CHAPTER XIII
King Street
King Street, which was presumably
named in honour of Charles II, first
appears in the ratebooks of the parish of
St. Martin in 1673: it had previously been known
as Charles Street like the street on the other side
of the square (see page 157,157n.). The ground on
the south side of the street formed part of the freehold granted by the Crown to the Earl of St.
Albans's trustees in 1665, as did the ground on the
north side between St. James's Square and Duke
Street. The remainder on the north side was part
of the land leased in 1661 by Henrietta Maria's
trustees to the Earl of St. Albans's trustees for
thirty years; subsequent grants extended this term
to 1740. This part of the street is still the freehold property of the Crown.
Between 1670 and 1672 the Earl of St.
Albans's trustees granted eleven leases of land in
King Street for terms of forty-two to forty-five
years. (ref. 1) The ratebook of the parish of St. Martin
for 1673 records thirteen names in King Street;
that for 1676 records twenty-seven occupants
(some of whose property may have been in the
courts leading out of the street), and that for 1686
in the newly formed parish of St. James records
twenty-four. Ogilby and Morgan's map (Plate
2) shows that the building of houses along both
sides of the street had been almost completed by
1681–2. Only the western extremity of the garden of Cleveland House (now No. 19 St. James's
Square) still remained open ground, and subsequently became the site of Cleveland Yard. In
1720 John Strype described King Street as 'a good
handsome Street'. Some of the older houses, now
demolished, are shown on fig. 55.
Ogilby and Morgan's map also shows that as
originally laid out King Street came to an abrupt
end a few yards west of Bury Street, and that the
only access to St. James's Street was through a
narrow alley (later Gloucester Court) leading out
of what is now called Crown Passage. To the
west of King Street stood a large house and stables
fronting St. James's Street. In 1684 Thomas
Lord Jermyn assigned his leasehold interest in this
house to Thomas Ellyott, (ref. 2) who by 1689 had
demolished it and formed a passage some twelve
feet wide connecting King Street with St. James's
Street (see Blome's map of 1689, Plate 3).
Along this passage, which was later known as
Little King Street and was described by John
Strype in 1720 as 'an open paved Alley', (ref. 3) a number of small houses were built. (ref. 2) Little King
Street subsequently became 'a disgraceful rookery' (ref. 4)
and in 1826 the Commissioners of Woods and
Forests obtained statutory authority to widen it. (ref. 5)
The freehold of all the land required on the north
side already belonged to the Crown, but most of
the land on the south side formed part of the freehold grant of 1665 to the Earl of St. Albans's
trustees and had to be re-acquired by the Commissioners. (ref. 6) The widening of the street was
carried out in 1829–30 at a cost of slightly less
than £20,000. (ref. 7) In 1831 the Commissioners
obtained statutory authority to stop up the greater
part of Gloucester Court, which connected Crown
Passage and St. James's Street. (ref. 8) The St. James's
Bazaar was subsequently erected on the south side
of the new line of King Street and on the site of
Gloucester Court (see page 438).
On the south side of King Street there were
(and still are) a number of courts or yards. Crown
Passage, which leads through to Pall Mall, is
marked on Ogilby and Morgan's map of 1681–2
as Golden Lion Court, on Blome's of 1689 as
Crown Court, and on Rocque's of 1746 as Old
Pav'd Alley; Zachary Chambers's map of 1769 (ref. 9)
marks the south end as Old Pav'd Alley and the
north end as Crown Court. Angel Court has
been so called since at least 1681–2. Pall Mall
Place is marked on Rocque's map as Binham's
Yard, and on Zachary Chambers's of 1769 as
King's Place or Binham's Yard; Rose and Crown
Yard and Cleveland Yard are both so marked on
Rocque's map. In 1844 King's Place was said to
be a 'low den of infamy'. (ref. 4)
A list of distinguished residents in King Street
whose names are not mentioned below is contained in the Appendix.
Nos. 1a, 1b and 1c King Street
These houses were built by Elger and Kelk in
1846 (ref. 10) (see page 159). From February 1847
until his return to France in September 1848,
No. 1c was occupied by Louis Napoleon. (ref. 11)
The three houses share a four-storeyed front,
stucco-faced and designed in the Italianate style to
accord with the much grander front of No. 18 St.
James's Square. The ground storey has been greatly
altered but each house retains its shallow porch,
with Doric columns attached to the screen walls,
and narrowside lights in the flanking rusticated wall
face. Each porch is surmounted by a modern ironwork railing which is returned and continued across
the front balcony of each house. The upper storeys
are two windows wide, but in Nos. 1b and 1c,
which have mirrored plans, the second window is
widened with side lights. The tall second-storey
windows are dressed with architraves and segmental pediments on consoles, and the third-storey
windows have modern ironwork guard-rails on
moulded sills projecting on consoles, as well as
cornice-hoods on consoles. A moulded stringcourse underlines the attic, where the windows are
plain but for their moulded sills. The crowning
entablature, composed of a wave-scrolled frieze
and a cornice with dentils and modillions, is surmounted by a pedestal-parapet.
No. 1 King Street
See page 309.
Nos. 5–7 King Street And No. 49 Duke
Street
Formerly Nos. 5 and 6 King Street and Nos. 49 and 50
Duke Street
In October 1896 the Office of Woods and
Forests granted a building lease of the sites of
Nos. 5 and 6 King Street and 49 and 50 Duke
Street to Edwin Bratt, the licensee of the Feathers,
an old-established public house at No. 50 Duke
Street. The old houses were demolished by
February 1897 and the new block was completed
by the late summer of 1898. The architect was
Robert Sawyer of Craig's Court, Charing Cross,
and the builders were W. H. Lorden and Son of
Upper Tooting. The building re-housed the
Feathers, the remainder of the space being occupied by two shops and by flats. The interior of the
new public house was lavishly fitted up; (ref. 12) the
Daily Mail of 5 May 1899 commented that
although public houses had 'developed exceedingly
of recent years', the Feathers was 'the latest and
the highest development in public-house decoration that has so far been reached'.
In 1920 the lease of the whole building was
sold to Messrs. Spink and Son, the fine-art dealers.
The premises formerly occupied by the public
house and No. 5 King Street were redesigned for
their use by William Woodward and Sons, of
Great James Street, Bedford Row. (ref. 13) No. 49
Duke Street appears to have been incorporated
into Messrs. Spink's premises in c. 1929. (ref. 14)
The building received severe air-raid damage
both by blast and fire in February 1944. It has
since been repaired, and Messrs. Spink and Son
now occupy the whole of the lower part. The
upper floors are used as flats.
The exterior is a bold and brash design of a free
Renaissance character, well suited to the original
purpose of the building. Built, presumably, of
stone but now painted, the two fronts differ in
length but are generally uniform in treatment,
being five storeys high with the windows paired in
bays, four to King Street and five to Duke Street.
The refaced ground storey has a simplified Doric
entablature of little projection, and an iron-railed
balcony projects from the third storey which is
finished with a Doric entablature, its frieze
carved with festoons and paterae above the paired
windows. The fourth and fifth storeys are combined in an arcaded face, finished with a deep
entablature, its frieze ornamented with vases
carved above the piers of the arcade. Over the
King Street front rise three dormers, the middle
one being an elaborate affair of three arches with a
pedimented centre flanked by scrolled consoles.
Each side dormer has an arched opening, framed
by pilasters and an entablature with a scrolled
pediment. Similar dormers are centred over the
five bays of the Duke Street front. At the corner
of the building projects an octagonal tower, rising
above the main entablature with two diminishing
stages, the upper being arcaded and crowned by a
dome.
No. 8 King Street: Christie's
From the middle of the eighteenth century St.
James's has attracted a number of fine-art dealers,
and ever since London became an important centre
of the fine-art trade after the French Revolution,
many famous sales have taken place in the area.
Among the fine-art businesses which flourished in
St. James's during the eighteenth century one of
the best known was, and still is, Christie's.
The history of the firm has been related elsewhere (ref. 15) and the following account is therefore
confined to the buildings occupied by the firm
since 1767. The name of the firm has been
altered at various times to include new partners,
but for the sake of brevity the firm has been called
Christie's throughout this account; no member of
the Christie family is now a partner in the company.
The antecedents of the auctioneer, James
Christie, who founded the firm, are not welldocumented, (ref. 16) but it is certain that he was in
business on his own by 1766. In December of
that year he issued catalogues from his premises in
Castle Street, Oxford Road (now Great Castle
Street) for a sale which he conducted at 'the
Auction Room, in Pallmall'. (ref. 17) The whereabouts
of this auction room is not known, but it may have
been in the house on the south side of Pall Mall
(pocket, drawing B) opposite Market Lane which
had been let to Richard Dalton in 1765 and which
was then described as lately occupied by George
Hobbs, auctioneer. (ref. 18) The site of this house is now
occupied by part of the United Service Club.
Between 1 June and 15 June 1767 Christie removed from his premises in Castle Street to Pall
Mall and from the latter date issued his catalogues
from the 'Great Room' or the 'Great Auction
Room' in Pall Mall. (ref. 19) The first sale which he
conducted there in 1767 was on 8 July. (ref. 20) The
position of this 'Great Room' is not certain. There
are two possibilities—the house later known as
No. 84 (the site of which is now occupied by part
of the Royal Automobile Club), or the house
(mentioned above) opposite Market Lane on the
site of the United Service Club.
In 1768 James Christie took a lease of two
houses, later Nos. 83 and 84, at the rear of which
he had already erected a large auction room. He
occupied No. 84 from 1768 until his death in
1803 (see page 368). In 1771 Richard Dalton
assigned his lease of the house opposite Market
Lane, previously occupied by George Hobbs,
auctioneer, to Christie, who covenanted not to
allow any art exhibitions there, save those of the
Royal Academy (see page 348).
Christie had been associated with the Free
Society of Artists since at least 1769. This rival
society to the Royal Academy exhibited at the
'Two New Rooms', Pall Mall, in 1767, the
'Great Room', Pall Mall, in 1768, and at
'Christie's', Pall Mall, in 1769–75. (ref. 21)
In view of the restrictive covenant in Christie's
lease from Dalton, it seems reasonable to assume
that the Free Society exhibited in the auction
room at the rear of Nos. 83 and 84 Pall Mall from
1771, and probably from 1769. The 'Two New
Rooms' and the 'Great Room', where the Society
exhibited in 1767 and 1768, may also refer to
these premises, since the auction room was built by
Christie in 1767–8 and may have replaced two
older rooms—new to the society, which had previously held its exhibitions elsewhere.
If this hypothesis is accepted, it follows that
No. 84 Pall Mall was Christie's first permanent
home in the St. James's area.
How long Christie held the rooms opposite
Market Lane is not known, (fn. a) since he does not
appear in the ratebooks at all for these premises,
but he continued to occupy No. 84 Pall Mall until
his death in 1803. He was succeeded by his son,
James Christie the second, who appears in the
ratebooks until 1810 (see page 368). Between
1810 and 1823 Christie apparently had the use of
the auction room at the rear of Nos. 83 and 84
Pall Mall and the ground floor of No. 83 as an
office. In April 1823 agreement was reached for
a new Crown lease to the Board of Ordnance, and
Christie vacated these rooms. (ref. 23) He moved to
King Street in 1823 (ref. 24) and, except for a short
period during and after the war of 1939–45,
Christie's have been there ever since.
The premises to which Christie moved in 1823
had in 1816 been leased by the Crown for seventy
years from 1809 to John Wilson, gentleman.
They consisted of two houses (Nos. 8 and 9)
fronting King Street, 'lately erected', and at the
rear a building 'now [used] as and for an Exhibition Room for Pictures'. (ref. 25) This was the European Museum (ref. 26) where were 'exhibited, for sale, a
number of costly pictures'. Admission to view
cost one shilling, and the museum was established,
probably by John Wilson, about 1793. (ref. 27) The
frontage to King Street of these two houses was
forty feet and the site extended back as far as
Princes Court (now Place). (ref. 25) Christie's did not
obtain a direct lease of these premises from the
Crown until 1880. (ref. 28)
In 1864 Christie's purchased the former Nos.
12 and 13 Great Ryder Street. Here they built a
block of residential chambers with an entrance on
the ground floor leading to their King Street
premises. The firm's present Ryder Street entrance was built to the east of the original one in
1900–1 (see page 319).
By 1878 the original premises had also been
extended to include a smaller, second, gallery which
had been rebuilt for Christie's in 1859 on land at
the rear of No. 5 Bury Street. In addition the
firm had acquired property in Duke Street. (ref. 29)
In 1884–5 the old houses and stable yard on the
Duke Street site (which then comprised Nos. 45–
48 Duke Street and Nos. 2–3 Princes Place) were
rebuilt in two parts, with a block of premises for
separate letting fronting the street, and a third,
additional, gallery for Christie's at the rear. The
architect was E. A. Gruning of Old Broad
Street. (ref. 30) In 1889 Christie's were granted a lease
of property in Bury Street, No. 5 and part of the
former No. 4, immediately adjoining their second
gallery. Here in 1889–90 they built a block of
residential chambers and shops, from the designs
of W. H. Crossland, of Upper Bedford Place. The
second gallery was retained unaltered. (ref. 31) The
firm's main premises at Nos. 8 and 9 King Street
were rebuilt in 1893–4 and extended eastward in
1896–7 by the addition of a further two bays on
the site of the former No. 7 King Street. The
architect was J. Macvicar Anderson (Plate 272b).
The original great gallery at the back was, however,
not rebuilt. (ref. 32)
Christie's premises were destroyed by incendiary
bombs on the night of 16–17 April 1941. The
firm moved to temporary quarters at No. 16a St.
James's Street and later to Spencer House. When
the King Street premises were rebuilt in 1952–3
the main façade of the old building, which had
escaped destruction, was retained and reconstructed as part of the new work. No. 5 Bury
Street was rebuilt in 1954–5 and Nos. 47–48
Duke Street in 1956–7.
The Portland stone front of Christie's is at once
the most distinguished and the most orthodox of
the late nineteenth-century buildings in King
Street, with all the qualities to be expected in the
work of so scholarly an architect as J. Macvicar
Anderson. The style is Renaissance with a strong
flavour of Baroque in the ground storey, and the
treatment is astylar. There are four well-defined
storeys below the main entablature with an attic
above, and vertical breaks form a central feature
projecting slightly from wings, all of similar width.
All storeys contain two windows in each wing
and a three-light window in the centre, except for
the ground storey where the porch projects between two windows. The Baroque Doric porch
is formed by two piers faced with rustic-banded
pilasters, supporting a rich entablature and a segmental pediment broken to admit a vase on a
pedestal. This Doric treatment is extended to the
rest of the ground storey, with triple pilasters between the windows, which have mask-keystones.
The face of the lofty second storey is coursed with
channel-joints, and the tall windows are dressed
with enriched architraves and cornice-hoods on
consoles, with a triangular pediment to emphasize
the middle light of the central window. A narrow
cornice underlines the plain face of the third
storey and forms a sill to the windows, which have
enriched architraves and console-supported pediments, triangular in the wings and segmental in
the centre. The fourth storey also has a plain
face and is underlined by a narrow frieze-band and
cornice, the last breaking forward on consoles to
form sills to the windows which have enriched
architraves only. The main entablature consists
of an architrave, a plain frieze terminating in console profiles, and a dentilled cornice. The attic
storey, its windows framed in moulded architraves,
is finished with a smaller entablature and a
balustraded parapet, the dies at each break in the
frontage supporting tall-necked urns.
Nos. 10–12 (consec.) King Street and Nos. 2–3 Bury Street
When the leases of Nos. 10–12 (consec.) King
Street and Nos. 2–3 Bury Street expired in October 1889, the Office of Woods and Forests immediately arranged to demolish the existing buildings and let the sites. (ref. 33) Early in 1890 the Office
accepted the tender of Edwin Levy, who planned
to erect a building for a new social club, to be
called the Glaucus Club. It was to be on a lavish
scale, with a concert auditorium. The style of
both the façade and the interior was to be 'Pompeian', presumably in allusion to the club's name,
which was taken from Bulwer-Lytton's The Last
Days of Pompeii. The architect was Arthur Green
of Suffolk Street, Pall Mall. He prepared a series
of plans and elevations during the first half of
1890, and work on the building seems to have been
put in hand. Early in 1891 the club-house scheme
was abandoned in favour of a block of shops and
residential chambers. Arthur Green submitted a
fresh set of drawings, incorporating the work
which had already been completed on the site. (ref. 34)
His designs were approved in September 1891 and
the new block was finished in the following year.
The building was severely damaged by enemy
action in April 1941; it was reconstructed between 1945 and 1947 as an office block. The
roof was carefully rebuilt on the lines of its predecessor, but with blue in place of the original
green slates.
The exterior of the building as executed is in no
way Pompeian, its design, though classical, being
confused and rather nondescript with mullions and
transoms in the upper storey windows. It contains
five storeys and a garret, and has fronts of six and
five windows respectively to King Street and Bury
Street linked by a six-storeyed angle tower, the
top storey of which is blind with a lunette in each
face and a projecting crowning cornice. The
ground storey of reddish-brown granite is filled
with large display windows, while the upper
storeys are of Portland stone, having little ornament other than a series of carved panels at secondfloor level. In the centre of the King Street front
is a three-window feature with three-quarter
columns between the windows in the ground
storey and tall pilasters above, the pilasters rising to
support a prominent cornice at fifth-floor level.
The sixth-storey windows have ornate pediments,
and before them and the windows of the fifth
storey are elaborate iron-railed balconies on big
brackets. Above the top cornice stands a single
dormer window, monumentally designed in stone,
its two round-arched lights flanked by a pair of
pilasters and crowned with a tall, pedimented
superstructure. The ground storey of the tower
has a curious feature with flanking pilasters
arranged in two stages and a cornice-hood on consoles above. In the lower stage is a window with a
four-centred arch and a keystone, and in the upper
stage a lunette containing a clock-face.
No. 22 King Street
The freehold of this site remained in the hands
of the Earl of St. Albans's trustees and of their
eventual successors, the family of Bunbury of
Mildenhall, Suffolk, until 1783, when the site and
the existing house were sold by Sir Thomas Bunbury to James Dodsley, the Pall Mall bookseller
and publisher, for £1400. (ref. 35) Presumably it was
bought by Dodsley as an investment, for he continued to live in Pall Mall. (ref. 24) He died in 1797,
and in 1806 the house was sold by his trustees to
Richard Hermon, a painter and glazier, (ref. 35) whose
family occupied the premises until 1882. (ref. 14) They
were builders and probably erected as a warehouse
or workshop the large one-storey building which
is shown in later plans at the back of No. 22. (ref. 35)
Various other tradesmen occupied the premises
until 1923, when Messrs. Goddard and Smith,
the auctioneers and estate agents, moved into the
building. (ref. 14)
No. 22 King Street has a plain brick front of
early nineteenth-century character, with a modern
stone shop-front of two bays. In each of the upper
three storeys are two windows, all equal in width
but decreasing in height with each successive
storey. They have stone sills, flat arches of
gauged brickwork, and plastered reveals; all are
furnished with barred sashes, and in the third and
fourth storeys with guards of trellis-patterned ironwork. The front is finished with a stucco
entablature of Doric character, and a plain
blocking-course.
Nerot's Hotel
Demolished in 1835 to make way for the St. James's
Theatre
John Nerot established his hotel in 1776 in one
of the principal houses in King Street, which had
formerly been inhabited from 1695 to at least
1707 by Richard Jones, first Earl of Ranelagh. (ref. 24)
Nerot's became one of the most fashionable hotels
in the West End, and patrons included Edmund
Burke in 1795 (ref. 36) and Lord Nelson, who met his
wife and his father there after his return in 1800
from the Battle of the Nile. (ref. 37) In 1810–11
Nerot's Hotel was removed to Clifford Street (ref. 38)
and in 1830 the house in King Street was described as a 'Ware Room'. (ref. 24) In 1835 it was purchased by John Braham and immediately
demolished.
The St. James's Theatre
Demolished 1957–8
John Braham, the founder of the St. James's
Theatre, was born in Goodman's Fields in about
1774; his parents, who died soon afterwards, were
German Jews. Through an introduction to Leoni
Lee, a celebrated singer of the time, he became
known for the beauty of his soprano voice, and in
1787 he appeared as 'Master Abram, pupil of
Leoni' at the Royalty Theatre in Wellclose
Square, Stepney. As a tenor he first appeared at
Drury Lane in 1796; after several years on the
Continent he returned to England in 1801 with
his reputation as a singer already secure. He subsequently amassed enough money to enable him
in 1831 to purchase a share in the Colosseum,
Regent's Park. (ref. 39)
(fn. b)
In 1835 Braham obtained royal approbation
for a new theatre in King Street and purchased the
freehold of Nerot's Hotel for £8000, which he
admitted was 'more than double its real value'. (ref. 40)
The proprietors of Covent Garden, Drury Lane,
the Lyceum and the Haymarket theatres all
petitioned against the grant of a licence to
Braham, (ref. 41) as also did a number of owners of
property adjoining the proposed theatre. (ref. 42) The
licence as finally granted was dated 25 July 1835
and was to run from Michaelmas 1835 to Easter
1836. (ref. 43)
Owing to difficulties in the completion of the
purchase of the ground and (in Braham's own
words) to 'the opposition of certain individuals who
had taken an erroneous view of the nature of my
hazardous enterprize', (ref. 44) there was some delay
before building work could begin. The theatre
was built in the autumn of 1835 in 'the almost
incredibly short space of thirteen weeks, six days
of which were so wet as to cause the work to be
suspended'. The architect was Samuel Beazley,
and the contractors Messrs. Grissell and Peto
(Plates 40, 41, figs. 52–3). (ref. 45) The theatre was
opened on 14 December 1835 with a performance
of Agnes Sorel, which was described as 'a Grand
New Original Operatic Burletta'. (ref. 42)
The design and decoration of the new building
attracted mixed comment in the press, (ref. 46) but
financially the theatre was a failure. In a petition
to the Crown praying for an extension of his
licence, Braham stated in February 1836 that he
had already spent over £40,000 'in the erection of
a Structure which I flatter myself will not disgrace
the quarter in which it is placed', but that 'the
temporary dread of damp from a new Building
prevented my receiving at first, that Patronage
from the Public with which I have since been
honored. So that up to last Month, the Receipts
were quite inadequate to my expenditure.' (ref. 44) The
exterior of the building was not completed until
the summer of 1836. (ref. 45)
Braham's connexion with the theatre lasted
until the end of the season of 1838, when his
financial resources were exhausted. (fn. c) He was
succeeded in the management by a Mr. Hooper,
whose programmes included the presentation of
performing lions, monkeys, dogs and goats. (ref. 48) At
the time of Queen Victoria's marriage in 1840
Alfred Bunn presented a series of German plays
and operas and for a short time the theatre was
known as 'The Prince's'. In 1841 John Mitchell,
a Bond Street bookseller and ticket agent, became
the lessee and presented a series of seasons of
French operas and plays. (ref. 49) In 1844 the freehold
of the theatre was put up for auction by order of a
second mortgagee, but was bought in at £9400. It
was stated at the time of the sale that the building
was mortgaged for the total sum of £14,500, and
that Beazley had estimated its value at from
£28,000 to £30,000. The lessee (presumably
Mitchell) paid a rent of £1200 per annum. (ref. 50)
The St. James's Theatre had to wait many
years for its first lasting success. In 1869 The
Building News reported that the theatre was to be
pulled down and rebuilt with an entrance from
Pall Mall. (ref. 51) In October of that year it was taken
by Mrs. John Wood, an actress-manageress, who
redecorated it at considerable cost (ref. 52) and for two
years enjoyed some success. After her departure
the theatre was empty for three years. (ref. 53)
The theatre's first long period of prosperity
began in 1879, when John Hare and Mr. and
Mrs. W. H. Kendal took it over. (ref. 54) The theatre
was redecorated, the dress circle enlarged and the
approaches remodelled. The Times stated that 'for
splendour and completeness' the appearance of the
theatre was 'greatly in excess of anything of the
kind that has as yet been seen'. The Builder was
critical. Playgoers would still 'find the wretched
old rococo, and the original fronts of the boxes and
amphitheatre', and the new proscenium clashed
with the old work; the use of the foyer for the
exhibition of pictures for sale was also deplored. (ref. 55)
The Hare-Kendal partnership at the St. James's
lasted until 1888. After an interval of three years
the theatre began its second long period of prosperity in 1891 under the management of (Sir)
George Alexander, whose reign lasted until his
death in 1918. His productions included the first
performances of Lady Windermere's Fan, The
Importance of Being Earnest and The Second Mrs.
Tanqueray. (ref. 56)
In 1899 the theatre was thoroughly renovated
for the first time in its history. The adjoining
houses on the east were remodelled as part of the
theatre, and the glass canopy running along the
full length of the front of the building was probably
erected at this time (Plate 40). The stage was
lowered and its depth increased, and the orchestra,
which had sometimes obstructed the view, was
sunk below the level of the stalls. The seating
capacity of the house was increased, and all but
two of the boxes were removed. The architect for
these alterations was Blomfield Jackson (formerly
a partner of C. J. Phipps), assisted by Emblin
Walker. The decorations were designed by Percy
Macquoid and were carried out by Messrs.
Morant and Co. A new act-drop was described as
a reproduction of a tapestry entitled 'Pastoral
Scenes' in the South Kensington Museum, and
was painted by D. T. White and H. Telbin. The
total cost of the work exceeded seven thousand
pounds. (ref. 57)
The distinguished tradition established by
Alexander was continued in the 1920's and 30's
by Gilbert Miller. The theatre was damaged by
enemy action in the war of 1939–45. Between
1950 and 1954 it was the scene of a number of
successful productions by Sir Laurence Olivier. (ref. 58)
The first rumours that the theatre was to be
sold and demolished began in January 1955, when
Terence Rattigan's Separate Tables was enjoying
a successful run. (ref. 59) The controversy over the
ultimate fate of the theatre lasted for two and a
half years, and evoked a government defeat in a
debate in the House of Lords and a vigorous campaign led by Miss Vivien Leigh for the preservation of the building. The theatre had, however,
made no profit for its owners during the previous
twenty-five years, and when it became known
that some half a million pounds would be needed
to save the theatre, all hope of preservation was
abandoned. The last performance took place on
20 July 1957, and demolition began shortly afterwards.
Architectural description
Samuel Beazley was the most proficient theatre
architect of his time, and the St. James's Theatre
was planned with his usual skill, on symmetrical
lines (figs. 52–3). Two short flights of steps rose
through the front portico into a spacious square
hall, at a level half-way between the pit and the
front tier, giving easy access to both. Above the
hall was a large saloon, level with the back row of
the second tier. The steppings of the three tiers
were set out in a semi-oval formation, and the
raking girders were supported by slender cast-iron
columns, the front of the first tier being cantilevered 5 feet, and that of the second tier 2 feet
6 inches, in front of the columns. The stage was
large in relation to the rest of the building, and
deep enough to permit the later installation of a
revolving platform. The plans suggest that an
older house was incorporated in the dressing-room
range along the east side of the auditorium.
The stucco-faced front (Plate 40) was a
charming design in a restrained Baroque style,
composed of two well-defined stages each with a
three-bay centre between wide wings. The lower
stage was dominated by the three-bay portico of
Ionic plain-shafted columns, forming the main
entrance and projecting between the wings, each
of three narrow bays and two storeys, the lower
containing doors and plain windows, and the upper
having segmental-headed windows between
scrolled consoles supporting the dentilled cornice.
The upper stage was underlined by a pedestal,
with balustrades below the segmental-pedimented
window in each wing, matching the balustrade
above the entrance portico. In the centre was a
three-bay colonnade of Corinthian plain-shafted
columns, forming a loggia in front of the three
round-arched windows of the saloon. In each
wing was an upper window of oblong form,
richly framed and finished with a scrolled pediment, just below the level of the bracketed main
entablature. The wings were finished with
balustraded pedestal-parapets, but in the centre
rose an attic of three bays, each containing a
shallow niche, between Corinthianesque pilasters.
Originally decorated by Crace (ref. 60) in the 'Louis
Quatorze' style then in fashion, the auditorium
underwent successive structural and decorative
transformations, finally acquiring an early French
Renaissance finish from no less an expert than
Percy Macquoid, the collector and authority on
English furniture (Plate 41). In general the
walls were plain, forming a ground for the richly
ornamented proscenium frame and the balcony
fronts, the last being faced with an elaborate
arabesque pattern of foliage-scrolls with amorini
and grotesque birds and beasts. The proscenium
frame was a monumental affair composed of two
giant Corinthian columns, with fluted and cabled
shafts, supporting a deep panelled frieze modelled
with an arabesque decoration of scrolls, sphinxes
and amorini, and a triangular pediment, broken to
admit a large group composed of a winged female
figure representing Fame, flanked by winged and
scroll-tailed lions. Above the stage boxes was an
elliptically arched ceiling, the main ceiling being
flat and enclosed by a horseshoe-shaped cornice.
Its surface was decorated with thin moulded ribs,
forming a pattern of interlaced quatrefoils, replacing a more elaborate ceiling of Macquoid's
designing, destroyed in the last war. (ref. 61)
Figure 52:
St. James's Theatre, King Street, ground-floor plan
Figure 53:
St. James's Theatre, King Street, section A-A
No. 25 King Street: The Golden Lion
Public House
There has been a Golden Lion public house on
this site since at least 1732. (fn. d) In that year Richard
Haines of King Street was granted a licence for a
public house called the 'Golden Lyon', (ref. 62) which
stood on the south side of King Street, immediately
to the east of the entrance to Angel Court. (ref. 24)
There were then two houses between Angel Court
and Pall Mall Place, the public house occupying
the western one. They were rebuilt as one,
probably in 1763. (ref. 63) This building appears to have
survived until 1897. (ref. 64)
In 1893 the then lessee, William John Purser,
obtained an extension of his lease for the purpose
of rebuilding the premises. Nothing seems to have
come of the project until 1896, when Purser
assigned the lease of No. 25 King Street to Maria
Hewitt, who was to carry out the rebuilding.
According to the agreement, work was to start
during the summer of 1897 and was to be completed within a reasonable time. (ref. 64) The rebuilding
seems to have proceeded according to plan, and the
present premises were probably completed during
the first half of 1898. (ref. 14) The name of the architect is not known.
The predecessor of the present Golden Lion is
shown in a view of Almack's Rooms (Plate 51a).
Three storeys high, the stucco-faced front of
simple classical design was formed as a canted bay.
An Ionic order dressed the ground storey, where
double doors flanked the central window over
which projected a great lamp. The sash windows
in the two upper storeys were framed with architraves, the middle window of the second storey
having, in addition, a cornice-hood on consoles. A
bandcourse underlined the third storey and above
the dentilled main cornice was a pedestal-parapet,
lettered with signs.
The present Golden Lion is five storeys in
height and has a garret in the roof. Designed in a
grotesque imitation of the Jacobean Baroque, its
narrow stone front bulges with projecting windows and carved ornament on a scale quite out of
keeping with its size. The ground storey has a
bow window decorated with columns of black
marble, and above it runs a tall fascia surmounted
by a ponderous stucco balustrade moulded in a
'ram's horn' pattern. At either side of the bow is a
pair of carved pilasters, and above each of these is
a huge bracket-stop completing the fascia. The
next three storeys have a slightly raised feature
consisting, in the second storey, of a wide segmental-headed window with a rusticated architrave
and, in the third and fourth storeys, of an oriel
window carved with arabesque detail. Flanking
the three storeys are tiers of broad pilasters, and at
either side of the oriel and between its lights are
narrower pilasters, all of them rising to a prominent cornice, with supporting consoles, at fourthfloor level. Resting on the cornice, at either side of
the fifth-storey window, are two big scrolls and a
pair of lions clutching shields, while over the window is a triangular pediment broken by a small
obelisk rising from the keystone.
Almack's Assembly Rooms
Later known as Willis's Rooms. Demolished: site now
occupied by Almack House
The success of William Almack's establishment
on the north side of Pall Mall in the early 1760's
(see page 327) evidently prompted him to further
speculation in the field of fashionable amusement.
In September 1764 and March 1765 he was
granted leases of four small houses on the south
side of King Street. Two of these houses were on
the west side of Rose and Crown Yard and two
were on the east; their total frontage, including
the entrance to the mews, was some seventy-three
feet. (ref. 65) He also acquired the lease of the stables
and coach-houses on the west side of the mews. (ref. 66)
Finally on 25 September 1765 John Phillips, carpenter, granted him a 993-year lease of the ground
to the west of these houses; this plot, which formed
part of the ground acquired by Phillips from the
Bond family in 1759 (see page 328), had a frontage of some sixty feet, and abutted King's Place
(now Pall Mall Place) on the west side. (ref. 67)
The assembly rooms were erected on the site
(fig. 59) with great haste between May 1764 (ref. 68)
and February 1765; the architect was Robert
Mylne, who also advised Almack on the 'bargain'
which the latter struck with his aristocratic
patrons (Plate 51). (ref. 69)
On 5 April 1764 Mrs. Elizabeth Harris wrote
to her son (later the first Earl of Malmesbury) that
'Almack is going to build some most magnificent
rooms behind his house [in Pall Mall], one much
larger than that at Carlisle House' in Soho
Square. (ref. 70) On 30 May Mylne wrote in his diary
'Attended Mr. James and Crewe for Club in
Kings Street. Attended Mr. Almack on bargain
between him and club in Kings Street.' (ref. 69) Mr.
James was perhaps Haughton James, a West India
proprietor (ref. 71) and a member of Brooks's from 1764
to 1813. (ref. 72) Crewe was probably John Crewe,
member of Parliament for many years after 1765
and a member of Brooks's from 1764 until his
death in 1829; he was created Baron Crewe in
1806. (ref. 73)
On 30 September Mylne noted 'Gave a plan of
Assembly Rooms in King Street for Duke of York
to Mr. Almack.' (ref. 74)
(fn. e) On 14 November Mylne
'wrote an advert, for Mr. Almack' (ref. 75) which was
inserted by the latter in The Public Advertiser on
the following day. It was addressed to 'the Ladies
and Gentlemen, Subscribers to the Assembly in
King street St. James's,' whom it informed that
'the Building already erected, and now finishing
for the Purposes of your Meeting, is in such Forwardness, that every Thing will be done by the
Time proposed; and that at any Rate, there will
be more than sufficient Time for the Number of
Balls, which are to be given in the latter End of
this Winter. Conscious of this Truth, I also beg
leave to mention, that the work in Point of
Strength, Convenience, and Elegance, is, and
shall be executed in the best, most neat, and richest
Manner.' The advertisement then described the
rules of the new establishment. 'Seven ladies' had
'each of them opened a Subscription Book', each
of which was 'to contain the Names of 60 Subscribers'. Each subscriber was to pay ten guineas
for admission to the twelve balls which were to be
given each season. 'The Entertainment of each
Night to consist of a Ball, in a Room 90 Feet long,
40 Feet broad, and 30 Feet high; Tea and Cards
in separate Rooms; and a Supper in a Room 65
Feet long, 40 Feet broad, and 20 Feet high, with a
Concert of Music from a separate Orchestra.' (ref. 76)
These rules show that a number of fashionable
patronesses provided Almack with the indispensable initial support which he needed for his venture;
they therefore had some right to the despotic
powers of admittance to the assemblies which they
later exercised over the fashionable world.
The assembly rooms were opened on 12 February 1765, although they were not finally completed until 1767. (ref. 77) The tickets of admission
were designed by Robert Mylne. (ref. 78) Despite its
aristocratic patronage, the project appears to have
been a risky venture. Almack only held a twentyone-year lease of part of the ground on which the
building was erected, (ref. 79) and the new assembly was
a direct challenge to Mrs. Cornelys's entertainments, which had been established at Carlisle
House in Soho Square since 1760. In December
1764 Horace Walpole noted that Mrs. Cornelys,
'apprehending the future assembly at Almack's',
was already enlarging and redecorating her
rooms, (ref. 80) while Mrs. Harris thought that 'As
there is already so commodious a place, [Almack's]
seems an unnecessary piece of extravagance.' (ref. 70)
In a letter of 14 February 1765 to Lord Hertford, Horace Walpole described the opening of
the new rooms. 'The new Assembly Room at
Almack's was opened the night before last, and
they say is very magnificent, but it was empty;
half the town is ill with colds, and many were
afraid to go, as the house is scarce built yet.
Almack advertised that it was built with hot
bricks and boiling water—think what a rage there
must be for public places, if this notice, instead of
terrifying, could draw anybody thither. They tell
me the ceilings were dropping with wet, but can
you believe me, when I assure you the Duke of
Cumberland was there? . . . There is a vast flight
of steps, and he was forced to rest two or three
times.' (ref. 81)
Despite this unpropitious start the assembly
rooms soon became firmly established. In a letter
of 22 February 1765 Gilly Williams refers to the
'three very elegant new-built rooms' in which
Almack provided the twelve weekly balls. (ref. 82)
There were already between three and four
hundred subscribers; the ladies could lend their
tickets, (ref. 70) but 'The men's tickets are not transferable, so, if the ladies do not like us, they have no
opportunity of changing us, but must meet the
same persons for ever.' (ref. 82) In the following month
Gilly Williams reported that 'Our female
Almacks flourishes beyond description. . . .
Almack's Scotch face, in a bag-wig, waiting at
Supper, would divert you, as would his lady,
in a sack, making tea and courtseying to the
duchesses.' (ref. 83) The great room is said to have been
completed in 1767. (ref. 84) In a letter dated 15 January
1768 George Selwyn refers to dancing 'in the new
blue damask room, which by the way was intended
for cards'. (ref. 85)
The initial prosperity enjoyed by Almack's
assembly rooms was probably checked by the
opening of the Pantheon in Oxford Street in 1772.
William Almack died on 3 January 1781, (ref. 86)
bequeathing his house in Pall Mall to his widow
and the residue of his property, including the
assembly rooms, to his son William. (ref. 87) On 28
February 1781 his only other surviving child,
Elizabeth, married Dr. David Pitcairn, (ref. 88) the
famous Scottish physician. (ref. 47)
(fn. f)
William Almack, the son, was a barrister; (ref. 91) the
short leases of part of the ground on which the
assembly rooms stood were renewed to him (ref. 92) and
he appears to have managed the business until
1792. (ref. 24) Towards the end of the eighteenth century the prosperity of the rooms declined, and
William Almack was compelled to mortgage
them. (ref. 93) He died unmarried and intestate on
27 October 1806 (ref. 91) and his property passed to his
sister Elizabeth Pitcairn. (ref. 94) Her husband, Dr.
David Pitcairn, paid off the mortgages, (ref. 95) and died
in 1809. (ref. 96) Elizabeth Pitcairn appears as the ratepayer from 1809 to 1817, and she may have
managed the rooms during this period. (ref. 24) In her
will, which was proved in 1844, she left a large
fortune, and the residue of her estate (including
the assembly rooms) was bequeathed to her grandniece and adopted daughter, Elizabeth Campbell. (ref. 97) The latter married Edward Calvert of
Thurstonbury (ref. 98) and their descendants retained
the freehold (which had been acquired at an
unknown date) until 1920. (ref. 99)
In 1792 the ratebooks show James Willis as the
occupant or manager of the rooms. James Willis
had been the proprietor of the Thatched House
Tavern in St. James's Street since 1770 (ref. 24) and on
18 August 1768 he had married Elizabeth Tebb,
niece of William Almack, senior; he was then
described as of the parish of 'Wingleham' in
Surrey. (ref. 100) At the time of his death in 1794 he
held a twenty-one-year sub-lease of the assembly
rooms. (ref. 101) His descendants continued to manage
the rooms (except perhaps for the years 1809 to
1817) until 1886–7. (ref. 102) For the whole of this
period the Willis family were tenants of Almack's
descendants. In the nineteenth century the rooms
were often referred to as Willis's Rooms.
In his will, which was proved in 1794, James
Willis described himself as a tavern keeper and
vintner; his wife and two eldest sons, James and
William, assisted him in the business, James as a
waiter, which was evidently a profitable occupation. (ref. 101) Elizabeth and James Willis, junior,
managed the two businesses at the Thatched
House Tavern and the assembly rooms until
1797 ; in the following year Elizabeth Willis was
succeeded by her second son, William. (ref. 24) The two
brothers continued in partnership in the management of both businesses until the death of William
Willis in 1839. (ref. 103)
During the second and third decades of the
nineteenth century the assembly rooms reached
the peak of their reputation. To obtain from the
lady patronesses a 'voucher of admission to this
exclusive temple of the beau monde' was 'the
seventh heaven of the fashionable world'. (ref. 104) In
1826 a novel entitled Almack's was published, (ref. 105)
whose story was 'neither more or less than the
struggle of fashionable folks to attend these
assemblies'. (ref. 106) The only tolerable character in
this work was Lord Glenmore, who considered
that the system at Almack's was 'altogether the
most unnatural coalition that ever existed in any
society. A set of foolish women caballing together
to keep the rest of the world in their trammels,
who have no kind of right to do so but what they
choose to arrogate to themselves, is a very curious
state of things, certainly; but that they should have
found hundreds of independent people silly
enough to bend to their yoke, is the most extraordinary part of the story.' (ref. 106)
(fn. g)
James Willis, junior, died on 2 January 1847
at his house in Somers Place, Hyde Park Square. (ref. 107)
The two businesses at the Thatched House
Tavern and the assembly rooms were then
managed jointly by James Willis's son, Frederick,
and William Willis's son, Charles. (ref. 108) The
Thatched House Tavern appears to have come to
an end in 1861. (ref. 14) The assembly rooms were
managed by Frederick and Charles Willis until
1869, when Frederick appears to have become
sole proprietor.
The decline of the rooms as a centre of fashion
appears to have begun about 1835. They were
redecorated by Mr. Kuckuck in 1860; (ref. 109) the
assemblies are said to have come to an end in 1863,
and for the next thirty years the rooms were used
for dinners, concerts, balls and public meetings. (ref. 110)
In 1886–7 the business was purchased by a company, Willis's Rooms Limited, (ref. 111) and in 1892 the
building was considerably altered and the whole
of the King Street front was refaced in cement. (ref. 112)
From 1893 part of the building was occupied by a
firm of auctioneers, Messrs. Robinson and Fisher,
and on the ground floor there were shops, often
occupied by fine-art dealers. Other parts of the
building were occupied by a restaurant and a
succession of clubs; from 1915 to 1922 Horatio
Bottomley, M.P., had rooms there. (ref. 14)
The building was destroyed by enemy action in
the war of 1939–45; the site is now occupied by a
block of offices called Almack House, erected in
1949–50.
Architectural description
Evidence bearing on the appearance of these
celebrated rooms is, unfortunately, very scanty.
There is the reliable water-colour view of the exterior (Plate 51a), which was so plain as to prove
that all the interest of the building was within.
More utilitarian in effect than many a nonconformist meeting-house, the front was of plain brickwork, with the great room expressed by the
six round-arched windows of the second storey,
and the entrance dressed with a pedimented
Ionic doorcase. Two passages penetrated the
ground storey, in the east part of which were
two shops with a mezzanine over, and at the
west end there were three storeys of accommodation, with a mezzanine over the ground
floor.
There are two sources of information about the
interior, one being the view of 'The Ball Room,
Willis's Rooms' in Old and New London, (ref. 113) and
the other being Cruikshank's lively illustration in
Life in London (1821) (Plate 51b). (ref. 114) Different as
they are in spirit, the two representations are not
incompatible, in fact, interpreting the first by the
second, a fair idea of Mylne's interior can be
formed. The illustration in Old and New London
almost certainly shows the great room after its redecoration by Kuckuck in 1860, but under the
heavy Victorian overlay can be seen the elegance
depicted, rather vaguely, by Cruikshank. It seems
clear, therefore, that the walls were divided into
bays by a Composite order, with paired pilasters
between the windows or panels of the long side
walls, and single columns between the five bays of
each end wall. Cruikshank suggests that the unfluted shafts were marbled or of scagliola. Between
the capitals the bays were decorated with a frieze
of festoons and paterae, and below these were
oblong panels with relief subjects. In Cruikshank's time the windows were furnished with
elegant scrolled pelmet-heads of gilt wood supporting swagged draperies, and Rococo lookingglasses filled some of the wall panels. He shows
the orchestra playing in a balcony with a gilt
trellised railing, but in a position it can hardly have
occupied, and two-tiered crystal chandeliers hang
from the ceiling. In the Old and New London
view, these have been replaced by huge lustres of
cut glass, hanging from a flat ceiling with a shallow
segmental cove, the general form of which was
probably original.