Early History
The Tāmaki isthmus, with its fertile soils and close proximity to both the Manukau and Waitematā harbours, has long been occupied by Māori. Butler House (Former) is situated on a ridge located a short distance from Ōhinerangi (Mt Hobson) to the north, Te Kōpuke (Mt St John) to the north-west and Maungakiekie (One Tree Hill) to the south-west. The maunga acted as sentinels and waypoints in the landscape; over time large settlements and extensive gardens and economic hubs appeared on their slopes. Pā sites on the maunga are a reflection of industry in Māori activity in the area particularly connected with Te Waiohua and then Ngāti Whātua. Following incursions by Ngā Puhi in the early 1820s the isthmus was temporarily abandoned. After Governor Fitzroy issued pre-emption waivers in 1844 allowing settlers to buy land directly from iwi, James Dilworth purchased a 152 acre farm, including part of Ōhinerangi (Mt Hobson) and the future site of Butler House from Waikato. He received the formal Crown grant for these lands in 1847.
James Dilworth and Dilworth Trust Estate
Originally from Ulster, Ireland, James Dilworth was an Auckland philanthropist, farmer and businessman who worked in banking before purchasing his farm. Upon his death in 1894, his will established the Dilworth Trust Board with the aim of founding a school to educate ‘disadvantaged boys’ from the Auckland Province and Ulster who were growing up in hardship. The purpose of the school was to provide these boys with education and support to become ‘good and useful members of society’. To raise funds for the establishment and running costs of the school the trustees set about creating income streams, including through subdividing, selling and leasing the estate’s land, and the school opened in 1906.
In 1928 the Dilworth Trust Estate subdivided part of the farm known as Farmer’s Hill, creating Otahuri Crescent and 31 residential sections. The subdivision fronted Great South Road at the southern edge of the wealthy suburb of Remuera, bordering Greenlane, and was the last part of the estate to be subdivided. Although the area was well connected to the rest of the city by tram and rail as well as roads, the trustees were hampered by the onset of the Great Depression from 1929 as they advertised the lots for lease. The worldwide Great Depression had a significant impact on New Zealand society – including occupants of Auckland’s more prosperous suburbs – and did not substantially lift until at least the mid-1930s. Some of the Otahuri subdivision lots were not leased and built on until after 1940.
Creation of Butler House
In 1930 Henry Butler purchased a 21 year Glasgow lease for the north-east facing corner lot in Otahuri Crescent at the top of the Farmer’s Hill ridge with plans to erect a house for himself and his new wife Esme Butler (nee Shrewsbury). Henry Butler, originally from Whanganui, was a recently qualified solicitor who went on to be a partner in the firm Butler White and Hanna, now Simpson and Grierson. Purchasing leasehold property can be seen as a strategy to facilitate obtaining the use of land in a well-to-do suburb at relatively low cost, which might be particularly desirable at a time of economic constraint.
Reflecting his status as a burgeoning middle-class professional, Butler commissioned the architectural partnership of Piper and Brooker to design his new marital home. Llewellyn Piper (1892-1975) and Ludlow Brooker (1901-1978) were both members of the New Zealand Institute of Architects who went on to have notable careers through the mid-twentieth century. Piper in particular became important in relation to forward-looking architecture and later in his career designed celebrated buildings of Modern design such as the Auckland Electric Power Board building, Newmarket, in 1946. Brooker went on to work as Chief Architect for the State Advances Corporation.
Having designed a number of residential homes in Remuera and adjoining well-to-do suburbs in varying styles, Piper and Brooker’s design for Butler House was significant for applying a late period Arts and Crafts style to a residence of relatively restrained proportions – which may, in part, be linked with economic constraints present at the time. As design historian Douglas Lloyd Jenkins has noted, the building ’illustrates the adaptability of the [Arts and Crafts] style to more modest circumstances and provides valuable proof that in Auckland, Arts and Crafts ideals were not solely expressed in large houses’. More particularly, Piper and Brooker’s design combined Arts and Crafts style with more modern, forward-looking architectural ideas including those emphasising external simplicity in appearance; the use of colour and texture to provide visual interest; and plan forms that provided more flexible possibilities in relation to the use of residential space.
At Butler House ideas about the design evolved between the initial conceptualisation, probably prior to February 1931, and construction before March 1932, with progressive features such as interior elements linked with open planning being introduced after initial plans were drawn up.
Centrally erected on its lot, the single-storey residence was primarily constructed from brick with a Marseille tile roof. Its form consisted of a ‘court plan’ incorporating a central body and with two asymmetric wings, reflecting progressive approaches to plan design that were coming into fashion. The projecting front bays of each wing and an off-centre entrance porch faced north, collectively defining a small, front entrance court facing Otahuri Crescent. In the 1930s, courts were considered to provide ‘an intimate outdoor place which belongs more to the house than to the garden’, and represented moves to more substantially integrate external and internal residential spaces. A small, plain timber garage with a tile roof was also constructed in the rear south-east corner of the lot.
The exterior decoration was restrained, particularly in comparison with grander two-storey examples of Arts and Crafts houses in Remuera and other nearby suburbs. Although the exterior detail was pared down it remained distinctive with prominent brick gables and a substantial brick chimney, and a contrasting timber lined porch with stucco and applied half timbering. The uninterrupted combination of red brick walls with the red roof tiles showed a chromatic interest and consistency in colour that indicated the influence of progressive architectural thought in Piper and Brooker’s design. The brickwork incorporated detailed corbels at the base of the gables and cantered window sills, and rectangular ventilators were placed in each gable. The front window on the larger, west bay was emphasised with a large copper sheet above the casement.
The interior similarly combined traditional Arts and Crafts features – particularly those linked with Tudor Revival style – with more innovative or forward-looking elements. Lloyd Jenkins has also noted the presence of a number of notable original features including some ‘very early examples of open planning’.
In its internal layout, public and private rooms essentially occupied separate wings connected by a lateral hallway. The west wing held the public facing living room and dining room, along with a small study. These public rooms and the hall were highly decorated, incorporating exposed wide timber beams on the ceilings, timber panelled wainscoting, and heraldry. Bi-fold doors, which were not shown on an early plan but were evidently added by the time of construction, connected the living and dining rooms allowing the rooms to form an open plan space when needed. A marble fireplace decorated with a Tudor arch motif was a prominent feature of the living room. This arch detail was extensively used throughout the house on all the doors as well as in the front entrance porch.
Private bedrooms and a sleeping porch were in the east wing with the kitchen and tiled bathroom situated between the wings toward the rear of the house. The kitchen shared a wall with the dining room and incorporated a serving hatch. The back porch was internally accessible from the kitchen and incorporated a laundry, additional toilet and fuel store. The bedrooms and hall contained built-in shelves and cupboards. The private spaces were more simply ornamented with thinner timber battens used for the ceilings instead of beams, while the sleeping porch was entirely lined with horizontal tongue and groove boards.
The decorative choices in the design – particularly the building exterior – reflect both the wider trend through the twentieth century towards reduced ornamentation but also the effect of the Great Depression on architectural design. Over this period, until after 1935, new house construction was uncommon and it is possible that the Butlers were not able to afford the costs associated with constructing a grander residence even considering the relative savings of purchasing leasehold rather than freehold property. The growing socio-economic unrest in the early 1930s may have also been a factor in the increasing occurrence of restrained exteriors as noted by Lloyd Jenkins, ‘with unemployed and hungry New Zealander’s rioting in city streets, a little domestic restraint was not only fashionable, it was wise’. Concealed from uninvited public view, the building interior retained greater ornamentation, including aristocratic symbols such as heraldic shields.
The enduring value of the building design was recognised five years after it was built when, in 1936, the Auckland branch of the New Zealand Institute of Architects (NZIA) included the place in the inaugural issue of its journal, Building Today. The design was identified in an article as one of a small number of recently constructed houses in Auckland that illustrated the importance of ‘simplicity of plan, of elevation and of outline’ in modern domestic architecture. Dwellings of artistic merit and ‘good taste’ were especially highlighted, including those such as Butler House which exhibited court plans – considered to have ‘delightful possibilities’ for artistic expression and which had ‘only recently come into vogue’. Aiming to promote the desirability of professional architectural input, the building’s creation by NZIA members was also emphasised.
The Butlers and their son John, born March 1932, resided in the house as it was built for over 35 years. After Esme and Henry’s deaths in 1965 and 1968 respectively, the lease was transferred to the Trustees, Executors and Agency Company of New Zealand Limited as John Butler was living overseas. The place was subsequently rented by Mrs Gearon for a number of years.
Later Ownership
In 1979 the leasehold property was sold to Brian and Valerie Muir who moved into the house with their children. Brian Muir had been the Director of the Christchurch City Art Gallery and moved to Auckland to take the position of Curator of Applied Arts at Auckland War Memorial Museum while Valerie Muir worked as a teacher. The Muirs made small changes to the property such as adding French doors for external access on the east and west elevations, building a small deck overlooking the east end of the garden and adding a pool on the west side – collectively expanding connections between the exterior and interior started with the initial design in 1931. Internally the study and the laundry were combined to create a third bedroom. Brian Muir died in 1989 leaving Valerie Muir the sole leaseholder.
When the lease ended in 1991 the Dilworth Trust offered the option to purchase the freehold title, which Valerie Muir purchased and then created a cross lease. The division of the lot was to the immediate west of Butler House (Former) and incorporated the pre-existing garage and pool, the latter being removed for the construction of a second residence. Mrs Muir retained Butler House (Former) and relocated a two-car garage from Torbay to the south eastern corner of the lot in 1995.
In 2006, the kitchen was modernised and extended with a conservatory. The addition enclosed the remaining portion of the back porch and toilet which was converted into an ensuite for the third bedroom.
Retaining much of its initial form and layout, Butler House (Former) remains a private residence in 2020, nearly 90 years after it was built.