tps.org.au

Hello
Since few weeks I try to check differences between two manuscript postmarks
Number 34 of Great Swanport and number 36 of Huon.
I bought this one several months ago.
It was sold for 34 Manuscript postmark which is rated not seen.
This one looks a bit different and was sold for Huon ( number 36).
But a lot different of others Huon's Manuscripts I have.
Checking the exhibit of David Mc Namee, It looks that there's at least, two differents manuscript postmarks for Huon, one of them looks really similar to the second one I have. The second Four Pence.
The main question is:
Is thomas Kellaway was the only Postmaster of Huon at this time?
I tried to find this information on Trove but I failed!

What the specialist think about that?
Do you have other postmarks of Huon?
Can we make a census of these postmark?

Thanks for your help.

Laurent

Hi Laurent

I would say that the manuscript cancel you have posted second from the top is '36' ..... I have seen many similar
cancels over the years, I assume all done by the same person.

My theory regarding the strange '6' is that the nib of the pen used was not effective in providing an inked line when moved
left to right after making a down-stroke, thus the two vertical lines. I am old enough to have learned to write using pen and ink and
can remember that there was a problem when trying to make a circle with such a 'device' !

Regarding the postmaster at Huon, unfortunately I cannot assist ..... John Hardinge may have some information on hand and can be contacted via this BB

If I can find any other images of the '36' cancel on Chalons, I'll post them in this topic to assist with creating a census.

regards, Ross

Hi Laurent!
I have done a little research on Huon during the first allocation period 1853 to 1861. Its quite confusing as the town Huon was actually called Franklin-Huon from 1853. Before this it was called just Huon, but is not the modern day location of Huonville.In fact the location of the original Huon and Huon-Franklin was what today we call Franklin, maybe 10 k downstream from the current Huonville.

Franklin (Huon) was the first location settled in this area and it was at the end of the stretch of the Huon river that was navigable by wooden ships in the 19th Century. The original Town of Huon, later Franklin-Huon still has old colonial stone buildings while the more modern town of Huonville is further up the River where its possible to have a bridge has no really old buildings.

To find the postmaster of Franklin-Huon its no use googling Huonville or Huon. Huonville did not have even a basic Postal Service until 1867 which is well after the First Allocation period . The First allocation numeral listings by Askeland refer to Huon but this is misleading as the name a that time was Huon-Franklin.

I have found a newspaper notice stating "Mr A N Spong to be postmaster at Franklin (Huon), vice Mr T F Merry, resigned; to take effect from the 1st January (1859)". We can assume before 1859 the postmaster was T F Merry. This would explain why we see two different styles of the number 46 on stamps during the first allocation.

Finally, there was also a town called Victoria close by which is sometimes referred to as originally being Huonville. This is not quite correct. Victoria was at what is now called Ranelagh, a few km inland from the Huon river bridge while Huonville is near the bridge across the Huon River.Victoria does have an arc-type date stamp but no first allocation numeral.
To people familliar with Tasmania, it seems obvious the Huonville was the original Huon but this is not correct. The current Huonville became the biggest town in the area much later in the 19th Century while the original Huon ( or Huon-Franklin) did not grow at the same rate and is now called Franklin.

BN 36 was used at Franklin-Huon now known as Franklin.
BN 34, originally issued to Little Swanport on Tasmania's E Coast was returned within a year of issue and there is evidence it was sent to Grove, which is a few k from the Huon River and in the same area as Huonville.

I have attached a scan of a Cover with manuscript endorsement 'Franklin" and the numeral 36 - similar to one up-loaded by Laurent.This is the first allocation manuscript numeral 36 of Huon-Franklin.

The status of manuscript 34 on single stamps is a little unclear as that number was also used by Fingall in the second allocation of barred numerals. It really needs to be on a cover with a postmark to tie it to the correct Post Office. The ms 34 on a star watermark or no watermark Chalon would also be fairly certain to be Grove.

Hello
Thanks Pete for your answer.
It's more clear now that Huon and Franklin were linked together.
I have found on Trove an article on Courier, 3 January 1855 saying:" Mr Thomas Frederick Merry has been appointed Postmaster at the Huon in the room of Mr S. Kellaway resigned"

I guess we can find three different styles of the postmarks 36.
Mr S Kellaway until 1855
Mr Merry from 1855 to 1859 and
then Mr Spong

Is anyone able to show a letter from Huon/ Franklin before 1855 with a manuscript postmark?

I think your letter Pete, dated 10/12/1857, is signed by Mr Merry,. Interesting to check other period.

Thanks again

Laurent

Hello again
here is two other postmarks of Huon/ Franklin, first allocation, numerals 36. It looks two differents manuscript.
maybe one of TPS member has some knowledge in graphology and can provide some help?

regards
laurent

Hello
Here again another "36" Postmark
Look like the same as posted before on two Pence...

Not so easy to find. Do you have other example?

Thanks

laurent