Robert Askew, his son, was employed at Derby in 1772, and in that year, along with John Laurence, absconded from his employment, and was advertised three different times in the Birmingham newspapers. In 1794 Askew, “enamel painter of Birmingham,” was living in Birmingham (at 8, Friday Street), and on the 2nd of August an agreement was drawn up, by which he bound himself “to work by the piece in lieu of the day, and at prizes mentioned in the ajoining list;” the subjects to be executed in the best manner in his power, and not agreeable to the coffee cans already executed, viz., Duke of York, King and Queen of France, and Spinning Wheel, &c., but in quality and effect equal to the Cupids on two flower pots by James Banford having R. Askew’s name written upon them (to prevent a mistake in alluding to them) in ink, subscribed this day in presence of Mr. C. King. The list of prices by the piece, attached to the draft of the agreement, is of great interest, but too long to insert. The coffee cans here named were some then recently painted by Askew, and as the bill for them contains many curious items and much valuable information on the Art-productions of that day, I give it entire. This bill, and many others which are still extant, show that Askew was the principal figure-painter employed at the Derby China Works. It is headed, “Mr. Wilm. Duesbury, Deptur to Richd. Askew, July 1794.”
Robert Askew, his son, was employed at Derby in 1772, and in that year, along with John Laurence, absconded from his employment, and was advertised three different times in the Birmingham newspapers. In 1794 Askew, “enamel painter of Birmingham,” was living in Birmingham (at 8, Friday Street), and on the 2nd of August an agreement was drawn up, by which he bound himself “to work by the piece in lieu of the day, and at prizes mentioned in the ajoining list;” the subjects to be executed in the best manner in his power, and not agreeable to the coffee cans already executed, viz., Duke of York, King and Queen of France, and Spinning Wheel, &c., but in quality and effect equal to the Cupids on two flower pots by James Banford having R. Askew’s name written upon them (to prevent a mistake in alluding to them) in ink, subscribed this day in presence of Mr. C. King. The list of prices by the piece, attached to the draft of the agreement, is of great interest, but too long to insert. The coffee cans here named were some then recently painted by Askew, and as the bill for them contains many curious items and much valuable information on the Art-productions of that day, I give it entire. This bill, and many others which are still extant, show that Askew was the principal figure-painter employed at the Derby China Works. It is headed, “Mr. Wilm. Duesbury, Deptur to Richd. Askew, July 1794.”
William Billingsley, whose name is more intimately mixed up with the history of porcelain than most of his contemporaries, was a china painter of unusual excellence, and a practical maker as well. Like many another man of genius, he was, however, unstable and erratic in his movements; but to this very quality we are indebted for the establishment of more than one eminent manufactory. To him and his practical skill is due the establishment of china-works at Pinxton, at Mansfield, at Nantgarw, and at Swansea, and to some extent the improvement of the ware at Coalport and at Worcester, as well as much of the high class of decoration at the old Derby Works; and he has thus “left his mark” on the history of Ceramic Art. Billingsley was a man of great genius, of extraordinary talent, of extreme ability as an artist, and of skill as a practical potter; but wanting stability, he became but a living illustration of the adage which says “a rolling stone gathers no moss.” He settled only for a very short time anywhere before he again moved; but wherever he did remain, if only for a short time, he left the impress of his name and the most indisputable evidence of his skill behind him. William Billingsley was the eldest son of William and Mary Billingsley, of the parish of St. Alkmund, Derby. He was baptized in that church on the 12th of October, 1758. The following is the entry of his birth:—“1758, Oct. 12, Baptized, William, the son of—Billingsley and—his wife.” Other entries in the register show that the names of his parents were “William” and “Mary.” His father died in March, 1770, when he was only twelve years of age.[23]Four years afterwards, on the 26th of September, 1774, when sixteen years of age, he was bound apprentice to William Duesbury. In the indenture he is described as “William Billingsley, son of Mary Billingsley, of Derby, in the county of Derby,” and he is bound apprentice for five years to “William Duesbury, of Derby aforesaid, China or Porcelain Maker,” to “learn the Art of Painting upon China or Porcelain Ware.” He was to receive aswages five shillings per week for the whole time of his servitude; not an advancing scale year by year as was usual. The indenture is signed by “William Billingsley,” “Mary Billingsley,” and “Wm. Duesbury,” in the presence of “Wm. Clarke.” To Mr. Duesbury he served the full time of his apprenticeship, during which time he received considerable instruction as a painter, from Zachariah Boreman,[24]one of the best artists of the old Chelsea Works, who had removed with those works to Derby. On the 4th of November, 1780, William Billingsley, then just over twenty-two years of age, married, at St. Alkmund’s Church, Derby, Sarah Rigley, of that parish, by whom he had several children, three of whom were baptised at St. Alkmund’s Church. On the expiration of his apprenticeship, William Billingsley continued in the service of Mr. Duesbury, and by his extreme skill as a flower-painter became the best artist in that line of decoration. In 1785, Mr. Duesbury died; and the business was carried on by his son, with whom Billingsley and other artists remained for some years. Soon after this time some correspondence having taken place between Mr. Duesbury and Mr. Coke concerning the properties of a bed of clay at Pinxton, in Derbyshire, which it was considered would be useful for the manufacture of china, trials were made, which ultimately resulted in Billingsley making an arrangement with Mr. Coke for the establishment of a manufactory at that place (seePinxton).Billingsley’s name frequently occurs in papers and memoranda relating to the Derby China Works in my possession, and certain patterns and designs in the old pattern-books of the works are distinguished as “Billingsley’s flowers.” As it is highly interesting to know what artists and other principal “hands” were employed at the same time as, and worked along with, William Billingsley, I give the following copy of a document relating to the keeping of the men employed on one part of the works from entering any other part:—“Derby China Manufactory, 23rd Nov., 1787. If any person in Future, either within the working Hours or at any other time, is seen or discover’d in the Rooms, Kilns, Apartments, or other Premises of the other (not having any proper Business relative to his particular Occupation there) he will positively be fined the sum of five Shillings. The Fines (if any are incur’d) to be put into the Box of Donations at pay time, on the Saturday after the detection.
William Billingsley, whose name is more intimately mixed up with the history of porcelain than most of his contemporaries, was a china painter of unusual excellence, and a practical maker as well. Like many another man of genius, he was, however, unstable and erratic in his movements; but to this very quality we are indebted for the establishment of more than one eminent manufactory. To him and his practical skill is due the establishment of china-works at Pinxton, at Mansfield, at Nantgarw, and at Swansea, and to some extent the improvement of the ware at Coalport and at Worcester, as well as much of the high class of decoration at the old Derby Works; and he has thus “left his mark” on the history of Ceramic Art. Billingsley was a man of great genius, of extraordinary talent, of extreme ability as an artist, and of skill as a practical potter; but wanting stability, he became but a living illustration of the adage which says “a rolling stone gathers no moss.” He settled only for a very short time anywhere before he again moved; but wherever he did remain, if only for a short time, he left the impress of his name and the most indisputable evidence of his skill behind him. William Billingsley was the eldest son of William and Mary Billingsley, of the parish of St. Alkmund, Derby. He was baptized in that church on the 12th of October, 1758. The following is the entry of his birth:—“1758, Oct. 12, Baptized, William, the son of—Billingsley and—his wife.” Other entries in the register show that the names of his parents were “William” and “Mary.” His father died in March, 1770, when he was only twelve years of age.[23]Four years afterwards, on the 26th of September, 1774, when sixteen years of age, he was bound apprentice to William Duesbury. In the indenture he is described as “William Billingsley, son of Mary Billingsley, of Derby, in the county of Derby,” and he is bound apprentice for five years to “William Duesbury, of Derby aforesaid, China or Porcelain Maker,” to “learn the Art of Painting upon China or Porcelain Ware.” He was to receive aswages five shillings per week for the whole time of his servitude; not an advancing scale year by year as was usual. The indenture is signed by “William Billingsley,” “Mary Billingsley,” and “Wm. Duesbury,” in the presence of “Wm. Clarke.” To Mr. Duesbury he served the full time of his apprenticeship, during which time he received considerable instruction as a painter, from Zachariah Boreman,[24]one of the best artists of the old Chelsea Works, who had removed with those works to Derby. On the 4th of November, 1780, William Billingsley, then just over twenty-two years of age, married, at St. Alkmund’s Church, Derby, Sarah Rigley, of that parish, by whom he had several children, three of whom were baptised at St. Alkmund’s Church. On the expiration of his apprenticeship, William Billingsley continued in the service of Mr. Duesbury, and by his extreme skill as a flower-painter became the best artist in that line of decoration. In 1785, Mr. Duesbury died; and the business was carried on by his son, with whom Billingsley and other artists remained for some years. Soon after this time some correspondence having taken place between Mr. Duesbury and Mr. Coke concerning the properties of a bed of clay at Pinxton, in Derbyshire, which it was considered would be useful for the manufacture of china, trials were made, which ultimately resulted in Billingsley making an arrangement with Mr. Coke for the establishment of a manufactory at that place (seePinxton).
Billingsley’s name frequently occurs in papers and memoranda relating to the Derby China Works in my possession, and certain patterns and designs in the old pattern-books of the works are distinguished as “Billingsley’s flowers.” As it is highly interesting to know what artists and other principal “hands” were employed at the same time as, and worked along with, William Billingsley, I give the following copy of a document relating to the keeping of the men employed on one part of the works from entering any other part:—“Derby China Manufactory, 23rd Nov., 1787. If any person in Future, either within the working Hours or at any other time, is seen or discover’d in the Rooms, Kilns, Apartments, or other Premises of the other (not having any proper Business relative to his particular Occupation there) he will positively be fined the sum of five Shillings. The Fines (if any are incur’d) to be put into the Box of Donations at pay time, on the Saturday after the detection.
“J. Duesbury.Boreman.Smith.Billingsley.Stables.Jno. Yates.Wm. do.Longdon.Tayler.Blood.Cooper.Butler.Soar.Dickinson.Kay.Fogg.Webster.Clarke.Barton.Mason.M. do.Atkins.Wedgwood.Ash.Morledge.Watthews.Lawrence.Whitaker.Porter.T. Moore.Shipley.B. Orme.——-[26]Wells.Keen.Parish.Spooner.Son.Wardle.Rogers.Musgrove.Morrell.Robins.Horsley.Green.Lovegrove.Whitiall.G. Holmes.Hill.Farnsworth.Whitaker.Laurance.Atkins.Morledge.Wedgwood.Ash.Wathews.Ball.Thos. Soare.[27]Jos. Stables.Wm. Cooper.Jno. Yates.Wm. Billingsley.Jno. Blood.Wm. Yates.Wm. Longdon.Wm. Taylor.Jno. Buttler.Wm. Smith.Z. Boreman.”
Again, in 1788:—“In November last notice was given that persons ofonebranch of the manufactory were not to go into the premises of theother, unless they had real business there relative to theireparticular occupation, notwithstanding which the practice is still by some Individuals continued. Notice is therefore herebyfinallygiven, that if any person in future (having received this Notice) shall intrude themselves contrary to this injunction they will positively be fined 5 shillings.
Again, in 1788:—
“In November last notice was given that persons ofonebranch of the manufactory were not to go into the premises of theother, unless they had real business there relative to theireparticular occupation, notwithstanding which the practice is still by some Individuals continued. Notice is therefore herebyfinallygiven, that if any person in future (having received this Notice) shall intrude themselves contrary to this injunction they will positively be fined 5 shillings.
“Sept. 24th, 88.
“Boreman.Billingsley.Jno. Yates.Wm. do.Taylor.Smith.Borton.T. Rogers.T. Simes.Webster.Soare.Stables.Cooper.Josph. Doe.Longdon.Blood.Buttler.Key.Fogg.Clarke.Dickinson.M. Mason.Shirley, Arthr.”
The following is also an interesting document, signed by Billingsley along with other artists:—“From the many injuries done to the trade by employing Women in Painting of China, &c., Particularly not being employ’d in London in any Painting or Gilding Shop whatsoever, we hope you will not withstand Granting us the favour of their not being employ’d here.
The following is also an interesting document, signed by Billingsley along with other artists:—“From the many injuries done to the trade by employing Women in Painting of China, &c., Particularly not being employ’d in London in any Painting or Gilding Shop whatsoever, we hope you will not withstand Granting us the favour of their not being employ’d here.
“Edwd. Withers.Samuel Keys.Jno. Brown.Wm. Cooper.Wm. Longdon.Wm. Yates.Thos. Rogers.Benj. Brocklesby.Jos. Stables.Billingsley.Soare.Jno. Yates.Wm. Taylor.”
In this matter of opposition to the employment of women Billingsley seems, later on, to have relented, as will be seen by the following very nice letter from Bernice Banford, one of the female painters employed, and wife of one of the men:—“Sir, I hope you will excuse me for takeing the liberty to trouble you again, as my motive for writeing is to Return you thanks for the Favour you was pleased to confer in allowing me some work. I have only painted 4 Dozen and 3 plates, at 3d.each, which I believe is Charged Right, but know not whether I am so happy to merit your approbation in the Performance. Mr. John Duesbury would have sent me more work, but Mr. Banford Declin’d it till your return, as all the men (Mr. Bilinsley and Mr. Complin Excepted) treated him in a very unbecoming manner, and even threaten’d him if the work was continu’d to me, which would at this time be of the greatest service to my Family, and should be very happy to contribute to its support. Pardon me, Sir, if I presume to say I am certain one word from you would ease their Doubts and effectually silence them. I am, Sir, with the greatest Respect, your Obliged, Humble Servt.,Bernice Banford.—March ye 3.”Billingsley appears to have been paid from about £1 10s.to £2 per week at the Derby China Works, and several of his accounts and receipts are in my possession. In one of these (September 23rd, 1793), the balance due to him being £34 7s.2d., he asks for “a draft on London for £30 at twenty-one days’ date,” on account, as usual, and acknowledges to having “lost some little time, which in some degree differs from our agreement, but it has been a matter of necessity, not choice;” and states that as he shall “in the course of a fortnight quit the public business,”—he at this time, as I gather, being landlord of a public-house (the “Nottingham Arms” in Bridgegate, Derby)—he shall be able to make up the time so lost. Again, receipts in 1793–4–5, show that he was still at that time in Mr. Duesbury’s employ in Derby. It may be well, before proceeding further, to say that, from a curious draft of an order to the painters employed at the Derby China Works, in my own possession, William Billingsley’s number which he was supposed from that time (not long before he left) to mark on such pieces as he painted was 7. The document is so curious, and will be so interesting to collectors, that I give it entire. It is as follows, and is in the second William Duesbury’s own handwriting:—“Every Painter to mark underneath each Article he may finish, the number corresponding to his name, and any other mark which may be required, in such manner as he may be directed (viz.):—
In this matter of opposition to the employment of women Billingsley seems, later on, to have relented, as will be seen by the following very nice letter from Bernice Banford, one of the female painters employed, and wife of one of the men:—“Sir, I hope you will excuse me for takeing the liberty to trouble you again, as my motive for writeing is to Return you thanks for the Favour you was pleased to confer in allowing me some work. I have only painted 4 Dozen and 3 plates, at 3d.each, which I believe is Charged Right, but know not whether I am so happy to merit your approbation in the Performance. Mr. John Duesbury would have sent me more work, but Mr. Banford Declin’d it till your return, as all the men (Mr. Bilinsley and Mr. Complin Excepted) treated him in a very unbecoming manner, and even threaten’d him if the work was continu’d to me, which would at this time be of the greatest service to my Family, and should be very happy to contribute to its support. Pardon me, Sir, if I presume to say I am certain one word from you would ease their Doubts and effectually silence them. I am, Sir, with the greatest Respect, your Obliged, Humble Servt.,Bernice Banford.—March ye 3.”
Billingsley appears to have been paid from about £1 10s.to £2 per week at the Derby China Works, and several of his accounts and receipts are in my possession. In one of these (September 23rd, 1793), the balance due to him being £34 7s.2d., he asks for “a draft on London for £30 at twenty-one days’ date,” on account, as usual, and acknowledges to having “lost some little time, which in some degree differs from our agreement, but it has been a matter of necessity, not choice;” and states that as he shall “in the course of a fortnight quit the public business,”—he at this time, as I gather, being landlord of a public-house (the “Nottingham Arms” in Bridgegate, Derby)—he shall be able to make up the time so lost. Again, receipts in 1793–4–5, show that he was still at that time in Mr. Duesbury’s employ in Derby. It may be well, before proceeding further, to say that, from a curious draft of an order to the painters employed at the Derby China Works, in my own possession, William Billingsley’s number which he was supposed from that time (not long before he left) to mark on such pieces as he painted was 7. The document is so curious, and will be so interesting to collectors, that I give it entire. It is as follows, and is in the second William Duesbury’s own handwriting:—
“Every Painter to mark underneath each Article he may finish, the number corresponding to his name, and any other mark which may be required, in such manner as he may be directed (viz.):—
The Painter in fine blue, and in laying grounds to use for his mark the like colours.
The Painter in fine blue, and in laying grounds to use for his mark the like colours.
“On omission of the above Injunctions, for the first Offence (after this public notice), the person so offending shall forfeit to the Box which contains donations for the Manufactory at large, one-fourth of the value of the Article or Articles found to be deficient in marking; for the second, one-half of the value; and for the third, the whole of the value, and discharged the Manufactory. And if any Painter is found working at any hour contrary to those alreadyappointed for Business, without Permission or Orders, such person shall, for the first offence forfeit to the Box 6d.; for the second, 1s.; for the third, 2s., and so on, doubling each time.”In 1795 Billingsley determined upon bringing his connection with the Derby China Works to an end, and for that purpose gave notice to his employer, Mr. Duesbury. Knowing how ill he could be spared from the decorative part of the manufactory, his employer endeavoured to retain his services, and, not unnaturally, put various obstacles in the way of his leaving Billingsley; however seems to have determined on the removal, and much to his credit that that removal should be an honourable one. The following letter shows his determination:—“Sir,—From the circumstance that occurr’d when I was last in Conversation with you, I am induc’d to take this mode of informing you of my opinion on the subject then in question. My opinion is, that I have fulfill’d the warning[28]I gave (my reasons in support of which it is not necessary to advance at this time). But as I am inform’d that you believe I have some further time to work for you before the Warning is fulfill’d—namely, to make up the time I lost in the six months I was under warning, and as it is my wish to leave no ground for dissatisfaction, I take this opportunity of informing you that I am willing to come and Work that time according to that opinion of the case. If the foregoing is according to your opinion and desire, your being so kind as to send me advise to that effect at any time in the course of a week, and likewise the time I have to work according to the rule and opinion above stated, I will attend your works accordingly. If I do not hear from you in the course of the time above stated, I must then conclude that you are satisfy’d, and the information that I have receiv’d is without foundation. I am, Sir, your Humble Serv.,Wm. Billingsley.—Derby, Oct. 14, 1796.”Shortly before this time Mr. Joseph Lygo, the London agent and manager of the business of the Derby China Works, wrote to his employer, Mr. Duesbury:—“I hope you will be able to make a bargain with Mr. Billingsley for him to continue with you, for it will be a great loss to lose such a hand, and not only that, but his going into another factory will put them in the way of doing flowers in the same way, which they are at present entirely ignorant of.” Despite all this, Billingsley left the Derby China Works, where he had been apprenticed, and in which he had worked for twenty-two years, and in 1796 commenced, for or with Mr. Coke, a small manufactory at Pinxton, near Alfreton. Here his practical skill stood him in good service, and the experiments he had long tried in china bodies were brought to bear satisfactory results. He succeeded in producing a granular body (the fracture having much the appearance of fine loaf-sugar), very soft, but of extreme beauty. Here Billingsley remained for about four years only, removing in 1800 toMansfield, where he started a small concern, which he continued for about three or four years longer. Having once become unsettled by his removal from Derby, Billingsley does not appear ever afterwards to have rested long in any one place. In 1804 he is stated to have commenced, or joined, some small china works atTorkseyin Lincolnshire; and a few years later he appears to have started a china manufactory atWirksworthin Derbyshire—no doubt being in part actuated in locating himself there through the fact of the existence of a beautiful white clay being found in connection with the lead mines at Brassington and other places in its neighbourhood. In 1811 Billingsley removed to Worcester, where he engaged himself with Messrs. Flight and Barr, of the Worcester China Works. Here, as in some of his other migrations, he was accompanied by his son-in-law, George Walker, the husband of his daughter Sarah. Of the engagement of these two atWorcester, Mr. Binns says: “In 1811, Billingsley, the Derby artist, came to Worcester. As a clever flower-painter, he was no doubt an acquisition, but that does not appear to have been the object of his visit. Billingsley knew something of making porcelain, and was possessed of a receipt which there is no doubt he valued very highly. From Messrs. Flight and Barr’s letter to Mr. Dillwyn, it would appear that he had endeavoured to introduce this special body at Worcester, but we do not think he was allowed to interfere to any extent in the manufacturing department. Walker, Billingsley’s companion and son-in-law, introduced a more important invention to the Worcester Works in thereverberating enamel kiln. These kilns had been in use in London and at Derby, but were now for the first time built at Worcester. Up to this time iron muffles were used, but from their arrangement requiring a preparatory kiln or muffle, after the same manner as the annealing oven of a glass-house, they were most objectionable, the ware having to be removed from one to the other whilst very hot. Previous to this iron muffle, a moreoriginal muffle still was used. The description given to us quite accords with the engraving in Biancourt, with the exception of the arrangement of the fire. In the old Worcester kilns the space between the bricks and the iron case was filled with small pieces of charcoal, and when the iron cover was finally placed, it was also covered with charcoal; the fire was then applied to the centre of the cover, and gradually extended all over and down the sides until it got to the bottom; the object of this arrangement was to get an equal heat all over, which would not have been the case had the bottom been heated first. The method of building these new enamel kilns was kept as a great secret, Walker always working by night. He built them both for Messrs. Flight and Barr and Messrs. Chamberlain.” After remaining two years only at Worcester, in 1813 Billingsley and Walker (the former under a name he had for cogent reasons assumed—that ofBeeley, this name being a contraction of his own B[illings]ley, or B’ley, otherwiseBeeley) left that place and went toNantgarw, a small, out-of-the-way village in Glamorganshire, near Pontypridd, where they established themselves and commenced making china. From here they sent up a specimen of their ware to Government,[29]to show their special body, and to seek Government aid; and the Board of Trade, through Sir Joseph Banks, requested Mr. Dillwyn, of the Swansea pot-works, to visit Nantgarw and report on the quality of the ware. This visit of Mr. Dillwyn’s resulted in his entering into an arrangement with Billingsley and Walker to transfer themselves and their works toSwansea, where he built a small manufactory for them, closely adjoining his other works. Not long after this Mr. Dillwyn received a notice from Messrs. Flight and Barr, of Worcester, informing him that Billingsley and Walker “had clandestinely left their service,” and warning him not to employ them. This occurred, I believe, in about two years from the time of founding the Swansea China Works, and on Mr. Dillwyn being assured by Messrs. Flight and Barr that china with the granulated body could not be made to be commercially successful, he gave up the manufacture, and dismissed Billingsley and Walker, who then at once returned to Nantgarw, where they resumed their manufacture of china, and produced many beautiful services and pieces, which now fetch remarkably high prices. The productions of this small manufactory having found their way into some of the best London dealers’ hands, Mr. Rose, of the Coalport China Works, feeling that the Nantgarw trade, if allowed to continue, would seriously affect his business, went over to Nantgarw, and after some negotiation, made a permanent engagement with Billingsley and Walker, and bought up from them at once their stock, their moulds, and their receipt for the body, and removed them and all their belongings (as he did also those of Swansea) toCoalport. Thus the manufacture of Nantgarw porcelain, just as it was approaching perfection and becoming known, was, unfortunately, at once and for ever closed.William Billingsley remained at Coalport[30]—living in a small cottage a short distance on the Shiffnal Road—for the rest of his days, which, however, were but few in number. In 1827 or 1828 (I am uncertain which), this remarkable man—one of themostremarkable in the whole line of English potters, and one to whose artistic genius the exquisite decorations of some of the Derby and of the Worcester productions are indebted, and to whose practical skill and life-long energies so many important factories owed their origin—passed away in complete obscurity and in much greater poverty than his talents deserved.George Walker, after the death of William Billingsley, removed with his family to America, where he founded and built a manufactory in New Troy, which he called “Temperance Hill Pottery,” at which he and his family were, I am enabled to add from reliable information, working to great advantage a few years ago, and where, I believe, they still continue.Jonathan Wedgwood, “of the Borough of Derby, China or Porcelain Repairer orThrower,” was employed for some time at the Derby Works. On the 2nd of December, 1772, articles of agreement[31]were drawn up between him and William Duesbury, by which he was to serve Mr. Duesbury for three years “in the Arts of Repairing or Throwing China or Porcelain Ware,” at the weekly wages of fourteen shillings “for every whole week” he “shall work according to the usual hours of Repairing at the said Wm Duesbury’s Manufactory in Derby aforesaid.” In the contested election of 1776, a John Wedgwood, son of William Wedgwood, of St. Peter’s Parish, Derby, claimed, through apprenticeship, to be admitted and vote as a freeman, and before the Committee of the House of Commons, was accordingly admitted. By the registers of St. Alkmund’s, Derby, it appears that a Jonathan Wedgwood was married on the 12th November, 1785—thirteen years after the date of this agreement—to Mary Stenson; and that three years before this time, 22nd Sept. 1782, an Amy Wedgwood was married to Abijah Tyrrell, both of that parish. The probability is that the Jonathan Wedgwood whose agreement I have quoted was born at Ellenborough in 1735; that he migrated to Burslem (where one of his children was born in 1757), and afterwards to Derby; and the Jonathan and Amy, whose marriages are noted, were his son and daughter. His name appears as one of the workmen in 1787.Other artists, &c., were as follows:—John Ash, a thrower and presser in 1794.Joseph Bancroft, who belonged to the old Derbyshire family of Bancroft, of Swarkestone and elsewhere, was apprenticed at the Derby Works, and became a proficient in painting flowers, birds, insects, and shells. He did not remain long after the expiration of his apprenticeship, but worked for Copelands and others, and lastly for Minton’s, in whose employ he died.James Banford, of London, a clever painter, was employed from 1790 till 1795. He removed from London to Derby in the middle of 1790, his wife, Bernice Banford, and family following him in August of that year. He appears, from penitent letters, to have been, like many of the other hands, addicted to drinking, and to have been of improvident habits. In one of his letters (Feb. 1, 1794) he says, “I cannot help informing you that I have been dissatisfied some time at the difference of wages between Mr. Boreman and self. I am not conceited of my work, but every man knows what he is capable of doing, and in any line of painting china except landscapes, I have the advantage of Mr. B. Cannot help observing that in the landscape line, when there is anything minute or requires neatness, my optic nerves are to be strained for 18s.pr week less, and tim’d to ten hours each day at the manufactory.”Bernice Banford, wife of James Banford, china painter, was also employed as a painter, but at her own house or lodgings. She had a somewhat unsteady husband and a family to look after, and seems to have been a great help to them. Here is her first letter, asking for work, showing that she had been employed at Wedgwood’s works in London; and another letter by her, when objection was taken to her being so employed, is given on page 103. “Sir, I beg pardon for addressing you on a Subject which nesessety oblidge’s me to which is to Solicit the favour of a little work in the painting way at home, I was brought up to the business at Mr. Wedgwoods manufactory in London, and flatter my Self I should be able to do the Slightest paterns on China. I would Sirvery willinly Contribute any thing towards the Suport of my family, and to assist my Husband to pay Some Debts which we owe in Derby, which if I Should be so happy to obtain Such a favour I Doubt not but we Should be soon able to Effect and do better for our Family than at present. if Siryou would please to take it into Consideration by Permiting me a little work, you would for Ever oblidge, Siryour Hume Sert,Bernice Banford.”W. Barker, formerly of London, was employed between six and seven years at the Derby Works, and left them in March, 1795.Richard Barton, the manager at Chelsea (it is he who makes out all the “weekly bills” and receives and pays) was a modeller. In 1773 “Barton, modling 2 small antiquit vauses, £1 1s.”John Bloodwas an apprentice at the Derby works, and became a clever painter.Robert Blore, a late apprentice at the Derby works, afterwards for a time produced on his own account small figures, vases, &c., at a small place in Bridge Gate; he removed into Staffordshire.Zachariah Boreman, one of the old Chelsea painters, employed by Spremont, and afterwards by Duesbury, and came down to Derby on the closing of those works, was for some time employed. In 1784 he left Derby and returned to London; but about 1794 fresh articles of agreement were entered into, and a supplemental agreement drawn up same day covenanted that “wherever three shillings and sixpence per day occurs in the aforesaid agreement, the words ‘seven shillings’ shall be inserted in Z Boreman’s agreement, when regularly executed on stamps.” He was to employ himself in painting, and in improving the enamel colours, &c. He is said to have died in London in 1810.R. B. Bowman, of Goswell Street, London, was engaged by articles of agreement, dated May 6th, 1793, to come down to Derby, and agreed to be there in three weeks from the 12th of that month. A week afterwards, however, he begged to have the agreement cancelled, as he had had “a beneficial offer in London, in the engraving branch,” at 30s.a week.George Bradbury, son of William Bradbury, of Little Chester, Labourer, was bound apprentice on the 10th of March, 1765, for seven years, to “William Duesbury of Derby aforesaid (altered by the pen to “in the said county”) China or Porcelain Maker,” “to learn the Art of Repairing China or Porcelain Ware.” (The indenture is printed on a skin of parchment; the name “William Duesbury, of Derby, China or Porcelain ,” being printed with the rest, and a blank left for writing in “maker,” “painter,” or the like.)Thomas Brentnall, a flower-painter.John Brewer, an artist of repute in London, who had previously, as early as 1782, been employed by Mr. Duesbury, was engaged by him in 1795, and removed with his family to Derby. He was engaged to paint figures, animals, landscapes, and flowers by the piece, a schedule of prices being drawn up for that purpose; and to be assured that he should not have less than a guinea and a half a week for the first year, and two guineas afterwards. Until his engagement with Mr. Duesbury he had not painted on china, and therefore had to make himself acquainted with the art after his arrival. Brewer later on gave lessons in drawing in Derby, and in 1811 held an exhibition of his drawings:—“Mr. Brewer most respectfully informs the Nobility, Gentry, Clergy, and others in Derby and its vicinity, that he has arranged for their inspection his Specimens of Water-colour Paintings as an Exhibition, consisting of more than two hundred different Subjects, many of them quite new, and the whole designed and painted by himself, which he hopes during the interval of time not given to the festival will afford an agreeable change of amusement. May be viewed from 8 in the morning until dark at his house near St. Mary’s Bridge, Bridge Gate, Derby. Admittance—Ladies and Gentlemen 1s., Children half price. Mr. Brewer’s pupils free, also purchasers of Drawings.”
“On omission of the above Injunctions, for the first Offence (after this public notice), the person so offending shall forfeit to the Box which contains donations for the Manufactory at large, one-fourth of the value of the Article or Articles found to be deficient in marking; for the second, one-half of the value; and for the third, the whole of the value, and discharged the Manufactory. And if any Painter is found working at any hour contrary to those alreadyappointed for Business, without Permission or Orders, such person shall, for the first offence forfeit to the Box 6d.; for the second, 1s.; for the third, 2s., and so on, doubling each time.”
In 1795 Billingsley determined upon bringing his connection with the Derby China Works to an end, and for that purpose gave notice to his employer, Mr. Duesbury. Knowing how ill he could be spared from the decorative part of the manufactory, his employer endeavoured to retain his services, and, not unnaturally, put various obstacles in the way of his leaving Billingsley; however seems to have determined on the removal, and much to his credit that that removal should be an honourable one. The following letter shows his determination:—
“Sir,—From the circumstance that occurr’d when I was last in Conversation with you, I am induc’d to take this mode of informing you of my opinion on the subject then in question. My opinion is, that I have fulfill’d the warning[28]I gave (my reasons in support of which it is not necessary to advance at this time). But as I am inform’d that you believe I have some further time to work for you before the Warning is fulfill’d—namely, to make up the time I lost in the six months I was under warning, and as it is my wish to leave no ground for dissatisfaction, I take this opportunity of informing you that I am willing to come and Work that time according to that opinion of the case. If the foregoing is according to your opinion and desire, your being so kind as to send me advise to that effect at any time in the course of a week, and likewise the time I have to work according to the rule and opinion above stated, I will attend your works accordingly. If I do not hear from you in the course of the time above stated, I must then conclude that you are satisfy’d, and the information that I have receiv’d is without foundation. I am, Sir, your Humble Serv.,Wm. Billingsley.—Derby, Oct. 14, 1796.”
Shortly before this time Mr. Joseph Lygo, the London agent and manager of the business of the Derby China Works, wrote to his employer, Mr. Duesbury:—“I hope you will be able to make a bargain with Mr. Billingsley for him to continue with you, for it will be a great loss to lose such a hand, and not only that, but his going into another factory will put them in the way of doing flowers in the same way, which they are at present entirely ignorant of.” Despite all this, Billingsley left the Derby China Works, where he had been apprenticed, and in which he had worked for twenty-two years, and in 1796 commenced, for or with Mr. Coke, a small manufactory at Pinxton, near Alfreton. Here his practical skill stood him in good service, and the experiments he had long tried in china bodies were brought to bear satisfactory results. He succeeded in producing a granular body (the fracture having much the appearance of fine loaf-sugar), very soft, but of extreme beauty. Here Billingsley remained for about four years only, removing in 1800 toMansfield, where he started a small concern, which he continued for about three or four years longer. Having once become unsettled by his removal from Derby, Billingsley does not appear ever afterwards to have rested long in any one place. In 1804 he is stated to have commenced, or joined, some small china works atTorkseyin Lincolnshire; and a few years later he appears to have started a china manufactory atWirksworthin Derbyshire—no doubt being in part actuated in locating himself there through the fact of the existence of a beautiful white clay being found in connection with the lead mines at Brassington and other places in its neighbourhood. In 1811 Billingsley removed to Worcester, where he engaged himself with Messrs. Flight and Barr, of the Worcester China Works. Here, as in some of his other migrations, he was accompanied by his son-in-law, George Walker, the husband of his daughter Sarah. Of the engagement of these two atWorcester, Mr. Binns says: “In 1811, Billingsley, the Derby artist, came to Worcester. As a clever flower-painter, he was no doubt an acquisition, but that does not appear to have been the object of his visit. Billingsley knew something of making porcelain, and was possessed of a receipt which there is no doubt he valued very highly. From Messrs. Flight and Barr’s letter to Mr. Dillwyn, it would appear that he had endeavoured to introduce this special body at Worcester, but we do not think he was allowed to interfere to any extent in the manufacturing department. Walker, Billingsley’s companion and son-in-law, introduced a more important invention to the Worcester Works in thereverberating enamel kiln. These kilns had been in use in London and at Derby, but were now for the first time built at Worcester. Up to this time iron muffles were used, but from their arrangement requiring a preparatory kiln or muffle, after the same manner as the annealing oven of a glass-house, they were most objectionable, the ware having to be removed from one to the other whilst very hot. Previous to this iron muffle, a moreoriginal muffle still was used. The description given to us quite accords with the engraving in Biancourt, with the exception of the arrangement of the fire. In the old Worcester kilns the space between the bricks and the iron case was filled with small pieces of charcoal, and when the iron cover was finally placed, it was also covered with charcoal; the fire was then applied to the centre of the cover, and gradually extended all over and down the sides until it got to the bottom; the object of this arrangement was to get an equal heat all over, which would not have been the case had the bottom been heated first. The method of building these new enamel kilns was kept as a great secret, Walker always working by night. He built them both for Messrs. Flight and Barr and Messrs. Chamberlain.” After remaining two years only at Worcester, in 1813 Billingsley and Walker (the former under a name he had for cogent reasons assumed—that ofBeeley, this name being a contraction of his own B[illings]ley, or B’ley, otherwiseBeeley) left that place and went toNantgarw, a small, out-of-the-way village in Glamorganshire, near Pontypridd, where they established themselves and commenced making china. From here they sent up a specimen of their ware to Government,[29]to show their special body, and to seek Government aid; and the Board of Trade, through Sir Joseph Banks, requested Mr. Dillwyn, of the Swansea pot-works, to visit Nantgarw and report on the quality of the ware. This visit of Mr. Dillwyn’s resulted in his entering into an arrangement with Billingsley and Walker to transfer themselves and their works toSwansea, where he built a small manufactory for them, closely adjoining his other works. Not long after this Mr. Dillwyn received a notice from Messrs. Flight and Barr, of Worcester, informing him that Billingsley and Walker “had clandestinely left their service,” and warning him not to employ them. This occurred, I believe, in about two years from the time of founding the Swansea China Works, and on Mr. Dillwyn being assured by Messrs. Flight and Barr that china with the granulated body could not be made to be commercially successful, he gave up the manufacture, and dismissed Billingsley and Walker, who then at once returned to Nantgarw, where they resumed their manufacture of china, and produced many beautiful services and pieces, which now fetch remarkably high prices. The productions of this small manufactory having found their way into some of the best London dealers’ hands, Mr. Rose, of the Coalport China Works, feeling that the Nantgarw trade, if allowed to continue, would seriously affect his business, went over to Nantgarw, and after some negotiation, made a permanent engagement with Billingsley and Walker, and bought up from them at once their stock, their moulds, and their receipt for the body, and removed them and all their belongings (as he did also those of Swansea) toCoalport. Thus the manufacture of Nantgarw porcelain, just as it was approaching perfection and becoming known, was, unfortunately, at once and for ever closed.
William Billingsley remained at Coalport[30]—living in a small cottage a short distance on the Shiffnal Road—for the rest of his days, which, however, were but few in number. In 1827 or 1828 (I am uncertain which), this remarkable man—one of themostremarkable in the whole line of English potters, and one to whose artistic genius the exquisite decorations of some of the Derby and of the Worcester productions are indebted, and to whose practical skill and life-long energies so many important factories owed their origin—passed away in complete obscurity and in much greater poverty than his talents deserved.
George Walker, after the death of William Billingsley, removed with his family to America, where he founded and built a manufactory in New Troy, which he called “Temperance Hill Pottery,” at which he and his family were, I am enabled to add from reliable information, working to great advantage a few years ago, and where, I believe, they still continue.
Jonathan Wedgwood, “of the Borough of Derby, China or Porcelain Repairer orThrower,” was employed for some time at the Derby Works. On the 2nd of December, 1772, articles of agreement[31]were drawn up between him and William Duesbury, by which he was to serve Mr. Duesbury for three years “in the Arts of Repairing or Throwing China or Porcelain Ware,” at the weekly wages of fourteen shillings “for every whole week” he “shall work according to the usual hours of Repairing at the said Wm Duesbury’s Manufactory in Derby aforesaid.” In the contested election of 1776, a John Wedgwood, son of William Wedgwood, of St. Peter’s Parish, Derby, claimed, through apprenticeship, to be admitted and vote as a freeman, and before the Committee of the House of Commons, was accordingly admitted. By the registers of St. Alkmund’s, Derby, it appears that a Jonathan Wedgwood was married on the 12th November, 1785—thirteen years after the date of this agreement—to Mary Stenson; and that three years before this time, 22nd Sept. 1782, an Amy Wedgwood was married to Abijah Tyrrell, both of that parish. The probability is that the Jonathan Wedgwood whose agreement I have quoted was born at Ellenborough in 1735; that he migrated to Burslem (where one of his children was born in 1757), and afterwards to Derby; and the Jonathan and Amy, whose marriages are noted, were his son and daughter. His name appears as one of the workmen in 1787.
Other artists, &c., were as follows:—
John Ash, a thrower and presser in 1794.
Joseph Bancroft, who belonged to the old Derbyshire family of Bancroft, of Swarkestone and elsewhere, was apprenticed at the Derby Works, and became a proficient in painting flowers, birds, insects, and shells. He did not remain long after the expiration of his apprenticeship, but worked for Copelands and others, and lastly for Minton’s, in whose employ he died.
James Banford, of London, a clever painter, was employed from 1790 till 1795. He removed from London to Derby in the middle of 1790, his wife, Bernice Banford, and family following him in August of that year. He appears, from penitent letters, to have been, like many of the other hands, addicted to drinking, and to have been of improvident habits. In one of his letters (Feb. 1, 1794) he says, “I cannot help informing you that I have been dissatisfied some time at the difference of wages between Mr. Boreman and self. I am not conceited of my work, but every man knows what he is capable of doing, and in any line of painting china except landscapes, I have the advantage of Mr. B. Cannot help observing that in the landscape line, when there is anything minute or requires neatness, my optic nerves are to be strained for 18s.pr week less, and tim’d to ten hours each day at the manufactory.”
Bernice Banford, wife of James Banford, china painter, was also employed as a painter, but at her own house or lodgings. She had a somewhat unsteady husband and a family to look after, and seems to have been a great help to them. Here is her first letter, asking for work, showing that she had been employed at Wedgwood’s works in London; and another letter by her, when objection was taken to her being so employed, is given on page 103. “Sir, I beg pardon for addressing you on a Subject which nesessety oblidge’s me to which is to Solicit the favour of a little work in the painting way at home, I was brought up to the business at Mr. Wedgwoods manufactory in London, and flatter my Self I should be able to do the Slightest paterns on China. I would Sirvery willinly Contribute any thing towards the Suport of my family, and to assist my Husband to pay Some Debts which we owe in Derby, which if I Should be so happy to obtain Such a favour I Doubt not but we Should be soon able to Effect and do better for our Family than at present. if Siryou would please to take it into Consideration by Permiting me a little work, you would for Ever oblidge, Siryour Hume Sert,Bernice Banford.”
W. Barker, formerly of London, was employed between six and seven years at the Derby Works, and left them in March, 1795.
Richard Barton, the manager at Chelsea (it is he who makes out all the “weekly bills” and receives and pays) was a modeller. In 1773 “Barton, modling 2 small antiquit vauses, £1 1s.”
John Bloodwas an apprentice at the Derby works, and became a clever painter.
Robert Blore, a late apprentice at the Derby works, afterwards for a time produced on his own account small figures, vases, &c., at a small place in Bridge Gate; he removed into Staffordshire.
Zachariah Boreman, one of the old Chelsea painters, employed by Spremont, and afterwards by Duesbury, and came down to Derby on the closing of those works, was for some time employed. In 1784 he left Derby and returned to London; but about 1794 fresh articles of agreement were entered into, and a supplemental agreement drawn up same day covenanted that “wherever three shillings and sixpence per day occurs in the aforesaid agreement, the words ‘seven shillings’ shall be inserted in Z Boreman’s agreement, when regularly executed on stamps.” He was to employ himself in painting, and in improving the enamel colours, &c. He is said to have died in London in 1810.
R. B. Bowman, of Goswell Street, London, was engaged by articles of agreement, dated May 6th, 1793, to come down to Derby, and agreed to be there in three weeks from the 12th of that month. A week afterwards, however, he begged to have the agreement cancelled, as he had had “a beneficial offer in London, in the engraving branch,” at 30s.a week.
George Bradbury, son of William Bradbury, of Little Chester, Labourer, was bound apprentice on the 10th of March, 1765, for seven years, to “William Duesbury of Derby aforesaid (altered by the pen to “in the said county”) China or Porcelain Maker,” “to learn the Art of Repairing China or Porcelain Ware.” (The indenture is printed on a skin of parchment; the name “William Duesbury, of Derby, China or Porcelain ,” being printed with the rest, and a blank left for writing in “maker,” “painter,” or the like.)
Thomas Brentnall, a flower-painter.
John Brewer, an artist of repute in London, who had previously, as early as 1782, been employed by Mr. Duesbury, was engaged by him in 1795, and removed with his family to Derby. He was engaged to paint figures, animals, landscapes, and flowers by the piece, a schedule of prices being drawn up for that purpose; and to be assured that he should not have less than a guinea and a half a week for the first year, and two guineas afterwards. Until his engagement with Mr. Duesbury he had not painted on china, and therefore had to make himself acquainted with the art after his arrival. Brewer later on gave lessons in drawing in Derby, and in 1811 held an exhibition of his drawings:—
“Mr. Brewer most respectfully informs the Nobility, Gentry, Clergy, and others in Derby and its vicinity, that he has arranged for their inspection his Specimens of Water-colour Paintings as an Exhibition, consisting of more than two hundred different Subjects, many of them quite new, and the whole designed and painted by himself, which he hopes during the interval of time not given to the festival will afford an agreeable change of amusement. May be viewed from 8 in the morning until dark at his house near St. Mary’s Bridge, Bridge Gate, Derby. Admittance—Ladies and Gentlemen 1s., Children half price. Mr. Brewer’s pupils free, also purchasers of Drawings.”