Part 4
_First and Second Shelves._ Note the two Tea Infusers in which the tea used to be brewed to replenish the small teapots. The Teapot on the right of the large Queen Anne is stamped “half-pint,” so will no doubt have been in a refreshment house when tea was scarce. The only makers’ names on the ten are Vickers and Dixon.
_Third Shelf._ See notes on Church Pewter (page 45). The Dish by Allen Bright in centre is 11½ inches across, the Flagon is 9½ inches high.
_Fourth Shelf._ Hot-water Jug. Jersey Cider or Wine Measure. Two Wine Flagons.
_Top Shelf._ See notes on Tappit Hens and Whisky Stoups (page 54).
I have several other tankards bearing makers’ initials and touch marks, and I know they were made prior to 1826, which I notice did not come into the Inspector’s mutilating hand until Queen Victoria was on the throne. I have just taken down two small measures of an uncommon shape, a gill and half-gill. They have had a small raised plate soldered on with raised lettering, “Imperial G. Crown R. IV,” under. They were excised once “W.R.,” and six times “V.R.”
I have gone to this trouble to make it clear that the Excise marks are a lame guide to the age of early pewter, as the Weights and Measures Act which compelled inspection was passed only in 1826. These Excise marks have been fair game for the antique dealers, one of whom, when recommending me to buy some of his tankards and measures, which bore a “Liver” bird as an Excise stamp told me that Lady ---- was collecting only pewter which bore the Liverpool mark. He seemed surprised at my ignorance when I told him this was the first time I had heard Liverpool was celebrated for the manufacture of pewter.
PEWTER CANDLESTICKS
Before going to bed I will just tell you how I got these tall fellows shown on Plate XX. They were in a greengrocer’s shop window, so I thought I would buy some apples. I came out with these 10½ inch candlesticks as well. No, I did _not_ steal them, and they were not actually given away, but that is not what I wanted to tell you. They have loose tops and in consequence are extra special. Be sure you blow out the light. Nearly all pewter tops get melted through the candles being left burning until they get down to the sockets.
Of the candlesticks in the group I wonder which you will like the best. I prefer the 7 inch, as they are oblong shape, base pillar and top; the bottoms have the original wood filling and the very old baize to stand on. I found these suddenly in the office of a gentleman who perchance made a lot of money out of me; anyway, shortly after this final transaction he retired from business, and built and endowed a--cinema. One candlestick was broken and the other needed repair, and as I could not clean them in the usual way I sent them to a manufacturer who made a good job and gave them a polish without injury to the priceless bottoms. The 4½ inch pair were kindly sent to me by a lady in Norway. I bought the 8 inch straight pillar pair from a Jew, who later wished to buy them back as he had found a new customer who would give 30s. for them. As I have given you these sizes you can easily guess the heights of the remainder.
CHURCH PEWTER
Church pewter which has been associated with Church worship now gets more worship than it did in its Church days. Firstly from the dealers, who seem to be able to get any money they like to ask from some collectors, who in their turn worship their expensive idols mainly on account of the satisfaction they experience in the knowledge that no other collector can worship at the same shrine. The flagon shown on Plate XIX originally came from Bearley Church, near Stratford-on-Avon. I was assured by the dealer that “Shakespeare attended Bearley Church.”
PLATE XX
DESCRIBING THE PEWTER
_Bottom Shelf._ Pair Bedroom Candlesticks with loose tops and extinguishers. Quaint Teapot. Tea Caddy. Chocolate Pot. Two-handled and one-handled Caudle Cups.
_First Shelf._ Spill Bowl inscribed “43” with crown and bugle, showing it belonged to the Leinster Regiment. Seven Beakers. Funnel dated 1698.
_Second Shelf._ Tobacco Jars. The two end ones are of lead, the one on the left being made by hand. The other is cast, and has on each side a reproduction of “The Last Supper” by Leonardo Da Vinci, very clearly moulded, while it is fitted with the old oak bottom fastened with iron studs.
_Third Shelf._ Three Baluster-shaped Wine Measures. Four Irish Measures. Five Measures.
_Fourth and Top Shelves._ See notes on Candlesticks (page 44).
PLATE XXI
DESCRIBING THE PEWTER
_Bottom Shelf._ Spice Box. Spice Dredger. Box Inkstand. Sand Sprinkler for drying the ink. Tray with Sheffield Plate Snuffers. Snuff Holder. Scotch Token Box.
_First Shelf._ At either end three Measures. Four Wine Cups. Three Measures in centre.
_Second Shelf._ Flask; top screws in and not on--a peculiarity of early Flasks. Wine Bottle Stand. Pap Boat and two Castor Oil Spoons (see notes). Rat-tail Toddy Ladles. Mould for Clay Eggs. Small Tea Caddy. Odd-shaped Flask.
_Third Shelf._ Tinder Box. Sandwich Case. Combined Sandwich Case and Flask. Saddle Flask and Cup. Tea Caddy. Snuff Box. Cigar Case.
_Fourth Shelf._ Peppers, except centre, which is probably for sugar.
_Fifth Shelf._ Double-ended Egg-cup. Egg-cup from St. Bees Lighthouse. Salts--three-legged, dated 1801. Glass-lined. Reversible. French. Three-legged Sphinx. Swan. Plain. Three-legged early Elkington. Two Egg-cups.
_Sixth Shelf._ Mustards. The three largest have fixed glass lining.
_Top Shelf._ Queen Victoria and Prince Albert with date 1840. Irish Harp. Cream Jugs and Sugar Basin (J. Vickers). Centre Cream and one adjoining are blue glass lined, and the fitting of the Pewter cover denotes careful workmanship.
“Did he read the lessons?”
“Of course, that’s why he went.”
After this I felt compelled to buy it.
I have some alms-dishes which may have done serious duty and I have one which I feel sure has never been inside any sacred building. I have also an old two-handled cup and a pair of collecting plates from the old Runcorn Baptist Chapel, which was erected soon after 1800 and closed about 1880; a small private set, paten and chalice and an engraved Scotch chalice, and I will embellish these notes by relating the extraordinary circumstance which brought the latter into my fold at a time when I was yearning for something sacramental.
I was in my office and had just put down a pewter snuffers-tray when a traveller for a Scottish firm was announced. As soon as the interview commenced he opened his bag to get out his samples, when my eye chanced to catch a glimpse of something almost hidden by a sleeping garment and my instinct spotted pewter. He told his tale and waited for an indication of the impression he had created, which was conveyed to him in this form.
“Excuse me, but was that a piece of old pewter I caught sight of in your bag?”
“Yes, sir; are you interested in old pewter? I slept the night in Warrington and I saw this in a shop as I was going to the station; I think it is an old rose-bowl, and I shall be pleased to give it to you if you will have it.”
Of course, I couldn’t think of such a thing, but I should be glad to exchange with him for a snuffers-tray I had on my desk. He assured me that he would be delighted, and as I always endeavour to give pleasure to others I fetched the tray. That gentleman secured a contract and a tray and left me with thanks and a seventeenth-century Scotch chalice. You never know your luck when collecting.
But for my awkward conscience I should include the basin shown on Plate VI, this being sold as “a vestry piece.” It may have been used by the parson, or for washing the Communion vessels, anyway I preferred to believe the dealer, and gave it a conspicuous position, which the ladies objected to, and I found it relegated to the rear. On seeking an explanation, and calling it “a vestry piece,” I retired hurt, so to speak, by the remark “Vestry! Why my aunt had a thing like that, in which she made us children wash our hands,” and then, still so gently o’er me stealing, memory would bring back the feeling of us youngsters having been caused to do the same very necessary performance in a similar utensil, with cold water from the pump at the old house at home fifty to sixty years ago.
FAKED PEWTER
I had not been many years a collector before I found spurious Communion cups and Communion sets were on the market and I obtained some very enlightening information, much of which I cannot publish. It was the practice to blacken the new pieces with acid to give them an appearance of age, and I heard of an instance relating to hundredweights of faked pewter, but I am coming straight to the point and the photographs on Plates XXV and XXVI will corroborate my statement. I was further informed that they were making deep dishes out of old bedpans, preserving the maker’s mark on the bottom. I had had a bedpan hidden away in the stable loft for some time, and I decided to prove how far this information was correct. The pan had come from Ireland with a box full of “gatherings,” and I had almost decided to sell it to be melted.
I eventually wrote to a firm of pewter manufacturers explaining the conversion I wished to have effected, and they informed me they would do the job if I would say whether I wanted a deep dish or a shallow one and what width of rim I desired. In about three weeks after I had sent them the bedpan I received the fine deep (alms) dish bearing the maker’s name and mark--Joseph Austen--well preserved, proving the article was made in Cork over 100 years ago. It looks very well indeed and I have never had its virtue questioned; in fact when I have told visitors they have been greatly astonished, while a few have been hard to convince.
Now you understand my remark that I had one “alms dish” that had never been inside a sacred edifice.
_When the Pewterer’s done his pewtering, And his work is quite au fait: When his making’s turned to faking, And the marks are left O.K.; The collector sees, and then agrees, The pewter must be old. Now doubts arise, before his eyes, He fears that he’s been sold._
PLATES AND DISHES
These under the eye of the camera are more or less alike, especially more--then let it suffice the reader to learn that I have forty small and thirty large of various sizes displayed wherever a likely space is available without giving a too crowded appearance. They nearly all bear makers’ marks or owners’ crests or initials, or evidence that they have been put to good use at some time or other. I have been told that when these big chaps were in vogue the various conglomerations forming the meal were heaped together and formed a goodly pile, so there is no doubt of the authenticity of the story of the Scottish farmer with a prodigious appetite at a Rent Dinner who when they wanted to take away his plate said “Bide awee for I hae just found a doo (pigeon) in the reddin o’ ma plate.”
As regards the rims, while I know some enthusiastic collectors could talk for a week on this feature, which to the uneducated suggests distinction without a difference, I will not labour the point.
I saw some very bright 9 inch plates in London recently with ornamental rims, and out of curiosity enquired the price. I was told 25s. each, but the information that they were Dutch was not vouchsafed.
Probably my “pride of the paddock” plate is one on Plate XIX (facing p. 43). It has a raised bead running round the centre of the rim, is thought to be early eighteenth century, and was made by Allen Bright, who has since retired from business. Judging by its shape it should pass muster as a genuine alms dish; though it may have been constructed to hold pennies in the kirk, I think it just as likely it held puddings in the kitchen--a thought inspired by the old knife-cuts on the bottom.
I have referred to the Irish plates being scoured on the back, and wiped on the front. Apropos of this remark I have a set of eight with the crest of a sea-horse on the rim; the marks are all obliterated, with the exception of the word “Jonas,” and by the lettering I was able to identify it as made by Jonas Durand about 1660. I also have three plates with the crest which represents the red hand of Ulster, and I believe they would originally be the property of an old Derbyshire family that has an estate in Ireland.
I have one very rare plate inasmuch as it bears on its surface ten rows of tap marks made with a round-headed hammer. The number in each circle lessens until they get down to seven, which surround the centre tap. This plate bears the initials and touch impression of the maker, which are undecipherable, but that does not worry me. I would far rather have the uncommon surface and indistinct marks than plain marks and a smooth surface. The strange thing is that if anyone wants a plate to, perhaps, stand a pot on, and there is no pottery one handy, or the artistic eye thinks a certain pot or flower would go better with a pewter than with a coloured pottery plate, they invariably lift this one off the dresser shelf, when any of the others would do equally well. This must stop, as I find the treatment does not improve its peculiar appearance.
On the first shelf of the oak dresser (Plate VI) there are four Scotch plates made by William Hunter, of Edinburgh, 1749-1773. The fronts must always have been well polished, for they shine like silver now. The backs have been kept clean, though not scoured, as the maker’s name and touchmarks are quite distinct. One pair were called “meatplates” and the other “pudding” or “porridge plates.” The latter are deep and would pass for collecting-plates among church pewter in some hands. My obtaining possession of these from the shelves of a farm kitchen in Scotland is an illustration of the proverb that kissing goes by favour. I wish I could obtain more in the same very agreeable manner.
As evidence of the age of the plates and dishes I give the following list of makers’ names, and the approximate dates when they were making these things hum. For most of my records I have searched my books of reference, and when these have failed me I have appealed to Mr. H. H. Cotterell, a great authority on marks, who has very kindly furnished me with the information required whenever possible.
Allen Bright 1750 J. Baskervile 1695 R. Chambers Tudor Rose Early 17th century T. Compton 1807 Thorne, London George Seymour 1768 Brown 17th century G. Smith 1676 G. Smith 1790 Jonas Durand 1658 William Hunter 1750 John French 1687 Charles Clarke (Irish) 1790 John Duncomb 1730
I must mention a pair of very rare plates of special shape with tooled borders. Two holes are drilled in each, and it is probably due to the fact that some vandal has scratched the name “Lizzie” on them that they have not been put to the use for which they were intended, namely, to embellish the drop handles of an old-time coffin. When an obliging broker told me he had a couple of plates he had saved for me, and then produced these ghastly things, I was rendered mute.
TAPPIT HENS (Plate XIX, facing p. 43).
_“Paint Scotland greetin owre her thrissle; Her mutchkin-stoup as toom’s a whissle.”_
BURNS.
Well she may with whisky at half a guinea a bottle!
When we were in Barmouth we stayed at the Cors-y-gedll Hotel, and when I asked the landlord, who up to that point had been the personification of geniality, “What is the meaning of Cors-y-gedll?” he blurted out, “Nobody knows; everybody asks me that question,” and left me abruptly. I was not a collector of old pewter in those days, but I can now fully appreciate the cause of his irritability, for the number of times I have been asked, “What is the meaning of ‘Tappit Hens’?” leaves me tired. I once suggested that the name may have originated because they tappited to see if it was empty or not, only to be further puzzled by the query “But why hen?” and I could only suggest that “It cackled whenever it laid an egg,” which was condemned as an inane joke, which if I had any conceit of myself as a humorist I should never repeat.
Having read so much about Tappit Hens, I have known all about the history a long time ago, and I have forgotten most of it. The name for a Scottish pint measure of a certain shape was “Tappit Hen,” which held two quarts (Imperial). A “Chopin” held a quart and a “Mutchkin” an Imperial pint. My photograph shows a pair of Tappit Hens and a Chopin.
After Tappit Hens came the lidded whisky stoups which were in use in Scotland from 1826 to about 1870, when an Act was passed to do away with profiteering by short measure, and so the use of lids was prohibited.
As inspired individuals began to buy up the original Tappit Hens the supply gave out, so the dealers elevated the whisky stoups to the designation of the former. I do not exaggerate, for I have seen Tappit Hens advertised, and had them sent on approval, only to find the much less valued stoup, or pot-bellied measures as they were often called. Now I suppose they are getting done up, and that any old thing with a lid on is a Tappit Hen. Anyway, I was told by a gentleman, whose knowledge and experience of his profession are much greater than they can be of Scottish pewter, that he had just bought a French Tappit Hen!
In all my travels I have only been offered the genuine article once, and that was in Glasgow some years back, and as I already had two of the same size I did not buy, although it would have been a good investment at the price at which I could then have purchased it. The three imposing Tappit Hen shaped measures I have bear on the lids the imprints of the initials of a fine family, whose old grey stone hall still stands in its lonely but grand surroundings on the Pentland Hills, of which I am constantly reminded by the kindness of a descendant, who placed these treasures in my hands.
I am not a statistician, but I dare hazard an opinion that there are ten or may be twenty times more “Tappit Hens” in existence to-day than ever were made.
It is now time I tapped Burns again:
_“Come, bring the tither mutchkin in, And here’s, for a conclusion.”_
BRITANNIA METAL
This name puts me on my mettle, and as the uncertainty of what is the difference between pewter and Britannia metal has not to my knowledge been clearly explained I intend to deal with this question somewhat didactically.
I was so struck with the effect of turning my 70th Regiment pint pot from a dirty disused mug into a pleasurable thing that I visited all likely shops for some few miles round and bought up everything I thought and was told was old pewter, and I soon had more than would fill a corner cupboard, which I had lined with blue velvet to show it off. Then I bought “Marks on Old Pewter,” by W. Redman, which was the only book bearing on the subject I could hear of, and in it I read:
“The manufacture of goods in Britannia (white metal) was an important 18th century addition to the Sheffield industries. Whether James Dixon or James Vickers commenced first to make this kind of ware we are not able to say. It is said that James Vickers bought for five shillings from a sick man whom he happened to be visiting a recipe for making white metal. The experiment turned out a great success, and for years both these firms were kept busy making all kinds of articles of what was called Britannia metal. Now these old articles are often called pewter, which is a mistake; neither of these firms made any pewter ware. Alloy: 80 per cent. tin, 10 per cent. antimony, and a little copper.”
This was rather a blow, as some of my purchases were stamped “Britannia Metal” and a few others “B.M.E.P.,” although the electro-plate was mostly worn off, giving the things a pewter-like look. Next I obtained a short history of the firm of James Dixon and Sons, and found they did make pewter in their early days. I also learned from a history of Sheffield in the 18th Century that Vickers started making money and Britannia metal at the end of that period, so this stuff seemed ancient enough.
I now had the pleasure of obtaining “Old Pewter,” by Malcolm Bell, and found among the illustrations articles of which I had duplicates, one of which was a pepper-pot, and this reminds me that when I went in for this and inquired the price, and was told fourpence, I repeated the word “fourpence!” which immediately drew the rejoinder “Yes, fourpence, it’s half full of pepper.” From the trouble I had in getting out that solid pepper, I rather think the pewter must have been built round it.
I opened a correspondence with Mr. Bell, and he most courteously and kindly gave me every assistance. In one of his letters he wrote: “I must confess that for my own part I could not pretend to draw any hard and fast line between pewter and Britannia metal, for though one can tell the difference between the extreme types by the eye the varieties merge so gradually into each other that the boundary is indefinable. In fact, hard metal pewter with 96 parts tin, 8 of antimony, and 2 of copper is practically identical with the Britannia metal containing 92 parts of tin, 8 of antimony, and 2 of copper,” which was what I expected. Consequently I have among my lot many pieces which may have been sold as Britannia metal in the old days, but I would defy anyone to pick them out and prove them not to be pewter.
I asked Mr. Redman to come over and see me, and he readily did so. After he had gone, and from remarks he had made, I gathered he had been more impressed by the kindness of my partner than with the quality of some of my pewter. The result of this interview was that I never refused anything in the pewter line of mature age, and came to the conclusion that the difference in the names was a clever move of cute business men to enable them to charge something extra for their wares which were made of somewhat harder metal than was being generally used at the time. I have frequently come across early plates and tankards that differed materially in their hardness.
MISCELLANEOUS PIECES
PAP-BOAT. On shelf 3, Plate XXI (facing p. 47), I show a specimen of rarity. Pap-boats would be as common as babies at one time. This one was bought at Lytham, and was introduced to me as a pig feeder. It is 4½ inches long.
CASTOR-OIL SPOONS. What a fuss they made about taking a dose of castor oil, or had they not conceived the idea of disguising it between other liquids? The manipulation of such a spoon was a tricky job, for after getting it into the mouth a twist would be needed to bring the lid on to the tongue, the lid would partly drop open and the castor-oil would then flow gently down the patient’s throat, provided of course there was no resistance. This forcible feeding was of everyday occurrence. The larger of the spoons is about seventy years old, and the smaller about ninety years.
There are eighty-five specimens on Plate XXI, and I believe that the reader, with the aid of a magnifying glass, will be able to form a very good idea of each piece. The photographing of the groups generally entailed quite a lot of work, and some anxiety, for as I do not develop myself, or, rather, as I do not do my own developing, I had put all the things back in their places before I knew if the negatives were right. Fortunately it turned out all the exposures had been correctly timed, which was more than I anticipated with the varying and often poor December light.
THE “ODAMIFINO” (Plate XXVI, facing p. 74.).