Ludwig Schill, Newark NJ Photographer... Loved To Use Revenue Stamps For Postage

I'm not sure if he deliberately used them for postage to flout the rules or if he didn't realize that they couldn't be used as postage, since they looked like postage stamps of the period, overprint notwithstanding. All of the usages I have seen are right at the initiation of the tax, so information may have been sparse. Dunno.

I've seen several 2nd-day of tax covers from Ludwig Schill, each being all-over advertising covers. I own two of them, shown here:








Well, then last week the item below showed up from our favorite New Jersey seller, idiotically described as a "scarce cover with Interpol revenue cancel". Wait, what?

1. It's an overprint, not a cancel.

2. Interpol? In 1898... seriously? Interpol didn't exist until well into the 20th century.

I know that some of our favorite ethically-challenged dealers tend to get "creative" in their descriptions, but now they've apparently taken it to 11 and just resorted to "making up random sh*t that sounds good".

What makes it interesting to me is not just that it is a Ludwig Schill illegal usage cover, but the date. This is the earliest use of R155 that I have seen, illegal or otherwise. The first day of the tax was July 1, 1898 and this predates that by 2 full days.

Unlike June-dated revenue cancels on documents (I have a June 30 cancel on a battleship revenue and have seen another June 29 example somewhere), which could possibly be backdated, i.e., the stamps weren't actually affixed on the cancel date, it is very unlikely that this stamp wasn't actually used on June 29, 1898.

While they may all be sealed now, there is a very good chance all three of these were sent unsealed at the 1 cent circular rate (single piece, 3rd class) and the revenue stamp counted for nothing anyway - and thus received no notice by the PO. The sender didn't slip anything by the PO at all. The true "illegal" uses would have no regular postage on them at all.

But why would a photographer have deliberately paid triple the needed rate when sending mail? Purchasing the revenue stamps and then using them needlessly doesn't make sense... unless they were somehow also a stamp collector wanting to "create" interesting fabrications... a bit of a leap considering what we don't know.

P.S. Illegal usages (in both directions: revenues used as postage and postage used as revenues) combining legitimate stamps with the opposite number, exist. Granted, more so with postage stamps used as revenues than the reverse. Run out of stamps in the middle of things and grab for what you had handy.

I cannot read the senders mind, but yes, I believe these 3 are collector-inspired, wasting the 2 cent revenue stamp. This is based on then-current rates and the fact that all 3 went through the mails without any due markings of any sort in an era when clerks had to hand face letters for the canceling machine, then sort them for delivery, and finally deliver them. They were seen by a least 3 sets of eyes. Also the placement of the stamps is unnatural. Why cover up part of your corporate name on the first 2? You want to lean toward legitimate, I want to lean toward contrived.

And yes, I understand postage as revenue and revenue as postage. I have several of each.

1st class letter rate was 2¢. If this wasn't a philatelic creation, why include the 1¢ Trans-Mississippi? I think John is right, the 1¢ stamp paid the postage and the 2¢ went along for the ride.
All three covers are addressed to "city" what was the drop rate in 1898? Too recent for my references.

Drop / local letter is 2 cents at offices with carrier service - same as a long distance letter at this time. 3 cents is indeed quizzical when the first-class rates increase in 2 cent steps.

Thus why I suggest a single-piece, 3rd class (circular rate) at 1 cent fits nicely with the revenue stamp as a philatelic bonus. The unsealed flap tucked in and dropped in a PO box so it got a dated cancel.

Here are two covers currently available on "that site", from 1898 and 1899 respectively, both sent from Newark for cent. The second one's description shows the printed matter enclosures.

Ahh, the things we'll never know for certain.

If you really care about tracking this down, you could check with the APS to see if addressees were APS members. I believe the APS will verify this information. You might also see if the CCNY can provide the information. If sent to an APS member, the cover would certainly be philatelic.

That cover is one day earlier then one that I own, used in Brooklyn.

Maybe "Interpol" was a Freudian slip, because our friends in New Jersey are worried about the police investigating their practices.

Or maybe it was just autocorrect being typically awful.

Much is being made of the fact that 3 cents is more than the required 2 cents. And so must be really 1 cent. Have you considered the possibility that three cents was needed because the envelope was heavier than usual. Maybe a photo or two in it?

The addresses make that very unlikely in 2 cases, the one to "or present occupant" and the one addressed to a company. Those almost certainly contained advertising.