CHAPTER XII
The Bedford Estate outside the Parish of
St. Paul
The lands which the Earls of Bedford
acquired in the vicinity of Covent Garden
in the sixteenth century were (from 1542)
all in the parish of St. Martin in the Fields. In
1646, when the new parish of St. Paul was formed
out of part of St. Martin in the Fields, the
nucleus of the Bedford estate, comprising the
Piazza and the adjacent streets together with the
curtilage of Bedford House, was transferred to the
new parish, which formed an enclave almost
entirely surrounded by the remaining portions of
St. Martin in the Fields. Most of the outer portions of the Bedford estate remained in St. Martin
in the Fields, and their history is therefore only
described in outline in this volume. (fn. a)
These outer portions of the estate formed four
strips of land bounded on their outer sides, on the
north by Long Acre, on the east by Drury Lane,
on the south by an irregular line shown in fig. 1,
and on the west by St. Martin's Lane. All of
these strips were outside the brick wall with
which the third Earl enclosed the central nucleus
of his estate in c. 1610. They were haphazardly
developed for building some years before the
planned layout of the centre of the estate began
in the 1630's, and by 1700 a large proportion of
these outlying parts had been granted away in fee
farm subject to the payment of small perpetual
ground rents. By so doing the Earls and Dukes of
Bedford lost almost all control over these areas,
and by the twentieth century even the ground
rents had in most cases been extinguished by a lump
sum payment from the owners of the fee farms.
The effect upon Bedfordbury (in the western
strip) of this absence of all restraint over either
building or the mode of occupation was described
in 1887 by the steward of the ninth Duke of
Bedford's London estates: 'Every grantee became
his own freeholder and his plot of land was under
his own absolute control, with this result: that
Bedfordbury commenced its career by every man
doing what was right in his own eyes in the way
of building. A number of alleys came into
existence, and instead of a single house being
put upon a single plot … a man would put two or
three or four on it, may be half-a-dozen houses, or
cottages, or anything he pleased upon it, and that
went on in perpetuity; and from the time those
grants were made until a few years ago … Bedfordbury gradually became one of the worst dens
in London.' (ref. 1) These remarks could almost equally
well be applied to the strips of fee-farm land on the
other three sides of the Bedford estate, though on
the north and south sides the decline did not proceed to quite such depths as in Bedfordbury. A
glance at the maps reproduced on Plates 7, 8, 9
reveals the contrast between the layout of the
four fee-farm strips and the central leasehold area,
and even now, after a century of rebuilding and
street improvement, much of the original uncontrolled seventeenth-century street pattern still
survives in the courts between St. Martin's Lane
and Bedfordbury, and between Floral Street and
Long Acre.
West Side: St. Martin's Lane,
Bedfordbury, New Row
The east side of St. Martin's Lane, from Long
Acre to a point south of William IV Street,
formed the western boundary of the convent
garden and, later, of the Bedford estate.
The frontage to St. Martin's Lane was possibly
built up soon after the Russells acquired the estate
but at the close of the sixteenth century most of the
area between St. Martin's Lane and the pales
surrounding the central portion of Covent Garden
was still open ground, albeit divided by fences into
garden plots let to various tenants. One of the
early leases has survived. It was made in 1598 and
the lessee, William Dawson, a joiner, covenanted
to plant three stocks of fruit trees in the garden
and a quickset hedge on his eastern boundary. (ref. 2) In
1609 two garden plots, at the northern end near
Long Acre, were sold in fee farm by the third
Earl of Bedford to Robert, Earl of Salisbury, (ref. 3) and
a range of stables was built there. The accounts
suggest that this was a sizeable building, for Simon
Basil, the King's Surveyor, certified one bill, (ref. 4)
Robert Lyming, the architect of Hatfield
House, designed at least part of the building, (ref. 5)
and Richard Ryder performed some of the carpenter's work. One of Ryder's tasks was to make
a door 'into the Comon garden for the groomes to
goe to watter their horses in the Long acr'. (ref. 6)
At some time before 1627 Bedfordbury, a
passage of 17 feet 6 inches in width, was
built parallel with St. Martin's Lane. (ref. 7) As in
the case of Hart Street and Long Acre a few
years later, the creation of the new street, parallel
with the old, encouraged the building of narrow
alleys between them. Little Chandos Street,
Dawson's Alley and King's Arms Stable Yard
were in existence by 1627 (ref. 8) and Goodwin's Court,
Hop Garden, Kynaston's Alley, Mays Buildings
and Turner's Court were added subsequently.
Some of these alleys still exist.
By 1635 little open space survived. A survey
of that date shows that most of the area was
covered by houses, shops, sheds, workshops and
stables. Many houses were entirely of timber,
although some had brick fronts, and one or two
had exterior staircases. (ref. 9) The fourth Earl made
no attempt to include the area in his scheme of
development for the central part of Covent
Garden, and instead he virtually abandoned his
interest in it by granting away all the former
garden plots between Salisbury stables and Little
Chandos Street in fee farm in 1635 and 1636. (ref. 10)
The only influence which the central development exerted over this outer western area was the
building of New Street (now New Row) between
King Street and St. Martin's Lane. This was
begun in 1635 or 1636, but in June of the latter
year the Privy Council ordered the fourth Earl
of Bedford to stop building there. (ref. 11) Over six
months later the Earl wrote to the Council,
explaining that he had ordered the workmen to
desist, and had no knowledge that the ban had
subsequently been broken. He had in any case
sold the ground, and the 'handsome' new street
conformed with his licence to build in Covent
Garden, was 24 feet broad and replaced 'a
noysome Alley' which had had an entrance only
4 or 5 feet wide. (ref. 12) What he did not point out was
that it was the only street providing reasonable
access between St. Martin's Lane and the Piazza,
and that the person to whom he had sold the
ground was his own agent, John Trenchard.
About fifteen months later Trenchard obtained
the Privy Council's permission to finish New
Street under the authority of the letters patent
granted to the Earl for Covent Garden. (ref. 13) The
street was eventually completed and, no doubt, provided a stimulus for the building of Rose Street
in defiance of the Privy Council (see page 268).
By the latter part of the nineteenth century the
absence of the controlling influence of a single
ground landlord had reduced the Bedfordbury
area to such squalor that in 1876 the Metropolitan Board of Works decided to promote a
scheme for its renovation. A report presented to
the Board in that year recorded that many of the
courts off Bedfordbury were less than 4 feet
wide and the houses were so dilapidated that in
some instances the roofs had fallen in. 'The
passages in the houses were so narrow that the
raising of one's elbows would cause them to
touch the walls on each side, and so dark that even
when the morning sun was shining brightly
outside it was necessary carefully to feel every
step taken.' The terrible sanitary conditions
were made worse by 'the filthy habits of the
occupants', and one house of six rooms was
occupied by thirty-three persons. In 1877 the
Board obtained the royal assent to a clearance
scheme and the area east of Bedfordbury was razed
three years later. Bedfordbury and the narrow
part of Chandos Street were widened to 30 feet
and 45 feet respectively and a new street 30 feet
wide was made connecting Bedfordbury to Bedford Court. The net cost to the Board was
£75,510. Most of the remaining land was sold
in 1880 to the trustees of the Peabody Donation
Fund and dwellings for 720 persons were erected
by 1881. (ref. 14)
North Side: Long Acre
Long Acre takes its name from the field which
became attached to Covent Garden in the Middle
Ages (see page 19) and marks the boundary
between the Bedford estate and the estate of the
Mercers' Company. It was laid out in about
1615 between the two estates, 24 feet being
given up for the roadway by the third Earl of
Bedford. Some 134–140 feet to the south stood
the brick wall erected in c. 1610 by the Earl
around the central part of Covent Garden, that is,
along the line now occupied by the north side of
Floral (formerly Hart) Street. The area between
the street and the wall was let out in garden plots,
the tenants being required to pitch, pave and clean
Long Acre and, if they built houses, to do so
'substantiallie and stronglie and in a convenient
decent and comelie forme, and three stories in
heigth (yf not above) and the forepart or front
thereof at the Least of brick'. (ref. 15) One large parcel
of ground was sold in 1618 to the Earl of Pembroke by Francis, Lord Russell, later the fourth
Earl of Bedford (ref. 16) (and was acquired in 1650 by
the Earl of Salisbury. (ref. 17) ) In 1630 the development
of the street was still incomplete and its unsatisfactory condition attracted the attention of the
Privy Council. The outcome was the licensing
of the fourth Earl's whole building enterprise in
Covent Garden (see page 26). In Long Acre a
number of building leases were granted in the
early 1630's by the Earl under agreements similar
to those operating on the rest of the estate, (ref. 18) and
Hart Street was laid out along the south side of
the third Earl's brick wall, with James Street in
the centre linking it with Long Acre. Both new
streets are mentioned, but not by name, in deeds
of 1632 and 1633. (ref. 19) By 1635 the ground between
Long Acre and Hart Street had been covered by a
variety of brick and timber buildings—stables,
sheds, workshops and houses—and only one plot,
'handsomely plainted with trees and flowers',
remained undeveloped. (ref. 9)
In 1635 and 1636 the fourth Earl granted in
fee farm several sites between Long Acre and
Hart Street (so far as can be judged, excluding
those on which building had taken place recently)
and thus abrogated control over their subsequent
development. (ref. 20) One such development attracted
the attention of the Privy Council in 1638 and
was referred to Inigo Jones. The property concerned was the 'handsomely plainted' garden
between Long Acre and New Street (now New
Row). After being granted in fee farm in 1635
it had changed hands and been parcelled out.
Several persons were concerned (including Richard Harris, a Covent Garden chapelwarden,
and Nicholas Stone, master mason of the King's
Works) but John Ward, citizen and girdler, was
singled out by the Privy Council. (fn. b) According to
Inigo Jones, Ward had designed to make a
communication from Long Acre towards Covent
Garden by means of an alley about 9 feet wide
extending south (to be called White Rose Street),
which was to open into a second alley extending
east, about 18 feet wide (to be called Red
Rose Street), and, if possible, to continue the
second alley southwards over ground which did
not belong to him. (ref. 22) Jones thought that Ward
would not be able to buy the land which he needed,
and complained about 'the pestering of such
places with Allyes of meane houses having but
one way into them, and no other to goe out',
and the Privy Council, 'disliking the desine',
ordered Ward 'to disist'. (ref. 23) However, the northern
and east-west arms of what is now Rose Street
had already been built, and were allowed to
remain. The scheme was finally completed in
1640, by Richard Harris, who had bought the
land he needed from Ward in the previous year. (ref. 24)
Harris's development required the collusion of
the Earl of Bedford, who 'did condiscend' that
Harris should build the southern arm of Rose
Street to connect with the recently opened New
Street. (ref. 25) It evidently proved an ill speculation
for Harris, who in 1647 was complaining that he
had entered into it 'most unfortunately … with
two Thousand pounds Losse, to the utter ruyne
and undoeing of [him], his wife and Children'. (ref. 26)
The contorted remains of Rose Street still survive
as a monument to speculators' folly, and the
ineptness of Charles I's Privy Council. (fn. c)
Rose Street was not the only 'pestering' in this
northern part of the estate. Whereas before the
formation of Hart Street and James Street there
was no communication at all between Long Acre
and the rest of Covent Garden, thereafter numerous alleys were cut through between Long Acre
and Hart Street, some on land granted in fee farm
by the fourth Earl or his successor the fifth Earl
(later the first Duke) in the 1650's. (ref. 29) Those
shown on Rocque's map (Plate 7) include Conduit
Court (named after Leonard Cunditt, a speculator,
and by the side of which stood a bagnio), (ref. 30) and
St. John's Court (named after a lessee, Mary,
Lady St. John). (ref. 31) Several of these alleys still
survive. Bow Street, however, remained shut off
from Long Acre until 1792–3, (ref. 32) and the opening
which was then formed was very narrow, the
present width at the northern end dating only from
1835. (ref. 33)
By 1660 only a few houses in Long Acre
remained within the Bedford estate. When some
of these were rebuilt in the 1670's and 1680's the
Earl of Bedford's leases stipulated that they should
conform to the standards which had been laid
down for 'second-rate' houses in the Act of
Parliament of 1667 for the rebuilding of the City
after the Great Fire. (ref. 34) At the time of the sale of
the estate in 1918 the only houses in Long Acre
which still belonged to the eleventh Duke of
Bedford were all east of James Street.
East Side: Drury Lane
No part of Drury Lane lies within the parish of
St. Paul, Covent Garden, but the west side
between Long Acre and Aldwych, which is in the
parish of St. Martin in the Fields, was the eastern
boundary of the Bedford estate. The street marks
the line of an ancient thoroughfare first recorded
in 1199, when it was described as an 'old' way. (ref. 35)
During the thirteenth century it was known as
'Aldewichstrate' (ref. 36) but by the early sixteenth
century it was called 'Foscue' or Fortescu Lane (ref. 37)
in allusion to the Fortescus, who had held adjoining lands (i.e. the convent garden, Long Acre
and the Mercers' Company property called
Elmfield). (ref. 38) The present name of the street
came into use in the latter part of the sixteenth
century, when the Drury family lived at Drury
House on the east side of the street. (ref. 39)
The development of the Earl of Bedford's
ground between Drury Lane and the central
great pasture of Covent Garden followed the
same pattern as on the north and west sides in
Long Acre and St. Martin's Lane. The frontage
to Drury Lane began to be built up in the early
years of the seventeenth century, and plots in the
rear were let to tenants for gardens. (ref. 40) Although
there were one or two fine houses fronting Drury
Lane, and a few built entirely of brick facing
Little Russell Street, the majority of buildings
were small and of poor standard, built of timber
or timber and brick, on very confined curtilages.
There were also many stables. (ref. 41)
Alleys soon began to be built between the
street frontage and the line of the brick wall
which enclosed the central area of Covent Garden.
The southernmost, known as White Hart Yard
and later as White Hart Street (Plate 53c, 53d),
marked the estate boundary and was older than
the others; during the Middle Ages its eastern
end probably marked the site of a gate leading
into the convent garden (see page 19). White
Hart Yard must certainly have been in existence
by 1586, the date at which Bedford House was
built, for it provided the only means of access
to the stables of the house. It also communicated
with the back premises of the White Hart Inn
in the Strand, which had been in existence since
at least 1550. (ref. 42)
Vinegar Yard is first mentioned in 1635 (ref. 43)
when it had evidently been in existence for some
years. Little Russell Street originated as a passage
leading into the central pasture; there was a gate
at its west end in the brick wall built in c. 1610
to enclose the central area. (ref. 44) Red Lion Court
(on the site of Broad Court) probably originated,
at some time before 1618, as the stable-yard of a
tavern. (ref. 45)
Many plots on the east side of the estate,
between Bow Street, Brydges (now Catherine)
Street and Drury Lane were granted away in fee
farm by the fourth and fifth Earls of Bedford
between 1635 and 1659. Their successors therefore had no control over these properties, which
quickly degenerated in much the same way as
Bedfordbury. In the first half of the eighteenth
century the Drury Lane neighbourhood was a
dangerous place to visit by night, empty houses in
the locality of the theatre being often taken by the
professional gamesters and sharpers who battened
on unsuspecting playgoers. (ref. 46) By the end of the
nineteenth century some of the worst social conditions in the whole of London existed in the
streets to the east of Drury Lane, but on the west
side too there was a good deal of poverty. (ref. 47) The
social regeneration of the area between Drury
Lane and Bow Street and Catherine Street was
not achieved until c. 1899–1900, when the
eleventh Duke of Bedford bought back a number
of properties which his predecessors had sold
more than two centuries previously. The street
layout was then improved by the closure of half-adozen courts and the extension of York (now
Tavistock) Street eastward to Drury Lane. Rehousing was undertaken by the London County
Council, which erected several blocks of flats
here.
South Side
The southern boundary of the Bedford estate
coincided for much of its length with the southern
boundary of the convent garden, but in the middle
it included Friars Pyes and projected south as far
as the Strand (see fig. 1 on page 20). The
history of Friars Pyes, on which Bedford House
and part of Cecil House were erected, is discussed
on pages 21–2.
Most of the property on the south side of the
estate to the east of Cecil House, where Exeter
Street was later built, was sold in 1561 to Sir
William Cecil to enlarge his garden. (ref. 48) South of
White Hart Yard, only a small piece of the estate
adjoining Eagle Court was retained, the rest
being granted away in fee farm between 1638 and
1657. (ref. 49)
West of Bedford House, the property on the
south side was let as additional garden ground
during the latter years of the sixteenth century
to the occupants of houses on the north side of the
Strand. (ref. 50) These garden plots were at first divided
from the rest of the Bedford estate by a fence and,
from c. 1610, by the brick wall which was erected
around the central pasture, and which extended
along the south side of the line of Maiden Lane.
Vine Street, a lane 12 feet wide, parallel with
and to the south of Chandos Street (see Plate 7),
was in existence by 1627. (ref. 8) By 1635 the buildings
on either side of Vine Street were in a dilapidated
condition and included many stables and workshops. (ref. 9) The greater part of this neighbourhood
was granted away in fee farm between 1635 and
1658.
When the parish of St. Paul was established in
1646 part of Cecil House garden, the curtilage of
Bedford House, the ground on the south side of
Maiden Lane and part of that on the south side of
Chandos Street were transferred to the new parish.