Postage Stamp Chat Board & Stamp Bulletin Board Forum
 

Yes, you can see the perforations on the right hand side

Whoa! the horses there. It's not my thread...it just seems to have become the place for predominantly Vic. cancels, unfortunately. And I am totally clueless about other colonies. That's why a dedicated site for one State is a wonderful idea.

_________________
FORESTS OLD, PASTURES NEW
(An expert is one who knows more and more, about less and less, until they know absolutely everything about nothing at all)

Sorry sorry mcgooley.

Hello Jeremy, I have a question about these two that I like to purchase. Are they the same type? Not sure which town cancel they belong too Bowen or Clermont can you lend a hand? $24 for the both maybe a bit high so I thought I ask first.




Thank you kindly
Michael

The top one (10s) looks more like 163, Stanthorpe RR as the 3 in numeral 63 has a different characteristic to the numeral in 63, as does the 6. The bottom one (2/6) is actually a known forgery of the numeral 29! Geoffrey Adams wrote on article on the forged numerals of Queensland in October 1979 in the Philatelist and remarked that this was the most common Queensland numeral forgery he had seen . You may ask yourself why would anyone bother? Well what happened is that the stamps were fiscally used and they have been chemically cleaned to remove the fiscal (usually a pen or pencil cancel) so that they can then be sold as mint stamps. But if it doesn't come off properly then the next best alternative is to put a fake cancel on and flog them off as postally used!

That is quite amazing Jeremy, I can see how the 2 fits into the 63 I am happy I asked instead of jumping, although I did jump with that previous roller cancel I asked about . Would it be polite to let the person selling know of the forgery?

Many thanks Jeremy,

Michael is still amazed

By all means let him know, although I don't know what difference it would make. Some people collect forgeries as they can be interesting in their own right, or as reference material to compare with the original numeral. This particular forgery is at least 33 years old now and probably much older!

I will have a little think about it, or just let him do his business, still most interesting to know this information Jeremy still a little shocked being a beginner .

Michael

Michael, in the 1880s and part of the 1890s, duty stamps and postal stamps could be used interchangeable. Ie a duty stamp could be put on an envelope and sent through the mail and a postage stamp could be put on a revenue document or some other such document for stamp duty purposes, like an invoice, recipt, mortgage, legal document etc etc.

If you see a high value stamp such as 5 shillings or 10 shillings or 1 pound postally used (with a postal cancel) then you should be suspicious. It is possible that it was genuinely postally used but it is highly unlikely unless it was on a very large and heavy parcel. It is far more likely that it was used for stamp duty purposes (fiscally cancelled with either a line or a signature or a date in pen or pencil or a coloured (usually blue or red) crayon) and then some time later "cleaned" so that it could be passed off as mint. This was done because fiscally used copies are not worth much whereas mint ones are! If it couldn't be cleaned "properly" (ie you can still see part of the fiscal cancellation) then it had a fake postal cancellation added to complete the deceit as genuine postally used copies of these revenue stamps are highly collectable and worth a significant price premium.

Hope this helps

Jeremy

Very much, a lot of help thank you Jeremy. Simple mathematics or in this case look carefully some things are to good to be true.

Thank you Jeremy
Michael

Look at this Michael, even the experts can get it wrong!

http://www.prestigephilately.com/catlot.php?acode=257152&auctionnum=173&sortcode=qld&r=country&x=qld&lim=20

I will be asking a lot more questions in the future , Jeremy I think you should be awarded a SB Medal.

Jeremy I placed a gamble bid on this one, it looks like a 500 cancel although a bit small in size, not to worry $1 was spent wisely . Still coming in the mail I hope.



Michael

Well this one has me stumped Michael. It looks like a 500 but it can't be as the post office for this one would have opened around 1892, long after this stamp was issued. It is not a 200 or 300 either. Playing with it, it looks like letters, probably soo (possibly oos) but the only problem is that there are no Qld post offices with oos or soo in their names (You can check here: https://www.premierpostal.com/cgi-bin/wsProd.sh/Viewpocdwrapper.p?SortBy=qld&country=)

When you get it have a good look and see if you can discern anything

Having another look, it could be GOO, in which case there are some possible matches for the time period that this stamp was used:

Goodna PO 1/11/1864.
Goondiwindi Renamed from Gundiwindi PO c.1861.
Gootchy PO 1/7/1869; renamed Gundiah PO 1/1/1882.

Hope this helps

Jeremy

It possibly could be 'LOOSE SHIP LETTER'.

Ron

Ohh I hope not, but if that's the case the stamp is still a nice one for the $1

Cheers Ron

Michael

Did any of you partake in Torsten Wellers sale, he had some nice items,

David B.

Michael, Loose Ships Letter is good, quite desirable "-)

David, yes I bid for quite a few items. The bidding was quite spirited!

Really, I never thought it would be, is it because of the age?

Thanks for the positive feedback Jeremy.
Michael

More that they are quite scarce. Loose ships letter was the cancel applied to letters posted on board ships, which was less common than posting letters at a post office. Over here on my stamp website are some of my examples. Some of them do look very similar to your cancel Michael.

http://jeremy29.smugmug.com/Queensland-Philately/Loose-Ship-Letter-markings/3483304_H5sLt3/1

Thanks Ron, that makes sense as the G in the GOO is not the right G.

I just recieved my Rockhampton 201 roller cancel yipee , and the one I thought was imperforate six pence above, it did not turn out all that bad well it is a bit cut up but look at the reverse, perforation a tiny bit out of line


Here is another I just recieved not a numeral though, it is Gunalda 1893 I think but with type 3b cancel, going of boomspeed the cancel ended in 1890, mine could read 1883 I just read it wrong , would this have the 2R rating Jeremy?



Appologies for showing non numeral cancels. I have a couple Qld stamps with some flaws where can I show them is there a home for them too?
Michael

The date is correct Michael, 1893, because this stamp didn't exist in 1883 (it was first issued in 1890)!. Manning has the earliest recorded cancel as 15 March 1894 so congratulations, this is now the earliest. It is 2R. Yes, put your flaws up here so we can see them if there are only one or two. If you have lots then best to start a separate thread.

Jeremy

Well that is wonderful news for my Qld collection I better keep my eye open a lot more. Please use this example for any records if need be

These flaws are not super just something different for my collection.
First has a break in the border at the top left.


Second you can see a couple from the right bottom corner and another near the left bottom corner, not sure if the speckled effect through the right side of the circle is anything.


Thanks Jeremy you made my day once again.
I Love Queensland
Michael

Nice items. The 2d is a Queensland first sideface, die 2. If you are interested in these stamps, have a look here: http://queensland1sideface.blogspot.com.au/p/queensland-2d-blue.html

The 3d brown is a lovely item. These issues have numerous flaws, so keep looking out for them Michael . The speckled effect could be a chemical reaction of the ink on the copper plate.

Thanks Jeremy, I will have a good look through your blog and I love finding flaws

Michael

Hi Jeremy, I recieved my Loose Ship cancel, and I can see it being just what rmort & yourself said.

Thanks again.

Enjoy Michael, it is always nice to find something different

I imagine this 227 of Cairns is fairly common, though had it been on a chalon I could be rubbing my hands with an RRRRR ?

_________________
Donald.
Aus KGV Head Addict !

I've just spent the weekend making a start on a project I've been meaning to do for a while, i.e. arranging all my Queensland stamps including numerals and postmarks. They were in real disarray and only roughly collated as I got them, then put them aside. A really didn't realise how many Chalons and sidefaces there were in various albums, dispersed hagners, boxes, etc. so the work isn't finished yet.

Looking at Bernie Manning's book (the latest as far as rarity ratings is concerned), brought up a few surprises while sorting the Chalons including 27 (Fort Cooper), 42 (unknown PO), 73 (unknown PO), 98 (Nerang Creek), 107 (Kilkivan), 134 (Thargomindah), 142 (Wivenhoe), etc.

The sidefaces, though not generally in the same league as Chalons as far as general rarity rating is concerned, had some surprises but the best so far is barred numeral 669 (unknown PO), rated NNS (number not seen):



P.S. In real life the numeral is much clearer than the scan shows.

I hope I find some more gems by the time I get through them

_________________
Tony

A spectacular find Tony

Am I right in assuming this was a common cancel on this stamp ?

_________________
Donald.
Aus KGV Head Addict !

Hello Jeremy and SB team, I need some help please I can't find this number in the Qld BN list, is it a Qld BN? Maybe it's a Victorian BN.



Cheers
Michael

P.S manfaefife, Jeremy must be busy or on a break someone might have an idea on that cancel, I don't have the book sorry.

Looks like it might be a railway canceller, but I cannot find my reference material on line while pretending to work.

Yes it is a railway cancel. I am at work as well so cannot tell you its rarity

5 isn't listed as a railway cancel in Manning. The only numbers listed under 10 are:

1 Brisbane (a rectangular cancel)
7 Wooloowin
8 Eagle Junction

I isn't listed under Ballarat in Freeman & White either, so possibly a NSW railway cancel (maybe from the northern rivers area of NSW )

_________________
Tony

Funny dwopper and thanks for assisting and thank you Jeremy and Lakatoi 4 also, all views are going for the railway cancel, can't wait for the verdict

Cheers everyone
Michael

I think I'd put my 2 bob's worth on it being a bogus cancel especially since it's on a 2s.6,

David B.

Oh wow bogus , Jeremy warned me about fakes. Thank you David the stamp is a One Pound though sorry about the error in scanning, I guess it doesn't matter it still maybe a bogus as you said.

Lucky I didn't blow $25

Michael

Micky,

not 100% sure, maybe Revenuer might know, it is not NSW or Vic. and they wouldn't exist on high values anyway.

David B.

I see, I have learnt something new and I need to note this one down for sure.

I need all the information I can get for future purchases and dodgy sellers.

Thanks again David

I wouldn't blame the seller as it looks good, can't see any sign of a fiscal cancel removal.

Be very careful with Queensland Hi Face Value stamps either mint or used, most aren't what they look like,

David B.

Yes yes I understand David.

The 2 x 63’s above are just appalling, please burn then as quickly as you can, the 10/- even has a huge pen cancel on it.

The pound Bradbury can join the 63’s on the fire as well.

Doing this kind act will rid the stamp world of this rubbish.

Manning does not do the railways well at all Numeral 5 began life as Mayne later it was relocated to Whinstanes-Doomben.

Revenuer I don't have the 63 lucky, they are on Delcampe and under the same seller, maybe someone with enough funds to buy and burn them can do the deed. And lucky again I did not spend the $25 on the pound, the 5 does look great for so called rubbish.

Thank you Revenuer for saving my pocket, phew..

Michael

Postally used high value stamps from Queensland are an interesting lot. They do exist as the British philatelic literature at the time often remarked on how they had been seen on parcels coming from Queensland. But they are very scarce and as has been pointed out, most are fakes. There was also comment in the literature at the time that as there were so many of these stamps - forged postally and fiscally used - in circulation that it was suspected that officials within the colonial government were fraudulently removing them from revenue documents and then selling them!

Hi Jeremy, Can I ask how this one is a fake? What signs are there for me to note down, as you said there are some but are very scarce, you and Revenuer know a lot to help myself and others with identifying them.

Thanks for helping once again, any comments on manfaefife 227 Cairns above?

Michael

The 227 was originally allocated to Cairns then re-allocated to Rocklea. Cairns usage to 1888. It's rated R in Manning on a sideface and a nice RRRRR on Commonwealth issues.

_________________
Tony

Does anyone want to have a go identifying this one? It is a NSW era (pre 1859 that continued to be used after Queensland came into existence) cancel but I am not 100% sure which one but I think it Taroom which was no 152 and which Manning lists as seen used in 1882



Thanks
Jeremy

Thank you Lakatoi 4, appreciate your help.

_________________
Donald.
Aus KGV Head Addict !