* 
CORRIGENDA, 
(So far as observed) in the preceding Eight Volumes. 
VOL. I. 
Page 140, note 1, line 2, for ‘‘ demilions” read ‘‘ demi-lions.” 
shot in line 3, for ‘‘ Church” read ‘‘ House.” 
5, 146, note 1. line 4, read ‘‘ Pieux quoique preux.” 
shetty i line 20, cancel two lines, from ‘‘ His son John Long,” &e., 
to ‘‘estate.” For the real facts, see vol. iii., 179. 
148, note 4, ‘‘ Horton,” eancel the whole note: and see vol. v., 318. 
152, note 2, last line, for ‘‘ who” read ‘‘ whose son.” 
186, note 1, Upon revision of the authority on which William of Eding- 
ton appeared to be a Cheney the evidence is considered ins ficient. 
Cancel from line 11 of the note, beginning ‘ He appears to have been,” 
all down to ‘‘in French ‘ Chéne.’ ” 
188, note, line 11. The letters have been more closely examined, and are 
certainly I. B. They cannot therefore apply to Thomas Bulkington. 
189, line 7, erase ‘‘ Pollette”’ before daughters, and insert it before 
‘(Pawlet.)” 
190, note 1, cancel ‘‘ Cheney.” 
253, lines 2 and 4, for ‘‘ Plympton ” read “ Pilton.” 
257, line 4, dele ‘‘ time.” 
261, line 7, for “‘ forty,” read ‘ fifty-six.” 
273, line 24, for ** Walter Long, Esq. read ‘‘ Lord Manvers.” 
298, line 21, for ‘* 1806” read ‘‘ 1608.” 
305, line 8, for ‘‘ 1582” read *‘ 1682.” 
309, note 1, line 10, for ‘‘ Osterhanger ” read ‘‘ Ostenhanger.” 
VOL. ile 
Page 28, line 17, for ‘‘ St. Cecilia” read “St. Edith.” 
” 
153, line 18, for ‘‘ Woodhampton” read ‘‘ Wedhampton.”’ 
156, line 14, The Dukes of Bolton never had Earl-stoke. 
275, line 24, for “‘ Belton” read ‘* Bitton.” 
282, note 1, line 4, for ‘‘ Berkeley”’ read ‘‘ Russell.” 
283, lines 3 and 4, for “ Briggs” read ‘ Bridges.” 
288, line 14, for ‘‘ Rich” read ‘‘ Roche.” 
382, line 21, for ‘‘ Nephew” vead ‘‘ Cousin.” 
388, line 26, for ‘‘42” read ‘* 47.” 
