论文部分内容阅读
因为一直没收到《中国邮史》2005年第6期,加之事忙并未翻阅近期《集邮博览》,承中国邮史研究会麦国培会长提醒并补寄一份,拜读后才知道我那篇小文引起不少邮友关注并提供了宝贵意见,这里一并表示感谢。对于《集邮博览》2005年第12期上黄继光先生的“释疑”一文,我略有不同意见,黄先生所称的“从拍品的表面情况分析,似较符合第八十六条所述情况,该拍品是否附有“寄信清单”?则不得而知。”那我们再来看看第八十六条究竟是怎么说的:
Because it has not received “China Postal History” 2005 the sixth period, combined with the busy did not read the recent “Philately Expo”, Cheng Chin China National History Research Association will remind and send a copy of President Mai Guopei, after reading I know That essay caused a lot of friends and concerned about the postal provided valuable advice, thanks here. I have a slightly different opinion on Mr. Huang Jiguang’s “Explanation of Discrepancy” in the “Philatelic Expo” in December 2005. According to Mr. Huang, “the analysis of the surface of the auction may seem more suitable for the situation described in Article 86, It is not known whether the auction is accompanied by a ”mailing list." Then let us look at what is said at Article 86: