Page 152 - Jarvis & Wright: Jamaica Display to RPSL

Jamaica: The Vendryes Official

Missing letters.
It has not (yet) proved possible to plate all stamps that are missing letters, which might seem
grounds for suspicion. However, all or most probably come from the first setting, and even ordinary
singles from the first setting are difficult to plate. Pearson explained anomalies by suggesting that
when fallen letters were restored a setting was rebuilt in a slightly different way, though that can only
explain differences afterwards, not oddities in the overprint while it lacked letters. It may be that the
type shifted slightly while letters were missing.

O omitted.
Copies showing the O omitted are almost certainly from setting 1, position 13. That position shows a
distinctive “lower case i for second I”. In many copies of setting 1, position 13, the dot of the I is an
oblong dash. The two copies here missing the O show two other different states of i, one with the
‘dash’ still just joined to the stem, the other with a separated round dot, suggesting that the error
persisted uncorrected for long enough to produce progressive wear.

Certificate, BPA (1988). For comparison,
Ex Baillie. setting 1, stamp 13.

Missing letters: dry prints.
Another way in which letters might not appear is if they were present in the chase but failed to print,
either through lack of ink (a dry print) or poor composition that allowed letters to sink lower.
A dry print is more likely. These are not true missing letters.

O omitted. L omitted.

↓

↑

There are slight ink traces where the O
should be, proving a dry print rather than a
plucked letter.

The postmark is 8 October 1890, so this is This copy shows the ink fading
from the first setting, probably position 15. gradually from left to right, affecting
Ex Sutcliffe. the second I and A as well as the L.