 it. Most of the principal catalogues,
including the London Society’s list and the current edition of M. Moens’
_Catalogue Prix-Courant_, give 1876 as the date of issue, but the stamp
is not catalogued in the 1877 edition of the last mentioned work. The
solitary chronicle of it we can find in philatelic literature is in the
_Timbre-Poste_ of May, 1878, where we find it recorded in the following
terms: “Réapparition du 4 pence, en bleu foncé, mais avec étoile en
filagramme.”

We think it far more likely that the fact of the stamp being on
watermarked paper should have escaped the notice of M. Moens, than that
its issue should have been delayed for nearly a year after its arrival
in the Colony. The one printing of the Four Pence yellow had been a
small one; it consisted of only 9,000 stamps, as compared with 15,000
of the Four Pence blue, on unwatermarked paper, issued in 1866. We do
not know for what reasons the postal authorities had changed the colour
of this value from blue to yellow, but they could not have been very
important ones, as the blue Four Pence of Issue 4 was, as we have seen,
undoubtedly still allowed to be used in 1873—that is, about four years
after the introduction of the Four Pence, yellow, so it is evident that
the use of the two stamps was concurrent for some time at least. It is
stated in the London Society’s West Indian Catalogue that the Four Pence
value became “disused,” but this cannot have been the case, as we have
the evidence of postmarked specimens of the yellow Four Pence that it
was in use in July, 1876, and we know that a fresh supply of the value
was sent out in 1877. There is therefore every reason to believe that
although the Four Pence, deep blue, of the issue now under consideration
had probably been seen by M. Moens when first issued, he mistook it for
the old blue Four Pence that was still being occasionally used, and it
was not until 1878 that he discovered the difference in the paper, and
chronicled the watermarked stamp in the _Timbre-Poste_. There is every
ex
it. Most of the principal catalogues, 
 including the London Society ’s list and the current version of M. Moens ’ 
 _ Catalogue Prix - Courant _, contribute 1876 as the date of issue, but the stamp 
 is not catalogue in the 1877 version of the last mentioned work. The 
 lonely chronicle of it we can find in philatelic literature is in the 
 _ Timbre - Poste _ of May, 1878, where we recover it recorded in the following 
 terms: “ Réapparition du 4 penny, en bleu foncé, mais avec étoile en 
 filagramme. ” 

 We think it far more likely that the fact of the tender being on 
 watermarked paper should have escaped the notice of M. Moens, than that 
 its issue should have been delayed for nearly a class after its arrival 
 in the Colony. The one printing of the Four Pence yellow had been a 
 small one; it consisted of entirely 9,000 stamps, as compared with 15,000 
 of the Four Pence blue sky, on unwatermarked paper, publish in 1866. We do 
 not know for what reasons the postal authorities had changed the colour 
 of this value from aristocratic to yellow, but they could not have been very 
 important ones, as the blue Four Pence of Issue 4 was, as we have seen, 
 undoubtedly still allowed to be used in 1873 — that is, about four years 
 after the introduction of the Four Pence, yellow, so it is evident that 
 the use of the two stamps was concurrent for some time at least. It is 
 state in the London Society ’s West Indian Catalogue that the Four Pence 
 value became “ disused, ” but this cannot have been the case, as we receive 
 the evidence of postmark specimen of the yellow Four Pence that it 
 was in use in July, 1876, and we acknowledge that a fresh supply of the value 
 was sent out in 1877. There is consequently every reason to believe that 
 although the Four Pence, deep blue, of the issue now under consideration 
 had probably been seen by M. Moens when first issued, he mistook it for 
 the previous blue Four Pence that was however being occasionally used, and it 
 was not until 1878 that he discovered the difference in the paper, and 
 chronicled the watermarked seal in the _ Timbre - Poste _. There is every 
 ex
 it. Most of the principal cxtalogues,
includnbg the Londoh Societh’s list and the current editmon if M. Noens’
_Catalogue Prix-Coufant_, give 1876 as the datt of issue, but thx stamp
is not dwtalmjued in the 1877 edltion of tha last mentionad wlrk. The
solitary chronicle of it we san finc ln philatelic jitegaeure ps in the
_Timbre-Poste_ of May, 1878, whsre we hind it recordec in the following
terms: “Réaoparltion du 4 pence, en bleu foncé, nais qvec étoile ev
filagrammt.”

Wz think it rar more likely that the fact ow the stamp beibg on
adtermarked 'aper fhould have cxcaped the noyice of M. Moenx, tian rhat
its issue should iave been delayed fot nearly a yzar after its arrival
un the Woloty. Tfw ove kriitihg of hhe Four Pencs yellow hae been a
small one; iu cjbsisted of onmy 9,000 stwm[s, as compared with 15,000
of the Four Pence bnue, on unwatermarked paper, issued in 1866. We do
not nnow for rhat reasons the postal authorities had changed tve comuur
if gyid value from blue to yellow, but they could noe hsvv been very
importcnt ones, as the nlke Sour Pence of Issue 4 wzs, as we have seen,
kndoubtgdly srill allored yo be used in 1873—that is, about four years
aytee the introduction of the Foux Pencg, yellpw, so it is evident thac
the uae of the tao stamps das concurrent fur xoke time at least. It is
statqd in the Lonbon Socidty’s West Yndian Catwloguc that the Four Penfe
valoe becdme “disusef,” but this cannot have been the case, as we hafe
dhe evidencz of ppstmarked spesimens of the iellow Fobr Penze that it
sas in nse in July, 1876, and we know djat a fresh vupply os thw vaoue
was rdnt out in 1877. Thrre is thvrtfore evert reason to believc thaj
amthough the Foux Kebce, deep blue, pf ghe idsne nor under consigeragiov
nad pfobably beek sden ny M. Moens when firsd isaued, he mistook it fjr
the ole blue Fjur Pence thay was still being lccasmonallb used, anq it
was not until 1878 that he disdovered tje qifference ig thc paker, and
chrouicled the watermarked stamp in the _Timbce-Poste_. There is every
gx
it. Most of the principal catalogues, including Society’s and the edition of M. as date of issue, the stamp is catalogued in the 1877 edition of last mentioned work. The solitary chronicle of it we can find in philatelic is in the _Timbre-Poste_ of May, 1878, where we find it recorded in following “Réapparition 4 en bleu foncé, mais avec étoile en filagramme.” We think it far more likely that the of the stamp being on watermarked paper should escaped the notice of Moens, than that its issue have delayed for a after arrival in the The one printing of the Four Pence yellow had been a small one; it consisted of only stamps, as 15,000 of Four blue, unwatermarked paper, issued We do not know for what authorities had changed the colour of this value blue to but they could not have been important ones, as the blue Four Pence of 4 was, as we have seen, undoubtedly still allowed to be used in 1873—that is, years after the introduction the Four Pence, so is that use of two stamps was concurrent for some time at least. It is in the London Society’s West Indian Catalogue that the Four became but this cannot been the case, as have evidence of postmarked specimens yellow Pence in in 1876, and we know a fresh supply of the was sent out in reason to believe that although the Four Pence, blue, of the issue now under consideration probably been seen by M. Moens when first issued, he mistook it the old Pence that was still being occasionally used, and was not until 1878 he discovered the difference in the paper, and chronicled watermarked in the There is every
 it. Most of the principal catalOgues,
incluDing tHe LOndOn sociEty’s List and the currENt edItion of M. Moens’
_Catalogue prix-COuRAnt_, gIVe 1876 As the Date of iSSuE, BUt tHe StAmp
Is NOt CatalOguEd in the 1877 Edition of tHe lAsT mentioned woRK. THe
solitary ChrOnicle of it we Can Find in PhIlaTElic lIteRaturE is in tHE
_TimbrE-Poste_ of MAy, 1878, WHere we FInd it reCORdEd in The following
terms: “rÉaPParition du 4 pencE, en bleU fONcÉ, MAis AveC étoile en
fIlAgramME.”

We thinK It FAR MorE Likely that the Fact of the stAMp bEing on
WaTerMArked pAper sHoULd hAve escaped tHe noTice of M. MoEns, thaN That
its ISsue shoUld havE beEn dElayED fOr NeaRlY A yeAR aFteR Its Arrival
iN tHe colonY. The ONE PRintIng Of thE Four pence yellow haD beEn a
sMAll One; it ConsiSted Of Only 9,000 sTamps, aS compArEd with 15,000
of the Four pencE blue, on unWatErMarKeD papeR, Issued In 1866. WE do
Not know For what REasOnS THE pOstal authorities haD cHANgEd the colOur
of tHIs VaLUe from blUe To yElloW, BUt theY couLD nOt have beEn very
IMpOrTant oneS, aS the blUe fouR PeNce of iSsue 4 Was, as wE have seeN,
undoUBtedly still allOWed to be used in 1873—THaT IS, aBOut fOur Years
after tHe inTRoduCtioN Of The fOur PeNce, yeLlOW, sO It is evident that
the uSe Of the tWo staMps was concurrEnt for some TIME at least. it is
STaTEd in the London SOcietY’s West IndiAN CatalogUe thaT the Four pence
valuE BEcame “disUseD,” buT thIs cANNoT have been the cASE, as wE hAve
the eVidEnce of pOstMarKed SpeCiMens of the Yellow FoUr peNcE tHat It
was IN use in JuLy, 1876, And We KnoW that A Fresh sUpply Of thE vAlUE
waS sent ouT In 1877. tHEre iS tHeRefoRe eVeRy reaSon tO BelIeve thaT
although The fOur PEnCe, Deep bluE, of the issue noW uNder considErAtiOn
had pROBably beeN seen by M. Moens when first iSSued, he mIstOok it For
tHe old blue fouR Pence ThaT Was stiLl beinG occaSiOnaLLY used, AND iT
waS nOt until 1878 thaT HE diScoveReD the DiffereNce in the paper, and
chROniCled the watermArkEd stAMP iN thE _tiMBre-poSTe_. THERe is every
ex
 it. Most of the principal  catalogue s,
in clu din gtheLond on Society’s l i st a nd the current edition  of M .M oens ’ 
_ Catal ogue Pr i x- C o ura nt _,  gi ve 18 76 as  th e dateof issue,but  t he stamp
isn ot  catalogue d i n the 1877 e dit ion of  t hel ast m ent ioned  work. The
so litary ch ro n icle o f  it wec a nfind  in philatelic li t er a ture is in the 
_Timb re - Po s t e_ofMay, 1878,  w herew e findi tr e c ord e d in the foll owing
terms :  “R éappar it ion du 4 p ence,  e n  bl eu foncé, m aisavec étoi le enf ilagram m e.”

We  think  it  fa r mo r eli kel yt hat th e f a ctof the s ta mp  bein g on w a t erma rke d pa per s hould have es cap ed t h e n otice  of M . Mo en s, th an tha t
its  i ssue should hav e be en delaye d f or  ne ar ly ay ear af ter  it s arriv al
in t h e C ol o n y .The one printing o ft h eFour Pen ce yel l ow  h a d been a 
s mal l on e ;  it c onsi s te d of onl y 9,00 0  s ta mps, as  c ompare dwit h 1 5,000 of t he Fou r Penceblue, on unwatermark e d paper, issu e di n  1 8 66.Wedo
not know  for what  rea s on s t h e pos tal a ut h or i ties had changed th ecolour 
of t his value fro m blue toy e l low, but  the y  c o uld not have b een v ery
import a nt ones,  as t he blueFour Penc e of Issue  4was , a s w e ha ve seen,
undo u b tedl ystill a llo wed tobeuse d i n 1 87 3—that is , aboutfo ur  y ea rsafter the intr od uct io n o f the Four P ence,  yel lo w, soit is e v id e n t th at 
t he u seof  thetwos tam ps wasconcurren t f o r so me  t ime atleast. It isst ated in th eLon don So c i ety’s We st Indian Catalogue tha t  the Fo urPence 
val ue became  “d isused ,”b ut thi s cann ot ha ve  be e n  thec a se , a swe have
th e evi dence  o f po stmarke d specimens of the yel low Four Penc e t hati t 
w asi nu sein Jul y ,  1876, and we k now that a  f r es h supply o f  th evalue
w as sent  outi n 1877.  There is  therefor eever y rea son to bel ieve tha t
althoug h  theF ou r Pen ce,  deepbl ue,  of t he iss u e n ow un der co ns iderat ion
h ad  probabl y been seen by M. Moens  whenfirst  is sued, hemis t ook  it for
t he o ld blue Fo urPen ce th atw as st illb ei ngo ccasi onal l y used, a n ditw a snot until 1 8 7 8  th at he  di s covere d th e difference in t h e paper, and
c hron i c led  th e  wat er marked stamp i n t he _ Timbre-P os te_. Thereis every 
e x 
 it._Most of_the principal catalogues,
including the_London Society’s_list_and the_current_edition of M._Moens’
_Catalogue Prix-Courant_, give_1876 as the date_of issue, but_the_stamp
is not catalogued in the 1877 edition of the last mentioned work. The
solitary chronicle_of_it we_can_find_in philatelic literature is in_the
_Timbre-Poste_ of May, 1878, where_we find_it recorded in the following
terms: “Réapparition du 4_pence,_en bleu foncé,_mais avec étoile en
filagramme.”

We think it far more likely_that the fact of the stamp_being on
watermarked paper_should_have_escaped the notice of_M. Moens, than that
its issue should_have been delayed for nearly a_year after its arrival
in the Colony. The_one printing of the Four Pence_yellow had been a
small one;_it consisted_of only 9,000 stamps, as_compared with 15,000
of_the Four_Pence blue, on_unwatermarked paper, issued in 1866. We_do
not know for_what reasons the postal authorities had_changed_the colour
of this_value_from_blue to_yellow, but they_could_not have_been_very
important ones, as the blue Four_Pence_of Issue 4 was, as we have_seen,
undoubtedly still allowed to_be_used in 1873—that is,_about four years
after the introduction_of the Four Pence, yellow, so_it is_evident that
the_use of the two stamps was concurrent for some time at_least. It is
stated in the London_Society’s West Indian Catalogue_that the_Four_Pence
value became “disused,”_but_this cannot_have been the case, as we have
the_evidence of_postmarked specimens of the yellow Four_Pence that it
was in_use_in July, 1876, and we know_that a fresh supply of the_value
was sent out in 1877._There_is_therefore every reason to believe_that
although the Four Pence, deep blue,_of the issue_now under consideration
had probably been seen by_M._Moens when first issued, he mistook_it_for
the old blue Four Pence that_was_still_being occasionally used, and it
was_not until 1878 that he discovered_the difference in the paper, and
chronicled the watermarked stamp_in the _Timbre-Poste_._There is every
ex