The ceramic art of Great Britain from pre-historic times down to the present day, Volume 1 (of 2)

by Llewellynn Frederick William Jewitt

Lowestoft and Gunton.

Lowestoft, on the very easternmost point of England, on the coast of Suffolk, is a pleasant town, with delightful sea views, a fine coast, and a picturesque neighbourhood. It is an ancient borough; is divided into three parts, respectively known as the “Old Town,” the “New Town,” and the “Lower Town;” and its principal street, from which branch off other streets to the left, and numberless “scores,” or narrow ways, leading to the Dene and the sea, is about a mile in length, and contains the principal residences, shops, and public buildings. Its chief trade, like that of Yarmouth, is the herring fishery; and many curious traditions of conflicts between the men of the two rival “bloater towns” are still extant among the inhabitants. The principal interest of the place, however, centres in the fact, that here, on one of the easternmost points of the East Angles, a manufactory of fine porcelain existed in the latter half of last century, and that genuine productions of those works are now much sought for by collectors. In 1863 I visited Lowestoft for the special purpose of seeking information regarding the works, about which at that time literally nothing was known, and after a vast deal of research, both in the town and out of it, I succeeded in obtaining the information which is embodied in this chapter, and which, with the exception of its being now revised and here and there amended, I contributed to the Art-Journal of July in that year.

It seems somewhat strange that the absolute “land’s end” on the eastern coast of England should have been chosen as the spot on which porcelain should be made, when the clay for the purpose had to be procured from the western “Land’s End,” Cornwall, and the coal from the extreme northern coast of Northumberland and Durham. It is not improbable, however, that the same cause which conduced to the establishment of the Chelsea works had much to do with the formation of those at Lowestoft. Certain it is that an extensive trade was in the early and middle part of last century carried on, as it is at the present day, with Holland; and certain it is, that at that time, as now, the town was the constant resort of Dutch fishermen and others; and as the first productions of the Ceramic Art in this neighbourhood appear, so far as I have been able to ascertain, to have been delft-ware, it is not too much to suppose that the first potters were from Holland, and made the ware from clay found in the neighbourhood. Specimens of this fine delft-ware, inscribed with names of people in the neighbourhood, and with dates, still exist, and attest pretty strongly to the correctness of this opinion.

Gillingwater, in his “History of Lowestoft,” written in 1790, says at p. 112:—

“The only manufactory carried on at Lowestoft is that of making porcelain, or china ware; where the proprietors have brought this ingenious art to a great degree of perfection; and, from the prospect it affords, promises to be attended with much success. The origin of this manufactory is as follows:—In the year 1756, Hewlin Luson, Esq., of Gunton Hall, near Lowestoft, having discovered some fine clay, or earth, on his estate in that parish, sent a small quantity of it to one of the china manufactories near London, in view of discovering what kind of ware it was capable of producing, which, upon trial, proved to be somewhat finer than that called the delft-ware. Mr. Luson was so far encouraged by this success as to resolve upon making another experiment of the goodness of its quality upon his own premises; accordingly he immediately procured some workmen from London, and erected upon his estate at Gunton a temporary kiln and furnace, and all the other apparatus necessary for the undertaking; but the manufacturers in London being apprised of his intentions, and of the excellent quality of the earth, and apprehending also that if Mr. Luson succeeded he might rival them in their manufacture, it induced them to exercise every art in their power to render his scheme abortive; and so far tampered with the workmen he had procured, that they spoiled the ware, and thereby frustrated Mr. Luson’s design. But notwithstanding this unhandsome treatment, the resolution of establishing a china manufactory at Lowestoft was not relinquished, but was revived again in the succeeding year (1757), by Messrs. Walker, Brown, Aldred, and Rickman. This second attempt experienced the same misfortune as the former one, and very nearly ruined their designs; but the proprietors happening to discover these practices of the workmen before it was too late, they took such precautions as to render every future attempt of this nature wholly ineffectual, and have now established the factory upon such a permanent foundation as promises great success. They have now enlarged their original plan, and by purchasing several adjoining houses, and erecting additional buildings, have made every necessary alteration requisite for the various purposes of the manufactory. They employ a considerable number of workmen, and supply with ware many of the principal towns in the adjacent counties, and keep a warehouse in London to execute the orders they receive both from the city and the adjoining towns, and have brought the manufactory to such a degree of perfection as promises to be a credit to the town, useful to the inhabitants, and beneficial to themselves.”

It appears from this account that the first pottery was established at Gunton, near Lowestoft, in 1756; but I am inclined to think that pot making had been carried on some years before this date. Marryat describes two plates in his possession, of coarse paste, with blue borders, which bear, respectively, the words—

QUINTON	QUINTON
BENJAMIN	MARY
YARMOUTH	YARMOUTH
1752.	1752.

which he considers may have been ante-dated; but the probability is that they are not, but that they were painted at Gunton or Lowestoft at the period whose date they bear. A remarkably fine blue and white delft plate, or dish, which belonged to the late Mr. James Mills, of Norwich, and traditionally said to be painted at Lowestoft, has a bold border of blue colour round the rim, and the centre bears a heart-shaped tablet (Fig. [836]) with a Cupid at either side bearing a pendent bunch of flowers. Above the tablet is a coronet, and below it a knot and tassel. The tablet bears the words—Robart & Ann Parrish in Norwich 1756. Other examples of this kind of ware, bearing names of individuals and places in the neighbourhood, have also come under my notice, and tend to strengthen my opinion that they must have been made somewhat prior to the year 1756.

Fig. 836.

It is a matter of extreme importance, and very noteworthy, that of the dated examples of wares known or recorded, those of 1752, 1756, 1759, and 1760, are not china but delft ware; and that those from 1762 forward to 1789 are china. The inference is that the manufacture of delft ware at Gunton or Lowestoft continued till about 1760, and that about that time the manufacture of porcelain was gradually making its way.

The proprietors of the porcelain works in 1757 are stated by Gillingwater to be Messrs. Walker, Brown, Aldred, and Rickman. Of some of these proprietors particulars will be found interwoven in my present article, but of the others very little is known. By 1770 the manufacture had advanced very considerably, so much so that in that year, as appears by the following advertisement, a warehouse for its sale was established in London:—“Clark Durnford, Lowestoft China Warehouse, No. 4, Great St. Thomas the Apostle, Queen Street, Cheapside, London, where merchants and shopkeepers may be supplied with any quantity of the said ware at the usual prices. N.B. Allowance of Twenty per cent. for Ready Money.”

The firm was carried on (as is proved by the address furnished to Mr. Duesbury, of the Derby China factory) under the style of “Robert Browne & Co.”; the address is “Mr. Robt. Browne & Co., China Manufactory, Lowestoff, Suffolk.”

Fig. 837.

One of the partners of the early firm, and the manager of the works, was Robert Browne, who died in 1771, when the management fell to his son, also Robert Browne, who, being an excellent practical chemist, made great improvements in the ware. He was constantly experimenting on “bodies,” and succeeded in bringing the art of making porcelain nearer to the Oriental original than had been at that time attained by any other individual. Of the first of these Robert Brownes an interesting relic remains in the possession of his great-grandson at the present day. It is a small inkstand, white, with blue ornaments. It is of nine-sided form, and has Chinese figures on seven of its sides, the other two being taken up with the pattern here engraved, the initials “R. B., 1762,” being those of Robert Browne just alluded to.

The manufacture of porcelain under the management of the second Robert Browne must have attained some great degree of excellence in 1775, for in that year I find that a man named David Rhodes, who was apparently employed by his master, Josiah Wedgwood, to collect together for him examples of the productions of the different manufactories of this country, enters in his account of expenses the purchase of a Lowestoft slop basin, for which he gave ninepence. The account, which is in the possession of Mr. Mayer, of Liverpool, is curious, as the following items will show:—

1775.		s.	d.
May 10.	A Flawed Chelsea Leaf, a Plymouth Teapot, and 2 Liverpool Coffee Cups	0	6
May 12.	A set of Bristol China	6	0
„	A ½-pint Worcester Basin and broken ware	0	6
„	2 Slop Basins, Derby and Leastoff	1	6
„	1 Quart Bristol Mug and Teapot Stand	2	6
„	A Broken Quart Mug, Bristol	0	6

Prices at which collectors nowadays would be only too glad to purchase specimens. Fancy a quart Bristol mug, and a teapot-stand of the same, for half-a-crown! and a Chelsea leaf, a Plymouth teapot, and two Liverpool coffee-cups for sixpence!

The works must at this time have become noted, or they would not have attracted the attention of Josiah Wedgwood, and made him desirous of examining the “body,” and comparing it with other wares made in this country. That the china produced at and before this time was good there can be no doubt, and the purchase of a “slop-basin” shows that tea-services must, prior to that time, have been made. It would be interesting to find that this identical slop-basin was still preserved at Etruria, as, possibly, it may be, although I have failed to recognise it.

A curious circumstance connected with the first Robert Browne, the memory of which has been preserved in his family, is worth relating, as showing the schemes and the underhand practices which were resorted to by manufacturers in those days (as, alas! now), to worm out and steal the secrets of others. The workmen who had been engaged from London having been, as alluded to by Gillingwater, shamefully tampered with, and bribed to injure the work at Lowestoft, probably induced Mr. Browne to retaliate in the manner I am about to describe. Being desirous, soon after the commencement of the works, to ascertain how the glaze was prepared, some of the colours mixed, and other particulars concerning the ingredients used, he went to London, and under the disguise of a workman, engaged himself at one of the china manufactories—of course either Chelsea or Bow. Here, after a short time, he bribed the warehouseman to assist him in his design, and soon accomplished his purpose. The warehouseman locked him up secretly in that part of the factory where the principal was in the habit of mixing the ingredients after the workmen had left the premises. Browne was placed under an empty hogshead close to the counter or table on which the principal operated, and could thus see through an opening all that was going on. From his hiding-place he watched all the processes, saw the proportions of the different ingredients used, and gained the secret he had so long coveted. Having thus remained a willing prisoner for some hours, he was at last released when the principal left the place, and shortly afterwards returned to Lowestoft, after an absence of only two or three weeks, in full possession of the, till then, secret information possessed by the famed works of Chelsea or Bow.

It may be well to note that the Brownes, I am informed, were engaged in the staple trade of the place—that of the herring fishery as well as in that of the manufacture of porcelain. The firm also were shipowners, and kept vessels constantly running “to the Isle of Wight for a peculiar sand, which, with pulverised glass and pipeclay, formed principally the ingredients of the groundwork of the ware,” and to Newcastle for coals.

Lowestoft is, fortunately, particularly rich in dated examples of its productions; but it is worthy of remark, that the whole of these examples, with names and dates, which have come under my notice, are white and blue; showing that, during the period through which these dates run, that was the character of the china made at these works, and that the finer body and the elaborate colouring which distinguish so much of the Lowestoft porcelain, were of later date. But of this presently.

The earliest dated example of Lowestoft china ware I have yet seen is the inkstand just described, which bears the initials “R. B.,” and the date “1762.” In Mr. Norman’s collection was a bowl with the name “Abrm. Moore, 1765,” and a basin, said to have been made for Sarah Crisp, has her initials “S. C., 1765.” The next is a fine bowl, with a large group of Chinese figures—emperor, mandarins, &c.—painted in blue, and inscribed on the bottom with the name of an eccentric old maid, well known in the town, and whose gravestone lies in the churchyard:—

ELIZA^TH BUCKLE
1768.

This bowl and other pieces of a service (notably a basin and cream jug, painted with shepherd and shepherdess) made for her, were painted by her nephew, a man named Robert Allen, who, as a boy, was one of the first employed when the manufactory was established and remained there until its close. The bowl is in the possession of his aged daughter, Mrs. Johnson. This Robert Allen may well be classed amongst the “worthies” of Lowestoft. Working at the china manufactory from the first, he became foreman, and was entrusted with the mixing of the colours and the ingredients of the material itself, and remained so till the close of the factory in 1803. As a painter he appears to have been chiefly employed on blue; at all events the only authenticated specimens of his work which I have seen are of that colour. He also employed himself in staining glass, and numerous pieces of his work are still preserved by families in the town. His principal work was the painting in the east window of the parish church, which he completed in the year 1819, being then in his seventy-fourth year, and presented it to the town. In acknowledgment of this service a silver cup, now in possession of his daughter, and bearing the following inscription, was presented to him:—“A token of respect to Mr. Robert Allen, from his fellow-townsmen at Lowestoft, for having, at the advanced age of Seventy-four, gratuitously and elegantly ornamented the East Window of their Parish Church Anno. Dom. 1819.”

After the closing of the Lowestoft works, Allen, who dealt in china, &c., put up a small kiln at his own house, where he carried on operations on a limited scale, buying the unfinished ware from the Rockingham works and painting and finishing it himself for sale. Mr. Brameld, of the Rockingham works, who was an excellent painter on china, occasionally visited Lowestoft, and became attached to Allen, to whom he presented a set of five vases, beautifully painted from nature with flowers copied from specimens he had gathered on the Dene. He also presented him with a snuff-box, painted by himself.

Of the same year as the bowl above described (1768) a dated example in the possession of Mr. Seago, the town clerk of Lowestoft, is a bowl, with the words—

EDWARD MORLEY
1768

Another bears the date—

RICD. MASON
JANY. 1TH
1771

Of this latter year another dated example is shown on the engraving (Fig. [838]); it has the words—“James & Mary Curtis, Lowestoft, 1771.” This mug was painted by Thomas Curtis, son of the pair named in the inscription. He was for some time, it is said, employed at Dresden, and became a “silent partner” in the Lowestoft works, and in his will is described as a “porcelain painter.” Part of a set of china, painted by this same Thomas Curtis on Oriental body, in 1775, and intended as a wedding present for his son James, is still preserved in the family.

Fig. 838.

The next dated example of blue and white was in the museum of the late Mr. Mills, of Norwich. It is a mug, and bears the inscription—“ROBT. HAWARD 1781.” The same gentleman had also other initialed specimens, made originally for members of his family. In Mr. Seago’s collection is an inkstand marked S. A. Sept. 26 1782, being the initials of Samuel Aldred; and Mr. Norman possessed a similar inkstand inscribed “A present from Lowestoft,” but not dated. In Norwich a later example, with the initials and date—

W
J  S
1784

is also preserved. A beautiful example, the latest known dated specimen of Lowestoft china, is in the possession of Mr. J. Williams, of Islington. It is a mug, three and a half inches high, painted in blue with borders and flowers, and has on the front the initials and name[105]

G C
LOWESTOFT
1789

These will be sufficient to show the range of years over which the Lowestoft blue and white porcelain was manufactured. That it was made to the close of the works there is every probability; but that it gradually gave way to a finer and higher class of goods is certain. Earthenware, too, of a fine kind, appears to have been made at Lowestoft, of which I have seen some interesting examples, so called, in various collections.

In the possession of Mr. Andreas A. Cockayne is a pair of remarkably good salt-cellars of undoubted Lowestoft make. The inside is painted with roses and other flowers, and the outside has festoons of roses and foliage, and on either side of each is a shield bearing gules, on a bend, argent, three leopards’ heads, caboshed, of the field; over all an escutcheon of pretence with the arms of Cockayne, argent, three cocks, gules. Crest, a leopard’s head, caboshed, gules.

Before speaking of the later and higher class of goods made, or painted, at Lowestoft, it is quite necessary to put collectors on their guard against giving implicit credence to all they hear in the locality as to the kinds of ware made at these works. I have seen undoubted specimens of early Worcester, of Caughley, of Bristol, and of several other localities, gravely asserted to be Lowestoft, and even attempted to be proved to be such by the very marks they bear. As a proof of this I may just mention that it is said the company did a large trade with Turkey, and the ware prepared for that market “had on it no representation of man or beast (so as not to offend Mahometan law), and at the bottom of each piece the Crescent was painted!” It is perhaps unnecessary to say that the pieces marked with the “Turkish Crescent” are the ordinary blue and white with the Worcester and Caughley marks, and that some of the pieces are the well-known “cabbage-leaf” and other forms of those makes.

Figs. 839, 840.

The great characteristic of the latter and more advanced porcelain made at Lowestoft, is its extreme minuteness and intricacy of pattern and beauty of finish. Indeed the decorations on many of the specimens which I have examined, are of a character far superior, both in design and in the exquisite and almost microscopic nicety of the pencilling and finish, to those mostly produced at other English manufactories. The borders are frequently very minute and elaborate, and the wreaths, festoons, or groups of flowers, are equally delicate in their proportions.

Some of the productions of the Lowestoft works are apparently painted on Oriental body, but there are many good examples in existence where the body is of Lowestoft make which are of very fine quality. The collector will be able to distinguish immediately between the examples painted at Lowestoft on Oriental body and those which were potted and painted there. Punch-bowls and tea and coffee services appear to have been the staple productions of these works, and, fortunately, many of the former, and several almost complete sets of the latter, are remaining in the hands of families in the neighbourhood, and in those of local collectors, who seem imbued with a truly laudable desire to keep alive the memory of what has been done for the Ceramic Art in their town. The bowls are usually of remarkably good form, and highly ornamented. They are mostly painted at Lowestoft, on Oriental body. Some of these, though not dated, nevertheless give collateral evidence of the period at which they were made, and become, therefore, historically valuable; as do also, indeed, some of the services bearing the initials, heraldic bearings, and monograms of families in the neighbourhood. A punch-bowl in the possession of the town clerk of Lowestoft, which is elaborately ornamented inside and out, bears inside a well-painted representation of a fishing lugger at full sail, within a circle, beneath which is the name of the vessel, The Judas. This bowl was made for the boat Judas, and was filled with punch and drank to its success before each fishing voyage, and at carousals at their end. In the same collection is another beautiful bowl, bearing on either side, within ovals, and surrounded by ornamental ovals, &c., portraits of the notorious John Wilkes, and another, with the words “Wilkes and Liberty.” The painting of these, as of all the higher class of wares, is very beautiful and, indeed, in some parts exquisite.

When writing in 1863 upon these works (and it must be borne in mind that I was the first to write upon them) I expressed myself as above. My opinion that some of the Lowestoft productions were painted there on Oriental body,—an opinion based upon thoroughly good foundation—has been taken exception to by a later writer (who has been indebted for nearly every scrap of information he has embodied in his work to what I then wrote), in no measured terms. I was fortified in that opinion by the judgment of the late Mr. Rose, of Coalport, than whom no man living had a more thorough practical knowledge of bodies and of all the different processes and phases of Ceramic Art, and whose opinion in all technical matters was sought and relied upon by all scientific men of real intelligence; and I am far from feeling disposed to give up that opinion at the mere dictum of a dealer. I have hesitation in saying that if a tithe of the pieces exhibited as Lowestoft were painted there (which I very much doubt), they assuredly were painted on Oriental body, for much of the ware now vaunted as Lowestoft is certainly not English.[106]

Fig. 841.

The coffee-pot (Fig. [841]) formerly belonging to Mr. Norman is a good specimen of Lowestoft painting. It forms part of a service, evidently a marriage-service, originally made for Captain Walsh. The initials it bears are probably those of himself and his bride. They are enclosed in an oval within a wreath of roses and palm branches, tied with a true lover’s knot. On either side is a Cupid, who supports a human heart pierced with two arrows, and this is surmounted by a coronet. On reference to the delft plate just described and engraved (Robert and Ann Parrish), it will be seen how strongly the design of that early example of Lowestoft earthenware accords with this, perhaps one of the most highly finished of its productions in porcelain.

It is unnecessary to describe other services, although many of them are of the highest beauty. One tea service, with the crest (an owl) and the monogram of W. W. conjoined, is especially deserving of notice, however, as being one of the choicest examples of porcelain painting of its kind which have come under my notice. This service, until lately intact, has unfortunately been dispersed, and portions of it passed into the collections of Sir Henry Tyrwhit, Mr. Norman, Mr. Seago, and others.

It is worthy of remark that on much of the Lowestoft china the rose is plentifully introduced. The reason for this is probably two-fold: first, the arms of the borough is the Tudor (or full-blown) rose, crowned with an open arched crown; and this may probably have been the principal incentive in giving the rose so constant and so prominent a place in the ornamentation of the china. Second, during the period of the great Revolution, a French refugee of the name of Rose, one of the cleverest of the French porcelain painters, found his way to Lowestoft, and was engaged by the company. He became the principal, and by far the best, of the artists employed, and probably introduced the rose more generally, in allusion to his name, than would otherwise have been done. To him may probably be ascribed the finest and most minutely finished specimens of painting which the works produced, and it was his taste which gave that French character to the general style of ornamentation which is so discoverable on many of the services. It is well to remark that on some of the pieces painted by him he is said to have introduced a small rose under the handle as a special mark of his work. Like that of many another man of genius, the lot of this clever refugee artist was a sad one. He was an aged man when he came to Lowestoft, and he remained at the works till his eyesight failed him, and he became very poor. A subscription was entered into, and a couple of donkeys to help him to carry water in the town purchased, and thus he passed his last few years.

Fig. 842.

In the group (Fig. [842]), I have shown some very characteristic examples of the higher class make of the Lowestoft works. The saucer is an excellent specimen of floral decoration, and shows better than many the rose which was so plentifully introduced in decoration. The painting, however, of these bolder groups of flowers is not so good as in the more minute ones—the artists, as I have before said, excelling in minute, careful, and elaborate pencilling rather than in breadth of style and colour. The coffee-cup is a simple but very good specimen of heraldic decoration. It is part of a set made for the celebrated writer, the Rev. Robert Potter, Prebendary of Norwich and Vicar of Lowestoft, one of the most distinguished classical scholars of his time, and chiefly known for his excellent translations of Æschylus, Euripides, and Sophocles, and for other equally learned works. The cup bears the arms or, a chevron, sable, between three mullets, gules, pierced of the first; with crest, and motto, “In Deo Potero.” The tea-cup in the same group is a good example of the not unusual French style of ornamentation, in wreaths, monograms, and initials. The shield bears the initials “M.S.J.,” and is surrounded by a remarkably elegant wreath of flowers, and surmounted by a crest. The engraving (Fig. [843]) is a simple sketch from the saucer belonging to the cup just described, and is therefore not filled in with the elaborate detail of the original. The mug engraved in the group is of a form very usual in Lowestoft specimens. It is well decorated with groups and sprays of flowers, among which the rose is predominant. The borders on all these pieces are of elaborate and minutely pencilled character.

Fig. 843.

Transfer printing on china does not seem to have been practised to any extent at Lowestoft. One jug, however, which has been handed down from father to son in the family of the most active proprietor, is preserved, with a memorandum that the copper-plate from which it was printed was given to Mr. Browne by a Mr. Gamble, of Bungay, who, with his family, was in the habit of visiting Lowestoft. Probably the plate was given that the family might be supplied with ware printed from it. The design is a sportsman with dog and gun, and on the spout of the jug are the letters ‘S. A.’ the initials of Samuel Aldred. I have also seen a set of beakers, &c., printed in blue, which are said to have been bought at the factory, and to be attested as Lowestoft make.

The Lowestoft works did not excel in figures, which were usually simple in design, and of small size. They are usually single rustic figures, and possess no notable features; four examples, purchased at the factory just before its close, are in the possession of Lady Smith, and are highly interesting as being well authenticated. Among the principal artists employed at the works were Rose, the refugee of whom I have just spoken, whose beautiful floral patterns decorate most of the best specimens of the ware of these works; Powles, a very clever artist, whose name is well known as the draughtsman of the plates illustrating Gillingwater’s “History of Lowestoft;” Allen, of whom I have spoken, who painted the east window of the parish church, and was the mixer of the colours at the factory; Redgate, who also was a good flower-painter; Curtis, of whose productions I have already spoken; Abel, John, and Joseph Bly; James, John, and Margaret Redgrave; and others named Stevenson, Balls, Mottershed, and Simpson. Besides these, several women were employed in painting and gilding.

The works were brought to a close in the year 1803 or 1804, and the materials and finished goods were sold by auction. The causes which led to their discontinuance were many, but principally the losses sustained by the company, and the successful competition of the Staffordshire manufacturers. One great loss was caused by the failure of their London agents; another and more serious one by the destruction of a very large quantity of Lowestoft china in Holland, with which country an extensive trade was carried on, as thus stated:—“When Napoleon crossed the river during a hard frost and captured Holland, amongst the British property destroyed was a quantity of Lowestoft china at Rotterdam, in value several thousand pounds.” The trade with Rotterdam was very large, and the ware was sent weekly in hogsheads by way of Yarmouth. These two losses, coming closely together, crippled the company; and the cost of manufacture, through having no coal nor any other requisite material in the neighbourhood, preventing them from producing ware so cheaply as could be done in Staffordshire and at Derby and Worcester, the works were closed, after the proprietors had realised considerable sums; and the town thus lost a branch of manufacture which was an honour to it, and which has given it a name in the annals of the Ceramic Art of this country.

And here, before proceeding further, let me again utter a word or two of caution to collectors, against placing too implicit a reliance upon what has been written concerning Lowestoft china, and against taking for granted that all which is nowadays called Lowestoft china is really the production of that manufactory. If all that is ascribed to Lowestoft was ever made there, the works must have been about the most extensive, and—if all the varieties of wares that are now said to have been there produced were made, as is asserted, simultaneously—the most extraordinary on record. The great bulk of the specimens now unblushingly ascribed to Lowestoft I believe never were in that town, much less were ever made there. Mr. Owen, in his excellent work on Bristol china, says truly:—

“The fashion has become general to attribute all such (Oriental) china to Lowestoft, in spite of the evidence afforded by its make, texture, and glaze. It is painful to see, in public and private collections, examples of Oriental ware so labelled, simply because, though hard porcelain, they bear English armorial coats and initials. Mrs. Wilton, of Twigworth Villa, Gloucester, has a set of Oriental china mugs—with the initials of her grandfather and grandmother—which were made for her ancestor in China, and brought thence by himself. According to the new fashion, these relics would be attributed to Lowestoft. Many porcelain punch-bowls are to be found in seaport towns with names and portraits of ships and very early dates; these bowls are often attributed to the works at Liverpool and Lowestoft. The officers of the East India Co.’s ships were accustomed to take out English delft bowls, and get them reproduced in common porcelain in China for their merchant friends; and many a relic now prized as of home manufacture was procured in this manner.”

And again:—

“If one hundredth portion only of the Oriental porcelain which, on the slight evidence of having a certain red trellis-work in the borders, or coarsely-painted roses, or English armorial bearings, is erroneously attributed to Lowestoft, had really been made there, that factory must have been the most prolific and wonderful in the kingdom. A higher critical appreciation of the peculiarities of Oriental ware would prevent such an error.”

The mill for grinding the materials for the manufactory “was in a ravine by the Warren House on Gunton Denes, where a fine stream of water constantly flows. This was dammed up, and when it had arrived at a certain height, was set to flow over a very large wheel (the largest of the kind at that time in the kingdom), for the purpose of grinding the materials for the china.” This water wheel is, I am informed, still in existence. The factory was situated in the town, and the premises are now occupied as a brewery. The street is still called Factory Lane. It is worthy of note that no mark was used upon Lowestoft china. Marryat mentions a mark of three parallel straight blue lines; but this is evidently an error, as no such examples appear to be known.