 stamps only, among those of the Colonies for
which Messrs. Perkins, Bacon & Co. used the same paper, as in 1874 it
was noticed by philatelists in the stamps of Antigua. A correspondence
about the watermarks of these stamps took place early in that year in the
pages of the _Stamp Collector’s Magazine_, and at about the same time the
subject was discussed at a meeting of the Philatelic Society, London.
Those who are curious in these matters will find all the particulars
given in the _Stamp Collector’s Magazine_, vol. xii., where it appears
from the letters printed that an idea prevailed that, as concerned the
stamps of Antigua, the paper with the star sideways denoted a later
issue. The explanation given by the then President of the London Society
was that the change in the position of the watermark was due to “the
stars being turned when cleaning the plates, or when they became worn.”
This was rather far-fetched, not to say grotesque, nor did it succeed in
satisfying all the correspondents of the _Stamp Collector’s Magazine_.
The true solution of the question is, that as the paper was sufficiently
large to admit of the plate being printed on it in either position, the
printer was quite indifferent as to how the paper was placed, and were
it not that this particular watermark is a symmetrical figure we should
doubtless occasionally find it inverted, as well as sideways. A variety
of the One Penny, with one point of the star up, was indeed chronicled
with “inverted” watermark in the _Stamp Collector’s Magazine_, vol. xii.,
p. 95, by the same writer who noticed the two different positions of the
stars we have just alluded to. The design of the watermark was, however,
such that it made no difference which end of the sheet was put first into
the press, and it passes our comprehension to know how an _inverted_
watermark could therefore be distinguished.

Although all the stars in St. Vincent stamps are of the same size,
owing to the “bits” being hand-made they vary a little in shape, and we
have seen faulty ones having one or more rays with the points broken
or twisted out of their proper direction. Besides this
stamps only, among those of the Colonies for 
 which Messrs. Perkins, Bacon & Co. used the same newspaper, as in 1874 it 
 was comment by philatelists in the stamps of Antigua. A correspondence 
 about the watermark of these stamps took position early on in that year in the 
 pages of the _ Stamp Collector ’s Magazine _, and at about the same time the 
 national was discussed at a meeting of the Philatelic Society, London. 
 Those who are curious in these matter will find all the particular 
 given in the _ Stamp Collector ’s Magazine _, vol. xii. , where it appears 
 from the letter printed that an idea prevailed that, as implicated the 
 stamps of Antigua, the paper with the ace sideways denoted a late 
 issue. The explanation given by the then President of the London Society 
 was that the change in the position of the watermark was ascribable to “ the 
 stars being turned when cleaning the plates, or when they became worn. ” 
 This was preferably far - fetched, not to say grotesque, nor did it succeed in 
 satisfying all the correspondents of the _ Stamp Collector ’s Magazine _. 
 The true solution of the question is, that as the paper was sufficiently 
 large to admit of the home plate being printed on it in either position, the 
 printer was quite inert as to how the newspaper was placed, and were 
 it not that this particular watermark is a harmonious figure we should 
 doubtless occasionally rule it inverted, as well as sideway. A variety 
 of the One Penny, with one point of the star up, was indeed chronicled 
 with “ inverted ” watermark in the _ Stamp Collector ’s Magazine _, vol. xii. , 
 p. 95, by the like writer who noticed the two different positions of the 
 stars we have just alluded to. The design of the water line was, however, 
 such that it make no difference which end of the sheet was put first into 
 the press, and it passes our comprehension to acknowledge how an _ inverted _ 
 watermark could therefore be distinguished. 

 Although all the star in St. Vincent stamps are of the like size, 
 owing to the “ bits ” being hand - made they vary a small in shape, and we 
 have visit faulty one having one or more rays with the points broken 
 or twisted out of their proper guidance. Besides this
 stwmps only, among those of the Colonies for
which Messra. Perkinr, Bacon & Co. used the same pa'er, qs in 1874 it
was noticed by phiuatelists in the wtamks of Antigua. A correspondence
aglut chx watermarks of these stakps took place exrpy in that year in the
pages of the _Ftamp Cplpector’s Magazige_, amq at about the same time the
subject waa discuvsed at a meeying of the Philatelic Soclety, London.
Those who age curious un trwse matters dill find all the partjculars
given in the _Stamp Colleztor’s Magazine_, coo. xlh., where it eppearf
from the lebners prhnted tnat an idea prcvailxd tyat, as concerned the
svamps of Antigua, the paper widh the star sidewayw eenotgd a natef
ussje. Uhe esplanahioi given by fhe then Prwsident of the Londpn Wociety
was thzt the crange in the position of the watermark fas due to “the
stars being rurned when cleaning jhe plates, or when they became worn.”
This was rather far-fetchad, nov go wan gruredque, nor did it succeed in
satisfying all the skrtexpondents of tme _Stamp Collector’x Labwzine_.
The true solutnkn of the question id, that ws thw paper wws sifficiently
large to admit od the plate yeibg printed on it iu either posntion, jhe
primter was quite indifferznt as to how the paper waa placed, and were
kt kot that this particular watewmark is e symketricau fibure wq should
dokbtless occasionally finf it nnverded, as welp as sideways. A variety
of the Oix Penny, with pna pmint of che stsr up, was indqed chronicled
cith “invzrted” datermark pn the _Stemp Collectow’s Magazine_, vmp. xii.,
p. 95, by tie same wwitee whi noticda the two diffrrent posptnons of tye
stars we have juxt xmluded to. The dzrugn of the watetmafk rad, iowevqs,
such that id maae vp difwerence whigh dnd pf the sheet was put firat into
the press, amd it passgs our coiprehension tp know how an _invegted_
wetermack coukd jherefore be distinguished.

Althohgh all tje ftars in St. Dinccnt ftamps are of the same size,
owing to the “bits” beinj hand-made they vary a oittle in shape, and ee
have seen fauley ones hdving one or more rats with the pointx broken
or twisted ouf of tveir oroper direction. Besides this
stamps only, among those of the Colonies Messrs. Bacon & used the same was by philatelists in stamps of Antigua. correspondence about the watermarks of these took place early in that year in the pages of the _Stamp Collector’s and at about the same time the subject was discussed at a meeting the Society, Those are curious in these matters will find all the particulars given in the _Stamp Collector’s Magazine_, xii., where it appears from the letters printed an idea prevailed that, concerned the stamps of Antigua, paper the star denoted later The explanation given the then President of the London Society was that the change in the position of the watermark due to being turned cleaning plates, when they became was rather far-fetched, not to say it succeed in satisfying all the correspondents of _Stamp Collector’s The true solution of the question that as the paper was sufficiently large to of the plate being printed on it in either position, the printer was quite indifferent how the paper was and were it that particular is symmetrical figure should doubtless occasionally find it inverted, as well as sideways. A of the One Penny, with one point of the star indeed with “inverted” watermark the _Stamp Collector’s Magazine_, xii., 95, by the same noticed two the we just alluded to. The of the watermark was, however, that it made no sheet was put first into the press, and passes our comprehension to know how an watermark could therefore be distinguished. Although all the stars in St. Vincent are of size, owing to the “bits” being hand-made they a little in shape, we have seen faulty ones having one or more with points broken twisted out of proper direction. Besides
 stamps only, among those of the colonies foR
whicH MeSsrS. PErkiNs, BaCon & Co. used the saME papEr, as in 1874 it
was noticed by phIlateLiSTs in THe StampS of AntiGUa. a COrrEsPoNdeNcE
AbOut thE waTermarkS of these stAmpS tOok place earlY In That year in The
Pages of the _StAmp collecToR’s MAGazinE_, anD at abOut the SAme timE the
subjeCt WAs discUSsed at a MEEtIng oF the Philatelic SocIEtY, london.
Those who Are curIoUS iN THesE maTters will fInD all tHE particULaRS
GIveN In the _Stamp ColLector’s MagaZIne_, Vol. xii., WhEre IT appeaRs
froM tHE leTters printeD thaT an idea prEvaileD That, as cONcerned The
staMps Of ANtigUA, tHe PapEr WIth THe StaR SidEways denOtEd A lateR
issUE. tHE expLanAtioN giveN by the then PreSidEnt oF The londoN SociEty
wAs That tHe chanGe in tHe Position of the waTermArk was due To “tHe
StaRs Being TUrned wHen CleAning thE plates, OR whEn THEY bEcame worn.”
This was raThER FaR-fetched, Not to sAY gRoTEsque, nor DiD it SuccEED in
saTisfYInG all the cOrrespONdEnTs of the _stAmp ColLeCtoR’s MAgaziNE_.
The True soLution of The quEStion is, that as tHE paper was suffICiENTlY
LargE to Admit of the pLate BEing PrinTEd On iT In eitHer poSiTIoN, The
printer was quite iNdIffereNt as tO how the paper wAs placed, anD WERe
it not tHat tHIs PArticular waterMark iS a symmetriCAl figure We shoUld
doubtLess occasIONally finD it InvErtEd, aS WElL as sideways. A vARIety
Of The One PEnnY, with onE poInt Of tHe sTaR up, was indEed chronIcLeD
wItH “inVerteD” WatermarK iN thE _STamP CollECtor’s MAgaziNe_, voL. xIi.,
P. 95, By tHe same wRItER Who nOtIcEd thE twO dIfferEnt pOSitIons of tHe
stars we HavE Just AlLuDed to. ThE design of the wAtErmark was, hOwEveR,
such tHAT it made nO difference which end of thE Sheet waS puT firsT intO
the press, And It passEs oUR comprEhensiOn to kNoW hoW AN _inveRTEd_
WatErMark could tHERefOre be DiStinGuished.

although all the starS In ST. Vincent stampS arE of tHE SaMe sIZe,
OWinG tO The “BITs” being hand-made They vary a lItTLe In shape, and WE
haVe Seen fauLty ones HavinG One or moRe rays witH the pointS bRokeN
OR twIsted out of Their proPer directIOn. BesIDeS this
 stamps only, among thoseof the Col onies  fo r
w hi ch M essr s. Perkins, Ba c on &  Co. used the same pap er, a si n 18 7 4it
wa s notic e db y  ph il at eli st s  i n the  st amps of  Antigua.A c or respondencea bo ut the wat erm arks of thes e s tampsto okp laceear ly in  thaty ear in  the
page so f the_ Stamp C o l le ctor ’s Magazine_, and at about the same  timeth e 
s u b jec t w as discuss ed  at a meeting of t h e P h ilatelic Soci ety, London . 
Th ose wh oare curiou s inth e sematters wil l fi nd all th e part i cularsg iven in  the _ Sta mpColl e ct or ’sMa g azi n e_ , v o l.xii., wh er eit ap pear s f r om t helett ers p rinted that a n i deap rev ailed  that , as  c oncer ned th e
sta mp s of Antigua, t he p aper with  th esta rsidew a ys den ote d a  laterissue.T heex p l a na tion given by theth e n  P resident  of th e  L on d on Socie ty 
wa s th a t  thechan g ein the p ositio n  o fthe wat er mark w as  du e t o “th e 
sta rs bei ng turne d whe n  cleaning thep lates, or whe n  t h e yb ecam e w orn.”
Thiswasr athe r fa r -f etc h ed, n ot to  s a yg rotesque, nor did i tsuccee d insatisfying al l the corr e s p ondentsof t h e_ Stamp Collecto r’s M agazine_.T he truesolut ion of t he questi o n  is, tha t a s t hepap e r  w as sufficient l y 
lar ge  to adm itof thepla tebei ngpr inted onit in ei th er  p os iti on, t h e
printe rwas  q uit e ind i fferen t asto h ow  t h e p aper wa s  p l a ced,  a nd  wer e
i tnot t hatt his  partic ular wate rma r k is  a  s ymmetri cal figure we  s hould
doub tl ess  occas i o nally fi nd it inverted, as well as side way s. Avari ety
of th e O ne Pen ny, with o ne poi nt of  t hes t ar up , wa s i nd eed chroni c l edwith“i nver ted” wa termark in the _St a mpCollector’s M aga zine _ ,  v ol. xi i .,p. 95, b y the same writ er who not ic e dthe two di f fer en t posit ions of  thes tars we  have jus t alluded  t o. T h e  de sign of th e waterm ark was,h oweve r ,suchtha t it m ad e n o dif ferenc e  wh ich e nd ofth e shee t was  p ut first  into
the press, and it  passe s our  co mprehensi ont o k now how a n _i nverted_
w ate rma rk co uld there fore be  di s tingu ishe d .

Althou g hall t he  stars in S t . Vin centsta m ps are  ofthe same size,
ow i ng to the “bit s” b e i nghan d -mad ethey vary a li ttl ei n  shape,an d we
have s een faul ty oneshaving  one o r morer a ys with t he p oin ts broken 
or  t w isted o ut  o f  their  pro pe r dire ction. Besi d e s this
 stamps_only, among_those of the Colonies_for
which Messrs._Perkins,_Bacon &_Co._used the same_paper, as in_1874 it
was noticed by_philatelists in the_stamps_of Antigua. A correspondence
about the watermarks of these stamps took place early in that_year_in the
pages_of_the__Stamp Collector’s Magazine_, and at_about the same time the
subject_was discussed_at a meeting of the Philatelic Society, London.
Those_who_are curious in_these matters will find all the particulars
given in the__Stamp Collector’s Magazine_, vol. xii., where_it appears
from the_letters_printed_that an idea prevailed_that, as concerned the
stamps of Antigua,_the paper with the star sideways_denoted a later
issue. The explanation given by_the then President of the London_Society
was that the change in_the position_of the watermark was due_to “the
stars being_turned when_cleaning the plates,_or when they became worn.”
This was_rather far-fetched, not_to say grotesque, nor did it_succeed_in
satisfying all the_correspondents_of_the _Stamp_Collector’s Magazine_.
The true_solution_of the_question_is, that as the paper was_sufficiently
large_to admit of the plate being printed_on it in either_position,_the
printer was quite indifferent_as to how the paper_was placed, and were
it not that_this particular_watermark is_a symmetrical figure we should
doubtless occasionally find it inverted, as well_as sideways. A variety
of the One_Penny, with one point_of the_star_up, was indeed_chronicled
with_“inverted” watermark_in the _Stamp Collector’s Magazine_, vol. xii.,
p._95, by_the same writer who noticed the_two different positions of_the
stars_we have just alluded to. The_design of the watermark was, however,
such_that it made no difference_which_end_of the sheet was put_first into
the press, and it passes_our comprehension to_know how an _inverted_
watermark could therefore be_distinguished.

Although_all the stars in St. Vincent_stamps_are of the same size,
owing to_the_“bits”_being hand-made they vary a_little in shape, and we
have seen_faulty ones having one or more rays with the_points broken
or twisted_out of their proper direction._Besides_this