Rusty, if the block has full OG, you can make an assumption that the block was precanceled, otherwise you are correct. It could very well have been canceled on document. This is definitely handstamped and not printed.
That makes sense, Dan. I wasn't considering the gum possibility.
Okay! Pardon the interruption. We now return you to the regularly scheduled discussion of David's interesting block.
That series of stamps was first issued in 1898 and the next proprietary series was not issued until 1914 so, unless HPC went out of business prior to 1910, isn't it reasonable to conclude that the date stamp is correct?
The tax was only in place from 1898 to 1902.
Thanks for the education!
David, a question: How can you tell this block was precancelled instead of just cancelled? I always thought that the only way you can be certain is if the cancel is printed, not handstamped or cancelled by manuscript.
re: Interesting Date Mistake on Henry Pharmacal Company Revenue
Rusty, if the block has full OG, you can make an assumption that the block was precanceled, otherwise you are correct. It could very well have been canceled on document. This is definitely handstamped and not printed.
re: Interesting Date Mistake on Henry Pharmacal Company Revenue
That makes sense, Dan. I wasn't considering the gum possibility.
re: Interesting Date Mistake on Henry Pharmacal Company Revenue
Okay! Pardon the interruption. We now return you to the regularly scheduled discussion of David's interesting block.
re: Interesting Date Mistake on Henry Pharmacal Company Revenue
That series of stamps was first issued in 1898 and the next proprietary series was not issued until 1914 so, unless HPC went out of business prior to 1910, isn't it reasonable to conclude that the date stamp is correct?
re: Interesting Date Mistake on Henry Pharmacal Company Revenue
The tax was only in place from 1898 to 1902.
re: Interesting Date Mistake on Henry Pharmacal Company Revenue
Thanks for the education!