Possible Canada Rate/Due Marking?

While it has been years since my involvement in Canadian philately, several questions come to mind.

1. Does the US (imperforate?) really belong on the cover?

2. Why are no dispatch markings present?

3. Any original contents to identify the date of posting or origination?

4. Why the "Not for England" endorsement?

5. What was the proper postage ca 1851 to 1859 to Nova Scotia from the US?


Such handstamped "5" markings were internal Canada or Nova Scotia markings for a paid letter. Remember Nova Scotia was a province until 1868. Unpaid letters were typically marked "Unpaid 7."

My "gut" feeling is this was originally a rather ordinary and philatelically common cover (given the above stated questions) to which someone added a 3c imperf US issue.

To the left of the first line of the address I can make out staining which could be signs of a stamp removal.

The "Canada" endorsement is reminiscent of a ship or steamer name requesting carriage on the ship of that name. One might check the sailing dates of the named ship for further information, but without a proper date, that would be of no use.

Perhaps a collector with the proper literature could fill in the blanks. As I said, my comments are all from recollection.

JeffS: Well, I am pretty sure the stamp belongs on the cover. The "5" marking is in black ink which indicates postage due, not prepaid (which would be red). I think this was applied in Nova Scotia and not Canada as the stamp was used in the 1850's. It is a cover front, so there are no contents, sadly. I am not sure what you mean by dispatch markings. The stamp is cancelled with a typical killer of the time. the "not for England" marking is quite a mystery though.

Ok, stop the presses.  I was sure it was a cover front, but I turned it over just now to find a part of the back.  This settles the date, which is contemporary with the usage of the US stamp.  I am not sure what UP-States means though.

smauggie - I believe that marking is a bit smudged UD STATES

Hi, Antonio!  Great to see you on TSF again.... it's been awhile!

Actually, I think that the "Not for England" note is simple to explain:  There is a town here in England, in West Yorkshire, called Halifax.  So, I think that the note is simply there to make the distinction that the recipient of the letter is in Halifax, Nova Scotia and not Halifax, England.

Don't know for sure that this is right, but it's just my common sense at work!

-Chris 

I was delayed yesterday in responding to this but I was going to suggest that the Halifax N.S. Was named after the original English city of Halifax and so the “Not for England “ is as Chris has said is to make sure it doesn’t make its way across the Atlantic in error. 

the UD. STATES.  HALIFAX date stamp on the reverse strikes me as a bit unusual since HALIFAX is certainly not in the US ,  I am going to suggest it is a special cancel used on Maritime mails ie a ship letter mark. 

I wonder if the “5” will be a ship letter charge?  This is speculation but it is the sort of thing we find on European mail around this time .

i believe there was much competition for carriage of mail between various US , Canadian and GB shipping companies and rates varied depending on which ships actually carried mail , Transatlantic mail rates were complicated and seem to have changed frequently as the charges dropped over the decades 1830-1870 pre Universal Postal Union times.

Given that the original presentation mentioned no backstamp, my mind took me to a letter mailed during the decimal stamp period. That was an inaccurate supposition.

The UPU had nothing to do with setting mail rates between the US and Canada and provinces.

The UD STATES postmark is an exchange office marking applied in Halifax. Exchange offices determined the percentage of postage that the destination country could claim. These were tallied over a period of time and sent to the US for payment.

I seriously doubt that the smudge to the right of the numeral 5 is an integral part of the marking. There is no reason to have a grid canceler attached to a rate marking not intended as a postmark. Looks more like an inked thumb print.

Perhaps a knowledgeable student of the subject can look up what the rate should have been and determine what value the missing stamp might have been. I am not convinced that the 3c stamp belongs on the cover and speculate the possibility that two stamps were soaked from the cover and at a later time, someone tried to salvage the cover by adding the 3c stamp.

I haven't collected Canada postal history for 20+ years and my library has been disbursed. I acknowledge I might be wrong on the 3c stamp. So someone needs to determine the value of the missing stamp (3c + ?) if the 3c is legit.

A posting at Frajola's board would bring a quick and accurate answer.