exchequer and accountant general to Anne of Denmark. At the
outbreak of the civil war he at first joined neither party, and
published a treatise called _The Moderator: expecting sudden Peace
or certaine Ruine_. In 1647, however, he entered the Long
Parliament, and was subsequently appointed a member of the council
for the colonies. At the Restoration he was taken into favour, and
many lucrative appointments were bestowed on him. The dates of his
birth and death are unknown. His residence in Gate Street, then
known as Lincoln’s Inn Fields, seems to date from the latter part
of 1658 or the very commencement of 1659. A letter from him is
extant written from Lincoln’s Inn Fields, dated 9th February,
1658–9, while one dated 20th July, 1658 is written from “Graies
Inn.”[56] Apparently he took the house on the occasion of his
marriage, as in an undated letter, after mentioning certain family
bereavements, he proceeds: “I was [thus] driven to meditat on a
settlement of myself; and did therefore accept of such an
oportunitie, as it pleased God about that time to offer mee, of
adventuringe upon marriage, w^{ch} I have donn upon such grounds
as you have all waies heretofore proposed to myself, my wife being
a widdowe, about my own yeares, never having had a child; of a
fortune capable of giving a reasonable assistance to mine, and of
a humour privat and retired. Soe that I am now become a settled
person in a house of my own in Lincolnes Inn Fields.”[57] His
house was famous, and both Evelyn and Pepys have, in their
diaries, left a description of it. The former thus records a visit
paid by him on 1st July, 1664. “Went to see Mr. Povey’s elegant
house in Lincoln’s Inn Fields, where the perspective in his court,
painted by Streeter, is indeed excellent, with the vases in
imitation of porphyry, and fountains; the inlaying of his closet;
above all, his pretty cellar and ranging of his wine-bottles.”
Pepys had been there a few weeks before, and under date of 29–30th
May, 1664, writes: “Thence with Mr. Povy home to dinner; where
extraordinary cheer. And after dinner up and down to see his
house. And in a word, methinks, for his perspective upon his wall
in his garden, and the springs rising up with the perspective in
the little closet; his room floored above with woods of several
colours, like but above the best cabinetwork I ever saw; his
grotto and vault, with his bottles of wine, and a well therein to
keep them cool; his furniture of all sorts; his bath at the top of
his house, good pictures, and his manner of eating and drinking;
do surpass all that ever I did see of one man in all my life.”
Charles Catton, the elder, was born in Norwich in 1728. He was
apprenticed to a London coach painter, and attained eminence, not
only in this branch of the profession, but as a painter of
landscapes, cattle and subject pictures. He was appointed the
king’s coach painter, and was one of the foundation members of the
Royal Academy. He died in Judd Place, in 1798.
For a number of years (1776–1781) his son, Charles Catton, the
younger, is shown in the Royal Academy Catalogues as residing at
his father’s house in Gate Street. He was born in London in 1756,
and acquired a certain reputation as a scene-painter and
topographical draughtsman. He died in the United States in 1819.
IN THE COUNCIL’S COLLECTION ARE:—
Exterior of No. 3 and cross to the memory of Mr. Booker, 1837
(photograph).
[58]Joinery details on first floor of No. 3 (measured drawing).
_The Ship_ Tavern, Gate Street—exterior, showing Little Turnstile
(photograph).
Twyford Buildings—View of court in 1906 (photograph).
XXV.—HIGH HOLBORN, BETWEEN LITTLE TURNSTILE AND KINGSWAY.
In 1592 a Commission on Incroached Lands reported[59] the existence of
certain property in St. Giles, held without any grant, state, or demise
from the sovereign. On 29th August, 1609, James I. granted the whole of
this to Robert Angell and John Walker. As the point is of importance,
the description of the premises included in the grant is here given in
some detail.[60]
“All that one messuage of ours with appurtenances in the tenure of
Thomas Greene, and one cottage with appurtenances, with garden, in the
tenure of Thomas Roberts, situated in the parish of St.
Giles-in-the-Fields ... and all those four cottages with appurtenances
lying and being on the south side of the public way leading from the
said town called St. Giles-in-the-Fields towards Holborne ... and all
those small cottages built within the small pightell called Pale Pingle,
lying and being within the parish of St. Giles opposite the aforesaid
cottages, namely, on the north side of the royal way between the town of
St. Giles aforesaid ... and Holborne.”
In 1650 a survey[61] was made of certain property “late belonginge to
Charles Stuart, late king of England,” and included therein were a
number of premises, which extended along the south side of High Holborn
for a distance of 234½ feet eastwards from Little Queen Street, and the
easternmost house of which was _The Falcon_.
To the reversion in fee farm of this property a Mr. Gibbert laid claim,
basing his pretensions on the identification of the property with
certain of that included in the grant of James I. above referred to, and
the surveyors reviewed at length his title, annexing a “plott of y^e
ground” (Plate 2). The conclusion to which they came was, that it was
“clere and aparent” that Green’s messuage and Roberts’ cottage and
garden, together with the four cottages opposite the Pale Pingle, were
the tenements granted to Gibbert, and that these were “at the least
40^{tie} pole” distant from the houses which he claimed. “Soe y^t his
clayme in those aforesaid houses is very unreasonable, false, imperfect
and untrue. And wee, whose names are heerunto subscribed, shall (if
Gibbert should bee so uncivell or shameles heereafter to lay clayme to
them before yo^r hono^{rs}) make it clerely appeare to the contrary if
at any tyme required.”
In spite of this emphatic condemnation of the unfortunate Mr. Gibbert,
there can be no doubt that the surveyors were wrong. They seem entirely
to have overlooked the possibility that the houses of Green and Roberts
were not adjacent to the four cottages opposite the Pale Pingle; in
fact, a perusal of the royal grant is sufficient to make it reasonably
certain that they were quite distinct. The matter is, however, capable
of definite proof.
A fortnight after the grant by James I., Angell and Walker conveyed the
whole of the property to Richard Reade and Henry Huddleston,[62] and
they in turn, on 23rd November, 1610, sold it to John Lee.[63] In the
indenture accompanying this sale the two first mentioned houses are
described as “all that messuage or tenement with appurtenances, late in
the tenure of one Thomas Greene ... _now called the signe of The
Falcon_, also one messuage or tenement or cottage there late in the
tenure of one Thomas Roberts.”
It is quite clear therefore that Gibbert was right in his contention,
and that the premises extending from Little Queen Street up to and
including _The Falcon_ had had their origin in the house of Green and
the cottage of Roberts, which had first been officially noticed in 1592.
There is also evidence (see below) that the land included in the grant
reached as far east as Little Turnstile.
With the above information it is possible to date the interesting plan
(Plate 2) appended by the surveyors to their report. It will be apparent
that this has almost exclusive reference to the property granted to
Angell and Walker in 1609. Thus, there are shown the four cottages by
the White Hart, opposite the Pale Pingle, the Pale Pingle itself, and
the land extending from Little Turnstile to Little Queen Street,
including Green’s premises, the only building which in the royal grant
is dignified with the name of “house.” It is therefore suggested with
confidence that the plan in question is a copy of the one appended to
the grant of 1609. With this assumption the title “Queene streete,”
given to the still unformed thoroughfare entering Purse Field is in
entire accord.[64]
Immediately after or shortly before Lee’s purchase, additional buildings
were erected, for on 11th December, 1610, he and Nicholas Hawley sold
_The Falcon_ to William Woodward,[65] “with all yards, wayes, waste
groundes, stables and appurtenances,” excepting, however, from the sale
“four little houses, cottages or tenements latelie builded on the west
side of the Falcon yarde.” Moreover, in 1612–13, the same vendors sold
to William Lane, junior, one messuage, two cottages, two gardens, and a
rood of land with appurtenances in the parish of St. Giles.[66] As in
1661 the property immediately to the west of Little Turnstile is
described as “now or late” in the possession of Mistress Lane,[67] it is
practically certain that the land sold in 1612 was identical therewith,
and Hollar’s plan of 1658 (Plate 3), which shows the area fully built
on, indicates the development which had taken place in the course of the
half century.
Building on the remaining portion of the land had also greatly
increased.[68] The survey of 1650 contains a detailed description of the
property, giving much interesting information as to the building
materials, arrangement of the rooms, outhouses, etc. The following is a
list of the premises. In most cases there were garrets in addition to
the storeys mentioned.
_The Falcon_ (2 storeys), and a house (3 storeys) in the rear. Frontage
15 feet. (Present No. 233.)
A house of three storeys. Frontage 33 feet. (Present No. 232 and site of
New Turnstile.)
_The King’s Head_ Inn (3 storeys), with an addition (2 storeys), a
gateway, a smith’s shop with room, stables, sadler’s house, tenement of
2 storeys, shed and coachhouses, houses of office. Frontage 54 feet.
(Present Nos. 229–231.)
Two small tenements lying in front of _The King’s Head_ (3 storeys), a
house (3 storeys), with small back addition. Frontage 19 feet.
A house (3 storeys), a garden with coach house and stable. Frontage 26
feet. (The site of these last two houses is now occupied by the Holborn
Station of the Piccadilly tube railway.)
_The Gate_ Tavern (3 storeys.) Special mention is made of the “very
faire and spacious dyneinge room, 38 feet in length,” on the first
floor. A bowling alley and gardens were in the rear. Frontage 38 feet.
The site is occupied partly by the Holborn station and partly by
Kingsway.
A house of 3 storeys, with a garden containing a small tenement of 2
storeys. Frontage 16 feet.
A similar house, with a garden containing a “small decayed tenement.”
Frontage 16 feet.
A tenement of 2 storeys, with a shop on the ground floor, a back
addition of 2 storeys. In the garden behind were two small tenements of
2 storeys. Frontage 17½ feet. The site of the three last mentioned
houses is now covered by Kingsway.
It will be seen from the above that New Turnstile was not included in
the original scheme for building. It is not shown in Morden and Lea’s
Map of 1682, nor in the map accompanying Hatton’s _New Guide to London_
of 1708, but appears in the sewer rate book for 1723.
XXVI.—NO. 211, HIGH HOLBORN (DEMOLISHED).
GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND DATE OF STRUCTURE.
It is very difficult to say when the south side of High Holborn, between
the sites of Kingsway and the Holborn Public Library, was first built
upon. Perhaps, even in Elizabeth’s reign, there were some scattered
buildings here, but certainly nothing like a continuous line of houses.
There seem to have been no building operations on a large scale, until
after the acquisition of the lease of Purse Field by Sir Charles
Cornwallis, in 1613.[69] Cornwallis sub-leased certain portions of the
Holborn frontage, extending south to the site of Parker Street, and on
these portions houses had been erected before 1650. No records of the
sub-leases have been found, but a part at least of the frontage to
Holborn had been sub-leased before 1634. Two years previously Charles I.
had confirmed a grant, made by his father to Trinity College, of six
markets and twelve fairs for the building of their hall. The college
sold to Henry Darell two markets and three fairs, and in August, 1634,
the latter petitioned to be allowed to set these up in St. Giles on His
Majesty’s inheritance.[70] This was granted on 15th December, 1634, a
writ of _Ad Quod Damnum_ issued, and on 10th March, 1634–5, an
inquisition by a jury was held, from which it appears that the proposal
was to hold the markets and fairs “in locis vocatis le pightells et
Pursfeild.”[71] The project aroused keen opposition on the part of the
Corporation of the City of London,[72] and in spite of its revival in
1637,[73] was eventually abandoned.
It is possible to identify the site of the proposed market, inasmuch as
in 1650 the frontage to Holborn between Little Queen Street and Newton
Street consisted of two “ranges” of buildings known as Shenton’s
tenements and Dayrell’s buildings, and it is clear that the latter
represent Henry Darell’s proposed market. Darell no doubt had already
obtained his lease before applying for a grant for a market, but no
houses would have been erected until after the failure of his scheme. It
is known[74] that one of his plots were let on a building lease on 23rd
November, 1639. The erection of buildings on this part of the Holborn
frontage may therefore be assigned provisionally to the year 1640.
Shenton’s tenements consisted of six houses in High Holborn and five in
Little Queen Street, extending 100 feet along the former and 115½ feet
along the latter thoroughfare. Their site is therefore wholly covered by
the Holborn Restaurant.
The largest house, then in occupation of Mrs. Shenton herself, was the
next but one to the corner, and is described in the survey of 1650 as
“all that tenement built as aforesaid[75] ... consistinge of one
kitchen, one hall, and one small larder, and adjoyninge one backside and
one garden, with severall necessary houses therein built and standinge.
And above stayres in the first story, one dyneinge roome with a balcony
there, and one chamber and a closett there. And above stayres in the
second story, two chambers with a closett there and two handsome garret
roomes over the same.”
Dayrell’s buildings consisted of twelve houses in High Holborn, and five
in Newton Street, and covered an area of 186 feet by 122 feet. They
were, on the whole, much superior to Shenton’s tenements. The
westernmost and largest house is described as “All y^t spacious brick
buildinge ... built with brick in a comely shape and very reguler, and
consistinge of 5 stepps in ascent leadinge into an entry leadinge into a
faire hall and parlour w^{th} sellers underneath the same, divided very
comodiously into a kitchen, a buttery and a larder. And above staires in
the first story a very faire dyneinge roome well floored, seeled and
lighted w^{th} a belcony there on the streete side alsoe, w^{th} said
roome is very well adorned and set fourth w^{th} a faire chimney peice
and frames all of black marble, and on the same floore backwards one
other faire chamber. And in the second story two faire chambers and a
closett in one of them. And in the 3rd story two more faire chambers and
a closett there, and over the same two faire garretes. Alsoe adjoyninge
to the same one garden.”
The houses appear to have been of different sizes, for their rentals
varied greatly, and this, combined with the fact that in subsequent
rebuilding nine houses took the place of the original twelve in High
Holborn, makes it impossible to identify the house which originally
occupied the site of No. 211.
The house was perhaps rebuilt in the latter part of the 17th
century.[76] A further rebuilding (perhaps the third) seems to have
taken place in 1815, when the premises were re-leased by the Crown.[77]
Plate 8 shows an interesting shop front. The ornamental iron guards to
the first floor windows are good specimens of wrought iron work.
The house was demolished in 1910.
IN THE COUNCIL’S COLLECTION IS:—
[78]Shop front (photograph).
XXVII.—SMART’S BUILDINGS AND GOLDSMITH STREET.
At the time of the survey of 1650 Newton Street (_i.e._, the old Newton
Street, north of the stream which crossed it where Macklin Street now
joins, and separated it from Cross Lane), was fully built, and the
remaining frontage of Purse Field to Holborn, between Newton Street and
the site of the Holborn Public Library, was apparently occupied by nine
houses, held by Thomas Farmer and Henry Alsopp, to whom Francis
Cornwallis had assigned his lease so far as concerned that part of the
field.
The yard, formerly Green Dragon Yard, at the side of the Holborn Public
Library, marks the site of the ancient stream which formed the western
boundary of Purse Field. The stream seems to have remained open in this
part of its course until about 1650, as a deed dated 7th November in
that year,[79] in view of the fact that Thomas Vaughan and his wife
Elinor “are to be att greate cost and charges in the arching or
otherwise covering over the sewer or wydraught under mencioned, by
meanes whereof the inhabitants there adjacent shall not be annoyed as
formerly they were thereby, as for divers other good considerations them
hereunto moving,” provides that the said sewer “as the same is now
severed, sett out and fenced, scituate ... on the backside of a messuage
of the said Thomas Vaughan commonly called ... by the name or signe of
_The Greene Dragon_” shall be demised to the Vaughans.
The land immediately to the west of the yard in question originally
formed part of Rose Field, and was probably developed at the same time
as the rest of that estate. In 1650, William Short, the owner of Rose
Field, in conjunction with John De La Chambre, sold to Thomas Grover 4
messuages, 12 cottages, 12 gardens and one rood of land with
appurtenances, in St. Giles.[80] The precise position of this property
is not mentioned, but there does not seem to be much doubt that the
premises are identical with, or a portion of, those which Grover sold to
Edmond Medlicott in 1666,[81] and which consisted of 16 houses in
Holborn, including the “messuage commonly known by the name or signe of
_The Harrow_,” and also the “lane or alley called Wild boare Alley
_alias_ Harrow Alley, with all the severall messuages, tenements,
edifices and void peice or plot of ground in the said alley.” The
property is said to front upon Holborn on the north, and to have for its
eastern boundary a way or passage leading from Holborn to the house and
garden of Mr. Braithwait. The dimensions are given as: “In depth from
north to south at the west end, one hundred fourscore and ten foote, and
throughout the whole range and pile of buildings besides from north to
south fower score and seven foote, and in breadth from east to west
sixty and three foote.” The last figure is certainly wrong, for even if
half of the sixteen houses in Holborn were lying behind the rest (as
indeed was probably the case) this would only admit of an average
frontage of 8 feet to a house. A probable emendation is “six score and
three” which gives a 15 feet frontage to each house.
The land behind these premises, reached by the path along, and
afterwards over, the stream, was leased by William Short in 1632 to
Jeremiah Turpin for the remainder (20 years) of a term of 36 years,[82]
and then consisted of garden ground upon which Turpin had recently built
a house. It seems most probable that this[83] is the place referred to
in the petition,[84] dated 17th June, 1630, of the inhabitants of High
Holborn, calling attention to the fact that there was a dangerous and
noisome passage between High Holborn and St. Giles Fields, by reason of
a dead mud wall and certain old “housing,” which lately stood close to
the same, where divers people had been murdered and robbed, and praying
for leave for building to be erected thereon. In their report[85] on
this petition, the Earls of Dorset and Carlisle refer to it as
“concerning the building of Jeremy Turpin,” and recommend the granting
of leave to build.
It may therefore be concluded that the house was built between 1630 and
1632. A full description[86] of the property as it was in 1640 is
extant, and is interesting as giving an idea of the private gardens of
that time. Reference is made, among other things, to the arbour formed
of eight pine trees, the “sessamore” tree under the parlour window, 13
cherry trees against the brick wall on the east of the garden, 14 more
round the grass plot, rows of gooseberry bushes, rose trees and “curran
trees,” another arbour “set round about with sweete brier,” more cherry
trees, pear, quince, plum and apple trees, a box plot planted with
French and English flowers, six rosemary trees, one “apricock” tree and
a mulberry tree.
The ground on which Smart’s Buildings and Goldsmith Street were erected
at one time formed part of Bear Croft or Bear Close, so called, no
doubt, because it was used as pasture land in connection with _The Bear_
inn, on the south side of Broad Street, St. Giles.[87]
At about 1570 there were, immediately to the south of the _White Hart_
property at the corner of Drury Lane, eight houses. The three most
northerly abutted on the east upon “a close of grounde called the Bere
Close, late belonging to Robert Wise, gentilman”[88]; while the five
others, with the close itself (of 2½ acres) are described as “adjoynynge
to the Quenes highe waye ... leadinge from Strande ... to thest end of
the said towne of Saint Giles on the west parte, and abuttinge upon the
close nowe our said soveraigne ladye the Quenes Majesties, called the
Rose feilde, on thest and south partes, and abuttinge upon the messuage
or tenemente nowe or late in the tenure of one William Braynsgrave,[89]
and the tenement called _The White Harte_, late in the tenure ... of one
Matthewe Bucke, and nowe in that of one Richarde Cockshoote, and the
Quenes highe waye leadinge from Holborne towardes the est end of the
said towne of Saint Gyles on the north part.”[90]
The boundary line between Bear Close and Rose Field is nowhere
described. It is known, however,[91] that Rose Field reached as far
north as the line bounding the rear of the buildings in Macklin Street,
and there is reason to believe that this line marks the actual division
between the two fields. As regards the eastern boundary a line starting
from High Holborn between No. 191 and No. 192[92] and running along the
western side of the southerly spur of Goldsmith Street, seems to fulfil
all the conditions. It is not known what was the depth of the eight
houses and gardens fringing Bear Close on the west, but allowing 60
feet, the area of Bear Close, defined as above, amounts to two acres. It
is hardly possible, therefore, to limit its boundaries any further. It
seems probable that the quadrangle shown in Agas’s map (Plate 1) at the
north-east corner of Drury Lane was Bear Close, and it will be observed
that, according to the map, the houses south of _The White Hart_
stretched along the whole of the Drury Lane frontage of the close.
Bear Close formed a part of that portion of the property of the Hospital
of St. Giles which, after the dissolution, came into the hands of
Katherine Legh, afterwards Lady Mountjoy. With the five southernmost of
the houses separating Bear Close from Drury Lane, and other property, it
was purchased of the Mountjoys by George Harrison, from whom by various
stages it came into the possession of James Mascall.[90] The latter died
on 11th May, 1585,[93] leaving the whole of his property to his wife,
Anne, who subsequently married John Vavasour. From her the whole of the
property above mentioned[94] seems to have come into the hands of Olive
Godman, younger daughter of James and Anne. A portion of this, including
“all the ground or land lying on the backside of [certain] messuages
towards the east, contayning two acres, now or late in the occupation
of ... Thomas Burrage” was settled on her daughter, Frances, on the
marriage of the latter with Francis Gerard in 1634.[95] There seems
little doubt that the land in question was Bear Close.
It was apparently soon after this that the close was laid out for
building, the planning taking the form of a cross, the long and cross
beams being represented respectively by the present Goldsmith Street and
Smart’s Buildings. The former street was, up to 1883, known as The Coal
Yard, in consequence it is said, “of the place being used for the
storage of fuel.”[96] The tale has a somewhat suspicious look. The fact,
too, that “Mr. Francis Gerard,” the owner of Bear Close, and “Bassitt
Cole, Esq.,” are found living in two adjoining houses in Drury Lane
close by in 1646 rather suggests that “Cole Yard” is so called because
of the name of its builder.[97]