Figure
11 [31] shows a specimen of provisional paper for 1840 - 1841 which
was prepared by applying a handstamp to unwatermarked “common paper”.
The “rubrica” beneath the stamp prove that it is provisional paper.
This provisional issue was revalidated for use for the biennial period
1851 - 1852. The design of the stamp differs from the
design of the stamp of the regular
issue of 1844-44. The design of the stamp of the regular issue
is shown in Figure 10. The sheet shown in Figure 13 was not used
and at the end of the biennial period of 1844-45, a hole about 1.5 cm,
in diameter was punched through the center of the stamp in order to invalidate
the stamp in accordance with the provision of Article 64 of the Royal
Cedula of February 12, 1830. [32]
USE
OF ADHESIVE STAMPS ON PROVISIONAL STAMPED PAPER
As
already explained on pages ___, during the period from July 1. 1886 to
December 31, 1887, adhesive stamps, both postage and revenue,
were affixed to the current stamped
paper in order to compensate for the
difference between the price of the current stamped paper and the
price of the stamped paper required by the Royal Decree of May 16, 1886.
For example, adhesive stamps of the total valve of 12 pesos might
be affixed to a sheet a of ILUSTRES stamped paper, whose price was 8 pesos,
of the biennial period of 1886-67. The result was
a sheet of stamped paper of the first class (SELLO 1) valued
at 20 pesos, as required by the Royal Decree of May 16, 1886.
During
this same period adhesive stamps, either postage, telegraph or revenue,
were frequently affixed to a sheet of “common” paper in order to produce
provisional stamped paper of any required class and price. In this case
the total value of the adhesive stamps affixed was the price of the paper.
Figure L shows a specimen of provisional SELLO 3, the price of which was
250 mil de peso, produced by affixing one 250 mil TELEGRAFOS stamp to a
sheet of “common” paper. The manuscript cancel of “14 Mayo / de 1887” indicate
when this this provisional SELLO 3 document was executed.
Figure
12
ADHESIVE
STAMPS ON DOCUMENTS SUBJECT TO MORE THAN ONE STAMP TAX
The
use of adhesive stamps to produce provisional stamped paper should
not be confused with the affixing of adhesive stamps to documents written
on stamped paper in order to pay a stamp tax which was in addition to the
requirement that the document be written upon stamped paper. The
stamp law required that public officials should collect a fee for signing
certain documents. This fee was collected by affixing to such documents
adhesive DEREGBOS DE FIRMA stamps for the amount of the fee. But law might
also require that such documents be written upon stamped paper. In
this case the document would first be written upon stamped paper of the
class required by law. The adhesive DERECHOS DE FIRMA stamp would
then be affixed to the stamped paper in payment of the “signature fee”.
The
law required that deeds be written upon stamped paper, but if the deed
acknowledged the receipt of a sum of money, an adhesive RECIBOS Y CUENTAS
stamp must be affixed to the document after if had been written
upon the required stamped paper. Such a document indicated the payment
of two separate and distinct stamp taxes.
THE
“RESSELADO” SURCHARGE
Figure
13 shows a specimen of stamped paper of the regular issue of 1896-97
which bears two surcharges. At the left of the stamp is an oval surcharge
which reads “Habilitado Para el Bienio De 1898- 99)” (Made Valid
for the Biennial Period of 1898-99). This surcharge undoubtedly was applied
by the Spanish Government prior to the occupation of Manila by the
American forces in August 1898. Across the face of the stamp is a
second surcharge, which reads “Resellado Para 1898-99”
(Restamped for 1898-99). This Resellado surcharge, which occurs in
several different forms and is also found on adhesive revenue stamps
and on postage stamps, has been the subject of considerable controversy
among collectors of Philippine postage stamps. It appears, however,
that at the time this controversy arose, the fact was unknown that the
“Resellado” surcharge existed on adhesive revenue stamps and on stamped
paper. If this fact had been known it might have altered the conclusions
of those who have claimed that the “Resellado” surcharge which occurs
on the Spanish-Philippine postage stamps of the issue of 1898 is a “fake”
surcharge.
Figure
13
The
revenue stamps and revenue stamped paper of the Philippines were not in
demand among collectors in 1898. Consequently there could have been
no incentive to produce a “fake” issue
of revenue stamps and stamped paper because there
was very little likelihood that such a “fake” issue could be sold to collectors.
Furthermore, if the alleged promoters of the so called “fake” issue of
postage stamps bearing the “Resellado” surcharge had applied the “Resellado”
surcharge to revenue stamps and stamped paper as a spurious means of giving
the appearance of authenticity to the “Resellado” issue of postage stamps,
full publicity would have been given by them to the “Resellado” surcharge
as it occurs on revenue stamps and stamped paper. Yet, the
existence of the “Resellado” surcharge on revenue stamps and stamped
paper seems to have been entirely unknown to those who engaged in
the controversy over the authenticity of the “Resellado” issue of postage
stamps.
The
story of the “resellado” issue of postage stamps told by Major F. L. Palmer
on page 53 of the “The Postal Issues of the Philippines” (J. M. Bartels
Co., 1912) is as follows”
With
the arrival of American troops at Cavite on July 16, 1898, an American
Post Office was established temporarily on one of the ships in the Bay,
and on July 30 on shore at Cavite. From this date until the end of
the following year, a veritable philatelic chaos existed in the Philippines.
Mails were received and forwarded as opportunity offered, by all of the
numerous “governments” involved, each of which used the stamps which were
most available at the time. As a result there were numerous vagaries
in matters philatelic, and certain so-called philatelists contributed their
aid (though not without hope of reward) toward rendering confusion
worse confused. Thus we are compelled to consider not only the Spanish
issues but also those of the United States for the American forces, the
stamps issued by the Revolutionary Government, and certain “provisional”
issues for the Philippines and other islands formerly controlled from
Manila. Of the Spanish issues it is sufficient merely to add (to
what has already been noted) that they continued in use where available
until replaced by those of the government which later came to exercise
actual control. The issues of the Revolutionary Government will be
treated in a separate chapter, and those of the United States will
follow.
Of
the other issues referred to, the first to claim consideration, through
priority in date, is the fake “provisional issue” for Zamboanga, a city
in the island of Mindanao, which has been listed by Kehl and Galvez.
AS the true story of this issue seems never to been printed and is by no
means without its humorous side, it will be given in detail as related
to the writer by one of the two promoters thereof, who will be referred
to as Messrs. A and B.
A
and B, both well known philatelists of Manila, realized that Manila
must sooner or later surrender to the Americans, that Spanish
rule would pass away, and that philatelic changes must ensue. Wishing to
take time by the forelock, in order that any profits obtainable might not
pass them by, they conceived a shortage of stamps at Zamboanga, where Mr.
B had a personnel in the postmaster. Mr. A was a former Spanish
official who had friends in high places at Manila, as be procured
through them a decree providing for surcharging stamps for use at Zamboanga
on the plea of the alleged shortage. This decree is said to have been issued
on August 12, the day before the surrender of Manila; apparently the dies
had been prepared and the stamps obtained in advance, for the surcharging
was done that night by the promoters themselves. Later, and when opportunity
offered, these supplies (except those retained by A and B for their own
philatelic uses) were forwarded to Zamboanga where they were (more or less)
placed in use. In March of 1899, Mr. B was in Zamboanga on business
and his friend, the postmaster, then provided him with covers bearing these
issues, which the postmaster obligingly cancelled as of quite a range of
dates, presumably to avoid the monotony of one date only. Mr. B thoughtfully
placed a full set of this issue on a cover which he sent by registered
mail to himself at his Manila address and which was forwarded by the same
boat on which he returned. This letter was duly delivered to him in
Manila, without any other stamps or postal charge, through the American
post office, thus furnishing undeniable (?) proof of recognition
by the American postal authorities of the validity of this issue.
Upon
investigation by the writer himself at the post office, it was found that
this letter (identified by its serial number) had been received and delivered
without charge, though no memorandum existed as to what stamps it had borne.
In reply to questions the postmaster, who had also been an employee
in 1898-99, further said that in those early days and until the American
offices were established throughout the islands, the postal authorities
felt themselves compelled to receive and deliver, or forward, all mail
arriving at Manila without regard to what stamps were used from points
where American offices (and stamps) were not available to the senders.
He added that even letters bearing stamps the Revolutionary Government
had been so received and delivered. Such delivery or forwarding,
therefore, amounted merely to passing such matter through the mails without
postage and on account of the emergency rather than to any official recognition
of the validity of any stamps actually used. In further pursuance
of his investigation, the writer visited the Bureau of Archives where
search was made for the decree (or some record of it) authorizing this
issue; no trace of it could be found, but his does not disprove the
issuance of such a decree, a failure to which is readily explicable as
due to the carelessness of employees in a time of so great turmoil. |
|