Saucy Jack Postcard

[Cap'n Jack]

I came here to be pertinent, not impressive.

[Stewart P Evans]

In Fairness

In fairness to Simon my wording was bad; what is misleading is to suggest that the card arrived as in the image shown, without a stamp.

His montage, of course, showed the postcard how it would have looked with its stamp, to illustrate his point.

Below are two scans of Ripper-related postcards of the day showing two types of pre-paid postcards -

[Simon Wood]

Hi Stewart,

The only problem with your explanation for the missing postcard stamp is that the words "POST CARD", "THE ADDRESS ONLY TO BE WRITTEN ON THIS SIDE", the Royal Insignia and stamp were all printed in the same colour—described in various philatelic books as 'brick red'.

There was therefore no technical reason for the stamp not to have reproduced.

The penny stamp on the Dear Boss envelope was lilac—Queen Victoria's favourite colour—and having a reduced red content did not reproduce as well, though its outline is faintly visible.

So, no stamp and no "postage due" marks on an official 1888 Post Office postcard which we know carried a pre-paid printed stamp.

There has to be another explanation.

I would respectfully suggest that it had something to do with the passing-off of a rather clumsy attempt at a postmark—a postmark, incidentally, which bears no resemblance to its counterpart on the opposite side of the postcard.

I make no apology for the implications. Sometimes, in order to move on, you have to think the unthinkable.

Regards,

Simon

[John Bennett]

The 'saucy Jacky' postcard, postmarked 'Oc 1 88', is missing and has been for many years, certainly beyond living memory.

We do not have a photograph of the postcard. What we have is the 1888 police colour facsimile of it (I have an original) and the early colour printing process used appears to have allowed only red and black. Therefore, presumably for that reason, the stamps were not shown on either the 'Dear Boss' letter, which carried a stamp-sized red outline and the postcard on which the stamp area is covered by the black postmark and the underlying stamp does not appear. Had a stamp have not been on the card then the usual postage due rubber stamps should have been present. I thought that I had explained this in the past on these boards.

[ATTACH]3507[/ATTACH]

Stewart,
This is purely a technical question - are we to assume that the facsimile techniques used in these cases fail to register colours other than red and black?

[John Bennett]

I shouldn't be surprised if someone didn't post an image of a letter from Jack the Ripper from 1888 with a lined Woolworth's notepad as the background.
Whatever next?

Oh dear, AP. Not a particularly impressive post.

[Stewart P Evans]

Woolworth's?

'To make up such images is misleading.'
I shouldn't be surprised if someone didn't post an image of a letter from Jack the Ripper from 1888 with a lined Woolworth's notepad as the background.
Whatever next?

What has Woolworth's got to do with it?

[Cap'n Jack]

'To make up such images is misleading.'

I shouldn't be surprised if someone didn't post an image of a letter from Jack the Ripper from 1888 with a lined Woolworth's notepad as the background.
Whatever next?

[Stewart P Evans]

'Dear Boss' Envelope

I am posting the images below to illustrate that the stamp (which is there on the original) is missing on the police colour facsimile of the 'Dear Boss' envelope. The edge of the stamp is shown by a red lined outline of the stamp.

[Stewart P Evans]

The 'saucy Jacky' Postcard

The 'saucy Jacky' postcard, postmarked 'Oc 1 88', is missing and has been for many years, certainly beyond living memory.

We do not have a photograph of the postcard. What we have is the 1888 police colour facsimile of it (I have an original) and the early colour printing process used appears to have allowed only red and black. Therefore, presumably for that reason, the stamps were not shown on either the 'Dear Boss' letter, which carried a stamp-sized red outline and the postcard on which the stamp area is covered by the black postmark and the underlying stamp does not appear. Had a stamp have not been on the card then the usual postage due rubber stamps should have been present. I thought that I had explained this in the past on these boards.

[Stewart P Evans]

Wrong

Hi Stewart,
The Saucy Jacky postcard which arrived at Central News was reproduced on Metropolitan Police posters as I showed—sans pre-paid stamp. I didn't make it up. It's a fact.
And there's nothing misleading about showing what the postcard should have looked like.
Regards,
Simon

I am not suggesting that you are deliberately misleading anyone, merely that you are wrong. Your montage of what the postcard received looked like is wrong. You are suggesting there was no stamp, you are wrong to do so.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Stewart,

The Saucy Jacky postcard which arrived at Central News was reproduced on Metropolitan Police posters as I showed—sans pre-paid stamp. I didn't make it up. It's a fact.

And there's nothing misleading about showing what the postcard should have looked like.

Regards,

Simon

[Stewart P Evans]

Not

This is what the Saucy Jacky postcard should have looked like—

[ATTACH]3503[/ATTACH]

And this is what arrived at Central News—

[ATTACH]3504[/ATTACH]

Where's the pre-paid stamp?
Simon

That is not what arrived at the Central News office. To make up such images is misleading.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Chris,

Thanks for the clarification. My mistake. I should have put 1894 as the first year in which adhesive stamps were permitted on postcards. This change was partly in response to complaints from private postcard manufacturers who had to go to the time and expense of having their postcards overprinted by the Inland Revenue and couldn't compete with the Post Office on price.

Saucy Jacky was an official Post Office postcard. Privately-manufactured postcards were not allowed to bear the Royal Insignia.

Regards,

Simon

[Chris Scott]

Interesting point, Simon
This article might help:

http://www.rpsl.org.uk/thames_valley/index.html

Unpaid And Underpaid Postcards by Michael Pitt-Payne FRPSL
This is a display of Post Cards which have been surcharged either because they were underpaid or because they were "contrary to regulations" and it covers the period from 1870 to 1924. The first official post cards were issued in the UK on 1st October 1870 and they were subject to regulations regarding the use of the front of the card, the attachment of labels and redirection. If the regulations were not complied with, the post card became liable to the letter rate and was surcharged as is demonstrated in the display.

As from 1st September 1894 the public were allowed to send Private Cards bearing adhesive stamps through the post and these were subject to regulations, which are set out in the display together with examples of how they were applied in respect of size, attachments and the materials used.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Trevor,

Up until 1896 all postcards were pre-paid with a printed-on halfpenny stamp. In 1888 it was impossible to buy a non pre-paid postcard.

This is what the Saucy Jacky postcard should have looked like—



And this is what arrived at Central News—



Where's the pre-paid stamp?

Regards,

Simon