A correspondent tells us that the surcharged provisionals were not the first instances of the use of the scissors at Port Hood, an envelope emanating from that office and bearing the half of the 2c stamp, divided diagonally, having been found with the date July 27th, 1898. We do not know what the regulations are in Canada on the subject of receiving postage in cash, but we should suppose that if a postmaster runs out of 1c stamps, receives postage on certain letters, in cash, and then, to save an entry in his accounts, cuts 2c stamps in half and affixes the halves to the letters, it would not be considered a very heinous offence, and it would account for curiosities of this kind occasionally turning up.
But Port Hood does not seem to have been the only office in which the scissors were used, for the following letter from the Montreal Philatelist shows that stamps were bi-sected at at least one other office. In this instance the postmaster divided 5c stamps as well as the 3c though, apparently, he did not apply any surcharge to the fractions:—
Cross Road, Country Harbor,
April 17th, 1900.
Dear Sir,—Your enquiry re stamps to hand. At the time you mention the 2c postage was given us so suddenly that I was about out and all my neighbour P. M. was also out and as I could only charge the public 2c I could not afford to put on a 3c stamp so cut 3c and 5c to about even the thing up and sent them along. Three or four days' letters were mailed in this way, but I do not know where they went to.
Yours very truly,
E. S. Sweet, Postmaster.
The same journal in referring to the Port Hood provisionals makes some interesting comments which are worth reproduction, viz.:—
This postmaster must be a relic of the anti-confederation regime, when such mutilations were allowed, as even an entire absence of the required values would not warrant, under present regulations, this antiquated process. In such cases the postmaster should forward the money to the office on which his mail is forwarded with a request to affix the necessary stamps; he can handstamp or write the amount paid on each letter if desired, but that is not necessary. As these fractional provisionals of the Port Hood P. O. were never issued to the public, but were affixed by the postmaster and the amount paid stamped on them, they are no more deserving of collection as postage stamps than the hand stamp or pen mark on an envelope would be if no stamp or portion of a stamp had been affixed. If it is asked “Why cut up and affix the stamps then?” the answer is the postmaster knew no better and wanted to make his cash account correspond with the total of stamps sold and on hand. He tried to simplify his book-keeping—nothing more—but went about it in an antiquated and unlawful way.
While genuine copies of these splits on original covers are interesting curiosities their philatelic value is not of the greatest importance, for they were, seemingly, never sold to the public but simply affixed by the postmaster after he had received payment in cash, to simplify his accounts. They were certainly not authorised and if they had been detected at the larger offices they would not have passed as valid for postage.
In concluding our notes with regard to these cut stamps we reproduce a letter from the Post Office Department in reply to a collector who had made enquiry about the validity of the splits: