Message Board

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


Page:1 2 3

Posted Mar 30, 20 19:53 by Wayne Farley (cwfarley)

NAPEX Show in June cancelled

The NAPEX board met via teleconference tonight and voted to cancel the show. The Virginia governor had issued a "stay at home" order to Virginia residents earlier today, effective until June 10. The show is not being rescheduled for 2020 due to the unavailability of a substitute weekend by the Hilton.

Posted Mar 30, 20 19:06 by Michael Schreiber (michaelschreiber)

World War I cards

Lavar's cards across the top near the stamp read:

"Eduard Debes' / Feldpost = Erinnerungskarte / fur die Heer und die Marine"

Eduard Debes' / Fieldpost - Memory Card / for the Army and the Navy

Based on inscription at lower left, the firm Eduard Debes of Blankensee was the publisher of the cards.

At upper left the card says "To be German means to be noble and brave."

These were morale-building cards for both senders and addressees.

Posted Mar 30, 20 16:31 by Roger Heath (decoppet)

WWI cards

Lavar - I notice that the first two cards have printed - "Feldpost", while on the third card the "Feld" is crossed out. Wasn't Feldpost free except for international use, so these remained German post office mail? The crossed out "Feld" might be the recognition that the rate had changed.

I think these were all printed matter rate. Beneath the Feldpost is smaller text that the cards are for "hier" and "marine". I can't read the text completely, nor can I read the German message.

Posted Mar 30, 20 13:59 by A. Lavar Taylor (lavart1)

WWI Postal History

One more comment regarding the three cards I posted yesterday. Notice that the cards were all franked with 5pf stamps. The international postcard rate was 10pf. And the extensive messages on the address side of the cards ensured that the cards could not be treated as printed matter. So why no postage due markings on any of the cards?

Postage rates for mail between Germany and the German PO's in China (along with mail between Germany and German colonies) had been the German domestic rate for a number of years prior to the outbreak of WWI. Upon the outbreak of WWI, that did not change.

So for the first two cards, postage was properly paid. But on Sept. 9, 1915, the postage rates for mail between German and the German PO's in China was changed to the international rate. Thus, the third card sent was short paid. But none of the postal employees involved in the transmission of that card noticed the shortage in postage.

Posted Mar 30, 20 13:39 by Bernard Biales (bernard b)

List of digitized archival govt records

I haven't used this, but note records on soldier, passengers arriving, ship crews.
Maybe for the R F digital list?

Posted Mar 30, 20 7:18 by Russ Ryle (hoosierboy)

re: transit markings

Morning Rick Leonard and all,

Thanks for the discussion and information. There is a similar situation with respect to registered covers. Any markings placed by post offices visited in route wound up on the bigger registered package envelopes carrying the items except at NYC and some other major cities where all registered mail flowed through a main post office. There it was opened, marked, and sent out to its destination station or branch.

Posted Mar 30, 20 0:24 by A. Lavar Taylor (lavart1)

WWI Postal History

Below is a partial scan of the reverse of one of the cards.


Posted Mar 30, 20 0:23 by A. Lavar Taylor (lavart1)

WWI Postal History

Here is the third card, sent on Sept. 21, 1915. There are two German censor markings, one from Berlin, one from Coln-Deutz. No other markings of any kind. All three cards were sent from postal station "54" in Berlin. All three cards were sent to the same person at the same address.They each took a different route to Shanghai.


Posted Mar 30, 20 0:20 by A. Lavar Taylor (lavart1)

WWI Postal History

Here is the second card, which was mailed on July 21, 1915. There is a transit marking from Galata (Turkey/Ottoman Empire) dated July 31, and two other markings, including a censor marking, from Turkey. Plus two markings from China, including a Shanghai receiving mark dated Sept. 25, 1915. No German censor markings.


Posted Mar 30, 20 0:17 by A. Lavar Taylor (lavart1)

WWI Postal History

This post and the following posts illustrate how mail going from one country to another could take different routes at different times during WWI. Featured in the posts are 3 post cards sent from Berlin to Shanghai within a 10 week period in 1915. These cards provided the recipient with news of the events in the War (from the German perspective, of course).

Shown below is the first card, sent on July 9, 1915. It is endorsed "via New York" but was censored at Brunn ( Austria? Today's Brno?), which seems very strange. There are no other censor or transit markings on the card.


Posted Mar 29, 20 20:26 by Leonard Piszkiewicz (lenp99)

Transit marking, continued

David, Yes, this is a typical example of how transit markings were used. The cover went to Astoria as a batch of mail to be sorted at Astoria. And off it went to Portland.

Posted Mar 29, 20 16:34 by David Snow (dwsnow)

Transit marking, continued

To understand why Astoria, Oregon, was chosen as a regional distribution office and thus applied the Transit marking of the cover I just posted, look at this map. The origin of Oysterville, Washington is marked with an arrow at top left. In those days there was no bridge connecting Astoria with Washington State. All mail crossing the Columbia River was transported by boat.

Once the cover reached Astoria, at the mouth of the Columbia River, at 5:30 pm, it was put on a train to head inland and south to Portland, about 100 miles away. The train tracks run alongside State Highway 30 as shown on this map.

And it reached its destination post office the same day it was posted, at 10 pm on January 25, 1905, for next day delivery.

I am always amazed how efficient the post office was at the turn of the century. Nowadays you would have to use Overnight Delivery Express Mail service for $26.35 (flat rate envelope) to replicate that sort of delivery 115 years ago that was done for merely 2 cents.


Posted Mar 29, 20 16:22 by David Snow (dwsnow)

Transit markings

Len P.,

Thank you for your detailed explanation of Transit markings - very helpful.

Your keywords are "Only those mailpieces that were not placed in packages would be resorted at distributing post offices and receive TRANSIT backstamps."

Here is an example of a Transit marking in my collection, on the back of a 1905 cover from Oysterville, Washington to Portland, Oregon. See Cover ID 22346 for image of front and description.

I suppose in this case rather than waiting for more mail to accumulate to put in a bundle or package, the Astoria post office put this cover on the fast train going to Portland to save time and not miss the connection.


Posted Mar 29, 20 15:19 by Bernard Biales (bernard b)

Salem spiral

I think there are rather more than three or four out there.  I think it was used for several months at a reasonably busy PO.  Rarish.   There is also a spiral cancel (initialed seal or seal ring marking?) known used on a couple of Salem 1847 covers c1850 or 51).  I wonder if that twelve cent imperf is the only or almost the only use from Salem.
Salem used four different unusual and very scarce to unique markings in 1858 -- I suspect these were tests related to the upcoming GPO contract that resulted in the so called small presidentials.

Posted Mar 29, 20 14:59 by Bernard Biales (bernard b)

Govt records

Some years ago Christies(?) had some PO accounting sheets for auction.  That era was my specialty.  I realized they were a major chunk of GPO records of local PO returns for the Confederation period.  I told Calvet (another, and senior, Col. Rev specialist) about this and gave him a bid to execute.  He said I was wrong, but then, mirable dictu, he called back full of enthusiasm about this great discovery.  He did a series of articles in the CCP using this material as a basic source.  I think the material went to Ed Siskin and, later, a current enthusiast.
But the point was, this stuff had been used as drawing paper.   Based on an earlier comment of Calvet I opined that this was part of the immense discarding of govt papers early in Civil War (to free up storage space).  Clavet thought this possible -- and thought it might have been picked up by some culture club (as drawing paper).  A nice little miracle that it survived.  It is in the nature of a follow on to the so called "Franklin Ledger".

Posted Mar 29, 20 14:10 by Leonard Piszkiewicz (lenp99)

Transit Markings

Transit markings were first mentioned in the 1879 PL&R Glossary, as far as I can tell. When I researched Transit markings from Chicago about 20 years ago, the following became apparent:

Usages of Chicago TRANSIT markings generally fall into two categories that may be considered extremes of the same type of mail distribution. A large proportion (perhaps nearly half) of observed Chicago transit markings are found on mail originating in the Chicago suburbs; these covers went to the Chicago Post Office for distribution, where they received a TRANSIT marking. A similar preponderance of covers bearing Philadelphia TRANSIT markings on mail from suburbs of that city has been noted. The other extreme is mail originating relatively far from Chicago (much farther than the suburbs), usually for delivery at some distance from Chicago; these covers usually originate in small towns.

The reason for this distribution of TRANSIT markings is based on the Post Office’s mail distribution scheme of the late 19th century. Mailing post offices (i.e., all post offices where mail was deposited) bundled outgoing mail by destination post office where there were enough mail pieces to make up a package or bundle, as prescribed in the 1887 Postal Laws and Regulations:

Sec. 539. Direct Packages.—Making a direct package is placing all letters for one post-office in a package by themselves, all faced one way, with a plainly-addressed letter on the outside, and a facing slip, bearing the postmark of the office and the name or number of the person making up the package, on the back of the same, faced out. This applies as well to offices using printed slips as to those that do not.

The vast majority of letters and cards were probably made up in such packages and passed through distributing post offices such as Chicago never receiving a backstamp in transit. However, mail that was insufficient for packaging by destination post office was bundled for further sorting at distributing post offices:

Sec. 536. Distribution of Mail by States, &c.—A distribution or separation should be made only of such mail for States or portions of States as can be advanced thereby. All mail for States of which no distribution is made must be made up “by States,” and facing slips used in accordance with section five hundred and forty-three; that is, letter and circular mail for each State must be made up in packages, and newspaper mail in canvas sacks, by itself, and the name of the State marked on the slip covering the package or tag attached to the sack.

While Sec. 536 does not specify how many mail pieces would constitute a separation that “can be advanced,” Sec. 978 of the 1893 PL&R (dealing with the Railway Mail Service) states that “letter and circular mail for each State must be made up in packages when there are ten or more letters for the State...”

Considering how mail was sorted and transported, as outlined above, it is apparent that most mail would not receive transit markings. Only those mailpieces that were not placed in packages would be resorted at distributing post offices (including Chicago) and receive TRANSIT backstamps.

Posted Mar 29, 20 13:39 by Chip Gliedman (cgliedman)

Shameless plug

Larry made the presentation I gave on the Red River Mails available on the Collectors Club home page. If anyone has any comments or corrections, they can reach me through the link to my email on this board.


Chip G.

Posted Mar 29, 20 13:04 by Rick Kunz (segesvar)

Transit Markings

The various orders to apply "Transit" markings were frequently ignored, while innumerable offices simply used their originating postmarkers. The actual discontinuance wasn't until PMG General Order 7107 eliminated the requirement for backstamping ordinary mail on May 8, 1913. Uprated items such as registry, Special Delivery and the like retained the usage, of course.

Posted Mar 29, 20 10:22 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

FAM 22 research request

As I have noted previously on this board, U.S. Foreign Air Mail route No. 22 formally ended 1 July 1946 with publication of Part 2 of the Official Postal Guide. But the June 1946 issue of the Official Foreign Air Mail Guide carried this notice: “Planes carrying mail via the Trans-Atlantic routes no longer depart from Miami. Therefore, the marking of mail (M) ‘Via Miami’ is not required, and the ‘(M)'’previously shown in the last column of Part 2 of the Guide has been eliminated.” Published the last week of the cover month, that means Miami had ceased to be the eastbound gateway to Africa and Asia some time in May or possibly April. I would like to pin down these dates more precisely with cover evidence, The latest records I have of inbound covers are 26 and 27 November 1945 Miami backstamps on registered air mail letters from Chungking, and I have seen several with April 1946 dates backstamped at New York. Does anyone have an inbound cover that exchanged at Miami later than 27 November 1945? What is the latest outbound cover to Africa or Asia that exchanged at Miami?

Posted Mar 29, 20 8:48 by Russ Ryle (hoosierboy)

re: transit markings

Morning Rick and all,

Thanks for the information. At what point did the USPO direct postmasters to discontinue applying transit markings? The 1879 date correlates nicely to when you begin seeing receiving back stamps on registered mail from larger 1st and 2nd class post offices. Also, NYC transit markings on foreign bound registered items.

Posted Mar 28, 20 19:36 by Richard Frajola (frajola)


John - you can click the images on the main page for 1200 dpi larger images.

Main Tasmania page is here

Posted Mar 28, 20 19:24 by John Shepherd (tas philatelist)

Sperati Project


re the Tasmania 1 Pound, would it be possible to post enlarged scans of the two types, original and corrected?

Posted Mar 28, 20 19:22 by Rick Kunz (segesvar)

Transit Markings, Philadelphia

Philadelphia, part


Posted Mar 28, 20 19:21 by Rick Kunz (segesvar)

Transit Markings

Mobile Post Office Society's "Catalog of US RPO Postmarks" has detailed listings and explanations of the "Transit" markings. Here's an excerpt from the first description page, and I'll post a page extract of one of the Philadelphia pages next.


Posted Mar 28, 20 13:00 by Richard Frajola (frajola)

Sperati Project Update

I have just uploaded a searchable, 20 meg, PDF file of the 212 page, collection-mounted group of Sperati material here.

Posted Mar 28, 20 8:51 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

Lavar's cover

After checking steamship arrivals, I think the letter was bootlegged to the United States on the SS President Harrison, which arrived 16 June at New York from a world cruise.

Posted Mar 27, 20 20:56 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

The photo at the bottom shows Normandie's mail being transferred to Aquitania, but if the cover to Germany had been among those bags, it would have been intercepted and censored in Britain, not France.


Posted Mar 27, 20 20:40 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

other side


Posted Mar 27, 20 20:40 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

"Missed the boat twice"

That was Larry Sherman's description of this 29 August 1939 cover to Germany. The sender endorsed it "Via s.s. BREMEN," but as previously noted, Bremen left New York abruptly without passengers or mail. So that endorsement was struck through, replaced by "Via s.s. NORMANDIE!" Normandie had been scheduled to depart 30 August, but fearing German submarines, she stayed in port, remaining at New York until she was seized by the U.S. Maritime Commission in December 1941, transferred to the U.S. Navy, and rechristened USS Lafayette.

The cover did get to Marseilles, probably on an American liner, and was censored at Narbonne, but by then France was at war with Germany so it was returned to the sender.

(Recently I brokered the sale of most of Larry's large WW2 postal history collection to a new collector/exhibitor, but a few nice items are still here, including this cover.)


Posted Mar 27, 20 20:17 by Gordon Eubanks (gordon)


Most email readers have a simple way to display the original email address. Also, some have very good spam filters. Certainly, gmail which I recommend has excellent spam filtering. I use it with Mac's Mail program.

I think the best advice is to not click on links that you do not understand and certainly not from people you do not know. Never give up any information that does not make very good sense for the situation. In CA though you must pay state income tax online and must give them SSN and bank account information.

I have not used AOL since the mid-1990's so I have no idea what it is like now. On Windows Microsoft, mail is supposed to be great.

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

WW2 postal history

On 26 August 1939 the Kriegsmarine ordered all German merchant ships to return to German ports, ahead of the invasion of Poland. SS Bremen's captain defied the order, completed his westbound trip to New York, debarked her passengers, and departed quickly without passengers or mail on 30 August. On 1 September she was ordered to Murmansk, to evade interception. I'm reasonably sure that was the last scheduled German flag ship to the United States; later ones would not have brought mail, and would have been interned on arrival.

I think Lavar's cover must have been carried and delivered by a German passenger on an American liner.

Posted Mar 27, 20 18:07 by A. Lavar Taylor (lavart1)

WWII Postal History

Louis Fiset-

Thanks for your post. I was aware that Drechsel was the head of the NY office for HAPAG-NDL at that time, but I didn't know that the US initiated denaturalization proceedings against him. You mentioned German flagships calling at NYC. Were there German Flagships calling at NYC in June of 1941? That seems late to me, but I've never researched when German warships stopped calling at US ports prior to the US entry into WWII. I thought the most likely explanation for transporting the cover outside the mails was diplomatic courier.

Posted Mar 27, 20 14:44 by Louis Fiset (louisfiset)

WWII Postal History

Regarding A. Lavar Taylor's query about how his WWII item reached the U.S., it turns out to be an interesting item.

The cover was censored at Berlin, then carried out of the mail to New York, likely aboard one of the German flag ships still calling there.  Perhaps it was part of a bundle of correspondence being sent this way to avoid Allied censorship.

Had the letter been posted through the mail, it likely would have been intercepted at Bermuda and censored there.

The addressee was a naturalized U.S. citizen and the New York manager for the North German Lloyd-Hamburg-American Steamship Lines from 1940 until Germany declared war on the U.S. at the end of 1941.  So, he was an important person.  He was also an ardent Nazi and well known to the FBI who brought proceedings to denaturalize him in early 1943.

I have POW cards from German seamen interned in Canada thanking Drechsel for comfort items sent to them, all, no doubt, employees of the shipping line.

Posted Mar 27, 20 14:11 by William T. Crowe (wtcrowe)

E-Mail Scams

Ken is correct. I got an e-mail this morning from the "Greater Bridgeton Amish Market" with an attachment showing "a copy of my statement that reflects what invoices we paid with our check". Bridgeton is in New Jersey and the e-mail came with a telephone number so I called. The person who answered the call said it was the Bridgeton Amish Market and that I was second person to call about an e-mail. The attachment was a word document, so I did not open it.

The e-mail address was "[email protected] - I forgot to ask if that was their correct e-mail address.

The pace of these things seems to be picking up as the Nigerian princes die off.

Yes, Richard I know you hate AOL, but I was trying to be polite.

Posted Mar 27, 20 12:54 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)


The e-mail came from Randy's actual address. I replied to the scam e-mail, and Randy answered. I too use the AOL tool that Bill Crowe uses. In this case, and in Tim Bartshe's case, the e-mail addresses were their real ones.

Posted Mar 27, 20 11:24 by Ken Stach (kenstach)

Scam E-Mails

Several weeks back I also received a scam email from a friend's computer email address. He had inadvertently opened a scam, which then stole his address book, and sent out propagating scam emails to everyone in his address list, including me. I opened the attachment which was supposedly from Dropbox. It asked me to enter my email address, which I thought was odd, but I did so. Then, it asked me to enter my email address flag!!! I knew then and there it was a scam.

I phoned my friend immediately and when he picked up the phone rather than saying "hello", he said "the email is a scam!" He had followed through upon receipt of his "Dropbox" request from a friend and entered his email password. Thus, the stolen email identity.

The key to these scams, etc. is don't ever input your passwords, SS#, etc. Anything that requires that has to be treated with 10x caution!!!

Posted Mar 27, 20 11:06 by Richard Frajola (frajola)


Bill - I am an AOL hater!

I suppose AOL is fine for the people using it but 95% of the scam emails I get seem to be the result of AOL's lack of security on an AOL email users address books.

That, plus there continuing fight with CenturyLink blocking emails from CenturyLink IPs.

Posted Mar 27, 20 10:32 by William T. Crowe (wtcrowe)

Scam E-Mails

I know people dislike AOL intensely, but I have been a user since 1993.

I do not know about other e-mail servers, but with AOL I can slide the cursor over the sender's address to see who the real sender is. Most of the spam ones I see come with "" or some long address unrelated to the supposed sender.

Posted Mar 27, 20 10:02 by Leonard Piszkiewicz (lenp99)

Scam e-mails

The email from Neil Creative Media appeared in my inbox a couple days ago. The Dropbox scam emails appeared some months ago. Best rule to follow is that if you're not expecting an email attachment or clickable link, if you want to look at it, email the alleged sender separately to verify that the sender actually sent it. Otherwise, delete.

Posted Mar 27, 20 9:03 by David D'Alessandris (davidd)

Scam e-mails

Hi Ken - did you reply to the scam e-mail or did you e-mail Randy directly?  I received the scam e-mail allegedly from Randy, and thought that the origin e-mail was something like "eilcreativemedia" without the "N" - but I deleted the spam and can't check my copy

Posted Mar 27, 20 7:22 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

Scary Internet scams

This week I have received e-mail messages from Randy Neil's Neil Creative Media and Tim Bartsche's real e-mail addresses urging me to download a file from Dropbox. I replied to the senders of both. Randy confirmed that this has been a problem recently. It's more worrisome than fake e-mails that put a genuine correspondent's name in the incoming "From" header but the actual sender has a different address.

Posted Mar 27, 20 5:26 by Luca Lavagnino (luca.lavagnino)

Caspary and Dale/Lichtenstein Catalogues Online

Charles, thank you very much for making these auction catalogs available. Perusing them will be a great pleasure for me, as I do not have the original ones in my library. Luca

Posted Mar 27, 20 4:35 by Franco Peli (francopeli)

Caspary and Dale/Lichtenstein Catalogues Online

Sincere thanks to Mr. Charles Epting for posting these auction catalogs. In memory of important past auctions of H. R. Harmer.

I hope soon to include other important auction sales of the past.


Franco Peli, Italy

Posted Mar 26, 20 19:27 by Brian Murphy (chester58)

Government & Private Records; Archives & Thefts; Dubois & Siegel

I was interested in the accounts of confused struggles to clarify ownership of government documents. The issue often hinges on what happened to records created by government officials in their official work. Until recent decades those officials could often consider the records their own, and take them away on leaving office. Or left them behind. Or discard them. So it’s unclear & confusing.

The New Brunswick records in the Dubois collection at Siegel are different. Mostly, they were private family letters, 1780s to c1830s, that remained with family descendants until mid 20th century when they were donated to archives. The letters with covers were stolen from the archives for their early postmarks in the 1970s by Frank Robertson, a philatelist and a professional archives and museum thief. He sold bundles of them to a few dealers. The thefts were discovered about January 1978: Frank got a couple of years for possession of stolen goods; the one or two dealers who had been selling this “new find” tried to buy it all back. A few of us returned our stolen letters to their owners (three Canadian archives) and sued the dealers. Since many of the letters & covers had been microfilmed before the thefts, our claims were successful. Nevertheless, a dealer or two bought up most of the loot, and hid it.

Since then, covers & letters of the major correspondences – John Saunders in Fredericton and Lt Col Beverly Robinson in Saint John – have increasingly appeared on the philatelic market. When spotted, the archives try to get them back, with mixed success. Usually, the collector or dealer is unaware and dismayed. I try here to give a link to the web page illustrating the stolen Saunders letters & covers, and detailing the 14 recoveries.

It appears one of the bundles gathered by a dealer c1978 ended up in the Dubois sale. One assumes the naughty dealer sold it to an unsuspecting Du Bois. About 10 or 12 Saunders letters from the website can be connected to the Du Bois catalogue. Now, since Siegel refused to sell anything stolen, we may hope that another group of these stolen letters and covers will be off the philatelic market and returned. It is hard to see any good coming from tolerating stolen goods in philately.

Posted Mar 26, 20 17:30 by Mark Schwartz (schwamoo)

Salem cancel on a 12c 1851

Use of the 12c to pay a quadruple rate is not common. And the Salem “machined circle of dots” makes it that much nicer.


Posted Mar 26, 20 17:28 by Mark Schwartz (schwamoo)

Salem cancel

Richard, I’ve seen 3-4 examples, all from Salem. None from any other town. Here is one in my Salem exhibit on a 3c 1851. I’ll post an image of one on a 12c 1851.


Posted Mar 26, 20 17:03 by Richard Frajola (frajola)

An interesting Salem, MA cover

I was happy to recently purchase the Salem cover below. It has a most unusual "PAID" + swirl of dots duplex cancel, a red postmark AND as a bonus, the cover has an albino embossed locomotive.

I think it is the fourth example of this unusual cancel device I have seen. Has anybody seen a similar contraption used from another office during this period?


Posted Mar 26, 20 16:09 by Farley Katz (navalon)

Ownership of historical government documents

The dificulty, complexity and expense of resolving the issue of ownership of old historical documents is shown in a series of court opinions from 2005-2006. An auctioneer was about to sell a large group of documents that were created under two South Carolina governors during the Civil War. The present owner had inherited them through their family, ultimately going back to a Confederate general. The day before the sale and after saying it had no interest in the documents, the state got a restraining order and asserted a claim. The bankruptcy court (the owner was in bad financial circumstances) in a lengthy opinion , held for the state that these were public documents. The district court reversed and the court of appeals affirmed , so that the state's claim was ultimately rejected, stating "Because the long possession of the papers by the Willcox family creates a presumption of ownership in their favor and the State has adduced insufficient evidence to defeat this presumption, we affirm."

Posted Mar 26, 20 14:16 by Charles Epting (charlesepting)

Caspary and Dale/Lichtenstein Catalogues Online

I hope everyone on the board is keeping well. I just wanted to mention that if you're looking for some light reading during these times of quarantine, I've uploaded all of the Caspary and most of the Dale/Lichtenstein catalogues as text-searchable PDFs which can be read online or downloaded. I'm also putting up a few other single-owner sales (including the Burrus Hawaii) which might be of interest. Most have prices realized at the end. Any comments/feedback would be much appreciated (especially if you spot something amiss, like pages out of order). I think that the introductions to these catalogues (written by the likes of Cole, Chase, Greene, Jessup, et al) are of particular interest.

I'm sure that many of you have these catalogues in your libraries, but it's my hope that they're a bit easier to utilize in this format :)

Posted Mar 26, 20 14:13 by Brian Murphy (chester58)

Dubois, Siegel, and Replevin

Scott ... I followed the auction on SAN, and had not understood that you all were so dispersed! Siegel did a fine job creating a virtual auction in difficult circumstances.

And at the same time you did a fine job with an additional problem! Siegel and Charles Shreve identified and withdrew 32 lots of probable stolen covers & letters; then you did a great job explaining the problem during the auction. Bravo!

In contrast, some other auction houses & collectors still turn a blind eye to selling and collecting these stolen archival covers. They should re-think. The secret and suspicious philately they are creating is incompatible with the openness and the sharing and the research and the data building advanced by this Board and by Siegel.

Page:1 2 3