| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: The Memorials of the Hamlet of Knightsbridge - with Notices of its Immediate Neighbourhood
Author: Davis, Henry George
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Memorials of the Hamlet of Knightsbridge - with Notices of its Immediate Neighbourhood" ***
This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.
KNIGHTSBRIDGE***
Transcribed from the 1856 J. Russell Smith edition by David Price, email
ccx074@pglaf.org. Many thanks to Royal Kensington Libraries for allowing
their copy to be used for this transcription.
[Picture: Knightsbridge—The site of Albert Gate]
THE
MEMORIALS OF THE HAMLET
OF
KNIGHTSBRIDGE.
With Notices of its Immediate Neighbourhood.
* * * * *
BY THE LATE
HENRY GEORGE DAVIS.
* * * * *
* * * * *
EDITED BY
CHARLES DAVIS.
* * * * *
* * * * *
LONDON:
PUBLISHED BY J. RUSSELL SMITH, SOHO-SQUARE;
AND TO BE HAD OF MR. DAVIS, ST. PAUL’S SCHOOLS, KNIGHTSBRIDGE.
1859.
* * * * *
LONDON:
TAYLOR AND GREENING, PRINTERS, GRAYSTOKE-PLACE,
FETTER-LANE, HOLBORN.
PREFACE.
IN presenting the MEMORIALS OF KNIGHTSBRIDGE to the public, apology must
be made for the delay in its appearance since the announcement of its
intended publication. This was occasioned by the sudden and protracted
illness of its Editor: since his restoration, he has prosecuted the work
with all the diligence which his time permitted.
The book is published in the hope that its critics may treat its Author
kindly, since the brain that indited it is, alas! no more. It is the
result of great assiduity and perseverance amidst peculiar difficulties,
and was only completed just before the death of the compiler, who,
towards its close, had laboured at it with greater energy than his
weakened frame ought properly to have borne.
The immediate motive for publication was the Editor’s regard, it might
almost be termed veneration, for its writer, seconded by favourable
opinions expressed by several literary gentlemen who perused the
manuscript, and knowledge that many notices by the same hand had already
appeared in “Notes and Queries,” “The West Middlesex Advertiser,” and the
various local papers that have occasionally been published in the
neighbourhood.
The work was written from notes made at various times, some having been
taken when its author was yet a boy. It may therefore be described as
the labour of his short and painful life; and it was felt that so long as
the result of his application was laid aside, so long did the Editor’s
duty to his brother remain unperformed.
As some little notice of our historian may be desirable, the following
sketch is subjoined:—
Henry George Davis was born at 4, Mill’s Buildings, on August 14th, 1830.
While an infant he had severe inflammation of the lungs, which afterwards
became confirmed pleurisy. He was educated at the Philological School in
the New Road. Of this Institution he was to the last fond and proud.
Having carried off many of its prizes, he always felt an identity with
it. He was of a studious inclination—a disposition doubtless fostered by
his infirmities; for he was never able to join in the sports of his
fellows. As he arrived at manhood, his disease (increased in 1850 by
rheumatic fever) became much more severe, and finally released his soul
“to its Almighty source” on the 30th of December, 1857.
The Editor has to acknowledge obligations to O. B. Cole, Esq.; to the
author of “Paddington, Past and Present;” to the Rev. M. Walcot, of “The
Memorials of Westminster;” Mr. Cunningham, of “The Handbook of London;”
Mr. Faulkner’s works; and to those sundry publications the name of which
is given with each quotation. He hopes his readers may have that
enjoyment in the perusal of the following History which was had in the
providing of it for them.
* * * * *
_St. Paul’s Schools_, _Knightsbridge_, _June_, 1859.
CONTENTS.
PAGE
CHAP. I. Introduction 1
CHAP. II. Historical Associations 32
CHAP. III. Modern Parochial Divisions: The Streets, 48
Public Buildings, &c. Their Associations,
Eminent Inhabitants, &c.
CHAP. IV. Belgravia 216
CHAP. V. The Sub-District of St. Barnabas 244
CHAP. VI. Social and Political Summary 267
PERSONS.
PAGE
Allen, John 181
Bennett, Rev. W. J. E. 97
Bensley, Richard 207
Birkhead Family 88
Blessington, Lady 138
Bellamy, G. A. 215
Bernal, Ralph 230
Bowles, Carrington 143
Broughton, Dr. 228
Buckingham, Anecdote of Duke of 27
Burton, Judge 115 & 185
Carlisle, Frederick Earl of 233
Caulfield, General 229
Chardin, Sir John 215
Cheselden, Mr. 182
Chudleigh, Miss 164
Clarendon, Hyde, Earl of 223
Clarke, Mrs. 265
Corbaux, Miss 266
Cornellys, Mrs. 156
Cromwell, Family of 75
Danvers, Family of 82
Derwentwater, Countess of 82
De Dunstanville, Lord 110
D’Oliveyra, Francis Xavier 210
D’Orsay, Count 141
Duncan, Sir H. 229
Egremont, Lord 232
Every, John 81
Eyre, Major Robert 37
Foote, Anecdote of 168
Gamble, Rev. J. 107
Gardiner, Sir R. 229
Gascoigne, Mrs. 154
George IV., Anecdote of 236
Grant, General Sir W. K. 227
Guthrie, Mr. 266
Harness, Rev. W. 100
Harrison, Thomas 207
Hawke, Honourable Miss 228
Higgins, Mr. M. J. 153
Howard of Escrick, Lord 34
Howard, Major 234
Humphry, Ozias 115
Humphrey, Sir William 82
Hunter, John 182
Inchbald, Mrs., Anecdote of 135
Jones, Gentleman 227
Lanesborough, Lord 180
Laremar, William 186
Lenthall, Sir John 75
Lens, Bernard 210
Lewis, Sir G. C. 110
Lewis, Lady Theresa 110
Lewis, William Thomas 265
Liddell, Hon. and Rev. R. 97
Liston, John 188
Liston, Mrs. 196
Louis Napoleon 139
Madan, Rev. M. 238
Maitland, Sir P. 229
Marsh, Charles 110
Marshall, J. 215
Miller, Robert 210
Milner, Isaac 138
Molesworth, Sir W. 229
Morgan, Lady 205
Morgann, Maurice 147
Morland, Sir Samuel 77
Morison, Dr. 200
Munster, Earl of 242
Murphy, Arthur 172
Nell Gwynne 258
Orrery, Countess of 211
Ossory, Lady 234
Penn, William 214
Pennington, Rev. Thos. 263
Pettigrew, Dr. W. V. 228
Pickett, William 188
Read, John 161
Reynolds, Sir Joshua 112
Richmond, Rev. Legh 226 & 240
Rodwell, H. 191 & 264
Rutland, John, Duke of 177
Ryland, W. W. 171
Skelton, William 264
Soyer, Mons. 142
Stirling, E. 107
Telfair, Cortez and James 146
Thornton, Henry 137
Thornton, James 257
Trevor, Sir John 200
Trotter, Thomas 177
Troubridge, Sir T. 229
Tytler, P. F. 97
Underwood, Dr. M. 177
Vandervelde, Cornelius 80
Villiers, Hon. George 109
Wakefield, Edward 215
Walcot, Rev. M. 100
Walpole, Robert 81
Ward, Seth 211
Warner, Captain 253
Wellesley, Marquis of 170
Wellington, Anecdote of Duke of 187
Wilberforce, William 137 & 241
Wilkes, John 136
Wilkie, Note on 258
Wright, Dr. Richard 215
Yarmouth, Countess of 215
PLACES.
Albert Gate 100
All Saints’ Church 98
Avery Farm Row 252
Baber’s Floor-cloth Factory 106
Belgravia 216
Belgrave Chapel 237
Belgrave Square 224
Belgrave Street, Upper 242
Blomfield Terrace 253
Bridge, The 20
Brompton Park Nursery 132
Brompton Road 103
Cake House, The 121
Cannon Brewhouse, The 113
Cavalry Barracks 118
Chapel Street 226
Chatham House 103
Chelsea Bun House 259
Chesham Place and Street 228
Chester Street 228
College of St. Barnabas 250
Commercial Road, The 253
Compasses, The 263
Downing’s Floor-cloth Factory 158
Dwarf, The 264
Eaton Place 228
Eaton Place West 229
Eaton Square 230
Eden Lodge 135
Ennismore Place and Terrace 103
Feathers, The 235
Five Fields, The 219
Fort at Hyde Park Corner 127
Fox and Bull, The 111
Gore House 136
Graham Street 257
Grosvenor Canal 249
Grosvenor Crescent 231
Grosvenor House 146
Grosvenor Place 218, 232
Grosvenor Row 257
Grove House 143
Half-Way House 179
Halkin Street 237
Halkin Street West 237
Hamilton Lodge 136
High Road 103
High Row 111
Hospital for Soldiers 235
Hospital, the Lock 238
Hyde Park 118
Hyde Park Corner 125
Infantry Barracks 187
Jenny’s Whim 253
Jenny’s Whim Bridge 253
Kensington Gore 131
Kent House 109
Kingston House 164
Kinnerton Street 144
Knightsbridge Green 144
Knightsbridge Grove 156
Knightsbridge Schools 91
Knightsbridge Terrace 146
Lanesborough House 180
Lazar House 52
Lock Chapel 241
Lock Hospital 238
Lowndes Square 149
Lowndes Street 242
Lowndes Terrace 155
Marble Arch, The 123
Mercer Lodge 135
Mills’ Buildings 117
Montpelier Square 159
New Street 159
Osnaburg Row 242
Park House 134
Park Side 160
Prince’s Gate 163
Queen’s Buildings 170
Queen’s Head, The 163
Queen’s Row 171
Ranelagh Grove 263
Ranelagh Terrace 263
Receiving House, Royal Humane Society 121
Ring in Hyde Park, The 122
Rising Sun, The 106
Rose and Crown, The 104
Rotten Row 125
Rutland Gate 178
Rutland House 177
St. Barnabas College 250
St. George’s Hospital 180
St. George’s Place 185
St. Paul’s Church 92
„ „ Appendix 280
St. Paul’s Schools, Append. 281
St. Peter’s Church 231
Serpentine, The 120
South Place 106
Spring Gardens 149
Star and Garter, The 264
Statue of Achilles, The 124
Stratheden House 110
Stromboli House 263
Swan, The 176
Tattersall’s 197
Trevor Chapel 200
Trevor Square 199
Trevor Terrace 106
Trinity Chapel 51
Trinity Chapel (Appendix) 279
Upper Belgrave Street 242
Upper Ebury Street 264
Westbourne, The 21
Westbourne Place 265
Westbourne Street 266
White Hart, The 163
White House, The 250
William Street 205
Wilton Crescent 206
Wilton Place 206
Wilton Street 243
York Hospital, The 266
MISCELLANEOUS.
PAGE
Act for Building Albert Gate (Appendix) 277
Address to Liston by Rodwell 191
Anecdote connected with the Duke of Wellington 187
Assassination, Intended, of William III. 36
Bad State of the Roads 24
Boscobel Oak, Trees from 130
Cattle ordered to be Slaughtered at Knightsbridge 33
Churchwardens of St. Paul’s 97
Club at the Fox and Bull 112
Cromwell Tradition, The (Appendix) 275
Cross-road Burial, The last 237
Dangers of the Five Fields 220
Derivation of Name 2
Description of Communion-plate at Chapel 62
Discovery of Curious Relics 34 and 153
Discovery of Human Remains at Fox and Bull 113
Duel between Hamilton and Mohun 122
Enlargement of the Chapel 61
Establishments similar to Lazar House 58
Extracts from the Chapel Accounts 85
Extracts, Curious, from Chapel Baptismal Registrars 70
Extracts, Curious, from Chapel Marriage Registrars 69 and 73
Geology of Knightsbridge 269
Government of Knightsbridge 271
Grant to Lazar House by James I. 52
Historical Anecdotes of Hyde Park Corner 126
Impromptu on Gore House 138
Innkeepers of Knightsbridge 27
Knightsbridge Volunteers 37
Knightsbridge a Family Name (Appendix) 275
Letter to Liston by Mathews, and reply 193 and 194
Letter to Earl Bathurst by Sheriff Waithman 41
Local Family Names 90
Manor and Parochial Divisions 4 and 48
Marriage Statistics of Knightsbridge Chapel 90
Ministers of Knightsbridge Chapel 63
Olden Time, The 23
Parochial Divisions 49
Patients discharged from Lazar House 56
Perambulation Festivities 50
Pimlico, Origin of Name of 245
Population of Knightsbridge 268
Reminiscence of the Compiler (Note) 104
Ditto of Shelley’s first Wife 112
Reputation of the Chapel for Suspicious Marriages 68
Restoration of Knightsbridge Chapel 58 and 61
Reviews in Hyde Park 119
Riots at Knightsbridge 40
Salubrity of Knightsbridge 269
State Visits to French Embassy 102
Tradition of Cæsar Crossing the Thames 250
Trees from the Boscobel Oak 130
Water Supply 30
Wyatt’s Insurrection Quelled 33
William III., Intended Assassination of 36
ILLUSTRATIONS.
PAGE
Knightsbridge, the Site of Albert Gate _Frontispiece_
The Westbourne, from the Park 22
Colours of the Knightsbridge Volunteers 39
Trinity Chapel 62
St. Paul’s Church 94
The Westbourne, looking north from Knightsbridge 101
The Cake House 122
Fort at Hyde Park Corner 128
Oak planted by Charles II. 130
Hyde Park Corner, 1824 131
Queen’s Buildings 172
Half-Way House 179
Lanesborough House 181
The Lock Hospital 238
Lock Chapel 241
ERRATUM
Page 235, line 19, for “Grosvenor Row” read “Grosvenor Place.” {0}
CHAPTER I.
“Instructed by the Antiquary Times,
We are, we must, we cannot but be wise.”
SHAKSPEARE.
KNIGHTSBRIDGE and Pimlico form the only suburbs west of the metropolis,
whose history remains unwritten. This neglect, perhaps, is owing to the
fact that neither place, till of late, assumed sufficient importance to
attract the topographical writer; nevertheless, I trust the following
pages will show that Knightsbridge is far from destitute of associations
deserving to be recovered and saved from the ravages of time.
The derivation of its name is somewhat obscure: the earliest mention of
the place I am acquainted with occurs in a charter of Edward the
Confessor, in which it is called KYNGESBYRIG; in one of Abbot Herbert of
Westminster, nearly a century later, it is spelt KNYGHTSBRIGG. It is
similarly written in the thirty-fifth year of the reign of Edward III.
The difficulty lies in the transposition from “Kyngesbyrig” to
“Knyghtsbrigg.” The former sufficiently indicates its origin; and to
avoid perplexity tradition comes opportunely to our aid, to point out the
latent allusion in the latter.
Knightsbridge, of course, must have its legend. No place in the kingdom
exists but must have some story to tell; and if it cannot show a castle
built by Cæsar, and battered down by Cromwell, recourse must be had
elsewhere for such. Well, then, our legend tells, that in some ancient
time certain knights had occasion to go from London to wage war for some
holy purpose: light in heart, if heavy in arms, they passed through
Knightsbridge on their way to receive the blessing awarded to the
faithful by the Bishop at Fulham. From some cause, however, a quarrel
ensued between two of the band, and a combat was determined on to decide
the dispute. They fought on the bridge which spanned the stream, while
from its banks the struggle was watched by their partisans. Both, the
legend tells, fell; and ever after the place was called KNIGHTSBRIDGE, in
remembrance of their fatal feud.
If this old story, which I many times have heard related, has tempted us
into the realms of fancy for awhile, another derivation of a totally
opposite kind will speedily drive us therefrom; according to this, the
name comes from the word “Neat,” signifying cattle, and refers to a time
when beasts for the London citizens were ordered to be slain here.
And, again, a commentator of Norden, the topographer, gives the following
anecdote, which it has been thought may account for the
name:—“Kingesbridge, commonly called Stonebridge, near Hyde Park Corner,
where I wish no true man to walk too late without good guard, as did Sir
H. Knyvett, Knight, who valiantly defended himself, there being
assaulted, and slew the master-thief with his own hands.” {3}
Against these two proposed derivations, however, it must be answered that
the place was called “KNYGHTSBRIGG” in Herbert’s charter long before the
time to which either of these circumstances apply. Edward the Confessor
owned lands here, and probably built a bridge for the convenience of
those monks to whom he devised a part of them; hence the name
KINGSBRIDGE. Having nothing recorded whereby we can account for the
change to KNIGHTSBRIDGE, we can only surmise that it was caused by
corruption of the name, or that there may be some foundation, other than
the story of the brave Knyvett, for the legend I have related.
THE MANOR AND PAROCHIAL DIVISIONS.
The land constituting this district appears to have belonged originally
to King Edward the Confessor. There is, in the British Museum, a charter
still preserved, a translation of which was printed by Mr. Faulkner, in
which, giving to the church at Westminster the manor of Cealchyth
(Chelsea), with various emoluments and privileges, the charter
proceeds—“Besides, together with this manor, every third tree, and every
horse load of fruits, grown in the neighbouring wood at KYNGESBYRIG,
which, as in ancient times, was confirmed by law.” This is the earliest
mention of Knightsbridge recorded; the land referred to is now occupied
by Lowndes-square and its neighbourhood.
Knightsbridge is not mentioned in Doomsday Book, neither is Westbourn,
Hyde, nor Paddington; and it is most likely that the returns for these
places are given with the surrounding manors of Eia, Chelchith,
Lilestone, &c. Eia was confirmed to the Abbey of Westminster by William
the Conqueror, and included the land between the Tyburn on the east, the
Westbourn on the west, the great military road (Oxford-street) on the
north, and the Thames on the south. Yet, although given thus early to
the Abbey, it was not included in the franchise of the city of
Westminster, notwithstanding Knightsbridge, which chiefly lay beyond it,
was so included; for, in 1222, a dispute having arisen between the Bishop
of London and the Abbot of Westminster, respecting their ecclesiastical
jurisdiction, it was referred to Stephen Langton, Archbishop of
Canterbury, the Bishops of Winchester and Salisbury, and the Priors of
Merton and Dunstable; and they decided that the Tyburn stream was the
limit of St. Margaret’s parish westward; adding, however, that, “beyond
these bounds the districts of Knightsbridge, Westbourn, Padyngton with
its chapel, and their appurtenances, belong to the parish of St. Margaret
aforesaid.” Part of Knightsbridge still belongs to St. Margaret’s, and
it is most probable that some great proprietor living in that parish
owned lands here, and hence, in old assessments, such became to be
reckoned component parts of the parish.
In the Confessor’s charter the mention of “the wood at Kyngesbyrig”
gives, I consider, an index to what the state of the place was then. It
doubtless formed a portion of the great forest which Fitzstephen
describes as belting the metropolis. It owned no lord, and the few
inhabitants enjoyed free chase and other rights in it. In 1218 it was
disafforested by order of Henry III., whom we afterwards find owned lands
here; and in the reign of his son, Edward I., Knightsbridge, according to
Lysons, is mentioned as a manor of the Abbey.
The monks of Westminster gradually acquired other lands here, additional
to those granted by the Confessor. At Westbourn also they had lands, as
the decree of 1222 proves; how possession of them was gained is not,
however, known. These properties the monks erected into a manor, called
“The Manor of KNIGHTSBRIDGE and WESTBOURN;” and by such name it is still
known. The whole of the isolated part of St. Margaret’s, including a
part of Kensington, its palace and gardens, are included in the manor of
Knightsbridge.
That there was a suspicion of the integrity of the monks’ proceedings,
however, we have proof in the fact that, in the twenty-second year of the
reign of Edward I. (1294–5), a writ of _Quo Warranto_ was issued to Abbot
Walter of Wenlock, to inquire “by what authority he claimed to hold the
Pleas of the Crown, to have free warren, a market, a fair, toll, a
gallows, the chattels of persons condemned, and of runaways, the right of
imprisonment,” and various other similar privileges, as well as “the
appointment of coroner in Eye, Knythbrigg, Chelcheheth, Braynford,
Padyngton, Hamstede, and Westburn,” &c.; to which he answered, that these
places were “members” of the town of Westminster, and that King Henry
III. had granted to God and the church of St. Peter of Westminster, and
the monks therein, all his tenements, and had commanded that they hold
them with all their liberties and free customs, &c.; and he produced the
charter proving the same.
Such was the reply of Abbot Walter of Wenlock, who appears, however, to
have been by no means over chary of the ways by which he could bring
wealth to his abbey; for we find that, in the twelfth year of Edward II.,
his successor, Richard de Kedyngton, was fined ten pounds because he
(Abbot Walter) had appropriated lay fees in Knythbrigg, Padyngton, Eye,
and Westbourne, without licence of the king. We also find that in the
same reign two inquisitions were held to ascertain what, if any, injury
the king would sustain if certain properties were allowed the Abbey:—
INQUISITIO AD QUOD DAMNUM 9: EDW. II., No. 105.
MIDDLESEX.
“Inquisition made before the Escheator of the Lord the King at the
church of St. Mary Atte Stronde, on Thursday next, after the Feast of
the Assumption of the Blessed Mary, in the ninth year of the reign of
King Edward, by the Oath of Robert de Aldenham, Alexander de Rogate,
Nicholas de Curtlyng, John de la Hyde, Walter Fraunceis, William de
Padinton, Hugh le Arderne, William Est, Arnold le Frutier, Simon le
Brewere, Roger de Malthous, and Roger le Marshall, junior—who say,
upon their oath, that Walter de Wenlock, lately Abbot of Westminster,
had acquired to himself and his House one messuage with appurtenances
in Knygthebregge of William le Smyth of Knygthebregge, and four acres
of land there of William Brisel and Asseline his wife, and nine acres
of land there of William Hond, and twelve acres of land in Padinton
of William de Padington, and three and a-half acres in Eye of Hugh le
Bakere of Eye, and thirteen acres of land in Westbourn of John le
Taillour, and eleven acres of land there of Matilda Arnold, and two
acres of land there of Juliana Baysebolle, after the publication of
the statute edited concerning the nonplacing of lands in Mortmain and
not before. And they say that it is not to the damage nor prejudice
of the Lord the King, nor of others, if the King grant to the Prior
and Convent of Westminster, that the Abbots of that place, for the
time being, may recover and hold the aforesaid messuages and land to
them and their successors for ever. And they say that the aforesaid
messuage is held of the said Abbot and Convent by service of a yearly
rent of sixpence, and of performing suit at the Court of the said
Abbot and Convent, and of finding one man for ten half-days to mow
the Lord’s meadow, price fifteen-pence; and one man for ten half-days
to hoe the Lord’s corn, price tenpence; and of doing seven
ploughings, price three shillings and sixpence; and of finding one
man for ten half-days to reap the Lord’s corn, price fifteen-pence;
and of making seven carriages to carry the Lord’s hay, price three
shillings and sixpence; and performing suit at the Court of the said
Abbot from three weeks to three weeks. And they say that the
aforesaid fifty-four acres and a-half of land are worth by the year,
in all issues over and above the aforesaid services, nineteen
shillings and sixpence. In witness of which thing the aforesaid
jurors have set their seals to this inquisition.”
Endorsed twenty shillings and sixpence. {10}
This sum due to the king and paid to him, shows that he still retained
some right or other over the lands mentioned. But this inquest does not
seem to have given satisfaction to all, for three years after, another
was held before the king’s escheator and a jury, concerning the same
lands; the return was, however, in the main similar to that of the first
inquiry, a fine of ten pounds being thereupon paid to the king.
But as early as the reign of Henry I. some lands at Knightsbridge
belonging to the Abbey had been aliened from it—one Godwin, a hermit at
Kilburn, having given his hermitage there to three nuns; Abbot Herbert
not only confirmed the grant, but augmented it with lands at
Cnightebriga, {11} and a rent of thirty shillings. The charter states
the land to be granted with the consent of the whole “chapter and
council,” to the holy virgins of St. John the Baptist, at Kilburn, for
the repose of the soul of King Edward, founder of the Abbey, “and for the
souls of all their brethren and benefactors.”
The next mention of this place occurs in a record dated 1270 (54 Henry
III.), when an inquisition was held to ascertain whether two acres of
land, &c., at “KINGESGOR between Knytesbrigg and Kensington” were of the
ancient demesne of the Crown or of escheat, its extent, value, &c. The
jury returned that the land was of the ancient demesne of the Crown, and
not of escheat, that it contained three acres, of which the Sheriffs of
Middlesex had received the issues, and was worth by the acre twelve-pence
per annum, and that such land belonged to the farm of the city of London.
Part of the Hamlet of Knightsbridge was within the manor of Eia, the
boundaries of which I have described. It included, with others, all the
lands now forming the parish of St. George, Hanover-square, and was given
to the Abbey, in 1102, by Geoffry de Mandeville, in consideration of the
privilege allowed him of the burial of his wife Athelais in the cloisters
of the Abbey. In Doomsday Book it answers for ten hides, but was
afterwards divided into the three manors of Neyte, Eybury, and Hyde.
Neyte is mentioned as early as 1342 in a commission of sewers, and was
near the Thames; Hyde, with lands taken from Knightsbridge, afterwards
formed Hyde Park. All these manors were enjoyed by the Abbey till the
Reformation, and at that tremendous crisis they reverted to the king.
In the account rendered to the king by the ministers appointed to receive
the revenues of the religious houses on their dissolution, the value of
the manor of Knightsbridge and Westbourn is thus given:—
£ s. d.
Knyghtsbrydge et Westborne Firm’ Terr’ 2 6 8
Knyghtebrydge, Kensyngton, et Firm’ 5 14 11
Westbourne
Pquis Cur 0 6 4½
In the “Monasticon Anglicanum,” vol. i., p. 326, it is thus entered:—
£ s. d.
Maniu de Knyghtebridge et Westbourne Firm’ Terr’ 2 6 8
Westborne, Knightsbridge, et Kensington, Man 5 14c 11
Redd et Firm
Pquis Cur 6 8½
Kilburn Priory was returned as of the value of seventy-four pounds, seven
shillings, and eleven-pence; and by the provisions of 27 Henry VIII.,
chap. 28, all its possessions went to the king. By an act passed in the
next session (28 Henry VIII., c. 38) its lands were exchanged by the king
with Sir William Weston, Prior of the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem,
for his manor of Paris Garden, Southwark. This act recites the indenture
relating to this exchange, describing the property very fully. {14}
After specifying the site of the priory, the Act proceeds—“and all other
the demayne londes of the sayde late Pryory lyeing and beying in Kylborne
aforesayde, Hamstede, Padyngton, and _Westborn_, in the sayde countie;”
“the hedge rowes rounde aboute Gorefeld and Goremede” are stated as
“conteyning, by estimacon, xj acres and a half acre, and xxti rodes,” &c.
The manors of Eybury, Neyte, and Hyde, were, with other Abbey lands,
exchanged with the king for the dissolved Priory of Hurley, Berkshire,
and the exchange was confirmed by Act of Parliament 28 Henry VIII., c.
49.
In the _Valor Ecclesiasticus_, taken by command of King Henry VIII. in
1535, the following entries relating to these manors also appear:—
“Repris ex offic Sacrist dei Monasterii
Reddit’ resolut’ videlt
Manerio de Eybury p. iijlz acr’ terr in Eyfelde per
annum iiij.”
“Repris’ ex offic Novi opis
Midd
Reddit’ resolut’ annuat’ de divs terr et tenements predict videlt.
£ s. d.
Prioresse de Kilborne exeunt de xvj
Manerio de Eybery exeunt de xv
Cust capelle b~te Marie monaster predict p x xj
divs terris apud Knightsbridge
Et manerio de Ebery pro manerio de Hide vij
“Repris ex offic sellarar xiii iiij
Reddit’ resolut’ annuat’ &c.
Dict manerij de Eybury pro terr voc
Marketmede
Notwithstanding the Reformation, Knightsbridge was still reserved to the
Abbey, and in the hands of its deans and chapters it has ever since
remained, excepting during the alienation of church lands in the
seventeenth century, when it became the property of Sir George
Stonehouse. The lands at the Gore, and near to it, passed into various
lay hands, and will be hereafter more fully noticed.
The manor of Eybury also passed into lay hands. In the Act 28, Henry
VIII. c. 49, it is stated as lately in the occupation of Richard Whashe;
and a person of that name rented the more considerable part of it known
as Ebury Farm in 1592, direct from Queen Elizabeth. Other portions of
the manor were similarly rented by persons who underlet the land again,
thereby occasioning great wrong to the inhabitants at large—for
notwithstanding the great length of time these lands had been in priestly
possession, the people, in some measure, appear to have maintained a
claim over them, and considerable portions were always laid open for use
in common at Lammas-tide (Aug. 1). This ancient right these lessees
under the Queen appear to have been determined to resist, and enclosed
the fields with gates and hedges, on which the inhabitants appealed, in
1592, to Lord Burleigh, High Steward of Westminster, for his interference
in their behalf. He ordered Mr. Tenche, his under-steward, to empanel an
inquest; and the decision of the jury being favourable to the
petitioners, they, thinking they should have Lord Burleigh’s countenance,
proceeded on Lammas-day to assert their rights. The gates were pulled
down, and the fences cut away, on which the tenants appealed on their
part to Burleigh, who, again referring the matter to Mr. Tenche, that
functionary, after inquiry, replied, that “certain of the parishioners of
St. Martin’s and St. Margaret’s assembled together,” and made an entry
into their “ancient commons” by making “a small breach in every
enclosure;” that some of those assembled “were of the best and ancientest
of the parishes; that they carried no weapon, and had only four or five
shovels and pickaxes, and had divers constables with them to keep her
Majesty’s peace;” and that “having thus laid open such grounds as they
challenged to be their commons, they quietly retired to their houses,
without any further hurt-doing.” One Peter Dod, in his evidence before
the inquest, said “they told him they would break open to Knight’s Bridge
and Chelsey;” and R. Wood, a constable, testified to the breaking of the
enclosure at “Aubery Farm towards Chelsey,” whence they crossed to
“Crowfield,” at the upper end of Hyde-park.
Her Majesty’s “poor tenants and farmours” petitioned Lord Burleigh to
commit some of the parishioners to the Star Chamber, and to stop further
proceedings until the case could be heard in the Court of Exchequer. The
inhabitants rejoined, stating “that Ebury Farm, containing 430 acres,
meadow and pasture, which was holden of her Majesty by lease, was granted
to one Whashe, who paid £21 per annum. And the same was let to divers
persons, who for their private commodity did inclose the same, and had
made pastures of arable land; thereby not only annoying her Majesty in
her walks and passages, but to the _hindrance of her game_, and great
injury to the common, which at Lammas was wont to be laid open, for the
most part, as by ancient precedents thereof made, do more particularly
appear.” They then state this system of inclosure had prevailed for
about twenty years; that in the Neate, there were 108 acres belonging to
her Majesty similarly enclosed, although they should also be common at
Lammas. Strype, from whom this account is derived, does not state how
the contest terminated; but certain it is that for very many years the
owners of some of these lands paid money to the parish officers of St.
Martin’s, in lieu of this claim; but I cannot find that this right of the
poor has at all for many years been inquired into. Parochial officers
have, in many instances, sadly neglected their duty; and this is not one
of the lightest accusations against them.
The manor of Ebury afterwards became the property of a family named
Davis, who owned it for a lengthened period. The last male of this
family, Alexander Davis, died July 2nd, 1665; by his wife, Mary, daughter
of Richard Dukeson, D.D., and who survived till July 11th, 1717, {19} he
had one daughter, Mary, who was married at St. Clement’s Danes, October
10th, 1676, to Sir Thomas Grosvenor. This manor devolved upon her; and
on her death, January 12th, 1730, came to be the freehold property of her
husband, whose descendant has been ennobled by the title of Marquis of
Westminster, and is the present Lord of the Manor of Ebury.
We will now revert to Knightsbridge proper again. It anciently occupied
a great deal more land than its present appearance indicates. In the
reign of Elizabeth certain lands appertaining to the park were within it.
An indenture to that effect, dated July 6th, in the eleventh year of the
Queen’s reign, between the Marquis of Winchester, Lord High Treasurer,
and Sir Walter Mildmay, Chancellor of the Exchequer, on behalf of the
Queen, and Francis Nevyll, one of the keepers of Hyde-park, on his own
behalf, was agreed to for the better preservation of the game; and it was
ordered that “our” land, called Knightsbridge land, containing, by
estimation, about forty acres, should, at the costs of her Majesty, be
“rayled” in, to hinder all manner of horses and cattle (except her
Majesty’s “dere”) entering the said enclosed land. The said Francis
Nevyll then covenants that while he is keeper he will keep the gates
thereof locked, and will not suffer any horses or cattle to be put
therein. He also agrees to make and sell in stacks, or carry into her
Majesty’s hay-barn, all the hay which may be made within the said
“rayled” lands, and deliver the same to “her Grace’s dere” in winter, and
shall not in the wintry half-year put to pasture within the said “rayled”
land above the number of ten kine or bullocks, or in lieu of every two
kine or bullocks, one horse or gelding. Another plot of ground,
belonging to the Lazar-house, was also enclosed within Hyde-park; but of
its extent, or why the institution should have been deprived of it, I
have not been able to ascertain.
THE BRIDGE.—The bridge, whence the place derives its name, we are
informed by Strype, was a stone bridge, and most probably the one he
described was the same as remained to our own time. When, or by whom,
first erected, is not recorded; but it is not improbable that the saintly
king who first gave the monks possessions here, to render such more
available, would throw a bridge across the stream. For by this road even
then was the only way to the metropolis from the west, and the stream was
both broad and rapid. It was situated between the last house of
Knightsbridge-terrace (Mr. Jeffrey’s), and the French Embassy, and a part
of it yet exists under the road; a portion of it was removed for the
Albert-gate improvements. In the churchwardens’ accounts of St.
Margaret’s, Westminster, are the following entries regarding it:—
1630. Item, received of John Fennell £23 6s. 4d.
and Ralph Atkinson, collectors
of the escheat, for repair of
Brentford Bridge and
Knightsbridge
1631. Item, paid towards the repaire £24 7s. 10d.
of Brentford Bridge, and of
Knights-bridge, and for charge
of the sute to defend ourselves
from the same, and other
expences touching the same, as
by the particulars appeareth
THE WESTBOURN.—The Westbourn, for such was the ancient name of the
rivulet which ran through Knightsbridge, was one of the numerous streams
which flowed from the range of Hampstead and Highgate to the Thames. Its
name is derived from its being most westerly of those streams in or by
the metropolis. Rising at West End, Hampstead, and running towards
Bayswater, it passed through it, behind St. James’s Church; here it
crossed the Uxbridge-road, and entering Kensington-gardens, passed
through them and Hyde-park, where its silver thread ran along the centre
of the Serpentine, into which it entered, and by the addition of several
ponds, it was widened in 1731. Leaving the park, it crossed the Great
Western-road at Albert-gate, thence it passed in an oblique line behind
the east side of William-street and Lowndes-square, behind Lowndes-street
and Chesham-street, and bending to the right, passed under
Grosvenor-bridge, where it divided and emptied itself into old Father
Thames by two mouths. The eastern course was stopped up when the
Grosvenor Canal was formed, but the mouth may still be distinctly traced
at the back of Westmoreland-street. The western mouth is the entrance to
the Ranelagh sewer, to which the stream has for many years degenerated.
By an under current, formed in 1834, its course was diverted at
Bayswater, to prevent drainage passing into the Serpentine; and when the
Five Fields were intended to be built on, a new sewer, for which Smeaton
had previously made surveys, was constructed. The whole of its course is
now covered in, although part of it was open so late as 1854.
[Picture: The Westbourne from the park]
The Westbourn was occasionally a source of annoyance to the inhabitants
of Knightsbridge. After heavy rains it overflowed; on September 1st,
1768, it did so, and caused great damage, almost undermining some of the
neighbouring houses; and in January, 1809, it overflowed again, and
covered the neighbouring fields so deeply, that they bore the appearance
of a lake, and passengers were for several days rowed from Chelsea to
Westminster by Thames boatmen.
THE OLDEN TIME.—It would appear from the warning of the chronicler, “not
to walk too late without good guard,” that our locality bore formerly
rather a bad name. And I fear I must admit that it did so, though,
perhaps, not more dangerous than any other of the chief highways to the
metropolis. The Great Western Road ran through the hamlet, which bore a
good proportion of inns, the proprietors of which would appear to have
rather connived at the iniquities practised, and thus rendered the action
of the law more difficult.
In 1380, Richard II., by his letters patent, dated March 2nd, granted to
John Croucher, of Knightsbridge, towards the repairing of the king’s
highway from London to Brentford, customs of the several vendible
commodities therein mentioned (those of ecclesiastical men, and their
proper goods bought for their use, excepted), to be taken at
Knightsbridge and elsewhere, as he shall think expedient, for three years
next ensuing. In 1382 this was renewed, and in 1386 was granted to John
Croucher and Lawrence Newport. {24} But, notwithstanding this early care
of the road, it does not appear to have been always followed up, for
Wyatt’s men entered London, in 1554, by this road; its state materially
aided in their discomfiture, and so great was the delay occasioned that
the Queen’s party were able to make every preparation; and when
ultimately they reached London their jaded appearance gained them the
name of “draggletails.” It would appear from the extracts quoted from
the St. Margaret’s accounts that the law was applied to the parish for
its neglect in this respect, and in 1724 a petition was presented to the
House of Commons, praying for an Act to remedy the evil. Twelve years
later, when the Court had resided at Kensington for nearly fifty years,
we find Lord Hervey writing to his mother that, “the road between this
place (Kensington) and London is grown so infamously bad, that we live
here in the same solitude as we should do if cast on a rock in the middle
of the ocean, and all the Londoners tell us there is between them and us
a great impassable gulf of mud. There are two roads through the park,
but the new one is so convex, and the old one so concave, that by this
extreme of faults they agree in the common one of being, _like the high
road_, _impassable_.” {25}
Mud and dust did not, however, form the greatest unpleasantnesses of the
road. In the Kensington register of burials there is an entry telling of
its terrible condition:—
25th November, 1687. Thomas Ridge, of Portsmouth, who was killed by
thieves, almost at Knightsbridge.
And Lady Cowper, in her diary quoted by Lord Campbell, {26} writes, in
October, 1715, “I was at Kensington, where I intended to stay as long as
the camp was in Hyde-park, _the roads being so secure by it_, that we
might come from London at _any time of the night without danger_, which I
did very often.”
It is difficult to understand the cool audacity of some of the attacks on
this road. The _Gentleman’s Magazine_, April, 1740, records that “the
Bristol mail from London was robbed a little beyond Knightsbridge by a
_man on foot_, who took the Bath and Bristol bags, and, _mounting the
post-boy’s horse_, rode off toward London.” On the 1st of July, 1774,
William Hawke was executed for a highway robbery here, and two men were
executed on the 30th of the ensuing November for a similar offence. {27a}
Even so late as 1799, it was necessary to order a party of light horse to
patrol every night from Hyde Park Corner to Kensington; {27b} and it is
within the memory of many when pedestrians walked to and from Kensington
in bands sufficient to ensure mutual protection, starting at known
intervals, of which a bell gave due warning.
Respecting the innkeepers, the well-known Sheffield, Duke of Buckingham,
in his Memoirs, tells the following curious story:—“I was informed that
the Earl of Rochester, the wit, had said something of me which, according
to his custom, was very malicious; I therefore sent Colonel Aston, a very
mettled friend of mine, to call him to account for it. He denied the
words, and, indeed, I was soon convinced he had never said them; but the
mere report, though I found it to be false, obliged me (as I then
foolishly thought) to go on with the quarrel; and the next day was
appointed for us to fight on horseback, a way in England a little
unusual, but it was his part to choose. Accordingly I and my second lay
the night before at Knightsbridge privately, to avoid the being secured
at London upon any suspicion; which yet we found ourselves more in danger
of there, because we had all the appearance of highwaymen, that had a
mind to be skulking in an old inn for one night; but this, I suppose, the
people of the house _were used to_, and so _took no notice of us_, _but
liked us the better_.” And in the “Rehearsal,” written in ridicule of
Dryden, we also have an allusion to the innkeepers’ habits and
characters:—“_Smith_: But pray, Mr. Bayes, is not this a little
difficult, that you were saying e’en now, to keep an army thus conceal’d
in _Knights-Bridge_?—_Bayes_: In _Knights-Bridge_? Stay.—_Johnson_: No,
not if the _inn-keepers be his friends_.”
Until the age of railways set in, these inns did a brisk trade with the
numerous travellers from the western parts. One of the occurrences of
the day was to watch the mails set off for their destinations; there were
above twenty at one time, besides stage-coaches. Now there is but one of
the latter kind, which still, every other day, goes to Brighton. Moore
mentions in his Diary waiting at Knightsbridge for his Bessie, coming to
town by the Bath coach. All now is altered—highwaymen, patrols, and
mails are all gone—and the road is the best entrance into the capital.
An Act, passed June 19th, 1829, placed the Great Western Road, from
Knightsbridge to Brentford Bridge, under the charge of the Commissioners
of Metropolitan Roads.
It was a long time before our hamlet became part and parcel of the
metropolis. A letter in my possession, written by an intelligent
mechanic, fresh from Gloucester, and dated August, 1783, describes it as
“quite out of London, for which,” says he, “I like it the better.” And
so it was; the stream then ran open, the streets were unpaved and
unlighted, and a maypole was still on the village green. It is not ten
years since the hawthorn hedge has entirely disappeared at the Gore, and
the blackbird and starling might still be heard. We have seen the
references to game in Elizabeth’s time, but few persons imagine, perhaps,
that within the recollection of some who have not passed long from us,
snipe and woodcocks might occasionally be lowered; now, however, we are
limited to our saucy friend the sparrow, for even the very swallows have
quitted us.
Forty years since, there was neither draper’s nor butcher’s shop between
Hyde Park Corner and Sloane Street, and only one in the whole locality
where a newspaper could be had, or writing paper purchased. There was no
conveyance to London but by a kind of stagecoach; the roads were dimly
lighted by oil, {30} and the modern paving only to be seen along
Knightsbridge Terrace.
Till about 1835, a watch-house and pound remained at the east end of
Middle Row; and the stocks were to be seen at the end of Park-side,
almost opposite the Conduit, as late as 1805. A magistrate sat once a
week at the Fox and Bull, and a market was held every Thursday.
The water supply was anciently by means of springs and wells, which were
very pure, numerous, and valuable. In the beginning of the eighteenth
century, Park-side was leased from the Dean and Chapter of Westminster by
the Birkheads, and the few houses then there were supplied by a conduit
they were permitted by the Crown to use, within Hyde Park. There was a
row of conduits in the fields each side of Rotten Row, whose waters were
received by the one at the end of Park-side, known as St. James’s, or the
Receiving Conduit; and which supplied the royal residences and the Abbey
with water. {31} There were several excellent springs also in the
hamlet, one of which appears to have been public property, from a story
told by Malcolm, to the effect that in 1727, there being an excessive
drought, the supply of water was rendered very precarious, and disputes
arose between the inhabitants of Knightsbridge as to whom it belonged.
The women appear to have taken an unusual share in this quarrel, which
was so fiercely carried on, that requisition was had to a magistrate to
hinder the tongue giving way to the hands and nails. The magistrate
decided that the water belonged to the St. Margaret’s part of the hamlet.
CHAPTER II.
HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS.
—“Thus I entertain
The antiquarian humour, and am pleased
To skim along the surfaces of things,
Beguiling harmlessly the listless hours.”
WORDSWORTH.
SO small a place as our hamlet formerly was, it could not have many
historical associations of which to boast, and this chapter must,
therefore, be brief. Too small and unimportant to be the scene of great
contests, or of political intrigues, few notices of it in connection with
history occur, but those few are far from being uninteresting.
In the year 1361, a dreadful plague broke out in France, and fears were
entertained that it might ravage London. To prevent this, great
precautions were taken, and the King promptly issued an order, in which,
reciting the evils which were occasioned by the offal and refuse being
thrown by the city butchers into the Thames, he ordered, on February 25,
with the consent of Parliament then assembled, that to provide “for the
honesty of the said city, and the safety of the people,” all “bulls,
oxen, hogs, and other gross creatures,” to be slain for the citizens,
should be led either to Stratford on the one side, or Knightsbridge on
the other, and be there slain and dressed ready for sale. And any
butcher offending by killing within these places should be imprisoned one
year: a piece of legislative wisdom our own times should imitate.
When the Kentish insurrection under Wyatt broke out against the marriage
of Mary and Philip of Spain, Wyatt having vainly endeavoured to enter
London by the bridge, was compelled to march to Kingston, in order to
cross the Thames; arriving at Knightsbridge, he there rested his men
“untyll daye,” they “being very weary with travel of that night and the
daye before.” In London, the quaint old chronicler tells us, “there was
no small adowe,” and by nine o’clock on the morning of February 7, 1556,
Wyatt set his men in motion, and “planting his ordenance upon the hill,
almost over agaynst the park corner,” left it there under a guard, and
marched towards Charing Cross. The Earl of Pembroke, who commanded
Mary’s troops, hovered about “untyll all was passed by, saving the
tayle,” which he cut off from the main body. This misfortune ruined
Wyatt, who soon after was captured, and ultimately executed; his head
being set up on Hay Hill, not far from the spot where he had left his
cannon.
During the contest between Charles I. and his people, many skirmishes are
traditionally said to have occurred here. Although in the numerous works
of all kinds I have referred to, no mention could be found of such; yet
that they did take place, many remains of that period, since brought to
light, testify. Mr. Faulkner records the discovery of a helmet,
breastplate, and some swords, on the site of Lowndes Square. In 1840,
many human remains, coins of Charles’ time, some curious horse-shoes, and
trappings, were dug up when the Albert Gate improvements were made. In
Grosvenor Place, and various spots in the Five Fields, similar remains
have also been discovered.
The infamous Lord Howard of Escrick, on whose perjured evidence Algernon
Sidney was beheaded, had a house at Knightsbridge, and it was the resort
of all the desperate and unprincipled adventurers {35} who are sure to be
found attached to the ranks even of the noble and high-minded in such
contests as were then going on between Charles II. and the Whigs. He
wrought himself into their consultations, and pretended entire devotion
to their cause; but it was only to ruin their plans and consign the
leaders to the scaffold.
Roger North, in his “Examen,” states that when the Rye House Plot became
known, the King commanded Howard’s apprehension, and accordingly the
Serjeant-at-Arms proceeded to Knightsbridge, beset his house, and going
in to search for him, “though he found the bed warm where he lay,” yet
could not find him, till at last they discovered him hidden behind a
chimney, on which “he came out in his shirt and yielded himself.” He
saved himself, as is well known, by despicably witnessing against others:
the ballads and satires of the day contain many allusions to him, and his
promised deeds, of which the following may serve as a specimen:—
“Was it not a damn’d thing,
That Russell and Hampden,
Should serve all the projects of hot-headed Tory?
But much more untoward
To appoint my Lord Howard
Of his own purse and credit, to raise men and money,
Who at Knightsbridge did hide
Those brisk boys unspy’d,
That at Shaftsbury’s whistle were ready to follow,
But when aid he should bring,
Like a true Brentford king,
He was here with a whoop, and there with a hollo.”
Lord Howard died in 1683, and was succeeded by his son Charles, at whose
death, in 1715, the sullied title became extinct.
Our hamlet has one more association with Stuart plots; but this time the
Stuarts’ partisans were the plotters. In 1694 Sir William Barclay and
Sir William Perkins, two staunch Jacobites, formed a plot for the
assassination of William III.; the plan being to waylay the King on his
return to Kensington from some hunting excursion, and shoot him. The
plan required a number of conspirators to render it successful, and
herein lay the monarch’s safety. Captain Porter, one of the first to
join, gave notice to the ministers, and several engaged in the crime were
apprehended. Porter, on the trial, stated that he had been with two
others to survey the ground, lying at the Swan at Knightsbridge one
night, and there talking over their plans. Finally, it was agreed to
commit the foul deed in a lane near to Turnham Green. Perkins and others
were found guilty on most clear evidence, and suffered death at Tyburn
accordingly.
THE KNIGHTSBRIDGE VOLUNTEERS.—Notwithstanding the declaration of our
brave tars on the threatened invasion of our shores, by Napoleon in 1803,
that he should not come by _water_, great excitement prevailed, and
volunteers were enrolled from one end of the country to the other, and a
deadlier contest never cursed the earth than such would have been, had
the Emperor dared to put his project into execution. Among those earnest
men who at this crisis rendered genuine service to the country by their
energies in this particular, was Major Robert Eyre, an officer who had
seen much and real service in the American War of Independence, and
elsewhere, but who had now settled down at Knightsbridge, where for years
he resided, one of the most respected of its inhabitants. He offered to
raise a corps in the hamlet, although it had already furnished a number
of men to the regiments of the surrounding locality. His offer was
accepted in the following terms:—
London, August 14th, 1803.
SIR,—Lord Hobart has acquainted me, that the King has derived great
satisfaction from the zeal and public spirit which have been
manifested by the offer lately communicated to me by you, which his
Majesty has most graciously been pleased to approve and accept. You
will be pleased to name your officers.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your most obedient servant,
SCOTT TITCHFIELD.
To Major Robert Eyre.
The regiment was raised at the Major’s expense, numbering 146 men, and he
brought them to a high state of efficiency. Major Eyre presented them
with a pair of colours, one of which, a blue flag, has on it a painted
rebus device, of a knight in armour riding over a bridge, emblematical of
the name of the hamlet. {39}
[Picture: The colours of the Knightsbridge volunteers]
On the 26th and 28th October, 1803, King George III. in great state and
formality reviewed the volunteers of the metropolis in Hyde Park. The
Knightsbridge regiment appeared on the latter day, and the vast body
acquitted themselves with great satisfaction to the authorities. In the
United Service Institution Library is preserved a paper confidentially
communicated to the commander of every regiment, describing the position
each corps was to take up in case alarm should occur, and from it I find
that the 1st Battalion of the Queen’s Royal Volunteer Infantry, Col.
Hobart, were to patrol along Grosvenor Place and Pimlico, to the Palace,
and along Piccadilly, to communicate with the 2nd Battalion of the same
regiment, and the St. Margaret’s and St. George’s Regiments. This 2nd
Battalion were to patrol Sloane Street, leaving one company in Chelsea
Waterworks, and to communicate with the Knightsbridge corps, who were to
remain in reserve at the north end of Sloane Street.
RIOTS AT KNIGHTSBRIDGE.—In those good old electioneering times, “the days
when George III. was king,” our hamlet was many a time the scene of riot.
Such scenes, of course, will not be here detailed; but two of them were
too serious to be passed over entirely, viz., on March 28th, 1768, and
October 4th, 1803. On the former occasion, Wilkes and Cooke were elected
for Middlesex; it was customary for a London mob to meet the Brentford
one in and about Knightsbridge; and as Wilkes’ opponent was riding
through with a body of his supporters, one of them hoisted a flag, on
which was inscribed, “No Blasphemer,” and terrible violence instantly
ensued. At the latter election, Burdett was the popular candidate, and
the excitement, which had been very great throughout, culminated with the
junction of the mobs at Knightsbridge, causing much confusion and damage.
The last riot in Knightsbridge was on the occasion of the funeral of
Honey and Francis (who were shot in the rioting on the occasion of the
funeral of Caroline of Brunswick) on August 26th, 1821. It occasioned a
correspondence between the Sheriff and the Government; and being fully
described therein, I insert it here.
MR. SHERIFF WAITHMAN TO EARL BATHURST.
MY LORD,—I consider it my duty to apprise his Majesty’s Government,
through your Lordship, of a violent outrage on the public peace,
committed by some individuals of the Life Guards, at Knightsbridge,
yesterday, and of an attempt at assassination upon me personally,
while in the execution of my duty as Sheriff of Middlesex, as the
head of the civil power of the county.
Your Lordship thought proper to direct the Lord Mayor on Saturday to
take the necessary measures to preserve the peace of the city, during
the intended funeral of Honey and Francis; and, although no such
caution was addressed to the Sheriff, as conservator of the public
peace of the county, I felt it my duty to direct the deputy-sheriffs
of the city and county to order out the constables of the divisions
nearest to, and through which the funeral was expected to pass; and
also to attend in person, with proper officers, to prevent or quell
any tumult or disorder.
Conceiving that under the existing irritation of the people, and the
circumstances for which they had assembled, some insult might be
offered to the Life Guards in their barracks, I disposed of the
constables chiefly in that vicinity, and actually ranged a body of
them in front of the barracks, with instructions to apprehend every
person who should attempt to commit any outrage or disorder.
The funeral, in consequence of these precautions, passed the barracks
in an orderly and quiet manner, marked by no other peculiar
circumstance than that of a brick being thrown from the barracks,
which fell near my horse, and wounded, as I am informed, a young
girl. My admonitions, and the presence of the constables, succeeded,
however, in repressing the irritation this wanton act was calculated
to excite.
When the procession had passed, and while the road continued to be
crowded with people, the gates of the barracks were thrown open, and
the avenue filled with soldiers. The people, as might have been
foreseen, gathered round the spot, and expressed their displeasure.
A tumult seemed inevitable. I requested to speak to the officer on
duty, but without effect; and, at length, by repeated expostulations
with the soldiers, I succeeded in prevailing on them to retire and
close the gates.
Some time after, upon returning to the same spot, I saw a number of
soldiers running from the wicker gate, and pursuing the people on the
causeway. Finding an affray actually commenced, I sprung my horse
upon the causeway, interposed between the parties, and succeeded in
separating them. While thus engaged, a soldier, with whom I had
before been expostulating, and who was, therefore, acquainted with my
official situation, started forward at a man, and knocked him down.
At the same time, while using my utmost endeavours to prevail on the
soldiers to retire into the barracks, and the people to desist and
keep the peace, the bridle of my horse was violently seized, on the
one side by a young officer in undress, and on the other by the
soldier whose violence I had just noticed, and who, together,
endeavoured to throw my horse over the causeway; and I only succeeded
in extricating myself by striking the soldier with my stick, and
making my horse plunge. Immediately several of the soldiers rushed
at me with their swords drawn, and one actually loaded his carbine,
and directed it towards me, but was, I am informed, knocked down by
one of the constables. Further mischief was prevented by the
interposition of some military officers of higher authority, and the
soldiers at length retired into their barracks.
My Lord, these circumstances require no comment. At a critical
juncture the soldiers were left to their own exasperated feeling, and
manifested a lawless spirit. The civil power under my direction was
fully adequate for the preservation of the peace among the people,
but not to encounter an armed soldiery. I had no communication from
his Majesty’s Government, nor could I obtain an interview with any of
the officers of the regiment. . . . I feel assured that had I not
interposed with the civil power and even risked my own life, a
frightful slaughter must have ensued. Of subordination to civil
authority the soldiers appeared to be wholly unconscious, and that
authority, in my person, was repeatedly insulted, and grossly
outraged.
It would, my Lord, be as needless as presumptuous in me to attempt to
instruct your Lordship and his Majesty’s Government in the nature of
the constitutional authority under which I attended yesterday, or the
right I possessed in my official character to have claimed the aid
and assistance of these very military to suppress tumult, who have,
upon this occasion, in open defiance of the civil authority, been the
promoters of it; nor need I add one word in aggravation of the
enormity of the offences committed: the offenders can some of them be
identified, and I trust your Lordship will cause immediate and
effectual means to be adopted to bring them to justice, as a salutary
example to others.
I have the honour to be, my Lord, &c.,
R. WAITHMAN.
Bridge Street, August, 27th, 1821.
To this letter Earl Bathurst replied as follows:—
Whitehall, August 28th, 1821.
SIR,—I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 27th
inst., relative to a riot which took place at Knightsbridge on Sunday
last. I had, before the receipt of your letter, given directions for
an inquiry to be made into the circumstances of this transaction, in
consequence of representations made to me, which, I am bound to say,
differ in many essential particulars from the statement I have
received from you.
I cannot refrain from expressing my regret and surprise, that when
the civil power under your direction was fully adequate (as you
state) for the preservation of the peace among the people, a mob
should have been permitted to remain in a continued state of riot,
after the soldiers had been withdrawn within their barracks, until
the Riot Act was read by Mr. Conant, and the rioters dispersed by the
peace officers under his immediate orders; and I do not understand
that in the execution of this duty he received any assistance from
you.
I am, Sir, &c.
BATHURST.
Mr. Sheriff Waithman.
CHAPTER III.
MODERN PAROCHIAL DIVISIONS: THE STREETS, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, ETC. THEIR
ASSOCIATIONS, EMINENT INHABITANTS, ETC.
“I pray you let us satisfy our eyes
With the memorials, and the things of fame
That do renown this city.”
SHAKSPEARE.
THE parish church of St. Margaret, Westminster, is the mother church of
this locality. Although the Decree of 1222, before referred to, limited
the western boundary of that parish to the Tyburn stream, it declared
that beyond that stream lay the town of Knightsbridge, which belonged to
it. In what parish the manor of Eia was situated is not stated, but it
is most likely that the higher portion of it was a forest, and the lower,
it is certain, was partly a marsh, and consequently altogether unnoticed
by the assessors; for the growth of parishes was very gradual, and their
proper boundaries for ages undefined. St. Martin’s-in-the-Fields is
mentioned as early as 1225, but did not become a regular parish till
after 1337, and not independent of St. Margaret’s till 1535. In St.
Martin’s the whole of the manor of Eia was then included; it consequently
reached as far as the Westbourne, and included a part of Knightsbridge;
this arrangement continued till the parish of St. George, Hanover Square,
in 1724, was formed out of St. Martin’s, and then this distant part was
included, absurdly enough, within the new parish.
On the west of the rivulet, which here divides St. George’s parish from
St. Margaret’s and Chelsea, the hamlet stands partly in those and partly
in Kensington parish. St. Margaret’s stretches from William Street,
behind Lowndes Terrace, across the top of Sloane Street, behind Brompton
Road, continuing the line behind Arthur Street to the bottom of Ennismore
Mews, where, abutting on the north wall of Brompton Churchyard, it
strikes off in a north-west direction and crosses the Kensington Road
just below Hyde Park Terrace, whence it runs along the road into the
town, and, including a few houses on the north side of High Street, it
enters the Royal Gardens, including a considerable portion thereof, and
the whole of the palace, within its boundary; it joins Paddington at a
point on the Uxbridge Road, and thence returns through the Serpentine to
Knightsbridge.
The parish officers of St. Margaret alone beat the bounds now, and they
appear always to have been strict in this duty, which, from some entries
in their books, one would consider to have been a little festive
occasionally:—
1595. Item, paid for bread, drink, £7 10s. 0d.
cheese, fish, cream, and other
victuals, when the worshipfull
of the parish, and very many
others of the poorer sort, went
the perambulation to Kensington,
in this hard and dere time of
all things, as may appear by a
bill of particulars
1597. Item, for the charges of diet at £6 8s. 8d.
Kensington for the perambulacion
of the parish, being a yere of
great scarcity and deerness
1642. Item, spent at Knightsbridge, £2 19s. 9d.
when divers of the burgesses and
vestriemen of this parish went
the perambulation
1668. Item, expended at a £26 13s. 4d.
perambulation this yeare at
Knightsbridge
Henry VIII.’s corpse passed through Knightsbridge for interment at
Windsor. In the St. Margaret’s books is the following entry:—
1547. Paid to the poor men that did bere £0 3s. 0d.
the copis and other necessaries to
Knightsbridge, when that King
Henry the Eighth was brought to
his burial to Wynsor, and to the
man that did ring the bells
Chelsea parish includes Lowndes Square and the adjoining streets, while
Kensington includes Queen’s Buildings, and a few houses in Sloane Street.
Thus is Knightsbridge absurdly divided, when for generations there has
existed within it a place of worship which could have been easily
rendered the focus of a new and independent parish, had its patrons been
so minded. The opportunity was lost when St. George’s was formed, and
Trinity Chapel, from having been, as it were, the nursing-mother around
which the village gathered, was permitted to dwindle, without a thought
for it, into comparative insignificance. This ancient religious edifice
I will now give an account of.
TRINITY CHAPEL
Was anciently attached to a Lazar-house or Hospital, with the history of
which it is most intimately connected. When or by whom founded is not
known—at least, if such is recorded, it is not mentioned by any writer on
ecclesiastical affairs; but as it appears always to have been attached to
the Abbey of Westminster, we may conclude its foundation was connected
with that establishment.
The earliest mention I have met with of the Lazar-house is in a grant of
James I., preserved in the British Museum, {52} as follows:—
1605, JAMES R. By ye king,
Trustie and welbeloued wee grete you well. Whereas we are given to
understand that the sick, lame, and impotent people in our hospitall
of Knighte-bridge, in our county of Middlesex, are greatly distressed
for want of wholesome water, both for the dressing of their meat, and
for making condiment potions for their sores, and that in our park
called Hyde Park, in our sayd county, adjoyning to the sayd
hospitall, there is within of 140 paces of the sayd hospitall a meete
spring of good water, wof by pipe of lead of the charge of five and
thirty pounds, may safely be brought to serve the sayde house, for
their relief in yt behalf, without any inconvenience growing thereby
to our said parke; in consideration of ye poverty, and for the
contynuall use and ease of ye sayd impotent and distressed people,
wee are graciously pleased to bestow uppon them ye sayd sum of
xxxv_l._, lawful money of England, for and towards the charge of
bringinge the sayde springe water to the sayde house by pipe of lead.
Wherefore our pleasure is, that you, our warden of our Mint, shall
appoint workmen, and give order for the doing thereof, and defray the
charge, not exceeding the sayd sum of xxxv_l._; ffor the which wee do
hereby give you full allowance out of those our moneys as remayne in
your hande, lately coyned in our Tower. And this shall be our
sufficient warrant unto you, and the duplicate of this published by
you a sufficient warrant and discharge to ye keeper and keepers of ye
sayde parke, and to all other persons that may consent for the doing
hereof. Given under our sign, &c., at or Castle of Windsor, the
sixth day of September, in ye thyrd yere of our raigne of England,
France, and Ireland, and of Scotland the thirty-eighth.
To our trusty and welbeloued servant Sr Thomas Knyvett, Knight,
warden of our mynt. C. C. INWOOD.
But, although this is the earliest document concerning the Lazar-house I
have seen, there exist earlier, to which the public have not access.
Lysons says there is, among the records of the Dean and Chapter of
Westminster, a statement of its condition in 1595, drawn up by John
Glassington, Governor of the House, by profession a surgeon, and whose
family rented the hospital, &c., from the Church of Westminster (at the
rent of 4s. per annum) for many years. In this document he states that
there were no lands belonging to this hospital, nor a groat of endowment;
that there had been a certain piece, which was then enclosed within Hyde
Park, to the great detriment of the charity. He also states that when he
became governor, the building was ready to fall; that he had expended
above £100 on it; that there were commonly thirty-six or thirty-seven
persons in the house, who were supported by voluntary contributions; that
the charge of the previous year, in provisions only, and exclusive of
candles, linen, woollen, salves, medicines, burials, &c., had been £161
19s. 4d. He adds a list of fifty-five persons whom he had cured, some of
whom had been dismissed as incurable from other hospitals. An account of
the regulations of the house is subjoined by him, by which it appears
that the patients attended prayers every morning and evening, and that on
Sundays there was morning and evening service for the neighbours; that
those who were able were obliged to work; that they dined every day on
“warm meat and porrege,” and that every man had his own “dish, platter,
and tankard, to kepe the broken from the whole.” {55}
In the parish accounts of St. Margaret’s are several entries relating to
this hospital:
1634. Item, for a pair of sheetes 3s. 6d.
for Jane Clare, when wee
sent her to the Spittle at
Knightsbridge
1638. Item, to Mr. Winter, keeper 16s.
of the hospitall at
Knightsbridge, for the
keeping of the Three
Innocents for one month
1639. Item, to Mr. Thomas Neale, 6s. 6d.
for three paire of shoes,
two paire for the poore
Innocents at the Spittle at
Knightsbridge, &c.
1646. Disbursements for the poore £4 2s. 11d. {56}
Innocents in the Spittle, or
Lazar-house, at
Knightsbridge; sum total,
There are no books or accounts of the Lazar-house existing at the Chapel
now, neither have I been able to ascertain whether they exist elsewhere,
or even at all. But in one of the register books still preserved is a
list of persons discharged from it; the date of the year is not given,
but I have reason to think it about 1676. There are twenty-seven
entries, of which the following may serve as samples:—
March 5—Priscilla Knight to London, criple.
,, 6—Mary ffranklin to Berkshire.
,, 9—John Wordner, his wife, to children, to Bristow, criple.
,, 10—Nicholas fflood, his wife, 4 children, to Wales, criple.
,, 18—Robert Dicerson, his wife, 2 children, to Gloster.
These unfortunate creatures most probably begged their way up from the
country, and, while inmates here, owed their subsistence to charitable
contributions, and, when cured, had to beg their way home again. There
was also the following entry in another book, date about 1695:—
“Thomas Pirkin, a soldier under Captain John Callipfield, in
Brigadier Solwin’s regiment, died in Hospital in August last past.”
Like its origin, its end is obscure: I cannot trace when, or from what
causes, its useful and Christian career was terminated. It was certainly
existing when Newcourt was collecting materials for his “Repertorium,”
published in 1720, and that is the last allusion to it I can find.
It has always been traditionally related in Knightsbridge, that during
the fatal year of the plague, 1666, the institution was for a while given
up to those who had been attacked by that scourge; and it is also said
that the enclosed plot on the Green was the spot where its victims, here
and elsewhere in the locality, were buried.
In Butler’s “Hudibras” (III. c. ii. v. 1110), among other charges Cooper
urges against the Presbyterians is, that they
“Fill’d Bedlam with predestination,
And Knightsbridge with illumination.”
And the last editor of Gray’s “Hudibras” supposes that by the
Presbyterian Illuminati here, Butler alluded to the unfortunate inmates
of this Lazar-house! {58a}
There were three other similar establishments in the suburbs of
London—namely, at Southwark, Kingsland, and Mile-end. Great care was
taken that those afflicted with leprosy, or other such disorder, should
be immediately conveyed to one of these places. The law was strictly
carried out, and where resistance was made, the sufferers were tied to
horses, and dragged thither. {58b}
That the chapel attached to this hospital was of ancient foundation, we
may justly infer from its being described as “very old and ruinous, and
ready to fall,” as far back as 1629. In that year, for that cause, the
inhabitants petitioned Laud, who then filled the see of London, for leave
to rebuild it at their own cost, it being the place to which they usually
resorted “to perform their religious duties and devotions.” The Bishop,
by his licence, dated July 7th, 1629, gave them permission so to do (the
consent of the vicar and churchwardens of St. Martin’s being first
obtained), “therein to frequent Divine Service and sermons, which Divine
offices were to be performed by a sufficient minister, lawfully licensed
from time to time,” by the Bishops of London, or their Chancellors for
the time being; “provided that the said inhabitants, or their families,
did once every quarter of a year repair to their respective parish
churches to perform their devotions, and every Easter receive the Holy
Communion there, and pay all rights, duties, and profits to their
respective ministers to which they did belong,” and this licence was to
continue in force during the pleasure of the Bishops of London.
The Chapel was accordingly rebuilt, and “consecrated to the use of the
poor of the Hospital,” who “having no maintenance but what they received
of alms,” and not being “able to maintain a curate, repair the Chapel, or
relieve themselves,” it was, on October 3rd, 1634, according to an
arrangement made by the Master of the Hospital, the curate, and some of
the principal inhabitants of Knightsbridge, ordered by Dr. Duck, then
Chancellor of London, that they, or the major part of them, should let
certain pews and seats in such manner as should best effect these
objects; that they should keep a register of their accounts, which were
to be adjusted every six months, reserving to the incumbents of St.
Margaret’s and St. Martin’s their respective rights and emoluments. Dr.
Duck presented one piece of the plate used in the celebration of the
Communion.
In 1650 the Parliamentary Commissioners appointed to inquire into the
state of ecclesiastical benefices, reported that Knightsbridge Chapel, in
the parish of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, belonged to a Lazar-house there;
that twenty years before the date of inquiry it was re-edified and
enlarged by public contributions; and that Henry Walker, the minister,
placed there on probation by order of Parliament, received £10 per annum
from the inhabitants. The Commissioners afterwards allowed him £40 per
annum. {60}
Among the records of the Dean and Chapter is a petition from John
Glassington, surgeon, dated 1654, praying to be admitted Governor of the
Hospital, which his ancestors had always rented of the church at
Westminster; which petition is accompanied by a certificate of Sir John
Thorowgood, one of the Commissioners for Middlesex, and an active public
officer in this locality at the time of the Commonwealth; but I infer the
application was unsuccessful for a time, for in the next year Henry
Walker was presented to the curacy by Cornelius Holland and George Reeve,
_joint-governors_ of the Chapel. John Glassington was, however, Governor
in 1659.
In 1699, Nicholas Birkhead, who was then lessee of the Chapel, rebuilt
it, and the present building is mainly his work. In 1789, it was
enlarged by its front being brought in a line with the adjoining houses,
a grass-plot eight feet deep having previously occupied this space. The
present front, galleries, &c., were then erected. At the end of the last
century Dixon Gamble, Esq., became lessee, but now it is held direct from
the Dean and Chapter of Westminster, who nominate the incumbent. There
is an endowment of £30 per annum payable by them, but the income is
derived chiefly from the pew rents.
The Chapel is as plain an edifice as possibly can be; there is no
ornament of any kind about it. It is built of brick, and is 53 feet
long, by 30 feet broad. The gallery is round three sides of the
building; the organ, built by Hancock, 1770, being on the south side.
The communion-table is at the _north_ end. The front terminates in a
pediment, over which is a small cupola containing one bell, thus
inscribed—
“MRS. MARY BIRKHED GAUE ME, 1733.”
In the brickwork are let in three stone slabs, the centre of which is
inscribed “Knightsbridge Chapel, 1789;” that on the right is inscribed,
“Rebuilte by Nicho Birkhead, Gouldsmith of London, Anno Dom. 1699;” the
left or western one has the following emphatic dedication cut in it, {62}
“Capella sanctæ Indiuidux Trinitatis.”
The Communion Plate consists of five pieces, all of silver; they are
inscribed as follows:—
THE LARGE CHALICE.—Sanctæ et Indiuidæ Trinitati—Rest to the Lord:—Mary
Birkhead (about 1708.)
THE PATEN.—Sanctæ et Indiuidæ Trinitati.—The Guift of Arthure Duck,
Docter of the Ciuell Lawe and Chancelor of London (1628 or 1629).
THE SMALL CHALICE.—Sanctæ et Indiuidæ Trinitati.—The Gift of the Right
Honbl. and Right Reverent Willm. Lord Bishop of London. {63a}
THE PLATE.—The Gift of Elizebeth Knightly to Knights-Bridg Church, Oct.
18th, 1705. {63b} There is a coat of arms engraved on the edge of this
piece, doubtless that of the donor.
THE FLAGON is modern, being the gift of the Rev. J. Foyster (about 1825).
[Picture: Old Chapel, Knightsbridge]
The list of its ministers is, as far as I have been able to trace them,
as follows:—
1630. Nathaniel White, licensed May 24th.
1637. William Pope—as curate.
1640. Nehemia Dod—as curate.
— Henry Walker on probation till 1655, when he was nominated curate.
1658. Christopher Lee appears to have been minister, but various other
names also appear in the registers till May 23rd.
1660. Thomas Wheatley then signs himself “Minister of Knightsbridge.”
1661 (Feb.). Henry Tilley.
1662 (April). Nathaniel Barker.
1663 (April). — Herring (whose name occasionally appears between
1658–60.)
1666. Robert Hodson, till October 20th.
1667. Francis Hall, licensed October 25th.
1669. Henry Herbert or Hubert, S.T.P., licensed April 26th. His
signature, however, occasionally appears before this date.
1671. John Cull.
1683. — Sanby, who was minister from January 1st, 1683, to December
31st, 1685.
1686. Henry Watts, who quitted in May, 1695; strangers appear to have
officiated till
1696. Thomas Bobar entered on his duties December 4th. He made way for
in
1699. Philip Horneck, who officiated from March 9th to October 16th.
1699. Thomas Knaggs appointed curate October 16th; he stayed till
January 10th, 1707, when Francis Jeffrey succeeded. But in February,
1708, Mr. Knaggs returned, and was minister till May 17th, 1713.
1713. Robert Hicks, to June 10th, 1719.
1719. Humphry Persehouse, who was minister forty-one years. He resigned
in December, 1759, when
1760. — Bailey, chaunter of Westminster Abbey, was appointed on January
1st by the Dean and Chapter. I believe he was succeeded by the Rev. John
Gamble, nominated by his father, as lessee. He died in 1811.
1811. — Harris. {65}
1822. J. G. Foyster, M.A. of Queen’s College, Cambridge. He published a
volume of sermons preached here. In 1832, Lord Brougham gave him the
rectory of St. Clement’s, Hastings, on which he quitted Knightsbridge.
He died there May 17th, 1855.
1832. John Martin, who shortly resigned, and was succeeded by the Rev.
Hibbert Binney, D.C.L., the late minister, who, since June, 1838 (when he
was appointed rector of Newbury), left the chapel to the ministry of the
Rev. John Wilson, now D.D., and the present incumbent. Dr. Binney died
June 6th, 1857. Among assistant ministers here have been the Rev.
Alexander Cleeve, author of several devotional works, who died September
23rd, 1805; the Rev. H. J. Symons, LL.D., who read the burial service
over Sir John Moore at Corunna. He gained the notice of the Duke of York
in this pulpit, and quitted it for the Peninsula with a regiment, to
which he was chaplain.
Baptisms and marriages were formerly solemnised here, and twenty
register-books, some very small, and others quarto and folio size, are
still preserved. Many of them, however, are but duplicates of the
others, and three are memorandum-books of the clerks, with registrations,
expenses, notices, and other entries therein. The _regular register of
baptisms_ has been missing a very long while, but duplicates of several
years have been preserved; with the exception of a few leaves, all the
books of expenses are lost also. {67} I have stated before that the
books of the Lazar-house are also missing, and so is the burial book, if
such ever existed. I shall be glad to quit this statement, so
disgraceful to some of the former officials of the Chapel, and give a few
extracts from those still fortunately preserved.
Previous to the passing of Lord Hardwick’s celebrated Marriage Act, in
1753, it was not necessary to the validity of a marriage that such should
be performed in a church, or solemnised by any religious ceremony. And
although the law of the Church visited with censure those who neglected
its canon in this respect, yet the Common Law recognised other and more
private modes. Consequently around and in London, at almost all the
chapels, marriages were performed, and at some in a very discreditable
manner. Lord Hardwick’s bill made it necessary to the validity of a
marriage that it should be solemnised in a parish church or public chapel
where banns had been regularly published. The result was, that as at
these chapels banns were not published, marriages therein solemnised were
no longer legal; and among others obliged to succumb to this law,
Knightsbridge Chapel was one.
It would almost appear that our Chapel had some reputation for its
irregularities in this solemnity, if we are to trust some of the pointed
allusions in the literature of a bygone currency. Shadwell, in his play
of “The Sullen Lovers,” published in 1668, makes Lovell say:—
“Let’s rally no longer: there is a person at Knightsbridge, that
yokes all stray people together; we’ll to him, he’ll despatch us
presently, and send us away as lovingly as any two fools that ever
yet were condemned to marriage.”
And in the _Guardian_ (No. 14, March 27, 1713), a run-away marriage is
spoken of as being celebrated “last night at Knightsbridge.” Although
such references seem to illustrate what could be only known as a fact, I
yet think they were but a jocular remark as regards Knightsbridge, and
not indications of a reality. It is scarcely possible to think such
would have been allowed in a place of worship, so much under the control
of the Dean and Chapter as this was; and many memoranda in the books
vindicate its ministers from the charge of winking at wrong, as these
allusions insinuate. Of these curious entries I give the following as
specimens:—
“MEM.—Thomas Palmer and Ann Clarke: if they come to be maryed, stop
them, and send for Mr. Clarke, next doore to the Mitre Tavern in
Duppin’s Ally, King Street, Westminster.”
“William Squire, silver-smith, living in Long Acre, who stood father
to Elizabeth Goldingham, who was married to Edward Keyn ye 20th of
ffebruary, 1690/1, does give this account of the said Elizabeth
Goldingham, that she has lodged at his house for 2 years, that she is
no heyress, but ffollows the trade of a manta-maker for her living,
and further he adds that she has neither ffather or mother liveing,
nor no relation who does any way look affter her, but that she is
really at her own disposal.”
But although such entries show the rule, I must admit that at a certain
period before the time to which the foregoing entries refer, are others
which appear suspicious; and if any irregularities occurred I should
place them between the two extreme dates, shown in the following
extracts:—
1678, April 28. Jacob Stent and Mary Crouch, secrecy for life.
1678, April 28. James Gibson and Anne Tarrant, secrecy.
1678/9, April 28. William Taylor and Elizabeth Steward, great secrecy.
1680, April 25. Edward Charlton and Alice Robinson, secret for 14 years.
1682, May 7. Andrew Barry and Mary Elton, secrecy.
With these curious notices of old systems, habits, and ideas, I proceed
to give some extracts from the registers, selecting those referring to
eminent persons, and which contain allusions of interest and peculiarity.
The earliest entry of baptisms is the following.
1663, Aug. 28. Will, ye sone of will birke of this hamlett, by Mr.
Herring.
1667, Jan. 23. Sofiah London, the daughter of Richard London and Mary
his wife.
A family named London lived in this locality many years, and there are
several entries of the name. Probably the celebrated gardener so named,
who will be afterwards noticed, belonged to it.
1668. Nathaniel, son of William Ipsley, baptised, September 8th.
Most probably this name should be Hipsley. Persons of this name were
clerks here many years.
1670, Nov. 3. James, son of James and Mary Rouse.
1675, Feb. 19. Dorothy, daughter of James Took, Esq., and Magdalen his
wife. Westminster parish.
1675, April 11. William Lord, son of Robert and Anne Thurlow.
A family of this name lived in the St. Margaret’s part of the hamlet in
the 17th century.
1675, Nov. 5. Joan, daughter of Robert and Hester Gunter, baptised.
Persons of this name may be traced from this period to the present time
in our locality. It is the earliest entry of the name I have found.
1676, Jan. 8. Margerite, the daughter of Elizabeth Bedford by Mr. Philip
Thomas.
1677, June 17. Tristram, the son of Tristram and Anne Huddlestone.
1677, July 20. George, son of Berkley Trye, Esq., by Mary his wife,
baptised by Jo. Andrews, entered at St. Martin’s.
The Tryes are a very ancient Gloucestershire family.
1678, Jan. 3. Robert, son of Robert and Hester Gunter.
1681, April 11. Anne, the daughter of George Sams by Martha Wheatley,
his servant, as ’tis told me.
1682, May 27. Thomas Dennis, 30 years of age, was baptised.
1683, March 4. Jane Rutter was baptised. A black woman.
1689, June 27. ffrances Wharton, the daughter of Jane Wharton, a child
of base (birth).
1691, Dec. 21. Hannah Hipsley, daughter of Thomas and Mary Hipsley, by
Mr. Watts. Born Dec. 6th.
1692, Feb. 14. Margaret Tarbet, the daughter of Margaret Perryvil; being
a woman-child that fell in travail in ye street.
1702. Mary, daughter of Thomas Werd by Mary his wife, was baptised the
3rd of May by Mr. Killberk.
This is the last baptism recorded, and only one is entered between
October 16th, 1694, and this date: the others are missing; and though I
know baptisms were occasionally solemnised here even to the end of the
last century, no later record has been preserved.
MARRIAGES.
There are no registers of marriages here now, anterior to April 1st,
1658, but in the Bishop’s register are some earlier ones, the first of
which is the following:—
16th April, 1632. Thomas Herbert, of Hammond Head, com. York, Esq.,
bachelor, 24; and Lucy Alexander, spinster, 20, daughter of Sir William
Alexander.
The earliest in the Chapel register book is as follows:—
1658, April 1. William Eaton and Jane Hurley were married.
1661, ffeb. 10. Richard Steele and Eliza Cotterill per me Ant. Dode.
1666, July 17. William Adkins and Katherine Edwards at ye Bowling Green.
The Bowling Green was perhaps at the Spring Garden, afterwards to be
noticed.
1666, Oct. 14. Thomas Clark and Elizabeth Milton.
1667, April 16. Philip Wharton and Hester Bewley.
1672, June 11. Sir Philip Harcourte and Eliz Lee married by Mr. Cull.
1672, July 13. Robert Chaloner, esq., and Dorothy Britten.
The Chaloners were one of the few old Middlesex families. They were
seated at Chiswick.
1675, Feb. 16. Christopher Benson and Eliz. Hilliard, belonging to ye
vice chancellor.
1675, Nov. 24. Gabriel Hipsley and Penelope ffry.
1676, May 7. Nicholas Brady and Bethia Chapman.
1676, Oct. 27. Arthur Deavereux and Anne Ireland in pompe Courte in ye
midle temple, 3 payre of stayres.
1677, July 17. Hugh Middleton, esq., and Mrs. Dorothy Oglander, married
by Mr. Nath. Cole, dd, his majesty’s Chaplain in ordinary.
1678, Feb. 21. William Harbord, esq., and Mrs. Katherine Russell by Mr.
James Symonds.
1678, July 23. Sir James Hayes and Grace Clavering.
1678, August 3. Sir John Lenthall and ye Lady Catherine Lant, secrecy,
by Mr. Joseph Stretch, minister.
Sir John Lenthall, only son of the Speaker, was Governor of Windsor,
under Cromwell, and knighted by him in 1657. On May 21, 1660, he moved
in the House of Commons that all who had borne arms against the king
should be exempted from pardon; and for such was called to the bar,
reprimanded, and degraded his knighthood. He afterwards lost his seat
upon petition against his return. He died in 1681.
1678, August 15. Robert Grime and Barbara January, the king’s taylor,
nexte doore to 3 tuns taverne lane.
1679, April 10. Thomas Lant, esq., and Mrs. Jane Bromfield.
1681, Feb. 20. John Stibbs and Sarah Cromwell.
For the last 250 years a family named Cromwell—and which, in the last
century, branched out considerably—has been resident in this part of
Middlesex. Cromwell, the minister of Henry VIII., was born at Putney,
not far out of the county; and Sir Richard Cromwell (grandfather to
Oliver the Protector), signed himself in letters to the “Mauler of
Monasteries” _his most bounden nephew_. In 1691 a Robert Cromwell lived
at Kensal Green, and is probably the person of the same name who sat on
the jury at the trial of Daniel Axtell. For many years a brewery at
Hammersmith has been conducted by persons of this name, not improbably
descendants from the Putney blacksmith.
1682, January 31st. John Cull, curate of Knightsbridge, and Martha
Turner, by Mr. Yearwood.
Mr. Cull was minister here twelve years. He died in 1683, and was buried
at Kensington on the 21st September.
1682, Dec. 24. Sir John Hatton and Mary Hinton.
1683, July 3rd. Heale Hooke, Baronet, and Hester Underhill by Seyward of
Kensington.
Sir Hele Hooke, for many years a resident in Kensington Square, died
there in July, 1712, by which the title became extinct. Mr. Seward was
curate there. (See Faulkner’s “History of Kensington.”)
1685, Sept. 12. David Gunter and Eliz. West.
1686, Sept. 4. Sir Francis de Geilhausen and Flora Bishop for Feb. 6,
1685.
1687, Feb. 1. Sir Samuel Morland, Knight, and Mrs. Mary Aylif, secrecy.
This entry records the unfortunate marriage of the celebrated inventor,
described by himself in such terms of misery, to the diarist Pepys. In
all the biographies of Morland I have referred to, and even in Burke, his
wife’s name is not given, and therefore I presume it has hitherto been
unknown. The wedding was, as the register tells, private; and eighteen
days after it took place, he wrote to Pepys, that, “being in very great
perplexities, and almost distracted for want of moneys,” a person whom he
had befriended in time of need proposed to recommend him an heiress, “who
had 500_l._ per ann. in land, and 4,000_l._ in ready money,” and property
of other kinds. “Believing it,” he writes, “utterly impossible,” that
one whom he had assisted, “should ever be guilty of so black a deed” as
to betray him in his distress, “I was, about a fortnight since, led as a
fool to the stocks, and married a coachman’s daughter, not worth a
shilling,” and whose moral character proved to be none of the purest.
He, procuring evidence (shortly after) of adultery, took the case into
the Ecclesiastical Court, which granted a divorce on that ground on May
17. {78} It was the _fourth_ time Sir Samuel tied the matrimonial knot,
and the _last_.
1687, May 3. Sir William Moet, and Antonetta Willobe.
1687, Sept. 1. John Atley and Mary Crumwell.
1689, Jan. 7. Richard Bailey and Eliz. Shakespeare.
1690, July 20. Sir Thomas Fautherly and Mrs. Frances Brown.
1690, July 31. John Lenthall and Eliz. Wildman.
1693, Jan. 8. Thomas Cromwel and Ann Smith.
1694, Aug. 12. Edward Shaxspear and Eliz. Ward.
1695, May 26. Tristram Huddleston, Gentleman of St. James’, Wmr., and
Mrs. Mary Darker of the same.
1695, Nov. 16. John Baptist Renoult, Minister of the parish of St.
Ann’s, Westminster, and Amery Henri, Widd.
1696, July 23. John Line of St. Martin’s Neat Houses, and Dorothy ffall,
spinster of St. Margaret’s, Westminster.
1697, Jan. 30. Jasper Arnold, Gent., of St. James, Westminster, and
Antonett Culmer of Kensington, spinster.
The Arnolds were a numerous and opulent family long resident in
Westminster. Families of the same name, and probably connected, also
resided in Knightsbridge and Kensington for above a century. One of the
Westminster Arnolds was a brewer, and a juryman on the trial of the Seven
Bishops. (See “Macaulay’s History.”)
1698, August 21. George Cumming, Taylor, at ye Woolstaple, near great
Tom, St. Margaret’s, Westminster, and Mary Watson of the same place.
1698, Dec. 18. William ffinton, Life Guardsman in college-street, near
ye Black dog: Catherine Llewyllen in Dean’s Yard, Westmr.
(Black Dog Alley still exists in College Street.)
1699, Jan. 1. Thomas Lewsie, peruke maker in ye pel-mel at ye sign of ye
two pidgeons, in St. James’ Westmr, and Mary pigot, of St. Paul’s, Covent
Garden, in maiden lane.
1699, Jan. 23. Richard Green, Barber, in St. Brides, at ye Barber’s pole
near ffleet-bridge, ye corner house but one, and Mary Truby of ye same
place.
1699, May 23. Thomas Fenwick of St. Margaret’s, Westminster, servt to
Storey at ye Park Gate, and Mary Gregory of ye same.
This notice is curious: Story’s Gate, named from the person here noticed,
is the entrance into St. James’s Park from Bridge Street. Story was
keeper of the Aviary to Charles II., hence Birdcage Walk.
1699, August 18. Cornelius Vander Velde, Limner, of St. Giles’, living
in Dyot street, over agt ye Sparrow’s Nest, and Bernada Vander Hagen, of
ye same.
Cornelius Vander Velde was brother to William Vander Velde the elder, the
great painter of sea pieces. He was himself a painter of nautical
subjects, and in the employ of Charles II. This is an addition to
Walpole’s notices.
1699, Nov. 16. Charles Goring, Gentleman of Heysdown, in the parish of
Washington, and Frances Bridger of Hams in ye same county. (Sussex) by
Mr. Knaggs.
Mr. Goring afterwards succeeded to the baronetcy.
1700, July 30. Robt Walpole, Esquire, of Houghton in ye County of
Norfolk, and Katharine Shorter, of ye Parish of St. James, Westm. by Mr.
Prevoste.
This record is that of the celebrated minister of the first two Georges.
His wife was daughter of a Lord Mayor of London, and mother of the
celebrated Horace.
1700, Nov. 22. Miles Pennington, Gent., living in Tuttle Street, at ye
sign of ye Green Dragon, and Eliz. D’oyley of the same.
1703, March 4. John Oldmixon and Elizabeth Parrey.
1703, Dec. 25. Benjamin Houghton and Eliz. Mandeville.
1704, April 28. John Every, Esq., and ye Honble Martha Thompson.
Mr. Every afterwards succeeded his brother in the baronetcy; his wife was
daughter of John, Lord Haversham.
1705, Jan. 6. Sir William Humphrey and Eleanor Lancashire.
Sir William was Lord Mayor in the first year of George I., and
entertaining the new king at Guildhall, was made a baronet. His wife was
widow of a London merchant.
1705, Jan. 8. Charles Danvers and Margaret Evans.
Danvers has been a name in Chelsea these 250 years past, and is still to
be found there. Sir John Danvers, of Chelsea, was one who signed the
death-warrant of Charles I.
1705, May 23. Henry Graham, Esq., and Mary, Countess of Darentwater.
This lady was the youngest natural daughter of Charles II., by Mrs. Davis
the actress, and known before marriage as Lady Mary Tudor. On August 18,
1687, being then only in her fourteenth year, she was married to Edward
Radcliffe, afterwards second earl of Derwentwater, by whom she became
mother of that ill-fated earl executed on Tower Hill for his share in the
Rebellion of 1715; of Charles Radcliffe, who also perished on the
scaffold thirty years after, and of two other children. Her husband,
from whom she separated in 1700, died April 29, 1705; and within a month,
as this record shows, she married Henry Graham of Levens, Esq., who died
the following year. She married thirdly James Rooke, whom she likewise
survived. She died at Paris, November 5, 1726, in her fifty-fourth year.
1710, May 30. Sir Tho. Robinson, Baronet, and Mrs. Elizabeth Hare by
license. Tho. Yalden, S.T.P.
Sir Thomas Robinson, grandson of Sir Thomas Robinson, killed in jumping
from a window to escape from a fire in his chambers in the Temple. His
wife was daughter of Sir Thomas Hare of Stow Bardolph. The officiating
clergyman was doubtless the poet of that name.
1710, Dec. 13. Charles May, esq., and Mrs. Jane Middleton.
1712, Jan. 19. Mr. Martin Purcell and Mrs. Mary Glagg.
1721, June 19. Charles Vanbrugh, esq., of the parish of St. Martin in
the Fields, and Anne Burt of ye same, married by Dr. Hough, rector of St.
George’s.
Most probably this gentleman was brother of the celebrated architect and
dramatist, Sir John Vanbrugh. His brother Charles was baptised Feb. 27,
1680.
1721, July 22. The Hon. Josias Burchett of St. Martin in ye Feilds,
esq., widower, and Margaret Aris, of St. Anne’s, Westminster, widow.
1726, June 8. Francis Bytheway of St. Clement’s Danes, Batchelor, and
Ann Persehouse of St. Martin’s in ye feilds, spinster.
1730, May 7. Noel Broxholme, M.D., St. James, Bachelor, 40, and Mrs. Amy
Dowdeswell, St. Ann’s Westminster, widow.
1741, May 26. The Rev. Mr. John Pettingall of St. Margaret’s,
Westminster, Batch: and Susanna Long of ye same, spinster.
Mr. Pettingall was minister of Duke Street Chapel, Westminster.
1752, Dec. 2. John Fry ye younger, of Bromley in ye County of Middx, and
Elizabeth Eveleigh, of ye same, spins.
This is the last entry; and the blank pages after show it to have been
the last marriage solemnised here.
In Wilkinson’s “Londina” the following curious extracts from the Accounts
are given:—
Monye laid out for and toward ye reparation of the said Chappell as
followeth:
* October 17, 1655.
To the plumer for a gutter of lead 18 of April, 01 10 3
1656 (Qy. 1655)
To Edward Rowles 00 08 3
To Robert Darwinn, for mendinge the great window 00 12 0
nexte the pulpit
* 1656.
To John Fitzwalter and his labourers 00 06 0
ffor lathes, nails, and lime, and sand 00 06 0
ffor three hundred of tiles 00 09 0
To Rowles his man for mendinge the Chappell 00 02 0
doore, and bell
* 24th October, 1657.
To Thomas Austin and his labourers 01 04 8
To Darwinne for mendinge the north windows 00 08 0
Memorandum undated, but I think 1658 is the year:—
Monnies gathered by the inhabitants of Knightsbridge for & towards
the Reparations of the Chappell called Trinitie Chappell, belonginge
to the Hospitale, Spittle, or Lazar House of Knightsbridge:
lb. s. d.
The Lady Stonehouse 00 10 0
Mr. Hall 00 05 0
Mr. Pate 00 02 0
Mr. Callaway 00 02 0
Mr. White 00 02 6
Mr. Harris 00 02 0
Mr. Boll 00 01 6
Mr. Lewis 00 01 0
Goodman Paldin 00 01 0
Mr. Hickman 00 01 0
Som toto 01 08 0
More Collected the 29th day of June at the Chappell doore at the
Requeste of Mr. Anthony dod, minister of Paddington:
01 01 1
1 8 0
2 9 1
More Collected the 01th day of April att Chappell doore att the
Request of Mr. Lee, Minister now present of Trinitie Chappell of
Knightsbrige the some of fiftye eight shillings two-pence, by us 58s.
2d.
2 18 2
Christopher Lee
Tho. Turner
Richard Halloway.
July, 1659.
Received of the Lady Langton (for her entrance 02 00 0
into her yere) towards the repayringe of the
Chappell, the some of 2
Received of Mr. Hall the same month 00 02 6
* The 9th of June, 1659. {86}
Received of John Glassington, Governour of the Hospital of
Knightsbridge the some of 10s.—which was collected for a breefe for
and towards the losses by fire in the parish of Brides’, London, I
say received by me,
Witness, Anthony Dod.
JOHN GRAY.
* The 27th Day of ffebr, 1658.
Then received of Mr. Glassington of the Hospitall of Knightsbridge,
for the use of the Bayliffe and Burgesses of East Thetford (Retford),
in the County of Nottingham, the some of ten shillings, which was
gathered for the rebuilding of the church of East Thetford aforesaid.
THO. MASON.
The following entry refers, perhaps, to the law which made conformity to
the Church of England a necessary qualification for official employment:—
Mr. Gamaleon Capell and Mr. John Adams received the Communion in
Trinitie Chappell at Knightsbridge the 14th day of July, 1680.
And the next is an instance of the operation of a very absurd and immoral
law:—
August ye 6, 1695. Recd of Mr. Tho. Hipsley {87} ten pounds and
seven shillings and six pence by order of ye Comishenors for
Marridges in Knightsbridge Chappell, at to shillings and six pence
per Marridg:
By us
JOS. RADLIFF
LAINE MEASE.
The next extract informs us the rental received by the Birkheads as
lessees; for I presume it to be a receipt for the whole year:—
Recd the third day of Jany, 1701, of Mr. Thomas Hipsley the sum of
fforty nine pounds for Rent, allowing all the King’s Taxes to
Christmas day last past, it being in full for Rent to the said
Christmas day. p. me,
MARY BIRKHEAD.
In Chelsea Register (1699) is the following entry—“Gave to the Beadle of
Knightsbridge, {88} yt brought Sir Thomas Ogle’s childrens clothes, at
their first coming to the parish 0 . 0 . 6.”
Regarding burials, the only entry in the books recording such is the
following:—“Mrs. Smith the wife of Edward Smith of Bromtone deced the 5th
day of March, and was bereed the 6th day of ye same month 1667.” If
persons were interred here in any number, the interments ceased most
probably before 1683, when Mr. Cull was buried at Kensington. No
register of such is to be found now, although the tradition was very
strong that the enclosure on the Green was consecrated for the resting
place of the dead.
Before concluding this account of the Chapel I must notice the Birkhead
family, with whom it was so many years connected. They appear to have
held considerable property in the hamlet, but I have not been able to
trace their history, other than what the following extracts from the
registers inform us:—
1672 May 28th. “Nicholas Birkhead and Susan Robinson, married by Dr.
Littleton.”
This, doubtless, was the “gouldsmith” who “rebuilte” the chapel: Dr.
Littleton was rector of Chelsea, and celebrated for his Dictionary and
other literary productions.
1678. Nicholas ye son of Nicholas Birkhead, junior, by Susanna his wife,
bapt. Aprill 30th 1678: in the parish of Buttolphe’s, Aldersgate, London.
This relates evidently to the same person: the other notices are as
follow:—
1688 July 1. John Clements and Eliz. Birkhead.
1689 Aug 20. Edward Nowell and Eliz. Birkhead.
1693 April 27. Thomas Rouse and Hester Birkhead.
1694 July 15. Richard Wright and Eliz. Birkhead.
1694 Aug 27. James Birkhead, Joyner, of St. Andrews, Holborn; and Anne
Jinks, spinster of St. Giles’ in ye fields.
1705 Feb 10. John Birkhead and Ann Gurney.
1723 June 18. Edward Brind of Buckingham, Batch, and Elizabeth Birkhead,
of St. Martin’s in ye fields, spinster. {90}
Here my account of this ancient foundation, which has afforded, bodily
and spiritually, aid to thousands, before the more splendid structures
which now eclipse it were erected, must close. I own I feel a deep
interest in the old place, shorn as it is of its usefulness in great
measure; and it is with regret I am compelled to bear witness against
those superiors of the venerable Abbey, to which it was attached, for
permitting its decay to go on, without one single attempt to renovate it
with fresh life and vigour. I cannot find that they have for the last
150 years aided it, or held out the parental hand in any way. They have
appointed its ministers, have allowed them a miserable endowment, and
this is the sum of their support. With the rentals they have drawn from
Knightsbridge for so lengthened a period, Church and Hospital ought now
to stand, both flourishing in useful prosperity, monuments alike to the
piety of our ancestors, and to the conservative care of their
descendants, who had striven to emulate their goodness by the extension
of the blessings their bounty bestowed. Is it so, that in this district
nothing can be done in the nineteenth to remedy the faults of the
eighteenth century?
In connection with Trinity Chapel was a school, founded in 1783, chiefly
by the exertions of John Read, who will be hereafter further noticed.
The education afforded was substantially good, better than most schools
of the same kind generally afforded, and was entirely free. Its support
was derived from the contributions of the public, and collections at the
Chapel. For many years the number was limited to 34 boys and 18 girls,
but in 1832 it was increased to 45 boys and 25 girls, beyond which number
the income of the Committee would not allow them to extend. To Mr.
Kember, its Treasurer, for many years the institution mainly owed its
existence; but at length, in 1844, the subscribers at a general meeting
transferred the institution, and attached it to the new church of St.
Paul.
Before this school was founded it would seem one of a similar kind had
previously existed, for Northvouck mentions one here, but with 6 boys and
6 girls only.
* * * * *
ST. PAUL’S CHURCH.—In this section the two churches to which the Hamlet
of Knightsbridge mainly pertains will be described. St. Paul’s claims
priority.
The first stone of St. Paul’s was laid November 6th, 1840, in presence of
nearly 500 persons, by George Drummond, Esq., of Wilton Crescent. The
want of Church accommodation had been greatly felt, and in this year
measures were taken to realise that want. Public subscriptions were
commenced, and a large sum subscribed; {92} but after the work had for
some time been progressed with, it was stopped from lack of resources;
this difficulty was, however, surmounted, and on June 30th, 1843, the
edifice was consecrated by Dr. Blomfield, Bishop of London, who preached
on the occasion from the 4th chapter of St. John’s Gospel, verse 14.
The site on which it stands was formerly an exercising ground belonging
to the foot-barrack, and was given by the Marquis of Westminster (who
likewise contributed £500 towards the organ), the lease being purchased
of the late Mr. Phillips.
The Church is one of the most handsome of modern architecture in London,
and a great credit to its designer Mr. T. Cundy. Its style is that known
as Early Perpendicular; it is 106 feet in length, by 59 feet 6 inches in
breadth; the height is nearly 50 feet. It consists of a nave and two
aisles, with a chancel at the east end on an ascent of four steps; around
the Church, along three of its sides, galleries are placed; in the west
gallery is the organ, and on this side are also galleries above for the
school children. At the west end is a lofty and very handsome tower,
having an arch open on three sides at its base to form the porch, above
which it is carried to the height of 121 feet, in two storeys, each
containing a large and beautiful window, sides and front. It terminates
with an embattled parapet of open-work, and eight crocketted pinnacles,
four of which rise from the angles. The tower contains a clock by Dent,
and three bells by Meares; the tenor weighs 22 cwt. 11 lbs., second 8
cwt, the small one 6 cwt. 4 lbs.
[Picture: St. Paul’s Church]
The chancel forms a very handsome termination to the interior; the
reading-desk and pulpit respectively occupy places at the north and south
corners of its entrance, while in advance, occupying a central position,
is the lectern, presented by the Rev. W. Bennett. In the south side of
the chancel are three _sedillæ_; over the Communion table are three
compartments of stonework, on which are inscribed the Lord’s Prayer, the
Ten Commandments, and the Creed; above the stonework it terminates in a
_rere-dos_, over which is the great window of stained glass by Wailes,
pourtraying the Prophets and the Twelve Apostles. This window and
ornamental stonework cost about £1,000.
The font is of Caen stone, of beautiful design, and five feet eight
inches in height; it is of octagonal form, the panels being divided by
buttresses, the projecting portion of each resting on an angel, each
angel either clasping its hands, or holding a shield or book bearing some
symbol corresponding with the subject of the panel immediately preceding.
Under each panel is a boss, representing some plant answering to the
subject on the panel. The shaft, supporting the whole, is placed on two
steps; it consists of eight mullioned arches, and as many buttresses
decorated. It is the work of Mr. Charles Physick, of Gower Street, and
was presented by the Rev. D. A. Beaufort, Mr. Bennett’s successor at
Portman Chapel. Its cost was £100.
The organ is a very powerful one; its case was designed by Mr. Cundy, and
harmonises with the general character of the Church. It covers 14 feet
square, and is 30 feet high.
The roof is open, and is said to be the largest unsupported by pillars of
any ecclesiastical edifice in the metropolis. It is of timber, and the
tie beams are filled with tracery.
Of the eight handsome windows of each side of the church, two in the
north and six in the south are filled with stained glass, all by Wailes,
of Newcastle, representing the most remarkable scenes and actions of St.
Paul, and of those Apostles whose names are to be read on each window.
Four of these windows were erected to the memory of various members of
his family by J. T. Horne, Esq.; one to John Backhouse, Esq., of the
Foreign Office, born October 14th, 1784, died November 13th, 1845; one to
the late Viscount Newry, to the Misses Alice and Caroline Colvile, and
one to Miss Caroline Carr. There is one also to Patrick Fraser Tytler,
born August 30th, 1791, died December 24th, 1849: he was author of “A
History of Scotland,” “Lives of Sir Walter Raleigh,” “Henry VIII.,” and
other works that have assumed a standard position in our literature.
The church will hold nearly 1,600 persons; 600 of the sittings are free.
The Rev. W. J. E. Bennett was nominated to the incumbency by the Bishop
of London; but certain differences having arisen between him and the
Bishop, he resigned in March, 1850, when the Hon. and Rev. Robert Liddell
was appointed in his stead.
The following is a list of the Churchwardens:—September 30, 1845, Hon.
Eliot Yorke, M.P.; Charles Briscoe. (These gentlemen were re-elected
also for the three following years.) 1849, April 10, Sir John E.
Harington, Bart.; Charles Briscoe. 1850, Sir J. E. Harington; Charles
Briscoe. 1851, April 21, T. H. Sotheron, Esq., M.P.; J. H. Tuck. 1852,
April 13, Viscount Castlereagh; J. H. Tuck. 1853, March 29, T. H. Horne,
Esq.; Charles Westerton. 1854, April 18. This was a contested election:
opposition having been made by Mr. Westerton to the mode of conducting
Divine Service, and other matters connected with the Church, he was
opposed by Thos. Davidson, Esq.; but after a poll, the numbers were
declared to be—for Mr. Westerton, 203; Mr. Davidson, 200. Mr. Horne was
renominated; but a caveat being entered against this election, the case
came on for adjudication before Dr. Phillimore, in the Archdeacon’s
Court, on May 30th, 1854, who declared the election null, in consequence
of the rejection of the votes of certain parishioners; and a new election
taking place on June 15th, the same gentlemen were again nominated, and,
after a poll of two days’ duration, the result was declared to be—for Mr.
Westerton, 651; Mr. Davidson, 323. 1855, April 10, W. H. Jackson, Esq.;
Charles Westerton: and the same gentlemen still fill the office.
ALL SAINTS’ CHURCH.—This handsome edifice was consecrated by the late
Bishop Blomfield on Saturday, July 21st, 1849. It was erected to supply
a very great want, for previously this isolated portion of St. Margaret’s
parish was destitute of a place of worship for the members of the Church
of England. Within the last twenty years the population has vastly
increased; and houses of first-class character have covered the
nursery-grounds and fields formerly abounding.
All Saints’ Church was erected from the designs of Mr. Vulliamy, in the
Lombardic or Byzantine style of architecture, and when completed will be
one of the most original and striking edifices in London. It consists of
a nave, and side aisles, divided by pillars polished to imitate marble,
terminating in an apse, forming the chancel, and the roof of which is a
blue ground spangled with gold. Galleries are erected round three sides;
in the western one is a very fine organ. The roof is open, of woodwork,
and harmonises pleasingly with the other parts of the building, although
comparatively plain.
A tower at the west end, and a suitable enclosure before the entrance,
yet remain to be accomplished, ere the work of completion is done. The
estimated cost of these works amounts to £2,100; and it is to be hoped
that the necessary funds may not be long forthcoming, to hinder their
commencement.
The minister is the Rev. William Harness, known for his edition of
Shakspeare and other contributions to current literature; and the senior
curate is the Rev. Mackenzie Walcot, whose “Memorials of Westminster,”
and other works on the ancient city, have rendered him its most popular
and pleasing historian.
Charles R. Harford and James Baber, Esqs., were the first chosen
churchwardens, and filled the office continuously till the present year,
when W. Aldridge, Esq., was instituted in room of Mr. Harford.
ALBERT GATE occupies an arched surface over the bed of the Westbourne,
which was here open and crossed by two bridges, one just within the Park,
and erected about 1734; the other, the old bridge from which our Hamlet
is named. On its west side was the “Fox and Bull;” on its east a low
court of very old houses, named after the “White Hart,” which, with these
other buildings and the Cannon Brewhouse, were entirely removed by
authority of an Act of Parliament (4 Vict., c. 12) passed March 10th,
1841, which empowered the Commissioners of Works to purchase the land on
which these tenements stood and the buildings thereon, for the purpose of
forming a new entrance to Hyde Park. Accordingly, these improvements
were carried out, and the iron gates, which are of a very chaste design,
were fixed August 9th, 1845. The two stags on the side pedestals
formerly performed the same watch and ward at the Ranger’s Lodge in the
Green Park. They were modelled from a pair of prints by Bartolozzi.
[Picture: “The Westbourne”—Looking North from Knightsbridge]
Part of the ground bought by the commissioners they leased for
ninety-nine years to Mr. Thomas Cubitt, who immediately built on the
eastern side a large mansion, for which it is said Mr. Hudson, M.P., paid
him £15,000. It is now the residence of the French Ambassador: here our
Queen paid a visit in state on May 12, 1854; and the Emperor Napoleon
held a Levee on his visit to her in May, 1855.
This house was at first the butt of the London wits, who named it
Gibraltar House, affirming it would _never be taken_. This opinion did
not deter Mr. Cubitt from erecting another, now the London and County
Bank Branch; and a third is now nearly finished for Captain Layland.
Architecturally, there is nothing in these mansions to admire,
notwithstanding the arrogance with which they force attention. Though so
gigantic, they are not imposing; of an unusual altitude, they are
destitute of ornament, and can only be likened to some “tall bullies,”
determined even in vulgarity to lord over their fellows.
BROMPTON ROAD: a row of houses built about twenty years since on the
garden of Grosvenor House. The National School House attached to
Brompton Church was built in 1841, in the Tudor style, from designs by
Mr. George Godwin.
ENNISMORE PLACE and TERRACE, built by Elger on land belonging to the Earl
of Listowel, from whose second title the name is derived; commenced in
1848, and finished in 1855. Along the curve at the bottom of the Terrace
(now called Princes Terrace) the boundary of St. Margaret’s parish abuts
on that of Kensington. No. 11, Princes Terrace, is the residence of Mr.
Bonamy Price.
HIGH ROAD: a heterogeneous row of houses between the Green and Rutland
Gate is so called. They are built without any attempt at uniformity, and
are generally of a mean description. Parts of the western end are now
called Trevor Terrace, and South Place. The oldest houses in the Hamlet
are in High Road: Chatham House (why so called I know not), built in
1688, now a broker’s, was for many years a boarding-school, and
originally surrounded by a garden. Three doors beyond is an ancient inn,
now known as the “Rose and Crown,” but formerly the “Oliver Cromwell,”
and which has been licensed above three hundred years. It is the oldest
house in Knightsbridge, was formerly its largest inn, and not improbably
the house which sheltered Wyatt, while his unfortunate Kentish followers
rested on the adjacent green. A tradition told by all old inhabitants of
the locality that Cromwell’s body-guard was once quartered here, is still
very prevalent, and an inscription to that effect was till lately painted
in front of the house; {104} and on an ornamental piece of plaster-work
was formerly emblazoned the great Protector’s coat-of-arms. Although I
have not been able to find any mention of this place in connection with
the Civil War, or with Cromwell, yet nothing is more certain than that
(as I have before noticed) our neighbourhood was frequently the scene of
skirmishes during that contest, or more probable than that it should be
so, considering it was the main road from the west to the capital. In
1647 the Parliament Army was encamped about here, and Fairfax’s
head-quarters were for awhile at Holland House; so also immediately
before and after the fight at Brentford. At all events, Mr. Corbould,
the distinguished painter, took this old inn as a subject; and “The Old
Hostelrie at Knightsbridge,” exhibited in 1849 at St. George’s Gallery,
formed a pleasing and animating picture. He laid the scene as early as
1497; and opposite the inn stands a well, surmounted by a figure of St.
George, while beyond is the spacious green, the meandering stream, the
bridge over it, surmounted by an embattled tower; while still further
appears the old hospital and chapel. All this is likely to be summarily
condemned as the painter’s fancy, but it nevertheless proves that an
interest in the place was not confined to the lower orders alone. The
house has of late been much modernised, and in 1853 had a narrow escape
from destruction by fire; but enough still remains in its peculiar
chimneys, oval-shaped windows, the low rooms, large yard and extensive
stabling, with the galleries above and office-like places beneath, to
testify to its antiquity and former importance. {106}
The “Rising Sun” was for many years the residence of Major Eyre of the
Volunteers. It is built of red brick, and on the coping is the date 16—.
There was formerly much carved work about the rooms, but all has
disappeared: a plain, old-fashioned staircase still exists. It has not
been licensed above thirty years.
Trevor Terrace consists of but ten houses. At the last, Mr. Pocock, the
architect, resides.
At the corner of South Place, which contains only three houses, is the
celebrated floor-cloth manufactory belonging to Mr. Baber. It was the
earliest one ever established, and first erected, in 1754, by Nathan
Smith. The first block used for patterns was cut by him, and is still
preserved in the factory. A woodcut of it is given in “Dodd’s British
Manufactures,” where full particulars of the process of this manufacture
are given. In 1794 the building was entirely destroyed by fire, but
restored the ensuing year; the whole was rebuilt in 1824, and presents a
remarkable appearance from its great height. At the north end is a
clock, over which is placed a figure of Time cut in stone.
The adjoining house (No. 2) was formerly called the “Parsonage,” because
inhabited by the Rev. J. Gamble, of Trinity Chapel. This gentleman was
in 1796 appointed Chaplain of the Forces, and in 1799 Rector of
Alphamstone and Bradwell-juxta-Mare, Essex. For many years also he was
private chaplain to the Duke of York, who generally attended his ministry
at the Chapel. Mr. Gamble was a Fellow of Pembroke College, Cambridge, a
very able preacher, and a highly popular man. He died in this house July
27, 1811.
Of late years this unpretending house has gained a world-wide celebrity,
having been the residence of Edward Sterling, the “Thunderer of the
Times.”
Edward Sterling was born at Waterford on the 27th February, 1773. He
entered Trinity College, Dublin, and qualifying himself for the bar, was
duly called thereto; when the Irish Rebellion breaking out, in his
twenty-fifth year, the barristers resolved to raise a corps of
volunteers; and thus a complete change in Sterling’s career was
commenced. He fought at Vinegar Hill, and doubtless fought well. He
quitted the bar, joined the Cheshire Militia, whence he and his company
afterwards volunteered into the line. In 1805 the regiment was
disbanded, and he removed to Kaimes Castle, Bute, where he cultivated a
farm. Afterwards he went into Wales, and was appointed Adjutant of the
Glamorgan Militia; and in 1810 published a pamphlet on Military Reform.
It was dedicated to the Duke of Kent, and went through a second edition
the following year.
In 1812 he wrote a series of letters to the _Times_, under the signature
of “Vetus,” which were afterwards collected and reprinted. In 1814 he
was at Paris, and witnessed the entry of Napoleon after his return from
Elba. He made the best of his way to London, which he never quitted as a
residence again. He resided at various places in the suburbs, but
ultimately settled at Knightsbridge, a more congenial home with its
military air; and from this modest nook poured forth the able,
torrent-like articles, which gained their unknown author the title of the
“Thunderer.”
He died here in the year 1847; his wife, the excellent mother of John
Sterling, died here also, on April 16th, 1843. {109}
This house was also a home to John Sterling when in London; and here
Carlyle, Maurice, Mill, and other gifted men, visited him. It is now the
residence of his brother, Colonel Sterling; and here also came, after his
honourable campaign in the Crimea, the brave Sir Colin Campbell, who for
his services in India was created Lord Clyde.
KENT HOUSE.—H.R.H. the Duke of Kent, about fifty years ago, rented a
small house, to which he added till it attained its present size, and was
named after him, Kent House. He resided here but a few years. After
him, Lord George Seymour inhabited it; and in 1817 the Hon. George
Villiers resided here. He was next brother and heir-presumptive to the
second Earl of Clarendon, and held several official employments. He
married the Hon. Theresa Parker, only daughter of John, first Lord
Boringdon, and brother of the Earl of Morley, and died at Kent House,
March 21st, 1827, leaving a numerous family, three of whom at least have
attained a high reputation, viz., the present Earl of Clarendon, the Hon.
C. P. Villiers, M.P. for Wolverhampton, and Lady Theresa Lewis, author of
“The Friends and Contemporaries of Lord Chancellor Clarendon.”
At Kent House (divided now) reside Earl Morley, and Sir G. C. Lewis, the
late Chancellor of the Exchequer. He married Lady Theresa (noticed
above), relict of P. H. Lister, Esq., and is author of many important
historical and political works, some of which were written in this house.
STRATHEDEN HOUSE.—This was many years the residence of a highly respected
family named Marsh. Charles Marsh, Esq., was a magistrate of the county,
and William Marsh was senior partner in the house of Marsh, Graham, and
Co., with which the forgeries of Fauntleroy were so interwoven. In the
misfortunes occasioned by this man Mr. Marsh was innocently, but
bitterly, involved. He was a very public spirited man, and greatly
respected in the locality.
Stratheden House was afterwards the residence of Francis Bassett, Lord de
Dunstanville. He was created baronet for his prompt heading of the
Cornish miners, and bringing them to the relief of Plymouth, when the
combined fleets of France and Spain cast anchor in the Sound in 1779. He
sat in the House of Commons many years, supporting Lord North, and
afterwards Pitt, by whom, in 1799, he was raised to the peerage. He
supported the Tory interest in the Upper House, and, though not a
prominent member, drew down on him the ire of the veteran reformer,
Cartwright. He died in 1835.
This mansion is now the town residence of Lord Campbell and Lady
Stratheden, after whom it is named. The first volume of the “Lives of
the Chancellors” is dated from this house.
HIGH ROW extends from Albert Gate Houses to the Barracks; part of it, in
an absurd spirit of sycophancy, is now called Albert Terrace. At the
west side of the stream, till the improvements were effected, stood a
celebrated inn, known as the “Fox and Bull,” traditionally said to have
been founded in the time of Elizabeth, and used by her on her visits to
Lord Burleigh at Brompton. Its curious sign is said to be the only one
of the kind existing. At the “Fox and Bull” for a long while was
maintained that Queen Anne style of society, where persons of “parts” and
reputation were to be met with in rooms open to all. A Captain Corbet
was for a long while its head; a Mr. Shaw, of the War Office, supplied
the _London Gazette_; and W. Harris, of Covent Garden Theatre, his
play-bills. {112a} Sir Joshua Reynolds is said to have occasionally been
a visitor, as also Sir W. Wynn, the patron of Ryland; and George Morland
frequently so. The sign was once painted by Sir Joshua, and hung till
1807, when it was blown down and destroyed in a storm. The house is
referred to in the “Tatler,” No. 259.
The “Fox and Bull” was for many years the receiving house of the Royal
Humane Society; {112b} and here was brought the poor frame of the first
wife of the poet Shelley, who had drowned herself in the Serpentine. She
had lodged in Hans Place, a short time before, and was known to the
landlord’s daughter, Miss Mary Ann Phillips; hence, her remains were
treated “tenderly,” and laid out “with care.” An inquest was held, and a
verdict returned, which saved her the revolting burial then awarded to
the suicide.
A magistrate used to sit here once a-week: the last was Mr. Bond, of
Sloane Street. The present is the third house that has existed under the
same sign. The first was undoubtedly of Elizabethan build; most of its
rooms were panelled and carved, with ornamented ceilings, &c.; and it was
not till 1799 that the immense fire-places and dog-irons were removed for
stoves. This house was pulled down about 1836, and the second
immediately built on its site; this stood till the alterations at Albert
Gate made necessary the removal of the business to its present situation.
In 1809 the landlord, digging to form a grain pit for his cows,
discovered six entire male skeletons, supposed to be remains of some who
had been slain (perhaps attempting to cross the bridge) in the Civil War.
The Cannon Brewhouse, a large unsightly brick building, occupied the
remainder of the site of the Albert Gate houses. Formerly here stood a
row of mean dwellings, with open cellars in front, and at the west end a
filthy court. They were all removed for the brewhouse, the first stone
of which was laid by the late Mr. James Goding, on April 10th, 1804; at
the top was a huge wooden cannon. {114} In 1841 the whole was pulled
down, and for ten years the ground was unoccupied; in 1851 a temporary
building for the Chinese Collection of Mr. Dunn was erected, which in
1852 made way for the large mansion not yet entirely finished.
The house now inhabited by Mr. Murray was, rather more than thirty years
since, the residence of Lady Ann Hamilton—the faithful attendant of
Caroline of Brunswick. Afterwards Mr. Chalon, and then Mr. Davis, both
artists of repute, inhabited it. To Mr. Davis succeeded Mr. White, a
naturalist, who had here a large collection of wild beasts and birds. I
have heard he was tutor to Van Amburgh.
Mr. Woodburn, when living supposed to be the first judge in matters
relating to ancient art, once lived in this house. He died in 1854. The
staircases still bear proof of the residence of these artists here.
Captain Corbet, a comrade of St. Vincent, lived at No. 19; Ozias Humphry
at 13; Maurice Morgann, opposite Sloane Street, John Taylor, the singer,
Paul Bedford (for several years at 18), Mr. Justice Burton, and Mr.
McCarthy, the sculptor, at 17—were all residents of High Row. Of these,
Humphry will be noticed here. He was born at Honiton in 1742; and early
evincing a taste for drawing, was taken from the Grammar School of his
native town and sent to London, where he prosecuted his studies most
assiduously. Having, after two years’ stay, been compelled to return
through the death of his father, he engaged himself to Mr. Collins, a
miniature painter at Bath. But in 1763, by the advice of Reynolds, he
returned to London, and was brought under public notice through his
auspices. For some years he practised with increasing success, and in
1773 set out for Italy with Romney; he returned in September, 1777, and
his fame rapidly increased. Miniatures he had chiefly devoted himself
to, but now he turned to full-portrait painting, to which Hayley in his
poem addressed to Romney refers:—
“Thy graces, Humphry, and thy colours clear,
From miniatures’ small circle disappear:
May their distinguished merit still prevail,
And shine with lustre on the larger scale.”
In 1785 he sailed for India; but the climate compelling him to return
before he had attained his object, he, in 1789, again exhibited in
London, confirming his former reputation, and next year he was elected
R.A. He was employed to paint a series of original portraits of the
Sackvilles by the Duke of Dorset; but ere he had completed them his sight
failed him, and though various attempts were made to pursue his art, they
were unsuccessful, and he was compelled to terminate his professional
career.
Humphry was held in high estimation by some of the greatest men of his
time; by Reynolds, Hastings, and Sir W. Jones. He is one of the heroes,
too, of Boswell’s inimitable biography: Johnson placed under his care his
godson, “a son of Mr. Paterson, eminent for his knowledge of books.” As
an artist, though he suffered many disadvantages, he ranked high; as a
man of moral worth, and kind affections, he was “zealous in good offices,
and strenuous in his efforts for rising genius;” and it was to him Dr.
Walcot first introduced Opie.
Besides the poetic niche of Hayley, Owen Cambridge mentions him—
“But, Humphry, by whom shall your labours be told,
How your colours enliven the young and the old?”
And Cumberland likewise—
“Crown’d with fresh roses, grateful Humphry stands,
While beauty grows immortal from his hands.”
Humphry resided several years in Knightsbridge; he died at 13, High Row,
March 9th, 1810, and was buried in St. James’ Chapel ground, Hampstead
Road. {117}
Out of the High Row runs Mills’ Buildings, so called from a builder of
that name who erected them in 1777. At the top, abutting on the Park, is
Park Row: at No. 5, Mr. Thomas Cooper for several years resided; and Mr.
F. Matthews once lived in this row.
The spot of ground now occupied by the Duke of Wellington’s stables, just
erected from designs by Hardwick, was purchased by the Duke from a Mr.
Williams, whose freehold property it was. Several houses in Park Place,
the “Nag’s Head,” {118} and five other houses, were removed for these
stables. Two of them touched on the Park, and were called Williams’
Cottages.
At the west end of High Row is the barrack for the Horse-Guards, an
extensive range of brick buildings, built in 1795, and capable of
accommodating 600 men and 500 horses. In the centre of the chief
building is an oblong parade, around which are the apartments for the
men, and the chief stabling for the horses. A mansion for the officers,
riding school, &c., stand at the western end.
HYDE PARK.—Of the glories of Hyde Park it is almost superfluous to speak;
it has been a place of great popular resort since the days of Charles II.
It was then visited, not as now, for air and exercise only, but was much
used by the citizens for their sports. May 1st, 1654, a great hurling
match was played before the Lord Protector. We read that on that day
also “great resort came to Hyde Park, many hundreds of rich coaches, and
gallants in attire; but most shameful powdered-hair men and painted and
spotted women.” Horse and footraces were also held here. “Shall we make
a fling to London, and see how the spring appears there in Spring Garden,
and in Hyde Park to see the races, horse and foot?”—(“Merry Beggars, or
Jovial Crew,” 1641.)
Many and famous have been the reviews here, some of them of deep
historical interest. In October, 1803, as before-mentioned, George III.
reviewed the different Volunteer Corps raised by the metropolis, when the
total number inspected amounted to 27,077 men, of whom our local
contingent mustered in force of 124. The enthusiasm created by the
appearance of the Guards on their return from the Crimea, and the first
distribution of the Victoria Cross by her Majesty in person, are fresh in
the public memory.
It is well diversified with wood and water; the Serpentine in its space
amply supplying the latter.
“Well may the coyest of the Nine
Be proud to sing the Serpentine;
For never breeze has swept, nor beam
Shed light upon a luckier stream.
’Tis but a brook, whose scanty source,
Hard by, just struggles in its course,
But scarce has reached, slow trickling thence,
The bounds of royal influence,
When, such the favour and protection
That flows from interest and connection,
’Tis bidden a nobler form to take,
And spreads and widens to a lake.” {120a}
Would that its waters were kept sweet and pure; how much more enjoyable
would its ride and walks be. Life at the Serpentine in the height of the
London season, and after a few days’ sharp frost, presents
characteristics that can be seen in the metropolis only.
The Hyde Park river, which no river is,
The Serpentine—which is not serpentine,
When frozen, every skater claims as his,
In right of common, there to entertwine
With countless crowds, and glide upon the ice.
Lining the banks, the timid and unwilling
Stand and look on, while some the fair entice
By telling, yonder skaters are quadrilling;
And here the skateless hire the “_best_ skates” for a shilling.
{120b}
As the Serpentine is at these two seasons productive of so much
enjoyment, so it is also at the same time the source of much danger. The
skater, the bather, and he who is sick of life’s miseries, too often
afford employment for the staff at the Receiving House of the Royal
Humane Society.
This edifice was erected on its north bank in 1834. One devoted to the
same purpose had previously occupied the same spot. In it are beds, warm
baths, tables, and apparatus of all kinds for the restoration of those
apparently drowned, in the hope that “perchance a spark may be
concealed.” Every effort of science is here exercised on the cases
requiring such attentions; the inspection of the public is invited by a
notice to that effect affixed outside.
Some little distance north and west of the Receiving House, formerly
stood a very ancient edifice, known by the name of “The Cake House;” it
was built with timber and plaster, and roofed with flat tiles. It was a
place for the sale of refreshments to those who visited the park—hence
its name. Pepys says, April 25th, 1669:—“Abroad with my wife in the
afternoon to the Park, where very much company, and the weather very
pleasant. I carried my wife to the Lodge the first time this year; and
there in our coach eat a cheesecake, and drank a tankard of milk.” We
may imagine by the following that it was the best known and more visited
than any other spot in the Park:—“Comely! nay, ’tis no London female;
she’s a thing that never saw cheesecake, tart, or syllabub, at the Lodge
in Hyde Park.”—(“The English Monsieur,” by the Hon. James Howard. 4to.
1674.)
[Picture: The Cake House]
Adjacent to this old Lodge was the famous Ring, where the racing and
other amusements were carried on; and where the ground was often dyed
with the blood of the duellist.
The Ring, or parts of it, can still be distinctly traced on the east of
the Ranger’s Grounds. Here fell the Duke of Hamilton, after his duel
with the Lord Mohun. Swift, in his journal to Stella, Nov. 15th, 1712,
says, “The Duke was helped towards the Cake House, by the Ring, in Hyde
Park (where the duel was fought), and died on the grass, before he could
reach the house:” a graphic picture, and a sad one, of that fashionable
and cruel custom now happily abolished in this country. The journals a
century ago were replete with notices of duels fought in the Ring in Hyde
Park.
Turn we now from these painful reminiscences. From the Ring, we have in
view the costly toy of George IV., the Marble Arch, which, for want of a
better destination, was removed to Cumberland Gate from Buckingham
Palace; it was designed by Nash, after the arch of Constantine at Rome,
and originally was intended to have been surmounted with a chariot and
horses, and afterwards with a classic equestrian statue of his Majesty;
this was actually executed by Chantry at a cost of 9,000 guineas, but it
never reached its intended elevation, and now occupies the pedestal at
the north-east corner of Trafalgar Square. Perhaps the most satisfactory
work of art in connection with the structure is the very beautiful pair
of gates. They are said to be the largest in Europe; are designed in
scroll, having six openings, two filled with St. George and the Dragon,
two with the royal cypher G.R., and two with lions _passant gardant_;
they cost 3,000 guineas, and are cast in an alloy composed largely of
copper.
At present the erection produces a somewhat poor effect, but it is not
fair to criticise it, seeing that its original design has not been
carried out; were it surmounted with a well-harmonised group, as at first
intended, no doubt its appearance would have been much more imposing.
We have in the Park, just within the entrance at the “Corner,” the statue
of Achilles, cast from cannon taken from the French, erected in honour of
the late Duke of Wellington, by a subscription of his “Countrywomen,” as
told by the inscription thus:—
TO ARTHUR, DUKE OF WELLINGTON,
And His Brave Companions in Arms,
This Statue of Achilles,
Cast from Cannon taken in the Victories of Salamanca,
Vittoria, Toulouse and Waterloo,
is inscribed
By their Countrywomen.
Placed on this Spot
on the XVIII. day of June, MDCCCXXII.
By command of
HIS MAJESTY GEORGE IIII.
We give a passing reference to Rotten Row, where, every evening during
the season, may be seen one of the most animating and national spectacles
of the metropolis; the fine gravelly road is then filled with equestrians
of both sexes mounted on the most beautiful horses, and parading up and
down to the admiration of the lounging spectators, whiling away their
evening hour on the seats or rails skirting the road. This road has
lately been injudiciously widened, being unused some eight months in the
year, and the crossing thereby rendered the more dangerous the remaining
four.
It is needless to speak here of the Great Exhibition of 1851: these pages
are not to tell of its beauties, its results, or the enthusiasm it called
into play; suffice it to say that our dear old Park was the scene of its
glories. We will hope that its peaceful memories may never be effaced
from among the nations.
HYDE PARK CORNER.—The earliest mention of this name I have met with is in
the “Chronicle of Queen Mary,” &c., published by the Camden Society,
where Wyatt is described planting his “ordenance over agaynst the parke
corner.” The name properly applies to that triangularly-shaped portion
of the Park formed by the line from Stanhope Gate to Apsley House.
Several interesting incidents have occurred at this spot deserving
notice. Here James I., in March, 1606, was met by his whole court and
the House of Commons, with the Speaker at their head, to welcome him on
his safe return from a hunting excursion near Woking, where it was stated
he had been murdered. Here, in 1625, Judge Whitelock sat on the grass
which grew in the road, and with his retinue ate the dinner brought with
them from the country, afraid to stay longer in London than absolutely
necessary, the plague having just carried off thousands of people. After
his meal, he galloped to Westminster Hall, adjourned the courts, and
quickly retired.
By this road, on August 6th, 1647, Fairfax and his army, all with a
laurel branch in their hats, entered from Kensington, accompanied by the
House of Commons, to go to Westminster, the matter of the Declaration
having been agreed to. From Kensington to the fort here, a guard stood
three feet deep; and at Hyde Park Corner they were met by the Lord Mayor
and Corporation, come to congratulate them on their arrival. “Lieut.
General Cromwell’s regiment of horse” was among them, we are told: this
was not his last appearance here. When he returned from his Irish
campaign, Fairfax and others met him at Hounslow; and as he approached,
Colonel Barkstead’s regiment, drawn up in the highway at the Park Corner,
saluted him. In the journal of George Fox, the Quaker, too, is an
anecdote of his meeting the Protector here.
After the fight at Brentford, consternation being felt by the Londoners
at the near approach of the Royal Army, a chain of forts was thrown up by
the citizens, connected with each other by means of earth works and
ramparts. Whitelock says it was wonderful to see how the women and
children, and vast numbers of people, would come and work at digging and
carrying earth to the fortifications. The newspapers of the day teem
with curious particulars of the prevailing excitement; one day we read of
five thousand felt-makers, another of four thousand porters, then of five
thousand shoemakers, and six thousand tailors, all to assist in the
pressing work. Nor were the fair sex behindhand; Butler, in his
“Hudibras,” alluding to this, says they
“March’d rank and file, with drum and ensign
T’ intrench the city for defence in,
Raised rampiers with their own soft hands
To put the enemy to stands;
From ladies down to oyster-wenches,
Labour’d like pioneers in trenches;
Fall’n to their pickaxes and tools,
And helped the men to dig like moles.”
[Picture: Fort—formerly at Hyde Park Corner]
And Nash, in a note on this passage, says:—
“Ladies Middlesex, Foster, Anne Waller, and Mrs. Dunch, were
particularly remarkable for their activity.”
One of these forts stood on the brow of the hill at Hyde Park Corner; it
was a large one, consisting of four bastions, commanding the ascent and
the adjoining fields. Four years afterwards—no further use remaining for
them—the House of Commons ordered their removal.
Dr. King relates an interesting anecdote of Charles II. meeting his
brother James at this spot, on his return from a hunting excursion, and
escorted by a party of the Guards. Charles, who was out for a stroll in
the Park, of which he was very fond, was attended by but two of his
Court. The Guards recognising the King, halted; and James being
acquainted with the cause thereof, stepped from his coach, and saluted
his brother, but expressed his surprise to meet him there almost
unattended, and thought he exposed himself to some danger. “No kind of
danger, James,” replied Charles, “for I am sure no man in England will
take away my life to make you king.” {129}
Respecting this interesting anecdote, a tradition tells us that Charles
II. was very partial to a walk in Hyde Park, and that at the spot to
which he limited himself generally he planted two acorns from the
Boscobel Tree. The trees from them grew at the north side of the
Serpentine, just where the road turns off by the magazine towards
Bayswater. For many years they were fenced in, but one only now remains;
the other, much decayed, was removed in 1854.
[Picture: Oak, planted by Charles the Second]
Hyde Park Corner is now the most magnificent entrance to the metropolis;
the entrances to the Parks, Apsley House, and, in the background, the
glorious towers of Westminster, form a scene at once imposing and
national. Formerly the entrance was very mean; a turnpike blocked the
way, and instead of the classic archways, paltry lodges and iron gates
led to the parks. Between the lodge and park side was a dead wall, eight
feet high, built in the reign of Charles II., but removed in 1828. The
toll-house was sold by auction, October 4th, 1825, and cleared away
immediately.
[Picture: Hyde Park Corner—1824]
The existing entrance to Hyde Park was completed in 1828, from designs of
Mr. Decimus Burton; the frieze was designed by Archibald Henning; the
ironwork by Bramah. The Triumphal Arch leading to Constitution Hill was
built about the same time; its beautiful gates were likewise the work of
Bramah.
From Hyde Park Corner the distances to the west are measured; a standard
stood near to Apsley House till about 1827.
KENSINGTON GORE was, as before shown, originally called
Kyngsgore—firstly, because it belonged to the king; and secondly, from
its peculiar shape; gore, an old English word, meaning “a narrow slip of
land,” according to the old glossaries. In Kent, the peasantry call a
triangularly-shaped piece of ground a gore; and seamstresses use the word
in a similar manner to the present day, to express a gusset or piece of
stuff let into their work. The early history of the Gore in connection
with Kilburn Priory has been noticed; and here its modern story must be
told. From Prince Albert’s Road to Noel House is generally now
considered as the Gore.
Brompton Park Nursery was established during the reign of Charles II.
During the greater part of the seventeenth century the land appears to
have belonged to the Percivals, ancestors of the Earl of Egmont. Philip
Percival, the friend of Pym and Hollis, was born here in 1603. Brompton
Park appears to have extended from what is now called Cromwell Road to
the road from Knightsbridge to Kensington. Various properties were cut
out of it; but the Percivals were here at least till 1675. Soon after
this date about sixty acres appear to have been formed into a nursery
garden, the first ever established in this country. It early excited
great attention, more particularly about 1690–1700, when it belonged to
George London and Henry Wise, the most celebrated gardeners of the time.
Evelyn, in his “Diary,” records, on April 24th, 1694, taking “Mr. Waller
to see Brompton Park, where he was in admiration at the store of rare
plants, and the method he found in that noble nursery, and how well it
was cultivated.” Evelyn again alludes to the nursery in his “Sylva,”
declaring that the “sight” of it “gave an idea of something greater” than
he could express. He speaks highly of the skill and industry here shown,
and says the like is not to be met with in this or any other country.
Bowack, writing in 1705, affirms that if the plants were valued but at
one penny each, they would be worth above £40,000.
Messrs. London and Wise translated from the French “The Complete
Gardener,” published in 1701. They were gardeners to William III.; and
Kensington Gardens were laid out by them. Wise also superintended the
laying-out of Hampton Court; and Evelyn mentions visiting him there.
After them, the establishment went through various hands; but when the
surrounding fields were built on, the smoke injured the plants; and the
railways bringing up fruit and vegetables cheaper than they could be
brought to perfection at here, the business gradually diminished, and in
1853 entirely ceased.
Along an ancient wall separating the grounds from those of Cromwell
House, a valuable collection of vines was planted, which were cultivated
with great success. This wall, the contents of the gardens, and the
dwellings therein, were cleared away in 1855. The following list of
owners is chiefly taken from Faulkner:—
1681. Lukar and Co. 1714. Smith and Co.
1686. Cooke and Co. 1756. Jefferies and Co.
1689. Wise. 1788. Gray and Co.
1694. London and Wise. — Gray, Adams, and Hogg.
1700. Swinhoe. 1849. Adams and Hogg.
Mr. James Gray, who was chief partner in this concern so long, died at
Brompton in 1849. He is mentioned with respect in Faulkner’s “History of
Kensington.”
Park House, a plain but spacious mansion, pulled down in 1856, adjoined
Princes Gate. It was divided from the road by a brick wall, part of that
ancient one just mentioned, for this house stood within Brompton Park:
hence its name. Probably a more ancient mansion stood here; but the late
one was for many years the seat of the Veres, bankers of the city of
London. Afterwards it became the residence of William Evans, Esq., M.P.,
soon after whose death it was sold.
Eden Lodge was the residence of Lord Auckland, Governor-General of India.
Here he retired after his return, and died in 1849.
Mercer Lodge, a small brick residence, was inhabited by Frank Marryat,
son of the novelist, and himself an author of one or two books of travel.
Mr. Henry Mayhew now resides here.
Immediately adjoining is a row of five houses, called emphatically
Kensington Gore. All are faced with white stucco, are very small, and
appear as if intended for the lodge of some great mansion never erected.
Two of them, which seem to contain but one room, have, however, second
storeys at the back, and good gardens, which, with the Park in front,
render them very pleasant residences. At one of these houses, in 1816,
Mrs. Inchbald inquired after some lodgings which were to let. The
landlady was too fine a personage for the writer of “The Simple Story,”
and so exacting in her demands that her applicant indignantly wended her
way elsewhere. No. 2, now called Hamilton Lodge, was once the occasional
residence of John Wilkes. The house was kept by Mrs. Arnold, mother of
his second daughter Harriett, who married Mr. Serjeant Rough, afterwards
an Indian judge. Wilkes sometimes had high visitors here: Mr. Leigh Hunt
quotes a memorandum of his, regarding a dinner here to Counts Woronzow
and Nesselrode; and if we are to set down Sir Philip Francis as Junius,
here Junius visited, as Mrs. Rough said, frequently; and when a child he
once cut off a lock of her hair. Wilkes to the last walked hence to the
city, attired in his scarlet and buff suit, with a cocked hat and
rosette, and military boots, a dress authorised by his position as
colonel of militia. The urn over the doorway Mr. Leigh Hunt imagines to
have been placed there by him as an indication of his classic taste, and
the supposition is most probably correct. No. 5 was the residence for
awhile of Count D’Orsay.
GORE HOUSE.—In 1808, Mr. Wilberforce took this mansion (which had
previously been the residence of a Government contractor) for his home.
He found it, he says, more salubrious than his house at Clapham; and
writes further, “We are just one mile from the turnpike at Hyde Park
Corner, having about three acres of pleasure-ground around our house, or
rather behind it, and several old trees, walnut and mulberry, of thick
foliage. I can sit and read under their shade, with as much admiration
of the beauties of nature as if I were two hundred miles from the great
city.” Here he passed many years of his happy and useful life, his house
the resort of those men who awoke our land from the deadly torpor into
which years of fearful warfare had plunged it. Here came Clarkson,
Zachary Macaulay, Romilly, and others, to commune together on those
measures which, to quote Channing, brought about “the most signal
expression afforded by our times of the progress of civilisation and a
purer Christianity.”
Wilberforce was exceedingly partial to Gore House, and his friends appear
to have always found a ready home within it. In 1814, Mr. Henry
Thornton, for many years M.P. for Southwark, and one of his most earnest
supporters, came here for the benefit of the air and medical aid. He
lingered a few weeks, and died here January 17th, 1815, aged fifty-three.
Isaac Milner, too, an early friend, who came to London to attend the
Board of Longitude, died here after five weeks’ illness, on April 1st,
1820.
The following year Wilberforce quitted Gore House. He retired to Marden,
in Surrey, a lovely spot and an interesting locality; but he regretted
leaving
“The still retreats that soothed his tranquil breast,”
and often in after years alludes to his old home, its associations, and
his “Kensington Gore breakfasts.”
Great is the contrast Gore House next presents: strange are the
mutabilities of a metropolitan mansion. After the philanthropist, a few
unknown persons held the place ere the next celebrity, one of a totally
opposite character, reigned. Lady Blessington—for to her allusion is
made—came here in 1836; and the opposition of ideas called forth by such
persons seems to have suggested to James Smith his
GORE HOUSE: AN IMPROMPTU.
Mild Wilberforce, by all beloved,
Once own’d this hallow’d spot,
Whose zealous eloquence improved
The fetter’d Negro’s lot;
Yet here still slavery attacks
When Blessington invites:
The chains from which he freed the Blacks,
She rivets on the Whites.
Lady Blessington came to Gore House in 1836; and the brilliant circle
which thronged around her in Seamore Place was increased with the greater
capabilities of the new residence. Haydon, writing February 27th, 1835,
says, “Everybody goes to Lady Blessington’s. She has the first news of
everything, and everybody seems delighted to tell her. She is the centre
of more talent and gaiety than any woman of fashion in London.” To Gore
House came novelists and dramatists, artists and actors, statesmen and
refugees. Here Louis Napoleon, just escaped from captivity at Ham, first
came for the shelter of an English roof; and afterwards—deep lesson too—a
few years later she went forth as privately perhaps as her guest had
entered, from the palace of which she had been Queen, to seek in the
capital of him whom she had harboured, that support she had so freely
bestowed on him; the late refugee then having an empire rapidly falling
into his hands; her object was not gained, and on this occasion “hope
left a wretched one that sought her.” Lady Blessington finally quitted
Gore House April 14th, 1849.
Marguerite, Countess of Blessington, was daughter of Edmund Power, a
coarse, unfeeling squire of Tipperary. She was born September 1st, 1790,
and at fifteen married to a Captain Farmer, as brutal a character as her
father. They separated in 1807, and he, compelled to go to India, died
there.
Being denied a home under her father’s roof, she for some years lived in
seclusion and study, but becoming acquainted with the Earl of
Blessington, married him in February, 1818. Then another phase of her
life commenced, and their mansion in St. James’s Square was the resort of
the most fashionable of the day. Her beauty at this time was very great,
and afforded a theme for the pen of Byron, and the pencil of Sir Thomas
Lawrence. With the poet she became acquainted during her well-known
continental tour, during which the introduction to D’Orsay also took
place. Lord Blessington dying at Paris in 1825, his widow remained there
till after the Revolution of 1830, when she returned to London.
Connected with the story of Lady Blessington, that of Count D’Orsay is
intimately woven. He was a great favourite of Lord Blessington, whose
daughter by his first wife was, when quite a young girl, fetched from
school to marry him; and a promise also is said to have been given from
the Count to his Lordship, and from the Count’s mother to Lady
Blessington, that they (the Count and her Ladyship) would never leave
each other. Be that as it may, they lived together for above a quarter
of a century, and increase of years seemed still stronger to consolidate
the engagement. D’Orsay led a gay and extravagant life in London,
considerably beyond his means, in great measure appearing to consider his
patronage sufficient payment. He undoubtedly possessed great abilities,
was an excellent artist, and a humourist of the first water. But his
conduct to his wife was cruel in the extreme; she was spurned by him
entirely; he still pocketing an income from her father’s estates! For a
long time he could only make his exit from Gore House on Sundays, for
fear of arrest, and his extravagancies vastly accelerated the day of
retribution. He and Lady Blessington retired to Paris, and Gore House
was stripped of its contents by public sale. There, whatever was the
cause, they met not with the reception anticipated. Lady Blessington
died soon after, on June 4th, 1849. D’Orsay designed her monument, and
in little more than three years after his career was ended. He died July
1st, 1852.
Gore House became, in 1851, Monsieur Soyer’s “Symposium for all Nations.”
Here that celebrated minister of the interior provided international
feasts, farewell banquets, &c.; and various amusements in the
highly-decorated rooms conduced to the public pleasure. The gardens were
beautifully laid out and ornamented with sculpture, while the interior
testified to the industry and taste of Madame Soyer in the art of
painting. In February, 1852, all was again dismantled, its _Baronial
Hall_ and _Encampment of all Nations_ being sold by auction.
Gore House was shortly afterwards purchased by the Royal Commissioners of
the Great Exhibition of 1851. The whole estate comprised about
twenty-one acres, added to which were Gray’s Nursery Grounds, Park House,
and Grove House, and various market-gardens, the grounds of Cromwell
House, and other lands belonging to the Earl of Harrington and the Baron
de Villars. Acts of Parliament were passed legalising the plans of the
Commissioners, and in accordance various old footpaths, &c., were
stopped, and houses removed. A complete revolution has been effected,
two magnificent roads leading from the Gore to Cromwell Road at Brompton
have been formed, and at length Gore House itself was doomed. Its
materials were sold by lots on July 17th, 1857, and soon after the
building was removed.
Grove House, adjoining Gore House, was for many years the residence of
Lady Elizabeth Whitbread, widow of the celebrated statesman. With Gore
House it has, since 1852, been used for schools and offices of the
department of Science and Art.
Beyond this spot our description does not extend: the district of All
Saints and manor of Knightsbridge stretch much further, but such parts
have been already described by Mr. Faulkner. Ere, however, I quite leave
the Gore, it must be mentioned that, among others, Carrington Bowles, the
celebrated printseller, had a house, and died here June 20th, 1793. The
Rev. Thomas Clare, vicar of St. Bride’s, Fleet Street, and an author of
some repute, also at one time resided here.
KINNERTON STREET is so called from an estate belonging to the Grosvenor
family. Here is a dissecting school and anatomical museum attached to
St. George’s Hospital.
KNIGHTSBRIDGE GREEN, formed by the junction of the Kensington and Fulham
Roads, was formerly of greater extent than at the present time. It was
formerly the village green in reality, and its last Maypole was preserved
as lately as 1800. At its east end was, till about 1835, a watch-house
and pound, and Addison, in a humorous paper in the “Spectator,” alludes
to it. Proposing to satisfy by home news the craving for intelligence
occasioned by the just concluded war, he writes,—“By my last advices from
Knightsbridge, I hear that a horse was clapped into the pound on the
third instant, and that he was not released when the letters came
away.”—(_Spectator_, No. 142.)
The greater part of the Green is now covered by Middle Row, a medley of
very inferior houses. On the north side is an old inn (rebuilt in 1851)
called after the bluff Marquis of Granby. The soldier has been
dethroned, and Sir Joseph Paxton promoted in his stead.
Vernon, the Butcher Cumberland, Wolfe, Hawke,
Prince Ferdinand, Granby, Burgoyne, Keppell, Howe,
Evil and good, have had their tithe of talk,
And fill’d the sign-posts then as Wellesley now.
William Moffatt, who in conjunction with Frederick Wood, surveyed London
and published a valuable and clever map of the levels thereof, lived at
this time in Middle Row. His coadjutor still lives (in indigent
circumstances) in the locality.
The small plot of ground railed in, is said, by a very general tradition,
to have been the spot where the victims of the plague from the Lazar
House and elsewhere in the hamlet were buried. I have strong reasons for
placing faith in this tradition; and in 1808, some human remains found
where now stands William Street were buried here, it being considered the
proper spot for such. King’s Row, built in 1785, has not a cellar to a
single house for this reason. At its end is a detached brick building,
the school-house of All Saints district.
A market was held here till the beginning of the present century for
cattle every Thursday; the last pen-posts were not removed till 1850. A
fair was also held here annually on July 31st.
Grosvenor House, which formed with Mr. Rogers’ premises one tenement, was
for many years the residence of the Gosling family, who were for a long
while connected with the hamlet. Francis Gosling, Esq., an eminent
banker, lived here; he died February 25th, 1817. Bennett Gosling, Esq.,
his nephew, resided in Lowndes Square, where he died, May 12th, 1855.
The “Pakenham” was built as the hotel for an intended railway terminus.
On its site was an old house, many years the residence of Mr. Egg, the
founder of the well-known firm of gunsmiths in Piccadilly.
KNIGHTSBRIDGE TERRACE till within the last five-and-twenty years had not
a shop in it. Every house was private, and had a deep basement area in
front. The corner house, now divided, was for many years Mr. Telfair’s
“College for the Deaf and Dumb.” James Telfair died in 1796, aged 84;
his son, Cortez Telfair, died April 23rd, 1816, aged 65. Both were
buried at Kensington, and in the church is a tablet to their memory. It
states Cortez Telfair to have been celebrated for his literary
attainments; but what these were I have not been able to learn, other
than that, in 1775, he edited “The Town and Country Spelling Book.” {147}
In one of the houses immediately facing the Chapel resided for many years
Maurice Morgann, Esq., author of an “Essay on the Character of Falstaff,”
and Under-Secretary of State to the first administration of Lord
Shelburne. He was also Secretary to the Embassy for ratifying the Peace
with the United States in 1783.
Besides his remarkable “Essay on Falstaff,” he published “Remarks on the
Slave Trade,” a useful and earnest pamphlet. In the “Gentleman’s
Magazine,” December, 1815, a writer endeavoured to fix on him the
authorship of the “Heroic Epistle to Sir William Chambers,” now known to
have been concocted by Mason and Walpole, but published under the
pseudonyme of “Malcolm M‘Gregor, of Knightsbridge, Esq.” But Dr.
Symmons, Morgann’s friend and executor, denied the ownership, and
declared his repeated injunctions were, that all his papers should be
destroyed, and that he never published any but those with his name.
Symmons had previously said, “Some of those writings destroyed, in the
walks of politics, metaphysics, and criticism, would have planted a
permanent laurel on his grave.” {148} Mr. Morgann is one who has an
honourable niche in Boswell’s inimitable “Life of Johnson.”
Morgann afterwards removed to High Row, where he died March 28th, 1802,
in his seventy-seventh year. “As a man, he stood detached from the
general contagion of the age he lived in; neither complying with the
vices of the great, however familiar or seductive, nor with their
frivolities, however general or imposing. His mind was compounded of
pure and simple elements, which inseparably mixed in his business, his
friendships, and intercourse with all mankind; and it was often no less
pleasing to his friends, than to the lovers of virtue in general, to see
with what lustre those plain but prepossessing colours outshone the glare
of fashion, and the accommodating varnish of modern morals.” {149a}
LOWNDES SQUARE, so named from William Lowndes, Esq., of Chesham, to whom
the land belongs. According to Dr. King, rector of Chelsea (1694 to
1732), in his MS. account of that parish, {149b} this site at one time
belonged to a Benedictine convent. It certainly formed part of the gift
of Edward the Confessor to the Abbey, but has been in lay hands ever
since the Reformation. At about where William Street joins the Square
stood a large detached house, formerly a place of amusement, and known as
Spring Garden. Dr. King mentions it as “an excellent Spring Garden.”
{149c} And among the entries of “The Virtuosi, or St. Luke’s Club,”
Established by Vandyke, is the following allusion:—
“Paid and spent at Spring Gardens, by Knightsbridge, forfeiture £3 15
shgs.” {149d}
That enjoyable chronicler, Pepys, too, I fancy alludes to Spring Gardens
in the following entry in his “Diary.” It must be premised that the
hearty clerk of the Admiralty had been to Kensington, and there, as was
frequently his wont, had had what he innocently and amusingly terms a
“frolic”:—
“June 16, 1664. I lay in my drawers, and stockings, and waistcoat
till five of the clock, and so up, and being well pleased with our
frolic, walked to Knightsbridge, and there ate a mess of cream, and
so to St. James’,” &c.
And again he chronicles (April 24th, 1665) a visit to the Park. “But the
King being there, and I now-a-days being doubtful of being seen in any
pleasure, did part from the town, and away out of the Park to
Knightsbridge, and there ate and drank in the coach and so home.”
Spring Gardens was at this time a name applied to almost all places of
outdoor recreation, the appellation being borrowed from the celebrated
garden near Charing Cross. But Pepys speaks also of a place of
entertainment called “The World’s End,” at Knightsbridge, which I believe
could have been only the sign adopted by the owner of this garden for his
house. Pepys, on another occasion relating that he went forth to Hyde
Park, was “_too __soon to go in_, so went on to Knightsbridge, and there
ate and drank at the World’s End, where we had good things, and then back
to the Park, and there till night, being fine weather, and much company.”
(“Diary,” May 9th, 1669.) Again, on May 31st in the same year, he
records going “to the World’s End, a drinking-house by the Park, and
there merry, and so home late.”
Congreve, in his “Love for Love,” alludes, in a regular woman’s quarrel,
to the place:—
_Mrs. Frail_.—Pooh, here’s a clutter!—Why should it reflect upon
you?—I don’t doubt but you have thought yourself happy in a hackney
coach before now. If I had gone to Knightsbridge, or to Chelsea, or
to Spring Garden, or Barn Elms, with a man alone—something might have
been said.
_Mrs. Foresight_.—Why, was I ever in any of those places! What do
you mean, sister?
_Mrs. Frail_.—Was I? what do you mean?
_Mrs. Foresight_.—You have been at a worse place.
_Mrs. Frail_.—I at a worse place, and with a man!
_Mrs. Foresight_.—I suppose you would not go alone to the World’s
End?
_Mrs. Frail_.—The World’s End! What do you mean to banter me?
_Mrs. Foresight_.—Poor innocent; you don’t know that there is a place
called the World’s End. I’ll swear you can keep your
countenance—surely you’ll make an admirable player.
_Mrs. Frail_.—I’ll swear you have a great deal of impudence, and, in
my mind, too much for the stage.
_Mrs. Foresight_.—Very well, that will appear who has most. You
never were at the World’s End?
_Mrs. Frail_.—No.
_Mrs. Foresight_.—You deny it positively to my face?
_Mrs. Frail_.—Your face! what’s your face?
_Mrs. Foresight_.—No matter for that, it is as good a face as yours.
_Mrs. Frail_.—Not by a dozen years’ wearing. But I do deny it,
positively, to your face, then.
_Mrs. Foresight_.—I’ll allow you now to find fault with my face; for
I’ll swear your impudence has put me out of countenance. But look
you here now; where did you lose this gold bodkin?—Oh, sister!—oh,
sister!
_Mrs. Frail_.—My bodkin!
_Mrs. Foresight_.—Nay, it is yours—look at it.
_Mrs. Frail_.—Well, if you go to that, where did you find this
bodkin? Oh sister! sister! sister every way!
_Mrs. Foresight_.—Oh! devil on’t that I could not discover her
without betraying myself. (_Aside_.)
The house belonging to this garden stood till about 1826. For many years
it was the residence of a Dr. C. Kelly, who here had an anatomical
museum. He resided here in 1773, and quitted it about 1805. The house
was afterwards tenanted by a gentleman named Bowes; and the museum became
the auction-room of Mr. Herring. About 1818, Warren, builder to George
III., took the premises; he turned the whole into workshops. After him
came Mr. Cubitt, who, about 1828, procuring a lease from Mr. Lowndes,
pulled the whole down, and laid out the ground for buildings. The first
houses were erected about 1836–7, but it was not till 1849 that the
square was wholly completed.
Various relics of the Civil War have been found on this site: arms,
spurs, bits, cockades, &c.; and relics telling of a different kind of
struggle—staves and handcuffs, evidences of successful rencontres between
the footpad and the constable. A path by the stream’s side ran along to
Bloody Bridge, proceeding thence to Ranelagh. On grand gala nights such
paths were protected by patrols and the more able of the Chelsea
Pensioners.
Among the eminent inhabitants of Lowndes Square may be enumerated the
late Sir William Molesworth and Mr. Leader, M.P. for Westminster, at No.
1; Mr. M. J. Higgins, celebrated for his contributions on military
matters to the _Times_, also lived at No. 1. He is thus delineated by
Mrs. Gascoigne in her poem, “Belgravia:”—
“Nor whilst my muse still haunts these favourite bounds,
Shall she forget to sing thy Square, O Lowndes!
Harbour of peace, near which the troubled sea
Of human traffic roars unceasingly,
Yet enters not—though day by day it swells
Fiercer and fiercer; at the opening dwells
A man whom rage and clamour ne’er withstood,
The well-known champion of the neighbourhood!
Him all who seek oppression view with fear,
For sharp his wit, his mind acute and clear!
With subtlest force, he wields the powerful pen.
But aims it at abuses, not at men!
Him Vestries know, and Rate Collectors dread,
For cool his spirit—hard his reasoning head;
And though a giant in his strength he be,
Yet free from Tyrant’s love of rule is he;
And whilst men seek, and to his judgment bend,
They find in him a leader and a friend.” {154}
Mrs. Gascoigne, author of “Belgravia,” “Spencer’s Cross Manor House,”
“The Next Door Neighbours,” and other works, resides at No. 14. Admiral
Sotheby, one who fought at the Nile, lived at No. 38, and died January,
20th, 1854. Sir Henry Campbell, who died in 1856, Sir Willoughby Cotton,
Mr. Tite, M.P., Mr. Brassey, the extensive contractor, Mr. Whiteside,
M.P., Mr. R. B. Wingfield, and Mr. Malins, M.P., number also among the
inhabitants of Lowndes Square.
The row of houses on the south side was designed by Mr. Lewis Cubitt, and
with greater regard to architectural effect than anything of its kind
then in the metropolis. It was built in 1843.
LOWNDES TERRACE—A row of shops between William Street and Sloane Street,
occupying the site of a row of old-fashioned houses, of two storeys high,
with pleasant gardens in front and rear, giving the roadway quite a rural
appearance. The house at the eastern end belonged to one Banting, who
built some projecting shops over the front gardens in 1815, and named the
row Waterloo Market. His expectations were not realised; and in 1823
these old premises were removed, and the present houses erected. There
were but six houses. At No. 5 resided, fifty years ago, Andrews, an
artist of some repute in his day; and at No. 6 for some years lived the
mother of Rodwell, the author and composer; and her son’s early years
were partly passed at this pleasant spot.
At the west end of this row a narrow lane, called Porter’s Lane, led to
the fields. On its right-hand side, and divided from it by a hedge,
stood a large detached mansion, known as Knightsbridge Grove, approached
through a fine avenue of stately trees from the highway. For many years
a man named Hicks, a “sporting character,” kept the place, and George
IV., when Prince of Wales, and others of similar tastes, were led hither.
Mr. Egg, the gunmaker, once erected a large wooden building for some
balloon experiments in the grounds. And this was, I believe, the house
where the notorious Teresa Cornellys attempted to recover her bygone
reputation.
Teresa Cornellys was a native of Germany; and early showing an
inclination to music, was brought up to it as a profession, and soon
became celebrated on the Continent as a public singer. Having
accumulated a considerable sum of money, she came to England, about 1757;
and her fame gradually becoming known, she was induced, in 1763, to open
Carlisle House, Soho Square, as a place of public entertainment. None
but the upper classes were admitted, and the rooms were decorated in the
most costly manner. Her balls, concerts, and masquerades soon gained
great celebrity, being carried on in a most glaring and extravagant
style. And this was not all: her masquerades were characterised, not
only by indecency, but also by mockery of the most solemn feelings and
principles. {157a} The lessees of the theatres were injured by her
popularity, and stimulated the outcry which began to arise; and at length
she was convicted before Sir John Fielding for performing dramatic
entertainments without a licence. The opposition of the managers, and
the Pantheon opening with a class of amusements somewhat similar in 1772,
with the restraint imposed by the magistrate’s decision, combined to ruin
her; and in August, 1772, her effects were sold by auction, and she
became a bankrupt. {157b}
The allusions to Mrs. Cornellys in contemporary literature are
innumerable; Murphy, in his Epilogue to _Zobeide_, 1771, refers to her
popularity:—
“Oh, farewell!
For her each haunt that charms a modern belle!
Adieu, Almack’s! Cornellys’! masquerade!
Sweet Ranelagh! Vauxhall’s enchanting shade!” &c.
This allusion will suffice for one view of her career. The opposite is
severely described by Combe, in his satire “The Diabolady,” published in
1777:—
“The ready ministers of hell’s commands,
Obedient fly, and take their several stands
At Court, Cornellys’, and the Coterie;
Where vice, more vicious by effrontery,
Fearless, unblushing, braves the eternal laws
Of God and man to aid the devil’s cause.”
After her bankruptcy she followed her profession for several years at
various places in London, but in 1785 was obliged to retire from the
importunities of her creditors. Ten years after, to the great surprise
of the public, she reappeared at Knightsbridge as Mrs. Smith, a retailer
of asses’ milk. A suite of breakfast-rooms was opened; but her former
influence could not be recovered. The speculation utterly failed; and at
length she was consigned to the Fleet Prison. There she ended her
shallow career, dying August 19, 1797.
Immediately beyond the entrance to the Grove stood Messrs. Downing’s
floor-cloth manufactory, formerly Morley and Downing’s. It was a
pleasant detached house, with a clean white front, and conspicuous green
verandahs. It was pulled down in 1823, and the manufacturing department
removed to the King’s Road.
MONTPELIER SQUARE, so called from the salubrity of its air, {159} was
built about 1837. Mr. Fairholt, the distinguished artist and antiquary
(at No. 10), Mr. Walter Lacy (38), Dr. Morison (27), and the Rev.
Mackenzie Walcot, to whose writings on the city of Westminster I owe
several obligations, are among its residents.
NEW STREET, built, I believe, about 1773, was a new street across the
fields to Sloane Street, and is the point dividing Knightsbridge and
Brompton—formerly, according to the landladies, a very “respectable”
street; it has in our day sadly changed. At No. 7, Chalon, the animal
painter, resided; and at No. 6, the Right Hon. David Pigott in 1824 and
’25, while studying under Mr., afterwards Chief Justice, Tindal. Mr.
Godwin, the editor of the _Builder_, also in his boyhood. In Exeter
Street resided a family named Perrin, one of whom it has been said was
employed by the Duchess of Kingston to furnish a place of meeting between
Prince George, afterwards George III., and his fair _inamorata_, Hannah
Lightfoot. {160} The Perrins appear to have long resided in
Knightsbridge; entries of the name occur in the registers of Trinity
Chapel as far back as 1680.
PARK SIDE, abutting on the south side of Hyde Park, is a part of the
manor of Knightsbridge, although eastward of the stream, and is the
freehold of the Dean and Chapter of Westminster. The Birkheads were once
the lessees; at present it is rented by the descendants of Mr. Gamble, of
Trinity Chapel. The row of petty shops at its east end were erected
about fifty years since, the houses formerly extending no further than
the one now occupied by Miss Marshall. The Knightsbridge Bank, a private
concern, was carried on in Mr. W. Stocken’s house, and these shops were
offices belonging thereto.
Just within the park is a conduit, which supplies the palace with spring
water; a descent of three steps in the main road led to a receptacle for
its supply to the inhabitants of Knightsbridge, which still exists in
another form. Close to this “spring,” as it is termed, the stocks were
placed for the punishment of village sots and rogues. No hamlet around
the “great wen,” as Cobbett called the metropolis, was without one.
Taylor, the water-poet, says—
“In London, and within a mile, I ween,
There are of jails or prisons full eighteen,
And sixty whipping-posts, and stocks, and cages!” {161a}
At No. 10 resided for many years John Read, a man of great benevolence of
character, of scientific celebrity, and of high repute in the locality.
He was born in 1726, and being brought up as a mathematical
instrument-maker, settled in Knightsbridge about 1754. He became known
for his researches into electricity, {161b} and published, in 1793, an
octavo volume, entitled “A Summary View of the Spontaneous Electricity of
the Earth and Atmosphere,” an accurate and judicious work; but it led him
into a controversy with Dr. Peart, a writer on the same subject. He also
studied meteorology, and a journal on that subject he contributed to the
“Philosophical Transactions.”
Other points of his history are told on the stone to his memory in St.
George’s Ground, Bayswater, where he was buried. The inscription I
subjoin:—
Sacrum Memoriæ
of
MR. JOHN READ,
Mathematical Instrument Maker,
a Native of
WHALLEY IN LANCASHIRE,
who died at
KNIGHTSBRIDGE
(where he had resided nearly sixty years)
on the 22nd day of September, 1814,
in the 88th year of his Age.
Without Patron, or Patrimony, by the honest fruits of Industry, he
laid the foundation of an easy competence. More indebted to Prudence
than Fortune for his acquisitions; but to Temperance alone for his
length of days. A deep Researcher of the latent causes of Nature’s
Phenomena; her vital Principle, he held in obedience, while he
enriched the science of Electricity with his experiments. Pleased in
the pursuit of Knowledge, and happy in the practice of Virtue; He was
a Philosopher with a benevolent heart, the Father of the
Knightsbridge Charity School; of the Free School of his native place
the Revivor. He lived an Example worthy of imitation, and died
without a groan.
Thus lived John Read, and so his spirit fled
And here his ashes mingle with the Dead.
Mr. Thomas Goding, founder of the well-known brewing firm, lived at No.
12.
The Queen’s Head, an old inn next the Chapel, was pulled down in 1843.
The house was once very curious inside, but had been considerably
altered. On its removal the date 1576 was found inscribed in the
brickwork.
The White Hart was more curious than the Queen’s Head, and retained its
characteristics to the last, when it was removed for the Albert Gate
improvements. Human remains, various ancient implements, and coins were
turned up below its foundation. A filthy court ran from it along the
bank of the stream. I have seen a memorandum of agreement by which a
house next door to the White Hart was let in 1694 for _five pounds per
annum_.
PRINCES GATE.—Two terraces are so called, very absurdly. {163} The real
gate is an entrance to the Park opposite, named after the Prince of
Wales, and opened in October, 1848. It stands on the highest plot of
ground between Hyde Park Corner and Windsor Castle.
Of the western terrace Mr. Leigh Hunt complains that “each house is too
high for its width,” and says “they resemble a set of tall thin gentlemen
squeezing together to look at something over the way.” I cannot agree
with Mr. Hunt’s humour, and consider them a very handsome and pleasing
row. Mr. Elmes, architect of St. George’s Hall, was designer, I believe,
and Mr. Elger the builder; the eastern row was finished in 1851, the
western in 1855. At No. 23, Vice-Chancellor Parker resided for a short
while before his death. Between the two terraces stands
KINGSTON HOUSE, built about 1770, a large and pleasant mansion, and when
first erected attracting notice by the conservatory attached to it. In
this conservatory is a large window, representing a garden scene, painted
by John Martin when a pupil of Charles Muss, the enamel painter.
Elizabeth Chudleigh was daughter of a Devonshire gentleman, who died when
she was very young; but her mother having interest with Mr. Pulteney, she
was appointed, at the age of eighteen, maid of honour to the Princess of
Wales, mother to George III. In the aristocratic circle into which she
was now introduced, she soon became a great favourite, and more than one
young scion of nobility cast a lover’s eye towards her. The young Duke
of Hamilton was, however, the successful one; and the pledge of affiance
passed mutually. He set forth on his travels, and she retired to the
residence of an aunt, Mrs. Hanmer, where she found one of the most
frequent visitors was the Hon. Mr. Hervey. He seems to have made up his
mind instantly; but aware of her pledge to the duke, he induced Mrs.
Hanmer to intercept their letters. The result of the scheme was as
Hervey expected: no letters arriving, Miss Chudleigh believed herself
slighted; and wrought on by the persuasions of Mrs. Hanmer, agreed to
accept Captain Hervey. They were married privately, August 4th, 1744,
but separated the day after, she continuing to fill her office as maid of
honour. The dissimulation this compelled her to practise was probably
the main cause of her after misfortunes; it was only by the knowledge
that he would be compelled to maintain her, that Captain Hervey could be
induced not to assert his claim; and her union being unknown at Court,
she was still as much courted as ever. Home came Hamilton—he had been
faithful to her—and demanded that explanation she was not able
(unaccountably to him) to give, offered his hand again, which, of course,
she was compelled to refuse. His despair was excessive; inquiries were
made, and the duplicity of Mrs. Hanmer unveiled.
Unfortunately, instead of allowing time to soothe her sorrows, she began
to drown them in a manner which showed a disregard of her sex and
position. To escape the torrent of torment, she resolved to travel; but
unwilling to go alone, was indiscreet enough to advertise in the
newspapers for a companion. She succeeded, and off they started; but, as
might have been expected, were soon tired of each other, and separated at
Berlin. Here she was introduced to the great Frederick, who treated her
with great distinction.
Returning home, she plunged into all the dissipation which then
characterised society in the metropolis; but again her husband crossed
her path and seemed determined to claim her, and finding remonstrance
useless, she resorted to the dishonest stratagem of tearing out the leaf
bearing the register of her marriage. Her husband had now no power to
prove their union, as the clergyman who performed the ceremony was dead.
This step she soon regretted; for Captain Hervey, succeeding to the
Earldom of Bristol, by his father’s death, her vanity made the rank of
Countess very acceptable, and through the clerk she succeeded in
replacing in the register-book the leaf she had abstracted.
Such was her position when the Duke of Kingston offered her his hand. Of
course such was impossible; and accordingly they lived together for
several years, but with such observance of external decorum, that though
a moral, it was not an evidenced certainty. Her husband, on negotiations
being opened, refused to gratify her with the title of Duchess; but a
separation afterwards suiting his own wishes, he agreed not to oppose her
application for a divorce, and the necessary proofs being withheld, it
was granted. She now attained her wishes, and was married to the Duke
March 8th, 1769.
While the Duke lived, the legality of the marriage was not questioned;
but he died September 24th, 1773, and left her his whole fortune, on
condition she did not marry again—a restraint she was by no means
inclined to abide by. She, however, set out for Rome, where Ganganelli
gave her apartments in the palace of one of his cardinals, and otherwise
showed her distinction. Here, however, her gaiety was soon stopped by
news of a disagreeable nature from home.
A Mrs. Cradock had been present as a domestic at her marriage with Lord
Bristol, and, being in reduced circumstances, applied to the Duchess’s
solicitor for relief; he, discrediting her tale, refused any, on which
she went to Mr. Evelyn Pierrepoint, nephew of the Duke, and informed him
of every particular. He thereupon preferred an indictment for bigamy
against the Duchess, of which being informed, she, after surmounting
various obstacles, landed at Dover, and was immediately bailed before
Lord Mansfield, preparatory to taking her trial.
Before, however, that came on, an unexpected enemy appeared. Foote,
imagining the case to afford capital material for his wit, wrote a piece,
called “The Trip to Calais,” in which the Duchess was cleverly satirised
as _Lady Kitty Crocodile_. Foote, whose real object was to obtain a sum
of money to suppress the piece, contrived to let her know what was astir;
and the Duchess, alarmed for once most terribly, sent for him. He waited
on, and read her a part of his play. She felt the sting, and rose in
great passion, declaring his delineation scandalous. He denied that the
character was intended for her ladyship, and the play was left for her
perusal. An intimation was made as Foote expected; but he refusing the
offer of £1,600, and declaring he would not abate one shilling from the
£2,000 demanded, he lost all; for her friends interceding with the Lord
Chamberlain, he sent for, and censured the play. Foote published a
letter of remonstrance, but the Duchess making every preparation for an
action at law, he was completely defeated. A paper-war ensued, in which
Foote had the advantage, greatly to the amusement, if not edification, of
the public.
On April 15th, 1776, her trial commenced in Westminster Hall, Lord
Bathurst sitting as Lord Steward. She was convicted; but pleading the
privilege of the peerage, was discharged with a caution.
She left England immediately, and passed the rest of her life abroad.
She purchased a magnificent estate near Fontainebleau, where she died,
August 20th, 1788. {170a}
After the death of the Duchess of Kingston, her mansion at Knightsbridge
became the residence, successively, of Sir George Warren, Lord Stair,
Lord Listowel, and the Marquis of Wellesley, brother of the great Duke of
Wellington, and himself one of the foremost statesmen of the time. He
resided at Kingston House some years, living in great retirement, and
died in it September 26th, 1842, in his 83rd year. {170b}
Kingston House was, after Lord Wellesley’s death, again the residence of
the Earl of Listowel, to whom the freehold belonged; and it is at present
inhabited by his son, the present earl. {170c}
QUEEN’S BUILDINGS, commenced about 1770, and was named after Queen
Charlotte. That part of it between Sloane Street and Hooper’s Court was
originally called Queen’s Row, the remainder Queen’s Buildings,
Knightsbridge, and at one time Gloucester Buildings.
First, I will notice Queen’s Row. Here, in 1772, the celebrated
engraver, William Wynne Ryland, resided. Ryland was born in 1732, and,
inclining towards the profession of an engraver, became a pupil of Simon
Revenet, then established in this country. On quitting him, his
godfather, Sir Watkin Williams Wynne, sent him to Paris, where he studied
under Francis Boucher, and J. P. Le Bas. After four years sojourn he
returned to England, and was appointed engraver to the King. He was the
first person who introduced into this country the style of engraving in
the chalk manner, applying himself chiefly to the pictures of Angelica
Kauffman. This system he greatly improved, and in it had no equal.
Strutt laments that his “mercantile engagements should have occupied so
valuable a part of his precious time, and prevented his pursuing the art
with that alacrity his genius required, which seemed formed for great and
extensive exertions.” He commenced business originally in Cornhill, but
here became bankrupt. He afterwards came to Knightsbridge, where he
resided till the dreadful act was discovered which consigned him to the
gallows.
On July 26th, 1783, he was tried before Judge Buller, for forging a bill
of exchange for £200. He well-nigh escaped; the forgery being so
beautifully executed that it was only the evidence of the paper-maker
which convicted him. Great exertions were made to save him, but
fruitlessly; and he was executed at Tyburn, August 29th, 1783. A few
months after, the stream being cleared of some of its mud, in order to
widen the roadway within the Park, a tin box containing some of the
unfortunate man’s plates for counterfeiting banknotes, was discovered.
{172}
No. 14 (corner of Hooper’s Court) was from 1792 to 1797 the residence of
Mr. J. C. Nattes, an artist of celebrity in his time. About the year
1800 this house became the residence of the celebrated Arthur Murphy.
Arthur Murphy was born at Cork in 1727. Early in life he was sent to St.
Omer’s, where he studied till his eighteenth year, when he returned to
Cork, and passed two years as clerk in a merchant’s counting-house. At
the end of this time he came to London, and entered a banking-house in a
similar capacity. But literature captivated him, the drama especially,
and it soon absorbed his mind.
[Picture: The House in which Murphy lived, 14, Queen’s Buildings]
His first publication, the “Gray’s Inn Journal,” commenced October 21st,
1752, and continued for nearly two years. But his prospects changing by
an uncle’s death, he, in October, 1754, betook himself to the stage,
appearing at Covent Garden, and performing _Othello_, _Hamlet_,
_Macbeth_, &c. But it was apparent an actor’s life he could not follow;
Churchill severely lashed him in the “Rosciad,” and Murphy retaliated in
an ode, an effusion as coarse as his opponent’s attack.
To literature he now mainly turned his attention. In 1756 he produced
“The Apprentice,” a farce, for Garrick; in 1758 “The Upholsterer,” and in
the ensuing two years “The Orphan of China,” “The Desert Island,” and
“The Way to Keep Him;” and in 1761 he published “All in the Wrong,” “The
Citizen,” and “The Old Maid.”
In the year 1757 he applied for admission to the Middle Temple, but, on
the ground of being an actor, was refused; he, however, induced Lord
Mansfield to interfere on his behalf, and through this influence he
entered Lincoln’s Inn. He was called to the Bar in 1762, and eventually
became leader of the Norfolk Circuit. Lord Loughborough also gave him a
Commissionership of Bankrupts—an office he held till his death.
The study of “Coke upon Littleton” was not, however, sufficiently
attractive to wean him from his literary pursuits, and several plays, all
of which were highly popular, appeared in rapid succession. Among these
were his celebrated “Grecian Daughter” and “Know your own Mind.” This
latter piece, published in 1777, was written for Mr. Harris, and was the
last he brought on the stage.
Besides these he also published an edition of Fielding’s works, with a
preliminary essay on his life and writings, an “Essay on the Life and
Genius of Dr. Johnson,” a translation of Tacitus, and various others.
In 1788 he retired to Hammersmith, where he resided till 1800; he then
came to Knightsbridge, and here, with the exception of a short time in
Brompton Row, he resided till his death. In this house his “Life of
Garrick” was written; he appears to have been happy and comfortable in
it, occupying the first and second floors, and having a neat and
intelligent landlady, whose interest he secured by procuring her son a
presentation to Christ’s Hospital. He died June 18th, 1805, frequently
repeating during the day the couplet of Pope—
“Taught half by reason, half by mere decay,
To welcome Death, and calmly pass away.”
It was to Murphy, Johnson owed his introduction to Mr. Thrale. “I
question,” says Madame D’Arblay, “if Mr. Thrale loved any man so well.”
With Reynolds and Burke, too, he was intimate, and reviewed the latter’s
“Essay on the Sublime and Beautiful.” At Knightsbridge he became
intimate with Maurice Morgann; but from the singular construction put by
the latter on the characters of Shakespeare’s plays, silence on these
points was bespoke in their interviews. Morgann died before Murphy, who
deeply regretted, Mr. Foote tells us, his friend’s death. {175}
At the corner of Sloane Street, and occupying the site of the first four
houses in it, was the Swan, an ancient and well-known hostelrie—a place
of great trade in former times. The sign still exists at No. 5, Sloane
Street; and that of the “Clock House” is also the same. Indeed the
latter was only the “tap” to the former, and the separation of interests
has not occurred above forty years. The old house was pulled down about
1777 or 1778. Otway, in “The Soldier’s Fortune,” alludes to it:—
_Sir Davy Dunce_.—“I have surely lost, and ne’er shall find her more.
She promised me strictly to stay at home till I came back again; for
aught I know, she may be up three pair of stairs in the Temple now;
or it may be, taking the air, as far as Knightsbridge, with some
smooth-faced rogue or another; ’tis a damned house that Swan,—that
Swan at Knightsbridge is a confounded house.”
Tom Brown also celebrates the Swan; and Dr. Wolcot (Peter Pindar) lays
the scene of one of his coarse effusions there:—
“At Knightsbridge, at a tavern called the Swan,
Churchwardens, overseers, a jolly clan,
Ordered a dinner for themselves—
A very handsome dinner of the best, &c.”
Beyond Hooper’s Court (so called from its owner) Mr. J. G. Huck, an
artist, lived at No. 11; Ozias Humphry in 1792 and 1793 at No. 19
(Mitchell’s). At 21, Thomas Trotter, an ingenious engraver and
draughtsman, especially in portraits. He died February 14th, 1803, and
was buried in the Broadway ground, Westminster.
At No. 7 resided Michael Underwood, M.D., one of the most distinguished
members of the medical profession then living. He wrote several
professional works, which, notwithstanding the advance of the science,
yet maintain their reputation. He attended Caroline of Brunswick at the
birth of the Princess Charlotte. Was a very benevolent man and the
gratuitous adviser to the poor of the whole neighbourhood. He died here
March 14th, 1820.
RUTLAND HOUSE, a large red-brick mansion, occupied the site of the
present Rutland Gate. John, Duke of Rutland, who bore the sceptre at the
coronation of George III., and once filled the office of Lord Lieutenant
of Ireland, died here May 29th, 1779, aged 88. The celebrated Marquis of
Granby, his son, also resided here. {177} The whole estate, consisting
of above six acres, was offered for sale by Mr. Robins in 1833, but was
bought in, and in a year or two after the house was pulled down, and the
land let for building. It belongs to Furzon Manners, Esq., now, a
descendant of the Viceroy.
Rutland Gate was commenced in 1838, and completed as far as Clytha House
in 1840. The remainder has been built since, the whole being completed
in 1856.
The large detached house on the western side (24) was built by John
Sheepshanks, Esq., the distinguished patron of British Art, who here
gathered together that choice and valuable collection which he has so
nobly presented to the nation. The collection was removed early in 1857.
Clytha House, the residence of Lord Edward Howard, was built for Mr.
Jones, of Clytha, who here gathered a collection, chiefly of the early
Italian schools, which was sold May 8th, 1852.
[Picture: The Half-way House]
Poor Eliot Warburton dated the second edition of his “Crescent and the
Cross” from Rutland Gate; at 21 resides Mr. Edward Corbould, one of our
finest delineators of female beauty; No. 22 was the residence of the
Marchioness Wellesley, widow of the eminent statesman; Mr. Albert Way,
the antiquary, Mr. Cotton and Mr. Prescott, both governors of the Bank of
England, also number among the residents of Rutland Gate. Nearly
opposite the western end of Rutland Gate, built in the roadway, stood an
old inn, of very bad character at one time, called the “Halfway House.”
An unusual array of stabling, troughs, pig-styes, &c., in a very
unsightly manner, were built along the causeway; and over the door were
several proofs of the faith in the old superstition that horse-shoes were
a preventive to the visits of evil spirits. In one sense the charm was
not efficacious, the house, from its lonely situation, being a resort for
the highwayman and footpad. A curious notice of a trial is given in
“Knight’s London,” where the thief-taker stated that if not met about
this spot, they should not have caught the robber at all: a proof of
their frequency, indeed! Jerry Abershaw is said to have been a visitor
here, and when the house was pulled down a secret staircase from a small
chamber in the western part of the house was found built in the wall, to
lead gradually down into the stables. Many a villain, doubtless, thus
escaped when the officers of justice were close upon him.
The “Halfway House” was pulled down in 1846 at an expense of £3,050, in
addition to the purchase of the fee. {180}
ST. GEORGE’S HOSPITAL.—A number of gentlemen of the medical profession,
dissenting from the system of management carried on at Westminster
Hospital, broke off their connection with it, and engaged Lanesborough
House for a new institution, conducted under their own auspices.
[Picture: Lanesborough House, afterwards St. George’s Hospital]
Lanesborough House is described by Pennant as the _country house_ of the
eccentric nobleman immortalised by Pope:—
“Old politicians chew on wisdom past,
And totter on in business to the last,
As weak, as earnest, and as gravely out,
As sober Lanesbro’ dancing with the gout.”
He caused the following quaint distich to be inscribed on the house front
in reference to its situation:—
“It is my delight to be
Both in town and country.”
The allusion of Pope to the dancing propensities of this nobleman is
curiously borne out by the fact, that when Prince George of Denmark died
he sought an interview with the widowed Queen, and advised her to dispel
her grief by following his favourite amusement. Not till disabled
entirely by the gout did he give up this relaxation. The “Golden
Gallery” around the dome of St. Paul’s was gilded at his expense.
Lanesborough House was of red brick, three storeys high, with one small
doorway, approached by three or four steps to the centre; the new
authorities added two wings, also of red brick, and on January 1st, 1734,
the institution was opened, having been established on October 19th,
1733.
One of those who took a leading part in this foundation was John Allen,
apothecary to the household of George I., George II., and George III.
successively. He remained a governor till his death, on March 17th,
1774. Another staunch supporter was the celebrated anatomist, Cheselden,
the friend of Pope and other literary men. Some of his greatest
operations were performed here. He was also surgeon to Chelsea Hospital,
and in its graveyard lies buried.
The hospital gradually increased in wealth and usefulness, till in 1784
the governors issued advertisements asking for increased aid to prevent
its decay. This arose from the fact that a large legacy left by a Mrs.
Crayle caused an idea to be spread abroad that further aid of this kind
was hardly wanted. Its legacies had been a main source of income; they
now fell off, and the Crayle bequest being reversionary, the income
rapidly fell, and at Christmas, 1783, the institution was above £1,900 in
debt; but a third of the profits of the Handel Festival held in
Westminster Abbey in 1784 enabled the governors to overcome their
difficulties.
The celebrated John Hunter was one of the eminent men who have been
connected with St. George’s Hospital. He was appointed surgeon in 1768,
and always took an active part in its management. Here on October 16th,
1793, his life was suddenly terminated. He had long disputed a matter of
right with his colleagues, and in an altercation he was flatly
contradicted, when a trifling address might have turned aside the
quarrel. He rushed into an adjoining room and there fell into the arms
of Dr. Robertson, one of the physicians, and his life was gone in an
instant.
The increasing prosperity and demand on the Hospital proved at last that
the old building did not afford the necessary accommodation, and
accordingly its destruction was resolved on. This was effected in 1827,
and the present building erected from designs by Wilkins. The old front
was towards Hyde Park; the new one faces the Green Park, and is rendered
imposing by its bold and massive tetrastyle portico, supported by square
columns. Besides its numerous wards, here are a chapel, museum,
lecture-room, and private apartments. The museum, so valuable to the
surgeon, is not adapted for the public, unless to point a moral to the
vicious and unwary. The mere curiosities are interesting; among them is
the half-sovereign taken from Mr. Brunel’s windpipe, by Sir Benjamin
Brodie, presented by its proprietor; the hide of the cow from which
Jenner took the first vaccine matter; a packet of needles, which came
simultaneously from the frame of a young lady, money and knives from
patients’ stomachs, and other similar relics.
One regular fund is yet wanting to render the institution complete. Many
a fellow-creature, who is entirely destitute, enters here, and, when
recovered, re-enters the world, without a roof to shelter his weakened
frame, or the wherewithal to obtain the common necessaries of life. Of
late this has been to a certain extent remedied. A porcelain slab has
been let into the wall (a corner-stone of faith it has been called)
bearing the simple inscription—“In aid of those patients who leave this
Hospital homeless and in need.” Ought such an appeal to rest solely on
the charity of the busy multitudes passing by? To announce such a fund
would, I believe, ensure its success.
In the burial-ground of St. George’s parish at Bayswater, is a headstone
inscribed—
“Sacred to the Memory of the Rev. James Clarke,
who died June 9th, 1811, aged 85 years.
During fifty-one of which he discharged the duties of Chaplain
to St. George’s Hospital, with credit to himself, and benefit to
the Institution.”
St. George’s Hospital formed a theme for one of Miss Landon’s poems.
ST. GEORGE’S PLACE, till of late years, consisted of old-fashioned
houses, about two storeys high. About 1827 the first improvement was
made by the opening of Wilton Place, and gradually these old houses have
been pulled down to make room for superior ones. Towards the upper end,
these houses were detached. In one of them lived a Captain Warner, one
of the heroes of Quebec. About 1829, Liston lived at No. 7, and at No.
12 for many years resided Mr. Richards, a well-known London auctioneer,
who died here in 1810.
At No. 14 resided for many years the mother of Mr. Justice Burton, to
whom belonged the freehold of this strip of land. She died here in 1799.
Her son, Mr. Justice Burton, resided for many years in the house at the
west corner of the entrance to the Barrack. Bred to the law, he became
Recorder of Oxford and a King’s Counsel, and in July, 1778, was appointed
one of the judges of Wales and Chester. He represented Woodstock and
Oxford in several Parliaments, supporting the ministry of William Pitt,
and at last became Father of the Benchers of Lincoln’s Inn. He died in
Brook Street, December, 1832, aged 89. The freehold mentioned was
originally vested in the Laremar family. The first one of whom anything
is known, was one William Laremar, captain of the Loyal Rebecca, a ship
trading to Virginia in 1676, a time when the colony was disturbed by the
rebellion of Nathaniel Bacon; the use of the vessel was given to the
governor, Sir William Berkeley, by whom Laremar was appointed Commodore
in St. James River, and was “maynly instrumental in the suppression of
that rebellion and mutiny,” for which good service he received
compensation from the Admiralty, the secretary of which was then Samuel
Pepys. From the Laremars the property passed to the Burtons, from them
to the Coles, and it is now enjoyed by Owen Blayney Cole, Esq. Liston
also resided at 14 many years; and the next house was once tenanted by
the Tathams, one of whom married Adam Adolphus, brother of the celebrated
counsellor.
In No. 3 of the present houses lived General Campbell, an old Peninsular
veteran. He died in June, 1852. No. 10 is the residence of Mr.
Coningham, M.P. for Brighton, and 11, of James Goding, Esq.
The “White Horse Inn” was formerly established on the site of No. 11.;
afterwards it was removed to the corner of the entrance of the Foot
Barracks, but was pulled down in September, 1856, with three houses, one
of which was Liston’s. Nos. 15 to 20 were built in 1849–50.
From the corner of Wilton Place the row extends ten houses further. No.
28 was Mr. Blore’s, the statuary’s. A house which stood at the corner,
and narrowed the entrance to Wilton Place very considerably, was removed
about 1841. For many years a Mrs. Dowell carried on the business of
tobacconist here. She was an eccentric old damsel, and so exceedingly
partial to the late Duke of Wellington, that she was continually
inventing some new plan whereby to express her regard. She sent him
occasionally patties, cakes, and other similar _delicacies_, and as it
was useless to attempt to defeat the old woman’s pertinacity, everything
was taken in. To such a pitch did she carry this mania, that I have
heard she regularly laid for him at her table, constantly expecting he
would call in. With her lodged William Pickett, who lived in
Knightsbridge the greater part of his life. A gravestone in St. George’s
ground tells his short history:—
“Sacred to the memory of Mr. William Pickett, artist,
who died at Knightsbridge, on the 23rd day of May, 1821,
aged 45 years.”
I must not leave St. George’s Place without a notice of John Liston. He
was born in 1776; and his father, who lived in Norris Street, giving him
a superior education, he, in 1795, became second master at Archbishop
Tennison’s school near Leicester Square; but thus early the stage appears
to have fascinated him, for he quitted his situation for acting plays
with the elder boys. He then went into a mercantile house in the City.
When Liston first appeared on the stage is not accurately known; but the
following note from a celebrated manager of the time appears to prove
that to him, at least, he was well known. It is as follows,—_verbatim_:—
“SIR,
“Your not favoring Me with an answr Relative to the I-dea of the
Cast, I at Random (tho’ very ill) Scratch’t Out, Makes it Necessary
for Me to have Your Opinion, in Order to Prevent Aney Mistake. I am,
“Sir,
“With every Good Wish,
“Yours, &c.,
“TATE WILKINSON.”
He now followed the stage as a profession, and obtained engagements at
various provincial establishments; among others, at Newcastle-on-Tyne,
under Stephen Kemble. The first comic part he performed was the very
subordinate one of _Diggory_, and even in this little part contrived to
throw that irresistible originality of humour for which he afterwards
became so celebrated. I have seen the copy the actor learnt from, with
his erasures, interlineations, &c.
His first acknowledged appearance on a London stage was at the Haymarket,
on June 10th, 1805, as _Sheepface_, in “The Village Lawyer.” On the same
evening Miss Tyrer made her re-appearance after a lapse of three years.
She was soon after to become his wife, and they were married on Sunday,
March 22nd, 1807, at St. Martin’s-in-the-Fields. Their mutual friend,
Charles Taylor, the celebrated _Noodle_, in “Tom Thumb,” gave the wedding
breakfast. The union proved a happy one; one son and daughter were its
issue. The former entered the army; the latter married Rodwell, the
composer.
It is impossible, in this sketch of Liston’s life, to notice all his
various performances and successes. His leading triumphs can alone be
glanced at. In January, 1823, he commenced a £50 per week engagement at
Drury Lane, as _Tony Lumpkin_; and in May, 1824, George IV. commanded the
“Hypocrite,” and heartily encored _Mawworm’s_ mock sermon. It was a
favourite part of Liston’s, and his performance of it inimitable. I have
seen a letter from a distinguished living actor, who had played the part,
he says, “greatly against the grain, well recollecting Mr. Liston’s
unapproachable excellence in it.”
In the ensuing year he reached the pinnacle of his fame by his
impersonation of _Paul Pry_. The popularity of the piece was immense,
and chiefly through the unequalled ease and skill with which he acted his
part. His well-known countenance was to be met with in every conceivable
form, in plaster and clay, in china and butter, in the centre of pocket
handkerchiefs, tobacconists’ “screw” papers, and in a variety of other
ways, his unbounded success with the public was attested.
In 1831 he joined Madame Vestris, and performed with increasing
popularity until the end of the season 1837. He never took a farewell
formally of the stage; and the last time he ever performed was for the
benefit of James Vining, in Planché’s “Peculiar Position;” and as
_Monsieur Champignon_ he ended his professional career. It was, I
believe, known to his friends that this would be his last appearance, and
the following address was written by Rodwell on this occasion. It has
never, I believe, been published:—
“Liston, farewell! for once the Comic Muse
Looks vex’d and dismal, griev’d with thee to part;
And heaves true sighs from her reluctant heart,
While virgin tears her clouded eyes suffuse,
By sorrows forc’d, despite of struggling art.
Her mask avails not now. Her faltering voice
Betrays the o’er-mastering passion in her soul;
For she must lose the servant of her choice,
Who made her chariot merrily to roll,
When he the Coachman played; and not less great
As the mock Marquis help’d her mimic state
Absurdly grave; or at his tricks again
As gay-hair’d Figaro swell’d her menial train,
Pompous and plausible, serene and sly,
With witty impudence, and humour dry.
Expert at all trades, too, with _last_ or _block_
Alike to _comb_ or _cobble_ wig or sock;
This he exactly fitted to her toe,
In walk, or jig, or gallopade to go;
And that so quaintly, whimsically curl’d,
It grew the merry wonder of the world.
Ney, just to keep the top or sole together,
He’d patch the Sock ev’n with the Buskin’s leather,
That she might follow in her sister’s path
With pewter poison-pot, and dirk of lath;
While he stalk’d on in Dollabella’s train,
A lord, of whom the Court might well be vain.
Our tears, O Liston! must with hers be blended
To see, too soon, thy comic labours ended.
And haply, oft when other servants bear
Some mawkish viand of our bill of fare,
Oft shall we turn dissatisfied, and wish
For Liston’s sauce, to help th’ insipid dish;
Whose very look and air were quite enough
To win our favour for the cook’s worst stuff.
Or, if the dish be good, provoked to see
Some clumsy serving-man instead of thee.
How shall we think, regretful of thy merit,
Who served up all with such bewitching spirit,
As made the best seem better, and the cook
To thee beholden, more than to his book,
However puff’d by papers, or by rumour:—
Thou great Original in comic humour!”
31st May, 1837.
Nor was this the only tribute Liston received; numerous were the attempts
made to induce him to alter his decision, but he was inflexible, and it
remained irrevocable. One of several letters I have seen I include here,
notwithstanding its writer is living; but he cannot regret to see a
letter given to the world showing such ability and excellent feeling. It
is as follows:—
T. R. C. G., Dec. 18, 1839.
MY DEAR MR. LISTON,—My mother has told me of one or two half-laughing
conversations she has had with you, on the subject of your delighting
the public with a few performances. Jest sometimes leads to earnest,
and, on the principle of never throwing away a good chance, I venture
to send you this to say, that should such a joyful occurrence be
within the verge of possibility at any time, you may consider
yourself King of Covent Garden; act when you please, what you please,
and as long as you please; stop when you please, take what money you
please, and be sure that, do whatever you please, you cannot fail to
please. More than this I cannot say, except that you shall be
allowed to sweeten your own tea, and, when you are too late for
rehearsal, beat the prompter. In plain English, and in sober
earnest, if you will make up your mind to gratify us by playing a few
of your old parts, everything that mortals can do to make you
comfortable and happy shall be done, and we shall be most proud in
being the caterers of a national treat.
I will not bore you more—only say the word, and we are “at your
feet.”
Ever yours, with kind regards to Mrs. Liston, very truly and very
faithfully,
C. J. MATHEWS.
Liston wrote a copy of his answer on the fly-leaf of this letter as
follows:—
MY DEAR MR. MATHEWS,—Notwithstanding the skill you exhibit in
endeavouring to arouse my dormant vanity, be assured, once for all,
it cannot prevail to overcome the unalterable determination I came to
when I quitted the stage, never to reappear professionally before the
public. Not only should I consider my reassuming the cap and bells,
at my advanced age, a moral indecorum; my decaying strength also
would render the experiment too hazardous, and I have no doubt were
Mr. Wakley the coroner to have to preside at an inquest on my
remains, he would—as he did the other day, in the case of a poor old
woman who drank herself to death—suggest to the jury the propriety of
returning a verdict of _Felo-de-se_.
Accept, however, my very grateful thanks for your liberal proposal,
as well as for the terms in which the offer has been conveyed; they
bring back a pleasing remembrance of the position we stood in to each
other a few years back, to which, though for a time interrupted, I
trust we are once again happily restored.
Mrs. Liston joins me in sincere hopes for the continual prosperity of
you and yours, and believe me (once again my _dear_ Charles),
Your friend and well wisher,
J. LISTON.
This correspondence, so interesting and so creditable to both parties,
shows Liston to have had a kind heart and joyous disposition, and that
such can exist with the highest notions of moral responsibility.
Liston’s private life was retired and becoming, the love of literature,
acquired early, never left him; few persons were greater students than
he, and his knowledge of the Scriptures is said to have been very
extensive.
The illness which terminated his life first attacked him four years
previously, in the form of apoplexy. The last attack came on suddenly,
on March 16th, 1846, and he never spoke again. He lingered till the
ensuing Sunday, when he died in the arms of his wife. That same day, and
almost that same hour (half-past ten), thirty-nine years previously, and
_on a Sunday too_, she had sworn “to love and to cherish till death
should them part,” and thus literally she fulfilled her vow.
He lies at Kensal Green; over his grave rises a column, bearing the
following inscription:—
“Sacred to the Memory of John Liston, who died March 22nd, 1846, aged
73. He lived many years an ornament to his profession, and died much
respected and regretted.”
Mrs. Liston survived her husband eight years. Born about 1780, she
became a pupil of Kelly, and made her first London appearance in 1800.
She was always a favourite with the public, the very appropriate part of
_Queen Dolabella_, in “Tom Thumb,” being generally considered her best.
She died at No. 28, Brompton Square, whither she removed from
Knightsbridge, September 19th, 1854.
Behind St. George’s Place was formerly a foot-barrack, established about
1758. It continued to be used as a depot until 1835 or 1836, when
Government sold the remainder of their lease. On part of the drill
ground St. Paul’s Church is built, and the barracks are let out as
tenements. Over a portion of its parade-ground Mr. Dunn built the St.
George’s Gallery, for his “Chinese Collection;” the “Exhibition of Modern
Art” was also, with other attractions, located here; among them Mr.
Gordon Cumming, with the relics of his African exploits. The lease of
this property is just expiring, and various improvements are
contemplated.
TATTERSALL’S.—Richard Tattersall, founder of this well-known
establishment, was born in 1723. He became training-groom to the last
Duke of Kingston, after whose death, I presume, he started on his own
account at Hyde Park Corner, as I find he sold off the Duke’s stud, and
an injunction was applied for, December 14th, 1774, to prevent payment of
the money to the Duchess, then under indictment. In 1775 frequent
advertisements of Tattersall’s show that his business rapidly progressed,
and his establishment soon became the head-quarters of the sporting
world. That it early gained an aristocratic fame is proved by the
allusion in “The Belle’s Stratagem,” first performed in 1782:—
“_Flutter_: Oh, yes! I stopped at Tattersall’s as I came by, and
there I found Lord James Jessamy, Sir William Wilding, and Mr. —.
But, now I think of it, you sha’nt know a syllable of the matter; for
I have been informed you never believe above one-half of what I say.”
Richard Tattersall died February 20th, 1795, aged 72. Two portraits of
him are still in his descendants’ possession; from one of them a portrait
in “Knight’s London” is engraved. {198} He was succeeded in his business
by his only son, Edmund, who carried it on until his death, January 23rd,
1810. His son, Edmund, who founded the foreign trade, then succeeded;
who dying December 11th, 1851, the business came to its present
proprietors.
The entrance to Tattersall’s is from Grosvenor Place, down a deep descent
under an unpretending archway. At the bottom is a tavern, bearing the
appropriate sign of “The Turf,” opposite to which is a gateway, leading
into a circular-shaped inclosure, on the skirt of which is a gravel path
encircling a grass-plot, from the centre of which rises a solitary tree;
here the horses are tried and examined. The subscription room—a well
proportioned one—was designed by Mr. George Tattersall, author of
“Sporting Architecture.” Over the mantelpiece of the counting-house hang
the regulations, dated 1780. In the courtyard is a domed structure
surmounted by a bust of George IV. in his eighteenth year, at which
period of life he was a frequent visitor. Beneath this dome is a pump,
surmounted by the figure of a fox. A writer in the “Sporting Magazine”
(June, 1852) stated that “Tattersall’s annual average of horses brought
to the hammer, is estimated at £45,000,” and that he believed “there were
97 stalls, and 13 loose boxes, or standing for 110.” The chief business
days are Mondays and Thursdays.
TREVOR SQUARE, so named from Sir John Trevor, who had a house on its
site, was built about 1818. The freehold is still that of his
descendant, Lord Duncannon; hence the names to be met with here are
derived, such as Hill Street, Arthur Street, Duncannon Cottage, &c.
At No. 1 in the square lived the notorious Harriette Wilson; and Mrs.
Andrée, a descendant of the Umfreville, whom William the Conqueror styled
his kinsman, died here in 1836.
Trevor Chapel, one of the largest places of worship in the metropolis,
belonging to the Independents, was built about 1817, under the ministry
of the Rev. John Morrison, D.D. He is still its nominal minister, but
his great age and infirmities preclude any active duty. The officiating
pastor is the Rev. John Statham. Dr. Morrison is beloved not only by his
congregation, but by the whole community of London Dissenters. He is
known also as the author of several theological works, the best of which
is a “Commentary on the Psalms.”
In the last century a portion of the land about this part was rented by a
French Protestant refugee family, named Moreau, of which General Moreau
was a member. They returned to France about eighty years since. {200}
All this land one hundred and fifty years ago was the property of Sir
John Trevor, many years Master of the Rolls. He was second son of John
Trevor, of Bynkinsalt, Denbighshire, Esq., by an aunt of the infamous
Chancellor Jeffreys, and was born about 1638. After a very lowly
education, he was taken by a relative, Arthur Trevor, a barrister, as his
clerk. Here he assiduously applied himself to the study of the law, and
afterwards entered the Inner Temple, and was called to the bar. His
advancement was very rapid, for, entering the House of Commons, he upheld
the Royal Prerogative to an extreme, denying the right of Parliament to
inquire into its exercise. He took a prominent part in the unjust
prosecution of the unfortunate Lord Strafford, and strenuously defended
Jeffreys when he obstructed the right of petitioning in the great
controversy between the _Petitioners_ and _Abhorrers_.
When James II. called his only Parliament in May, 1685, Trevor, who sat
for Denbigh, was, through the Government influence, elected Speaker.
{201} The new Parliament, however, did not suit James, and at the
commencement of a second session was dissolved. Trevor’s obsequiousness
was rewarded with the Mastership of the Rolls, an office to which he was
appointed October 20th, 1685. It is said he aimed now at the
Chancellorship, and, with that object, endeavoured to injure Jeffreys by
aiding the outcry against him on the occasion of the shameless case of
Alderman Cornish.
In July, 1688, Trevor was sworn of the Privy Council; but William of
Orange soon after landing, with characteristic meanness he held aloof,
but when James returned after his first flight, imagining a reaction was
come, declared in his favour; his hopes proved transitory, and he
therefore joined the High Tories, who wished to make William Regent only.
He, however, was declared King, and Trevor was removed from the Rolls.
In 1690 a new Parliament was called, and Trevor joined the more moderate
of the two sections into which his party was divided; and having offered
to support the new King, and also bring over partisans from the opposite
camp, if restored to the Speaker’s chair, his proposal was agreed to; and
so well did he perform his part, that William in a few weeks appointed
him First Commissioner of the Great Seal, he still retaining the
Speakership, and in less than two years, his successor at the Rolls
dying, he was restored to that position also. But great inconvenience
resulted, and on May 2nd, 1693, the Great Seal was given to Somers.
In 1694 a great agitation was manifested in the House of Commons, in the
belief that the Court, and even the House itself, was tainted with
bribery. A committee was appointed, and on the 12th March, 1695, Mr.
Foley, the chairman, read its report, which implicated Trevor; and a
debate arising, a resolution was proposed “That Sir John Trevor, Speaker
of this House, receiving a gratuity of 1,000 guineas from the City of
London, after passing of the Orphans’ Bill, is guilty of a high crime and
misdemeanour.” This motion Trevor had the mortification to put from the
chair, and the unparalleled humiliation of declaring it unanimously
carried. The House immediately adjourned, and two days after he resigned
the chair, and on the 16th a motion for his expulsion from the House was
carried, and a new writ issued for the borough he represented. {203} He
was, strangely enough, permitted to retain his Mastership of the Rolls,
and no further proceedings were taken against him. The rest of his life
he wisely spent in his judicial office, never again withdrawing from it
for politics. He died at his house in Chancery Lane, May 20th, 1717, and
was buried in the Rolls Chapel.
Trevor’s character, on the whole, is but a poor one; a selfish ambition
appears to have made him consider the end, and not the means, the chief
object of his care.
His circumstances, doubtless, compelled him to practise a rigid economy,
which, as he advanced in years and position, grew into meanness. But it
would be unjust not to mention the redeeming points in his career. Lord
Campbell states that “he was not only an upright but an enlightened
judge, and he pronounced many decrees which to this day are considered of
high authority.” No charge of bribery or favouritism was ever brought
against him in the fulfilment of his judicial duties. “He had a villa at
Knightsbridge,” says Lord Campbell, “then almost a day’s journey from
London, and he has been absurdly censured for occasionally hearing cases
at his private residence, a practice all equity judges sometimes must
necessarily follow.” And notwithstanding his niggardly disposition he
founded six almshouses in St. Martin’s parish, Shropshire, and provided
also several other charities. He left issue an only daughter, Anne, who
married Michael Hill, of Hillsborough, Esquire, who had two sons—Trevor,
who became heir to the Hills, and was ancestor of the Marquis of
Downshire, and Arthur, who inherited this property, assumed the name of
Trevor, and was, April 27th, 1765, raised to the peerage as Viscount
Duncannon; and from him the present freeholder is descended.
William Street was built about 1830. At No. 11 resided for many years
Lady Morgan, whose works occupy too distinguished a place in our
literature to need mention here. Mrs. Gascoigne, in her poem,
“Belgravia,” after sketching the portrait of Mr. Higgins, as before
given, describes Lady Morgan as follows:
“Nor his the only pen Belgravia’s bounds
Can boast, whose glory far and wide resounds!
Endowed with manly powers, a woman’s quill
Can treat and master every theme at will;
And in her wisdom’s energetic scope,
Put down a _Wiseman_, and unchair a _Pope_.”
The last line alludes to the controversy so cleverly sustained by her
ladyship, as to the genuineness of St. Peter’s Chair—a paper war, forming
a capital chapter for a future Disraeli, and the only amusing episode
connected with the Papal Aggression of 1851.
WILTON CRESCENT was commenced in 1826 by Mr. Seth Smith. At No. 24 for
many years lived Mr. Hallam, the celebrated historian. Here the great
_literati_ of our times were wont to meet, for Mr. Hallam’s assemblies
were of the most celebrated and intellectual. At No. 16 the late Lord
Dudley Stuart once resided; it is now the residence of Mr. Richardson.
No. 20 is the town-house of the Earl of Winchelsea, the “Protestant
Earl;” 39 was the residence of the Rev. W. Bennett; and 30 of Lord John
Russell, before his removal to Chesham Place. Mr. Baron Watson resides
at 38; and Mr. Milner Gibson at No. 50. Lord Chewton, who so gallantly
fell in leading his men at the Battle of Alma, lived at 37.
WILTON PLACE, occupying the site of a cow-yard, into which there was a
narrow entrance from the main road, was built in 1827. At No. 15 Sir
James Macdonald, the gallant defender of Hougoumont, lived, and died
there in May, 1857; also the Hon. Thomas Stapleton, an antiquary, at 13;
Mr. Westmacott at 21. The Chisholm used to occupy 35; and Miss Reynolds,
the actress, still resides at No. 4.
With Wilton Place these notices of Knightsbridge (proper) close; mention
of those eminent persons whose _locale_ cannot be traced will, I think,
appropriately finish this chapter.
RICHARD BENSLEY, the celebrated actor of the last century, resided the
latter part of his life at Knightsbridge. Appearing for the first time,
in 1765, as _Pierre_ in “Venice Preserved,” he maintained a good
reputation as an actor for a lengthened period, not quitting the stage
till May 6th, 1796. He had the honour to deliver Johnson’s prologue to
Goldsmith’s “Good-Natured Man;” and as _Pierre_, _Iago_, and _Hotspur_,
his fame stood high among his contemporaries. He was appointed
barrack-master at Knightsbridge (he had in early life been in the army),
which appointment he held till his death in 1817.
THOMAS HARRISON, a poet, a friend of Addison and Swift—“my own creature,”
the latter calls him—who brought over the celebrated Treaty of Utrecht,
died at Knightsbridge, on February 14th, 1713. He was a _protégé_ of
Swift, who describes him, in 1710, as “a young fellow we are all fond of;
a little pretty fellow, with a great deal of wit, good sense, and good
nature.” He was then tutor to a son of the Duke of Queensbury on _forty
pounds a year_; Swift introduced him to the Ministry, and he was sent out
as Secretary to the Embassy to arrange the Peace of Utrecht, St. John
presenting him with fifty guineas to bear his expenses. Less than two
years had elapsed on February 11th, 1713, when Swift, returning from a
dinner, found a letter on his table from Harrison, telling him he was
ill, and desired to see him. He went in the morning, found him suffering
from fever and inflammation, harassed and penniless; got thirty guineas
for him from Bolingbroke, and a Treasury order for £100 of his arrears of
salary. He then removed him to Knightsbridge for change of air. On
February 14th, Swift writes,—“I took Parnell (the poet) this morning, and
we walked to see poor Harrison. I had the £100 in my pocket. I told
Parnell I was afraid to knock at the door. My mind misgave me. I
knocked, and his man, in tears, told me his master was dead an hour
before.” Swift seems to have loved Harrison, and felt his loss acutely.
“Think,” he says, “what grief this is to me! I went to his mother, and
have been ordering things for his funeral with as little cost as
possible, to-morrow at ten at night. Lord Treasurer was much concerned
when I told him; I would not dine with Lord Treasurer, or any one else.
No loss ever grieved me so much.” And the next day he records, “At ten
at night I was at his funeral, which I ordered to be as private as
possible. We had but one coach with four of us; and when it was carrying
us home, after the funeral, the braces broke, and we were forced to sit
in it, and have it held up, till my man went for chairs, at eleven at
night, in terrible rain.” {209}
Tickell, in one of his poems, mentions Harrison as—
“That much loved youth, whom Utrecht’s walls confine;”
and indeed, though little is known of him, he seems to have been a
favourite with his contemporaries.
BERNARD LENS, miniature painter to George II., retiring from his
profession, settled at Knightsbridge, where he died, December 30th, 1740.
According to Vertue, he was buried at Kensington, but his name does not
appear on the register. He was tutor to the celebrated Duke of
Cumberland, and excelled as a copyist of Rubens and Vandyke, whose
colouring he imitated admirably.
ROBERT MILLER, a loyalist in the American War of Independence. He held
two official situations in Virginia, which he lost in the revolution. He
died at Knightsbridge, February, 17th, 1792.
FRANCIS XAVIER D’OLIVEYRA, a Portuguese chevalier, born in 1702, and
filled the office of Secretary to the Embassy at Vienna. He was
persecuted by the Inquisition on account of the publication of his
travels, and accordingly came to England, where he abjured the Romish
creed. Thus sacrificing fortune to the dictates of conscience, he first
encountered great difficulties, but found friends, especially Archbishops
Potter and Herring. Frederick, Prince of Wales, also assigned him a
pension. He resided some years at Knightsbridge, which he quitted in
1775. He died October 11th, 1783. {211}
The COUNTESS OF ORRERY, friend of Swift, died at Knightsbridge, October
27th, 1758. He esteemed her highly “as a person of very good
understanding, as any he knew of the sex.” In his will, Swift bequeathed
to Lord Orrery “the enamelled silver plates to distinguish bottles of
wine by,” given him by his “excellent lady.”
SETH WARD, BISHOP OF SALISBURY, had his town residence at Knightsbridge.
He was born April 15th, 1617, at Aspedon, near Buntingford. Brought up
at the Free School of his native place, he was removed to Sydney Sussex
College; but refusing to subscribe the covenant, lost his fellowship, and
in 1643 removed to the neighbourhood of London. Part of his time he
spent at Albury, in company with Oughte, and there the two prosecuted
their mathematical studies together.
In 1649, the Savilian Professors of Astronomy and Geometry being removed
from their offices by the Parliamentary Commissioners, Ward was chosen to
fill the former chair. On this he took the oath of allegiance to the
Commonwealth, and exerted himself to restore the lectures, which had been
greatly neglected, and under him they speedily revived.
In 1652, he took his Doctor’s Degree, and in 1659 was made Principal of
Jesus College, and afterwards Master of Trinity College; but at the
Restoration he was compelled to resign these appointments. While at
Oxford he gained the acquaintance of some of the most eminent men of the
time, especially of Wilkins, afterwards Bishop of Chester. Their
meetings led to the formation of the Royal Society, which Ward strongly
supported, and of which he was one of the most efficient members.
Although he had taken office under the Commonwealth, he had friends under
the Monarchy, who were able to forward his interests. Among them were
Monk and Clarendon; and through their intercessions he was presented to
St. Lawrence Jewry, and afterwards to the Precentorship of Exeter. His
rise was now rapid, for in 1661 he was appointed Dean, and in the ensuing
year Bishop of that Diocese.
In 1667 he was translated to the Bishopric of Salisbury, and in the House
of Lords, being an able speaker, took a prominent part in the debates.
He has been accused of lending rather too complying an ear to the Court,
both in Parliament and the rule of his diocese; probably these charges
arose from his supporting the ill-advised and tyrannical Conventicle Act,
which his predecessor, Bishop Earl, a man beloved by all parties, had
opposed. On the other hand, it must be borne in mind he approved of the
opposition to James II., and to two copies of the petition his signature
was affixed.
His residence, when his duties called him to the metropolis, was at
Knightsbridge, and here he was visited by all the leading literary and
scientific men of the day. Evelyn, in his “Diary,” March 25th, 1674,
writes, “I dined at Knightsbridge, with the Bishops of Salisbury,
Chester, and Lincoln, my old friends.” The celebrated Isaac Barrow was
also a frequent guest; and it was at the Bishop’s table he was seized
with the illness which in a short time ended his days. The celebrated
Sir Charles Scarborough was another friend—he also was Ward’s medical
adviser; and Burnet states he was at Knightsbridge with him when the
Queen’s coach came for him to attend her at the birth of the future
Pretender.
The Bishop’s health towards the close of his life was very indifferent,
and at length he was deprived of his faculties altogether, and died at
Knightsbridge, January 6, 1689, in his seventy-second year. He was a
very learned man, as his writings abundantly show, and a very charitable
one. At his native place he founded almshouses, and also left a sum for
apprenticing its poor boys. I know nothing more beautiful or pure in a
great man’s character than to see him remembering in his old age those
villagers among whom, in a comparatively humble sphere, he first drew
breath. Such conduct indicates a benevolent mind and a good heart; and
such public acts which seem to show a different spirit, I would rather
attribute to a temporary fear or extraneous motive, other than the
genuine constitution of the mind. A life of Ward was published by Dr.
Pope, author of the celebrated ballad, “The Old Man’s Wish.” {214}
William Penn resided at Knightsbridge, at No. 8, St. George’s Place, it
is said; in order to be nearer the Court, where he was a great favourite
with the Queen; he left it in 1706. Sir John Chardin, the famous Persian
Ambassador of the time of Charles II., lived once in this same house. So
imbued was he by his travels with Eastern ideas, that on Persian
festivals he used to illuminate his windows with candles. He was buried
at Chiswick, 29th December, 1713. The clever but unfortunate George Anne
Bellamy also lived here in 1747. Dr. Richard Wright, F.R.S., and
physician to St. George’s Hospital, died here, October 14th, 1786. J.
Marshall, a botanist and gardener, and well known as a writer on such
subjects, lived at Knightsbridge many years; and Edward Wakefield, author
of “Ireland, Political and Statistical,” died here, May 18th, 1854, aged
eighty-six. John Allen, of Knightsbridge, in 1685, left to the parish of
Hammersmith 10s. annually to twenty poor people. The Countess of
Yarmouth, mistress of George II., also numbered among its inhabitants.
CHAPTER IV.
BELGRAVIA.
“Belgravia! that fair spot of ground
Where all that worldlings covet most is found!
Of this stupendous town—this mighty heart!
Of England’s frame—_the fashionable_ part!”
BELGRAVIA: A POEM.
BETWEEN the Hamlet of Knightsbridge and the district of Pimlico are a
number of streets and squares to which the fashionable term of Belgravia
has been given, and which is now the recognised name of the locality.
Southward of the old King’s Road has for 200 years been known as Pimlico.
To this boundary, sanctioned by usage, I shall adhere; considering only
those places as in Belgravia between this line, and one formed from St.
George’s Hospital, by Grosvenor Crescent and Motcomb Street; while the
east boundary is Grosvenor Place; and the west, the sewer. The name is
derived from a title of the Marquis of Westminster, taken from a village
in Leicestershire, where he has great property. Halkin, Motcomb, and
Kinnerton Streets, also derive their names from properties of the
Marquis; Eaton Square from his seat, and Wilton Place, &c., from the
title of his brother.
I need hardly say Belgravia is yet in its youth; of history, strictly
speaking, it really has none. Where now stands this
“Oasis of the fashionable west,”
was, thirty years ago, nought but marshy fields—fields in a very forlorn
condition, covered with rank grass and weeds in full luxuriance; bounded
by mud-banks, and almost wholly given up to sheep and asses. I cannot do
better than let the lady, who has chosen Belgravia for her theme,
describe its former aspect.
Time was, when here, where palaces now stand,
Where dwell at ease the magnates of the land,
A barren waste existed, fetid, damp,
Cheered by the ray of no enlivening lamp!
A marshy spot, where not one patch of green,
No stunted shrub, nor sickly flower was seen;
But all things base, the refuse of the town,
Loathsome and rank, in one foul mass were thrown;
Breeding the vapours that in fever’s hour
Lend to Disease its desolating power,
And quench the life of thousands, like the blight,
Noiseless, but sure, that in a single night
Upon the blossoms’ opening bloom descends,
And brooding rests, till all their promise ends.
Belgravia was and still is within the manor of Ebury, and in ancient
times within the parish of St. Martin’s-in-the-Fields. It now belongs to
St. George’s, Hanover Square, but subdivided; about half pertaining each
to St. Paul’s, Knightsbridge, and St. Peter’s, Pimlico. The early
history of this manor has been already noticed; now for its modern.
King George III., on taking up his residence at Buckingham House, wished
to purchase the fields lying immediately contiguous, in order to prevent
buildings being erected so as to overlook his garden. The Lock Hospital
stood then alone, but it was apparent that the ground would soon be
occupied, if the King should fix his abode so near. He therefore entered
into a negotiation for its purchase, but George Grenville, then Minister,
refused to sanction the expenditure of the sum demanded, viz., £20,000,
and Grosvenor Place was accordingly commenced building in 1767. The
streets running from this line were terminated by high mud banks, which
formed a boundary no traveller ventured over. The other side formed a
part of the Five Fields, and it was not till 1825 that the determination
was come to to cover it with houses. Mr. Thomas Cubitt and Mr. Seth
Smith then took leases from the Marquis of Westminster, and Belgravia
speedily arose.
The Five Fields was an ominous name to our forefathers. Addison, in the
“Tatler” (No. 34), refers to them as the place “where the robbers lie in
wait;” and pages might easily be covered with the records of the
frightful crimes here committed. The King’s Road, anciently only a
trackway for the use of the farmers and gardeners, was the only road
across. A lane led to it from Hyde Park Corner, and other paths
intersected the fields into five large parts—hence the name; but it was
not till Charles II. found the road a near way from Whitehall to Hampton
Court that any public way was formed, and not then till after some
discussion between the Government and the parishioners of Chelsea. In
the reign of George I. disputes arose as to the right of way; but, after
inquiry, the Government acknowledged the claims of the inhabitants to be
just. {220} In the documents relating to this dispute the fields are
said to be open, and the bridge, then called “Bloody Bridge,” now known
as Grosvenor Bridge, only “a footbridge, with a plank or board,” till
built in a regular manner in the time of Charles II. The road across the
fields was very insecure; and for many years, under a royal order,
fifty-two privates, and six non-commissioned officers, half every
alternate night, patrolled the ground. On grand gala nights at Ranelagh
the number was greater; but on all occasions it was customary for persons
wishing to cross to wait for a sufficient number to meet together to
ensure mutual protection, and then, with two men carrying lanterns on
long poles, and who obtained their living by such service, sallying
across under their guidance. Such a relation almost forces a smile now;
but it must be borne in mind that no houses were situated along the
King’s Road a hundred years since. It was also then very circuitous,
running from the Palace garden wall along the present north garden of
Eaton Square to Sloane Square. Its dangers were very great, as the
newspapers of the last century afford melancholy proof. I give one
specimen:—
“On Saturday evening last, February 24th, a servant belonging to Mrs.
Temple was robbed and barbarously wounded near Bloody Bridge in the
King’s Road, leading from Chelsea. Her Royal Highness the Princess
Amelia coming from Hampton Court, hearing a man groaning, ordered her
servant to stop; and it proving to be the man above-mentioned, he was
taken behind the coach and brought to town; and her Highness ordered
all possible care to be taken of him.” {221}
Bloody Bridge seems to have gained its fearful character early; in
Chelsea register is the following notice of the name:—“1590. John Dukes
was this year enjoyned to make a Causie at _bloody_ Gate.”
Charles Dartquineuve, the friend of Pope, and to whom Dodsley was once
footman, was appointed surveyor of the King’s Private Roads, in 1731, in
room of General Watkins. Pass-tickets of copper were issued in that
year, and are prized by the curious in such matters.
Duellists also sought the Fire Fields, and Aubrey tells of one meeting
near to Ebury farm, in the time of Charles I., between Lord Mohun and a
foreign nobleman. The former was killed, not without suspicion of foul
play; and the credulous antiquary relates that at the time of the duel,
his mistress saw him approach her bed, draw the curtains, and go away
without speaking!
Great numbers of the lower orders used to frequent the Five Fields, to
indulge themselves with the brutal sports so prevalent formerly among
them. Near where Coleshill Street now stands was a famous resort for
cock-fighting, and every Good Friday numbers came to witness the
barbarity. Duck-hunting in the ponds and bull and bear-baiting were also
largely carried on; the head-quarters of the latter being at a house by
the Willow Walk, once the habitation of the notorious Jerry Abershaw.
It is pleasant to quit such recollections for those of a purer kind. The
old herbalists frequented these fields, where, they tell, the “wild
clary” grew plentifully; and along the river’s bank the “bitter cresses”
in great perfection. And Swift, walking to London from his Chelsea
residence in 1711, mentions the hay-making in the fields; “it smells so
sweet,” he says, “as we walk through the flowery meads;” but he spoils
the idea by telling us that “the hay-making nymphs are perfect drabs.”
The market gardens in the Five Fields, though not very numerous, were
very valuable, being devoted chiefly to the culture of the asparagus and
the rarer vegetables. Norden, in 1593, tells us,
“The deepe, and dirtie, loathsome soyle,
Yields golden gaine to painefull toyle;”
and that the labourer “will refuse a pallace to droyle in these golden
puddles.” The nursery ground of Messrs. Allen and Rogers was in being so
late as 1832, adjoining to the King’s Road. The father of Mr. Redgrave,
the distinguished artist, resided in a house on the King’s Road, and here
his eminent son was born.
One historical reminiscence will conclude the notices of the fields.
Clarendon tells us that he, Hampden, Pym, Marten, and Fiennes had dined
together at Pym’s lodgings, when Fiennes proposed a ride into these
fields. Accordingly they set off; and the conversation turning on the
Episcopacy Bill, Fiennes asked Hyde why he so passionately adhered to the
Church, Hyde’s reply was an expression of doubt as to the stability of
the State, or of religion itself, if the government of the Church was
altered; and Fiennes rejoining that much blood would be shed ere that
would be submitted to, Hyde (Clarendon) remarks it was the first positive
declaration he had heard from any particular man of the party. Hampden,
Pym, and other leaders of those eventful times, are said to have sought
the air and private intercommunication in the Five Fields. This anecdote
concludes this early portion of Belgravia’s history; the reader’s
attention will now be drawn to its streets and squares.
BELGRAVE SQUARE was commenced in 1825, and designed by Basevi. It is 684
ft. in length, by 637 ft. in breadth. The two detached mansions on the
western side were designed by H. E. Kendall. The one in the south-west
was originally built for Mr. Kemp, of Kemp Town; afterwards it was
occupied by Lady Harriett Drummond, the Marquis of Tweeddale, and in 1837
became the residence of Lord Hill, for many years Commander-in Chief.
After his death the late Earl Ducie lived here, and on his decease, in
1853, the house was sold, and enlarged to its present size. The mansion
in the north-west was the residence of the late Earl Brownlow.
General Sir George Murray, the friend of Wellington and Peel, lived at
No. 5, and died there in 1846, respected and regretted. No. 2 was the
residence of the late James Goding, Esq., who formed a fine collection of
paintings, and other works of art. No. 6 is the Duke of Bedford’s, and
at No. 9 resides the celebrated Countess Dowager of Essex. At No. 10
lived M. Drouyn de l’Huys, while Ambassador at St. James’ from France.
At 16 resides Sir Roderick Murchison, and at 18 lived the late Earl of
Ellesmere. No. 36, sometimes called Ingestrie House, was in 1840 the
residence of H.R.H. the Duchess of Kent, and at present of Colonel
Douglas Pennant. Mr. Labouchere at 27, the Archbishop of York 41, Sir M.
S. Stewart at 42, the Duke of Montrose, Mr. Abel Smith, and Field-Marshal
Lord Combermere, are also residents of Belgrave Square.
The last of the Dukes of Gordon died at his residence here, May 28th,
1836, aged 66; and Mr. Scrope, last male of a family illustrious in our
historic annals, lived at No. 13. He was author of “Days of Deer
Stalking,” published in 1839; and “Days and Nights of Salmon Fishing,”
published in 1843. Mr. Scrope died in Belgrave Square, July 20th, 1852,
in the 81st year of his age. His son-in-law, Mr. Poulett Scrope, M.P.,
and author of the “History of Castle Combe,” soon after quitted this
mansion for one at Prince’s Gate.
CHAPEL STREET, so named from the Chapel attached to the Lock Hospital,
which abutted on it, was completed about 1811. Legh Richmond, while
Chaplain of the Lock, resided in this street. Writing to his wife, he
says, “It is surrounded by fields, has a very pleasing prospect, charming
air, great retirement and quietness, with a little garden, a remarkably
neat exterior, and as neat and comfortable an interior.” Nor was he the
only one who found in Chapel Street a comfortable and happy home: the
celebrated comedian, Gentleman Jones as he is called generally, for many
years lived at No. 14. “The very aspect of their rooms is exhilarating,”
writes Lady Chatterton, “though small, and furnished without any show or
expense. A vine which grows at the back of the house, half conceals the
windows with its luxuriant branches; and some fresh flowers in the rooms
are fit emblems of those who reared them.” {227}
Mr. Jones acquired fame both as an actor and author, but in his later
years employed himself as a teacher of elocution. He died in Chapel
Street, and lies buried in St. Peter’s vaults. A marble tablet to his
memory, at the entrance to the Church, bears the following inscription:—
“Beneath rest the mortal remains of Richard Jones, for more than
forty years in public life, a dramatic performer, he was admired; as
in private life respected as a teacher of elocution, he was a public
Benefactor. As a Christian and a Man his conduct was exemplary. He
died 20th of August, 1851, aged 72. Here also repose the remains of
Sarah, his wife. She died 18th of June, 1850, aged 71. And Eliza
Jane his sister, who died 29th November, 1828, aged 40.”
General Sir W. K. Grant, one of the eight British officers who saved the
Emperor of Germany from capture, on the plains of Cambresis, in 1794, and
who otherwise saw severe service in the last great war, died in 1852, at
his residence, No, 24, Chapel Street. At her residence, in this street,
also died, in March, 1818, the Hon. Miss Hawke, author of a poem on the
“Fall of Babylon.”
CHESHAM PLACE, the freehold of which belongs to the Lowndes family, is so
named from their seat in Buckinghamshire. No. 37 is the well known
residence of Lord John Russell, and No. 35 was Sir Charles Wood’s. To
Chesham Place the Russian Embassy was removed in 1852.
CHESHAM STREET.—Henry Parish, Esq., of diplomatic celebrity, resided at
No. 7.
CHESTER STREET.—At No. 13, the residence of Lady Gipps, died Dr.
Broughton, the first Bishop of Sydney. The Right Hon. Frederick Shaw
lived at No. 5, and Colonel Sibthorpe at 27; at No. 7 resides Dr. W. V.
Pettigrew,
“Whose sympathetic mind
Delights in all the good of all mankind.”
Mr. Hurlstone and Miss Shirreff are also residents in Chester Street.
EATON PLACE.—Among former residents may be enumerated General Caulfield,
author of several works on the Government of India; Sir Robert Gardiner,
one of the bravest of the old Peninsulas; Sir H. Duncan, son of the
victor of Camperdown, and himself a _tar_ of true British stamp, died
here in 1836. Sir Thomas Troubridge was another of that mighty school;
he fought with Nelson at Copenhagen, and elsewhere, and died here in
1852. Sir William Molesworth, one of our ablest and most advanced
statesmen of modern times, and who has secured to himself a permanent
position in our literature, died at his residence (No. 87) in 1855.
Among present residents are Dr. Lushington (18), Sir Erskine Perry (36),
Sir George Grey (14), Mr. Justice Wightman (38), Mr. Heywood (5), Sir
Arthur Elton, M.P., and the Bishop of Hereford.
At No. 80, the residence of Captain Massingberd, the Hungarian statesman,
Kossuth, stayed on his first arrival in this country, in the autumn of
1851.
EATON PLACE WEST.—General Sir Peregrine Maitland, who fought at Corunna,
and commanded a brigade at Waterloo, died at his residence in this
street, May 30th, 1852. Mr. Collier, M.P. (2), and Mr. H. F. Chorley
(13), live in this street.
EATON SQUARE was commenced in 1827, but not wholly completed till 1853.
It is 1,637 ft. long by a breadth of 371 ft. Among its distinguished
residents may be noticed the late Lord Chancellor Truro, who died at his
residence (No. 83) in 1853. Mr. Henry Redhead Yorke, at 81; Lord
Alvanley, of celebrity in the days of the fourth George, at 62; General
Sir Thomas Bradford, and Admiral Sir Edward Codrington, the victor of
Navarino.
The late Ralph Bernal, Esq., resided at 75, and here formed one of the
most splendid collections of ancient art ever brought together. He died
here in 1853. No. 71 is the residence (official) of the Speaker of the
House of Commons; in one year, says Mr. Cunningham, the rent, rates, and
taxes of this house amounted to £964.
Among present residents in Eaton Square are the Earl of Ellenborough at
No. 115, Sir Frederick Thesiger, now Lord Chelmsford (7), Mr. Justice
Willes (16), Sir John Pakington (41), Sir Francis Baring (4), Mr.
Fielder, Commissary-General in the Crimea (57), Colonel Tulloch (63), Mr.
M. J. Higgins (71), Mr. Cardwell (74), Baron Martin (75), Sir Augustus
Clifford (92), Sir W. Clay (93), and General Codrington, our
Commander-in-Chief at the capture of Sebastopol, at 110.
At the east end stands St. Peter’s Church, built in 1826, and denounced
by Mr. Cunningham as one of the “ugliest in all London.” The site is an
excellent one, few superior in the metropolis; it is a just source of
regret, therefore, that a more creditable design was not chosen. It was
designed by Henry Hakewill, in the Ionic Order, and consecrated by Dr.
Howley, then Bishop of London, July 27th, 1827. It was burnt down in
1835, when the altar-piece, “Christ crowned with Thorns,” a good specimen
of Hilton, R.A., was with difficulty saved. It was presented to the
Church by the British Institution.
GROSVENOR CRESCENT is still unfinished. Here reside the Rev. A. P.
Stanley, Sir Charles Trevelyan, and at No. 1 the Earl of Clarendon, late
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. The Crescent is ultimately to be
continued to open into Grosvenor Place, and thus it will form the main
entrance to Belgravia; an improvement very greatly needed.
GROSVENOR PLACE.—The story pertaining to the foundation of this street
has been told already. Originally the houses were built no further than
the Lock Hospital, which occupied the site of the Grosvenor Place Houses.
At the bottom, where the junction with the King’s Road was formed, was a
cluster of mean dwellings, and one inn, known as “The Feathers.”
At No. 1, Dr. Lane’s celebrated School of Anatomy and Medicine has for
many years been established. No. 4 originally formed two houses, which
were thrown together by the late Earl of Egremont, who here first formed
the splendid collection of pictures now at Petworth. He was a great
patron of English artists, and an excellent judge of their productions.
Haydon, one of those he had befriended, declares he “never saw such a
character, or such a man, nor were there ever many. ‘Live and let live’
seems to be the Earl’s motto.” Lord Egremont died in November, 1837.
{232}
The mansion at the north corner of Halkin Street is that—
“Where the Howards’ noble race
For many a year have made their resting place.”
The first nobleman of this title who resided here was Frederick, the
fifth earl. He was born in 1748, and died in 1825, and is the nobleman
often mentioned by Boswell as gaining Johnson’s praise for his literary
performances. But however valuable these may be considered, he owes his
literary immortality to the attacks made on him by Byron. He was
guardian to the poet, who dedicated to him his “Hours of Idleness,” which
the Earl is said to have coolly received, an affront which deeply rankled
in Byron’s breast—causing a wound his mother did her best to widen.
Byron, however, seems to have forgotten his animosity, for in his
“English Bards and Scotch Reviewers,” as originally intended for the
press, he compliments Carlisle:—
“On one alone Apollo deigns to smile,
And crowns a new Roscommon in Carlisle.”
But the intended honour was not permitted to remain. Receiving, as he
considered, a fresh slight, Byron erased the praise, for the vituperative
sarcasm still to be read:—
“Let Stott, Matilda, and the rest
Of Grub-street and of Grosvenor-place the best,
Scrawl on, till death release us from the strain,
Or common sense asserts her rights again.”
But the poet regretted the severity, and afterwards, in his noble tribute
to Major Howard, gave utterance to his repentance;—
“Their praise is hymned by loftier harps than mine;
Yet one I would select from that proud throng,
Partly because they blend me with his line,
And partly that I did his sire some wrong.”
And of the Major he writes with rapturous eloquence:—
“When shower’d
The death-bolts deadliest the thinn’d files along,
Even where the thickest of war’s tempest lour’d,
They reach’d no nobler breast than thine, young gallant Howard.”
Byron’s staunchest friend, Hobhouse—now Lord Broughton—lived about No. 7,
when colleague with Burdett in the representation of Westminster; so also
did Lady Ossory, the correspondent of Horace Walpole. Writing to her, on
February 1st, 1775, he says:—“I hope this is the last letter I shall send
you before you land at Hyde Park Corner turnpike. You will have a very
good neighbourhood there; Lord and Lady Apsley are mighty agreeable
people.”
No. 15 in 1773 was the Duke of Athol’s; the Marquis of Titchfield,
Lord-Lieutenant of the County fifty years ago, also resided in Grosvenor
Place, as did Mr. Orby Hunter, a leading man in the _ton_ in the days of
George IV.
No. 44 is the residence of the Hanoverian Minister, and here his
Sovereign stayed during his visit to London in 1853. No. 24 is the
Bishop of Worcester’s, and No. 46 Sir James Graham’s. Earl Stanhope, the
historian, resided some years at No. 41, but now at No. 3, Grosvenor
Place Houses. The centre of these three is Sir Anthony Rothschild’s, the
other Lord Harry Vane’s.
Near to the south end of Grosvenor Place stood, for above a century, a
small hospital for invalided soldiers. The poet Armstrong, friend of
Thomson, was in 1746 appointed physician to it. The establishment was
closed when the improvements here were contemplated about 1846.
Adjoining to it was “The Feathers,” to which a curious anecdote is
attached. A Lodge of Odd Fellows, or some similar society, was in the
habit of holding its meetings in a room at “The Feathers,” and on one
occasion when a new member was being initiated in the mysteries thereof,
in rushed two persons, whose abrupt and unauthorised entrance threw the
whole assemblage into an uproar. Summary punishment was proposed by an
expeditious kick into the street; but, just as it was about to be
bestowed, the secretary recognised one of the intruders as George, Prince
of Wales, afterwards George IV. Circumstances instantly changed: it
indeed was he, out on a nocturnal excursion; and accordingly it was
proposed and carried that the Prince and his companion should be admitted
members. The Prince was chairman the remainder of the evening; and the
chair in which he sat, ornamented, in consequence, with the plume, is
still preserved in the parlour of the modern inn in Grosvenor Street
West, and over it hangs a coarsely executed portrait of the Prince in the
robes of the order. The inn, the hospital, and various small tenements
were removed in 1851, when the present stately erections were immediately
commenced. On the ground being cleared away, various coins, old
horse-shoes, a few implements of warfare, and some human remains were
discovered.
At the intersection of the cross-roads at the end of Grosvenor Place,
suicides were subjected to the revolting burial then awarded by the law.
The last person on whom the law was carried out here was named Griffiths,
the son of a colonel in the army, who had first murdered his father, and
then destroyed himself. This took place on June 27th, 1823.
HALKIN STREET.—The north side is chiefly occupied by Mortimer House, the
residence of the late Earl Fitzwilliam, and by Belgrave Chapel, built in
1812. Its ministers have been the Rev. John Pitman, author of “Practical
Lectures on the Gospel of St. John,” the Revs. J. Thackeray, J. Jennings,
and the present minister, the Rev. W. Thorpe, D.D.
The detached mansion at the corner, numbered as 49, Belgrave Square,
finished in 1850, is the residence of Mr. Sidney Herbert. The premises
now occupied by Messrs. Wimbush were those in which the same business was
conducted by Mr. Vernon, the munificent patron of modern British art.
HALKIN STREET WEST contains a small chapel, now belonging to the National
Scottish Church, and in which Dr. Cumming occasionally preaches. Its
present minister is the Rev. L. Macbeth. Built by Mr. Seth Smith, it was
originally attached to the Church of England, under the ministry of the
Rev. J. Gibson.
LOCK HOSPITAL (The), which formerly stood on the site of Grosvenor Place
Houses, was built in 1746, and patients admitted on January 31st, 1747,
for the first time. The Institution included an asylum for the reception
of penitent females, founded in 1787, and a chapel, built in 1764, with
the primary view of aiding the income by its pew rents. The chapel was
always celebrated for the powerful and popular preachers who occupied its
pulpit, among whom may be mentioned Martin Madan, Thomas Scott, editor
and commentator of the Scriptures, and C. E. De Coetlogon; while Legh
Richmond, Romaine, Rowland Hill, and the celebrated Dr. Dodd, have often
preached here. Of these, the one most connected with this locality was
the Rev. Martin Madan.
[Picture: Old Lock Hospital]
His father was M.P. for Wootton Basset, and Groom of the Bedchamber to
Frederick, Prince of Wales; his mother, a daughter of Spence Cowper, and
niece of the celebrated Chancellor; an accomplished woman, and authoress
of several poems of considerable merit. Martin was originally brought up
to the bar, which he forsook for the Church; was ordained, became
Chaplain to the Lock, and one of the most popular ministers of the day.
He was a distant relation of the poet Cowper, who first imbibed from him
those religious principles which afterwards formed so predominant a
feature of his mind.
In 1780 his popularity received a severe blow from the publication of his
“Thelyphthora,” a singular work in defence of polygamy. There can be no
doubt that the work was issued with good intentions, but the manner of
treating the subject was at least novel, and especially so in a
clergyman.
Madan was the author of various other works, and likewise of some repute
as a musical composer. Many of the tunes and chants in the “Lock Hymn
Book” have his initials attached. The “Song of Miriam” is, perhaps, his
most popular piece. At the same time, mention must be made of his
composition to Pope’s Ode, known as “Vital Spark,” also of the piece
“Before Jehovah’s awful Throne.” I have heard him spoken of by elderly
folks with deep respect; and whatever his shortcomings may have been, a
want of charity was not among them. That he was equally respected in
high society may be inferred from his friendship with Lord Chancellor
Bathurst, who gave him a chaplaincy.
He died at Epsom in the 64th year of his age, and was buried at
Kensington, May 8th, 1791.
The connection of Legh Richmond with the Lock was of very short duration.
He was induced to accept the minor office of assistant to the Rev. Thomas
Fry, then chaplain, and while here attracted the notice of Ambrose Serle,
author of “Horæ Solitariæ,” a constant attendant of the chapel. Serle
was applied to by Mrs. Fuller to recommend her a pious and practical
clergyman to fill her living of Turvey; he immediately recommended
Richmond, and thus it was that estimable man obtained the position he
filled with such great credit to himself and the Church, and benefit to
his people. His ministrations here extended only from February to
October 1805.
Wilberforce strongly supported this Institution, and frequently attended
the Chapel. He occasionally alludes to it in his “Diary;” and Legh
Richmond mentions observing him at the communion-table on one occasion,
with a negro at his side, a coincidence which he afterwards found was
quite accidental. The incident was not without a lesson!
[Picture: Lock Chapel]
The buildings were of brick, and as plain as they possibly could be.
They were pulled down in 1846, and the Institution removed to the Harrow
Road.
LOWNDES STREET.—Colonel Gurwood, the editor of “Wellington’s Dispatches,”
resided at 33, and Mrs. Gore, the novelist, once at 42.
OSNABURG ROW, a court nearly at the lower end of Grosvenor Place, named
after the Duke of York, who also was Bishop of Osnaburg. The Guards’
Hospital, before noticed, adjoined it, and the court was removed at the
same time that building was cleared away.
UPPER BELGRAVE STREET.—Numbers 1 and 2 were the first houses finished by
Mr. Cubitt. No. 3 is Lord Charles Wellesley’s, and previously the
present Duke of Wellington’s; hither the great Duke might frequently be
seen escorting the present Duchess home. Mrs. Gore lived at No. 2, and
at 13 the late Earl of Munster. Several sketches of Lord Minister’s life
are given in Mr. Jerdan’s “Autobiography,” in which it is inferred the
fatal aberration of intellect which led to his self-destruction arose
from the discordant feelings arising from the anomalous position he held,
and which he was unable to brook. He was author of several works on the
history of our eastern empire, and was a patron of literature and
learning. {243}
WILTON STREET.—Here Mr. Spencer Percival, eldest son of the minister
killed by Bellingham in 1812, resided.
CHAPTER V.
THE SUB-DISTRICT OF ST. BARNABAS.
“Nor rough nor barren are the winding ways
Of hoar antiquity, but strown with flowers.”
WARTON.
THE district parish of St. Paul’s, Knightsbridge, stretching southward to
the Thames, embraces in its bounds a considerable part of Pimlico. When
St. Barnabas’ Church was built, for the local management of the parish,
this southern portion was allotted to its minister’s care, and therefore
I follow a division most suitable for my plan, and give a brief outline
of the history of this part of the parish, in order that my notice may
not be incomplete.
Of course, I do not intend to describe the suburb now called Pimlico as a
whole, but only that portion of it within the district of St. Paul’s; yet
I cannot even do so without touching on one or two items of general
history: and first, then, for the name.
The first mention of the name Pimlico appears in the parish books of St.
Martin in the year 1626. {245a} The ancient name of the place was
Eybury, from the manor of Eia or Eye, signifying water; a most
appropriate name for a spot bounded on three sides by running streams.
There was a Manor House once existing, which we may infer was of some
importance, from its being one of those houses for which a licence to
crenellate or fortify was granted. This privilege was granted in 1307 to
John de Benstede, by Edward I. {245b} Hence the addition of _bury_ to
the original name of Eye or Eia, such addition meaning fortifications.
But to the name. The true explanation of its origin is to be found in a
rare, if not unique tract, entitled, “News from Hogsdon,” 1598:—“Have at
thee then, my merrie boys, and hie for old Ben Pimlicoe’s nut brown.”
{245c} This “old Ben Pimlico,” of Hoxton, kept, in the days of Queen
Bess, a right famous hostelrie, a popular place of resort, as numerous
allusions in the dramatists {246} of the period testify. Pimlico Walk
still exists at Hoxton, and doubtless indicates the pathway along which
the pleasure-seekers wended their way to Old Ben’s.
It is evident in the above quotation that a _person_ is alluded to; but
the word frequently expresses a _drink_, most probably derived from this
worthy. This is evident from the following verses:—
“Let Hogsdon’s scrapers on their base,
Sound fum—fum—fum—from tattered case,
Nor Mean nor Treble now take place,
But Tenor.
A Counter-Tenor is that note.
Tho’ easy—’tis ne’er sung by rote,
But got with wetting well your throat
With claret.
Or stout March beer, or Windsor ale,
Or Labour-in-Vain (so seldom stale),
Or _Pimlico_, whose too great sale
Did mar it.”
THE COUNTER RAT, 1670.
This Ben Pimlico, and the ale named after him, are both spoken of with
equal laudation by the dramatists—by Ben Jonson more especially, who
lived in the neighbourhood, and doubtless was familiar with both. But in
his play of “The Alchemist,” the allusion, I think, points to a bygone
place:—
“_Lovewit_: The neighbours tell me all here that the doors
Have still been open—
_Face_: How, sir!
_Lovewit_: Gallants, men and women,
And of all sorts, tag-rag, been seen to flock here
In threwes, these ten weeks, as to a _second Hogsdon_
_In days of Pimlico and Eyebright_.”
This evidence of Jonson I think conclusive that the original Ben
Pimlico’s had gone. The question is where; and my reply is, to Ebury.
The reasons are—
1st. We had in this locality a pathway known as the Willow Walk, and
there is such yet remaining at Hoxton.
2nd. The movement of places of amusement to the western suburbs
commenced in the time of James I. At this time the Exchange, Islington,
and Hoxton began to lose their charms, and pleasure-folk went to Spring
Garden, the Mulberry Garden, &c.
Though this argument, if such it can be called, is wholly inferential, I
do not think there is anything to oppose to it, unless the number of
places called Pimlico {248} tells against the view taken. But here,
again, the probability is that they borrowed their names from the one at
Hoxton, because of its popularity; and the coincidence of the Willow Walk
is moreover wanting: what I argue for is, that on the decay, for some
reason or other, of Ben Pimlico’s establishment at Hoxton, he, or some
one belonging to it, came to Ebury, formed his Willow Walk leading to the
house, and his popularity being so great, the village became gradually to
be called after him, and its ancient appellation imperceptibly lost.
That part of Pimlico now in St. Paul’s district was, in the last century,
a complete moral wilderness. As is apparent to the present day, the
dwellings were of the meanest character; and it was only the infamous who
long lived here. Jerry Abershaw lived in a house along the Willow Walk;
and Maclean the highwayman, whom the ladies went to see (according to
Horace Walpole), also lived on this spot. Its secure condition for
persons of this description may be imagined, when it is recollected that
there was, previous to 1768, no direct road to this part. The only way
was from Chelsea; the road through Belgrave Place was not fit for
carriages till this time. It was then completed and carried on to the
Stonebridge, a bridge over the Westbourne, by the end of Wilderness Row.
Parties going to Ranelagh by coach went along the King’s Road, a roadway
to the left leading to the Grove; but in that day the silent highway of
the Thames was much used, and as the ballad tells, the “fine city ladies”
delighted in a voyage to Ranelagh or Vauxhall.
The Grosvenor Canal, which forms the boundary of our district on one
side, was formed in 1823; its head had been the property of the Chelsea
Waterworks Company, who in that year removed their works to their late
position at Ranelagh. The canal enters the Thames a few yards eastward
of the new Pimlico Bridge, the story of which is too recent, and too much
one of “discord dire” to obtain further notice in these pages.
At the foot, where the Pimlico Bridge now stands, was the “White House,”
a lonely habitation by the river side, used once by anglers; opposite to
which, on the Surrey side, stood the “Red House,” a still more noted
place of resort. Fifty yards westward of this spot, according to
Maitland, Cæsar crossed the Thames, on his second expedition into
Britain; but the opinion of Maitland is not generally shared in by
antiquaries, who, notwithstanding the arguments advanced by different
writers, in favour of spots they themselves have fixed on, yet in general
adhere to the opinion of the father of English antiquaries, and agree
with Camden, that this passage of the Thames was at Coway Stakes.
Nevertheless it must be borne in mind, that many relics of this period
have been found in the bed of the Thames at and about this spot; and
during the progress of the bridge, coins and relics of a later time, many
of which were Roman, were also discovered.
ST. BARNABAS’ COLLEGE consists of a Church, a Residentiary-house for the
Clergy attached thereto, and a School-house, with residence for the
teachers. The design originated with the Rev. W. J. E. Bennett, and the
ground was the gift of the Marquis of Westminster. The commencement of
the work was with the School-house, the foundation-stone of which was
laid June 11th, 1846 (St. Barnabas’ Day); the foundation-stone of the
Church was laid twelve months later, on which occasion the new
School-house was formally opened; and on St. Barnabas’ Day, 1850, the
Church was consecrated by the late Bishop of London.
The architecture, chosen by Mr. Cundy, under whose superintendence the
College was erected, is the Early Pointed. The Church has a tower and
spire of Caen stone, containing ten bells, the gift of as many
parishioners; it is 170 ft. high. The interior is of great splendour,
the open roof being finely painted, and the windows throughout of stained
glass, by Wailes, of Newcastle, and representing incidents of the life of
St. Barnabas. The chancel is separated from the body of the Church by a
carved oak screen; the other wood fittings are also of oak. The lectern
(a brass eagle), the communion-plate, font, and other costly ornaments,
were the gifts of private individuals.
The Church has sittings for about 1,000 persons, all of which are free.
It was erected entirely by voluntary contributions, and under the
energetic incumbency of Mr. Bennett. Its cost has been about £15,000, of
which the expense of the carcase of the Church, vestries, and buildings
attached, amounted to £10,232.
St. Barnabas is but a Chapel-of-Ease to St. Paul’s, and is under the same
legal government. Churchwardens are, however, appointed by the Incumbent
of St. Paul’s for the maintenance of order and other similar offices;
but, in other respects, the usual legal duties devolve on the wardens of
St. Paul’s. The Schools are designed for 600 children—200 each of boys,
girls, and infants.
During the Anti-Papal agitation of 1850, this Church was more than once
the scene of unseemly disturbances on the part of the mob, and, to
suppress which, it was necessary to call in the aid of the police.
AVERY FARM ROW doubtless is a remnant in name of some rural time. A
family named Avery frequently appear in the registers of Knightsbridge
Chapel, from 1663 to 1691; the probability is they were farmers here.
Another Avery Row runs parallel to Bond Street.
BLOMFIELD TERRACE was so named after the late Bishop of London. At No.
1, the late Captain Warner, so well known for his _invention_ of the
“long range,” died in December 5th, 1853. He had long resided in the
locality, and was well known in it. He left seven children with their
mother, in great distress, for whom the Hon. and Rev. Robert Liddell made
a public appeal; but it afterwards transpired his wife was living in
receipt of parochial relief at Ashford. Warner was buried in the West
Brompton Cemetery.
COMMERCIAL ROAD (The), on the right-hand side of the canal, is occupied
almost entirely by factories, workshops, and the dwellings of those
employed therein. A “House of Refuge,” under the management of the
clergy of the parish, is situated here; and also a Ragged School, both
supported by public contributions.
Jenny’s Whim Bridge, sometime called the Wooden, and now Ebury Bridge,
crosses the canal at the north end of the Commercial Road. Here was a
turnpike, similarly named, till 1825. Jenny’s Whim was a very celebrated
place of amusement, on the site of St. George’s Row. It was equally the
resort of high and low, and with all classes was for a lengthened period
a favourite place of recreation. I never could unearth the origin of the
name, but presume the tradition told me by an old inhabitant was the
correct account, viz., that it was so called from its first landlady, who
caused the gardens to be laid out in so fantastic a manner, as to cause
the expressive little noun to be affixed to the pretty and familiar
christian name she bore. Angelo says it was established by a celebrated
pyrotechnist in the reign of George I. The house had a large breakfast
room, and the grounds, though not large, contained a bowling green,
alcoves, arbours, and flower beds, with a fish pond in the centre. There
was also a cock-pit; and in a pond adjacent the brutal sport of
duck-hunting was carried on. This is alluded to in the following sketch,
quoted from the _Connoisseur_, May 15, 1775:—“The lower sort of people
have their Ranelaghs and their Vauxhalls as well as the quality.
Perrot’s inimitable grotto may be seen, for only calling for a pint of
beer; and the royal diversion of duck-hunting may be had into the
bargain, together with a decanter of Dorchester, for your sixpence, at
Jenny’s Whim.”
Angelo says:—“It was much frequented, from its novelty being an
inducement to allure the curious, by its amusing deceptions. Here was a
large garden; in different parts were recesses, and by treading on a
spring—taking you by surprise—up started different figures, some ugly
enough to frighten you—a harlequin, a Mother Shipton, or some terrific
animal. In a large piece of water facing the tea alcoves, large fish or
mermaids were showing themselves above the surface.” Horace Walpole, in
his Letters, occasionally alludes to Jenny’s Whim; in one to Montagu he
spitefully says—“Here (at Vauxhall) we picked up Lord Granby, arrived
very drunk from Jenny’s Whim.”
Towards the close of the last century, Jenny’s Whim began to decline; its
morning visitors were not so numerous, and opposition was also powerful.
It gradually became forgotten, and at last sunk to the condition of a
beer-house, and about 1804 the business altogether ceased.
Jenny’s Whim has more than once served the novelist for an illustration;
see “Maids of Honour; a Tale of the Times of George the First:”—“There
were gardens,” says the writer, mentioning the place, “attached to it,
and a bowling green; and parties were frequently made, composed of ladies
and gentlemen, to enjoy a day’s amusement there in eating strawberries
and cream, syllabubs, cake, and taking other refreshments, of which a
great variety could be procured, with cider, perry, ale, wine, and other
liquors in abundance. The gentlemen played at bowls—some employed
themselves at skittles; whilst the ladies amused themselves at a swing,
or walked about the garden, admiring the sunflowers, hollyhocks, the Duke
of Malborough cut out of a filbert tree, and the roses and daisies,
currants and gooseberries, that spread their alluring charms in every
path.
“This was a favourite rendezvous for lovers in courting time—a day’s
pleasure at Jenny’s Whim being considered by the fair one the most
enticing enjoyment that could be offered her; and often the hearts of the
most obdurate have given way beneath the influence of its attractions.
Jenny’s Whim, therefore, had always, during the season, plenty of
pleasant parties of young people of both sexes. Sometimes all its
chambers were filled, and its gardens thronged by gay and sentimental
visitors.” {257}
The house is still partly standing, and by its red brick and lattice-work
may be easily identified.
GRAHAM STREET.—In this street lived and died a man for many years well
known in London, James Thornton. He was _cook_ to the Duke of Wellington
throughout the Peninsular and Waterloo campaigns. When, on the death of
his great master, it was stated in the papers that the Duke’s dinner on
the eventful 18th of June was dressed by a Frenchman, he indignantly
wrote to the _Times_, claiming his honour. He possessed an unlimited
fund of anecdote, and used to boast he buried Lord Anglesea’s leg, and
helped to support Raglan at the amputation of his arm. Thornton died in
1853.
GROSVENOR ROW, together with Queen Street and Jews’ Row, form one
thoroughfare. It formerly was one of the most remarkable streets in or
around the metropolis, and, to a great extent, is so now. To Jews Row
came Wilkie to sketch his “Chelsea Pensioner reading the Account of the
Battle of Waterloo,” painted for the Duke of Wellington. The iron gate
shown in the picture is still to be seen. The numerous signs bear
witness to the military air of the neighbourhood, such as “The Snow
Shoes,” a recollection of Wolfe’s glorious campaign, the “General
Elliott,” and the “Duke of York.”
Grosvenor Row, which terminates at the Stone Bridge (as the place is
marked in old plans), was built in 1768. At the end is the “Nell Gwynn,”
a tavern named after the mistress of Charles II. Its sign-board was
originally decorated with her likeness; and the legend, firmly believed
by old Chelsea folk, that to her the noble institution adjacent owes its
foundation, was painted underneath. Nell’s residence at Sandy End has
been doubted by Mr. Cunningham. It is certain that her mother resided
near the Neate Houses in Pimlico; and, in the records of Knightsbridge
Chapel, there are occasionally entries of the name—connections not
improbably of the royal mistress. One of the entries, Jan. 13, 1667,
records the marriage of Robert Hands and Mary Gwin, the former being the
name of a family long resident freeholders in Pimlico, and to whom
Chelsea Bun House, which I am now about to notice, belonged.
CHELSEA BUN HOUSE was established early in the eighteenth century, but
the exact time is unknown. It had obtained a reputation for its buns as
early as 1712; for in that year, Swift, who then resided at Chelsea,
mentions buying one of them in his walks. It soon became quite a
fashionable resort of a morning: even the Royal Family used familiarly to
visit Mrs. Hands, who was a complete living history of all the affairs of
the district, and of those who came thither. To her customers her
garrulous anecdote was a fund of amusement, and her house and colonnade
were continually crowded with loungers. George II., his Queen, and their
family, patronised the place, and were frequently to be seen laying siege
to its delicacies. George III., too, after he had ascended the throne,
did not forget the spot where, in his childhood, he had paid many a
pleasant visit; and in his turn, when his family was young, he and Queen
Charlotte frequently accompanied it thither. The latter presented Mrs.
Hands with a silver half-gallon mug, highly ornamented, and five guineas
at its bottom, as a testimony of her appreciation of the attentions
bestowed on the royal children.
On Good Fridays the concourse of people drawn hither was immense.
Business on this day was always commenced at four o’clock in the morning,
by which time numbers of customers were waiting; and on some occasions it
has been estimated that fifty thousand persons have assembled here for
hours before eight o’clock. Occasionally the crowd became unruly, and
disturbances ensued, and it was found necessary to close the
establishment partially. Handbills of a warning character were issued,
and constables stationed to preserve order.
When Ranelagh declined from its zenith, the Bun House experienced the
reverse of fortune. Parties visiting the former generally called to
patronise the latter before they entered; and the success of the one
depended more perhaps than would have been easily credited on that of the
other, and it gradually dwindled away to complete insignificance.
The Bun House consisted of but one storey, was about 50 ft. in length by
14 ft. in breadth, with a colonnade in front projecting over the
pavement, and affording a convenient shelter in wet weather. The
interior was fitted up in a perfectly unique manner; the array of
curiosities of every kind, and various countries, forming a collection
amusing and grotesque. There were artificial and natural curiosities,
the former including models of St. Mary Redcliffe, and of a ship; clocks
of curious devices, and a model on horseback of the Duke of Cumberland,
in the costume worn at Culloden; two grenadiers in the costume of the
same period, four feet in height, in lead, and weighing each nearly two
hundredweight. There were also some paintings, the most famous of which
was the portrait of Aurungzebe, Emperor of Hindostan. The natural
curiosities consisted of stuffed birds and animals, minerals, ores, and
similar rarities, arranged in cases; while the furniture, antique in
manufacture, multifarious in design, strong in make, and comfortable in
use, added to the peculiarity of the place, and its attractions. In the
King’s collection in the British Museum is an engraving of “A Perspective
View of Richard Hands’ Bun House, at Chelsea, who has the Honour to serve
the Royal Family.”
Various improvements being carried out in this part of Pimlico, in
accordance with an Act of Parliament (introduced by Sir Matthew Wood),
passed in 1839, the Bun House was condemned and pulled down in that year;
preserving its ancient appearance, though not its ancient reputation, to
the last.
After Mrs. Hands died, her son carried on the business. He was a most
eccentric character, and dealt also largely in butter, which in all
weathers he carried about the streets in a basket. He, like his mother,
was thoroughly versed in the lore of the district, and like the old
Bluegown in Scott’s “Antiquary,” was the bearer of its news as well as
butter. He was much respected in the neighbourhood; and on his death, an
elder brother, who had entered the army, and was then a poor knight of
Windsor, became proprietor. He also was eccentric in manner, and
peculiar in costume; and on his death, leaving no friends or relatives,
the property was claimed by the Crown.
Chelsea Bun, House has given name to one of Miss Manning’s novels,
published in 1854.
Opposite to the Bun House stood Stromboli House and gardens, a minor
place of recreation, at its height about 1788; on the site of St.
Barnabas’ College stood the Orange tavern and tea-gardens. Here was a
private theatre, at which the local genii of the sock and buskin
performed to their admiring neighbours; and at the junction of Grosvenor
Row and Ebury Street stood an old inn, a relic of the Republicans in the
neighbourhood, and which bore one of the peculiar and enthusiastic
appellations of that period—_God encompasseth us_. This was corrupted
into “The Goat and Compasses,” an absurd and unmeaning sign, but the
modern inn is now called simply “The Compasses.”
RANELAGH GROVE AND TERRACE is so named from the celebrated place of
amusement of our ancestors; but is in the parish of Chelsea, and
therefore not within our design. At No. 2, Ranelagh Terrace, died the
Rev. Thomas Pennington, nephew of the celebrated Elizabeth Carter. He
was author of two works of foreign travel, and also of “Memoirs of the
Grand Dukes of the House of Medici.” He died December 21st, 1852, in his
92nd year.
UPPER EBURY STREET.—Part only of this street is within the district of
St. Paul’s; in it died Rodwell, the composer, and William Skelton, a
celebrated engraver. Skelton’s productions are numerous, and extend over
a lengthened period, among them a series of portraits of the reigning
family from George III. to our present Queen. He died here, August 13th,
1848, in his 86th year, and was buried in Brompton Cemetery.
Several places of public entertainment were in the neighbourhood of Ebury
Street, the chief of which were “The Star and Garter” and “The Dwarf;”
both were in their heyday about 1760; and notices of them were frequent
in the papers of the time. “The Cherokee Chiefs,” objects of wonder in
1760, and alluded to in Goldsmith’s “Citizen of the World,” were
frequently to be seen here. “The Star and Garter” stood near to the end
of Burton Street, “The Dwarf” on the site of the factory in Elizabeth
Street. There were besides these, places of minor resort, mere
tea-gardens. “To drink tea at Pimlico” became proverbial in the last
century. Here came from the close streets, to inhale the purer air of
the fields, hundreds of the working-classes; more especially on the
Sunday they poured forth, old and young, married and single. Gay says of
the spring-time—
“Then Chelsea’s meads o’erhear perfidious vows,
And the press’d grass defrauds the grazing cows.”
One of these places was attached to the house now numbered 75.
WESTBOURNE PLACE is a neat double row of houses (deriving its name from
the stream) joining Eaton and Sloane Squares. No. 2 was the house taken
in 1808 by Colonel Wardle for the notorious Mary Ann Clarke, as part
recompense for the services she was to render in the prosecution of the
inquiry into the conduct of the Duke of York. Into the history of this
disgraceful connection I do not intend to enter, any more than to say,
that afterwards an action was brought against Colonel Wardle for the
value of the furniture supplied to this house, as was alleged, on the
faith of his personal promise. William Thomas Lewis, for many years a
popular comedian, and acting manager of Covent Garden Theatre, died at
his residence in Westbourne Place on January 13th, 1811. No. 23 was once
the residence of Miss Corbaux, celebrated as a painter, and for her
knowledge in those most recondite of studies, the histories and languages
of the ancient nations of the East.
WESTBOURNE STREET branches off Westbourne Place. Mr. Smith, author of “A
History of Marylebone,” once lived here. In this street is a Baptist
Chapel. Formerly, on a part of this ground, was York Hospital, a depôt
for invalid soldiers, and named after the Duke of York. Here for two
years, _without pay_, Mr. Guthrie, the eminent surgeon, attended on the
poor fellows maimed at Waterloo. The establishment, in 1819, was removed
to Chatham.
CHAPTER VI.
SOCIAL AND POLITICAL SUMMARY.
“The more carefully we examine the history of the past, the more
reason shall we find to dissent from those who imagine that our age
has been fruitful of new social evils. The truth is that the evils
are, with scarcely an exception, old. That which is new is the
intelligence which discerns, and the humanity which remedies
them.”—MACAULAY.
HAVING with the previous chapter brought my account of Knightsbridge to a
close, I cannot more appropriately conclude than by a few remarks on
subjects coming within the scope of the heading of this chapter. But
here again my notes must necessarily be meagre and brief, for
Knightsbridge never having been of itself parochial, books, such as
generally form the staple of such chapters as this, have never been kept
to show, with the accuracy parish books do, the rise and progress of the
place.
The population of the parish of St. George, Hanover Square, was,
according to the census of 1851, 73,230 persons, of whom 40,034 were
within the two wards of Knightsbridge and Pimlico; and of this number,
about 14,000 are resident in the district of St. Paul’s. The population
of All Saints’ district cannot with accuracy be tested, a large part of
it lying beyond our bounds; and building having made very extensive
progress even since 1851, its population has increased in proportion.
In 1578, Mr. Walcot states only six persons were rated by the St.
Margaret’s overseers in Knightsbridge and Kensington; and in 1687 only
five people are rated in St. Martin’s books for the whole of Pimlico.
The progress of building appears to have taken place not so much
progressively as in two distinct movements. The first was from 1770 to
1780, and the other from 1825 to our own time; on examination, it will be
found that few of our streets were built at other periods. A letter
before me of a skilled carpenter, written in 1783, tells his friends in
the country he gets 2s. 8d. per day for his labour, and that he is
allowed to make seven days per week, “and if the peace continueth” he
shall be able to realise 20s. or a guinea per week; for his lodging he
paid 2s. per week. If this was a fair sample of the rate of wages then,
the mechanic’s financial condition must have improved to an extent little
credited perhaps by themselves.
The air of Knightsbridge has always been considered pure and salubrious.
Swift brought Harrison to the place for the benefit of pure air; and
fifty years since it still maintained the character, for Lady Hester
Stanhope sent a faithful footman here for the same relief. Constitution
Hill and Montpelier Square derived their names from this fact. The main
street of Knightsbridge, from Hyde Park Corner to Kensington, stands on a
peculiar but well-defined terrace of the London clay, which separates the
gravels of Hyde Park from those more southward, {269} and is rather more
than thirty feet deep. The yellow gravel of Hyde Park, says Sir Charles
Lyell, is, comparatively speaking, of modern date, consisting of slightly
rolled angular fragments, in which portions of the white opaque coating
of the original chalk-flint remain uncovered. Southward of the clayey
line just mentioned the surface soil is a “made” one. Underneath the
native earth are thick layers of sand, beneath which is a blue clayey
earth, and then a sediment, consisting chiefly of cockle and oyster
shells, which beautifully retain their appearance. Thus the soil of our
locality is a porous one, and rapidly absorbs the surface water; an
advantage greatly tending to the health of the inhabitants, for parts of
Pimlico are but slightly above high-water mark, and the air would
consequently be very moist and relaxing.
In a sanitary point of view all is not fair, even in Belgravia; behind
its imposing mansions many a foul spot is hypocritically hidden; and
although much has been done by the medical officer, there yet remains
plenty of work on hand for him: too many spots yet requiring thorough
transformation, and a vigilant watch to be kept, that selfishness be not
permitted to triumph over public good. {270}
The local government of part of Knightsbridge and Belgravia was formerly
undertaken by a Board of Trustees chosen by authority of an Act of
Parliament passed in 1829. This was one of the local measures swept away
by the general Act of Sir B. Hall; and now the Knightsbridge ward
(extending to Ebury Street) returns twenty-seven members to the vestry of
St. George, as constituted by his bill. The other parts of the hamlet
were under control from various bodies deriving authority under several
Acts of Parliament, but now belong to wards of the parishes in which they
are situated. The bill passed by Sir B. Hall, though perhaps not all
that could be desired, is yet calculated to effect an immense improvement
over the old system, which in this locality, conflicting with other
interests and regulations, worked but poorly. Many of the improvements
and alterations, appearing in themselves to be but trifling, yet, when
looked at in the aggregate, are of great benefit and importance, were
effected by the energy of individuals instead of the action of the local
board. One instance will suffice. The footway between the Spring Gate
and Hyde Park Corner remained a gravel walk, which in winter time became
mere slush, until some of the inhabitants at length caused the Government
to pave it in 1854; and even the “crossing” from the Spring Gate to St.
George’s Place was paid for by Mr. Westerton and one or two other
inhabitants.
In politics, in the days of Burdett, the Knightsbridgites were generally
Radicals of the first water. Burdett was in every respect their man. He
and Hobhouse once started on their “chairing” from the house at the
corner of Sloane Street.
The right of voting for representatives is not the only privilege the
inhabitants of the hamlet enjoy. Those who are in the All Saints
District are qualified for all the numerous hospitals and charities in
the parish of St. Margaret’s, which are among the best and most liberal
in the metropolis.
The Government having decided on erecting at the “Gore” museums and
galleries for our National Collections, it is only reasonable to believe
that such will result in a thorough revolution in the locality. Such has
already taken place at the Gore and Brompton, and it behoves those who
have the local management in their hands to render the neighbourhood a
fit one for such establishments. The improvement of its approaches
should, above all things, be considered; and in the main street of our
hamlet there is yet, unluckily, too much room for improvement. It would
be a worthy entrance to the capital of the kingdom, if the many
abominations now offending the eye could be removed; and it is doubtful
if there is any valid reason for not setting to at the work right
earnestly. If the Park could be thrown open all the way from Apsley
House to the Chapel (for it is hopeless to expect the removal of the
vulgar monsters at Albert Gate), and again continued to include the
Barracks, such would render the roadway the most beautiful and fine in
every way; would add to its healthiness by allowing the free air to
circulate, and ultimately prove to be of the most lasting benefit to the
community. But if in course of time the present buildings are but to
make way for others, it will not only perpetuate a nuisance, but a
disgrace. {273}
I believe I have now noticed all that (in accordance with my plan)
requires illustration from me. I therefore close the subject, and trust
the reader will say “Farewell” to it with a spirit of satisfaction; that
at least in some respect amusement has been afforded and instruction
gained; and that the time spent in perusing these pages will not, in the
end, have been considered unprofitably employed. Good reader, farewell!
APPENDICES.
APPENDIX I.
KNIGHTSBRIDGE A FAMILY NAME.
IN the Issue Roll of the Exchequer, edited by Frederick Devon, are
several payments in the 43rd Henry III. to Henry de Knythebrig, Nicholas
de Eye, and others, carpenters employed at the King’s Palace. A Richard
Knightsbridge was rector of Sheatham in 1640; and the name, though
rarely, may still occasionally be met with.
APPENDIX II.
THE CROMWELL TRADITION.
UNTIL the year 1853 there stood a curious and lonely mansion in the
Brompton Lanes known as Cromwell House. The original name was Hale
House, but it was never called by it within the memory of any now living.
There are one or two versions of the story attached to this old house
printed; but they do not entirely agree with that which I have always
heard—to the effect, that on some occasion Cromwell’s troop was quartered
at Knightsbridge; and he one day venturing to stray among the lanes of
Brompton, was met by some cavaliers who knew him, and pursued him to this
house, where he was sheltered till assistance arrived from Knightsbridge
and liberated him. And a confirmation was presumed to exist in the
inscription on the inn’s front at Knightsbridge that Oliver’s bodyguard
was once quartered there, and that it was once his “posting-house.”
I am perfectly aware that almost every village has its Cromwellian
legend, and also that every endeavour to connect the Protector and this
mansion has hitherto failed. But I own I am by no means inclined to
throw over the pleasing belief entirely. There is a charity at
Kensington still, called Cromwell’s Gift, which always has been ascribed
by parish officers and inhabitants to the generosity of the great ruler;
and although this is unaccountably not entered in the parish books, I do
not consider such an omission a reason for disbelieving the history
handed down by successive generations of parish officers, and still to be
read in the church porch. In true earnest, I think the omission
favourable to my view. No other origin has ever been assigned to the
charity; and the church authorities at the Restoration would scarcely
have permitted a laudatory inscription to the Protector to remain. There
are no other claimants, and never were: the tradition is, and always has
been, that to Oliver Cromwell Kensington is indebted for this charity,
and to him alone.
What reason, then, for this remembrance? The old legend of Cromwell
House, is the answer. We know the Parliament forces were frequently
quartered here. Through Knightsbridge ran the high-road from Oxford; and
Cavaliers proceeding thence would most probably take the bye-road as they
neared the metropolis. And the idea is surely not an improbable one that
Cromwell may have been met with in the manner related.
So far for the legend; but apart from this is another consideration. In
1668, the Lawrences of Shurdington, in Gloucestershire, rented Cromwell
House of the Methwolds. Henry Lawrence was President of Cromwell’s Privy
Council, and in other ways a staunch adherent of his policy. If it could
be proved he resided here at any time during his official career, a new
light would be thrown on the subject, and probably clear it up. On the
whole, therefore, I consider there are grounds, though they may be but
slight, for not entirely discarding the tradition, which may yet be some
day entirely unravelled.
APPENDIX III.
ACT FOR BUILDING ALBERT GATE.
AS the Act of Parliament which authorised the improvement at Albert Gate
may prove hereafter to be one greatly affecting the inhabitants of the
hamlet and the frequenters of the Park, the clause relating to
Knightsbridge is here appended.
The Bill passed May 10th, 1841, and received the Royal Assent a short
time following:—
“Anno Quarto Victoriæ Reginæ, Chapter XII. An Act to enable Her
Majesty’s Commissioners of Woods to make a new Street from Coventry
Street, Piccadilly, to Long Acre, and for other Improvements in the
Metropolis.”
Clause LXXVII.—And whereas it is in contemplation by the Commissioners of
Her Majesty’s Woods, Forests, Land Revenues, Works, and Buildings, to
recommend to Her Majesty, with a view to public Improvement and the
Accommodation of the Inhabitants of the new Squares, Streets, and Places,
that have lately been erected and formed in the neighbourhood of
Knightsbridge, in the County of Middlesex, to make a new Thoroughfare and
Opening into Hyde Park, subject to such Regulations as Her Majesty may
approve of: And whereas the Dean and Chapter of the Collegiate Church of
Saint Peter Westminster are the Owners of certain Ground and Houses on
the North Side of the Knightsbridge Road, and immediately adjoining that
part of Hyde Park where the intended Opening is proposed to be made, and
it is essential to the Accomplishment of the projected Improvements that
the said Dean and Chapter should have Power to sell, or to lease for any
Term not exceeding ninety-nine Years, to the said Commissioners of Her
Majesty’s Woods, Forests, Land Revenues, Works, and Buildings, certain
small Portions of such Ground and Houses, for the Purpose of enabling the
said Commissioners to make the said intended Opening, and to erect Houses
of a suitable Class and Elevation on each Side thereof, be it enacted,
That it shall be lawful for the said Dean and Chapter of the Collegiate
Church of Saint Peter Westminster, and they are hereby authorised and
empowered to contract for, Sell, and convey to Her Majesty, Her Heirs and
Successors, at such Price or Prices as shall be agreed upon, or
ascertained in manner prescribed by the Act hereinafter referred to, to
be the fair value thereof, all or any Part of the Ground and
Hereditaments hereinafter described, that is to say, all that Piece or
Parcel of Ground, with the Cannon Brewery, the Fox and Bull Public House,
and other Buildings, thereon erected and built, situate on the North Side
of the Knightsbridge Road aforesaid, bounded on the East by the
Watercourse leading from and out of the Serpentine River to the River
Thames, and extending Westward from such Watercourse Two hundred and
thirty Feet or thereabouts on the North and South Sides thereof, and
containing in Breadth one hundred and thirty Feet or thereabouts on the
West Side thereof, and One hundred Feet or thereabouts on the East Side
thereof; and also all that other Piece or Parcel of Ground, with the
several Messuages and Buildings thereon erected and built, known and
distinguished by the Nos. 23, 24, and 25, Knightsbridge, bounded on the
West by the said Watercourse, and extending Eastwards therefrom
Seventy-four Feet or thereabouts on the North and South Sides thereof,
and containing in Breadth Eighty-four Feet or thereabouts on the West
Side thereof, and Seventy Feet or thereabouts on the East Side thereof,
with the Appurtenances; and that it shall be lawful for the said Dean and
Chapter, and they are hereby authorised and empowered, by Indenture under
their Common Seal, on the Surrender of any existing Lease or Leases of
the same Premises, or any Part or Parts thereof, to the said
Commissioners, or to such Person or Persons as the said Commissioners
shall appoint on behalf of Her Majesty, Her Heirs and Successors, for any
Term or Number of Years not exceeding Ninety-nine Years, at such Rent,
and subject to such Covenants, Conditions, and Provisoes, and on such
Terms as shall be agreed upon between the said Dean and Chapter and the
said Commissioners, and to enter into such Contracts and Agreements for
the Purposes aforesaid as to them shall seem proper; and all Contracts,
Agreements, Sales, Leases, Conveyances, and Assurances, shall be valid
and effectual in the Law to all Intents and Purposes whatsover.
APPENDIX IV.
TRINITY CHAPEL, MEMORIAL WINDOWS OF ST. PAUL’S CHURCH, AND ST. PAUL’S
SCHOOLS.
THE following brief notices are considered worthy of addition to the
work. In the first place, the days of the Old Chapel, with its present
undignified appearance and circumscribed circle of usefulness, are
numbered. It is purposed, so soon as Dr. Wilson can procure the
necessary funds, some £3,000, to pull down the present ruinous edifice,
and erect a structure in its stead more worthy of the present position of
Knightsbridge. Seventy years ago it was a poor rural hamlet: it is now a
wealthy populous district. Shall its oldest institution not keep pace
with the locality? May it not yet remain “the Nursing Mother” of its
natural and legitimate district? It is trusted that the authorities in
such matters may apportion it an ecclesiastical district, and thus at
last repair the blunder perpetrated at the various parochial divisions to
which our neighbourhood has been subjected. It may be argued that this
new arrangement is unnecessary; but to an observer it will have appeared
that when in our metropolitan districts new churches have been built,
they have been filled, and work has been found for their clergy without
at all lessening the congregation or otherwise disturbing to injury the
constitution of the parent parish. We anticipate a similar result: the
present chapel is not nearly large enough for its congregation; and one
has only to visit St. Paul’s to see that more space is wanted there.
“Division of work makes light labour;” with what greater force will that
apply in spiritual matters. We hope that the history of this old and
useful foundation recorded in this work may so interest the public that
they will at once so add to the £2,000 collected by Dr. Wilson as to
enable him to carry his praiseworthy design into effect immediately.
The next point is, to the memorial windows of the Church, mentioned at
page 96, have been added the following, in memory of the persons here
named, one to each:—George Canning Backhouse, Esq.; Sir Joseph Bailey,
Bart.; Arthur Stert, Esq.; Major-General J. Bucknall Estcourt,
Adjutant-General to the Crimean Army; Captain the Hon. Robert Hay
Drummond, Coldstream Guards, wounded in the trenches before Sebastopol;
Lieutenant Hubert Greville, Coldstream Guards, killed 5th November, 1854;
Brigadier-General Arthur Wellesley Torrens, K.C.B.; and Captain Viscount
Chewton, Scots Fusiliers. On the whole, the list of those for whom these
are memorials is one of which those connected with the Church may well be
proud—monuments alike to the illustrious dead and the pious regard of
their survivors.
The third and last addition is relating to the Schools. They will now,
in the course of this year (1859), be at length housed in buildings fit
and proper for the purpose. Since the original foundation in 1783, this
has never been the case. The new buildings are of a very tasteful
design, in the Early English style. They are built of white Suffolk
bricks, in the form of a cross, with ornamental red brickwork and
Bath-stone windows and dressings. They will have accommodation for 400
children, although the average attendance does not exceed, of boys 120,
girls 70, infants 90; but occasionally the numbers are many more, as from
their position (that part of town being half empty greater part of the
year) the attendance is necessarily fluctuating: they are entirely
supported by voluntary contributions and the school-pence. The education
given is on the national system; and if we may judge from the number of
young persons who, having risen to respectable positions in life, come
occasionally to visit their late instructors, it is not unfruitful of
good results. The estimated cost of the present edifice is £3,000. The
requisite residences of the teachers will be attached thereto so soon as
the subscriptions will allow. The remainder of their history is told on
the parchment enclosed in the foundation-stone, thus:—“To the glory of
God and the welfare of Christ’s poor in the communion of his Church in
England, these parochial Schools of St. Paul’s, Wilton-place,
Knightsbridge, are devoted. The first stone was laid on St. Matthias’
day, in the year of our Lord 1859, by Henry Barnett, Esq., Treasurer of
the Schools; Robert Liddell, Parish Priest; Thomas Cundy, Architect;
George Trollope, Builder.”
* * * * *
* * * * *
London: TAYLOR AND GREENING, Printers, Graystoke-place, Fetter-lane.
FOOTNOTES
{0} In this LibraryBlog eText the erratum has been applied.—DP.
{3} “Memorials of Westminster,” by Rev. Mackenzie Walcott.
{10} See “Paddington: Past and Present,” p. 22.
{11} So the name is written in the body of the charter still preserved
in the British Museum in the title the name is spelt “KNYGHTSBRIGG.”
{14} See “Statutes of the Realm,” published by the Record Commissioners.
{19} After the death of her first husband she married John Tregonwell,
Esq., but lies in the same grave with the former, in St. Margaret’s
Churchyard, where a tomb may be still seen to their memory.
{24} Faulkner’s Brentford.
{25} Dated November 27, 1736. See Lord Hervey’s Memoirs, edited by Mr.
Croker.
{26} “Lives of the Chancellors,” vol. iv., p. 420. See also Evelyn’s
Diary, November 15, 1699, where he complains of robberies here, even
while coaches and travellers are passing.
{27a} This year seems to have been prolific in such cases; the following
is taken from the _London Chronicle_, December 27, 1774:—Mr. Jackson, of
the Court of Requests, Westminster, was attacked at Kensington Gore, by
four footpads: he shot one dead, and the others decamped.
{27b} See _Morning Chronicle_, May 23, 1799.
{30} The last oil-lamp was removed from Park-side about 1850.
{31} See analysis, &c., of these waters in Dr. Aldis’ Report on Sanitary
Condition of this district, and _Builder_, October 10, 1856.
{35} See “Notes of the Evidence given against Lord Howard of Escrick, at
the Grand Inquest,” &c., a single sheet, 1681.
{39} The flags are preserved in the United Service Museum, to which
institution they were, with various papers, given by the Major’s son, S.
A. Eyre, Esq. There was a song written in honour of the corps by one
Bradshaw, of which I have only been able to recover the chorus:—
“Then with Major Eyre we’ll go, my boys,
Then with Major Eyre we’ll go.”
{52} Additional MSS., No. 5,755, British Museum.
{55} Lysons’ “Environs of London.”
{56} Nichols’ “Illustrations of the Manners and Expenses of Ancient
Times,” 4to, 1797; in which these accounts are published.
{58a} See Bell’s edition of Butler. Mr. Bell’s doubt as to the
existence of the Lazar-house in the time of the Civil War is, as our
extracts show, unfounded.
{58b} “Notes and Queries,” vol. i., p. 260.
{60} “Parliamentary Surveys and Minutes of the Committees,” quoted by
Lysons.
{62} Emphatic, notwithstanding its bad Latin.
{63a} There having been but two Bishops of London with the Christian
name of William, about the time of any eminence that the Chapel enjoyed,
this must have been one of those two, William Laud or William Juxon;
seeing that Laud licensed its rebuilding, and that his chancellor was so
far interested in it as to give the Paten, I think it may be safely
assumed that the small chalice was presented by the former. Laud was
bishop from 1628 to 1633, when he was translated to Canterbury, and
afterwards beheaded. Juxon succeeded him in the See of London, 1633
until 1660; he was the prelate present with Charles I. in his last
moments.
{63b} It was frequently dignified with the title of church. I have
papers by me of 1837, so describing it.
{65} “To forward Mr. Hervé’s plan for the support of such of the middle
classes of society who have fallen upon evil days, the Rev. Mr. Harris
has lent his chapel at Knightsbridge, where Mr. Hervé will deliver a
lecture on Tuesday morning. . . . Mr. Harris, perhaps, thinks with us,
that the most acceptable part of religion is that practice which comforts
the afflicted, and benefits the unfortunate; and, if report be true, Mr.
Harris does not confine himself merely to the recommendation of
benevolent actions.”—_Examiner_, August 30, 1812.
{67} Doubtless, when they were in private hands, they were kept by the
clerk’s daughter, in 1819 (see Wilkinson’s _Londina Illustrata_); the
account of the chapel in this work is very erroneous, but most of the
papers therein published are missing. Dr. Wilson has the remainder in
his custody, and they having lately been repaired by the author of this
work, are likely to last many years.
{78} See Correspondence at the end of Pepys’ “Diary,” vol. iv., pp. 235,
241, and 242.
{86} The entries to which is affixed an asterisk are not at the Chapel
Books now; they have been made away with since 1819, when they were
copied for Wilkinson’s “Londina.”
{87} Thomas Halley was clerk from 1664 to 1669, when William Hipsley was
appointed: in Kensington register his burial is entered December 2nd,
1689, when Thomas Hipsley succeeded him. He appears to have been the
builder and carpenter of the place, took great interest in the
Revolution, and in the Wars against Louis XIV., as appears by some of his
memoranda. He was clerk for many years.
{88} The last beadle died in 1835, since when the office has been
vacant.
{90} Many names still in the locality, or that have died out within the
last half century, are to be found in these Registers; it may be
serviceable to note a few:—Aley, Arnold, Baber, Beadle, Briscoe, Britten,
Burton, Coppin, Cowell, Cromwell, Danvers, Dexter, Faulkner, Gunter,
Gwin, Hipsley, Lilly, London, Merriman, Morland, Perrin, Pope, Rouse,
Thorowgood, Timberlake, Whitehead, Wise, Woolley. From their imperfect
condition it is useless to attempt a statistical analysis of the
baptisms, but of the marriages I have made a few notes, as follow:—In
1659 there were 36 marriages; in 1661, 81; in the half-year ending
December 31st, 1665, they had increased to the large number of 335. For
about twelve years they continue very numerous, but in 1696 there were
394 marriages, two years after the number fell to 155; in 1704 they
decreased to 45, and such decrease continued till, in 1747, only five
entries are made, in 1751 only _one_, and in 1752 but _two_.
{92} When the foundation stone was laid they amounted to about £12,000;
among the contributors were Earl Fitzwilliam, £500; the Earls of
Bradford, Brownlow, Burlington and Winchelsea, Geo. A. Haldimand, J. A.
Smith, and E. J. Shirley, Esqs., each £200; Duke of Montrose, Marquis
Camden, Earl Sefton, Earl Carlisle, Sir J. Mordaunt, Sir J. Heathcote, T.
Cubitt, T. Cundy, Esqs., each £100; and Geo. Drummond, Esq., £200.
{104} This inscription, through various means, I have traced back nearly
a century: another century makes us contemporary. Would all recollection
of such momentous times die away in that time? The writer of this spoke
to an old man in 1845, who remembered the bells ringing for the capture
of Quebec by Wolfe in 1759.
{106} See the Appendix.
{109} See for further notices of Sterling, Carlyle’s “Life of John
Sterling;” and “The Fourth Estate,” by F. K. Hunt.
{112a} A number of these are in my possession.
{112b} There was a very old wooden gate, opening from the yard at the
back into the park; the bodies of those drowned in the Serpentine were
brought in through it.
{114} Afterwards bought by the well-known Andrew Mann, and placed by him
on the top of a public house at the corner of Warwick Street, Pimlico.
{117} See “Gentleman’s Magazine,” 1810; “Life of Romney,” by his
brother; “Johnsoniana,” &c. Of Part XIV. of this work Humphry was
author.
{118} Afterwards called the “Life Guardsman.”
{120a} “Letters to Julia,” by Henry Luttrell.
{120b} “Year Book,” 1826.
{129} “King’s Anecdotes of His Own Times.”
{147} See “Faulkner’s Kensington,” and “Notes and Queries,” vol. xii.,
p. 186.
{148} See “Symmons’ Life of Milton,” 2d edit., 1810, pp. 122–124.
{149a} Cooke’s Preface to “Conversation: a Didactic Poem.” 1807.
{149b} Quoted by Faulkner, “Hist. Chelsea.”
{149c} “Journey to London,” quoted by Mr. Peter Cunningham.
{149d} “Notes and Queries,” v. 487.
{154} “Belgravia: a Poem.”
{157a} See “Oxford Magazine,” for 1770; London and Country magazines,
between 1770 and 1774.
{157b} In the Bankrupt List, _London Gazette_, November, 1772, appears
the following:—“Teresa Cornellys, Carlisle House, St. Ann, Soho, dealer.”
{159} I need hardly point out the allusion. Montpelier is said to be
the Cheltenham of France.
{160} See “Monthly Magazine,” April, 1821; and “Notes and Queries,” vol.
x., p. 228.
{161a} See “The Virtues of a Jail.”
{161b} His experiments were made by an electrometer of his own
construction, which extended several yards above his house. See
_Examiner_, October 2nd, 1814.
{163} “Gate” is a modern stupidity for a square or terrace. What can be
more unmeaning?
{170a} For report of her trial, &c., see “Gentleman’s Magazine,” and
“London Chronicle,” 1776; Ditto, ditto, 1788. “Walpole’s Letters to
Mason” (“Bentley’s Miscellany,” vol. 33).
{170b} See Creasy’s “Eminent Etonians.”
{170c} Kingston House is now sometimes called Ennismore House, from the
second title of Lord Listowel. It is generally considered the
termination of Knightsbridge in this direction. In old directories it is
described as No. 3, Knightsbridge.
{172} See “London Chronicle,” June 22nd, 1784.
{175} Life of Arthur Murphy, by Jesse Foote; Madame D’Arblay’s Diary,
&c.
{177} The following are from newspapers:—“Births, Sep. 28. The lady of
the Marquis of Granby, of a daughter, at Rutland House, Knightsbridge.”
1772.
“On Friday night the Marquis of Granby arrived at the seat of his
grandfather, the Duke of Rutland, at Knightsbridge, from making the tour
of France and Holland.”—_London Chronicle_, July 5, 1774.
“Died yesterday at Rutland House, Knightsbridge, Lord William Robert
Manners, youngest brother of the Duke of Rutland.” 1793.
{180} Timbs’ “Curiosities of London.”
{198} The writer in “Knight’s London” fixes the opening of Tattersall’s
about 1779, but it was earlier.—See _Morning Post_, August 23rd, 1775.
{200} Walcott’s “Memorials of Westminster,” Appendix. 2nd edition.
{201} See “Macaulay’s History of England,” i., 512.
{203} See “Macaulay’s History;” “A Collection of the Debates Concerning
the late Briberies and Corrupt Practices,” 1695; “Manning’s Lives of the
Speakers,” &c.
{209} See “Journal to Stella,” Jan. 2nd and Feb. 4th, 1711; also Feb.
12th and 15th, 1713.
{211} Lyson’s “Environs of London.”
{214} In Kensington register are the following entries:—
1665. “Robert Southwell, of Whitehall, Esq., and Mrs. Elizabeth
Dering, daughter of Sir Edward Dering, of Surrenden, Kent, married by
Seth Ward, Lord Bishop of Exeter, 26th January.”
1686. (Buried.) “John Humfreys, servant to the Right Rev. Seth,
Bishop of Salisbury, at Knightsbridge, 2nd December.”
{220} See “Faulkner’s Chelsea,” vol. i., p. 44.
{221} “Read’s Journal,” May 24, 1753; see also “Faulkner’s Chelsea.”
{227} Lady Chatterton, “Home Sketches,” vol. ii. p. 280.
{232} See “Haydon’s Diary,” November 14, 1837. Also vol. iii, p. 77.
{243} See “Autobiography of William Jerdan,” vol. ii., pp. 282–284.
{245a} “Cunningham’s Handbook of London.”
{245b} “Gentleman’s Magazine,” 1856.
{245c} See “Notes and Queries,” vol. i., p. 474.
{246} See Ben Jonson’s “Bartholomew Fair;” Greene’s “Tu Quoque;” “The
City Madam;” “The Devil is an Ass;” “The City Match,” &c. &c.
{248} There was one at Bankside; also places so named are to be found in
Yorkshire, Lancashire, and Cudham in Kent.
{257} In 1755, a 4to satirical tract was published, entitled “Jenny’s
Whim; or, a Sure Guide to the Nobility, Gentry, and other Eminent Persons
in this Metropolis.”
{269} Letter of Mr. R. W. Mylne in the _Times_, June 7, 1857.
{270} See Dr. Aldis’s “Report on Sanitary Works in Belgravia;” “Letter
to the Vestry of St. George,” &c.
{273} See the Appendix.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Memorials of the Hamlet of Knightsbridge - with Notices of its Immediate Neighbourhood" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.