"Short Paid" Cancel On #93?

I am having difficulty identifying this "xx PAID" cancel.

To me it appears to be a "Short Paid" postal mark. I cannot find any similar markings in Cole or Skinner/Eno but did find one in the Herst Zareski book on page 261.

A search on ebay shows a similar looking marking (in red) on cover with a #34.

Is this a legitimate marking?

Thanks in advance - Harry

Wouldn't it more likely be 'post paid'?

No, I think short paid is much more likely. Overseas covers might be short paid. There would be no reason to put post paid on a cover since the stamps are what is paying the postage in the first place. Post paid means "With the postage having been paid in advance".

Short Paid.
Actually, a NY Exchange Office marking for international mail.
Not usually applied to the stamps, but nothing says it couldn't be on the stamp if the clerk was in a hurry or if there wasn't a good place on the envelope to strike it.

See this page for some other examples.
http://www.cgpostal.com/12cent/slide34.jpg

Interesting!

The letter on the left looks like it could be an E. What about Packet Paid?

No.

Chipg - Great information and thanks so much! Would it be safe to say the cancel is a NYFM cancel?

Classic Coins - My first thought is that this was "Packet Paid" also. The only examples I could find are circular handstamps for that era.

Harry

HarryG,
The Weiss NY Foreign Mail Cancel handbook with, many examples illustrated, can be found here
http://www.stampsmarter.com/NYFM_landing.html
Don

No. NY Foreign Mail cancellations are cancellations on New York City mail to foreign destinations. This is not one of them. If the letter was mailed in NYC, the red cancellation could be considered a NYFM cancellation, but we have no way to know that, as it is not one of the distinctive ones that jumps out as NYFM. Baltimore often used red cancellations on foreign mail (see: http://www.cgpostal.com/12cent/slide71.jpg )


The Exchange Offices (in NY, Boston, and other cities) handled the rating and routing of mail from all over the country on its way to foreign destinations. They would look at the amount paid, any routing designations by the sender, and the treaty rates by different carriers and decide if:
a) there was enough postage for the destination for the weight of the letter

b) the fastest way to route the letter, given the amount of postage. In some cases, there might be enough to send a letter by way of London, but not enough to send it direct mail to the destination country by another treaty, even though that would be faster.

c) the amount of the postage that would be retained by the US for services and the amount credited to the foreign government for the services provided.

For example, a letter to GB up to 1868 cost 24c per 1/2 oz. Of that, 5c was for US internal postage, 16c was for transatlantic carriage, and 3c was for GB internal postage. If a prepaid letter was routed on a ship under contract to the US Gov't (an American Packet), the US would retain 21c of the postage. If routed on a ship under contract to the British Gov't (a British Packet), GB would get 19c credit (the US keeping the 5c internal). For unpaid mail, the markings would represent debits due from the other. The countries would "settle up" periodically (I don't remember the frequency). After the UPU came into effect, these debits/credits went away.

In this case, the letter was Short Paid - It didn't have enough postage to take it to the destination - either too few stamps, or too much weight. The Exchange office marked it such, justifying why they treated the letter as unpaid and why the postage would be due from the recipient.

Clear(er)?

Chip

Couple of things:
Bill only looked at NYFM cancellations in the Banknote period. Bill classified these marks by type. Nick Kirke took this a step further and looked at the periods of use and overlaid they general styles of cancellations with date periods. You can see his exhibit of the Banknote period at this link:
http://www.rfrajola.com/nk3/NK3.pdf
(Its a big .pdf file)

There actually were distinctive markings that were used for Foreign Mail in the NY Post Office from the first days of US Stamps. Nick has extended his collection back to the NY Postmaster Provisionals and will be publishing his findings in a coming Chronicle of the US Philatelic Classics Society ( http://uspcs.org ). Additionally, he will be exhibiting this in NY at the big show in May. You should check it out if the topic interests you.

C.

Chip - It makes a lot of sense - Thanks for sharing your knowledge and taking the time!
Harry