India’s First Ship

Despatch Handstamp
Abhishek Bhuwalka

[Author’s note: This article was first published

as a blog in April 2022. It has been revised and
updated for publication here. I would like to
acknowledge the inputs of Martin Hosselmann
with respect to what the numbers inside the
handstamp might denote.]

T
he appearance of a cover in a recent
Cavendish auction (Figure 1) bearing a
rare Calcutta handstruck stamp inspired
me to write this piece.

The handstruck stamp I am talking about is a

‘Ship Despatch’ stamp type Giles SD1. Giles
refers to Hammond Derek Giles, one of the
greatest postal historians of India (Figure 2).

Before we get into the postal history aspects, a

brief background. The East India Company
(EIC) was incorporated on 31 December 1600
and had a monopoly on trade with East Indies
and later East Asia. Initially the company was
a humble trader; but starting with the Battle of
Plassey in 1757, the warring Company slowly
eroded the authority of the local rulers and ef-
fectively assumed the powers of a sovereign
state. Many influential British personalities in-
cluding members of Parliament were its share-
holders and hence turned a blind eye to its
(mis) deeds. Figure 1. Lot 743 from Cavendish Auction held on 2-3 March 2022

Nevertheless, constant warfare had led the

company into deep debt. So as to protect
their interests, the British Government proposed and
Parliament passed the Regulating Act of 1773 and
shortly thereafter the East India Company Act of 1784
(also called Pitt’s India Act after the William Pitt the
Younger, who just 24 when he became the Prime Min-
ister of Britain in 1783). The latter provided for the ap-
pointment of a Board of Control which was responsible
for overseeing the EIC; its President was effectively
the minister for the affairs of the EIC.
Genesis of Ship Letter Charges
As of 1793, the EIC ruled parts of India including the
cities of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay. Letters written
by the expatriate community comprising of
mostly Britishers, but also Europeans of other na-
tionalities, were carried to Great Britain by the
ships of the EIC free of cost.
It may have come to the notice of the Court of Di-
rectors of the EIC that this facility was being mis-
used and some were sending heavy private letters
and packages. Hence, in a letter dated 5 June 1793
addressed to the Governor General in Council
(The Marquess Cornwallis when it was written but
John Shore by the time it arrived in India), the
Court of Directors of the EIC gave the following
directions in a letter dated 5 June 1793:

1 of 4
 tax as stipulated was paid; it then went on to list
the names of the recipients (Figure 3).

First Ship Despatch Handstamp

This introduction of ship postage led to the cre-
ation of India’s first handstruck ship despatch
handstamp at Calcutta – the famous Giles SD1
(Figure 4). It is also the one handstamp from the
pre-stamp (pre-1854) era mentioning ounces;
ounce, as a weight measure, wasn’t used locally in
India.

While Giles mentions only three examples have

been recorded, there are more, and the total num-
ber may be pushing into double digits. Ironically,
a handstamp created on account of the ‘more than
two ounces’ rule, has only been seen applied on
letters weighing less than that number!

Figure 2. Derek Hammond Giles (1913-2003), a The order of the Governor General in Council and
pioneering postal historian and prolific writer. issued by the Public Department on 4 December
From the 2000 Spink auction catalogue, India 1793 (signed by E. Hay, Secretary to the Govern-
and States Stamps and Postal History featuring ment) mentions:
the Derek Hammond Giles Collection.
The Honourable Court of Directors having
Every Private letter or Package, which weighs directed that a Person belonging to the
more than Two Ounces, to be taxed with the Secretary’s Office, being a Covenanted
Payment of four Sicca Rupees; every one Servant, shall be appointed to carry these
exceeding Three Ounces, nine Sicca Rupees; Regulations into execution Mr. Richard
and others of a yet greater Weight, to be Ahmuty, the Head Assistant in the Public
charged, in like manner, with the Rates Department, has been ordered to undertake
formed of the Squares of the Number of this duty.
Ounces which they exceed in weight – for
example, any letter or Package which exceeds
Two Ounces, to pay Four Rupees; any that
exceeds Three Ounces Nine Rupees; any that
exceeds Four Ounces Sixteen Rupees; and so
on :- And no letter which is rateable with
Postage to be received into the Packet,
without the Postage being paid, and the
Weight written on the cover.

The directions so received were published in the

Calcutta Gazette of 5 December 1793 (order dated
4 December), the (Madras) Courier of 20 December
1793 (order dated 7 December), and in the Bombay
Courier of 28 December 1793.

Note that there was no ship postage payable on

letters weighing below two ounces. The intention
behind the order is clear: to discourage private in-
dividuals from burdening the ships with heavy
packages while still allowing communication with
their family and friends.

The rule was implemented in all the three Presi-

dencies immediately. The scrupulous William
Jones, Postmaster General of the General Post Of-
fice at Fort St. George, Madras, for instance, issued
a notice on 21 January 1794 stating that certain Figure 3. Madras Post Office Notice dated 21 January
letters weighing above two ounces that were lying 1794 issued by William Jones, the Post Master General,
in the post office wouldn’t be forwarded until the listing letters weighing above two ounces that have
been held back for non-payment of "the tax"

2 of 4
 him to the staff at the Post Office or did he deliver
them on board the ships himself? If the latter, did
he apply the handstamp on letters himself?

It isn’t known if a person corresponding to Mr.

Ahmuty in Calcutta was appointed at Madras and
Bombay. And no corresponding handstamps as in
Calcutta was ever issued in Madras or Bombay;
outgoing letters from Madras from this period are
known to exist but they don’t bear any hand-
stamps of that place.

Analysis of the Handstamp

Figure 4. India’s first Ship Despatch
Handstamp: Giles SD1 of Calcutta
Mr. Ahmuty, by whom alone Letters or
Packages, to be transmitted in future to
Europe in the Government Packets, are to be
received, will attend to his Office, in one of
the lower apartments at the Council House,
for ten days previous to the day fixed for the
dispatch of a Packet, Sundays excepted,
between the hours of ten in the morning and
four in the afternoon, and again between the
hours of seven and nine in the evening, for
the purposes pointed out in the Company’s
Orders.
It will be necessary that Gentleman at a
distance from Calcutta, should instruct their
Agents or Friends at the Presidency to cause
their Letters to be delivered to
Mr. Richard Ahmuty, instead of
sending them, as has frequently
happened, under cover to the
Secretary, or the Gentlemen in
his Office, for transmission by
the Packets.
Now let’s analyse the handstamp closely. The
word ‘No.’ on the first line indicates that the in-
tention was to number individual letters for
record keeping purposes. However, none of the
existing copies have any manuscript number filled
in against it.
Second, ‘Oz. D’ denotes ounces and penny-
weights; 18.23 pennyweights being equal to one
avoirdupois ounce (and 20 pennyweights being
equal to one troy ounce).
As per the Research Group led by Col. C. N. M.
Blair which resulted in the India Study Circle’s
publication, India-U.K. Mails, there are two inter-
pretations for ‘B.P. Sa.Rs.’ One being ‘Bearing
Postage Sicca Rupees’ and the other being ‘Bengal
Postage Sicca Rupees’. If, as we have seen from the
aforementioned order, ship letter charges were
supposed to be collected in advance, the former
wouldn’t make sense.

For reasons we can well speculate on,

London decided that a person from
the Secretary’s office and not from
the postal department would be re-
sponsible for receiving letters and
collecting the tax due.

So, if as per the Governor General’s

order, all letters were to pass via Mr.
Ahmuty, was the idea of this hand-
stamp his or his superiors? Did Mr.
Ahmuty pass all letters received by

Figure 5. Lot 44 from Cavendish Sale on 9

September 2015 featuring the Michael
Manning Collection of Indian Postal
History, the most iconic sale of Indian
prestamp covers in recent times.

3 of 4
Most examples of the stamp don’t have any man-
uscript markings inside. However, some do have
numbers; one in the Michael Manning Sale of
2015 had a ‘3’ (Figure 5), one in the collection of
someone I know has a ‘5’, and yet another has a
‘1/1’.
Now, one can conjure up some thoughts on what
these numbers imply. Do they denote the postage
paid? No, since these numbers i.e., 3, 5, and 1/1,
don’t correspond with the rates of Rupees four,
nine, 16, etc. stipulated. Do they reflect some kind
of numbering by Mr. Ahmuty? No, since the place
to put in any filing number was right at the top.
The only theory that one can give credence to is
that they denote the weight of the letter. So ‘3’ and
‘5’ would mean three and five pennyweights re-
spectively (about 4.67 and 7.78 gm) and ‘1/1’
would mean one ounce one pennyweight (29.90
gm). This would also imply that the row contain-
ing ‘B.P. Sa.Rs’ was left blank in each of the three
cases; understandable since these letters didn’t
exceed two ounces and hence no postage was
payable on them.
Demise of the Ship Letter Charges
This handstamp has been found used only in 1794
and 1795. There is a good reason for it. The June
1793 order may have triggered resentment and
4 of 4
objection amongst the local expatriates. Hence, by
a letter dated 6 May 1795, the Court of Directors
decided to abolish this rule.
Having reconsidered our Orders of the 5th of
June 1793, directing that all private Letters
for Europe, weighing more than Two Ounces
should be subject to a certain Postage, we
have thought proper on account of the
inconvenience which we understand
Individuals have sustained thereby to revoke
the same.
The letter was published in the Calcutta Gazette of
8 October 1795 (order dated 29 September) and
Madras Courier of 9 September 1795 (order dated
5 September); it would surely have been published
in the Bombay papers as well; however, I haven’t
been able to trace that yet.
References
Giles, D[erek]. Hammond. Catalogue of the Hand-
struck Postage Stamps of India. London:
Christie’s Robson Lowe, 1989
Blair, Col. C.N.M., and D[erek]. Hammond Giles.
India - U.K. Mails. The India Study Circle for
Philately, 1973-1981