#65? Date Help 1862 Minnesota Sioux War Cover Research US 3c Washington

Picked this cover up recently and am trying to pin down exactly when it was cancelled, which I fear is hopeless.

Fort Ridgely, Minnesota existed from 1853/54(opened) and closed in 1867. The 67 closure seems to rule out all of the Scott #79 and 94's but still leaves at least a five year run for the 64's and 65's. The picture is very very close to real life on the color- guessing this is a rose or rose brown of some kind and not pink at all.

The Sioux Uprising or War began August 18, 1862 and Fort Ridgely was attacked on the 20th and 22nd. So if this is an August 27, 1862 cancellation it becomes a very big deal to those of us who worry about such things.

If it is from another year it is still quite unusual and interesting but maybe not as significant as 1862 would be. The fort is pretty tough to collect for anything original so glad to find this either way.

BTW- the Sutler aka P.O. was a putz! He figured out the F.R.military reservation was unplatted (the Gov forgot to claim it) so in 1861 he got title to the land. His case went all the way up to US Grant in 1866 who said if he did this while sutler fire him NOW.


*** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum. ***

The color says it isn't a 64. The MN postal history site lists this cancel a rarity factor of 5 on a scale of 0-9. Lovely cover.

https://mncancels.org/#home

Oops, realized I forgot to specifically ask if the date of issue on the stamp can be pinned down beyond #65 (1861-1866 right?) if there is anything unusual about it or not.


Thanks for the MN cover page link!

I think the rarity 5 goes to a 10++ (as a historical item, not the cancel of course) if this was sent 5 days after the Indian attack. Sure wish the letter was still in it.

It does not look to me like it would be an 1862 printing of the 3 cent 1861 issue. Much more likely to be some period thereafter.

I'll see if I can find some of my Uprising resources and report if I find anything further to help

That's a wonderful cover on many levels.

I do wonder if the stamp has been lifted and moved slightly - note the middle left center area where the cancel does not extend onto the cover. It is common that stamps get lifted and imperfectly re-applied. If that cancel agrees with the town, which it sounds like it does, then that would explain it. Not a big deal.

I would think it would be worth getting expertized given the uncertain tying of the stamp to the cover. I can see some possible light tying at the top but that is not much to hang an expertizing on given the lack of any tying on the left where one would expect it given the way the cancel is heavily inked there and how it stops dead at the edge of the stamp. My guess is that it is okay, but it would be worth getting any question settled. As for the year I don't think there is any way to tell within the span of several years. As the original poster suggests, hoping it is 1862 is fun but hope is not something to count on - especially given the number of years it could be making any one in particular having low odds. Its too bad the letter is not present, or even the recipient making a note of when she received it as is sometimes seen on covers.

I managed to get another Fort Ridgely cover- I think it is the same cancellation and the edges are really abrupt so I think I feel pretty good about the intact/original state of the first one. Though I readily yield to those here if they think there are issues.... R Faux- If you are interested in the whole 1862 Uprising wanted to ask if you know of a list of Defenders who received the medal in 1896 since they can be numbered?

i wonder if the stamp in the first cover and the right stamp of the second were cancelled before being placed on the covers, as the left stamp of the second cover overlaps the first and ties it. was it put on later when the cover was found overweight?
in any event they are nice items.

I'm a little uncomfortable about both covers. Again I would urge that you have them expertized and hopefully the experts will say they are what they seem to be.

Perhaps a close up zoom of the stamps themselves? After a couple of responses I also see a potential problem on the first cover. On the left side of the stamp part of the cancel stops on the edge of the stamp which clearly should have tied it to the cover but it doesn't.