Classic British Commonwealth With Revenue Cancels

Can one of the forum members with more experience and knowledge please educate me on why rare classic stamps with revenue cancels are frowned upon? I am NOT referring to common low value stamps. I will refer to two particular issues as examples and I apologize if I have the Scott catalog number wrong as I do not have it hand to refer to. The first would be the high value engraved Trinidad stamp, I believe Scott 89 or 90 that you only occaisionally seen in any form and the other is the very late 19th Century (1895-1898) British East Africa Queen Victoria series engraved with values up to 50r and I am referring to the last 2 or 3 stamps of this series, the large sized ones that you almost never see in any conditio, mint or used. I have the 20r green stamp with a very clean probably revenue cancel in great shape, a beautiful stamp, and frankly have not seen another one in recent memory. The 50r lilac I have only seen once, did not buy as it appears to me to have been bleached as the colors appear washed out. It was not certified. But the question remains, these are items that one hardly ever sees. Naturally when collecting used, one would like an item that passed through the mail, but it appears that revenue stamps are actually penalized. Or am I looking at this wrong? Have other forum members seen these stamps being offered for sale?

There was a huge prejudice against revenue usage, coming from collectors of postage stamps. I agree that there are a number of BC stamps that you typically will only see with revenue cancels. The stamps you listed, along with a whole bunch of the high value KGV and KGVI stamps, like Kenya and (to some degree) the keyplates from Bermuda, Leeward Islands, etc. Scott Classic mentions fiscal use, only, known or suspected for many of the high values.

I think internet sales have eroded this traditional discount a bit. It has always been a truism that dealers care much more about revenue usage when buying than when selling. (What I mean to say is that when buying a stamp with apparent revenue usage, a dealer was/is going to pay even less than usual.)

The internet is now full of stamps with clear revenue usage that are listed at regular used catalogue values. Many, many listings make absolutely no mention of a clear revenue usage. I guess caveat emptor applies here, as in all things.

Perhaps the growth in revenue collecting has also helped to bring the revenue usages back nearer the mainstream? Not sure about that, though.

That said, I'll buy a revenue usage if the cancel is not too obtrusive, but I'll apply my own discount factor if the stamp is anything over ten or twenty dollars. My accumulation is more flexible than some, because I've got small but growing collections of BC revenues, so there is always a home for these hybrids. And I'm not buying for resale.

My 2d.

Collin

Most high value British Commonwealth stamps say "Postage & Revenue" on them. The higher values were mostly used for revenue usage. As well, some stamps had such an odd value that they were only to be used for revenue usage.

Case in point: note the 12/6 stamp of Bermuda, KGV-KGVI reign. A stamp denominated 12/6 is like having a stamp denominated $13.50... sort of. That stamp will always be seen with a revenue cancellation as it was affixed to boarding passes for people coming and going on ships... it's the port fee.

I agree... I collect stamps with a cancel, revenue or otherwise.

Be aware that in some small colonies, low-value defintiives with revenue cancels are difficult to get; whereas low values from the Dominions, with revenue cancels are fairly common.

On a similat note, perhaps chequer could explain low-value Canadian stamps on cheques, in the first half of the last century.

David

There is a general bias simply because many advanced collectors of used stamps want them to be postally used, not CTO, not soaked off FDCs, not revenue cancelled... not even pen-cancelled most times. Used collectors may often settle for the aforementioned, but when it comes to paying the big bucks, you can pretty much expect to want genuine postally used.

Also, for the high denomination stamps, in many cases the revenue-cancels are far more common that postal cancels. The catalog values are strictly for postal cancellations, and reflect the difference in quantities AND demand. You may think you hardly see the revenue cancels for many high-denomination stamps -- trust me, they exist in good quantity in the backrooms of many stamp stores. Many stamp dealers are a bit careful who they sell these revenue specialty collections/accumulations to, because they all know there are many who will try to alter the stamps or just blatantly fish for fools who will pay postal cancel prices for these more abundant revenue cancel copies.

There are, of course, more than a few exceptions in which the revenue cancel actually is worth MORE than postal cancel!! For example, a few Iceland stamps have a higher catalog value for revenue (TOLLUR) cancels, even though most will have a lower catalog value for that revenue cancel. But I am on the road w/o my catalogs, so I don't remember the specific catalog numbers.

Mostly just my opinion...
k

To add to what has already been said, the reasoning goes back to the very definition of what constitutes a postage stamp. That is of course that it is available to be postally used.

The very first stamps issued in most countries/colonies were only available to be used postally. The collection of revenue and duties etc for other services or taxes was a separate issue and had it's own methods, whether it be stamp, label or handstamp etc.

Almost immediately people started collecting postage stamps. For whatever reason there was little interest in revenue stamp collecting, people were interested in mail and postage stamps, so that's what they collected. Most likely because that was the most readily available and perhaps I could use the term "visible." The mail arrived with the stamp/s attached, ready for collecting. They were also relatively cheap compared to what most revenues demanded.

With all the different revenues that needed to be collected and the printing involved in having both revenue stamps and postage stamps, some countries/colonies changed their laws to make it that stamps could pay either revenue or postage, there would be no separation. In the colony of Victoria, this happened in 1884. As soon as the Act was passed, all the revenue stamps that were already on issue became available to be used for regular postage. Victoria also issued a new series of stamps with the words "Stamp Duty" inscribed, for use as either revenue or postage.

But people were already firmly collecting "postage" stamps. They weren't interested in a stamp that wasn't used postally. So right from the start, stamps that were fiscally used were not deemed to be "postage" stamps, even if it was the same as a stamp that could be used to mail a letter. This prejudice has just carried on through the years, the majority of collectors think of revenue stamps and postage stamps as two entirely different entities. Most people only collect postage stamps, and even if collecting revenue as well that will be a separate collection. They don't want a revenue stamp sitting amongst their postage stamp collection. And a stamp with a revenue cancel, whether it was available to be used postally or not, is a revenue stamp and not a postage stamp. So this is why you see the revenue cancels frowned upon.

Most (if not all, I'm not sure) countries later reverted back to separate stamps for postal use.

The common view is if a stamp was available to be used as revenue, the only way to include it in a postage stamp collection is mint or postally used. The price of a stamp is dependant on demand, not rarity. A stamp can be rare but still be cheap if no-one wants it. It's only buyers that drive prices up.

Now I've rambled on for long enough.

Balf

Khj: thank you for your comments. However I have seen the top value lilac British east Africa Victoria exactly once. Please direct me to the stamp dealers you make reference to who have such stamps in quantity.

I would always be happy to fill a difficult, high-value space with a fiscal cancel. It would then be banished to ebay when I found a postally used example!