Removing Pre 1900 Stamps Off Cover

Have some old envelopes, most in bad condition.

Should I remove the stamps in order to better identify their Scott# or is it best to keep the stamp on cover.

Show pictures please

It depends.

Thanks, I'll get back to you all with pictures at some point

Good morning gjmmaddog,

Yes, scans please. A damaged envelope does not help the value of a cover as postal history but does not destroy it either. Please look for markings on the back side of each item as they document the travels of some envelopes through the mails. The most common stamp can have much greater value if left on a damaged cover.

Please don't remove stamps from envelopes. By leaving them intact it paints a better picture than just the stamp by itself.

Without images, it is hard to make a learned or specific response, but as a postal historian, several thoughts come to mind:

1. Leave covers and documents intact - even if ratty - especially if one is a beginner and does not fully understand all the varied facets of postal history of the cancels, rates, routes, senders, recipients, messages, etc.

2. Don't get too caught up in "I must ID this stamp" to the detriment of destroying something more valuable. Most stamps can be ID'd on cover, or at least narrowed down to 2-3 types, which is often sufficient. I can show examples which I can only ID to one of two cheap varieties on a $100+ cover due to its postal history aspects. Do I destroy the $100 cover to find out which 15 cent stamp I have? No.

A good example is Scott 331 and 374, one cent Franklin stamps differing only by double line vs single line watermark. Both were workhorse stamps of their era. Both catalog at the nominal 25 cents used. I may be able to confirm the earlier type by the postmark date, but otherwise the value of the mail piece is driven by the other postal history aspects which may be considerable.

Here is a case in point. Removing this stamp leaves you a cheap almost worthless stamp. Leaving it on cover shows it being used in France.