Imperial Russia: Judicial Fiscal Stamp Forerunners - examples from Saratov

Click on Image to Magnify

Imperial Russia introduced standardised fiscal stamps to signal the payment of judicial (Court) fees in the late 1880s. These stamps, printed in St Petersburg to the usual high standards, were attached to Court documents and normally cancelled and dated, most often in manuscript.

Prior to that, many local courts produced "Raffle Ticket" - style stamps (or tickets) to indicate payment of judicial fees. The "MAPKA" (Stamp) right part of the ticket was attached to the document relating to the fee paid and the middle "KVITANTSIA" (Quittance, Receipt) was given to the person paying the fee. The Court did its own financial accounting using a third, left hand part to the Raffle Ticket kept by the court clerk. John McMahon on his russianrevenuestamps.com website shows a (unique) complete sheet of tickets from Kamenets-Podolsk laid out in the three columns just described.

Anyway, these Court Tickets are collected by Russia Revenue specialists as forerunners of regular judicial fee stamps. They are generally quite scarce and, for some courts, rare. Above I show a selection of items from Saratov. These were in a  large Russian fiscal accumulation I recently acquired for my stock. I have removed them from grubby album pages. 

Top left is a mint pair of tickets dated "187..". This mint pair is useful because on the back one can see that the Stamp is gummed (ready to be stuck to a document) but that the Receipt is not. Below the date you can see details of the Saratov court from which this ticket originated. On the right of the top row is a used ticket dated 1879  without indication as to whether it is Stamp or Receipt. From its left hand corner position, it is clear that this is a rare example of the accounting book ticket which was retained

In the middle row there is a used pair dated 1882 and a used stamp dated 1885

In the bottom row there are stamps and receipts for 1889, showing that these local Fee tickets continued in use after the supposed general introduction of Court Fiscal stamps in 1887.

The unusual presence of three pairs in this group may indicate that the Saratov court was careless about providing receipts. Any other ideas?

Russia: Maria Feodorovna Charities and the Playing Card Tax

Click on Image to Magnify

Philatelists are familiar with Imperial Russia's Maria Feodorovna administration and taxes mainly from the Advertising Letter Sheets produced in the 1890s and early 1900s.  The advertising allowed the sheets to be sold at below the face value of the postage stamp imprinted on them. They are attractive items, popular with collectors, and command 150 - 300 euro each at auction. There is a book which illustrates them in full colour by Dr Arnold Ryss, Charity Letters bearing advertisements for the benefit of orphans 1898 - 1901 (2004)

The distinctive feature of all Maria Feodorovna related items is the presence of an image of a Pelican feeding its young - traditionally, with its own blood. The Pelican also appears on the Theatre Tax stamps which are familiar to Russian revenue collectors. Some of those are common, others - notably the later high values - are scarce. I blogged about them on this site on 28 February 2012. Here is a set of the 1892 isue; the 25 and 50 kopeck top values on the right are rarely seen:

Click on Image to Magnify 

The Maria Feodorovna administration dated back to 1797 when the Emperor Paul entrusted his wife with control over the orphanages established by Catherine the Great. The administration expanded its work to include promotion of girls' education and provision of institutions for the blind and deaf. It was funded by charitable donations but also by the Theatre Tax, the profits of a factory producing playing cards and a tax on Playing Cards. 

Above is an image of a Playing Card tax label for 30 kopecks. This label is very scarce but quite well known and it has been reproduced on the Internet - for example, by John McMahon at russianrevenuestamps.com. McMahon dates them to 1892 onwards.

Mentioned but not illustrated in John Barefoot's Russia Revenues catalogue are the orange and black banderoles used to seal packs of playing cards and illustrated here (I think for the first time on the Internet). The Barefoot catalogue is almost useless except for the section on tobacco and other banderoles which is based on the collection of the late Steve Alushin.

Finally, an item I cannot find listed or illustrated anywhere, a long banderole (illustrated in two images which are of different widths only because of cropping) which is a playing card tax strip for 30 kopecks applied to  bundles of playing card packs designed for distribution at clubs or meetings - this is spelt out in the text of the banderole on the pink background.The banderole has been extensively repaired but appears complete. At the very least, it is very rare and it may be unique. Click on the Images to Magnify

All these banderoles, like cigar and cigarette tax bands, are printed on the thinnest of cigarette paper (or "Bible paper") and the fine quality engraved printing was done by the Imperial State Printing Works in St Petersburg. 

Washing Stamps

My latest acquisition is a large (1500 stamp) collection of Russian fiscals, vignettes and bus tickets. Though sold at a fancy auction with a fancy name attached, it's basically a schoolboy collection, the large album pages filled with stamps, often mixed up and none written up. There are a few pencil notes made with a thick pencil. The stamps have been hinged to the pages, and the hinges are often enough on the top of old hinges - or in many cases, on top of  bits of old mint postage stamps cut up and used as hinges. It's a pity because there are some rare stamps present. I will show you some pictures when I have solved my problems with Windows 10 - today it tells me I don't have enough memory to do what I used to be able to do every day before I upgraded. I have concluded that it is a virus, designed to make me replace my computer and scanner and printer and ... I think it will succeed.

Anyway, when I look at some of these old stamps, I think there is just one thing I can do to improve them. I never repair stamps but I do wash them. I think that is legitimate because it returns the stamp closer to its original state before collectors got hold of it. More or less, you can get back to the state a stamp was in at the moment the first dealer or collector washed it off an envelope or a document. Unused stamps pose a separate problem: if there is no gum left, then it is reasonable to wash them. But if there is still some gum, it is probably important to retain it. So washing is ruled out.

I never wash stamps in batches, always one at a time in small dishes. That way, if the colour of one stamp dissolve  it does not affect the others. I use warm water not hot and I find that very few stamps or cancellations are fugitive at that temperature. Finally, I rinse the stamp in cold water to make sure I get rid of all the dirt and particles of hinge and so on.

Of course, some times you discover more Bad News: a thin in the stamp hidden by a hinge, for example. Or a stamp which breaks into two when the hinges come loose. But most of the time you end up with a stamp with better colour, a more even surface and no accumulation of  stuff on the back which does not belong to the stamp and should never have been  there in the first place.

Stamp Exhibitions: Could these be the new FIP Rules for Judging Exhibits ...

Recently, I bought some material from the estate of a collector who had won Gold Medals in international stamp exhibitions. It surprised me that much of the postal history I had acquired was of below average quality. It was obvious that some of this was the fault of the collector: he had opened out envelopes, re-folded entire letters, trimmed roughly opened envelopes, scribbled on his material as if it was scrap paper. How do you get to win Gold Medals if you do that, I wondered?

I took a look at the FIP (Federation Internationale de Philatelie) rules for exhibits in the Traditional Philately and Postal History classes. They say that exhibits should aim to show material of the “highest available quality”. But when it comes to the allocation of Points by juries, only 10 points out of 100 are awarded for “Condition”.

I therefore propose a very simple rule change:

FIP wishes to encourage recognition of the  fact that stamps and covers are autonomous, historically interesting artefacts which deserve careful treatment, handling and conservation in a state as close as possible to that in which they originally existed. In order to discourage dealer, expert and collector damage to items, FIP will increase the points allocated to the category “Condition” from 10 to 30, reducing other categories as indicated in the revised schedule.

Specifically, FIP Juries will regard all of the following as things which reduce the Condition of a particular item and make it ineligible for the award of Maximum points:

Stamps: hinges on mint stamps; absence of gum on stamps which were originally gummed; ownership, dealer or expert handstamps; ink and pencilled notes of any kind. Exhibits should be mounted in such a way as to enable Jurors to examine the backs of stamps.

Postal History: opening out of covers, trimming, re-folding; owner, dealer or expert handstamps; all ink and pencil markings including dealer prices and expert signatures (especially when in close proximity to stamps); evidence of the use of an eraser to remove pencilled markings. Exhibits should be mounted in such a way as to enable Jurors to examine the backs of covers and cards.

Where a photographic Expert certificate is held, it should be mounted on the back of the relevant page of the exhibit. No other form of Expertising (handstamps, signatures) will be accepted.

Exhibitors are advised that in some cases it may cause further damage to an item to erase a pencilled note and they should use their judgment in deciding whether or not to erase. In some instances, they may wish to indicate on their Exhibit why they have decided not to erase such graffiti.

Er, that’s it. 

Russia 1919: Northern Army OKCA covers

This Blog follows on from the previous post.

Here is one of those rare things, a Northern Army OKCA cover which appears to have travelled through the post:

Click on Image to Magnify

A photo of this cover was published in 1991 by Dr R J Ceresa in vol 3, Parts 19 / 21 of his The Postage Stamps of Russia 1917 - 1923 handbooks. He gives its provenance as the collection of a Herr Muller (not Müller - see Ivo Steijn's Comment below). Now it looks at least semi-philatelic but the important question (at this point) is whether it did go through the post.

At the top is a Manuscript registration cachet "N 112 Gdov" in a different pencil and handwriting from that which produced the address. The address is an army hospital in Ivangorod - Narva and the addressee is named Klever and is identified as a hospital or medical orderly. The stamps are cancelled POLNA SPB 28 9 19 and we know (thanks to Alexander Epstein) that this canceller was in use at Gdov at this time.

On the back is the name and address of the sender, another Klever, but in a different pencil and handwriting. It links the sender to the Northern Army.The letter has been roughly opened - but in such a way as to create in my mind the suspicion that there was nothing in the envelope.

Most importantly, the cover has a new style Estonian cancellation for NARWA "a" 1 10 1919, perfectly genuine ... BUT not quite enough to rule out this possibility, that Klever carried this letter himself to Narva and got it backstamped there. There are no Registry markings which one could link to Narva.

However, on the same day Klever sent another letter with Registry number "N 117 Gdov", this time addressed to the well-known stamp dealers and catalogue makers Senf in Leipzig. This cover is illustrated in poor quality by Dr Ceresa and not in my possession, so I cannot improve on it:

Click on Image to Magnify

This cover has an Estonian censor triangle on the front and a LEIPZIG receiver on the reverse. This cover surely did go through the post, suggesting that the previous one did too - unless Klever carried them both to Narva. But if he had done that, even the most co-operative post office would probably have backstamped the Leipzig letter with a NARWA cancellation in order to indicate the transit. This cover also has Klever's pencilled address on the back but again in a different handwriting and pencil.

The fact that Klever was writing to Senf indicates a clear philatelic motivation, most likely informing them of the existence of this stamp issue. It is in fact good news for the authenticity of this issue that someone was doing this from the right place and at more or less the right time.

It would be good to know who Klever was. The point of this analysis, however, is to argue that the likelihood that the first cover travelled through the post to Narva is increased by the near-certainty that this second cover travelled through the post to Leipzig. What would really help the analysis along would be to have the covers in between Gdov 112 and 117 and on either side of those numbers. How many letters did Klever send on that day? Who else used the post office that day?

Added 8 December 2015: Carsten Alsleben provides this reference to a very interesting article in Russian by Igor Myaskovsky:

http://philatelie.ru/3248/pochtovoe-ispolzovanie-marok-sza-i-oksa.html

What's Wrong With Stamp Catalogues

I was thinking about the general catalogues we use without thinking – Michel, Gibbons, Scott, Yvert, in Russia Standard and maybe a few others. Some are good, some are not. It often depends on the country you are interested in.

But all these catalogues date back to the days when collectors were most often one of each collectors and dealers one of each dealers. The collectors wanted to stick stamps in pre-printed albums or “write them up” and the dealers kept stockbooks by numbers.

You get lots of information which makes writing up easy: Date of Issue, Method of Printing, Paper type, Perforation gauge, sometimes (Gibbons) stamp designer and printer's name. You get a numbered list of stamps and Mint and Used prices, sometimes with some note distinguishing Used and CTO.

Many of these catalogue entries have been essentially unchanged for decades – well, a hundred years in some cases - as if there is no such thing as on-going philatelic research. Yvert is an example.

What you don’t get is a sort of overview which creates a context for understanding what you might find and what you will not find. In the days of one of each collecting that may not have mattered very much. Today, when people collect covers and do social philately, the old-style catalogue is not very helpful.

Let’s take an example. Look at your preferred catalogue for the Northern Army (OKCA) issue of 1919. It will be under “Russia” and will show five values, none of which is worth anything either mint or used. You will get additional information, varying from catalogue to catalogue. 

What you don’t get is a Thumbnail Sketch which sets out what we know about this issue, 100 years on. Here’s my own attempt at a Thumbnail, which could be made more precise from the literature available (mostly due, in this case,  to Alexander Epstein and Dr R J Ceresa):

This issue was printed in very large quantity in sheets of 200 made up of two panes of 100, separated by a wide gutter and printed tête-bêche to each other. Most sheets were separated into two halves, so that the gutter variety is quite scarce. Most of these stamps were sold to the stamp trade, at the time or later, and are very common as singles (often now in poor condition) and small blocks. Sheets of 100 are quite common. Despite being common, the stamps were forged and the forgeries are much scarcer than the genuine stamps. Very little Proof material or Printer’s Waste is known and when found is worth significantly more than the basic stamps. The absence of such material suggests that this issue was originally planned as a perfectly legitimate stamp issue.

The stamps were extensively Cancelled to Order in sheets and also CTO on philatelic covers, which are quite common and obviously philatelic. Specialists are not entirely clear which cancels were officially authorised. Some may have been manufactured by stamp dealers. It seems likely that some of the CTO material, and maybe most of it,  was produced in Estonia and not at the post offices in Northern Army controlled areas of Russia.

Postally used examples of the stamps are virtually unknown, and only about a dozen covers are recorded which appear to have gone through the post from the few post offices controlled by the Northern Army. Most of those covers originate from Gdov where however the Imperial Russian canceler of POLNA SPB was in use.  Any stamp or cover with a POLNA SPB cancel should be examined carefully and submitted for an Expert opinion.

A specialist could improve on that thumbnail and a good catalogue editor could make it shorter. If I am right about this, a Thumbnail like this orients you to a specific stamp issue and gives you some idea of what to expect and what to look out for.

For more dicussion of OKCA stamps,see my next Blog

Russian Consular Post in Tabriz; Imperial Russian Stationeries; Kerensky Chainbreakers ...

When I buy at auction, I never know what I have bought until I get home …

Yesterday, I viewed hundreds of Russian covers – mostly Imperial – grouped into about 30 Lots in an English auction. I didn’t have a lot of time and so I had to make quick assessments and valuations. The material was in very “Mixed Condition”  and I knew I would not see every missing stamp or cut down envelope as I worked through the material. Equally, I thought I would notice the important items.

So in one Lot I decided to bid on it when I came across the following cover, not mentioned in the catalogue description of a group of about  80 covers:

Click on Image to Magnify

Yes, it’s a  cover from the Russian Consulate in Tabriz sent to Tiflis, with Censor mark and receiver cancellation on the reverse. The French Consulate have patronised their Ally's consulate to send this letter ( putting a War Charity stamp into the franking). The letter would have travelled up to Dzhulfa on the border and then have been forwarded by TPO to Tiflis. It’s clean, attractive and scarce – maybe even rare. I felt it justified a Bid at the Estimate for the whole Lot even without looking at the other material. So maybe I skimmed through that too fast, because when I got home and looked again today, I pulled out this:

Click on Image to Magnify

This is such a “busy” cover that it is easy to miss the most important thing: top right corner. This is a stationery envelope for 3 kopecks. Wait a moment: When did I ever see a stationery envelope for 3 kopecks? I could not remember any … so I looked in Ilyushin and Forofontov’s 2004 Moscow – published book on Imperial Russian Stationery 1845 – 1917. Yes, this envelope exists , it dates from 1909 in two formats (this one the larger), and it’s # 51 in their catalogue with a valuation of “50” in used condition, which is really nothing in their scale of valuations. So I wonder now why I have never seen this envelope before .. perhaps I just did not notice it! At 3 kopecks, it would have been used for mailings benefitting from concessionary tariffs - printed matter or samples without value, for example.

Then I had another surprise. Nearly every item in the Lot was Imperial, though the catalogue description read “1910 – 1919”. Here's the 1919 cover. It was  among a bunch of covers collected for their Registration labels. I looked at the label on the front as I browsed through the bunch:

Click on Image to Magnify

 Today I looked at the back:

Click on Image to Magnify

This is a registered cover from January 1919 franked at the newly-introduced rate of 50 kopecks in the tariff of 1 January 1919 which made the sending of ordinary letters and cards Free. The 35 kopeck Kerensky stamp was widely distributed in Bolshevik Russia at the end of 1918 – it is usually said that it was issued to mark the 1^st Anniversary of the October ( subsequently November) Revolution. But it's very scarce on non-philatelic cover like this, addressed from Kasimov in Ryazan guberniya to a People’s Court at Divovo in the same guberniya.

I won't spoil things by dwelling on the disappointments:

Click on Image to Magnify

Added 8 December 2015: Alexander Epstein sends me these examples of the 3 kopeck stationery envelope. Note that they are all with added stamps and none of them dated anywhere near Ilyushin and Forofontov's 1909 date. Maybe the issue of these envelopes was delayed?

Click on Images to Magnify