Free Mail question - James Smith 1857

Post Reply
Message
Author
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 471
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:54 pm
Location: Hobart, Tasmania

Free Mail question - James Smith 1857

#1 Post by admin » Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:54 pm

I am trying to understand why the cover shown below was sent by free mail. Its to James Smith, Forth, the well known prospector and later Member of Parliament.
In 1857 he would have been living at Forth having moved back to Tasmania but did not begin prospecting seriously until 1859. In other words he had no claim to Free franking privileges during this period. He became a Member of parliament in the 1880s.
The cover was sent from Hobart as evidenced by the circular red "Free' handstamp of Hobart on the front, going via Launceston, hence the red diamond free stamp of Launceston on the reverse, a transit stamp.
What I do not understand is why the signature, apparently 'Mr J Smith" under the printed On Public Service at the top is there? I may be wrong about the precise detail of the signature. It could be taken Smith sent it himself from Hobart to Forth but he would not have had free privileges as mentioned above. I say this because free franking holders were required to sign the envelope.
I assume the underlined endorsement bottom left is actually he signature of the holder of the free franking privilege but I cannot decipher it. Listings of Free privileges at the time only show the Office of the Free Franking privilege holder, not the name of the incumbent. It could be ???? Office or perhaps its someones name, I cant tell.
I wonder if anyone can shed any light on this, specifically what the endorsement bottom left on the front is?
The reverse shows what i think is the Tas Govt crest on the envelope flap, so I take it the envelope is form some Government agency which was entitled to free franking.
James-Smith-SEp-1857.jpg
James-Smith-SEp-1857.jpg (780.57 KiB) Viewed 2610 times

David McNamee
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:02 am
Location: California, USA

Re: Free Mail question - James Smith 1857

#2 Post by David McNamee » Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:21 pm

I believe this is from Sir Francis Smith == Attorney General's Office.

Post Reply