Cut Squares Illegal Use?

I've seen numerous examples, though I don't own any, of cut squares from postal stationary being affixed to a plain envelope and successfully mailed. Was this considered an illegal usage? If so, could someone post an example that required postage due payment?

Yes, illegal use. Frequently they make it through undetected. Here is one of mine with 4c due.


Here is one from e-bay with creative use of 3 postal card cut squares. It says "Due" in pencil but no evidence it was actually collected.

Stamped envelopes and postal cards were considered cancelled if the cancellation was anywhere on the front hence the illegal use of cut outs to pay postage as it was impossible to tell if the cut out was from a legitimately used item or from a mint item.

Jobi01 - You answered the question I had but didn't ask. Thank you.

I've had stamp dealers do something similar: paste entire postcards onto a package and use them as postage. I don't think that's technically legal either, but somehow the packages still made it through the mail without any problems

An International Klein Blue postage stamp, used to frank an invitation to one of the artist's shows. No "postage due", and the cancel was put on the envelope, not the stamp. Sacré bleu!

Use of entire postal cards or pre-stamped envelopes is legal and the result is known as a paste up.

I had forgotten about this topic until today -- some great answers here. Thank you! @ZebraMan your cover poses another question: why was it given 4¢ postage due instead of 2¢?

I do not know why the cover was charged 4 cents due. I assumed it was a double-rate penalty for unpaid mail. A google query tells me "The Penalty Policy: Under U.S. postal laws of that era, if a letter was mailed with partial postage, the recipient was only charged the exact missing amount. However, if a letter was dropped into the mail stream completely unstamped (unpaid), it was flagged at the delivery office and penalized by charging the recipient double the standard rate." But in none of the foot notes could I find the exact rules to confirm that theory, or the time period(s) where the 2x underpayment penalty was in effect to require 4c due rather than 2c.

A Linn's article on "Circumstances determined handling, fees for U.S. shortpaid mail" says if a letter was mailed without postage, the mailed item was to be returned to the sender, but "Finally, before that date [1928?], if an unpaid first-class letter inadvertently reached the delivery office, twice the postage was due, to be collected from the addressee."

https://www.linns.com/news/us-stamp...r-us-sh.html


It could also be a "top of pile" example, like John Becker recently mentioned in the 1/2 cent postage due thread, where there could have been two 2-cent due letters received the same day for the same "Prussian Remedy Company" address, and the postal clerk put 4 cents of postage due stamps on the top letter rather than 2 cents on each of the two unpaid letters.

"Double deficiency" seems most likely.

Agreed. But the "top-of-stack" theory explains why some covers are merely marked "Due" without a postage due stamp.

Two more that passed without postage due being collected.

A full explanation of the varying postage due collection amounts, circumstances and dates is well covered in Tony W.'s US Domestic Rate Books. He was even more detailed in his award winning domestic postage due exhibit. The cover in question was assessed a 2x penalty.

Edit:



Flightle, the subject is domestic US postage due.

Picked this up yesterday evening:

I wonder if it would have even gone airmail even if the postage was accepted, it's only 71 miles. Seems unlikely with postage due.