Trades Tuesday--Lowestoft Pottery
Legendary Lowestoft Porcelain
Lowestoft is a factory shrouded in mystery and surrounded by legend. In fact, it has been asserted that the factory never existed at all! On the other hand, there was for many years a superstition abroad that any finely painted pieces of china with a rose placed below the handle came from Lowestoft. One theory was exploded together with many others when exhaustive excavations were made on the site of the old factory in 1903.
Origins rooted in Dutch Pottery.
Art-Journal published on July 1, 1863 wrote:
"It seems somewhat strange that the absolute 'land's end' on the eastern coast of England should have been chosen as the spot on which porcelain should be made, when the clay for the purpose had to be procured from the western 'Land's End', Cornwall, and the coal from the extreme northern coast of Northumberland and Durham. It is not improbable, however, that the same cause which conduced to the establishment of the Chelsea works had much to do with the formation of those at Lowestoft. Certain it is that an extensive trade was in the early and middle part of the last century carried on, as it is at the present day, with Holland; and certain it is that at that time, as now, the town was the constant resort of Dutch fishermen and others; and as the first productions of the Ceramic Art at Lowestoft appear, so far as I have been able to ascertain, to have been a kind of fine delft ware, it is not too much to suppose that the first potters were from Holland, and made the ware from clay found in the neighbourhood. Specimens of this fine delft ware, inscribed with names of people in the neighbourhood, and with dates, still exist, and attest pretty strongly to the correctness of this opinion."
Competitors aim to end the Lowestoft pottery trade.
"Gillingwater, whose memory it is truly pleasant to find is still warmly cherished by the old inhabitants of the place, in his 'History of Lowestoft,' written in 1790, says, at p. 112--
"The only manufactory carried on at Lowestoft is that of making porcelain, or china ware; where the proprietors have brought this ingenious art to a great degree of perfection; and from the prospect it afords, promises to be attended with much success. The origin of this manufactory is as follows:--In the year 1756, Hewlin Luson, Esq., of Gunton Hall, near Lowestoft, having discovered some fine clay, or earth, on his estate in that parish, sent a small quantity of it to one of the china manufactories near London, in view of discovering what kind of ware it was capable of producing, which, upon trial, proved to be somewhat finer than that called the delft ware. Mr. Luson was so far encouraged by this success as to resolve upon making another experiment of the goodness of its quality upon his own premises; accordingly he immediately procured some workmen from London, and erected upon his estate at Gunton a temporary kiln and furnace, and all the other apparatus necessary for the undertaking; but the manufacturers in London being apprised of his intentions, and of the excellent quality of the earth, and apprehending also that if Mr. Luson succeeded he might rival them in their manufacture, it induced them to exercise every art in their power to render his scheme abortive; and so far tampered with the workmen he had procured, that they spoiled the ware, and thereby frustrated Mr. Luson's design.
Introducing Thomas Curtis.
A great deal of jealousy surrounded the early days of Lowestoft; It was owing to this that the original factory, started by Mr. Luson, had to be closed. It was reopened the next year by a company, of whom the moving spirit was Robert Browne. Lowestoft never made hard paste porcelain, as it has been asserted; It employed several excellent artists, one of whom, Thomas Curtis, was formerly at Dresden, and another, a French refugee named Rose, painted some wonderful garlands and wreaths of roses on some of the finer ware. You who have any of these delicate pieces, treat them tenderly, for they are true price of blood-he who decorated them for your pleasure died in abject want, blind, and a stranger in a strange land. A great deal of Lowestoft is of simple decoration, strokes of the brush to indicate a scroll or a leaf, sprays of blossoms tied with ribbon, coats of arms, and birthday plates; the early blue and white was made in direct imitation of Worcester.
 |
A Lowestoft Porcelain Curtis
Pattern Teapot and Cover c1785 |
For a similar
example see: Lowestoft Porcelain in Norwich Castle Museum, volume 2, Smith,
Sheenah page 37 lower plate and page 140, No 329. Described as one of the
so-called Curtis patterns linked to the decorator Thomas Curtis of which their
are several variants whilst two examples are recorded inscribed with dates 1787
and 1790.
|
|
Early History of Lowestoft Porcelain and Industrial Espionage.
A small factory was started in this Suffolk town in 1757, and continued in operation until 1802. In the past it received attention out of all proportion to the merit of its productions, and through a mistake in a book published in 1863 a very large amount of Chinese hard-paste porcelain was accredited to it. In spite of the fact that this has been proved a fallacy; much Chinese ware of the once-disputed type is still called 'Lowestoft'; not only in England, but also in America.
Lowestoft ware is similar to that of Bow, and the factory is said to have been started by a man who smuggled himself into the Bow works and learned the secrets of their manufacture. This story may or may not be true, but the two porcelains are very alike in appearance and both contain bone ash. Much domestic ware painted in under glaze blue was made at Lowestoft, and is indistinguishable from that made at the London factory. Many of the pieces were decorated in colors, and a few figures are claimed to have been made.
This story was published in the Art-Journal on July 1, 1863 and relates the story of how Mr. Robert Browne discovered the process of a particularly fine glaze used in the Bow factory.
"A curious circumstance connected with the first Robert Browne, the memory of which has been preserved in his family, is worth relating, as showing the schemes and the underhand practices which were resorted to by manufacturers in those days (as, alas! now), to worm out and steal the secrets of others. The workmen who had been engaged from London having been, as alluded to by Gillingwater, shamefully tampered with, and bribed to injure the work at Lowestoft, probably induced Mr. Browne to retaliate in the manner I am about to describe. Being desirous, soon after the commencement of the works, to ascertain how the glaze was prepared, some of the colours mixed, and other particulars concerning the ingredients used, he went to London, and, under the disguise of a workman, engaged himself at one of the china manufactories--of course either Chelsea or Bow. Here, after a short time, he bribed the warehouseman to assist him in his design, and soon accomplished his purpose. The warehouseman locked him up secretly in that part of the factory where the principal was in the habit of mixing the ingredients after the workmen had left the premises. Browne as placed under an empty hogshead close to the counter or table on which the principal operated, and could thus see through an opening all that was going on. From his hiding-place he watched all the processes, saw the proportions of the different ingredients used, and gained the secret he had so long coveted. Having thus remained a willing prisoner for some hours, he was at last released when the principal left the place, and shortly afterwards returned to Lowestoft, after an absence of only tow or three weeks, in full possession of the, till then, secret information possessed by the famed works of Chelsea or Bow.
It may be well to note that the Brownes, I am informed, were engaged in the staple trade of the place--that of the herring fishery--as well as in that of the manufacture of porcelain. The firm also were shipowners, and kept vessels constantly running 'to the Isle of Wight for a peculiar sand, which, with pulverised glass and pipe-clay, formed principally the ingredients of the groundwork of the ware.' and to Newcastle for coals."
One feature of the productions during forty-five years is the large number of commemorative pieces that were made. They range from small tablets honoring a birth or death, to sets of tankards with the name of the alehouse for which they were made. They are interesting; much sought after and rare, many having gone to museums.
The Lowestoft Porcelain Factory, Suffolk England 1757-1802
The first British-made ceramics which were intended to replicate Chinese porcelain were first made in the East coast herring fishery of Lowestoft during the early part of the 18th century. There were established and thriving trade routes in to The Hague, Rotterdam, Haarlem and Antwerp and - consequently - the first accomplished potters in East Anglia were of Dutch origin.
The first factory, founded by Hewlin Luson, used local clay but soon failed. In 1757 a consortium of local worthies – Obed Aldred, James Richmond, Robert Browne, Philip Walker and Robert Williams started a manufactory in the centre of Lowestoft, under what is now the carpark of the First & Last pub on Dove Street.
The first actions of Walker & Co, as they were to be named, was to do away with use of Luson’s Gunton clay, and use kaolin brought up from the west country on fishing vessels owned by Obed and Philip Walker, which were already a regular sight on the route down the English Channel to the Isle of Wight, Newlyn and back.
Very early examples of Lowestoft porcelain – sometimes credited to Luson’s works - were overworked and insubstantial, had glaze applied in varying thicknesses and generally had a pinkish hue, which is attributed to the inclusion of the local tile-clay. By the time production had become established in the town – and kaolin was being brought in from farther afield – an underglaze blue was being used, derived from a cobalt oxide wash; although the substrate was now greatly improved, decoration was not at that time a Lowestoft forte, black-blue designs seem to have been “finished” with the use of a pen to add detail and outline.
By the mid 1760’s decorating skills improved, and the range of products expanded to include more unusual pieces such as spoon trays, eye baths, cruet sets, vinaigrettes and mustard pots alongside the more standard selection of cups and saucers, plates, pitchers and jugs. The finishing glaze was made clearer and harder and the introduction of coloured enamelling gave the manufactory a full repertoire of well-executed production and finishing techniques. Bow and Worcester designs were extensively copied.
Robert Allen was one of the first employees of Walker & Co, joining the payroll in 1758 whilst in his early teens and was placed at the painting tables where an innate artistic ability soon became apparent. Working his way assiduously up the hierarchy within the company, Robert was made factory foreman, and ultimately “manager of all the works” at which point he was in sole charge of pretty much everything that went on, from the composition of the substrate to the formulation of paints and glazes.
Allen extended his own decorative output by buying in blanks that he acquired from the Rockingham works in Yorkshire. He used this “homework” to experiment with the process of applying gilt decoration, working alongside the resident Lowestoft expert James Mottershead – all gilded examples of the company’s outturn will have been embellished by one of these two gentlemen.
Allen was also responsible for the vast majority of Lowestoft’s sought after “trifles” – small scale, almost miniature pieces which would bear the legend “a trifle from Lowestoft”, or from Bungay, or Beccles or any other local settlement from where a storekeeper or hotelier would commission what amounted to early souvenirs of their locale. Robert remained an employee of Walker & Co until the closure of the business in 1803.
One of the projects in which Allen will have taken an active part would have been the introduction of the use of transfer printing in around 1770. The better painters were encouraged to concentrate on traditional hand painting and enamelling, to underwrite the development costs. It was this decade which saw the unnamed “tulip painter” come to prominence, with several outstanding examples of work bearing this particular flower being produced – these are now some of the most highly collectable Lowestoft artefacts.
A similarly unidentified French artist – purported to have fled his homeland to escape the tumult of revolution specialised and excelled in the depiction of roses. Signing his works with a tiny depiction of the same, he was said to be “able at times to produce depictions of such exquisite detail as to give the appearance of those fashioned in the Midlands by Mr Billingsley” – a comparison with the itinerant genius William being just about the highest praise imaginable.
It is these last two decades of the 18th century that saw the production of Lowestoft’s most collectable wares – other than the tulip and rose ranges - and the company seemed to be on the verge of establishing themselves as one of the leading players in England’s burgeoning porcelain trade, but the self-same trade with the Netherlands that played a part in the factory’s inception was to lead indirectly to its downfall.
 |
A very rare Lowestoft toy teapot and cover, circa 1770-80 |
Provenance: Curtis Collection 1887, lot 228, Rt Hon Sir Samuel Hoare, Bart Collection, sold Sotheby's, 17 November 1933, lot 37, Mrs Coleman Collection. The Curtis sale in 1887 comprised the effects of Charles John Mann Curtis, a son of Thomas Curtis, a painter at the Lowestoft factory. Illustrated by Geoffrey Godden, Lowestoft Porcelains (1985), dust jacket and colour plate 2, Eighteenth Century English Porcelain, A Selection from the Godden Reference Collection (1985), plate 158, p 195, English Blue and White Porcelain (2004), colour pl. 77 and An Introduction to English Blue and White Porcelains (1974), pl. 14, fig. 79. This rare pot belongs to a group of Lowestoft porcelain 'Trifles', made as gifts from Lowestoft and other local towns and villages. All appear to have been inscribed by the same hand, likely to have been that of the painter Robert Allen.
Competition and Napoleon put an end to Lowestoft Pottery Manufacturing.
Competition from other UK facilities was placing an increasing burden on the business, as the great Staffordshire factories rose to prominence, and the difficulty of having to import coal and clay from remote sources was beginning to take its toll. Lowestoft’s leading London agency went bankrupt due to mismanagement by its local officers, cutting off the immediate route to that most lucrative of markets, but it was the French who dealt the fatal blow.
Great quantities of Lowestoft porcelain had for years been exported to Holland, and warehoused in Rotterdam before being sold on across the near continent. When Napoleons army sacked Rotterdam they made a point of seeking out British interests for special treatment. The Lowestoft stores were duly razed to the ground, and tens of thousands of pounds worth of porcelain pieces were smashed and, obviously, rendered unsellable. The company was unable to bear this combination of grave losses, and closed shortly afterwards, in 1803.
 |
A fine Lowestoft
Porcelain Curtis Pattern decorated Teapot and Cover c1785. The composition
reflects the prevalent Chinese Export porcelains known as 'Compagnie des indes'
and ascribed to the local Lowestoft painter Thomas Curtis born to James and
Mary Curtis in December 1759. Thomas is thought to have stayed with the
Lowestoft factory until 1799 a few years prior to the closure in 1802. |
Lowestoft porcelain was for some years somewhat under-appreciated, if not overlooked – with the exception of the specific floral ranges mentioned above which were highly regarded only for the quality of their decoration. This 19th century misconception that “Common Pasture” was primarily a site almost entirely devoted to the decoration of imported blanks and presumed to have been of oriental origin given the high quality of the china itself.
The supposition was that Lowestoft’s production never really gathered momentum after the subterfuge and sabotage instigated by its competitors at Bow which bought Hewlin Luson’s first undertaking to its knees. However, in the early years of the 20th century, extensive building work was undertaken on a malting which then occupied the site of Walker & Co’s earlier factory – the pub car park - and excavations uncovered vast numbers of wastage-pieces broken during manufacture and moulds evidence of industrial scale production with locally-produced material that was the product of a talented and capable group of ceramicists too – Walker & Co should rightly be considered as more than a provincial curiosity
Comments
Post a Comment