THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OE CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES I I k i II. The Church from the South-West. From a photograph taken circaiSgs. SAINT MARY STRATFORD BOW. BY OSBORN C. HILLS, A.R.I.B.A. WITH AN INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER BY C. R. ASHBEE, M.A. BEING THE SECOND MONO- GRAPH OF THE COMMITTEE FOR THE SURVEY OF THE MEMORIALS OF GREATER LONDON. THE COMMITTEE FOR THE SURVEY OF THE MEMORIALS OF GREATER LONDON. Honorary Members. The Right Hon. THE EARL OF MEATH. J.T. MICKLETHWAITE, F.S.A. Mrs. MITCHELL. F. D. MOCATTA. A.MOORE. ERNEST W. MOUNTFORD, F.R.I.B.A. A.J. MUNBY. F.MURRAY. PHILIP NORMAN. The Rev. J. P. NOYES, M. A. GEO. PITT. W. G.RAWLINSON. J. S. REDMAYNE. E. R.ROBSON, F.R.I.B.A. W. K. SHIRLEY. The Hon. LYULPH STANLEY. J.J.STEVENSON. Miss STONE. R.G.TATTON. W.THOMPSON. T.THORNTON. HAMO THORNYCROFT,R.A. The Right Hon. lord tredegar. Mrs.thackeray turner, j. a.c.vincent, j. humphrey ward. j.wells,m.a. Active Members. H. LOWERISON. E.A.MANN. E.T. MARRIOTT, B.A. THEO. MOORE, A.R.I.B.A. A. E. NUTTER. W. POWELL. F.R.TAYLOR. F. C. VARLEY. ALFRED P. WIRE. E. W. M. WONNACOTT. ERNEST GODMAN, Secretary of the Committee. yf" -i- W. ADAMS. Mrs. H. S. ASHBEE. B.T. BATSFORD. E.W.BROOKS. A. G. BROWNING, F.S.A. R.M.BURCH. The Right Hon. LORD CARLINGFORD W. CARPENTER. G.CHAMBERS. WALTER CRANE. G. CROSBIE DAWSON. Miss S.DUCKWORTH. F. M. DUTTON. The Rev. J. P. FAUNTHORPE. GEORGE FRAMPTON, A.R.A. Dr. RICKMAN J. GODLEE. The Rev. W. GOODCHILD. I.C.GOULD. ProfessorJ.W. HALES. Mrs.J. S.HILL. A.J. HOLLINGTON, L.C.C. Mrs. HOPE. H.P. HOPGOOD. H. L. HOPKINSON. Mrs. E.HUBBARD. The Rev. J. E. KELSALL, M.A. The Rev. J. KENNEDY, M.A. H. LUXMOORE. C.J. MARSHALL, A.R.I.B.A. 4,77 V C.R. ASHBEE, M. A., Chairman of the Committee. The Rev. A. G. B. ATKINSON, M.A. MAX BALFOUR. O. BEACHAM. Sir WALTER BESANT. CECIL BREWER. SPEDDING CURWEN,J.P. A.DUNBAR-SMITH. MATT. GARBUTT, A.R.I.B.A. H.CLAPHAM LANDER, A.R.I.B.A. 640723 AN INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER BYC. R. ASHBEE. IT is good to think that the second of the Monographs issued by the Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London, is the record not only of an important building described, but of an im- portant building saved from destruction. Three times during the present century has the Church of S. Mary Stratford atte Bowe been reported upon by experts as in imminent danger of falling, and its immediate re- moval advised. Fortunately the good people of Bow have been either too sensible, too poor, or too simple-minded to follow the advice of the ex- perts and thus their old church has been, with one or two additions and alterations that are described in the following pages, left to them much in the condition in which it has stood during the last tour centuries. That this has been so is due primarily to the fact that the Committee de- The S.P.A.B. cided to adopt the report of the Society for the Protection of Ancient report Buildings (The S.P.A.B.) in preference to other more elaborate schemes of restoration. Whatever may be the future verdict on the fitness of the restoration one thing is certain, namely, that the adoption of the S.P.A.B. report saved the church ; and by saving the church may be taken to mean quite literally, the body of the whole fabric with the exception of the tower. The key to the position was the rebuilding of the north wall and the chancel; and the alternative scheme was coupled and not unwisely with an enlargement for the needs of the parish, and this enlargement it was only possible to get on the north and the east. All the expert opinion, however, was agreed that if the north wall were removed the whole fabric would be endangered, and Sir Arthur Blomfield was quite right in insist- ing that under the circumstances the best plan was to pull the whole church down, with the exception of the tower, and build a new one. With the question whether it would have been better to have had a larger The point of church I am not here concerned, that is a parish question; but from the principle in- point of view of saving to greater London one of its most interesting and volved beautiful landmarks, there is no doubt that the adoption of Sir Arthur Blomfield's proposal would have been most unfortunate. The Committee chose and, as I believe the result shows, chose wisely. As this choice en- tailed a different method of carrying out the work than that commonly in use in church restoration, I may perhaps be permitted to say a word on the matter. A point of principle is involved in this, which is not unim- portant, & which may be indicated, for the guidance of committees who desire to retain the historic featuresof the buildings under their care and are anxious of not incurring the charge of reckless restoration. A committee is necessarily rather a timid organism, and when its archi- ^3 5 The system tect comes to it and says : " Your church is in a very bad condition, but I of builders cannot tell you what it will cost to put it right till I begin pulling it about. contract as It may be^iooo, it may be ,^5000; letmehave ^^500 to begin with and applied to I'll report further," this timidity is not strengthened. Yet this, to all in- Kestoration tents and purposes, is what happened in the case of Bow Church, & there is no doubt that in nine cases out often where there has to be any exten- sive repairing, or if the objectionable word must be used — "restoration," it is in this form that the problem first presents itself. Unless an architect starts with the hypothesis that he is going to pull down a wall & rebuild it, with say 10 per cent, of the old stone, pull down a roof and re-roof it with 2 per cent, of the old timber, unless he deliberately draws up his specification for the builder's contract on the basis of new work, he can- not honestly give his committee a definite idea what genuine "restora- tion" work will cost, nor can the contractor he employs honestly fulfil the contract entered into. I use the word "honestly" advisedly, because I hold that most restora- tion work is dishonest. Not that the walls when built are not well built nor the timber well chosen, but that the complete work purports to be what it is not. It is not the old building with the story of the centuries in it, it is a new building with a few of the old materials retained. It is diffi- cult to blame any one in particular, committee, architect, contractor, or workman; they do not meet on a basis of mutual trust. It is a social and economic rather than a structural or esthetic principle that is involved. Inshort,the modern building contract system is inapplicable to the work of genuine restoration. Method of As an illustration of what is implied, the external walling may be in- •working on stanced.The illustration. No. 12, facing p. 20 will give some idea of what Boiv Church the wall surface, rotten & corroded by the foul gases of Stratford and Brom- ley was like: to take down & rebuild this would have been impossible, but to carefully and reverently go over it stone by stone, and joint by joint, was not, & this we did. Where the joints were defective they were made good, where the gaps were large they were filled with flint or tile, where the old stone was sound at heart but decayed on the surface, it was cut away and stopped with cement, just as a careful dentist, who is not con- cerned with pulling out his patients' teeth, cuts away decay & then does his stopping ; only when absolutely necessary was new stone inserted. It will be observed that work of this kind is better done on the scaffold- ing than in the office, indeed it is not an architect's work at all but a ma- son's, as most good restoration always must be, and it cannnot be con- tracted for. At Bow Church therefore, to meet the financial risks involved in work- ing without a contract, the work was broken up into sections, the care of it intrusted to Messrs. Hills & Son under the supervision of a committee 6 of architects* appointed by the S.P.A.B., by whom the Society's report was drawn up. No individual contractor was employed, but different firms or masters were engaged, t'.^., Mr. H. C. Mitchell of Tamworth, to do the masons' work, the Guild of Handicraft, of Essex House, Bow, E., to do the carpentry and smiths' work. The payments were for the most part time payments on schedule basis, though in some instances special contracts were entered into. Payments were made monthly on the certi- ficates of the local architects endorsed by the hon. sec. of the Committee, and the members of the S.P.A.B. Committee visited the work in turn. For the fuller details as to the condition of the work and the manner in which it has been carried out, I cannot but refer to the chapters of Mr. Osborn Hills, who has shown in them the same conscientious care in getting together what there is known of the history of the church as he showed during the repair of the building. C. R. ASHBEE. Essex House, Bow, E. '^Messrs. Thackeray Turner, W. R. Lethaby, Philip Webb, C. JVinmi/l, and C. R. Ashbee. a4 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. „ Preceding Date. page 1 . The Church from the north-east. From an old oil circa painting 1750 5 2. „ „ south-west. From an old pho- Frontis- tograph 1895 piece 3. „ „ south-west. From an old print 1806 9 4. ,, „ north-west. ,, „ 1826 9 5. „ „ west. „ „ 1809 9 6. The North Aisle Wall and Old Vestry. From a pho- tograph ------- 1895 19 7. The same view after the Restoration, and showing the New Vestry ------ 1899 19 8. Plan - - - - - - - -1899 17 9. Elevation. The Tower ----- 1888 21 10. Sections and Elevations, by Wm. Ford, Esq., archi- tect (deceased) ------ 1820 21 1 1. Plan of the Church and Yard, &c., by the same hand 1824 15 12. Detail of West Doorway and Window of Tower - 1895 19 I 3. The newly discovered windows in the Tower - 1899 19 14. Stonework of Turret and North Aisle Battlement showing a previous restoration _ _ _ 1898 19 I 5, South-east Buttress of the Chancel before the Restor- ation -____- 16. The Interior, looking eastward - - - 17. „ „ westward - - - 18. ,, „ westward - - - 19. „ „ eastward - - - 20. „ „ eastward - - - 21. „ Western Arch and Window 22. „ North-west Corner 23. „ The "Apostles'" Window 24. „ The North Arcade and Aisle - 25. The Old Font - ----- 26. The New Font - _ - - _ 27. The Wylford and Amcott Monument - 8 - 1899 19 - 1849 27 - 1849 27 - 1899 37 - 1896 11 - 1899 17 - 1896 43 - 1896 43 - 1895 27 - 1895 17 - 1899 25 - 1899 25 - 1899 29 o oo I 3 O U u U (U ''^ 3 4~l 'Si O > C ^ * ^^ i u J=. JD 1 u- U 1 o 4-* ' ^ c u o _C -4-^ !U o ■«-» , l- c u- o J5 vi: (J Lh c 3 •— < C/3 C/3 3 O 0> mI ;.*• 4-< o > -t-i O ^ CHAPTER I. A FEW HISTORICAL NOTES BEARING UPON THE HISTORY OFS. MARYSTRAT- FORDBOW. THE fragmentary nature of the records relating to the venerable Inaccuracy parish church of Bow renders any attempt to compile a complete of Records history of this sacred edifice a somewhat difficult task. Beyond the brief references contained in the well-known works of Stow, Strype, and Lysons, and the short account of the church to be found in Insley's "Memorials of Bow Church," very little appears to have been published regarding the early historyof "The Chapel of Stratford atte Bowe," as it was formerly termed. But such information as can be gleaned from those authorities, & from a study of the building itself and its monuments and registers, establishes beyond dispute the fact that for at least four centuries the church, although repeatedly repaired, has remained, generally speak- ing, unaltered and even unenlarged ; and that for a yet longer period the same site in the king's highway has formed the consecrated spot upon which the inhabitants of the riverside town of Stratford atte Bow have been wont to perform the duties of their religion. In trying to piece together the various records one cannot fail to be im- pressed with the want of preciseness on the part of both writers and art- ists. The latter are the greater sinners : in studying the illustrations of a century since startling discrepancies are revealed. To quote a case in point — one of the largest of the buttresses of the tower is shown in an il- lustration dated 1806* but not in one of 1809*; while in 1826* it reap- pears bearingsuch a venerable character that it evidently could not have been demolished & rebuilt in the interim. However, it is well known that historical accuracy was not a quality that the engraver felt himself called upon to exercise. The number of battlements shown in an illustration would depend, not upon the number existing, but upon what would, in the artist's opinion, look the best. One very badly drawn view of "Bow Church in Middlesex, 1754," to be seen at Guildhall, is so inaccurate that one can only conclude that the artist never saw our ancient structure. It seems that from time immemorial a village existed upon the banks of The village the Lea, around the site upon which Bow Church now stands, and that at Bow a ford was used by the villagers. Did they wish to be expeditious they would cross by the straight ford, but the crossing was fraught with some danger, & the cautious would make a detour and use the old & safer ford. I- *See illustrations Nos. 3, 5, iSf 4, opposite. -^ -f- he land. 9 Bow bridge It was in the reignof Henry I. that the bridge "arched like unto abowe" was erected, and so we get the name Stratford at the bow. The building of the bridge was due to Queen Matilda, Henry's wife, and she, accord- ing to Leland, was herself "well washed" in the waters of the Lea. Stratford The name of Stratford Bow seems in the early days to have been applied Bow indiscriminately to the villages of Bow, Bromley, Stratford & Old Ford, which surrounded the straight ford and the bridge in the form of a bow. In course of time the straight ford and the old ford gave their names to the localities of Stratford & Old Ford respectively. Later, Stratford seems to have been written Stratford atte Bo we, for so we find it in Chaucer, who lived between 1340 and 1400: "And Frensch she spak ful faire and fetysly After the scole of Stratford atte Bo we. For Frensch of Parys was to hire unknowe." — Canterbury Tales. Evidently " the father of English Poetry," who himself lived at Aldgate, was acquainted with the peculiarities of the Bow of his own time. The school here meant was probably that of the neighbouring convent of St. Leonard Bromley. In the seventeenth andeighteenth centuries thename of Old Ford appears to have been written as one word, Oldford. Defoe so writes it in his " Memoirs of the Plague," and so we find it on one of the monuments of the church — that erected to Thomas Rust, who died in 1 704. We, in the nineteenth century, have reverted to the original mode of writing it, by separating its syllables again into distinct words, & super- adding to each of them the dignity of capital letters.* The bridge was in existence until some sixty-five years ago, when hav- ing become dilapidated, and being too narrow and also looked upon as scarcely safe, it was removed to make way for the present structure. This latter erection was, with some ceremony, declared open for traffic in 1 8 3 5 . Writing just one hundred years ago the Rev. Daniel Lysons describes Bow as follows: "The Village of Bow, as it is usually called (dropping its original name of Stratford, and preserving only the distinction), is situated two miles to the east of London on the Essex road. The parish lies within the hundred of Ossulston, and is bounded on the east by the river Lea, which separates it from Low-lay ton and Westham in Essex; on the north by Hackney; on the north-west by Bethnal Green; on the west and south-west by Stepney; and on the south-east by Bromley S. Leonard. It contains about 465 acres of land, of which 218 are arable, the remainder pasture, upland pasture, and marsh-land, except i 3 acres occupied by nursery gardens." * Insley. 10 The Chantry Returns statethat the Chapel of Stratford Bow was founded The Chape/ by King Edward III. on a piece of ground which formed part of the of Stratford King's highway; but Newcourt* places the date of its erection earlier, Bou\ i 3 i i for he says: " In the year 1311a licence was granted by Bishop Baldock. (dated from Stepney) to the inhabitants of Stratford & Oldford, to build Bishop Bal- a chapel for the convenience of attending divine service, they being so docks licence far distant from their parish church, and the roads in winter impassable by reason of the floods. By the terms of this licence, the inhabitants were to assign a sufficient income for the chaplain to attend divine service on all the great holidays at the mother church and contribute to its repair. Long after this some diffisrences arose between the inhabitants of Stepney and those of Strat- ford,j- who seem to have been desirous of rendering themselves inde- pendent of the mother church. Our villagers were worsted in the strug- gle in the year 1 497, and an agreement was then drawn up, whereby the 1 497 inhabitants of Stratfordj- promised for the future to acknowledge them- selves parishioners of Stepney, and their chapel subject to that church. The inhabitantsof Stepney on their part agreed toaccept 24s. perannum in lieu of all charges for repairs of the mother church, & to dispense with the attendance of the people of Bow except on the feast of their patron, S. Dunstan, and on the Wednesday in Whitsun-week, when they were to accompany the rest of the parishioners in procession to S. Paul's Ca- thedral. In the reign of Henry VIII., when Westminster was made a bishopric, the parish of Stepney was excused from this procession to S. Paul's upon condition that the rector and churchwardens of Stepney and the curate and chapel-wardens of Stratford (Bow) should attend on the said day, and make an offering of lod. at S. Peter's, Westminster. .| By reference to the Chantry Roll in the Augmentation Office it will be Chantrey seen that Hellen Hilliard gave certain property producing 50s. per ann. Roll and other persons subscribed a total of _^^I3 6s. 8d. "to augment the priest's wages." When the chantries and guilds were seized by the King, these lands, sharing the general fate, were sold. The inhabitants attempted to recover them but without avail. Even all the " olde Latin Boks " were taken. The Minister's salary in Henry VIII. 'sday was jTS per annum, but in the year 1654 the sum of £c)2 was voted to Fulk Bellers, minister of Stratford Bow.§ It is certain, then, that a chapel existed at Bow during the fourteenth & fifteenth centuries, thesite & plan of which were beyond doubt identical with what is now seen, except that the vestries & organ-chamber, here- after mentioned, have been added. * Vol. /., p. 742. -f • Stratford was synonymous with Bow and Old Ford. ^.Newcourt, Vol. I., p. 742. ^Lysons,p. 497. 1 1 Dates of the Mr.Insley in his Memorials then says that "no part of the present struc- ediftce ture, judging from its architecture, is older than the closing years of the fifteenth century — about 1 480 or 1 490." Having very carefully studied the various partsof the fabric and searched the writings of Stow, Strype, Leland, Lysons, and the Parish Registers, I can come to no conclusion other than that Mr. Insley is mistaken. Neither do I see the force of his argument when he says, referring to the dispute of 1497: "Now, what more likely than that the people of Bow, having just become pos- sessed of a newchurch, should desire to be independent and to be formed into a separate parish, free from the control of, and obligation to pay dues to Stepney, the benefits of union with which parish were henceforth all on one side ?" The conjecture is groundless, and Lysons, writing about 1797, distinctly says " the original structure still remains." " Itconsistsof achancel,nave, and two aisles, separated from the nave by octagonal pillars and pointed arches. The tower is of stone, square and plain and not embattled." Now we know that the church has not been pulled down since that year, and therefore we may safely conclude that it is the original structure erected under the Licence of Bishop Baldock in i 3 1 1 . It has, however, been altered and restored so often that only the wall of the north aisle can be properly attributed to that date, & the following pages are an attempt to trace so far as is possible the various alterations from that day to this. It seems almost certain that a few years before the compromise of 1 497 a complete restoration had been undertaken, for much of the work is of this date, viz.: (i) The base and middle storey of the tower, including the tower arch and west window, also the two traceried windows just exposed by the present restoration. (2) The chancel walls and ceiling, but not the gabled roof over. (3) The roof of the nave (about half of which has just been renewed). (4) The walls of the nave and the lower portions of the south aisle wall. For many years the exit from the church was by two doors, one at the west end of each aisle. The west doors were closed and the space within the tower (now occupied by lobbies, &c.) formed aconvenient baptistry. This probably remained until shortly after the death, in 1701, of Mrs. PriscaCoborn, Bow's greatest benefactress, her trustees erected a gallery in the tower, projecting a little more than one bay into the nave to ac- commodate the children of the school she founded. Also she bequeathed funds for the construction of a coved ornamental plaster ceiling, with a large central dome. T/iededka- It does not appear that the dedicationofthe church to S.Mary took place tion until 1 7 1 9, when the church ceased to be a chapel-of-ease to Stepney & 12 became the parish church of S. Mary Stratford Bow. Until this date it was known as the chapel of Stratford Bow. Sir Walter Besant states: "It was formerly the church of a nunnery founded at Stratford-le-Bow by William the Conqueror." This is quite a mistake, as was pointed out by the "Builder" of June lo, 1899. -^^ doubt he was confusing Bow with the neighbouring church of Bromley, which exactly fits his description. The two parish churches are not more than 300 yards apart. The change was brought about byan Act of Parliament in the ninth year '/'//f Act of of the reign of Queen Anne (171 1), followed at intervals by supplemen- n Anne tary Acts for the erection of fifty new churches "in and about the cities 171 1 of London and Westminster & the suburbs thereof." Limehouse, Spital- fields and S. George's in the East were among the number & were made independent parishes. By the same Acts the Hamlet of Bow was separ- ated from the parish of Stepney in 1 7 1 9. '719 In the "Minutes of Vestries and other matters,"* is a resolution of con- Vestry siderable interest and importance which reads as follows : minutes 1736. Thursday . 25/// March . ^73" The Chancel being very much out of repair and it appearing to the Vestry that it ought to be kept in repair at the charge of the Parish, Agreed that the said Chancel be forthwith put into necessary repair. Six Vestrymen present. It is probable that the oak panelling of the sanctuary of the chancel was introduced at this time but no record appears to exist. The nextitemofinterestisthefireof April 1747, which did considerable 1747 damage. It was customary to keep the valuable deeds and papers in the tower, and the original Deed of Consecration was much injured. The clock also was destroyed. The fire seems to have originated from a house on the south side of the church and the clock, which then hung over the roadway and projected a considerable distance, afforded a ready means of communicating the flames to the sacred building. This projecting clock does not seem to have been restored, for the fol- lowing minute apparently refers only to the works and dials of the clock in the tower. 1762. Sunday. 6th August. 1762 Mr. Thwaite ofClerkenwellto thoroughly repair the Church Clock for the sum of Ten Guineas and to keep the same in repair and wind and regulate the same every week and clean when necessary for the sum of ^os. per annum. * From a copy in the possession of Mr. H. L. fVheatley, parish clerk. 13 In the year 1755, in preparation for the war afterwards known as the Seven Years' War, lead was greatly in demand and many public build- ings were stripped of their roofs to provide material for bullets. The chancel of Bow, so runs the legend, shared this fate; and, it being neces- sary to procure protection from the weather, the gable was formed in brickwork, and roofed with tiles as now seen. The fact that the roof was thus altered is certain, but no record has yet been found indicating whe- ther the scarcity of lead affected the question.* The legend Another legend of doubtful authenticity refers to the alleged burying of oftheiwhap- unbaptised infants in the roof of the chancel. This has been done in other fixed infants churches, the parents believing, it is said, that the holy angels hovering around the sanctuary would be more likely to take the babes to Heaven than if interred in some less holy place. Though the legend may have gained some believers there can be no doubt that such a custom was never practised at Bow, for until 1755 the roof was flat, and no gable existed in which the body could be placed, and it is highly improbable that such an act would be done during the last century and a half. Nevertheless the roof was entered a few years ago & careful search was made: no remains, save those of one or two sparrows, were discovered. The Boii- In some of the older illustrations it will be seen that the westernmost Baker windows of both aisles were at one time doors. It appears from a tale that has been handed down, that, for about a century, a baker's shop existed opposite the north aisle door. This baker cooked the Sunday dinner for several of the shopkeepers living on the south side of the way. An assist- ant posted inside the church gaveasignal when the preacher reached his "seventhly and lastly," whereupon the baker & his boys instead of walk- ing round outside the churchyard, took theshortcutthroughthechurch, making such a clatter with their hot plates and pies that after vainly at- tempting to stop the practice by other means, the authorities blocked up the doors and re-opened those at the west end under the tower. -f* It is hardly conceivable that the baker's action alone caused the doors to be blocked, though it is probable the incident related may have had some bearing upon the alterations at this time. It would seem that after the minute of 1762 the vestry no longer under- took the repair and maintenance of the church. The repair- In 1 794 the church was cleaned and re-decorated, and the south aisle re- ingof'ijgj\. stored and refaced externally with Portland stone as now seen. It is prob- able also that the pulpit and seats were altered. *SeeCh.IF.p.^6. •j- The parish clerk affirms that it was the baker s customers who were the of- fenders. H In 1824 the crowded condition of the church and churchyard was be- coming a scandal. Every fresh interment caused the removal and dese- cration of some deceased predecessor, &, perhaps the most potent reason of all, the living foresaw that they could not be interred in Bow church- yard unless the latter were enlarged. The outcome of the agitation was an appeal to Parliament for a special Act to empower the purchase of the The Act of old market-place (long since disused) at the east end; and the purchase 1825 of the taverns and houses at the west end. The Bill was passed & became law on the 20th May i 825, and shortly afterwards the demolition began of "all the premises which lie at the east and west ends of the present churchyard of the said parish church of S. Mary Stratford Bow, and be- tween the Turnpike Roads which surround the same."* At the same time the low wall enclosing the churchyard was demolished & replaced by the present cast-iron railing on the granite base. Four feet, it is said, of the topmost earth and bones were removed to the Stratford marshes, and thus fresh provision was made for the rapidly increasing number of burials. In 1829 the fall of the upper part of the tower necessitated another par- Fallofpor- tial restoration, which is described in Chapter IV. tion oftlic For many years the church windows had been fitted with red curtains, tourrini'i^Zi) but these were removed in 1836, and in 1844 the ceiling put up at the expense of Mrs. Prisca Coborn-f- was removed & the old rafters exposed. The restora- About I 850 the small addition to the brick vestry was made, which ad- tionsofi'^T^t) dition is now used as the choir entrance lobby. To this alteration is due, /;/;r/i844 no doubt, the blocking up of the window discovered in making the new doorway by the pulpit as described in Chapter II. Referring to the drawing of the interior dated i 820 it will be seen that two of the piers were, at that date, of much greater bulk, and that the ar- cading ended with a half arch at the eastern end. These piers were cut down and the arcading completed as now seen. The west end of the south aisle was at one time filled with a gallery for the sole use of the inmates of the workhouse. .| It was small and very low and was removed in i 855. For years past stones of varying size had from time to time fallen from thefaceof the tower, especially during the prevalenceof a westerly wind, & many people were afraid to enter the church. The pathway (the gates of which may still be seen) across the churchyard at that time, ran close by the west doors, but in 1883, the fall of stones & debris increasing, and one large stone falling within a few inches of a passing pedestrian, the * From a copy kindly lent by Mr Wheat ley. -y See p. i 2. .| This Jine old house is shoivn in the illustration No. 3 opposite p. 8. 15 pathway was shifted several feet to the west, and such loose stones as could be easily reached without a scaffold were wedged up with Roman cement. The alteration of the east window is described under the head of stained glass in Chapter III. and also in Chapter IV. In fact only one alteration remains to be recorded in this chapter dealing with the History of Bow Church, viz., that in 1 870 an organ chamber was built upon the south side of the chancel. The west window and the tower arch had from 1702 until this date been completely blocked out from view by the organ, the gallery & the ringers' floor. The removal of the organ, followed in 1891 by the raising of the ringers' floor and the demolition of the gallery, has resulted in an unobstructed view of the finest architectural feature in the church. What would the worshippers of only some fifty years ago say if they stood to-day in the church as it now appears? Probably they would regret that theirfamilypewsweregone and that the "paupers and common people" now sit side by side with their more wealthy neighbours instead of being relegated to galleries. The loss of the heavy coved ornamental plaster ceiling and the exposure of the medieval rafters would possibly excite their condemnation, and question would be raised why the choir should not face the east like other people. Doors have become windows, and in one case a window (first blocked up) has become a door. Galleries, organ, seats, pulpit, curtains and even the nave arcading and floor have been re- moved, altered, or re-arranged, and the ceiling gone, within this short period. Probably the church would not now be recognised. Externally, however, the case is very different, for though the iron rail- ing takes the place of the old low wall, and the organ chamber and choir vestry have been built, the tower, the nave, aisles and chancel remain the same. 16 VI. The North Aisle Wall and Old Vestry. m <" -a OJ 5C -13 > u H VIII. Kty TO 1^60 |-|00 ^^ I J870 r^^^v^ mm cs I ■■■■!'■ ■■' 1 30 _J The Plan. Showing the approximate dates attributed to the various parts. CHAPTER II. AN EXAMINATION OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE CHURCH AND THE MATERIALS USED THEREIN FROM TIME TO TIME. TH E church is remarkable neither for constructional skill, nor enrichment of detail. Surrounded oi old by marsh land, the build- ing materials nearest to hand did not admit either of vigorous treatment, or delicate ornamentation; and it is surprising that in such a position, and built with such materials, the walls are as sound and the structure as secure as it is. The chancel and aisles may be said to be built of chalk, flint, and ragstone rubble faced chiefly with thin coursed ashlar built with little or no bond. Even the brick walls of the nave are constructed largely of chalk & rub- ble. The mortar, used lavishly in the construction of the walls, is gener- ally of excellent quality, that in the lower bay of the tower especially so. It is mottled in appearance, this being occasioned by the large quantity of chalk mixed with it, and it is exceedingly tough. Itiswell that it is so, for on the soundness of the mortar depends the lengthof lifeof the build- ing. The chalk throughout is perfectly dry & sound, and is occasionally found in roughly squared blocks; but as a general rule this is not so. In a very few instances during the recent restoration, chalk was found on the external face of the wall, but was then very much decayed. The earlier brickwork is of good quality. A curious feature of many of Earlier the red bricks in the eastern gable and elsewhere, was the large number Brick-work of thick broken claytobacco pipe stemswhichhad been embeddedinthe walls. The oak timbers in both chancel and nave roofs have practically been untouched until the present restoration. Speaking generally the structural features of this remnant of medizeval architecture, are (i) the absence of bond in the masonry; (2) the success- ful employmentof chalk in large quantities; and (3) the excellent quality of the mortar. The nave is constructed with chalk and rubble, faced with red bricks ex- Nave ternally & internally, the latter being plastered. The south wall is a little out of plumb, and the north wall very much so; the latter also bulges outwards considerably. A line stretched taut from the tower end to the chancel end of the wall, reveals the fact that it bulges 8] inches outwards in the centre, while it is y\ inches out of plumb in its total height for bl 17 nearly the whole length. The reason for this has been assigned to the re- moval in 1 844, of the ceiling and joists which were said to tie the two opposite walls together. When, however, it is borne in mind that the walls are not fractured, and bear no signs of having gone quickly; also that the ceiling was no part of the original design (being added by the Trustees of Mrs. Coburne in 1 702, and removed again in 1 844) it will be conceded that the defect is unlikely to be the work of half a century only. The nave was originally supported upon stone piers of varyingsize,with a plain chamfered arcading. After many alterations all assumed the pre- sent octagonal shape; and it is to these repeated alterations we owe the fact that only two bays are alike, all the others differ both in height and span. The piers are probably a ragstone, though a high authority has ex- pressed the opinion that they may be Hassock. That they are limestone may be assumed. At one of the Restorations referred to in the preceding chapter they were roughened and plastered. Clerestory The clerestory windows are of Box ground stone,* some of which having JVindows weathered badly, were, at a former restoration, patched & repaired with Roman cement. This coating having become loose in places, it has been found necessary to again repair them; this time Portland stone has been used, together with the best of theChilmark taken from the hood mould of the " Churchwarden Gothic " window in the chancel. Oak Timbers The oak timbers in the roof are of great strength and weight, taking into consideration their number (there are forty-four principals) & the work they are called upon to perform. It is probable that they have remained untouched, until recently, since the day they were framed. North Aisle The north aisle wall is built of random rubble, and is surmounted by a red brick battlemented parapet. The wall abounds in chalk, & it is clearly of older construction than any other portion of the edifice. On removing the interior plaster in order to fix the new oak wainscoting, the wall was discovered to be largely faced with chalk, some of which was squared & bedded after the manner of masonry; & even on the outside face several pieces of chalk were found, though greatly perished. Much firestone was also found built in with the flints and ragstone rubble on the exterior face. The firestone was so badly decayed (exposing the interior mortar & chalk to the assaults of the weather and to the attacks of atmospheric gases) that it was found necessary to remove it, and replace with Port- land. On the whole the interior of the wall is still fairly sound, and as long as it remains weather tight no danger is to be apprehended. While piercing the wall for the new doorway leading to the vestries, an * C. Mitchell, The Master Mason. 18 no:.. IX. West Elevation of the Tower. From a drawingdated 1888. gIpIp^->^-^tq^ ^il::z^:ti^L^^^^^:^lM^l.:rUT^ X o o W u O o N CO g c Q 'T3 U 3 •T3 O X a> w '13 O N OO (U -4-t G Q 13 u u n3 C u u S U O c ► c o Scale of Feet 40 50 60 70 80 r XII. Detail of the West Doorway and Window, before the restoration, showing the decayed condition of the work. XIII. The Newly-Discovered Window Tracery in the Tower. > X XV. The South-East Buttress of the Chancel showing the fracture and settlement. XVa. The South-West Buttress of the Tower. The plumb-Hne shows the extent of the decay of the past four centuries. interesting discovery was made. About 5 ft. 6 in. from the floor level was a splayed red brick window opening* with an oaken lintel very much decayed, & a foot above that, built into the wall, was another oak scant- ling. The inside of the opening, which was 7 ft. 6 in. high by 5 ft. wide, was filled with the remains of 15th century window tracery, mullions, and jambs; very much chipped and broken, but still bearing the work- man's tool marks, and on one side a thick coat of whitewash. A portion of a moulded door jamb, some remains of more modern windows and a few small blocks of firestone and chalk, filled up the remainder of the window, which was thickly plastered over. The new doorway is in brown bed Portland. The existing windows in this wall are modern and are built of Portland Wind'rws stone of good quality, but mixed here and there with a soft freestone, which, having perished, has been replaced. The mortar used in the con- struction of this wall was found to be very firm, except where itwas open to attacks from the weather through the decay of the outer face. The wall is two feet thick at the present ground level. The red brick battlements were capped with moulded Hollington-i^ and Battlements Bath stone coping (the latter probably original) most of which fell to pieces on being removed, and which has been replaced with Portland. The Hollington stones have for the most part been retained. The south aisle wall is 2 ft. 5 in. in thickness and has a Portland stone South Aisle facing. A few of the original ragstone quoins still remain at the western end. It was during the recent repair of these that the mason found a few fragments of window mouldings embedded in the thickness of the wall. The Portland stone ashlar with which the battlements are faced, is ex- ceedingly thin, in some instances being not more than 2|^ in., backed with loose rubble of poor quality. This has been removed and replaced with sound stone without disturbing the exterior face, except where abso- lutely necessary. The battlement at the South West angle has been re- built. Both aisles have flat plastered ceilings with deal rafters and are covered with lead. The chancel is built of ragstone rubble, coursed externally. There is also Chancel much chalk and flint in the interior of the walls. The old mortar is gener- ally of excellent quality,exceptonthe south side, the upperpart of which was one mass of rubbish. The east gable has long been covered with a thick growth of ivy, which, though very picturesque, wrought great havoc in the walls. Hundreds of birds made this part of the church their nesting-place, & during the recent renovation several cart-loads of litter were removed from behind the stones of the ashlar face. * See Chap. I. p. 1 6. f Staffordshire. b2 19 The Tower The battlements were found to be in so precarious a condition as to ne- cessitate their being practically rebuilt, a very large proportion of the original ragstone ashlar was refixed. The S.E. angle fell during the pro- gress of the work and has been rebuilt. In a mortar joint in the adjoining battlement a copper coin of the reign of George III., bearing the crown- ed harp and the legend "Hibernia," date 182-, was discovered, proving a partial restoration early in the century. The corner buttress* at this same angle had no foundation whatever, and was fractured its whole length; the N.E, angle buttress was also several inches out of plumb and was badly cracked for half its length, from the top weathering downwards. Both buttresses have been rebuilt, many of the old quoins being retained in their former positions. The window on the south side is of good Portland stone. Formerly the outer members were of Chilmark very badly constructed, they are now of brown bed Portland. On the inside, the ragstone relieving arch has been rebuilt & a new key-stone inserted. Immediately above this window, extending from the wall plate downwards and striking off towards the angle of the building, was an old fracture; this was well syringed out and grouted, bond stones being built across both externally and internally. The square headed window on the north side is built of Portland, and the large east window of Bath stone. The oak-panelled timbers of the ceiling are well-preserved. New oak trusses now replace the old ones, & iron girders carry the wall plates and tie in the walls in place of the former beams, which had so far decayed as to render them useless. The chancel walls are 2 ft. i in. in thickness at the present ground level, & are still slightly out of plumb. The red brick gable was seven inches out of the perpendicular and the Bath stone coping was very loose & rotten. The tower, the most important feature of the church, is mas- sively built, being 66 ft. 10 in. highbyabout23ft. 2in. square; the turret at the south-east angle rises another 10 ft. 3 in. above the tower battlements. At the '/:=z>\ \ ground level the walls are 5 ft. 7 in. thick; at the level of the ringers' chamber 4 ft. 2 in., and at the belfry windows 3 ft. in thickness. The exterior face is almost entirely of ragstone, but internally firestone is much employed. ''^ See illustration, plate ij./xz^f i 9. 20 The two western buttresses are exceptionally narrow, being about 2 ft. across for a base projection of 4 ft. 9 in., and a height of 47 feet; and have little or no bond into the main wall. In the lower bay of the tower a very great numberof the stones are bedded on oyster shells. Until the restora- tion the upper halves of the N.W. and N.E. buttresses were badly frac- tured ; the former for 6 feet and the latter for i o feet below their respec- tive topmost water tablings; the latter also bulged slightly. Many of the stones in the buttresses, as well as in the main walls of the tower have the appearance of massiveness; but in many cases a stone which measures over four feet in length on the external face, is but five or six inches in thickness, and occasionally even less than that. To give an ex- ample of the loose method of constructional masonry employed in the church — the N.W. buttress had but eight internal quoins in the northern angle & nine in its western angle, for a height of 47 feet; while the S.W. buttress had eleven and five in its western and southern angles, respect- ively. Practically thewhole of the ashlar face above the west window had become separated from the interior rubble, on account of this same loose- ness of bond. A great heap of litter was taken from behind the masonry here; while the back of the hood mould of the west window was com- pletely honeycombed by the ubiquitous London sparrow. The upper bay of the tower is built of coursed Kentish rag externally, & rubble internally. The belfry windows, quoins, coping stones, and string course, are in Derbyshire grit. The stone isof good quality; but the mor- tar is not so good as that employed in the older work, the joints there being much closer and the masonry geometrically accurate & the whole thoroughly well built. The battlements, however, and that part of the turret above the tower do not appear to have been built with the same care. The N. and S. windows in the Ringer's Chamber had been bricked up for many years; the outside being stuccoed and jointed to imitate stone. It is to this that we owe the preservation of so much of the original tracery. The exterior Portland stone arches belong to a previous re- storation. THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY MORTAR IN BOW CHURCH. The following extracts are taken from an Article on " The Chemical Examination of Mortar," by H. F. Hills, F.C.S., which was published in "The Builder" of Sept. 17, 1898. " The sample of Bow Church mortar taken for analysis was from a joint in the chancel wall, &c is believed to have been made when the wall was first erected in A.D. 1 480-1 490. The joint was in too good a condition b3 21 to justify penetrating into it to any great depth, but the extreme exterior surface was avoided, "Comparing the analysis of this mortar with Mr. Hughes' analyses (of mortars from the ancient abbeys and castles of the British Isles) it is found that Corfe Castle possesses the mortar which most nearly ap- proaches it in composition, thus: Probable date of erection Bow Church. Corfe Castle, about A. D. 1 480- 1 490. 1000. Water (lost at 21 2oF.) - - - 4-48 2-42 Water of combination - - - 3-3° 4-02 Lime _ _ _ - - 26-55 31-05 Magnesia - - - Potash - - - Soda _ _ _ - - ■31 •28 •20 •15 - _ Oxide of iron Alumina - s 4-00 •95 •15 Sulphuric anhydride Carbon dioxide - - - 4-86 18-47 •26 22-86 Chlorine - - - - - •65 Gelatinous silica, soluble in alkali - 8-37 7-50 Insoluble matter (sand) - - 29-28 29-51 Other matter and loss - •38 100-00 lOQ-OO "According to Mr. Hughes, the mortar of Corfe Castle is one of the best mortars examined by him, but the above analysis shows that Bow Church mortar is of an equally good quality. It is remarkable that Mr. Hughes did not find as much as 1-5 percent, of sulphuric anhydride in any of the ancient mortars, whereas Bow Church mortar contained 4-86 per cent. This may have been present in the lime originally used, or partly present in the water used for mixing the mortar, or it may have been absorbed from the atmosphere through the agency of rain water. The sand when separated from the calcareous portion of the mortar appeared to be of good quality, the grains being irregular in size,&for the most part having sharp edges. " It must be remembered that most of the carbon dioxide, the combined water, and possibly of the sulphuric anhydride, has been absorbed since the lime and sand were mixed. Deducting these three constituents, and 22 39'9i I r4i 36-19 0-42 5-45 •52 I00"00 calculating the percentage proportions of the remainingcompounds,the analysis appears thus: Bow Church Mortar (on quicklime basis). Moisture - - - - - 6' 10 Insoluble silicious matter - - _ Silica, soluble in alkali _ _ _ Lime ______ Magnesia _____ Oxide of iron and alumina - - - Other matter and loss _ _ _ "The proportions of sand and lime used were probably (roughly) one of sand to one of lime." THE COMPOSITION OF THE BUILDING STONE. The following article from the "Architect," Vol. LX, p. 146, corrobo- rates the opinion that the stone employed in the original structure was most probably Kentish ragstone: The Stone in Old Bow Church. By Harold F. Hills, F.C.S. "Much difference of opinion has recently been expressed as to the nature and source of the stone used in the construction of the oldest existing portion of Bow Church (1480 — 90 a.d.), that Mediaeval building in East London which since 1896 has remained closed on account of its dangerous condition, and is now about to be restored. "Withaviewtogaining, if possible, some conclusive information on the subject, the writer has subjected some pieces of the stone to careful chemical analysis, in order that the composition of a specimen might be compared with the published analyses of the building stones from the various English quarries. "A difficultyhas, however, been encountered owing to the fact that even our most modern text-books publish only a few analyses made sixty years ago for the Royal Commission on the Selection of Stones for the Houses ot Parliament, and the solitary analysis of Kentish ragstone and hassock made by Phillips for Whichcord's paper on ' Ragstone ' in 1 846. "Careful search through the literature dealing with building stone dur- b4 23 ing the last half-century reveals very few additional analyses, and the comparison cannot therefore be as complete as might be desired. Nevertheless, the results are interesting, and indicate very strongly that the stone is in all probability Kentish ragstone, as will be seen by the fol- lowing figures: 4-* o o (J Water pared one. a 0 c s of Iron and uminium. nation atter. 1) Stone. IS 3 u rt . bulk of d as com ulkofSt ■t-f 3 O O a c resent in Forms. rt 0 f Combi latile M u u 3 4-» '0 *J u X> • -M Q p.. <:i v _ 0 0 3 4-* 'G Per cen absorb with c^ J2 u rt U a C 0 u rt u 0 Water andV X! "3 Bow Church, N. chancel wall i6<;-8 6-4 yi;o 88-7^ o-io i-oi; i-8o 0-05 0-60 trace Bow Church, base of tower - 168-3 5-0 6-jo 86-07 0-40 0-44 2-20 I -60 0-42 0'20 Kentish rag . (Whichcord) 1 66 '•3 6-5 92-6 0-5 0-4 "No other published analysis compares so closely with the composition of the Bow Church stone as that of Kentish rag quoted by Whichcord, & although the percentage amount ofwater absorbed by Kentish rag (taken from Rivington's ' Notes') appears to be less, this is accounted for by the fact that the Bow Church stone showed signs of decay, and as a limestone decays it becomes more porous. T/ie E^ect of London Air. London "In order to ascertain whether the composition of the surface of the Atmosphere stone had been affected by the East London atmosphere, some surface scrapings were taken from the same spot in the chancel wall as the sam- ple of stone previously analysed, and it was found the sulphuric anhydride had risen from a mere trace 107-78 per cent., while the amount of 'vola- tile matter and combined water' had risen from -05 to 2-24 per cent. " These results corroborate those of Dr. Voelcker, who in 1 864 showed that house soot contains sulphate of ammonia, and that this sulphate of ammonia converts limestone (carbonate of lime) into sulphate of lime, and stated that in the presence of moisture the sulphate of lime'takesup water of crystallisation, and thereby leads to exfoliation of the stone.' " 24 XXV. The Old Fourteenth Century Font. XXVI. The " New Font" of 1 624. CHAPTER III. AN ACCOUNT OF THE MONUMENTS, INTERNAL FITTINGS AND FURNITURE OF THE CHURCH. THE old font is now carefully preserved in the north-west corner Tfw Fonts of the aisle. It isevidently of considerable merit, and a good piece of 1 5 th century work ; octagonal in shape with a quatrefoil carved on each side of the bowl. It is unfortunately so decayed as to render the task of deciphering the various designs & the lettering next to impossible, and the illustration of it in the extra illustrated copy of Lysons' "Environs of London," in theGuildhall Library, is not quite reliable, though the base shown therein is doubtless more correct than the cement restoration now to be seen. The newer font is of Italian Renaissance character and is of marble. No record exists showing when or how it was acquired, but from its char- acter and also from a marginal note to be seen in the old registers, its date may with tolerable certainty be attributed to 1624. The entry in ques- tion is as follows: "The font newset up. This the first child christened," and the date given is October 17th of the above year. The font is oval in shape, and is in excellent preservation. Owing to the introduction of this new font the old one was relegated to an out-of-the-way corner of the church for about a century. Then it experienced several changes of fortune. First of all it was sent across to the workhouse yard opposite and used as a flower stand. Thence it was rescued through the interventionofthechurchwardens, brought back to the church and placed in the chancel. At the Induction Service of 1 880 it was again driven forth and found its way to a builder's yard near the church. Upon the death, a few years later, of the builder, who was also churchwardenatthetime,thefontwas planted in thechurchyard among the tombstones, the stem or base being buried about afoot in the ground. In the year 1 89 1 it was again allotted a corner within the sacred edifice. At the present moment it has been removed from the church by a firm of sculptors and marble masons, for repairs. The tables now in use in the respective vestries have both served for a Communion number of years as communion tables. That in the clergy vestry is the 'lahles finer piece of work. It is of oak, with spiral triplet legs and an inlaid top; the whole being polished. Its date is unknown, but it is probably of last century, and took the place of the table now in the choir vestry which is 25 of the Stuart period in character, and probably is of the same date as the new font, though this is conjecture. In 1892, however, when altar fron- tals were first used at Bow, the then rector discarded the newer table and again used the older one, which was lengthened and heightened, though somewhat crudely. It has now been reduced to its original dimensions, but still bears the marks of the alteration. The Com- Until the reseating in 1 887 the communion rail ran round three sides of mi/nion Rail the table as shown on the older plans. The panelled recesses on each side (answering to the sedilia in other churches) were used (though not with- out protests from some) for the choristers' hats, overcoats, and umbrellas. The seats themselves could be lifted & formed a sort of box or cupboard which was used at one time for storing all sorts of rubbish. In the cleans- ingand reseating in 1 891 under the supervision of Sir Arthur Blomfield, A. R. A., the altar rail was continued straight across the chancel, the latter raised to its present level, and the existing tiles laid. It was not, however, till the present year that, by the munificence of the present rector, the new carved oak altar and re-table, the dossal, altar carpets, & choir seats, were added. The Carved The church possesses two very fine examples of carved oak chairs. They Oak Chairs were obtained by the rector and churchwardens in 1857 or 1858. There appears to be no other record than this. The Pulpit A reference to the plans of 1 824 and 1828 shows alterations in the posi- tion of the pulpit. In fact, on no two plans are the positions identical.The earliest position seems to have been about one-third of the way down the church against one of the piers of the north arcade. This pier was much wider, but was subsequently reduced to its present dimensions. Without doubt the well-known three-decker oak pulpit was retained in one posi- tion or another until well into the present century. In 1836 this pulpit was altered, the seats for the clerk and minister being nearly on the same level beneath the pulpit. The three-decker was again altered a few years later, thus forming a simple moulded panelled pulpit. It will hardly be believed nowadays that in consequence of the oak be- coming rather darkand gloomy in comparison with the new pews of this date, it was painted, grained, and varnished in a poor imitation of new oak. The last the writer saw of this pulpit was in a music hall opposite the church; it had been cut down and was apparently used as a pay-desk. The present pulpit is of oak, very light, and it stands upon a stone base which is hardly so good as the pulpit itself. The pulpit base bears the in- scription: " To the glory of God. Presented by George JVilliam Allan as a thankoffering^ 1887." 26 XVI. The Interior, looking Eastward, in 1849. From a water-colour drawing kindly lent by the Rev. G. T. Driffield, M. A. > X -a u ^ u. Q o H ^ oo O HH c lU #* -n Pi u, 1L> us -C ^ ^-l 4-> >> (U x: ^ 4-* c V W) • — ' c >. -;^ -a o c o ^ btj O c & i~t rt c 1^ HH HD u t- -C .^ H O O o t- (U 4»* rt & rt s o u. X X -T3 C -a o a, < The following minute* is evidence of the origin and date of an earlier The Or^an organ : 1762. Sunday. October yd. At this meeting Mr. Alexander Hill, the churchwarden, proposed to make a present of an Organ, to be put in the Church for the use of the Parish; and Mr. Benjamin Wayne was chosen Organist unanimously at a salary of f^20 per annum, to be paid out of the monies arisingfrom the Bills and Ground. Present: The Rector, i Churchwarden, 2 overseers^ 4 Vestrymen. A faculty was obtained and the organ duly set up. This I believe to have been a very small instrument whose long keys were black and short keys white, the reverse of the ordinary modern key-board. It is said to have been brought from some neighbouring tea- gardens. It was replaced early in the present century by Messrs. J. W. Walker& Sons, who constructed a new instrument in the gallery. In the year 1 887, by the generosity of the widow of the late churchwarden, f- this small organ was partly rebuilt and modernized. It is much to be re- gretted that the fashion of 1 870 should have led to the construction of a chamberwhich effectually detractsfrom such good qualities aa the organ possesses. The seating has been altered so often that it is difficult to regard any one The Seats arrangement as permanent or characteristic in the church. High-backed pews, well-cushioned, and some with little curtains, were in vogue in the early half of the present century. A curious little drawing is still to be seen in one of the vestries showing apian of the seats in 1804. No know- ledge remains of what existed at an earlier date. The Restoration Com- mittee has now provided chairs. The church unfortunately possesses one large stained glass window. It is 'The East garish in colour, hard and unpleasing in outline, and of no artistic merit. Window This is the east window, inserted some thirty years since to the memory of members of the Soutter family. It is said that the then rector would not tolerate either figures or symbols, but even that is hardly sufficient excuse for the production now seen. The only good original window in the church is at the west end. This is The West an excellent example of the architecture of the period, viz., about 1480. Window It is filled in withclearglasswith the exception oftwo lights of (probably seventeenth century) enamelled glass representing Moses and Aaron respectively. These, with the twelve enamelled glass lights of the same * From copies of the minutes in the possession of Mr. H. L. Wheatley, parish clerk. •f- Wm. Bangs. 27 character (in the western-most window of the north aisle) representing the twelve apostles, were all taken from the east window to make room for the above-mentioned stained glass. It is said* that at one time the east window was entirely blocked & light obtained only by the north and south windows of the chancel. About 1818 (when only the lower portion of the window was bricked up) the enamelled glass, referred to below, was inserted, while the large boards containing the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments were immediately underneath, facing the congregation, in the position now occupied by the dossal. Upon the minutes of the Select Vestry will be found the following entry: 1758 Sunday 2nd "July. , At a meeting of the Select Vestry it is ordered that the Lord's Prayer^ Creed ^ and Decalogue be paint ^gild and write the characters on the Glory, the whole to be in gold for the sum of Twelve pounds Five shillings and at the same time Nathaniel Sawyer was ordered to wash, white wash and colour the ceilings and walls of the Church as before for the sum of Three pounds. Maces About the year 1855, during the churchwardenship of Mr. Goddard, a pair of maces, purporting to be of solid silver, were purchased for ^"J^. Unfortunately their intrinsic value is small as it has been proved that the metal used was pewter, not silver. The maces bear neither date nor mark upon them. The workmanship is skilful, and they doubtless lent a touch of picturesqueness to many a ceremony at which Mr. Goddard and his successors, officiated. They may be seen in plate No, 23, opposite p. 27. The Bells The church has eight bells, five given in 1760, each of which is thus inscribed: " fohn Cook, Esquire, collar-maker to His Majesty, The Principal subscriber " " Lester & Pack of London, fecit, 1 760." The next in point of age is inscribed as follows: " The Rev. Mr. Allan Harrison Eccles, M.A., Rector. ^' J i^^(->i i Church Wardens, S. Mary Stratford, Bow. " Thos. Mears of London,fecit 1797." A small bell, sometimes termed the "priest's bell," and sometimes the "sanctus bell," was added in 1821, and bears the following inscription: " f. Rose, R. E. Crawley, Church Wardens, 1821." * Mr. H. L. Wheatley. 28 X X o 'JJ < O H XXVII. The Amcotts and Wyltbrd Brass. The remaining two bells are dated 1858, but who gave them does not appear. The Rev. George Townshend Driffield, Rector, and Godfrey Goddard, Richard Walter Crawley, Church Wardens, are the names inscribed, and " S. Mears, Founder, London, 1 858." Though not the "Bow bells" which can claim to have recalled Dick Whittington with achime so propheticof his future greatness, still there are few peals which can send forth a sweeter or more melodious chime. MONUMENTS The church is not rich in monuments that can claim to have more than a local interest. No doubt this is accounted for by the fact that Bow being (until last century) merely a chapel-of-ease to Stepney, the local celebri- ties preferred to be interred in their parish church. Among the few men of note connected with Bow Church are found the following names, extracted chiefly from Lyson's "Environs of London": Sir William Furnival died 1383. Edmund, Lord Sheffield of Spanish Armada fame; John le Neve, author of" Monumenta Anglicana"; and Dr. Samuel Jebb, an eminent physician, who published a life of Mary Queen of Scots and other works, all lived in Bow. Monuments* did at one time exist in the church to the memory of: Thomas Beaufix, Justice of Peace and Coroner, 1458. Henry Wilson, of Oldford, i 502. John Tate, 1508. Richard Gray, 1532. These monuments have, however, completely disappeared and I have failed to ascertain what position they occupied or anything about them. The oldest remaining monument and the one with perhaps the most artistic merit, is a brass on the wall of the south aisle. It has two shields bearing respectively the arms of Amcotts and Wylford,thus: L Amcotts. Quarterly ofeight:^ 1 . Arg. a tower bet. 3 covered cups ar. Amcotts. 2. Arg. a fesse bet. 3 escallops^//. Sutton. 3. Barry of 8 a. and^. a lion saliant su. Wasthouse. 4. Gu. gutty iirg. a castle triple towered or. Hawburgh. 5. Gu. on a bend arg. double cotised 3 escallops sa. 6. Arg. on a bend cotised sa. 3 griffin's heads erased of the field, beaked or. Sawley. 7. Barry ofbgu. and crm. Kirton. 8. Arg.. 3 annulets ^i/. bet. 2 bendlets sa. Dawery. Monuments The Amcotts and Wylford Brass hysons. 29 II. Amcotts, quarterly of eight, as above, impaling Gu. a chevron en- grailed charged with a crescent of the field, between 3 lion's faces. The blazoning of the first shield is copied from Lysons,but his descrip- tion of the second is quite inaccurate, and is as given above. The charges on both shields are now indistinct both in colour and form. Underneath is the following inscription in black letter: — Here under lyeth buryed Grace the Dowgther of Mr. John Wylford {late Alderman of London) and why lie she lyuyd the wyffe of John Amcotte of the same ciette,fyshemonger, by whom he had II sones named Hamond and Harry and a daughter namyed Grace the which Grace the Mother decessyd the XIII of July and her sonne Hamond decessyd ye VI of August folloying in Ao dni I 55 1 , and lyethe buryed with his mother whose dethes and vertuous end have ye in Remembrawns in Callyng to ye Lyuyng God for ye forgyveness ofyorsynnes. Though very small this monument is intricately carved as will be seen in the illustration,* and is an excellent exampleof the workof theTudor period. The Jordan In striking contrast to the last is the monument to the memory of Thomas Monument Jordan, 1 67 1 , fixed on the north wall of the chancel. In design it is em- inently of the Stuart period and well executed in marble. On a shield in the pediment above the inscription are the arms sab. an eagle displayed in bend or. cotised arg.\ Lysons also adds, a canton or. in sinister chief, but this is now obliterated, and the whole blazoning of shield much defaced. The shield is surmounted by a helmet bearing the crest, a hound sejant rampant, and mantling. Both the helm & mantling are decorated with colour, part of the helm being gilded. TheSummers In 1 704 a simple tablet of small size was erected and may still be seen on Monument the wall of the south aisle containing the following inscription: This Stone is erected to the Memory of Mrs. Elizabeth Summers, Widow of Mr. Samuel Summers, of this Parish. She was a kind Neighbour, a good Chris- tian, and a constant friend to the Poor. By her Last Will and Testament she ordered the Sum of Two Hundred Pounds to be invested in some Parliamentary Funds, upon this special Trust, that the Interest and Produce thereof be annu- ally distributed on New Tears Day to the Poor of this Parish for ever. She died the 2bth of June 1 764 aged ()^ years. The Walker Very different is the next monument, to John Walker, 1707; it is very Monument large, and most elaborately carved. In addition to busts of the departed, there are cherubs, weeping boys, a death's head and several skulls, carved * Illustration No. 27,/. 29. 3Q wreaths and flowers, drapery, scrolls, and a coat of arms. The shield for- merly bearing these arms is now quite bare ; it was fixed separately on the front of the upper part of the monument. The arms are given by Lysons / as follows: On a chevron between 3 crescents, as many amulets, quarter- ^^ ing 3 peacocks — the coat of Peacock of Finchley. The inscription reads: Sup. Hoc. Tumulo. Obdormit 'Jacobus Walker Armicer mercator integerrimus. Ecclesice Anglic ance decus: expers dolt, singulari cum humanitate omnes tractavit prole utriusq^ generis b:atus; Pater verefacillimus. In arnicas. inpauperes, & pracipue in Clerum. Liberalitate^et Charitate. pra cateris Insignis. cum octoginta annos confecisset invicta animipatientid, intrepide piam animam ejflavit die Ian. xxviii. anno salutis mdccxii. sita est etiam Dorothea uxor prcedicti lac: Walker, eximijs virtutibus, tam Animi quam Corporis, ornata. conjugi charissffio conjux chariss*'^'* mater indulgentissima. tn omnes a mica, com is. affabilis. mente. ac manu mumjica. hanc vitam {meliorem expectans) placide commutavit Maij xxix die, anno cetat xlvii. ara xtiance mdccvi. ad Parentum perpetuam memoriam Tho. Walker arm. Jil natu max. Hoc monumentum obsequij ergo devotissime posuit, et consecravit. The monument cf Thomas Rust on the wall of the south aisle is of very Rust Monu- poor design, but it is of interest in its reference to one of the oldest and ment most important industries of the parish, viz.. Dyeing. In Gascoyne's map of 1703, and other even older records, the dye works of Bow are noted. Indeed, it is comparatively recently that the works on the banks 31 of the Lea, in the Old Ford Road, were swallowed up by the Midland Railway Company. The bulk of the industry had, however, long since migrated to other parts of the Metropolis.* The stone is thus inscribed: In hopes of a joyful Resurrection Under a Grave stone near this place lies de- posited the Body of Thomas {son of Edward Rust Citizen and Draper of London and Scarlet Dyer ofOldfordin this Parish by Elizabeth his JViJe) who depart- ed this life on the 1 2th day of June 1 704 Aged i ^ years. Likewise Elizabeth {wife of the said Edward Rust she was third daughter off arvis Day of Melton Mobree in the County of Leicester, Gent, by his first wife Elizabeth") who departed this life the 6th day of November 1 706 Aged 5 5 years. Also the said Edward Rust [Toungest son of William Rust of Shirlington in the County of Bedford by Johanna his wife) . He had by the said Elizabeth issue four sons viz: Edward and William {who died infants and are buried in the Parish of St. Catherine Creed Church London, Stephen his only surviving and the above said Thomas) He departed this life the 21st day of December \'j2\in ye 6^h year of his Age. The said Stephen Rust departed this life the ()th day of March 1 7 3 9 w M^ 5 6M year of his Age. The Alice On the north wall of the nave stands the monument of Alice Coburne. Coburne Though far from beautiful it is well executed in white marble. It is sur- Monument mounted by a bust of the deceased, and at the foot are three cherubs sur- rounding the Coburne arms: — On a lozenge shaped shield, Arg. on a chevron between 3 bugle horns sa. as many mullets or. — the arms of Foster, of whom her mother Mrs. Prisca Coburne was daughter. The somewhat pedantic Inscription is as follows: Infra siti sunt cineres Alicia Coburne, Filia unica Thomce Coburne, gen, de Stratford Bow, Qua {Licet defunctd inter pariendum matre, defuncto item post mensibus Patre,tamen) * Pick's History of England, Vol. 3,/. 558, states that in 1 643 a Dutchman established himself at Bow and taught the English the method of producing the fine scarlet dye for which foreign cloths were so much celebrated. An interesting article could be written on the ancient industries of the parish, not the least im- portant of which was the manufacture of china; which business was finally pur- chased by Duesbury about 1 750, when he transferred it to Derby. 32 inauditci Noverca Priscce Coburne curd liberaliter educata^ cum attigisset annum decern quintum^ Supra cetatem longe Prudentia optimisque animi dotibus ornata, supra quot'idianas formas miris modis e/egans et venusta, supra prceceptis Philosophorum cunctis virtutis numeris absoluta, supra Jidem omnibus aqua et benigna omnibus vie issim grata; Suorum denique deliciee, spes sola Familice. Tandem ea erat vis Forma ac virtutis, attraxit ad se amantem, [fV — JV — ), Qui veniendo, videndo victus, earn solam sibi speravit uxor em, eam solam comitem vita, Thalamique participem. Prosper a omnia procedere visa, cum inopinato variolarum morbo correpta, nupturiens puel/a, magna omnium cum luctu,amantis maxima, obiit [infandum obtit) , via scil. Mali Anno Christi nati mdclxxxix, Et ipssimis die Nuptiis destinatd sepulta hie recubuit; Quasi mortali amplexui prceponens Abrahami sinum. Ubijam suavi obvoluta Requie, manet avdaTaciv Jus tor urn: eoprimum die visura terreno suo cor pore corpora pulchriora, virtutem sua, dum in vivis erat,perfectiorem; Amor em, vel suo erga Procum, vel procierga seipsam ardentiorem. In id tempus daret hoc quale monumentum, maestissimi amatoris opus, dimidid tantum parte super stitis, memoria virginis Tr}'; fiaKapiTiho<; utriusque, amori sacrum. The foregoing Inscription is translated into English verse, by the Rev. W. P. Insley, M.A.: "Neither hath he pov^rer in the day of death. "^£cc/fj-. viii. 8. Beneath this tablet rests the mortal Form Of Alice Coburne, lov'd and only child Of Thomas Coburne, Gentleman, of Bow^; Whose birth was purchased by a Mother's life. And ten months later felt a Father's loss. CI 33 Brought up with unexampled love and care By her kind foster-mother, Prisca Coburne, At fifteen years she showed so rare a grace Of mind and person, that she far excelled Those of her age and circle. Beauty, virtue, love. Religion, learning, kindness — all were hers; Pride of her friends, sole hope of House and Name. Ere long these many charms of mind and form Drew to her side a lover, (W. — W. — ) Who came, saw and was conquered, and who fondly hoped That she, and she alone, would be his wife, His life's companion, partner of his couch. Heaven seemed to bless the union ; and a future Gilded with dreams of happiness and love Seemed to await the pair; when soon, alas! That fell Destroyer of the human race. The black Disease,* seized the expectant bride; And to the unutterable grief of all her friends. But most of all of her distracted Lover, Death claimed the hapless maiden as his own ; And on the self-same day that should have seen Her glad espousal, she was laid within This tomb ; as tho' she had preferred A seat in Abram's bosom to the fond And warm embraces of a husband's love. There sweetly, gently sleeping waits she now The joyful resurrection of the Just ; When shall her body change its mortal grace. Fair as it was, for one diviner far; When shall her soul be clothed with righteousness. And radiant with a glory, such as eye Hath ne'er in this terrestrial world beheld. Shall taste a richer, purer, holier love. Until that day may this poor monument. The mournful tribute of thy weeping Lover, Who feels that half his soul is from him torn. Stand, «S'tf/«/'t'^ Maiden ! sacred to thy mem'ry And our mutual love. The scripture text is the translation of the Hebrew heading, the italics that of the Greek and the rest of the Latin. *The Small Pox. 34 The last of the old monuments is that of Mrs. Prisca Coburne exactly Mrs. Prisca opposite to that of her daughter which it slightly exceeds in size and or- Coburne nament. The shield and arms are the same as on the monument of Alice Coburne. The inscription is written in English and runs as follows: To ye memory of Prisca Coburne, widw. who lyeth buryed in ye ilk near this pillar and dyed ye i 3/// of Nov., 1 70 1 , and by her will dated ye 6th of May, 1 70 1 , gave ye charities follg. to ye poor inhabitants of this Hamblet, who have no pensions, to be paid as ye will mentions. Then follows the enumeration of her various bequests for religious and charitable purposes. It may not be amiss to mention that Prisca Coburne, whose maiden name was Prisca Forster, and the record of whose baptism is found in our registers in the year 1622, was the daughter of one of the ministers of Bow, and appears to have been the widow of a brewer in the parish, where she was born and which she desired to benefit by her charities." * Thevalueof the sums left by Prisca Coburne to the parish of Bowfor re- ligious and charitable purposes was estimated a few years since as being equivalent to a capital sum of not less than ^T 14,000. Of the other monuments in the church all are modern, and, with one ex- Later Mon- ception, call for little or no remark. The first, in order of age, is that uments erected to Jonathan Arnold who was buried at Dagenham; the second to George and Richard Crawley, twin brothers and members of one of the oldest remaining families in Bow; the third to James Harris, a former parish clerk; and the fourth to Mrs. Driffield, the first wife of the Rev. G.T. Driffield, rector of Bow, 1844 — 1879. The exception alluded to above is the brass just erected in the south aisle Hunter to the memory of James Bernard Hunter, and relatives of his connected with the parish. Mr. Hunter was a member of the Restoration Committee, and took great interest in the work. His family have for more than three generations been well known in Bow,and theparish cannot but feel that it has lost an able supporter. The brass is above the spot where the family used, as children, to sit Sunday after Sunday. In the churchyard is to be seen the family tomb of the Hunters. * Ins ley. c 2 is The brass bears the following inscription : /// Loving Memory of James Bernard Hunter, M.Inst.C.E. ofthejirm of Hunter and English, Engineers, Bow; who was born in this parish, Oct. 21,1855, and died at Hampstead, April 21,1899. " He was my friend faithful and just to me." Also of fames Hunter, Father of the above, died May 6, 1883. Also of Walter Hunter, Grandfather of the above, died Feb. 28,1852. Both of this parish. " Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord, even so,saith the Spirit, for they rest from their labours." External Of the three external monuments two are little more than rectangular Monuments slabs to the memories respectively of Mrs. Joyce Hunt, spinster, who died in 1758, in her83rdyear;&Joseph Jones, whodiedin i8o2,aged72.* The third, however, which is affixed to the wall of the south aisle is of some historical interest, and states that it was erected to the memory of certain members of a family named Cook, collar makers to His Majesty, the last of whom, John Cook, died in 1763. The name of this John Cook is the one before referred to as appearing on the church bells, to the cost of which he was apparently a subscriber. COMMUNION PLATE. The Plate The following extracts are, by the kind permission of the author, from Mr. Edwin Freshfield's "Communion Plate of the Parish Churches in the County of London." Flagon ^^\ Asilverflagonwiththedatemarkfor 1718 ht. I3in. >^^ and a maker's mark Fa crowned in a cir- dia. 6|in. cularstamp; inscribed:" DienataliDc- Q2„ mini nostri Jesu Christi \% Decembris Yvt_ r I An : Salutis 1 7 1 8 in usum Ecclesixpar- ochialis de Stratford Bow banc lagen- am dono dedit et dicavit Rev : Vir Hen- ricus Lambe, L.L.D., non ita pridem Ecclesis prsdictx Minister." * Described on the stone as '■'■a man from his birth almost deaf and dumb." 36 Cups AND Covers ht. of each gin. ,. ^ , V bowl -J 4 in. dia.ofeach'r ^ :• ^root 4in. oz. dwt. oz. dwt. wt. 15 17& 14 8 Covers. oz. dwt. oz. dwt. wt. 4 16 & 4 5 w Twosilvercupsand paten covers. Onecup and cover have the date mark for 1 624 and a maker's mark T F in monogram inaplain shield; inscribed:" Vallantine Poole gave thre pounds towards this cuppS. B."The other cup&coverhave the date mark for 181 3 and a maker's mark RE EB in a quatrefoil stamp; in- scribed: "S Mary Stratford Bow 181 3 Rev: Hamlet Harrison, Rector, Joshua Robins, Francis Jowers, churchward- ens, William Lambert, John Gadsden, overseers." A silver paten without marks; inscribed: "Ex dono PriscjE Colburn Ano : dni 1683 S.B." Four silver dishes with the date mark for 1836 & a maker's mark C.R.G.S. with inscriptions showing that they were pre- sented by the subscription of a few of the inhabitants in 1 8 37,Johnson Gibson, Thomas Ansell, being churchwardens. A silver spoon with perforated bowl, with the date mark for 181 8, and a maker's markGW; inscribed:"Francis Jowers, Charles Brett, churchwardens. Bow, A.D. 1818." The maker's marks T F and F A will be found in Appendix A of Old English Plate, under dates 1609 and 1698 (part 2). The latter is there given as the mark of William Ffawdery. T F, a very common mark, will be found on church plate all over the City. Paten • • ■ ■ • < oz. dwt. dia. lojin. wt. 16 7 Dishes • • • • • < dia.ofeach 9in, oz. dwt. wt. of each 13 9 Spoon dwt. wt. 14 VAULTS. None of the historians before quoted devote a single word to this subject and anyone perusing their writings would naturally conclude that no vaults existed. There are, however, several entries in the parish registers notifying burials in these vaults. The vault under the nave will, upon reference to the plan, be seen to be of great length. It is over 60 feet long, 10 feet wide and 6 feet high in the centre. There are 50 coffins more or less intact: of these the inscriptions T/ie Vaults C3 37 of 17 were decipherable in 1 891 when I entered the vault. The remain- ing 33 were mostly so placed that the inscriptions were hidden by the upper rows. Speaking generally, the coffins were situated one row on each side, parallel with the side walls and with the feet of the occupants turned towards the east. The coffin of Mrs. Harriet Johnson, who died in March, 1853, was left in the gangway near the entrance, as if it were known that no other interment would be made therein. The oldest inscription deciphered was dated 1 784, but this gives no clue to the age of the vault, for the south-east corner is partitioned off with a low brick wall in which is a stone bearing the inscription : " Remains of bodies in wood coffins" Evidently more room had been required in some far-gone period, & the "remains" had been swept up and placed in the corner. The coffins are mostly stacked three or four deep one on top of the other, and the only inscriptions that could be seen were those at the top, and necessarily the most recent interments. In one case where the lower coffin had given way and let the upper two fall over sideways, an attempt was made to get to the date of the lower inscription, but it was found to be too far perished. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary it would appear that this vault is of the same date as the church. The first note of an interment I can find in the parish registers is 1552,* but these books go no farther back than 1538. The entrance shown with the flight of steps is comparatively modern (1836) andiseasily recognised bytheletter V boldly incised on the north aisle wall. The original entrance was by an aperture in the floor of the nave at the western extremity of the vault. The construction is not unlike a low railway tunnel walled in at both ends. I very greatly regret that at the time of my visit (having then no intention of writing an account of the church) I took no notice of the brick-work, except that the bricks were red, hard, and set with excellent mortar. It is, unfortunately, im- practicable to inspect thework again as the wood block flooron concrete covers the entire vault, and to re-open the vault without the previous consent of the Home Secretary is an indictable offence. The crown of the arch is only a few inches below the church floor. The vault under the vestry is of the same date as the clergy vestry. Only eight coffins were found,-f and one of them had crumbled away to dust and a perfect skeleton lay revealed. This was the only case in which no * " Nicholas Farkson Clarke was curate of ye chappel and deceased ye 26th day of July and lies buried in ye church." -\- Several entries in the registers prove that other bodies had been interred in this vault. These were probably all removed about a century ago to make room for fresh comers. 38 lead coffin was found. As a rule the wood outer coffin had decayed save for a strip of wood here and there studded with brass-headed nails. There is in the register an entry to the effect that one of the Crawley family was first interred in this vault and afterwards re-interred in the family vault in the churchyard. Search has been made, but no other vault exists within the walls of the sacred edifice. REGISTERS. In 1 538 an Act was passed requiring parish churches to keep registers of The Church the births, marriages and deaths occurring in the parish. Bow was only Registers a chapel-of-ease at this time, but it is quite in keeping with its constant attempt to assert its independence of Stepney, that it should at once start its own registers. Unfortunately the books are not complete, though they will compare favourably in this respect with most of the neighbouring parishes. The records for the year 1780 to 1790 are missing, but beyond this there is a fairly continuous record from November i 5 38 to the present day, and it is from this source that we learn how many worthies have been connected with the place. The earliest register appears to consist of several thin volumes bound to- gether; thus we find several years (i 538-1637) of weddings, then several of christenings, and finally the record of the burials. The year 1538 first occurs in the second part, viz., that allotted to baptisms. This is, no doubt, merely due to the erratic manner of the binding. The entries for nearly the whole of the first century are evidently in one handwriting, which proves it to be a copy and not the original. In the earliest complete year (1539) there are recorded 18 baptisms, 12 weddings and 21 burials. This gives the impression of a small and de- creasing population, but in those days the death rate affiarded no true basis of calculation, as the tables of mortality fluctuated enormously with the appearance and disappearance of the plague. In 1 577 there were 6 deaths from the plague, while in 1603 there were 89; but in many years there were none, so that the 21 deaths against 18 births in 1539 did not necessarily mean a falling population. In 1625 there were 102 burials (of which 30 are marked " plague ") & in 1 665 the number increased to 1 39, but none are marked as due to the scourge which was then sweep- ing England for practically the last time. The following extracts from the registers, with a note here and there de- Extracts of rived from other sources, may prove of interest. Should the reader desire interest to corroborate the following, or search for others, an application should be made to the parish clerk, who informs me thatacharge is made "o/*! J. for the frst year and bd.for every other year''' This would amount in all to ^(^9 IS. if the whole of the registers were searched. C4 39 Humphrey, Son of Sir Humphrey Brown, Knt., baptised 15th Dec, 1554- John Harman, Esqre., one of the " gentilman hushers " of the chamber of our Sovereign Lady the Queen, and the excellent Lady Dame Dorothye Gwydott, widow, late of the town of Southampton, mar- ried Dec. 2 1 St 1557. Dugles, daughter of Henry Howard, Esq., baptized Jan. 29th, 1 571-2. Note. This Henry Howard was afterwards the second Lord How- ard of Brindon. Dugles (or Douglas) afterwards married Sir Arthur George. Henry, Son of Henry Lord Howard baptized May i6th 1585. (He died in his infancy). A poore boy was burryed ye 9th day of March, 1 575, Peter Cooy a poore man that died att ye Armitage in ye Bridge (1550). A poore man that died in Thomas White's barn was hurried ye 25th day of March (1551). Cristian Stewart a woman was buried on Mary Magdalene's day (i5S0- Nicholas Farkson Clarke was curate of ye chappel and deceased ye 26th day of July 1552, and lies buried in ye church. William Gowge, the son of Thomas Gowge, was baptised the 6th No- vember, 1575. The name of Gowge frequently occurs in the registers. This lad afterwards became an eminent divine among the Puritans. He was a minister at Blackfriars. Neale* says he was for many years esteemed the father of London ministers. He sat in the assembly of divines and frequently filled the moderator's place. His works are " The Whole Armour of God"; Commentaries on the Epistle to the Hebrews and on the Canticles; A Tract on the calling of the Jews; several sermons; and an exposition on the Lord's Prayer, &c. Thomas Gowge, his son, also a person of eminence, was baptised (at Bow Church) on September 29, 1 605. He established several schools in Wales, at which he caused to be educated at his own expense nearly 2000 children, who were taught the English language. He printed 8000 Welsh bibles, 1000 of which he gave away, and directed the remainder to be sold at a cheap rate in the principal towns in Wales. He published several volumes of sermons, devotional works and tracts. He died in 1 68 1 (not, however, at Bow) and the funeral ser- mon was preached by Archbishop Tillotson. Mary, or Margaret, daughter of Hugh Vere, and John, son of John Vere, * Neale s History of the Puritans, vol. II., p. 3 3. 40 baptised at Bow in 1581 and 1582 respectively, were descendants of John, Earl of Oxford. Henry, son of the Right Hon. Lord Rich, baptised Aug. 19, 1590. He afterwards became the celebrated Earl of Holland, of whom anec- dotes have been given in the account of Kensington.* A Portuguese gentleman, treasurer to the King of Portugal, who was staying at the time in Bow, died in the house of "The Peter and Powle," and was buried the i st April, i 59 1 . The King of Portugal here mentioned was Don Antonio Perez, prior of Crato, who pre- tended to the crown of that kingdom in opposition to Philip H. of Spain. He was crowned at Lisbon, but was soon obliged to quit his new dominions by the superior power of Philip. He came to Eng- land in I 58 I, where he met with a kind reception from Elizabeth, j- Wm. Whitaker, Doctor of Theology at Cambridge, married Joan Fen- ner, April 8, 1591. Mrs. Mary Yorke, daughter of Sir Edmund Yorke, buried 29th Decem- ber, 1 59 1. Henry Watts, Merchant Taylor, married Anne Davis in 1606. Marie Ingram, daughter of Sir Arthur Ingram, Knight, was brought from S. Leonards .|. and baptised the 20th June, 1 6 1 6. It iscurious that Lysons states in his account of Bow thatThomas,son of Sirjohn Ingram, Knight, wasbaptisedjune 20, 1 6 1 6. Sirjohn, ac- cording to Stow,§ was a Spanish merchant and citizen of London. Mary, daughter of the Hon. Wm. Maynard, buried in Essex, February 20,1688. This Maynard was the second son of Lord Maynard, & it is recorded that he married the daughter and heir of Thomas Evans, Esq., of Stratford Bow. As I cannot find the entry in the registers, the wed- ding probably took place in some other church. Bow Clay, a boy about 1 5 years of age, taken up in the street at Stratford in Essex, was baptised i6th March, 17 17. That the boy was clay there can be no doubt, and perhaps the name is appropriate, but it seems rather cruel to have inflicted such a name upon him. Probably it was the china industry of the place that sug- gested it. The names of William Penkethman, the celebrated comedian, who was married here in 1714; & the wedding in 1726 of the Rev. John Henley, the famous orator, must close the list. It will hardly be out of place to conclude this chapter with a list of the * Lysons. -j- Rapins History of England^ Vol. II.., p. 1 1 4. .{; The adjoining parish of Bromley. § Stows Survey., Book II., p. 154. 41 rectors and parish clerks to whom the admirable condition of the regis- ters is due. Rectors. 1 71 9 Robert Warren, D,D. 181 1 Hamlet Harrison. 1 740 James Parker. 1 844 George Townshend Driffield. 1740 Thomas Foxley. 1880 Wm. Pimblett Insley. 1 77 1 Allan Harrison Eccles.* 1892 Marmaduke Hare. 1802 Samuel Henshall. 1899 Manley Power. 1 808 Frodsham Hodson. Parish clerks (licensed by the Lord Bishop of London) : 171 8 — Rust.-f- 1807 William Hanson. 1754 Josiah Hunt. 1816 James Sholl. 1760 Joseph Dickenson. 1822 James Harris. 1764 James Dorrington. ^^57 John Ivimey. 1802 William Ballinger. 1874 Henry Lewis Wheatley, '^'According to the Registers the Rev. Allan Harrison Eccles died of '■'■decline " Oct. 6, 1 80 1 , aged 6 1 years, and was buried in the '■'■Chancel under the Com- munion Table." •\- Memorandum of Dr. Warren, Dec. 22, 1724: '■'■Mr. Rust, ye late Parish Clerk kept the Registers but very imperfectly and I could not get it out of his hands till the churchwardens and myself threatened to complain of him at Doctor s Commons." Reference to the above list will show that it does not appear , who was parish clerk from 1 724 — 1 754. 42 XXI. The Western Arch and Window in i 896. XXII. The North-West Corner in 1896. CHAPTER IV. A SHORT REVIEW OF THE RECENT RESTORA- TION AND SOME OF THE DIFFI- CULTIES IT ENTAILED. IF not from time immemorial, at any rate within the memory of liv- ing man, there have always been Restoration Difficulties. To go no farther back than 18 29, the church was known to be greatly in need of repairs, and on the 29th January of that year matters came to a climax by the fall of the upper portion of the tower during a gale in the night. Some thirty-five years earlier the south aisle had been partly re- built and partly refaced and various minor works carried out, but no complete restoration had been made. It is a great misfortune that no funds have ever existed for the maintenance of the fabric. A little repair is required and the fact has to be ignored because there are no funds and the defects in question are not big enough to form the basis of a " Restor- ation Scheme" and are therefore left to become a serious matter. On January 29, 1 829, Mr. William Ford, an architect of local celebrity (especially among the Nonconformists of that day) was instructed to draw up a Report upon the church. His plans, in the writer's possession, are not published herewith because they are merely "proposed plans," and do not affect the Bow Church of to-day. No doubt the plans were good, if regarded in the spirit of that age, and they were certainly drastic and thoroughgoing. Shortly, Mr. Ford recommended that the whole of the church should be demolished except the lower part of the tower (the upper part had fallen) and that a new edifice should be raised. In the new design were large galleries on three sides of the church (similar to those in S.James, Ratcliffe, built about eight years later), there was neither chancel nor choir but a small recessed sanctuary at the east end through which one had to pass to reach the vestry. The church would have been well lighted and airy, but, beyond that, one can only be devoutly thankful that it was decided to put up with the old church a little longer. Grati- tude, however, is due to Mr. Ford for the able way in which he repaired the upper portion of the tower and for the record of the work in the drawings he left. From time to time repairs were executed, such as new lead roofs to aisles, the removal of the plaster ceiling, &c., but the structural defects were ignored as long as possible. About the year 1882, with a new energetic rector and a well-known builder for churchwarden, another attempt was made to grapple with the difficulty. Sir Arthur Blomfield, A.R.A., was asked to report upon the matter. He advocated the same plan as Mr. 43 Mr. Ford's Plans 1829 Sir Arthur B/omJieliPs Design iSS 2 Ford had done in 1 829, viz., to rebuild the whole of the edifice except the tower & the organ chamber. There was this difference, however, that Mr. Ford's proposed structure would have met with the admiration of few, while Sir Arthur Blomfield's design would have given the parish- ioners a well-proportioned and beautiful new church with the old tower. Opinions were divided between the desire to retain the ancient edifice, and a desire to have a new building which would give better accommo- dation and make all further restoration schemes unnecessary for the next generation or two. However it was found impossible to raise the funds, and owing greatly, it is believed, to the death of the churchwarden before mentioned,* the scheme was abandoned. The Repairs In 1 887 the aisle roofs were renewed and the PriscaCoburne gallery re- ofiSSj & moved, while in 1 89 1 a scheme was adopted for reseating and cleaning 1 89 1 the church, and about ,^300 was raised and expended, but this was in no sense a restoration. Several important items were included under this head, such as the removal of the carved and glazed screens behind the churchwardens' pews, the removal of the monumental stonesinthe floor and the substitution of wood blocks & tiles, and finally the raising of the level of the sanctuary. In July, 1895, the rector and churchwardens instructed the architects Messrs. Hills & Son, to prepare a Report dealing with the fabric. Sub- sequently a committee was formed. Sir Arthur W. Blomfield, A.R.A., consented to act as Consulting Architect, and in February, 1 896, plans, specifications, and quantities were prepared and approved by the Bishop of London's Fund, for rebuilding and widening the north aisle & erecting new choir vestry, and several minor matters. This scheme entailed the expenditure of some two thousand pounds and left the larger section of the restoration to be dealt with at a later date. A few months later (June, The 1 896), The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings drew up a S.P.B.A. Report generally deprecating the proposals. Funds had not come in so Report fast as had been hoped, and this criticism apparently killed what little life was left in the movement. The Subs id- In October of the same year, however, a serious subsidence of a portion ence of the of the chancel roof occurred. The architects reported that a further col- Chancel lapse would probably take place and recommended that the church be Roof closed and the chancel boarded off. The committee at this time were not quite pulling together. Some thought that the better plan would be to demolish the church and rebuild it upon another site. If, it was argued, the London County Council would purchase the site and effect a widen- ing of the road, the money so obtained would go a long way towards the building of a new church. This church could be made large enough to * Wm. Bangs. 44 X o oo CO bJO o o XIX. The Interior,looking Eastward; taken in i 896 immediately before the Church was closed. X X o o oc OS W c o o o meet the requirements of the present time, and all anxiety about dilapi- dations (for long past a serious matter in so poor a parish) would be laid at rest for many years to come. The Bow Vestry in December, 1896, recommended that the London Proposed County Council be approached " tvith a view to the Council buying the site Sn/e of the of the church as a Metropolitan Improvement ^ This recommendation was Church introduced and strongly urged by the senior churchwarden, while his colleague and the then rector also supported it, but hoped the Council would maintain the tower. Strong counter proposals were made, how- ever, at the instance of the Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London, and in accordance with the S.P.A.B. scheme, with the result that the London County Council declined to entertain the proposal. After this nothingwas done for several months. Services were heldatthe y^. church Vestry Hall for nearly a year, when a temporary iron church was erected Closed in the churchyard. The Bishop of Stepney* then took the matter up with vigour and insisted on the church being closed, as any further fall during service might cause a panic and loss of life. He at once formed a committee of the following gentlemen: The Right Rev. The Bishop of Stepney, Chairman. 'yy^^ Bishop The Hon. Lionel Holland, M.P. for Bow, Treasurer. of Stepney s W. Wallace Bruce, London County Councillor for Bow and Bromley. Committee The Rev. Marmaduke Hare, subsequently replaced by The Rev.Manley Power, M.A., Rector. Waite Chester Sewell, ) -^, , , T u \\T■^^■ T?ii • . i Churchwardens. John William Llkington, S^ C. R. Ashbee, M.A., Hon. Sec. \ Representative of the Society for the to the Committee, ^ Protection of Ancient Buildings. Ambrose Poynter, Representative of the National Trust. •j-William Christie, a late Churchwarden. tBernard Hunter, ) „ • 1 t^ • 1 • !;.,,„ ' Representing the Parishioners. Walter A. Hills, } . ,. Osborn C. Hills, S ^'''^''^''''- The first meeting was held on the 14th March, 1 898, & the only changes on the Committee have been caused by the appointment to the living of the Rev. Manley Power, M.A., in the place of Mr. Hare; &thedecease of Mr. Bernard Hunter in April, & Mr. William Christie in July, 1899. TheCommittee had the difficult task of drawingupascheme thatwould * Bishop Ingram. -j • Died July, 1899. X Died April, 1899. 45 satisfy the various societies and critics. All idea of enlarging or altering the church was abandoned; and every effort made to secure a thorough restoration of the existing fabric with as little alteration as possible. No proper estimate could be formed of the expenditure required on the tower as no scaffolding had been erected, but the architects' estimate for the remainder of the work of restoration amounted to ^3,700, and the Committee agreed to assume that another thousand pounds would be re- quired for the tower. Appeals were issued to the CityCompanies, Church Building Societies, and other bodies. The "Times," the "Daily Graphic," the " Builder," and many other papers lent their columns,& a great effort was made to raise enough to warrant a start being made. Summary of What has been done may be briefly summarised as follows: The chancel work done roof has been practically re-formed by inserting new deal timbers between the old oak rafters of 1755. The latter are left intact though theynowdo no work. The old heavy oak beams have been spliced and strengthened with oak or iron and the metal covered with mortar to preserve it. The gable has been rebuilt in brickwork as before. The old gable was so roughly built, and in so ruinous a state, that the writer contended it was evidently meant as a merely temporary covering during the war,* and that the most intelligent restoration would be to put back the flat roof & battlemented east end as it existed until the year 1755. The Restoration Committee, however, decided to follow the advice of the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, and to rebuild the red brick gable and tiled roof as they found them. The walls have been repaired &thejoints filled with tiles or flints bedded in mortar; one buttress has been underpinned with concrete and partly rebuilt; and the other, at the south-east corner, has been taken down and rebuilt.In restoring the hood mould of the south window it was discovered that a doorway had existed there at one time, but no mention of it has been found in any of the writings examined. The old vestry has been provided with new lead; a new floor has been laid ; the brickwork refaced externally ; a new window has taken the place of the old door,and the old window is blocked up. The choir vestry isthe only addition to the fabric made by the Committee. The architects strong- ly recommended that the red brick"excrescence,"as previous writers have called the old vestry, should be faced with stone and form part of the de- sign of a new stone-built choir vestry. The Society, however, deemed that brickwork was more appropriate taking into consideration the atmos- pheric conditions in East London that are so destructive to stone, and that moreover it would be less calculated to enter into competition with the * See page I ^. 46 old work. As the Society's proposal had the additional merit of being eco- nomical, the Committee decided to act upon it. It had been much hoped that the nave roof would need but little repair. A close examination, however, revealed that the tile laths were com- pletely rotten; and in the end the roof had to be stripped, new oak rafters inserted with sequoia panels and new cleft oak laths. The old tiles were replaced as far as possible, similar secondhand hand-made tiles were ob- tained from a contractor at Battersea who happened to be demolishing some old houses at the time, and the deficiency was made up with the best new hand-made tiles. Three oak tie beams, each fourteen inches by ten, were inserted to tie the walls and secure them from spreading further. The south aisle has been practically untouched, though the battlements have been rebuilt with the old facing stones, & a few quoins at the south- east corner have been renewed. The north aisle required very careful treatment, & that the wall has been preserved and restored, and not rebuilt, is due to the personal care & skill nf the master mason. The brick battlements have been repaired & point- ed, and some of the capping is new. Anewdoorway has been formed in the north aisle giving access from the church to the choir lobby. In cutting away the masonry it was found that an old window had existed. For the rest, the old decayed plaster ceiling has been cut away and the spaces between the rafters filled with sequoia wood as before stated. The stained and varnished deal seats have been removed and replaced by chairs in the nave, while the choir benches are now of oak of an open pattern in lieu of the old deal benches. An oak dado has been fixed round the walls & piers. The internal double windows have been added to reduce the noise from the passing traffic. All the monuments and other work have been cleaned only, and the walls, &c.,have been painted and colour-washed. At one time considerable difficulty appeared to be threatening. The Dis- trict surveyor, whose duty it is to safeguard the interests of the public, desired that a large quantity of the masonry should be demolished and rebuilt, whereas the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings were extremely anxious that not one stone should be removed unnecessarily. The architects however, were allowed to proceed. The upper or restored portion of the tower, for the most part, merely re- quired repointing, though a dozen or more new stones were built in. On removing the rotten brick panels of the ringers' gallery the remains of tra- cery of the old windows was discovered. It is much to be regretted that the tracery ot thewest window of this room has long since been cut away. I think that every writer of this century who has described Bow Church 47 Structure has considered the structure to be beyond repair. More than a century considered! since it was described as "what remains of an ancient building;" some beyond repair seventy years back we find the expression " tottering with decay;"* and in the present decade Sir Walter Besant, himself a member of the Com- mittee under whose auspices this monograph is issued, has called it a " building that must soon pass into oblivion," & expressed the hope that someone will make an etching of it before it has quite crumbled away. I have tried to show how this was also the view held by eminent profes- sional experts, and when in addition we find how in 1896 the church was closed as dangerous, it will be seen that the term " Restoration Dif- ficulties " was no idle one. The Committee's predominating wish has been throughout to give the ancient edifice a new and lengthy lease of life without destroying the character and mellow softness of a church " Grown grey beneath the shadowy touch of time." ^ The ''Mirror," 1^2$. THE END. 48 INDEX. PAGE Act of 1 825 15 Adams, W. 3 Aisles I7>i9 Alderman (late) John Wylford 30 Aldgate Amcotte,John Amcott Monument Amcotts Brass Anne, Queen (171 1) Ansell, Thomas Apostles' Window Arcading "Architect," The Armicer, Jacobus Walker Armitage Arnold, Jonathan Ashbee,C.R. Ashbee,Mrs.H.S. Ashlar Atkinson, Rev. A. G. B. Augmentation Office 10 30 8 29,30 37 8 18 23 31 40 35 3'5>7'45 3 18,21 3 1 1 Baker, The Bow Baldock, Bishop Balfour, Maxwell Ballinger, William Bangs, Wm. Bathstone Batsford,B.T. Battlement Beacham,0. Beaufix, Thomas Belfry Windows Bellers,Fulk Besant, Sir Walter Bethnal Green Blackfriars Blomfield, Sir Arthur, A.R. A 5,26,43,44 Bow 10 14 1 1 3 42 27.44 19,20 3 18, 19,20,21 3 29 21 1 1 3> 13.48 10 40 Bow Bridge Bow Vestry Box Ground Stone Brett, Charles Brewer, Cecil Brickwork Bromley Brooks, E.W. Brownbed Portland Browning, A. G.,F,S.A. Brown, Sir Humphrey Bruce, W. Wallace "Builder" The Burch,R.M. Buttresses „ South-East Byas, Edward 13 PAGE 40 45 18 37 3 17 10 3 19,20 3 40 45 21,46 3 21 8 45 Canterbury Tales 10 Carlingford, Lord, Right Hon. 3 Carpenter, W. 3 Carved Oak Chairs 26 Ceilings 16,18,20 Chalk 17,18,19 Chambers, G, 3 Chancel ij Chantry Returns 1 1 Chantry Roll i r Chapel-of-Ease 1 2 Chapel of Stratford Bow 1 1 " Chapel of Stratford atteBowe" 9 Chaucer 10 Chilmark stone 18,20 China Industry 32,41 Christie, William 45 ChurchwardenGothicWindows 1 8 Churchwardenship 28 City Companies 46 Clarke, Nicholas Farkson 38,40 Clay, Bow 41 i PAGE PAGE Clerestory Windows 18 Driffield, George Townsher 'd. Clock 13 Rev., Rector 29, 35.42 Coburne, Mrs. Prisca Duckworth, Miss S. 3 12, 15, 18,32,33,35 > 37. 44 Duesbury 32 Alice 32 .35 Dugles (Duglas) Howard 40 „ Thomas 35 Dunbar-Smith, A. 3 Committee, Bow Church 45 ,48 Dutton, F. 3 „ for the Survey > of Dyeing 31 the Memorials of Greater London 45 East Gable 19 Communion Rail 26 „ Window 16,27 „ Tables 25 Eccles, Allan Harrison, Rev "^^ Consecration 13 Mr., Rector 28,42 Cook, John, Esq. 28, .36 Edmund, Lord Sheffield 29 Cooy, Peter 40 Edward IIL, King 1 1 Coping 20 Elevations&Sections,Wm.F ord's 8 Coping Stones 21 Elevation, The Tower 8 Corfe Castle 22 Elizabeth Rust 32 Corner Buttress 20 Elkington, John William 45 Covers 37 "Environsof London, "Lysons' 29 Crane, W. 3 Essex Road 10 Crato, Prior of 41 Evans, Thomas 41 Crawley, George 35 „ Richard 35 Facing Stones 47 „ R. E., churchwarden 28 Family Pews 16 »» 39 Faunthorpe, Rev. J. P. 3 Cups 37 Fenner,Joan 4» Curwen, Spedding, J.P. 3 Ffawdery, William Fire in 1747 37 13 Dagenham 35 Firestone 18, 19,20 "Daily Graphic" 46 Flagon 36 Davis, Anne 41 Flint 17,18 Dawery 29 Fonts, The 25 Dawson, Crosbie G. 3 Ford, William, Mr. 43 Derby 32 Foxley, Thomas 42 Derbyshire Grit 21 Frampton, George, A.R.A. 3 Dickenson, Joseph 42 Freestone 19 Dishes 37 Freshfield, Edwin 36 District Surveyor 47 Fulk Bellers n Doctors' Commons 42 Furnival, Sir William 29 Dorrington, James 42 Driffield, Mrs. ii 35 Gadsden, John, Overseer 37 PAGE PAGE Galleries 16 Hill, W. Alexander 27 Garbutt, Matt, A.R.I. B.A. 3 Hodson, Frodsham, Rev. 42 Gascoigne's Map 31 Holland, Earl of 41 George III. 20 Holland, Lionel, Hon., M. P. 45 George, Sir Arthur 40 Hollington, A.J., L.C.C. 3 Gibson, Johnson 37 Hollington Stone 19 Giles, Mr. John, Churchwarden 28 Hood Mould 46 Girders 20 Hope, Mrs. 3 Goddard, Mr. 28 Hopgood, H. P. 3 „ Godfrey, Church- Hopkinson, H. L. 3 warden 29 Howard, Henry 40 Godlee, Rickman J., Dr. 3 „ Lord of Brindon 40 Godman, Ernest 3 Hubbard, Mrs. E. 3 Goodchild, Rev. W. 3 Hughes, Mr. 22 Gould, I. C. 3 Hunter & English 36 Gowge, Thomas 40 „ James Bernard 35, 36,45 „ William 40 „ Walter 36 Grace, dau. of John Wylforc I 30 Hunt, Joyce, Mrs. 36 Gray, Richard 29 „ Josiah 42 Guild of Handicraft 7 Guildhall Library 25 Ingram, Arthur, Sir 18,41 Gwydott, Dame Dorothye 40 „ Bishop 45 „ John, Sir 41 Hackney 10 Marie 41 Hales,J.W.,Prof 3 Insley,Rev. W.P. ic '33,42 Hanson, William 42 Interior views of Church 8 Hare, Marmaduke,Rev. 42,45 Ivimey,John 42 Harman,John 40 Harrison, Hamlet, Rev. 42 Jambs 19 Harris, James 35.42 Jarvis Day 32 Harvey 30 Jebb, Samuel, Dr. 29 Hassock Stone 18,23 Johnson, Harriet, Mrs. 38 Hellen Hilliard 1 1 Joists, Ceiling 18 Henley, Rev. John 41 Jones, Joseph 36 Henry I . 10 Jordan Monument 30 Henry VIII. 1 1 Jowers, Francis, Churchwarden -^7 Henshall, Rev. Samuel, 42 Hill, Mrs. J. S. 3 Kelsall,Rev.J. E. 3 Hills, Walter A. 45 Kennedy, Rev. J. 3 „ H.F.,F.C.S. 21 Kensington 41 „ Osborn 7 Kentish Rag 21 „ Walter A., & Son 6,44 Kentish Ragstone 23,24 iii King Edward III. Kirton PAGE 1 1 29 PAGE Lambe, Henricus, Rev. 36 Lambert, William, Overseer 37 Lander,H.Clapham,A.R.I.B.A. 3 Lea 32 Lead 1 9 Lectern See errata at end. Leicester 32 Leland 9, 10, 12, 31 Lester & Pack 28 Lethaby, W. R. 7 Licenceof Bishop Baldock 11,12 Limehouse 13 Limestone 18 Lisbon 41 London County Council 44 London's Fund, Bishop of 44 Lovelidge, Richard, Mr. Churchw^arden 28 Lowerison, H. 3 Luxmoore, H. 3 Lysons "Environs of London" 29 Lysons, Rev. Daniel 9, 10, 1 1, 12, 25' 3°' 31' 41 Maces 28 Mann, E. A. 3 Margaret Vere 40 Market Place demolished 1 5 Marriott, E. T. 3 Marshall, C. J., A.R.LB.A. 3 Mary Queen of Scots 29 Mary, daughter of Hugh Vere 40 Mary, daughter of the Hon. Wm. Maynard 41 Matilda, Queen 10 Maynard, Lord 41 Maynard, Wm., Hon. 41 Mears, S. 29 „ Thos. 28 iv Meath, Earl of. Right Hon. Melton Mobree " Memorials of Bow Church " " Memoirs of the Plague" Micklethwaite, J.T., F.S.A. "Mirror," The Mitchell, H. C, of Tamworth Mitchell, Mrs. Mocatta, F. D. Monuments Moore, A. „ Theo., A.R.LB.A. Mortar 19,21,22,46 Mountford,ErnestW., A.R.LB.A. 3 Mullions, Window 19 Munby,A.J. 3 Murray, F. 3 3 32 9 10 3 48 7 3 3 29 3 3 Nathaniel Sawyer Neale Neve, John le Newcourt New Vestry Norman, Philip North Aisle „ Battlements „ Wall Arcade „ and Aisle and South Windows Wall -West Corner Noyes, Rev. J. P. Nutter, A. E. Oldford Oldford Road Old Vestry „ Font „ Ford Organ 28 40 29 1 1 8 3 28 8 18 26 8 28 17 8 3 3 ",32 32 8 8 10 16,27 PAGE Organist 27 Oxford, John, Earl of 41 Parish Clerk 42 Parker, James 42 Paten 37 Peacock of Finchley 30 Penkethman, William 41 Perez, Don Antonio 26, 41 Pews 27 Philip II 41 Phillips 23 Pick's"History of England" 32 Piers 18 Pitt, Geo. 3 Plan of Church 8 Plaster Ceiling 47 Poole, Vallantine 37 Portland Stone 18,20,21 Portugal, King of 26,41 Powell, W. 3 Power, Manley, Rev. 42, 45 Poynter, Ambrose 45 Pulpit 26 Queen Anne (1711) 13 Queen Matilda 10 Queen of Scots, Mary 29 Quoins 19, 20, 21, 47 Rafters 1 9 Ragstone 17,18,20 Ragstone Ashlar 20 Rapin's "History of England" 41 Rawlinson, W. G. 3 Redmayne, J. S. 3 Registers 39 Restorations of 1 8 36 and 1 844 15 Rich, Lord, Right Hon. 41 Ringers' Floor 16 Ringer's Chamber 21 Rivington's "Notes" 24 PAGE Robins, Joshua, Churchwarden 37 Robson, E.R., F.R.I. B.A. 3 Roman Cement Roofs Rose, J. Rubble Rust, Edward „ Mr. „ Thomas William 16,18 44 28 17, 18, 19,21 32 42 10,31 32 Sawley 29 Seating 27 Sections and Elevations 8 Sequoia Wood 47 Seven Years' War 1 4 Sewell, Waite Chester 45 Shirley, W. K. 3 Sholl, James 42 Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings 44, 46, 47 South Wall 17 South-East Buttress 8 Soutter Family 27 Spitalfields 1 3 St. Catherine Creed Church 32 St. Dunstan 1 1 St. George's-in-the-East 1 3 St. James, Ratcliffe 43 St. Leonard, Bromley 10 St. Paul's Cathedral 1 1 St. Peter's, Westminster 1 1 Stanley, Lyulph, Hon. 3 Stepney Stevenson, J. J. Stewart, Cristian Stone, Miss Stow Stow's " Survey," Book 1 1 Stratford String Course Strype 10, 11,12, 29 3 40 3 9, 12 41 ID, I I 21 9, 12 V PAGE PAGE Stuart Period 26, 30 Voelcker, Dr. 24 Summers' Monument 30 Sutton 29 Wall Plate Walker & Sons, Messrs. J. ' 20 W. 27 Table 26 „ James 31 Tamworth, Mitchell H. C, of 7 „ Monument 30 Tate, John 29. „ Thomas 31 Tatton, R. G. 3 Ward, J. Humphrey 3 Taylor, F. R. 3 Warren, Dr. 42 „ Merchant 41 Wasthouse 29 Thomas Rust 32 Watts, Henry 41 Thompson, W, 3 Wayne, Mr. Benjamin 27 Thornton, T. 3 Webb, Philip 7 Thornycroft, Hamo, R.A. 3 Wells,J.,M.A. 3 Thwaite, Mr., of Clerkenwell 13 West Doorway 8 Tillotson, Archbishop 40 „ Window 16 .,21,27 Timbers 1 7 ,18 ,20 Westernmost Windows 28 "Times," The 46 Western (Tower) Arch 8 Tower 17 ,20 ,21 Westham 10, 18 „ arch 16 Westminster 1 1 Tredegar, the Right Hon. '. Lord 3 Wheatley, H. L. 13,15,2; 7,28,42 Trusses 20 Whichcord on "Ragstone "23,24 Turner, Thackeray 7 Whitaker, William 41 „ Mrs. Thackeray 3 Window of Tower 8 Turret, Stonework of 8 „ Tracery Wilson, Henry 19 29 Varley, F. C. 3 Winmill,C. 7 Vaults 37 Wire, Alfred P. 3 Vere, John 40 Wonnacott, E. W. M. 3 „ Hugh 40 Wylford Brass 8,29 Vestries 25 „ Hamond 30 Vestry Hall 45 „ John, Mr. 30 „ Minutes, 1736 13 „ Monument 8 „ New 8 ,, Old 8 York, Mary, Mrs. 41 Vincent,J. A. C. 3 VI HERE ENDS THE SECOND MONOGRAPH OF THE COM- MITTEE FOR THE SURVEY OF THE MEMORIALS OF GREATER LONDON, WHEREIN IS SHOWN HOW THE OLD CHURCH OF STRATFORD AT BOW, WHICH HAD BEEN CONDEMNED TO DESTRUCTION BY THE RESTO- RERS, HAS BY THE LOVING CARE OF THOSE WHO THOUGHT OTHERWISE, BEEN SAVED TO THE DWEL- LERS OF EAST LONDON IN MUCH OF ITS ORIGINAL BEAUTY. PRINTED FOR THE COMMITTEE AT THE PRESS OF THE GUILD OF HANDICRAFT, LTD., AT ESSEX HOUSE, BOW, MDCCCC. Published by Edward Arnold, 37, Bedford Street, Strand. There are 250 copies of this book, printed of which 100 are reserved for the Committee. This is No. ^ ERRATA. p. 29, line 9 from bottom, for ar. read az. p. ,, ,, 7 „ „ „ -f"- » s^- P-3I » 4 9> top „ amulets „ annulets. p. „ „ 8 51 5) „ Armicer „ Armiger. p. „ » 21 >> 55 „ j//d hie sita, etc Thefolloiving was omitted in error: The church possesses a modern brass lectern bearing the following in- scription: "Presented by J. B. and A. C. Durham to the Church of St. Mary Stratford Bow. June, 1886." The illustration on p. 20 shows a section through wall of tower, the out- side of wall facing the outer margin of page. THE OLD PALACE OF BROMLEY- BY-BOW. BY ERNEST GODMAN, ARCHITECT. BEING THE THIRD MONOGRAPH OF THE COMMIT- TEE FOR THE SURVEY OF THE MEMORIALS OFGREATERLON- DON. MEMBERS OF THE SURVEY COMMITTEE DURING THE PERIOD OF THE WORK. The former Presidents of the Committee were — The Late LORD LEIGHTON, P.R.A., and ThelateRightRev.Dr.CREIGHTON,LORD BISHOP OF LONDON. Honorary Members. W.ADAMS. The lord ALDENHAM. R. A. ALLISON, M. P. Mrs.C. R. ASHBEE. Mrs. H. S. ASHBEE. The lord BALCARRES. B. T. BATSFORD. ALBERT E. BERNAYS. The late Sir WALTER BES ANT, M.A., F.S.A. BOARD OF EDUCATION, SOUTH KENSINGTON. LEONARD BORWICK. CECIL C. BREWER. E. W. BROOKS. A.G.BROWNING, F.S.A. WILFRED BUCKLEY. W. CARPENTER. TheCHELSE A PUBLIC LIBR ARY The Rev. y. F.CORNISH. E. COLQUHOUN. The Right Hon. L. COURTNEY, P.C. GEO. WASHINGTON CRAM. WALTER CRANE. G.J. CROSBIE DAWSON. W. H. DICKINSON, M.A., L.C.C. CAMPBELL DODGSON. Miss S. DUCKWORTH. F. M. DUTTON. OWEN FLEMING. T. MACKENZIE FOWLER. GEORGE FRAMPTON, A.R.A. W. WATERHOUSE GIBBINS. Dr. RICKMAN J. GODLEE. The Rev. W. GOODCHILD. I. CHALKLEY GOULD, a 2 The LATE JOSEPH GRIMSHIRE. The GUILDHALL LIBRARY. RICHARD W. HALE. ProfessorJ.W. HALES. W.J. HARDY, F.S.A. Mrs.J. S.HILL. J.J. HOLDSWORTH. H.B. HOPGOOD. Mrs. E.HUBBARD. TheRev.J.KENNEDY,M.A.,F.S.A. Dr. G.B.LONGSTAFF,J.P., L.C.C. The countess OF LOVELACE. Mrs. F. LOWREY. H.LUXMOORE. WILLIAM MACGREGOR. MAURICE MACMILLAN. F. E. MASEY. The earl OF MEATH. J. PAGETMELLOR. J. T. MICKLETHWAITE, F.S.A. F. D. MOCATTA. The lord MONKSWELL, LC.C. A. MOORE, F.S.I. G. vaughan morgan. Dr.J. D.E.MORTIMER. A.J. MUNBY, M.A., F.S.A. MissB. NEWCOMBE. PHILIP NORMAN, F.S.A. The Rev. J. P. NOYES, M.A. VERE L.OLIVER. Dr. G. PAGENSTECHER. The PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC LIBRARIES. The Rev. MANLEY POWER. AMBROSE M. POYNTER. SirE.J. POYNTER,P.R.A. Colonel W. F. PRIDEAUX, C.S.I. 3 EDWARDS. PRIOR. S.K.RATCLIFFE. W. G. RAWLINSON. COLIN E. READER. Mrs. COLIN E. READER. J. S. REDMAYNE. The REFORM CLUB. The LORD JUSTICE SIR JOHN RIGBY. THE MARQUIS OF RIPON. E. R. ROBSON, F.R.I.B.A. F. VV. SARGANT. Maj.-GeneralE.H.SARTORIUS. SirCOLINSCOTT-MONCRIEFF. T. MYDDELTON SHALL- CROSS. W. K. SHIRLEY. H. C. SOTHERAN. The Hon. LYULPH STANLEY. J.J.STEVENSON. Miss STONE. R. G.TATTON. W.THOMPSON. T.THORNTON. HAMO THORNYCROFT, R.A. Miss NORA TOMLIN. The lord TREDEGAR. Mrs. THACKERAY TURNER. J. A. C.VINCENT. G. HARRY WALLIS. T. HUMPHREY WARD. Sir JOHN WATNEY. J. WELLS, M.A. Mrs. WESTLAKE. Mrs. S. a. WHITBOURN. J. G. WHITE. JOHNE.YERBURY. KEITH D. YOUNG. Active Members. C. R.ASHBEE,M.A., Chairman of the Committee. ERNEST GODMAN, Secretary of the Committee. W.ASCROFT. TheRev.A.G. B.ATKINSON, M.A. MAX BALFOUR. C.J.BATHURST. J. H.BELFRAGE. REGINALD BLUNT. W.J.CAMERON. Miss A. G. E. CARTHEW. SPEDDING CURWEN,J.P. R. DAVIES. G.DIXON. MATT. GARBUTT, A.M.I.C.E. A.R.I.B.A. W.H.GODFREY. AUSTIN GOMME. MERVYN O'GORMAN. A.GRENVILLE. OSBORN C. HILLS, A.R.I.B.A. G. HORWOOD. HENRY KING. H. CLAPHAM LANDER, A.R.I.B.A. ERNEST A. MANN, M.S.A. E.T.MARRIOTT, M.A. THEO. MOORE, A.R.I.B.A. Miss B. NEWCOMBE. SYDNEY NEWCOxMBE. E. C. NISBET. A. E. NUTTER. A.W. PARKMAN. W.J. PLAYER. A.R.QUARTERMAN. J.HENRYQUINN. F.W. READER. Miss E. SPARKS. Mrs. SPOTTISWOODE. F.R.TAYLOR. G.TROTMAN. F. C. VARLEY. W.A.WEBB, A.R.I.B.A. ALFRED P. WIRE. E. L.WRATTEN. PREFACE. SUCH historical evidence and local tradition concerning the origin of the Old Palace as it was possible to collect has already been re- corded in a previous publication of the Survey Committee — the volume on Bromley-by-Bow. Little therefore remains for this present monograph but to illustrate more fully the beautiful detail in decorative work — either of stone or wood carving, panelling, and modelled plaster, in all of which the Palace so richly abounded. I would like here to acknowledge the help so freely given in my labours by the members ot the Survey Committee and others. My thanks are due to Mr. H. Hemingway, owner of the Palace, and occupier of the southern portion from 1874 until its purchase by the London School Board in 1893; to Mrs. Papineau, who also resided there from 1859 to 1873, and to Mr. J. House; to these I am indebted for much valuable information concerning the traditions and later history of the building. I have also to thank Messrs. H. Clapham Lander, A. W. Waddington, Ernest A. Mann, A. E. Nutter, and other ot my colleagues on the Survey Committee for their assistance in preparing the various drawings and photographs which illustrate the book, and of which due mention will be found in the following pages; and the Committee is indebted to the Board of Education, South Kensington, for permission to use the various photographs made from the ceilings, and to Lord Balcarres for a similar permission in respect of the ceiling at Balcarres House, Fife, N.B. ERNEST GODMAN, Secretary of the Survey Committee. 37 Cheyne Walk, Chelsea, Oct., i 901 . as CONTENTS. PAGE MEMBERS OF THE SURVEY COMMITTEE DURING THE PERIOD OF THE WORK - - - - 3 PREFACE --------- 5 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ------ 7 AN INTRODUCTORY NOTE ON THE FOLLY OF DE- STROYING THE OLD PALACE, BY C. R. ASHBEE - 9 DESCRIPTION OF THE ILLUSTRATIONS An attempt to restore the original building - - - 11 The ceilings and modelled plaster work - - - - 15 The underground passage - - - - - -17 INDEX - - - - - - - - - - 19 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 1 Block Plan, showing old Palace and adjoining buildings in relation to present Board School (measured drawing) _ _ _ Ernest Godman. 2 General view of Palace from North-east (drawing) F. C. Varley. 3 Ground Plan (measured drawing) - - Ernest Godman. 4 First Floor Plan „ „ - - ,, „ 5 Elevation of East Front (measured drawing) - „ „ 6 Section looking South ,, ,, - „ ,, 7 View of Palace and adjoining buildings from Ernest Godman and the South _ - - _ F.C. Varley. 8 Carved stone, with date, on South side of house (drawing) - Ernest Godman. 9 Fireplace in State room (photo) lo Fireplace, panelling, and carved frieze in State room (measured drawing) - - H.Clapham Lander. I I Details of carving and mouldingof fireplace in State room (measured drawing) - - „ „ I 2 Detail of carved panel in fireplace of State room (drawing) - - - H. C. Lander and A.Waddington. ,, carved stone fireplace. North-west room on first floor (measured drawing) - Ernest Godman. ,, oak doorway from main staircase to State room (measured drawing) - - ,, ,, I 3 Fireplace & panelling of State room, as re-erect- ed in South Kensington Museum (photo) - H.Clapham Lander. 1 4 Detail of upper part of fireplace in State room (photo) 15-16 Detail of pilaster and carving, fireplace in State room (photo) - - - „ „ 1 7 Panelling with carved pilaster and part of ceil- ing from State room (photo) - - South Ken. Museum. 1 8 Carved pilaster of State room and original oak window (drawing) _ _ _ Arthur E. Nutter. 19 Ceiling of State room (drawing) - - Ernest A. Mann. 20 Arms of James L, ceiling of State room (drawing) 21 Portions of ceiling of State room, showing Royal Arms and figure of Hector (photos) - South Ken. Museum. 34 7 22 Ceiling in 'Panel room,' Balcarres House, Fife, N.B. (photo) - - - South Ken. Museum. 23 North-west room, ground floor, showing part of ceiling and frieze (photo) - - „ „ 24 Ceiling in North-west room, ground floor (photo) ,, „ 25 Panel in ceiling, North-west room, ground floor (drawing) - - - -F. C.Varley. 26 Ditto (photo) - - - -South Ken. Museum. 27 Ditto (photo) - - - - „ „ 28 Ceiling from room on first floor (photos) - ,, „ 29 Ditto (photo) ------„ „ 30-33 Details of modelled plaster from ceilings — panels, ornaments on ribs, and friezes (four lithographs) _ - - -F. C.Varley. 34 Frieze from room on first floor (photo) - South Ken. Museum. 35 Staircase, south end of house (drawing -Ernest Godman. ^6 Decoration on brickwork of chimney stack, south side ot house - - - ,, ,, 37 Conjectural view of Palace & adjoining build- ings, as originally designed (drawing) - „ „ AN INTRODUCTORY NOTE ON THE FOLLY OF DESTROYING THE OLD PALACE. IT is useless to cry over spilt milk, but if the destruction of what, in a sense, was the finest building in East London did nothing else, it at least awakened the public conscience and was the immediate cause of the founding of the Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London, under whose auspices this monograph, the third of the series, is now presented. The fairly complete record which we have already given perhaps makes it needless here to go over the same ground again ; it is to be assumed that those who subscribe to the present volume will already have become possessed of the former which this Committee prepared for the London County Council, but in so important a building as the Old Palace there was necessarily much that it was impossible to record in the limited space at ourdisposal in the larger volume. Mr. Godman's records of the old Palace, therefore, together with the in- teresting collection ot drawings which he succeeded in making before everything was cleared away, will give some idea of what was lost to Greater London by this most shameless piece of destruction; but I would like here to sayatewwordsfromthepoint ofview not of the antiquarian, but of the citizen who holds that national history expressed in the local records of building is too sacred a thing to be lightly ignored by public bodies; and who believes that the time has come for us to ask of those whom we elect to manage our affairs, a more educated and enlightened view in regard to what is still left to us. It is an axiom with the average Englishman that he may do what he likes with his own; — one of the sacred rights of private property, it would seem, is, that if you have any- thing beautiful you may destroy it. But this does not extend to public property, nor is it a point ofview that can be held by public bodies. Mr. Godman has confined himself, therefore, to giving a concise de- scription of a series of the pictures here following, some from drawings, some from photographs made by members of the Survey Committee, and some by the South Kensington Museum. Leaving these to tell their own story I would here merely like to point out what might have been done with a little enlightened action on the part of the London School Board. Wenow have on the site of King James' Palacea well built Board School, and by well built I mean of course built in accordance with all the ordin- ary regulations, sanitary, solid, grey, grim, and commonplace. What we might have had with a little thought, and with no extra expense to the rates, would have been an ideal Board school with a record of every period of English history from the time of Henry VIIL as a daily object lesson for the little citizensof Bromley, a school-house thatcontained panelling 9 of James I., carving of William III., the modelled plaster work of the Scotch craftsmen of the early Jacobean time, rooms all the more graci- ous for the sumptuous additions of the later Stuarts, records of the time of Queen Anne, fireplaces, overmantels, and panelling of the Georges, Adam's work, and the black and white marble flooring laid down by the rich merchants of wealthy Middlesex who lived in the Palace up to the time of the expansion of London in the beginning of this century, — a school-house to be proud of. When we see records of this kind at Eton, at Marlborough, at Harrow, at Haileybury,we say how blessed are our English public schools to have such a historic background for our sons to grow up amongst. It perhaps does not occur to us that to the little Board school child, who surely needs it much more than the sons of our aristocracy or our bourgeoisie, such historic associations are infinitely more necessary, more valuable, more refining. I know of few records at any of our great public schools that would come up to what the London School Board here destroyed, and I am sure there is not a public school in England but would have been proud to have as its central building the Old Palace of Bromley. I shall be met no doubt with the argument that modern Board schools have to be built according to certain regulations, and that these do not admit of the modification of old or historic buildings. Possibly this may be so, if it be, it is high time the Board devoted itself to getting those reg- ulations altered. To urge them in this instance is mere excuse for want of imagination. Even the notorious Board, now fortunately defunct, in whose reign the old Palace was removed, had among its members several gentlemen who were genuine educationalists, and no educationalist of any repute would dare nowadays to dispute the value of historic record and noble building. It may be urged, and no doubt with some truth, that the majority of the members of a body like to the London School Board are not educational- ists and do not profess to be, that their object is to fulfil functions of a financial character relating to the rates, and to see that certain laws with regard to the teaching of children in a certain direction are carried out. This argument does not go far. To admit that the having a noble school- house is a wise objective for a School Board, as for a higher grade school, is tantamount to admitting that the objective might in this instance have been attained without any appreciable addition to the rates; all difficulties of a structural or architectual nature in preserving a building like the Old Palace as a nucleus, were quite easy to surmount. The Board, in short, did not know what it was doing, it was in the hands of advisers who were equally ignorant; it committed a foolish action and has had to take the consequence. Likeotherpublicbodiesthatfromtime to time have acted similarly, it has been pilloried for its folly. Meantime, however, the Palace is lost to us. lo C. R.ASHBEE. DESCRIPTION OF THE ILLUS- TRATIONS. AN ATTEMPT TO RESTORE THE ORIGINAL BUILDING. On plate 37 an attempt has been made to reconstruct the external view of the Palace with its adjoining buildings according to the original de- sign. In determining the positions and forms of the various features ad- vantage has been taken of the numerous discoveries made at the time of the demolition ; door and window frames and posts which still remained in position are shown on the plans, others were built up and their posi- tions defined only by the filling of later brickwork; while in some cases the evidence rests only on accidental discoveries of the original work rescued in more or less fragmentary form from these built-up openings and other parts of the structure. Comparison also has been made with contemporary buildings in the neighbourhood: Charlton House, near Greenwich, Kent, which is a re- puted John Thorpe design, has many points of resemblance to the Palace; Kirby Castle, Bethnal Green, which was also a design of John Thorpe; the early 17th century mansion now known as the 'Workmen's Home,' 217 Bow Road; Bromley House, the manor house of the upper manor of Bromley ; and Aston Hall, near Birmingham. The plan, as restored below, contained many features of interest; and Planof although a comparatively small building, the setting out and decoration 0/d Palace of the rooms was dignified. Doom outbutlJing I. Ifrtjjnll' TOWER ■ J-u;ill,rf$t,C^t I I Halt Staircase Doorways State room The hall was one storey in height, & all traces of the screen, if there ever had been one, had vanished in the subsequent alteration and remodel- ling; the fireplaces and almost all the panelling being also replaced at that period. At k was an arcade of moulded oak posts and arches almost complete, leading to the garden and the smaller stairs. Oneof the arched openings, illustrated here, is preserved in the South Kensington Museum. 30IHL [EaiDy,fiOTQ®M ■p4*f — f P — P — <(■ — [i — V^ •fii I r I I r I I I' . I r [Pfb£\i^ QHtjf^hdC^.. The great staircase, situated at the south end of the building was also intact. It was constructed round a square well hole, the handrails, balus- ters, newels, and other parts being entirely of oak, elaborately moulded, and of large dimensions. Details ot the various parts are given on plate 35. Many of the internal doorways still retained the original moulded solid oak frames, the mouldings on the side posts ending with carved stops about two feet from the floor. In almost every case these mouldings and stops were varied in design, that shown on plate i 2 being one of the simplest. It is scarcely necessary to do more than refer to the description of the state room already published,* also the numerous photographs & draw- ings on plates 9-2 1 of this book, illustrating the fireplace with its carv- ing and arms of James I. ; the ceiling with the modelled ornaments, ribs, panels of heroes, and the Royal Arms; and the panelling with carved pilasters and frieze. This room hasbeen re-erected complete in the south hall of the South Kensington Museum,with the exception of the moulded oak door frames on either side of the fireplace, and the i8th century pine chimney-piece inserted in the original opening. Along the frieze at the top of this was carved the inscription from Proverbs xv.,v. 17: BETTER-IS-ADINNEROFHERBSWHERE-LOVEIS "* '■Survey ofBromley-by-Boiso^pp. 33-40. 12 aces External Towers The original woodwork of the other fire-places had been replaced by Fireph carved and moulded chimney-pieces of later dates, chiefly of the time of the 1 8th century alterations. The most elaborate of these was in the room over the State room. It was of pine with carved swags and pilasters, and as late as 1 873 still retained a large medallion in the centre with carved heads of James I. and his wife Anne of Denmark, surrounded by a wreath of holly leaves. Behind this was discovered the original carved stone fire- place, with coloured and gilt frieze. Several other similar stone fireplaces still remained in various parts of the Palace, one of them being illustrated on plate i 2. That the towers were originally built higher is proved by the fact that, while the timber framing of the main roofs was intact, the pyramidal roofs on the towers, and the ceilings immediately below them, were formed almost entirely of fragments of the oak mullioned windows and beams, some moulded, of the earliest date, and evidently placed there from other parts of the building. The lead cupolas on top are conjectural, but are of a form quite common at the period, and similar to those at Charlton House. The windows are restored mainly from the evidence of the original Windoics openings, mostly built up in the i8th century alterations, assisted by re- ference to those at Aston Hall and Charlton House. That shown on plate 18 is restored from the various portions found in the roofs, walls, and blocked-up window-openings of the house, and now preserved in South Kensington Museum. There were two kinds of windows — those with large moulded oak frames, which are assumed to have been placed on the principal front, the east, and those composed entirely of moulded bricks. These latter were evidently on the north and west sides of the building ; one long low window, five lights wide, still remained, although blocked up, in the north wall and gave light to the ' Kitchen,' or the north end of the Hall, as it is assumed to have originally been. There were also evidences of similar windows in other parts of this and the west wall. Numbers of moulded bricks, ovolo-moulded mullions,and others, form- ing parts of cornices and string courses, were found built into the ori- ginal window openings; while in one of these (on thegarden front of the North-west room on ground floor) was found the fragment of i 5th cen- tury carved Purbeck marble, already described.* The chimneys were of various sizes and shapes, and in almost all cases Chimney had been rebuilt from the roof upwards. Only in one instance at the stacks south end of the house, as shown in the sketch, was the original moulded brick plinth left. Plans of some others are given on plate 4. * '■ Survey of Bromley-by-Bow,' p. 36. 13 External decoration of brickwork Outbuild- ings and do- mestic offices The decoration on the face of the brickwork shown in plate 36 was dis- covered plastered over, behind the oak panelling on the South face of the chimney stack at the end of the State room at a height of about i 5 feet from the ground level. The body of the chimney stack was of red bricks, on these diapers of a blue-grey colour had been painted to the pattern shown, and the joints lined with white. There were also remains of cement quoins at the corners of the stack. The use of cement quoins instead of stone was apparently common at this period in districts where stone was not easily obtainable, and there is a notable example still left in the neighbourhood — Eastbury House, Barking, about five miles distant, built in 1 572-1 573. This is constructed entirely of red bricks, all the windows, gables, doorways, mouldings and other external featureswhichinthefirstcasewere constructed of mould- ed brickwork, being cemented over to represent stone. It was also a usual custom to diaper the external faces of the walls, using black or vitrified bricks for the purpose; but it would perhaps be diffi- cult to find a contemporary example of painted diapers. It is difficult to understand the reason for the decoration in such a posi- tion, the chimney stack, so far as could be seen, never having been on an outside wall of the house, unless we suppose that it may have formed part of an earlier, and possibly smaller, building, which was incorporated with the Palace. There were, however, so far as one could see, no other features in the building that could justify such an assumption. The timber framed buildings in the foreground were traditionally the outbuildings containing the servants' and retainers' dwellings, offices, and outbuildings attached to the Palace; and have already been fully de- scribed.-j- In this case tradition is helped by the following facts: ■f • Survey of Bromley-by-Bow, />/>. 4 1 , 4 2 . 1 . The nearness of these buildings to the Palace. That they were of the same date is proved by the fact of oak. framed windows being dis- covered in the walls of the ' Seven Stars ' public-house, with mould- ings identical with those in the Palace, described above. 2. The door in the north towerof the Palace, communicating with these buildings, and the windows in the north wall overlooking them. 3. The position of the underground passage. 4. The small amount of accommodation for servants in the Palace, com- pared with the size of the building, and the scale of the internal planning. Theoakframingwasverymassive, and although covered over on the out- side with weather boarding in the i 8th century, & plastered inside, was in perfect condition at the time of the demolition of the ' Seven Stars,' the corner building, in 1895. The timber was framed as shown in the draw- ing; and the upper storey overhung the lower on the north side. The greater part of these outbuildings still remain, and face the High Street. THE CEILINGS AND MODELLED PLASTERWORK. Of modelled plaster ceilings three only remained, Scare shown on plates Ceilings 3-4. There were also three plaster friezes, two of them complete, along ^friezes the top of the walls of the north-west rooms on the ground and upper floors, the former illustrated by the lithograph on plate 3 3, and the latter by the photograph on plate 34. The remains of the third, consisting of three repeats only,was on the chimney breast ot the room above the State room, and is shown on plate 33. The handling of these varies consider- ably, that on plate 34 being perhaps the best; it is essentially English in design, with its open strapwork scrolls, flowers and fruits, while the others partake much more of the Italian character. All these friezes were covered by the later work, the two former by the 1 8th century panelling, which extended from the floor to the ceiling, andthelatterby the carved pine mantelpiece, which also covered an original stone fireplace similar to that shown on plate 12, with a richly carved, coloured and gilt frieze. Of the ceilings the setting out of those in the ground floor rooms was on lines more or less common to the period. Examples similar to that in the State room are still preserved in the Stateroom 'Panel room,' Balcarres House, Fife, N.B.; Leathersellers' Hall, St. ceiling Helen's, London — illustrated by Malcolm;* several also are illustrated by Gotch;!" and there are no doubt many others of similar design. The details vary considerably in each ceiling, but in that at Balcarres House * '119 Views in London and in the Vicinity of the Metropolis,' 1836. •j- ''Architecture of the Renaissance in England,fo. London, i 89 1 . 15 illustrated on plate 22 it will be seen there are panels similar to those on the Old Palace ceiling containing figures of ancient heroes.* Ceiling of With regard to the ceiling in the north-west room it is interesting to north west note,that in the ceiling of the principal room of the' Workman'sHome/f- room not only is the design similar, but the ornament running along the ribs of both ceilings is cast from the same moulds, thus proving that both were the work of the same hand, and executed within a short period of each other. There are also in this latter ceiling the little cherubs' heads, with halo and wings only, similar to those bordering the panels containing the heroes in the State room ceiling, plate 2 1 . There are also similar ceilings to this at Broughton Castle, Oxon; Uni- versity Library, Cambridge; and Aston Hall, near Birmingham. In this last the detail is much bolder and simpler than at the Palace. |. Ceiling Of the third and perhaps the most beautiful, which is illustrated in plan of room on on plate 4, and by photographs on plate 28, the writer has, so far, not first floor seen a similar example. The design is formed by intersecting circles and quatrefoils,each about ten feet diameter, with grotesque heads, shown in detail in the lithographs on plates 3 1-3 2, to mark their intersections; the ribs are ornamented with a running design of nuts and various fruits, treated in a much less conventional manner than in the other ceilings, and the panels between the ribs ornamented with the fan, pomegranate, and other subjects shown in detail on plates 30 to 32. Only one-third of this ceiling was left, but the design of the whole is shown in the plan on plate 4. The sketch given here shows a section through one of the ceiling ribs. * See also '^ Survey of Bromley-by-Bow^ p. 38. \Ibid.,^.l^. X Gotch, Arch Ren.,pt. ^., /». 23. 16 In construction all ceilings were similar, and appeared to be built up as Construction follows: The ceilings were formed with two coats of plaster; on the first ofcel/ings coat the design was drawn or marked and the body of the ribs (a) 'roughed in' with plaster; the undersideof this was roughened or scored to take the cast work (b) , which varied from \ to \ inch in thickness, & was formed of plaster mixed with some hardening material like marble dust. The outer mouldings (c) as will be plainly seen by reference to the vari- ous photographs, were then run by hand, not struck from centres, and the ribs were complete. The panels on the face of the ceiling were next ap- plied, and the finishing coat of plaster was put on to the surfaces of the ceiling between these and the ribs. A much larger proportion of hair was used than is the custom at the present day. The pendants on the ceiling of the State room appeared to be fixed in the same manner as the ribs, the cores being strengthened by long nails placed crosswise through them into the ceiling ribs. The State room ceiling was the only one, in the first instance, that was purchased by the authorities of the South Kensington Museum, and re- moved thence during the demolition. The remains of the two others, consisting of one or more repeats of each ornament and section of ribs, were collected by the writer (careful drawings of these ceilings being also made at the time), and these remains, together with the friezes above mentioned, were by him subsequently handed to the Museum for re- construction. THE UNDERGROUND PASSAGE. Following the usual tradition in such cases, an underground passage was Direction of commonly supposed to lead from beneath the Palace to one or other of underground the following buildings: West Ham Abbey, King John's Palace at Old passage Ford, and Boleyn Castle at East Ham. During the demolition careful search was made for remains of this passage, and it was found to actually exist. Starting from the cellar under the 'scullery' in the north-east corner, an arched opening in the east wall led into a square brick cham- ber eight feet by ten, with walls and arched roof of red bricks ; a section across the chamber is shown in the sketch. Continuing northward the passage still retained its arched roof and was blocked by brick walls, evi- dently of dates subsequent to the passage, at every few feet. It was again accessible by the trap door in the yard of the adjoining house, shown at G, on plate i, but beyond here had apparently been destroyed to make room for the foundations of this house. As the work of demolition pro- ceeded these portions of the passage were filled in with rubbish, and so prevented the possibility of further exploration. Probably the passage made a bend here eastward (it did not run under the 'Seven Stars'), and curvinground by the north side of the churchyard ran into,oralongside, the river Lea. The crown of the vault is said to have given way a few b 17 ^^ « ii ^pj^MpPi ^P ^^^^H ^aHHHB i^^^^^^^^^ ^^ffi: fflflrllTfWlllWiK y//M^0^^^^^^ iiP'll 'iinsjijillj m ^^^P*MJjj f^^K ^M ly:::;:::-] ■TilHi:;: : 'liillilii 1 ^gS^^ pill •SSSSiii 1 m liiip iii liliii! ^5^^^ m R fi^^Siifflitt Abbey King °John s Palace Boleyn Castle years since in the road at the north-west corner of the churchyard and to have let a van down. The following notes may be of interest, and throw some light on the various statements as to the termination of the passage. At West Ham Abbey, the Cistercian Abbey of Stratford Langthorne, a passage somewhat similar to that at the Palace was discovered in i 845, and is fully described in Fry's 'East and West Ham,' p. 140. Its general direction was, however, eastward, and terminated at some distance from the abbey in a marsh ditch, from which it was inferred that the passage had been an ancient monastic sewer. At King John's Palace, Old Ford (the remains of which, consisting of some boundary walls, gateway, and a few fragments of buildings, are situ- ated in Old Ford Road, about half a mile north of the Old Palace) the writer is informed, by those who have seen it, that an arched subterranean passage exists, commencingbeneaththegardenofthehouse atthe south- east corner of Wick Lane, running southward under the 'Sounding Alley' on the opposite side of Old Ford Road, then continuing in the same direction across Tredegar Road near the spot occupied by the 'Joiners' Arms' public house. In this part of the passage a stone coffin was found some 25 years ago. At Boleyn Castle, a building of i6th century date, careful search at the base of the tower, the supposed termination of the passage, has failed to reveal any trace of the existence of such a passage. It will appear from these notes that very little dependence can be placed on the traditions respecting the termination of the passage. That it ex- isted there can be no doubt ; it was much too large and carefully built to be a sewer; it is possible, therefore, that it was used as a secret means of access to the house from the river. 18 INDEX. Adam's period, work of the, in the Old Palace - - - Ashbee, C. R. Introductory Note on the folly of destroying the Old Palace _--___ Aston Hall, Birmingham, reference to ceiling at - - resemblance to the Old Palace in design page lo 9 i6 windows of Balcarres House, Fife, N.B., ceiling in Panel room at - Lord, references to ceiling at Balcarres House, Fife, N.B. - Board of Education, South Kensington, photographsof Old Palace ceilings contributed by the - - - .. Board School on the site of the Old Palace _ _ _ Boleyn Castle, East Ham, reference to underground passage at 1 7, Bow, Workmen's Home - - - - 11, Bromley House, resemblance in design to the Old Palace Churchyard --_-__ Broughton Castle, Oxon, reference to ceiling at - Ceilings and modelled plaster work in the Old Palace Charlton House, Kent, cupolas on towers of - resemblance in design to the Old Palace windows of - Churchyard, Bromley- _____ Cistercian Abbey of Stratford Langthorne (WestHam Abbey), the Coffin, Stone, found in underground passage near the 'Joiners' Arms' public house, Bow _ _ _ _ Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London, members of, during the period of the work founding of the ------ puh\ica.tionof the Survey of Brom/ey-Sy-Bow Construction of the Old Palace ceilings, method of Contents of book -_--__ Denmark, Anne of, carved head over fireplace - - - Description of the illustrations _ - - - Eastbury House, Barking, comparison of external features with thoseof the Old Palace - - - - ' + Eton, reference to old records at - - - - 10 •5 5 5 9 18 16 1 1 18 16 '5 13 1 1 13 18 18 18 3 9 r J) 17 6 J 3 1 1 19 page Fry, East and West Ham, description of underground passage at West Ham Abbey - - - - - 1 8 Georges, work of the period of the, in the Old Palace - --.' lo Godman, Ernest, records of the Old Palace - - "9 preface by- - - - - -5 Gotch, Architecture of the Renaissance in England, reference to 15,16 Haileybury, reference to old records at - - - - 10 Harrow ,, ,, ,, - - - - 10 Hemingway, H., former owner of the Old Palace - - 5 Henry VIII., work of the period of, in the Old Palace - - 9 House, J., notes on the Old Palace by - - - - 5 Inscription from the State room fireplace - - -12 Introductory Note on the folly of destroying the Old Palace, by C. R. Ashbee - - - - ~ 9 James I., arms of, in the State room ceiling - - - 12 — • carved head of, over fireplace - - - " ^3 work of the period of, in the Old Palace - - 10 'Joiners' Arms ' public house, Bow, underground passage near - 1 8 King John's Palace, Old Ford, arched passage beneath - - t8 underground passage leading from the Old Palace to 1 7 Kirby Castle, Bethnal Green, resemblance in design to the Old Palace - - - - - -11 Lander, H. Clapham, drawings by - - - - 5 Lea, River, and underground passage leading from the Old Palace to i 8 Leatherseller's Hall, St. Helens, London, ceiling at - - ^5 List of Illustrations - - - - - - 7 London County Council, Survey of Bromley-by-Bow, prepared by the Survey Committee for the - - - 9 London School Board, the purchase and destruction of the Old Palace by - - - - - 5,9, 10 Malcolms' ^/t'WJ-i9/'L5;/d'9/;, 1836, reference to - - " ^5 Mann, Ernest A., drawings by - - - - 5 Marlborough, reference to old records at - - - 10 Middlesex, merchants of, and additions to the Old Palace by - 10 Nutter, Arthur E., drawings by - - - - 5 20 ' Panel room,' Balcarres House, Fife, N.B,, ceiling of - " '5 Papineau, Mrs., former resident of the Old Palace - - 5 Preface - - - - - - -5 Queen Anne, records of the period of, in the Old Palace - i o Scotch Craftsmen, modelled plaster work by, in the Old Palace - 10 'Seven Stars' public house, and underground passage - - 18 formerly outbuildings attached to the Old Palace - i 5 ' Sounding Alley,' Old Ford, underground passage beneath - i 8 South Kensington Museum, arched opening in the Old Palace,now in 1 2 illustrations of the Old Palace ceilings, &c., sup- plied from the - - - - "9 reconstruction of the Old Palace State room. now m - - - - - 1 2, 17 Stratford Langthorne, the Cistercian Abbey of (West Ham Abbey) i 8 Stuart period, additions to the Old Palace in the time of the - i o Survey of Bromley-by-Boiv, references to - 5, 9, i 2, i 3, 14, 16 Thorpe, John, designer of Kirby Castle, Bethnal Green - - ir reputed designer of Charlton House, Kent - -11 Underground passage beneath the Old Palace - - " '7 University Library, Cambridge, reference to ceiling at - -16 Waddington, A. W., drawings by - - - - 5 West Ham Abbey, underground passage leading to it from the Old Palace - - - - - - 17 Wick Lane, Old Ford, underground passage from house in -18 William in. , carving of the period of, in the Old Palace - 10 'Workmen's Home,' Bow, reference to ceiling in - - 16 resemblance in design to the Old Palace - - 11 21 HERE ENDS THE THIRD MONOGRAPH OF THE COM- MITTEE FOR THE SURVEY OF THE MEMORIALS OF GREATER LONDON, ON THE OLD PALACE OF BROM- LEY-BY-BOW, WHICH WAS WRITTEN BY ERNEST GODMAN FROM NOTES AND DRAWINGS MADE IN THE PALACE DURING THE TIME OF ITS DESTRUCTION IN 1 893-1 894. WITH AN INTRODUCTORY NOTE BY C. R. ASHBEE.PRINTED FOR THECOMMITTEE ATTHE ESSEX HOUSE PRESS, BOW, MDCCCCII. Published in England by Edward Arnold, 37 Bedford Street, Strand ; and in America by Samuel Buckley & Co., 100 William Street, New York. 350 copies, of which 200 are reserved for the Committee. This is No.g^ PLATE I "'GH STREET. PLATE 2. GROUND VIEW OF PALACE FROM THE NORTH-EAST. PLATE 3. Kf PLATE 4. ir s- z < cy PLATE 5. PLATE 6. o z 5 o o 2 1 C* L'? LONDON. PLATE 12. PLATE 13- FIREPLACE AND PANELLING OF STATE-ROOM, AS RE-ERECTED IN SOUTH KENSINGTON MUSEUM. PLATE 14. DETAIL OF UPPER PART OF FIREPLACE IN STATE-ROOM. PLATE 15. DETAIL OF PILASTER AND CARVING. FIREPLACE IN STATE-ROOM. PLATE 1 6. DETAIL OF PILASTER AND CARVING. FIREPLACE IN STATE-ROOM. PLATE 17. PANELLING, WITH CARVED PILASTER, AND PART OF CEILING, STATE ROOM. PLATE i8. CARVED PILASTER IN STATE ROOM AND ORIGINAL OAK MOULDED WINDOW. 'mui^m^ ffiiL[LW([rQ(0)F^ A.c M oru. PLATE 19. n PLATE 20. ARMS OF TAMES I. CEILING OF STATE ROOM. CEILING OF STATE ROOM, SHOWING THE ROYAL ARMS AND MODELLED FIGURE OF HECTOR. PLATE 21. '■e ''^' - ^p^ ' HPj-3 ^'-\^ V , ^^L^^Mfff '" H 'K' B.O- - ^^^^^9^ :r -■* ..f PLATE 2 2. CEILING IN "PANEL ROOM." BALCARRES HOUSE, FIFE, N.B. PLATE 23. NORTH WEST ROOM, GROUND FLOOR, SHOWING CEILING AND FRIEZE. PLATE 24. &^."v -^- CEILING IN NORTH-WEST ROOM, GROUND FLOOR. PLATE 25. PANEL IN CEILING. NORTH-WEST ROOM, GROUND FLOOR. PLATE 26. PANEL IN CEILING, NORTH-WEST ROOM, GROUND FLOOR. PLATE 27. PANEL IN CEILING, NORTH-WEST ROOM, GROUND FLOOR. PLATE 28. 1 PART OF CEILING OF ROOM, FIRST FLOOR. PLATE 29. PART OF CEILING OF ROOM, ON FIRST FLOOR. TME OLD PALACE Of BPO/ALCY CO .N*'*'' \ r ^ ' o O UJ o < a: -\ _j O ^ > w THE. OLD PA(.ACE Gf BfeOALEY BOX INTER/ECIION ^1 ^!::/lFf J ckQCHh ri!:s)9... . ThE OLD PALACL Or BROALEIY PLATE 34. FRIEZE FROM NORTH-WEST ROOM, ON FIRST FLOOR. DETAIL OF MAIN STAIRS AT SOUTH END OF HOUSE, PLATE 35. t^KNDANT, PMOTO-IiThO SPRAOUE »C" L"'l.0rjDOI PLATE 36. Cement quoin. J jimL IL JiiniiiL .jiiir ^iiL JiilL liiiilL iiiiir~iiii _ jjiir ni id DiiC niiLJiianaiiiti- niiai r "liiiiiaaaiiiiiic niniir ~lilL "" □□□ _J L L ~1 □□■iC c :3 (z jiin r : L J jiiiiiiaaiici __- _,_, ,, jiiniiiaiiic -11- ^"yLr- jiir "liiiiici JPilL. ^-SP^ liir ziiic iiaiii niic "liiuiiiriiiL TUT ^jpnc „ zmc: jiiiic ]iir jiiniiiLJiiir jiiic iiiiir ]iii!r ^iiir liiilZ]! liiiiiir ~jm^ DECORATION ON BRICKWORK OF CHIMNEY STACK, SOUTH SIDE OF HOUSE. PLATE 37. ^ T' ^- ♦ • • ^ ^ I' THE SURVEY OF LONDON: BEING THE FIRST VOLUME OF THE REGISTER OF THE COMMITTEE FOR THE SURVEY OF THE MEMORIALS OF GREATER LONDON, CONTAINING THE PARISH OF BROMLEY- BY-BOW. EDITED BY C. R. ASHBEE, M.A., FROM THE MATERIAL COLLECTED BY MEMBERS OF THE SURVEY COMMITTEE AND PRINTED UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL. A.D. 1900. %1. LONDON : p. S. KING AND SON, 2 and 4, Great Smith Street, Westminster. " I have long had thoughts of drawing up something for London like St. Foix's Rues de Paris, and have made some collections. I wish you would be so good in the course of your reading to mark down any passage, to the end as where any great houses of the nobility were situated, or in what street any memorable event happened. I fear the subject will not furnish much till later time, as our princes kept their courts up and down the country in such a vagrant manner." Horace Walpole to the Rev. Mr. Cole, Strawberry-hill, April i6th, 1768. PREFACE. This volume gives die result of a complete survey of the parish of Bromley, and is published by the London County Council as the first instalment of what is hoped to be accomplished for all London. In 1896, 2ist January, on the motion of Sir John Lubbock (now Lord Avebury) , the Council resolved — "That the following addition be made to the order of reference of the General Purposes Committee — ' To consider and report in the case of the con- ERRATA. Page vii., line 19, ist col., for Crane read Cram. „ II, line 12 from top, for William Bean read Dan. " 19. M 17 .. lVoodtn_^ read IVoodin. " 20, „ 8 The houses in No. XV. of the Register (pp. 43-44) are not all in the parish of Bromley, two of them (Nos. i and 3) being just inside Bow. They have been put together for the sake of convenience. [h.b. 17 societies attended, viz. — Architectural Association ; British Archaeological Association ; City Church Preservation Society ; Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London ; Kent Archaeological Society ; Kyrle Society ; London and Middle- sex Archaeological Society ; London Topographical Society ; National Tmst for Places of Historic or Natural Beauty ; Royal Archaeological Institute ; Royal Institute of British Architects ; Society of Antiquaries ; Society of Arts ; Society for the Pro- tection of Ancient Buildings ; and Surveyors' Institution. In the course of an interesting discussion, during which the representatives of the various societies expressed their gratification at the Council taking action in the matter, and the hope that the interest shown by the Council would stimulate greater public interest in ancient buildings. Sir Robert Hunter, representing the National Trust for Places of Historic or Natural Beauty, stated that the members of different societies were all of opinion that some register or list of buildings, interesting by virtue of their antiquity or architectural beauty and associations iii. PREFACE. This volume gives the result of a complete survey of the parish of Bromley, and is published by the London County Council as the first instalment of what is hoped to be accomplished for all London. In 1896, 2ist January, on the motion of Sir John Lubbock (now Lord Avebury) , the Council resolved — " That the following addition be made to the order of reference of the General Purposes Committee — ' To consider and report in the case of the con- templated destruction of any building of historic or architectural interest, what course of action the Council should adopt.' " The result of this resolution was to make the General Purposes Committee of the Council the committee entaisted with the work of preserving, as far as the Council could, buildings of historic interest. The Committee took active steps to carry out the Council's wish, and on the 23rd February, 1897, reported to the Council what they had done with a view to giving effect to the above-mentioned resolution. In the first place the Committee deemed it essential that a list, as complete as possible, should be obtained of all buildings of historic or architectural interest in London, and they appointed a sub-committee to deal with the matter. With a view to obtainino- the necessary particulars for such a list, a communication was addressed to certain societie.s, several of whom expressed their willingness to assist the Council. Subsequently it was decided that the best means of arriving at a satisfactory and expeditious mode of procedure would be to hold a conference with the various societies' who had been asked to kindly assist the Council in the matter, and accordingly a conference took place at the County Hall on 4th December, 1897. Representatives from the following societies attended, viz. — Architectural Association ; British Archaeoloeical Association : City Church Preservation Society ; Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London ; Kent Archsological Society ; Kyrie Society ; London and Middle- sex Archjeological Society ; London Topographical Society ; National Trust for Places of Historic or Natural Beauty; Royal Archaeological Institute; Royal Institute of British Architects ; Society of Antiquaries ; Society of Arts ; Society for the Pro- tection of Ancient Buildings ; and Surveyors' Institution. In the course of an interesting discussion, during which the representatives of the various societies expressed their gratification at the Council taking action in the matter, and the hope that the interest shown by the Council would stimulate greater public interest in ancient buildings. Sir Robert Hunter, representing the National Trust for Places of Historic or Natural Beauty, stated that the members of different societies were all of opinion that some register or list of buildings, interesting by virtue of their antiquity or architectural beauty and associations 111. should be compiled. In support of this it was contended that at the present time there was considerable ignorance as to what London possessed in the way of build- ings of interest, and that frequently it was only realised that a building was of historic interest when that building was in danger of being removed. The Trinity Almshouses were cited as an instance. A list or reo^ister would, it was thought, remove in a great measure the risk of losing such buildings. The Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London having already commenced to prepare such a register, it was thought that good purpose would be sened if that committee were to continue its work in connection with the preparation of the register. In the end the conference passed a series of resolutions as follows — (i.) That it is desirable that a register or list be made of buildings of historic or architectural interest in London ; and that the register be in such a form as to admit of amplification, both as to buildings and detail of buildings, according as future information comes to hand. (2.) That it is desirable to form a general committee to include representatives of the different societies interested in the matter, and that the Council be requested to appoint representatives on such committee. (3.) That die e.xisting Committee for the Sur\'ey of the Memorials of Greater London, having already made a register of buildings in the east end of London, be requested to continue its work ; and that it is desirable that similar registers be compiled for the rest of London, it being understood that such registers are formed for the use of the London County Council. (4.) That the General Purposes Committee of the Council be requested to consider the desirableness of the register being printed from time to time by the Council with suitable drawings and illustrations. The General Purposes Committee of the Council afterwards considered these resolutions, and resolved that they should be adopted, and taken up to the Council. The Committee thereupon made known to the Council that the Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London had already taken steps to compile a register of historic buildings in London, had collected a considerable amount of material, and had generously offered to hand over to the Council the result of its labours, so far as they related to London, if the Council would print the register. On the 27th July, 1897, the Council resolved to print the register, and voted the necessary' sums for the purpose. A -Still more important step was taken in 1 898 by obtaining from Parliament the statutory power to protect buildings and places of historic interest. The terms of the statute are as follows — " It shall be lawful for the Council if they think fit to purchase by agreement buildings and places of historical or architectural interest or works of art, or to undertake or contribute towards the cost of preserving, maintaining and managing any such buildings and places, and to erect and maintain or contribute towards the provision, erection and maintenance of works of art in London " (London County Council (General Powers) Act, 1898, section 60). iv. Besides this the Council has acquired statutory power in several Acts of Parlia- ment obtained by railway companies to take possession of all objects of archseological interest excavated by railway companies operating in London. The Council has by these acts taken all possible steps to do what is necessary in the preservation and recording of places of historic interest in the county. It has been the pioneer among the local authorities of the country in the matter, and the statutory power which it obtained in 1898, or something equivalent, is now likely to be extended to all the county councils of the kingdom, with the result that places of beauty and historic interest may not be swept out of existence without good cause being shown. The report of the Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London upon the first instalment of the register best explains the use and interest of the work thus begun, and it is accordingly appended hereto. G. L. GOMME, Statistical Officer of the London County Council. The County Hall, Spring Gardens, September, 1900. V. MEMBERS OF THE SURVEY COMMITTEE DURING THE PERIOD OF THE WORK. The Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of London, President of the Committee. [The late Lord Leighton was former President.] Honorary Members. W. Adams. The Lord Aldenham. R. A. Allison, M.P. Mrs. C R. AsHBEE. Mrs. H. S. AsHBEE. The Lord Balcarres. B. T. Batseord. Albert E. Bernays. Sir Walter Besant, M.A., F.S.A. Leonard Borwick. E. W. Brooks. A. G. Browning, F.S.A. R. M. BuRCH. W. Carpenter. G. Chambers. The Chelsea Public Library. The Rev. J. F. Cornish. The Right Hon. L. Courtney, M.P. George Washington Crane. Walter Crane. G. Crosbie Dawson. W. H. Dickinson, M.A., L.C.C. Campbell Dodgson. Miss S. Duckworth. F. M. Dutton. The Rev. J. P. Faunthorpe. Albert Fleming. Owen Fleming. George Frampton, A.R.A. W. Waterhouse Gibbins. Dr. Rickman J. Godlee. The Rev. W. Goodchild. L Chalkley Gould. The Guildhall Library. Richard W. Hale. Professor J. W. Hales. Miss Octavia Hill. Mrs. J. S. Hill. J. J. Holdsworth. A. J. HOLLINGTON. Mrs. Hope. H. B. Hopgood. H. L. HOPKINSON. Mrs. E. Hubbard. The Rev. J. E. Kelsall, M.A. The Rev. J. Kennedy, M.A. Dr. G. B. Longstaff, J. P., L.C.C. The Countess of Lovelace. Mrs. F. Lowrey. H. Luxmoore. William Macgregor. Maurice Macmillan. C. J. Marshall, A.R.LB.A. F. E. Masey. The Earl of Meath. J. Paget Mellor. J. T. Micklethwaite, F.S.A. Mrs. Mitchell. F. D. MOCATTA. The Lord Monkswell, L.C.C Vll. Honorary Members. A. Moore, F.S.I. G. Vaughan Morgan. S. Vaughan Morgan. Dr. J. D. E. Mortimer. Edward W. Mountford, F.R.I.B.A. A. J. MuNBY, M.A., F.S.A. Frank Murray. Philip Norman. The Rev. J. P. Noyes, M.A. Vere L. Oliver. Dr. G. Pagenstecher. Miss Helen A. H. Parker. Geo. Pitt. Colonel W. F. Prideaux, C.S.I. W. G. Rawlin.son. Colin E. Reader. J. S. Redmayne. The Lord Justice Sir John Rigby. The Marquis of Rifon. E. R. RoBsoN, F.R.I.B.A. F. W. Sargant. Major-General E. H. Sartorius. Sir Colin Scott-Moncrieff. T. Myddelton Shallcross. W. K. Shirley. H. C. Sotheran. R. Phene Spiers, F.S.A. The Hon. Lyulph Stanley. J.J. Stevenson. Miss Stone. R. G. Tatton. W. Thompson. T. Thornton. Hamo Thornycroft, R.A. Miss Nora Tomlin. The Lord Tredegar. Mrs. Thackeray Turner. J. A. C. Vincent. G. Harry Wallis. J. Humphrey Ward. Alfred Waterhouse, R.A. Sir John Watney. J. Wells, M.A. Mrs. Westlake. Mrs. S. A. Whitbourn. J. G. White. John E. Yerbury. Acting Committee. C. R. Ashbee, M.A., Chairman of the Co^nmittee. Ernest Godman, Secretary of the Committee. Theo Moore, A.R.I. B.A. Miss B. Newcombe. A. E. Nutter. Mervyn O'Gorman. J. Henry Quinn. Miss E. Sparks. Mrs. Spottiswoode. F. R. Taylor. F. C. Varley. W. A. Webb, A.R.I. B.A. Alfred P. Wire. W. Ascroft. The Rev. A. G. B. Atkinson, M.A. Max Balfour. Reginald Blunt. Cecil C. Brewer. Spedding Curwen, J. p. R. Davies. Matt Garbutt, A.M.I.C.E., A. R.I. B.A. OsBORN C. Hills, A.R.I. B.A. H. Clapham Lander, A. R.I. B.A. Ernest A. Mann, M.S.A. E. T. Marriott, M.A. vin. CONTENTS. Preface Members of the Survey Committee during the period of the work Page. iii Vll xi xiii List of illustrations Introduction ■" ••• ••• ••• I. The Church of St. Mary ... ... ... ... 3 II. The Vicarage of St. Mary ... ... ... ja III. The Manor House of the Upper Manor ... ... ... 15 IV. Bromley Hall (The Manor House of the Lower Manor) ... 17 V. The Manor House, Brunswick-road VI. Tudor House, St. Leonard's-street VII. Nos. 142 and 144, St. Leonard's-street ... VIII. No. 135, St. Leonard's-street ... IX. Drapers' Almshouses, Priscilla-road ... ... ... 26 X. St. Andrew's Mission Church, Gurley-street ... ... 28 XI. Good Shepherd's Mission Hall, Back-alley XII. House on Bromley Wharf, Three Mills-lane XIII. The Old Palace of Bromley XIV. " Seven Stars " Public-house XV. Some smaller houses and buildings of interest, either at present standing in Bromley, or demolished during the compilation of this Register ... .. & ••• ••• ... ... 43 XVI. Nos. 122 to 128, St. Leonard's-street ... ... ... 45 I"dex ^g 19 21 25 29 33 41 IX. [h.B. 16 B LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. Tudor House Number 1. Bromley Hall ... Plan of ground floor (measured drawing) 2. ,, ,, Elevation of front to Brunswick- road (measured drawing) 3. ,, ,, View from north-west, with the "Manor House" adjoining (drawing) Plans of ground and first floors (measured drawing) 5. ,, ,, Elevations of east and west fronts (measured drawing) 6. ,, ,, Detail of doorway, east front (measured drawing) 7- >, ,, General view (drawing) 8. ,, ,, North-east view from garden (drawing) 9. ,, ,, Porch from south side (drawing) ... 10. ,, ,, Entrance door and railings in front (drawing) 11. ,, ,, Old gateway of Northumberland House (drawing) 12. ,, ,, Stairs and oak door in the hall, ground floor (drawing) 13. ,, ,, Stairs, first floor (drawing) 14. ,, ,, Cupboard and panelling in kitchen (drawing) 15. Nos. 142 AND 144, View from north-east (photo) St. Leonard's- STREET 16. ,, ,, View from south-east (photo) 1 7. Drapers' Alms- View from north-east (photo) HOUSES 18. ,, ,, Carved brackets to chapel doorway (drawing) Ernest Godman. F. C. Varley. C. Perks. Ernest Godman and Austin Gomme. Ernest Godman and Austin Gomme. F. C. Varley. M n 1 » M M »» XL Number 19- House on Bromley Wharf, Three Mills-lane 20. The Old Palace 21. 22. 23. 24- 25- .. 26. 27. 28- 31- .- 32. Nos. 2 TO 18, High- street 33- »> )i 34- No. 4, High-street 35- Nos. 62 TO 90, High-street 36. )> )) 37- Map of Bromley Parish View from south-west (drawing) Ground plan (measured drawing)... First floor plan (measured drawing) Section looking south (measured drawing) Fireplace and panelling of state room (photo) Detail of chimney-piece in state room (two photos) Detail of upper part of fireplace in state room (photo) Stone, with date, on south front (measured drawing) Details of modelled plaster from ceilings — panels, ornaments on ribs, and friezes (four lithographs) View looking north-west (drawing) View from north-east (drawing) . . . East front (drawing) View from north-east (drawing) . . . View looking east (drawing) Reduced from the Ordnance Sur- vey. Showing the position of build- ings included in the Register F. C. Varley. Ernest Godman. H. Clapham Lander. Ernest Godman. F. C. Varley. xu. INTRODUCTION. In layinof before the citizens of London the first volume of a work Origin of , , , , , the worl{. that may, perhaps, never be finished, but that at least seeks to mark down the main lines upon which her great history could be preserved and studied, it will not, perhaps, be out of place to say a few words as to the origin of the present volume, and those that may follow upon it. Six years ago the public conscience was stirred by the destruction by one of the leading municipal bodies of a great historic building, illus- trated and described in this book (pp. 33 — 40). Some of those who were influential in saving portions of the wreckage for national purposes decided to form themselves into a committee and appeal to the public, with a view to compiling a register or survey of whatever was still left of interest in the eastern districts of London, and in those parts, still but little touched, into which Greater London was spreading. A line, 20 miles in length, was drawn northwards from Aldgate Pump, and southwards to the Thames, and whatever was bounded by the river on the south, by this line on the west, and by the circumference struck from Aldgate Pump north and east to the two 20-mile radii at either projection, was taken as within the scope of the Survey Committee. This delimitation of boundary at first sight appears somewhat arbitrary, The area but a glance at the map will show the reason of the choice. Aldgate Pump was not only a historic spot in itself but it marked the eastern point of the old City of London, and within the circumference thus drawn, lay not only the great East End, but most of the beautiful eastern suburbs that are rapidly being destroyed to make building room — for slums very frequently ; but if not slums, then, at the best, a sort of dreary villadom — for the vast population that is flowing out from the centre or being drawn in from perishing agricultural Essex. The area embraced the following parishes — Bromley. Bow. Poplar. Limehouse. Stepney. Mile End. London Parishes. Ratclifl". Shadwell. St. George-in-the-East. Wapping. Whitechapel. Aldgate. Spitalfields. Bethnal Green. Hackney. Stoke Newington. xni. Tottenham. Edmonton. East Ham. West Ham. Stratford. Plaistow. Upton Park. Forest Gate. Manor Park. Great Ilford. Little Ilford. Barking. Dagenham. Chadwell Heath. Romford. Hornchurch. Upminster. Rainham. Leyton. Leytonstone. Wanstead. Middlesex Parishes. Enfield Highway. Essex Parishes. Walthamstow. Chingford. High Beech. Waltham Abbey. Nasing. Epping. Lough ton. Buckhurst Hill. Woodford. Woodford Bridge. Barkingside. Aid borough. Theydon Bois. Theydon Garnon. Theydon Mount. Lambourne. Chigvvell. Warley, Little. Warley, (jreat. Ponders' End. Noak Hill. Havering atte Bower. Wennington. Aveley. Purfleet. Ockendon, North. Ockendon, South. Cranham. West Thurrock. Brentwood. Shenfield. Stanford Rivers. South Weald. Navestock. Harold Wood. Stapleford Abbots. Stapleford Tawney. Stifford. These parishes were divided up into districts, and apportioned to members of the Survey Committee, who visited them, made drawings and photographs, and filled in forms, of which the one below given is a type.* FORM. Name of Place and Position. Parish of Ground Landlord, Leaseholders, &c. General Description and Dates of Works. Historical Notes. Condition of Repair. In the Register are Bibliographical References. XIV. These were then sent in to me for editing ; where necessary I myself visited the places in question, and the result may be seen in the records of the parish of Bromley. Some thousand drawings, sketches, and notes, covering various parishes, had been thus collected and arranged when a conference of the various organisations interested in Old London was held under the auspices of the London County Council, who, as a result, agreed to print that portion of the work which related to the County of London. This necessarily led to a change in the method employed. The out- lying parishes were allowed to stand over, though parishes like Ilford, West Ham, Leyton, and Barking had already been extensively surveyed, and attention was fixed on those nearer home — those, be it said, that are necessarily less interesting to the amateur, whose best work is done on Saturday afternoons and summer holidays. As the work developed and the collected material increased, the Develop- size of the volumes had to be reconsidered. At first it had been hoped to ^vork. put ten parishes into a volume ; then four parishes, then the parishes of Bromley and Bow together, seemed to be of size sufficient for one issue ; and, finally, the parish of Bow has been kept back, although it is already in part set up in print, and Bromley alone has been issued as the first volume of the Register. The portion of the Register thus offered represents, therefore, only The a small fragment of the Committee's whole work, whether for Greater "^^'^ ^'"" London or for the more limited area of the county. The work is neces- sarily of many hands. In estimating its comprehensiveness, and also its accuracy, these facts have to be taken into consideration ; and while we hope and believe that this first volume is an accurate record of what existed in the area surveyed in the year 1894, it is only right to say that neither this portion nor the rest of the work lays claim to completeness : all that may be ventured is that, in the area undertaken, the Committee have tried to make the survey as complete as possible. The variety of hands at work alluded to above has necessitated a somewhat disproportionate and conse- quendy incomplete treatment of parts of the survey, although the labour of each has been revised by myself, and the fact that in some, though very few, cases, we have been unable to obtain permission to visit, may have made us sometimes unwittingly miss out things that should, perhaps, have been recorded. As each portion of the work has been finally set up in proof by the Council's printers, it has in many cases received further valuable help at the hands of the Council's statistical officer, Mr. G. Laurence Gomme, whose historical and antiquarian knowledge has been placed unreservedly at the Committee's service. The present volume is to be taken, therefore, as only a small section The volume on Bromley. XV. of the work we have done, or have before us to do, and, in judging it, we ask that its aim shall be the critic's first consideration. This aim is briefly to stimulate the historic and social conscience of London; and we are glad to have received the help of the County Council in our endeavour to do this. We believe that if such a register as is here offered in this first volume were drawn up of every parish in London, it would go far towards preventing that destruction of the historic and beautiful landmarks of the great city that our Committee have set themselves to try and save ; and we think that the parish of Bromley itself is a good illustration of what might have been done. A glance through the present volume shows that of the sixteen objects or groups of objects deemed by us to be of sufficient importance to be recorded, six have been destroyed during the compilation of this work, and at least two others threatened with destruction. The drawings, photographs or plans in each case recorded as being in the Committee's MSS. collection, and of which some are here reproduced, will show the relative importance attached to the objects surveyed. The parish It is sad to think of what might have been done with the parish, had ''^' there but been a little historical judgment, a little co-operation between the public bodies and the private holders of property to whose care the parish has been entnisted in the last few years ; and our Committee are bold to think that had the survey been in existence seven years ago, perhaps some of the worst of the vandalism might have been prevented. A reference to plates 32-36 of this book and to the map will show the beautiful conformation of the old high street, and also the points marked in red that we have recorded : a walk through the existing parish will show how this high street has been spoiled and disgraced, how its line has been disregarded, how everything in it has been sacrificed to the immediate requirements of the moment ; as if those who have had the handling of it in the last few years had said : — " This is a slum, let the history or the beauty go, for the poor anything is good enough, and at all hazards we must make things pay," Where stood the picturesque 17th and iSth century houses with their tiled roofs and richly moulded timber cornices and canopies now stands a grim and melancholy casual ward. Where was the stately house of the Adams' time is now the goods dep6t of the London and Tilbury Railway. Where stood "Tudor House" in its garden is now the somewhat conventional "open space," with a view of the factory chimneys beyond ; where, next it, was the Old Palace of James L is now a gaunt, uninteresting Board School ; and where clustered the picturesque gable and chimneys of the half-timber inn of the " Seven Stars" is now a flaming gin palace of four stories. These are merely cited as instances of the so-called " improvements " XVI. in this particular parish that have taken place during the last six years, the period covered by our surve)\ Our Committee do not wish to imply that a good deal of this was not inevitable, but they plead that a good deal of it was unnecessary, and could, with proper municipal direction or advice, have been prevented. Perhaps it may not be fair to take the parish of Bromley as an Bromley as example of what is happening over the whole of London ; but sometimes of"what"is'^ one is apt to ask whether their historic conscience is entirely lost to the happening . . ^ J J . ^ all over Citizens ot London, so swift, so complete, so apparently needless — and, alas ! London. so ignorant — is often the destruction of the records of their past. I was anxious to test how far the example of Bromley was a fair one, to discover how far this disregard of the historic conscience could be illus- trated by what was happening over the whole of London, so I asked representative members of the various societies whom the Council has called in from time to time to assist in the work, to help me in making a list of beautiful or historic objects, whether in buildings, or in what may be called the amenities of London, that have been either destroyed or threatened with destruction during the last six years — the time over which we have been at work. I cannot in every case vouch for the accuracy of the information List of things supplied me, and in some instances where things have been only threatened, ^'^Xstro'ed the threat in itself may have aroused sufficient opposition to lead to its '" London withdrawal ; but all will, I think, be agreed in looking through my list, that we last'si^' ^ are confronted with a very serious state of things, and that the time has come ^^^^''■ when we should face the question of how best to preserve history, for the honour of our own and future ages ; that the time has come when our municipalities should regard it as a part of the duty they are called upon by the ratepayers to fulfil, and when we should adopt some such course as is adopted in the towns of Italy, of Germany, of France, even of America, for preserving reverently and generously the great things committed to our charge. I place the list with the notes as they have been sent to me, putting first the things that have been destroyed .since 1894, and next the things that have been threatened. I wish we might say that both were complete ; but this is far from beino- the case. ■^vn. [„.3., I.— BUILDINGS, &c., DESTROYED DURING THE LAST SIX YEARS. {a) Inside the Administrative County of London. Stratford-place . . . Haymarket Colonnades Adam-street, Adelphi The Rolls Chapel The City Churches The Old Palace of Brom- ley Tudor House, Bromley ... Alfred Stevens' Lions ... The Embankment Garden of Chelsea Hospital The work of Robert Adam. In part, but so that the symmetry and dignity of the whole plan is destroyed. One of the best-planned late Georgian streets in London. One of the finest specimens of Adam's work (almost entirely). Containino- the monument of Dr. Young-, which was the work of Torrigiano, and also the medieval chancel arch. The church of St. Michael, IVood-sireel, of ancient foundation, was rebuilt by Wren after the Great Fire, and pulled down in 1897 under the Union of Benefices Act. On its destruction, the lower part of the tower was found to be mediaeval, and the walls were on the ancient foundations. The parish is now united with that of St. Alban, Wood-street. The church of Si. Michael, Bassishaw, also of ancient foundation, was in part also destroyed in the Great Fire, and rebuilt by Wren, who, as was his custom, worked in as much of the old building as he could. It is also being destroyed under the Union of Benefices Act, the parish being united to that of St. Laurence Jewry. The church of St. George, Botolph-lane, also rebuilt by Wren after the Fire, has been closed for years. It is, we understand, condemned under the same Act. Built in 1606. Described in this volume (pp. 33-40). Described in this volume (pp. 21-23). Before the British Museum railings. In part, and one of the finest cedar trees in London. xvin. The "Old Bell Inn" ... Church-row, H.\mpstead.., St. Mary Woolnoth Church Old Merchants' Houses in the City The 17TH Century Houses ON the south side of Barnard's Inn Clement's Inn Hare-court, Temple Dick's Coffee-house Ashburnham House, Dover- street Coleherne-court, Earl's- court bullingham house, off Church - street, Ken- sington The 13TH Century Crypt, Laurence Pountney-hill The last portion of the Blackfriars Monastery, ON the north side of Ireland-yard. Bedford-square ... The last galleried inn in London on the Middlesex side of the water. In part. The interior destroyed. Nos. 10 and iiA, Austin Friars. No. 10 had a fine staircase. It was panelled, and the ceiling was painted on plaster with alle- gorical figures in the style of Sir James Thornhill. Built into the basement was an arch which had formed part of the cloister of the Augustine Friars. No. 4, Coleman-street, with its " Cedar Room," of date between 1610 — 1625. On the destruction of the house a quantity of mediaeval pottery was found in a well beneath. When the latter was converted for the pur- pose of the Mercers' School. With its brick garden-house. In part. No. 8, Fleet-street, that was of 17th century date. Very famous in the literature of the 1 8th century. Now replaced by flats. Date about 1750. Recently destroyed, the site and garden, some two or three acres, to be built over. This was the house where Sir Isaac Newton died. The house and extensive srarden have been built over. No. 4 that was. This was in perfect con- dition, and it was let by the Merchant Taylors' Company on building lease and destroyed. Destroyed this year. Many Adam interiors destroyed. XIX. Russell-square FiTZROV-SQUARE Hanover Chapel, Regent- street, W. The "Cock Tavern,"Fleet- stree r. Harley House, Maryle- bone-road Emanuel Hospital, West- minster. Church-row, Aldgate Cass's School, Aldgate... The Wardrobe, Stepney... 17TH Century Merchant Houses, Bow Mitre-square, Aldgate ... Palestine-place, Bethnal- green The " Catherine Wheel Inn," Bishopsgate. The i 8th Century Rectory AND Boundary Wall, Bow The " Seven Stars " Inn, Bromley Sir Francis Drake's House IN the City 17TH and i8th Century Houses in St. Leonard's- street and High-street, Bromley Half-Timber Houses in Mile End and White- chapel Roads The whole planning of the square spoiled by block buildings, and facades of many of the houses spoiled. The elevations spoiled, and stonework painted over. With beautiful timbered garden, and some of the finest planes in London. 1 6th to 18th century date. 1 8th century date. Adjoining, and formerly part of Gwynne House. It was destroyed by the London County Council in widening the thoroughfare. Opposite Bow Church. With the remains of the Priory. A group of 1 8th centurj^ buildings. Part of the courtyard, with the galleries of the old inn. Where the front garden was has now been built a new bank premises, completely spoiling the line of the High-street and J. O O blocking out the view of the tower of St. Mary's Church. See descriptions in this volume (pp. 41-42). No. 35, Basinghall-street that was. See descriptions in this volume (pp. 24, 43-45)- Mostly destroyed by the new railway improve- ments. These were of dates varying from 1 6th to 1 8th century; they are partly recorded in the Committee's Register. XX. Coopers' Almshouses, Rat- Recorded in the Committee's Register. CLIFF Skinners'Almshouses, Mile Recorded in the Committee's Register. End Nos. 84 AND 85, High- Early i8th century houses, with fine stair- STREET, Putney cases. Pulled down by the General Omnibus Company. The Gables, Wandsworth- Two houses of late 17th century date COMMON Replaced by a pauper establishment. (6) Outside the Administrative County of London, but within the Greater London Survey. RoKEBY House, Stratford Where now stands a music hall. Kew Bridge ... ... One of the few remaining stone bridges on the Lower Thames. Salwav House, Leyton ... Of 17th century date, gate piers only left. Grove Hall, Woodford. The Abbey Wall, West This was early Norman work, and destroyed Ham by the Great Eastern Railway. 17TH AND I 8th Century Houses in High-street, East Ham. Salisbury House, Ilford The garden has been built over and the front blocked out. Ivy Lodge, Plaistow ... Elizabethan date, destroyed by the West Ham Corporation. The Greyhound Inn, West Ham Fairmead Hall, High- Elizabethan date, L shaped plan. street, Stratford Leasowes, Leyton Sunny Side, Leyton Lea Hall, Leyton Of varying dates from i6th to i8th century, containing beautiful panelling, wrought iron gates and other detail. Stratford Green... ... Built over in part by the new Technical Schools. Capper's House, Leyton ... Recorded in the, Committee's Register. XXL II.— BUILDINGS, &c., THREATENED DURING THE LAST SIX YEARS. (a) Inside the Administrative County of London. Chelsea Hospital. Saved in great measure by the agency of the Survey Committee. (See the Trinity Hospital Monograph issued by the Com- mittee.) Trinity End Hospital, Mile St. Mary - le - Strand Church. St. Clement Danes Church. St. Mary's, Stratford atte BowE, Church I 6a, Brook-street The Inner HOUSE Temple Gate- St. MarvWoolnoth Church The Jewel Tower, West- minister. The City Churches. St. Ethelburga, Bishops- gate Lincoln's Inn Fields Christ's Hospital. Sir Joshua Reynolds' House IN Leicester-square. Turner House, Chelsea... Thomas Carlyle's House in Cheyne-row Sir Isaac Newton's Housii. Newgate Bromley Churchyard, with THE Huguenot tombs. Saved in part by the agency of the Survey Committee and recently restored by the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings. (See the Bow Church Mono- graph issued by the Committee.) One of the most beautiful pieces of Adam's work in London. Together with 17, Fleet-street, the reputed Chancery of Cornwall ; but now saved by the action of the City and the London County Council. Exterior only (by conversion into a station). Threatened under the Union of Benefices Act. The western Mansions. side, with the Inigo Jones Now saved. But now saved mainly by the enterprise of Chelsea residents and American sub- scribers. The facade of this is one of the best works of the younger Dance. xxii. Chestnut House, Old Ford, Late i8th century date, but containing carved Bow oak and stone fireplaces of early 17th centur}' date. Fernside, Wandsworth Common. Ironmongers' Almshouses, Now saved. Kingsland-road, N.E. Temple Gardens ... ... In part. Golder's Hill Estate, Since saved. Hampstead Churchyard Bottom Wood, Since saved. Highgate Latchmere Allotments, Battersea. The Burial - ground of At the corner of Tudor and Dorset-streets, Bridewell Hospital E.C. The Corporation intend building on it. The Blind School, S.E. ... The generating station for the Baker street and Waterloo Railways. Grove Hall, Bow. {b) Outside the City and County of London, but within the Greater London survey. The Great House, Leyton With its panelled rooms and Thornhill paintings. Lake House, Wanstead ... With its banqueting hall and paintings. Pymme's Park, Edmonton... But now saved by the action of the Middle- sex County Council. Valentines, Ilford ... The ground being gradually cut up for building. Cranbrook, Ilford ... „ ,, The Angel Inn, Ilford ... A 17th century coaching inn. The old sign only left. Ilford Hall, Ilford ... Stands in a fine garden. Great Desideratum Club House, Ilford. BoLEYN Castle, Upton Park Fully described in the Committee's Re- gister. A fine Tudor building, with ofarden and grrounds. Pest House Common, Rich- mond. The Home Field, Chiswick. xxiii. Totter Down Meadows, Tooting The Old Tithe Barn of Cumberland House, Plaistow Hare Hall, Romford Giddea Hall, Romford ... Shern Hall, Walthamstow Rectory Manor, Waltham- stow. The Temple House, East Ham Rancliffe House, East Ham. Ray House, Woodford. Manor House, Woodford. Walwood House, Leyton- stone. Strype's Vicarage, Leyton The Old Town Hall, Barking Sold to the London County Council for build- inof artizan dwellingrs. Probably the tithe barn of West Ham Abbey, and reputed the largest in Essex. Now saved ; a stone-fronted house, built in 1 769 from the designs of Payne. The house of an ancient manor of Westmin- ster Abbey ; it was originally built by Sir Thomas Coke, temp. Edward IV., rebuilt by John Thorpe in the early 17th century, which was again destroyed in 1720, and the present building erected by Sir John Eyles. A 1 7th century manor house, with beautiful grounds. Of early 19th century date, but containing some earlier fitments. A beautiful little example of early i8th century garden architecture. The grounds cut up and built upon ; the house still standing. This was the residence of the famous anti- quary. It has been saved by conversion into a church-house. A beautiful Elizabethan building, carried on an open timber arcade, and standing in the market-place alongside of the abbey gateway. Where the above-mentioned are in private hands, it is, of course, difficult to bring public pressure to bear ; but it is as often as not the case that a public or semi-public body has been responsible. Thus examination will show that, among others, responsibility for the care of or blame for the destruction of, the places above enumerated has lain with such bodies as the London Count)' Council, the London School Board, the Charity Commissioners, the Elder Brethren of the Trinity House, the Office of Works, the Ecclesi- astical Commissioners, the War Office, the Bedford Estate, &c. xxiv. Ill some cases it would have been difficult, perhaps impossible, to The historic retain some of the buildings, &c., specified, even with the most conservative London, intentions or the most generous expenditure ; but the fact of its being possible to draw up within the limited period of six years such a list as the above, is in itself a very serious indictment against the common sense and the adminis- trative capacity of the citizens of London. It touches their credit with posterity. That they should be so ready to thoughtlessly destroy the noble and beautiful things committed to their charge argues an indifference and a want of trust that it will be difficult at some later time, perhaps even impossible, to explain away. " Qiteni deus vult perdcrc" can be not inappro- priately applied to the guardianship of our historical heritage. Are we incapable, or not, of maintaining our trust as the centre of empire ? The question is a grave one, the trust may be taken from us. The greatest city of England — of the whole world — should not only look to the preserving of her historic record, she should go out of her way to see that immediate, that short-sighted considerations, whether public or private, should not intrude themselves. To the Canadian, the Australian, the American, the son of a new world of our own blood, this great London that he comes home to see is interesting not for its modernity, not to him even for its life, it stands to him as a symbol for the majesty of history. We ought not to let parochial considerations prejudice this idea. It was a wise axiom of William Morris' that whenever a great piece of history or a noble work of art was threatened with destruction, it was because " somebody wanted something." There was no real desire on the part of the public to destroy a Trinity hospital, a "Wren" church, an Elizabethan palace, an open space. The public was ready for a lead always if the case could be fairly put before it; but there was somebody behind who was more pushing, some brewer who wanted to enlarge his yard, some impecunious landlord who wanted to realise, some building speculator who had a scheme to develop, some official in a Government department who wanted to show a good balance-sheet for the year — somebody who wanted something. It should be the object of a wise municipality to have a means by a means of which the public interest should be safeguarded against the private encroach- guarding ment that is implied in its not having a first say in matters of this kind. I 'g^g^d'""*^ do not mean that the municipality should buy up every old house, pledge itself to turn every open space into a garden and so forth, but that there should be some means by which the public should be first consulted when any question arose that affected the history or the dignity of London ; and the proper body to supply this means would seem to be the London County Council. It has obtained the necessary statutory power ; it has already taken action in one case under that power, and if properly advised in each case it would be the most authoritative body to bring about the desired results. XXV [h.b. d Expert But what is it that actually happens ? A piece of London history opinion and , , _ ., the London comes under the hammer, let us say, and the Council may or may not get Counal information in time to act. If it is asked to step in and do something, there is at present no proper machinery by which the Council may consult the views of those who have made this subject their special study. Nobody has any locus standi. Nobody can take any action. The inevitable result is that two things happen, each of them bad. An agitation, which almost invariably resolves itself into an attack, is started in the public Press, and the individual members of the Council are lobbied by the parties interested on both sides. This is unfair to the public, but it is unfairer still to the A suggested members of the Council. But if expert opinion were so organised as to be tion. able to advise the London County Council quickly and effectively in all cases of this kind, it would be a great step forward in the safe-guarding of London's right to the enjoyment of her own history. Co-operation \Ye are constantly met in our desire to adapt thinofs of a past age to pality with the needs of our own with the difficulty of their inappropnateness. 1 have enterpdse heard Mr. Sidney Webb say that it might become a serious question for the Council to have upon its hands a number of old empty houses for which there was no particular purpose, and which had to be kept up. The diffi- culty is, how^ever, not so great as it seems. A purpose should, and I consider can, always be found if we go the right way to work ; but the right way is not necessarily the purely utilitarian way. A Committee ought to be formed to put itself in touch with all the various social agencies that are each in their way seeking to work in the direction of the raising of the standard of life in the community. There is the Church, there are the various Nonconformist centres, the clubs, the University settlements, the trade unions, there are the societies, antiquarian, historical, and so forth, there is the National Trust, the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, and other organisations. It will, I think, usually be found that when any of these bodies are approached in the right manner, sympathetically, and on account of what I have called the historic conscience, they respond in a like way. If the Count}'^ Council would instruct its Committee to act with such a com- mittee permanently, the results would, I am convinced, well repay the endeavour. The recent case of the destruction of Tudor House by the London County Council itself rather illustrates what I mean. Here was an Eliza- bethan house, not perhaps in itself intrinsically valuable, but which there was no great need to destroy. The illustrations and description given in this volume will show that it possessed aesthetic and historic interest. An offer was made for its maintenance and upkeep as a University settlement ; but the wise assimulation of the two municipal services of education and recreation was never really placed before the Council, and the project was lost. XX vi. I have ventured to cro thus fully into the question of what micrht be Larger .. ° . .,, , , questions done it the Council pursue the wise course it has already started upon of involved. calling to its assistance, and giving the lead to, the various bodies, societies, and voluntary associations who are each in their own way working for the ennobling and improvement of London, but I think that there are still some greater and more important questions that would be touched upon, that might even be more wisely settled than they are at present ; these are the housing question, the question of parks and open spaces, the question of museums, and the question of nomenclature. The reflections here following are offered, not so much as my own, but as held for the most part by my colleagues on the Survey Committee, and deduced by us from the experience we have had during the progress of our work. That the suggestions they call forth appear, in many cases, incom- patible with the method under which modern municipal government has to be conducted, or that they trench upon the province of other Government departments is not our concern. Our object is merely to state facts, or to show up what we believe to be abuses from the point of view — social, historical and eesthetic — from which we handle our subject. It is for the legislators to devise the way out. Of these questions by far the most important for the life, moral and The housing physical, of the community is the housing question. What is it we find } ° ^^ ^°°^' We who have searched and recorded what remains of things that are beautiful or health-giving or dignified in those districts of London beyond the far East-end, whither its vast population — its poor — gravitate, perhaps have better opportunities than others of knowing. We hear much talk about the housing of the poor in the centre, we see great experiments being tried, we see masses of the population drifting outwards. But what happens to them, what becomes of them, where do they go ? The answer to this our Committee can supply in its search work. We find that for every slum destroyed in the centre, half a dozen are run up in the suburbs ; we find that while the legislators are theorising and experimenting as to how the poor should be housed inside the County of London, the jerry builder is solving the problem for them outside, to the infinite loss and detriment of the community. We find estate after estate, park after park, coming under the hammer, the trees cut down, the roads stupidly planned ; everything, in short, sacrificed to the financial exigencies of the few people immediately interested. It needs no prophet to foretell that all this work will some day have to be undone at great cost and great loss. To any one who has studied the needs and requirements of the poor who are drifting into these new and dreary suburbs of Greater London, for the most part outside the county xxvii. area, it is clear enough that what is being offered them is a mere make- shift, a habitation in which life of any dignity or nobility is impossible, a condition of things that is seldom better, sometimes worse, than the slums and side streets of the centre from which they have been driven. The needless f^g buildintT contract system strikes at the root of all nobility destruction ... ,^. . • t-> -i t a -l ^ of great in plannmg — architecture is non - existent. Building Acts are but estates. Httle protection against bad or slovenly building ; the difficulties of distance and travelling are added to the ugliness of life ; for the children nothing is done ; nothing is done to protect the open spaces, the trees or gardens, that might with proper planning be preserved ; if there is any beautiful object of the past, some house, perhaps, that could be utilised for library, club, museum, school or parish purposes, it is torn down and sold to the wreckers for its value in old materials ; while as for that quality of beauty in old roads or streets, the lie of the land, the disposition of the buildings, &c., all those things that make a locality interesting, and that were instinctively felt and understood by our ancestors, they are merely dismissed by the people who pride themselves as practical, with suspicion and contempt. There are at least ten such estates at the present moment, some of them with parks and gardens that the care of centuries has brought into being, some with historic houses, whose interiors will bring high profit to the Wardour-street dealers for West-end mansions, that we have recorded as about to be destroyed. Since the starting of our work, perhaps twenty such have been broken up. We consider that a wiser, a more far-sighted policy, would so handle those estates that they should conduce to the well-being and the healthier life of the poor whose habitation they are to become. There is no reason why the estates should not be properly laid out, the roads planned in accordance with the existing trees and avenues, the gardens preserved for common enjoyment, and whatever fragments of local history there may be to start with, saved for the pleasure of the com- munity that is to come — no reason, except the sordid utilitarianism of the system under which they are destroyed. We Londoners flatter ourselves that with the more enlightened municipal government which we enjo)- we now take more thought for the well-being of the community than was taken in such matters in the beginning of the present century or at the end of the last. But are we sure that we are not deceiving ourselves ? Is any attempt made now to lay out a suburban estate such as was once the Bedford Estate in Bloomsbury, or the Tredegar Estate in Bow ? Writing to me in 1895 on the work of the Survey, one of the older members of our Committee, to whom its work is much indebted, and whose xxviii. words for their pathos as well as their direct bearing upon the subject I make free to quote here, said — " I have been grieved to see so many places cut up and destroyed — " mansions and buildings pulled down during the last 40 years. When I " lived there (at Bow) it was all fields around. We could see from our " landing window 29 church spires — from Shoreditch to Forest Gate — and " St. Paul's Cathedral, and the first mistletoe I gathered (or saw) was on a " tree in Bearbinder-lane, a name now almost forgotten. Then the walk " over to Limehouse was by Bromley Fields, and part of the wall of the " Convent was existinof in Three Mill-lane — and the Palace now sfone too ! " At Leyton, the Grange with its five avenues existed, and we used to walk " over cornfields to the church, where now hundreds of houses are. Harrow " Green was a quiet country spot with the old cage and pound, and Leyton- " stone, a rural Quaker retreat ; Walhvood House in a pretty little park ; " Walthamstow a drowsy village in the fields, now a perfect horror ; " Wanstead the same, but too urban now ; Upton, Plashet, East Ham and " Little Ilford, charmingly quiet and untouched — and I might go on so." Instead of planning: vast stacks of model dwellinafs in the heart of The wisdom the great city, would it not be a wiser course to secure some of these policy of beautiful districts in the immediate suburbs, such as our Committee has reservations, marked down as doomed from its point of view, and lay them out intelligently for the future citizens of London ? We believe that were the means for doing this made easier, the actual work of housing could be done not only much more cheaply but much more beneficially for the health and life of the poor, and we are convinced that had this been done 25 or 30 years ago, much of the misery, the ugliness and the degradation of East London as it now exists would have been saved. I have often thought that if a few philanthropists were to form them- selves into a committee for buying up land in the outlying districts of London, and be content to hold this till the times were ripe, binding them- selves to make no return beyond perhaps a 3 per cent, dividend when the new area ultimately came to be built over, and at the same time made it their object to save the amenities of each district they handled, the results would be better than any Peabody or Rowton or Boundary-street under- takings. It would, in fact, be carrying out in practice that wiser and more far-sighted policy of "reservations" pursued in Massachusetts, and from which not only our philanthropists, but our municipalities might take a lesson for the future of Greater London. If the housing question is the most important, that of parks and open Parks and spaces appears to us, from the conclusions which our investigations have °^^" spaces, forced upon us, to be inseparably connected with it. To us it seems that while the municipalities are allowing the real parks on the outskirts of XXIX. London to be destroyed, they are only playing with the subject. The question should be treated much more broadly and on a larger scale. It is too apt to resolve itself into a mere matter of ring fences and band-stands. Ever)- year what is practically a new town of from 20,000 to 50,000 inhabitants, is thrown off from London. What we would like to see is some means by which the e.xisting parks and open spaces that are being sacrificed for these mushroom towns should be safeguarded and preserved. I am not saying that it is not a wise plan to buy areas in the heart of the metropolis for purposes of " lungs," but what we want to insist on is the comparative waste and extravagance of the system by which small and costly areas are preserved at a very high charge to the rates, when large and beautiful tracts could be acquired at often agricultural prices in the near suburbs. All the time, moreover, the population is drifting away from the centre, and we are laying up for the future an exaggeration of that very problem which we are now trying inadequately to solve. Were the population of London stationary and non-migratory, our method of going to work would be sound enough, but at present it is short-sighted, hap- hazard, and recklessly wasteful. My Committee plead for a larger, wiser, and more statesmanlike manner of handling the problem ; a manner that shall take into consideration the drift of population, the gravitation of trades, the effect of the new railways now under construction, and the great decentralising influence of the bicycle and other methods of locomo- tion. We plead that the parks and open space problem shall not be treated in the rather parochial way in which it is at present treated, that it shall be regarded as part of the greater question of the amenities of municipal life, and that, perhaps, by some combination among municipalities, or by some action taken in conjunction with private individuals, a wiser and more far- sighted policy in such matters should be adopted.* * Since writing the above, I have come across an instructive confirmation of the facts which our Committee seeks to bring home, and upon which its conclusions are based, in the recently pub- lished Blue Book on Education and Population in London. In the General Report of Mr. T. King, Her Majesty's Senior Inspector of Schools, relating to the Metropolitan Division, which comprises the district of the School Board for London, the County of Middlesex, and portions of Essex and Hertfordshire, he says — " Streets and dismal crowded courts of small houses are destroyed, and gigantic warehouses, or " still more enormous ' buildings,' are being erected in their place. In both cases the poor are driven " to herd together again in some new den, whilst the workmen seeks a home outside London, '• unless he can find rooms in a 'building.' Thus a considerable decrease of population is being " caused in many parts of London, and, though the loss may be balanced to some extent by increases " in other parts where building is still in progress, yet competent judges consider that London, as at " present constituted by law, will not increase much in population, as 11 cannot in extent. On every " side, however, great towns, too closely joined to London even to be called suburban, are daily " increasing, from Stratford round to Chiswick, and from Wimbledon round to Greenwich, where alone " within the boundary of London, there is still extensive space for building. On the east and north- " east of London the increase of population is extraordinary ; and the workmen's trains on the Great " Eastern R;iilway alone transport daily men enough to fill a large town, men who leave their wives and " families at home." .\.\X. Among the other questions of importance to the community that in >>iiiseums. the opinion of the Survey Committee would receive a more intelligent consideration were that Court of Appeal of which I spoke above instituted, we place that of museums and of nomenclature. People fail entirely to recognise the great importance of both these things to the community. They are educational factors of the highest influence, provided that intelligent consideration is given them. At present both are practically disregarded, they play no part in municipal life. To most people a museum suggests cases of stuffed animals, or at best something dead and unconnected with living things. A lumber room into which you put stuff which you do not want to throw away, but are at a loss to know where else to bestow it. The manner in which our great collections have been gathered and housed, all at random and hugger mueeer, has lent colour to this. We who have watched durino- the last six years the breaking up of what we consider should be the real store-houses, plead that the spirit of collectomania is not the spirit upon which a museum should be formed. Every museum, we consider, should have a definite purpose, a historical setting, a reference to the locality in which it is placed, and above all should be connected in some way or other, whether through the school, the technical college, the church, or the industries of the locality, with the life of the district in which it is situated. That there should be one central collection is in itself questionable, Municipal though admissible perhaps from an educational point of view for students, and centres But it need not be laro-e in order to be educational. The crenuine student, °^ study. moreover, will go to where the things are he is in search of, and the result, as a rule, of gathering all things together under one vast roof as at South Kensington, means that the classification is incoherent, and the things so huddled up that they are unapproachable. Many of the priceless treasures stripped from beautiful houses and churches in London suburbs and at present at South Kensington, might as well be in Wardour-street cellars, for all the benefit either the student or the community reap from them. What we would like to see would be a number of small municipal museums in different parts of London, connected in one way or another with local organisations, and, wherever possible, set in some historic house and surrounded by the garden that is already in existence. Among the great houses that our Committee has surveyed which we consider would well serve such a purpose, and some of which are now threatened with]destruction, or will shortly be, we would name * Pymmes Park, Edmonton, with its Elizabethan interior ; Great House, Leyton, with its Thornhill paintings and beautiful oak-panelled rooms ; Lake House, Wanstead, with its painted banqueting chamber ; Boleyn Castle, Upton Park, with its charming Elizabethan work, * Now fortunately saved owing to the wise action of the Middlesex County Council. xxxi. The lost opportunity in Bromley. Nomencl.'i ture. its memories of the unfortunate queen whose name it retains ; Eastbury House, Barking, and Parsloes, Dagenham, with their wonderful interiors and the records they share between them of the Stuart families and the Gunpowder Plot ; all those places, and they are only a few of those that might be mentioned, are surrounded by beautiful gardens, there are still flowers and trees in them that it would be impossible to plant again in new ground under London atmosphere, and all could be connected with some existing local organisation, and become centres for small historic collections- of the different and scattered parishes in which they are respectively placed. It is private enterprise that will do all this and form the collections if the municipality will take the lead intelligently. When our Committee was at work in Bromley a variety of local records and objects dealing with the history of the parish was offered to us, but we had nowhere to- place them, and knew not what to do with them. It would have been perfectly easy to have formed a historical museum in Bromley within the last six years, as beautiful almost as the Musee Plantin in Antwerp itself. The Old Palace described in this volume would have been its fitting home, and this could have been attached without any diffi- culty to the new school erected by the School Board. There was the nucleus there of one of the most beautiful collections in London ; and I know many residents in Bromley and East London generally, who would have been only too glad to have given records of local history, and also money to assist in such a project. It would have meant establishing a "Monument Historique," such as is constantly done in similar cases in every city in France and other countries more enlightened in these matters than ourselves. It would have been possible to construct in this Palace a complete visual picture of the old parish of Bromley from the time of Chaucer, when the monastery stood there, through the period of the Royal manors into the time of the merchant princes. There would have been the records of the Armada heroes who came and settled there, of the the Scotch colony, who brought with them their foreign craftsmanship of the plaster ceilings, of the Huguenot refugees, whose tombs still stand in the churchyard, and of the Bow and Bromley pottery makers of the last century ; in short, an epitome of the life of a London parish preser\'ed in a most exquisite setting, and of the utmost value for its beauty and its living interest to the young citizens who are bred in what is now a disgraced slum. Had it but only been for the comparison between what is left and what might, with a little intelligent guidance, have been preserved, it would have been good to have seen that thing done. Every chance, everj' hope of it has now in these brief six years been swept away ! It is, perhaps, in the matter of nomenclature that the historic record is most affected, and where the aid of the private student, the historian, and xxxii. the antiquary would be most at the community's services if the questions involved in it came under the consideration of the Court of Appeal. There is a good deal to be said for leaving everything that has to do with the naming of streets and districts to the haphazard choosing of individuals ; under normal conditions, they may be said to choose rightly, by instinct. But the conditions under which historic estates are torn down and built over by speculative contract are not altogether normal. The Englishman has a healthy objection to the French system of changing all the names at the whim of the municipal officer in power ; he deems it a sad break in the historical continuity. But when a whole page of history is wiped out for him in his own London, and a jerry builder and an estate surveyor let loose to name the streets after their various sentimental associations of foreign travel or otherwise, it does not appear to him that his proceedings are one degree less foolish than the freaks of his French neighbour. What should be aimed at is some sort of compromise. The historic association and the whims of the individual that may or may not go to the making of new history should be combined. It is difficult to realise how important often this apparently trifling question of nomenclature may become. The instances in Bromley itself and already referred to, may be again cited. The name "Tudor" House from the Tudor of the Scotch colony who lived there in the reign of James I. had been practically lost, merged in the numbering, while the Old Palace merely appeared as No. 4 and 6, St. Leonard's-street. Had the name been preserved, it is just possible that the School Board authorities, who were quite unaware of what it was they were purchasing, might have received that timely warning, which they so regretted not having had, when it was too late. Another illustration that may be cited is the recent naming of the new Borough of Poplar, which includes the parishes of Bow, Bromley and Poplar. Had the nomenclature been considered from the historic point of view, the naming would certainly have been different. There are occasions when it may be advisable to obliterate history, or to make new history in preference to retaining the old, but there is never any excuse for doing this unintelligently or wantonly. It would perhaps be unfair in an introduction to a work of this kind, instances of which aims not only at giving a record but also at sueg-estino- a oolicv to ^"^^cessfui ■ . _ c>c> ^ Jr y ' ciction on omit mention of some of the instances where the principles our Committee the part of seek to emphasize have been carried out practically. The recent acquisition '^^ ^°""^"- by the London County Council of No. 17, Fleet-street, the reputed Chancery of the Duchy of Cornwall, is a good instance in point, but perhaps more important still is the Council's Strand improvement scheme. That this was considered with the definite intention of preserving the two Strand churches, shows that the Council deliberately accepted its responsibility as custodian -xxxin. of the amenities of London, and though it is uncertain as yet whether the scheme may or may not lead to the destruction of the west side of Lincoln's Inn Fields where stand the Inigo Jones houses, it is impossible not to agree with the soundness of the policy which inspired it. Another exercise of a wise, civic forethought, due perhaps rather to the enterprise of the private societies than to municipal action, was the defeat of the so-called "Westminster improvement scheme." By this ingenious "scheme of improvement " we were threatented with the destruction of most of what was interesting in old Westminster, we were to lose the historic Jewel Tower, a portion of the Embankment garden, most of the good 17th and 1 8th century houses in the district, and in return for these concessions, and the opening of a very ill -planned and pettily conceived thoroughfare through the slums, we were offered an enormous block of flats close up beside Victoria Tower. Fortunately this' scheme is a thing of the past, but it is well that we should not forget how nearly it got through Parliament, and how easily such a thing might occur again. This rushing through of ill-considered proposals or of undertakings devised mainly in the interest of their promoters, is another of the things that the Court of Appeal would help to counteract. Further cases could be given of the way in which the municipalities have helped in the preservation of the amenities of greater London, but perhaps the best illustration of the readiness of the leading municipality of London to further the work here indicated is to be found in the printing and issuing under its auspices of the present volume, the first of a series which it is hoped will mark down the history of London. The comple- The question now is, can the work, even with the Council's assist- tion of the ance, be carried through, and if so within what period of time ? The answer to this depends on one thing only — the readiness of the public to assist the endeavours of the Survey Committee, and to follow the lead thus set by the Council in printing the records which the Committee has so far succeeded in collecting. It is, after all. individuals who do the actual work, and it is to individuals that we appeal. All who have had experience of the difficulty of organising amateur work will know how hard it is not only to keep such work up to the necessary standard of efficiency, but to maintain it permanently. On the other hand, there is a certain quality of enthusiasm needful for the production of the greatest works that cannot be bought, and that has no actual commercial value. What I seek for is a mean between the two. A small paid staff will always be necessary to do the work of noting, copying, tracing, transcribing, indexing and correspondence, and the experience now gained by Mr. Ernest Godman during his six years' work as Secretary of the Committee, is a very valuable aid to its work. A survey of one parish, such as this volume presents, could hardly be accomplished xxxiv. by voluntary labour alone, much less a survey of several hundred parishes. But there are numbers of men, artists, antiquaries, young architects, amateur photographers, householders, landlords, lawyers, clergymen, who, if rightly approached would give help, and I think gladly, in the production of a historic record of their own time. The parishes in the County of London together with the City number 192 ; if Greater London be included, as indicated at the outset in the Committee's first scheme, the total would amount to something like 400. Thus, taking the County of London and the City it would, if one volume be brought out a year, take more than one hundred years to complete a survey commencing in 1894. As for the cost, it is impossible even taking the printing and publication as provided and the higher labour as given, to produce a volume at less than ^100 for clerical and out-of- pocket expenses, and this would still leave the Committee at the mercy of the amateur staff in the matter of time. I believe, however, that if a time limit of ten years were set, and a An appeal sum of say ^10,000 placed at the Committee's disposal, the work could be done in the time and the London County Council have upon its shelves at the close of this period a complete historical survey of London. The whole of the sum in question would be expended in payment to clerks, assistants, draughtsmen and photographers, who should do the work of supplementing the voluntary labour which would be given as heretofore by members acting upon local committees, and interested in local records. The object of this introduction is to call attention to the larger issues of the work, to point to its living purpose rather than to its dry bones, and to appeal to all citizens of London into whose hands it may chance, to help in an undertaking that should commend itself to them if they have the social welfare and nobility of the great city at heart. To sum up in conclusion the points which we have here sought to Summary. bring out : they are as follows — 1. We wish to see made for the whole of London a Register, of which the present is the first volume, and we wish to see recorded in it all that London yet possesses of historic or sesthetic interest. 2. We think that this should be done by private enterprise, aided and guided by the municipality. 3. The objective, however, is not so much the making of a paper record, as the preservation of the things recorded. 4. To this end we believe that a committee should be appointed representative of all the bodies in London who are engaged upon work dealing with the historical remains of London. Before this committee every "case" of impending destruction should be openly considered, and the result of its deliberations forwarded to the London County Council with a view of action being taken thereon. XXXV. 5- We believe that the thing to aim at as regards method is a combination not only between private and municipal enterprise, but between the various municipalities that go to make up greater London ; and the formation of such a committee would conduce to this end. 6. We consider that the question of the proper housing of the poor is one of the questions involved in the work we have before us ; and that it should be studied in connection with the larger issues of which it is a part, and which go to make up the amenities of life in a great city. 7. We consider that the subject of parks and open spaces should be regarded from a larger point of view than it is at present, and that the right policy is rather to preserve the existing parks, trees and gardens on the outskirts of London than to open costly areas in the centre. 8. We hold that a system of municipal museums, or storehouses of history and local life, should be established in conjunction with the various existing centres of municipal or social life, and that the great houses with beautiful interiors and fine gardens that every year fall to the jerry builder, should be used for such purposes rather than destroyed. 9. We would urge that more consideration should be given to the subject of nomenclature. 10. In fine, we plead that the object of the work we have before us, is to make nobler and more humanly enjoyable the life of the great city whose existing record we seek to mark down ; to preserv^e of it for her children and those yet to come whatever is best in her past or fairest in her present ; to induce her municipalities to take the lead and to stimulate among her citizens that historic and social conscience which to all great communities is their most sacred possession. C. R. ASHBEE, On be ha // of the Committee Essex House, for the Survey of Greater London. Bow, London. PARISH OF BROMLEY-BY-BOW. BROMLEY-BY^BOW. I.-THE CHURCH OF ST. MARY. General description and date of the structure. Nothing remains of the old church, which was originally the chancel of the church of St. Leonard's Convent, the "Scole of Stratford atte bowe " mentioned by Chaucer in the description of the Nonne Prioresse in the "Canterbury Tales," except two small fragments of the walls, built up in the north-east and south-east corners of the nave. The rest of the building was reconstructed piecemeal in 1842-3, and consisted of nave with south aisle, chancel with apsidal east end, and tower with pyramidal spire at the south-west angle. The north aisle and porch were added in 1874. The outside walls of the church were rebuilt in bricks, the roofs tiled, and the inside walls plastered. The large semicircular arch ornamented with chevron and other mouldings across the west end of the nave, stands in the same place as, and is said to be an exact copy of, an old one of Norman date which was built up in the west wall of the old church, and must have originally formed the division between the chancel and the nave of the conventual church. A great number of the monuments and tablets were preserved at the destruction of the old building and placed in the new churck. Some of these are very fine examples of 17th century date, of coloured marbles, with figures and heraldic and decorative treatment. The more interestino- are described below. The carved oak tablets containing the Commandments, the Lord's Prayer, and the Aposdes' Creed, date 1692, and a large coat of arms about eight feet high and seven feet wide, carved in wood in high relief, made to the order of the parish in 1660, were also rescued. The tablets are now in St. Andrew's Church, Gurley-street, and the coat of arms is in the Good Shepherd's Mission Hall, Back-alley, both mission churches in the parish. There were up to the beginning of 1898, three bells : one stated by Dunstan as dated "John Clifford, churchwarden, 1636," the other two dated "T. Mears, Londini, 1843." The churchwardens sold them and bought a new peal of eight tubular bells in 1897. It is much to be regretted that merely for the sake of the small quantity of metal it .should have been considered necessary to sell the old bell. On the floor of the tower, pardy hidden by the stairs, is a slab of Purbeck marble about 6 feet long and 3 feet wide with the matrix of a very fine brass with two figures, shields, and a border with inscriptions round the edge of the slab. This is undoubtedly the slab mentioned by Dunstan {Hist. Brom.) as formerly containing the figures of John de Bohun and wife, who were buried here in 1336. BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Weever also [Fun. Mon., page 541), states: — "In this Abbey church some- time lay entombed the body of John de Bohun, eldeft fonne and heire of Humfrey de Bohun, Earl of Hereford and Effex, 5th Earl of Hereford and 4th Earl of Effex, of that name." MONUMENTS. William Ferrers, 1625. — Rebuilt into the north aisle wall in 1874. It is composed of alabaster, with panels of black marble, and is about 12 feet high and 6 feet wide. In the centre are demi-figures, coloured and gilt, of William and Jane Ferrers, with one hand each clasping a skull, and the other holding books. Above the figures are two arches supported by corbels ornamented with cherubs' heads, carved and gilt. In a panel over the arches is the motto- Liue well, and dye neuer, Dye well, and Hue eauer. ^tatis Suae 35 \ Et Suae 25 On each side of the figures are Corinthian columns supporting an entablature and broken pediment, in the centre of which is a shield bearing the arms of Ferrers — Arg. on a bend^«. plain cotised sa., three horseshoes or., a crescent sa. for difference, surmounted by a helmet and the crest, an ostrich//;'., holding in beak a horseshoe or. with manding at the sides. Above this is another shield on which the same arms are repeated. Under the figures is a niche in which is placed the figure of a sleeping child, his head resting on a pillow, and a rose in his hand. On either side in panels are the words — As nurses striue theire Babes in bed to lay When they too ly-berally the wantons play. Soe to preuente his farther growinge crimes, Nature his nurse, gott him to bed betimes. Immediately under the child is another decorative panel with ribands and 4 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. arabesque carvings, also a shield surmounted by a cherub's head, and bearing the Ferrers arms. Beneath is the inscription — Here lyes ye body of William Ferrers ye only son and heyre of Will Ferrers Esq'*'^ late Citizen &. Mercer of London, who tooke TO wyfe Iane one of y*^ daught' of S*^ Peter Van-Lore, of London Knight by whom hee had one childe, His Wyfe & childe dyed both BEFORE him AND HE DEPARTED THIS LYFE A MONTH BEFORE HIS FaTHER. He was a gentleman of religious sovle towardes God and a sweet be- haviour towardes MeNN and HIS DEATH WAS BY HIS KINDRED AND GENERALLY BY ALL MVCH LAMENTED. He DYED THE 2Sth OF AuGUST 1625 AND LEFT HIS Vnckle Thomas Ferrers his Executor who to the memory of him hath ERECTED this SMALL MONUMENT. In THIS MOST PURE AND BLESSED SHADE (SUCH BY THE SACRED ASSHES MADE THAT HEARE IN HABIT MUST) DO'S LYE THE Man, WHOSE VERTUES CANNOT DYE HIS Alms, his Prayers his Pyety HAVE SENT HIS SOWLE ABOVE THE SKY. Nature full well had taught his wife TO SUM her HOWERS IN PIUS LIFE TO God, to friend, to poore, to ALL, SHE WAS AS GOOD AS WE DARE CALL FRAYLE FLESH GOOD PASSENGER GIVE PRAYS E TO THEM WHO MADE SUCH HAPPY DAYES. Sir John Jacob, 1629. — This is the most beautiful and original in design of any in the church. It is about 13 feet high and 6 feet wide, composed of alabaster and coloured marbles, and built high up on the south wall of nave, against the chancel arch. Between three detached marble columns with gilt caps, are figures of Sir John Jacob and his wife, kneeling on cushions, with clasped hands, and facing each other. They are dressed in the costume of the period. At the back of them are two arched recesses. The columns each support, and are united to the back of the monument by, an entablature, each having a shield on top. The centre shield, which is larger than the sides, bears the following arms — Quarterly, ist and 4th, arg. a chevron gu. between wolves' heads erased sa. for Jacob, 2nd and 3rd az. three trussed lambs arg. Crest, a lion statant sa. The shield on the top of column on the side nearest to chancel bears the charge — Jacob impaling arg., a chevron between three stags passant attired or., and that on the opposite side bears the arms of Jacob only. The inscription on the panel at the bottom of the monument is as follows — BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Hic TVMVLVS. Parentes Opt! cv Prole nvmerosa NoN VESTRY ViRTVTl's SED DoLORIS MeI Mon'^^'^^ ESTO QvAM Vterq erga Dev Pivs ; qva Regi svo Obseqve, & CoMMODvs ; QVA Ami'ci's Fiovs ; QVA Patri^. Vt'ius ; Mevm iMiTARi ; Pii Lectoris SVPPLERE QvOD FiuALIS MODESTIA RET'iNVIT. Valete Posteri Sic IN Christo et vivi'te, et morimini'. JoH Jacob F: Parent!^, Mcerens MerentIb, P. By far the most interesting portion of this monument, however, is the charming way in which the children and grand-children of Sir John Jacob and wife are shown by the shields and vine leaf decoration in the space above the inscription. They are disposed as follows — 1. Arg., on a bend az. three dolphins embowed of the ist ducally crowned and finned or. impaling Jacob, for Henry Rolt and Ellen Jacob. 2. Az. a chevron engrailed or., between three plates, each charged with a cross pat^e^^?;. impaling Jacob, for George Bury and Mary Jacob. 3. Jacob impaling az. three esquires' helmets or. with a bordure engrailed arg., for John Jacob and Elizabeth Halliday. 4. Gzi., a chevron vaire between three eagles displayed or. impaling Jacob, for Thorn. G. Wilmer and Elizabeth Jacob. 5. Az. a fcsse erm., impaling Jacob, for Robert Seyliard and Barbara Jacob. On the frieze above these shields is the inscription — OBIIT 6 MAII AD 1629 /ET SV.^ 56 .Sir John Roberts, 1692. — A large monument about 15 feet high and 7 feet wide, in black and white marble. It stands on the north aisle wall, against porch door. The design consists of a central niche flanked by twisted Corinthian columns supporting an arched entablature, urn, and mantling at the sides, all in white marble. The centre piece, with the urn and weeping female figures, are also of white marble. Above the niche is a shield ornamented with swags on each side, and bearing the following arms — Quarterly, ist and 4th, or. a lion rampant gu., 2nd az.^ a bow charged with an arrow, the bow in chief, the arrow pointing to base, arg., 3rd, az., a cross arg. BROMLEY-BY-BOW. between four mullets or. for Roberts ; impaling arg., a boar's head couped sa., armed arg., langued^«., between three cross crosslets of the 2nd for Amy. Over all is a small shield charged with a hand couped gu. The inscription at the bottom of the monument is as follows — In this Vault Lyeth In y^ Same Vault y^ Body oF Dame also Lyeth S^ lOHN Margery Roberts Roberts Barr^ Daughter of M^ Patron of this Church William, Amy, who dye the y4th of Marchant in Exon December 7692 to And Late Wife to whose Memory his S"^ loHN Roberts of Relidl Dame Deborah Bromley Bar By Roberts Being his 2^ Wife Caufed this Whom he had 4 Sonns & 3 Daughters Infcription all which dyed in there infancy. She Departed this Life Septembery^2i.AD. 1 690. In 11 ^emory of whome her hufband caufed this Monument to be Erected Tho death his Body in y^ Here only is Refervd her Pious Duft Grave doth bind the Nobler Soule is ffree and Vnconfind t) Untill the Refurrection of y^ Juft and Both Shall Reign with Chrift when (by his Pow'r) Rejoyn'd. BROMLEY-BY-BOW. The third compartment, which is blank, was evidently left for the second wife, but she is not recorded either here or elsewhere in the church. Sir William Benson, 1712. — This is the largest monument in the church. It is 16 feet high and 7 feet wide, and stands on the west wall of the north aisle. It is of black and white marble, and somewhat similar in design to the Roberts monument. In the centre is a large semicircular-headed recess, flanked by pilasters of veined white marble, and covered with an ogee shaped pediment. There is the customary urn in the recess, on a square pedestal, with cherubs on each side. In front of the pedestal is a kneeling skeleton, crowned with a laurel wreath, and holding a shield, on the face of which is another shield, bearing the arms — Arg., three trefoils sa., between two bendlets gu., impaling az. a chevron engrailed erm. between three crowns or. The inscription is as follows — SACRED TO THE MEMORY OF S"* WILLIAM BENSON Knt. lord of this mannor and patron of this church y^ east end of which he built at his own expence and underneath lyes inter'd he was of an ancient family in the county of york, and married martha daughter of john austin of brittins in the county of essex esq."*. by whom he had nine sons and five daughters. After a usefull life spent in the practice of sobriety, industry, iustice, SINCERITY, charity, LOVE OF HIS COUNTRY AND ALL OTHER CHRISTIAN AND SOCIALL VERTUES HE LAY DOWN TO REST ON THE XXI'.' DAY OF AUGUST MDCCXII IN Y= LXXIl" : YEAR OF HIS AGE FULL OF PEACE AND HOPE THE HAPPY EFFECT OF j HAVING MADE THIS ONE MAXIM Y"^ RULE OF ALL HIS ACTIONS I \ DOE WELL AND FEAR NOTHING. 1 Nor is this monument with less filial piety '. devoted to the excellent memory of '. DAME MARTHA BENSON B WHO DEPARTED THIS LIFE Y XXIV: OF DECEMBER MDCCXXII IN THE SIXTY-THIRD YEAR OF HEK AGE GULL BENSON FILUS. BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Under the panel containing this incription, arranged on a festoon of vine leaves and tendrils is a series of 14 discs bearing the names of each of their children, one on each disc. WILLIAM the Eldest ROBERT the 2 Son, died young MARTHA Eldeft Daughter lANE ye 2 Daughter SUSANNA the third Daughter MARY ye 4 died young ELIZABETH the 5 died young BENJAMIN the Eighth son SEPTIMUS, died January ye 7th 7774 RICHARD 5 died Young THOMAS ye 6 died voung HARRY the Seventh Son lOHN ye J died YOung SAMUEL the Fourth died Young Sir Richard Munden, 16S0. — A white marble monument on the north aisle wall. The inscription is set in a panel with pilasters at each side, and a semicircular pediment over which supports the arms and crest. The pilasters are flanked by carved scrolls. The arms on the top shield are — per pale gii. and az., on a cross engrailed arg. five lozenges of the 2nd, on a chief or. 2 jambs erased sa., on a canton of the last an anchor cr. Crest, a leopard's head sa., spotted or., corned and langued gu., issuing from a crown vallary for Munden. The two shields at the bottom bear the arms, respectively — (i) Munden, {2) Munden impaling gu., a fesse between three cross crosslets fitchee or, for Gore. The incription is as follows- BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Here Underneath lyeth in Hope of a Blessed Refurrection Y^ Body of S^ RICHARD MVNDEN Knt one of his Majesties Captains at Sea who having bin what upon Publick duty & what upon Merchants Account SuccefsfuUy Ingaged in J4 fea-fights after seaueral Confiderable Exploits & fignal seruices Performed to his KING and Country whereof that of taking St HELENA is not to be forgotten, dyed in y^ Prime of his youth & Strength in y^ XL year of his Age Jun 25^^ AD 1680 He had to wife M*"^ SVSANNA GORE by whom he left one son RICHARD born fince his Fathers death & fiue Daughters, SUSANNA ELIZABETH DOROTHY ANNE & RACHEL Think Reader how every man even at his beft eftate is Altogethir vanity Psalm XXXIX Vers 5^*^ Elias Russell, 1690, and K'atherine, his wife, 1720. — A small white marble monument also on the wall of the north aisle, erected by their children Elias and Katherine in 1722. On the upper part of the monument is a shield, with the arms — ar^., a chevron between three cross crosslets fitchee sa.. impaling cirg., on a bend sa., three eagles displayed of the first. There is also a small brass, now fixed in the middle of the step leading from the nave to the chancel, containing a shield surmounted by a helmet, and mantling at the sides. The arms on the shield are — Sa., on a chevron erm. 3 martlets of the first, a crescent for difference. Crest — before a tree fructed a talbot couchant regardant. 10 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. THE CHURCHYARD. A feature of frreat interest is the old churchyard, which is one of the few remaining in this part of London in anything like its original condition, though even here some of the tombs have been shifted. There is a variety of late 17th and iSth century monuments, many to Huguenot families, with altar tombs and head stones, some of them of considerable beauty, or with carving of interest. They are disposed under the shade of trees planted in two avenues, and here and there among the tombs, the whole making a very charming and characteristic sjDot. The finest of the monuments is that of Duprie, a graceful circular structure, with a spire supported on stone arches, near the south-west entrance of the church. Among the other noteworthy tombs are those of Gad, Stevens, Patrick, Howson, William Shurley, Hector Graham (with carved angels' heads and scroll work), William Dean, Richard Charlton, Gillham, Phillip Starkey, Sweeting, Andrew Urgill, and those indicated in the key plan for their carving. Condition of repair. The monuments in the church are in good condition, e.xcepting the one to William Ferrers, 1625, on the north aisle wall. Owing to this having been badly re-constructed in its present place in 1874, when the north aisle was built, parts have bulged out and sagged, and the monument had to be repaired about a year since. It has been recently proposed to cut the trees down and level the churchyard for an asphalte playground. It is to be hoped that while means will be found for making the churchyard more public, nothing will be done to either destroy its beauty or the historical interest of the monuments it contains. It is much better left as it is. Historical notes. The registers date back to the end of the i6th century. The present church occupies the site of the former church, which was the chapel of a Benedictine nunnery dedicated to St. I^eonard. The best account of the ancient church is given in R. Newcourt's Repertorium Ecclesiasticzim Parochiale Londinensi (London, 1708-10. Folio, 2 vols.) Pages 576-578 of Vol. I. are devoted to Bromley St. Leonard nunnery and church. As the church is believed to have been the chapel of the nunnery, its history is intimately bound up with that of the nunnery. Authorities differ as to the date of its foundation. Thus Newcourt says, " Weaver tells us that this religious structure was .... founded by King Henry H. in the 23rd of his reign ; " " but that it was a Bene- dictine nunnery before the reign of King Henry H. appears from what Mr. Tanner tells us, in his Notitia Monasficn, that this house at Stratford-Bow was a Benedictine nunnery dedicated to S. Leonard, and founded by William, Bishop of London, in the time of William the Conqueror." Whether Tanner was correct or not is uncertain, but that Weever was wrong is largely confirmed by the existence of a charter granted by King Stephen to the nuns of this house. " The monastery was valued at the suppression to be worth i^'loS is. Ild. (Dugdale), ^121 i6s. (Speed)." "After the dissolution of this monastery, King Henry VHL, in 32nd of his reign, April 21st, granted .... the site thereof, and the church with its appur- tenances, and the mannor with its appurtenances, as also the rectories with the advowsons of the vicarages of this church of Bromley .... to Sir Ralph Sadler, Knight, one of his Privy-Counsellors." Six years later, " in 38 of the same king," the property returned to the crown. Elizabeth, in the isth of her reign, granted the rectory and parish church of Bromley, with the appurtenances, to Ric. Pickman for 2i years; and, in 28th of her reign, to Ambrose Willoughby for 40 years more. James I., in 7th of his reign, granted them to Francis Morrice and Francis Philips, and their heirs in soccage, to be held of the Manor II BROMLEY-BY-BOW. of East Greenwich. " As to the church here that is parochial, it is very small, and seems to be only a part of that church which did belong to the late dissolved monastery aforesaid. It is a donative or curacy, and was lately in the gift of Sir John Roberts, Knight, deceased, who dwelt in a goodly house built where- abouts the said monastery stood ; and whilst he lived pretended this church to be exempt from the Bishop of London's jurisdiction ; but (with submission) without any ground for such pretence, as I conceive, for it appears by the London registry, that the prioresses of this house were from time to time chosen by licence from the Bishop, and their election confirmed by his vicar-general, in which elections they expressly owned the Bishop of London for the time being, for their ordinary, patron and founder, and to be under his jurisdiction, and when such elections were confirmed, they swore obedience to the said Bishop of London and his successors, whom in the verj' oath is stiled Founder and Patron of the said priory, and their Ordinary and Diocesan. Thus stood the jurisdiction of the bishop over this house before its dissolution ; and since that time the curates (for here is neither spiritual rector nor vicar) of this church have from time to time been licensed by the bishop or his vicar-general, and appeared at episcopal visitations ; where likewise the churchwardens have also appeared and been sworn, as they constantly are, by the Archdeacon of Middlesex, or his official, at his visitation ; and the Bishop's Commissary of London and Middlesex hath the proving of wills, and granting administrations of such as die in this parish, to this very day, and so hath had from time immemorial." On page 920 of the same volume there is given a list of curates of the church from 1561 to 1697. Mr. A. Wood, in his Ecclesinsficat Antiquities of London and its Suburbs (London, 1S74), says that " fragments of the chapel are supposed to have been retained in the walls of the old parish church. It was Romanesque, and consisted of nave and chancel only, as did the old .St. Pancras. There was a bell- cot at the west-end. From the old church there has been preserved in the modern building an octagonal font of late-pointed dale, incised with twelve dedication crosses, ten of them on the bowl, the others on the stem." This font has since been replaced bv a modern one of stone and coloured marbles elaborately carved and ornamented in the Norman style. Bibliographical references. Lysons (Environs, iSlo — Middlesex, vol. i., pages 39-44) gives an account of the original church, its architectural features, external and internal, and its monuments. Strype's edition of Stow's Survey {6t\\ edition, 1755), vol. ii., pages 766-768, contains an account of the monuments in the church. This account is complementary to Newcourt's, and gives at length a large number of the inscriptions on the tombs. Weever's Funeral Monuments, page 541, contains descriptions of some of the tombs formerly in the old church. Brewer {London and Middlesex, 1816, vol. iv., pages 287-290) gives a short account of the old church, very similar to Lysons'. Dunstan (History of the Parish of Bromley St. Leonard, 1862, pages 69-148) deals at length with the old and new churches, detailing the steps of the gradual transformation. The new church was first opened for service in 1843. Views are given of the old and new churches, and the interior of the new church. A list of the clergy who have officiated since the dissolution of the prior)- is given. In the Committee'.s MS. collection are — Church — (i) Tomb of Sir John Roberts, in north aisle (photo). (2) General view from the road (2 photos). (3) Ferrers monument, north aisle (2 views, photo and colour). (4) Jacob monument, in nave (photo). (5) Tomb of Elias Russell north aisle (photo). (6) Jacob monument, sketch showing position of heraldic shields and vine-leaf decoration containing names of children (line drawing). 12 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Churchyard — (7) A key plan in penril of the churchyard as it is, with the more noteworthy tombs numbered and described. (8) The plan of the Metropolitan Public Gardens Association for the opening of the churchyard as an open space (line drawing). (9) A revision of this plan by Mr. C. R. Ashbee, for the purpose of showing how the more important monuments might be preserved (line drawing). (10) View from church looking west (colour drawing). (11) View from church looking south (photo). (12) Tombs at west end of church (2 views, photo and line drawing). (13) Looking south-east (photo). (14) Tombstone of William Dan (colour drawing). (15) Group of tombstones to south-west of church (photo). (16) Duprie monument (2 views, photo and colour). (17) View looking west (photo). (18) View looking east towards church (photo). (19) Tomb in north corner of churchyard (photo). 13 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. II.-THE VICARAGE OF ST. MARY. General description and date of the structure. The house is middle or late i8th century, with additions of about the year 1800, and subsequent modernizations in about 1850. The entrance hall is the principal feature, and is quarried with black and white marble, and simply panelled. In the corner is a fine piece of English i8th century cabinet work, a triangular cupboard in Spanish mahogany, with car\'ed doors and drawers, and an inlay of light wood in the broken pediment above. There are two good coloured marble mantelpieces of the Adam time in the drawing room and dining room. Some of the 1 8th century wainscoting in the upper part of the house still remains. In the vicarage is also the famous silver gilt chalice and paten of 161 7, possibly by Viansen, as it bears Nuremberg design in the workmanship. The inscription in both cup and paten is — "161 7, Bromley, Middlesex: the gift of the women." The Jacobean oak pulpit of the church is preserved in the vicarage, the late vicar having upholstered it with French leather and converted it into a lounge. Condition of repair. The house is in good repair. Historical notes. The house is stated formerly to have belonged to Messrs. Smith, Garrett and Co., brewers, before it was used as a vicarage. It was purchased from them in 185S for ;^I,2S8 i8s. 6d. Bibliographical references. Dunstan {History of the Parish of Bromley St. Leonard, pages 134- 13S), gives at length the report of the committee " to consider the propriety of purchasing the house [the house occupied by the incumbent in 1857] as a perpetual residence for the clergymen of the parish." A very brief account is given of its appearance and surroundings. A view of Broadway, 1840, where the vicarage stands, is given. In the Committee's M.S. collection is — (i.) View of house from the churchyard (photo). H BROMLEY-BY-BOW. III.-THE MANOR HOUSE OF THE UPPER MANOR. General description and date of structure. The Manor House attached to the Upper Manor of Bromley, stood on or about the spot now occupied by the school in Priory-street. It is stated by Lysons to have been built by Sir John Jacob, the lord of the Upper Manor, in the reien of Charles I. It was of brickwork, with tiled roof, and somewhat similar to the Old Palace in general form, with projecting wings at each end. Views of the building are given by Malcolm {Views of London, 1836), and in the extra illustrated copy of Lysons' Environs in the Guildhall Library are two original drawings in wash, showing its appearance at the end of last century. Dunstan states that it was pulled down in the early part of the present century after about only 150 years of existence. In Rocque's Map of London it is called " Bromley House," and its position and extent of the grounds are shown. The grounds, with the fishponds, gardens, &c., extended from the river Lea on the east, to Four Mill street (the present .St. Leonard's- street) on the west, and on the south to Three Mills lane. On the north they were bounded by the church- yard, and the present churchyard wall, with its blocked up gateway, may possibly be a part of this wall. The grounds remained intact until a period within the memory of the older inhabitants of the neighbourhood. In Dunstan's time (1862) the north and south boundary walls yet remained, and had ornamental gates of brickwork. Considerable portions of the walls yet remain, principally on the west side adjoining the towing path of the river, and on the south side in Hancock-road. The site of the fishponds is now covered with factories, and the gardens by rows of small houses. Historical Notes. Lysons' Environs of London states — "The manor of Bromley belonged to the above-mentioned convent [that of St. Leonard, Bromley], to which it is said to have been given by Sir Ralph Jossiline. After the dissolution it was granted, with the site of the priory and advowson of the church, by Henry VIII. to Sir Ralph Sadler, who granted a lease of the priory, with certain premises adjoining, to Joan Gough, at the yearly rent of £2$ los. 8d., and in the year 1546 exchanged the manor again with the crown for other lands. After the expiration of Joan Cough's lease, Queen Elizabeth granted the same premises for 21 years to Sir Thomas Cotton. The manor, in the year 15S3, was the property of Henry Morgan, alias Wolf, who obtained a licence to alienate the same, with certain tenements and tofts, 30 acres of arable, 15 of meadow, 30 of pas- ture, 2 of wood, and £j, rents of assize to Thomas Spencer, Esq., and Richard Shute. In 1607 a licence was obtained by Hugh and John Hare, to alienate the same premises to Arthur Ingram and his heirs. Soon after this the manor seems to have reverted to the crown. King James granted it in 1609 to Francis Morriceand Francis Phillips; it was vested in the crown again a.d. 1620, when, being valued at ;£'7 1 2S. 6d., it was settled 15 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. among other manors upon Charles I., then Prince of Wales; this monarch, in the fourth j'ear of his reigfn, granted it to Edward Ditchficld and others, trustees for the City of London, who, five years after- wards, sold it to Sir John Jacob. Sir John was a great sufferer in the civil war : his estates having been sequestrated, this manor appears to have passed into the hands of Abraham Wilmer, Esq., who was allied to the Jacobs by marriage, and who is stiled patron of the church in 1650. Sir John Jacob died in 1666. The manor afterwards came to the family of Roberts. After the death of Sir John Roberts, Bart., which happened in 1692, it became the property of Sir William Benson, Knt., who dying in 1712, his son sold it about the year 1719 to Mr. Lloyd, a merchant of London." After passing through several hands, and being divided and re-united, the manor was purchased by Mr. William Mann, whose descendant Colonel Mann, is the present lord of the manor. Bibliographical references. Lysons' Environs of London (Middlesex, voL i., pages 40-41.) Dunstan Hist. Bromley St. Leonard, pages 156-161. Brewer Beauties of England and Wales, vol. x., part iv., page 288. Malcolm (119 views in London and in the vicinity of the Metropolis, 1836), where a view of the house is given. Rocque Survey of London 1741-45. Gascoyne {Map of Stepney, 1703), where the house is indicated by a small perspective sketch, and described, Efqr. Benfons. 16 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. IV.-BROMLEY HALL (THE MANOR HOUSE OF THE LOWER MANOR). Ground Landlord, Leaseholders, &c. The house forms part of the Macintosh estate at South Bromley, and is at present tenanted by deaconesses in connection with the East London Institute, Bow- road, E., and used as a nurses' home. General description and date of structure. This house stands on the east side of Brunswick-road, opposite the end of Venue-street. It is an interesting specimen of late Tudor work, dating from perhaps the 15th century, with a few later additions. In plan it is rectangular, and has small octagonal turrets, one at each corner. The walls are built of small red bricks, and considering the size of the house, are of great thickness. The windows on the principal (the west) and the garden side were altered some time in the 1 7th centur)', and have flat brick pilasters, heads, and sills in the manner of those in the tower of Boleyn Castle, at Upton Park. There is also, above the ground floor windows on the west front, a fine moulded brick string course of the oldest period, and the original brick plinth to the walls and turrets. The north and south walls have been cemented over, hiding all traces of the original work. The string courses have also been hacked away until they are now flat bands. In the middle of the north side is a projection that suggests a bay-window behind. The roof belongs to a later date than the walls ; it is hipped all round, with a flat top, and has at the eaves a large plaster cove ; the angle turrets are carried up to this height, and then break off abruptly. The interior of the house was almost entirely remodelled in the latter half of the x8th century. The principal rooms on the ground floor, the study on the first floor, and the hall are panelled with woodwork of this period. The entrance doorway, which has an arched and pedimented head, is also a good example of this date ; and there are in the various rooms some quaint mantelpieces of wood of the period. One fireplace is still left, with the open space for the dog stove, and is tiled round with interesting old figured tiles. In the cellar are the base and a few steps of an old brick staircase ; the steps are of brick, with the outside of the tread of oak. The stairs from the Hall to the first floor were replaced in the last century, but those from the first floor to the attics were fortunately left. They have moulded handrails and spiral turned balusters, and at the top a row of plain flat balusters. 17 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. The corner of the road opposite the Hall was formerly occupied by a lodge, and extending across the intervening space was a large iron gate, which cut off the road leading through to Poplar. This road was a private one, and known to com- paratively recent times as " Quag-lane ; " the public road to Poplar was continued round where Venue-street and St. Leonard's-road now are. The house has underground passages variously stated to lead to the Boleyn Castle at Upton Park, the Old Palace, situate near the parish church, and the Abbey, at West Ham. A careful examination of the cellar walls, which belong to the earlier or Tudor work, fails to reveal in any place a blocked-up archway or entrance to such passage. Condition of repair. The house is in excellent repair and preservation. Historical notes. Dunstan states that the Manor of Bromley Hall (or the lower manor) belonged to the Priory of Christ Church in London, it having been given to them by Geoffrey and William de Mandeville. At the Dissolution it was granted by Henry VIII. to Richard Morrison, and after passing through the hands of various owners, one of whom Was William Cecil, afterwards Lord Burleigh, it passed into the possession of the Hare family, at that time owners of the Upper Manor. They in 1606 conveyed it to Arthur, after- wards Sir Arthur, Ingram, and from him it reverted to the Crown. It then passed to William Ferrers, who died seised of it in 1625, and was buried in Bromley Church (see pages 3-4). In 1799 it was purchased by Joseph Foster, an eminent calico printer, who established extensive calico printing works in its grounds; since then it has been used by Sir E. Hay Currie. The grounds that formerly belonged to the house are now occupied by an oil company's works, extending down to the river, and oil-tanks take the place of the old fish-ponds, which are very clearly defined in Rocque's Survey of London. In Gascoyne's map of the neighbourhood (1703) Bromley Hall is shown by a rough perspective sketch, in which the roof, &c., are the same shape as at present, showing that the alterations took place before this date. The lower manor, or the Manor of Bromley Hall, appears to have been formed out of the original Manor of Bromley. The Manor House of Bromley proper was erected by Sir John Jacob, about 1634, upon or near the site of the Priory House. This building stood on the site now occupied by Priory- street, adjoining the churchyard, and was pulled down about 1812. Bromley Hall was the manor house of the lower manor, and is situated in Brunswick-road, a continuation of St. Leonard's-street. which commences from High-street, near the church, and the old manor house above described, and runs parallel to the river for some distance. Bromlej- Hall is about half a-mile from the High-street. Bibliographical references. No description of this house is contained in any of the historical works relating to the district, but the manor itself is described in hysons' Eiivirons of London (Middlesex, vol. i., p. 41), and in Uunstan's History of Bromley St. Leonard, pp. 152-154. The house is marked on Rocque's Map of London, 1741-5. Gascoyne's Map of Stepney and Neighbourhood, 1703. Brewer, Beauties, vol. x., page 290. In the Committee's MS. collection are — *(i) Ground plan (measured drawing). *(2) West elevation, with details of moulding.s (measured drawing). *(3) General view from the north-west (water colour drawing). (4) View from the west (photo). (5) Details of upper stairs (measured drawing). [Those marked with an asterisk are reproduced here.] 18 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. V.-THE MANOR HOUSE (BRUNSWICK-ROAD). Ground Landlord, Leaseholders, &c. The property and ground belong to Mrs. Macintosh, and form part of the Macintosh estate in South Bromley. The present leaseholder, who has held the lease for eight years, is Mr. Alfred William Hammond. General description and date of the structure. The house is square in plan, with additions at the north-west corner ; the main entrance faces east. It adjoins Bromley Hall on the south side, and is known as 240, Brunswick-road. The exterior, and in fact the whole of the house, appears to be not earlier in date than the end of the 1 8th century. The windows and door on the ground floor are square headed, but have semi-circular yellow brick arches above them in the manner common to the houses of this period. Inside there is very little that is native to the house of any interest. The great charm lies in the additions made at different times by various inhabitants. All over the house in many rooms is a variety of old oak carving, grotesques, &c., mainly " Early Renaissance " in style, which were obtained at great expense by a former tenant, Mr. Wooding. He was an actor and clown, and had a mania for old car\'ed oak work. In the library is a carved wooden chimney piece, of 17th century date, with panels filled with festoons, drums, musical instruments, &c. The staircase is a curious piece of work ; it is all of oak, and the handrail was made by Mr. Wooding with various lengths of moulding pieced together ; the balusters are of carved oak of perhaps French design, and at the bottom there is an immense newel with a wooden lion, well carved, seated on top. The ceiling of the staircase part of the hall, and the soffit of the stairs, are covered with paintings on canvas, .with groups of allegorical figures, which were painted by the actor tenant and his friend Telbin, the scene painter at Drury-lane Theatre some forty years ago. The library fireplace has a dog stove, and the sides and hearth are covered entirely with old Dutch tiles, some very good in design. Mr. Hammond has followed partly on the same lines, and has substituted one or more dog stoves and open fireplaces for the old stoves. The garden is quaint and was probably laid out by the eccentric actor. It is composed mainly of a series of zig-zag mounds, covered with trees and shrubs of all kinds, and paths running along the tops of these mounds, connected with each other by bridges. 19 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Condition of repair. The house is in good condition structurally, and is kept in excellent condition by the present tenant. Historical notes. The house has been called the " Manor House" for a period extending beyond the memory of the oldest inhabitant hereabouts ; but there is no doubt that Bromley Hall is the original manor house of the Lower Manor of Bromley. Previous tenants were the Stockwells (the ship builders), and after them Mr. Wooding, whose lease the present tenant continued. Bibliographical references. There does not appear to be any mention of this house in Dunstan's History of Bromley or any of the surveys of London. In the Committee's MS. collection are — (I.) A view from the north-west (colour drawing). 20 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. VI.-TUDOR HOUSE, ST. LEONARD'S STREET. Ground Landlord, Leaseholders, &c. The property was held by the trustees of the late George Gammon Rutty, and was purchased on 13 June, 1898, by the London County Council for the purpose of converting the grounds into a public garden. General description and date of structure. The house is situated between Grace-street and the Conereg-ational Church. In plan it is square, with a projecting porch on the eastern side, and additions on the south and west, and it contains work of three periods— (i.) Elizabethan (late i6th century) ; (ii.) William III.; (iii.) Early 19th century (c. 1805). The hall is carried through from the east to the west side of the house, the stairs are at the west end. The fireplaces are grouped together in two large stacks, which rise symmetrically through the roof near the centre of the north and south fronts. Of the first period the chief remains are, besides the whole planning and grouping of the house, some carved oak woodwork and panelling in kitchen, fireplace in south-east room on first floor, which is of oak, and has a moulded and block cornice supported by fluted pilasters, and an oak door, now reversed in position, with elliptical panel at the top and semi-circular headed panel at the bottom, fixed at the west side of hall. The greater part of the house appears to have been refitted in the second or William III. period. The staircase, with its massive newels and handrails, and large turned balusters, is of this date, also the panelling of the drawing-room, and the principal rooms of the ground floor. In the north-east room on the ground floor is a fireplace with a moulded and carved cornice and frieze and carved wood architrave of this date. The walls of the south-east room of first floor, and the south-west room of ground floor, together with some other parts of the house, are covered with wood panelling of similar character to the small panels and moulded stiles of the Eliza- bethan period, but in deal. The eastern or principal front is also of the second period. It is nearly square in elevation, and has, in the centre of the first-floor level, a small square room lighted by a three light window, carried out from the large drawing-room, and supported at its outer corners by circular wooden Doric columns on pedestals. Above it on the second floor is a balcony with an iron railing. The entrance doorway is of wood, with 21 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. elliptical arched head, and flanked by rusticated wooden pilasters. The face of this front is also divided up from the ground to the underside of the parapet with flat brick pilasters, and between these are placed the windows, which have red brick jambs and moulded sills. All the other fronts of the house have flat horizontal brick bands between each storey, and the original ovolo-moulded brick plinth at the bottom of the walls. The original windows have all been removed and replaced by sliding sashes of various dates. The work of the third period consists mainly in small alterations in the house, the windows of the west front, and the additions on the south and west sides. The gardens and grounds cover an area of about i^ acres, and have a frontage to St. Leonard's-street of over 200 feet. Only the part of the ground which extends from the ground to the Congregational Church is now used as garden, the remainder being occupied by the workshops and stables. At the northern end of the garden is one of the old entrance gateways from Northumberland House, Whitehall, destroyed some years since. There is also an interesting wooden ship's figure-head of last century's date, and some groups of statuary and figures of comparatively recent date. In Rocque's Map of London the grounds are shown stretching westward as far as Devons-road, or " Bromley-lane " as it is called. Condition of repair. The house, when it came into tlie hands of the London County Council, was in excellent condition, especially the old work. Historical notes. This house, although of late i6th century date, is so named from its having been the residence of one of the Tudor famil)-, who, according to tradition, came to Bromley and joined the Scotch colony founded by James I., who is supposed to have built the Old Palace, which stood next to it on the north side. The house is one of several buildings which still remain as relics of the village of Bromley. The village is marked by the winding High-street, which widens into a triangular space before the churchyard. In the High-street are several interesting specimens of architecture of the village type, and in the triangle before alluded to are interesting houses included in the Register, while on the south side abutting on the churchyard are several houses occupying the site of the ancient Manor House, formerly the site of the Priory. St. Leonard's-street branches off from the south side of this triangle, and a short way down on the right hand side is Tudor House. Its position therefore is one of great interest as illustrating the early topographical condition of Bromley, and if it were destroyed a very distinctive landmark would have perished. For further evidence as to the Scotch colony at Bromley founded by James I., see the description of the Old Palace of Bromley, and the reference to the ceiling preserved at South Kensington Museum, and the one by the same hand in the " Panel Room " at Balcarres House, Fife. 22 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Bibliographical references. There are no references to this house in any of the parish histories or general histories of London, but it is marked on Rocque's Map of London, 1741-5. In the Committee's MS. collection are — *(l.) Plan of ground floor (measured drawing). *(2.) Plan of first floor (measured drawing). *(3.) Elevation of east front (measured drawing). *(4.) Elevation of west front (measured drawing). *(5.) Detail of doorway, east front (measured drawing). *(6.) General view (water colour drawing). *(7.) North-east view from garden (colour drawing). *(8.) Porch from south side (colour drawing). *(9.) Entrance door and railings in front (colour drawing). *(io.) Old gateway of Northumberland House (colour drawing). *(ll.) Stairs and oak door in the hall, ground floor (two drawings, in colour and line). *(l2.) Stairs, first floor (colour drawing). *(l3.) Cupboard and panelling in kitchen (line drawing). [Those marked with an asterisk are reproduced here.] *3 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. VII.-Nos. 142 and 144, ST. LEONARD'S-STREET. General description and date of works. These are the last of an interesting group of buildings which stood until very few years since upon the spot. In construction and appearance they are very similar to the " Seven Stars " public-house, and the houses adjoining it in the High-street, and may be of the same date. The fronts are of timber framing with weather- boarding over. The lower storey is built on a foundation of bricks, and the upper storey projects about two feet beyond the lower one ; one of the curved brackets supporting the upper storey is still left at the south corner. There is a gable in the centre of the garden front, and the whole face is rough-cast over. Historical notes. It is probable that these will soon disappear owing to the increase of traffic since the completion of the Blackwall-tunnel. The road at this point is the narrowest, as all the other buildings have been set back as they have been rebuilt. The " Five Bells" public-house was the most interesting of these; the exterior was rough-cast, and gabled in front, with each storey projecting over the one beneath it, mullioned windows with lead lights, and large fireplaces inside. In the Committee's MS. collection are — •(i.) View of the houses from the north-east (photo). *(2.) View of the houses from the south-east (photo). (3, 4.) View of the houses from the garden (photo). [Those marked with an asterisk are reproduced here.] ^4 BROA4LEY-BY-BOW. VIII.-No. 135, ST. LEONARD'S-STREET. Ground Landlord, Leaseholders, &c. The house with the grounds belongs to the London, Tilbury and Southend Railway Company. It was until lately in the possession of Messrs. Jukes, Coulson and Company, and was with its grounds used as an iron works. General description and d.vte of structure. The house is about 40 feet square, and is built of yellow bricks ; the principal entrance faces south. On the east side, facing the garden and river, is a large circular bay window, and a rain-water pipe-head bearing the date 1784. The interior was stripped of its fittings, marble chimney-pieces, &c., some years since, and the only remaining thing of interest now is the elliptical arched groining over part of the hall, supported by pilasters with caps ornamented with leafage of Greek character. The stables and offices are arranged in a long rectangular block of similar construction to the house, with a hipped slate roof, on the south side of the house, and adjoining the road. Over the centre of the block is a pediment. The grounds extend from the road to the river Lea, and southward from the London, Tilbury and Southend Railway for a distance of 350 feet. The kitchen garden still remains intact, to the south of the grounds and adjoining the river, but is now owned by the Gas Light and Coke Company, and let out in garden allotments. The original extent of the grounds was about 4^ acres. Condition of repair. The house stands now nearly in carcase, and is in a somewhat dilapidated condition, although structurally quite sound. Historical notes. The above account was written in 1896. Since then the house, with the stables, has been pulled down, and the whole ground cleared preparatory to building a goods depot, which is now (1898) in course of construction. There was a house of somewhat similar character to this (No. 133) on the north side of the railway, standing in the works of Messrs. Fraser and Eraser, Limited. It was destro3-ed about eight years since for the purpose of extending their workshops. In the Committee's MS. Collection are (1) A general view of the house from the south-cast (colour drawino-). (2) Detail of the rain-water head (colour dra'wino-). (3) View of house from the south (line drawing). ^ [h.b. 9 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. IX.-DRAPERS' ALMSHOUSES, PRISCILLA-ROAD. Ground Landlord, Leaseholders, &c. Mr. W. Girton, machine dealer, of Bow-road, has leased the chapel for the past 20 years. The houses on either side of the chapel are occupied and in private hands. General description and date of structure. Formerly the almshouses covered three sides of a quadrangle, in the same manner as the principal block of the Trinity Hospital in Mile-end-road. There were six houses on each of the east and west sides, and at the southern end, facing the road, a central block containing the chapel and four houses. This block is now the only remaining portion of the almshouses, and stands at the .southern end of Priscilla-road, at right angles to it, parallel to Bow-road, and adjoining the North London Railway on the west side. It is rectangular in plan, with the chapel slightly projecting in the centre. The front of the chapel is of very finely-rubbed red bricks, and is crowned by an elaborate moulded and blocked wood pediment and cornice, which cornice is also continued on each side to form the eaves of the houses. In the centre of the pediment is an elliptical shield bearing an inscription recording the foundation of the almshouses, but now much defaced. Above it were the arms of the founder^according to Lysons {Gti. a pale wavy Erm: between six escallop shells or.) ; these are now m.issing. Over the entrance doorway to the chapel is a wooden pediment .supported by carved brackets with charming little cherubs, each looking inwards. The windows are circular-headed, and the external angles of the chapel front have stone quoins. The houses on either side of the chapel have very little that is noteworthy in design beyond the square-headed and mullioned windows : the rooms inside are of plain wood panelling. Condition of repair. The interior of the chapel has been almost entirely ruined save for the plaster cornice and cove next the ceiling. It has in fact, since the demolition of the other houses about 25 years ago, been used as a warehouse and store room. Historical notes. It is stated in I.ysons' Environs that the almshouses were erected for 12 poor persons in 1706, by the Drapers' Company. Dunstan {Hist. Brom.) says that part of the ground they stood on was taken from the adjoining' almshouses (Sir John Jolles') which stood on the spot now occupied by the Bromley Vestry Hall and the adjoining shop?;. In addition to this, says Strype, an additional piece of land was purchased, " about three-quarters of an acre, more or less, which cost the company ^"195." "These 26 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. two pieces of land were then thrown together, and formed what we now call the Alms House field, measuring a.I 3 28. On this last mentioned piece, the company built a chapel and twelve almshouses; corresponding with those eight on the opposite side, the whole forming three sides of a square, having the chapel in the centre of the south side and facing towards the road. Over the door of the chapel is a neat tablet having the following inscription " — Mr John Edmunson, Saylemaker, DEC'd, out of a pious & CHARITABLE INTENTION FOR ReLIEF OF TwELVE POOR PEOPLE LEFT AN ESTATE To THE Worshipful Company of Drapers To WHOSE worthy memory & IN PURSUANCE OF THEIR TRUSTS, THEY HAVE BUILT THIS ClIAPPEL AND TWELVE Almshouses. Anno Domini, 1706. The estate, which was left for the maintenance of these almshouses, produced about j^iSo per annum in 1706, but increased so that in 1836 four additional houses were built (Dunstan). Bibliographical references. Lysons (Environs. iSlo— Middlesex, vol. i., p. 44) mentions the almshouses very briefly, but Dunstan (History of Bromley, pp. 205-212) gives a very complete history of these and adjoining almshouses. Strype, Survey of London, Appendix, cap. I, p. 1 12. Brewer, Beauties of England and Wales, vol. x., p. 290. In THE Committee's MS. collection are— *General view of the front of the almshouses (photo). Detail view of doorway and front of chapel (photo). *Details of the carved scrolls to chapel door (drawing). ■- Those marked with an asterisk are reproduced here. 27 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. X.-ST. ANDREW'S MISSION CHURCH, GURLEY-STREET. General description. In this church are installed the old altar tablets which formed the altar piece of the chancel of the old parish church (see page 3), and date from 1692. In form they are rectangular, and have large cornices along the top enriched with carving on the mouldings. The centre tablet is about S feet high by 5 feet wide, has a central panel with carved moulding round, and contains the Commandments, written in good letters ; at the top is a figure of Moses, painted on the panel. Under this panel are two of smaller size, filled with carving in the form of swags, with grapes and vine leaves united by ribands ; in part the carving is completely undercut. The side tablets are smaller, about 6 feet high by 2 feet 6 inches wide, and contain panels with the Lord's Prayer and the Apostles' Creed respectively written on them in gold letters; under these are raised panels with bolection mouldings. Condition of repair. Excellent. Historical notes. In 1692, when Sir \V. Benson came into possession of the manor and tithes of the Upper Manor of Bromley, he lengthened the chancel of the parish church, by building a small addition at the east end about ten feet square, and placed these tablets on the eastern wall of this addition, above the communion table. (See inscription on his tomb in Bromley Church, given on page 8.) Upon the reconstruction and enlargement of the church in 1843 they were rescued by the vestry clerk, Mr. James Dunstan, just as they were being placed in the cart to be taken off to the builder's yard to be broken up, and were placed by him in the old boys' school in Priorj'-street. (History of Brojiilcy, page 79.) In 1SS9 they were removed to St. Andrew's Church, and put up at the east end, and at the last restoration, about four years ago, they were again shifted and placed in their present position on the west wall. Bibliographical references. I.ysons [Environs), Brewer (Pjcanties of England and Wales), a.nA Dunstan (History of Bromley), give information as to the building of the addition to the chancel in 1692, but the tablets are noted by Dunstan only. In thk Committee's MS. collection are — (i) Measured drawings of the tablets (line drawing). (2) Details of the carving (line drawing). 28 <:> BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Xl.-GOOD SHEPHERD'S MISSION HALL, BACK-ALLEY. General description. There is a large achievement of arms, consisting of a shield bearing the royal arms, with garter, supporters, mottoes, helm with crest, and scroll work background, fixed high up on the south wall in the mission church. It is a fine piece of work about 8 feet high and 7 feet wide, carved in high relief, and very boldly treated, with the spaces of background completely cut away, and is carved in soft wood and coloured. In the centre is the shield of elliptical shape bearing the arms of Charles II. — Qum-terly : ist and ^th g7'and quarters, France tnodcrn and England quarterly ; 2nd grand quarter, Scotland ; 3rd grand quarter, Ireland. The garter encircles this and bears the motto— HONI • SOIT • QVI • MAL • Y • PENSE. Above the shield is the royal helm placed affronte, which bears as a crest a small lion statant crowned with tail curled up over its back. Below along the bottom of the achievement is a flat band, raised in the centre, bearing the motto — DIEV • ET • MON • DROIT. At the sides are the supporters, on the dexter a lion rampant guardant, impe^-ially croivned ; on the sinister a unicorn armed, zinguled, and crined, gorged with a coronet, and chain affixed. The background is foliage and scroll work, treated in the same bold manner as the other parts. The original colouring is now all lost, the whole surface being thickly covered with paint and varnish to make it look like oak ; the shield and bands bearing the mottoes were repainted about four years ago, but the colouring is not quite correct. These arms were obtained in 1660, upon the Restoration of Charles II., it would appear in accordance with the order of the Council that the Royal Arms should be set up in all churches throughout the kingdom (vide Bloxam's Goth. Arch., page 456). The following is the entry in the churchwardens' accounts for that year, given by Dunstan — Pd to Mr. Cartwright for carving ye King's Armes £ s. d. in ye Church - - - - - - - 06 00 00 Pd to the panter, Mr. Wright of Limehouse, for gilding the King's Armes in ye Church - - 03 00 00 They were set up on the west wall of the old parish church, near the belfry, but were removed in 181S, owing to the erection of the children's gallery, and placed against the south wall opposite the church door (see page 3). In 1833 they were placed in the boys' school in Priory-street, and there remained undl the closing of 29 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. the school, through the falling in of the lease, September, 1889. Owing to the unusually large size of the Royal Arms (7 feet by 8 feet), the ^■icar of the parish, the Rev. G. A. M. How, found the greatest difficulty in securing a suitable home for their re-erection, and at last even caused them to be advertised for sale in the newspapers. Mr. W. G. Clutterbuck, headmaster of the national schools, pleaded for their retention in the parish, and for want of a better site suggested the soudi wall of the Good Shepherd's Mission Hall, where they are now fixed. BlIiLIOGRArniCAL RKFKREN'CES. M. H. Bloxani, Gothic Archttecfitre (Svo, London, 1859), pages 456, 457. J. Dunstan, History of Bromley, page 83. In the Committee's IMS. collection is — (i) Photograph of the arms. •o BROMLEY-BY'BOW. XIT.-HOUSE ON BROMLEY WHARF, THREE MILLS LANE. Ground Landlord, Leaseholders, &c. Messrs. S. Tudor and Sons arc the present leaseholders, and have oil wharves and warehouses on the eround. o General description and date of structure. The house stands on the south side of Three Mills-lane at its eastern end, about lOO yards back from the road and 20 yards from the river Lea ; it is used partly for the offices of the Oil Company, and partly as residence for their staff. In plan it is square, each side being about 40 feet long. The exterior is partly rough cast and pardy bricks, and the windows have sliding sashes of iSth century date. The principal entrance is on the west side. Inside very little remains of earlier date than the i8th century. The carcase of the house is, however, much older, the arrangement of the rooms, chimney stacks, hall and stairs, &c., being exacdy the same as in Tudor House, and probably of the same period. The outside walls were formerly of timber framing, on a brick basement, lathed and rough cast outside, and panelled inside. The eastern front, facing the river, and one half of each of the north and south fronts adjoining it. were rebuilt in brickwork towards the end of last century, and two bay windows added on the south side. The kitchen retains on its walls some panelling that appears to be earlier than the 1 8th century in date. Several of the rooms on the ground and upper floors are panelled with woodwork of late 17th and 18th century date, and contain some good fireplaces of the Adams period. There are also on the first floor on the north and south sides of the house adjoining the bedrooms, powder closets similar to those in Tudor House and Essex House, 401, Mile-end-road, E. Some parts of the attics are fitted up with remains of panelling of various dates. The grounds were originally of considerable extent, but are now cut up and covered by several factories and wharves. There is a long narrow pond remaining on the south side of the house and at right angles to the river, with which it formerly communicated ; this, it is thought, may be part of a moat which at one time sur- rounded the house. There is also said to be an underground passage leading from the house in a north-westerly direction, but search, accompanied by occasional excavation, have so far been unsuccessful in uncovering any portions of it. 31 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Historical notes. Nil. Bibliographical REFERE^fcES. Nil. In the Committee's MS. collection are — *(i) A view of the house from the south-west (water colour). (2) Details of the arch across hall (water colour). * That marked with an asterisk is reproduced here. 32 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. XIII.-THE OLD PALACE OF BROMLEY. Ground Landlord, Leaseholders, &c. The London School Board. General description and date of structure. The house was designed on a rectangular plan similar to Hardwicke and Montacute, with corner towers on the principal front, which faced to the east. It stood on the eastern side of the grounds, facing St. Leonard's-street. On the south side of the house were a few later additions. The stables and offices, which were built round a quadrangle in plan, stood a litde to the south of the building, adjoining St. Leonard's-street. The house was mainly of two periods, early James I. (1606) and late i8th century, c. 1750. It also contained oak panelling and fitments of the time of Charles II. or James II. The stable buildings belonged apparendy to this period. To the first or Jacobean period belonged the whole structure of the house, the floors, walls, ceilings, roofs, and most of the chimney stacks. The walls were of red brick, and though the older windows had been replaced by the sash windows of the second or middle i8th century period, there was sufficient evidence to point to their earlier condition, viz., large moulded wood mullions and transomes with square lights and in other parts angle bays shaped with moulded red bricks ; these angle bays had also moulded brick cornices with string courses and bases. A great many of the moulded bricks which formed part of the mullions, angles, string courses, &c., of these windows, were built up again in the walls, when these windows were replaced by the .sliding sashes. Many parts of the original massive oak window frames were also discovered built up in the walls, over fire-place openings, when these were reduced in width, and in the pyramidal roofs of the towers, which were also altered in the same period. One of the old mullioned windows was discovered in situ in the pulling down, at the south side of the house. On the face of the chimney-stack on the south_side was a stone, set in a panel, with moulded brick dentils round, bearing the date Anno 1606, incised in the stone, the figures being run with lead (see plate 27). The whole of the eastern face of the building, with the towers, was re-fronted in the i8th century, the sash frames, large wood moulded ^and blocked eaves cornice, and flat narrow bands of brickwork being substituted for the original architectural features. The west front was also treated in a similar manner, being subsequendy cemented all over. Instead of the eaves cornice, however, a flat brick parapet was placed along the top of the wall. Within there were some 24 rooms of greater or less interest. The best of 33 ["•'>• "3 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. these was the large state room on the ground floor, of which the walls were covered with beautifully moulded oak panelling, with carved pilasters at intervals, and at the ceiling level a richly ornamented wood frieze with carved arabesque panels, modillions, and cornice. A great feature in the room was the richly moulded and panelled plaster ceiling, planned on a pattern of intersecting squares, with beautifully modelled and enriched pendants hanging from the point of intersection of the ribs, and circular panels with the heads of Alexander, Hector, and Joshua (dux), modelled in mezzo relievo. The central panel in the whole ceiling contained the shield of James I., bearing quarterly, ist and 4th the arms of England and France quartered \ 2nd, Scotland ; 3rd, Ireland ; encircled by the garter with motto, HOMI • SOIT • QVI . MAL • Y • PEI/ISE • at the sides the letters I.R., and crown over. The same shield, with the garter and crown, but without the initials, was also carved on the panel of the great oak chimney piece. The whole of this room with its ceiling was, owing to the inter- vention of certain members of the Sur\?ey Committee, saved from destruction, and is at present at the South Kensington Museum. In addition to this ceiling there were two others, one on the ground floor (see plan, plate 20), and the third — the finest of the three — in the room above the state room, on the upper floor (see plan, plate 21). That on the ground floor was complete, and treated similarly to that in the state room, being also planned on a pattern of intersecting squares, richly moulded, with ornamentation along the ribs and in the panels. The ceiling of the room on the upper floor, that over the state room, which has been destroyed, was by a master hand, and suggested the treatment of some of the famous ceilings at Audley-end. Only a third of it remained, however, the rest having been removed, possibly in the past century, and owing to some accident, as care appeared to have been taken to preserve what was left. When entire it consisted of six circles, about 10 feet in diameter, three along and two across the room, touching each other and the walls. These were intersected by other circles and quatrefoils. The ribs were ornamented with a running design of leaves, with various fruits, wood nuts, &c. At the intersections of the ribs were grotesque heads, surrounded with wreaths of flowers. The panels were ornamented with various designs, pomegranates, shell ornaments and others. The ceilings of these rooms had been very thickly coated with various relays of whitewash, but the delicacy of the work was easily discovered when it was scraped off. It is interesting to note that the circular panels of the ceiling of the north- west room on the ground floor contained smaller circular ornamental panels of exactly the .same design and detail as those of the ceilinof in Sir Paul Pindar's house in 34 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Bishopsgate, now in the South Kensington Museum (see drawing in Roland Paul's "Vanishing London," 1893). This circumstance is noteworthy, as there were only six years between the dates of the two buildings, and the ceilings may therefore have been by the same hand. There were also two modelled plaster friezes of the 1606 date left round the top of the walls of the north-west rooms of ground and first floors. The design of that in the lower room, which was separated from the ceiling by a small ogee plaster cornice, was of severe scroll leaves of acanthus character, with shell ornaments alternately reversed, boldly modelled. The frieze in the upper room was of the more usual Elizabethan strapwork scroll, with a beautiful pattern of interlacing stems with various fruits and flowers, and much more delicate in feeling and execution. Both these friezes were complete, and extended all round the rooms, although hidden by the i8th century panelling, which covered the walls from floor to ceiling. There were also the remains of another frieze, the narrowest of the three, over the fireplace of the room over the state room, and partly hidden by the later chimneypiece. This was of scroll pattern, ornamented with honeysuckles, pinks, and other details. Of the carved stone fireplaces, oak panelling and dadoes, and other details of the Jacobean period, there were a great many still left in the palace. In the upper room on the west side, which was wainscoted with panelling of the middle 18th century period, were two beautiful mantelpieces: one, in wood, of the Charles II. time, and another, in stone, of the 1606 period, well carved and delicately coloured and gilded, which was discovered underneath the later one. There were also similar carved stone mantelpieces of the same date in the north-west rooms of the ground and upper floors. That in the bottom room had a frieze ornamented with vine leaves and scrolls, and a shield in the centre, which, so far as could be seen, bore no heraldic charges. The fireplace in the upper room had a frieze ornamented with scrolls and dolphin heads. Several of the original solid oak door frames, with moulded sides and ornamental stops at bottom were also left in various parts of the house, and are noted on the plan. One of these, which had a semicircular arch at the top, and stood at g on the ground plan, is now preserved at South Kensington Museum. The interior i8th century work had also much that was beautiful. It would seem that in about 1750 the Palace had been converted into two houses, probablj- residences for city merchants, of whom many lived in this parish at the time (witness the tombstones in Bromley churchyard, and the church registers, see page 11). The underground passage, about which local tradition had many tales to tell, was proved to exist during the work of demolition. It was of Tudor four-centred arch form, about five feet in width and heiofht. Startingf from the cellar outside the north tower, it ran northwards for a short distance, but had been blocked up in several places. 35 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Built into the lower part of the west wall, at the north corner, was a piece of Purbeck marble, with carved cinque-foiled head of 15th century date carved on it. This might seem to indicate that the house was built in part from the remains of the old Nunnery of Bromley St. Leonard's, the " Convent of Stratford atte Bowe " of Chaucer's Prioress' Tale, on the site of which is now the parish church of St. Mary (see pages 1 1-12). There were also discovered, built into blocked-up window openings and other places, parts of bay window angles, mullions, string courses, and plinth in moulded red bricks, that may either have been brought from the nunnery as above stated, or possibly have formed part of the original design of the palace before the alterations of the 1 8th century period. \ Condition of repair. The palace was demolished by the London School Board at the beginning of the compilation of this register. On the eve of its destruction the house was in admirable repair, the timbers perfect, the fitments and interior panelling for the most part preserved. The early Jacobean stone carving on the mantelpieces was still crisp and new, and the plaster work of the ceilings of much thickness and sound consistency. The original oak staircase in the southern part of the house, with its massive moulded newels, handrails, and balusters was also in perfect preservation. Historical notes. Tradition and evidence. — According to tradition the old palace is connected with the name of King James I. The king is supposed to have founded a settlement in the parish early in the 17th century of persons mainly of Scotch nationality, and at the same time built this house as an occasional residence or hunting lodge for himself. Though there is no record of this in the parish histories it appears to be borne out by various pieces of evidence : — (i.) The arms, mottoes, crest and initials of James I. were placed in the centre of the ceiling and over the fireplace of the state room, now in the South Kensington Museum, (ii.) Mrs. Papineau, who lived in the southern part of the palace from 1S59 to 1S73, states that there was a large medallion of James I. and his wife, Anne of Denmark, on the fireplace in the room above the state room, (iii.) The Manor of Bromley was in the possession of the Crown at or about the time of the erection of the building (see pages 15 and 16), although there does not appear to be any record of the house among the surveyor's accounts of the period of its building preserved in the Record Office. The rolls of Andrew Kerwyn, paymaster of the works on the royal castles and residences for 1605 — 1607, include in all nineteen buildings, but the house is not mentioned therein as being in course of erection or under repair; neither is it included in the same rolls in the allowances for alterations and repairs to the various houses used by the king and court while on progress. The following piece of evidence, however, would seem to account for the omission, (iv.) Among the domestic state papers in the Record Office is a recommendation from the Council to the king, that certain lands and tenements in Bromley be granted to Sir Arthur Ingram. Although the old palace is not particularly mentioned, it is probable that the grant includes it. The date is given as March, 1617, and is as follows: — " Mate it please your Excellent Ma^}f Accordinge to yo' highnes good pleafiire fignified by S>' Robert Naunton ivee have confidered of S'' Arthur Ingram /lis fieticon, Andfnd tliat there was paid unto yo'' Ma^'f for the tithes in the peticon mentioned p. ann. vi I xvj the laft of December 1613 tlie fome of xlix'- xit^ And likeviife that the f aid Tithes viere formerly pajfed by yo'' Ma^'J in ffee farme to ffrancis Morice 36 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. and ffrancis philips the xxv*^' of September in the vi/^' yere o/ya'' happie raigne of En gland as pte of a value of 5000/ p. ann. and compounded for by 5'*' William Rider & S*" Walter Cope knights and others And touchinge the Tenevit^ and lands now defired to be paffed by Si" Arthur Ingram, wee find they are pcell of the Manno'' of Bromley w'^" came to the Crowne by exchange from S*" Raph Sadler knight and the pels p. ann. viijl. viijs. ivd. were leafed by the f aid Sadler for 99 years before the exchange of w'^^' terme there is :ig yeres yet to come and of pt. of the fame p. ann- ■vl. vjs. ■viijd. there is a leafe in Revfion for xxj yeres after the expiration of the former leafe And the other pels defired to pajfe are Copiholdt of Inheritance, and are of the yerely rent of xxtj^ vttj" The premiffes defired to be paffed exceede the value of the Tithes to be surrendered p. ann. Ixip ffor ■u'<^'' if S'' Arthur pay vnto yo'' Ma{'f the fome of one hundred df twentie pounds the eftates and values being conjidered, In our opinion he giveth yo^ highnes the full worth of the fame, w^h .^gg j^^ue thought fitt to certifie vnto yo^ Ma^}^ and w^^all we liaue caufed a bill to be prepared of a graunte of the pmiffes in ffee farme readye for yo^ Md^^ signature, and humblye leave the same toyo^ highnes gratious pleafure " Fr. Bacon Tho. Lake T. Stiff olke Jul. Cafar Pembroke. Dunstan, History of Bromley, and Ford, Account of Bow and its neighbourhood, &c., are the only writers who mention the house, and Dunstan's statements and inferences arc quite inaccurate and mis- leading. He only exhibits ignorance of existing work, and carelessness in study of the records when, passing on from describing the arms of Charles II., formerly fixed in the Church, but now in the Good Shepherd's Mission Hall (see page 29), he says :— "And hence (to the loyalists /Jt'OT/i. Charles II.) may be inferred the origin of those arms at present to be seen in the drawing room of a large brick house near the Church, which has been for nearly the past 50 years occupied as a boarding and day school. On account of which arms being found there it has been fondly imagined that it was originally a royal palace, and hence of late years it has assumed the distinctive appellation of the ' Palace House School.' We will not stop to enquire into the numerous fanciful tales related concerning this house, but It is sufficient to say that they have not the least foundation in authentic history." Ford refers to the house in the following manner: — Great James the First, that sapient King Whose praises I delight to sing; Ironically I mean. For he was treacherous, mean, and base. And seeking High and Mighty place, Forsook his Mother Queen : — But let him have been what he may. He lived at Bromley in his day : His hunting seat remains : And some apartments there you'll find, Most rich examples of their kind. Will pay you for your pains. Outside there's nothing now, to show The house was built so long ago : But inside you will see, The pendant ceiling, pannei'd wall. Rich chimnies. Royal arms, and all Just as it used to be. Then all was country around, The Forest near — then open ground With Stebonheath close by. And hunting was the favourite sport. Of James the first, and all his court : To make the hours fly. BROMLEY-BY-BOW. Lysons states that the manor house of the upper manor, in which the old palace was situated, was built by Sir John Jacob in the reig^n of Charles I. (see page 15), and as there is no mention of a previous manor house it may be assumed that the palace, even if were not what tradition states, was used as the manor house for the first 30 years or so of its existence. Authorship. — It is evident that the palace was, both in planning and the ornamental details, the work of a master hand — possibly of John Thorpe. We know that he designed at least two buildings about this time in the neighbourhood, Charlton House, near Greenwich, built about 161 2, by Sir Adam Newton, tutor to Henry, Prince of Wales (Richardson), and Kirby Castle, Bethnal Green, built for John Kirby, citizen of London (Gwilt). The former, which is still perfect, has many strong points of resemblance to the old palace before the iSth century alterations : the square towers flanking the entrance front, but carried a storey higher than the parapet of roofs, with a lead cupola on top; the roofs are hipped at the ends as in the old palace, and have carved stone balustrades; in the old palace these had been replaced by a large moulded wood cornice on the east facade, and a brick parapet, cemented over on the west. There were also sufficient remains of oak and brick mullioned bay windows, moulded brick string courses and plinths, to show that the general character of the work was, on a rather smaller scale, the same as Charlton House. The internal planning and arrangement of rooms was very similar to many of the plans in J. Thorpe's book of sketches. Ceilings. — In addition to the points before mentioned, some of the details of the ceilings are exactly the same as in the buildings noted below. The planning of the two ceilings in the ground floor rooms appears to have been common; several of each type are illustrated by Gotch, Malcolm, and others. Balcarres House, P'ife, N.B. (built temp. James VI., Scotland), has a ceiling in the " Panel Room " of the same design as that in the state room, with circular panels containing heads of Alexander, Hector and Joshua, apparently cast from the same moulds as those in the state room ceiling, but without the cherubs' heads and wings. Lord Balcarres, writing to the Chairman of the Survey Committee on this point, says : "We have no building records of Balcarres House. The type of ceiling is by no means uncommon here- abouts. It is always said this work (throughout Scotland) was done by Italians. I believe it can be shown that a great deal was done by Scotsmen who Italianized their names; as our singers do." " The Workmen's Home," Bow-road, E., a large building of early 17th century date, contains a ceiling in the large room on the first floor of the same design as that in the north-west room of the palace, though the details are much plainer and of different character, except that the cherubs' heads are repeated as in the state room ceiling. This is supposed to be the house in which Lord Sheffield, who lived in Bow in 1612, resided. (See Brewer's Beauties of England and Wales, vol. x., part iv., page 285.) Sir Paul Pindar's house, Bishopsgate, had a ceiling of the same design as that in the state room. In another ceiling, part of which is preserved in the South Kensington Museum, was a panel exactly similar, except in the central part, to one of those in the room in north-west comer of the old palace. Chestnut House, Old Ford-road, Bow, a small building of late 1 8th century date, contains several fireplaces and overmantels, in stone, marble and oak, of the same date as the old palace. In one, at present the kitchen fireplace, are carved on the stone frieze dolphins' heads and foliage very similar to those on the fireplace in the north-west room on the first floor of the palace. In another, a carved oak, overmantel, now fixed in the wall of drawing room, are carved heads treated in the same way as those shown in the lithograph plate at the intersection of the ribs of first floor ceiling. These, together with the fact that Chestnut House was evidently built about the time of the remodelling of the palace, suggest that they were removed here from the latter building. Later History and Demolition. — The house for about a century after being divided up was used as a boarding school and sometimes as residences. Among the residents was the painter, Mr. Woodin, whose son, the actor, and author of Olio of Oddities, also lived for some years in the " Manor House," Brunswick-road (see page 19). In 1874 the property came into the possession of Messrs. Hemingway, by purchase from G. G. Rutty, who established a colour works on the ground floor, and used the state room as a store, the northern part of the house being used as a club, and then a lodging house. Messrs. Hemingway, at the end of 1893, sold the property to the London School Board for the purpose of pulling down the house and erecting a Board School on the site, and the buildings were then sold again to a firm of house breakers for ;^25o. I'pon protests being made by members of the Survey Committee .38 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. and other societies interested in the matter, the Board decided to buy back again the fireplace in the state room for ;^I50, and replace it in one of the rooms of the new school. Meanwhile the authorities of South Kensington Museum had purchased the panelling and ceiling of the room and removed them to the Museum ; the fireplace was therefore purchased again from the School Board, and the whole room temporarily set up in its present position. So far as can be traced, the fittings, carved wood, stone, and plaster were disposed of in the following manner — The whole of the state room and an arched oak doorway from hall, to South Kensington Museum. All the remaining fireplaces of 1606 date, the oak panelling, balusters, newels and handrails of the main stairs, to a dealer in Brompton-road. The two 1 8th century fireplaces, some Adams grates, the circular cupboard shown on ground plan (plate 20), and various cornice mouldings, to the Magpie and Stump House, Cheyne- walk, Chelsea. The remains of the ceilings of north-west room on ground floor, and room on first floor above state room, the three plaster friezes, the parts of original oak mullioned windows, the moulded bricks, and carved Purbeck marble to Mr. Ernest Godman, of Bromlej-by-Bow. Bibliographical references. Ernest Godman, The Old Palace of Bromley-hy-Boiv, 1900, published by the Survey Committee in the series of tnonographs of famous London buildings, where the house is fully illustrated by plans and drawings, together with details of the plasterwork, panelling, and carving. J. Dunstan, History of Bromley, 1862, page 84, whose account of the house is, however, not trustworthy. Roland Paul, Vanishing London, 1893, where a drawing of the fireplace and panelling in the state room is given. C. K. Ashbee, Chapters in Workshop Reconstruction and Citizenship, 1894, pages 18-19, where the facts of the sale of the house b)' the London School Board are given. The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, London, Annual Report, 1894, contains the protest made by the Society to the London School Board against the destruction of the palace, and the reply of the Board thereto, together with a number of facts as to the great historic and artistic interest of the building. Daily Graphic, December 15th, 1898, where an illustration b)' H. W. Brewer, of the room as set up in the South Kensington Museum, and a note on the history of Bromley manors, are given. The Artist, No. 204, December, l8g6, which has a photograph of the fireplace of state room. The Builders' fournal. No. 247, November, ist, 1899, which has a photograph of part of ceiling of north-west room, ground floor. Public Record Office,State Papers, Domestic, James I., vol. XC, 129. Public Record Office, The Declaracon of Thaccompte of Andrewe Kerivyn gent Paymafter of the vioorkes donne vppon the Tower of London and all other his highnes Honnors Ciiftles and Mannor Houfes vsually rcfervedfor his Ma'f_ repaire and aboade. [Pipe Office, Declared Accounts, Works and Buildings, 1605-6, 1606-7.] Some Account of the Antiquities of Bow, Middlesex, and its immediate neighiourhood, by an old inhabitant of Bow (W. Ford). Printed at Bow, 8vo., 1853. Encyclopcediu of Architecture, by Joseph Gwilt, 1842 edition. Articles on Elizabethan and Jacobean Architecture. C. J. Richardson, volume of tracings of John Thorpe's Sketch Book, in South Kensington Museum (Art Library). Architecture of Renaissance in England, J. A. Gotch, fo. London, i8gi. South Kensington Museum, Photographs of ceilings and panelling (Art Library). There are also articles and letters relating to the history and protests against the destruction of the building in various London and local newspapers from December, 1893, to March, 1894. 39 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. In the Committee's MS. collection are — *(l.) Plan of ground floor (measured drawing). *(2.) Plan of first floor (measured drawing). (3.) Plan showing the old Palace, with " Seven Stars " public-house and houses adjoining on the north side (measured drawing). (4.) Plan showing position of Board School in relation to site of Old Palace (measured drawing). (5.) View from north-east (line drawing). (6.) View of east front and " Seven Stars " public-house adjoining (water colour). (7.) View of south front (line drawing). (8.) East front (measured drawing). *(9.) Section looking south (measured drawing). •(10.) Fireplace in state room, as re-erected in South Kensington Museum (photo). *(ll-l2.) Details of carving on fireplace (2 photos). *(i3.) Details of upper part of fireplace (2 photos). (14.) Fireplace in north-west room, first floor (measured drawing). (15.) View along roof, looking north (line drawing). (16.) Painting on outside brickwork, south side (pencil drawing). (17.) Oak doorway, ground floor (measured drawing). *(!8.) Date tablet on south side of house (measured drawing). (19.) Plan of modelled plaster ceiling, first floor (measured drawing). *(20-23.) Details of modelled plaster from ceilings — panels, ornaments on ribs, and friezes (4 lithographs). (24.) Circular panel in ceiling of north-west room, ground floor (line drawing). (25.) View of main staircase (line drawing). (26.) View from south-east, showing house and stables (line drawing). (27.) Plan of ceiling of state room, now in South Kensington Museum (line drawing). (28.) Details of rib and centre panel, ceiling in state room (line drawing). * Those marked with asterisk are reproduced here. 40 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. XIV.-" SEVEN STARS" PUBLIC-HOUSE. (at the corner of High-street and St. Leonard's-street). Ground Landlord, Leaseholders, &c. Messrs. Taylor, Walker and Co., brewers, are the owners of the premises. General description and date of structure. In plan the building is roughly of a T-shape, the oldest part being that portion corresponding with the transverse bar of the letter, which adjoins the High-street. It is about fifty-three feet in length and eighteen in width. The walls are entirely of timber construction, the lower walls standing on a basement of red bricks, the upper storey overhanging on the north side, and gabled at the east and west end.s. In date it evidently belongs to the very early part of the 17th century, the same date as the Old Palace, as there are moulded beams, mullions, &c., of the same character as in the Old Palace. The remaining portions of the building, which are contained in the stem of the T, are of various materials, mo.sdy red bricks, and of later dates, and extend from the south side of the house to the north wall of the Old Palace. .Structurally, the older part of the house is of considerable interest. The walls consist of large oak beams, nearly a foot square, framed together and tenoned into each other, and placed verdcally at intervals of about eight feet ; in the inter- vening spaces are smaller upright studs, also of oak, from four to six inches in width, tenoned into the larger beams. The upper storey overhangs the lower on the north side about two feet ; this lower storey rests on a foundation of bricks carried up about two feet above the ground level. The filling in between the timbers in the external walls was done in the manner usual at the period — i.e., the spaces were lathed with stout oak laths, and plastered on the outside. At the back of the laths was placed a layer of clay, mixed with chopped straw, about \\ inches thick ; this again was plastered on the inside. The timber framing was therefore visible both on the outside and inside of the building, and still remains so in the upper rooms. The lower rooms have been again lathed on the inside at some later period, and plastered so as to bring the walls to an even surface. The whole of the timber construction of the ground storey is also left intact. At the north-east corner and in the centre of the north side are the two original entrance doorways. Both have large oak door-posts, each about a foot square, which are ovolo-moulded on the outer edges down to the level of the brick plinth. The 41 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. transomes also are well moulded, and are similar in design to those of the original wood mullioned windows of the Old Palace adjoining. A noticeable thing about the large brick chimney stacks also is that they are carried up inside the house, adjoining the timber walls, but entirely mdcpcndent of them, they are, therefore, not visible from the outside. The fireplace openings on the ground floor are about 7 feet 6 inches in width, and have proportionately large flues. That in the taproom was doubtless the old kitchen fireplace, and has not been reduced in width. The other has been blocked up to about one-third of its original size. Between these fireplaces are the stairs, winding round a central newel ; on the staircase is one of the original oak window frames, with moulded mullions. At some time towards the end of the last century the whole of the exterior walls were covered with weather boarding, thus totally hiding and destroying the effect of the original timber framing ; the wood mullioned windows were also replaced by sash windows. The houses adjoining on the west side, facing High- street, which are in date and construction similar to the " Seven Stars," were also treated in the same manner. Condition of repair. The house is in excellent structural repair ; the old oak framing undecayed and firm as when first built. Historical notes. Nothing definite is known as to the actual date of the building, although, according to local tradition, it is several centuries old. It is stated that by means of a deed, or record on vellum, now preserved at the " Ship Inn," Rochford, Essex, by a former proprietor of the " Seven Stars," it is possible to trace it back certainly for 300 years, and that it was at that period used as a Freemasons' lodge. There is also another local tradition, which seems reasonable, that this house, together with those adjoining on the west side, and extending to Edgar-road (Nos. 62 to go), were built in 1606 at the same time as the Old Palace, for the servants' and retainers' dwellings, domestic offices and outhouses. The " Seven Stars " is now (September, 1895) being pulled down to make room for a larger building, but the adjoining houses are for the most part still intact. Bibliographical references. J. Dunstan, History of Bromley, 1862, mentions the house, and gives a view of the Broadway in the year 1840, where it is shown. See also pages 14, 22. Ernest Godman (The Old Palace of Bromley -hy-Bow, 1900), where further illustrations and plans are given, showing more fully the relation of the " Seven Stars" and houses adjoining to the Old Palace. In the Committee's MS. collection are — (i.) Ground plan of the house. (2.) Interior view, first floor, during demolition. (3.) Views of the exterior from High-street and St. Leonard's-slrcct. (4.) View of the backs of all the houses facing the High-street and adjoining the Old Palace. (5.) Plan of this and the adjoining houses in High-street, showing their relation to the Old Palace. 42 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. XV.-SOME SMALLER HOUSES AND BUILDINGS OF INTEREST, EITHER AT PRESENT STANDING IN BROMLEY, OR DEMOLISHED DURING THE COM PILATION OF THIS REGISTER. HOUSES IN HIGH STREET. The house on the west side of the Vicarage (No. 95) is probably of middle 1 8th century date. The plan is square, and the front has red brick window facings and strings. In the centre, on the ground floor was the principal entrance, over the door was a canopy with fine carved scroll brackets ; this was removed some six years ago, when the house was bought by Messrs. Edie, founders, whose works adjoin, and a window made in its place. The interior is spoiled, the panelled room, capacious cupboards and fine staircase having suffered greatly from the alteration. In the Committee's MS. collection are — A view of the house from High-street. ASHMORE TERRACE, Nos. loi to 105. The Ashmore-terrace houses are of the later i8th century. The doorways are of wood, with pilasters at sides and cornice over the top. The wrought iron entrance gates and railings, though of no great note, are the only examples remaining now in Bromley. The fronts of these houses facing High-street are of brick, but the backs are weather-boarded. In the Committee's MS. collection are — (l.) General view of the houses from the street. (2.) Details of the porches. (3.) Drawings of the iron gates and railings. No. 45, HIGH STREET. On the north side, at the corner of Baker's-alley, was an interesting building of middle 17th century date. It had a long low elevation, 40 feet wide, and two 43 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. stories (with attics) in height. The walls were of dull red bricks, with lighter colour for the window jambs, arches, &c. At the eaves was a large moulded wood cornice. The entrance door in the centre of the front had a flat canopy, with carved oak acanthus scroll brackets. The windows had sliding sash lights, with a mullion in the centre : they evidently were of much different form originally, and extended nearly the whole width of the front. The sashes of the attic windows still preserved the original leaded lights. Internally, nearly all the fittings that were movable {e.g., stair balusters, rails, &c.) had disappeared, most probably for firewood. Only one feature of interest still remained : one of the circular cupboards, in a room on the ground floor. The house disappeared at the beginning of 1896 to make room for a block of cottages. In the Committee's MS. collkction are — (i.) A block plan of the house and ground. (2.) A drawing of the front facing High-street. Nos. 2 to 18, HIGH STREET. These houses stand at the west end of the High-street, between Devons-road and Bow- road, and are of 17th and i8th century date. No 2 has a long low elevation, with weather-boarded upper storey. No. 4 has a gabled and weather-boarded front, and is illustrated in plate 34. The remaining houses are all small, with brick fronts, mullioned and sash windows, and some have interesting bits of detail in canopies and doors. The grouping of the whole block is very picturesque. In the Committee's MS. collection are — *(l.) View looking north-west. *(2.) View from north-east. *(3.) East front, No. 4. * These are all reproduced here. 44 BROMLEY-BY-BOW. XVI.-Nos. 122 to 128, ST. LEONARD'S STREET. General description and date of structure. These houses were situated on the west side of the street, between the post office and the Limehouse-cut (the site now occupied by the Poplar Casual Ward). The houses, with the exception of No. 124, belonged to the latter part of the 1 8th century. They were built of yellow bricks, and had plain square sash windows; the doors had small wood canopies over. The central house (No. 124) was by far the finest. It was rectangular in plan, and dated from the early part of last century. The front was of grey and red bricks. At the eaves was a large projecting wood cornice ; the roof was sharply pitched and tiled, and had five dormers in the front. The entrance doorway, in the centre of the front, had a wood canopy supported by moulded brackets. The interior panelling and fitments were almost intact. The staircase was of fine design, and had large turned balusters and moulded handrails. Nearly all the rooms were panelled with woodwork of late i8th century date. One cupboard on the ground floor was panelled round with small moulded panelling of early 1 7th century date, similar in detail to that in the Old Palace. Condition of repair. The houses, though internally in a very dirty condition, appeared to be structurally sound. They were demolished during the compilation of the register. In the Committee's MS. collection are- (i.) General view from the south-east. (2.) Views from the garden. (3.) Detail of the panelling. 45 INDEX. Adam (Robert), work of, i6a, Brook-street good specimen of mantelpieces in drawing- room and dining room of St. Mary's Vicarage fireplaces in house on Bromley Wharf Adam-street, Adelphi, destroyed in part ... Aldgate pump, eastern point of area marked out by Committee for their survey Altar tablets in St. Andrew's, Gurley-street Amy (William), reference to, on Roberts' monu- ment in St. Mary's Church Ancient Buildings, Society for the Protection of, representative of, at conference convened by London County Council Bow Church, recently restored by annual report, 1894, reference to Angel Inn, Ilford, destruction threatened Anne of Denmark, medallion of James I. and, in Old Palace Antiquaries, Society of, representative of, at conference convened by London County Council... Archseological (British) Association, representative of, at conference convened by London County Council... Archaeological Institute, Royal, representative of, at conference convened by London County Council... Architects (British), Royal Institute of, representa- tive of, at conference convened by London County Council Architectural Association, representative of, at Conference convened by London County Council... Armada heroes, records of, in Bromley Arms, Royal, in Good Shepherd's Mission Hall, Back-alley ... ... ... ... 3, Artist, TAc?, reference to Arts, Society of, representative of, at conference convened by London County Council Ashbee (C. R.), introduction by xiii reference to plan of, in Committee's MS. collection, for preserving the more important monuments in St. Mary's Churchyard Chapters in workshop reconstruction and citizenship, reference to .\shburnham House, Dover-street, destroyed Ashmore-lerrace, Nos. lol to 105 ... Audley-end, ceiling in Old Palace of Bromley similar to some of those at ... Austin Friars, Nos. 10 and IIA, destroyed Austin (John) of Brittins in the county of Essex, reference to, on Benson's monument in St. Mary's Church Avebury (Lord), see " Lubbock." 14 31 xviii xiii 28 in xxii 39 xxiii 36 111 xxxii 29, 30 39 iii -xxxvi 39 xix 43 34 xix Bacon (Fn), signature of, to deed granting certain lands to Sir Arthur Ingram ... ... ... 37 Baker's-alley, building at corner of ... ... 43 Balcarres House, Fife, reference to ceiling in the " Panel Room " at ... ... ... ... 22 contains ceiling similar to that in state room of Old Palace 38 Barking, Old Town Hall, destruction threatened xxiv Barnard's Inn, 17th century houses on south side of, destroyed ... ... ... ... ... xix Bearbinder-lane, Bow, " mistletoe in " ... ... xxix Bedford Estate, responsibility for care of historic buildings ... ... ... ... ... xxiv Bedford-square, many Adam interiors destroyed.. xix Bells in St. Mary's Church 3 Benedictine Nunnery, St. Mary's Old Church the chapel of ... ... ... ... ... 11 Benson (Sir William), monument in St. Mary's Church, 1712 ... ... ... ... ... 8-9 connection with Bromley Manor ... ... 16 connection with altar tablets in St. Andrew's, Gurley-street ... ... ... ... ... 28 Blackfriars Monastery, Ireland-yard, last portion destroyed ... ... ... ... ... xix Blind School, S.E., destruction threatened ... xxiii Bloxam's Gothic Architecture, reference to ... 29, 30 Bohun (Humfrey de), Earl of Hereford and Essex ... ... ... ... ... ... 4 Bohun (John de), buried in St. Mary's Church (Weever) ... ... ... ... ... 4 and wife, buried in the floor of the tower of St. Mary's in 1336 (Dunstan) ... ... 3 Boleyn Castle, Upton-park, destruction threatened xxiii suitable for local museum ... ... ... xxxi comparison of Bromley Hall with ... ... 17 underground passage from Bromley Hall to.. 18 Brasses in St. Mary's Church 3, 10 Brewer (H. W.), reference to illustration by, of state room of Old Palace 39 Brewer's Beauties of England and Wales, refer- ence to 12,16,18,27,28,38 Bridewell Hospital Burial Ground, destruction threatened xxiii Broadway, 1840, reference to view of, in Dunstan's History of Bromley ... ... ... ... 14, 42 Bromley Hall (The Manor House of the Lower Manor) 17-18 Bromley House, Manor House of Upper Manor, so called on Rocque's Map of London ... 15 Bromley Vestry Hall, built on site of Sir John Jolles' Almshouses ... ... ... ... 26 Bromley Wharf, house on, Three Mills-lane ... 31-32 Brompton-road, purchase of remnants of the Old Palace by dealer in 39 Brook-street, i6a, destruction threatened ... ... xxii 47 INDEX. PAGE. Builders' Journal, reference to ... ... ... 39 Bullingham House, Kensington, destroyed ... xix Burleigh (Lord), see " Cecil." Bury (George), reference to, on Jacob's monument in St. Mary's Church 6 Caesar (Jul.), signature of, to deed granting certain lands to Sir Arthur Ingram ... ... ... 37 Capper's House, Ley ton, destroyed ... ... xxi Carlyle's (Thomas) House in Cheyne-row, destruc- tion threatened ... ... ... ... xxii Cartwright (Mr.), reference to ... ... ... 2g Cass's School, Aldgate, destroyed ... ... ... xx "Catherine Wheel Inn," Bishopsgate, destroyed .\x Cecil (William, afterwards Lord Burleigh), con- nection with Bromley Lower Manor ... 18 Charity Commissioners, responsibility for care of historic buildings ... ... ... ... xxiv Charles I. receives grant of Bromley Manor ... 16 Charlton House, Greenwich, work of John Thorpe ... ... ... ... ... ... 38 Charlton (Richard), tomb in St. Mary's Church- yard u Chaucer, reference to St. Leonard's Nunnery in Canterbury Tales (" Nonne Prioresse") ... 3 Chelsea Hospital, destruction threatened ... ... xxii Chelsea Embankment, Garden of, destroyed ... xviii Chestnut House, Old Ford, destruction threatened xxiii contains fireplaces and overmantels of same date as some of those in the Old Palace ... 38 Christchurch Priory, connection with Bromley Manor 18 Christ's Hospital, destruction threatened ... ... xxii Church-row, Aldgate, destroyed ... ... ... xx Church-row, Hampstead, destroyed in part ... xix Churchyard Bottom Wood, Highgate, destruction threatened ... ... ... ... ... xxiii City Church Preservation Society, representative of, at conference convened by London County Council... ... ... ... ... ... iii City churches, several destroyed or threatened xviii, xxii Clement's Inn destroyed ... ... .. ... xix "Clifford (John), churchwarden, 1636," inscribed on one of St. Mary's three bells ... ... 3 Clutterbuck (W. G.), connection with coat of arms in Good Shepherd's Mission Hall, Back-alley ... ... ... ... ... -o Coat of arms in St. Mary's Church "Cock Tavern," Fleet-street, destroyed ... Coke (Sir Thomas), Giddea Hall, Romford by Cole (Rev. Mr.), Strawberry-hill, extract letter from Horace Walpole to Coleherne-court, Earl's-court, destroyed Coleman-street, No. 4, destroyed Conference convened by London County Council.. Cooper's Almshouses, Ratcliff, destroyed 3> 29.30 XX built xxiv from ii xix xix ncil.. XV xxi Cope (Sr Walter), connection with certain lands in Bromley Cotton (Sir Thomas) receives grant of St. Leonard's Priory for 21 years Cranbrook, Ilford, destruction threatened Cumberland House, Plaistow, destruction of Old Tithe Barn threatened Currie (Sir E. Hay), connection with Bromley Lower Manor ... Daily Graphic, reference to ... Dan (William), tomb in St. Mary's Churchyard... reference to drawing of tomb in Committee's MS. collection ... Dance, the j'ounger, facade of Newgate, one of the best works of ... Dick's Coffee House, No. 8, Fleet-street, destroyed Ditchfield (Edward), connection with Bromley Manor Drake (Sir Francis), house of, in the City, destroyed Drapers' Almshouses, Priscilla-road Dugdale, reference to Dunstan (James), altar tablets from chancel of St. Mary's Church rescued by ... History of Bromley, reference to 3, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 37, Duprie monument, the finest in St. Mary's Church- yard reference to drawings of, in Committee's MS. collection . Eastbury House, Barking, suitable for local museum East Greenwich, manor of, rectory and parish church of Bromley to be held of the East London Institute, Bromley Hall tenanted by deaconesses in connection with Ecclesiastical Commissioners, responsibility for care of historic buildings Edie (Messrs.), founders, owners of houses on west side of St. Mary's \"icarage Edmunson (John), inscription to Elizabeth, Queen, grants rectory and parish church of Bromley to Ric. Pickman and Ambrose Willoughby grants St. Leonard's Priory to Sir Thomas Cotton ... Emanuel Hospital, Westminster, destroyed Embankment garden, part of, threatened by West- minster Improvement Scheme Essex House, powder closets similar to those in house on Bromley Wharf Eyles (Sir John), present Giddea Hall, Romford, erected by Fairmead Hall, High-street, Stratford, destroyed Fernside, Wandsworth - common, destruction threatened 36 15 xxiii 18 39 13 xxii xix 16 XX 26-27 II 28 39. 42 II 13 xxxii 11-12 17 43 27 IS XX 31 xxiv xxi 48 INDEX. Ferrers (William), monument in St. Mary's Church, 1625 ... ... •■■•. ... 4 reference to drawings of monument in Com- mittee's MS. collei-tion connection with Bromley Lower Manor Figure-head in garden of Tudor House Fitzroy-square spoiled " Five Bells " public-house, St. Leonard's-street, description of ... Fleet-street (No. 17), destruction threatened acquisition of, by London County Council ... Font in St. Mary's Church ... Ford's Account of Boiu and neigliboiirhood, refer- ence to . . , Foster (Joseph), connection with Bromley Lower Manor ... Fraser and Fraser, Limited, house in works similar to No. 135, St. Leonard's-street Freemasons' Lodge, " Seven Stars " public-house formerly used as Gables (The), Wandsworth-common, destroyed ... Gad, tomb in St. Mary's Churchyard Gascoyne's Map of Stepney, 1703, reference to ... Gas Light and Coke Company, owners of kitchen garden of No. 135, St. Leonard's-street Giddea Hall, Romford, destruction threatened ... Gillham, tomb in St. Mary's Churchyard... Girton (W.), lessee of Drapers' Almshouses Chapel ... Godman (Ernest), some remnants of Old Palace now in possession of ... The Old Palace of Bromley-by-Bow, refer- ence to ... Golder's-hill Estate, Hampstead, destruction threatened Gomme (G. L.), preface by Good Shepherd's Mission Hall, Back -alley coat of arms originally in St. Mary's Old Church ... Gore (Mrs. Susanna), reference to, on Munden's monument in St. Mary's Church Gotch's Architecture of Renaissance in England, reference to Gough (Joan) leases St. Leonard's Priory from Sir Ralph Sadler Graham (Hector), tomb in St. Mary's Churchyard Great Desideratum Club House, Ilford, destruc- tion threatened Great Eastern Railway, daily transport of pas- sengers ... Great Mouse, Leyton, destruction threatened suitable for local museum " Greyhound Inn," West Ham, destroyed Grove Hall, Bow, destruction threatened ... Grove Hall, Woodford, destroyed ... Gwilt's Encyclopcedia of Architecture, reference to 5. II 12 18 22 XX 24 xxii xxxiii 12 37.39 18 42 xxi II 18 16 25 xxiv II 26 39 39-42 xxiii iii-v 29-30 38,39 XXX xxiii xxxi xxi xxiii xxi 8,39 Hallidaj' (Elizabeth), reference to, on Jacob's monument in St. Mary's Church Hammond (A. W.), present leaseholder of "Manor House" Hanover Chapel, Regent-street, destroyed Hardwicke, plan similar to that of the Old Palace of Bromley Hare-court. Temple, destroyed Hare Hall, Romford, destruction threatened Hare (Hugh and John), connection with Bromley Manor ... Hare family, connection with Bromley Lower Manor ... Harley House, Marylebone-road, destroyed Harrow-green, " a quiet country spot " H ay market Colonnades destroyed ... Hemingway (Messrs.), purchase of Old Palace by Henry H., founder of St. Leonard's Nunnery (Weever) Henry VHL grants site of St. Leonard's Nunnery to Sir Ralph Sadler grants Bromley Manor to Sir Ralph Sadler... grants Bromley Lower Manor to Richard Morrison Henry,Princeof Wales, Sir Adam Newton tutor to High-street, Bromley, houses in High-street, East Ham, 17th and iSth century houses in, destroyed ... High-street, Putney, Nos. 84 and 85, destroyed ... Home Field, Chiswick, destruction threatened ... How (Rev. G. A. M.), connection with coat of arms in Good Shepherd's Mission Hall, Back-alley Howson, tomb in St. Mary's Churchyard Huguenot refugees, records of, in Bromley 17th and iSth century monuments to, in St. Mary's Churchyard ... Hunter (Sir Robert), representative of National Trust at Conference convened by London County Council Ilford Hall, Ilford, destruction threatened Ingram (Sir Arthur), connection with Bromley Manor ... connection with Bromley Lower Manor as to granting of certain lands and tene- ments in Bromley to ... Inner Temple Gatehouse, destruction threatened... Ironmongers' Almshouses, Kingsland-road, de- struction threatened ... Ivy Lodge, Plaistow, destroyed Jacob (Sir John), monument in St. Mark's Church, 1629 '. reference to drawings of monument, in Com- mittee's MS. collection connection with Bromley Manor ... 15, Manor House of Upper Manor, built by PAGE. 6 19 XX 33 xix xxiv IS 18 XX xxix xviii 38 II II 15 18 38 43-44 xxi xxi xxiii 30 II xxxii 111 xxiii 15 36-37 xxii xxiii xxi 5-6 12 16, 18 38 49 INDEX. James I., grants rectory and parish church of Bromley to Francis Morrice and Francis Philips grants Bromley Manor to Francis Morrice and Francis Philips ... James 1., Scotch colony in Bromley founded by ... shield of, in Old Palace of Bromley ... connection with Old Palace ... and Anne of Denmark, medallion of, in Old Palace ... Jewel Tower, Westminster, destruction threatened xxi JoUes' (Sir John) Almshouses, Drapers' Alms- houses built on part of the site of ... Jossiline (Sir Ralph) grants Bromley Manor to St. Leonard's Con\ent Jukes, Coulson and Co., former owners of No. 135, St. Leonard's-street ... Kent Archaeological Society, representative of, at Conference convened by London County Council... Kerwyn (Andrew), paymaster of works, rolls of ... Kew-bridge destroyed King (T.). Report on Education in metropolitan division, reference to ... Kirby Castle, Bethnal-green, work of John Thorpe ... Kyrle Society, representative of , at Conference con- vened by London County Council ... Lake House, Wanstead, destruction threatened ... suitable for local museum Lake (The), signature of, to deed granting certain linds to Sir Arthur Ingram ... Latchmere allotments, Battersea, destruction threatened Laurence Pountney-hill, 13th century crypt in, destroyed Lea Hall, Leyton, destroyed Leasowes, Leyton, destroyed Leytonstone, "a rural Quaker retreat" Lincoln's-inn-fields, destruction threatened xxii, Lloyd ( — ), connection with Bromley Manor London and Middlesex Archaeological Society, representative of, at conference convened by London County Council London and Middle.sex, Bishop's Commissary of, proving of wills by ... London, Bishop of, St. Mary's Church exempt from jurisdiction of ... (William), founder of St. Leonard's nunnery (Tanner) London County Council, Register of Historic Buildings formed for use of ... General Powers Act, 1S98, section re historic buildings responsibility for care of historic buildings ... 15 22 34, 36 36 36 i, xxiv 26 15 25 HI 36 xxi 3S iii xxiii xxxi 37 xxiii xix xxi xxi xxix xxxiv 16 IV xxiv London County Council, purchase of Totter Down Meadows, Tooting Tudor House purchased by ... Tudor House destroyed by -acquisition of No. 17, Fleet-street London School Board, responsibility for care of historic buildings Old Palace of Bromley destroyed by ... 33, London, Tilbury and Southend Railway Company, goods depot on site of house of Adam's time owners of No. 135, St. Leonard's-street London Topographical Society, representative of, at Conference convened by London County Council ... Lubbock (Sir John), motion by, before London County Council Lyson's Environs, reference to 12, 15, 16, 18, 26, 27. ■ reference to special edition in Guildhall library Macintosh Estate, Bromley Hall part of ... Macintosh (Mrs.), owner of " Manor House," Brunswick-road " Magpie and Stump " House, Cheyne-walk, Chel- sea, some remnants of Old Palace now in ... Malcolm's Views of London, 1836, reference to 15, Mandeville (Geoffrey and William de), connection with Bromley Manor... Mann (William), connection with Bromley Manor " Manor House," Brunswick-road ... Manor House of the Upper Manor of Bromley ... Manor House, Woodford, destruction threatened... Manor of Bromley, account of Massachusetts, " reservations in " ... " Mears (T.), Londini, 1843," inscribed on two of St. Mary's three bells... Merchant Houses, Bow, destroyed... ■ • in the City, old, several destroyed Merchant Taylors' Company, lease of crypt in Laurence Pountney-hill Metropolitan Public Gardens Association, reference to plan of, for opening St. Mary's Church- yard as an open space Middlesex, Archdeacon of, churchwardens of St. Mary's sworn by Middlesex County Council, Pymme's-park, Ed- monton, saved by action of ... Mile-end and Whitechapel roads, half-timber houses in, many destroyed ... Mitre-square, Aldgate, destroyed Montacute, plan similar to that of the Old Palace of Bromley Morgan .(Henry), alias Wolf, owner of Bromley Manor in 1583... Morrice (Francis), rectory and parish church of Bromley granted to, by James I. ... • connection with Bromley Manor XXIV 21 xxvi xxxiii .xxiv 36,38 xvi 25 28,38 15 17 19 39 16,3s 18 16 19-23 15-16 xxiv 15-16 xxix 3 XX xix 13 12 xxiii XX XX 33 15 II IS. 3& 50 INDEX. PAGE. XXV Morris (William), reference to ... Morrison (Richard), connection with Bromley Lower Manor ... Munden (Sir Richard), monument in St. Mary's Church, 1680 ... Musee Plantin in Antwerp, reference to Museums, importance of, to community ... National Trust for Places of Historic or Natural Beauty, representative of, at conference con- vened by London County Council ... Naunton (Sr. Robert), mention in deed granting certain lands to Sir Arthur Ingram... Newcourt's Repertorium Ecclesiasticum Parochiale Londinensi, reference to Newgate, destruction threatened Newton (Sir Adam), Charlton House built by ... Newton (Sir Isaac), death at Bullingham House, Kensington threatened destruction of house of ... Northumberland House, Whitehall, entrance gate- way now in Tudor House Office of Works, responsibility for care of historic buildings "Old Bell Inn," destroyed Palace House School, recent name of Old Palace Palace of Bromley, the Old... site now occupied by Board School ... destroyed name practically lost ... resemblance to Manor House of the Upper Manor ... underground passage from Bromley Hall to said to have been built by James I.... same date as " Seven Stars " public-house. . cupboard on ground floor of No. 124, St. Leonard-street similar to that in .. Palestine-place, Bethnal-green, destroyed Papineau (Mrs.), residence in Old Palace Parishes, list of, in London, Middlesex and Essex included in Survey Committee's area ...xiii-xiv Parsloes, Dagenham, suitable for local museum ... xxxii Patrick, tomb in St. Mary's Churchyard ... ... 11 Paul's Vanisliing London, reference to ... ... 35,39 Pembroke, signature of, to deed granting certain lands to Sir Arthur Ingram... Pest House Common, Richmond, destruction threatened Philips (Francis), rectory and parish church of Bromley granted to, by James I. ... connection with Bromley Manor Pickman (Ric), rectory and parish church of Bromley granted to, by Queen Elizabeth ... Pindar (Sir Paul), house of, Bishopsgate, ceiling in Old Palace of Bromley similar to one in ... 34 Poplar Casual Ward, now occupying site of Nos. 122 to 128, St. Leonard's-street 18 9-10 xxxii xxxi 36 II, 12 xxii 38 xix xxii xxiv xix 37 33-40 xvi xviii xxxiii 15 18 22 41 45 XX 36 37 IS. 38 45 Priory-street boys' school, site of Manor House of the Upper Manor of Bromley ... ... 15 altar tablets and coat of arms from St. Mary's Church first housed in ... ... 28, 29 Public Record Office, references to papers in ... 39 Pymme's-park, Edmonton, destruction threatened xxiii suitable for local museum ... ... ... xxxi " Quag-lane," private road from Bromley Hall to Poplar 18 Railway companies, as to objects of archjeological interest excavated by... ... ... ... v Rancliffe House, East Ham, destruction threatened xxiv Ray House, Woodford, destruction threatened ... xxiv Rectory, Bow, destroyed ... ... ... ... xx Rectory Manor, Walthamstow, destruction threatened xxiv Registers, St. Mary's Church ... ... ... II Reynolds' (Sir Joshua) House in Leicester-square, destruction threatened ... ... ... xxii Richardson's John Thorpe's Sketch Book, reference to ... ... ... ... ... 38-39 Rider (Sr. William), connection with certain lands in Bromley ... ... ... ... ... 36 Roberts (Sir John), monument in St. Mary's Church, 1692 ... ... ... ... ... 6-8 St. Mary's curacy in the gift of ... ... 12 reference to photo of tomb of, in Committee's MS. collection 12 • connection of family with Bromley Manor ... 16 Rocque's Map of London, reference to 15, 16, 18, 22, 23 Rokeby House, Stratford, destroyed ... . xxi Rolls Chapel, destroyed xviii Roll (Henry), reference to, on Jacob's monument in St. Mary's Church... .. ... ... 6 Russell (Elias), monument, reference to photo of, in Committee's MS. collection ... ... 12 and Katherine, his wife, monument in St. Mary's Church lo Russell-square, spoiled by block buildings ... xx Rutty (G. G.), Tudor House held by trustees of ... 21 purchase of Old Palace by Messrs. Heming- way from ... ... ... ... ... 38 Sadler (Sir Ralph), site of St. Leonard's Nunnery granted to, by Henry VIII.... ... ... 11 connectiim with Bromley Manor ... ... 15, 37 St. Alban, Wood-street, now united with St. Michael, Wood-street ... ... ... .xviii St. Andrew's Mission Church, Gurley-street ... 28 • tablets originally in St. Mary's Old Church.. 3 St. Clement Danes Church, destruction threatened xxii St. Ethelburga, Bishopsgate, destruction threatened xxii St. Foix's A';f(? i/c' /"arii, reference to ... ... ii St. George, Botolph-lane, threatened under Union of Benefices Act xviii St. Laurence Jewry, now united with St. Michael Bassishaw xviii 51 INDEX. 45 25 24 22 XX !-i3 xxii 14 xxii xxii xxii St. Leonard's Convent, Old Church of St. Mary originally the chancel of the church of Old Palace built in part from remains of St. Leonard's-street (N'os. 122 to 128) — ^'o• 135 Xos. 142 and 144 Tudor House fronting 200 feet on and High-street, Bromley, 17th and i8th century houses in, many destroyed... St. Mary, Bromley ... Churchyard, with the Huguenot tombs, de- struction threatened Vicarage .. St. Mary-le-Strand, destruction threatened St. Mary, Stratford atte Bow, destruction threatened St. Mary Woolnoth, destruction of interior xix St. Michael Bassishaw, destroyed under Union of Benefices Act ... St. Michael, Wood-street, destroyed under Union of Benefices Act St. Pancras, Old, consisted of nave and chancel only, like St. Mary"s Old Church Salisbury House, llford, destroyed SaUvay House, Ley ton, destroyed .. " Scole of Stratford atte Bowe," Chaucer's name for St. Leonard's Convent ... Scotch colony in Bromley, founded by James L ... records of connection with James I. " Seven Stars " public-house destroyed . site now occupied by gin palace resemblance to Nos. 142 and 144, St. Leonard's-street reference to drawings of Old Palace and ... Seyliard (Robert), reference to, on Jacob's monu- ment in St. Mary's Church Sheffield (Lord), residence at "Workmen's Home," Bow-road Shern Hall, Walthamstow, destruction threatened " Ship Inn," Rochford, Essex, deed preserved at, relative to " Seven Stars " public-house ... Shurley (William), tomb in St. Mary's Churchyard Shute (Richard), connection with Bromley Manor Skinners' Almshouses, Mile-end, destroyed Smith, Garrett and Co., brewers, former owners of St. Mary's Vicarage South Kensington Museum, ceiling from Sir Paul Pindar's house now in remnants of Old Palace now in ... 22, 34, 35, 39 reference to photographs of ceilings and panelling in reference to drawings of remains of Old Palace erected in Speed, reference to ,.. 12 xxi xxi 3 22 xxxii 36 41-42 XX xvi 24 40 38 xxiv 42 II 15 xxi 14 34 39 40 II Spencer (Thomas), connection with Bromley Manor 15 Starkey (Phillip), tomb in St. Mary's Churchyard 11 Stephen, King, charter granted by, to St. Leonard's Nunnery ... ... ... ... ... ii Stevens, tomb in St Mary's Churchyard ... ... 11 Steven's (.Mfred) lions before British Museum railings, destroyed ... ... ... ... xviii Stockwells, the shipbuilders, previous tenants of " Manor House," Brunswick-road .. ... 20 Stow's S'aryey, reference to ... ... ... 12,26,27 Strand Improvement Scheme and historic build- ings ... ... ... ... ... ... xxxiii Stratford-green, destroyed ... ... ... ... xxi Stratford-place, destroyed in part ... ... ... xviii Strype's Vicarage, Leyton, destruction threatened xxiv Suffolke (T.), signature of, to deed granting certain lands to Sir Arthur Ingram ... ... ... 57 Sunny-side, Leyton, destroyed ... ... ... xxi Survey of the Memorials of Greater London, Com- mittee for the, origin of ... ... ... xiii representative at conference convened by London County Council ... ... ... iii — ^ — and Register of Historic Buildings ... ... iv members of, during period of the work ... vii-viii Bow Church saved in part by... ... ... xxii Trinity Hospital saved in great measure by xxii protests by, as to destruction of Old Palace 38-39 state room of Old Palace of Bromley saved by 34 Surveyors' Institution, representative of, at con- ference convened by London County Council iii Sweeting, tomb in St. Mary's Churchyard ... 11 Tablets in St. Mary's Church 3,28 Tanner's Noiitia Monastica, reierence to ... ... 11 Taylor, Walker and Co., brewers, owners of " Seven Stars " public-house ... Telbin, the scene painter, work in " Manor House," Brunswick-road Temple Gardens, destruction threatened ... Temple House, East Ham, destruction threatened Thornhill (Sir James), panelling in No. 10, Austin- friars in style of Thorpe (John), Giddea Hall, Romford, rebuilt by Old Palace possibly the work of Torrigiano, monument of Dr. Young in Rolls Chapel the work of ... Totter Down Meadows, Tooting, destruction threatened Trinity Hospital, realised to be of interest when in danger of being removed comparison with Drapers' Almshouses Trinity House, responsibility for care of historic buildings Tudor and Sons (Messrs. S.), present leaseholders of house on Bromley Wharf , Three Mills-lane Tudor family, residence in Bromley 41 \9 xxiii xxiv xix xxiv 38 xviii IV, xxit 26 52 INDEX. PAGE. ... 21-2,^ xvi, xviii, xxvi ... xxxiii Tudor House, St. Leonard's-street ... destroyed name pr.Hctically lost resemblance to house on Bromley Wharf, Three Mills-Iane powder closets similar to those in house on Bromley wharf Turner House, Chelsea, destruction threatened ... Union of Benefices Act, destruction of City churches under I'rgill (Andrew), tomb in St. Mary's Churchyard Valentines, llford, destruction threatened ... V,m-l,ore (Sr Peter), reference to, on Ferrers' monument in St. Mary's Church Viansen, silver gilt chalice and paten of 1617 in .St. Mary's Vicarage, possibly by Village of Bromley, relics of ... Walpole (Horace), reference to letter from, to Rev. Mr. Cole W'althamstow, "a drowsy village in the fields" ... WaKvood House, l.eytonstone, destruction threatened Wardrobe (The), Stepney, destroyed by London County Council \\'ar Office, responsibility for care of historic buildings W'ecvcr's Funeral Jllvnuincufs, reference to 4, 3« 31 xxii xviii 1 1 xxiii 14 22 ii xxix XXIV 11,12 West Ham Abbey, The Old Tithe Barn of Cum- berland House, Plaistow, probably the tithe barn of... ... ... ... ... ... xxiv — — underground paes.ige from Bromley Hall to.. 18 wall destroyed ... ... ... ... ... xxi Westminster Improvement Scheme, defeat of, due to enterprise of private societies ... ... xxxiv Willoughby (.Ambrose), rectory and parish church of Bromley, granted to, by Queen Elizabeth ... ... ... ... ... 11 Wilmer (Abraham), connection with Bromley Manor ... ... ... ... ... ... 16 Wilmer (Thom. G.), reference to, on Jacob's monument in St. Mary's Church ... ... 6 Woodin (Mr.), former tenant of " Manor House," Brunswick-road ... ... ... ... 19, 20 residence at Old Palace ... ... ... 38 Wood's Ecclesiastical Antiquities of London and its Suburbs, reierence to ... ... ... 12 Workmen's Home, Bow-road, contains ceiling similar to that in north-west room of Old Palace 38 Wren, churches of St. Michael, Wood-street, St Michael Bassishaw,and St. George, Botolph lane, rebuilt by, after Great Fire ... ... xviii Wright (Mr.), of Limehouse, reference to ... 29 Young (Dr.), monument in Rolls Chapel ... 53 Jas. Trascott & Sod,| Art Printers, I Suffolk Lane, Cannon Street, EC. BRO/X\LEY HALL THE FtmnNCS AND LCWEE PART OFTHU >»ALL ABE OF STONEWORK 7 BLOCKED UP BAY WINDOW GARDEN OF THE /AANOR. HOVJ-EV BRVNJNK/ICK kOAD- •rtALE 30 .FEET. BI^O/^LEV HALL. ELEVATION -OF FRONT ■ TO BRVNSWICK. ROAD- SCALE iA FEET. BROMI.KY HALL VIEW FROM NORTH-WEST, WITH THE "MANOR HOUSE" ADJOINING. z < -I CL (T 8 _l U. 1- 'Si O X O Q t-H 1 If n« f o L3 1 o z z Q « 1 s \ z < a t '•/ D z O Q:: O Pi o Q \^ Qa. l5 TUDOR HOUSE. TUDOR HOUSE. GENERAL VIEW. TUDOR HOUSE. NORTH-EAST VIEW FROM GARDEN. TUDOR HOUSK. I'ORCH FKUAI SOUTH SIDE. lO TUDOR HOUSK. ENTRANCE DOOR AND RAILINGS IN FRONT. I I TUDOR HOUSE. OLD OATEWAV OF NORTHUMBERLAND HOUSE. 12 TL'DoR IIOL'SK. STAIRS AND OAK DOOR IX THE HALL, GROUND FLOOR. TUDOR HOUSE. STAIRS, FIRST FLOOR. H TUDOR MOUSE. CUPBOARD AND PANEL- LING IN KITCHEN. Nos. 142 eS: 144, ST. LKOXARD'S STREKT 15 VIEW FROM NORIH-EAST. i6 Nos. 142 & 144, ST. LKONARD'S STREET. \IE\V FROM .SOUTH-EAST. DRAPERS' ALMSHOUSES. YIKW FROM NORTH-EAST. i8 DRAPERS' ALMSHOUSES. CARVED BRACKETS TO CHAPEL DOORWAY. 19 HOUSE ON BROMLKV WHARF, THREE Ain.ES L.WE. VIEW FROM SOUTH-WEST. 20 ^•r 2 I tvj z < LL I- THK OLD I'ALACK. 22 SECTION LOOKING SOUTH. THE OLD PALACE. FIREPLACE ANIJ PANELLING OF STATE ROOM, AS RE-ERECTED IN SOUTH KENSINGTON MUSEUM. THE OLD PALACE. 24 DETAIL OF CHIMNEY-PIECE IN STATE ROOM, CJROUND FLOOR. Till': OLD PALACE. 25 DETAIL OF CHIMNEY-PIECE IN STATE ROOM, GROUND FLOOR. 26 THE OLD PALACE. DETAIL OF UPPER PART OF FIREPLACE IN STATE ROOM, GROUND FLOOR. 27 THK OLD PALACE. BRICH DENTILS I I STONE. WITH DATE, ON .SOUTH FRONT. 1'3' -- > .^<^^ THE. OLD PAL AC f: Of BRO/ALrY ORNA.'KnEiMT on 2iB. ltSTEK.SECTlOH or K-BS FIRST FlCS>i2 CEIDNG. OCNA/Jf\ENT OH CEILING fe!E. N .W. '^(mii^ GROVND M(S)e F.CV. ThE. OLD PAi ACE OF BROALEY f2T)ia/ri' INTERXFCliOiH F!Ri-T.rL®ie li )X, ^:5 ^ y4^ . v^^^ ik: -*^ A.B.ORNA./A£Nir rRO-^ CEUJNS R!ES THE OLD PALACn Or BROALEY "•"""WSKeSKKaw^ .y /% «!5^^"*-Vk ^5 > < in C4 •■■' ^3 St u 'i c o 2Q o UJ o < -J < a: a _i O liJ r —i i Z|_ @ !L, 21 U 10' 32 Nos. 2 TO 1 8, HIGH STREP:T. VIEW LOOKINt; NORTH-WEST. 33 i\os. 2 TO 1 8, HIGH STREET. \"IEVV FROM NORTH-EAST No. 4, HIGH STREET. ^^^'■/r/. ExAST P^RONT. Nos. 62 TO 90, HIGH STREET. \'IE\V LOOKIN(_; EAST. -■■ ir> 'V Pii'jurv •""■•"* """'^■'"'*"'^**'''^*^'<**'^B>jKtt.yaf;gir THE COMMITTEE FOR THE SURVEY OF THE MEMORIALS OF GREATER LONDON. Essex House, Bow, E. juiie, 1900. The Right Rev. the LORD BISHOP OF LONDON, President of the Committee. The Late LORD LEIGHTON was the previous President. HONORARY MEMBERS W. ADAMS. The Right Hon. LORD ALDENHAM. R. A. ALLISON, M.P. Mrs. C. R. ASHBEE. Mrs. H. S. ASHBEE. The Right Hon. LORD B.\LCARRES. B. T. BATSFORD. ALBERT E. BERNAYS. Sir W.A^LTER BESANT. LEONARD BORWICK. E. W. BROOKS. A. G. BROWNING, F.S.A. R. M. BURGH. W. CARPENTER. G. CHAMBERS. The CHELSEA PUBLIC LIBRARY. The Right Hon. L. COURTNEY, M.P. The Rev J. F. CORNISH. WALTER CRANE. G. CROSBIE DAWSON. W. H. DICKINSON, L.C.C. Miss S. DUCKWORTH. F. M. DUTTON. The Rev. J. P. FAUNTHORPE. ALBERT FLEMING. OWEN FLEMING. GEORGE FRAMPTON, A.R.A. W. W.-\TERHOUSE GIBBINS. Dr. RICKMAN J. GODLEE. The Rev. W. GOODCHILD. I. CHALKLEY GOULD. Professor J. W. HALES. Miss OCTAVIA HILL. Mrs. J. S. HILL. J. J. HOLDSWORTH. H. B. HOPGOOD. H. L. HOPKINSON. Mrs. E. HUBBARD. The Rev. J. E. KELSALL, M.A. The Rev. J. KENNEDY, F.S.A. Dr. G. B. LONGSTAFF, J. P., L.C.C. Mrs. F. LOWREY. II. LUXMOORE. maurice macnhllan. c. j. marshall, a.r.i. b. a. F. e. masey. The Right Hon. THE EARL OF ME.'KTH. J. PAGET MELLOR. J. T. MICKLETHWAITE, F.S.A. Mrs. MITCHELL. F. D. MOCATTA. The Right Hon. LORD MONKSWELL, L.C.C. A. MOORE, F.S.I. G. VAUGHAN MORGAN. S. VAUGHAN MORGAN. Dr. J. D. E. MORTIMER. EDWARD W. MOUNTFORD, F.R.I.B.A. A. J. MUNBY, M.A., F.S.A. FRANK MURRAY. Miss B. NEWCOMBE. PHILIP NORMAN. The Rev. J. P. NOYES, M.A. VERE L. OLIVER. Dr. G. PAGENSTECHER. Miss HELEN A. H. PARKER. GEO. PITT. Colonel W. F. PRIDEAUX. COLIN E. READER. W. G. RAWLINSON. J. S. REDMAYNE. The Right Hon. LORD JUSTICE SIR JOHN RIGBY. The Right Hon. THE MARQUIS OF RIPON. E. R. ROBSON, F.R.I.B.A. F. W. SARGANT. M.^jor-General E. H. SARTORIUS. SIR COLIN SCOTT-MONCRIEFF. W. K. SHIRLEY. 11. C. SOTHERAN. R. PHENE SPIERS, F.S.A. The Hon. LYULPH STANLEY. J. J. STEVENSON. Miss STONE. R. G. TATTON. W. THOMPSON. T. THORNTON. HAMO THORNYCROFT, R.A. Miss NORA TOMLIN. The Right Hon. LORD TREDEGAR. Mrs. THACKERAY TURNER. J. A. C. VINCENT. J. HUMPHREY WARD. ALFRED WATERHOUSE, R.A. JOHN WATNEY. J. WELLS, M.A. Mrs. WESTLAKE. Mrs. S. a. WHITBOURN. ACTIVE MEMBERS. C. R. ASHBEE, M.A. Chairman of the Committee. W. ASCROFT. The Rev. A. G. B. ATKINSON, M.A. MAX BALFOUR. REGINALD BLUNT. CECIL BREWER. SPEDDING CURWEN, J.P. R. DAVIES. ^L•VTT. GARBUTT, A.M.I.C.E., A.R.I. B. A. MERVYN O'GORMAN. OSBORN C. HILLS, A.R.I.B.A. H. CLAPHAM LANDER, A.R.I.B.A. ERNEST A. MANN, M.S. A. E. T. MARRIOTT, M.A. THEO. MOORE, A.R.I.B.A. A. E. NUTTER. J. HENRY OUINN. Miss E. SPARKS. Mrs. SPOTTISWOODE. F. R. TAYLOR. F. C. VARLEY. W. A. WEBB, A.R.I.B.A. ALFRED P. WIRE. ERNEST GODMAN, Secretary of tke Committee. OBJECT OF THE COM- MITTEE. METHOD OF THE COM- MITTEE. IN placing before the public the fourth Report of the Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London, some recapitulation of its objects may be of use as well as some statement of the work it has succeeded in doing. THE object of the Committee has been to take up certain areas in London, and in them to register and record with drawings, photographs, and other records, whatever may be deemed to be of historic or jesthetic interest. The work is not confined to buildings only, any valuable open space, any remnant of an old village green, any beautiful tree, any object of local life or custom that may have a definite external embodiment, or any interesting piece of handicraft, even if it be but a signboard or a wrought iron gate, comes within the Committee's survey. THE aim is to draw attention to these things. If they are in private hands to get the owner's consent towards their registration ; if under the guardianship of any representative public or semi-public authority, to encourage their main- tenance, for public purposes, as national trusts. THE method upon which the work has been carried out has been simple. The area undertaken (some 30 parishes in the Eastern side of London, together with the portions of Essex adjoining, and included in the area of Greater London) has been divided up among the acTtive members of the Committee, and they either independently, or in conjuniTtion with the Secretary of the Committee, have filled up certain forms upon a definite classification. These forms have been amplified with sketches, photographs, measured drawings, &c., and sent in to me for classification and revision. Where necessary, I have myself visited the places referred to, or called in other expert opinion to my assistance. A copy of this form of classification is appended below. Name of place and Position Parish of Ground Landlord, Leaseholders, &c. General description of works. and date Historical Notes. Condition of repair. Bibliographical References. In the Register are CHURCH OF ST. MARY, STRATFORD ATTE BOW. VIEW FROM SOUTH WEST 5 WORK DONE. /^ VERY large and beautiful collection of drawings, photographs, sketches, measured work, &c., has now been compiled by the different active members of the Committee, and is mounted and arranged in great albums according to the parishes of London. This portion of the work is similar to the famous Grace collecftion in the British Museum, and the Committee believes that when completed will form a unique Collection of what the Great London, at the close of the present century, still retained of historic interest or beauty. The Committee calculates that some 200 forms have been filled up, and some 2,000 drawings, photographs and sketches made. It has further to be added that in cases where a building within the survey has already been written about or illustrated, such as Waltham Abbey, Eastbury House, Barking, or Brooke House, Clapton, the Committee confines itself to giving a bibliographical survey, and noting its adlual condition at the time of registration. GRAPHS.°'*° IF again any piece of work appears to deserve special attention, such as the Trinity Hospital, in Mile End; the Church of St. Mary, Stratford-atte-Bow ; Hill Hall, near Epping, the work of John of Padua, and the Great House, Leyton ; the Committee seeks among its members to arrange for the preparation of a monograph upon the building in question. Two of these monographs have already appeared, and are in the hands of members of the Committee. They are supplied to all subscribers to the Committee's work of one guinea or over during the year of publication. TER, vol'l the most important portion of the Committee's Historical as distinct from what may be called its " watch " work is the compilation of the Register or Survey of London Buildings. IT will be remembered that by the resolution of the London County Council in 1897, the Council recognised the work of this Committee as already in progress, and agreed to print such of its records, from time to time, as went to the making of the body of the Register, provided those records could be brought within the administrative County of London, and provided the printed books were reserved only to subscribers and members of this Committee. After some delay it was arranged that the work should be done in parishes, beginning in the eastern distridls of London, and taking up a western district as soon as possible. The original intention had been to take some six or eight parishes in a volume ; closer examination however showed that the material the Committee had already got together was so great, and it seemed so advisable to print in extenso a work that was to rank as monumental in the History of London, that it got narrowed down into the doing of one parish only, and at a time, thus praftically giving to each parish a separate volume. THE first of these volumes, dealing with the parish of Bromley, is now printed off, and will be in the hands of members of the Committee shortly. The second, which is partly in type, deals with the parish of Jiow. EXTE^NDED^ THE third volume of the Register, it is to be hoped, will be an even more important one, and will deal with the parish of Chelsea. The Committee has already started forming its Chelsea collection, and a series of beautiful drawings of the houses on Cheyne Walk has been partly made. The completeness or full value of this volume of the Register will much depend on the response made by residents in Chelsea to the appeal for permission to make notes and drawings of its many fine interiors, and otherwise assist the Committee to further the ends it has in view. IF the wants of the Survey Committee may be concisely summed up, the things for which it is now appealing, and which it requires from dwellers in London, or such as are interested in the history and amenities of the great city, they are as follows : HONORARY MEMBERS. WE want — i. — A large body of honorary or subscribing members, so that we shall be not only insured against publishing the somewhat costly records we are anxious to issue without loss, but have a good margin over to carry on the work of preserva- tion and "watching" which is even more important than that of merely recording. The fact that the London County Council has undertaken to print the register free of cost to the Committee should make it evident to all such members that they will receive a fair return for their subscriptions. ji.!.iiMiin.:i.ii|iiit""'-'i''' . UJlLl Q o tE O 30 -H Ti Ul a en — H o ■n X < o tn w O a ►J Q Q < X a S a rii a S r\ E H CJ a ^ () A H < '"' J ^ < (J a o O a a 7: J r' o H i; a a [— X u THE OLD I'ALACE OF BROMLEY FIREPLACE IN STATE ROOM ■i^zS^ 5-'. II ACTIVE WE want— 2.— An incre:ised membership on the " aftive " list. Young architeas MEMBERS. * and artists for choice who can make intelligent historical drawings, or those who would give their labour and their leisure in entering up the forms, making notes or photographs to be placed at the disposal of the Committee for the Register and the MSS. colledlion. I believe there are many who, if they had the opportunity offered them of having their work issued free of risk to themselves, would be willing to co-operate with and work for the Committee. GIFTS WE want — 3. — Gifts from all who have such matter in their possession — photo- graphs, drawings or historic records of the parishes we are each year engaged in surveying. At the present moment we are especially anxious of gifts relating to work in the parishes of Bow and Chelsea, though we should accept anything that recorded existing work in London. I often have things sent me of work that has once existed, but that is not what the Committee is there to handle. Its work is not antiquarian, it seeks to touch only living things ; it desires to show not what has been, but what acftually exists of beautiful or historic things in the London we inhabit, and more particularly of the small things, the things in private hands, the things that are apt to be lost or forgotten. Westminster Abbey, Somerset House, St. Paul's, Waterloo Bridge— even the city Churches— have many advocates, and there are many to defend them if they are injured. But not so the little things, the beautiful private houses of London, the noble pieces of old workman- ship, the little pieces of local history that still exist in many parts, and that go to make up the interest or beauty of the great city. If every gentleman who inhabited a house that was built, say, before the year 1800, and took a pride in it, would have it photographed inside and out, its ceilings, its cornices, or any in- teresting thing in it, and would send plates to the Secretary of the Committee, and would fill up the Committee's forms, it would add greatly to the completeness of the work before us. M^n-EE's' IN giving some account of what the Survey Committee has been enabled to do in " WATCH " WORK. the way of preservation, it is perhaps needless to go over the ground of previous reports, but briefly it may be stated that the following are among the things it has helped in preserving, not necessarily by its own unaided efforts, but sometimes FINANCE. 12 taking the initiative and usually in conjun6lion with bodies such as the National Trust, the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, and the Metropolitan Public Gardens Association : — the Trinity Hospital in Mile End, the old Church of St. Mary Stratford atte Bow, the State Room in the old Palace of Bromley, together with several ceilings, the memorial tablets in the Coopers' Almshouses, the Huguenot Tombs at Bromley, the panelled room in Rokeby House. The plates issued with this report give a better idea of some of these things. There will be few who would allow that the saving of these things to London is not a great boon, and though it would be unfair to say that had there been no Survey Committee they would have been lost, still, it is, in some cases, more than probable, and at least the Committee is there to give those who are interested the chance of expressing their views. A FEW words may be of interest, in conclusion, as to the financial position of the Committee's work and to show at what relatively small expenditure work of this kind may be done, or how much more might be accomplished, if the body of active and subscribing members were increased. BY the recent decision of the Committee, it has been arranged to place the work on a definite subscription basis. To substitute, in place of the former method of appealing, every two or three years, by means of a report, to those who might be willing to help the work in one way or another, a regular system, by which there shall be a minimum annual subscription of not less than £i is. od., in return for which subscribing and adlive members will receive copies of the year's publications. OF these there will have been three by the close of the present year, and the Statement of Accounts shows that in the five years during which the work has been carried on, the total receipts from subscribers, made up to December, 1899, have been ^^123 8s. 6d., and the total expenditure has been £329 7s. yd. The balance of ;^205 igs. id. has been made up by myself. But against the balance stands as an asset the MSS. collection of drawings and records above referred to, and the 14 v^ O, v\r" 15 remaining copies of the published books. It is our hope that the realisable value of these has not been overstated at the figure set down — £ioo. IT will be admitted, I think, that good work, not only for the history and records of London, but also towards the preservation of its existing amenities, is being done, and I am emboldened by the encouragement I have so far received to appeal to all citizens of London who may have the work at heart to assist, not only in making good this deficit, but by the other ways above specified, in helping the Committee with the means of carrying out the great work it has before it more speedily and more efficiently. TWO HUNDRED annual subscribers of not less than a guinea would pay the bulk of the working expenses and enable the Committee to bring out at least one volume a year. But it would do more than this; it would give the Committee the means of taking up more actively each case as it arose, of bringing even yet greater public pressure than at present to bear, and of voicing that opinion which so many hold, but have not the opportunity of expressing in behalf of the amenities of the great city and its immense history. C. R. ASHBEE, Chairman of the Coininittee. THE Bow Church Monograph, (the Committee's publication for iSgg), is issued free to all subscribers during the present year. The London County Council Register will be similarly issued to all subscribers during the year of its publication. Back publications will be allowed only to such as have subscribed the minimum for the year of issue. 16 STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS OF THE SURVEY COMMITTEE'S EXPENSES FROM ITS COMMENCEMENT, MARCH, 1894, TO DEC. 31, 1899. MARCH, 1894, TO DEC, 1896. To Subscriptions and Donations from March 20th, 1894. to December 31st, 1896 Society for Protection of Ancisnt Buildings (legal cost^ cf contesting Trinity Hospital case made good by them) By Sales of the Trinity Hospital monograph to non-subscribers Deficit made up by Mr. C. R. Ashbee i s- d. 68 3 12 24 no General Expenses — Ordnance Survey maps of the districts surveyed .. .. i 15 Cartridge Sheets, Covers, and materials for the MS. Register i 10 Printed forms, Circulars, Mmute book. etc. . . . . . . 1212 Special expenses incurred in saving the Trinity Hospital .. 7 - Pcstaje for 2 years and 9 months Stationery for ditto Salary to Secretary (Mr. Ernest and Travelling expenses — • From May 7 to Dec 31,1894.. ,, Jan. to Dec. 31, 1895 .. ,, Jan. to Dec. 31, 1896 . . Sundries Share of Counsel's fee for contesting Trinity Hospital Case in conjunction with other Societies . . . . . . . , . . . . 3 Cost of Printing Publishing, and expenses of Trinity Hospital monograph, edition of 1000 copies . , . . . . . . . . 85 ;f2o6 7 I To Subscriptions Deficit . . To Subscriptions Deficit / s. d. 48 12 6 88 II I ;£i37 3 7 i s. d. 6 15 - 173 6 iij ;fi8o 1 Hi 22 17 7 • . S 10 Godman) I 15 " 23 19 - 40 - - 20 - - S1 19 - - 13 - 1897. By deficit, brought forward Salary to Secretary . . Expenses and postage Travelling expenses . . Cy deficit, brought forward .. Salary of Secretary and expenses F. C. Varley lor special drawings Expenses, &c. 1899. To deficit i s. d. 205 19 I /205 19 I By deficit F. C. Varley for special drawings Salary of Secretary and expenses ;f206 7 I i s- d. . HO I I 20 - - 6 - - I 2 6 /137 3 7 / s- d. 88 II I :o II - 58 I s 22 18 5i /iSo I i.i L s- d. 173 6 Hi 25 12 ^. 7 - /205 19 I MSS COLLECTION, REGISTER AND BACK COPIES OF BOOKS IN STOCK, TAKEN AT /loo. THE COMMITTEE FOR THE SURVEY OF THE MEMORIALS OF GREATER LONDON. MEMBERS OF THE SURVEY COMMITTEE DURING THE PERIOD OF THE WORK. The former Presidents of the Committee were — The late LORD LEIGHTON, P.R.A., and The late Right Rev. Dr. CREIGHTON, LORD BISHOP OF LONDON. HONORARY MEMBERS Magpie and Stump House, 37 Cheyne Walk, Chelsea, S.W. July, 1902. W. ADAMS. The LORD ALDENHAM. R. A. ALLISON, M.P. Mrs. C. R. ASHBEE. Mrs. H. S. ASHBEE. The LORD BALCARRES. B. T. BATSFORD. ALBERT E. BERNAYS. The late Sir WALTER BESANT M.A., F.S.A. Mrs. BIGHAM. BOARD OF EDUCATION, SOUTH KENSINGTON. LEONARD BORWICK. CECIL C. BREWER. E. W. BROOKS. A. G. BROWNING, F.S.A. WILFRED BUCKLEY. W. CARPENTER. The CHELSEA PUBLIC LIBRARY. The Rev J. F. CORNISH. E. COLQUHOUN. The Right Hon. L. COURTNEY, P.C. GEO. WASHINGTON CRAM. WALTER CRANE. G. J. CROSBIE DAWSON. W. H. DICKINSON, M.A., L.C.C. CAMPBELL DODGSON. Miss S. DUCKWORTH. F. M. DUTTON. OWEN FLEMING. T. MACKENZIE FOWLER. GEORGE FRAMPTON, A.R.A. W. WATERHOUSE GIBBINS. Dr. RICKMAN J. GODLEE. The Rev. W. GOODCHILD. The GUILDHALL LIBRARY. RICHARD W. HALE. W. J. HARDY, F.S.A. Mrs. J. S. HILL. J. J. HOLDSWORTH. H. B. HOPGOOD. Mrs. E. HUBBARD. The Rev. J. KENNEDY, M.A., F.S.A. Dr. G. B. LONGSTAFF, J.P., L.C.C. The countess OF LOVELACE. Mrs. F. LOWREY. WILLIAM MACGREGOR. MAURICE MACMILLAN. F. E. MASEY. The EARL OF MEATFI. J. P.-VGET MELLOR. J. T. MICKLETHWAITE, F.S.A. F. D. MOCATTA. The lord MONKSWELL, L.C.C. A. MOORE, F.S.I. G. VAUGHAN MORGAN. Dr. J. D. E. MORTIMER. A. J. MUNBY, M.A., F.S.A. I'HILIP NORMAN, F.S.A. The Rev. J. P. NOYES, M.A. VERE L. OLIVER. Dr. G. PAGENSTECHER. The PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC LIBRARIES. The Rev. MANLEY POWER. AMBROSE M. POYNTER. Sir E. J. POYNTER, P.R.A. Colonel W. F. PRIDEAUX, C.S.I. EDWARD S. PRIOR. S. K. R.A.TCLIFFE. W. G. RAWLINSON. COLIN E. READER. Mrs. COLIN E. READER. J. S. REDMAYNE. The REFORM CLUB. Sir JOPIN RIGBY. The MARQUIS OF RIPON. F. W. SARGANT. Major-General E. H. SARTORIUS. Sir COLIN SCOTT-MONCRIEFF. T. MYDDELTON SHALLCROSS. W. K. SHIRLEY. H. C. SOTHERAN. The Hon. LYULPII STANLEY. J. J. STEVENSON. Miss STONE. R. G. TATTON. W. THOMPSON. T. THORNTON. HAMO THORNYCROFT, R.A. The LORD TREDEGAR. Mrs. THACKERAY TURNER. J. A. C. VINCENT. G. H.\RRY WALLIS. T. HUMPHREY WARD. Sir JOHN WATNEY. J. WELLS, M.A. Mrs. WESTLAKE. Mrs. S. a. WHITBOURN. J. G. WHITE. JOHN E. YERBURY. KEITH D. YOUNG. ACTIVE MEMBERS. C. R. ASHBEE, M.A. Cliairman of the Committee ERNEST GODMAN, Secretary of the Committee. W. ASCROFT. The Rev. A. G. B. ATKINSON, M.A. MAX BALFOUR. C. J. BATHURST. J. H. BELFRAGE. REGINALD BLUNT. W. J. CAMERON. Miss A. G. E. CARTHEW. SPEDDING CURWEN, J.P. R. DAVIES. G. DIXON. MATT. GARBUTT, A.M.I.C E., A.R.I. B.A. W. H. GODFREY. AUSTIN GOMME. MERVYN O'GORMAN. A. GRENVILLE. OSBORN C. HILLS. A.R.I. B.A. G. HORWOOD. HENRY KING. H. CLAPHAM LANDER, A.R.I.B.A. ERNEST A. MANN, M.S.A. E. T. MARRIOTT, M.A. THEO. MOORE, A.R.I.B.A. Miss B. NEWCOMBE. SYDNEY NEWCOMBE. E. C. NISBET. A. E. NUTTER. A. W. PARKMAN. W. J. PLAYER. A. R. QUARTERM.A.N. J. HENRY QUINN. F. W. READER. Miss E. SPARKS. Mrs. SPOTTISWOODE. F. R. TAYLOR. G. TROTJIAN. F. C. VARLEY. W. A. WEBB, A.R.I.B.A. ALFRED P. WIRE. E. L. WRATTEN. WITH this I take pleasure in forwarding, on behalf of the Survey Committee, the Report of its work for the years 1901-1^02. The statement of the object and method of the Committee may be best quoted from the previous report. OBJECT OF THE object of the Committee has been to take up certain areas in London, THE COM- ^ MiTTEE. ^jj(j jj^ them to register and record with drawings, photographs, and other records, whatever may be deemed to be of historic or aesthetic interest. The work is not confined to buildings only, any valuable open space, any remnant of an old village green, any beautiful tree, any objecft of local life or custom that may have a definite external embodiment, or any interesting piece of handicraft, even if it be but an inn sign or a VvTought iron gate, comes within the Committee's survey. THE aim is to draw attention to these things. If they are in private hands to get the owners' consent towards their registration ; if under the guardianship of any representative public or semi-public authority, to encourage their main- tenance, for public purposes, as national trusts. MF.THOD OF THE method upon which the work has been carried out has been simple. The THE COM- ^ * MITTEE. area, undertaken (some 250 parishes in London, and the area of Greater London), has been divided up among the aftive members of the Committee, and they, either independently, or in conjundtion with the Secretary of the Committee, have filled up certain forms upon a definite classification. These forms have been amplified with sketches, photographs, measured drawings, &c., and sent in to me for classification and revision. Where necessary, I have myself visited the places referred to, or called in other expert opinion to my assistance. A copy of this form of classification is appended below. Name of Place and Position Parish of Ground Landlord, Leaseholders, &c. General description and dale of works. Historical Notes. Condition of repair. Bibliographical References. In the Register are is In C- o E- w z; " o 'Si o TER VoL^'i THE most important portion of the Committee's Historical, as distindt from what may be called its "watch" work, is the compilation of the Register or Survey of London Buildings. THE first volume of the Register, "The Survey of the Parish of Bromley-by- Bow," was printed and published by the London County Council for the Com- mittee in 1900, and since then the Committee has been principally engaged on the " Survey of Chelsea," for which the bulk of the material is now complete, though not collated. Much work has also been done on portions of other parishes, but as the Committee has no permanent officer who shall unite and edit all the material, and make the practical editing of it his sole work, completion is necessarily slow. GRAPHS ^°' ^^ ^^^ work of the Register is growing by degrees, we have better progress to report with the Monographs. The following list of important buildings distributed over the area " watched " by the Committee, and which have not yet had adequate justice done to them, will show that the aftive members are busy, and that the Committee hopes during this or the following year to place fresh publications in the hands of its subscribers. THE names of the adlive members engaged on the separate works are appended in each case ; assistance also is being rendered by such members of the Com- mittee as are experts in drawing, photography, heraldry, &c. : — THE CHURCH OF S. DUNSTAN, STEPNEY The Hon. C. W. Pepys. SANDFORD MANOR HOUSE, FULHAM Mr. W. A. Webb. THE CHURCPI OF ST. MARY MAGDALENE, EAST HAM Mr. Ernest Godman. BROOKE HOUSE, HACKNEY Mr. Ernest A. Mann. THE CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS, WEST HAM Mr. Osborn C. Hills. THE GREAT HOUSE, LEYTON Mr. Edwin Gunn. MORDEN COLLEGE, BLACKHEATH Mr. T. Frank Green. WALTHAM ABBEY Mr. George Trotman. THE MEDIEVAL TIMBER CHURCHES OF ESSEX, INCLUDED IN THE AREA OF THE SURVEY Mr. Ernest Godman. 6 THE Monographs already issued are as follows : — No. I. THE TRINITY HOSPITAL IN MILE END Mr. C. R. Ashbee, 1896. No. 2. THE CHURCH OF ST. MARY STRATFORD BOW Mr. Osborn C. Hills, 1900. No. 3. THE OLD PALACE OF BROMLEY-BY-BOW Mr. Ernest Godman, 1902. FINANCE. A SHORT statement as the financial position of the Committee's work may be of interest, and will also serve to show at vvhat relatively small expenditure work of this kind may be done, or ho\v much more might be accomplished, if the body of active and subscribing members were increased. IT will be seen, from the Statement of Accounts appended to this Report, that the difficulty of finance is what is really hampering the Committee's action. It can do its work well enough, for it has the men and the method, but it cannot get its work done in any appointed time, because it has not as yet the means for employing a permanent officer or secretary at a substantial salary who shall make it his whole business to revise, edit, and collate, and what is more important than all, keep in hand the continually growing body of Active Members who, though experts, must always remain amateurs and irresponsible in matters of time. THE Statement for the years 1900 — 1902 will show that though the financial position is better, there is still a debt of £2^^ us. lo^d., and until this is satis- factorily wiped out, as we hope it may be by the issue of the next report, the Committee would not be justified in appointing a salaried officer. A SUGGESTION has however been made for finding this salary, say some ;r250, by means of a guarantee among a number of gentlemen at -£"25 apiece for a period of three years, and several members of the London County Council have, among others, intimated their willingness to co-operate in this, in order to help the work along. ANOTHER suggestion has also been made, tliat the Committee's work, since it has now grown so great, shall be divided into two portions ; the Register or Survey proper, and the Monographs or Surveys of special buildings. That the latter shall CHURCH OF ST. MARY MAGDALENE, EAST HAM. ■^•*5| i* rfi ^te-'visiSH| t3 R,| itttalB ^^B CBOfy^- v-i-i^^^K ^^' ' (t *** u^Bn i ^gfPmJr^'HfB ^^I^Hi'i HHII^^^I <^ o « as ffi o Reprinted from " The Times," Saturday, June 2yd, 1900. SURVEY OF THE MEMORIALS OF LONDON. A MEETING of tlie Committee for the Survey of the Memorials of Greater London wns held on Thursday niyht at 74, Cheyne-walk, Mr. Courtney, M.f*., presiding. THE fourth report of the committee was presented. It stated that, with a view to prosecuting the work of the committee in registering and recording with drawings, photographs, and other records whatever might be deemed to be of historic or a;stlietic interest in Greater London, the area undertaken had been divided up among the active members of the committee, who filled up certain forms upon a definite classification. The forms were amplified with sketches, photographs, measured drawings, etc. Many of these were exhibited at the meeting. The work was not confined to buildings only, but embraced any object of local life or custom having a definite embodiment. The chief portion ot the committee's historical work, as distinct from its work of watching, was the compilation of the register or survey of London buildings. The London County Council had recognized the work of the committee, and agreed, upon certain conditions, to print such of its records from time to time as went to the making of the body of the register. It was arranged that the work should be done in parishes, beginning in the eastern districts of London, tl.e committee taking up a western district as soon as possible. The first volume, dealing with the parish of Bromley, was now printed and would shortly be issued to members. The second dealt with the parish of Bow. The third, it was hoped, would be an even more important one, dealing with the parish of Chelsea. The committee had already started forming its Chelsea collec- tion, and a series of drawings of the houses on Cheyne-walk had been partly made. The committee appealed to all citizens of London for co-operation in the work and financial assistance in making good the deficit. THE report having been presented, the Bishop of London was unanimously elected president of the committee in succession to the late Lord Leighton. MR. C. R. ASHBEE, on behalf of the committee, read a statement as to their work. He said that their aim was to stimulate the historic and social conscience of London. They believed that if such a register as was now offered in the case of Bromley were drawn up for every parish in London it would go far towards preventing the destruction of the historic and beautiful landmarks of London. A reference to the Bromley volume would show what might have been done in that parish. The beautiful conforma- tion of the old High-street had been spoiled, its line disregarded, and everything in it sacrificed to the immediate requirements of the moment. Where stood the picturesque 17th and rSth century houses with their tiled roofs and richly moulded timber cornices and canopies, now stood a grim and melancholy casual ward. Where was the stately house of the Adam's time was now the goods depot of the London and Tilbury Railway. Where stood Tudor-house in its garden was now the somewhat conventional ojien space, with a view ot factory chimneys beyond, and where, next it, was the old palace of James I., was now a gaunt uninteresting Board school. The committee did not wish to imply that a good deal of this was not inevitable, but they pleaded that a good deal was unnecessary and could with proper direction or advice have been prevented. He read a list, made up from information that had been sent him, and by no means claimed that it was complete, of objects threatened or destroyed, in whole or part, in London during the last six years. Inside the City and county of London these included Stratford-place, the work of Robert Adam, destroyed in part ; H.aymarket-colonnades, one of the best-planned late Georgian streets in London; Adam-street, Adelphi, one of the finest specimens of Adam's work, almost entirely destroyed; the Rolls Chapel, containing the monument of Dr. Voung, the work of Torrigiano, and also the medi£Eval chancel arch ; City churches — the church of St. Michael, Wood-street, of ancient foundation, rebuilt by Wren after the great fire, and pulled down in 1897 under the Union of Benefices Act; St. Michael Bassishaw ; St. George, Botolph-lane, condemned under the same Act; the old palace of Brom- ley; Tudor-house, Bromley; Alfred Stevens's lions before the British Museum railings; the Embank- ment-garden of the Chelsea Hospital, in part; the old Bell Inn, the last galleried Inn in London on the Middlesex side of the water ; Church-row, Hampstead, in part ; the interior of the church of St. Mary Woolnoth ; old merchants' houses in the City, Nos. to and iia, Austin-friars, and No. 4, Coleman-street ; the 17th century houses on the south side of Barnard's Inn ; Clements Inn ; Hare-court, Temple, in part ; Dick's Coffee House, No. 8, I'Teet-street ; Ashburnham-house, Dover-street, now replaced by flats ; Coleherne Court, Eail's-court ; BuUingham-house, oif Church-street, Kensington; the 13th century crypt of Laurence I'ountney-hill, let by the Merchant Taylors' Company on building lease and destroyed ; the last portion of the Blackfriars Monastery on the north side of Ireland-yard, destroyed this year ; Bedford- square, many Adam interiors destroyed; Russell-square, the whole planning of the square spoiled by block buildings, and the fa(;ades of many of the houses spoiled ; Fitzroy-square, the elevations spoiled and stone work painted over ; Hanover Chapel, Regent-street ; the Cock Tavern, Fleet-street ; Harley-house, Marvlebone-road, with beautiful timbered garden and some of the finest planes in London ; Emanuel Hospital, Westminster ; Church-row, Aldgate, Cass's School, Aldgate ; the Wardrobe, Stepney, destroyed by the London County Council in widening the thoroughfare; 17th century merchants' houses. Bow-; Mitre-sciuare, Aldgate, with the remains of the Priory; Palestine-place, Bethnal-green, a group of i8th century buildings ; the Catherine Wheel Inn, Bishopsgate ; the i8th century rectory and boundary wall, Bow ; Sir Francis Drake's house. No. 35, Basinghall-street ; and so on. This was followed by a list of objects and buildings destroyed outside the City and county, but within the survey ; and a further list of things threatened during the last six years, these including Chelsea Hospital ; Trinity Hospital, Mile End; St. Mary-le-Strand Church; St. Cl'emenl Danes Church ; St. Mary's, Stratford-atte-Bow ; the Inner Temple Gatehouse, together with 17, Fleet-street, the reputed Chancery of Cornwall, now saved by the action of the City and the London County Council ; the Jewel Tower, Westminster ; the church of St. Ethelburga, Bishopsgate ; Lincoln's Inn-fields, the western side, with the Inigo Jones mansions ; Christ's Hospital ; Sir Joshua Reynolds's house in Leicester-square ; Turner's house, Chelsea, now saved ; Thomas Carlyle's house in Cheyne-row, now saved mainly by the enterprise of Chelsea residents and American subscriptions ; Golder's - hill Estate, Hampstead, since saved ; Churchyard Bottom Wood, since saved ; Latchmere Allotments, Battersea, etc. Examination showed that the resiionsibility or blame in these cases rested with such bodies, among others, as the London County Council, the London School Board, the Charity Commissioners, the Elder Brethren of the Trinity House, the Office ot Works, and the Bed- ford Estate. The fact of its being possible to draw up within six years such a list was in itself a very serious indictment against the common sense and adjninistrative capacity of the citizens of London. He did not suggest that the municipality should buy up every old house, and so forth ; but he urged that there should be some means whereby the public should be first consulted when any question arose that affected the history and dignity of London. The proper body to supply this means would seem to be the London County Council, which had obtained the necessary statutory power. A committee ought to be formed to put itself in touch with all the various social agencies that were seeking to work in the direction of raising the standard of life in the community. (Cheers.) LORD MONKSWELL, L.C.C., in moving the adoption of the report, defended the London County Council's attitude towards buildings of historic and architectural value. LORD JUSTICE RIGBY seconded the motion. lie hoped the committee would be able to carry their work very much further, and that through their instrumentality there would be in the course of a few years a tolerably adequate record of such places of interest and beauty as had still been preserved. (Cheers.) MR. LAURENCE GOMME moved that the survey be now extended to the parish of Chelsea, where, he said, there was a most promising field for the survey. LORD BALCARRES, in seconding the proposal, said he thought there was an unnecessary vein of pessimism running through Mr. Ashbee's address. Mr. Aslibee had read a long list of places'destroyed during the last six years and of the places threatened, but would not a list of the places destroyed in the previous period of six years be very much more serious? In the earlier of those two periods, not only threats, but cases of actual destruction, went without any protest at all. The very fact that they spoke of places being threatened was one of the most promising proofs of the progress of the work in which Mr. Aslibee was engaged. Some buildings they knew to be doomed. Newgate Gaol, in its way one of the finest buildings in London, was doomed,' and Christ's Hospital, of course, would ultimately 'go, too. But public spirit was awakening on the subject, and he trusted that in a few years' time their progress would be such that protests would be more effective. He believed the London County Council was a tremendous agency for good in this respect. (Cheers.) MR. ASHBEE said, in reply, that he did not feel himself a pessimist. He recognised, in such achieve- ments as the defeat of the Westminster improvement scheme, that much had been accomplished. He appealed to the artists and other residents of Chelsea for help in the work of the committee, and to amateur photographers for the assistance of their cameras, and he hoped also for an increase of the honorary membership and subscriptions. The committee was ready to supply a list of the things of interest in Chelsea as far as they knew of them at present. THE motions were carried, as was also a resolution of thanks to Mr. Courtney for presiding, moved by Sir Colin Scott-Moncrieff. THE CHAIRMAN, in acknowledging the vote, said he had heard his friend Sir William Harcourt boast of being a Philistine. They would all be slow to question the self-knowledge of Sir William Harcourt— (laughter)— but he went on to define what he meant by Philistine. Sir William said, "I am a Philistine; and so far as I can see, that means a man of common sense." According to that interpretation they would, perhaps, all be ready to shelter themselves under the same title. On such occasions as the present he had always felt himself in the presence of a conflict between the past and the present. He was always a combatant, and he must say something against the current feeling of the meeting. (Laughter and cheers.) There was a real peril if we insisted on keeping up so much that had been handed down to us that the new life was encumbered and burdened by what it received from the old. The struggle between, on the one hand, the desire to preserve what was often in itself beautiful and had become more beautiful with age, and, on the other, the possession of the new and fresh life, would, he believed, result in some form of beauty such as they often saw deduced from a conflict of opposing or partly opposing forces. Reference had been made more than once by the speakers to the London County Council. Ten years ago, when the County Council was just starting its existence, every one would have agreed that a more utilitarian and unpromising body could not have existed. But the County Council defied the prophets, and had become the patron and supporter of that committee, and was going to publish its work. (Cheers.) It was not always possible to preserve the buildings of the past, but they would always, he hoped, do something to preserve its records. Lord Balcarres had said quite truly that they ought not to be despondent about the present. We were not so bad compared with our predecessors. We did not pull down City churches with the same recklessness. We discriminated. The House of Commons, a body not quickly penetrated with new ideas, was possessed of the same feelings. The Westminster scheme was defeated with not much difhculty. Thirty or forty years ago the scheme would probably have gone through. He congratulated the comm'ittee on its adoption of the word survey, and in conclusion said he suspected that at the root of their aims lay the desire not only to preserve or record the survivals of the past, but to develop in themselves a sense of' beauty which should secure that when old things were superseded something beautiful should take their place, worthy to be substituted for that which was bound to go and to be passed down to those who came after them. (Cheers.) The meetings of the Committee, during the peiijd of the Survey in Chelsea, are to be held, by kind permission, at the houses of the following members. The dates n/ill be announced later. The Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of London FULHAM PALACE. The Right Hon. the Marquis of Ripon CHELSEA EMBANKMENT. The Right Hon. Lord Monkswell MONKSWELL HOUSE, CHELSEA EMBANK- MENT. The Right Hon. Lord Justice Sir John Rigby ... CARLVLE HOUSE, CHELSEA EMBANKMENT. The Right Hon. Leonard H. Courtney, M.P. ... CHEYNE WALK, CHELSEA. Colonel Sir Colin Scott-Moncrieff ii, CHEYNE W'ALK, CHELSEA. Major-General E. H. Sartorius OLD SWAN HOUSE, CHELSEA EMBANK- MENT. John Westlake, Esq., Q.C THE RIVER HOUSE, CHELSEA EMBANK- MENT. Mrs. H. 8. Ashbee MAGPIE AND STUMP HOUSE, CHEYNE WALK. EASTBURY HOUSE, BARKING. PART OF TOWER IN COURTYARD. 10 t-^ tr :-j