What we collect!

 

Stamporama Discussion Board Logo
For People Who Love To Talk About Stamps
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Stamporama Discussion Board Logo
For People Who Love To Talk About Stamps
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Stamporama Discussion Board Logo
For People Who Love To Talk About Stamps



What we collect!
What we collect!


United States/Covers & Postmarks : US receiving postmarks

 

Author
Postings
Rhinelander
Members Picture


Support the Hobby -- Join the American Philatelic Society

21 Mar 2007
08:13:06pm
Question for the cover experts: Does anyone know the official date on which the application of receiving postmarks on regular mail ceased to be required in the US?

Thank you very much,

Arno
Like
Login to Like
this post
David Teisler (Teisler)

21 Mar 2007
09:17:03pm
re: US receiving postmarks

Arno,

i'm pretty sure it was never required other than for special categories of mail, such as registry, certified, and other services that needed (and still need) to document the movement of mail. The use of receiving cancels on my common US mail is pretty sporadic to say the least, and its presence is more observed for its rarity than its requirements. That said, i'm not familiar with any postal regulation that initially required it nor later freed us from it. If this refers to earlier, pre-stamp periods, a receiving cancel has more to do with the payment than the receipt (oh, my, here's double meaning of a word. I mean receipt in the arrival sense rather than financial) as, until Roland Hill, letters were generally paid for by the recipient, not the sender. I believe it's 1855 when prepayment was mandated, thereby negating the need for those receiving cancels documenting payment (not arrival). YOu may quote me, but at your peril. If we get no better answers than mine (even if it's the same), i'll pose this to US Specialized, Steve Davis' group, on your behalf. They're bound to know, rahter than, like me, guess.

David

Like
Login to Like
this post
Rhinelander
Members Picture


Support the Hobby -- Join the American Philatelic Society

21 Mar 2007
09:43:02pm
re: US receiving postmarks

Hi David,

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. Somehow I have it in the back of my mind that "back in the days" all mail was required to receive a receiving postmark upon arrival at its destination post offices. Of course, it is a different story how consequently this rule was followed.
From another source I have that the UPU dropped the requirement of receiving postmarks for regular mail in 1908. But how fast was this incorporated in America? Did the US even adhere to a previous UPU requirement, if it existed (you suggest not)?

Again, I am not taling about registered mail etc. There exists the requirement of receiving evidence even today: it's called tracking and they simply scan the bar code.

Let see what else comes up here. But obviously, if you can pass this on to some other platform, I would be quite happy.

Arno

Like
Login to Like
this post
David Teisler (Teisler)

22 Mar 2007
12:53:09am
re: US receiving postmarks

Hi Arno,

First, there may have been a UPU regulation on international mail between UPU signatories, which would be a different animal altogether. I don't believe UPU regulates domestic mail (not sure) but they do have jurisdiction on international mail, and perhaps the rule you're looking for is an itnernational UPU rule, not a US domestic rule.

Bar codes tell the postman where the letter is GOING not where it's ARRIVED. It's simply recoding the address, with additional information, including ZIP+4 and Carrier Route. It bears no relation to being received, as this is coded at the BMF center nearest the sender (before i was doing multiple meanings, now i'm doing homonyms). The USPS doesn't track these bar codes for proof of delivery; they're simply for help in determining the destination.

i don't have access to my collection right now, just some odds and ends, but looking at the 19c and early 20c, the US domestic covers with receiving cancels is about 50%. But this is strictly anecdotal and proves nothing, and certainly doesn't give us the rule you're looking for nor its repeal. Still, it demonstrates a lax application at best, if it's a rule.

AGain, if we don't hear anything definitive in this forum, i'll ask elsewhere. But there's a wealth of knowledge in this group, and i wouldn't be surprised if one or more of our members could quote the regulations.

David

Like
Login to Like
this post
Bob Ingraham (Bobstamp)

22 Mar 2007
01:28:21am
re: US receiving postmarks

My understanding is that receiving postmarks were used to track the efficiency of postal services, in terms of time taken for delivery. They certainly were used on regular mail on a regular basis in the late 1800s and through the first half of the 1900s, and provide important clues for postal history sleuths. However, all of this is stuff just dredged out of the muck at the bottom of my brain, and I have no knowledge of specific postal regulations vis-a-vis receiving stamps.

Bob

Like
Login to Like
this post
MKS

23 Jul 2007
02:52:30pm
re: US receiving postmarks

Does anyone know whether arrival postmarks are still used by USPS on mail addressed to General Delivery? Postal service must know when such items arrive, because they are only held for 30 days and must be returned to sender after this time period.

Like
Login to Like
this post

rusforum.mystampworld.com/
THOMAS E. HARLEY,SR.

23 Jul 2007
08:20:03pm
re: US receiving postmarks

MKS,
havent seen recieving postmarks for a long time.
The only RPM that I have ,are the ones used on registered mail and insured letters,,but the cancel is usually on the slip,and not the envelope.
The cancel is on the top slip,and after you sign for the letter,that slip is removed and kept by postal authority,,as proof the intended recipient got the letter,and date recieved.Your copy of the slip,still attached to the envelope,,only shows your signiture,,no cancel.
TOM

Like
Login to Like
this post
David Teisler (Teisler)

24 Jul 2007
06:12:10am
re: US receiving postmarks

I believe Tom is right, receiving post marks would be used only if the service employed requires it. In earlier days, when most mail was left at the PO, hand stamps were used to indicate that the mail had been advertised.

David

Like
Login to Like
this post
MKS

24 Jul 2007
12:05:45pm
re: US receiving postmarks

Thank you for your response. But then the question remains: when the post office gets a letter addressed to General Delivery (i.e. when the recipient has to come and claim the letter, see DMM 508.6), they must know when it arrived, because according to DMM 508.6.4 they have to hold it for 30 days starting from the day it arrived. If no one claims the letter, it is returned to the sender after 30-day period expires. If such letters are not postmarked on arrival, how do postal workers know when it arrived and whether the 30-day period has expired or not?

Like
Login to Like
this post

rusforum.mystampworld.com/
THOMAS E. HARLEY,SR.

24 Jul 2007
08:43:43pm
re: US receiving postmarks

MKS,
General Delivery hasnt been around for quite some time.
You either have a post office box,or a home adress.
You either pick up your mail,or it is delivered to you.
The only mail with no specific adress,is advertisements sent to occupant.
If you have mail at the PO,and you havent picked up any for more than a week,,the rented box would be overflowing,,or PO sorting station,with your mail would be the same. Without a "hold for pick up" card,you become suspect for possible emergency,and police are notified to check your adress for possible problems. You may be sick,injured or dead,,any of several reasons for you not picking up your mail on a regular schedual. It's part of an alert system now in effect(for your protection). Also included in this is piled up newspapers,unkept front yard,and a few other noticeable things that point to a possible emergency situation needing attention .
To say it short,,there isnt a reason that a letter would be held for a specific time,and returned,unless it states so on the envelope" if no reply,return within 5 days"
The new barcode on letters today has all that info of where ,when,and how the letter was sent,transported,and arrives.And is either back stamped,or across the bottom of the front(at least its supposed to be.
Besides,a common "general delivery" letter usually only takes 3 days to arrive,no matter where it's from (barring any unseen delivery problems),,so 33 days after the canceled date on the CD,would have been used to determine the 30 day rule.
But as far as I can recall,I've not seen a "return to sender" cover,with reason of 30 day expiration.
A lot of these type ,undeliverable,or just un picked up,,that were returned,,never went to sender,but to the dead letter office.
TOM

Like
Login to Like
this post
MKS

24 Jul 2007
09:35:11pm
re: US receiving postmarks

TOM,
General Delivery can still be used, since the relevant section of DMM still applies (section 508.6). I recall hearing a story on TV about some homeless people in NYC utilizing this service to receive mail.
I have found modern examples of covers addressed to General Delivery on the net, have a look at the top 7 covers on this site:
http://www.gemworld.com/USA--MailPkgsReceived.htm
As you can see, all of them have a red date stamp marking. First I thought these are the arrival postmarks, but looking at the cancellation date I am pretty sure now that these are the dates when 30-day holding periods expire for these items. In other words, if a letter arrives on Apr. 5, they mark it with May 5 date stamp, indicating the expiration date of the holding period.
Regarding the barcodes on letters, I may be wrong, but I think that only zip+4 is barcoded in POSTNET format on modern ordinary mail. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSTNET

Like
Login to Like
this post

rusforum.mystampworld.com/
THOMAS E. HARLEY,SR.

24 Jul 2007
10:34:38pm
re: US receiving postmarks

MKS,
nice info.
So bar codes are for recepient end only,,zip + 4 and delivery point(adress or box number).
As to the examples of general delivery,,
The 3c one,,general delivery was added on,,hand written,,all other info was hand printed.
The remainder,are post office to post office delivery.Evidently the recepient had no home or is a non resident,,and recieves mail by pick up at PO.This is ,as you say,a possible homeless personage situation.Although the last image shows he finally found an adress,a hotel room(suite),but still picked up mail at the PO.
Most of he covers are from a small PO to the Main PO in Fresno.--general post to main post.
It is however a form of general delivery under the codes.
Something new I havent seen before,hope you or someone can expand on explanation--
the last cover had in the recipient adress,,,"ZIP EXEMPT". Does this replace the general delivery statis? Does it mean POs no longer have a zip adress.Or does it mean a zip is not needed for a PO to PO "general delivery"/ "general post delivery" ?????????????
Ahhhh,,we lean something new every day,,stamp collecting,what a hobby.
TOM

Like
Login to Like
this post
David Teisler (Teisler)

25 Jul 2007
11:18:37am
re: US receiving postmarks

The red date is made by an office equipment device, not a USPS dated cancel, and it should not be considered having any official capacity. Jack Slevkov or Jack Potter could each have done this.

Clearly Jack is someone who's nibbling at the edges of postal and federal legality. His "ZIP Exempt" postal code is a clue. Please see the treatise on the misapplication of the Buck Act (this predates postal codes, much less ZIP codes) http://pw1.netcom.com/~rogermw/debuck.html

In this case, ZIP exempt is probably an attempt at claiming he's not under federal jurisdiction, and his use of general post rather than a box is to reduce his own identification. His advertisement for trees is the second link to come up when I googled ZIP Exempt: http://www.gemworld.com/LoquatTrees.ASP. here's the relevant section of his site re: ZIP Exempt:
Jack Slevkoff's Enterprises
c/o 4460 West Shaw Avenue, Suite 140
Fresno [Non-domestic]
California [Zip Exempt]
usA

Note the non-domestic (as if it were foreign) and ZIP Exempt. Even "usA" is incorrectly listed, all in what appears to be attempts to claim non-federal status.

Whether he is also nibbling at philatelic edges, who knows.

I realize that this takes us a little far afield, but it seems relevant in that our little Jack is playing fast and loose with rules.

David

Like
Login to Like
this post
MKS

25 Jul 2007
10:44:40pm
re: US receiving postmarks

I think David is right about "Zip Exempt" and other stuff. I was also puzzled when I saw the words "Non-domestic" on what appears to be regular domestic mail, but now I see where that is coming from. Regarding the red dates, those markings should probably be considered unofficial in the sense that they cannot be relied on when proving something, but I think there is a good chance that they were applied by postal workers. Of course, Jack himself could have handstamped those covers with the dater, but what would be the point? Only to fool us maybe... :-) I think one of these days I will send a cover to myself addressed to General Delivery just to see how they handle these letters in my post office. :-)

Like
Login to Like
this post

rusforum.mystampworld.com/
David Teisler (Teisler)

26 Jul 2007
06:24:22am
re: US receiving postmarks

MKS, please, send to GD and show us the results. I, for one, am interested.

I don't think the red line has postal validity. If the USPS dates it, it's via the CDS with full information (date, time, locale). This is Jack's personal notation. Remember, Jack's running a business out of this GD, and this is almost certainly his way of tracking time to fulfillment.

David

Like
Login to Like
this post
Rhinelander
Members Picture


Support the Hobby -- Join the American Philatelic Society

15 Aug 2007
06:20:03pm
re: US receiving postmarks

Back to my original question . . .

I found the answer and would like to share. Postmaster General's Order No. 7107 of May 8, 1913 directed that the backstamping of all ordinary mail be halted. According to one source, the practice of applying received markings to postcards discontinued already about in 1907.

Even prior to 1913 many covers do not have received markings. Blame the human tendency to cut corners when workload is heavy.

As to when received or transit markings were first required, I don't have an exact date for that. The practice certainly dates back quite a bit. I know though that special "REC'D" handstamps were issued to post offices beginning in the 1880s.

Arno

Like
Login to Like
this post
THOMAS E. HARLEY,SR.

16 Aug 2007
03:07:30am
re: US receiving postmarks

Arno,
quite interesting.
The practice of the recieved marking may have been discontinued in 1913,but the practice continued in some small communities.
But not with a "recieved" marking.
They just simply hand canceled with thier local CD cancelor.
I recall seeing letters in the early 1950's with this type proof of reciept date.
A letter from Philadelphia,PA to me,with Philadelphia CD cancel when sent,and a couple days latter,an Apollo ,PA. CD cancel(where I recieved it). Sometimes both cancels appeared on the front of the cover,and sometimes on the reverse of the cover was the recieveing CD.
The red.or black "recieved" may have been discontinued,but the practice still goes on,,although in a different form.
So check those multi canceled covers for the extra cancels may be a recieving date,and thus may be included in rec'd cancel collecting area of postal history. Actually it's "recieving markings"
TOM

Like
Login to Like
this post
Rhinelander
Members Picture


Support the Hobby -- Join the American Philatelic Society

16 Aug 2007
02:33:25pm
re: US receiving postmarks

Well, Tom, English is not my native language, even though I am a permanent resident and live here for quite a while now. Still, my spelling and word order can be a little screwy at times (as is English spelling in general). Anyway, I learned "always 'i' before 'e' except after 'c'." Thus, "believe" but "receive" . . . gets me.

As far as the 1913 postal regulation goes, it relates only to "ordinary" mail. I don't think the backstamp requirement for registered or express mail changed at the time and maybe not even until today. Maybe yours is such a letter or the Apollo PM wanted to leave evidence for the expeditious treatment of the mail for some other reason.

Also, at all times, postoffices have used their regular CDS as received or transit markings if the special purpose stamps was not at hand. But you raise an interesting question. Next time I am at the post office I will ask if a special received postmarks does even still exist these days. I think, scanning the bar codes of incoming priority etc. mail prior to delivery has made receiving postmarks virtually obsolete.

Like
Login to Like
this post
MKS

28 Aug 2007
11:26:24am
re: US receiving postmarks

It seems to me that modern registered mail does not get receiving postmarks. I have received several R-letters this year and none of them had those. I am not sure about express mail, though, since I never get any of it.

Like
Login to Like
this post

rusforum.mystampworld.com/
stamperdad
Members Picture


28 Aug 2007
02:02:43pm
re: US receiving postmarks

I think most modern registered, certified or special delivery(no express mail) has a bar code label that eliminates the need for transit markings. The postal clerks just scan it each step of the way and it is instantly sent to the computer database. Then the sender or recepient can log on and enter the tracking number, get an update on where the item is. Ain't modern technology grand. LOL

Steve

Like
Login to Like
this post

stamperdad.wordpress.com
        

 

Author/Postings
Members Picture
Rhinelander

Support the Hobby -- Join the American Philatelic Society
21 Mar 2007
08:13:06pm

Question for the cover experts: Does anyone know the official date on which the application of receiving postmarks on regular mail ceased to be required in the US?

Thank you very much,

Arno

Like
Login to Like
this post
David Teisler (Teisler)

21 Mar 2007
09:17:03pm

re: US receiving postmarks

Arno,

i'm pretty sure it was never required other than for special categories of mail, such as registry, certified, and other services that needed (and still need) to document the movement of mail. The use of receiving cancels on my common US mail is pretty sporadic to say the least, and its presence is more observed for its rarity than its requirements. That said, i'm not familiar with any postal regulation that initially required it nor later freed us from it. If this refers to earlier, pre-stamp periods, a receiving cancel has more to do with the payment than the receipt (oh, my, here's double meaning of a word. I mean receipt in the arrival sense rather than financial) as, until Roland Hill, letters were generally paid for by the recipient, not the sender. I believe it's 1855 when prepayment was mandated, thereby negating the need for those receiving cancels documenting payment (not arrival). YOu may quote me, but at your peril. If we get no better answers than mine (even if it's the same), i'll pose this to US Specialized, Steve Davis' group, on your behalf. They're bound to know, rahter than, like me, guess.

David

Like
Login to Like
this post
Members Picture
Rhinelander

Support the Hobby -- Join the American Philatelic Society
21 Mar 2007
09:43:02pm

re: US receiving postmarks

Hi David,

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. Somehow I have it in the back of my mind that "back in the days" all mail was required to receive a receiving postmark upon arrival at its destination post offices. Of course, it is a different story how consequently this rule was followed.
From another source I have that the UPU dropped the requirement of receiving postmarks for regular mail in 1908. But how fast was this incorporated in America? Did the US even adhere to a previous UPU requirement, if it existed (you suggest not)?

Again, I am not taling about registered mail etc. There exists the requirement of receiving evidence even today: it's called tracking and they simply scan the bar code.

Let see what else comes up here. But obviously, if you can pass this on to some other platform, I would be quite happy.

Arno

Like
Login to Like
this post
David Teisler (Teisler)

22 Mar 2007
12:53:09am

re: US receiving postmarks

Hi Arno,

First, there may have been a UPU regulation on international mail between UPU signatories, which would be a different animal altogether. I don't believe UPU regulates domestic mail (not sure) but they do have jurisdiction on international mail, and perhaps the rule you're looking for is an itnernational UPU rule, not a US domestic rule.

Bar codes tell the postman where the letter is GOING not where it's ARRIVED. It's simply recoding the address, with additional information, including ZIP+4 and Carrier Route. It bears no relation to being received, as this is coded at the BMF center nearest the sender (before i was doing multiple meanings, now i'm doing homonyms). The USPS doesn't track these bar codes for proof of delivery; they're simply for help in determining the destination.

i don't have access to my collection right now, just some odds and ends, but looking at the 19c and early 20c, the US domestic covers with receiving cancels is about 50%. But this is strictly anecdotal and proves nothing, and certainly doesn't give us the rule you're looking for nor its repeal. Still, it demonstrates a lax application at best, if it's a rule.

AGain, if we don't hear anything definitive in this forum, i'll ask elsewhere. But there's a wealth of knowledge in this group, and i wouldn't be surprised if one or more of our members could quote the regulations.

David

Like
Login to Like
this post
Bob Ingraham (Bobstamp)

22 Mar 2007
01:28:21am

re: US receiving postmarks

My understanding is that receiving postmarks were used to track the efficiency of postal services, in terms of time taken for delivery. They certainly were used on regular mail on a regular basis in the late 1800s and through the first half of the 1900s, and provide important clues for postal history sleuths. However, all of this is stuff just dredged out of the muck at the bottom of my brain, and I have no knowledge of specific postal regulations vis-a-vis receiving stamps.

Bob

Like
Login to Like
this post
MKS

23 Jul 2007
02:52:30pm

re: US receiving postmarks

Does anyone know whether arrival postmarks are still used by USPS on mail addressed to General Delivery? Postal service must know when such items arrive, because they are only held for 30 days and must be returned to sender after this time period.

Like
Login to Like
this post

rusforum.mystampworl ...
THOMAS E. HARLEY,SR.

23 Jul 2007
08:20:03pm

re: US receiving postmarks

MKS,
havent seen recieving postmarks for a long time.
The only RPM that I have ,are the ones used on registered mail and insured letters,,but the cancel is usually on the slip,and not the envelope.
The cancel is on the top slip,and after you sign for the letter,that slip is removed and kept by postal authority,,as proof the intended recipient got the letter,and date recieved.Your copy of the slip,still attached to the envelope,,only shows your signiture,,no cancel.
TOM

Like
Login to Like
this post
David Teisler (Teisler)

24 Jul 2007
06:12:10am

re: US receiving postmarks

I believe Tom is right, receiving post marks would be used only if the service employed requires it. In earlier days, when most mail was left at the PO, hand stamps were used to indicate that the mail had been advertised.

David

Like
Login to Like
this post
MKS

24 Jul 2007
12:05:45pm

re: US receiving postmarks

Thank you for your response. But then the question remains: when the post office gets a letter addressed to General Delivery (i.e. when the recipient has to come and claim the letter, see DMM 508.6), they must know when it arrived, because according to DMM 508.6.4 they have to hold it for 30 days starting from the day it arrived. If no one claims the letter, it is returned to the sender after 30-day period expires. If such letters are not postmarked on arrival, how do postal workers know when it arrived and whether the 30-day period has expired or not?

Like
Login to Like
this post

rusforum.mystampworl ...
THOMAS E. HARLEY,SR.

24 Jul 2007
08:43:43pm

re: US receiving postmarks

MKS,
General Delivery hasnt been around for quite some time.
You either have a post office box,or a home adress.
You either pick up your mail,or it is delivered to you.
The only mail with no specific adress,is advertisements sent to occupant.
If you have mail at the PO,and you havent picked up any for more than a week,,the rented box would be overflowing,,or PO sorting station,with your mail would be the same. Without a "hold for pick up" card,you become suspect for possible emergency,and police are notified to check your adress for possible problems. You may be sick,injured or dead,,any of several reasons for you not picking up your mail on a regular schedual. It's part of an alert system now in effect(for your protection). Also included in this is piled up newspapers,unkept front yard,and a few other noticeable things that point to a possible emergency situation needing attention .
To say it short,,there isnt a reason that a letter would be held for a specific time,and returned,unless it states so on the envelope" if no reply,return within 5 days"
The new barcode on letters today has all that info of where ,when,and how the letter was sent,transported,and arrives.And is either back stamped,or across the bottom of the front(at least its supposed to be.
Besides,a common "general delivery" letter usually only takes 3 days to arrive,no matter where it's from (barring any unseen delivery problems),,so 33 days after the canceled date on the CD,would have been used to determine the 30 day rule.
But as far as I can recall,I've not seen a "return to sender" cover,with reason of 30 day expiration.
A lot of these type ,undeliverable,or just un picked up,,that were returned,,never went to sender,but to the dead letter office.
TOM

Like
Login to Like
this post
MKS

24 Jul 2007
09:35:11pm

re: US receiving postmarks

TOM,
General Delivery can still be used, since the relevant section of DMM still applies (section 508.6). I recall hearing a story on TV about some homeless people in NYC utilizing this service to receive mail.
I have found modern examples of covers addressed to General Delivery on the net, have a look at the top 7 covers on this site:
http://www.gemworld.com/USA--MailPkgsReceived.htm
As you can see, all of them have a red date stamp marking. First I thought these are the arrival postmarks, but looking at the cancellation date I am pretty sure now that these are the dates when 30-day holding periods expire for these items. In other words, if a letter arrives on Apr. 5, they mark it with May 5 date stamp, indicating the expiration date of the holding period.
Regarding the barcodes on letters, I may be wrong, but I think that only zip+4 is barcoded in POSTNET format on modern ordinary mail. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSTNET

Like
Login to Like
this post

rusforum.mystampworl ...
THOMAS E. HARLEY,SR.

24 Jul 2007
10:34:38pm

re: US receiving postmarks

MKS,
nice info.
So bar codes are for recepient end only,,zip + 4 and delivery point(adress or box number).
As to the examples of general delivery,,
The 3c one,,general delivery was added on,,hand written,,all other info was hand printed.
The remainder,are post office to post office delivery.Evidently the recepient had no home or is a non resident,,and recieves mail by pick up at PO.This is ,as you say,a possible homeless personage situation.Although the last image shows he finally found an adress,a hotel room(suite),but still picked up mail at the PO.
Most of he covers are from a small PO to the Main PO in Fresno.--general post to main post.
It is however a form of general delivery under the codes.
Something new I havent seen before,hope you or someone can expand on explanation--
the last cover had in the recipient adress,,,"ZIP EXEMPT". Does this replace the general delivery statis? Does it mean POs no longer have a zip adress.Or does it mean a zip is not needed for a PO to PO "general delivery"/ "general post delivery" ?????????????
Ahhhh,,we lean something new every day,,stamp collecting,what a hobby.
TOM

Like
Login to Like
this post
David Teisler (Teisler)

25 Jul 2007
11:18:37am

re: US receiving postmarks

The red date is made by an office equipment device, not a USPS dated cancel, and it should not be considered having any official capacity. Jack Slevkov or Jack Potter could each have done this.

Clearly Jack is someone who's nibbling at the edges of postal and federal legality. His "ZIP Exempt" postal code is a clue. Please see the treatise on the misapplication of the Buck Act (this predates postal codes, much less ZIP codes) http://pw1.netcom.com/~rogermw/debuck.html

In this case, ZIP exempt is probably an attempt at claiming he's not under federal jurisdiction, and his use of general post rather than a box is to reduce his own identification. His advertisement for trees is the second link to come up when I googled ZIP Exempt: http://www.gemworld.com/LoquatTrees.ASP. here's the relevant section of his site re: ZIP Exempt:
Jack Slevkoff's Enterprises
c/o 4460 West Shaw Avenue, Suite 140
Fresno [Non-domestic]
California [Zip Exempt]
usA

Note the non-domestic (as if it were foreign) and ZIP Exempt. Even "usA" is incorrectly listed, all in what appears to be attempts to claim non-federal status.

Whether he is also nibbling at philatelic edges, who knows.

I realize that this takes us a little far afield, but it seems relevant in that our little Jack is playing fast and loose with rules.

David

Like
Login to Like
this post
MKS

25 Jul 2007
10:44:40pm

re: US receiving postmarks

I think David is right about "Zip Exempt" and other stuff. I was also puzzled when I saw the words "Non-domestic" on what appears to be regular domestic mail, but now I see where that is coming from. Regarding the red dates, those markings should probably be considered unofficial in the sense that they cannot be relied on when proving something, but I think there is a good chance that they were applied by postal workers. Of course, Jack himself could have handstamped those covers with the dater, but what would be the point? Only to fool us maybe... :-) I think one of these days I will send a cover to myself addressed to General Delivery just to see how they handle these letters in my post office. :-)

Like
Login to Like
this post

rusforum.mystampworl ...
David Teisler (Teisler)

26 Jul 2007
06:24:22am

re: US receiving postmarks

MKS, please, send to GD and show us the results. I, for one, am interested.

I don't think the red line has postal validity. If the USPS dates it, it's via the CDS with full information (date, time, locale). This is Jack's personal notation. Remember, Jack's running a business out of this GD, and this is almost certainly his way of tracking time to fulfillment.

David

Like
Login to Like
this post
Members Picture
Rhinelander

Support the Hobby -- Join the American Philatelic Society
15 Aug 2007
06:20:03pm

re: US receiving postmarks

Back to my original question . . .

I found the answer and would like to share. Postmaster General's Order No. 7107 of May 8, 1913 directed that the backstamping of all ordinary mail be halted. According to one source, the practice of applying received markings to postcards discontinued already about in 1907.

Even prior to 1913 many covers do not have received markings. Blame the human tendency to cut corners when workload is heavy.

As to when received or transit markings were first required, I don't have an exact date for that. The practice certainly dates back quite a bit. I know though that special "REC'D" handstamps were issued to post offices beginning in the 1880s.

Arno

Like
Login to Like
this post
THOMAS E. HARLEY,SR.

16 Aug 2007
03:07:30am

re: US receiving postmarks

Arno,
quite interesting.
The practice of the recieved marking may have been discontinued in 1913,but the practice continued in some small communities.
But not with a "recieved" marking.
They just simply hand canceled with thier local CD cancelor.
I recall seeing letters in the early 1950's with this type proof of reciept date.
A letter from Philadelphia,PA to me,with Philadelphia CD cancel when sent,and a couple days latter,an Apollo ,PA. CD cancel(where I recieved it). Sometimes both cancels appeared on the front of the cover,and sometimes on the reverse of the cover was the recieveing CD.
The red.or black "recieved" may have been discontinued,but the practice still goes on,,although in a different form.
So check those multi canceled covers for the extra cancels may be a recieving date,and thus may be included in rec'd cancel collecting area of postal history. Actually it's "recieving markings"
TOM

Like
Login to Like
this post
Members Picture
Rhinelander

Support the Hobby -- Join the American Philatelic Society
16 Aug 2007
02:33:25pm

re: US receiving postmarks

Well, Tom, English is not my native language, even though I am a permanent resident and live here for quite a while now. Still, my spelling and word order can be a little screwy at times (as is English spelling in general). Anyway, I learned "always 'i' before 'e' except after 'c'." Thus, "believe" but "receive" . . . gets me.

As far as the 1913 postal regulation goes, it relates only to "ordinary" mail. I don't think the backstamp requirement for registered or express mail changed at the time and maybe not even until today. Maybe yours is such a letter or the Apollo PM wanted to leave evidence for the expeditious treatment of the mail for some other reason.

Also, at all times, postoffices have used their regular CDS as received or transit markings if the special purpose stamps was not at hand. But you raise an interesting question. Next time I am at the post office I will ask if a special received postmarks does even still exist these days. I think, scanning the bar codes of incoming priority etc. mail prior to delivery has made receiving postmarks virtually obsolete.

Like
Login to Like
this post
MKS

28 Aug 2007
11:26:24am

re: US receiving postmarks

It seems to me that modern registered mail does not get receiving postmarks. I have received several R-letters this year and none of them had those. I am not sure about express mail, though, since I never get any of it.

Like
Login to Like
this post

rusforum.mystampworl ...
Members Picture
stamperdad

28 Aug 2007
02:02:43pm

re: US receiving postmarks

I think most modern registered, certified or special delivery(no express mail) has a bar code label that eliminates the need for transit markings. The postal clerks just scan it each step of the way and it is instantly sent to the computer database. Then the sender or recepient can log on and enter the tracking number, get an update on where the item is. Ain't modern technology grand. LOL

Steve

Like
Login to Like
this post

stamperdad.wordpress ...
        

Contact Webmaster | Visitors Online | Unsubscribe Emails | Facebook


User Agreement

Copyright © 2024 Stamporama.com