Colonial Williamsburg Digital Library

Photograph - Interior - Living Room

THE HOUSE INTERIOR DISCUSSED IN DETAIL

FLOORS

All flooring is old yellow pine. Some floor boards were patched during restoration. Throughout the two stories of the house the flooring, with the exception of the floor boards of the two rooms of the new south wing, is the old flooring which was found in place at the time the restoration of the house was begun. All of this flooring of the old parts of the house was left undisturbed, except for some of the boards in the southwest room of the second floor. These were taken up and relaid. The flooring of the rooms of the new wing consists of old floor boards salvaged from 18th century houses of the vicinity.

The width of floor boarding varies considerably. The following are measurements taken at random in the various rooms:

• Hallway lot and 2nd floors 7"-9"
• Northeast room lst floor 5"-9 ¾"
• Northwest room lst floor 6"-9"
• Southwest room lst floor 6"-9 ½"
• Southeast room lst floor 6"-9"
• Northwest room 2nd floor 5"-lO"
• Southwest room 2nd floor 5"-10"
• Northeast room 2nd floor 5 ½"-11 ¾"

The flooring nails that were used for the parts added in patching the floors are of wrought iron. The appearance of the nailing of the newly laid parts corresponds with that of the old nailing.

BRICKWORK

Brick Paving occurs on the "interior" as the floor surface of the rear court. This, together with the steps of the court, is discussed under the subject of brickwork.

PART OF HEARTH, NORTHWEST ROOM, FIRST FLOOR

Brick Hearths. All fireplace hearths, floors and linings of the fireplaces are of brick. The drawing at the left shows part of the hearth of the fireplace in the northwest room of the first floor. The other hearths in the house have the same general pattern excepting for slight differences in their overall dimensions. 59. All hearth brick are laid tightly together in sand, without mortar at the points. The hearth and lining brickwork are carefully selected for similarity in color and size.

STONEWORK

The only stonework within the house is used as the surround of the fireplace in the east wall of the southwest room. The marble is white with a faint gray figure. The basis for the use of this marble was the need for some facing other than plaster, which, it is believed, was not used originally. Small fragments of marble were found, indeed, in the neighborhood of the house and these may have been part of some fireplace facing of this kind, but there is no proof of this.

STAIRCASE

All the woodwork in the stair hall, including the stairs, handrailing, panelled dado, doors and door architraves, is original and complete. Some repair to certain parts was required -- adjustments needed to bring the stairs and accessory parts to a complete and satisfactory whole.

The stairway is an open type stairs with a flight of ten risers from the first floor to a square landing ("half-pace"). At right angles to the first flight there are three additional risers leading to a second square landing or half-pace, which in turn leads to a third flight of seven risers, parallel with the first one. There are twenty risers in all. The ends of the treads are open and they are ornamented with carved wood FULL SIZE DETAILS OF STAIRWAY AND STAIR HALL BRUSH-EVERARD HOUSE 60. brackets. The handrailing starts at the ground floor, not from a square newel post, as was most common, but from a curved, goose-neck type rail end and a turned newel.

STAIR HALL

A panelled wall dado follows the rise of the stairs. This can be seen in the photograph that accompanies this report.

It is suggested that the reader examine sheet #109 of the working drawings which shows the stairway in the various elevations and sections. Therein are contained all the details of the stair railing, nosing, balusters and dado.

It was believed by the architects (John Henderson and Richard Walker) who examined the building and who made measured drawings of the interior, that the stairs may have bean a replacement on an earlier stairway, installed within twenty-five or thirty years after the original building was constructed, or that no stairway existed in the house until about mid-century when this stairway was built. Its character -- the nature of its moldings, the dog-eared (croisette) returns, none of which are found elsewhere within the house -- suggest that it stems from a period later than that of the original structure. The architects thought that the stair may have been taken from some other old house and reused here.

The carved brackets, whatever their period, are extremely fine in their workmanship and elegant in their design. The flowered ornaments 61. with their scrolls pose an interesting question of authorship; they resemble the stair end ornaments of two other houses, -- both large houses of the early 18th century, Carter's Grove and Tuckahoe. It is possible that the same skilled carver was hired to do the brackets of all three houses.

HALL INTERIOR SHOWING STAIRS AND WALL WITH PLASTERING REMOVED

Some elements of the stairs, such as the wall dado, hand railing and stair ends are well built; at the same time, evidences of shoddy workmanship appear in the manner in which the balusters are attached and in the somewhat crudely curved lowest step, which is fitted in exactly to the newel post and adjoining woodwork.

VIEW LOOKING TOWARD THE STAIRS AND THE DOOR TO THE NORTHWEST ROOM

Stair Dimensions:

• Width, wall to center of railing: bottom flight -- 3/8"; intermediate flight -- 62. 3/8" and top flight -- 3'-11".
• Riser height: 6 ¼" + or -
• Tread width: 11 1/8" + or -
• Number of risers: 20
• Height of railing at run: 2'-7 ½"
• Height of railing at upper floor: 2'-10 ¾".

STAIR AS SEEN FROM SECOND FLOOR LANDING

STAIR DETAIL SHOWING CARVED END BRACKETS

Rear Stairway

When the house was taken over by the Restoration a part of the old rear stairs in the north wing had been removed, presumably to make room for an outside doorway in the south wall. Traces of the old position of the stair were discovered, making it possible to reconstruct the stairway as it once existed. In the course of this reconstruction the outside doorway was moved to its original position somewhat to the east of the later door.

MANTELS

MANTEL IN NORTH-WEST ROOM (Before restoration)

Northwest room mantel and room end (first floor).

The closet at right side was evidently a new addition and so was removed.

The brick facing within the mantel frame was new and was also removed, revealing the old fireplace.

In order to restore the fireplace to its supposed original appearance, the mantel shelf was raised approximately 3 ½" to an outline where the shelf had been originally placed. In addition, a pulvinated frieze and new inner moldings completed an enframement of the plaster face surrounding the fireplace. The working drawings, sheet #106 should be examined.

MANTEL IN SOUTH-WEST ROOM (With walls stripped, showing brickwork and fireplace partially filled.)

Mantel in southwest room (1st floor), before restoration. The cupboard at left was found to be old and so was retained. The doorway to the rear (S. E.) room was found to have been rehung at some recent date. It was changed to swing in the direction of the rear room in accordance with the old door stop markings. The fire place opening of this chimney piece was surrounded by a facing of off-white Italian marble. The marble facing was determined by 1.) the evidence of there having existed some facing, presumably of stone: 2) The discovery of marble fragments among the artifacts gathered from the basement siftings. A new bolection molding of wood surrounds the marble facing. See working drawings #103, 104, and 107.

Photograph - Mantel in Northeast Room

Mantel in the northeast room, (1st floor) showing partial stripping, including removal of lath and plaster.

The next step in the process of restoration included complete removal of brickwork within the fireplace, found to be lined with a coating of oystershell lime plaster.

This mantel required no alteration or patching.

Northeast bed room mantel (second floor), shown at left, was moved to the southeast room of the first floor. In reinstalling this mantel at its new location a few repairs were made to the frame.

The fireplace from which it was removed was closed.

SECOND FLOOR FIREPLACE

Photograph - Northeast Bedroom Mantel

Fireplace in southwest bed room, second floor has an opening width of 2'-2". Brick jambs measure 14" in width. There is no woodwork. The hearth as found consisted of a combination of square tile and bricks. This was repaired using some of the original material.

The two second floor (front) fireplaces are without woodwork.

Fireplace in northwest bedroom, second floor consists of a fireplace with rounded back (see detail sheet No. 102) and brick jambs. The fireplace opening is 2'-2" in width and approximately 16" in depth. The brick jambs are 8 ½" in width. The brick hearth was retained as found but with some brick repairs.

PANELLING

The panelling within the house includes base-of-wall ("dado") panelling in the following rooms:

• Northwest room, first floor (old).
• Southwest room, first floor (old).
• Stair hall, first floor (old).
• Southeast room, first floor (reconstructed).

There are other panels, namely,

• overmantel and overdoor in northwest room, east side (old).
• overmantel in southwest room. (old)

FULL SIZE DETAIL, DADO CAP AND PANEL MOLD, SOUTHEAST ROOM.

Hallway. The panel treatment in the hall differs in detail from that of the two principal rooms (northwest and southwest), since it has a dado cap which is not of the chair rail type. This dado cap, instead of following a straight line as in the northwest room, has an undulating contour. Its novel and baroque character, suggests that it was introduced into the house at some time after the latter's original completion, perhaps when the stairway was added. (A dado cap, copied exactly after that of the stairhall panelling, was used as the cap of the new panelling of the southeast room.)

The panelling of the hall is an exceptionally fine example of 18th century craftsmanship and deserves study by architects 66. and students of interior design. Illustrations of the hallway and its treatment are shown and discussed in this report under the subject of "Staircase."

TYPICAL (OLD) PANEL SECTION OF NORTHWEST AND SOUTHWEST ROOMS AND HALLWAY. THIS DETAIL WAS FOLLOWED IN THE DESIGN OF THE NEW PANELLING OF THE SOUTHEAST ROOM.

The panelling of the northwest and southwest rooms has characteristics that indicate that it, also, was added to the rooms at a time subsequent to the first construction of the house. For example, it was discovered, upon examination of the wall framing beneath the existing panelling, that this lower part of the wall had been plastered at one time. On the framing studs, below the chair rail level, one can see nail holes for the laths and some staining caused by the plaster. In addition, the top of such base-of-wall panelling would normally have been formed by a dado cap and not a chair railing such as the one we find here, which consists of a backboard to which a molded rail is attached. The panelling, then, seems to have been an after-thought, particularly since it is definitely crowded into its location below the chair railing and not set back to its correct depth. A comparison should be made with good examples such as those found in the Randolph-Peachy or Tayloe House in Williamsburg.

It will be recalled that the projecting southeast wing of the Brush-Everard House had disappeared and had been replaced later by a lean-to addition, ten feet in depth. This patently late feature was removed during the restoration of the house and a deeper wing was added, which followed exactly the old foundation outlines. It was also apparent, from 67. foundation evidence, that this wing had once had its own chimney, so that a new chimney stack was built adjacent to the existing chimney of the southeast room. The first floor room within this part. (approximately 15'-6" x 17'-0") is entirely new, excepting for its mantel and a single wood panel above the doorway at the west side, adjoining the chimney. (This panel is shown in the upper illustration on page 31-a.) On the basis of the discovery of this panel, it was assumed by the restorers that this end of the room in the original southeast wing was panelled and that a panelled dado surrounded the room. While this alone was scant evidence for such a treatment of the reconstructed room, it was further supported by the fact that most rooms of houses of the upper middle-class of that day were treated in this manner. All of the working details for the moldings, sash, panelling, etc. follow closely the woodwork profiles of the front rooms, which are original.

The molded chair railing of the northwest and southwest rooms of the Brush- Everard House is unusually heavy in scale as compared with other trim of the house and with molded chair railings found elsewhere in Tidewater Virginia. The thought persists that it may have been made up of moldings from the nearby Palace or shaped by block planes that were created for the Palace railing. That the molded railing was installed subsequent to the building of the house is to be assumed from the fact that the moldings at the sides of the window openings and doorways are cut off square. (See following page on which three old Williamsburg chair rails are compared with that of the Brush-Everard House.)

CORNICES

Interior cornices were found in place at the junction of the walls and ceiling in the northwest, southwest and northeast rooms of the first 68. CHAIR RAILINGS COMPARED 69. floor. These cornices are all old but they differ in a minor way one from the other. The three cornices are unusual in that they were applied, apparently, as an afterthought at a date later than that of the first construction. In two of the rooms (the southwest and northeast) the cornice was installed over the plastering; in other words, the rooms had first been plastered, and, as we are to see, papered, after which the cornice was applied. It is also worthy of note that no cornice appears in the hallway, a rather unusual circumstance for a major first floor space in an 18th century house. The absence of the cornice in the hall and the application of one over the plastering in the two rooms mentioned is evidence for the supposition that no cornices existed in these rooms at all until sometime subsequent to the completion of the house.

THE CORNICES OF THE BRUSH-EVERARD HOUSE, SHOWN (HALF FULL SIZE) FOR PURPOSES OF COMPARISON.

As in the case of many other features of this house, which differ from each other from room to room, the cornice treatment is not uniform throughout. Unlike the other two first floor rooms, the northwest room, apparently, had a cornice from the beginning, since the cornice in this room had not been superimposed upon the plaster but had been installed before the plastering was done and received it (the more usual treatment 70. of plaster and trim in 18th century buildings in Williamsburg.) This suggests that this room, which was the one nearest the Palace and looked out upon it, was thought of, originally, as the best room of the house and that the cornice was applied at the outset to give it extra embellishment.

The cornices in the two front rooms differ chiefly in the widths of the backboards. These backboards are beaded at their lower edge, and where they are applied to the plaster surface, they project approximately ¾", excepting above the mantel on the fireplace side of the room. The cornice of the northeast room has, like the others, a backboard but differs from them in having a smaller crown molding. The cornice in the reconstructed southeast room (first floor) is patterned after the old cornice of the southwest room. It was applied, like the cornice in the northwest room, before the plastering was done. No cornices were found in the rooms of the second floor.

CORNER BOARDS (Interior)

Wood corner boards are found in the rooms at projecting wall corners, such as those formed by the breast and side walls of a chimney. The detail at the left shows an old example from the house. This served as a pattern for the similar corner boards which were installed in the reconstructed south wing. The size of these corner boards is 2 ¾" x 7/8", while the bead measures ½" on both faces. These interior corner boards serve to receive the plaster as the corner boards of the house exterior receive the weatherboarding.

FULL SIZE DETAIL OF INTERIOR CORNER BOARD

BASEBOARDS

Baseboards, sometimes known as skirting boards, are the narrow wood bands which are 71. fitted against the floor, 'round the bottom of the wainscoting or of a plastered wall.

There are four baseboard types within the house, three of which are shown at full size at the left.

FIRST FLOOR BASEBOARDS OF THE BRUSH-EVERARD HOUSE

Example "A" (northeast room) is a common design found in many Williamsburg rooms. It is a shape suited to a plastered wall, since the plastering is carried down to it, being set back approximately 3/16" from the face of the skirting.

Example, "B" (hallway) is appropriate for a wood-panelled dado, since it is of slight thickness, and therefore suitable for application to a wood backing.

Example "C" (northwest and southwest rooms), which has a cavetto or concave top, is also applicable to a wood backing and it is therefore suitable for use with a wood dado.

Example "D" (second floor -- not shown above) is simple a board base without moldings, which is set approximately flush with the bottom of a wood or plastered wall. Its width is about 3 ½". It is appropriate in its simplicity since the second floor is without cornices, chair railings, or mantels. We have already noted the restraint in the treatment accorded the second floor fireplaces. At the same time the dormer windows, overlooking Palace Green, are provided with practical and convenient window seats.

DOORS AND DOOR TRIM

Most of the doors are old, while the new ones are replicas of old doors used at one point or another within the house. The molded contour of the door panels resembles, in most cases, the contour of the dado panelling, which is uniform throughout the house. The wide variety of door sizes supports a fact which has already been discussed, namely, that the house was built at different periods, and suggests that the doors were borrowed from other buildings of the town, in the same way, as we suspect, other features of the building were salvaged from existing houses. One of these features is the window trim, which varies from room to room of the house in much the same way as do the doors.

The special attention which has been paid to the trim of the hall doors leading to the northwest and southwest rooms -- the use of croisettes^* at the base as well as the top of the frame -- is noteworthy.

CROISETTE AS USED IN BRUSH-EVERARD HOUSE

The chart on the next page lists all of the doors, both exterior and interior, and contains, in outline form, full information concerning them and door trim.

DOORS AND DOOR TRIM

HARDWARE

Much of the hardware, particularly the hinges, required for the operation of doors, windows, and shutters is old and was found in place. Where old hinges were missing, old examples, salvaged from other pre-revolutionary houses, were used. Several latches required new knobs or "keepers." Existing door locks in some cases required a knob or a set of keys to complete them. Some locks, notably the brass ones, are old and were obtained from a supply of salvaged hardware belonging to Colonial Williamsburg.

Wrought iron prevails as the material for latches and hinges. Door locks are of iron, except for those on doors nos. 101 and 106, which are brass. Knobs are of iron or brass as indicated.

NOTE: Knobs and keepers for locks and latches, where missing, were supplied from the Colonial Williamsburg stock of old hardware or through the use of reproductions.

HARDWARE found in Brush-Everard House.

PAINTING AND COLOR

As with most colonial houses little evidence of old color remained on the exterior of the Brush-Everard House, due to the effects of weathering and the replacement of parts. Fragments of pigment, however, were discovered in some crevices around the windows. The fragments gave a clue to the color used when the parts were first installed or when they were first painted. Investigation of the layers of paint on parts of the old trim which were relatively well protected from the weather indicated that this trim, and possibly, therefore, the weatherboarding as well, had once had a priming coat of Spanish brown. The old finish coat had been, apparently, a yellow ochre.^*

On the interior of the house, paint surfaces were examined and studied by scraping down through layer after layer of paint -- an estimated ten or eleven coats. In this process the sequence of paint layers helped to determine at what period features of the interior such as woodwork had been installed. As an example, the succession 81. of paint layers of the cornice, chair railing and door trim of the northwest room were examined and found to be in agreement. These paint coats were studied and compared with the paint coats on other woodwork in the room (panelling and mantel) that was inspected of being of an origin later than that of the main part of the house or of the cornice, door trim and chair railing. As a result of this examination the architects were convinced that the top four or five color coats were alike throughout the room, but there the similarity ended, for beyond these the color layers differed. It was thereupon decided that the two features which were thought to be of a later date, namely, the paneling and the mantel, had, indeed, been introduced subsequent to the other parts on which the scraping was done. We do not know when these features were installed but we think that it was sometime during the 18th century.

The baseboards or skirting in the house were painted black, the color customarily used in 18th century Williamsburg for this feature of the trim.

COLORS USED IN PAINTING OF RESTORED BRUSH-EVERARD HOUSE

The exterior and interior colors used in painting the restored Brush-Everard House were, in nearly all instances, based upon old colors found on or in the house.

The colors of the weatherboarding and exterior trim were derived from remnants of color -- much weathered, to be sure --- which still existed on a piece of old weatherboarding and a piece of the original cornice found in protected places on the house. The color of the shutters was taken from that of an old shutter which had been in use on the Brush-Everard Kitchen (p. 53). This shutter was presumed to be an old one which had once hung on the house since it exactly fitted the first story windows of the west side of the house.

The manner of determining the colors of the interior woodwork is illustrated by the procedure used in the case of the northwest room of the first floor. The architects are convinced that the woodwork in this room was installed at different periods, that the cornice, chair rail and base were placed in position earlier than the mantelpiece and the panelling of the dado (p. 66). This conclusion was based, among other things, on the fact that the deeper layers of paint in the case of the first-named features did not agree with the deeper paint layers of the mantelpiece and dado. The objective in the painting of this room, was to reproduce the color which was used in the first coat of paint applied after the various items of woodwork were in place in their final form. Successive patches of color were removed from the cornice, chair rail, base, mantelpiece and panelling until the deepest paint layer was reached which all of the features shared in common. It was 83. assumed that this was the paint coat which had been given the woodwork of the room after the dado panelling was installed.

In a similar manner the paint layers on the woodwork of the southwest and northeast first floor rooms was investigated and the earliest color common to all of the features determined. This color was then reproduced and used in the painting of the restored rooms. In the case of the southeast first floor room, which is reconstructed, a panel existed over the door head on the east side of the doorway which had formerly connected this room with the southwest room. The color had been preserved on this panel thanks to the protection which had been given it by the leanto addition which existed at the southeast corner of the house when the latter was taken over for restoration. Since this panel had been part of the trim of the once-existent south wing, its color -- one of its deeper layers, that is -- was used as a basis for determining the color to be used in the reconstructed room.

The colors of the woodwork of the hallway and of the three old rooms of the second floor were determined in a like manner. No evidence existed as to the color which the woodwork of the second floor room of the reconstructed south wing might have had so that the color of this room is, of necessity, conjectural. This room is not an exhibition room, however, and is kept closed to the public so that it is not of vital importance that this paint color be completely authentic.

BRUSH-EVERARD PAINT COLORS

WALLPAPER

Fragments of wallpaper of two different designs were found beneath the cornices of the northeast and southwest rooms when the house was stripped of its plaster during the process of restoration. The fragments in each case were several feet in length and approximately 4" wide (the width of the cornices under which they were preserved). Original samples of the two papers are shown at the left and a brief description of them follows.

WALLPAPER FOUND BENEATH CORNICE IN NORTHEAST ROOM (ABOVE) AND UNDER THAT OF SOUTHWEST ROOM (BELOW).

BRUSH-EVERARD HOUSE FURNITURE AND FURNISHINGS

American highboy, c. 1710-20, of cedar and white pine in northwest bedroom, second floor

The furniture and furnishings of the Brush-Everard House, a listing of which follows, are original throughout. Among the objects are things both of European provenance and of American manufacture, including a number of Southern pieces. There are some 17th century items, as well as examples of the William and Mary, Queen Anne and Chippendale styles. Inventories and related material were used as aide in the selection of the various items. According to John Graham, head of Colonial Williamsburg's Curator's Department, which had charge of the furnishing of the house, no attempt was made to achieve museum quality in the furnishings of the house but, rather, to make these representative of the household effects of an 18th century gentleman in well-to-do but not opulent circumstances. "However," says Graham, "some of the furnishings are outstanding examples of their kind, if not unique." --The numbers appended to the items in the following furniture listing are accession numbers of the Curator's Department.

THE BRUSH-EVERARD HOUSE AN EXAMPLE OF PAINSTAKING RESTORATION

The Brush-Everard House was evidently the home of middle class families of Williamsburg. As a dwelling, it is less pretentious than the Carter-Saunders and Wythe Houses, located on the other side of the Palace Green; it is closer in appearance and size to Captain Orr's Dwelling, frequently referred to as a typical Williamsburg house of the first and second quarters of the 18th century.

The care given to the recovery of the Brush-Everard House approaches closely the strict ideals set up by Colonial Williamsburg for house preservation , as distinct from the process of restoration , namely;

That an old and original building be recovered by repair alone, and that no old part which is sound be discarded.
That worn surfaces be tampered with as little as possible; that, for example, accretions and changes associated with age, such as acquired rough textures of woodwork, layering of paint, patched plaster, worn floors and stair treads -all evidences of bygone use -- be left intact and not be replaced by modern parts or finishes.
That additions for modern convenience, and even restored parts be clearly indicated to the observer and distinguished from the old, so that the living and historically significant qualities of the building remain undisturbed.

The Architectural Department of Colonial Williamsburg has sought to meet these ideals of preservation. The departures from them were made not by choice but out of necessity. For example, old exterior weatherboarding and cornice moldings had all but vanished. As we have already observed, all sound fragments, however small, were retained and incorporated in the finished fabric. It was hoped that the old interior plastering could be patched and it was a disappointment when it was found necessary to replace it by modern plaster.

Where parts of the house which had disappeared were reconstructed, on the basis of early foundations, full acknowledgement is made in this report that these parts are new additions to the old front portion of the building, which has remained essentially unchanged over the course of two centuries.

The visitor to the restored Brush-Everard House, in browsing through its interior, will find practically all the woodwork within the house authentic and original; the mantels are additions which were made a generation or so after the first structure was completed. The stairway of the house is believed, from internal evidence, to have been of a design period of a decade or more later than that of the body of the house. The doors and door and window trim, while they vary somewhat from room to room, are, without exception, of the 18th century. On the whole, the Brush-Everard House is as it stood when first completed, and it is one of the most precious of the architectural possessions of Colonial Williamsburg. As we have said, it is smaller and less impressive than the house of Robert Carter, directly across the Palace Green, but as an example of highly developed, indigenous design and craftsmanship it is undoubtedly superior to it.

February 22, 1950

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The writers of this report on the Brush-Everard House wish to acknowledge with thanks the kind assistance given them by the following individuals in the assembly of materials for the manuscript:

• Mr. and Mrs. Robert Morton Hughes, Jr. , who supplied valuable information concerning Mr. Hughes' grandfather, Sydney Smith, and his aunts, the Misses Estelle and Cora Smith. They also placed at the disposal of the writers a number of photographs of Miss Estelle and Miss Cora. One of the pictures of Miss Cora was reproduced and used in the report.
• Mrs. George P. Coleman , who for many years knew the Smith sisters intimately and who furnished many interesting facts about them. She also permitted extracts from her poem, Lay of the Lost Lion to be used in the report. She read the portion of the manuscript which deals with the Smith family and made a number of helpful suggestions for its improvement.
• Mrs. Rutherfoord Goodwin , who, for a time, lived in the brick office and boarded with the Misses Estelle and Cora Smith, and who gave the writers information concerning the personalities of the sisters and about incidents which occurred during the period she resided near them.
• Miss Mary Stephenson , whose Research Report on the Brush-Everard House was a source of much information concerning the various owners and occupants of the house and who assisted in the uncovering of new facts concerning them.
• Miss Fanona Knox , who also aided in the finding of useful data by suggesting to the writers likely sources of information.
• Mr. John W. Henderson , who knows the architecture of the house better, perhaps, than any other person, and whose constant and unfailing aid in furnishing information concerning its past and restored conditions was of the first importance to the writers.
• Mr. Singleton P. Moorehead , who, as always in the preparation of the reports, has given the writers valuable information and advice during the writing of the manuscript.
• 91-a.
• Mr. Sidney Benton , field superintendent in charge of the work of restoring the Brush-Everard House, who has been uniformly helpful in giving the writers information whenever they visited the building site. Mr. Benton participated in the discovery of the old wallpaper fragments found at the house.
• Mr. Thomas Williams , Colonial Williamsburg staff photographer, from whose excellent negatives most of the photographic illustrations of the Brush-Everard House used in this report were made. He has been most courteous in furnishing the prints -- from his own photographs and a few from those of others -- which were from time to time needed.

SEQUENCE OF OWNERSHIP OF THE BRUSH-EVERARD PROPERTY
(Condensed from the Research Report prepared by Mary E. McWilliams in May, 1943 and a supplementary report written by Mary A. Stephenson in May, 1947.)

1717

July 8, 1717. The trustees of the city of Williamsburg granted to John Brush two lots (#165 & #166) with the proviso that he build a house upon them within 24 months. Brush, apparently, complied with the requirement for he retained the lots after the two-year period had elapsed. This would seem to signify that buildings of some sort were built upon the lots between 1717 and 1719.

1726

John Brush died before December 19, 1726, since his will was probated on that date.

1727

February 2, 1727. Elizabeth Brush sold her share of the house and lots to her brother-in-law, Thomas Barber.

1727-28

May, 1727. Thomas Barber died. His wife sold the property on November 11, 1728 to Elizabeth Russell, a widow. There is evidence which suggests that the latter became the third wife of Henry Cary II.

1742

Cary is the next known owner of lots #165 and #166 and it is possible that he acquired them by marrying Elizabeth Russell. When he came in to possession of the lots is not known, but it is a matter of fact that he sold them to William Dering, a dancing mastery, in 1742.

1744

William Dering gave to Peter Hay, Williamsburg physician, and Bernard Moore, gentleman of King William County, a mortgage on the buildings and lots and certain of his chattels.

1745

Dering, always hard up, apparently, next mortgaged the property to Philip Lightfoot. Philip Lightfoot died in 1747 and the mortgage passed to his son, William.

1751

William Dering must have died sometime before February 14, 1751, for on the date, as he notes in his diary, John Blair, Sr. attended Mrs. Dering's "outcry" -- that is, public auction, of the property. It is possible that Blair was the successful bidder for the property and that he at that time came into possession of it.

1773

Our supposition that he became the owner is based on the single fact that John Blair, his son, transferred lot #172, the one on which the garden directly back of the former Brush House was located, to Thomas Everard in 1773.

1783

The Frenchman's Map of 1783 shows, at the position of colonial lots #165 and #166, a small house with five outbuildings directly back or northeast of it, and a room or wing projecting from the south side of the house. Dr. Isaac Hall of Petersburg was apparently the next owner. Hall married Martha Everard, and, if, as was likely, she had inherited the lots from her father, Thomas Everard, then, according to the Virginia law of the time, Hall would have become, automatically, the legal owner. Certain evidence (see Research Report of May, 1947) points strongly to the fact that Hall was, indeed, at one time, owner of the property.

1788-1819

Again, definitive proof is lacking, but the evidence indicating that Dr. James Carter was the next owner is strong. The unknown Draftsman's Map (late 18th or early 19th century) has the name "Carter" inscribed on lots #165, #166 and the adjoining lot #172, The College Map (1791?) also has the name "Carter" on the same lots. In 1788 Williamsburg tax transfers indicate that James Carter came into possession of "3 lots via Dr. Hall." Since we believe that Dr. Hall owned the former Brush property, these three lots were undoubtedly #165, #166 and #172. Incomplete tax records for Williamsburg also show that Carter (after 1801, his estate) is charged with 3 lots from 1791 through 1819. The above facts are supported by further evidence, given in the Research Report, which points to Carter's ownership of the property in question. It is not known whether or not he actually occupied it.

1794

Carter died in 1794 leaving a will which indicates that he had an under-aged daughter, named Elizabeth. Some time later (1810), Milner Peters of Norfolk married an Elizabeth Carter. Peters probably came into possession of the property by virtue of his marriage to this Elizabeth Carter.

1820-1828

In 1820, 1825, and 1828 Peters was taxed for one lot on which stood buildings valued at $500. Since the tax records from 1820 on often treat two or more contiguous lots as one, the property for which Peters was taxed was probably the one-time Brush holding.

Early in the 19th century -- the exact period is not known -- the widow and family of Governor John Page lived in the house but apparently did not own it. The house for this reason, however, was at one time known as the "Page House." It was apparently Dabney Browne, a professor at the College of William and Mary, who followed Peters in the ownership of the property. Browne was taxed for one lot which he obtained "via Wm. T. Milner Peters decd " Browne continued to be taxed for this lot until 1847.

1847

In 1847 Daniel P. Curtis is listed in the tax records as possessing a lot and houses "Formerly chd to D. Browne & Transfd to Daniel Curtis in 1847." Actually this transfer was made in 1845, as a deed given by Curtis to Sydney Smith on Dec. 8, 1849 makes clear.

The erstwhile Brush property remained in possession of Sydney Smith and his descendants for well-nigh a century. When Miss Estelle Smith, the last of the Williamsburg line of Smiths died in 1946 it passed into the hands of the Williamsburg Holding Corporation.

Though his statements pertain not to the ownership but rather to the condition of the house we should not omit to record here the information contributed by that elderly Williamsburg resident of long memory John S. Charles. Recalling the appearance of the house in the 1860's, Charles believed that it had, at that time, a 96. much smaller front porch than the one which existed when the restoration of the house was begun. The small detached brick storehouse just north of the house, which was built and used by Sydney Smith as a law office, had remained, according to Mr. Charles, unchanged since the 1860's.

Miss Estelle Smith also recalled the smaller front porch spoken of by Mr. Charles. Her father replaced it by the long porch after the Civil War. The roof of the smaller porch was supported by a pair of fluted columns, and pilasters framed the entrance doorway. Evidences of these pilasters could still be seen on the weatherboarding adjacent to the doorway at the time the measured drawings of the house were made.

DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED IN ARCHITECTURAL RECORDS

(This glossary is appended as an aid in the interpretation of certain terms used in the reports which are frequently subject to misinterpretation,)

The word "existing" is used in these records to designate features of the building which were in existence prior to its restoration by Colonial Williamsburg.

The phrase "not in existence" means "not in existence at the time of restoration."

The word "modern" is used as a synonym of "recent" and is intended to designate any feature which is a replacement of what was there originally and which is of so late a date that it could not properly be retained in an authentic restoration of the building. It must be understood, however, that restored buildings do require the use of modern materials in the way of framing as well as modern equipment.

The word "old" is used to indicate anything about a building that cannot be defined with certainty as being original but which is old enough to justify its retention in a restored building as of the period in which the house was built.

The word "ancient" when used in these reports is intended to mean "existed long ago" or "since long ago." Because of the looseness of its meanings the term is seldom used but when used, it denotes great age.

"Antique" as applied to a building or materials, is intended to mean that these date from before the Revolution.

"Greek details," "Greek moldings" refer to the moldings, and architectural treatment featured by the Greek Revival, dating in this locality approximately from 1810 to 1860.

Length signifies the greatest dimension of a building measured from end to end.

Width is used in the reports to mean the dimension of a building measured at right angles to the length.

Depth, as applied to the size of a lot or house is the dimension measured at right angles to the street.

Pitch is here interpreted as meaning the vertical height from floor to floor.

The term "restoration" is applied to the reconditioning of an existing house in which walls, roof and most of the architectural details are original, but in which there is replacement of decayed parts, and some missing elements such as mantels, stairs, windows, cornices, dormers.

A building "preserved" has reference to a building in its pristine condition, without replacement of elements, such as stairway, windows, paneling, mantels, flooring. The term preservation does imply however, necessary repairs, to protect the building from weather, decay, excessive sagging, etc.

"Reconstruction" is applied to a building rebuilt on old foundations, following the documentary description of the original structure. The reconstructed Capitol, for example, is a rebuilt building, following the precise descriptive specifications for construction given in Acts of the Virginia Assembly, 1662-1702. Use is also made in this work of pictorial data, such as the Bodleian Plate, and recorded measurements and drawings.

It is to be noted that the existing roof covering, whether original or modern, has been replaced in all of the restored buildings -with a few minor exceptions, by shingles of fireproof material (asbestos cement) because of the desirability of achieving protection against fire.

When we say "reconstruction (or restoration) was started" the actual beginning of work is meant, not authorization which may occur at an earlier date.

When we say "reconstruction (or restoration) was completed," we refer to the actual completion date of the building and not to the date when the building was accepted.

ADDENDUM

BRUSH-EVERARD HOUSE
Block 29, Colonial Lots #165 and #166
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(Sources of Information Consulted in the Preparation of this Report).

Archaeological Data

• Archaeological Report, Brush-Everard House and Outbuildings, Areas A and E, and archaeological drawing covering the same areas (February 28, 1947). Both the report and the drawing are by James M. Knight.

Artifacts

• The artifacts found at the site have been examined, including a shutter found in the kitchen, parts of old window sash discovered in the basement of the house and pieces of marble which became the basis for the marble surround of the fireplace in the southwest room.

Research Data

• Research Report by Miss Mary E. McWilliams, May, 1943, 13 p.
  Comment on the "Smith" House by Miss Estelle Smith who lived all her life in it. Miss Smith suggested to Miss McWilliams certain revisions in her Research Report and gave her transcriptions of the writing scratched on several of the window panes of the house.
• Supplementary Research Report by Miss Mary A. Stephenson, May, 1947, 12 p. 103.
• Files of the Department of Research and Record, Colonial Williamsburg.
• E. G. Swem's Virginia Historical Index which contains references to individuals, events, building practices and places.
• Deeds, wills, inventories and other property records in the Department of Research and Record.
• Files of the Virginia Gazette, consulted with the aid of the Virginia Gazette Index for data on persons, buildings and other subjects.
• Journals of the House of Burgesses of Virginia
• Files of the Architectural Records Office, which include a collection of photographs and measured drawings, which were consulted to find the precedent followed in the restoration of vanished features of the house.
• Reminiscences of old residents of Williamsburg, notably Mr. John S. Charles, Miss Victoria Lee and the above-mentioned Miss Estelle Smith.

Maps

• The Frenchman's Map, the Rochambeau Map and Williamsburg town maps of 1800 or thereabouts, including the Estelle Smith, Annie Galt, Bucktrout and Tyler Maps.

Correspondence

• General Files of correspondence with reference to the project.
• Files of letters, etc. written to and by the resident architects, Messrs. Kendrew and Moorehead, and the consulting architects, Perry, Shaw and Hepburn concerning the Brush-Everard property.

Drawings and Specifications

• Files of the Department of Architecture, including sketches, field notes and drawings, measured drawings and working drawings. The field notes and drawings and the measured drawings were made in 1937 by Richard A. Walker and John W. Henderson. The working drawings were made in 1949 by John W. Henderson, Joseph F. Jerkins, Robert E. Taylor, Albert M. Koch, Ralph E. Bowers and Ernest B. Lund.
• Specifications, completed May 12, 1949, with addenda appended on June 6, 1949 and July 11, 1949, respectively.

Photographs

• Progress photographs, taken during the process of restoration as a pictorial record of the successive stages of the work.

Books

• Johnston, Mary. Audrey. This book, written in 1902, is a romantic novel in which a considerable part of the action takes place in and about a "little white house" on the Palace Green in Williamsburg. Judging by its location this house was the Brush-Everard House. In a letter written by Mary Johnston to Dr. W. A. R. Goodwin in 1930, the author of Audrey comments on the imaginary nature of the book.
• Waterman, Thomas T. and Barrows, John A. Domestic Colonial Architecture of Tidewater Virginia. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1932. This book contains drawings of Ampthill in Chesterfield County.
• Waterman, Thomas T. The Mansions of Virginia. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1946.
• Goodwin, Rutherfoord. A Brief and True Report Concerning Williamsburg in Virginia. Richmond: The Dietz Press, 1940.
• Tyler, Lyon Gardiner. Williamsburg, the 01d Colonial Capital. Richmond: Whittet and Shepperson, 1907.
• Salmon, Richard. Palladio Londinensis: or, The London Art of Building, third edition. London, 1748.
• Neve, Richard. The City and Country Purchaser's and Builder's Dictionary [etc.]. London, 1736. Various other handbooks of 18th century architecture were also consulted in search of a basis for and as a check on building practices and materials of the 18th century.

Consultations with Individuals

• -Consultations concerning the house and site were held with Messrs. Singleton P. Moorehead, Ernest Frank, John W. Henderson, James M. Knight, Joseph F. Jenkins and field superintendent Sidney Benton.
• -Consultations with Mrs. George P. Coleman, Mrs. Rutherfoord Goodwin and Mr. R. M. Hughes, Jr. concerning the Smith family. All of these individuals supplied valuable information concerning the Smiths. Mrs. Coleman 105. and Mr. Hughes also lent the original photographs of the Misses Estelle and Cora Smith from which the copies used in the report were made.

Visits to the site

• --Numerous visits were made to the Brush-Everard property, in the course of writing this report, to check architectural details of the house and to examine features of the site.

BRUSH-EVERARD HOUSE
INDEX

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

9, 10,11,91, 91a

Act of 1705

2,22,23

Acts of Virginia Assembly

100

Addendum

101a, b, c

Allen-Byrd House

15d

Aluminum foil insulation

37,38

Ampthill

4,5

Plan of

19

Approved methods of restoration

52

Archaeological drawings

17,30

Archaeological evidence

30

Archaeological excavation, when made

Title page

Archaeological report

30

Asbestos-cement shingles

43

Audrey House

1,14

BARBER, Thomas

92

Barge Boards

41

Barraud, Dr., House

15d

Baseboards

70, 71

Details

71

Types

71

Basement paving

25,31,33

Benton, Sidney I., construction superintendent

Title page

Aid from

91

Bibliography

102-105

Blair, John, Jr,

6,93

Blair, John, Sr.

93

Bodleian Plate

98, 100

Book listing

102-105

Boxwood arbor

7

Bracken House

23

Brafferton Hall

4

Brick

Bond

27

Color

26

Drains

35

Drips

33

Methods of making

26

Mortar

27

Nogging

37,38

Rubbed

27

Sizes

26,27

Brick and marl paths

34

Brick office

96

Brick paving

24

Brickwork

25

Brick drips

33

Color of brick

26

Hearths

33

Joints

27

New work

25,26

Old work

25,26

Reproduction of old bond

27

Where used

25

Browne, Dabney

95

Brush, Elizabeth

5,92

Brush-Everard House

Brick-chimneys

22

Chimney location

16,17

Compared with Captain Orr's Dwelling

23

Court

17

Dating of

98

Design characterized

22

Dimensions

22

Enlargement

16,17

Exterior discussed

25

First owner

1-4

Foundations

16,28

Garden

23a

Historic associations

15a

Interior

56-88

Legends

15a,10,11

Location

1,14

Names of

1

New parts

30

Original form

16,18,23

Painting of

80-85

Plan arrangement

16,21

Plan drawing

18,23

Plot plan

23a

Porch

13,20,23

Pre-restoration photograph

20

Rear view of

31a

Restoration discussed

20

Roof

42

Second form

17

Symbol found on framing

15a,b,c

View of, as restored

1

Window panes

15a

107

Brush, John

1-4

As gunsmith

2

Builder of first house

98

First owner of house

2

Gunsmith's equipment listed

3

His death

3, 92

Inventory of furniture

3

Keeper of arms in Public Magazine

12

Obtains lots

92

Bruton Parish Church

4

CAMPIOLI, Mario E., Director of the Department of Architecture

Title page

Capitol, reconstructed

100

Captain Orr's Dwelling

23,52,89

Carter, Elizabeth

94

"Carter's Grove"

Stair brackets

61

Carter, Dr. James

94

Carter, Robert

88, 90

Carter-Saunders House

89

Cary, Henry,I

4

Cary, Henry, II

4,5,19,92

His ownership of house

5

Chair railings

67, 68

Comparative chart

68

Discussed

67

Charles, John S, recollections

95, 96

Chimney pieces,

see mantels

Chimney stacks

23,25,31

Clapboard roofing

44

Coke, Susan

15d

Coleman, Mrs. George P.

10,11

Aid from

91

Poem by

11,12

Color examples

82-85

Color,

see painting and color

Concrete foundations

30

Corner boards (exterior)

11

Vestigal type

42

Corner boards (interior)

70

Detail of

70

Cornices, exterior

39,40

Dormer

47-49

Cornices, interior

67, 69, 70

Backboards

70

Comparative drawings

69

Widths

70

Cramps of Wrought Iron

36

Croisettes

72, 73

Defined

72

Detail of

7,72

Illustrated

47-49

Curtis, Daniel P.

95

DATING of a building

97, 98

Definitions

99

Dering, William, dancing master

5,92, 93

Doors and door trim

92, 93

Dimensions

73

Frames

73

Location

73

Old and new

73

Panel sections

73

Schedule

73

Sills

73

Trim

73

Types

73

Doors (exterior)

54,73

Dormers

45-51

Door-dormer removed

45

How restored

45,46

Location

45-51

Moldings at rake

47,48

Pediment treatment

48

Sash

47

Sheathing

46,47

Sills

46,47

Treatment of sides

46

Type

45

View of north dormer

46

West front

45,46

Wing dormer

50

"Double-pile" defined

22

END boards

40

English bond

27

Entrance steps

25

Entrance stoops

51

Everard, Martha

8,93

Everard, Thomas

6-8

Acquired lot #172

93

His daughters

8

Member of Bruton Church

8

Standing in community

8

Exterior construction

25

FIELD notes, when made,

Title page

Firearms

2

108

Importance of

2

Use of by home guard

2

Fireplace lining

101a

Fireplace,

see mantels

Flashing of chimneys

43

Flashing of valleys, etc.

43

Floors

56, 58

Materials

57

Nailing method

58

Sizes of boards

57

Foundations

28,31

Brick bond

27

Concrete walk

30

Condition

28

Discussed

17

Old foundations

31a

Thickness

30,31

Treatment

29

Under pinning

29

Framework of house

36

Frank, Ernest M., Assistant Director, Department of Architecture

Title page

Frenchman's Map

24,93

GARDEN

4,7,23a,24

Gilmer, Dr., house and shop

6

Glass sizes

55

Glass ordered by Everard

101a

Goodpasture, Dr.

11

Goodwin, Mrs. Rutherfoord

9,91

Goodwin, Dr. W.A.R.

15

Gothic revival office

8

Illustration of

24

Greek moldings

100

Greek Revival style

100

Grilles

53-55

Gunsmith

2

HALF-acre lots

2

Hall, Dr. Isaac

93-94

Hardware

74-78

Details

79

General consideration

74

Hinges

52

Materials

74

Schedule giving type and location

74-78

Hay, Peter

93

Hearth detail

58

Hearths

33,58, 59

Henderson, John

Age of woodwork

81

Aid from

91

Chief draftsman

Title page

Rear stairs

60

Hinges

Garnet type defined

52

Types described

52

Hopkins, Alden, Resident landscape architect, Colonial Williamsburg

Title page

Horrocks, Rev, James

8

Hospital at Williamsburg

8

Hughes, Robert M., Jr.

10,91

Mentions office

22

Supplies information

10,91

INDIANA limestone

36

Insulation

37,38

Interior of house

56-88

Brickwork

58-59

Corner boards

70

Cornices

67, 69, 70

Doors and trim

72, 73

Floors

57, 58

General description

56

Mantels

63, 64

Marble for fireplace

59, 63

Panelling

65, 67

Staircase

59-62

Stonework

59

Wallpaper

86-88

Woodwork

56

JOHNSON, Mary

14

Description of Brush-Everard House

14

Letter to Dr. Goodwin

14,15

KENDREW, A. Edwin, Head of the Division of Architecture

Title page

Kidd, Joseph

88

Knight, James M., Archaeologist, Department of Architecture

Title page

Knox, Fanona, aid from

91

LAW office described by R.M Hughes

22

"Lay of the Lost Lion"

11,12

Levingston house

14

Lightfoot, Philip

93

William

93

Lime

27

Lion anecdote

11

Lossing, Benson J. Sketch for Raleigh Tavern

98

Lots #165 and #166

1,4,5,6,22

MCWILLIAMS, Mary E.

92

Mantels

63, 64

Maps of Williamsburg

93, 94, 101b

Bucktrout

101b

109.

College

94

Frenchman's

93

Unknown draftsman's

94

Marl paving

24

Method of Restoration

52

Michel, drawing of

97

Middleton, Dr. A. Pierce

15b

Modillion cornice

39

Moody smokehouse

52

Moore, Bernard

93

Moorehead, Singleton P., Architectural Advisory Consultant

Title Page

His definition of drawbore

3

Opinion on dormers

48

Mortar

27, 36

NAILS for weatherboarding

37

Norton, John, and Sons

6

OCHRE

80

Office building

5,96

Outbuildings shown on plan

23a

Overseer

4

Ownership sequence

92-96

Oyster, shell lime

27

PAGE, Eliza

15d

Page, Governor, John

15d

Page, House

1,95

Page, John

95

Paint

80-85

Spanish brown

80

White lead ordered

7

Yellow ochre

80

Painting and color

80-85

Colors discussed

80

Examples of color

82-85

General consideration

80, 81

Ochre

80

Schedule

82-85

Spanish brown

80

Panelling

65, 67

Dado cap detail

60a,65

Dado type

65

Details of

66

Doors

73

Hallway type

65, 66

With chair railing

65, 66, 67

Paved areas

24a,34

Paving

24,25

Basement

33,34

Of walks

34

Patterns

35

Perry, Shaw and Hepburn, architects

Title page

Peters, Milner

94, 95

Plot plan

24a

Porch, described

96

Powder Magazine

4

President's House

4

Purbeck stone

36

RAKE Boards

41

Raleigh Tavern

97, 98

Randolph-Peachy, Panelling

66

Randolph, Peyton

8

Restoration, date of

Title page

Restoration of house

20, 21

Restoration principles

21,52,89, 90

Roof

42 ,43 ,44

Covering

43

Framing

43,44

Old roofing found

44

Shed type

43a,43b

Slope

42,43

Type

42

Russell, Elizabeth

5,92

SHED roof

43a,43b

Archaeological basis

43a

Framing shown

43a

Shingles

43

Shop of John Brush

2

Shutters

53-55

Louvred

53-55

Panelled

53,55

Schedule of types

55

Sills

53,55

Smith family

8-13

Smith, Henry

15d

Smith House

1

Smiths, residents of Brush Everard House

8

Smith, Sydney

8,91, 95, 96

Cora

9,10

Estelle

9,10,15c,95, 96

Describes window pane markings

15c

Henry, of Yorktown

8

Spanish brown

80

Spotswood

2,3

Staircase (main)

59-62

Balusters

60, 61

Dado cap

60a,65

Dado described

60, 61

Described

59, 60

Dimensions

61, 62

End brackets

59-62

Handrailing detail

60a

Handrailing discussed

60

Newel posts

60, 61

Nosing detail

60a

Risers

59

Views of

61, 62

110.

Staircase (rear)

32,62

Stamp Act

97

"Statute House" described

22

Steel used for frame

37

Stephenson, Mary

Aid from

91

Research Report by

92

Steps at rear

32

Stone steps

32

Stonework

36,51,59

Color and texture

36

Use of iron cramps

36

Stoops

51

Symbols, described

15a,15b

Illustrated

15b

TAYLOE HOUSE panelling

66

Terms defined

99-101

Theatre, the first, its location

14

Trim, exterior

39

Trusses for roof frame

37

"Tuckahoe" stair-end brackets

61

Turnbuckles

37

UNDERPINNING

29

Undertaker

4

VIRGINIA Assembly, acts of

100

WALKER, Richard A.

60

Wallpaper

86-88

Advertized in Gazette

88

Colonial wallpaper discussed

87, 88

Description of

86, 87

Examples

86

Old paper discovered

86, 87

Williamsburg wallpaper

88

Weatherboarding

31a,38,101c, 101d

As roofing

101c, 101d

Williams, Thomas, photographic aid

91

Window glass

7

Window pane markings

15e,15a,15c,15d

Wood lath

37

Woodwork

56

Wren Building

4,97

Wythe, George

6

Wythe House

6,89