While wond’ring China shall with envy see,
And stoop to borrow her own arts from thee.
Cynthio.
Worcester, 20th Dec., 1757.
A different version of this poem was reprinted in the Worcester Journal of January, 1758, with the addition of a couple of lines. It is there headed:—“On seeing an armed bust of the King of Prussia curiously imprinted on a Porcelain Cup of the Worcester Manufacture, with Fame resounding her Trump and an emblematical representation of his victories: Addressed to Mr. Josiah Holdship;” and an “extempore on the compliment of imprinting the King of Prussia’s Bust being ascribed to Mr. Josiah Holdship.” The extempore being the following important lines:—
“Handcock, my friend, don’t grieve, tho’ Holdship has the praise,
’Tis yours to execute—’tis his to wear the bays.”
From this it would seem that the credit of the invention (for more information see the chapters on the Liverpool potteries and the Coalport china works) was even then a vexed question in Worcester; some ascribing it to Holdship, and others to Hancock; and, no doubt, each of those individuals claiming it for himself. Robert Hancock was an engraver of some eminence in Worcester, and “was chief engraver[79] to the Worcester Porcelain Company on its first establishment;” and it is also said he was in partnership with Dr. Wall. He died in 1817, aged eighty-seven. Valentine Green, the historian of Worcester, and a famous mezzo-tint engraver, was a pupil of Robert Hancock’s (by whom many of the plates in his “History of Worcester” are engraved), as was also James Ross, the line engraver. Valentine Green died in London in 1813, and was buried in the churchyard of St. Mary’s, Paddington, where his gravestone now stands. Hancock, it is believed, had, previously to printing on porcelain at Worcester, produced some printed plaques at Battersea, specimens of which, with his name attached, are in existence.[80]
Richard Holdship, it will have been seen, was one of the original proprietors of the Worcester works, and became, in 1751, the lessee of the premises (Warmstry House) in which the manufacturing operations were commenced. In 1759 he, conjointly with his brother Josiah Holdship, purchased the property for £600, having previously purchased some houses to the south of the works, on whose site he erected a large and commodious mansion. He, however, became bankrupt in 1761, having sold his shares in the porcelain works to Mr. David Henry, of London, for the immense sum of five shillings.
Shortly after that, Holdship appears to have left Worcester, and, as evidenced by the original deed in my own possession, in 1764 bound himself by bond and various articles of agreement, to Messrs. Duesbury and Heath, of Derby, for the making and printing china or porcelain ware. In these “articles of agreement” he is described as “Richard Holdship, of the city of Worcester, china maker,” and in it he agrees for “the sum of one hundred pounds of lawful British money,” to be paid down, and for an annuity of thirty pounds a year, to be paid to him during life, to deliver to Messrs. Duesbury and Heath, “in writing under his hand, the process now pursued by him the said Richard Holdship, in the making of china or porcelain ware, agreeable to the proofs already made (by him) at the china manufactory of the said John Heath and William Duesbury, in Derby;” also, “during his life to supply and furnish” them “with a sufficient quantity of soapy rock used in the making of china or porcelain ware, at such a price as any other china manufacturers do, shall, or may at any time hereafter give for that commodity;” and “also that he, the said Richard Holdship, shall and will during his life print, or cause to be printed, all the china or porcelain ware which the said John Heath and William Duesbury, their heirs, &c., shall from time to time have occasion to be printed, of equal skill and workmanship, and upon as reasonable terms as the said (Heath and Duesbury) can have the same done for by any other person or persons whomsoever, or agreeable to the prices now given in.” He also binds himself not to disclose or make known his process to any other persons during the continuance of these articles, nor to bequeath, sell, or communicate them to any persons, so as to take place after his death, unless the articles are cancelled during his lifetime. The agreement was to continue in force so long as Duesbury and Heath determined to carry on the business according to his process; and whenever they should decline doing so, then Holdship was to be at liberty to sell or communicate his process to any one else. At Derby, Holdship also printed stoneware. As I have stated in my account of the Derby china works, the printed ware did not appear to meet Mr. Duesbury’s views, or to be so advantageous as the higher class of goods painted by hand, for which he was famed, and thus there were constant complaints and recriminations passing between Holdship and his employers. From some of the documents I glean that his process was “for printing enamell and blew;” that he had an assistant named William Underwood; that he valued his press at £10 10s.; offered his “utensils and copper engraved plates at half prime cost;” that his “enamell collours, weight 151 lbs.,” he valued at £35, including his process for making the same; and that he proposes to “yield his process for printing enamell and blew, for which he hath been offered several hundred pounds.” How long the agreement continued I cannot say, but at all events, Holdship was still employed at Derby at the end of 1769.