This 19 July 1906 locally registered cover appeared in Spink's Hong Kong November 1998 Auction and was sold for HK$5,200. The Hong Kong Study Circle, U.K. has endorsed it being a bogus cover in their Journal #308/Jan. 1999 p.19.  The reasons being quoted as follows: -
    1)  All four additional handstamps are much more intense in colour, but they have no 'edge' typical of handstamps made of metal such as steel or brass.
    2)  The handstamps are very spotty, as though produced by a poor quality photocopier.
    3)  The red handstamp is noticeably written in Chinese style - the three S's are inverted.
    4)  An addressee with a street number would not need to be "advertised'. There would be no reason to refuse this letter - there was no charge to pay.
    5)  The red manuscript "Sender Unknown" and "Unclaimed Retour" were added for additional effect.
   The HKSC concludes that "Altogether an amusing concoction with an ability to confuse."

There are other interesting points regarding this cover: -

• The KE 12c stamp bears the company mark WM & Co recorded by Webb as William Meyrink & Co.
• 12c was the correct rate - 2c for local letter up to half oz. and 10c being the registration fee.
• The boxed hexagonal instruction marks are not the style of markings found in the 1900s, however, there is a hexagonal marking with the wording 'RECEIVED WITHOUT CONTENTS' in the KGVI period recorded by Proud p.240
• The instructional marks on this cover are likely to be made of wood and the intensity of the black ink is of a different period than the registration cachet and datestamp.
• There might be a reason to refuse the registered letter. Firstly if 'E Chong' did not exist and the occupier would refuse the letter naturally. Secondly, if the letter were philatelic in origin, there was every reason for the recipient to refuse the letter in the hope that instructional markings would be applied in due course. The letter then needed to be 'Advertised' on a list displayed at the post office if the recipient was not known. The other two marks - 'Advertised Unclaimed' and 'Retour' would be the correct markings to be applied after a period of time if the letter was still uncollected. In this case probably on 3 December (see m/s in red ink 'unclaimed retour 3/12'). The 'Advertised' and the two 'Retour', 'Advertised Unclaimed' markings were applied months apart but the "look" of the black colour is the same - an unlikely occurrence in those days that the ink pad remaining the same quality from August to December!

Since forgers seldom make only one cover, therefore have members and other collectors seen covers bearing these four instructional markings?