我的另类天下第一封 天下第一, 收件人, 上海, 英国, 另类

eureka168

1864年英国寄上海封, 无票无戳（工部）
我原来没 计划购买这封，直到我看到收件人的名字

下载 (38.63 KB)

2016-10-15 20:28

麦国培

好东西，看来有故事

eureka168

先卖个关子

eureka168

很有意思收件人地址是工部局

麦国培

关注

艾明

如封左下角"赵藏"印鉴图属真，就应是赵姓名人收藏封。(拙见)

eureka168

是的,我同意。

eureka168

最初看到这个封后, 我的直觉反应是工部局自己的进口邮件都被香港客邮局投抵了
因此 所有英系进口邮件不会由上海工部邮局投抵。因此，上海工部局香港客邮混合封(票或戳)不可能存在。
但不可否认的，上海工部香港客邮混合封是仍然存在的但非常罕见.
也许这些混合封有特殊的解释 。

genel

工部市政局史前封，好封

eureka168

Gene,

During the early time of SHanghai LPO, HK Post Office and Shanghai LPO shared the same building. So, why would any Shanghai resident would  drop off international mail at Shanghai LPO, and Shanghai LPO forward the letter to HK PO?   And, paid Shanghai LPO's postage / fee?


So, I am puzzled by the existence of the outbound Shanghai-origin  international "combo" covers.   Those mails' sender could just go to the foreign post offices to mail their letters, and save one candarin charged by the Shanghai LPO.

eureka168

Just one more point.

According to my research and understanding, one of reasons for Shanghai LPO's  creation  was for Shanghai LPO to deliver international inbound mails. The agents of shipping companies (Such as P&O) was charging 4 cent per letter  for delivering a letters at Shanghai.   Shanghai LPO was setup to reduce the delivery fee; Shanghai LPO only charged one cent or free if the receiver had subscribed to Shanghai's services.  For the trading companies, this should be big saving.

So, inbound combination covers were legitimate in my opinion.  I am not so sure about outbound.