Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Is the letter still in the envelope or is it just the cover?
Login to Like
this post
Isn't that a bit weird? Why would a military censor examine an empty cover, or did he check it was indeed empty?
Login to Like
this post
"Isn't that a bit weird? Why would a military censor examine an empty cover, or did he check it was indeed empty?"
I suspect it isn't so much that the item needed censoring as it was required to have a censor marking.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
I may not fully understand the censor marking. Does it signify that the piece ought to be checked or does it say that it has been checked?
Login to Like
this post
That it has been checked. In order for it to be forwarded on to its destination it needs a marking showing it was checked. In this case all they did was notice that there was no enclosure.
Login to Like
this post
It is more likely that the contents were removed by the recipient, and subsequently resealed. It is my understanding that military mail subject to censorship was to be posted unsealed. In that case the censor would have sealed before sending it on its way.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Philb's cover isn't an airmail cover, but I assume that this quote, from Airmail Operation During World War II, describes censorship policies that were generally in effect for all first-class mail during the war:
"It is important to recognize that much of the censorship operation could actually be described as examination of the mail. Some of the mail that came through censorship operation was passed without being opened and received a marking or hand stamp to indicate that the particular mail item had been examined from the outside but not opened."
Bob
Login to Like
this post
Approvals
re: Piece of history
Is the letter still in the envelope or is it just the cover?
Login to Like
this post
Approvals
re: Piece of history
Isn't that a bit weird? Why would a military censor examine an empty cover, or did he check it was indeed empty?
Login to Like
this post
re: Piece of history
"Isn't that a bit weird? Why would a military censor examine an empty cover, or did he check it was indeed empty?"
I suspect it isn't so much that the item needed censoring as it was required to have a censor marking.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Approvals
re: Piece of history
I may not fully understand the censor marking. Does it signify that the piece ought to be checked or does it say that it has been checked?
Login to Like
this post
re: Piece of history
That it has been checked. In order for it to be forwarded on to its destination it needs a marking showing it was checked. In this case all they did was notice that there was no enclosure.
Login to Like
this post
re: Piece of history
It is more likely that the contents were removed by the recipient, and subsequently resealed. It is my understanding that military mail subject to censorship was to be posted unsealed. In that case the censor would have sealed before sending it on its way.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Piece of history
Philb's cover isn't an airmail cover, but I assume that this quote, from Airmail Operation During World War II, describes censorship policies that were generally in effect for all first-class mail during the war:
"It is important to recognize that much of the censorship operation could actually be described as examination of the mail. Some of the mail that came through censorship operation was passed without being opened and received a marking or hand stamp to indicate that the particular mail item had been examined from the outside but not opened."
Bob
Login to Like
this post