Experimental Forms of Separation:
The Archer Perf 16

 

Henry Archer's third machine was the first to be based upon perforating, instead of rouletting.  At first the results were not favorable and required adjustments before the perforation machine was approved. 

The perforated stamps that were produced by the trials were issued for public use and can be found used in different parts of England.  many apparently went to the West of England.  The experiment was conducted from 1850 ---January 1854. 

The Archer  Perf. 16  stamps  can  be found on  cover  in  two  basic groups.  Those  of  the  period  of  1850-1 and those of 1853-4.  Plates  92   through  101  exist  on  cover.  Plates  90  and   91  are   only   known  as  singles  off cover.

Die I, Alphabet I,  Wmk  S. C. ,  Perforated 16, 

Plate 100

 Plate 93.   London 11 April 1851 to Holywell North Wales 12 April 1851  3 years before the official government perforations were issued

 There is a desire amongst collectors to obtain covers bearing the Archer Perf 16 on cover dated before the date of the first officially perforated stamps came into use.  Covers dated after 28 January 1854, although no less uncommon than the earlier covers are less popular. 

Stamps from Plates 90 through 101 were made available to Archer for experimentation and all were used. 

Traditionally, it had been believed that other plates outside of the Plate 90 -101 range were also considered to have been used by Archer, but current scholarship seems to prove otherwise. 

 

The Plates which are no longer considered part of the Archer experiment are Plates 8, 71, 79, 105 and 107.  The scarcest of the Archer Perf 16 Plates, at least in the sense of catalog value is Plate 92, used on cover dated 1850-1. 

For a very interesting commentary on the Archer Plates that were dropped by Stanley Gibbons please see the below which I received from Mr. Scott Treacy who studies this area.

Plate 97. London  21 Jan 1854  to Reigate 21 Jan 1854.  This cover is dated 7 days before the  officially perforated stamps were issued.

 

Identification of the Archer Perf 16 stamps is most easily accomplished through identification of the check letters.  Archer used only Plates 90-101 which are all  Alphabet I  plates.  The Officially perforated stamps were issued using Alphabet II.  Therefore in order to be an Archer it must be Die I, Small Crown,  Perforated 16, Alphabet I.

Observations in support of The Archer Plates 107:  Scott Treacy explains in regards to Plate 107: It is true that Gibbons has removed several plates from its Archers list. But there are many collectors, including obviously myself,  who believe that genuine Archers from other plates do exist.

  
The facts are these, using plate 107 as a case in point:
 The opponents of 'other plates' will, quite rightly, tell you that as far as is known the trials on the perforating machine took place at Somerset House on 6 January 1850 and then again in May 1850. After this Archer was in dispute with the Post Office about how much they were to pay him for the purchase of the patent. This was not sorted out until July 1853. There is no known evidence that Archer or any one else operated the machine at Somerset House between these times. As plate 107 was not registered until 1 January 1851, how then could sheet(s) from it have been used in the trials of January and May 1850?
 
Opponents will then say they therefore can't exist and leave it there - not an unreasonable position based solely on the above facts.
 
But there are other matters which must be taken into consideration.
 
First, I should like to point out that the way the perforating was performed meant that the exact position, or 'idiosyncrasies', of individual perforations would be the same for any stamp perforated by Archer that is from any given column. Thus all Archers with a righthand check letter of say A, will demonstrate similar precise positions of individual perforations.
 
I must now admit my personal stake in this, for I have a copy of CG plate 107 perforated by Archer, and I have recent RPSL certificate (2000) to support it. The thing is that my stamp has been compared to five other known Archers from the G column, and has been found to match exactly the 'idiosyncrasies' of these known Archers. 
 
There is no way that this could be duplicated, and is absolute proof that my stamp was perforated on the Archer machine.
 
There are a total of four items from plate 107, including two 1854 covers, which have received certification from RPSL based on this sort of evidence.
 
So to my mind, the perforation evidence backed-up by the fact that two contemporary covers are known means that something in the story is missing. Maybe one day some documentation will be found which confirms the legitimacy of the 'other plates'.
 
In addition to my stamp, I have seen stamps from plate 107 (GI, JC), 108 (EC), 111 (PE) and 116 (NK) that I believe to be genuine Archers.
 
 For many years SG refused to list imperforate stamps from plates 176 and 177, because its panel did not believe they existed.....but they were wrong!
 Therefore it should be seriously considered that they are incorrect in the case of the Archer Plates as well.
 
 Many thanks to Scott Treacy for permission to publish his above comments.

 
 
Main Page