 |
| Lettercard Geuzendam G9 (introduced on the 20th of July 1905) - Rotterdam 14 October 1906 |
The lettercard above bears some wonderful postmarks, since the interval reads 12-2V. This interval is known as a 'Nachtuurkarakter' in Dutch (Nighttime Hour Character). Together with 2-6V these intervals were being introduced in the summer of 1905 to accommodate a new service by the Dutch railways which had started in April of that year. The Dutch Railways had introduced a special mail train on the section Amsterdam-Rotterdam to cope with the ever increasing postcard and letter volumes which were being sent late in the evenings and nights.
The Dutch Postal Service (P.T.T.) had used the 12-6V interval since decades, but felt obliged to further curb this rather 'broad' interval to 12-2V and 2-6V. Remember the V stands for 'Voor' in Dutch, which means 'before noon' in English. So 2-6V means between 2 and 6 a.m. Why the P.T.T. introduced these intervals is a bit of a mystery really. Maybe the board of directors thought people would accuse the Postal Service for possible delays if they wouldn't further define the interval. In this new situation the P.T.T. could make a better counterargument against an angry 'customer' when he would claim his letter took more than six hours to reach his address (yep, people did care for seriously speedy snail-mail in these days). The P.T.T. could point out the newly introduced interval and argue that the letter was only posted after 2 a.m. (in the case of a 2-6V) which meant it had only travelled for (e.g.) 4 hours instead of 6...
Still, I am not quite satisfied with this explanation, as the old interval (12-6V) wasn't discarded at all. On the contrary: these new Nighttime Hour Characters were only used very sparsely. Only Amsterdam 12-2V regularly occurs as departing cancellation. So the mystery remains... Apparently 'Nachtuurkarakters' were used in the Main Post offices of Amsterdam, Leiden, The Hague, Delft, Schiedam, Rotterdam and Dordrecht. Apart from some Amsterdam and Rotterdam cases, the other intervals are rare and incredibly hard to find. Moreover, they always seem to appear on Postcards and never on letters or lettercards. To be frank, this Rotterdam 12-2V is the first time I've seen a 'Nachtuurkarakter' on a lettercard!
 |
| Rotterdam 12-2V on a Princess Wilhelmina lettercard |
A plea for postponement of payment
As interesting as the postmarks is the message. It took me some time to unravel the mesmerizing (or illegible - whatever you like!-) handwriting. But in the end this laborious task might prove of great interest. Please read the text first!:
~
Rotterdam 13 ... 1906
Weledelgeb. Heer,
Naar aanleiding der brief heb ik de eer U mede te deelen, dat 't mij, doordat ik ongeveer 10 dagen ongesteld geweest ben, onmogelijk was persoonlijk naar U te komen om over de zaak van Dr. Boks te spreken. U verlangt nu van mij dat ik na drie dagen 't gehele bedrag moet kunnen voldoen. Ik geef U echter beslist de verzekering dat voor mij, hoe gaarne ik ook 't wenste - 't eenmaal onmogelijk is. Er bestaat hier geen onwil maar onmacht. Ik hoop dan ook dat U met mij eenige consideratie zult willen gebruiken. Op 't einde der maand Dec. kan ik ƒ25,- betalen, en zal dan zorgen er over drie maanden - na Dec. - 't restant betaald wordt. Ik kan 't wel niet geloven dat U mij voor dit bedrag ongelukkig zult willen maken. Ik op ... uwer goed gunstig over zult willen beschikken en verblijf ik naar U bij voorbaat bijzonder dankzeggende. Hoogachtend W [of Uw?] Ledel.
~
~
Dear Sir,
In reply to your letter I have the honour in letting you know, that I was unable to come over to you in person to discuss the case of Dr Boks because I was ill for for about 10 days. You now demand of me to pay the entire sum after three days. I can assure you though that that is simply impossible, however much I have wished it to be otherwise. It is a matter of impotence rather than obstinacy. Hence, I do hope that you are willing to show some consideration for me. At the end of December I could pay ƒ25, and I will see to the rest of it in three months. I could not even think of the possibility you want me to make unhappy for such an amount of money. I ... you will be benevolent regarding this and I remain you very much grateful in advance. Yours sincerely, W. [our Your?] Ledel
~
After searching delpher.nl again for any traces of Mr Boks or the sender (I think it reads Ledel, but I am not sure), I am left with nothing. The addressees were distinguished Rotterdam lawyers back in 1906, but they do not have a clear link with Mr Boks or the sender when combing through all newspapers of 1906...
To my great delight though there may exist a link between Mr Boks and this Ledel person. Dr. D. B. Boks was a Dutch surgeon specialized in gynecology and midwifery from 1902 onwards. According to his In Memoriam he opened his own clinic in Rotterdam in 1902.
 |
| D.B. Boks (1869-1937) |
Mrs J.H. Ledel published an article in a Dutch magazine for midwifery in 1905. As a successful and professional midwife in Tilburg she complained about the unfair competition she had to endure from doctors which practiced midwifery as well. Doctors like Dr. Boks I assume... In short, she states that doctors often only ask ƒ7,50 for delivering a baby, whereas the official minimum tariff for delivering was ƒ10,- at the time. Mrs Ledel was quite understandably very angry about these unfair practices. She even claimed that certain doctors would create an atmosphere of fear in order to exploit their position. For instance, she recalls a woman who complained to her that a doctor wouldn't visit her when she would become seriously ill because she favoured an ordinary midwife above a professional doctor to deliver her baby. Gloomy business which smells as cheap touting for patients.
Only a month after the publication of her article the doctors replied in the November issue of the Dutch magazine: they were furious. Maybe more angry about her life (she lived together with a woman!) than the actual article. In the end an external committee of inquire had to be created to settle the argument. Ledel wanted a hearing, but alas she wasn't granted one.
A great story and a very interesting one with regard to feminism and fair relations between men and women. I am not convinced however that our lettercard has anything to do with it. I'm not even sure if Ledel is the sender, and there are more complications... First: the letter was postmarked in Rotterdam, whereas J.H. Ledel lived and worked in Tilburg. Second: why would she owe her lawyer anything? A vain attempt to charge against the doctors one year after her article - which she lost? Third: the person who wrote the letter should have gone to his/her lawyers to discuss the case of Dr. Boks. This implies that Mr. Boks started a lawsuit...
 |
| Johanna Ledel and Florine Froch, her companion. |
Questions, questions, and more questions: that's where we left with again. Where do I find the answers?
 |
| Reverse of the lettercard with postman mark (first round (A)) and a somewhat redundant arrival postmark as it is (exactly) the same as the departure postmark! |
