churches of revived Gothic in the recollection ground, and where justice to the full must of the writer was St. Matthew's in the City recognize individual rights. Thus, we had Road, not very far from the "Angel" at almost despaired of the long-projected widenIslington, a pleasanter quarter then than ing of Parliament Street, but now, as an now. Holy Trinity, Paddington, is also accomplished fact, it has become the fitting remembered as a brand-new church in 1849. avenue of the truly imperial quarter of St. Mary Abbot's at Kensington is one of the London. The earliest block, the Treasury most important examples, and were it but old, Offices at Whitehall, was the work of the and perhaps less obscured by stained glass, it forties. This, indeed, was not much more would command much admiration. The Gothic than a new front to an old building; it was revival has been maintained through nearly and is handsome classic work, but scale has the sixty years, its last achievement being greatly increased, and this block has become the re-edification of the greater part of St. dwarfed by later buildings of greater proporMary's Overie, Southwark, which has become tions. The Home, Colonial, Foreign, and a twentieth-century cathedral-a fine work India Offices form a splendid group, which in our day, yet small in contrast with the happily on one side presents itself to mighty churches of old. And here must St. James's Park, and thence makes a very have mention the constant sustentation work charming picture. The great War Office block, at the Abbey, especially the facial restoration raised in front of the comparatively insignifiof the north transept, the merit of which is cant, but still appreciated Horse Guards, is now perhaps generally allowed, though it would be outwardly completed. The Admiralty still vain to expect unanimous approval. On turns a stately though gloomy visage towards St. Paul's, internally, elaborate and costly the street; but large and handsome addiart has been bestowed, and new, sweet bells tions have been made on the Park side. ring from its belfry. Also much redemp- Another immense block of buildings is rising tion work has been done on our one great with faces towards the Abbey and Parliament Norman fragment, St. Bartholomew's. Street, and we wait with unfailing interest the full realization of this magnificent seat of Government. of The Gothic art has not been employed on churches alone; it has been frequently applied to secular buildings, and if its success Westminster must not be left without be questionable, the doubt seems to affect observing from the fine bridge across the only the interior adaptability to modern use. river the eight handsome divisions We are now mainly concerned with the St. Thomas's Hospital, a very noticeable addiexternal beauty imparted to London, and tion to the beauty of London. The new police find great satisfaction in these Gothic acqui-quarters on the Westminster bank are also sitions. The Houses of Parliament were important, though less admired. And along building in the forties and some years later; the Embankment (noticed in my previous they are certainly beautiful. Fault-finding communication) have risen the fine buildis always easy, especially when architecture ings of the London School Board-now the is concerned; here the main body of the London County Council's Educational Offices building has been thought deficient in pro- the Thames Conservancy, the City of portion, and overwrought with repeated London School, and others. ornament. But if this be the fault, it is W. L. RUTTON. redeemed by the noble towers, especially the Victoria Tower, the stately magnitude and grace of which render it unrivalled throughout the world. Next we are reminded of the removal of the comparatively modern buildings of the Courts of Justice, now transposed to another site, whither we will presently follow them, observing here the opening of space and the revelation of old Westminster Hall, the famous beauty of which, however, is internal. At Westminster block after block of grand Government buildings has been raised, and still they are far from completion. Projects have but slowly progressed in a city where energy and industry have enormously enhanced the value of 27, Elgin Avenue, W. (To be concluded.) SIR THOMAS NEVILL, 1503-82. SIR THOMAS was the third son of Richard, Lord Latimer, who died 1531, and uncle of the last lord, who died 1577. He and his younger brother Marmaduke married Maria and Elizabeth, two of the four daughters and coheiresses of Sir Thomas Tey, of Brightwell Hall, Suffolk, and Pigott's Ardley, Essex. Morant's account of him (apparently taken from Harl. MS. 3882) is full of gross inaccuracies, which it may be well to correct. His history is of interest, as, if any male descendant remains, he would be the heir male of the house of Nevill. Morant, Chauncy, and Drummond give the Nevills of Ridgewell, Essex, as descendants; but I have, under the heading' Cromwell Fleetwood' (10th S. iv. 74), given reasons for thinking that this descent is open to grave doubt. There were about this time so many Sir Thomas Nevills of different families, that, it is most difficult to distinguish between them. For instance, 1540, the date given by Morant for the death of this Sir Thomas, is really that of his father-in-law Sir Thomas Tey; there has evidently been a confusion of notes which has been slavishly copied. The Thomas whose I. P.M. of 1602 Morant also refers to, as that of the son and heir of our Sir Thomas, was Thomas Nevill of Stock Harvard, Essex, who married Rebecea, daughter of Gyles Allen, of Hazeleigh. He was son of Hugh Nevill of Ramsden Belhouse, whose will was proved in 1603 (Com. Essex) as of Brightlingsea. Sir Thomas Nevill of Mereworth, Speaker of the House of Commons and brother of Lord Abergavenny, died in 1543. The 'D.N.B.' says that his first wife was Elizabeth, widow of Robert Amadas, a member of the firm of goldsmiths to Henry VIII. This marriage took place in the chapel of Jenkins Manor at Barking, Essex, on 28 August, 1532; but it was certainly not the first marriage of this Sir Thomas, as a monument to his daughter Margaret in Widial Church (Lipscomb's 'Bucks,' iii. 474) states that she was born in 1525, and was the daughter of Katheryne, daughter of Lord Dacre. This lady, who is buried at Narden, in Kent, and there called Elizabeth Daker, is the only wife generally given to Sir Thomas. The subject of this notice may quite possibly have been the bridegroom. There was also a Sir Thomas, second son of Ralph, fourth Earl of Westmoreland, of whom there are no particulars in the genealogies. He was probably the Sir Thomas Nevill, K.B., whodied in 1546(Musgrave's 'Obituary'). He may, however, have been the Sir Thomas Nevill who on 5 November, 1544, married Frances Amiel, widow, at Bramfield, Suffolk. She was probably the Frances Hopton who in the visitation of Suffolk, 1561, p. 44, is said to have married first ·Jeromye (sic); secondly, Sir Thomas Nevill of Yorkshire; and thirdly (p. 195) the son of William Hovell, of Ashfield, Suffolk. The Jeromye is a sub. sequent addition, and should probably have been Jermye, the name of a well-known Suffolk family. The herald must have made a mistake, or there were two previous marriages, or possibly the Amiel is a mis reading of the register. A Chancery suit of 1561-2, Thomas Nevyll, knt., v. Arthur Robsarte, Esq., shows that the marriage was not happy, as Sir Thomas sues for the return of a bond of 1,000l. which he had given as security that he would not "beat or vex" his wife on condition that she behaved well; he asserts that she had misbehaved several times. Sir Thomas of the Westmoreland family is not mentioned in the rebellion of 1569, and had probably died previously. Thomas Nevill of Holt, Leicestershire, was knighted by Somerset in 1543 on the Scotch campaign; it was his heiress who married Thomas Smyth, of Cressing Temple, who took the name of Nevill. Maria Tey, who must have been married by 1536, died in 1544, according to the I.P.M. of 37 Henry VIII. (1545), which names October of the preceding year as the date of her death, and states that Thomas, her son and heir, is aged nine. Morant says that she died in October, 1544, and was buried at Ardleigh; but in view of the mistake already mentioned this requires confirmation. He also states that in 1552 Thomas Nevill held the manor of Liston hall, in Gosfield, of the Earl of Oxford. In the parish register of Gosfield is the burial of Maria Nevill on 19 Oct., 1544, and also the birth of Ann Nevill, 1543. In 1558 the manor was in other hands. There was about 1600 a Thomas Nevill, a substantial yeoman, at Gosfield, which adjoins Halstead, where the ancestors of the Ridgewell family lived; his will (Arch. Essex, Bushen 3) was proved in 1622. He may be identical with the Thomas Nevill of Abbess Roding, a neighbouring parish, who paid subsidy there in 1565, and at Felsted in 1571: he probably belonged to a family of Willingale and Fifield of whom there are records back to 1522 they intermarried with a branch of the Jocelyns. Sir Thomas, then called of Aldham, was inpolitical trouble in 1537 (Dom. State Papers, vol. xii. part ii. 242), when his brother Marmaduke was committed to the Tower. F have not been able to find what happened to Sir Thomas, but it is unlikely that he escaped Cromwell without serious fine, which may account for the little show he made in after years. He paid subsidy in 1549 and 1553. His brother, Lord Latimer, had been implicated' in the first rising in Yorkshire, which was pardoned in December, 1536; he made his peace, and kept out of that of the ensuing February. Sir Thomas's sister was married to Francis Norton, the prime mover of the |