DEFICIENT POSTAGE / FINE (TO PAY) HANDSTAMPS

[Ross Ewington]

I have just unearthed this tatty cover front endorsed "Photo only" and addressed to Mount Nicholas

qq4661.jpg (110.32 KiB) Viewed 2342 times

qq4661a.jpg (331.06 KiB) Viewed 2342 times

Mailed from Launceston (date of duplex not fully discernible but the year is possibly 1891), the article has a clear impression of the rare "Deficient Postage / Fine ........ / To Pay"
h/stamp (Reid DP07 - Patrick stated in 2008 that only 2 covers had been recorded). Total fees of 3/6d paid by the addressee (3d Platypus postal/fiscals "to the value of..." cancelled
with BN276 used at Mount Nicholas)

[Hobbit123]

I am now the proud and happy owner of this item. It is, I believe a portion of the wrapping applied to a package of photographs that weighed just under 6 ozs. The sender paid the packet rate of 1d per 2oz, being 3d. However, I guess that the sender did not comply with the packet regulation and leave the packet open or accessible for inspection (see attached copy of the "preparation for Post" taken from Postal Guide No.1, page 23 as printed in Orchard Volume 7. As a result, it was charged as a letter at 2d per ½oz, making 2/- in total Thus the deficiency of 1/9 and corresponding fine.

To the best of my knowledge, this is the only recorded example found to date of Platypus stamps being used for Postage Due.

I guess this also confirms the date as 1891.

Patrick