Part 7
This china venture failed, the real estate of the company was sold, and the proprietors returned to England asking public attention and charity for their poor workmen. Thus forlornly ended the first porcelain factory in America; and thus tamely subsided the rivalry between English and American china materials. When we consider the vast natural resources in America for the china-maker to draw from—the inexhaustible supply of raw materials—the unlimited beds of rich kaolin, the vast stores of pipe, potter’s, ball, and fire clay—the endless mines of quartz and felspar, the tinted earths of Alabama, the colored kaolin of Illinois, the mines of lithomarge in Tennessee—to say nothing of the boundless wealth of supplies in the far West—it seems to us that America was very slow—indeed is still very slow in taking advantage of the hints given by Cookworthy, by Champion, and by Wedgwood in the eighteenth century.
This quickly-ended china factory of Bonnin and Morris is the one referred to in the _Edinburgh Weekly Magazine_ of January, 1771, which says: “By a letter from Philadelphia we are informed that a large china manufactory is established there, and that better china cups and saucers are made there than at Bow or Stratford.” Benjamin Franklin, writing to his wife from London in January, 1772, after thanking her for the cranberries and apples and various American home reminders that she had sent to him, adds, “I thank you for the sauce-boats, and am pleased to see so good a progress made in the china manufactory. I wish it success most heartily.” But writing to an English potter in November, 1773, he says, “I understand the china-works in Philadelphia is declined by the first owners; whether any others will take it up and continue it, I know not.”
Mr. Prime, in his book, gives the information that there were “some undoubted specimens of the work deposited in the Franklin Institute on exhibition.” I do not know where those specimens now are. A pair of vases at the H. L. D. Lewis sale in Philadelphia, in December, 1890, were catalogued as having been made at this first porcelain manufactory. There is no existing record of the fact that they were produced there, and no stamp or mark to prove it, and I do not know why they were thus assigned. They were purchased by the Mount Vernon Association for eighteen dollars each, and can now be seen in Washington’s old home. They stand ten inches in height, are flat in shape, about six inches in diameter, have gilded griffin handles and polished gilt faces, and are decorated with highly colored views of naval battles. They have an interest to all collectors as being specimens of the first china factory in America, as well as from the fact that they were early ornaments of Mount Vernon.
Philadelphia seems to have taken and kept the lead in the manufacture of porcelain in America, or else we are more fortunate in having the records of Philadelphia pot-works preserved for us. The Pennsylvania Society for the Encouragement of Manufactures offered in 1787, a “plate of gold to the value of twenty dollars,” as a prize for the “best specimen of Pennsylvania-made earthen ware approaching the nearest in quality to the delft white stone or queen’s ware,” and an equal prize for the best salt-glazed ware; and in 1792 a prize of $50 for similar ware. In 1808 Alexander Trotter exhibited at Peale’s Museum, in Philadelphia, some of the articles manufactured at his Columbian Pottery, which was situated on South Street, between Twelfth and Thirteenth Streets, in that city, while the warehouse was at No. 66 North Second Street. This business continued until 1813. The proprietor advertised “tea and coffee-pots, pitchers, jugs, wine-coolers, basins, ewers, and baking dishes;” and it was also stated that an “elegant jug and goblets from the queen’s ware manufactory” were used at the Republican dinner on July 4, 1808, at Philadelphia. This ware was similar to the Staffordshire stone wares. In the same year a firm named Binney & Ronaldson made in South Street, in Philadelphia, red and yellow teapots, coffee-pots, and sugar-boxes. At the beginning of the century D. Freytag advertised that, at 192 South 5th Street, Philadelphia, he would decorate piece china with gold and silver; hence he must have had a kiln for firing. In the year 1800 a pottery, called the “Washington Pottery,” was established by John Mullawney on the north side of Market Street, near Schuylkill South, in the same city. The productions were called “Washington ware,” and consisted of pitchers, coffee-pots, teapots, cream-pots, sugar-boxes, wash-basins, bowls, etc. It was carried on by the same proprietor until 1816, and was in operation for many years after. In 1813 the Northern Liberty Pottery was founded by Thomas Haig on the corner of Front and Market Streets, and the manufacture of earthen ware is still continued by one of his descendants. David G. Seixas had a similar manufactory at about the same time, from 1817 to 1822, at Market Street near Schuylkill 6th. In 1817 George Bruorton announced through the Philadelphia press, that he would enamel and gild arms, crests, ciphers, borders, or any device on china, or queen’s ware as good as any imported. Also “china mended by burning in and warranted as sound for use as ever.” In 1826 Joseph Keen also decorated china in Market Street, near Eleventh Street. So we can plainly see how much the question of china decoration and china-works was thought of in that town.
In the year 1828, William Ellis Tucker had a china store at 86 Arcade, in Philadelphia. He thus advertised: “American china of a quality equal in strength and beauty to any that can be imported, and upon the most reasonable terms. Initials or fancy work to suit the taste of individuals will be executed agreeably to order in the neatest style.”
In the year 1868 Miss Peters presented to the Historical Society of Pennsylvania a porcelain pitcher which had been made at the establishment of Messrs. Tucker & Hemphill. At the request of the Society, Mr. Thomas Tucker prepared the following paper on the manufacture of porcelain in the United States.
PHILADELPHIA, May 13, 1868.
TO THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF PENNSYLVANIA:
GENTLEMEN: Herewith please find a small account of the manufacture of porcelain in the United States.
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 back-yard of the store, where he painted in the white china and burned 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 kind of ware called queen’s ware. He then commenced experimenting with felspar 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, where he erected a large glazing kiln, enamelling kiln, mills, etc. He burned 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 seggars after the kiln was burned. 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 Os, the article in which the china was placed in the kiln, with silex; but this man had washed them with felspar, which of course melted, and fastened with every article to the bottom. But William discharged him, and we soon 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 August 22, 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 or factory, which they filled with porcelain. After the death of my brother, Judge Hemphill and myself continued the making 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 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 is now as perfect as when first done.
I herewith present you with a pitcher which I made thirty-one years ago. You will notice the glazing and transparency of this specimen is equal to the best imported china; but the gilding, having been in use so many years, is somewhat injured. I would like to give you a larger article, but I have but few pieces left.
Very respectfully yours, etc., THOMAS TUCKER.
I cannot understand why Thomas Tucker should have fancied that his brother was the first to make porcelain in the United States. Could he not have known of the ante-Revolutionary china-works of Bonnin & Morris?
There are in the Trumbull-Prime Collection several specimens of Tucker’s “natural porcelain.” The paste and glaze are excellent, but the forms are commonplace, and the decorations indicate want of experience and taste, gold being profusely used.
At an early date, certainly in the eighteenth century, pot-works were established in Allentown, Pa., and in Pittsburg, where decorated pottery was made which resembled German manufactures, and which was often ornamented with mottoes and legends in slip decoration.
From 1793 to 1800 John and William Norton made red ware in Bennington, Vt.; since then stone-ware has been made in the same works. In 1847 Messrs. Lyman & Fenton started a pottery in Bennington, in which they made both pottery and soft-paste porcelain. These works continued for about twelve years. Specimens of their tortoise-shell wares are in the Trumbull-Prime Collection. One in the shape of a lion is here shown. They also made figures of men and animals in Parian wares, the first, doubtless, produced in America. The impressed circular mark on some of the enamelled pottery was “Lyman Fenton & Co. Fenton’s Enamel, patented 1849, Bennington, Vt.”
In the year 1837 by far the most important enterprise in the manufacture of pottery and porcelain that had ever been organized in America was started under the supervision of Mr. James Clews, who had been a potter in Cobridge, England, from the years 1819 to 1829, and who was the largest manufacturer of dark blue Staffordshire wares at that date. An account of many pieces of his production in his English pottery, and of the stamps and marks used by him, is given in Chapter XVII.
He emigrated to America, and went to what was then the Far West—to Indiana; and with capitalists from Louisville, Ky.—Reuben Bates, Samuel Cassiday, William Bell, James Anderson, Jr., Edward Bainbridge, Perly Chamberlin, William Gerwin, John B. Bland, Willis Ranney, and James Lewis—incorporated a company, under the name of The Indiana Pottery Company, with a capital of $100,000 and power to increase to $200,000. A special act of January 7, 1837 (see Indiana Local Laws, Twenty-first Session, p. 7), states that these parties had “heretofore associated themselves together for the purpose of manufacturing earthenware and china in the State of Indiana, under the name and style of The Lewis Pottery Company.”
The Indiana Pottery Company built its works in Troy, Perry County, thus having means of easy transportation by the Ohio River to New Orleans and other important points.
Mr. Clews had amassed much wealth in his Cobridge works, but he quickly lost it in this new enterprise in the new land, which proved far from successful. The chief difficulty lay in the hiring of proper workmen. The English potters proved wholly unreliable in this country, and the expense of importing fresh relays of workmen was too great to be endured. Nearly three hundred potters were brought over from England. The founders also found it impossible to make white ware with the clay in the vicinity of Troy, and of the vast beds of fine kaolin which exist in Indiana they were doubtless ignorant. The dark blue ware which they manufactured proved far from satisfactory, and though so brilliantly started by practical and wealthy men, this pottery was quickly closed, after making a considerable quantity of yellow and Rockingham ware. In 1851 a firm named Sanders & Wilson leased the buildings, which were burned in 1854, but were rebuilt. There are now two potteries in Troy.
In the early part of this century, probably in 1827, a china factory was established in Jersey City, N. J., which made hard-paste porcelain. Specimens of pure white with gilded vines are in the Trumbull-Prime Collection. In 1829 the works became known as the American Pottery Company, and pieces of their manufacture at that date bear that mark. This pottery is still in existence, though known by another name. They made from the year 1830 the embossed brown pottery pitcher with “hound handle,” which was also such a favorite with English potters from the time it was manufactured at Fulham. The design for these American hound-handled pitchers was made by Daniel Greatbach, a prominent English modeller, who came to this country many years ago. A specimen which I possess is of mottled tortoise-shell, green, brown, and yellow, and bears the design of a hunt around the body and grape-leaves on the top, but more frequently the pitchers are simply colored brown. Some have a mask of Bacchus on and under the nose, and one I own has the nose formed by an American “spread eagle.” They were a favorite hot-water jug in the early years of their manufacture, their size, strength, and shape making them particularly suitable for such a purpose. They were sometimes fitted with metal covers fastened to holes drilled through the pottery. I have seen them twenty inches in height, and at least three feet in circumference. In some parts of the country they are known as “tavern pitchers,” perhaps from power of association. Such is the one herewith shown, now owned by Robert T. Van Deusen, esq., of Albany. Some were doubtless from English potteries, but many are American. Glazed brown “tobys” with the circular impressed mark “D. & J. Henderson, Jersey City,” were also made, but the exact age of such pieces is unknown.
Of the later porcelain factories which have been established in America I will not speak—the factories of Trenton, Baltimore, East Liverpool, Long Island City—which now number over five hundred. Their story will doubtless be written ere long by some historian of the ceramic art in America, but hardly comes within the bounds of this work. Specimens of their manufacture, especially of the truly artistic productions of the Baltimore China Works, should, however, be secured by every china collector, though they do not appeal so strongly to the china hunter, to whom the pleasures of the chase often exceed the delight in the spoils, and to whom old china, like old wine, is better than new.
V. EARLIEST POTTERY WARES
The first rare pieces of porcelain owned by the American colonists were India china; but Delft ware, salt-glazed ware, and the tortoise-shell or “combed” wares were the earliest forms of pottery that were imported to any great extent.
Many pieces of heavy blue and white Delft have been found in New England, some being Dutch, some English. The shapes, decorations, and pastes are so similar that it is impossible for even the most careful observer definitely to judge of the place of manufacture, and there are seldom guiding and aiding marks. In Connecticut much Delft is found, sometimes with Dutch words and inscriptions. Doubtless the Connecticut planters bargained and traded with the New York Dutch, who perhaps took onions and notions from the canny Connecticut men in exchange for Delft. In New York, along the Hudson River to Albany, much fine Delft is still preserved in old Dutch families, especially in the old Dutch farm-houses and manor-houses. At the Albany Bi-centennial Loan Collection, in 1886, a fine showing was made of old Delft by representatives of the families of the old patroons—of the Ten Eycks, Ten Broecks, Bleeckers, and Van Rensselaers.
A few stray Delft wanderers may be found in Massachusetts and New Hampshire—meat dishes and plates, pale and ugly, as if the journey inland had faded them out. On Long Island, Delft is still kept and used in Dutch families—it is not the oldest Delft, however, nor is it much prized. The typical Delft vases, decorated in blue, yellow, and white, once graced the high mantel or beaufet of many a low, comfortable Dutch farm-house in Flatbush, New Utrecht, and Gravesend, and occasionally one can still be found. A fine set is in the old “pirates’ house” at Flatlands. The Dutch made many teapots, we are told, but I have never found an old Delft one in America. I have seen a few dull blue and white Delft flower-pots—possibly one hundred years old—clumsy, ugly things, whether old or new. I wish I could drive through the old Dutch settlements on Long Island—New Utrecht, and Flatlands, and New Lots, and Gravesend—and ransack the great, spacious garret of every concave-roofed story and a half farm-house I passed. I know I could bring many a piece of Delft to light—forgotten and unheeded by its stolid owners.
That Delft was not very highly prized by the Dutch settlers, nor by their descendants, may be proved by many inventories and lists, such as this, of the estate of John Lefferts, of Flatbush, made in 1792:
£ s. 25 Pewter plates (1s. each) 1 5 37 Earthen plates 10 9 Pewter dishes 1 15 8 Earthen dishes 1 6 Sets china cups and saucers 3 27 Delft plates 13
Pewter was plainly much more valued than Delft, and India china was still more highly prized.
Old Delft tea-caddies are both curious and pretty. Here is one shown, marked with the names “Aalta Evert and Gerrit Egben” and the date, 1793. It was doubtless a wedding or betrothal gift. In this piece the dark blue decoration is under the glaze, and the red and black quaint Dutch-dressed figures and the inscription are over the glaze, and were doubtless painted to order and fired when the piece was purchased for a gift or token. This labor-saving device was brought to perfection by a Dutch potter named Zachary Dextra, though the cunning Chinese and Japanese had employed it when they held supremacy over the Dutch market. If a skilled painter painted under the glaze, an inferior workman could easily do the finishing touches over the glaze.
The Delft apothecary jars are the rarest and most curious pieces seen, and form a charming posy-holder. They are eight or ten inches in height, and are lettered with the abbreviated names of drugs. “Succ: E. Spin: C.,” “U. Althae,” and “C: Rosar: E.” are on three of my jars. They frequently have a spout on one side, and are then usually globose in shape, with a spreading base. Some have handles. When the Dutch used these jars, a century or more ago, they covered the open top with tightly-tied oil-skin and poured the medicinal or chemical contents from the spout, which, at other times, was kept carefully corked. These jars are identical in shape with the old “sirroop-pots” of Dutch museums; for instance, the one made by Haarles, the eminent _plateelbakker_, in 1795, as a “proof of his skill,” and now preserved in the archives at Delft.
The most familiar and universal decoration on Delft plates and meat dishes is the conventionalized “peacock” design. It sometimes takes rather a ludicrous appearance, often forming a comical caricature of a ballet-dancer. A coarsely-drawn basket of flowers is also common. I have also seen in America specimens of the “musical plates” of Delft. These bear designs of musical instruments, scores of song or dance music, or simply a staff with a few notes, a motif, accompanied usually by inscriptions, mottoes, or couplets, sometimes in Dutch, sometimes in French, the latter showing usually so decided a touch of extreme opera-bouffe _équivoque_ that such “musical plates” would scarcely be in demand for family use, and make us turn to the Dutch-lettered pieces as being more desirable simply because the language of their decoration is less widely known and comprehended. Even these cannot be positively classed as Dutch, for the early English potters copied servilely the Dutch designs. The vases often have figures of men and animals and Dutch landscapes. A fine collection of Delft plates and placques and vases may be seen in the Trumbull-Prime Collection.
“Fine Holland Tile” was advertised in the _Boston News Letter_ of June 11, 1716—the first announcement of the sale of Delft in America, though not in the form of table-ware—and in the same paper, under date of August 10, 1719, we find a notice of “Dutch Tile for Chimney.” From that date, all through the century, in the various newspapers, we find constantly recurring advertisements of Delft chimney tiles on the arrival of every foreign ship. They must have been imported in vast numbers, and were not expensive; “9 dozen Dutch tiles, £1 10s., 10 dozen Dutch tiles, £2 10s.,” were the values assigned. In spite of these facts I have found them very rare in New England—they have wholly disappeared. In historical rooms, in museums, they may be seen, but seldom in old houses. The Robinson House in old Narraganset has a fine set; in a few old houses in the Connecticut valley I have seen sets of the coarsely painted “scripture tiles” so disparaged by Benjamin Franklin, but they are rare. Even on Long Island and on the banks of the Hudson they are now seldom found. Storytellers of New England life usually place blue and white tiles around their Yankee fireplaces, but they are more plentiful in the imagination of such narrators than in reality. With the various changes in the manner of heating New England dwellings, the chimney tiles have all vanished, even when the houses still stand, and nearly all the old city houses have been entirely removed to make way for more modern business structures. English potters made tiles in such close imitation of the Dutch that it is impossible to distinguish between them. Doubtless many of the “blue and white chimney tile” so largely advertised were English manufactures imported under the name of Dutch tiles, while still others were not chimney, but roof tiles.