1914 George Wash 3 Cent Violet On Cover Mint Never Cancelled

Hey guys X-mas may have come early for me and ina huge way I hope!...Picked this one up Sunday riding down the beach yard saleing and I believe this is Scott 456 instead of 464 which somebody wrote on envelope,but I need some professional help here from you guys..what do you think I have here and would you keep it on the envelope or remove it..which would be higher value is what I really need to know..I only have a 2002 Scott catalog and would like to know value of this stamp as well if anyone could help me there on this as well
I think this is one bad to the bone cover and should leave it as is,,am I correct??
Thanks you all so very much as always!

Whatever it ends up being, it almost needs be classified as used. There is no pricing in Scott for unused with no gum, which this would be if removed from the cover.

Your enthusiasm and optimism are boundless. I'm not sure why you think this is a 456 rather than a 464. I not really sure how to tell the difference, though I think one is watermarked and the other not. At any rate you'll have to remove it from the cover to find out.
As for the cover. Bad to the bone? I'd say just bad. It's not postally used, it's torn, and unless you've got a thing for pipe organs, it doesn't add any value or information. Since it's already adhered to the cover, the gum is gone and is no longer MNH, so you might as well soak away and go watermark hunting.

Yes... what would this be classified as is right Stallzer hahaha..thinking though I finally pulled one out of my tail here..finallyyyyy

Thank you James I love this becuase its like treasure hunting or something!Exciting digging through all these albums ect and then to stumble on this,,I think its pretty darn unique and reason being is that the 456 and the 464 arnt found that often and to have it on a envelope never used well whats the odds of finding this..smiling ear to ear on this one,,its a biggie for me atleast,,my biggest find yet to date..and I dont know much at all in this to be honest

Is it a type I or a type II?? Looks like a horizontal coil, perf'ed. 10 vertical. Could be a 445,456,493 or 494. If its a flat plate, its 445, scarce find; if rotary, it could be any of the other three. 456 has a single line watermark. 493 and 494 are not watermarked. 493 is type I and 494 is type II. 493 & 494 are much more common finds. The only way I know to tell if its 456 is to lift it and check for a watermark. If you want to leave it with the cover, I guess you could hinge it back on after lifting it? If its a flat plate it can only be 445 and if its a type II it can only be 494. if its type I, rotary then the question is whether its 456 or 493--big difference in catalogue value.

Can't really tell by the top of the stamp if that's a coil or not. If it is a coil than it's certainly not a 464. Could be a 394, 445, 456, or 494, if it is a coil. Now you need to check watermarks and perfs.

Edit - Al E beat me to it :)

Should be easy enough to differentiate between the 464 & 456. The 456 is a horizontal coil, perf 10 vertically.

*Edit* - You can eliminate catalog value on it since it's neither MNH, MH, used or used on cover.

Well I guess the ol' dyslexia kicked in (no I don't really have it). I sometimes do transpose numbers when I'm not thinking and I was thinking 446, which of course is a coil, but the wrong colour and denomination. So forget what I said above about the ID. Some days I'm lucky I can ID myself.

Hope the identification was not made with ballpoint pen on the cover because it is obviously NOT a SC 464.

It does appear to be a coil of some sort from what I can see. I wonder why it was stuck on that cover and never mailed? suspicious?

Not suspicious at all. I have quite a few covers like that where a Stamp was placed on the envelope and never mailed. I suspect some people pre-stamped envelopes and mailed when ready while some never made it out the door.

The envelope is interesting, but this can never be considered a used cover without a postmark tying the stamp to envelope. As such, you can remove the stamp and identify it properly ... and don't bother trying to hinge the stamp back on the cover.

If this were mine, I would delicately try to soak the stamp off so as to not destroy the envelope. Even without a stamp, the cover is collectible as an advertising piece.

Good luck!

Brian

Thank you everyone! How do I now check for watermark?Are they easy to see once stamp is off?

Well guys I soaked the stamp in cold water and watched it sink to the bottom of bowl...I didnt take my eyes off it ,,kept watchin,,,nd still kept watching and then all of a sudden I see it starting to seperate fromt eh envelope...at that very second I took it out and got my little tooth pic under it and zip off she came perfectly without incident..lifted it up with my toothpick and set it on 3 laying there,,then put a few ontop of it so it wasnt allowed to curl up an would dry ina nice flat state,and it was off the palte getting dry under as well laying on the 2 toothpicks..there totaly dry and time for the hold to the light deal to se if you see a watermark...
well at first glace I did not see a thing..but still held the stamp up there and kept snapping pictures in hopes that on the correc angle I would see something..never did until I downloaded my pics,,going though the pics I see the lines crossing...A WATERMARK has been found on the stamp..so now I indentify the stamp as a SCOTT 456 COIL and in my getting that stamp off that envelope at that verty second I did,it appears that I have the glue on the back still as well..
Heres what she looks like~










I could have never did this without the help from all of you,,just a few months ago I came on here knowing absolutly nothing at all abaout stamps,now here I am removing stamps and finding watermarks! Thank you all and all of you have a wonderful holiday season ok!
Dave