Tasmanian Postmarks – Names Found on the Pictorial Series
This article is reproduced from Australian Philately December 1949
I may be excused for continuing with the subject of postmarks, but they used
ta say “If you’re on a good thing stick to it”—and that’s the way it is this time.
“Although 1 have studied the series for a number of years it was only recently
that it occurred to me to go through what I had for the Town Postmarks. This
excursion was doubtless prompted by my friend Harry Porter’s chase after the
“T.P.O.s.” At any rate, it has led to much correspondence with Messrs. Petterd
(Hobart), Lancaster and Viney (Launceston), three of the leading Tasmanian
collectors of these items, all of whom had taken up the subject years before me. In
the upshot it is believed that something very near completeness has been evolved,
and a full list of the names will eventually appear in this journal. A few words on
certain general aspects of the subject will not, however, be wasted here.
In the first place the numeral “killers,” a type of cancellation used since 1853,
came to an abrupt end some time in the second half of 1900, being completely re:
placed by circular “town name and date” cancellations. These numerals, as far
as the Pictorial series is concerned, are therefore found only on the De La Rue
printed stamps. In the second place, the larger size of the stamps (as, say, com-
pared with the lower values of the other Australian States) meant that, using simi
lar sizes of cancellation, most if not all of the Tasmanian cancellation will inevitably
appear on a single stamp (where a single was used). In short, these Tasmanian post-
marks stand out with a clarity unequalled in other Australasian issues of their time.
And in addition, as Mr. Porter points out, they seem to have been, almost without
exception, applied with care. Finally, there is the tremendous scope of this sub-
ject, considered in relation to the small population and the fact that during the
period in question, well over one-third of that population lived in Hobart and
Launceston. To date, on the Pictorials we have located some 450 different “name”
postmarks! A very small proportion of these were due to changes of name, but
that doesn’t alter the picture these postmarks present of the amazing postal facilities
then—and still—offering in the “Spec.” In the circumstances outlined it is also
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PICTURE
It’s not surprising that many of the rare markings are amongst the clearest. The
various “types” of cancellation used, and those cases (particularly Hobart and
Launceston), where more than one type was employed, are also receiving their
full measure of consideration. It is to me a little sad to find that so few collectors
resident in Tasmania Cor elsewhere) realise the tremendous potential that lies in
every issue but one (i.e., the “Tablets™) of this State, as well as in the whole of its
cancellations—pre-stamp to 1912.
(ii) Manuscript Cancellations.
(a) On the Early Issues.
Since my previous notes appeared I have seen several copies with “39” and “47”
in MSS. These numbers, according to the list referred to in the last number,
belonged to Kangaroo Point (this name is otherwise unknown to me though I do
have a “Kangaroo Valley”) and Oatlands respectively.
(b) On the Pictorials.
Despite its clarity, my friend Mr. Lancaster tells me that the “Segana” I noted
is almost certainly “Legana.” 1 now have the following other MSS. cancella-
tions:—Lanena (30.6.11); Magnet (16.7.02); Mount Read—three (16.11.01 to
3.12.01); Westbury (10.5.09); Northdown (25.11.02); Oldina (26.2.11); Strick-
land (8.1.08). Mr. P. W. Simonson has shown me quite a few “Robiganas” in
MSS. on Australian 1d. reds in 1914-15. This was in use for some time before
a canceller of normal type was provided. It does not, however, come within our
period. Of those listed to date the following do not appear to have been found
with a normal cancellation, viz., Blythe Road, Legana, Oldina, Strickland. The
others have all turned up with the normal type of cancellation. Further study of
the normal cancellations (dates of use, etc.) will doubtless reveal, in some cases
at any rate, the reason behind the use of a manuscript cancellation.
(iii) Employment of “Crown Seals” as Cancellations on the Pictorials.
I will have more to say on this interesting subject at a later stage, but here
merely record the Fact that in addition to “Kelso” (previously mentioned), two others
can be found—”The Oaks” and “Wattlegrove Lower.” All these offices are also
found later with normal type of cancellation. 1 have three or four examples of
each Crown Seal. The latest printing represented is a 2d. (with “Kelso”) from a
1903 printing. “Wattlegrove Lower” 1 have seen only on the De La Rue prints.
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PICTURE
At the time these stamps were produced the printing trades did not have
the mass production machines that we have today. The perforator in use in the
greater number of shops was a hand-operated (rarely footpower) affair, punching
a single line of holes at one operation. Anywhere from one to five sheets could
be handled at one time, depending on the thickness of the paper, consequently a
considerable time was required to perforate 1000 sheets with a single lina of holes.
On the other hand, a good pressman would put through the press 1000 sheets of
paper while an operator was running one line of holes in the same number of
sheets. In those days slack times occurred, so I am inclined to think that Messrs.
Leigh, anticipating future orders while they had the press set up for the job, had
more sheets printed than they required for the job in hand, with the view of
having them perforated during a slack period. There were too many of these imper-
forates floating around in the ‘nineties to have come from occasional sheets discarded
during the run or from spoilage during the makeready of the press.
The sheets of the ‘One Penny’, 20 to the sheet, have seven lines of perforating
and would have consumed the greater part of a day in perforating 1000 sheets.
Mr, Foster also mentions a constant plate variety in the 1d. Palm Tree (which
he believes is unrecorded) on No. 1 in the top left pane. This is found in both
colours and shows a missing pearl above the “P” in “PENNY”.
VICTORIA.
(i) The “Boyd’s City Express” Local
This is one of a number of Australian Locals into which the writer is pursuing
investigations. The point to be made here is that it is not “lithographed,” as de-
“scribed in the Hurt Catalogue, but “surface-printed,” and almost unquestionably
electrotyped. Each copy shows very minor Haws, and nver some years copies have
been collected and studied with a view to establishing the number of stamps in
the sheet which, on the evidence to date, appears to be comparatively small. 1
would greatly appreciate a loan of any copies which readers can make available.
There is no doubt that its scarcity has been somewhat exaggerated. It is of course
rare, but is frequently found here in old-time collections.
(ii) 1902-12 “Perforation Varieties.”
I have received an interesting letter on the above subject from Mr. A. H. Davis,
of Birmingham, England. Mr. Davis, who resided in Victoria from 1902 two 1921,
was the Victorian representative for Ewen’s, a firm well known to old timers for
its wonderful new issue service. Mr. Davis says—anent my remarks on the inclu-
sion or non-inclusion in the Gibbons’ Catalogue of certain perforation varieties.
During that period I visited the Melbourne G.P.O. at least once weekly, and
handled locally-used stamps daily. 1 had every means of knowing what stamps were
issued and 1, too, never saw or heard of S.G.574 and the other numbers mentioned.
although I pride myself on having seen—mint or used—almost every example of
the excessively scarce compound perforations that DID exist.
