Chats on English China

BIBLIOGRAPHY

GLOSSARY OF TERMS USED

I

OLD
DERBY

CHATS ON ENGLISH CHINA

I

OLD DERBY

It is not too much to hope that the eyes of some reader will stray into these pages as a wanderer in a strange land, one whose interest in china has never been awakened. We hope to lure such a wight with sweet cajolery. If perchance we can get him to examine one or two dainty specimens of old blue china we shall have him enmeshed in our toils. If he be an artist he will not escape from the enchantment of Derby and of Worcester. If he be a mere business man, here is an item from Messrs. Christie’s catalogue of a sale on January 14, 1902: “Coffee-pot and cover, Worcester. Painted with figures, birds, and flowers, in colours in Chinese taste, and with alternate dark-blue scale-pattern panels—£28 7s.” And this, mark you, is an ordinary item selected at random, a business sample, if you will.

Mr. Andrew Lang, in one of his “Ballades in Blue China,” has cunningly put into rhyme a poet’s reason for his love of china:—

We should be less than human if we did not point the moral by quoting the delicious sentences of a City man (one can hardly imagine Charles Lamb a City man journeying daily to Leadenhall Street!) concerning—

“Those little, lawless, azure-tinctured grotesques that, under the notion of men and women, float about, uncircumscribed by any element, in that world before perspective—a china teacup.... Here is a young and courtly mandarin handing tea to a lady from a salver—two miles off. See how distance seems to set off respect. And here the same lady, or another—for likeness is identity on teacups—is stepping into a little fairy boat, moored on the hither side of this calm garden river, with a dainty, mincing foot, which, in a right angle of incidence (as angles go in our world), must infallibly land her in the midst of a flowery mead—a furlong off on the other side of the same strange stream!”

And now, having brought you thus far, reader, will you not journey with us and learn something of the magic and the mysteries of old china? We are a goodly company, and if you have a fine eye, a pretty fancy for your own taste, and a keen zest for a bargain, join hands with us.

Derby holds a high place in the history of British porcelain, inasmuch as it was here that its manufacture was matured, and the ability and perseverance of three generations of the Duesbury family raised the productions to the level of those of the great European factories.

It is generally believed that the manufacture of china first sprang into existence at Derby in 1750, about a year or so before the works at Worcester were established. 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 pipemaker’s oven in the neighbourhood.

About this time there were some pot works on Cockpit Hill belonging to Alderman Heath, a banker, and the productions of the Frenchman, probably a refugee, having attracted notice, an arrangement was made between him and Heath and Duesbury by which the manufacture of porcelain would be carried on jointly. This man’s name, to whom the absolute honour of commencing the Derby China Works belongs, was Andrew Planché. A deed exists by which a partnership for ten years was entered into by the three above named. Planché found the skill and secret knowledge, Heath the money (£1,000), and Duesbury the ability to carry out the scheme.

Besides this deed there is no other record of the Frenchman, as the firm became known as “Duesbury and Heath,” and apparently the usual fate of the poor inventor overtook Planché.

William Duesbury was of Longton Hall, in Staffordshire, and was the son of a currier. By trade he was an enameller. Entries in the family Bible, in the possession of the Duesburys, prove that in 1755 he removed to Derby to carry on the newly-acquired business “in ye art of making English china, as also in buying and selling all sorts of wares belonging to ye art of making china.”

Records of the kinds of china manufactured and sent to London are interesting. There were blue fluted boats, mosaic boats, sage-leaf boats, fig-leaf sauce-boats, octagon fruit plates, vine-leaf plates, coffee cups, flower vases, blue strawberry pots, standing sheep, cats, honeycomb jars, coffee-pots, butter-tubs, Chelsea jars, teapots, figures of Mars, Minerva, &c., Spanish shepherds, candlesticks, and, of course, many varieties of plates and dishes, and cups and saucers.

Once or twice the name of the firm appears as “Duesbury and Co.,” but it is more usually “Duesbury and Heath.” Finally, it became Duesbury only.

Coming to the marks which were used, in our illustration we have arranged them in chronological order, the earliest being at the top.

The mark used in the earliest days is not certain, but in all probability the letter D, when in gold, is one of the first used. It is, however, exceedingly rare to find a piece thus marked. This letter D may equally stand for Derby or for Duesbury.

From 1770 to 1773, the script initial and the anchor known as the Derby-Chelsea or the Duesbury-Chelsea mark was introduced, as William Duesbury had purchased “the Chelsea Porcelain Manufactory, and its appurtenances and lease thereof,” on February 5, 1770, and made this addition to the Chelsea anchor. This mark of the Derby-Chelsea period is usually in gold, and was used both at the factory at Chelsea and at Derby. Examples of this period are of comparative rarity, and are eagerly sought after by collectors.

The Derby-Chelsea marks are given in the “Chat” on Chelsea (p. 39).

The works at Chelsea were not finally discontinued till 1784, when they were destroyed by Duesbury, the kilns and every part of the factory pulled down, and what was available sent off to Derby. About the year 1773, a and a crown were used. This mark is mostly in blue, but sometimes in puce, light red, or green. This crown was added by Royal permission, because the factory had been honoured by Royal patronage.

Will my readers note that in the earlier pieces of Derby and Crown-Derby china the crown is carefully jewelled; in the later productions of the Duesbury period the mark was rudely executed, and the crown was hastily pencilled.

Of the introduction of the cross daggers and six spots, about the year 1782, there is the tradition that it was a defiance to all manufactories except three, viz., those of Sèvres, Dresden, and Berlin.

We give as a headpiece a typical example of early Crown-Derby. It represents a two-handled covered cup and saucer decorated with the well-known rich blue and gold border and festoons in pink. It is marked in puce with jewelled crown. This specimen is from the national collection now at the Bethnal Green Museum.

The vase we reproduce is 6¹⁄₂ in. high and has the crown and crossed batons and dots, which mark has been photographed and appears in the illustration (p. 17). It is richly decorated and a good specimen, as is the smaller vase, or pastille-burner, with masks, and similarly marked (p. 11).

These two specimens, together with the Crown-Derby mug and saucer, decorated in tomato red and gold, are from the collection of Mr. W. G. Honey, which was on view at the Cork Exhibition.

The first William Duesbury died in 1785. His son, William, who had for the last few years been in partnership with him under the firm of Duesbury and Son, succeeded him. This second William Duesbury increased the fortunes of Derby china with astonishing rapidity. The King and Queen, and the Prince of Wales (afterwards George IV.), and the leaders of fashionable society were among his customers. There was a craze for a time, and titled ladies painted flowers and other pictures on the porcelain supplied to them by the Derby factory. It was afterwards fired and finished for their own special use.

Of these ladies, Lady Margaret Fordyce, Lady Plymouth, and Lady Aubrey executed some beautiful drawings, which probably still remain in their families. Lord Lonsdale had twenty-four plates painted with landscapes in Cumberland after his own sketches, and many other noblemen and gentlemen did the same.

On the death of Duesbury the second, his widow married his late partner, a Mr. Michael Kean, an Irishman, and clever artist. This was in 1798. But Kean hastily withdrew from the concern when the third William Duesbury came of age, who for a time carried on the factory under the firm of “Duesbury and Sheffield.” In 1815 the premises passed into the hands of Mr. Robert Bloor.

It was in the year of Waterloo that the third William Duesbury, and last of the great family of potters who had established the factory, 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. Ultimately the entire business passed into the hands of Mr. Bloor, and the name of Duesbury disappears from Derby records.

For some years up till about 1825 or 1830, Mr. Bloor used the Old Derby mark, the crown, cross daggers with dots, and D beneath, but about that period he discontinued it, and adopted instead a mark with his own name. It is well for readers to note that down to the discontinuance of the old mark, it had invariably been done with a pencil, but those adopted by Mr. Bloor were printed.

In our illustrations of the other marks used at Derby we place them in chronological order. The first printed mark used under the Bloor régime was the circle enclosing the crown, and the words “Bloor, Derby,” printed around. In some specimens, of a little later date, the mark is a trifle larger, and the crown more carefully designed. Another mark used occasionally about the year 1830 was the word “Derby” enclosed in a scroll; while on some other specimens of about the same date, or a little later an old English D, surmounted by a crown, is marked, or the word “Derby” in Roman capitals on a ribbon, appears beneath the usual crown.

We now come to a rather painful chapter in the history of the Old Derby, practically a series of misdoings, which terminated the glorious career of so famous a manufactory. It is interesting to see when trade, with its somewhat ruthless methods, comes into conflict with art, with her finer susceptibilities, how art has to go to the wall. It was the same story at Derby.

Before Bloor’s time it had been the unvarying plan of the Duesburys—so particularly jealous were they of their reputation, and of maintaining the highest possible character of the Derby ware—to allow only perfect goods to leave the premises. However trivial the fault, the articles were not considered good enough to send out in the name of Derby. These damaged wares had accumulated to a very large extent at the manufactory. Mr. Bloor, who was not a rich man, and who was filled with the very laudable desire to make the Derby concern successful, and who, moreover, had to pay off his purchase money by instalments, caught at the chance of disposing of this accumulation of Old Derby stock. Here it was that his trade instincts overcame his love of the fine arts. Better far had it been if the whole buildings had been consumed by fire, and the old stock destroyed, than that the damaged goods should have been foisted upon the public. But it fell about otherwise, and Mr. Bloor disposed of the Derby failures by auction at the different large towns. By this means he amassed great sums of money, which brought him immediate capital, but which was the death-blow to Derby ware. The old Derby was eagerly bought, but this temporary success resulted in permanent and never-to-be-remedied evil. Seeing how readily the public bought up the Derby ware, the temptation arose to produce large quantities of the ware specially for the auction rooms. The Duesburys would have risen in their graves had they known of these proceedings; but Fate avenged them, for the decline of the Derby factory commenced from this moment.

We give, also from Mr. W. G. Honey’s collection, a fine example of Bloor Derby china; it is five inches in height, and is marked with a crown and the words “Bloor, Derby,” in circle around (p. 17).

In 1845 Mr. Robert Bloor died, followed in the next year by his brother Joseph, who had assisted him for many years. For a little while the works were in the hands of a Mr. Clarke, who finally discontinued them and sold most of the models to the Staffordshire manufacturers. The end came in 1848, when a number of the workmen left Derby for ever and migrated into Staffordshire and Worcester. Here, then, is the end of the Old Derby works.

Old Derby china will, therefore, be seen to be divided into two periods—the great Duesbury period and the declining period when Bloor became a factor.

A word or two to readers who possess specimens of later Derby may be of interest. Among our marks will be seen several other names connected with Derby. In 1848, when the works were closed, a number of the old hands were actuated by the desire to continue the making of china at Derby They, therefore, under the name of Locker and Co., started a little manufactory, and adopted the design we give.

Mr. Locker died in 1859, and the works were then carried on in the name of Stevenson and Co. Finally we have the name of Courtney, who appears to have been one of Bloor’s agents. Messrs. Stevenson and Hancock adopted the last mark for their wares, after persuasion by connoisseurs, who objected to the use on modern Derby of the old mark of the crown, cross daggers, and . The legacy which the Bloors and some of the modern successors left to the name of Derby is not a very happy one. The tampering with the marks, or the bartering of modern as old, or the disposal of damaged stock, all go to lessen the faith of the public. As the years go on, the china buyer becomes more discerning, and is not that blind monster which manufacturers too often imagine him to be.

In the hurried sketch we have given of the decline of Old Derby we have little to say of the wonderful biscuit ware which was one of the secrets of Derby, which secret has now been lost. The biscuit figures produced in the best days of Derby are unsurpassed for fineness of modelling and beauty of finish. It was in experimenting to find how Derby produced this biscuit that Copeland discovered his celebrated Parian ware.

There is a peculiar pleasure to the lover of things old and things true in the unravelling of the complicated chain which environs an old factory such as Derby. The lives and ambitions of men, fathers, sons, and grandsons, are bound up with the traditions of the firm. Then trade had somewhat the air about it of the old mediæval guilds. There were secrets which no money could buy. All this lies on the china shelf for you to read, if you care to. Perhaps when your erring maid drops your Derby cup and saucer you will philosophically remember that it is not a cup and saucer, but only as the autumn leaves that are strewn on the grave of Duesbury, the potter—just a symbol to remind you that man’s creations, after all, turn to dust and ashes. But all that is very mournful, and mayhap one shall find you later busy with fish-glue and brush, at which pastime you will need to be a philosopher too.

Characteristics of Old Derby China.

With a history such as that of Derby, general characteristics cannot be laid down, but certain typical patterns were made at Derby. A favourite pattern was the “French sprig” or “Chantilly,” technically termed “129 sprig” at the Derby works, being an imitation of the Angoulême china, painted with a forget-me-not or small blue cornflower, and a gold sprig laid on the white. This is of frequent occurrence on fluted cups. Deep blue borders with gold leafage and simple festoons in pink was a characteristic decoration of early Crown Derby. The “Japan” patterns of Derby during the last years of the eighteenth century and early years of the nineteenth, were profusely decorated with blue and red, and often richly gilded.

SALE PRICES.

II

CHELSEA
CHINA

II

CHELSEA CHINA

The origin of Chelsea china is like that of the celebrated Charles James Harrington Fitzroy Yellowplush, “wropped in mystry.” The southwestern corner of London has always been connected with the making of pottery in some form or another. To-day Messrs. Doulton carry on the tradition of Lambeth and Vauxhall. Battersea was famed for its enamelled ware, and Fulham had a factory established by John Dwight, M.A., of Christ Church, Oxford, the inventor of porcelain in England, to whom a patent was granted in 1671 for his manufacture of porcelain and stone ware.

Tradition, with a light heart, circulated the fable that the origin of the Chelsea works was owing to the clay that was brought as ballast in ships from Chinese ports. In a “Life of Nollekens” this absurdity finds its way into print, but for all that it is utterly without foundation. “The cunning rogues produced very white and delicate ware, but then they had their clay from China, which, when the Chinese found out, they would not let the captains have any more for ballast, and the consequence was that the whole concern failed.”

Equally foolish and erroneous statements have been made about other of the English factories, and the difficulty of sifting real facts from a mass of chaff in such factories as Bow or Lowestoft is very great.

In the early days of Chelsea, and, by the way, the exact date of the establishment of the factory is not known, the clay was obtained from Cornwall. Dr. Martin Lister, in a work published in 1699, mentions the fact that an inferior kind of porcelain was made at Chelsea, probably little better than opaque glass. It is known that a manufactory of glass was set up at Chelsea by some Venetians under the auspices of the Duke of Buckingham. It is interesting to note that the Chelsea mark of an anchor is identical with that of Venice. In 1745 the works at Chelsea had attained a Continental fame, inasmuch as the French company, in petitioning for the establishment of a factory at Vincennes, urged that its aim was to counteract the importation of English and German ware.

1745 is a very convenient date, as we then come on surer ground. The earliest dated example of English porcelain known has the word, “Chelsea, 1745,” scratched on it under the glaze, and is also marked with a triangle. We reproduce this mark in our list of Chelsea marks.

Life was given to the Chelsea factory by the patronage of George II., who did much to encourage its work. He procured workmen, models, and materials from Saxony and Brunswick, and thus enabled Chelsea to enter into competition with the best designs and productions of Dresden and Sèvres. The Duke of Cumberland took a warm interest in the factory, and contributed an annual sum to its revenue. In 1750 we find the Chelsea works in the hands of Nicholas Sprimont, a foreigner of considerable artistic taste, who established the reputation of Chelsea. The best period of Chelsea ware is from this date till the year 1765. Porcelain made between these two dates is always much sought after, and brings considerable sums under the hammer. For instance, in February, 1902, at Christie’s, a Chelsea teapot, painted with birds and trees in colours, in spiral panels, with borders of gilt flowers, fetched £96 12s., and a pair of vases, 11¹⁄₄ inches in height, square shaped, the four panels painted with male and female Chinese figures, sold for £588. In July, 1902, a figure of a Chelsea shepherdess, brought £33 12s.

There is little doubt that at this time there were being manufactured at Chelsea some very fine specimens of porcelain. Horace Walpole writes, in 1763, “I saw yesterday a magnificent service of Chelsea china, which the King and Queen are sending to the Duke of Mecklenburg. There are dishes and plates without number, an epergne, candlestick, salt-cellars, sauce-boats, tea and coffee equipages, et cetera. In short, it is complete, and cost £1,200.”

One pleasing feature is the fact that Mr. Sprimont made a handsome fortune by his skill and industry as a director. During his time, it is said that “the china was in such repute as to be sold by auction, and as a set was purchased as soon as baked, dealers were surrounding the doors for that purpose.” This fanciful scene of competing dealers striving to secure a specimen of Chelsea almost before it was cooled from the furnace is too picturesque to be literally true.

We reproduce a figure of a carpenter, eight inches high, coloured, marked with anchor in red (p. 29). This specimen of Chelsea is now at the Bethnal Green Museum. We give an illustration of a beautifully decorated vase in the collection at the British Museum, representing the Death of Cleopatra. The French style of design is singularly evident in this example (p. 31).

Of the marks on Chelsea china, it may be observed that the earlier specimens, in the days when they imitated blue and white Oriental models, are unmarked. Later the anchor appears, embossed in a raised oval, impressed on the bottom of the piece, and bearing the anchor in relief. Various forms of the anchor are used, and in varying colours, apparently according to the caprice of the workman, who drew it with his hair-pencil. Red is the colour most commonly used, and the best pieces are mostly marked in gold, with the anchor more carefully drawn.

Specimens with the double anchors are very valuable, as this was a mark only used on very high-class pieces.

The triangle is one of the marks of Bow, and the little milk-jugs in the form of a goat, decorated with raised flowers, were attributed to Bow, on account of this mark, but the last mark we give shows beyond dispute that the triangle was also used as a Chelsea mark.

Having told of the rise and progress of Chelsea, we have regretfully to chronicle its fall. The following contemporary advertisement is mournful reading: “To be sold by auction, by Mr. Burnsall, on the premises, some time in March next (1764), at the Chelsea Porcelain Factory, everything in general belonging to it, and all the remaining unfinished pieces, glazed and unglazed; some imperfect enamelled ditto, of the useful and ornamental; all the materials; the valuable and extensive variety of fine models in wax, in brass, and in lead; all the plaster moulds, and others; the mills, kilns, and iron presses; together with all the fixtures of the different warehouses; likewise all the outbuildings, etc., etc. And, as Mr. Sprimont, the sole possessor of this rare porcelain secret, is advised to go to the German spaw, all his genuine houshold furniture, etc., will be sold at the same time.

“N.B.—Soon after, when everything is sold belonging to the manufactory and the large warehouse cleared, there will be some most beautiful pieces of the truly inimitable Mazarine blue, crimson, and gold, that Mr. Sprimont has thought deserving finishing; that will be sold at Chelsea, as the whole remaining and the last produce of that once most magnificent porcelain manufactory.”

This was in 1764, but no purchaser came forward, and the factory lingered on till 1769, when again we find it advertised, and the end of Chelsea china is very near, Mr. Sprimont having entirely left off making the same. Josiah Wedgwood had some idea of purchasing some of the Chelsea china: “There’s an immense amount of fine things,” he writes to Bentley. But at this date, Mr. William Duesbury, of the Derby manufactory, took over the Chelsea works as he had previously taken over those of Bow, and carried them on for some years until 1784, when he pulled down the buildings, and removed all that was useful to his factory at Derby, and thus the manufacture of Chelsea china came to an end.

The earliest examples of Chelsea china were in imitation of the ordinary blue Delft patterns, but later, Oriental patterns were very successfully copied, both in blue and white, and in mixed colours. Both Sèvres and Dresden were then adopted as models, and with very fine results. The colours were remarkably vivid, and only skilful artists were employed, the specimens they turned out being exquisitely decorated and finely conceived. The fine vases in the French style in imitation of Sèvres, with gros bleu, crimson, turquoise, and apple-green were made from 1760 to 1765.

Later, debased French forms were copied and an over elaboration was employed which marked the decadence of Chelsea. This over elaboration in art often marks the period of its decline. When wood engraving attempted to copy the refinements and delicacy of steel engraving it exceeded its limitations. To-day the glass-blower of Venice commits the same blunder when he, with false art puts lace patterns on his glass ware.

The two most important specimens of Chelsea china, both from their size and quality, are undoubtedly the “Chesterfield” vase, and the “Foundling” vase. They are two feet high, with bold rococo scroll handles, surmounted by dome-shaped covers; they are painted with pastoral subjects on white medallions. The reverse sides are painted with exotic birds of rich plumage, and the body or ground of the vase is of a rich gros bleu colour. The former was bought for £2,000 by the Earl of Dudley, and the latter, which was a gift to the Foundling Hospital, was sold by the Governors to the same nobleman, and they are now both at Dudley House. We give an illustration of the celebrated “Foundling” vase.

The raised flowers arranged in vases and ornamental figures were a feature of Chelsea ware; butterflies, bees, and other insects were introduced among the leaves, and the modelling was always well done. We reproduce a characteristic piece of Chelsea with delicate work, and exhibiting many of the individualities of Chelsea design (p. 27).

As the earliest specimens of Chelsea were unmarked they can only be judged by the body, the general style of workmanship, and the glaze. The ordinary Chelsea marks we have already given, but we now give the marks which were used by Mr. Duesbury for a time when he was proprietor both of the Derby works and those of Chelsea. This ware is known as “Derby-Chelsea” ware, and is very much sought after. There are some finely enamelled plates in the Victoria and Albert Museum with the mark we give. They are magnificent specimens of the Derby-Chelsea and are scarcely distinguishable from their Oriental prototypes except in the softness of the paste.

It is interesting to remember that Dr. Johnson thought he could discover a means of further perfecting the Chelsea china. He applied to the proprietors, who allowed him to fire his compositions in their ovens at Chelsea. The worthy lexicographer attended there about twice a week and stayed all day, accompanied by his housekeeper, who brought a basket of provisions with her. Nothing, however, came of the experiments.

In taking leave of Chelsea we must remember that its success was an encouragement for the formation of manufactories in other parts of the country during the closing years of the eighteenth century. The workmen trained there under Sprimont found their way to Derby and to Worcester, and to parts of Staffordshire, and carried their experience with them. If for nothing else Chelsea deserves to be remembered as an art centre; and although Sprimont broke down in health and had to go to the “German spaw,” and leave his pictures to be sold at Christie’s, for all that, Chelsea spelt success.

Characteristics of Chelsea China.

The glaze is a softer milky white, and is not so thick as that on Bow pieces. It is carefully finished in every detail. The figure subjects are not so crudely painted as those of Bow. Three spots unglazed are sometimes found on Chelsea plates and dishes, caused by the three points on which pieces have rested. Chelsea china is remarkable for its great weight. The bases and rims, particularly of smaller pieces, are ground quite smooth. Just above the rim black specks and small tears of the coagulated glaze are noticeable. As in Bow, an insect or spray was sometimes cleverly painted over flaws and defects.

SALE PRICES.