“Porcelain began about the year 1750. There is only one manufactory, which employs about seventy people. The clay is not of equal fineness with the foreign, but the workmanship exceeds it. The arts of drawing and engraving have much improved within these last thirty years. The improvements of the porcelain have kept pace with these. They adhere to nature in their designs, to which the Chinese have not attained. A dessert service of one hundred and twenty pieces was recently fabricated here for the Prince of Wales. The spot upon which this elegant building stands, which is internally replete with taste and utility, was once the freehold of my family. It cost £35, but the purchaser, my grandfather’s brother, being unable to raise more than £28, mortgaged it for £7. Infirmity, age, and poverty, obliged him to neglect the interest, when, in 1743, it fell into the hands of my father as heir-at-law, who, being neither able nor anxious to redeem it, conveyed away his right to the mortgagee for a guinea.”

And again, in his MS. “History of the Hutton Family,” 1799,[8] he says, speaking of John Hutton:—

“He was the man who purchased the house east of St. Mary’s Bridge, now the China Works, for £35, but being master of only £28, mortgaged the premises to Mr. Crompton, a banker, for the other seven. He becoming old and poor, and inheriting the supineness of the Hutton family, suffered the trifling interest to remain unpaid till the mortgagee seized the premises. The freehold in 1743 fell into the hands of my father, as heir-at-law, who assigned over his interest to Mr. Crompton for a guinea.”

The manufactory was situated on the Nottingham Road, near St. Mary’s Bridge, in a locality then named Suthrick, or Southwark. On its site, in 1845–6, the Roman Catholic nunnery of St. Marie, designed by Pugin, was erected, but this has now, like the China Works, become “a thing of the past”—the nunnery having been purchased by the Midland Railway Company, and taken down in 1863. Hutton’s remark as to this site being his patrimony, is very curious, and adds an increased interest to the locality. The very premises he speaks of were those first occupied for the making of porcelain, and, curiously enough, they were opposite to Lombe’s silk-mill, from which they were divided by the road and the broad expanse of water of the River Derwent.

It is generally believed that in 1750, perhaps a little earlier, the manufacture of china first sprang into existence in Derby—about a year or so before the works at Worcester were established; and there is a tradition that the first maker was a Frenchman, who lived in a small house in Lodge Lane, and who modelled and made small articles in china, principally animals—cats, dogs, lambs, sheep, &c.—which he fired in a pipe-maker’s oven in the neighbourhood, belonging to a man named Woodward. There were, at this time, as I have shown, some pot works on Cock-pit Hill, which afterwards belonged to Alderman Heath, a banker; and the productions of this French refugee, or rather son of a French refugee, having attracted notice, an arrangement was made between him and Heath and Duesbury, by which the manufacture of porcelain was to be carried on jointly. This man’s name, to whom I take it belongs the absolute honour of commencing the Derby China Works, was Andrew Planché; and I am enabled to arrive at this conclusion by means of a draft of a deed now in my possession, by which a partnership for ten years was entered into by the three already named. In this arrangement I apprehend Planché found the knowledge of mixing bodies and glazes, Heath the money (£1,000), and Duesbury the will, ability, and skill to carry out the scheme. These articles of agreement are as follows:—

“Articles of Agreement between John Heath of Derby in the County of Derby Gentleman, Andrew Planche of ye same Place China Maker & Wm Duesberry of Longton in ye County of Stafford Enamellor. Made and enter’d into the 1st of Jany 1756.

“First it is agreed by ye said John Heath Andrew Planche & Wm Duesberry to be Copartners together as well in ye Art of making English China as also in buying and selling of all sorts of Wares belonging to ye Art of making China wch said Copartnership is to continue between them from the Date of these Presents for & during ye Term of Ten years from thence & then fully to be compleated & ended And to that end He ye said John Heath hath ye day of ye date of these Presents deliver’d in as a Stock ye sum of One Thousand Pounds to be used & employ’d in Common between them for ye carrying on ye sd Art of making China Wares And that one third share of Profits arising therefrom It is mutually agreed between all ye sd parties shall be receiv’d by & paid to ye said John Heath till ye said Prinl Sum of £1000 be paid in Also it is agreed between ye sd parties to these Presents that ye sd Copartners shall not at any time hereafter use or follow ye Trade aforesaid or any other Trade whatsoever during ye sd Term to their private Benefit and advantage. And also that ye sd Copartners shall during ye said Term pay and discharge equally and proportionably between them all expenses they shall be at in managing ye Art and Trade aforesaid[F1: period?] And also that all Gain or Profit that shall arise from ye Art & Trade aforesaid during ye said Term shall be divided between them ye sd Copartners Share and Share alike And likewise that all such Losses as shall happen by bad Debts Ill Commodities or otherwise shall be borne equally between them And it is further agreed by ye sd Parties that there shall be kept during ye sd Term Just & True Books of Accounts to wch sd Books any of ye sd Copartners shall have free access without Interruption of ye other And it is further agreed that at any time hereafter at ye request of ye said John Heath New Articles shall be made & an additional Term of years not less than Ten shall be added with such alterations and additions as may be found necessary And that ye said Copartners shall from time to time communicate to each other every Secret of ye said Art And that ye said John Heath shall have it in his power to appoint any other Person to Act for him if he should chuse so to do wch Person shall be as fully impowered to Act with regard to all Covenants herein contained as ye sd John Heath himself. Witness our hands the Day & Year above written.”

These articles are not signed, and as in no instance which has come under my notice the name of Planché again appears—and as I can only trace the firm as that of “Duesbury and Heath”—I fear one is driven to the inference that the usual fate of clever men awaited Andrew Planché, and that when his knowledge was fully imparted, he was, from some cause or other, discarded by those who had taken him in hand. At all events, this is the only instance in which his name appears in any of the papers connected with the works which I have examined. Of Planché, however, whom I was the first to discover and note in 1862, but who, despite all I had written, was spoken of by Mr. A. Wallis, eight years later, as “an apocryphal French refugee,”[9] I am enabled to give some additional particulars.

Andrew Planché was one of the five sons of Paul Planché, a French refugee, by his first wife, Marie Anne Fournier, also a refugee, whom he married in 1723. Andrew was born on the 14th, and baptized on the 24th, of March, 1727–8, and his youngest brother was Jacques Planché (born in 1734), who married his cousin (the only daughter of Antoine Planché by his wife Mary, daughter of Herr Abraham Thomas and his wife Catherine), and was father of my old and valued friend, J. R. Planché, F.S.A., the well-known dramatist and antiquary. This fact I brought to his knowledge in 1862, and again when he was writing his interesting “Recollections,” in which he has embodied some of the information I supplied him with. Through the re-marriage of their father, the two boys, Andrew and Jacques, had early to shift for themselves; the latter made his way to Geneva, where he learned the business of watch-making, and the former, I believe, went into Saxony, and there learned the art of making porcelain at Dresden. How he came to Derby is at present a mystery, but he was there at all events as early as, if not earlier than, 1751. This is proved, as I shall presently show, by the birth of one of his sons. In 1751 he would be 23 years of age, and was living in the parish of St. Alkmund, in Derby. The following entries are extracted from the parish register of St. Alkmund’s:—