| Author |
Replies: 11 / Views: 959 |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
975 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
8956 Posts |
|
|
Probably applied at the receiving end would be my guess, but I am wrong all the time :)
Peter |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
3282 Posts |
|
|
I agree. The handstamp is not dissimilar to those used in New South Wales. I couldn't find any similar handstamps in my Irish literature. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
Australia
38679 Posts |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
3282 Posts |
|
|
That's a belter of a cover Rod! I'm thinking you may be right. It's not a NSW handstamp as the values on the majority of them were filled in by the postal clerk. The cover you've shown is the same year as the OP so were there different handstamps for different Australian colonies?
Here's where it gets interesting. From 1 January 1889 to 1 January 1891 the rate from GB to NSW was 4d 'by the long sea route'. This makes me think the cover was picked up in GB as being deficient in postage and sent by the cheapest route. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
Australia
38679 Posts |
|
|
Bobby, It meant nothing to me, until you pointed out the postage rate. I thought the fine looked like 3.5 pence, but 5.5 pence makes the 8d correct.
So the letter was returned undelivered at the cost to the taxpayer.
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
3282 Posts |
|
|
No Rod it's a 4d fine and a 1.5d deficiency. The standard rate to/from the UK at that time was 6d. |
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by Bobby De La Rue - 02/16/2019 03:11 am |
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
Australia
38679 Posts |
|
|
Right, thanks how was the fine adjudged? I was of the opinion Australia was always "double deficiency" ie 3d
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
975 Posts |
|
|
Rod,
The double deficiency was a UPU agreement IIRC.
Victoria (along with the the Australian Colonies and New Zealand) did not join the UPU until 1 October, 1891, after this letter was sent.
In Colin Capill's book, 'New Zealand and the Universal Postal Union to 1907', RPSoNZ 1993, pp 14-15, he states that Victoria was part of the Empire rate of two-and-a-half pence per half oz from 1 January, 1891 onwards.
Prior to 1 Janaury, 1891 (commencing 1889), the rate was 6d per half oz. My letter is prepaid 5d against a required 6d, the deficiency of '1d' and a fine of '6d' the process prior to UPU rules being applied.
Some of the UK 'deficient postage' markings are very similar to my cover and I just wanted to check.
John
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
Australia
38679 Posts |
|
|
Thanks John, great explanation, I'll save that, not sure where, possibly under my "Australia~Postage Dues" for easy recall.
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
975 Posts |
|
|
Rod,
I'd save under 'Victoria - pre-UPU taxed mail' (it won't be a big folder). |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
Australia
38679 Posts |
|
|
I get your suggestion, John, however for my sanity, easier under "Postage Dues"  I have 200 folders for Australia, and "Postage Dues" has only 113 files. Easier just to scroll through 113 abstruse connections to postage dues. I don't think we shall have a pre UPU context coming up soon.  |
Send note to Staff
|
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 959 |
|