932e 
 U8I 
 
 UC-NRLF 
 
 $B 157 7ia 
 
OF THE 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
THE ALLEGED 
 VANDALISM AT 
 lATFORD-ON-AVON 
 
 By 
 
 SIDNEY LEE 
 
 Life Trustee of Shakespeare's Birthplace 
 
 WITH TWELVE ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 " The earth hath bubbles, as the water has, 
 And these are of them " 
 
 WESTMINSTER 
 
 :hibald constable & co ltd 
 
 2 WHITEHALL GARDENS 
 
 1 
 
WILLIS VICKERY 
 

 THE ALLEGED VANDALISM AT 
 STRATFORD-ON-AVON 
 
Digitized by tine Internet Arciiive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 littp://www.archive.org/details/allegedvandalismOOIeesrich 
 
THE 
 
 ALLEGED VANDALISM AT 
 
 STRATFORD-ON-AVON 
 
 By 
 SIDNEY LEE 
 
 Life Trustee of Shakespeare's Birthplace 
 
 WITH TWELVE ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 The earth hath bubbles, as the water has 
 And these are of them " 
 
 WESTMINSTER 
 ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE & CO Ltd 
 
 2 WHITEHALL GARDENS 
 1903 
 
Butler & Tanner, 
 
 The Selwood Printing Works, 
 
 Frome, and London. 
 

 TO MY FRIENDS 
 IN AMERICA 
 
 M551887 
 
 L 
 
Contents 
 
 CHAPTER P\GE 
 
 Preface ii 
 
 I The Writer's Relations with Stratford . 21 
 
 II The Charges brought against the Trustees 23 
 
 III Henley Street and its History — the Reno- 
 
 vated Birthplace .... 
 
 IV The Cottages purchased by Mr. Carnegie 
 V The Corporation and the Free Library 
 
 VI The Choice of a Site . . . 
 
 VII The History of the China Shop . 
 
 VIII Conclusion 
 
 28 
 
 34 
 42 
 
 45 
 56 
 64 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 I The Birthplace Trustees . . . . -67 
 
 II The Library Committee's Report adopted by the 
 
 Town Council on May 12, 1903 . . -74 
 
 III Report of Mr. Thackeray Turner, Secretary of the 
 Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, 
 to the Committee of that Society . . -76 
 
List of Illustrations 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Henley Street, looking West . Frontispiece 
 The Buildings in Henley Street involved in 
 THE Discussion 25 
 
 Shakespeare's Birthplace with adjoining Building 
 IN 1788 ........ 27 
 
 Shakespeare's Birthplace in 1806 . . . -31 
 Shakespeare's Birthplace in 1840 . . . -33 
 Shakespeare's. Birthplace as it is now, after the 
 
 Restoration 35 
 
 The Four Cottages purchased by Mr. Carnegie . 37 
 
 The Corporation China Shop, the Two Cottages 
 
 AND the Birthplace . . . . . 49 
 
 The Site of the Proposed Free Library . . 51 
 
 The Corporation China Shop 53 
 
 Design for the Stratford Free Public Library 55 
 Henley Street, looking East . . -57 
 
 IQ 
 
Pref^ 
 
 ace 
 
 This statement, a small part of which has already 
 appeared in the newspapers, treats of the action 
 that has been officially taken by the Trustees of 
 Shakespeare's birthplace and by the Corporation 
 of Stratford-on-Avon in regard to the disposition 
 of certain buildings in Henley Street, which have 
 been the subject of a long public controversy. 
 It is common knowledge that that controversy 
 was initiated in February by Miss Marie Corelli, 
 who has resided in Stratford for the past three 
 years, and that it has been maintained by her 
 and her friends with spirited persistence up to the 
 present time. It is with regret that I find myself 
 in conflict with Miss Corelh. However mistaken I 
 may deem most of her action in the present 
 matter, I have no reason to disbelieve in her 
 devotion to Stratford and to Shakespeare's 
 memory. 
 
 Two separate, but adjacent, portions of Henley 
 Street are in question; one portion was lately 
 assigned to the control of the Birthplace Trustees, 
 
 II 
 
PREFACE 
 
 the other portion has for centuries been the ex- 
 clusive property of the Corporation. Each body 
 exercises perfectly distinct functions and acts 
 independently of the other. But their recent 
 action has this much in common. Each body 
 with a view to the public advantage, has resolved, 
 on grounds which are sufficiently indicated in 
 the following pages, to devote certain property at 
 its disposal to one or other of two branches of 
 the public service. It should be understood, how- 
 ever, that these two branches — respectively, the 
 better protection of Shakespeare's Birthplace from 
 fire and the provision of the town of Stratford with 
 a free public library— are separate and distinct. 
 At the beginning of this year both the Birth- 
 place Trustees and the Corporation had it in con- 
 templation to demolish some houses in Henley 
 Street, and to devote their sites to public uses. 
 To this course of action Miss Corelli published 
 objections. At the outset no exception could be 
 taken to her strictures, apart from the circum- 
 stance that they misapprehended the general wish 
 of the inhabitants of Stratford, and confused 
 together the two objects and the two authorities 
 which were involved in the discussion. Doubt 
 seems to me justifiable as to whether any genuine 
 literary, historical or archaeological interests were 
 imperilled by the procedure contemplated by either 
 of the two Stratford authorities concerned. But 
 both Trustees and Corporation postponed final 
 
 12 
 
PREFACE 
 
 action, in order to give critics of their proposals 
 every opportunity of examining the position of 
 affairs. A prolonged series of protests against the 
 proposals of the two bodies followed Miss Corelli's 
 first interposition. Into many of these a heat 
 was imported which appeared to be out of keep- 
 ing with the issues at stake, and all misconceived 
 in much the same way the crucial features of 
 the situation, and the respective responsibilities 
 of Trustees and Corporation. 
 
 But it is not the early criticism of the Stratford 
 authorities that calls at this distance of time for 
 detailed notice. On quite another footing stand 
 the more recent denunciations. These denun- 
 ciations are subsequent to the time when the 
 authorities had arrived at and had announced 
 the wise and considerate policy which was to 
 govern their final action. The authorities pub- 
 licly adopted all such views of their advisers 
 as rested on sound and accurate information. 
 Yet that circumstance was ignored, and the 
 campaign was continued with greater bitterness 
 and more obvious inaccuracy than in its early 
 stages. 
 
 On May 12, at a meeting of the Council of the 
 Corporation — (the proceedings were fully re- 
 ported) — it was clearly shown that scrupulous 
 care was being taken to respect reasonable 
 literary, historic, and archaeological sentiment. 
 
 13 
 
PREFACE 
 
 The grave misapprehensions which had infected 
 nearly the whole of the irresponsible censures that 
 had appeared in the press, were at this meeting 
 authoritatively exposed. Nevertheless, the original 
 misstatements and misrepresentations were not 
 suffered by their authors to perish. They were 
 quickly repeated with increased vehemence. On 
 May 17, five days after the Council's unanswerable 
 refutation, Miss Corelli, in a speech addressed to a 
 meeting of the O.P. Club in London, sought to give 
 to the old misconceptions a new lease of life. An 
 article in the June number of the New Liberal 
 Review ^eiiiiiledi ''The Beatitudes of Mr. Carnegie," 
 pursued the like path. Such procedure has 
 naturally engendered in that large section of the 
 public which is without opportunity of inde- 
 pendent investigation the utmost confusion of 
 thought. That confusion can only be dissipated 
 if the full history of the controversy be brought to 
 public notice. 
 
 With what recklessness the war has been 
 waged by irresponsible critics during the past 
 few weeks may be inferred from the fact 
 that on May 25 a writ was served upon the 
 Birthplace Trustees. They were vaguely charged 
 with various offences against the Act of Parliament 
 by which they were incorporated in 1891. The 
 Attorney-General, *' at and by the relation of 
 Charles John Williams (Member of the Council 
 of the British Archaeological Association), and 
 
 14 
 
PREFACE 
 
 Allen Sculthorpe Walker (Correspondent of the 
 British Archaeological Association)/' issued 
 against the Trustees as defendants a claim for — 
 *' (i) an injunction to restrain the Defendants 
 from a continuance or repetition of the demo- 
 lition of buildings under their authority and 
 control and from erecting or permitting the 
 erection of buildings contrary to the provisions 
 of the Shakespeare's Birthplace Trust Act 1891. 
 '' (2) Execution of the trusts under the 
 aforesaid Statute. 
 
 '' (3) Further and other relief." 
 Of the two *' relators " or '' informers " I 
 only know Mr. Walker as the author of letters 
 in the newspapers which adversely criticized the 
 action of the Stratford authorities. I do not 
 remember to have heard of Mr. Williams be- 
 fore. The hearing was appointed for Mr. Justice 
 Buckley's Court. These gentlemen's allega- 
 tions, so far as they were specified, were 
 obviously misconceived. But it is impossible 
 to examine them closely, because no statement 
 of claim was ever filed. On June 26, thirty-two 
 days after the writ was served, the ''relators'" 
 solicitors sent to the Trustees' solicitors a notice 
 of discontinuance of the action, at the same 
 time forwarding a cheque for costs. The amount 
 was deemed by the Trustees' solicitors in- 
 adequate ; and the costs are to be taxed in the 
 usual way. 
 
 15 
 
PREFACE 
 
 It is difficult to explain the procedure of the 
 *' relators," but it is sufficient for my present 
 purpose to put the episode on record. Numerous 
 illustrations of the more habitual controversial 
 methods of the opponents of the Corporation and 
 the Trustees figure in the notes to my statement ; 
 in an appendix I have printed specimens of 
 the aspersions that have been cast upon the 
 Birthplace Trustees, a list of whose names I 
 supply. 
 
 I have also added the report of the Library 
 Committee of the Corporation which was adopted 
 by the Town Council on May 12, and the report 
 on the Library site prepared by Mr. Thackeray 
 Turner on behalf of the Society for the Protection 
 of Ancient Buildings, dated June 2, 1903. 
 
 My remarks on the restoration which Shake- 
 speare's Birthplace and the adjoining building 
 underwent after they became the property of 
 the public in 1847, embody facts which are 
 familiar to all acquainted with the history of 
 Stratford. The murky cloud of misunderstanding, 
 which in the popular imagination envelopes Hen- 
 ley Street, renders it desirable that the street's 
 whole story should be precisely told. The 
 slipshod handling of local history which charac- 
 terizes most of the voluminous attacks on the 
 local authorities seems calculated, unless it be 
 squarely faced, to debase the intellectual currency 
 of all interested in Stratford. The truth about 
 
 16 
 
PREFACE 
 
 Shakespeare's Birthplace does not prejudice the 
 value of its associations. Many may learn with 
 regret that the dormer windows and the porch 
 were removed from the house in 1800 after 
 they had so long resisted time's ravages, and 
 that a brick front was erected in place of the 
 ancient timber fa9ade of the adjoining building 
 in 1840. But all may find comfort in the positive 
 knowledge • that the interior has been wonder- 
 fully well preserved, and that the renovation 
 was probably the most successful work of the 
 kind ever accomplished. Care was taken to 
 protect all that it was safe to leave standing, 
 and to follow up accurately in the detail of 
 restoration every surviving relic of the original 
 structure. 
 
 Although I believe that much weight attaches to 
 the facts that I set forth, it is on the illustrations 
 that I mainly rely for a full and lasting vindi- 
 cation of the action of the Trustees and the 
 Corporation. 
 
 The four views of the Birthplace in various 
 stages of its history possess, I think, general 
 interest. The earliest known representation of the 
 house, which dates from 1788, and is repro- 
 duced at page 27, has the highest value. It seems 
 to have been drawn by Rupert Green, son of 
 Valentine Green, the eminent engraver/ 
 
 ^ Green's sketch was engraved on copper-plate by Colonel 
 Philip De la Motte. The original copper-plate is preserved in 
 
 17 B 
 
PREFACE 
 
 The eight views of Henley Street, with repre- 
 sentations of all the buildings involved in the 
 present controversy, as well as of a design for the 
 new Library (after a sketch by Mr. Edgar Flower)^, 
 are extremely pertinent to the immediate issue. 
 
 Henley Street, as it is, is faithfully portrayed in 
 the frontispiece to this volume. It is this street 
 which we are warned by an enthusiastic supporter 
 of Miss Corelli is about to be profaned for the 
 first time by the '' spirit of uncouth modernity." 
 It is this street which according to another writer 
 of like temper, has, until this agitation began, 
 '*been held sacred and protected from the hand 
 of the restorer and votary of so-called modern 
 improvements." It was '* for the preservation " 
 of this street ''from any modern intrusion" that 
 Miss Corelli herself, at a meeting of the Selborne 
 Society, held in London as recently as May 5, 
 1903, '* pleaded . . . not only for ourselves but for 
 all the unborn generations, that they might wend 
 their way as we did, down the historic thoroughfare 
 
 the Birthplace Museum at Stratford-on-Avon. An early im- 
 pression is in the British Museum. Colonel Philip De la Motte, 
 who was an archaeologist of some repute, and an intimate 
 friend of Captain Grose the antiquary, resided at Batsford, 
 Gloucestershire, which lies about sixteen miles to the south 
 of Stratford. 
 
 ^ This sketch in its main outUnes agrees with the design 
 prepared for the Library Committee by Mr. E. C. Holtom, 
 architect of Stratford, in the autumn of 1902. Mr. Holtom's 
 design was published as a supplement to the Stratford-on- 
 Avon Herald, on August 15, 1902. 
 
 18 
 
PREFACE 
 
 and find it spared from any touch of modernity'' 
 It is charitable to assume that these writers are 
 afflicted with no more serious disorder than de- 
 fective vision. Descriptions, from fellow-pens, 
 of Mr. Carnegie's cottages and of the Corporation 
 china-shop, which are all frequently depicted in 
 this volume, seem to bear witness to equally 
 distorted eyesight. It is my hope that these 
 pictorial illustrations may serve to restore to 
 normal vigour all visual power that the heat 
 of controversy has impaired. 
 
 S. L. 
 July 8. 
 
 *^* The views of the Library site are reproduced here by 
 permission of Mr. E. Anthony Tyler, of Stratford-on-Avon, 
 who is owner of the copyright. 
 
 19 
 
The Alleged Vandalism at Stratford-on- 
 
 Avon 
 
 I 
 The Writer's Relations with Stratford-on-Avon 
 
 At the beginning of this year I was elected a 
 Trustee of Shakespeare's Birthplace, an honour 
 which I highly appreciated. My interest in 
 Stratford is of old standing. The first book that 
 I published — now near two decades ago — dealt 
 with the town's early history and associa- 
 tions. More recent Shakespearean researches 
 have intensified my regard for the place and its 
 literary traditions. It was in a spirit of loyalty 
 to those traditions that I accepted the office of 
 Trustee, and I hope to fulfil my responsibilities 
 in the like temper. 
 
 Within a few days of my election as Trustee 
 of the Birthplace, I had to leave England to fulfil 
 a series of long-standing engagements in America, 
 whence I am just returned. Rumours reached 
 me in America that my fellow-Trustees proposed 
 to remove or alter various buildings adjoining 
 Shakespeare's Birthplace, and that public opinion 
 
 21 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 was, on literary and artistic grounds, strongly 
 excited by this course of action. 
 
 As soon as I arrived home, I made careful 
 inquiry into the origin of these rumours. I 
 learned that for some months past the Trustees 
 had been constant objects of denunciation by 
 persons who, from various points of view, claimed 
 interest in the affairs of Stratford. 
 
 After due investigation of the circumstances, 
 I have now assured myself that the public has 
 been misled on almost all the essential points. 
 Spasmodic endeavours have been made to remove 
 the misconceptions from the public mind. But 
 they persist in many quarters. I believe it to 
 be to the public advantage, and in the interests 
 of truth, to set forth clearly the full facts of the 
 case. The public may then be in a position 
 to form a judgment on the subject which shall 
 be final. But it should be understood that I 
 take this step on my sole personal responsibility. 
 
 22 
 
II 
 
 Charges Brought Against the Trustees 
 
 Put briefly, the charges alleged against the Trustees 
 were two. Firstly, it was stated that they were 
 wantonly bent on destroying the historic aspect 
 of Henley Street, in which Shakespeare's Birth- 
 place stands, by arranging for the demolition 
 of houses of historic interest, which had lately 
 come into their possession, in the immediate 
 neighbourhood of the Birthplace. Secondly, the 
 Trustees were accused of conspiring with the 
 Corporation of Stratford-on-Avon to apply to 
 the purposes of a Free Public Library another 
 building of ancient date, which was situated in 
 the same street, in close proximity to the Birth- 
 place. The Trustees' action was described as 
 *' iconoclastic " and *' barbarous," as a '' serious 
 piece of vandalisnl " involving '' desecration " 
 and '' spoliation " of historic edifices. 
 
 It was made a further ground of objection, 
 that the contemplated changes owed their origin 
 to the intervention of Mr. Andrew Carnegie. 
 That gentleman had not only purchased the 
 
 23 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 houses adjoining the Birthplace, for presentation 
 to the Trustees, but had also undertaken the 
 expense of providing Stratford with a Public 
 Library. It would bean impertinence to dwell on 
 this part of the theme. No right-minded person 
 can fail to resent the introduction of Mr. Carnegie's 
 name into the controversy in other than appre- 
 ciative terms. Mr. Carnegie's action was taken 
 in characteristically generous response to applica- 
 tions which reached him from the town. He 
 attached no conditions to his gifts, which were 
 manifestly designed to serve the interests of 
 Stratford and its literary associations. 
 
 Two separate issues have been raised in 
 the strife, and have not been kept adequately 
 distinct. The Trustees of the Birthplace, as 
 constituted by the Act of Parliament of 1891, 
 form a body that is quite independent of the 
 Corporation of Stratford. The Act gives the 
 Corporation a large representation on the Board 
 of Trustees, but each body has its own statutory 
 functions. Yet the Trustees have been con- 
 stantly denounced for action, wholly outside their 
 province, which was taken by the Corporation 
 independently of them. 
 
 In regard to the present issues, the Trustees 
 are solely concerned with the fate of the cottages 
 in immediate proximity to the Birthplace garden, 
 which were purchased by Mr. Carnegie for presen- 
 tation to them. The second issue touches the 
 
 24 
 
u a 
 
 a = 
 
 y. .2 
 
 2 9. 
 
 O II 
 
 > -c 
 
 5^ « 
 
 as - 
 
 
 Z S 
 
 a b« 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 fate of another building, which, although it adjoins 
 this newly acquired property of the Trustees, 
 belongs to the Corporation and has, in the exercise 
 of that body's exclusive discretion, been appropri- 
 ated by it to the projected Free Library. But I 
 wish to cover the whole field of the discussion, 
 and therefore am prepared to deal with the Cor- 
 poration's action in regard to the Library, at the 
 same time as I draw attention to the misunder- 
 standing which lays such action at the Trustees' 
 door. 
 
 26 
 
O 3 
 
 U 3 
 
 a.5 
 "- -a 
 
 ll 
 
 o V 
 
 u a 
 -.52 
 
 c« 
 
 II 
 
 « o 
 
 
 
 «o 
 
Ill 
 
 Henley Street and its History — The 
 Renovated Birthplace 
 
 Some knowledge of the past history and present 
 condition of Henley Street, in which stand 
 Shakespeare's Birthplace and all the buildings 
 involved in the dispute, is essential to a just 
 view of the situation. The Trustees are charged 
 by Miss Corelli with neglecting to preserve ** the 
 present irregular beauty of historic Henley Street." 
 As recently as last month she wrote that *' if the 
 proposed alterations are carried out, not a scrap 
 of the original side of Henley Street as thousands 
 of pilgrims have known and seen it will remain.'* 
 One critic described the street as "a thing of 
 peculiar value " which '* once changed . . . 
 will be lost for ever." " Let Shakespeare's Street 
 alone ! " cried another. ** Leave the sacred side 
 of Henley Street uncontaminated by modern bricks 
 and mortar ! " 
 
 These adjurations may be admirable in senti- 
 ment. But the remorseless hand of time robbed 
 them of practical significance or of relevance to 
 
 28 
 
HISTORY OF HENLEY STREET 
 
 the present issue, more than a hundred years ago. 
 
 What's gone and what's past help 
 Should be past grief. 
 
 Henley Street is undoubtedly one of the oldest 
 in the town. Its records date from the Middle 
 Ages. But no part of Stratford underwent more 
 frequent and more complete renovation between 
 the date of Shakespeare's death and the end of 
 the last century. Few Elizabethan or Jacobean 
 features are discernible in the earliest extant 
 sketch of the street, the water-colour drawing 
 (now hanging in the Birthplace Museum) which 
 Mrs. Edward Fordham Flower executed in 1835. 
 Such few Elizabethan or Jacobean features as 
 are visible there have long since vanished. As 
 the little Elizabethan or Jacobean houses of 
 timber and rough-cast fell in the course of ages 
 into decay, they were from time to time replaced 
 by new structures, usually wholly of brick. 
 More than sixty houses form the street. The 
 owners (of all but two or three) were private 
 persons in humble circumstances, who naturally 
 carried out the needful renovations with a sole 
 regard to economy, and with no consciousness of 
 sentimental considerations. 
 
 As a result, the street, with the exception of 
 one short strip, has long been lined by low, fea- 
 tureless brick-fronted tenements, ranging in date 
 through all the decades of the nineteenth century. 
 
 29 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 One large section, on the side of the street almost 
 directly opposite to Shakespeare's Birthplace, 
 is barely four years old. Its architecture is of 
 obtrusively suburban type. 
 
 In some instances, when the buildings fell to 
 ruin and reconstruction became inevitable, the 
 interior timber supports were retained in order 
 to save expense, and relics of ancient workmanship 
 of no very romantic character were by economic 
 accident and by no archaeological design in- 
 corporated in the reconstructed edifices. But, 
 even here, new flat brick fronts, fashioned entirely 
 of modern material, invariably displaced the old 
 timber facades with their overhanging storeys. 
 
 It is common knowledge that Shakespeare's 
 Birthplace, with the adjoining house, which was 
 also his father's property, is now distinguished 
 among other things from the rest of Henley 
 Street, by enjoying permanent legal protection 
 from the casual vicissitudes of reparation to 
 which its neighbours have always been and will, 
 except in special conditions, always be liable. 
 But Shakespeare's Birthplace has enjoyed its 
 immunity from structural disturbance only 
 since 1847. The structure had suffered experi- 
 ences very like those of its neighbours before 
 it was purchased for the public in that year. 
 Some thirty years earlier half of it was furnished 
 with a brand new brick front and the timber 
 facade concealed and damaged. Happily the 
 
 30 
 

 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 timber- work of the interior was well preserved. 
 But the present exterior of the Birthplace build- 
 ings is the outcome of a thorough-going, if 
 scholarly, reconstruction, which conformed to a 
 sketch made in 1788. 
 
 In order to isoltae the renovated premises, 
 houses on each side of it, despite the fact 
 that they were in part of seventeenth 
 century construction, each with an ascertainable 
 history, were demolished at the date of the re- 
 storation. Their sites were designedly left vacant. 
 However necessary such " spoliation '' was, it 
 deliberately added some fifty years ago one 
 more— and a by no means unimportant — element 
 of divergence between the aspect of the Birthplace 
 and street in the sixteenth century and that 
 which it bore in the nineteenth. Consequently 
 " the irregular beauty of historic Henley Street " 
 is, as far as the present condition of the street 
 is concerned, the '^very coinage of the brain." 
 
 The modest elevation of most of the modern, 
 or comparatively modern, buildings of which the 
 street now consists, is in harmony with the general 
 proportions of the roadway and of the renovated 
 Birthplace. It is desirable that, in any further 
 rebuilding of the thoroughfare, the present eleva- 
 tion should be respected. But whatever happen 
 now, Henley Street can never regain its pristine 
 form or feature. 
 
 32 
 

 M "1 
 
IV 
 
 The Cottages Purchased by Mr. Carnegie 
 
 According to an editorial statement in the 
 Birmingham Gazette of May 9, the true question 
 at issue in this controversy is *' whether our most 
 precious national memorial [i.e., Shakespeare's 
 Birthplace] shall suffer irreparable injury " at 
 the hands of its legal guardians. It would 
 be difficult to misrepresent the question more 
 completely. 
 
 The present position of affairs, as far as the 
 Birthplace Trustees are concerned, is due to a 
 fire which in 1896 completely destroyed two 
 shops in Henley Street, six doors off the little 
 garden on the east side of the Birthplace. The 
 accident brought home to the Trustees the de- 
 sirability of isolating the Birthplace more effect- 
 ually than before from neighbouring premises. 
 To secure this object, it was necessary to acquire 
 the cottages in Henley Street which abutted on 
 the narrow gardens of the Birthplace. It was 
 desirable either to demolish these and to extend 
 the garden over their vacant sites, or to free them 
 
 34 
 
y^ r-, 
 
 o I 
 
 < o 
 
 a i 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 of danger of fire by withholding them from domes- 
 tic or mercantile occupation. With the same 
 object it was essential to remove, or at any rate 
 withhold from further domestic occupation, a 
 modern cottage with a modern-antique exterior in 
 the Birthplace garden on the east side which 
 was built for the custodian's residence at the time 
 of the public purchase in 1847/ Other provision 
 for housing the custodian was therefore needful. 
 
 Some doubt was justifiable as to whether 
 the terms or financial position of the Trust 
 allowed the Trustees to apply their funds to all 
 these purposes. But last year Mr. Carnegie re- 
 lieved the Trustees of their main difiiculty on this 
 score by purchasing, for presentation to them, a 
 row of four cottages on the east side, where the 
 risk of fire was chiefly imminent.^ 
 
 The purchase of these cottages was only carried 
 through at the expenditure of much time and 
 money. Mr. Carnegie's intervention was indeed 
 
 ^ The modern-antique messuage or dwelling-house occu- 
 pied by the custodian, with an adjoining stable forming part 
 of the dwelling house, is enumerated among the Trustees' 
 properties, which the Act of 1891 directs them to maintain " in 
 fit and proper order." The Trustees consequently finally 
 decided to withhold the custodian's house from domestic 
 occupation rather than remove it. 
 
 ^ At the same time Mr. Carnegie reserved to the Corpora- 
 tion the right of appropriating to its own purposes a 
 portion of the site of these four cottages, and he left the 
 definition of the precise extent of the site, which was to be 
 thus appropriated, to mutual arrangement between the 
 Trustees and the Corporation. 
 
 36 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM j 
 
 peculiarly opportune on more grounds than 
 were foreseen. The owner of the three cottages 
 farthest from the Birthplace had been a refresh- I 
 ment caterer on a modest scale. It now proved 
 that she intended to convert her three tene- 
 ments into a single restaurant or tea-shop of an 
 orthodox modern pattern. It was only on pay- 
 ment of a very large sum (;^2,ooo) that she re- 
 linquished her resolve of establishing a restaurant 
 on what (she argued) was, from its proximity to 
 the Birthplace, with its annual army of visitors, 
 the best site for such a purpose in the town. 
 Thus by a happy coincidence Mr. Carnegie's 
 purchase protected the Birthplace, not only from 
 peril of fire but from peril of proximity to a 
 most incongruous innovation.^ 
 
 No conspicuous historic nor archaeological in- 
 terest attached to any of the four houses. The 
 two farthest removed from the Birthplace (on 
 whose site once stood a single timbered and 
 
 ^ On November 17, 1902, Mr. Carnegie wrote to the late 
 Sir Arthur Hodgson, K.C.M.G., then Chairman of the Exe- 
 cutive Committee of the Trustees., stating how fortunate he 
 would esteem himself if the Trustees would accept his purchase 
 from him — " to be added and preserved as part of the Birth- 
 place property." Mr. Carnegie continued : " Deeds satis- 
 factory to you will be duly executed by me. I purchased the 
 houses and ground expressly to make this gift." The 
 Executive Committee of the Trustees at their meeting of 
 December 3, 1902, unanimously passed a resolution of thanks 
 to Mr. Carnegie " for his most generous offer." Deeds mak- 
 ing the Trustees absolute and unconditional owners have 
 since been executed. 
 
 38 
 
MR. CARNEGIE'S COTTAGES 
 
 thatched cottage) were Uttle better than hovels ; 
 they had been crudely built of cheap modern 
 brick within living memory, were innocent of all 
 architectural features, and were at the back in. 
 ruinous condition. These two tenements have 
 been recently demolished, and the site is to 
 be converted into a garden. 
 
 The other two cottages, nearest the Birthplace, 
 boast a more reputable record. In Shakespeare's 
 day they formed one domicile which was occupied 
 by a blacksmith called Richard Hornebye. The 
 premises were early divided into two dwellings. 
 In 1620 one of these was bought by Thomas 
 Nash, who six years later married Shakespeare's 
 granddaughter, Elizabeth Hall. But the Shake- 
 spearean connexions of the premises are of the 
 slenderest. Shakespeare's granddaughter is not 
 known to have been associated with the house. 
 Her husband never occupied it, and at his death 
 it passed to a cousin, Edward Nash, whose de- 
 scendants owned it till 1709. Shakespeare's grand- 
 daughter survived her husband, and succeeded 
 to some of his property, but this Henley Street 
 tenement was at no time in her possession.^ 
 
 After its subdivision into two tenements, the 
 building does not seem to have undergone further 
 radical change until 1760. Thenceforth renova- 
 tion was frequent. About 1810 the old timber 
 
 ^ Cf. Nash's will in Halliwell's New Place (1864), pp. 117 seq; 
 
 39 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 front with an overhanging storey was removed, 
 and a new flat brick front with projecting windows 
 on the ground floor was set up in its stead. 
 Despite other repairs, of later date, the ancient 
 timber of the side-walls, the timber beams of the 
 roof, and an open fireplace with ingle-nook and 
 chimney-corner seats were suffered to survive/ 
 
 So long as the houses were tenanted, these 
 features, which may date from the sixteenth cen- 
 tury, were largely concealed by modern plaster, 
 whitewash, and wall paper. Their presence was 
 verified by experimental scraping after the 
 residents had left the premises during the past 
 few weeks. A correspondent of the Birmingham 
 Daily Post first described those relics of the original 
 building in his newspaper on May 9, 1903. He 
 seemed somewhat to overestimate their value. 
 But a thorough survey led the Trustees to the 
 conclusion that the old work inside these cottages 
 
 ^ Mrs. Alice Meynell, who joined in the outcry against the 
 Trustees, described these cottages in a letter to the Academy 
 of March 7, as " two gabled and timbered houses of which the 
 age is disputed, but the proportions and appropriateness 
 are obviously right." Another like misrepresentation, even 
 more typical of the public criticism which has been re- 
 cently in circulation, figured in the Sunday Sun of April 
 26, where the writer declared these " two quaint cottages " 
 to be " of ancient though rich Elizabethan design." In view 
 of Mrs. Meynell's misconception of the aspect of the buildings, 
 it is no matter for surprise that she should add: — " Their 
 place is to be taken by a new Free Library, to be built by 
 the munificence of Mr. Carnegie." No such destination of 
 this property was at any time contemplated. 
 
 40 
 
MR. CARNEGIE'S COTTAGES 
 
 rendered their preservation desirable. The expert 
 advice of Mr. J. A. Cossins, the architect, who 
 represents at Birmingham the Society for the 
 Protection of Ancient Buildings, showed that 
 it would be easy to renew the ancient shape 
 of the interior. The harmless nineteenth- 
 century brick facade has neither architectural 
 nor archaeological value, but I believe that the 
 Trustees propose to leave it standing for the 
 present. 
 
 Whatever the extent of the renovation, the 
 two cottages will henceforth be employed solely 
 for the purposes of the Birthplace Trust. Neither 
 fire nor artificial light will be permitted in them. 
 The Custodian's house, which stands in their 
 western vicinity, will be vacated and will remain 
 untenanted, while the garden formed of the un- 
 occupied land, whence the two adjacent hovels 
 have been removed, will now bound the cottages 
 on their eastern side. Thus the object of isolat- 
 ing the Birthplace, which the purchase of the 
 cottages was intended by Mr. Carnegie to secure, 
 will be fully attained. At the same time, the 
 Trust and the Public will greatly benefit by the 
 extra room-space which the conservation of the 
 two cottages places at the disposal of the 
 Trustees. The Trust has long been in want of 
 convenient board-room, secretarial offices and 
 muniment room, and to almost all those pur- 
 poses the new property can readily be adapted. 
 
 41 
 
V 
 
 The Corporation and the Free Library 
 
 I NOW turn to the action of the Corporation in 
 the matter of the Free Library. Here, too, I 
 find that the censorious clamour rests on every- 
 thing except accurate knowledge. The need or 
 desire of a Public Library in Stratford has been 
 impugned. We are told that there are enough 
 libraries there already, and that, finally, if a 
 Hbrary is to be '' imposed " on the town at all, 
 it is the height of impropriety to set it up in 
 Henley Street. 
 
 Undoubtedly there are in the town two good 
 Shakespearean collections of books, each devoted 
 to a particular department of the subject ; one 
 of these special collections, dealing with the bio- 
 graphy of the poet, is in the Birthplace Museum ; 
 the other, dealing with his works, is in the Shakes- 
 peare Memorial Library. But the existence 
 of these collections — admirable as they are in 
 their own way — has little bearing on the present 
 question. These Shakespearean collections have 
 nothing in common with a library destined to 
 
 42 
 
THE FREE LIBRARY 
 
 serve the general purposes of the Stratford 
 pubhc. At present the numerous readers and 
 students among the rank and file of the Stratford 
 townsfolk are without free access to any general 
 literature apart from Shakespeare — to works of 
 reference, to standard treatises of science or art, 
 to newspapers and periodicals. The Corporation's 
 critics are in error in imagining that the towns- 
 folk cherish doubts as to the advantages that they 
 or their numerous summer-visitors are likely to 
 derive from a Free Library. The Public Library 
 system may be open to abuse in practice, but 
 no sensible native of Stratford has been found to 
 deny that its principle is sound and one capable 
 of useful application to his own town. 
 
 Mr. Carnegie's gift did not originate the 
 Library movement there. A dozen years ago 
 endeavours to establish a Free Public Library 
 were initiated, and, although those endeavours 
 progressed slowly, they never wholly ceased. 
 Last year, before Mr. Carnegie's gift was in question, 
 it was understood at Stratford that Miss Corelli 
 herself, who now attacks both Trustees and 
 Corporation on the ground that the town '' has 
 never sought a Free Library at all," was generously 
 considering a proposal to provide a site for a 
 Free Library or Reading Room, in furtherance 
 of the townsfolk's wishes. The still vacant plot 
 of land in Henley Street which the fire of 1896 
 had cleared, was widely discussed as a suitable 
 
 43 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 location. Although it was only six doors off the 
 Birthplace, its appropriation to the purposes of a 
 Free Library or Reading Room was, before this 
 controversy arose, believed in Stratford to have 
 the approval of Miss Corelli herself/ This scheme 
 of devoting to the public purpose of a Library 
 the only vacant site in Henley Street is now in 
 course of fulfilment by the joint action of Mr. 
 Carnegie and the Corporation. 
 
 ^ Mr. Fred Winter, an active citizen of Stratford and a 
 zealous supporter of the Free Library movement, wrote a 
 letter, which was published in the Stratford- on- Avon Herald 
 on June 12, to the effect that " before any mention was made 
 of the proposed gift of a Free Library to Stratford-on-Avon by 
 Mr. Carnegie," he was asked to obtain for Miss Corelli a price 
 for this piece of land (then belonging to Mr. John Wright) 
 in Henley Street, " for the purpose of a Free Library," and 
 that the negotiation for the purchase fell through because 
 Miss Corelli deemed the price asked by the owner to be 
 " too high." I am informed by Miss CorelH's solicitors that 
 Mr. Winter's statements are untrue, and that she has issued 
 writs for libel against him and the proprietor of the 
 Stratford-on-Avon Herald. Both gentlemen are defending the 
 action. 
 
 44 
 
VI 
 The Choice of a Site 
 
 Irresponsible gossip reiterated throughout the 
 controversy that Mr. Carnegie, with a view to 
 associating his name with Shakespeare's, proposed 
 to erect in proximity to Shakespeare's Birthplace 
 an ostentatious building of palatial splendour. 
 Mr. Carnegie has, indeed, been charged with a 
 fixed resolution to '' overshadow, dwarf and hide " 
 Shakespeare's Birthplace by erecting in its near 
 neighbourhood an '' assertive " edifice, which 
 should commemorate his own name. In an article 
 entitled '' The Body Snatchers," in the April 
 number of the monthly review called King and 
 Country^ Miss Corelli wrote that Mr. Carnegie's 
 Library was likely to '' proudly overshadow 
 Shakespeare's Birthplace as a sign-manual of 
 what the over-officiousness of moneyed men can 
 do to dwarf the abode of genius." '' There is 
 only one Henley Street," wrote Lady CoHn 
 ^. Campbell to the Birmingham Daily Post in ''an 
 ■ admirable letter," according to Miss Corelli, which 
 fc'' puts the case in a nutshell," — '' There is only one 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 Henley Street and there is not room in Henley 
 Street for both Shakespeare and Carnegie. Which 
 is to wipe out the other ?" ^ With a moderation, 
 be it said, that is quite praiseworthy in view of 
 the strained language that seems inevitable in 
 Miss Corelli's adherents, the editor of The Sphere 
 lent his support to the like theory on May i6 : 
 '' Something ' magnificent,' suggestive of this 
 generosity of an American millionaire, will arise 
 by the side of Shakespeare's House to the entire 
 dwarfing of the older structure." 
 
 The whole suggestion is a travesty of the truth. ^ 
 
 ^ Miss Corelli's " The Body Snatchers " in the April-June 
 number of King and Country, p. 401. To the same category- 
 should be assigned a singular telegram " from 200 Shake- 
 spearean students," of which the Mayor announced the receipt 
 at the close of the meeting of the Council on May 12. These 
 " students " " viewed," they informed the Mayor, " with the 
 utmost pain and indignation the proposals to erect a 
 Public Free Library in Henley Street, so long sacred to the 
 immortal memory of Shakespeare only. They warmly pro- 
 tested against it, and were resolved if such an act be perpe- 
 trated, to hand down to execration the names of those who 
 perpetrated and consented to the same, united with the name 
 of Francis Gastrell, the destroyer of the Shakespeare mulberry 
 tree." These protesters showed moderation in describing 
 Francis Gastrell, who also demolished Shakespeare's house. 
 New Place, as merely " the destroyer of the Shakespeare 
 mulberry tree." 
 
 * A writer, seeking to explain Miss Corelli's position, in the 
 Sunday Sun of April 26 is responsible for the following : "As 
 I understand it, the local authorities are willing that Mr. Car- 
 negie should present their township with a new and up-to-date 
 palace of literature, with all the latest architectural nicknacks 
 and the finest things in Pittsburg fixings ; the said palace to he 
 
 46 
 
THE LIBRARY SITE 
 
 The only part that Mr. Carnegie has played in 
 the business has been to promise payment for 
 the library building, whatever the form the 
 Corporation allotted to it, and on whatever 
 site they placed it. He has expressed the wish 
 that his name should not be bestowed on the 
 building and that it should be merely called 
 "The Stratford Free Public Library." 
 
 reared in close proximity to Shakespeare' s Birthplace — adjoining 
 the garden thereof, on a site now held by two quaint cottages of 
 ancient though rich Elizabethan design." The passage needs 
 no comment, but I italicize one clause which unconcernedly 
 assigns a wrong site to the Library, and misconceives the object 
 with which Mr. Carnegie purchased the cottages. Another 
 writer in The New Liberal Review for June goes a step 
 further in a like tirade which, by its references to Mr. 
 Carnegie, constitutes a curious specimen of taste. The 
 writer asserts : ''In this one instance [of his gift of a library 
 to Stratford-on-Avon] Mr. Carnegie has broken his rule of not 
 providing the site. Why does he do so in this instance and 
 in no other, save for the notion which is being held on to by 
 the local authorities with truly pig-headed obstinacy, in the 
 face of the protest of every member of the archaeological 
 society and of every one else with anything like a grain of 
 intelligence, that it would be a neat and good thing to have 
 Carnegie in the same street with Shakespeare. No doubt 
 Mr. Carnegie loves Stratford-on-Avon. So do I — and there 
 are others. But it is overdoing affection if one indulges in 
 the rib-breaking embrace of the bear. Mr. Carnegie has 
 purchased the site of the cottages adjoining the birthplace of 
 Shakespeare. Let him see to it that better use is made of the 
 site than the immodest projection of his own name with that 
 of Shakespeare. Even if the old cottages ought to be pulled 
 down (rather a sudden discovery), there is no argument in this 
 for the erection of a Norman Shaw faked Tudor structure." 
 It will be seen that this writer is as misinformed as most of his 
 fellows in regard to the actual site of the Hbrary. 
 
 47 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 The circumstances of the case excluded from 
 the Corporation's consideration an elaborate 
 architectural design. The cost of maintaining 
 the new Library was to fall on the rates,. and the 
 rateable value of a little town like Stratford was 
 quite small. Consequently the authorities were 
 debarred by their legal obligations from ever con- 
 templating the erection of any but a building of 
 modest dimensions which would alone be appro- 
 priate to the size' and rateable capacity of the place. ^ 
 
 The selection of the Henley Street site was in- 
 duced by like imperative practical considerations, 
 and, despite all the bold assertions to the contrary, 
 no rational archaeological interests are jeopardized 
 thereby. 
 
 The Corporation already owned, in Henley 
 Street, premises which, though they were long 
 occupied as a china-shop, could be turned to 
 municipal uses with the smallest possible burden 
 to the ratepayers. This arrangement was at once 
 sanctioned by the Local Government Board. 
 On one side, these premises were bounded by the 
 row of cottages which have been transferred by 
 Mr. Carnegie to the Birthplace Trustees. On 
 the other side stood the vacant land of which the 
 
 ^ The original design prepared by the local architect, Mr. 
 Holtom, and published in the Sir atford-on- Avon Herald on 
 August 15, 1902, is the best refutation of the baseless sug- 
 gestions of " millionaire magnificence." It has been adapted 
 by Mr. Edgar Flower in the sketch reproduced on page 55, 
 and is in its main aspects to be carried out. 
 
 48 
 

 T 
 
 \m^^ 
 
 r "' " \ T 
 
 i\m^^ 
 
 
 Tpl v^-i 
 
 V 
 
 
 \\_ 
 
 \ " 
 
 ^m 
 
 2 J^iSiu m, 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 appropriation to the purpose of a Library was 
 already in contemplation. 
 
 To unite that, still vacant plot with the adjacent 
 site of the Corporation's premises was eminently 
 desirable on grounds alike economical and 
 archaeological. Firstly, the union secured for 
 the projected Library a modest area of con- 
 venient extent. Secondly, it has to be borne in 
 mind that the vacant plot of land adjoined on its 
 further limit the Municipal Technical School, and 
 that, by setting up the Library in proximity to 
 the School, the Corporation would be able to 
 practise the wise economy of placing both in- 
 stitutions under a single administration. Thirdly 
 (and this point is not the least important of the 
 three), it was well known that, were the vacant 
 land not soon secured for public purposes, it was 
 destined for a new shop of unattractive modern 
 type. Mr. Edgar Flower, whose liberality and 
 zeal for the welfare of Stratford are as conspicuous 
 as his artistic skill and knowledge, rendered the 
 town the best of services, from every point of view, 
 by purchasing the vacant land at the price asked 
 by its owner and by handing it over to the Cor- 
 poration to form part of the site of the new 
 Library. 
 
 Of all the censure passed on the Corporation or 
 Trustees in the course of the controversy, prob- 
 ably the least justifiable is the adverse criticism 
 levelled at the Corporation on account of the 
 
 50 
 
&5 4) 
 
 < -5 
 
 K ft 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 policy that it adopted in regard to its Henley 
 Street premises (now used as a china-shop). All 
 manner of erroneous information has been put 
 into circulation on the subject. The present con- 
 dition and the historical associations of the 
 building have been incessantly misrepresented. It 
 has been christened quite erroneously " the house 
 of Shakespeare's cousin/' and that misnomer 
 has even defaced a resolution passed by the 
 British Archaeological Association. The National 
 Trust for Places of Historic and Natural Beauty 
 offered early in May to purchase the building 
 of the Corporation, in order to preserve it intact, 
 and ^' to make of it a special feature of Stratford- 
 on-Avon." In spite of the obvious signs of modern 
 reparation which it presented, the Secretary of the 
 National Trust described the shop as ''an almost 
 unique dwelling-house of the Shakespearean period , 
 and well worth maintaining in its unmodernized 
 condition,'' 
 
 The circumstance that the Corporation had for 
 several months been patiently taking the best ad- 
 vice, with a view to preserving in the building what- 
 ever was of ancient value, was as completely 
 ignored by the National Trust when offering to 
 buy the building, which was not for sale, as 
 by other antiquarian societies, which at the 
 same time petitioned the Corporation to delay 
 all action on every manner of irrelevant ground. 
 It was stated over and over again that the 
 
 52 
 
^i.'Y»,-;; ^ 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 Corporation had obstinately resolved to destroy 
 the china-shop root and branch, after their 
 adoption of a report to the exactly opposite effect.^ 
 
 ^ On May 17, five days after the Town Council had publicly 
 adopted the report of the Library Committee recommending 
 the preservation of all sound portions of the house, and the 
 restoration of the rest, Miss Corelli remarked to the O.P. 
 Club : " We ask for this house ; we who love Shakespeare 
 want it cared for and kept intact on behalf of the nation, and 
 this is what we are denied by the Executive Committee of the 
 very Trustees who profess to guard what they are deliber- 
 ately prepared to destroy." The confusion here is very 
 great. The Executive Committee of the Birthplace Trustees 
 had nothing to do with the fate of the Corporation's china-shop. 
 The Library Committee of the Corporation which recommended 
 the Corporation to keep the shop standing, and the Corpora- 
 tion which adopted that recommendation, are compelled by 
 statute law to " guard " the ratepayers' interests. They 
 are in no position to " profess to guard " anything else. 
 
 This report is printed in full in Appendix IL 
 
 54 
 

 
 m 5 « 
 
 W 4,73 
 
 M 0) in 
 
 2 Is 
 
 
VII 
 
 The History of the China-Shop 
 
 The authentic history of the premises is extant 
 in the Corporation archives. At the time of Shake- 
 speare's birth they were leased to one Gilbert 
 Bradley, who was soon succeeded by one William 
 Wilson. The Thomas Greene, to whom the lease 
 passed in 1609, ^^^ there described as a yeoman 
 of the neighbouring village of Bishopton. He 
 is, on no showing, identifiable with the better 
 known Thomas Greene, who was the first Town 
 Clerk of Stratford, and is often called, on purely 
 conjectural grounds, Shakespeare's cousin ; in 
 any case the relationship must have been very 
 distant. Miss Corelli and her friends never tire 
 of writing and speaking of the china-shop as " the 
 house of Shakespeare's cousin," in spite of clear 
 evidence to the contrary. ** We are pleading," 
 she told the O.P. Club on May 17, '' for the quaint 
 little half-timbered (sic) dwelling of one Thomas 
 Greene, once Town Clerk of Stratford, and 
 cousin to Shakespeare himself." The Town 
 
 56 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 Clerk lived, not in Henley Street, but in the very 
 differently situated thoroughfare of Old Town, 
 sometimes called in the records " Old Stratford." 
 In his official capacity, as his extant autograph 
 notes attest, he negotiated the leasing-out of the 
 Henley Street shop to his namesake '' of Bishop- 
 ton,"^ and was always careful in his entries in the 
 Corporation minute books to distinguish between 
 himself and the resident in Henley Street, who 
 bore his own appellation, w^henever it was need- 
 ful to mention either. 
 
 By 1781 the house had fallen into ruinous 
 condition, and shortly afterwards a new brick 
 front replaced the old timber fagade, which was 
 entirely demolished. But time's ravages were 
 not stayed, and in 1831 the practical re-building 
 of the whole edifice was urgently recommended. 
 
 That suggestion was imperfectly acted upon, 
 and by 1855 the premises became uninhabitable. 
 For twenty months they were unoccupied ; they 
 were then let to the father of the present occupiers 
 
 ^ The Henley Street Thomas Greene was sworn a burgess 
 of Stratford on September i, 1615, and the entry to that effect 
 in the minutes of the Town Council or " Common hall " is in 
 the handwriting of the Town Clerk, Thomas Greene, who was 
 careful to interlineate the distinguishing words " of Henley 
 Street " after his namesake's appellation. Again, in the 
 minutes of the Council meeting held on January 30, 1617-8, 
 a statement respecting the payment by Thomas Greene 
 of £10 for a new lease of his house in Henley Street is followed 
 by a reference to "the house that Mr. Thomas Greene dwelled 
 in in Old Stratford. " 
 
 58 
 
THE CHINA-SHOP 
 
 on condition that he put them in '* tenantable 
 repair." This was done as crudely and as cheaply 
 as possible ; but it is difficult to understand how, 
 in presence of the fact that the house had parted 
 with its timber front at the close of the eighteenth 
 century, and had undergone frequent alterations 
 since, the Secretary of the National Trust can 
 justify his description of it seven weeks ago as 
 '' an almost unique dwelling-house of the Shake- 
 spearean period in unmodernized condition." 
 Archaeological enthusiasm here seems to have 
 signally overstepped the bounds of accuracy. 
 
 The house is now in a very bad state. The 
 greater part of the parapet of the modern brick 
 front has fallen down. In the ordinary course of 
 events the Corporation would be legally obliged 
 to provide for the house's entire reconstruction. 
 
 The assignment of the premises to a public 
 object renders possible renovation which shall 
 be in fuller harmony with archaeological senti- 
 ment of the practicable kind. Mr. Cossins, the 
 architect, who was at first of opinion that the 
 building was too dilapidated to make its pre- 
 servation feasible, subsequently advised the Cor- 
 poration that the premises might after thorough 
 reparation be adapted to the purposes of a library 
 without detriment to any structural work of 
 really ancient origin that could be safely retained. 
 
 The Corporation accepted Mr. Cossins' final advice 
 without any demur. At the same time it ^was 
 
 59 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 decided that the new modest building to be 
 erected as part of the hbrary on the adjacent 
 vacant land should strictly conform in style and 
 elevation with the renovated premises. Mr. 
 Cossins' advice has now received the full approval 
 of the Society for the Protection of Ancient 
 Buildings. At the invitation of the Library 
 Committee of the Corporation, Mr. Thackeray 
 Turner, the Secretary of the Society, in company 
 with another member, inspected the china-shop 
 premises on May 29. They have since reported 
 that '' the premises are well worthy of pre- 
 servation from their interest and age," and that 
 *' undoubtedly such buildings would be more 
 likely to be permanently preserved if regularly 
 used and occupied, which seems to have 
 been only partially the case for some years." 
 The report calls attention to the fact that 
 '' the modern brick front ... is not struc- 
 turally in a sound condition, and it cannot be, 
 because the houses being of timber, and the 
 front of brick, there is no satisfactory bond 
 between them." It is recommended that the 
 whole of the ancient work which remains inside 
 the house should be retained unaltered, but that 
 a new timber front should be constructed. Useful 
 suggestions follow as to the materials that it would 
 be desirable to employ and the general principles 
 of simplicity that should be respected.^ The 
 * For the full report see Appendix III. 
 60 
 
THE CHINA-SHOP 
 
 Society's report is in full accord with all that 
 the Stratford authorities have done or sought to 
 do. 
 
 In view of this report of the Society for the 
 Protection of Ancient Buildings, it is interesting 
 to recall the action taken by the British Archaeo- 
 logical Association. On May 20 the Association 
 passed a resolution in which the china-shop was 
 once more called, without qualification, *' the 
 house of Shakespeare's cousin " ; and it was 
 peremptorily declared, in direct conflict with the 
 report of the Society for Protecting Ancient 
 Buildings, that '' the removal of the brick front 
 ought not to be carried out." On June 24 Mr. 
 George Patrick, A.R.I.B.A., the honorary secre- 
 tary of the Archaeological Association, addressed 
 to his Chairman and Council an official report, 
 made on their instructions, in regard to the whole 
 question. Again the china-shop was *' stated to 
 have been the house of Shakespeare's cousin," 
 and the further intelligence was offered that ^^ at a 
 later date it was believed to have been occupied 
 by Mr. Collins, the lawyer who drew up Shake- 
 speare's will." The second statement finds no 
 more support than the first in the complete set 
 of legal papers affecting the house which are pre- 
 served in the Corporation archives. Neverthe- 
 less, Mr. Patrick proceeded to give expression 
 to his fear that '' the proposed alterations to 
 the interior of the house " would destroy ** its 
 
 61 
 
THE ALLEGED VANDALISM 
 
 identity as the house occupied by a relative of 
 Shakespeare." ^ 
 
 ^ The whole of Mr. Patrick's report is curiously incon- 
 clusive. He describes the side of the house that is now 
 exposed by the demolitions of the adjoining cottages as " in 
 a very dilapidated condition, requiring very careful reparation, 
 and that without further delay. Some of the timbers are 
 quite decayed, and others show the action of fire at some 
 period. This house appears to have had, originally, an over- 
 hanging front, as the recent demolition alluded to has ex- 
 posed the angle storey post and curved bracket of massive 
 timber. Careful reparation of this side with old sound timber, 
 of which, I am informed, there is plenty available from other 
 demolished houses in the town, and the filling in of the inter- 
 spaces with good ' rough-cast,' is what I would venture to 
 recommend for its preservation, together with careful pointing 
 of the exposed brickwork." Mr. Patrick repeats the previously 
 expressed view of the Association that " it would be a mistake 
 to remove the red brick front or to carry out the proposed 
 alterations (of Mr. Cossins), as the house does not appear to 
 me to be suitable to the purposes of a library. . . , Carefully 
 repaired, as above suggested, the house will last for many 
 years, and will be available for other public purposes." Here 
 Mr. Patrick appears to labour under the delusion that the 
 Corporation enjoys immunity from the ordinary legal obli- 
 gation of keeping its corporate property in thorough and 
 permanent repair, and that it is at liberty to devote at will 
 propertv in a dilapidated or semi-repaired state to undefined 
 public purposes which serve no known pubhc requirements. 
 The main effect of the Corporation's retention of the damaged 
 fa9ade, which has neither historic nor archaeological interest, 
 would be, apart from questions affecting the Corporation's 
 obligations in regard to the due maintenance of its property, 
 to bolster up for the few years longer that the front might 
 still survive the spurious claim to real antiquity which 
 has been urged in its behalf. It is right to add that Mr. 
 Patrick, in conclusion, admits " the difficulty of the posi- 
 tion in which the Corporation of Stratford-on-Avon, the 
 Birthplace Trustees and the Library Committee are placed." 
 
 62 
 
THE CHINA-SHOP 
 
 Moreover, in a letter addressed to the Birmingham 
 Gazette on July 4 Mr. Patrick said : " As to the communi- 
 cations that have passed between the local authorities, Mr. A. 
 Flower and myself, on behalf of my Council, I can only say 
 we have been treated with the greatest courtesy, and I trust 
 our views have been expressed with like consideration." 
 
 03 
 
VIII 
 
 Conclusion 
 
 Thus it will be recognized that, so far from 
 destroying '' historic Henley Street/' the Trustees 
 and the Corporation, through the generous aid of 
 Mr. Carnegie, are doing precisely the opposite. 
 They are permanently preserving all structural 
 work in houses under their control there, which 
 has proved on accurate examination to possess any 
 kind of archaeological interest. The process of 
 modernizing Henley Street has in past years 
 progressed very far, and of late, but for Mr. 
 Carnegie's interposition, threatened a conspicuous 
 advance. That process has now, at an interesting 
 point in the thoroughfare, been arrested, and 
 some careful and scholarly restoration has been 
 made practicable. 
 
 Of the aspersions that have been cast, in the 
 present controversy, on members of the Flower 
 family, which through three generations has 
 devoted itself to the true interests of Stratford 
 and its associations, it need only be said that 
 they injure the repute of no one except that of 
 
 64 
 
 i 
 
CONCLUSION 
 
 their author. Sane pubHc criticism of the work 
 of the Trustees and of the Corporation is, in view 
 of the national interest attaching to their property, 
 to be welcomed. Advice tendered by responsible 
 persons has never, I believe, failed to receive most 
 respectful attention. Every reasonable facility 
 for inspecting what is done, or is proposed to be 
 done, at Stratford is invariably afforded visitors 
 by those in authority. Differences on aesthetic 
 questions are at times inevitable, and admit of 
 temperate discussion. Loud-mouthed censure, 
 based on imperfect or erroneous information, is 
 always to be deprecated and never deserves any- 
 thing but reprobation. 
 
 65 
 
APPENDIX I 
 
 The Birthplace Trustees. 
 
 The Birthplace Trust was created on January i, 
 1848, for the purpose of preserving, on behalf of 
 the public, the house at Strat ford-on- A von known 
 as Shakespeare's Birthplace, with the adjoining 
 building, which had been in the occupation of 
 Shakespeare's father. Other property of Shake- 
 spearean interest was subsequently conveyed to, 
 or acquired by, the Trustees in accordance with 
 the terms of the Trust. In order that '* this 
 national Trust " should be established on a more 
 permanent and efficient basis — '' with due and 
 proper provisions for carrying the same into 
 effect" — an Act of Parliament was passed in 
 1 89 1 ''to incorporate the Trustees and Guardians 
 of Shakespeare's Birthplace, and to vest in them 
 certain lands and other property in Stratford- 
 upon-Avon, including the property known as 
 Shakespeare's Birthplace ; and to provide for the 
 maintenance in connexion therewith of a Library 
 and Museum ; and for other purposes." It is 
 this Act of 1891 which now governs the proceed- 
 ings of the Birthplace Trustees, 
 
 In accordance with the provisions of the Act, 
 
 67 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 the following persons now form the duly consti- 
 tuted body of Trustees — 
 
 EX-OFFICIO TRUSTEES 
 
 The Lord Lieutenant of the County : The Lord Leigh. 
 
 The High Steward of the Borough : 
 
 The Mayor of the Borough : George Martin Bird, Esq.* 
 
 The Aldermen of the Borough : W. G. Colbourne,* 
 R. Latimer Greene,* R. Hawkes, A. E. Park, 
 W. Pearce, J. Smallwood. 
 
 The Justices of the Peace for the Borough : R. M. Bird, 
 Esq.,* G. Boyden, Esq., Jas. Cox, Esq.,* R, Latimer 
 Greene, Esq., R. Hawkes, Esq., W. Hutchings, 
 Esq., J.J. Nason, Esq., M.B.,* J. Smallwood, Esq. 
 
 The Town Clerk of the Borough : Robert Lunn, Esq. 
 
 The Vicar of the Parish : The Rev. G. Arbuthnot, M.A.* 
 
 The Head Master of the Grammar School : The Rev. 
 CoRNWELL Robertson, M.A. 
 
 LIFE TRUSTEES 
 
 Ernest Edward Baker, Esq., F.S.A. 
 
 The Rev. Canon Evans, M.A. 
 
 Edgar Flower, Esq., J. P.* 
 
 Archibald Dennis Flower, Esq., C.C* 
 
 The Lord Ronald Sutherland Gower, F.S.A. 
 
 Frederick Haines, Esq., F.S.A. 
 
 Sir Henry Irving. 
 
 Sidney Lee, Esq., Litt.D.* 
 
 Sir Theodore Martin, K.C.B., K.C.V.O. 
 
 The Earl of Warwick, D.L., J. P. 
 
 In Miss Corelli's article called '* The Body 
 Snatchers," which appeared in the April- June 
 
 * Members of the Executive Committee. 
 68 
 
THE BIRTHPLACE TRUSTEES 
 
 number of King and Country^ she printed with 
 various comments the names of these Trustees. 
 The Ex-ofhcio members she described as " all ex- 
 cellent, well meaning and worthy men, but none 
 of them even profess to be deeply skilled in 
 matters literary or artistic. . . . Only three may 
 presumably claim to have received a thorough 
 literary education/' viz., the Lord Lieutenant, 
 the Vicar, and the Schoolmaster. Of the Life 
 Trustees, she declared that all excepting two were 
 inactive, but that these two, viz., *' Edgar Flower, 
 brewer ; and Archibald Dennis Flower, his son, 
 likewise brewer . . . may be plainly said to 
 ' manage ' the whole thing." 
 
 On May 5, in a speech which was addressed to 
 the Selborne Society at its annual meeting (held 
 in London under the chairmanship of Lord 
 Avebury, president of the Society), and was 
 fully reported in Nature Notes : The Selborne 
 Society's Magazine for June, Miss Corelli said, 
 *'The existing Act of Parliament with respect to 
 the Birthplace was not sufficiently protective; it 
 vested all business in the hands of certain persons 
 acting as Trustees on behalf of the nation." In 
 ignorance of the mode of co-optative election 
 provided by the Act, which imposes no manner 
 of pecuniary qualification. Miss Corelli proceeded 
 to state : '' Every person being the donor of 
 £100 could be a Trustee."^ After deploring 
 
 ^ The clause dealing with the election of Life Trustees (Ex- 
 officio succeed in virtue of their office) runs thus : — 
 " Whenever, by death, resignation or otherwise, any one or 
 
 69 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 the devotion of any part of Henle}^ Street to 
 the purposes of a Library, and announcing her 
 fear that Mr. Carnegie was unhkely to suggest 
 any change of site, *' as he had said in a letter to 
 her that he had full faith in the local authorities," 
 Miss Corelli remarked, *' The only local authority 
 he [i.e. Mr. Carnegie] knew or whom he had met or 
 conversed with was Mr. Flower, the brewer. He 
 [i.e. Mr. Carnegie] said in a most vague way that 
 the Shakespeare Society at the Birthplace had 
 thanked him for his gift." Mr. Carnegie, by a 
 slip of the pen, evidently wrote *' Shakespeare 
 Society " for '' Shakespeare Trustees." Never- 
 theless, Miss Corelli continued thus : '' That 
 just showed the muddle the poor man was in, for 
 there was no Shakespeare Society at the Birth- 
 place. Mr. Flower, the brewer, dominated all the 
 rest. Was it right that such a possession should 
 be governed by one or two local men, who were 
 neither students nor lovers of Shakespeare, but 
 merely interested in trade ? " 
 
 On May 17 Miss Corelli addressed a crowded 
 meeting of the O.P. Club in London on the subject 
 
 more of the Life Trustees by this Act appointed shall cease 
 to act, then and in every such case the Trustees shall, at a 
 meeting convened, with notice of the object, by a circular 
 in writing, addressed to every Trustee by the Secretary (if 
 any) of the Trustees, or if there shall be no Secretary, then 
 by the Town Clerk of the Borough of Stratford-upon-Avon, 
 not less than two nor more than three weeks before the day 
 of such meeting, and at which meeting not less than five 
 Trustees shall be present, proceed to appoint a Trustee or 
 Trustees to fill the vacancy so created." 
 
 70 
 
THE BIRTHPLACE TRUSTEES 
 
 of '* the demolition of certain portions of Shake- 
 speare's birth street." Of the Birthplace Trust 
 she spoke as follows (I quote a shorthand writer's 
 notes) : '' Ladies and Gentlemen, — We have heard 
 of big Trusts : Trusts that spring up in a night 
 like mushrooms to wither in the morning ; Trusts 
 that are spun like gossamer and are dispersed 
 with the first adverse wind ; Trusts like unsus- 
 pected quicksands absorbing men's lives and 
 fortunes into oblivion ; Trusts that may be, for 
 all we know, as solid as the rocks. But the most 
 curious Trust anybody ever heard of is surely the 
 Shakespeare's Birthplace Trust, which by Act of 
 Parliament in 1891 is stated to be on behalf of 
 the nation, but which has now become entirely 
 involved in a Brewery Company. I do not 
 profess to explain how this quick change Trust 
 has been effected, but that it is so can be affirmed 
 beyond a doubt. Nothing can be suggested, re- 
 solved or carried out at Shakespeare's Birthplace 
 without the authority of the principals of the 
 Brewery. All the custodians, committees or libraries 
 are under the same government absolutely. The 
 nation is represented there, not in a form of con- 
 sideration and respect for the poetic term, but 
 for the prosaic beer barrel. The Chairman of the 
 Executive Committee (Edgar Flower) is a brewer ; 
 his son, Archibald Flower, who is alone responsible 
 for forcing Mr. Carnegie into this matter against 
 all the appeals and protests of learned and literary 
 Societies, is likewise a brewer. These are the 
 principals of the Trust on behalf of the nation. 
 
 71 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 There are other Trustees who are not brewers, but 
 learned and distinguished men ; but these seldom, 
 I may almost say never, attend the meetings. 
 The Executive Committee nominate a few orna- 
 mental persons whose names are a guarantee of 
 a description, but whose daily-life business makes 
 their attendance well-nigh impossible. The rest 
 are selected among purely local individuals.'' 
 
 These quotations more especially illustrate 
 the habitual tone of the criticism to which 
 two of the Birthplace Trustees, Mr. Edgar 
 Flower and Mr. A. D. Flower, have been subjected 
 throughout the controversy. The remarks are 
 not in themselves worthy of notice. True 
 lovers of Strat ford-on- A von, alike in this country 
 and in America, are familiar with the benefits 
 that the Flower family has continually conferred 
 on the town through fully seventy years. The 
 late Mr. Edward Fordham Flower, Mr. Edgar 
 Flower's father, was one of four local residents 
 whose purchase on their own responsibility in 
 1847 of Shakespeare's Birthplace enabled the 
 building to be permanently preserved as a national 
 trust. Regard for the welfare of Stratford and for 
 the memory of Shakespeare has always governed 
 the family's public and private life. 
 
 An anonymous writer in the Birmingham Gazette 
 on June 30, writing over the signature '* Fiat 
 Lux," stated in reply to such portion of my state- 
 ment as was published in that newspaper the 
 day before : '* Mr. Sidney Lee, among other 
 diffuse matter, speaks of ' aspersions cast on the 
 
 72 
 
THE BIRTHPLACE TRUSTEES 
 
 Flower family/ No one is aware that any 
 aspersions have been cast on any particular 
 'family.'" The extracts that I print above 
 will scarcely permit ''Fiat Lux" to deny again 
 that aspersions — and aspersions, indeed, of singu- 
 lar unseemliness — have been more than once cast 
 upon the Flower family in this controversy. 
 
 I happily find myself in full accord with the 
 further observation of "Fiat Lux" that "this'is 
 a matter in which all personalities should be sunk 
 in consideration of a national feeling." 
 
 73 
 
APPENDIX II 
 
 The Library Committee's Report adopted by 
 the Town Council, on May 12, 1903 
 
 The Committee, which consisted of the Mayor 
 (Councillor Bird), Alderman Smallwood, Council- 
 lors Flower and Greenway, reported as follows — 
 
 " The Committee has held many meetings since 
 its appointment. Mr. E. G. Holtom was in- 
 structed to prepare plans, and Mr. Jethro A. 
 Cossins (who represents the Society for the Protec- 
 tion of Ancient Buildings) was called in to assist, 
 and particularly to advise as to the treatment of 
 the old house used as a china shop. 
 
 *' At first Mr. Cossins reported that, owing to 
 the very small remains of the old building, the 
 dilapidated condition of the property, and the 
 difficulty of adapting it, he advised its entire 
 removal ; but since then he has twice very care- 
 fully examined the building and gone closely into 
 the matter with Mr. Holtom, and is now of opinion 
 that a part of the old timber framed structure 
 may be preserved. 
 
 ** The precise form the elevation will assume 
 will depend largely upon what is revealed by 
 puUing down the modern brick front. It is 
 feared that it will be found that all the framing 
 has been destroyed, but the position and propor- 
 
 74 
 
REPORT ADOPTED BY TOWN COUNCIL 
 
 tions of the old gable will be apparent, and pos- 
 sibly some further small parts may remain. 
 
 " Mr. Cossins fully approves of the revised de- 
 sign which Mr. Holtom has made. 
 
 ** The building on the ground between the china 
 shop and the Technical School will be in the same 
 style as the old house, while the modern ware- 
 house at the back will be replaced by a reading- 
 room in character with the other buildings. 
 
 ** Arrangements having been made for the 
 accommodation elsewhere of Messrs. Birch as 
 from March 25, the work might have been com- 
 menced on that date, but as the outside public 
 had shown great interest in this matter, it was 
 thought well to wait until after the Shakespeare 
 Festival in order that visitors to the town might 
 have a good opportunity of seeing the site before 
 it was touched. 
 
 '' Many persons, who did not know or remember 
 the actual surroundings, had been led to believe 
 that some beautiful old cottages were to be re- 
 placed by a huge red-brick modern structure. 
 
 '' It is satisfactory to note that, after inspection, 
 the general verdict has been favourable to the 
 suggestions of the Committee, and it is particu- 
 larly gratifying to know that Mr. Sidney Colvin, 
 who wrote a severe letter of condemnation to the 
 Times, and whose opinion is highly esteemed, has 
 now inspected the site and entirely changed his 
 views. 
 
 '* There is now nothing to prevent the work 
 being carried out." 
 
 is 
 
APPENDIX III 
 
 Report of Mr. Thackeray Turner, Secretary of 
 the Society for the Protection of Ancient 
 Buildings, and another Member of that 
 Society, to the Committee of that Society 
 
 *' To the Committee of the Society for the Protec- 
 tion of Ancient Buildings. 
 
 *' We have to report that on Friday, May 29, 
 we visited the buildings in Henley Street, Strat- 
 ford-on-Avon, as to which there has been con- 
 siderable controversy in the Press. 
 
 *' The building to which our attention was 
 directed is one which is occupied as a china shop, 
 on the same side of the street as the Birthplace of 
 Shakespeare. It is for the most part (and origin- 
 ally was wholly) of half-timber and plaster work, 
 without very decided architectural style, buc 
 most probably belonging to the sixteenth century. 
 It appears to have consisted of two distinct 
 houses, built at different times, but with no long 
 interval between, and has suffered some alteration 
 and addition in the course of centuries, the most 
 important of which is a brick face, which com- 
 pletely replaced the street fronts of the two houses, 
 and reduced them to one uniformly flat^surface. 
 
 76 
 
MR. TURNER'S REPORT 
 
 On the west side, however, two modern cottages 
 have lately been removed, and it can be seen that 
 the front of the upper storey of the house on that 
 side hung over the lower by a foot or two, the oak 
 bracket and post supporting it still remaining in 
 position. In the upper room some of the floor 
 boards of the portion that overhung have been 
 taken up, and it can be seen that at the eastern 
 end the beams have been supplemented so as to 
 carry out the floor to meet the wall and make it 
 lineable with the adjoining house, which it was 
 not originally. 
 
 '' On the other side of the china shop is a blank 
 space a few yards wide (on which stood a modern 
 house burnt down some years ago), and beyond 
 it the new buildings of a Technical School, with 
 an entrance from Henley Street. 
 
 " It appears to us unfortunate that a new 
 building so large and of such obtrusive architec- 
 tural character should have been erected in an 
 ancient part of Stratford, but it is there, and we 
 understand that it is desirable that the proposed 
 Public Library should adjoin it so as to be under 
 one administrative staff. We also understand 
 that it is proposed to utilize the old houses above 
 described (known as the china shop) for the pur- 
 pose of the Library, and to connect them by new 
 work with the Technical School. 
 
 '* We consider that the old houses (even apart 
 from the great probability of their being a part of 
 the street as it was in Shakespeare's time) were 
 well worthy of careful preservation from their 
 
 77 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 intrinsic interest and age, and that undoubtedly 
 such buildings would be more likely to be perma- 
 nently preserved if regularly used and occupied, 
 which seems to have been only partially the case 
 for some years. It is certain, however, if the 
 houses can no longer be retained for their original 
 domestic use, that in adapting them to the pur- 
 poses of a Library, the modern brick front must 
 be so extensively altered that its present character 
 would cease to exist. Moreover, it is not structur- 
 ally in a sound condition, and it cannot be, because 
 the houses being of timber, and the front of brick, 
 there is no satisfactory bond between them. 
 
 ^' This brings us to the conclusion that if the 
 buildings are to be used for a Library, a new front 
 must be erected, and we consider that the whole 
 of the ancient work which remains can be, and 
 ought to be, retained unaltered, literally ; and to 
 do this it is desirable, if not essential, that the 
 new front should be constructed of timber. 
 
 ** In doing this we would urge that the purposes 
 for which the building will have to be used should 
 not be subordinated to any desire to * restore * 
 the old front, that the doors and windows should 
 be of the sizes and in the positions most suitable 
 for convenient access and lighting ; that the aim 
 should be primarily the upholding of the ancient 
 work, and after that has been secured, the char- 
 acter of the new work should be dictated by the 
 uses which it will have to fulfil, no attempt being 
 made to follow the old work in design. 
 
 " We advise that English oak should be used 
 
 78 
 
 J 
 
MR. TURNER'S REPORT 
 
 as far as possible in bulk, unworked, that no oil 
 or varnish should be applied to the oak, and that 
 no mouldings, chamfers, or other ornamental 
 features should be introduced. We suggest that 
 the ground floor might be filled in between the 
 structural posts, doors, windows, etc., with brick, 
 and in order to avoid the ugly large modern 
 bricks, old ones might be made use of. 
 
 '' In order to retain all the old work, the upper 
 storey of one house must necessarily overhang 
 the lower, and its base line cease to coincide with 
 that of the adjoining one. 
 
 '* We would also suggest that plaster or rough- 
 cast might suitably be employed, blue lias lime 
 being used as the cementing material. Cement 
 should be avoided, for its undesirable quality for 
 such purposes is exemplified in Shakespeare's 
 Birthplace. 
 
 (Signed) '' Oliver Baker. 
 
 '' Thackeray Turner. 
 
 ** June 2, 1903." 
 
 79 
 
Butler & Tanner, The Sclwood Printing Works, Frome, and London. 
 

 ' 
 
 n«^o j_oo r 
 
 « 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 f 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ivi551837 
 
 yCl50S43