Prestonpans Porcelain

Graeme Cruickshank

Scottish Pottery Studies 6 6

Published for The Prestoungrange Arts Festival by Prestoungrange University Press in association with Burke’s Peerage & Gentry

cover 10/18/07 10:57 AM Page 2

Prestonpans PorcelainGraeme Cruickshank

Scottish Pottery Studies 6

Published for The Prestoungrange Arts Festival by Prestoungrange University Press in association with Burke’s Peerage & Gentry

Copyright © 2007 Prestoungrange University Press with Burke’s Peerage & Gentry

All rights reserved. Copyright under international and Pan-American Copyright Conventions.

The right of Graeme Cruickshank to be identified as Author of this Work has been asserted by him inaccordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any other form orby any other means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the priorpermission of the publisher and copyright holder. Within the UK, exceptions are allowed in respect of anyfair dealing for the purpose of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under theCopyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988.

While the publisher makes every effort possible to publish full and correct information in this book,sometimes errors of omission or substance may occur. For this the publisher is most regretful, but herebymust disclaim any liability.

ISBN 978 0 85011 051 7

Prestoungrange University Press with Burke’s Peerage & Gentry forThe Barons Courts of Prestoungrange and Dolphinstoun227/229 High Street, PrestonpansEast Lothian, Scotland EH32 9BE

Typescript by Rita StewartDesign & Typesetting by Chat Noir Design, FrancePrinted & bound in Great Britain

2

SCOTTISH POTTERY STUDIES is the name of a series of booklets, the aim of each being to examinesome specific aspect of Scottish Pottery history. The scheme was initiated in 1980 as a result of a bequestfrom Frank E. Cruickshank of Aberdeen. This author researched, compiled, scripted, designed, produced,and distributed the first two booklets, and is therefore grateful that succeeding titles have been publishedby organisations which relieved me of some of these practical chores. I would like to thank Gordon,Baron of Prestoungrange, for allowing two special aspects of Prestonpans pottery production to becomepart of the series, which develop themes from the book Prestonpans Pottery published by thePrestoungrange Arts Festival in 2007.

Previous titles in the series:

No. 1 Scottish Spongeware (1982), out of print.

No. 2 Scottish Saltglaze (1982).

No. 3 Campsie Ware (1992), Glasgow City Libraries.

No. 4 A Visit to Dunmore Pottery (2002), Stirling Museum.

3

Foreword

The potteries of Prestonpans are justly famed forthe range of their ceramic products, some ofwhich are unique in Scottish terms, and othersbeing taken to a high level of production whichwon widespread renown1. Porcelain, however, isnot generally thought of in these terms, but sucha product was made in Prestonpans in the early20th century, and to an acceptably high standard.Totally overshadowed by Scotland’s otherporcelain producer, the celebrated NautilusPorcelain Company of Glasgow, the manufactureof such ware in Prestonpans has been overlookedto a large extent. The basic fact is known toScottish pottery enthusiasts, as there is a sectionon it in Arnold Fleming’s book Scottish Pottery,and marked pieces are known though theirnumbers are small. This booklet is an attempt, atleast in part, to redress the balance.

The pedigree of Prestonpans porcelainThere is quite a tale, at times rather tangled,behind the production of porcelain atPrestonpans, which has its spiritual home atBelleek in Co. Fermanagh in Ireland (see Figure1) The story begins in 1852, some five years priorto the construction of the Belleek factory, whenlarge deposits of feldspar were discovered at theestate of John Caldwell Bloomfield of CastleCaldwell on Lower Lough Erne. His interest inceramics had been stimulated by the acclaim wonby some of the pottery displays at the Great

Exhibition of the previous year, held in theCrystal Palace in London, and the discovery offeldspar literally under his feet inspired notions ofestablishing a porcelain factory. When the otheressential ingredient, kaolin, was also discoveredat Castle Caldwell, porcelain production becamea realistic proposition. A further stimulus wasprovided by the Dublin International Exhibitionof 1853, at which the Worcester PorcelainCompany won the highest category of award fora dinner service made of Belleek clay – yet Irelandhad no pottery exhibits of its own on show.

The Belleek Pottery was started in 1857 byRobert Armstrong, a Dublin architect thenworking at the Royal Worcester factory, which atthat time was importing large quantities of Castle

4

Prestonpans Porcelain

1

Caldwell feldspar. His interest had been arousedsufficiently for him to join Bloomfield in hisporcelain tests. Armstrong’s partner was DavidMcBirney, a wealthy Dublin merchant; it was hewho financed the venture, which traded asMcBirney & Co. After slow beginnings, the pacechanged with the arrival of William Bromleyfrom the famed Goss factory in Staffordshire. In1857, the same year as Belleek was founded,William Henry Goss had joined the celebratedStaffordshire firm of William Taylor Copeland.Having quickly risen to the position of chiefdesigner in Copeland’s factory, the young WilliamGoss launched out on his own account in 1858,establishing himself in Stoke. He progressed sorapidly in the business that his new firm won agold medal at the London InternationalExhibition of 1862. By this time, he had built upa team of talented designers, headed by WilliamGallimore. In 1863, ten of Goss’s most skilledworkmen were induced to join the new BelleekPottery in Ireland, including foreman WilliamBromley and chief designer William Gallimore.The Goss style therefore had a profound effect onthe Belleek manner of production.

One of the ‘Goss ten’ was a designer namedJames Cleary, who was trained by WilliamGallimore. Following the return of Gallimore tothe Goss factory in 1866, Cleary succeeded himas head of the modelling department at Belleek.This was a successful time for Belleek, with goldmedals being won at the Dublin Exposition of1872, and commissions were received fromroyalty (including Queen Victoria) and thenobility. Export markets opened up. However, inthe early 1889s both partners died, McBirney in1882 and Armstrong in 1884, at which point,after a brief period of closure, Joshua Poole came

from Staffordshire to manage the works. It is atthis time that we first encounter the name whichwas to play such a crucial role in the productionof porcelain at Prestonpans: John Boyle. In hisStory of Belleek, John Cunningham has recorded:“at the first AGM under the new management, adecision was taken to employ the first commercialtraveller on behalf of the Pottery, a local man, MrJ. Boyle” (p.38). Assuming this to be the JohnBoyle of our story, he was a young man agedabout 22 years at this time.

After a period of prosperity, Belleek Pottery wasnow heading for stormy waters. Poole wasquickly replaced by an uneasy workforce whowanted an Irishman and a Catholic in charge, buthe was succeeded as manager by the head of themodelling department, the above-mentionedJames Cleary, who ran the works from 1884 to1900. It was during this tenure that an eventoccurred which was to direct John Boyle awayfrom Belleek. Tensions arose over workingpractices and the efficiency of the factory, andadding to these difficulties were internal divisionsin local nationalist politics which spilled over intothe Pottery, and commercial rivalries within thevillage of Belleek. Matters came to a head, and astrike broke out in 1888. At a tempestuousmeeting there was a call for a change ofmanagement, but when the seconder of themotion rose to speak, clutching a large bundle ofpapers, he was ruled out of order because he hadnot paid for all the shares he had acquired. Afterseveral impassioned speeches and a deal of mud-slinging, a key moment in our story occurred, asdescribed by John Cunningham: “Then Mr Boyle,who had until recently been the traveller for thePottery, arose to speak holding a large sheaf[probably the papers of the ousted seconder of

5

the motion]… but he was utterly routed when inresponse to his opening questions, Mr Myles [oneof the Pottery’s directors] asked him was it nottrue that while he had been selling Belleek wareand the Pottery paying for his hotels andtravelling expenses, he had also been selling glassfor another company? Since Boyle was unable todeny the allegation, he was unceremoniouslydismissed from the fray” (p.42). Belleek Potteryrecovered from these difficulties, and indeed itcontinues to prosper to the present day, but thefocus of our attention now moves to Glasgow.

The firm of McDougall & Sons was a long-established business dealing in china,earthenware, and glass, which could trace itsorigins back to 1790. A century later, it hadgrown to be the largest of its kind in Glasgow,with several branches throughout the city, itshead office and showrooms being located at77–79 Buchanan Street. The McDougalls did notsimply act as retailers; they also had a glassengraving and china painting business. Thebreadth of their activities is evident from the PostOffice Directories. Conflating two similar entriesfor 1895, we find: “McDougall & Sons,wholesale, retail, and export glass and chinamerchants, glass engravers, china decorators andgilders, and importers of foreign goods”. Thefirm’s telegraphic address was ‘Porcelain’. Theirsuccess in these ventures encouraged theproprietors, brothers Daniel and JohnMcDougall, to enter the field of porcelainmanufacture.

In the following year, 1896, the lengthy Directoryentry for McDougall & Sons had a veryinteresting addition: “porcelain manufactory,Barrowfield”. It would appear that they hadleased a portion of the mighty Barrowfield

Pottery of Henry Kennedy, stonewaremanufacturer, where they initiated theirporcelain-making enterprise. It was an immediatesuccess, and a move to larger premises was anecessity. The Directory entry for 1897 gave thename of its new base: “works, Possil Pottery,Possilpark”. This factory had been established in1876 under the name of the Saracen Pottery forthe manufacture of earthenware, ceasingproduction in 1893. Now it was given a newlease of life by the McDougall brothers. Morethan that, their new venture and its outputreceived a name, for in that same year of 1897another entry in the Directory reads: “The‘Nautilus’ Porcelain Company, manufacturers of‘Nautilus’ porcelain; showrooms 77 & 79Buchanan Street; works, Possil Pottery,Possilpark”. In the following year, a furtherdescription – “art pottery ware, &c” – wasadded.

The range of Nautilus porcelain is indicated byan advertisement which appeared in the PotteryGazette in 1903 (see Figure 2). The production ofsuch wares demanded a high degree ofprofessional expertise from the workforce, and inhis study of the subject, Gerard Quail indicates(though without stating his sources) where theycame from: “They [the McDougalls] procured thebest china modellers, mould makers, and chinapainters, from Worcester, Staffordshire, andLimoges in France to ensure a high standard.From Belleek in Ireland craftsmen in porcelainwere induced to come to Scotland to practicetheir art of making delicately woven baskets fromfine strands of porcelain (p.16).

None of the Belleek workers’ names arementioned by Quail, but it would seem that JohnBoyle was among them. Whether he had survived

6

at Belleek after the stormy events of 1888 andwhat he had been doing since is not known atpresent, but he was certainly in Glasgow beforethe turn of the century, holding a position ofgreat relevance to our story. The 1901 Censusincludes the name of John Boyle, aged 39,“Pottery Manager”; the name of the Pottery isnot stated, but a strong pointer is provided by theaddress – 277 Saracen Street (the original nameof the Possil Pottery was the Saracen Pottery,being situated diagonally across a plot of landfrom Saracen Cross and facing the mightySaracen Foundry). John Boyle had been born inIreland (the record being no more specific thanthat) as had his wife Hannah and their first fourchildren, the youngest of whom was then aged 8.However, the fifth child, aged 3, had been born inGlasgow. This implies that John Boyle had movedwith his family to Glasgow between 1893 and1898. The median is 1895/6 – right at the timewhen the McDougalls initiated the production ofporcelain.

The products of the NautilusPorcelain Company were justlyfamed as they reached the epitome ofthis class of ware. Some of theirshapes possess a classic simplicity,but more often than not they areexotic, frequently in the extreme,with finely painted decoration andlavish gilding. The other mainstay ofproduction consisted of a wide rangeof porcelain miniatures bearing thecoats of arms of burghs from all overScotland and sometimes beyond, verysimilar to Goss wares. NautilusPorcelain was given a stand at the1901 Glasgow InternationalExhibition where its wares receivedhigh praise. Technically and

aesthetically, it was reckoned to be the equal ofLimoges, the leaders in the field till then, and theMcDougalls’ cursive M mark was sometimesmistaken for Meissen! Throughout the firstdecade of the 20th century Nautilus thrived, andalthough his name is absent from the Directories,John Boyle was apparently the works managerfor most if not all of this period. Tough times layahead, however; the leading light in the firm,John McDougall, died in 1910, and althoughDaniel tried to carry on, assisted by his son andtwo nephews, it was not to last. An economicrecession hit hard, the finer classes of ware beingthe first to suffer, and early in 1911 theMcDougalls were forced to close down thePottery. The fine display of Nautilus Porcelain atthe Glasgow Exhibition later that year was verymuch its swan-song, yet a phoenix had alreadyarisen from the ashes, and its birthplace wasPrestonpans.

7

2

The advent of porcelain production atPrestonpansPrior to considering the move from Glasgow toPrestonpans, it is necessary to look back beyondthe start of porcelain production here to theorigins of its progenitor, a company called ClunasTiles and Mosaics Ltd. Its Articles of Associationwere drawn up in 1906 and registered under theCompanies Act on 30th June that year2 (seeFigure 3). The founder was William Clunas, a tile

and marble merchant with premises in Edinburghand Leith, who had ambitions to expand hisrange of interests. Objective 3 in theaccompanying Memorandum of Association speltthese out: “To carry on the business ofmanufacturers of encaustic tiles, glazed andenamelled tiles, bricks, ceramic mosaics, faience,pottery and glass ware, and generally to carry onthe business of clay workers in all its branches” –but note, there was no mention of porcelain. As ifthis range was not enough, it was continued inObjective 4: “To carry on the business of tile-fixers, mosaicists, marble, slate, stone, andgranite workers, cement merchants andmanufacturers, coal-masters, carriers andcontractors”; and it did not end there.

A plot of land was purchased in the south-westquarter of Prestonpans from James McNeil ofNorthfield House, located near the mineralrailway line which branched off the main east-coast line just to the west of Prestonpans Station,and then came northwards before swinging eastinto Northfield Colliery. Unfortunately, thebuilding seems to have just missed inclusion inthe Ordnance Survey map of 1906, but from thedescription given in the feu charter3 it lay in theirregular plot of land bounded by the curve of theouter rail of the said railway (though not to comewithin six feet of it), the southern extension ofRedburn Road, and Rope Walk (though neitherof these street names are mentioned). This meansit is probably unconnected with the largestructure labelled “Brick Works (Disused)” whichis shown on the succeeding Ordnance Survey mapof 1932; although the railway had gone by thistime, it would have lain inside the curve of theinner rail (see Figure 4). William Clunas hadambitious plans for his company, Objective 8

8

3

being “To employ agents and maintain agenciesin the United Kingdom, its Dependencies andColonies, and in foreign countries”. Sadly forhim, however, the venture seems barely to havegot off the ground, and in 1909 after just acouple of years the company went intoliquidation, according to the Valuation Rolls.

The works did not remain vacant for long. In1910, the Valuation Rolls show that a Pottery(unnamed) was established on Redburn Road,under the proprietorship of John Smith andothers, per J. & T. Allison, house and estateagents and valuators of 11 South St. David Street,Edinburgh. It was not until the closure of the

Pottery several years later that the ValuationRolls named these “others”. There was a distinctcarry-through from the Clunas concern, with twodirectors and two contractors among the Pottery’sproprietors. Additional information comes fromthe Post Office Directories. The full list reads:

John Myrtle Smith, 44 Blacket Place, Edinburgh(a plumber);

D. Wilson’s representatives per J. & T. Anderson,WS, 48 Castle Street, Edinburgh (DavidWilson, a joiner and builder, had been adirector of Clunas Tiles and Mosaics Ltd.);

J.P. Cochrane, Southlea, Cramond Bridge (this

9

4

Figure 4 Ordnance Survey map of 1906 showing the area where the Castle Pottery is believed to have stood; superimposed tothe south (heavily stippled) is the precise position of the later brickworks, which would appear to be unconnected, while to thewest the complex captioned “Pottery” is that of Belfield & Co.

was James P. Cochrane whose company ranthe Murano Works in Murano Place,Edinburgh, golf ball makers andmanufacturers of golf clubs and all golfingaccessories);

James Hardie, 18 Chapel Street, Edinburgh (ofGeorge Hardie & Son, joiners, cabinet-makers,and house agents);

J. Smith & Son, 10 Bath Street, Portobello (whohad been contracted for the mason, brick, andtiling work in the construction of the Clunasfactory, George Smith coming in as a Clunasdirector);

T.C. Kelly, 113 Rose Street, Edinburgh (this wasThomas C. Kelly of John Kelly & Son,ironmongers, who had been a Clunasdirector);

J.M. Smith’s representatives (presumably anotherreference to John Myrtle Smith, at the top ofthe list);

R. & G. Scott, 247 High Street, Portobello(Robert and John Scott, joiners andupholsterers, who had been contracted for thejoiner work in the construction of the Clunasfactory);

Cowan & Stewart, WS (William Cowan andJames Stewart), 10 Castle Street, Edinburgh,per J. & T. Allison as above.

Thus the new Pottery had an impressive array ofdifferent types of tradesmen as directors, but thekey name does not appear in this list. TheValuation Rolls for 1910 give as tenant of thePottery none other than John Boyle of the PossilPottery, Possilpark, Glasgow. It seems that he hadinitiated the production of porcelain the

Prestonpans before it had totally ceased inGlasgow. Curiously, he is listed in this fashion forthe next seven years, even though the PossilPottery was out of operation between 1911 and1922.

The works name: Castle PotteryWe know from ceramic marks and documentarysources that the name of the factory whichproduced Prestonpans porcelain was the CastlePottery – but what castle? Prestonpans does nothave one. The ancient Preston Tower wouldhardly seem to merit such a title, but the namesof several other buildings offer possibilities. Ahouse situated near Preston Doocot had the name‘Castle View’, while a larger villa located not farfrom the Pottery was known as ‘Castle Park’. Ona more mundane level, there could be aconnection with a notable building in the HighStreet colloquially called ‘Castle o’ Clouts’,though it was demolished in 1910, the same yearas Castle Pottery went into production, to allowfor the expansion of the soapworks of JamesMellis & Co. Another possibility is to abandon aPrestonpans connection and look instead atEdinburgh Castle; the group of proprietors whichran the Castle Pottery included two Edinburghlegal firms, J. & T. Anderson and Cowan &Stewart, and both of them had their offices inCastle Street at numbers 48 and 10 respectively.

In truth, none of these theories sound all thatplausible, and perhaps it is necessary to return towhere we started for the answer. Preston Towertoday, mildly impressive though it is, is but astump when compared with what it looked likewhen complete. A rare view of it in its entiretyappears in a detailed and competently executedsketch showing the disposition of the troops in

10

the famous local battle of 1745, which wasdrawn by “an officer of the Army who waspresent” (see Figure 5). It is unnamed there, buton John Ainslie’s map of the ‘Southern Part ofScotland’ of 1821, it is captioned “Castle”.Furthermore, this structure is called “PrestonCastle” on the Ordnance Survey maps of 1854,1892, and 1906, adding “(remains of)” on theearliest version and “(ruins of)” on the others,only being given its present name of “Preston

Tower (ruins of)” on the 1932 edition. Ruinous itmay have been by the early 20th century whenthe Pottery was in operation, but the name ofPreston Castle was still in use. Constructed inabout 1365, it was twice burned by Englishinvading armies (in 1544 and 1650) and twicerestored, but an accidental fire in 1663 left it inits present ruinous state (see Figure 6). Thechequered history of this venerable pile gave it adegree of local renown, and its name of ‘Castle’

11

5 6

was apparently borrowed by the Pottery whichwas erected less than half a mile away.

The brand name: Coral PorcelainOne of several factors which intimately linkedCastle Pottery with Possil Pottery was the factthat Scotland’s only two producers of porcelaineach gave their products exotic trade names, inboth cases applying them to the companies aswell.

Firstly, Nautilus porcelain. The nautilus is ashelled marine creature belonging to thecephalopods, the highest class of molluscs (seeFigure 7). It is seen here in motion, the shot beingtaken by the author in Singapore; the reason whynot all of it is in the frame is that the nautilusswims by employing a system of jet propulsion,resulting in rapid jerky movements. This was thebest shot I could achieve in half a dozenattempts). There are two types: the pearlynautilus of the Southern Seas, and the papernautilus of the Mediterranean, the latter alsoknown as the argonaut. This name hasconnotations in Greek mythology, the Argonautsbeing a band of adventurous sailors, led by Jason,who set off in their ship the Argo on a quest tobring back the fabulous golden fleece fromColchis on the distant shores of the Black Sea.They encountered many hazards on the way,none greater than the Sirens with their alluringsongs, but in the end they were successful. Manypieces of Nautilus porcelain are marked with arepresentation of the Argo (see Figure 8). Theshell of the nautilus makes the creature’s namevery appropriate for a brand of porcelain,combining qualities of beauty, delicacy, andtranslucence (see Figure 9). The name “Nautilus”was registered as a trademark by McDougall &

12

7

8

Sons in 18954 (but not including therepresentation of a winged snake, as suggested insome of their advertisements). By way ofconfirmation that McDougall & Sons had not yetbegun the manufacture of porcelain, they aredescribed simply as “glass and china merchants”,though clearly plans were well advanced and thestart of production was imminent. The words“Nautilus Porcelain” appear on pieces as themaker’s mark, in a variety of formats.

Coral porcelain continues the theme of an exoticmarine life-form providing the name, though thelink with porcelain does not possess the samevalidity. Coral takes many forms, and some ofthem are indeed beautiful, but there is little toconnect it with porcelain beyond that. Certainlythe type represented in the Coral Porcelain trademark bears no resemblance to porcelain (seeFigure 10); it appears to be a fragment from thecommon corallium nobile which looks like a bushshorn of its leaves and twigs. Some other

explanation needs to be found for the use of thisname.

The answer may lie in the artistic linking of thenautilus shell with coral (the latter supporting theformer) which seems to have fascinated theporcelain producers of the British Isles. It may beremembered that the pedigree of Prestonpansporcelain had a distant connection withWorcester, and sure enough Royal Worcesterproduced a delectable piece of fine modellingshowing just such a nautilus/coral combination.Some earlier versions (eg dated 1867) were closeto gaudy with their decoration, which becamemore restrained later. The same shape was madeby Goss, the first solid link in the chain, whichproduced a fine nautilus shell supported onbranches of coral (see Figure 11) – even if it israther incongruously embellished with a coat-of-arms, for which Goss became famed above all.Belleek then took up the theme. It had alreadydisplayed a liking for quasi-coral embellishments,in particular with the production of Queen

13

109

Victoria’s dinner service (made at Her Majesty’sexpress request and presented by her to theEmpress of Germany). The grounds basin tookthe form of the shell of an echinus (sea-urchin)supported on stalks of coral (see Figure 12); notealso the buckie shell lying on top of the base. Aneven more extravagant use of coral as an appliedmotif by Belleek occurred on Queen Victoria’smirror frame (see Marion Langham, p.70 andp.71 upper left). A small sketch5 of a nautilusshell supported by coral on a base of largepebbles does little justice to the actual stunningpiece of ceramic art (see Figure 13). Possil Pottery

14

11

12 13

also made a nautilus and coral item, though thecoral takes the form of a circular foot-rim ratherthan supporting stalks. Given that John Boylewas employed at Belleek before coming toPrestonpans via Possilpark, he would surely havebeen aware of the nautilus/coral ceramicgrouping, which may possibly have inspired hisselection of a trade-name for Prestonpansporcelain – having Nautilus succeeded by Coral.

The Coral Porcelain trade mark (which does notappear to have been registered) consists of notone but two forms of marine life, the other beinga shell of the buckie variety, perhaps a whelk.

The presence of this motif may also be explainedby the Belleek/Nautilus heritage, for bothproduced a similar shell, standing vertically,supported on stalks of coral! As it happens, theBelleek example shown here (see Figure 14) hasbeen photographed beside a nautilus/coralcombination with some coloration this time,while the Nautilus example (see Figure 15) isembellished with hand-painted floral decorationtypical of such wares. Furthermore, John Boylemay also have been aware of an existingPrestonpans connection, for Belfield & Co alsoproduced a vertical buckie shell (see Figure 16)though the supports here look more like stalks of

15

14 15

seaweed than of coral. Such products do notappear to have been marked, but they are typicalof Belfield’s renowned majolica ware, even havingtheir interiors coloured crimson or mauve just aswith marked Belfield tea-sets. All of the abovemay add up to the provision of a reason for thechoice of brand-name and trade-mark for CoralPorcelain.

Coral Porcelain productsConsidering that the Coral Porcelain Co.operated at the Castle Pottery in Prestonpans forseven years (1910–1916), identifiable productsare remarkably rate. We are therefore fortunateindeed to have a surviving bill-head which liststhe range of wares which was produced (seeFigure 17). Although less extensive than that ofNautilus (see Figure 2), the three major categoriesall feature within the Nautilus range, and inmany ways it looks as if Coral was very much acontinuance of production on the other side ofthe country. Looking at the three Coral categoriesone at a time, they are:

1) “tea, dessert, centre pieces…” – an example inthis category may be a large vase of exoticform (see cover illustration and Figure 18). Itsgeneral shape, and in particular its gilthandles, may be compared with Nautilusitems (see for example Figure 19), while thehand-painted floral decoration featuring redand yellow pansies could have been executedby a Nautilus decorator (see for exampleFigure 20). Another spectacular item is a largebowl of irregular shape standing on a base ofvine stalks (see Figure 21). The shape couldwell be Nautilus and the decoration even moreso, not just the painting of the natural subjectsbut also the pierced and gilded rim. Despite

16

16

17

their close similarities with Nautilus, there isno doubt about the Prestonpans provenanceof these two pieces, as they both carry thecomplex Coral Porcelain mark (see Figure 10).Note: Just as we are about to go to press, theauthor has seen two items of marked Nautilusporcelain identical in shape to the two Coralpieces described above, though with quitedifferent decoration. There seems no doubtthat the Coral Porcelain Co. were usingNautilus moulds.

2) “wicker flower baskets…” – this descriptionsounds as if it means ‘flower baskets made ofsimulated wicker work’, but perhaps whatwas meant was ‘wicker flowered baskets’, aswith the Nautilus advertisement for “floweredand wicker baskets”, ie baskets of simulatedwicker-work encrusted with flowers. This wasvery much a Belleek speciality and remains sountil the present day, winning the companyworld-wide renown. Such items were alsomade by Nautilus6 (although they are

17

18 19

notoriously difficult to identify, partly becauseof the problem in applying a mark). It istherefore no surprise to learn that Coral madethem also, and the appearance of a provenPrestonpans example is awaited with interest.

3) “…coat-of-arms ware” – miniature items in awide variety of shapes bearing coats-of-armsbecame the staple of the Goss factory to suchan extent that the term ‘Goss ware’ is oftenused to describe this range, which was alsoturned out by many other makers. AdolphusGoss (son of the founder, who eventually took

18

20

21

over the running of the factory) introducedheraldic embellishments on a range ofminiatures based initially on ancient vesselsrecovered by archaeology, in which he had akeen interest. He did this without theenthusiastic support of his father, but within afew years his marketing acumen had beenproved correct, and the enormous success ofthis class of ware meant that the factory floor-space had to be trebled to cope with demandand the production of all other lines ceased.Not surprisingly, Belleek also producedheraldic miniatures, though not in anythingapproaching such numbers: first periodexamples (1863–1890) are rare, those fromthe second period (1890–1926) a little less so.On the other hand, Nautilus did produce themin quantity; an extensive range of objectscarried the coats-of-arms of burghs all overScotland and a few from further afield –

southern England, Ireland, even as far away asIndia (for two examples see Figures 22 and23).

Coral Porcelain heraldic miniatures are morecommon than their large exotic items, but stillmay be regarded as rare. A small vase (see Figure24) may be regarded as typical, and thesomewhat larger rococco teapot (see Figure 25) isstill smaller than one of average size. There is acertain irony here, for both of these pieces carrythe coat-of-arms of the city of Glasgow! Onoccasions, novelty miniatures were produced inthe best tradition of the enormous Goss range ofsuch items. Such wares are now keenly collected,but when a book was published called CrestedChina: The History of Heraldic Souvenir Warecompiled by Sandy Andrews (Horndean, 1980),Coral Porcelain did not make an appearance. Theomission was rectified in what was essentially asecond edition, Price Guide to Crested China by

19

22 23 24

Nicholas Pine (Waterlooville, 2000), whichincludes a good drawing of the mark and a verybrief mention of the company. The wares listedconsist of “a range of ‘smalls’ with Scottishcrests…. Models, home/nostalgic [example: cradleon rockers]… and traditional/national souvenirs[example: thistle vase]” (p.149). Incidentally, thisclass of ware is often erroneously referred to as‘crested’, but invariably the pieces carry the fullachievement of arms, not just the crest.

Coral Porcelain at the Scottish NationalExhibition, Glasgow, 1911Perhaps the finest hour for the Coral PorcelainCompany came with its participation in theScottish Exhibition of National History, Art, andIndustry, which was held in Kelvingrove Park,Glasgow, from May to October 1911. By thistime, the Scottish pottery industry had passed itspeak, but many factories throughout the countrystill had some way to run; Glasgow itselfsupported eight potteries at this time. The paucityof pottery on show at this major event istherefore somewhat surprising. This may bepartly explained by the fact that ‘Industry’, which

had been the dominant theme in the GlasgowInternational Exhibitions of 1888 and 1901, wasnow displaced by ‘History’. Indeed, the 1911Exhibition’s declared aim was to fund theendowment of a Chair of Scottish History andLiterature at Glasgow University. The eventproved hugely popular, and during its six-monthrun it attracted not far short of ten millionvisitors.

A large exhibit was put on by Doulton & Co Ltdof Lambeth in London, who at that time alsooperated a branch in Hawkhead Road, Paisley.Their displays, however, were confined tosanitary items. Another London firm, Norman W.Franks of Bayswater, put on a show ofreproduction “Old English Hand-Painted Potteryand Persian Pattern Pottery” (the latter verygaudy and having little to do with Persia, thoughthey were by no means the only firm to give itsuch a moniker), “all dipped in leadless glaze [asproudly declared in the mark on items which stilltoday are not uncommon in Scotland], thuspreventing lead poisoning to the workers in thepotteries”. This company were merchants ratherthan manufacturers, but the latter category wasrepresented by Pilkington’s Tile and Pottery CoLtd of Manchester, producers of the famedLancastrian lustred wares.

A most interesting exhibit was mounted bySneddon & Sons of Glasgow (further details ofthe company appeared in the Post OfficeDirectory of that year: Alexander Sneddon &Sons, wholesale and retail glass, china, andearthenware merchants, and glass engravers andship and hotel furnishers, 123–127 StockwellStreet and 88 Union Street). They cast their netwidely, and included “a large collection ofmedium and high-class China Ware, useful and

20

25

ornamental, including articles of the famedCoalport, Royal Worcester, Royal Crown Derby,and other well-known British makers”.Fascinatingly, they had arranged an “Exhibitionof fine old Glasgow Ware, manufactured inGlasgow sixty to seventy years ago [ie in the1840s], including the following pieces made inGlasgow Pottery – viz., one Parian China [adubious term] Figure (‘Dante’), two Red andGold Vases, one Etruscan Vase, [and] a ChinaInk-Stand in Green and Gold”. By the phrase“made in Glasgow Pottery”, the compiler of theCatalogue surely must have meant the GlasgowPottery of J. & M.P. Bell & Co., for no otherScottish firm possessed the capability to producesuch wares.

Approaching closer to our topic was a display byTodd, Cunningham & Petrie of Albion Street,Glasgow. Their “general fancy goods” weremanufactured from a variety of materials, andtheir “Souvenir and Crest Goods” sound like theheraldic china miniatures bearing their TC&Pmark, generally made in Staffordshire, which stillmay be found today. Coming closer still was adouble exhibit staged by McDougall & Sons ofBuchanan Street, Glasgow, comprising thefollowing: “Glass, China, and Earthenware.Painters showing process of Decoration on China.Special exhibit of ‘Nautilus’ Porcelainmanufactured in Glasgow”. However, as we haveseen, the production of Nautilus porcelain hadbeen wound down by this time to the point ofcessation, so this exhibit was more of a nostalgicretrospective review than representative of acurrent commercial enterprise. Glasgow hadfollowed Edinburgh’s lead in holding three majorexhibitions in less than quarter of a century, thefirst two international and the third national. The

assessment of all the pottery on show at theGlasgow National Exhibition of 1911 givenabove reveals one most surprising fact – the goingpottery concerns were all English, with Scottishrepresentation being confined to historic displaysonly – with one exception: the Coral Porcelain ofPrestonpans.

The Official Catalogue of the Exhibition (whichhad a most attractive cover, (see Figure 26) gave

21

26

details on page 211 of the display of CoralPorcelain, at Stand No.613 (see Figure 27).Interestingly, they termed their product “IvoryPorcelain”, which they could supply either plainor decorated. The items made are largely asdiscussed before: tea, dessert, and dejeuner sets,

vases (as Figure 18), centre pieces (as Figure 21)wicker flower baskets (as discussed), figures,flower pots, and coat-of-arms ware (as Figure24). The notable new line is figures, and inmanufacturing these Coral was following one ofthe most acclaimed achievements of Nautilus. Weeven have a piece of Coral porcelain which wasspecially made as a souvenir of this Exhibition. Ittakes the form of a miniature lighthouse,appropriately inscribed, and including a colouredview of part of the Exhibition itself (see Figure28).

The McDougalls had their display of Nautilusporcelain placed in the prestigious Palace ofIndustries, its position clearly marked on the planof that building, while Coral had to be contentwith an unspecified location in the grounds whichcontained numerous minor pavilions and kiosks(see Figure 29). Nevertheless, this Prestonpanscompany could be proud that it was the solerepresentative of the Scottish pottery industry to

22

27

28

29

put on a display of a range of its products thencurrent. Given that the Coral Porcelain Companywas only a year old at the time, its success inGlasgow must have given the firm a tremendousfillip.

Some Coral Porcelain workersThe main man was of course John Boyle, ex-Nautilus, and ex-Belleek before that. The oddthing is that throughout the seven years he ranthe company in Prestonpans he is listed asassociated with the Possil Pottery in Glasgow,even though it was closed for that period and theproduction of Nautilus Porcelain had ceased.Given the possibility of a slight overlap, thedescription in the Valuation Rolls may have beenvalid in the first year, but not thereafter.

The bill-head described and illustrated in the lastsection was not in this instance a financialaccount; it is headed “Memorandum” and tookthe form of a personal reference, written in JohnBoyle’s own hand, of the ‘to whom it mayconcern’ variety (see Figure 30). It is dated 21stJanuary 1915, and records:

“The bearer, Ina Whyte, has been ouremployment about 3 years learning ChinaPainting & during that time we found herstrictly honest and careful.

The Coral Porcelain Co.

Jno. [ie John] Boyle”

No address is given beyond “Castle Pottery,Prestonpans, by Edinburgh N.B.” (the inclusionof a preposition is an improvement over thedescription given in the mark). There was notelephone, but the concern did have a telegraphicaddress: “Castle Pottery, Prestonpans”. Ina

Whyte (later Mrs Davidson) reportedly recalledthat John Boyle had indeed come from theBelleek Pottery in Ireland. The tale is related ofanother pottery worker, Mrs Nelson, who had anovel way of being called home for her middaymeal. When lunch-time arrived, this was signalledby a teacup being placed in the window of herhouse, which faced onto the factory.

In 1913, John Boyle entered into a co-partneryagreement with Daniel Harrigan, of 33 HopeStreet, Glasgow, the address of D. Harrigan &Co, glass importers. The purpose was probably tosecure an injection of cash – it is difficult to seewhat else Harrigan had to offer – but thearrangement did not work out, and just a yearand a quarter later the co-partnery was dissolvedby a decree of the Court of Session. Notice wasgiven in The Scotsman, and also in the EdinburghGazette7. The petitioner was Daniel Harrigan,now described as a commission agent at the sameaddress as before, and the respondent was JohnBoyle, china manufacturer, Castle Pottery,Prestonpans. Not only was the partnershipthereby dissolved, but the whole estate and effectsof the Coral Porcelain Co was sequestrated. Thedeparture of Daniel Harrigan in 1915 after such ashort period of time must have been a blow toJohn Boyle, and it seems that Coral Porcelain didnot continue in production very long after that.

23

30

In 1917, his residence was listed in the ValuationRolls for the first time, at 1 Bath Place,Portobello, though no pottery affiliation is stated.In the following year, 1918, the [Castle] Pottery islisted under ‘occupier’ as “empty”, while under‘tenant’ there is just a blank. It was the end of theroad for the Coral Porcelain Co – but not forporcelain production in Prestonpans at thislocation, nor indeed of John Boyle’s involvement.

The Scottish Porcelain Co. Ltd.

After lying vacant and tenantless for two years,the Castle Pottery came back to life under thecontrol of the Scottish Porcelain Co Ltd. Itscertificate of incorporation under the CompaniesAct is dated 30th October 1919, and its principalobjective was made clear in a Memorandum ofAssociation of the same date: “To acquire andtake over as a going concern and carry on thebusiness of manufacturers of and dealers inporcelain, earthen, and similar wares, now orlately carried on by John Boyle at the CastlePottery, Prestonpans”. Three directors are listed:John Boyle, porcelain manufacturer, residing at 1Bath Place, Portobello; James N. Stewart, anEdinburgh solicitor; and Alexander G. Anderson,a fancy goods manufacturer in Edinburgh, withpremises at 3, 5, 6, 15, and 16 The Arcade,Princes Street, at 41 Leith Street, and works at 23Montgomery Street. A total of 5,000 £1 shareswere issued and allocated as follows: 1,000 toJohn Boyle (being the purchase price of moveablemachinery, implements, and stock, plus the acreor so of land where the factory stood), 1,000 toAlexander Anderson as the new player in thegame, and 1,500 (being the purchase price of thebuilding and fixed machinery therein) to a groupconsisting of George Smith, builder (375), thelawyers Cowan & Stewart acting as trustees (750,

divided equally between William Cowan andJames Stewart with 375 each), and Robert andJohn Scot, joiners (375, divided almost equallywith 188 and 187 respectively). This accountedfor 3,500 shares, the remaining 1,500 were notallocated. In terms of the people involved, it wasalmost as if the Coral Porcelain Co lived on.

By virtue of an agreement dated 22nd October1919, the new company purchased from JohnBoyle “the good will of the said business, withthe exclusive right to use the name of the ‘CastlePottery’, and all trade marks connectedtherewith”. In return, he agreed to act asmanager of the Pottery, and “to devote his wholetime to the interests and business of theCompany” for a minimum period of three years,“subject to the right of the Company to terminatethis engagement at any time in the event of hisservices not being satisfactory in the opinion ofthe Board of Directors”. (This may be an obliquereference to the failure of the Coral PorcelainCompany; and a question mark still hangs overthe reasons for his departure from Belleek andfrom Possilpark.) Boyle also gave an undertakingthat “he shall not directly or indirectly engage orbe interested in any similar business in anycapacity, and that in the event of his leaving theservices of the Company”, the same would apply“for the space of three years from the date ofleaving said service and within a radius of thirtymiles from Prestonpans”8.

Attached to this agreement is an inventorydetailing the accommodation and contents ofCastle Pottery at that time. This inventory wasreproduced in full in a study of the subject byJean Shirlaw in the Scottish Pottery HistoricalReview9. (Unfortunately, the title of the article,the author’s name, and the reference for the

24

inventory and associated documentation were allomitted from the published article; my thanks toMrs Shirlaw for supplying the latter.) Theaccommodation of the Pottery included thecasting rooms, the gilding and painting room(with 12 painters’ rests), the sagger house, thekiln department, the colour and enamel mill room(though the gold was dealt with in the gilding andpainting room, with 1 gold grinding slab and 1gilding wheel), the slip kiln room, and the makingroom. Besides the engine room, a lot ofmachinery was listed. Materials included whitelead, boracic acid, china clay, ground Cornishstone, cullet, raw feldspar, calcined feldspar,fireclay, terra cotta clay, and fritt. There was alsoa long list of sundries. In terms of the types ofware produced, there were some revealing entries.There were all of 600 engraved copper plates;

597 were of “crests, views, etc.” while the other 3were of “Thistle Pattern, for tea and dessertware”. The huge number suggests that some ifnot all of these copper plates were taken from thePossil Pottery when the production of Nautilusporcelain ceased. In terms of what was actuallybeing made, there were 23 boards of fettledporcelain, 15 wicker flower baskets (flowered),and 15 boards of terra cotta, all in the ‘green’state.

Items made by the Scottish Porcelain Co Ltd areeven rarer than items of Coral Porcelain; indeed,this author knows of no piece bearing such amark. The closest is a miniature vase in the shapeof a thistle, again of the heraldic ware type (seeFigure 31). It carries the mark SCOTCHPORCELAIN and a thistle (see Figure 32) which

25

31 32

I have speculated previously (in 1979) may be themark of the Scottish Porcelain Co. Ltd10. Thiswas put forward with a considerable degree ofcaution, and it was pointed out that the itembearing the mark “goes to great lengths topresent itself as a Scottish piece: it has beenmodelled in the shape of a thistle, the transfermark illustrates a thistle, and the name of theware is ‘Scotch Porcelain’ – is all this overtScottishness a put-on to deceive unwary Englishtourists?” (p.51). There certainly are pitfalls toavoid when going down this road, with productscarrying Scottish-sounding names actually beingmade in England, such as the Caledonia China ofGlasgow – except that the Glasgow association isthrough its retailer, with its maker doubtless inStaffordshire; likewise the Scotia Pottery, whichwas operated by Edward T. Bodley & Co inBurslem. Even so, I was perhaps being over-cautious, because my suggestion won quicksupport from Irene MacDonald, who ran anantique shop in Haddington. She knew of a finelattice-work basket in the Belleek style which hadbeen given to its owner by her aunt inPrestonpans who said that it had been made inthe porcelain factory there. The aunt also had atea-set from the same factory, the cups beingshaped like flowers and the sugar basin like athistle; the mark was “Scotch Porcelain”. IreneMacdonald also described a little Belleek-typevase with applied porcelain flowers, whichcarried the Scotch Porcelain plus thistle mark (asillustrated here). Such evidence led me toconclude: “ ‘Coral Porcelain’ and ‘ScotchPorcelain’ may simply be the names of similarproducts made by the same factory [CastlePottery] under different phases of management”(p.74). That was my feeling in 1981, and it is thesame but stronger now.

ConclusionWith porcelain being produced in Prestonpans foraround fourteen years, it is most surprising thatso little can be identified as such. One obviousexplanation for this odd state of affairs is that thegreat bulk of it was unmarked. A likely exampleof such an item is a cup and saucer ofundecorated porcelain with an off-white body(remember the 1911 description of Coralporcelain as “ivory” ware which could besupplied “plain”). The rim of the saucer has astriking ‘concertina’ effect (see Figure 33); thematching cup with its three-stemmed handle hasborrowed a Nautilus shape (see Figure 34),though while the Nautilus product was given aglossy glaze over a fine white body, the one fromPrestonpans had a matt glaze over a creamy body full of grit. The likelihood is that theunmarked cup and saucer are products of theCastle Pottery.

Another possible explanation for the dearth ofScottish Porcelain Co Ltd marked items is thatthey do exist, marked – but not with the mark oftheir maker, rather with that of their retailer. Acandidate is the porcelain bearing the brand-name‘Porcelle’. This was registered as a trade mark in1910 by William Ritchie & Sons Ltd ofEdinburgh, “fancy goods merchants.11 Pieceshave been recorded carrying the Porcelle nameplus a shield, with a helmet crest with visorclosed, containing the initials W.R. & S. (seeFigure 35). Little is given away regarding themaker, for the mark simply says “BritishManufacture”, but a case can certainly be madefor the possibility, even probability, of aPrestonpans provenance. The Post OfficeDirectories give William Ritchie & Sons Ltd at24, 26, 28, 30 and 32 Elder Street, Edinburgh,

26

manufacturing and wholesale stationers, andprinters and publishers of Christmas cards andcalendars, followed by the description ofrelevance here: “specialists in leather and fancygoods”. The Porcelle trade mark device is verysimilar to Ritchie’s company trade mark whichthey had registered seventeen years earlier in189712 though with some differences: the basicshape of the original shield is nearly the same butnot identical, and in place of the company’sinitials it bears three crosses, a crescent, and adiagonal bar (known as a ‘bend’, even though itis quite straight) inscribed with their telegraphicaddress ‘Reliable’. Although William Ritchie &Sons Ltd were basically stationers, their widerinterests are reflected in the term “fancy goods”contained in the two descriptions referred toabove, seemingly a reference to porcelain trinkets

27

33

34

35

carrying coats-of-arms, and so these Porcellegoods may well be Prestonpans products.

The Scottish Porcelain Co Ltd seems to haveoperated successfully at Castle Pottery for a fewyears, the key – as always when examiningporcelain production at Prestonpans – being JohnBoyle. The Company’s annual share capitalreports show that he continued to live at 1 BathPlace in Portobello until 1921, then nearby at 52Bath Street until 1923. After that date,uncertainty sets in. In 1924, his name disappearsfrom the list of directors, his shares in theCompany having been redistributed among theother share-holders on 21st May of that year.That seems to have been the end of John Boyle’sconnection with the porcelain industry ofPrestonpans, and the days of the industry itselfwere numbered. The Company appears to havecontinued in operation in 1925, though it faltered badly in 1926. A letter from its secretary, James Stewart, to the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies at Parliament Square,Edinburgh, dated 11th October of that year,contained the following bleak statement: “ThisCompany is being continued on the Register only until the heritable property can disposed of,when the Company will be wound up”. Thissounds very much as if production had ceased,and the situation is reflected in the ValuationRolls. The Pottery (still unnamed) continued atRedburn Road under the proprietorship of theScottish Porcelain Co Ltd, its administrativeaddress being 13 Castle Street, Edinburgh, the chambersof Cowan & Stewart WS. There is no telling how active it was, if at all, in its later years. In1929, the ‘occupier’ column states “empty”,and in 1931 that changed to “ruinous”. By

1933, both the Company name and the propertyitself had been expunged from the Rolls.

The closing phase of the Scottish Porcelain CoLtd makes rather sad reading. The directors andshare-holders continued as before in the annualshare capital reports until the end of 1932, whenin place of the annual report, an extraordinarygeneral meting of the Company passed a specialresolution resolving that it be wound upvoluntarily. This was easier said than done,because there were no funds out of which theexpenses of going through the formal procedureof winding up could be met, and so on 4thSeptember 1937 another application was made tothe Companies Registration Office in Edinburghto have the Company statutorily removed fromthe Register. This was submitted by JamesStewart, its former secretary and now itsliquidator, who added rather poignantly: “I may say that at the statutory meeting heldfollowing upon the Company going intoliquidation, I was the only person present, and Ihave no doubt that this would happen if a finalmeeting was convened”. Notice of the Companybeing struck off the Register and dissolvedappeared in the Edinburgh Gazette of 22ndOctober 1937, confirmation being given in thecertificate issued by the Registrar dated 25thJanuary 1938.

The standard work Scottish Pottery by ArnoldFleming does have a section on Castle Pottery,but with a huge omission. He places the buildingof the original factory rather too early (viz at theend of the 19th century), though he is correctabout the pre-porcelain phase: “It was erected bya man Clunas, who, after a brief period, wascompelled to give up the venture and close theplace” (pp. 167 & 168). He then moves straight

28

29

on to the Scottish Porcelain Co Ltd asthe current operators, which they were in1923, without the slightest mention ofthe Coral Porcelain Co – which is whythis writer felt compelled to record itwhen a marked piece came to light (seeCruickshank 1974). The rest of hisaccount is mostly sound: “The works areunder the management of Mr Boyle, whoat one time was in the Belleek Pottery atFermanagh, in Ireland. The potteryproduces small articles in lustreporcelain, with the coats-of-arms ofvarious Scottish towns painted on them[actually printed on in black, with thecolours painted in], and also a largevariety of fancy ornaments, among whichmay be noted wicker baskets beautifullyand delicately made of woven clay in themanner of the original Belleek ware”(p.168).

It is certainly to be hoped that morespecimens will come to light which canbe positively attributed to the CastlePottery, better still if they bear one ofthat factory’s marks. It is regrettable thatno map is known to exist which showsthe precise location of the Pottery andthe layout of its work buildings, but weare fortunate in having a photograph ofCastle Pottery, which shows three kilns(possibly there was another) and a coupleof chimneys (see Figure 36). The twopeople standing in front are ColinCampbell senior and junior, who livednearby; young Colin was aged about sixat the time, and as he was born in 1920that dates the photograph to around

36

30

Figure 37 A simplified chartsuggesting the pedigree ofPrestonpans porcelain by meansof makers’ marks.

1926, during the period when the Castle Potterywas operated by the Scottish Porcelain Co Ltd Allthese strands of evidence combine to tell thestory, partially at least, of the Castle Pottery andits wider associations (see Figure 37), and tofirmly establish Prestonpans as a producer ofporcelain among its many other ceramicproducts.

AcknowledgementsThanks are due to the following for allowing thereproduction of works in their care:

Figure 3, National Archives of Scotland; Figures 4and 5, National Library of Scotland; Figure 13,Ulster Museum; Figure 15, Victor MurphyMemorial Trust; Figures 17 and 30, John Burnssenior; Figures 21, 25, 28, National Museums ofScotland; and Figure 35, Nan Campbell.

Gratitude is also expressed to the following fortheir kind assistance: Alex and Sylvia McKenzie,John Fortune, John Burns senior, KimMawhinney of the Ulster Museum, DavidReynolds of the Belleek Collectors’ InternationalSociety, and David Paton of the Scottish PotterySociety. Special thanks to Rita Stewart for hertyping of the manuscript.

BibliographyCruickshank, Graeme 1978 ‘Coral Porcelain’ in

Scottish Pottery Society Archive News No. 3,p. 10.

Cruickshank, Graeme 1979 ‘More on the CoralPorcelain of Prestonpans’ in Scottish PotterySociety Archive News No. 4, p. 51.

Cunningham, John 1992 The Story of Belleek(Belleek).

Fleming, Arnold 1923 Scottish Pottery (Glasgow).

Jewitt, Llewellynn 1878, 2nd edn. 1883 TheCeramic Art of Great Britain (London).

Langham, Marion 1993 Belleek Irish Porcelain:an illustrated guide (London).

Mawhinney, Kim 2005 Marks of Distinction: theBelleek Collection at the Ulster Museum(National Museums & Galleries of NorthernIreland, Belfast).

McCrum, Sean n.d. The Belleek Pottery (HMSO,Ulster Museum, Belfast).

MacDonald, Irene 1981 ‘The Scotch Porcelain ofPrestonpans’ in Scottish Pottery HistoricalReview No. 6, p. 74.

Quail, Gerard 1983 Nautilus Porcelain (GlasgowDistrict Libraries).

Rees, Diana and Cawley, Marjorie 1970 APictorial Encyclopaedia of Goss China(Newport, Mon.).

Smith, Gerald 1979 Belleek Porcelain andPottery: a handbook for the collector (St PeterPort, Guernsey).

Tulloch, Alister 1989, 2nd edn. 1991 Prestonpansin old postcards (Zaltbommel, Netherlands).

Sources of IllustrationsFigure 1 Drawing of the Belleek Pottery,

produced by Butterworth & Heath, publishedin Jewitt’s Ceramic Art of Great Britain, Vol. II, p. 487; 2nd edn., p. 601. With caption,cover of McCrum’s Belleek Pottery.

Figure 2 Advertisement for Nautilus Porcelain,Pottery Gazette, 1st May 1903.

31

Figure 3 ‘Articles of Association, Clunas Tilesand Mosaics Ltd.’, 1906: National Archives ofScotland, BT2/6230/4.

Figure 6 Old photograph of Preston Tower, fromTulloch’s Prestonpans in old picture postcards,No. 4.

Figure 11 Photograph of Goss nautilus/coralfrom Rees and Cawley’s PictorialEncyclopaedia of Goss China, p.28 upper.

Figure 12 Drawing of a Belleek echinus shellsupported on stalks of coral from Jewitt’sCeramic Art of Great Britain, Vol.II, p. 489,Figure 727; 2nd edn., p. 602, Figure 1725, perthe Art Journal.

Figure 14 Photograph of Belleek nautilus/coraland buckie from Langham’s Belleek IrishPorcelain published by the Quiller Press Ltd,London.

Figure 35 Photograph of Castle Pottery, circa1926, from Nan Campbell, widow of ColinCampbell junior, the young boy in thephotograph.

References1 For further details, see Cruickshank, Graeme

2007 Prestonpans Pottery (Prestonpans)

2 National Archives of Scotland, BT2/6230.

3 loc.cit., copy of Feu Charter held in theRegister of Sasines for the County ofHaddington, RS100/206; signed 12th April1907.

4 No.189,577 registered on 31st August 1895(see Trade Marks Journal, 25th September1895, p.827).

5 Jewitt, Ceramic Art: 1st edn., Vol.II, p.490,Figure 728 no.2; 2nd edn., p.604, Figure1728.

6 For a good photograph of such wares, seethe Pottery Gazette, 1st July 1907, p.803.

7 Inserted in The Scotsman, 20th February1915, p.1, and the Edinburgh Gazette, 23rdFebruary 1915, p. 331 (the latter noted byHenry Kelly in the Scottish Pottery SocietyBulletin No. 21 [n.d.], p.10).

8 National Archives of Scotland, BT2/10708.

9 Scottish Pottery Historical Review No.8,1984, pp. 63–66.

10 See Cruickshank 1979.

11 No. 325,923 registered on 6th August 1919(see Trade Marks Journal for 1910, p. 1521;also noted and illustrated under ‘New TradeMarks’ in the Pottery Gazette, October1910, p. 1137).

12 No.173,833 registered on 11th July 1893(see Trade Marks Journal for 1893, p. 803).

32