Read All About It!

[Revenuer]

This is the last thread to get a start so I thought I would put this page up to kick it off.

Does anybody have a complete black cancel on a full newspaper? I have seen partial black cancels but never a complete strike....Dave

53.jpg (119.83 KiB) Viewed 1092 times

[David McNamee]

Here from my notes is an auction cat listing Robson Lowe 19 DEC 1978: "1827 Hobart Town Courier newspaper with fine NEWS PAPER DUTY/ VAN DIEMENS LAND/ Crown/ TWO PENCE Stamp Duty imprint in black." Unfortunately, I cannot lay my hands on the catalogue at the moment.

[Hobbit123]

David

My understanding is that Francis Kiddle has one. I have not seen it, but Neil Russell tells me that he has.

Patrick

[Malcolm Groom]

Some years ago I bought a full bound set of the Hobart Town Courier for 1827 and the (two ?) issues with the black duty applied were present on complete issues. All the subsequent issues were so imprinted in red. Interestingly one of the issues with black imprint had an error of date in the issue date on the paper. Not sure who the buyer was but at least I can confirm that they exist.

Malcolm

[Revenuer]

Patrick

Francis copy is a cut out and it is in his exhibit on line from the revenue society web site but it is a full black strike.

http://www.revenuesociety.org.uk/invite ... %20001.jpg

------

Malcolm

I believe Dingle ended up with your 'find' in a book shop. Because it was bound a lot of the tax marks were trimmed off due to the binding, including the blacks, i think Dingles blacks are aboue one quarter to a third. But still very nice to have

Dave

[Ross Ewington]

Here's an article by A.F. Basset Hull printed in the Hobart Mercury on April 3rd 1889 that provides
the background to the newspaper duty story.

http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/printArticlePdf/9209587/5?print=n

[Hobbit123]

Well. here is a strike in black on a full newspaper. The date is rather late, but it is suggested that it was struck in error.

1 March 1828 Hobart Town Courier

HTC Black.jpg (1.75 MiB) Viewed 778 times

The image does not seem to be an oxidised orange, as it is a pretty even black, but it could be as there is a tiny bit of orange in the (indistinct) letters of 'NEWS'. I prefer to think that the clerk used the wrong pad, and that there were traces of orange left from previous usage. Purchased recently as Lot 1364 in 21st Century Auctions, together with an(other) example in orange. It will do me, as I will use it for displays rather than as an exhibit.

[Revenuer]

Pat I looked long and hard at this and discounted it as an oxidised red copy and decided not to bid, glad you will not be adding it ti your exhibit!

ox1.jpg (44.7 KiB) Viewed 772 times

ox2.jpg (51.46 KiB) Viewed 772 times

ox3.jpg (67.4 KiB) Viewed 772 times

ox4.jpg (41 KiB) Viewed 772 times

[Ross Ewington]

I agree with Patrick i.e. it was struck in black in error ..... the vermilion/orange colour cannot turn
intense black as a result of oxidation.

Several years ago I sold a bound copy of Gazettes that had another example of the same edition
which was undoubtedly* in the usual vermilion/orange colour which also supports the 'struck in error' view.

* I checked right through 'just in case' ..... I did note however that the latest usage was somewhat intermittent towards the end.

[Revenuer]

I have seen three bound editions also dingle has one none have black cancels after the first one but many have oxidization to them. If Ross is correct and Patricks copy is indeed cancelled in error then we must discount each and every single cut out in black including the Francis Kiddle copy as it is identical to Patricks. I would have thought if an error in colour was the case then a whole days worth world have been done and not just a single copy. Maybe we now need to change the record books and only accept the 1st issue black on a full paper and throw out all cut outs as possible errors.