At this time some philatelists prodded the Smithsonian to collect and display stamps in the National Museum alongside \u201cIndian relics, curios,\u201d coins, and other specimens. The National Philatelic Collection, as it would later be named, at this time was distinct from the USPOD\u2019s collection and began modestly in 1886 with the donation of a few Confederate stamps. Organized with other Civil War-era artifacts, the stamps hardly stood out among the other objects displayed in the museum as philatelists desired. Spencer Baird, a former Smithsonian Secretary, willed his stamp collection to the institution in 1888, but it was not available for public viewing. Collector Frank Moore felt that philatelists and stamps were \u201ccompletely left out in the cold by the respected managers of this great institution.\u201d To rectify this hole, he suggested in 1893 that all collectors send \u201cgood stamps\u201d to the museum to build up the national collection. ((Frank Moore, \u201cNot In It,\u201d Golden Star<\/em> 4, no. 4 (April 1893): np; Collins, “Postal Museums and Collections”.)) Even with these donations, stamp presence at the Smithsonian remained small until the two national collections merged in 1913.<\/p>\n The Department moved forward with staging exhibitions in the new museum drawing on their experiences from the Centennial and Columbian Expositions and built upon saved display pieces from the Chicago exhibit. Staged in a renovated storage room in the main USPOD building in Washington, Postmaster General Bissell bragged at its opening that this formed a \u201ccredible nucleus around which a great national postal museum\u201d would be formed for the \u201cbenefit and interest of this and future generations.\u201d Not only meant for collectors, this museum highlighted developments in all aspects of postal history, including a catalog of all stamps printed in the United States (1847-1893). Philatelists noted that the Department had begun collecting stamps from other countries, causing Mekeel\u2019s Weekly to comment that even \u201cUncle Sam cannot resist the pleasures of philately.\u201d ((\u201cPost Office Museum,\u201d Washington Philatelist<\/em> 6, no. 2 (October 1894): 1\u20132; United States Post Office Department, Annual Report of the Postmaster-General of the United States for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1894<\/em>, 46\u20137.; and \u201cUncle Sam Cannot Resist,\u201d Mekeel\u2019s Weekly Stamp News<\/em> (January 31, 1895): 1.)) As one might imagine, some philatelists were not satisfied with the state of the USPOD\u2019s stamp collection. They thought postal officials should have kept a complete set of U.S. stamps ever printed and wanted the USPOD to hire a philatelist to curate the collection.<\/p>\n The museum would highlight US and international postal affairs and history, leading the Department to hire a curator, Ira Slack, to manage the museum\u2019s collection. Not a philatelist himself, Slack looked to the expertise of dealers for advice on mounting stamps and in some instances secured stamps for displays at World\u2019s Fair postal exhibits and at the museum. Philatelists saw great value in a government saving its postage history but criticized the Department for not employing a practicing philatelist or even a \u201cstamp man of medium experience\u201d to manage their holdings in a systematic, \u201cphilatelic way.\u201d Despite collectors\u2019 concerns, this postal museum became a popular tourist destination in Washington, attracting between 75,000 and 100,000 visitors annually. ((\u201cThe Government\u2019s Stamp Collection,\u201d Mekeel\u2019s Stamp Collector <\/em>1 (July 4, 1904): np; Collins, “Postal Museums and Collection”; A Collector, \u201cUncle Sam\u2019s Collection of Stamps,\u201d Southern Philatelist<\/em> (November 1911): 95; \u201cMany Interesting Exhibits in the P.O. Dept. Museum,\u201d Atlanta Constitution<\/em>, March 27, 1910, 5. An estimated number of 75,000-100,000 people visited the museum annually in 1910.))<\/p>\n Given the high visibility and robust visitation numbers in the 1910s, it is difficult to understand why Postmaster General Frank Hitchcock shut the USPOD\u2019s museum and transferred its holdings to the Smithsonian. Crowding in the main post office building forced Hitchcock to evict the museum, since the USPOD needed the office space. Hitchcock wanted the objects to remain accessible to the public, but wanted visitors out of the main Department offices. Recognizing that the Department was not equipped to properly care for its objects, including the large stamp collection, Hitchcock forfeited the collection in favor of an institution that could. After two years, the collections transferred to the Smithsonian. ((Collins, “Postal Museums and Collection”.)) As non-collectors, postal officials did not quite understand the specific philatelic practices of caring for and displaying stamps. Hitchcock, like Wanamaker, believed that the government played a significant role in saving its philatelic and postal history even as it transferred the duties of preserving stamps as artifacts to the National Museum. A federal entity continued to collect stamps and postal-related objects under the auspices of the Smithsonian and not the USPOD\u2014at least for the following two decades.<\/p>\n Club philatelists also believed that the government had a duty to recognize philatelic practices through proper care and exhibition of stamps. To the delight of the philatelic press, the Smithsonian hired Joseph Leavy in the first ever federal position of \u201cPhilatelist\u201d to care for the newly transferred philatelic collections to the National Museum. Philatelic papers covered the news of Leavy\u2019s hiring and praised him for his skills in mounting and organizing stamps in a \u201ctabulated and orderly form.\u201d For the first time, according to one philatelic writer, \u201cwe now have a stamp exhibit that may be considered a credit to us all.\u201d Housed in mahogany cabinets and mounted under glass frames in the Arts and Industries building, Mekeel\u2019s boasted that not even the British Museum had as \u201cmodern and up-to-date an abode\u201d to house its philatelic collection. Even with this praise, members of the American Philatelic Society (APS) were extremely concerned, and a little confused, that the National Philatelic Collection might be abandoned and that the new Philatelist might be fired. In response to a frantic resolution passed by the APS at their 1916 annual meeting, the Assistant Secretary of the Smithsonian assured APS members that the philatelic collection was \u201cas permanent as the life of the nation and has never been regarded in any other light.\u201d ((\u201cThe Government Collection,\u201d Mekeel\u2019s Weekly Stamp News<\/em> (March 27, 1915).; \u201cJoseph B. Leavy, The Govt Philatelist Who Has Achieved Great Success,\u201d Mekeel\u2019s Weekly Stamp News<\/em> (March 27, 1915): 1.; and R. Rathburn to Dr. H.A. Davis, April 16, 1917, in \u201cU.S. Government Collection,\u201d American Philatelist<\/em> 30, no. 17 (June 1, 1917): 233\u201334.)) In his statement, the physical permanence of that collection equated to the strength and permanence of the US, together with all objects held by in the History Division of the National Museum that, in theory, collectively illustrated the history of the US.<\/p>\n This transfer from the Department, or the producers of stamps, to the federal entity charged with preservation and diffusion of knowledge, signified a shift in how philatelists and citizens would view stamps once printed. Stamps were not merely physical representations of prepaid postage, but they also contained historical significance once printed, worth saving. Philatelists, of course, understood this from the earliest days of collecting. Even John Wanamaker saw value in establishing a public exhibition space for displaying stamps and postal-related objects in federal buildings as the Department had begun\u2014after the Columbians\u2014printing stamps that represented selected scenes from the American past.<\/p>\n The physical construction of stamp displays\u2014whether at the Smithsonian or in other public exhibition spaces\u2014encouraged viewing of stamps as individual snapshots of stories or scenes. Lacking contextual information about the subjects represented on stamps encouraged viewers to look at the stamps as products of their design\u2014printing techniques, colors, grills, perforations\u2014and not for the circumstances which produced those illustrated stories. This type of museum presentation was not uncommon in early twentieth century museums, where objects stood in cases lacking explanation. Curators working in the early twentieth century did not create thematic narratives that placed objects within a rich historical and cultural context. Rather, the object\u2019s significance was understood to be inherent and obvious to observers, and often a short label identified only the title of an object. ((Steven Conn, Museums and American Intellectual Life, 1876-1926<\/em> (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998).)) This type of display encouraged an uncritical assessment of the stories told on stamps and did not address the stories or images did not show. Hiring a philatelist, not just a curator trained in museum practice or in history, signified that the federal institution of national memory formally acknowledged that philately was a distinct and valued practice.<\/p>\n Maintaining a philatelist on staff to replace Mr. Leavy in 1921 was important for the Smithsonian when they announced the position upon his retirement. In addition to taking the Civil Service exam, the government required applicants to have a high school diploma and philatelic experience and \u201cwork as an amateur collector\u201d would not be considered. The government formally drew distinctions among collectors, something that we know philatelists had done for years. Just as Leavy\u2019s personal and professional life revolved around stamps, so would his successor\u2019s. Catherine L. Manning earned the position and became known as \u201cUncle Sam\u2019s First Lady of Philately.\u201d She began collecting when she was a girl and then worked for stamp dealers, including the well-known stamp dealer, J.M. Bartels. Manning\u2019s selection also highlighted that while most philatelic clubs banned female membership, many women still collected stamps. By the 1930s, the Philately section of the History Division became well established at the Smithsonian. ((Leavy served as editor of American Philatelist<\/em> for one year and published articles on stamps from Holland and Belgium. According to A.C. Roessler\u2019s<\/em>, before he was hired as Philatelist, he was a brewer in Brooklyn \u201cbefore the anti-hootch amendment became law, but the Government does not hold that against him now.\u201d \u201cThe U.S. Stamp Section at Museum,\u201d A. C. Roessler\u2019s Stamp News<\/em> (May 1921): np.; \u201cKnow Your Fellow Members,\u201d Washington Philatelic Society Newsletter<\/em> (October 27, 1940): 27.; and Catherine L. Manning, \u201cPhilately in the National Museum,\u201d National Philatelic News<\/em> (October 15, 1930): 6.)) As both the Smithsonian and the USPOD saw value in saving stamps as part of the national story in the 1910s and 1920s, the Department saw the popularity of collecting rise, and they recognized the need for a better way to handle requests from collectors.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" As the USPOD developed a philatelic relationship with collectors and citizens, the federal government established a postal museum and national collections that encouraged philately and spawned interest in postal matters. In 1894, the USPOD opened a small museum in Washington, DC that highlighted the accomplishments of the US postal service. Major museums were opening in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"parent":80,"menu_order":4,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-117","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stampingamericanmemory.org\/2014version\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/117","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stampingamericanmemory.org\/2014version\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stampingamericanmemory.org\/2014version\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stampingamericanmemory.org\/2014version\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stampingamericanmemory.org\/2014version\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=117"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/stampingamericanmemory.org\/2014version\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/117\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stampingamericanmemory.org\/2014version\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/80"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stampingamericanmemory.org\/2014version\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=117"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"Postage](\"http:\/\/stampingamericanmemory.org\/2014version\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/08\/SIA-SIA2010-2544_postalcollections_SI.jpg\")
<\/a><\/span>Postage Stamp Collection on display at the National Museum (Photo, Smithsonian Institution Archives)<\/small><\/span>\n