Questions
& Answers
Members of the Hong Kong Study Circle
may submit their questions concerning philatelic items of
Hong Kong and the Treaty Ports. A clear scan, relevant
details and a specific question should be sent to the Webmaster at
webmaster hongkongstudycircle.com
Answers are welcome from
any interested party - member or otherwise.
[Images
with blue boarders can be clicked to enlarge them.]
Q018:
Unidentified Marking on QV Postcard Sent to France in 1897 (Adrian Waynforth)
|
|
Does anyone recognise the marking on this QV postcard?
It appears to contain the letters O U C H(?)
|
|
posted: 27 May 2023
|
 |
Q017:
Hong Kong and Treaty Ports Stamp Dealers' Mail (Ian Briggs)
|
|
I research and collect pioneer stamp dealer mail globally c.1860-1920.
I collect both outgoing and incoming mail.
I have included an image of an example of an outgoing cover from the dealer
Graca & Co who operated in Hong Kong from around 1896.
This cover is from their later period and dates from 1936.
Whilst I have strong data from other countries, I have almost none from
Hong Kong and the Treaty Ports. Early research suggests that there has
been little work carried out to date in relation to the pioneer dealers
who operated from Hong Kong and the Treaty Ports for the period 1870-1920.
I would like to hear from members if they are aware of any previous studies
carried out in this area previously. Also, if any members have any
Hong Kong/Treaty Ports stamp dealer covers from the period in question I
would love to see a scan of them.
|
|
posted: 18 March 2023
|
 |
Q016:
KEVII 1904 $2 Slate and Scarlet Used in Tientsin (Christopher Norton)
|
1904 $2 Slate and Scarlet
|
1907 $2 Carmine-Red and Black
|
|
Does anyone possess an example of the 1904 KEVII $2 stamp with a Tientsin c.d.s.,
i.e. Gibbons Z1011?
Alternatively has anyone seen an example anywhere?
Either way I should be extremely grateful to receive a scan of such an example or further details of its location.
Please note that I do not refer to the 1907 KEVII $2 (Z1023) of which several examples are known with a Tientsin c.d.s.
|
|
posted: 16 January 2023
|
 |
Q015:
KGV 1933 12c Purple on Yellow/White Back Overprinted 10 Cents Stamp Duty (Sarah Harvey)
|
|
KGV 1933 12 Cents Purple/Yellow Overprinted 10 Cents Stamp Duty
It is very hard to find any information about this overprinted stamp, or even a mention.
It is listed in the Barefoot Catalogue at least.
The overprint was probably added to requisition J in 1933.
Of interest is the fact that the overprint slopes upwards; the right stamp has its
overprint higher than the left hand one.
Does anyone have similar? Or different? Or more information?
|
|
posted: 19 October 2019
|
|
Update from Sarah Havey
Further examples have been obtained : Un-overprinted examples are :
- from same Requisition J
- corner stamps as in overprinted block
New overprinted example has :
- overprint in straight, not sloping as original block
- has heavier inking than original
It has been suggested that the overprint was applied locally during the late 1930's, using the surplus
stamps from requisition J (printed in 1933).
|
|
posted: 11 September 2020
|
 |
Q014:Unidentified
Security Marking on KEVII 10c. (Christopher Norton)
|
|
KEVII Adhesive with Security Marking of Greek Letters
This is a KEVII 10c. adhesive cancelled Hong Kong 22 JU 05, but tied to a cover with
a security marking that our Security Markings Study Group has been unable to identify.
This marking is in violet ink and appears to be a circle containing the Greek letters
πΔ (Pi Delta). My first thought was that it was a U.S. fraternity or sorority marking but
I have been told that no such fraternity/sorority has ever existed. It is on a cover
addressed to the U.S.A. ( Mrs. Taite, Los Angeles, California) and the reverse flap
shows the logo/imprint of the Hong Kong Club. The suggestion of a Hong Kong Daily Press
marking has been rejected as the initials "D P" were in use in 1905.
Can anyone identify this security marking?
|
|
|
posted: 16 April 2019
|
 |
Q013:
QV Postal Stationery Card Used in Chile? (Christopher Norton)
|
|
Hong Kong 1880 QV
Postcard with Chilean Obliterator
These images are of a used QV
1880 issue 1c. postal stationery card.
The only killer that fits the partial impression cancelling the indicium and the
1880 date, is C30 used at Valparaiso, Chile. (It is not a P.&O. cancel.)
So can anyone suggest the circumstances in which a 1c. Hong Kong postcard
addressed to Sydney, Australia was accepted by the Valparaiso post office?
If anyone can translate the German message, so much the better .
|
|
|
posted: 20 March 2019
|
 |
Q012:
Can anyone identify this marking? (Christopher
Norton)
|
|
Hong Kong 1900 QV 2c
adhesives with marking of diamond assembly of small
squares
Can anyone help with identifying this marking?
Where did it originate from? Has anyone come
across another example of it?
|
|
posted: 16 March 2019
|
A012:
(William Lack) |
|
From William Lack :
Shown here is an image of an Indian stamp with a diamond/lozenge obliterator that matches
the image of the one on the 2c Green shown above.
While the stamps in question are separated by 50 +/- years of use - the shape and density
of the marks look the same - so maybe India is the location of the cancel - therefore
likely to be a form of arrival marking? - looking through eBay's India section I see these markings regularly but annoyingly none are labelled as to location it originates from so maybe it is common knowledge to Indian stamp collectors...
Further comment from Chris Norton :
It is certainly possible that this cancel was brought out of retirement by the Indian Post
Office in order to cancel mail that arrived uncancelled. A likely source of uncancelled
mail from Hong Kong is that posted on board ship.
|
|
posted: 24 April 2019
|
 |
Q011:
Large rubber Hong Kong handstamp (Mrs. Susan Crewe)
|
|
Illustrated here is a cover cancelled with a large rubber Hong Kong handstamp dated 24th October 1968
Proud records similar handstamps and says they were used on "small packets" addressed to China.
This is a small envelope, which would have contained a letter, addressed to Sweden.
Does anyone have any more information about the use of this handstamp?
|
|
posted: 29 January 2018
|
|
Ingo Nessel has proivded another example of this cancel.
This one is dated 30th November 1968 with index 4 and the cover is addressed to USA.
|
A009: (Ingo Nessel) |
Ingo Nessel writes -
I found the reference on these rubber handstamps: A Brief History of Hong Kong Postal
Cancellations and Markings, Volume Four, Circular Rubber Handstamps for Hong Kong Postal
Use, published jointly by China Philatelic Association and Kongkong Post Stamps in 1998,
Chapter One, pages 23 - 30 "Types of Circular Rubber Handstamps and Their Uses".
It contains detailed descriptions of the large variety of cancels types and their intended
use. Usage was for 11 different Post Office services or types of mail, the salient ones
being (i) As normal datestamps in branch post office counters, when steel datestamps were
not available, and (ii) For cancelling small packets to PRC.
However, there is no mention of usage of rubber handstamps on packets or letters to foreign
destinations such as Sweden (Susan's example) and the USA (Ingo's example). Due to the
scarcity of such markings on general foreign mail, these may have been aberrations.
Susan's example looks like a normal airmail letter at the extant $1.30 rate, while Ingo's
is a medium size envelope that could have been construed as a small packet, with a $22.00
rate.
Part B of this book contains images of the known Hong Kong rubber handstamps up to 1998,
including branch post offices. In the GPO section, page B1 illustrates 2 examples of these
handstamps. One is dated 10 Oct 1968 with index 2, the other is 21 Nov 1968 with index 4.
Thus Susan's example has an unlisted index "1". Unfortunately, the images are only of the
cancels, so we do not know the destination of their covers. They are coded "SP" which infers
small packet service to PRC.
Much remains to be explained on this subject. It would be useful if members send scans of
any such covers they may have in their collections.
|
posted: 13 April 2018
|
 |
Webmaster's Update -
A search through back issues of HKSC Bulletins have found the following -
From Bulletin 183 May 1973 (Editor C.C.Gower)
Cancellations - Hong Kong / Hong Kong
I have just come across what appears to be a hitherto unrecorded and somewhat unusual
cancellation. This is obviously a rubber handstamp of 35mm diameter worded in approximately
3mm high letters 'HONG KONG' at the top, 'HONG KONG' at the bottom, the date in a single
line across the centre and a numeral centrally above the bottom Hong Kong. Numbers seen are
2 and 3. Both, unfortunatley are 'on piece', although without any doubt taken from covers,
in one case cancelling a Q.E.II 5c adhesive and the other a 10c. Dates are 1968.
From Bulletin 184 July 1973
Cancellations - Hong Kong / Hong Kong with numeral central above bottom Hong Kong
Mr. R.E.Hall of Hong Kong advises he has examples of the following numbers:
|
3 |
dated |
12 SE 68 |
|
4 |
|
6 SE 68 |
|
5 |
|
6 SE 68 |
|
6 |
|
22 MY 71 |
|
whilst Mr. A.E. Chaney of Hong Kong has, on piece:
|
2 |
dated |
23 Oct 68 |
|
3 |
|
15 Oct 68 |
|
4 |
|
10 Dec 68 |
|
With the exception of number 6 all the dates so far recorded are in 1968. It would be
interesting to know whether any numbers is still in use in 1973 and also was there a
number 1 and any other numbers above 6. Numbers 3, 4 and 5 held by Mr. Hall have
Registration slips of the same numbers whereas number 6 was on an 'ordinary' cover.
From Bulletin 185 September 1973
Cancellations - Hong Kong / Hong Kong
We express our appreciation of Mr. A.E.Chaney of Hong Kong in ascertaining that this hand
c.d.s. has been and is still in use for application on small packets and items with uneven
surfaces at the General Post Office Sorting Office. We regret however, that due to a
misinterpretation some of the information in Bulletin 184 was incorrect. To 'put the record
straight' the numbers recorded to date of this c.d.s. are :- 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.
(No. 6 has not yet been reported).
From Bulletin 186 November 1973
Cancellations - Hong Kong / Hong Kong
Mr. E.F. Gee has pointed out that this marking was first reported in Bulletin 154. Apparently
originally this marking was used only on official mail, not cancelling adhesives but now is
in general use. Mr. Gee also mentions that the original markings differed in size No. 1
being 35mm, whilst numbers 2 and 3 were 38mm. Numbers 1 and 2 also had a double outer circle
1mm apart. The current number 2 definitely has only a single circle and it appears possible
that the various cancellers have been replaced as they became worn.
From Bulletin 154 April 1969 (Editor P.C.Pearson)
Official Mail
Recently a new handstamp has appeared on Official Mail. This is a rubber handstamp with a
double outer ring 38/35 mm worded HONG KONG at the top and bottom with a figure 1. in the
lower half and the date across the centre. Examples have been shown to us by Mr. D.Sellars.
|
posted: 14 April 2018
|
 |
Q010:
HONG KONG PAID type 14a used as arrival mark in black and blue? (Dr. Andrew Cheung)
|
Webb recorded type 14 only in red, but Proud p. 400 quoted
"occasional use recorded in 1865 and 1870" still no mentioning of colour.
Below are two incoming letters from London
|
|
|
1. 1863 London to Hong Kong
With HONG KONG PAID type 14a 17-AU-63 (high index C) in black as arrival backstamp.
|
|
2. 1865 From Valencia, Spain sent by forwarding agent in London to Hong Kong
With HONG KONG PAID type 14a 7-MY-65 (high index C) in blue as arrival backstamp.
|
The normal Hong Kong c.d.s. was in the same colour i.e. black in 1863 and blue in 1865 during
this period.
Two possiblities exist:-
1. Accidental use by mistake, yes, in 1863, but, in 1865, payment by adhesive stamps on letters had become compulsory and the Hong Kong Paid c.d.s. would have been made redundant (and therefore locked up in the safe).
2. Taken out at busy times due to lack of ordinary datestamps. Proud recorded only 7 Hong Kong c.d.s. datestamps at the time.
Practical point: Each datestamp taken out from the safe everyday needed to be stamped in the day-book and signed by the duty clerk, therefore, it seems unlikely that the clerk took out the wrong datestamp especially in 1865.
Have members seen any HONG KONG PAID c.d.s. type 14, 14a or the new 14b. used this way?
Acknowledgement: The 1863 London-Hong Kong cover belongs to Mr. B.M. Wong.
|
|
posted: 27 June 2017
|
 |
Q009:
Why are there different parcel post frankings? (Chris Norton)
|
|
During the 1950s and early 1960s, three different types of franking were in use
concurrently on parcel post items, i.e. Webb Types P5 & P6, plus machine produced
labels. Why was this necessary?
|
|
|
posted: 13 June 2017
|
A009: (Dr.
Andrew Cheung) |
What we are seeing here are: -
1. Circular steel Hong Kong Parcel Post c.d.s.
2. Standard British type "rocking horse" rubber parcel post handstamp
3. Postage Paid Parcel label by machine (Hasler?)
The circular steel can be found cancelling stamps on parcels or more often on parcel dispatch cards.
The rectangular rubber chop is designed for cancelling large blocks of stamps stuck on heavy
parcels received at Parcel Post counter.
The gummed postage paid meter label was used for those parcels received at the Parcel Post counter
without stamps on.
Even today, the clerk at the Parcel Post counter would either pick up the steel or the
rubber Parcel Post chop (nowadays made by Trodat) to cancel stamps affixed on the parcel.
Since most senders have no idea of the postage, after weighing, the clerk would print out
a label for affixing on the parcel.
There is also a fourth type, also made by Trodat, a rubber c.d.s. used mostly on food
parcels to mainland during the Cultural Revolution during mid-60s. Such parcels were sent
in cloth bag and stamps affixed on these items could only be adequately cancelled by a
rubber handstamp. Upon arrival, after emptying the contents, the recipient would have
utilised the cloth to patch up holes in his jacket or using several pieces to make clothing.
Even though thousands of such cloth bags were sent, the survival rate of the entire bag
is almost zero...hence a huge philatelic rarity...if you come across one.
posted: 27 June 2017
|
 |
Q008:
Can someone identify the red "A" marking? (William
Lack)
|

|
Hong Kong 1862 8 cents
yellow buff struck with a red capital "A" in a
lined circle then cancelled B62.
"Attached is an image of a stamp I bought in the past
year and have had absolutely no success in finding
anything about it. Some thoughts at a HKSC meeting was
that it was a maritime cancel from somewhere in the
Indian Ocean region."
|
|
published: 29 Sept 2014
|
 |
Q007:
Can someone identify this MISSENT TO handstamp?
(Frank Young)
|
|
MISSENT TO JKT 19000
"In 1998 I received a letter from Hong Kong. The cover
was marked with a MISSENT TO JKT 19000
handstamp. There are no markings on the back of the
cover.
I presume this marking is the usual MISSENT TO type of
marking for mis-directed mail but have been unable to
find out where it was missent to."
|
|
published: 7 July 2011 |
A007: (Ron
Rakusen) |
"I was looking at this one and it
seemed obvious that JKT was short for Jakarta in
Indonesia. A search of postcode in Indonesia found
the following, which suggests that different parts of
Jakarta use the 19xxx postcodes. On that basis,
JKT 19000 would possibly be Jakarta Head Post Office
postcode where MISSENT mail goes."
published: 14 July 2011
|
 |
Q006: Can
someone identify the source and authenticity of
this “5” overprint? (Robert Hazelwood)
|
|
Hong Kong QV 10˘
green CA with "5" overprint
The adhesive also bears an “AMOY” straight line cancel.
His literature search has been a failure except for the
reference entitled “THE LARGE NUMERALS” at the top
of page 147 in Webb. Also, he has not found anyone
who has seen one and is not certain that his example is
the same as those mentioned.
He sent the scan to another HKSC member, who had never
seen it before, but referred him to an article on
overprints in a HKPS Newsletter. However, the style
of the numeral is entirely different from any covered by
that article. Another HKSC member was puzzled too,
but sent him a photocopy of other numeral overprints, all
of which differed from his.
|
|
published: 14 April 2010 |
A006: (AIR
CDRE R. Gurevitch) |
"One of my lesser collecting interests
is Cuba and the ‘Puerto Principe’ overprints on Cuban
stamps undertaken between December 1898 and January 1899
by the US Military Administration. These overprints were
extensively forged. It occurred to me that the overprint
on Robert's Hong Kong stamp was remarkably similar to the
"5" used in forgeries of the overprint at position 4 on
some of the 'Puerto Principe' overprint settings. I
scanned Robert’s illustration, a 10˘ green stamp, and a
forged 'Puerto Principe' 5˘ stamp. I was able to
manipulate the two scans and to superimpose the “5”
overprint to ascertain any similarities. The result is
shown below.
I have no hesitation in stating that the “5”s appears to
be of the same type and hence I consider the "5" on the
Hong Kong stamp to also be a forgery."
answer published in Journal No.
354, July 2010
|

|
Q005:
Can someone identify this cancellation? (John
Robertson)
|
|
Hong Kong early revenue stamp
with a "2" cancel
The stamp is struck twice with the "2" cancel. If
this is a genuine cancel, where was it cancelled?
Was someone playing games, and this is a fake?
|
|
published: 26 Dec. 2009 |
 |
Q004:
Can someone identify this 'Royal Mail Packet'
handstamp? Was it applied on board or not? (Eddie
Lawrence)
|

|
HANKOW, CHINA TO MILAN, ITALY
Italian postcard posted on the River Yangtze with a HK4
cents stamp cancelled at the first port of call (Hankow)
with a British Post Office cds. In addition, a Shanghai
British transit stamp and a Milan arrival cds were applied
to the obverse. There are no marks on the reverse.
The Royal Mail Steam Packet Company cachet was applied on
board the ship.
The card caught the P. & O. packet that sailed from
Shanghai on February 10 for Colombo, Ceylon arriving on
February 25 to be transshipped to the S. S. Arcadia that
sailed on the 26th for Egypt, where it was transferred to
a Mediterranean vessel for Italy and then overland to
Milan. The transit time was 39 days.
|
|
published: 16 Jan. 2009 |
A004: (Lee
Scamp) |
First, another
question: Is there clear evidence that this card was
“posted on the River Yangtze” and “cancelled at the first
port of call (Hankow)”, vs having been posted at the
Hankow BPO? The itinerary from Shanghai is as
follows:
Thus, there is no likely
reason, at least not one that I can think of, that a
“ROYAL MAIL STEAM PACKET COMPANY / SOUTHAMPTON / Posted on
high Seas” cachet should have been applied to it.
Note that the 12.3 Brindisi arrival date of the P&O
Isis fits very well with the 13.3 Milano cds.
It is hypothetically,
although only remotely, possible that this card could have
been sent via the Trans-Siberian Railway. If so, it
should have reached London in about 22 to 26 days, so by
around 4.3 to 8.3. Then, it could theoretically have
been forwarded via Southampton on an RMS packet to
Italy. If the RMS ran to Italy, it would have taken
about 7 days to Marseille, and about another day to
Italy. But why would it not have been sent across
the English Channel and via France to Italy, as was all
other first class mail? The only way that it could
have received the RMS cachet would have been as a loose
letter, but if it had been carried by an RMS packet, it
would have been in a mail bag from the London GPO.
Thus, the odds against this routing seem quite
astronomical.
answered: May 2014
|

|
Q003: Why
no
registration label? Where was the green hand stamp
applied? (Ingo Nessel)
|
|
- This $7.50 rate cover addressed to Germany has a
green "REGISTERED" hand stamp, and is cancelled at GPO
registration section on October 21, 1971. But there is
no registration label.
- NB: The rate is constructed from the 5 x $1.30 rate
per 1/2 oz. = $6.50 to zone 2 (which includes Europe)
plus $1.00 registration fee = $7.50 total.
|
|
published: 1 July 2008 |

|
Q002: Is
there
any documentation on this 58c airmail rate to
China? (Ingo Nessel)
|
|
- Unrecorded rate.
- It is not mentioned in Halewood or Proud.
|
|
published: 1 July 2008 |
A002: (Nicholas
Halewood) |
 .
This is an example of the surface letter rate/air fee
structure that appears to have been in force from early
1946 to 25 July 1946. The air fee, per ˝oz, was 50˘ for
China, and $1.00 for Commonwealth and other countries. So
this cover bears 8˘ per 1oz surface letter rate plus 50˘
per ˝oz air fee. So to China it was 58˘ for ˝oz, $1.08 for
1oz, $1.66 for 1˝oz, $2.16 for 2oz, etc.; for Commonwealth
and other countries it was a little more complicated
because although the air fee was the same the surface mail
rates were different - Commonwealth countries, 20˘ for
first 1oz and 10˘ for each additional 1oz; and other
countries, 30˘ for first 1oz and 15˘ for each additional
1oz.
I have no documentary evidence of this rate structure,
just cover evidence. Also the cover in question was to
Shanghai, so if it went by ship to Shanghai the 50˘ air
fee was unnecessary; an alternative could have been
by boat to Canton and then by air.
answered: 30 August 2008
|

|
Q001:
Is this a Shanghai censor, or was it censored in Hong
Kong? (John Robertson)
|
 |
- British censor marking, on Shanghai canceled piece.
- Oval REGISTERED / JY 30 17 / SHANGHAI. B
|
|
published: 23 April 2008 |
A001: (Ingo
Nessel)
|
A recent eBay lot illustrated a
registered cover from Shanghai to Peshawar, India dated
April 17, 1917. It contained what looks to be the same
censor marking as that of John's example on piece.
A look at the reverse of the cover showed the routing was
not via Hong Kong, rather it was probably sent on a sailing
directly from Shanghai to an Indian gateway port, either
Bombay or Tutticorin as notated on the front of the cover.
Thus the censor marking is likely to have been applied at
Shanghai, but certainly not at Hong Kong.
answered: 13 December 2009
|
 |
|