Message Board

Time Period:   Username Search:
Order By: Keyword Search:
   Reset Filters

Messages:

Page:1 2 3 4

Posted Jun 29, 20 10:54 by Terence Hines (thines)

And now a bit of philatelic whimsy

The sender, Arthur W. Line, was an early maker of first day cover cachets.

Image

Posted Jun 29, 20 10:33 by David Snow (dwsnow)

Forwarded mail, 1800

Ron Cipolla,

Thanks for sharing your most interesting forwarded cover from February 1800, and kind wishes.

I did some research on the addressee, Col. Nathan Rice, Commandant U.S. Infantry at Boston.

I found the best source listing early U.S. Army officers is the "Historical Register and Dictionary of the United States Army, from its Organization, September 29, 1789 to March 2, 1903", 2 Vols., by Francis B. Heitman (1903). This book is available online. See link.

Lieutenant-Colonel Nathan Rice was Commandant of the Fourteenth Regiment, and served 3 March 1799 to 15th June 1800. Serving under Rice were Majors Jno. Walker and Issac Winslow. The Fourteenth Regiment was organized under the Act of July 16, 1798 and discharged June 15, 1800 under the Act of May 14, 1800. Evidently the Regiment was disbanded June 15, 1800.

Posted Jun 29, 20 10:21 by Mohamed Nasr (mohamed_nasr)

Dec 8 to Germany RTS -- back

Back

Image

Posted Jun 29, 20 10:20 by Mohamed Nasr (mohamed_nasr)

Dec 8 to Germany RTS -- front

Morning after Pearl Harbor.

Image

Posted Jun 29, 20 10:06 by Mohamed Nasr (mohamed_nasr)

Dec 1941 RTS -- (2)

Back

Image

Posted Jun 29, 20 10:05 by Mohamed Nasr (mohamed_nasr)

Dec 1941 RTS

Here is nice one that escaped the censorship label, despite being cut open per the note on the back.

Image

Posted Jun 29, 20 6:48 by Richard Matta (rkmatta)

December 1941 Return to Sender

Tim O'Connor - I thought it was a 6 but looking at it under a magnifying glass you may well be correct that it is a 9. Hard to be certain.

I know I once had one Dec 4 that did make it to Germany but I don't recall if I still have it or sold it.

Posted Jun 29, 20 6:26 by Tim O'Connor (drtimo)

December 1941 Return to Sender

Richard, my eyes aren't what they used to be so I used a glass on the date. Is that a "9" or a "6" ? Tim

Posted Jun 28, 20 20:53 by Farley Katz (navalon)

ABNC die numbering

Ross-

Thank you so much for the information. I will follow up with your CCP article.

Regards

Farley

Posted Jun 28, 20 19:49 by Ross Towle (rosstowle)

ABNC die numbering

From the start of ABNC to 1879 consolidation, dies were numbered.  The ABNC had several series, each starting the number 1.  Thus a die number would not uniquely define a die.  It could one of several different unrelated images.  After the consolidation, the ABNC started all over.  Again multiple series each starting with C-1.  Finally in 1923, after dealing with their own 2 systems plus the systems of the various bank note companies it had acquired, the ABNC decided to renumber all dies on hand.  Each die would have a unique number.  The dies on hand were numbered under 50,000.  All new dies would get a unique number greater than 50,000.  Most of the time the old die number would be lined out.

This is why some INDEX COPY cards list two die numbers -- one old system) and one  new system for the pre-1924 issues.  And one die number for post 1923 issues.

You will also see die proofs where the printed die number is the original number and the new number will be added in pencil (usually in lower right corner).  Also die proofs were taken with the old number lined out and with the new die number.

To answer Farley's original question:  The Peru llamitas issue dies used 3 different fonts for the die number, two dies also had "American Bank Note Co." under the number, and one die had a description of the die above the die number.  Check out the Sept-Oct 2009 Collectors Club Philatelist for my article on ABNC die and order numbers.

Posted Jun 28, 20 19:35 by steven frumkin (sfrumkin)

Oops

Proofreading your own stuff is very important.

In my earlier post, the last line should read:

11 - US on Germany & Italy (!!!!) but Dec. 12 in Japan).

Posted Jun 28, 20 19:16 by steven frumkin (sfrumkin)

War Declarations (Dec. 1941)

[Dates in Washington DC shown at left]

7- Japan on US (Dec. 8 in Japan).

8 - US on Japan (Dec. 9 in Japan).

11 - Germany & Italy on US (same date in Japan)

11 - US on Germany & Italy (same date in Germany & Japan but Dec. 12 in Japan).

Posted Jun 28, 20 17:52 by Scott Trepel (strepel)

ABN Master Dies

Farley K.:

I am far from an expert in this area. And my memory is not sharp. However, I believe a number of ABN dies - and that number could be very large - were acquired by ABN during the acquisition/consolidation period, and were numbered long after the dies were originally made.

One specific example is the American Letter Mail Co. 5c Small Eagle (5L1) die, which was used to make proofs. The serial number 25874 appears on the die proofs, but I think it was added by ABN decades after the original die was prepared by Durand Perkins.

Again, an expert in this area would be able to provide a better explanation, but the question you ask may have answers that should be analyzed for nuances.

Posted Jun 28, 20 17:42 by Richard Matta (rkmatta)

1941 New York return to sender

I've got one to Germany dated Dec 6, 1941 with Bermuda censor and ... nothing else (reverse is blank).

Image

Posted Jun 28, 20 15:38 by Albert Briggs (abriggs)

1941 New York return to sender

On page 71 of the book "Intercepted in Bermuda" by Peter Flynn is a image of a cover mailed 12/6/1941 from Washington, DC and has a New York Return to Sender pointing hand machine postmark dated July 26, 1942, one day after the previously posted cover but otherwise the same marking.

Posted Jun 28, 20 15:29 by Albert Briggs (abriggs)

1941 New York return to sender reverse

Reverse.

Image

Posted Jun 28, 20 15:26 by Albert Briggs (abriggs)

1941 New York Return to sender

Another 1941 cover sent by surface from New York, censored at Bermuda, with handstamp Return to Sender, Service Suspended but not processed by New York post office on return until January, 1943.

Image

Posted Jun 28, 20 14:49 by Roland Cipolla (roncipolla)

D Snow's Forwarded Request

David,

I hope all is well.

Here is a pretty forwarded cover, 1800. It has some other cool things going for it also.

Image

Posted Jun 28, 20 14:38 by Bernard Biales (bernard b)

RTS

A couple of minor points on the reference to the interesting article by Fiset.  I think the reference to detention of Japanese beginning Dec. 7 doesn't refer to enemy aliens -- that is, it is likely the other orders covering other nationalities mentioned by Fiset occured at later dates.  Ken has already discussed by implication that the appointment of Hoover as censor czar on the 11th is somewhat independent of the dates that transistional letters could get through or not.

Posted Jun 28, 20 14:32 by Bernard Biales (bernard b)

I'm almost sure that I was wrong.

The notion that the change was at origin makes excellent sense.  The handwritings are similar -- but the "o"s are different and the Portsmouth u is angular and the Dover v is rounded -- that could be more consistent with two hands.  I was coming from the angle that I think there are a other examples of this -- but I could be mixing it up with a major correspondence to Hanover (I think Mark S. has at least one example of the later.) 
Furthermore, contra to my previous comment, the rate was left of at Portsmouth if it was indeed forwarded through the mails, which favors the origin readdressing. 

Posted Jun 28, 20 13:18 by David Snow (dwsnow)

Forwarded mail

Mark,

Thanks for sharing your great examples of forwarded mail. I enjoyed viewing your exhibit page.  I concur with your opinion that my cover was not forwarded. Not only for the reasons you state, but due to the fact that the "Dover" added appears to match the handwriting and ink color of the rest of the address. Mystery solved.

Bernard: Thanks for your post and information.

Posted Jun 28, 20 12:34 by Bernard Biales (bernard b)

Due and unDue but not Due Due

Palpation and hold to light would have trouble specifically detecting 4 sheets.  More likely weighed 1+ to 1 1/4 ounces.  Does it have a letter listing enclosures.
That is a very very early use of the word due by the post office.
The Hale forwarded covers present a conundrum.  There was a ruling that letters to people in a town that did not have a PO, and who picked up letters at a certain nearby office, could have free forwarding if the sender used the wrong nearby office.  But that is a mighty big stretch in this case.   Another possibility is that everybody knew what was going on (maybe via charge account) and Dover did not bother to change the rate on the actual cover.  Or maybe it was a good natured local micro corruption.

Posted Jun 28, 20 11:41 by Richard Matta (rkmatta)

1837 cover

This cover says "Paid" and 37 1/2 as well as "Due 37 1/2", I assume it turned out to have 4 sheets of paper instead of 2, maybe banknotes?

Image

Posted Jun 28, 20 11:33 by Mark Schwartz (schwamoo)

Forwarded Mail

David,

I suspect I could find hundreds of them. See the attached for a page from my Salem exhibit that shows some very interesting examples.

I believe that the writer of your letter crossed out the Portsmouth and wrote in Dover. Not only does the letter not show any additional rate for forwarding, it also does not show the Portsmouth CDS.

Image

Posted Jun 28, 20 9:51 by David Snow (dwsnow)

Forwarding of mail in 1822

Here is a 1822 cover in my collection, sent from Charleston, S.C. to Portsmouth, N.H., and then forwarded to Dover, N.H. 25c collect rate as it was over 400 miles from origin.

According to the book "The Forwarding of Mail by the U.S. Post Office Department, 1792-2001" by Anthony Wawrukiewicz, this cover should have been charged an additional rate of postage from Portmouth to Dover, a distance of 13 miles, equal to 6 cents (Act of 1816, under 30 miles)  but clearly this did not occur.

So I figure that the sender of this cover corrected his error in addressing prior to mailing, or else the postmasters at Portsmouth and Dover simply neglected to charge additional postage.

If anyone else has examples of forwarded stampless mail with the additional postage charged for the second leg of the journey, that would be great. I have a later example from 1861 (See Cover ID 28587) but nothing earlier. Thank you in advance.

Image

Posted Jun 27, 20 19:34 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

RTS

The British had been censoring US trans-Atlantic FAM 18 air mail to Europe since 1940, which entailed removing it from the plane, opening it, examining it, resealing it, and if passed, boarding it on the next flight through, otherwise holding it.

Thus mail that had departed New York just before the Pearl Harbor attack had flown no farther than Bermuda before being interrupted for censorship.

Immediately after the attack, joint US-British-Canadian discussions assigned responsibility for censorship so as to avoid redundancy and share information gleaned from examination. It seems likely to me that mail in transit at that time would not have been rushed through while decisions were being made.

At the start of the war with Japan no one knew that it was the start of the war. Even after the declarations of war, and the US suspension of mail to all Axis and Axis-occupied countries, no one knew whether the suspension would be brief or prolonged. So the mail at Bermuda was returned to New York and held until events clarified the global situation. At that point mail had piled up, so marking it RTS and returning it took several weeks in mid-1942.

Posted Jun 27, 20 19:15 by Richard Drews (bear427)

Flourish

Ron,

Just a pattern of underlines. See three lines under Connecticut. The person wrote with flourishes, but I see no reason to impute a meaning to 3 connected vs. 3 unconnected parallel lines. The spots of ink at the upper left are your ink blot test.

Rich

Posted Jun 27, 20 18:28 by Roland Cipolla (roncipolla)

1838 Letter NYC to Fairfield CT

The address panel of an 1838 letter from NYC to Fairfield is pictured below. It has a notation at lower left "with two News Papers". At the upper left is some kind of a flourish or what.

Since there is no postmark it probably did not go through the post .... but any ideas on the flourish?

Image

Posted Jun 27, 20 18:16 by Gordon Eubanks (gordon)

NY to Belgium letter

Thanks, Richard, Ron

The letter definitely left New York to Bermuda where it was censored. My guess is that the letter was returned to New York at some time where it received the return to the sender, after sitting in a large pile as mentioned below. I have another that was held in Bermuda until 1946, released and sent on to Switzerland. 2nd letter was registered.

Posted Jun 27, 20 18:05 by Richard Drews (bear427)

RTS

An excellent article on the censorship of mail during WWII can be found at:

https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2001/spring/mail-censorship-in-world-war-two-1.html

Brief summary. We started to prepare for censorship in late 1939 and actively censored many Aixs power nationals. On Dec 8, 1941 Axis nationals were declared enemy aliens and the FBI had already begun emergency arrests on Dec. 7th under a blanket presidential warrant.

This is a key passage:

On December 8, 1941, the secretary of war ordered corps area commanders to inaugurate censorship of telephone and telegraph wires crossing international borders. Three days later, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, on presidential authority, helped set up a postal censorship program to be carried out by the War Department. He was ordered to hold this temporary position until his civilian replacement could be chosen.

The entire document is fascinating reading. It was authored by Louis Fiset in 2001.

Rich

Posted Jun 27, 20 17:48 by Richard Drews (bear427)

RTS

Bernard,

The sneak attack on Pearl disrupted more than the West Coast mails. I don't have quick access to my old notes from when I sold my Prexy holdings almost 25 years ago. It's possible that Gordon's letter was processed, but I'm not at all certain that it would have been put on a flight that would connect to one taking it into German held territory. Ken Lawrence would likely have that info readily accessible. We're looking to sell and move out of Illinois and way too much philatelic literature has been packed up, sold or donated.

Thanks for your astute observation. Exact dates are important.

Rich

Posted Jun 27, 20 17:28 by Richard Drews (bear427)

RTS

Bernard,

The sneak attack on Pearl disrupted more than the West Coast mails. I don't have quick access to my old notes from when I sold my Prexy holdings almost 25 years ago. It's possible that Gordon's letter was processed, but I'm not at all certain that it would have been put on a flight that would connect to one taking it into German held territory. Ken Lawrence would likely have that info readily accessible. We're looking to sell and move out of Illinois and way too much philatelic literature has been packed up, sold or donated.

Thanks for your astute observation. Exact dates are important.

Rich

Posted Jun 27, 20 17:12 by Bernard Biales (bernard b)

RTS

Richard D -- except that war had not been declared.  I think Hitler declared war on the tenth or eleventh and we declared war on the eleventh  or twelfth.

Posted Jun 27, 20 16:47 by Richard Drews (bear427)

RTS

Gordon,

Definitely a NYC marking. Based on the 8:30 pm CDS, the letter went to the NY office where it had been known for many hours that war had been declared. It sat with thousands of other letters that had started on their journey and returned plus all the others that came on subsequent days. 7 1/2 months later it was finally returned to sender. Very nice item. The color of the 30 cent is so vivid in the scan. Have you checked the shade?

Stay well.

Rich

Posted Jun 27, 20 16:34 by Dave Savadge (nomad55)

NYC RTS

Definitely at the main NYC post office. I have seen this marking before.

Posted Jun 27, 20 16:22 by Roland Cipolla (roncipolla)

1838 Letter NYC to Fairfield CT

The address panel of an 1838 letter from NYC to Fairfield is pictured below. It has a notation at lower left "with two News Papers". At the upper left is some kind of a flourish or what.

Since there is no postmark it probably did not go through the post .... but any ideas on the flourish?

Image

Posted Jun 27, 20 16:13 by Roland Cipolla (roncipolla)

Return To Sender

Gordon,

Given the (1) alignment of the NY CDS and pointing hand box (2) the color and density of the black ink and (3) the sharpness of each marking, I would vote for NYC.

I also kind of remember an article a while back on "Pointing Hand Markings" for the US. Maybe it might be in there......maybe APS.

Posted Jun 27, 20 15:50 by Gordon Eubanks (gordon)

19441 Letter to Denmark

I am very interested in opinions on where the return to sender was applied. The letter entered the mail on 7 Dec 1941 and headed to Bermuda on a FAM 18 flight where examiner 4344 censored the letter. Probably on Clipper Atlantic arriving in Bermuda 8 Dec

A July 1942 NY City postmark appears on the front of the letter. Not surprising it was delayed as higher priority cargo, troops, and official mail were given priority. No markings at all on the reverse.

Any thoughts on where the Return to send was applied.

Image

Posted Jun 27, 20 12:37 by Michael Serdy (golfduffer)

Western Cover Society

Since the virus, our group, who have been meeting forever at the Marines Memorial Hotel, Leatherneck Restaurant, on the last Friday of the month, have tried a Zoom meeting. It has been great. It actually gives some other members of WCS who live in other states the ability to join and the stories and knowledge abound. The only thing missing is buying some great material from the other members who happen to have items for sale. We have even thrown around the idea, after or when we can go back to the Restaurant, which is on the 12th floor of the building, overlooking San Francisco, we can have this Zoom meeting become a regular monthly added event. Anyone who wants to join, contact me, and I will send out the invite.

Posted Jun 26, 20 20:17 by joe kirker (centuryc3)

George Wentz Jr.

Hoping for more info on past (1930's-1940's +) stamp dealer George Wentz Jr. from San Marcos, Texas. He became involved with the 1936 rocket mail flight between McAllen, Texas and Reynosa , Mexico.

Any other details will be much appreciated. Thanks---Joe

Posted Jun 26, 20 18:46 by Leonard Piszkiewicz (lenp99)

Backstamps

Quick thumbnail: Began with the PL&R of 1879. Started falling out of favor and practice in the 1890s, although the USPOD kept reminding postmasters to backstamp on receipt in the Postal Guide. Finally, there was an experiment in the first half of 1906 where New York and Chicago stopped backstamping as an experiment. That was regarded as a success and POs could petition Washington to allow them to discontinue backstamping. Larger POs were allowed, and in stages down to smaller offices, finally completely rescinded for all offices in 1913.

Posted Jun 26, 20 15:30 by David Kent (davekent)

Backstamps

Here's a start: in my research on Naval ship postmarks, I somewhere found a reference that said that the backstamping of routine mail (i.e., not registered etc.) ended in 1913. I don't have any notes on hand on where I found this, but it almost certainly would have been in either the Postal Bulletin or more likely the Postal Guide of that period.

Posted Jun 26, 20 14:41 by Stefan Jaronski (thebugdoc)

Use of receiving post office back stamps

Can anyone tell me what was the period during which backstamps were applied by the recieiving office in US to denote receipt?  General starting date (year), When the practice petered out. Thanks. 

Posted Jun 26, 20 5:55 by Russ Ryle (hoosierboy)

RE: NYC PO Card

Morning Matthew and all,

What other years do you have cards from? Can you post images or send them to me privately? Russ

Posted Jun 25, 20 22:09 by Matthew Kewriga (mkewriga)

1881 NYC PO Card

Russ,

I knew those scans looked familiar, I posted them a few years back on the board. I have since acquired a couple more cards.

Posted Jun 25, 20 21:25 by Leonard Piszkiewicz (lenp99)

re: Annual Report of Third Division Mailing & Distribution Dept N.Y.P.O. for 1877

Ken, Thanks. Russ' post said "shelves" so I saw Book Shelves and didn't look farther. Confusing and misleading.

Posted Jun 25, 20 19:51 by Roland Cipolla (roncipolla)

List of California PO and Postmasters, 1854

I have been working with a group of Western newspapers, c. 1849 - 1865 that I have been scanning and cataloging. One of them, "Daily Placer Times And Transcript." Published in SF on 4 October 1854, has some really cool content that I thought I would share in a few posts - if it might be of interest.

This paper is important as it notes that the first copy of the just-signed treaty with Mexico had recently arrived in San Francisco.

On page 3 is a contemporary listing of all the postoffices and postmasters within California.

A couple of other posts will follow in time.

Image

Posted Jun 25, 20 18:38 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

Len, Scroll down.

Posted Jun 25, 20 17:16 by Leonard Piszkiewicz (lenp99)

re: Annual Report of Third Division Mailing & Distribution Dept N.Y.P.O. for 1877

The link and the first book on the first row leads to USPOD Postal Supply Catalogs, but I can't find the 1877 Report. Where is it?

Posted Jun 25, 20 16:37 by Russ Ryle (hoosierboy)

re: Annual Report of Third Division Mailing & Distribution Dept N.Y.P.O. for 1877

Thanks to Len and Don the complete document can be now seen at:

http://www.stampsmarter.com/learning/Home_USPOD.html

Don has reorganized somewhat this digital philatelic library into "shelves" of like or similar items followed by individual books. You may need to refresh your browser (F5) to see this new format and recent additions. Currently it is the first book on the first row under a red new banner.

Page:1 2 3 4