ST. CHRISTOPHER
Early Postmarks
The earliest recorded mark is type PC,* used as a receiving mark on a letter sent out from this colony in 1746. Unfortunately the original of this mark bore a bad blemish, but apparently it is the only one known. It is 31mm. long, with serifed letters 4½mm. high.
Of the Type PD there are at least eight varieties, mostly in serifed capitals, although in Types PD 3 and 4 the letters, other than the initial letters, are in lower case type. It will be noticed that the position of the apostrophe seems to have caused some difficulty to the makers of these handstamps! Details of the varieties of Type PD are given in the following table. Where only one example has been recorded the precise date is given: where more examples have been seen just the year (or years) is given.
* Throughout these notes 1 have used the notation adopted by Robson Lowe.
Type PD:-
| Sub-type | Length (mm) | Height of Letters(mm) | Date |
| 1 | 34 | 4½ | 16.11.1779 |
| 2 | 31 | 4½ | 1789-90 |
| 2a | 30 | 5 | 21.9.1790 |
| 3 | 24 | 4½ | 17.7.1793 |
| 4 | 23 | 4½ | 1795 |
| 5 | 29 | 5½ | 1793-96 |
| 6 | 33½ | 7 | 1794-97 |
| 6a | 33½ | 7 | 1796 |
| 7 | 39 | 5½ | 1798-99 |
No. 6a differs from No. 6 in just one detail; the "T" in 'ST.' is replaced by a dot. When I had seen only one specimen of this I rather inclined to the view that it might have been due to underinking of the handstamp (although the remainder of the impression was very distinct. Since then, however, Dr. Urwick has shown me a specimen from his collection which exactly corresponds with my own. It would seem, therefore, that 6a is a different handstamp or else a damaged state of No. 6. Personally having examined both specimens very carefully, I have come to the conclusion that it is a separate mark.
This raises in my mind the problem of where and how these handstamps were produced. Type PD was used in several Colonies, and I should have thought that they were probably all made in metal to a specific pattern in England. If the handstamp were lost or damaged it might have been replaced by one made locally, possibly being cut from a wood block. Such a theory would perhaps account for the numerous variations produced in St. Kitts, but would hardly explain the peculiar set up of Type PD 1. It would be most interesting to hear of other theories, or established facts about these early postmarks.
The earliest dated mark (Type PF) I have recorded is for 1799. Variations in this mark have been noted up till 1805, and the main features of these are noted below.
Type PF:-
| Sub-type | Length (mm) | Height of Letters(mm) | Date |
| 1 | 34½ | 5 | 22.5.1799 |
| 1a | 34 | 5 | 13.6.1800 |
| 2 | 30 | 4½ | 7.5.1803 |
| 3 | 31½ | 4 | 1802-05 |
The only real difference between Nos. 1 and la is that in the former only the last two figures of the year are given; in No. la, as well as in Nos. 2 and 3, the year is in full. The last example I have seen of PF3 is dated 2 Aug. 1805."