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

Help With 1881 Illinois Cancel

 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 3 / Views: 351Next Topic  
Pillar Of The Community
United States
6499 Posts
Posted 01/02/2023   4:25 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this topic Add stallzer to your friends list Get a Link to this Message
Can't find anything where Galesburg ended in GH.

Was looking at something that ended *****BURCH but the more I look at it O believe the C is a G.

Knoxville ILL receiving mark on the rear

That's all I have.




Send note to Staff

Pillar Of The Community
5010 Posts
Posted 01/02/2023   5:02 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add John Becker to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
(Cancel would be from 1891, rather than 1881. Stamp not issued in the 1880s)

Name standardization was one of PMG John Wanamaker's legacies. Particularly in the 1893-1895 era there are hundreds of post offices which had small changes in their names. It was a gradual process over several years. These are particularly noticeable when looking for opening/closing dates in post office lists like found on Jim Forte's webpage.

Some of the more notable standardizations:
-borough to -boro
-burgh to -burg.
-centre to -center
place condensations like Le Roy to Leroy and La Fayette to Lafayette.
possessive names lost their apostrophe, etc.
Pittsburgh, PA resisted.

In the case of Galesburgh, Postal Bulletin #4018 dated May 8, 1893 has:



Out of necessity, offices might continue to use their old devices until the new ones arrived.

Add: As I keep digging ... Marshall Cushing's wonderful and extremely useful1893 volume "The Story of Our Post Office" has a more contemporary account on page 282:
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by John Becker - 01/02/2023 5:59 pm
Pillar Of The Community
United States
527 Posts
Posted 01/02/2023   5:06 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rdavid to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
As someone with deep roots in Galesburg, I found this most interesting. (KNOX alum, grandfather taught at Lombard, etc,)
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
6499 Posts
Posted 01/02/2023   5:07 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add stallzer to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
You are amazing John.

Thank you !!

Edit - Adding in Receiving mark on rear

This is why I went with 81. Lazy of me to miss the issue date of the stamp.


Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by stallzer - 01/02/2023 5:11 pm
  Previous TopicReplies: 3 / Views: 351Next 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 - 2023 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 - 2023 Stamp Community Forums
It took 0.14 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05