MexiMail

Sad news to report the passing of Jose Gilberto Chong on February 19.  Gilberto was a long time member of MEPSI and a dealer and author of La Presencia China En Mexico, A Traves Del Correo 1903-1976.   He was a very sweet man who always had a smile and a warm greeting for all.  He will be sorely missed by his family and friends.
Descanse En Pax Don Gilberto.

Greetings fellow MEPSI members,


I've just been informed that PIPEX 2021 where we have scheduled our annual meeting this year has been changed to a VIRTUAL SHOW.  It will not be an in person show this year.  This change is a result of the slow roll out of the vaccine and the fear that many people who would normally attend will not be able to.


We will still hold our annual General Membership meeting and Board meeting but they will be held on Zoom.  Exhibits will still be accepted but will be online instead.  This information has not been posted on the PIPEX 2021 website yet but will be soon.  The fees for entering exhibits will be lower.  We would also like to plan presentations or seminars.  More information will follow once we have it.  Thank you.
Marc E. Gonzales

Spuff,
The 1856 red 4r reprints were printed from 4r plate II.  There are complete sheets known of this plate of Scott #9, they have no plate line and less space between horizontal rows than plate I.  In the Expert Committee reference collection I see many of the 4r 1856 reprints have plate positions identified so someone in the past (perhaps Bash) went to the trouble of identifying these positions on the 1856 reprints.  Attached is an example.  I have not seen such scratches on reprints before and don't think the scratches are what identifies these as positions 11-12.  I'm not sure these are scratches, perhaps smears.
Marc

I want to inform everyone that PIPEX2020 has officially been cancelled due to the COVID 19 pandemic.  Prepaid exhibit and banquet fees will be refunded.  During these trying times please stay healthy.
Marc E. Gonzales

The original printings of the 1864 Juarez issue differ from the reprints in shade and thickness of the paper.  The reprints are extremely common, the original stamps quite rare and expensive.  The reprints have been used to create fake used stamps.

My question is do unused stamps with no overprints exist from the original printing?  I've always assumed that an unused stamp with no overprint is a reprint, but would like to verify that this is correct and that unused un-overprinted original printing stamps are not known.  Thanks.
Marc Gonzales

Farley,
The Great Western departed Mobile on March 9 for Vera Cruz.  The "3" rate is for the delivery in Vera Cruz.  The cover would have been dropped off in Vera Cruz but after leaving the British ship it would then enter the Mexican Postal system and would need to pay postage.  3 reales would be for an overweight cover, i.e. up to 3/4 oz. 

Outgoing covers mailed from Vera Cruz to be put on a British ship would still pay the internal Mexican postage to deliver to the British consul for placement on the British ship.  That's why you would see two VC cancels on outgoing covers, one Mexican and one British.  It should be the same for incoming covers, otherwise the letters would have to be privately delivered.  I don't understand why there are no other Mexican markings or British markings.  The Mobile cancel is not clear but appears to be a US mark, not a British mark.  The 25 is likely the US postage charge, but where is the British charge?
Marc Gonzales

Rodolfo,
I think the stamp could have a PUEBLA overprint but I don't think it is an 1867 Provisional usage.  Although the area you highlighted looks like it could be 1867 year, the typical Puebla cancels used at this time did not show the year, only the month and day i.e. Sch. 1147.  1861 Hidalgos used provisionally in 1867 often have the Gothic Mexico name which proves they are provisionally used, other examples may have the PUEBLA name and unless on a dated cover can't be identified as they would look just like an 1861 usage.  Attached is example of a provisional PUEBLA usage, as you can see there would be no way to say this is 1867 usage unless it had a letter and docketing.
Marc Gonzales