SMALL QUEEN PERFORATIONS




A table comparing the Kiusalas guage, the old(slightly yellow) Instanta gauge,
and the new Instanta Gauge.

KIUSALAS	OLD	NEW
GAUGE	INSTANTA	INSTANTA
64	12.3	12.38
65	12.1	12.18
66	11.9	12.01
67	11.7	11.81
68	11.5	11.63

I will use 'old' Instanta measurements from here on when referring to any Small Queen Perforations.


It is generally accepted that the Kiusalas gauge is the ultimate guide for the perforations found on the Small Queen issue.

The logic behind the Kiusalas gauge is unassailable. In short the theory is that any machine developed in the late nineteenth century would naturally be based on Imperial units, IE some fraction of an inch. The gauge shows the distance between perforation holes measured in 1000Th's of an inch. Thus 64 implies that the holes are 64/1000 of an inch apart.

This works well until a person really starts to try to use the gauge. It always seemed to me that many stamps didn't quite fit. They would be almost 65 but sort of 66. However if a person assumes that they 'must' be one or the other it was necessary to make a choice. This meant that I ended up with with a lot of perforation varieties 65x66, 66x65, 66x66 etc. As I acquired more material it has become clear that there is a problem. Many of the stamps appear to be in between the Kiusalas measurements. This is particularly obvious when one compares large multiples. The difference between 11.9 and 12.0 is not very large over one stamp but becomes obvious over a strip of 6.

The difference became clear to me when I began to compare imprint pieces of the 1c Yellow. I have many imprint strips from the last 'Montreal' plates with S1,S2,S3,S4 above the imprint. These are all perfed 12.1x12.1. I also have many imprint pieces from the 'Ottawa' plates with A,B,C,D above the imprint. All of these are perfed 12.0x12.1. If one goes by the logic associated with the Kiusalas gauge these stamps would all be 65x65. But how does one explain the difference? If you put a 'Montreal' strip beside an 'Ottawa' one it is clear that they aren't the same. Did the perforation machine change over the years? If so why not gradually? Did the stamps shrink or expand in some manner? It is probably possible to come up with a complex arguement to explain this phenomenom but there is a simple solution.

I like the logic behind the theory of the Kiusalas gauge. It is only reasonable to suppose that the perforating machines were made in an ordered manner with the perforation holes separated by a consistant Imperial measurement. However 1/1000 of an inch doesn't work. But 1/2000 of an inch does. If one assumes that Kiusalas was right except that there are twice as many possible valid perforations then the existence of stamps that measure 12.0 or 12.2 is explained.



HOME