PHILATELY.

Otago Witness, 14 December 1893, Page 34

PHILATELY.

Br Old Stamp,

IS A COLLECTOR A DEALER 2

This question has long been a debatable point among collectors. Many societies have gone the length of excluding recognised dealers from membership. Many collectors feel quite insulted if you even insinuate that they are dealers. What is the meaning of the word "dealer"? It means "one who deals, one who trades." People do not deal who do not get a profit out of their dealing ; or at least they expect to. Take the average collector. He barters away one stamp of which he has already one in his collection for another stamp which he has nob. This is fair exchanging, for it must be presumed that the two are of pretby nearly equal value. If one is of much more value than the other tho difference must be made up iv some way to equalise the bargain. Many collectors can boasb that their collections have nob cost them a halfpenny. So much the better luck theirs. I wish I could boast the same way. This effect must, then, be produced through the charity of friends. lam sure these collections I refer to were not picked up in the streets. Of course if a man is rich enough and ambitiou3 enough and of such a determination of character as to say in his own mind that he will only buy or acquire stamps that are actually necessary or wanting in his album, then I am quite free to admit that he is essentially a collector and not a dealer. Bub how many are there of this description ? I think I may safely say none in the colonies, or, if there are, I don't know of them. There may be such at Home. When I write of this class I include the man who will not buy a stamp because it is cheap ; a man who will refuse to buy any stamp he does not actually want for his collection, no matter how cheap. And where are they ? Extremely few, and very far between. Many say they are nob dealers because they do "not seek to make profit out of buying. They say thejl* only buy stamps to exchange for other stamps to put into their collection. They will buy any stamp worth 10s for 2s 6d (or as much less as they caD, or as little more as they can), and with this bargain they will possibly acquire Sbveral stamps tor their collection. This is dealing. They console themselves with thinking that they are not dealing, because they are not laying aside the profits of their deals in the shape of money. But what on earth is the difference if they make a lucky purchase and make a pound out of it or whether they add a pound to the value of the stamps in their collection? It all comes to the same thing. Assuming that my readers are advanced collectors, and who are well up in the value of stamps, is there one amorig them, or dees any one know of another, who would not at any time give 2s 6d, cay, for a stamp he knows quite well to ba worth 20s ? I don't. Whether a collector has the particular stamp in his album or not, matters not ; he cannot resist buying a bargain. Then, again, among our collectors there are those who have correspondents abroad. These do a certain amount of trading between themselves. One sends the other a sheet for him to select from or dispose of. Doesn't he get a commission ? Of course he does. It would be contrary to human nature if he didn't. We collectors are constantly receiving letters asking for stamps to add to collections or to exchange away for others. This is all dealing. Perhaps it would be possible to create a middle class, to be called " the amateur dealer" or the " collector dealer." For long enough there was a wide gulf between the amateur and professional in sporting circles. Though not so wide, the gap between the dealer and the collector is very similar. The sporting crowd have created a go-between, why nob the stamp collectors ? Many argue that because they never sold a stamp they are not dealers. It is nob necessary to sell only to become a dealer. If you barter you are virtually selling to make a profi 1 ", and not a loss. There may be, as I said before, a few who may be termed collectors only ; but I maintain that by far tho greater majority of tho&e who call themselves collectors ODly are nothing less than dealers. They need not be ashamed of it — it's all right if they are honest. There's nothing derogatory in being a dealer, though evidently many think so, else why their iniliguatioa when they are spoken of as such? I am afraid I shall not convince those who think to the contrarj . The question, I believe, is occupying the attention of some philatelic periodicals at Home, and I shall be curious to see which way the weight of argument goes. Doubtless there may be something to be said on the other side, though in the meantime I know of nothing further than I have written.

It is no secret now that Mr Phillips, manager for Stanley Gibbons (Limited), who paid the record price for two postage stamps lately, at once resold them to a wealthy Birmingham collector for just £100 more than he paid for them, the price for the two thus being £780.

Much stir was created among London dealers about the middle of October by the news of the theft of a collection worth £100. There have been quite a number of these thefts lately. In one case the thief was caught red-handed, and yet allowed to go because he concocted an ingenious lie. A police constable who had been summoned to the spot was fairly " flabbergasted " when he saw the culprit liberated. " Well," he muttered, when he had recovered his mental balance, "you're one of thejworst Jugginses I ever met ! " and having told the dealer what he thought of him, the policemau moved off — a fine picture of the outraged majesty of the law,— Stamp Collectors' Journal.

About the same date a boy of 16 entered a dealer's shop — the same shop as above referred to, I think — and having sold a few stamps, bought others. Having 6d left he said he would take an 8c Columbian. The dealer had to leave the shop to procure this, and while he was away the boy decamped, taking with him a collection worth about £100. The boy was a constant customer at the shop. So far no clue has been obtained as to who the youth was.

It is said that before the United States Columbian stamps were issued from the press orders for them aggregating over £40,000 had been received by the Government from collectors abroad. This, of course, would be all clear profit to the Government, over and above the trivial cost of printing them.