THE
CERAMIC ART
OF
GREAT BRITAIN

FROM PRE-HISTORIC TIMES DOWN TO THE PRESENT DAY

BEING A HISTORY OF THE ANCIENT AND MODERN

POTTERY AND PORCELAIN WORKS

OF THE KINGDOM

AND OF THEIR PRODUCTIONS OF EVERY CLASS

BY

LLEWELLYNN JEWITT, F.S.A.

LOCAL SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF LONDON;
HON. AND ACTUAL MEMBER OF THE RUSSIAN IMPERIAL ARCHÆOLOGICAL COMMISSION, AND STATISTICAL
COMMITTEE, PSKOV;
MEMBER OF THE ROYAL ARCHÆOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND;
ASSOCIATE OF THE BRITISH ARCHÆOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION;
HON. MEMBER OF THE ESSEX ARCHÆOLOGICAL SOCIETY AND OF THE MANX SOCIETY, ETC.;
COR. MEMBER OF THE ROYAL HISTORICAL SOCIETY,
ETC. ETC. ETC.

ILLUSTRATED WITH NEARLY TWO THOUSAND ENGRAVINGS

IN TWO VOLUMES.—II.

LONDON
VIRTUE AND CO., Limited, 26, IVY LANE
PATERNOSTER ROW
1878

[All rights reserved.]

LONDON:
PRINTED BY VIRTUE AND CO., LIMITED,
CITY ROAD.

[All rights reserved.]

CONTENTS OF VOL. II.

CERAMIC ART IN GREAT BRITAIN.

CHAPTER I.

Potteries of the Tyne, Tees, and Wear—Newcastle-on-Tyne—Warburton Pottery—Newcastle Pottery or Forth Banks Pottery—Stepney Bank Pottery—Ouseburn Bridge Pottery—Ouseburn Ford Pottery—Ouseburn Potteries—Low Pottery—South Shore Pottery—Phœnix Pottery—St. Peter’s Pottery—Gateshead—Carr’s Hill Pottery—St. Anthony’s Pottery—Sherriff Hill Pottery—Tyne Main Pottery—North Shields—Low Light Pottery—South Shields—Tyne or Shields Pottery—North Hylton—South Hylton or Ford—Southwick Pottery—Wear Pottery—High Southwick Pottery—Deptford Pottery—Monkwearmouth—Sheepfold Pottery—Sunderland Pottery and the Garrison Pottery—Seaham Harbour—Newbottle—Bishop Auckland—New Moor Pottery—Stockton-on-Tees—Stafford Pottery—North Shore Pottery—Middlesborough-on-Tees—Wolviston Pottery—Coxhoe Pottery—Alnwick.

The following brief account of the earthenware works of Newcastle-upon-Tyne and its district, drawn up for the British Association, in 1863, by Mr. C. T. Maling, one of the manufacturers, may serve as an introduction to this chapter. “The manufacture of white earthenware was introduced into this district by Mr. Warburton, at Carr’s Hill Pottery, near Gateshead, about 1730 or 1740. Those works were very successfully carried on for seventy years, when they gradually declined, and in 1817 were closed. A small portion of the building is still used as a brown ware pottery. The next manufactory was built by Mr. Byers, at Newbottle, in the county of Durham, about 1755, where brown and white earthenware still continues to be made. In 1762, Messrs. Christopher Thompson and John Maling erected works at North Hilton, in the county of Durham; their successor, Mr. Robert Maling, in 1817 transferred his operations to the Tyne, where his descendants still continue the manufacture. St. Anthony’s, Stepney Bank, and Ouseburn Old Potteries were commenced about the year 1780 or 1790. Messrs. A. Scott & Co. and Messrs. Samuel Moore & Co. erected potteries at Southwick, near Sunderland, the former in the year 1789, the latter in 1803. The pottery carried on by Messrs. John Dawson & Co., at South Hylton, was built by them in 1800. The works of Messrs. John Carr & Sons, at North, Shields, were erected in 1814. Messrs. Thomas Fell & Co. built St. Peter’s Pottery in 1817. The establishment of Messrs. Skinner & Co., Stockton-on-Tees, dates from 1824. There are now about twenty-five potteries in this district, of which, on the Tyne, six manufacture white and printed wares, four white, printed, and brown wares, and three brown ware only, employing 1,200 people, and manufacturing yearly about 12,000 tons of white clay and 3,000 tons of brown clay, and consuming in the process of manufacture about 34,000 tons of coals. On the Wear there are two potteries manufacturing white and printed wares, two white, printed, and brown wares, and two brown ware only, employing about 500 people, manufacturing yearly about 4,000 tons of white clay, 1,500 tons of brown clay, and consuming in the manufacture about 14,000 tons of coals. On the Tees there are four potteries manufacturing white and printed wares, employing 500 people, manufacturing 5,000 tons of white clay and consuming 13,000 tons of coals. Two potteries at Norton manufacture brown wares; the particulars of their operations the author has not been able to obtain. The potteries in this district, being situated upon navigable rivers, have great advantages over their inland competitors, Staffordshire and Yorkshire. The expenses on clay from sea freight and inland carriage average 13s. per ton to Staffordshire, and 5s. per ton to this district; and in flints the advantage is still greater, in Staffordshire the average being 19s. per ton against 4s. 6d. per ton here. Coals, although a little dearer here per ton, are so much superior in quality that 80 tons of Newcastle coals are equal to 100 tons of Yorkshire or Staffordshire coals. About 1858 Messrs. Skinner & Co., of Stockton-on-Tees, first applied Needham & Kite’s patent filtering press for expelling the surplus water from the slip, which had formerly been done by evaporation. This is a much cleaner and better process than the old system, and is now adopted by thirty or forty potteries in England and Scotland. With the exception of three potteries in this district and at Glasgow, machinery has been very little applied to the manufacture of earthenware, and even at these works not nearly to the extent to which it is capable of being profitably adopted. One manufactory on the Tyne, Ford Pottery, having the best machinery, supplies at least 80 per cent. of the jars used by confectioners for marmalade and jam, &c., in England and Scotland. The description of goods manufactured in this district is that used by the middle and working classes, no first class goods being made here. The principal markets, in addition to the local trade, are the Danish, Norwegian, German, Mediterranean, and London, for exportation to the colonies. The trade to the United States being so very small from here, the American war has affected this district less than any other.”

The potteries of the Tyne are:—

Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

Warburton Pottery was established about 1730; its site was on Pandon Dean, Newcastle-on-Tyne. Coarse ware was, I believe, its only product. It was removed between 1740 and 1750 to Carr’s Hill, Gateshead (which see).

Newcastle Pottery, or Forth Banks Pottery, commenced operations about 1800, by Messrs. Addison and Falconer. Some years after it passed into the occupation of Messrs. Redhead, Wilson, and Co., then Messrs. Wallace and Co., who now make only brown ware, but formerly manufactured white and printed ware also.

Stepney Bank.

The Stepney Bank Pottery was established about 1780 or 1790, for the production of the common earthenware. In 1801 it was occupied by Messrs. Head and Dalton; in 1816 by Messrs. Dryden, Coxon, and Basket; in 1822 by Messrs. Davies, Coxon, and Wilson; in 1833 by Messrs. Dalton and Burn, who were succeeded by Mr. G. R. Turnbull, by whom the character of the ware was considerably improved. About 1872 the works passed into the hands of Mr. John Wood, who produces both white and brown ware.

Ouseburn.

Ouseburn Bridge Pottery was commenced in 1817, by Mr. Robert Maling (see [North Hylton Pottery]), who manufactured white and printed ware chiefly for the Dutch market. He was succeeded, in 1853, by his son, C. T. Maling, who in 1859 built Ford Pottery, and discontinued his old works. They were re-opened under the name of the Albion Pottery, by Bell Brothers, about 1863; next by Atkinson and Galloway, and lastly by Mr. W. Morris, and were finally closed in 1872.

Ford Pottery.—This pottery was built in 1859 by Mr. Christopher T. Maling, son of Mr. Robert Maling, who, in 1817, had removed the Hylton pottery[1] to Newcastle. The works were erected for the purpose of manufacturing by machinery the various goods produced by Mr. Maling, the main bulk of which are marmalade, jam, and extract-of-beef pots. These are of a very fine and compact white body, with an excellent glaze made from borax without any lead; and it is said that at least 95 per cent. of these pots used by wholesale manufacturers in Great Britain are made at this establishment. The pots being entirely made by machinery are necessarily much more uniform in size and weight and thickness than those produced by any other process, and these, as well as the excellence of body and glaze, are advantages which have been appreciated. The mark used is simply the name or MALING impressed in the clay,

with, sometimes, the initial of the house for whom they are made, as for “Keiller,” and so on.

Ouseburn Pottery was built about the same date as Stepney Bank Pottery, by Mr. Yellowley, who was succeeded by Messrs. T. and J. Thompson, then by Mr. I. Maling; it was finally closed about 1864. White, printed, and brown ware were its productions.

Another “Ouseburn Pottery” was established, at the latter end of last or the early part of the present century, by Mr. Ralph Charlton, who carried on the business on a small scale for the manufacture of brown ware. On his death he was succeeded by his son, John Charlton, who after a few years gave up the business, and was succeeded by Mr. George Gray who, or his predecessor, enlarged the kilns, &c. Mr. Gray was succeeded in the business by Messrs. Morrow and Parker, from whose hands it passed into those of Mr. Rogers, who erected another kiln and otherwise extended the buildings. It was next worked by Mr. William Blakey, who held it until 1860, when it passed into the hands of Messrs. Robert Martin and Co., who still continue the business. The goods made are brown ware, and brown ware lined with white, in all the usual classes of domestic vessels.

Another “Ouseburn Pottery,” established some years ago, passed in 1860 into the hands of Mr. John Hedley Walker. Its productions are plain and ornamented flower-pots, chimney-pots, and horticultural vessels of various kinds, as well as the lead-pots and lead-dishes which are so extensively used in the lead works of the district.

The Low Pottery, identical with the Ouseburn Pottery, now discontinued, was carried on by Messrs. Thompson Brothers, for the manufacture of white and Sunderland wares.

South Shore Pottery.—Now discontinued.

The Phœnix Pottery was built by John Dryden and Co., about 1821, for the manufacture of brown ware. White and printed ware were made afterwards. About 1844, it passed into the hands of Messrs. Isaac Bell and Co. for a short time; it was afterwards purchased and carried on by Messrs. Carr and Patton (who at same time had North Shields Pottery); it was then carried on by Mr. John Patton; next by Messrs. Cook Brothers, who discontinued manufacturing earthenware in 1860, and converted the premises into a Chemical Factory.

Mr. John Charlton had also a small manufactory in the Ouseburn.

St. Peter’s Pottery was established in 1817 by Messrs. Thomas Fell and Thomas Bell under the style of “Thomas Fell & Co.,” by whom it was carried on until 1869, when it became a limited liability company under the same title; the shareholders being the descendants of the original proprietors. The productions are still, as they have always been, the ordinary classes of common earthenware, in white, printed, and sponged varieties. The mark was formerly an anchor with the letter F

(for “Fell”) on one side, and the workman’s mark or number on the other, impressed in the body of the ware. Later on this mark was discontinued, and the name FELL substituted. Under the company only printed ware is marked, and that bears the name FELL & Co.

St. Anthony’s Pottery.—This is one of the oldest potteries for fine ware on the Tyne, being established about 1780, but nothing is known as to its earlier history. In 1803 or 1804 it passed into the hands of a Mr. Sewell, in whose family it has continued to the present day, under the styles of “Sewell & Donkin,” and “Sewell & Co.” The following particulars were furnished to me by the aged manager of the works, Mr. T. T. Stevenson:—

“I cannot go back to say when first begun as a Small White and Common Brown Ware Works, but about 1803 or 1804 it was taken by the Sewells, and gradually extended by them for Home trade until 1814 or 1815, when a considerable addition was made to manufacture entirely for exportation, chiefly C.C. or Cream Coloured, Painted, and Blue Printed, and when I came to the Works in 1819, the description of ware then produced say about five Gloss Ovens and two or three Enamel Kilns per week, say C.C. and best Cream Colour to imitate Wedgwood’s Table Ware then made in considerable quantities for Holland and other Continental markets, all kinds of Biscuit Painted, Printed very dark engraved patterns, also Stamping with Glue, and Printing on the Glaze from Wood Engravings, also with Glue, I believe the first that was done in this way, Gold and Silver lustre, &c. So it has been continued up to the present period by the Sewell family; but latterly not doing so much business, owing to a change of partnership, and is at present in the market for sale since the death of Mr. Henry Sewell, the natural son of the late Joseph Sewell, who was the Potter for nearly sixty years, and was a noble specimen of a good master and the old English gentleman.”

The fact of printing on pottery from wood engravings, being practised at these works, is highly interesting, as I have been enabled to ascertain that engravings by Bewick were thus brought into use; specimens are, however, very rare. In the Museum of Practical Geology are examples of St. Anthony’s ware; they bear the marks—

SEWELL  SEWELL & DONKIN  SEWELLS & DONKIN   SEWELLS & CO.

Gateshead.

The Carr’s Hill Pottery was the first manufactory for white ware in the North of England. Painted, enamelled, and brown ware was also made. It was established about 1750, by a Mr. Warburton, who removed to this place from Newcastle (see [Warburton Pottery]), and was successfully carried on by him and his successors until 1817, when it was closed. A part of the premises was afterwards carried on by Messrs. Kendall and Walker, and later still by Messrs. Isaac Fell and Co.

Sherriff Hill.

Sherriff Hill Pottery.—These works are carried on by Mr. George Patterson, as the successor of the firm of Jackson and Patterson. His chief productions are white ware, which are supplied largely to the Norwegian Markets.

Messrs. Lewins and Parsons are also stated to have had a pottery here for the manufacture of the common kinds of earthenware.

Tyne Main Pottery, on the opposite side of the river to St. Peter’s, was built by Messrs. R. Davies and Co., in the year 1833, and carried on by them, manufacturing white, printed, and lustre ware, chiefly for the Norwegian market. It was closed in 1851. Mr. R. C. Wilson, the managing partner, then commenced manufacturing at Seaham Harbour.

There was also a pottery at Heworth Shore, carried on by Patterson, Fordy, and Co. It was closed about 1835.

There was also a pottery at Jarrow for a few years, which manufactured brown ware only.

North Shields.

The “Low Light Pottery” was established in 1814, by Mr. Nicholas Bird, and afterwards passed from him, in or about 1829, to Messrs. Cornfoot, Colville, and Co. The firm was afterwards changed to Cornfoot, Patton, and Co., and on the withdrawal of Mr. Cornfoot, and the addition of Mr. John Carr, the style was changed to that of “Carr and Patten.” Next the firm was “John Carr and Co.,” and when the concern became the property of the first of these partners, the late Mr. John Carr, he and his sons carried it on under the style of “John Carr and Sons.” It is still continued by the same family under that style. Originally brown and black wares of the usual common kinds were made, in addition to the ordinary earthenware, but in 1856 these were discontinued, and the ordinary white earthenware in cream coloured, printed, painted, and lustred varieties substituted; these are the only productions of the firm. These goods are exported principally to the Mediterranean ports and to Alexandria, for transport to Cairo, and by the Red Sea to Bombay, &c. It is for these markets that the goods are mainly manufactured. In brown ware, common mugs, butter-jars, pancheons, milk-pans, &c., were produced; and in black ware, Egyptian black and smeared tea-pots, cream ewers, and other articles were produced. The mark, which, however, has been but seldom used, is a stag’s head.

South Shields.

The Tyne or Shields Pottery was established about 1830, by a Mr. Robertson, from whom, about 1845, it passed into the hands of Mr. John Armstrong; by whom the works were considerably enlarged. In 1871 the concern was purchased by Messrs. Isaac Fell and George Shields Young, by whom it is still carried on under the style of “Isaac Fell and Co.” The goods manufactured are “Sunderland” and “brown” wares, of which large quantities are shipped for the Continent, as well as supplied to the London, Scottish, and other home markets. The goods are, as usual, made from the common brick clay, and after drying are lined inside with white slip; and they are glazed with lead glaze. The “Tyne Pottery” is, with the exception of the works of Messrs. Harwood, at Stockton-on-Tees, the largest in the district for this kind of pottery.

The Potteries of the Wear are:—

North Hylton.

A pottery was established here in 1762, by Messrs. Christopher Thompson and John Maling, for the manufacture of the ordinary brown and white earthenware for the home trade, and also for France: the first printed ware made in the North of England was manufactured here. The works were also celebrated for their enamel and lustre wares. In 1817 their successor, Mr. Robert Maling, removed his works from Hylton to the neighbourhood of Newcastle-on-Tyne, where he manufactured principally for the Dutch markets. They were afterwards carried on by Dixon, Austin, Phillips, and Co., who at the same time carried on the Sunderland Pottery (which see).

In the Mayer Museum is an excellent example of this lustre ware. It is a large jug, of creamy-white earthenware, very light, ornamented with purple lustre in wavy lines, &c. On one side of the jug is an engraved and coloured view of the iron bridge over the river Wear, and underneath it (engraved and transferred from the same plate) in three small ovals, with borders, &c., are the inscriptions:—“A South-East View of the Iron Bridge over the Wear, near Sunderland. Foundation-stone laid by R. Burdon, Esq., September 24th, 1795. Opened, August 9th, 1796. Nil Desperandum. Auspice Deo.” “Cast Iron, 214 tons; Wrought do., 40.” “Height, 100 feet; Span, 256.” “J. Phillips, Hylton Pottery.” On the other side of the jug is another engraving, having in its centre a tree, on one side of which, in the distance, is a ship, and on the other a public-house. In the foreground of the ship side of the tree is a sailor; and on the other a woman with hat and feathers, an umbrella, and a little dog. Underneath are the words—“Jack on a Cruise. ‘Avast there! Back your maintopsail.’” In front of the jug, beneath the spout, in an oval, occurs the verse:—

“REST IN HEAVEN.

“There is an hour of peaceful rest

To mourning wanderers given;

There’s a tear for souls distrest,

A balm for every wounded breast—

’Tis found above in Heaven.”

In my own collection is another example of this white ware with purple “lustre-splash” ornament. On one side is an engraving, in an oval, of the same bridge; and around the oval the inscription—“A West View of the Cast Iron Bridge over the River Wear; built by R. Burdon, Esq. Span, 236 feet; height, 100 feet. Begun, 24 Sept., 1795. Opened, 9 Aug., 1796.” On the other side, a ship in full sail. Another example is a punch-bowl. Like the others, it is decorated with purple lustre, and with views, ships, and verses in transfer-printing. On the bottom, inside, is a similar view of the Wear bridge to the one just described, in an oval, with the same inscription. The inside is divided into three compartments, in one of which is a ship in full sail, with the words—

“May Peace and Plenty

On our nation smile,

And Trade and Commerce

Bless the British Isle.”

in another, in a border of flowers, surmounted by a small ship, is this verse:—

“Glide on, my bark, the summer’s tide

Is gently flowing by thy side;

Around thy prow the waters bright,

In circling rounds of broken light,

Are glittering as if ocean gave

Her countless gems to deck the wave.”

and on the third, is a similar border:—

“THE SAILOR’S TEAR.

“He leap’d into the boat,

As it lay upon the strand,

But, oh! his heart was far away

With friends upon the land;

He thought of those he lov’d the best,

A wife and infant dear;

And feeling fill’d the sailor’s breast,

The sailor’s eye—a tear.”

On the outside, are also three engravings. The first is a ship in full sail; the next a border of flowers with a small “world” at top, with the verse:—

“This is a good world to live in,

To lend, or to spend, or to give in,

But to beg or to borrow,

Or to get a man’s own,

It is such a world

As never was known.”

and the third has a border of flowers and the verse:—

“The loss of gold is great,

The loss of health is more.

But losing Christ is such a loss

As no man can restore.”

South Hylton or Ford Pottery.

The works of Messrs. John Dawson & Co. were erected by them in 1800, and were carried on by the firm until 1864, when, on the death of the last of the family, Mr. Charles Dawson, they were closed and converted into bottle houses; these were destroyed by fire. The flint mill was taken by Mr. Ball, of the Deptford Pottery, who grinds large quantities of flint for both home consumption and export. The mark was simply the name “DAWSON” impressed in the ware. A part of the premises were, several years afterwards, used as a brown ware manufactory, and later still by Messrs. Isaac Fell and Co.

Southwick.

The Southwick Pottery was built in 1788, by Mr. Anthony Scott, who had, previously to that time, carried on a small potwork at Newbottle, and it is still the property of one of his descendants, Mr. Anthony Scott, and is carried on by that family, under the style of “Scott Brothers and Co.” At these works, which are among the most successful in the district, and where especial care is taken as to quality of the productions, the usual classes of white, coloured and brown earthenware are produced. In these works upwards of 150 “hands” are employed. The goods are made for foreign markets, the greater part being exported to Denmark and Germany. Messrs. Scott Brothers and Co., of these works, stand—and deservedly so—high in the scale of manufacturers, and their goods, whether of the finer or of the commoner classes, are in good repute, and are well calculated for an extensive home trade.

The Wear Pottery, founded by Messrs. Brunton & Co., in 1803, and soon after carried on by Messrs. Samuel Moore & Co., passed, about 1861, into the hands of its present proprietor, Mr. Robert Thomas Wilkinson, by whom it is carried on under the style of “Samuel Moore & Co.” The goods manufactured are the ordinary descriptions of white, sponged, and printed earthenware, and also brown ware, for the English, German, and Danish markets.

The High Southwick Pottery, for Sunderland ware, is carried on by Mr. Thomas Snowball.

Deptford Pottery.—These works were established at Diamond Hall, in 1857, by Mr. Wm. Ball for the manufacture of flower-pots, in which he effected many important improvements, one of the principal of which is the “making them hollow footed, or with concave bottoms, with apertures for drainage and air, and kept free from the attacks of worms. This gives them a superiority over most, and has gained an extensive patronage.” In 1863 the manufacture of “Sunderland Ware”—glazed brown earthenware lined with white—was introduced, and is carried on very largely for the London and Scottish markets. At these works, too, suspenders, highly decorated, and other flower vases, seed-boxes, &c., are extensively made. Machinery has lately been introduced which very much facilitates the manufacture of the ware.

Monkwearmouth.

The Sheepfold Pottery, for Sunderland ware, is carried on by Messrs. T. J. Rickaby & Co.

The Sunderland Pottery or the Garrison Pottery, also established by Mr. Phillips, and carried on by Dixon, Austin, Phillips, and Co., produced white and Queen’s ware, in all the usual variety of articles. Sponged, printed, painted, and lustred earthenware were also produced. The works are now discontinued. The marks were

PHILLIPS & CO.    PHILLIPS & CO.
Phillips & Co.    SUNDERLAND, 1813

PHILLIPS & CO.
SUNDERLAND POTTERY.

In the Mayer collection is a well-painted quart mug, with allegorical group of the arts, with the name “W. DIXON, 1811,” pencilled on the bottom. Among other examples in the Jermyn Street Museum are a printed coloured and lustred jug, bearing on one side the common view of the bridge over the Wear, and on the other the Farmers’ Arms, while in front are the words—“Forget me not,” within a wreath. It bears the name DIXON AUSTIN & CO., SUNDERLAND. Figures were also produced, and marked examples may be seen in the same museum. The name occurs in various ways beyond those just given. Thus, among others, are “W. Dixon,” “Dixon & Co.,” “Dixon & Co., Sunderland Pottery,”

DIXON AUSTIN & CO
Sunderland Pottery

DIXON & CO
Sunderland Pottery

DIXON & CO
SUNDERLAND

Seaham Harbour.

A manufactory was built here about the year 1836 for the manufacture of brown ware by Captain Plowright, of Lynn, and in 1838 it was altered into a white and printed ware manufactory, by a number of workmen from Messrs. Dawson and Co., of Hylton; it was closed about the year 1841, and re-opened in 1851, by Mr. R. C. Wilson, and finally closed in 1852.

Newbottle.

These works were founded about 1755, by Mr. Byers, and he manufactured both brown and white wares. They passed into the hands of Mr. Anthony Scott, who carried them on until 1788 (see “[Southwick]”). They are now discontinued. A pottery for the manufacture of common brown ware, and flower-pots, &c., was also carried on by Messrs. Broderick, but is now discontinued.

Bishop Auckland.

New Moor Pottery, at Evenwood, carried on by Mr. George Snowdon for the manufacture of brown ware.

The potteries of the Tees are:—

Stockton-on-Tees.

Stafford Pottery.—Several earthenware manufactories have been carried on at this place, and, at the present day, there are four pot-works in operation, at each of which a considerable number of hands are employed. The largest, called the “Stafford Pottery,” at South Stockton, or Thornaby, was established, in 1825, by Mr. William Smith, a builder of Stockton, for the manufacture of the ordinary brown ware. Determining shortly afterwards to add the general earthenware to its productions, he visited Staffordshire, and engaged and ultimately took into partnership Mr. John Whalley, a Staffordshire potter of considerable skill, to carry on the work. The firm commenced, under the style of “William Smith & Co.” in January, 1826. In 1829, in order further to extend the concern and increase its capital, a partnership was entered into with Messrs. William and George Skinner, sons of Mr. Skinner, banker, of Stockton, and continued for some years, when Mr. George Skinner having purchased the interest of his brother, and of Mr. William Smith, changed the name of the firm to that of “George Skinner & Co.” By Mr. George Skinner and Mr. Whalley it was carried on for some years, when the latter retired, and the management devolved on Mr. Ambrose Walker, who, shortly after the death of Mr. Skinner in April, 1870, succeeded to the business, and still carries it on in connection with the executors of Mr. Skinner under the style of “Skinner and Walker.” Mr. Walker is a native of Hanley, and in 1837, when a boy, came to Stockton with his father, who at that time entered the service of Messrs. Smith & Co. In 1843 he became junior clerk, and was instructed in the art of potting by Mr. Whalley, who subsequently transferred to him his valuable receipts.

It is worthy of remark that at these works for many years past, no thrower is employed; this important branch of the art being entirely superseded by machinery, for the application of which to potting the firm has acquired a high reputation.

The goods manufactured were principally “Queen’s ware;” a fine white earthenware; and a fine brown ware, which were shipped in large quantities for Belgium, Holland, and some parts of Germany. I am also informed that the firm at one time established a branch pottery at Genappes, near Mons, in Belgium, sending workmen from Stockton; and that the manufactory there was carried on under the style, of “Capperman & Co.” One mark is—

W. S. & CO.
QUEEN’S WARE.
STOCKTON.

impressed in the body. Other examples have simply the words

STOCKTON.

or

S. & W.
QUEEN’S WARE.
STOCKTON.

or the same, without the initials impressed upon them.

In 1848 the firm consisted of William Smith, John Whalley, George Skinner, and Henry Cowap, and in that year an injunction was granted restraining them from using, as they had illegally done, the name of “Wedgwood & Co.” or “Wedgewood,” stamped or otherwise marked on goods produced by them. The following is the official notification of this matter, which I here reprint from my “Life of Wedgwood:”

“Vice-Chancellor of England’s Court,

“Lincoln’s Inn, 8th August, 1848.

“In Chancery.

“Wedgwood and others against Smith and others.

“Mr. Bethell on behalf of the Plaintiffs, Francis Wedgwood and Robert Brown (who carry on the business of Potters, at Etruria, in the Staffordshire Potteries, under the Firm of ‘Josiah Wedgwood and Sons’), moved for an Injunction against the defendants, William Smith, John Whalley, George Skinner, and Henry Cowap (who also carry on the business of Potters, at Stockton, in the County of Durham, under the firm of ‘William Smith and Company’), to restrain them and every of them, their Agents, Workmen, or Servants, from stamping, or engraving, or marking, or in any way putting or placing on the Ware manufactured by them, the Defendants, the name ‘Wedgwood’ or ‘Wedgewood,’ and from in any manner imitating or counterfeiting such name on the Ware manufactured by the Defendants since the month of December, 1846, or hereafter to be manufactured by the Defendants, with the name ‘Wedgwood’ or ‘Wedgewood,’ stamped, engraved, or otherwise marked or placed thereon. M‘r. Bethell stated that the trade mark ‘Wedgwood’ had been used by the family of the Wedgwoods for centuries; he would not, however, go further into the matter at present, because Mr. Parker appeared for the Defendants, and it might become necessary—with whom, and himself, it had been arranged by consent on Mr. Parker’s application on behalf of the Defendants, for time to answer the Plaintiffs’ Affidavits—that the Motion should stand over until the Second Seal in Michaelmas Term next; and that in the meantime the Defendants should be restrained as above stated; except that for the words, ‘since the month of December, 1846,’ the words, ‘since the month of July, 1847,’ should be substituted. Mr. J. Parker said he appeared for the Defendants, and consented without prejudice; and on his application for time to answer the Plaintiff’s Affidavits, the Court made an order accordingly.

“On the 9th day of November, being the Second Seal in Michaelmas term, 1848, Mr. E. Younge, as counsel for the above-named Plaintiffs, moved for, and obtained, a perpetual Injunction against the Defendants in the Terms of Mr. Bethell’s Motion, substituting for the words, ‘since the month of December, 1846,’ the words, ‘since the month of July, 1874;’ the Defendants consenting to pay to the Plaintiffs their costs.

“Solicitor for the Plaintiffs,

“Samuel King,

“Furnival’s Inn, Middlesex.”

In 1845, Messrs. George Skinner and John Whalley took out a patent for “certain improvements in the manufacture of earthenware pastes and vitreous bodies, and also a new composition and material for the same, with certain new modes of combination thereof, which improvements, compositions, and combinations are applicable to the manufacture of earthenware pastes, vitreous bodies, slabs, tiles, and pavement, and various other useful and ornamental purposes, and is especially adapted for grave indicators, hydrant indicators, etc., as it is impervious to all weather and unaffected by change of atmosphere.” This consists in “combining chalk or carbonate of lime in union with silica, flint, or silex.” In the specification seven compositions are given, five of which are for ware and the other two for glaze. The compositions for ware are various “combinations of the above substances, and they contain besides, some or all of the following substances, namely, Cornwall stone, china clay, ball clay, felspar, helspar, or sulphate of barytes.” The wares may be tinted with the oxides generally used. Nos. 1 and 2 compositions do not require glazing; Nos. 3, 4, and 5 can be glazed with glazes which either do or do not contain lead. In this patent two glazes without lead are claimed. One of these is made of felspar and chalk, and the other of chalk, silica, flint, or silex, Cornwall stone, china clay, ball clay, and felspar, mixed in certain proportions.

North Shore Pottery.

The “North Shore Pottery” was established about 1840, by Mr. James Smith, afterwards of Danby Grange, near Yarm, in Yorkshire, and was carried on by his nephew, Mr. William Smith, Jun. (son of the William Smith to whom I have alluded as the founder of the “Stafford Pottery”), under the style of “William Smith, Jun., and Co.” Subsequently to this the business was carried on successively under the styles of “G. F. Smith and Co.” and “G. and W. Smith.” A few years ago the senior partner, Mr. S. P. Smith, retired from the concern, and since then it has been continued solely by Mr. William Smith, son of the founder and still present owner of the works.

The classes of goods made at this pottery were both in white and cream-coloured wares, and some of the examples of the first productions are of excellent quality. The markets for which, principally, the “North Shore Pottery” goods were and are made, are, besides the home trade—which is principally confined to London and the South of England—Holland, Germany, and Denmark. Large quantities of wares are also exported to Constantinople, and other Mediterranean markets. The goods now made are the usual classes of white earthenware, and printed and coloured goods, in dinner, teas, toilet, and other services; bread, cheese, and other trays of good design; mugs, jugs, basins, and all the usual varieties of domestic vessels. In quality they equal the ordinary classes of Staffordshire ware, and many of the printed patterns (notably, perhaps, the “Danby”) are of a superior kind. The “sponge patterns” for foreign markets are extensively used, and green-glazed ware in flower-pots, &c., are also made.

The impressed mark at the present time is

W. S.
Stockton.

The printed marks, besides an ornamental border and the name of the pattern, bear simply the initials W. S.

Other potteries are Mr. Ainsworth’s, at North Stockton, for white and printed wares; Mr. Thomas Harwood “The Norton Pottery,” at Norton, for Sunderland and yellow wares; and Messrs. Harwood Brothers, “Clarence Pottery,” for Sunderland ware.

Middlesborough-on-Tees.

The Middlesborough Pottery was established in 1831; the first oven being fired in April of that year, and the first order shipped to Gibraltar in September. They were the first public works established in Middlesborough. From 1831 to 1844 the firm traded under the style of “The Middlesborough Pottery Company,” and from that year until 1852 as “The Middlesborough Earthenware Company.” From 1852 to the present time the firm has traded under the name of the proprietors as “Messrs. Isaac Wilson & Co.” The works, with wharf, occupy an area of about 9,702 square yards.

At the first commencement of the works the proprietors directed their attention to the production of the better classes of ordinary earthenware for the continental trade, and in the same year in which the works were started, their present extensive warehouse at Roding’s Mart, Hamburg, was established. The goods produced are the ordinary “opaque china,” cream-coloured ware, and lustre enamelled ware in dinner, tea, and toilet services, and all the general classes of domestic vessels, enamelled flower pots, bread trays, &c. Some of these are of very good quality, and the printed services are equal to the more ordinary Staffordshire goods. The principal impressed marks, used are the following—

The printed marks indicating the pattern have, in addition to the name of the pattern (“Convolvulus,” “Trent,” “Nunthorpe,” &c.) the initials of the firm, as “M. P. & Co.” for “Middlesborough Pottery Company,” and “I. W. & Co.” for “Isaac Wilson & Co.”

Wolviston Pottery, now discontinued, formerly produced yellow ware.

Coxhoe Pottery, also discontinued, produced Sunderland ware.

Alnwick.

There were formerly pot-works here; but no trace of them is now left, save the name of the street, “Potter Gate,” where they existed. The former name of this street was, in 1567, “Barresdale Street,” but potters having there located themselves, it became gradually changed. Another old street in this town now known as “Clayport,” was formerly called “Clay-peth,” peth being a provincialism for a steep road, and clay the nature of the soil; probably it was this clay that the Alnwick potters turned to good account.

CHAPTER II.

Liverpool Pottery—Shaw’s Delft Ware—Shaw’s Brow—Zachariah Barnes—Sadler and Green—Transfer Printing—Wedgwood’s Printed Ware—Drinkwater’s Works—Spencer’s Pottery—Richard Chaffers—Reid and Co.’s Works—The Penningtons—Patrick’s Hill Works—The Flint Pottery—Herculaneum Works—Warrington Pottery and China—Runcorn—Prescot—St. Helen’s—Seacombe.

Liverpool.

It would, perhaps, scarcely be expected that in such a busy, bustling, and gigantic place of enterprise and commercial activity as Liverpool—in the midst of shipping of every description, and surrounded by the most enormous and busy undertakings of one kind or other—we should successfully look for the full and perfect accomplishment of so quiet, so unostentatious, so peaceful, and so delicate an art as that of the potter. But thus it is; and Liverpool, which counts its docks by tens, its wharves and stores by hundreds, its shipping by thousands, and its wealth by millions—which can boast its half-million inhabitants, its overground and under-ground railways, and every appliance which skill and enterprise can give or trade and commerce possibly require—which has undertaken the accomplishment of some of the most wonderful and gigantic schemes the world ever knew, and has carried them out in that spirit of commendable and boundless energy that invariably characterises all its actions—has not been behindhand with its more inland and more modest neighbours in the manufacture of delicate porcelain, and of pottery of the most fragile nature.

It is more than probable that in mediæval times the coarse ware of the period—the pitchers, porringers, dishes, &c.—was made on the banks of the Mersey. The first mention of pottery, however, occurs in 1674, when the following items appear in the list of town dues:—

“For every cart-load of muggs (shipped) into foreign ports, 6d. For every cart-load of muggs along the coasts, 4d. For every crate of cupps or pipes into foreign ports, 2d. For every crate of cupps or pipes along the coast, 1d.”

A WEST PROSPECT OF GREAT CROSBY 1716

Fig. 1.

Shaw’s Delft Ware Works.—The earliest potwork of which there is any reliable information, appears to have been that of Alderman Shaw, situated at Shaw’s Brow, which afterwards became a complete nest of pot-works belonging to different individuals. At these works was most probably made the earliest known dated example of Liverpool delft ware. This is a large oblong-square plaque, unique in its size and decoration, which is preserved in the Mayer museum, and is shown on Fig. [1]. It is of fine delft ware, flat in surface, and measures 2 feet 7 inches in length, by 1 foot 8 inches in depth, and is nearly three quarters of an inch in thickness. The body is composed of the ordinary buff-coloured clay, smeared, like what are usually called “Dutch tiles,” on the face with a fine white clay, on which the design is drawn in blue, and then glazed. The plaque represents the village of Great Crosby as seen from the river Mersey, and bears the name and date, “A west prospect of Great Crosby, 1716,” on a ribbon at the top. In the foreground is the river Mersey, with ships and brigs, and a sloop and a schooner. The large ship in the centre of the picture has a boat attached to her stern, and another boat containing two men is seen rowing towards her, while on the water around them are a number of gulls and other sea-birds. On the sandy banks of the river are several figures, consisting of a woman with a basket on her arm, apparently looking across the river; another woman, also with a basket on her arm, walking with a long stick; a man also walking with a stick; a gentleman on horseback; and a man driving an ass before him. Beyond these figures rise the sandbanks, covered with long grass and heather, in which is a rabbit warren. The warren keeper’s house is shown, as are also numbers of rabbits. Beyond this again, in the open space, are a number of figures: men are seen galloping on horseback; women are carrying baskets; men are walking about, some with dogs, others without; and the intermediate space is pretty well studded with cattle, rabbits, and birds; a milkmaid milking one of the cows. Behind this, again, the ground is divided by hedgerows into fields, in which are cattle, people walking to and fro, and a milkmaid carrying a milkpail on her head. In the background is the town of Great Crosby, including the school-house and numerous other buildings, with long rows of trees, palings, gates, and other objects incidental to the scene. To the left of the spectator is Crosby windmill, still standing; and those who are best acquainted with the aspect of the place, as seen from the river at the present day, say that little alteration has taken place in the village; that this view, taken a hundred and fifty years ago, might well pass for one just executed.

Concordia Parua Res Crescunt

THIS SEAT WAS ERECTED BY
JOHN HARRISON AND
HENRY HARRISON OF
LEVERPOOLE 1722

Fig. 2.

Another plaque, Fig. [2], is of a few years later date, 1722. It is affixed to the wall over one of the seats of old Crosby Church, and bears the arms of the Merchant Taylors’ Company, viz., argent, a royal tent between two parliament robes, gules, lined ermine; on a chief azure, a lion of England; crest, a Holy Lamb in glory, proper; supporters, two camels, or; motto, “Concordia parvæ res crescunt.” Below is the inscription—“THIS SEAT WAS ERECTED BY JOHN HARRISON AND HENRY HARRISON, OF LEVERPOOLE, 1722.” This plaque measures sixteen inches on each side, and is nearly an inch and a half in thickness. It is of precisely the same kind of ware as the view of Crosby, and was doubtless the production of the same establishment. John and Henry Harrison are said to have been natives of Crosby, the grammar school of which village they erected and endowed, after having made large fortunes as merchants in London, the trust being held by the Company of Merchant Taylors. Mr. Mayer mentions that another of these curious plaques, or slabs, was attached to the front of a house at Newton-cum-Larten. It was circular, and bore the arms of Johnson and Anton impaled, with the date 1753. The Mr. Johnson whose armorial bearings it represents, was afterwards Mayor of Liverpool, and formed St. James’s Walk. He married Miss Anton, an heiress, and built the house where the slab was affixed, and which is believed to have been made and presented to him for that purpose by his brother alderman, Mr. Shaw, the potter. Another dated example is a mug in the Mayer museum shown on the accompanying engraving. It is decorated with borders in blue and black, and bears on its front the initials and date

P
I · R
1728

Fig. 3.

There were, it appears, two potters, at least, of the name of Shaw—Samuel Shaw, who died in October, 1775, and Thomas Shaw, who, I believe, was his son. The works were, as I have stated, at a place which, from that circumstance, took the name of Shaw’s Brow, a rising piece of ground on the east side of the rivulet that ran at the bottom of Dale Street. Here the early pot-works were established, and here in after years they increased, until the whole “Brow” became one mass of potter’s banks, with houses for the workmen on both sides of the street; and so numerous were they that, according to the census taken in 1790, there were as many as 74 houses, occupied by 374 persons, the whole of whom were connected with the potteries. At these works, Richard Chaffers, to whom credit is due for the advances he made in the manufacture of porcelain, was apprenticed to Shaw, and on the Brow he established his own manufactory. In 1754 the following very interesting little notice of these pot-works occurs in “The Liverpool Memorandum Book:”—

“The chief manufactures carried on here are blue and white earthenware, which at present almost vie with China. Large quantities are exported for the colonies abroad.”

Fig. 4.

Of about this period are some examples in the Mayer museum. Fig. [4] is a magnificent punch-bowl, measuring 17½ inches in diameter, and of proportionate depth. It is of the ordinary Delft ware; its decorations painted in blue. At the bottom of the bowl, inside, is a fine painting of a three-masted ship, in full sail, with streamer flying at the mast-head, the Union Jack at the jib, and a lion for a figure-head. This bowl was “made for Captain Metcalfe, who commanded the Golden Lion, which was the first vessel that sailed out of Liverpool on the whale fishery and Greenland trade, and was presented to him on his return from his second voyage, by his employers, who were a company composed of the principal merchants of Liverpool, in the year 1753.” The size of the bowl, and the excellence of its decorations and workmanship, show to what perfection Shaw had arrived in this manufacture. Among other articles besides mugs and punch-bowls, were char-pots; these, like the rest, are of Delft ware, and usually decorated with fishes around their outsides. One (Fig. [5]) bears the initials I. B. Figs. [6 and 7] are two mugs, of the same body and glaze as the plaques already described. The larger one, a quart mug, is ornamented with flowers, painted in blue, green, and black, and bears the initials and date T. F. 1757, the initials being those of Thomas Fazackerley, to whom it was presented by its maker, a workman at Shaw’s pottery. In 1758, Mr. Fazackerley having married, his friend made the smaller of the two mugs, a pint one, on which he placed the initials of the lady, Catherine Fazackerley, and the date C. F. 1758 within an oval on its front. This mug is decorated with flowers, painted in green, yellow, and blue. Fig. [8] is one of a pair of cows, 4¾ inches in height; the upper half of each lifts off. They are excellently modelled, and painted in flowers, evidently by the same artist as the Fazackerley mugs, in yellow, blue, and green. Fragments of figures were, I believe, found in excavating on the site of Shaw’s pottery.

Fig. 5.

Figs. 6 and 7.

Another dated example of about this period is a fine Delft ware bowl, on the outside of which are painted birds, butterflies, and flowers, and on the inside a man-of-war, painted in blue and colours, with the inscription, “Success to the Monmouth, 1760.”

Fig. 8.

Figs. 9 to 12.

A most interesting matter in connection with the Delft ware works at Shaw’s Brow is the fact of a number of broken vessels being discovered on its site during excavations for building the Liverpool Free Library and Museum, in 1857. On that occasion an old slip-vat was found containing clay, which might probably have been prepared as early as 1680. The clay was of the common coarse kind, the same as the general body of Delft ware. Of this clay so discovered Mr. Mayer had a vase thrown and fired. Some of the Delft cups, &c., exhumed are shown on Figs. [9 to 14]. These are all of a pinkish white; one only having a pattern painted in blue. Another example of Delft ware (Fig. [15]), said to be of Liverpool make, in Mr. Mayer’s collection, is one of a pair of flower vases, of good design, with heads at the sides, and elaborately painted in blue. It is marked on the bottom—

W
D A

in blue. Another example (Fig. [16]), said to be of Liverpool make, is the puzzle jug, and bears the very appropriate motto, painted in blue—

“Here, Gentlemen, come try y^r skill,

I’ll hold a wager, if you will,

That you Don’t Drink this liq^r all

Without you spill or lett some Fall.”

Zachariah Barnes.—another maker of Delft ware in Liverpool—was a native of Warrington, and brother to Dr. Barnes, of Manchester. He was born in 1743, and having learned the “art, mystery, and occupation” of throwing, &c., commenced business as a potter in the old Haymarket, at the left-hand side in going to Byrom Street. He is said to have first made China, but afterwards turned his attention to Delft ware, and soon became proficient in the art. The principal varieties of goods made by him were jars and pots for druggists; large dishes, octagonal plates and dishes for dinner services; “Dutch tiles;” labels for liquors; potted-fish pots, &c., &c. Of the druggist’s jars, of which he made considerable quantities, it is said that the labelling in his time underwent no less than three changes from alterations in the pharmacopæia.

Fig. 13.

Fig. 14.

Fig. 15.

Fig. 16.

The large round dishes made by Barnes were chiefly sent into Wales, where the simple habits of their forefathers remained unchanged among the people long after their alteration in England; and the master of the house and his guest dipped their spoons into the mess and helped themselves from the dish placed in the middle of the table. Quantities of this ware were sent to the great border fairs, held at Chester, whither the inhabitants of the more remote and inaccessible parts of the mountain districts of Wales assembled to buy their stores for the year. The quality of this ware was very coarse, without flint, with the usual Delft-like thick tin glaze. But Barnes’s principal forte lay in the manufacture of square tiles, then much in vogue. When these tiles were required to be printed, that part of the work was done by Messrs. Sadler and Green. So large was the sale of this article, that Mr. Barnes has been heard to say he made a profit of £300 per annum by his tiles alone, he having a monopoly of the trade. He also made large quantities of pots for potting char, which were sent to the lakes. The ovens were fired with turf brought from the bogs at Kirkley, and on the night of firing, the men were always allowed potatoes to roast at the kiln fires, and a certain quantity of ale to drink.

WORMWOOD

Fig. 17.

The labels for different kinds of liquors, to which I have just alluded as being largely made by Barnes, were of various sizes, but generally of one uniform shape; the one engraved (Fig. [17]) being five a and half inches long. Examples in the Mayer Museum are respectively lettered for Rum, Cyder, Tent, Brandy, Lisbon, Peppermint, Wormwood, Aniseed, Geneva, Claret, Spruce, Perry, Orange, Burgundy, Port, Raisin, and other liquors. They are of the usual common clay in body, faced with fine white slip and glazed.

Fig. 18.

The tiles made by Zachariah Barnes were usually five inches square, and about a quarter of an inch in thickness, and were used for lining fire-places, forming chimney-pieces, and other domestic purposes. Originally, the tiles were painted in the ordinary Delft style, with patterns of various kinds—flowers, landscapes, ships, groups, &c.—usually in blue, but sometimes in colours. A plaque of Liverpool Delft, painted in two or three colours (in the possession of Mr. Benson Rathbone), is shown on Fig. [18]; it represents a bird in a cage, the perspective of which is more curious than accurate.

Sadler and Green.—The tiles to which I have alluded bring me to a very interesting part of the subject of this chapter. I mean the introduction of printing on earthenware, an invention which has been attributed to, and claimed by, several places, and which will yet require further research to entirely determine. At Worcester it is believed the invention was applied in the year 1756, and it is an undoubted fact that the art was practised there in the following year, a dated example of the year 1757 being, happily, in existence.[2] At Caughley transfer-printing was, as I have already shown, practised at about the same period. At Battersea, printing on enamels was, it would seem, carried on at about the same date, or probably somewhat earlier. At Liverpool it is certain that the art was known at an earlier period than can with safety be ascribed to Worcester. A fine and exquisitely sharp specimen of transfer-printing on enamel, dated 1756, is in Mr. Mayer’s possession. It is curious that these two earliest dated exemplars of these two candidates for the honour of the invention of printing on enamels and earthenware, Liverpool and Worcester, should be portraits of the same individual—Frederick the Great of Prussia. But so it is. The Worcester example is a mug, bearing the royal portrait with trophies, &c., and the date 1757; the Liverpool one an oval enamel (and a much finer work of art), with the name, “J. Saddler, Liverp^l. Enam^l.”

The art is said to have been invented by this John Sadler, of Liverpool, in 1752. In Moss’s “Liverpool Guide,” published in 1790, it is stated:—“Copper-plate printing upon china and earthenware originated here in 1752, and remained some time a secret with the inventors, Messrs. Sadler and Green, the latter of whom still continues the business in Harrington Street. It appeared unaccountable how uneven surfaces could receive impressions from copper-plates. It could not, however, long remain undiscovered that the impression from the plate is first taken upon paper, and thence communicated to the ware after it is glazed. The manner in which this continues to be done here remains still unrivalled in perfection.”

John Sadler, the inventor of this important art, was the son of Adam Sadler, a favourite soldier of the great Duke of Marlborough, and was out with that general in the war in the Low Countries. While there, he lodged in the house of a printer, and thus obtained an insight into the art of printing. On returning to England, on the accession of George I., he left the army in disgust and retired to Ulverstone, where he married a Miss Bibby, who numbered among her acquaintance the daughters of the Earl of Sefton. Through the influence of these ladies he removed to Melling, and afterwards leased a house at Aintree. In this lease he is styled “Adam Sadler, of Melling, gentleman.” The taste he had acquired in the Low Countries abiding with him, he shortly afterwards, however, removed to the New Market, Liverpool, where he printed a great number of books—among which, being himself an excellent musician, one called “The Muses’ Delight” was with him an especial favourite. His son, John Sadler, having learned the art of engraving, on the termination of his apprenticeship bought a house from his father, in Harrington Street, for the nominal sum of five shillings, and in that house, in 1748, commenced business on his own account. Here he married a Miss Elizabeth Parker, daughter of Mr. Parker, watchmaker, of Seel Street, and soon afterwards became engaged in litigation. Having got together a good business, his fellow townsmen became jealous of his success, and the corporation attempted to remove him as not being a freeman of Liverpool, and therefore having no right to keep a shop within its boundaries. Disregarding the order of removal, the corporation commenced an action against him, which he successfully defended, and showed that the authorities possessed no power of ejection. This decision was one of great importance to the trading community, and opened the door to numberless people who commenced business in the town.

Mr. John Sadler was, according to Mr. Mayer, the first person who applied the art of printing to the ornamentation of pottery, and the story of his discovery is thus told:—Sadler had been in the habit of giving waste and spoiled impressions from his engraved plates to little children, and these they frequently stuck upon pieces of broken pot from the pot-works at Shaw’s Brow, for their own amusement, and for building dolls’ houses. This circumstance gave him the idea of ornamenting pottery with printed pictures, and, keeping the idea secret, he experimentalised until he had nearly succeeded, when he mentioned the circumstance to Guy Green, who had then recently succeeded Mr. Adam Sadler in his business. Guy Green was a poor boy, but spent what halfpence he could get in buying ballads at the shop of Adam Sadler. Sadler liking the lad, who was intelligent beyond his age or his companions, took him into his service and encouraged him in all that was honourable. John Sadler having, as I have said, mentioned his discovery to Guy Green, the two “laid their heads together,” conducted joint experiments, and having ultimately succeeded, at length entered into partnership. This done, they determined to apply to the king for a patent; which, however, under the advice of friends, was not done.

The art was first of all turned to good account in the decoration of tiles—“Dutch tiles,” as they are usually called—and the following highly interesting documents relating to them, which are in the possession of Mr. Mayer, and to whom the antiquarian world is indebted for first making them public, will be read with interest:—

“I, John Sadler, of Liverpoole, in the county of Lancaster, printer, and Guy Green, of Liverpoole, aforesaid, printer, severally maketh oath that on Tuesday, the 27th day of July instant, they, these deponents, without the aid or assistance of any other person or persons, did within the space of six hours, to wit, between the hours of nine in the morning and three in the afternoon of the same day, print upwards of twelve hundred Earthenware tiles of different patterns, at Liverpoole aforesaid, and which, as these deponents have heard and believe, were more in number and better and neater than one hundred skilful pot-painters could have painted in the like space of time, in the common and usual way of painting with a pencil; and these deponents say that they have been upwards of seven years in finding out the method of printing tiles, and in making tryals and experiments for that purpose, which they have now through great pains and expence brought to perfection.

• “John Sadler.,
• “Guy Green.

“Taken and sworn at Liverpoole, in the county of Lancaster, the second day of August, one thousand seven hundred and fifty-six, before William Statham, a Master Extraordinary in Chancery.”

“We, Alderman Thomas Shaw and Samuel Gilbody, both of Liverpoole, in the county of Lancaster, clay potters, whose names are hereunto subscribed, do hereby humbly certifye that we are well assured that John Sadler and Guy Green did, at Liverpoole aforesaid, on Tuesday, the 27th day of July last past, within the space of six hours, print upwards of 1,200 earthenware tiles of different colours and patterns, which is upon a moderate computation more than 100 good workmen could have done of the same patterns in the same space of time by the usual painting with the pencil. That we have since burnt the above tiles, and that they are considerably neater than any we have seen pencilled, and may be sold at little more than half the price. We are also assured the said John Sadler and Guy Green have been several years in bringing the art of printing on earthenware to perfection, and we never heard it was done by any other person or persons but themselves. We are also assured that as the Dutch (who import large quantities of tiles into England, Ireland, &c.) may by this improvement be considerably undersold, it cannot fail to be of great advantage to the nation, and to the town of Liverpoole in particular, where the earthenware manufacture is more extensively carried on than in any other town in the kingdom; and for which reasons we hope and do not doubt the above persons will be indulged in their request for a patent, to secure to them the profits that may arise from the above useful and advantageous improvement.

• “Thomas Shaw,
• “Samuel Gilbody.”

“Liverpoole, August 13th, 1756.

“Sir,

“John Sadler, the bearer, and Guy Green, both of this town, have invented a method of printing potters’ earthenware tyles for chimneys with surprising expedition. We have seen several of their printed tyles, and are of opinion that they are superior to any done by the pencil, and that this invention will be highly advantageous to the kingdom in generall, and to the town of Liverpoole in particular.

“In consequence of which, and for the encouragement of so useful and ingenious an improvement, we desire the favour of your interest in procuring for them his Majesty’s letters patent.

• “Ellis Cuncliffe,
• “Spencer Steers,
• “Charles Goore.

“Addressed to Charles Pole, Esq., in London.”

In the Mayer museum are found, among other invaluable treasures, some enamels on copper bearing impressions from copper-plates transferred to them, and having the name of “J. Sadler, Liverp^l, Enam^l,” and other examples of enamels and of earthenware with the names of “Sadler, Sculp.,” or of “Green.” Messrs. Sadler and Green appear to have done a very profitable and excellent business in the printing on pottery. The process was soon found to be as applicable to services and other descriptions of goods as to tiles; and these two enterprising men produced many fine examples of their art, some of which, bearing their names as engravers or enamellers, are still in existence. Josiah Wedgwood, always alive to everything which could tend to improve or render more commercial the productions of his manufactory, although at first opposed to the introduction of this invention, as being, in his opinion, an unsatisfactory and unprofitable substitute for painting, eventually determined to adopt the new style of ornamentation, and arranged with the inventors to decorate such of his Queen’s ware as it would be applicable to, by their process. The work was a troublesome one, and in the then state of the roads—for it must be remembered that this was before the time even of canals in the district, much less of railroads—the communication between Burslem and Liverpool was one of great difficulty. Wedgwood, however, overcame it, and having made the plain body at his works in Staffordshire, packed it in waggons and carts, and even in the panniers of pack-horses, and sent it to Liverpool, where it was printed by Sadler and Green, and returned to him by the same kind of conveyance. The works of Sadler and Green were in Harrington Street, at the back of Lord Street, Liverpool, and here they not only carried on their engraving and transfer-printing for other potters, but made their own wares, and carried on an extensive business. It was here that they printed ware for Josiah Wedgwood. Of this connection of Wedgwood with the Liverpool works, Mr. Mayer thus writes:—

“About this time Josiah Wedgwood was making a complete revolution in the art of pottery; and four years after Messrs. Sadler and Green’s invention was announced to the world, Wedgwood brought out his celebrated Queen’s ware. Dr. Gagerly seizing upon the new style of ornamentation invented in Liverpool, he immediately made arrangements with the proprietors for decorating his hitherto cream-coloured Queen’s ware by their process; and accordingly I find him making the plain body at Burslem, and sending it in that state to Liverpool by waggon, where it was printed, and again returned to him by the same conveyance, except in the case of those orders that must go by sea, fit for the market. This he continued to do until near the time of his death, when we find by invoices in my possession that ware was sent to Liverpool and printed by Mr. Guy Green as late as 1794. A little before this time, his manufactory at Etruria having been made complete in all other branches of the art, and the manufacture at Liverpool being much decayed, he engaged many of the hands formerly employed there: amongst the indentures is the name of John Pennington, son of James Pennington, manufacturer of china, dated 1784, to be taught the art of engraving in aquatint, and thus he was enabled to execute the printing on his own premises in Staffordshire, thereby saving the expense of transport to and fro. In proof that Mr. Wedgwood did this, I may quote a few passages from letters to his partner, Mr. Bentley, in London. He says:—

“‘1776.—We wrote to Mr. Green in consequence of your letter, acquainting that a foreign gentleman wanted a series of ware printed with different landskips, but that he would not confirm the order without knowing how many different designs of landskips we could put upon them.’

“Mr. Green’s answer is:—

“‘The patterns for landskips are for every dish a different landskip view, &c.; about 30 different designs for table, soup, and dessert plates, and a great variety for various purposes of tureens, sauce boats, &c.’

“‘1768.—The cards (address) I intend to have engraved in Liverpool, &c.’

“‘1769.—One crate of printed tea-ware.’

“On the other hand I find letters from Mr. Green to Mr. Wedgwood:—

“‘1776.—Your Mr. Haywood desires the invoice of a box of pattern tiles sent some time ago. As I did not intend to make any charge for them, I have no account of the contents. The prices I sell them for to the shops are as follows:—For black printed tile, 5s. per dozen; green vase tile, 4s. ditto; green ground, 4s. ditto; half tiles for borders, 2s. 9d. ditto; rose or spotted tiles, 3s. 6d. ditto, &c.’

“‘1783.—I have put the tile plate to be engraved as soon as I received your order for doing it; but by the neglect of the engraver it is not yet finished, but expect it will be completed tomorrow.’

“‘1783.—Our enamel kiln being down prevented us sending the goods forward as usual.’

“‘1783.—The plate with cypher was done here. I think it would be best to print the cypher in black, as I am much afraid the brown purple that the pattern was done in would not stand an up and down heat, as it would change in being long in heating.’

“‘1783.—For printing a table and tea-service of 250 pieces (D. G.) for David Garrick, £8 6s. 1½d.

“‘1783.—Twenty-five dozen half-tiles printing and colouring, £1 5s.’

“The last invoice I find from Mr. Green is dated

“‘1793.—I am sorry I cannot make out the invoice you request of goods forwarded you, April 4, for want of having received your charge of them to me. Only directions for printing these came enclosed in the package.’

“‘1798.—To printing two fruit baskets, 1s.’

“This last item, of course, does not imply that Mr. Wedgwood had the chief of his work done here, but no doubt the articles were required to match some service previously sold, of which Mr. Green had possession of the copper plates. In the following year Mr. Green retired from business to enjoy the fruits of his long and successful labours. The following memorandum, in the handwriting of Mr. Sadler (from Mr. Sadler’s receipt-book in my possession, date 1776), will give an idea of the extent of their business:—

“J. Sadler and G. Green would be willing to take a young man about 18 into partnership for a third of their concern, in the printing and enamelling china, earthenware, tile, &c., business, on the following conditions:—1st, That he advances his £200 for the third part of the engravings and other materials necessary for the business (N.B.—The engravings alone have cost above £800). 2nd. That he should give his labour and attendance for twelve months without any share of the profits, in consideration of being instructed completely in the business. 3rd. After the expiration of twelve months, the stock in ware should be valued as low as is common in such cases, and he should immediately enter as a partner into the profits of the whole concern throughout, either paying the value for his third share of such stock, or paying interest for it till it is cleared off. The value of the stock is uncertain, being sometimes £200 more than other time; but reckon it at the least may be about £600. The sole reason of taking a partner is, J. Sadler not choosing to confine himself to business as much as heretofore.”

Specimens of these early printed goods, bearing Wedgwood’s mark, are rare. The curious teapot (Fig. [19]) will serve as an example. It bears on one side a well-engraved and sharply printed representation of the quaint subject of the mill to grind old people young again—the kind of curious machine which one recollects in our boyish days were taken about from fair to fair by strolling mountebanks—and on the other an oval border of foliage, containing the ballad belonging to the subject, called “The Miller’s Maid grinding Old Men Young again.” It begins—

“Come, old, decrepid, lame, or blind,

Into my mill to take a grind.”

Fig. 19.

The teapot is marked WEDGWOOD. In the possession of Mr. Beard, of Manchester, is a fine dinner service of the printed “Queen’s ware,” and other pieces of interest. In the Museum of Practical Geology is an example of this printing, the design on one side of which is a group at tea—a lady pouring out tea for a gentleman, and on the opposite side the verse:—

“Kindly take this gift of mine,

The gift and giver I hope is thine;

And tho’ the value is but small,

A loving Heart is worth it all.”

Examples of Liverpool made pottery, printed by Sadler and Green, are also of uncommon occurrence. In the Mayer Museum the best, and indeed only series worthy the name in existence, is to be found, and to these wares I direct the attention of all who are interested in the subject.

Of TILES printed by John Sadler and Guy Green, many examples are in existence—a large number, some bearing their names, being in Mr. Mayer’s Museum. Of these I also possess examples, and others again are found in other collections. They are remarkable for the sharpness of the engraving, the wonderful clearness and beauty of the transfers (the ink used being evidently far superior to that usually used at the present day), and excellence of the glazes. They are printed either in black, green, red, or purple, and the devices are extremely varied. It is interesting to add, that the same copper-plates which were used for decorating these Delft ware tiles were used also for ornamenting mugs, jugs, &c., of finer earthenware. Adam Sadler died on the 7th of October, 1788, aged eighty-three, and his son, John Sadler, the 10th of December, 1789, aged sixty-nine, and they were buried at Sefton.

Drinkwater.—Another Delft ware pottery was situated at the bottom of Duke Street, in a small street which, from that establishment, took the name which it still retains, of “Pot-House Lane.” These works were conducted by Mr. George Drinkwater (who was born in the neighbourhood of Preston), brother to Mr. James Drinkwater, who, in the navy, acquired considerable riches and honour, and was ancestor of Sir John Drinkwater. The works were not, however, of very long continuance, and except they can be authenticated by evidence of descent, &c., the productions cannot be distinguished from those of the other potteries of the time. In the Mayer museum are some authenticated specimens of Drinkwater’s make, among which a large plate, twenty-three inches in diameter, is the most interesting.

Spencer.—Another potwork of a similar kind was established by a Mr. Thomas Spencer, at the bottom of Richmond Row. These works were, however, carried on only for a few years, when Mr. Spencer removed to the “Moss Pottery,” near Prescot, where he continued to make coarse red ware for common use.

Chaffers.—One of the most noted men connected with the ceramic art in Liverpool was Richard Chaffers, who made great advances in that art, and to whom his native town owed the introduction of the manufacture of china. He was the son of a shipwright of considerable eminence and means; was born in Mersey Street, Liverpool, in the year 1731, one year only after the birth of Josiah Wedgwood; and was apprenticed to Mr. Alderman Shaw, the Delft ware potter, of whom I have already spoken. About 1752 he commenced business on his own account, for which purpose he took, or erected, some small works on the north side, and nearly at the bottom of Shaw’s Brow, where he began making the ordinary kind of Delft ware of the period, the same as he had learned to manufacture during his apprenticeship. These productions he, as well as the other makers in Liverpool, in great measure exported to what were then our American colonies, now the United States of America. In the manufacture of this ordinary blue and white ware—the staple of the trade as it then existed—Chaffers continued for some years actively employed. From the Delft ware Chaffers passed on to the manufacture of fine white earthenware, and produced an excellent body, and an almost faultless glaze. The rapid strides which Wedgwood was making in the art served as a strong incentive to Richard Chaffers, and he determined to go on improving until his productions should equal those of his great rival. In this, of course, he did not succeed, but he did succeed in making the pottery of Liverpool better than that of most localities. A dated, though not very early, example of Chaffers’s make is fortunately in the Mayer museum and is here engraved (Fig. [20]). It is, Mr. Mayer says, “a pepper-box of the hour-glass shape,” painted in blue on a white ground, with a chequered border at top and bottom, and the name,

Fig. 20.

Richard Chaffers 1769

Fig. 21.

round the waist. “So well known was the ware of Mr. Chaffers in the American colonies,” continues Mr. Mayer, “that it was a common saying of a person that was angry, that ‘He’s as hot as Dick’s pepper-box,’ alluding to those made by Mr. Chaffers, who exported a very large portion of his manufacture to the then English colonies.” But here I think he is decidedly in error. The example is, no doubt, a pounce-box or pounce-pot of the ordinary and not at all uncommon form, and was made and painted with his name and date so prominently, for use on his own desk. This pounce-box remained in the family of its maker until it was presented to Mr. Mayer by the grandson of Richard Chaffers, Mr. John Rosson.

In 1754 or 1755 William Cookworthy, of Plymouth, as I have already shown in my account of those works, discovered the “moor stone, or growan stone, and growan clay”—two important materials in the manufacture of china—in Cornwall, and in 1768 he took out his patent for the manufacture of porcelain from those materials. Chaffers having determined upon prosecuting researches into the nature of china ware, and of endeavouring to produce it at Liverpool, entered into a series of experiments, but finding that the “soap-stone” was essential for his purpose, and that the district where it was found was held by lease for its production, so as to keep the monopoly of its use to Cookworthy and those whom he might supply with it, he determined to try and seek the stone in a fresh locality. About this time a Mr. Podmore, who had for some years been employed by Josiah Wedgwood, and who was a good practical potter, and a man of sound judgment, left Wedgwood’s employment, intending to emigrate to America, and establish himself as a potter in that country. To this end he went to Liverpool, intending thence to embark for the colony. On reaching Liverpool, he called upon Mr. Chaffers, who was then the leading man in the trade at that place, and the result of their meeting was, that Mr. Chaffers finding Podmore to be a man of “so much intelligence and practical knowledge, induced him, by a most liberal offer, to forego his American project, and enter into his service.” This Podmore entirely confirmed the views of his new master as to the importance of getting a supply of the Cornish materials, and the two practical men together soon effected improvements in the then manufacture of earthenware, and laid their plans for future operations. Of the manner in which Chaffers set about his search, and the successful results at which he arrived, Mr. Mayer gives the following graphic account:—

“Mr. Chaffers’s object now was to come into the field with Staffordshire pari materiâ, if I may be allowed that play upon words. He therefore determined to set out for Cornwall upon the forlorn hope of discovering a vein of soap-rock. The operations would be most expensive and laborious, somewhat akin to the process of boring for coal in our country. But where was he to begin? On whose estate, was it to be found? What description of men was he to employ? He was, however, in the prime of manhood, of untiring energy, of fine address, and, what was then necessary, an excellent horseman. He obtained letters of introduction from the Earl of Derby, Lord Strange, his eldest son, and other men of consequence in our county, to some of the leading landowners in Cornwall, then attending their duties in Parliament. In those days there were no mail-coaches and railways to aid the weary traveller. A stout horse was the only means of conveyance for a man of the higher class. Imagine Mr. Chaffers, having taken leave of his wife, and his numerous family and friends, mounted with a pair of saddle-bags under him, containing a supply of linen, &c., a thousand guineas,—the first instalment to pay the wages of the miners,—a brace of pistols in his holsters, pursuing his journey to London. He had made considerable progress in practical geology, though the science was then but little cultivated. Having, during his stay in London, obtained permission to bore for soap-rock from more than one of the principal proprietors of mountain land he judged most likely to yield it, he proceeded to Cornwall and commenced operations. His first efforts were not successful. He moved to another quarter with no better result; in a word, he expended large sums of money without finding the wished-for vein. Somewhat disheartened but not subdued, he determined to return home, where his presence was much wanted. He did not, however, intend to abandon, but only suspend, his operations. He accordingly assembled all the miners in his employ, and announced to them, to their great regret, his determination. Previously to his departure, he scrupulously paid every man his wages. One of them was missing: he was told the man in question was gone up the mountain to try another place. He then left that man’s wages in the hands of the ‘captain of the gang,’ and, mounting his horse with a heavy heart, took leave of the men, to whom his animated and conciliatory manners had greatly endeared him. The road to the nearest town, the name of which I never could learn, was precipitous and rugged. A traveller on horseback made so little progress, that a mountaineer on foot, by taking a short cut over the rocky crags, could easily come within earshot of him. After journeying for some time, he thought he heard a faint cry in the distance; he dismounted, and, ascending a hill, plainly saw the signal of discovery flying from a lofty peak. It appeared that the man who had separated from his fellow-miners, and pursued his researches alone, had discovered a vein, and finding Mr. Chaffers had left them, he hoisted the preconcerted signal, and pursued him across the mountain with the pleasing intelligence, shouting at times to attract the somewhat dispirited traveller’s attention. Mr. Chaffers immediately returned, took the whole gang into permanent employment, and obtained an ample supply of the long-sought-for clay, which was conveyed to the nearest port, and shipped thence to Liverpool. On its arrival the vessel entered with its precious freight into the Old Dock, dressed in colours, amidst the cheers of the assembled spectators. During his absence, Mr. Chaffers had regularly corresponded with his wife, but on his arrival in London on his return home, the continued fatigue he had endured, together with anxiety of mind, brought on a dangerous fever, under which he laboured for several weeks. He was unknown at the inn where he stayed; but the landlord, seeing that his guest—a very handsome man—had the dress and demeanour of a gentleman, called in an eminent physician, who sedulously and skilfully attended his patient. The doctor examined his saddle-bags, and having ascertained his name and address from the letters and papers therein, communicated to his anxious wife all the particulars of his illness, and concluded with the consoling intelligence that ‘he could that day pronounce him out of danger.’ As soon as he could travel, he delighted his family and friends with his presence in Liverpool. No sooner had Mr. Chaffers arrived at home, than he set to work with his new materials, and soon produced articles that gained him much reputation, as was frankly acknowledged by the great Wedgwood, to whom Mr. Chaffers presented a tea-set of his china ware, and who, on looking at one of the cups, admiring the body and examining the colours used in decoration, exclaimed, ‘This puts an end to the battle! Mr. Chaffers beats us all in his colours and with his knowledge; he can make colours for two guineas which I cannot produce so good for five!’”

William Cookworthy discovered the Cornish stone about the year 1754 or 1755, and Richard Chaffers must soon afterwards have prosecuted his researches in the same direction, for in December, 1756, we find him making his “porcelain or china ware” in considerable quantities, both for home sale and for exportation. This is shown by the evidence of Williamson’s Liverpool Advertiser and Mercantile Register for the 10th of December, 1756, in which the following advertisement, discovered by Mr. Mayer, occurs:—

“Chaffers and Co., China Manufactory.—The porcelain or china ware made by Messrs. Richard Chaffers & Co., is sold nowhere in the town, but at the manufactory on Shaw’s Brow. Considerable abatement for exportation, and to all wholesale dealers. N.B.—All the ware is proved with boiling water before it is exposed for sale.”

Liverpool may therefore boast of producing its china in 1756, if not in 1755, which is an early date in the annals of English porcelain manufacture. Not only, however, in this year did Richard Chaffers and Co. make china-ware, but another firm, that of William Reid and Co., held at the same time, as I shall presently show, the “Liverpool China Manufactory,” where they produced blue and white ware in considerable quantities.

Fig. 22.

Of the “china ware” made by Richard Chaffers some excellent examples are in the Mayer collection. They are unmarked, but remained in the possession of the family until they passed from Chaffers’s descendant to Mr. Mayer. One of these is the cup (Fig. [22].) It is, of course, of “hard paste,” and is of remarkably compact and excellent texture. It is painted, after the Indian style, with figure and landscape of good and rich colours, and is faultless in manipulation and in its glaze. Examples of Chaffers’s china are of exceeding rarity, but in the Mayer collection is a fine jug, bearing in front a portrait of Frederick the Great, with trophies of war on either side. This jug has the peculiarity of being painted inside as well as out. At the bottom, inside, is the Prussian Eagle in a border; in the spout is a trophy, and all around the inside of the vessel roses and other flowers are spangled about.

Chaffers carried on his works for some years, making both earthenware and china—the former largely, the latter but to a limited extent—but was suddenly cut off in the midst of his usefulness, and at an early age. It appears that Podmore, his foreman, being seized with a malignant fever, and beyond hope of recovery, sent a message to Chaffers, expressing “his wish to see his dear master once more before their final separation.” With this request Mr. Chaffers, who was a man of full and sanguine habit, most kindly but unfortunately complied, and at once visited the sufferer. The consequence was he took the fever, and soon afterwards died, and master and servant were interred near to each other in St. Nicholas’s churchyard. “This unfortunate event, by taking away both master and principal assistant, put an end to the prosecution of the trade, and was the commencement of the breaking up of that branch of the art which Mr. Chaffers had mainly brought to such a high state of perfection. A great number of the potters ultimately emigrated to America, whilst many of the best hands transferred themselves to the service of Mr. Wedgwood, or were hired by other Staffordshire manufacturers.”

Reid & Co.—About the year 1753 or 1754, I believe, works were established in Liverpool by a Mr. William Reid, who afterwards took a partner and conducted his business under the style of Reid & Co. These works, in 1756, were called “the Liverpool China Manufactory.” In that year Messrs. Reid & Co. opened a warehouse in Castle Street, as is shown by the following announcement in Williamson’s Liverpool Advertiser of November 19, 1756:—

“Liverpool China Manufactory.—Messrs. Reid & Co., proprietors of the China Manufactory, have opened their warehouse in Castle Street, and sell all kinds of blue and white china ware, not inferior to any make in England, both wholesale and retail. Samples sent to any gentlemen or ladies in the country who will pay carriage. Good allowance for shopkeepers and exporters.”

In 1758, Messrs. Reid & Co. removed their warehouse to the top of Castle Hey, where, having largely increased their business, they occupied much more extensive premises. In the same year they were found advertising for apprentices for the painters in the china manufactory. In 1760, again, the works appear to have considerably increased, and “several apprentices for the china work” were advertised for, as well as “a sober, careful man, who understands sorting and packing of ware and merchants’ accounts.” Messrs. Reid & Co. continued in business many years, and produced, besides their “china ware,” a considerable quantity of the ordinary blue and white earthenware, most of which was exported.

Pennington.—Another of the principal manufacturers of Liverpool pottery was Seth Pennington, of whose works, as well as those of his two brothers, a few words may well be here introduced. Of the Penningtons, three brothers were potters, and each had separate works. Their names were James, John, and Seth, and they were sons of John Pennington, a maltster, by his wife, formerly a Mrs. Johnson, of Everton. James Pennington, the eldest, had his works on Copperas Hill, but produced only the commoner varieties of ware, and being dissipated, and having done his youngest brother a serious injury by divulging a secret in the mixing of colour, he removed to Worcester, where he obtained employment, and where, at a later period, one of his sons painted a fine dinner service for the Duke of York.

Fig. 23.—Part of Pennington’s Works.

John Pennington, the second son, had his pot-works at Upper Islington, which he carried on for some time. Ultimately he sold the concern to a Mr. Wolf, “who being a scientific man, made great improvements in the ware, but ultimately finding it did not answer, as the Staffordshire potters were making such rapid strides towards monopolising the whole trade, he gave up the manufacture, and the works were closed, never to be resumed.”

Figs. 24 and 25.

Seth Pennington, the youngest of the three brothers, it appears, had his pot-works in that nest of potters, Shaw’s Brow. His factories were very large, extending as far as Clayton Street, and were conducted with much spirit. At these works, Seth Pennington, besides the ordinary classes of earthenware then in use, and which he produced in large quantities both for home consumption and for exportation, made a remarkably fine kind of ware that successfully competed, for vases and beakers, with the oriental, both in its colour, its glaze, and its decoration. He also produced many remarkably large and fine punch-bowls both in Delft ware, in fine earthenware, and, latterly, in china. The largest size bowl I have met with was made by Pennington, at these works, and is here shown. This fine bowl, which is 20½ inches in diameter and 9 inches in height, is painted in blue on the usual white ground. Outside it is decorated with a landscape with two bridges in the foreground, on which men are standing to fish, trees, houses, church, &c., &c. Inside the upper part of the bowl is decorated with a series of six trophies, composed of flags, swords, cannons, drums, trumpets, spears, &c., divided from each other by different kinds of shot, viz., chain, crescent, arrow or triangle shell with fusee burning, cross or bar, and grape. In the centre, and filling up the inside of the bowl, with the exception of the border, is a group of ships and boats on the water, with the inscription beneath it—

Success to the Africa Trade,
George Dickinson.

Figs. 26 to 30.

This bowl was painted probably about the year 1760–70 by John Robinson, who was apprenticed, and afterwards employed, at Pennington’s works. Robinson subsequently removed into Staffordshire, and ultimately presented the bowl to the Potteries Mechanics’ Institution at Hanley, where it is now carefully preserved along with his note—“John Robinson, a pot painter, served his time at Pennington’s, in Shaw’s Brow, and there painted this punch-bowl.” Several other bowls of Pennington’s make are in the Mayer collection. Of these, two of the finest are dated. One bears on its outside a design of trees, birds, and butterflies, painted in yellow and green, and on its inside a ship in full sail, with the words, “Success to the Monmouth, 1760.” The other has on the outside a soldier and a sailor, one of whom is seated on the stock of an anchor, and holding in one hand a sword, and in the other a punch-bowl; and the other sitting, Bacchus-like, astride a barrel. Between them is a chest, bearing the words “Spanish gold;” while inside the bowl is a painting of a ship in full sail, with the words, “1779. Success to the Isabella.” Of the fine earthenware vases and beakers illustrations are given on Figs. [26 to 30]. They form part of a set of chimney ornaments, purchased by Mr. Mayer from the only and aged daughter of Seth Pennington, by whom they had been treasured as examples of her father’s manufacture. In the making of blue colour, Pennington succeeded in beating all his competitors, and it is said that a Staffordshire manufacturer offered him a thousand guineas for his recipe. This he refused, “as it was a source of great profit to him, being kept so secret that none ever mixed the colours but himself.” His brother James, however, whom I have spoken of as being a dissipated man, persuaded him to tell him his secret, and soon afterwards, in one of his drunken bouts, told it to a pot-companion, who at once sold it to the Staffordshire house, and thus did Pennington a grievous injury. Seth Pennington took into partnership a Mr. Port, but the connection was not of long duration. Having turned his attention to the manufacture of china, he produced some excellent services and other pieces in that material. In china[3] he also produced punch-bowls, as well as services. Pennington is said to have used the following marks—

Figs. 31 and 32.

Christian.—Philip Christian was another of the famous Liverpool potters, and had his works also on Shaw’s Brow, but higher up than those of Pennington. They were on the site of what is now known as Islington Terrace. His house was at the corner of Christian Street, which was called after his name. At these works he produced octagonal and other shaped plates of tortoiseshell ware, as well as bowls and other pieces of the same material. He also made the ordinary earthenware of the time. Here, later on, he manufactured china[4] to a considerable extent, and, after the death of Richard Chaffers, is said to have become the leading potter in the place. Mr. Christian is said to have produced in china ware some remarkably good dinner, tea, and coffee services, as well as a number of vases and other ornaments. It is, however, impossible at present to authenticate his productions, so similar are they to those of other makers of the same time and place.

Patrick’s Hill Pot-house.—In 1760 the firm of Thomas Deare & Co. took the old Delft ware pottery at Patrick’s Hill, known as the “Patrick’s Hill Pot-house,” where they manufactured “all sorts of the best blue and white earthenware.”

The Flint Pot Works.—About the same time a Mr. Okell carried on “The Flint Pot Works,” which were situated at the upper end of Park Lane, near the Pitch House. Here he made blue and white earthenware, and afterwards the more fashionable cream-coloured ware. Mr. Okell died in 1773–74, and the works were then taken by Messrs. Rigg and Peacock, who immediately advertised their intention of “making all kinds of cream-coloured earthenware, &c.” Mr. Rigg was, I have reason to believe, from Newcastle-under-Lyme, and a descendant of the celebrated Charles Rigg, the pipe-maker of that town. In the same year there was also a pot-house, called the “Mould Works,” carried on by Messrs. Woods & Co., near the infirmary, but where nothing of a finer description than jars, sugar-moulds (for sugar refiners), crucibles, chimney-pots, melting-pots, black mugs, and the like, were made.

In 1761 Liverpool was the scene of a strongly contested election between three rival candidates, viz., Sir William Meredith, Bart., Sir Ellis Cuncliffe, Bart., and Charles Pole, Esq., and the election was carried by the potters, one hundred and two of whom gave plumpers for Sir William. This is proved by the poll and squib book, which was published by John Sadler, and I allude to the circumstance for the purpose of introducing an engraving of one of the drinking-mugs made specially for the occasion by the “jolly potters” of Liverpool. This mug is of common white earthen ware, and has a rude border, with the words,

Ser William
a
Plumper,

scratched in, in blue, in the soft clay before firing.

Fig. 33.

In connection with this election, a song written especially for the potters, and no doubt sung while this very mug was filled with strong ale, and passed round from mouth to mouth, is worth reprinting:—

THE POTTER’S SONG.

To the tune of “Ye mortals whom fancy,” &c.

ADDRESSED TO THE PLUMPING POTTERS.

Ye true-hearted fellows, free plumpers and men,

Independent in Britain, how great is your claim!

Not power without candour can soothe with a smile,

Or forms of vain grandeur e’en fancy beguile.

Chorus.

And thus sings the parent of liberty’s cause,

If my son you would be,

If my son you would be,

Like Britons undaunted, like Britons be free.

Tranquillity, heightened by friendship’s supply,

Degraded may censure, with malice stalk by!

Auspiciously reigning, those plumpers, they say,

Unluckily carry the spoils of each day.

And thus, &c.

Regardless of great ones, we live uncontrolled,

We’re potters and plumpers, we’re not to be sold.

No purchase but merit can cheapen such souls,

Thus circled in friendship, we live by our bowls.

And thus, &c.

Regained, now preserve the true blessing of choice,

And strike at the wretch that would blast a free voice;

Thus rich in possession of what is our own,

Sir William’s our member, Squire Charley may moan.

And thus, &c.

Fig. 34.—Herculaneum Pottery.

The Herculaneum Pottery,—the largest earthenware manufactory ever established in Liverpool,—was founded in the year 1796, on the site of some old copper works on the south shore of the river Mersey at Toxteth Park. The pottery had originally been established about the year 1793–4, by Richard Abbey, who took into partnership a Scotchman named Graham. Richard Abbey was born at Aintree, and was apprenticed to John Sadler, in Harrington Street, as an engraver, where he produced many very effective groups for mugs, jugs, tiles, &c. Of these, one of his best productions was the well-known group of the “Farmer’s Arms.” After leaving Sadler’s employment, Abbey removed to Glasgow, where he was an engraver at the pot-works, and afterwards served in a similar capacity in France, before he began business in Liverpool. Messrs. Abbey and Graham were successful in their factory at Toxteth Park, but Abbey growing tired of the business, they sold it to Messrs. Worthington, Humble, and Holland, and he retired to his native village, where he died in 1801, “at the age of eighty-one, after breaking a blood-vessel whilst singing in Melling Church, where, being a good musician, he used to lead the choir on a Sunday. He was buried at Walton.”

In the Mayer museum is a teapot of cream-coloured ware, with black printing, of Richard Abbey’s making. On one side is “The Farmer’s Arms,” with supporters quarterly: viz., 1st, a sheaf of corn; 2nd, two scythes in saltier, across them in fess two flails, knitted together by a sickle; 3rd, a hay rake and hay fork in saltier, with a three-pronged fork, prongs upwards, in pale; 4th, a riddle and a bushel measure; crest, a plough; supporters, a dairymaid with a churn, and a mower with a scythe; motto, “In God is our trust.” On the other side is the appropriate verse;—

May the mighty and great

Roll in splendour and state;

I envy them not, I declare it;

I eat my own Lamb,

My Chicken and Ham,

I shear my own sheep, and I wear it.

I have Lawns, I have Bowers,

I have Fruits, I have Flowers,

The Lark is my morning alarmer;

So you jolly Dogs now,

Here’s “God bless the Plow,”

Long Life and content to the Farmer.

On taking to these works, Messrs. Worthington, Humble, and Holland engaged as their foreman and manager, Mr. Ralph Mansfield, of Burslem. This person served them for some years, and afterwards commenced a small pottery on his own account at Bevington Bush, where he made only the commoner kinds of earthenware. These works ceased at his death. Besides Mansfield the foreman, the new Company engaged about forty “hands,” men, women, and children, in Staffordshire, and brought them to Liverpool to work in different branches of their art. As Wedgwood had chosen to call his new colony “Etruria,” the enterprising company determined on christening their colony “Herculaneum,” which name they at once adopted, and stamped it on their wares. The buildings acquired from Richard Abbey were considerably enlarged, the arrangements remodelled, new ovens and workshops erected, houses for the workmen built, and then workpeople were brought from Staffordshire. The story of the removal of this band of artisans is thus pleasantly told by my friend Mr. Mayer: “After enlarging and remodelling the works, and the little group of emigrants, who were chiefly from Staffordshire, being ready to start, their employers gave them a dinner at the Legs of Man public-house at Burslem, to which a few of their friends were invited. There they spent the parting night in jollity and mirth; and at a late hour, in conformity with an old Mercian custom, still prevalent in some parts of Staffordshire, the parting cup was called for, and each pledged the other to a loving remembrance when absent, and a safe journey and a hearty goodwill. Next morning at an early hour they started on their journey, headed by a band of music, and flags bearing appropriate inscriptions, amongst which was one, ‘Success to the Jolly Potters,’ a motto still met with on the signs of the public-houses in the Staffordshire pot districts. When reaching the Grand Trunk Canal, which runs near to the town of Burslem, after bidding farewell to all their relatives and friends, they got into the boats prepared for them, and were towed away amid the shouts of hundreds of spectators. Now, however, came the time for thought. They had left their old homes, the hearths of their forefathers, and were going to a strange place. Still the hopes of bettering themselves were strongest in their thoughts, and they arrived in Runcorn in good spirits, having amused themselves in various ways during their canal passage, by singing their peculiar local songs, which, as ‘craft’ songs, perhaps stand unrivalled in any employment for richness of material, elegance of thought, and expression of passion and sentiment, and it is to be regretted that many of them are daily becoming lost. Amongst other amusements was one that created much merriment—drawing lots for the houses they were to live in, which had been built for them by their employers; and as they had not seen them, nor knew anything about them, the only preference to be striven for was whether it should be No. 1, 2, 3, &c.

“At Runcorn they stayed all night, as the weather was bad and the river very rough, after one of those storm-days frequent in the Mersey, when the waters are lashed by the wind into such fury, that few boats dare venture out, and many who had never seen salt water before, were afraid to trust themselves upon it in a flat. Next morning, November 11, 1796, the wind had subsided. They embarked on board the flat, and at once, with a fair wind, got into the middle of the Mersey, where it becomes more like an inland sea surrounded by lofty mountain ranges. This much surprised the voyagers, alike by its picturesque beauty and the vast extent of water. They had a pleasant voyage down the river, and arriving at their destination, were met on their landing by a band of music, and marched into the works amidst the cheers of a large crowd of people, who had assembled to greet them. Thus commenced the peopling of the little colony called Herculaneum, where a few years ago, on visiting the old nurse of my father, who had accompanied her son there, I heard the same peculiar dialect of language as is spoken in their mother district in Staffordshire, which to those not brought up in that locality, is almost unintelligible.”

From this it will be seen that the little colony was peopled in the middle of November, 1796. The works were opened on the 8th of December, on which occasion an entertainment was given to the workpeople, as will be seen from the following interesting paragraph from Gore’s General Advertiser of December 13th, 1796:—

“On Saturday last, the new pottery (formerly the copper works)[5] near this town was opened, and a plentiful entertainment given by Mr. Worthington, the proprietor, to upwards of sixty persons employed in the manufactory, who were preceded by a military band, from the works along the docks and through Castle Street. Two colours were displayed on the occasion, one representing a distant view of the manufactory. We have the pleasure to say, that these works are very likely to succeed, from their extent and situation, and will be of infinite advantage to the merchants of Liverpool.”

The first productions of the Herculaneum works were confined to blue-printed ware, in which dinner, toilet, tea, and coffee services, punch-bowls, mugs, and jugs, were the principal articles made; and cream-coloured ware, which was then so fashionable. At a later date, terra-cotta vases and other articles were produced, as were also biscuit vases, figures, &c.

Of the cream-coloured ware, or Queen’s ware, the examples which have come under my notice are of remarkably fine quality, and are as well and carefully potted as those of any other manufactory, scarcely even excepting Wedgwood’s own. In colour they are of a somewhat darker shade than Wedgwood’s and Mayer’s, and not of so yellow a cast as the Leeds ware. The collector will find some good examples of this ware in the Mayer Museum at Liverpool, which will serve for comparison with other makes. The Herculaneum works also produced some remarkably good jugs with bas-relief figures, foliage, &c, of extremely fine and hard body. These pieces, which rival Turner’s celebrated jugs, are marked with the name HERCULANEUM in small capitals, impressed.

In terra-cotta, vases of good design, as well as other pieces, were produced. In the possession of Mr. Beard is a remarkably fine pair of covered vases, with boldly-modelled heads of satyrs for handles, and festoons on the sides. The vases are black, and the heads and festoons gilt. This fine pair is marked Herculaneum. In Mr. Rathbone’s collection is a wine cooler of vine leaves and grapes, of similar design, and of the same reddish colour as some of Wedgwood’s terra-cotta coolers. It is marked Herculaneum, impressed on the bottom.

In Blue Printing the Herculaneum Works produced many remarkably good patterns, and the earthenware bearing those patterns was of a fine hard and compact body, of excellent glaze, and the potting remarkably good and skilful. Some services had open-work basket rims, of similar design to those produced by Davenport. One service bore views of the principal towns in England, the names of which were printed in blue on the bottoms of each piece, which mostly bear the impressed mark of Herculaneum in large capitals. Batt printing was also practised.

CAMBRIDGE

Fig. 35.

In 1800 the manufactory was considerably increased, and again in 1806 it received many additions. At this time, in order to augment the working capital, the number of proprietors was increased. Early in the present century china was made at these works, and continued to be produced, though not to a large extent, to the time of the close of the works. Of the china produced several examples may be seen in the Mayer museum. In 1822 it was ordered by proprietors at a meeting held in that year, that “to give publicity and identity to the china and earthenware manufactured by the Herculaneum Pottery Company, the words ‘Herculaneum Pottery’ be stamped or marked on some conspicuous part of all china and earthenware made and manufactured at the manufactory.” In 1833 the company was dissolved, and the property sold for £25,000 to Mr. Ambrose Lace, who leased the premises to Thomas Case and James Mort, who are said to have carried on the business for about three years only. By these gentlemen, it is said, the mark of the “Liver” was introduced. About 1836 the firm of Case, Mort & Co. was succeeded by that of Mort and Simpson, who continued the manufactory until its close in 1841. During the time the works were carried on by Case, Mort & Co., a fine dinner-service, of which a portion is in Mr. Mayer’s museum, was made for the corporation of Liverpool. It was blue-printed, and had on each piece the arms of Liverpool carefully engraved, and emblazoned. In the same collection is part of another service of somewhat similar description, but with the earlier mark of Herculaneum impressed. The marks used at the Herculaneum Works at different periods appear to have been the word

HERCULANEUM  HERCULANEUM

impressed in large capitals. The same in small capitals, also impressed. These have generally a number attached, which, of course, is simply the mark of the workman or of the pattern. The same name also occasionally occurs in blue printing. A crown, with the word Herculaneum in a curve, above it, impressed. A crown within a garter, bearing the word Herculaneum; impressed. (Figs. [36] and [37].) The words in capitals, impressed,

HERCULANEUM
POTTERY.

HERCULANEUM

Fig. 36.

HERCULANEUM

Fig. 37.

The crest of the borough of Liverpool, a bird called the Liver, or Lever, with wings expanded, and bearing its beak a sprig of the plant liverwort. Of this mark of the crest three varieties are shown on Figs. [38 to 40]; they are all impressed in the ware. An anchor, with and without the word Liverpool in a curve, above it (Fig. [41]), impressed. Another, and more imposing looking mark, has the name of the pattern (“Pekin Palm,” for instance) within a wreath of foliage, surmounted with the crest of Liverpool, on an heraldic wreath.

Figs. 38 to 40.

LIVERPOOL.

Fig. 41.

Among the men of eminence who have been connected with the potteries of Liverpool, besides those named, were William Roscoe, the eminent Art-critic and biographer; Peter Pever Burdett, the engraver, who also worked for Wedgwood, and who introduced the process of transferring aquatints to pottery and porcelain; Paul Sandby, who assisted other manufactories; and other artists of note. It may also be well to say a word or two on those pieces which more than others are considered to be “Liverpool pottery,” and which, indeed, I believe are thought by many collectors to be the only kind ever made there. I allude to the mugs, plates, &c., of cream-coloured ware which are decorated with ships or with flags of different merchants, and signals. These were principally made at the works of Guy Green, in Harrington Street, of whom I have already spoken. Some pieces have the engraving of the lighthouse and flags, with the name, “An east view of Liverpool Light House and Signals on Bidston Hill, 1788.” The flags are all numbered, and beneath are references, with the owner’s names, to forty-three different flags. Another piece with the same date has forty-four flags and owners’ names, showing the addition of a new merchant in that year. Others again, without date, show fifty and seventy-five flags, and are therefore interesting as showing the rapid extension of the port. These pieces are very sharply engraved and printed in black, and the flags on some of the pieces are coloured.

Warrington.[6]

This pottery was one of but short duration, but during the time it was in operation some very good ware was produced. The works were commenced about 1797 or 1798, by Messrs. James and Fletcher Bolton, who were brothers, and members of the Society of Friends. These gentlemen got their idea of starting an earthenware manufactory at Warrington from the fact that the great bulk of the raw materials from Cornwall, &c., used in the Staffordshire manufactories for the finer kinds of wares, was brought by sea to Liverpool, where it was unshipped and sent on again by boats on the Trent and Mersey Canal, and thus passed within a short distance of Warrington. Messrs. Bolton, with this knowledge, and with the further fact before them that the Liverpool potters drove a very successful trade, very shrewdly argued that if the Staffordshire manufacturers could make money, with the longer freightage from Ellesmere, they, at Warrington, with the shorter freightage, might hope for equal success. Soon after the establishment of the works they associated themselves with Mr. Joseph Ellis, of Hanley, in Staffordshire, who was practically conversant with every branch of the manufacture. Joseph Ellis was born in 1760, and was apprenticed to Wedgwood, as a turner. He is said to have been very clever and ingenious, of careful and sober habits, and of a plodding disposition. He married a daughter of Ralph and Ellen Simpson, of Hanley, a family then considered to be in very fair circumstances, from whom he derived considerable pecuniary help, which, together with his own thrifty habits, soon placed him in comfortable circumstances. Mr. Ellis became superintendent of the Tabernacle Independent Chapel Sunday-school, now said to be the oldest place of worship of that denomination left in the Potteries. As his family began to increase, he disposed of his property in the potteries, joined Messrs. Bolton at Warrington, and became the managing partner of the firm. He is said to have directed his special attention in all his spare time to the discovery of new colours, glazes, and bodies, and to have been very successful in jasper and enamelled ware. To the manager of some adjoining glass-works he also gave many useful recipes for colours. Mr. Ellis’s manuscript recipes for different glazes and colours required in the manufacture are still preserved in the hands of his descendants, and show him to have been a man of considerable practical knowledge and skill.

A number of potters were engaged at Hanley and the other pottery towns, and they, with their wives and children, forming quite a little colony, and their household goods, tools, and everything requisite for their use and for the trade they were engaged in, were brought by canal to Warrington, where kilns, sheds, and other buildings were erected. Here they commenced operations. The goods made at these works were intended principally for the American markets, and a good trade was soon established. The works continued to flourish until 1807, “when the embargo which was laid by the Americans upon all articles of British manufacture, and the subsequent war between Great Britain and America, in 1812, caused the failure, by bankruptcy, of the firm.”

In 1802, Mr. Ellis appears to have fallen into a weak state, and his share in the concern was given up on condition of an annuity being granted to himself and his widow and children, so long as the pot-works were carried on. With the failure of the works of course this arrangement ceased. He died at Warrington, and was buried in the old dissenting burial-ground at Hill Cliff, near that town.

The potters, with their wives and families, their household goods and tools, and all their other belongings, on the failure of the firm, returned to Staffordshire in the same manner as they arrived. During their stay at Warrington, they are described as having held little or no communication with the townspeople; marrying only and solely amongst themselves; preserving their own manners, customs, and amusements; and, beyond purchasing at shop or market the necessaries of life, keeping quite aloof from “the natives,” with a pertinacity so remarkable as still to be the subject of occasional remark. The expressions, “as proud as th’ potters!” and “as close as th’ potters!” are still to be heard, and serve to perpetuate the remembrance of the class-feeling which existed. They dwelt in “Pottery Row, Bank Quay,” on the bank of the river Mersey, and this name is the only local record which Warrington now possesses of this little colony of industrious workpeople. The factory itself has been successively converted into lime-kilns and an iron ship-building yard, and is now used as a chemical works.

Of the productions of the works Dr. Kendrick has got together a number of examples, which he has deposited in the Warrington museum. The wares produced were an ordinary quality of white ware; blue and white printed goods, and common painted goods; as well as an inferior description of black-jasper ware, and both gold and silver lustre. Besides these, a china ware is said to have been made to some extent, but of this, although the matter is generally believed, there is, perhaps, some little doubt. Among the examples in the Museum is a black teapot of somewhat curious character. It is of a hard, but somewhat inferior black ware, and is ornamented with raised borders and groups of figures—some of the borders, the figures, and the swan knob of the lid, being surface-painted in yellow, red, &c. The lid is attached by a hinge. Another curious piece is a “tobacco-jar, comprising within itself a drinking mug and a candlestick,” and also a small upright jar, capable of holding exactly half-an-ounce of tea,—the quantity, we are told, which was served out to each visitor to the tea-gardens of that day. The china ware attributed to these works is somewhat curious. It is of a kind of creamy colour, and of inferior quality, and is ornamented with raised borders, &c, and with groups of figures in blue. In general appearance it is more like earthenware than porcelain. Among the examples, stated by Dr. Kendrick to have been made at Warrington, is a lantern of Delft ware, ornamented with flowers in blue. There are, however, grave doubts as to this having been made in this locality. No mark is known. This distinction is believed to have been omitted in consequence of the jealous dislike of the Americans of that day to anything emanating from the mother country.

Warrington Pottery.—These works, in a locality where older ones had long existed, were established in 1850 in Dallman Lane, by the late Mr. John Welsby, who manufactured stoneware, Rockingham and black tea-pots, coarse red ware, terra cotta chimney tops (the construction of the “Dallman Chimney Pot” being very effectual for preventing smoky chimneys), ornamental garden vases, flower-pots, pancheons, &c. On his death, in 1863, the works passed into the hands of Mr. Thomas Grace, who, in 1871, removed them to their present site, on the Winwick Road. Mr. Grace’s productions consist of plain black ware of various descriptions, chimney tops, and plain and fancy garden vases, flower-pots, &c., which he supplies largely to the home markets. Most of the goods are made from clays found on the spot, and those of Arpley Moor, a mile or two distant from the works.

Sutton.

At Sutton, near Warrington, where some potteries for the manufacture of the commoner descriptions of wares are still worked, Dr. Kendrick is of opinion pottery was made in mediæval times. His opinion is founded on the fact of a fragment of a vessel in form of a mounted knight (of somewhat the same character as those already described in last volume) being said to be made of Sutton fire-clay. The fragment was found in Winwick Churchyard, and is preserved in Warrington Museum; fragments of similar ware are frequently dug up in the district.

Runcorn.

Old Quay Pottery.—These works were carried on in 1869 by Mr. John Cliff who, in that year, removed from the Imperial Pottery, Lambeth, to this place, where he manufactures largely chemical stoneware and other goods. Mr. Cliff has taken out patents for an improved kiln, and for wheels for throwers, and lathes for turners, which have the reputation of being the most effective, simple, and valuable of any in existence.

Prescot.

The Moss Pottery.—Mr. Thomas Spencer, who last century established pot works at the bottom of Richmond Row, Liverpool (see Page 33) for the production of Delft ware, removed them to Prescot, where he founded the “Moss Pottery,” and made coarse brown ware from the native clays of the district. At his death the works passed into the hands of his son, who, in turn, was succeeded by his son, the present owner of the place, Mr. Thomas Spencer. White stone ware was afterwards manufactured to a large extent, but of late years the operations have been principally confined to sanitary ware, one of the most notable features of which are the socket drain pipes, for which Mr. Spencer holds a patent, dated April 10th, 1848. Sugar moulds for sugar refiners were at one time a staple production of the Moss Pottery, but these have been superseded by the iron moulds now in general use. Mr. Spencer, too, has taken out a patent (in 1861) “for improvements in apparatus for the manufacture of articles of earthenware, and of other plastic materials” by which saggars for burning earthenware in glass cisterns, crucibles, etc., are made by direct action of steam pressure. The principal goods produced are vitrified and glazed earthenware; sanitary and chemical wares; garden, sea-kale and other pots; black ware articles; filters; stoneware bottles, jars, pans, barrels, foot warmers, and other useful domestic articles.

St. Helen’s.

Messrs. Case, Mort & Co., of the Herculaneum Works at Liverpool, had, at one time, a manufactory at St. Helen’s, where goods of common quality were produced. Messrs. Doulton, of the Lambeth Pottery, have also established a branch manufactory here for drain pipes, sanitary ware, &c.

Seacombe.

Mr. Goodwin, a potter of Lane End, in Staffordshire, in 1851, established a pottery at Seacombe, on the opposite shore of the Mersey from Liverpool. He brought his workmen from Staffordshire, and fired his first oven in June, 1852. Of this pottery, now closed, Mr. Mayer thus wrote in 1855: “The ware manufactured here at present consists principally of earthenware and stoneware, chiefly of blue and colour printed ware, and, lately, parian has been made of a good quality. Here has been introduced one of the throwing tables for making hollow ware, cups, bowls, &c., by machinery, with the aid of which four boys who are quite unacquainted with the art can, in a day or two’s practice, produce as much work as by the old process of hand throwing could formerly be made by five men in the same space of time. The success of the undertaking may be considered fairly established, and a very large and increasing trade is now carried on with the east and west coast of South America, Turkey, California, and India. So admirably arranged are the buildings on this work that all the different parts work together. The ware after being fired is carried direct from the ovens into the bisque warehouse which adjoins them, and on the other side the coal is conveyed along a railway and deposited close to the mouths of the kilns. The whole may be looked upon as a model for all future buildings and arrangements for pot works. Indeed, so perfect is it that it has been visited by several manufacturers from France and Germany, who, by permission of Mr. Goodwin, have taken plans of it as a guide for new works to be erected in those countries.”

CHAPTER III.

Derby—Cock-pit Hill—Mayer—Heath—Derby China—Andrew Planché—Duesbury and Heath—William Duesbury—Purchase of the Chelsea Works—Weekly Bills—Show Rooms in London—Sales by Candle—Changes in Proprietorship—Bloor—Locker—Stevenson & Co.—Hancock—Painters and Modellers—Spengler—Coffee—Askew—Billingsley—Pinxton—Nantgarw—Swansea—Other Artists employed at Derby—Cocker and Whitaker’s China Works, &c., &c.

Derby.

Cock-pit Hill.—There is nothing yet known as to the time when these works were first established. It is certain that at a tolerably early period coarse brown ware was made here, of much the same general character as that made at Tickenhall and by the Tofts, but researches have as yet failed to bring to light any particulars regarding them. There is a positive certainty that the Mayer or Mier family were potters in Derby for more than one generation. A John Mier—an ancestor probably of the Mayers or Meers, of Staffordshire—was a pot-maker in 1721. Some vessels bearing his name are extant. One of these, a posset-pot, bears the words IOHN MIER MADE THIS CUP 1721. Another has been described as “a three-handled pot that holds about two gallons, which is said to have been made at these pot works.” It is of coarse brown ware, glazed, and bears the words:—

“Drink be merry and mary

God Bles creae George & Queen ann

John Mier made this cup 1708.”

Another, a large pitcher in my own possession, traditionally said to have been made in Derby, bears the initials I S between the date 1720 (Fig. [42]), and below the I S the letters D F, about which it is perhaps scarcely worth hazarding a conjecture. It is 16½ inches in height, and is of dark brown glazed ware. The name best known in connection with these works is that of Heath, and they were carried on by this family for a considerable number of years. How, or when, the works came into the hands of the Heaths, remains to be discovered. In 1772, in some very curious and unique MS. “Lists of Gent., &c., in Derby, 1772,” in my own possession, occurs in one, under “Cock-pitt Hill,” “Mayer Mr..... pott merchant,” and in another, “Cock-pitt Hill,” “Mr. Mayer ..... pott merchant.” In the same list, dealers are put down as keeping a “pott shop,” while Mayer is returned as a “pott merchant.” In this same list “John Heath” is entered as an “Alderman;” and “Mr. Chris. Heath” as a “Comon Council Man.”

I S 2
DF

Fig. 42.

On the 1st of January, 1756, a draft of an agreement was drawn up “between John Heath, of Derby, in the County of Derby, gentleman; Andrew Planche, of ye same place, china maker; and Wm. Duesberry, of Longton, in ye County of Stafford, enameller,” by which they became “co-partners 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” for ten years, with power on Heath’s part to extend for another ten years. In this agreement, the original MS. of which is in my own possession, Heath (who, it will be seen, is described as a “gentleman,” while the others are respectively described by their trades of “china maker” and “enameller”) agrees to pay in £1,000 to the concern, as his share “as stock,” “to be used and employ’d in common between them for ye carrying on ye said art of making china wares,”[7] for which he was to receive one-third of the profits till the principal sum of £1,000 be paid back.

One of the clauses in this agreement is as follows:—“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.” From this it would seem that John Heath could not at that time be carrying on the Cock-pit Hill Works. There is nothing to show that this deed was ever legally executed, and two years later—in 1758—I find him named as one of the proprietors of the Cock-pit Hill Works, along with two partners, “William Butts, gentleman,” and “Thomas Rivett, Esquire”—Butts, I presume, being the practical man of the concern. The document in which this appears is in my own possession, and is a commitment of a man named John Lovegrove, one of the workmen “at their pottery in the said Borough of Derby,” for running away from his said service. The commitment is as follows:—

“Borough of Derby.

“To the constables of the said borough of Derby and to each and every of them and also to the Keeper of the House of Correction for the said borough.

“Whereas Information and complaint hath been made before me Samuel Crompton Esquire Mayor and one of his Majesties Justices of the peace for the said Borough by William Butts of the said Borough Gent upon his oath that John Lovegrove was on the Thirteenth day of January last duly hired as a Labourer and Servant to the said William Butts and to Thomas Rivett Esquire and John Heath Gent for one year then next ensuing to work at their Pottery in the said Borough of Derby and that the said John Lovegrove hath departed and run away from his said service, his said year not being expired, And Whereas in pursuance of the Statute in that case made and provided, I have had the said William Butts and John Lovegrove before me and have duly examined the Proofs and allegations of both the said parties touching the matter of the said Complaint and upon due consideration had thereof have adjudged and determined and do hereby adjudge and determine the said Complaint to be true. These are therefore to Command you the said constables and each and every of you forthwith to convey the said John Lovegrove to the said House of Correction for the said Borough of Derby and to Deliver him to the Keeper thereof together with this warrant. And I do hereby Command you the said Keeper to receive the said John Lovegrove into your Custody in the said House of Correction there to remain and be corrected and held to hard Labour for the space of      from the Date hereof and for your so doing this shall be your sufficient Warrent Given under my Hand and seal the    .”

It will be seen that this commitment is not dated, but I am enabled to fix it with certainty to 1758. Samuel Crompton was Mayor of Derby in 1758, 1767, 1777 (to complete the year of office of Robert Hope, deceased), 1782, and 1788, and High Sheriff of the County in 1768, while holding office as Mayor. There is nothing in the commitment to show to which of these years of Crompton’s Mayoralty it can be assigned, but as Thomas Rivett, one of the partners named in it, died in 1763, it leaves no doubt that 1758 is the correct date. This Thomas Rivett, one of the partners, was Mayor of Derby in 1715 and 1761, and High Sheriff of the County in 1757. In 1747 he was elected Member of Parliament for the Borough of Derby in room of John Stanhope, deceased, and served till 1754. He died in 1763, and was buried in All Saints’ Church. John Heath was Mayor in 1763 and 1772, and his son, Christopher Heath, was Mayor in 1774.

The works were situated on Cock-pit Hill, at the commencement of Siddal’s Lane. The site is still known as the “Pot Yard.” It is distinctly marked on some of the old maps of Derby, and appears to have stood immediately opposite the “Cock-pit” itself—an octagonal building, with a spire-roof terminated with a vane. Buildings existed on this spot as early as 1610, and at that time probably were employed for the making of the rough ware of the period. In the last century they seem to have formed three sides of a quadrangle, and to have been of considerable extent. In 1772 it is thus spoken of in “A Short Tour in the Midland Counties;” after speaking of the china works, the writer says:—“Here is also a pottery, and I was showed an imitation of the Queen’s ware, but it does not come up to the original, the produce of Staffordshire.”

In 1780, in consequence of the failure of the Heaths (who were bankers and men of property, besides one of them being at one time the partner of Duesbury, and, later, the owners of these pot works), the Cock-pit Hill Pottery sold off its stock of goods. The following is one of the announcements of this sale.—

“To the Merchants, Traders, and Dealers in Earthenware.

“To be Sold without Reserve (and considerably under the usual wholesale prices) at the Derby Pot Manufactory a large quantity of Earthenware, being the whole stock in trade of that great and extensive Factory commonly known by the name of the Derby Pot Works, consisting of an assortment of Enamelled, and Blue and White useful China, a large quantity of Enamelled Creamware and plain Cream Tea-table-ware, a great quantity of White Stone and Brown ware.

“N.B.—The aforesaid Earthenware, &c., will be opened for sale on the 4th and 6th of April and continued every Tuesday and Thursday until the whole is disposed of; on which days (but no other in the week) a proper person will attend the sale. The Earthenware will be sold in different lots, and is well worth the notice of Pot Carriers in and about the neighbourhood of Coleorton Moor. No less a quantity than two horse loads will be sold to any one person.”

In the same year, 1780, a sale of “a large quantity of earthern and china ware from the Pot Works on Cock-pit Hill, in Derby, being the stock-in-trade of Messrs. John and Christopher Heath, of Derby, bankrupts,” was advertised to take place by auction at the King’s Head Inn, Derby. The works were carried on for a year or two by the assignees of Messrs. Heath, but in 1782 “a lease of the Pot Works situate on Cock-pit Hill, in Derby, twelve years after which have yet to come, and unexpired, at Lady Day next, at the yearly rent of £6, and the lessee has a right by the lease to take away the buildings (except only leaving a fence-wall), and except a barn that was built on the premises before the lease was granted,” was advertised for sale by auction, along with other property, by the Heaths, “at the house of Mr. George Wallis (being the New Inn, in Derby), on Tuesday, 12th March.” The lease, however, does not seem to have found a purchaser, for in the Derby Mercury of March, 1785, another sale is announced “in Messrs. Heath’s bankruptcy,” in lots, of “the materials of some buildings at the late Pot Works on Cock-pit Hill, in Derby, consisting of brick, tile, and timber; also some old iron, old lead, Hopton stone, a quantity of deal boards, and some lumber.”

Although these works were very extensive, and produced a large quantity of goods of various kinds during the Heaths’ time, but few specimens can, unfortunately, be correctly appropriated. This, of course, is owing to the fact that no mark was used by the owners of the works, and therefore, doubtless, scores of examples pass as “early Staffordshire,” and as the productions of other places. Three or four well-authenticated pieces, however, may be named. The first is a jug in my own possession. It is of the “imitation of the Queen’s ware,” alluded to in a previous page, and bears on one side, within a border of foliage, the quaint and characteristic drinking inscription, “One Pot more and then, why what then, why another Pot.” On the other side and front, within one continuous border, is a blacksmith busy at his forge, working the immense bellows with his left hand, and holding the iron in the fire with his right; while in front is a youth standing by the anvil waiting, as a “striker”; tools and other things lying about; and the inscription, “Thos. Burton, Winster, 1778.” This jug was made at the Cock-pit Hill Works, for Mr. Thomas Burton, a blacksmith, of Winster, whose name it bears, and who is represented at his forge, and from his family passed into my own hands. It is engraved, Fig. [43].

Fig. 43.

Another excellent example belonged to my friend, the late Mr. Lucas. It is a teapot, of the same kind of ware, and bears on one side the words, “Harper for ever fow play and now fair dealing”—probably in commemoration of the contested election of 1768, when Sir Henry Harpur was defeated by Godfrey Clarke, Esq.

Derby China.

It is no little thing to say of Derby that the town in which the silk manufacture of England first took its rise—for here the first silk-mill ever built in this kingdom was erected by John Lombe; in which the cotton trade made its first gigantic stride—for here Arkwright and Strutt completed their invention for spinning, and within a few miles erected the first cotton-mill in England; in which the hosiery trade was first brought to perfection—for here Strutt invented his famed “Derby Ribbed Stocking Machine,” and carried on his manufacture of those articles; and in which many other branches of manufacture have also had their rise—should likewise have been one of the few places, and one of the first, in which the manufacture of porcelain was matured, and in which the biscuit was first invented. But so it is, and it is no little for Derby to be proud of, that these branches of industry, which are among the most important in the kingdom, should have had their birth, and in their infancy been carefully nurtured, within its boundaries. The stories of Lombe and his silk, Arkwright and Strutt and their cotton, and Jedediah Strutt and his stockings, have been often told, and will bear telling again and again; but that of Duesbury and his china has never been fully told, and it was only by the most laborious research that I was enabled, in 1862, to tell it, and to show to what an extent the manufacture, under the care of three generations of one family, was carried. That information I now, after many years of patient research, considerably amplify. Alas! that so important, so beautiful a branch of Art should ever have been allowed to decay in the town by which it has so long been fostered.

One of the earliest printed notices of the Derby China Works occurs in a scarce old book, “A Short Tour in the Midland Counties of England performed in the summer of 1772, together with an account of a similar excursion undertaken September, 1774.” It is as follows:—

“The manufacture of porcelain employs, in all, near a hundred men and boys; several of the painters earn a guinea and a half per week. Mr. Duesbury (who has also bought the manufactory at Chelsea) is every day bringing the art nearer to that perfection at which it has arrived in other countries. Derby porcelain is at present by no means contemptible: figures and other ornaments are among their most capital articles. Here is also a pottery, and I was showed an imitation of the Queen’s ware, but it does not come up to the original, the produce of Staffordshire.”

In the “Poll Book” of 1775, when Christopher Heath was Mayor of Derby, the following names occur:—

• Bakewell, Thomas, Derby, Pot-man.
• Dewsberry, William, Derby, China-man.
• Hill, Joseph, Derby, China-man.
• Needham, Henry, Derby, Pipe-maker.
• Simpson, Moses, Derby, Potter.
• Strong, Benjamin, Derby, Pipe-maker.
• Wood, William, London, China-man.
• Withers, Robert, Rotherham, Potter.
• Mosley, Thomas, Derby, Potter.

Bray, who wrote his “Tour” in the year 1777, says, speaking of Derby:—

“The china manufactory is not less worthy of notice. Under the care of Mr. Duesberry it does honour to this country. Indefatigable in his attention, he has brought the gold and blue to a degree of beauty never before obtained in England, and the drawing and coloring of the flowers are truly elegant. About one hundred [this number is in his second edition corrected to seventy] hands are employed in it, and happily many, very young, are enabled to earn a livelihood in the business.”

Dr. Johnson visited the Derby China Works in 1777, and the following is Boswell’s note on the visit:—

“When we arrived at Derby Dr. Butter accompanied us to see the manufactory of China there. I admired the ingenuity and delicate art with which a man fashioned clay into a cup, a saucer, or a teapot, while a boy turned round a wheel to give the mass rotundity. I thought this as excellent in its species of power as making good verses in its species. Yet I had no respect for this potter. Neither, indeed, has a man of any extent of thinking for a mere verse-maker, in whose numbers, however perfect, there is no poetry, no mind. The china was beautiful; but Dr. Johnson justly observed it was too dear; for that he could have vessels of silver of the same size, as cheap as what were here made of porcelain.”

Pilkington, in his “View of the Present State of Derbyshire,” published in 1789, says:—

“About forty years ago the manufacture of porcelain was begun by the late Mr. Duesbury. This ingenious artist brought it to such perfection as, in some respects, to equal the best foreign china. The ornamental part of the business was at first almost solely attended to. But the foreign demand being much interrupted by the last war, the proprietor turned his thoughts to the manufacture of useful porcelain. At this work a very rich and elegant dessert service, consisting of one hundred and twenty pieces, was lately made for His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales. The number of hands at present employed by Mr. Duesbury is seventy-two, and the manufacture is in a flourishing state.”

William Hutton, the historian of his native town and of Birmingham, who wrote his “History of Derby” in 1791, says:—

“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 y^e same Place China Maker & W^m Duesberry of Longton in y^e County of Stafford Enamellor. Made and enter’d into the 1_st of Jan_y 1756.

“First it is agreed by y^e said John Heath Andrew Planche & W^m Duesberry to be Copartners together as well in y^e Art of making English China as also in buying and selling of all sorts of Wares belonging to y^e Art of making China w^ch said Copartnership is to continue between them from the Date of these Presents for & during y^e Term of Ten years from thence & then fully to be compleated & ended And to that end He y^e said John Heath hath y^e day of y^e date of these Presents deliver’d in as a Stock y^e sum of One Thousand Pounds to be used & employ’d in Common between them for y^e carrying on y^e s^d Art of making China Wares And that one third share of Profits arising therefrom It is mutually agreed between all y^e s^d parties shall be receiv’d by & paid to y^e said John Heath till y^e said Prin^l Sum of £1000 be paid in Also it is agreed between y^e s^d parties to these Presents that y^e s^d Copartners shall not at any time hereafter use or follow y^e Trade aforesaid or any other Trade whatsoever during y^e s^d Term to their private Benefit and advantage. And also that y^e s^d Copartners shall during y^e said Term pay and discharge equally and proportionably between them all expenses they shall be at in managing y^e Art and Trade aforesaid[F1: period?] And also that all Gain or Profit that shall arise from y^e Art & Trade aforesaid during y^e said Term shall be divided between them y^e s^d 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 y^e s^d Parties that there shall be kept during y^e s^d Term Just & True Books of Accounts to w^ch s^d Books any of y^e s^d Copartners shall have free access without Interruption of y^e other And it is further agreed that at any time hereafter at y^e request of y^e 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 y^e said Copartners shall from time to time communicate to each other every Secret of y^e said Art And that y^e 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 w^ch Person shall be as fully impowered to Act with regard to all Covenants herein contained as y^e s^d 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:—

• 1751. Sept. 21. Baptized Paul Edmund, the son of Andrew Planché and Sarah his wife.
• 1754. 12 Oct. Bap. James, the son of Andrew Planché and Sarah his wife.
• 1754. Dec. 10. Buried James, the son of Andrew Planché and Sarah his wife.
• 1756. March 4. Bap. James, the bastard son of Andrew Planché and Margaret Burroughs.
• 1756. July 3. Bap. William, the son of Andrew Planché and Sarah his wife.

That Andrew Planché was not very strict in his morals is revealed by these extracts, which show that in 1756 he had two sons baptised within four months of each other, the first by a young woman named Margaret Burroughs, and the second by his wife. This was the year, 1756, in which the articles of agreement were drawn up. What became of Planché after he left Derby is not known. He appears to have been a very erratic individual, and his whereabouts uncertain. He was living at Bath at the ripe age of 76, in 1804, and died there soon afterwards. At all events, I have proof that he was in Derby eight years—how much longer I know not—and I have also, as will be seen, indisputable proof that William Duesbury had no connection with Derby till 1755–6, the date of the deed I have printed above.

When Duesbury, whether in conjunction with Planché and Heath or not, commenced business, it appears to have been in the small premises which had not long before been relinquished for a guinea by the father of William Hutton; and in them was thus commenced, in a very small way, that manufacture of porcelain which afterwards grew to so immense an extent. In the year 1756 the draft of agreement was drawn up, and the ware made at the manufactory must soon have found a ready sale, for in the course of a very few years Mr. Duesbury was carrying on a good trade, had a London house for the sale of his productions, and became a thriving and well-to-do man.

William Duesbury was of Longton Hall, in the county of Stafford, and was the son of William Duesbury, currier, of Cannock, in the same county, who in 1755, as is evidenced by the original deed in my possession, made over to him his household furniture, leather, implements of trade, and other effects, on condition that he should find him “during the term of his natural life, good and sufficient meat, drink, washing, and lodging, wearing apparel, and all other necessaries whatsoever.” The following is a verbatim copy of this curious deed, from the original. It is fully stamped, signed, and attested, and runs as follows:—

“This Indenture made the Twenty-seventh day of September in the twenty-ninth Year of the reign of King George the second over Great Britain and so forth and in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and fifty-five Between William Duesbury of Cannock in the County of Stafford Currier of the one part and William Duesbury of Longton Hall in the Parish of Stoke-upon-Trent in the said County of Stafford Son of the said William Duesbury of the other part Witnesseth that for and in Consideration of the natural Love and affection which he the said William Duesbury hath and beareth to the said William Duesbury the younger And of the Covenant or Agreement hereinafter contained on the part and behalf of the said William Duesbury the younger to be done and performed and of the Sum of Five Shillings of lawful British Money to the said William Duesbury in hand paid by the said William Duesbury the younger at or before the execution of these presents the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged He the said William Duesbury Hath given granted bargained and sold and by these presents Doth give grant bargain and sell unto the said William Duesbury the younger All and singular the Household Goods Leather Implements of Trade and all other the goods Chattles and Personal Estate of him the said William Duesbury situate and being at Cannock aforesaid or elsewhere in the said County of Stafford and every of them and every part thereof And all the Estate right title Interest & property claim and demand whatsoever both in Law and Equity of the said William Duesbury of in or unto the same every or any part thereof To have and To hold take retain and enjoy the said Household Goods Leather Implements of Trade and every of them And all other the goods Chattles and personal Estate above given granted bargained and sold or mentioned and intended so to be with their appurtenances unto the said William Duesbury the younger his Extors. admors. & assigns from henceforth absolutely and for ever to his and their own Use and benefit And the said William Duesbury for himself his Extors. & admors. doth covenant promise and grant to and with the said William Duesbury the younger his Extors. admors. & assigns that he the said William Duesbury his Extors. & admors or some of them All and singular the said Goods Chattles and personal Estate above given granted bargained and sold or mentioned & intended so to be to the said William Duesbury the younger his Extors. & admors. against all Men shall and will warrant & for ever defend And the said William Duesbury hath put the said William Duesbury the younger into possion. of all & singular the said Goods and Chattles by delivering him one Pewter Plate in the name of all and singular the said Goods and Chattles at the execution of these presents And This Indenture further witnesseth And the said William Duesbury the younger in Consideration of the Premises for himself his Heirs Extors. & admors. doth covenant promise grant and agree to and with the said William Duesbury his Extors. & admors. That he the said William Duesbury the younger his Heirs Extors. and admors. or some of them shall and will from time to time and at all times hereafter find and provide for the said William Duesbury during the term of his natural Life good & sufficient meat drink washing and Lodging wearing apparel and all other necessaries whatsoever at the proper Costs and Charges of him the said William Duesbury the younger his Heirs Extors. Admors. or assigns In witness whereof the said Parties to these presents have hereunto set their Hands and Seals the day & year first above written.

Sealed and delivered

in the presence of

William Duesbury.

Mary Knight.

Jo: Knight.

William Duesbury.

I next find William Duesbury, the enameller, of Longton, entering into partnership with Heath and Planché on the first January in the year following his executing this deed for the maintenance of his father; and entries in the family Bible prove that at this time he removed to Derby, to carry on his newly-acquired business “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.” The partnership deed bearing date the first of January, 1756, shows that the negotiations must have been made in the previous year, 1755, and as the deed of gift from his father is dated September 27th of that year, it is evident that the one was consequent on the other, and that the arrangement with his father was the result of his determination to come to Derby. The father lived until 1768, and died and was buried in Derby. In the parish register is the entry, “1768. Buried, Mr. Duesbrie, March 17.”

William Duesbury was born on the 7th of September, 1725, and married Sarah James, of Shrewsbury (who was born on the 12th of August, 1724). In 1755 he was residing at Longton, as an enameller on china ware, &c., and in 1756 removed to Derby to carry on the porcelain works there. By his wife Sarah, who died on the 14th of September, 1780, and was buried at St. Alkmund’s Church, Derby, he had several children. These were, so far as I have been able to ascertain, William, born in London in 1752, and died there in infancy; Anne, born at Longton, Oct. 3, 1754, who became the wife of Richard Egan, linendraper, of London, and afterwards china, earthenware, and glass dealer, of Bath; Mary, born in London, in 1753, but baptised at St. Alkmund’s, Derby, who died in infancy; another Mary, born at Derby, Nov., 1756, and died in 1783; Sarah, born in 1758, and died an infant; another Sarah, born in 1759, and buried in 1767; Dorothea, born in 1761, who married the Rev. John Chawner, of Church Broughton, in 1786; William, born in 1763, who succeeded his father; and James, born in 1765, who, after an erratic and evidently misunderstood and unfortunate life, died in obscurity. Mr. Duesbury himself, after a long and useful life, in the course of which he not only established the Derby China Works, but became the purchaser of those of Chelsea, Bow, Vauxhall, and Kentish Town, died at Derby, and was buried at St. Alkmund’s Church, in that town, on the 2nd of November, 1786.

William Duesbury, son and successor of the last named, was born at Derby, and baptised at St. Alkmund’s Church there, March 1, 1763. On the 4th of January, 1787, he married Elizabeth, daughter of William Edwards, Esq., solicitor, of Derby, the lady having three days before completed her twentieth year. By her he had issue three sons—William, who succeeded him; Nathaniel, who died in 1809, aged 19; and Frederick, who became an eminent physician in London—and two daughters, viz., Sarah, who remained unmarried, and died in 1875; and Anne Elizabeth, who became the wife of Francis Jessop, Esq., solicitor, of Derby. So far it has been necessary to summarise this bit of family genealogy, but the remainder will form a part of the thread of the history of the works.

The manufacture of china under the first William Duesbury must have rapidly risen into eminence, for in 1763, in an account of “goods sent to London,” no less than forty-two large boxes appear at one time to have been despatched to the metropolis, and the proceeds, I presume, of the sale of a part of them, on the 2nd of May, in that year, amounted to no less a sum than £666 17s. 6d. It is very interesting, at this early period of the art, to be enabled to say of what varieties of goods the consignment to London consisted, and I therefore give the list of contents of some of the boxes entire, and also a few items from others. I do this the more readily because it has been recently said by the writer to whom I have already alluded, “We doubt very much whether the higher sorts of fine porcelain (figures, vases, &c.) were made upon the Nottingham Road until the purchase of the Chelsea Works in 1769 and the commencement of what is called the Chelsea-Derby period, which lasted until 1785 or 1786.”

Box No. 41 contained—

• 8 Large Flower Jarrs, at 21s.
• 3 Large Ink Stands, at 42s.
• 1 Small ditto, at 24s.
• 4 Large Britanias, at 36s.
• 6 Second-sized Huzzars, at 12s.
• 4 Large Pidgeons, at 7s.
• 12 Small Rabbets, at 2s.
• 12 Chickens, at 2s.
• 16 Small Baskets, at 2s. 6d.

Box No. 31—

• 4 Large Quarters, at 40s.
• 4 Shakespeares, at 42s.
• 6 Miltons, at 42s.
• 24 Bucks, on Pedestals, at 2s. 6d.

Box No. 29—

• 4 Large Quarters, at 40s.
• 2 Jupiters, at 68s.
• 2 Junos.
• 5 Ledas, at 36s.
• 1 Europa, at 36s.
• 2 Bird-catchers, at 10s. 6d.
• 12 Sixth-sized Solid Baskets.
• 18 Second-sized Boys, at 1s. 6d.

Box No.11—

• 24 Enammelled, round, fourth-size, open-worked Baskets.
• 12 Blue ditto.
• 12 Open-worked Spectacle Baskets.
• 9 Second-size Sage-leaf boats.

There were also, of various sizes, blue fluted boats, Mosaic boats, sage-leaf boats, potting pots, caudle cups, blue strawberry pots, fig-leaf sauce boats, octagon fruit plates, vine-leaf plates, coffee cups, flower vases, standing sheep, feeding sheep, cats, sunflower blows, pedestals, honeycomb jars, coffee pots, blue guglets and basins to ditto; butter tubs, Chelsea jars, tea pots, honeycomb pots, figures of Mars and Minerva, sets of the Elements, Spanish shepherds, Neptune, the Muses, bucks, tumblers, roses, Jupiter, Diana, boys, garland shepherd, Spaniards, Chelsea-pattern candlesticks, Dresden ditto, jars and beakers, polyanthus pots, &c., &c.

It is worthy of note that at this time, although much within the ten years stipulated for the partnership, the name of William Duesbury alone usually occurs. It is true that in some instances “Duesbury and Co.,” and “Duesbury and Heath,” are met with, but these are the exception. The works at Derby continued now rapidly to extend, and fresh articles and subjects were being continually added to those already made. The best available talent was got together, apprentices were taken to the modelling, the painting, the making or “repairing” of china, and other parts of the manufacture, and it was soon found advisable to have a regular warehouse in London.

The mark used in the earliest days of the works is not certain, but I believe, and I have reason for that belief, that it was simply the letter

, which, would stand either for “Duesbury” or for “Derby;” probably in gold. The figures and groups, too, were numbered and registered for reproduction.

On the 17th of August, 1769, Mr. Duesbury arranged for the purchase of the Chelsea China Works, their purchase being completed on the 5th of February, 1770, when a payment of £400, in part of the purchase-money, was made by Mr. Duesbury, who thus, as the proprietor of the Derby and the Chelsea Works, became the largest manufacturer in the kingdom.[10] The history of the Chelsea Works has already been fully given in the first volume of this work, and therefore it is only necessary here to say, that in 1862, in my paper on the Derby China Works, in the Art Journal, I was for the first time enabled to state the fact that Mr. Duesbury purchased “the Chelsea Porcelain Manufactory, and its appurtenances and lease thereof,” on the 5th of February, 1770, and that it was covenanted to be assigned over to him on or before the 8th of that month; the date of the arrangement to purchase being August 17th, 1769. For some few years, then, Mr. Duesbury carried on both establishments, and subsequently removed the models and some of the workmen to Derby, where also he removed such of the models, &c., from Bow, which had likewise come into his possession. The purchase of the Chelsea Works soon entailed upon him the commencement of some heavy law proceedings which lasted many years. The cause of these proceedings was the attempt at recovery of a quantity of goods claimed by Duesbury as a part of his purchase, being goods made by Spremont, and of his material, but which were afterwards sold, it was said, wrongfully, by Francis Thomas, to a person named Burnsall. The action was commenced in 1770, and in 1771 Mr. Spremont, the old proprietor of the Chelsea Works, died. The proceedings, however, continued for several years.

During the time Mr. Duesbury carried on the Chelsea Works, from February 1770 to 1773, the “weekly bills” are now in my possession, and are particularly interesting as showing the nature of the articles then made, and the names of the painters and others employed, and the amount of wages they earned. The following examples will be read with interest. The first I give is quite one of the early ones—of the same month in which the works were delivered over to Duesbury:—

1770. A Weekly Bill at Chelsea from the 24 of March to the 31.

Work done this Week at Chelsea—

• 6 Large Ornement Pedistols for the Grand Popore.
• 5 Large Popore Perfume Pots to Ditto.
• 1 Square Perfume Pot Deckarated with heads of the 4 seasons.
• Roberts, Making Cases hall the week.
• Piggot, Working the hors in the Mill, and fettling of rims.
• Inglefield, Pounding of the glass, and cutting of wood.

Recd. of Mr. Duesbury in full of all Demands for self and the a Bove.

Richd. Barton.

1770. A Weekly Bill at Chelsea from Decr. 1 to the 8.

Rec. of Mr. Duesbury in full of all demands for Self and the a Bove.

Exd. and Ent.

Richd. Barton.

Amongst other interesting entries from week to week in the bills, I have chosen a few examples to illustrate the kind of work then carried on in this factory.

Examples of this kind[15] could be multiplied to any extent, but to bring the extracts a little later down in date, I shall content myself by giving the “weekly bill at Chelsea from June 19 to the 26, 1773,” to show that the same hands, with the addition of a modeller named Gauron, were still employed:—

Recd. of Mr. Duesbury in full of all demands for Self and the a Bove.

Richd. Barton.

Before Mr. Duesbury purchased the Chelsea works the mark of that manufactory was an anchor,

and to this Mr. Duesbury added the letter D

; and the mark now known as distinguishing the “Derby Chelsea” ware was thus—generally in gold. Examples of this period are of comparative rarity, and are eagerly sought after by collectors.

Fig. 45.

In 1772, in the very curious MS. “Lists of Gent., &c., in Derby, 1772,” in my own possession (a list prepared for official purposes over elections), are the following entries under “Southwark,” as that part of Derby was called. In one:—

and in the other list:—

In June, 1773, Mr. Duesbury took the lease of premises (late the Castle Tavern) in Bedford Street, Covent Garden, for a warehouse for his Derby and Chelsea ware, and here, with this William Wood as his agent (afterwards succeeded by J. Lygo), he exhibited and kept a large stock of his manufactures, and carried on, in conjunction with his two works, a very thriving and lucrative trade. Here he issued a “List of the principal additions made this year to the new invented Groups, Jars, Vases, Urns, Beakers, Cups, Chalices, &., of Mr. Duesbury’s Derby and Chelsea Manufactory of Porcelaines, Biscuits, and China Ware, both Ornamental and Useful.” This “list” is printed in small quarto. Among the articles enumerated, one hundred and twenty-three in number, the following will be sufficient to show their beautiful and elaborate nature, and the amount of labour and artistic skill which they exhibited:—

“1. Their present majesties, the king and queen, and royal family, in three grouped pieces of biscuit. The centre piece represents the king in a Vandyke dress, on a blue and gold basement, supported by four lions leaning on an altar richly ornamented in blue and gold, with hanging trophies of the polite arts and sciences. The crown, munde, and sceptre reposing on a cushion, of crimson, embroidered, fringed, and tapelled in gold. 14 inches.

“42. A large beaker, sky-blue ground spotted in white; two dolphins, lion footed, standing on white goats’ heads, form the two anses in crimson and white edged with gold, the mouth of the beaker and the top of the vase are furrowed with twisted crenures in white and gold; the zone of the top is adorned with golden lions, turned toward white and gold marks; the rim of the cup part is foliated and crenulated friese, white and gold, with detached patera, the pediment striped with gold in alternate triangles, the foot covered with gilt leaves; the pedestal in white and gold has four white sphinxes for angular supporters, over which runs a gold festoon fixed to the surbase; the whole, with the pedestals, 20 inches.

“105. A white gallon cask, with gold edged hoops, adorned with four trophies of music emblems of love, in chiaro-oscuro, surmounted by a young coloured Bacchus, sitting on the bung tasting a grape, of which he holds a basket full between his legs, and a cup in his left hand, the barrel is made to turn round on a pivot fixed in an ormolu pediment, a satyr’s mask holds an ormolu cock in his mouth, which opens and shuts by a spring. 18 inches.”

The works at Chelsea were not finally discontinued until the year 1784, when they were destroyed by Mr. Duesbury, the kilns and every part of the work pulled down, and what was available sent down to Derby. The removal of the kilns, and the work of demolition, was entrusted to Robert Boyer, the painter, &c., the old and faithful servant whose name appears in the “weekly bills” above given; and when his work was done he removed to Derby at twenty-five shillings per week in place of a guinea, with house rent free, and fire as heretofore.[16] It is also worthy of remark that Mr. Duesbury purchased the Bow business, and owned the pottery at Pedlar’s Acre, at Lambeth, the rents of which he assigned in 1781.

Fig. 46.

Periodical sales of stock were held in London by Mr. Duesbury, and judging by the catalogues of “Sales by Auction” by Messrs. Christie and Ansell, of Pall Mall, and “Sales by Candle,” by Mr. Hunter, the articles sent up for the purpose were excellent examples of the manufacture, and just such as were likely to be sought after by the traders—the “chinamen” of London. The descriptions of the goods were of much the same character as in the “list” referred to, with this addition, that in the late catalogues the price (the trade price possibly) was attached to each article. I have by me the priced catalogues of several years’ sales, and it is highly interesting to examine them, and to see the prices the different articles realised at the sales. They give, perhaps, one of the best insights into the porcelain trade of that period of anything I have seen. A few items, taken at random, from some of these catalogues, will be useful to the collector. The “Catalogue of an elegant and extensive assortment of Derby and Chelsea Porcelaine” for sale on May 10th, 1781, and four following days, has a long and full title-page, and occupies thirty-two octavo pages. The company were invited to this sale by cards, of which the following is a copy:—

“At Mess^rs Christie and Ansell’s great Room, next Cumberland House, Pall Mall, will be sold by Auction on Tuesday next, the 7th of May 1782, and the Four following Days, an elegant and extensive Assortment of the Derby and Chelsea Porcelain, consisting of Table and Desert Services, Tea and Coffee Equipages, Biscuit Ornaments, &c., &c.

“To be viewed on Saturday the 4th of May, and till the Sale (Sunday excepted), which will begin each Day at 12 o’clock.

“N.B.—Mr. Duesbury flatters himself the Produce of his Manufactory this Year will be found far superior to any Thing he has ever yet exhibited, and therefore humbly hopes he shall experience the wonted generous Countenance of the Nobility, and his Friends in general, whose Patronage (with the highest Sense of Gratitude) he will be ever studious to deserve.”

The following are a few of the lots offered. It was a five days’ sale, and there were 529 lots in all. The figures I have placed in brackets, thus [   ] are the prices the lots realised at this sale:—

A complete set of tea china, waved, shank’d, enamel’d with a border of green flowers and gold edge, 41 pieces. [£3 3s.]

Six French-shape chocolate-cups and saucers, enamel’d with festoons of green husks and pink and gold border. [18s.]

One small-size group representing Music, in biscuit. [21s.]

One pair of element-groups representing Air and Water, and 4 standing seasons, in ditto (biscuit). [£1 18s.]

An elegant Etruscan-shape vase, enamel’d in compartments with a figure of Shenston, and fine blue ground striped with gold.

One set of five beautiful vases, enamel’d in compartments with landscapes and figures, richly finished with green and gold.

A beautiful dejune, enamel’d in compartments with Cupids and striped with gold.

A beautiful large group of figures of the three Virtues, in biscuit. [30s.]

A beautiful desert-service, enamel’d with coloured flowers and fine blue and gold leafage border, consisting of 24 plates, 2 large oblong compotiers, 1 ditto with a foot, 2 heart-shape, 4 round, and 4 square ditto, 1 pair cream-bowls, covers, stand, and spoons.

One beautiful vase, enamel’d in compartments with a landscape on one side and Romeo and Juliet on the other, richly finished with chas’d and burnish’d gold.

One pair of ewer-shape vases, enamel’d in compartments with figures and richly gilt.

An elegant inkstand, fine blue and gold. [10s. 6d.]

One group of Jason and Medea before Diana.

One set of (three) vases, beautifully painted in compartments with jett figures, and richly finished with chas’d and burnish’d gold. [£7.]

One pair of Etruscan-shape vases, enamel’d with trophies and figures richly gilt.

A beautiful dejune, enamel’d with vases, &c., rich, finished with fine blue and gold. [63s.]

Six caudle cups, covers and stands, peacock pattern, white and gold. [25s.]

A superb and elegant pair of caudle cups, covers and stands, enamel’d in compartments with figures and striped with gold.

One pair of small foxes, in biscuit. [10s.]

A figure of Time and a set of the Seasons, enamel’d. [35s.]

One small group representing Music, 1 pair Sportsman and Companion, 4 small groups, and 4 small flower vases, in biscuit. [£2 6s.]

One pair of Dragon candlesticks, green and gold.

A beautiful three-quart punch-bowl, enamel’d with flowers and rich blue and gold border [17s.]

One superb and elegant vase with therms, beautifully enamel’d with figures, the Three Graces on one side and a landscape on the other, in compartments, enriched with chased and burnished gold, and 2 ewer-shape vases to match, figure of Virtue on one side and Prudence on the other.

One pair of basket-work antique-handled vases, enamel’d with figures, Pomona and Prudence on one side and a landscape on the other, in compartments, gilt to match.

One beautiful large group of two Virgins awaking Cupid, in biscuit. [42s.]

One ditto to match of two Bacchants dressing Pan with a garland of flowers.

One pair of beautiful groups representing Poetry and Music, in biscuit.

One set of figures, the four quarters and four small groups, in biscuit. [30s.]

One large punch-bowl, enamel’d with festoons of coloured flowers and gold edge. [12s.]

One large perfume-vase, beautifully painted in figures in compartments representing Eneas meeting Venus before he enters Carthage, richly gilt.

One pair of large beakers to match, enamel’d in compartments with figures, on one side Bacchus and Ariadne, and on the other Venus and Adonis, richly gilt.

A very rich and beautiful compleat desert service, enamel’d with different vases, festoons of green husks, and fine blue and gold, consisting of 24 plates, 2 large oblong compotiers, 1 ditto with a foot, 4 round, 2 heart-shape, 4 oval, 4 oblong ditto, and a pair of cream-bowls, covers, stands, and spoons. [£22 1s.]

Four pierced desert flower-vases, 1 pair fitting figures, and 4 shooting Cupids, in biscuit.

One pair of fox-hunters’ cups.

A very beautiful Seve-pattern compleat desert service, enamel’d with roses, fine mosaic border, richly finished with chased and burnish’d gold, consisting of 24 plates, 3 oblong compotiers, 2 heart-shape, 4 round, 4 square, 4 small oblong ditto, and a pair cream-bowls, covers, stands, and spoons. [£25 4s.]

One pair of sitting religious figures, in biscuit. [9s.]

One pair Satyr-head drinking-mugs, enamell’d and gilt. [8s.]

One beautiful figure of Shakespear, in biscuit, and fine blue and gold pedestal. [21s.]

One pair large rummers, enamel’d with festoons of coloured flowers, and gilt. [6s. 6d.]

Two large leaves, 4 small ditto, and one round fruit-dish. [13s.]

One group of 3 boys playing at hazard, and one ditto of a galanter show, in biscuit.

Six Egg-spoons, 6 artichoke-cups, and 6 asparagus-servers, enamel’d, fine blue and white. [9s.]

One sett of 3 vases, enamel’d with birds and gilt.

One large-size group representing Poetry and Music, in biscuit. [22s.]

One pair of large gardeners, 2 pair of muses, and 4 small flower-vases in ditto.

An elegant stand for different cheeses and butter, enamel’d with vazes and fine mazarine blue and gold (rivetted). [21s.]

1 sett of 5 elegant jars, enamel’d in compartments with groups of natural flowers and fine blue and gold.

A beautiful large group of 3 graces and 2 cupids, supposed to be crowning her Majesty with garland of flowers, in biscuit.

One pair of element groups, 1 pair of large fruit and flower figures, and one pair figures representing earth and water, in ditto. [42s.]

A neat chimney-piece embellished with composition ornaments.

Six beautiful coffee or chocolate cups and saucers, enamel’d with Cupids, fine blue ring and gilt.

A very rich and beautiful desert-service, enamel’d with roses and fine mazarine blue and gold border, consisting of 24 plates, 2 large oblong compotiers, 1 ditto with a foot, 2 heart-shape, 4 oval, 4 octagon, and 4 shell-shape ditto, and a pair of cream bowls, covers, stands, and spoons. [£28 7s.]

One beautiful group of 2 Virgins awaking Cupid, and a ditto of 2 bacchants dressing Pan with a garland of flowers, in biscuit. [£3 18s.]

One superb and elegant vase with therms, beautifully enamel’d with figures of wisdom and Vigilance on one side, and a landscape on the other in compartments, and richly ornamented with fine blue and gold, 2 ewer-shape vases to match, figure of Virtue on one side and fortitude on the other, with landscape and fine blue and gold.

One pair of elegant tripods richly ornamented with fine blue and gold.

One pair of beautiful antique lamps.

One beautiful vase, enamel’d in compartments, with a figure of rhetoric and a landscape enrich’d with gold stripes.

Two Neptune-head drinking-mugs.

One figure of Andromache weeping over the ashes of Hector, and one pair of Madona groups, in biscuit.

A large dove-house ornamented with natural flowers and richly gilt.

One large oval-shape vase and two egg-shape, enamel’d with Cupids gathering the vintage, richly finished with burnished gold.

One pair of elegant figures, Bacchus and Ariadne, 1 pair sportsman and companion, and 1 pair harlequin and columbine, in biscuit. [37s.]

One group of 4 Cupids, in biscuit. [17s.]

Four pierced flower vases, 2 pair gardeners, and 1 pair small dancing groups in ditto. [34s.]

A superb and elegant large vase with therms, beautifully enamel’d with figures of the three Graces on one side and a landscape on the other, 1 pair of ewer-shape vases to match, figure of Virtue and History on one side and landscapes on the other, in compartments, enrich’d with chased and burnished gold.

One pair of Egg-shape vases to match, enamel’d with figures of Prudence and Rhetoric.

Four small desert flower-vases, in biscuit. [9s.]

A beautiful group of 4 Cupids, 2 pair of small music figures, 1 pair French shepherds, and 4 small vases, in biscuit. [£2 3s.]

One pair large dancing groups, in biscuit. [24s.]

A pair of uncommonly large octagon jars (near 2 feet high) decorated with natural flowers and finely enamel’d with figures, landscapes, &c., richly ornamented with chased and burnish’d gold, the figures represent a votaress of Bacchus and Innocence washing her hands at an altar.

Six breakfast basons and saucers, enamel’d with green festoons and gold edges.

One pair of large perfume-vases, enamel’d with flowers, ornamented with dogs, rabbits, &c., and gilt.

An elegant Seve-pattern complete desert-service, enamel’d with roses and rich mosaic and gold border, consisting of 3 dozen plates, 2 large oblong compotiers, 4 round, 2 heart-shape, 4 large square, 4 small oblong, and one large ditto with a foot for the center, and a pair of cream-bowls, covers, stands, and spoons. [£30 9s.]

One pair groups, the arts and sciences, and a pair large gardeners, in biscuit. [30s.]

One superb and elegant large vase with therms, enamel’d in compartments with figures, the three Graces, enrich’d with chas’d burnish’d and gold. [£8 8s.]

One pair of beautiful oval jars to match, the figures represent Apollo and Agrippina lamenting over the ashes of Germanicus. [£6 6s.]

One of pair small enamel’d foxes. [10s.]

A pair of hares’ heads, enamel’d, after nature. [10s.]

Three elegant vases, enamel’d with rose-coloured figures from Ovid, and enriched with gold. [£9 19s. 6d.]

One pair large dogs, enamel’d.

A desert-service, enamel’d with roses, festoons of green husks, and pink and gold border, consisting of 24 plates, 3 large oblong compotiers, 4 round, 2 heart-shape, and 4 small oblong ditto, and a pair of cream-bowls, covers, stands, and spoons. [£13 2s. 6d.]

Six elegant ice cream cups, enamel’d with festoons of red husks, and fine blue and gold.

Two pair of large boys riding on dolphin and fawn, in biscuit.

One of these sale catalogues, at the risk of occupying much space, I here reprint entire, because I conceive nothing could more completely show the character of the goods, ornamental as well as useful, which at that time were the staple productions of the Derby works. It cannot, I opine, but be of immense use to collectors in assisting them to correctly appropriate and date their examples. The catalogue which I now reprint (one of several years in my possession) is of folio size, and occupies twelve pages. The selling prices are printed in the catalogue; the prices realised at the sale, however, were not, on the average, more than one-half the printed ones. The proceeds of the whole sale was £276 4s. It is of the year 1785. The title-page is as follows:—

“Four Months Promp.——CHINA, for SALE, by the CANDLE, at Mr. William Duesbury’s Warehouse, in Bedford-Street, Covent-Garden, On Wednesday the 9th, and Thursday the 10th of March, 1785, at Six of the Clock in the Afternoon, A very good Assortment of Derby Figures and Candlesticks, compleat Tea and Desert Services, Caudle and Chocolate Cups, &c. of the newest and best Patterns. To be viewed on Monday and Tuesday, and ‘till the Time of Sale. To be Sold by Auction by WILLIAM HUNTER, Sworn Broker, No. 59, New Bond-Street.—Printed by Joseph Good, Stationer, &c., No. 79, Fleet Street.”

At the back of the title are the conditions, thus:—

“Bedford-Street, Covent-Garden, March 9, 1785.—Conditions of the Sale.—I. The Goods are all to be taken away without any Allowance at the Buyer’s Expence, on or before the 14th day of March, 1785, and paid for on delivery.—II. Buyer’s Notes, approved of by the proprietor, will be taken payable four Months after date.—III. The Proprietor will allow a discount of 2½ per Cent. to those who chuse to pay ready money.—IV. Such goods as shall not be taken away as aforesaid, the Proprietor shall be at liberty to re-sell without further notice, either by public sale or private contract; and all losses attending such re-sale shall be made good by the respective Buyer or Buyers at this Sale.—V. If any dispute shall arise between any Bidders concerning any lot, such lot to be put up again.—VI. The Buyer to pay Six-pence per lot deposit, in order to bind the bargain, which is not returnable.”

Then follows:—

A CATALOGUE, &c.

Figs. 47 to 50.—From the Museum of Practical Geology.

A few months before Mr. Duesbury’s death—which, as I have stated, took place in November, 1786—he took his son William into partnership, and the business was carried on under the style of “Messrs. William Duesbury and Son.” It thus appears upon the title-pages of the sale catalogue of 22nd September in that year, but is altered back to “Mr. William Duesbury” alone in that for 21st December following. For some years before the death of his father the younger Mr. William Duesbury had devoted himself untiringly to the advancement of the works. No man could have been more highly respected, both by his workmen and by all who knew or had dealings with him at home and abroad, than was this second William Duesbury, and under his care the works continued to grow in importance with an astonishing rapidity, and soon became by far the most prosperous and most successful in the kingdom. The connection which had previously been formed with the principal families, from royalty downwards, spread and increased, and among the hundreds of names of purchasers on the sale sheets and other papers, I come across, at random, those of the King, the Queen, the Prince of Wales (afterwards George IV.), who was a large customer for dessert, tea, coffee, and other services; the Duchess of Devonshire, William Pitt, Sir Hugh Pallisser, the Margravine of Anspach, the Duke of Northumberland, Lord Howe, and indeed almost every title then in the peerage. Besides this, several ladies of distinction painted groups of flowers and other pictures on porcelain, supplied to them for the purpose by Mr. Duesbury, who afterwards fired and finished them for their own special use. Of these ladies, Lady Margaret Fordyce, Lady Plymouth, and Lady Aubrey executed some beautiful drawings, which probably may still remain in their families. Lord Lonsdale also had twenty-four plates painted with landscapes in Cumberland, from his own sketches, and many other noblemen and gentlemen did the same; many sets of china being painted with views of different parts of the estates of those for whom they were manufactured. Bronze figures of horses—probably originally belonging to the famous Duke of Newcastle, whose work on Horsemanship is the finest ever produced—were lent to Mr. Duesbury from Welbeck Abbey; and Lady Spencer also sent some choice moulds for working from. Altogether the Derby works, during the latter part of the first Mr. Duesbury’s time, and during the life of his son, were, as I have said, the most successful, the best conducted, and the most fashionable establishment of the kind in the kingdom.

Fig. 51.—“King’s vase,” Museum of Practical Geology.

Constant application to business, and the wear and tear of the brain from incessant anxieties, about 1795 made such fearful inroads on the health of Mr. Duesbury, that he was induced by his friends to take into partnership a Mr. Michael Kean, a very clever miniature painter, an Irishman by birth, who brought his talents to bear on the works, and by his skill in designing and drawing added much to the beauty of the articles manufactured. His connection however, seems to have been a source of still greater anxiety to Mr. Duesbury, whose mind gradually gave way under his load of care. In 1796 Mr. Duesbury died, and after a time Mr. Kean (who had for a time the management of the business for the widow and her young family) married the widow, but not long after, from reasons into which it is needless to enter, as they do not affect the narrative, withdrew hastily from the concern, and the works were then continued for, and afterwards by, the third William Duesbury. Mrs. Duesbury, by her second marriage (with Michael Kean) had a family of five children. She died in 1829, after having passed a not altogether happy life. This third William Duesbury (grandson of the founder of the works) was the eldest son of William Duesbury by his wife, Elizabeth Edwards. He was born in 1787, and on the 26th September, 1808, married Annabella, daughter of William E. Sheffield, Esq., of the Polygon, Somers Town, London, and for a time the concern was carried on under the firm of “Duesbury and Sheffield.”

In 1815, Mr. Duesbury leased the premises to Mr. Robert Bloor, who had been a clerk to his father, and had carried on the business during Mr. Duesbury’s minority, and the entire concern ultimately passed into his hands, and was carried on by him for the first few years with much judgment and skill.

Fig. 52.

Before Mr. Bloor’s time it had been the constant plan of the Duesburys—so worthily tenacious were they of their reputation, and of keeping up the high and unblemished character of their works—to allow none but perfect goods to leave their premises, and no matter how costly the article, or how trivial the fault (frequently so trivial as to be only perceptible to the most practised eye), all goods which were not perfect were stowed away in rooms in the factory, and had accumulated to an enormous extent. When Mr. Bloor took the concern, this stock of seconds goods became an almost exhaustless mine of wealth to him. Having to pay the purchase money by instalments, he found the easiest method of doing so was to finish up these goods, take them to different large towns, and there sell them by auction, and also to have sales at the manufactory; one of these sales, in 1822, continued twenty-five days. By this means Mr. Bloor amassed large sums of money, as the “Derby china” found ready and liberal purchasers wherever it was thus offered. This system, however, though it had a temporary good, produced a lasting evil. The temptation to produce large quantities of goods specially for auction sale was so great as not to be withstood, and as by this means they were disposed of “with all their imperfections thick upon them,” less care was devoted to their manufacture, and the decline of the works, principally from this cause, commenced.

Mr. Robert Bloor was assisted in his works by his brother Joseph, by whom the “mixing” was mainly done, and from 1828, when Mr. Robert Bloor’s health began to fail, they were carried on for him by a manager named Thomason. The two brothers died within a short time of each other. Robert, who had lost his mind for many years before his decease, died in 1845, and Joseph the year following. The works then passed into the hands of Mr. Thomas Clarke, who had married a grand-daughter of Robert Bloor’s, who discontinued them, and sold most of the models, &c., to the Staffordshire manufacturers—the greater bulk going into the hands of Mr. Boyle, a manufacturer, of Fenton, who was son of Mr. John Boyle, and for a short time before his death a partner with the Wedgwoods. The final dissolution of the old works took place in 1848, when a number of the workmen naturally migrated into Staffordshire and Worcestershire.

At this time, however, several of the old hands—actuated by the laudable desire of securing the continuance of a business which for a century had been so successfully carried on, and of continuing it as one of the trades of their native town—clubbed together (to use a characteristic expression), and commenced business on their own account. They each and all threw into the common stock what knowledge, experience, money, and tools, &c, they possessed, took premises in King Street (on the site of old St. Helen’s Nunnery), and under the name of “Locker and Co.” commenced making “Derby china,” and adopted, very properly, a distinctive mark, which shows this epoch in the works. It is a somewhat curious circumstance, that on the site of the old china works the modern Roman Catholic nunnery of S. Marie was erected; while on the site of the old nunnery of St. Helen, the present china works are now carried on. Great difficulties were encountered by this band of workmen, but their zeal and determination overcame them.

Mr. Locker (who was a native of Blackfordby, and had been clerk and warehouseman at the old works in the latter part of their existence) died in 1859, and the works were next conducted under the style of “Stevenson and Co.,” and “Stevenson, Sharp, and Co.,” till the death of Mr. Stevenson, when the style was changed to that of “Hancock and Co.,” and the works are now continued by Mr. Sampson Hancock, and bid fair, if not to rival the early glory and success of the works, at least to do credit to the town of Derby, in which they are situated. Some of the productions are highly creditable to the taste and skill of the men, and show that “ye art of making English china,” imparted to William Duesbury in 1756, is not forgotten, but remains with his successors to the present day.

One of the last large services made by Bloor was a magnificent dessert made for her present Majesty, and some large additions to that set, and pieces for replacing, have been from time to time made by the present owners of the works, which are still therefore as fully entitled to the name of “Royal” works as any of their predecessors. The marks used by these later firms will be found engraved on page 93; I give them to complete the chronological series. The name of Courtney, which appears on one of these marks, was Bloor’s agent.

Having now gone through the History of the works, it only remains to speak of the artists employed, and of one branch of the manufacture, that of “Biscuit,” which requires more than a passing notice. This material was a discovery of, and quite peculiar to, the Derby Works, and the secret of its composition is still preserved. To it the beautiful material Parian thus owes its origin. One of the Derby workmen having engaged himself to Mr. Copeland, was trying experiments to recover the secret of the biscuit composition, when instead of it he produced accidentally that which has been named “Parian,” and in which all the exquisitely beautiful figures and groups that characterise their, and other equally admirable, productions have since, with modifications and improvements, been worked. It is pleasant thus to know, that although the art of making Derby biscuit figures has been discontinued, the Parian has sprung from it, and was first produced by a Derby man. Nothing could exceed the sharpness and beauty of the biscuit figures as produced in the best days of the Derby Works, and some examples, for delicacy and fineness of modelling, and for sharpness of touch, have never, in any ceramic material, been surpassed, or scarcely equalled.

Transfer printing on china appears to have been introduced at Derby in 1764—some years before even Wedgwood printed his own ware, but while he was in the habit of sending it off to Liverpool to be printed by Messrs. Sadler and Green. The process, however, did not obtain much favour at Derby, and Mr. Duesbury evidently found it better, and more satisfactory, to adhere to hand-work in all his goods. The person who introduced the process, and whom he engaged to carry it on, was Richard Holdship, of Worcester, who, by deed, covenanted for the sum of £100 paid down, and a yearly sum of £30 so long as the works continued on his process, to impart in writing to Messrs. Duesbury and Heath his secret process for making china according to proofs already made by him at the Derby Works; to supply them with all sufficient quantities of soapy rock at fair prices; and to print all the china or porcelain ware which might have occasion to be printed. The engagement with Holdship lasted, at all events, many years, but during that time the printing evidently was not much followed, as in his letters to his employers he is constantly complaining of having no work for his presses, and in having no goods made according to his process. He had an assistant named William Underwood, and in one of his letters he values his press at ten guineas in cash, and his copper-plates at a large amount, while he says “for his process for Printing Enamell and Blew, he hath been offered several Hundred Pounds.” His stock of enamel colours, 151 lbs. in weight, he offers to sell for £35. It is needless to write more in this place of Holdship’s connection with Derby, as I have already given more full particulars in the first volume, page 232. At one time John Lodge, the eminent engraver, engraved some plates for printing at Derby. The following is his bill for some engraving done in 1771:—

Mr. Deusberry Dr. to John Lodge,

Sept. 28, 1771.

Recd. the Contents in full of all demands, John Lodge.

Fruit dishes, and other articles were at one time made with open-work reticulated rims or sides; a raised “Dresden” flower being placed on each of the outer sections in much the same manner as was characteristic of one period of Worcester work. These were made both in blue and white, and in enamel; they are somewhat scarce.

Fig. 53.

In 1789 Mr. Duesbury endeavoured to introduce batt-printing into his manufactory, and for that purpose prevailed on his former assistant, J. Hancock, then in Staffordshire, to inquire into and describe to him the process. I must not omit to say that earthen ware, called the “Cream Ware,” very closely resembling Wedgwood’s celebrated “Queen’s Ware,” was made at Derby for a short time, and was of great beauty. Specimens of this ware are of great rarity.

In 1790 Mr. Duesbury invented a machine for exhibiting the contraction of earthen bodies when in the fire; this he had constructed by Spooner and Son.

Figs. 56 to 58.

The marks used at the Derby China Works may be thus briefly summarised. The simple writing letter

is said to have been the first mark used by William Duesbury. The

, which stands either as the initial of Derby or of Duesbury, conjoined with the anchor of Chelsea

is the distinctive mark of the Chelsea-Derby period—the period when William Duesbury, who had purchased the Chelsea works, carried on both the manufactories, and, later, produced goods at Derby from the Chelsea moulds. Two or three varieties of this mark, according to the taste or whim of the workmen, occur (see Figs. [56, 57, and 58]).

Figs. 59 to 61.

Two other marks, the one a

surmounted by a crown, and the other an anchor, similarly surmounted, are said to have denoted respectively the articles made at this period at Derby and at Chelsea (Figs. [59] to [63]). Now and then the first of these is met with in connection with the anchor (Fig. 63).

Figs. 62 to 67.

The most usual mark is that of the letter D, with crossed swords, dots, and crown, of which several varieties occur. Sometimes the initial is the writing letter

, and sometimes a Roman capital D, and the crown also varies according to the caprice of the painter. Figs. [64 to 67] show some of the varieties.

Fig. 68.

A variety of this, in which a

and a

are conjoined, denotes the period when the works, in their later days, were carried on by Duesbury and Kean. It was, however, only very sparsely used. For some years, at all events up to about 1825 or 1830, Mr. Bloor continued to use the old mark of the Duesburys—the crown, cross daggers with dots, and D beneath—but about that period discontinued it, and adopted instead a mark with his own name (Fig. [68]). It is well to note, that down to the discontinuance of the old mark, it had invariably been done with the pencil, by hand, but that those adopted by Mr. Bloor were printed ones. The first printed mark I believe to be Fig. [69], and somewhat later the same was used, but slightly larger in size (Fig. [71]). Other marks are shown on the engravings. Figs. [74 and 75] have an old English

surmounted by a crown; another (Fig. [76]) a crown, with a riband bearing the word DERBY in Roman capitals beneath it.

Figs. 69 to 73.

Figs. 74 to 78.

Other marks, said to have been for one purpose or other—of course as imitations—used at Derby, are the following:—

Figs. 79 to 84.

In my own possession is a design, in pencil, by Mr. Duesbury, by his own hand, for a mark, which I engrave on Fig. [84], although I believe it was never adopted. At all events I have failed in discovering a single specimen so marked. Mrs. Palliser, however, engraves a mark as occurring on a cup and saucer, which somewhat assimilates to it. She also gives, from a specimen in her own possession, the word

in writing letters. This, she states, occurs “in black on a biscuit statuette;” but I fear the mark has been added at a later date. Another mark, which has been described to me, but of which I have not seen an example, is very similar to Fig. [84], but has the cross daggers and crown added, with the encircling words “DUESBURY, DERBY,” Fig. [85]. It may be well, en passant, to notice a mark which appears on one of the copper-plates of the Caughley works (see Vol. I., p. [273]). It is an anchor over the word “Derby.” As the initials RH conjoined also appear along with the anchor and word “Worcester,” and may mean either R. Hancock or Richard Holdship, the probability is they belong to the latter (who was connected with the Derby works), and that the anchor was adopted in allusion to his name, hold ship—a very clever and ingenious device. Another variety belonging to Mr. Robinson differs slightly from these.

Figs. 84 to 89.

On some services, notably on the royal service, mentioned on page 88, Mr. Bloor had his name painted in full—

Messrs. Robert Bloor & Co.,
34, Old Bond Street,

on the back of plates, &c. The “Co.” in this instance was Mr. Thomas Courteney, the London agent, through whom the order was procured. His place of business was 34, Old Bond Street, and many of the goods afterwards made for him bore the accompanying mark, Fig. [91]. Messrs. Locker & Co., at the modern King Street works, used the mark, Fig. [92], and their successors, Stevenson, Sharp, and Co., the next one. The next firm, Stevenson and Hancock, used, in accordance with my suggestion, and a sketch I made for them, in 1862, the old Derby mark of the crown, crossed daggers, dots, and letter

, with the initials of the firm S. H. (for Stevenson and Hancock); this is still continued by the present sole proprietor, Sampson Hancock—the letters S. H. being, fortunately, his own initials.

Figs. 91 to 94.

Of the artists employed at the Derby China Works, the principal modellers appear to have been Spengler, Stephan, Coffee, Complin, Hartenberg, Duvivier, Webber, and Dear, and many others, including Bacon the sculptor, were employed in London, and the models sent down to the works.

Of the painters, the principal ones were Bowman, who was originally of Chelsea, afterwards of Derby, and then again of London, and who was one of the best flower and landscape painters of his day; Billingsley, who received instruction from Bowman, and whose flower pieces have certainly never been surpassed, or even equalled; Hill, a famous painter of landscapes, who delighted in sylvan scenery; Brewer, also an excellent landscape and figure painter, and whose wife, Bernice Brewer, was also a painter; Pegg, who surpassed in faithful copying of nature, in single branches and flowers, and in autumnal borders; Samuel Keys, a clever ornamentalist, who ended his days in the employ of Mintons; Steel, who excelled all others in painting fruit; John Keys, a flower painter; Cotton and Askew, two highly-gifted painters of figures; Webster, Withers, Hancock (two, uncle and nephew), Bancroft and others as flower painters; Lowton, clever at hunting and sporting subjects; and Robertson, at landscapes.[17] But besides these, there were many other really clever artists employed. It is pleasant, too, to know, that “Wright, of Derby,” the celebrated portrait painter, the contemporary and fellow pupil with Reynolds, lent his powerful aid on some occasions,[18] in supplying drawings and giving advice, as did also De Boeuff, Bartolozzi, Sanby, Glover, and many others of eminence; and it is also interesting to add, that one of the Wedgwood family, Jonathan Wedgwood, was at one time employed at Derby. The draft of agreement between himself and William Duesbury, dated 1772, is in my own possession, and by it he binds himself for three years to work at “the arts of repairing or throwing china or porcelaine ware,” for the sum of fourteen shillings per week. A few brief notes upon some of the artists of the Derby works will doubtless be of service to collectors; I therefore dot down the following memoranda:—

J. J. Spengler, a Frenchman, had been occasionally employed in London by Mr. Duesbury to model figures for him, and in 1790, on the recommendation of Mr. Vulliamy, entered into an agreement to come to Derby. Mr. Wallis, in his not very reliable account of the Derby China Works, to which I have before referred, says Spengler “was brought to Derby from London by Mr. Kean,” but this is an error. He was in Derby years before Mr. Kean had any connection with the works. The original agreements, dated July 13 and September 15th, 1790, are in my own possession (as are also a number of original letters, accounts, and other documents connected with him), and is as follows:—

“A Copy.

“A Memorandum.

London, July 13, 1790.

“That the Bearer, Mr. J. Spengler, has agreed to come down to the Manufactory at Derby, to work as Modeller, &c, and to receive for the first month after the rate of three Guineas per week, and his expenses paid down by the Coach. His hours of work is to be from Seven o’clock in the morning till the rest of the People in the Manufactory give Over work in the Evening. It is further agreed on, that after the expiration of the first Month, if the parties like each other and they agree for a fixed time to come, The bearer, Mr. J. Spengler, is then only to receive after the rate of two pounds ten shillings per week from the first day he began to work in the manufactory.

“Witness:   (Signed)   “For Mr. W. Duesbury.

“B. Vulliamy.   “J. Spengler.   “J. Lygo.”

He accordingly came to Derby and a more full agreement was drawn up in September. On the 15th of that month he drew up and signed a memorandum to the effect that as he knew nothing either of the laws or language of England, he was to go to London to cause to be examined the agreement made between himself and “Monsieur Duesbury Maitre de la fabrique de Porcelaine a Derbey,” and should it be found right, to return at once to Derby and sign and execute it; Mr. Duesbury agreeing to pay the expenses of the journey and half the loss of time at the rate fixed in the agreement. This memorandum, which is well written, but in wretched French, is signed by “J. Spengler” and by “Mr. Duesbury” thus:—

“Sep. 15th, ’90. As far as I can understand the French Language, I conceive the above to be right.

W^m Duesbury.”

Spengler first went down to Derby in the beginning of August, 1790, soon after the date of the agreement of July 13th (having just previously modelled a “Figure of Astronomy, in London,” for which Mr. Duesbury paid him ten guineas, and for extra time expended over it at Derby, in finishing, an additional two and a half guineas), and his first pieces of work were “Figure with a Vase (Morning),” and its companion, a “Figure with a Vase (Noon),” for each of which he was paid seven guineas; and the “Three Graces,” for the time expended on which he was paid six guineas.[19] Before long, unpleasantness arose through Spengler’s inattention to work, breach of contracts, and getting into debt, and in 1792 he left Derby surreptitiously. Proceedings were taken by Mr. Duesbury; his goods (the inventory of which, dated March 18th, is before me) were sold; and he was captured at Ramsgate, and placed in the King’s Bench Prison. The result of law proceedings was that Spengler entered into a fresh agreement with Mr. Duesbury (I have the draft) by which he covenanted “Not to lose more time in any one week than half a day, sickness excepted, under the penalty of paying after the rate of 7s. per day to Mr. D., Mr. S. to continue to serve Mr. D. to the best of his skill (without working for any other person) until he shall have paid Mr. D. the ballance due to him, and all lawful expences; Mr. D. receiving two-thirds of his earnings, Spengler to have liberty to attend any number of hours (that the manufactory is open for others) over and above those work’d by himself and the rest of the other hands for overtime, and to receive in the same proportion for such time as for the regular day’s time,” and so on. He was, evidently, for the purpose of carrying out the agreement, bailed out of the King’s Bench by a friend, whose letters I possess, but by November of the same year had again left his employment.[20]

Spengler was then again in the King’s Bench, from which, on the 31st of January, after other correspondence, he wrote a very pathetic letter (in French, as all his letters are) to Mr. Duesbury, and ultimately it appears that an arrangement was come to for him to work in London. In 1794, fresh arrangements were again in progress (Spengler, who was living at Chelsea, in the meantime having continued to work for Mr. Duesbury), and much correspondence took place; the result being that in February, 1795, Spengler returned to Derby, under a fresh agreement, which, as it contains much valuable information as to figures and groups, and prices for modelling them, I give entire:—

“Heads of an Agreement to be enterd into between Wm. Duesbury of Derby in the County of Derby & J. J. Spengler, Modeller, Viz.:—

“J. J. S. to serve W^m. D. his Ex^s. Adm^s. or Ass^s. in his Manufactory at Derby for so long as W. D. his Ex^s. Adm^s. or Ass^s. shall have occasion for the assistance of J. J. S. W. D. his Ex^s. Adm^s. & Ass^s. reserving to themselves the power of Terminating this Agreement by giving J. J. S. 1 Month’s notice at any time. J. J. S. to have the like power of Terminating it at any time by giving 1 M^s. notice unless he shall not be able in that time to complete any Set of work he may have undertaken in which case J. J. S. to stop with W. D. his Ex^s. Adm^s. or Ass^s. till such work is so finishd if required by W. D. his Ex^s. Adm^s. or Ass^s.

“W. D. having been a great looser by J. J. S. under a former Agreement, it is now agreed that W. D. his Ex^s. Adm^s. or Ass^s. shall have the liberty to pay J. J. S. for his Work either by the day at four shillings p^r day of 10 hours (to be the same hours which other Workmen work for a day from time to time in the Porcⁿ. Manufactory at Derby) or by the piece as aftermentiond at their option when any piece of Work shall be finished.

“The prizes for each Male or Female Human Figure to be Modeld by J. J. S. from any sketch either on paper or in Clay &c. as highly finished as the Russian Shepherd Group—Palemon & Lavinia Group—Blind Beggar & Daughter D^o. modeld for W. D. by J. J. S. some time since to be

						£	s.	d.
If	4	Inches high		& not exceding	5 In.		6	6
„	5	„		„	6 „		8	0
„	6	„		„	7 „		11	6
„	7	„		„	8 „		13	6
„	8	„		„	9 „		16	0
„	9	„		„	10 „		18	6
„	10	„		„	11 „	1	1	0
„	11	„		„	12 „	1	4	0
„	12	„		„	13 „	1	8	0
„	13	„		„	14 „	1	13	0
„	14	„		and so on in proportion.
„	15	„
„	16	„
„	17	„
„	18	„
Intermediate Sizes in proportion.

“J. J. S. to go to Derby at his own expence & to begin work in 28 Days after his signing this Engagement. In the mean time Mr. Lygo to pay him from the Time he signs this Agreem^t. 5/- p^r. Week to be repaid by J. J. S. by Weekly Stoppages of Eight Shillings.

“J. J. S. in all other particulars to work at & be subject to the same rules, orders, & regulations as the rest of the Workmen of the Manufactory at Derby.

“All Sketches to be made whether in Clay or on paper, &c., under the direction of Mr. D. his Ex^s.] Adm^s. or Ass^s]. by the day without limitation of time. J. J. S. to do the best he can in this particular to dispatch business.

“J. J. S. & W. D. agree hereby to execute regular articles of agreements conformable to the above specified heads so soon as the same can conveniently be prepared, under the Penelty of One Hundred Pounds. Signd this 10^th day of Jan^y 1795.

“SPENGLER

“Witness—Joseph Lygo.”

“Modeler.

In a letter dated February 3, 1795, it is said “Spangler will set off for Derby tomorrow, he intends walking as it will not be so expensive and he may as well be walking to Derby as stay here doing nothing.” How long he remained in Derby after this I have not ascertained but as Mr. Duesbury died the following year, and things went very awkwardly, it is probable he did not long remain.

Pierre Stephan, another Frenchman, was for some years a modeller and china maker at Derby, and produced many lovely groups and single figures. He removed to Jackfield, where he commenced a small pot-works, producing not only earthenware, but encaustic tiles. His son, Mr. Peter Stephan, is, at the time I write, a skilled modeller at the Coalport China Works. (See page 305, vol. I.) By articles of agreement entered into on the 17th September, 1770, “between Peter Stephane of Derby in the County of Derby, Modeler and China or Porcelaine Repairer of the one part and William Duesbury of the same place China or Porcelain Manufacturer of the other part” he binds himself for three years “to employ himself in the art of Modelling and Repairing China or Porcelaine Ware” at £2 12s. 6d. per week. The agreement is signed “Pierre Stephan” and “William Duesbury,” and is attested by “Constantine Smith,” “Friederick Decuber,” and “Thos. Morgan, Junr.”—names which will be found noticed elsewhere. In 1795 Stephan was at Shelton, and while there continued to model for and send moulds to Mr. Duesbury.

Fidele Duvivier, a Frenchman, entered into an engagement with the elder Mr. Duesbury in 1769. The agreement (duly signed by both Duesbury and Duvivier, and attested by “John Bosher” and “S. Horrocks,”) is dated 31st October, 1769, and is “between Fidelle Duvivier of the borough of Derby China or Porcelain Painter,” and “William Duesbury of the same place China or Porcelain Manufacturer,” and covenants that the former shall, for four years from that date, “diligently and faithfully according to the best and utmost of his skill and knowledge, exercise and employ himself in the Art of Painting China or Porcelain Ware,” for the weekly wages of 24s.; Mr. Duesbury agreeing, at the end of that time, to give him an additional five guineas “in case he shall merit the same.” He became the principal flower painter at the Derby Works, and his style was much followed by the later painters. Duvivier remained some years at Derby, and then left, being afterwards employed at Wedgwood’s and various other places. In 1790, being then employed at the New Hall Works (which see), he wrote the following letter to the then Mr. Duesbury, and in consequence, I believe, he returned for a time to Derby:—“Hanley green, the 1 novebr 1790, Mr. Dousbery, Sir,—take the liberty Adressing you with a few lines, as mine Engegement in the new Hal Porcelaine manufatory is Expierd, and the propriotors do not intend to do much more in the fine line of Painting, therefor think of Settling in new Castle under lime being engag’d to teech Drowing in the Boarding School at that place, one School I have at Stone, so as to have only three days to Spare in the week for Painting, wich time Could wish to be employ’d by you preferable to eany other fabricque, because you like and understand good work, as am inform’d, my painting now to watt I did for your father is quit diferent but without flatering my Self, Hope to give you Satisfaction, in Case you Schould like to inploy me, Sir,—your anser will much oblige your Humble Servant, Duvivier P.S. the conveyance would be much in fevoir for to Send the ware to and from as ther is a waggon Every week from darby to new Castle”

William J. Coffee, a modeller, who “made his mark” at Derby, was the son of William Coffee, who worked either at Hempel’s or Triquet’s pottery at Chelsea, and afterwards entered into domestic service in a gentleman’s family. Coffee was, I believe, brought up to some branch of the business with his father at these Chelsea works, and was afterwards employed at Coade’s Lambeth Pottery.[21] He first came down to Derby, I believe, about the year 1791, and agreements were entered into between him and Mr. Duesbury. I believe he at first came as a kiln-man. He does not, as a modeller, seem to have made much head-way at first, and even in 1794 the London agent wrote, “I do not much admire Mr. Coffee’s modelling from what I have yet seen. The figure No. 359 is one of the most stupid looking things I ever saw, and the figure of Apollo in group No. 379 is very vulgar about the bosom, for sure never such bubbys was seen and so much exposed—the design is pretty enough.” Soon after this a fresh agreement was entered into as to prices to be paid for figures according to size by the piece, or at day’s wages; Mr. Duesbury covenanting to have the option of paying him after the rate of 3s. 6d. per day for each day of 10 hours that he works at the manufactory, “or at the rate of 7s. for any single human figure of 6 inches high, whether standing or in any other action, which if standing would be 6 inches high; and that all figures shall be roughed out naked in correct proportions before draped;” three pence for every half inch additional in height being paid, and so on. On the 30th of January, 1795, a fresh agreement was entered into:—“Memorandum—Whereas Heads of an Agreement between Wm. Coffee and Wm. Duesbury were Executed by W. C. and W. D. wherein 6 Months notice was agreed upon between them when either wished to close the Agreement—It is hereby agreed between W. D. and W. C. that the said Agreement shall be cancell’d, and this Agreement stand in its place viz—W. C. shall Modell for W. D. untill the 6th of July next at the prizes which shall be paid by W. D. to the Modeller he has now engaged to come down who is to have 4s. pr. day for such work as he shall do by the day and various prizes by the piece in proportion to their value when he works by the piece in lieu of by the day—NB—This Agreement is not to be construed to imploy that W. D. has agreed to raise W. C.’s wages by the day above 3s. 6d. when he shall chuse to imploy W. C. by the day in preferance to his working by the piece—Signed this 30th of Jany. 1795. NB—W. C. remarks, that he would wish to know before he begins any piece of work whether the said work is to be Executed by him by the day or by the piece, W. D. certifies by this proviso that such was always his intention—W. Coffee, W. Duesbury, Witness, Charles King.”

In the same year Coffee left Derby, and engaged himself with Sir Nigel Gresley, Bart., and Mr. Adderley, at their china works at Burton-on-Trent,[22] and immediately wrote as follows to Mr. Duesbury:—“Burton on Trent J 4 1795, Sir,—My being your Debtor makes it my Duty to inform you immediately of my arrival here and likewise of my engagement with Sir Nigel Gresley and Mr Adderley lest you should suppose that I had forgot the Obligation I lie under to you—but am extremely sorry to understand that you meant to injure me respecting my Business as that would totally deprive my honest intention of paying you, the mode of which I shall be happy to submit to your own satisfaction when I wait on you, I intend as soon as possible.—I am sir your h servant, W. Coffee.” To this Mr. Duesbury returned a manly letter, denying the imputation, asking for the name of Coffee’s informant, and assuring him that he has only to make the mode of repayment quite convenient to himself. In the same year the father of Coffee thus wrote:—“London Sepr 9th 1795, Sir,—My Son since He left you has been at Work near your Manufactory for Sir Nigel Gresley which He says He inform’d you of at the time—having finished all there was to do there He is now return’d to London and out of Employ. As I was very sorry for his leaving you and severely reflected on Him for it—He now assures me that He shou’d be extremely happy to serve you again—for a constancy if you thought proper under an Article for a Term of Years—at the lower rate of 18 or 17 Shillings pr week—He gave Sir Nigel the greatest satisaction both in His behaviour and in His Business—as a proof of which Sir Nigel has offer’d to give Him the best of Characters at any time it shou’d be requir’d of Him—therefore Sir you cou’d be satisfied in that respect at any time you pleas’d—hoping whatever may have happen’d at any time disagreeable your goodness will forget—Your condescention in favouring me with an Answer directly will much oblige Sir Your most humble Servant William Coffee P.S. He is wiling to repair or do what work you think proper. I will attend Mr Ligo hopeing your kind Answer.” The result was that Coffee returned to Derby; worked at the china factory as of old; and afterwards commenced business on his own account in Derby. Here he produced terra-cotta figures of considerable merit and in tolerable variety. Of these, a wolf, a lion, a dog, and others are strikingly good. He stamped his productions with his name, “W. COFFEE, DERBY,” and occasionally the number, or the date. He also gave lessons in modelling, and turned his attention to oil-painting and sculpture. His statue of Æsculapius, on the roof of the Infirmary at Derby, was his principal work. It was executed in or about 1810.

Richard Askew was employed at the Chelsea works when taken to by Duesbury, and came from there to Derby in 1772. His name occurs regularly in the “weekly bills” at Chelsea where he received 4s. 2d. a-day wages. The following is an account for extra work done by him:—

Recid. £2 2s.

April the 30, 1771.

Richard Askew.

Robert Askew, his son, was employed at Derby in 1772, and in that year, along with John Laurence, absconded from his employment, and was advertised three different times in the Birmingham newspapers. In 1794 Askew, “enamel painter of Birmingham,” was living in Birmingham (at 8, Friday Street), and on the 2nd of August an agreement was drawn up, by which he bound himself “to work by the piece in lieu of the day, and at prizes mentioned in the ajoining list;” the subjects to be executed in the best manner in his power, and not agreeable to the coffee cans already executed, viz., Duke of York, King and Queen of France, and Spinning Wheel, &c., but in quality and effect equal to the Cupids on two flower pots by James Banford having R. Askew’s name written upon them (to prevent a mistake in alluding to them) in ink, subscribed this day in presence of Mr. C. King. The list of prices by the piece, attached to the draft of the agreement, is of great interest, but too long to insert. The coffee cans here named were some then recently painted by Askew, and as the bill for them contains many curious items and much valuable information on the Art-productions of that day, I give it entire. This bill, and many others which are still extant, show that Askew was the principal figure-painter employed at the Derby China Works. It is headed, “Mr. Wilm. Duesbury, Deptur to Rich^d. Askew, July 1794.”

William Billingsley, whose name is more intimately mixed up with the history of porcelain than most of his contemporaries, was a china painter of unusual excellence, and a practical maker as well. Like many another man of genius, he was, however, unstable and erratic in his movements; but to this very quality we are indebted for the establishment of more than one eminent manufactory. To him and his practical skill is due the establishment of china-works at Pinxton, at Mansfield, at Nantgarw, and at Swansea, and to some extent the improvement of the ware at Coalport and at Worcester, as well as much of the high class of decoration at the old Derby Works; and he has thus “left his mark” on the history of Ceramic Art. Billingsley was a man of great genius, of extraordinary talent, of extreme ability as an artist, and of skill as a practical potter; but wanting stability, he became but a living illustration of the adage which says “a rolling stone gathers no moss.” He settled only for a very short time anywhere before he again moved; but wherever he did remain, if only for a short time, he left the impress of his name and the most indisputable evidence of his skill behind him. William Billingsley was the eldest son of William and Mary Billingsley, of the parish of St. Alkmund, Derby. He was baptized in that church on the 12th of October, 1758. The following is the entry of his birth:—“1758, Oct. 12, Baptized, William, the son of—Billingsley and—his wife.” Other entries in the register show that the names of his parents were “William” and “Mary.” His father died in March, 1770, when he was only twelve years of age.[23] Four years afterwards, on the 26th of September, 1774, when sixteen years of age, he was bound apprentice to William Duesbury. In the indenture he is described as “William Billingsley, son of Mary Billingsley, of Derby, in the county of Derby,” and he is bound apprentice for five years to “William Duesbury, of Derby aforesaid, China or Porcelain Maker,” to “learn the Art of Painting upon China or Porcelain Ware.” He was to receive as wages five shillings per week for the whole time of his servitude; not an advancing scale year by year as was usual. The indenture is signed by “William Billingsley,” “Mary Billingsley,” and “Wm. Duesbury,” in the presence of “Wm. Clarke.” To Mr. Duesbury he served the full time of his apprenticeship, during which time he received considerable instruction as a painter, from Zachariah Boreman,[24] one of the best artists of the old Chelsea Works, who had removed with those works to Derby. On the 4th of November, 1780, William Billingsley, then just over twenty-two years of age, married, at St. Alkmund’s Church, Derby, Sarah Rigley, of that parish, by whom he had several children, three of whom were baptised at St. Alkmund’s Church. On the expiration of his apprenticeship, William Billingsley continued in the service of Mr. Duesbury, and by his extreme skill as a flower-painter became the best artist in that line of decoration. In 1785, Mr. Duesbury died; and the business was carried on by his son, with whom Billingsley and other artists remained for some years. Soon after this time some correspondence having taken place between Mr. Duesbury and Mr. Coke concerning the properties of a bed of clay at Pinxton, in Derbyshire, which it was considered would be useful for the manufacture of china, trials were made, which ultimately resulted in Billingsley making an arrangement with Mr. Coke for the establishment of a manufactory at that place (see [Pinxton]).

Billingsley’s name frequently occurs in papers and memoranda relating to the Derby China Works in my possession, and certain patterns and designs in the old pattern-books of the works are distinguished as “Billingsley’s flowers.” As it is highly interesting to know what artists and other principal “hands” were employed at the same time as, and worked along with, William Billingsley, I give the following copy of a document relating to the keeping of the men employed on one part of the works from entering any other part:—“Derby China Manufactory, 23rd Nov., 1787. If any person in Future, either within the working Hours or at any other time, is seen or discover’d in the Rooms, Kilns, Apartments, or other Premises of the other (not having any proper Business relative to his particular Occupation there) he will positively be fined the sum of five Shillings. The Fines (if any are incur’d) to be put into the Box of Donations at pay time, on the Saturday after the detection.

• “J. Duesbury.
• Boreman.
• Smith.
• Billingsley.
• Stables.
• Jno. Yates.
• Wm. do.
• Longdon.
• Tayler.
• Blood.
• Cooper.
• Butler.
• Soar.
• Dickinson.
• Kay.
• Fogg.
• Webster.
• Clarke.
• Barton.
• Mason.
• M. do.
• Atkins.
• Wedgwood.
• Ash.
• Morledge.
• Watthews.
• Lawrence.
• Whitaker.
• Porter.
• T. Moore.
• Shipley.
• B. Orme.
• ——-[26]
• Wells.
• Keen.
• Parish.
• Spooner.
• Son.
• Wardle.
• Rogers.
• Musgrove.
• Morrell.
• Robins.
• Horsley.
• Green.
• Lovegrove.
• Whitiall.
• G. Holmes.
• Hill.
• Farnsworth.
• Whitaker.
• Laurance.
• Atkins.
• Morledge.
• Wedgwood.
• Ash.
• Wathews.
• Ball.
• Thos. Soare.[27]
• Jos. Stables.
• Wm. Cooper.
• Jno. Yates.
• Wm. Billingsley.
• Jno. Blood.
• Wm. Yates.
• Wm. Longdon.
• Wm. Taylor.
• Jno. Buttler.
• Wm. Smith.
• Z. Boreman.”

Again, in 1788:—

“In November last notice was given that persons of one branch of the manufactory were not to go into the premises of the other, unless they had real business there relative to theire particular occupation, notwithstanding which the practice is still by some Individuals continued. Notice is therefore hereby finally given, that if any person in future (having received this Notice) shall intrude themselves contrary to this injunction they will positively be fined 5 shillings.

“Sept. 24th, 88.

• “Boreman.
• Billingsley.
• Jno. Yates.
• Wm. do.
• Taylor.
• Smith.
• Borton.
• T. Rogers.
• T. Simes.
• Webster.
• Soare.
• Stables.
• Cooper.
• Josph. Doe.
• Longdon.
• Blood.
• Buttler.
• Key.
• Fogg.
• Clarke.
• Dickinson.
• M. Mason.
• Shirley, Arthr.”

The following is also an interesting document, signed by Billingsley along with other artists:—“From the many injuries done to the trade by employing Women in Painting of China, &c., Particularly not being employ’d in London in any Painting or Gilding Shop whatsoever, we hope you will not withstand Granting us the favour of their not being employ’d here.

• “Edwd. Withers.
• Samuel Keys.
• Jno. Brown.
• Wm. Cooper.
• Wm. Longdon.
• Wm. Yates.
• Thos. Rogers.
• Benj. Brocklesby.
• Jos. Stables.
• Billingsley.
• Soare.
• Jno. Yates.
• Wm. Taylor.”

In this matter of opposition to the employment of women Billingsley seems, later on, to have relented, as will be seen by the following very nice letter from Bernice Banford, one of the female painters employed, and wife of one of the men:—“Sir, I hope you will excuse me for takeing the liberty to trouble you again, as my motive for writeing is to Return you thanks for the Favour you was pleased to confer in allowing me some work. I have only painted 4 Dozen and 3 plates, at 3d. each, which I believe is Charged Right, but know not whether I am so happy to merit your approbation in the Performance. Mr. John Duesbury would have sent me more work, but Mr. Banford Declin’d it till your return, as all the men (Mr. Bilinsley and Mr. Complin Excepted) treated him in a very unbecoming manner, and even threaten’d him if the work was continu’d to me, which would at this time be of the greatest service to my Family, and should be very happy to contribute to its support. Pardon me, Sir, if I presume to say I am certain one word from you would ease their Doubts and effectually silence them. I am, Sir, with the greatest Respect, your Obliged, Humble Servt., Bernice Banford.—March ye 3.”

Billingsley appears to have been paid from about £1 10s. to £2 per week at the Derby China Works, and several of his accounts and receipts are in my possession. In one of these (September 23rd, 1793), the balance due to him being £34 7s. 2d., he asks for “a draft on London for £30 at twenty-one days’ date,” on account, as usual, and acknowledges to having “lost some little time, which in some degree differs from our agreement, but it has been a matter of necessity, not choice;” and states that as he shall “in the course of a fortnight quit the public business,”—he at this time, as I gather, being landlord of a public-house (the “Nottingham Arms” in Bridgegate, Derby)—he shall be able to make up the time so lost. Again, receipts in 1793–4–5, show that he was still at that time in Mr. Duesbury’s employ in Derby. It may be well, before proceeding further, to say that, from a curious draft of an order to the painters employed at the Derby China Works, in my own possession, William Billingsley’s number which he was supposed from that time (not long before he left) to mark on such pieces as he painted was 7. The document is so curious, and will be so interesting to collectors, that I give it entire. It is as follows, and is in the second William Duesbury’s own handwriting:—

“Every Painter to mark underneath each Article he may finish, the number corresponding to his name, and any other mark which may be required, in such manner as he may be directed (viz.):—

The Painter in fine blue, and in laying grounds to use for his mark the like colours.

“On omission of the above Injunctions, for the first Offence (after this public notice), the person so offending shall forfeit to the Box which contains donations for the Manufactory at large, one-fourth of the value of the Article or Articles found to be deficient in marking; for the second, one-half of the value; and for the third, the whole of the value, and discharged the Manufactory. And if any Painter is found working at any hour contrary to those already appointed for Business, without Permission or Orders, such person shall, for the first offence forfeit to the Box 6d.; for the second, 1s.; for the third, 2s., and so on, doubling each time.”

In 1795 Billingsley determined upon bringing his connection with the Derby China Works to an end, and for that purpose gave notice to his employer, Mr. Duesbury. Knowing how ill he could be spared from the decorative part of the manufactory, his employer endeavoured to retain his services, and, not unnaturally, put various obstacles in the way of his leaving Billingsley; however seems to have determined on the removal, and much to his credit that that removal should be an honourable one. The following letter shows his determination:—

“Sir,—From the circumstance that occurr’d when I was last in Conversation with you, I am induc’d to take this mode of informing you of my opinion on the subject then in question. My opinion is, that I have fulfill’d the warning[28] I gave (my reasons in support of which it is not necessary to advance at this time). But as I am inform’d that you believe I have some further time to work for you before the Warning is fulfill’d—namely, to make up the time I lost in the six months I was under warning, and as it is my wish to leave no ground for dissatisfaction, I take this opportunity of informing you that I am willing to come and Work that time according to that opinion of the case. If the foregoing is according to your opinion and desire, your being so kind as to send me advise to that effect at any time in the course of a week, and likewise the time I have to work according to the rule and opinion above stated, I will attend your works accordingly. If I do not hear from you in the course of the time above stated, I must then conclude that you are satisfy’d, and the information that I have receiv’d is without foundation. I am, Sir, your Humble Serv., Wm. Billingsley.—Derby, Oct. 14, 1796.”

Shortly before this time Mr. Joseph Lygo, the London agent and manager of the business of the Derby China Works, wrote to his employer, Mr. Duesbury:—“I hope you will be able to make a bargain with Mr. Billingsley for him to continue with you, for it will be a great loss to lose such a hand, and not only that, but his going into another factory will put them in the way of doing flowers in the same way, which they are at present entirely ignorant of.” Despite all this, Billingsley left the Derby China Works, where he had been apprenticed, and in which he had worked for twenty-two years, and in 1796 commenced, for or with Mr. Coke, a small manufactory at Pinxton, near Alfreton. Here his practical skill stood him in good service, and the experiments he had long tried in china bodies were brought to bear satisfactory results. He succeeded in producing a granular body (the fracture having much the appearance of fine loaf-sugar), very soft, but of extreme beauty. Here Billingsley remained for about four years only, removing in 1800 to Mansfield, where he started a small concern, which he continued for about three or four years longer. Having once become unsettled by his removal from Derby, Billingsley does not appear ever afterwards to have rested long in any one place. In 1804 he is stated to have commenced, or joined, some small china works at Torksey in Lincolnshire; and a few years later he appears to have started a china manufactory at Wirksworth in Derbyshire—no doubt being in part actuated in locating himself there through the fact of the existence of a beautiful white clay being found in connection with the lead mines at Brassington and other places in its neighbourhood. In 1811 Billingsley removed to Worcester, where he engaged himself with Messrs. Flight and Barr, of the Worcester China Works. Here, as in some of his other migrations, he was accompanied by his son-in-law, George Walker, the husband of his daughter Sarah. Of the engagement of these two at Worcester, Mr. Binns says: “In 1811, Billingsley, the Derby artist, came to Worcester. As a clever flower-painter, he was no doubt an acquisition, but that does not appear to have been the object of his visit. Billingsley knew something of making porcelain, and was possessed of a receipt which there is no doubt he valued very highly. From Messrs. Flight and Barr’s letter to Mr. Dillwyn, it would appear that he had endeavoured to introduce this special body at Worcester, but we do not think he was allowed to interfere to any extent in the manufacturing department. Walker, Billingsley’s companion and son-in-law, introduced a more important invention to the Worcester Works in the reverberating enamel kiln. These kilns had been in use in London and at Derby, but were now for the first time built at Worcester. Up to this time iron muffles were used, but from their arrangement requiring a preparatory kiln or muffle, after the same manner as the annealing oven of a glass-house, they were most objectionable, the ware having to be removed from one to the other whilst very hot. Previous to this iron muffle, a more original muffle still was used. The description given to us quite accords with the engraving in Biancourt, with the exception of the arrangement of the fire. In the old Worcester kilns the space between the bricks and the iron case was filled with small pieces of charcoal, and when the iron cover was finally placed, it was also covered with charcoal; the fire was then applied to the centre of the cover, and gradually extended all over and down the sides until it got to the bottom; the object of this arrangement was to get an equal heat all over, which would not have been the case had the bottom been heated first. The method of building these new enamel kilns was kept as a great secret, Walker always working by night. He built them both for Messrs. Flight and Barr and Messrs. Chamberlain.” After remaining two years only at Worcester, in 1813 Billingsley and Walker (the former under a name he had for cogent reasons assumed—that of Beeley, this name being a contraction of his own B[illings]ley, or B’ley, otherwise Beeley) left that place and went to Nantgarw, a small, out-of-the-way village in Glamorganshire, near Pontypridd, where they established themselves and commenced making china. From here they sent up a specimen of their ware to Government,[29] to show their special body, and to seek Government aid; and the Board of Trade, through Sir Joseph Banks, requested Mr. Dillwyn, of the Swansea pot-works, to visit Nantgarw and report on the quality of the ware. This visit of Mr. Dillwyn’s resulted in his entering into an arrangement with Billingsley and Walker to transfer themselves and their works to Swansea, where he built a small manufactory for them, closely adjoining his other works. Not long after this Mr. Dillwyn received a notice from Messrs. Flight and Barr, of Worcester, informing him that Billingsley and Walker “had clandestinely left their service,” and warning him not to employ them. This occurred, I believe, in about two years from the time of founding the Swansea China Works, and on Mr. Dillwyn being assured by Messrs. Flight and Barr that china with the granulated body could not be made to be commercially successful, he gave up the manufacture, and dismissed Billingsley and Walker, who then at once returned to Nantgarw, where they resumed their manufacture of china, and produced many beautiful services and pieces, which now fetch remarkably high prices. The productions of this small manufactory having found their way into some of the best London dealers’ hands, Mr. Rose, of the Coalport China Works, feeling that the Nantgarw trade, if allowed to continue, would seriously affect his business, went over to Nantgarw, and after some negotiation, made a permanent engagement with Billingsley and Walker, and bought up from them at once their stock, their moulds, and their receipt for the body, and removed them and all their belongings (as he did also those of Swansea) to Coalport. Thus the manufacture of Nantgarw porcelain, just as it was approaching perfection and becoming known, was, unfortunately, at once and for ever closed.

William Billingsley remained at Coalport[30]—living in a small cottage a short distance on the Shiffnal Road—for the rest of his days, which, however, were but few in number. In 1827 or 1828 (I am uncertain which), this remarkable man—one of the most remarkable in the whole line of English potters, and one to whose artistic genius the exquisite decorations of some of the Derby and of the Worcester productions are indebted, and to whose practical skill and life-long energies so many important factories owed their origin—passed away in complete obscurity and in much greater poverty than his talents deserved.

George Walker, after the death of William Billingsley, removed with his family to America, where he founded and built a manufactory in New Troy, which he called “Temperance Hill Pottery,” at which he and his family were, I am enabled to add from reliable information, working to great advantage a few years ago, and where, I believe, they still continue.

Jonathan Wedgwood, “of the Borough of Derby, China or Porcelain Repairer or Thrower,” was employed for some time at the Derby Works. On the 2nd of December, 1772, articles of agreement[31] were drawn up between him and William Duesbury, by which he was to serve Mr. Duesbury for three years “in the Arts of Repairing or Throwing China or Porcelain Ware,” at the weekly wages of fourteen shillings “for every whole week” he “shall work according to the usual hours of Repairing at the said Wm Duesbury’s Manufactory in Derby aforesaid.” In the contested election of 1776, a John Wedgwood, son of William Wedgwood, of St. Peter’s Parish, Derby, claimed, through apprenticeship, to be admitted and vote as a freeman, and before the Committee of the House of Commons, was accordingly admitted. By the registers of St. Alkmund’s, Derby, it appears that a Jonathan Wedgwood was married on the 12th November, 1785—thirteen years after the date of this agreement—to Mary Stenson; and that three years before this time, 22nd Sept. 1782, an Amy Wedgwood was married to Abijah Tyrrell, both of that parish. The probability is that the Jonathan Wedgwood whose agreement I have quoted was born at Ellenborough in 1735; that he migrated to Burslem (where one of his children was born in 1757), and afterwards to Derby; and the Jonathan and Amy, whose marriages are noted, were his son and daughter. His name appears as one of the workmen in 1787.

Other artists, &c., were as follows:—

John Ash, a thrower and presser in 1794.

Joseph Bancroft, who belonged to the old Derbyshire family of Bancroft, of Swarkestone and elsewhere, was apprenticed at the Derby Works, and became a proficient in painting flowers, birds, insects, and shells. He did not remain long after the expiration of his apprenticeship, but worked for Copelands and others, and lastly for Minton’s, in whose employ he died.

James Banford, of London, a clever painter, was employed from 1790 till 1795. He removed from London to Derby in the middle of 1790, his wife, Bernice Banford, and family following him in August of that year. He appears, from penitent letters, to have been, like many of the other hands, addicted to drinking, and to have been of improvident habits. In one of his letters (Feb. 1, 1794) he says, “I cannot help informing you that I have been dissatisfied some time at the difference of wages between Mr. Boreman and self. I am not conceited of my work, but every man knows what he is capable of doing, and in any line of painting china except landscapes, I have the advantage of Mr. B. Cannot help observing that in the landscape line, when there is anything minute or requires neatness, my optic nerves are to be strained for 18s. pr week less, and tim’d to ten hours each day at the manufactory.”

Bernice Banford, wife of James Banford, china painter, was also employed as a painter, but at her own house or lodgings. She had a somewhat unsteady husband and a family to look after, and seems to have been a great help to them. Here is her first letter, asking for work, showing that she had been employed at Wedgwood’s works in London; and another letter by her, when objection was taken to her being so employed, is given on page 103. “S^ir, I beg pardon for addressing you on a Subject which nesessety oblidge’s me to which is to Solicit the favour of a little work in the painting way at home, I was brought up to the business at Mr. Wedgwoods manufactory in London, and flatter my Self I should be able to do the Slightest paterns on China. I would S^ir very willinly Contribute any thing towards the Suport of my family, and to assist my Husband to pay Some Debts which we owe in Derby, which if I Should be so happy to obtain Such a favour I Doubt not but we Should be soon able to Effect and do better for our Family than at present. if S^ir you would please to take it into Consideration by Permiting me a little work, you would for Ever oblidge, S^ir your Hume Sert, Bernice Banford.”

W. Barker, formerly of London, was employed between six and seven years at the Derby Works, and left them in March, 1795.

Richard Barton, the manager at Chelsea (it is he who makes out all the “weekly bills” and receives and pays) was a modeller. In 1773 “Barton, modling 2 small antiquit vauses, £1 1s.”

John Blood was an apprentice at the Derby works, and became a clever painter.

Robert Blore, a late apprentice at the Derby works, afterwards for a time produced on his own account small figures, vases, &c., at a small place in Bridge Gate; he removed into Staffordshire.

Zachariah Boreman, one of the old Chelsea painters, employed by Spremont, and afterwards by Duesbury, and came down to Derby on the closing of those works, was for some time employed. In 1784 he left Derby and returned to London; but about 1794 fresh articles of agreement were entered into, and a supplemental agreement drawn up same day covenanted that “wherever three shillings and sixpence per day occurs in the aforesaid agreement, the words ‘seven shillings’ shall be inserted in Z Boreman’s agreement, when regularly executed on stamps.” He was to employ himself in painting, and in improving the enamel colours, &c. He is said to have died in London in 1810.

R. B. Bowman, of Goswell Street, London, was engaged by articles of agreement, dated May 6th, 1793, to come down to Derby, and agreed to be there in three weeks from the 12th of that month. A week afterwards, however, he begged to have the agreement cancelled, as he had had “a beneficial offer in London, in the engraving branch,” at 30s. a week.

George Bradbury, son of William Bradbury, of Little Chester, Labourer, was bound apprentice on the 10th of March, 1765, for seven years, to “William Duesbury of Derby aforesaid (altered by the pen to “in the said county”) China or Porcelain Maker,” “to learn the Art of Repairing China or Porcelain Ware.” (The indenture is printed on a skin of parchment; the name “William Duesbury, of Derby, China or Porcelain    ,” being printed with the rest, and a blank left for writing in “maker,” “painter,” or the like.)

Thomas Brentnall, a flower-painter.

John Brewer, an artist of repute in London, who had previously, as early as 1782, been employed by Mr. Duesbury, was engaged by him in 1795, and removed with his family to Derby. He was engaged to paint figures, animals, landscapes, and flowers by the piece, a schedule of prices being drawn up for that purpose; and to be assured that he should not have less than a guinea and a half a week for the first year, and two guineas afterwards. Until his engagement with Mr. Duesbury he had not painted on china, and therefore had to make himself acquainted with the art after his arrival. Brewer later on gave lessons in drawing in Derby, and in 1811 held an exhibition of his drawings:—

“Mr. Brewer most respectfully informs the Nobility, Gentry, Clergy, and others in Derby and its vicinity, that he has arranged for their inspection his Specimens of Water-colour Paintings as an Exhibition, consisting of more than two hundred different Subjects, many of them quite new, and the whole designed and painted by himself, which he hopes during the interval of time not given to the festival will afford an agreeable change of amusement. May be viewed from 8 in the morning until dark at his house near St. Mary’s Bridge, Bridge Gate, Derby. Admittance—Ladies and Gentlemen 1s., Children half price. Mr. Brewer’s pupils free, also purchasers of Drawings.”

Robert Brewer is stated to have been a brother to John Brewer. He was a pupil of Paul Sanby. On leaving the Derby works he commenced practising as a drawing master, and died in 1857.

Benjamin Brocklesby, son of John Brocklesby, of Derby, labourer, was apprenticed, for seven years, on the 16th of September, 1783, to learn “the Art or Business of Painting Porcelain or China Ware.” On the 24th of August, 1787 (Mr. Duesbury, to whom he had been apprenticed, having died on the 30th October, 1786) he absconded, and on the 13th January, 1789, a warrant was issued for his apprehension, and endorsed to be executed in Middlesex and Westminster.

George Broughton, a painter.

Thomas Broughton, painter, 1776.

Joseph Bullock, son of Joseph Bullock, of the borough of Derby, Framework Knitter, was bound apprentice on the 23rd September, 1765, by the same printed indentures “to learn the Art of Painting upon China or Porcelain ware.”

Sebastian Clais, a Frenchman, was employed as a painter about 1772–9.

James Clarke, a painter and gilder, was apprenticed, and for nearly 30 years remained, at the works.

William Cleavey was also an apprentice, and became a flower-painter.

George Cocker, born in Derby in 1794, was apprenticed at the Derby Works about 1808, as a figure maker, and continued to work there till 1817, when he removed to Coalport, where he is said to have been much employed in making raised flowers. He next, in connection with two partners, also workmen, commenced a small manufactory at Jackfield, which, however, was closed in a few months. He then got employment at the Worcester works, and in 1821 returned to Derby and again worked at the Derby China Works till 1826. In that year he left, and in partnership with another of the “hands,” Thomas Whitaker, commenced a china manufactory in Friar Gate, Derby, under the style of “Cocker and Whitaker.” The following is the announcement of the opening of these works:—

“DERBY.—NEW CHINA WORKS, For the Manufacture of Porcelain Figures, Ornaments, &c.—MESSRS. COCKER and WHITAKER beg most respectfully to inform the nobility, gentry, and the public, that they have commenced the above business in Friar Gate, Derby, where they manufacture, and have now ready for inspection, and sale, a numerous assortment of Goods in Biscuit and Enamel, such as they hope will be found not inferior to anything of the kind at present produced in this kingdom.

“Messrs. C. and W. have also a variety of TEA and DESSERT SERVICES of modern and approved patterns; and by arrangements already made, and a strict attention to the orders with which they may be favoured, they hope to obtain the honor of that patronage they now venture to solicit, and which it will ever be their most earnest endeavour to merit.

“N.B.—Ladies or Gentlemen may have Figures, Ornaments, &c. executed from models or drawings of their own.

“Friar Gate, Derby, Feb. 28, 1826.”

Their place of business was at the bottom of Friar Gate, near St. Werburgh’s church; Cocker living on the opposite side of the street, a little higher up, where he erected a kiln and all the necessary appliances. The business, however, did not answer well; the partnership with Whitaker was terminated; and in 1840 Cocker removed with his family to London. Here, in Chenies Street, Tottenham Court Road, he carried on his business of china figure making, and had a small shop in Regent’s Quadrant for their sale. This again not answering, he, in 1853, obtained an engagement with Messrs. Minton and removed to Stoke-upon-Trent, where he died, at the age of 74, in 1868, His figures and busts, of which he produced a goodly variety, were of small size, and were produced both in biscuit and painted. They were very clever and meritorious. He also made, rather extensively, as they met a ready sale, small baskets of beautifully-formed raised flowers; and brooches and other trinkets in the same way. In these he was assisted by his sons, daughters, and nephew. Groups of animals were also produced.

George Complin was one of the most noted painters at the works, many of his landscapes being of high character. He must have been an old man in 1794, for in one of his letters (Sept. 18) of that year he says, “I think my hair admits of more respect.” In the same letter he speaks of his employment, “the variety I do, and the variableness of the work.”

William Cooper was a clever flower painter, 1770–76.

William Cooper, son of Sarah Cooper, of Derby, was apprenticed for seven years on the 1st of January, 1777, to learn the “Art of Painting upon China or Porcelain Ware.” His father also, I believe, had been employed at the works about 1770, to his death, in 1776.

William Corden, born at Ashbourne, 28th Nov. 1797, and was apprenticed to the Derby China Works in 1811. He remained some time after the conclusion of his apprenticeship, and then commenced as a miniature and portrait painter. In 1829 he was employed in painting portraits at Windsor Castle, and from that time continued to receive royal commissions. In 1843 he was employed to paint by the Queen, and in the following year was sent by the Prince Consort to the Castle of Rosenau, in Coburg, to copy family portraits for him. He died at Nottingham, 18th June 1867. A workman named Corden was also connected with the Liverpool pot-works.

William Cotton, a painter of landscapes and rural scenes, in the early part of this century.

William Cresswell, a flower-painter.

J. Deare was a modeller of considerable note, in London, and was employed by Duesbury to model various groups and figures in 1784.

William Dexter, a fruit, flower, and bird painter; became a noted enamel painter and draughtsman. He died in 1860, and his wife—Mrs. Dexter—was the celebrated costume lecturer on “Bloomerism.”

Richard Dodson, a clever painter of birds, was the son of William Dodson, one of the late foremen.

William Dixon, a painter of humorous figure subjects.

John Duesbury, overlooker and private timekeeper.

Elin was a painter and gilder from 1786 to 1795.

J. Farnsworth was an apprentice, and remained when out of his time. He died in 1822.

John Frost, son of William Frost, of Nottingham, was bound apprentice to Edward Phillips, “China or Porcelain Painter,” on the 16th of April, for seven years, “to learn the art of Painting upon Porcelain ware,” and on the 25th of February in the following year (1771) he was transferred, by fresh indenture, to Mr. Duesbury.

William Gadsby, of Little Chester, mould maker, bound himself by agreement, dated September 2, 1772, for four years (“in the Art of Making Molds”), at ten shillings per week; Mr. Duesbury, in addition, agreeing “to give William Gadsby a Waggon Load of Coals at the end of every year.”

William Hall, a flower-painter.

John Hancock, son of George Hancock, of Derby, was bound apprentice for seven years, on the 29th of September, 1769, “to learn the Art of Painting upon China or Porcelain or China Ware;” to receive 1s. 6d. a week for the first year, 2s. for the second, 2s. 6d. for the third, 3s. for the fourth, 4s. for the fifth, 5s. for the sixth, and 6s. for the seventh year. He became a very clever and successful flower painter. From Derby he is said to have gone to Swansea for a time, and from thence to have removed into Staffordshire. In 1786–7, he was settled at Hanley, where he seems to have remained many years, and occasionally supplied Mr. Duesbury with enamel colours. He had a brother (probably George Hancock) working for Mr. Duesbury in 1790. To him is due the invention of gold, silver, and steel lustre, which, according to his own account, written when at the age of 89, he first put in practice at Spode’s manufactory. After working at many places—Spode’s, Turner’s, and others—Hancock, about 1816, was engaged by Messrs. Wedgwood as colour-maker and manager of one of the departments of their works. He died in 1847, in the 90th year of his age. Some receipts of his and of Aaron Hancock are given in Shaw’s Chemistry. His five sons were all brought up to their father’s business.

J. Hancock, jun. There appears to have been a second J. Hancock, who was an apprentice and who absconded. He is described as “5 ft. 5½ inches high; dark brown long hair; between 18 and 19 years of age; had on a dark blue coat with yellow metal buttons (rather too short for him), velvet breeches, and either a striped velvet waistcoat, or red and white washing waistcoat.”

George Hancock, second son of John Hancock, removed to Derby in 1819, and became a painter at the Derby works; and in 1820 his elder brother, John, also was there engaged as a colour maker and painter. He died in 1840. George Hancock is said for a time to have been employed by Billingsley at Pinxton and at Mansfield. In 1835 he removed to Burton-on-Trent, having been engaged by Mr. Edwards for those works. After many changes he died in 1850. These two were uncles of Mr. Sampson Hancock, the proprietor of the present Derby China works, whose father was James Hancock. William Hancock, a son of the younger John, was one of the last apprentices at the Derby works, and is now one of the most successful designers in the potteries.

William Hand, a handler and presser.

Francois Hardenburg (lodged with a Mrs. Johnson), as he spelled it himself, or Heartenburg, as it was spelled by Mr. Duesbury, was a modeller in Derby in 1788 and 1789; having previously been employed at Caughley. On the 8th of December in the latter year, he was dismissed through repeated “idleness and ignorance.” “Brosley, February 16th, 1789. Hon^d Sir, I take the Libberty of wrightng to you not knowing aney other Name to truble in what I ham going to aske I am a pirson in bunisness was a frend and trusted Frances Hartinbirg. When at Mr. Turners Manufactory it was not in His power to pay me before he Left, but Promised to returne some as soon as he got worke as it is more than I Can afford to loose Shall Esteeme it as a great favor if you will be so good as to give leafe for one of your Servants to answer this to let me know if he is there or not as he is not so gratfull to answer aney letter That is sent to him. And ham Sir your Most Obed. and Humbe. Sarvt., Ann Oakes. P.S. plest to Direct for Me at the Tirkes armes, near Jacfield in Brosley, Shropshire.” He afterwards resided in London.

John Haslem, a very late painter of flowers, figures, and animals.

John Henson, one of the last apprentices, became a partner with Mr. Hancock, in the present works in King Street; he died in 1873.

Hickey,—“A Mons^r Mons^r Hickey, pres l’Hotel d’Angleterre a Bruxelles,”—entered into negotiations with Mr. Duesbury in 1792; the correspondence having gone on since 1789. He was “a native of Ireland,” “a man of reputation,” and a clever painter, and “the first china burner in the world, who understands the whole from the beginning to the end; if he (Mr. Duesbury) would establish a Saxon manufactory,” &c.

Hill, a native of Warwickshire (commonly known by the soubriquets of “Jockey Hill,” and “The Flying Painter,” through his partiality for horses and horse-racing), a landscape and flower painter of considerable note. After leaving Derby he settled in London as a buyer and seller of old Government stores, and died there about 1827.

James Hill, one of the latest apprentices, became a clever flower-painter. At the close of the works he became one of the partners at the King Street works, and died in 1854.

Holland, a flower painter.

William Holmes, a modeller of small animals.

William Horsley, kiln man or labourer, and private timekeeper, 1794.

David Keen		“Fire-men,” all bound themselves by agreement for threeyears each, on the 2nd September, 1772, to employ “themselvesin glazing and burning of Porcelain, or in such otherbranch of the business” as Mr. Duesbury might think properto employ them in, at six shillings per week each.
Joseph Hall
Jacob Spooner
Robert Woodward
Thomas Wardle
Samuel Weaver
William Whitehall
John Butler
Willam Yates

Samuel Key, son of Thomas Key, of Derby, who let out horses for hire, was, in 1785, apprenticed to Mr. Duesbury, and died in 1850, in his 80th year. He was a painter of considerable skill, especially in the fashionable Dresden style. After leaving Derby, he worked for Minton’s at Stoke-upon-Trent. He drew up a MS. account of the old Derby China Works, from memory, in 1837, of which he seems to have made two or three copies; one of these is in my own possession. Three of his sons, John, a flower-painter; Edward, a modeller; and Samuel, also a modeller; were apprenticed at the works. The latter became a famous modeller, and his statuettes of theatrical celebrities and others were of a high order and became popular. He removed into Staffordshire.

John Key, son of Samuel Key, also an apprentice, was a clever painter of flowers, and afterwards a teacher of drawing, but died young. His brother Samuel is a clever modeller.

Joseph Lakin was employed in 1789.

John Lawrence, “repairer,” was one of the earlier hands, and in 1772 he, along with Robert Askew the younger, absconded while under articles of agreement, and was advertised in the Birmingham papers. On April 11, 1790, he wrote, “I now am in employ for Mr. Turner, the Salop china manufactory.” This was after he left Derby. In July of the same year, dating from “Broasley, July 12, 1790,” he desires letters to be addressed to him “at the China Works, near Bridgnorth, Shropshire.”

Stephen Lawrence was a clever moulder of ornamental ware.

Cuthbert Lawton, or Lowton, was a painter of figures and general subjects, including hunting scenes, which are said to have been his forte.

Leonard Lead, of Belper, “wood collier,” executed articles of agreement on the 20th May, 1790, by which he bound himself to “burn, manufacture, and convert into charcoal in a good and workmanlike manner, all the cord wood which he the said William Duesbury shall have occasion to have converted into charcoal;” not to work for any one else when he has any in hand for him; and to be paid 7d. a quarter for every quarter of charcoal so made. In this he continued till 1795, when Mr. Duesbury finally gave up the use of charcoal. In a letter of Lead’s he says that “for generations back, both of father’s side and mother’s, have followed the above-mentioned business” of “coaling and cording line”—i.e., charcoal burning. A son of his, of the same name, was, I believe, apprenticed at the works as a flower-painter.

William Longdon, sen., was a china painter of considerable note at the Derby Works.

William Longdon, jun., son of William Longdon, sen., china painter, became an apprentice to Mr. Duesbury, July 5th, 1790, “for painting or embellishing porcelain or earthenware.” In an order in bastardy in 1799, he is described as a “china-painter.”

John Lovegrove (the same as named on page 58 in my notice of the Cock-pit Hill Works), Edmund Hopkinson, and Joseph Kirkland, gilders.

William Lovegrove entered into an agreement to work for Duesbury.

Daniel Lucas, a landscape and general painter, died in 1867. His sons, John, William, and Daniel, were all apprenticed at the Derby works.

Maclachlan, a painter of landscapes.

Thomas Mason, of Derby, “China or Porcelain repairer,” bound himself by an agreement, dated September 2, 1772, for four years to Mr. Duesbury, at one guinea per week; Mr. Duesbury, by an additional clause, promising “to make Thomas Mason a present of five guineas at the end of each year over and above what is specified in the articles (according to his service).” Later on a Thomas Mason was a timekeeper.

M. Mason was an apprentice to Mr. Duesbury as a painter. He left Derby and engaged himself to Mr. Barr of Worcester, in October, 1792.

George Mellor, whose forte was painting flowers and insects, was an apprentice but left and went to Pinxton. After that he was employed at Coalport, and then in Staffordshire, but returned to the Derby works. He died in 1861. His son, George Mellor (now of London), was also a painter and gilder, as likewise was his daughter Sarah.

William Moore, Edward Belfield, John Morledge, Thomas Trundell, and Joseph Shipley, were throwers in 1774–6.

John Morlidge, son of William Morlidge, of Derby, hatter, was apprenticed for seven years, on the 21st August, 1777, “to learn the Art of Repairing of China or Porcelain Ware.”

Mullins, a figure and landscape painter, was engaged for one year certain to come down from London in 1795, to paint in enamel on porcelain by the piece, at a fixed scale of charges, on which for the first month he was to have 20 per cent., and the second month 10 per cent. additional. The prices, in the original list in my possession, are very curious.

John Musgrove, kiln man and labourer about 1796.

William Pegg, a Quaker, was a remarkable man in more ways than one. He was a tolerably clever painter, but of a very erratic and changeable character, and a religious enthusiast; indeed, judging from his writings, there can be but little doubt that he was not in all things perfectly sane. He wrote a singular account of himself, “Traits in the singular life of that persecuted man, for his obedience to the Truth, W_m Pegg, who joined the Society of the People called Quakers in the year 1800,” in which he traced his descent from Abraham, “who is said to be the Father of the Faithful,” because his family were of the seed of Esau, red; and that on his mother’s side he was descended from Ishmael, because she (his mother) and “all her kin are swarthy and marked with a brown freckle.” William Pegg was the son of Thomas Pegg, of Etwall, near Derby, who was a gardener at Etwall Hall, and a member of the parish choir, where he played the hautboy; from here he removed to Whitmore, in the Staffordshire pottery district. William Pegg was born in 1775, and two years afterwards his father removed to Shelton, where, at the age of ten, William Pegg was sent to work at a pottery. At fourteen he was put to learn the painting on china and earthenware, and when of age removed to Derby, and engaged himself at the china works till he was twenty-three, when he gave it up, and took to the stocking frame, at which he worked at one place or other for twelve years. He then, in 1812, returned to his old occupation, “making drawings and pictures and painting china,” till 1820, when he again gave it up, and commenced a small shop. He married Anne Hendley of Derby in 1814, and died in 1851. Pegg was a clever painter of flowers, and his productions had the merit of being, in almost every instance, painted from nature.

Thomas Pegg, a brother of William Pegg, was one of the gilders for many years.

William Pegg, of a different family, was an apprentice at the works in the beginning at the present century, but left, and became a clever designer for calico printers.

Robert Pennington, painter, 1775.

Edward Phillips, of Derby, “China or Porcelain Painter,” by agreement entered into September 2, 1772, bound himself as a china painter, at twenty-five shillings per week. He afterwards, I believe, removed into Staffordshire, where he carried on business on his own account.

John Porter, son of Elizabeth Porter, of Spoondon, widow, was apprenticed for seven years, on the 7th of April, 1777, “to learn the Art of Painting upon China or Porcelain Ware.”

Henry L. Pratt, a landscape painter, was apprenticed at the Derby works, and afterwards, employed in Staffordshire. He became a clever artist in oil, and died in 1873.

E. Prince, a landscape painter.

Richard Roberts, one of the Chelsea workmen, under Duesbury at Chelsea, was a soldier and pensioner at Chelsea Hospital, and was allowed occasional furlough to paint at Derby. Mr. Duesbury endeavoured to procure his discharge, so that he might remain with him. Here is one of the orders regarding him: “By Order of Sir George Howard, K.B., General of His Majesty’s Forces, and Governor of the Royal Hospital at Chelsea. Permit the Bearer, Richard Roberts, a pensioner in the above-said Hospital to pass from hence to Darby in Darbyshire, for the space of Two Months from the Date hereof, and then to return to the above-said Hospital. He behaving as becomeith. Given under my hand this first Day of Dec^r. 1781.

“L. Grant, Adj^t.”

George Robertson, a landscape painter, died in 1835.

Robinson, a landscape painter.

John Rockley, labourer; agreement for three years, from 1795 and forward, at 9s. per week to be employed in the kilns, or in any other manner.

Thomas Rodgers was employed, at all events, from 1778 in which year his wages were raised a shilling per week. He received this addition for three years (£7 16s.) in January, 1782, after that, till 1793, he received an addition of 3s. a week.

Thomas Rogers, timekeeper and labourer, 1780–95.

Jonathan Rose, a painter, came from London to Derby in 1780, and was employed some time.

James Rowse, a late flower-painter. Now employed at the King Street Works.

Sartine was a modeller in London, employed by Duesbury in 1790, on the recommendation of Vulliamy, to model figures.

Charles Sheen, a clever thrower and presser, formerly of Worcester, and in 1791, at the New Hall works at Shelton, was engaged for Derby.

Thomas Simes (or Sims) was an apprentice, from the age of 11 to 21, to Mr. Duesbury; in 1792 he absconded, and a warrant was issued for his apprehension, and endorsed for the county of Stafford.

Mundy Simpson, a gilder and general painter.

William Slater, born at South Normanton, was an apprentice at the Pinxton works, but came to Derby in 1813. He was a good general painter. He died in Staffordshire in 1867. Two of his sons, William and Joseph, were apprenticed at the Derby works. They and their sons rank among the best painters in the Staffordshire potteries.

Constantine Smith, of Derby, in the county of Derby, preparer of colours and porcelain painter and enameller, was one of the best “hands” at the Derby works. On the 28th of October, 1773, his son William Smith was bound apprentice to him.

William Smith, who had on the 28th October, 1773, been bound apprentice to his father, Constantine Smith, to learn “the art of preparing colours, and Painting and Enameling Porcelain,” agreed with Mr. Duesbury, to whom he had “finished his time,” and been since employed, in 1790, to employ himself “in preparing enamel colours, painting china, or otherwise at the discretion of Mr. Duesbury.” Up to this time he had been receiving a guinea a week, but on the signing of this fresh agreement Duesbury was to pay him £10 down, and to raise his wages to 25s.

Joseph Smith was a landscape painter; he had 7s. a dozen for painting teas No. 115 in 1792.

William Smith, son of Hannah Smith, of Derby, agreed “to make colours for painting on china or porcelain ware,” and by covenant entered into on the 23rd of November, 1778, agreed as follows:—“I do hereby promise to pay to my mother, Hannah Smith, weekly, and every week, out of the wages I may get under Mess^rs Duesbury & Co., the sum of eighteen shillings, to commence from this date and expire the 28th October, 1780. Witness my hand, this 23_d Nov^r 1778.—W. Smith.”

Thomas Soare was an apprentice to Duesbury, and afterwards employed by him. He was son of —— Soare, of Little Chester, and was a clever gilder and arabesque painter. After leaving the China Works, Thomas Soare commenced, in 1810, a small business on his own account. The following is his advertisement, copied from the “Derby Mercury” of April 5th, 1810:—“Enamelled China.—Thomas Soare, with the greatest respect, begs to inform the Nobility, Gentry, and Public at large that he enamels Dessert, Breakfast, and Tea Services with Arms, Crests, Cyphers, &c., in the most elegant manner and on the most reasonable terms. His long experience in the Derby Porcelain Manufactory encourages him to look with confidence for support, which it will be his study to deserve and his pride to acknowledge. N.B.—Ladies instructed to Paint china at their own apartments, on reasonable terms. Navigation Row, near St. Mary’s Bridge, Derby.”

Thomas Southall, “son of Humphrey Southall, of the Borough of Derby, Pincher,” was apprenticed on the 25th of December (Christmas Day) 1772, for seven years “to learn the Art of Painting upon China or Porcelain Ware.”

J. Stables, a clever gilder, was employed for very many years.

John Stanesby, a flower painter in the latter days of the works.

Thomas Steele, one of the later and more celebrated painters of flowers and fruit, in the latter of which he excelled. He died in 1850, in his 79th year. Three of his sons, Edwin, Horatio, and Thomas, were apprenticed at the works.

Martin Stephens, then of Duke Street, St. James’s, London, signed articles of agreement in 1794.

Francis Stone, a skilled workman, was employed at all events from 1770 to 1772, and probably much longer.

Joseph and Thomas Tatlow were late apprentices and became clever painters.

Taylor, at first a blue painter, afterwards became a clever arabesque and Indian pattern painter. He painted the centres of a service of plates for Mr. Digby in 1784.

James Turner, a late flower-painter.

S. or J. Vidal, a painter, who, in August, 1793 till May, 1795, was living at “No. 1, Grosvenor Row, near the Bun-house, Chelsea,” arranged, in the latter year, to leave London for Derby “for six months every year, from June to January.” In 1793, he had sent specimens of his flower-painting to Mr. Duesbury, and in doing so said, “As I have not painted anything on china in this country, I am for that reason induced to show what I am capable of doing in that line, being perfectly master of the employment and direction of employing the colors, having painted for about eleven years in the Porcelaine line,” &c.

John Wardle, “china painter” in 1800 (so described in an affiliation order).

Wathews, a thrower and presser, was employed in 1787–90.

William Watson, a general painter.

H. Webber, a noted modeller, was employed in London by Mr. Duesbury, and afterwards, in 1795, removed to Derby; the terms of his engagement being shown in a letter from which the following is an extract:—“London, Wed_y, July 15, 95.

N^o 4, Lisson Grove,

near Lisson Green.

“Dear Sir,—When I had the pleasure of seeing you in Town, I understood (or rather misunderstood) you was about to depart for the Lakes; not for Derby: Therefore I had no intention of writing to you ’till I shou’d have heard of your return home;—But a call from M_r Lygo has set me right on that head, and I lose no time to perform my promise; which I think was, that as soon as I cou’d make up my mind on the matters spoken of, to communicate it to you. Permit me then Sir briefly to say, that the terms you propose—namely £100 pr. An^m. I accept; with the allowance of a months vacation in the year without deduction. But I find many obstacles arise which I am sorry for—the detail of which I will not trouble you with; but only beg leave to point out one of them,—which is—how to get a tenant for the house I live in, and what relates to it. However, I have requested the favor of M^r. Lygo to speak of it to any friend he may suppose wou’d wish such a thing, and have also spoken to other acquaintances and friends; and you may rest assur’d Sir, that as soon as I can get rid of this Stumbling-block (which is indeed the principal), I shall not fail to use the utmost diligence in doing away every other in hope to realize the pleasure I anticipate of paying my respects to you at Derby. I am Sir, with Deference and Regard, Your Most obed^t and very Humble Servant, H. Webber.”

Moses Webster, a flower-painter, was an apprentice, and afterwards employed at the works. He was afterwards a teacher of drawing, and died in 1870.

John Wells, a labourer, to be employed in any part of the manufacture of china; fresh articles of agreement dated 1794.

William Wheeldon (whose mother was a sister of the wife of William Billingsley), was a clever flower painter.

John Whitaker, one of the workmen, in partnership with Mr. Cocker, began in February, 1826, a china manufactory in Friargate, Derby, but he failed in the same year. His son, John Whitaker, began to work at the Derby China Works in 1818, when only eleven years old, and in 1821 (Feb. 23rd) was bound apprentice to Mr. Blore. In 1831 he became overlooker, and so continued until the close of the works. Later on he was employed at Minton’s and other places. He died in 1874.

Richard Whitaker, a thrower and presser, employed in the ornamental department, in which he was very clever, from about 1769 till 1786, when he died.

William Wingfield, apprenticed at the works, was a clever modeller, but died young.

John Winrow, son of John Winrow, of Duffield, Innholder, was apprenticed, by the same printed indentures, for seven years, on the 6th of June, 1766, “to learn the Art of Painting on China or Porcelain ware.”

Edward Withers, “of London, porcelain or china painter,” entered into an agreement with Mr. Duesbury, on the 8th of May, 1789, engaging himself for three years from the 27th of September in that year “as a painter on porcelain” at the rate of 3s. 6d. per day. It is said that he had previously been employed at Derby, and from thence removed into Staffordshire, where he worked as a china painter; then to Birmingham, where he worked as a painter of japanned tea-trays. He is stated to have died in Bridge Gate, Derby. A William Withers, potter, residing in 1778 at Rotherham, was in that year a voter at Derby.

William Yates, a gilder.

John Yates, general and flower painter and gilder, apprenticed to, and afterwards employed by Duesbury about 1772. He is said to have excelled in hunting subjects and flowers.

In 1876, while this chapter is passing through the press, new China Works, on a large scale, are about to be established on the Osmaston Road, Derby, by Mr. Edward Phillips, one of the proprietors of the Royal Porcelain Works at Worcester; there is therefore at last the pleasant prospect of one of the old staple trades of the town, that of porcelain, being brought back in all its integrity, and carried on with vigour and enlightenment.

CHAPTER IV.

Chesterfield—Caskon—Heathcote—Brampton—Posset Pots—Puzzle Jugs—Welshpool and Payne Potteries—The Pottery—Walton Pottery—Wheatbridge Pottery—Alma, Barker, and London Potteries—Whittington—Bromley—Jewitt—Newbold—Eckington—Belper—Codnor Park—Denby—Bournes Pottery—Shipley—Alfreton—Langley Mills—Ilkeston—Pinxton—Pinxton China—China Tokens—Wirksworth—Dale Abbey—Repton—Encaustic Tiles—Tile Kilns, London—Tickenhall—Kings Newton—Burton-on-Trent—Swadlincote Potteries—Church Gresley Potteries—Gresley Common—Woodville—Hartshorne, &c.—Wooden Box—Rawdon Works—Pool Works—Coleorton—&c., &c.

Chesterfield.

The earliest potter in Chesterfield of whom there is any record is William Caskon, or Kaskon, who died 8th Henry VIII. (1517), and the next is Ralph Heathcote, who was both a potter, brazier, and bell-founder. This Ralph Heathcote, who had married Elizabeth, daughter of John Tomson (or Tomason, as it is variously spelled), brazier, of Chesterfield, became by will of his father-in-law (will dated October 1, 1496) executor. Tomson lived in Saltergate, in a house previously held by William Forneday and Margaret his wife, which was surrendered to him in 1483. This house was afterwards, in 1501, released to “Ralph Heathcote, of Chesterfield, Potter.” This is evidenced by two deeds, one by Thomas Moore, of Cuttethorpe, releasing the messuage in Saltergate to “Ralph Hethcote, of Chesterfield, Potter”; and the other from Thomas Moore, of Cuttethorp, and James Moore, of Syrley Grange, “to Ralph Hethecote, of Chesterfield, Potter,” a bond for £20 to secure peaceable possession of the messuage in the Saltergate, Chesterfield, late in the occupation of John Tomson, deceased, and W. Forneby, deceased.”

It is evident, from a deed of 8th Henry VIII. (1517), that Ralph Heathcote took to the trade and goods of William Caskon, potter, of Chesterfield, in that year. The deed is a receipt from “Isabel Kaskon, ye daughter of William Caskon, of Chesterfield, Potter, lately deceased,” to “Rauff Hethcote, of ye same place, brasier, for her child’s part of the goodes and money of the said William Caskon.”

In 1557–8 Robert Parker, of Chesterfield, gent., and Mary, his wife, son and heir of George Parker, deceased, of the one part, and Rauf Heathcott, of Chesterfield, potter, of the other part, released a tenement in Saltergate, and lands at Tapton Lane.

The manufacture of pottery continued uninterruptedly from Heathcote’s time downwards, although the names of the potters are not always to be found. In a scarce little book, entitled “A Short Tour in the Midland Counties of England performed in the Summer of 1772,” the following interesting notice of Chesterfield occurs:—

“Chesterfield is a large town; but, as I passed through, I saw nothing uncommon but the ugly church; it is old and built of bad stone, but rendered most disgusting by its wooden spire (covered with lead) being so much warped that I discovered its crookedness at three miles distance. In the town is a manufacture of pots. At Asher and many villages in the neighbourhood camomile is much cultivated.”

Pilkington, who wrote in 1789, says, speaking of the manufactures of Chesterfield:—

“Nor should it be omitted, that a large quantity of coarse earthenware is manufactured here. In this business three potteries are worked, which afford employment to about sixty hands.”

Sir Richard Phillips, who wrote his “Tour” in 1828, says, speaking of Chesterfield:—

“There are some potteries in this neighbourhood which employ about 200 persons, at wages of from 10s. to 13s. per week, and for better workmen, from 18s. to 25s. The description of manufacture is exclusively brown ware, except in one instance, which includes black also. The number of potteries is ten, and the larger part is for home consumption, though a small proportion is sent to the Dutch market.”

Brampton.

The manufacture of brown ware at Brampton has probably been established a couple of centuries. In the early part of the present century there were here six earthenware manufactories, which were carried on by the following persons:—Mrs. Blake (this now forms part of the works of Mr. Matthew Knowles); Mr. William Briddon (now continued by his son); Mr. Luke Knowles (now forming part of Mr. Matthew Knowles’ works); Mr. Thomas Oldfield (now continued by his nephew, Mr. John Oldfield); Mr. John Wright (now discontinued; it stood on what is now the site of the present rectory of St. Thomas’s Church); and that of Edward Wright and Son (still carried on by the family). At the present time there are eight manufactories, which will be separately spoken of presently. At these, brown ware of a remarkably hard and durable quality, and stoneware of the most impervious character, are made in great perfection and in immense quantities. The clays principally used are “Stone Edge,” or “Lidd clay,” found at East Moor, or Wadshelf, about three miles away, and “Brampton clay,” found in the immediate neighbourhood.

Figs. 95 and 96.

Figs. 97 and 98.

At Brampton, “posset pots” have, for some centuries, been, and still continue to be, made. Of these some notice is already given in vol. i., pp. [107] , [108] , and [418]. The two here engraved (Figs. [95 and 96]) show their general form; the one is dated 1750 and the other 1819. I have myself examples as late as 1874. Usually the name of the parties for whom they are made are incised in same manner as the pattern.

Another marked feature of Brampton, or “Chesterfield Ware,” has for a long period been the “puzzle jugs” there made. These, which are still produced on the old models, as well as in more modern applications of the principle, are made in a variety of shapes and of various sizes. In some the perforations in the neck and rim are more elaborate and intricate than in others, and some have three, five, or seven spouts. Commonly, as in Fig. [97], they are ornamented with figures or other designs in relief, but sometimes are plain.

Another usual class of design is that which includes jugs, mugs, and other vessels whose handles (Fig. [98]) are formed of more or less cleverly modelled greyhounds. Some of the larger of these mugs have two, others three, and others four, handles thus formed.

The Welshpool and Payne Potteries.—These works, belonging to Messrs. Matthew Knowles and Son, are among the largest in Brampton. They embrace the old works carried on last century by Mr. Blake, and afterwards by his widow, and those of Mr. Luke Knowles, with considerable additions. They came into the hands of Mr. Matthew Knowles about 1840, and were by him considerably enlarged. Recently he has been joined in partnership by his son, under the style of “Matthew Knowles & Son,” and the works were again in 1875 very much extended. At these works all the general descriptions of brown and stone ware goods are produced; but an immense number of articles are made for the Australian, Russian, African, and Jamaica markets, as well as for the home trade. Among the articles produced in large quantities at these works are stoneware spirit-bottles, and spirit kegs and barrels, which are much esteemed for their hardness and durability and their fine quality; ginger-beer bottles, both in stone ware and brown ware; jam jars, for wholesale preserve manufacturers (such as Grey, Dennett & Co., and others), in gallon and half-gallon sizes, in brown ware glazed inside, forming one of the staple productions of Mr. Knowles, and of which, with one exception, he is the only maker in the district; stew and sauce pots; fruit and other jars; flat dishes; turtle and beef pots; bowls and collanders; tobacco-jars, highly ornamented; “Punch” jugs of striking design, “hunting” jugs, “game” jugs, and other jugs designed and modelled with great taste; puzzle-jugs; posset-pots; candlesticks of classical design and good execution; bread-baskets; toast-racks; tea-kettles; flower-pots and vases; foot and carriage warmers; grotesque tobacco-pipes, and a large variety of other goods, besides the usual domestic vessels, are made at these works, and are as good as the common nature of the material will admit. The filters made by Mr. Knowles, of which he produces a large number, are of excellent construction, and of good design. They are among the best produced, and being in the fine deep rich colour of the “Chesterfield ware,” are very effective, and perhaps more pleasing in appearance than many others in the “Bristol ware,” &c. In china clay ware also a large variety of articles of remarkably good quality are made. It may be well to add that at these works the clay is prepared by steam. It is “blunged,” and then passed through a fine sieve, driven at considerable speed on a large flat iron boiler, heated by steam, where it is boiled to a proper stiffness. It is then passed through a pug-mill, and is ready for use. Mr. Knowles’s are the only works in Brampton where this process is adopted.

“The Pottery.”—These works were established, in 1810, by “Messrs. Oldfield, Madin, Wright, Hewitt & Co.,” by whom they were carried on. After various changes and retirements, Mr. John Oldfield became, in 1838, sole proprietor of the works, and under his name they continue at the present time. The works have from time to time been considerably extended; they are now nearly the largest in the district, and employ a large number of hands. The goods manufactured are the usual descriptions known as “New Brampton” or “Chesterfield ware,” or, as more frequently falsely called in the London and other markets, “Nottingham ware,”—a remarkably hard, compact, and durable salt-glazed brown ware; and stoneware, which is dipped in different “slips.” In “brown ware,” the principal goods produced are dishes and bowls of various kinds; turtle, beef, butter, Dutch, stew, sauce, and other pots; bottles and jars of all shapes and sizes, and for all uses; pitchers and jugs in endless variety; churns: milk-pans and pancheons; nappies and porringers; tea and coffee-pots; Welsh trays; carriage and feet-warmers; hare-pans and dog-troughs; spirit and wine-barrels and kegs; figured flower-pots and stands; scent jars; “hunting,” “cottage,” “tulip,” and other figured jugs and mugs; moulds for puddings, blanc-mange, jellies, &c., of great beauty and of excellent and even artistic design, and many other articles. In “antique ware,” Mr. Oldfield makes remarkably effective and well-designed hunting, game, cottage, tulip, and other jugs; figured Stilton-cheese stands; fruit-dishes and trays; tea and coffee-pots; tobacco-pots, some of which, with goblet and candlestick, are very striking; watch-stands; “Toby Fill-pot” jugs; small figures of stags, dogs, &c.; grotesque and twisted pipes; puzzle-jugs, &c. In stoneware many articles are also produced, the great bulk being bottles and spirit kegs of various kinds and of every size, from one pint up to ten or more gallons in capacity; and sanitary goods.

Filters also form a staple branch of the manufacture, and these are filted up on an exceedingly good principle, with vegetable charcoal, sand, &c., on the premises, and are supplied in large quantities both at home and for exportation. The manufacture of filters was here commenced in 1826.

The clays used and the processes observed in the manufacture may be briefly alluded to as follows:—

Five kinds of clay are here used, viz., Barclay, which is procured from Stanedge, near Wingerworth. This clay is used to make the arches which are technically called “Bars,” and two of them form nearly a semicircle that spans from side to side of the ovens and whereon the pots are placed. Setting-clay is a clay that is found on the peat-moss, near Stanedge, and is quite of a sandy nature: it acquires the name from its being rolled by the hands into “nobs” and placed upon the “Bars” to “set” the pots upon; unless this was used, the pots would have to be broken to get them off the “Bars.” The Lidd-clay (what is commonly called Fire-clay) is used in the lower parts of the “Ovens” or “Kilns,” because of its being stronger to resist the fire; this clay is procured from Loads, near Holymoorside, about two miles from Brampton. The next clay is the Brampton-clay which is burnt in the upper portion of the “Ovens,” because it will not stand the amount of fire that the Lidd-clay will, although it is of a much closer body, and, when glazed, will resist the action of any acids. Mixed-clay is burnt in the middle portion of the “Ovens;” it is, as its name implies, a mixture of the Brampton and Lidd-clay, of each about equal portions to suit the fire or heat in that portion of the ovens.

At these works spirit bottles of a similar character to the one engraved on Fig. [105] were made. One was a representation of Lord Brougham, with the words, “The true Spirit of Reform.”

Among the marks used by this firm are—

ESTABLISHED
1826
J. OLDFIELD & CO.
CHESTERFIELD
WATER FILTER
MANUFACTURERS,
WHOLESALE AND RETAIL
AND FOR
EXPORTATION.

OLDFIELD & CO
MAKERS

OLDFIELD & CO.
CHESTERFIELD.

J. OLDFIELD.

Figs. 99 to 102.

The Walton Pottery was built by William Briddon, the grandfather of the present proprietor, in 1790, and at his death was continued by his son, William Briddon. This gentleman died in 1848, and was succeeded by his son, William Briddon, the present proprietor. It has consequently, from the first to the present moment, been carried on by three generations of William Briddons. The goods made are brown ware and stoneware in all their varieties. In these are produced stew, souse, turtle, beef, and butter pots; jugs of every variety; preserve and pickle jars; pancheons, bowls, and cullenders; porringers and patty-pans; bottles of every conceivable size and shape; filters; spirit-barrels and kegs; foot-bottles and carriage-warmers; tea and coffee-pots; twisted and grotesque pipes, and many other articles. In quality they are much the same as those of other Brampton manufactories.

Wheatbridge Pottery.—These works have been in the family of their present proprietor for three generations. They are now carried on by Mrs. J. Walton Wright, the widow of the late proprietor. The staple trade of the manufactory is general brown ware for the Dutch markets.

The Alma Pottery was commenced by its present proprietor, Mr. Samuel Lowe, and his then partners, about 1852. After a few years Mr. Lowe’s two partners withdrew from the concern, and it has continued in his hands solely to the present time. The goods produced are the same general kinds, both of wares and articles, as the other Brampton potteries. In brown ware and in stoneware Mr. Lowe produces filters, bottles of every kind and size, jugs and mugs, jars of various descriptions, and all the articles usually produced in these wares, and of the same general quality as those of other works in the district.

Barker Pottery

, belonging to Mr. Henry Briddon. Here all the usual articles in brown ware are made.

The Pottery of Mr. William Briddon, Jun., produces the usual kinds of wares, and most of the articles, of the district.

The London Pottery, belonging to Messrs. F. Lipscombe & Co., of London, was established by them for the purpose of manufacturing their filters.

Whittington.

At Whittington, pot works have existed from an early date, and are still continued. At these much good ware and many specialities of design, &c., were produced; it is only necessary to premise that the goods are commonly known by the general term of “Chesterfield ware” or “Nottingham ware”—it being a fact that London houses still sell, and persist in calling, the products of these Derbyshire works by the latter name.

The Whittington Potteries[32] are of very old establishment, having been in existence since about the middle or latter end of the seventeenth century, if not longer. Here the ordinary brown ware of the period was manufactured; the ware being of extreme hardness and closeness of texture, and having a rich warm reddish-brown colour. About the year 1800, and for some years later, the works, which were near the race-course, were held by Mr. William Bromley, who, in addition to the ordinary brown ware, made also a white, or cream-coloured, earthenware of fine quality. In this fine body he manufactured dinner, tea, and other services, principally decorated, in the prevailing manner, with transfer-printing in blue. He also practised batt-printing for some of his goods. Mr. Bromley also made some experiments in, and succeeded in producing, a very good china ware, but he did not prosecute this branch of manufacture to any extent. At that time, when Mr. Bromley was making the fine earthenware, and was experimenting on porcelain bodies, my late father, Mr. Arthur Jewitt, then a young man, was residing at Brampton, and was in habits of close intimacy with him. My father being a man of scientific, as well as of high literary attainments, and being, moreover, a good artist, took considerable interest in his friend Mr. Bromley’s manufacture, and at his own house at Brampton entered with spirit into a series of experiments in enamelling and enamel-printing, and in other processes for decorating the wares. For this purpose he caused to be erected in his own house two enamel kilns, one of which he had constructed on the ordinary simple principle of heating, and the other on the spiral principle. He also fitted up, for the purpose of these private experiments, a small printing-room, and here, being, as I have said, a good artist, he tried various processes for transferring aquatints and etchings (which he etched and prepared himself) by the batt-process, both on to the biscuit and on to the white glazed ware. By this process he produced many remarkably successful transfers; but, like the boy who dug up the seeds in his garden day by day, to see if they were sprouting, and so killed them, he was always so impatient to see the result of his experiments that he did not wait for the fire in the kilns to die out, but opened the doors, and so frequently spoiled all the pieces. Sufficient, however, remained each time to show that he was right in his experiments, and that his trials were all that could be desired.

Fig. 103.

Besides transfer-printing, he tried some interesting experiments in surface-painting on the biscuit. Only one example of this ware is known to exist, and this fortunately is now in my own possession. It is here engraved (Fig. [103]). It bears a view of (I believe) Renishaw Hall, and part of the park, with deer, &c. The body is extremely light, and the painting highly artistic. It is simply surface-painted on the biscuit. It is a small flower-pot, or “bow-pot,” and saucer, and is only 3⅜ inches in height.

These experiments are highly interesting in connection with the Whittington and Brampton potteries. They were very successful, and showed that had my father devoted his time and his talents to the process, great results would have been achieved. As it was, he prosecuted his inquiries as an amateur only, and from a simple love of the art, and his name, until I made it known in the Art-Journal a few years ago, has never been publicly associated with the fictile history of the country. I felt that it was due to the memory of one of the most talented of men, and the best of parents, that I should place his name on record in connection with an art in which, for a short time, in midst of a busy literary life,[33] he took such a lively interest.

Mr. Bromley continued the works for some years, when they changed hands. He was a man of great ability and of much spirit, and did more to further the standard of excellence of the works in his district than any of his contemporaries. He had three sons, Rev. Samuel Bromley, who was a poet of no ordinary stamp, and was a Baptist missionary to Jamaica and other countries; Joseph Bromley, who entered the army; and the Rev. James Bromley, whose name is well known in connection with the Wesleyan persuasion. The works afterwards belonged to Messrs. Robert Bainbrigge & Co. The pot-works at Whittington, in the early part of the present century, were carried on by Mr. William Johnson and Mr. Aaron Madin. At the present time there are two manufactories at this place; viz. those of Mr. Samuel Lancaster, successor to Mr. Madin, and Mr. James Pearson.

Stone Bottle Works.—These works, at Whittington Moor, were established in 1818 by Mr. Aaron Madin, and they are now carried on in his name by his son-in-law, Mr. Samuel Lancaster. The goods produced are in stoneware, brown ware, and coarse black ware. The stoneware is made of fire-clay, found underneath the Tupton coal-measures at Brampton and elsewhere, and glazed with the usual compound of flint, Paris white, Cornwall stone, barytes, and ground glass. It is of good quality, and very hard and durable. The ground ware is, as is usual in the district, salt-glazed; and the black ware, which is made of the common brick-clay, is glazed chiefly with lead-ore. The goods produced are the usual domestic and other articles made in the neighbourhood, and their quality is equal to most others.

Whittington Pottery.—At these works, belonging to Mr. James Pearson, the usual classes of goods, as made at the other potteries of the district, are produced.

Whittington Moor Pottery.—Mr. S. Lancaster (late A. Madin) has a manufactory of coarse pancheon ware at this place; the body, as usual, coarse red outside, and lined with a black glaze inside.

Newbold.

There is a manufactory of coarse brown ware—pancheons, bread-pans, stein-pots, &c.,—carried on by Mr. W. Sharratt at this place. The productions are of much the same character as those of Whittington Moor, Tickenhall, &c.

Eckington.

Pilkington in 1789 says, “A manufacture of sickles is carried on. There are also two potteries in the town.”

Belper.

About the middle or towards the latter part of last century, a small manufactory of common coarse brown ware existed here, and about 1800 Mr. William Bourne took to the works carried on by Messrs. Blood, Webster, and Simpson, at Belper Pottery. Mr. William Bourne, sen., was, it appears, very much engaged in the business of the then new canal. Letters of his, and of his son, William Bourne, jun., in which reference is made to his connection with the canal, and show business transactions between them and Mr. Duesbury of the Derby China Works, are in my own possession. Mr. Bourne carried on the manufacture of salt-glazed blacking, ink, ginger-beer, and spirit bottles. The ordinary brown ware, produced from a less vitreous clay, found on the spot, consisted of bowls, pans, pancheons, dishes, pitchers, and all the commoner varieties of domestic vessels, and these were of excellent and durable quality. The stoneware bottles, &c., were made from a finer and more tenacious bed of clay, at Denby, a few miles distant. The finer, or figured wares, were made from clay procured from Staffordshire. By Mr. Bourne all these descriptions of goods were made, but he principally confined himself to the manufacture of stoneware bottles of various kinds. A good antique-shaped hunting jug, and other similar articles, with figures in relief, was also extensively made. In 1812, Mr. Joseph Bourne (son of William Bourne) took to the Denby Pottery (which see) then carried on by Mr. Jäger, and the two works were carried on simultaneously until 1834, when the Belper Pottery was finally closed, the workpeople, plant, and business being removed to Denby, and incorporated with those works, and the premises converted into cottages. From that time no pottery has been made at Belper. The site of the works was at Belper-Gutter, and “Pot-House Lane,” the name of one of the streets, perpetuates the manufacture.

BELPHER & DENBY
BOURNES
POTTERIES
DERBYSHIRE

Fig. 104.

WILLIAM, IV,TH’S REFORM CORDIAL.

Figs. 105 and 106.

The mark used while these works were carried on in conjunction with those at Denby was this; and it may be well to remark that a series of political bottles, bearing representations of various Reform leaders, were made. On these the head of the individual—the King, Sir Francis Burdett, Earl Grey, or whomsoever was intended—formed the neck of the bottle, and the arms and bust the shoulder; political references, and the name of the political leader, were impressed on the clay. One of these, which represents the King (William IV.) is engraved on Fig. [105]. It bears in front the words “WILLIAM IV.’S REFORM CORDIAL,”—the “cordial” being the brandy or other spirit it was intended to contain. Another is a representation, in smaller form, of Lord John Russell (afterwards Earl Russell); it bears, in front, the name “LORD JOHN RUSSELL,” and on a scroll which he holds in his hand are inscribed the words, “THE TRUE SPIRIT OF REFORM.” At the back is the mark Fig. [104]. At these works too, I believe, quaintly designed inkstands, of which Fig. [106] is an example, were made. The projecting lower jaw formed the well for the ink, while holes on the shoulders served for places to put the pens in when not in use. They were made of the ordinary vitrified stoneware.

In 1827 a coarse-ware pottery was carried on here by Mr. Heapey.

Codnor Park.

The pottery at Codnor Park was built in the year 1820, by the world-renowned Butterley Iron Company, the owners of the famed iron works of Butterley and Codnor Park. At this time the Butterley works were under the management of the late Mr. William Jessop, son of one of the partners, and afterwards senior partner of the firm. Some years before this time the Company had constructed a large cast-iron bridge for the Nabob of Oude, and on its despatch a brother of Mr. William Jessop accompanied it to India to superintend its erection, taking with him several workmen, among whom was an engine-fitter named William Burton. From some cause or other the bridge was not erected by the Nabob, and after remaining several years in India, the parties returned to England. On their return, this William Burton was induced to commence the pottery, and having engaged a skilled workman from the Brampton Potteries, near Chesterfield, he commenced operations in 1821. The pottery was situated near the Codnor Park Iron Works, from which it took its name, and pretty close to the Butterley Canal, and was successfully carried on for several years. Sir Richard Phillips, in his “Tour,” in 1828, thus notes the pottery:—

“Over near Codnor Castle, I viewed a rough and ill-built manufactory, where they turn and bake those opaque bottles used for ginger-beer, soda-water, liquid blacking, &c. About 50 women and children finish 100 gross per day, and they sell the pints at 15d. and 16d. per doz., and all pints at 2s., and quarts at 3s. 6d. They are made of the clay of the vicinity, and the agent for selling them is Kemp, in Milk Street, London. They are harder and less liable to burst than glass bottles.”

In 1832, Mr. Burton having got into pecuniary difficulties, the works were closed. After remaining unworked for many months, the concern was, in 1833, taken by Mr. Joseph Bourne, of the Denby Pottery. They gave employment to about sixty persons.

The Codnor Park Works were carried on by Mr. Bourne until 1861, when they were finally closed, and the workmen, plant, &c. were transferred to the Denby Works, where additional work-rooms had been erected for their accommodation.

The clay was of a similar kind to that used at Denby, but owing to a larger impregnation of iron the ware produced therefrom was not equal in appearance to that made at Denby, though the bottles were highly vitreous, and had an extensive sale. This clay was obtained at Cupet Green, in the immediate neighbourhood, and the coal from Birchwood Colliery. (The hard coal is the only kind adapted for burning in the salt-glazed kilns.) London was the chief market, the crates being forwarded by canal.

The classes of goods produced at Codnor Park were all the usual classes of household vessels, and also stoneware bottles of various kinds, and of all sizes up to six gallons, and pans, bowls, jugs, pitchers, and other articles. Besides these, however, a remarkably fine, compact, light, and delicate buff-coloured terra-cotta was produced. In this were made butter-coolers, vases of various kinds, flower-baskets and pots, ewers, spill-cases, and numberless other articles. Many of these were of excellent design, and beautifully decorated with foliage and other ornaments in relief. Puzzle-jugs, &c. were also made of this material, and surface-painted with a peculiar mottled effect. The mark during Mr. Burton’s time was his name and “Codnor Park,” or simply the name “Wm. Burton,” impressed on the clay. The manufacture of ordinary household earthenware was discontinued when Mr. Bourne took to the concern, his operations being confined to the manufacture of bottles. For some of this information I am indebted to Mr. Humphrey Goodwin (through Mr. Bourne of Codnor Park), who was connected with the works from their opening in 1821 until their close.

Denby.

The “Denby Pottery” is situated in the parish of Denby, seven miles from Derby and two from Ripley,—a village memorable as being the birthplace of Flamstead, the astronomer,—in the midst of the rich ironstone and coal-fields of Derbyshire, the former of which are said to have been regularly worked from the time of the Romans.[34] The works were commenced in 1809 by a Mr. Jäger, on the estate of W. Drury Lowe, Esq., where, some time before, a valuable and extensive bed of clay had been found to exist. This clay, previous to the establishment of the Denby Works, was used at the Belper Pottery, for the manufacture of stoneware ink, blacking, and other bottles. The Denby clay was also supplied to the Derby China Works, in considerable quantities, where it was used for saggers, and for a few other articles which were produced. In 1812, Mr. Joseph Bourne, son of William Bourne, of the Belper Pottery, succeeded Mr. Jäger, and the Belper and Denby works were carried on simultaneously until 1834, when the Belper Works were discontinued, and the plant and workpeople removed to Denby. The works were at this time much increased, and gradually extended their operations. In 1833, the Codnor Park Works (which see) passed into the hands of Mr. Bourne, and were carried on by him, along with those of Denby, until 1861, when they were closed, and the workpeople, plant, &c., as in the case of the Belper Works, removed to Denby. Considerable additions were made for this increase of workpeople, and the manufactory was much extended. In 1845, Mr. Bourne also became possessed of the Shipley Pottery (which see), and in 1856 removed those works to Denby. With the Denby Pottery are therefore incorporated those of Belper, Codnor Park, and Shipley.

Mr. Joseph Bourne having taken his son, Joseph Harvey Bourne, into partnership, the business was carried on under the style of Joseph Bourne and Son, and has so continued until the present day. Joseph Bourne died in 1860, and his son in 1869, and the works are still carried on, under the old trading style, by the family. In 1851 a medal was awarded to Mr. Bourne for his stone bottles.

In addition to the extensions required from time to time at Denby to provide for these continual augmentations arising from the closing of the smaller works, the business has so extended as to necessitate considerable additions and improvements. Excellent machinery has been applied to the blunging and other processes, and instead of the old process of getting rid of the water from the slip by evaporation, the clay is obtained therefrom by the patented process invented by Messrs. Needham and Kite, Vauxhall, London, ten of their presses being employed, turning out at least 25 tons per day of workable clay. The class of ware produced has not varied to any extent, though an advance in shape and quality is evident from a comparison with some of the earlier specimens extant. The great bulk of the stoneware produced by Messrs. Bourne and Son is the kind known as the salt-glazed stoneware, which, on account of its peculiar vitreous and non-absorbent qualities, is in great demand not only in the home market, but in all parts of the world. About the year 1836 a considerable change was made in the size and form of the salt-glazed kilns, and for these improvements Mr. Joseph Bourne obtained a patent. The old kilns were only half the height of the present ones, and had each five chimneys. To these, what may be called an upper storey has been added, and, while the lower half is fired by mouths opening into the kiln and the flame passing perpendicularly up the kiln, the upper portion is fed by fires passing out of the kiln by means of flues at the side, and the modern kilns have only one chimney, thus securing a better consumption of smoke and lessening the objectionable results which would follow from such a dense volume of smoke proceeding from a low chimney. Since this patent was taken out an additional improvement has been made by the erection on the top of each kiln of a separate small oven, in which biscuit or terra-cotta fancy articles can be burnt, these being simply burnt by the heat passing up the chimney and from the top of the kiln, but no flame or salt-glaze reaching the goods. Much thought and care as well as considerable expense have been expended during the last twenty years to perfect the manufacture of telegraph insulators, and the very large business transactions in this department proves that the enterprise of the firm has not been fruitless.

Messrs. Bourne and Son have for many years possessed the exclusive right to manufacture Mr. Varley’s Patent Double V. Insulators, and since the transfer of the telegraphs to the Government, the firm have executed immense quantities for that department of the public service. A demand having recently arisen for white-glazed ink and other bottles, additional appliances have been provided on the most approved and modern principles, which have enabled the firm to produce a class of ware of this description unrivalled alike for its excellence and appearance.

Figs. 107 to 109.

The main productions of the works are as follows:—

In bottles, which are the staple production, almost every variety are manufactured in large quantities both in the patented vitreous stone, and white glazed, varieties of ink-bottles of every shape and size are made by thousands weekly, as are also ale, porter, ginger-beer, blacking, fruit, and every other kind of bottles. Spirit and other liquor bottles, with handles, up to a very large size, are also made. Feet-warmers, carriage-warmers, and medical appliances, with or without patent screw stoppers; spittoons, tobacco-jars, churns, mortars and pestles, pipkins, bird fountains, inkstands, feeding-bottles, candlesticks, pork-pie moulds, and every variety of domestic vessels, are made. Druggists’ shop-jars, snuff-jars, spirit-barrels, pudding-moulds, &c., many of them highly ornamented, are also made. The filters are of excellent construction, and good form, and are made to purify from 5 to 30 gallons per day each.

“Hunting Jugs”—a name by which a certain class of jugs with raised ornaments consisting of hunting subjects, sometimes a stag, at others a fox, chased by horsemen and dogs; and with other relief subjects of trees, bee-hives, windmills, and men seated smoking or drinking, &c., are called—are made here to a great extent, and of the hardest and most durable quality, and with an excellent glaze. Some of these are made with greyhound handles of very clever and effective design, of the class shown on Fig. [98]. Upright jugs, or canettes, of the same general character, are also made, as are also plain jugs. Jars, too, are a staple branch of the Denby manufacture, and for preserves, pickles, jellies, marmalades, &c., are considered to be of the best quality. They are made of the most approved shapes, and of every variety of size, covered and uncovered; one great advantage of this make being the great width of the mouth, ensuring cleanliness, and preventing the waste that occurs with an overhanging shoulder. The same remark holds good with regard to the stew-pots.

In terra-cotta, which is of a remarkably light and fine quality, and of a warm buff colour, many elegant articles are made. These are flower vases of various designs, lotus vases, garden and other vases, wine-coolers, water-bottles, ewers with snake handles, flower-stands, Stilton-cheese stands and trays, fern stands, fonts, Indian scent jars, butter coolers, mignionette boxes, and many other articles of artistic excellence.

The marks used by the Denby Pottery are as follows:—

Figs. 110 to 113.

VITREOUS STONE BOTTLE
BOURNE & SON
PATENTEES,
DENBY POTTERY
NEAR DERBY.

BELPER & DENBY
BOURNES,
POTTERY
DERBYSHIRE.