Nos. 80–82 (consec.) Pall Mall: Old
Schomberg House
Schomberg House (Plates 206, 207, 208, figs. 62–4)
took its name from the third Duke of Schomberg, for whom it was reconstructed in 1698. In
1769 the house was divided into three; the eastern
house (No. 82) was demolished in 1850, and the
only part of the seventeenth-century building now
surviving is the façade of Nos. 80 and 81, which
was incorporated in the present building erected in
1956–8 (see page 417). The eastern part of the
present façade is a reconstruction copied from the
original front (cf. Plates 205, 206b).
In 1664 two adjoining vacant sites, each with a
frontage of thirty-five feet to Pall Mall, were leased
by the Earl of St. Albans's trustees to Richard
Gomelden and Dr. Thomas Sydenham, respectively. (ref. 189) Dr. Thomas Sydenham, the famous
physician (see page 49), lived in Pall Mall from
1660 until his death in 1689, (ref. 190) at first in a house
on the south side (not the site of Schomberg
House) and later on the north side. (ref. 34)
A house was erected on each of the two vacant
sites let to Gomelden and Sydenham, and both
were occupied in 1667, the easternmost by Lord
Belasyse and the westernmost by Sir Thomas
Clarges. By 1670 the two houses had been
united, (ref. 34) having been purchased by the Dowager
Countess of Portland, widow of Jerome Weston,
the second Earl. (ref. 191) The Countess occupied the
house, known for the remainder of its existence as
Portland House, until her death in 1694. (ref. 192) By
her will she directed that the house should be sold
to pay her legacies. (ref. 193)
The house was purchased by the third Duke of
Schomberg, Meinhard von Schönberg, who was
born at Cologne in 1641. His father, Frederick
Herman von Schönberg, accompanied William of
Orange to England in 1688 as his second-incommand, and on William's accession was created
Baron Teyes and Earl of Brentford, Marquis of
Harwich and Duke of Schomberg. (ref. 132) Meinhard
joined his father in England at the beginning of
1690 (ref. 194) and both took part in the battle of the
Boyne. Frederick was killed in the battle and was
succeeded in his titles by his son Charles; Meinhard was naturalized in 1691 (ref. 132) and was created
Baron of Mullingar, Earl of Bangor and Duke of
Leinster in the same year. (ref. 195) He was apparently a
resident of No. 9 Park Place in 1691–3; he also
appears in the ratebook of 1692 for a house on the
site of No. 5 St. James's Square. (ref. 34) In 1696
Charles, second Duke of Schomberg, died, and
Meinhard succeeded to the title; (ref. 132) he also received a grant of £4000 out of the Post Office,
which represented interest on money granted to
his father 'in consideration of his great services'. (ref. 196)
In the same year, 1696, Schomberg became the
occupant of the house in Pall Mall on the west
side of Portland House, which had belonged to
Nell Gwynne. About this time or shortly afterwards he purchased Portland House and moved
into it in 1698. (ref. 34)
Luttrell noted on 3 November 1698 that 'Portland House in the Pall Mall is rebuilt, and will be
richly furnished for duke Schonberg'. (ref. 197) On the
other hand, in March 1698 William Seabrooke
and Robert Jeffs petitioned the Commissioners of
Sewers for permission to lay new drains from the
house they were 'repayring' for the Duke. (ref. 198) The
architectural evidence available before the reconstruction of 1956–8 suggested that the house was
by no means completely rebuilt in 1698, although
a great deal of work must have been done to
account for the increase in the rateable value from
£4 in 1698 to £10 in 1699. (ref. 34)
Robert Jeffs, or Jeffes, was the son of a Buckinghamshire yeoman and had been apprenticed in
1670 to Israel Knowles, (ref. 199) a City carpenter, and
one of the three master carpenters at St. Paul's
Cathedral. (ref. 200) According to George Vertue, the
French painter Pierre Berchet was employed to
decorate the house, and was responsible for 'the
stairs case painted statues Clair-obscure ornaments
boys etc.' (ref. 201)
The street front of Schomberg House, as now
restored and incorporated in the new building on
the site, is four storeys in height and there is a
basement entirely below ground level (Plate 205).
It is built of brick with stone dressings and the projecting centre is pedimented and has three widely
spaced windows to each storey, the middle one
being set forward in a narrow vertical band of
brickwork. On either side are pairs of closely
spaced windows, with a lead rainwater pipe between them, and closet wings with single windows in front and blank panels on the inner
return sides. (fn. a) The ground storey of each closet
wing has been restored to its original form as an
open porch, with two plain-shafted Ionic columns
and their pilaster-responds, the capitals having
diagonal volutes and the entablature comprising
an oddly proportioned architrave and frieze, and a
plain modillioned cornice, all of painted Portland
stone. Each porch now contains an entrance
doorway, the central door with its late eighteenth-century porch being no longer used. The main
cornice and pediment were formerly in timber but
have been replaced by a copy in artificial stone
during the recent rebuilding: there is a deep, plain
cove below the cymatium with brackets, carved
with shells and acanthus-leaf ornament, arranged
singly and in pairs. The brickwork is vermilion in
colour and the window openings, with their flat
gauged arches and sunk panels below the sills, are
dressed with gauged bricks forming 'chains' down
the front of the building. There are plain keystones and the stone sills are flush except to the
ground storey where they have been lowered. The
basement windows have cambered heads, the wall
here being faced with stucco. All the windows
now have double-hung sashes of a late Georgian
pattern, those to the upper storeys having wide,
nearly flush frames. The stonework appears to be
Portland; it is now painted.
Figure 62:
Schomberg House, Pall Mall, plans
Figure 63:
Schomberg House after reconstruction 1956–8, elevation to Pall Mall
Figure 64:
Schomberg House, Pall Mall, elevation of
rear south-west wing
When the eastern third of the façade was reconstructed to the original design in 1956–8, the
existing lead rainwater pipe and head were reproduced on the east side. But in the course of
repairing the old head, the last figure of the date on
it, which was missing, was mistakenly replaced as
an '1'. The Royal Commission on Historical
Monuments (ref. 204) states that the date on this head, as
on another which existed at the rear of the building, was 1698.
Of the late seventeenth-century garden front,
the only substantial portion to survive until 1956
was the west closet wing (Plate 207a, 207b, fig. 64).
This was equal in width with the front wing but of
considerably greater projection, and each of its
faces broke forward, with single windows at the
rear and niches on the inner return side. There
was an offset with mouldings at ground-floor level
and moulded stone storey-bands at the level of the
two floors above, all of these being continued
across the main face of the building, that at second-floor level, however, only as a plain brick band.
The windows had segmental heads with moulded
stone architraves and scroll keystones carved with
acanthus leaf and other ornament. The sills were
moulded and the pediments to the ground- and
first-floor windows, segmental below and triangular above, cut into the panelled aprons of the windows over them. On the first floor the level of the
sill had been lowered and all but the head of the
ground-floor window had disappeared and its keystone had been largely cut away. On the inner
return of the wing the central projection was
entirely of stone, with a small moulded plinth
above each storey-band. The niches, which were
lined with plaster, were semi-elliptical on plan as
well as at their heads, and had plain keystones, and
sills and aprons similar to those already described.
The brickwork of the basement was pierced on
this side by a semi-circular headed arch.
There can be little doubt that the whole of the
rear of the house was originally the same height as
the closet wing, that is, three storeys above a basement. Parts of the original walling survived until
the recent rebuilding to two-thirds of the ground
storey and one-third of the two upper storeys.
There was a central projection similar to that on
the street front, with a comparable, though
broader, break forward containing the central
opening. The windows had segmental heads and
one retained a plain keystone, though none was in
its original state. There were no stone quoins and
the main part of the walling appeared, beneath a
thick coating of whitewash, to be of an inferior
brick to that used for the other elevation. There
were some dressings of a hard red brick which may
have been original.
There is nothing incompatible between the
square-headed windows and absence of horizontal
bands on the street front and the cambered arches
and storey-bands of the rear wall. An example of
this, which had certain other characteristics in
common with Schomberg House, was a house,
dated 1670, which formerly existed in a court off
Botolph Lane in the City and of which photographs are in the possession of the National Buildings Record. The front was of brick with stone
dressings, but the back, which looked on to the
very narrow Lovat Lane, was of coarser brickwork with thick storey-bands and rough cambered
brick arches to the windows. It is possible that the
garden front of Schomberg House was originally
built in this manner, and that the wings, and perhaps other parts, were altered in 1698.
The style of the closet wing at the rear was so
different from that of the street front that it is
highly unlikely that they were built at the same
time. It is also unlikely that the wing was later
than 1698, the date on the rainwater head which
survived in the angle between the wing and the
main building. The rear wing was the more
advanced in style and it seems probable that it
represents some of the work carried out for
Schomberg.
In Kip's view (Plate 4) the rear of the house
is shown in some detail. The closet wings are only
given a slight projection but the architectural
decoration is suggested, and the central doorway,
with its double flight of steps down to the garden
at basement level, has a hood as its sole embellishment. This view shows an octagonal cupola rising
in two stages from a balustraded platform above an
almost flat roof. However, the earlier view by
Knyff engraved by Kip, (ref. 205) although probably in
general less accurate, shows the cupola above a
hipped roof, as also does an anonymous view from
across St. James's Park, dating from the reign of
Queen Anne. (ref. 206) In this two additional cupolas are
shown, but no details of the front, and the print is
not very reliable. All trace of the original roof had
disappeared long before the recent rebuilding, but
in the reconstruction the street front has been
given a steeply pitched, tiled roof screening the
higher part of the building behind, and there are
small hipped roofs over the closet wings.
If the main fabric of the house was not rebuilt
for Schomberg it must of course be that of Portland
House. In that case the considerable increase in
rates in 1699 is difficult to account for, but perhaps a storey was added to the street front,
accounting for the dissimilar heights of the front
and back. How much of the original pair of
houses remained after this alteration it is impossible to say, but the columns supporting the front
closet wings suggest a pair of entrance porches.
The centre of the house must have been reconstructed either when the two houses were combined in 1670 or at the time of Schomberg's
rebuilding in 1698. The earlier date seems more
likely because on Ogilby and Morgan's map of
1681–2 there is a crude representation of the
building from the rear which shows it to have had
a central pediment and projecting closet wings, in
fact, roughly what now exists on the street front.
One cannot be certain that this representation was
intended to show the rear elevation rather than
that facing Pall Mall. On Blome's map of c. 1689
is a similar representation, perhaps copied from the
earlier one.
The division of the house into three in 1769
and other later alterations, had left little evidence
of the original planning arrangements (fig. 62).
On the north front was a central room, presumably the entrance hall, with a Doric colonnade
at the rear. There was a room of similar size
behind and to the west a front room, a smaller
back room and a large top-lit stair compartment in the centre. The bottom flight of the
staircase, which was not the original one, was on
the axis of the space behind the colonnade. On the
first floor the rooms corresponded with those
below, there being a cross-corridor above the
colonnade. The centre of the back and front of
the house did not exactly coincide, and the plan of
the eastern third, before the mid nineteenthcentury rebuilding, is not known. The internal
partitions, except for those which became the partywalls of the three separate houses, were of heavy
timber construction. Of the original decoration
and fittings almost nothing survived. The date of
the Doric colonnade in the hall is uncertain: it
was of timber and the four columns, two of them
attached, were unduly slender and their bases had
been altered: the central intercolumniation was
wider than the other two and the columns supported a moulded architrave only (Plate 207e). All
the chimney-breasts had a double break forward
and there was one bolection-moulded chimneypiece of red-and-white marble in the west front
room (Plate 207d). The closets at the rear had
plain box cornices, that on the second storey being
a simple cyma moulding. There was nothing else
worth noting.
Work on Schomberg House was completed by
the end of December 1698, when the Duke entertained the French ambassador, the Duke of Ormonde and 'other persons of quality' there. (ref. 207) In
the following year a group of disbanded soldiers
who 'grow every day more and more tumultuous
. . . beseiged the Duke of Schomberg and the
general officers as they were sitting . . . at the
Horse Guards, and afterwards went to his house in
Pall Mall, and threatened to pull it down'. (ref. 208) The
danger was averted, however, and the Duke continued in peaceful possession, occasionally entertaining foreign ambassadors. (ref. 209) On his death in
1719 (ref. 132) the house passed to his daughter,
Frederica. (ref. 210) She lived there until her death in
1751, with her first husband, Robert Darcy, Earl
of Holdernesse, who died in 1722, and her second
husband, Benjamin Mildmay, Earl Fitzwalter,
who died in 1756. (ref. 192) The lease passed to her son
Robert, fourth Earl of Holdernesse, (ref. 211) who let the
house to John Montagu, Earl of Sandwich, a
fellow member of the Society of Dilettanti, (ref. 212)
from 1756 to 1768, and to Thomas Thynne,
Viscount Weymouth in 1769. (ref. 192)
In 1769 the Earl of Holdernesse surrendered his
Crown lease and a new one was granted, at his
nomination, to John Astley. (ref. 213) The artistic
associations which made Schomberg House famous
began with Astley's ownership. He, probably
with his sub-tenants' assistance, divided the house
into three, and each part, later known as Nos. 80–82, has a separate history until the year 1859,
when the three parts were united again by the
occupancy of the War Office.
It is not certain how much work was done at
the time of Astley's division but a good deal of internal refitting had been carried out about the
middle of the eighteenth century, including some
fairly plain woodwork and enriched plaster cornices. One chimneypiece of this date had survived
in the central front room on the first floor. It
consisted simply of an architrave with carved
mouldings, supporting a shelf of later date.<According to The World, 7 Dec 1787, Astley divided the house into three and was his own architect.>
No. 82
The eastern wing of Schomberg House was
converted into a shop which from 1769 to 1857 (ref. 214)
flourished as a fashionable textile store run by a
succession of mercers and furriers, i.e., 1769–75,
Gregg and Lavie, mercers; 1776–81, Lavie;
1782–4, William King; 1785–96, R. Dyde and
Co., importers of lace, cambrics and lawns, haberdashers, milliners and fur manufacturers, and
1796–1857, Harding and Co., furriers and warehousemen. (ref. 215)
(fn. b)
A survey was made of No. 82 in 1850, when
the demolition of the house on its east side for the
erection of the new Ordnance Office (see page
368) endangered its east wall. James Pennethorne
stated that this wall had 'been built at so many
different times . . . that it is in a dangerous state
and must be rebuilt'. The other main walls and
timbers of Schomberg House were in 'an unsound
state', the front and back walls being out of upright. Harding and Co., the occupiers of No. 82,
were willing to rebuild the whole house, if a new
lease of all three parts could be obtained; but,
owing to the current policy of the Crown, the
option for the new lease of No. 80 had to be
offered to the occupier and sub-lessee, Sir John
Kirkland, the Army's General Agent for Recruiting. (ref. 217) No difficulty stood in the way of a
new lease of No. 81, however, which was only
held on a yearly tenancy, and which John Thomas
Payne, the occupier, wished to surrender. Harding and Co. therefore obtained an agreement with
the Crown for a new lease, with covenants first to
rebuild No. 82, their own shop, by the middle of
1851, and to rebuild No. 81 not later than 1866.
Both houses were to be completed as one 'uniform
Architectural Building', at a cost of not less than
£2500 each. Messrs. Lawford's and Heneker's
plans were found 'unobjectionable' by Pennethorne, and they were approved in August 1850.
No. 82 was rebuilt by August 1851, Harding and
Co. having spent £5000 on this house and on
repairing No. 81. (ref. 218) The firm occupied No. 82
until 1857 (see below).
The new building (Plate 204) was Italianate in
style, four storeys in height and faced with yellow
brick with dressings of brown stone. It had a small
Doric portico and a large crowning cornice. The
exterior lacked distinction, but within, on the first
floor, was an arched corridor with saucer-domes
which had some of the quality of Sir Charles
Barry's work. The rear room on this floor was surprisingly richly decorated. The walls were arcaded
and the ceiling panelled, the rich mouldings
being picked out in gold. The plain surfaces
were painted with excellent arabesque decoration
(Plate 208b, 208d).
No. 81
The central portion of Schomberg House was
taken by John Astley for his own occupation.
Astley (? 1730–87) was a portrait painter. He
studied in London and Rome and painted portraits
in Dublin for a few years. His first wife, Lady
Duckenfield Daniel, was a rich widow; shortly
after her marriage to Astley she and her daughter
died, leaving him a considerable fortune. (ref. 219) He
was said to have paid £5000 for Schomberg House
and to have spent another £5000 on its conversion. (ref. 220)
A staircase was inserted at the front of the
house on the west side, and it was reputedly Astley
who added the studio at the top of the house, overlooking St. James's Park. (ref. 221) The alteration included the rebuilding of the rear wall of the house
from the first floor upwards and the new work was
faced with a hard yellow brick with red dressings.
The studio was lit by a large three-light window,
above which was a pediment with a round window
in the tympanum, the timber mouldings having
plain modillions. The approach was by a narrow
and twisting staircase, having simply turned
balusters and a thin mahogany handrail, which
rose in a square compartment constructed of timber, with a domed roof. (fn. c) The doorways and window openings in the lobby, and also the window to
the main room, were remarkable in having threecentred arched heads. The lobby (Plate 208a, 208c)
had a shallow saucer-dome in plaster with a band
of ornament round its base. The junction of the
walls and the dome, without the use of pendentives, was clumsy, but this was disguised to a certain extent by plaster decoration forming a lunette
on each wall face, its head meeting the base of
the dome. The northern lunette contained
a circular window. The lower part of the lobby
was panelled in timber with a small cornice and a
rich guilloche band in plaster above, but much of
the plaster decoration was missing. The panelling
was divided by a chair-rail and the upper panels
had enriched mouldings and oval plaques with
festoons and drops: the cornice was also enriched,
all the ornament being executed in composition.
In the studio, which was square with a large
cupboard recess on either side of the lobby, the
decoration was considerably mutilated and the
chimneypiece had been removed, but there was an
enriched plaster cornice and fluted frieze, a chairrail with a band of fret ornament and a moulded
skirting and architraves. The large window came
to within eighteen inches of the floor. In the rear
rooms on the ground and first floors there were
enriched plaster cornices of this period.
Astley lived in the central part of Schomberg
House from 1769 to 1777. (ref. 34) In 1781 it was
taken by Dr. James Graham (1745–94), a quack
doctor (ref. 18) who had studied medicine at Edinburgh
University. Having travelled abroad, he set up
as an aurist and oculist in Bristol and Bath in
1774, and at the beginning of 1775 came to London. He established himself in Pall Mall 'nearly
opposite the King's Palace', where he offered consultations gratis between the hours of eight and
twelve. (ref. 222) After another period abroad he went
to Bath where he set up an electrical apparatus in
January 1777. (ref. 223) He moved to London again in
1779 and established a 'Temple of Health' at No.
4 Adelphi Terrace. (ref. 224) In 1781 Graham came to
Schomberg House. (ref. 34) His establishment here
was called the 'Temple of Health and Hymen', (ref. 225)
and his advertisements called attention to his
'Medico-Electrical Apparatus' (ref. 226) and to the
'grand celestial state bed', which was supported by
forty pillars of brilliant glass, was covered by a
dome lined with mirrors, had coloured sheets, and
played music. (ref. 227) He also dispensed three medicines, 'electrical aether', a preventative medicine,
'nervous aetherial balsam . . . for decayed and
worn out constitutions', and 'imperial pills', which
were 'purifiers of the blood and juices'. (ref. 228)
Graham's activities were not confined to
quackery, for in 1782 six men were prosecuted
'for keeping a Common Gaming House for
playing at E.O. at Dr. Graham's in Pall Mall',
and an unsuccessful attempt was made to bribe
certain of the prosecution's witnesses. (ref. 229)
The 'elisium', as Graham described his house,
was redecorated in 1783 and on its re-opening he
informed the public that he would 'have the
Honor of delivering from the Celestial Throne his
very celebrated Lecture on Generation'. 'The
Suite of Apartments in this Elysian Palace—in
this magical, enchanting Edifice, far excel, in
point of Elegance, Brilliancy, and Magnificence,
every Royal Palace in the World, and to glowing,
vivid and brilliant Imaginations, they will now be
found to realize the Celestial, Soul-transporting,
and dissolving Descriptions that are given in the
Fairy-Tales.' (ref. 230)
In 1784 Graham vacated Schomberg House (ref. 34)
and his subsequent publications gave some indication of his travels. He was eventually confined in a
lunatic asylum. (ref. 18)
The next occupant was Richard Cosway
(1740–1821), another painter. As a boy he
waited on the students at a drawing-school in the
Strand in return for lessons. He won prizes and
eventually became a fashionable portrait painter
and a miniaturist. (ref. 231) His wife Maria, whom he
married in 1781, was also a miniature-painter and
book-illustrator. They moved to Schomberg
House in 1784. (ref. 71) Richard Cosway had risen 'from
one of the dirtiest boys, to one of the smartest of
men' and his wife's Sunday concerts 'were sanctioned by his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales,
and some of the highest fashionables of the day;
the professional talents were of the first class, and
Pall Mall, upon Sunday evenings was hardly
passable'. (ref. 232) The Cosways lived in Schomberg
House until 1791. (ref. 34)
A print entitled 'A View from Mr. Cosway's
Breakfast Room Pall Mall, with the portrait of
Mrs. Cosway' was published in 1789 by the
engraver William Birch. The landscape was
painted by William Hodges, R.A., and the portrait by Cosway himself. The room appears to be
the one probably added by Astley at the top of the
house.
From 1792 to 1795 the house was occupied by
Thomas Goddard on behalf of the Polygraphic
Society (ref. 34) 'for the exhibition of their wretched
copies of good pictures'. According to J. T.
Smith, the Society 'put up the figures at the
porch', (ref. 232) i.e., the Coade stone termini supporting
the porch roof, which were probably cast from
the same moulds as those framing the doorway
of the Coade stone showrooms in Westminster
Bridge Road. (ref. 233) The shafts of these termini
are panelled and have moulded bases with the
impressed mark, 'coade lambeth', the easternmost one being dated 1791. They rest on high
stone plinths and they support the entablature
without abaci. Above the plain dentil cornice is a
blocking-course and a balustrade with a moulded
capping and plain dies. Breaking through the
centre of this is a very large tablet with a reclining,
draped, female figure in high relief, holding an
artist's palette and brushes. (fn. d) The tablet has its
own capping and is flanked by clumsy 'anvil'shaped consoles resting on the balustrade. The
former entrance doorway has a plain, moulded
architrave and is flanked by panelled strip-pilasters
topped by draped satyr masks which support the
entablature, the eastern one being a modern replacement. The mask and the tablet are probably
also of Coade stone and, like the termini, they are
excellently modelled. The rest of the work is not
of the same quality and appears to be, in part at
least, of a stone resembling Bath (Plate 206c).
Michael Bryan (1757–1821), the connoisseur,
picture-dealer, and publisher of the Dictionary
which bears his name, occupied the house from
1796 to 1804. (ref. 71) He 'adorned it with old pictures,
for the most part extensively retouched by . . . William Brooks'. (ref. 232)
In 1805 and 1806 the house was occupied by
Peter Coxe (d. 1844), the auctioneer and poet. (ref. 235)
In 1804 Anthony Harding, haberdasher, now the
lessee of the whole of Schomberg House, (ref. 236) had
let the centre portion to Thomas Payne (ref. 237) the
younger (1752–1831), who like his father was a
bookseller. His shop at Schomberg House was
opened in 1806; after his retirement in 1825 (ref. 18)
the business was continued under the name of
Payne and Foss by his nephew John Thomas
Payne, who retired in 1850. (ref. 238) Harding and Co.
then occupied No. 81 whilst their own premises
at No. 82 were being rebuilt. The firm's lease of
No. 81, which contained a covenant to rebuild by
1866, was given up and a new one taken (see
below).
No. 80
The most notable of the eighteenth-century
artists who were associated with Schomberg
House was Thomas Gainsborough. His residence
in the western wing between 1774 and his death in
1788 (ref. 71) is commemorated by a London County
Council plaque.
It was probably for him that a new staircase was
inserted, presumably in the position occupied by
the old main stair. The new one (Plate 207c),
which existed until the recent rebuilding, had cut
strings with shaped spandrels at the ends of the
steps, and thin turned newels and balusters. The
handrail was of mahogany and the bottom flight
of the stair was nicely curved, but the whole effect
was somewhat meagre, even where the panelled
ceiling rose to the large roof-light with a certain
amount of enriched moulding. Another addition
which may well have been carried out for Gainsborough was the pair of large, plainly decorated
rooms, one above the other, which were built over
the garden. They were each fifteen feet high and
had single large windows overlooking the garden
of Marlborough House. The rooms were connected to the house by passages of timber construction, the lower one being plain but the upper one
arcaded, with lunette windows and roof-lights,
and steps arranged in two flights between them
with a small niche on the landing. It seems likely
that at least the upper room was used by Gainsborough as a studio. Some of Gainsborough's pictures and drawings were sold after his death at an
exhibition of his work held in the house; the rest
were sold later at Christie's. (ref. 239) His wife Margaret lived in the house until her death in 1792. (ref. 34)
The next occupant of Gainsborough's house
was the painter, Robert Bowyer (1758–1834).
The ratebooks record him as a resident for the
years 1793–1803; he then moved from Schomberg House to another house in Pall Mall. (ref. 74)
In 1830 Decimus Burton made alterations to a
house in Pall Mall, presumably No. 80, for (Sir)
John Kirkland, (ref. 108) army agent. (ref. 44) Some unremarkable chimneypieces and cast-iron window-guards
dated from this period and were probably Burton's
work.
Later history of Nos. 80–82
In 1852 Harding and Co. agreed to purchase
the lease of No. 80 from the occupant, Sir John
Kirkland, who was allowed to occupy the upper
floors (ref. 218) until 1859. (ref. 214) New leases of all three
houses were granted to the firm in 1854, (ref. 240) with
covenants to rebuild the centre and western wing
by 1865. Before any attempt was made to carry
out these covenants, however, the firm left the
premises in 1857, (ref. 44) and the whole house was put
up for sale. (ref. 241) The particulars of the sale suggested that the house was 'admirably adapted for a
national gallery of pictures . . . also . . . for conversion into a nobleman's mansion, Banking Establishment . . . or . . . a handsome and Commodious
Club house'. The rebuilding covenants were
obviously a great drawback to possible purchasers,
but in December 1857 the Secretary of State for
War entered into treaty with the Crown and
succeeded in obtaining their relaxation. Thus the
preservation of the central and western houses was
largely fortuitous. In 1859 the whole house was
taken by the Office of Works for use by the War
Office. (ref. 128)
When the War Office staff accommodated in
Pall Mall was removed to the present War Office
building in Whitehall in 1906 Schomberg House
was retained for use by the staff of the Director of
Barrack Construction. (ref. 150) It remained in use,
chiefly for government offices, until shortly before
its demolition in 1956.