Thomas Read Kemp and why Thomas Cubitt was so essential to his scheme

Introduction

Thomas Read Kemp’s eponymous Kemps Town development is a complex story with many twists.

Kemp’s quite complex personal and religious life clearly plays into the narrative.

Equally, how the design arose is likely quite complex and the cast of characters is worth exploring.

Barings’ family money is central to the story and how Kemp’s personal life [remarrying] impacted that financing.

Ultimately, how Kemp withdrew from the public life and his Brighton development an apparently broken man leaving his lawyer George Faithfull to manage his affairs, seemingly, ineffectually.

However, even after assembling this mass of materials it is easy to feel that something is missing from the narrative. it doesn’t quite hand together. There is the sense of another hand, or hands, at work. That probably revolves around George Faithfull’s true roll in matters. Sadly with the loss of the mass of the bulk of the materials, only a small part is retained, it is unlikely we will ever know the full story unless a further cache of letters comes to light.

But we can be a little more certain of some aspects of the story as we have here, for the first time, reproduced Thomas Rad Kemp’s account ledgers from Barings bank as well as weaving a mass of primary source materials together to put a slight different slant on the history of Thomas Read Kemp and Thomas Cubitt’s epic undertaking in Brighton.  As well as the remarkable survival of the previously unpublished 1826, Kemp – Cubitt  deed for Kemp’s Belgrave Square mansion and Cubitt’s first tranche of plots in Brighton.

Thomas Read Kemp

Thomas Read Kemp (1782-1844) came from a land-owning family. His father, also a Thomas, was MP for Lewes, where the younger Thomas was born, was left a moiety of the manor of Brighton by his uncle, Thomas Friend. In 1786 part of this was rented by the Prince of Wales, who later built the Royal Pavilion on the site.

Thomas Read Kemp read General Arts, graduating in 1805 at St John’s College, Cambridge [others have suggested that it was Theology, but Mike Osborne asserts that this was not offered until 1856], and the year after he graduated, in 1806, he married Frances Baring, daughter of Sir Francis, the founder of Baring’s Bank, by whom he had four sons and six daughters.¹ In 1811 he succeeded his late father, both as Lord of the Manor of Brighton and as MP for Lewes. He resigned his seat in 1816 [printed notice of resignation below] in order to found a dissenting religious sect, first at St James’ Chapel in St James’ Street and then at Trinity Chapel in Ship Street, designed by Amon Henry Wilds.

The Kemps and their growing family lived firstly at Herstmonceaux Place , then at The Temple which was an enormous house [engraving below], later to become Brighton and Hove High School in Montpelier, also probably, designed by Wilds. By 1823, Thomas had returned to the established church, which enabled him to resume a career as an MP, firstly for Arundel, then for Lewes again from 1826 -37.

Kemps Town

Thomas Read Kemp had a very grand plan and the very deep pockets of, his relations, the Baring banking family to finance it.

Various sources have suggested that Kemp was levelling the Black Rock – Kemps Town site from around 1822 with a large workforce. There does not appear to be any primary source evidence for this assertion.

In 1823 Kemp laid out York Street, now Eastern Road, to link the town to a whole new fashionable development. This does provide a suggestion that the original [~250 house] scheme predates the known Wilds & Busby scheme dated 1824 [RIBA Archives SD68/10/1] so could another hand have been involved, or it could be that Wilds was engaged solo? Some slight evidence for the supposition that Wilds was engaged by Kemp is provided by a 10th November 1822 entry in Kemp’s Barings account for £13 3s 0d. Unhelpfully it doesn’t list Wilds’ initials so it is equally possible that the entry refers to Amon Wilds senior in some constructional capacity or something else entirely.

So, it could just be that the grand layout was, in fact, the work of Amon Henry Wilds with the facades being more of an applique from Busby. However, unless some further evidence comes to light this remains a supposition on a flimsy basis.

Kemp engaged the architects Charles Augustin Busby [1786 – 1834] and Amon Henry Wilds [1790 – 1857] to draw up the master plan, for want of a better term, for Kemp[s] Town.

We have examined their partnership and how it broke up further down the page.

Charles was often confused with his father, the builder, Amon Wilds. With whom he had formed a partnership in May 1823, for this purpose.  To further add to the confusion his birth year is given variously as 1784 or 1790 – however the parish registry is quite clear that he was born and baptised in 1790. Three sheets of their work, layout [below – dated 1824] and facades on the drawing sheets have survived [RIBA Archives SD68/10(1-3)] other unlabelled sheets are possibly part of the drawings set.

Some circumspection on the timeline of the Kemp[s] Town development is required.

The drawings for Kemp[s] Town were exhibited in the Royal Academy in 1825 [catalogue page below]. The catalogue entry [pg. 38 item 914] makes clear that the Busby & Wilds that both Kemp[s] Town and Brunswick Square were simultaneously in build in 1825.

With a grand scheme, some grand marketing is needed. So, Kemp engaged John Bruce to produce the engraving [below] showing Kemp[s] Town as Kemp wished it to look with the full scheme of 250 grand houses. The engraving is, supposedly, from 1826. Needless to say, that full scheme never eventuated.

The original plan, shown in the various Bruce acquaint postcards [above] and perspective drawings, was for an estate of 250 large houses with two substantial additional squares. However, this ambitious scheme was modified to just 105 houses. The layout plan [below] for the 105 house scheme, Sussex Square and Lewes Crescent, survives in the RIBA Archives [SD68/10/1].

Clearly the Busby – Wilds layout plan [above] was intended to be for a deed plan both from its scale, which is identical to other extant deed plans, and from two of the properties being coloured in pink to indicate the adjacent plots being transacted.

The fact that this is almost certainly a deed plan would seem to indicate the transaction of the sites or carcasses for the buildings hence the preparation of the relevant documents which would have included the site plan. Assuming, of course that the narrative of carcasses being built and then transacted is based in fact.

This fits better with the suggestion of the 1823 Kemp setting out of York Street, now Eastern Road, as the first act of the development of Kemp[s] Town.

This would strongly suggest that the scheme was drawn up in 1822, or prior, which also points towards the original grand layout being the work of Wilds, before Busby was perhaps brought in to give the development some architectural flair. Or maybe it was the other way around? Did Busby draw up the ridiculous 250 house scheme and Wilds from his building background was brought in to make the scheme practical?

However, there is a problem with this narrative in that the first mention of York Street appears in 1802 [Sussex Advertiser – Monday 18 January 1802]. It could be that York Street previously existed and was extended by Kemp for the purposes of the Kemp[s] Town development. Or the road was realigned to form the known shape of Sussex Square?

As can be seen from John Bruce’s 1833 map [below] York Street is an extension of Edward Street which becomes Kemps Town Road which in turn becomes York Street.

Baxter’s 1822 map of Brighton shows Kemps Town Road as a dotted outline. This could perhaps mean that was a track or has been set out. There is no key to the map.

There is mention in Bruce’s pocket book, [History of Brighton with the latest Improvements to 1835, John Bruce, 4th Edition, 1835, John Bruce, Brighton pg. 44] ‘Brunswick Town [sic] was begun about a year after the commencement of Kemp Town’

Another feature of note is the lines of the junction between the properties between the straight section in Sussex Square and the curved section in Lewes Crescent. Seemingly, some of the houses have frontage but no internal and no gardens 27 & 14] in spite of having a plot number. Also, some of the plots [26 & 27] appear to have curious curved lines of junction [detail below, top]. This is remedied on the deed plan variants, which all seem to be traced from a common source [detail below, bottom].

Another Busby Wilds drawing in the RIBA Archives also springs to attention. Although it is labelled Portland Place, though not in Busby’s hand, it bears more similarity to Lewes Crescent than it does to Portland Place. This is particularly notable with respect to the ink markings for balustrades.  Balustrades are clearly present in the 1838 engraving of Kemps Town [below – we are trying to locate a better image of the engraving]. Even if the balusters are absent in contemporary times, they do appear to have been a part of the design intentions and the contemporary engraving appear to have been produced from the design intentions.

Also, balustrades, at the upper fenestration level, do not appear to be a contemporary feature on Portland Place from any early engraving that we have been able to find. We would suggest that this drawing has, at the very least been, recycled for use on Lewes Crescent as Kemps Town was a couple of years later than Portland Place [1824] but it could be the other way around as the timeline is poorly defined.

Compare this to the 1838 Champion engraving of the same portion of Lewes Crescent below and you can see the upper fenestration/balustrade detail matches near perfectly. It is impossible to see the ground floor. The engraving also foreshortens the grand 1st floor windows and exaggerates the height of the band of masonry between the 1st and 2nd floors, which is further accentuated by the lack of any representation of the string course detailing, as can be judged from contemporary photographs. The uppermost fenestration and balustrade repeat details are strikingly similar whilst the stepping in the levels in not exactly the same to the right-hand side of the plan and engraving.

Onto Building The Great Scheme

The finished houses on the Kemp Town Estate were mainly achieved in two stages. Once the site was set out on Kemp’s Black Rock site, basic ‘carcasses’ were erected to tight specifications. Each had a basement, walls, ceiling joists throughout, a roof and apertures for doors and windows openings which would have been simply boarded up. Stairs and water supplies were initially not included as was presumably the plaster work for walls and ceilings.

By 1828  most of the carcasses were supposedly in place but only 11 were occupied [Anthony Dale, Fashionable Brighton, Oriel Press, 1987, pg. 76]. On this substantial site there were, naturally, several builders involved. In Sussex Square, Thomas Wyborn built 13 carcasses and James Ingledew 19. The names of Stafford and Ingledew also crop up as well as Thomas Cubitt.

However, in 1825/6 there was a national banking crisis [the local Brighton Banks suffered badly with a run starting in December 1825 – reported Thursday December 22nd 1825 in the Brighton Gazette, that lead to Lashmar & Co falling into difficulties] a number of banking casualties which may well explain why various builders failed and it could well have lost Kemp a substantial amount of monies, and the builders were definitely feeling the squeeze. Wyborn [although this may not be quite true as a printed notice indicating a meeting of creditors 19th May 1826 postmarked 15th May 1826, East Sussex Record Office LIA 39/1 “relating to the bankruptcy of Thomas Wyborn“] although not bankrupted had to go into liquidation and return his plots to Thomas Read Kemp in 1826, presumably on grounds of non performance maybe in terms of progress or in terms of making his lease payments.

Ingledew was, supposedly, in a similar situation. Although we have found no archival material to substantiate this.

However, Mathias Wilks and his son Joseph Browne Wilks benefited from this crisis and bought a number of the sites with carcasses already built. Kemp sold some of those he had acquired from Wyborn to builder Thomas Good[h]all. There is record of two payments to Thomas Goodall for £1,000 on 31st August & 30th November 1825 from Kemp’s Barings account [below]. These could well be stage payments for the carcasses or maybe for something else entirely.

With all the carcasses built and a few other grand schemes on the go most of Kemp’s ready money is tied up.

Thomas Cubitt becomes involved

Kemp then does an offset deal with  Thomas Cubitt to build him a massive Belgrave Square mansion partially in exchange for some of the Kemp[s] Town carcasses set out with great clarity in a 19th June 1826 deed [Westminster Archives 2778]. Over time Cubitt acquired, finished and slowly sold 37 plots and carcasses on which he finished the houses with the first 10 assigned in the 1826 agreement. Although he did end up living, for some of the time, in one of them as did his brother William. Kemps Town, was the one any only development Thomas Cubitt ever carried out significantly outside of London. However, it is anecdotally stated that he wished he had never got involved in the Kemps Town development [Dale gives a reference of: Brighton Herald, 16th January, 1892. However this is far from contemporaneous. Hobhouse gives no reference for her similar assertion].

Mike Osborne asserts that this sale of plots to Cubitt was through Kemp’s ‘contacts.’ However, this does not stand close inspection as the deal for a house on Belgrade Square was simultaneous with the initial transfer of plots to Cubitt as is absolutely clear from the 19th June 1826 deed and building agreement [Westminster Archives 2778 – click to open PDF] between them that is fully extant.  What it does show is that Kemp was clearly using his, at this time, unsuccessful development to leverage himself into a massive Belgrave Square mansion.

Whilst Thomas Cubitt would have been attracted by the Barings connection and may indeed have been introduced by one of the Barings clan: seeing their generous funding of Kemps ambitious projects as a possible means of using the Barings very deep pockets to fund his own ambitious plans.

So, how did the Cubitt – Kemp connection arise?

This is an interesting question to ponder. There are quite a number of possibilities and none really excludes any of the others so: it could well be that the fusion of the them was the key.

First to consider is Cubitt’s own brother Lewis. The architect Henry Edward Kendall, who had already designed Kemp’s Belgrave Square mansion, via Cubitt’s own brother Lewis Cubitt [who married Kendal’s daughter Sophia in 1830] who had worked in trained in Kendall’s studio. Kendall [with his son Henry Jnr.] also went onto design the Kemp Town Esplanade and Tunnel. Lewis had compared is training in Kendalls studio by 1824 [reference needed] and was back working with Thomas as a project manager on mid sized jobs. Lewis Cubitt and Henry Kendall went onto to be amongst those who founded The Royal Institution of British Architecture.

It is also certain that Lewis Cubitt did some, at least external design works at Kemp Town, as a deed dated June 1828 [East Sussex Record Office R/C 4/140/1] states that ‘and to the layout by Lewis Cubitt of ornamental gardens’.

Second to consider is via John Smith, brother of Robert Smith, Lord Carrington Thomas Cubitt’s main backer at the time, to whom Kemp has sold Dale Park, which he owned for a short time, in 1825.

Third to consider is via Henry Baring who had previously commissioned Busby to rework a Humphrey Repton & John Adey Repton scheme for an aviary/pheasant house at Somerley – drawings dated 1814-5 survive in the Earl of Normanton’s collections [C.A. Busby The Regency Architect of Brighton and Hove, RIBA Heinz Gallery Exhibition Booklet, Neil Bingham, 1991, London ISBN 1 872911 10 2 pg. 41].

Cubitt’s 1826 agreement with Kemp

The full 19th June 1826 agreement survives [click to open full PDF – it is a very large file]. The agreement identified that Cubitt will be responsible for finishing off ten properties being plot Nos 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 & 28 in the colour plan reproduced below. The text states that the relevant properties are highlighted in green although the green is somewhat faded.

The works were to include the stables that also follow through in green to the design on the right of the plan. However, it is relatively clear that the construction of the stables, for some unclear reason, did not apply to plot No 9.

The deed is quite complex and requires some further interpretative work.

How the ownership of the plots unfolded

Many authorities have tried to create a transactional history of Kemps Town plots. This is not simple as many of the properties were transacted multiple times and there appears to be no extant over arching source recording these transactions.

There is mention [Anthony Dale, Fashionable Brighton, Oriel Press, 1987 and Hermione Hobhouse, Thomas Cubitt: Master Builder, Universal Books, 1971] of a set of Kemps Town Committee minutes recording these matters. These are The Kemps Town Enclosure Committee minutes and are held at East Sussex Record Office, Brighton in the series AMS 6028.

The relevant volumes are AMS 6028/1/1 [May 1828 – Jan 1843] and AMS 6028/1/2 [Jan 1844 – Jan 1872]. This is the subject of current work.

Below are a few of the other deeds that are in East Sussex Record Office, Brighton mainly chosen for the quality of the deed plans.

Kemp Town Histories gives the early history of No 1 Lewes Crescent

“The 6th Duke of Devonshire purchased the shell or carcass of No 1 in 1829. It is the fulcrum of Lewes Crescent and Chichester Terrace and the Duke described it as being like a ‘fan without a handle’. The shape may be irregular but the interior of the house is magnificent with fine painted ceilings, an elegant cantilevered staircase with a dial of the gilded weather vane on the roof halfway up it.

In a book published privately in 1845, the Duke vividly describes the experience of living for so many seasons effectively on a building site surrounded by scaffolding. Notwithstanding these inconveniences, a succession of crowned heads of state visited the house in the 1850s. So did Metternich, the Austrian Chancellor, and Landseer, Thackeray and Lord Palmerston.

No1 later became known as Fife House after Edward VII’s daughter who married the Duke of Fife. The King visited many times and famously convalesced there with his daughter in February 1908. The Enclosures Committee wrote to all residents asking them to refrain from using the Gardens so that the King might enjoy exclusive rights.”

Typically Cubitt mortgaged his holdings to maintain liquidity, in this case with George Palmer of Bedford Row to William Spencer, Duke of Devonshire on a deed entitled ‘A deed of covenant from Thomas Cubitt of Eaton Place and George Palmer of Bedford Row to William Spencer, Duke of Devonshire, concerning a parcel of land in Kemp Town, Brighton, 5th Feb 1829. The initial mortgage with Palmer seems to have been two separate deeds on 20th & 21st July 1827. William Spencer’s mortgage was for the relatively small sum of £1,950 which reflected the rather parlous state of the development. You can read the full copy deed here.

In the 12th June, 1828 Indenture between Thomas Read Kemp and Henry Faithfull [below, click here for full PDF of the indenture] it states

“sold and actually conveyed to various purchasers several of the said messages and tenements and other buildings….and herediments so sold and actually conveyed as aforesaid are coloured Pink in the said plan annexed…”

The one thing that oozes from the page is the forceful language concerning the level of sales of plots.

The indenture then goes onto set out the interests of  Mathias Wilks and Joseph Browne Wilks who hold the herediments coloured Brown in the plan below.

The salmon pink tinted parcels, held by Thomas Read Kemp, number around 52. Cubitt’s name figures heavily in the indenture. Cubitt was always careful not to tie up monies and sold and remortgaged houses as soon as they were ready and readily remortgaged any lands that he held to keep his liquidity high. Given Cubitt’s substantial level of ownership it would appear likely that Thomas Read Kemp was now in the minority in the development.

When compared with the 1826 Kemp – Cubitt deed there appears, on cursory inspection, to be some overlap of ownership. However, this could be explained by single year building leases having expired and not having been renewed.

20th June 1828 Matthias Wilks acquired another plot No 6, on the West side of Sussex Square. It is noted in the text of the Indenture and the plan [click here for full PDF] that Thomas Cubitt held No 7 Sussex Square. Interestingly there is no mention of there being an existing carcass of the building on this site. So it would appear that it was a vacant plot.

30th June 1828 Matthias Wilks to Thomas Read Kemp, Deed of Covenant for a piece of land situate on the South side of York Street, Kemp Town [click here for full PDF]. Again from the language of the Indenture there is nothing built upon it at the time of the transaction.

The end result

Developing Kemps Town certainly took a long time. Cubitt had a lot of work to do guiding and helping Kemp’s scheme to fruition. Kemp had exited England in favour of France and left matters in his solicitor, George Faithfull‘s, hands but the real driving force to finish the project was Thomas Cubitt.

Kemp himself move into 21 & 22 [below] Sussex Square.

Oblique shot of Sussex Square, Brighton. OLBC photo, September 2024.

Thomas Read Kemp’s approach to the development of Kemps Town

You do, often get the sense that Thomas Read Kemp wanted to be The Big Man. Otherwise, it is hard to understand why he was giving away lumps of land for various functions such as churches and or burial ground or even funding the construction of expensive churches whilst the basic Kemps Town enterprise was failing to provide the necessary sound business returns.

Initially, funded by loans from the Barings family things got off to a strong start – a least in terms of construction speed as Kemp funded the construction of most of the carcasses [walls with roof and floors but no windows] himself. Frances Baring, his wife, died in 1825 in labour.

Things were still flying along financially, at least in his mind, up to the early 1830’s. However, then the seemingly bottomless Baring family support then ended and Kemp then had to look to his own assets to fund both the project and his lifestyle.

Kemp’s 1832 remarriage may well have drawn the curtain on further Barings support.

And by the 1835 he was forced to relinquish the huge Belgrave Sqaure mansion that Cubitt had built for him.

Thomas Read Kemp’s house on Belgrave Square

The other half of the Cubitt bargain of 1826 was the construction of a massive, Henry Edward Kendall designed, mansion for Thomas Read Kemp in Belgrave Square. The full 19th June 1826 agreement survives [click to open full PDF – it is a very large file].

An undated sketch is extant [below] for the front elevation of  Thomas Read Kemp’s mansion on Belgrave Square. It is not certain if this is an architectural impression of what the grand mansion might have looked like, perhaps by Kendall. Or if it is a sketch of the finished article. The doubt is caused by the foliage to the side of the house which would not appear to have fitted into the plot which suggests that it is an impression rather than an sketch of the actual but that it is conjectural.

This a very large, even by Belgrave Square’s exulted standards, corner site mansion.

Based on the pages from Thomas Cubitt’s Belgravia [reproduced below LA/4608/01/02/001] lease book for Thomas Read Kemp’s house on Belgrave Square was a short lived enterprise with Kemp having exited the lease by 17th August 1835 [pg. 14].

There is far more detail regarding the initial 19th June 1826 transaction in the full deed [reproduced above] the aspects concerning the Kemps Town dealings are not included. It may well be that the Brighton volume of the Cubitt lease books gives more colour to the transaction. However, this is not available to be studied as it is in private hands.

Cubitt has to provide Kemp with a mortgage of £4,000 @ 5%: presumably for him to finish the house off [below]. What is not mentioned is that the £10,000 that was to be paid to Cubitt as per the 1826 deed [above] was in fact paid in lands, proximate to the Kemp[s] Town Estate, Brighton rather than monies.

This is not an ideal state of affairs as this is exactly when Robert Smith aka 1st Lord Carrington is signalling [letter of 13th October 1883 from Lord Carrington to Thomas Cubitt] that he must draw down his financial support for Cubitt’s ‘engagements [see letter

Cubitt manages to get the full mortgage off his own books by 13th September 1833 to George Crow.

Kemp pays off the mortgage to George Crow on 15th August 1835 presumably with the proceeds of the sale to the Marquis of Westminster.

The lease was then surrendered on 17th August 1835 [below]. However, Cubitt is still benefiting from his yearly rental incomes. Individually, these are not huge sums per property but the sheer number of properties that these were being drawn from made The Cubitt organisation  an extremely wealthy one until the 1930’s when the leases started to expire and revert the the freeholder.

Hobhouse [Thomas Cubitt: Master Builder, Heroine Hobhouse, New York, 1971, pg. 369] asserts that the house was then rented out by Kemp from 1837 after Kemp has moved to France.

Sue Grey states [Georgian Group Journal, Thomas Read Kemp and the shaping of Regency Brighton, Vol XVII, 2009 pg 136], ‘One of his other daughters, Fanny, remained at Belgrave Square until 1839, when the houses there land in Kemp Town were let.’

Thomas Read Kemp’s account with Barings Bank

As Thomas Read Kemp was married to, Frances Baring, a member of the banking dynasty, it made sense for him to have an account with the family bank. Barings have close to a full run of ledgers. We do not believe that these ledger pages have previously been examined or published.

For a few years it appears that Thomas Read Kemp used Barings for most of his transaction as there are some very full ledger pages such as his 1824/25 reproduced below.

NB we have cropped the pages where other customer names or details were shown. Some page entries, particularly later years, only cover a few odd lines. The lighting on the Barings Archive produces some strange mottled image effects.

Then the numbers of transactions dwindles until the account falls progressively into disuse through the 1830’s, with a balance of £50 left in presumably to keep the account open for some reason. Maybe he liked receiving the Barings envelopes, or maybe it was a condition of his many loans from the Barings clan that he maintained an open account? It simply isn’t possible to know from the surviving records.

Loans by various member of the Barings Clan

By 1830 Kemp appeared to be trying to rationalise his debt position and did a deal with Alexander Baring to relax security for two loans of £23,000 and £5,000 totalling £28,000. This was just before the 1830’s building slump hit and even various of Cubitt’s London schemes then started to struggle.

An interesting Debit

Other banking

An Unsuccessful Sale

• 7 Sussex Square [lot 4] – unfinished
• 28 Sussex Square [lot 2] – almost(!) finished
• 29 Sussex Square [lot 1] – finished
• 30 Sussex Square [lot 3] – unfinished
• 46 Sussex Square [lot 8] – unfinished
• 47 Sussex Square [lot 9] – unfinished
• 17 Lewes Crescent [lot 5] – unfinished
• 24 Lewes Crescent [lot 6] – almost(!) finished
• 28 Lewes Crescent [lot 7] – almost(!) finished
• Chichester House [lot 10] – finished

The plan for the 1842 auction [above] gives some idea as to the complexity of Thomas Read Kemp’s affairs. The image of The Park [below – HOW/ACC3405/7 Volume 1 Pg. 1 – East Sussex Record Office, Brighton] shows how unbelievably complex Kemp’s land holdings were in 1830. Rationalising these medieval strip holdings into building plots required the cooperation of a large number of parties, in this case successfully swapping holdings, this generated an unbelievably complex web of transactions and how to deal with mortgages and charges against the lands.

The scale of the complexity of the operation can be gauged by all the related document requiring two huge ledgers with 318 numbered pages [HOW/ACC3405/7 & HOW/ACC3405/8].

In other areas of land holding this approach was not successful until after Kemp’s death and so development, if the market was ready for it, would inevitably not have progressed.

 

The Busby Wilds Architectural Partnership

Busby had a considerable and mixed history as an architect and designer. He corresponded with Sir John Soane and we are fortunate that some of his letters and other materials survive in the Sir John Soane’s museum archives.

Busby had a number of scrapes with regard to collapsing or sagging roofing. He designed two churches and the Church Commissioners rejected his designs on the basis of the iron roofing. However, in this surviving pamphlet, if the name checked quotes are accurate, just about every namely engineer in the land agreed that his roof design was more than adequate. This seems to have included Timothy Bramah [the iron master] & Henry Maudslay [engineer].

John Loudon and Sir John Soane also appears to have signed this in some capacity even though they were architects and not engineers. Mind you, there wasn’t really the distinction then that there is now between the professions. You can read the full four page pamphlet here.

A number of authorities ascribe Busby’s departure for Brighton from London to this rejection. There is no extant direct evidence for this.

Busby and Wilds had a spectacular falling out in 1825 as recorded in Brighton’s Petty Sessional Division [East Sussex Record Office PTS/2/1/8 page 362] where Amon Henry Wilds was found guilty of Offence: assault of Charles Augustin Busby; Sentence: [illegible] 27th July 1825. So, we don’t know what the sentence was, it could be that the lower part of the page states or that could relate to something else. Or it could be that what could possibly be the  ‘3/-‘ [to the lower left hand side of the page] is record of a fine.

Overall, it could well explain why Kemp gravitated towards the more experienced and stable hands of Thomas Cubitt and others for the next stage.

The interesting thing about the dissolution notice for their partnership [above] dated 24th June 1825 is that Busby is left with the debts of the partnership. Which is suggestive that it was a misstep of Busby’s that caused the failure of the partnership.

Anthony Dale [Anthony Dale, Fashionable Brighton, Oriel Press, 1987, pg. 28] suggests that it was not clear if it was Wilds senior or junior who was the partner in the Busby Wilds practice but the partnership dissolution notice [above] makes it absolutely clear that it was Amon Henry Wilds who was in the partnership and it is also coherent to it being Amon Henry Wilds who was found guilty of Busby’s assault. Sue Berry has also arrived at a similar conclusion, Sussex Archaeological Collections, 150, (2012), 163–83.

What they fell out over could have been issues leading up to an investigation into the collapse (one of many collapses) of a building that Amon Wilds had built, and it is illustrative of some major issues as something has to be spectacularly wrong for a building to collapse.

The Sir John Soane museum website [citing C.A. Busby The Regency Architect of Brighton and Hove, RIBA Heinz Gallery Exhibition Booklet, Neil Bingham, 1991, London ISBN 1 872911 10 2] suggests that the whole reason that Busby left England for America was that one of his buildings collapsed in 1817. We are attempting to locate a primary source for this to verify it.

Busby’s practical and engineering knowledge left something to be desired. His design ‘Sketch of Fire Proof Roof To Smiths Shop’ [RIBA Archives SD71/5] is terrifying in the manner that it ignores that basics of accepted structures.  The main members do not meet at the apex and instead a strut of 1.5″ iron is used. It is tempting to suggest, on the evidence of this drawing alone, that Busby didn’t really understand structures at all. This design was analysed and found inadequate [Assessment of the structural adequacy of the early 19th Century roof truss designs by C Busby etc, R. J. M Sutherland, 23rd July 1989]. Suggestions of an uncertain approach to hydraulic engineering are also derived from his designs for improved canal locks which unfortunately would have required the Law of Conservation of Mass to be suspended. Although, oddly, when the Busby drawings were initially discovered, Neil Bingham is quoted as saying [Evening Argus June 1988] “now we have the plans for the roof we can see that it was quite secure and he was falsely accused” which is at variance with the later engineering analysis Bingham himself cites above [C.A. Busby The Regency Architect of Brighton and Hove, RIBA Heinz Gallery Exhibition Booklet, Neil Bingham, 1991, London ISBN 1 872911 10 2].

However, Busby did use a conventional, for the time, timber structural design for a roof in his extant designs for St Margaret’s Chapel/Church [below] ~1820 – now demolished.

A further collapse!

But was this collapse anything to do with Busby?

“………an action taken by Mrs Dulany against Amon Wilds, the builder of 69 Grand Parade, after the house had begun to collapse in October 1826. The case was initially heard at the Horsham Assizes before a special jury in March 1827. The jury delivered a verdict in favour of Mrs Dulany. However, the judge returned the case to trail against both the partners. The following August the case was revived, against Wilds and his former partner Busby, at the Lewes Assizes. A judgment was again entered in favour of Mrs Dulany. However, much to the disappointment of the ‘many persons’ who had travelled from Brighton to witness the trial, the action was referred to Thomas Joshua Platt (1790-1862) for arbitration, presumably in the quantum and the ultimate result is unknown. The detailed bill of Mrs Dulany’s solicitor includes attendance on Busby to examine the deeds of his partnership with Wilds and of its dissolution in order to rebut Wilds’s plea in abatement; the bill also names the witnesses, whose tavern and accommodation bill amounted to £47 9s 6d. The trial was also attended by the town surveyor, Thomas Furner”

Text adapted from the catalogue entry for AMS6025, East Sussex and Brighton and Hove Record Office. This includes a bill from Edward l’Anson AMS6025/52 with the catalogue entry stated as Edward J’Anson but this is likely to be a typo as l’Anson was a well-known South West London based architect and surveyor.

Lloyds Bank Archives holds a large collection of relevant papers but unfortunately no drawings for the final judgment – if there ever was a final judgment, which we believe that there was not.

There is some suggestion the Mr Reacher, the builder engaged by Mrs Delaney to make good the house under the supervision of Charles Barry [who later went on to design the Houses of Parliament], that the structural issue was due to an arch which was inadequate and failed. Mrs Delaney’s handwriting is increasingly hard to decipher as she nears the end of her life.

The closest we can come to a verdict is that damages of £6,000 [another court report states £5,000] were awarded against Wilds and Busby [below]. However, this was subject to an arbitration by Joshua Platt of which we can find no extant record.

There is some indication in the Delaney papers held by Lloyd Bank Archives that the matter never came to a final settlement before the death of Mrs Delaney, whose will was proved on 14th October, 1828 [Perogative Court of Canterbury 1826-28, piece 1746, quire 551-600], leaving everything to her daughter.

The suspicion has to be that the matter fizzled out or was quietly settled on Mrs Delaney’s death. This is reinforced by a letter from Mr Furner, the Brighton Town Surveyor, enquiring about his fees and the return of documents in a letter of 11th September 1829 in which he states:-

‘Absence from Brighton has prevented my replying to your Letter of the 2nd September before. I now beg to return you the whole of the Bills Voucher etc(?), received from you pending the action brought by the late rs Delaney against Wilds & Busby, the receipt of which you will have the goodness to acknowledge.’

Sue Berry has also analysed The Busby & Wilds partnership in her article, Sussex Archeological Collections, 150, (2012), 163–83.

Older but still interesting is, Fashionable Brighton, Anthony Dale, Oriel Press, 1987. It is probably best to read Sue Berry’s two papers first as they disambiguate a number of confusions of Dale’s.

Hermione Hobhouse, Thomas Cubitt: Master Builder, Universal Books 1971 is mostly drawn from [and credited to] Antony Dale and the now inaccessible Cubit Estates Limited Leasebook for Brighton. It is unlikely the Lease Book would add much to our understanding of the transaction save to give precise listings of who transacted what when and whom the mortgagees were.

¹ Personal communication from the St John’s College, Cambridge archivist 14/10/24.

²In an earlier escapade, ThomasRead Kemp has mortgaged Ann Sober’s house in Kemps Town without her knowledge. She had to go to court to get the mortgage set aside.

³ Typical wordings for the Kemps Town restrictive covenants taken from, 12 Chichester Terrace:-

“Subject to the restrictive covenants contained in an Indenture dated the sixteenth day of September One thousand eight hundred and thirty four and made between Thomas Bubitt of the one part and Thomas Road Kemp of the other part an abstract of which is set forth in the Schedule hereto so far as the same are still subsisting and capable of taking effect. The Schedule above referred to. Abstract of restrictive covenants contained in the before mentioned Indenture of the 16th day of September 1834 To rebuild or repair the premises if destroyed or damaged by fire according to the then present Plan and Elevation and so that the same might range uniformly with the other houses adjoining thereto At the end of every three years after the house should have been completed to paint the outside with two coats of good oil colours and in order to preserve uniformily of colour in the paint the colour thereof should be fixed and determined by a committee of five persons of whom Thomas Read Kemp during his life and after his death the owner or owners for the time being of the Inclosure of Pleasure Ground at Kemp Town he she or they to form one and the remaining four to be chosen by the majority of the respective owners lessors and occupiers for the time being of houses in Kemp Town to be present at a meeting or meetings to be appointed for that purpose. To pay a fair and equal proportion with the other owner or owners for the time being of houses in Kemp Town who might have a right to the use and enjoyment of the same of the expense of painting railing maintaining and keeping in good order the pleasure grounds roads footways therein mentioned and which he or they or his or their tenants was or were to have the use and enjoyment and the trees and shrubs in the said Pleasure Grounds and the Walks therein and the enclosure railings or fences thereof and also of cleansing repairing and when requisite of rebuilding the principal sewers made for the convenience of houses built or in building at Kemp Town the same to be regulated by the said Committee. Not at any time or times thereafter to alter or permit or suffer to be altered the front elevation of the messuage nor make or put or suffer to be made or put any shop window therein nor carry on or suffer to be carried on any trade business or calling whatsoever in or upon any part thereof or otherwise use or cause permit or suffer the same to be used to the annoyance or injury of the houses or lands adjoining thereto then or then late the property of the said Thomas Read Kemp or the owner or owners thereof for the time being and that no building of an offensive nature should at any time thereafter be erected on the said piece of ground.”

Other things that we found that might be of interest

Amon Wilds: banking