The question is an important one, since in the above view the Mound-builders would, as we shall hereafter see, form the link connecting the ancient people of South and Central America with the pottery-making Indians of our own time in New Mexico, Colorado, and Arizona.

Now and again new discoveries are made which act as stimuli to fresh researches. A few months ago a terra-cotta tablet covered with written characters was reported to have been brought to light in Stoddard County, Missouri. It was said to bear the appearance of having been impressed with its undecipherable characters while the clay was still damp, to have then been hardened and glazed. A hint is all that is needed to originate speculation. We can turn to the terra-cotta tablets of Assyria and ask if there is{427} no connection between them and this Missouri relic, and if the partially submerged continent in mid-Atlantic of old writers is really mythical. Such a hint was dropped at the time of the discovery. It might possibly be better to compare the tablet with some of the inscriptions of Central America. It concerns us more at present to find that the Mound-builders used sun-dried bricks in rearing their giant structures. In the Lower Mississippi and along the Gulf these bricks appear to have been generally employed to strengthen the embankments. One in Mississippi is described as having a supporting wall of “sun-dried brick two feet thick, filled with grass, rushes, and leaves.” On some appears the impress of human hands. As to their pottery, it may be said in general terms to compare well with that of the South Americans. In the Peabody Museum at Harvard, an extensive collection has been brought together. Some of the vases are admirably finished, and of good design. Others are quaintly designed, but somewhat rudely worked, and would appear to indicate that fictile art had little attraction for that people. We have seen numberless specimens showing a partiality even in the humblest vessels for imitations of animal and human forms. Examples of this and other kinds are given in the preceding illustrations.

enlarge-image
Fig. 407.—Mound-builders’ Vases.
Fig. 407.—Mound-builders’ Vases.

From a comparison of the pottery of the Mound-builders with that{428} of South and Central America, the conclusion will be inevitably reached that the view already taken of the migrations of the former people is correct. Between the ruder works of the two peoples there is often a striking and close resemblance. To this class belongs a great deal of the pottery of the Mound-builders to be seen in collections. Among them we find nothing equal to the best Peruvian art; but in the details of decoration and the tendency of the potter toward certain typical forms, specimens may be discovered such as we might expect from a nation composed of emigrants, and far removed from the centre where the rudiments of their art were acquired.{429}

CHAPTER IV.

INDIAN POTTERY.

Professor O. C. Marsh in a recent lecture touched upon this point, and at the same time hinted at a possible community of race among all the ancient peoples of America. “On the Columbia River,” he said, “I have found evidence of the former existence of inhabitants much superior to the Indians at present there, and of which no tradition remains. Among many stone carvings which I saw, there were a{430} number of heads which so strongly resemble those of apes that the likeness at once suggests itself. Whence came these sculptures, and by whom were they made? Another fact that has interested me very much is the strong resemblance between the skulls of the typical Mound-builders of the Mississippi valley and those of the Pueblo Indians. I had long been familiar with the former, and when I recently saw the latter, it required the positive assurance of a friend who had himself collected them in New Mexico to convince me that they were not from the mounds. In a large collection of Mound-builders’ pottery, over a thousand specimens which I have recently examined with some care, I found many pieces of elaborate workmanship so nearly like the ancient water-jars from Peru, that no one could fairly doubt that some intercourse had taken place between the widely separated people that made them.”

According to this view the Mound-builders would have a relationship with the Peruvians on the one hand, and with the Pueblos on the other. When the Mound-builders retreated from their upper settlements, they maintained for some years their occupancy of territory along the lower Mississippi, before finally retiring toward the south. It is hardly possible that they disappeared en masse before the invaders, or that those lingering behind the main body should have been utterly exterminated. It would be difficult in that case to account for such exceptional Indian tribes as the Natchez and Mandan. Both tribes were skilful workers in clay. The Natchez, at the time when the West was first opened up by Europeans, over three hundred years ago, were making pottery comparable with that of Europe. They found the requisite clay on the banks of the Mississippi, and were acquainted with the use of color. The Mandans employed earthen-ware in their households, almost as extensively as any modern people. They baked pots in such a way that they were as capable of resisting the action of heat as the metal utensils of the present day. These were hung over the fire for purposes of cooking and numberless other articles of earthen-ware were seen in their lodges. The Mandans were making pottery on the upper Missouri forty-five years ago, and probably continued doing so until a late date.

The Pueblos of New Mexico, Colorado, and Arizona present us with another problem, which can only be solved by one of two suppositions,{431} either that they are the descendants of emigrants from Central America who degenerated through contact and association with Indians, or that they represent a remnant of the Mound-builders who sought in the west the security which the main body of their countrymen found in the south. We shall find additional reason hereafter for believing that if there was no extensive amalgamation of the races, the Indians at least borrowed some of the customs of their predecessors. If it be well understood that the ancient occupants of the territory extending from the mouth of the Mississippi northward and westward to Arizona had a common origin, and that their victorious barbarian successors were in certain districts modified by absorption, such facts as a similarity between the pottery of Louisiana or Illinois and Colorado need not be received with either hesitation or bewilderment. And, besides, the historical necessity for ascribing it to a specific age is thereby materially lessened.

The Pueblos, or Village Indians, of New Mexico and Arizona have left many interesting pieces of earthen-ware, and many others of the present time come from the same section. There is abundant proof that this entire district was inhabited at a very ancient date, and the relics of successive degrees of civilization are found in the ruins. El Moro, in New Mexico, was visited by Lieutenant Simpson in 1849, and afterward by Lieutenant Whipple. Pottery was found painted in zones and wavy lines, and occasionally highly polished. Following the same parallel westward, Lieutenant Whipple discovered other ruins to which no age could be ascribed, although some were clearly more ancient than others, indicating that the region must have been inhabited throughout a long series of years. More pottery was collected, brightly colored, and painted after patterns resembling those noticed at El Moro. The paintings occasionally assumed the forms of animals and insects. Still farther to the west, at Zuni, and at places beyond it in the same direction, the examples of the ceramic work of the early inhabitants multiplied. Sun-dried bricks were found to have been employed in building, and in addition to painted pottery, an older indented kind was met with.

An extended exploration of the same region, but somewhat farther north, was made in 1875, under the auspices of the United States Geological and Geographical Survey of the Territories. Mr. W. H.{432} Holmes and Mr. W. H. Jackson subsequently presented notices of the results of their examinations of the ancient ruins within an area of six thousand square miles, chiefly in Colorado, but partially also in New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah. Their joint evidence regarding the immense quantities of fragmentary pottery seen in the course of their explorations must create great astonishment. In speaking of the ruins of a village in New Mexico, situated on the Rio de la Plata, about twenty-five miles above its junction with the San Juan, Mr. Holmes says, “The soil was literally full of fragments of painted and ornamented pottery.” Near the same locality, and while riding through a desert-like district, he observed “fragments of pottery strewed around,” and “on the high dry table-lands, on all sides, fragments of pottery were picked up.” Writing of the Montezuma cañon in Utah, Mr. Jackson says, “As the valley widened it was dotted in many places with mounds thickly strewed over with the ever-accompanying ceramic handiwork of the ancient people in whose footsteps we are following, and occurring so frequently and of such extent as to excite astonishment at the numbers this narrow valley supported.” The same writer says, “All who have ever visited this region, which extends from the Rio Grande to the Colorado and southward to the Gila, have been impressed with the vast quantities of shattered pottery scattered over the whole land, sometimes where not even a ruin now remains, its more enduring nature enabling it to long outlive all other specimens of their handiwork.”

The presence of such immense quantities of fragmentary pottery can possibly be explained upon the hypothesis that the vessels were liable to fracture when exposed to the fire, and that those cracking under the heat were thrown away when taken out of the primitive and open kiln.{433}

The specimens obtained, both fragmentary and entire, give abundant opportunity for studying the processes and decoration of these old-time potters. As illustrating the fertility of their talent for shaping and ornamenting their wares, Mr. Holmes observes that on one occasion, when encamped in the Mancos Cañon, he found, within a space of ten feet square, fragments of fifty-five different vessels, and adds that, “in shape these vessels have been so varied that few forms known to civilized art could not be found.” The clay varies according to locality, in some cases being of an apparently fine quality mixed with sand and shells, and in others coarse and more friable. All this old pottery was made by hand, and fired, although no remains of kilns have been discovered.

The smaller pieces, such as cups and jars, are usually covered with a peculiar thin, hard, and smooth glaze or enamel, and then painted. The larger pieces, which apparently answered the purpose of the Egyptian amphora, present a rough, corrugated surface, are seldom glazed and never painted. A specimen of the latter class, found among the débris in one of the cliff-houses of the Mancos in Colorado, is given in the illustration (Fig. 408). Its rough exterior is to be attributed to the process of making. The potter began by drawing the clay into strips, and then commencing at the bottom, wound the strips spirally and pressed each layer down upon that below it, indenting the outside with a stick or with his thumb. The illustration (Fig. 409) may serve to elucidate the method of construction. The inside{434} is perfectly smooth, and so well are the strips worked together, that they show no division on fracture. An attempt was made at decoration or variety, by running the strips a few times round without indenting them and by attaching scrolls or spirals immediately below the neck. All the pottery of this description is ancient. A jar of similar construction to the above, but of a better shape, was found in Epsom Creek, Utah (Fig. 410). The fragment of a handle (Fig. 411) would appear to indicate that the ancients were familiar with the well-known cable pattern of modern porcelain manufacturers. It is made by twisting together three rolls of clay. A ladle (Fig. 412) and what seems to have been a pipe (Fig. 413) will tend to show farther the extent of the resources of the aboriginal potters of the west.

enlarge-image
Fig. 417.—(Entire).
Fig. 417.—(Entire). Fig. 418.—(Restored). Fig. 419.—(Restored). Fig. 420.—(Fragment).

enlarge-image
Fig. 421.—(Extended to show Pattern).
Fig. 421.—(Extended to show Pattern).

In the specimens of their painted pottery we have the best means of judging their art. The painting is generally black laid upon the white enamel or glaze; and however the color was obtained, it was very durable. Although the fragments, as we have seen, have lain on the ground exposed to the action of the weather for at least several centuries, the color, in very few cases, shows any symptom of decay. In one piece the white ground has actually worn away, leaving the black decoration in relief. The designs show a vast amount of ingenuity on the part of the artists. They are nearly all modifications of the fret and scrolls. A very common style (Fig. 414) consists of a series of enclosed squares, the alternate borders being composed of crossed lines and straight lines, and having undecorated bands between. A remarkably fine specimen (Fig. 415), both{435} in shape and the simplicity of its decoration, was taken from a grave on the banks of the San Juan, near the mouth of the Mancos. Its excellent form, and the throwing of the classical fret round the widest part of the body, bear witness to an artistic sentiment of considerable refinement. The artists of the time appear to have chiefly directed their attention to tasteful combinations of lines in triangular, rectangular, and other odd forms, in which the two latter are united or conjoined with straight bands of color. A fine specimen (Fig. 416) was found in a heap of rubbish at a cave ruin on the De Chelly. Its perfectly rotund form argues a skill in manipulating the clay which one can hardly conceive possible without the assistance of the wheel. For the purpose of farther illustrating the decorations and shapes, a few fragments are presented in a restored and extended form (Figs. 417-420). In nearly every case the decoration is on the inside of the vessel, sometimes covering the entire surface, but more frequently taking the form of a band round the lip; when it appears on the outside, it generally consists of a narrower band (Fig. 422). It will be observed that, so far, we have not met{436} with a single attempt at decoration by painting animal or floral forms. Mr. W. H. Jackson says that only one fragment has been found exemplifying such a style (Fig. 423). It was found in the upper cañon of the Montezuma, and has the figure painted on the inside. A rudely modelled frog on the outside of a fragment of a cup (Fig. 424) is from the same district. In this case the ornamentation is in relief on the outside.

It would be interesting to inquire if the modern Moquis of Tegua are the degenerate descendants of the ancient inhabitants of the cave-dwellings and cliff houses of the valleys of the San Juan and its tributaries. The probabilities are in favor of such a supposition, just as the semi-civilized dwellers in modern Zuni are the descendants of the old Pueblos. There are evidences of decay scattered throughout the entire region.

In architecture the inhabitants of the present day are certainly inferior to their old-time predecessors, and in the ceramic art there is a similar decadence. A very peculiar and altogether exceptional piece (Fig. 425) was found by Mr. W. H. Jackson among the Moquis of Tegua, about which its possessors could give him no information. He concluded that it had been made at Zuni by the Pueblos, and a color of probability is lent to this supposition by the fact, previously noted, that the Pueblos of Zuni make use of insect and animal forms in decorating their pottery. The specimen mentioned is evidently of modern manufacture. The upper part is white, the lower red, and the figures are red and black. More nearly resembling, although far inferior to, the ancient works is a piece (Fig. 426) made by the Moquis of Tegua. The decoration is after the ancient type, but more crowded and complicated, and covers both the inside and the outside of the vessel. It is a fair example of the modern work, of which two{437} further examples are given (Figs. 427 and 428).

The modern Pueblos are exceptional both for the comparative excellence of their work, and by reason of the fact that they make pottery for the purposes of trade, as well as for their own use. This appears from Gregg’s work, published about twenty-five years ago, entitled “Commerce of the Prairies.” The author says: “They manufacture, according to their aboriginal art, both for their own consumption and for the purpose of traffic, a species of earthen-ware not much inferior to the coarse pottery of our common potters. The pots made of this material stand fire remarkably well, and are the universal substitutes for all the purposes of cookery, even among the Mexicans, for the iron castings of this country, which are utterly unknown there. Rude as this crockery is, it nevertheless evinces a great deal of skill, considering that it is made entirely without lathe or any kind of machinery. It is often fancifully painted with colored earths and the juice of a plant called guaco, which brightens by burning.”

To revert for a moment to Professor Marsh’s remarks, there appears to be abundant reason for considering a great proportion of the old pottery of America as belonging to one class, and that the old inhabitants were originally of one race. The corrugated ware which we first found in Colombia reappears among the Pueblo Indians, and has also been found in Utah. The Indians made it in New Jersey, Pennsylvania,{438} Delaware, Georgia, Florida, and District of Columbia, having probably acquired the art from their predecessors. Professor Rau says it was widely known in North America, and Mr. Hartt shows the wide spread of the practice of coiling throughout South America. The latter states upon authority that the tribes on the Araguaya River all coil, using the hand, water, and a bamboo trowel. The same process is found among the tribes of the Orinoco section. The red and dark brown painted ware we have traced from Peru to Nicaragua, and thence to the Moqui settlements. The Moquis of Arizona make great numbers of the shallow ladles with short handles terminating in animals’ heads, similar to those of Peru. We have seen the Brazilians and Moquis both using vegetable colors on pottery, and it is probably only our ignorance of Peruvian and Central American methods which hinders our tracing these processes back to antiquity. It is difficult upon any other hypothesis than that of a community of race to explain these facts. We have said that the Moquis may be descendants of Mound-builders seeking safety in the west. They may also have come directly from the south, and having passed the country lying between the Gulf of Mexico and the Sierra Madre, have reached the Colorado River, along the upper affluents of which their settlements extend.

An interesting discovery was made some years ago by Mr. Charles Rau on the Cahokia Creek in Illinois, in the rich alluvial strip of land known as the “American Bottom.” He there found the place where pottery had been made by some former inhabitants, and saw the clay-pit, and the heaps of shells to be ground or broken and mixed with the clay. The vessels were all round-bottomed, and do not appear to have differed much in shape from those of the San Juan Valley. The painting deserves particular notice. It was laid upon the outside so as to cover it, and sometimes on both sides, and in either black, dark brown, or a beautiful red, only one color being used on each article. “It is evident that the coloring preceded the process of baking, and the surfaces thus coated are smooth and shining, the paint replacing to a certain extent the enamel produced by glazing.” Covering the entire surface with one color does not suggest much ingenuity, but on the pieces where incised lines and indentations form the decoration, there are fuller evidences of artistic feeling. The lines were either{439} drawn straight round the vessels, or formed zigzags or figures of greater or less simplicity. Without insisting upon any relationship between the potters of the Cahokia and the Mound-builders, Mr. Rau believes the pottery he found to be equal to that taken from the mounds of the Mississippi valley. Some of the unpainted vessels were made in basket moulds, and other remains, such as the fragment of a toy canoe, show that modelling was practised to some extent. The age of this pottery is left to conjecture.

The same writer quotes from Dumont, who wrote about a century and a quarter ago, a description of the method of making earthen-ware adopted by the inhabitants of the large tract of country then called Louisiana. The passage is here given in full: “After having amassed the proper kind of clay and carefully cleaned it, the Indian women take shells which they pound and reduce to a fine powder; they mix this powder with the clay, and having poured some water on the mass, they knead it with their hands and feet, and make it into a paste, of which they form rolls six or seven feet long and of a thickness suitable to their purpose. If they intend to fashion a plate or a vase, they take hold of one of these rolls by the end, and fixing here with the thumb of the left hand the centre of the vessel they are about to make, they turn the roll with astonishing quickness around this centre, describing a spiral line; now and then they dip their fingers into water and smooth with the right hand the inner and outer surface of the vase they intend to fashion, which would become ruffled or undulated without that manipulation. In this manner they make all sorts of earthen vessels, plates, dishes, bowls, pots, and jars, some of which hold from forty to fifty pints. The burning of this pottery does not cause them much trouble. Having dried it in the shade, they kindle a large fire, and when they have a sufficient quantity of embers, they clean a space in the middle, where they deposit their vessels and cover them with charcoal. Thus they bake their earthen-ware, which can now be exposed to the fire, and possesses as much durability as ours. Its solidity is doubtless to be attributed to the pulverized shells which the women mix with the clay.” It will be observed that this is practically the same method of construction described by Messrs. Jackson and Holmes as existing in the San Juan valley.{440}

In a valuable paper upon “The Stone Age in New Jersey,” by Dr. C. C. Abbott, of Trenton, and published in the report of the Smithsonian Institution for 1875, much interesting information is given of the Indian pottery of that State. Dr. Abbott describes a small round vase with flaring rim, decorated before firing with lines roughly made with a pointed stick. He then gives a caution which it is well to bear in mind when examining the pottery comprehensively styled Indian. The vase is in size similar to those found in western mounds, but less carefully ornamented. Difference in decoration is not, however, always a safe test to apply in order to distinguish the pottery of the Mound-builders from that of the Indians. “In gracefulness of outline the New Jersey vase is the equal of that of the Mound-builders, while we have seen a drawing of a large vase found in Vermont which exceeds in elaborateness of detail any figured by Messrs. Squier and Davis. The Mound-builders were never inhabitants of what is now known as New Jersey nor of the State of Vermont, but pottery is sometimes found in these sections the equals in some instances of the pottery of the west in style of decoration, while in all cases it is as hard and durable.” A pipe, the bowl of which slopes outward and with the underside of the stem flattened, is also described by Dr. Abbott. It is made of fine yellow clay. A fragment of another pipe with a quadrangular bowl was made of the paste generally used by the Indians, a mixture of clay, mica, and shells. Some of the fragments of pottery are curiously marked with dots and lines. In one case a spear of grass had been employed to make bead-like studs in rows on the surface.

A discovery was made a few years ago in Tennessee, by which we learn something of the Indian processes (Dr. J. F. Wright on “Antiquities of Tennessee,” Smithsonian Report, 1874). It consisted of an excavation six or eight feet in diameter, and four or five feet deep, and was apparently a kiln or oven for baking pottery. Unwrought clay, charcoal, fragments of pottery, and pieces of bark more or less charred were found among the sand in the excavation. The pottery was peculiarly marked on the inside, and investigation led to the conclusion that the vessels had been moulded round an interior core of beech bark, the corrugations of which corresponded exactly with the impressions on the pottery. The Maryland Indians (Paper by O. N.{441} Bryan, Smithsonian Report, 1874) are thought to have baked some of their pottery in nets.

Many others of the Indian tribes practised the fictile art, very few, so far as is known, being entirely ignorant of it. Moulding in clay was not, however, a practice likely to commend itself or to offer any attractions to the nomadic red man, and it fell into desuetude, whenever the introduction of metal utensils rendered its continued pursuit not absolutely necessary. Some of the tribes which followed the buffalo possibly never engaged in it, but left the practice to their corn-raising brethren (Dr. W. E. Doyle on “Indian Forts and Dwellings,” Smithsonian Report, 1876). The exceptional tribes of New Mexico and Arizona, which cannot, as already pointed out, be identified with the North American Indians, are chief among the few which still continue to make pottery. We have seen that they adhere in a great measure to the ancient shapes and primitive decorative patterns. The fact of chief importance in connection with the old potters of the West and the processes to which they resorted is their employment of a glaze. It is considered by Dr. Emil Bessels as the most striking peculiarity of the pottery found near the ruins. It is regular, very hard, sometimes opaque and whitish, at others transparent and tinged with blue. Neither this glaze nor the colors have been accurately analyzed, but of the latter the reddish-brown and brown are undoubtedly mineral, derived from iron and manganese. The black was probably an organic substance, such as charcoal made into a pigment by being mixed with fine clay.{442}

CHAPTER V.

UNITED STATES.

And here it may be profitable to consider some of the obstacles in his way. The first of these is commercial. With a high protective tariff the home manufacturer is barely enabled to compete with the foreign producer in plain domestic wares. The import duty does not cover the greater expense of working in this country. Statistics show that in the items of labor and material the American manufacturer, as compared with the European, labors under a disadvantage of about one hundred per cent. In works of art this disadvantage is vastly increased. The makers of the tariff draw a distinction of only ten per cent. between white granite and decorated porcelain, or, in other words, they give the makers of artistic porcelain protection greater by twenty-five per cent. than that accorded the makers of granite. A distinction to the extent of five per cent. is drawn in the tariff between undecorated and decorated porcelain and parian. Art work, therefore, is benefited to the extent of one-ninth more than plain goods of the{443} same material. It need not be pointed out that art is thus protected less than workmanship, since the proportionate cost of artistic work, as compared with skilled and unskilled labor, is far greater here than in Europe. As a consequence, there is little to induce manufacturers to turn to art unless some profit can be drawn from the reputation which it brings. It is not intended to discuss here the question of protection versus free trade. The tariff is merely brought forward to illustrate the difficulty of rearing up something worthy of being called an American art. To demonstrate this by example, here (Fig. 429) is a porcelain plate made at Greenpoint on a challenge. It is a copy of a plate now in the possession of Mr. George Such, of South Amboy, by whom it was purchased at the sale of the effects of Louis Philippe. The original is from Sèvres, and is decorated chiefly in gold. The Greenpoint copy was made in order to test the question whether it were altogether unreasonable to entertain the hope that American decoration might not—at some future day, of course—equal that of Sèvres. Those who saw both had some difficulty in distinguishing the original from the copy, and in some instances could not do so without examining the ware as well as the decoration. The copy is a remarkably fine specimen of decorative art, and would lead us to entertain great expectations regarding the work of the artist when his skill is devoted to original designs.

The challenge made was, therefore, fully answered. Should it be asked why, under these circumstances, similar work should not be done regularly, the answer is simple. The existing state of the market, in so far as the demand for American artistic work is concerned, is such that prices will barely bring back the actual cost of production. Toward lessening that cost the efforts of manufacturers must be directed; and in connection with this subject a remark may be quoted, made by President T. C. Smith at the Convention of the Potters’ Association:{444} “Foreign clays can be put down in New York tide-water cheaper than you can buy Pennsylvania clays, by about fifteen per cent.”

The great expense attending the production of works of art is not, however, the only drawback with which the American manufacturer has to contend. It may, in fact, be said that the impediments to the rapid advancement of ceramic art in America have not yet been touched upon. They consist of neither the lack of capital, enterprise, experience, nor skill.

It is a singular fact that while native manufacture advances with rapid strides, and finds on all sides a public ready to give it a hearty reception, native art must force its way to recognition. Its first honors must be won abroad. It must bear a foreign stamp to be accepted at all in the home of its birth. The cause of this is not far to find. The American market is a good market, and is so regarded by the world at large. Foreign artists send their works to it, and are sure of a welcome. Competition by a native superior is thereby made difficult; by an equal almost impossible; by an inferior, an absurdity. The foreign competitor comes branded as a genius, and home critics hesitate about issuing a verdict in favor of a countryman. They appear to have a lack of confidence in their own judgment, and would rather endorse or modify another’s opinion, than take the responsibility of issuing an independent one of their own. Patrons suffer from a similar diffidence. On the one hand they see certainty, on the other uncertainty. On this side is the work of one who has won the praise of all Europe; on the other, nothing but that of one who makes a direct appeal to their own discrimination.

Under such conditions it is difficult for an art to struggle into existence. French art is to a Frenchman the finest and best the world ever saw. Englishmen support English art because it is their own. They are satisfied with it, if all the universe should wonder what it is they nurse and cherish. It is good to them, and that is enough. If their own opinion should change, it will then have become a curiosity, and therefore doubly worthy of their care. American art may be good, even equal to the best, but unfortunately it is American. Receiving no notice, the artist loses even the benefit of criticism, and concludes that his own people compliment themselves by believing that no work of art can be produced among them.{445}

This may appear overdrawn, but the facts are eloquent. It has been said that, as a rule, Americans take a pride in their own manufactures. That of pottery is an exception. Almost anywhere granite-ware can be seen bearing as a mark the royal arms of England, with the motto in full—in this case very appropriately—honi soit qui mal y pense. It is a curious mark for an American potter, or at first sight seems so. The ware may have been made at Trenton, or anywhere else in America, and the explanation is simple. The dealers will not buy it without that mark, and first suggested its use as they would order a certain style of decoration. Inquiry among the dealers brings out the whole truth. Their customers look for the English mark, and finding it, are satisfied. After this we need not inquire if the English granite-ware is superior to the American. There is no question of superiority or inferiority, but only one of the potency of a name.

Again, in the matter of porcelain, that made and decorated in this country is sold every day for French, German, or English. It is, in fact, “all things unto all men,” according to the requirements of the purchaser and the ingenuity of the dealer. In some cases it is bought plain, and decorated, after it leaves the factory, in the various foreign styles. No objection is ever made to its appearance, its finish, purity, durability, or decoration, only it has the misfortune to be American, and its parentage must be concealed at all hazards, and even in spite of the manufacturer’s mark. Here, again, there is no question of quality, but only one of the effect of a name.

To discuss the objectionable part of misrepresentation is away from the present purpose, and the deduction from these facts is the only thing now requiring to be made. They argue that upon their merits there are wares produced in America which, if made anywhere else, would cope with the corresponding qualities now imported.

For artistic works the struggle is still harder. In their case the test is not practical, but critical. They demand taste, and not use, to be appreciated; and, as a consequence, very rarely receive the recognition to which they are entitled. Art grows slowly, and, especially in a country so largely interested in commerce as America, is long in reaching its maturity. Looking at it aright, there is all the more reason why, when it makes its appearance, it should be received with{446} warmth and treated with deferential respect, in order that its growth may be hastened and not retarded. America is, in this respect, an exception to the nations of the earth. The question may be looked at from various points of view. The patriotic course would certainly be to encourage, and not by neglect to stifle, a budding art. If the art be poor, it stands in all the greater need of encouragement, in order that, for America’s sake, it may rise to an equality with that of other countries.

In France, Germany, Prussia, Russia, Italy, China, and England, the ceramic art received the support of governments and wealthy patrons, and the result has been recorded. In America such support is neither given nor required. What is chiefly needed is appreciation. In the Republic the people are the rulers and patrons. In their hands are both power and wealth, to be used in the rearing of art, surely with as much discrimination and judgment as in the monarchies of Europe and the Orient. We might say from another stand-point that the earliest works in any branch of the arts are those of the highest value in the future. They reveal to the historian the foundations of the eminence from which he views the past, and that eminence America will undoubtedly attain. The skill now being developed, and the taste now being cultivated, are the legacy of the present generation to the next, and future attainments will be but the interest of present struggle and endeavor.

These considerations, however, are, in a certain sense, extraneous. The American artist and artist-manufacturer demand no exceptionally favorable position, nor that their works shall be viewed in any other than a fairly critical and commercial light. Prejudice in art is the end of criticism; prejudice in commerce is suicidal.

The materials for making every kind of ware are found in different parts of the country, and the industry is for that reason well distributed. As early as 1766 American clays were imported into England, captains on their return voyages often taking samples from the Carolinas, Georgia, and Florida. Many of these reached Wedgwood, who, in allusion to one of them, says, “It will require some peculiar management to avoid the difficulties attending the use of it.” He elsewhere avows his willingness to make all necessary experiments with American clays. These trials turned out well, as we find him{447} making arrangements for a regular supply from Ayor, in the country of the Cherokees, about three hundred miles from Charleston. He desired a monopoly by patent or parliamentary grant, but ultimately sent out an agent, of whom we learn nothing more, except that he began his journey to the Cherokee deposit. In October, 1768, a cargo of Carolina clay reached Liverpool, and the trade became general both in the Cherokee and Pensacola clays, Wedgwood apparently giving the preference to the latter. What use he made of it is not precisely stated. More interesting is the fact that America contributed to Cookworthy’s invention of natural porcelain in England in 1760. It is said that an American showed Cookworthy, in 1745, specimens of both kaolin and petuntse found in Virginia, and samples of the ware made from them. Cookworthy’s own account of it is slightly different, inasmuch as lie only mentions having seen specimens of the manufactured china. He says: “I had lately with me the person who has discovered the china earth. He had with him several samples of the china ware, which I think were equal to the Asiatic. It was found on the back of Virginia, where he was in the quest of mines; and having read Du Halde, he discovered both the petuntse and the kaolin. It is this latter earth which he says is essential to the success of the manufacture. He is gone for a cargo of it, having bought from the Indians the whole country where it rises.” Mr. Cookworthy was not favorably impressed by the gentleman from Virginia, of whom no more is heard. Nor does it appear that he returned to England with the cargo, which he thought he could land there at about sixty-five dollars per ton. There is one purely American feature of the story, and that is the purchase from the Indians of “the whole country where it rises.”

The final practical effect of Mr. Cookworthy’s association with this American was the foundation of the English porcelain industry. The acknowledgment is thus made in the catalogue of the Museum of Practical Geology: “The great advance of the porcelain manufacture in England is due to the discovery of the kaolin of Cornwall by William Cookworthy, of Plymouth, about 1755. He apparently had his attention directed to the subject by an American, who showed him samples of china-stone and kaolin from Virginia, in 1745.” One hundred and thirty-two years later, the country from which the suggestion{448} came is importing kaolin from that which received and acted upon it.

New Jersey is the only State of the clay deposits of which we know much historically or have any precise information. The facts here presented are gleaned from a report issued by the State Geological Survey, and will give an idea of the value of our native clays. It is stated, on the authority of Mr. Samuel Dally, of Woodbridge, that the clay there was known to the soldiers before and during the Revolution, and that, when stationed at Perth Amboy, they called it fuller’s-earth, and used it for cleaning their buckskin breeches. In 1800 the South Amboy clay was dug for making stone-ware, and after 1812 the use of New Jersey clays for fire-bricks and other refractory materials began. Soon after 1816, Mr. Price was shipping fire-clay from Woodbridge to Boston, to be used in making fire-bricks. About 1820, Mr. Jacob Felt, of Boston, bought fifty tons of Woodbridge clay from Jeremiah Dally, at twenty-five cents per ton, and so started a regular trade, which was maintained for many years. The Woodbridge deposit is very rich, and is now extensively worked, the clay being suitable for different purposes. It can be used as fire and pipe clay, or for white-ware, and also meets the requirements of paper-makers. In 1835 the same clay was in use by Howell & Bros., Philadelphia, for satining wall-paper. Gordon, in his Gazetteer (1833), speaks of a discovery of extensive beds of white pipe-clay between Woodbridge and Amboy; but even in 1840 its extent and uses were not fully known. Coming down to 1855, we find clay for fifty millions of fire-bricks being taken from the pits at Woodbridge, Perth Amboy, and South Amboy; 2000 tons for the paper-makers; 2000 tons for making alum, and a large quantity for fine pottery. In 1868 the aggregate production had doubled. In 1874 265,000 tons of fire-clay were dug, and brought, at an estimated average price of $3 50 per ton, $927,000; 20,000 tons of South Amboy stone-ware clay, at $4 per ton, brought $80,000. These figures are sufficient for the formation of an opinion of the worth of a good clay deposit.

With regard to the materials to be obtained in this country, it may be premised that, from a vague use of words having an otherwise definite meaning, it has been difficult to obtain satisfactory information upon some of the most interesting points. The following extract is{449} taken from a report upon the pottery industry, by the secretary of the United States Pottery Association to the Industrial Directory for 1876: “The clay, or kaolin, mines of the United States have been wonderfully developed the past few years. Rich and inexhaustible beds of fine kaolin are now being worked in the following States: Delaware—three extensive deposits; Pennsylvania—three very fine mines are worked, and the whole of Chester County abounds with as fine a deposit as England can boast; Illinois, Missouri, and Indiana can boast of rich deposits also now being worked; New Jersey abounds in ball-clay, common white-ware clay, and all kinds of fire and retort clays; while Maine, Connecticut, and Maryland furnish felspar in abundance, and Pennsylvania and Maryland endless quantities of quartz or silica. Every section of the country, from the Rocky Mountains to the State of Maine, has raw material in great variety, as yet unimproved.” In view of these statements, it may appear singular that the Union Porcelain Works at Greenpoint are consuming large quantities of imported kaolin. To explain this, we must believe the word kaolin in the above extract to be applied to the native clay as found, and before it is freed from any impurity. This belief is supported by M. Ch. de Bussy, one of the French members of the International Jury at the Centennial Exhibition. In his report he says: “Les matières premières pour la poterie sont abondantes aux États-Unis. Des dépôts de kaolin sont exploités dans un grand nombre d’États, principalement dans ceux de New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Georgia. Plusieurs des matières désignées sous le nom de kaolin ne sont pas toutefois le produit de la décomposition du feldspath in situ; ce ne sont à proprement parler, que des argiles blanches qui ne peuvent servir à la fabrication de la porcelaine que par leur association à du feldspath et du quartz.” He then goes on to say that the kaolin is not prepared with sufficient care, and that for that reason the Greenpoint factory uses for its table porcelain a great deal of English kaolin.

Another reason is that the English clay can always be depended upon, and that the native, for lack of proper preparation, cannot. The general conclusions of M. Ch. de Bussy are confirmed by investigations made here. The above mentioned report by the Geological Survey, embracing all or the greater number of the clays of the State{450} of New Jersey, gives much valuable information, and farther substantiates our view. The following table has been compiled from the data there given, for the purpose of comparing the imported kaolin with the New Jersey clays, and thus arriving at the truth upon this point:

In the selected clays of New Jersey the great preponderance of silica at once attracts attention, and is to be attributed to the admixture of sand, which averages about seventy-five per cent. of the mass. Whenever the silica is present in a greater amount than the standard percentage given in the table, and particularly when it appears in the form of sand, the clay becomes less fit for making fine ware. The body is proportionately coarser. The Jersey clay, therefore, although locally dignified with the name of kaolin, cannot be used by the manufacturer of porcelain.

The deposit has been made under less favorable circumstances than that of south-western England. There nature has to a great extent performed the washing process, by carrying the decomposed felspar along a valley and dropping the impurities and coarser ingredients by the way. The artificial process is simply the counterpart of that of nature. In New Jersey the clay and quartz-sand are in some places deposited together, and are then miscalled felspar; in others they have been partially assorted, the fine particles being deposited in one bed, the quartz-sand in another. An analysis of three specimens{451} of this “felspar” shows the following ingredients, the decrease of sand and increase of alumina being especially noteworthy:

These tables will explain the language of the report, that the New Jersey “kaolins” are “simply mica-bearing sands,” and that the felspar “is more properly a kaolin.” “The so-called kaolin is a micaceous sand, consisting of fine-grained white quartz-sand, mixed with a small and varying percentage of white mica, in small flakes or scales, and a very little white clay.” In other words, there is no New Jersey clay entitled to the distinctive name of kaolin, and the inveterate misapplication of the word illustrates the difficulty to be encountered by the inquirer into this matter. M. de Bussy, for example, in the passage quoted, falls very naturally into the error of classing New Jersey with the “large number of States in which deposits of kaolin are found.” His mistake, and the confusion of terms which led to it, makes it all the more desirable that something definite should be known of the deposits in other States.

As to the deposits of Pennsylvania and the West, there appears to be considerable difference of opinion, but the existence of clay for making every kind of ware, from drain-pipes to porcelain vases, is beyond all doubt. A partial analysis of Georgia kaolin showed that in the leading ingredients of silica and alumina it approached very nearly the standard given in the table. The whole question appears to be one of analysis, preparation, and experiment, so that when the manufacturers buy clay for a special purpose, they can depend absolutely upon what they obtain.

Mr. T. C. Smith, of Greenpoint, is so confident of the richness of this country, that he believes kaolin of the best quality exists in abundance, and that it will in course of time be an article of export.

At the Centennial Exhibition, Mr. Laughlin, of East Liverpool,{452} Ohio, appeared as one of the representatives of Western enterprise. He thinks the varieties of clay in America outnumber those of all the rest of the world. At East Liverpool all the varieties are used. A new clay found in Missouri, and expected to be very valuable, has recently been added to the list. It gives the paste a peculiar softness of color, and lends additional beauty to the manufactured ware. Mr. Laughlin said nothing of exporting clays, but thought it highly probable that European capital would be brought into this country to work the inexhaustible materials which it contains for every kind of ware. What are wanted to render these kaolinic treasures available are the enterprise, skill, and capital to prepare and compound them. It is, at least, suggested that this is the greater part of the difficulty, and that if the peculiar qualities of each deposit were more precisely known, if the crude material were skilfully cleaned, and experiments were systematically conducted for the purpose of discovering the combinations necessary for making a true and regular porcelain clay, there would be no necessity for going away from home for any ingredient of the requisite porcelain paste. This supposition is borne out by the fact that a few years ago a number of American potters attempted to make porcelain with kaolin brought from the South, and in every instance failed. Others have since met with success more or less complete. Böttcher did not succeed on his first attempt, and, in fact, it was not until several years after his death that the best Dresden ware was made. In a similar manner, experiment alone can enable American potters to avail themselves of the undoubted wealth of their own country. Meantime, it is noteworthy that the deposits of all kinds now being worked are of sufficient value to maintain a number of mills for levigating, drying, and grinding. Several are on the Susquehanna, in Maryland; at East Liverpool, Ohio; at Fort Ann, New York; on the Connecticut River; and at Trenton, New Jersey.{453}

POTTERY.