Stamp Community Family of Web Sites
Thousands of stamps, consistently graded, competitively priced and hundreds of in-depth blog posts to read








Stamp Community Forum
 
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!

Who Was The Upper Keswick, N.b. Postmaster In 1941

 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Replies: 8 / Views: 142Next Topic  
Pillar Of The Community
United Kingdom
573 Posts
Posted Yesterday   5:04 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this topic Add Anthraquinone to your friends list Get a Link to this Message
This is a cover to the UK dated 1941. The A.I. systems Claude 5 and Copilot both think the return address is from Upper Keswick but I find that hard to read as such. The other option of of offices near Fredericton is Upper Kingsclear but that does not fit at ll.

The PASSED FOR EXPORT handstamp includes the postmasters initials L.C.

I live in the UK and have to rely on on-line sources for my info. I have not been able to find a list of postmasters for New Brunswick in 1941 to confirm the name. Can anyone help please.

Send note to Staff
Edited by Anthraquinone - Yesterday 5:05 pm

Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1123 Posts
Posted Yesterday   6:49 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add ZebraMan to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
How about Upper Jemseg?
Today the town is just named Jemseg but prior to the 1960s there was an Upper Jemseg and a Lower Jemseg.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jemseg

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
4432 Posts
Posted Yesterday   8:27 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Parcelpostguy to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
This is a cover to the UK dated 1941. The A.I. systems Claude 5 and Copilot both think the return address is from Upper Keswick but I find that hard to read as such. The other option of of offices near Fredericton is Upper Kingsclear but that does not fit at ll.


PROOF AGAIN:

AI is often off base, way off base.

Folks using AI do not have the skill set to verify the AI "answer" even when it was written out for them.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
4432 Posts
Posted Yesterday   8:33 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Parcelpostguy to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
So I normally do not correct AI, but in in this case it is an error of the OP which I will correct:

Quote:
The PASSED FOR EXPORT handstamp includes the postmasters initials L.C.


Should be read as, "PASSED FOR EXPORT L(etter of) C(redit)."

Edit to remove unneeded the.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Parcelpostguy - Yesterday 8:34 pm
Pillar Of The Community
United Kingdom
573 Posts
Posted Today  4 Hrs 40 Min ago  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Anthraquinone to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
ZebraMan

Thank you for your helpful reply. Jemseg fits much better and looks correct. It did not show up in my searches because I used "Upper" while looking for possibilities for small communities near Fredricton as I had problems reading the second name.

AQ
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United Kingdom
573 Posts
Posted Today  4 Hrs 24 Min ago  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Anthraquinone to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Parcelpostguy

Pillar Of The Community or not why did you even bother to post a reply like your first when you had absolutely nothing helpful to say.

You obviously do not understand anything about how L.L.Ms. work and how they can occasionally give incorrect answers which was one of the reasons for my first post.

You also obviously do not realise how they can help philately. You just seem keen to show your self assigned "superiority" . There should be no place in this forum for replies like yours. If you want to be that rude and condescending I suggest you will find a much better home in the Stampboards forum run by Glen Stephens who you seem to have a lot in common with,

Your second reply was a more helpful suggestion although you still could not resist using a nasty condescending tone once more to show your "superiority" I have no objection to being corrected for any errors I may make but would appreciate a more polite way of doing it. It must be wonderful to be like you and go through life never making an error

AQ

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
436 Posts
Posted Today  2 Hrs 35 Min ago  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add hornet785 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi AQ,

looks a nice 30 cents transaltantic airmail to England.

Hornet
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United Kingdom
365 Posts
Posted Today  2 Hrs 13 Min ago  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Flightle_Bee to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Betts wrote Jemseq, which appears to be the old spelling of Jemseg, possibly up till the mid C20.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United Kingdom
573 Posts
Posted Today  56 Min ago  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Anthraquinone to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Thank you. I am going with Jemseg. For what I need the modern spelling is fine and shows up on maps etc.

AQ
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
  Replies: 8 / Views: 142Next Topic  
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.

Go to Top of Page

Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Stamp Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Stamp Community Family - All rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Stamp Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use    Advertise Here
Stamp Community Forum © 2007 - 2026 Stamp Community Forums
It took 0.14 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05