BOUNDARY STONES OF THE FOREST OF WALTHAM. 127
It is possible, therefore, on this view, that the discrepancy
between the dates of the Perambulation and the erection of the
stones is only apparent, and not real, and in favour of this
explanation is the fact that the day of the month (Sept. 8th) is
the same on the stones and on the record of the Inquisition
(Wednesday, Sept. 8th, 17th Charles I.), the original of which
has been consulted by Mr. Christy in the Record Office. On the
other hand it might be pointed out that the introduction of an
error of date in this case is made less probable by the specifica-
tion of the month, which is nearly half a year beyond the limit
(March 25th) which can be allowed for differences in the mode
of reckoning in vogue at that period. The clearing up of this
discrepancy must, therefore, be left for future research by
antiquarians.
With respect to the first stone mentioned in the Perambula-
tion, the Havering Stone, an error occurs in the original paper
of 1895 (loc. cit. p. 7), which I wish now to explain and to
correct. It was thought at the time of our visit to the locality
in that year that the whole length of the ditch between the road-
way and the wall of Whalebone House had been filled in and
levelled up so as to bury the stone. On the occasion of a
"perambulation" made in July of last year (1908) by the
Committee appointed to carry out the re-erection of the stones,
it was found that the stone was really in its original position in
the wall, as figured by Mr. H. A. Cole (loc, cit. p. 6), and that
this portion of the ditch had not been filled in. The mistake had
originated through the circumstance that between the dates of
Our first and second visits a new road had been cut through the
Whalebone estate, and the ditch to the west of this filled in. The
new road was wrongly identified with the old "Beames Land
Lane," at the corner of which the Havering Stone was located.
As a matter of fact the old "Beames Land Lane" still survives in
the form of a field-path starting from the corner of the wall
containing the stone in question and leading out on to the
Havering road not far from the Forest Bounds Stone. The
latter, as I may again point out, is not referred to specifically in
the Perambulation of 1641.
In adding this note to a communication made to the Essex
Field Club some 14 years ago I am glad to be able to state that
the whole series of seven stones referred to in the Perambulation