Evandale Junction - use on Pictorial in 1913

[RogerKinns]

Evandale Junction is rated RRRRR in the Commonwealth period, the only known date (on a 1d Roo) being 29 April 1913. The illustration below shows a poor, but apparently unambiguous, strike on a perf 12.5 1d thin paper. It is dated 31 January 1913. The top line of the date points towards the 'ON' in 'JUNCTION'. This is not the case in superficially similar Guildford Junction postmarks, where the top line of the date points towards the 'I'.

1d thin paper, Evandale Junction, 31-Jan-13.jpg (49.03 KiB) Viewed 2678 times

[admin]

Roger,
This raises an interesting issue. According the the recent Guide to cds on Pictorials ( Courier No 58) the late date on Pictorial is also 29.4.13 but the rating on Pictorial is only R- (7).
I am not sure that this messy area of overlap between the State and Commonwealth period lends itself to rules of thumb regarding cutoff dates. This case is a little unusual in that more often the State period postmark on Pictorial that is rarer than the same postmark in the Commonwealth period .

Personally I think these cases where the same postmark radically changes rarity depending on what stamp it appears within the space of, in this case, the same day, are an anomaly in what is otherwise a fairly robust rarity rating system . I may be in the minority here!

[RogerKinns]

Pete,

I'm inclined to agree, but is the latest known date on a Pictorial really 29 April 1913? That happens to be the date of the cds on the 1d Roo, which is presently being offered in the TSA postal auction as the only known use of the Evandale Junction cds in the Commonwealth period. I have no reason to doubt the truth of that for Commonwealth stamps. It would be good to see a better 1913 strike on a Pictorial than the one I have.

Roger

[Ross Ewington]

Here is the 29.4.1913 strike offered for auction by TSA.

ct1103.jpg (99.93 KiB) Viewed 2667 times

I have been informed recently by John Hardinge that another example on a 1d Roo exists
and was probably once attached to this example - I have amended my auction description.

I think that the report of a third example of the Type 1 cds with this date but on a 1d Pictorial needs to be validated
as it may be an error.

Will the owner please step forward!

[Ross Ewington]

Personally I think these cases where the same postmark radically changes rarity depending on what stamp it appears within the space of, in this case, the same day, are an anomaly in what is otherwise a fairly robust rarity rating system.

I think this situation is a result of the collection of postmarks on the Pictorials as a specific and popular hobby pre-dates collecting Tasmanian postmarks in general by at least a couple of decades. There are other anomalies such as the rarity of the PARADISE Type 1 cds on a "Commonwealth" stamp and that of the PARADISE Type 3 on a Pictorial issue simply because the post office was razed by fire on May 19th 1913!

paradise.jpg (43.47 KiB) Viewed 2667 times

Then there's the given rarity of a strike of ORRVILLE on a Pictorial i.e. RRRRR(20), not being reflected in the valuation of a contemporary strike on a QV S/face issue (rated similarly RRRRR by John H.] and so on ......

Unfortunately, I feel that we will always be "stuck" with a problem in regard to a small number of rarity ratings dating from the changeover from Tasmanian to Australian stamp issues.