1851 Issue With An 1851 Date Stamp

In my previous post of 1/23 I noted that I was following up on some pieces I had put aside over the years for further investigation when retired. Here is another one from the box.
This has the initial appearance of an 1851 date stamp. But a June 4th 1851 piece shouldn't exist. On the other hand, why would someone fabricate such a stamp when one could just as well use a year that could exist? I find this perplexing and welcome comments and observations from those familiar with markings of this period. Is this just a bunch of silly business?

It is not a "51" but part of the CDS. If it was a year date it would be in a horizontal line below the 4, not curved along the outer rim. What you are reading as "51" is part of the city and state, probably a Columbia or Columbus. Moreover, I do not believe any town marks are known with year dates before 1853.

Hi Rephil --

This is a very interesting cds.

FWIW -- I agree with SPQR that the supposed "51" is not a year date.

That said -- To my eyes, given the layout of a typical CDS -- the supposed "51" is too far away from the trajectory of the outer rim of the CDS to be part of the town name or the state abbreviation. I also note that the font size of the supposed "51" appears noticeably smaller than the town name.

I am wondering if the CDS might possibly be an integral straight line "5 P(AID)" -- and what you are seeing are the first 2 characters?

I ran a quick scan through Simpson's and Siegel's power search and could find nothing that matches.

Very curious -- and I am looking forward to what others might have to say as well.

Regards // ioagoa

My first reaction is that the '51' might actually not be part of this CDS, but, instead be another marking from the cover that happened to cross the stamp.

The observations made about it possibly being a State abbreviation, or PAID type of marking are certainly very possible, but the overall spacing and orientation doesn't seem correct for either -- at least at first glance. Maybe there is some optical illusion at work here or maybe the month slug is rotated somehow.

I am not aware of any CDS style 1851 year dates; or 1852.
SPQR is correct. There are a few straightlines, like Sonora, CA with that date.

Want to see a more complete "1851" year date?
Keiji Taira and I got some enjoyment out of this item, when he found it around 1991 or so.

Just so readers don't get too confused by the 1c stamp I just posted -- the number beneath the 3 bars on this New York cancel are supposed to be the day of the month - "not" the year.

So October had 51 days that year (not). There are also November 31st dates and other non-existant things known. Mostly errors by the PO, but not year-dates.

Hi txstamp --

That is a great strike of the transposed Oct 15 date stamp -- a curiosity and conversation piece to be sure -- thanks for showing it.

On the OP's supposed '51' cancel -- upon closer study -- I think you are correct that the overall orientation and spacing does not fit for a straight-line integral '5 PAID' -- so the only potential for something along those lines is if the "PAID" was abbreviated as "Pd" -- but even that looks too tight for a good fit?

I sure would have liked to be able to see the cover that stamp came from -- as then we could probably figure out the story -- but alas -- unless somebody can find a match to another strike -- it will probably remain a mystery.

Regards // ioagoa

As usual, thanks to the posters who have replied on this topic.
I am now of the opinion that the "51" is really part of a '5 P(AID"). But that brings up the question of what rate could be paid with a 3 cent stamp plus an additional 5 cents. Can anyone familiar with postal rates of the 1859s clarify this and propose a possible solution?

A partial "5 paid" of some sort is not a very satisfying answer.
5 Paid would be a rate in the 1845-1851 time period.
The 1851-1855 time span had the rate differential of 3 cents prepaid and 5 collect. One encounters "3 paid" markings, but NOT "5 paid".

I would first confirm the exact town by looking at the letter spacing, serifs, etc.

(5 (C)ent paid or (D)ue?
Don't know just wondering if it's a fancy C or a D

It might also be a "US" that was part of an exchange office marking

Looking at the spacing of the letters in the town name and the circle framing the cancel, my guess is that the state initials would be directly below and centered under the date, or nearly so. The '51'/'5P'/'5'whatever doesn't have any business being where it is if it were integral to the cancel. What SHOULD be there (actually, I would think farther from center than the '5P') - what MUST be there is a state identifier. As others have said, I don't think the '51'/'5P'/'5'whatever is part of the CDS. Its position and orientation to the CDS is too 'odd' to be part of the CDS. I DO see traces of ink farther from center than the '51'/'5P'/'5'whatever that are probably the state identifier, but it is incomplete - the bulk of it would be off the stamp. That is a little too bad, too, because 'COLUMBUS/COLUMBIA' are fairly common town names.

So.... what is the '51'/'5P'/'5'whatever?? I dunno. '5 PAID' is a weak contender, as others have said. How about '15 PAID' for a 'multi' overweight letter, and the '1' is weak? Would they even HAVE a 5 times overweight PAID stamp? I doubt it. Maybe others can comment on that. It could possibly be a foreign cancel of some sort - that would open up the possibilities greatly. Many foreign destination letters of the day had 3-cent stamps, among many others, to make up the rate. The destination may well have been a country where the rate at the time would almost REQUIRE a 3-center to help make up the total. Remember, before 1855, the series consisted of the 1c, 3c, and 12c only. The 5c and 10c came later in response to foreign rates being such a pain in the keester to make up using only the 3 existing denominations.

I am sorry I am not more help!