R154 & R155 Improper Usage And Way Out Of Date.

Every now and then something besides the U.S. 3c 1851-61 stamp catches my eye.
This time its this creation of a first flight cover. Improperly used, 30 years outdated, Revenue Stamps. I like this kind of piece.

A fun colorful cover. Am I correct to assume that the revenue stamps serve no purpose other than eye candy? That the 5 cents regular postage is sufficient for the air mail service? Still, neat item.

The domestic airmail rate was 10 cents per half ounce when the cover was mailed.
The rate went down to 5 cents per ounce on August 1, 1928.

So yes, the revenue stamps should not have been accepted, but older, odd, and quirky frankings can often be found on these philatelic airmail covers.

Ah, the switch to the 5 cent rate was in 1928. Thanks for the clarification. An even more interesting cover then.

Its an attractive and neat cover for sure.

The sender was remiss in not putting a 3c 1851 on there for you as well.

Fun cover, but strictly philatelic (fiscaltelic?) IMO.

Personally I like them, but I won't pay large premiums unless the improper use is in-period for the revenue stamps in question and do not have other "red flags" for contrived usage.

I just passed on a couple (not as eye catching however) at our local show a few weeks back as the dealer wanted $20-50 per cover. Now, if it were a commercial cover in-period, that's a different matter.

But yeah, if you like it and it doesn't break the bank, it's all sorts of fun!

Rev it was part of a small lot of covers that if I were to approximate the value of the other items it would leave this cover at a cost of $20-25. Although one of the covers I count as a $2 item might have more actual value. I'll post it in another thread in the Covers section.

Zebra I was surprised to see that the IR stamps actually are included in paying the postage. It makes it a bit more fun to think about the interaction of the sender and the postal clerk.

tx I guess the sender was stingy with his #10s and 11s!! tx if you read this, I wonder do you have any out of date use 1851-61 3c. This might be better for another topic but are they more rare because the stamps were actually demonetized?

stampcrow - I don't think I have any demonetized usages of pre-1861 stamps at the moment, although that's certainly something that interests me.

There is a famous cover with a US #2 on it that Carroll Chase mailed to himself, I think in the 1920s. Philatelic of course, but still neat.

The demonetized usages are actually a very complicated study, as demonetization was enforced at different times in different cities, and, also north vs south. There are numerous dimensions to it. There are some great postal markings that came out of this as well. Some cities, like Philadelphia, seemed to quit allowing old stamps right away in late August 1861, while New York city, was much more tolerant, and accepted them for quite some time.

Simply put, usages of demonetized stamps during late 1861 or in nearby years, that are clearly non-philatelic (which those would be) are quite collectible, and, in some cases quite valuable.

One does have to, however, factor in, whether the usage was accepted or denied. On par, the usages that are denied are the ones that are more valuable, I would say, but that is not an absolute. You have to consider the full context of the cover. Late 1861 usages from New York, are probably the least interesting, and are fairly common, since NYC accepted them as normal.

Later philatelic usages, are not terribly interesting of course other than as fun novelty items.

edit: your question as to whether these stamps are rarer used late vs other stamps, since they were demonetized - I would say that is true. Sorry for my long winded answer above.

I realize that the discussion of demonetized postage is presumably about those stamps used on cover after demonetization, but since the original topic of the thread is about improper uses, there is also the case of demonetized postage stamps used improperly as revenue stamps.

In my opinion, genuine uses of such are incredibly scarce. I've been focused on improper uses (both postage stamps used on document as revenues and the reverse, revenue stamps used on cover as postage, as well as the use of non-documentary revenues as documentaries) for almost 15 years now, but have only been able to acquire 4 examples... and it's been at least 7 years since I last saw any example available anywhere.


Scott # 14 strip of 3 used in 1867. Has a 2003 PF certificate. Purchased from the late Bill Langs on ebay.




Scott #24, 2 examples paying tax on an 1868 receipt.




Scott #26, along with a 2-cent revenue, paying 5 cents tax on an 1864 affadavit.




Scott #26, on an 1869 estate receipt, with a 5-cent revenue stamp on the reverse paying the certificate tax for a court filing. This may be the only known example of an improper use of demonetized postage as revenue along with a legitimately paid revenue tax on the same document (albeit two separate transactions).

Back when I was building a specialized 1c 1851 collection, I always wanted a 1c imperforate used for revenue. I never found one, but much of my looking was before everything was online.

I've never seen one.