Page 5 of 335

Posted: 19 Oct 2008 12:50
by tonymacg
At a guess, the Newsletters weren't scanned along with the India Posts. However, casting the mind back a long way, the Newsletters didn't contain much hard fact - they were more just reports of meetings. So I don't think you'd get much use out the Newsletter, even if you saw it.

And again, if memory serves, there no use any more asking Joe Meadows himself about it ... :cry:

The most constructive thing to do is to try to assemble a set of the different Settings. I've been trying, but I'm still a fair way from completion. Happy to share scans of sheets, though.

Posted: 21 Oct 2008 12:20
by Eric Casagrande
Well I finally was able to purchase the remaining stamps in the Dhar State series -- SG7; SG7b (rose); SG8; SG9; and SG10.

Hopefully I should receive them by early next week. :D

Now on to the sheets.

Tony ... any ballpark idea on the price level for sheets of SG1 through SG6 nowadays? Just so that I have some type of idea.

Posted: 21 Oct 2008 13:09
by tonymacg
Eric, only SG 1 and 2 come up at all regularly in sheets. $US50 - $US60 is probably a fair thing for them, unless the sheet was from an unusual setting. The others are harder. And if they are from the rarer settings (say, I to III), you'll have to fight me for them, too ...

I see that Gibbons is currently offering a sheet of SG 2 at £45, and a sheet of SG 6 (with SG 6e of course) at £325. Those prices are a bit on the steep side, I think. On the other hand, sheets of SG 6 don't show up every day - but at least there was only the one setting of the 2 Anna :wink:

Tony

Posted: 21 Oct 2008 13:25
by tonymacg
And here's one for the Cochin fanciers which has just arrived:

Image

SG O99 and O99b, the 'Tail to turban' flaw on stamp 1, nearly ruined by one of those wretched Arricators :evil:

Posted: 21 Oct 2008 14:13
by Eric Casagrande
Nice variety. :D

Posted: 21 Oct 2008 14:14
by Eric Casagrande
tonymacg wrote:Eric, only SG 1 and 2 come up at all regularly in sheets. $US50 - $US60 is probably a fair thing for them, unless the sheet was from an unusual setting. The others are harder. And if they are from the rarer settings (say, I to III), you'll have to fight me for them, too ...

Tony
I think you'd win that fight ... at least until I get my feet further wet. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Having fun at it though, so far.

Posted: 21 Oct 2008 14:22
by tonymacg
Eric, things are a bit disorganized on the home front at the moment (home being painted) but I'll try to get around to scanning the sheets I have, and either posting them here, or emailing them to you.

Posted: 21 Oct 2008 14:24
by PeterS
tonymacg wrote:Eric, things are a bit disorganized on the home front at the moment (home being painted) but I'll try to get around to scanning the sheets I have, and either posting them here, or emailing them to you.
Post them here and don't deprive the rest of us of the 'pleasure'! :)

Posted: 21 Oct 2008 14:30
by tonymacg
No accounting for tastes, I suppose ...

To hear is to obey!

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 06:49
by Eric Casagrande
Tony .... I found just what you're looking for ... :wink: :D

Put in an offer! :lol:

http://cgi.ebay.com/India-Jaipur-State-Mewar-Brahmani-Dawk-e ... 0293456647

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 08:53
by tonymacg
Yeees, well ... At the moment, I have my hands full paying the £300 for my extravagances at the last ISC Auction :cry:

:idea: But if you want to try a new 'State', Eric ...

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 09:23
by Eric Casagrande
If I were to take on a little extra besides my current workings on Dhar State, then I would probably lean towards Indore. :D I hear there are some interesting uses of Indore postage within Dhar State. :D

BTW ... I finally heard back from the U.S. co-ordinator about the "N" symbols within the IP index paginations, and it was as you pointed out (and as I discovered in one volume of the IP), related to the ISC Newsletter, which has not been included in the IP back-issue archive.

He also said I wasn't likely missing anything by it.

I also heard by the way, that there will be a new list put out within the next month, concerning the North American library, and I am looking forward to seeing it. :D

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 09:44
by tonymacg
Eric, Dhar then Indore: you're encircling Barwani!

There is an Indore group within the ISC, and they've published a few articles on various aspects of Indore in India Post over the last few years, though I can't recall any on Indore used in Dhar. However, as the territories of the two States were so thoroughly intertwined as you can see from the maps, and as there were jointly administered enclaves, I'd guess almost anything would be possible - and absolutely fascinating. I don't think the Indian PO would have permitted an exchange of State-franked mails across the border between Dhar and Indore, but who knows what might have happened irregularly on the ground.

Personally, I find the stamps of Indore a bit dry, but the postal history might be another matter altogether. You can still buy the early pink, unstamped, official mail covers from Indore (I have a few; I can post a scan of one if needed) for very little, and the postal stationery postcards are cheap, too. And best of all, both are fairly readily available.

Of course, both Indore and Dhar were ruled by Mahrattas, so there must surely have been dynastic connections as well. (The rulers of Barwani were Rajputs, so are out of that loop.)

Good news about a North American library. Down here, we've almost gathered enough strength to start thinking of an official Antipodean branch ... almost

Tony

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 09:47
by PeterS
tonymacg wrote:Eric, Dhar then Indore: you're encircling Barwani!

Tony
Perhaps leaving the best till last?? :)

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 09:52
by tonymacg
No more competition, please :twisted: Until I come to sell up, that is ...

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 09:54
by PeterS
tonymacg wrote:No more competition, please :twisted: Until I come to sell up, that is ...
Tony, after this thread, it might be a bit too late to be worrying about competition! :)

You even had me thinking about collecting them, NEARLY! :roll:

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 10:01
by tonymacg
Peter, look into my eyes, you are becoming sleepy, sleepy ...

You feel an irresistible attraction to Bhor ...

Now when you wake up ...

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 10:05
by PeterS
tonymacg wrote:Peter, look into my eyes, you are becoming sleepy, sleepy ...

You feel an irresistible attraction to Bhor ...

Now when you wake up ...
Damn! I seem to have dozed off for a second there! Now why do I have this irrestible urge to collect Barwani?????

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 10:14
by tonymacg
Curses, it was Bhor I was trying to lead you towards.

Have to try again: maybe Travancore this time.

Peter, look into my eyes ...

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 10:40
by Eric Casagrande
Here are a couple of Indore-Dhar related stories, found within India Post:

India Post No. 60 ... Volume 13 No. 2

INDORE STATE STAMPS USED IN DHAR

Not long ago, while looking at postmarks of some earlier Indore State stamps, I found both a vertical pair and a single of the 1/2 anna S.G.10 (both somewhat damaged, unfortunately), with circular cancellations of the neighbouring Dhar State branch office of Singana:

SINGANA
B.O.
28 OC.
13
DHAR

and

SINGANA
B.O.
2 MY.
14
DHAR
(within circles)

It is interesting that letters with Indore State stamps were accepted by a Dhar State village post office and forwarded to points in Indore State.

At the time of cancel (1913-14) Dhar used only Imperial postage, but this may have been a convenience allowed to Indore State villagers whose nearest B.O. was farther away than Singana in Dhar? Perhaps I.S.C. members now in
Indore could clarify this situation?

W.G.ANDERSON.
Ontario, Canada

.... And the follow up .....

India Post No. 62 ... Volume 13 No. 4

INDORE STATE STAMPS USED IN DHAR

There were four Imperial post offices in Dhar State - KUSKI, DHAR, DHAR BAZAR and SINGANA, and all four were in account with the Imperial Head P.O. of Indore from 1912 to 1915.

Amongst the duties of every Imperial post office postmaster was one concerning dealing with letters sent under cover to him to be posted. This duty could be relegated to his deputy or assistant, but if there were any irregularities detected on the transmission of postal articles from and to his office or in his daily and monthly postage account statements, the responsibility was his.

Except under the "NAIVRE" or "PAQUET BOT" procedures of the U.P.U. regulations, no form of "postage" other than that authorised by the Supreme Government in India could be accepted on articles posted in any Imperial post office or letter box under both the Inland and Foreign Post systems.

There is no better way to indicate this than by my recording permanently this regulation found in the P.O. Guides:

"Postal exchanges with certain Native* States. Imperial postage stamps, postcards, and embossed envelopes overprinted with the name of the Native* State, can be used for correspondence posted within the limits of the State, and intended for delivery in any part of British India, but they will not be recognised in payment** of postage for correspondence posted in any Imperial post office or letter box."

(* After W.W.I [1914-18], in recognition of the valuable part played by India and its troops in the winning of that War, the Government had the derogatory term "Native" expunged from all Government publications, to be substituted by the term "Indian". Please therefore amend the above-quoted regulation as from 1918-19, and further amend this by the information which follows:

**With the introduction of Air Mail transmission of postal articles under the Inland and Foreign Post systems, insert the following words at the place indicated **"of air fee in any case or".)

You have thus before you and readily available to all members, present and to come, a Regulation brought up to date and on permanent record.

E. G. OEHME.

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 10:42
by PeterS
tonymacg wrote:Curses, it was Bhor I was trying to lead you towards.

Have to try again: maybe Travancore this time.

Peter, look into my eyes ...
Barwani, Barwani....I MUST collect Barwani.........

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 11:10
by tonymacg
Eric Casagrande wrote:Here are a couple of Indore-Dhar related stories, found within India Post:

India Post No. 60 ... Volume 13 No. 2

INDORE STATE STAMPS USED IN DHAR

Not long ago, while looking at postmarks of some earlier Indore State stamps, I found both a vertical pair and a single of the 1/2 anna S.G.10 (both somewhat damaged, unfortunately), with circular cancellations of the neighbouring Dhar State branch office of Singana:

SINGANA
B.O.
28 OC.
13
DHAR

and

SINGANA
B.O.
2 MY.
14
DHAR
(within circles)

It is interesting that letters with Indore State stamps were accepted by a Dhar State village post office and forwarded to points in Indore State.

At the time of cancel (1913-14) Dhar used only Imperial postage, but this may have been a convenience allowed to Indore State villagers whose nearest B.O. was farther away than Singana in Dhar? Perhaps I.S.C. members now in
Indore could clarify this situation?

W.G.ANDERSON.
Ontario, Canada

.... And the follow up .....

India Post No. 62 ... Volume 13 No. 4

INDORE STATE STAMPS USED IN DHAR

There were four Imperial post offices in Dhar State - KUSKI, DHAR, DHAR BAZAR and SINGANA, and all four were in account with the Imperial Head P.O. of Indore from 1912 to 1915.

Amongst the duties of every Imperial post office postmaster was one concerning dealing with letters sent under cover to him to be posted. This duty could be relegated to his deputy or assistant, but if there were any irregularities detected on the transmission of postal articles from and to his office or in his daily and monthly postage account statements, the responsibility was his.

Except under the "NAIVRE" or "PAQUET BOT" procedures of the U.P.U. regulations, no form of "postage" other than that authorised by the Supreme Government in India could be accepted on articles posted in any Imperial post office or letter box under both the Inland and Foreign Post systems.

There is no better way to indicate this than by my recording permanently this regulation found in the P.O. Guides:

"Postal exchanges with certain Native* States. Imperial postage stamps, postcards, and embossed envelopes overprinted with the name of the Native* State, can be used for correspondence posted within the limits of the State, and intended for delivery in any part of British India, but they will not be recognised in payment** of postage for correspondence posted in any Imperial post office or letter box."

(* After W.W.I [1914-18], in recognition of the valuable part played by India and its troops in the winning of that War, the Government had the derogatory term "Native" expunged from all Government publications, to be substituted by the term "Indian". Please therefore amend the above-quoted regulation as from 1918-19, and further amend this by the information which follows:

**With the introduction of Air Mail transmission of postal articles under the Inland and Foreign Post systems, insert the following words at the place indicated **"of air fee in any case or".)

You have thus before you and readily available to all members, present and to come, a Regulation brought up to date and on permanent record.

E. G. OEHME.
Eric, this is very interesting - I hadn't come across it before. But then, there is rather a lot of reading matter on that CD.

While Ernie Oehme's response was undoubtedly technically correct (Ernie was an absolute terror on such things), you have to wonder if down at the village level, things might have worked differently.

Of course, the loose stamps might have come from a combination cover with British Indian stamps, with the Indore stamps accidentally being cancelled with the Singana CDS, or being cancelled there because they hadn't been properly cancelled in Indore.

I have a mountain of used Indore sitting in a stockbook, waiting for me to work up the enthusiasm to look at postmarks. Maybe the time is approaching ...

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 11:12
by tonymacg
PeterS wrote:
tonymacg wrote:Curses, it was Bhor I was trying to lead you towards.

Have to try again: maybe Travancore this time.

Peter, look into my eyes ...
Barwani, Barwani....I MUST collect Barwani.........
No, No, Peter, in Barwani there is weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. Not at all a safe place for nice, well-brought up young men. Now Travancore on the other hand ...

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 11:15
by PeterS
tonymacg wrote:
PeterS wrote:
tonymacg wrote:Curses, it was Bhor I was trying to lead you towards.

Have to try again: maybe Travancore this time.

Peter, look into my eyes ...
Barwani, Barwani....I MUST collect Barwani.........
No, No, Peter, in Barwani there is weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. Not at all a safe place for nice, well-brought up young men. Now Travancore on the other hand ...
Hmmm? Let me see;

Nice? Nope, doesn't describe me.
Well brought up? Well, my parents TRIED...but, you know....
Young? Not any more!

Can you send me a list of Barwani items you are after? I may as well start with them. )

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 11:16
by OttawaMike
Now, now, fellas. Surely there must be plenty of Barwani to share? 8)

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 11:21
by tonymacg
No I have almost all the good stuff. And I don't want to share the ones I haven't yet stolen from their rightful owners :evil:

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 11:21
by PeterS
OttawaMike wrote:Now, now, fellas. Surely there must be plenty of Barwani to share? 8)
But Mike! I don't WANT to share! I want my Barwani and I want them NOW!!!!

I must collect Barwani....I must collect Barwani...

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 11:24
by OttawaMike
OK kiddies, I give up.


Is that why they call them FEUDatory states?

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 11:26
by tonymacg
Quite possibly ...

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 12:22
by vandemonia
Tony:

I'm perplexed as to why your hypnotic influence did not work on Peter!

It certainly worked on me. :shock: I have sold my heart and soul and chequebook to Cochin!

Cheers!

John

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 12:50
by tonymacg
John, I'm not sure I want to suggest reasons ... but anyone who could choose Cochin over, say, Jind, or even Jammu & Kashmir, well ...

That said, perhaps if we both concentrate on Peter - with two sets of dotted lines out of our eyes directed at him, who knows? Perhaps he'll wake up to himself.

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 12:52
by PeterS
tonymacg wrote:John, I'm not sure I want to suggest reasons ... but anyone who could choose Cochin over, say, Jind, or even Jammu & Kashmir, well ...

That said, perhaps if we both concentrate on Peter - with two sets of dotted lines out of our eyes directed at him, who knows? Perhaps he'll wake up to himself.
I must collect Barwani..... I must collect Barwani...... :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 12:59
by tonymacg
Well, as long as you promise to confine yourself to everything after SG 31 :cry:

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 15:08
by Eric Casagrande
Tony ...

So basically - if I am reading this correctly - Anderson says he has ownership of two Indore stamps that had been postmarked by the Singana (Dhar) Postal Branch.

Oehme on the other hand - and again if I am reading both his response and the included postal regulation correctly - seems to indicate this isn't possible, on the grounds that mail without British Imperial franking was disallowed at Imperial Post Offices within British India.

Basically Oehme implies the postal cancellations are forgeries?

Secondly ... am I led to believe that (also implied by the postal regulation quote by Oehme), not even covers with overprinted stamps from the Convention states could be posted within an Imperial Post Office?

If the second point is true ... then what is the point for those Convention States to even put their individual State overprints on the British India postage in the first place? Why not just use the regular British stamps and save the trouble and headaches?

Posted: 23 Oct 2008 15:36
by tonymacg
Eric, as I read it, yes: Anderson was saying that that he had IPO postmarks on Indore stamps, and Ernie Oehme was saying it couldn't happen.

You'll see an awful lot from Ernie in the archives, because he loved a good argument, and he could never accept that the rules might not be followed to the letter. However, he didn't actually collect stamps: his interest was purely in the operation of the Indian Post Office, in all its ramifications. I don't think he's suggesting the postmarks are forgeries - rather that they could not have come about regularly, or in accordance with the regulations, anyway. This leaves room for accident, deliberate creation of a philatelic oddity by some clerk in the Singana office, or indeed forgery (though that seems very unlikely to me).

As to the Convention States, I suspect it was largely a matter of face: Gwalior was one of the premier States, and Patiala was not far behind; Chamba, Jind and Nabha were smaller, but I'd guess all of them, in the final analysis, wanted to make that small assertion of individuality. (You'll remember that Gwalior always used bilingual or Hindi only overprints.) And the Convention States stamps were valid for postage throughout India. (Lot 906 in the (London) Harmers auction of the 11 November next has an example of an apparently legitimate use of Patiala stamps to an address outside India.)

Keep those questions coming! I love a good controversy as much as Ernie did.

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 14:52
by Eric Casagrande
Interesting recap on Ed Deschl, by the Editor of India Post, in the first issue of this year. It shocked me a bit when I read what a stunning collection of postal stationary he had put together -- yet died with his rent in arrears.

Apparently his landlord sold off all his belongings to recover the debt.

Kind of sad to hear that he also was survived by one son, with whom he had little contact.

In certain respects this was kind of T.M.I. for me, as if I were invading his privacy.

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 15:17
by Kev
I give in Eric!
What's T.M.I. please?
Kev.

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 15:21
by Eric Casagrande
Too Much Information. :D

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 15:27
by Kev
Thankyou!
Kev.

Posted: 26 Oct 2008 17:40
by tonymacg
The story about Ed shocked me, too. He appeared a kindly, ever-helpful sort of bloke, with a great knowledge of postal stationery. For those of us who had had some contact with him, the background was very poignant. I was shocked and saddened, but I'm still glad to know. It makes me respect him the more.

Posted: 27 Oct 2008 07:11
by Eric Casagrande
Tony --

You posted this sheet of SG 2 within your other thread on Dhar.

Image

Within which setting might it be classified?

The reason I ask is because I just noticed that my SG 2 is found at Position 8 on this sheet ... wherein all four of the spades point outwards in different directions, and the one at the upper right corner is scrunched in appearance.

If I were a betting man, I would say that according to Gibbons it appears the SG 2 was from Setting 6 ... but I am not sure if this is always the case.

Posted: 27 Oct 2008 07:20
by PeterS
Eric Casagrande wrote:Tony --

You posted this sheet of SG 2 within your other thread on Dhar.

Image

Within which setting might it be classified?

The reason I ask is because I just noticed that my SG 2 is found at Position 8 on this sheet ... wherein all four of the spades point outwards in different directions, and the one at the upper right corner is scrunched in appearance.
That really is a sheet that only its printer could love!! :)

Posted: 27 Oct 2008 08:53
by tonymacg
Peter, you ain't seen nothin' yet, as they say in the Classics.

Eric, will get back to you about the setting.

Tony

Posted: 27 Oct 2008 09:17
by tonymacg
Eric Casagrande wrote:Tony --

You posted this sheet of SG 2 within your other thread on Dhar.

Image

Within which setting might it be classified?

The reason I ask is because I just noticed that my SG 2 is found at Position 8 on this sheet ... wherein all four of the spades point outwards in different directions, and the one at the upper right corner is scrunched in appearance.

If I were a betting man, I would say that according to Gibbons it appears the SG 2 was from Setting 6 ... but I am not sure if this is always the case.
Eric, I have the sheet marked as Setting VI. I'm not sure if I ever checked it further, because that was supposed to be the only Setting this type appeared in.

If your SG 2 position 8 matches the same position in the sheet (leaving aside trivial things like missing frame lines :) ) and its margins look suitable for a position on the bottom row, I think yours is pretty certainly Setting VI.

This is the 2 Anna, SG 6. It's Setting VII. (Again, this value was only printed from this Setting.)

Image

Will post other examples later. For the moment, I'm wrestling with an urgent job, and painters repainting my rooms :cry:

Tony

Posted: 27 Oct 2008 09:20
by PeterS
tonymacg wrote:
Eric Casagrande wrote:Tony --

You posted this sheet of SG 2 within your other thread on Dhar.

Image

Within which setting might it be classified?

The reason I ask is because I just noticed that my SG 2 is found at Position 8 on this sheet ... wherein all four of the spades point outwards in different directions, and the one at the upper right corner is scrunched in appearance.

If I were a betting man, I would say that according to Gibbons it appears the SG 2 was from Setting 6 ... but I am not sure if this is always the case.
Eric, I have the sheet marked as Setting VI. I'm not sure if I ever checked it further, because that was supposed to be the only Setting this type appeared in.

If your SG 2 position 8 matches the same position in the sheet (leaving aside trivial things like missing frame lines :) ) and its margins look suitable for a position on the bottom row, I think yours is pretty certainly Setting VI.

This is the 2 Anna, SG 6. It's Setting VII. (Again, this value was only printed from this Setting.)

Image

Will post other examples later. For the moment, I'm wrestling with an urgent job, and painters repainting my rooms :cry:

Tony
Tony, I am almost afraid to ask, but I will. Are these sheets CTO? Or are the what appears to be cancellations in the middle of each 'stamp' actually part of the design?

Posted: 27 Oct 2008 09:34
by tonymacg
Fair question, Peter.

No, they're not CTO. CTOed Dhar are usually nicely SOTN. These sheets are pristine mint.

The black marks are the seal of the Maharaja of Dhar, and none of this set were supposed to be issued without the seal. Copies of stamps do exist without the seal, but they're rare. (I have a copy of the ¼ Anna missing seal, SG 3a, and probably CTO. The stamp seems genuine in type, but I suspect that someone has somehow removed the seal. Not sure how, but I don't feel very comfortable about my SG 3a.)

The Ugly States of Bussahir and Duttia also always impressed seals on their stamps before issue, too. I'm not sure how Scott deals with Duttia, but US sellers regularly offer mint Duttia, with the seal in place, as used. More eBay Dreamers :wink:

Posted: 27 Oct 2008 09:35
by Eric Casagrande
Peter ... the handstamps are actually not cancellations but in fact overprints.

Oh ... looks like I didn't jump in quickly enough (... or I jumped in too quick). :lol: :lol:

Posted: 27 Oct 2008 09:46
by Eric Casagrande
Tony ... yes even the breaks within the inner framing are at the same places and are the same apparent length as in the example in position 8. :D

Posted: 27 Oct 2008 09:52
by tonymacg
Then that's pretty conclusive: Setting VI, position 8!

Posted: 27 Oct 2008 11:35
by Eric Casagrande
Was Deschl's book on the Postal Stationery of the India States, centered on the Feudatory States or Convention States?