Taxed Covers (Postage Dues on Cover, etc.)

skilo54 · **Posted:** Sat Nov 12, 2011 22:22:51 pm

nigelc wrote:

skilo54 wrote:

I am also happy to share with you all this one from my 1d. Downey Heads:

This on a pair of Die2's with perfin initials 'M U I C'. Sent from London to Amsterdam where a 5c postage due stamp was applied and tied.

The back has some "barely theres", most likely transferred from the othe covers in the pile. The marking to the left of the business name looks interesting to me though?

Have a Good one,

Skilo54

Nice one Skilo!

The MUIC perfin isn't listed in my 8th Edition Perkins Identified GB Perfins catalogue (1998). I wonder if it's been added since? If not, this would a new identification.

That is an excellent observation Nigel, very cool! I take the M U I C is for the "Motor Union Insurance Company"

Hopefully someone else would be able to comment, but regardless, what would you suggest I do in order to let the appropriate folks know about it? Should I pop it onto the GBPS forum? Probably not a bad idea eh?

Thanks for bringing this to my attention, that is exactly why I love being a part of this wonderful forum!

What a great way to start the day!

Skilo54

chippin · **Posted:** Mon Nov 14, 2011 01:03:33 am

I would appreciate some thoughts on this home made newspaper wrapper from New Zealand (Auckland - I think) to Transvaal.

Very few clues.

The stamp is a 1d second sideface, perf 11, which means the wrapper must date from 1897 or later. So between 1897 and 1900 most likely.

Postal rate for newspapers, at that time, was 1d for anything upto 4oz and then ½d for every subsequent 2oz.

No backstamps or other marks.

I assume the 'T' tax mark was applied in New Zealand although it would be an unusual mark from there (however similar marks are shown in Vol lll of the RPSNZ Handbooks).

No further marks to suggest by how much postage was defficient, how much was due. I assume therefore nothing was collected.

Any thoughts/comments?

chippin

No backstamps.

torstenweller · **Posted:** Thu Dec 08, 2011 14:52:29 pm

Here are a couple of Australian Decimal-era items with Postage Stamps used to pay postage due:

Australia 1971 (Nov) cover sent locally with single franking QE2 6c orange tied MILDURA / VIC-AUST datestamp under-paying 7c domestic letter rate (increased from 6c on 1 October 1971) and taxed with black oval undenominated "T 2c" cachet on face charging double 1c deficiency and QE2 2c olive affixed tied MILDURA / VIC datestamp to pay postage due

Australia 1972 (May) Medical Clinic, Lonsdale St, Melbourne business reply cover endorsed "32" and "$2.88" indicating postage payable on 32 articles at 9c each comprising 7c domestic letter rate plus 2c business reply post fee (for 20-99 articles) with Navigators $2 Bass and 40c Tasman pair (2) and National Development 8c Ord River Scheme affixed tied Melbourne datestamps to pay postage due

These items are available in our Postal History Auction 10 closing Tuesday December 13th at 9pm (AEDST) which can be seen at:
http://www.torstenweller.com/auctions

Seasons Greetings to all,

Lakatoi 4 · **Posted:** Thu Dec 08, 2011 15:21:41 pm

The front of this Rhodesian cover seems at a quick look to be a pretty stock standard, airmailed FDC:

Unfortunately the PO label and 5/5d. of GB postage dues on the rear say otherwise :!:

:

Some background (from Wikipedia)

"Rhodesia declared unilateral independence from Britain in 1965 as a result of being pressed into accepting the principles of black majority rule. London regarded this state of unilateral declaration of independence as illegal. It applied sanctions and expelled Rhodesia from the sterling area."

Basically the stamps issued at that time were not recognised or accepted for postal use by GB and many other nations, though some did accept them.

granne50 · **Posted:** Thu Dec 08, 2011 21:57:14 pm

I haven't visited this page for a while and just found this cover. The taxing result on this cover was not correctly analysed.
Yes it was ½d short but when doubled and 1d due the conversion rate in Australia was 1d=8 1/3centimes, but the PO had ruled there should be a T10 minimum. So the use of the T16 2/3 shield was incorrect and rightly crossed out but should have then been altered to T10 for overseas destination not 1d which only applied on domestic mail.

ivqii wrote:

GlenStephens wrote:

1932 charming 'Taxed' cover ½d KGV. NSW to Tennessee.

Added this guy up for sale here today - http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=29984

What a ripper. A burst of colour, and huge "eye-appeal". :mrgreen:

Totally commercial use, Botany NSW to Knoxville Tennessee. Sender affixed 2½d of stamps, but I think that was the rate to England - and USA was higher at 3d. Many did not realise that.

Rather untidy cds, therefore non philatelic cancels of "BOTANY - 1 JL - 32 - NSW" cds.

As he underpaid by ½d, Postage Due at double deficiency was 1d, and this was indicated via the circled blue "T 1d" crayon levy.

Someone in PO has earlier applied the attractive NSW Shield "N.S.W. T 16â…”" - the UPU marking in Gold Centimes, and crossed that sum out in pencil as can be seen.

Postage Due equal to 1d was duly collected n Chicago on arrival, and this is noted with red marking hand-stamp lower left - "Chicago Illinois - Postage Due 2 cents"

The ½d Orange CofA wmk KGV is not common on ANY commercial cover - even domestically - and is ACSC $50 thus, and with the dues marking and unusual destination a huge premium. PLUS the 2d Bridge - also a cat $30 stamp on ANY cover.

I don't collect US at all - but in the course of my South Africa taxed cover collecting I have acquired over the years lots of SA - US covers with a US inward taxe mark.

Can any of our US collectors advise whether this Chicago handstamp is scarceish - I feel that it might be

Lakatoi 4 · **Posted:** Thu Dec 08, 2011 22:09:30 pm

So with my Rhodesia to GB cover in the post above the last one, I assume that normal postage from there to GB should have been paid but the stamps weren't acceptable by Government decree.

So the normal proper rate plus a deficiency was applied by the PO in GB to make it 5/5d., is that right :?:

If so, was it a double deficiency :?:

norvic · **Posted:** Thu Dec 08, 2011 22:31:05 pm

It was an interesting situation in that the sending post office accepted them but the post office in the receiving country ruled that they were invalid and raised a surcharge. Whether this was double the UK-Rhodesia rate for the item (according to weight) or double the postage actually on the cover is an interesting point.

Arguably, overfranked first day covers should have had the correct postage calculated according to weight and service (in this case, registration), but without checking rates I don't know how 5/5d was arrived at as that would have meant postage+registration of 2/8½d.

ivqii · **Posted:** Thu Dec 08, 2011 22:59:14 pm

norvic wrote:

It was an interesting situation in that the sending post office accepted them but the post office in the receiving country ruled that they were invalid and raised a surcharge. Whether this was double the UK-Rhodesia rate for the item (according to weight) or double the postage actually on the cover is an interesting point.

Arguably, overfranked first day covers should have had the correct postage calculated according to weight and service (in this case, registration), but without checking rates I don't know how 5/5d was arrived at as that would have meant postage+registration of 2/8½d.

About 20 years ago I formed a small collection ( about 30 ) of these covers and tried a bit of analysis.From memory the Taxes applied were all over the place with some of them making no sense - this one at first glance certainly doesn't.I still have the collection somewhere at home.I will try to dig it out tonight and see if I can add anything to the thread

One thing I do know - this action by the GPO was completely illegal as the Rhodesian stamps were always regarded as valid by the UPU.Suffice it to say that this course of action was set in place by John Stonehouse a really really nasty crooked politician who was then Minister of Posts and Telegraphs and who subsequently faked his own suicide to try to escape fraud charges.He was discovered alive and tried,convicted and sentenced to 7 years. BTW Mods he died in 1989 so there is no fear of any libel actions arising from my statement

ivqii · **Posted:** Fri Dec 09, 2011 09:08:23 am

Right as promised here are some scans from my little collection - I will load them in 3 posts as they seem a bit heavy

btw looking at a few articles I have with the covers it seems that Stonehouse was not the only one involved - Tony Wedgwood Benn was also complicit.He was described in a TV programme this week as a "Prince of the Labour Party " - I prefer to think of him as a Count personally :wink:

The covers follow for comment but as I stated in my earlier post there seems to be no uniformity in due calculations

ivqii · **Posted:** Fri Dec 09, 2011 09:09:33 am

ivqii · **Posted:** Fri Dec 09, 2011 09:10:43 am

Lakatoi 4 · **Posted:** Fri Dec 09, 2011 09:13:27 am

The weirdest postage due arrangement (or lack thereof) applied that I've ever seen. No apparent uniformity at all that I can see :!:

So it appears that the correct airmail rate from Rhodesia at the time was probably 2/6 :?:

ivqii · **Posted:** Fri Dec 09, 2011 20:57:53 pm

Tony - I can't lay my hands on the rates at the moment

But I think that during the course of this nonsense they changed from 1/3d to 2/6d.I also seem to recall that the purple Independance 2/6d stamp was issued before the rate change so at one stage people using these to the UK were effectively overfranking the covers - hence the 1/3d Taxe on one of my covers shown

I AM speaking very much from memory though.Perhaps someone on the Board can help

Richard

norvic · **Posted:** Fri Dec 09, 2011 21:38:06 pm

ivqii wrote:

This is supposition, and not based on anything but a certain perverse logic :!:

The first one is prepaid at 2s6d and surcharged at the same rate.
The second one is prepaid at 2s6d and surcharged at 1s3d.
The third one is prepaid 15c and surcharged at 3s6d.

I think the surcharging on these should have had no 'penalty' - ie instead of double the deficiency only the basic rate was supposed to be charged.
Therefore with the minimum UK-Rhodesia airmail rate being 1/3d, the second cover is correctly surcharged.
The first cover surcharge is incorrectly based on the original postage paid rather than the actual postage rate (unless it was heavier than the first step).
I doubt very much that 16c equated to 3/6d and I don't think the UK rate had increased to 1/9d. It is possible that this item was the top of sent to the same address and the surcharge is the sum of the shortage on all but that seems very unlikely for this sort of mail. This one is a puzzle.

norvic · **Posted:** Fri Dec 09, 2011 21:44:32 pm

ivqii wrote:

In these the first one seems to be the same as the second one in the previous post, ie surcharged at the same letter rate as UK-Rhodesia without penalty.
The third one is similar to the last one in the previous post, ie 15c Rhodesian equating to 3/9d in the previous case, but 2 x 15c = 7/- in this case. To be exact either this one should be 7/6d or the previous one should be 3/6d.
The middle one is a real puzzle. Aside from it being marked 'insufficient postage for airmail' it is prepaid at 15c which in the previous post equated to 3/9d, and in the lowest cover would equate to 3/6d. But only 7d has been charged in this country. That may well equate to the surface UK-Rhodesia rate.

I think inconsistency was the rule for these covers!

Motacilla · **Posted:** Fri Dec 09, 2011 22:08:30 pm

Interesting covers.
A check with my records on the surcharging of Rhodesia mail from 1965 to 1970 produces the following information:

8 Dec 1965 - Apr 1966 : Double deficiency surcharges based on correct postage required less the value of any legal stamps present

17 Feb - 8 Oct 1970 : Calculate the correct postage less the value of any legal stamps used; double this value; convert the result to sterling at 1c = 1.4d

Sterling Period to 31 Mar 1967 : Surcharge per ½ oz airmail registered letters : 1s3d single rate plus 1s registration fee = 2s3d

Sterling Period from 1 Apr 1967 : Surcharge per ½ oz airmail registered letters : 1s6d single rate plus 1s registration fee = 2s6d

1 Apr - 8 Oct 1970 : Surcharge per ½ oz airmail registered letters : 15c single rate plus 12½c registration fee; multiply by 1.4d = 38½d ~ 3s3d

The surcharging of these mail ended on 8 Oct 1970

Lakatoi 4 · **Posted:** Fri Dec 09, 2011 22:51:31 pm

One thing you can rely on in life and that's a Government Dept. will totally stuff things up if given half a chance, works every time :roll:

agondocz · **Posted:** Fri Dec 23, 2011 05:15:48 am

Here are two items from 1983 with Omani stamps used to pay the postage due.

The aerogramme is from India, the cover from Tunisia.

I cannot tell whether the Tunisian cover had any indication of what the deficiency was.

Does the India Post Office still use the horseshoe style marking to indicate that there is postage due? Was the boxed marking applied in India or in Oman?

Any help appreciated.

Best wishes,
AndrewG

Lakatoi 4 · **Posted:** Fri Dec 23, 2011 09:22:58 am

I posted this in another topic here (not to do with taxed covers) but it's relevant for this topic as well.

An "opened out" 1937 cover from the Moss Vale, NSW branch of the Commonwealth Bank to the Head Office of that bank. Postage due of 1d. applied for the late fee:

billys · **Posted:** Fri Dec 23, 2011 19:08:33 pm

Hi all,

Here is a difficult case (for me) I was unable to understand all what happened.

Cover sent from Versoix in Switzerland to "Près les Basses" - France or Ste Croix in Switzerland.
Sent to Paris and taxed 15 cents, cancelled in Paris, seems that the cover could not be delivered.
Sent back to Hendaye - France and taxed again 30 cents.

Your comments will be very helpful.

Regards.

Billys.

funbaldguy · **Posted:** Sat Dec 24, 2011 17:06:41 pm

An interesting envelope from South Africa to the US...

tonymacg · **Posted:** Sat Dec 24, 2011 17:14:20 pm

Apparently Mt Victoria was doing a special on 2d Dues:

honza · **Posted:** Sat Dec 24, 2011 22:02:54 pm

billys wrote:

Hi all,

Here is a difficult case (for me) I was unable to understand all what happened.

Cover sent from Versoix in Switzerland to "Près les Basses" - France or Ste Croix in Switzerland.
Sent to Paris and taxed 15 cents, cancelled in Paris, seems that the cover could not be delivered.
Sent back to Hendaye - France and taxed again 30 cents.

Your comments will be very helpful.

Regards.

Billys.

Ahoj Billys!

A few suggestions - just guesses really

The cover was first addressed to a hotel near les Rasses (not les Basses), which is near Sainte Croix in the Swiss canton Vaud.

It was posted on to Paris in France where it incurred a 15c charge.

It was undeliverable there and posted on to Hendaye, also in France. This incurred a further 15c postage due and since the first had not been collected, the original 15c due was crossed out and the charges combined into a 30c stamp.

Cheers,

Honza

billys · **Posted:** Sat Dec 24, 2011 22:50:28 pm

Ahoj Honza,

Thanks for the comments, I agree with your explanation, they are not only guesses.

But I got a question, why an extra 15ct tax in Hendaye?
I guess that 15ct taxation in Paris was enough for this period rate.

Regards.

Billys.

honza · **Posted:** Sat Dec 24, 2011 23:04:12 pm

Ahoj Billys!

I am assuming the first 15c was not collected because the item had to be redirected.

Then in Hendaye they charged both 15c fees in one 30c stamp and put a cross through the first 15c stamp.

The result would be that la poste received the full incurred charges 2 x 15c = 30c in Hendaye, but I would have thought the Paris office would have been 15c out in its accounts because of its use of the stamp and the payment going to another office.

If Hendaye credited 15c to the Paris office, then they would have a deficiency, being left with only 15c and using a 30c stamp.

Cheers,

Honza

billys · **Posted:** Sun Dec 25, 2011 02:20:00 am

Ahoj Honza,

Very plausible explanation.
I might claim 15ct to the post office of Hendaye, with interests it could make a lot of money... :roll:

Many thanks for taking time to explain that.

Best wishes for Christmas, to you and all the community.

Regards.

Billys.

honza · **Posted:** Sun Dec 25, 2011 02:28:19 am

Thanks billys and the same to you.

Cheers,

Honza

norvic · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2012 09:18:03 am

Here's another Rhodesia UDI cover prepaid at 15c (16 APR 1970 GATOOMA) surcharged at 3/6d in England.

And an underpaid 1970 Christmas Card from somewhere in the UK to Norfolk VA, USA, where it arrived 29 December. Happy New Year Commander, that'll be 15c please!

VegasCraig · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2012 13:37:42 pm

Just received a postcard from Hong Kong, delivered 3 months after being sent, presumably by seamail. It was franked with a inland HK$1.40 definitive. The current rate for seamail postcards is HK$2.90, explaining the top "150," but I'm not sure if the lower "230" is meant to be a surcharge or not.

Can anybody tell me if I'm reading the 150 right, and what the 230 would be?

Also, this item was delivered in my normal mail, with no attempt by the US Post Office to collect any postage due.

Thanks!

Motacilla · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2012 15:55:31 pm

Nice taxed postcard.
The figure "230" refers to Hong Kong foreign surface letter rate at the 1st weight step.
The US postal clerk was supposed to multiply the fraction with its foreign letter at the 1st weight step to arrive at the tax due but obviously this was not done

norvic · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2012 20:39:53 pm

Motacilla wrote:

Nice taxed postcard.
The figure "230" refers to Hong Kong foreign surface letter rate at the 1st weight step.

Yet "The current rate for seamail postcards is HK$2.90" - illogical, captain!

VegasCraig · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2012 20:49:35 pm

norvic wrote:

Motacilla wrote:

Nice taxed postcard.
The figure "230" refers to Hong Kong foreign surface letter rate at the 1st weight step.

Yet "The current rate for seamail postcards is HK$2.90" - illogical, captain!

I just checked the HK Post Office website again, and HK$2.30 is the cheapest rate for seamail letters / postcards within Asia, while HK$2.90 is the cheapest rate for countries outside of Asia (and this card was sent to the US.)

I've also just randomly found an envelope I received from Hong Kong in 2009, also underpaid, also not collected by the USPS. Apparently HK$2.30 is the base rate they use, regardless of distance / zone.

This envelope weighs 85 grams, costing HK$6.60 by seamail to the US (showing the difference of HK$2.90 in the T stamp); however, it was delivered in about a week (meaning airmail), and should have cost HK$13.10.

I'm still not technically understanding the 150/230 and 290/230 stamps; how much postage due should I have paid? I could have understood the previous threads incorrectly, but if I did understand properly, should I have paid 15/23rds of the current rate of postage from the US to HK? (64 US¢ at the time?)

Thanks for clearing up a mystery...

manfaefife · **Posted:** Thu Feb 16, 2012 05:27:39 am

Too early for postage due but a taxed unstamped postcard with Mount Gambier Squared Circle

Global Administrator · **Posted:** Tue Mar 27, 2012 13:53:44 pm

Ceylon 1939 cover to Australia taxed 3d with 3 x 1d Postage Dues.

Listed this guy up today. :mrgreen:

Unusual 1939 cover with Ceylon SG 387/388 cancelled "Columbo 10 JUL - 39". Underpaid attracting a local underpaid rating in blue crayon and bold "FTS" circle in black. (= "TAX - Foreign Service")

Assessed at "3d" due in red crayon here, and that was collected via a strip of 3 x 1d Dues SG D113, Cat £4½.

SG rates these Dues on cover as "From 20 x", so very scarce use. Dues lightly tied by 1939 'Baulkham Hills' arrival cds.

Attractive raised print Army Service blue crest on flap.

Closed tear at top from rough opening, but 73 years old and a scarce pre-war commercial used survivor - most of these foreign envelopes had the stamps torn off by a keen kid!

norvic · **Posted:** Tue Apr 17, 2012 01:38:52 am

Here's a strange one from UK to France.

The Edward VII stamp was on the front when I bought it, with a space where the stamp had been removed from the address side. Only when I looked at it closely did I realise that the stamp was not tied on the front, but nonetheless the date was good and it appeared to be from Southampton as suggested by the fragment of postmark on the back. So I removed it and put it on the back - but it still isn't right, because the stamp that is missing was not in the same place vis-a-vis the postmark as this one would have had to be.

I wonder if there were two cards posted at the same time, and the recipient or a later collector decided to move the stamps to the front, for some reason, but mixed them up? There's no real explanation, and the card looks barely better now than it did before my tinkering

HalfpennyYellow · **Posted:** Wed Apr 18, 2012 04:46:20 am

Cover sent from Helensburgh, Dunsartonshire to Paola, Malta on 3 June 1969. Taxed 2d at Valletta, Malta on 6 June 1969.

asmodeus · **Posted:** Sat Apr 21, 2012 06:15:17 am

Great Britain SG: D19 (E VIII issue) used 1940

danyeung · **Posted:** Sun Apr 29, 2012 21:08:25 pm

1964 UK to PNG / Sydney taxed cover.

London 03/11/64
Port Moresby 07/11/64
GPO Sydney /11/07/64

norvic · **Posted:** Sun Apr 29, 2012 21:16:02 pm

danyeung wrote:

1964 UK to PNG / Sydney taxed cover.

London 03/11/64
Port Moresby 07/11/64
GPO Sydney /11/07/64

I see no reason for postage due; is that 7d fee for Poste Restante - that seems a bit excessive!

manfaefife · **Posted:** Sun Apr 29, 2012 21:31:08 pm

A taxed cover from Australia to England:

The Pom · **Posted:** Mon May 07, 2012 22:14:18 pm

This cute little cover was in a mixed lot that arrived recently. Shown next to a GB machin to show how small it is (65 x 100mm).

Verhütet Verkehrs Unfälle = Prevent Traffic Accidents.

nigelc · **Posted:** Mon May 07, 2012 22:19:27 pm

norvic wrote:

danyeung wrote:

1964 UK to PNG / Sydney taxed cover.

London 03/11/64
Port Moresby 07/11/64
GPO Sydney /11/07/64

I see no reason for postage due; is that 7d fee for Poste Restante - that seems a bit excessive!

I guess the postage due is for forwarding from Papua New Guinea.

tonymacg · **Posted:** Tue May 08, 2012 00:16:45 am

An example of what happened when you put your mail in the wrong letterbox in Jaipur State in days gone by. This postcard was intended to travel via the Jaipur State post office from Sambhar Lake, a major centre of salt production, to Mandawa, a large trading centre. Evidently someone put it in the Indian Imperial letterbox, not the Jaipur. The Indian Post Office treated the card as unpaid, disregarding the Jaipur stamp, hence the octagonal SAMBHAR LAKE/UNPAID strike, and the horseshoe NAWALGARH DUE mark, before finally carrying the card to its destination at Mandawa.

opkedia52 · **Posted:** Tue May 08, 2012 02:44:15 am

Example of wrong posting between Holkar and Gwalior state:

There was a Holkar P.O. at Ujjain (which was in Gwalior state) upto 1903.This is a Holkar envelope adressed to Indore P.O.but dropped in Gwalior state P.O. at Ujjain.Hence it was treated as unpaid and taxed for One Anna with serpent due seal and there is also a TOO LATE serpent seal as bonus for philatelist.Had this been posted in Holkar P.O.at Ujjain there would not be any taxed seal and it would have been an ordinary cover for me.

Another example;

This is another example of cover posted in right P.O.(Holkar cover posted in Holkar P.O. at Mahatpur) but sent to a place-Ujjain- where it was not valid (Holkar postals are valid within Holkar state only).It was delivered by Gwalior state P.O. at Ujjain hence taxed for 1 Annas.
The Holkar P.O. at Ujjain was only a recieving P.O. and not a delivery office.Hence the above taxed envelope.

opkedia

norvic · **Posted:** Tue May 08, 2012 18:47:11 pm

nigelc wrote:

norvic wrote:

danyeung wrote:

1964 UK to PNG / Sydney taxed cover.

London 03/11/64
Port Moresby 07/11/64
GPO Sydney /11/07/64

I see no reason for postage due; is that 7d fee for Poste Restante - that seems a bit excessive!

I guess the postage due is for forwarding from Papua New Guinea.

Anybody confirm that? There's no surcharge for forwarding from UK to international destinations. If the original items were posted within the UK the additional postage is paid; if the items came in from outside the UK then stamps for the difference between the cost of postage to the new destination and the original place of sending must be added.

For instance something from Norway - UK - Philippines would have stamps added for the difference between UK - Norway and UK - Philippines.

manfaefife · **Posted:** Fri May 11, 2012 07:16:01 am

Taxed cover among some India covers:

norvic · **Posted:** Mon May 21, 2012 06:13:44 am

1962 Ireland cover, prepaid 2d, underpaid 2d as Liable to Letter Rate. I wonder if this was originally prepaid at the printed paper rate. The latest opening is at the right-hand end, but the left side has been resealed (no indication that it was by the PO after examination, though). Pair of 2d green Dues. Sadly folded vertically but still sharp and clean.

Wolfgang · **Posted:** Tue May 22, 2012 03:35:43 am

Sweden to Germany

stallzer · **Posted:** Tue May 22, 2012 12:35:19 pm

1898 Honduras to US.

torstenweller · **Posted:** Fri Jun 08, 2012 17:25:31 pm

Here are a few new items that caught my eye -

Australia 1955 (Sept) cover sent surface mail to Fairymead Sugar Co, Yandina, Cape Marsh, Br. Solomon Islands with single franking d Kangaroo (no watermark, perf 14 x 14) tied Toowoomba, Qld "Visit Toowomba Carnival Of Flowers" slogan cancel underpaying 3d British Empire surface letter rate and taxed with manuscript "T / 6" applied locally and "CTMS / T / 18" cachet applied at Brisbane charging double 3d deficiency (at 1d = 3 centimes), on arrival British Solomon Islands 3d brown, 2d red and 1d green Postage Dues affixed tied YANDINA / BRITISH SOLOMON ISLANDS datestamp to pay postage due

Australia 1964 (Feb) cover sent to Melbourne with single franking 5d Christmas 1963 tied MYRTLEFORD / VIC datestamp underpaying the 8d rate for a standard-size letter weighing over 1oz and up to 2oz, taxed with oval "T 6d" cachet applied locally on face for double deficiency and 6d Anteater affixed tied ELIZABETH ST. P.O. / PBR / MELBOURNE C1 [Private Box Room] datestamp to pay postage due [the use of Australian Postage Due stamps was discontinued on 31 January 1963 and thereafter ordinary postage stamps were used to indicate payment of postage due]

Australia 1964 (July) long cover sent unfranked to Transport Regulation Board, Exhibition Buildings, Carlton, Vic with FAIRFIELD / N.20 / 2 / VIC-AUST datestamp underpaying the 5d domestic letter rate, taxed with double-oval "T 10d" for double deficiency and 2/- Flannel Flower (3), 1/- Colombo Plan, 6d Anteater and QE2 2d brown (2) all perf VG affixed tied RECORDS REC'D / FILED BY dated cachet to pay postage due on this and other similar items

Australia 1965 (Nov) Department of Agriculture, Perth OHMS long cover sent airmail to Port Hedland, WA with single franking 5d Christmas 1965 tied Perth datestamp underpaying the 1/11d rate for a standard-size airmail letter weighing up to 3oz, taxed with manuscript "T 3/-" in pencil on face for double deficiency and Birds 3/- Ibis affixed tied PT HEDLAND / WEST-AUST datestamp to pay postage due

Australia 1970 (June) H.H. Webb Proprietary Ltd. long merchant cover sent airmail to Footscray, Vic with single franking Flowers 15c Blue Gum tied Brisbane parcel roller cancel paying second weight-step (up to 2oz) domestic airmail letter rate but taxed with violet boxed "EXCEEDS 3 OZS / TAX 28c" cachet on face for double deficiency of 14c off the 29c fourth weight-step (up to 4oz) rate and 10c Anemone Fish (2) and 8c Coral Fish affixed tied FOOTSCRAY / VIC datestamp to pay postage due

Australia 1977 (Dec) cover endorsed "Card Only" sent airmail to Singapore (flap unsealed) with single franking 15c Christmas 1977 tied Sydney "Christmas Greetings" slogan cancel underpaying the 20c Zone 2 airmail greeting card rate, taxed with Sydney "T 5 / 25" cachet and large boxed "T / PAYABLE BY ADDRESSEE / 65c ..." cachet on face, Singapore Postage Dues 50c olive, 10c red, 4c brown and 1c green affixed tied Singapore datestamp
These items are available in our Postal History Auction 11 featuring 300+ lots of Australian and Pacific Postal History including material from Australia (KGVI and QE2 Pre-Decimal and Decimal), Christmas Island, Cocos Island, Nauru, Norfolk Island, and Papua & New Guinea. Auction 11 is now available on our auction website http://www.torstenweller.com/auctions and closes on Tuesday 19 June 2012.


Buy/Sell all paper made collectibles!	*Click for our Current Auction*	*Click For Our Newest Issues*	Internet Auctions-Buy & Sell Stamps

Postage Stamp Chat Board & Stamp Bulletin Board Forum

Taxed Covers (Postage Dues on Cover, etc.)

Who is online