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
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some stamps?
Our stamp forum is completely free! Register Now!

Freeman - NSW Numeral Cancellations (2nd Edition)

Next Page    
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 18 / Views: 2,201Next Topic
Page: of 2
Pillar Of The Community
2136 Posts
Posted 03/20/2018   8:42 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this topic Add Bobby De La Rue to your friends list Get a Link to this Message
The second edition of this marvelous publication was released late in 2017, five years after the first edition.

I have been collecting and researching NSW numerals for years and wanted to share some of my research with our members who are also collecting this area.

First off, there are four numerals where no rarity rating has been mentioned. These omissions were in the first edition and in 2014 I asked the author what the ratings were. He advised as follows:

52 (2) Bourke not rated due to lack of material. (NB: I have seen type 5 often)

916 Boggy Flat RRRR

1785 The Albert RRRR

1800 Nicholson's RRRRR

There are also a number of Post Offices listed on page 347 with opening dates but no numeral has been allocated. After looking at the closing dates of Post Offices I can offer the following information:

Inverlochy opened 1/4/1861 closed 30/6/1861 should've received numeral 335 in the chronology. This numeral is allocated to Lime Kilns which opened 1/8/1861 so it's possible 335 went to Inverlochy first.

Dingo Creek and Tarago were both opened 1/6/1862 the only numerals available at this date were 133 and 169.

Hursley opened 1/9/1862 numeral 108 available from 1/8/1862.

Corang renamed from Nerriga 1/1/1865, see numeral 263.

Belalie opened 16/6/1866, Icely opened 1/7/1866, Larbert opened 1/8/1866 numeral 350 available from 1/1/1863, 381 available from 1/9/1864, 159 available from 1/8/1865, numeral 282 possibly available from October 1865, 391 available from 1/2/1866.

Collington opened 1/10/1866 numeral 385 available from 16/9/1866.

Ruby Creek opened 16/9/1872 at this date there were at least 30 available numerals, not including those listed above.

The last rays type numeral (835) was issued on 15 July 1876 so I would suggest that offices opened after this date would surely have been given a barred numeral handstamp. Freeman states no numeral was issued for Merah North (opened 30/5/1904) so it would seem unlikely that Combara (opened 1/6/1904) would've been given a numeral, despite the fact that Toolejooa (opened 1/7/1904) was given numeral 2099.

Numeral 1595 is recorded but the Post Office is unknown. The numerals either side have opening dates of 1/2/1891. Might 1595 be Enfield North? Enfield PO relocated on 27/4/1891 to the old site of St. Thomas PO so the dates are close. Perhaps there was a delay in the gazetted date of moving Enfield.

Wilbertree (opened 1/9/1864 closed 31/10/1865) is listed in the index with numeral 418 but is not in the main tabulation. As far as I'm aware no example of Wilbertree has been recorded.

There is a suggestion that Parragundy was issued with numeral 2100. On page 7 Freeman states "There is a good chance that the logic of finishing the series at 2100 in Victoria had been copied from the New South Wales counterparts."

Numeral 2100 in Victoria was issued to King Valley on 15 November 1906, 2 years and 4 months after Parragundy was opened. Taking the fierce intercolonial rivalry into consideration, I believe Victoria ran to numeral 2100 to spite New South Wales, not to emulate them.

There are only two minor criticisms of the book. Firstly, the maps in the back do not cover the entire state. Second, the location of quite a few offices is given as X amount of kilometres from the GPO. I believe this information was copied over from the Hopson & Tobin publications. If you are collecting these numerals, download the Geographical Encyclopaedia of New South Wales, published in 1892 from here: along with a county map of New South Wales from here: and a postal station map from here:

The locations of some Post Offices are frightfully obscure (eg: 347 Teesdale, 381 Geddai) so if you're stuck, let me know and I will try to help.

Bobby DLR
Send note to Staff

Bedrock Of The Community
36272 Posts
Posted 03/20/2018   9:23 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rod222 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Fabulous information Bobby,
thank you very much.

Therein lies the dichotemy, monographs or catalogues that arrive too expensively, reflect the vast amount of work involved, but fail to reach the rank and file.

Release at an affordable price, and the information gets broadcast and the advantage or thousands of collectors adding information.
Since buying the Victorian Pmks, we have found 3 or 4 obscure.

The NSW have remained fairly dormant.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
2136 Posts
Posted 03/21/2018   02:02 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Bobby De La Rue to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Thanks Rod

For the numerals I collect a specific area of NSW and still have 60 numerals out of 185 to go. Of those 60, 44 are rated 5R (1-2 copies known) or not recorded. The joys of the goldfields

I've found a couple of numerals though: 267 Oranmier which is noted in the 2nd edition and 792 of Bulgandramine which is rated 'number not recorded'. The 792 is barely discernable but it's on cover and the backstamps prove it's Bulgandramine. Even more remarkable is that the letter was still enclosed. I've not long had this cover.

I have 739 Tenandra on cover also but the number is illegible. Again, the backstamps prove the origin. In the first edition of the book it was rated NNR but an example on piece (Tattersals) was sold by Millennium Auctions (sale 52, lot 417, hammer $270).

The Bulgandramine and Tenandra covers are in my De La Rue collection and are nothing to look at. They each have a 2d stamp. The Oranmier is on the 2d diadem below.

There does seem to be more collectors of Victoria numerals than NSW I reckon, but that suits me just fine!

My holy grail is 191 of Windeyer. I was one of the underbidders when an example was sold by Status (sale 326, lot 1661, hammer $600). It's gone from NNR to 3R so I'm hoping to get one eventually.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Bobby De La Rue - 03/21/2018 02:15 am
Pillar Of The Community
2136 Posts
Posted 11/21/2019   7:42 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Bobby De La Rue to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I am continuing my research and the focus here will be on the patterns of allocation.

The 2R type, comprising 4 segments in each ray, was introduced at some time during 1857. After examining the listings, every Post Office except two has a 2R type listed.

The two exceptions are 9 of Bathurst and 134 of Manilla.

The 4th device of Bathurst in the listings is stated as a 3R19 but surely this is a typo. I think it should say 2R19. The example shown is very worn but there is one ray to the southwest that clearly shows 4 segments. Earlier examples of the device show 4 segments clearly (see below).

For Manilla, the 2nd device listed is probably a 2R14, not a 3R14 as stated. With a rating of RRRRR we'll have to wait for a better example to confirm this. There was no example in the Tamiami auction so maybe Hugh had the only known copy.

A new style, the 3R type (3 segments in each ray) was introduced in 1863, the contract being with John Sands. There were some early teething problems with numerals 400 to 402 but from 403 each device has 3 dots or rays in each segment.

From numeral 588 a new contractor, John Thornthwaite, was used. The device was still a 3R type, and with two exceptions early in the run (numerals 592 and 598) these devices have 12 rays. This type was issued until numeral 835, whereafter the barred type was introduced.

There are 3 anomalies in the Thornthwaite listings.

Numerals 766 and 767 are both known with 16 rays and the numerals themselves look different. Hugh lists both with a 3R12 but in each case the number in not known. I'm thinking these 3R16 devices were crafted by a different pair of hands and that there never was a 3R12 device for these offices.

The third is 657 of Dark Corner. Hugh lists and illustrates a 3R20 for this office but this is impossible. If the 3R12 device was lost it wouldn't have been replaced by a device bearing all the hallmarks of the previous contractor. At any rate, the Post Office there was only open for 18 months and wasn't reopened until 1898.

The stamp illustrated in the book is a more worn 557 of Candelo, as a comparison with Hugh's illustrated 557 will show.

Lastly, the numeral below appears to be an unrecorded type for Bathurst.

It's a 2R type on a 4d De La Rue, watermarked single lined 4, which was first issued in 1867.

The size and shape of the numeral is clearly different from the 2R20 of St. Marys (numeral 6).

The 5th Bathurst device (a 3R16) has a similar looking numeral but the rays are dashes, not dots. A more clear example of the 4th device is below but the shape of the numeral is different.

I have an 1870 cover from Bathurst that doesn't have a numeral, only 2 CDs. It's worth noting that the 5th device, which is from 1863 at the earliest, is rated RRRR. The following two 3R16 numerals are not too difficult to acquire.

Any thoughts on my apparent discovery would be much appreciated
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
2136 Posts
Posted 11/30/2019   6:45 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Bobby De La Rue to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I have some more information on the listings for those collecting:

9 Bathurst - (17) appears to be listed in error. The type 5s are (11) and (12). Further, Bathurst is 55kms from Lithgow, not 11.

131 Wattle Flat - (3) & (4) The 3R16 type was issued after the 2R type. I'm actually highly suspicious of the 3R16 as it has a flat topped 3. Is the illustration an inverted 121? I have the 2R35 on DLRs, Centennials and the 1897 stamps.

106 & 256 Euston - as Buranga (now called Buronga) didn't have a Post Office until 1941, the location could be better described as 81kms west of Balranald. Buranga is also mentioned in the location for numeral 108, a Queensland office.

295 - Swatchfield/Swallow's Nest - Swatchfield is between Mount David and Isabella. Swallow's Nest is between Rockley and Black Springs. NB: When not in drought, this is some of the most picturesque countryside in New South Wales.

300 Russell's - Currango is a trig station a long way from the Adaminaby-Kiandra road (see but this little article might help in a more accurate location: The 1864 contract states "To and from Cooma, Adaminaby, Russell's and Kiandra".

302 Goolagong - This town is 28kms from Canowindra.

394 Rydal - (2) appears to be listed in error. Note the illustration of the 3R16 is 394 (2).

404 - the location is in present day Wentworth Falls. See this article for some more info:

897 - the Post Office should say Upper Burragorang

1218 - Beaufort is near Glen Innes, not Mudgee

1578 - the location should say Peak Hill

1914 - the location should say Berridale

Finally, here's another apparently unlisted Bathurst cancel.

The stamps are SG217b, issued in June 1880. Any thoughts or comments on these apparent Bathurst cancels would be most appreciated. Perhaps I'm misreading them and they are something else?

Anyway, I hope this additional information helps
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
2136 Posts
Posted 12/16/2019   9:18 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Bobby De La Rue to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
My recent research focuses on numerals where an office hasn't been allocated, along with reallocations of certain numerals.

Firstly, two corrections from my earlier posts. Swatchfield is south-west of Black Springs, along a road that used to traverse Campbells River and Native Dog Springs Creek. Secondly, the 9 numeral on the 6d DLR pair is actually numeral 99 of Walgett.


For numerals where no Post Office has been allocated, I suggest that a lot of these are numeral reallocations for Post Offices that were reopened, having been closed for a period of time. The suggestion is based on the opening dates of the Post Offices listed on page 347 that have not been allocated a numeral.

108 (3) Type 3R20 recorded on 1d engraved KGV. Should this be a 2R20? Compare to numerals 379 to 399 (types 2R18/20). Emu Ferry (379) opened 1/4/1863 & 108 (2) closed 31/7/1862. 108 (3) has been allocated to an office that was still open in 1913.

350 (2) Type 3R16 This can't be Boro as the 3R16 type came into being in August 1864.

381 (2) Type 2R18 illustrated on an 1897 1d shield. Rated RRR. It is the original device. Allocated to an office that was still open in at least 1897.

870 Type 4B? (Rated RRRRR, Stamp d green). The device shown in image is very odd. Could it be a fake? Post Office reopened around March-April 1877.

907 Rated NNR. Post Office reopened January 1878.

1057 Rated RRRRR, Stamp 1897 1d. Post Office reopened Dec. 1880 Jan. 1881

1259 Rated RRRRR, Stamp 1897 2d. Apparently two types but surely (1) is an underinked 1258? Office reopened Jul. Sep. 1884

1570 Rated NNR. Office reopened October 1890

1595 Rated RRRRR, Stamp 1d DLR. Office reopened February 1891.

2014 Rated RRRRR, Tamiami's example is on an 1897 1d. Office reopened November 1900.


The following notes are based on a study of the first 1000 numerals.

It would appear that prior to about 1881, any office that closed and subsequently reopened retained their original numeral, unless the numeral had been reallocated to another office. Numerals known to have been reallocated after the original office was closed and prior to their reopening are 27, 103, 106, 108, 210, 258 and 378.

From 1881, almost every office that closed and then subsequently reopened, that originally had a rays type cancel, were issued with a new 4B type cancel, but retained their original numeral. The exceptions are numerals 670 (closed 1885), 720 (closed twice in 1884), 745 (closed 1891), 755 (closed 1882) and 817 (closed 1884). These offices were closed for 2 years, 1 and then 4 months, 2 months, 9 days and 1 years respectively.

Brown & Campbell state that Rocky Glen (numeral 774) was closed in 1900 and reopened on 16/7/1900. It is worth noting that, for example, Huskisson opened in 1875 with rays type 3R12 numeral 817, closed in 1884 and reopened in 1886. This office also has a type 4B cancel. Was this new device supplied on the reopening of the office?

Offices that were allocated a 4B type on their original opening that were later closed, and were then given a new numeral on reopening are 848, 894, 913, 925 and 950. These offices were closed for approximately 11, 7, 7, 8 and 10 years respectively.

There are four offices in Freeman that have reopening dates in error (378 Brush Grove, 400 Kangaloon, 596 Eurobodalla, 832 Binnaway) and three others that have a reopening query (260 Maryland reopened in 1920, 466 Cameron's type 4B recorded, 489 Wammerawa never reopened).

Brown & Campbell have closing/reopening dates for the following numerals (138, 198, 256, 282, 302, 440, 467, 468, 522, 617, 649, 673, 748, 774 and 856) but Freeman does not have this information.

Freeman has closing/reopening dates for numerals 169, 211, 325, 479, 842 and 861 but Brown & Campbell does not.

For 188 Concord, the details are: opened 1/7/1851 as Longbottom, named changed to Concord 1/1/1873, closed 31/5/1883, reopened 2/7/1883, closed 31/12/84, Beaconsfield (q.v. numeral 1119) reopened on new site 11/6/1885, renamed Concord 20/6/1885, closed 16/12/1886, reopened 6/8/1890.


The following five offices were reduced to Receiving Office status but kept their numeral as the stamps shown in Freeman were issued after the reducing to RO status:

230 Long Swamp (RO 1/1/1888 & closed 15/9/1890), 359 Junee (RO 3/9/1878 & PO 1/11/1878), 504 Gullen (RO 1/5/1879 & PO 15/4/1888), 558 Unumgar (closed 30/7/1870, RO 1/9/1874 & PO 16/6/1887) and 800 Gurrundah (RO 1/5/1887 & PO 1/8/1918)


The following numeral devices were used at different offices:

106 Euston/Rocky River (Type 1A), 137 Moama/Mossgiel (Type 2R32), 225 Araluen/Blacktown (Type 5R23), 267 Oranmier/Burrier (Type 2R36), 320 Algullah/Long Reach (Type 2R34), 322 Sassafras/Oberon (Type 2R34), 381 Geddai/unknown (Type 2R18) and 408 Mulwala/Monkerai (Type 3R16)

The following offices may have used the same device: 152 Piney Range/Wombat (Type 2R36), 210 Kembla/Maclean (Type 2R20) and 264 Boro/Colo (Type 2R31)


Finally, some miscellaneous obsevations:

Numeral 52 Moulamein: closed 1854 and reopened 1859 with numeral 265. Bourke opened July 1862. 2R38 device not recorded at Bourke. If never supplied, Bourke mustn't have had a numeral device until the 3R16 type provided by the John Sands contract in August 1864.

Numeral 117 Upper Bingera: established 9/7/1862 on original site of Bingera & given numeral 341, Bingera moved to new site 9/7/1862.

Numeral 133 (2): The stamp shown is a DLR 2d Wmk single line 2, issued April 1863. The stamp must be from 3rd allocation of the numeral. Caidmurra must therefore be rated NNR but is certainly numeral 133 as this was the only numeral available when office opened.

Numeral 138: Office NOT renamed. Oberon established 1/2/1866 on original site of Fish River Creek & given numeral 322, Fish River Creek moved to new site 1/2/1866.

Numeral 322: Highest known device reallocation.

Numeral 389: Type is 2R20, not 2R26.

Numeral 418: Highest known numeral reallocation.

Numeral 463: The stamp mentioned is a DLR 2d Wmk Crown/NSW, issued 1871 at the earliest. Therefore the numeral must've been reallocated, unless the numeral was not returned to the GPO.

Numeral 466: Freeman lists a 4B type, indicating the numeral was reallocated at some stage.

Numeral 481: Stamp shown is an 1897 2d but the office closed in 1868. q.v. numerals 760 & 867. Were these numerals never returned to the GPO? Was the Postmaster at King's Plains the same person at Bartlett's Camp?

Numeral 658: Stamp shown is an 1897 1d. q.v. numeral 710. The office was only closed for 3 months in 1873. This may be an instance of an office using two numerals concurrently.

Numeral 884: Allocated to Gobondry but office scheduled opening of 1/6/1877 was cancelled. Could the numeral have been reallocated at a later date?


Cross referencing closing and reopening dates from Hopson & Tobin's work with Brown & Campbell and Freeman is the next thing on my research list.

Happy collecting folks
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Bobby De La Rue - 12/17/2019 2:44 pm
Bedrock Of The Community
36272 Posts
Posted 12/17/2019   06:47 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rod222 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Bobby this is all French to me,
however, I applaud your work and discipline,
for the NSW Postmark collector, some valuable work.
I sense you are having a lot of fun.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
2136 Posts
Posted 12/17/2019   2:48 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Bobby De La Rue to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Thank you Rod

Gary Watson's short article 'Confessions of a Postmark Tragic' is well worth a read:

It's on page 53.

It is a lot of fun, but it's a lot of work too!
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Bedrock Of The Community
36272 Posts
Posted 12/17/2019   6:12 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rod222 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Well....wash my socks !
I never anticipated reading this....Australia uses acronyms ERD and LRD !
I am severely disappointed,
I have always used EKU and LKU Earliest Known Use etc.

Not sure I can get used to ERD

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
2136 Posts
Posted 12/29/2019   02:56 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Bobby De La Rue to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I was looking through some saved images and can add the following small amount of information.

Numeral 339 Wood's Reef:

Millennium Auctions offered the stamp below in May 2012.

Wood's Reef closed in 1868 and the numeral was reallocated as the scan below confirms.

The image is from 2016 (ie: when I saved it) and I think it might have been auctioned by Status but I can't say for sure.

So the office the device was reallocated to must've still been open in at least 1897 when this stamp was first issued.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
2136 Posts
Posted 09/30/2020   7:07 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Bobby De La Rue to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Further to my post on November 30 last year, when looking at the 2nd edition of Freeman's book yesterday, the 17th postmark for numeral 9 Bathurst caught my eye.

The (17), which is a type 5 (ie: the numeral in 3 concentric ovals), was added in the second edition of Freeman's book. It wasn't there in the first edition.

In both editions, types 11 and 12 relate to the type 5 numeral. In both editions there are no illustrations of this type, suggesting it's rare.

I looked through my own holdings and have just one example of this numeral, on an 1894 cover.

Hopson & Tobin only give one date, 1892, for this type.

I'm thinking that entry (17) was put there pending a rewrite of the listings. I cross-referenced all the duplexes listed in Hopson & Tobin with Freeman's listings and my own holdings.

I would suggest the RRRR rating offered for (17) is correct, and that (17) should be renumbered (11) and (12) should be deleted from the listings.

If anyone has any examples of this postmark I'd like to see them!
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Bobby De La Rue - 10/01/2020 02:47 am
Pillar Of The Community
2136 Posts
Posted 05/25/2021   02:36 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Bobby De La Rue to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Time for an update to this thread.

First of all, the '9' on the 4d DLR is in fact a 6 of St Marys.

My further research, thoughts and opinions are below.


The device used at Maryborough has two side bars, not four. See the White auction, lot 723. If Rockley was issued with numeral 102 it would have to be on an imperf. stamp. Was the stamp shown for 102 (1) actually used at Rockley? Is there any evidence that the 101 (1) 2R23 device attributed to Stroud was actually used there? It makes more sense that it would've been used at Carroll, given the 102 (2) 2R20 device is known to have been used at Stroud.


The following numeral devices should exist, but are absent in the listings:

Type 1B Numeral 54 Pyrmont - As the office opened on 1 April 1853, there is no reason why Type 1B should not exist

Type 2R - When these devices were introduced in April 1857 they comprised, in most cases, of 20 rays, give or take one or two. The following offices have no such device listed: 108 (1) Good's Inn, 110 (1) Surat, 137 (2) Moama, 154 (1) Pure Point and 158 (1) Rushcutters Bay.

NB: For Pure Point, a 2R20? was listed in the first edition.

Some more miscellaneous observations

Numeral 10 (3) The device must've been made during the second half of 1863, given the size of the numerals and that there are 4 dots in each ray. A peculiar looking device that must've had a very short period of use

Numeral 14 (2) This should say 1An, not 1Av as stated

Numeral 27 (3) I would think it much more likely that the illustration shows a cleaned (2) device. I have an example of both types, the (2) on a 2d perforated Diadem and the (3) on a 2d DLR

Numeral 52 Moulamein closed 1854 and reopened 1859 with numeral 265. Bourke opened on 22 July 1862. The 2R38 device allocated to Moulamein is much more likely to have been used at Bourke as this style of device was being made when Bourke opened. qv 154 Myrtleford below

Numeral 70 (2) It's most unlikely that this device was issued to Blayney as this office opened on 1 April 1857, by which time type 1A devices had ceased to be issued. The last 1A device known to be issued was to Wallabadah which opened on 1 October 1856

Numeral 121 (3) The illustration appears to show two strikes of the device, which appears to be the 2R20 type cancel. I have an 1867 cover from Guyong cancelled with the 2R20 device, by which time the 3R16 type should've been in use

Numeral 131 (3) The illustration is either an inverted numeral 121 3R16 of Guyong (see note above) or quite possibly a rays cancel 121 of Clifton, Queensland. Further, there is no way a 2R35 device would've replaced a 3R16 device

Numeral 154 This office closed on 31 January 1859, therefore any strike of the 2R34 device must be allocated to Myrtleville (see note above and also here:

Numeral 158 Despite the note about lack of evidence, the type 1A device must've existed and been allocated. White states that Rushcutters Bay was opened as a sub-office on 1 July 1853 and that it is not clear when it was raised to Post Office status. Hopson & Tobin say that Rushcutters Bay was opened on 1 April 1853 and was closed by 1860. Cullen Bullen was opened on 1 July 1861

Numeral 191 Only one device exists for Windeyer, the 2R20. The device is known on cover from 1860 and on stamps from 1903/4

Numeral 301 The type 4B illustrated is numeral 303 of Petersham

Numeral 463 The earliest known date of use of a DLR 2d Wmk Crown/NSW stamp is 12 January 1872. Upper Run closed on 31 October 1868, strongly suggesting that the numeral must've been reallocated. The numeral was rated NNR in the first edition of the book and is not illustrated in the second edition

Numeral 760 This was a navvie camp almost equidistant from Caloola and Moorilda, as confirmed by the National Archives papers. It has nothing to do with King's Plains (see my comment about numeral 481 in this thread)

Numeral 856 (1) As the device is listed as NNR, it can be only assumed to exist, but on what basis has this assumption been made? There are many variances in the size of the numerals in the early 4B types

Numeral 1239 (1) and (2) The illustration of the first 4B device gives the impression that it had been damaged at some point during its use. The illustration is a Wmk Large Crown/NSW, perforated 10 stamp, which was still in use in 1888. I have the second 4B device (or the first device before it was damaged) on a 2d Prussian blue DLR Wmk Large Crown/NSW, perforated 11x12 comb, known in use from November 1884. Is (2) a repaired version of the damaged (1) or a replacement? Other than my example, I have only seen the (2) device on 1d Record Reign stamps. Is my example the (1) device in its original state? I have not seen this numeral on a centennial issue. Should one be found, it may answer the question of when the device was damaged or repaired/replaced

Portland 1612 (1) and (2) I have the first 4B device on a 1907 postcard. This would suggest the second 4B device must've been issued at a later date. The second device was not listed in the first edition of the book

Numeral 1890 (1) and (2) The first 4B device is known used in 1903/4. The thick bars are typical of the 4B type, from numeral 1757 of Savernake to the end of the sequence. The (2) sold by Premier Postal in 2014 gives every impression of being a Tattersall's piece. The latest Tattersall's cover I have is from Leura, dated 21 June 1907. I have not seen a NSW Tattersall's cover dated later than June 1907

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Bobby De La Rue - 05/25/2021 02:37 am
Pillar Of The Community
2136 Posts
Posted 08/09/2021   8:55 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Bobby De La Rue to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
In the latest Status auction, there is a cover in lot 222 that I found interesting.

The description says:

"1874 Annandale to Ashfield with Sydney transit b/s, franked 2d blue cancelled very light strike of numeral 192 (RRR, ex Petersham closed 1st July 1872) & this previously unrecorded reallocation must be RRRRR (Annandale opened 1st July 1872!) with departure & arrival b/s."

I did some digging and this is not a reallocation.

Hopson & Tobin say that Petersham changed its name to Annandale on 1 July 1872. This office subsequently closed on 31 October 1885. I have the numeral cancellation on a 1d DLR (SG 223f).

This in turn led to numeral 640 which Freeman allocated to Annandale.

It should be allocated to Ruby Creek. This office opened on 16 September 1872 but there is every indication it was to be opened a little earlier.

Below is an extract from the NSW Government Gazette calling for the mail contract.

Note that the Post Offices allocated numerals 642 to 645 all opened on 1 August 1872.

I've done a lot of further research on NSW numerals and will put something together soon
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Bedrock Of The Community
36272 Posts
Posted 08/09/2021   10:45 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rod222 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Nice research Bobby
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
2136 Posts
Posted 08/11/2021   11:16 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Bobby De La Rue to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Thanks Rod

First off, a quick update from my post on 21/3/2018. I have 48 numerals to go out of 189 (I expanded my collecting area by four POs), but when counting all the devices known (and deducting those I have discounted as not existing - see below) I have 199 out of 266. All but nine of those I don't have are rated 5R or NNR.

I have two separate documents for my studies. One focuses on the area I collect and the other is for everything else.

The following notes are from the first document.

Bathurst 9 (15) The numeral is the same type as (14), not type (13) as stated.

Carcoar 10 (3) Further to my post on 25/5/2021, the device is on a perf. 12 Registered stamp, dating it between February 1860 and about March 1861. There is enough evidence in the illustration to suggest there may be two strikes of the device, and the rays are not clear enough to definitely say how many there are. The 2R20 device for Carcoar is known used on a well worn 2d perf. diadem and a perf. 13 6d diadem, and is illustrated in the book on a 6d imperf diadem. The (3) device gives every impression of a Queensland cancel. The Registered stamp was valid for use in Queensland until January 1861. No 2R device in use in New South Wales prior to March 1861 looks like this device.

Orange 14 (2) This is a part strike of 114 of Tambaroora. The stamp is position 41 on the plate. If it was a 14 the device would've been introduced in 1856, as per Freeman's statement on page 3 of the book. I have a cover dated 6 March 1857 bearing the first device. The 2R devices were brought into use the following month.

Mudgee 18 (2) This is a 48 of Tarcutta. Close examination of the image in the PDF included in the first edition will confirm. The left and right extremities of the horizontal bar of the 4 can be seen.

Sofala 104 (2) This is most likely a recut, but possibly a repair, of the (1) device. The upwards inflection at the right end of the horizontal bar in the 4 appears to be the same in both devices.

Tambaroora 111 & Bowenfels 114 If the 114 3R16 was initially, or up to the end of 1878, used at Tambaroora, then the 111 3R16 must've been used at Bowenfels. Is there any supporting evidence? Any covers in support of this would have DLR &/or Diadem stamps, Wmk Crown/NSW type 1 or earlier. Do covers of the 2R type exist? Type 1A of 114 known on cover from Tambaroora. Type 1A of 111 for Bowenfels is not known. Might the numerals have been swapped in 1864 when the 3R16 type came into use?

White says Bowenfels opened as a Receiving Office on 30 April 1852 and was raised to Post Office status on 1 October 1852. Hopson & Tobin say that Bowenfels Post Office was opened on 1 July 1852 and do not mention the Receiving Office. If White is correct the sequence should've been Binda 111, Jamberoo 112, Tambaroora 113 and Bowenfels 114. By the time the Tambaroora/Bowenfels error was realised it would've been easier to swap the numerals of these two offices rather than renumber all four offices affected. See 'New Post Offices' notice in the NSW Government Gazette 6 August 1852. I have an 1855 cover to Bowenfels but there is no arrival datestamp. The earliest known Bowenfels datestamp is 1861 according to Hopson & Tobin.

Pure Point 154 (2) This device was listed in the first edition but was absent in the second. A 2R20 (or a rays count close to this) should most certainly exist, but an example has yet to be found.

Locksley 530 Types (1) and (2) are the same device. The illustration for (2) in the book is very untidy but I have one clear example, and have seen another, both on 1d Record Reign stamps. By comparing the positions of the rays relative to the numerals of these two examples with the illustration for the supposed (1) device in the book, it's obvious they are the same device.

Crudine 758 The 3R12 device is known used in 1903/04. The 4B type therefore must've been issued later.

Essington 837 (2) This is the same device as (1) but the appearance of the side bars is only due to wear or the angle of the strike.

Clear Creek 947 (2) This device was not listed in the first edition of the book, but is known used in 1903/04. Type (1) is on a 2d Record Reign, narrowing the date range of the introduction of type (2) to around 6-7 years.

Kinnatown 1788 The illustration is numeral 788 of Wallendbeen. Numeral 1788 cannot exist on a Record Reign stamp as the office closed on 11 July 1896.

Porters Retreat 1890 (1) and (2) Further to my post on 25/5/2021, the (1) device, known used in 1903/4 as mentioned, is on a 2d Record Reign, Wmk Large Crown/NSW type 2 (ie: SG Wmk 65). I have the (2) type on a 2d Record Reign, Wmk Large Crown/NSW type 1 (ie: SG Wmk 40). Most, but not all, of the devices issued around this time have thick bars. Two exceptions are numerals 1867 and 1880. I believe the 1890 numerals should be listed in the opposite order.

As always, I hope this info helps!
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Bobby De La Rue - 08/12/2021 12:06 am
Bedrock Of The Community
36272 Posts
Posted 08/11/2021   11:49 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rod222 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Way beyond my area of study,
but fantastic to see such scholarship in this discipline.

Hope you get some answers.
I have saved it, it may help some others with my database, when I pass on.

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous TopicReplies: 18 / Views: 2,201Next Topic  
Next Page
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 - 2022 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 - 2022 Stamp Community Forums
It took 0.31 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05