Transcribed from the 1874 J. Hewetson edition ,
REMARKS
UPON
THE PROPOSED
DESTRUCTION OF THE TOWER OF
THE PARISH CHURCH,
OF ST.JOHN,
HAMPSTEAD,
BEING
A LETTER
ADDRESSEDTO
THE REVD SHERRARD B.BURNABY, M.A.
Vicar of Hampstead.
BY
GEORGE GILBERT SCOTT, M.A.
Sometime Fellow of Jesus College, Cambridge.
p. 326, ChurchRow,
Hampstead.
May 1st, 1874.
My Dear Mr. Vicar,
Will you permit me to address to you, and through you toothers, some remarks upon the subject of the Restoration of ourParish Church.
Such a request needs I think no apology. As aparishioner I cannot be indifferent to such a question. Asan architect, whose attention has been directed professionally tothe subject for more than two years, I may fairly ask ahearing. Did I need a further excuse the address at thehead of this letter would supply it. Living as I do, and,please God, shall do for many years, almost under the shade ofthe Parish Church, and having it before my eyes continually, Ihave every opportunity of coming to a clear opinion upon thematter, and every motive to form a sound one.
The movement of public opinion which issued in the invitationto certain architects to submit in competition designs for therestoration of the building had two sources.
The existing arrangements of the church are not in accordancewith the improved ecclesiastical taste of the present day. The high pews which encumber the interior, the galleries whichdisfigure its really fine proportions, the cramped space aboutthe holy table, the unsightly reading desk, the absence of anyproper chancel, and of any conveniences for a well-conductedchoir, shock the taste and offend the judgment of allwell-informed churchmen. It is probable however that thisfeeling would have failed to produce a general p. 4movement infavour of restoration had it not been aided by a fact, the forceof which was apparent to every one. I allude of course tothe settlement of the Tower which had become serious as early as1829.
In that year Messrs. Vulliamy, Hardwick & Good were calledin to report upon the state of the Tower. Other reportswere made in 1861, 1864, 1866 and 1868. The cracks whichthe subsidence of the Tower caused in those parts of the churchwhich abut upon it, occasioned naturally considerable alarm, andthe opinion became general that before long it would be necessaryto take down the Tower to avoid a catastrophe.
The scheme proposed early in 1872, for the “alterationand possibly enlargement of the Parish Church,” was theresult of these two distinct impulses.
The course which was adopted reflects great credit upon theTrustees. Instead of resorting to an open competition,three architects were invited to send in designs, and a properremunera