I bought a small collection of mostly used stamps recently and has been pleasantly surprised by some of the contents. There is however a slight disappointment with the most expensive item.
However, the date of 11 AUG 1905 seem recurrent for this issue. This suggests that this is a fixed date CTO for this surcharged set made for the benefit of collectors. This is similar to the Kudat A AU 15 1899 which is often seen in the earlier surcharged issue of 1899. This is also now believed to be a CTO cds rather than a fake as suggested in the SG catalogue and by early writers in the Sarawak Journal. A similar situation also existed for the Labuan D6 16 NOV 00 cancellation on the 1899 4c surcharged set.
This 1886 perf 14 stamp has the Sandakan D3 which was used for an extended period between 1885 and 1903. It was the earliest cds from Sandakan. Early examples have this distinctive brownish red colour.
I found this rather unusual a colour for a Sandakan D14. Almost certainly not common in my experience and would desire a clearer example.
In this small collection were these two 1886 overprinted stamps which was part of my reason for buying. They are uncommon in this nicely used condition. The half cent has an indistinct fiscal cancellation, I think. The 10c is a very pleasant surprise and a bonus as it has a faint Labuan 9 bar cancel which is clearer on the back and is probably rare for this issue.
The overprint is one of 3 settings and this being the most common. More details is available in a past post by clicking here.
Maybe I am over critical here but the ink of this surcharge seems too dark and thick for me in comparison with the other non inverts in my collection. However the bar cancel seems to overlay it and signify postal use. But it is quite easy to forge this type of bar cancellation as well even though it compares very well with the real thing.
It seems to fit the 14 bar cancel very well which is a big relief. So on balance maybe okay.
This is the Fournier forged surcharge on these stamps. It is very close but luckily the bottom of the two legs of the "n" seems a lot closer and the outlines of "6" is more blurred.