POST 1912 DATESTAMP INQUIRIES - ASK QUESTIONS HERE !!

[MaxH]

Orford Perhaps someone can help with these postmarks.
They are both Type 8aT(ii), however whilst they both show '12' in the time slot, and they are both "N" which I take to be Noon.
I did consider that the 'PN' version should have read 'PM', but it is definitely an N
One of them is timed '12PN' whilst the other is '12N' with the 12 displaced one line downwards.

What does it all mean?Orford 12 N.jpg[/attachment]

Orford 12 N.jpg (214.39 KiB) Viewed 266018 times

Orford 12 PN.jpg (295.06 KiB) Viewed 266018 times

[MaxH]

Ross Type 7(m). Hardinge states that this type has the 'first letter in year SMALL.'
The attached example has the first numeral LARGE. Is this a new example, or is Hardinge misquoted?
Please advise.

Ross 7m.jpg (177.41 KiB) Viewed 266015 times

[John Hardinge]

RE Hobart SD, the listing should be varied, as what occurred was "SD" was crudely filed off and then again started to reappear, so by 1987-88 it is again apparent, even though no longer used for special delivery.

Re Orford, yes it's definitely an "N". In the second example they have rolled up the "P" in the date line but left the "N' in place. Curious.

Re Ross, clerical error, it should be first letter in year large, not small

[Ross Ewington]

This Type R5 datestamp used at the STAMP OFFICE · 17 OCT 1962 · G.P.O. HOBART is not
recorded on John's listing for Hobart

ud103.jpg (365.1 KiB) Viewed 266008 times

Is this an omission from the list or has been excluded as being similar to postmaster or department
datestamps which were not strictly 'postal'??

[John Hardinge]

I have seen it before. Did not list the later types of these. It's pretty scarce tho.

[MaxH]

Kingston Paid CDS
This 8aT(ii) postmark appears not to be listed by Hardinge. Firstly the listing describes Red ink
rather than the blue used in this example and secondly, the date is well past the quoted last date of17 Mar 1991,
and it certainly is not a R6aT.
Any ideas please?

Kingston R8T.jpg (176.29 KiB) Viewed 265983 times

[MaxH]

Sandy Bay Paid CDS
Hardinge lists an R6a in Red and in Black however the present example is certainly
not a R6a as there is no dash between TAS and 7005 and there are dashes at the sides, although the date fits the range.
Also the colour is blue rather than Red or Black. Is there an R8 variety?

Sandy Bay Type 6.jpg (74.96 KiB) Viewed 265983 times

[MaxH]

Savage River
This postmark appears to be unlisted by Hardinge.
He cites 2 types of 6a postmarks and 3 examples of Type 7 postmarks and then states that the post office was closed in 1995
and is now a Community Postal Agency. It appears to be a type 6 postmark, but this is unlisted.
There is no evidence of a dash between the Tas and 7321 so it cannot be a 6a.

Savage River Type 6.jpg (138.63 KiB) Viewed 265982 times

[MaxH]

Smithton coded rubber cancellations.
The attached cancellations with codes 1-3 appear to be R6 however these are not listed in Hardinge who
lists these codes as R6a. Also the dates precede the listed dates by approx 12 months and in one instance, 18 months.
Can anyone help me to identify these postmarks please?

Smithton R6 1.jpg (249.38 KiB) Viewed 265981 times

Smithton R6 2.jpg (190.96 KiB) Viewed 265981 times

Smithton R6 3.jpg (240.79 KiB) Viewed 265981 times

[MaxH]

Ridgley 6a Postmark
I am totally confused. This is a 6a postmark but the date appears to have an inverted 7
which is not so unusual BUT if we accept the date as 1974 there is a problem.
The earliest listed date is given as 22 Dec 1974, however Hardinge states that the CDS was manufactured
on 4 Oct 1974. Any ideas please ?

Ridgley 6a.jpg (450.42 KiB) Viewed 265966 times

[Ross Ewington]

well-spotted Max

I think we can record it as a dateline variety from 1994 ..."first digit in year as inverted 7"

[MaxH]

Orford Type R6 shifted date line
These two postmarks are submitted for interests sake
The longer dateline (with large 2 in the day section) states 25 Feb 1994
The other postmark is the puzzle as the dateline has been shifted to the right with the month
shortened to FE and the year expressed as '94.
I thought initially that there was a missing time section, but this is not listed.
Not that the dates are only 16 days apart.
Was the shortened version a temporary postmark?

Orford date variety_NEW.jpg (535.71 KiB) Viewed 265896 times

[Jeffharris]

One possibility for this to occur is that the date line was badly damaged and removed from the canceller. Each item of mail was then cancelled with the canceller 'sans' dateline. Then there would have been a trip to the local newsagent to purchase a cheap datestamp, and that was then applied to the pile of cancelled mail. Cumbersome and time consuming perhaps, but the misaligned date suggests that may have happened!

[John Hardinge]

RELIEF No.3 · TAS-AUST used at MAYDENA - early date 29JY57 · late date on envelope (with address in identical handwriting) 18OC57

Cover with earlier postmark endorsed "Maydena (P.O. Burnt recently)"

qq2082.jpg

I also found about another five similar envelopes with postmarks dating from the interim period.

There is a 'problem' here that warrants investigation.

Maydena Type 5 details.jpg

While the late date for the Type 5 cds is fine, the current ERD for the Type 5s as 31MY57 is possibly an error as I believe that the
post office was razed during late June/early July 1957 (unfortunately, copies of The Mercury from this period cannot be viewed online using Trove)
and the Type 5 cds destroyed at that time.

Can anyone provide an early date of use for the Type 5s datestamp prior to October 18th, 1957?

TYpe 5s was not used until 1958, earliest date seen 22 March 1958. Relief No 3 used at least late July to 19 DEc 1957. P.O apparently burnt down June 1957

[John Hardinge]

Kingston Paid CDS
This 8aT(ii) postmark appears not to be listed by Hardinge. Firstly the listing describes Red ink
rather than the blue used in this example and secondly, the date is well past the quoted last date of17 Mar 1991,
and it certainly is not a R6aT.
Any ideas please?

Kingston R8T.jpg

This is the canceller listed as R6aT

[John Hardinge]

Smithton coded rubber cancellations.
The attached cancellations with codes 1-3 appear to be R6 however these are not listed in Hardinge who
lists these codes as R6a. Also the dates precede the listed dates by approx 12 months and in one instance, 18 months.
Can anyone help me to identify these postmarks please?

Smithton R6 1.jpg

Smithton R6 2.jpg

Smithton R6 3.jpg

Should be listed as R6

[John Hardinge]

Ridgley 6a Postmark
I am totally confused. This is a 6a postmark but the date appears to have an inverted 7
which is not so unusual BUT if we accept the date as 1974 there is a problem.
The earliest listed date is given as 22 Dec 1974, however Hardinge states that the CDS was manufactured
on 4 Oct 1974. Any ideas please ?

Ridgley 6a.jpg

From the look of the contemporary stamps I would say these are used 1994.

[MaxH]

Gawler ?? R5
Can anyone help with the identity of this postmark ?
Type R5 is described in "The Classification System" as being used at Military POs and at larger centres.
Hardinge states that the last postmark used at this office was a Type 5s which was in use post 1995.
Possibly this postmarker was used as a Relief marker.

Gawler R5.jpg (347.35 KiB) Viewed 265880 times

[MaxH]

Sidmouth 1997 Inverted dateline.
I have found two different inverted datelines on this postmark. 28 April 1997 and 08 May 1997
Has anyone seen this before?

Sidmouth invert April.jpg (264.55 KiB) Viewed 265873 times

[John Hardinge]

With Gawler I would think that the square rubber CDs would have been produced quickly, probably as a result of a failure in the Type 5s CDS.

[MaxH]

Tullah dated 18FE 101
I presume this postmark should read 18FE91
Has anyone else seen this aberration ?

Tullah Feb 101.jpg (340.29 KiB) Viewed 265795 times

[Ross Ewington]

I think it may be for '2001' ..... does anybody know the issue date of stationery with this particular indicium?

[MaxH]

Lower Sandy Bay
I am not sure whether I have misidentified the post mark.
There is only one rubber datestamp listed by JH and this is R8 (4 Nov 1993-IU 1995).
The present postmark is dated 2 Apr 1992 which would appear to be an extremely early date of usage.
OR is this a 6T? which at least fits the dates.
Can someone help me to identify this postmark please?

Lower Sandy Bay 8T.jpg (258.78 KiB) Viewed 265784 times

[MaxH]

Hobart Bathurst Street 5?
can anyone help me to identify this postmark It is certainly a 5s, But which one ?
5s(i) is out because there is a dot after "Hobart"
5s(ii) is out because there is no break under the "s" of "AUST"
5s(iii) seems out because the "H" of "HOBART" is narrow and:
5s(iv)seems to be out because the bars are the same length and the dash is very short.

Bathurst St ID.jpg (150.8 KiB) Viewed 265784 times

[MaxH]

LATROBE - Paid at.
Verification required please.
I think the dateline says"1D" (double impression) 12 AU60
which would make this postmark 2bR. Any ideas please?

Paid at Latrobe.jpg (182.39 KiB) Viewed 265784 times