table of contents vol 7, no. 2, september 2018 · 2018-09-28 · page table of contents vol 7, no....
TRANSCRIPT
Table of Contents
Vol 7, No. 2, September 2018
Page 2 Editor’s Notes
Page 3 Marcas Postales del Perú by Roque Castillo y Ricardo Castillo
Page 8 English translation of Marcas Postales del Peru
Page 9 2019 Rocky Mountain Stamp Show
Page 10 Contraband Correspondence by C. Wooster
Page 12 British Agencies in Peru-Appeal for an Article
2
Editor’s Notes
We still need people to contribute articles to Trencito 2. You may send articles to me at [email protected]. We prefer that articles be submitted in Word using Georgia 11 font. We welcome comments on previous articles as well.
On page 11 I have appealed for an article on the British Agency postmarks on Peru stamps, listing the British postmarks found in Peru. I found it of interest there was no postmark listed for either Lima or Cuzco. If you are knowledgeable in this area, our readers might find an article on these issues interesting.
I was able to resolve the issued I was having with Yahoo, so all may now communicate with me at the Yahoo address.
Thank you. David Paddock, Editor.
President: Chuck Wooster [email protected]
Vice President & Webmaster Henry Marquez [email protected]
Editor: David Paddock [email protected]
Web Site: www.peru-philatelic-study-circle.com
E-mail Addresses:
Post a message: [email protected]
Subscribe: [email protected]
List Owner: [email protected]
3
Marcas Postales del Perú
ENIGMATICOS NUMEROS EN LA CORRESPONDENCIA PERUANA
Roque Castillo y Ricardo Castillo
Revisando nuestra colección de sobres, tarjetas postales, cubiertas, etc., encontramos aproximadamente
500 ejemplares que mostraban números. Estos, aparentemente, originados en dispositivos de jebe, aplicados
a mano, en un lugar despejado del anverso de la pieza postal.
Estos números se hallan en la correspondencia circulada entre Lima y los distritos aledaños o en la
destinada a la Capital para ser repartida en ella. En raras ocasiones se observan en cartas dirigidas de Lima al
interior o al extranjero. (fig.1) Hasta ahora, no los hemos visto en la correspondencia de tránsito.
Figura 1. Circular impresa en un lado del papel, doblada y sin pegar, se le consideraba “impreso”.
Casi en la totalidad del material revisado, estos números se encuentran sobre cartas. El hallazgo de ellos
en tarjetas postales, tarjetas de visita, impresos (fig. 2), papeles de negocio, encomiendas, es muy escaso.
4
Figura 2. Carta origina en Lima con destino a Santiago, Chile, ostenta el número 24.
La gran mayoría de estos sobres exhiben solo una marca. En 5 casos encontramos que portaban 2
números diferentes. (figs. 3 y 3a) Estos sobres están dirigidos al interior del país. En este grupo encontramos
una carta originada en Ica, (fig. 3b) con destino Lima en la que se ve, que un número fue anulado y otro, al
parecer, diferente, le fue aplicado.
Figura 3. Carta privada de circulación local. El sobre exhibe 2 marcas postales diferentes.
5
Figura 3a. Carta de Lima a Supe Puerto mostrando 2 números diferentes.
Figura 3b. Carta de Ica a Lima, con doble marca, una anulada y la otra es diferente.
6
Una carta muestra esta marca como matasellos, (fig. 4) pareciera que fue el celo de un empleado postal
en salvaguardar el patrimonio del Correo anulando estas estampillas que escaparon el control en su oficina de
origen. Otra carta lleva esta marca en el dorso.
Figura 4. Carta comercial de circulación urbana. Se observa el uso de esta marca postal como matasellos. Es el único
ejemplar encontrado
El período de uso está entre 1940 a 1968, consideramos que éste variará conforme avancemos en su
búsqueda. La fecha más tardía que hemos registrado es 10-XII-1968.
Los números son de tipo arábigo. (fig. 5) Muy pocos son del tipo romano. (fig. 6) Encontramos
ejemplares que muestran números acompañados de letras mayúsculas. (fig.7). (El hallazgo de letras, en la
correspondencia, es otro capítulo muy interesante que estamos evaluando). Hemos encontrado desde el
número 0 al 56 y en el tipo romano, los números II, IV y V.
El tamaño varía entre 5 mm. y 20 mm. La forma de los mismos es muy diversa, respondiendo a los
muchos estilos disponibles. Pueden mostrar los bordes, estar rellenos, sombreados, etc. Pueden hallarse
aislados o enmarcados en círculos, cuadrados, rectángulos, ruedas dentadas, etc. (fig. 8) Estos marcos pueden
ser simples o dobles. Los colores usados son el negro, violeta, azul, verde, y sus diferentes tonalidades. (fig. 9).
Desde el inicio de esta revisión nos preguntamos sobre el significado de estas marcas postales.
Revisamos la literatura filatélica peruana, conversamos con venerables y antiguos servidores postales y
también con estudiosos de las estampillas y la historia postal peruana sin encontrar respuesta convincente
sobre su uso, finalidad postal, etc.
Así, se especuló que podrían ser marcas aplicadas en la mesa de distribución de la correspondencia, en
la sede central, para orientarla a las sucursales o a las oficinas distritales de llegada; pero éste no parece ser el
uso, porque hay cartas dirigidas a una misma dirección, en la misma fecha y llevan números diferentes.
Otra posibilidad es que estos números identifiquen a los carteros que las repartían. Esta opinión se
apoyaba en otras marcas postales que asignaban un número al cartero, como se ve en las marcas de devolución
al remitente (Fig.10) Pero, si así fuera, que fin tendría aplicarlas en cartas dirigidas a provincias o al extranjero?
Esperamos la contribución y ayuda de los colegas filatelistas para aclarar este panorama.
7
Figura 5. Diferentes estilos y tamaños.
Figura 6. Números romanos.
Figura 7, Los números se muestran acompañados de letras mayúsculas.
Figura 8. Variedad de marcos.
8
Figura 9. Las tintas empleadas eran de diferentes colores.
Figura 10. Marca postal de devolución al remitente, donde se consigna un número al cartero; ésta de la sucursal No. 31 firmada por
el cartero número 19.
The following is an English translation of the above article. For the figures references, refer to the
above illustrations. Please note that I use a computer translation application that is not always 100%
accurate.
Peru postmarks
The Numbers Mystery in Peruvian Correspondence
Roque Castillo y Ricardo Castillo
Reviewing our collection of envelopes, postcards, covers, etc., we found approximately 500 copies showing
various numbers. These, apparently, originated in rubber devices, hand-applied, in an open place on the front
of the postcard.
These numbers are found in the correspondence circulated between Lima and the neighboring districts or in
the one addressed to the capital for distribution there. On rare occasions they are seen in letters directed from
Lima to the interior or abroad. (Fig. 1) So far, we haven't seen them in the transit correspondence.
In almost all the revised material, these numbers are on letters. The finding of them in postcards, business
cards, printed material (Fig. 2), paperwork, and parcels, is very scarce.
The majority of these envelopes exhibit only one brand. In 5 cases we found that they carried 2 different
numbers. (Figs. 3 and 3a) Figure 3a envelope is directed to the interior of the country. In this group we find a
letter originated in Ica, (Fig. 3b) with the destination Lima in which one sees, that a number was cancelled and
another, apparently, different, was applied to it. A letter shows this mark as postmark, (Fig. 4) It seems that it
was the intention of a postal employee to safeguard the heritageof the mail by nullifying those stamps that
escaped control in the home office. Another card carries this mark on the back.
The period of use is between 1940 to 1968. We think that it will vary as we advance our research. The most
recent date we have registered is 10-XII-1968.
9
The numbers are an Arabic type. (Fig. 5) Very few are of the Roman type. (Fig. 6) We find specimens that show
numbers accompanied by capital letters. (Fig. 7). (The finding of letters in correspondence is another very
interesting chapter that we are evaluating). We have found from the number 0 to the 56 and in the Roman
type, the numbers II, IV and V.
The size varies between 5 mm. and 20 mm. The shape of the same is very diverse, responding to the many
styles available. They can show the edges, be filled, shaded, etc. They can be isolated or framed in circles,
squares, rectangles, sprockets, etc. (Fig. 8) These frames can be single or double. The colors used are black,
violet, blue, green, and its different shades. (Fig. 9).
From the beginning of this review we wondered about the meaning of these postmarks. We revise the Peruvian
philatelic literature, we converse with venerable and old postal servers and with scholars of the stamps and the
Peruvian postcard history without finding convincing answer about its use, postal purpose, etc.
Thus, it was speculated that they could be trademarks applied to the distribution table of the correspondence,
at the headquarters, to orient it to the branches or to the district offices of arrival; But this does not seem to be
the use, because there are letters addressed to the same address, on the same date and carry different numbers.
Another possibility is that these numbers identify the mailmen who distributed them. This opinion was based
on other postal marks that assigned a number to the postman, as seen in the return marks to the sender (Fig.
10) But, if so, what purpose would have to apply them in letters addressed to provinces or abroad?
We look forward to the contribution and help of philatelic colleagues to clarify this view.
2019 Rocky Mountain Stamp Show
The 2019 the Rocky Mountain Stamp Show (RMSS) in Denver, Colorado, USA; will host a Latin America Fest show in late May 2019. This will be similar to Sescal 2008 and Chicagopex 2012. The Peru Philatelic Study Circle (PPSC) is one of the guest societies at RMSS.
Preparations already have started. The RMSS organizing committee requested an estimate on frames, possible speakers to provide some presentations, etc.
From the initial responses, we are anticipating filling 50 frames with Peru related exhibits (of which we have about 30 already secured) plus two presentations by Chuck Wooster and Henry Marquez. In addition, there will be a general meeting and perhaps another activity if time permits.
We’d like to request your support in the form of exhibiting, providing a presentation, etc. while philately in general seems to be declining in participation, the Philately of Peru seems to be always alive and kicking, by the same usual suspects, but we need more.
We also are in conversations with our members in Peru, hope they can bring a good contingent of exhibits, including the very nice and special Peru Thematic exhibits from members of CAF (Circulo Amigos de la Filatelia of Lima).
For more information, or to submit an exhibit or presentation, please contact Henry Marquez at [email protected]
10
Contraband Correspondence
Chuck Wooster
Postal services are a monopoly and almost all governments have gone to great lengths to preserve this
monopoly. This was especially true in the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century. Today, this practice
has largely been abandoned and we routinely rely on UPS, FEDEX, email and other non-governmental means
to deliver messages and packages in competition with the post office.
Like most countries, Peru was a big a defender of their postal monopoly. The tariff of September 16,
18261 references an earlier supreme decree of December 1, 1821 that establishes a penalty of 50 pesos for
carrying a letter outside of the mail system. Depending on distance, the cost of a single letter was between 3
and 5 pesos. Thus, this penalty was between 10 and 17 times the value of a single letter. In addition, whomever
denounces or apprehends the carrier of contraband correspondence was to receive half of the penalty and his
name was not to be disclosed. The only exception was official correspondence delivered to a government
authority.
The January 1851 tariff2 set the penalty at 4 pesos per single letter (less than ½ ounce). At this time the
postage rate for a single letter was between 1 and 3½ reales, again depending on distance, and amounted to
between 9 and 32 times the cost of a single letter. Once again, 50% of the penalty was to be paid to whomever
discovers the fraud. This time the exceptions are letters of recommendation and letters between towns that do
not have post offices.
The 1866 Reglamento3 established a penalty of 4 soles per ½ ounce or 40 times the cost of a single
letter. Now 100% of the penalty was to be paid to whomever discovers the fraud, less the cost of postage that
should have been affixed to the letter.
Under the 1876 Reglamento4 the fine was set between 5 and 20 soles per 15 grams, but there is no
mention of who should receive the penalty. Finally, the 1916 Reglamento5 established a penalty of 5 soles for a
single letter or 50 times the regular cost of postage. The requirement to pay the informant 50% of the fine,
without disclosing his identity, was also reinstated. If the carrier of the contraband letter could not pay the fine,
the fine was to be paid by the letter’s sender, if that can be determined (Article 573). One last note; the fine is
to be assessed with stamps?
How often did this type of fraud occur? Occasionally we see references to the assessment of penalties for
contraband correspondence in the Boletín Postal y Telegráfico. This wasn’t a consistent practice and the
inclusion of these penalties varies from year to year, probably due to changes in editorial policy. However, a
quick review of the first 6 months of 1930 finds references to 42 instances when such a penalty was assessed.
We only know of a single example of how this penalty was assessed. It is a 1931 letter signed by the
postmaster of Huarmey, a receptoria office of the Casma postal district (figure 1) and reads as follows;
Correos, Telégrafos y Radiotelegrafía del Peru
En Huarmey a los nueve días del mes de noviembre de mil novecientos treinta y uno, siendo las once
de la mañana, se presentó a esta oficina de Correos Dn. Amador Gamarra Juez de Paz del distrito de esta,
1 Colección de Leyes, Decretos Y Ordenes Publicadas En El Peru Desde El Año 1821 Hasta El 31 de diciembre de 1859, Tomo Quinto, 1861, page 14. 2 Op cit., page 80 3 Reglamento De Correos Del Peru Y Diccionario Geografico, Lima 1866, pp 29-30. 4 Reglamento General De Correos Del Peru, Lima 1876, pp 86-87. 5 Reglamento General De Correos, Telégrafos Y Teléfonos, Lima 1916, pp 105-6.
11
trayendo un Expediente sencillo, que le había sido entregado por Dn. Santiago Alegre, por encargo del
interesado Dn. Juan Rodriguez; dicho Expediente, fue dirigido al mencionado Juez, sin el franqueo
correspondiente, cayendo en decomiso, como contrabando de correspondencia, conforme el Art. 568 del
Reglamento General de Correos y Telégrafos, y, al pago inmediato de S/. 5.00 por parte del interesado y
único responsable Dn. Juan Rodriguez, no así el indicado Alegre que está comprendido En el Art. 573 y
manifiestamente responsable el tantas veces citado Rodriguez.
Huarmey 9 de noviembre de 1931
Denunciante Interesado
Juan G. Rodriguez
Figure 1
Jefe Oficina
Ricardo Falaveral
12
In Huarmey on the ninth day of the month of November nineteen hundred and thirty-one, being
eleven o'clock in the morning, he presented himself to this post office Dn. Amador Gamarra Justice of the
Peace of this district, bringing a simple case file, which had been delivered by Dn. Santiago Alegre, on request
of the interested party Dn. Juan Rodriguez; said file, was addressed to the aforementioned Judge, without
the corresponding postage, being confiscated as contraband correspondence, according to Art. 568 of the
General Regulations of the Post and Telegraph, and, subject to the immediate payment of S /. 5.00 by the
interested and sole responsible party, Dn. Juan Rodriguez, and not the indicated Alegre as understood by
Art. 573 and clearly responsible for the many times cited Rodriguez.
The letter is signed by Juan Rodriguez who sent the letter and was responsible for paying the fine.
Amador Gamarra, who carried the letter, was not held liable in accordance with Article 573. Whoever reported
the violation was not identified but did sign the letter with two small red x’s. Finally, the Receptor of Huarmey,
Ricardo Falaveral, signed and affixed a cancel from his office.
The back of the letter (figure 2) contains a half sheet of 50 each 10 centavos postage due stamps, as
payment for the 5 soles fine. The stamps are cancelled with an Admon. De Correos Y Telegrafos / Casma
/ Peru / Dic 2, 1931 cancel. Unfortunately, the Boletín Postal y Telegráfico stopped publishing these types of
fines in 1931, otherwise we would likely have been able to find corroboration of this penalty.
Figure 2
British Agency in Peru—An appeal for an article
Occaionally one finds a British cancellation on a Peru stamp, usually a letter followed by a 2-digit number such
as C38. I have done some research in this area. If any of our members or readers can shed some light on these
issues, and would want to help co-author a paper for Trencito 2, I think it would be an interesting topic for our
members. If you are interested, please contact the editor at [email protected]. The postmarks from Peru
include: C36, Arica; C38 Callao (probably most common); C42 Islay; C43 Paita; C65 Pisagua; C87 Irquique
and D94 Pisco and Chincha Islands.