The Etymology and Boundaries of the
Parish—The Old Church: its Monumental Inscriptions;
Remarkable Spring Tides, taken to Church in a Boat, Penance,
&c.—Ancient Manor Houses, and Distinguished
Residents—Moravian Chapel and Burial Ground—Park
Chapel—St. Mark’s College—The New West Brompton
Congregational Church—Loss of Sir John Balchen and 1100
Seamen in the “Victory”—Ascent in a Balloon in
1784—Fatal Duel—The Knight and the Poor
Carpenter—Jews’ Burial Ground, to which is added an
Amusing Anecdote—The Queen’s Elm—Singular
Tavern Signs, &c.—The old Embankment of the
Thames. Interspersed with Notices of many of the most
Eminent Residents in the Parish in the “Olden Times,”
and other Interesting Particulars.
Lord Brougham, in the course of
some remarks on modern English literature, incidentally observed
that “local histories were not only interesting to the
residents in the districts to which they referred, but such minor
works would be found of immense value to future national
historians.” This was also the avowed opinion of Mr.
Faulkner, when he published his invaluable “History of Chelsea,” upwards of 40
years since, and my motive in undertaking the present work is to
carry forward the great object which that laborious local
historian contemplated. The defects, and no doubt there
will be many discovered in it, are submitted to the kind and
impartial consideration of the reader. My humble position
in life will not in the slightest degree, I feel confident, tend
to depreciate my long-cherished desire—especially as
the shades of evening are fast closing the day-light of my
earthly life—to add to the information which has already
been given respecting a parish to which I am much attached, both
by birth and early associations.
The earliest mention of Chelsea is to be found in the Saxon
Chronicle, in the year 785; from which record it appears that a
Synod was then held in it, and at which period it was the
residence of Offa, king of the Mercians. As regards the
etymology of its name both ancient and modern writers have
expressed different opinions. Mr. Lysons says, he has seen
it written Cealc-hylle, in an old charter of Edward the
Confessor, and hence objected to the obvious etymology, as there
is neither chalk nor hill in the parish. Mr. Faulkner
considers, however, that “hylle” is an evident
mistake for “hythe;” and Cealc-hythe signifies not a
place abounding in chalk, but a wharf or landing-place for chalk
brought from other quarters. This amended definition seems
at once to remove the previous objection, particularly as large
quantities of chalk and lime were formerly, and even now at
times, landed at a wharf by the river-side at Chelsea. In
the ancient record of Domesday, it is written Cherchede and
Chelched. The parish was called Chelchethe in the taxation
of Pope Nicholas, in 1291; and this was the common way of
spelling it for several centuries. Among the manorial
records of the time of Edward II. it is spelled Chelcheya and
Chelchuthe. Mr. Norden says, “It is so called from
the nature of the place, whose strand is like the Chesel,
(ceosel, or cesel,) which the sea casteth up of sand and pebble
stones, thereof called Cheselsey, briefly Chelsey.”
How altered is the state of the strand or shore at the present
time! Would that there were now only the sand and pebble
stones! But there is a probability that this complaint will
be remedied. The long expected embankment from Battersea
Bridge to Chelsea College, it is said, really is to be
commenced and completed, and those old and dilapidated houses in
that narrow and dangerous thoroughfare, known as Duke Street and
Lombard Street, are to be pulled down. If this should be
the case, the parishioners will then possess one of the finest
promenades, with Battersea Park opposite to it, which may be
found along the entire banks of the river Thames.
Having made this slight digression, to infuse a little of what
is popularly called “new life” into our subject, we
will here mention that the county of Middlesex received its name
from having
been inhabited by a party of Saxons, who, being located in the
midst of the three kingdoms of the East, West, and South Saxons,
were called by their neighbours Middlesaxons, which, in common
conversation, was soon abbreviated to Middlesex.
The parish of Chelsea is bounded on the north by the Fulham
Road, which separates it from Kensington. On the east at
the entrance into Sloane Square, at which place there was an open
rivulet, which divided it from St. George’s, Hanover
Square, and was said to rise at or near to Hampstead; and, after
crossing Hyde Park, where it formed the Serpentine River, and
Knightsbridge, flowed behind Cadogan Place (along a portion of
Lowndes’ Square) into the Thames, at Ranelagh, which
adjoined Chelsea College. In January, 1809, this rivulet
overflowed its banks, and caused great devastation for several
days. The waters formed a complete lake, and were of
considerable depth. Boats were employed in carrying
passengers from Chelsea Hospital to the old Bunhouse, on their
way to London. On the west, the parish is divided from
Fulham a little beyond St. Mark’s College; and on the south
it is bounded by the Thames.
That portion of the parish at Kensal New Town, which is near
to Wilsden, will be briefly noticed again in reference to the
“Ancient Manor Houses.” This land, as held by
the parish, is about 173¾ acres.
It will soon be seventy years since
I was first taken to this venerable Church. The most
trifling incidents in childhood often bring to remembrance, when
arrived at mature age, events of an important and interesting
character. Such was the case with regard to my earliest
conscious attendance at Chelsea Old Church. At the period
to which I allude, residing at the other part of the parish, we
had to go across what was then called the “Common,”
situated to the east of the present new St. Luke’s Church,
a portion of which was at that particular time covered with
new-mown grass to dry previously to being carried away.
Most young persons love to toss and tumble about the hay when
such an opportunity is afforded them, and certainly I
felt as delighted with the sport as others of my own age.
Often afterwards, when there was a disposition not to take me, I
earnestly pleaded to go with the rest to the Church, but my
youthful thoughts were more fixed on some anticipated enjoyment
on the road to it. As I advanced in years, however, my
native Old Parish Church became gradually endeared to me, and
nothing connected with it scarcely ever escaped my notice.
The exact period when the Church was erected is a question of
great uncertainty. In the Domesday Survey of the Parish no
mention is made of any endowment for a priest, which is
considered by some writers a proof that there was no Church
existing. This conclusion is doubtful. There is no
record relative to the Rectory previous to the reign of Edward
II., therefore it is conjectured that the Church was first
founded about that period.
Mr. Bowack says, “In the year 1667, the old Church,
which was much decayed, being too small to contain the
congregation, grown large by the vast increase of buildings about
that time in the town,” (what would he now think, in 1869,
of the immense number of houses, and 70,000 inhabitants!)
“it was agreed by the parishioners that part of it should
be demolished, and that such alterations and additions should be
made as were necessary for decent accommodation.
Accordingly the shattered tower and west end of the Church were
pulled down, and the north and south aisles carried several yards
towards the west, by two brick walls, being in all about 80 ft.
from the ground. The walls of the Church were raised, the
windows enlarged, the old parts beautified, the inside new paved,
the churchyard considerably raised, and enclosed with a high wall
of brick; and most of this done at the voluntary charge of the
inhabitants, and the whole roof, lead, timber, &c., at the
sole cost of the Lady Jane Cheyne. The Church was furnished
with all the necessary ornaments, and the steeple with a good
ring of six bells, by the bounty of the inhabitants.”
From this statement it would appear that the Church was
originally of small dimensions.
It will not be asserting too much if we say that the Old
Parish Church contains more magnificent monuments, to the
memories of distinguished individuals, than are to be found in
any other church in the metropolis.
Lord Bray.—In the chancel, the most
ancient monument is that of Lord Bray, and of his son Lord John
Bray. It is an altar-tomb, now much defaced, but was
originally ornamented with the effigies in brass of these two
noble lords, and with escutcheons of their arms. According
to Weever, there was the following inscription in his
time:—“Of your charitie pray for the soul of Edmund
Bray, knight, Lord Bray, cosin and heire to Sir Reginald Bray,
Knight of the Garter.” There is a very long and
curious account of the funeral of Lord John Bray in the
Herald’s College, 1557.
Sir Thomas More.—Against the
south wall of the chancel is the monument of Sir Thomas More,
erected according to his own desire, in the year 1532. The
tablet on which the inscription is engraved is under a Tudor
arch, the cornice of which is ornamented with foliage, and in the
centre of it is his crest, viz., a Moor’s head. The
spandrils of the arch are ornamented with branches of the vine,
and in the midst are his arms and those of his first wife, and on
each side are the arms of himself and his two wives. The
eventful history of More, and the termination of his earthly
career, must be familiar to the reader. After he was
beheaded, his body is said by some to have been interred in the
church, but others have contended that it was buried in St.
Peter’s, in the Tower. There are many legends
respecting the head, but Mr. Brayley asserts positively that it
was finally deposited in St. Dunstan’s, near Canterbury,
and that he saw the head there many years ago. The
inscription on the tablet is of considerable length.
The Marquise de Cugnac.—Near
the Communion Table, against the south wall, on a square
ornamental slab, is an inscription to the memory of Elizabeth,
the wife of the Marquis de Cugnac. As a proof of his
unshaken love he erected this monument. She died in 1653,
aged 20 years. The marquis was of a Protestant family,
famous in the reigns of Henry IV., Lewis XIII. and XIV.
The Sedile.—In the south wall
of the chancel, near the altar, was usually placed the
“Sedile” a seat for the use of the priest at
certain intervals during the celebration of the Mass, but when
the church was almost rebuilt, in 1667, this ancient
architectural ornament, and many others were removed, and not a
vestige of them now remains.
Thomas Hungerford, Esq.—In the upper
chancel is the monument of the above-named gentleman, having the
effigies of himself and his two sons in armour kneeling on one
side of an altar, and his wife and daughter on the other.
The entablature is supported by three Corinthian pillars, resting
on pedestals.
Rev. John Rush.—On the right
of the one above are tablets to the memory of the Rev. John Rush
and family. He was Curate of the Parish for a great many
years, and when the new Parish Church was completed, Mr. Rush
became Minister of the Old Church, and resigned the curacy.
He was one of the Directors of the Waterloo Bridge Company, and
took a great interest in everything connected with the
construction of that bridge. He died in 1855, aged 85, and
was buried in the Brompton Cemetery.
Two Daughters of Wilton, the Sculptor.—Against the east wall is
a monument, composed of two urns of white marble, to the memory
of Lucy Smith and Anne Wilton, two sisters, 1781. Wilton,
their father, was the sculptor.
The Original Altar Piece was very plain, formed by an obtuse
arch ornamented slightly with foliage, &c. In the
centre was painted the Decalogue; while the north side displayed
the Camp of Israel, and the south side Moses on the Mount,
receiving the two tables of the Law.
Rev. Adam Littleton, D.D.—On
a square marble tablet, against the north wall of the lower
chancel, is an inscription to the memory of this eminent divine,
who was rector of this parish for 24 years. He died in
1694, aged 66.
On the east wall, on plain marble slabs, are inscriptions to
the memory of Martha Denyer, who died in 1795, John Denyer, in
1806, and Elizabeth Denyer, in 1824. This family was very
benevolent. Amongst a few other inscriptions is one to the
memory of Edward Holl, Esq., who was a regular attendant at the
church, and much respected. He died in 1823.
Richard Gervoise,
Esq.—Between the north aisle and lower chancel is a large
monument raised in the form of an arch open at both sides, about
10 ft. in height, ornamented with roses, branches, and fluted
carving, erected to the memory of Richard Gervoise, Sheriff of
London, who died in 1557, and also in memory of his son.
Baldwin Hamey, M.D.—On a pillar, near
the preceding, are inscriptions to the memory of Dr. Baldwin
Hamey, Ralph Palmer, Esq., and Alice, his wife. Mr. Palmer
was a kind benefactor to the church. He died in 1715.
On the west side of the same pillar is an inscription to the
memory of Henry Powell, Esq., who was a great friend to the widow
and fatherless.
Colours of the Old
Volunteers.—Over the nave are suspended the colours
of the two battalions of Queen Charlotte’s Royal
Volunteers, which were placed there on the disbandment of the
regiment. These banners were presented by her Majesty in
1804, at a time when the country was threatened with invasion. [7] One or two of them are almost in
ribbons, but it is to be hoped they will remain untouched in
their present position as long as possible. There are still
living some few old people in the parish who remember, when boys,
marching by the side of these colours with all the heroic
consequence of supposed military triumph.
The Pulpit is composed of oak,
divided into panels, and ornamented with carved foliage and
fruit. There was formerly a massive sounding board to
correspond with it, but which was necessarily taken away when the
pulpit was judiciously placed in its present central position in
the middle aisle.
Having noticed the chancel and nave, we will proceed to that
part which is called the Lawrence
Chapel, at the north side. This chapel is considered
by many to be coeval with the first endowment of the
church. It was built by the then Lord of the Manor, whose
mansion stood near it, the site of which is now occupied by
Lawrence Street, so called after the Lawrence family. The
old manor house was pulled down by Henry VIII., who built another
in Cheyne Walk, to which allusion will have to be frequently
made. The Lawrence chapel was many years ago in the
possession of Mr. Offley, who bequeathed it to Colonel Needham,
of whom it was bought in the year 1789, with part of the east
side of Lawrence Street, to which it is an appendage, by Mr.
Lewer. It is still private property.
Thomas Lawrence, Esq.—Against the
north wall of this chapel is the monument of the father of Sir
John Lawrence, on which are represented himself, his three sons,
Elizabeth his wife, and six daughters, all kneeling. On the
cushion on which Mrs. Lawrence kneels are two babes, wrapped up
close to the chin, with their faces only visible. The
cornice is supported by three fluted Corinthian columns.
Underneath are the following lines:—
“The yeares wherein I lived were
fifty-fower,
October twenty-eight did end my life;
Children five of eleven God left in store,
Sole comfort of they’re mother and my wife.
The world can say what I have been before,
What I am now examples still are rife;
Thus Thomas Lawrence spekes to tymes ensving
That Death is sure, and Tyme is past reneving.”
Sir John Lawrence, Bart.—On a
large ornamented tablet of black marble, against the east wall,
is an inscription to the memory of Sir John Lawrence, Bart., who
died in 1638, aged 50. Attached to it are these quaint
lines:—
“When bad men dye and turn to their last
sleep,
What stir the poets and engravers keep,
By a feigned skill to pile them up a name,
With terms of Good, and Just, out-lasting fame:
Alas! poor men, such most have need of stone
And epitaphs; the good, indeed, lack none,
Their own true works enough do give of glory
Unto their names, which will survive all story:
Such was the man lies here, who doth partake
Of verse and stone—but ’tis for fashions
sake.”
On the same wall is the monument of Sarah Colvile, daughter of
Thomas Lawrence, Esq., and wife of Richard Colvile, of Newton, in
the Isle of Ely. From small trusses, ornamented with human
heads, rise two Doric pillars, with a curved entablature which
supports a pediment. The soffit of the cornice is decorated
with clouds, stars, and a dove; and on the edge of the cornice is
a passage of Scripture (1 Cor. xv. 52). Between the pillars
is a half-length figure of a female, wrapped in a winding sheet,
with her hands in a supplicating posture, and as rising from the
tomb. The inscription states she was the happy mother of
eight sons and two daughters. She died in 1631, in the 40th
year of her age.
There is also an inscription on the floor of this chapel to
the memory of Henry, youngest son of Sir John Lawrence, who died
in 1661, aged 30.
Lady Jane Cheyne.—This stately
monument is placed against the wall of the north aisle, but
before we proceed to give a description of it, we will notice the
inscription that was placed at the entrance to the vault of the
Cheyne family, at the bottom of the chancel:—
“Charles Cheyne, Esq., Lord of this Manor of
Chelsea, which was purchased by the rich dowry of his wife,
erected this burial-place for his most excellent wife, the Lady
Jane Cheyne, eldest daughter of William Duke of Newcastle, not
long deceased, and for his own use, when he shall die. It
was consecrated the 3rd day of November, 1669. I beseech
thee, Almighty God, that she may quiety rest here till the
resurrection of the flesh. Amen.”
The monument consists of a semi-circular temple, the
façade supported by two Corinthian columns of Scagliola
marble, rising from a plinth and pedestals, with a proper
entablature, surmounted by an elliptical pediment, the tympanum
of which is ornamented with scroll work and foliage, and the
soffit of the upper cornice consists of panels, with rosettes and
foliage, and dentals, with pendant guttæ placed
alternately. To give the latter a resemblance of their
original intention, the base of the pediment was justly decreased
in width in the centre. From acrotini at the shoulders rise
flaming urns, and in the centre is a richly ornamented
cross. In the interior of this temple is a large black
sarcophagus, resting on pedestals of Scagliola marble. On
this sarcophagus is represented Lady Cheyne, in white marble,
lying upon her left side, and reclining upon a tesselated
cushion, holding a book; at her feet lies a coronet. This
monument was executed by the celebrated Bernini, and cost
£500. It is generally considered to be a chef
d’œuvre of art. Lady Cheyne died in 1669,
aged 48.
On the sarcophagus, under the figure of Lady Jane Cheyne, is
an inscription to the memory of Charles Cheyne, Viscount
Newhaven, and Lord of the Manor of Chelsea, who was buried in the
same vault. He departed this life in 1698, aged 74, being
29 years after Lady Jane Cheyne, his first wife’s
death.
Richard Guildford, Esq.—On a
marble tablet, near the preceding, is this
inscription:—“Richard Guildford, who died 16th Nov.
1680, and also his two wives, Abigail and Elizabeth. He
gave to this parish for ever a yearly sum of £10, to be
distributed on the 5th of December, the day of his wedding with
his wife Elizabeth.”
Henry Raper, Esq.—Near this spot are
deposited the remains of this gentleman, who died in 1789, and of
his wife Katherine Raper, who died in 1823. This family was
greatly respected.
At the west end of the north aisle formerly stood the old
font, and in a book case close to it a large folio Bible,
Fox’s Book of Martyrs, a folio Common Prayer Book, and the
Homilies of the Church of England, each secured with a
chain. The books are now placed at the south side of the
church, and the present marble font stands at the entrance to the
middle aisle.
On the left of the great western entrance is an inscription on
a marble tablet to the memory of Mrs. Bayley, who died in 1828,
aged 45. This tablet was placed by her uncle, Wilton, the
sculptor.
The Ashburnham Bell.—This
bell originally in the steeple that was taken down for security
in 1815, is now placed in the porch, as a relic of former
days. On a board near the bell are recorded the following
particulars:—
“This bell was given to the Old Parish
Church of Chelsea by the Hon. Wm. Ashburnham in the year
1679. It was a grateful offering on his part to commemorate
his escape from drowning in the Thames, into which he had
wandered during a dark night of the above year, and from which he
was saved by hearing the clock of this church strike the hour of
nine. Many changes in the church having taken place since
then, and this bell having long remained unused and nearly
forgotten, it is here preserved as an interesting Chelsea
antiquity, having been removed from the Clock Tower and placed in
its present position by order of the Church Trustees, and under
the direction of
A. Gerald W. Blunt, M.A.,
Rector.
R. Henry Davies, B.A., Incumbent of
the Church.
T. B. Diplock, M.D., G. W. Richards, } Churchwardens.
March 1862.”
There was another account given of this bell many years
ago. It was that the Hon. W Ashburnham was returning home
from Lambeth in a boat at night, when almost suddenly there came
a dense fog over the river, which prevented him seeing any object
whatever. He became alarmed, and allowed the boat to drift
for some distance, expecting every moment it would run foul of some
barge or craft, and that he would be plunged into the river, when
to his great joy he heard Chelsea Church clock strike nine, and,
judging from the sound that he was nearly opposite the church, he
seized the oars and pulled away as direct as he could towards it,
and at length landed safely on shore. It afterwards
appeared that had the boat drifted much further it would have
been upset, and in all probability Mr. Ashburnham would have met
with a watery grave. The family, considering the striking
of the clock to have been a most providential means of saving his
life, gave the bell, and made certain conditions that it should
be rung every evening during the winter months, in case of any
future similar event. The sexton paid 5s. to the
bell-ringer for attending at nine o’clock, as stated, for
the season.
On the right of the western entrance, in the south aisle, is
an inscription to the memory of Teak S. Edwards, Esq., F.L.S.,
who died in 1819, aged 50. “As a faithful delineator
of nature few equalled, and none excelled.”
Near to where now the Homilies are placed was originally fixed
the monument of Lt.-Col. the Hon. H. Cadogan, executed by
Chantrey, a fine specimen of that celebrated sculptor’s
chisel. It was removed to the New Parish Church, some years
since, and consequently it must be noticed in the account of that
beautiful architectural edifice.
Lord and Lady Dacre.—This is
one of the most magnificent monuments that can be found in any
parish church in London, and my only surprise is that so few of
the inhabitants of the parish, comparatively, have inspected
it. It stands against the wall of the south aisle, and was
erected to the memory of Gregory, Lord Dacre, and Anne, his
wife. They are represented in white marble, lying on a
sarcophagus, under an arch supported by marble pillars of the
Corinthian order. Lord Dacre is in armour, with a long
beard and short hair; her ladyship is habited in a gown and long
cloak with a ruff. A dog is at the feet of each. On
either side is a lofty obelisk. Over the arch are the arms
of the family; the whole is richly ornamented with flowers and
several pieces of elaborate Mosaic work.
The parish of Chelsea, by Lady Dacre’s will, have some
presentations to her Almshouses in Westminster, on condition of
keeping the monument in repair. It has been lately painted
and beautified. Lord Dacre died in 1594, and Lady Dacre in
1595. This monument was originally placed in Sir T.
More’s chapel, it is so described in Lady Dacre’s
will. When the church was almost rebuilt in 1667, it was
placed in its present situation.
On a marble tablet, against the same wall, is an inscription
to the memory of Catherine, wife of the Rev. T. Mahon, Rector of
Newport, Co. of Mayo, Ireland, who died in 1822, aged 20.
Sir Arthur Gorges.—Bowack, in
his “Antiquities of Middlesex,” mentions a monument
raised about 4 ft. from the ground, with the effigies of Sir
Arthur Gorges, his lady, three sons, and five daughters, in brass
plates fixed thereon, no trace of it can now be discovered.
There is, however, on a black slab, fixed against the north wall
of Sir Thomas More’s chapel, an inscription to the memory
of Arthur Gorges, Esq. (eldest son of Sir Arthur Gorges), who
died in 1668. He married Mary, daughter of Lord
Bayning. This was her third marriage. She is here
buried with her husband.
Sir Thomas More’s Chapel,
which was built by him, belonged to the proprietor of his house
until it was sold by Arthur Gorges, Esq., to Lionel, Earl of
Middlesex, when he reserved the chapel to himself, as he
continued to reside at Chelsea in another house. In 1664,
when he sold the last-mentioned house, he only renewed a right of
burial for his family. The chapel passed therefore with the
house, through various owners, to Sir William Milman, and
ultimately it became the freehold property, for many years, of
the late Mr. Mann, of Paradise Row, now called Queen’s Road
West. It is still private property. A large Gothic
arch opens into the chancel, and is supported by pillars, the
capitals of which are ornamented with human heads, rudely but
curiously carved, together with bundles of rods resembling the
fasces or badges of the ancient Roman magistrates; on the
entablature of the easternmost is the date 1527.
Duchess of
Northumberland.—The venerable monument of Lady Jane
Guildford, Duchess of Northumberland, is placed against the north
wall of this chapel. This interesting memorial consists of
an altar-tomb under an arched recess, crowned by four canopies
and supported by five reticulated pillars, the bases of which
rest on the altar-tomb as on a plinth. The faces of the
tomb are divided into panels, containing quatrefoils enclosing
shields, and one coat of arms remains. The back of the
recess is divided into three compartments by small graduated buttresses;
that on the west contained the arms, and sons, while that on the
east displays the effigies of the Duchess and her
daughters. The soffit of this recess is richly groined, the
canopies are divided by graduated buttresses with pinnacles at
their apices; they consist of a trefoiled arch with angular
pediments crocketed, and terminating in rich finials, and the
spandrils are panelled. The frieze, formed by two
cavittoes, is ornamented, the lower with rosettes, and the upper
with portcullis and rosettes arranged alternately. The
whole is surmounted by a cornice of foliage. The Duchess
appears in the front, kneeling, habited in a surcoat, with her
arms richly emblazoned, originally in enamel. Behind her
are her daughters, with their Christian names engraved over their
heads in Gothic letters. On the left side were represented,
on a brass plate, (now long torn off) the effigies of her
sons. The inscription states that the Duchess had issue
thirteen children, eight sons and five daughters. She died
“at her maner of Chelsey, ye 22 daye of January, in ye
second yere of ye reigne of our Sovereyne Lady Queene Mary the
first, and in A.D MDLV., on whose
soul Jesus have mercy.”
Sir W. Milman.—On the same
wall as the preceding is the monument of this gentleman, who died
in 1713. There is also another to the memory of several of
the same family.
Sir Robert Stanley.—The
monument of this distinguished resident is at the east end of the
chapel. Two figures, representing Justice and Fortitude,
support the arms of Stanley, and three large urns; on the centre
one, on a medallion, is the bust of Sir Robert in alto relievo,
who is represented with whiskers but no beard. On the urns,
on each side, are medallions of two of his children, whose deaths
are noticed on the monument. He died in 1632, and was the
second son of the “Earle of Darbie.”
Near the principal window here is a small brass plate fixed
into a marble tablet to the memory of Humphrey Peshall, Esq., who
died in 1650.
There are a few other inscriptions in different parts of the
church, but the principal and most ancient ones have been all
noticed. We will now proceed, therefore, to describe some
of the monuments in the old churchyard.
Dr. Chamberlayne.—On the south side,
fronting the river, there are several monuments to the memory of
this family, for the erection of which and for making a vault Dr.
Chamberlayne obtained a grant from the parish, in consideration
of a benefaction which will probably be mentioned
hereafter. He was buried here in 1703. On the left
side of the western window, on a large mural slab, is an
inscription to his memory. The latter part of it is
remarkable:—“He was so studious of doing good to all
men, and especially to posterity, that he ordered some of his
books, covered with wax, to be buried with him, which may be of
use in times to come. God preserve thee, O traveller! go,
and imitate him. This monument, not to be rashly violated,
his friend, Walter Harris, Doctor of Physic, caused to be erected
as a testimony both of his respect and grief.”
“Dr. Harris evinced some singularity of opinion,”
says Mr. Faulkner, “in supposing that posterity would gain
any information from works thus entombed with the body of their
author; but whatever might have been the intention, his views in
depositing the books in the tomb of his friend have been
frustrated, as, some years since, Dr. Chamberlayne’s tomb
yielded to the injuries of time, and, on examination, it was
discovered that the damp and moisture admitted by the general
decay, had totally obliterated almost every appearance of them;
his seal, with his arms, was however still perfect.”
A Female Heroine.—One of the
inscriptions to the memory of the Chamberlayne family is as
follows:—In a vault hard by lieth Anne, sole daughter of
Edward Chamberlayne, LL.D., who long declining wedlock, and
aspiring above her sex and age, fought under her brother, with
arms and manly attire, in a fire-ship, against the French, for
six hours, on the 30th June, 1690. After returning home she
married Sir John Spragg, with whom she lived very affectionately
for eighteen months, but, giving birth to a child, she died a few
days after in 1691!
On the north side of the churchyard, on a mural monument, is
an inscription to the memory of John Pennant, Esq., who died in
1709.
Sir Hans Sloane, Bart.—In the
south-east corner is a large and handsome monument to the memory
of this distinguished resident in the parish, and of his
lady. As frequent notices are taken of Sir Robert Stanley
in this work, it is only necessary here to give a brief
description of the tomb. It is composed of Portland stone,
on the top of which, under a portico, supported by four
pillars, is placed a vase of white marble, with four serpents
entwined around it, executed out of one piece; on each side is an
entablature, the arms on one, and the crest on the other.
It was executed by Wilton, the statuary, and was caused to be
erected there by his two daughters, Elizabeth Cadogan and Sarah
Stanley. Sir Hans Sloane died in 1753, in his 92nd
year. Lady Sloane died in 1724.
Henry S. Woodfall, Esq.—Near
the north-east corner of the churchyard, on a flat stone, was
some years since an inscription to the memory of Henry S.
Woodfall, the celebrated printer of the Letters of Junius, who
spent the latter part of his life in calm retirement amongst his
Chelsea friends. He was an associate of many distinguished
literary characters, and died in 1805.
Philip Miller, Esq.—Close to
the preceding spot is an obelisk to the memory of Philip Miller,
Curator of the Botanic Gardens, Chelsea, and Author of the
Gardeners’ Dictionary, &c. He died in 1771, aged
80. This monument was erected by the Fellows of the
Linnæan and Horticultural Societies in 1815.
Against the wall of the old Vestry Room (now School Room) are
tablets to the memory of Thomas Bowes, M.D., F.R.S., William
Moncrieff, Professor of Humanity at St. Andrew’s, and Mrs.
Methuen. The dates of these are 1723 and 1732.
These are the principal raised cenataphs and mural tablets in
this ancient churchyard.
On the 22nd of January, 1818, the following resolution was
unanimously carried at a meeting in Vestry
assembled:—“Resolved that this meeting sensibly feels
the propriety as well as the necessity of an organ being placed
in the parochial Church, and that the best means to effect this
desirable object will be by voluntary subscription, and that it
be immediately entered into.” A committee was
appointed to carry this resolution into effect, and Luke
Thomas Flood, Esq., was requested to become the treasurer, but,
although a great many contributions were received, the aggregate
sum was insufficient for the purpose, and the money was tendered
back to the subscribers. This failure, and the offer made,
occasioned considerable amusement amongst some of the
parishioners, and many laughable squibs were printed and
circulated. The most ludicrous of these was a poetic
effusion, written by a gentleman of education and who was not
altogether a stranger in literary circles. It was entitled
“The Organ in the Suds,” and embodied much of
that wit and humour which is so frequently displayed in
“Punch.” Sometime
afterwards, however, the effort was successfully renewed, and an
organ was purchased. The two principal candidates for
organist were Mr. Goss, then comparatively unknown in the musical
world, but who has since risen to eminence as a composer, and is
now organist at St. Paul’s Cathedral, and Mr. Ling, who had
become a great favourite with many of the subscribers. The
feeling amongst the friends of these gentlemen was very strongly
manifested, and the proceedings on the day of election were
characterized by much excitement. Mr. Ling obtained the
greatest number of votes from the subscribers, and consequently
was elected. Mr. Goss, however, was appointed organist of
the New Church, when it was completed, by the Church Trustees,
agreeably to the decision of Dr. Crotch, Mr. Attwood, and some
others, who were requested to decide on the relative
qualifications of the candidates. There were a great many
parishioners present on this occasion.
From the Report of the Old Church Organ Committee, dated Feb.
16, 1819, a copy of which is now before me, it appears that the
entire amount received was £325 4s. 6d.; that
the organ cost £200, and that the expenses altogether were
no less than 125 4s. 6d., including £24
4s. for a Faculty, and £25 to Mr. H. Bevington, for
removing the organ and keeping it in repair for twelve months, as
per agreement. The remaining expenditure was for necessary
alterations in the gallery, and for fittings, &c. The
organ had been previously erected in a private mansion, which
will explain the charge for removal, and the sum paid for the
organ was considered at that time to be a great bargain.
The singing, prior to the erection of the organ, was indeed
very bad, being almost entirely confined to the school children,
who were placed in galleries specially erected for them, at the
extreme western part of the church, and so close to the ceiling
that a grown person could scarcely stand upright in them.
A circumstance occurred at the church, about the year 1809, of
a singular character. There had been some very high tides
during the week, and on the following Sunday morning the waters
rose several feet against the southern boundary wall, which
rendered the employment of a boat necessary to convey those of
the congregation who resided in the neighbourhood near to
Battersea Bridge to the western entrance of the church.
Although there have been some very high spring tides since that
time, I am happy to say, the congregation have always been
enabled to walk to the Old Church without the least fear of being
drowned on their way to it! The raising of the road, and
other alterations, have no doubt checked such overflowings at
this particular spot.
The next event is one of unusual interest. The statement
may be relied upon as authentic, and the circumstance of its not
having gained publicity has been owing to the few persons who
witnessed it and the secrecy enjoined, but after nearly sixty
years have elapsed, and the individuals concerned being long
since deceased, the particulars may now be fairly disclosed
without any breach of confidence.
A short time after the conclusion of Divine Service, on a
Sunday morning, a gentleman alighted from a carriage and
proceeded to the Vestry Room, where two others were waiting his
arrival. As soon as the congregation had dispersed, the
parties, with two or three parochial officers, &c., went to
the entrance of the middle aisle, and the inner door being
closed, the person especially referred to hurriedly knelt
down. A paper was then placed in his hand, which was a
recantation of certain opprobrious epithets that he had applied
to a lady in one of the streets in the parish, stigmatizing her
publicly by a term which the reader can easily supply. When
he recited the offensive words he laid particular emphasis on
them, evidently in a spirit of bravado and not of
contrition. Penance and penitence were not in any way,
apparently, considered by him as synonymous terms. There is
scarcely an individual who would suppose that such an event
occurred, at so comparatively recent a period as sixty years ago,
in the old Parish Church of St. Luke, Chelsea.
On Wednesday night, the 27th of December, 1827, this church
was sacrilegiously broken into, and the following articles
stolen, viz., two plated flagons, two plated chalices, two plated
salvers, a blue cloth covering the Communion Table, and a table
cloth and napkin for the same; a crimson cushion and hanging for
the pulpit, the brass branches from the pulpit and those from the
chandeliers in the middle aisle. On Thursday night, the 1st
of February following, the church was again entered and robbed of
the chandeliers, the brass curtain rods, and the cushions from
the churchwardens’ and overseers’ pews.
A reward of £100 was offered by the Secretary of State,
and £70 by the parish, for the discovery of the robbers,
who were soon after taken, tried at Newgate, and condemned to be
transported for life.
The following is a list of the names of most of the rectors,
commencing with the earliest one recorded, and terminating with
the Hon. and Rev. G. V. Wellesley, D.D., who continued of course
rector when the new St. Luke’s Church was completed.
The list of subsequent rectors will be found placed in the notice
of that church:—
Patrons.
|
Name.
|
Institution.
|
Edward II.
|
Roger de Berners
|
1316
|
„
|
Nicholas Hosbound
|
1339
|
Edward III.
|
Martyn de Moulish
|
1348
|
„
|
William Palmer
|
1368
|
Abbot & Conv. West.
|
Thomas de Preston
|
1368
|
There were
altogether 29 Rectors instituted by the Abbot and Convent of
Westminster.
|
Sir
Thomas More
|
John Larke [19a]
|
1530
|
„
|
John Richardson [19b]
|
1543
|
Duchess of Somerset
|
Richard Ward [19c]
|
1585
|
C. Cheyne, Esq.
|
Adam Littleton, D.D.
|
1669
|
Viscount Cheyne
|
John King, D.D.
|
1694
|
Sir Hans Sloane
|
Sloane Elsmere, D.D.
|
1732
|
„
|
Reginald Heber, M.A.
|
1766
|
Earl Cadogan and Henry Stanley
|
Thomas Drake, D.D.
|
1770
|
Lord Cadogan
|
W. B. Cadogan, M.A.
|
1775
|
Lady Mendip and Mrs. D’Oyley
|
Charles Sturgess, M.A.
|
1797
|
Earl Cadogan
|
Hon. and Rev. Dr. Wellesley
|
1805
|
The Rev. Dr. Littleton was educated at Westminster School,
under the celebrated Dr. Busby, and afterwards became Prebendary
of Westminster. He was well skilled in the Oriental
languages and in rabinnical learning. He died at Chelsea in
1694, in the 67th year of his age.
The Rev. Dr. John King was a divine of considerable literary
eminence. Amongst a variety of works he published a sermon,
entitled, “The Divine Favour the best Alliance; or,
Repentance the Safest Sanctuary in Times of Danger; preached at
the Parish Church of Chelsey,” in 1701. There is in
the British Museum a small quarto volume, in manuscript, by Dr.
King, containing “Remarks on the Life of Sir Thomas
More,” and a letter, designed for Mr. Hearne, respecting
Sir T. More’s house at Chelsea. He died in this
parish in 1732, aged 80, much respected, and was buried at
Pertenhall. The family of Dr. King bear the same arms with
Robert King, the first Bishop of Oxford.
The Rev. Dr. Sloane Elsmere died in 1776, and left behind him
a volume of sermons to be published for the benefit of the
“Girls’ Charity School,” of which he was the
original founder. He was a relation of Sir Hans Sloane.
The
Rev. Reginald Heber received his school education at the Free
School, Manchester, from whence he removed to Brasenose College,
Oxford. Mr. Heber, in 1766, succeeded to a considerable
estate (his elder brother dying unmarried) at Hodnet, in
Shropshire; and in the same year he was inducted to the rectory
of Chelsea, the presentation to which had several years before
been purchased for him by his brother. He found the
rectoral house in bad condition, and partly rebuilt and greatly
improved the whole of it. In 1770 he exchanged the rectory
of Chelsea with Dr. Drake, rector of Amersham, Bucks, for Malpas,
in Cheshire. Mr. Heber married, in 1773, the daughter of
the Rev. Martin Bayly, which lady died the following year,
leaving an infant son, Richard Heber, who became Member for the
University of Oxford. Eight years after he married,
secondly, the daughter of Dr. Cuthbert Allanson, by whom he had
two sons, Reginald, the late lamented Bishop of Calcutta—a
prelate whose memory is revered by Christians of all
denominations—the other son was Thomas Cuthbert Heber, and
he had also one daughter. Mr. Heber died at Malpas in 1804,
in his 76th year.
The Hon. and Rev. William Bromley Cadogan, second son of Lord
Cadogan, was born in 1751, and had his education at Westminster
School, from whence he was removed to Christ Church College,
Oxford. He obtained several prizes at the University for
classical knowledge. On the death of Dr. Drake he was
presented to the rectory of Chelsea. He also became vicar
of St. Giles’s, Reading. Mr. Faulkner gives a
singular anecdote relating to the unsolicited offer of this
vicarage to Mr. Cadogan. Lord Bathurst, who was then
Chancellor, called at Lord Cadogan’s house, and desired to
see him. His lordship was not at home; and the servants,
seeing Lord Bathurst very plainly dressed, admitted him into the
hall only, having no suspicion of his high rank. The
Chancellor therefore wrote a note at the hall table, requesting
Lord Cadogan to accept the vicarage of St. Giles’s,
Reading, for his son. The offer of so valuable a
preferment, and so near to the family seat at Caversham, was
peculiarly acceptable to Lord Cadogan. It appeared,
however, that the parishioners were deeply affected by the death
of the Rev. Mr. Talbot, their late vicar, and equally grieved at
the appointment of his successor; but they flattered themselves
that the new vicar, being a young gentleman of noble family,
would feel no disposition to do the duties himself, and that the
Rev. Mr. Halward, who had been recently appointed, and towards
whom they already were much attached, might be continued in
the curacy. A petition for this purpose was presented to
Mr. Cadogan, but it was rejected with strong marks of
disapprobation. The old congregation therefore became
dispersed. Some of them, under the patronage of the
Countess of Huntingdon, opened a place for Divine worship for
themselves, while others, who were unwilling to leave the church
altogether, thought that they perceived marks of sincerity in his
conduct and preaching, attempted, by frequent admonitory letters,
to convince Mr. Cadogan of what they considered to be his
“errors,” and to set him “right.”
On this occasion several letters passed between him and Mrs.
Talbot, the widow of the previous vicar, whose house was opened
for religious exercises, and where prayer was occasionally
offered up for his conversion. Mr. Cadogan is said to have
been highly offended, but at length, humbled and subdued, he fell
at the feet of accumulated kindness, and confessed to the last
moment of his life, that “Mrs. Talbot’s letters and
example were the principal means of leading him to the saving
knowledge of Christ.” It produced, it appears, a
great change in his manner of preaching, and led the way to his
intimacy with the Rev. Mr. Hill, Mr. Romaine, and others, who
were distinguished by the title of popular preachers. He
likewise offered the curacy to Mr. Halward, who previously he had
but “lightly esteemed,” but that gentleman had then
accepted some preferment which prevented him from acceding to the
offer. Mr. Cadogan divided his time between Chelsea and
Reading; but finding his labours in both places too arduous, he
let the rectory-house, and left Chelsea in charge of the Rev. Mr.
Middleton, his curate, except at the season of Lent, and of the
Sacrament, on which occasions the church was crowded. Mr.
Cadogan was seized at Reading on a Thursday evening, after his
lecture, with an inflammation of the bowels, and departed this
life on the following Tuesday, expressing with his lips that
which was his “glorious theme, the unbounded love of
Christ.” He died in 1797, aged 46.
A monument, designed by Bacon, is erected in the church at
Reading. Beneath the inscription are the crosier or
pastoral staff; the rod of Aaron, which budded and yielded
almonds; and the book mentioned in the Revelations, as sealed
with seven seals.
The Rev. Charles Sturges was presented to this rectory in
1797. Respectful mention is made of him in Mrs.
Trimmer’s publication on the Sunday Schools of Old
Brentford. He has a copy of Latin verses in the Musæ
Etonenses, and another in the Academiæ Cantabrigiensis
Luctus, on the death of George II. The sudden
death of Mr. Sturges was another verification of that passage in
our Burial Service, “In the midst of life we are in
death,” &c., which he had read many times at the graves
of the parishioners. He expired on the 22nd of April, 1805,
after only half an hour’s illness, from an apoplectic
seizure, immediately before the hour of dinner, at the rectory of
Loddington, Northamptonshire, and his remains were interred in
the chancel of that church.
The Hon. and Rev. Gerald Valerian Wellesley, D.D., succeeded
Mr. Sturgess. A notice of him will be found in the account
of the New Parish Church.
The Rev. R. H. Davies, M.A., who had been previously senior
curate of the new Parish Church, succeeded the Rev. John Rush
when he died in 1855, as Incumbent of the Old Church.
Through his exertions and instrumentality, a small vestry, or
robing room, has been attached to the church. The great
inconvenience and injury to the Minister’s health, arising
from his having to walk across the churchyard in his robes, and
also to change them, especially in the winter months, had been
sadly experienced and justly complained of by almost every
officiating clergyman in my recollection. Very considerable
alterations and great improvements have likewise been made in the
interior of the church, during the fourteen years that Mr. Davies
has been the Incumbent, without interfering greatly with its
ancient architecture. Perhaps the best way to convey an
adequate idea of what has been accomplished will be to give an
account of the expenses, taken from a Report recently
published.
The New Gallery
|
£395
|
11
|
0
|
Re-pewing
|
420
|
13
|
6
|
New Stoves, &c.
|
44
|
15
|
0
|
Iron Railing
|
65
|
0
|
0
|
Ventilators
|
32
|
18
|
9
|
East Window
|
83
|
18
|
7
|
Reading Desk
|
5
|
3
|
6
|
New Vestry, &c
|
94
|
14
|
3
|
Corona in Chancel
|
12
|
0
|
0
|
Alterations to Organ
|
60
|
0
|
0
|
A great
part of the cost of these extensive and essential alterations was
contributed by the Trustees for building the new St. Luke’s
Church; a very large portion by the liberal contributions of the
congregation, and a part also by the Rev. Mr. Davies’s own
friends not connected with the church, and others to whom he
applied. The schools, as will be seen, have been greatly
benefitted, and various charitable societies established, by
which means vast blessings have been conferred on the poor in the
neighbourhood.
In the year 1706, a Vestry Room and School Room, with
apartments for a master, were erected at the expense of W. Petyt,
Esq. [23] There is a descriptive
inscription upon the west front of the school room, which records
the donation, at the conclusion of which it is added, “To
all which may God give a blessing. Soli Deo
Gloria.” The original deed of gift is entered in the
Vestry minutes. Mr. Petyt resided in Church (lane) Street,
and died there in 1707, aged 71, but was buried in the Temple
Church. He was a member of the Inner Temple, and Keeper of
the Records in the Tower of London.
In 1819 there were 100 boys and girls educated and clothed
free of any expense to their parents. The girls at that
period were instructed in a house rented in Lordship’s
Place, near Cheyne Row. These schools, with the master and
mistress, were transferred to the new School Rooms, at the back
of the present Parish Church.
The Rev. Mr. Davies recently appealed to the Vestry for a
grant of £100 to make considerable repairs in this old
building, it being in a most dilapidated condition (the ground
floor, which was the Vestry Room, was for some time previously
used as a fire-engine station), and the one school room
altogether inadequate for the proper accommodation of the
children of the district, promising himself to be answerable for
the deficiency in the amount of the expenditure. The
Vestry, in consideration of its having been bequeathed to the
parish, complied with the request. Mr. Davies likewise
obtained for the same laudable object a grant of £20 from
the Ragged School Union, the congregation generously contributing
the remaining sum required to put the building in thorough
repair. The entire cost was rather more than
£279. There are now three good school-rooms instead
of one, as was formerly the case, and consequently the number of
children attending the schools has been greatly augmented.
It may here be mentioned that the “watchhouse,”
and the “stocks” for vagrants, formerly stood close
to the river, opposite the church.
Blackstone, in his
“Commentaries,” says that manors are, in substance,
as ancient as the Saxon Constitution. The manor of
Chilchell, or Chelcheya (Chelsea), was given it appears, in the
reign of Edward the Confessor to the Abbot and Convent of
Westminster, by Thurstan, the governor of the king’s
palace, who held it of him. This gift was confirmed by a
charter, which transfers the manor, with all its rights and
appurtenances, as fully as it was held by Thurstan:
“besides, together with this manor, as a free gift, every
third tree, and every third horse load of fruits grown in the
neighbouring wood at Kyngesbyrig” (now called
Knightsbridge). This charter, which is in the Saxon
language, is still preserved in the British Museum. It is
sealed with a waxen seal, suspended by a silken string, after the
Norman fashion, in the front of which are the effigies of the
king, holding in his right hand a cross, and in his left a globe;
on the reverse is the same image, holding in his right hand a
spear surmounted by a dove, and bearing in his left a sword, with
this inscription on both sides, “The seal of Edward King of
England.”
King William, by a charter dated at Westminster, confirmed the
land to the Monastery of Westminster.
The
Record of Domesday Book, to which we are so greatly indebted, was
begun in 1080, and completed in 1086. In it is mentioned
the lands in Chelsea, then in possession of the Church of
Westminster.
The general description given of menial persons, including
those in the manor of Chelsea, at the period when the survey of
the land belonging to the lords, or great landowners, was taken,
shows the lamentable state of thousands of our
fellow-creatures. Slaves were allowed nothing but
subsistence and clothes, and were distinguished from freemen by a
peculiar dress. Long hair was a mark of dignity and
freedom; for that reason, slaves, (menial persons,) were obliged
to shave their heads, by which they were reminded of their
inferiority of condition. At length Henry VIII. granted
manumission to two of his slaves and their families, for which he
assigned this just reason: “God at first created all men
equally free by nature, but many had been reduced to slavery by
the laws of men. We believe it, therefore, to be a pious
act, and meritorious in the sight of God, to set certain of our
slaves at liberty from their bondage.” The granting
of leases, which afterwards followed, almost completely
emancipated the “villain-slave,” so that at the time
of Elizabeth, scarcely any person existed to whom the former laws
applied.
Gervace, abbot of Westminster, aliened the manor of
Chelchithe, to his mother Dameta and her heirs. Afterwards
it was held by the heirs of Bartholomew de Fontibus.
Several court rolls of this manor, during the reigns of King
Edward III. and Richard II. are among the records of the Dean and
Chapter of Westminster.
A brewer, of the name of North, was presented at one of these
courts for not putting up a sign as was customary; and at another
the wife of Philip Rose was fined 6d. for being a common
babbler.
Simon Bayle appears to have been lessee of the manor house, 33
Hen. VI., and from that period there is a total deficiency of
records till the reign of Henry VII.
Sir Reginald Bray was now in possession of the manor. He
was Receiver General to Sir Henry Stafford, a younger son of the
Duke of Buckingham, who married the widow of the Earl of
Richmond, and mother of Henry VII. There are many
interesting historical particulars respecting Sir Reginald
Bray. He was buried in the chapel of St. George,
Windsor.
From Sir Reginald Bray the manor descended to Margaret, only
child of his next brother, John, who married Sir William Sandys,
created afterwards Lord Sands. He was one of those peers
who subscribed the articles exhibited to Henry VIII. against
Cardinal Wolsey; and the next year was also one who signed the
declaration to the Pope, intimating the danger of losing his
supremacy, in case he did not comply with the king’s wishes
in regard to his divorce from Queen Catherine. He died in
1542.
There have been various surmises as to the correct definition
of “Sands End,” in Fulham parish, which immediately
adjoins Chelsea, and is called such for a short distance. I
venture to suggest the following explanation. Lord Sands,
being Lord of the Manor of Chelsea, his rights terminated at the
spot just mentioned, and to record this fact the people of Fulham
called it Sands End, signifying thereby that Lord Sands’s
jurisdiction and property ended there. Perhaps this idea is
not original, but I have never heard it thus explained, and
therefore I have given it.
This Lord Sands, a few years previous to his death, conveyed
to Henry VIII. the manor of Chelsea, with certain closes or land
situated at Kensal Green, near Wilsden, containing about
137¾ acres. [26] In 1861 there were in that part
of Kensal which belongs to this parish 591 houses and 3223
inhabitants. The number of houses has since increased, and
the present population may be estimated at 3500 persons.
There are a great many highly respectable residents, and a large
number of superior new houses are continually being erected in
the adjoining wealthy parishes, which will ultimately increase
the trade and value of property in the entire district.
There are also several new Churches and Chapels built within the
last few years in the neighbourhood. The Paddington Canal,
which passes through the detached parts of Chelsea and
Kensington, was opened with an aquatic procession on the 10th of
July, 1801, in the presence of a vast concourse of
spectators.
“Henry VIII. was probably induced to possess this
manor,” says Mr. Faulkner, “from having observed, in
his frequent visits to Sir Thomas More, the pleasantness of the
situation on the banks of the Thames; and from the salubrity of
the air, deeming it a fit residence for his infant daughter, the
Princess Elizabeth, then between three and four years of
age. But, on his obtaining it, finding that the manor house
was ancient, and at that time in possession of the Lawrence family, [27] he erected a new manor house on the
eastern side of Winchester House,” which stood on the site
of the river-side entrance to Oakley Street, Cheyne Walk.
It was “here the young Princess was nurtured, and it most
probably was her chief residence during her father’s
reign. In 1540, Sir Francis Bryan was made ‘Keeper of
Chelsey’ for life, by patent, 31 Hen. VIII.”
On the marriage of Henry with Catharine Parr, this manor was
assigned to that Queen as part of her jointure. Most
unfortunately for her future welfare, Catharine, after the
decease of the king, placed her affections upon the brother of
Jane Seymour, Thomas Lord Seymour, to whom she was subsequently
married. Whatever she might have dreaded from the temper of
her previous royal husband, was realized in the accumulated
injuries she received from Seymour, whose turbulent passions and
uncontrolled ambition led him to aspire to the hand of the
Princess Elizabeth, who then resided at Chelsea under the
Queen’s care. She died at Sudeley Castle in 1548, not
without suspicion of poison.
After the death of Catharine Parr, the manor was bestowed on
the Duke of Northumberland by Edward VI. On the accession
of Mary, the duke was impeached, attainted of high treason, and
beheaded in 1553.
Jane, Duchess of Northumberland, was a most singular instance
of the vicissitudes of fortune, having been the wife of one of
the greatest men of that age, she lived to see her husband lose
his head on a scaffold; to see one son share his father’s
fate, another die in a prison, and the rest of her children live
only by permission. Amidst this accumulated distress, which
was heightened by the confiscation of her property, she displayed
great firmness of mind, though left destitute of fortune and
friends, till the arrival of some of the Spanish nobility, who
interested themselves so warmly in her favour, that they
prevailed on the Queen to reinstate her in some of her former
possessions. She made a will, written with her own hand,
unassisted by the advice of any learned in the laws.
Amongst a variety of other bequests, she left to Sir Henry Sidney
the gold and green hangings in the manor house, “water
side, at Chelsey.” “My will,” she says,
“is earnestly and effectually, that little solemnities be
made for me, for I had even have a thousand foldes my debts to be
paide, and the poore to be given unto, than anye pompe to be
shewed upon my wretched carkes; therefore to the wormes will I
goe, as I have afore wrytten in all poyntes, as you will answer
yt afore God; and you breke any one jot of it, your wills
hereafter may chaunce be as well broken.”
Notwithstanding the strict injunctions contained in her will, she
was buried with great funeral pomp, in February, 1535; two
heralds attending, with many mourners, six dozen of torches, and
two white branches, and “a canopy borne over her effigies
in wax, in a goodly hearse to the church of Chelsey.”
Ann of Cleves, after her divorce from Henry VIII., appears to
have resided in this manor house, where, it is said, she died in
1557, and was buried in Westminster.
Queen Elizabeth, in 1559, leased this manor to Ann, Duchess of
Somerset, widow of the late Protector, for life. Her
Majesty afterwards granted the manor to John Stanhope, Esq.,
vice-chamberlain of her household. On the accession of
James I. he was created Lord Stanhope, of Harrington.
After several families had held the manor, we find it in
possession of the Cheyne family.
Charles Cheyne, afterwards Viscount Newhaven, married Lady
Jane, eldest daughter and co-heir of William Duke of Newcastle,
with whom he obtained an immense fortune. This lady is
celebrated for her excellent endowments, which she exhibited in a
distinguished manner during the civil wars in the reign of
Charles I., in her keeping the garrisoned house of her father,
where she was left with one of her sisters, against the enemy,
till, overpowered by their force, she was made prisoner, but, by
the success of the royal arms, it was retaken. Her duty and
piety to her exiled father, in making repeated remittances, which
she effected by the sale of some rich jewels left her by her
grandmother, the Lady Ogle, after the vain efforts she had made
for his pardon, deserve to be remembered. Lord Cheyne, as
we learn from the inscription on Lady Jane’s monument,
purchased the manor of Chelsea with a part of the large dower she
brought him on his marriage. His lordship very highly
embellished the house and gardens, and they excited some
curiosity at the time. Mr. Evelyn, in his Diary, thus
notices them: “I made my Lord Cheyney a visit at Chelsea,
and saw those ingenious water-works invented by Mr. Winstanley,
in which were some things very surprising and
extraordinary.” This Mr. Winstanley was the ingenious
architect who built the Eddystone Lighthouse, and perished in it
when blown down by the great storm in 1703. When Lord
Cheyne died in 1698, he was succeeded by William, his son and
successor.
Sir Hans Sloane, Bart., purchased the manor of William Lord
Cheyne, the second and last Viscount Newhaven, in the year
1712. Sir Hans was descended from a family originally of
Scotland, but settled in the north of Ireland, where he received
his first education. At that early age he evinced a very
strong inclination to study the works of Nature, which he pursued
with uncommon application through the rest of his life.
Being desirous of improving himself in the several branches of
physic, to the profession of which he was ardently devoted, he
came to London, and resided in a house adjoining to the
laboratory of Apothecaries’ Hall. Here Mr. Sloane
acquired a perfect knowledge of the preparations and uses of most
chemical medicines; and at the same time prosecuted his favourite
science of botany in the Apothecaries’ Gardens at
Chelsea. He ultimately became President of the Royal
College of Physicians, London, and associated and corresponded
with most of the eminent men of his day. He had been
previously Secretary to the Royal Society, which he held for 20
years without any salary, and was the intimate friend of Sir
Isaac Newton. In the last sickness of Queen Anne he was
called in to her assistance, as one of her physicians, as he had
been on some former occasions. He was created a baronet by
George I., an honour which had never before been conferred upon
any physician in England. Upon purchasing the manor of
Chelsea, he gave a portion of the ground of his garden to the
Apothecaries’ Company, in order to perpetuate it for the
improvement of botanical knowledge, and to communicate to others
that instruction which he had himself received there.
Besides the donation of so large and valuable a piece of ground,
in a delightful situation on the banks of the Thames, and near
the metropolis, he contributed largely towards building the
stairs at the water-side gate, and an additional sum towards the
expenses of the garden. When Sir Isaac Newton died, Sir
Hans Sloane was chosen as President of the Royal Society, and
continued in that high office for fourteen successive
years. His decay was very gradual, and foretold that he
would one day “drop like a fruit fully ripe.”
He died in 1753, and was interred in the churchyard of
Chelsea, in the same vault with his lady. His funeral was
attended by many persons of distinction, and several Fellows of
the Royal Society. He has been styled “the father of
natural history in these realms.”
Sir Hans Sloane’s invaluable Museum, sold to the nation
at his decease for £20,000, being about a fourth of its
value, was the nucleus, and so far the first foundation, of the
British Museum. He bequeathed one moiety of the manor of
Chelsea to his daughter Sarah, the wife of George Stanley, Esq.,
of Paultons, in Hampshire, and the remainder to his second
daughter, the lady of Charles Lord Cadogan, in which family the
property still remains. Hence the names of Cheyne Walk,
Hans Place, Sloane Street, Cadogan Place, Oakley Street, and
Paultons Square. The eldest son of Earl Cadogan takes his
father’s second title, Viscount Chelsea.
Mrs. Stanley, daughter of Sir Hans Sloane, left one son and
two daughters; Hans Stanley, Esq., the son, who died in 1780, and
bequeathed to his sisters, Anne, the wife of W. Ellis, Esq.,
afterwards Lord Mendip, and Sarah, the wife of Christopher
D’Oyley, Esq., his moiety of this manor, with the reversion
to Lord Cadogan and his heirs.
Sir Thomas More purchased an estate
at Chelsea, about the year 1520, and built himself a house, as
Erasmus describes it, “neither mean nor subject to envy,
yet magnificent and commodious enough.” The site of
this house has been long disputed. The Rev. Dr. King, (who
is noticed amongst the rectors of the Old Church), in his
“Letter designed for Mr. Hearne,” relative to Sir
Thomas More’s house, and which is in the British Museum,
says, “As seven cities in Greece contended for the
birthplace of Homer, so there are no fewer than four houses in
this parish which lay claim to Sir Thomas More’s residence,
viz.: that which is now the Duke of Beaufort’s; that which
was lately Sir Joseph Alstone’s; that which was once Sir
Reginald Bray’s, and afterwards William Powell’s,
which is now built into several tenements; and that which was
lately Sir John Danvers’s, which is also now pulled down;
and on part of the ground a small street is built, called
Danvers Street, and some other houses. Now of all these, in
my opinion, Beaufort House bids fairest to be the place where Sir
Thomas More’s stood.” He then proceeds to give
his reasons for arriving at this conclusion, which, when
considered in connection with the statements of other writers on
the subject, clearly establishes the correctness of Dr.
King’s opinion. Sir Thomas More’s house,
therefore, we will conclude stood almost on the site of what is
now called Beaufort Street, facing Battersea Bridge. After
his death, however, very considerable alterations and additions
were made by succeeding occupants, both in regard to the house
and grounds attached to it. The house, in its altered
state, was pulled down about 140 years ago.
Erasmus gives a pleasing description of the manner of
More’s living with his wife and family at Chelsea.
“There he conversed with his wife,” says he,
“his son, his daughter-in-law, his three daughters and
their husbands, with eleven grand-children. There is not a
man living so affectionate to his children as he; he loveth his
old wife as well as if she was a young maid.” Fox, in
his Martyrology, however, throws a sad blast over the character
of More. He states that More used to bind heretics to a
tree in his garden, called “The Tree of Troth,” but
this was denied by More himself. Henry VIII., to whom he
owed his rise and fall, frequently came to Chelsea to visit
him. Sometimes the king would ascend to the house-top with
him to observe the stars and converse on astronomy. Amongst
the illustrious foreigners entertained and patronised by Sir
Thomas More, may be mentioned Hans Holbein, a celebrated painter,
who lived with him for nearly three years painting portraits of
him, his relations, and friends. It is generally admitted
that he had a house in Chelsea for aged people, whom he daily
relieved.
More delighted in telling the following “merrie
story,” as he termed it:—A friar while preaching
“spyed a poore wyfe of the paryshe whysperyng to her
pew-fellow, and he fallyng angry thereto, cryde out unto her
aloude, ‘Hold thy babble, I byd thee, thou wyfe in the red
hood!’” He regularly attended Chelsea Church,
and very often assisted at the celebration of Mass, and at times
he would put on a surplice and join the quire.
The pathetic story of More’s wit was never so touchingly
illustrated as on the day after he resigned the Great Seal.
He went to Chelsea Church as usual with his wife and family, none
of whom he
had yet informed of his resignation. During the service, as
was his custom, he sat in the choir, in a surplice. After
service it was the custom for one of his attendants to go to her
ladyship’s pew, and say, “My Lord is gone
before.” But this day the Ex-Chancellor came himself,
and making a low bow, said, “Madam, my Lord is
gone.” Then, on their way home, to her great
mortification, he unriddled his mournful pleasantry by telling
her his lordship was gone, in the loss of his official
dignities.
Sir Thomas had four children, three daughters and one son; the
latter was the youngest. His first wife wished very much
for a boy; at last she brought this son, who proved to be of
slender capacity; upon which he said to her, “You have
prayed so long for a boy, that now you have got one that will be
a boy as long as he lives.” The good lady walked away
from him.
By indefatigable application, More cleared the Court of
Chancery of all its causes. One day, having ended a cause,
he called for the next, and was told there was “no other
depending in the Court.” He was delighted to hear it,
and ordered it to be inserted on the records of the Court.
It gave rise to the following epigram, not the worst in the
English language:—
“When More some time had Chancellor been
No More suits did remain;
The same shall never More be seen
Till More be there again.”
The pitiful story of More’s daughter, Margaret, parting
with her beloved father, on the morning of his cruel execution,
is truly affecting. She followed him to the
scaffold—embraced him, implored his blessing, wept upon his
cheek, bidding him in anguish adieu. A second time she went
forward to him, clung round his neck and kissed him, when at
last, notwithstanding his apparent gravity, tears fell from his
eyes * * * and soon afterwards she was severed from him for
ever! It appears that his original intention to be interred
in the Old Church, was unhappily not fulfilled. Dr. King
states that “his body was buried in the chapel of St.
Peter, in the Tower, and his head, after some months, was bought
by his daughter, Margaret, and taken down from London Bridge,
where it was fixed upon a pole, and was buried,” probably
as stated, in St. Dunstan’s, near Canterbury. Aubery,
however, asserts that “after he was beheaded, his trunke
was interred in Chelsey Church, near the middle of the
south wall, where was some slight monument erected, which being
worne by time, Sir John Lawrence, of Chelsey, at his own proper
costs and chardges, built to his memorie a handsome one, with
inscription, of marble.” This statement, as regards
the interment of Sir Thomas More’s body, does not accord
with the opinion of most other writers on the subject.
After the death of More, his mansion was granted in the 28th
of Henry VIII. to Sir William Paulet, afterwards Marquis of
Winchester, to whom Edward VI. granted in fee both that and all
other premises in Chelsea and Kensington, forfeited by his
attainder.
The Marquis of Winchester, who was so much of a courtier as to
accommodate himself to princes as well as to subjects of very
different characters, was, from his natural and acquired
abilities, perfectly qualified to act with propriety in the
highest offices of the state. In the reign of Edward VI. he
was made Lord High Treasurer of England. It is said that by
his councils, in a great measure, the Duke of
Northumberland’s design of setting the Lady Jane Grey on
the throne was prevented; for which good office of loyalty to
them, the Queens, Mary and Elizabeth, continued him in the
Treasurer’s Office, which he enjoyed for thirty years; and
on being asked how he preserved himself in that place through so
many changes of government, he answered, “By being a
willow, and not an oak.” He died in 1572, aged 97
years. The marquis greatly enlarged and improved the house,
and, according to Norden, “adorned Chelsea with stately
buildings.” His eldest son, John, second Marquis of
Winchester, died at Chelsea in 1576. The widow of the first
marquis died in 1586.
Gregory, Lord Dacre, soon afterwards had possession of Sir
Thomas More’s house. He was the son of Thomas Fynes
Lord Dacre, who succeeded his grandfather in the 26th of Henry
VIII.; and who, in 1541, was engaged with some other persons in
chasing the deer in Sir Nicholas Pelham’s park, when a fray
arising between them and the keepers, in which one of the latter
was killed, he was found guilty of being accessary to the murder,
and suffered death accordingly; but his children were restored to
their honours in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. Gregory,
Lord Dacre, died at Chelsea in 1594, without issue; and his
sister Margaret, the wife of Samuel Lennard, Esq., claimed the
barony, and was allowed it in the second of James I.
Lady
Dacre survived her husband but a few months, and bequeathed her
house at Chelsea, with all its appurtenances, to the great Lord
Burleigh, with remainder to his son Robert, afterwards Earl of
Salisbury, and Lord High Treasurer. “I have
seen,” says Lysons, “among the records at the Rolls
Chapel, a pardon of alienation to Sir Robert Cecil, dated June
21, 39th Elizabeth, for acquiring these premises of Thomas Lord
Buckhurst.” This distinguished nobleman, afterwards
Earl of Dorset, was brother to Lady Dacre, and resided frequently
with his sister at Chelsea, but it is not known whether he had
any interest in the estate.
The Earl of Salisbury is supposed to have rebuilt Sir Thomas
More’s house, as the initials of his name were to be seen
on the pipes and in several of the rooms.
Henry Clinton, Earl of Lincoln, bought the house of the Earl
of Salisbury, and probably came immediately to reside in it, as
there are some entries respecting his family in the Parish
Register in the beginning of the year 1609. By his first
wife, Lady C. Hastings, daughter of Francis, Earl of Huntingdon,
he had two sons, Thomas, his successor in the title, and Edward;
and by his second wife, widow of W. Norris, Esq., he had a
daughter, Elizabeth, who married Sir Arthur Gorges, and also two
sons, Henry and Robert. The latter died in 1609, and was
buried at Chelsea.
Sir Arthur Gorges, on the death of Henry, Earl of Lincoln,
became the possessor of the house, and he and Lady Elizabeth, his
wife, in consideration of £4300, sold it to Sir Lionel
Cranfield, afterwards created Earl of Middlesex. It was
described as the “greatest house at Chelsea, with two fore
great courts adjoining, environed with brick walls, also a wharf
(landing-place for a pleasure boat, &c.) lying in front,
having a high brick tower on the east and west ends, and a high
water tower, standing upon the west corner of the wharf, and the
watercourse belonging thereto. An orchard, a garden, having
a peryment standing up in the middle, and a terrace on the north
end thereof, with a banquetting house at the east end of the
terrace, having a marble table in it. A great garden,
dovecote close, containing five acres, the kitchen garden,
brick-barne close, containing ten acres.” Lord
Middlesex held the mansion till 1625, when he sold it to Charles
I., who, in 1627, granted the said house, &c., to the Duke of
Buckingham.
George
Villiers, first Duke of Buckingham, the son of Sir George
Villiers, was born in 1592. By the elegance of his person,
and the courtliness of his address, he gained as great an
ascendance over King James as the favourite of any other prince
is known to have done by a long course of assiduity and
insinuation. The Earl of Clarendon says, that the duke
“was of a most flowing courtesy and affability to all men
who made any address to him, and so desirous to oblige them, that
he did not enough consider the value of the obligation, or the
merit of the person he chose to oblige; from which much of his
misfortune resulted.” He married Lady Catherine
Manners, the daughter of Francis, Earl of Rutland, by whom he had
three sons and a daughter; he was assassinated at Portsmouth in
1628, by one Felton. The eldest son, George, who succeeded
him in his title and estates, being very young at the time of his
father’s murder, was sent to travel during the civil wars;
and returning to England whilst Charles I. was under restraint,
he and his brother, Lord Francis Villiers, thought themselves
obliged to venture their lives and fortunes for the king at the
first opportunity. Soon after, the Parliament voted that he
should be proceeded against as a traitor, and that his estates
should be sequestered.
Sir Thomas More’s house, for such it ought still to be
considered, notwithstanding the great alterations made in it, was
now known as Buckingham House, in consequence of its having been
granted to the first Duke of Buckingham. It appears by the
following extract from a periodical paper after that duke’s
death, to have been in possession of his daughter Mary, who
married James, Duke of Richmond and Lenox: “The Duchess of
Lenox, daughter of the Duke of Buckingham, being then at Oxford,
petitioned the Lords for leave to come to London, or to her house
at Chelsey, to be under Dr. Mayerne’s hands for her health;
a pass was ordered for her, and the concurrence of the Commons
desired.”
Buckingham House, in 1649, having been seized by the
Parliament, was committed to the custody of John Lisle, one of
the Commissioners of the Great Seal. This gentleman’s
own estates were afterwards confiscated, and he then retired to
the continent. He was shot by some unknown person as he was
going to church at Lausanne. A short time after the house
was granted to Sir Bulstrode Whitlock, who resided with his
family at Chelsea for some years.
Sir
Bulstrode Whitlock was the son of a Judge of the Court of
King’s Bench; he wrote a memorial of English affairs from
the latter part of the reign of Charles I. to the
Restoration.
George, the second Duke of Buckingham, soon after the
Restoration, recovered his father’s estates, and was the
possessor of this house for a few years, but was soon obliged to
dispose of it for the benefit of his creditors.
Dryden, in his poem of Absalom and Achitophel, has drawn the
following portrait of this nobleman in the character of
Zimri:—
“A man so various, that he seemed to be
Not one, but all mankind’s epitome:
Stiff in opinions, always in the wrong,
He’s every thing by starts, and nothing long;
But in the course of one revolving moon,
Was Chymist, Fidler, Statesman, and Buffoon.
In squandering wealth, was his peculiar art,
Nothing went unrewarded but desert.
Beggar’d by fools, when still he found, too late
He had his jest, and they had his estate.”
James Plummer, one of the Duke of Buckingham’s principal
creditors, was the person in whose name this house was aliened in
1674, in trust, for George, Earl of Bristol, who is said to have
died at Chelsea, and to have been buried in the church, but there
is no memorial of him, or entry of his interment in the Parish
Register.
George Digby, Earl of Bristol, was born in 1612, and was
educated at Oxford; he soon became distinguished by his
remarkable advancement in all kinds of elegant literature.
In the beginning of the Long Parliament he was disaffected to the
Court; shortly afterwards he appeared a declared enemy to the
Parliament; and having testified his dislike of their proceedings
against Lord Strafford, he was expelled the House of Commons in
1641. Upon the death of the king his lordship was exempted
from pardon by the Parliament, and obliged to live in exile till
the restoration of Charles II., when he recovered all he had
lost; he grew very active in public affairs, spoke frequently in
Parliament, and made himself conspicuous for his enmity to Lord
Clarendon. Lord Bristol died in 1677, “neither loved
nor regretted by any party.” The house at Chelsea he
bequeathed to his Countess, Lady Ann Russell, daughter of
Francis, Earl of Bedford, who sold it in 1682, to the Marquis of
Worcester, created Duke of Beaufort, and who died in 1699.
The name of the house was now changed to Beaufort House.
Mr. Evelyn, in his Diary, makes frequent mention of
it:—“I went with my Lady Sunderland to Chelsey
(1679), and dined with the Countess of Bristol (her mother) in
the great house, formerly the Duke of Buckingham’s, a
spacious and excellent place for the extent of ground and
situation, in a good air. The house is large, but
ill-contrived, though my Lord of Bristol expended much money upon
it. There were divers pictures of Titian and Vandyke, and
some of Bassans, very excellent, especially an Adonis and Venus,
a Duke of Venice, a Butcher in his shambles selling meat to a
Swiss, and of Van Dyck, my Lord of Bristol’s picture, with
the Earl of Bedford’s at length. There was in the
garden a rare collection of orange trees, of which she was
pleased to bestow some upon me.” Again, in 1683, Mr.
Evelyn says, “I went to see what had been done by the Duke
of Beaufort on his house at Chelsey; he had made great
alterations, but might have made a better house with the
materials and the cost he had been at.”
Henry, second Duke of Beaufort, by his will, dated in 1712,
left all his estates, in trust, to be sold, and the produce
appropriated according to a settlement made at his
marriage. The house, however, continued to be the residence
of that noble family till about the year 1720. Mary, relict
of the first duke, died here in 1714, at the good old age of 85
years.
It may here be observed that Chelsea, not only in former
times, but at the present period, 1869, is admitted to be
generally a very healthy parish. This assertion is proved
by the weekly reports given to the Vestry by Dr. Barclay, the
medical officer of health, and which is confirmed by other
gentlemen of the medical profession. The reports read at
the meetings of the Chelsea Board of Guardians, also, shew that a
great many of the inmates of the workhouse live to a very
advanced age; and from peculiar facilities I possessed, many
years ago, I can positively assert that the number of aged
persons, who had for a long period been residents, was greater
than in most of the other suburban parishes.
Sir Hans Sloane, after the mansion had stood empty for several
years, purchased it in 1736, for the sum of £2,500 at a public sale,
and had it pulled down in 1740. The gate, which was built
by Inigo Jones for the Lord Treasurer Middlesex, he gave to the
Earl of Burlington, who removed it to his gardens at Chiswick,
which occasioned the following lines by Pope:—
PASSENGER.
O Gate, how com’st thou here?
GATE.
I was brought from Chelsea last year,
Batter’d with wind and weather;
Inigo Jones put me together;
Sir Hans Sloane,
Let me alone,
Burlington brought me hither.
This gate was placed in an avenue near the house at Chiswick,
and consisted of a portico, supported by two columns of the Doric
order on one side, and pilasters on the other. On two stone
tablets were inscribed: “Builded by Inigo Jones, at
Chelsea, MDCXXI.”
“Given by Sir Hans Sloane, baronet, to the Earl of
Burlington, MDCCXXXVII.”
Bowack thus describes Beaufort House in 1705: “This
house is between two and three hundred feet in length, has a
stately ancient front towards the Thames, also two spacious court
yards, and behind it are very fine gardens. It is so
pleasantly situated, that the late Queen Mary had a great desire
to purchase it before King William built Kensington, but was
prevented by some secret obstacles.”
Attached to the house was a chapel, which appears to have been
attended by a few of the inhabitants. In various marriage
licenses, granted in 1722, and in other years, persons were to be
married in the Parish Church, in the chapel of Chelsea College,
or the chapel of Beaufort House.
The above account of this celebrated mansion cannot fail to be
highly interesting to the generality of readers. Mr.
Faulkner has truly observed, “that few houses can boast of
having been the residence of such a succession of noble and
distinguished characters.”
Beaufort (row) Street, which was begun to be built about
1766, takes its name from the Duke of Beaufort. A portion
of his vast estate was the property of Mr. Long, a very old and
respected parishioner, partly leasehold, under Earl Cadogan, and
some of it, if not all, is still held by that family.
To meet the tastes of all classes of readers, I shall
occasionally deviate from the prescribed order which it was my
original intention to have pursued; by doing so it will remove
the weariness that frequently arises, especially in works of this
description, from dwelling too long on one particular
subject. This motive, I trust, will be accepted as an
apology for apparent digressions.
There was formerly a Ferry a little eastward of the spot where
now stands Battersea Bridge, and consequently not far distant
from the distinguished mansion just described. It belonged
to Thomas, Earl of Lincoln, who sold it in 1618 to William
Blake. After some time it became the property of Sir Walter
St. John, and passed with the Bolingbroke estate to Earl Spencer,
under whom it was held in 1766, when an Act of Parliament was
obtained for building a bridge over the Thames, from Chelsea to
Battersea, and empowering Lord Spencer to build the same.
Fifteen proprietors having subscribed a sum of money each, it was
accordingly begun in 1771, was opened for foot-passengers in the
same year, and in the following year was ready for
carriages. From 1772, when the bridge was finally erected,
to the present time, 1869, is exactly 97 years, and this is the
precise age of it. It is a most unsightly structure of
wood, about one furlong in length, 28 ft. wide, and its cost
rather more than £20,000. The proprietors have a vote
for the counties of Middlesex and Surrey.
Lamps were first placed on the bridge in 1799, and in 1821 and
1822 an iron railing 4-ft. high, on the western side, was
substituted for the original wooden railing, and in 1824, the
eastern side was completed. So far apart were the original
wooden railings, which were placed crossways, that the body of a
child might have passed through them, and, if not observed, no
person cognizant of the fatal accident. There were also, at
the above period, eight projecting recesses, four on each side,
constructed for the safety of foot-passengers, and a slightly
raised pathway made.
The number of lives that have been sacrificed at this bridge,
together with the barges sunken at it, even within the last few
years, is really painful to contemplate. It is a sad
contrast, in every respect, to the elegant structures that now
span the river, and it is to be hoped there will soon be erected
another one in its place—one that will be an ornament to
Chelsea, Battersea, and the metropolis.
That part of the river, known as Chelsea Reach, was so
fashionable a rendezvous of pleasure boats and barges in the
reign of Charles II. that some persons have described the scene
as being a sort of Pall Mall Afloat, and it was called
“Hyde Park on the Thames,” in that king’s
reign. The reach is the widest of any part westward of
London Bridge, which rendered it peculiarly suitable for such
grand aquatic displays. There were dukes and duchesses,
marquises, earls, and barons, with a similar fashionable throng
to that which may still be witnessed in Hyde Park. The
watermen were arrayed in dresses of all colours, and the whole
presented a scene of grandeur which cannot be adequately
described.
Fishing, at the above period, was carried on to a very
considerable extent at Chelsea; but, owing to the fishermen using
unlawful nets, and other causes, it fell into decay, and,
finally, proved an unprofitable speculation. In my earlier
days two or three fishermen earned a scanty living by selling the
fish they caught, and a few lovers of angling also occasionally
“pulled up” some very fine roach and dace, in the
prime season, at Battersea Bridge.
The river at Chelsea, some years since, presented in the
summer season a very animating and pleasing scene. The
sailing matches attracted numbers from London, and excited great
interest amongst the inhabitants. As aged men, however, are
said to see nothing now equal to “the days when they were
young,”—and lest it should be thought I was
magnifying the scene, making the sailing matches of former days
something like, for excitement and enthusiasm, the present
renowned Oxford and Cambridge Boat Races—I will endeavour
to avoid the possibility of being charged with giving an
exaggerated description of them. But, seriously speaking,
it may be said, with truth, that Cheyne Walk and Battersea
Bridge, on such occasions, were crowded with many of the
nobility, and a vast number of ladies and gentlemen, either in
carriages or on horseback. The fleet of sailing boats, with
the little Spitfire generally ahead, and “Tom
Bettsworth,” [41] the owner, on board, when seen at a
short distance approaching Chelsea, with the sun shining on the
white canvas sails, and other pleasure boats decorated with
flags, in many of which were musicians playing various lively
popular tunes, presented a sort of miniature resemblance to those
delightful spectacles which are now only to be seen off Erith,
&c. The steamboats have rendered such displays
impracticable for some years past at Chelsea, and pleasures of
this kind must give way to the transactions of business and
public convenience. Commodore Capt. Harrison, a
distinguished member of one of the first Yacht Clubs, took a
great interest in the Chelsea Sailing Matches. He resided
in the parish, and was highly esteemed for his conviviality and
gentlemanly deportment. His remains were interred in the
Brompton Cemetery.
I will now renew the notices of distinguished residents in
this part of the parish, occasionally giving a short description
of new public erections, and other interesting particulars.
Henry
Sampson Woodfall, Esq., was born in Little Britain, in 1739, and
when he retired from the active affairs of life, he took a house
in Lombard Street, near the Old Church. At a very early age
he had the honour of receiving from Mr. Pope half-a-crown for
reading to him, with much fluency, a page of Homer. When
twelve years old he was sent to St. Paul’s School, on
leaving which he was apprenticed to his father, a printer in
Paternoster Row; and at the age of nineteen he had committed to
his charge the whole business of editing and printing the
“Public Advertiser.” From this period till the
beginning of 1793, he continued constantly in the exercise of
this laborious function. During so long a time, when
parties ran extremely high in politics, it is not surprising that
a printer should have gotten into some difficulties. He
used jocularly to say to his Chelsea friends that he had been
fined and confined by the Court of King’s Bench; fined by
the House of Lords and Commons, and indicted at the Old
Bailey. He laid particular emphasis on the words
“fined” and “confined.” His conduct
respecting those celebrated letters, signed Junius, displayed great integrity and
disinterestedness of character. He associated much with
Garrick, Coleman, Bonnel, Thornton, Smollett, Goldsmith, and
other wits of his day, and his own conversation overflowed with
interesting anecdotes.
In this street resided for many years Mr. W. Lewis,
bookbinder, the intimate friend of Dr. Smollett, and his fellow
companion, on their journey from Edinburgh to London. It
was by the advice of Smollett that he settled at Chelsea; he is
pourtrayed in the novel of “Roderick Random,” under
the character of Strap the Barber, and many facetious anecdotes
are there related of his simplicity, vanity, and ignorance of the
world. Mr. Lewis died about 1785.
Danvers Street was begun to be built in the latter end of the
17th century, on the site of Danvers Gardens, and from thence
takes its name. Danvers House adjoined Sir Thomas
More’s estate, if it was not actually a part of his
property, or that of his son in-law, Roper; there existed
anciently a thoroughfare or private way between the houses in
Lombard Street, on the north side, towards the King’s Road,
but to what extent cannot now be ascertained.
Sir John Danvers, who possessed this property as early as the
reign of Elizabeth, was the younger brother of Sir H. Danvers,
created Earl of Danby in 1625, and by reason of his noble birth was
made Gentleman Usher to King Charles the First. In this
promotion, having more pride than wit, he lived above his income,
and finding himself plunged deeply in debt, and discarded by his
family and his Sovereign for associating with the seditious, and
propagating their principles about the Court, he, with hopes of
gain, and of protection from his creditors, joined the rebels,
always embraced the religion of the prevailing party, and at last
submitted to that base office, to assist with his presence in the
mock court of justice, and, with his hand and seal to the warrant
annexed, to take away the life of that king whose bread he had
eaten; being induced thereto (as a writer of that period states)
chiefly through an expectation of ousting his brother, and
seizing upon his estate for his own use, by the same authority
and power as so unjustly cut off his Majesty’s head.
He died a natural death in 1659, before the restoration.
Sir John married Magdalen, daughter of Sir Richard Newport,
and relict of Sir Richard Herbert, by whom she was mother of the
famous Lord Herbert of Cherbury.
After the death of her first husband this lady continued a
widow twelve years, and was highly esteemed for her great and
harmless wit, cheerful gravity, and obliging behaviour, which
gained her an acquaintance and friendship with most people of
eminent worth or learning in the University of Oxford, where she
lived four years, to take care of the education of her eldest
son, her children being all young at the death of their
father. She died in 1627, and was buried at Chelsea.
The Dean of St. Paul’s, whilst preaching her funeral
sermon, could not refrain from tears, as Walton reports, who was
present.
Danvers House passed from the Danvers family to the Hon. T.
Wharton, who, by Queen Anne, in 1714, was created Marquis of
Wharton. The house was pulled down about 1716. The
garden and grounds extended to the King’s Road;
considerable remains of this house were discovered on the site of
Paultons Square in 1822, consisting of the foundations of walls,
the remains of the great bath, and various fragments of stone
pillars and capitals, the whole covering a great space of land,
but being considered by the proprietor, Mr. Shepherd, nurseryman,
too extensive to take up, they were again covered with
earth. It was Sir John Danvers who first introduced into
this country the Italian method of horticulture, of which his
garden was a most beautiful specimen. Against the wall of
the house at the south end of Danvers Street, is placed a
stone thus inscribed:—“This is Danvers Street, begun
in ye year 1696 by Benjamin Stafford.” In 1742 this
was a public house, the sign of the Bell, which was suspended
across the street. The house at the south-west corner was
also, it is said, formerly a public house, known by the sign of
the Angel.
Duke Street, as already indirectly intimated, was first built
at the time when the Duke of Buckingham resided at the
“greatest house in Chelsea,” and was thus named in
compliment to that nobleman. There is nothing clearly known
as to the origin of Lombard Street.
Luke Thomas Flood, Esq., first resided in Cheyne Walk, but
afterwards removed to the spacious house at the western corner of
Beaufort Street, fronting the river. He was a very great
benefactor to the parish, an active and intelligent magistrate,
and interested himself in promoting at all times whatever was
conducive to the welfare and improvement of Chelsea. He was
treasurer of the Parish Schools for many years, and, in 1818,
through his indefatigable exertions, he succeeded in nearly
doubling the number of children that had attended them, and who
were clothed and educated free of expense to their parents.
Towards the close of his life he went to Brighton, where he
remained till his death, which occurred about 1860. His
munificent annual gifts to the poor of this parish, as bequeathed
in his will, but which he desired to be at once carried into
effect, during his remaining days, will cause his memory to be
revered in this parish by all future generations. Mr. Flood
possessed some valuable pictures by the most eminent Masters.
Charles Hatchett, Esq., resided in the adjoining house, known
as Belle Vue House. It was built by his father, in
1771. In it was a small but choice collection of pictures,
amongst which were two landscapes, by Salvator Rosa; a Madonna
and Child, by Andrea del Sarto; a beautiful small landscape, by
Van Goen; another by Ferg, and a large one by George Barrett,
R.A., with cattle, by the elder Mr. Gilpin. A very
excellent portrait of Mrs. Hatchett, by Gainsborough; and a
picture, supposed to be by Giovanni Bellini, the subject “a
Dead Christ and Holy Family.” The library was very
extensive, containing many valuable editions of the Greek and
Latin Classics, a numerous series of historical works, and the
voluminous Transactions and Memoirs of the Royal Society.
The collection of manuscript and printed music was also very
considerable. Mr. Hatchett was the author of several works
on chemical science, and was a magistrate for the county.
He contributed to most of the local charities, and as a private
gentleman was much respected. He died in 1846, at an
advanced age.
This ancient mansion stands also in front of the river, and
adjoined Sir Thomas More’s. It was erected by the
Earl of Lindsey, in the reign of Charles II., on the site of a
house originally built by Sir Theodore Mayerne, an eminent
physician, and the only instance on record of a physician who was
retained in that character by four kings. He lived many
years in Chelsea, and died here at the age of 82. At his
death, Robert, Earl of Lindsey, purchased the house, which he
pulled down, and erected the present edifice; it has, however,
undergone great alterations by subsequent proprietors, and is now
divided into five houses. The Earl of Lindsey died in 1701,
but his widow resided here till 1705. In the same year
Lindsey House was occupied by Ursula, Countess Dowager of
Plymouth, and by her son, Lord Windsor. It was afterwards
in the possession of Francis, Lord Conway, the second son of Sir
E. Seymour, who was created a peer in 1703. By his third
wife, Charlotte, sister to Lady Walpole, he had Francis, Marquis
of Hertford, who was born at Chelsea in 1718. The house
continued in the Ancaster family till 1750, when it was purchased
for the Moravian Society.
Count Zinzendorf, who was the purchaser, formed an intention
of establishing a settlement at Chelsea for the Moravians, and
took a plot of ground to erect a large building for the reception
of three hundred families, to carry on a manufactory; and,
besides possessing Lindsey House, he also purchased a piece of
ground, part of the gardens of Beaufort House, for a burial
ground, together with the stables belonging to that old mansion,
and likewise a slip of ground to erect a chapel. The chapel
was fitted up, but the settlement, which was to be called Sharon,
failed. The house was, however, inhabited by some of the society. Count Zinzendorf himself lived there, and
presided over the community as long as he dwelt in England.
In 1754 an English provincial Synod was held here, at which the
minister of the brethren’s church at London, John Gambold,
a divine greatly esteemed for his piety and learning by several
English bishops, who were his cotemporaries at Oxford, was
consecrated a bishop of the church of the brethren; he had
previously published a hymn book for the children belonging to
the brethren’s congregation, printed entirely with his own
hands at Lindsey House. The inmates of the house consisted
chiefly of Germans and missionaries, for whose use the Count
principally intended the establishment, that they might make it a
sort of caravansera or resting place when they arrived in this
country, in passing to or from their various missionary
establishments in the British dominions. The panels of the
great staircase, being wainscotted, were painted by Haidt, a
celebrated German artist; there were also in the house several
admirable portraits. The house was sold by the society in
1770. There has not been any other settlement for the
Moravians since that period. Their church is episcopal and
has been acknowledged as such by Parliament. They live, in
their settlements, like members of one large family; the most
perfect harmony prevails amongst them, and they seem to have but
one wish at heart, the propagation of the Gospel and the general
good of mankind.
The Moravian Burial Ground, the entrance to which is at the
north end of Milman’s Row, occupies about two acres of
ground. The whole is divided into four distinct
compartments. The brethren are buried in separate divisions
from those of the sisters; for, as in their public assemblies,
they still adhere to the ancient custom of separating the sexes,
the men occupying one, and the women the other side of the
chapel, so they retain it even in their burying ground. The
tomb-stones are all flat, placed on turf, raised about six inches
above the ground, in regular rows. The inscriptions in
general record only the names and age of the persons
interred. Amongst them are the following:—
William Hammond, 1783, formerly a clergyman of the Church of
England; he was of St. John’s College, Cambridge, and was
the author of a book, entitled, “The Marrow of the
Gospel,” being the substance of some sermons preached
before the University. He was a man of considerable
learning, and an excellent Greek scholar, in which language he wrote
his own life. The late Rev. Mr. La Trobe had the manuscript
in his possession some years ago.
James Fraser, aged 63, 1808, who made fifty-six voyages
between England and Labrador, in the service of the Moravian
Missions on that coast.
James Hutton, 1795, of whom there is an engraved portrait in
mezzotinto, with a trumpet to his ear. This worthy and
well-known character was accustomed to pay morning visits to some
of the first families in Chelsea; he used likewise to seek out
objects that were in distress, and relieved them according to
their necessities. The character of Albany, in Miss
Burney’s celebrated novel of Cecilia, is said to be meant
for his portrait. He died in the 80th year of his age.
The Rev. C. J. La Trobe succeeded him as secretary to the
brethren.
James Gillray, 1799, forty years sexton at this cemetery,
father of Gillray the celebrated caricaturist, whose works are so
much admired for their spirit and effect.
Pætrus Bæhler, 1770. A very active Minister
among the Moravians, and one of their bishops. He came to
England in 1738, was very intimate with Wesley and Whitfield,
whom he visited at Oxford, and who were in the same ship with him
when he went to America as Minister of the Colony of Georgia.
Benjamin La Trobe, 1786, father of the Rev. C. J. La Trobe, a
man of distinguished excellence as a preacher, the editor of
several religious works, and for a long time superintendent of
the congregation in England. He removed many
“absurdities which prevailed in their religious
proceedings, and which had subjected the whole community to
unmerited scandal.”
Christian Renatus, Count of Zinzendorf, May 28, 1832.
There is against the south wall of the chapel a tablet to his
memory. He was the only son of the celebrated Count
Zinzendorf.
Mary Theresa Stonehouse, daughter of Sir John Crisp, Bart.,
and wife of the Rev. George Stonehouse, 1751. This monument
is on the right of the preceding.
In this
cemetery also lies buried an Esquimaux Indian, called
Nunak. As he had not been baptized, he was not permitted to
lie in the same division with the community, but was placed
outside the walk under an elm tree, having an inscription to his
memory in the same style as the rest of the Brethren.
The burial service of the church is particularly
impressive. The coffin being deposited in the middle of the
chapel, a hymn is sung by the congregation, for they value and
carefully cultivate music as a science, and the responses of
their liturgies are attended with peculiar effect. The
Minister then delivers a discourse, in which some account is
given of the deceased, with suitable exhortations. The form
of service contained in their Liturgy is next read, and the
congregation then follow the corpse, the men walking together,
and the women the same. A scriptural passage is read,
commencing as follows. “Meanwhile none of us liveth
to himself; for whether we live, we live unto the Lord, and
whether we die, we die unto the Lord,” &c. The
following is then sung by the congregation:—
“Now to the earth let these remains
In hope committed be,
Until the body, chang’d, obtains
Blest immortality.”
While the above verse is being sung the body is let down into
the grave. A prayer is then offered, and the whole is
concluded by singing a verse of another hymn.
The chapel at the north side of the burial ground occupies the
site of the old stables of Beaufort House. It is a plain
building, displaying no architectural adornments, and it is now
upwards of fifty years since Divine service was performed in it
by the brethren. For a long time it has been occupied as a
schoolroom for the boys belonging to Park Chapel National and
Sunday Schools, and most of the annual meetings of the numerous
societies, which are supported by the congregation of Park
Chapel, are at present held in it.
The house adjoining the entrance to the Moravian Chapel and
Burial Ground, some few years since pulled down, was for many
years in the occupation of the Howard family, of the Society of
Friends. The elder Mr. Howard was gardener to Sir Hans
Sloane; his brother having a natural genius for mechanics,
became a clockmaker, and made the clock in the Old Church, in
1761, for the sum of £50. In the front of
Howard’s house was placed a large clock, and hence the
origin of the appellation, “Clock House,” as now
applied to what was once the Moravian chapel.
It was mentioned at the commencement of the description of
Lindsey House, that it had been divided into five houses, called
Lindsey Row. These houses still remain, and are inhabited
at the present time by families of great respectability.
They command a most delightful prospect of the Thames, which here
forms a sort of bay; the view from the upper stories is bounded
on the south by the Surrey Hills, and Putney Heath on the
north.
Henry Constantine Jennings, Esq., a most eccentric and
unfortunate gentleman, resided in the first house on the
east. He was born in 1731, and was descended from a very
ancient and illustrious family, the Nevils. The celebrated
Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, he reckoned among his
progenitors. At an early age he obtained a commission in
the first regiment of Foot Guards, and afterwards went abroad on
his travels. While in Italy, he formed an acquaintance with
the Duke of Marlborough, then Marquis of Blandford, and it is
said he suggested the idea of the cabinet of antiques, afterwards
engraved by Bartolozzi, and so well known as the Marlborough
Gems. It was at this period, doubtless, that Mr. Jennings
acquired a passion for objects of taste. On his return to
England, he repaired to his seat at Shiplake, in the county of
Oxford, and unfortunately for him became addicted to the
pleasures of the turf, and the result was that his fortune was
soon dissipated. Mr. Jennings now withdrew from society and
lived in obscurity. A sudden change of fortune seems,
however, to have released him from pecuniary difficulties, for we
find him collecting, with great ardour, every object of
antiquity, &c., that was presented to his notice, and which
he could purchase. He also possessed a most valuable
library. But, again, he became reduced in his
circumstances, and had to dispose of his books and collections at
a vast loss.
From
this time but few particulars are known of Mr. Jennings, until he
settled at Lindsey Row, about 1792. Here he continued to
reside, fully occupied as an antiquary, a virtuoso, and an
author, until, at length, his health began to decline, and his
fortune daily became deteriorated, in consequence of his
inordinate passion for collecting objects of taste; at last he
closed his eccentric career a prisoner within the rules of the
King’s Bench, where he expired February 7, 1819, aged
88.
This remarkable gentleman, whom I well remember, seemed more
properly to belong to some distant generation rather than the one
in which he lived—his character, dress, and manners, were
so different in every respect. The fate of such a man, to a
certain extent, awakens our sympathy, for his pursuits were
generally throughout his life most refined; and the disasters
which befel him is a warning to many in the present day.
Mr. Jennings’s Museum well deserves to be noticed.
It consisted of a rare and valuable collection of the most chosen
specimens of taste, and probably the completest collection of
shells. Many fine specimens of minerals and scarce coloured
gems, cameos, and intaglios; crystals, and other choice
productions of nature, such as diamonds of almost every colour,
rubies, emeralds, pearls, sapphires, &c.; not to omit many
excellent specimens of well-preserved birds and quadrupeds.
Old, and first-rate impressions of prints from Raphael, and
others of the Roman school; some fine specimens of sculpture,
both ancient and modern; many fine and scarce impressions of
first editions, classical and of the entertaining kind, with many
original drawings and pictures; in short, all that could interest
one who had been long a real amateur. Among the portraits
was a fine one of Mary, Queen of Scotland, and another of Titian
and his Mistress, the Mary in her fourteenth year; likewise
several rare enamel miniatures of interesting characters; among
which was one of the Princess Elizabeth, about seventeen years of
age, this latter by Holbein; with some well-preserved medals in
gold and silver.
This collection was disposed of by auction, by Mr. Phillips,
in 1820; the shells, and most valuable articles, being removed to
Bond Street, and the preserved birds, quadrupeds, and other
articles of rarity, together with the furniture, were sold at
Lindsey Row.
T.
Bonner, Esq., a gentleman much respected in the parish, resided
in Lindsey Row for many years. Mrs. Bonner was at all times
most active in relieving the necessitous and deserving
poor. She occupied the house some time after the death of
her husband, and died a few years ago.
Sir Mark Isombard Brunell, the originator and designer of the
Thames Tunnel, resided for a considerable period in the centre
house. His public works will immortalize his name to the
latest posterity, as being one of the most eminent engineers of
the present century.
John Martin, R.A., K.L., so well known for those
grandly-conceived and sublime compositions, “Joshua
commanding the Sun to stand Still,” “The Fall of
Nineveh,” “The Last Judgment,” &c., also
resided in Lindsey Row for some years. The late Prince
Consort was a frequent visitor to his Studio, and it is a
pleasing fact to record that Mr. Martin kindly permitted the
neighbouring inhabitants, and others, to have access occasionally
to it, accompanied by an attendant, during his absence from
home. He died, as will be remembered, not many years
since.
Timothy Bramah, Esq., a distinguished engineer, likewise
occupied a house in Lindsey Row, for some years. The family
was always greatly respected, and a member of it still resides in
a house near the one where Mr. Bramah resided. The
“Bramah Lock” at once denotes the celebrity of the
firm.
The Rev. James Hutchins, M.A., who succeeded his father, the
Rev. John Hutchins, as Evening Lecturer at the Old Church,
resided for some years at a house at the western corner of
Milman’s Row, fronting the river. Mr. Hutchins, the
son, was also Evening Lecturer at the new St. Luke’s Church
for several years. The Lecturer was remunerated by
voluntary contributions, chiefly, collected from the inhabitants
throughout the parish, the average amount altogether being about
£60 per annum.
Milman’s Row, which nearly adjoins Lindsey Row, and
which might now with great propriety be called Milman Street,
leads to the King’s Road. It derives its name from
Sir William Milman, who died in 1713, the estate having been for
some years in his possession. The ancient parsonage-house
and grounds, which were exchanged by the Rector in 1566, with the
Marquis of
Winchester, for the present Rectory, stood upon this spot.
Strewan House, which is on the western side of Milman’s
Row, has been occupied at different periods by many
highly-respectable families. It is now in the possession of
George Berry, Esq.
The foundry, which belonged to a person of the name of
Janeway, was situated near World’s End Passage. It
was very extensive, and here the old bells of the Church were
re-cast in 1759. Riley Street, which stands on part of the
foundry ground, was built principally in 1790.
Patrick Gibson, aged 111 years, lived in a house near the old
World’s End Tavern. For many years this remarkable
man was a purser in the navy, in the reign of George III., and on
all occasions he was invariably found in the thick of the battle,
fighting with the most determined bravery. He assisted in
conveying General Wolfe off the field, and served under Lord
Nelson at the Battle of Trafalgar. William IV., when Duke
of Clarence, visited him at Chelsea, and took great interest in
his affairs. He resided in the parish 20 years, and died in
1832, at the remarkable age of 111 years, which was proved to be
correct from official dates and by particular events. An
exceedingly striking portrait of Patrick Gibson, by McNaughten,
adorns the walls of Greenwich Hospital.
The World’s-End Tavern was a noted house of
entertainment in the reign of Charles II.; the tea-gardens and
grounds were extensive, and elegantly fitted up for the reception
of company. The origin of the sign of the house is
uncertain. It was probably so named on account of its then
considered distance from London, and the bad and dangerous state
of the roads or pathways to it. Most of the visitors came
in pleasure boats along the Thames. This ancient tavern is
particularly mentioned in Congreve’s comedy of “Love
for Love,” in a dialogue between Mrs. Foresight and Mrs.
Frail, in which the former accuses the latter of having been seen
at the “World’s End.”
Mrs. Foresight.—I suppose you would
not go alone to the World’s End?
Mrs. Frail.—The World’s End! what, do you
mean to banter me?
Mrs. Foresight.—Poor innocent! you don’t
know that there is a place called the World’s End. I
declare you can keep your countenance—surely you’ll
make an admirable player.
Mrs. Frail.—I declare you have a great deal of
impudence, and, in my mind, too much for the stage..
Mrs.
Foresight.—Very well, that will appear who has
most. You never were at the Word’s End?
Mrs. Frail.—No.
Mrs. Foresight.—You deny it positively to my
face?
Mrs. Frail.—Your face, what’s your
face?
Mrs. Foresight.—No matter for that, it is as good
a face as yours.
Mrs. Frail.—Not by a dozen years wearing.
But I do deny it, positively, to your face, then.
Mrs. Foresight.—I’ll allow you now to find
fault with my face; for I declare your impudence has put me out
of countenance. But look you here now; where did you lose
this gold bodkin? Oh, sister! oh, sister!
Mrs. Frail.—My bodkin!
Mrs. Foresight.—Nay, it is yours—look at
it.
Mrs. Frail.—Well, if you go to that, where did
you find this bodkin? Oh, sister! sister! sister every
way!
Mrs. Foresight.—Oh! bother on’t that I
could not discover her without betraying myself.
(Aside.)
Joseph Mallard W. Turner, Esq., R.A., resided for some time in
a small house directly facing the Thames, in the road leading to
Cremorne, where he died in 1851. No doubt he selected this
spot on account of the attractive scenery on the river, and the
fine view of some parts of Surrey, as also to enjoy for a time
the benefits arising from a more secluded life. At the age
of thirty years, Mr. Turner was recognised as the first landscape
painter of the day. For a period of sixty years he
contributed to every exhibition of the Royal Academy, sending in
all 259 pictures. For many years he refused to part with
some of the choicest specimens of his art, and after his death it
was found that he had left those to the English nation, together
with a great number of drawings and engravings. Mr. Turner,
while residing here, lived in almost entire seclusion. He
would not see any person, excepting a few very intimate friends,
and, in fact, was extremely anxious not to be recognized.
This inclination, at the close of his life, was very
natural. The world is indebted to him for his productions,
and Chelsea is proud to add his name to its list of distinguished
residents.
The roadway in front of the house occupied by Mr. Turner, and
along the front of that part of the river, has been considerably
widened, and now presents a well-formed embankment. A
handsome terrace has been erected, besides a number of houses on
the adjoining ground.
This villa was first formed by Theophilus, Earl of Huntingdon,
who died in 1746. It afterwards belonged, successively, to
Richard, Viscount Powerscourt; to the Countess Dowager of Exeter,
relict of Brownlow, the eighth Earl; and to Sir Richard
Lyttleton, who married the Dowager Duchess of Bridgewater, and
died in 1770.
After the death of the Duchess, in 1777, Thomas Dawson,
Viscount Cremorne, at that time Baron Dartrey, purchased the
villa in 1778. He considerably enlarged and embellished the
premises, under the skill of the eminent Mr. James Wyatt.
His lordship died in Stanhope Street, Mayfair, in 1813, in his
89th year, greatly respected, and bequeathed the estate to his
relict, the late Viscountess. It is stated, in an account
published shortly after Lord Cremorne’s death, that
“his generosity was unbounded, and his heart, in the most
comprehensive sense, charitable. But his most excellent
character is, that he was a Christian in mind and
practice.”
The Dowager Viscountess Cremorne, born in Philadelphia in
1740, died at her house in Stanhope Street in 1825, in the 86th
year of her age. Her ladyship resided at Chelsea a great
portion of the year, and kept a large establishment. She
was one of the most kind-hearted residents in the parish.
For years it was her custom to entertain annually the children of
the parochial and other schools, and she patronized the tradesmen
of Chelsea as far as it was practicable, giving special orders to
that effect to her household. Queen Charlotte occasionally
visited her in the summer months, when the children again
attended, and received tokens of her benevolent regard for
them. She was buried by the side of her husband in the
family vault at Stoke. The carriages of the Royal Family
followed in the funeral procession for some distance, and most of
the tradesmen closed their shops. She bequeathed the villa
to her first cousin and executor, Granville Penn, Esq., second
surviving son of Thomas Penn, and brother of John Penn, Esqrs.,
of Stoke Park, Bucks, Hereditary Governors and Proprietaries of
the Province of Pennsylvania. Granville Penn, Esq., resided
in it for a few years. It would occupy too much space to
give a sketch even of the history of this distinguished
family.
Lord
and Lady Cremorne possessed a very fine and extensive collection
of paintings, which were sold by auction, on the premises, in
1827. Amongst them was a copy of Correggio’s picture
of the Madonna and Child, and St. Jerome at Parma, by Copley,
full size, and accounted the best copy of that celebrated
picture. The late Lord Lyndhurst purchased it. The
grounds, &c., are now known as Cremorne Gardens, but this
once pretty villa can scarcely now be recognised as the favourite
residence of Lord and Lady Cremorne.
Ashburnham House is situated to the west of the late Lord
Cremorne’s premises. Dr. Benjamin Hoadley built the
house, in 1747, for his own residence, but it has since been
greatly altered by different occupiers. He was the eldest
son of the Bishop of Winchester, and was a Fellow of the Royal
Society when very young. In the learned world he was known
as a philosopher. Dr. Hoadley was also an eminent
physician. At his death Hoadley House was purchased by Sir
Richard Glynn, who sold it to the Earl of Ashburnham, and thence
it obtained the name of Ashburnham House. It was next in
possession of that learned physician, Dr. Cadogan, who resided in
it for a few years, and planted in the garden a large quantity of
medicinal herbs. Lady Mary Coke resided here for about ten
years, and sold it to Mr. Brown, who occupied a house near to it,
called Ashburnham Cottage. Mr. Stevens at length possessed
the house, and resided in it for many years. Afterwards it
was the residence of the Hon. Leicester Stanhope, subsequently
Earl of Harrington.
On the banks of the river, in front of Ashburnham House, was a
piece of land, called the Lots. The Lammas rights of the
parishioners, with respect to this land, are now extinct.
Those who wish to know the particulars, will find them fully
recorded in the Annual Vestry Reports, which may be obtained at
the Vestry Hall, and which will render many parochial details in
this work quite unnecessary.
On the south side of the King’s Road, and near to the
boundary line which divides the parishes of Chelsea and Fulham,
is Dudmarton House, which was for a considerable period the
residence of Samuel Gower Poole, Esq., who erected a chapel on
the premises, where he occasionally preached, and amongst others
the Rev. Dr. Jay, of Bath, the Rev. John and Charles Hyatt, the
Rev. Dr. Collyer, &c. The Rev. Dr. Raffles, it is stated,
preached his first sermon there when he was quite a youth.
Mr. Poole also established a school for the education of poor
boys, many of whom were clothed through his exertions.
Near to what is now the Chelsea Railway Station, on the north
of the King’s Road, is Stanley House. In the reign of
Queen Elizabeth this was part of the estate of Sir Arthur Gorges,
who was knighted in 1597, and died in 1625, and who built a house
on this site for his own residence. Rowland White, writing
to Sir Robert Sidney, Nov. 15, 1599, says, “As the Queen
passed by the faire new building, Sir Arthur Gorges presented her
with a faire jewell.” The family of Gorges at this
period possessed very considerable property in Chelsea, which
they afterwards gradually disposed of to the Cheyne family and
others.
Sir Arthur Gorges was the intimate friend of Spenser, who
lamented the death of the first Lady Gorges, daughter of Viscount
Bindon, and who died in 1590, in a beautiful elegy, entitled
Daphnaida; he has recorded likewise the conjugal affection and
the talents of her husband, under the name of Alcyon, in the
following elegant lines:—
“And there is sad Alcyon, bent to mourne
Though fit to frame an everlasting dittie;
Whose gentle spright for Daphne’s death doth tourne
Sweet lays of love to endlesse plaints of pittie.
Ah! pensive boy, pursue that brave conceipt
In thy sweet eglantine merriflure;
Lift up thy notes unto their wonted height,
That may my muse and mates to mirth allure.”
Sir Arthur married, secondly, Lady Elizabeth, daughter of
Henry, Earl of Lincoln, by which marriage he became possessed of
Sir Thomas More’s house, which, in 1619, he conveyed to
Lionel, Lord Cranfield. He died in 1625, leaving by his
second wife six children. Lady Elizabeth Gorges, his widow,
in 1637, sold this estate to her daughter, Lady Elizabeth
Stanley, widow of Sir Robert Stanley, and confirmed the same by
her will in 1643, in which year she died. The family of
Stanley appear to have held possession of this estate, and
resided here till the latter end of the seventeenth century, when
this branch of it became extinct, in the male line, by the death
of William Stanley, Esq. in 1691. The house was rebuilt
about this period; and, being left in an unfinished state, was
for several years unoccupied. It belonged, in 1724, to
Henry Arundel, Esq. Admiral Sir Charles Wager died here in
1743. It is said that this gallant officer was educated a
Quaker, and that though he left that society, he was always
particularly kind to its members.
After passing through several hands, Stanley House became the
property of Miss Southwell, afterwards the lady of Sir James
Eyre, Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, who sold it in 1777
to the Countess of Strathmore, one of the most intelligent female
botanists of the age. Her ladyship had begun to build
extensive hothouses and conservatories, brought exotics from the
Cape, and was continually raising an increase to her collections,
when, by an unfortunate marriage, the cruel spoiler came, and
threw them like loathsome weeds away. The Countess married
A. R. Bowes, Esq., whose barbarities to her exceeded every thing
recorded in the annals of crime, and drew upon him the
execrations of the whole country. [57] After
suffering innumerable indignities from her husband, the Countess
exhibited articles of the peace against him in the Court of
King’s Bench, and obtained a separation, under heavy
securities. She passed the remainder of her days in much
affliction, both in body and mind, and departed this life on the
20th April, 1800. Bowes died miserably in a jail.
Stanley House was purchased of the Countess of Strathmore, by
Mr. Lochee, who kept the Military Academy at Little Chelsea, and
was for some time in the occupation of Richard Warren, M.D.
This eminent physician was the son of the Rev. Richard Warren,
Archdeacon of Suffolk. He died in 1797, and was buried in
the chancel of Kensington Church, where a monument, with a Latin
inscription, was erected to his memory.
About
the year 1815, Stanley House was purchased by William Hamilton,
Esq., who resided in it for some time, and made great additions
to the original structure, by building a picture gallery on the
east side. He had a good collection of paintings, a capital
portrait of his father, the Rev. Dr. Hamilton, Vicar of St.
Martin’s in the Fields, and many fine casts of the Elgin
marbles. In 1822, Mr. Hamilton was appointed Envoy to the
Court of Naples, and during his absence from Chelsea, he let the
house to some distinguished families, amongst them may be
mentioned the Marquis of Queensbury. Mr. Hamilton
afterwards sold the estate to the National Society.
Stanley House, as it was formerly called, became the residence
of the Principal of St. Mark’s College, which was
established by the National Society, in the year 1841, as a
Training Institution for Schoolmasters, in connexion with the
Church of England. To the Rev. Derwent Coleridge, M.A., the
first Principal of the College, must be attributed the eminent
position it has attained among the educational institutions of
the country. He was the Principal of the College for a
period of twenty-three years, and greatly beloved by the
Students, popular among his Colleagues and Assistants, and
enjoyed the respect and confidence of the Council, who had the
pleasant task of co-operating with him. In January, 1864,
he was presented by the late Bishop of London to the Rectory of
Hanwell, which occasioned his resignation.
Many candidates of great eminence were desirous to become the
Rev. Mr. Coleridge’s successor, and from among them the
Rev. John G. Cromwell, M.A., Hon. Canon of Durham, and formerly
Scholar of Brasenose College, Oxford, was selected, his
testimonials being of the very highest order, and his successful
administration of the Training College at Durham, during 12
years, appeared to the Council a sufficient guarantee for his
success at St. Mark’s. This expectation has now been
happily fully realized.
The
Vice-Principal is the Rev. C. F. Eastburn, M.A., Fellow of St.
John’s College, Cambridge, and the Rev. C. S. Dawe, B.A.,
is the Normal Master in the College, and Head Master of the
School, and, from the testimony of those who are well-qualified
to form an impartial opinion, they most efficiently discharge
their respective arduous duties, and this just acknowledgment
equally applies to the Tutors, Mr. W. Lawson, F.R.G.S., and Mr.
O. Breden.
On the west side of the house the National Society added a
quadrangle, built in the Italian style, and in the grounds, near
the chapel, an octagon building as a Practising School, for
teaching children who reside in the locality. The grounds
of the College consist of eleven acres of garden and grass
land.
The Upper School gives a superior education to 160 boys, who
are instructed in all the usual branches of an English education,
and also in Latin and French.
The Middle School gives a similar education, with the
exception of Latin and French, to 180 boys.
The Lower School is intended for the sons of the humbler
classes, and gives sound instruction in elementary subjects to
200 boys.
There is accommodation in the College for 100 Students, who
are being trained here for Schoolmasters.
The Chapel stands close to the Fulham Road, and is open to the
public twice every day, at 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. On Sundays the
Services begin at 11 a.m. and 4 p.m. The seats are free,
and the expenses are defrayed by voluntary contributions.
There is no endowment of any kind. The exterior of the
building is unpretending. The interior has a distinctive
character given to it by the windows of stained glass, which
produce an impression of warmth and beauty. There is an
excellent organ and a full choir, composed of the Students and a
certain number of boys from the schools. The Services are
all choral, and on Sundays are usually well attended. On
the anniversary of the College foundation, St. Mark’s Day,
April 25, a sermon is preached and a collection made on behalf of
the Chapel Funds, and the surrounding gentry and clergy, together
with the former Students, are invited to a banquet. At the
last Anniversary Festival the sermon was preached by the Dean of
St.
Paul’s, the text being selected from Luke iv. 16. In
the evening, in the Lecture Hall of the College, selections from
an Oratorio and other pieces were admirably rendered by the
Students, under the direction of the Rev. T. Helmore, precentor,
and John Hullah, Esq., to a crowded and most fashionable
audience, and many of the old Students of the College. We
must also mention E. C. May, Esq., to whom much of the
proficiency of the choir may be justly attributed.
We will pass by Mr. Veitch’s Royal Exotic Nursery, and
the extensive Show Establishment belonging to Messrs. Weeks &
Co., both of which will probably be noticed in a subsequent part
of this work, when a more general notice will be taken of the
entire King’s Road, and merely observe that a great number
of villas, and many superior dwelling houses, have been erected
within the last few years in this immediate locality. As
examples of such instances it is only necessary to mention the
splendid house built by John Weeks, Esq., in Edith Grove, and
those in Gunter Grove, Maude Grove, &c., in addition to which
many more well-built houses are now being erected in the
neighbourhood.
This structure is worthy of special notice. It stands on
a valuable freehold site, and was erected in 1866, at a cost of
between £5000 and £6000, exclusive of the site.
It has sittings for 1100, and owes its existence to the exertions
of the present pastor, the Rev. C. Winter, who had previously
preached for some time in a small chapel in Gunter Grove.
The style adopted is Gothic, of the geometric decorative
period. The building is faced with Kentish ragstone, and
all the dressings are of Boxhill buttstone. The design
consists of three central door-ways, with a large five-light
traceried window over, and traceried side light; separate
entrances to the staircases with panelled parapets and side roofs
over; the sides and chancel end of the building are of brick; the
windows in two tiers with stone dressings; the upper tier
consists of circular traceried windows, and the whole design is
such as to produce a very pleasing effect, which will be much
increased when the tower and spire are carried up as intended. The
building is entered in front by the doors before mentioned, and a
spacious vestibule leads through inner lobbies to the body of the
church, which occupies an area of 70 ft. by 50 ft., but including
chancel and entrance lobbies its length is 106 ft. The
building is surrounded on three sides with spacious galleries,
supported by iron columns, handsomely decorated, running up to
and supporting the roof. The ceiling is divided into bays
by wood spandril arches springing from column to column, and from
the columns to the walls. The chancel arch is a very
effective piece of coloured brickwork, and the chancel recess is
arranged with its windows and angular plan so as to add much to
the general effect, which is considerably increased by a very
handsome memorial window, the gift of the family of Mr. Pitts,
one of the deacons of the church. The building is lighted
by star-lights of an improved design suspended from the
roof. The pulpit, which is spacious and handsome, is of
Caen stone and stands on a platform, around which the seats are
arranged concentrically, a great improvement on the ordinary
rectangular pewing. The larger room under the chancel is
devoted to a variety of useful purposes, such as Infant School,
Sunday Schools, Day School, &c. The chapel in Gunter
Grove has been converted into a Public Hall, and ultimately no
doubt will prove of general use to the neighbourhood. The
Sunday Schools, one of which is held at the Hall, number about
300 children.
Proceeding a little to the north-west, we arrive at what was
formerly called Little Chelsea, but which is now designated West
Brompton. Without wishing to remove our neighbour’s
land-mark, or to trespass beyond the precise boundaries of
Chelsea, the parish of Kensington being on the north side of West
Brompton, we will notice the residence of William Boscawen, Esq.,
who resided near to those spacious mansions now being erected on
the grounds formerly known as Walnut-Tree Walk, now called
Redcliffe Gardens. Mr. Boscawen was the younger son of
General George Boscawen, and was born in 1752. At an early
age he was sent to Eton, where he obtained the
particular notice and favour of the celebrated Dr. Barnard.
From Eton he removed to Exeter College, Oxford, and afterwards
studied the law, became a member of the Middle Temple, and was
called to the bar. His legal studies were not unfruitful,
as he published an excellent book under the title of “A
Treatise of Conviction on Penal Statutes,” &c., 1792,
8vo. In 1785 he was appointed a Commissioner of the
Victualling Office, in consequence of which he soon after quitted
the bar, and in the following year married a daughter of Dr.
Ibbetson, Archdeacon of St. Albans. Being an excellent
classical scholar, and warmly attached to literary pursuits, Mr.
Boscawen published, in 1793, “A Translation of the Odes of
Horace,” which, being much approved of, was soon followed
by a Translation of the Satires, Epistles, and Art of
Poetry. In 1801 he published a small volume of Poems, which
displayed an elegant taste, a poetical mind, and a correct
versification, and he was for several years an able coadjutor to
the British Critic. He died, after a short illness, in
1811. That excellent institution, the Literary Fund, he
considered almost as his child, and his affection to it was
testified not only by contribution, but by annual verses in its
praise, and assiduous attendance at its meetings.
Mr. Lochee’s Military Academy was established at this
place about the year 1770, and enjoyed a high degree of
reputation; many of our most eminent military characters received
their education under him. The premises, which were laid
out as a regular fortification, and were opened to view, excited
much attention at the time. Mr. Lochee afterwards,
unfortunately, engaged in the revolutionary troubles which
agitated Flanders in the year 1790, and being taken prisoner by
the Austrians, was condemned to be hanged; he, however, obtained
permission to come to England, to settle his affairs, upon
condition of leaving his only son as a hostage; and upon his
return to the Continent he suffered the punishment of
death. His son, afterwards, married a daughter of the late
Mr. King, an eminent book auctioneer, of King Street, Covent
Garden, and, lamentable to relate, fell by his own hands.
Balloon Ascent in 1784.—On
the 16th of October, in the above year, an immense concourse of
people assembled at Mr. Lochee’s Military Academy, to
witness Mr. Blanchard’s ascent in his balloon. The
fields, for a considerable distance round the spot, were crowded with
horse and foot, in consequence of which, a general devastation
took place in the gardens, the crops being either trampled down
or torn up; the turnip grounds were totally despoiled by the
multitude; all the windows and houses were filled with company,
and every roof and tree was crowded with spectators. At
twelve o’clock Mr. Blanchard, and Mr. Sheldon, a surgeon,
stepped into the car, and the cords being loosened, the balloon
slowly ascended, when it was discovered that it would be
requisite to throw out some ballast; but before this could be
accomplished, it struck some trees and descended to the
ground. Being lightened, it again ascended, and moved
horizontally about a quarter of a mile, when it made a rapid
direction towards Sunbury, where they alighted, and Mr. Sheldon
reluctantly quitted the car. Mr. Blanchard re-ascended, and
pursued his aerial excursion to Rumsey, Hants, where he
descended, at half-past four in the afternoon, in a meadow, and
still standing in his car. The balloon was first seen over
Abbotswood Common, and appeared about the size of a small
hogshead. Upon his alighting he was jovially
entertained. The day being rather dark, and the atmosphere
low, the balloon was out of sight in about thirty minutes.
About the year 1699, the Earl of Shaftesbury purchased an
estate at Little Chelsea, which had formerly been the property of
Sir James Smith, whose widow resided there in 1695. The
Earl rebuilt the house, and generally resided in it during the
sitting of Parliament. He was first charged to the parish
rates in 1700. Locke here wrote part of his
“Essay,” and Addison several of the Spectators.
Anthony Astley Cooper, third Earl of Shaftesbury, the learned
author of “The Characteristics,” was born in 1671, in
the house of his grandfather, who took such care of his
education, that, at the age of eleven, he is said to have read
with ease both Latin and Greek. In 1683, he was placed at
Winchester School, where he continued till 1686, when he made the
tour of Italy and France. About five years after his return
from Italy, he visited Holland, where he passed much of his time
in the society of Bayle, Le Clerc, and other ingenious men.
Soon after his arrival in England, he became Earl of Shaftesbury,
by the demise of his father, but did not attend the House of
Lords during the first session after he had succeeded to the
peerage; nor did he appear there till his friend, Lord Somers,
sent a messenger to acquaint him with the pending partition treaty in
February, 1701. On the accession of Queen Anne he retired
to Chelsea, to continue his favourite course of study; here he
resided till 1711, when he set out for Italy, and died at Naples
in 1719. His lordship’s philosophical writings are
generally known. Of his letters there are several extant,
dated from Chelsea in 1708.
The house was afterwards the residence of Sergeant Wynne, and
of his son, Edward Wynne, author of several Tracts, whose
knowledge and proficiency in polite literature could only be
exceeded by his charity and benevolence. Dying a bachelor
in 1785, his estates, together with his house at Little Chelsea,
and his very valuable library, collected chiefly by his father,
devolved to his brother, the Rev. Luttrell Wynne. This
house was alienated by him to William Virtue.
The parish of St. George, Hanover Square, purchased it in the
year 1787, as an additional workhouse for the poor. An Act
of Parliament passed that year, declares it to be in St.
George’s Parish, so long as it shall continue to be
appropriated to its present use. The same act exempts it
from all dues and rates demandable by the Rector and the parish
of Chelsea, on condition of paying to the former £3
3s. per annum, and to the latter £6 13s.
4d.
Sir John Cope, Bart., about the year 1700, resided in a large
house at Little Chelsea, according to Bowack, which was
subsequently occupied as a private mad house. The house has
been pulled down, and its site is now called Odell’s
Place. Sir John sat for Oxfordshire and Banbury in several
Parliaments. He married Anne, daughter of Mr. William
Booth, by whom he had seven sons, and one daughter. There
are some entries of their baptisms in the Parish Register.
Sir John died January 11th, 1721. His fourth son, Galen,
born at Chelsea, resided there about the time of his
father’s death. The worthy baronet was a magistrate
for this county, and his name regularly appears for a series of
years affixed, in confirmation of the parochial rates.
Robert Boyle, Esq., a most distinguished philosopher and
chemist, the seventh son of Richard, Earl of Cork, resided, in
1661, at Little Chelsea, and there he was visited by the learned
and eminent of his time. Monsieur de Monconys, in his
Travels, thus mentions a visit which he made to Mr. Boyle at this
place:—“I went after dinner with Mr. Oldenburg and my son,
two miles from London, in a stage coach, for five shillings, to a
village called Little Chelsea, to visit Mr. Boyle.”
After giving an account of several experiments which Mr. Boyle
made in his presence, he thus proceeds:—“He has a
very fine laboratory, where he makes all his extracts, and other
operations, one of which he shewed me with salt, which being put
in quite dry with gold leaves sixteen times thicker than that
used by gilders into a crucible on a slow fire, even over a
lighted candle, the salt calcined the gold so perfectly that
water afterwards dissolved them both, and became impregnated with
them in the same manner as with common salt. He possesses a
very fine telescope, and two excellent microscopes, which are
larger than mine.” Mr. Evelyn, in his Diary, has also
recorded a visit to the same place. “I went with that
excellent person and philosopher, Sir Robert Murray, to visit Mr.
Boyle at Chelsea, and saw divers effects of the Eolipile for
weighing air.” Bishop Burnet, in Mr. Boyle’s
funeral sermon, has given an eloquent account of this great
philosopher and scholar.
Charles, fourth Earl of Orrery, grand-nephew to Mr. Boyle, was
born at Little Chelsea in 1676. He was author of a comedy,
entitled, “As you Find it,” and of some verses which
discover his wit and poetical genius. Queen Anne created
him a peer of Great Britain in 1711, by the title of Lord Boyle,
of Marston, in the county of Somerset. His lordship died in
1737. He was the improver of that noble instrument the
Orrery, which, in honour of him, was called after his name.
Sir James Wishart resided in Little Chelsea, and died in May,
1723. He was a native of Scotland, and was made an Admiral
by Queen Anne; in 1710 he became a Lord Commissioner of the
Admiralty, in which year he was returned Member of Parliament for
Portsmouth. The Queen also conferred the honour of
knighthood upon him; but, in the following reign, he lost all his
places, and was dismissed from the service, for favouring the
interest of the Pretender.
Admiral Sir John Balchen, another distinguished naval officer,
resided in Little Chelsea about 1723. He was lost in the
“Victory” in the year 1744. Sir John sailed, in
July, from Spithead with a strong squadron, in quest of an
opportunity to attack the French fleet at Brest, under the
command of M. de Rochambault. In the Bay of Biscay he was
overtaken by a violent storm that dispersed the ships, and drove
them up the English Channel. Admiral Stewart, with the
greater part of them, arrived at Plymouth; but Sir John
Balchen’s own ship, the Victory, which was at that time
considered to be the most beautiful first rate in the world,
foundered at sea; and this brave officer perished, with all his
officers, volunteers, and crew, amounting to eleven hundred
choice seamen.
The Right Hon. Edward Hyde, third Earl of Clarendon, died at
his house at Little Chelsea in 1723. He married Catherine,
daughter to Henry Lord O’Brien, eldest son and heir to the
Earl of Thomond, of Ireland, by whom he had a son and two
daughters. The title descended to the Earl of Rochester,
and soon after became extinct.
Fatal Duel.—In January, 1784,
a duel was fought in a field near Little Chelsea, between Captain
Charles Mostyn, of the navy, and Captain Clarke, of the African
Corps, which terminated in the death of the former, who was shot
through the heart. The quarrel originated in defence of a
Jew, who went about diverting company, by taking off Mr.
Fox. Some words arising, Captain Clarke demanded an
apology, which Captain Mostyn declined to make to him. Mr.
Mostyn was a gallant officer, only 25 years of age, who, for his
intrepid behaviour, had been made post-captain in the Solitaire,
a French ship of the line, taken by the Ruby. Happily for
the humanity of England, such dark blots on its history are now
for ever erased, by the adoption of more stringent laws and the
advancement of religious and moral principles.
Dr. Baldwin Hamey was born in 1600. He retired to Little
Chelsea from the hurry of his profession the year before the Fire
of London, saving thereby his library; he also escaped from the
direful effects of the plague in London. At Chelsea he
contributed largely towards the erection of the church steeple,
and gave the great bell which had his name on it. I may
here state that the first large bells are mentioned by Bede, in
the year 680. Before that period the early British
Christians made use of wooden rattles (sacra ligna) to call the
congregation of the faithful together. Dr. Adam Littleton,
in gratitude to Dr. Hamey for the above benefactions, printed at
the end of the first edition of his Latin Dictionary, a copy of
Latin verses which he dedicated to him. Dr. Hamey was a
great scholar, a philosopher, and an eminent physician. At
his death he bequeathed to the College of Physicians the estate
of Ashlins, in Essex, besides money and books. There is a
manuscript
life of him, written about 143 years ago, by his relation, Mr.
Palmer. “Chemistry,” says the biographer,
“now began to come into vogue, which Dr. Hamey could not
well be reconciled to, from his Galenical principles, and at his
age. It seemed to him to be a stroke of
quackery.” He declined a knighthood, and the offer of
being first physician to Charles II. after his restoration.
The same modesty made him waive the offer of being President of
his beloved College of Physicians, although he had held all other
subordinate offices in it. He died in 1676, and was buried
in the Old Church.
The Goat and Boots Tavern still stands at the eastern corner
of Park Walk, West Brompton, or Little Chelsea, although from its
age it seems probable that in a few years a new house will be
substituted for it. The sign was originally painted by
Morland, to pay his tavern bill. In old deeds it is called
the Goat. Perhaps poor Morland added the
“Boots” to the sign to make it more attractive, and
to get a better price from the proprietor, but this is mere
conjecture.
Park Walk, in a very old map of Chelsea, is called
Lovers’ Walk, and it appears to have been planted with
trees, but from some unknown cause—surely all the loving
lads and lasses had not left the parish—it degenerated into
Twopenny Walk. After dark, from its retirement and
seclusion, it was dangerous for persons passing that way.
It has been now for many years a good thoroughfare from the
King’s Road to West Brompton, having Park Chapel in a
central position, and houses on both sides of the road.
When the improvement at the bottom of Milman’s Row is
entirely completed, there will then be an excellent and
continuous roadway to the river-side.
This Chapel was so called from being situated within the
precincts of Chelsea Park, which originally formed the northern
part of Sir Thomas More’s grounds. It was built in
1718, by Sir Richard Manningham, who, in 1730, granted a lease of
it to the Rev. William Lacey, of Battersea. At that period
there was
only the Old Church, and an additional episcopal place for Divine
worship was needed for the convenience of the residents in Little
Chelsea.
The following is a complete list to the present period of the
Clergymen who have been Ministers at Park Chapel:—
1730
|
Rev. William Lacey, Battersea.
|
1736
|
— Dr. Sloane Ellesmere, Rector of Chelsea.
|
1766
|
— Mr. Gower, Chelsea.
|
—
|
— Mr. Jacobs, Rector of St. Dunstan’s in the
West.
|
1785
|
— Dr. Kelly, Vicar of East Mere, Hants.
|
1792
|
— Jas. Ward, Fellow of Queen’s Col.,
Cambridge.
|
1797
|
— Thomas Ellis.
|
1800
|
— J. Manning.
|
1802
|
— J. Gee Smyth, Rector of Chellesworth, Suffolk.
|
1812
|
— John Owen, Rector of Paglesham, Essex.
|
1822
|
— Henry John Owen, son of the preceding.
|
1834
|
— John Harding.
|
1836
|
— Henry Vaughan.
|
1836
|
— Thomas Vores.
|
1841
|
— John C. Miller.
|
1846
|
— W. Cadman.
|
1852
|
— C. J. Goodhart.
|
Dec. 1868
|
— J. G. Gregory.
|
The Rev. J. Gee Smyth, M.A., who it will be seen possessed
Park Chapel in 1802, made very considerable alterations in it
about 1810. It may be said to have been almost rebuilt by
him. The late Mr. Richard Mann, of Chelsea, took a very
correct sketch of the chapel, as altered by Mr. Smyth.
Since 1810, at different times, it has undergone great repairs
and some material improvements.
The Rev. John Owen, M.A., was born in London in 1765. He
received his education at St. Paul’s School, and removed
from thence to Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, where he
prosecuted his studies with such success as to obtain several
prizes, and to be elected a Fellow of his College. After
taking holy orders, he soon distinguished himself as a preacher,
and attracted the notice of Bishop Porteus, who bestowed on him
the living of Paglesham, in Essex, having previously recommended
him to the Curacy of Fulham, which he held until the decease of
that venerable prelate; and, on his resigning the Lectureship, in
1813, the inhabitants of that parish presented Mr. Owen with a
handsome testimonial of their attachment, as an acknowledgment of
the faithful manner he had discharged his duties. He was
one of the distinguished founders of the British and Foreign
Bible Society, and acted as honorary secretary for eighteen
years. During the whole of this period he most zealously
advocated, in every possible way, the circulation of the Holy
Scriptures, in conjunction with the Rev. Dr. Steinkoff, and the
Rev. Joseph Hughes, M.A., of Battersea. Mr. Owen possessed
great mental talents, both as an extempore preacher and a
writer. He was remarkably quick and correct in his
conceptions, extremely thoughtful in forming his conclusions, and
kind and considerate whenever a sense of duty compelled him to
differ from others in opinion. He wrote the History of the
British and Foreign Bible Society, and other works; and continued
to discharge his sacred duties as Minister of Park Chapel as long
as his health permitted. He died at Ramsgate, the 26th of
September, 1822, in the 57th year of his age. He resided at
Fulham during nearly the entire period of his active life.
The Rev. Henry John Owen, M.A., succeeded his father in
1822. While at Park Chapel he was much esteemed by the
congregation, and when he left many deplored the loss of him.
The Rev. John Harding, M.A., was appointed Minister of Park
Chapel in 1834. Some time after he became the Rector of St.
Ann’s, Blackfriars. In both parishes he was much
beloved by his congregations, and greatly esteemed by the
parishioners. At length he was consecrated Bishop of
Bombay, and, having remained in India for many years, he returned
to England, and a short time since preached on a Sunday evening
at Park Chapel. An affecting scene took place on that
occasion, as his lordship left the chapel. A great number
of persons had assembled outside to shew the respect they
entertained towards him, notwithstanding his long absence from
Chelsea. When Bishop Harding approached, he seemed almost
overpowered with the kind recollection manifested by so many of
the congregation and other inhabitants, and, after a slight
pause, he said, with considerable emotion, “My dear
friends, I thank you from my heart for your kind remembrance of
me. May God bless every one of you!” It should
here be mentioned that Bishop Harding, previously to his ministry
at Park Chapel, had been at St. Luke’s New Parish Church, with the
late revered Rev. H. Blunt, M.A., father of the present respected
Rector, at which Church he was also greatly esteemed.
The Rev. Henry Vaughan, M.A., did not long remain at Park
Chapel, as the state of his health rendered it impossible for him
to continue. Some short time afterwards he was called to
his eternal rest. I heard it once stated that Christian
love was engraved on his forehead.
The Rev. Thomas Vores, M.A., who was next in succession, was,
like his predecessors, much beloved. About five years after
his appointment he vacated it, and went to Hastings.
The Rev. Dr. Miller, the Rev. W. Cadman, M.A., and the Rev. C.
J. Goodhart, M.A., were equally respected as being zealous and
faithful ministers. The two former are, at the present
time, in the full vigour of life, and actively engaged in
discharging their sacred duties in large parishes. With
respect to Mr. Goodhart, who has only recently left the chapel,
and whose ministry there extended over so many years, it would be
a difficult task to notice him adequately in a given space; the
best summary will be to state that on his retirement he was
presented with a silver salver and a purse containing about
£540, as a testimony of the high respect entertained by the
congregation for his long and faithful ministrations.
The Rev. J. G. Gregory, M.A., succeeded Mr. Goodhart at the
close of the year 1868. The body of the chapel, since his
appointment, has been entirely re-pewed, the old high pews having
been all removed, and the seats made more commodious by
additional width being given to them. Several other
alterations have been made, and a few more are said to be in
contemplation. The whole interior of the chapel is
therefore now greatly improved, both as regards comfort and
appearance. The exterior of the structure, however,
requires to be altogether rebuilt, as soon as practicable, so as
to accord with the ecclesiastical architecture of the present
day, especially in such a locality as West Brompton and South
Kensington. In the Vestry Room are portraits of the
different Ministers of Park Chapel, commencing with the Rev. John
Owen, and terminating with the Rev. Mr. Goodhart, with only one
exception, the portrait of Mr. Vaughan, the absence of which may
be attributed to the short period of his ministry, in consequence
of his illness and death, and the difficulty afterwards of
procuring a correct likeness of him. It would be well if
this memorial portrait could be added to the others.
Their
Royal Highnesses the Dukes of Kent and Sussex attended this
chapel in 1812, when a collection was made for the benefit of the
schools, on which occasion a guard of honour, selected from Queen
Charlotte’s Royal Volunteers, was stationed at the doors on
their arrival and departure.
Adjoining the chapel a building was erected, in 1828, by
subscription, and the profits of a sale of fancy work, for the
reception of the children of Park Chapel Schools, &c.
The whole charge originally was £900. Several
alterations, however, have since been made in the arrangement of
this building. The Girls’ Day and Sunday Schools, and
the Infant School, are now only held in it, besides a few
occasional meetings in connection with the numerous benevolent
societies supported by the liberal contributions of the
congregation. The boys’ school was transferred to the
Clock House some years since. This latter school owes its
origin to Samuel Gower Poole, Esq., who once resided in Dudmaston
House, King’s Road, and to whom reference has already been
made. The annual meetings. &c., are also held in the
Clock House schoolroom.
This was part of the property of Sir Thomas More, and is
called, in old deeds, the “Sand Hills;” was
originally open fields, with a footpath across to Little
Chelsea. The whole was enclosed with a brick wall, in 1625,
by the Lord Treasurer, Cranfield, and converted into a park,
which name it has retained ever since, but the walls have
gradually given way to the erection of buildings. The park
originally consisted of 32 acres, situated north of the
King’s Road, between Park and Upper Church Street. [71]
In 1721 a patent was obtained for a manufactory of raw silk,
and this park was taken for the purpose, and planted with
mulberry trees. It attracted a considerable share of public
attention
at the time, but proved unsuccessful. The premises of the
Raw Silk Company were rated in the parish books at
£200.
In Walpole’s Catalogue of Engravers, it is stated that
James Christopher le Blon, in 1734, set up a project for copying
the cartoons in tapestry, and made some fine drawings for the
purpose. Houses were built, and looms erected, on the above
mulberry ground, but either the expense was too great, or the
contributions did not arrive fast enough. The bubble burst,
several suffered, and Le Blon was heard of no more.
Interesting Particulars of Sir Henry and
Lady Wilson. On the northern border of the old park,
just described, is a capital mansion in which Sir Henry Wright
Wilson resided for many years, the entrance to it being in the
Fulham Road, and which is still designated as Chelsea Park.
The pleasure grounds attached to it were some years since much
more extensive than they are at present. Sir Henry married
a daughter of the Earl of Aylesbury, who was left a valuable
estate in Hampshire, said to be worth about £3000 a year,
under the most singular circumstances. Lady Frances Wilson
was informed in the year 1824, while at breakfast, that an
eccentric person named Wright, who had died a few days previously
at an obscure lodging in Pimlico, had appointed her and Mr. C.
Abbot his executors, and after some legacies had bequeathed to
Lady Frances the residue of his property by a will dated as far
back as 1800. As Lady Frances declared herself unacquainted
with the name of the testator, she at first concluded that there
was some mistake. After further explanation, the person of
Mr. Wright was described to her, and Lady Frances recollected
that the description answered that of a gentleman she had
remembered as a constant frequenter at the Opera many years
previously. To satisfy herself of the identity she went to
Mr. Wright’s late lodgings, and saw him in his coffin, when
she recognised the features as those of the person whose eyes had
so often persecuted her when she was Lady Frances Bruce, but who
had never spoken to her, and of whom she had no knowledge
whatever. [72] Lady Francis was never considered
by her friends to be beautiful, and the general opinion at the
time was that the legacy was intended for a lady who occupied a box
next to that in which Lady Frances sat when at the Opera.
Sir Henry was in Parliament when the above estate came into his
wife’s possession, but he afterwards had to contest his
seat, and lost it.
Sir Henry Wright Wilson and the Poor
Carpenter.—The following anecdote will no doubt
amuse many readers. Sir Henry’s establishment was
large, and he had been accustomed to employ at times a jobbing
carpenter, who had at one period been in better
circumstances. This person had received specific
instructions to do certain work, which required a little trifling
assistance, such as to help him to remove something which stood
in the way, and which the carpenter could not possibly do without
temporary aid. He asked several of the grooms and others to
assist, but they all made frivolous excuses, and consequently the
work was not done by the appointed time. When Sir Henry
returned home he noticed that his orders had been neglected, and,
on ascertaining the particulars, without making any remarks, he
quietly entered the house. The next morning, however, he
gave instructions for his carriage with four horses to be
immediately got ready. He then sent for the carpenter, and
after a short time the carriage was at the entrance door, when,
to the great surprise of the servants, he desired him to take a
seat in it. Sir Henry then mounted his horse, and,
notwithstanding the dirty state of the roads, took them through
Fulham, over Putney Bridge, round by Wandsworth and Battersea,
back to Chelsea. On their return he insisted that the
horses and carriage should be immediately cleaned, or else to be
dismissed from his service. Sir Henry being esteemed a good
master they preferred obedience, and it was said that although
the carpenter was afterwards subject to an occasional jeer, he
never had again to complain of their conduct towards him.
Queen’s Elm.—This is
situated at the top of Upper Church Street, but the spot for some
time past seems to be merged into the Fulham Road, and is either
so called, or else it is described as being near to it. The
original name, Queen’s Elm, which it is to be hoped will
still be retained, is said traditionally to have derived its
origin from the following circumstance. Queen Elizabeth was
walking out with the great Lord Burleigh, and being overtaken
with a heavy shower of rain, took shelter under an elm tree
growing on this spot. After the shower was over, she said,
“Let this henceforth be called the Queen’s
Tree.” This tradition is remarkably confirmed, as will be seen
by the following extract:—“It appears by the Church
Book, beginning 1586, and in the 28th Elizabeth, that the tree at
the end of the Duke’s Walk is in Chelsea parish called the
Queen’s Tree; and that there was an arbour built round it
by one Bostocke, at the charge of the parish.”
The Jews’ Burial Ground is at Queen’s Elm, and was
erected in 1816 by the individuals whose names are inscribed on
the wall of the entrance building, and to their
descendants. There is also inscribed the 16th Psalm in
Hebrew. The lower part of the building is called the hall,
the upper part is intended for the keeper. Unlike the
arrangement in the Moravians’ Burial Ground, the graves are
in rows, without any distinction as to sex. At burials the
mourners do not approach the grave, but stand at a distance, so
that they may hear sufficiently to join in the prayers.
The Rev. J. B. Owen, M.A., Vicar of St. Jude’s Church,
Chelsea, in an admirable lecture delivered by him in 1862, in the
Vestry Hall, King’s Road, related the following
anecdote:—“An Hebrew friend amused and puzzled me
with a sentiment he had once given at a festival of one of the
London Guilds. Being pressed for a toast, he gave
‘The Queen of the Jews, and of no other
nation.’ Many conjectures were hazarded, as wide of
the mark as Jezebel and the Queen of Sheba. The company
confessed themselves beaten, and at last my friend gave the
answer—‘Queen Victoria.’ But this only
darkened the enigma more than ever. After some time, he
said, J. (or I.) E. W. S. makes Ireland, England, Wales, and
Scotland, and J. E. W. S. spells Jews, and makes Victoria
‘Queen of the Jews, and of no other
nation.’”
“England,” said Mr. Owen, “owes a great
national debt of amends to their Hebrew brethren. For
several centuries they were bought and sold as chattels,
plundered and exiled, as if they were outlaws. In the
sixteenth year of Edward I. all the Jews in England were imprisoned, and
though they redeemed themselves for a vast sum, three years
after, the fraudulent tyrant banished them all; and they remained
in banishment 364 years, till the rough justice of old Oliver
Cromwell restored them to their trade and worship. The
proverb ‘worth a Jew’s eye’ alludes to the
barbarities practiced on the Jews, whose money was commonly
extorted from them by drawing their teeth, or putting out their
eyes. There are no judgments in Scripture more terrible
than those denounced against the oppressors of Judah. We
may be thankful that we have lived to witness the last vestige of
injustice to our Hebrew fellow-citizens erased from our
statutes. Have we also honestly received the social and
religious interests of the Jews into the unreserved sympathy of
Christian hearts?”
Francis Hargrave, Esq., a barrister, resided in York Place,
(the houses of which are now nearly all converted into shops, and
which is situated near to the Jews’ Burial Ground), for a
considerable period. He particularly distinguished himself
in the Habeas Corpus case of James Somerset, a negro, for
whom he was counsel, and his argument was the occasion of a
precedent being established for the freedom of slaves the moment
they set foot on English land. He possessed a very
extensive and most valuable library, which Parliament purchased
for £8000, in order that it might be placed in the British
Museum. He died here in 1821, aged 80.
Sydenham Edwards, Esq., F.L.S., an eminent botanical
draughtsman, lived in Charles Street, Queen’s Elm, and
afterwards removed to Barrossa Place, where he died in
1819. The Flora Londinensis, Rees’
Encyclopædia, &c., were greatly indebted to his
masterly pencil.
Alexander Stephens, Esq., built and resided in Park House,
Upper Church Street, for a great many years. He was the
author of several popular works, was born at Elgin, about 1757,
and completed his education at the University of Aberdeen, which
he left at the early age of 18 years, for the purpose of proceeding to
the West India Islands, principally with a view to add to his
stock of useful information and knowledge of the world. Mr.
Stephens purchased a Commission in the 84th regiment, but never
joined in consequence of the sudden reduction of that
corps. At the age of 21, he entered himself a member of the
Middle Temple, where he continued his vigorous pursuit of legal
studies for several years. His earliest production was
“Jamaica,” a descriptive poem; and his next,
published within a few years afterwards, “The
Temple,” a kind of law journal. But of his printed
works, undoubtedly, the most approved are the volumes of the
“Public Characters;” also a “Life of John Horne
Took,” and the “History of the Wars, which arose out
of the French Revolution.”
The industry of Mr. Stephens in the collection of the
materials for his biographical works has not often been
surpassed. He was accustomed to commit to paper the most
trifling memoranda illustrative of the history of any eminent
individual the moment they were communicated to him.
Mr. Stephens enjoyed the confidential friendship of the late
Duke of Kent, and was in habits of unreserved intimacy with many
other distinguished characters of the age. He was related
to the Duke of Roxburgh, whose claim to that title he pleaded
with memorable success in the House of Lords.
Although generally of retired habits, Mr. Stephens often felt
interested in the parochial concerns of Chelsea, and
distinguished himself by the manliness and zeal with which he
supported measures which to him appeared likely to prove
beneficial.
Mr. Stephens wrote much and well for the periodical
press. The pages of the Analytical Review abound in
important articles from his pen. To the Monthly Magazine,
also, he was a frequent contributor. Besides the
composition of papers on the Belles Lettres, he was in the habit
of furnishing biographical notices for that journal. In
extent of information touching the lives and actions of the
cotemporary generation, he was equalled by few writers of his
age. Mr. Stephens’s sound constitution was gradually
impaired by intense study, added to the immoderate use of
coldiam, on the efficacy of which he placed implicit
reliance. For the last two years of his life he suffered
severely from the gout, and at last died somewhat suddenly at his
house in Upper Church Street, in 1821, aged 64, and was interred
in the burial ground attached to St. Luke’s Church.
A. H.
Haworth, Esq., occupied a house in Upper Church Street in 1825,
and for some time previous to that year. He possessed an
unrivalled Museum of Entomology and Natural History, the
collection of 40 years laborious research. It would be
impossible here to give any thing like an adequate notice of what
it contained. There were about 40,000 insects, arranged in
systematic order, and about 20,000 dried plants, arranged in
natural order, and glued. His contributions to the
Linnæan Society and Horticultural Society, Philosophical
Magazine, &c., were greatly esteemed.
I. N. Sartorius, Esq., so long celebrated for his faithful
delineations of animal life, resided in this street in 1830, and
for some years.
Philip Reinagle, Esq., R.A., celebrated for his beautiful
specimens of landscape paintings, and whose family were eminent
for their proficiency in the fine arts, resided also here about
the same period.
W. H. Davis, Esq., at a much later period, resided also for
many years in Upper Church Street, near the King’s Road; he
was considered to be one of the best animal portrait painters,
and was constantly employed every Smithfield Cattle Show, his
works being very highly prized.
Crossing the King’s Road, we enter into that portion of
Church Street which leads direct to the Old Church. This
ancient thoroughfare was built upon at a very early period, and
many eminent persons have resided here at various times; but
principally since the Rectory was removed hither, in 1569, from
Milman’s Row.
William Tebbs, Esq., Proctor, resided nearly opposite the
Rectory House, in Church Street, for many years; he was highly
respected professionally, and much esteemed for his kindness and
liberality to the poor. Mr. Tebbs, sen., dwelt here in
1819, and his name appears subsequently and previously for a long
time as a contributor to most of the local charities.
Henry Virtue Tebbs, Esq., son of the preceding, and who was in
partnership with his father, resided in a commodious detached
house, with large enclosed garden, in Cooks’ Ground, for a
long time. Like the rest of his family he was greatly
respected by the inhabitants, and ever ready to promote every good work in
the parish. Of him it may truly be said that he was the
constant friend of the needy and helpless. He was a zealous
supporter of the Chelsea Auxiliary Bible Society, and he devoted
most of his leisure hours in promoting the various societies
connected with Park Chapel, especially the Day and Sunday
Schools. Some few years since he removed from the parish to
the deep regret of a numerous circle of friends, whose sincere
hope is that his benevolent heart may still beat for many a year
to come.
One of the most ancient mansions (pulled down some few years
ago) was called Church Place. It was said to have been the
residence of various eminent persons; and some have confidently
asserted that it was the palace of the Earl of Essex. It
was also said to have been used by Queen Anne as a laundry.
In the back front there was a date, cut in brick,
“1641.” This old house is first mentioned in
the parish books in 1696; it is also mentioned repeatedly in the
Inquests of Court Leet, and Court Baron, before and after that
period.
Dr. Atterbury resided facing the river, near the Old Church,
in 1695, as appears by the parish books, and afterwards in Church
Street, for several years; one of his letters is dated from hence
in 1698. There he became acquainted with Swift, in 1711, to
whom he was before unknown.
Francis Atterbury, Bishop of Rochester, was born in 1662, and
was educated in Westminster School, and afterwards was elected a
Student of Christ Church, Oxford, where he soon distinguished
himself by his wit and learning, and gave early proofs of his
poetical talents. In 1687, he made his first essay in
controversial writing, and shewed himself an able and strenuous
advocate for the Protestant religion. In 1691 he took holy
orders, and was elected in the same year Lecturer of St.
Bride’s, London, and Preacher of Bridewell Chapel.
Upon the accession of Queen Anne, in 1702, Dr. Atterbury was
appointed one of her Majesty’s Chaplains in Ordinary; and
in 1704 was advanced to the Deanery of Carlisle. In 1713,
at the recommendation of Lord Chancellor Harcourt, the Queen
promoted him to the Bishopric of Rochester.
In 1722, Dr. Atterbury, on suspicion of being concerned in a
plot in favour of the Pretender, was apprehended and committed to
the Tower. Shortly afterwards he was condemned to perpetual
exile. Just before this, a large fine dropped to him as
Dean of Westminster, but he could have no right to receive it
without the seal being set to it in full chapter. Sir
Robert Walpole earnestly enquired whether a Chapter could not be
held in the Tower, that he might receive the benefit of the
fine. A chapter was accordingly there held, and the Bishop
received a £1000 for his share. This anecdote, which
is well authenticated, does great credit to the liberality of
Walpole.
Dr. Atterbury, in his private character, was most amiable and
exemplary; as a preacher he was eloquent, and as a writer, his
sermons, letters and other tracts, proved most decidedly that he
possessed piety, genius, and erudition. On the 18th of
June, 1723, having the day before taken leave of his friends,
this eminent prelate embarked on board the Aldborough man-of-war,
and landed on the Friday following at Calais.
A prelate for wit, and for eloquence
fam’d,
Apollo soon miss’d, and he need not be nam’d;
Since amidst a whole bench, of which some are so bright,
No one of them shines so learn’d and
polite.—Sheffield, 1719.
The celebrated Dean Swift came to Chelsea in the year 1711,
and took up his residence facing Dr. Atterbury’s house in
Church Street.
Dr. Jonathan Swift, Dean of St. Patrick, in Dublin, an
illustrious poet, and political and satirical writer, was born in
Dublin in 1667, and died in 1745. Of a life so various and
so full of business as Swift’s, we know not what part we
could select consistent with the limits of this work that would
not excite rather than gratify curiosity.
The company of Swift was courted by persons of the first rank
in life and literature; the following peculiarities may be
related:—He made to himself a rule never to speak more than
a minute at a time, and to wait for others to take up the
conversation. He was singularly happy in punning; and used
to say, that none despised that talent but those who were without
it. He also greatly excelled in telling a story; but, in
the latter part of his life, used to tell the same rather to
often. Though to strangers he appeared churlish, and
austere to his servants, it is said he was a kind and generous
master; he was also very charitable to the poor.
Swift
has been very minute and circumstantial in describing the
particulars relative to his residence here, and his acquaintance
with Dr. Atterbury. I will select one instance of
it:—“I got here,” says he, “with Patrick
and my portmanteau for sixpence, and pay six shillings a week for
one silly room, with confounded coarse sheets. I lodge just
over against Dr. Atterbury’s house; and yet, perhaps, I
shall not like the place the better for that.”
Thomas Shadwell, Esq., Poet Laureat, another resident of
Church Street, was born at Stanton Hall, Norfolk, and received
his education at Bury School, and Caius College, Cambridge.
His father, who held a place of profit and distinction in the law
in Ireland, bestowed the learning and exercises of a gentleman
upon him. Notwithstanding that, Lord Rochester has
said,
“None seem to touch true Comedy
But hasty Shadwell and slow Wycherlye,”
yet that lord had a better opinion of his conversation than
his writings when he said “that if Shadwell had burned all
he wrote, and printed all he spoke, he would have shewn more wit
and humour than any other poet.” In the reign of
William III. he succeeded Dryden, as Poet Laureat, under whose
lash he had previously fallen. His works, consisting of
seventeen plays, were published in three volumes 12mo. in 1720,
with a short account of his life written by his son, Sir John
Shadwell, Knight, who was physician to Queen Anne, and resided in
a house at Chelsea, which had been previously occupied by Dr.
Arbuthnot. Shadwell died at Chelsea in 1692, aged 52, and
was buried in the Church, November 24, when a funeral sermon was
preached by his friend Dr. Nicholas Brady, in which he assures us
that “his natural and acquired abilities made him
sufficiently remarkable to all that he conversed with, very few
being equal to him in all the becoming qualities and
accomplishments of a gentleman.” His widow, who had
been an actress, survived him, and resided at Chelsea some
years.
Dr. John Arbuthnot, a native of Scotland, had his education in
the University of Aberdeen, where he took the degree of Doctor of
Physic. He came to London about the year 1695, and at first
taught the mathematics for his support. His facetious and
agreeable conversation introduced him by degrees into practice;
and he became eminent in his profession. Being at Epsom
when Prince George of Denmark was suddenly taken ill, he was
called in to his assistance; his advice was successful, and his
Highness recovering, employed him ever afterwards as his
physician.
The Queen’s death, and the disasters which fell upon his
friends on that occasion, deeply affected his health and spirits;
and, to divert his melancholy, he paid a visit to his brother, a
banker, at Paris. He returned to London, and continued his
medical profession with great reputation, employing his leisure
hours in writing papers of wit and humour.
About this time Dr. Arbuthnot took a house in Church Street,
where he at times entertained a select number of his
friends. He died in 1735 in Cork Street, Burlington
Gardens. In his writings he has shewn himself equal to any
of his cotemporaries in humour, wit, and learning. Sir John
Shadwell, son of the Laureat, afterwards occupied the house.
Dr. Edward Chamberlayne, it appears from the land tax book of
this parish, anno 1704, resided next door to Dr. King, the
rector, in a house that is still standing, and which is a few
doors north of the White Horse public house, in Church
Street. He was descended from an ancient family, and born
at Odington, in Gloucestershire, in 1616. During the civil
war he made the tour of Europe. After the Restoration he
was chosen F.R.S.; and, in 1669, attended Charles, Earl of
Carlisle, as secretary to the embassy to Stockholm, with the
order of the Garter for the King of Sweden. Shortly
afterwards the degree of LL.D. was conferred on him at Cambridge,
and also the same at Oxford at a later period. About the
year 1679, he received the appointment of tutor to the Duke of
Grafton, one of the natural sons of Charles II.; and subsequently
he instructed Prince George of Denmark, consort to Queen Anne, in
the English language. He died at his house in Church Street
in 1703, having been an active magistrate in this parish for many
years.
John Chamberlayne, (son of Dr. Chamberlayne,) who resided in
the house formerly occupied by his father, was a learned and
worthy man. He was admitted into Trinity College, Oxford,
in 1685, and was gentleman usher to George Prince of
Denmark. He translated, from the French and Spanish: 1. The
Manner of making Tea, Coffee, and Chocolate. 2. From
Italian into English, A Treasure of Health, written by Castor
Durant de Gualdo, physician of Rome. 3. The Arguments of
the Books and Chapters of the Old and New Testaments, with
Practical Observations, written originally in French by the Rev.
Mr. Ostervald, Professor of Divinity, and one of the members of
the church at Neufchatel, in Switzerland, and by him presented to
the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, of which society
he was a member. 4. The Lives of the Members of the Royal
Academy of Sciences; translated from the French of M. de
Fontenelle; republished since, in 1721, under the title of
“Memoirs of the Royal Academy of Sciences of Paris,
Epitomized, with the Lives of the late Members of that
Society.” 5. The Religious or Christian Philosopher;
or, The right Use of Contemplating the Work of the Creator;
translated from the Dutch of Dr. Nieuwentyt, with cuts. 6.
History of the Reformation in and about the Low Countries;
translated from the Low Dutch of Gerard Brandt. 7. The
Lord’s Prayer, in 100 Languages. 8. Dissertations,
Historical, Theological, and Critical, on the most memorable
events of the Old and New Testaments, wherein the Spirit of the
Sacred Writings is shewn, their authority confirmed,
&c. Mr. Chamberlayne was Fellow of the Royal Society,
to whom he communicated several papers on important
subjects. He augmented and improved his father’s book
of “The Present State of Great Britain,” to the
latter editions of which his name is prefixed. He was not
only learned but pious, earnest at all times in promoting and
disseminating religious principles. In the old churchyard,
facing the river, are inscriptions to the memory of this
distinguished family. [82]
Mr. Bowack, to whom we are so much indebted for his valuable
information, resided near Dr. Chamberlayne’s house in
Church Street. In 1705 he began to publish, in folio
numbers, “The Antiquities of Middlesex; being a Collection
of the several Church Monuments in that County; also an
Historical Account of each Church and Parish, with the Seats,
Villages, and names of the most eminent Inhabitants.”
The work extended through the parishes of Chelsea, Fulham,
Kensington, Chiswick, and Acton, and was then discontinued.
It is much to be regretted that he could not complete his
design. He has preserved many monumental inscriptions,
since destroyed. Mr. Bowack was writing master to
Westminster School. “I have,” says Mr.
Faulkner, in reference to his own work, “carefully embodied
the greater part of the information contained in his
(Bowack’s) folio volume, now become extremely
scarce.”
John
Martyn, Esq., who resided in Church Street, next door to Dr.
Chamberlayne, was the son of a merchant of London. He was
born in 1699. With him it was a subject of frequent
exultation, in after-life, that Providence had thrown him into a
country, and produced him at a period so fertile in genius and
literary accomplishments. “It was truly the golden
age of learning,” says Mr. Faulkner, “and to converse
with those heroes who adorn it was deemed no mean privilege, or
glory, by one who well knew how to value mental
wealth.” He was sent by his father to a private
school (his mother died when he was scarcely a twelvemonth old),
and here by his own industry rather than by any advantage of
instruction, he made a tolerable proficiency in school learning,
but was taken away from his beloved books to engage in the
business of a counting house. Most youths of his age, in
such an occupation, would have found their minds sufficiently
employed, but he, insatiate of knowledge, after the labours of
the day, dedicated most of those hours which are usually given to
bodily rest to the improvement of his understanding.
Mr. Martyn’s propensity to the science of botany was
first excited by an acquaintance with Mr. Wilmer, an apothecary,
who afterwards became the reader in the Botanic Garden at
Chelsea, and by an intimacy contracted with Dr. Blair and Dr.
Sherard. In the year 1732, he published a translation of
“Tournefort’s History of Plants about Paris,”
and in the same year a “Catalogue of the Plants about
London,” but he did not complete it. From a strong
conviction that observations made upon plants in their natural
places of growth were the least liable to error, he about the
same time began his botanical excursions, which were mostly
performed on foot, and were continued for a long period with
unwearied diligence. His “Hortus Siccus,”
containing 1,400 specimens, is a sufficient testimony of his
industry. Nor did he confine himself wholly to the
contemplation of vegetables, and their hidden virtues; the
numerous insect tribe began to attract no small share of his
attention. In 1721, he principally instituted the Botanical
Society, in London. Dr. Dillenius was president, and Mr.
Martyn was secretary. This society kept together till
1726. About this time he became a member of the Royal
Society, and now began to apply himself most seduously to the
practice of physic. For this purpose he was admitted of
Emmanuel College, Cambridge, and kept five terms, with an
intention to have proceeded regularly with his degrees, but from
peculiar circumstances he was prevented from finishing his
design. He had now lived and practised physic in Great St.
Helen’s, Bishopsgate Street, during three years; but,
finding the air of London disagree with his constitution, he
embraced a favourable opportunity which offered of removing to
Chelsea, where he practised physic with success and great
reputation for above twenty years.
In 1733, he was chosen Professor of Botany in the University
of Cambridge, where he had given several courses of lectures, and
had greatly restored the study of that science.
Mr. Martyn, in 1723 (as is stated in a preceding page),
married Eulalia, youngest daughter of the Rev. Dr. John King,
Rector of Chelsea, by whom he had three sons and five daughters,
all of whom were born in Church Street, Chelsea, in the same
house wherein their mother was born and died, and in which her
father, Dr. King, lived and died. Mrs. Martyn died in 1749,
from a cancer in her breast, occasioned by a violent blow given
her as she was walking in London.
In 1750, Mr. Martyn married, secondly, a daughter of Claude
Fonnereau, Esq., merchant of London, who bore him one son and
survived him. Soon after this he retired to Streatham,
Surrey. In 1761 he resigned his professorship of botany;
and some time after presented to the University his library of
botanical books, amounting to above 200 volumes.
Chelsea, notwithstanding the happiness he enjoyed at
Streatham, seems after all to have been his favourite place of
abode, as he removed back again to his former residence in Church
Street, and at last, by the most gradual and gentle decay, died
there in 1768.
Mr. Martyn’s benevolence was that of a Christian,
diffusive and unconfined; he was considered as the father of the
poor in the parish, and gave constant attention to the sick, both
in and out of the workhouse. He was the author of many
works, two of which we shall notice:—
“An Account of an Aurora Australis,
seen at Chelsea, March 18, 1738–9.” This was
the first account which had ever been given of that
phenomenon.
“An Account of an Earthquake felt in
London, February 8, 1749–50.”
The
following extract from the latter account will no doubt interest
the reader: “At 40 minutes after noon, all the houses were
violently shaken, especially those nearest the river. A
maid servant, passing from one under office to another, felt the
ground, which was six feet below the surface, shake. Of
those who were in the street, or on the river, some felt, others
not. It was felt at Fulham, but not at Hounslow, Brentford,
nor Richmond, nor farther westward than Kensington Turnpike; it
seemed to terminate in the west, about two miles beyond
Chelsea.”
Mr. Martyn was also engaged in a weekly paper, called
“The Grub Street Journal,” which had a large sale,
about the year 1736. It was one of the most curious of the
periodical papers of that period. In a fine vein of irony
it attacked the heroes of the Dunciad, and tells some secrets of
their obscure quarrels. [85] The papers he
contributed are distinguished by the signature
“B.”
William Petyt, Esq., to whom we have already slightly
referred, in the account of his gift to the parish of the School
Room at the Old Church, resided in Church Street, and died there
in 1707, aged 71 years. Of his progress through life there
is no information, except that he enjoyed considerable reputation
as a writer on the laws and constitution of England, which are
preserved in the Inner Temple Library. There is a long
Latin epitaph to his memory in the Temple Church. It was
the year before his death that he built the schoolrooms and
vestry.
The White Horse Inn in Church Street, which was burnt down
some years since, and a new one substituted for it, was a very
ancient house, built in the style which prevailed in the reigns
of Henry VIII. and Queen Elizabeth. The disposition of the
rooms, the ancient panelling, and the various grotesque ornaments
and carving, especially of human figures in the form of brackets,
were well worthy of inspection, and excited the attention of most
strangers who visited the house.
The old Parochial Guardian Society mostly held their meetings
at the old White Horse Inn. The principal room was large
and consequently well-adapted for such purposes; and when the
parishioners met in open vestry, the house being opposite to
the Vestry Room where they assembled, it was particularly
convenient on such occasions for the accommodation of the
ratepayers generally. The above society comprised a great
many members, and acted in conjunction with a large number of the
resident gentry of the parish.
Justice Walk, which extends from Church Street to Lawrence
Street, took its name from a magistrate who lived in it. An
avenue of lime trees formerly adorned it, and, being kept in good
order, it was a very agreeable footway for passengers.
There is now in it a commodious Wesleyan Chapel, built in
1841. The exterior is plain and unpretending. The
interior is neat, comfortable, and well ventilated. Beneath
the chapel is a spacious school room, in which the Sunday School
is held. This school is very well attended. Through
the exertions of the members, and other friends, the interior of
the chapel has recently been painted, and rendered more
comfortable in many respects.
The Chelsea China Manufactory was situate at the corner of
Justice Walk, and occupied the houses to the upper end of
Lawrence Street. Several of the large old houses were used
as shew-rooms. It has been discontinued for nearly 90
years.
The manufactory of Chelsea porcelain was set on foot and
carried on by a Mr. Spremont, a foreigner. The
establishment employed a great number of hands; but the original
proprietor having acquired a large fortune retired from the
concern, and his successors, wanting his enterprise and spirit,
did not so well succeed, and in a few years finally abandoned
it. Previous to the dissolution, the proprietors presented
a memorial respecting it to the Government, requesting protection
and assistance, in which they stated that “the manufacture
in England has been carried on by great labour and a large
expense; it is in many respects to the full as good as the
Dresden; and the late Duke of Orleans told Colonel York that the
metal or earth had been tried in his furnace, and was found to be
the best made in Europe. It is now daily improving, and
already employs, at least, 100 hands, of which is a nursery of
thirty lads taken from the parishes and charity schools, and bred
to designing and painting: arts very much wanted here, and which
are of the greatest use in our silk and printed linen
manufactories.”
Specimens of this porcelain have always been much
esteemed, and still retain a great value. At the sale of
the effects of Queen Charlotte, the articles in Chelsea china, of
which her Majesty had a large collection, brought very high
prices. Mr. Watkins, in his Life of Queen Charlotte, says,
“I beheld with admiration a complete service of Chelsea
china, porcelain, rich and beautiful in fancy beyond
expression. I really never saw any Dresden porcelain near
so fine.”
Mr. A. Stephens, whom we have already noticed, was told by the
foreman of the Chelsea China Manufactory (then in the workhouse
of St. Luke’s, Middlesex), that Dr. Johnson had conceived a
notion that he was capable of improving on the manufacture of
china. He even applied to the directors of the Chelsea
China Works, and was allowed to bake his compositions in
their ovens in Lawrence Street, Chelsea. He was accordingly
accustomed to go down with his housekeeper, about twice a week,
and stop the whole day, she carrying a basket of provisions with
her. The Doctor, who was not allowed to enter the
mixing room, had access to every other part of the
premises, and formed his composition in a particular apartment,
without being overlooked by any one. He had also free
access to the oven, and superintended the whole of the process;
but completely failed, both as to composition and baking, for his
materials always yielded to the intensity of the heat, while
those of the Company came out of the furnace perfect and
complete. Dr. Johnson retired in disgust, but not in
despair, for he afterwards gave a dissertation on this very
subject in his works; but the overseer assured Mr. Stephens, in
1814, that he was still ignorant of the nature of the
operation. He seemed to think that the Doctor imagined one
single substance was sufficient, while he, on the other hand,
asserted that he always used sixteen, and he must have had some
practice, as he had nearly lost his eye-sight by firing batches
of china, both at Chelsea and Derby, to which the manufacture was
afterwards carried.
Chelsea china, originally patronised by the Duke of
Cumberland, and afterwards by Sir R. Faulkner, was a long time in
such repute as to be sold by auction, and as a set was purchased
as soon as baked, dealers were surrounding the doors for that
purpose. [87]
Lawrence Street derives its name, as previously intimated,
from its having been the site of the residence of the Lawrence
family for many years. On this spot stood the first old
Manor House, until Lord Sandys alienated the manor to Henry
VIII., when that king sold it to Sir Thomas Lawrence, and erected
another in Cheyne Walk.
The ancient family of Lawrence first came into England with
William the Conqueror, and settled at Ashton Hall, in the county
of Lancaster, where they resided for 300 years, and possessed an
immense property, which, in the year 1591, included 34 manors,
the rental of which amounted to £6000 per annum. It
is uncertain when this family first came to Chelsea, but as the
Lawrence chapel in the Old Church is built in the style of
architecture which prevailed at the beginning of the fourteenth
century, they were probably settled here about that period, and
some time before they purchased the manor house. Some of
the family who were buried in the chapel have already been
mentioned.
The chief branches of this eminent family resided in Chelsea,
in London, and at Iver, Bucks. Sir John Lawrence, knight,
was Lord Mayor of London in 1665.
Some “Pious Contemplations,” on the arms of the
Lawrence family, are written in the margin of their
pedigree. They are supposed to have been affixed to it in
1664, but the author is not known. The following are the
concluding lines:—
“The way to Heaven is not with roses
spread,
But throng’d with thorns, as was Thy sacred head;
Our peace is hack’d and hew’d, our life’s a
war,
We, for our Cross, must many crosses bear—
Or, a red sea our passage doth withstand,
Or, fiery serpents, or, a barren sand,
Ere we can reach the truly Holy Land.”
“Christ’s Cross the ladder is that leads to
bliss,
Blest Jacob’s vision was a type of this;
Who climbs by other steps is at a loss—
To Heaven the only ladder is the Cross.”
Ann,
Duchess of Monmouth and Buccleugh, relict of James, Duke of
Monmouth, resided in the “great house” in Lawrence
Street about 1714, and from that time it was called Monmouth
House. The following item appears in the
Churchwardens’ accounts for the year 1716: “Paid the
ringers, when the Princess (afterwards Queen Caroline) visited
the Duchess of Monmouth, six shillings.” The Duchess
was, it is said, for her agreeable person, good sense, and
irreproachable character, one of the most amiable ladies about
the Court. During the first years of her marriage she seems
to have been as happy, and as much envied as any woman in the
kingdom; but this happiness was of short duration; she was
unfortunately supplanted in the Duke’s affections by Lady
Harriet Wentworth, daughter of the Earl of Cleveland, whose
personal charms were superior to her own. Her Grace died in
1732, aged 90 years.
Mr. Gay was for some time secretary to the Duchess, as stated
in Johnson’s Life of Gay.
Dr. Smollett afterwards resided in the same house in Lawrence
Street. He came to Chelsea on account of the bad state of
health of his beloved daughter, who was at that time in a
consumption, under which she finally sank in the year 1763.
The house and premises were extensive, and well suited for the
residence of a person of rank. There are few men of real
genius who have written more voluminously than Dr.
Smollett. His entertaining novels are so well known that it
seems almost unnecessary to mention Roderick Random, the
Adventures of Peregrine Pickle, Ferdinand Count Fathom, and Sir
Launcelot Greaves, the Expedition of Humphry Clinker, &c.
He was bred to the medical profession, and in the early part
of his life served as a surgeon in the navy. It is said
that before he took a house at Chelsea he attempted to settle as
a practitioner, at Bath, but was unsuccessful, chiefly because he
could not render himself agreeable to the ladies. This,
however, was a little extraordinary, for Smollett was as graceful
and handsome a man as any of the age; besides, there was a
certain dignity in his manner which could not fail to inspire
respect whenever he appeared. Abandoning physic altogether
as a profession, he fixed his residence at Chelsea, and turned
his thoughts entirely to writing.
Dr. Smollett’s History of England has had a most
extensive sale. He is said to have received £2000 for
writing it and the continuation. During the last years of his life he
was employed in abridging the Modern Universal History, great
part of which he had originally written himself. In the
year 1755 he set on foot the Critical Review, and continued the
principal manager of it till he went abroad for the first time,
in the year 1763. He had made some very severe remarks on a
pamphlet published by Admiral Knowles, who commenced a
prosecution against the printer; and, just as sentence was going
to be pronounced, he came into Court, and avowed himself the
author; upon which he was fined £100, and condemned to
three months’ imprisonment in the King’s Bench.
It is there he is said to have written the Adventures of Sir
Launcelot Greaves, in which he has described some remarkable
characters, then his fellow-prisoners. When Lord Bute was
called to the chief administration of affairs, he was prevailed
upon to write in defence of that nobleman’s measures, in a
weekly paper called the Briton. This gave rise to the
well-known North Briton, wherein he was rather baffled.
Smollett’s constitution being at last greatly impaired
by a sedentary life, and assiduous application to study, he went
abroad for his health in 1769. He wrote accounts of his
travels, in a series of letters to his friends, which were
afterwards published.
During that time he appears to have been occasionally in a
distressed state of mind. In his first letter he
writes:—“In gratifying your curiosity, I shall find
some amusement to beguile the tedious hours; which, without some
such employment, would be rendered insupportable by distemper and
disquiet. You knew and pitied my situation: traduced by
malice, persecuted by faction, abandoned by false patrons, and
overwhelmed by domestic affliction.” He here alludes
to the loss of his only daughter. In another letter,
addressed to Mr. Reid, of this parish, he desires to be
remembered to his Chelsea friends, wishing them that health and
happiness to which he himself was a stranger, and adds, “I
am very glad to know your concert was so brilliant, and I hope
all your Chelsea societies will continue to flourish.”
Dr. Smollett returned to England, but afterwards went back to
Italy, where he died in 1771.
The old Chelsea Stage Coaches started from Lawrence Street and
Church Street, between which places there were extensive
stabling, and a residence for the proprietor in the centre of the
yard. The fare for inside passengers was
1s. 6d., outside 1s., and no intermediate
fare at a lower sum was taken. Thanks to the General
Omnibus Company, to the Steamboat, and the Railway Companies, we
can now go to almost the extremity of London for 6d. and a
shorter distance for 3d.
Lordship Place takes its name from having been the site of the
barns, &c., of the Lord of the Manor. It is a short
street, near the river, connecting Lawrence Street with Cheyne
Row. In the early Parish Registers occur many lamentable
details of poor people being found dead in these barns, where
they had taken refuge from the inclemency of the weather.
Cheyne Row was built in 1708, and was named after the Lord of
the Manor.
John Denver, Esq., resided in Cheyne Row for the last twenty
years of his life. He devoted his time to study, and the
forming of a collection of early printed Bibles, manuscripts, and
missals, which was at last one of the most valuable in
England. His daughter, Miss Denyer, was very clever in
painting and illuminating on vellum, &c. Her drawings
and miniatures were equal to the finest specimens of the middle
ages. Mr. Denyer died at the age of 71, and was buried in
the Old Church, and his affectionate daughter was also interred
near her father and mother. This family was distinguished
for their benevolence to the poor.
In Cheyne Row, within my recollection, many old and
influential families have resided there, who were greatly
respected. Amongst them may be mentioned Edmund Chalmers,
Esq., Thomas Chalmers, Esq., John Hulme, Esq., Edward Holl, Esq.,
the benevolent Mrs. Hebert, Richard Draper, Esq., George Blyth,
Esq., and Isaac Wrentmore, Esq.
Thomas Carlyle, Esq., who is so well-known in literary and
other distinguished circles, and who is certainly one of the most
profound writers of the present age, has resided in Cheyne Row
for a great many years. The University of Edinburgh, last
year, conferred on him the highest honour it could bestow.
His habits of life at Chelsea are naturally secluded, but he is
nevertheless greatly respected by those who have an opportunity
of acquiring a knowledge of his social worth. Mr. Carlyle
begins now to bend with age, although apparently in tolerable
health, and, notwithstanding his recent severe bereavement, not a
cloud seems to dim the vigour of his intellectual faculties.
In
Upper Cheyne Row there was formerly a manufactory for melting
gold and silver in crucibles, which was said to produce the best
articles of the kind in England.
Cook’s Grounds was formerly a back way to Alston House,
Cheyne Walk.
Cook’s Ground Chapel was originally built for the use of
the French Protestants, who had taken refuge in this country
after the revocation of the edict of Nantes, in the year
1685. Several French gardeners settled upon this spot, and
the Rev. Dr. King, the rector, mentions them in terms of great
kindness, and strongly recommends them to the protection of his
successors. The chapel was for many years in the
Independent Connexion. The Rev. Benjamin Fielder, in 1773,
succeeded the Rev. Mr. Trail, and died in 1803. His death
was very affecting; he had seated himself in the pulpit, and,
after a hymn had been sung, he was observed with his head
reclining, and without any signs of life. He was
immediately removed, but never spoke afterwards. The Rev.
John Bunce, who was well known and respected in Chelsea, was
minister at this chapel for many years, and subsequently Dr.
Tracey, Mr. Webb, and at the present time Mr. Hayward.
Shrewsbury, or Alston House, a capital mansion, built about
the latter end of the reign of Henry VIII., was situated in
Cheyne Walk, to the west of the present “Pier
Hotel.” This house was considered for a long time to
have been the residence of Sir Thomas More; but Dr. King has
proved, from the most authentic documents, that it never had any
just pretensions to that honour.
It was an irregular brick building, forming three sides of a
quadrangle. The principal room was one hundred and twenty
feet in length, and was originally wainscotted with carved
oak. One of the rooms was painted in imitation of marble,
and appeared to have been originally an oratory. Certain
curious portraits on panel, which had ornamented the large
rooms, were destroyed some few years since; this is to be
regretted, as, in all probability, they represented its former
owners, or, at least, some persons of note.
Leading from the premises, towards the King’s Road,
there is a subterranean passage, which has been explored for a
short distance. It is said, traditionally, to have
communicated with a cave or dungeon, situated at a considerable
distance from the house; but for what purpose made, no one now in
its vicinity confidently presumes to guess.
The following information concerning this subterranean
passage, is obtained from a letter of Miss Gulston to Miss Tate,
who was the proprietor of the estate:—
“I have found an old man, now living at
Chelsea, who worked at the paper manufactory when a lad, and who
has established the facts. I have always been laughed at
when I have mentioned the story. I have gotten two drawings
of the room and passage.
“The entrance to this passage was from the room used by
the paper stainers as a drying place. It had no fire-place
in it; the dimensions were nearly as follows: 25 feet high, 50
long, 36 wide; the ceiling was strong with beams, to sustain the
upper floors, but without any plastered ceiling. You
descended into it by a wide winding staircase, through a
circular-top door, strongly fortified with rivets and four large
hinges: this door was so contrived, that it opened far enough
back to hide the approach to the hole, and could there be
fastened so as to have the appearance of belonging to the large
room, and the circular steps leading to it caused the more
deception.
“The side walls are all brick. This man never
could proceed with his light more than a distance of thirty
yards, when the light invariably went out. The passage is
free from any incumbrance of earth, or from any part of the side
walls having given way; as far as could be ascertained, its
direction was towards the river.
“It is regularly paved with two flag stones, leaving a
border of six inches of earth; width 3 feet, length 5½
feet.
“This passage was discovered, owing to the
proprietor having been robbed of a quantity of paper for
years. The man now alive volunteered to detect the thief;
the paper was found on the staircase descending to the
passage.
“E. Gulston.”
Alston House was for many years the residence of the
Shrewsbury family.
George, Earl of Shrewsbury, succeeded his father in the title,
June 28th, the 13th Edward IV., while a minor. In the reign
of Henry VIII. he was in high favour with that monarch, was
steward of the household, and a privy counsellor, and accompanied
the King at his interview with Francis I. at Guisnes.
In 28 Henry VIII., on the rebellion in the North, called
“the pilgrimage of grace,” occasioned by the
dissolution of the lesser monasteries, he was constituted the
King’s Lieutenant, to march thither with a powerful army,
he himself having raised a number of men at his own expense, when
the Earl, and the Duke of Norfolk, succeeded in bringing the
rebels to submission, and obtained for them the King’s
pardon. This nobleman resided occasionally at Chelsea; and
here his sixth son, by his first wife, was born. The Earl
died 1538; he is characterised by Polydore Virgil, “as a
person noble, prudent, and moderate through the whole course of
his life.”
Francis, his son and heir, is mentioned among the freeholders
in the court rolls of the Manor of Chelsea, 35 Henry VIII.
This nobleman also enjoyed the favour of his sovereign during
three succeeding reigns. In 1545 he was appointed the
King’s Lieutenant in the North; and in the following year
was installed one of the Knights Companions of the most noble
order of the Garter. In 2 Edward VI. he had the command of
a large army that was sent into Scotland, and in 1st of Queen
Mary was made President of the Council of the North. He
died September 21, 1560.
George, Earl of Shrewsbury, son of the preceding, was
installed a Knight of the Garter, May 17, 1562. In 1568 the
custody of the Queen of Scots was committed to his charge.
In 1573, he presided as Lord High Steward at the trial of the
Duke of Norfolk; and on the death of his Grace, which happened soon
after, he was constituted Earl Marshal of England. He died
1590, and was buried at Sheffield, in the county of York.
“An inquisition, taken at Derby, 3rd April, 33 Elizabeth,
on the death of George, Earl of Shrewsbury; after reciting lands,
&c., in many counties, adds Middlesex, one capital messuage,
&c., in Chelsea. The value is lumped in many manors,
into a gross sum of £800 a year.” The
inscription on his monument, among other things, sets forth,
“That, as he excelled in mind, so was he skilled in the
affairs of war.” On the arrival of Mary, Queen of
Scots, in England, she was again put under his care, and so
continued till 1584. His behaviour to her was ever generous
and honourable, sparing no cost for her entertainment.
Words cannot fully express the care and concern he had for her,
nor can envy itself say otherwise than he was a faithful and
prudent person; in a word, his integrity in his high office was
not to be suspected, although evil disposed persons secretly and
vaguely gave out that he had used too much familiarity with his
royal prisoner. Thus, noble by descent, he was more noble
and illustrious in his actions; famous at home and abroad; loyal
to his prince and true to his country; and he resigned his soul
in “a good old age.” The Earl married to his
second wife, Elizabeth, widow of Sir William St. Loo, Captain of
the Guards to Queen Elizabeth, who survived him, and to whom he
probably bequeathed his house at Chelsea, as it appears to have
descended to her son William, first Earl of Devonshire. In
“Lodge’s Illustrations of English History,” is
a letter of this nobleman, dated from Chelsea, in 1585.
Elizabeth, Countess of Shrewsbury. This lady, who was
much celebrated for her beauty and accomplishments, and still
more for her extraordinary fortune in the world, was daughter of
John Hardwick, Esq., of the county of Derby. At the age of
fourteen she was married to Robert Barley, Esq., who, in about
two years, left her a very rich widow. The next husband was
Sir William Cavendish, ancestor of the Duke of Devonshire.
Her third was Sir William St. Loo. In this third widowhood
she had not survived her charms of wit and beauty, by which she
captivated the then greatest subject of the land, George, Earl of
Shrewsbury, whom she brought to terms of considerable honour and
advantage to herself and children; for he not only yielded to a
very large jointure, but to a union of families, by marrying
Mary, her youngest daughter, to Gilbert, his son and afterwards
his heir, and giving the Lady Grace, his youngest daughter, to
Henry, her eldest son. In 1590 she was a fourth time left,
and continued a widow till her death. Her’s was a
change of conditions that, perhaps, never fell to any one woman
before or since: to be four times a creditable and happy wife,
and to rise by every husband to greater wealth and higher
honours; and, after all, to live seventeen years a widow in
absolute power and plenty. She built three of the most
elegant seats that were ever raised by one person in the same
county—Chatsworth, Hardwick, and Oldcoates; all transmitted
entire to the first Duke of Devonshire. The Countess died
in 1607, aged 87. She bequeathed all her estates to her son
William, Earl of Devonshire; and we find this nobleman to have
been in possession of this mansion at Chelsea soon after her
death.
William, Earl of Devonshire, received his education with the
sons of the Earl of Shrewsbury, his father in-law; and, being
distinguished for eminent abilities, was advanced to the dignity
of Baron Cavendish, by James I. in the third year of his reign;
at which time of his creation his Majesty stood under a cloth of
state in the hall at Greenwich, accompanied by the princes and
the greatest part of the nobility, both of England and
Scotland. In 1618 he was created Earl of Devonshire.
He died at Hardwick in 1625. The Earl married, to his
second wife, Elizabeth, daughter of Edward Boughton, Esq., of the
county of Warwick, and widow of Sir Richard Wortley. This
lady survived him, and continued to reside at Chelsea till her
death, which happened in 1643, as appears by the parish book, in
which are also entries of the burials of some of her
domestics.
After the death of the Countess of Devonshire, this ancient
house became the property of Sir Joseph Alston, who was created a
baronet by Charles II. in 1682. Mrs. Mary Alston, the wife
of this gentleman, died here in 1671, and her funeral sermon was
preached by Dr. Littleton, who published it shortly after, in
quarto. Sir Joseph was in possession of this house in 1664;
it afterwards came into the possession of Mr. Tate, and was
occupied as a stained paper manufactory.
In 1813 it was pulled down, and the materials sold by a
builder, who had obtained possession; and now not a stone remains
to show where it once stood.
The family of Tate were originally of Chelsea, and had at one
time large property here, which they parted with by
degrees. They attained property also in Leicestershire,
through a marriage with the daughter of Lord Zouch.
The Bishop of Winchester’s Palace, which was pulled down
some years since, adjoined the gardens of Alston House, on the
east, and on the site of which is now Oakley Street, and a
terrace of well-built houses, fronting the river. The
houses erected in Oakley Street are throughout of a superior
class, and as the road is of considerable width, with a good
pavement, it now forms the most respectable and important direct
thoroughfare from the King’s Road to the centre of Cheyne
Walk. The contemplated embankment and Albert Bridge will be
noticed at the conclusion of this work, so as to get correct
information.
The ancient palace of the Bishops of Winchester, in Southwark,
having been dilapidated and laid waste, an Act of Parliament was
passed in the year 1663 empowering George Morley, Bishop of
Winchester, to lease out the houses in Southwark, and for other
purposes. In the ensuing year the Bishop, in pursuance of
this Act of Parliament, purchased a new brick house at Chelsea,
then lately built by James Duke of Hamilton, and adjoining to the
Manor House, Cheyne Walk, on the east, and Alston House, on the
west, for £4250, to be the future residence of the bishops
of this see, and to be called Winchester House. By the Act
it was held to be within the diocese of Winchester.
The Bishopric of Winchester is of good antiquity, and has
never changed the see since its foundation. The Bishops are
Chancellors of the see of Canterbury, and Prelates of the most
noble Order of St. George, called the Garter, which office was
vested in them by King Edward III. at the establishment of that
noble Order, and has continued with them ever since.
Anciently, they were reputed Earls of Southampton, and are so
styled in the Statutes of the Garter, made by Henry VIII.
1662.
|
George Morley, Bishop of Worcester.
|
1684.
|
Peter Mews, Bishop of Bath and Wells.
|
1707.
|
Sir Jonathan Trelawney, Bart., Bishop of Exeter.
|
1721.
|
Charles Trimnell, Bishop of Norwich.
|
1723.
|
Richard Willis, Bishop of Salisbury.
|
1734.
|
Benjamin Hoadly, Bishop of Salisbury.
|
1761.
|
John Thomas, Bishop of Salisbury.
|
1781.
|
Hon. Brownlow North, Bishop of Worcester.
|
1820.
|
George Tomline, Bishop of Lincoln.
|
Dr.
Tomline was the last Bishop of Winchester who had possession of
this ancient house, but he never resided in it.
George Morley, chaplain to Charles I., was a great scholar and
an eminent divine. After the death of the king he retired
to the Hague, where he attended on Charles II. At the
Restoration he was made Dean of Christ Church, and in the same
year Bishop of Worcester, whence he was translated to
Winchester. His constant practice was to rise at five
o’clock in the morning, to go to bed at eleven, and to eat
but once a day. By these rules he preserved his health with
very little interruption through the course of a long life.
He died in 1684.
Peter Mews was born at Parscandle, in Dorsetshire, in 1618,
and was educated at Merchant Tailors’ School, under the
care of Dr. Winiffe, then Dean of St. Paul’s, and
afterwards Bishop of Lincoln. From school he was elected
scholar to St. John’s College, Oxford, and became Fellow of
the same College at the commencement of the civil war. Soon
afterwards he left Oxford, entered the royal army, and was
promoted to the rank of captain; he served for some time, and
then went to Holland.
During the Interregnum he took holy orders, and at the
Restoration returned to his college, where he took the degree of
D.D. On the death of Dr. Bailey he was made President of
St. John’s College. In 1669 he was chosen
Vice-Chancellor of Oxford, and in 1673 he was promoted to the see
of Bath and Wells, which he held for about twelve years, till he
was translated to Winchester. He died 1706, aged 88.
Singular Predictions.—In
1706, John Needs, a Winchester scholar, foretold the deaths of
Mr. Carman, chaplain to the College, of Dr. Mews, Bishop of
Winchester, and of himself, within that year, to several of his
school-fellows, among others, to George Lavington. This
declaration exposed him naturally to much raillery in the school,
and he was ludicrously styled “Prophet Needs.”
Mr. Carman died about the time he mentioned. For this
event, however, he had little credit, it being said, that the
death of such an old man might reasonably be expected.
Within the time prefixed Bishop Mews also died by a strange
accident. He was subject to fainting fits, from which he
soon recovered by smelling spirits of hartshorn. Being
seized with a fit whilst a gentleman was with him, and perceiving
its approach, he pointed eagerly to a phial in the window; the
visitor took it, and in haste poured the contents down the
Bishop’s throat, which instantly suffocated him. As
the time approached which Needs had prefixed for his own
dissolution, of which he named even the day and the hour, he
sickened, apparently declined, and kept to his chamber, where he
was frequently visited and prayed with by Mr. Fletcher, second
master of the school, and father of the Bishop of Kildare.
This gentleman reasoned and argued with the youth, but in vain;
for with great calmness and composure the patient resolutely
persisted in affirming that the event would verify his
prediction. On the day he had fixed, the house-clock being
kindly put forward, struck the hour before the real time; he saw
through the deception, and told those who were with him, that
when the church clock struck he should expire—he did
so!
Mr. Fletcher left a memorandum in writing to the above
purpose; and Bishop Trimnell, about the year 1722, having heard
this story at Winchester, wrote to New College, of which Mr.
Lavington was then Fellow, for further information. His
answer was, that “John Needs had indeed foretold that the
Bishop of Winchester (Mews) and old Mr. Carman should die that
year; but then they being very aged men, he had foretold, for two
or three years before, that they should die in that number of
years. As to foretelling the time of his own death, I
believe he was punctually right.” Dr. Lavington gave
the same account to his friends after he was Bishop of
Exeter.
Jonathan Trelawney was a younger son of Sir J. Trelawney, of
Petynt, Cornwall; but his elder brother dying in 1680, he
inherited the title. He was educated at Christ Church,
Oxford, where there is a portrait of him. He was in
succession Bishop of Bristol, Exeter, and Winchester; a man of
polite manners, competent learning, and uncommon knowledge of the
world.
Bishop Trelawney was one of the seven prelates committed to
the Tower by James II. for their efforts to maintain the
Protestant cause. When the news of his probable peril of
life reached Cornwall, the miners proposed coming up to London in
a vast body to demand the bishop’s release. The song
in every mouth was—
“And shall Trelawney die?
And shall Trelawney die?
Then twice five hundred Cornish men
Will know the reason why.”
It is
said that the bishop was open, generous, and charitable, a good
companion, and a good man. He died in 1721. [100]
Charles Trimnell, son of the Rev. Charles Trimnell, Rector of
Repton Abbotts, Huntingdonshire, was educated at Oxford. He
was consecrated Bishop of Norwich in 1707; was made Clerk of the
Closet to George I., and translated to the see of Winchester in
1721. This bishop, naturally of a weak constitution, did
not long survive his last promotion. He died at Farnham in
1723, aged 40. This prelate was a steady partizan of the
revolution, which he defended by his pen; warm, yet temperate;
zealous, yet moderate; and his piety did not prevent him from
gaining a perfect knowledge of mankind.
Richard Willis, Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, was
promoted to the deanery of Lincoln, by King William; and in 1714
was consecrated Bishop of Gloucester, translated in 1721 to
Salisbury, and thence to Winchester in 1723, where he resided
till his death, which happened suddenly at Winchester House,
Cheyne Walk, in 1734, aged 71; his wife was buried in Chelsea
Church, in 1727, but he himself was buried in his own
Cathedral.
Bishop Hoadly, a prelate of great merit, was the son of the
Rev. Samuel Hoadly, Master of the Public Grammar School at
Norwich; he was educated at his father’s school till he
went to Catherine Hall, Cambridge, where he afterwards became
College Tutor, and appears to have been held in high esteem
throughout the whole course of his academical studies.
Although he applied to study with an intensity of application
that made him eminent, he acquired at the same time considerable
proficiency in music. In 1698 he was ordained, and about
three years afterwards he married Miss Curtis, a great proficient
in the art of painting, many of her portraits exciting public
attention, particularly one of Bishop Burnet.
In 1704 Mr. Hoadly obtained the rectory of St. Peter le Poor;
he began writing as soon as he came to London; and in 1709 the
following vote was passed in the House of
Commons:—“Resolved, That the Rev. Benjamin Hoadly,
having often justified the principles on which his Majesty and
the nation proceeded in the late happy revolution, hath justly
merited the favour and recommendation of this House. That
an humble address be presented to her Majesty, that she would be
graciously pleased to bestow some dignity in the church on Mr.
Hoadly, for his eminent services, both to the Church and
State.” A change of Ministry prevented any benefit
arising to him from this address; but he afterwards had bestowed
on him, by the grandmother of the Duke of Bedford, the rectory of
Streatham, Surrey. Soon after the accession of George I. he
was made Bishop of Bangor. From thence he was successively
translated to those of Hereford, Salisbury, and Winchester, which
last he enjoyed nearly twenty-seven years.
It is somewhat a singular circumstance, that when Bishop
Hoadly went to Court to kiss the King’s hand on his
promotion, he did not know the way up stairs, the attendants
being all busily engaged at the moment, and by mistake he sat
down in an outer room unobserved, and some affirm that he lost
the honour of being presented on that occasion to his
Majesty.
The doctrines contained in his publications gave such offence
to the clergy, that they produced the famous Bangorian
Controversy. On the 16th of December, 1761, having supped,
he retired to bed in perfect health, but in the middle of the
night he was seized with a fit of vomiting, of which the violence
abated in about an hour. Medical assistance was immediately
sent for, and the bishop seemed better, but about two
o’clock the following even, his lady found him dead,
without knowing the precise moment of his departure. As a
writer, he possessed powerful talents; his greatest defect,
perhaps, was in extending his periods to a disagreeable length;
for which Pope has thus recorded him:—
“But, sir, of writers? Swift for
closer style,
But Hoadly for a period of a mile.”
Amongst the most celebrated writers of modern times, who have
possessed great argumentative powers, this “defect”
is generally a natural consequence. Lord Brougham, for
instance, was remarkable for the length of his periods, or final
sentences, but with him it evidenced deep thought, and enabled
him to impart into his writings and speeches that eloquence and
force of language for which he was so highly extolled.
Bishop Hoadly might have been one of those “powerful”
writers.
Dr. John Thomas was born in 1696, and in 1733, being then
Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, he was presented by the Dean and
Chapter of St. Paul’s, to the united parishes of St.
Benedict’s and St. Peter’s, Paul’s Wharf,
London. In 1742 he became Canon Residentiary of St.
Paul’s, and was sworn in one of his Majesty’s
Chaplains in Ordinary. He was consecrated Bishop of
Peterborough in 1747, and four years after was appointed
Preceptor to the Prince of Wales. On the death of Bishop
Hoadly he was presented to the see of Winchester. Dr.
Thomas died at his episcopal palace, Cheyne Walk, in 1781, aged
85, having sustained throughout life the character of an
exemplary prelate. [102]
The Hon. Brownlow North was born in 1741, was the younger son
of the first Earl of Guildford, and brother to that Lord North
who became twice Prime Minister of this country, once during the
American war, and, secondly, in conjunction with Mr. Fox.
Mr. North was first educated at Eton, and afterwards at Trinity
College, Cambridge. In 1770 he was promoted from a canonry
at Christchurch, to the deanery of Canterbury. His elder
brother being now Prime Minister he obtained the mitre of
Lichfield and Coventry in 1771, at the early age of 30. In
1744 he was promoted to the see of Worcester, soon after which he
was promoted to the rich see of Winchester. By his wife,
formerly Miss Bannister, a lady previously well known in the
fashionable world, he had a very numerous family, of whom both
sons and sons-in-law were amply provided with valuable livings in
the church. The bishop with his family went to Italy, and
shortly after their return his lady died; his lordship died at
his palace at Chelsea, after a long illness, accompanied with
blindness, at the age of 79, July 12, 1820.
Bishop North was kind and charitable. The present writer
gladly embraces this opportunity to testify to the truth of this
statement. The bishop was walking in front of his palace,
as was his frequent custom, when the writer, then quite a youth,
fell accidentally with considerable force on the shore of the
river, it being at the time “low water.” The
bishop observing the accident, and perceiving the injury
sustained, gave immediate instructions for his being carried
home, compensating the men, and offering to pay any additional
expenses. This may appear no more than an act of duty on
the part of the bishop, but the writer cannot refrain from
remembering it as a deed worthy of a “good
Samaritan.”
Winchester Palace was of humble exterior, and displayed
little of grandeur or of magnificence. It was two stories
in height, and built with red bricks, without pilasters or any
other architectural ornament; but, however plain in its exterior,
it comprised every convenience and comfort that could be required
for a large establishment. The building formed a
quadrangle, and its principal entrance was in the south front,
the ground floor of which comprised the great hall, kitchen, and
chapel, the latter being of moderate dimensions, plainly but
neatly fitted up. The great staircase at the eastern end of
the hall led to three grand drawing rooms, which extended the
whole length of the south front, and which, during the residence
of Bishop North, were splendidly furnished. The walls were
covered with beautiful paper, having gold borders, the ceilings
were richly ornamented in stucco work, and the chimney-pieces
composed of various coloured marbles, put up at considerable
expense by the bishop after his return from Italy. The
sleeping rooms, and other domestic chambers, occupied the whole
north front, commanding fine views over the gardens
adjoining. On the ground floor of this front were two
libraries, and other apartments, bounded on the east by a great
gallery, leading to the gardens.
Having been obliged in the year 1791, by the bad health of
part of his family, to seek the climate of Italy, Bishop North
collected there many curious articles of undoubted antiquity, of
modern art, and of natural history, of which the principal were,
Greek sepulchral vases, specimens of ancient marbles used in the
Roman villas, mural paintings from Herculaneum, beautiful works
in Mosaic, fine bronzes, splendid gems, curious china,
&c. These were disposed with much taste in various
apartments of the house, and some of them we will notice.
The great entrance hall was 40 ft. long, and 20 ft. wide; on a
table stood an antique juvenile bust of Bacchus, which was much
admired.
The grand staircase was of noble proportions, and was
ornamented with a variety of objects of taste, disposed in glass
cases, consisting of specimens of all the articles of domestic
use among the ancient Romans. Here likewise stood a
sepulchral Roman vase of white marble, ornamented with
rams’ heads and elegant festoons of white flowers, with the
following inscription:—
Semproniæ
Elegantiorib. choreis
Psallendoq; Præstantis
Suæ viridis in medio juventæ
E. Vivis
Per crudelia fata direptæ
Sodaliu. Sibi. Choors. Dilecta
D.O.M.
Moer. M.P.
In bloom of youth, midst sweet companions
dwelling,
With elegant and tuneful arts excelling,
Fate did Sempronia suddenly remove:
Submissive to the wise behests of Heaven,
Those lov’d companions (full of hope) have given
To her this token of their loss and love.
W. B.
Near the preceding was a plaster cast of Dr. Burney, author of
the History of Music, taken from the original bust by
Nollekens. The three drawing-rooms were of the same
dimensions as the hall; the first was ornamented with several
mosaic and fresco paintings from Herculaneum, and other works of
ancient arts. In the next apartments were portraits of
Bishop North, and his lady. Along the gallery which led to
the garden were disposed, in glass cases, a rich variety of
beautiful shells, with spars and ores, and a large collection of
Italian marbles. The house was also adorned with many
specimens of modern art, in modelling and painting, executed by
Miss North, the Hon. Mr. Brownlow North, and by others of his
lordship’s family.
Winchester House was well and expensively supplied with water,
conveyed by pipes from a conduit, built by Henry VIII., situated
in the King’s forcing grounds at Kensington.
Upon pulling down the palace a singular discovery was
made. In a small room, to the north front, and at the
north-west corner, were found on the plaster of the walls, nine
figures of the size of life, viz., three men and six women, drawn
in outline with black chalk in a bold and animated style.
Various opinions have been given respecting these spirited
sketches. They displayed much of the manner of
Hogarth, who lived on intimate terms with Bishop Hoadly, and it
was supposed that these figures applied to some domestic incident
in the bishop’s family, or to some scene in a play.
His lordship’s partiality for the drama was great. A
near relative, who resided in Chelsea, wrote the comedy of
“The Suspicious Husband.”
The palace remained unoccupied after the death of Bishop
North; for Lady Tomline, the wife of Bishop Tomline, conceived a
dislike to the place altogether. His lordship, in
consequence, applied to Parliament and obtained an Act to enable
him to sell the premises. The Lord of the Manor became the
purchaser; and subsequently the whole fabric was sold by
auction.
As full particulars have already been given of the
distinguished occupiers of the ancient Manor House, Cheyne Walk,
it is here only necessary to describe the structure of this once
celebrated residence. [105]
Immediately adjoining Winchester Palace, on the east, was
situated the ancient Manor House and lands. It was a
spacious house, built by Henry VIII., the original consisting of
a rather plain brick structure, one storey above the ground
floor, with irregularly-shaped windows, and divided by four
buttresses of great width, carried up considerably higher than
the roof, either as ornaments or concealed flues. The
parapet of this part was castellated. Two additions, on the
east, seems to have been subsequently added to the original; one
of them being three stories in height, the other of two, without
either buttress or embrasures. The number of windows in the
entire front was thirty-four, and the entrance door accorded with
the period of Henry VIII. The whole presented an idea of
monastic antiquity.
Sir
Hans Sloane, it is said, was buried from the eastern end of the
Manor House. A man, named Howard, who was employed in the
removal of his books, stated that they amounted to nearly 40,000
volumes.
On part of the site of the old Manor House, and adjoining
Winchester Palace, in the first house eastward in Cheyne Walk,
resided for a long time the Rev. Thomas Clare. When the
destruction of the episcopal domain took place, Mr. Clare, with
some difficulty, obtained a portion of the land upon which the
gardens of the above venerable edifice stood, in the arrangement
and disposition of which he omitted nothing which might do
justice to the memory of its former illustrious owners and
occupiers, or excite the approbation of visitors of judgment and
taste.
Sir Richard Steele appears, from the parish books, to have
rented a house by the water-side, rated at £14 per
annum. In a letter from Sir Richard to Lady Steele, dated
Chelsea, 14th of February, 1716, he says, “Mr. Fuller and I
came hither to dine in the air, but the maid has been so slow
that we are benighted, and chuse to lie here rather than go this
road in the dark. I lie at our own house, and my friend at
a relation’s in the town.”
Sir Richard was born about the year 1676, in Ireland, but of
English parents. At a very early age he was sent from
Dublin to London, and was educated with Addison at the Charter
House; from hence he removed to Merton College, Oxford; he left
the University without taking a degree, and entered the army, a
step highly displeasing to his friends. However, as he had
a constant flow of good nature, a generous frankness of spirit,
and a sparkling vivacity of wit, these qualities rendered him the
delight of the soldiery, and having made choice of a profession
which set him free from all the ordinary restraints in youth, he
indulged his inclinations in the wildest excesses. He
became Secretary to Lord Cutts, who obtained for him the rank of
captain in Lord Lucas’s regiment of Fusileers; and, in the
beginning of Queen Anne’s reign, he was appointed to the
profitable place of Gazetteer, to which he had been recommended
by Mr. Addison. Steele had already exhibited his talents as
a dramatic writer with success, and in 1709 he began to
publish “The Tatler,” which was undertaken by him in
concert with Dr. Swift, and others; and by this work his
reputation was perfectly established. This was followed by
“The Spectator,” which was carried on chiefly by the
assistance of his friend Addison, and the success of this paper
being still superior to that of the former, encouraged him to
proceed in the same design in the character of “The
Guardian.”
In 1710 Sir Richard was made a Commissioner of the Stamp
Duties, which office he resigned in 1713; and from a placeman he
became a violent oppositionist. He took his seat in the
House of Commons as Member for Stockbridge, in Hampshire, but was
expelled thence in a few days after for writing several seditious
libels. From this time till the death of Queen Anne his
attention was wholly engrossed in writing and publishing
political tracts. [107]
On the accession of George I. he was again taken into favour;
was appointed Surveyor to the Royal Stables at Hampton Court, had
the honour of knighthood conferred upon him, and during the whole
of this reign continued to receive many marks of the royal
bounty.
It might now naturally be imagined that, taught by ample
experience, Sir Richard would pay some attention to economy:
such, however, was the power of habit, and such was his
thoughtless profusion, that scarcely a twelvemonth had passed
before he was obliged to sell his share in a theatre to relieve
the oppressive exigencies of want. In 1725 he surrendered
the whole of his property to his creditors, and retired to Wales,
where, in the following year, he was seized with a paralytic
stroke, which rendered him incapable of any further literary
effort.
By the indulgence of the mortgagee he resided on his estate,
near Carmarthen, which he had formerly acquired on his marriage
with his second wife. After lingering nearly two years in
this secluded situation, he died September 21, 1729. Such
was the chequered life of Steele, at one time exulting on the
wing of prosperity; at another depressed by all the evils of the
most embittered poverty. His frailties were not the
offspring of vice, but the effects of habitual carelessness and
the want of prudence. Compassionate in his heart; unbounded
in his benevolence; no object of distress that he could relieve
ever left him with a murmur; and in the hour of prosperity he was
ever ready, both with his influence and property, to promote the
views of literature and science, and to assist the efforts of
unprotected genius. Mental wealth, however poor and humble
the possessor, was esteemed by him to be of invaluable worth. [108]
This well known coffee-house was first opened in the year
1695, by one Salter, who had been a servant to Sir Hans Sloane,
and had accompanied him on his travels. The collection of
curiosities, which were principally the gift of his master, being
the duplicates of his various curious collections, drew from
London a multitude of spectators. It existed for more than
a century, and was at length sold by public auction in the year
1799.
In “The Tatler,” No. 34, Sir Richard Steele has
given the following humorous description of this once far-famed
collection of rarities, and of its eccentric
proprietor:—
“Being of a very spare and hective
constitution, I am forced to make frequent journies of a mile or
two for fresh air; and indeed by this last, which was no further
than the village of Chelsea, I am farther convinced of the
necessity of travelling to know the world; for, as it is usual
with young voyagers, as soon as they land upon a shore, to begin
their accounts of the nature of the people, their soil, their
government, their inclinations, and their passions, so really I
fancied I could give you an immediate description of this village
from the Five Fields, where the robbers lie in wait, to the
coffee-house, where the literati sit in council. A
great ancestor of ours, by the mother’s side, Mr.
Justice Overdo, (whose history is written by Ben Johnson,) met
with more enormities by walking incognito than he was
capable of correcting; and found great mortifications in
observing, also, persons of eminence, whom he before knew nothing
of: thus it fared with me, even in a place so near the town as
this. When I came into the coffee-house, I had not time to
salute the company, before my eye was diverted by 10,000
gimcracks round the room, and on the ceiling. When my first
astonishment was over, comes to me a sage, of thin and meagre
countenance, which aspect made me doubt whether reading or
fretting had made it so philosophic; but I very soon perceived
him to be of that sect which the ancients call Gingivistæ,
in our language, tooth-drawers. I immediately had a respect
for the man; for these practical philosophers go upon a very
rational hypothesis, not to cure, but to take away the part
affected. My love of mankind made me very benevolent to Mr.
Salter; for such is the name of this eminent barber and
antiquary. Men are usually, but unjustly, distinguished
rather by their fortunes than their talents, otherwise their
patronage would make a great figure in that class of men which I
distinguish under the title of Odd Fellows; but it is the
misfortune of persons of great genius to have their faculties
dissipated by attention to too many things at once. Mr.
Salter is an instance of this; if he would wholly give himself up
to the string, instead of playing twenty beginnings to tunes, he
might, before he dies play Roger de Caubly quite
out. I heard him go through his whole round; and, indeed, I
think he does play the Merry Christ Church Bells pretty justly;
but he confessed to me, he did that rather to show he was
orthodox than that he valued himself upon the music itself.
Or if he did proceed in his anatomy, why might he not hope in
time to cut off legs, as well as draw teeth?
“The particularity of this man put me into a deep
thought, whence it should proceed that, of all the lower order,
barbers should go further in hitting the ridiculous than any
other set of men: watermen brawl, cobblers sing; but why must a
barber be for ever a politician, a musician, an anatomist, a
poet, and a physician. The learned Vossius says, his barber
used to comb his hair in iambics; and indeed in all ages, one of
this useful profession, this order of cosmetic philosophers, has
been celebrated by the most eminent hands. You see the
barber, in Don Quixote, is one of the principal characters in the
history, which gave me satisfaction in the doubt, why Don Saltero
writ his name with a Spanish termination; for he is descended in
a right
line, not from John Tradescant, as he himself asserts, but from
that memorable companion of the Knight of Mancha; and I hereby
certify, to all the worthy citizens who travel to see his
rarities, that his double-barrelled pistols, targets, coats of
mails, his sclopeta, and sword of Toledo, were left to his
ancestor, by the said ancestor to all his progeny down to Don
Saltero. Though I go thus far in favour of Don
Saltero’s merit, I cannot allow a liberty he takes of
imposing several names (without my licence) on the collections he
has made, to the abuse of the good people of England, one of
which is particularly calculated to deceive religious persons, to
the great scandal of the well-disposed, and may introduce
heterodox opinions: he shows you a straw hat, which I know to be
made by Madge Peskad, within three miles of Bedford, and tells
you it is Pontius Pilate’s wife’s chambermaid’s
sister’s hat. To my knowledge of this very hat, it
may be added, that the covering of straw was never used among the
Jews, since it was demanded of them to make bricks without
it.
“Therefore this is really nothing, but, under the
specious pretence of learning and antiquity, to impose upon the
world. There are other things which I cannot tolerate among
his rarities, as the china figure of a lady in the glass case,
the Italian engine for the imprisonment of those who go abroad
with it; both of which I hereby order to be taken down, or else
he may expect to have his letters-patent for making punch
superseded, be debarred wearing his muff next winter, or ever
coming to London without his wife.
“It may be thought, perhaps, I have dwelt too long upon
the affairs of this operator; but I desire the reader to remember
that it is my way to consider men as they stand in merit, and not
according to their fortune or figure; and if he is in a
coffee-house at the reading hereof, let him look round, and he
will find there may be more characters drawn in this account than
that of Don Saltero; for half the politicians about him, he may
observe, are, by their place in nature, of the class of
tooth-drawers.”
The curiosities of this collection were deposited in
glass-cases, and consisted of a great variety of petrifactions,
corals, chrystals, ores, shells, animals preserved in spirits,
stuffed animals from various parts of the world, idols, curious
Chinese manuscripts, missals, birds, snakes, butterflies, medals,
models, fire-arms, fishes, portraits, prints, &c.
A
catalogue of the whole was printed, with the names of the donors
affixed; and under the management of skilful hands this
collection could not have failed to produce ample remuneration
and profit.
Such collections, aided by those of Tradescant, Ashmole, and
Thoresby, cherished the infancy of science, and should not be
depreciated now, as the playthings of a boy are scorned after he
has arrived at manhood. Mr. Pennant’s ancestor, who
lived at Chelsea, often took his great nephew, Mr.
Pennant’s father, to the coffee-house, where he used to see
poor Richard Cromwell, a little and very neat old man, with a
most placid countenance, the effect of his innocent and
unambitious life. He imagines this was Don Saltero’s
coffee-house, to which he was a benefactor, and has the honour of
having his name mentioned in the collection. [111]
Mr. Pennant, when a boy, saw “his uncle’s gift to
the great Saltero,” which was “a lignified
hog.” What Mr. Pennant thus facetiously denominates,
is called, in the edition of Saltero’s catalogue that we
have seen, “a piece of a root of a tree that grew in the
shape of an hog.” He feared this matchless curiosity
was lost; at least, it is omitted in the last, or forty-seventh
edition of the catalogue.
What author, except Mr. Pennant, can flatter himself with
delivering his works down to posterity in impressions so numerous
as the labours of Don Saltero?
The name of Don Saltero made its first appearance in the
newspaper, June 22nd, 1723; whence the following account of
himself and his rarities is extracted.
“Sir, fifty years since to Chelsea great,
From Rodman, on the Irish main,
I stroll’d, and maggots in my pate,
Where, much impro’d, they still remain.
Through various employes I’ve past,
A scraper, virtuos’, projector,
Tooth drawer, trimmer, and at last
I’m now a gimcrack-whim collector.
Monsters
of all sorts here are seen,
Strange things in nature as they grow so,
Some relics of the Sheha queen,
And fragments of the fam’d Bob Crusoe.
Knick-knacks, too, dangle round the wall,
Some in glass cases, some on shelf,
But what’s the rarest right of all,
Your humble servant shows himself.
On this my chiefest hope depends,
Now if you will the cause espouse,
In journals pray direct your friends
To my Museum Coffee-House:
And, in requital for the timely favour,
I’ll gratis bleed, draw teeth, and be your shaver.
Nay, that your pate may with my noddle tarry,
And you shine bright as I do—marry, shall ye
Freely consult your Revelation Molly.
Nor shall one jealous thought create a huff,
For she has taught me manners long enough.”
Chelsea Knackatory.
DON SALTERO.
Dr. Franklin, in his Life, mentions coming to Chelsea to see
Don Saltero’s collection:—“We one day (says he)
made a party to go by water to Chelsea, in order to see the
College, and Don Saltero’s curiosities. On our
return, at the request of the company, I undressed myself, and
leaped into the river. I swam from near Chelsea the whole
way to Blackfriars Bridge, exhibiting, during my course, a
variety of feats of activity and address, both upon the surface
of the water as well as under it. The sight occasioned much
astonishment and pleasure to those to whom it was new. In
my youth I took great delight in this exercise.”
This noted coffee-house was for many years, in the present
century, conducted in a most respectable manner. There was
a subscription room, where gentlemen met and conversed, and which
was frequently visited by men of literature and science, many of
whom are still living, but of late years it had lost the
celebrity of former days. It was rebuilt in 1867, is now a
capital private residence.
Henry Redhead Yorke, Esq.—This accomplished scholar died
at his residence, at No. 19, Cheyne Walk, in 1813, in the 41st
year of his age. He was a great classical scholar. In
his youth as he himself expressed it, he was “madly in love
with ideal liberty.” He became an officer in the
French army, and a member of the National Convention, and personally
acquainted with all the leading characters of the French
Revolution. He was denounced by Robespierre; and but for a
friendly hint from the celebrated Condorcet, must have been
guillotined, had he been one hour longer in making his
escape.
In the month of March, 1798, he was liberated from Dorchester
Castle, after an imprisonment of four years, for a seditious
libel. He had paid a fine of £200, and entered into
securities for £2,000.
Some years previous to his death his political ideas became
moderated, and he manifested a strong sense of the value of the
British constitution. He had been called to the bar; a
profession for which he was highly qualified, and in which there
was every reason to hope he would have risen to high eminence,
had his life been prolonged. Indeed, the zeal with which he
devoted himself to his various professional pursuits, hastened,
if it did not bring on, the disorder which put a period to his
existence at the comparative early age of forty-one years.
As a classical scholar, and nervous elegant writer, he has left
few equals. His letters, under the signature of
“Galgacus,” have scarcely been surpassed since the
days of Junius. In private life, Mr. Yorke was
distinguished for benevolence and liberality of sentiment,
openness of character, and his company was courted by men of all
parties.
Francis Chalmer, Esq., (son of Edmund Chalmer, Esq.,) resided
in Cheyne Row for a great many years. He was a magistrate
for the county, and highly esteemed in the parish. As a
gentleman he was affable and courteous, and kind to the
poor. He died at his house in Cheyne Row, in July, 1859,
and was interred in the Brompton Cemetery.
Leigh Hunt, Esq., the well-known author of many interesting
works, and who was the associate of the most distinguished
political as well as literary men of the earlier part of the
present century, occupied a house in Upper Cheyne Row for a
considerable time.
Miss Frances Elizabeth Eggleton, and Miss Christian Mary
Eggleton, lived in Cheyne Walk. They were the daughters of
Mr. David Eggleton, of Church Street, a very old Chelsea
family. The former lady died in 1861, and the latter in
1867. Miss Frances Eggleton bequeathed a sum of money, to
be given at her sister’s death to the Rector and
Churchwardens, in trust, for them to give, on Christmas Eve,
“a shoulder of mutton of not less than seven pounds in
weight, and not exceeding eight pounds in weight, and four pounds
of bread, to each of twenty poor persons of Chelsea, being
married persons and having a family.” An extract from
her will, respecting this gift, will be inserted amongst the
other parochial legacies.
Charles Rawlings, Esq., who resided in Cheyne Walk for many
years, was much respected in the parish, and was of a most
benevolent disposition. His deed of gift in 1862, and the
legacies in 1864, will be found in the list of Chelsea
Charities.
Dr. Bayford, a distinguished proctor, and father of the
present Dr. Bayford, resided with his family in a spacious house,
within a few doors of Manor Street. His sons, in their
younger days, were particularly attached to aquatic
exercises.
Nathaniel Handford, Esq., an old and respected parishioner,
resided also in Cheyne Walk, where he died. Mrs. Sarah
Handford, his relict, who did not very long survive him, left
several small legacies, in 1865, to various charitable societies
in the parish.
W. Carpenter, Esq., well-known in literary circles, and who
has long been connected with the press, resided likewise within
the last few years in Cheyne Walk.
R. E. N. Lee, Esq., occupied the house at the corner of Manor
Street, (now in possession of Dr. Sannemann,) for a considerable
period. He was Steward of the Manor for eighteen
years. He died in 1833, and in St. Luke’s Church
there is a tablet to his memory. No family was more
respected in Chelsea.
Mr. J. Fraine, a solicitor, resided at No. 13, in Cheyne Walk,
and died in 1785, aged 70. The history of this gentleman
and his family was marked by some very uncommon
circumstances. He was himself afflicted with a continual
gnawing pain in his left arm, which he carried on a board in a
sling; and by pinching his jaws and throat, and beating his right
cheek through the violence of the pain, he had marked them very
much. He compared the sensation to a worm in the marrow of
the upper bone of his arm, and used to keep a boy to beat it with
a stick whenever the pain returned, and to tap on the back of
his head with a piece of wood covered with cloth. Mr.
Fraine’s death was occasioned by the fall on his right
thigh of a leaden weight, with which he was exercising as a
remedy for his complaint; the injury brought on a speedy
mortification. This extraordinary case was fully described
in a letter, subsequently written by Dr. Monsey. The
calamities of this unhappy gentleman extended also to his son and
daughter, both of whom fell by their own hands.
Mr. Fraine’s only son. King Samuel, an amiable,
accomplished young man, who received his education at Christ
Church, Cambridge, put an end to his existence at his chambers in
the Temple, in 1799, aged 22 years, for which no reason can be
assigned but disappointment in love.
Miss Fraine, whose duteous attention to her tortured and
frequently impatient father was most exemplary, after the
dreadful catastrophe of her brother’s suicide, not wholly
unaccountable from hereditary irregularities of system, seemed to
have a dread (not aversion) of marriage. The tendency of
her social feelings, strictly regulated and controlled by the
reserve of modesty and the dignity of virtue, almost irresistibly
inclined her best affections towards wedlock; whilst her
extremely sensitive forethought shunned the general result of
engagements ennobling to mankind in general, but appalling in
many lights to herself.
During this state of mind, repeatedly avowing her contempt for
birds, cats, and dogs, she expressed great attachment for infant
children. Miss Fraine, in 1780, frequently expressed to a
very near neighbour her ardent wish that a particular child were
placed under her own sole and immediate management.
“I cannot safely marry,” she would often observe,
“but I shall undertake the charge of an infant’s
education with delight.”
After making many serious colloquial attempts to reason
against such an intention, the Rev. Weeden Butler sent some
sportive lines to the highly gifted and unfortunate lady.
It succeeded so far as to repress any further application by the
lady, but her feelings remained the same. The following
elegant jeu-d’esprit was written with similar effect.
She appears to have possessed great sensibility of feeling
without adequate reflection.
In fairy guise and playful mood,
Euphrania, young and fair, and good,
Vows, if her friends a price would set
Upon their daughter Harriet,
Herself the gift of Heaven would buy,
And cherish it beneath her eye.
Does, then, Euphrania mean to say,
(If we would cast our young away,
Like ostriches) she’d prove a mother,
And rear the nestling of another?
Ye powers, it is a strange temptation!
Let us not treat it with flirtation.
Come, think upon it well, dear wife;
We love our offspring as our life.
Euphrania’s offer is adoption:
Take it, or leave it, is our option.
Heigho! I read your tearful eye,
“For the babe’s good we must comply.”
’Tis said, ’tis done. Now, in a trice,
Let us determine well the price;
And, shunning all superfluous joke,
Settle the worth of infant folk.
The bargain is as clear as water;
Full many a one has sold a daughter.
The consent of the parents having thus been obtained, the
price to be given for the infant daughter is the next
consideration. The following is a summary of the supposed
value of the child:—
Imprimis. For a hazel eye,
And tongue that never told a lie, &c.
|
£52
|
10
|
0
|
Item, for pranks and wanton wiles,
Nods and becks, and wreathed smiles, &c.
|
80
|
0
|
0
|
Item, for filial obedience,
One of our daughter’s chief ingredients, &c.
|
100
|
0
|
0
|
Then, item, for her race and name,
Nearly in value both the same, &c.
|
200
|
0
|
0
|
Item, for every hope and fear
That hitherto hath chequer’d care, &c.
|
67
|
10
|
0
|
|
£500
|
0
|
0
|
For such a sale, to us are due
A Bond, and final Judgment too;
From you the former may be given,
The latter must be left to . . . Heaven.
Advised, pressed, solicited, nay, perhaps, commanded by
an anxious father, this lady at last married. Soon
afterwards she grew melancholy and desponding, and fell by her
own hand, at her residence at Richmond, in the year 1785.
She married Captain Fortescue.
Dr. Dominiceti’s
Baths.—The dwelling house afterwards occupied by the
Rev. Weeden Butler, a few doors from Flood Street, Cheyne Walk,
was once inhabited by one Dominiceti, an Italian physician, of
very considerable notoriety and talents. At this house he
established medicinal baths for the cure of all diseases; and it
was fitted up with pipes, &c., for the accommodation of
numerous patients, who might choose to reside with him while they
were under his care. In 1765 it is described as a large,
pleasant, and convenient house, which contains four spacious and
lofty parlours, two dining rooms, and thirteen bed
chambers. On the east side of the garden, and directly
communicating with the house, was erected an elegant brick and
wooden building, 100-ft. long, and 16-ft. wide, in which were the
baths and fumigatory stoves, etc. It appears, from his own
account, that he expended about £37,000 altogether in
erecting, contriving, and completing his house, and baths in
Cheyne Walk.
Among his visitors and patients, at Chelsea, was his Royal
Highness Edward Duke of York, who entrusted the preservation of
his life to Dominiceti’s sole direction for above a month;
and that in direct opposition to the advice of the Physicians and
Surgeons of the Royal household. Sir John Fielding, having
experienced the good effects, as he considered, of these baths,
wrote a “Vindication of Dr. Dominiceti’s Practice of
removing various afflicting diseases by medicated baths, stoves,
fumigations, and frictions, founded on facts.”
Dominiceti resided for several years in Chelsea. He
became bankrupt in the parish in 1782, and at length disappeared,
overwhelmed with debt.
We will now notice one of the most distinguished scholars and
clergymen of the early part of the present century, the Rev.
Weeden Butler, who resided in the above-mentioned house for a
great many years, and also one of his sons, etc., until a
comparatively recent period, and which cannot fail to be highly
interesting to a large number of readers.
The
Rev. Weeden Butler was born at Margate, in 1742. When aged
fourteen, he lost both his parents; and with his own free will
was articled as clerk to Mr. Rosewell, a respectable solicitor,
in Angel Court, Throgmorton Street, London. At the
expiration of his term, he was offered by his considerate late
master and constant friend till death, a share in the business;
but he had determined to renounce for ever the profession of the
law, and resolved, by intense study and application, to improve
his superior intellectual powers, and ardently to prepare himself
for holy orders. About this time, he frequented all the
churches and chapels within and around the vast metropolis, as an
enquirer after truth. The result of his search fixed his
choice, and he devoted his time thenceforth, as a firm member of
the Establishment, upon the fullest conviction of its
excellence. The course of his classical and theological
reading was directed by that splendidly and variously gifted, but
most unhappy character, Dr. William Dodd, to whom, for a salary
of small extent, he acted as an assiduous amanuensis, till his
patron’s ignominious death, in 1777.
Dr. Dodd’s “Commentary on the Holy Bible,”
was partly compiled, and wholly written out for the press, by the
then unknown Rev. Weeden Butler, who also greatly assisted in
editing the four last volumes of “The Christian’s
Magazine,” and corrected the proof sheets of the poem, in
blank vase, “Thoughts in Prison,” of which Dr.
Dodd’s own MS. was in the possession of Mr. Butler’s
eldest son in 1829–30. In this last singularly
affecting composition occur lines indicative of the worth of the
person eulogized, and of the author’s gratitude:—
“But I am lost! a criminal
adjudg’d!
A guilty miscreant! can’st thou think, my friend!
Oh! Butler ’midst a million
faithful found;
Oh! can’st thou think, who know’st, who long hast
known,
My inmost soul; oh! can’st thou think, that life,”
&c.
Dr. Dodd resigned his office of Morning Preacher, in Charlotte
Street Chapel, Pimlico, in February, 1776, and at his strong
recommendation, Dr. Courtney nominated the deserving Reader, Mr.
Butler, who was licensed Morning Preacher accordingly; and
afterwards by purchase he became proprietor of the chapel,
officiating therein up to the year 1814. When the subject
of the present article retired from Chelsea, to Gayton; where he
piously discharged the duties of curate to his second son,
till his increasing infirmities compelled him to resign this his
last charge, and he finally withdrew to Greenhill, in the
neighbourhood of Harrow, where he died.
He was master of the school in Cheyne Walk for forty years;
where many persons of considerable rank had been so thoroughly
grounded in morality and general learning as to become bright
ornaments to their country. Amongst other scholars, the
Rev. Weeden Butler had the gratification of seeing his two sons
treading assiduously in his own paths. The Rev. G. Butler,
D.D., in 1805, was chosen Head Master of Harrow School, and
continued as such, with great reputation, for many years.
The elder Mr. Butler was one of the earliest institutors of
the “Society for the Discharge and Relief of Persons
imprisoned for small debts,” and most materially assisted
James Neild, Esq., his next door neighbour, in firmly
establishing that excellent Institution. The friendship,
indeed, which existed between these two benevolent characters,
cannot be better exemplified and attested than by the following
few extracts from a letter written by Mr. Neild, dated Chelsea,
January 1, 1808.
“When I look back to the distant period of our lives,
and observe, that, of the first Committee of the Society, you,
Rev. Sir, and myself, remain the only survivors, I cannot but
feel the most powerful, and, at the same time, the most humble
gratitude to the Great Disposer of all human events, for having
suffered me to live and witness the happy result of our early and
well-meant endeavours. * * * * With growing and well-merited
esteem, Sir, I witnessed your successful exertions in behalf of
the Society, at its earliest institution. Often have I felt
the influence acknowledged by all who have heard the eloquent and
impressive discourses which you have delivered from the pulpit,
in recommendation of the objects embraced by this Charity, and
never can the gratifying recollection be effaced which beamed
from every countenance around you, when you mentioned the receipt
of £100 from an eminent advocate for suffering
humanity.” Mr. Neild concludes by referring to the
promotion of Mr. Butler’s son (Dr. Butler), which he
considers to be the reward of his virtues; of those early
advances which his father’s tuition enabled him to make in
literature, and to the purity of his Christian principles.
In 1787 he instituted the Chelsea Sunday Schools, with the
sanction of the Rev. W. B. Cadogan. His Royal Highness the
Duke of
Kent had a great regard for Mr. Butler, and appointed him one of
his domestic chaplains. Hardly one charitable Society in
London existed, to which his popular oratory did not essentially
contribute credit and profit. He died in a good old age,
and his remains were placed in the family vault at Chelsea.
The Rev. Weeden Butler, his eldest son, occupied the same house
for many years afterwards, as also the son of the latter, Thomas
Butler, Esq., who was much esteemed by a numerous circle of
friends while he resided in Cheyne Walk. The whole of this
family were remarkable for their classical attainments and love
of literature. The Rev. T. Helmore, Precentor, St.
Mark’s College, has since resided in Mr. Butler’s
house.
A very fine portrait of Dr. Dodd, painted by Gainsborough, and
a large quarto volume of the doctor’s unedited poems, in
MS., bound, including a tragedy, called “The
Syracusans,” and a comedy, called “Sir Roger de
Coverly,” were left by Mr. Butler, to his legatees.
The portrait is the only likeness extant The Rev. Philip Dodd,
and the Rev. Weeden Butler (eldest son of Mr. Butler), possessed
all the Doctor’s unprinted sermons.
James Neild, Esq., who resided at No. 4, Cheyne Walk, was born
in 1744, at Knutsford, in Cheshire, in the neighbourhood of which
his family had some good estates. He came to London, and
was placed with Mr. Hemming, the King’s goldsmith, but
after a short time, he removed to a jeweller’s. In
1770 he settled in St. James’s Street, and continued there
till the year 1792, when finding his health declining, and having
recently lost his wife, he retired from business to Chelsea, with
an ample fortune.
The attention of Mr. Neild, very early in life, was drawn to
the distressed state of persons imprisoned for debt; the
endeavour to alleviate which soon became his favorite pursuit,
and one which he followed with intense application.
In 1773, having previously visited most of the prisons in
England, and many on the continent, he was, together with his
benevolent friends, Dr. John C. Lettson, and the Rev. Weeden
Butler, chiefly instrumental in instituting the Society for the
Relief and Discharge of Persons imprisoned for small debts.
In 1812 he published “The State of the Prisons,” in a
quarto volume, a work teeming with valuable information.
Mr. Neild died in 1814, and was buried in Battersea Church.
He married a daughter of John Camden, Esq., of that parish.
John
Camden Neild, Esq., was a magistrate for the county, and the son
of the preceding. He resided in his late father’s
house in Cheyne Walk, and bequeathed half a million of money to
Queen Victoria. He died in 1852.
John Goss, Esq., the present organist of St. Paul’s
Cathedral, lived at No. 3, Cheyne Walk. He was appointed
Organist of St. Luke’s New Church, when that sacred edifice
was completed. His proficiency, even at that early period
of his musical life, excited general admiration, and large
portions of the congregation frequently waited in the Church, at
the close of Divine Service, to listen to his concluding
performances.
There are several highly respectable families, who have for
many years resided in Cheyne Walk, of whom it would have been
only an act of justice to notice, but the strict rules of
propriety prevent my discharging an otherwise pleasing duty,
which, in some instances especially, is much to be regretted, as
they take a deep interest in the promotion of whatever tends to
enhance the welfare of the parish.
Mr. Thomas Doggett, a native of Ireland, was an actor, and
made his first appearance in Dublin; but his efforts not meeting
with sufficient encouragement he removed to London, where he
performed with great reputation, and by his talents, industry,
and economy, acquired a competent fortune, and quitted the stage
some years before he died. He was also a patentee and
manager of the theatre with Wilks, Booth, and Cibber; the latter
of whom gives Doggett the following character:—“He
was the most original and the strictest observer of nature of all
his cotemporaries. He borrowed from none of them; his
manner was his own, he was a pattern to others, whose greatest
merit was that they had sometimes tolerably imitated him.
In dressing a character to the greatest exactness, he was remarkably
skilful; the least article of whatsoever habit he wore seemed in
some measure to speak the different humour he presented, a
necessary care in a comedian, in which many have been too remiss
or ignorant. His greatest success was in characters of
lower life, which he improved from the delight he took in his
observations of that kind in the real world. In songs, and
particular dances too of humour, he had no competitor.
Congreve was a great admirer of him, and found his account in the
characters he expressly wrote for him. In those of
Fondlewife in his Old Bachelor, and Ben in Love for Love, no
author and actor could be more obliged to their mutual masterly
performances. He was very acceptable to several persons of
high rank and taste, though he seldom cared to be the comedian,
but among his more intimate acquaintances.
He is highly spoken of in the Spectator. He wrote one
play, called “The Country Wake,” a comedy, acted with
great applause; and out of this play were made two farces,
“Hob, or the Country Wake,” and “Hob’s
Wedding.” The first has been acted often with great
success, and likewise several songs have been added to it in
imitation of the Beggar’s Opera, since which it has been
acted under the title of Flora.
In his political principles he was, in the words of Sir
Richard Steele, “a Whig up to head and ears;” and he
took every occasion of demonstrating his loyalty to the house of
Hanover. One instance, among others, is well known; which
is, that in the year after King George I. came to the throne, in
1715, Doggett gave a waterman’s orange-coloured coat and
silver badge to be rowed for; on the latter is represented the
Hanoverian horse.
This contest takes place on the 1st day of August, being the
anniversary of that King’s accession to the throne, between
six young watermen, who had just completed their apprenticeship;
the claimants starting off on a signal being given at that time
of the tide when the current is strongest against them, and
rowing from the Old Swan, near London Bridge, to the White Swan,
at Chelsea. This tavern adjoined the Apothecaries’
Botanical Garden, on the east, and enjoyed a great share of
public favour for many years; but in the year 1780, it was
converted into a Brewhouse. Since this period, the place of
landing the victor has been at a house bearing the same sign, near to
Cheyne Walk. I have been favoured with the following
chorus, said to be written by a waterman:—
“Let your oars, like lightning flog it,
Up the Thames as swiftly jog it,
An’ you’d win the prize of Doggett,
The glory of the river!
Bendin’, bowin’, strainin’, rowin’,
Perhaps the wind in fury blowin’,
Or the tide agin you flowin’,
The coat and badge for ever!”
Mr. Doggett, at his death, left a sum of money, the interest
of which was to pay for the same for ever.
The “Yorkshire Grey” public house stood at the
west corner of Old Manor Street, opposite the river. It was
a very old tavern, mostly frequented of late years by the
watermen who plied at the stairs opposite to it. It has
recently been pulled down, and two good private dwelling houses
now occupy the site.
In the year 1824, a new road was opened, connecting Old and
New Manor Street, forming a direct communication from Cheyne Walk
to the King’s Road, and St. Luke’s Church.
Prior to that period a large garden crossed the street, with a
wall and iron railing, so that the two streets were entirely
detached.
With respect to the embankment of the shores of our parish,
this was certainly the work of ages, much posterior to the Norman
Conquest, nor was it even completed before the latter end of the
seventeenth century, for, from the manorial records, we find them
to have been frequently imperfect, whilst the keeping them in
repair and good order, was a subject of vexatious dispute between
the Lord of this Manor and his tenants; and hence sometimes by
the parish and the turnpike trust; sometimes by those persons who
inhabited houses immediately in front of the River, to the extent
of their own frontages; and sometimes by the Lords of the Manor
themselves, to the extent of their frontages. This
uncertainty respecting the right of repair was attended with many
evils, the walls being often out of order, and in a dangerous
state. In December, 1822, upon the trial of an indictment
on the prosecution of the Kensington turnpike trust, against the Lords of
the Manor, in the Court of King’s Bench, the Chief Justice
ruled at nisi prius, that the onus rested on the
latter, unless and until they could show on whom by right of
tenure, or otherwise, the burthen lay.
Having now arrived at the conclusion of Book I., in which are
described all that is worthy of special notice in a great portion
of the western extremity of the parish, I shall commence Book
II., with a description of that beautiful architectural
structure, St. Luke’s Church.