CHAPTER XXII
Albany: Stone Conduit Close
Of the present buildings of Albany the
'mansion' (or Albany House) is the former
Melbourne House built by Sir William
Chambers in 1771–4 for the first Lord Melbourne. Behind the mansion two ranges of
chambers stretching north to Burlington Gardens
were built by Henry Holland in 1802–3 when
the mansion was reconstructed internally for
occupation in apartments. Melbourne House was
built on the site of an earlier house dating from
the post-Restoration development of this part of
Piccadilly.
Little is known of this first house to be built
here. The site had been part of Stone Conduit
Close and was a portion of the ground granted by
the Earl of Clarendon in August 1664 to Sir
William Pulteney and Sir John Denham, the
western half of which Denham, in association
with Pulteney, sold to the Earl of Burlington in
January 1666/7 (see pages 342, 390–1). On 20
November 1668 Pulteney and his trustee Henry
Guy, of Tring, Hertfordshire, esquire, granted
the freehold of the westernmost part of the
remainder, a block of land about 100 feet wide
and about 550 feet deep, stretching between
Piccadilly and the present Burlington Gardens, to
Sir Thomas Clarges (who was later, with Guy, to
be named as trustee for much of Pulteney's
property in the latter's will). A yearly rent-charge
of £22 was reserved, payable from Lady Day
1670. The deed recording this grant is in the
possession of the present owners of the site, the
Albany Trustees, by whom the rent-charge is
still paid to the Sutton estate as successors to the
Pulteney estate. (ref. 1)
On this plot of ground Sir Thomas Clarges
erected a house, of which he first appears as
occupier in the 1671 ratebook. He certainly
resided in the house in May of that year. (ref. 2)
Nothing is known of the identity of the architect
or builders of the house. The street front is very
roughly indicated on Ogilby and Morgan's map
of 1681–2 (Plate 3a). A clearer view, but of only
the north-west corner of the house, appears at the
edge of the Knyff-Kip engraving of Burlington
House in c. 1698–9 (Plate 42a). This shows a
house with, like Clarendon House, a balustraded
platform roof. In common with the other
Piccadilly mansions it stood back behind a courtyard. In the hearth tax return for 1674 Clarges
was assessed for 39 hearths compared with Lord
Townshend's 15 in the adjacent house to the east
and Lord Burlington's 41 to the west. (ref. 3) The size
of house which this seems to indicate is surprising,
but the Knyff-Kip view shows a large west wing
of the same height as the central block, and Ogilby
and Morgan's map a perhaps slightly smaller east
wing. Probably these wings were capable of separate occupation and thus account for the two houses
additional to the main mansion which are mentioned in Clarges's will of 1694 (ref. 4) and which were
separately rated in this part of Piccadilly until 1699,
when their disappearance from the ratebooks is
accompanied by an increased assessment of the
main house. In 1691 the ratepayer for one of these
two residences was said to live 'chez' Sir Thomas
Clarges. (ref. 5) A number of the ratepayers presumed
to have lived in these wings of the house apparently
held official or semi-official positions or were
acquaintances or relations of the Clarges. The first
occupant of one residence, in 1671, was Sir
Thomas Ingram, probably the Chancellor of the
Duchy of Lancaster. Later occupants were Henri
Justel, the French Protestant émigré and keeper
of the King's library at St. James's, (ref. 6) who lived
here in 1683–4, Captain Oglethorp, doubtless
Gentleman of the Horse, (ref. 7) in 1685, and Armand
de la Bastide, a soldier, and a political acquaintance
of Clarges, from 1689 to 1699. (ref. 8) In the other
residence the first occupant, from 1674 to 1676,
was the Court painter, Antonio Verrio. A later
occupant, from 1695 to 1699, was Anthony
Hammond, Member of Parliament, the writer on
public finance, who in 1694 had married Clarges's
grand-daughter. (ref. 6)
Sir Thomas Clarges was rated for the main
house until 1690, when he was succeeded as ratepayer, five years before his death, by his son Sir
Walter. After 1695 a number of short tenancies
followed, the occupants including Count Tallard,
during his embassy in England, in 1700–1, the
second Duke of Queensberry in 1702–5 during
the preliminaries to the Union with Scotland in
which he played a prominent part, and the
Venetian ambassador from 1706 to 1707 or later.
In 1695–6 and again in 1699–1700 the assessment of the house was increased, the latter
change, as has been seen, being evidently associated with the ending of the separate occupation
of the wings. In 1708 Hatton spoke of the house
as 'a stately new Building'. (ref. 9)
On 20–21 January 1709/10 Sir Thomas
Clarges's grandson, also Sir Thomas, sold the
house for £4600 to the Secretary of State,
Charles Spencer, third Earl of Sunderland, whose
family retained the house for some thirty-seven
years. (ref. 10) Sunderland may have been already in
occupation at the time, as in the spring of the
previous year the gardener Henry Wise was
planting 137 limes, 7 jessamines and 6 honeysuckles in a garden in Piccadilly belonging to
the Earl. (ref. 11) The Earl's immediately preceding
house had been in St. James's Square, but
from 1696 to 1702 he had lived in the
adjacent house eastward where his mother
the Dowager Countess probably still resided. (ref. 12)
He is said (ref. 13) to have thrown this latter house and
Clarges's former house into one, but it is clear from
title-deeds and ratebooks that he did not in fact do so,
although in April 1711 he took a nineteen-year
lease of part of the eastward site as a stable yard. (ref. 14)
As an avid book-collector Sunderland was concerned to house his treasures fittingly. In 1714
Macky referred to the library as a 'Noble Room
built on purpose'. (ref. 15) In about 1719–20, however,
extensive building operations were undertaken, to
house the library even more handsomely, at a cost
of at least £5132 (probably excluding furnishings
other than joiners' work). The building was
evidently executed under the direction of the
Surveyor General of Works, Sir Thomas Hewett,
with the bricklayer Thomas Elkins undertaking
some payments to other workmen. (fn. a) The work
was not quite finished when Sunderland died in
April 1722, and sums for carpets, walnut furnishings and chimney glasses in the old and new
library were paid to the noted cabinet-maker
James Moore by Sunderland's executors. (ref. 16) The
new library stretched northward on the east side
of the garden. It was described by Macky in 1723
as 'the finest in Europe, both for the Disposition
of the Appartments, as of the Books: The Rooms,
divided into five Appartments, are full 150 Foot
long, with two Stories of Windows, and a
Gallery runs round the whole in the second Story,
for the taking down Books.' (ref. 17) The workmen's
bills show that each of the five apartments had
'Italian Mold'd Marble Chimney pieces' and that
the library was lit by forty large-paned sash
windows. (ref. 11)
An inventory of the late Earl's goods, made in
February 1722/3, does not add anything of note
to the description of the library, which his successor insured for £10,000. (ref. 18) It does, however,
give the designation of the rooms in the house.
For the most part these were listed, in the customary manner, by floors, but all the rooms in the
'left wing' were described together, supporting
the belief that this part at least had earlier been a
separate residence. The description of the furnishings in the house indicates that some of the rooms
were decorated to a scheme of colouring, blue in
Lord Sunderland's bedchamber and yellow in
Lady Sunderland's dressing-room; there were
also a 'Crimson Damask bedchamber' and a
'Green drawing room'. Some tapestries are
mentioned but were mostly in store. China jars
were set about the rooms and in the green
drawing-room was a silver tea service (and a silver
statue of Hercules weighing some 62 ounces).
Bedchambers contained a spinet and a harpsichord and there was 'an organ compleat' in the
chaplain's dining-room. A marble side table is
mentioned in one room and a 'larg Square
Carve'd Guilt table with a leather Cover' in
another: apart from these, the furniture was
'wainscot' or walnut, except for japanned
cabinets and Indian tea-tables. Numerous lookingglasses are mentioned and glasses or paintings
over the chimneys. The chimneypieces are
not described. All the hearth furnishings were
of steel. The entrance hall had the twenty-four
fire-buckets usual in such places, and there were
three blunderbusses in an adjacent room. (ref. 19)
In June 1745 Sunderland's son, the third Duke
of Marlborough, together with mortgagees, sold
the house for £6000 to his brother-in-law, the
fourth Duke of Bedford. The conveyance was
not in the form of a mortgage and was direct to
the recipient and not in trust for him, but it was
perhaps made to secure various debts of the Duke
of Marlborough's which were mentioned as
charges on the property. (ref. 20) The Duke of Marlborough continued to occupy the house until
1747 when, on 15–16 April, the Duke of
Bedford sold it, again for £6000, to the First
Commissioner of Trade and Plantations, Lord
Monson. (ref. 21) Lord Monson died in the following
year and was succeeded in the house by his son
who retained it until 18–19 March 1763 when
he sold it, profitably, to the Paymaster General,
Henry Fox, who was about to be created Lord
Holland. The price was £16,000. (ref. 22) Whether the
Monsons had rebuilt or improved the house is not
known, but Dasent says that the second Lord
Monson had pulled down Lord Sunderland's
library in 1758. (ref. 23) A comparison of Rocque's
map of 1746 with Rhodes's of 1770 confirms
that the library was removed between these dates.
Lord Holland's ownership lasted for eight
years, and was marked by the preparation in 1764
of an elaborate and sophisticated design for a
complete rebuilding by Robert Adam (ref. 24) (Plate
112a). Nothing was done in fact, perhaps because
with his retirement from the House of Commons
Lord Holland's interests became diverted to his
villa on the Thanet coast.
On 31 March–1 April 1771 Lord Holland
sold his house for £16,500 to Sir Peniston Lamb,
who in the previous year had been created Lord
Melbourne and who was then living at No. 28
Sackville Street. The transaction included an
agreement to secure Melbourne against any claim
on Lord Holland's estate by the Crown, to whom
he was a debtor as Paymaster General. (ref. 25) Melbourne, twenty-six years old and two years married
to an attractive and strong-willed wife, was
possessed of great wealth inherited from his father
(a lawyer who had at one time himself been
a mortgagee of the property from the Duke of
Marlborough). He now determined to pull down
the old house and to build on its site the town
residence which survives as the 'mansion' of
Albany (Albany House). The architect he chose,
on the recommendation of the second Baron
Grantham, British ambassador to Spain, (ref. 26) was
Sir William Chambers, to whom he became
related in 1775 by the marriage of Chambers's
daughter to Lady Melbourne's brother John
Milbanke. Chambers's zest for the work may
well have been sharpened by his knowledge of
Robert Adam's very different plan for the site,
of which he had a drawing made. (ref. 24) The composition and detailed design of the house developed
in deliberate rivalry to the innovations in style and
plan by which Adam was attracting the patronage
of the fashionable world.
By July 1771 the old house had been demolished, (ref. 27) and in November the first surviving letter
of Chambers referring to the house reported that
the work was going forward 'very briskly and
very well', with the 'chamber floor' (second floor)
nearly completed. (ref. 28) The carcase of the house was
finished in the following May. (ref. 29) Between 1771
and 1772 the rateable value was increased from
£250 to £375. (ref. 12) By July 1772 the kitchen block
on the east of the court-yard was covered in and
the stable block on the other side nearly so. (ref. 30)
Chambers suggested deferring the construction of
the coach-house and gateway until the following
year, and his design for the screen-wall and
entrance is dated 1773. (ref. 31) In the meantime the
finishing of the interior was begun, starting at the
top. Much thought was given to the design of
the ceilings. By October 1773 all the plasterers
were reported to be out of the house and the paving
of the hall and great staircase was about to begin. (ref. 32)
Early in 1774 the family moved in: the stables had
been occupied (in Chambers's words) by 'the Cattle,
as horses, Grooms and Coach-men,' since the previous spring. Melbourne, rather like Sir Watkin
Williams Wynn in St. James's Square, celebrated
the opening of his residence with 'two public
morning Concerts to show his house'. (ref. 33) Work on
the house proved, however, not to be at an end.
The operations which continued for at least the
rest of that year were substantial, including the
decoration and furnishing of the 'round room' on
the first floor, and it seems clear that they constituted a belated alteration or extension of the
original design. In the last known letter between
Melbourne and Chambers during the building
period, in November 1774, the owner was hoping
that the workmen could be out of the house by
the New Year. (ref. 34)
Few of the workmen's names are known. The
bricklayer, who was reproached by Chambers in
November 1771 for the 'infamous' quality of the
bricks he was using, was Edward Gray. (ref. 35) Two
of the workmen concerned with the ceilings,
presumably as plasterers, were Collins and
Evans. (ref. 36) Chambers mentions that the services of
a joiner, Mr. John Robey, who was working for
him at Earl Fitzwilliam's house, Milton Park,
were to be employed at Melbourne House under
'my Joiner'. (ref. 37) Paintings for some of the ceilings,
including those of the 'two great rooms' and in
'the Gallery' were provided by Cipriani who in
1773 had submitted drawings with his prices
written on the back. Other painters were also
paid, (ref. 38) probably including Mr. (?William) Marlow
of Leicester Fields, who had been asked to paint
large pictures to be set in stucco frames over and
opposite the chimney in the eating-room. (ref. 39) Rebecca
and Wheatley are also said to have decorated some
of the rooms, (ref. 40) but they are not mentioned in
Chambers's letters. Unlike Robert Adam, Chambers made use of the services of another architect,
James Paine, to design and provide chimneypieces
in 1773. (ref. 41) Paine was being or had recently been
employed by Melbourne at No. 28 Sackville Street
and at Brocket Hall, Hertfordshire, (ref. 42) which
perhaps explains his employment here. Chippendale was employed to supply furnishings
and also, evidently, to suggest their disposition,
but Chambers made it clear that he was deeply
concerned with the place of furniture in his
decorative scheme. In August 1773 Chippendale had called on Chambers with some
designs. They seemed very well, but Chambers
communicated to Melbourne his wish 'to be a
little consulted about these matters as I am really
a Very pretty Connoisseur in furniture'. He went
on to criticize 'the method of fitting up my Lady's
dressing Room with Girandols and a Glass out of
the Center and the Girandoles quite irregularly
placed. Pictures would be much better and in the
great room fewer Sophas and more chairs would
be better than as Chippendale has designed.' (ref. 43) In
October 1774 Chippendale's work was being
submitted by Melbourne for Chambers's approval. (ref. 44) In essentials the control of the decorative
scheme seems to have been as comprehensive as
in Adam's work of the time, with Chambers's
cognizance extending down to the design of door
scutcheons. (ref. 43)
Chambers's conscious opposition to the decorative innovations and professional ambitions of the
Adams is avowed in a letter from him to Lord
Grantham. 'Messieurs Adam have lately published
a book of their ornaments, with a preface rather
presumptuous, as I am told; for I have not yet read
the book; in which they boast of having first brought
the true Style of Decoration into England, and
that all the Architects of the present day are only
servile copyers of their excellence. I do not agree
with them in the first of these positions; and can
produce many proofs against the last, among
others, Melbourne house, decorated in a manner
almost diametrically opposite to theirs: and more,
as I flatter myself, in the true Style, as approaching
nearer to the most approved Style of the
Ancients.' (ref. 45)
Melbourne himself took a constructive interest
in the attempt to achieve a calculated perfection.
In October 1774 he wrote to Chambers: 'Upon
full consideration about furnishing the round
room (in which you have exceeded my utmost
wish) I am more and more averse to admitt any
gilding whatever even in the furniture, in my
opinion the Elegance of that room is from the
lightness of well disposed well executed Ornaments; vastly preferable to any load of gilding we
Could have introduced. Therefore I am sure that
carrying that Simplicity throughout, we shall
succeed much better; and the novelty of a room
of that sort finished without any gilding, cannot
fail to Please. Therefore I wish you would
Consider in what manner we can colour the glass
frames and Chairs, so as to Correspond with that
uniformity we have already so much attended to.
I have stopped the gilding of any of the things for
that room, at Chippendale's, altho' some few
things were done, but I had rather give up that,
so that we may make the room all Perfection, by
which it will give me great Pleasure, and particularly as it will put your taste very superior to
any in this Country.' (ref. 44) Chambers, however,
replied: 'It is I think clear that the Glasses and
Soffas in the Niches should be gilt, for glasses
without gilding are large black spots that kill the
effect of every thing about them, and the dead
coloured silk with which the soffas are to be
covered, must have gold to relieve it; when it will
suit perfectly with the room; and I am under no
apprehensions that the brilliancy of the gilding
will hurt the effect of the rest, but rather set its
plainness off to advantage. The Chairs must of
Course be gilt, but they are much too small; Arm
Chairs would have answered much better.' (ref. 46)
Throughout the period for which letters
survive Melbourne seems to have been outspokenly and expansively pleased with Chambers's
work. In August 1773 Chambers had been able
to report to Lord Grantham in Madrid the happy
outcome of his recommendation to the Melbournes: 'they are pleased with what has been
done, and I am much pleased with their treatment'. (ref. 45)
Chambers's letters to Lord Grantham
contain a slightly disingenuous element; in April
1774 he was claiming that 'little more than two
years' had passed since the foundations of the
house, then in occupation, were laid, (ref. 47) whereas
two and a half years earlier the house was, as has
been seen, already at second-floor level. But
Melbourne's own letters, written after he had
moved in, testify to his satisfaction. In February
1774 he wrote, 'I believe few people have had
better reason than myself to be pleased with so
large a sum laid out', (ref. 42) and in the autumn, when
the additional work was still in hand, 'I am sure
in this you will Shew, as you have in all other
parts of my works, more taste, and in every
respect give me more satisfaction, than all other
Architects put together could possibly have
done'. (ref. 48) The house, though it failed to check the
turn of taste towards the Adams, seems to have
had also a general success: in December 1773
Lord Grantham obligingly reported from Madrid
that he had heard 'a very good Account of
Melbourne house'. (ref. 49)
Chambers seems to have been responsible for
paying all the workmen, including the decorative
painters. The cost of the work to October 1773
had been some £22,959, of which £21,300 had
been incurred under Melbourne's contract with
Chambers and the rest for 'extra works' by
'plaisterers, painters, carvers etc.': of the total,
some £3159 was then still owing. (ref. 50) By November
1774 the cost had risen to about £24,632, but a
jotting by Chambers on the back of a letter from
Melbourne suggests that by then the latter had
advanced £25,102, leaving a balance in his favour
against the work still outstanding. (ref. 51) This
evidently proved considerably more expensive
than was expected, and no prompt settlement was
made. Ten years later there was still owing to
Chambers, secured by a bond, the sum of £3000,
on which the interest was two years in arrears.
Melbourne sought apologetically to turn aside
Chambers's reported wrath with the offer of a
year's interest. (ref. 52) Chambers's reply is not known
but the principal sum was still owing in March
1789 when it was secured by a mortgage of the
house itself. (ref. 53) This was still undischarged when
Melbourne disposed of the house some three
years later.
Melbourne's version of the cost of the house
has been recorded by Mrs. Steele, the companion
of his mistress, Mrs. Baddeley, in an account of a
conversation with Melbourne printed in Lady
Birkenhead's Peace in Piccadilly. (ref. 54) The conversation is undated but occurred when Lady Melbourne was buying silks with which to hang her
rooms. 'His Lordship declared … upon his
honour, that when the house, in Piccadilly, which
he was building, was finished, and the furniture
in it complete, so as to sit down in it to dinner,
from a just calculation, it would cost him one
hundred thousand pounds. "An astonishing
sum!" exclaimed I. "It is a much greater sum",
continued his Lordship, "than I intended, when
I first began"; for Mr. Chambers' the surveyor's
estimate of the house and offices complete, did not
exceed thirty thousand pounds; but, after they
had gone on some way, and had made by his
orders, some few alterations, it came to twenty
thousand more. So that the buildings [sic] of that
house came to fifty thousand pounds, beside the
sixteen thousand pounds paid for the old house
and ground.' (ref. 55) Melbourne seems to have been
both extravagant and ingenuous in matters of
finance, and this statement of his commitments
may be nearer the truth than would commonly
have been the case with such protestations made
to Mrs. Steele by admirers of Mrs. Baddeley.
During the Melbournes' occupation of the
house the future Prime Minister, the second
Viscount, was born here, on 15 March 1779. (ref. 56)
In February 1785 the Melbournes came to an
agreement with their friend, the sculptress, Anne
Damer, for her to open a door and window into
their garden from the yard of a house in Sackville
Street. (ref. 57) Mrs. Damer is said to have advised on
the finishing of Melbourne House. Lady Birkenhead has written: 'Her knowledge and advice were
valued by Lady Melbourne and were of great
service to her in the decoration of the house.' (ref. 58)
The Melbournes' tenure of the house was
shorter than they had probably intended. The
manner of its termination was unusual, being by
an exchange with Frederick, Duke of York and
Albany, for his leasehold house in Whitehall
(now the Scottish Office). The agreement for the
exchange was concluded on Christmas Day 1791
and is said to have resulted from Lady Melbourne's
assent to a remark dropped by the Duke during a
visit to Melbourne House. (ref. 59) Lady Birkenhead
has surmised that a reason for the Melbournes'
compliance may have been financial difficulties
arising from the elaborate state maintained by
them at the house, (ref. 60) which Melbourne had
already mortgaged for £10,000 in 1775, (ref. 61) before
charging it with the £3000 owed to Chambers.
The Duke appears as occupant of the house in
the 1792 ratebook. As both the Duke's Whitehall house and Melbourne House were mortgaged
the exchange was a complicated transaction, and
was not completed until November of that year.
By the agreement of Christmas 1791 the Duke
had undertaken to pay Melbourne £23,570 as
part of the exchange. On 20–21 July 1792
Chambers and Melbourne's other mortgagee,
T. H. Broadhead, conveyed their interests to
mortgagees of the Duke—Chambers to William
Adam and John Antrobus (a partner in the banking firm of Thomas Coutts and Company), and
Broadhead to Oliver and James Farrer. At the
same time, on 21 July, a deed poll was executed
by Melbourne and the Duke, declaring that, in
addition to £13,000 plus interest paid by the
latter's mortgagees, the Duke had paid £4707 10s.
to Melbourne, making a total of £18,000 paid as
part of the purchase money. Melbourne undertook to convey Melbourne House on payment of
the residue and on the assignment to him of the
lease of the Whitehall house. This the Duke in
turn undertook to perform within six months. (ref. 62)
The final conveyances and assignments were
made on 6–7 November. The conveyance of
Melbourne House was made by Adam, Antrobus
and the Farrers to Edmund Antrobus, a partner
in Coutts's bank. His tenure, however, was to the
use of Thomas Coutts for a mortgage-term of
1000 years to secure £16,000 previously lent by
Coutts to the Duke, and then to the use of the
Farrers to secure the £10,000 they had paid for
Broadhead's mortgage. (ref. 63) The house was also
charged, together with the Duke's other property
at Oatlands in Surrey, with the sum of £34,000
owed by him to the Farrers, although it was
subsequently discharged of this encumbrance. (ref. 64)
On 5 January 1793 the Duke charged the house
with a further sum of £10,000, of which £6000
was borrowed from Coutts (making the debt to
him charged on the house £22,000) and £4000
from the Farrers. (ref. 65) The interest of these mortgagees, and in particular of Thomas Coutts, in
the mansion (now called York House) was to
have an important influence on its history.
The Duke's personal extravagance was comparable to the Melbournes', and perhaps occasioned the decision to dispose of the house some
ten years later. Nothing, however, is known of
the first inception of schemes for the redevelopment of the site, which were in prospect by 1800.
The first report of impending redevelopment
seems to be in the text of Thomas Malton's
Picturesque Tour Through … London and Westminster accompanying a view of Uxbridge House
published in May 1800. This notices that 'it is
now in contemplation, to open a communication
with Piccadilly, by pulling down York house, and
building a street of handsome houses on the site of
the gardens, in a direct line with Saville-row.
Such a communication continued to Conduitstreet would be a very important improvement;
and it is hoped there will be no impediment to
prevent its completion.' (ref. 66) The earliest direct
records of this project, however, date only from
October 1801, and introduce the speculators who
were eventually to carry out a very different
transformation of the site. One was the architect
Henry Holland, who had worked for the Duke
at his Whitehall house and at Oatlands, and who
was acquainted professionally with Thomas
Coutts. (ref. 67) His associate was the successful young
building contractor, Alexander Copland of St.
Martin's Lane, whose work on barracks and
military hospitals might have recommended him
to the Duke and who at that time was constructing the Duke of York's School in Chelsea.
Holland and Copland had evidently proposed to
Thomas Coutts the construction of a single row
of houses facing west across a 38-foot-wide roadway to the wall of Burlington House. York House
would have been demolished, and by the end of
October Coutts had asked James Burton to value
the materials of the house. (ref. 68) A detailed questionnaire was submitted by Coutts to Copland, from
which it appeared that the latter was expecting
£1100 or £1200 per annum in ground-rents. (ref. 69)
The precise method of disposing of the property
does not appear, but all the mortgagees seem to
have been very concerned to obtain proper security that the old materials would not be disposed of by the builder (evidently not Copland
himself). (ref. 70) On 1 November the Duke cordially
signified to Coutts his assent to the proposal
and thanked him for his 'obliging solicitude
for the thorough Success and Security' of the
project. Holland and Copland were then making
'detailed Plans', (ref. 71) but very soon afterwards the
project was abandoned. One cause may have
been the inability to prevent the owner of Burlington House from raising his garden wall opposite
the houses. (ref. 69)
With the abandonment of the proposed street
York House's continuance was assured, and the
next short-lived proposal contained in embryo the
development actually carried out.
On 22 January 1802 Copland came to an
agreement with the Duke for the purchase of the
site. The price was to be £37,000, payable in
instalments. Copland was to be admitted into
possession of the property on 25 March 1802
provided the first instalment had been paid, but
the conveyance was not to be executed until the
whole payment had been made. (ref. 72) There was a
proviso for Copland to rescind the agreement
within three months. Lady Birkenhead has
stated that this would have become operative if
Copland had by then been unable 'to procure
Subscribers … to the … House and premises as a
Subscription House or Hotel to the amount of
£50,000 or upwards'. (ref. 73) The nature of the
development then intended is indicated in a
printed proposal, without date but assignable to
about this period. This was a prospectus 'for
Purchasing in Shares, The Extensive Freehold
Mansion House and Premises, Situated in Piccadilly, Now in the Occupation of His Royal
Highness the Duke of York, and For Making
Large Additions to the Same, and Such Alterations, as are Necessary to open the Whole as A
Magnificent and Convenient Hotel'. A feature
of the enterprise which in essentials was carried
over into the establishment of Albany as it now
exists, was the attempt to attract a hundred subscribers of £600 each, the first forty of whom
were to elect three trustees to hold the property.
A committee of seven was to finish and furnish
the hotel and erect the additional buildings. The
hotel was to be for the residential accommodation
of families and was to be known as the Royal
York Hotel. It was to be opened at 'Midsummer
next'. (ref. 74)
By March 1802, however, this intention had
been abandoned for a more original and, in the
outcome, highly successful project. On 7 March
1802 a memorandum by Copland recorded that
he had waived his right to cancel the agreement
and had agreed to become absolute purchaser of
the premises. The price remained the same but
the Duke and his mortgagees, Coutts and the
Farrers, had agreed to an adjustment of the period
of payment, which was now to be by eight instalments from May 1802 to September 1805.
Copland declared his intention of 'making
extensive additions' and of 'building on part of the
said premises and of converting the Buildings into
and selling the same in separate Lots of Apartments and of letting part of the Ground on
Building Leases'. The Duke and his mortgagees
agreed that after the payment of Copland's second
instalment on 29 September 1802 they would
join in 'proper conveyances of each set of apartments as soon as the same is finished and sold' and
in granting building leases of the parts of the site
to be so let. This was to be conditional upon
Copland's paying over an amount which, with the
instalments then paid, would equal half the value
of the part disposed of, until the purchase price
was paid. (ref. 72)
At this time, the end of the first quarter of
1802, the Duke ceased to be rated for York
House.
Nothing is known of the discussions and
deliberations by which the idea of Albany was
developed, as a speculation and as architecture.
In this month of March 1802 the main features
of the conversion of the old house and the construction of new buildings had, however, been
sufficiently settled for a number of copies of
finished and coloured manuscript plans to be prepared, doubtless for submission to prospective
purchasers (Plate 115). Five levels are shown,
from basement to garret storey, and each is entitled
a 'Design for dividing and disposing of the Mansion
House and Premises lately occupied by His Royal
Highness The Duke of York'. Henry Holland's
authorship is shown by his inscription 'H. H.
Sloane Place Mar. 1802' on some of the plans and
on a pen-and-ink plan of part of the layout. (ref. 75) As
well as the mansion itself, Chambers's forecourt
buildings were to be retained, but four shops were
to be built on the Piccadilly frontage. Behind the
mansion, on each side of the former garden, two
ranges of buildings were to be erected, consisting
of chambers opening off staircases in the manner
of a college or inn of court. The general dimensions and layout were very similar to that executed.
The northern ends of the ranges were not,
however, carried right up to the oblique frontage
of Burlington Gardens, and the internal planning
of the separate sets of chambers was different from
that executed and without the simple and graceful formality actually achieved (Plate 119a, fig. 72).
A printed prospectus dated 1802 was prepared,
doubtless to accompany these plans. The former
idea of an hotel survived vestigially in the proposed
provision of a dining-room, under the direction
of a maitre d'hôtel, and of 'Hot and Cold Baths
etc.', for the use of the inhabitants. But the
essence of the proposal was the division of the
existing and projected buildings 'into elegant and
convenient Sets of independent Freehold Apartments'. They were to be sold, by Copland and
the mortgagees, for prices between £350 and
£800, with or without the payment to Copland
and his heirs of a fee-farm rent of between £20
and £40 at the option of the purchaser. (ref. 76) In the
event, the prices at which sets were first sold were
sometimes considerably more than was indicated
in the prospectus.
In April 1802 a supplemental agreement was
drafted but probably not executed between the
Duke and Copland. This provided for the latter
to pay only £34,000 instead of £37,000 purchase
money. An appended note explains, however,
that the larger sum would be paid by Copland 'in
Case the Interest of his royal [highness] should
enable Mr. Copland to dispose of 25 Sets of the
apartments as in that Case Mr. C's risque and
trouble will be much lessened'. (ref. 77) The Duke was
in any event interested in the success of the
scheme as a means of discharging his debts to his
mortgagees, and Coutts stated some six months
later that he was buying sets of chambers, not for
residence but only 'to encourage the finishing of
the transaction proposed, and to oblige His
R.Hs'. (ref. 78) It is not certain whether the purchase
price was in fact reduced, as it was subsequently
stated at both sums. (ref. 79)
At this time, in July 1802, eighteen subscribers
had come forward and Copland and Coutts agreed
that they should 'chuse their sets as soon as they
please': (ref. 80) as has been seen, in October Coutts was
himself choosing sets. By 17 January 1803
Copland was able to come to agreements for the
sale of sets of chambers on staircases C and D,
which he undertook to finish according to agreed
specifications by the following 24 June. It is not
clear how far building had already progressed.
The specifications include provisions respecting
the exterior walls and the roof, and for the staircases to be of Portland stone. Specifications for
the interior finishing were not very detailed. They
included 'plain plaster Cornices in the Principal
Rooms, and the Walls either Stuccoed, or
papered, with paper at One Shilling per Yard… .
Statuary and veined Marble Chimney Pieces, in
the Principal Rooms'. (ref. 81) On the same day
Copland agreed 'that the Dining Room Kitchen
Cellars Hot & Cold Baths Residence of the
Maitre D' Hotel—The Pavement, Iron Rails,
covered way, Gates etc. are to be finished in a
substantial & proper Manner according to the
Plan Proposed by Mr Copland at His Expense.' (ref. 82)
One of the sets was to be sold for £1600 or for
£800 plus a rent-charge of £40 per annum and
another two for £1200 each with the option of
similar alternatives. (ref. 81) In February three more
sets were agreed to be sold for £3600. (ref. 83) In the
same month, on 28 February 1803, the four shops
fronting Piccadilly were leased by the Duke,
Coutts, the Farrers, Edmund Antrobus and Copland. The leases ran for 99 years from the previous Lady Day at a peppercorn for the first year,
and the carcases were thus probably newly completed at the time of the leases. One of the leases
was to Edward Lardner, senior, of the Strand,
gentleman. The other three were to William
Slade of 34 Lower Thornhaugh Street, Bedford
Square, a bricklayer, who was probably the
builder, (ref. 84) and who later estimated for some small
repairs to stucco-work for the Trustees. (ref. 85) The
first occupants of the shops were a gold and silver
lace manufacturer, a druggist, a pastrycook and
fruiterer, and a linen draper (Plate 116a).
At the end of August 1802 a legal opinion had
been taken on the Duke's and the Farrers' title to
the property, evidently in contemplation of their
joining in the agreed conveyance to Copland
after 29 September. (ref. 86) In fact, however, the conveyance to Copland seems never to have been
made in the form proposed. He began to pay
instalments of money to Coutts, in discharge of
Coutts's £22,000 debt from the Duke, early in
September 1802 (ref. 87) but by the end of the following
September he had paid only £9500 to Coutts
and £9300 to the Duke. There was thus
still £12,500 owing to Coutts and £5700 to the
Duke to complete the purchase. In the meantime,
however, as has been seen, the disposal of parts of
the premises had been going forward.
The intended nature of the legal estate of the
various interested parties is indicated in the
printed prospectus of 1802 (ref. 76) and is stated in one
of the deeds by which the whole property was
finally settled in the autumn of 1803. The latter
records that Copland had contracted with several
persons for the sale to them of sets of chambers,
'previously to which it was proposed and agreed
between the said Alexander Copland and the
several Purchasers respectively that the Inheritance in fee simple of and in the said sets of Apartments or Chambers and all other the said Premises
should be conveyed to and vested in Trustees;
not exceeding 7; with a view to general regulation; and so as to give each Proprietor a freehold
Estate therein in Equity'. It was similarly
agreed that the purchasers and all future proprietors 'should be subject to such rules and
regulations to be from time to time framed by the
said Trustees respecting the occupation, letting or
other disposing of the said Apartments by each
Proprietor; and respecting the general management and regulation of the whole Concern; as
would, in the Trustees' judgment be most conducive to the benefit of the Proprietors in
general'. The parts of the premises to be run by
the maître d'hôtel were to be conveyed in fee
simple to the Trustees, who were to let them to
him and divide the proceeds among the proprietors. (ref. 88)
It was also agreed that the Trustees were to be
elected from among the proprietors at a meeting
held after Copland had sold twenty sets of
chambers. (ref. 88) By 22 April 1803 it was possible to
hold such a meeting of proprietors, at the
Thatched House Tavern. (ref. 89) Seven Trustees
were elected and held their first meeting six days
later at 'Albany House'. A secretary and steward
was elected, rules and regulations were ordered
to be drafted and it was decided to apply to
Copland (who was of course a 'proprietor' but
had not yet been elected a Trustee) for the
conveyance to them of the maître d'hôtel's part
of the premises. (ref. 90)
By the time the final settlement of the property
came to be made, by lease and release on 28–29
September 1803, the two ranges of chambers in
the former garden had been built. The conveyance now made noticed that Copland had contracted to purchase the site from the Duke but
that, as has been said, £18,200 was then still
owing to the Duke and to Thomas Coutts. This
sum had been advanced to Copland by two partners in Coutts's bank, Coutts Trotter and
Edward Marjoribanks (the former being himself a
proprietor of chambers). It also noticed that the
Farrers had agreed to release the property from
the sums of £34,000 and £4000 owed to them,
having other security for the same. The conveyance of the whole premises was now made by
the Duke and his mortgagees (Coutts, the
Farrers and Edmund Antrobus, Copland also
being a party to the transaction), to Trotter and
Marjoribanks for a mortgage-term of 500 years
to secure their £18,200, and then to the seven
Albany Trustees. On the day of the release, 29
September, Copland and the Trustees made a
declaration of trust in respect of this conveyance,
by which the Trustees as legal owners were
charged with the regulation of the whole property
and with the letting of the maître d'hôtel's part as
previously indicated, and were constituted trustees
of the rest of the property for Copland and his
heirs so long as the latter remained proprietors. (ref. 64)
In October Robert Mylne was valuing sets of
chambers for Thomas Coutts or his associates (ref. 91)
and in December a number of conveyances of
sets were made by the Trustees and Copland to
proprietors. (ref. 92) 'Albany' first appears in the ratebooks in 1804, although only ten occupants, apart
from the secretary, are shown.
On 28 February of that year articles of agreement were concluded between the seven Trustees
of the first part, thirty-three other proprietors of
chambers of the second part, and Copland, as
proprietor of chambers and of the fee-farm rents
charged on some of the other chambers, of the
third part. (ref. 93) This recited the previous transactions
and proceeded to lay down rules and regulations
to be observed by the proprietors. Among these
was the provision that 'No projection or alteration
in any of the Walls, Windows, Common Staircases or Roofs nor any alteration whatever
varying the present Figure of the Buildings shall
be made without the consent in writing of the
majority of the Trustees first obtained.' The
repair of the roof, exterior walls, staircase, etc.,
belonging to each building was to be made under
the direction of the Trustees at the expense of the
proprietors of that building.
'In order to exclude improper Inhabitants'
there was to be no letting or sale of chambers
without the consent of the Trustees, and 'No
Profession Trade or Business' was to be 'carried
on in any of the Apartments or Chambers without
the approbation of the majority of the Trustees in
writing'.
The first rule of all may be thought conclusive
in a matter that later became the subject of
debate: it established that 'the Premises mentioned
in the foregoing Articles shall be called Albany'.
In the nineteenth century, however, the use of
'the Albany' was common and the present
resolute omission of the article seems to spring not
so much from awareness of correct usage as from
a sense, about the beginning of the twentieth
century, that 'the Albany' sounded 'like a publichouse'. (ref. 94)
The early minutes of the Trustees, in 1803,
were signed by Henry Holland, who doubtless
supervised the fabric of the building when it was
first being brought into use. But in August 1804,
some two years before Holland's death, Robert
Smirke, a relation of Copland's, was officially
appointed unpaid architect to the Trustees (ref. 95) and
was responsible for overseeing such slight alterations as were thereafter made in the building,
chiefly in cutting entrances to the parts used as a
dining-room or 'tavern'. In 1812 a request from
Lewis Wyatt to make additional upper windows
on the west side of the court-yard was refused as
it would 'change the present uniformity of the
Building'. (ref. 96)
In 1808 Smirke took a set in Albany. In 1819
the Trustees gave permission to George Basevi
to practise as an architect in a ground-floor set
looking on to Vigo Street. (ref. 97) A similar concession
was made to the solicitor who took chambers in
the eastern court-yard building formerly used as
a kitchen. The limitation on the use of apartments for business or professional purposes seems
not to have been applied strictly in the court-yard.
Henry Angelo had a fencing school here in
1804 (ref. 98) and in 1807 the pugilist John Jackson
probably used the same apartments, (ref. 99) which were
subsequently occupied by the architects George
and Lewis Wyatt. For a short time Jane Austen's
brother Henry, of the banking firm of Austen
and Maunde, also had his office in the court-yard.
The new residential enclave thus created was
intended for occupation by men of position and
wealth. Nine of the earliest sets to be sold, in
December 1803, cost between £616 and £1620
each, a rent-charge of £30 or £40 being payable
for some of them. (ref. 100) In 1811 Smirke took a
twenty-one-year lease from the Trustees of
chambers in the mansion, previously used by the
maître d'hôtel, at £126 per annum (ref. 101) and in 1814
Byron took a seven-year lease of Lord Althorp's
chambers, also in the mansion, at £110 per
annum, with the option of purchasing the set for
£1900 within one year. (ref. 102)
The sets had not been taken up immediately,
but by 1807 there were some fifty residents and
by 1811 some sixty-four, (ref. 12) with few vacancies
except in the court-yard buildings which were
then being converted from their use as adjuncts
of the dining-room. This had proved consistently
unsuccessful since its opening in 1803 and the
project was abandoned in December 1810. (ref. 103)
The Trustees had already guarded against any
failure of the hoped-for revenue from this source
by reserving to themselves in the rules and regulations the power to make a rate of a shilling in the
pound on the estimated value of each set. This
was paid by the occupant in addition to the parish
rate. The shilling rate is still made on the
original valuation although it is now necessary to
make such a rate nine times a quarter.
The lighting of the buildings had been put out
to contract in June 1805 at a cost of £90 per
annum. (ref. 104) In December 1815 Smirke approved
'very advantageous' proposals from the Gas Light
Company but gas lighting was not introduced
until 1818. (ref. 105) In June 1820 the Trustees agreed
that the parish should light the entrance from
Piccadilly, the court-yard and the portico of the
mansion. (ref. 106)
During the years 1866–8 the Trustees were
in negotiation with the Government over the
interference with Albany's light and air by the
erection of the London University and Royal
Academy buildings behind Burlington House. A
general accommodation was reached but two
individual proprietors, Earl Spencer and Sir
Henry Drummond Wolff, seem to have insisted
successfully in 1868 on the purchase of their sets
of chambers (five in all) on the west side of the
mansion by the Commissioners of Works, who
thus became Albany proprietors. (ref. 107) The Commissioners were selling two of these sets in April
1873. (ref. 108)
Electric light seems first to have been introduced, into a set of chambers in the mansion,
under permission granted in November 1887 to
the owner, who wished to dispense with gas 'to
save the decorations' of his rooms. A wire was to
be brought from Sackville Street. (ref. 109) An agreement with the St. James and Pall Mall Electric
Light Company for the provision of current to
the chambers generally was reached in April
1893 (ref. 110) but in November 1894 the Trustees
were still considering the introduction of electric
light into the 'public passages' of Albany. (ref. 111)
In January 1889 the first permission was
granted to an owner of chambers, in the western
range, to have a telephone wire brought to his
apartments. It was a condition that it should run
from the Bristol Hotel in Burlington Gardens
and should 'not cross Albany at any point'. (ref. 112)
It was probably in the 1880's that women were
first resident in Albany although the exact date is
not certain. The apartments had at first been so
obviously intended for masculine occupation that
no formal exclusion of wives or single women was
written into the regulations, thus permitting their
admission in later years. In 1883 the parish rates
for a set of chambers were first paid by a woman,
perhaps the widow of the previous occupant, (ref. 113)
and in 1889 the Trustees gave permission for an
unmarried lady and also a married couple to take
sets of chambers for occupation, (ref. 114) though neither
permission seems to have been acted upon. (ref. 115)
In the late nineteenth century Albany was in
less favour as a place of residence than before or
since, and the proprietors of chambers were having
difficulty in disposing of them. In 1889 negotiations were begun for the sale of the property.
The prospective purchasers were Frank Kirk, a
contractor, and G. D. Martin, architect, who
acted through the solicitors, Tyrrell Lewis and
Broadbent of Albany Courtyard. The suggested
price seems to have been £250,000. Negotiations
continued for two or three years, and in 1891 the
Trustees apparently put the property in the hands
of agents for sale at £320,000. The negotiations with Kirk and Martin lapsed in 1892 and
in the same year an unsuccessful offer of about
half of the site was made to the Royal Academy. (ref. 116)
The following years were crucial for the
survival of Albany substantially in its original
form. In about 1893 some fifteen sets were
empty and were used as 'luggage and lumber
rooms'. (ref. 117) In June 1894 nine proprietors of
chambers stated to the Trustees that they were
'dissatisfied with the present condition of the
property': one source of complaint was the nonresidence of the Trustees and in the following
year two resident proprietors were elected
Trustees. One of these was Mr. William Stone,
who was to be closely associated with the preservation of Albany's distinctive character in the
following half-century. (ref. 118) During the next two
years the sale of Albany was again debated, and
alternatively the modernization of its buildings
and appearance. In May 1895 the Trustees
considered estimates for the replacement of the
wooden covered way between the mansion and
Burlington Gardens by 'a new ornamental cast
iron glazed covered way, with mosaic paving' at
a cost of some £1435. The Trustees' surveyor,
J. P. Seddon, recommended that if a new covered
way was to be made it should be of a 'more
modern description' than the 'rustic character' of
the original. By October, however, it had been
decided to repaint the existing structure. (ref. 119) In
1897 it was decided not to alter the old buildings
materially. (ref. 120)
Some lesser alterations were made in 1894–5.
The steps to the mansion were remade in Sicilian
marble and a mosaic pavement was laid in the
hall, by Jesse Rust of the Vitreous Mosaic Company, Battersea. (ref. 121) An additional flight was made
in the staircase hall of the mansion from the first
to the second floor, by Mr. Greig, architect. (ref. 122)
At the northern end of the eastern range John
Lane took the ground-floor set for his publishing
house, The Bodley Head, then producing the
early numbers of The Yellow Book, and was
allowed to convert the bow window into an
entrance. The alteration was carried out in 1894:
the architect is said to have been (J. T.) Wimperis (ref. 123) and the ornamental ironwork grille was
designed by Nelson Dawson. (ref. 124)
The Trustees were again contemplating the
sale of Albany in 1903 (ref. 125) and in 1907. Of the
forty-five proprietors who expressed an opinion
on the proposal in the latter year twenty-six
approved it and nineteen disapproved, but the
sale was not proceeded with. (ref. 126)
As has been seen, the shops on each side of the
entrance from Piccadilly had been built as part of
the original redevelopment of the property. Their
sites had, however, been granted on ninety-nineyear leases before the final settlement of the rest
of the property on the Albany Trustees and were
held, subject to these leases, by the Trustees on
behalf of Alexander Copland and his heirs. As
the expiry of the leases on Lady Day 1901
approached, the legal power of Copland's heirs to
sell the sites had become the subject of dispute.
In the event this power was conceded, and the
first major alteration of the Chambers-Holland
ensemble occurred in 1926 when the two shops
west of the entrance were rebuilt for the owners,
Messrs. Meakers, by the architectural firm of
Bomer and Gibbs. (ref. 127) In 1937 the shops east of
the entrance were rebuilt for the lessees by
Yates, Cook and Darbyshire as part of Nuffield
House: this conformed to G. J. Skipper's overall
design for the rebuilding of Sackville Street by
the freeholders, the Sutton estate. (ref. 128)
During the 1939–45 war Albany suffered
considerably from enemy action, particularly
during a raid in October 1940 which severely
damaged the Vigo Street end of the eastern range
of chambers. (ref. 129) Block G was almost gutted down
to second-floor level. Rebuilding was carried out
in 1951–52 by Messrs. Higgs and Hill. (ref. 130)
Apart from war-damage the residential parts of
Albany have not recently suffered change. The
control now exercised by the Trustees has been
directed to preserving the character of the building
from any further alterations such as those
to Holland's fenestration introduced here and
there in the laxer times of the later nineteenth
century. A probable factor in this strengthened
control was the acquisition of a large number of
freehold sets of chambers by Mr. William Stone
before his death in 1958. Seven of the residents are now proprietors of the sets they
occupy. (ref. 131)
Adam's design for Lord Holland
The single surviving plan of Adam's 1764
design for Lord Holland (ref. 24) (Plate 112a) holds the
promise of a far more exciting building than that
subsequently erected by Chambers for Lord
Melbourne. Adam proposed that the house
should be approached by way of a large ovoid
court-yard, an idea probably inspired by the
colonnade of Burlington House. This court-yard
was to be enclosed by four segmental colonnades
of five bays, linked on the north to south axis by
large circular lobbies, and on the east to west
axis by square coach-houses. Behind the southern
pair of colonnades were stables, but the northern
colonnades formed loggias opening to the
spandrel-shaped courts before the house. This
was almost square and planned with single ranges
of rooms round a central court, perhaps in
a deliberate attempt to recall a Roman villa.
Lord Holland's private apartments occupied the
whole of the western range, and the eastern was
taken up by a suite of reception rooms, the middle
one being an apse-ended oblong. At each end of
this was a circular ante-room, that to the north
leading to the apse-sided dining-room, in the
middle of the garden front. The south ante-room
led to the entrance hall, on the north side of which
was the circular principal staircase, flanked on the
east by an oval secondary stair, and on the west
by the waiting-room to Lord Holland's library.
Architectural Description: Albany
Melbourne House, the present mansion of
Albany, was a well-designed and sensible building,
but obviously the work of a determined adherent
to the Palladian faith who was resolved to resist
the new fashions introduced by his great contemporary, Robert Adam. Chambers's plans (ref. 132)
show a severely rectangular entrance court, and
the house had few of the interestingly shaped
rooms of an Adam design (Plates 112b, 112c, 113a).
Behind the screen-wall to Piccadilly were low
buildings for coach-houses etc., these flanking a
small square fore-court that opened, probably
through a screen of columns, to the great
court. This is the present Albany court-yard,
around which the buildings are placed in the
conventional Palladian manner, the house on
the north side dominating the attendant wings
on the east and west. Here, however, the relationship seems forced because the buildings
are awkwardly cramped by the narrow site.
The long and low east wing originally contained the great kitchen and other offices, and
there were stables in the corresponding west wing.
There are various plans by Chambers that relate
to Melbourne House, but none can be taken fully
as evidence of what was finally built except,
perhaps, for one of the principal floor, a working
plan rather than one prepared for displaying to a
patron. (ref. 133) But all the plans confirm the general
arrangement of the house, with the rooms
arranged round a central staircase compartment.
The large oblong entrance hall had a fireplace in
each end wall, the west flanked by doors opening
south to a porter's room, and north to the private
stairs. On the north side of the east fireplace was
a door to the service stairs from which there were
doors leading to two butler's pantries, one having
a bed alcove and a silver closet. Three openings
in the north wall of the hall gave access to the
great staircase, contained in a large oblong
compartment rising the full height of the building.
West of the stair compartment was a large anteroom, with a door on its south side leading through
an octagonal lobby, off which was a water-closet,
to Lord Melbourne's dressing-room. North of the
large ante-room was the library, a large room
having an elliptical bow with three windows on
to the garden. A corresponding bow formed the
north end of the state dining-room, with a
screened ante at its south end, entered from the
stair compartment. In the centre of the north
front, between the state dining-room and the
library, was the common dining-room. The
principal floor was similar in its general arrangement, with bedrooms and dressing-rooms on the
south front, a state dressing-room over the
library, the drawing-room over the common
dining-room, and the great salon over the state
dining-room. The fully dimensioned working
plan (Plate 113a) probably shows the final arrangement of this floor, with an oval ante-room on the
west side of the principal staircase. The west end
of this oval room is shown contained in a splaysided bay, presumably to be built out over the area
lighting the rooms below. The chamber storey
seems to have been skilfully planned with alcoved
bedrooms and apse-ended dressing-rooms on the
south front, and a large alcoved bedroom in each
bowed end of the north front. There were also
several large and handsomely shaped bedrooms in
the attic storey.
The Piccadilly screen and the buildings flanking the small forecourt were demolished in 1803
by Holland, but the screen is well shown in a
Soane lecture diagram and in two drawings by
Chambers. The dominant feature was the central
entrance, formed in the manner of a grand doorcase, with a rustic archway framing a straightheaded door-opening, dressed with an architrave,
a frieze carved with fluting between bucranea,
and a cornice continuing the arch impost. Above
the doorway, in the open tympanum of the arch,
rose a poppy-head urn. Against each wide pier
of the rustic arch stood an engaged Doric plainshafted column, supporting a triglyphed entablature and a triangular pediment. Chambers's
drawing in the Victoria and Albert Museum (ref. 31)
shows the entrance to Melbourne House in a
sylvan setting. The central arch and the gate
piers are composed of vermiculated rustic stones,
the arch keystone is adorned with a mask, and the
Doric frieze has metopes of Roman urns and
helmets. The elevation by Chambers in Sir John
Soane's Museum (ref. 134) (Plate 114b) depicts the arch
and piers in plain rustics; the keystone is plain
and the metope enrichments are paterae. The
lecture diagram (ref. 135) (Plate 114a) conforms with
this except that the metopes are not ornamented. On either side of the arched doorway
were wide openings for carriage gates, hung
on rustic piers. The outer piers formed stops
for the plain screen-walls, each of which had a
central doorway dressed with an architrave
broken by a keystone, a shortened frieze, and a
cornice projecting from the plain band coping of
the wall. The ironwork in front of the screen
consisted of plain railings and gates between
ornamental panels, and over the side doorways
and above the gate piers were lyre-shaped lamp
holders.
The east and west wing buildings survive, with
reconstructed interiors and slightly altered fronts
(Plate 111, fig. 70). Like the house, each front
is a tripartite composition, with a central feature
originally having three openings widely spaced in
each storey, and recessed flanking faces with
three openings more closely spaced. The
ground-storey windows are proportioned to a
double square and those above are a single square.
The simple design is carried out in stock bricks,
stone being used for the plinth and sill-band
to the ground storey, for the architrave, pulvinofrieze and triangular pediment to the central
doorway (originally a window), for the firstfloor window sills and the keystone of the
central window, for the cornice framing the brick
tympanum of the large triangular pediment of the
central feature, and for the cornice and blockingcourse of each flanking face.
Compared with the wings, the front of the
house seems huge in scale (Plate 111, fig. 70).
Three storeys high above the semi-basement,
and seven windows wide, it is a composition
with a central feature, three windows wide and
crowned with a triangular pediment, flanked by
slightly recessed faces each two windows wide.
The brickwork is of a finer quality and different colour to that used for the wings, and
the stone dressings are appropriately more elaborate. The semi-basement, where the windows
have flat arches of gauged brick with plain
keystones, is finished with a stone bandcourse.
The round-headed windows of the ground
storey are recessed with wide margins in an
arcaded face, the brick piers being finished with
a cornice-impost of stone, and the brick arches
having plain keystones rising to the first-floor
bandcourse. A Doric porch, with plain-shafted
columns and engaged antae in front and an arched
opening in each side face, encloses the flight of
steps rising to the central doorway, where the
two-leaf door with side-lights and a radial fanlight
is set in a round-arched opening. A moulded
sill caps the brick die of the pedestal to the two
storeyed upper face, and, before alteration, was
continued unbroken below all the first-floor
windows. These are dressed with stonework, the
central window dominating with a moulded
architrave flanked by narrow pilasters with
scrolled consoles supporting a narrow frieze and a
triangular pediment. The head of the architrave
is ornamented with a draped bucraneum, the
pulvino-frieze is broken by a plain tablet and has
patera stops over the consoles, and the cornice is
dentilled. The flanking windows in the central
feature are similarly dressed, but are without
pilasters, consoles, patera stops and pediment.
The two windows in each side face are simply
dressed with an architrave, frieze and cornice.
Chambers's working detail for the central window
has a note instructing the mason to make these
simplifications when dealing with the other
windows. (ref. 136) The chamber-storey windows have
probably been enlarged and originally may have
been nearly square, and completely framed with
moulded architraves of stone. A mutuled cornice
of stone finishes the front, with a plain triangular
pediment over the central feature and a
blocking-course above each flanking face.

Figure 70:
Albany, court-yard elevations
The interior has suffered from change to a far
greater extent than the exterior. Although the
main structural walls and some of the smaller
rooms were retained, the large rooms were subdivided by Holland and his successors, and much
of the decorative work by Chambers and his
craftsmen and artists has gone. There are, however, drawings to provide sufficient evidence to
show the immense care taken to perfect the design
of the principal rooms, for some of which several
schemes were produced. The most impressive
feature was probably the principal staircase, which
can be studied in the various plans and in a very
explicit section (ref. 137) (Plate 113b). The large and
lofty compartment in the middle of the house
was an oblong in plan, some 36 feet east to
west, and 24 feet 4 inches north to south.
The stone staircase began with two short flights
rising against the north wall to meet at a central
landing. From this point a flying branch crossed
to another landing, resting on columns, in the
middle of the south side. Twin branches against
the south wall continued the stair to the east and
west arms of the first-floor gallery. The sectional
drawing, taken on a north-south line, shows
that the stone steps had bracket profiles, and that
the flying branch rested on a form of arch, possibly of cast iron, decorated with a moulding of
cross-banded reeding. The second landing rested
on Corinthian plain-shafted columns and an entablature with a frieze-tablet of griffins flanking
an urn. The balustrade, which is not shown,
was presumably of wrought iron.
The wall surfaces of the compartment were
apparently quite plain and served as a field for the
doorcases, and for the statues standing in plain
niches that were placed centrally between the
doorways, or flanking them. All the doorcases
were similar, each with an enriched architrave,
and a modillioned cornice framing a triangular
pediment above a frieze, plain on the ground floor
but ornamented with a Vitruvian scroll on the
principal floor. (fn. b) Below the gallery was a frieze of
circular paterae between paired acanthus buds, and
a narrow enriched cornice. The principal-floor
stage was finished with a frieze of anthemion
ornament, and a mutuled cornice. Above this a
plain attic rose to a simply-coffered flat ceiling with
a central lantern light of oval plan and conical
form, its low drum treated as an entablature with
a frieze decoration of festoons and pendants.

Figure 71:
Albany, early plan. Redrawn from a plan in Residential Flats, 1905, by Sydney Perks

Figure 72:
Albany, plans and section

Figure 73:
Albany, section through the Ropewalk
Although much of the original decoration was
destroyed or mutilated in the course of Holland's
reconstruction, one fine ceiling survives entire,
that of the north-west room on the first floor,
originally the state dressing-room. Chambers's
drawing for this survives, (ref. 138) and shows the design
composed round a large circular panel containing
a central motif surrounded by acanthus scrollwork, overlaid by the deep loops of a festooned
garland. An ornamental band of interlacing oak
garlands encircles this panel, and a similar but
more closely interlaced band surrounds the segmental panel in the bowed end of the ceiling. The
spandrel panels around the large circle are filled
with arabesques of acanthus scrolls sprouting from
urns.
The salon, at the east end of the north front,
was probably a splendid room, with freestanding columns placed in each corner of the
oblong body, flanking the bowed north and south
walls, but no drawings of the decoration appear to
have survived. There are, on the other hand,
several schemes relating to the screened recess at
the south end of the state dining-room, but
nothing to indicate which design was executed.
Chimneypieces and other furnishings were removed in 1803 to Renishaw Hall, Derbyshire,
where a chimneypiece, with squirrels carved in
the capitals, can be identified with one of
Paine's. (ref. 139)
Holland's twin ranges extend from south to
north and front to the Ropewalk, as the covered
passage between them is called. They comprise a
basement, three storeys of equal height containing
the sets of chambers, and a garret storey. The
basement contains kitchens etc., belonging to the
ground-floor sets, and in front extends a passage
by which servants and tradesmen can reach
the various staircases. The garret contains the
kitchens for the sets on the upper floors, and
rooms originally intended as servants' bedrooms
(figs. 71–3).
Both ranges are composed of four identical
units, each storey having one set of chambers on
either side of a staircase, and there is a single unit,
larger in scale, at the north end. Holland's drawing of March 1802 (ref. 133) shows the intended plan
of a standard set, and the very light construction
proposed for the internal walls. There were to be
two good rooms in front, both above 15 feet in
width, each having a large window of three lights,
wide between narrow, towards the Ropewalk.
The first room was a parlour, 22 feet 6 inches
deep, the second was a bedroom, 18 feet deep, and
their fireplaces were placed back to back in the
dividing wall. There were two small rooms at the
back, the first being an entrance lobby, 12 feet by
9 feet, with a corner fireplace, and the second a
small bed-or dressing-room of the same size but
without a fireplace. Between this room and the
front bedroom was a small lobby and a cupboard,
and opening out of the bedroom was a watercloset. This, like the back rooms and staircase
landings, derived daylight from one of the small
areas recessed into the back wall.
It is doubtful whether any part of the buildings
was finished exactly to this plan, for those sets
which it has been possible to inspect show important variations. Generally, the two front rooms are
linked by a wide two-leaf door, centrally placed
opposite the chimney-breasts which project from
the staircase wall and the wall dividing the sets
(Plate 119a). The entrance lobbies have generally been made smaller than was first intended, so
that the second back room is large enough to be
used as the bedroom.
The stucco-faced fronts towards the Ropewalk are very simple in design (Plate 118a),
merely a well ordered pattern of large-paned
windows, those lighting the rooms being divided
by narrow mullions into three lights, wide between
narrow, set with slight recession in plain segmentalheaded openings, those on the first floor being
furnished with iron balconies of vertical bars. The
entrance doorways are set in round-arched openings, and the fronts are finished with a simply
moulded parapet.
The buildings at the north end, fronting to
Vigo Street and Burlington Gardens, are designed
on a large scale and finished in stock brick (Plate
117a). Each has a simply detailed front, on
the inner side of which projects a wide segmental bow, rising through the lofty ground
and first floors, with a stone-framed window
of three lights in each storey. At first-floor
level is an iron-railed balcony, embracing the
bow and extending across the flat flanking face,
which is one window wide. In the ground
storey of the west building is a doorway,
with narrow side-lights and a fan-ornamented
tympanum of stucco, framed in a plain brick
arch, designed in Holland's style but possibly a
later alteration. Above it, but to the left of its
centre, is an oblong window lighting a mezzanine.
There are two superimposed windows in the firstfloor face, the square upper light also serving a
mezzanine. The second floor has two windows,
the wide one above the bowed projection being
divided into three lights. Reference has already
been made to the altered ground storey of the
east building's front, part of which is canted
back to conform with the frontage line of Vigo
Street.
The tall and large-scaled fronts of the end
blocks are in complete contrast with the tiny
pavilion-like shops that flank the Ropewalk
entrance (Plate 117). This feature remains
much as Holland designed it, although the shopfronts have been altered and the charming
'Chinese' colouring has not been perpetuated.
The drawing in Sir John Soane's Museum (ref. 140)
(Plate 116b) shows the two shops, each with
an oblong window divided by glazing-bars and
framed by wide piers painted with green panels
having yellow borders on a grey ground, the
slightly recessed stallboard being similarly decorated, and the fascia painted with blue and green
panels between yellow frets. At the extremities of
each shop-front are slender colonnets, supporting a
tent roof that slopes back to the low gable end of
the Ropewalk, and to the stucco-faced upper
storey of each shop, containing a single window
and finishing with a low pyramid roof of lead.
The covered way of the Ropewalk, with its tentshaped ceiling of narrow boarding, its bracketended fascias and simple diagonally braced
'Chinese' railings extending between the widely
spaced posts, all glossily painted, gives to this part
of Albany the atmosphere of a perpetual garden
party (Plate 118b).
To flank the entrance from Piccadilly to the
court-yard, Holland designed matching buildings
containing shops with a mezzanine floor, and two
storeys of living accommodation (Plate 116a).
Each building had two wide shop-fronts facing
to Piccadilly, divided and flanked by three
narrow piers with panelled shafts, projecting
to carry, at the level of the mezzanine windows,
finely-modelled spread eagles of Coade stone. (fn. c)
These eagles appeared to support a continued
balcony of stone, having an iron railing of
vertical bars topped with a key-fret border.
The upper part of the front was faced with
stock bricks and contained two tiers of four
evenly spaced windows set in plain openings. The
tall casements of the first floor opened to the
balcony, and there was a narrow sill-band extending beneath the sash windows of the attic. The
return front of each building was four bays
wide, with shop-windows in the ground storey
and blind recesses in the floors above. Both
fronts were finished with a cornice of bold projection and a plain parapet. It is regrettable that
these handsome matching buildings have been
replaced by two architecturally unrelated structures.
List of Notable Residents up to 1961 (fn. d)
Ackland, Rodney, playwright, 1944–51
Acton, Sir John (later first Baron), historian, 1865
Acworth, Sir William, 1907–25
Adam, William, ? attorney-general, 1805
Agar-Ellis, Hon. Leopold, M.P., 1861–4, 1881–4
Ainslie, Sir Robert, baronet, 1814–23
Althorp, Lord, later third Earl Spencer, 1804–14,
1821–35
Annesley, Major-General Hugh, 1842
Annesley, Sir James, 1839–41, 1843–7
Anson, Viscount, later second Earl of Lichfield, 1851,
1853–4
Antrobus, Sir Edmund, baronet, 1865–6
Arbuthnot, Major-General the Hon. Hugh, 1836–68
Archdall, Captain Mervyn, M.P., 1850–2
Arkwright, George, M.P., 1846–55
Armstrong, Sir Alexander, naval medical officer, 1876–
1896
Armstrong-Jones, A. C. R., later Earl of Snowdon,
1950–2
Ashton, Sir Leigh, Director of the Victoria and Albert
Museum, 1950–2, 1954–8
Audley, twenty-third Baron, 1946–8
Austen-Leigh, Richard, author and printer, 1937–43
Bancroft, Sir Squire, actor, 1917–26
Baring, Thomas, ? financier, 1832–5
Barnard, Sir A. F., 1825–31
Barnes, Sir James Stevenson, 1836–9
Barrington, Hon. Sir William Augustus, 1898–1904
Bartlett, Sir Basil, baronet, 1945, 1949–51
Basevi, George, architect, 1819–26
Bax, Clifford, writer, 1933–41, 1944–
Bearstead, second Viscount, 1947–8
Beauclerk, Lord Frederick, 1807–11
Beecham, (Sir) Thomas, musician, 1916–19
Bellamy, Thomas, architect, 1836
Beresford-Hope, Alexander James, politician and
author, 1880–7
Bernstein, Sidney, 1939–43
Blackett, Sir Edward, baronet, 1830–1
Blake, Hon. Anthony Richard, 1845–7, 1849
Blennerhasset, Sir Rowland, baronet, 1865–6
Blond, Anthony, publisher, 1953
Borthwick, twentieth Baron, 1891–8
Bosville (-MacDonald), Colonel the Hon. James,
1857–9
Boucicault, Dion, actor, 1883–4
Bourchier, Arthur, actor-manager, 1904–7
Bourke, General John Jocelyn, 1879–95
Bourne, William Sturges, politician, 1807–8
Bouverie, Hon. Edward, 1840–3
Bowker, Sir Reginald James, Foreign Office official,
1954
Brackenbury, General Sir Henry, 1904–6
Bradshaw, Major-General Lawrence, 1812–13
Brand, Thomas, twentieth Baron Dacre, 1807–20
Brass, Sir William, M.P., 1913–16, 1920–42
Breadalbane, sixth Earl of, 1870–2
Brereton, Major-General Sir William, 1856–64
Broadwood, Henry, M.P., 1818–36
Brooke, Lord, later third Earl of Warwick, 1807–8
Brougham, Henry, later first Baron Brougham and
Vaux, Lord Chancellor, c. 1806–10 (ref. 141)
Bryant, Arthur, historian, 1936–8
Budé, General, 1804
Buller, Sir James East, 1872–8
Burdett, Sir Robert, baronet, 1867–80
Burke, Viscount, 1866–70
Burroughs, Sir William, 1825
Butt, Charles Parker, Q.C., 1876–9
Byron, sixth Baron, poet, 1814–15
Caillard, Sir Vincent, 1900–4
Campbell, Major-General Patrick, 1885–1905
Canning, George, statesman, 1807 and 1810 (ref. 142)
Carnegie, Captain the Hon. Swynfen, 1856–8
Carr-Saunders, (Sir) Alexander Morris, later Director
of the London School of Economics, 1911–13
Carter, Albert Thomas, jurist, 1926–46
Cattermole, George, water-colourist, 1838–9
Charteris, Colonel the Hon. Richard, 1855–8
Clanricarde, second Marquess of, 1875–1910
Clark, Sir Kenneth, Chairman of the Arts Council,
1955–
Clarke, Sir Geoffrey, Indian Civil Servant, 1934–40
Close, Admiral Francis Arden, 1880–1901
Cochrane, Alexander Baillie, later first Baron Lamington, 1839–44
Colborne, General Sir Francis, 1890–5
Colebrooke, Henry T., Sanscrit scholar, 1816–21
Colston, Sir Charles Blampied, 1954–
Colville, Charles Robert, M.P., 1848–51
Cook, John Douglas, journalist, 1856–68
Cope, Sir John, 1811–14
Corry, Montagu, later first Baron Rowton, 1871–3
Cotton, Thomas Forrest, physician, 1926–8
Courteney, Rear-Admiral George, 1856–62
Craigie, Mrs., the novelist 'John Oliver Hobbes', 1906
Cranstoun, tenth Baron, 1845–62
Craven, Hon. Keppel, 1811–20
Cruise, William, legal writer, 1823–4
Cunliffe, Sir Robert, baronet, 1869
Dalbiac, Sir James Charles, 1839–47
Dawney, Hon. Marmaduke, 1810
D'Azeglio, Marquess Taperelli, 1868–76
De Salis, Count Francis, 1838–9
Desart, Earl of, 1813–16
Des Graz, Geoffrey, Chairman of Sotheby's, 1939–53
De Worms, Baron Henry, politician, 1879–83
Dickinson, Robert Edmund, M.P., 1902–10
Duff, Robert William Abercromby, M.P., 1863–6
Duncan, Viscount, later second Earl of Camperdown,
1836–8
Duncombe, Thomas Slingsby, M.P., 1845–9
Edmunds, Admiral Charles, 1874–9
Ellis, Charles Rose, M.P., later first Baron Seaford,
1806–11
Elphinstone, Mountstewart, statesman, 1834–47
Erne, fifth Earl, 1932
Errington, Sir George, baronet, 1875–86
Erskine, Rear-Admiral John, 1853–4, 1858–87
Esher, third Viscount, 1961–
Evans, Dame Edith, actress, 1942–
Evershed, Sir Raymond, Master of the Rolls, 1948–51
Fergusson, Sir Ewan, 1958–
Fergusson, Sir James, baronet, M.P., 1887–9
Fermor, Hon. Frederick, 1858–60
Fisher, (Sir) Bertie Drew, 1929–35
Fitzclarence, Captain the Hon. George, 1863–4
Foley, Major-General St. George, 1861–6
Fonnereau, Thomas George, author and artist, 1837,
1839
Fox-Pitt, Major-General William, 1960–
Fraser, Sir William, baronet, 1885–98
Frere, Alexander Stewart, publisher, 1940–
Gascoigne, Major-General Charles, 1856–66
Gaunt, Rear-Admiral Sir Guy, 1924–5
Gell(e), Sir William, archaeologist and traveller, 1814–
1817
Gillett, William, banker, 1865–75
Gladstone, (Sir) John, Liverpool merchant, 1830–1
Gladstone, William Ewart, statesman, 1833–9
Glenelg, Lord, 1845–64
Graham, Rear-Admiral Charles, 1856–8
Graham, Lieutenant-General Hope, 1874–5
Graham, Sir James, baronet, statesman, 1855–8
Greene, Graham, novelist, 1954–
Grigg, Sir James, Secretary of State for War, 1955–
Guest, Montagu, M.P., 1904–9
Guest, Hon. Oscar, 1916–17
Hailstone, Rev. John, geologist, 1805–14
Haliburton, Arthur, later first Baron Haliburton,
1876–8
Hall, (Sir) Samuel, lawyer, 1881–95
Hamilton, Cosmo, dramatist and novelist, 1912, 1930
Hamilton, Patrick, novelist and playwright, 1944–51
Hanbury, Robert William, M.P., 1880
Hand, Admiral George Sumner, 1874–83
Hansler, Sir John, 1859–67
Hardwicke, John, ? London police magistrate, 1825–
1849
Hart, Charles, ? organist and musical composer, 1840–
1841
Hastings, Sir George, physician, 1917–26, 1932–43
Hastings, Sir Patrick, barrister, 1948–52
Hay, Lord William Montagu, later tenth Marquess of
Tweedale, 1870–7
Henniker, Sir Frederick, traveller, 1822–5
Herbert, Sir Thomas, 1844–6
Hesketh, Roger Fleetwood-, M.P., 1954–
Hobart, Sir Robert, 1959–
Hobart, Sir Robert Henry, 1895
Hobhouse, Sir Charles, baronet, M.P., 1918–23
Holland, Henry, architect, 1804
Hope, General Sir James, 1832–42
Horne, Alderson Burrell, actor-manager, 1918–39,
1944–53
Horsman, Edward, Whig politician, 1840
Howard, Hon. Henry George, 1869–75
Howard, Hon. James, 1841–5
Hubbard, Eric Hesketh, artist and writer, 1930–56
Huntingdon, fifteenth Earl of, 1949–51
Huxley, Aldous, author, 1936–8
Ingilby, Sir William, 1809–20
Ives, George Cecil, author and criminologist, 1895–7
James, Captain Charles, ? writer, 1804
Jodrell, Sir Neville, M.P., 1908–32
Johnson, Right Rev. H. F., Bishop of Colchester,
1898–9
Jones, Henry Arthur, dramatic writer, 1898–1902
Jones, Richard, ? actor and dramatist, 1806–8
Karno, Frederick, music-hall artist, 1917–23, 1928
Kelburn, Viscountess, 1948–
Kemp, T. R., ? founder of Kemp Town, Brighton,
1806
Kennedy, Sir Alexander, engineer, 1915–28
Kenyon, fourth Baron, 1903–27
Keppel, Admiral the Hon. Sir Henry, 1891–1904
Kerr, Robert, ? architect, 1868–9
Kesteven, second Baron, 1877–9
Kilcoursie, Viscount, later tenth Earl of Cavan, 1895–
1900
King, Sir Richard Duckworth, 1848–53
Kinnaird, ninth Baron, 1827–34
Kinnaird, Hon. Arthur, M.P., later tenth Baron
Kinnaird, 1835–43
Knoblock, Edward, playwright, 1914–25
Konody, Paul George, art critic, 1913–25
Labouchere, Henry, M.P., 1866
Lane, (Sir) Allen, publisher, 1927–37
Lane, John, publisher, 1894–1926
Law, Hon. Edward, later first Earl of Ellenborough,
1812–13
Leake, Percy Dewe, chartered accountant, 1913–49
Lee, Francis, Baron of Sicily, 1824–5
Lee of Fareham, first Viscount, 1947
Lee of Fareham, Viscountess, 1949–
Leigh, Chandos, poet and author, later first Baron
Leigh, 1813–17
Leighton, Margaret, actress, 1957
Lewis, Sir John Henry, 1835–45
Lewis, Matthew Gregory ('Monk'), author, 1810–18
Littler, Prince, impresario, 1944–55
Louth, thirteenth Baron, 1875–6
Lowther, Claude, M.P., 1901–11
Lowther, Lord, M.P., later second Earl of Lonsdale,
1830–3
Lucan, second Earl of, 1826–33
Lucan, third Earl of, 1826–30 (as Lord Bingham),
1860–1
Lucas, Reginald Jaffray, M.P., 1907–14
Lugard, General Sir Edward, 1870–8
Lugard, Major-General Sir Henry, 1871
Lustgarten, Edgar, writer, 1949–
Luttrell, Henry, wit and poet, 1804–30
Lyle, Sir Alexander Park, baronet, 1927–33
Lyle, Sir Archibald, second baronet, 1927–45
Lyttelton, fourth Baron, 1839–40
Lytton, Edward Bulwer, novelist, later first Baron
Lytton, 1835–7
Macaulay, Thomas Babington, later Baron Macaulay,
historian, 1841–56
McClean, D. F. S., Vice Chairman Daily Mail,
1960
McDonald, Hon. Dudley, 1810–40
McDonald, Major-General the Hon. James, 1848–50,
1852–6
Mackay, Hon. Alan, 1946–8
Mackay, Admiral the Hon. Donald, 1839–41
MacKenzie, James Young, Foreign Office official,
1949–53.
MacKinnon, General George Henry, 1871–5
Macnutt, Rev. Frederick Brodie, then curate of St.
James's, Piccadilly, 1901–2
Malcolm, Dugald, Vice-Marshall of the Diplomatic
Corps, 1955, 1958–
Manners, Lord Henry Charles Somerset, 1841–55
Manners, Lord John, M.P., later seventh Duke of
Rutland, 1840–50
Manners-Sutton, J. H. T., M.P., later third Viscount
Canterbury, 1847–53
Margesson, Captain Henry David Reginald, M.P.,
later first Viscount Margesson, 1924
Marshall, Howard, broadcaster, 1954
Merz, Charles, engineer, 1902–10
Mint, Sir William, 1873–5
Mirski, Prince Michael, 1904–10
Morgan, Sir Herbert Edward, 1934–7
Morshead, Sir Warwick Charles, 1854–6
Moseley, Dr. Benjamin, physician, 1804–12
Mozley, Rev. Thomas, divine and journalist, 1856–7
Muggeridge, Malcolm, journalist, 1955–6
Murray, Admiral the Hon. Anthony, 1854–66
Nathan, Sir Matthew, later Governor of Queensland,
1918–20
Nathan, Sir Robert, retired Indian Civil Servant,
1916–21
Neave, Sheffield, physician, 1896–8
Newman, Sir Lidston, baronet, 1857–66
Newton, Robert Milnes, London police magistrate,
1881
Nicolson, Hon. Sir Harold, writer, 1954–
Nicolson, Nigel, M.P., 1960–
Nolloth, Rear-Admiral Matthew, 1876–80
North, Hon. Frederick Henry, 1868–1917
Obolenski, Prince Serge, 1915–17
O'Connor, Sir Terence, M.P., 1929–37
Oppenheim, Larsa, jurist, 1900–2
Osgoode, William, jurist, 1808–24
Palmerston, Henry, third Viscount, 1808 (ref. 142)
Paulet, Lord Frederick, 1856–70
Paulet, Lord George, 1838, 1845–62
Paulet, Lord William, 1849–66
Payler, Major-General James, 1846–54
Peachy, General William, 1829–30
Pechell, Sir James, 1827–30
Petre, Hon. Albert Henry, 1881–3
Ponsonby, fourth Baron Ponsonby of Imokilly, 1861–
1866
Ponsonby, Captain the Hon. Ashley, 1856
Portsea, Baron, 1943–7
Pownall, Sir George, 1808–12
Pownall, Sir John, 1806–9
Priestley, J. B., writer, 1945–7
Pryce-Jones, Alan, literary critic, 1957–
Ramsay, Lord, later thirteenth Earl of Dalhousie, 1877
Rattigan, Terence, playwright, 1945–50
Ray, Cyril, journalist, 1943–53
Reinhart, Max, publisher, 1950–5
Rhodocanakis, Prince, 1874
Rice, Hon. William Spring, 1867–80
Rollo, tenth Baron, 1856
Rose, William Stewart, poet, 1817–19
Rougier, George Ronald, Q.C., 1944–
Rowley, Sir Josias S., baronet, 1817–24
Russell, Sir William, baronet, 1861–3
Sadleir, John,? Irish politician and swindler, 1850–2
St. Asaph, Viscount, later fifth Earl of Ashburnham,
1870–4
Saxton, Sir Charles, 1814–26
Saye and Sele, ninth Baron, 1836–45
Seaton, second Baron, 1864–88
Seton, Sir Bruce Maxwell, baronet, 1872–86
Seymour, Lord Webb, 1805–16
Shand, Sir Charles, 1881
Shaw, Sebastian, actor, 1938–41
Shortt, John, County Court Judge, 1896–8, 1900–11
Sibthorp, Colonel C. W., Tory politician, 1832–40
Siddeley, John Davenport, pioneer motor car manufacturer, later first Baron Kenilworth, 1925–38
Sligo, second Marquess of, 1810–13
Smiley, Sir John, baronet, 1922–8
Smirke, (Sir) Robert, architect, 1808–18, 1820
Smith, General Philip, 1892–5
Sotheby, Admiral Thomas, 1810–16
Stanley, Lord, M.P., later fifteenth Earl of Derby,
1851–5
Steele, Major-General Augustus, 1868–84
Stephenson, Vice-Admiral Sir Henry, 1888–93, 1900–
1904
Stern, Mrs. G. B., novelist, 1942–58
Steuart, Major-General Charles, 1862–73
Stewart, Sir John, 1923
Stone, William, 1893–1906, 1936–59
Stopford, Hon. (Sir) Frederick William, 1890–4
Storks, Major-General Sir Henry, 1857–9, 1867–74
Strode, Nathaniel, solicitor, 1848–72
Sykes, Sir Frederick Hugh, M. P., 1917–23
Talbot, Henry Fox, pioneer of photography, 1826–9
Temple of Stowe, fifth Earl, 1911–14
Templetown, second Viscount, 1851–63
Thomas, Sir Alfred Brumwell, architect, 1919–40
Throckmorton, Sir Nicholas, baronet, 1865–8
Tree, Sir Herbert Beerbohm, actor, 1904
Twisleton, Hon. Edward, 1852
Twiss, (Sir) Travers, lawyer, 1844–54
Upton, General the Hon. Arthur, 1824–53
Valentia, Lord, 1809–10
Valletort, Lord, later fourth Earl of Mount Edgcumbe, 1859
Vaughan, General Sir John Luther, 1899–1909
Vincent, General John, 1832–46
Von Alvensleben, Baron Joachim, 1912
Vos, Philip, K.C., 1938–47
Vyvyan, Air Vice-Marshall Sir Arthur Vyell, 1924–
1935
Waller, Lewis, actor, 1911–15
Walston, Baron, 1955–
Ward, Robert, ? novelist and politician, 1812–45
Warrender, Sir George, baronet, M. P., 1809
Waterhouse, Sir Ronald, 1930–42
Watkins, Major-General Westrop, 1861–4
Watson, Sir Charles, baronet, 1908–12
Webster, Sir Augustus, baronet, 1858–62
Welby, Sir Alfred, 1936–7
Wheeler-Bennett, (Sir) John, 1929–37, 1954–5
Whitbread, William, ? M. P., 1818–24
Wigram, Major-General Godfrey, 1900–8
Wilmot, Sir John Eardley-, baronet, M. P., 1837–40
Wilmot-Horton, Sir Robert, baronet, 1839–43
Winchester, fourteenth Marquess of, 1871–87
Wingfield, Major-General John, 1876–89
Wolff, Sir Henry Drummond, politician and diplomat,
1864–6
Wollaston, Admiral Charles, 1826–49
Wood, (Sir) George A., Major-General, 1809–10
Wood, Rear-Admiral Sir James A., 1816–29
Wood, Sir Mark, 1809–29
Wynne, Sir Trevredyn Rashleigh, engineer, 1916–39