Kerr 64.1-18 ==> 124.X

Join Roman and Simon as we do our best to test the listings made by Kerr and later by Chan. What has been missed? Which overprints have been assigned to the wrong towns? What is genuine and what is suspect? - You get the idea......

Moderators: archiem, doc032848, wlin98004

User avatar
Roman
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:20 am

Kerr 64.1-18 ==> 124.X

Post by Roman » Thu Aug 31, 2017 6:38 pm

Does someone do not agree that this set belongs to Kerr 124.X and not 64.1-18? ;)

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 7:14 pm
Location: Rural Sussex, England
Contact:

Re: Kerr 64.1-18 ==> 124.X

Post by admin » Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:00 am

For anyone who is mystified by this see my website http://manchukuostamps.com/HoLi.htm it will help you get your bearings.

Most of the covers I have seen are cancelled 兩江口 Liang-chiang-k’ou (I am using the spelling from Fisher). This is a nearby village see map (marked Holichen you will see Lienkiangkow just below it).

But - I had an old collection which I use as a reference. This was collected by an American soldier who was in Manchuria in 1946 and he collated a great many of these stamps and marked the towns from which he thought they originated. He states that this postmark comes from Ho Li.

I have seen a cover marked with a 鶴立 Ho Li cancel, so even though I have seen fewer covers marked Ho Li than I have Liang-chiang-k’ou, I still think Ho Li is the point of origin.

I could be convinced otherwise......
Attachments
HoLiCancels.jpg
HoLiCancels.jpg (120.08 KiB) Viewed 1759 times
HoLiMap.jpg
HoLiMap.jpg (90.04 KiB) Viewed 1759 times

User avatar
Roman
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:20 am

Re: Kerr 64.1-18 ==> 124.X

Post by Roman » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:31 am

I studied ~15 covers from „Ho Li” for Kerr 64.1-18 all cancelled at LienKiangkow.

Can you show me a single cover from Kerr 64.1-18 not cancelled in LienKiangkow which has also not a pure philately purpose?

The problem I see for this cover the “pure” philately purpose. The postal rate does not match and the cancellation date is few months before the stamps were (base on my research) issued. We need a more solid proof to put this set to Ho Li. Stamps from Kia Mu Sze have a very similar overprint as “Kerr 64.1-18” and they are practically same town with LienKiangkow divided just by a river …. Is this a random! ;)

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 7:14 pm
Location: Rural Sussex, England
Contact:

Re: Kerr 64.1-18 ==> 124.X

Post by admin » Sat Sep 02, 2017 3:38 am

My snapshot simply demonstrates that it is possible to find covers with a Ho li cancel. I accept that it is a weak case.

My cover was cancelled 19 March 1946, do you have any covers pre-dating this? Maybe the stamps were first issued in Ho Li but the post office moved down the road to Lienkinagkow.

User avatar
Roman
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:20 am

Re: Kerr 64.1-18 ==> 124.X

Post by Roman » Sat Sep 02, 2017 6:26 pm

Another interesting fact:

- All existing commercial covers with Kerr 64.1-18 dated June ~ August 1946 (expect the philatelic one).

- All existing commercial covers with Kerr 64.19-40 dated June ~ October 1946

As long we don't find any additional covers with Kerr 64.1-18 and a Ho Li cancel the sum of the facts that Kerr 64.1-18 belongs to Kerr 124.X are (at least for me) overwhelming.

Let us see if we can find more about this topic in the future! :)

doc032848
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 4:05 pm

Re: Kerr 64.1-18 ==> 124.X

Post by doc032848 » Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:59 pm

Members,
You have all been doing some good research here. I will tell you what I can as it may help.
Firstly, this specific province is almost maddening in its complexity. It seems that it was virtually anarchic at times.
The Russians coming in from Ussuria hit this area hard militarily, and the province had a serious bandit problem. The Russian Army did not bother to "clean up" the Areas they occupied. The CPC and Union Communists had a really hard time getting rid of these bandits.
Another one of the reasons is that it was in this area that the Jurchen under Nirhaji organized the "Manchu" people centuries earlier. So their hold on it was tenacious.
It was not until July, 1946 that it was pacified in the area where the Ho-li stamps came from. Fighting was ferocious around I-lan. Troops had to be brought in from Payan, which was incorporated in Hojiang by the CPC.
It is characteristic of postal districts to use the same overprints at all first class post offices open in that district.
So the fact that the Holi stamps are found used more frequently in Liang-jiang-k'ou than Ho-li is not unusual. Very often we find stamps of a central city or town being distributed to other towns in its district.
Most MLO sets were purchased at P. O. windows and the dealer or collector used to write the name of the P. O. they got them in on the selvage. But that does not mean that the stamps they bought originated there in all cases. We often find that overprints from different nearby places are identical. The person that bought them did not realize it at the time.
So we have problems like this one.
Now the question is, how do we explain the problem Roman raises about the evidence of covers? I think covers are very important evidence. They appear to be here as Roman points out.
Now we must test it. Does anyone know when the CPC Army liberated the two towns? That would help us a great deal!
BTW, which town(s) shows which color surcharge on cover?

User avatar
Roman
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:20 am

Re: Kerr 64.1-18 ==> 124.X

Post by Roman » Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:26 am

All covers of Kerr 64.1-18 (blue and black) shows without exception the cancel of Lianjiangkou (蓮江口) [Kerr 124].

Date of Liberation:
Heli (鶴立) = 1945 (August 13)
Lianjiangkou (蓮江口) = 1945 (August), exact date is so far unknown for me, but as the GMD was here never in power again and the whole area was liberated in 1945 (incl. Jiamusi).

The possibilitiy of a stamp issue in Heli or Lianjiangkou before June 1946 I also can't imagine. Lianjiangkou (蓮江口) was since 1939 under the jurisdiction of Heli (鶴立), but if this remained after 1945 is unclear. Even if the smaller outpost Lianjiangkou was instructed by the Heli local government to use the stamps Kerr 64.1-18 they should belong to Lianjiangkou and not Heli.

We should slowly ask us how Kerr grouped and located the stamps in his catalog? It was mainly not by the cancels of the covers, so far this I understand now. If the cover register in the back of his catalogs is correct he had only access to very few covers. A German senior expert for this area told me recently Kerr grouped and located the stamps based on old Harbin stamp dealer lists he had access to. If this would be the case, we need to put everything into question what Kerr wrote in his catalog. Hope someone can tell me the story I heard is not correct...

doc032848
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 4:05 pm

Re: Kerr 64.1-18 ==> 124.X

Post by doc032848 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:03 pm

Roman, Members,

You have asked some very good questions.

Firstly, thank you for the dates of liberation for Heli and Liangkiangkou. I must assume that they were liberated by the Red Army and control turned over to Zhou Pao-chung's Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army. However, when the Red Army defeated the Kwantung and Manzhoukuo Armies, they were not thorough. They only kept control of those places where they had something they wanted to take.
They left the disarming of the enemy's armies to the "ROC" in name, but in the hands of Zhou's forces in reality. Eventually, the CPC disarmed some of the bandit forces but not all. In the South they gradually took over control of the places under Zhou's forces, leaving the forces of Zhou to take control of the areas North of Changchun in greater numbers.
Both armies had their hands full clearing out the bandit armies, and setting up governments in the south (CPC) and north (NEAJUA).
I will finish this in the morning.

doc032848
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 4:05 pm

Re: Kerr 64.1-18 ==> 124.X

Post by doc032848 » Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:32 am

Continuing what I was saying, the army of the USSR did not do all the work expected of it in occupying the Northeast but left it to the NEAJUA to do so. If you would like to read more about this Army and Zhou Baozhong (Chou Paochung), I refer you to the work of Chong Sik Li. He and his comrades are widely discussed in the most of major histories written about this very period and prior.
Now to the covers, I ask you why it is necessarily the case, that because a set of stamps is found used more in a sub -post office than the central post office of a district, as here, the stamps HAVE to have originated there? When there is fighting going on in an area, can that happen?
Secondly, what are the criteria we use to decide what is a philatelic cover and what is not? Further, if stamps that exist almost exclusively on correspondence between collectors or on first day covers, or on orders from the main P. O. of any country, are philatelic in the strictest sense, then are they bogus? If that is the case, then at a bare minimum a l00,000 stamps, if not 200,000 "stamps" would have to be dropped by Scott, Michel and Gibbons as bogus.
Moreover, in many, many sets of our beloved Liberated Areas were eliminated as bogus because we have no covers for them,
a LOT of real stamps would have to be dropped as bogus.
This is true of many areas of the stamps of China.
Further, who told us the GMD got no personnel into Jiamuzi? The first wave was flown in in September, 1945 and the second larger wave in November, 1945 by the USSR. In addition, many of the bandit armies were in alliance with the GMD. So no communist army or bureaucracy controlled these areas for the final time until as late as 1947.
Moreover, the people in most areas were inclined to follow the international treaty and accept the GMD, and it took nothing less than heroic vanguard work by CCP cadres working in the background.
You must realize also, that the Manchu are not the Han. They are a different culture and some even say race of people than the Han. That was especially true of this area, as the biggest stronghold of any bandit group was in Yi-lan. It was not taken until late 1946.
I say simply that we can not understand any piece of evidence until we know the history within which it came to be.

As for how the stamps got listed in Kerr, and all the rest of it, I spent two years trying to figure that out. What I have written above was the result of 39 years of research now.

User avatar
Roman
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:20 am

Re: Kerr 64.1-18 ==> 124.X

Post by Roman » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:25 am

Gerorge, thank you for your post. We can't compare "regular" Liberated Area stamps if they not exists on covers as the same range like MLOs stamps not exists on covers. For almost in catalog listed LA stamps official journals existing who describe in detailed the announcement of the stamps. Because of the wartime situation many stamps were (as you said) invalid before they were official released to public. Anyhow the existing LA catalogs are still full of mistakes, for example Yang NW103-106 does not belongs to LA, they are issues of Second East Turkistan Republic (ETR) of China and so on. Generations of collectors never really cares about the history if Liberated Area stamps, otherwise I can't explain all these mistakes in the catalogs.

A philaletic cover is usually something like this:
- no postal rate is match
- full set on the cover
- often fake cancelled by real cancel back-dated.

A cirital area like "MLOs" which is widely contaminated with forgeries, bogus and philatelic issues the only chance we have to clean this up is to concentrate on commercial covers (here Kerr also made a clear separation).

Lianjiangkou (蓮江口) was 1946 in the hand of the CPC, there is no doubt about this. Many detailliert articles describe this as well. In Lianjiangkou was an important railway station as well. More information in Chinese you can get here for example: https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E6%9D%8E% ... B%E8%8A%9D

As long no new evidence comes out that can proof Kerr 64.1-18 (blue and black) were used (at any time) in Heli we need to accept the fact existing catalogs are wrong and Kerr 64.1-18 is the first issue of Kerr 124.X.

Post Reply