favoured guests. The Minstrel’s Gallery is carved and panelled, and ornamented in the true old fashion, with the antlers of stags—memorials of the chase. There is no ceiling; the roof and rafters are exposed to view; the fireplaces are large; and the walls are wainscoted all round, to a certain height. From this great hall, at the upper end, in the corner on the left hand, are two passages; one opening upon the terraces in the garden, inviting the guests to refresh themselves; and the other leading to the grand staircase, and the principal apartments above.
“This staircase is formed of large blocks of stone; which can hardly be said to be
either jointed or joined, and from the top of it, on the right, you enter what we should now call a drawing-room, hung with arras, and having a large bow-window as the only light to it, at one corner, and a little door at the other, behind the arras, leading into the gallery just mentioned, which goes round two sides of the hall. This room, however, (whatever name we might now give it) was called theDining-room, and probably had that appellation because the lord of the mansion did, even originally, on some particular occasions,hereentertain a few of his visitors of high dignity and rank; and because afterwards, in latter ages, it became more commonly appropriated to that purpose, when greater distinction was ordinarily made between the guests.”
This room is low; the ceiling is divided by five beams, which were once gilt and otherwise decorated. It has a rich cornice, and the walls are covered with oak wainscoting. It contains a fine oriel window, decorated with arms, emblems of the chase, and royal portraits, said to be those of Henry VII. and his queen, whose son, Prince Arthur, as we have seen, was partly educated here. In this room is a portrait of the king’s jester, “Will Somers.” Under a carving of the royal arms is the following pithy exhortation, in old English,Drede God and honor the King; a right good old-fashioned mode of exhibiting moral precepts, a custom more honored in the observance than the breach.
“On the left of the passage, at the head of the great stairs, you ascend again by five or six enormous semicircular steps (framed of solid masses of timber, as ill joined as the stone steps), to a fine long gallery, 110 feet in length, and 17 in width, which is now all wainscoted, in a curious manner, with fine oak, the frieze being adorned withboars’ heads,thistles, androses. This wainscoting, though modern in comparison with the antiquity of the house, is yet become in these days very ancient, and conveys an excellent idea of the magnificence of the intermediate ages. There is a great square recess in the midst of the gallery, of fifteen feet by twelve, besides several great bow-windows; and the whole puts one very much in mind of the galleries in the old palaces in France, so often mentioned by Sully and the French historians.”
This magnificent Gallery, or ball-room, is said to have been erected in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. It occupies the whole south side of the inner court. Its narrowness seriously impairs what is otherwise a very beautiful design: its height is fifteen feet. The floor is of oak, respecting which tradition gives a curious story; to the effect
From a drawing by T. Allom.Day & Son, Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
From a drawing by T. Allom.Day & Son, Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
From a drawing by T. Allom.Day & Son, Lithʳˢ to The Queen.
that the boards were all furnished fromonetree that grew in the garden, and that its roots were cut into the circular steps by which entrance to the gallery is gained. The windows contain the armorial devices of the successive owners, and those of Prince Arthur. The ceiling is extremely beautiful, graceful, and elegant, in a high degree,
and is a fair specimen of an age that, more than any other, produced wonderful designs of this description. The architecture of Elizabeth and James had nothing to shew more beautiful than its ceilings. From this gallery a short passage leads to a room named by Mr. King “My lord’s parlour,” but on insufficient authority. From this apartment there is a passage, through ill-framed doors, to a flight of stairs, leading down to the principal terrace of the garden.
The “garden at Haddon” has been time out of mind a treasure-store of the English landscape-painter; one of the most favourite “bits” being “Dorothy Vernon’s walk,” with the door out of which tradition describes her as escaping to meet her lover, Sir John Manners, with whom she eloped.[15]
“All these rooms, except the gallery, were hung with loose arras, a great part of which still remains; and the doors were concealed everywhere behind the hangings, so that the tapestry was to be lifted up to pass in or out; only for convenience there were great iron hooks (many of which are still in their places), by means whereof it might occasionally be held back. Few of these doors fit close, and wooden bolts, rude bars, and iron hasps, are in general their best and only fastenings. Besides the gallery, the dining-room, and these three apartments, there were only two others, and those but small ones, which could be said to belong at all to the principal suite. One of these apartments, however, is very remarkable; having an odd cornice, with a deep quadruple frieze, three or four feet in depth, if not more, formed of plaster, and adorned with a running foliage of leaves and flowers, in four compartments, like bands, or fillets, one above another. The room is hung with arras, as the others are; but from a quaint sort of neatnessappearing in the whole of it more than in them (we quote again from Mr. King), “I am much inclined to call itmy lady’s chamber. There is, behind the tapestry, the door I mentioned, leading to a steep flight of narrow steps, which descend into the great court, not far from the arch belonging to the chapel, and which gave her an opportunity of going thither rather a nearer way than the rest of the family, and without crossing so much of the great court. All the rest of this great pile of building (containing another large square court besides that we have been speaking of) is filled with small trifling apartments, not one of which deserves description, but which formed a labyrinth almost as inextricable as that of Crete, and which could be of no use but to lodge a vast host of dependents, retainers, and servants.”
The Chapel is placed at the south-west corner of the Hall. It is of great antiquity, and
contains many objects of interest, although it is of comparatively small size. It has a body and two aisles: the pulpit and reading-desk are on the left side. The pews of the family are high, of rich old oak, which was originally gilt. There is, also, a rich Gothic window, which formerly contained much painted glass, of old date, part of which was stolen some years ago. The roof was reconstructed in 1624 by Sir George Manners. Part of the chapel is exhibited in the appended engraving.
One remark only we have space to add. The evil hands that have fallen upon so many of our national edifices have spared Haddon; the ruthless improvements of “classic Goths” have been forbidden here. This we owe to the noble house of Rutland: who claim, therefore, a debt of gratitude alike from those who love nature and those who venerate antiquity.
W. Walton, Del et lith.M & N Hanhart Lithogʳˢ.HARDWICK HALL, DERBYSHIRE.
W. Walton, Del et lith.M & N Hanhart Lithogʳˢ.HARDWICK HALL, DERBYSHIRE.
W. Walton, Del et lith.M & N Hanhart Lithogʳˢ.
HARDWICK HALL, DERBYSHIRE.
Hardwicke Hallis situated about six miles from Chesterfield, and the same distance from Mansfield, in the picturesque and beautiful shire of Derby. The name does not occur in Domesday Book: Hardwicke, at the Conquest, formed part of the manor of Steinesby, which was granted to Roger of Poictou; by King John it was transferred to Andrew De Beauchamp; in 1258 it passed to William De Steynesby, whose grandson, John, died possessed of it in 1330. Soon afterwards, the family De Hardwicke were here established, and remained in possession for six generations: their pedigree closes with Elizabeth Hardwicke, the wife of Sir William Cavendish; and Hardwicke, with its princely domains, has continued in the possession of her lineal descendants, through the noble family of Cavendish, to their representative, the owner of the Mansion and Estate, His Grace the Duke of Devonshire and Baron Cavendish of Hardwicke.
Previous to the erection of the present Hall, a still more magnificent structure existed here; but, from vestiges of the ruins which yet remain, its date is not placed at a very remote period from that of the building we describe, which was erected between the years 1590 and 1597, by the lady of Sir William Cavendish, then the relict of the Earl of Shrewsbury.[16]The character of the founder is thus recorded by Lodge:—“She was a woman of a masculine understanding and conduct; proud, furious, selfish, and unfeeling; who lived to a great old age, and died immensely rich, without a friend;” Fuller writes of her as “a woman of undaunted spirit;” while her monument, in All Saints’ Church, Derby, describes her as “beautiful and discreet.” She was the wife of four husbands—but had issue by only one, the founder of the famous family of Cavendish.
Hardwicke has, for a very long period, derived romantic interest from the popularbelief that it was one of the prisons of the lovely and persecuted Queen of Scots. It is, however, certain, that although for a time in the custody of the Earl of Shrewsbury, she never was immured at Hardwicke, her prison having been one of the Earl’s “strong castles at Sheffield;” where she passed twelve weary years in “melyncholy and grefe,” in “sickness and despair”—the victim of unceasing suspicion, “in the hopeless monotony of sedentary employment, with an impaired constitution and a restless mind”—treated with so much severity by the Countess as to extort from the more humane Earl, in one of his petitions to the Queen, a complaint against his “wyked and malysious wyfe.”[17]
The House, which has undergone no material change since the time of its erection, according to Lysons, “exhibits a most complete specimen of the domestic architecture which prevailed among the higher ranks during the reign of Queen Elizabeth;” and it remains in its original state, “with little or no alteration.” The Poet Gray, adopting the popular error, pictures it as so primitive in character that “one might think the Scottish Mary was but just walked down into the Park;” and Mrs. Radcliffe, who described the mansion at some length in her “Tour to the Lakes,” (1795,) notes the “proud, yet gentle and melancholy look of the Queen as she slowly passed up the Hall,” and contrasts it with the “somewhat obsequious, yet jealous and vigilant air” of my Lord Keeper Shrewsbury.
The name of the Architect who designed and superintended Hardwicke is unknown; “Gerard Christmas, John Thorpe, and the Smithsons, father and son, who built Wollaton Hall, in the vicinity, present a probable claim to this monument of their professional talents.” It is built of stone, and round the top is a parapet of open work, in which frequently appear the initials of the founder—E. S.—“memorials of the proud Dame’s vanity.” The principal front comprehends two hundred and eight feet in extent.
The structure crowns the summit of a small hill, that commands an extensive view of the adjacent country, and overlooks a valley of vast extent, which combines every component of the best English scenery. The eminence rises somewhat abruptly but very gracefully, and terminates in a terrace, from whence the prospect is inconceivably grand and beautiful. Looking over the tops of magnificently grown oaks and yews, and other forest trees, with which the slopes, immediately beneath, are thickly studded, the eye ranges over a wide-spreading landscape, to which Nature has been abundantly bountiful; and the whole is bounded by the far-famed Peak.
The mansion is of great extent—massive and firm in construction; solemn and stately grandeur is the great characteristic of the time-honoured pile; its general form is square; at each corner is a high tower, square also. The exterior retains all the peculiar features of the age of its erection. The Entrance Hall is large, and fitted up with oak wainscotting and rich old tapestry—said to have been woven from the designs of Rubens. It contains a statue, by Westmacott, of the unhappy Queen whose melancholy history is so intimately associated with that of the founder of Hardwicke. The Minstrel Gallery is still there, recalling the days of its ancient hospitality and festivity. The litho-tint print, from a drawing by Mr. Lake Price, exhibits one of the finest of the apartments—the State-room, or Presence-chamber; the walls are partly of wainscot and partly hung with tapestry—an adornment with which the rooms at Hardwicke are profusely enriched. The cabinets, chairs, and other articles of furniture, are in admirable keeping; and among them is a large table of the time of Elizabeth, curiously inlaid with an odd mixture of heraldic badges, musical instruments, and games. The State-bed shown in the centre of the picture was brought hither from Chatsworth; it is never used, but is kept “for show.” The Picture Gallery extends in length 169 feet; and is filled with family portraits. Scattered about this Gallery are
curious specimens of ancient furniture. Among them is an interesting couch, which is said to have belonged to the old House. It is of plain but elegant design: the cushions being elaborately wrought in silk and gold on velvet, that may almost be said to be falling to pieces with age.
The passages and two principal staircases are broad, massive, and commodious; here, as in all other parts of the mansion, every available space is covered with tapestry, pictures, rich carved work, or subjects in relief. The house may, indeed, be likened to a richly illuminated black-letter history; every wall tells a story, and every piece of furniture suggests one,—all being of a quaint but impressive character, and in happy unison with each other and with the genius of the place. On the whole, perhaps this famous house is, in all parts and points, as deeply interesting a relic of the olden time as can be found in England. It is a treasury of antiquities, where, in a brief hour or two, a rich store of knowledge may be gained of the size, general character, furniture, and appointments of an English mansion of the seventeenth century.
The old Hall, as we have observed, stands very close to that which, for the purpose
of distinction, is styled “the new;” although much of it remains in a tolerably safe condition, it is somewhat perilous to explore the interior. A correct idea may be formed of its present state from the annexed engraving. Some of its windows still contain the old rough glass of diamond shapes set in lead; but, for the most part, they offer free ingress and egress to the winds, and succour to the ivy that twists luxuriantly about the mouldering mullions and broken walls, reaching above the ruins of even the highest summits. The only specimens of its interior decorations now existing, are
subjects in relief over the fire-places, and the most remarkable of these is in a large room on the upper floor. We engrave one of them, taken from a lower room.
The gratitude of all who venerate Antiquity, and enjoy the refreshment derived from ancient Art, is due to his Grace the Duke of Devonshire, who freely permits the visits of those who desire to examine the two structures—the old and the new. Unceasing care and vigilance are exercised to keep them in order, and prevent as far as possible the inroads of Time. This object is not achieved without great expense; expense incurred entirely to give pleasure to others—the thousands by whom the seat of his ancestors is examined every summer. We deeply lament to add, that utterly unworthy persons occasionally obtain access to the apartments—that fellows who richly merit a flogging at the cart’s tail, have defaced many of the decorations by scrawling upon them, not only their own degraded names, but words even more deserving the epithet “infamous.”
F.W. Hulme, Delᵗ.on Stone by W. Walton. M & N Hanhart, Lithogʳˢ.FORD HOUSE, DEVONSHIRE.
F.W. Hulme, Delᵗ.on Stone by W. Walton. M & N Hanhart, Lithogʳˢ.FORD HOUSE, DEVONSHIRE.
F.W. Hulme, Delᵗ.on Stone by W. Walton. M & N Hanhart, Lithogʳˢ.
FORD HOUSE, DEVONSHIRE.
Forde House, surrounded by lofty hills, rests in the centre of a lawn of considerable extent, having at its eastern extremity a beautiful sheet of water, distant about a mile from the town of Newton Abbott, at the foot of Milbourne Down. Although this ancient and celebrated mansion is not externally profuse in architectural decoration, it affords an accurate idea of the residences of the gentry in the reign of James I. Its elevation exhibits great simplicity, with a tendency to decoration, shewing an immense improvement in the style of building, compared with the heavy and incongruous houses of the previous era; its principal front having a centre with two wings, the central
projection being ornamented with a cupola or belltower; whilst numerous large windows, having their compartments divided by stone mullions, give to it a character which time has not altered.
It was erected in the year 1610 by Sir Richard Reynell, Knt., second son of Richard Reynell, Esq., of East Ogwell. Risdon, in his “Survey of Devon,” gives the following account of Forde:—“Within the parish of Wolborough is Forde, fairly seated, which, at the surrender of such structures, was purchased by Taverick, whose heirs were wedded to Drew, Marshall, and Hayman; they alienated their estate to Sir Richard Reynell, Knt., a flourishing branch of the house of Ogwell, who has beautified the old buildings with new edifices; and having issue one only daughter, Jane, wedded her according to her worth, to Sir William Waller, Knt., descended from an ancient family in Kent.” The daughter and heiress of Sir W. Waller, Margaret, married Sir W. Courtenay, a direct ancestor of the present Earl of Devon, a nobleman universally beloved; since which period it has continued in the Courtenay family.
Respecting the interior of the house, although much has been done to render it adapted to modern habits, still much remains of its former state to give a correct idea of byegone days; its magnificent ceilings, its oaken staircase, its panelled hall, and massive doors, tend to recall those times when grandeur and security were more considered than the finished decorations of the present day. The Hall is entered by a low stone porch, which forms the central projection of the house; it is thirty feet long and twenty feet wide. It is lighted by two large mullion-latticed windows, having inserted in stained glass the arms of Reynell, Waller, and Courtenay. It is wainscoted throughout, and the fireplace stands in relief, having for its base two doric columns, which support a superstructure of smaller
columns, with elaborate decoration. The ceiling is formed into a variety of geometrical figures, and ornamented with numerous allegorical subjects, whilst a deep frieze, consisting of winged horses in plaster, meet the wainscoted sides of the Hall.
A finely carved oaken staircase, of considerable width, the balustrades of which are massive and highly decorated, leads to the Great Drawing-room, and to King Charles’ Bed-chamber. Its disused bed and antique chairs add to the interest of the place, and remind the visitor of its former illustrious occupant. It may be justly said of Forde, that it has lost little of its pristine interest by the modern alterations it has undergone.
For many years past Forde has had various occupiers. At present it is let on lease to Henry Cartwright, Esq., a gentleman much respected. In 1844, Mr. Cartwright served the office of high-sheriff, and since then has continued an active Justice of the Peace.
The family of Cartwright is among the most ancient of the British Commoners; as we find that Sir Hugh Cartwright, temp. Edward, led the van at the battle of Poictiers; and in the reign of Henry VII., 1485, by the marriage of Hugh Cartwright with Matilda Cove, four great branches sprung; one of whom, William, Captain in the Navy (temp. Charles I.), obeying the authority of his Royal Master against that of the Parliament, was by the latter deprived of his honours, and, dying in poverty, left an only son, William, the great-great-grandfather of the present occupier of Forde, who settled in Devonshire soon after the Reformation. By maternal descent, Mr. Cartwright is joint representative of the ancient and ennobled family of Anson. His grandfather, W. Anson, was first cousin of the Hon. Lord Anson, and last male branch of the Anson family. Mr. Cartwright married Miss Minet, daughter of J. Minet, of Baldwyn’s Park, Kent, Esq., and grand-daughter of Sir Charles Pole, Bart., of Wolverton, by whom he has issue Anson, Reginald, and others.
F.W. Hulme, Delᵗ.on Stone by W. Walton. M & N. Hanhart, Lithogʳˢ.SHERBORNE LODGE, DORSET.
F.W. Hulme, Delᵗ.on Stone by W. Walton. M & N. Hanhart, Lithogʳˢ.SHERBORNE LODGE, DORSET.
F.W. Hulme, Delᵗ.on Stone by W. Walton. M & N. Hanhart, Lithogʳˢ.
SHERBORNE LODGE, DORSET.
Sherborne Lodge, now the seat of Earl Digby, stands upon a rising ground, at a little distance from the ancient castle. It is surrounded by a large park, which, according to Leland, was in his time “inclosed with a stone waulle.” The Lodge is built on a singular plan, in the form of the letter H, with hexagonal towers at the four corners, and two others on each side of the centre of the principal front. The general appearance of the building is peculiar rather than picturesque; but, notwithstanding, it offers much that is interesting and worthy of admiration. The centre part is said to have been built by Sir Walter Raleigh, who, “by his merit and the royal favour,” obtained a grant of the Manor and Castle of Sherbourne, and many other lands belonging to the See of Sarum. He is said to have spent much time here, beginning “very fairly to repair the castle” (the ruins of which still remain); but, altering his purpose, “he built in the park adjoining to it, from the ground, a most fine house, which he beautified with orchards, gardens, and groves of much variety and delight,” so that for the “pleasantness of the seat and the delicacies belonging to it, it is unparalleled by any in these parts.” Notwithstanding these laudations of what Sir Walter had done, he appears to have left much of his plan incomplete.[18]Two wings were added soon after the Restoration, by the Earl of Bristol, who appears to have drawn freely on the ruins of the castle for the required materials.
The house contains many interesting and valuable pictures, chiefly portraits of remarkable historical personages. Among them is a good specimen of Cornelius Jansen; a portrait of Elizabeth, Countess of Southampton; also a portrait of Henry, first Earl Digby, by Sir Joshua Reynolds. But the most remarkable is a picture of the famous procession of Queen Elizabeth to visit Lord Hunsdon, at Hunsdon House, in Hertfordshire; she is carried in an open sedan by eight of her principal noblemen. Vertue ascribes this picture to Gerard, her majesty’s painter.
Sir Walter is said to have used unfair means to gain possession of this property, “being
charged with having persuaded Bishop Coldwell to pass it to the Crown, on his election to the See of Salisbury, after which Sir Walter obtained a grant of it;” which, however, in the end proved a snare to himself, for it excited envious and malignant feelings in his fellow-courtiers, whose machinations were not without influence in promoting his subsequent disgrace and death. In a letter to his wife, written after his condemnation, he desires her to procure his dead body, and lay it either at Sherborne or in Exeter church, by his father and mother. It does not appear that he was buried at either place.
The grounds around the Lodge and Castle ruins were laid out and “improved” by Brown, of whose skill in landscape gardening they present a fair example; of which one of the most noticeable features is a large artificial lake, formed by confining within the grounds what was formerly an inconsiderable stream, but which is now considered one of the most beautiful and extensive pieces of water in the west of England.
Sherborne contains several interesting remains, of which we have given two,—the Abbey
House (introduced above) and an old mansion in St. Swithin’s Street; the latter conspicuous for a beautiful oriel window. The whole neighbourhood is, indeed, rich in antiquities, of a rare and curious order; not the less valuable because of their association with the romantic history of one of the most remarkable men of a remarkable age; in particular we may make reference to an ancient dwelling, now a country inn, which supplies abundant evidence of former state and splendour; although now applied to “base uses” of which its founders must have had little apprehension.
J.D. Harding, Delᵗ.on Stone by W. Walton. M & N. Hanhart, Lithog{rs}.AUDLEY END, ESSEX.
J.D. Harding, Delᵗ.on Stone by W. Walton. M & N. Hanhart, Lithog{rs}.AUDLEY END, ESSEX.
J.D. Harding, Delᵗ.on Stone by W. Walton. M & N. Hanhart, Lithog{rs}.
AUDLEY END, ESSEX.
Audley End, the most celebrated of the mansions in Essex, takes its name from Sir Thomas Audley, Chancellor to King Henry VIII., to whom the Abbey of Walden and most of the lands at the west end of the parish had been granted at the Dissolution by Henry VIII.; and who is believed to have fixed his residence there, although, as Lord Braybrooke remarks in his history of this house, “the fact cannot now be established. Horace Walpole, notwithstanding, and, after him, Mr. Gough, assumed that Audley Inn was the original designation; but for this assertion no authority whatever is adduced: not to mention that many of the neighbouring hamlets are still distinguished by the names of North End, Sewer’s End, Sparrow’s End, &c.; and that similar instances frequently occur in different parts of the County of Essex.”
The manor of Walden having been originally granted to the celebrated follower of William the Conqueror, Geoffrey de Mandeville, Earl of Essex, after many mutations, again reverted to the crown, and so remained till May 1538; when it was granted by Henry VIII., with the recently dissolved Abbey of Walden, and the greatest part of the advowsons and estates belonging to that foundation, to Sir Thomas Audley, from whom are descended the Earls of Suffolk, Berkshire, and Carlisle, the Earls and present Marquis of Bristol, and the Lords Howard de Walden; besides the Earls of Binden and Lords Howard of Escrick, whose titles are extinct.
Sir Thomas Audley, a clever and crafty man, was the principal instrument in the hands of the king in effecting the dissolution of the religious houses; by which he also greatly enriched himself, for the rapacity of Henry never exceeded that of Sir Thomas, who was all his life employed in asking for grants and emoluments, under the plea of ill-paid services or absolute poverty—an excuse as disgusting as it was untrue; and nothing can exceed the fawning perseverance of his begging-letters, as printed by Lord Braybrooke in his “Historyof Audley End,” or the meanness of soul that runs throughout them, and which his lordship, with right feeling, does not do otherwise than unequivocally condemn. The first step in the king’s favour made by Sir Thomas (after he was, at the recommendation of the Duke of Suffolk, to whom he was steward or chancellor, introduced to Henry) was occasioned by his conduct as Speaker of the Long, or Black Parliament, to which office the king had caused him to be elected, which first sat in November 1529, and continuing, by prorogation, six years, effected the dissolution of all the religious houses whose revenues did not annually exceed 200l.
“To enable us justly to appreciate the importance of this measure, it must not be forgotten that by this one act three hundred and seventy-six monasteries were simultaneously suppressed, and their revenues, of the yearly value of 32,000l., placed at the king’s disposal, together with their personal property, amounting to 100,000l.; and so absolute was the monarch’s authority, and so abject the servility of his Parliament, under the guidance of their Speaker, that no opposition was offered to the bill during its progress through the House of Commons. We may easily imagine that Henry was not a little pleased with these proceedings; and Audley’s services became so necessary to him that he was, in the ensuing year, constituted Attorney-General for the duchy of Lancaster, and, in November following, made King’s Sergeant; and so rapid was his promotion, that, on the 20th of May, 1532, we find him, upon the resignation of Sir Thomas More, knighted, and appointed Keeper of the Great Seal; and, in January 26, 1532-3, Lord Chancellor. In the exercise of his new functions Audley proved as subservient to the wishes of his royal master as he had shewn himself upon all former occasions; and having, while Speaker, gratified the king, as well as the people, by passing six bills to restrain the power of the clergy, and greatly forwarded the measure of dissolving the lesser religious establishments, he now undertook the arduous task of obtaining the surrender of the more wealthy foundations; and in this enterprise his endeavours were shortly crowned with complete success; and, before the expiration of two years, the king found himself in possession of all the remaining monastic establishments, producing, with those already dissolved, an annual income, according to Hume, of 142,914l.”[19]
“To enable us justly to appreciate the importance of this measure, it must not be forgotten that by this one act three hundred and seventy-six monasteries were simultaneously suppressed, and their revenues, of the yearly value of 32,000l., placed at the king’s disposal, together with their personal property, amounting to 100,000l.; and so absolute was the monarch’s authority, and so abject the servility of his Parliament, under the guidance of their Speaker, that no opposition was offered to the bill during its progress through the House of Commons. We may easily imagine that Henry was not a little pleased with these proceedings; and Audley’s services became so necessary to him that he was, in the ensuing year, constituted Attorney-General for the duchy of Lancaster, and, in November following, made King’s Sergeant; and so rapid was his promotion, that, on the 20th of May, 1532, we find him, upon the resignation of Sir Thomas More, knighted, and appointed Keeper of the Great Seal; and, in January 26, 1532-3, Lord Chancellor. In the exercise of his new functions Audley proved as subservient to the wishes of his royal master as he had shewn himself upon all former occasions; and having, while Speaker, gratified the king, as well as the people, by passing six bills to restrain the power of the clergy, and greatly forwarded the measure of dissolving the lesser religious establishments, he now undertook the arduous task of obtaining the surrender of the more wealthy foundations; and in this enterprise his endeavours were shortly crowned with complete success; and, before the expiration of two years, the king found himself in possession of all the remaining monastic establishments, producing, with those already dissolved, an annual income, according to Hume, of 142,914l.”[19]
Henry thus acquired ample funds for the remuneration of those ministers and favourites who had been the instruments of his tyranny, and who had ensured the consummation of his grand designs; amongst these Audley, as the principal actor, was not forgotten, and he revelled in the church spoliation he had ensured his master. The rich priory of Christ Church, Aldgate, with all the church plate and lands belonging to that house, was first granted him; and afterwards many portions of the estates previously belonging to the lesser religious houses of Essex, with licenses to alienate them, of which he duly availed himself. Thus St. Botolph’s priory at Colchester, with all its revenues, the priory of the Crouched Friars in the same town, and Tiltey Abbey, near Thaxted, were added to the list of his monastic spoils, after the gifts from the king in 1538, on Sir Thomas’s application, of the rich abbey of Walden, with all the estates, manors, and advowsons thereunto attached. He was also created Lord Audley of Walden, and installed a Knight of the Garter. “Yet,” says Lord Braybrooke, “instead of Audley’s being contented withthese repeated marks of the royal favour, we are compelled to admit that every grant which he obtained encouraged him to importune the king for further recompense; and his letters, preserved in the Cottonian library, prove that, in making these applications, he was mean enough to plead poverty as an excuse, and even to assert that his character had suffered in consequence of the public services which he had been obliged to perform.” With a watchfulness for every advantage which might accrue to him, and a continued solicitation for gifts, he continued to enjoy the king’s confidence till his death, in 1544. He is buried in the church of Saffron Walden, where a plain altar-tomb of black marble perpetuates his memory.
Sir Thomas Audley left two daughters, and the youngest, dying in 1546, left the eldest (Margaret) sole heiress. She married Lord Henry Dudley at the early age of fourteen; he was arraigned for high treason in 1533, and, pleading guilty, was ordered for death; but Mary pardoned him, and restored his property. He was killed at the battle of St. Quintin’s, in Picardy, in 1557, and his widow, in the same year, married Thomas, the fourth Duke of Norfolk, dying herself at the early age of twenty-three.
The Howards thus became possessed of Audley End; but the duke’s ill-judged project of forming a matrimonial alliance with Mary Queen of Scots, under the impression that, if they both survived Elizabeth, he should eventually become king-consort of England, was a scheme which cost him his life; he was beheaded for high-treason on Tower Hill, June 2, 1572—a sentence which he bore with exemplary fortitude.
His son, Lord Thomas Howard, was the builder of Audley End. He was restored in blood by act of Parliament in 1583, and, when very young, embraced the military service, but abandoned it for success at court, where he sought every opportunity of ingratiating himself with the queen, and succeeded, in a great measure, in obtaining her countenance. During the next reign, almost the whole of his life was passed at court; and although the high and lucrative offices which he held afforded him more ample means of displaying his magnificence than those enjoyed by his ancestors, he contrived to eclipse them all in extravagance; and we are assured that in the building of Audley End alone he expended a no less sum than 190,000l.He was much honoured by King James I., and was advanced by him to the Earldom of Suffolk, and made Lord Chamberlain, and afterwards Lord High Treasurer of England. Lady Suffolk was, unfortunately, a woman of a covetous mind, and having too great an ascendancy over her husband, used it in making him a party to her extortions on persons who had business to transact at the Treasury, or places to obtain at court; and her husband was charged with embezzlement, deprived of his office, and fined 30,000l., but which was reduced by the king to 7000l.He was generally considered to have been chiefly guilty only in concealing the mal-practices of his wife, who eventually died in debt and difficulty.
From this period the history of the possessors of Audley End is a mere confused piece offamily biography, of little interest to the general reader: they seem never to have recovered the charges entailed upon them by the building of Audley End, and constant curtailments of the house and park were made by each succeeding owner up to the partition of the estates in 1747. The cost of the original building appears to have involved Lord Suffolk greatly, for we learn from one of his letters, printed in the “Cabala,” that, at the period of his committal to the Tower, he was in debt nearly 40,000l., though he had then recently sold the Charter House to Mr. Sutton for 13,000l., and disposed of his property at Aynhoe in Northamptonshire; and he died possessed of Lulworth and Framlingham Castle, and Charlton in Wiltshire, with the estates belonging to them, as well as Suffolk House in the Strand, besides the large Essex property derived through his mother, Margaret Audley. At all events the cost of the building must have been very serious, nor did the charge of maintaining it prove less formidable; so much so, in fact, that none of the possessors of Audley End, after the death of the first Earl of Suffolk, were enabled to keep an establishment suitable to the size and magnificence of the house. Earl Theophilus and his son James, the third earl, seem, indeed, to have resided there; but the latter, of whom it is not recorded that he took any active part during the Commonwealth, lived in retirement, and, after the Restoration, gladly availed himself of the opportunity of alienating the house and park to Charles II., and thus dispose of a possession which, from his being unable to enjoy it, could only be considered as a source of mortification.
At this period the house was of regal magnificence, and consisted, besides the offices, of various ranges of building, surrounding two spacious quadrangular courts; that to the westward was the largest, and was approached over a bridge across the lake, through a double avenue of limes, terminating with a double-entrance gateway, flanked by four circular towers. The apartments on the north and south sides of the principal court were erected over an open cloister, and supported by pillars of alabaster; while, on the eastern side, a flight of steps led to the entrance-porches, placed on a terrace running parallel to the great hall, which formed the centre of the building, and which is now the principal front of the mansion, despoiled as it at present is of its grand entrance-court. Beyond the hall was the inner court, surrounded by an arcade, over which were the principal apartments, the three sides of which only remain, while the chapel beyond has been entirely demolished. It will thus be seen that the present house is but a wreck of the original building.[20]
Of the original architect, Lord Braybrooke thus writes: “According to Horace Walpole, Bernard Jansen was the architect employed; but after hazarding this assertion he contrives to establish a stronger claim in behalf of John Thorpe, who built many of the houses of the nobility about that period, and whose partiality for what Walpole terms barbarous
ornaments and balustrades he especially notices; adding, that some of his vast bow-windows advanced outwards in a sharp angle, and thus actually describing a portion of the principal court at Audley End long since demolished,” but represented in our woodcut from Winstanley’s view of the original house, where one occurs at each side of the principal entrance.
Thorpe’s claim to the erection of Audley End has been further confirmed by the discovery of the ground-plan of the house, corresponding to that engraved by Winstanley, existing among the curious volume of original plans and drawings made by John Thorpe himself, formerly preserved at Warwick Castle, and afterwards in the possession of Sir John Soane. Upon this plan a variety of pencilled alterations might be traced. “And there appeared,” says Lord Braybrooke, “so strong a family likeness (if such an expression may be used) in the different elevations throughout the volume, that no doubt could be reasonably entertained as to their all being the work of the same individual. The house has always been supposed to have been commenced in 1603, and to have occupied thirteen years before it was entirely finished; and the date of 1616 still remains upon one of the gateways.”
In 1666 the house was sold to Charles II. (who liked it as well for its regal magnificence as for its convenience to Newmarket) for the sum of 50,000l.a portion being paid, and 20,000l.being left on mortgage. In 1670 the court was regularly established there, and the queen very frequently resided in the house. “Lord Suffolk and his successor, the fourth earl, seem to have resided at Chesterfield Park after the sale of Audley End, which was committed to the charge of one of the family, who held the office of housekeeper and keeper of the wardrobe, with a salary; and this arrangement continued till 1701, when the house and park were reconveyed to Henry the fifth Earl of Suffolk, upon condition of his relinquishing all claim to the 20,000l.which had remained on mortgage from the year 1668; nor is it clear that any interest had been ever paid upon it.”
The work of demolition commenced in 1721, when the three sides of the grand quadrangle, which formed so magnificent an entrance to the house, were demolished by the advice of Sir John Vanburgh, with the kitchen and offices, which occupied a considerable spacebehind the north wing of the building; and the chapel and cellars, which projected at each extremity of the gallery wing, were probably soon afterwards removed, leaving the inner court only untouched; the entire building being then in the form of an open square. In 1747, Lord Effingham, who succeeded the Earl of Suffolk, sold the house and park to Elizabeth countess of Portsmouth for 10,000l., which sum included the timber, 500 head of deer, a water-mill, and the right of presentation to the Mastership of Magdalen College, Cambridge. There was a debate at this time about pulling the house entirely down and selling the materials, and for which a valuation was actually made; or else, for converting the buildings into a silk-manufactory, for which the spacious premises and mill near the stables seemed well adapted. At this time the house was rapidly going to decay, the windows were without glass in many places, the furniture taken away, the cupola in the centre in danger of falling from every high wind, and the eastern wing with its noble gallery so unsafe that Lady Portsmouth levelled it to the ground in 1749. This splendid gallery occupied the whole of the first floor of the demolished wing, and measured 24 feet in height, 226 feet in length, and 32 feet in width, exclusive of the bow in the centre, which was sufficiently spacious to contain a full-sized billiard-table. The whole room was fitted up with wainscot, in which a profusion of ornamental carving was introduced. The Labours of Hercules were represented in oak upon the chimney-piece; and upon the stuccoed ceiling, the Loves of the Gods.
The Countess of Portsmouth at her death bequeathed her possessions, in default of issue, to John Griffin Whitwell, eldest son of her sister Anne, afterwards confirmed Lord Howard de Walden and Baron Braybrooke of Braybrooke, in the county of Northampton. This nobleman, at great expense, restored the dilapidated house at Audley End; and continued his repairs and renovations until he had succeeded in making this noble relic again habitable.
The present aspect of the house, as seen from the main road to Newmarket and