Explaining 1961 Dues Assessed a U.S. Air Postcard

by Stephen S. Washburne



I've a continuing interest in U.S. > Portugal mail, and in particular items assessed postage due. Recently I acquired the puzzling card below (fig.1) and set out to explain its intriguing postal markings and rates.

The puzzle starts with why it was charged postage due in Portugal, since the U.S. surface postcard rate was then 7¢(1), exactly the U.S. franking! One would naively think that although endorsed "by airmail" and an airmail stamp was used, the card could and would travel at the surface rate.

First, details of the card and its markings. Picture postcard of the Goodyear hangar at Akron w/ two blimps; personal 'wish you were here message' from "Henriques" to Eng. Jose Luis Blanco Nogueira in Lisboa. Franking 7c Airmail issue of August, 1959 (Scott C60) tied w/ AKRON OH | SE.17 | 1961 cds. Violet h/s "Air Mail to U.S. Exchange" and "T/ 24 centimes" in circle complete the U.S. markings.

Portuguese markings: cds CORREIOS | 24 SET 61 | LISBOA - 1, "2.40" twice (black & blue ballpoint), blue crayon "1567" and due stamps totaling 2.40 escudos (Scott J58,63; Afinsa P58,63) cancelled with pen "X".

Portuguese markings are easily explained once we accept the "T/ 24 centimes" marking as requiring the receiving postal administration (Portugal) to collect 24 gold centimes, the UPU fictitious currency, whose equivalent was 8¢ U.S. and 2.40 Portuguese escudos. The Lisboa arrival cds indicated receipt and commencement of processing. The crayon "1567" was the sequence number of the postal articles the clerk had processed that day and the one of the "2.40"s also a clerk marking. Due stamps were applied and presumable cancelled by the carrier, who added the other "2.40" upon receipt of payment from the addressee in Rua Castilho.

Now for the U.S. Markings and why it was charged. The keys are that the card bears no return address and the violet "Air Mail to U.S. Exchange" mark. If it had borne a return address, it would simply have been returned for postage. But according to Wawrukiewicz(2):

" The UPU Convention of Brussels of 1952 . . . concerning short paid airmail articles . . . if the article bore no return address, it was to be sent by air to the US exchange office of dispatch, [emphasis added] regardless of its weight, provided it bore at least 75% of the required airmail postage; otherwise the airmail markings were to be canceled, the article endorsed "Not in Airmail," and forwarded by surface means."

Here the required postage was 11¢(3), hence the deficiency was 4¢-a bit less than the required 75%. The UPU rule of double the deficiency was still in effect, and since one cent was equal to 3 centimes, the card was marked 4¢ x 2 x 3 = 24 centimes.

As a final note, 2.40 esc seems to have been a popular charge: I have cards incoming from France & Holland in this period bearing identical charges.

Please direct any comments to the author at P. O. Box 43146, Philadelphia, PA 19129-3146 or

mailto:stephen.washburne@verizon.net

1. Wawrukiewicz, Anthony S. and Henry W. Beecher. U.S. International Postal Rates, 1872-1996. (CAMA, Portland, OR) p. 64. Rate in effect July 1, 1961-April 30, 1967.

2. ibid., p. 256.

3. ibid, p. 209. Rate in effect July 1, 1967 to April 30, 1967.