GB RPSL PB-CORRESP-LB-1011002-101102-0234

Draft

Item

• May 18449 (Creation)

Royal Philatelic Society London

466 435. N Dear Sir, London. H&G Regul Puer May 18449 I received your letter Af the 5th nut eveloſing the 2 Dublin 20%. Noter number 30,502 134,526 on the same evening & dam ofliged by your to see them. The told that 2 opinion Apachling with any requests of experploter creates had I had formed while told been made out soul Bank Bugland Note is more than confinued for although Theld it utterly importe to Atain a sufficient quantity fick on both piers of the paper for use duas not do sure that the waterum for both could not be. thereby. On examine your 2 Notes however not only is there a total want of ink in the separate prices butin accomplis the process the party doing it has destroyed the Watermarks on the whole notes thereby exercising his ingenuity without any possible benefit to the derived therefrom. A scenes impossible to suppose that this practice should be carried on to any great extent particularly if the Bank jiné trouble- Kjine trouble leparta brzuching such notes without a watermarke. Should this mutilation however prevail to prevail cure I know Bwould bevant to any extent the to have Lanuch thining paper although the present thickness of your notep which is about that of the Bank of England is the best adapted for wear. There are many persons pertur perficer Capable of accomplishing this splitting process Phone documents are liable to it but in the case of bank Note- (except as a matter of Curiosity) Isce nothing to indur its being practical. Should your Directors, however think otherwill & think it an evil that this thing J. Hewa Can be done, the adoption of a back pitate would Accoat de sent an und to it at once. return you the deter here with thing Destes hezewith ouly Deaubin Gebe FBB Gentlemen, a our new We have received the extraetfren Jetter Written by the Manager of the Commercial Banks & Sydnech which you sent us lastevemich, in relation to the dented worker upon the notes lates made by us for the new worth shoreld prove défection forthat Bank. In reply meber to ripus regret that as to weakness and length of wear butas what. have sent for the différent denominations are of 3 004 different patterns and all are objected to, we donoffeel justified in proposing a continuance of this indentation under day other form asthet might prove equally objectionable, When it was first adopted we a Security explained to you the real facts, namely, that the thing was new, that it would prove aperfect- apamest forgery pootrets mixed up with worn it mean by any process, and that we had other papers, and handled continually that it did Stand that test, and we were certainly led to beleive. that there would be very little, if any difference in the wear of such notes over others? Had they worn well, we do not thing the objection that they become somewhat indistinct because the forger by wear, a very important one, bust produce a note with the indepture perfectly by visible, or he would not reply copy the note at all? and this he cannot do However with the Knowledge wehen Now acquired, we consider the Bank's bestplan will be to adopt abacking to their Notes (with the saucean of security as the enclosed specimen very difficult to ge 466 435. N Dear Sir, London. H&G Regul Puer May 18449 I received your letter Af the 5th nut eveloſing the 2 Dublin 20%. Noter number 30,502 134,526 on the same evening & dam ofliged by your to see them. The told that 2 opinion Apachling with any requests of experploter creates had I had formed while told been made out soul Bank Bugland Note is more than confinued for although Theld it utterly importe to Atain a sufficient quantity fick on both piers of the paper for use duas not do sure that the waterum for both could not be. thereby. On examine your 2 Notes however not only is there a total want of ink in the separate prices butin accomplis the process the party doing it has destroyed the Watermarks on the whole notes thereby exercising his ingenuity without any possible benefit to the derived therefrom. A scenes impossible to suppose that this practice should be carried on to any great extent particularly if the Bank jiné trouble- Kjine trouble leparta brzuching such notes without a watermarke. Should this mutilation however prevail to prevail cure I know Bwould bevant to any extent the to have Lanuch thining paper although the present thickness of your notep which is about that of the Bank of England is the best adapted for wear. There are many persons pertur perficer Capable of accomplishing this splitting process Phone documents are liable to it but in the case of bank Note- (except as a matter of Curiosity) Isce nothing to indur its being practical. Should your Directors, however think otherwill & think it an evil that this thing J. Hewa Can be done, the adoption of a back pitate would Accoat de sent an und to it at once. return you the deter here with thing Destes hezewith ouly Deaubin Gebe FBB Gentlemen, a our new We have received the extraetfren Jetter Written by the Manager of the Commercial Banks & Sydnech which you sent us lastevemich, in relation to the dented worker upon the notes lates made by us for the new worth shoreld prove défection forthat Bank. In reply meber to ripus regret that as to weakness and length of wear butas what. have sent for the différent denominations are of 3 004 different patterns and all are objected to, we donoffeel justified in proposing a continuance of this indentation under day other form asthet might prove equally objectionable, When it was first adopted we a Security explained to you the real facts, namely, that the thing was new, that it would prove aperfect- apamest forgery pootrets mixed up with worn it mean by any process, and that we had other papers, and handled continually that it did Stand that test, and we were certainly led to beleive. that there would be very little, if any difference in the wear of such notes over others? Had they worn well, we do not thing the objection that they become somewhat indistinct because the forger by wear, a very important one, bust produce a note with the indepture perfectly by visible, or he would not reply copy the note at all? and this he cannot do However with the Knowledge wehen Now acquired, we consider the Bank's bestplan will be to adopt abacking to their Notes (with the saucean of security as the enclosed specimen very difficult to ge

• English

Summary: The letter discusses issues with bank notes, including the lack of ink, destruction of watermarks, and the impracticality of certain splitting processes. It suggests adopting a back print to prevent forgery and improve durability.

To: Gentlemen

Date: May 18449

Images: 101102_0234.jpg