor of numerous overage destroyers, wished to strengthen defense of the eastern approaches to the mainland and the Panama Canal. As a result of this situation, on 2 September 1940 the U.S. agreed to swap 50 of these destroyers in return for 99-year leases on certain base sites in various strategically placed British possessions: the Bahamas, Jamaica, Antigua, Saint Lucia, Trinidad, and British Guiana. Presumably the idea for these originated from this agreement. In the Bulletins (#68, #69) of the BWI Study Circle, W.A.Townsend wrote that they were considered BOGUS as they were onlty seen in MINT condition. The Commonwealth (SG?) Catalogue agreed that they were BOGUS. (1971) There are seven values known. The 3c (yours) and 12c are overprinted in BLACK. The 1c, 2c, 6c, 36c, and $1 are overprinted in RED. http://www.dave.studd.btinternet.co.uk/guiana6c.jpg http://www.dave.studd.btinternet.co.uk/guiana36c.jpg http://www.dave.studd.btinternet.co.uk/guiana$1.jpg Finally, there is an article on this stamp issue in Sixth Sense (KGVI Study Group) issue #16 (page 8). A copy of that issue is available for 2 Pounds + Postage from: http://www.murraypayne.com/ (I am not connecte4d to the latter in any way.) I trust that this information is of assistance to you. Blair |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Greetings DCP23:
British Guiana 1938-1952 - Marine Detachment Overprint In the fall of 1940 Britain and the United States completed negotiations which culminated in one of the most extraordinary military deals in history. Britain, holding numerous Caribbean possessions, desperately needed additional convoy vessels to protect her vital Atlantic supply line against submarine depredations; the U.S., possessor of numerous overage destroyers, wished to strengthen defense of the eastern approaches to the mainland and the Panama Canal. As a result of this situation, on 2 September 1940 the U.S. agreed to swap 50 of these destroyers in return for 99-year leases on certain base sites in various strategically placed British possessions: the Bahamas, Jamaica, Antigua, Saint Lucia, Trinidad, and British Guiana. Presumably the idea for these originated from this agreement. In the Bulletins (#68, #69) of the BWI Study Circle, W.A.Townsend wrote that they were considered BOGUS as they were onlty seen in MINT condition. The Commonwealth (SG?) Catalogue agreed that they were BOGUS. (1971) There are seven values known. The 3c (yours) and 12c are overprinted in BLACK. The 1c, 2c, 6c, 36c, and $1 are overprinted in RED. http://www.dave.studd.btinternet.co.uk/guiana6c.jpg http://www.dave.studd.btinternet.co.uk/guiana36c.jpg http://www.dave.studd.btinternet.co.uk/guiana$1.jpg Finally, there is an article on this stamp issue in Sixth Sense (KGVI Study Group) issue #16 (page 8). A copy of that issue is available for 2 Pounds + Postage from: http://www.murraypayne.com/ (I am not connected to the latter in any way.) I trust that this information is of assistance to you. Blair |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
You are right, that's what I mean
Yes, it is gummed and never hinged too. In fact, it's actually a block of 4. And there are also some other values from that set overprinted exactly like that. The overprint appears rather nicely done, not at all like it's someone's joke or something. "Tony Clayton" wrote in message ... In a recent message "DCP23" wrote: http://cjoint.com/?jvrd1QgqRX This is a British Guiana stamp with an overprint "Marine Detatchment", which neither Scott nor Stanley Gibbons know nothing about. I presume you mean neither know anything... I suspect it is a private overprint used in the manner of perfins. Is it gummed? -- Tony Clayton Coins of the UK : http://www.coinsoftheuk.info Sent using RISCOS on an Acorn Strong Arm RiscPC ... A seminar on Time Travel will be held two weeks ago |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Wow! That certainly is VERY helpful. Fast, too.
Thanks a lot!!! "Blair (TC)" wrote in message oups.com... Greetings DCP23: British Guiana 1938-1952 - Marine Detachment Overprint In the fall of 1940 Britain and the United States completed negotiations which culminated in one of the most extraordinary military deals in history. Britain, holding numerous Caribbean possessions, desperately needed additional convoy vessels to protect her vital Atlantic supply line against submarine depredations; the U.S., possessor of numerous overage destroyers, wished to strengthen defense of the eastern approaches to the mainland and the Panama Canal. As a result of this situation, on 2 September 1940 the U.S. agreed to swap 50 of these destroyers in return for 99-year leases on certain base sites in various strategically placed British possessions: the Bahamas, Jamaica, Antigua, Saint Lucia, Trinidad, and British Guiana. Presumably the idea for these originated from this agreement. In the Bulletins (#68, #69) of the BWI Study Circle, W.A.Townsend wrote that they were considered BOGUS as they were onlty seen in MINT condition. The Commonwealth (SG?) Catalogue agreed that they were BOGUS. (1971) There are seven values known. The 3c (yours) and 12c are overprinted in BLACK. The 1c, 2c, 6c, 36c, and $1 are overprinted in RED. http://www.dave.studd.btinternet.co.uk/guiana6c.jpg http://www.dave.studd.btinternet.co.uk/guiana36c.jpg http://www.dave.studd.btinternet.co.uk/guiana$1.jpg Finally, there is an article on this stamp issue in Sixth Sense (KGVI Study Group) issue #16 (page 8). A copy of that issue is available for 2 Pounds + Postage from: http://www.murraypayne.com/ (I am not connecte4d to the latter in any way.) I trust that this information is of assistance to you. Blair |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Thank you!
wrote in message ups.com... DCP23 wrote: http://cjoint.com/?jvrd1QgqRX This is a British Guiana stamp with an overprint "Marine Detatchment", which neither Scott nor Stanley Gibbons know nothing about. Please help. Googling on "marine detachment" "british guiana" (including the quotes) finds a "presumably" explanation at http://www.dave.studd.btinternet.co....anamarine.html and several other hits (some of them broken) which provide further information and say that these stamps were prepared but not issued. Chris |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Blair (TC) wrote:
Greetings DCP23: British Guiana 1938-1952 - Marine Detachment Overprint In the Bulletins (#68, #69) of the BWI Study Circle, W.A.Townsend wrote that they were considered BOGUS as they were onlty seen in MINT condition. The Commonwealth (SG?) Catalogue agreed that they were BOGUS. (1971) The fact that "Detachment" is misspelled "Detatchment" lends weight to the theory that the overprint is bogus! -- John Ray, London UK. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Once Upon A Time John Ray wrote:
The fact that "Detachment" is misspelled "Detatchment" lends weight to the theory that the overprint is bogus! You're questioning the spelling skills of Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C.? WHAT KIND OF AMERICAN ARE *YOU*?!! ** Captain Infinity |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Help with Swiss Inverted Overprint | George | General Discussion | 7 | June 22nd 05 08:09 PM |
ZARA Overprint on Italy | Chris Doran | General Discussion | 11 | September 24th 04 07:29 PM |
Some Exotics #1 ~ South Kasai | Rodney | General Discussion | 2 | July 9th 04 05:20 AM |
Gossaert Madonna Booklet Overprint | Ronald Maifeld | General Discussion | 3 | December 26th 03 03:19 PM |
Gossaert Madonna Booklet Overprint | Ronald Maifeld | US Stamps | 0 | December 23rd 03 08:36 PM |