India 4 Anna Bisect On Part Cover.

Acquired this piece in a job lot of British India Covers - India SG 45 - 45a. I have a couple of questions firstly is the stamps tied to the cover, secondly if the postmark can be identified. From my observation I have never seen a bisect used outside of the India P.O. in Strait Settlements. Any insights thanks in advance.


*** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum. ***

Maybe I'm crazy, but I think I see two ghost perfs right in the middle of where a whole stamp would have been, along the bottom. Careful removal by knife, steam and/or other tricks?

Straits Settlements
1855
Cancelled at Singapore, Penang, Malacca
4 annas Black as 2as
They are all of considerable rarity.

1856-1864
4annas Black as 2as
Sinapore, Penang, Malacca.
Covers bears dates between 1859 and 1863

Please post an image of the full cover, front and back


Curiously, I recognise the handwriting........

Robson Lowe fails to ID any bisect of this stamp
outside the Straits.

The handwriting I recognise, appears on East India Stamps,
and with such values, as shown on yours, I would have expected
"Stamped" to be handwritten across the stamps.

This is not so, ergo my suggestion may be the original stamp has been removed, and this pair added after.

Please scan the whole/ part cover, front and back. Thank you.

This is not a full cover it is part of a cover as the image uploaded.
Back of the part cover.

I believe the date of Dec.6th is marked by stamps. The black GPO cancel shows Dec 18,1857 and appears to be on top of the red cancel date of Jan 12, 1855,56,58? Hmmm!

The red Postmark, a tad outside my reference (1856)
I only have the "Square with indented sides" "Month before day"
1836 - 1843
Reorganised Penny Post from 1794
(Twopenny post from 1801)
Yours appears to be similar, but for later 1856 with code "B" at bottom
Willcocks or Whitney fail to ID that one.

Still researching the Black Pmk

Guess:

Cover is a letter from George Curnar Barnes
(Commissioner of the CIS-SUTLEY States , India (Punjab)

Writing a letter to MARGARET STAPYLTON
Devonshire Street and (Near Portland Place?) or vice versa
London. 1856

What I do not understand are the two backstamps and why the 25 day
difference to the two marks.

We may have to contact SCF members Ron and Eunice Shanahan
the early Brit experts, on the backstamps.

This item was in a group of about twenty five British India Covers. There were a couple of mutiny covers in the lot. I had researched it with all the resources that I have and did come up with a probable location of Devonshire Street in Portland Place but could not decipher the name of the person it was addressed to. Excellent detective work rod222.

A lot of guesswork,
but they were married in 1856, so it is a decent odds it would be them,
or close relations.
The Genealogy link does not allow dates until you join, as per usual.

The GPO Postmark, still not identified, I wonder if it is British or?
The date plug there, the "8" looks inverted.

Deciding the red receiving postmark is 1858
So he may be writing to his mother in law

There is (apparently) a lot of Hijinx going on with this fragment.
As No1Phil pointed out, the black GPO is over the red Pmk.

Now to deceive the viewer, with the red underneath of 1858
the scallywag has added a very convenient fleuron, covering the "8"
It looks lonely and out of place there, to me.

Were fleurons used that early in Brit Postmarks?

If, it were a genuine use of a 4 anna bisect, would it be hanging around in a cover job lot?
Methinks no, it would be in an advanced collection.

Methinks or pareidolia thinks that he sees an 8 or 6 in the diamond lozenge cancel on the left stamp. There is nothing like that visible on the bisect. If you have a blacklight, see if you can tell if the lighter continuations of the bottom lozenge bars below the bisect cut match the dark parts.

The staining on the cover below the bisect cut does roughly match the shape of a lozenge killer, but staining in that area is often a sign of a forger at work.

rod wrote: "I would have expected "Stamped" to be handwritten across the stamps.
My understanding was that it was to prevent a messenger sent to the P.O. with a letter from stealing the stamps for resale and reuse. The manuscript security mark is common enough but certainly is not on all used stamps and covers of the period. Perhaps that small ink smudge in the southwest corner of the left stamp might have been what was used.

That's how I read it HB,
What we have here are 3 instances of script from the same hand, in my opinion.
The flourish of the "S" and the downward stroke of the lower case "T"
crossed at the top, is undeniable.

Now, whether that hand is from the sender, or an aide de camp
we shall never know, yet I believe a personal letter would most probably, be by the sender.

I offer the other two instances, for your consideration.
The added evidence of having the extraordinary circumstance
of 3 instances of hand script, may be explained by the sender being a commissioner.
Vast amounts of correspondence would have been sent and received.

I am wondering, if there is some way to indicate evidence under the stamps....part script of "stamped" perhaps.
Or a part pmk.

My paltry collection of 4 anna blacks, show the same hardly distinguishable postmarks.
Most pmks of this era show Barred Diamonds with numerals.

The stamps don't look tied to piece, the small bit of cancel under the entire 4a stamp look highly dubious, and was the 6a rate a valid one. I'd put it down as a fake; the stamps did not originate on thus piece.

Worth keeping as an example of the forger's craft.