Tasmania aka Van Diemen's Land

I also collect what are known as Tasmanian Pictorials (1899 - 1912) not so much for the stamps but for the postmarks. Some of the postmarks are a lot rarer than others as some POs shut down.

Here is just a small sample. My highest rated postmark is a RR from Stonor PO

Here is one of mine:

Very nice example of this stamp and a very clear CDS (although unrated). I have not been there but Perf12 probably has.

Of course the stamp show lake Marion, whereas Snake Plains is in a totally different part of Tassie.


Lake Marion



Snake Plains

I think the Snake Plains on the stamp is a different place from the modern Snake Plains. Although Campbell Tasmania: The Postal History and Postal Markings is silent on the fate of the Snake Plains post office, I understand Snake Plains was renamed Glendevie sometime around 1909.  I have been through Glendevie many times as it is on the main road south of Huonville.

The modern Snake Plains is an inhospitable boulder-covered scree-bank on the side of Mount Wellington.  I imagine the Snake bit comes from the fact it is infested with snakes.  I have been very close to this Snake Plains, having walked the Pipeline Track a number of times, but I don't think there ever was a post office at this location.

Thanks Perfs12, I should have thought of the habit of name changing! Lol.

88-Tamar East, later Dilston? It feels to me as if there is 'stuff' going on in the area where a 3 shouldn't have anything going on.

My 2d.

It could be 68. In the first allocation, 68 was Hobart Town. I don't have any specific knowledge on distinguishing first and second allocations, so I'm only assuming...

I was thinking that a 3 shouldn't have ink in the open area (i.e., the area you would erase to make an '8' into a '3'.



Here is a 68 off of ebay that has been marked to show what I mean.

But, I see something different every time I look at BC's stamp.

I was perfectly willing to go with 88, too. But...



The only hangups I have are:

1.  There is the 'blob' that would be at the end of the top arc of a '6'
2.  There looks to be some inking where a three or an eight should have none...admittedly weak.
3.  This little extension is continuing up toward the left side of a '6' and not curving in like the left side of a '8'

Just throwing out ideas...

We need Perfs 12's input, he knows this stuff.

I'm leaning toward the "68", although I don't think it is conclusive.

Somebody might want to put it through that online image enhancing thing... (whatever it is called).




 

Further to the above.

I don't think it can be '88'. 88 was a second allocation only barred numeral obliterator, issued for Dilston circa 1871, well outside the normal usage period for the 4d orange Courier.

This is looking more like '68', which is one of the more common numerals seen. 38 was Jerusalem (now Colebrook, just up the road from me), and is uncommon.

There you go, it was fun anyway...but knowledge is power!

Caffeine and nicotine are my power sources...food occasionally.