At Loosdrecht (Hard Paste), not far from Utrecht, De Moll began a small factory in 1772. He made a fine quality of china, closely following the Dresden. It had but a short existence. His mark was “M o L.,” meaning Manufactur oude Loosdrecht.

Amstel (Oude), near Amsterdam, made the next essay (1782), and produced good porcelain; but it could not hold its own against that which the English were now sending forth into the markets of the world—patriotism was not equal to cope with cheapness.

The mark was the letters A and D combined, in script.

At New Amstel, nearer to Amsterdam, the attempt was also made, which continued through 1808 to 1810, when it too died. The mark here was also in script.

Marks used at Amsterdam:





Fig. 158.Porcelain of The Hague.

At The Hague, about 1775, both hard and soft porcelain was made, and of great excellence. More was done here than at Amsterdam, and the work was of superior quality. Some of the painting was excellent—equal to that done at Dresden. Tea and dinner services of great beauty were made, which are now and then to be bought in Europe. The examples shown in Fig. 158 are a plate, and cup and saucer, from Mr. Wales’s collection.

The mark was a stork holding a fish, the symbol of the town.



At Lille (Soft Porcelain), Sieurs Dorez and Pelissier, uncle and nephew, were granted privileges for making porcelain as early as 1711, and this with that at St.-Cloud were the only factories at that time in Europe. But little is known of this ware, except that it resembled that made at St.-Cloud, and that it had no distinctive mark. Hard porcelain was afterward made there (1784) by one Durot, which showed great excellence, the decoration being mostly flowers and gold. These pieces are quite rare.

The mark was a crowned dolphin.



At Tournay (Doornick) soft-paste porcelain was made in 1750, and a very large business was done at one time, as many as two hundred workmen being employed in 1762. Chaffers says this factory is still at work, and that pâte tendre is still made there, which is in close imitation of that once made at Sèvres.

The mark of the tower is sometimes referred to Tournay, and sometimes to the porcelain made at Vincennes. It is in doubt. The other mark in gold indicates best; in blue or red, second-best. The marks “To” and “Ty” are supposed to be old marks of Tournay.

The marks used:



Sweden.—That the coldest and most savage country of Europe should be rich in anything except men and women is strange. And is it? According to the standards of England or America, we may say, No. And yet travelers tell us that in the towns and on the country estates are houses rich with works of art, and filled with books. So far as these go they indicate wealth and leisure. But the best sign of a prosperous people is not pictures; neither is it books. Is it not that more than one-half her people own their lands and raise the food they eat? Is it not that the greedy cormorant called “Trade” has not shut up most of her people in those Bastiles called factories, and thus degraded body and soul to the verge of, if not into, the gulf of pauperism and vice?

This helps to explain the general well-being which is still to be found in those northern countries of Sweden, Norway, and Denmark; but it does not fully explain whence came the first flow of wealth and the first gatherings of art into Sweden. I believe they came from the great and successful wars of Gustavus Adolphus and Charles XII.

By no possibility can war be careful of the rights of man. War is intended to hurt, to exhaust, to consume other nations. War not only takes food and munitions in the conquered country; it takes whatever it wants and can take, whether of necessaries, luxuries, gold, or art. War, we know, enabled the first and great Napoleon to enrich his palaces and the museums of Paris with the finest works of art found in the countries he overran. War, I do not doubt, brought into Sweden the beginnings of those collections which now count many of the fine pictures of Guido and Raphael, of Teniers and Douw. Frugality and general well-doing have done the rest; so that all through the south of Sweden, and less in Norway, are to be found delightful houses and cultivated people. But neither Sweden nor Norway has made Art the first business or first glory of life; and well for her that they have not. This is the ornament and finish of the structure, not its body or soul.

We do not look, therefore, to find here any such institutions as those of Meissen or Sèvres.



Fig. 159.Marieberg Porcelain and Faience.

At Marieberg, near Stockholm, in 1759, porcelain of a good quality was made, and continued to be made in a small way for some twenty years. Before this, faience or pottery was made there, and at Rörstrand, as early as 1727. Some good examples were at the Exhibition at Philadelphia in 1876. Of the work of Marieberg I know of none in this country, except that in Mr. Wales’s collection, at Boston, consisting of some small porcelain custard-cups and a very beautiful faience vase, both of which we have had engraved (Fig. 159).

The mark used:



The three crowns and the letters MB are sometimes followed by the private marks of the painters, as in the above.



Fig. 160.Porcelain of Denmark.

Denmark.—Porcelain, it is believed, was made at Copenhagen as early as 1760; but it did not continue for a long time. Few specimens of this early work are believed to exist. A hard-paste factory was begun in 1772, by Müller, who, with the aid of the Baron von Lang, made a company, by which the capital was raised. It did not pay, and in 1775 it became a royal factory, and the Government paid its annual deficit. Excellent work was made here, the great aim being to equal the production at Dresden. It was up-hill work and a costly whim. Within a short time (1876) the works are said to have gone into private hands, who are prosecuting the business with vigor and skill. Certainly a very creditable display was made by some three or four firms of Copenhagen at the Philadelphia Exhibition in 1876. In faience and terra-cotta they have arrived at great excellence. The Greek vase has been there revived, and copied with much precision. Seipsius and Ruch are mentioned by Marryat as the leading painters at the royal works at Copenhagen in the last century. Our illustration, from Mr. Wales’s collection, is good work, and follows the lead of the Dresden painters (Fig. 160).

In the “Manual of Marks,” by Hooper and Phillips, are two marks—given here—but the “three wavy lines” is the mark almost universally known. They indicate the waters of the Sound and Great and Little Belts.



Russian Porcelain—Hard Paste.—When Peter Alexeyevitch, called Peter the Great—that shrewd savage—undertook to make his kingdom a power in Europe, he soon saw that he must create among his people wants which then did not exist. In 1697 he made his first pilgrimage to the dock-yards of Saardam and the quays of London, to see for himself what those nations did to make themselves rich and strong, feared if not loved. He found ships, trade, factories. He went back to his barbarians, and forced them to build a new port—St. Petersburg (1703); set them to work to make dock-yards, to build ships, to organize factories; he forced upon them new wants and new industries. If he did not make them happier, he certainly made them stronger. He organized them, combined them, so that they moved at his own powerful will. His successors, following his example, have made Russia the second power of Europe. When, in 1716, Peter visited Paris, he carried back to his capital great store of works of art—not that he cared for works of art, but his savage shrewdness told him these were the things which the growing and grasping nations of Western Europe valued; and so he would have them, too. But Art has had but an imitative life in Russia, even to this present time. Now, her silversmiths, and at least one artist, a worker of bronze named Lanceray, have made such exquisite work, and shown it at the Philadelphia Exhibition in 1876, that one begins to believe that Art in this savage Russia may not forever be content to copy what some one else has done. As to porcelain, Russia has not done much, but yet something.

The Government of Russia, inspired, like the rest, after the success at Dresden, with the desire to produce fine works, at once made efforts to secure the services of accomplished men to establish a porcelain-manufactory. This appears to have been done in the year 1744, by the Empress Elizabeth Petrovna, when good porcelain was produced, probably in small amount. In 1765, however, the Empress Catherine II., with her accustomed restless energy, threw herself into the competition. She enlarged the works and secured whatever was possible of artists and workmen, and produced some of the finest porcelains of Europe. The clays used appear to have been wholly Russian, and her market was mostly with the rich nobility of her own kingdom. Still the china-fanciers of all Europe, then even more eager than now, purchased the Russian work; and it is found in good collections, though but little of it is offered for sale.

M. Demmin quotes from a Russian work of 1773: “Il existe une fabrique de porcelaine, située sur la Néva, route de Schlüsselburg, à quatorze versts de Pétersbourg. Elle fabrique des porcelaines tellement belles et fines, qu’elles ne le cèdent en rien à la porcelaine de Saxe, soit pour la blancheur et la finesse de l’émail, soit pour la beauté du décor. Sa blancheur est même supérieure à celle de Meissen. Le directeur, l’inspecteur, tous les maîtres et ouvriers sont à la solde de la cour,” etc.

The porcelain has a fine glaze, the paste being hard and slightly bluish; the decorations usually highly finished in the styles prevailing at Dresden.



Fig. 161.Russian Porcelain.

The piece shown in Fig. 161 is a teapot, of superior glaze and finish, from Mr. Wales’s collection; the handle and spout are peculiar, finishing, as they do, with the neck and head of a bird, ending at the base of the spout in a small wing-decoration. The paste, the glaze, and the painting of the teapot and the cup and saucer are excellent.

The Russian marks most used are:



A mark in blue, supposed to be an early one. The Empress Catherine II.’s mark (1762 to 1796). The Emperor Paul’s mark (1796 to 1801).
The Emperor Alexander I.’s mark (1801 to 1825). The Emperor Nicholas’s mark (1825 to 1855). The mark now is a crown, with the letter A in script, Alexander II.

Tver.—About 1787 an Englishman named Gardner made some porcelain at Tver, of which so little is to be obtained that it is hardly known in collections. His mark seems to have been [image of symbol not available], the monogram in Russian letters of A. Gardner, and sometimes the full name in Russian characters.

Moscow.—In 1830 some porcelain was made at Moscow by A. Popoff, a piece of which is in the South Kensington Museum, marked with his name in Russian characters. There seems also to have been porcelain made at Moscow by M. Gulena, of which little is known. His mark was the initial letters of Fabrica Gospodina, and his own name, in Russian characters.



Poland.—At Korzec, in Poland, in 1803, a Frenchman named Mérault, from Sèvres, made porcelain for a few years, probably in small quantity; and a mark upon some pieces of his is a triangle containing an eye.

CHAPTER XVII.

POTTERY AND PORCELAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.

The First Porcelain made here.—Bonnin and Morris.—Franklin Institute.—William Ellis Tucker.—Tucker and Hemphill.—Thomas Tucker.—General Tyndale.—Porcelain of T. C. Smith and Sons.—Early Advertisements.—Josiah Wedgwood.—Lord Sheffield’s Report.—Alexander Hamilton’s Report.—History of Norwich.—Samuel Dennis, New Haven.—Isaac Hanford, Hartford.—Gallatin’s Report.—The “Washington Pitchers.”—Lyman and Fenton, Vermont.—Rouse and Turner, New Jersey.—Potteries at Trenton.—In Ohio.—The Centennial Exhibition.

DOUBTS have been expressed whether Porcelain was made in the United States as early as 1770; though there was no question as to the existence of the true china-clays, and that Wedgwood and other potters in England knew of them and had used them. More, they were fearful that they would be put to use in this country, to the injury of their trade.

The investigations of Charles Henry Hart, Esq., of Philadelphia, seem to remove the doubt as to the making of porcelain in that city as early as 1769 or 1770. Looking over the newspapers, he finds, under date of December 29, 1769, an advertisement as follows:

“NEW CHINA-WARE.—Notwithstanding the various difficulties and disadvantages which usually attend the introduction of any important manufacture into a new country, the proprietors of the china-works now erecting in Southwark have the pleasure to acquaint the public that they have proved to a certainty that the clays of America are productive of as good PORCELAIN as any heretofore manufactured at the famous factory in Bow, near London,” etc.

Subsequently other advertisements appeared for apprentices, etc., signed by G. Bonnin and G. A. Morris. This would seem conclusive. Mr. Hart also states that some specimens of the work then made are deposited in the Franklin Institute of his city.

It is not likely that the work reached a commercial success, or that it was long continued.

Subsequently porcelain was made and decorated in that city by Messrs. Tucker and Hemphill, as will clearly appear from the following communications.

Mr. Thomas Tucker prepared for the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, in 1868, this brief statement:

“William Ellis Tucker, my brother, was the first to make porcelain in the United States. My father, Benjamin Tucker, had a china-store in Market Street, in the city of Philadelphia, in the year 1816. He built a kiln for William in the yard back of the store, where he painted in the white china, and burnt it on in the kiln, which gave him a taste for that kind of work.

“After that he commenced experimenting with the different kinds of clays, to see if he could not make the ware. He succeeded in making a very good opaque ware, called ‘queen’s-ware.’ He then commenced experimenting with feldspar and kaolin to make porcelain, and, after much labor, he succeeded in making a few small articles of very good porcelain. He then obtained the old water-works at the northwest corner of Schuylkill Front and Chestnut Streets, where he erected a large glazing-kiln, enameling-kiln, mills, etc.

“He burnt kiln after kiln, with very poor success. The glazing would crack and the body would blister; and, besides, we discovered that we had a man who placed the ware in the kiln, who was employed by some interested parties in England to impede our success.

“Most of the handles were found in the bottom of the seggars[17] after the kiln was burnt. We could not account for it until a deaf-and-dumb man in our employment detected him running his knife around each handle as he placed them in the kiln.

“At another time every piece of china had to be broken before it could be taken out of the seggar. We always washed the round O’s—the article in which the china was placed in the kiln—with silex, but this man had washed them with feldspar, which, of course, melted, and fastened every article to the bottom; but William discharged him, and we got over that difficulty.

“In the year 1827 my brother received a silver medal from the Franklin Institute of Pennsylvania, and in 1831 received one from the Institute in New York. In 1828 I commenced to learn the different branches of the business.

“On the 22d of August, 1832, my brother William died. Some time before, he connected himself with the late Judge Hemphill. They purchased the property at the southwest corner of Schuylkill Sixth and Chestnut Streets, where they built a large store-house and factory, which they filled with porcelain. After the death of my brother, Judge Hemphill and myself continued the working of porcelain for some years, until he sold out his interest to a company of Eastern gentlemen; but, being unfortunate in their other operations, they were not able to give the porcelain attention. In the year 1837 I undertook to carry it on alone, and did so for about one year, making a large quantity of very fine porcelain, many pieces of which I still have.

“The gilding and painting are now as perfect as when first done.”

Mr. Tucker presented at this time a piece of the work, which is now in the collection at Philadelphia.

In addition to this I give a communication from General Hector Tyndale, which adds confirmation to the above:

“About the years 1760 to 1770 potteries were established in the United States—notably at Philadelphia—of which few records now remain. But they attracted the attention of the English potters, as may be seen by a letter from Josiah Wedgwood (page 367, Meteyard’s ‘Life of Wedgwood,’ London, 1865), wherein he expressed apprehension of the effect of these upon British ‘trade and prosperity.’

“Porcelain-works, to which Mr. Elliott alludes, were established in Philadelphia (corner of Schuylkill Sixth and Chestnut Streets) about the year 1830, Judge Hemphill being among the most prominent of the founders of them. The wares made were of very good, and, in some respects, of excellent qualities. The products were white and decorated table and tea services, and decorative wares. The ‘body’ was very good, being hard, dense, tough, and translucent, quite vitreous, with sharp and clear ring, and withstanding great and rapid changes of temperature. In appearance it somewhat resembled the French (Limoges) porcelain of that day, and, in durability and use, that of Berlin, and quite equal to either. The glaze was good, and well adapted to receive colors. The forms were copies of the French and English of the time, and these were almost always bad. The ornamentation was generally poorly copied from the English or French, or, if original, was decidedly worse. English, French, and German artisans were imported, but whatever skill these may have had was soon lost, owing perhaps to the want of comparative and competitive productions, and also to the want of taste among the general buyers and the public. So far as ornament was concerned, and a knowledge of æsthetic rules or a prevailing sense of beauty and fitness were involved, this attempt at manufacture was premature. These works continued, with a diminishing success, for several years; and the founders, who lost much money in the establishment, deserve much credit for their serious and wellnigh successful effort.

“At present there are porcelain-works near New York—at Greenpoint, and perhaps elsewhere—making very good and enduring wares, of excellent ‘body’ and glaze, but of coarse and inartistic form and ornament.”

The porcelain-factory last spoken of is that of T. C. Smith and Sons, which, at the Centennial Exhibition, made a creditable display.

Through the courtesy of Mr. Prime, editor of the “Hand-Book of the New York Museum of Art,” I am able to give some extracts essential to this brief history:

“When Delft pottery began to be used for table and household purposes in England, it is probable that small quantities found their way to this country, but neither crockery nor porcelain took the place of pewter and wood on American tables, and the importations increased but slowly with the increase of population and wealth. Wooden trenchers, pewter dishes, mugs, water-pitchers, etc., continued in general use until the present century. By an examination of early newspapers we are enabled to learn much of the character of the table-furniture which dealers advertised for sale, and these were probably alike in all parts of the country. We find pewter always prominent. In the New Haven Gazette of September 30, 1784, a druggist advertises Wedgwood mortars and pestles. In the same paper, October 21st, a dealer advertises ‘blue and white stone-ware, consisting of butter-pots, jars, and cans;’ also ‘quart, pint, and half-pint water-flasks; matted ditto; spaw ditto; Bristol ditto.’ In the same paper, November 25th, a dealer advertises ‘queen’s-ware in small crates, well assorted,’ which had been imported direct to New Haven; and, December 2d, he advertises ‘English china cups and saucers.’ On November 4, 1784, the same dealer advertised ‘a large assortment of coarse stone-ware in crates, large round bottles holding nearly two quarts, in small, convenient hampers, and quart, pint, and half-pint flasks,’ with a discount to those who buy large quantities. This last advertisement may refer to wares made in America. In 1785 we find advertised ‘Nottingham, queen’s, china, and glass ware.’ ‘Nottingham ware’ had long been a popular name in England for brown potteries, originally made at Nottingham, and the name continued in use here until a very recent date.

“Bricks and ruder forms of pottery were made in New England in the eighteenth, and possibly in the seventeenth, century. Investigations in progress may elicit information now wanting on this subject. Josiah Wedgwood, in a letter written in 1765, speaks of a pottery then projected in the Carolinas of whose work he had great apprehensions, and seems to desire some government interference to prevent the colonies from making their own pottery and thus injuring the home business. Before the end of the eighteenth century many potteries were established in various parts of the country, but, so far as is now known, no articles were produced except the ordinary coarser kinds of household utensils.

“ ‘A Brief Examination of Lord Sheffield’s Observations on the Commerce of the United States,’ by Matthew Carey, was printed in successive numbers of the American Museum, in 1791, and was collected in a volume, printed the same year at Philadelphia, with a supplementary note on ‘The Present State of American Manufactures,’ etc. On pages 126 and 127 he has the following observations: ‘Manufactures of glass, of earthen-ware, and of stone, mixed with clay, are all in an infant state. From the quantity and variety of the materials which must have been deposited by Nature in so extensive a region as the United States, from the abundance of fuel which they contain, from the expense of importation, and loss by fracture, which falls on glass and earthen wares, from the simplicity of many of these manufactures, and from the great consumption of them, impressions of surprise at this state of them, and a firm persuasion that they will receive the early attention of foreign or American capitalists, are at one produced. Coarse tiles, and bricks of an excellent quality, potter’s wares, all in quantities beyond the home consumption, a few ordinary vessels and utensils of stone mixed with clay, some mustard and snuff bottles, a few flasks or flagons, a small quantity of sheet-glass and of vessels for family use, generally of the inferior kinds, are all that are now made.’

“Hamilton’s return of exports of the United States from August, 1789, to September, 1790, printed in the appendix to Carey’s book, gives, for earthen and glass ware, nineteen hundred and ninety dollars.

“In Miss Caulkins’s ‘History of Norwich,’ Chapter XLIX., it is stated that in 1796 ‘a pottery for the manufacture of stone-ware was established at Bean Hill, which continued in operation far into the present century, seldom, however, employing more than four or five hands.’ In Morse’s ‘Gazetteer,’ 1797, we read, under Norwich, that the inhabitants manufacture ‘stone and earthen ware.’ In the Norwich (Connecticut) Gazette, September 15, 1796, we find this advertisement of a pottery, which appears to have been in operation by a Mr. Lathrop prior to 1796, and is, without doubt, the one referred to by Miss Caulkins and Dr. Morse:

“ ‘C. POTTS & SON, informs the Public, that they have lately established a Manufactory of EARTHEN WARE at the shop formerly improved by Mr. Charles Lathrop, where all kinds of said Ware is made and sold, either in large or small quantities, and warranted good.’

“A memorial of Samuel Dennis, dated New Haven, October 9, 1789, to the General Assembly of Connecticut, shows ‘that he is acquainted with the potter’s business, and is about to erect a stone-pottery; and there is in this country a plenty of clay which he presumes of the same kind with that from which the queen’s-ware of Staffordshire is usually made; and that he wishes to erect a pottery for the purpose of manufacturing the finer kinds of ware usually made in Staffordshire, particularly the queen’s-ware,’ and he asks the aid of the State in founding the works. His memorial was negatived, and it does not appear whether he went on with his project.

“Isaac Hanford, of Hartford, Connecticut, took out a patent, January 20, 1800, for a new method of making bricks, tiles, and pottery-ware in general, and of discharging the moulds. Nothing further is known of his work; but coarse pottery has, from the beginning of the century, been made in Hartford. Prior to 1800 a pottery was in existence at Stonington, Connecticut, managed by Adam States, who was succeeded in the business, after 1804, by his sons, Adam and Joseph. They made jugs, butter-pots, jars of all sizes, and some small wares with handles, uniformly of soft pottery, usually gray in color, with salt-glaze. Contemporary with this was a pottery at Norwalk, Connecticut, which made red wares of soft pottery in many forms. We learn from a lady, whose memory extends back to 1804, that it made jars and pots of all sizes, teapots, mugs, and large milk-pans, then in common use among the farmers in Connecticut, glazed with a lead-glaze, the color deep red with flashes of black, probably caused by smoke in the firing. Other potteries produced wares similar to the Stonington and Norwalk.

“From a report of the Secretary of the Treasury (Mr. Gallatin), made in 1810, it appears that the exports of ‘coarse earthen-ware’ exceeded the imports. In this report the secretary says that progress has been made in the manufacture of ‘queen’s and other earthen ware,’ and that ‘a sufficient quantity of the coarser species of pottery was made everywhere. Four manufactories of a finer kind had lately been established which made ware resembling that of Staffordshire.’ Dr. Dwight, in his ‘Travels’ (1822), after quoting the above, states that he had gained access to the reports from Massachusetts and Connecticut, upon which the secretary’s report had been founded, and gives among the manufactures of Connecticut for the year, potteries, twelve; ‘value of earthen and stone ware, thirty thousand seven hundred and forty dollars;’ and for Massachusetts, ‘earthen-ware, eighteen thousand seven hundred dollars.’

“Before the end of the last century direct trade had been established between the United States and China, and Oriental porcelain began to make its appearance in America. The English trade increased rapidly in the early part of the present century, and English manufacturers had begun to decorate pottery with American subjects for the American market. Porcelain seems to have been decorated at Lowestoft with American designs, for special orders, before 1800.

“From 1810 to 1830 great quantities of English pottery, especially blue and white wares, were imported. Much of this was decorated with American views, buildings, landscapes, and pictures of public events, the principal exporters in England being J. and R. Clews, of Cobridge, and the Ridgways, of Shelton.”



Fig. 162.The “Washington Pitchers.”

The “Washington Pitchers” were made at this period by the English potters, and were shipped here and sold in great numbers. They are now much prized, but are not uncommon. Few of them have any merit as works of art, being intended only to please the patriotic sentiment of the country.

The smaller one of our illustration (Fig. 162) contains the best picture of Washington of any I have seen painted upon porcelain, and is really an excellent engraving after Stuart’s great picture.

It is said to have been made in England, by order of a Philadelphia dealer, in 1801. Both of these pitchers are in the Historical Society of Philadelphia.

The larger one is more patriotic and less artistic. Around the portrait are entwined the names of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Vermont, Kentucky—fifteen States, and fifteen stars.

On the front is the eagle, and the patriotic Latin, E pluribus unum. Also the name of the owner, James Taylor, M. D. On the other side, in an oval, is some poetry, made in England for our use, as follows:

“As he tills your rich glebe the old peasant shall tell,
While his bosom with Liberty glows,
How your Warren expired, how Montgomery fell,
And how Washington humbled your foes.”

The intentions of the poet we may accept as good, even if slightly mercenary.

One more brief extract will complete this history:

“In 1847 a factory was established in Bennington, Vermont, by Messrs. Lyman and Fenton, and continued in operation till about 1860. Pottery was made in various forms, with good enamel; bisque or Parian wares were produced, and soft-paste porcelain of good quality, well decorated. So far as is at present known, this was the first American factory which has attempted to make figures of men and animals. A peculiar enamel seems to have been patented by Mr. Fenton, of this firm, which was used on some of the pottery. The impressed mark on pottery of this class was arranged in a circle, ‘Lyman, Fenton and Co., Fenton’s Enamel, Patented 1849, Bennington, Vermont.’

“Some time prior to 1829 a factory was established in Jersey City, New Jersey, by persons not now known (said to be French), which made porcelain. No mark was used, but we are indebted to Messrs. Rouse and Turner, the present proprietors, for fragments of the porcelain made prior to 1829, which is hard paste of fair quality. The enterprise was not successful, and in 1829 David Henderson and Co. bought the works, and carried them on under the name of the American Pottery Company. They made white and brown potteries, decorating the former with prints, and the latter with colored enamels and raised work; and also a translucent pottery, which is apparently a natural soft-paste porcelain. Their mark was ‘American Pottery Company, Jersey City, New Jersey,’ in a circle, stamped in the paste. They executed work for druggists and other dealers in New York, printing labels on their jars, boxes, etc. A favorite pattern was a brown pottery pitcher, the handle a hound, the surface covered with a raised representation of a hunt. It was made in various sizes, and is still produced, with a changed form of the same decoration. In 1855 Messrs. Rouse and Turner became proprietors of the factory, and have since carried it on with much success, producing granite, Rockingham, and stone wares, plain and decorated, for table and general use. They use clay obtained from Woodbridge, New Jersey, and another clay from Bath, South Carolina; and occasionally a clay from Glen Cove, Long Island, which contains silex. Their stone-wares are made by the mixing of certain clays, without the addition of other substances. They use no mark on their fabrics.

“Important works are now in operation at Baltimore, Maryland, and at Trenton, New Jersey, making varieties of pottery, plain and decorated, and stone-wares of excellent quality.”

At the Exhibition at Philadelphia good exhibitions were made by Messrs. Otto and Brewer, Mercer Pottery Company, James Moses and Isaac Davis, of Trenton; also by Laughlin Brothers, of East Liverpool, Ohio.

Some twenty firms, mostly from Trenton, were collected in the southeast corner of the Main Building, where they made a creditable display of what is known as the “white granite” ware, so useful and so detestable; thick, that it may resist the hostility of the Milesian maiden, clumsy because of that, without color or decoration of any kind, and cheap: can we expect or demand much? Looking more carefully, we found in Otto and Brewer’s exhibit a modeler named Broome, who had made some base-ball players which were full of life and spirit; also some unglazed vases which had excellence of form and precision of modeling and decoration, showing that good things may be done here. In Fig. 163 we show one of the Parian vases designed by Broome, who only needs encouragement to develop into excellence. James Moses, too, had some white-and-gold work which was good. Isaac Davis, one of these granite-potters, had ventured to turn his cups with a sense of good form, and with a thin lip from which one might drink without being reminded of the horse-trough; he must beware lest it should not pay!



Fig. 163.Parian Vase.

Laughlin Brothers, of Ohio, had a good show of the same kind of wares, and they had also a decorated dinner-set which was good. They had more than this, in that they promised us something. They are using feldspars, kaolins, clays, silexes, from various parts of the United States, and believe we have the best and the greatest variety to be found in any country; but besides these a new clay or mineral, as they think, has been found in Missouri, which promises to be of infinite value. It is cheap, is easily ground and mixed, and imparts to the body a creamy softness and a beauty which add much to the production. That this is true was shown in some of the cups made with it. Moreover, as Mr. Laughlin states, several of the best porcelain-makers of Europe are seriously contemplating the propriety of establishing themselves on this shore of the sea, and putting to use these kaolinic treasures. And why not? With cheap clays, cheap fuels, cheap foods, may we not begin to supply ourselves, if not some of the rest of the world, with the finest productions of the potter’s wheel? And it would seem a good thing for us to do.

APPENDIX.

BOOKS UPON POTTERY AND PORCELAIN.

The following synopsis of works on “pottery and porcelain,” for which we are indebted to Mr. G. W. Wales, will be found useful and interesting:

General Historical Treatises.—Jacquemart, “History of the Ceramic Art”—a descriptive philosophical study of the pottery of all ages and nations, profusely illustrated in aquatint and woodcut, and containing one thousand marks and monograms; Semper, “Der Stil in den Künsten,” in the second volume treats of ceramics, and is a well-illustrated, comprehensive, and useful hand-book; Mareschal, “La Faïence Populaire au 18me Siècle,” has one hundred and twelve colored plates, mostly of French and Delft porcelain; Maze, “Recherches sur la Céramique” is illustrated by photographs, and has a list of marks and monograms; Burty, “Chefs-d’Œuvre des Arts Industriels,” gives a popular account of ceramics, well illustrated (there is a translation by Chaffers); Stallknecht’s papers on “Artistic Pottery and Porcelain” give also an account of the articles in the Vienna Exposition of 1875; Treadwell’s “Manual” is a brief popular work; Hall, “Bric-à-brac Hunter.” One of the best works in English is Marryat’s “History,” well illustrated, in colors. So also is Graesse’s “Guide de l’Amateur,” a very complete collection, in fac-simile, of marks and monograms. Chaffers’s “Keramic Gallery,” besides historical notices and descriptions, gives several hundred photographs of rare and curious specimens of these arts.

Besides these works, devoted especially to ceramics, it will be well to refer to the following, selected out of many books treating generally of the arts of the middle ages, most of them illustrated in the best style, in which may be found chapters or short treatises on pottery and porcelain, with admirable illustrations adapted for use as designs for decoration: Sommerard’s “Arts au Moyen Âge,” plates; Villemin, “Monumens Français;” Lenoir, “Musée des Monumens Français;” Lacroix, “Arts of the Middle Ages;” Louandre, “Arts Somptuaires;” “Instrumenta Ecclesiastica;” Racinet, “L’Ornement Polychrome;” Jones, “Grammar of Ornament;” Bedford, “Treasury of Ornamental Art;” Newbery, “Gleanings from Ornamental Art;” Chenavard, “Album de l’Ornamentiste;” “Tradesman’s Book of Ornamental Designs;” Wyatt, “Industrial Arts of the Nineteenth Century;” Durand, “Recueil et Parallèles des Edifices de tout Genre;” South Kensington Museum, “Industrial Arts;” “Photographs from the British Museum;” Labarte, “Arts Industriels au Moyen Âge;” Zahn, “Ornamentmalerei.”

Manufacture.—The following books treat more particularly of the processes of manufacture of pottery and porcelain, only incidentally touching the artistic history. They are mostly in French, viz.: Brongniart, “Traité des Arts Céramiques,” two volumes of text and one of plates. This is well illustrated, and cited by all writers on the subject as high authority. Figuier, in the first volume of the “Merveilles de l’Industrie,” which treats both sides of the subject, is very fully illustrated as regards both the manufacture and the art-history of glass, pottery, and porcelain. Other briefer treatises are those by Guillery, Bastenaire-Daudenart, Boyer, and a treatise on pottery (Paris, 1772), in volume ii. of the “Description des Arts et Métiers.” In English: Tomlinson’s “Brief History,” from the “Encyclopædia Britannica;” and Arnoux, in volume iii. of Bevans’s “British Manufacturing Industries.” See also Turgau, “Les Grandes Usines de France,” for history of the Sèvres porcelain; Denistoun, “Dukes of Urbino,” volume iii., page 382, for an account of the manufacture of maiolica in the duchy of Urbino; Rosina, “Memoria sulle Stoviglie,” on manufacture of utensils and analysis of clays in the Lombardo-Venetian territory.

The following books give some practical instructions on painting, enameling, etc.: Tilton, “Designs and Instructions for decorating Pottery;” Snell, “Practical Instructions;” “Art Recreations;” Gessart, “Art of Enameling;” Sutherland, “Practical Guide;” Reboulleau.

Marks and Monograms.—Chaffers’s “Marks and Monograms,” which contains also an historical essay on English pottery, with illustrations; also his “Collector’s Hand-book”—a concisely-arranged volume of fac-similes of marks, a supplement to the work just named; Mareschal, “Iconographie de la Faïence”—a dictionary of ceramic artists and marks, with colored illustrations of the different styles; Hooper and Phillips, “Manual”—a dictionary of easy reference; Demmin, “Guide de l’Amateur de Faïences” (two volumes)—a comprehensive, illustrated work of high authority; Bohn’s “Guide to Knowledge of Pottery and Porcelain,” containing also a priced catalogue of the Bernal collection, and an essay; Maze, “Recherches,” illustrated by photographs; Meteyard’s “Wedgwood Hand-book”—a thorough history of this exquisite ware. See also a work by the same author, for admirable photographs of Wedgwood’s principal works, and Fortnum’s “Catalogue of Maiolica.”

The following books treat of the history of pottery and porcelain of different countries and periods:

England.—For a sketch of the art of pottery in England, see the introductory chapters of volume i. of Eliza Meteyard’s “Life of Josiah Wedgwood;” her “Wedgwood Hand-book,” which gives marks, monograms, priced catalogues, and a glossary of technical terms. The same author has recently (1876) published “Wedgwood and his Works,” admirably illustrated with photographs of his more important works; also “Wedgwood Memorial,” likewise beautifully illustrated. Prefixed to Chaffers’s “Marks and Monograms” is an Essay on the Vasa Fictilia of England;” Jewitt’s “Life of Wedgwood” contains also a “History of the Early Potteries of Staffordshire,” well illustrated; Haslem’s “Old Derby China,” illustrated in color, gives a full account of this ware and of the principal workmen, with marks and price-lists; Binns’s “Century of Potting in Worcester” gives in an appendix a sketch of Celtic, Roman, and Mediæval pottery in Worcestershire. See also “Wedgwood, an Address by W. E. Gladstone” (1863); Boyer, “Traité sur l’Origine, les Progrès et l’État actuel des Manufactures de Porcelaine et de Faïence en Angleterre”—one of the excellent Roret manuals of arts and trades.

France.—Mareschal, “Faïence Populaire au 18me Siècle,” with one hundred and twelve finely-colored plates, mostly of French and Delft ware (Paris, 1872); Pottier, “Histoire de la Faïence de Rouen” (1870), two volumes, quarto—an elaborate and finely-illustrated treatise; Pouy, “Les Faïences d’Origine Picarde” (1872), with colored plates and marks; Forestié, “Les Anciennes Faienceries de Montauban,” and other places in the department of Tarn-et-Garonne. On the pottery of the Gauls, see Du Cleuzion, “Poterie Gauloise.” A publication by the Arundel Society gives fine photographs of twenty examples of “Henri-Deux ware” from the South Kensington Museum.

Italy, Germany, Spain, etc.—On “maiolica,” see the history by Passeri, treating of the products of Pesaro and Urbino, and of the works of Giorgio da Gubbio. On “maiolica and Italian faience,” see the splendidly-illustrated works by Delange and Sauzay, “Monographe de l’Œuvre de Bernard Palissy” (Paris, 1872); and the “Recueil de Faïences Italiennes” of the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth centuries (Paris, 1869), by Delanges, Darcel, and Bornemann. Fortnum’s “Maiolica;” also his “Catalogue of Maiolica, Hispano-Moresco, Persian, Damascus, and Rhodian wares in the South Kensington Museum,” finely illustrated in color, and giving marks and monograms; “Centennial Exposition Catalogue of the Castellani Collection;” Beckwith’s “Majolica and Fayence” (New York, 1877) is a concise and useful general treatise on ceramics, containing much information in small space, with numerous photo-engraved illustrations; Drake’s “Notes on Venetian Ceramics;” Riaño, “Catalogue of Art Objects of Spanish Production in the South Kensington Museum;” De Jorio, “Galleria de’ Vasi, Real Museo Borbonico;” “Le Secret des Vraies Porcelaines de la Chine et de Saxe” (1752); Robinson, “Catalogue of the Soulages Collection.” Asselineau, “Meubles et Objets divers du Moyen Âge” gives specimens of Palissy and Flemish ware. Lazari, “Notizie della raccolta Correr di Venezia.”

Oriental and Savage Races.—Alabaster, “Chinese Art Objects in South Kensington Museum;” Audsley and Bowes, “Keramic Art,” now in course of publication, splendidly illustrated with colored plates by Racinet; Jarves, “Glimpse at the Art of Japan;” Schweinfurth, “Artes Africanæ;” Hartt, “Manufacture of Pottery among Savage Races.” On the cloisonné enamels of China, see appendix to Julien’s “Industries de l’Empire Chinois.” On “Chinese porcelain decoration,” consult “Owen Jones’s Examples of Chinese Ornament,” giving one hundred fine colored plates, from examples at South Kensington.

Tiles.—Nichols’s “Examples of Decorative Tiles, in fac-simile, chiefly in Original Size;” chapter entitled “Céramique,” by Riocreux and Jacquemart, in volume iv. of Lacroix’s “Moyen Âge et la Renaissance,” which contains a bibliography of ceramics.

Ancient Pottery.—Birch’s “History of Ancient Pottery” treats of Assyrian, Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Etruscan, Celtic, Teutonic, and Scandinavian pottery, and is fully illustrated. It contains also a list of the principal collections of ancient pottery. One of the best works is Millingen’s “Ancient Unedited Monuments,” giving excellent colored illustrations of painted Greek vases. Other valuable works are those of Inghirami, “Pitture di Vasi Etrusche,” four volumes quarto, with fine outlines of Greek vase-decoration, some in color; a very beautifully-illustrated work (in color) is that of the Count of Syracuse, “Notizia dei Vasi dipinti rinvenuti a Cuma;” see also Lucien Bonaparte’s “Museum Étrusque;” Donati, “Della Maniera d’interpretare le Pitture ne’ Vasi fittili antichi;” “Description of the Ancient Terra-Cottas in the British Museum,” illustrated by line-engravings; Stackelberg, “Die Gräber der Hellenen,” giving plates of urns, vases, bass-reliefs, etc.; Dumont, “Inscriptions Céramiques de Grèce;” Fabroni, “Vasi fittili aretini;” Kramer, “Ueber den Styl und die Herkunft der bemalten griechischen Thongefässe;” De Sanctis, “Vasi antichi della Collezione Hamilton,” with outline illustrations; G. Gerhard, “Vases Grecs relatifs aux Mystères,” outline illustrations; Gerhard, “Etruskische und kampanische Vasenbilder” (Berlin, 1843), with finely-colored illustrations of vases; Gerhard, “Auserlesene griechische Vasenbilder” (Berlin, 1856), two volumes text, two volumes plates, quarto, also admirably illustrated; Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge, part iii., “Fictile Vases;” Schliemann, “Trojanische Alterthümer;” “British Museum Catalogue of Greek and Etruscan Vases,” with outlines; “Catalogue of the St. Petersburg Imperial Collection of Vases in the Ermitage,” with sixteen plates of outlines; Inghirami, “Etrusco Museo Chinsino,” copperplate outlines; “Engravings of Ancient Vases in the Collection of Sir William Hamilton” (Naples, 1791), three volumes folio.

On Egyptian pottery consult Wilkinson’s “Ancient Egyptians;” and the splendid illustrated volumes of Champollion, Lepsius, and Belzoni, for illustrations from the monuments.

Biography.—Jouveaux, “Histoire de trois Potiers Celèbres,” biographical sketches of Palissy, Wedgwood, and Böttger; “Lessons from Noble Lives” (Palissy); see C. C. Perkins’s “Tuscan Sculptors,” volume i., for a chapter on “Luca della Robbia,” also in Vasari; Vasari, volume xiii., page 72, “Vita di Battista Franco.” For a list of books of reference on “ceramics,” see Chaffers’s “Marks and Monograms.”

INDEX.

A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Z