Chapter XI (2)

“Mr. Champion can assert with truth that his hazard and expense
was many times greater than those of the original inventor. Mr.
Champion mentions this without the least disparagement to the
worthy gentleman, who is his particular friend; he gives him all
the merit which was due to so great a discovery; he deserved it
for finding out the means of a manufacture which will, in all
probability, be a very great advantage to this country; but yet
Mr. Champion claims the merit of supporting the work, and, when
the inventor declined the undertaking himself, with his time,
his labour, and his fortune, improved it from a very imperfect
to an almost perfect manufacture; and he hopes soon, with proper
encouragement, to one altogether perfect.

“What regards the original discoverer is, in some measure,
answered in the foregoing paragraph, but the original discoverer
is not without a reward. Mr. Champion at this moment allows him,
and is bound to his heirs, &c., in a profit equal to the first
cost of the raw material, and, as Mr. Champion’s manufactory is
encouraged, must increase to a very great degree.

“Nor is Mr. Wedgwood more excusable for his implication that
a want of skill prevented the work being brought earlier to
perfection; undoubtedly the difficulty arose from a want of
skill in working these new materials. This is a profound as
well as civil remark of Mr. Wedgwood’s; but that skill was to
be acquired only by care and expense, and that care and expense
are Mr. Champion’s merits. Mr. Champion pretends to no other
knowledge as a potter than what he has acquired in the progress
of this manufacture, his profession of a merchant not putting
more in his power; but he had the experience of Mr. Cookworthy,
the inventor, one of the most able chemists in this kingdom, to
whom the public is indebted for many useful discoveries; he had
the experience of the manager of his works, a person bred in the
potteries, and thoroughly conversant in manufactures of this
kind; the workmen he employed were brought up to the branch, and
he has spared no expense in encouraging foreign artificers.

“But Mr. Champion, as a further answer to Mr. Wedgwood’s
implication of want of skill, begs leave to observe that the
_Dresden_ manufacture (like this, a native clay), which has
been established so great a number of years, was long before
it attained perfection, and even now it has not that exact
proportion of shape which the Chinese manufacture possesses.
The _Austrian_ manufacture (also a native clay) was twenty-five
years before it attained any degree of perfection, and then only
by accidental aid of the Dresden workmen who were dispersed
during the late war. The work in _Brandenburgh_ is nothing more
than the Dresden materials, wrought by workmen removed hither
from that city, the Brandenburgh work having no clay of its
own territory. Mr. Champion is surprised that Mr. Wedgwood can
find no cause but one, which he chooses to blame, why a new
manufacture, upon a principle never before tried in England,
should not have attained perfection in a shorter space than the
very short space of seven years.

“As to Mr. Wedgwood’s calculation of the profits sufficient to
recompense the ingenuity, and repay the trouble and expense of
others, Mr. Champion submits it to a discerning and encouraging
legislature, whether a seven years’ sale is likely to repay a
seven years’ unproductive, experimental, and chargeable labour,
as well as the future improvement to grow from new endeavours?
Until Mr. Champion was able to make this porcelain in quantities
to supply a market, it was rather an object of curiosity than a
manufacture for national benefit.

“There is one branch of the manufacture, the _blue and white_,
upon which he has just entered--this branch is likely to be the
most generally useful of any: but the giving a blue colour under
the glaze, on so hard a material as he uses, has been found full
of difficulty. This object he has pursued at a great expense by
means of a foreign artificer; and he can now venture to assert
that he shall bring that to perfection which has been found so
difficult in Europe in native clay.

“If the various difficulties which have attended his work from
its beginning could have been foreseen, this patent ought not to
have been applied for at so early a period. The time in which
profit was to be expected has necessarily been laid out in
experiment. It was thought that when the principle was found,
the work was done; but the perfecting a chemical discovery into
a merchantable commodity has been found a troublesome and a
tedious work. It is therefore presumed that the legislature
will distinguish between the over-sanguine hopes, in point of
time, of an invention which, however, has at length succeeded,
and those visionary projects which deceive for ever. Upon
the whole, Mr. Champion humbly rests his pretensions to the
protection of the legislature upon three grounds--that he has
been almost from the beginning concerned in the work which has
cost so much labour and expense; that he now allows the inventor
a certain and increasing recompense, though the carrying that
invention to an actual merchantable manufacture was entirely
his own work; that the potteries of chinaware in most other
countries in Europe have been at the charge of sovereign
princes. It has been immediately so in France, Austria, Dresden,
and Brandenburgh; in Italy they have been under the care of
great noblemen. In this original work Mr. Champion claims the
principal share of supporting, improving, and carrying into
execution a manufacture so much admired in China and Japan, and
now first attempted in Britain, in capacity of resisting the
greatest heat, equal to the Asiatic and Dresden.”

Wedgwood answered this “Reply” of Champion’s by some “Remarks,” which he issued to the members of the legislature, wherein he reminds them that he “has all his life been concerned in the manufacture and improvement of various branches of pottery and porcelain; that he has long had an ambition to carry these manufactures to the highest pitch of perfection they will admit of; and that so far from having any personal interest in opposing Mr. Champion, it would evidently have been his interest to have accepted of some of the obliging proposals that have been made to him by Mr. Champion and his friends, and to have said nothing more upon the subject; but Mr. Wedgwood is so fully convinced of the great injury that would be done to the landed, manufacturing, and commercial interests of this nation, by extending the term of Mr. Champion’s monopoly of raw materials, of which there are immense quantities in the kingdom, and confining the use of them to one or a few hands, that he thought it a duty of moral obligation to take the sense of his neighbours upon this subject, and to give up to the manufactory at large all advantages he might have secured to himself. It is upon these principles, and these alone, that he has acted in this business, and therefore he humbly presumes he does not merit the censure of _avidity_ in grasping at other men’s manufactures, though he thinks that himself and all manufacturers should be protected in the _free use_ of all raw materials that are not invented by men, but are the natural productions of the earth. When Mr. Wedgwood discovered the art of making _Queen’s Ware_, which employs ten times more people than all the china works in the kingdom, he did not ask for a patent for this important discovery. A patent would greatly have limited its public utility. Instead of _one hundred manufactories_ of Queen’s Ware, there would have been _one_; and instead of an exportation to all quarters of the world, a few pretty things would have been made for the amusement of the people of fashion in England. It would be the same with the use of the materials in question: if they are not only confined to the use of one person or manufactory, by patent, for fourteen years, but that patent be extended for twenty or thirty years longer, so long they may be the means of supporting _one_ trifling manufactory; but if the materials are left free for general use, and Mr. Champion is in possession of the result of all his experiments and real discoveries with respect to the art of manufacturing these raw materials into porcelain, no essential part of which has been revealed by him to the public, either in his specifications or otherwise, then there is reason to expect a very large and extensive manufactory of porcelain will be established in various parts of this kingdom, to the great benefit of the public, without any injury to Mr. Champion.”

Wedgwood continued his “remarks” by replying that Mr. Champion’s offer of inserting a clause to allow the potters the free use of the raw material in all kinds of earthenware, restricting its use in porcelain only to himself, was a useless concession, because Champion had failed to define the difference between earthenware and porcelain, and had failed to impart the secret of his manufacture to the public, either by his specifications or otherwise. “How then,” he asked, “are the Staffordshire potters to use the growan stone and growan clay for the improvement of their finer stone and earthenwares, without producing such a manufacture as may in Westminster Hall be deemed porcelain?” He also said that, judging from Mr. Champion’s own words, Cookworthy’s patent “ought not to have been applied for at so early a period,” it was evident that the “patent was taken out for a discovery of the art of making true porcelain before it _was_ made; and if the discovery has been since made, there can have been no specification of it; it has not been revealed to the public, it is in Mr. Champion’s own possession, and being _unknown_, it is presumed the right to practise it cannot be confirmed or extended by Act of Parliament, which ought to have some clear ground to go upon.” The patent, he says, has evidently been considered as a privilege to the patentee, “for the sole right of _making experiments_ upon materials which many persons have thought would make good porcelain, and on which experiments have been prosecuted by several successive sets of operators many years before the date of the patent.” He contended that it would have been an “egregious injury to the public” to continue the patent to one person who was no original discoverer, who was only just commencing the commonest and most useful part of his business with the aid of a foreign artificer, in the hope that a discovery might at some future time be made. He considered that if the raw materials were thrown open to all, “a variety of experienced hands would probably produce more advantage to the nation in a few years than they would ever do when confined to one manufactory, however skilful the director might be,” and that the extension of the patent securing the monopoly “would be a precedent of the most dangerous nature, contrary to policy, and of general inconvenience,” and therefore he “humbly hopes the legislature will not grant the prayer of Mr. Champion’s petition,”--a hope which, however earnestly expressed, and however tenaciously followed, was eventually of no avail. To this opposition, however, is doubtless to be traced the ultimate abandonment of the patent, and the manufacture of the less difficult soft paste to so great an extent in Staffordshire.

The term of the original patent, it will be remembered, was for fourteen years, of which nearly eight years remained unexpired at the time when it was assigned over by Cookworthy to Champion. The extension petitioned for would thus have given Champion nearly twenty-two years’ exclusive right to the raw materials, and it was this extended monopoly which aroused the watchfulness of Wedgwood, and made him determined to use his utmost efforts to prevent its being enacted. In this opposition--which was determined and energetic, though only partially successful--Wedgwood, besides memorialising the legislature against granting the prayer of the petition, issued a number of “Reasons why the extension of the term of Mr. Cookworthy’s patent, by authority of parliament, would be injurious to many landowners, to the manufacturers of earthenware, and to the public.” In addition to this, he made out and presented a “Case of the manufacturers of earthenware in Staffordshire,” setting forth the advantages that would be derived from throwing open the use of the raw materials, and the disadvantages which an extension of the monopoly would entail, not only on the manufacturers, but on the public at large.

These “reasons” why the extension of the term of Mr. Cookworthy’s patent, by authority of parliament, would be injurious to landowners, to the manufacturers of earthenware, and to the public are so ingenious, and the “case” so carefully made out, that I here give them entire.[95]

“It would be injurious to the _landowners_, because by means
of this monopoly materials of great value would be locked up
within the bowels of the earth, and the owners be deprived of
the power of disposing of them; for the present patentee and his
assigns have contracted with _one gentleman_ that he shall sell
these materials only to _them_, and that they shall purchase
such materials only from _him_, during the term of _ninety-nine_
years.

“It would be injurious to the _manufacturers_ of earthenware;
because, notwithstanding the mechanical part of their
manufactory, their execution, their forms, their painting, &c.,
are equal, if not superior, to those of any other country, yet
the _body_ of their ware stands in great need of improvement,
both in colour and texture; because the public begin to require
and expect such improvement; because without such improvement
the sale of their manufactures will probably decline in favour
of foreign manufacturers, who may not be deprived of the
use of the materials that their countries produce. For the
consideration in this case is not whether one manufacturer or
manufactory shall be supported against another, but whether the
earthenware manufactories of _Great Britain_ shall be supported
in their improvements against those of every other country in
the world; because the materials in question are the most proper
of any that have been found in this island for the improvement
of the manufactures of earthenware; and because _no line has
been drawn_, or _can be drawn_, with sufficient distinctness,
between earthenware and porcelain, and especially between
earthenware and the various kinds of this patent porcelain, to
render it safe for any potter to make use of these materials in
his works.

“The extension of this monopoly would be injurious to the
_public_, by preventing the employment of a great number of
vessels in the coasting trade in bringing the raw materials
from the places where they would be dug out of the earth to the
different parts of this island where they would be manufactured.

“This extension would also be injurious to the public because
it would prevent our manufacturers of earthenware from being
_improved in their quality_ and _increased in their quantity and
value_ to the amount of many hundred thousand pounds _per annum_.

“And lastly, it would be injurious to the public by preventing
a very great increase of our exports, _which must infallibly
take place_ when the body of our earthenwares shall come to be
improved so as to bear a proportion to the beauty of their forms
and the excellence of their workmanship.

“Upon the whole, would it not be unreasonable to extend the term
of a monopoly in favour of an individual to the prejudice of ten
thousand industrious manufacturers, when the individual can have
no merit with the public, as he has made no discovery to them?”

The following is the “case” of the manufacturers of earthenware in Staffordshire, as drawn up by Wedgwood:--

“The potters, and other persons depending upon the pottery in
_Staffordshire_, beg leave humbly to represent that Nature has
provided this island with immense quantities of materials proper
for the improvement of their manufactures; that such materials
have been known and used twenty or thirty years ago, and that
many experiments were made upon them by various operators with
various degrees of success.

“That porcelain was made of these materials, and publicly sold
before the year 1768.

“That in March, 1768, _Mr. Cookworthy_, of _Plymouth_, took out
a patent for the sole use of the materials in question, called
in the patent moor-stone or growan, and growan clay, for the
making of porcelain, which is defined to have a fine colour and
a lucid grain, and likewise to be as infusible as the Asiatic.

“That _Mr. Cookworthy_ contracted, as the condition upon which
he held the privilege of his monopoly, that he would make a
full and true specification of the art by which he converted
these materials into porcelain, and that he entirely failed in
fulfilling this obligation.

“For in the pretended specification which he made, he omitted
to describe the _principal operations_ in which his art or
discovery consisted, having neither exhibited the proportions in
which the materials were to be mixed to produce the _body_ or
the _glaze_, nor the art of _burning_ the _ware_, which he knew
to be the _most difficult_ and important part of the discovery.

“That the company concerned in the porcelain manufactory at
_Plymouth_, established under the authority of this patent,
contracted with one gentleman, in whose lands these materials
are found, that he should sell the materials only to them, and
that they should purchase materials from no other person, during
the term of ninety-nine years.

“That nevertheless there are great quantities of such materials
in other estates in _Cornwall_ and _Devonshire_, and probably in
many other parts of this island.

“That in the year 1774 _Mr. Cookworthy_ assigned over his patent
right to _Mr. Champion_, of _Bristol_, who now applies to
parliament for an extension of this monopoly, seven years before
the expiration of the patent; which assignment was made upon
condition that _Mr. Cookworthy_ should receive for ninety-nine
years from _Mr. Champion_ as large a sum every year as should be
paid to the proprietor for the raw materials, hereby laying a
tax of 100 per cent. upon them.

“That _Mr. Champion_ in his petition sets forth that he has
brought this discovery to perfection; and that in a paper he
has published, entitled _A Reply, &c._, he says that if the
various difficulties which have attended this work from the
beginning could have been foreseen, _this patent ought not to
have been applied for at so early a period_; that is, in plain
English, the patent was taken out for the discovery of an art
before the discovery was made by the patentee. And if the
discovery has been made since, there has been no specification
of it; it has not been recorded for the public benefit; it is
in _Mr. Champion’s_ own possession; it is kept from the public
for his own private emolument: and the _nature_ of it being
_unknown_, it is humbly presumed such a pretended discovery can
neither entitle the patentee nor the petitioner to the extension
of a monopoly injurious to many thousands of industrious
manufacturers in various parts of the kingdom.

“And in the same paper in which we find the above curious
confession, _Mr. Champion_ acknowledges that even at _this time_
he has just entered upon the commonest and most useful branch
of his manufactory, which he has pursued at a great expense,
by means of a _foreign artificer_, and can _now_ venture to
assert that he _shall_ bring it to perfection. And in the space
of seven years yet to come of his patent, and fourteen years’
further indulgence which he expects from parliament, one would
hope some discovery might be made; but would it not be an
egregious injury to the public, an unheard of and unprecedented
discouragement to many manufacturers who have great and
acknowledged merit with the public, to continue to _one person_
who, in _this instance_, has no _public merit_, the monopoly of
earth and stones that nature has furnished this country with
in immense quantities, which are necessary to the support and
improvement of one of the most valuable manufactures in the
kingdom?

“_Mr. Champion_ says, in the Reply referred to above, he ‘has no
objection to the use which the potters of _Staffordshire_ may
make of his or any other raw materials, provided earthenware
only, as distinguished by that title, is made from them. He
wants to interfere with no manufactory whatsoever, and is
content to insert any clause to _confine_ him to the invention
which he possesses, and which he has improved,’ &c.

“If _Mr. Champion_ had accurately defined the _nature_ of his
own invention; if he had described the proportions of his
materials necessary to make the body of his ware; if he had
also specified the proportions of his materials necessary to
produce his glaze, as every mechanical inventor who takes out
a patent is obliged to specify the nature of the machine by
which he produces his effect; if _Mr. Champion_ could have drawn
a _distinct line_ between the _various kinds of earthenware
and porcelain_ that have been made, and are now made in this
kingdom, and _his porcelain_, a clause might have been formed to
have confined him to the invention which he says he possesses,
and to have prevented him from _interrupting the progress of_
other _men’s improvements_, which he may think proper to call
imitations of his porcelain; but as he has not chosen to do
the former, nor been able to do the latter, no manufacturer of
stoneware, Queen’s ware, or porcelain, can with safety improve
the present state of his manufacture.

“It is well known that manufactures of this kind can only
support their credit by continual improvements. It is also
well known that there is a _competition_ in these improvements
through all _parts of Europe_. In the last century _Burslem_,
and some other villages in _Staffordshire_, were famous for
making _milk pans_ and _butter pots_, and by a succession
of improvements, the manufactory in that neighbourhood has
gradually increased in the variety, the quality, and the
quantity of its productions, so as to furnish, besides the
home consumption, an annual export of useful and ornamental
wares, nearly to the amount of _two hundred thousand_ pounds;
but during all this progress it has had the free range of the
country for materials to work upon, to the great advantage of
many landowners and of navigation.

“_Queen’s_ ware has already several of the properties of
porcelain, but is yet capable of receiving many essential
improvements. The public have for some time _required_ and
expected them. Innumerable experiments have been made for
this purpose. There are immense quantities of materials in
the kingdom that would answer this end; but they are locked
up by a monopoly in the bowels of the earth, useless to the
_landowners_, useless to the _manufacturers_, useless to
the public; and one person is petitioning the legislature,
in effect, to stop all the improvements in earthenware and
porcelain in this kingdom but his own.

“For the next step, and the only step the manufacturers can
take to improve their wares, will be deemed an invasion of this
_vague_ and _incomprehensible_ patent.

“The manufacturers of earthenware are justly alarmed at the
prospect of extending the term of the patent, because, without
improvements, the sale of their manufactures _must certainly
decline_ in favour of _foreign manufacturers_, who may not be
deprived of the _free use of the materials their countries
produce_; for the consideration in this case is not whether one
manufacturer or manufactory shall be supported against another,
but whether the earthenware and porcelain manufactories of
_Great Britain_ shall be supported in their improvements against
those of every other country in the world. Upon the whole, the
petitioners against the bill humbly presume this monopoly will
appear to be _contrary to good policy_, highly _injurious_ to
the public, and _generally inconvenient_; that the extension of
the monopoly, supposing any patent to be valid, would be greater
_increasing the injury_; that the bill now depending is not only
calculated to _extend_, but to _confirm_ it, and therefore they
humbly hope it will not be suffered to pass into a law.”

Despite all this factious opposition--for it was factious in the extreme--to his petition by Wedgwood, as the representative of the potters, and by the members of parliament for the county of Stafford, and others who had been moved by the exertions of Wedgwood and his friends, the bill passed the House of Commons, and was sent up to the lords without amendment. The “case” just given, along with extracts from the bill, with comments, showing, among other things, that the passing of the Act, as originally framed, conferred the full benefits of Cookworthy’s patent on Champion, without compelling him to enrol anew any specification of his process of manufacture, was printed for circulation among the members of the Upper House. With reference to this important point, it was shown that Cookworthy, having enrolled his specification, and having afterwards assigned the patent right to Champion, the bill enacted that all and every the powers, liberties, privileges, authorities, and advantages which in and by the said letters patent were originally granted to the said William Cookworthy, shall be held, exercised, and enjoyed by the said Richard Champion for the present term of fourteen years, granted by the said letters patent, and after the expiration thereof, for the further term of fourteen years, in as full, ample, and beneficial a manner as the said Richard Champion could have held the same in case the said letters patent had originally been granted to him. The view of the bill is manifestly to confirm to Mr. Champion the letters patent for the present term of fourteen years, as well as to grant him fourteen years more. Had it been intended only to _enlarge_ the term, and that the letters patent should have stood upon their own ground, such words of confirmation would not have been necessary; or if they had been thought so, they should have been succeeded by words to the effect following:--“_Subject, nevertheless, to the same provisoes, conditions, limitations, and agreements, as the said William Cookworthy held and enjoyed the same before the date of the said assignment._” But these being omitted, and the bill having stated that the “said William Cookworthy had described the nature of his said invention and the manner in which the same is to be performed,” it is evident that the design of the bill is not only to confirm absolutely the letters patent, and consequently the monopoly of these materials for the present term of fourteen years, but also to grant it to him for fourteen years more; and the Act is to have this operation, even though the letters patent may be void by the discovery not being a new invention, according to the statute of James I., or by Mr. Cookworthy’s not having conformed to the terms and conditions of the letters patent, by having described and ascertained the nature of the said invention, and the manner in which the same is to be performed. That the making of porcelain is not a new invention is too evident to need any proof; that the letters patent are not within the intent of the statute is manifest by a cursory perusal of it. That Mr. Cookworthy has not described and ascertained the nature of this invention and the manner in which the same is to be performed (unless the discovery of the materials can alone be deemed so), will appear by what he has been pleased to call his specification. But it will appear in evidence that even the discovery of the materials was not, at the time of granting the letters patent to Mr. Cookworthy, “new and his own,” but that they were at that time, and had been long before, applied to the uses of pottery.

“Is it therefore reasonable that Parliament should confirm to
Mr. Champion the present term of fourteen years, and also grant
him fourteen years more, in the monopoly of an immense quantity
of materials, the natural products of the earth, for the making
of porcelain, which no person is to _imitate or resemble_; but
also virtually the sole privilege of vending and disposing of
these materials at what price and in what manner he thinks
proper? For no person can use them in any respect but they will
produce (if not the same effect) an effect that will _resemble_
what he may call his patent porcelain; and it is not to conceive
how he can be deprived of the exclusive right of selling as well
as using these materials if the bill now depending should pass
into a law.”

The presenting these papers to the Lords produced more effect, it would seem, than the efforts in a similar direction had apparently done in the Commons. The consequence was, that “Lord Gower and some other noble lords, having fully informed themselves of the facts upon which the merits of the case depended, and having considered the subject with a degree of attention proportioned to its importance, saw clearly the injurious nature of the bill, and were determined to oppose it.” This determination brought on a conference between the two noble lords who took the most active part for and against the bill, and the result was the introduction of two clauses, the first making it imperative on Champion to enrol anew his specification of both body and glaze within the usual period of four months; the second throwing open the use of the raw materials to potters for any purpose except the manufacture of porcelain, was as follows:--

“Provided, also, that nothing in this Act contained shall
be construed to hinder or prevent any potter or potters, or
any other person or persons, from making use of any such raw
materials, or any mixture or mixtures thereof (except such
mixture of raw materials, and in such proportions, as are
described in the specification hereinbefore directed to be
enrolled), anything in this Act to the contrary notwithstanding.”

The Act being obtained (specimens of his skill in making porcelain having been submitted to the Committee by Champion), the specification was duly prepared and enrolled according to the provisions of the Act. It is dated the 12th of September, 1775, and was duly enrolled on the 15th of the same month. The following is the specification, which will be found to contain much matter of interest; and, taken in conjunction with that of Cookworthy, given in my account of the Plymouth works, completes the important series of papers in connection with this manufactory:--

“TO ALL TO WHOM THESE PRESENTS SHALL COME, I, RICHARD CHAMPION,
of Bristol, Merchant, send greeting, and so forth.

“WHEREAS his present Majesty, King George the Third, in the
eighth year of his reign, did grant his Royal Letters Patent
to William Cookworthy, of Plymouth, chymist, for the sole use
and exercise of ‘A DISCOVERY OF CERTAIN MATERIALS FOR MAKING
OF PORCELAIN,’ which Letters Patent have been duly assigned to
me the said Richard Champion; and whereas by a certain Act of
Parliament (intitled an Act for enlarging the Term of Letters
Patent granted by his present Majesty to William Cookworthy, of
Plymouth, chymist, for the sole Use and Exercise of a Discovery
of certain Materials for making Porcelain, in order to enable
Richard Champion, of Bristol, Merchant--to whom the said Letters
Patent have been assigned--to carry the said Discovery into
execution for the Benefit of the Public), all and every the
powers, liberties, rights, and advantages by the said Letters
Patent granted to the said William Cookworthy are granted to me,
the said Richard Champion, my executors, administrators, and
assigns, during the remainder of the term of the said Letters
Patent, and from the expiration thereof for a further term
therein mentioned, provided I, the said Richard Champion, should
cause to be inrolled in the High Court of Chancery, within
four months after passing the said Act, a specification of the
mixture of the raw materials of which my porcelain is composed,
and likewise of the mixture and proportions of the raw materials
which compose the glaze of the same, which specification was in
the hands of the Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain:

“NOW KNOW YE THEREFORE, that I, the said Richard Champion, do
hereby testify and declare that the specification hereinafter
contained is the true and just specification of the mixture
and proportions of the raw materials of which my porcelain is
composed, and likewise of the mixture and proportions of the raw
materials which compose the glaze of the same, and which, at the
time of passing the before-mentioned Act, was in the hands of
the Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain (that is to say):--

“The raw materials of the above porcelain are plastic clay,
generally found mixed with mica and a coarse gravelly matter.
It is known in the counties of Devon and Cornwall by the name
of growan clay. The other raw material is a mixed micarious
earth or stone called in the aforesaid countries moor-stone
and growan. The gravel found in the growan clay is of the same
nature, and is used for the same purpose in making the body
of my porcelain as the moor-stone and growan. The mixture of
these materials to make the body of the porcelain is according
to the common potter’s method, and has no peculiar art in it.
The proportions are as follow:--The largest proportion of the
stone or gravel aforesaid to the clay aforesaid is four parts of
stone to one of clay. The largest proportion of clay to stone
is sixteen parts of clay to one part of stone mixed together.
I use these and every proportion intermediate, between the
foregoing proportions of the stone to the clay and the clay to
the stone, and all this variation I make without taking away
from the ware the distinguishing appearance and properties of
Dresden and Oriental porcelains, which is the appearance and are
the properties of mine. The raw materials of which the glaze
is composed are, the stone or gravel aforesaid, and the clay
aforesaid, magnesia, nitre, lime, gypsum, fusible spar, arsenic,
lead, and tin ashes.

“The proportions of our common glaze are as follows, together
with every intermediate proportion, videlicet:--

Growan gravel 128 parts }
Growan or moor-stone 112 „ } The materials
and I vary it from 96 to 144 „ } ground and mixed
Magnesia 16 „ } together with
and I vary it from 14 to 18 „ } water.
Gypsum 3 „ }
Lime 8 „ }

“But I also use the following materials for glaze:--

Growan clay 128 parts }
Growan or moor-stone 112 „ }
and I vary it from 84 to 140 „ }
Magnesia 20 „ }
and I vary it from 16 to 24 „ } The materials
Lime 8 „ } ground and mixed
and I vary it from 6 to 10 „ } together with
Nitre 1 „ } water.
and I vary it to 2 „ }
Fusible spar 20 „ }
Arsenic 20 „ }
Lead and tin ashes 20 „ }
and I vary it from 16 to 24 „ }

“I have described truly and justly the raw materials, the
mixture and proportions of them which are used in making my
porcelain, which has the appearance and properties of Dresden
or Oriental porcelain, and which porcelain may be distinguished
from the frit or false porcelain, and from the pottery, or
earthen or stone wares, as follows:--

“The frit or false porcelain will all melt into a vitreous
substance, and lose their form and original appearance in a
degree of heat which my porcelain, agreeing in all properties
with Asiatic and Dresden, will not only bear, but which is
necessary for its perfection. My porcelain may be distinguished
from all other wares which are vulgarly called earthen or
stone wares, which can sustain an equal degree of heat, by the
grain, the colour of the grain, and by its semi-transparency;
whereas the earthenwares, such as Staffordshire white and yellow
earthenwares and all other earthenwares which sustain a strong
heat without being fused, are found, when subjected to the most
intense heat, to appear cellular or otherwise, easily by the eye
to be distinguished from the true porcelain.

“In witness whereof, I, the said Richard Champion, have hereunto
set my hand and seal this twelfth day of September, in the year
of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, and in
the fifteenth year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord, George
the Third, by the grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and
Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, and so forth.

“RICH. (S. S.) CHAMPION.

“Sealed and delivered in the presence of us,
“HENRY SHERWOOD,
“Of Wood Street, London.
“ROBERT REYNOLDS,
“Of Coventry.

“AND BE IT REMEMBERED, that the twelfth day of September, in
the year above written, the said Richard Champion came before
our said Lord the King in his Chancery, and acknowledged the
writing aforesaid, and all and everything therein contained and
specified, as form above written. And also the writing aforesaid
was stampt according to the tenor of the statute made in the
sixth year of the reign of the King and Queen William and Mary
of England, and so forth.

“Enrolled the fifteenth day of September, in the year above
written.”

The works of Richard Champion were in Castle Green, Bristol, and I was enabled, in 1863, assisted by the researches of Mr. Edkins, kindly undertaken at my request, to fix the exact locality both of the works and of Champion’s residence. This he determined by the singularly fortuitous circumstance of a Directory for the city of Bristol having been published--and for that one year only--in the year in which Champion obtained his Act of Parliament, 1775. In this Directory, which is of extreme rarity, occurs the following entry:--

“Champion, Richard, _China Manufactory_, 15, and his house, 17,
Castle Green.”

This occurs in the alphabetical list of “Merchants, Tradesmen, &c.,” and in another list of the “Merchants and Bankers and their residences,” is the following:--

“Champion, Richard, 17, Castle Green.”

It is perhaps worth just mentioning that this Directory, so opportunely made, is an admirable illustration of the difficulties under which compilers of those useful publications had to labour in the olden times. It was compiled by a person of the name of Sketchley, and, most of the houses not being in those days numbered, he carried with him a lot of metal figures, and nailed them on to the doors as he went on, charging a shilling at each house for doing so; and it is related of him that, with a strict eye to business, he excluded the names of some persons from his list who refused to pay the impost! Fortunately for my purpose, Richard Champion had evidently paid a couple of shillings, and so ensured not only his residence at No. 17, but his works at No. 15 being duly entered. The site of the china works is now covered with small houses.

Armed with his new Act of Parliament, by which he was empowered to enjoy nearly twenty-two years’ patent right, Champion spared no pains and no expense to make the productions of his works as good as possible; and that he continued to produce a magnificent body and a remarkably fine glaze, and turned out some truly exquisite specimens of fictile art, both in design, in potting, in modelling, and in painting, is fully evident by examples still remaining in the hands of collectors.

The commoner description of goods, the blue and white ware, seems to have been, very naturally, considered by Champion to be the branch most likely to pay him, commercially, and this he at one time cultivated to a greater extent than any other branch. His acknowledged and advertised model was the Dresden, and his best efforts were turned in this direction. The patterns which he adopted, being, naturally, in many cases almost identical with those produced at Worcester and other places--which, of course, arose from the fact of the different works copying from the same models--the ware made by Champion is sometimes apt to be appropriated by collectors to that manufactory. It may, however, easily be distinguished by those who are conversant with the peculiarities of its make.

In blue and white, Champion produced dinner, tea, and coffee services, toilet pieces, jugs, mugs, and all the varieties of goods usually made at that period. The blue is usually of good colour, and the painting quite equal to that of other manufactories. Some of these pieces are embossed, and of really excellent workmanship. A good deal of the blue and white ware was marked with the usual cross, but it appears more than probable that the greatest part of this kind of goods passed out of the works unmarked.

Another characteristic class of goods made by Champion was the imitation of the most common Chinese patterns, examples of which are shown in the next engraving of a saucer and a teapot.

There is a thorough Chinese style in the decoration of these pieces, and the colouring is also remarkably well reproduced. The saucer bears the usual mark of the cross, but very many examples of this class which have come under my notice are not marked at all, and pass as foreign pieces. In the same group I have given a cup of elegant form, but of different style, to show the beauty of its outline. Transfer printing was not, it would appear, practised by Champion, but some examples, Mr. Owen informs me, are known, which, although made at Bristol, were evidently printed at Worcester.

The expenses attendant on this unwarrantable opposition in Parliament drained Champion’s exchequer, and despite the energy of himself, the skill of his workmen, and the beauty of the ware produced at his manufactory, Richard Champion’s hopes of permanently establishing an art in Bristol, which should not only be an honourable and useful, but a remunerative one, proved fallacious, and in little more than five years from his obtaining of the Act of Parliament, the works which he had laboured so hard to establish, and on which he had expended so much time, money, and skill, were lost to the city of Bristol, and removed for ever from its walls, but not, fortunately, until he had proved incontestably his ability to produce a genuine porcelain of the finest texture, and of the most artistic and finished style.

In 1775 Champion advertised his works as “Patent China, at the Manufactory in Castle Green.” In 1776 he advertised it thus:--

“Established by Act of Parliament, The Bristol China Manufactory
in Castle Green. This China is greatly superior to every other
English Manufactory (_sic_). Its texture is fine, exceeding the
East India and its strength so great that water may be boiled
in it. It is a true Porcelain composed of a native clay and is
thus distinguished from every other English China which being
composed of a Number of Ingredients mix’d together the principal
part being Glass occasions it soon to get dirty in the wear
renders it continually liable to Accidents and in every respect
only an Imitation and therefore stiled by Chemists, a false
Porcelain.”

In 1778, Josiah Wedgwood, in a letter, dated August 24th in that year, says, “Poor Champion, you may have heard is quite demolished; it was never likely to be otherwise, as he had neither professional knowledge, sufficient capital, nor scarcely any real acquaintance with the materials he was working upon. I suppose we might buy some _growan stone_ and _growan clay_ now upon easy terms, for they have prepared a large quantity this last year.” This curious letter, whose sympathy was certainly left-handed, did but little credit to Wedgwood--the man who of all others had worked hard to crush him, and had succeeded in so doing. His hope now that Champion was “quite demolished” was that he might be able to gain his point and get the growan stone and clay on easy terms! It is lamentable to feel that a great name could sink so low. It does not appear, however, that Champion ever became bankrupt, or even appealed to his creditors.

In his Bristol works, although only his own name appears in the various documents to which I have alluded, Champion had friends who assisted pecuniarily in his undertaking. One of these friends was Joseph Fry, the grandfather of the present Mr. Francis Fry, F.S.A., of Bristol, whose name is as well known among biblists and connoisseurs in china for his fine collection of old bibles and choice porcelain as the firm to which he belongs is to the general public for the “Fry’s Chocolate” which they manufacture to so large an extent. Mr. Joseph Fry, the friend of Champion, died in 1786, about nine years after the works had been closed on their removal into Staffordshire; and it appears that the only return he got for the capital he had sunk in the concern, was the beautiful set of vases now in the possession of his grandson.

The patent right was sold by Champion, in 1781--not 1777, as stated by Shaw--to a company of Staffordshire potters, who continued the manufacture at New Hall (which see for a continuation of this narrative) for some time, when the ordinary soft-paste china was allowed to supersede it. Thus the works at Bristol were brought to a close, and the manufacture of porcelain was lost to the locality. Champion himself with his family removed for a time into Staffordshire, fixing themselves at Newcastle-under-Lyne, in November, 1781, and there remained until April, 1782, when, having been appointed a Deputy Paymaster-General of the Forces, by Edmund Burke, he left Staffordshire “at a day’s notice,” and removed to London, having apartments at Chelsea Hospital. This appointment he only held till 1784. In October of that year he sailed for Charleston, in South Carolina, and there he died, in 1791.

Bristol china (marked), every description of which, owing to the short time the works were in operation, and other causes, is scarce, is particularly rare in the finer and more highly finished varieties. Fortunately, however, examples of these different varieties, of the very finest kind, are still preserved, and attest most strongly to the extreme perfection to which Champion succeeded in bringing his works. Much discrimination is, nevertheless, required in appropriating examples, and it is well to caution collectors against placing too much reliance on the sweeping way in which, by some writers, all examples are hauled into the Bristol net; and by others into those of Lowestoft and other places.

One of the choicest examples of the highest class of art in Bristol porcelain existing at the present day, is the tea-service of which the cup and saucer engraved on Fig. 749 forms a part. This splendid service, of which, through the courtesy of Miss Smith, this cup and saucer passed into my hands, possesses a double interest, first from its being made “the best that the manufactory could produce;” and, second, from the historical associations which are connected with it. This example is also highly important as showing the perfection to which the manufacture of porcelain had been brought by Champion in 1774–5. It seems that in 1774 Edmund Burke, while the contested election for Bristol was going on, remained in that city, and for a month was the guest of Mr. and Mrs. Smith, who were his warm friends and zealous supporters, and he presented this splendid set of china, made expressly, by his own order, by Mr. Champion, to Mrs. Smith, and the remains of the set are now the property of that lady’s daughter, Miss Smith, of Berkeley Crescent. This set, it is fair to presume, was ordered by Burke while remaining in Bristol, or at all events about that time, which would be the very year in which the transfer of the Plymouth works to Champion of Bristol was completed. As a service of such exquisite beauty and such minute detail in painting would necessarily be a work of time, the absolute date of its completion may be set down to the beginning of the year 1775. The decorations of Burke’s service are of chaste and elaborate design and delicate workmanship. It is profusely and massively gilt in both dead and burnished gold, the wreaths of laurel, &c., being in green, which was Burke’s electioneering colour. Each piece bears the monogram of Mrs. Smith, S S conjoined, formed of wreaths of roses in pink and gold, and also the arms of Smith, _sable_, a fesse between three saltiers _or_; on an escutcheon of pretence the arms of Pope, _or_, two chevronels and a canton _gules_, the latter charged with a mullet of the first; and the crest of Smith, a saltier _or_. The pieces of this service are marked with the usual cross. In the Museum of Practical Geology is a cup and saucer of the same form, presented by the Duchess of Northumberland, in which the festoons and borders are of similar character, but of very inferior workmanship to those just described. Another remarkably fine and, of course, unique service was brought under the hammer in 1871, and deserves more than a passing notice. This service had been made by Champion and presented by him and his wife to Mrs. Burke. On the larger pieces were the arms of Burke impaling Nugent on a pedestal, supported, dexter, by a figure of Liberty; and, sinister, by a figure of Plenty. On the top of the pedestal is Cupid with a flaming torch, and at the base the inscription, “I. BVRKE, OPT. B. M. R. ET. I. CHAMPION. D. D.D. PIGNVS. AMICITÆ. III. NON. NOV. MDCCLXXIV.” Other decorations also are introduced. Portions of this service (which it is a pity was ever dispersed) are in possession of Mr. Callender, of Mr. Edkins, of Mr. Fry, and others. I am indebted to Mr. Owen for permission to reproduce from his admirable volume the engraving of a portion of this service (Fig. 750), and for the use of several other woodcuts.