I much regret that the pardon to Trenchard has not been presented _in extenso_ to the readers of "N. & Q.;" for the contractions and very irregular punctuation will render it almost unintelligible to those who are not conversant with other documents of the kind. The following words are actually misprinted. In line 3. "he" for l're (literæ); line 12. "nuncupabatur" (one word); col. 2. line 1. "Jud'camenta" for Indictamenta, and "condempnac'onas" for condempnationes; line 3. and again line 14. "fforisfutur" for forisfactiones; line 23. "n're" for nostri; line 34. "existim't" for existunt; line 37. "p'lite^r" for placitetur; line 39. "mea parte" for in ea parte; last line, "p'rato" for privato. It is also necessary to correct the error into which MR. TAYLOR has fallen in supposing that this pardon was granted on the 7th of December, 1688. The date it bears, "decimo septimo die Decembris anno regni nostri tertio," refers to a year earlier, viz., the 7th of December, 1687. The Revolution occurred in the _fourth_ year of the reign of James II. "Mr. Trenchard of the Middle Temple" was clearly the same who was afterwards Sir John, and Secretary of State to King William. See the biographical notice of him appended to the pedigree of Trenchard in Hutchins's _History of Dorsetshire_, in which work two portraits of him are given. He had been engaged in Monmouth's rebellion; and it is said that he was at dinner with Mr. William Speke at Ilminster, when the news arrived of Monmouth's defeat at Sedgmoor. Speke was shortly after hung before his own door; whilst at the same time, having secreted himself, Trenchard had the good fortune to be embarking for the continent. The other John Trenchard mentioned by MR. TAYLOR as occurring among the regicides, was great-uncle to Sir John, who was only forty-six at his death in 1694. JOHN GOUGH NICHOLS. Macaulay may be right about the great seal notwithstanding Trenchard's pardon. It is just possible such documents may have been kept ready "cut and dried" for filling up. Charles I. began to reign March 27, 1625. I know of a pardon dated Feb. 10th in the first year of his reign, with the great seal of _James I._ appended. Surely it did not take eleven months to cut a new great seal, which seems the likeliest way of accounting for the use of the old one. P. P. * * * * * THE DODO. (Vol. v., pp. 463. 515.) I beg to inclose the copy of a letter received by me in reply to my inquiry respecting the specimen of a _dodo_ said to be at the house of _Sir John Trevelyan, Bart., Nettlecombe Park, Somersetshire_, a notice of which appeared in "N. & Q." published on the 15th ultimo. I shall feel much obliged if you will have the kindness to publish the same as an answer to MR. WINN's Query. A. D. BARTLETT. "Sir,