The ceramic art of Great Britain from pre-historic times down to the present day, Volume 2 (of 2) : $b being a history of the ancient and modern pottery and porcelain works of the kingdom and of their productions of every classJewitt, Llewellynn Frederick William
History
The ceramic art of Great Britain from pre-historic times down to the present day, Volume 2 (of 2) : $b being a history of the ancient and modern pottery and porcelain works of the kingdom and of their productions of every class
Jewitt, Llewellynn Frederick William
Pottery, British -- History
uninteresting changes, it was, as will be seen, ultimately purchased by
the china manufacturers. At this time the works had been considerably
increased, and they grew gradually larger, till, in 1802, they are
described as three messuages, three pot-works, one garden, fifty acres
of land, thirty acres of meadow, and forty acres of pasture, &c. About
the time of the withdrawal of Keeling and Turner from the partnership,
and the removal of the works from Tunstall to Shelton, Richard Champion
left.
Fairly settled at New Hall, the company took for their manager Mr.
John Daniel, who afterwards became a partner in the concern. The
firm, as at first formed at Shelton, consisted of Messrs. Hollins,
Warburton, Clowes, and Bagnall, but was afterwards carried on by
Hollins, Warburton, Clowes, and Daniel. A considerable quantity
of china was produced under the patent, but the most extensive and
profitable branch of the New Hall business was the making and vending
of the glaze called “composition,” made of materials to whose use the
company had the exclusive right. This “composition,” made from the
ingredients given in the specification printed in my account of the
Bristol works, was supplied by the New Hall firm to the potters of the
neighbourhood, and even sent to other localities, to a large extent
and at a highly remunerative price. The ware made at this period was
precisely similar in body and glaze to that of Bristol, to which, from
the fact of some of the same artists being employed, it bears also a
marked resemblance in ornamentation. In 1796 the patent, which had been
enjoyed successively by Cookworthy, Champion, and the Staffordshire
company, for a period of twenty-eight years, expired; but the company
continued to make the hard paste china, and to supply “composition”
(many potters finding it more convenient still to purchase instead of
making that essential) to other manufacturers. In 1810, the firm--then
consisting of four partners, viz., Samuel Hollins, of Shelton, Peter
Warburton (son of Jacob Warburton), of Cobridge, John Daniel, of
Hanley, and William Clowes, of Port Hill--became the purchasers of the
New Hall estate for the sum of £6,800. In 1813 Peter Warburton died,
leaving his share in the works to his father (Jacob Warburton) and John
Daniel, as trustees under his will. In 1821, John Daniel died, and two
years afterwards Samuel Clowes died also. John Daniel, I presume, was a
son of Ralph Daniel, to whom the potters were indebted for discovering
the system of making moulds in plaster of Paris instead of in brass,
as previously done. Mr. Daniel is said to have visited the potteries
and porcelain manufactories in France, and brought back with him a
mould of cast plaster of Paris, which he showed and introduced to the
English makers. The potters, however, knew so little of the process by
which the mould was produced, that they got blocks of the gypsum of
Derbyshire and _cut_ their moulds in them, until it was explained
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account