Chapter 21

The first case is where the injury is caused by reason of any defect in the condition of the ways, works, machinery or plant connected with or used in the business of the employer, provided that such defect arises from, or has not been discovered or remedied owing to the negligence of the employer, or of some person in the service of the employer and entrusted by him with the duty of seeing that the ways, works, machinery or plant are in proper condition. The second case is where the injury is caused by reason of the negligence of any person in the service of the employer who has any superintendence entrusted to him (that is, a person whose sole or principal duty is that of superintendence, and who is not ordinarily engaged in manual labour) whilst in the exercise of such superintendence. The third case is where the injury is caused by reason of the negligence of any person in the service of the employer to whose orders or directions the workman at the time of the injury is bound to conform and does conform, where such injury results from his so conforming. The fourth case is where the injury is caused by reason of the act or omission of any person in the service of the employer done or made in obedience to the rules or by-laws of the employer, or in obedience to particular instructions given by any person delegated with the authority of the employer in that behalf, provided that the injury results from some impropriety or defect in such rules, by-laws or instructions. The fifth case is where the injury is caused by reason of the negligence of any person in the service of the employer who has the charge or control of any signal, points, locomotive engine or train upon a railway.

The first case is where the injury is caused by reason of any defect in the condition of the ways, works, machinery or plant connected with or used in the business of the employer, provided that such defect arises from, or has not been discovered or remedied owing to the negligence of the employer, or of some person in the service of the employer and entrusted by him with the duty of seeing that the ways, works, machinery or plant are in proper condition. The second case is where the injury is caused by reason of the negligence of any person in the service of the employer who has any superintendence entrusted to him (that is, a person whose sole or principal duty is that of superintendence, and who is not ordinarily engaged in manual labour) whilst in the exercise of such superintendence. The third case is where the injury is caused by reason of the negligence of any person in the service of the employer to whose orders or directions the workman at the time of the injury is bound to conform and does conform, where such injury results from his so conforming. The fourth case is where the injury is caused by reason of the act or omission of any person in the service of the employer done or made in obedience to the rules or by-laws of the employer, or in obedience to particular instructions given by any person delegated with the authority of the employer in that behalf, provided that the injury results from some impropriety or defect in such rules, by-laws or instructions. The fifth case is where the injury is caused by reason of the negligence of any person in the service of the employer who has the charge or control of any signal, points, locomotive engine or train upon a railway.

In all these cases it is provided that the employer shall not be liable if it can be shown that the workman knew of the defect or negligence which caused his injury, and failed within a reasonable time to give, or cause to be given, information thereof to the employer or some person superior to himself in the service of the employer, unless he was aware that the employer or such superior already knew of the said defect or negligence. It was inevitable that these provisions should call for judicial interpretation, and a considerable body of authority has grown up about the act. Where general words are used, it must always occur that, between the cases which are obviously within and those which are obviously without the words, there are many on the border line. Thus, under the act, the courts have been called upon to determine the precise meaning of “way,” “works,” “machinery,” “plant,” and to say what is precisely meant by a “defect” in the condition of each of them. They have had to say what is included in “railway” and in “train,” what is meant by having “charge” or “control,” and to what extent one whose principal duty is superintendence may participate in manual labour without losing his character of superintendent, and what is the precise meaning of negligence in superintendence. These are only illustrations of many points of detail which, having called for judicial interpretation, will be found fully dealt with in the text-books on the subject. A workman who, being within the act, is injured by such negligence of a fellow-servant as is included in one or other of the five cases mentioned above, has against his employer the remedies which the act gives him. These are not necessarily the same as those which a stranger would have in the like circumstances; the amount of compensation is not left at large for a jury to determine, but is limited to an amount not exceeding such sum as may be found to be equivalent to the estimated earnings, during the three years preceding the injury, of a person in the same grade employed during those years in the like employment and in the district in which the workman is employed at the time of the injury. Moreover, the right to recover is hedged about with technicalities which are unknown at the common law; proceedings must be taken in the county court, within a strictly limited time, and are maintainable only if certain elaborate provisions as to notice of injury have been complied with. Where the injury causes death the action is maintainable for the benefit of the like persons as are entitled under Lord Campbell’s act in an action at common law.

The law continued in this condition up to 1897. In the majority of cases of injury to a servant, the doctrine of common employment still protected the master; and where, under the Employers’ Liability Act, it failed to do so, the liability was of a limited character and often, owing to technicalities of procedure, difficult to enforce. Moreover, there is nothing in the act to prevent master and servant from entering into any special contract they please; and in many trades it became a common practice for contracts to be made wholly excluding the operation of the act. In 1893 an attempt was made to alter the law by a total abolition of the defence of common employment, so as to make a master as liable to a servant as to a stranger for the negligence of any of his servants acting in the course of their employment, and at the same time to prohibit any agreements to forego the rights so given to the servant. The bill did not become law, and no further change was made until, in 1897, parliament took the first step in what has been a complete revolution in the law of employers’ liability. Up to that year, as has been seen, the foundation of a master’s liability was negligence, either of the master himself, or, in certain cases, of his servants. But by the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1897, a new principle was introduced,Acts of 1897 to 1906.whereby certain servants in certain employments were given a right to compensation for injuries, wholly irrespective of any consideration of negligence or contributory negligence. As regards such servants in such employments the master was in effect made an insurer against accidental injuries. The act was confessedly tentative and partial; it dealt only with selected industries, and even within these industries was not of universal application. But where it did apply, it gave a right to a limited compensation in every case of injury by accident arising out of and in the course of the employment, whether that accident had been brought about by negligence or not, and whether the injured servant had or had not contributed to it by his own negligence.

The act applied only to employment on, or in, or about certain localities where, at the same time, the employer was what the act called an “undertaker,” that is, the person whose business was there being carried on. If we wanted to know whether a workman was within the act, we had to ask, first, was he employed on, or in, or about a railway, or a factory, or a mine, or a quarry, or an engineering shop, or a building of the kind mentioned in the act; secondly, was he employed by one who was, in relation to that railway, &c., the undertaker as defined by the act; and thirdly, was he at the time of the accident at work on, or in, or about that railway, &c. Unless these three conditions were fulfilled the employment was not within the act.

The employments to which the act applied comprised railways, factories (which included docks, warehouses and steam laundries), mines, engineering works and most kinds of buildings. “Workman” included every person engaged in an employment to which the act applied, whether by manual labour or otherwise, and whether his agreement was one of service or apprenticeship or otherwise, expressed or implied, oral or in writing.

By the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1900, the benefits of the act of 1897 were extended to agricultural labourers.

The Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906 (which came into force on the 1st of July 1907) extended the right of compensation for injuries practically to all persons in service, and also introduced many provisions not contained in the acts of 1897 and 1900 (repealed). It does not apply to persons in the naval or military service of the crown (s. 9), or persons employed otherwise than by way of manual labour whose remuneration exceedstwo hundred and fifty pounds a year, or persons whose employment is of a casual nature, and who are employed otherwise than for the purposes of the employer’s trade or business, or members of a police force, or out-workers, or members of the employer’s family dwelling in his house. But itexpresslyapplies to seamen.

To entitle a workman engaged in an employment to which the act applies to compensation all the following conditions must be fulfilled: (1) There must be personal injury by accident. This will exclude injury wilfully inflicted,Conditions of claim.unless the injury results in death or serious and permanent disablement, but the act introduces a new provision by making the suspension or disablement from work or death caused by certain industrial diseases “accidents” within the meaning of the act. The industrial diseases specified in the 3rd schedule of the act were anthrax, ankylostomiasis, and lead, mercury, phosphorus and arsenic poisoning or their sequelae. But § 8 of the act authorized the secretary of state to make orders from time to time including other industrial diseases, and such orders have embraced glass workers’ cataract, telegraphists’ cramp, eczematous ulceration of the skin produced by dust or liquid, ulceration of the mucous membrane of the nose or mouth produced by dust, &c. To render the employer liable the workman must either obtain a certificate of disablement or be suspended or die by reason of the disease. If the disease has been contracted by a gradual process, all the employers who have employed the workman during the previous twelve months in the employment to which the disease was due are liable to contribute a share of the compensation to the employer primarily liable. (2) The accident must arise out of and in the course of the employment. In each case it will have to be determined whether the workman was at the time of the accident in the course of his employment, and whether the accident arose out of the employment. It will have to be considered when and where the particular employment began and ended. Other difficulties have arisen and will frequently arise when the workman at the time of the accident is doing something which is no part of the work he is employed to do. So far as the decisions have gone, they indicate that if what the workman is doing is no act of service, but merely for his own pleasure, or if he is improperly meddling with that which is no part of his work, the accident does not arise out of and in the course of his employment; but if, while on his master’s work, he upon an emergency acts in his master’s interest, though what he does is no part of the work he is employed to do, the accident does arise out of and in the course of his employment. (3) The injury must be such as disables the workman for a period of at least one week from earning full wages at the work at which he was employed. (4) Notice of the accident must be given as soon as practicable after the happening thereof, and before the workman has voluntarily left the employment in which he was injured; and the claim for compensation (by which is meant notice that he claims compensation under the act addressed by the workman to the employer) must be made within six months from the occurrence of the accident or, in case of death, from the time of death. Want of notice of the accident or defects in it are not to be a bar to proceedings, if occasioned by mistake or other reasonable cause, and the employer is not prejudiced thereby. But want of notice of a claim for compensation is a bar to proceedings, unless the employer by his conduct has estopped himself from relying upon it. (5) An injured workman must, if so required by the employer, submit himself to medical examination.

When these conditions are fulfilled, an employer who is within the act has no answer unless he can prove that the injury arose from the serious and wilful misconduct of the workman. The precise effect of these terms is not clear; but mere negligence is not within them.

Where the injury causes death, the right to compensation belongs to the workman’s “dependents”; that is, such of the members of the workman’s family as were at the time of the death wholly or in part dependent upon the earnings of the workman for their maintenance. “Members of a family” means wife or husband, father, mother, grandfather, grandmother, step-father, step-mother, son, daughter, grandson, granddaughter, step-son, step-daughter, brother, sister, half-brother, half-sister. The act of 1906 makes also a very remarkable departure in including illegitimate relations in the direct line among “dependents,” for where a workman, being the parent or grandparent of an illegitimate child, leaves such a child dependent upon his earnings, or, being an illegitimate child, leaves a parent or grandparent so dependent upon his earnings, such child or parent is to be included in the “members of a family.”

Under the act compensation is for loss of wages only, and is, as has been said, based upon the actual previous earnings of the injured workman in the employment of the employers for whom he is working at the time of the injury. InAmount.case of death, if the workman leaves dependents who were wholly dependent on his earnings, the amount recovered is a sum equal to his earnings in the employment of the same employer during the three years next preceding the injury, or the sum of £150, whichever is the larger, but not exceeding £300; if the period of his employment by the same employer has been less than three years, then the amount of his earnings during the three years is to be deemed to be 156 times his average weekly earnings during the period of his actual employment under the said employer. If the workman leaves only dependents who were not wholly dependent, the amount recovered is such sum as may be reasonable and proportionate to the injury to them, but not exceeding the amount payable in the previous case. If the workman leaves no dependents, the amount recoverable is the reasonable expenses of his medical attendance and burial, not exceeding £10. In case of total or partial incapacity for work resulting from the injury, what is recovered is a weekly payment during the incapacity after the second week not exceeding 50% of the workman’s average weekly earnings during the previous twelve months, if he has been so long employed, but if not, then for any less period during which he has been in the continuous employment of the same employer; such weekly payment is not to exceed £1—and in fixing it regard is to be had to the difference between the amount of his average weekly earnings before the accident and the average amount which he is able to earn after the accident. Any payments, not being wages, made by the employer in respect of the injury must also be taken into account. The weekly payment may from time to time be reviewed at the request of either party, upon evidence of a change in the circumstances since the award was made, and after six months may be redeemed by the employer by payment of a lump sum. A workman is within the act although at the time of the injury he has been in the employment for less than two weeks, and although there are no actual earnings from the same employer upon which a weekly average can be computed. But how are the average weekly earnings which he would have earned from the same employer to be estimated? The question must be determined as one of fact by reference to all the circumstances of the particular case. Suppose the workman to be engaged at six shillings a day and injured on the first day. If it can be inferred that he would have remained in such employment for a whole week, his average weekly earnings from the same employer may be taken at thirty shillings. If it can be inferred that he would have worked one day and no more, his average weekly earnings from the same employer may be taken at six shillings.

All questions as to liability or otherwise under the act, if not settled by agreement, are referred to arbitration in accordance with a scheme prescribed by the act. Contracting out is not permitted, save in one event: where a scheme of compensation, benefit or insurance for the workmen of an employer has been certified by the Registrar of Friendly Societies to be not less favourable to the workmen and their dependents than the provisions of the act, and that where the scheme provides for contributions by the workmen, it confers benefits at least equal to those contributions, in addition to the benefits to which the workmen would have been entitled under the act, and that a majority (to be ascertained by ballot) of the workmen to whom the scheme is applicable are in favour of it, the employer may contract with any of his workmen that the provisions of thescheme shall be substituted for the act; such certificate may not be for more than five years, and may in certain circumstances be revoked. The act does not touch the workman’s rights at common law or under the Employers’ Liability Act, but the workman, if more than one remedy is open to him, can enforce only one. When the circumstances create a legal liability in some other person,e.g.where the injury is caused by the negligence of a sub-contractor or of a stranger, in such cases the employer, if required to pay compensation under the act, is entitled to be indemnified by such other person.

Under the Factory Acts, offences, when they result in death or bodily injury to health, may be punished by fine not exceeding £100, and the whole or any part of such fine may be applied for the benefit of the injured person or his family, or otherwise as the secretary of state determines. Similar provisions occur in the Mines Acts. Any sum so applied must be taken into account in estimating compensation under the Employers’ Liability and Workmen’s Compensation Acts.

Under the Factory Acts, offences, when they result in death or bodily injury to health, may be punished by fine not exceeding £100, and the whole or any part of such fine may be applied for the benefit of the injured person or his family, or otherwise as the secretary of state determines. Similar provisions occur in the Mines Acts. Any sum so applied must be taken into account in estimating compensation under the Employers’ Liability and Workmen’s Compensation Acts.

Law in Other Countries.—InGermany(q.v.) there is a system of compulsory state insurance against accidents to workmen. The law dates from 1884, being amended from time to time (1885, 1886, 1887, 1900, 1903) toGermany.embrace different classes of employment. Occupations are grouped into (1) industry; (2) agriculture; (3) building; (4) marine, to all of which one general law, with variations necessary to the particular occupation in question, is applicable. There are also special provisions for prisoners and government officials. Practically every kind of working-man is thus included, with the exception of domestic servants and artisans or labourers working on their own account. All workmen and officials whose salary does not exceed £150 a year come within the law. No compensation is payable where an accident is caused through a person’s own gross carelessness, and where an accident has been contributed to by a criminal act or intentional wrongdoing the compensation may be refused or only partially allowed. With these exceptions, compensation for injury is payable in case of injury so long as the injured is unfit to work; in case of total incapacity an allowance is made equal to two-thirds of the injured person’s annual earnings, in case of partial incapacity, in proportion to the degree that his wage-earning capacity has been affected. In case of death the compensation is either burial money or an allowance to the family varying in amount from 20 to 60% of the annual earnings according to circumstances. The provision of compensation for accidents falls entirely upon employers, and in order to lighten the burden thus falling upon them, and at the same time to guard against the possible insolvency of an individual employer, associations or self-administering bodies of employers have been formed—usually all the employers of each particular branch of industry in a district. These associations fix the amount of compensation after each accident, and at the end of the year assess the amount upon the individual employers. There is an appeal from the association to an arbitration court, and in particularly complicated cases there may be a further appeal to the imperial insurance department. No allowance is paid until after the lapse of thirteen weeks from the accident, and in the meantime the injured person is supported from a sick fund to which the employers contribute one-third, the employee contributing two-thirds. In Germany quite twelve millions of workpeople are insured; in 1905 a sum of nearly eight millions sterling was paid for accidents, and a million and a half to the families of those killed in accidents.

InAustriathe compulsory insurance of workmen was provided for by a law of 1887, with subsequent amendments. Briefly, nearly every class of industrial worker is included under the Austrian law, which is administered byAustria.special territorial insurance institutions, each of them embracing particular classes of industries or workers. The institutions are managed by committees, one-third of the members of each committee being chosen by the minister of the interior, one-third by the employers and one-third by the workers. Compensation is payable, in case of accidents, on a scale proportionate to the injured person’s wages during the preceding year. In case of death, a certain sum is paid for funeral expenses, an annuity to the widow, if one is left, equal to 20% of the deceased’s annual wages—if the widow remarries, she receives a lump sum equal to three annual payments in liquidation of the annuity—an annuity to each legitimate child equal to 15%, or, if the child has no mother, equal to 20% of the father’s wages; an annuity to the father or mother, if dependent on the deceased for support, equal to 20% of the annual wages. As in the English act of 1906 illegitimate children are recognized by being granted an annuity in the case of the death of a father equal to 10% of his wages. In no case can the total amount of the annuities exceed 50% of the deceased’s annual wages. Where the accident has resulted in total incapacity, the workman receives an annuity equal to 60% of his wages. No allowance is paid until after the fourth week, during which time the injured is supported by the sick-insurance institutions. The provision for the system is raised by contributions to the extent of nine-tenths by the employers and one-tenth by the workers, deducted from their wages. Instead of the German method by which an annual payment equal to the amount disbursed is required from each employer, he is required to provide the full amount necessary for the complete payment of the pension, this amount being placed to the credit of a special insurance fund.

InFrancea system of compulsory state insurance againstFrance.accidents was created by a law of 1898. The principal feature in the French law is the attempt to meet the possible insolvency of the employer by the establishment of a special guarantee fund, created by a small addition to the “business tax” (contribution des patentes), and, in the case of the mining industry, by a small tax on mines.

Norway, by a law of 1894, amended in 1897 and 1899, adoptedNorway.a system of compulsory insurance modelled to a great extent on the German system. Instead, however, of a trade association as in Germany, or a district insurance association as in Austria, there is a government insurance office, in which employers have to insure their workmen.

InDenmarka law was passed in 1897 rendering employersDenmark.personally liable for the amount of compensation for accidents, but employers may relieve themselves of this liability by insuring workmen in an assurance association approved of by the minister of the interior. This course, however, is discretionary with employers.

InItaly, although many attempts were made between 1889 and 1898 to introduce a system of compulsory insurance, it was not until the latter year that the principle was adopted. There is a National Bank for the InsuranceItaly.of Working men against Accident (Cassa Nazionale di Assicurazione per gli infortuni degli operaji sul lavoro), created under a law of 1883. It has special privileges, such as exemption from taxation and the employment of the branch offices of the state post-office savings bank as local offices. Under the law of 1898 there is a primary obligation on the employer to insure his workmen with the National Bank, but he may, if he prefers, insure with other societies approved by government. Employers employing about five hundred workmen may, instead of insuring, establish a fund for the payment of not less than the statutory compensation, subject to giving adequate security for the sufficiency of the fund. Exemption from compulsory insurance is granted to employers who have established a mutual insurance association, which must comply with certain prescribed conditions. Railway companies, also, are exempt, if they have relief funds which conform with the provisions of the act.

InSpainan act of the 30th of January 1900, adopted theSpain.principle of the personal responsibility of the employer for accidents to workmen other than those due to vis major. The act also lays down regulations for preventing accidents in dangerous trades, and releases the employer from personal liability on effecting adequate insurance of his workmen with an approved insurance company.

Hollandhas adopted the principle of compulsory insurance by a law of the 2nd of January 1901. An employer has to pay the necessary premium to the State Insurance Office, or byHolland.depositing adequate security with the State Office he mayundertake the payment of the prescribed compensation himself. Or he may transfer his liability to an insurance company, provided the company deposit adequate security with the State Office. The State Insurance Office is under the management of directors appointed by the crown, and decides on all questions as to compensation; there is also a “Supervisory Board” of the State Office with joint representation of employers and workmen. There is an appeal from the State Office to Councils of Appeal, and from them to a National Board of Appeal.

Greecehas a law of the 21st of February 1901, providingGreece.for compensation for accidents causing incapacity of more than four days’ duration to workmen in mines, quarries and smelting works. The employer is exclusively liable for such compensation and for medical expenses during the first three months; after that time he is liable for one-half, the other half being borne by a miners’ provident fund, supported by certain taxes on the properties affected, fines, &c.

By a law of the 5th of July 1901,Swedenadopted the principleSweden.of the personal liability of the employer for industrial accidents. The employer can, however, insure himself against liability in the Royal Insurance Institute. Compensationbecomespayable after the expiration of sixty days from the date of the accident.

Russiahas a law which came into force on the 1st of JanuaryRussia.1904. Under this law employers in certain specified industries are bound to indemnify workers for incapacity of more than three days’ duration due to injury arising out of their work. Employers are exempt from liability by insuring their workmen in insurance companies whose terms are not less favourable than those laid down by the law.

Belgiumpassed a law dealing with industrial accidents on the 24th of December 1903. It adopts the principle of the personal liability of the employer in certain specifiedBelgium.trades or industries. There is a power of extension to such other undertakings as may be declared dangerous by the Commission on Labour Accidents. Employers may exempt themselves from their liability by contracting for the payment of compensation by an insurance company approved by the government or by the National Savings and Pension Fund. Where an employer does not so contract, he must (with certain exemptions) contribute to a special insurance fund. The law of 1903 also established a permanent Commission on Labour Accidents.

SwitzerlandSwitzerland.in 1899 adopted a law providing for accident insurance, but it was defeated on referendum in May 1900.

In theUnited Statesthe law mainly depends on the doctrine of common employment, and the extent to which this doctrine is applied varies considerably in the different states, more particularly as to who are and who are not to be regarded as fellow-servants. The tendency, however, has been to increase the liability of the employer for theUnited States.negligence of a fellow-servant, and in the case of employment on railways many states have passed laws either modifying or abrogating the doctrine. Colorado, by a law of 1901, has entirely abrogated it; and Alabama, Massachusetts and New York have laws generally similar to the English act of 1880. But the greatest departure, due to the initiative of President Roosevelt, has been the passing by the Federal Congress of the laws of April 22 and May 30, 1908, one giving damages to injured employees of interstate carriers by railroad, and common carriers by railroad in Territories, the District of Columbia, the Canal Zone and other territory governed by Congress, and the other giving regular wages for not more than one year to injured employees of the U.S. government in arsenals, navy yards, construction work on rivers, harbours and fortifications, hazardous work in connexion with the Panama Canal or Reclamation Service, and in government manufacturing establishments. These national laws, which were intended to serve as an example to the states, specifically provided for employers’ liability and for the non-recognition of the doctrine of common employment.

Most of the British colonial states have adopted the principle of the English Workmen’s Compensation Act of 1897, and theBritish Colonies.various colonial acts are closely modelled on the English act, with more or less important variations in detail. The New Zealand Act was passed in 1900, and amended in 1901, 1902, 1903 and 1905. The act of 1905 (No. 50) fixes the minimum compensation for total or partial disablement at £1 a week when the worker’s previous remuneration was not less than 30s. a week. South Australia passed a Workmen’s Compensation Act in 1900 and Western Australia one in 1902. New South Wales passed one in 1905, and British Columbia in 1902.

1“Employ” comes through Fr. from Lat.implicare, to enfold, Late Lat. to direct upon something.

1“Employ” comes through Fr. from Lat.implicare, to enfold, Late Lat. to direct upon something.

EMPOLI,a town of Tuscany, Italy, in the province of Florence, from which it is 20 m. W. by S. by rail. Pop. (1901) 7005 (town); 20,301 (commune). It is situated 89 ft. above sea-level, to the S. of the Arno. The principal church, the Collegiata, or Pieve di S. Andrea, founded in 1093, still preserves the lower part of the original arcaded façade in black, white and coloured marble. The works of art which it once contained are most of them preserved in a gallery close by. Some of the other churches contain interesting works of art. The principal square is surrounded by old houses with arcades. The painter Jacopo Chimenti (Jacopo da Empoli), 1554-1640, was born here. Empoli is on the main railway line from Florence to Pisa, and is the point of divergence of a line to Siena.

EMPORIA,a city and the county-seat of Lyon county, Kansas, U.S.A., on the Neosho river, about 60 m. S.W. of Topeka. Pop. (1890) 7551; (1900) 8223, of whom 686 were foreign-born and 663 were negroes; (1910 U.S. census) 9058. It is served by the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fé, and the Missouri, Kansas & Texas railways. The city has a Carnegie library, and is the seat of the state normal school and of the College of Emporia (Presbyterian; 1883). Emporia’s industrial interests are mainly centred in commerce with the surrounding farming region; but there are small flour mills, machine shops, foundries and other manufacturing establishments,—in 1905 the value of the factory product was $571,601. The municipality owns and operates the water-works and the electric-lighting plant. Emporia was settled in 1856 and was chartered as a city in 1870. The EmporiaGazette, established in 1890, was purchased in 1894 by William Allen White (b. 1868), a native of Emporia, who took over the editorship and made a great stir in 1896 by his editorial entitled “What’s the matter with Kansas?”; he also wrote several volumes of excellent short stories, particularlyThe Court of Boyville(1889),Stratagems and Spoils(1901) andIn Our Town(1906).

EMPORIUM(a Latin adaptation of the Gr.ἐμπόριον, fromἐν, in, and stem ofπορεύεσθαι, to travel for purpose of trade) a trade-centre such as a commercial city, to which buyers and dealers resort for transaction of business from all parts of the world. The word is often applied to a large shop.

EMPSON, SIR RICHARD(d. 1510), minister of Henry VII., king of England, was a son of Peter Empson, an influential inhabitant of Towcester. Educated as a lawyer he soon attained considerable success in his profession, and in 1491 was one of the members of parliament for Northamptonshire and speaker of the House of Commons. Early in the reign of Henry VII. he became associated with Edmund Dudley (q.v.) in carrying out the king’s rigorous and arbitrary system of taxation, and in consequence he became very unpopular. Retaining the royal favour, however, he was made a knight in 1504, and was soon high steward of the university of Cambridge, and chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster; but his official career ended with Henry’s death in April 1509. Thrown into prison by order of the new king, Henry VIII., he was charged, like Dudley, with the crime of constructive treason, and was convicted at Northampton in October 1509. His attainder by the parliament followed, and he was beheaded on the 17th or 18th of August 1510. Empson left, so far as is known, a family of two sons and four daughters, and about 1513 his estates were restored to his elder son, Thomas.

See Francis Bacon,History of Henry VII., edited by J.R. Lumby (Cambridge, 1881); and J.S. Brewer,The Reign of Henry VIII., edited by J. Gairdner (London, 1884).

See Francis Bacon,History of Henry VII., edited by J.R. Lumby (Cambridge, 1881); and J.S. Brewer,The Reign of Henry VIII., edited by J. Gairdner (London, 1884).

EMPYEMA(from Gr.ἐν, within, andπῦον, pus), a term in medicine applied to an accumulation of purulent fluid within the cavity of the pleura (seeLung:Surgery).

EMPYREAN(from the Med. Lat.empyreus, an adaptation of the Gr.ἔρπνρος, in or on the fire,πῦρ), the place in the highest heaven, which in ancient cosmologies was supposed to be occupied by the element of fire. It was thus used as a name for the firmament, and in Christian literature for the dwelling-place of God and the blessed, and as the source of light. The word is used both as a substantive and as an adjective. Having the same Greek origin are the scientific words “empyreuma” and “empyreumatic,” applied to the characteristic smell of burning or charring vegetable or animal matter.

EMS,a river of Germany, rising on the south slope of the Teutoburger Wald, at an altitude of 358 ft., and flowing generally north-west and north through Westphalia and Hanover to the east side of the Dollart, immediately south of Emden. After passing through the Dollart the navigable stream bifurcates, the eastern Ems going to the east, and the western Ems to the west, of the island of Borkum to the North Sea. Length, 200 m.

Between 1892 and 1899 the river was canalized along its right bank for a distance of 43 m. At the same time, and as part of the same general plan, a canal, theDortmund-Ems Canal, was dug to connect the river (from Münster) with Herne in the Westphalian coal-field. At Henrichenburg a branch from Herne (5 m. long) connects with another branch from Dortmund (10½ m. long). Another branch, from Olfen (north of Dortmund), connects with Duisburg, and so with the Rhine. There is, however, a difference in elevation of 46 ft. between the two branches first named, and vessels are transferred from the one to the other by means of a huge lift. The canal, which was constructed to carry small steamers and boats up to 220 ft. in length and 750 tons burden, measures 169 m. in length, of which 108½ m. were actually dug, and cost altogether £3,728,750. The surface width throughout is 98½ ft., the bottom width 59 ft., and the depth 81⁄6ft.

See Victor Kurs, “Die künstlichen Wasserstrassen des deutschen Reichs,” inGeog. Zeitschrift(1898), pp. 601-617 and 665-694; andDeutsche Rundschau f. Geog. und Stat. (1898), pp. 130-131.

See Victor Kurs, “Die künstlichen Wasserstrassen des deutschen Reichs,” inGeog. Zeitschrift(1898), pp. 601-617 and 665-694; andDeutsche Rundschau f. Geog. und Stat. (1898), pp. 130-131.

EMS,a town and watering-place of Germany, in the Prussian province of Hesse-Nassau, romantically situated on both banks of the Lahn, in a valley surrounded by wooded mountains and vine-clad hills, 11 m. E. from Coblenz on the railway to Cassel and Berlin. Pop. 6500. It has two Evangelical, a Roman Catholic, an English and a Russian church. There is some mining industry (silver and lead). Ems is one of the most delightful and fashionable watering-places of Europe. Its waters—hot alkaline springs about twenty in number—are used both for drinking and bathing, and are efficacious in chronic nervous disorders, feminine complaints and affections of the liver and respiratory organs. On the right bank of the river lies the Kursaal with pretty gardens. A stone let into the promenade close by marks the spot where, on the 13th of July 1870, King William of Prussia had the famous interview with the French ambassador Count Benedetti (q.v.) which resulted in the war of 1870-1871. A funicular railway runs up to the Malberg (1000 ft.), where is a sanatorium and whence extensive views are obtained over the Rhine valley. Ems is largely frequented in the summer months by visitors from all parts of the world—the numbers amounting to about 11,000 annually—and many handsome villas have been erected for their accommodation. In August 1786 Ems was the scene of the conference of the delegates of the four German archbishops, known as the congress of Ems, which issued (August 25) in the famous joint pronouncement, known as the Punctation of Ems, against the interference of the papacy in the affairs of the Catholic Church in Germany (seeFebronianism).

See Vogler, Ems,seine Heilquellen, Kureinrichtungen, &c. (Ems, 1888); and Hess,Zur Geschichte der Stadt Ems(Ems, 1895).

See Vogler, Ems,seine Heilquellen, Kureinrichtungen, &c. (Ems, 1888); and Hess,Zur Geschichte der Stadt Ems(Ems, 1895).

EMSER, JEROME,orHieronymus(1477-1527), antagonist of Luther, was born of a good family at Ulm on the 20th of March 1477. He studied Greek at Tübingen and jurisprudence at Basel, and after acting for three years as chaplain and secretary to Raymond Peraudi, cardinal of Gurk, he began lecturing on classics in 1504 at Erfurt, where Luther may have been among his audience. In the same year he became secretary to Duke George of Albertine Saxony, who, unlike his cousin Frederick the Wise, the elector of Ernestine Saxony, remained the stanchest defender of Roman Catholicism among the princes of northern Germany. Duke George at this time was bent on securing the canonization of Bishop Benno of Meissen, and at his instance Emser travelled through Saxony and Bohemia in search of materials for a life of Benno, which he subsequently published in German and Latin. In pursuit of the same object he made an unsuccessful visit to Rome in 1510. Meanwhile he had also been lecturing on classics at Leipzig, but gradually turned his attention to theology and canon law. A prebend at Dresden (1509) and another at Meissen, which he obtained through Duke George’s influence, gave him means and leisure to pursue his studies.

At first Emser was on the side of the reformers, but like his patron he desired a practical reformation of the clergy without any doctrinal breach with the past or the church; and his liberal sympathies were mainly humanistic, like those of Erasmus and others who parted company with Luther after 1519. As late as that year Luther referred to him as “Emser noster,” but the disputation at Leipzig in that year completed the breach between them. Emser warned his Bohemian friends against Luther, and Luther retorted with an attack on Emser which outdid in scurrility all his polemical writings. Emser, who was further embittered by an attack of the Leipzig students, imitated Luther’s violence, and asserted that Luther’s whole crusade originated in nothing more than enmity to the Dominicans, Luther’s reply was to burn Emser’s books along with Leo X.’s bull of excommunication.

Emser next, in 1521, published an attack on Luther’s “Appeal to the German Nobility,” and eight works followed from his pen in the controversy, in which he defended the Roman doctrine of the Mass and the primacy of the pope. At Duke George’s instance he prepared, in 1523, a German translation of Henry VIII.’s “Assertio Septem Sacramentorum contra Lutherum,” and criticized Luther’s “New Testament.” He also entered into a controversy with Zwingli. He took an active part in organizing a reformed Roman Catholic Church in Germany, and in 1527 published a German version of the New Testament as a counterblast to Luther’s. He died on the 8th of November in that year and was buried at Dresden.

Emser was a vigorous controversialist, and next to Eck the most eminent of the German divines who stood by the old church. But he was hardly a great scholar; the errors he detected in Luther’s New Testament were for the most part legitimate variations from the Vulgate, and his own version is merely Luther’s adapted to Vulgate requirements.

Bibliography.—Waldau,Nachricht von Hieronymus Emsers Leben und Schriften(Anspach, 1783); Kawerau,Hieronymus Emser(Halle, 1898);Akten und Briefe zur Kirchenpolitik Herzog Georgs von Sachsen(Leipzig, 1905);Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, vi. 96-98 (1877). All histories of the Reformation in Germany contain notices of Emser; see especially Friedensburg,Beiträge zum Briefwechsel der katholischen Gelehrten Deutschlands im Reformationszeitalter.

Bibliography.—Waldau,Nachricht von Hieronymus Emsers Leben und Schriften(Anspach, 1783); Kawerau,Hieronymus Emser(Halle, 1898);Akten und Briefe zur Kirchenpolitik Herzog Georgs von Sachsen(Leipzig, 1905);Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, vi. 96-98 (1877). All histories of the Reformation in Germany contain notices of Emser; see especially Friedensburg,Beiträge zum Briefwechsel der katholischen Gelehrten Deutschlands im Reformationszeitalter.

(A. F. P.)

ENAMEL(formerly “amel,” derived through the Fr.amail, esmal, esmail, from a Latin wordsmaltum, first found in a 9th-century life of Leo IV.), a term, strictly speaking, given to the hard vitreous compound, which is “fused” upon the surface of metallic objects either for the purpose of decoration or utility. This compound is a form of glass made of silica, minium and potash, which is stained by the chemical combination of various metallic oxides whilst in a melted condition in the crucible. This strict application of the term was widened to signify the metal object coated with enamel, so that to-day the term “an enamel” generally implies a work of art in enamel upon metal. The composition of the substance enamel which is used upon metal does not vary to any great extent from the enamels employed upon pottery and faience. But they differ in this respect, that the pottery enamel is usually applied to the“biscuit” surface of the ware in a raw state; that is, the compound has not been previously “run down” or vitrified in the crucible by heat, as is the case with enamelling upon metal, although, in most of the enamelled iron advertisement tablets, the enamel is in the raw state and is treated in a similar manner to that employed upon pottery.

Examination of the enamels upon brick of the Assyrians shows that they were applied unvitrified. It was upon pottery and brick that the ancient Egyptians and Assyrians achieved their greatest work in enamelling. For as yet no work of such magnificence as the great enamelled walls of the palace of Rameses III. at Tell el-Yehudia in the Delta of the Nile, or the palace of Nimrod in Babylon, has been discovered upon metal of any kind. But there were gold ornaments and jewelry enamelled of noble design in opaque turquoise, cobalt, emerald green and purple, some of which can be seen at the British Museum and the Louvre. An example is shown in Plate I. fig. 3.

In the subsequent Greek and Roman civilizations enamel was also applied to articles of personal adornment. Many pieces of jewelry, exquisite in workmanship, have been found. But a greater application was made of it by the Greek sculptors in the 4th and 5th centuriesB.C.For we find, in many instances, that not only were the eyes made of enamel—which (artistically speaking) is a somewhat doubtful manner of employing it,—as in the fine bronze head found at Anticythera (Cerigotto) in 1902, but in the colossal figure of Zeus for the temple at Olympia made by Pheidias the gold drapery was gorgeously enamelled with figures and flowers. This wonderful work by the greatest sculptor the world has ever seen was destroyed, as so many priceless works of art in enamel have been: doubtless on account of the precious metal upon which they were made. It was in all probability the crowning triumph of a long series of essays in this material. The art of ancient Rome lacked the inspiration of Greece, being mainly confined to copying Greek forms and style, and in the case of enamelling it did not depart from this attitude. But the Roman and Etruscan glass has many beautiful qualities of form and colour that do not seem entirely borrowed, and the enamel work upon them so far as we can discern is of graceful design and rich colour. No doubt, were it not, as has been remarked, for the fact that enamelling was generally done upon gold and silver, there would still be many works to testify to the art of that period. Such as there are, however, show a rare appreciation of enamel as a beautiful material. With the decline of this civilization the art of enamelling probably died out. For it has ever been one of those exquisite arts which exist only under the sunshine of an opulent luxurious time or sheltered from the rude winds of a poorer age by the affluence of patrons. The next time we hear of it is in an oft-quoted passage (c.A.D.240) from the writings of the great sophist Philostratus, who says (Icones, i. 28):—“It is said that the barbarians in the ocean pour these colours into bronze moulds, that the colours become as hard as stone, preserving the designs,”—a more or less inaccurate description of the process ofchamplevé. This has been understood (from an interpretation given to a passage in the commentary on it by Olearius) to refer to the Celts of the British Islands. It also goes to prove that enamelling was not practised at this day in Greece. We have no British enamels to show so early as this, but belonging to a later period, from the 6th to the 9th century, a number of the finest gold and bronze ornaments, horse trappings, shields, fibulae and ciboria have been discovered of Celtic and Saxon make. The Saxon work has nothing to show so exquisitely wrought as that found in Ireland, where one or two pieces are to be seen now in the Dublin Museum, notably the Ardagh chalice and some gold brooches. In the chalice the enamel is of a minute inlaid character, and appears to have been made first in the form of a multi-colour bead, which was fused to the surface of its setting, and then polished down. Many of the pieces seem to have been made after this fashion, which does not speak very highly of the technical knowledge of enamelling, but it is none the less true enamelling of an elementary character. The shield at the British Museum has an inlay of red enamel which is remarkable in its quality. For centuries such a fine opaque red has not been discovered. An example of Irish work is shown in Plate II. fig. 10.

From Ireland the art was transferred to Byzantium, which is to be seen by the close resemblance of method, style, design and colour. The style and design changed in course of time, but the craft remained. It was at Byzantium that it flourished for several centuries.

The finest work we know of belonging to this period is the Pala d’Oro at St Mark’s, Venice, believed to have been brought from Constantinople to Venice about 1105. This magnificent altar-piece is incloisonnéenamel. A typical example is the ciborium and chalice belonging to the South Kensington loan collection. The design entirely covers the whole of the surface in one rich mass composed of circular or vesica-shaped medallions filled with sacred subjects and foliated scrolls. These are engraved and enamelled, and the metal bands of the scrolls and figures are engraved and gilt. The characteristic quality of the colour scheme is that it is composed almost wholly of primaries. Red, blue and yellow predominate, with a little white and black. Occasionally the secondaries, green and purple, are used, but through the whole period of Byzantine enamelling there is a total absence of what to-day is termed “subtle colouring.” The arrangement of the enamels is also distinct, in that the divisions of the colours are not always made by the cloison, but are frequently laid in side by side without the adjoining colours mingling or running together whilst being melted. For instance, in a leaf pattern or in the drapery, the dress may be cobalt, heightened with turquoise or green. Thus it is interesting to observe that the artist employed the metal dividing lines frequently for the sake of aesthetic result, and was not much hampered by technical difficulties. This was the rule when opaque enamels were used. It is also worthy of remark that these opaque enamels differ from those in common use to-day, in that they are not nearly so opaque. This quality, together with a dull, instead of a highly polished surface, gives a much softer appearance to the enamels. Again, the whole tone of the enamels is darker and richer. Many examples of Byzantine work (see fig. 1.) are to be seen in the public and private art collections throughout Europe. They are principally upon ecclesiastical objects, missal covers, croziers, chalices, ciboria, pyx, candlesticks, crosses and tabernacles. In most instances the enamels are made in separate little plates rudely fastened with nails, screws or rivets to a metal or wooden foundation. Theophilus, a monk of the 13th century, describes the process of enamelling as it was understood by the Byzantines of his time, which probably differed but little from earlier methods. The design and drawing of the figures in Byzantine enamels is similar to the mosaic and carving. The figures are treated entirely as decorations, with scarcely ever the least semblance of expression, although here and there an intention of piety or sorrow is to be descried through the awkward postures in which theyare placed. In spite of this, the sense of decorative design, the simplicity of conception, the strength of the general character, and the richness of the colour, places this period as one of the finest which the art of enamelling has seen, and it leads us to lay stress upon the principle that the simplest methods in design and manipulation attain a higher end than those which are elaborate and intricate. It might be asserted with truth that this style never arrived at the degree of delicacy and refinement of later styles. But the refinement was often at the expense of higher qualities.

The next great application of these kinds of enamelling was at Cologne, for there we find not only the renowned work of Nicolas of Verdun, the altar front at Klosterneuberg, which consists of fifty plates inchamplevéenamel, but in that Rhenish province there are many shrines of magnificent conception. From here the secrets of the craft were taken to Limoges, where the greatest activity was displayed, as numerous examples are found throughout England, France and Spain, which no doubt were made there (see Plate I. fig. 6.) But no new method or distinct advance is to be noticed, during these successive revivals at Byzantium, Cologne or Limoges, and it is to early 14th-century Italy that we owe one of the most beautiful developments, that of the process subsequently calledbasse-taille, which signifies a low-cut relief upon which transparent enamel is fused.

In this process enamelling passed from a decorative to a fine art. For it demanded the highest knowledge of an artist with the consummate skill of both sculptor and enameller. Witness the superb gold cup, called the King’s Cup, now in the British Museum, and the silver cup at King’s Lynn. The first is in an excellent state of preservation, as it is upon gold, but the latter, like most of the ancient enamelling upon silver, has lost most of its enamel. This was due—as the present writer believes after much experiment—to the impurity of the silver employed. The King’s Cup is one of the finest works in enamelling extant. It consists of a gold cup and cover, hammered out of pure gold; and around the bowl, base and cover there are bands of figures, illustrating the scenes from the life of St Agnes. The hands and faces are of pale jasper, which over the carved gold gives a beautiful flesh tone. The draperies are in most resplendent ruby, sapphire, emerald, ivory, black and orange. The stem was subsequently altered by an additional piece inserted and enamelled with Tudor roses. It is a work of the 13th century, and belonged to Jean, duc de Berry, who gave it to his nephew, Charles VI. of France, in 1391. It afterwards came into the possession of the kings of England, from Henry VI. to James I., who gave it to Don Juan Velasco, constable of Castile. It was purchased by subscription with the aid of the treasury for the British Museum.

Other well-known pieces are the silver horn in the possession of the marquess of Aylesbury, and the crozier of William of Wykeham at New College, Oxford. The discovery about the same time of the process calledplique-à-jourforms another most interesting and beautiful development. Owing to the difficulty of its manufacture and its extreme fragility there are very few examples left. One of the finest specimens is now at the Victoria and Albert Museum, South Kensington. It is in the form of two bands of emerald green enamel which decorate a silver beaker. They are in the form of little stained glass windows, the cloisons forming (as it were) the leads. These fine cloisons and shapes are most correct in form, and the whole piece shows a perfection of craftsmanship rarely equalled.

The end of the 15th century saw a development in enamelling which was not only remarkable, but revolutionary in its method. For until then the whole theory of enamelling had been that it relied upon the enclosing edges of the metal or the cloison to hold it to the metal ground and in part to preserve it in the shape of the pattern, much in the same way as a setting holds a stone or a jewel. All the enamel before this date had been sunk into cells or cloisons. Two discoveries were made; first, that enamels could be made which require no enclosing ribbon of metal, but that merely the enamel should be fused on both sides of the metal object; secondly, that after an enamel had been fused to a surface of metal, another could be superimposed and fused to the first layer without any danger of separation from each or from the metal ground. It is true that such processes had been employed upon glass on which enamel had been applied, as well as upon pottery; and it is probably due to the influence of a knowledge of both enamelling upon metal and upon glass or pottery that the discovery was made.

In most of these enamel paintings the subject was laid on with a white enamel upon a dark ground. The white was modulated; so that possessing a slight degree of translucency, it was grey in the thin parts and white in the thick. Thus was obtained a certain amount of light and shade. This gave the process calledgrisaille. But strange to say, it was not until a later period that this was practised alone, and then the modelling of the figures and draperies became very elaborate. At first it was only done in a slight degree, just sufficiently to give expression and to add to the richness of the form. For the enamellers were thinking of a plate upon which to put their wonderful colours, and not only of form. The painting in white was therefore invariably coloured with enamels. Probably the earliest painter in enamel was Nardon Pénicaud, many of whose works (one of them, dated 1503, is in the Cluny Museum) have been preserved with great care. He had many followers, the most distinguished of whom was Léonard Limosin (i.e.of Limoges). He excelled in portraiture. Examples of his work (between 1532 and 1574) are to be found in most of the larger public and private collections. Léonard Limosin and his Limoges contemporaries were very largely addicted to the employment of foil, which became too largely used, thus spoiling their otherwise fine serious work.

The family of Jean Pénicaud, Jean Court de Vigier, Pierre Raymond and Pierre Courteys were all great names of artists who excelled in thegrisailleprocess.Grisailleis similar topâte-sur-pâtein pottery, and depends for its attractive quality entirely upon form and composition. No comparison should be made with enamels in colour, for they occupy a different category—similar to cameo.

The casket shown in Plate II. fig. 9 is by Jean Pénicaud. It is a fine example of the enamelling in this style, very beautiful in colour. The hands and faces are in opaque white enamel; the draperies, garlands and flowers are in transparent green, turquoise blue, purple and cobalt over foil. The background is in transparent violet over white enamel ground, which isseméwith gold stars. The draperies are also heightened with gold.

One of the most marvellous pieces of brilliant craft is the missal cover (Plate I. fig. 5) at the South Kensington Museum, said to have belonged to Henrietta Maria, queen of Charles I. The subjects are the “Creation of Adam and Eve” and the “Fountain of Youth.” It is about 4 in. by 7 when opened out. The enamel is encrusted upon the figures, ornament and flowers which are beaten up in pure gold into high relief. The extraordinary minuteness and skill of handling, and the extreme brilliancy of the enamels, which are as brilliant to-day as on the day they were made, together form one of the unique specimens of art craftsmanship of the world. To the subdued taste of to-day, however, the effect is tawdry. The conception and design are also alike unworthy of the execution.

Since the Assyrian and Egyptian civilizations, there has been a succession of luxurious developments followed by lapses into the decline and death of the art of enamelling upon metals. In each revival there has been something added to that which was known and practised before. The last revival took place five hundred years ago, accompanying the rebirth of learning and the arts; but after flourishing for over a century, the art gradually fell into disuse, and remained so until the recent revival and further development. The development consists, first, in the more complete knowledge of the technical processes, following upon the great advances which science has made; and secondly, in a finer and more subtly artistic treatment of them. The advance in technical knowledge comprises greater facility and perfection in the production of the substance enamel,and its subsequent application to metal surfaces; more intimate knowledge of metals and their alloys to which it is applied, and greater ease in obtaining them from the metalliferous ores and reducing them to suitable dimensions and surfaces. For instance, it is now a simple matter to obtain perfectly pure copper by means of electricity. Again, formerly a flat sheet of metal was obtained by hammering, which involved an infinite amount of hard labour, whereas it is accomplished to-day with ease by means of flatting and rolling mills:i.e.after the metal has been obtained from the ore in the form of an ingot, it is stretched equally to any degree of thinness by steel rollers. Further, the furnaces have been greatly improved by the introduction of gas and electricity as the heating power, instead of the wood or charcoal employed.

Plate I.

Plate II.

In the manufacture of the substance enamel a much greater advance has been made, for whereas the colours, and consequently the schemes of colour, were extremely limited, we now possess an infinite gradation in the colours, as well as the transparency and opacity, the hardness and softness of enamels. There are only two colours which cannot yet be obtained; these are opaque vermilion and lemon yellow in a vitrified state. Many of the colours we now employ were not known by enamellers such as Léonard Limosin. Our enamels are also perfect in purity, brilliancy and durability, qualities which are largely due to the perfect knowledge of the proportion of parts composing an enamel and their complete combination. It is this complete combination, together with the absence of any destructible matter, which gives the enamel its lasting quality.

The base of enamel is a clear, colourless, transparent vitreous compound called flux, which is composed of silica, minium and potash. This flux or base—termedfondantin France—is coloured by the addition of oxides of metals while in a state of fusion, which stain the flux throughout its mass. Enamels are either hard or soft, according to the proportion of the silica to the other parts in its composition. They are termed hard when the temperature required to fuse them is very high. The harder the enamel the less liable is it to be affected by atmospheric agencies, which in soft enamels produce a decomposition of the surface first and ultimately of the whole enamel. It is therefore advisable to use hard enamels in all cases. This involves the employment of pure—or almost pure—metals for the plates, which are in most respects the best to receive and retain the enamel. For if there is an excess of alloy, either the metal will possibly melt before the enamel is fused or afterwards they will part company. To the inferior quality of old silver may be attributed the fact that in all cases the enamel has flown off it; if it has not yet wholly disappeared it will scale off in time. It is therefore essential that metals should be pure and the enamels hard. It is also noteworthy that enamels composed of a great amount of soda or potash, as compared with those wherein red lead is in greater proportion, are more liable to crack and have less cohesion to the metals. It is better not to use silver as a base, although it is capable of reflecting a higher and more brilliant white light than any other metal. Fine gold and pure copper as thin as possible are the best metals upon which to enamel. If silver is to be used, it should be fine silver, treated in the methods calledchamplevéandcloisonné.

The brilliancy of the substance enamel depends upon the perfect combination and proportion of its component parts. The intimacy of the combination depends upon an equal temperature being maintained throughout its fusion in the crucible. For this purpose it is better to obtain a flux which has been already fused and most carefully prepared, and afterwards to add the colouring oxides, which stain it dark or light according to the amount of oxide introduced. Many of the enamels are changed in colour by the difference of the proportion of the parts composing the flux, rather than by the change of the oxides. For instance, turquoise blue is obtained from the black oxide of copper by using a comparatively large proportion of carbonate of soda, and a yellow green from the same oxide by increasing the proportionate amount of the red lead. All transparent enamels are made opaque by the addition of calx, which is a mixture of tin and lead calcined. White enamel is made by the addition of stannic and arsenious acids to the flux. The amount of acid regulates the density or opacity of the enamel.

To elucidate the development which has occurred, it will be necessary to describe some of the processes. After the enamel has been procured in the lump, the next stage in the process, common to all methods of enamelling, is to pulverize it. To do this properly the enamel must first be placed in an agate mortar and covered with water; next, with a wooden mallet a number of sharp blows must be given to a pestle held vertically over the enamel, to break it; then holding the mortar firmly in the left hand, the pestle must be rotated with the right, with as much pressure as possible on the enamel, grinding it until the particles are reduced to a fine grain. The powder is then subjected to a series of washings in distilled water, until all the floury particles are removed. After this the metal is cleaned by immersion in acid and water. For copper, nitric acid is used; for silver, sulphuric, and for gold hydrochloric acid. All trace of acid is then removed, first by scratching with a brush and water, and finally by drying in warm oak sawdust. After this the pulverized enamel is carefully and evenly spread over those parts of the metal designed to receive it, in sufficient thickness just to cover them and no more. The piece is then dried in front of the furnace, and when dry is placed gently on a fire-clay or ironplanche, and introduced carefully into the muffle of the furnace, which is heated to a bright pale red. It is now attentively watched until the enamel shines all over, when it is withdrawn from the furnace. The firing of enamel, unlike that of glass or pottery, takes only a few minutes, and in nearly all processes no annealing is required.

The following are the different modes of enamelling:champlevé, cloisonné, basse-taille, plique-à-jour, painted enamel, encrusted,andminiature-painted. These processes were known at successive periods of ancient art in the order in which they are named. To-day they are known in their entirety. Each has been largely developed and improved. No new method has been discovered, although variations have been introduced into all. The most important are those connected with painted enamels, encrusted enamels andplique-à-jour.

Champlevé enamellingis done by cutting away troughs or cells in the plate, leaving a metal line raised between them, which forms the outline of the design. In these cells the pulverized enamel is laid and then fused; afterwards it is filed with a corundum file, then smoothed with a pumice stone and polished by means of crocus powder and rouge. An example is shown in Plate II. fig. 8.

Incloisonné enamel, upon a metal plate or shape, thin metal strips are bent to the outline of the pattern, then fixed by silver solder or by the enamel itself. These strips form a raised outline, giving cells as in the case ofchamplevé. The rest of the process is identical with that ofchamplevéenamelling. An example is shown in Plate I. fig. 4.

Thebasse-tailleprocess is also a combination of metal work in the form of engraving, carving and enamelling. The metal, either silver or gold, is engraved with a design, and then carved into a bas-relief (below the general surface of the metal like an Egyptian bas-relief) so that when the enamel is fused it is level with the uncarved parts of the design enamel, and the design shows through the transparent enamel.

Painted enamelsare different from any of these processes both in method and in result. The metal in this case is either copper, silver or gold, but usually copper. It is cut with shears into a plate of the size required, and slightly domed with a burnisher or hammer, after which it is cleaned by acid and water. Then the enamel is laid equally over the whole surface both back and front, and afterwards “fired.” The first coat of enamel being fixed, the design is carried out, first by laying it in white enamel or any other which is opaque and most advantageous for subsequent coloration.

In the case of agrisaille painted enamelthe white is mixed with water or turpentine, or spike oil of lavender, or essential oil of petroleum (according to the taste of the artist) and the white is painted thickly in the light parts and thinly in the grey ones,whereby a slight sense of relief is obtained and a great degree of light and shade.

Incoloured painted enamelsthe white is coloured by transparent enamels spread over thegrisailletreatment, parts of which when fired are heightened by touches of gold, usually painted in lines. Other parts can be made more brilliant by the use of foil, over which the transparent enamels are placed and then fired. An example is shown in Plate I. fig. 7.

Enamels by theplique-à-jourmethod might be best described astranslucent cloisonnéenamels; for they are similar tocloisonné, except that the ground upon which they are fired is removed, thus making them transparent like stained glass.

Two new processes have been the subject of the present writer’s study and experiment for several years, which he has lately brought to fruition. The first is an inlay of transparent enamels similar toplique-à-jourwithout cloisons to divide the colours. For if enamels do not run together whilst in a melted state, as is seen in the case of painted andbasse-tailleenamels, there should be no necessity for it in this process. The result is a clear transparent subject in colour. The other process consists of a coloured enamel relief. It resembles the della Robbia relief, with this important difference, that the colour of the enamel by its nature permeates the whole depth of the relief, whereas in the della Robbia ware it is only on the surface. It also has a fresco surface, instead of one highly glazed. The quality of the enamel is as rare and unlike anything else as it is beautiful. It is in point of fact the only coloured sculpture in which the whole of its parts are one solid homogeneous mass, and through which the colour is one with the substance and is not applied. The process consists of the shapes of the various parts of the relief being selected for the different enamels, and these enamels melted together, in the mould of the relief, which is finished with lapidary’s tools.

Miniature enamel paintingis not true enamelling, for after the white enamel is fired upon the gold plate, the colours used are not vitreous compounds—not enamels in fact—as is the case in any other form of metal enamelling; but they are either raw oxides or other forms of metal, with a little flux added, not combined. These colours are painted on the white enamel, and afterwards made to adhere to the surface by partially fusing the enamel, which when in a state of partial fusion becomes viscous.

There are many of these so-called enamels to-day, which are much easier of accomplishment than the true enamel, but they possess none of the beautiful quality of the latter. It is most apparent when parts of a work are true enamels and parts are done in the manner described above. These enamel paintings on enamel are afterwards coated over with a transparent flux, which gives them a surface of enamel. Many are done in this way for the market.

All these methods were used formerly, before the present revival; but they were not so completely understood or carried so far as they are to-day. Nor were the whole methods practised by any artist as they are now. The greatest advance has been in painted enamels. This process requires that both sides of the metal plate shall be covered with enamel; for this reason the plate is made convex on the top, so that the concave side does not touch theplancheon which it is supported for firing, but rests on its edges throughout. There are several reasons why these plates arebombé, the principal one being that in the firing they resist the tendency to warp and curl up at the edges as a flat thin plate would do. Further, the enamel having been fused to both sides is not so liable to crack or to splint in subsequent firings. This is most important, for otherwise the white which is placed on afterwards would be a network of cracks. The manner of firing has also to do with this, but not nearly so much as the preliminary care and mechanical perfection with which a plate is prepared. Nearly all the old enamels are seen to be cracked in the white if minutely examined. To obviate this the following points must be observed: The plate must be of an excellent quality of metal, equal in thickness throughout, and perfectly regular in shape. It must be arched equally from end to end. The first coat of enamel must be of a perfectly regular equal thickness on both sides, entirely covering the plate. Whatever the medium employed in painting the white on to the enamel, it must be completely evaporated before the plate is placed in the furnace. The furnace must be heated to a bright red heat, and theplanchemust be red-hot before being taken out for the enamel to be placed upon it, and then quickly returned to the furnace and the muffle door shut tight so as to allow no draught of cool air to enter it. Then as soon as it has begun to fuse, which if a small piece, it would do in a minute or so, the muffle door is slightly opened to afford a view of it. As soon as it shines all over its surface, it is withdrawn from the muffle.


Back to IndexNext