CHAPTER VI
Frith Street and Bateman Street:
Portland Estate
The streets described in this chapter are
shown in fig. 2 on page 28. They take
their names respectively from Richard
Frith, citizen and bricklayer, and from the
Bateman family which occupied Monmouth
House for many years in the eighteenth century.
Frith Street
The first known mention of this street by name
(if a later recital may be relied upon) is in June
1678, when Richard Frith and William Pym
leased a site on the west side for building. It was
then called a new street. (ref. 1) It is first named in the
ratebooks in 1680, but with only three ratepayers.
Ogilby and Morgan's map of 1681–2 (Plate 2)
shows the street fully built but this is certainly a
mistake. The chief period of building was in the
1680's. Eighteen ratepayers are named in 1683,
and twenty-one in 1685. The ratebooks for
1686–90 are missing. Forty-two ratepayers are
listed in 1691, when the street was fully developed
except for those parts (all the east side north of
Bateman Street and the west side north of No. 64)
which were at that time included in the curtilages
of houses in Soho Square.
The street name obviously derives from that
of the main developer, Richard Frith (who was
conceivably the 'Mr. Frith' rated for a house on
the east side in 1684): the name of the street, like
Richard Frith's, was sometimes transformed into
'Thrift', as on Rocque's map published in 1746.
The east side of the street north of Bateman
Street was built up in the early eighteenth
century: Nos. 6–10 (consec.), which did not form
part of the Portland estate, in 1718 (see page 154)
and Nos. 2–5 (consec.) in c. 1731 (see page 153).
Three additional houses were added at the northern end of the west side (the former Nos. 65–67
consec.) by new building or reconstruction in the
1760's on the rearward curtilage of No. 31 Soho
Square.
Almost nothing is known of the identity of the
building tradesmen directly responsible for the
first houses here, although it happens that two
houses which can reasonably be associated with a
known builder, Richard Campion, still survive
in carcase (Nos. 60–61, see pages 164–5). Alexander Williams, probably the bricklayer, was rated
for a house on the west side c. 1691–3.
A third builder, John Markham, carpenter,
was in 1680 building six houses identified as being
in this street and Romilly Street. He and Frith
mutually agreed for the completion of the carpenter's and bricklayer's work respectively but the
disputes in which they became involved (more
fully described elsewhere) delayed the completion
of the houses and consigned Markham to gaol (ref. 2)
(see page 34).
From its early days until about the 1770's the
street usually had two or more persons of title
resident in it. The French element among the
ratepaying occupants was a little less marked than
in some other streets of Soho, if the occurrence of
French-seeming names in the parish ratebooks
may be taken as a rough guide; it becomes more
noticeable in the 1730's and 1740's. As in Dean
Street, by the 1790's few of the ratepayers' names
look foreign. (ref. 3)
'Dancing Schools' are mentioned in the street
in 1693 (ref. 3) and 'Mr. Hume's Dancing School' or
'great Dancing Room' in 1710–12. It was
latterly run by Anthony Fert, a 'French Dancing
Master'. It is probable that it was situated at the
south-east corner with Bateman Street, (ref. 4) and that
the building was subsequently used by the wellknown tapestry-workers, Joshua Morris, William
Bradshaw and Tobias Stranover (ref. 3) (see page 516).
In 1720 Strype described Frith Street as
'graced with good Buildings well inhabited,
especially towards Golden [sic, recte Soho]
Square'. (ref. 5)
In the 1730's at about the time of, or shortly
before, the realization of the Portland freehold,
there was considerable rebuilding on the east side
of the street, although not all of it seems to have
been directly controlled by Portland building
leases. On the west side the rebuilding was less
extensive, and it is probable that five houses
towards the northern end (Nos. 60–64 consec.)
still preserve some of the original late seventeenthcentury fabric.
Most of the street south of Bateman Street is
shown on the Portland estate map of c. 1792–3. (ref. 6)
South of Old Compton Street most of the buildings that are shown have ground-floor plans which
indicate the existence of shop fronts. North of
Old Compton Street none of the houses on the
east side seems to have a recognizable shop front
except at corner sites: a few shop fronts are shown
on the west side.
By 1850 very few houses in the street were in
wholly private occupation. There were a number
of ordinary retail tradesmen, and four or five
engravers, but the trades most noticeably represented were those of tailor or dressmaker, and of
goldsmith, jeweller or watchmaker. In 1900
this last class was still predominant, together
with metal-workers, engravers and some other
'craftsmen': the tailors had almost disappeared.
An 'advertising contractor' is listed in the street,
and had in fact been there since 1869. (ref. 7)
The street is now the principal 'entertainment'
street in Soho, containing the largest number of
restaurants and 'clubs'. It is best seen at night
when the glare of neon signs distracts attention
from the dilapidated appearance of its buildings.
It has been possible to identify eighteen of these
as dating, at least in carcase, from the first half
of the eighteenth century or earlier. But apart
from Nos. 5–7 and No. 60, the early houses are
barely recognizable from the outside, and two,
Nos. 29 and 30, have been almost completely
rebuilt, leaving wooden staircases of the early
eighteenth century curiously embedded in the
centre. Judging from the surviving buildings and
from the evidence of the Portland estate map, the
street was from the first one of modest, narrowfronted buildings having the standard two-room
plan, the most notable exceptions being the former
Nos. 9, 10 and 51–52. Rebuilding of a domestic
character was still taking place at the beginning
of the nineteenth century, when Nos. 44–49
were rebuilt, Nos. 44–48 with the arcaded
second storeys that were also used in refronting
the former Nos. 12 and 13. By the beginning of
the present century a number of large commercial
buildings were being erected, some of them, like
No. 8–9, of very poor quality. The newest
building, No. 11–13, pays at least some attention
to the still domestic scale of the street, its five-storeyed front faced with pinkish-brown brick and
containing relatively small square windows.
The rateable value of the houses in the street
totalled about £1,780 in 1740, with an average
assessment of about £34 for each house. In 1792
the total was about £2,170 and the average about
£38. In 1844 the total was about £3,510, and the
average had risen to about £54. In 1896 the total
was about £5,480 and the average about £96.
Very little amalgamation of sites had taken place. (ref. 3)
Residents and lodgers in houses in Frith Street
which are not described elsewhere included:
Dr. Walgrave, probably (Sir) William Waldegrave, physician to Queen Mary of Modena, c.
1685; Lady Coney, c. 1691–2; Robert Spencer,
first Viscount Teviot, c. 1691–3; Colonel Parsons,
possibly William Parsons, chronologer, c. 1691–4;
Sir Henry Marwood, c. 1691–1709; Dr. Samuel
Wall, c. 1691–1709; Sir William Monson, fourth
baronet, c. 1691–1727, succeeded by Lady
Monson, 1727–33; Sir David English, 1692–c.
1694; Lady Whaley, c. 1693; (ref. 8) Lady Garth,
1694–c. 1697; Colonel Ingoldsby, c. 1696–7; Sir
William Norris, envoy to India, c. 1698; (ref. 9) Colonel
Windham, c. 1703; Lady Downes, c. 1703–10;
Lady Guise, c. 1703–19; Sir Thomas Aston, c.
1706–17; (ref. 10) Richard Coote, third Earl of Bellomont, 1709–11; Sir Roger Bradshaw, 1710–15;
Sir John Thompson, first Baron Haversham, Lord
of the Admiralty, 1710, succeeded by Lady Haversham, 1711–13; James Vernon, Secretary of State,
1711–26; Dr. Silvester, 1715–17; James Graham, first Duke of Montrose, c. 1716; (ref. 11) Joshua
Morris, 1720–8, succeeded by William Bradshaw, 1729–31, and Tobias Stranover, 1730–3, all
tapestry-workers (see page 516); William Vane,
first Viscount Vane, 1722–c. 1725; Richard
Phillips, governor of Nova Scotia, c. 1724–5;
Lady Jenkinson, 1726–8; Dr. Barker, 1728–45;
William Duncombe, miscellaneous writer, 1731–
1761; Sir Charles Mordaunt, 1734–55; William
Herbert, second Marquis and second titular
Duke of Powis, c. 1738–45; Maria, Duchess of
Wharton, widow of first Duke, 1739–51; Dr.
Beaumont, 1742–8; Charles Molloy, possibly
the journalist, 1743–6; Peter Gillier, violinist of
the chapel royal, (ref. 12) 1744–68; Dr. Oliphant,
1748–50; John Trotter, perhaps the army contractor, and associates, 1748–99; Matthew
Mattee, perhaps Matthew Maty, physician and
librarian, 1753, and Dr. Paul Mattee, 1754 or
1755–6; Dr. Brudenell Exton, 1753–9; Major
Durand, 1753–65; Major-General (? William)
Deane, 1753–75; Rev. Dr. Moore, 1755–9;
Dr. Fleming, 1760–2; Dr. Hinchliffe, perhaps
John Hinchliffe, headmaster of Westminster,
later Bishop of Peterborough, c. 1760–5; (Sir)
Robert Foley, baronet, 1766–81, succeeded by
Lady Foley, 1782–94; Thomas Sheridan, actor,
c. 1767; (ref. 13) Rev. Mr. Brilly, 1774–8; J. C.
Fischer, oboist, c. 1776; (ref. 14) William Pether,
mezzotint engraver and miniaturist, 1781–6;
Timothy Sheldrake, perhaps truss-maker to the
East India Company, 1785–7; General (?
George) Garth, c. 1786–92; (ref. 6) John Bannister,
comedian, 1787–95; Christopher William Hunneman, portrait and miniature painter, 1790–4;
Elizabeth Inchbald, novelist, c. 1788–91; (ref. 15)
J. T. Smith, topographical draughtsman and
antiquary, c. 1797; (ref. 16) Horne Tooke, c. 1804; (ref. 17)
Auguste Marie, Comte de Caumont, bookbinder, (ref. 18) 1801–14; Arthur Murphy, actor, c.
1801; (ref. 19) George Lipscomb, perhaps historian of
Buckinghamshire, 1806–11; J. Foggo, painter,
c. 1816–18; (ref. 20) Charles Ollier, perhaps publisher,
1830–2; John Bell, sculptor, c. 1832–3; John
Hayes, painter, c. 1821–48; (ref. 21) John Snow, anaesthetist and investigator of cholera, c. 1840–9; (ref. 21)
H. W. Diamond, surgeon and photographic
innovator, c. 1844–9 (at former No. 22); (ref. 21) Jabez
Hogg, surgeon and photographic writer, 1851–3.
Some artists whose addresses are given as being
in Frith Street in exhibition catalogues, but whose
names do not appear in the ratebooks, are listed
below, with the years in which they exhibited:
Peter Vandyke, painter, 1764; Joseph Farington, painter, 1769–71; John Francis Rigaud,
painter, 1772–3; Henry Edridge, miniature
painter, 1786; Johann Heinrich Ramberg,
painter, 1788; J. A. Gresse, painter and royal
drawing master, 1794; (ref. 14) Adam Buck, painter,
1798–1812; G. Keith Ralph, painter, 1803;
John Constable, painter, 1810–11; William
Brockedon, painter, 1812–13; George Robert
Lewis, painter, 1823–4; Anthony Stewart,
miniature painter, 1827–8.
No. 5 Frith Street
This is the southernmost, and only survivor, of a
range of four houses (Nos. 2–5 consec.) built c.
1731 on the rearward (southern) part of the site
of No. 30 Soho Square (Plates 120a, 121c,
figs. 34–5). The head lessee of the whole site
from the Portland family was the author, William
Duncombe, (ref. 22) who was himself to be the first occupant of the adjacent house, No. 4. (ref. 3) The builder
of Nos. 2 and 3, under sub-leases from Duncombe,
was Joel Johnson of St. Marylebone, bricklayer
(who was dead by August 1731). (ref. 23) It is not
known whether Johnson built No. 5, or how far
the range was uniform. The first occupant, in
1731, was a Mrs. Newdigate, (ref. 3) who in that year
had as lodger Mary Barber, the poetess and friend
of Swift. (ref. 24)
Although relatively plain the house is of
interest as one of the best-preserved examples of its
period in the area. It now comprises a basement
and four storeys, with a brick front three windows
wide. The brickwork has been resurfaced and
dyed red, but it seems originally to have been
purple-red in colour, except in the fourth storey,
which is a later addition in yellow brick. The
windows have segmental gauged arches, and
within the openings are set recessed box-frames,
some containing barred double-hung sashes, some
modern casements. A broad sill-band of stone runs
beneath the second-storey windows, while above
the third storey is a moulded stone cornice. The
doorcase is of stone, now painted, and comprises a
moulded architrave with a (mutilated) moulded
cornice on carved consoles above; the door itself
is original with six raised-and-fielded panels in
ovolo-moulded frames, but the fanlight is later.
The area-railings remain, having urn-finials to
the standards. The back wall is of purple-red
brick with segmental-headed windows containing
slightly recessed box-frames.
Internally the house has the standard plan of a
single front and back room, the latter having the
dog-legged staircase beside it on the north and a
three-storeyed closet-wing projecting beyond it
on the east. In the first three storeys the rooms,
entrance passage and staircase compartment are
lined with two heights of panelling, to which
relatively few alterations have been made, even
though the first- and second-floor front rooms have
been subdivided. The ground- and first-floor
panelling is set in ovolo-moulded framing and
finished with a moulded dado-rail and a box-cornice, the entrance passage and the two front
rooms having raised-and-fielded panels; on the
second floor the panel-frames are plain and a
smaller cornice is used. The ground-floor front
room has an original wooden fireplace-surround
enriched with leaf and cable mouldings, and in the
second-floor back room is a plain flat surround
of stone, simply moulded on the inner and outer
edges. At the end of the entrance passage, flanking the opening to the staircase compartment, are
two fluted pilasters, having above them entablature-blocks with moulded architraves.
Figure 34:
Nos. 5–7 (consec.) Frith Street, plans
The staircase is the most handsome feature of
the house. The first two flights have cut strings
decorated with carved step-ends, each tread
having a moulded nosing and carrying two turned
and twisted balusters; the moulded handrail is
continued over plain column-newels and at the
foot sweeps round to form a volute. The upper
flights, rising to the third floor, have moulded
closed strings, but with the same type of baluster
and newel. Some of the balusters are without the
twisted moulding, but these are probably later
replacements.
Nos. 6–10 (consec.) Frith Street
Nos. 8–10 demolished
This range of houses was built in 1718 (Plates
118, 119, 121a, figs. 34–5). The site did not form
part of the Portland estate, being included in the
curtilage of Monmouth House and having been
formerly occupied by the back premises of the
mansion. In February 1716/17 the Crown lease
of that whole site had been acquired by the Lord
Mayor, Sir James Bateman, who promptly had
important alterations made to the mansion,
doubtless by Thomas Archer (see page 109). In
September 1717 Sir James was entering into
articles of agreement for the construction of the
five houses fronting on to Frith Street. The other
party was William Thomas of Soho, subsequently
described as a clothworker, a property speculator
who was later responsible for the development
of the Lowndes Market area of St. James's. (ref. 25)
The agreement comprised a sub-lease for a year
to Thomas, until September 1718, at a peppercorn
rent. Thomas undertook to build and wainscot
the five houses in conformity to an annexed
ground plan. In January 1717/18 new articles
were concluded, for building to an altered plan
and to an elevational design, both of which survive
(Plate 118): Bateman also lent Thomas £2,000
to complete the work. (ref. 26) Very little record remains
of Nos. 8–10 as they were actually built, but from
the evidence of Nos. 6 and 7 it would seem that
the original design was adhered to only in its
general lines. There was no delay in building,
however, and by July the five empty houses could
be insured against fire, for £2,000. (ref. 27) Three were
occupied by October, when Bateman's son and
executor, William, leased the houses to Thomas
for sixty years. (ref. 28) A little over a year later Thomas
disposed of his speculation, for some £3,197. (ref. 29)
The leases from William Bateman had stated
that the houses had been built in accordance with
the regulations of the recent Act to safeguard
buildings against fire. The comparatively rapid
construction may not, however, have been of the
best, as the front of No. 10 was said to be giving
way in 1820, (ref. 30) and that of No. 6 was required by
the District Surveyor to be rebuilt in 1909. (ref. 31)
Figure 35:
Nos. 5–7 (consec.) Frith Street, elevations
There is no evidence on the architectural
authorship of the original or amended design or on
any connexion of Thomas Archer with the work.
The first occupants of Nos. 6–10 were
respectively Mrs. Millett, 1718–22, (ref. 3) Major
Phillip Roberts, c. 1718–19 (ref. 32) (a Madam Kennedy
paying the rates), (ref. 3) Captain Watson, 1718–30, (ref. 3)
Edward Conyers, 1719–22, (ref. 3) and Edward Harrison, 1720–1, or William Pealing, 1721–8. (ref. 33)
At No. 6 later occupants (ref. 3) included Sir Marmaduke Wyvill, 1724–5, Lady Frances Hewett,
1736–56, (ref. 14) the Prussian Resident, 1757–64,
Henry, thirteenth Baron Willoughby of Parham,
1768–75, George, the fourteenth Baron, 1775–
8, and Joseph Munden, perhaps the actor, in
1795. (ref. 21)
Early in 1830 William Hazlitt took lodgings at
No. 6, and produced his last essays here, including
'The Sick Chamber'. He died in the house on 18
September of the same year: his last words were
'Well, I've had a happy life'. (ref. 34) He was buried in
St. Anne's churchyard, Lamb and P. G. Patmore
being the only mourners. (ref. 35) In 1905 a commemorative tablet was erected by the London County
Council and was retained when the front wall was
rebuilt, together with that of No. 7, in 1909.
As is noted in more detail below, some alterations
were made to the fronts at that time.
Occupants of No. 7 included Lady Hewett,
1731–5, (ref. 3) and probably Mrs. Henry Ross, the
painter, and her son, later Sir William Ross, the
miniaturist, who exhibited paintings in 1811 from
a house in this street. (ref. 36)
An occupant of No. 8, in c. 1732–3, was Tobias
Stranover, (ref. 3) the painter and tapestry-designer (see
page 517).
Occupants of the former No. 9 included
Captain Draper, 1724–7, Lady Buckley, 1728–9,
Colonel Julius Caesar, 1754–7, and the Hon.
Henry Roper, 1770–6. (ref. 3)
All five houses were disposed of by the Crown
in 1829–30, by sale and exchange for properties
in St. Martin in the Fields which were required
for the West Strand improvements. (ref. 37) Nos. 6–8
had then recently been occupied wholly as furnished lodging-houses and Nos. 9 and 10 partly
so. (ref. 38)
(fn. a)
No. 9 was demolished in 1904, when C. F.
Hayward, the District Surveyor, suggested to the
Clerk of the London County Council that an
attempt might be made to preserve paintings that
were visible on two walls of the stair hall. This
proved impracticable although photographs were
taken. A carved step-end from the house is said
to have been deposited at the London Museum.
Architectural Description
The elevational drawing of January 1717/18 is
a rare survival showing an unusually interesting
design for a group of terrace houses (ref. 40) (Plate 118).
It is a curious mixture of architectural features,
some rather advanced and some old-fashioned for
their period. Palladian influences, uncommon in
builders' houses of this date, are clearly apparent,
but more surprising is the attempt to disguise the
varying widths of the frontages behind a uniform
façade. The use of half-windows, on the other
hand, is a device generally associated with the
late seventeenth century.
The drawing shows a row of five houses, each
containing a basement and four storeys. The
fronts of Nos. 6, 7 and 8 are three windows wide
while those of Nos. 9 and 10 are four windows
wide, Nos. 6, 9 and 10 having the additional half-window in each storey. The fronts are arranged
in three groups with pilasters between groups and
at each end of the range. This is a departure from
the more usual early eighteenth-century practice
of placing a pilaster between each house, and has
the effect of giving the row a single façade of
three bays. Such an arrangement, moreover, has
meant ignoring the internal grouping of the
houses by placing Nos. 9 and 10, which have mirrored plans, in separate bays.
Above the ground storey in each bay is a raised
bandcourse, and above the third storey a moulded
cornice which breaks forward over the pilasters.
The fourth storey, a rare feature in London
houses of this date, particularly above a main
cornice, is finished with a tall parapet. This
again is unusual in having long raised panels,
presumably intended to be of brick, extending
nearly the full width of each bay. The doorways
are shown with only plain architraves, but no
doubt it was intended to elaborate on these when
the houses were built. The area-railings are
shown in more detail, and it is worth noting that
they are an early type, having solid square standards with ball-finials.
The extent to which this design was carried
out cannot be established with any certainty, for
Nos. 8–10 were demolished without their exteriors having been recorded. However, a plan of
No. 9, attached to a deed of 1826, shows a pilaster
at the southern end of the frontage and none at
the northern end, as in the original design. (ref. 41)
This pilaster in fact still survives, between the
rebuilt fronts of Nos. 9 and 10. The plan of 1826
also indicates that the intended half-window had
been omitted.
Although Nos. 6 and 7 have not been destroyed,
their fronts have been rebuilt as inexact copies of
the originals (Plate 119a, fig. 35), and the only
evidence of their appearance as built comes from
an old photograph showing No. 6 and part of
No. 7. (ref. 42) The main departure from the original
design seems to have been that the windows in the
three lower storeys were set in shallow, vertically
continued recesses, the heads of the third-storey
windows, unlike those in the rebuilt version, also
forming the heads of the recesses. This is another
unusual device without an exact parallel; the
closest is perhaps Rutland Lodge, at Petersham.
The windows had segmental arches, not flat as in
the drawing, and contained double-hung sashes in
flush frames, although these had probably been
renewed in the nineteenth century. The half-window at the north end of No. 6, which has been
omitted in the rebuilt elevation, was, however,
built as intended. One other small difference was
that the bandcourse above the ground storey was
moulded on both edges and carried across the
flanking pilasters, these having a small brick
moulding below the main cornice to give the
appearance of a capital. The doorways, set
together in the centre of the double frontage,
shared a single doorcase. This is not shown in the
original drawing, but it was almost certainly the
one actually built; it has survived the rebuilding,
except that the lower parts have been renewed
(Plate 121a). It is of wood, consisting of three
fluted Doric pilasters supporting an entablature,
the architrave and frieze of which break forward
above the pilasters and are there decorated with
triglyphs; the present doors are not the original
ones.
The fourth storey had been considerably altered at No. 6 by the insertion of a long window
containing four pairs of sliding sashes, but the
single window of No. 7 shown in the photograph
was much taller than those in the original drawing.
There was no sign of the panelled parapet, but
on the other hand there were flanking pilasters,
suggesting that the fourth storey had been built in a
revised form.
The fronts have been rebuilt in yellow brick
with red dressings, in contrast with the brickwork
of the surviving southern pilaster, which is
purple-red with red dressings in the upper storeys.
At the back the walls are wholly of this colour,
containing segmental-headed windows with flush
frames; the second landing window of the staircase at No. 6, however, is round-arched, and so
probably was the one below, until it was altered,
evidently in the early nineteenth century. There is
a raised bandcourse above the second storey in both
houses, and also below the parapet in the closetwings, which alone have not been heightened.
The latter have quoins of red brick and retain the
original red-tiled roofs with a hip at the eastern
end.
Internally Nos. 6 and 7 have mirrored plans
conforming closely to the original design (Plate
118, fig. 34), and No. 8 seems to have been intended in its turn to mirror No. 7. The plan is
the standard one of a single front and back room,
the latter with the staircase to one side of it and a
closet-wing projecting at the back. Nos. 9 and
10 were planned on a more generous scale, as
befitted their wider frontages. They too had mirrored plans, but L-shaped with a deep front and
back room on one side of the house, and on the
other side the two staircases, one behind the other.
The main staircase was constructed round three
sides of the entrance hall, a spacious room corresponding in depth to the adjoining front room. It is
not known how far Nos. 8 and 10 conformed to
this proposed plan, but the plan of 1826 already
mentioned shows that No. 9 followed it almost
exactly. (ref. 41)
The finishings of Nos. 6 and 7 are generally
well preserved, despite the insertion of a few partitions. The ground and first floors have ovolomoulded panelling finished with moulded
dado-rails and box-cornices, the front rooms, the
entrance passage and, at ground-storey level, the
staircase compartment, having raised-and-fielded
panels. No. 6 has the characteristic pair of fluted
pilasters at the end of the entrance passage, and
although none remains at No. 7, space is left for
them in the arrangement of the panelling. It is
evident that the ground floor of No. 6 has undergone careful alteration, the front and back rooms
having been thrown into one, perhaps in the early
nineteenth century, and the dividing wall replaced
by a rather crude screen composed of two wooden,
or wood-encased, Doric columns with antae;
the screen remains, but the rooms are now once
again divided by a partition. In the entrance
passage the fluted pilasters have been moved a little
way eastwards of their original position, and the
north wall relined with sunk panelling. The
second-floor rooms have only plain sunk panelling
finished with the smaller type of cornice, but
modern bolection mouldings have been applied
to the panel-frames.
No. 6 is unusual in having retained most of its
original wooden fireplace-surrounds; all have now
been boarded in, but a description of 1951 notes
that they then had marble linings and that some
contained good iron grates, presumably of the
early nineteenth century. (ref. 43) The surrounds are
mostly similar in type, eared, with egg-and-dart
mouldings in the ground-floor front room and in
both main rooms on the first floor, hollow-moulded
in the ground-floor back room, and ovolomoulded in the second-floor back room; in the
first-floor closet-wing, however, there is a bolection-moulded surround, apparently original. No.
7 has only one original surround, a flat stone one
with simple mouldings on the inner and outer
edges.
The staircases are of wood, built to the doglegged pattern instead of the narrow open-well
type shown on the original design. At No. 6
the first two flights have cut strings decorated
with shaped step-ends, each step carrying two
turned balusters with square waist-blocks. The
balustrade is finished with a moulded handrail
which is carried over a column-newel at each
turn of the stair, forming, at the foot of the stair,
a half-volute over a fluted newel. The upper
flights are simpler, with a moulded closed string
carrying balusters of a less elaborate turning.
At No. 7 the same design seems to have been used,
although the balustrade has been boxed in.
Little attempt was made to record the interiors
of the other three houses before their demolition,
but there is a good drawing of the main stair hall
of No. 9 made in 1885 (ref. 42) (Plate 119b), and this is
to some extent supplemented by the notes and
photographs taken by the London County Council in 1904. (ref. 44) The staircase was of wood, rising
round the east, north and west walls of the hall to a
first-floor gallery along the south wall. The cut
strings were decorated with carved step-ends,
each step carrying three turned balusters. These
had square waist-blocks, and the outer two had
twisted shafts, a pattern which was repeated in
the balustrade of the gallery. The moulded handrail was ramped up at each turn of the stair over a
fluted column-newel, and again in the centre of
the gallery-balustrade over a similar newel. The
walls of the hall had a panelled dado following the
line of the balustrade, above which they were
painted, at least on the east and north sides and at
the back of the gallery. The paintings were in
far too bad a condition for their subject to be deciphered. The north wall had the upper half of a
partially draped female figure, while the east wall
had at first-floor level a full-length figure, evidently male, in a relaxed posture with the head and
one knee bent. Both paintings were flanked by a
border resembling rusticated stonework. At
ground-floor level the east wall had a panel of
foliated scroll-work, and on the wall behind the
gallery the head and breast of a woman were just
visible. The hall was finished with a dentilled
cornice, and there were signs of a ceiling-painting consisting of several naked female figures and
a helmeted male figure floating among clouds.
Nos. 14 And 15 Frith Street
These houses were built in 1733–4, together
with the former Nos. 12 and 13 (now demolished).
The builder was possibly Samuel Price of St.
Martin in the Fields, carpenter. (ref. 45) No. 15 was
occupied in 1804–6 by Henry Meyer, portrait
painter. (ref. 3)
The houses are of four storeys with fronts
three windows wide, except for the (probably
added) fourth storey of No. 15 which has only one
window. Neither front retains much of its original
appearance and that of No. 15, now rendered with
cement, is recognizable only by the proportions of
its windows. These suggest that there was a close
similarity between the houses, and in fact the
Portland estate map (ref. 6) shows that before No. 15
was gutted they had mirrored plans.
At No. 14 the front still has its original purpler-ed brick, the jambs and flat gauged arches of the
windows being of red brick. The fourth storey is,
however, an addition in yellow brick, and the
first-floor windows have been lengthened and the
doorway altered. Inside there is a wooden dog-legged staircase, much altered but retaining its
original carved step-ends.
The whole interest of No. 15 lies in its early
nineteenth-century Gothick shop front, a rare
survival in London (Plate 132d, fig. 36).
This was perhaps inserted in 1816, when the
premises were in the occupation of Charles
Clark(e), a bookbinder. (ref. 46) The shop (now
restaurant) front has three unequal bays, with
slender triple shafts of cast iron between them and
at either end. The wide northern bay, originally
the shop window, is divided by wooden glazingbars into four rows of eight small oblong panes,
except that the top part is designed to resemble a
four-centred arch filled with cast-iron tracery, the
spandrels occupied by panels of an unclassifiable
three-leaf pattern. The narrow centre bay,
intended for the shop door, has now been converted
into a window, but at the top there remains a panel
like that over the adjoining window, except that
the arch is two-centred and contains interlacing
tracery. The southern bay is occupied by the door
to the upper floors, this having five panels with
raised centres and heavily moulded frames. Above
it is a fanlight with tracery of a more orthodox
geometrical pattern, and flanking this a pair of
attenuated consoles, possibly designed to carry a
cornice. The whole front is finished with a simple
entablature consisting of a plain frieze and a
groined cove cornice.
Figure 36:
No. 15 Frith Street, elevation of shop front
Nos. 16–18 (consec.) Frith Street
These houses were erected in c. 1735 under a
sixty-five-year building lease from Michaelmas
1734 granted by the Portland family to William
Bignell of St. Anne's, glazier. (ref. 47) The first occupant of No. 17 was Peter Suidre, surgeon, and of
No. 18 Mark Marcelein, staymaker. (ref. 48)
Sir Samuel Romilly, the law reformer, was born
at No. 18 in 1757 when that house was occupied
by his father, Peter Romilly, a successful jeweller.
The family removed to St. Marylebone in 1769
but retained No. 18 for business purposes until
1792. (ref. 49) The house is referred to in 1800 as the
Duke of Portland's office. (ref. 50)
Although very much altered, it is clear that the
three houses were originally of similar character.
Each contains a basement and four storeys, of
which the fourth storey is a later addition, probably
replacing a roof-garret. The fronts of Nos. 17
and 18 are three windows wide, and that of No.
16 two windows wide, all apparently built of pale
yellow stock brick. Except where altered or
rebuilt, the windows have segmental gauged
arches which are probably of fine red brick, as are
the jambs, but all have been dyed a deep red. No.
18 retains its original wooden doorcase, consisting of an enriched architrave flanked by panelled
pilasters, above which are carved consoles; the
cornice they were intended to carry has, however,
been removed. The reveals and soffit of the doorway are panelled, and the door itself has six
heavy raised-and-fielded panels in ovolo-moulded
frames. All three houses have had shop fronts
inserted in the ground storey and the third storey
entirely rebuilt, while No. 17 has recently been
rendered with cement. The back walls appear to
be of purple-red brick with segmental windowarches.
Nos. 17 and 18 have mirrored plans of the
standard two-room type, with projecting closets.
No. 18, which is the better preserved internally,
has a hall with a dentilled box-cornice and,
flanking the entrance to the stair compartment, a
pair of fluted Doric pilasters. The staircase is of
wood, the dog-legged flights having in the lower
stages cut strings decorated with carved step-ends.
The treads have moulded nosings and each carries
two turned balusters with square blocks above the
urn-bases. The strings are fixed into column
newels, and upon these rests the broad moulded
handrail. No. 17 has been much altered, but
probably the finishings were originally very
similar. The staircase, now partly boxed in,
appears to be of much the same pattern, and there
are fluted pilasters in the hall, although this has
been considerably reduced in width.
No. 16 differs from the other two in having an
open-well staircase placed between the front and
back rooms. Apart from a few traces of early
eighteenth-century work, the finishings are
entirely mid nineteenth century and the plan
may therefore have been altered from the original.
It does, however, date from the end of the eighteenth century at latest. (ref. 6)
No. 20 Frith Street
Demolished
The house formerly on this site was perhaps
built or rebuilt about 1725–6, when it was occupied by Lewis Aubert, a wine merchant. (ref. 51)
It was in this house that Mozart, aged about
nine, stayed with his father and sister in 1764–5,
as lodgers of Thomas Williamson, a staymaker.
The family had removed from No. 180 Ebury
Street about the end of September 1764, (ref. 52)
probably to No. 20 Frith Street, where they were
certainly living in January 1765, when the young
Mozart dedicated his Opus 3 (K.10–15) to Queen
Charlotte from that address. (ref. 53) The family was
still there on 30 May: (ref. 54) they left London in
July. (ref. 55) During their stay in Frith Street the
works composed by Mozart probably included
K.19, 19d, 20, 21 (19c), 206 (21a), 220 (16a),
222 (19b) and 223 (19a). (ref. 56) Advertisements inserted by Leopold Mozart in The Public Advertiser
in the spring of 1765 announced that 'those
Ladies and Gentlemen, who will honour him with
their Company from Twelve to Three in the
Afternoon, any Day in the Week, except Tuesday and Friday, may, by taking each a Ticket,
gratify their Curiosity, and not only hear this
young Music Master and his Sister perform in
private; but likewise try his surprising Musical
Capacity, by giving him any Thing to play at Sight,
or any Music without Bass, which he will write
upon the Spot, without recurring to his Harpsichord'. (ref. 57)
The front of the house is shown in a photograph
of 1908. (ref. 58) Quite apart from its association with
Mozart, it is of interest as one of the best early
eighteenth-century fronts known to have existed
in the street. Built of brick, it was four storeys
high and three windows wide, although the fourth
storey may have been a later addition. The
windows had segmental gauged arches and the
jambs were probably dressed with red brick, while
within the openings were slightly recessed boxframes. There was no bandcourse between the
second and third storeys, but above the latter was a
moulded brick cornice returned at either end. A
shop front had been inserted in the ground storey
in the early or mid nineteenth century.
No. 22 Frith Street
From August 1924 to February 1926 J. L.
Baird occupied a two-room attic laboratory in this
building and first demonstrated true television
here, before an informal gathering of members of
the Royal Institution of Great Britain, and others,
on 27 January 1926. (ref. 59) In 1951 the London
County Council erected a plaque commemorating
the event.
No. 26 Frith Street
This house was erected in c. 1735 under a
sixty-five-year building lease from Michaelmas 1734 granted by the Portland family to
Francis Tredgold of St. Marylebone, carpenter. (ref. 60)
The ground plan is shown on the Portland estate
map of 1792–3 (ref. 6) (Plate 9, fig. 50 on page 197).
It is a very modest house, built on a site constricted by the gardens of the houses in Old
Compton Street. But though much altered it
remains one of the better-preserved early buildings in the southern part of the estate. It contains
a basement and four storeys, the top storey
probably converted from an original roof-garret,
and has a front three windows wide, but this has
been completely altered by a refacing of stucco in
the mid nineteenth century. It has the standard
two-room plan, but with no projecting closet
and with a stair compartment that is shallower in
depth than the adjoining back room. The
wooden staircase with short dog-legged flights
remains, these having moulded closed strings
fixed into column-newels with big square heads;
the balustrade, however, has been cased with
asbestos. The compartment is lined with simple
sunk panelling finished with a small cornice, and
possibly the only room to receive a more elaborate
treatment was the front room on the first floor,
where a box-cornice remains. The first-floor
back room retains a plain wooden chimneypiece
consisting of a flat surround moulded on the inner
and outer edges.
Nos. 37 and 38 Frith Street
These plain-fronted brick houses were built in
1781 (ref. 3) (Plate 120c). The builder is not known.
(See also No. 24 Romilly Street, page 204.)
Nos. 39–41 (consec.) Frith Street
These three houses were built in 1743 by
John Blagrave of St. George's, Hanover Square,
carpenter, under a building lease running for
approximately fifty-six and a half years granted
to him by Edmund Byron, a Soho lawyer. Byron
himself was only the assignee of an earlier Portland lease. (ref. 61) The first occupant of No. 39 was a
shoemaker. (ref. 62)
Outwardly they constitute a more or less uniform group, each containing a basement and four
storeys, and having a brick front three windows
wide (Plate 120c). The windows have flat
arches, mostly gauged, and each of the upper
storeys has a stone sill-band of progressively
diminishing width. All have had modern shop
fronts inserted and the upper storeys of No. 41
have recently been rendered with cement. Possibly the only original work is in the second storey,
where the brickwork (at least of Nos. 39 and 40)
is purple-red and the windows, which have arches
of the same colour, contain box-frames. The top
two storeys of Nos. 39 and 40 have certainly been
rebuilt in nineteenth-century yellow brick and
perhaps the sill-bands were added at the same time.
Possibly, however, the broad second-storey
sill-band is original, like that at No. 5 Frith
Street, although a second and slightly lower bandcourse at Nos. 39 and 40, now cement-rendered,
may be the older feature.
The interiors vary in plan. No. 40 has the
standard arrangement of a single front and back
room with a dog-legged staircase beside the back
room on the north and a closet projecting beyond
it on the west. Nos. 39 and 41, restricted for
space by the backs of houses in Romilly Street and
Old Compton Street, are smaller, with the
only good-sized room at the front; the back room
is very small and cramped, and at No. 39 the
staircase actually forms a projecting wing. Little
remains of the original finishings. No. 40 has at
the end of the entrance passage a pair of Doric
pilasters supporting a plain round arch and in the
first-floor room two heights of fairly complete
cyma-moulded panelling with a moulded dadorail and a box-cornice. The staircase has heavily
moulded closed strings, turned balusters, a moulded
handrail and column-newels, the latter with small
turned pendants. No. 39 has a similar staircase
but the balustrade has now been boxed in.
Nos. 44–48 (consec.) Frith Street
This range of houses was built in 1804–7, after
a fire. All were probably built as private residences. (ref. 3)
No. 45 was occupied in the 1840's by the
Sydenham Society. (ref. 21) No. 46 was occupied in
1822 by J. R. Planché, dramatist and later
Somerset Herald. (ref. 21) The first occupant of No.
47, in 1808–10, was William Ottley, (ref. 3) probably
the writer on art and later keeper of prints at the
British Museum. He was succeeded, from 1811
to 1816, by James Walker, court engraver to
Alexander I of Russia, and at that period pictures
were also exhibited from this address by the battle
painter, J. A. Atkinson, another artist patronized
by the Russian court. (ref. 36) The painter, Isaac
Pocock, also perhaps exhibited from here. (ref. 63)
In 1829 Nos. 46 and 47 were taken by Sewell
and Cross, silk mercers and upholsterers, (ref. 46) for
whom J. B. Papworth designed a classical
shop front and an interior in 1832. Neither
survives, but the shop front is known from a
photograph in the Council's collection (Plate
133b), and Papworth's drawings for the interior
are preserved in the Library of the Royal Institute
of British Architects. (ref. 64)
Architectural Description
The houses are of four storeys with basements,
having uniform brick fronts, two windows wide.
The brickwork has now been rendered with cement at No. 45 and dyed red at the other houses,
but originally it appears to have been yellow in
colour; the slightly taller parapets at Nos. 46 and
47 are the result of a rebuilding. The fronts are
designed to a stock pattern widely used by London
builders at the beginning of the nineteenth century.
The windows are completely plain with flat
gauged arches, but those in the second storey are
set in shallow round-headed recesses, having below
them a broad continuous sill-band of stone. No.
45 differs from the others in having narrower sillbands in the third and fourth storeys, but these
may have been added when the front was rendered.
In every case the ground storey has been altered
in modern times.
The shop front inserted by Papworth for
Sewell and Cross at Nos. 46 and 47 (Plate 133b)
had two wide display windows in the centre and a
doorway at either end, the divisions between these
units being marked by attached Ionic columns
supporting an entablature; the columns had fluted
shafts and were placed singly, except for a pair in
the centre disguising the end of the party wall.
The display windows, which were probably
arranged in small panes originally, had been altered, but the door of No. 46 was original, having
six sunk panels in heavily moulded frames. In
front of the windows was an unexpectedly
domestic-type area-railing with urn-finials to the
standards, doubtless a survival from the period
before the ground storey was converted into
a shop. One curious feature was a pair of low
pedestals with panelled sides and pedimented
tops, placed in front of the columns at either end
of the front and possibly intended as bases for lamp
standards.
The 1832 designs for the interior show an
arrangement of bays, variously filled with shelves
or doorways, divided by plain-shafted Ionic
columns with enriched neckings to the capitals,
the latter being linked from column to column by
a band of key-fret. At that time Sewell and Cross's
premises also had entrances at Nos. 40 and 42
(then Nos. 45 and 44) Old Compton Street,
where Tallis's view of 1838–40 (ref. 65) shows a shop
front apparently similar to that in Frith Street
(fig. 49 on page 195).
The interiors of the houses have not been
examined in detail, but Nos. 46 and 47 have the
common plan of a single front and back room with
a staircase beside the back room; such finishings
as remain are of the plainest early nineteenth-century type.
No. 49 Frith Street
This house was built at the same time as,
although separately from, the uniform range to its
south, in 1804–5, after a fire. (ref. 3)
It contains a basement and four storeys with a
yellow brick front three windows wide. The
windows have flat gauged arches, now dyed red,
and contain in the third and fourth storeys barred
double-hung sashes recessed within plastered
reveals. In the second storey the windows are
longer, extending down to a stone bandcourse at
floor level, and are guarded by diagonally braced
iron railings, although these may have been
renewed. The ground-storey windows have been
replaced by a display window, but to the north of
them is the original round-headed doorway,
within which is a reeded door-frame flanked by
pilaster-strips; the door is six-panelled, with four
raised-and-fielded panels above two flush ones,
and over it is a patterned fanlight. Around the
basement area is an iron railing with urn-finials to
the standards. The back wall is of purple-red brick,
having window arches of yellow gauged brick.
The plan of the interior consists simply of a
single front and back room, the wooden geometrical
staircase lying beside the back room on the north.
The finishings are of the plain type described
below at Nos. 58 and 59, except that the hall has
an eccentric modillion cornice, and, at the staircase end, a segmental arch springing from panelled
pilasters.
No. 51–52 Frith Street
Demolished
A large house was built here in 1731 on the site
of two houses, probably by the Soho carpenter,
Thomas Richmond, who at that time held a sixty-five-year Portland lease of the site commencing at
Michaelmas 1734. (ref. 66) An early occupant of the
house was Major-General Onslow (probably
Richard, nephew of the first Baron), from 1739
to 1747. (ref. 3) He was succeeded by Richard Osbaldeston, successively Bishop of Carlisle, 1747–62,
and of London, until his death here in 1764. (ref. 3)
The house was burnt down in 1803 but in
the later nineteenth century the interior was
remembered as 'magnificent', with a painted
staircase. (ref. 67) The ground-floor plan is shown on
the Portland estate map of c. 1792–3, (ref. 6) although
by that date the original layout had been considerably altered for conversion into a shop. It is
clear, however, that the plan was fairly similar
to those of Richmond's houses at Nos. 75 and 76
Dean Street. The main staircase was at the front
of the house, at the northern end. This occupied a
spacious compartment, some twenty feet in depth,
with the flights of the stair rising against its west,
north and east walls, probably to a gallery against
the south wall. It was heated by a small fireplace
set in the angle of the front and party walls. Almost certainly it had also been designed to serve as
an entrance hall, probably with a width of thirteen
feet six inches. In this case the shop doorway
shown in c. 1792–3 would have been the original
front doorway, giving access to the hall at its
southern end.
Adjoining the hall on the south was probably a
single front room about twenty feet square, while
behind that on the west was the principal back
room, probably about sixteen feet square. The
north wall of this room appears to have been
replaced, by the time the plan was made, with a
row of columns of quatrefoil section, very likely
cast-iron ones in Gothick style. Immediately
behind the main staircase lay the back staircase,
itself of open-well type in a compartment seven
feet two inches wide and eight feet six inches
deep. Behind this in turn was a small closet, and
to the south of them both a narrow room or
vestibule.
The house was replaced in 1805 by new premises for the previous occupants, Jackson and
Moser, later Roger Moser and Company, ironmongers. (ref. 68) They comprised two houses over a
shop, and a manufactory. These premises have
now also been demolished.
A drawing of 1885 shows that the building was
four-storeyed, with a brick front four windows
wide. (ref. 42) The windows contained barred, doublehung sashes, and those in the second storey had
moulded architraves, probably of cement, and
elaborate Rococo cast-iron guard-rails. The shop
front was the chief feature of interest, an imposing design, even if not, perhaps, the best suited
for the display of goods (Plate 133a). Its principal
elements were three doorways set in arched
surrounds, a central one to the shop, flanked by a
pair of rather insignificant display windows, and
one at each end, presumably giving access to the
upper floors. The doorways were round-headed,
being flanked by panelled piers from which sprang
plain recessed archivolts. In the heads of the
arches were patterned fanlights, and at either side
circular panels containing lion-heads. The doorways at either end had double doors, each of three
panels, almost flush with the piers, but those to
the doors to the shop were deeply recessed within
panelled reveals. The shop front was finished
with an entablature having a plain frieze and
moulded cornice; in 1885 it was surmounted by an
elaborate version of the royal coat of arms, centrally placed and almost two-thirds the height of
the second-storey windows. A rather similar
shop front formerly existed at No. 74 Dean Street.
Nos. 58 and 59 Frith Street
These two houses were probably both built c.
1800–1. The first occupant of No. 58 was
Samuel Briggs, a plumber. (ref. 3) In 1841–3 No. 59
was occupied by H. W. Diamond, surgeon and
photographic innovator. (ref. 21)
The houses are closely similar in style, each
having a brick front comprising four storeys
above a basement, but whereas No. 58 is two windows wide, the narrower No. 59 has space only for
a single wide window (Plate 120b). The wallface is of pinkish-yellow stock brick with slightly
cambered gauged window-arches to match, the
only relief being afforded by a stone band at
first-floor level; at No. 58, however, the brickwork has now been dyed yellow. Within the
window-openings are barred double-hung sashes
in concealed frames, the second-storey windows,
which extend down to floor level, having iron
guard-rails, these being plain at No. 58 but trellispatterned at No. 59. The doorways, placed at
opposite ends of their respective fronts, are roundarched, containing six-panelled doors and fanlights with radial glazing-bars; at No. 59 the
door has a good lion-head knocker (Plate 121d).
The original area-railings have almost entirely
gone, but there is a short length beside the
doorway of No. 59, having a standard with an urnfinial; No. 58 now has modern wrought-iron
railings and an overthrow lamp-holder designed in
early eighteenth-century style.
The interiors have roughly mirrored plans,
each floor having a single front and back room
with the staircase compartment lying between,
but No. 58, the larger of the two, has a closet
behind the staircase and a passage beside the
back room on the ground floor, leading out to the
yard behind; above this passage on the first floor
is a narrow closet with a lobby at the eastern end
giving the back room separate access to the staircase. The finishings, where they have survived,
are of the plainest type, the walls of the rooms being
lined with plain wooden dadoes having moulded
rails and skirtings, and finished with simply
moulded plaster cornices; the doors are sixpanelled, the sunk panels being decorated with a
raised moulding. The staircases are of the
geometrical pattern, constructed of wood with
shaped step-ends, moulded nosings to the treads,
and thin square balusters supporting a continuous
mahogany handrail.
No. 58 contains a number of ornate wooden
chimneypieces, some of them incorporating early
or mid eighteenth-century carving, but these must
be modern insertions.
No. 60 Frith Street
This is one of the better-preserved late seventeenth-century houses surviving from the first
development of Soho Fields (Plate 120b). It was
perhaps built, together with No. 61, by the
carpenter, Richard Campion. In 1691 the two
houses were valued together, as part of his estate,
at about £1,800. By 1688 No. 60 had been taken
on lease from Campion by Elizabeth Price, who
was perhaps the first occupant. (ref. 69) She was later
said to have been 'a Player and mistress to
several persons', (ref. 70) and by 1689 had acquired both
a house in Pall Mall and an involvement with
Charles the (titular) fourth Earl of Banbury,
which finally resulted in a claim that he had taken
her abroad and married her (bigamously or
otherwise) at Verona. (ref. 71) This he denied, asserting that she had become engaged to 'a Spaniard one
don Hugo Simple . . . but finding herselfe not in a
condition for marriage chose to goe beyond sea
till she had dissipated herself from that Incumbrance'. (ref. 72) In 1697 the Court of Delegates decided
against the Earl's marriage to Elizabeth Price in
favour of an earlier union. (ref. 70) In the following year,
however, she was still designating herself Countess
in her answer to a Chancery suit. This dispute
was concerned with her or the Earl's power to
mortgage No. 60 Frith Street, but does not reveal
anything of interest beyond Campion's lien on this
and the two adjacent sites. (ref. 73)
If Mrs. Price occupied the house, she soon let
it to 'persons of quality'. (ref. 74) The first recorded in
the ratebooks, in 1691, was Lady Butler. The
next occupant, from 1692 to 1698 or later, was
Colonel John Beaumont, (ref. 75) no doubt the soldier
of that name (d.1701) who had fallen foul of
James II and had been created colonel of the
regiment formerly the Duke of Berwick's by
William III. (ref. 76) He was (like the Earl of Banbury)
a lethal duellist. A more pacific later occupant
of the house, from 1753 to 1757, was the painter,
Nathaniel Hone. (ref. 3)
In the period about 1840 a number of artists
exhibited from this address, including Thomas
Musgrove Joy. (ref. 77)
The house now contains a basement and four
storeys, and has a brick front three windows wide
(Plate 120b). In the ground storey the front
has been rendered with cement, while the two
storeys above have been resurfaced and mockpointed, but the brickwork appears originally to
have been purple-red in colour, red brick being
used for the jambs and arches of the windows.
The fourth storey is a later addition in yellow
brick, probably replacing an original roof-garret.
The windows have slightly cambered gauged
arches, and within the openings are recessed boxframes containing barred double-hung sashes,
although both these are probably renewals of a
later date. The ground and second storeys have
keystones to the window-arches and are finished
with stone bandcourses; the third storey is not
treated in this manner because, presumably, it was
intended to be overshadowed by an eaves-cornice.
The doorcase is a late eighteenth-century
insertion, dating perhaps from 1778, when the
house was unoccupied (ref. 3) (Plate 121d). It is of
wood, consisting of a pair of Ionic pilasters supporting an entablature. The capitals of the
pilasters are unconventional in having bands of
acanthus leaves below volutes hung with swags,
and the frieze is decorated with paterae, acanthus
leaves and a pair of urns linked by a swag. The
door itself is six-panelled, with four raised-andfielded panels above two flush ones, and there is a
fanlight with radial glazing-bars.
The back wall is of purple-red brick, except
for the fourth storey which is an addition in yellow
brick, as at the front. The windows have jambs
and segmental arches of red brick, and contain
recessed box-frames, while above the ground and
second storeys are raised brick bandcourses. The
projecting closet-wing, though much rebuilt,
appears to have been of similar character.
Internally the house has the standard plan of
one front room, one back room and a projecting
closet-wing, the dog-legged staircase lying beside
the back room on the south. The finishings have
been altered in both the early and late eighteenth
century, but the ground and first floors retain a
fair quantity of bolection-moulded panelling. For
the most part only the dado has survived, but the
south wall of the entrance passage and the first
two storeys of the stair compartment are still
panelled in two heights. The staircase has been
largely rebuilt, but the pair of flights leading to
the third floor are original, with moulded closed
strings, twisted balusters, and a flat moulded
handrail carried over thick square newels. The
single flight from the ground floor to the basement
is probably of the same date, but it differs in having
only turned balusters. The first-floor front room
has a moulded plaster ceiling and frieze of the
late eighteenth century.
No. 61 Frith Street
This house is closely similar in its proportions
to No. 60, and for this reason may be regarded as
being basically of late seventeenth-century date.
Like No. 60 it was perhaps built by the carpenter,
Richard Campion, as he was named as owner of the
house on this site in 1690. (ref. 73) The front was rebuilt in 1950, (ref. 43) but a photograph of 1943 shows
that it had previously been completely altered and
stuccoed in the early nineteenth century (ref. 78) (Plate
120b). The interior appears to retain little of
interest, apart from some early nineteenth-century
work, but a note of 1950 suggests that at that time
traces of late seventeenth-century work still
remained. (ref. 43)
Probably the first occupant, in 1691 or earlier,
was Lady Cole, and later occupants included
Colonel Matthews, c. 1694–6, and Sir Jeffery
(or Geoffrey) Palmer, 1716–20. (ref. 3)
Nos. 62–64 (consec.) Frith Street
It is possible that these three houses, which are
of similar proportions, are all of late seventeenth-century date, and were in existence by 1691 (ref. 3)
(Plate 120b). Only No. 62, however, retains
work that is certainly of that period. Some
rebuilding by John Clarkson of St. George's,
Hanover Square, carpenter, was probably undertaken at Nos. 63 and 64 in c. 1734, and it is
possible that at No. 63 it amounted to a complete
reconstruction. (ref. 79)
Lodgers at No. 64 included W. M. Bennett,
portrait painter and miniaturist, in 1812–18, (ref. 80)
and the actor, William Macready, at the time of
his first appearance on the London stage, in
1816. (ref. 81)
Architectural Description
Each of these houses contains a basement and
four storeys, the top storey of which has probably
been converted from an original roof-garret.
The fronts are three windows wide, but Nos. 63
and 64 have been rendered with cement and No.
62 rebuilt above second-floor level, so that little
evidence of their original appearance is left. At
No. 62 the brickwork in the second storey,
though much blackened, appears to be purple-red,
and the jambs and segmental gauged arches of the
windows, though now dyed a deeper shade, appear to have been originally red. Cementrendered sill-bands, possibly of brick, remain in
the second storey of Nos. 62 and 63, and No. 63
has bandcourses above both the second and third
storeys. All three houses have modern shop
fronts in the ground storey. Internally the houses
are arranged on the standard two-room plan, with
projecting closets at Nos. 62 and 63. No. 62
has its original, late seventeenth-century, doglegged staircase of wood, the moulded closed
strings fixed into square newels and the vase-type
balusters supporting a broad moulded handrail.
No. 63 has been completely altered in modern
times, but No. 64, the best of the group, retains
a fair quantity of work dating from an early
eighteenth-century refitting. The first-floor
rooms are complete with sunk ovolo-moulded
panelling finished with moulded dado-rails and
box-cornices, and the cornice in the front room
is further elaborated with dentils. The doors and
shutters are panelled to match, and the back
room has a simple wooden fireplace-surround consisting of a strip of ovolo-moulding. The staircase, also dog-legged, has moulded closed strings,
column-newels and a moulded handrail, but the
balustrade has unfortunately had to be cased with
asbestos. The stair compartment is lined with
ovolo-moulded panelling as far as the half-space
landing above the first floor, and thereafter with
unmoulded panelling to the top of the house.