VI THE LOWESTOFT FACTORY We have dealt with Worcester and with Derby, with Chelsea and with Bow. Of the latter, we told of the difficulty of determining the marks, and of accurately naming the china; but what are we to think of a factory, which we may term the “Mrs. Harris” among china factories, inasmuch as some people with no less scepticism than Sairey Gamp’s friend, believe it did not exist at all. The legends of Lowestoft are many and varied, but we think we shall succeed in presenting some sort of rational account of the factory to our readers, which may dispel many notions, perhaps wrongly, held by those to whom “Lowestoft” is a It is stated that a Dutch sailor, wrecked on the coast, in return for the hospitality of a gentleman who brought him to his house, was instrumental in pointing out the value of the white earth which he discovered on the gentleman’s estate. It is certain that the sand on the coast of Suffolk at Lowestoft is of great purity, as compared with that of other parts of the country, and, when the Lowestoft works were closed, the Worcester factory availed themselves of it in making their best porcelain. There are certain plates of reputed Lowestoft manufacture, dated 1752 and thereabouts, bearing the names of Quinton, of Yarmouth, Parrish, of Norwich, and other local families. These plates are of earthenware body, with coarse decorations in blue, and having a yellow rim. They were made to celebrate the marriage of the persons named on them. In the one we reproduce, specially photographed for this volume, the inscription runs: “Henrÿ and Marÿ Qu?inton, Yarmou?th, nor f f: olk. 1755.” This lettering, with the two dots over the letters y, and the peculiar placing of the commas over the letters u, is conclusive evidence that it was written by a foreigner, and presumably plates such as these were made in Holland to order of some shipmaster. One of the owners of the original factory was Robert Browne, who died in 1771, when the management was undertaken by his son—also Robert Browne—who made great experiments in pastes. There is a story of how Robert Browne the second paid a visit to London disguised as a workman, and by secreting himself in a barrel, was enabled to watch the mixing of the ingredients forming the paste of Chelsea or of Bow. The presence of coats of arms upon genuine known pieces of Lowestoft may have caused some confusion, which has continued to the present day. At the end of the last century a great deal of Oriental china was made having coats of arms of English families upon it. Although Lowestoft bore no resemblance in its body to Oriental ware, people came to suppose that, in some way or another, the ware was brought in its Lowestoft may be divided into two parts, the first dealing with the early period when blue and white ware was made, and the second period, when a finer and higher class of goods, with heraldic designs and floral intricacies, were introduced. At one period of its history the paste of Lowestoft appears to have been harder than that of Bow or Chelsea. Roughly, just a half of a century saw the rise and fall of Lowestoft. It was established from 1756, and in 1802 the factory had ceased. Many families in the Eastern Counties to this day possess specimens of the Lowestoft china with names and dates painted on them. This china with names or initials upon it, or bearing a date, in addition to its personal value is of historic interest in determining periods of manufacture. We give a highly interesting and very rare pair of dated cups and saucers, with unusual decorations, vine leaves in gold, clusters of grapes in red, and tablet in centre with inscription, “M. and E. Calder, Norwich, 1776,” rich blue glaze and gold bands. Among other dated specimens of Lowestoft white and blue ware is a fine bowl, with Chinese figures of After the closing of the Lowestoft works, Allen put up a small kiln at his own house, where he carried on operations on a limited scale. He bought the unfinished ware from Mr. Brameld, of the Rockingham factory, and painted it and refired it, selling it himself afterwards. We reproduce a design of a mug painted by Thomas Curtis for his father and mother, whose names appear on it. It is said that Curtis was formerly employed at Dresden, and that he was a “silent partner” in the Lowestoft works. Many other examples of blue and white exist with dates and names upon them, and there is more than enough evidence to show that, short as was the history of the Lowestoft factory, it did good work. We shall now proceed to give an account of the wonderful decorative qualities of a great artist in We have dealt with the earlier ware made there—of the blue and white porcelain and of the delft ware probably made in Holland; we now come to the higher and finer products of Lowestoft, over which so many debates have taken place. It has been held that this ware was decorated at Lowestoft, but that it was real Oriental body imported in its half-finished state from the East, and only painted and re-fired in this country. However, on the signed testimony of one of the workmen, it is positively stated that no Oriental porcelain ever came into the factory at Lowestoft to be decorated. “No manufactured articles were brought there to be painted, and every article painted in the factory had been previously made there.” The question, too, of hard paste being made at Lowestoft is now disproved; among all the recently discovered fragments is nothing of hard paste. The theory that porcelain came over from China through Holland to Lowestoft, if it be examined, does not hold water. First, it would not have paid, especially as then a large duty existed on china imported, whereas Lowestoft china was produced at a fairly cheap cost, and supplied to the public to compete with Worcester, and Derby, and the Staffordshire makers. Again, when the Lowestoft factory broke up, there would naturally have been a lot of unfinished Oriental porcelain in its white state, prior to the decoration, thrown on the market. What became of But there is a certain amount of mystery about Lowestoft, and a great quantity of ware exists both in this country and abroad, which is classed as Lowestoft china, but which is really Oriental porcelain with British armorial bearings. In fact, the little factory has provided a considerable field for speculation as to what it did and what it did not produce. For so small a factory there is quite a literature in magazine articles, and one volume has been written upon it. The factory started about 1765, and closed down in 1802. When it closed its kilns and heaps of shards were hurriedly buried, it extinguished the hope of an art that promised to be greater. The abandonment of an art industry always breaks some hearts. There is just one fleeting glimpse of one of the old painters when teacups and roses were no longer wanted. Perhaps some of our readers will look under the rose and read a story, sad enough, but true of many a craftsman at the end of the day. One old artist who, by your leave, ladies, painted red roses and twined chains of rosy wreaths, who put smiles and sunshine with his artful brush on to your tea services, had a very aching heart at the end of the journey. Fate herself twined a chain of grey roses for him. He was blind and poor. In his old age, he laboured, a broken-down old man, in the heat of the sun. A couple of donkeys given to him out of charity enabled him to bring water into Lowestoft. A The writer is able to confirm the above statements respecting Lowestoft by information which has been courteously supplied by a kinswoman of the celebrated designer of the bouquets of roses on the Lowestoft porcelain. The first clay was discovered by Mr. Luson of Gunter Hall in 1756 (now the estate of Miss Fowler), who sent a small quantity to London to ascertain its quality. Upon trial it was found to be excellent, and Mr. Hewlin Luson procured workmen and erected a temporary kiln on his estate near the old Warren Houses on the Dunes north of Lowestoft. A good deal of jealousy was aroused and trade rivals attempted to wreck the scheme and tampered with the workmen engaged. After a year’s struggle a company was formed who purchased some houses in Bell Lane, now Crown Street, and established a factory. In December, 1902, an interesting discovery was made on the site of the old Lowestoft factory. The kiln for drying malt of Messrs. Morse, brewers, is actually the old kiln in which the Lowestoft ware was fired, and upon the flooring of this being removed to make a drain, several moulds and fragments of china were found. I am especially indebted for many This important discovery led to a complete investigation of the old site, and, largely owing to the enterprise of Mr. A. Merrington Smith, of Lowestoft, steps were taken to commence excavations. These resulted, in July, 1903, in the further find of several bushels of broken moulds and fragments of china. We give an illustration of the scene when the moulds and fragments had been discovered. Among these fragments are some decorated pieces ready for glazing, which cannot be washed, as the colours, of course, come off. There are glazed fragments in blue and other colours. There is quite a variety of handles for cups, mugs, &c., and there are cups made without handles. There are some birthday tablets, and some clay pipes with heraldic devices made for William Harvey, of Yarmouth. One small piece, evidently part of the bottom of a cup, has a crescent marked in blue; but this does not prove that Lowestoft used the crescent as a mark; in all probability it is the fragment of some Worcester piece they had for purposes of copying. There are also unglazed fragments for basket-work, The bulk of these moulds and fragments are in the possession of W. Rix Spelman, Esq., of Norwich, and it is to be hoped that careful study and research will, by means of these indisputable facts, re-establish the reputation of Lowestoft— “Defamed by every charlatan And soil’d with all ignoble use.” Mr. Crisp, of Denmark Hill, London, possesses some of the moulds which were disinterred at the first discovery on the Lowestoft site. He has had china made in them and baked, and has presented the results to the British Museum, where they are now exhibited. They seem too poorly made to show to advantage the delicate patterns in relief. The headpiece (p. 113) shows two sauce-boats, blue and white, with raised decoration. It will be seen from the fragment of mould, photographed with them, how exactly this newly discovered mould helps to identify the pieces. Among the fragments is part of a teapot mould, on which is the date 1761. Chaffers, in his authoritative work on china, remarks of Lowestoft that some of the larger pieces bear traces of having been “made in a mould,” and here, just a hundred years after the factory ceased, comes corroborative evidence. There is an interesting mould for an oval perforated basket, such as Bow and Chelsea produced, with diamond spaces to be cut out; and upon one of the fragments of a mould for a sugar basin appears the most delicate tracery and exquisite designs in leaves and scrolls, and prominent among the decoration is the Japanese chrysanthemum. All East Anglians and lovers of old Lowestoft will be pleased at this piece of new evidence in favour of the theories held concerning the old factory, whose reputation has been well-nigh blasted by thousands of spurious imitations made in France—literally covered by vulgar design and more vulgar coats of arms. We are able to reproduce some genuine old Lowestoft. A remarkable piece is the old mug, about 6 in. high, depicting an old fishwife with bellows under her arm, and holding a spit of herrings. This is decorated in blue and white. On the reverse side of mug is a fishing boat. At the bottom it bears the name “John Cooper, 1768.” Under the scroll of the handle are the letters “R. P.,” probably signifying that it is the work of Richard Philips, a painter at the Lowestoft factory. Unfortunately it is damaged, as will be seen by the illustration, but for all that it is a specimen of considerable value. The jug we illustrate, having the “Mandarin” decoration common to Worcester and Bristol, is a fine example of Lowestoft under-glaze blue painting. It bears the figure 5 upon it as a mark. It may be observed that many of the Lowestoft pieces of blue and white bear a striking resemblance to old Worcester. At first blush one is “A Trifle from Lowestoft,” a legend which is a There are certain marks on undoubted Lowestoft pieces which the writer has examined. The letter “R,” which might be the signature of Redgrave the painter. On another piece the letter “H” appears under the rim, which may stand for Hughes. The letters “R. P.” on the mug we illustrate (p. 125) may equally stand for Richard Powles or Richard Philips. Characteristics of Lowestoft China.The china is soft paste, and is often very badly potted. The blue is inclined to run. There is a gritty appearance in places on the glaze, which is spotted as if by sand. In some of the blue decorated pieces, where a flight of birds is introduced, the crescent moon (like the Worcester crescent mark) has been put in almost as a challenge to Worcester. One especial feature is the green hue of the glaze settled under the rims of saucers and basins and cups. The paste often has little bumps on it, and a mound in the centre of base under rim. Roses, set back to back, appear on Lowestoft pieces. The red of Lowestoft is of a peculiar quality, approaching puce in some specimens, and varying from mauve pink to carmine. SALE PRICES.
|