CHAPTER XX
Heddon Street Area: Mulghay Close
On the plan of 1585 (Plate 1) this area is
shown as divided into two parts. That on
the west belonged to the Abbot and
Convent of Abingdon until its surrender to the
Crown in 1536 and measured 1 acre 2 roods 36
perches; that on the east is shown on the plan as
the Queen's land and in the tenure of one Cockshott, presumably Richard Cockshott. (ref. 1) Across
both parts is written 'At the Gravell pitts'. In
1590 Thomas Poultney acquired the lease of all
the former Abingdon lands, and he or his descendants presumably also acquired the lease of the
eastern part, for by 1651 they were both enclosed
as one field within the Pulteney lands, and were
described as a piece of pasture land containing 5
acres, commonly called Mulguly Close. (ref. 2) The
origin of this name is not known and in later
documents it is given as Mulghay. An alternative
name which first appears about the 1660's was
Dog Field and on at least two occasions Mulghay
Close and the fields to the north were collectively
referred to as Dog Fields (ref. 3) —hence, perhaps, the
attribution of the name Dog Lane to the way
leading from Piccadilly to Tyburn Road on the
line of the present Warwick Street and the northern part of the former Swallow Street. (ref. 2)
As part of the Pulteney estate Mulghay Close
was included in the reversionary lease granted to
Sir William Pulteney in 1661 by Queen Henrietta Maria, and in the Crown lease of 1668; the
effect of these grants was to extend his interest to
1722/3. (ref. 4)
After the lease of 1668 Mulghay Close was
laid out for building and the existing roads on the
north, east and south sides (Beak, Warwick and
Glasshouse Streets) were linked by two cross
streets intended to be 26 feet wide and at right
angles to each other, Leicester Street from east to
west and Swallow Street from north to south
(fig. 58). This layout divided the close into four
rectangles. In 1668 Sir William Pulteney granted
fifty-year leases of the two northern blocks to
Ralph Wayne and of the two southern to John
Harrison, both described as of St. Martin's in the
Fields, gentlemen. (ref. 5)
Not much is known about this initial development of Mulghay Close but the ground was,
apparently, let out in plots by Wayne and
Harrison to building tradesmen, one of whom
was Henry Wells, plasterer. (ref. 6) The mean character
of the houses and the quality of the workmanship
was no doubt a contributory factor in provoking
Sir Christopher Wren's petition to the King
which resulted in the proclamation against new
buildings in April 1671 (see page 7).
Figure 58:
Mulghay Close, layout plan. Based on Horwood's map of 1792, with Regent Street superimposed
In December 1672 Harrison obtained a
retrospective licence from the King permitting
him to continue building in Dog Field and in the
adjoining field westward (Crabtree Field). The
reason given for the granting of the licence was
that the foundations of the buildings had been
laid by Harrison before the date of the King's
proclamation and that he had satisfied both Wren
and Lord Burlington, whose mansion was newly
built nearby, that the buildings would not 'be of
annoyance to us or others'. He covenanted not
to erect any more buildings and to finish those
already begun in brick and stone, with party
walls, and sufficient scantlings, etc.; noisome
trades were forbidden. (ref. 7)
Harrison and his son William mortgaged their
interest in their half of Mulghay Close in 1673
and by 1680 the cost of redemption was estimated
at £2000. (ref. 8) In contrast, the total rent payable to
the Pulteney estate for the whole field during the
terms of Harrison's and Wayne's leases was only
£15 10s. (ref. 9) The buildings erected during Harrison's and Wayne's tenancies stood for about fifty
years, after which they were swept away by the
general redevelopment which affected the whole
of the Pulteney estate.
Sir William Pulteney died in 1691, and in
March 1692/3 his trustees sold their leasehold
interest in the south-west quarter of Mulghay
Close to Nicholas Baxter of St. James's, gentleman. (ref. 10) After the passing of the Act of 1721
which enabled the Crown to grant the freehold of
part of the estate to Sir William's grandson,
William Pulteney, the remaining three quarters
of the close were granted to the latter in fee on
16 February 1721/2. (ref. 11) The freehold of the southwest quarter still belongs to the Crown, and its
eastern frontage to Swallow Street is now marked
by the fronts of the buildings on the west side of
Regent Street between Vigo and Heddon Streets.
Rebuilding quickly followed the grant in fee.
Beginning in February 1721/2 Pulteney entered
into contracts to grant building leases, most of
which were for sixty-one years. These agreements were substantially the same as those for
other parts of the estate which were being
redeveloped about this time (see page 9), and
stipulated that the houses to be built should be of
the second rate as described in the Act of 1667 for
the rebuilding of the City of London. The agreements for Mulghay Close differed from those for
other parts of the estate, however, in requiring
the houses to be built 'in an uniforme manner as
shall be directed by the Surveyor of the said
William Pulteney … to answer a Pattern for
uniformity of the houses intended to be built on
the ground of the said William Pulteney in the
said Streets [Beak, Warwick, Glasshouse, Leicester, Swallow and Heddon Streets] and with
Square roofs or Cielings in the Garrets or uppermost Stories in the Front Houses agreed to be
built in Warwick Street'. Another clause only
found in building agreements for Mulghay Close
provided for rubbish to be cleared away from the
streets during building, within six days of notification by Pulteney's surveyor, on pain of a fine of
10s. a load. (ref. 12)
Builders who entered into agreements with
Pulteney, and the number of leases eventually
granted to them, were: William Arnott, carpenter
(3), William Carpenter, bricklayer (1), Richard
Cobbett, glazier (6), and Edward Collens,
carpenter (3), all of St. James's; Morris Hoff of
St. Anne's, carpenter (4); William Horton of St.
James's, joiner (2); Joell Johnson of St. Marylebone, bricklayer (25); Francis Martin, coachpainter (6), Richard Nicholson, carpenter (11),
Samuel Phillips, carpenter (3), Henry Ryly, carpenter (2), and Henry Stenton, bricklayer (5),
all of St. James's; Richard Thornton of St.
Marylebone, bricklayer (2); Elizabeth Wallrond,
widow, and Frederick Wallrond, timber merchant, both of St. James's (3). Thornton and
Ryly were also granted one lease jointly.
Other lessees were: John Bates (4); Ann
Carpenter (1); Mary Carpenter (1); Thomas
Chapman (3); John Falkner (2); William Forest
(1); Thomas Gamon (1); Thomas and Eleanor
Goosetree (1); Martha Griggson (1); Henry
Harrison (1); Benjamin Hilliard (Hillyard) (3);
Richard Hudson (1); William Insley (1);
William Jackling (2); Charles Kilminster (5);
Thomas Knight (2); Robert Loving (1);
William Ludby (2); Martha Mawle (2); Thomas
Miller (1); Thomas Rich (2); Henry Roger (1);
Samuel Skelton (2); Robert Smith (1); John Till
(1); Arthur Ward (1); Benjamin Whetton (4);
George Whetton (2); and Francis Whitmarsh
(2). (ref. 13)
The south-eastern quarter was the first to be
rebuilt, all the leases being granted between April
1722 and March 1723. The house plots were not
large and much of the back land in the centre of
the rectangle was given over to four yards opening
out of four passages—one in each street. (ref. 14) In the
north-east quarter, where there was a mixture of
small and medium sized houses, all the leases were
granted between May 1723 and December 1724
(except one to Henry Roger in 1728). Only two
yards were laid out in this rectangle, one approached by a passage in Swallow Street, the other
by a passage in Leicester Street. (ref. 15) The building
agreements for the Warwick Street front specifically prohibited the making of any gateway or
passage for carts, possibly because of the heavy
through traffic there. (ref. 12)
The north-west quarter of Mulghay Close,
which was leased in 1725–6, was laid out in a
T-shape, with Heddon Court crossing the north
end of Heddon Street (fn. a) and a row of houses on
the west side of Swallow Street which backed on
to the houses on the east side of Heddon Street. (ref. 17)
The latter are the only houses of which a representation survives (Plate 127a), but they were,
presumably, typical of the rest.
The eighteenth-century redevelopment was
swept away in its turn by the making of Regent
Street. S. P. Cockerell, the then surveyor of the
Pulteney estate (which had by this time devolved
upon the Sutton family), contracted in 1819 with
the Commissioners for the new street for the sale
of many of the houses owned by the estate in this
neighbourhood. The sale was made in 1823 for
over £58,000. (ref. 18) None of the eighteenth-century
houses survive, but the line of Leicester Street,
renamed Heddon Street and Regent Place, is still
discernible. Heddon Court has been renamed as
part of Heddon Street.
Angel and Crown Public House, Warwick Street
There has been a public house on this site since
at least 1722/3, when Richard Nicholson of St.
James's, joiner, granted to William Broadmead
of the same, victualler, a lease of a newly erected
messuage here, which was to be known as the
Harp and Crown. (ref. 19) It was described for many
years as the Angel, but by c. 1800 it had become
known as the Angel and Crown. (ref. 20) The present
building was erected in 1877 to the design of
Henry R. Cotton. (ref. 21)
Glasshouse Street Chapel
Demolished
In 1687–8 a French protestant church was
established in Glasshouse Street; it is said to have
been on the north side near the corner with
Savile Row. It was known both as L'Eglise de
Glasshouse Street and L'Eglise de Piccadilly but
in 1693 moved to Orange Street and there
became known as L'Eglise de Leicester Fields.
The building in Glasshouse Street remained
empty until about 1696, when it was again used
as a 'meeting house', probably by a congregation
of Scottish Presbyterians. In 1710 the latter
moved to a building formerly occupied by the
French congregation in Swallow Street. The
Glasshouse Street building was then taken by a
group of Baptists who remained there until about
c.1743. There is no further evidence as to its use
as a place of worship and some fifty years later it
was described as having long since ceased to
exist. (ref. 22)