SECULAR BUILDINGS
The size of burgage plots in the medieval town
is not known but some plot widths in Saturday
Market and Wednesday Market and along
Butcher Row and Toll Gavel appear to have
been as small as 9½ to 11½ ft. (fn. 37) That coincides
with the usual size of the bays in known medieval
buildings, but whether it was an original feature
or was arrived at by subdivision is not clear.
Examples of surviving houses with single-bay
frontages are no. 13 Butcher Row, no. 11 Ladygate, and nos. 2 and 29 Saturday Market. By
contrast other known medieval buildings, such
as no. 15 Flemingate, nos. 6-8 Highgate (now
demolished), and no. 49 North Bar Within,
suggest that markedly wider frontages existed in
what may have been less commercial parts of
the town.
Exposed timber framing seems to have been
the usual form of construction for houses until
the 17th century. In 1540 Leland described
Beverley as 'well builded of wood'. (fn. 38) The most
common surviving building type has a twostoreyed range along the street, but there were
presumably many single-storeyed buildings
which for commercial or structural reasons have
not survived. Although there are several instances where there is also a range running back
down the plot, such as no. 15 Flemingate (fn. 39) and
nos. 18-24 Hengate, the White Horse inn, there
is only one, no. 11 Ladygate, where such a range
ends with a gable on to the street. (fn. 40) Back lanes
gave access to the rear of many of the houses
and it is possible that others were reached by
the narrow side passages that are still a feature
of the town, but there is no evidence for the
wide tunnel entrances found in many other
medieval towns (fn. 41) or for the development of
courtyard houses or inns. Nothing is known
about the use or arrangement of rooms within
the houses and no medieval halls have been
indentified. The house which the town acquired
for a guildhall may have had a hall, for the
surviving 15th-century twin doorways at the east
end of the later council chamber were perhaps
entrances to service rooms from a screens passage.
Where they have been seen, as at nos. 11 and
33-5 Ladygate, the plinths on which the timberframed walls rest are of chalk blocks. Later
raising of the street level (fn. 42) and the porosity of
the chalk caused the speedy decay of the lower
members of timber walls. One of the few original
ground-floor walls to have survived is at no. 49
North Bar Within, at the junction with Tiger
Lane. The plinth is below modern ground level
and the wall has fairly closely spaced studs of
relatively poor quality, with broad tension braces
at the corners and close to the centre. The upper
floor is jettied to both streets and there were
brackets below the jetty. The framing of the first
floor is similar to that below and both floors now
have an infill of coursed brick. (fn. 43) Purpose-made
wall tiles are an original feature between the
studs in several other houses, such as no. 11
Ladygate, (fn. 44) and bricks laid in a herring-bone
pattern also occur, as at no. 1 Flemingate, the
Sun inn, (fn. 45) although it is not certain that they
are original. A type of comparatively flimsy
construction has been seen in Beverley in which
timber framing was adapted to take brick infilling
with a coarse plaster coating on both sides,
finished with a coat of fine gypsum plaster on
the inside if needed. (fn. 46) No evidence of wattleand-daub infill has been found.
Most of the other recorded timber-framed
houses were jettied on the street front (fn. 47) and had
relatively thin studs, but the majority did not
have prominent bracing. The upper floor of the
street front of nos. 6-8 Highgate was unusually
elaborate in that it had a carved and moulded
bressummer, broader studs, and a mid rail. It
also retained a blocked three-light window with
traceried head and a crown-post roof. It was
probably erected in the later 15th century as part
of a longer range. (fn. 48) Other crown-post roofs have
been seen at no. 15 Flemingate, nos. 19-21
Ladygate, and nos. 30-4 Saturday Market. The
roof at no. 15 Flemingate, which is in a rear
wing, has a cambered tiebeam with small solid
braces and a carved central boss suggesting a
first-floor room of some importance. (fn. 49) At no.
49 North Bar Within joints on the surviving
tiebeams are evidence for a crown-post roof of
six bays over the range along the street. Roofs
of simpler construction and without crown posts
have been recorded on other timber-framed
buildings, for example no. 11 Ladygate, but it
is not clear whether they are evidence of lower
status or of a post-medieval date. Timber framing also survives at nos. 7-9 and 23 North
Bar Within. The pitch of the roofs and later
evidence (fn. 50) suggest that the medieval houses were
thatched, although when pantiles were in common use in the later 17th century a similar pitch
was used. Steeply pitched roofs are still to be
seen at nos. 19-21 Ladygate and no. 49 North
Bar Within.
The continuing production of brick locally
after the Middle Ages and its common use in
the later 17th century suggest that it was available
in the 16th and early 17th century, but no brick
building that can be certainly ascribed to that
period survives. In the later 17th century in
Beverley, as in Hull, there was a brief flourishing
of the style now known as 'Artisan Mannerism',
which is particularly distinctive when it is
executed in cut and moulded brick. (fn. 51) At no. 58
Flemingate there are moulded stringcourses and
the windows are surmounted by pediments
which are not supported by the flanking pilasters. (fn. 52) In a narrow passage behind no. 19
Highgate one elevation, which is dated 1671, is
divided by a series of pilasters which run up to
the eaves, and between them there are segmental
and triangular pediments which do not appear
to be closely related to the much altered openings
below them. (fn. 53) The tall pilastered elevation was
repeated in a more sophisticated form in stone
on a house in North Bar Within that was later
replaced by St. Mary's Manor. It was probably
built for James Moyser, who had a house with
14 hearths there in 1672. (fn. 54) The two-storeyed
front was seven bays long and had a prominent
central doorcase with a hood supported by brackets. The central bay projected slightly and was
surmounted by a pediment which continued the
mouldings of the prominent cornice; the cornice
was supported on the flanking bays by Doric
pilasters. (fn. 55)
The projecting central bay continued to be a
feature of Beverley houses into the early 18th
century, for example at no. 65 Toll Gavel, of c.
1703, and no. 30 Highgate. The short lived
Mannerist style, however, was replaced in the
late 17th century by houses with a much flatter
main elevation which was surmounted by a
prominent cornice of brick or wood. At the back
they often had steeply pitched gables with tucked
brickwork in what appears to be a continuation
of an older, more vernacular, tradition, but no
examples can be ascribed to an earlier date.
Newbegin House, which was probably built for
Charles Warton (d. 1714), (fn. 56) and no. 54 Keldgate
have fronts of seven bays with wooden modillion
cornices and steep roofs with dormers. Both
houses still have their original staircases with
plain square newels, elaborately moulded
strings, and turned balusters. (fn. 57) No. 54 Keldgate
also has some of its bolection-moulded panelling
and one overmantel on which there is a painting
of an imaginary landscape. (fn. 58) Similar staircases
survive in several other houses, for example no.
11 Butcher Row, no. 51 Keldgate, where there
is also bolection-moulded panelling, and no. 65
Toll Gavel.
The use of brick, even for the smallest houses,
had become general in Beverley by the earlier
18th century and it was varied only by the
limited use of stone dressings, notably for keystones, sills, and gable kneelers, and by wooden
cornices and doorcases. Much of the brick was
locally made and is pale reddish brown in colour.
Many Holderness brickmakers appear not to
have adopted a standard thickness of 3" until
late in the century, but at their best the bricks
are uniform in size and texture. They were
capable of being laid with thin mortar joints,
notably on the smarter elevations where Flemish
bond became general soon after 1700, for example at no. 7 Hengate, built between 1709 and
1713; (fn. 59) English bond continued in use in less
prominent positions for another century or more.
The even texture of the brick made it suitable
for cutting and rubbing for shaped voussoirs
which were often finished with bastard tucks.
Cornices were sometimes made of moulded
bricks, as on the fronts of nos. 9, 11, and 17 Toll
Gavel, and when painted white, presumably by
later owners, they have greater prominence.
Simpler cornices consisted of a projecting course
laid diagonally, a design which was used over a
long period, or of single bricks projecting at
intervals. For the cheapest work one or two
oversailing courses were sufficient.
Thatch was used for roofs well into the 18th
century. When houses were reroofed the cheapest alternative was pantiles, but the more fashionable plain tiling was sometimes used on those
parts of the roof visible to the public. A rebuilding lease for a house in North Bar Without
in 1731 required flat tiles for the front, as before,
but pantiles at the back, (fn. 60) and another for no. 69
Minster Moorgate in 1758 stipulated flat tiles
for the Lairgate frontage and pantiles for the
east and north fronts. (fn. 61) A house in Eastgate in
1739 had flat tiles at the front and both pantiles
and thatch at the back. (fn. 62) A more expensive
pantile, imported from Holland, had its upper
surface glazed brown or black. A tiled roof
was specified for the rebuilding of a house in
Highgate in 1744, 'if Holland tile then to be
eaved with English tile', and the roof of the
Routh almshouses, built in 1749, was to have
'blue Dutch tiles', (fn. 63) but no such tiles survive in
the town. (fn. 64) The most expensive roofing material
was Westmorland slate, which weathers to a pale
greyish-blue; it was used on the Hall, Lairgate, (fn. 65)
and Norwood House c. 1760. From the early
19th century improved communications allowed
the use of the harder Welsh slate, with a roof of
shallower pitch, but even well into the 19th
century a roof might be of slate facing the street
and of pantile elsewhere, as on nos. 2-4 Hengate.
Rooms of differing importance were distinguished by the choice of mouldings for doorways, chimneypieces, and cornices. Sometimes
the painter would grain door panels in imitation
of more exotic wood. (fn. 66) Chimneypieces might be
of marble, as at Norwood House (fn. 67) and the Hall,
Lairgate, of plain or carved wood, (fn. 68) or, from the
1770s, decorated with ornament of composition (fn. 69) or stamped metal. The plainest cornices
were of the Doric or Tuscan orders. More ornamental, the Ionic was used either with modillions,
as at no. 62 North Bar Without and no. 11 Saturday Market, (fn. 70) or with dentils, as at no. 51
Keldgate (fn. 71) and nos. 40-1 Saturday Market.
Richer still were the Corinthian and the Composite. The latter has a two-tiered modillion or
architrave moulding and was used in a front room
of nos. 39-47 North Bar Within, the former Tiger
inn. In due course a greater richness of decoration
was introduced with the use of plaster ornament,
typified by the stucco cornices at the Hall,
Lairgate, and in the library at Norwood House.
A cornice at no. 3 Hengate has a similar profile
but without the foliage enrichment. (fn. 72)
The general use of ordinary sash windows
may have come relatively late to Beverley; the
building contract for no. 31 Newbegin (Newbegin Bar House) in 1744 provided for oak sash
windows for the main front but lead and iron
casements for the rest. (fn. 73) Tripartite sash windows
of an unusual form were installed at no. 7
Hengate in the late 18th century. To allow easy
passage into the garden the box frame was
modified so that parts of the upper sashes could
rise above both the architrave and room cornice. (fn. 74) External shutters were a common feature
of houses in Beverley, and they survive at nos.
18-24 Hengate. (fn. 75) Elsewhere, some of the larger
garden windows have fixed or dummy shutters.
Single-storeyed cottages remained in demand
throughout the 18th century. (fn. 76) Sometimes an
upper floor was added along with a new and
shallower roof, as at no. 14 Hengate. Terraces
were also being built, the earlier examples having
two storeys and steeply pitched roofs, like nos.
13-17 North Bar Without, which date from the
mid 18th century. When Cross Street was made
c. 1827 it was at first intended to build threestoreyed terraces of houses there and in Register
Square. Only a few houses were built, however,
along with several public buildings. (fn. 77) In courts
behind the older streets there were also groups
of two- or three-storeyed houses with a single
room on each floor, as at no. 38 North Bar
Within.
The more fashionable houses of the period
owed much to the patronage of several members
of the local gentry. Two of the Moysers of
North Bar Within were much concerned with
architecture. John Moyser (c. 1660-1738), son
of James, (fn. 78) was among those who secured the
restoration of the minster from 1713 onwards, (fn. 79)
and John's son James (c. 1693-1753) was an
amateur architect whose designs included Bretton Hall and Nostell Priory (Yorks. W.R.) (fn. 80)
and the Routh almshouses in Keldgate. (fn. 81) The
Moysers' circle included the Hothams of South
Dalton, one of whom, Sir; Charles Hotham, Bt.,
employed the London, architect Colen Campbell
to design a large town house in Eastgate. (fn. 82)
Building work began in 1716. (fn. 83) The cubical
centre block was flanked by lower wings, with
stables and service rooms on either side. The
main staircase was of mahogany and cedarwood. (fn. 84) The entrance front had two reception
rooms flanking the vestibule, but the principal
rooms overlooked the garden. The elevations
were of brick with ample stone dressings to the
windows, Ionic porch, cornice, and crowning
balustrade with urns. The internal detailing and
supervision of the work were probably left to
the carver and architect William Thornton, who
was also then at work on the nearby minster. In
1719 Thornton was paid £730 for his work, (fn. 85)
presumably including some carving: surviving
fragments can be stylistically attributed to his
firm. (fn. 86) The house had a short life. It was bought
by the builder Thomas Wrightson in 1766 and
he demolished it. (fn. 87) New houses that were built on
the site incorporate carved decoration salvaged
from the house. (fn. 88) The influence of Campbell's
design proved to be limited. No one was to
imitate his concealed roof or Anglo-Palladian
dressings. Instead the typical later five-bayed
fronts of the middling houses had tiled roofs and
modestly dignified doorways: no. 8 Lairgate (the
Cross Keys Hotel) and Walkergate House (fn. 89) are
largely intact examples, while nos. 29 and 56
North Bar Without have had Victorian alterations.
The Moysers were also members of the circle
around Lord Burlington, whose country seat
was at nearby Londesborough. Burlington's influence in Beverley is most easily traced in almshouses, which had previously been built in a
plain style typified by the Warton almshouses in
Minster Moorgate. In 1727 Burlington's design
for almshouses and a school in Kent was published (fn. 90) and the arcaded front was partly copied
by the unidentified builder of the Tymperon
almshouses in Walkergate and by Moyser at
the Routh almshouses. The arcaded theme was
repeated in an extension to Routh's almshouses
in 1810 (fn. 91) and it was adapted again for twin
lodges at nos. 45-7 Keldgate and elsewhere. (fn. 92)
Two large houses built in the 1760s, Norwood
House and the Hall, Lairgate, display different
characteristics. Norwood House was evidently
built for the attorney Jonathan Midgley (d.
1778), on the site of a house that he bought in
1751. (fn. 93) Both elevations of the central block are
treated as full length temple fronts, five bays
long, flanked, by lower links and projecting
wings. The pediment roof spans the full depth
of the block, its shallowness necessitating a
complex structure. On the main front a circular
window in the tympanum forms the centre of a
large carved wooden cartouche with extended
chains of husks. The first-floor windows have
floating cornices, that in the centre having full
stone dressings, and the ground floor is wholly
rusticated with a dominant entrance doorway.
On the garden front the sole ornament is the
doorcase. (fn. 94)
The Hall, Lairgate, was the town house of the
Pennymans who, with William Constable of
Burton Constable, were the great patrons of the
later 18th century. Constable's influence may
have prompted the employment of Timothy
Lightoler and others, then working at Burton
Constable, on the organ screen at the minster
in the 1760s. (fn. 95) Constable and the Pennymans
commissioned designs from John Carr of York
in the 1750s and 1760s. Carr also designed the
assembly rooms in Beverley in 1760 and perhaps
the racecourse grandstand on Hum, which
resembled other grandstands of his. (fn. 96)
Thomas Pennyman bought a house called St.
Giles in 1753 and it had been rebuilt by 1765,
when it was acquired by Sir James Pennyman. (fn. 97)
By the mid 19th century it was known as Beverley
Hall, and later as the Hall. (fn. 98) Its many windows
looked on landscaped grounds that extended
from Lairgate to Westwood. The house, which
was originally seven bays wide and two rooms
deep, shows an adaption of a style of the 1690s,
with massive hipped roof, bold cornice, and
stone angle quoins. About 1771 it was enlarged
westwards with two much bigger rooms, the new
dining and drawing rooms. Sir James Pennyman
was ambitious. The drawing room has a Chinese
wallpaper comparable to one at Nostell, and
Pennyman's architect (almost certainly John
Carr) provided a ceiling duplicating one that
Carr had designed for Thirsk Hall (Yorks.
N.R.). (fn. 99) Both rooms had finely carved marble
chinmeypieces, and the doorways framed carved
and crossbanded mahogany doors. (fn. 1)
The Adamesque style adopted by Carr was
echoed in the refurbishment of nos. 30-2 Lairgate (the Lairgate Hotel), where a new doorcase
and fanlight, staircase, and staircase ceiling all
differ little from comparable examples in London. (fn. 2) Richly carved work of the period also
survives at nos. 6-8 Newbegin, which were built
between 1773 and 1784. (fn. 3) Simpler variations
occur at no. 3 Hengate, nos. 3-5 Ladygate, and
nos. 55-63 North Bar Within. (fn. 4) The doorways
of the last group have Gothic fanlights, a quirk
repeated at no. 39 North Bar Without, built by
William Middleton in 1769-70 for Ferdinand
Stanhope, (fn. 5) and at the assembly rooms, for which
Middleton had been the building contractor. (fn. 6)
The North Bar Within terrace was therefore
probably Middleton's, too. Later in the century,
perhaps under the influence of his son and
partner John, the firm built several houses with
doorcases that have elongated Doric columns
beneath shallow pediments: examples are nos.
72-4 Lairgate, the building of which was ordered
in 1797, (fn. 7) and no. 40 North Bar Within and no.
2 North Bar Without, both of 1792-4. (fn. 8)
Architects and craftsmen such as the Middletons and the Wrightsons (fn. 9) kept abreast of changes
in fashion with the help of architectural pattern
books. From the 1770s the catalogues of firms
that made composition ornament, such as Coade
of Lambeth, were also available. Similar sources
may have been used for some of the cast lead
fanlights still to be seen, for example at no. 24
Lairgate.
The largest houses in the 18th century, notably
the Hotham house, Newbegin House, Norwood
House, and the Hall, Lairgate, were widely
distributed in the town. The only factor that
their positions had in common was a potential
for developing a large garden behind the house.
At Norwood House the landscaped garden was
begun by Jonathan Midgley, who bought a 3-a.
close in 1751 and enlarged the site in 1758; a
further 6 a. were added in 1803 by William
Beverley. (fn. 10) Houses with a third storey, suggesting a degree of prosperity, are mainly to be seen
along the main axis of the town from North Bar
Without to the minster, with a few in Keldgate,
Lairgate, and Walkergate. Nevertheless, in all of
those streets there survived into relatively recent
times cottages of a modest character. With the
possible exception of the area around North bar
it seems that no part of the town was socially
distinctive.
Terraced housing became more frequent in
Beverley in the later 18th century and nos. 55-63
North Bar Within were not exceeded in size by
anything later; all but one of the houses are of
three bays and they are three storeys high with
attics. The ground floor is raised a few feet above
the street but as is usual in Beverley there is no
basement and the front door opens on the
pavement. (fn. 11) Smaller in scale is a terrace of 8
houses in Landress Lane, perhaps of c. 1800,
and another of 14 early 19th-century houses on
the west side of Albert Terrace. Nos. 103-13
Walkergate, of c. 1820, are built of white brick
and have prominent paired doorcases and small
front gardens. White brick, which was presumably not locally made, never became fashionable
in Beverley.
Of the diverse elements of the Regency style,
Gothic is poorly represented. No. 110 Lairgate
was built in the Regency style by 1828, with a
Gothic porch added later. (fn. 12) The Grecian form
of the Classical style was used for the sessions
house and the entrance to the gasworks. (fn. 13) The
true Greek revival is best displayed in no. 11
Cross Street, which Edward Page was building
for himself in 1834. (fn. 14) The house takes the form
of a stuccoed 'villa' with stuccoed links and white
Gault brick wings; above the Doric columned
entrance is a cast-iron balcony, and there is a
deep Italianate eaves cornice. Other buildings in
former newsroom in Cross Street, (fn. 15) and, a little
the Greek revival style are the guildhall, the
later, the former Savings Bank, Lairgate, of
1843-4, (fn. 16) which has Ionic capitals. Also Greek
are marble chimneypieces like that in the library
of Norwood House. (fn. 17)
Another stucco-fronted 'villa' was St. Mary's
House, North Bar Within. Henry Ellison bought
the existing house there (fn. 18) with 3½ a. in 1794 and
enlarged the grounds in 1796. (fn. 19) Within a few
years he had built the new house, further back
from the street than the old one; the main block
had a large bow window on the east or garden
front and two smaller ones on the south. (fn. 20) Among
changes made by 1853 were the replacement of
the south-facing bows by a conservatory and,
inside, the installation on the staircase gallery of
wrought-iron communion rails from the minster. (fn. 21) Later changes included the addition of a
Doric porch on the entrance front. Evidently
also stucco-fronted was Grove House, which
Pennock Tigar built next to his works at Grovehill c. 1830. (fn. 22)
The earliest surviving purpose-built shop
fronts are of the mid 18th century. An example
of a projecting front is at no. 28 Saturday Market,
a three-sided bay still with its folding shutters
and with a pentice roof running across both
window and doorway. In the later 18th and early
19th century shop windows and doorways were
usually integrated and the glazing was taken
close to the pavement. The typical window was
a shallow bow beneath a straight fascia, as at no.
6 Eastgate, no. 14 Norwood, and nos. 32-4
Saturday Market. In those examples the shutters
were stored indoors, but at no. 27 Saturday
Market they were kept in lateral boxes that were
integral features of the design. The slightly later
front at no. 25 Wood Lane is scarcely curved
and the detailing simple. (fn. 23) By the mid 19th
century bow-windowed or canted bay-windowed
shop fronts appear to have been a usual feature
of many commercial premises. (fn. 24)
The transition between Georgian and Victorian styles spanned several decades and even as
late as the early 1850s builder-architects like
James and Marmaduke Whitton found ready
purchasers for their conservatively designed
houses in Willow Grove and on the west side of
North Bar Without. (fn. 25) The former are of Gault
brick but nos. 7-9 North Bar Without are
stucco-fronted. The most obvious change in the
Victorian period lay in the greater frequency of
three-storeyed facades, and there was also a
demand for garden space, especially for a garden
at the front, however small. Already by the 1820s
a front garden was a desirable amenity; the
now demolished 12 houses of Providence Row,
Wilbert Lane, built before 1828, (fn. 26) for example,
each had a front garden. Many houses were still
built without them before 1840, however, and it
was only by the 1870s that they became a
standard feature. Terraced houses with front
gardens are to be seen in Grayburn Lane, Wood
Lane, Woodlands, and elsewhere. Regent Street
was among the few late Victorian streets built
without front gardens.
The development of the area between Trinity
Lane and Wilbert Lane was begun in the 1840s
and was the work of the land agents Edward (d.
1855) and Gregory Page (d. 1869); (fn. 27) they laid
out Railway Street as an approach to the station
and, to the north, George Street and Wilbert
Grove. Railway Street was eventually to be lined
with three-storeyed terraces, the other streets
with more modest terraces and business premises. Gregory Page first built no. 13 Railway
Street as his own residence; it is a generous
double-fronted house with pedimented Ionic
doorcase. Later plots were of only half the width
and the houses have plainer doorways. By 1851
only five houses had been built in Railway
Street, (fn. 28) and it was many years before the site
was fully developed. Some of the later houses,
for example in Wilbert Grove, were given front
gardens.
In the mid 19th century some of the larger
houses had gardens laid out as small parks, for
example no. 29 Keldgate, the Hall, Lairgate, no.
56 North Bar Without, Norwood House, and
St. Mary's Manor, while on a smaller scale there
were other gardens planned in the fashionable
villa style, such as those at Newbegin House and
Walkergate House, with shaped beds and flowing
paths. (fn. 29)
Using powers granted by a series of Acts
designed to improve public health and housing,
the local board of health in 1862 appointed a
borough surveyor, and bylaws made in 1868
included a provision that plans of new buildings
should be submitted; the first plans were considered early in 1869. (fn. 30) Although not required
under the bylaws elevations were sometimes
submitted, too; they reveal, for example, that the
sacrifice of Georgian bow-fronted shop windows
could be offset by the introduction of first-floor
bay windows, as at no. 41 Saturday Market in
1870. (fn. 31) The bylaws also governed the layout of
buildings and the standards of construction to
be observed. In addition to building and rebuild
ing on sites in the older parts of the town,
speculative builders were responsible for much
piecemeal development of land along, for example, Grovehill Road, Holme Church Lane, and
Norwood, fitting houses and new streets into the
existing field pattern. No attempt was made
to design the layout of larger areas until the
corporation began to build housing estates after
the First World War. (fn. 32)
Much of the demand for larger houses in
the town in the later 19th century came from
business and professional men, both local and
from Hull. Most attractive to them were sites in
New Walk and North Bar Without, and west of
the town centre near Hurn and Westwood.
Richard Hodgson, for example, moved from the
house near his tannery in Flemingate in 1854 to
Westwood Hall, which he had built in Westwood
Road, (fn. 33) and Charles Simpson built Westwood
House (now part of Westwood Hospital) in
1858. (fn. 34) In some cases it was thought sufficient
to enlarge an 18th-century house, as at no. 4
North Bar Without, or to add fashionable stucco,
as at no. 29 in the same street. William Hawe
(1822-97), of Beverley, carried out many such
alterations, but he was among the architects who
put up new houses, too. (fn. 35) He preferred the
Classical style, as shown in the mansard roofs
and French detailing at nos. 2-10 New Walk,
built c. 1870. (fn. 36) In contrast the Hull architects
R. G. Smith and F. S. Brodrick built nos. 9-11
New Walk c. 1878 in an uncompromisingly high
Victorian manner; Brodrick himself lived in one
of them. (fn. 37) They used a wholly different, halftimbered, style for no. 43 North Bar Without,
built in 1880 for J. E. Elwell, the Beverley
woodcarver. (fn. 38) Elwell himself imitated the style
next door at no. 45 in 1894 and at nos. 4-6 across
the road in 1892-4. (fn. 39) The influence of Smith
and Brodrick grew rapidly. They designed the
new county hall (fn. 40) and then in 1893 built nos. 35 and 44-6 Westwood Road in a similar Flemish
style. (fn. 41) Nos. 3-5 were equipped with bathrooms,
a novelty for houses of that type, and in their
detailing and the use of both common and stock
bricks they show a standard of design well above
that of Smith and Brodrick's rivals building
smaller terraced houses.
Other Hull architects who worked in Beverley
included Cuthbert Brodrick, who designed the
semidetached pair that is now no. 37 North Bar
Within in 1861, (fn. 42) Thomas Marshall, at nos. 202 St. Giles's Croft in 1883, William Marshall, at
nos. 52-4 Westwood Road c. 1877, and William
Thompson, at nos. 19-21 New Walk in 1878.
By the 1890s the influence of national styles
which were disseminated by manuals of design
and construction had become paramount, as is
shown by window and door detailing, especially
in the use of coloured tiles to decorate the
dadoes of entrance porches (fn. 43) and of decorative
woodwork for doorways, windows, and cornices.
Another common feature, now almost lost, was
the use of cast iron for railings, gates, and
window balconies; a balcony survives at no. 18
St. Giles's Croft. Cast iron was also employed
for several decorative downspouts, as at nos. 2531 New Walk, of 1883, (fn. 44) and Highgate House,
on the corner of Wednesday Market and Lord
Roberts Road. (fn. 45) Internally, cast iron was used
for the staircase balustrade of York Lodge, York
Road, designed by Rawlins Gould of York in
1869, (fn. 46) at no. 37 North Bar Within, (fn. 47) and at no.
62 North Bar Without.
The typical earlier 19th-century doorcase was
of wood, with plain wide pilasters supporting a
simple entablature, as at no. 28 Norwood. For
greater show freestanding square piers were
used, in Doric form at nos. 1-3 Norwood Far
Grove and Corinthian at nos. 118-20 Norwood (fn. 48)
and nos. 19-21 New Walk, built as late as 1878.
The applied doorcase was displaced by the
inset porch, with a plain lintel, as at nos. 25-9
Woodlands, of 1863, (fn. 49) with a brick Gothic arch,
as at nos. 69-77 Norwood, of 1871, or, most
often, with a debased arch and moulded classical
architrave. Sometimes the arch was segmental,
as in St. Giles's Croft, or semi-elliptical, as in
Grovehill Road. (fn. 50) It is uncertain whether the
arches are of stone or cast cement. More economical are nos. 2-3 Fosters Yard, Beckside,
where William Hawe used plain brick segmental
arches for both the inset porches and the adjoining windows in 1885. (fn. 51) The plainest opening of
all was a revival of an early 18th-century type,
still to be seen, for example, on the east side of
Highgate and at no. 65 Toll Gavel. Among
secondary details the use of thin stone slabs,
sometimes with dummy joints to simulate brickwork, for window heads became frequent after
1800, with the insertion of a plain or carved
keystone as a later variation. At eaves level
projecting wooden boards supported a moulded
wood or a cast-iron gutter, as at nos. 13-33
Railway Street.
For shop fronts from the 1820s or 1830s there
was a gradual increase in the use of plate glass
with flat-fronted windows. Such was the case at
no. 42 Toll Gavel, where the snake-entwined
columns indicated a chemist's shop. At no. 34
Toll Gavel a Red Indian sign for a tobacconist's
survives behind the Victorian Gothic shop front;
both there and at no. 20 North Bar Within the
later shop front is noticeably higher than the
older interior behind it. A move towards larger
pane size is represented at no. 11 Saturday
Market and a little later, c. 1850, by the use of
full-height panes set into arched tops, as at nos.
99-101 Walkergate. By the 1870s much larger
panes of plate glass were being used, held in
slender turned colonnettes. (fn. 52) At nos. 2-4
Hengate, of c. 1860, which may have been built
as a furniture workshop and warehouse, the
first-floor display windows have pairs of lights
opening inwards and a light iron balcony. (fn. 53)
Among other business premises the bank at
no. 63 Saturday Market, designed by William
Hawe in 1863, (fn. 54) is one of the few Victorian
buildings in Beverley that is not domestic in scale
or detail.