5. Some additional notes on the straight-line postmarks

Glancing through the Robert A. Siegel auction catalog used in August 1974 when the Kurt Adler collection went on the block yields several items up for bid. The following chart lists the items for sale. The illustrations are digitally enhanced reproductions from the auction catalog of some of the earlier single straight-line postmarks observed for Moscow. Descriptions listed are quotations from the catalog.

LoL No. Spelling Type Color Style Date

5 MOSCOV straight line black bold 14Aug 1785 6 MOSCOV straight llne black 8Dec1785 8 MOSCOV straight line black heavy 15126 Apr 1789

10 MOSCOV straight line black bold 22Dec1791 63 MOCKBA straight line black script 1Jan1803 64 MOSCOV straight line red 1 Jun 1805 65 MOCKBA straight line red italics 1808 66 MOCKBA straight line rad all caps 1809, 1810 67 MOSCOV straight llne red bold 1825

From the Kurt Adler auction - 1974

Lot #5. Moscov, Bold s1r. line on 14 Aug. 1785 folded letter to Lyon (France). May be the earliest recorded use of this postmark.

Lot "#6. Moscov (Early French spelling). Fairly clear s1r. line pmk. on 8 December 1785 folded letter to St. Petersburg, docketed 15 Dec. 1785, 7 days in transit. Claimed to be the earliest known use of this postmark within Russia. [not shown here]

Lot #10. Moscov, Bold s1r. line on 22 Dec. 1791 folded letter to Herrnhut (Germany).

Lot #64. Moscov, Red s1r. line, trifle bent, Bold sharp strike on 1 Jun 1805 folded cover to Herrnhut.

Lot "#65. MOCJCBa (Moscow) Bold Red str. line, Cyrillic italics on 1808 folded cover to St. Petersburg.

124

The Goss sales, Harmer's February and November 1958, yield the following:

Spelling Type Date Size

MOSCAV Boxed Straight-line 1767 MOSCOV Straight-line 1772 4MM MOSCOV Straight-line 1790 MOSCOV Straight-line 1791

Goss Sale of 1958

Reading auction catalogs is an excellent way of finding new information or confirming existing information. Auction catalogs offer the reader a window into some of the rarities of stamp collecting and, with luck, a nice color photograph of the item. They also offer the reader a glimpse into reality. Items appearing for sale in the auction catalogs tend to be the same items turning up again, possibly bought and sold merely for profit. In other words, if you want the item, an auction catalog is one place in which you can find how much you might expect to pay for a similar item!

Another excellent source is journals published by philatelic societies specializing in Russian philately. In the British Journal of Russian Philately No. 33, October 1963, Messrs. F. Julius Fohs and Kurt Adler shed some light on these pre-stamp markings. They inventoried the collections of the greatest collectors of the time and listed what they found including several illustrations. Below is the list of single straight-line postmarks they prepared. The illustrations are examples of the postmark style. Several items listed did not include a reference to an illustration and are left blank in the table below.

FIGURE TYPE DATE

MOSCOV, AUGUST, FRENCH 1785 MOSCOV,DECEMBER,FRENCH 1785 MOSCOV, APRIL, FRENCH 1787 MOSCOV FRENCH 1787

1 MOCKBA, ONE LINE, RUSSIAN, RED 1791 2 MOSCOV, ONE LINE, FRENCH 1792

MOCKBA, ONE LINE, ITALICS, RUSSIAN, RED 1803 2 MOSCOV, ONE LINE, FRENCH, RED 1805

MOCKBA, RUSSIAN, RED 1806 2 MOSCOV, ONE LINE, FRENCH, RED 1808 3 MOCKBA, ONE LINE, RUSSIAN 1808 2 MOSCOV, ONE LINE, FRENCH, RED 1809/10 2 MOSCOV, ONE LINE, FRENCH, RED 1822

.MOSCOV Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3

125

Turning once again to the auctions used for the single straight-line postmarks, the following double straight-line postmarks are noted. No attempt is made here to associate these marks with the appropriate postal function.

Lot. Lot. No. Spelling Type Color Style Date No. Spelling Type Color Date

69 MOSKOU 2 line cancel black 1840s 2159 MOCKBA 2-line black 1837 MOSCOU 2160 MOSCOU 2-line red 1840 MOSCAU

From the Kurt Adler auction - 1974 Mercurphila auction - 1984

Messrs. F. Julius Fohs and Kurt Adler also shed some light on double straight-line postmarks. Their illustrations were provided to show whether the mark was Cyrillic or Latin. There are two Cyrillic spellings for Moscow (figs. 1 and 3) and only one illustration (fig. 2) for all the Latin spellings of Moscow. The reader will notice that there are no examples in their table spelling Moscow as in fig. 2. It is possible there is an error in their data since no examples of "MOSCOU" are noted. Below are their findings.

126

FIGURE TYPE

NA* MOCKBA, TWO LINES, RUSSIAN 1 MOCKBA, TWO LINES, RUSSIAN 2 MOSCOV, TWO LINES

TOP LINE MOSCOV DATE LINE

2 TWO LINES, MOSKAU, GERMAN, RED 3 TWO LINES, LIKE 1845 (BELOW) 3 TWO LINES

TOP LINE DATE LINE

2 MOSCAU, GERMAN 2 MOSCAU, TWO LINES, GERMAN, RED

*No illustration indicated

MOCHB A l ~34 !IO lllR

Figure 1

~IOSCOV 1837 Juin e

Figure 2

DATE

1833 1834 1837

1841 1844 1845

1847 1848

SIZE

23X8.5MM 26.5X9MM 4X26.5MM 2 X 3 X24.5MM

37.5X10 MM 24.5X3MM 37.5 X 3-4.5MM

MOCRRB.A 1845 Aeu6p11 !O

Figure 3

B. State Town Post Branch Offices (06IQerocy.QapcTBeHHOe ropo.QCKoe IloqToeoe OT.Qt.neHie)-1844-1860

When the Moscow Town Post was established in 1845, two Town Postal Sections (TI01noaoe OT ;::rtJieHie ropo~cKoA: TI01nhl) were created to handle internal Moscow mail. At the same time, five State Town Post Branch Offices existed , which handled all other aspects of mail service in and out of Moscow. Sub-Offices of the Town Post (OT ~i>Jib r opo~cKo:A: floIIThI) were created in 1859/1860 and co-located with the Branch Offices in 1867 to handle internal Moscow mail and were subordinate to the Town Postal Sections initially. Although the Postal Sections and the Branch Offices both use the word "otdelenie" in their description, caution must be taken to keep them separated.

The five State Town Branch Offices were located in the more heavily populated areas of Moscow and serviced the various shops handling mail functions as well. There was no Branch Office located in the vicinity of the Main Post Office since the Central Section/Postal Section handled all mail within the postal sector of the Main Post Office. Postmarks from these sections are very scarce and virtually non­existent prior to 1850.

The postmarks of the five State Town Post Branches consisted of either two or three lines containing the town name, Branch Office designator, and the date. They measure 10--17mm high and 30--57mm long. The normal configuration has Moscow on the top line, the Branch Office designator on the second line, and the date on the third line. The date is normally displayed as year, month, day. Exceptions can be found used by the Second and Third Branch Offices.

Dobin lists the largest grouping of these marks ever seen by Western philatelists, 17 examples! The Dobin illustrations give an example, the period of use, and the dimensions of the postmarks.

1. First State Branch Office (B01)

MOCl\BA 1 Om11e11ett.i.e

25 Mapra 1.847

Period of use: 184 7 Size: 21 x 3.5mm

MOCK BA 1 DTA°t>.11eHiR

rnss r MaTpa 19 Period of use: 1857-58 Size: 18.5 x 3mm

MOC KB.A 1 0TADolfeH i S\

8 AeKaop~ 1856 roAa.

Period of use: 1856 Size: 18.5 x 3mm

MOCKBA 1 0 1' A ?>II e !fr.I\

19Ho>16pR 1857 r .

Period of use: 1857 Size: 26 x 4mm

MOCl\BA l-Tt> Ou~-4uo1i, I 858 r. l"°H9 it

Period of use: 1858 Size: 17 x 3mm Noted on money correspondence

127

2. Second State Branch Office (B02)

MOCRBA OmAoJleH.le 2 1844 Ma.i.11 8

Period of use: 1844 Size: 57 x 4mm Noted on official correspondence Predates Town Post Establishment

MOCK'BA 0 TAlii\eHie. 2

18 SOAnpt>A~ G

Period of use: 1850 Size: 31x3.Smm

MOCHBA 2 0T,41.>..AeHi'2.

i8Sb r. MA~ 1G

MOCK'BA 0 CT1AbAeltle 2

18~5 Hosr6pn 16

Periodofuse: 1845-1849 Size: 29 x 4mm

MOCK BA OrAoAeHie 2

I 853 r. Mapra 2

Period of use: 1852-1854 Size: 20 x 3mm

2 OT.a, Period of use: 1827-1828 Size: 17 x 3mm

MOCK BA 0 rnA'f>Jlt Hlt 2.

1S.lfS Aarycma 3

Period of use: 1845-1849 Size: 29 x 4mm

MOC}{f OTAi>11e:H•E 2.

1855 ro C oas:i6'pb

Period of use: 1855 Size: 17 x 3.5mm

Period of use: 1856 Size: 21 x 3mm

(This mark predates the Town Post by 18 years! Dobin states it is noted on covers along side the double-circle marks of the 1820s attributed to the Dispatch Office for Receipt of Ordinary Internal Correspondence. Pages 87-90)

128

3. Third State Branch Office (B03)

MOCK BA Period of use: 1847 Size: 25.5 x 3mm

1 ltoHb t8~7 Notedonmoneycorrespondence

5

/?eryzff &L-''/

~ /2#~~4' Lrh'J'.

A Tillis extra-post cover :&om Moscow to a General Staff Colonel Buturlin in the Caucasus Corps, the headquarters of which were located in Stavropol'. The cover was mailed on 13 April 1844. Second Branch Office.

t72(}

A Tillis extra-post cover from Moscow to the same addressee as above. Posted on 22 April 1844, the cover has a double straight-line postmark. Shown here only to illustrate the correspondence. (P. T. Ashford Book, Imperial Russian Stamps Used in Transcaucasia, Part One, Postal History.)

129

......

\ \ \ ~~ 't ... , . . \, ·:·\

..... . 'l' -., '{\;. ... " .. '.• .

. ,

An (Tift.is?) extra-post cover from Moscow to a General Staff Colonel Buturlin in the Caucasus Corps, the headquarters of which were located in Stavropol'. The cover was mailed on 29 May 1844 and arrived in Stavropol' on 5 June, from where it was forwarded to Ekaterinograd. Second Branch Office.

130

H I

/ ' I

8 March 1856?, First Branch Office on a cover to Smolensk.

1February1857, First Branch Office. Torrey collection, whereabouts unknown.

131

·--r/ ___ J-1

---- t

'"J I •

·~.·-,.· -~·

1 Februa.iy 1851, First Branch Office. Cover sent to Prince Dolgorukov in Moscow and forwarded to Tula.

132

·ti·

7 March 1859, Second Branch Office. Money letter from Moscow to Sergievskii Posad

133

16 January 1859, Third Branch Office. Money letter from Moscow to Sergievskii Posad.

134

4. Fourth State Branch Office (B04)

MOCKBA 4 OJoJ.i,Ae .,.be }858 0~Adp~ 'J.7

Period of use: 1858 Size: 20 x 3mm

5. Fifth State Branch Office (BOS)

MOCRBA 5 OTA\.Ae~i e

1856 0J<T.$1Gp~ 27

Period of use: 1856 Size: 29 x 3.5mm

MOCK BA

5 0TAEJteH i E

1860 r. }ltt$Ap b 2.1

Period of use: 1860 Size: 19 x 3mm

. ........_ .... I

: ~~Jf ;p;;~,,;i ;'b;~#-1~ ; .. -•

J. . .... - ~~//~t~/€?~/_ f •

~~/~//////7"/~ p~//~~//~40~/, 7h/.f/r/L7 ~~~~// .~hy//~-:_~.-h

.~~,,r~//~i .. .

27 October 1858, Fourth Branch Office. Cover sent to Sergievskii Posad. "2 in dots" mark cancels stamp. Dobin book.

135

C. In with the new, out with the old. But what are we to do? (1858-1866)

The period between 1858 and 1867 is not clear from available material. We know there was a reorganization ordered for St. Petersburg in 1858"", and that it was formally approved in 1861. We do not know if the same order to reorganize applied to Moscow in 1858 or after that. According to the 1862 Almanac, Moscow still had the same structure it had before 1858.

According to the History of the Moscow Post, Part One, pp.120-121, the otdels and Central Section did not exist until 1867. This fits well with the introduction of the dotted numerals for the otdels and the postmarks with the Central designator. If the otdelenies did not form before 1867, we have no evidence to support or refute that theory.

What exactly happened between 1858 and 1867 is partially known from isolated items of the pe­riod. We know that Moscow introduced the "2 in dots" postmark to cancel stamps. We know that the Dispatch Offices (1 & 5) are observed from the early 1860s applying their forwarding postmarks.

We have single examples of a few marks during this period that must remain unclassified until more material is available. The marks and their possible identification will be covered in this section, but no firm designation can be provided. To assist in the analysis of these marks, we will use examples of St. Petersburg postmarks of the time as listed by Imhoff, Baillie, and Dobin.

The postmark below on the left is listed for St. Petersburg by Imhoff and Baillie as belonging to the Central Section, but is not listed by Dobin. Both Imhoff and Baillie indicate it is "unique" since they provide no further information about the postmark. The postmark on the right is a Moscow dispatch postmark with a similar design, but a different year. The key to this mark may be whether the entry between roP. and OTll. at the bottom is the Cyrillic letter "n'' or the Roman numeral "II." If it is a "P," then the word is probably pochtovoe and the OTD is probably otdelenie. This would mean that the mark belonged to a Town Branch Office. (Remember the Town designation disappears and we use City after the reorganization.) If it is a "II," then it could be the Second Otdel of the City Post or the Second Town Branch Office. We do not believe the Roman numeral is a time plug. (See cover on page 106.)

Imhoff2.l.13.1/Baillie CIC only noted once in December 1860.

October 1861. roP. n. OTll.

If we presume the above postmark has a "P" between the word roP. and OTll., then how do we handle the postmarks listed on the next page, which were used also as dispatch postmarks? We show here a "III" and a "V" and have seen a "IV," but do not have a photocopy of it. These marks were in the collections of the late Gordon Torrey and Norman Epstein, but the current owners are unknown to us. If Moscow did not reorganize until 1867, then these postmarks cannot belong to the otdels or City-Post otdelenies, but must belong to the Town-Post Branch Offices. If Moscow attempted to reorganize in the same period of time as St. Petersburg, then the marks become even less clear as to their designator. OR, did Moscow do a partial reorganization introducing either the otdels or the otdelenies before the Cen­tral Section? If they are otdels, then they predate the available literature's information. We believe these marks are possibly the Town-Post Branch Offices of which there were five before the reorganization.

136

February 1858. roP. III. OTll. February 1864. roP. V. OTll.

During this period, there are no equivalent postmarks from St. Petersburg. There is a similar post­mark, but the time frame is 1870-1872. Both Baillie and Dobin do not list this postmark. Imhoff does list it. The postmark is shown below, and may or may not belong to the Central Section in St. Peters­burg.

Imhoff2.l.15.2. 1870-1872.

Imhoff, Baillie, and Dobin list a postmark for the Central Section (Imhoff doesn't differentiate) shown below. They state the postmark was used between 1859 and 1882.

Imhoff2.l.15.l. 1859. Baillie CIA. 1859-1882. Dobin says up to 1881.

Moscow presents a similar, yet unique mark. The example shown below is illustrated in Prigara and is a photocopy from a cover in the collection of the late Norman Epstein, whereabouts unknown. Postmarks with roPOll. TI04T. in their designator are not seen (again) until 1874.

137

D. Moscow comes to life (1867-1905)

One of the most disturbing issues we have encountered while attempting this study is the lack of material in the early years. Local mail appears to be nonexistent prior to 1867. After 1874, the quantity of available covers increases slightly. It isn't until 1883 that Moscow begins to use its postal system for intra-city mail. After 1883, the volume picks up at a good pace, and it is off and running by the beginning of the 20th century.

Mail going to other parts of Russia and especially going abroad enjoys more exposure up to 1883. However, the amount of material available is not indicative of what we should be able to evaluate.

There are a few clear date lines that can be defined to indicate when new devices were introduced into the City Post. Unfortunately, we have not been able to find in the literature available to us what triggered the changes in every case.

Since St. Petersburg and Moscow were both following the same "basic" postal plan according to literature available, we decided to compare the date lines we have been able to establish for Moscow with what happened in St. Petersburg. We used studies by Imhoff, Baillie, and Dobin for this purpose. Dobin provides the best historical version, while Imhof and Baillie provide the best postmark versions. Problematic areas we encountered are:

1. The use of the term Central in St. Petersburg when the postmarks do not include the designator in the early years. Moscow uses the designator for Central in the early years but abandons it in 1883.

2. Declaring St. Petersburg postmarks with a neuter adjectival ending (E) as belonging to the otdels and not the otdelenies.

3. The Dispatch Office numbers for Moscow and St. Petersburg are not numbered the same for like functions. In Moscow, it is clearly the first Dispatch Office that is responsible for ordinary domestic mail, while in St. Petersburg it is the 6th.

4. Moscow does not introduce postmarks with designators for the City Post Dispatch Office until 1907. St. Petersburg introduces them in the early 1890s.

5. In Moscow, one does not note use of the indicators that could possibly be assigned to the otdels or otdelenies until the 1890s. In St. Petersburg one notes use of the words otdel and otdelenie in the postmarks much earlier.

6. All GOROD. POCHT. marks belong to the Central Section for St. Petersburg. If this is the case in Moscow, then very little mail was postmarked outside the Central Section or the Dispatch Offices.

We did find a couple of places that probably match, but not much else. Either the two postal systems were proceeding according to different plans or Moscow refused to follow the global plan. The chart on the next page illustrates the results of our analysis.

Until more official information becomes available, we will label those marks that we cannot defend as otdelenies or otdels simply as City Post and number them one up accordingly. We hope that we can find official literature that will allow us to definitively identify what happened in Moscow after 1858.

The theory we will put forth is that the Postal Sections remain active in Moscow, although they disappeared in St. Petersburg with the 1858 reorganization. These marks manifest themselves in the geometric marks and the mutes. We realize this goes against what has been published to date which says that the geometric devices were used by the first three otdels, after (?) they turned in the dot numeral devices in 1883. We must ask about the other otdels and otdelenies, and why they cannot be identified from postmarks. The amount of information published about the mute marks, as well as examples available for study, provide absolutely no clues as to their designation.

138

-w \0

Year

Type ...... (I) Cl 0 ~ C\I "' ~ LO co ...... co Cl 0 a; C'll "' """

LO co ...... co co co ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ..... (I) (I) co co co co co co (I) (I) (I) co co co co co co co co (I) (I) (I) (I) co co co co co ...... .... .... .... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... .... .... .... .... ...... ...... ...... ...... ......

SPB comparison x x x ,, x J ..

Central Section

gorodsk pochty

gp no horns

gpw/horns

gorod pocht

gorod pochta

CPD marks

gorod pocht w/Roman #

Dot Numerals

Geometric Marks

Mutes

Comparison to St. Petersburg, noted as an "X" on the graph above.

1868-the OTDELS cancel mail retrieved from their area of coverage 1871-the Central Section is combined with the Dispatch Office for Sorting and Forwarding domestic mail. 1876-0TDELS now cancel ALL mail they retrieve and new devices are introduced for them to use. 1883-1885-the 6th Dispatch Office handles all domestic mail

co co co ......

1886-1888-the Central Office is separated from the Dispatch Office to which it had been earlier assigned and becomes the City Post Dispatch Office. New device GORODSK. POCHTA.

1888-the GOROD. POCHT. marks with serial numbers 1-11 (less 10) appear. 1891-the GOROD. POCHT. receives new cross-date devices. 1895-the City Post Dispatch Office gets new devices with a Dispatch designator. 1897-the Telegraph Offices and the OTDELENIEs begin to merge.

0) 0 Ci C'll "' co Cl Cl Cl co (I) (I) (I) (I) ...... .... .... .... ....

x

Chart comparing date lines of St. Petersburg and Moscow postal changes.

d'i LO co ...... co 0) 0 0 C'll "' g LO 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0 0 0 0

co co co co co co 0) 0) Cl Cl Cl 0) ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... .... .... .... ......

x x

-

----,.....__

XI. The Central Postal Section (1867-1883)

Prior to 1867, all correspondence went to the Main Post Office for logging and forwarding. During this period, we observe the Dispatch Offices applying their marks to indicate receipt/forwarding of the mail and to cancel the stamp.

In conjunction with the reorganization of the City Post in 1867, a device was introduced for the Central Postal Section (CPS). This device (CPS-l)was a double circle design with the outer circle measuring approximately 26mm and the inner circle approximately l 9mm. Across the top is "MOCK. UEHTPAJlbHOE"-Moscow Central; on the bottom is "OT ll'BllEHIE"-(Postal) Section. In the inner circle we find the year at the top, the month and day in the middle, and the time on the bottom. This device was in use from 1867 until 1868.

CPS-1

: I

t,..; •'

1867, 12 o'clock. Cover to Nizhegorskaya Yarmarka.

140

.

' ..

20 March 1868 with hour plug reading 21/z hours. Unusual time for Moscow! Also note the Nikolaevskaya railroad mark applied at St. Petersburg to the left.

.; • ..... ~~ .....

/ ,/

.. .

'· \\- -:·· h; ·'..:.._~I:, .. ~:.

6 May 1868, 2 o'clock. Cover from St. Petersburg to Moscow. Also note the TPO mark for route No. 1-2 of5 May 1868. The "1" next to the day indicates this mark was applied at the first station on the line, St. Petersburg.

141

In addition to the above device, the devices listed below were used alongside and lasted a bit longer. These devices have been observed in use between 1868-1877. They have the same double-circle design, but measure between 27-32mm for the outer circle and 17-21 mm for the inner circle with the inner circle displaying a break in its lower half to accommodate an hour plug. The Russian for Moscow Central (Postal) Section is contiguous flowing between the circles from the lower left in a clockwise direction. The date is listed in three lines: year on top, day in the middle, month on the bottom. These devices have the hour indicated with the letter "4" instead of the entire word. The entire word for hour will not appear again on any device. Noted in black and blue colors.

There are two versions of the inscription for "Moscow." The first version has a":" (colon) after MOCK and the second version has a".'' (period) after MOCK.

CPS-2 using the full word for section-"OT ,llnJlEHIE" Observed 1869-1877.

Noted with colon: 1869-1872/1873. Noted with period: 1872/3-1877.

CPS-la using an abbreviated form of the word for section­"OT ,llnJlEH:" Observed 1868--1873.

Noted with colon: 1868--1870. Noted with period: 1870-1873.

Il'shtejn says these marks were used only on Sunday and the hour is always a 2 or a 4. Our examples indicate the hours of use were 2, 4, 8 or 9, and 12, and Sunday was not the only day.

In 1874, the CPS again introduced new devices. The devices are similar to the previous ones in design, i.e., a double-circle design with the inner circle displaying a break in its lower half to accommodate an hour plug. The outer circle measures between 27-35mm and the inner circle between 17-21mm. The text was changed to read "MOCK. CT04T. UEHTP. OT,llnJl. 4"-Moscow Post Central Section. The designator for hour (4) is included as a part of the text indicating that the hour plug is simply a changeable numeric plug. This device was used for intra-city mail from 1874 until 1876, and on all correspondence from 1876 until 1883. From 1874 until 1879, the date reads: year on the top, day in the middle, month on the bottom. From 1879 until 1883, the date reads: day on the top, month in the middle, year on the bottom. Postmarks with the designation "Central Office" are not observed after 1883. On CPS--3, the letter "n" is noted as a "lb" in OTDEL and has been observed only in 1874. CPS-3a uses the letter '"ll" in OTDEL. CPS-4 has the year on the bottom.

CPS-3a CPS--4

142

t • t

I. /. . .,,

. . ·.-:

'·

4 September 1869 (Thursday), 4 o'clock. CPS-2. Cover from Moscow to St. Petersburg. 1st Dispatch Office mark in red. St. Petersburg arrivaVdispatch mark of 6 September to the right.

. ......... '

'·

/ ' ,, .. -::.--Ul

5 November 1869 (Wednesday), 2 o'clock. CPS-2. Cover to Elisavetgnui. 1st Dispatch Office mark in red. Dot numeral open-head "2" on indicium.

143

144

-~he.a u-c:. ~ ~'. 0/7/ ~

.'-'CJ. , v~o/?,,, ck:;/""' £-<:CL~ '. 1

J~,,,.,~ ~~r~ ... .. Cnau~ ~~~"7dhjp;t&U?aY/U.l"-t-,1

./ /

7 June 1870 (Sunday), 2 o'clock. CPS-2. Cover from Tver' to Moscow. Moscow third Dispatch Office arrival mark, morning.

~ I • \ .. '

~- .

:

21August1870 (Friday), 2 o'clock. CPS-2. Cover from Nizhnii Novgorod to Moscow. Cover posted at the Nizhnii Novgorod railway station as indicated by the cancellation on the stamp and a dispatch mark on the reverse (at top).

Third Dispatch Office arrival mark, morning, top right.

145

146

,.

24 March 1871 (Wednesday), 12 o'clock. CPS-2. Cover from Moscow to St. Petersburg.Moscow dot numeral "2" cancels the stamp, at top. St. Petersburg arrival/dispatch mark on reverse, at bottom to right.

/ ...

18 August 1871 (Wednesday), 8 or 9 o'clock(?). CPS-2. Cover from Moscow to Simbirsk. Moscow dot numeral "2" cancels stamp. Moscow Nizhnii Novgorod railway station dispatch mark on reverse, at top left. Simbirsk arrival mark

on front of cover, at bottom.

147

. ' .

I ~

/' /

i'

/· /

,/ /

.. .

. . ~::.· ... ·

26 April 1872 (Wednesday), 12 o'clock. CPS-2. Cover to Penz.a. Moscow mark is blue.

148