Stamps of the Release

French Stamps of the Release

With the Release, many French cities emitted stamps.

The review “French Philately” (re-examined federation, note) published a study which started in N° 304 (October 1979) and which finished in 1984 (N°364).

The author, J.P. Bousquet, divide the emissions of the Release into three categories:

  • official emissions recognized by the postal and telecommunications authorities
  • semi-official emissions not recognized by the postal and telecommunications authorities
  • various emissions (patriotic, commemorative, deprived).

official emissions recognized by the administration of the postal and telecommunications authorities

They are 15.

To know, the particular circumstances which marked each emission, to refer to “the French Philately” which published or mentioned the official documents which caused them and gives the figures of pullings.

These 15 cities, correspond to the emissions dimensioned in the catalogs. About these 15 emissions, the catalog “Marianne” (N°1 edition, p 537) expresses the following opinion: “It is not in our matter to seek the pressures which, at the time, could make admit on this list such emission rather than such other. We can to only incline us in front of the administrative decision…, although on this list appear a good number of labels of origin more than doubtful”

These doubts, the catalog “Marianne” the bracket with the emissions of Chambéry (“officialized whimsical series one does not know why. ” and of Loaches (“emission without true official authorization”. Souligons so that there is no confusion that the chapter on the emissions of the Release was not included in editions 2 and 3 of this catalog.

Semi-official emissions not recognized by the administration of the postal and telecommunications authorities

Although these emissions were not recognized by the administration, let us observe that the majority of them were carried out following an official ordinance, manufactured under the control of the local government; the author quotes the official reports, the certificates of magistrates; these stamps were sold with the post office and the matrices destroyed after pulling.

With judging some by their characteristics, one always clearly does not see the border which separates them from the emissions of the first category, apart from the administrative decision to recognize the ones and not the others. This is why the objective examination of the historical circumstances of the birth of each emission is an essential step. Let us repeat that our concern is to give to the readers a precise information source. For example, the reader who would like to know the circumstances and the pulling of the emission of Monteuil-Bellay could seek in “French Philately” N° 309.

The list of the emissions of the second category includes/understands 36 names:

  • Angouleme-L' Houmeau

  • Annecy
  • Annemasse
  • Audierne
  • Baccarat
  • Badonviller
  • Bellegarde
  • Bourgueil
  • Charity on the Loire
  • Chouzé
  • Five-March the Pile
  • Collonges-Fort-l' Locks
  • Curzay
  • Delle
  • Gex
  • Courcelles-with-Touraine
  • the Vault on the Loire
  • Castle-Renault
  • Cholet
  • Evreux
  • Lignères-with-Touraine
  • Monteuil-Bellay
  • Mouthiers on Boëme
  • Orleans
  • Paimbœuf
  • Pernay
  • Pornic
  • Rochecorbon
  • Russet-red the
  • Paris 122
  • Salins
  • Holy-Foy-the-Large
  • Saint Nazaire
  • Salon from Provence
  • Saverne
  • Thizy

Various emissions (patriotic, commemorative, private)

They relate to the following emissions on which much of equip are allowed.

  • Ahun

  • Alençon
  • Antibes
  • Audincourt
  • Autun
  • Belfort
  • Béziers
  • Boulogne
  • Bressuire
  • Brest
  • Breiz Unan (“Brittany Plain” or “alone”)
  • Treich Breiz (“victorious Brittany”)
  • Breiz disgavret (“delivered Brittany”)
  • Briançon
  • Caen
  • Calais
  • Cannes
  • Castrate
  • Casteljaloux
  • Chamberaud
  • Chénérailles
  • Clermont-Ferrand
  • Cluses
  • Cognac
  • Colmar
  • Conflans-Saint-Honorine
  • Digne
  • Douai
  • Dunkirk
  • Elbeuf
  • Gap
  • Grandvillars (Territory of Belfort)
  • Lorient
  • Louhans
  • Luble
  • Mamers
  • Mansle
  • Marseilles
  • Slander
  • Metz
  • Modane
  • Montceau them Mines
  • Montivilliers
  • Montlucon
  • Montluel
  • Montpellier
  • Morlaix
  • Mornant
  • Nanterre
  • Nevers
  • Neuilly
  • Nice
  • Our-lady of Alençon
  • Ushant
  • Paris (mail FFI)
  • Pontarlier
  • Ponthierry
  • Provence
  • Provins
  • Roanne
  • La Rochelle
  • the Rock on Yon
  • Romorantrin
  • Rouet
  • Saint Brieuc
  • Saint-Dié
  • Saint Laurent-of-VAr
  • Sault
  • Saumur
  • Sospel
  • Soulac on sea
  • Thonon
  • Toulouse
  • Tulle
  • Venve
  • Verdun
  • Vesoul
  • Vichy
  • Transfers
  • Vouvray
  • Ile of Yeu

Bibliography of the overloads of the Release

By publishing the list of the emissions of the Release, classified in 3 main categories, our goal was not to present this classification like word of Gospel. This classification results, partly, of an administrative decision of 1944 which cannot be modified. Some are the reserves which one can make on this decision, the classification is essential like a reality independent of the will of the philatelists.

Apart from “French Philately”, T it exists bibliographical references? Undoubtedly. The book which refers in this field is that of Jacques F. Lion “the stamps of the Release”, 1967, Paris. It contains a very significant number of information on the circumstances of the emissions, one finds there the texts of the official decisions, the official reports of the emissions known as “semi-official”, pullings etc… One finds it with the library of the museum of the Post office.

The defect of this book is related to its date of publication, 1967. Since then of research were made; they led to important discoveries and corrections. The example of Gourdon is in this respect significant. One knew a series of stamps overloaded of a cross of Lorraine; this series had been baptized, one does not know too much why “emission of Gourdon”. However the research undertaken near the authorities of this city of the Batch led to this surprising result: no authority of this city had given the order to overload stamps and people was not with the current of these overloads.

The chance intervened. It was discovered that correspondences carrying of the overloads of the Release, in particular of Brittany, had been addressed to a philatelist of Lyon: Mr. Gourdon! One had the idea to make research in this direction, and one discovered that the emission “of Gourdon” was actually a variety of the emission “Trec' H Briez” (victorious Brittany), with the same cross of Lorraine but without the Breton inscription. This history shows that the legends are born sometimes well curiously and how much it is difficult to discover and to restore the truth. It is happy in this case, that it was philatelists rather persevering and enough perspicacious to discover it. This discovery is told in N° 5 of the “Bulletin of the collectors of stamps of the Release” (January 1968) under the title “Emission of Gourdon or Mr. Gourdon?”.

However the book of Mr. Lion, published before this discovery, mentions alleged “the emission of Gourdon (Batch)”. but that does not call into question the scientific probity of this author, who recognizes in his book the absence of information on this emission.

In 1973, appeared a catalog of a tiny format (in 12th), entitled “the stamps of the Release, Free France”, published by Pierre Mayer, negotiating in postage stamps; its catalog does not have an other claim to be a catalog of merchant, a catalog of quotations. Each overload is reproduced there in order to allow the identification. But no information on the circumstances of the emissions is found, no official report. The emissions are placed in the alphabetical order; they all are on the same plan, that (more than doubtful) of Pontarlier like that (indisputable) of Bordeaux.

This catalog more recent than the work of J. Lion took account of some discovered, corrected certain errors. Compared to the work, one finds there 26 emissions in less and 22 moreover. Opposed by their design, these two works are complementary.

Let us come to the principle from classification from the emissions from the Release. While limiting to 15, the emissions which she recognizes, the administration created a situation which at the origin of an interminable controversy. The administration made its decision following an investigation being based into two criteria: the quality of the authority which required the emission, the setting on sale of totality to the counters of the post office. But, point out some, which credit to grant to an investigation carried out in 1944, whereas the communications were dubious? And which were the authorities having quality to make overload the stamps during this period of war and of insurrection where the first administrators of the released cities (military authorities or civil, persons in charge of resistance) were in a hurry to make disappear on the correspondences the traces from a mode honni?

Since 1945, philatelists specialized in this collection qualified the choice of the administration of whimsical. Two of the 15 recognized emissions did not answer exactly the criteria, whereas forty would satisfy there, although not recognized. The debate reached an acuity raised in 1975 when the administration of the postal and telecommunications authorities published an official statement where the perenniality of the list of the 15 emissions was reaffirmed (“Le Monde of the philatelists”, n° 268, August 1974). The association of the collectors of the stamps of Release (ACTL) disputed this list at the postal and telecommunications authorities. The Minister for the postal and telecommunications authorities answered by an end not to receive: “Obviously It would not know to be question for my administration of returning, after a 30 years deadline, on the contents of this list. ” the ACTL then considered a recourse to the Council of State. But this action (which can be done only within one 2 month) appeared inadmissible. (“Le Monde of the philatelists”, n° 276, May 1975, then published an article entitled “Thirty years after, the overloads of the Release”, in which its author Mr. Paul Demeny, defended essentially, the truth of official list. The “bulletin of the ACTL” answered it by the sour feather of Mr. Huot. The controversy reached the sour tone of the polemic. But the silence of the large press was such as neither the attempt at recourse in Council of State, nor the increase in the protestors arrived at the knowledge of the philatelists.

Five years later. (“Le Monde of the philatelists”, n° 329, March 1980, published an official statement of the postal and telecommunications authorities, recalling the character sacro-saint of the list of the 15 emissions and dedicating to the eternal damnation all the other overloads. In its following number, the same newspaper published a “development” of Mr. Dumont, Academy of Philately, which questioned the founded good of the official statement of the postal and telecommunications authorities. After having denounced the scandal of Decazeville (emission at once disappeared that sold) and the negligible pulling of that of Chambéry, it notes: “But more cocasse as regards emission of the Release is that if, the postal and telecommunications authorities, thus legitimated the dreadful bastard ones, they always refused to recognize a legitimate child, namely the emission of Orleans”. It is about an entirety postal of 1,20F, overloaded “RF” by the regional management of the postal and telecommunications authorities and drawn with 120.000 largely diffused specimens.

Meanwhile, as from October 1979, “French Philately”, had opened its columns with a specialized collector, Mr. Bousquet, who by publishing the list of the emissions of the Release popularized the searchs for Jacques Lion after having updated them. This publication lasted until the end of 1984.

Such is the history of this conflict which exists since 1944 within the world of philately, conflict which periodically generates controversies of which we recalled some episodes. Are the specialized collectors right on all these points? For the knowledge, it is necessary to examine each point! This study which the administrative opposition to progress makes impossible on the official level, each one can undertake it for its account. Background documents exist, they were published. Now our readers know exactly where they can find them.

Sources:

  • “French Philately”, re-examined the French federation of Philately (N°304 with N°364).
  • “Popular Philately”, review of the International Philatelic Union (N°322 and N° 326) (www.philatelie-populaire.com

Random links:Jean Alavoine | Jean-Baptiste Lestiboudois | Cyrtodactylus collegalensis | Extremely of Tournoux | Cushion | Edward_F._Albee_Foundation,_Inc.