Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Numbers, post: 2235892, member: 11668"]That 1928E isn't a print shift--that's the normal location of the date and the seal on that series. In general, the 1928-1934 notes have more overlaps like this than the later series.  With the larger seals and taller serials, there wasn't room for everything to be separated.  On some denominations a serial number tends to touch a border or a signature; on these $5's the seal tends to cover part of the series date. This wasn't considered a problem--after all, the seal already deliberately overlaps the legal-tender wording (it makes the notes harder to counterfeit photographically if the red and black printings overlap), so a few more overlaps aren't hurting anything.  If you go back and look at the large-size notes, there are even more significant intersections between the intaglio and overprinted elements; on some designs it looks (by modern standards) like no space was left for the seal/serials at all, and they were just thrown on on top of everything else. The 1950D $100 with the series into the border is more unusual; by then, the seals and serials had been shrunk, and there was enough space that the various bits of the design were generally separated.  But I still doubt that an overlap this small, on a denomination this high, is likely to generate much interest as an error....[/QUOTE]