IVTHE PERFINS, FASHION OR NECESSITY ?

It is beyond any doubt that the companies and institutions which demanded and got the approval for the use of PERFINS on postmarks were those that had a great volume of mail (editorial offices, banks, companies, publishing houses).

As this procedure became known, an impressive number of companies, some of them of little economic significance (agencies, laboratories, chemist's shops, the customs, currency exchange agencies), got the approval to use their own PERFIN shape.

Private PERFINS occured for fear of theft, given the fact that a great number of employees had access to them, and the value of postmarks for forwarding the correspondence by mail was high and rather difficult to control.

In Romania, this procedure was allowed by the Post in May 1891, but actually used from 1 January 1892 (Telegraph Post Bulletin, page 464).

Is seems that the first beneficiaries of these approvals were „Universul”(The Universe) newspaper, „The National Bank of Romania”, „The Marmorosch Blank Bank”, observation based on the existence of their prints on the postmarks issued „Number in four corners”, withdrawn from circulation on 13 July 1894.

PERFINS would be made manually, and, in order to speed up the process, the sheets would be folded in two, or in accordion pleats, on rows or columns, thus resulting pairs: mirror, reversed, têtê-bêchê (separating from the sheet before or after the application of the PERFIN). Fig. 1.4

a) mirror b) reversed c) têtê-bêchê

Vertical fold Horizontal fold Fold in fourhtsFig. 1.4

There are pieces proving the folding of the sheet in acordion pleats, or in two, in the latter case being distinguished only pairs that are close to the folding, while those far from the folding may be noticed only on the sheet or stripes. Fig. 2.

a) Folding the sheet in two b) acordion pleatsFig. 2.4

In order to increase efficiency they would also use the technique of a single PERFIN applied on two postmarks at once (Fig. 3.), thus getting four postmarks with PERFINS in the case of overlapping sheets (Grigore Racoviceanu, „Filatela”(Philately) magazine no. 1 of 1970 stated that no more than two sheets could be marked with PERFINS at the same time).

Marking on two postmarksFig. 3.4

But the double marking on the same postmark is not justified, thus resulting it was made out of negligence (except for the double PERFINS with different shapes, which probably represented bankrupt companies, whose stocks of PERFINS were taken by another company and marked with a new PERFIN on the old one).We have knowledge about the existence of double identical reversed, overlapping or shifted PERFINS (Fig. 4.)

a) reversed b) shifted c) overlappingFig. 4.4

As time passed, the steel needles that executed the PERFIN became worn or broke and thus we frequently came accross incomplete PERFINS; those that can be read differently than the original are really spectacular (3&C insteasd of B&C, T T instead of U, 3S instead of BS etc.). Fig. 5.

Incomplete PERFINSFig. 5.4

It was certainly hoped that the method of making PERFINS would eradicate embezzlement, because once it was marked, the post card or the private envelope, could only be used by the company which authorized the PERFIN insignia.

Nevertheless, we identified frankings of postmarks with PERFINS, altough rarer, on souvenir illustrated postmarks, on envelopes without headings, the content of the text proving, undoubtedly, the abuse at the expense of the company. (Fig. 6.4)

Front side with PERFIN

Verso souvenir illustratedAbus at the expense of „Kepich Brothers Bank”

Fig. 6.4

So, the use of PERFINS was a fashion at that time ?No, if we take into account the persistence in spreading this procedure (800

shapes of Romanian PERFINS are known nowadays, but the list is growing bigger

every day), important companies growing the number of their Perfin machinery, with different shapes, although they had the same group of letters („The National Bank of Romania”, „The Romanian Commercial Bank”, „The Marmorosch Blank Bank” etc.)

Yes, because the companies followed the example of the multinational enterprises which were using their insignia in their branches in Romania (Dresdner Bank, Wiener Bank Verein, Heinrich Frank Shӧne etc.). Fig. 7.4

a) Dresdner Bank b) Heinrich Frank Schöne c) Wiener Bank Verein

Fig. 7.4

They strived to conceive suggestive and appealing PERFIN emblems, coats of arms they took pride in, as they extended the use of PERFINS on revenue stamps, charity postmarks, for the aviation, for the victims of natural disasters, vignettes, contribution stamps, for the Red Cross, culture and even on invoices, receipts and other administrative forms, an initiative which was rather useless. (Fig. 8.4)

PERFIN emblems

PERFINS on non-postage stampsFig. 8.4

The process of applying PERFINS on postmarks started being used in 1892 and there are PERFINS identified up to 1953, but there was no decree to interdict the use of this method, late dates still being found.

V

PERFINS APPLIED ON REVENUE STAMPS

Used to collect tax and duties, the revenue stamps are issued by national and local governments, as well as by official or accredited bodies.

They were introduced and used in England in 1694, following the example of Netherlands, but aiming at a more consistent contribution at the state budget, especially in terms of excise duties on brewery or distillery, as well as other categories of goods liable to duty. Their use was justified by the need to optimize the

government operations, as it proved the duties had already been paid. Almost similarly, the ruler Ghica Vodă, after a period of exile in Wien, returned to the throne and promulgated „No. 2 Ordinance”, a law imposing a stamp duty that shall lead to the first issue of a revenue stamp in Moldavia, named „Royal stamp” in the form of a sheet bearing an embossed stamp and wet stamp dating from January 12, 1856 at „Atelia Timbrului” Iași.

The first Romanian revenue stamps were printed on February 29, 1872, when the „Law for tax duty and registration” which established their use, passed.The implementing regulation for the law of tax duty and registration (no. 190/26 August/7 October 1872), stipulated that it would be implemented on 1/13 September 1872, and to sell the revenue stamps, the cashiers of the Ministry of Finance were authorized to lend them to people authorized by the law.

During this period, the Romanian postmarks of king Carol I were being printed in France and the Ministry of Finance was having discussions with the French authorities on the printing of revenue stamps,too.

At the same time, the same Ministry, founded „The Department for the Manufacture and Distribution of Stamps” – Stamp Factory, and starting with 1875 its printing house printed revenue stamps with the state coat of arms in black and the background in different colours, according to each value.

The year 1882 marked the extension of the stamp factory. Consequently, the following were printed : stamps for the Chambers of Commerce, statistical stamps (1919), social work and social report stamps (1915), monopoly stamps and tobacco tax stamps as well as consular stamps meant for the activity of embassies or for being applied on passports (1921), and 1929 was the issue year for the official postmarks meant to be franked for the mail of officials.

Official postmarks started being used once the financial independence of postal operations was acknowledged. From that moment on, all authorities or state institutions which had the privilege of forwarding mail for free by the post had to pay for its transportation. Issued in 1929, they were used until 15 March 1932 when they were withdrawn from circulation.

Famous for its beauty, the issue of revenue stamps representing the effigy of King Carol I was printed in 1911 and used until 1919. It was only in 1932 when the first series of revenue stamps, completely made by the Stamp Factory, representing the effigy of King Carol II was issued.

Revenue stamps could be used in post operations, but only those issued in order to pay tax imposed on a certain service. Similarly, revenue stamps, could also be applied, starting from 1893, on customs declarations if they were directed through the post. As the cases of fraud (either by forgery or by theft) had to be descouraged, they started making them by letterpress, by which they could produce works by numberings or by PERFINS in other cases.

The cancellation of a revenue stamps could be done in several ways, such as: -double crossing through in ink or in the shape of a cross by ink pencil Fig 1.5

Fig. 1.5

-by rubber stamps imbued in ink Fig 2.5

Fig. 2.5 -by punching together with a mobile postmark, by the use of metal stamps

Fig 3.5

Fig. 3.5

-by stamping applied on punched, unused revenue stamps Fig. 4.5

Fig. 4.5

-by tearing

As to their cancellation by the use of PERFINS there are the following ways known: Fig 5 -two-lettered PERFIN MF used by the Ministry of Finance, from October 1884 to April 1892, measuring 10x6 mm. - two-lettered PERFIN VP (Vama Poștei – Post Customs) used in Bucharest from May 1902 to September 1903 measuring 26x15 mm - two-lettered PERFIN VF (Vama Focșani- Foscani Customs) measuring 28x16mm

- 1-3 hole PERFINS used during 1889 – 1906 - „CANCELLED” PERFINS the word measuring 55x15 mm -„PAID” PERFINS applied on vignettes or fee stamps to establish funds -„OPERATED ON” PERFINS on administrative documents

Fig. 5.5

Similarly, on analyzing the procedure of applying PERFINS on postmarks, we can notice that, compared to the PERFINS encountered on the postmarks where the insignia could not take more than half of their surface (superior or inferior) – a measure imposed by the post, on revenue stamps there are two types of PERFINS.

1. PERFINS which, in order to simplify the operations, used the same type of emblems, so the same emblems as those of the postmarks complying with the compulsory provisions regarding the surface it should have taken on a postmark, were used on mobile revenue stamps, although they were not meant to circulate by mail.(fig 6.5).

The use of revenue stamps within the post is a different field that is not the subject of this paper.

Fig. 6.5

Personal machine for applying PERFINS Fig 7.5

Fig. 7.5Here, we can also identify two categories.

-the large ones, used particularly for the simultaneous application of the PERFIN on the postmark and on the form, in order to authenticate, some of them stand for the signature of a mandated person, similar to the cancellations of mobile stamps bearing signatures.(fig 8.5).

Fig. 8.5-customized PERFINS meant to eradicate abuse at the expense of the company

that were encountered within the postal circuit, but are included in the catalogues, in special chapters (fig 9.5)

Front side Verso C.A.P. PERFIN Front side M.J. PERFIN

Animal selling ticket (watermark) Application form (mobile stamp)

Fig.9.5

According to the distribution of fees of sale activities, this procedure was also used for the administrative documents with a heading, fiscally reinforced by the application of a dry stamp „THE STOCK EXCHANGE OF BUC.; on the verso there are revenue stamps for invoices and registers cancelled by tearing, bearing PERFINS of the companies, not included at present in the PERFIN catalogues.(fig.10.5)

PERFIN with AIC insignia 16x8mm

PERFIN with S.W. insignia 15x9 mmFig. 10.5

Unused mobile revenue stamps with PERFINSFig. 11.5

Although they were used by the Post too, some countries consider the revenue stamps as non-postage, but the competitions of the collections of revenue stamps are acknowledged by the International Federation of Philately, having their own commissioner, unlike the vast number of other non-postage stamps.

The non-postage stamps are those which are not usually marked with the name of the country or the issuer, and are issued, basically, with the intention of fundraisings for charity, for advertising or local stamps where there is no post office (zemstvo).

They are quite rarely categorized, having found examples like the following throughout the world: propaganda labels, commemorative stickers, exile stamps, stamps issued by another country, commemorative labels, railway labels, fancy or fun stamps, political stamps, hotel stamps or vignettes (other than the postmarks issued by the post).

The domain of the occasional issues should be mentioned, particularly those regarding cultural events or exhibition activities, on the occasion of which attractive models were issued, that were highly appreciated among the thematic exhibits.

But the study of this field is not the subject of this paper, our intention is only to point out the few PERFINS known on this kind of media (fig 12.5).

Railway transportation label cancelled by a pencil

Contribution stamps C.R. PERFIN for the House of WritersFig. 12.5

This again proves that the aplication of PERFINS was, and it still is in some countries, an indisputable method of eliminating reprehensible acts, of simplifying the postal activities or activities related to post, with extinctions in many fields, often using the same technical means.

VI

THE ENEMY OF THE POSTMARK

Motivated by the economic boom of the 4th decade of the 20th century, the excessive increase in the volume of mail brought serious problems to both private companies and authorities on handling and hoarding the postmarks necessary for forwarding.

In order to eliminate these shortcomings, in 1927 (according to Petre Murea), the mechanical franking of mail was allowed, actually introduced from 1 January 1929, by analogy with the foreign countries, „the systematization and Westernization of services” being the main purpose of the Romanian Post (official letter of D.G.P.T.T. to the Ministry of Interior number 214006/1931).

The franking machines (most of them produced by „Universal Postal Frankers Limited”) were the hope of relieving private companies (and not only) which could have saved a lot of money, staff and time (The Official Monitor of 23.01.1930).

If we take into account the fact that there was a perfect control of the amounts handled for franking mail and the issues related to counting and storage of postmarks became much simpler, we could easily understand why the mechanic franking flooded the field of mail forwarding (12 machines in January 1929, 112 in December 1929, 158 at the end of 1940).

For instance, the advantages of „Universal 5” franking machine were obvious, as it could frank any value, allowed the simultaneous use of a location stamp including the date and address of the company(sometimes even an advertisment), it was was sealed, being impossible to be used by unsuitable people and particularly, it counted the mail forwardings, making easier their final counting.

During the reference period, the abusive uses of postmarks had increased highly, that is why the application of PERFINS was widely used, but this procedure did not prove faultless, quite often postmarks with PERFINS being used on personal mail items (abuse at the expense of the company).

There were claims that even the authorities would either transport mail clandestinely by coaches (official letter 214006/1931), or would use stamped postmarks for franking (official letter 1560/1932), or they would forward mail in free of charge envelopes, with a heading, after the revenue stamps had been withdrawn from circulation (official letter 36487 of 1932), or they would wrongly use registered letters for simple forwardings.

All together, and each separately, they determined the Post to insist on the extension of the use of mechanic frankings, advertising through the provider of the Royal Court, Nicolae Ivanovici who took care of purchasing these products as the General Agent for Romania (official letter 4589 of 04. 05. 1932).

The mechanic franking was also supposed to cancel the compulsory postmarks, having clear instructions where they should be stuck so that they could be obliterated.

Only if the instructions were not followed, the compulsory postmarks or the payment tax postmarks were obliterated by the control stamp of the post offices, the ink cancellation being quite rare (Emila Drăgușin F11 of December 1987).

It seems that the franking by automatic machines diminished the interest for the application of PERFINS, but throughout time, we have the testimony of the philately pieces (and they were not small in number) mechanically franked while having PERFINS applied. ( Fig. 1.6 and Annex 2.).

Fig. 1.6

It is certain that, if the last Romanian PERFINS date back to 1953, the fanking by automatic machines kept on functioning, it still exists today and advances more and more, being the main enemy of the adhesive postmark.

(annex 1)

LIST OF THE COMPANIES HAVING USED THE SAME PERFIN ON THE TERRITORY OF SEVERAL

COUNTRIES

(annex 2)

LIST OF THE ROMANIAN COMPANIES WHICH SIMULTANEOUSLY USED PERFINS ON

POSTMARKS AND MECHANIC FRANKINGS

Page 1- „VOREL” Laboratory Piatra Neamț – machine „Universal Postal Frankers” no. 73, lace frame 22x25 mm. C 54 PERFIN emblem „C.V.”.- SOCEC Publishing House and Bookshop – machine „Francotyp”no. 46 lace frame 26x3o mm. S 18 PERFIN „SC” emblem.

Pag. 2- „Bayer” medicine factory – machine „Francotyp” no. 28 lace frame 26x30 mm. B11 PERFIN „BAYER” emblem.- „Adeverul - Dimineața” Publishing House – machine „Francotyp” no. 29 lace frame 26x30 mm. A11 PERFIN „A.D.” emblem.

Pag. 3-The General Bank of Wallachia – machine „Francotyp” no. 10 lace frame 26x30 mm. B75 PERFIN „B.G.T.R.” emblem.- „Gheorghe Stănoiu” Lottery– machine „Francotyp” no. 21 lace frame 26x30mm. G 12 PERFIN „GR” emblem.

Pag. 4- „MOLDOVA” Bank of Bucharest – machine „Francotyp” no. 5 lace frame 26x30 mm. B87 PERFIN „B.M.” emblem.-The Romanian Bank of Bucharest – machine „Francotyp” no. 9 lace frame 26x30 mm. B115 PERFIN „B.R.”emblem.

Pag. 5

- „CRISSOVELONI” Bank of Bucharest – machine „Hasler” no. 32 lace frame 28x32 mm. B27 PERFIN „B.C.” emblem.-Cartea Românească Bucharest – machine „Hasler” no. 36 lace frame 28x32 mm. C42 PERFIN „C.R.”emblem.

Pag. 6-The Romanian Credit bank of Bucharest – machine „Francotyp” no. 2 lace frame 26x30 mm. B43 PERFIN „B.C.R.” emblem.-Oțelul Poldi Bucharest – machine „Francotyp” no. 74 lace frame 26x30 mm. O9 PERFIN „OP”emblem.

-2-Pag. 7

-„Rudolf Mosse” S.A. Bucharest – machine „Francotyp” no. 22 lace frame 26x30 mm. R24 PERFIN „R.M.”emblem.

- Reșița Factories and Domaines– machine „Francotyp” no. 4 lace frame 26x30 mm. U4 PERFIN „U.D.R.” emblem.

Pag. 8-INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER CORPORATION – machine Francotyp no. 55 lace frame 26x30 mm. I7 PERFIN „I.H.C.”emblem.- AND REIGER Sibiu – machine „Universal Postal Frankers” lace frame 22x25 mm. PERFIN of unlisted company „R.A. emblem”

Pag. 9-BOEHLER S.A. Bucharest – machine „Francotyp no. 144 lace frame 26x30 mm. O3 PERFIN of unlisted company „O.B.” emblem.-Romanian Bank S.A. Bucharest – machine „Francotyp” no. 150 lace frame 26x30 mm. B117 PERFIN „B.R.” emblem.

Pag. 10-Nicolaie Ivanovici provider of the Royal Court – machine „Universal 5” no. 234 lace frame 22x25 mm. N8 PERFIN „N.I.” emblem.-The National Bank of Romania, Bucharest – machine „Francotyp” no. 153 lace frame 26x30 mm. B103 PERFIN „B.N.R.”emblem.

Pag. 11-Heinrich Frank Söhne Brașov – machine „Francotyp” no. 136 lace frame 26x3o mm. Ib/1 PERFIN, heraldic badge.- MOLDOVA S.A. Bank of Iași – machine „Francotyp” no. 47 lace frame 26x30 mm. B91 PERFIN „B.M.”emblem.

Pag.12-The Romanian Banking Association, Bucharest – machine „Francotyp” no. 99 lace frame 26x30 mm. S16 PERFIN „S.B.R.”emblem.- „DURA” Electrical Company, Timișoara – machine „Universal Postal Frankers” no.109 lace frame 22x25 mm. D23 PERFIN „DURA” unlisted company.

Pag. 13

- „HERZ” Publishing House, București – machine „Francotyp” lace frame 26x30 mm. H7 PERFIN „HERTZ” emblem.-The Official Journal and the State Printing House, Bucharest – machine „Francotyp” lace frame 26x30 mm. M31 PERFIN „M.O.emblem” unlisted company.

NoteThe references to PERFINS were made according to „the Catalogue of Commercial PERFINS” László Erős 1996.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Làslò Erős – Catalogue of the Romanian Commercial PERFINS, Transfilex Publishing House, Cluj Napoca – 1996

Nicolaie Tripcovici – Passion, study, competition, Sport Turism Publishing House, 1985

Vojtech Maxa Roumanian Perfins, RPS 2; 4./1981 and no.. 1; 3; 4. /1982

Vojtech Maxa – Notes on Roumanian Perfins, The Perfins Buletin no.3/1974

George Pataki – More on Roumanian Perfins, RPS no. 4/1982

Tam Llewellyn Eduards – Perfins of Roumania, RPHB no. 1 (31) April 2000

Grogore Racoviceanu – Noi contribuții privind mărcile perforate din România F1/1970

Ed. Konya și T.G. Comănescu – PERFINS of Postmarks F9/1964

Emilia Drăgușin – Study of Stamps on Mechanically Franked Mail F11 – 12/1987

Valereiu S. Neaga – Special Romanian Stamps until 31. 12. 1947

Iosif Micu – Dominant Types of Romanian Mechanic Frankings, F10/1974

Mircea Pătrășcoiu – 103 series of Franking Machines during 1929 – 1947, F1/2008

Călin Marinescu/Ștefan Vîrtaci – Revenue Stamps used by the Romanian Post 1872 – 1915, Palimpsest Publishing House, 2009