| Author |
 Replies: 3,777 / Views: 249,086 |
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
342 Posts |
|
|
May 26, 1852 New-Orleans, Wholesale "Prices Current". Black "May 28 (1852) MOBILE" CDS. There is a small pencil notation on the reverse that says "7a / 67L1E". I don't have my Nienken handy, but I will shortly and I will look it up. I know that the 3c stamp is not position 67L1E, so maybe the 1c matches. (I checked. It looks right to me) Nothing special here, other than these colors kind of pop out nicely on the printed circular. Sent to: Misters A. Schumacher & Co. Baltimore I think it is a pretty cool cover. If someone else wants to discuss the 1c + 3c rate, I'd appreciate the information. Stan Shepp   |
Send note to Staff 
|
Stan Shepp |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
342 Posts |
|
|
Thanks ioagoa. I appreciate your willingness to share your knowledge. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
Stan Shepp |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
913 Posts |
|
|
Quote:
If someone else wants to discuss the 1c + 3c rate, I'd appreciate the information. I was hoping someone else would weigh in on this. I can think of three possible reasons for a 4¢ rate during this period: 1) Way letter fee + 3¢ domestic postage 2) carrier fee + 3¢ domestic postage 3) 4¢ printed matter for distance 2,500 to 3,500 miles The distance from Mobile (or New Orleans) to Baltimore is well under 2,500 miles, so I don't think it is #3. Given the origin of New Orleans and postmark of Mobile, I would guess it is a way letter, without a way marking. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3503 Posts |
|
|
Mobile had a high volume of un-marked Way mail overflow coming in from New Orleans. There were private contractors that would take mail from New Orleans to Mobile, to save a day on processing and get out quicker, rather than having it get stuck in the NO PO for a bit.
The Plate 1E 1c stamp looks off-hand like it may be the dark-blue shade from Plate 1E. That is found during spring of 1852 - typically Mar-Apr timeframe. If so, that's a nice find. Those are not common.
|
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
342 Posts |
|
|
Thanks SPQR & Testament.
I was assuming a "WAY" or carrier fee.
I dont understand how a carrier would get paid if they charged a penny, but used it to put a 1c stamp on the letter. That would just give all their fees straight to the USPS.
The 1c seems to have gone to pay for the stamp, which leads me to think that the USPS received the money, so they must have provided the service - which leans more to the "WAY" usage.
txstamp, it is a May 1852 use, and the color is beautiful. Scott's only lists blue as the color for these 1c stamps. Do Nienken or Ashbrook address the dark blue shades? I am now wondering if that's what the previous owner meant by the "7a" pencil notation on the reverse.
Stan Shepp |
|
Send note to Staff
|
Stan Shepp |
| Edited by stanshepp - 04/13/2023 10:36 am |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3503 Posts |
|
|
Page 77 of Neinken discusses colors of Plate 1E stamps. From Neinken: Quote:
The stamps from this plate range in color from very pale blue to dark blue, but
can be classified as three distinct colors ; pale blue, blue, and dark blue, with the
great majority of printings found in the pale blue color. At various times after
September 1851 , the printings alternated between the pale blue and blue, and perhaps
in October some printings were made in a slightly darker shade than the typical
blue. The rarest color is the dark blue and it is believed this color was used for
only a short time before the plate was altered in the Spring of 1852. The earliest
printings from Plate 1 Late are found in a very beautiful rich dark blue, which while
similar to the last impressions taken from Plate 1 Early is a slightly richer and darker
shade. I have never seen any Plate 1 Early dark blue colors that would absolutely
match the beautiful dark blue of the first printings from the plate in its altered state. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
913 Posts |
|
|
Quote:
I dont understand how a carrier would get paid if they charged a penny, but used it to put a 1c stamp on the letter. That would just give all their fees straight to the USPS. I think you might be confusing carriers with local posts - carriers were appointed by the Postmaster and worked out of the Post Office. Local Posts were private enterprises competing with the Post Office carrier department. Not all cities had carrier service. Some Post Offices with carrier departments issued semi-official carrier stamps, and some used government-produced official carrier stamps. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by SPQR - 04/13/2023 11:01 am |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3503 Posts |
|
|
Way fee - It gets even weirder, particularly in New Orleans, but also Mobile.
The NO postmaster in this timeframe was, incorrectly, adding on the Way fee to the total cost of mailing - such that recipients often had to pony up the extra 1c to get their mail. i.e "Due Way 1".
No doubt, to avoid this, some businesses started pre-paying, via stamps, the Way fee. You see this more often for NO and occasionally Mobile for this time period, as a result of the misunderstanding of the PL&R, which said that the PO should pay the Way fee out of, essentially petty cash, and not pass it on to the recipient.
This got cleared up, I think in early 1853. See James Baird's Chronicle article explaining this. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by txstamp - 04/13/2023 11:48 am |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3503 Posts |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3503 Posts |
|
|
Here is a 7c rate, I have, prepaid by stamps, for an overweight letter, plus the 1c way fee. This was carried on the Glendy Burke. The 1c stamp is 35L1E, Ty II, the 3c stamps, are, if memory serves me, from plate 1E, orange brown. edit: this originated at a cotton plantation at Rodney, Mississippi. edit2: although the way fee was being incorrectly collected, it also illustrates that the way fee is fixed, at 1c, and does not scale with weight, etc. This is a well-known cover, as there are very few known 7c rate covers prepaid by stamps. There is a mate to this cover - same franking, same correspondence. I had both of them during the 1990s .... Sometime I'll have to make a better scan ...  |
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by txstamp - 04/13/2023 1:11 pm |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
342 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
327 Posts |
|
|
Good morning all. While plating a #11 I came across position 80R6 and I'm seeing some differences in the Chase and Lund copies that makes me think one is incorrect (guessing Lund). The SSD doesn't have any examples of this position to compare with so I was hoping folks could check their copies and verify which is correct or if I'm in error.
The specific areas I am seeing differences are:
1) Top right corner. Gap between URDB and TFL is narrower on Lund example
2) Top left corner. The left frame line on Lund does not extend up past the ULDB but does on the Chase example.
There are other discrepancies (recutting of LFL), but these two stick out the most.
Thanks in advance.
Harper1249 |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
614 Posts |
|
|
Hi Harper -- I agree with you that the Lund copy of 80R6 is definitely wrong. I have not attempted to plate it yet -- (but will add it to my "to-do" list). In the meantime -- if you end up plating it -- please post the correct position. See below for my one and only reference copy of 80R6. Apologies for the overlap of the stamp above that obscures the TFL -- but without hauling out my plates, dismounting, and then rescanning the stamp -- this is all I have readily available. In any event, the recutting in the LFL is pretty distinctive on this position -- and despite the obscured TFL in the scan -- hopefully this will be of some help to you. I will also check with some other fellow platers to see if I can get additional -- and better -- reference copies. Regards // ioagoa  |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
327 Posts |
|
|
Thanks for the confirmation Ioagoa. Don't worry about pulling out your copy as my stamp turned out to be from plate 7. I have plated the suspect Lund stamp and I believe its position is 98L8. It matched up nicely with the Chase and the Lund example currently used for 98L8. I'd be happy to reach out to Mr. O'Doherty but i'm not seeing any way to contact him from his web page.
Regards
Harper1249
|
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
342 Posts |
|
|
I'm a little miffed at technological limitations. I have these scanned at 1200DPI and can't upload a decent image. Plate 1 Late reconstruction. Rick N. - you'll get your copies in your email tomorrow. Stan Shepp     |
|
Send note to Staff
|
Stan Shepp |
|
|
Replies: 3,777 / Views: 249,086 |
|
Posted 04/12/2023 01:10 am
