Postage Stamp Chat Board & Stamp Bulletin Board Forum
 

I have seen this cancel from time to time I think.
Was it only used for the cto upu presentation set or was it used for regular cancellations later or was there a similiar cancel to this used for day to day purposes?
Just wondering if I should pick up ones that look like this with out question?
Thanks again.

I think it was a 'regular' Melbourne GPO canceller. Quite why it was used for the 25 April CTO/UPU presentation sets is a bit of a mystery, especially since the day before and the week before they'd been using the MELBOURNE steel cancel we're all familiar with.

My guess is that some poor worker was a bit overloaded. He/she had to make up 200 sets on 15 April, and another 400 sets on 24 and 25 April. After a hard shift on 24 April, fell sick. Or asked for some help. I reckon the powers-that-be sent the remaining sheets of stamps down to the GPO for cancelling, or, alternatively, brought in a clerk from the GPO, with canceller, to finish making up the sets.

Since quite a number of the UPU sets are dated 24 April, there may have been some sort of deadline to get the job completed by 25 April.

Well, just a theory.

The problem is that, unless you can get a clear 25 April 1913 cancel, there isn't any way to be sure that the stamp is one of those UPUs. And I suppose even that doesn't prove it conclusively.

None of Arthur Gray's stamps (as posted on page 17 of this thread) has a clear, unequivocal 25 April 1913 cancel - his are known to be UPUs because of additional factors. As an example, even the 'three-quarters' cancel you posted above doesn't reveal any date.

I think that the anonymous, unremarkable counter cancel on those later UPUs is the reason so few of them are around. They just don't hit you between the eyes. Who would have given a second thought to that ½d stamp were it not for this thread? All that can then be said for sure is that it is a contemporary Melbourne GPO counter cancel.

A stamp with a clear date strike would be special.

Clive

Hi

Another recent purchase
4d violet block of four - Brisbane CTO cancel
Plated as 2L1, 2L2, 2L7 (BW 111(2)d Left frame broken at top) and 2L8 (BW 111(2)e Thin "FOU" of "FOUR" (retouch))



And below are another 2 similar blocks from my collection



Cheers
Alex

Alex I think that is the same cancel as on the sheet of 1d Roos in the Archives we have a pic of from the PO Doco in 2010, and the 10/- and £1 Roo blocks I sold that were from the PO archives.

So where did blocks of 4d Violet come from?

Glen

And whilst on 1913 'Specimen' type multiples, I had these unique pairs listed on my Rarity Page yesterday for an HOUR, and a trade member bought them for very many $1000s.

About the 3rd time I have handled these, since buying these off a chap who'd not touched them for 35 years.

Glen

Hi Glen

The Brisbane CTO cancel on the 10/- roo block looks slightly different from the cancel used on the 4d violet block. If you look at the letterings of the cancel on the 10/- roo block (esp "Queensland"), the letterings of that cancel is larger than the one used on the 4d violet block.

Regarding where do they come from, I found the following information from one of the Grosvenor auctions - The “Ayers”Collection of Australia King George V Heads - conducted on 28 February 2006. Lot 341 of that auction was a similar block of 4d violet with Brisbane CTO cancel, and was described as follows:

"4d. violet, a block of four cancelled to order with central Brisbane c.d.s., from the single sheet (less eight stamps) sent from Melbourne in 1929, some being later presented to Officials and a few released by sale from archive."

I wonder if anyone else have more information, why this was prepared in the first place? Seems strange that it was "sent from Melbourne" but cancelled with Brisbane CDS?

Cheers
Alex

This stamp was sold on eBay by gottacute on 23 April -
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll ... true&rt=nc


It sold for $130.25. Can someone please tell me what I'm missing here? To be fair to the seller, this isn't an item she/he bigged up -

Quote:

KGV 1/2d Acsc 63A EMERALD SINGLE WMK CTO . EMERALD IA VERY SCARCER SHADE. NICE AND PO FRESH.

Which is positively restrained by her/his usual standards - not a 'gem' nor a 'superb' to be seen.

It might even have a bit of toning on the top edge.

So, $130

Clive

It does look like an ACSC listed variety 63(2)e Vertical gash in kangaroo's tail 2L7. The variety is cat. $25 used and $40 mint. A normal CTO 63w is cat. $20, so I think $130 is still way over what it is worth.

There were 4 different bidders $57 to $130. Am I still missing something or are they 'crazy ebay bidders' ?

This lot of single watermark CTO, I purchased at auction recently for $190 (+commission) is much better value.

Yes, indeed, and your ½d has a very similar cancellation.

I bought a couple of these from Glen a few months back, for $60 the pair, and I've since bought two more for less than $20 each.

But for $130, it's a mystery to me, but I do very much feel like I've missed something.

And should have said, austcollect, that was very shrewd buying.

The 4d blues are especially nice, and from memory ACSC catalogues them at $100 each. Also, the 1/4 is particularly hard to find and not in my view catalogued anywhere near enough relative to the other stamps in that 'single watermark' series..

But what caught my eye was the 1d red. Can you give us a high res scan of just that stamp, please? Does it have gum? If it's CTO, you may have a rare beast there.

Clive

The KGV SW CTO stamps were a mixture of mint and no gum:



½d green NG, ½d orange NG, 1d red NG, 1d violet NG, 1½d black-brown MH, 1½d red-brown MUH, 1½d green NG, 2d orange MH, 2d red MUH, 2d red-brown NG, 4d orange NG, 4d violet MUH, 4d blue (1) MUH, 4d blue (2) MH, 4d olive MH, 4½d violet NG, 5d brown MUH, 1/4 turquoise MH.

I have seen very few 1d red KGV CTO. Larger scan of 1d red:

Mate, I wouldn't swear to it being CTO, but I think that it is. And I wish it were mine.

A lovely and exceptionally scarce stamp.

Interesting range of CTO cancels in this KGV SW lot.

Clockwise MELBOURNE at top, blank at base, half side cancel: ½d green MR (2?) (15?), 4d orange JA (21?) 15, 5d brown (MR?) 2 15.

Issue dates: ½d green 22/02/15, 4d orange 6/01/15, 5d brown 22/02/15

The 1d red engraved normally has the same CTO cancel (Clockwise MELBOURNE at top, blank at base), so this was probably included in the CTO sets instead of the 1d red letterpress along with the ½d, 4d, 5d. The 1d red engraved CTO is much more common than the 1d red letterpress CTO.

Other CTO cancels in this KGV SW lot:

1. Clockwise G.P.O. at top, anti-clockwise MELBOURNE at base, quarter cancel: 4½d violet.

2. Clockwise G.P.O. at top, ? at base, quarter cancel: ½d orange, 1½d red-brown, 2d red-brown, 4d violet.

3. Clockwise MELBOURNE at top, ? at base, quarter cancel: 1d red, 1½d black-brown (half cancel), 1/4 turquoise.

4. ? at top, anti-clockwise MELBOURNE at base, quarter cancel: 1d violet, 1½d green, 2d red (maybe - difficult to read), 4d blue, 4d olive.

5. Clockwise G.P.O. MELBOURNE at top, ? at base, half cancel: 2d orange.

Cancel no.2 may be the same as no.1 or no.5.

Cancel no.3 may be the same as no.5.

Cancel no.4 is probably the same as no.1.

Hi I am new to Stampboards.

I have been collecting stamps on and off for years. Decided to fill in some gaps in my Aust pre dec stamps and have been buying a few roos. The last one I bought was a 10/- perf OS 3rd WMK with gum (CTO). My 2007 SG values this at 60 pds much less than a non- OS one so I suppose it is relatively common perf OS.

I stumbled onto this post about CTOs and am surprised people are now paying a premium for them. In the past they were worth less because they had not been genuinely used. In the case of some of the earlier HV ones like late States stamps and roos etc I believe they are often more common CTO than genuinely used as they were given to pollies etc as presentation packs.

Can anyone explainwhat is driving this? Also the one I bought has original gum. Should I clean it off? I gather gum left on old stamps can ultimately damage the stamp.

Simple case of supply (very limited in many cases) and demand (exceeding supply in many cases). The First WMK Kangaroos, for example, were only sold in small numbers in Specimen sets (just over 2,100 sets). The Presentation examples (with dates other than DEC 3 13) are much scarcer than that. By comparison, there were over 1 Billion 1d Red Kangaroo stamps actually printed.

On your 10/- Third WMK OS, this stamp was included in Specimen sets (sold by the Post Office) in error, originally. Any stamp over 5/- Face Value was supposed to be overprinted SPECIMEN. When the Post Office decided to include OS stamps in the sets they included the 10/-, £1 and £2 incorrectly. When this was realised the £1 and £2 were immediately removed (a very few sets with them in it were sold).

For some reason, the 10/ remained in the sets right up till obsolete stamps were removed from sets in 1944. The actual demand for 10/- stamps was quite small, probably smaller for Commonwealth departments, and so the CTO is much more common than the same stamp postally used. There are a few other examples that are also easier to find CTO than used (like the 5/- Bridge or the Kingsford Smith OS overprints), but the majority of CTO stamps from Specimen sets are much scarcer than postally used.

_________________
Peter
Hawthorn - AFL Premiers 1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008.

Peter,

Don't be too modest - you have done more for the cause of Australian CTO stamps, with and in this thread, than anyone in the country. Supply and demand rules, always, but you've made a significant contribution to demand.

Good on you.

Clive

I've been meaning to open this topic up for discussion for some time now, so here goes. Please excuse if it has already been dealt with.

Here are some KGV Heads with the MELBOURNE CTO cancel. Bog standard, no smoke and mirrors.


Except that it ISN'T the MELBOURNE CTO cancel as used for the first watermark roos and the KGV 1d engraved.

Compare the above images with these -


- or this -


The lettering of MELBOURNE is plainly quite different in terms of spacing between the letters. In particular, look how close the letters L and B are on the heads compared with the roos. And the gaps between U and R, and R and N on the Heads is much wider than on the roos. Also the position from which the date starts is almost exactly in a horizontal line from the M of MELBOURNE on the first watermarks stamps. On the KGVs the date starts between the M and the E of MELBOURNE.

This canceller also displays marked signs of wear, especially on the right side, with some lettering almost missing or otherwise clearly worn.

My theory is that the 'classical' MELBOURNE steel canceller was 'retired' after the July 1914 postmarking of the KGV 1d engraved. For the CTO postmarking of the 1915 KGV heads, a new, similar-ish but clearly different canceller was brought into use. And it was retired after a very brief period of use, quite probably because it was fast giving up the ghost.

Thoughts?

Clive

Clive, certainly sounds feasible to me. The Flat Top 3 is somewhere between the 2 (in terms of starting position of MELBOURNE).



Whereas the classic MELBOURNE Canceler of pre 1914 appears to be a smaller version of the one used on the First WMK Kangaroos.

_________________
Peter
Hawthorn - AFL Premiers 1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008.

Steel postmarkers were VERY robust. Giving clean impressions for some years at smaller POs as the postmark books show us clearly.

Philatelic were not using them very much, and were using them far more carefully than your average PO did! And use per day average would be way less.

It may well be there were several of the crisp steel cancels on hand for when different staffers needed to use them simultaneously, so more examination might well be instructive.

Yes, but here the focus is not on steel cancellers per se, but rather the steel canceller(s) used for CTO postmarking 1913-1915 (on first watermark roos, KGV 1d red engraved, KGV ½d, 4d and 5d of 1915).

I think it can be safely said that the 'classic' MELBOURNE steel canceller was used only for first watermark roos and the KGV 1d engraved.

The three KGV heads of 1915 were all postmarked with a similar but different canceller, as shown in my previous post, but here are a couple more examples -


I'm beginning to wonder if in fact these were steel cancellers. Especially looking at the 4d orange. As Peter said, this cancel is sort of mid-way between the original MELBOURNE steel and the rubber 'type 2' cancel used for the low value first watermark roos.

I'd go further: I think the canceller used in 1915 was rubber. That would account for the rapid wear, as well as the inevitable heavy and/or blotchy cancels found on so many of the stamps.

Also worth mentioning that Arthur Gray's CTO second watermark roos, illustrated on page 17 of this thread, have this cancel.

For whatever reason, the canceller was retired after June 1915, but in my view it was because, like the type 2 rubber canceller used in December 1913, it just didn't stand up to the wear.

Clive

A few recent purchases.



Unfortunately the dates not clear on most of them. The 1/- are both the upright watermark, and the cancels differ. As such, they appear to be 1 x 15 April and 1 x 25 April. The 5d is also 25 April. The bottom two have a 17 date, so presumably 17 July.



April cancel, but fake perfin. A real shame, as otherwise it would have been a nice example.

Andrew,
Some very nice items indeed. Think I've seen that 6d before.

Have you seen Dr Geoff Kellow's article 'Distribution of Kangaroo Stamps to the Universal Postal Union' in the Australian Commonwealth Collectors Club of NSW's March 2012 Bulletin?

Terrific article, absolutely essential reading for any CTO enthusiast.

The picture relating to the 17 July 1913 cancels is still emerging. My guess, as I've written here before, is that these stamps were presentation items given to new members of the incoming Cook government and new opposition members and senators.

It would not have been necessary, or so it seems to me, for the stamps to have been given to all MPs since most of them would have received a set three months earlier (the 15 April CTOs).

So, considerably fewer of the 17 July stamps than the 200 specially cancelled in April.

Although not, I think, as hard to find as the 25 April (UPU) cancel, i.e. the 5d and 1/- you posted above.

Clive

Hi Clive, any chance of a copy of that article you mention showing up on here would love to read it .

I'd be really happy to, but it would require permission from the author and the publisher. Copyright and intellectual property rights are involved.

On the plus side, Dr Kellow's December article, about the number of April 1913 presentation sets, was very quickly made available through the AUSTRALIA 2013 website, so perhaps this one will soon be posted up on that site as well.

Something unusual that turned up in an Estate today, and just put into stock for $60.

SADLY empty. Nice green silk string bindings etc.

The curious thing was that these have SIX separate storage pages. Have others seen the 6 page version?

Nearly all other I have seen were 3 HORIZONTAL folds, and 3 pages. OR 2 facing pages vertically.

Lovely condition for what I assume is about 80 years old.

One of the MEL dealers is urging ACSC to list the various Specimen folder types, and if he prevails some of them will be nice pieces I think.

The ACSC of course catalogues only booklet COVERS for the early booklets, (no stamps inside) and many of those get into 5 figure listings.

I have just emailed cover photos of all the early stamp booklet covers to SG, from Arthur Gray's collection, as oddly they show no covers before WW2. They'll be in the next SG cat hopefully.

Glen

Glen,

If "put into stock for $60" means this is for sale, would you consider it sold to me, please?

If so, let me know and I'll arrange an EFT payment.

Clive

Hi!

A nice set!

Did you see that your 6d roo in the second row has a nice constant "island flaw" below Albany! This surely makes this stamp a bit scarcer! Perhaps you could provide a larger scan of that stamp to confirm?

Greetings

Josto

The 6d blue April cancel was described as "large white flaw sought of WA".

Clive - this did not come from the ebay lot of 3 that you are thinking of.



To contrast

Andrew,

That's the one I meant - not sure why you thought I was talking about the 'other' one. They are both in the scan you originally posted.

Clive

Clive - apologies, I was obviously confused.

As 1st watermarks are disproportionately represented, here are some 3rd wmks.

Andrew,

That is an especially cruel riposte.

For something a little different, how's this for a doubled (CTO) postmark?



Clive

Clive

Very nice. It also looks yellow orange (but that may just be the scanner).

Clive .. very nice .. can't recall seeing THAT much doubling before!

I recently purchased a bulk lot from Canada and located
this nice looking engraved Kooka.

It has the Vic Aust postmark and based on previous posts/threads
it is likely a forgery?

My question is what on earth would this stamp be doing in Canada?
And why bother stamping with a fake CTO for the sake of a few
extra catalogue dollars?

It is a CTO and the cancel is perfectly genuine. The 6d Engraved is one of the relatively few CTOs that are worth less than nice postaly used. The stamp was in Specimen sets for much of the time from issue to around 1944 (apart from periods where obsolete stamps were not included).

The dates of cancels on this stamp range from 1914 (when issued) to at least 1939 (which is what the cancel on yours is likely to be).

_________________
Peter
Hawthorn - AFL Premiers 1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008.

Gee, that's a big call, Peter.

I have a couple of collectors' packs from the late 1930s and neither has a 6d kooka (although that doesn't mean they weren't included, just that my sets don't have one). On the other hand, I know of several packs from the early 1930s which do.

I'd be more than mildly surprised to learn that the 6d kooka was still in packs going into the 1940s.

I'd like to hear other views on that cancel of woodster's. Has anyone else got a copy with that (relatively) late VIC AUST postmark? If kosher, it says that quantities of stock of this stamp were still held some twenty years after its issue - this for a stamp of which fewer than a million were issued - in 1914.

That said, a lovely example of the stamp, super perfs, margins and centering, cream of the crop.

Clive

Clive, I have a pack with the CofA Kangaroo Specimens. So it has to be from the early 1940s. It contains the 6d Engraved Kooka. I have noted a couple of examples of 6d Engraved with a 1939 cancel date.

_________________
Peter
Hawthorn - AFL Premiers 1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008.

Here are some of my CTO 6d Kookas. The first three appear to have various sections of the same cancel as Woodster's (though none are as nice as his ), and also show various parts of a '3' & '9' in the year date. The last one has a different cancel, but is clearly 1932, and I'm guessing is a CTO cancel.





I've also got one (which I haven't scanned) with a 1914 type Melbourne cancel. So there seems to be a fair variety of CTO cancels on this issue.


Scott

Here's another example of that last CTO cancel which has gum.



Do these watermark Narrow Crown Postage Dues look like Presentation cancels?





The 3d has flat gum, the 2d no gum.

Iain

iaincraven,

Thanks for posting your example of the 6d Kooka. Mine didn't have any gum, so wasn't 100% sure that it was CTO.

I'll leave it to the more experienced members of this thread to comment on your Postage Dues, but for what it's worth they look CTO to me


Scott

First Kooka is 100% fine. It comes with many CTO cancels variants.

Dues appear OK ... the earlier 1909 Dues set is nearly only found CTO!

Glen

_________________
.
Click HERE to see superb, RARE and unusual stamps, at FIXED low nett prices, high rez photos, and NO buyer fees etc!

Scott
Looks like the top right stamp could be the "recut inner frame below tail" variety - BW 60d.
Quite a scarce stamp and in very nice condition.
Michael Eastick has an off centre example on his website for $250.00
Might be worth some further investigation.

Blue-lazer,

Thanks so much for pointing that out! I believe that you are correct, it matches well with the picture in the ACSC.

For those that are wondering what we're talking about (and I will pretend I am knowledgeable after learning about it 30 seconds ago ) - there is a lighter inner frame at the bottom of the normal stamp. In mine, however, there is nothing between the tail and the thick outer frame.

Hope I can return the favour in some way in the future blue-lazer.


Scott

You are welcome Scott.
Glad to help
Peter

True. And yet, for example, that is not the case for the KGV 1d engraved, a near contemporary of the 6d kooka.

While pondering why stocks of the 6d kooka were being CTO cancelled as late as 1939, or thereabouts, a thought struck me. A mischievous thought.

Are CTO stamps cancelled 'out of period' somehow less desirable than those which have contemporary or 'in period' cancels? I mean, many are very quick to 'downgrade' ordinary postally used stamps if they have been cancelled 'out of period'. On that logic (?) shouldn't CTO stamps be regarded the same way?

Another question: what is the earliest dated CTO cancel on a 6d engraved kooka? I'd be surprised if it's this one (24 MR).



By which I mean the 24 MR cancel belongs, I think, to around 1922-4, although I'd be happy to be corrected. I'm not entirely sure any 6d kookas were CTO cancelled 1914.

Clive

Clive, I will have to hunt around for it to scan. However, I have a 6d Kooka with the same Melbourne cancel as that applied to the First WMK Kangaroos. That canceler does not seem to have been used after 1914.

As to why the 1d Engraved disappeared sooner, I think there is a very simple reason. The 1d was a letter rate stamp and was delivered in quite limited numbers - for a letter rate stamp (so limited that there was a rationing of the number you could buy when first released).

Obviously, there was adequate stock of the 6d (a face different stamp as well) to last through to 1944. Not that surprising, as the 6d Kangaroo continued to be produced right through till the late 1930s.

As to the status. My personal view is that a CTO is a CTO. It was not taken to the PO by a collector to get a per favour cancel. The cancel date is as issued by the Post Office. The fact that there are a number of cancel dates for any given stamp is purely a function of the preparation date (akin to issue date) of the Specimen pack it was included in.

For what it is worth, my CTO Date database contains the following dates for the 6d Engraved; 24/??/??, 24/MR/??, ??/SE/14, 10/??/14 and ??/AU/39. I suggest there are probably 3 separate dates in that group.

_________________
Peter
Hawthorn - AFL Premiers 1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008.

This block with gum above from my stock at $600 has the more usually sighted CTO cancel.

HOWEVER the '1913 style' cancels are not that uncommon I have found. Have owned many of them as singles.

THE UPU samples all had those - with the "Flat Top 3" type cancel - although this one is unique with the SPECIMEN overprint.

Glen,

The date on that block - is it upside down relative to the wording? I keep seeing 53 or 52 as the year, but it must be my specs?

The single example is special. It does look very much like the 'flat-topped 3' canceller used on the low value first watermark roos. The 6d engraved wasn't issued until August 1914, and yet our theory here is that the type 2 canceller had been pensioned off during the CTO cancelling of the first watermark collectors' sets stamps.

Then, having apparently used the 'flat-topped 3' canceller for the kookas, it was retired again, seemingly permanently, although a not-dissimilar datestamp was brought into use just a few months later to cancel the first of the CTO KGV Heads (½d, 4d, 5d).

Fascinating. Seems like with CTOs something new bobs up each week.

Clive