Demurrage: Lets Play What Is It - Bring Your Best Or Your Worst - Just Bring It

ppg - I'm aware that Media Mail is subject to inspection. But I'd be very surprised if there are staff to perform inspections of Media mail anymore. I get and send a fair amount of it and have not seen or heard of any trace of manual inspection in 15-20 years. Not that I'm complaining, as the postal inspectors have their hands full with fradulent stamps,, etc.

Actually about half of my Media Mail I have received during the past two years has been opened and inspected. Likewise I do my best to allow inspection before sealing it up. For a small office, such is not a problem, now if you are at the main office in SF, LA or NYC your results may differ.

Okay back to the game....




Well revcollector's radar is correct, the auxiliary ("handstamps") markings should be the focus. One was discussed quite well. It however was no coincidence that the revenuecollector's cover was brought over by me.

Well???

Re inspections, we might add that " Free Matter for the Blind or Physically Handicapped" USPS mailings are also subject to inspection and are supposed to be packaged so as not hinder inspection.

I had an aunt who sent material back and forth to a library for the blind and the printed instructions sent to her were to leave the envelope returning her marked sheet of selections with the flap tucked in, not sealed, so as not to hinder inspection.

Edited to add, getting back to the matter at hand "Demurrage".
A term not heard often these days…. But present in both instances.

Yes the three line marking while not rare, is scare and rather uncommon.enough not to be seen by most folks, even those who collect auxiliary marking.

But, the game continues...

So before a tooth, yes, ouch, took my attention elsewhere where were we?

Yes we were addressing the three line auxiliary handstamp shown here:


This particular auxiliary marking with "demurrage" is not common. I have seen several over the years. From: https://www.linns.com/news/us-stamp...n-1943-cover John Hotchner reports he has seen three as of 11-8-2021. In the same article he quotes Tony Wawrukiewicz has never seen demurrage actually collected with the marking. Tony has seen demurrage collected once with a different marking.

Late last month when I started this thread, Tony mentioned to me he has seen this three line marking relatively often but never with demurrage collected. I mention that one of Tony's most recent exhibits and studies is focused on postage due material and as such he will have seen more than the average person. I asked as often when information is published about a "scarce" something, other examples come out of the wood work. John mentioned no additional examples.

Me, I have three or four examples of the demurrage three line marking, several on airmail letters but only the OP cover with the demurrage line filled in.

What makes to OP cover interesting is that there is a "2" specifically on the demurrage line. That is not for demurrage as from when demurrage started in October 1930 until it ended in July 1968 it was always charged as a multiple of 5 cents. Plus it only was charged on C.O.D. (Collect on Delivery) matter.

On the OP cover, the 2 cents was a penalty fee for short paid postage due matter. John Becker implied it was a penalty collection. While correct about a penalty, actual demurrage was not a penalty but rather a special fee to be collected in certain circumstances.

I will stop now to allow for comments if anyone has them. Later I will explain the rating on the OP cover at which time I will post a front and back image of a true COD Demurrage Collection. Any such item is difficult with perhaps a handful known but more on that later as well.

I've been spending some time with my half-cent due covers the last day or so, something long overdue. I have several covers from the same sender (Harry H. Jones, N.M.C.), to various recipients in Freemansburg, PA, all from different ships at different ports of call.

One of them has attributes I never noticed previously (file under "missing the forest for the trees") that IMO makes it especially scarce: sent from the ship U.S.S. Rochester, in Balboa, Canal Zone, mailed February 22, 1932... with the J68 affixed on Leap Day, February 29, 1932!

There aren't going to be many Leap-Day half-cent due covers out there...

Forest/trees: Your cover I posted and you quoted is another one. The cancellation is good as it is a "receiving ship" cancellation from San Diego.

Most any leap year day cancel is fun to find, especially when what it is found upon is itself a tougher item.

Edit: Of course since we are talking ships, I had to edit this for a missing rrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, not to say either ship was run by pirates.

As I noted in my reply you reference, that was a quick guess with no references handy. I have given it no further thought. I don't tend to re-research items which others have already researched.

Dermurrage:


So was it simply a case of the clerk picking up the incorrect 3-line due marking? And really intending to use this device:

(Meter printed off the edge and not considered valid)

Parcelpostguy.....I like the fact that your cover with three lines has an error.....the 3rd line reads "TOTAT" not "TOTAL".....Cool !!

First that is not my cover, I believe it still belongs to revenuecollector. Good catch about the spelling error and actually underscoring the joy of postal history, in which there can be many different directions and subjects upon which a story can be told.

Mine in the OP is correctly spelled.

So we now know the cover in my OP is not a demurrage example in spite of the indications shown.

This mailing, "closed against inspection," contained as small catalog at the third class rate of 1.5 cents per ounce which began January 1, 1949. Based upon the six cents in postage, the item weighed more than three ounces and not over four ounces at 1.5 x 4 for 6 cents total. As it was closed against inspection it was rerated to first class. At more than three and not over four ounces at the 3 cents per ounce the four ounce postage was 12 cents with 6 cent affixed credited to that amount. That, twelve less six leave 6 cents due which is two rates (three cents per rate) underpaid. Since the sender did not include a return address, there was a one cent penalty for each full rate underpaid, or in this case, two cents total penalty. It was that penalty of two cents noted on the 'demurrage' line. Six cents plus the two cents penalty makes up the eight cents due and collected.

As too regrets, I regret that the postage was not one of the popular regular issue series but one gets what they find.

Now demurrage is not a penalty, rather it is a storage fee for Collect on Delivery, COD, items not delivered within 15 days and held for longer. It began on July 1, 1930 and ended with the last day being July 24, 1968. The rate of this fee was 5 cents per day beyond 15 day. during the entire period except for the period March 26, 1944 through October 31, 1944, when it was ten cents per day.

Now finding examples of proper demurrage has been difficult. While the rate was known and discussed in all three editions of Tony W's US Domestic Rate Books it was not until the third edition that he had access to a illustration to include as Figure 41 -7 on page 351. Below is my example which is dated four days later and uses a money order (COD Payment) with a serial number ten higher. It, along with the one in the book, are two of the three to have come from one small holding. The book copy collected for ten days demurrage, 50 cents while the copy below collected 10 cents for two days demurrage.



Mailed in Chicago 8-4-50, arrived at office of delivery 8-7-1950 with the fifteenth day being 8-22-50. It was picked up 8-24-1950 two days later with the ten cent demurrage fee.

Edit: Addition of "Demurrage:" to the original title requested of the moderators. It was warranted now that this post was made. The title has also been updated; thank you moderators. US Collect on Delivery, COD, additional services, Demurrage fee, collected with postage due stamps.

Parcelpostguy.....Sorry, my mistake, I reread your post and finally saw......"Via SCF messaging I also invited revenuecollector to this thread since the above cover was posted by him back in the linked thread."

Revenuecollector......thats an awesome error on that cover!

I was checking for some images in my computer and found this one which I believe is the third and final companion piece to the demurrage one above and that mentioned in Tony W's rate book.




I do not own it but believe it traded for about $3000.00 as indicated by the seller.