Might Have Found A Scott 127 Pair But Will They Certify It ?

I found this cover,according to the back it was mailed June 22/1870 using the 15C grill stamp,looks like it has another date under that of 1874 but I can't read the word in front of 1874,then sometime it was re-mailed for 6 cents.Was it mailed in 1874 which would mean no 127's or later ?Both mailings were to the same person also.How did the original sender get his mailed envelope back ?

The pair has no grill showing what-so-ever,I need it looked at but read online they(certification companies) do not certify anymore 127's because the grill's were so faint that they won't do anymore.Even if these have a faint grill I'd like to send this cover in but don't want to find out they can't do it.

It's a neat cover,it's payment for a 1793 Continental Cent which as I collect coins too is really kool.The "Type II" I think means no grill.

Any advice,thanks.

Double rate ( the coin) Registered letter, pretty busy on the back;
The notation of the coin looks to be the same ink as the docketing
Geo Till
South Troy P Office
Wabashea CO
Minneso
Rec'd June 21 1870 is my best guess and under that in blue ink
Reply 22 1870
and sent 315 in it and
had it registered cost 15c The black ink Sept 1874 sure is odd.
Is that a blue layout line on the 15c 1869?

Those layout lines are almost always visible on the bi-colored 1869's. There might even be a dot just above the frameline. You can look at others to see where the dots normally are.

No. It refers to the 15c stamp which is a Type II.

Ungrilled 3c 1869s were distributed in the first part of 1870, so the date is right.
You'd have to send it for certification and they'll want to lift at least one side from the cover to look at the gum. Ungrilled stamps have a brown (like molasses) gum on them.

I thought for the locomotives that they needed to be unused with original gum in order to certify a no grill.

There are certified used copies of #114a (without grill) footnoted in the Scott Specialized under the listing for #114.

Not that I'm likely to encounter this as a pratical question, but how can one tell the difference between Scott #114a Scott #127?

Al,

The only certified 114a that's used came off of a cover with the original gum intact. In fact, I seem to remember that the stamp came off the cover in front of him. This is what Brian Bleckwenn himself told me.

The right three cent looks like it has grill points right in front of the train. The grill was over the gum, which is why they will only certify OG stamps. Plus the grills were often fairly light, and the stamps have been on the cover for over 140 years, and we have no idea what has happened to this cover during that time. Any serious collector of this issue has seen dozens of three cent covers with stamps that show no grill. Waste of time and money to send it. It's a nice registered cover, enjoy it for what it is.

Billw2, From 2017 Scott Specialized: "Two examples used are recorded for 114a on normal paper and two used examples on gray paper. On normal paper, there exists a used single with original gum and black pen cancel (2015 Philatelic Foundation certificate), and a single on cover that was lifted to check for a grill and replaced (2011 Philatelic Foundation certificate). No. 114a used on gray paper exists as a strip of three on piece (1978 Philatelic Foundation certificate), and as a single on advertising cover, lifted and hinged back in place (2015 Philatelic Foundation certificate)."

I don't personally know if this information from Scott is factual, but that's what's there.... These two are in the PF database. The second one may be the one they are alluding to.. "with original gum and black pen cancel.."??

Before reading this and checking the PF, all I was aware of was the strip of three on gray paper...

http://pfsearch.org/pfsearch/pf_grd...lledfrom=lkp

http://pfsearch.org/pfsearch/pf_grd...lledfrom=lkp

There is also an interesting article from Scott Trepel in the February 1987 Chronicle about ungrilled 114s with the Brooklyn, Conn. Cancel.

Al,

As I understood that one with the PFC from 1978 would never get a good cert today. I wasn't aware of the one that got a cert from 2015, but I had this conversation with the guys at the PF back in 2014 when I visited. The consensus was that without the stamp having OG no 1869 without a grill was getting a cert.

Bill

Yes, they have to draw the line somewhere. Kinda like with #315s that don't measure up to the 21.5x25mm cert. standard set by the experts.

The grill series seems to be a really problematic area. In both the 1869 series and the 1870 series, apparently, one cannot conclusively identify what one has in their hands. In both cases, experts agree that grills were applied so light that they cannot be detected.

Scott 137 is available as a pair, one with a grill, and one without -- so is it a pair of #137, until you split the pair, and then you have a single Scott # 137 and a single Scott # 148? Clearly the other split pairs from the sheet are being treated this way.

What seems inconsistent to me is that philatelists treat these two issues differently. If, under all careful examination, one cannot find a grill on a stamp, it was issued without a grill. Perhaps future technology will allow us to examine the stamp more effectively, and thus expert opinion may change on a particular stamp.

What is done now is assume that a person has the inexpensive version. That is not a fact based decision.