The Crusading Ribeiro of Indian

Philatelist
By Abhishek Bhuwalka

I n the Western world, philately took a pivotal turn in

the early 1860s when it moved from being the
pastime of schoolboys and eccentric adults to a
hobby of a more serious nature. The equivalent
inflationary period for Indian philately came about some
three decades later, in the 1890s. In a short matter of
time, the tribe of collectors saw a rapid increase and
some of the pioneering philatelists came together to
form the earliest philatelic societies. Dealers
proliferated and showcased their wares in the philatelic
press; the more enterprising ones reached out to
collectors directly through their regular price lists. The
publishing and journalistic scene became vibrant and
the earliest philatelic books and magazines were issued.

In its earliest decades, Indian philately was pretty much

centered around the great cities of Bombay and
Calcutta. While Calcutta was the capital of British India,
Bombay was fast progressing to become its economic
hub (a title it holds to this day). Located on the western Figure 1. Julio Ribeiro (1867-1897)
and eastern coasts respectively and separated by 1,200
miles of land, the two cities jostled on a lot of issues; those philatelic would not be left behind!

The accolade of being the first journal falls on the Bombay-based Indian Philatelist (IP).1
Given that Indian philately was dominated by the Britishers, it is a matter of surprise that IP
was conceived, managed, and edited by a Catholic of Indo-Portuguese descent, Julio Ribeiro
(Figure 1). Starting off in a small way, the journal peaked in its first year; unfortunately, it
closed down before it could reach the age of two. This was in keeping with philatelic
magazines the world over; hundreds of journals sprouted only to die within a year or two, or
after an issue or two. However, before it fizzled, enough paper had been set to type to give
future historians more than a glimpse of the prevailing Indian philatelic scene.

Julio Ribeiro, IP editor

Unfortunately, we don’t know as much about IP’s first editor as we should. Born on February
16, 1867, Ribeiro received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1888 when he passed first class; he was
awarded the Ellis Scholarship and the Duke of Edinburgh Fellowship.2 Subsequently he
became the first Catholic to receive a Master of Arts degree from the University of Mumbai;
something he must have been proud of, given that it suffixed his name on IP’s masthead. He

Page 1 of 16
 was mainly a collector of and expert in the stamps
of Portuguese India. He may have collected some
other Indian states and British India as well.3 Apart
from IP, he edited a Portuguese language magazine
called Bulletim Indiano.

Was Ribeiro a dealer? It is quite likely than he was

not.4 However, his brother, Hector Ribeiro, ran
Bombay Philatelic Company,5 a stamp firm of
some repute.

Initial Days of IP
The first number of IP (Figure 2) is dated May 1,
1894, and is an eight-page paper. The introductory
editorial clarifies its raison d’etre:

“We make no apology for the present paper. It

may be that the philatelic brotherhood is not large
in India, but it is a growing one. If only
Figure 2. Vol. 1 No. 1 of Indian Philatelist opportunities are given them, Indian philatelists
will make their importance felt…”

On what IP proposed to cover (Figure 3), it said:

“Our beginnings are necessarily small. We shall have usually an original article of
philatelic interest, a chronicle of new issues, a brief review of important articles from
the philatelic press of the world and short, scrappy notes and views.”

(In short, the format of IP was quite similar to that of leading British and American magazines
of the time.)

From a commercial perspective, it appealed to advertisers saying they now had a chance to
buy space in a philatelic journal rather than take “recourse to lay papers, in search for a
chance philatelist, among a crowd of readers who care not a jot for the wares one
advertises.”6

Finally, the masthead of the paper read, “Philatelic Monthly published in the interest of
Collectors and Dealers” and “Conducted by Julio Ribeiro, M.A.” However, there is no address
mentioned, which is strange. In the second issue, the address for communications is
mentioned: “Dadar, Bombay, India.” Dadar is a fairly large area in Central Bombay and, at
the time, was far (some seven miles) from the philatelic hub in the Fort area of South
Bombay.

The adjoined Table 1 gives a short bibliography of IP. Note that advertisement pages are in
parentheses. From Vol. 1 No. 6, ad pages began to be numbered with Roman numerals.

Page 2 of 16
 Figure 3. A typical IP issue would contain an
editorial, an original article or reprints culled
from other journals, news and notes, reviews of
other journals, and society reports

Page 3 of 16
Table 1. Bibliography of Indian Philatelist.

Date Volume Number (Ad pages); Editorial Pages

May 1, 1894 I 1 (4, unnumbered); 8 (pp 1-8)
June 1, 1894 I 2 (4, unnumbered); 12 (pp 9-20)
July 1, 1894 I 3 (8, unnumbered); 12 (pp 21-32)
August 1, 1894 I 4 (10, unnumbered); 10 (pp 33-42)
September 1, 1894 I 5 (14, unnumbered); 14 (pp 43-56)
October 1, 1894 I 6 (xii, numbered); 16 (pp 57-72)
November 1, 1894 I 7 (xii, numbered); 16 (pp 73-88)
December 1, 1894 I 8 (xvi, numbered); 12 (pp 89-100)
January 1, 1895 I 9 (xvi, numbered); 12 (pp 101-112)
February 1, 1895 I 10 (xiv, numbered); 14 (pp 113-126)
March 10, 1895 I 11 (xix, numbered); 17 (pp 127-143)
April 10, 1895 I 12 (xvii, numbered); 14 (pp 144-157) (xii
missing)
May 25, 1895 II 1 (vii numbered + 1 unnumbered); 12 (pp 1-
12)
June, 1895 II 2 (vii numbered + 1 unnumbered); 12 (pp 1-
12)
July, 1895 II 3 (vii numbered + 1 unnumbered); 12 (pp 1-
12)
August, 1895 II 4 (vii numbered + 1 unnumbered); 12 (pp 1-
12)
September, 1895 II 5 (vii numbered + 1 unnumbered); 12 (pp 1-
12)
October, 1895 II 6 (vii numbered + 1 unnumbered); 16 (pp 1-
16)
December, 1895 II 7 (viii numbered + 1 unnumbered); 13 (pp
1-13)
January, 1896 II 8 (viii numbered + 1 unnumbered); 11 (pp
1-11)
February, 1896 II 9 (iv, numbered); 16 (pp 1-16)
March, 1896 II 10 (vi, numbered); 14 (pp 1-14)
April, 1896 II 11 (vi, numbered); 14 (pp 1-14)

Reception
The first issue of IP seems to have been well received. In its second issue, Ribeiro sounded
excited:

“The eagerness with which the “Indian Philatelist” was received by the public and their
generous support has proved a great source of encouragement to us. Improvements can still
take place and will be introduced gradually. The present number has been increased to 16
pages.”

(Ribeiro’s “16 pages” was 12 pages of reading matter and four pages of advertisements).

Page 4 of 16
 Figure 4. Some of
the
advertisements
from the pages of
IP

Page 5 of 16
The international press, from America to England to Australia, were generous as well. The
Philatelic Record, perhaps the best journal of that time, reviewed IP in its August 1894 issue:

“We have now received the third number of the Indian Philatelist, and we cannot
but congratulate the Editor and the contributors to its pages on the matter that has
every month been provided for its readers.”

The Philatelic Review of Reviews (presented gratis to all readers of the Philatelic Journal of
Great Britain) of June 11, 1894, was of the opinion:

“We cannot find a more exact address for our new and promising contemporary.
The post mark on the wrapper is Dadar. The first number appeared in May and
contains eight pages of reading matter. The paper on which it is printed leaves some
thing to be desired, but we cannot expect everything all at once…”

Advertisers in IP
One way to judge the quality and popularity of a magazine or newspaper is to browse
through its advertisements; sellers do not put in their money in dud publications. In that, IP
seems to have done something right since it managed to attract advertisements from India
and abroad (Figure 4).

Some of the names seen are, from England: Stanley Gibbons, Ltd., Theodor Buhl & Co.,
Butler Bros. of Oxford, Alfred Smith & Son of Bath, and Thos. Rodpath & Co. From America:
C.H. Mekeel Stamp & Publishing Co., R. F. Albrecht
& Co., and Scott Stamp & Coin Co., Ltd. And from
Europe: A. Weisz of Budapest and Roland Meister
from Germany.

Apart from quarter to full page ads, there were

classifieds as well. Of course, Ribeiro’s brother’s
Bombay Philatelic Company and the editor’s own
Bombay Stamp Exchange had a place in every issue.

As can be seen from the table, the number of pages

of advertisements reached its peak towards the end
of the first year before declining precipitously in the
second, reflecting falling standards of the magazine
itself.

Spat with Philatelic World

Depending on one’s perspective, Ribeiro comes
across as either principled or rebellious. To a Figure 5. Wenzel’s first column in the second issue of
IP

Page 6 of 16
 Figure 6. B. Gordon Jones (1872-1857)

philatelic historian though, the fact that the pages of

the country’s first magazine can be so interesting and
entertaining is a matter of delight.

The first evidence that Ribeiro wielded a sharp pen

comes from a column that he publishes under the
pseudonym “Wenzel” in the fourth issue, August
1894. We do not know who Wenzel was; perhaps the
nom de plume of Ribeiro himself.

Wenzel made his first appearance in the second issue

of June 1894 (Figure 5) wherein he congratulated the
Figure 7. Review of IP in the first issue of Jones’ editor (!) for having the courage and fortitude in
The Philatelic World venturing upon such an undertaking. He went on to
bemoan the state of Indian philately while pouring
scorn on local dealers. In the fifth issue of September 1894, he cast a favorable light on the
Bombay Philatelic Society (BPS) and its workings. He wrote a few more columns but none as
scathing as the August one.

What ruffled Wenzel’s feathers was a not-so-flattering review of IP (Figure 6) in the July 1894
issue of India’s second journal The Philatelic World (PW). While the first 13 issues of PW were
published by the young Calcutta dealer, B. Gordon Jones (Figure 7), he edited the first two
only. Jones may seem harsh on a fledging contemporary but his comments on its language
and grammar are spot on.

Obviously, the rebel was not going to take this affront lying down. Wenzel charged Jones of
being upset that a Bombay upstart had beaten his endeavor by two months. He inquired:

Page 7 of 16
 “Surely there is room in the country for two such publications and if such be the
case, it is but right to inquire why should the new born infant be gifted with such a
short temper? What fairy god-mother presided at its birth?”

Raising the Bombay-Calcutta rivalry card, he railed against what he felt was Jones’ rabidity
towards his city’s philatelic scene:

“There is no doubt that the Bengalee7 Philatelic Philosopher will find that he cannot
enlist either the indulgence of an enlightened public or their support, if his
publication is to be devoted to attacks on persons who are considerably known in
philatelic circles on this side of India.”

He then personally attacked Jones, the dealer, saying:

“It does not require a very strong sight or a powerful magnifying glass to discern
what this pretender is aiming at. Compare his offers for July, 1894, as given in the
inside of the back cover and note the great rarities of India this well-stocked “Know-
all, has for disposal.” (sic; the quotes are placed incorrectly). With one exception,
there is hardly any rare stamp of India catalogued therein.”

Reacting to criticism about its language, Wenzel defended the editor and criticized Jones:

“Is he possessed of a certain amount of courtesy as due from one editor to another,
when both elect to espouse the same cause and work for it. Is he so perfect in
everything apportioning to philately and the English language thrown in, so as to
pose as an infallible grammarian? Is he aware of the existence of such a person as
represented by a printer’s devil?

(Unfortunately, the printer’s devil continued to

plague IP in the future.)

Finally, against the insinuation that Bombay was

the hub of forgers, Wenzel retorted:

“By the by, does it not strike you that the shoe
has pinched? Let the world-wise authority take a
ramble through Lall and Bow Bazaar, and the
labyrinths of lanes off Bentinck Street and go and
satisfy himself of the respectability,
scrupulousness and knowledge of stamps of the
many so called dealers and then speak of Bombay
as the lurking place of such. Alas! that a man
should live in a glass house and attempt to throw
stones!”

Ribeiro/Wenzel obviously took one review too

much to heart. We see this trait in him, again and
Figure 8. Charles F. Larmour (1853?-1914)

Page 8 of 16
again, that when he is pushed, he reacts with great hostility and does not mind making it
personal.

The editorial of PW passed to C.F. Larmour (Figure 8) from the September 1894 issue. This
seems to have placated Ribeiro/Wenzel. In IP’s November 1894 issue, Wenzel praised
Larmour as a person with “intimate knowledge of stamps” and waved the white flag:

“We are very pleased to note the change effected in the editorial chair of our
Calcutta contemporary and regret that inadvertently we have been lead [sic] to do
an injustice to a gentleman for whom we entertain a great respect and high esteem.
Also that owing to circumstances, over which we have no control, the short comings
of one person should have been visited upon another.”

N.H. Mama, dealer and forger

Ribeiro’s adversary was the Parsee8 dealer, N. H. Mama who, Ribeiro consistently claimed in
IP, was a forger. There may have been other reasons for the unpleasantness between them.

BPS (Figure 9) was formed when seven gentleman (and one visitor) met at the Presidency
Surgeon’s office at Bombay on August 29, 1892. One of the founding seven was Julio Ribeiro.

Figure 9. Council of the Bombay Philatelic Society from 1895. (Photo courtesy of The Royal Philatelic Society’s Philatelic
Collections.)

Page 9 of 16
He was appointed the vice president at this meeting. However, he objected to the office
bearers being appointed permanently, and said that it would be better to have the office
bearers as they now stood only as a temporary measure till the next ordinary meeting. His
objections, very likely, came from Mr. N.H. Mama being appointed the treasurer.

In its first ordinary meeting on October 3, 1892, voting for office bearers for the ensuing year
took place; neither Ribeiro nor Mama were elected for a post, though Ribeiro made it onto
the committee. In retrospect, Ribeiro sacrificed the post of vice president but managed to
keep Mama away from the important post of treasurer. Unfortunately, as he would soon
learn, Ribeiro could not keep a check on Mama’s influence on the society.

In a special meeting of the committee of BPS held a few days later on October 10, 1892,
Ribeiro drew the committee’s attention to an article in The Philatelic Journal of America dated
September 1892 about Afghan forgeries and Mama. Another meeting was quickly called nine
days later, and Mama given a chance to respond. The sub-committee was convinced by
Mama’s explanations that the forgeries were top grade and that he should not be blamed if
he could not detect them before offering them for sale.

This must have surely disappointed Ribeiro.

Two years later, however, Ribeiro had the power of the pen. In the second issue of IP, in the
column on forged Scinde Dawks,9 he said, “The primary source of these forgeries is one and
one only…”

In his third issue, in a column aptly named “Black List”, Ribeiro came out in the open:

“It may be to the interest of uor (sic) readers to learn that Mr. N. H. Mama, who
flooded the market with a special issue of Cabul stamps,10 has entered his schedule
in the Insolvency Court. During the transition period, he is trading under the name
and style of the Great Philatelic Co. Those who were promised a refund for the
Cabul forgeries and other bogus stamps will probably get nothing, as the stock of
stamps which he represented as his assets realized only about ten rupees at
Auction.”

Stanley Gibbons Monthly Journal of August 31, 1894, reproduced this and confirmed Ribeiro’s
assertion:

“We can fully bear out the statement that this man has been selling forgeries, as we
quite recently examined a collection of nearly 9000 stamps, formed by a gentleman
residing in Persia; we picked out several score of Afghan, Jhind, Gwalior, and other
stamps as bad, all of which had come from Mama.”

September 1894 saw the start of a new magazine from Bombay called Indian Postage Stamp
News (IPSN). While the publisher/editor was shown to be one P. A. Sakloth, Ribeiro claimed
in the November issue of IP that Mama was behind it. Apparently, Mama got into publishing
to defend himself against attacks from the likes of Ribeiro and to promote himself. 11 Ribeiro
warned his readers,

Page 10 of 16
 “We would like to know the genuiness [sic] of the advertisements and interviews,
before advising intending subscribers to place their subscriptions.”

Over the years, Ribeiro seemed to get the impression that the BPS would not do anything to
curb Mama, his activities, and his influence on the society and its members. Things came to
a head in the first few months of 1895.

Spat with Bombay Philatelic Society

While Ribeiro surely had an allergy for Mama, his relationship with BPS in general seemed to
be cordial until 1895. In the first issue of IP of May 1894, Ribeiro reproduced a paper on
“Unpaid Postal Impressions of Mauritius,” read before BPS by its secretary, J. Seymour
Summers. The following issue carried a report of the 17th ordinary meeting of BPS. The
report is interesting in that Ribeiro mentions the start of IP and that he would be willing to
give a copy of the journal free to each member of the society and also carry the reports of the
society free, provided the society reduced the annual membership fees from12 rupees to 5
rupees.

One possible reason for Ribeiro’s request may have been his desire for more members to join
the society but it was idiosyncratic to link the two. Nevertheless, the “question was
postponed for final settlement to the next meeting, when it was hoped Mr. Ribeiro would be
present and would urge good reasons in support of his proposition.” In the next meeting
Ribeiro seemed to have backtracked and proposed that as soon as the society’s membership
reached 30, the fees should be cut in half to 6 rupees.

Following a successful philatelic exhibition of The Philatelic Society of Bengal, BPS decided
to hold one as well. The first signs of a true rift were now visible as Ribeiro complained in the
February 1, 1895, issue, “It is sure to be a failure, as few of the members of the Bombay
Philatelic Society have been invited to in send their exhibits and only two days were allowed,
in which to prepare them.”

In the April 1895 issue, reporting on the exhibition, the knives were truly out.

“Our local society is a curious anomaly. Avowedly started for the benefit of
philately, it has done nothing to develop the science in the course of its three years’
existence. First, dealers were admitted and Mr. N.H. Mama was the treasurer. Then
they were excluded and some of the bad cargo had to go.12 An exchange branch was
started, which converted every member into an authorized vendor of stamps – until
that absurdity was also knocked on the head. Then came projects innumerable – a
reference list of Portuguese India, a philatelic exhibition of rarities, an auction sale, a
Magazine and so on, until these perpetual projectors ware shamed into action and
under the able direction of the Treasurer matured a hastily adopted scheme. Its
practical results are transmitted to posterity in a pamphlet, which is destined to
cover the Society with anything but glory. We had some difficulty in securing this
monument of philatelic knowledge of the managing committee of the Bombay
Philatelic Society. The Secretary seemed to know very little about it. At last a copy
was got from the Treasurer and it was a revelation.
Page 11 of 16
 “Dr. C. F. Paco’s ‘unchronicled’ rarities of Portuguese India figure on the opening
pages of this marvellous work. This ‘specialist’ seems to have a curious idea about
the meaning of ‘unchronicled’ rarities. Mr. A. J. Agabeg has gone one better than his
colleague, the Doctor. He exhibits a lot of stamps from a dealer’s stock and the
selection has been made without any discernment. A member of the Committee
might have known better. Another exhibitor has followed in the steps of this
gentleman, but not to that extent.

“As a whole, the show was very poor and though the non-collecting public may have
concurred in the extraordinary ideas entertained by some of the exhibitors
regarding the value of their exhibits, philatelists must have formed a juster (sic)
estimate of the whole affair….all the members of the Society who care for its good
name and still hope to convert it into an instrument of usefulness must regret the
hole-and-corner arrangement, which resulted in this exhibition of ignorance and
incompetence. Aping is not imitating.”

In a column in the May 1895 issue titled, “The Bombay Society Again,” Ribeiro writes:

“How not to do it, will fairly characterize the actions of the local Philatelic Society.
The latest move of the Committee is the resuscitation of the exchange rules and the
exchange section. In this model exchange society, if a member wants to exchange
his duplicates, he cannot do it. He must either buy or sell them. The restrictions on
the pricing of stamps are simply childish.13 The whole manoeuvre [sic] will merely
benefit the few shady dealers, who are in friendly terms with the Committee and
who cannot sell their goods in a legitimate way. The so-called exchange rules were
expunged for a good cause14…The philatelic experts will of course have an
opportunity of sanctioning the genuineness of spurious stamps, and the members
will continue to sell their bad duplicates, under the thin guise of exchanging them.”

It is obvious that Ribeiro is throwing everything at Mama. In the June 1895 issue, Ribeiro
sounds anguished, part of which betrays his helplessness.

“It is significant that the Bombay Philatelic Society has found a champion of its
doings in the person of Mr. N.H. Mama, the gentleman whose connection with
forged Scinde Daks and bogus Cubuls is well-known. It is well-known that Mr. Mama
is the sole owner of the Great Philatelic Co., and it is painful to see members of the
local Society parading themselves in the company of such dead beats.”

What (or Who) is “Truth”?

To needle BPS, the May 1895 issue (the first issue of Volume II), reproduces a report carried
by PW in its April issue on the Bombay exhibition. Of course, PW did not have much good to
say about the exhibition, hoping that “India’s premier (sarcasm!) Philatelic Society will do
itself more justice in its next exhibition.”

Ribeiro must have felt vindicated by this review. Nothing else explains why extracts from a
rival would find a place in his journal.
Page 12 of 16
Figure 10. Extract of letter from “Truth”’ published in Vol. II No. 2 (June 1895) criticizing BPS and lauding Ribeiro

Ribeiro is not yet finished with his crusades. In the June 1895 issue, a letter from “Truth” was
published (Figure 10); like “Wenzel,” this was probably another pseudonym used by Ribeiro
to give the impression that there are others out there who shared his distaste of the way BPS
was functioning.

“Truth” commended the editor for the stand taken against BPS. He then went on to criticize
the society’s “Philatelic Golden Gang, whose objects are to give a name and a standing to
people who would otherwise find no status in the philatelic world.” He regretted that BPS
failed to respond to the criticism of the exhibition and laid the charge that most of its
members are dealers. He claimed that “member after member has left the Society in sheer
disgust at the pretense of work.” Finally, “Truth” alluded to the good name that BPS had in
English philatelic circles (through the writings of Marcellus P. Castle15 and Stanley Gibbons16)
when he concluded:

“It is doing a public service after this to divulge these facts, that respectable
members may choose better associates and that out siders may know exactly the
credit that ought to be attached to the reports of great progress which are exported
to Europe, simply because they find no credit here.”

The Court Martial

BPS was quick to strike back. At its general meeting held on August 8, 1895, a resolution was
unanimously passed requesting the council to take notice of the “Truth” article (BPS seemed
to be aware that it was no letter but rather an article written by the editor) which made “some
very injurious imputations” against BPS. Just two days later, the council met and decided
that Ribeiro, as editor, must be held responsible for articles appearing in IP and that he be
called up, as member of BPS, to explain. It further said that a meeting of the council would
be held on August 19, at which the question of permitting Ribeiro to remain a member of the
Society would be considered.

In a letter dated August 10, the Hon. Secretary, Summers, informed Ribeiro of the charges
and asked him to either respond to them before the 19th or appear before the council on that

Page 13 of 16
day. On August 15, Ribeiro wrote back saying that as a member of the society, he was not in
any way responsible to the society for anything that may appear in IP. Dripping in sarcasm,
he said, “I cannot extend my congratulations to the form of notice that the Council of the
Society have resolved to take of the matter.” He further asked,

“̉You speak of a charge, but you do not define it… Your Council evidently are going
to constitute themselves into a tribunal for the purpose of judging me. It is very kind
of them to do so, but I must decline to be a party to such a ridiculous assumption or
to any travesty of justice.”

Interestingly, Ribeiro signed this letter as “Founding Member, Bombay Philatelic Society,”
perhaps trying to remind the society of his long-standing relationship with it.

Perhaps wanting a compromise, the council gave Ribeiro another chance to answer the
charge and postponed the matter to August 27. Ribeiro declined to play ball again. The whole
sordid drama came to an end when the council decided to strike his name off the roll of
members with effect from August 28.

The whole saga of BPS, Ribeiro, Mama, and others make it apparent that no one party can
claim to be the arbiter of truth. BPS comes out as bereft of good strong leadership; consider
the numerous times its rules were changed in response to lobbying from one quarter or
other. Further, in supporting Mama, a notorious forger, certain council members of BPS were
certainly in the wrong.

And despite his protestation to the contrary, Ribeiro does not come out smelling good either.
One can charge him for vitriolic personal attacks when criticized, for indulging in settling
petty scores rather than trying to carry people along, for rebellion when not called for – in
short for being quite immature and negative in his approach and for having a perennial chip
on his shoulder.

Final Days of IP
Ribeiro does not mention the society in IP again. Meanwhile, its last few issues see a sharp
fall in standards. Ribeiro seems to have expended his energies in his numerous quarrels and
no longer seems to have the enthusiasm required to run the journal; it has been pretty much
a solo effort.

Apart from reprints from contemporaries and advertisements, IP no longer had much to
offer. The April 1896 issue was the last to come out; there is no indication in that issue that
the journal was shutting down for good.

Larmour, then editor of PW, announced in the October 16, 1896, issue:

“We regret to learn that our Bombay Contemporary, the Indian Philatelist, has
collapsed.”

Page 14 of 16
Another reason for the journal shutting down may
have to do with Ribeiro’s own life drawing to a close.
He died on February 23, 1897, aged just a week over
30. In the February 16, 1897, issue of PW,17 Wilmot
Corfield (Figure 11), the editor, paid his tributes:

“I am deeply grieved to hear of the death, in

Bombay, of Mr. Julio Ribeiro, who was the
editor of the Indian Philatelist. He was a keen
Philatelist, and a clever writer. This sad news
came to me just as I was closing these notes.”

Postscript: Bombay’s philatelic decline

With Mama’s Indian Postage Stamp News having Figure 11. William Wilmot Corfield (1859-1919)
shut down with the last issue coming out in
September 1895, BPS decided to start a magazine of its own titled The Quarterly Philatelic
Circular (QC) under the editorship of its Hon. Secretary, Summers. The editorial of the first
issue, January 1896, spoke of the need for an official organ of the Society and to “chronicle
the excellet (sic; the editorial devils troubling IP hits the new magazine!) services which it has,
during its brief but useful career, rendered to philatelic science.” It hit out against existing
publications which were “too much under the conduct of persons who, either professedly or
indirectly, deal in stamps.” Unfortunately, the pages of QC show that it had a pretty
uneventful and unexciting 1896 and it folded after four issues.

The year 1896 saw the BPS in terminal decline. Bombay lost its status as the philatelic capital
of Indian philately to Calcutta, its great rival, where exciting stuff was taking place. Early 1897
brought the birth of The Philatelic Society of India and its brilliant journal, The Philatelic
Journal of India. The next quarter century belonged to Calcutta until a new breed of Bombay
philatelists appeared in the 1920s who revived the city’s glorious days.

Notes and References

1
Indian Philatelist became The Indian Philatelist from Vol. II No. 1 issue of May 25, 1895.
2
The Times of India. “University Intelligence: The Second B.A. Examination.” December 21, 1888: 5.
3
A report of the meeting of the Bombay Philatelic Society held on July 23, 1894, says that Ribeiro showed
several forgeries of the small service India, surcharged Gwaliors, and a pair of unused India 1854 four anna
stamp.
4
The pages of IP carry the regular advertisements of one Bombay Stamp Exchange. While the word
‘Exchange’ in the title of Bombay Stamp Exchange hits at a more innocuous activity, the entity’s
advertisements in IP make it clear that it was indeed a dealer in stamps of India and its native states as well as
that of the whole world. (The bibliophile may be happy to note that the Bombay Stamp Exchange sold
philatelic books, catalogues, and albums as well!). Now this entity’s address is always shown as just ‘Dadar’.
This area of Bombay, far from the philatelic scene, is the same one as that where IP is published from. It is
hence reasonable to suspect that Riberio may, in fact, have been its owner. However, we need to consider two
aspects: (a) dealers were not allowed to be members of the Bombay Philatelic Society and that some had
resigned when this rule came about; Riberio did not (b) when Ribeiro’s relationship with the city’s philatelic
establishment was nose-diving and he was under much scrutiny, no such charge was laid at his door by the
other side.

Page 15 of 16
5
The Bombay Philatelic Company was founded in 1889 and celebrated its centenary in 1989. The Indian
operations looks to have now closed. In 1947, its proprietor, Mr. J. F. Droucette Dias, left India to go to the UK
and shortly thereafter emigrated to the US; his brother took over the Bombay business. Dias’ son, Brian Dias,
runs Bombay Philatelic, Inc. from New Jersey and deals in new issues. See bombaystamps.com.
6
As quoted in the IP. The first and last two to four pages of each issue were advertisements. The cost of
advertising was the following: For a single insertion, one page Rupees (Rs) 12, half a page Rs. 7, quarter page
Rs. 5, and one-eight of a page Rs. 3-8. The currency was 16 annas = 1 Rupee. Rs. 3-8 was therefore 3 rupees
and 8 annas.
7
Bengalee or Bengali i.e. someone of or from Bengal, the state in which Calcutta is located.
8
Parsee or Parsi is a member of a group of followers in India of the Iranian prophet Zoroaster (or Zarathustra).
The Parsis, whose name means “Persians,” are descended from Persian Zoroastrians who emigrated to India
in possibly the 8th century, to avoid religious persecution by Muslims. There are less than 60,000 Parsis in India
today and most of them live in and around Bombay. Notwithstanding their small numbers, the community
has always wielded a disproportionate economic influence.
9
Issued in 1852, the white, blue, and white Scinde Dawks (SG nos. S1, S2, and S3) were used only in the
Scinde province of India.
10
That is, the stamps of Afghanistan
11
Sample the editorial from the third issue of IPSN dated 25 November 1894. It lauds Mr. N.H. Mama
“towards enlarging philately in India” and that “his disinterested devotion is sufficiently well known to call for
any further eulogy and comment.” The previous issue cheekily asks who ‘Wenzel’ is. A few months later,
during the Ribeiro-BPS spat, IPSN sides with the latter. Unfortunately for Indian philately, the magazine
closes down with Vol. II No. 1 of September 25, 1895, being its last issue.
12
In its fourth ordinary meeting on December 19, 1892, the Society decided that dealers should not be
admitted as members. N. H. Mama and N. D. Bottiwalla, a respected Bombay dealer, resigned shortly
thereafter.
13
The exchange rules passed in the April 6, 1895, committee meeting of the Society were: (a) Cash be paid for
stamps at the time of their removal from sheets (b) 5 percent of the price be credited to the Society’s funds,
(c) Basis of exchange shall be Stanley Gibbons’ latest catalog, and (d) Mr. Alex. J. Agabeg be appointed the
Exchange Secretary.
14
Ribeiro had proposed the cancellation of the then-existing exchange rules of the society. The motion was
passed in the October 24, 1894, regular monthly meeting (twenty-sixth) of BPS.
15
In the winter of 1892/93, Castle took a tour of the East. He visited Bombay and met members of BPS on
December 8, 1892. He was mighty impressed and wrote in The London Philatelist of January 1893 that BPS
was flourishing and judging by the interest taken therein by its members, he anticipated a promising future.
16
Gibbons visited Bombay in March 1893 and was, like M. P. Castle, highly taken in by a city “teeming with
philatelists, stamp collectors, and stamp dealers.” Recording his experiences in the April 29, 1893, issue of
Stanley Gibbons Stamp Monthly, he declared that Bombay took first rank in India as the chief (philatelic) city,
although Calcutta was nominally the capital. He also attended a meeting of BPS on March 20 and wrote that
BPS appeared be prospering exceedingly, and doing much good to the general body of collectors resident in
the city.
17
While Ribeiro died on February 23, the news was carried in the February 16 issue of The Philatelic World. This
may be because this issue, Vol. III No. 7 & 8 Whole No. 31, came out later then the 16th. It was already made
into a double number and in the editorial, Corfield says, “We are late this month, but we trust, better late than
never.”

Page 16 of 16