Glenhaven Local Used But Off Cover

The Glenhaven local mentioned in one of my other threads. A nice copy, unfortunately no longer on cover. I believe it is a Type V, but I don't have a Scott Specialized to check.

What features of the stamp would you use to distinguish types? I notice there are two dots in the broken links, except for the upper left one, which has only one.

The cancel seems to contain an O. Do you have any idea of this location?

This page will give you more info on Glen Haven. Cancellation should be either Homer or Scott, NY.
Chip

According to a 1904 version of Scott Specialized (which is available in part online) the key element is the border. Type III and Type IV have the chain link, with Type III having various ornaments in the corners. Type IV has no ornaments in the corners. The stamp shown I now realize is a Type IV not V. Things have changed since 1904.

First letter looks like an "S" and the second could be a "C", so perhaps Scott, NY as Chip suggests.

Here's the Scott, NY version:

Using Scott for ID'ing carriers and locals is completely useless. The go-to source is Larry Lyons' 3 volume "The Identifier for Carriers, Locals, Fakes, Forgeries and Local Posts of the United States". The chain border makes yours a type IV, of some sort. Lyons shows 4 original plate variants, 2 forgeries, and 1 bogus type. Yours does not match any of them exactly, so you may have something new. He should see it.

I agree with John Becker. The stamp seems to have all the characteristics listed in Lyons for a genuine copy except for the single dot in the broken link at upper left.

FYI (For your Interest)
Source: United States Locals and their History
Charles Coster 1877
Scott & Company

Here is a display from the Farrell collection, see 71L3(type IVvar). I'm not sure who's numbering system it might be Scott's?


https://www.pennypost.org/pdf/farre...llection.pdf

Hello Stallzer, I saw that article, and on page 5 the stamp in the upper right hand side is a Type IV with a single dot in the same chain link as the one I posted. I don't have a copy of Lyons, so either to John or Dudley, is the difference between the one posted and the type IV's in Lyons the single dot or something else

There are other things, such as the length of the line above ONE CENT, period vs. comma after MAIL, the break in some of the chain links, etc. None of the features that identifies a forgery, according to Lyons, are present in the stamp in question here, but as John said neither does it match all the features illustrated for the various genuine Type IV varieties.