Introduction

Page 2

CLARENDON & PAPIER MÂCHÉ

Miles Lewis

The origins of Clarendon are shrouded in mystery. The exact date of the building isn’t known, and nor is the designer. There is no other house of importance in Australia about which so little is known. So I hope that my Tasmanian colleagues will forgive my presumption if I make a few suggestions.

I understand that the house is still thought to date from about 1838. But Clive Lucas found a piece of iron roof tile in the side of a chimney, which he thought was original – in which case the house could be no earlier than 1850. But I don’t think that’s the case.

The most striking external aspect of this house is that it has a classical portico without a pediment. This is completely un-English. The very heart of the Palladian Revival in England, which in turn is the backbone of the Georgian style, was the introduction of the pedimented portico. Colen Campbell’s unbuilt design for a house dedicated to Sir Robert Walpole, was intended 'to introduce the Temple beauties in a private building' – a reference principally to the temple portico which he used here for the first time, and which then appeared on hundreds of country houses.

‘Clarendon’, view: Miles Lewis. House dedicated to Sir Robert Walpole, by Colen Campbell: Colen Campbell, Vitruvius Britannicus, II

There is one place where classical porticoes were regularly used without pediments, and that was France, and especially the work of Ange-Jaques Gabriel in the mid-eighteenth century, especially the Petit Trianon at Versailles. But how would France come to have influenced Van Diemen’s Land? And there is a third place, colonial USA, where southern mansions, such as the Hermitage at Nashville, are of this type, but it’s even harder to see a connection.

Government Offices, Murray Street, Hobart, rortico by James Blackburn 1842; ‘Clarendon’, portico. Miles Lewis

But we can say that there was one architect in Australia who used classical porticoes without pediments – James Blackburn. Another aspect of the Clarendon portico which is unusual is the fact that it is a giant order – that is, the columns run through more than one floor height. That is rare in the early nineteenth century, and particularly rare in a house. But it had also been done by Blackburn in his unbuilt designs for Government House, Hobart.

Door and window at ‘Clarendon’; French wndow at ‘Rosedale, from James Blackburn’s remodelling of c 1846-7. Miles Lewis.

Another argument for Blackburn is the elegance of the detailing, which I would compare with Blackburn’s work at Rosedale. I’m not saying it’s the same, but the sophistication and elegance is comparable. So I say that Blackburn’s auihorship is suggested by the unpedimented portico, the giant order, the elegant window surrounds, and – as I will argue below – the extensive use of Bielefeld’s papier mâché.

comparison of the end wall treatments: ‘Clarendon’ and ‘Lake House’, Cressy, 1830-6. Miles Lewis.

My final comment on ‘Clarendon’ is not about Blackburn at all, but about the Regency character of the house. The stucco finish is characteristic of the Regency, and much more common in the north of Tasmania than the south, mainly because freestone is less readily available. The tripartite division of the side wall compares with that of Lake House, Cressy, and if we can draw any conclusion from this about the date it does suggest that 1838 is much more likely than 1850. In any case, if I am right in crediting Clarendon to Blackburn, it would have to date from before he left Tasmania in 1849.

The threshing ban at Clarendon: Helen Stitt. Barns illustrated in Robert Beatson, 'On Farm Buildings in General', in Board of Agriculture [London], Communications (London 1804 [1797]).

The farm buildings at Clarendon are quite another matter. They are vernacular rather than high style, they are late in dater, and they can in fact be dated with some precision. But so far as their form and appearance goes they are entirely English and traditional: these illustrations by Robert Beatson in 1804 are very comparable. But they are all roofed in Morewood & Rogers iron tiles, which appear to be the original roof material, and this puts them all after 1850. In fact we can be even more precise than that.

Victorian patent no 9 to Edmund Morewood & George Rogers, 18 March 1857, moulds for pressing iron roofing tiles. Tile from 'Coriyule', near Drysdale, Victoria, c 1850

Morewood and Rogers tiles are galvanized wrought iron sheet, pressed into shape. They were formed by pressing between dies, as illustrated in their Victorian patent.

'Coriyule' near Drysdale, by Charles Laing, 1849-50: Laing's drawing of the south elevation: State Library of Victoria. North view: Miles Lewis.

Despite the contrary belief of some of my New South Welsh colleagues, they seem to reach the Australian colonies in 1850.1 The house, ‘Coriyule’, at Drysdale, Victoria, was on the very cusp of change. The architect’s drawings prepared in 1849 show a slate roof. But in 1850 galvanised iron tiles appeared on sale in Melbourne, and the roof was changed. The original tiles remained on the roof until last year.

Inscriptions on tiles at ‘Coryule’, Drysdale, and the Mills cottage, Port Fairy, Victoria: Miles Lewis.

At least one of the Coriyule tiles carried an inscription in red paint, consisting of some numbers, followed by the letters ‘MR’ - clearly for Morewood & Rogers. But tiles from some other sites carry similar inscriptions, usually in red and always by the same hand There are variations in detail, and at the Mills cottage, Port Fairy, the word ‘best’ can be seen at the top right. There are two or three other examples in Victoria marked in this way. But in later buildings it stops, and a stencilled brand appears instead.

The question is, who painted the inscriptions, and what do they mean? Morewood and Rogers maintained an agency in Melbourne, but the hand cannot be that of the agent, because there were two agents in succession, Nathaniel Pollock and David Cannan, and they can’t both have had the same handwriting. It seems that the lettering was done in England.

Inscriptions are found on only a small minority of tiles, perhaps one in twenty or less. So it seems that the tiles were sold in bundles, and the top tile in the bundle was inscribed. The English despatcher must have painted on something like the number of tiles in the bundle and/or the gauge of the iron, followed of course by the letters MR for Morewood & Rogers.

Orrville Hotel outbuilding, Muckleford, c 1856: underside of roof tiles, with an inscribed tile, and showing the timber rolls under the side laps. Roof of the Wesleyan Chapel, 300 Church St, Richmond, Victoria, by George Wharton of Wharton & Burns 1853-4. Both Miles Lewis

But a more precise interpretation became possible because a large number of these tiles were obtained from the big roof of the Wesleyan Chapel at 300 Church Street, Richmond (Melbourne) when it was replaced in 2003. Seventeen of the tiles had inscriptions such as the following:

24 x 24 [?Best] 1 - 0 - 19 MR

24 x 24 Best 1 - 0 - 20 MR

[obscured] 1 - 0 - 18 MR

The first line ’24 x 24’ must indicate the number of tiles in the bundle and probably the gauge (or thickness) of the iron, but the second line seemed to be a mystery.

The second lines of the seventeen tiles were as follows:

It seems that the tiles would have been in bundles containing a set number, probably twenty-four as suggested by the first line, but varying in weight due to idiosyncrasies in the manufacture, and the second line is the weight of the bundle. This is consistent with the early nineteenth century practice of selling articles such as nails and lead shot by weight rather than by unit. The figures range from 1-0-19 to 1-1-27, and in my belief represent hundredweight [1 cwt = 112 lb], quarters [1 qr = 28 lb], and pounds [lb]. The range is therefore 131 to 141 lb or about 6%, and if this is the weight of a bundle of 24 tiles, then each tile weighs about 6lb, or 2.7 kg, which is about right

Stencilled brand of a Morewood & Rogers Patent Tile, on a house near Beechworth. Inscribed and stencilled Morewood & Rogers tiles, both from the former stables, ‘Murndal’, Victoria, demolished 1950s, provided by Paul Roser. Miles Lewis.

There are also tiles which bear a printed (doubtless stenciled) brand, and are later in date. And it seems that when the company changed the brand they also changed to selling the tiles by unit rather than by weight. This change takes place – or at least reaches Australia - late in 1854, which is helpful in dating roofs where both types appear, as in the now demolished stables at ‘Murndal’ Victoria.

'Clarendon': roof of the service wing and underside with a stencilled tile. Miles Lewis.

This is also critical because at 'Clarendon', Tasmania, the restoration architect, Clive Lucas, believed that the tiles were the original roofing of 1838, yet the brand shows they are not even of the earliest Morewood & Rogers phase.

‘Clarendon’ threshing barn: view of the underside of the roof, and detail showing stencilled tiles, with the traces of a painted inscription on the central one. Miles Lewis; Helen Stitt.

At the ‘Clarendon’ threshing barn many of the tiles bear the stencilled Morewood & Rogers brand. But two of them also have painted inscriptions (now very faded, partly obliterated, and partly obscured) in the same hand as those in Victoria, which are therefore probably that of the same English despatcher. But they don’t say M & R, for Morewood & Rogers. They appear to read:

The 'M + Co' marks a change from the printed brand, and indicates that these tiles date from the dissolution of the partnership late in 1854. Morewood & Rogers failed financially and were reconstructed as Morewood & Co, so the change in brand can be another useful clue in dating buildings. A little later it became A Morewood & Co.

Star Hotel, Stanley, Victoria: underside of tiles branded 'A. Morewood & Co. Patentees London'. Miles Lewis. Victorian patent no 197 to Robert McGavin, 10 February 1859, for iron roofing tiles.

Morewood & Rogers had never actually manufactured the tiles themselves, but contracted the work out to Walker & Co of Gospel Oak, near Birmingham. In about 1858 (the original patent having expired), Walkers began making the tiles under their own brand, Gospel Oak, or just the letters 'G.O.' with an anchor between. So this brand can be similarly useful in dating. Another development was when Robert McGavin of the Clyde Engineering Works, Glasgow, took out a Victorian patent in 1859, for an improved form with the transverse ribs curved in plan. Some tiles of this form have been found, and are presumably imported, though it is unclear whether McGavin manufactured them himself or sold the rights to an established manufacturer.

The other important technical aspect of Clarendon is its papier mâché decoration. By the late eighteenth century the English were using papier mâché as a substitute for plaster in ceiling ornaments, and this was common in the early nineteenth century.2 Papier mâché seems to have been first imported to Australia in about 1837. It was used extensively until about 1860, and then more sporadically at least until at least the 1880s.

Papier mâché is essentially pulped paper and paste pressed into moulds and then baked. This could be used to create lightweight decorative elements, cheaper than plaster. In broad terms, then, papier mâché tends to mean mashed up paper formed in moulds, whereas carton pierre tends to be layers of paper built up successively over the mould, to create a cardboard-like layer. But in practice the two are often combined, with the sheet paper facing over the pulp backing.3

In 1826 C F Bielefeld developed his own improved form of papier mâché, and architectural ornaments by Bielefeld & Haselden were soon afterwards illustrated in J C Loudon’s Encyclopaedia of Cottage Farm and Villa Architecture of 1833, that text which was so extensively used in Tasmania. And Loudon makes the important point that these were not brittle, like plaster, and could be much more readily transported: ‘They are perfectly light and strong; and may be sent to any part of the world.’

1. Announcements and/or advertisements appeared in Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth.

2. Notably at Horace Walpole's 'Strawberry Hill'. The idea of papier mâché - or mashed up paper formed in moulds - seems to have originated in the East, but by the sixteenth century picture frames and various small items were being made from it in Britain. The material had appeared in Paris by 1740.

3. By the end of 1847 the usual method of manufacture was to press sheets of brown paper, with glue between, onto a suitably shaped mould, remove and trim the resultant shell, press a mixture of pulp and rosin into the same mould, and then take this out and press it into the prepared shell. In England the pulp was generally mixed with resin and glue, and in France with whitening and glue, and in both cases it was pressed into boxwood or plaster moulds, backed with glued paper. In England this paper was pre-moulded, as provided in Clay’s patent, but not in France. Up to 1846 most of the better quality papier-mâché work in England was made by Clay's process, but then new methods of using the pulp were devised by Brindley and T H Jennens.

Introduction

Page 2