注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

牧星谭邮--肖宏的博客

昨日海空牧星箭,今朝史河探邮趣;近代华夏史,百年邮传承。

 
 
 

日志

 
 
关于我

国家级邮展评审员 延陵邮学会副会长 常州市集邮协会副会长 江苏省集邮协会理事、学术委员会委员

网易考拉推荐
GACHA精选

大清郵政史(1897-1911)之混合封 ---法國客郵  

2017-08-16 06:57:37|  分类: 邮史资料 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |
大清郵政史(1897-1911)之Combination Cover 混合封 ---French Office 法國客郵局 - 延陵牧星 - 牧星谭邮--肖宏的博客
 From Changsintien to Belgium. CIP 10c canceled by Changsintien Post Office Tombstone mark. French 25c canceled by Shanghai French P.O. CDS on Jan. 6, 1900.

On the back transit Tientsin Bilingual Dater of Dec. 26, 1899 and Shanghai Bilingual Dater of Jan. 5, 1900.

大清郵政史(1897-1911)之Combination Cover 混合封 ---French Office 法國客郵局 - 延陵牧星 - 牧星谭邮--肖宏的博客
Postal card from Tientsin to Germany. ICP Postal Stationery - 1st Issue 1c, CIP 4c canceled by Tientsin Bilingual Dater on Oct. 3, 1900. Transit Shanghai Bilingual Dater of Oct. 12, 1900. French 10c canceled by Shanghai French P.O. CDS on Oct. 12, 1900. Unclear German arrival CDS of Nov. 15, 1900.
大清郵政史(1897-1911)之Combination Cover 混合封 ---French Office 法國客郵局 - 延陵牧星 - 牧星谭邮--肖宏的博客
 From Chefoo to France. CIP 10c canceled Chefoo Bilingual Dater on July 16, 1901. French 25c canceled by Shanghai French Post Office CDS on July 19, 1901.

On the back unclear transit Shanghai Bilingual Dater of July 18, 1901. 2 Bordeaux CDS of Aug. 26, 1901 and Saint-Palais CDS of Aug. 28? 1901.


(French) Indo-Chinese Office

Question No. 4
What was the postage rating on this international cover?
大清郵政史(1897-1911)之Combination Cover 混合封 ---French Office 法國客郵局 - 延陵牧星 - 牧星谭邮--肖宏的博客
 

 From Lungchow to Indo-China. CIP 2c and 4c canceled by Lungchow Bilingual Dater on March 24, 1902. French Indo-Chinese 5c and 10c added and forward to Lang-Son where canceled by Lang-Son Tonkin Indo-Chinese P.O. CDS on March 25, 1902. Arrival Hanoi CDS of March 26, 1902.

This mail was sent almost three months after the Sino-French postal treaty came into force on January 1, 1902. Did the treaty not apply to the Indo-China offices.

The international rate was 10c per 1/2 ounce at that time. Why did this cover pay only 6c and receive no postage due treatment?

What was the postage rating on this international cover?

As we all know, the French Post Office letter rate was 25 centimes (equal to Chinese 10cents) during the IPO period; examples of this rate are very common. While there are plenty of combination covers with 25ctms French and 10cts IPO adhesives, rather few exist with 15ctms French Indo-Chinese and 6cts IPO postage. The one in question is such a cover. First of all, we know that the cover is not domestic mail matter not from the foreign stamps alone (some domestic destination mails going through an international route also required foreign stamps and an international rate) but from the final destination – Hanoi. But the 6c IPO postage is not an international rate either, since the IPO international rate for a letter was 10 cents (20c for non-UPU countries) through out the Imperial Post period. I have checked several books on Chinese postal rate and postage tables in several Chinese stamp catalogs, but it seems as if this 6c international rate did not officially exist. If this rate did not existing, how could we explain this cover? 

When we could not find the answer directly from Chinese rates, we had to try the foreign offices’ rates for possible explanations. I checked the Indo-Chinese postal rates and found that from Feb. 16, 1879 to Dec. 31, 1898 the rate for a letter up to 10 grams was 25 centimes; from Jan.1, 1899 the rate was reduced to 15 centimes; and from 1907 to 1919 the rate was further reduced to 10 centimes. Most importantly, these rates were unified rates, which means that the same rates were applicable to domestic and international destinations, French colonies and non-French colonies – there was one rate for everywhere. The cover in question was mailed in March 1902 and therefore, the 15 centimes was the applicable rate for Indo-Chinese Post Office. 15 centimes was equivalent to 6 cents of the silver dollar. I assume that the sender of this mail knew of the lower Indo-Chinese rate and the Chinese dollar equivalent amount, then took advantage of the lower rate and saved 40% of the postage. Although I have not found confirmation of this in writing yet, there should be existing documentation referring to this. For the time being, we are assuming that since the sender had already paid 6 cents in Chinese stamp (equivalent to 15 centimes), the IPO would not lose money on the item, and it was therefore an acceptable practice.


(By Paul Lee---filatelist@hotmail.com)

  评论这张
 
阅读(113)| 评论(0)
推荐

历史上的今天

在LOFTER的更多文章

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2017