Chapter III: Book I (2)

* * * * *

It may here be mentioned that the “watchhouse,” and the “stocks” for vagrants, formerly stood close to the river, opposite the church.

History of the Manor. ROYAL AND DISTINGUISHED RESIDENTS.

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 6_d._ 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’s House.

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.

Battersea Bridge, Sailing Matches, &c.

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.

HYDE PARK ON THE THAMES.

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.

SAILING MATCHES.

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.

Lindsey House, the Moravians, &c.

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.

* * * * *