Maxwell Craven, ‘ Grange, ’, The Georgian Group Journal, Vol. xV, 2006, pp. 215–228

text © the authors 2006 LITTLEOVER GRANGE, DERBYSHIRE

MAXWELL CRAVEN

ewis Nockalls Cottingham has been justly  ]’, but another drawing in the same sale (‘Sketch L lauded for his important contribution to the for Additions &c to Snelston Hall’) was dated  June Gothic revival, but in re-establishing his reputation,  , although also drawn on paper watermarked Janet Myles was unable to find much of his work in  . The drawings are therefore Cottingham’s the classical style, beyond an early scheme for south proposals for John Harrison’s house, Littleover London housing, preliminary ideas for Snelston Hall Grange, and they must have been made some time, in Derbyshire and a number of ambitious but unbuilt perhaps shortly, after  . schemes for public buildings in the capital.  This John Harrison was a attorney, who article discusses some previously unpublished inherited Snelston Hall in  , and Yeldersley Hall designs by Cottingham for a classical villa at in  , both through his wife. His ownership of Littleover on the south-western edge of Derby, and Littleover was not previously known.  However, he suggests that the house which was built there was a was described as of Littleover in his father-in-law’s reduced version of one of Cottingham’s proposals, will, proved in  ; a valuation of the parish of probably by the local amateur architect Richard Littleover in  reveals that Harrison then owned Leaper. The house was altered in  – , enlarged  acres,  rods and  perches of land there; and in  and again in  by T.H.Thorpe and directories establish that his house there was Partners, gutted by fire in  , and subsequently Littleover Grange.  rebuilt to the designs of Mr Graham Watson (Fig. ). Harrison was the son of the first marriage of The drawings (formerly in the Stanton collection another John Harrison, who appears to have from Snelston Hall, and for many years on deposit at established the family fortune.  The elder Harrison the Derbyshire Record Office) were sold in  . had been a yeoman in the village of Normanton-by- They were catalogued as designs for Snelston Hall, Derby (then actually part of the parish of St Peter, although one was entitled ‘A Design for a Villa Derby). He was baptised there on  October  , intended to be erected at Little Over, near Derby for and on becoming a freeman of Derby on  March John Harrison Esqr’. This drawing was marked  he was described as a framesmith.  But in  ‘No. ’, and another eleven, marked with sequential he set up in business as an attorney, and took Samuel numbers up to  (with two sheets, Nos.  and , Richardson Radford into partnership in  . The missing), were clearly part of the sequence. Another route by which he navigated his career through such unnumbered sheet was entitled ‘A Design for a Villa changes in less than eighteen years seems to be lost for Mr Harrison’, and appears to have represented an to us, but his purchase, shortly before his death, of alternative design. All were in pen and wash, signed Mundy House, The Wardwick, Derby, from Edward by Cottingham, but none were dated. The paper was Miller-Mundy of Shipley Hall, MP, may imply a watermarked ‘Turkey Mill J Whatman  [or powerful patron.  The elder Harrison first married

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE

Fig. . Littleover Grange, Derby, south elevation. Maxwell Craven ,  .

Juliana Saxelby, who died on  June  , leaving and Derbyshire bench, and in  he served as High him with two daughters and a son – the younger Sheriff of Derbyshire. He obtained a grant of arms in John. In January  he married Mary, daughter of  . His retirement was occasioned both by the Revd. George Almond, whilom headmaster of Derby death of his father-in-law the year before and by the School, who had married another Normanton termination of an inheritance dispute two years yeoman’s daughter; indeed, conceivably Harrison previously, which Harrison had been instrumental in and his second wife were kin.  By this marriage resolving self-interestedly.  Harrison had a third daughter, Mary.  He died on His father-in-law was Edmund Evans of  January  . Yeldersley Hall, whose daughter and heiress, The younger John Harrison, was born on  June Elizabeth, he had married at St Werburgh’s, Derby,  and was baptised at St Werburgh’s church three on  September  . Evans was a member of a days later. Where he was educated is not clear, but he recently emergent manufacturing family closely allied was at the Inner Temple by  . In  he was in with the Strutts, and he had built Yeldersley Hall a Derby, taking over his father’s practice as an attorney, few years before.  The inheritance dispute, however, and in  he entered into partnership with concerned the Lower Hall estate at Snelston, which Benjamin Frear, retiring in  . On his retirement had descended to the childless Margaret Bowyer, Harrison was appointed to both the Staffordshire Mrs Edward Okeover, during whose time the house

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE

Fig. . Nos.  –, St Mary’s Gate, Derby, stable yard gate piers. Maxwell Craven ,  .

there burnt down. She had then re-married the her death in  , Harrison’s mother-in-law having Revd. Thomas Langley and outlived him. On her pre-deceased her husband in  . Until  , death, Langley’s son, Thomas, her step-son, took therefore, Harrison had reason to contemplate over, but when he died in  , the estate was building a suburban house for himself, conveniently claimed by Elizabeth Harrison and her unmarried near his office at  – St Mary’s Gate. Cottingham’s sister, Sarah Evans, against Thomas’s son, the Revd. drawings for Littleover were presumably made John Langley, and his aunt, Mrs Welch. Elizabeth before this date. Harrison and Sarah Evans, meanwhile had already Nos.  – St Mary’s Gate has a pretty small inherited Snelston Upper Hall, bought by their uncle stable block and coach-house of c. with Soanian in  from the Bowyers.  grooving on the stone gatepiers (Fig. ). Could Harrison established his right to the entire Harrison also have obtained designs for this from Snelston estate in  , proposed extensions to Cottingham?  Janet Myles suggested that Harrison Upper Hall immediately and progressed to ideas for and Cottingham might either have been put in touch a new house on the same site within three and a half by mutual friends in the Inner Temple or through years.  It was eventually built in  . Although he Derby-born Edward Blore, whose father had been a also inherited Yeldersley Hall in  , Edmund Derby attorney and antiquary, said to have served Evans’s second wife remained ensconced there until articles to one E. Evans.  The latter is more

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE persuasive, especially as Harrison himself was a The ground floor fenestration is set in blind arches budding antiquary, or at least a collector of with rather Soanian panelled aprons. The verandah curiosities.  and side portico are omitted. The three chimney Of the drawings sold in  , those numbered , stacks have also acquired some Soanian acroteria .  and  (and apparently the missing No. ) are plans. Nos.  and  both have overhanging eaves. In The proposed house was to be a square of seven No. , on the other hand, the hipped roof rests on the bays, with a central courtyard. No.  (on paper blocking course of a neat, fairly plain cornice (Fig. ). watermarked  ) shows the entrance on the south It too has seven bays, with the three central bays side, with a three-bay break front. A hall with oval recessed and more closely set. It has no ornament lobbies gives access, via a screen, to an imperial other than a continuous first-floor sill band, sunk staircase lit from the courtyard. The east and west panels below the ground floor windows, and a fluted elevations are similar, with end bays which contain a baseless Doric portico framing the door alone. The tripartite window in a modest projection flanking general effect is rather pedestrian, perhaps in part five-bay centres, that on the west having the central because the elevation is given no setting and the bay adapted as a door. The north range was intended drawing itself is less robustly executed. as a service wing. No. , however, is in the style of execution of No.  amplifies this. The screen was to be Ionic Nos.  and , and is closest to what was eventually and the stair, having risen to mezzanine level in a built (Fig. ). The elevation is of five bays only, and single broad flight, divided and turned a right angle the centre was recessed as in No. , with two bays via three further steps before turning again to reach flanking the door, over which is a niche. There is a the landing in two equally broad flights. The hall was tetrastyle Ionic portico spanning the recessed to be flanked by the dining room (west) and the portion, but projecting beyond the side bays, both of drawing room (east), each benefiting from two which are wide with the fenestration recessed almost southerly lights and a tripartite one to the returns. as if between abnormally wide antae . The wide Behind the dining room was to be the breakfast flanking bays are broken up by two-storey recessed room, then ‘John Harrison’s room’ and beyond panels in which the windows are set. The ground ‘John Harrison’s drawing room’. Beyond the main floor has Wyatt windows set in blind segmental drawing room on the east front were staff rooms. arches. Like Nos.  and , the roof has overhanging The courtyard appears to have been intended to eaves, with the addition of barge boards ornamented have a peristyle. by sunk panels. Its chimneys repeat the Soanian Nos. ,  and  are different schemes for the ornament of No. . entrance front. No.  is again of seven bays, with a No.  illustrates the west side elevation and fits three bay pedimented break front (Fig. ). The ground best with the plans of No.  and the elevation of No.  floor has a continuous elegant Doric peristyle. The (Fig. ). It has seven bays, of which the five central first floor sill band develops into pedestals under the bays are slightly recessed and more closely set. It has two windows which flanked the central one; these a single-storey tent-roofed ornamental iron verandah were the only windows not set in a blind arch with of filigree delicacy. The wide end bays are relieved by depressed top. The west side has an iron verandah blind two-storey segmental arches, and their ground- but the east side has a stone or stuccoed portico. floor windows are set within blind round arches, a In No.  the break front is narrower, with a sophisticated and neatly satisfactory arrangement central niche rather than a window, and the peristyle rather reminiscent of Joseph Pickford’s villas of fifty is restricted to it alone, forming a portico (Fig. ). years before. 

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE

Fig. . L.N.Cottingham, proposal drawing No.  for Littleover Grange, c.  – . Mellors and Kirk.

Fig. . L.N.Cottingham, proposal drawing No.  for Littleover Grange, c.  – . Mellors and Kirk.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE

Fig. . L.N.Cottingham, proposal drawing No.  for Littleover Grange, c.  – . Mellors and Kirk.

Fig. . L.N.Cottingham, proposal drawing No.  for Littleover Grange, c.  – . Mellors and Kirk.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE

Fig. . L.N.Cottingham, proposal drawing No.  for Littleover Grange, c.  – . Mellors and Kirk.

Fig. . L.N.Cottingham, proposal drawing No.  for Littleover Grange, c.  – . Mellors and Kirk.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE

Fig. . L.N.Cottingham, proposal drawing No.  for Littleover Grange, stables, c.  – . Mellors and Kirk.

This elevation also shows a lower pavilion to the plan. The main range has  bays, the central trio north, illustrated end-on, apparently connected by a being substantially wider, taller, pedimented and plain low connecting quadrant. This building is centrally embellished with a truly Soanian cylindrical absent from any of the plans that survive, however, and horizontally grooved drum set on three grieces and may represent a phase where Cottingham had and topped by a cupola resting on a cornice under provided for a U-plan house open to the north with an iron weathercock. Without the cupola, however, the service range set back and connected by quadrants. its effect is arrestingly Palladian, each bay alternating No.  is a section of the southern rooms, facing between doors and blind panels, all set in blind north (Fig. ). The central double doors of the hall arches and with small thermal windows above the are flanked by niches filled with statues, as in No. . impost band in each bay. The centrepiece has two The dining room and drawing rooms either side wide end bays flanking a narrow recessed central have dadoes, low pilastered chimney pieces and one, with tall and wide arches below the former and mirrored overmantels. Above, there are two a narrow one with a thermal window above and in bedrooms flanking two dressing rooms, the latter the middle. Above a band, which continues the with a rather archaic arrangement of back-to-back cornice of the wings, are arranged three low tripartite corner fireplaces. No.  is a section of a staircase and windows with a blind depressed arch above each, clearly went with No.  . echoing the treatment of the main façade of the The final pair of drawings are for a substantial house as depicted in Nos.  and  . The pediment is stable block (Fig. ); No.  is an elevation, No.  a embellished with a clock.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE

Fig.  . L.N.Cottingham, unnumbered proposal drawing for Littleover Grange, c.  – . Mellors and Kirk.

The unnumbered design, like No. , is also on appropriate frieze and topped by an iron balustrade. paper watermarked  (Fig.  ). It includes south The west front, of six bays, the two wider central ones (left) and west (right) elevations, ground, first floor recessed and embellished with an iron verandah, and basement plans, a roof plan and a section, all on neatly emphasises this point. The east front, too, of one sheet. The central courtyard is eliminated in this five evenly spaced bays, was to have been embellished scheme and the staircase apse is lit from a court with a central small ornamental iron portico. recessed into the north side. The staff stair runs up No.  specified that the verandah was to be alongside the main one and the landing is galleried wrought, but it is not specified whether the portico with a screen or arcade on the west side in front of balustrade was to be wrought or cast. Derby at this the master suite. The entrance front is of five bays, period had two foundries specialising in ornamental the wide single central one being recessed. And, on work, with a third, Weatherhead, Glover, & Co. of the upper storey, which is separated by a plain band, Duke Street, founded in  . It may be that the the central one was flanked by a pair of niches, each drawings were prepared in Cottingham’s London filled with statuary. The portico below is semi-circular, office, and he was perhaps unaware of the local supported by a pair of baseless Doric columns with availability of cast-iron details. All the designs show

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE the house to have been stuccoed, no doubt with the supervision of a trusted local man and friend like Brookhouse’s Roman Cement, made nearby in Alderman Richard Leaper (  – ),  aided Derby, and very popular at this period amongst local by local builders, probably Joseph and Thomas builders.  Cooper.  Littleover Grange as built was a variant of Certainly the canted bays strongly suggest drawing No. , but with the antae much reduced in Leaper, who used virtually identical ones ab initio width and the chimneys heightened (Fig. ). The on Highfield House, Derby, c. . Leaper may order of the portico became Composite instead of also have seen Cottingham’s drawings, for the plan Ionic and, although there was no outward sign of the on the unnumbered drawing illustrated an elliptical central niche, a workman employed in the cleaning entrance hall leading via a door and cross passage to up of the blackened shell prior to rebuilding in  a dog-leg staircase turning in an apse, and this stair reported that the central first floor exterior niche had arrangement occurs locally at Leaper’s Thornhill been built but later crudely blocked up and stuccoed House, in the district of California, and at Mill Hill over.  The ground-floor end bays were occupied by House, Mill Hill Lane, Derby, complete by  and single storey canted bays with cornices matching that attributable to Leaper, both nearby.  A stable block of the portico and the sill band was replaced by a of epic proportions added to The Pastures, plat band. , which was built to designs by Richard The east elevation as built had only three bays, Leaper for John Peel, cotton spinner, in  , albeit retaining the tripartite window on the return. closely resembles Cottingham’s stable design, the The north front seems originally to have been of five central tower drastically simplified.  Leaper’s sight widely-spaced bays with a central portico of two pairs of Cottingham’s drawings could be explained if he of Composite columns supporting a plain frieze, dentil was the builder of Littleover Grange. cornice and dwarf parapet, a shortened version of the Although there is little documentation of the portico on the south side. The north front was also construction of Littleover Grange, it appears to have asymmetrical, with the west side breaking forward been standing by the time John Harrison’s father-in- considerably, giving the impression that the reduction law died on  October  . By about  it had in accommodation was done crudely by the deletion been let to his fellow attorney and whilom partner, of a third of the east side but not of the west. William Williamson, and Harrison had presumably Clearly the house was built on a much less moved into Snelston. Later still , John Thomas ambitious scale than all the proposals and it may be Morley, a lace manufacturer, lived there, but in  it that the missing drawing No.  embodied this final was sold to the iron founder Reuben Eastwood.  It manifestation. Yet what appears to have been built may well have been he who turned the house round, lacks the refinement of most of the drawings, and adding a portico with paired composite columns on small but telling details appear to have been changed, the north side (Fig.  ). It may also have been him like the addition of surrounds to the windows, where who built the staircase; it was timber, of early on the drawings there were only recessed panels or eighteenth-century type, with carved tread ends and discreet blind arcading. two differently turned balusters (with knops) per It is possible that by the time he was ready to build tread, but in mahogany. This apparently Victorian Harrison realised that he was going to get eventual confection implies the loss of the original hall and possession of Snelston, so reduced his requirement staircase. to a seat that was adequate temporarily and thereafter Eastwood’s most noticeable change was to add a easy to let. If so, Harrison may have left the task to small west extension, set well back from the south

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE

Fig.  . Littleover Grange, Derby, north elevation. Maxwell Craven.

front, which boasted an Italianate campanile with a However, the outbreak of war led to the house being smoking room at the top, lit by paired round-arched requisitioned (and later purchased) by Rolls-Royce windows with prominent keyblocks, an impost band as an overspill development office for Merlin and blind balustrades below the sills, all under a engines. Only a group of yellow brick outbuildings, pyramidal roof (Fig. ). But Eastwood had not without doubt additions for Eastwood, remained actually moved into Littleover Grange, and his with the Council and are still in community use. alterations were incomplete, when he died aged  , Rolls-Royce (colloquially, in Derby, invariably on  February  . ‘Royce’s’) added a rather utilitarian west wing Eastwood was succeeded by his widow, Sarah, containing specialist workshops and lecture rooms the sister of municipal grandee and long-serving MP in vaguely matching style (Fig.  ). It had Crittall Thomas Roe, later st (and last) Lord Roe of Derby, windows but was stuccoed to match the house, and who died there in July  . By then the two painted white. The previous stone colour only Eastwood sons had moved out, leaving it to their four survived on the frieze and entablature of the unmarried sisters. On the death of the last of these, porticoes, and on the cornice and dwarf parapets of Florence Deborah, in  , the house, outbuildings the canted bays. Royce’s used it until the company’s and gardens were sold to the Parish Council for bankruptcy in  when it was vacated and put on £, , and the remainder of the estate went to local the market by the Receiver.  speculative builders, Messrs. Fryer, for £, , and It was quickly purchased, extended and opened were covered with semi-detached housing.  in October  as the headquarters of the Derbyshire

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE

Fig.  . Littleover Grange, Derby, south elevation, showing west wing built by Messrs. Rolls Royce in  . Maxwell Craven.

Freemasons to serve  Derbyshire lodges, although FRIBA, but with brushed aluminium sliding windows. the initiators were the officials of Derby’s original Furthermore, as well as completely renewing the lodge, the Tyrian, founded in  . The stable block interior, the opportunity was taken to extend the was demolished and a vast new wing with a large remaining shell in order to accommodate a Masonic temple at first floor level, over-sailing a banqueting suite, so that part of the building can be lodging for the Tiler, was erected northward from hired out for functions.  This involved drastically the Royce extension, constructed of window-less altering the proportions of the south front by the pre-cast concrete slabs, interspersed with Cornish addition of about eight feet at the east end, and a granite and Norwegian marble. The architects were rather longer addition to the west, completely hiding T. H. Thorpe & Partners of Derby.  the base of Eastwood’s campanile . Further alterations Unfortunately, a close examination of the fabric is were also made on the north side. not now possible, for the entire building caught fire on the early morning of  December  and the original portion was completely gutted. The Freemasons lost a  year-old collection of irreplaceable museum-quality relics and documents.  Since then the house has been rebuilt under the direction of the Masonic architect Graham Watson,

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE

NOTES  She married Maj. George Young, son of Sir William  Janet Myles, L. N. Cottingham  – Architect of Young, nd Bt., of Dominica on  August  , and the Gothic Revival , London,  ,  ,  – ,  – . had ‘numerous issue’ including the Derby architect  Mellors & Kirk, Gregory Street, Lenton Lane, Julian Young, who designed the extension to Nottingham, NG NL, sale of – December  , St Helen’s House, Derby, in  [J. Foster, Peerage , lots  – , catalogue pp.  – . The collection London,  , II,  ; Builder ,  April  ; was broken up amongst a number of purchasers. Burke’s Landed Gentry , London,  – , III,  ].  Ibid ., lot  ; Myles, op. cit. ,  , fig.  .  Burke’s Landed Gentry , London,  , I,  .  It was thought of as a fiefdom of the Heathcote  Mallender, cit . family of the Smythson-esque Littleover Old Hall  M.A.J.B.Craven, ‘A Derbyshire Armory’, Derbyshire [M.A.J.B.Craven & M.F.Stanley, The Derbyshire Record Society , XVII,  ,  . The arms he used Country House , Ashbourne,  ,  – ], and of previously were without authorisation. the Peels, for whom Richard Leaper designed The  Glover, op. cit. , II,  . Pastures in the west of the parish [S. Glover, History  Harrison’s elder sister, Ann (baptised at St Werburgh’s & Gazetteer of Derbyshire , nd edn., Derby,  / ,  Feb.  ), had married James Stanton there on II,  ,  ]. The Peels were cousins of the Prime  December  ; their only son, Henry Stanton, Minister and cotton spinners at Burton-upon-Trent married Juliana, third daughter of John Harrison by and Fazeley in Staffs. Elizabeth Evans in  , and it was his son who  Derby, Messrs Taylor, Simpson and Mosley eventually succeeded to the Harrison estates. Two (solicitors), deeds of Littleover Grange. I am grateful weeks before his own marriage Harrison’s other to Messrs Paul Grimwood-Taylor and Michael sister, Juliana, had married John Stanton, James Mallender for their kind assistance. Stanton’s nephew, in the same church [Burke  Derby, Derby Local Studies Library (hereafter ( ), loc.cit. ]. DLSL), DL  Box , pp.  – . House and park  Craven and Stanley, op. cit. , II,  – . occupied the former Heath and Hackendale Closes.  The saga is explained more fully in Craven and Although Gervase Bennet, a seventeenth-century Stanley, op. cit. , II,  . Elizabeth Evans won her owner of the Snelston estate, also owned an estate at case through descent from the Bowyers via her Littleover, Harrison would seem to have purchased mother, Dorothy daughter and heiress of Francis this land, released as part of the Littleover and Coles of Birmingham by Ellen, daughter and Normanton enclosure award of  [Feoffment on co-heiress of William Bowyer of Snelston. land on Littleover and Normanton Commons,  Myles, op. cit. ,  ; Mellors & Kirk, op. cit. ,  ff., between Ralph Melland and Samuel Simpson,  July lots  &  et seq .  , private collection, courtesy Dr Alan Hough].  Howard Colvin, Biographical Dictionary of British  There is a basic account of the Harrison family in Architects  – , New Haven and London, Burke’s Landed Gentry , London,  , I,  ; all  ,  . supplementary information is from the parish  John Harrison extended Yeldersley Hall after his register transcripts in Derby Local Studies Library. father-in-law’s death in  , but none of the  DLSL, Burgess Rolls, H. drawings in the former Stanton collection seem to  DLSL, Robotham Deeds, DL  , No.  ,  August relate to this. Conceivably any muniments were sold  ; M.A.J.B.Craven, The Derby Town House , with the house in  to the Duchess of York’s Derby,  ,  – ; on Harrison’s legal career I am great grandfather, Henry FitzHerbert Wright. In any indebted to Michael Mallender, Esq., one of the case the new wing Harrison caused to be added was partners in Harrison’s successor firm, Messrs. tactfully designed to exactly match the main block Taylor, Simpson & Mosley (pers. comm.  March of c.  and betrays none of the features of the  ). Radford was later struck off for defalcation. drawings sold in December  . The work could  Almond was a BA of Trinity College, Cambridge, well have been undertaken by an Ashbourne Headmaster of from  to  , and builder. From  until his death in  , Vicar of from  to  ; he was Yeldersley was the seat of his son, a third John buried on  November  [B. Tachella, Derby ( – ), although it was let after  and sold in School Register , Derby,  , xi].  [Craven and Stanley, op. cit. , II,  – ].

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV  LITTLEOVER GRANGE , DERBYSHIRE

 Dorothy Evans died in  and the enterprising decade thanks to the Health Authority, is unknown. Edmund re-married Sophia Webster at Chapel-en- Applications to spot list both Mill Hill and le-Frith parish church on  May  ; perhaps so Thornhill have been refused. late a re-marriage finished him off.  DLSL, sale particulars of The Pastures,  ; Joseph  Although gutted on the ground floor, this building Hunter, ‘Familiae Minorum Gentium’, Harleian remains in situ . Society ,  ,  .  Myles, loc.cit . ‘Edward’ Evans [ Derby Miscellany , I  Craven and Stanley, op. cit. , II,  – . These (), June  ,  ] does not seem to exist; he is stables seem to have been added after  along certainly none of the Edmund Evanses of the family with a pretty Gothick double lodge at the gates, of John Harrison’s wife. Nevertheless, Blore’s Derby almost certainly by Leaper. connections were impeccable.  Craven and Stanley, op. cit. , II,  – , where  I am indebted to the late Col.J.R.G.(‘ Pongo’) some of the information is superseded by this Stanton for this information. article, but which gives a reliable account of the  For instance, at Pickford’s own house, No.  Friar history of the house subsequent to  ; Derby Gate, Derby, at Etruria Hall, Staffs., and at Ogston Mercury ,  February  , Eastwood’s obituary. Hall, Derbs. [Edward Saunders, Joseph Pickford of Eastwood’s firm was founded by his father James in Derby , Stroud,  ,  ,  ]. The Moreldge, Derby, in  , but by an  Glover, op. cit. , II,  – . amalgamation of  became Eastwood and  Ibid. ,  . Swingler of Cotton Lane and Osmaston Road, Derby  Pers. comm., November  . That part of the [M.A.J.B.Craven, Derby, An Illustrated History , south wall was taken down and reinstated without Derby,  ,  – ; pers. comm., A.R.Eastwood, the anomalies. Esq., of Bramhall, Cheshire,  March  ].  Craven, Derby Town House , cit ,  – . Mill Hill  He was then living at The White House, Osmaston was sold for demolition in July  . Road, very close to his works [C.N. Wright,  On the Coopers see Colvin, op. cit. ,  . Joseph Directory of Derby , Nottingham,  ,  ]. used plaster cornices identical to those at Littleover  Craven and Stanley, op. cit. ,  , the latter figure Grange at Parkfields House, Kedleston Road courtesy of Eastwood, cit . (attested as by him in Glover, op. cit. , II,  –) and  My thanks are due to Mike Evans Esq. and the Rolls very old-fashioned they were too, for those used by Royce Heritage Trust for this information. Joseph Pickford in his dining room at his own  Derby Evening Telegraph ,  October  ,  , cols. house in Derby,  , are extremely similar. –.  Colvin, op. cit. ,  .  Derby Evening Telegraph ,  December  .  Idem . The likely fate of Thornhill, derelict for over a  The Square , March  ,  –.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME XV 