Postage Stamp Chat Board & Stamp Bulletin Board Forum
 

Hi, I spotted this stamp in a mixed lot of Australia and NZ (and bought it ), and a quick check of my latest ACS catalogue suggests it's R123 with a CV of $2000 NZ.

Can this be right - are they that scarce and collectable? My 1980 Kiwi catalogue has it at $150... still waiting for my Barefoot to arrive. Cheers, Jim

This is a revenue stamp, not a postage stamp, and as such is scarce - the price is not outlandish.

_________________
David Smitham
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Upper Hutt 2013 Stamp Show 13 - 15 September 2013 Upper Hutt, NZ.

Does this look like genuine postal use of the 1867/1871 revenues? Appears to be on a registered letter sent to London; the dates look consistent with a ship journey (I think) and I think that the 1880 revenues were cleared for postal use in 1882, so perhaps the 1884 usage is legitimate... I have never heard of these ones being used for postal purposes however (and am likewise a little skeptical of many of the 1880 revenues with coin or squared circle cancels claimed as postals).

Postal use is undoubted - the London arrival Registered red oval is often seen so this is legit. Whether it was TAXED or not we will never know.

11d seems a strange rate?

What dope cut it up I wonder?

Thanks. That's good to know. I thought it seemed pretty clear cut but as this was on eBay I wasn't sure (it seemed too cheap for postal usage).

Yes criminal to cut the envelope up - perhaps there was another stamp that some collector wanted to keep? I don't know much about postage rates to the UK at that time for registered mail... Bob Odenweller's book on Chalon heads suggests that most mail from 1870 (14 years before this item) was via San Francisco and initially 6d per 1/2 ounce. Registration would add 6d, but I don't know the situation by 1884.

Jim

They are clearly postally used.

There was a period early in 1882 when fiscals were used in place of standard postage stamps and there is an excellent chapter in Robin Gwynn's book "Collecting New Zealand Stamps" arguing for the 4d, 6d, 8d and 1/- values of the 1880 revenue series to be considered as 'provisionals' used in the interim period prior to the issue of the 2nd Sidefaces in April 1882.

The Stamp Ammendment Act of 1881 permitted the use of stamps for revenue purposes and revenue stamps for postal purposes. The 2nd Sideface issue was the first definitive issue intended for both postage and revenue purposes.

Genuine postal use of revenues is usually considered as being restricted to 1882. After that most usage, although undoubtedly pre-paying postage, is philatelically inspired. This seemed to be particularly popular in the 1890s.

Glen is also correct to challenge the 11d rate. This is not correct and would suggest there was another stamp (at least) on the cover. The letter rate in 1884 (via San Francisco or by Direct Steamer to the UK) would have been 6d per ½oz plus 6d registration.

Watch out for cleaned fiscal revenue stamps re-used for postal purposes.

chippin

Thanks Chippin. Great information. I suspect that this may well be a case of philatellically inspired usage... but I like the piece all the same. Would have been even nicer to have had the 1880 issue, but you grab what you can when you see it

I do have another question about the squared circle postmark of Christchurch which is reasonably common on the long types; I seem to remember reading somewhere that a narrow U indicated fiscal use. Do you (or anyone else) know more about this? And I have seen the pound long types with apparently postal cancellation used as late as the 1920s... are these sorts of issues covered in the book you mention?

cheers,
Jim

The One Pound Long Queens were regularly used as postage stamps (as were the later "Arms" issue) as they were the only high-value stamps available.

Regular "postage" stamps (which were really "postage AND revenue") only went up to 3 shillings values until George 6th's era.

So expensive mail thereafter often had 'fiscals' on.

thanks for the reply; on eBay you quite often see 2, 3, 4, 5 and even 10 pound stamps with apparent postal cancels. Campbell Patterson notes that postal cancels were often used for fiscal purposes, and without embossing or being tied to piece that it is impossible to know what the usage was. For example I have a 1/- of the 1862 long types with a squared circle postmark on piece, but suspect it's revenue due to the type of paper. I think the date is also before these stamps were authorised for postal usage.

Just to make things more tricky, in David Smitham's excellent Kiwi Revenue book, several apparent postal town cancels are noted as being used exclusively for revenue purposes, so I really do struggle with knowing what a legitimate cancel looks like. So I take the view that if it looks like postal usage then that's probably as far as one can go for stamps off piece... caveat emptor.