Share your REGISTERED cover scans from all over the world.

stamps1804 · **Posted:** Fri Dec 23, 2011 07:17:31 am

Hello!
I would like to show a cover which i received a few days ago.
This is registered from Canada to Germany.
The letter was checked by customs and has been opened on request.
I always like receiving covers like these, franked with all kinds of stamps.
I always have to laugh ,when i pick them up at the post office, they look so irritated with so many stamps. :lol:

mozzerb · **Posted:** Fri Dec 23, 2011 08:31:45 am

billys wrote:

I hope that the postal fees are in accordance with postal rates to France for this period.

Yes, minimum 1½d inland, 2½d to France, hence an extra 1d. The 4½d embossed stamp was for the inland rate plus 3d registration.

If either of those is a spare get in touch.

makielb · **Posted:** Sat Dec 24, 2011 03:22:19 am

Just going through an old batch of Israel/Palestine covers that I purchased in 2001 that I had set aside for getting rid of. (am I really that far behind?)

Anyway, I found this interesting bit of philatelic history.

SInce it's a registered cover I thought that it might belong here.

Anyway, what's interesting about this?

#1 - Yes, it's obviously philatelic
#2 - It was posted in Deir el-Dalah, Gaza during the final days of the Israeli occupation of Gaza following the 1956-7 Sinai War.
#3- The idea that the Israeli's had already printed registry labels showed that they had intended a rather lengthy occupation, which really wouldn't happen for another ten years.

That's about all.

HalfpennyYellow · **Posted:** Sun Dec 25, 2011 01:53:21 am

crosscrescent wrote:

Any comments on these registered covers would be most welcome.
Putting them on 4 different posts.
The first is from Malta, I think it was in 1891.

The front:

The back:

Cheers
Andrew

This cover is worth 15 euro and was issued in 1885.

honza · **Posted:** Sun Dec 25, 2011 02:02:10 am

Ahoj Andrew!

Although there is the embossed Malta registration fee stamp on the flap, it looks as if one or more additional adhesives have been removed from the front.

A pity because otherwise it would have been a very nice cover.

Cheers,

Honza

ScotsmanAbroad · **Posted:** Sun Dec 25, 2011 14:36:24 pm

waroff49 wrote:

When i was at school, one of our French teachers left to join a Govt. dept. to translate letter/documents in French to English ......

...did they have spies even back in Napoleonic times??? :lol:

ScotsmanAbroad · **Posted:** Sun Dec 25, 2011 14:39:07 pm

Here's a modern one I received this week

Catweazle · **Posted:** Thu Dec 29, 2011 13:56:10 pm

Here's some I got recently from a dealer's in town. Pretty nice covers, all for only $2 each!

And this US cover has an INSURED mark on it, which I assume is the same as registered.

This busy one wasn't $2. I paid $15 for it. Fair you think? Well, I certainly like it anyway - it's got a story to tell, that's for sure!

Feebletodix · **Posted:** Sun Jan 01, 2012 20:13:14 pm

Good day to you all

A recent acquisition, names etc removed at the request of the recipient.

Hungarian to UK

Regards

Feebletodix

norvic · **Posted:** Mon Jan 02, 2012 04:12:31 am

ScotsmanAbroad wrote:

Here's a modern one I received this week

It's a pity those old stamps are on there with the nice £3 Machins (although even those are pre-Feb 2009!).

I'm trying to work out the rate, as written at top left.
£4.95 is the International Signed For fee
£2.50 is the rate for 60g letter or 100g small packet.
£2.50+2.07 = £4.57 is no specific rate. The small packet rate is £4.26 for 300g + £1.11 for an additional 100g. The letter rates are £4.28 for 140g and £4.83 for 160g.

So.... is there a customs declaration on the back that tells us the declared weight?

muruk · **Posted:** Mon Jan 02, 2012 10:30:08 am

This one's on the giveaway thread, but thought I would put up a scan here for posterity.

1957 Uprated Pre-stamped Envelope, Chilliwack, BC, Canada to Stranraer, Scotland, UK:

Love the cute, tiny Chilliwack postmarks ... maybe they shrunk in the cold. :shock:

BruceK · **Posted:** Mon Jan 02, 2012 16:48:46 pm

A registered cover from Melbourne, Australia (19 April 1907) to a solicitor in York, England (28 May 1907).

Interesting that it has red / blue marks and a London registration stamp.

Appears that the red mark was applied in Melbourne and the blue mark and registration stamp applied in London.

mozzerb · **Posted:** Tue Jan 03, 2012 00:54:57 am

BruceK wrote:

A registered cover from Melbourne, Australia (19 April 1907) to a solicitor in York, England (28 May 1907).

Interesting that it has red / blue marks and a London registration stamp.

...

Appears that the red mark was applied in Melbourne and the blue mark and registration stamp applied in London.

At the time this was posted, the UK had recently introduced registration labels -- in February 1907, much later than many places, who often applied labels or handstamps of their own on entry (the Belgian ones are the most frequently seen). The serial numbering system -- using labels or handstamps -- was made a requirement for international mail at (IIRC) the 1897 Washington UPU conference, but the British PO made no move to actually implement it until they received a snotty letter from the USPO on the subject in 1905.

But once labels had been introduced, the same situation applied in reverse -- letters that arrived from places that didn't use labels had them applied in the UK. Typically this would be at the Inland Section, although I've seen Plymouth labels on letters landed nearby. Not sure when the labels were introduced in the Empire -- presumably they began to come into use shortly after as various places followed the lead of the mother country. The extra blue crossed lines are presumably also a UK addition because regulations required them, even with a red cross applied elsewhere. It was also standard practice to datestamp registered mail on arrival, hence the UK ovals.

BruceK · **Posted:** Tue Jan 03, 2012 18:10:54 pm

mozzerb wrote:

At the time this was posted, the UK had recently introduced registration labels -- in February 1907, much later than many places, who often applied labels or handstamps of their own on entry (the Belgian ones are the most frequently seen). The serial numbering system -- using labels or handstamps -- was made a requirement for international mail at (IIRC) the 1897 Washington UPU conference, but the British PO made no move to actually implement it until they received a snotty letter from the USPO on the subject in 1905.

But once labels had been introduced, the same situation applied in reverse -- letters that arrived from places that didn't use labels had them applied in the UK. Typically this would be at the Inland Section, although I've seen Plymouth labels on letters landed nearby. Not sure when the labels were introduced in the Empire -- presumably they began to come into use shortly after as various places followed the lead of the mother country. The extra blue crossed lines are presumably also a UK addition because regulations required them, even with a red cross applied elsewhere. It was also standard practice to datestamp registered mail on arrival, hence the UK ovals.

Thanks mozzerb, excellent information.

Voyager · **Posted:** Tue Jan 03, 2012 18:26:31 pm

Received this registered envelope just today

sent from Sittingbourne, Kent, U.K. on Dec 20, 2011
received at Thanjavur, India on Jan 03, 2012

Queenslander · **Posted:** Tue Jan 03, 2012 19:19:37 pm

Came across this GB 1960's cover recently. Posted from London Airport by BOAC Pay Office. Not sure if it's worth anything.

Catweazle · **Posted:** Thu Jan 05, 2012 15:00:54 pm

Queenslander - it's always worth something! :wink:

mozzerb · **Posted:** Fri Jan 06, 2012 08:58:42 am

Queenslander wrote:

Came across this GB 1960's cover recently. Posted from London Airport by BOAC Pay Office. Not sure if it's worth anything.

Usage from an unusual post office, hard to tell if commercial or philatelic, a bit grubby and with poor strikes of the postmarks -- say about £2-3 because of that, in better nick a tenner. If there was something to indicate that the use of two different 3d stamps clearly wasn't semi-philatelic, then add a bit (not a lot, unfortunately -- GB usage collecting isn't at the same keenness levels as Australian usage collecting).

Addendum: actually, thinking about that a bit more, it might well be the case that the 3d definitive was added to uprate the envelope before sale (that happened a lot, on official instructions in the Post Office Circular -- in some cases the stamps were added to unissued stocks of postal stationery pre-stamped at old rates before the envelopes were even sent to the post offices). The registration fee went up from 1s 6d to 1s 9d on 29th April 1963, but the basic letter rate stayed the same at 3d. In which case, that's rather an interesting usage with an additional 3d commemorative and it looks rather better!

waroff49 · **Posted:** Fri Jan 06, 2012 09:19:01 am

If as Torre said, the postage rate went from 1/6 to 1/9 and the postage rate was 3d., then it is overpaid by 3d. The rego stamp says 1/9+3d+3d. Unless the extra 3d was for additional insurance.

mozzerb · **Posted:** Fri Jan 06, 2012 11:12:41 am

waroff49 wrote:

If as Torre said, the postage rate went from 1/6 to 1/9 and the postage rate was 3d., then it is overpaid by 3d. The rego stamp says 1/9+3d+3d. Unless the extra 3d was for additional insurance.

Basic letter rate was 3d for up to 1oz. The next two steps were 4½d for 1-2oz and 6d for 2-4oz, so this letter would only had had to weigh a bit above 2oz to require postage of 6d. Not unlikely in the least. If the 3d had been for extra insurance, then the total fee of 2s would have been written in the "Fee paid" space at bottom left.

The general rule being that it's not a good idea to think of a basic letter rate as being the letter rate! It's only the first stage.

waroff49 · **Posted:** Fri Jan 06, 2012 11:48:07 am

Glad that's cleared up. Now how many £ notes would it take to make envelope and contents to 2 oz.? Oh! it might have coins.....forget I asked....

Queenslander · **Posted:** Fri Jan 06, 2012 14:55:57 pm

Thanks for that. I thought the extra stamps were to cover additional insurance as the envelope already had 1s & 9d on it.

norvic · **Posted:** Sat Jan 07, 2012 01:09:50 am

The minimum registration fee increased from 1s6d to 1s9d in 1963, so the 3d Wilding would be added, with no need to write the 'Fee Paid' at the lower left because that was only when registration above the minimum was paid for.

Obviously commercial because of the marking on the back. London Airport PO would have been used a lot for mail from travellers, but also from companies operating on the site. Registration label is nice though, and an enlarged scan of that should be on Tallanet's British Postmark Database thread.

honza · **Posted:** Sat Jan 07, 2012 01:42:03 am

Ahoj Ian!

I think the confusion is caused because the back of the envelope still gives the registration rate as 1/6 and yet the embossed stamp on the front is already 1/9 so that 2/3 was paid altogether after the addition of the two adhesives.

Maybe the sender (or even postal official?) had made the same mistake and read the back rather than looking at the embossed stamp.

Cheers,

Honza

norvic · **Posted:** Sat Jan 07, 2012 01:51:26 am

When the envelope was printed at 1s9d it was 1s6d registration + 3d postage.

When the minimum registration fee increased to 1s9d the full rate was 2s requiring the addition of a 3d adhesive, while postage remained 3d.

If the weight of the item was over the minimum (included in the preprinted stamp) then an additional adhesive would be required for that. So the full payment is

1/6d reg + 3d postage + 3d registration for new minimum + 3d excess postage for weight = 2/3d

mozzerb · **Posted:** Sat Jan 07, 2012 06:42:35 am

norvic wrote:

When the envelope was printed at 1s9d it was 1s6d registration + 3d postage.

When the minimum registration fee increased to 1s9d the full rate was 2s requiring the addition of a 3d adhesive, while postage remained 3d.

If the weight of the item was over the minimum (included in the preprinted stamp) then an additional adhesive would be required for that. So the full payment is

1/6d reg + 3d postage + 3d registration for new minimum + 3d excess postage for weight = 2/3d

Yep, what Ian said.

And what I said too! I thought the situation was clear from the amounts on the various stamps, but obviously not. The point of selling a registered envelope was that (at this time) the embossed stamp covered the minimum inland postage and minimum inland registration fee without needing additional adhesives. When either of those changed, a new envelope was eventually issued pre-stamped for the new total, but old versions needed uprating for the difference. The printed text on the back would be out of date perforce.

Here there was a 3d increase in the minimum registration fee, hence a 3d definitive was added (probably) before sale. Extra stamps would be needed if either the letter weighed more than the minimum or extra insurance was paid -- but here clearly the extra 3d is not the latter, which would have made a total registration fee of 2s, because it wasn't marked as such. (It was only necessary to mark the fee on the envelope if it wasn't the minimum, to show what had been paid.) Hence the 3d would be extra postage, and this fits with the then-current rates.

Also as Ian says, the pay office cachet on the back makes it basically commercial -- although until I remembered about the official uprating with adhesives, I was a bit suspicious that it might have been due to a collector asking for their wages to be sent out with an interesting two-3d franking! Then again, there probably wouldn't have been many collectors interested in that in the early 1960s.

All in all, it's an interesting item and I was probably pessimistic about the value! Pity about the weak postmarks and the stain on the back though.

honza · **Posted:** Sat Jan 07, 2012 07:30:50 am

Ahoj Ian and Mozzer!

Thanks for the further clarification. I was thinking the embossed stamp was only for the registration fee. I believe that was the case at one time, but probably much earlier or was it somewhere else in the Empire?

Thanks both anyway,

Cheers,

Honza

mozzerb · **Posted:** Sat Jan 07, 2012 07:42:53 am

honza wrote:

I was thinking the embossed stamp was only for the registration fee. I believe that was the case at one time, but probably much earlier or was it somewhere else in the Empire?

The early GB registered envelopes -- from 1878 up to the last QV issue -- did indeed only have a 2d stamp for the registration fee. Since they'd been talking about changing that anyway, from the first EVII issue on they included postage as well (with the exception of a couple of envelopes in 1956 and 1971 which had only the overseas registration fee -- less than the inland one for short periods).

Not sure about the rest of the Empire, but I'd expect that you could find examples of both approaches at various places and times.

norvic · **Posted:** Sat Jan 07, 2012 08:28:02 am

For a long period the embossed stamp on British registration labels showed the total value and the breakdown between registration fee and postage.
Those which had only the registration fee included the international ones - I think they were magenta or scarlet in '71?

mozzerb · **Posted:** Sat Jan 07, 2012 09:25:53 am

norvic wrote:

For a long period the embossed stamp on British registration labels showed the total value and the breakdown between registration fee and postage.
Those which had only the registration fee included the international ones - I think they were magenta or scarlet in '71?

Yes, 15p magenta, and the 1956 one was a 6d puce. (Don't have any scans handy, but I'll have to make a note to dig them out.) And for the record on this thread we should probably mention that the Forces ones were registration fee only as well (free postage on active service).

Iggy · **Posted:** Sat Jan 07, 2012 09:35:00 am

norvic wrote:

ScotsmanAbroad wrote:

Here's a modern one I received this week

It's a pity those old stamps are on there with the nice £3 Machins (although even those are pre-Feb 2009!).

I'm trying to work out the rate, as written at top left.
£4.95 is the International Signed For fee
£2.50 is the rate for 60g letter or 100g small packet.
£2.50+2.07 = £4.57 is no specific rate. The small packet rate is £4.26 for 300g + £1.11 for an additional 100g. The letter rates are £4.28 for 140g and £4.83 for 160g.

So.... is there a customs declaration on the back that tells us the declared weight?

Ian,
£4.95 = international Signed For Rate
£2.50 = additional compensation up to £500.00
£2.07 = small packet rate up to 100g (Rest of World)

Iggy

norvic · **Posted:** Sat Jan 07, 2012 20:17:33 pm

Iggy wrote:

norvic wrote:

ScotsmanAbroad wrote:

Here's a modern one I received this week

It's a pity those old stamps are on there with the nice £3 Machins (although even those are pre-Feb 2009!).

I'm trying to work out the rate, as written at top left.
£4.95 is the International Signed For fee
£2.50 is the rate for 60g letter or 100g small packet.
£2.50+2.07 = £4.57 is no specific rate. The small packet rate is £4.26 for 300g + £1.11 for an additional 100g. The letter rates are £4.28 for 140g and £4.83 for 160g.

So.... is there a customs declaration on the back that tells us the declared weight?

Ian,
£4.95 = international Signed For Rate
£2.50 = additional compensation up to £500.00
£2.07 = small packet rate up to 100g (Rest of World)

Iggy

Thank you - I was in error, writing £2.50 instead of £2.07 on line 2. Had I got that right I might have spotted the £2.50 fee which was the fly in the ointment. Never seen one of those before, so that makes it a worthwhile cover in its own right!

locakart · **Posted:** Wed Jan 11, 2012 03:53:06 am

Also posted on the OHMS covers thread.

A British Collector of Taxes OHMS registered envelope from 1970.

The envelope is 234 X 119 mm and is printed on thick manila paper with the sealing flap at the right. It is printed in blue (rather than the usual black) ink with the blue registration cross over both the front and back. There is nothing else apart from the cross on the back.

This one is used from York with a registration label and two York cancellations of 9 October 70 tying the flap to the body of the envelope.

hutch · **Posted:** Wed Jan 11, 2012 19:21:37 pm

Here's a couple of interesting registered covers from different places in USA to the same firm in NSW.

and the back

second one

Could they have been sent to someone who collected stamps as they both seem to have quite a few different stamps. Also, is this the correct postal usage for the time?
Another question, what is the significance of the large oval O as a cancellation. Anne

europhil · **Posted:** Thu Jan 12, 2012 01:15:09 am

At that time, PO regulations required the use of mute cancels
on the front of registered letters, and dated cancels on the
reverse. This was to insure that any clerk handling the item
would look at both sides.

THis is no longer the case, but I'm not sure when the rules
changed.

hutch · **Posted:** Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:50:45 pm

Thanks europhil. Most interesting. Anne

ScotsmanAbroad · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2012 18:16:11 pm

norvic wrote:

Iggy wrote:

norvic wrote:

ScotsmanAbroad wrote:

Here's a modern one I received this week

It's a pity those old stamps are on there with the nice £3 Machins (although even those are pre-Feb 2009!).

I'm trying to work out the rate, as written at top left.
£4.95 is the International Signed For fee
£2.50 is the rate for 60g letter or 100g small packet.
£2.50+2.07 = £4.57 is no specific rate. The small packet rate is £4.26 for 300g + £1.11 for an additional 100g. The letter rates are £4.28 for 140g and £4.83 for 160g.

So.... is there a customs declaration on the back that tells us the declared weight?

Ian,
£4.95 = international Signed For Rate
£2.50 = additional compensation up to £500.00
£2.07 = small packet rate up to 100g (Rest of World)

Iggy

Thank you - I was in error, writing £2.50 instead of £2.07 on line 2. Had I got that right I might have spotted the £2.50 fee which was the fly in the ointment. Never seen one of those before, so that makes it a worthwhile cover in its own right!

Thanks for the extra info, Iggy and Norvic - here are the contents, just to complete things.
½d Vermillion block with a flaw.

ScotsmanAbroad · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2012 18:27:08 pm

Trinidad to London. Queen Victoria registered cover, used in 1904.

HalfpennyYellow · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2012 20:00:10 pm

Three GB KGV large registered envelopes

First: 3d brown uprated with a 3d stamp (perfin 'HUTH' for Fredrick Huth & Co., London) sent from London, E.C. to New York on 8 January 1915.

Front,

and the back,

HalfpennyYellow · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2012 20:03:40 pm

Second: 4½d envelope uprated with Mackennal 1d sent to New York City on 16 June 1928

Front,

Back,

HalfpennyYellow · **Posted:** Sat Jan 14, 2012 20:07:44 pm

Third, another 4½d envelope uprated with 2 Mackennal 1½d and a Downey 1d sent to Paris, with two red wax seals. Sent from London W. C. on 22 January 1931.

Front,

Back,

nolimitsstamps · **Posted:** Sun Jan 15, 2012 08:25:24 am

As the headline says:

Now on e*ay: http://tinyurl.com/86oz47y

vijayvenkat · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2012 04:07:09 am

Do registered official FDCs (with spl post mark) have any value as a collectible. The covers are addressed to an individual and are opened. Some of the covers have Blocks of 4 stamps affixed?

Have some from India - 1960's

Will post some pictures once i learn how to post them.

norvic · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2012 04:15:41 am

vijayvenkat wrote:

Do registered official FDCs (with spl post mark) have any value as a collectible. The covers are addressed to an individual and are opened. Some of the covers have Blocks of 4 stamps affixed?

Have some from India - 1960's

Will post some pictures once i learn how to post them.

Some people collect them, but this thread isn't for asking about values in that sense.
Best start a new thread with a question about those covers.

tonga2 · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:15:01 pm

Here are a few registered covers showing the self-adhesive shaped stamps from Sierra Leone:-

tonga2 · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:15:48 pm

tonga2 · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:16:31 pm

tonga2 · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2012 12:17:13 pm

norvic · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2012 09:05:18 am

Unused but barely collectable Barbados registered envelope, Queen Victoria 2d registration fee stamp on the flap.
Has red printing and thus red crossed lines rather than the blue used in the UK.

Newfoundland 23 July 1937 with Coronation set and selection of definitives - not FDC, but obviously philatelic

norvic · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2012 09:10:36 am

Seychelles 1957 FDC to Zanzibar (Mombasa backstamp a month after posting). There are three listed varieties for this, all with italic letters, but this is marked 'G' variety . As far as I can see any overprint without partly filled-in letters, or letters slightly distorted either by the type or excess ink is probably scarce!

On closer examination the flaw is on the original stamp, and consists of a white dot at the top of the 'G" in FISHING :lol:

which can be seen here.
This isn't listed in Gibbons Elizabethan (1968) or Urch Harris's Commonwealth Catalogue (1967).


*Click For Our Newest Issues*	*Click for our Current Auction*	Internet Auctions-Buy & Sell Stamps	Melbourne 2013 - May 10-15

Postage Stamp Chat Board & Stamp Bulletin Board Forum

Share your REGISTERED cover scans from all over the world.

Who is online