Imágenes de página

but to mutilate and destroy its proportions is an easy task. The dedication of this part of the Chapel to Our Lady is an accidental circumstance, and forms no part of the architect's plan; to him it only constituted the appropriate finish and completion of his design; and to whom it was to be dedicated, or for what purpose it was to be used, was to him a matter of no consequence. If it had never been dedicated to any saint, but had been only used as an ambulatory, still it would have equally formed part of his design, and borne the same relation to the other parts as it still does. The question, therefore, is, not whether the Chapel of our Lady, or the Consistory Court of the Bishop of Winchester, is to be preserved; but whether the integrity of the architect's plan is to be broken and its harmony destroyed, or whether a complete and perfect design is to be retained in its original state. I flatter myself I have said enough to rebut the assertion of its being an excrescence: a word now in favour of its existence on the ground of utility. It is now the Consistory Court of the Diocese of Winchester, and therefore has its use. This fact has been overlooked by the Utilitarians.

I did intend to press the claims the building has to preservation upon churchmen, on the score of the many who were here brought to the bar of Bishop Gardiner, to answer for their religious opinions, in the dismal times of persecution; but having already Occupied so much of your time, I can only state, that here was this Court, and here still remains, or did until lately, in all probability the very wainscotting of the very Court in which Gardiner presided, and before which several who afterwards obtained the crown of martyrdom were arraigned by their cruel persecutors.

Although I have trespassed so long, I must add a word or two on the Vestry which was held a few days since, to consider the propriety of pulling down the Lady Chapel.


must own I blush when I hear a banker, a magistrate, and a gentleman treating the question as merely one of pounds, shillings, and pence, and expressing most gratuitously his contempt of "the book-reading lovers of

See these addresses hereafter, p. 39.

antiquity," and I cannot help adding, that it was with no small degree of pleasure and gratification that I read the very able and eloquent speech made by a legal gentleman in reply to the cold calculator who advocated the destruction of the pile. It is my misfortune, perhaps, that I cannot view this and many other subjects as mere pounds, shillings, and pence questions. I am (perhaps to my own disadvantage in the pounds, shillings, and pence way) a book-reading lover of antiquity;" and having derived a fund of instruction and amusement from such a line of reading, am not likely to deviate from it, however much it may be despised by men who look into no books but their ledgers, their journals, and their day-books; to whose admiration a dark smoky counting-house offers higher claims than the temple or the cathedral; and in whose estimation the king's head on a sovereign is a piece of workmanship far above the Apollo or the Laocoon.

The destruction of the structure is postponed for the present, and whilst life is there is hope; and there is moreover a chance of my again troubling you on this subject, unless I hear, as I sincerely hope to do, that the Lord Bishop of the diocese has issued his mandate against the demolition. And one important reason to urge such a step is this: for many years the respectable part of the inhabitants of the Borough have been buried in this Chapel, for which large fees have been paid. Now surely the Diocesan will not allow families who have paid heavily for the liberty of depositing the remains of their relatives within a building, to be in a worse situation than if they had paid only the common rate of burial-fees, and laid their relatives in the church-yard, where the remains of their friends would still be in consecrated ground, instead of the underground vaults and cellars of perhaps a banking-house. Yours, E. I. C.

[blocks in formation]



Church of St. Saviour's, Southwark.

stepped forward and voluntarily prof fered their personal services to endeavour to defeat the measure, and their purse to contribute towards the restoration of the building; that I doubt not a few remarks on the subject will readily find admission in your pages, always open to the conservators of our national, antiquities.

It is evident, from the rapid strides and insidious measures of the enemy, that promptitude, perseverance, and united activity, are necessary to the success of so good and patriotic a


The Bishop of Winchester is said (in the exercise of a mild and excellent judgment) to have refused his assent to the proposal, on the ground that nothing could justify the demolition of an edifice set apart for the worship of God, but the indispensable necessity of a case affecting public convenience; but as the proposed measure was the very converse of this plea, he could not give it his approbation.

Scarcely has this just decision of an eminently respectable Christian Bishop been made known, than we hear of the introduction of a Bill into the House of Commons for the purpose, it is said, of controlling his jurisdiction, and giving facility to that spoliation to which his "veto" would have legally set a bound!

It cannot however be, that a British House of Commons will consent to become the instruments of a base cupidity, which in order to gain a few feet of ground for the purpose of erecting shops, warehouses, or other commercial buildings, would sweep from the surface of the earth a matchless edifice, that has for ages resounded with prayers and praises, addressed by our forefathers to the common Father of us all.

[ocr errors]

It will be a vain endeavour, even in days when party feeling unfortunately runs high, to give a party colouring to this matter; because those who can advisedly advocate such an act of barbarism, will be disowned by every human being who has an iota of sound judgment, or respect for that one faith which unites all sects of real Christians in an universal consent to protect the places which are set apart for religious worship and instruction.


It has been shown to demonstration, by a gentleman who has on a late oc



casion so eloquently advocated the cause of public taste, that even on the question of "pounds, shillings, and pence, ,"* the worshippers of Mammon must be losers by the measure; because the restoration of St. Saviour's Church, in an open space, surrounded by buildings of a superior class, must tend to bring the neighbourhood of the Borough into good repute, and to attract to it those who will, by their opulence, benefit the inhabitants.

The Church of St. Saviour's was erected in the middle of the thirteenth century, a period in which Gothic architecture flourished in elegant simplicity, and that it consists of one uniform design, a nave, two transepts, a central tower (which should be open to the view from within), a choir (lately correctly restored at great expense by the parish, under the superintendance of George Gwilt, Esq. F.S.A.), and the Chapel of the Virgin, which in the superstition of the dark ages of Christianity (as to matters of faith) was erected by the pious of that day behind the high altar. Now certainly it may be admitted that the appearance of the exterior of the Lady Chapel, viewed from the opposite point on the Bridge, is at present unsightly. Pan-tiles, excrescences of modern brick-work, &c. &c. deform, nay totally obscure, to the general observer, the primitive appearance of the building but a few simple observations will correct any misapprehensions arising from this unfavourable coupd'œil. The Lady Chapel retains on the outside, even now, all its essential primitive forms of four high pointed roofs; and in the interior they constitute at the present time, without any mutilation, four avenues of groined arches, resting on light and elegant insulated pillars.

The Lady Chapel, moreover, as part of the original design, abuts against and props, as it were, the high altar of the Church; remove it, and the east end of the Church will inevitably. fall on the heads of the " money changers" who would erect their stalls in the Temple. Will they aid the parish in rebuilding it?

Having now viewed this edifice from a near point on the magnificent new

*See Speech of Thomas Saunders, Esq. F.S.A. as reported in p. 39.

[ocr errors]

bridge, of which the Church, in a restored state, would become so grand an appendage in perspective connection, let us look at it from the centre of the bridge, or from the city side of the river. St. Saviour's Church, from the great west door to the eastern extremity of the Lady Chapel, is in length some 250 feet; the tower rises from the centre. The nave, at present unroofed, lies open to the winds of heaven, to sapping damps and dislocating frosts; in this state, in a few years, the nave will no longer exist. The walls of the nave down, we have then the centre tower and the choir left standing, in deplorable and ridiculous aspect, to disgrace the moneyed interests of Southwark and her august parent-but this is not all, the Lady Chapel has been swept away, to make room for a smug banking-house, duly edified in the pseudo-Greek style, and covered with some pecks of Roman cement. There stands the towerthere stands its only prop the choir, shortened to little more than the tower's breadth by the excision of the Lady Chapel!!!

Antiquaries, Artists, Countrymen at large, you are not such fools as this! You will not construct a bridge, unrivalled, in its way, in Europe, that foreigners may stand on it and laugh at you!

Little more need be added, than that the parish of St. Saviour's is, taken in the aggregate, poor; they certainly ought not to be burthened with the charge of restoration, they cannot sustain it. The Government, the City of London, the spirited part of the public at large, will contribute a sufficient fund to restore this important building, the only conspicuous one in the ancient pointed style which remains to adorn London,* the Queen of Cities, the Augusta of ancient Britain, the Emporium of the World! A. J. K.

AT a meeting of the parishioners of St. Saviour's, Southwark, held on the 5th of January,

Mr. WESTON, banker, rose to propose that the proposition of the London Bridge committee should be adopted. He was of opinion that the parish was now called, from a regard of its own interest, and as a matter of duty, to consent to the removal

*It will be recollected that Southwark is a member of the City of London.

of that part of the church called the Spi→ ritual Court. They should not allow any nonsense of national pride to deter them from merging all other objects in their own advantage. The parishioners who pay rates should not be deluded by antique fame, or by the magnificence of masonry. They should look to the present times, and to themselves. The dilapidation of that old appendage, however beautiful, gorgeous; and noble, would still be a pecuniary saving to the householders. From a calculation, he came to the conclusion that the householders would gain by its demolition. To be sure, the book-reading lovers of antiquity would cry, "horrible.' With such men he had nothing to do with such men he possessed no sympathy of feeling.


that it was better for the meeting to confine Mr. SAUNDERS, solicitor, and F.S.A. said, itself to the definite object before it, and not wander into wild and extraneous discussion. The simple proposition was, should the venerable old chapel attached to the church, the pride and ornament of the city of London, not of the parish alone, be pulled down to gratify the cupidity of a few, or should it be upheld (for it was still durable and strong) to reflect a glory on the parish, as a monument to which every citizen of the empire would point the notice of a stranger with triumph and delight. This was not a cold question of pounds, shillings, and pence; but was an inspiring question of national glory, and of English disinterestedness. It was not a question whether the parish may save a miserable pittance by its dilapidation (and all the laboured urguments and calculations of the countinghouse had as yet failed to convince him, as he was sure they had failed to convince every other reflecting man), or whether the rich and vaunting citizens of one of the most independent parishes in the wealthiest (but no, there was no sacrifice), to retain, city in the world, would sacrifice little in its antique grandeur, a venerable pile, to which the learned and curious stranger would again say, as he often did before, to the personal knowledge of many who heard him," Well, these islanders are not only, but have been, a mighty people: learned in the arts, as they are great and proud in arms; this style of architecture is their own, not borrowed from ancient models it is noble in its conception, and lasting in its execution." (Great cheers.) Let it be recollected, too, that this chapel is the only consistorial court in the whole diocese of Winchester in existence. Demolish it, and what will become of the interests of that important diocese ? retain it, and see what an advantage will be gained, by increasing the value of houses in the neighbourhood. A splendid view will be thrown open at the metropolitan entrance to this great city. Every mau of



Church of St. Saviour's, Southwark.

common discernment must see the advantage of not choking up such an edifice in a crowded part of the city, with the trumpery of temporary buildings. He had devoted much of his time to the study of the liberal arts, and the cultivation of literature; but it was as a man of business, a parishioner, and a citizen, that he would cry out against this outrage on public decency, and this inroad on the real interests of the parish. The parish, in point of money, the god of some men's idolatry, will suffer deeply. There is no man who does not see that, eventually, the preservation of the church, and the formation of a free space about it, will be pregnant with immense benefit. No one plan of auy architect (and there are many) suggested the propriety of destroying the building, but all spoke of it as a thing that ought to be upheld. Will any one deny this? Why not keep it as a vestry-hall? The parish wants such a place. Should not the parish imitate the noble example of the Fishmongers' Company, who a short time ago sacrificed a source of revenue to the splendour of their hall? If this building be levelled, what security is there that the mania of dilapidation would stop here? Then nothing, however sacred, can be safe from spoliation and ruin.

After some debate the question was postponed; but at a subsequent meeting was carried in the affirmative.

The following reasons against pulling down the LADY CHAPEL, have been circulated, under the names of Messrs. Savage and Cottingham; and as the opinions of architects of such merited eminence are deserving of the utmost attention, we think it desirable to insert them entire.

HAVING been requested by some highly respectable gentlemen to give our opinions upon this projected spoliation, we have great pleasure in offering all the aid in our power to stay such irremediable mischief; and beg to say that our opinions perfectly concur against the measure, for the following reasons:

Because it is one of the most chaste and elegant specimens of early pointed architecture of the thirteenth century of which this country can boast.

Because it is an important and necessary appendage to the venerable and beautiful edifice of the ancient Collegiate Church, and cannot be removed without destroying the splendid architectural effect of the whole structure.

Because it is of the same date and in unison with the side Ailes of the Choir (which have been already restored with the most correct judgment), and communicates therewith in direct line: And because these


beauties will now acquire additional value! by being brought into view in a much more ample manner than heretofore; and with an elevated horizon, when viewed from the southern grand approach to the New London Bridge, exactly as an artist would desire; whereby the grandeur of design and variety of outline of the whole composition will be exhibited to the greatest advantage.

Because the eastern wall of the Choir was never intended to be exposed below the roofs of the Consistorial Court, as is sufficiently proved by the ancient doorways of the gallery of the Clerestory communicating with the roofs of this building, and which ancient doorways still remain. And the walls below are not of sufficient thickness to admit of arched recesses sufficiently deep to correspond in style with the architecture of the Choir, without entirely destroying the remains of the magnificent Altar-piece, now in progress of restoration by subscription: and because a new design will be required for the parts exposed to view by the removal of the said Chapel, to correspond with the able restoration already made of the Choir end above the roofs of the said Chapel, and for which new design there is not nor can be any authority what


Because, upon the dry question of pounds, shillings, and pence, we hesitate not to say that the perfect restoration of the Consistorial Court will cost less money than the necessary alteration to the East End of the Choir, in case of its removal. Notwithstanding the neglect which this beautiful edifice has suffered, it is still stable and firm in all its bearings: its beautiful clustered pillars are truly perpendicular; its pointed ribs are not at all displaced from their centres or intersections, and are capable of maintaining themselves for as many more centuries as they have already existed. The walls and elegant windows of the interior remain nearly perfect; while those of the exterior, although neglected and injured, have sufficient remains of their various parts to guide the architect to a perfect restoration of the whole, without the slightest innovation,- —a circumstance of the highest importance; as it enables us to hand down to distant posterity, in all their original purity, these splendid works, illustrating the skill and imaginative genius of our forefathers, and which, through neglect and want of taste, or more sordid motives, are daily suffered to crumble into dust.

Because, if for no other reason, the Parishioners require the use of the Chapel for their numerously attended Parochial Meetings, as a Vestry Hall.

Because it is apprehended that the unworthy motive for destroying and removing the Chapel is, that houses may be built, as again to encumber and obstruct the public view of this beautiful pile of


building; which, be it remembered, is the third church in the Metropolis; and possessing, as it does, sufficient merit to attract the attention of all foreigners of taste visiting this country, to whom, as well as to our own countrymen, it has ever been a subject of regret, that our public buildings should, from an ill-judged parsimony, be exhibited to so little advantage. tage. It would therefore be an unaccountable perversity, to neglect the opportunity now so fortunately given to remove the stigma in this instance. And there can be no question but that the leaving an ample view of this magnificent edifice will give great additional value and interest to this approach to the metropolis; as was originally understood to be the intention of the London Bridge Committee, and as the honour of the parish and ornament of the metropolis most imperiously require.

We therefore trust that the Chapel will be suffered to remain, at least until an appeal is made to the public for providing the necessary resources for its restoration by subscription, which appeal we feel assured, from the recent examples in respect of York and Hereford Cathedrals, will not be made in vain, for an example equally valuable, and situated in the centre of the metropolis.

JAMES SAVAGE, 31, Essex Street.

Waterloo Bridge Road.

14th January, 1832.

Since the above was written, a meeting in favour of the restoration of the Chapel was held, on the 21st January, when a conservative Committee was decided upon, to which Mr. Taylor, the author of the History of the Church and Parish, now in course of publication, acts as gratuitous Secretary. And in furtherance of the object, a declaration was prepared against the demolition :-one in duplicate for the signatures of the parishioners, another for those of the friends of the restoration. Both are numerously and respectably signed; and to the latter may already be seen a collection of signatures which will be sure to meet with that attention which is ever due to exalted talent.

Jan. 28. We are happy to close this subject for the present, with a more cheering prospect. A highly respectable meeting has taken place this day at the Freemasons' Tavern, at which (in the unavoidable absence of the Marquis of Lansdowne) Arthur Pott, esq. of Southwark, took the Chair. A series of Resolutions was passed, and

unanimously moved and seconded in very eloquent speeches from gentlemen of the first character as Architects, Antiquaries, and men of taste;-all agreeing in their sentiments, of the singular beauty of the Lady Chapel, as a fabric inferior to none in the kingdom for the purity of its style, and remarkable also for many peculiar beauties in its construction.

These important Resolutions, among others, were unanimously agreed to:

"That the parish of St. Saviour having expended upwards of 30,000l. in the repairs of their magnificent Church, of which sum a debt of 8000l is still unpaid, it is therefore expedient that all who take an interest in upholding the glory and reputation of their country, should forward those objects by enabling the parish to restore the Chapel of our Lady by a public subscription.

"That, as it is now ascertained that the New London Bridge Committee do not insist upon the "Chapel of our Lady" being destroyed, a Committee be formed to promote the important local and national object of its restoration, by soliciting subscriptions, and acting in concert with the parishioners; and that an application be made to the London Bridge Committee to allow a more ample space for the view of the edifice by the public."

At the moment of this sheet going to press, we have not time or space to do justice to the high talent displayed by the respective speakers; among whom were Thomas Saunders, esq. (who deserves the highest praise for calling the meeting together), William Paynter, esq. barrister-at-law, the Rev. Mr. Wix, L. N. Cottingham, esq. architect, James Savage, esq. architect, George Gwilt, esq. architect, T. F. Robinson, esq. architect, Robert Wallace, esq. the present architect of St. Saviour's, W. Walton, esq. F.S.A. barrister-at-law, Richard Taylor, esq. F.S.A., A. J. Kempe, esq. F. S. A., G. Woodfall, esq. F.S.A., W. Etty, esq. R.A., Sydney Taylor, esq. and numerous other eminent individuals.

The meeting was assured by professional authority, that 2000l. would restore the Lady Chapel, and that its wanton destruction would incur nearly as large a sum, in upholding the Choir after the Lady Chapel was taken away. A subscription was then commenced, headed by the Lord Bishop of the Diocese, who contributed 300%; and several gentlemen various sums from 50%. downwards.

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]
« AnteriorContinuar »