Last
Updated: 14 April 2010
Questions &
Answers
Members of the Hong Kong Study
Circle may submit their questions concerning philatelic
items of Hong Kong and the Treaty Ports.
A clear scan, relevant details and a specific question should be sent
to the Webmaster at the email address which follows. Answers
are
welcome from any interested party - member or otherwise. The Webmaster
reserves the right to edit any material before posting on the site.
This e-mail address is displayed as a graphic so that Internet
marketers cannot easily copy it.
| Question | Answered | | Q006 | - | | Q005 | - | | Q004 | - | | Q003 | - | | Q002 | A002 | | Q001 | A001 |
[Images with blue boarders can be clicked to
enlarge
them.]
Q006: Can someone identify the source and authenticity of this “5” overprint? (Robert Hazelwood)
|

|
Hong Kong QV 10˘ green CA with "5" overprint
The
adhesive also bears an “AMOY” straight line cancel. His
literature search has been a failure except for the reference entitled “THE LARGE NUMERALS”
at the top of page 147 in Webb. Also, he has not found anyone who
has seen one and is not certain that his example is the same as those
mentioned. He sent the scan to another HKSC member, who
had never seen it before, but referred him to an article on overprints
in a HKPS Newsletter. However, the style of the numeral is
entirely different from any covered by that article. Another HKSC
member was puzzled too, but sent him a photocopy of other numeral
overprints, all of which differed from his.
|
|
published: 14 April 2010 |

|
Q005: Can someone identify this cancellation? (John Robertson)
|

|
Hong Kong early revenue stamp with a "2" cancel
The
stamp is struck twice with the "2" cancel. If this is a genuine
cancel, where was it cancelled? Was someone playing games,
and this is a fake?
|
|
published: 26 Dec. 2009 |
 |
Q004: Can someone identify this 'Royal Mail Packet' handstamp? Was it applied on board or not? (Eddie Lawrence)
|

|
HANKOW, CHINA TO MILAN, ITALY
Italian
postcard posted on the River Yangtze with a HK4 cents stamp cancelled
at the first port of call (Hankow) with a British Post Office cds. In
addition, a Shanghai British transit stamp and a Milan arrival cds were
applied to the obverse. There are no marks on the reverse. The Royal Mail Steam Packet Company cachet was applied on board the ship. The
card caught the P. & O. packet that sailed from Shanghai on
February 10 for Colombo, Ceylon arriving on February 25 to be
transshipped to the S. S. Arcadia that sailed on the 26th for Egypt,
where it was transferred to a Mediterranean vessel for Italy and then
overland to Milan. The transit time was 39 days.
|
|
published: 16 Jan. 2009 |

|
Q003: Why
no registration label? Where was the green hand stamp applied? (Ingo
Nessel)
|

|
- This $7.50 rate cover addressed to Germany has
a green
"REGISTERED" hand stamp, and is cancelled at GPO registration section
on October 21, 1971. But there is no registration label.
- NB:
The rate is constructed from the 5 x $1.30 rate per 1/2 oz. = $6.50 to
zone 2 (which includes Europe) plus $1.00 registration fee = $7.50
total.
|
|
published: 1
July 2008 |

|
Q002: Is
there any documentation on this 58c airmail rate to China? (Ingo
Nessel)
|

|
- Unrecorded rate.
- It is not mentioned in Halewood or Proud.
|
|
published: 1
July 2008 |
| A002: (Nicholas
Halewood) |
 .
This is an example of the surface letter rate/air fee structure that
appears to have been in force from early 1946 to 25 July 1946. The air
fee, per ˝oz, was 50˘ for China, and $1.00 for Commonwealth and other
countries. So this cover bears 8˘ per 1oz surface letter rate plus 50˘
per ˝oz air fee. So to China it was 58˘ for ˝oz, $1.08 for 1oz, $1.66
for 1˝oz, $2.16 for 2oz, etc.; for Commonwealth and other countries it
was a little more complicated because although the air fee was the same
the surface mail rates were different - Commonwealth countries, 20˘ for
first 1oz and 10˘ for each additional 1oz; and other countries, 30˘ for
first 1oz and 15˘ for each additional 1oz.
I have no documentary evidence of this rate structure, just cover
evidence. Also the cover in question was to Shanghai, so if it went by
ship to Shanghai the 50˘ air fee was unnecessary; an
alternative could have been by boat to Canton and then by air.
answered: 30
August 2008
|

|
Q001:
Is this a Shanghai censor, or was it
censored in Hong Kong? (John Robertson)
|
 |
- British censor marking, on Shanghai canceled
piece.
- Oval REGISTERED / JY 30 17 / SHANGHAI. B
|
|
published: 23
April 2008 |
|
A001: (Ingo Nessel)
|
A recent eBay lot illustrated a
registered cover from Shanghai to Peshawar, India dated April 17, 1917.
It contained what looks to be the same censor marking as that of John's
example on piece. A look at the reverse of the cover
showed the routing was not via Hong Kong, rather it was probably sent
on a sailing directly from Shanghai to an Indian gateway port, either
Bombay or Tutticorin as notated on the front of the cover. Thus the
censor marking is likely to have been applied at Shanghai, but
certainly not at Hong Kong.
answered: 13 December 2009 | |
 |
|