Cancel With 12 In Circle With Bars. Does Anybody Know Where It Is From?

For years I have been trying to identify this cancel:




The stamp is from Suriname, but the cancel is not. In the book "Curacao, An Identification Guide for Cancels" by Dick Phelps, I found the following example on a cover with a Venezuelan stamp via Curacao to New York: (According to the book, the cover is from 1892.)





And finally here is an example on a stamp from Curacao (not my stamp):



Does anybody have any idea?

They all look like the same cancel to me, just different levels of inking.

The Curacao/Netherland Antilles squared circle cancel was used alone on mail, never with a killer so far as I know. It is used here on the cover as a transit mark. The cover (probably) originated from Venezuela and is a paquebot cover, though not so marked. The "12" cancel was struck on receipt in New York; I'm 98% sure. This is a US-style killer. There may be an outside chance it's a Venezuelan cancel, but a killer like this with the number 12 is unlikely, I think.

So the Suriname and Curacao stamps probably came from paquebot covers arriving at New York.

http://www.rfrajola.com/nk3/nk3.pdf
see page 128 for the cancel type/style used in a duplex cancel on outgoing US foreign mail.

Thank you for your replies. I also believe that all three cancels are the same.

I did some searching in contemporary newspapers, and found that the "Caracas" of the Red D Line was scheduled to leave Curacao on 19th September 1892, and arrive via La Guaira in New York 26 September. So the cover must have been on this ship.

The Caracas had previously been in Puerto Cabello, but is unlikely to have been taken off the ship for the transit mark. Perhaps it arrived on the "Maracaibo" on 17 July from Maracaibo.

Perhaps the clerk in Curacao forgot to cancel the stamp? It seems most likely therefore that the cancel is from New York, but I would like to find definite confirmation of this.

Interestingly, in the 17 July issue (Amigoe de Curacao) there is an announcement for an undeliverable letter for D.A. de Lima Jr.

I hope that someone will be able to shed some more light.


Thanks again.

Jan

Did you mean 1882 instead of 1892? 1892 is unlikely for the use of this Escuelas stamp.



If it was carried by a single ship, there is absolutely no reason for a Curacao transit mark; the cover would be in a mailbag aboard ship and there is no reason for taking this off a ship if not handled by Curacao postal authorities. Why not transfer the letter at Curacao so another ship could take it to New York even just a day faster? The line mentioned did not have the only ships crossing from Curacao to New York.



There is no reason for a clerk in Curacao to cancel the stamp. Since a Curacao postmark is there, it came off a ship, was handled by the PO there and was put on/transferred to another ship. There would be no reason for the townmark if the mailbag remained on the same ship.



This letter is addressed to D.A. de Lima Co.. The address is clear enough and proper for the time period. Probably the same ultimate addressee, but particularly if this was a large business, one cannot directly link this cover to that report.

I assume that since the back has not been shown, there is nothing there.

If the Curacao cancel is on the cover it was sent from Curacao in 1882.The 25 centimos
stamp dates from 1882 but apparently for inland use only.Under rated franking.The "T"
tax was crossed out.The US cancel looks genuine but the stamp is not the original one;something does not look right in the line up between the two halves.
I think it is a manipulated cover..

The squared circle cancel was first used in Curacao in 1891, so 1892 is a likely date for the cancel. I know very little about Venezuelan philately so can't comment on the stamp itself.




I agree. That is why I mentioned the possibility it originated on the "Maracaibo".




It is not my cover, and the image came from a book. The author was only interested in the Curacao cancel (BTW it is the earliest known use of this hammer). He didn't show the back, but there could have been something there to confirm the 1892 date. Unfortunately, the author passed away a couple of years ago, so we may never know.

The cover may have been manipulated, but it is the only one I have ever seen with this cancel, so it all I have to go on.

Jan