An Interesting "Boston Negative" Cover

It was a single page of Boston Negative Numbers in my great-grandfather's collection that set me down the fancy cancel road. I keep an eye out for anything interesting, and recently picked this up on ebay. Two different Boston stations, two Boston carriers, two hand notations and at lower left...
HELP?

• I am having no luck identifying purple Boston hand-stamp.
• With no return address, I would appreciate opinions on the pencil notation at UL - 2 / Recd Aug 31/80. Did this get picked up perhaps?

I love 19th century addresses!
L.M. Hutchinson/Summer St/Boston Mass
(Care of Mr Pierce/up two flights)

The origin postmark is North Conway, NH

To take a stab at the cancel at the lower left of the front:
BOSTON, MASS.
RCD, DOR. STA. (received at Dorchester Station)

It's a wonder what you can do when you manipulate the receiving mark by orienting it properly and darkening the color:



So the actual text in the receiving mark reads: REC'D. IN BOSTON, MASS.

I tried to search for the marking and came up with this example wherein Kelleher Auctions suggests that this particular received marking is "scarce":

http://db.kelleherauctions.com/php/...=6728&lang=1

Pencil notation was probably a notation by 'dead letter' clerk as to when it was taken in for counting days to dispose if no caller for letter or delivery status by sender. The pen in ink script of 'no such person at 29 Summer Street' was probably noted by the current resident and returned (pen & ink by nip point writing device) to the carrier (or dropped in a collection box??) to be returned to sender as undeliverable. If no return address then it goes to the dead letter office for other determination. In early days, Postal clerks would open mails to determine address for return or forwarding.

wt1 - Huzzah! I did the same thing this afternoon (finally home with my "real" computer equipment) and came up with the same reading of the hand stamp. I bookmarked the Kelleher lot for later reference. Much appreciated!

eligies - The DLO info helps out with a couple other covers which have various return markings but I had no clue how it got returned. Thanks!

So the question is who wrote what and when? With the gap bewteen the Aug 11 and Aug 28 markings, it makes sense that the letter was first delivered on Aug 11 and took some time before getting back into the system - and that the "no such person at ..." was added by the first errant recipient after a delay of 2 weeks.

At that time, a letter would hae been advertised, then if unclaimed, sent to the DLO. Both departments would have had handstamps. So the absence of either in a clearly discernable form makes me believe that it did not go this route.

But rather that it finally got back to the carrier division for a second try on Aug 28, was recognised by a different carrier and properly delivered on Aug 31 - as noted in the corner by the correct recipient.

Also, in the 1800s it was common to number letters in sequence so that missing letters could quickly be identified. I suspect this may be the 2nd letter of this correspondence - a reason why the carriers would not yet be familiar with a new patron on their routes.