Hong Kong 1891 Jubilee "Position 11" Fake or Genuine?

New Discoveries

Dr. A.M.T. Cheung FRPSL

1. "O" to "HONG" much rounder than normal.

2. Top circle of "g" to "HONG & KONG" larger than the normal Position 11.

3. The "J" has an angle at the base which is different from all genuine "J" with a curved bottom.

4. The first "E" of "JUBILEE" is slightly sloping to the left.

5. The second "E" of "JUBILEE" is much wider and taller than the "E"s of Position 11.

6. Many other characteristics such as the "Thin left stroke in H of Hong", "Wide bottom loop of g in Kong" and "Thick 1 of 1891" etc. can easily pinpoint it as a fake overprint.

7. "8" & "9" of "1891" dropped beyond the horizontal level.

8. The "8" of 1841 is larger and rounder.

1891 "Jubilee" overprint on QV 2c  carmine is the first commemorative stamp of Hong Kong issued to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the occupation of Hong Kong. It is believed that a special printing of the 1883 2c carmine stamps were overprinted by typography with the wording '1841-Hong Kong-Jubilee-1891'locally by Noronha & Sons, the Government contract printer; apparently only 50,000 copies were overprinted.

Many types of forgeries are known but most are crude and readily distinguishable. However, in July 1988 newsletter, it mentioned that a member of our Society has found a copy of the 1891 Jubilee bearing a Hankow * c.d.s. dated JUxx 9x. The stamp has the characteristics of "Broken tail of Kong" and "Rounded first E" of the JUBILEE specific to Position 11; however, there are other features not seen in the this position (see above). World-wide Jubilee experts expressed different opinions regarding the status of this new "Position 11" and finally a RSPL certificate was obtained stating "Genuine stamp...Position 11..." which seems to settle the matter once and for all.

An article on Hong Kong forgeries in the Society's Journal 3 written by the same author questioned the authenticity of this "Hankow Jubilee Position 11" as more and more similar looking examples turned up in the market. Our Journal 3 published in February 1999 records four more copies viz. two shown in Dr. Chan Siu Hon's Jubilee book, one cancelled Foochowfoo shown in Ming Tsang's book on HK Forgeries and one cancelled Foochowfoo rested in an Australian member's collection. Shortly after publication of Journal 3, our member Charles Chan obtained yet another example cancelled Shanghai. A further copy, the seventh, was reported in June 1999 newsletter found in a local auction identified as a part Hankow * cancel showing the letters "A N" and the month 'JY'. The October 1999 newsletter mentioned another two new finds, one cancelled B62 and the other Foochowfoo with a possible 1900 date since a last digit "0" can be seen. Thus the total number of this "Position 11" Jubilee as recorded by the Hong Kong Philatelic Society was NINE. Four copies cancelled Foochowfoo (three dated 91), two with B62, two with Hankow and one with Shanghai c.d.s.

Recently, four more copies were sold at an Internet auction as one lot in January 2002. All four appear to be the abovementioned "Position 11", two cancelled B62, the other two bear cancellations of Shanghai and Hankow respectively. It is also interesting to see that one of them also has a company security marking and this appears to be the first time that  security markings ever appear on a Jubilee stamp; the possibility of the stamp being genuine is rather remote since I doubt someone could obtain large enough supply to be used by his company. Furthermore, it would be unsound economy to use them on company's mail as prices of the Jubilee stamps shot up many folds shortly after they were sold out on the first day. Therefore, is the company chop added subsequently? or is the Jubilee overprint applied on top of a used stamp with a company chop? Perhaps the buyer of this lot could tell us. And perhaps the buyer could also tell us whether the Jubilee overprint of the stamp bearing a centrally placed smudgy B62 is on top or below the postmark.

Jubilee experts have different opinions as to the authenticity of this "Position 11" Jubilee stamp. Some British experts expressed the opinion that it might come from the "Seventh Printing". However, there are others who are equally convinced that the stamp is a forgery.
Our Australian member Alfred Chu wrote an article on this subject which appeared in the September 1999 newsletter and he noted that all the then known examples display different centering. "It would appear that it is not statistically reasonable for such an "uncommon overprint" to have that many different centering. Apparently, they do come from the same column. The forger probably just picked up whatever QV2c stamps available to him and produced his Jubilees." In addition, another Australian member Richard Gurevitch also pointed out that it is statistically unreasonable to find so many used in the Treaty Ports especially when the stamp was never officially available at these ports.

If this is indeed a forgery, it must have existed as early as mid 1891 since the known "Foochowfoo" examples bore postmarks of 1891. And why not? Someone at that time surely knew he could make a few quick bucks selling Jubilees by forging them as soon as possible since the market price of Jubilee stamps had already rocketed soon after they were sold out.

And finally, whodunit? I leave it up to you to find out...................
For comments click here