Another Triply Taxed Bill of Exchange

As I reviewed documents in anticipation of resuming to blog after a two month hiatus, I discovered that I had not finished a series of blogs about foreign bills of exchange. We featured a number of interesting bills both incoming to, and outgoing from, the United States during the series. To review those prior blogs and the varied countries and territories included in the series, go here.

I had planned to conclude the series by blogging about two triply taxed bills of exchange, one from Bob Patetta's collection and one from mine. Trying to feature them both in a single blog became laboriously difficult. Realizing that it likewise would be laborious to read, at the last moment I decided instead to blog about them separately.

I featured Bob Patetta's triply taxed document here, and then moved on to another subject. Actually, I had delayed blogging about my triply taxed document hoping to receive comment regarding the questions raised about Bob's document, especially info about the then Swiss cantonal tax rates pertinent to my document as well. Enough background, time to look at the document at hand; and I'll again ask about the Swiss tax rates as my query remains unanswered.

The Western State Bank Of Chicago

Sight Draft of The Fred Knapp Company

March 27, 1902

Although reduced at left, enough of the sight draft remains intact to extrapolate the likely missing text using wording standard to similar drafts. Here's the full text, with the proposed missing wording in red:

At Sight ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Pay to the

Order of The Western State Bank of Chicago~~~~~~~

~~~One Hundred Forty-three and no/100~~~Dollars

Value Received and charge the same to account of ___

The draft was written personally by Fred H. Knapp, in his capacity as Secretary and Treasurer of The Fred H. Knapp Company. It's unclear however to whom the draft was addressed other than to say it was to a company in Fribourg, Switzerland whose name ends with the letter "p".

Today's Standard Knapp, Inc. traces it's roots back to the Fred H. Knapp Company and it's interesting to note the company's website mentions having manufacturing licences in Switerland as that provides a tantilizing hint that Knapp might have set up European operations in Fribourg by 1902 and this draft might have represented a payment to that operation. At least the name Knapp ends in the letter "p"!

Reverse of Knapp Draft

Showing US and Swiss Revenues

and most of the Transit Endorsements

That the draft was taxed 8c by the Western State Bank, whose cancel obliterates the four R164 battleship documentary issues, suggests the amount was $143 as the tax for outbound bills of exchange, as this draft was considered, was 4c per each hundred dollars in value or fraction thereof.

Apparently the Brits taxed transient Bills of Exchange passing through their banks a flat fee of one penny as both Bob Pattetta's draft fo $1,000+ and this one of $143 were taxed the same, one penny. The tax rate in the Swiss Canton of Fribourg however must have been a variable rate as Bob's $1,000+ draft was taxed 140 centimes and this $143 draft just 20 centimes.

Triply Taxed Bills of Exchange

One of the joys of blogging about the taxed documents of the Spanish American War era has been corresponding and trading notes with other collectors. In the course of blogging about bills of exchange, Bob Patetta and I discovered we both possessed bills of exchange that had been taxed in three countries: The United States, Great Britain, and Switzerland. As "philatelic hat tricks" so-to-speak, they hold prized status in our respective collections.

Bob's is in the form of a Customer's Bank Draft; mine was written as a Sight Draft. Initially I thought it would be fun to include both in the same blog, but decided instead they deserved separate attention. Here's Bob's example.

To accomodate all the transit endorsements plus an explanatory note, a piece was added, (at right on front view), so the document is elongated to the degree that it's hard to show in its entirety. I've done so, for the record, in the first two illustrations below, and will discuss the draft from the next set of four detail scans.

The First National Bank of Wallace, Idaho

Customer Draft of John Ritz

August 3, 1898

Patetta scan

Reverse of Ritz Draft

Showing Swiss Revenues and Transit Endorsements

Patetta scan

Detail view of Ritz Draft

Showing US and GB Revenues

Patetta scan

The draft was written by John Ritz, Wallace, Idaho to Fredrik Ritz, Buren an der Aare, Canton Bern, Switzerland. As best I can determine, 5,260 Swiss Francs equated to slightly more than US$1,000. At 4-cents per $100 in value or fraction thereof, the proper tax rate for singly written bills of exchange, the US tax was 44 cents (11 x $.04), so Ritz overpaid the tax by 1-cent. The US stamps are pencancelled "J R" with a further date stamp of "AUG 3 1898" added by the Wallace Bank. Also note what appears to be an internal bank tracking number, 9909, within the the oval cancel at upper right:

The First Bank of Wallace

No. 9909

Wallace, Idaho.

As the endorsements on the reverse will show, the draft passed through the Hanover National Bank in New York to the Union Bank of London which taxed the draft One Penny atop the US stamps. Cancelled:

UNION BANK OF LONDON

19 AUG 1898

LIMITED

Detail of Top Portion of Reverse of Ritz Draft

Showing Swiss Revenues and Two Endorsements

Patetta scan

Incredibly the draft apparently reached Bern the next day, August 20, the date of the Marcuard & Co. cancel shown below. Marcuard & Co. added the Bern Canton revenues, shown above, totaling 41 centimes. We'd appreciate receiving comment at 1898revenues@gmail.com from anyone able to explain the Swiss tax rates.

If you look closely at the Pay Hanover National Bank Or Order endorsement of the First Natl Bank of Wallace, you'll note it has been overprinted with a three-tiered boxed ENDORSEMENT ERASED cancellation with wavy lines in the top and bottom tiers. Again, we'd appreciate comment from anyone who could explain which party may have added that cancel and why.

Detail of Middle Portion of Ritz Draft

Showing Three Endorsements
Patetta Scan

The above middle portion of the draft shows the tranmittal endorsement from the Union Bank of London to Marcuard & Co. in Bern as well as Marcaurd's subsequent endorsement to an unknown entity in Buren:

Payez a l' ordre de la

???????? der ???????? Buren

Valeur en compte

Berne, le 20 Aout 1898

The final endorsement is important as that's the party that ultimately would have communicated with Fredrik Ritz. Again, we seek comment about that unknown party.

Detail of Bottom of Ritz Draft

Showing an Explanatory Note
Patetta Scan

Finally, we'd appreciate hearing from anyone who could translate the text of the note written at the bottom of the draft.

Despite the questions raised it is a wonderful piece demonstrating taxation in three political realms and our thanks go to Bob Patteta for providing the scans.

Outbound Bill of Exchange from US to Mexico

Consolidated Kansas City Smelting and Refining Co.

22.58 Silver Peso Bill of Exchange to Mexico

July 13, 1898

The Consolidated Kansas City Smelting and Refining Company was a huge conglomorate of numerous companies by 1898 including the Mexican Ore Company ( bill signed by their cashier), and the El Paso Smelting Works (cancel on US stamps). Without the documentation that likely accompanied this payment it's hard to tell who was paying for what other than someone involved with the CKCS&RC was sending 22.58 Pesos to someone in Mexico.

Because 22.58 Peso is less than $100 yet the bill was taxed 4-cents with a pair R164 battleship revenues, it's likely that only a single copy of this bill was issued. The relevant tax was 2-cents per $100 on each copy if bills were written in sets of two or more, or 4-cents per $100 if written singly. The bill was also taxed 4 centovos in Mexico by the Banco Comercial de Chihuahua in Juarez, just accross the Rio Grande from El Paso.

Today Juarez is one of the most violent cities in the world due to the Mexican drug wars, but in 1898 there was an open border between Mexico and the United States.

El Paso Smelting Works cancel:
E.P.S. Works
JUL 13, 1898

What are the Odds? Another Money Wire to Richwald!

Receipt for Money Wire to Richwald

F. A. Kail Banking and Exchange Office

42 Avenue C, New York, NY

June 6, 1899

Our thanks go to JW Palmer for providing today's subject document. Actually JW sent this scan to me several years ago asking if I thought it had anything to do with foreign exchange. We both assumed it involved foreign exchange, but alone, by itself, neither of us understood it was a receipt for a money wire. It wasn't until some other similar documents, like the P. V. Obiecunas, Max Schamberg, and Maurice Grau receipts, came to our attention did we recognize this to be another example of a money wire. Sometimes in philately, as elsewhere, understanding doesn't occur until a critical mass of material is accumulated. Alone each piece is hard to understand, but looking at them all together makes it easy to see that they are simply receipts for transfers of money that didn't involve paper documents; i.e. money wires!

And it never ceases to amaze me what I learn when I look at items critically, as one must when creating an exhibit, or writing an article, or, in this instance a blog. It wasn't until I decided to include this item in this series of blogs about money wires that I recognized this K. A. Kail Co. money wire for 50 Kr. sent from New York City is addressed to a party residing in Richwald, the same small town in the Austro-Hungarian Empire to which the P.V. Obiecunas money wire was addressed. Given the thousands of immigrants who must have sent money back to family and friends in Europe, what are the odds that of the handful of recorded examples, two (one from Pittsburgh and one from New York City) would be addressed to the same small town where less than 1,000 people resided?

As 50Kr is less than $100 it is properly taxed as a singly written bill of exchange, the tax for which was 4-cents per each $100 in value, or fraction thereof.

Other than the date, June 6, 1899, the cancel regrettably is illegible.

We'd appreciate reports to 1898revenues@gmail.com of other examples of similar money wire receipts.

Another Money Wire to Europe

Receipt for Money Wire to Europe

P.V. Obiecunas, Pittsburg(h), PA

December 28, 1899

Wasko Szandala sends 40Kr. (about $10.00) by wire through P.V. Obiecunas in Pittsburg(h), PA to Mila(sp?) Czupa in Boglarka, Hungary, a small village now located in Northeast Slovakia. The "P.O. Richwald" reference suggests that the money would be sent to that neighboring town as it had a post office where the money could be received.

According to the 1913 census Boglarka had 248 inhabitants, all Ukrainian(Ruthenian). Richwald had 850 residents, all Slovaks. Although Richwald had a post office, it did not have a telegraph. The closest town with telegraph service was Bardejov, about 15 Km to the East.

It's unclear where Obiecunas sent the wire, but the money was most likely converted to a postal money order and sent to Richwald for delivery.

Untied Pen Cancel: P. V. O.

Stamp Tied by Datestamp and Payer's Name

That the stamp is tied by the name of the payer and the datestamp suggests it was already affixed to a blank receipt form. Many Pittsburg area immigrants likely sent funds to family members in Europe via Obiecunas and other similar firms providing banking and European exchange services. That the P.V.O. pencancel doesn't tie suggests it was a precancel, another hint the forms were prestamped and ready for use.

As the amounts were most likely small (under $100) it would have made sense to set up the receipts in advance with a 4-cent stamp paying the tax on a singly written outbound bill of exchange. Again, as there was no financial instrument was actually drawn, the receipt provided the medium for recording the tax payment for the transaction.

International Money Wire Taxed as a Bill of Exchange

Receipt for Money Wire to Europe

Max Schamberg & Co., Pittsburg, PA

March 11, 1901

For years Max Schamberg was the consul for the Austro-Hungarian Empire, or at least for the Austrian Monarchy, in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. In 1866 he founded his own company providing banking and transportation services, primarily to serve the ever increasing immigrant population in Pittsburg. He sold the business in the 1880s to Issac E. Hirsch, who is identified as the proprietor in the upper right corner of this 1901 receipt.

That this receipt for 10 Roubles is taxed 4-cents suggests that the money was transferred to Europe via cable where it either was converted to a postal money order or sent via registered mail to the intended recipient. Had an actual bill of exchange been drafted and sent through the mail, the tax stamps would have been affixed directly to that document and not this receipt. The receipt simply served as an appropriate medium for the tax stamps required by the wire transaction.

We do seek assistance regarding the name and location of the recipient. It appears to be Szachne? Lawsonordiz? in Lasman? We may be far off the mark with those spellings. As the amount was given in roubles, I suspect this may have been going to the Ukrainian area of the Austro-Hungarian empire, but that's purely supposition. Can anyone offer more definitive information?

As best I can determine, 10 roubles would have been worth around $100 in 1900. It would have been considered to be a singly-written bill of exchange for which the tax was 4-cents per $100 in value, so the tax of appears to be is correct. We'd appreciate comments from anyone who might otherwise confirm the exact exchange rate between roubles and dollars in 1901.

Double-ring Circular Date Stamp:

MAX SCHAMBERG & CO.

MAR/11/1901

Pittsburg, Pa.

Maurice Grau Heads for Paris

John Munroe & Co. Bank Transaction Statement

for a Money Wire Taxed as a Bill of Exchange

September 26, 1898

Tim Kohler scan

From 1898 to 1903 the Maurice Grau Opera Company produced the operatic season at the Metropolitan Opera House in New York City. Grau often travel abroad personally to secure contracts to bring top European talent to the Met's New York stage.

The above banker's statement documents a cable transfer of 50,000 francs "for credit of" Maurice Grau indicating that Grau was wiring money to himself for use while in Paris. As there was no tangible draft, check, or bill of exchange upon which to affix the tax stamps required by the exchange transaction, the bank placed them on the statement sent to Grau documenting the transaction.

That no actual tangible bill of exchange ever existed for this transaction highlights the point that what was being taxed in this instance was the transaction, not the document itself. In other instances however, such as with miscellaneous legal certificates, it clearly was the War Revenue Law's explicit intention that the physical document be taxed, and not necessarily the underlying transaction it represented.

Double-ring Circular Date Stamp

JOHN MUNROE & CO.

SEP/26/1898

*

Tim Kohler scan

The tax on an outbound single-copy bill of exchange, as this was considered, was 4-cents per $100, or fraction thereof. The 50,000 francs, plus the cost of the cable, converted to $9,587.83. So the tax should have been calculated as (96 x .04 = $3.84). Presumably the clerk handling the transaction miscalculated as $3.88 in tax is present on the statement, an overpayment of $0.04. Usages of the $3.00, R174 Commerce issue, and the 3-cent, R165 Battleship are uncommon; to find them both on the same document, extremely so.

Our thanks go to Tim Kohler for providing this unusual bill of exchange document.

A Bill of Exchange from the Territory of Hawaii

459:3:8 Pounds Sterling Bill of Exchange (Second Copy)

from Bishop & Co. Honolulu, Territory of Hawaii

to Gaspar Sylva for payment through N.M. Rothschild & Sons, London

July 13, 1900

Cancel from Reverse

BISHOP & CO.,

JUL 13 1900

HONOLULU, H.I.

Hawaii became a US territory on July 7, 1898 just days after the War Revenue Law took effect. The law was applicable to US Territories as well as States so applicable documents from Hawaii had to be taxed as they were in all the other US Territories at the time. Examples of taxed documents from the US Territories are uncommon and from Hawaii, even moreso.

At the standard rate of exchange, $4.85/£1.00, £459:3:8 equaled about $2,228, so this second of exchange from a set of three was properly taxed 46 cents at the rate of 2-cents per $100 in value or fraction thereof.

Because of the vagaries of the mails and other forms of transit, it was standard practice for banks and major companies to write payment drafts like this bill of exchange in sets of two or three copies, sending each separately, often by different routes, with the understanding that only the first to arrive would be negotiated. All copies of bills of exchange written in sets were taxed at the rate of 2-cents per $100 or fraction thereof. As this second of exchange shows no evidence of being cashed, one of the other copies must have arrived first.

Bishop and Company, founded by Charles Bishop, was the first bank in Hawaii. It became the First Hawaiian Bank in 1960 and continues today as part of the BancWest Corporation.

An Outgoing Bill of Exchange to Hungary

Lewis Johnson & Co. Bill of Exchange (check) for 59 Kronur

to Jeanette Friedman, Kaschau, Hungary

L. J. & CO.

JAN/14/1901

(note inverted year date)

Unlike inbound Bills of Exchange which were taxed at a flat rate of 2-cents per $100 in face value or fraction thereof when paid, outgoing Bills of Exchange instead were taxed when written. If written singly they were taxed a flat rate of 4-cents per $100 in value or fraction thereof or, if written in sets, each bill in the set was taxed 2-cents per $100 in value.

The above bank check from the Washington, DC banking house of Lewis Johnson & Co. , the first of a set of two, was properly taxed 2-cents; 59 Kronur(sic.) being worth much less than $100.

A 2nd Day, July 2, 1898, Bill of Exchange

$5,000 Bill of Exchange, Consolidated Kansas City

Smelting and Refining Company, Mexico City

to an unidentified Mexican payee

paid through Consolidated's New York Office

JW Palmer scan

We've blogged about several foreign bills of exchange inbound to the United States in recent days. Today we view another one courtesy of JW Palmer that was taxed on July 2, 1898, the second day of the Spanish American War tax! The "sight date" for this draft was July 1, 1898, the first day of the war tax, when it was "accepted" for payment 10 days later on July 11 per the draft's terms of payment.

Why wasn't it taxed on July 1, the date it was accepted? Was the Consolidated Kansas City Smelting and Refining Company unsure about whether or not tax was due -- it was written June 25, 1898 some 5 days before the tax went into effect; or didn't they have any stamps on July 1, or? The new tax stamps were hard to come by in New York City on July 1, 1898 and it might have taken Consolidated a day to acquire some or to find out that, yes, even though the draft was written prior to the effective date of the new tax law, the tax was required as the payment date, the relevant date for taxation, was after July 1.

It's a nice early usage of a pair of the R171 50-cent battleship documentaries, properly paying the 2-cent per $100 in face value tax on a $5,000 inbound bill of exchange. Their usage suggests that the $1 Commerce issue may not have been available in New York on July 1.

Reverse of BOE showing transmittal endorsements and

Mexican Revenues: two 1-Peso and 1 50-Centavos from the 1897 issue

JW Palmer scan

It is unclear to whom Consolidated directed this draft; the Payee's name and their transmittal endorsement on the back are not readable; nor is the handstamp on the Mexican revenue stamps. A hint appears in the bottom left corner on the front where "H. S. & Co. No.........." is handstamped in red with number 66658 entered in pen on the dotted line; presumably Consolidated's internal reference to the payee's invoice or letter of credit number. But we've been unable to determine the identity of "H. S. and Co."

It is clear that "H. S. and Co." referred the draft to an international banking house, Lazard Freres, in New York, who collected the payment from Consolidated's New York headquarter's office. The Lazard Freres firm today continues as Lazard and John previously has blogged about their cancels.

Detail Showing July 1, 1898 Accepted Handstamp of CKCSRC
and cancels on the 50-cent stamps
In Purple:
JUL 2 1898
In Red:
International Metal Co. (double strike)

Curiously the stamps are cancelled with a single-line handstamp of the INTERNATIONAL METAL CO. Like the Consolidated Kansas City Smelting and Refining Company, the International Metal Company was a huge mining firm doing business in many Western States and then US Territories as well as in Mexico. The firms may not have been directly related, but they shared some common directors. Maybe Consolidated got the 50-cent tax stamps from International?

We'll likely never know, but it sure is a nifty draft and our thanks go to JW Palmer for sharing it.

A Bill of Exchange from Colombia

$500 Bill of Exchange

Pedro Mantilla, Rionegro, Colombia to Munoz & Espriella, New York

October 10, 1898

Without any of the accompanying documentation; there is a pencil notation "carta" (letter) dated 14 October 98 at the bottom of the draft; one can only speculate the purpose of this 90 day sight draft drawn against the Munoz & Espriella firm of New York. The firm appears to have been a shipping agent so perhaps this was a request for payment for some a shipment.

Reverse of $500 Draft Showing Transmittal Endorsements and

10-cent, R168 Battleship Revenue Stamp

The draft was routed through Silva Otero Brothers in Bucaramanga, the main city in the Department of Santander, Colombia where Rionegro also is located. Silva Otero Brothers sent the draft to Munoz and Espriella who accepted it on November 9, 1898 for payment as of February 7, 1899. At the rate of 2-cents per $100 in face value, or fraction thereof, Munoz and Espriella paid the proper tax, 10-cents, with an R168 ten cent battleship revenue.

Cancel of Munoz & Espriella:

M. & E.

NOV/9/1898

N.Y.

The draft looks pedestrian, but it was printed on Crane Japanese Linen paper with an ornate watermark featuring a crane and the year date 1896. A similar watermark may be found here.

Two More Bills of Exchange from Japan

$280 Bill of Exchange

Tajimi Trading Company, Tajimi, Japan to Shigetsugu Amano, Boston, Mass.

September 19, 1900

Bob Patetta scan

Similar to the Japanese bill of exchange previously considered, both of the bills shown today were written as four month sight drafts payable through the Tomi Bank in Tajimi, Japan. The Tomi Bank then routed them through the One Hundred Bank in Toyko who sent them on to the Brown Brothers & Company in Boston for collection from the importers to whom they were addressed. The reverse of the draft above is not shown, but the transmittal endorsements are nearly identical to those of the other drafts.

The tax on bills of exchange inbound to the US was 2-cents per $100, or fraction thereof . So both were properly taxed six cents; the $280 bill above bears 2- and 4-cent battleship revenues and the $300 bill below has a pair of 3-cent battleships. That both bills were taxed 2-sen in Japan, the same as the $200 bill shown previously suggests the Japanese tax was a flat 2-sen per bill regardless of its amount. We invite any reader able to confirm the Japanese tax rate to comment below.

$300 Bill of Exchange

Tajimi Trading Company, Tajimi, Japan to T. Huruta, Amano & Co. Boston, Mass.

December 24, 1901
Bob Patetta scan

Reverse of $300 draft showing transmittal endorsements and

the 3-cent, R165, battleship revenues
Bob Patetta scan

B. B. & Co.
JAN/21/1902
BOSTON
Bob Patetta scan

The US stamps on these two bills again were applied by Brown Brothers. The paperwork that most likely accompanied the bills is not present, but most certainly the Brown Brothers and the banks in Japan charged fees for processing them, perhaps deducting them from the payment amount at each step.

Foreign Bill of Exchange - Japan to US

$200 Foreign Bill of Exchange - Japan to US

Written by Tajimi Trading Company, Tajimi, Japan

April 15, 1902

Bob Patetta scan

The trail of this bill of exchange is easier to trace than the one from Germany considered in our first blog about bills of exchanges inbound to the United States from foreign countries. In this instance it appears the Tajimi Trading Company is requesting a transfer, or perhaps a payment, of $200 from its branch office in Boston, Massachusetts to its home office in Tajimi, Japan.

In 1900 the Tajimi Trading Company was a major exporter of Japanese pottery and other ceramics with offices in Boston and New York. Their store in Boston was located at 63 Summer Street. Today the City of Tajimi is still known for its ceramics; it hosts the Mino International Festival every three years.

Reverse Side Transmittal Handstamps

of Firms Processing the Exchange

Bob Patetta scan

The Bill of Exchange was initiated by the Tajimi office of the company on April 15, 1902 requesting payment of $200 AT FOUR MONTHS SIGHT from its office in Boston. The payment was requested through the Tomi Bank in Tajimi.

Following the endorsements on the back of the bill: Tomi Bank referred it to the One Hundred Bank(OHB) in Tokyo; and OHB requested payment through the Brown Brothers & Company in Boston. Brown Brothers was a major international merchant banking company that had offices in many major cities in the US and Great Britain. Today's Brown Brothers Harriman in Boston traces its roots to B. B. & Co.

Referring again to the front of the bill, Brown Brothers apparently presented it to Yuto Takata, of the Boston office of the Tajimi Trading Company to whom the bill was addressed, on May 13, 1902 as his signed "ACCEPTED" endorsement of that date appears in the upper left corner of the bill. The penned notation "stps 4¢" obviously refers to the 4 cents tax due and "Sept 13" is the due date for payment , four months after May 13 the "at sight" date.

The two 2-cent R164 battleship revenues, paying the applicable tax of 2-cents per $100 in value were affixed and cancelled by Brown Brothers. I'm not able to decipher the Japanese markings, but the 2-sen Japanese revenue stamp had been applied earlier in Japan, I suspect by the Tajimi Trading Company.

The final endorsement on the back shows Brown Brothers effected payment back through channels on September 15, likely after receiving payment from Mr. Takata.

Detail of Stamp Cancellations

Cancel on the US R164 Battleships reads:

B. B. & Co.

MAY/13/1902

BOSTON
Bob Patetta scan

Our thanks again go to Bob Patetta for providing another interesting usage from his collection of 1898 revenue documents.

Foreign Bill of Exchange - Germany to US via Great Britain

This bill of exchange is written in the form of a bank draft. The trail of its payment is hard to follow because it was routed though numerous banks in three countries. The applicable US Spanish American War tax, two cents per $100 in value, or fraction thereof, for bills of exchange inbound to the US from a foreign country is easy enough to understand. But without the documentation and payment instructions that most certainly accompanied this draft, we don't know who was paying whom, or for what purpose. The draft itself offers scant information, just a reference to a March 20, 1900 letter of credit.

From a fiscal history standpoint we note that when it was received by the London Agency of the Deutsche Bank of Berlin, they paid the one penny British tax. And when the National Bank of Burlington, Iowa ultimately received and paid the draft they properly taxed it two cents with an R164, 2-cent battleship documentary, the proper amount for a payment less than $100. The standard conversion rate at the time for a British Pound was $4.85; so 20 Pounds = $97.00.

20 Pounds Sterling Foreign Bill of Exchange - Germany to US

Written as a Sight Draft by Oberrheinische Bank - Heidelberg

August 8, 1900

I count ten handstamp markings on the draft, six on the front, and four on the back. It went from the Heidelberg branch of the Oberrheinsche Bank; to their Mannheim branch; to the Deutsche Bank of Berlin; to the National Provincial Bank of England where the trail seems to go cold. The Union Bank of London and the Continental Bank of Chicago were listed on the draft as correspondent banks, but the draft doesn't appear to have been routed through either of them. In fact the Chicago Bank reference was crossed out at some point. So how it actually got to the National State Bank of Burlington, Iowa is unclear.

Happily it nonetheless made its way into philatelic hands as it is a nice example of a combination usage of two country's revenue stamps.

Reverse Side Transmittal Handstamps of Oberrheinische Bank

and September 14, 1900 Payment Handstamps of

National State Bank, Iowa

AT LEFT:

Nat'l State Bank

SEP 14 1900

Burlington, Iowa

AT RIGHT:

DEUTSCHE BANK of BERLIN

25 AUG 1900

LONDON AGENCY

Deutsche Bank "D" "B" perfin

The draft itself bears perfins for the numbers "25" and "8" (through the reference to the Union Bank of London). The Deutsche Bank in London probably added those, a likely reference to the date they processed the draft, August 25, 1900.

We'd like to show other examples of multi-country tax stamp combinations and invite anyone having examples involving 1898 US revenues to send scans of them with a brief description to 1898revenues@gmail.com.