Museum better off elsewhere

Dare one as an "outsider" step into the alarmingly one-sided debate about Rowley's House? Full marks to Rosie Talbot (Letters, October 19) for writing to the Star under her own name. No marks to "name and address supplied" for cowering behind anonymity on the subject.

Few marks either to Rosie's teachers if they led her to believe that Rowley's House was Tudor or had anything to do with Anne Boleyn, who had been dead for 60 years before it was built.

Indeed, England had moved on to the Stuarts by the time Mr Rowley chose to parade his wealth by building his mansion.

Moving the museum to the Music Hall buildings will enable the exhibits to be displayed with access to all and will include the genuinely Tudor Vaughan's Mansion which is so often overlooked in this debate.

Pictures from the 19th century show Rowley's with an imposing entrance on to Hill's Lane. The entrance is now caged off with ironwork and the leaded windows replaced with plate glass.

The museum would be better off in a more suitable locale and suggestions that the building will be "lost" if it is returned to the private sector for housing/commercial use, where it was for the first 350 years of its existence, are wide off the mark.

Surely the answer is to secure Grade I listed status for the building. If it is not special enough to be listed, then what is the fuss about?

Charles Jerrett, Shrewsbury