This addition of a fine of 6d. upon unpaid or insufficiently prepaid letters would naturally cause senders to be anxious to see their correspondence properly stamped, and consequently a good many more cut stamps would be required after the appearance of this notice, which no doubt was published in New Brunswick the same as in this country. We should therefore expect to find a greater number of half Three Pennys postmarked after October 1st, 1859, than previously to that date. As regards the bisection of the Six Pence and One Shilling values, there was not the same _raison d’être_; but the varieties are probably due to one or perhaps both of these causes: (_a_) The public seeing the Three Pence was allowed to be used in this way, may have concluded the two other stamps might be similarly employed, and not having the value by them they required at the moment, manufactured it out of either the Six Pence or One Shilling. (_b_) Or it may be that certain Post-offices fell short of Three Penny and Six Penny stamps, and issued the halves of the two higher values provisionally until a fresh supply of the required value was obtained. Whatever was the true cause of these varieties, whether they emanated from the public or were issued in this state by the Post-office, they were certainly allowed by the postal officials to frank correspondence. I can add no further information about the half Three Penny stamp surcharged 1½d., beyond that found in the article in _The Philatelic Record_, I have already mentioned, and the remarks in a supplementary paper in the number of that journal for January, 1887. I entirely agree with the conclusions the writer comes to; viz., that the authenticity of the surcharge is open to grave doubt, and that in all probability the variety is altogether “bogus.” At the same time the author is perhaps in error when he says the charge for delivering letters in the towns of Fredericton and St. John in 1857 was 1d. each, and not 1½d. It is true the Postmaster-General’s report for that year speaks of 1d. as the sum charged, but we must bear in mind that this is probably 1d. sterling (all the other rates being quoted in this way), which would therefore equal 1¼d. currency, and 1d. would most likely be given in the list as the nearest equivalent for 1½d. currency. Again, the remark “that when the cents issue took place in 1860 no stamp was issued anywhere approaching to the value of 1½d.” is equally applicable to the value 1d., as the Two Cents stamp was, according to the catalogues, not issued until quite the end of the year 1863. The annexed notice is found in _The Royal Gazette_ for August 3rd, 1859: “POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT, FREDERICTON, _6th July, 1859_. “Part 9, Section 2, of Post Office Regulations is repealed, and the following adopted; viz.: