CHATS ON ENGLISH CHINA

I
OLD DERBY

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

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

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

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

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

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

It is generally believed that the manufacture of china first sprang into existence at Derby in 1750, about a year or so before the works at Worcester were established. There is a tradition that the first maker was a Frenchman, who lived in a small house in Lodge Lane, and who modelled and made small articles in china, principally animals—cats, dogs, lambs, sheep, &c.—which he fired in a pipemaker’s oven in the neighbourhood.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It was in the year of Waterloo that the third William Duesbury, and last of the great family of potters who had established the factory, leased the premises to Mr. Robert Bloor, who had been a clerk to his father, and had carried on the business during Mr. Duesbury’s minority. Ultimately the entire business passed into the hands of Mr. Bloor, and the name of Duesbury disappears from Derby records.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Characteristics of Old Derby China.

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

SALE PRICES.