Answering the questions "Is this a London Print or a Richmond Print?" and "Is this a genuine CSA item or is this a counterfeit, reproduction, reprint, forgery or fake?" is the focus of this guide. A simplified matrix is followed by a more in-depth discussion of the characteristics of the two printings.

This pair is typical of De La Rue printings.

The London v. Richmond question is a matter of printing quality, paper type, color and gum. London printings are very good, very uniform in quality and in color. Richmond prints are variable for paper, printing quality, color and gum. Another way to identify these two issues is by the date of the postmark.

A Simplified London or Richmond Matrix

                                 London  (#6)                         Richmond  (#7)

• Paper           Thin, surfaced                     Any other type
• Printing        Sharp, clear impression       Any printing defect  
• Ink                Blue                                  Any shade of darker blue or lighter blue
• Gum             White, thin, even                 Dark, patchy, thick, brush marks
• Postmark      Before 15 July 1862   

If the example you are studying has any characteristics of the Richmond printing it is a Richmond printing.

The paper: London printings are printed on a thin, surfaced hard paper. However, along with the printing plates Thomas De La Rue and Co. shipped to the CSA a quantity of stamp paper. So, some Richmond prints were produced on paper very close to, if not identical to, the paper used in London. A stamp of this design that is not on the London paper is going to be a Richmond printing.

Richmond Printing. Note the                    London printing with full
incomplete inking of the tablet                 gum that has created creases
of value.                                                characteristic of the type.

Note the round defect to the right
of Davis' mouth; also the outer
frame line is bleeding into the main
design at the upper left corner. These
are telltale characteristics of a
Richmond printing.

The printing: The impressions from the London printings by Thomas De La Rue and Co. are quite clear and sharp. They have, in many instances, an almost chiseled appearance in the portrait. The outer frame lines are crisp, unbroken and completely separated from the rest of the design. Richmond prints, especially early printings done on London paper can be very difficult to distinguish in used condition. Usually, a small defect of printing will give away the source of such a hard to place stamp. See the minute diagonal line extending from the edge of the design to the first leg of the N of CENTS on this example. This stamp is on London paper, has a thin white gum but the printing quality, although good, is not up to the usual De La Rue examples. Richmond printings have a large variety of plate defects. Two of the most common are having the outer frame line and the inner design bleed into each other. The other is to have a circular or oval area in the design that mis-printed. Either of these conditions marks the stamp as a product of Archer and Daly of Richmond. The Popeye, the White Cravat are two of the more famous recurring varieties of this design.

This stamp appears to be an
early Richmond Print. There
is a slight defect below the
N of CENTS.

The Color: Light blue is the color used in the London Printings. The Richmond printings come in a variety of shades of blue. If the stamp is not in the De La Rue shade of ink, it is a Richmond printing.

The Gum: London prints have a uniform, light and thinly applied gum. Unused copies with gum will show a uniform, thin and light colored gum. It may or may not have cracked over time. If it has cracked, many times these gum cracks telegraph through to the front surface giving the stamp a textured  appearance. On used copies this will no longer be present. Richmond issues have a variable gum.   The color, thickness, smoothness and coverage all vary. If the stamp has a darker gum, or shows uneven application, or large skips, or heavy brush marks this is a Richmond print.

The Postmark: The postal rates of the CSA changed between the issuance of the London Prints and the issuance of the Richmond Prints. Any cover franked with a single five cent typograph is probably a London print. If the date is visible and it is before 25 July 1862 then it is a London Print. Covers franked with two five cent typographs after 25 July 1862 could be one of each or they may be both of either type. To tell the difference look at the paper, the printing and the color.

Example of the                         Example of New York Counterfeit
New York Counterfeit                sold on eBay as genuine Dietz #6.

Is it a fake?

There are numerous fakes of this design. The one most commonly seen, and offered as genuine, is the New York Counterfeit. This has several distinguishing characteristics.   The most telling is the shortness of the mid crossbars of the "F" and "E" of FIVE.  Also, the printing is not very clear and the color is a blue with a greenish cast to it. Another telltale of this forgery is the outer frame line is roughly twice the thickness of the curved line at the corners near the stars and trefoils. On genuine stamps it is roughly the same thickness. Other forgeries of this design exist but they are almost impossible to mistake for a genuine stamp if there is a genuine stamp available for comparison.

One Cent De La Rue in Deep Orange ink.
Both Dietz and Scott assign #14 to this stamp.

The One Cent

The One Cent orange comes in two shades, deep orange and orange. Frequently this has faded and in some cases, faded to the point of making the design difficult to see. A mixed blessing as this is not the prettiest stamp on the planet.   Thomas De La Rue and Co. of London produced a single printing of 400,000 stamps, or 1000 sheets. The one cent rate never materialized so this stamp was never issued.   Canceled examples have bogus cancels. This stamp was also faked but the fakes are on modern paper, not the hard, thin surfaced paper used by De La Rue. It is usually quite easy to tell the fakes from the genuine examples even from a scan.

Dietz impression of the
Two Cents De la Rue

The Two Cents

De La Rue reworked the design of the One Cent to produce a plate of Two Cents stamps. There are no known examples of De La Rue printed stamps of this design. In the 1920s August Dietz pulled a few impressions from the plate in green. Since then others have reproduced the design using a variety of photographic or lithographic technologies. None were ever used in the Confederacy.

PhotoShop re-arrangement
of the Five Cents design to
mimic the DeLaRue Ten Cents design.

The Ten Cents

The Five Cents design was also re-worked by DeLaRue to show a value of Ten Cents. Examples printed from sections of the DeLaRue printing plate were printed after the end of the War Between the States. They have also been printed from plates of wholly new manufacture by a variety of people and in many colors. Often these reproductions will have wider spaces between the stamps than the narrowly placed genuine examples. I do not have an example in my collection but have simulated the look of this using PhotoShop to re-arrange the letters on the tablet of value and to change the color to the frequently seen black ink.

Note: If you feel this guide has not been helpful please contact me with your comments about its deficiencies so I may consider addressing them in future revisions.  Robert Chambers (CSA #3505)