1885 Minneapolis Dog Tag

[milco]

Found this yesterday at a construction site at a school. Measures 28mm in diameter.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[TommNJ]

Very nice old dog tag, , Congrats!

TommNJ

 

[leslie(nova scotia)]

From the land of the Bluenose....man that is old. Multiply in dog years by 7......................................yopuz going to be around den me sun....not dis bouy! Nice scoff youz!

 

[garbageman]

Are you sure the tag isn't from 1952 with the issue number being 1,885? I hope I'm wrong. -Garbageman

 

[DPBOB]

an 1885 dog tag would be more ornate
Sorry to say but it's a 1952
Do some research and you'll find out that Minnneapolis didn't have tags then

 

[coffeefreek]

Did a google search for "Minneapolis Dog Tax" found that there were ones listed from 1889 that were octogon in shape but the same pattern. That tag was in the 2700 range and there was one in the 4000 range. It appears that this could be from 1885. There are many listed on line from the late 1800's. Good Find! I think you have an OLD tag!

 

[milco]

an 1885 dog tag would be more ornate
Sorry to say but it's a 1952
Do some research and you'll find out that Minnneapolis didn't have tags then

I thought the same thing at first, but then I compared this to other 19th Century tags and also corresponded with a dog tag collector who stated that the tag/license # is almost always larger than the year date.

 

[Lowbatts]

Congrats Darren!
I too would think it's number 1885 for a 1952 tag but by 1952 they had more of legend on them usually including some Dept. of Health or other such info.

Awesome good find!

 

[Emperor Findus Cladius]

The only two images of dog tags in that general time frame had the first number as the license number and the number at the bottom is the date, so yours would be tag number 1952 from 1885 following this flow of logic. Only thing is this could have changed in later years swapping the two number positions. Looking at what it was stamped on though, that looks more modern than the other two tags, plus the stamping on the other two tags was a little more crude than yours. If I had to take a guess I would have to lean the same way everyone else is leaning, tag number 1885 from date 1952. But I have been wrong before.

 

[oddcoins]

This is denfinitely an 1885 tag with serial #1952. I exchanged a few e-mails with the world's leading authority on dog tax tags, BILL BONE. He's been documenting and recording dog tags for over 41 years now. He's the author of US DOG LINCENSE TAGS.

Currently, the oldest known Minneapolis dog tag reported to Mr. Bone is dated 1883. Then the next one is dated 1886. But now this one that you've found is the only known one dated 1885!

NICE FIND!!!!

 

[oddcoins]

an 1885 dog tag would be more ornate
Sorry to say but it's a 1952
Do some research and you'll find out that Minnneapolis didn't have tags then

I thought the same thing at first, but then I compared this to other 19th Century tags and also corresponded with a dog tag collector who stated that the tag/license # is almost always larger than the year date.

That is exactly right! The serial number digits are always larger than the date digits!
this is true not only on old tags, but on the new ones too!

 

[ModernMiner]

This is denfinitely an 1885 tag with serial #1952. I exchanged a few e-mails with the world's leading authority on dog tax tags, BILL BONE. He's been documenting and recording dog tags for over 41 years now. He's the author of US DOG LINCENSE TAGS.

Currently, the oldest known Minneapolis dog tag reported to Mr. Bone is dated 1883. Then the next one is dated 1886. But now this one that you've found is the only known one dated 1885!

NICE FIND!!!!

WOW!!! Awesome find.
Congrats,
MM