BEF evelope with some asks

[Ingo Egerlandt]

Hello members,

yesterday, I brought these envelope in Essen from a german dealer for small money.

The first censor handstamp has got the number 148. On reverse, only broken Krag machine cancellarion, after censoring. The date is 26th April 1940.

Than my asks about this envelope.

1. The field post office handstamp are vergotten. I think about, this is not normal?
2. The censor handstamp 212, I found it mostly on envelopes who was send outside Great Britain. This envelope is going to London. Have a member a another envelope with the 212 censor handstamp, adressed to GB?

Than on a Field Post Service envelope with two censor handstamp.

3. The censor label, I think about, this is a civil censor label or a 8th military censor label?

4. If you have got another envelopes with No 148, please write me about the FPO handstamp. I will looking for identify from which unit come this envelope. In my collection it is the first 148 army censor handstamp.

At last. This is not a fake.  I can´t see any manipulations on these envelope.

Please write me what you mean about this envelope.

[Peter Harvey]

Hi Ingo,

I noticed no-one else responded to this post so had a closure look at the cover, I assume that you may have already answered some of your questions.

It appears to me that the letter was censored (the 148 cachet was initially applied) and then was referred for further censorship, rather that being posted through the Field post office.

The label is an Army label Army Form W.3424, tied with the second censor cachet (212), I assume this was then allowed for postage and has been posted through the Base APO.

The machine date stamp on reverse 26 APR 40 could only be one of a couple of machine date stamps in use at this time I think, either 1 BASE ARMY P.O or 1 ARMY POST OFFICE, there is little detail and I can not make this out.

Any other comments?

Peter

[Ingo Egerlandt]

Hi Peter,

Thank you at first, for your information.

One more ask please. Why is the machine cancellation onto and not under the censor label?

I think about, it is a normal datestamp from GB and not one of the BEF machine cancellation. One of the BEF machine cancellation must be stamped before the 2nd censor opened this letter. I control the cancellation on my original and I can´t found any sign of one frome the BEF machine cancellation.

One more ask. I think about, the censorship to use the Army Censor handstamp 212 was used in Reading and later in Bournemouth and not in France. All other Fieldpost from France censored in France direct.

The censor label are not in my newsletter from the FPHC? This is new one for me. Have a collector the complete details for me about the military censor labels where used in BEF time?

Ingo

[akennedy]

Censor stamp no 212 was used by a base censor, presumably in France, checking mail already censored at unit level.

Alistair

[Peter Harvey]

Hi Ingo,

Following on from Alistair and the reference to the Base censor and to answer your question. I think the mail was censored at unit level, not posted, passed to the Base censor. It was then opened, sealed with the Army Label and tied with the 212 cachet and only at that point did it enter the postal system where the machine mark was applied.

Peter

[Ingo Egerlandt]

Peter and Alistair,

all fieldpost censored in the units at first.

But, when the Army censor handstamp 212 not stay on one place, it must given more than one Army censor handstamp 212 for this service.

I think about the censor handstamp must stay in England on a central place (Reading and later Bournemouth) and than send the envelope FPO 80 back to France and later to Belgium. And these send the same way, but goes than to London and other to USA and other countrys.

Base Censor in Cherbourg?

I control the machine cancellation again. They can about APO 1 or BAPO machine cancellation, but it is a big ask.

Let look us for the Army censor handstamp 212 was staying or it is given more than one 212 handstamps.

I found the censor label in my WW2 censor marks publication.

Ingo