Sample text
A LITHOGRAPHIC HOUSE: DAY & SON
'... It was undertaken, we believe, expressly for the purpose of being reproduced in the way in which it is now before the public ... one can almost fancy the original painting is again before us -- allowing for difference in size and the rich impasto of the artist's pigments. Considering the difficulties which surround chromolithography when engaged on such a subject, the result is really astonishing.'
-- From a review of a colour lithograph after 'The Marriage of Their Royal Highnesses The Prince of Wales and the Princess Alexandra of Denmark in St. George's Chapel, Windsor', painted in 1864 by G. H. Thomas and reproduced by Day and Son Ltd.
The firm of William Day, later Day and Son, was one of the largest and most prominent lithographic firms of the second third of the nineteenth century. The examination of the firm and its work which follows sheds some light on how they dealt with the printing of a wide range of material and in so doing provides an insight into the lithographic trade in general. Day and Son occupied an exceptional position amongst both lithographers and publishers in Britain. Although their origins are unclear, the firm attracted many talented draughtsmen and grew quite large lithographing a great volume of high quality work. They also began to publish many of the books which contained their own plates -- a very unusual activity for lithographers in England at that time; indeed, the art of lithography in colours was raised to new heights by some of the magnificent books they published. Day and Son held this unique position as both printers and publishers of many fine quality books with colour plates for more than twenty years, and their decline during the mid 1860s is perhaps indicative of the increased mechanisation and other changes that were occurring in the trade during that time. Some specific problems and details of production that engaged one particular lithographic house will be investigated in this work.
The discussion of the history and practices of the firm that follows is sketchy and incomplete in many ways. Because of their prominent position in the trade and the large quantity of work they produced during these years, there seems to be much more material regarding Day and Son than many other houses producing colour lithographic work at this time. This material, however, consists primarily of only isolated stories and details and passing references to the firm; there is less material available about other lithographic houses which unfortunately makes a comparison of Day and Son with similar establishments difficult. Nevertheless it is very surprising that there has not been a more thorough study of the firm's history or works. Because of their size and position, the firm must have exerted a strong influence on lithographic production. A survey of some of the details of the firm should therefore prove especially illuminating and valuable, although the following examination of Day and Son probably reveals certain characteristics that were unusual rather than common in the trade.
The early history of the firm is rather obscure. It appears to have begun with William Day, senior, whose earliest imprint has been found on a lithograph dated 1824. William Day's imprint appears again in 1825, and in this year bears an address of 59 Great Queen Street. There seems to have been another lithographic printer named William Day listed in the commercial directories between 1817 and 1837, but no other trace of him has yet come to light. An article in the Journal of the Society of Arts of 1891 about lithography, records that William Day was introduced 'to the art by chance, having a lithographic press left upon his premises that he thought he might utilise'. Whether or not this was true, Day's earliest imprint describes him as 'Successor to Rowney Forster', the firm of artists' colourmen originally founded in 1785; this, however, may only indicate that he acquired the use of their name and perhaps their goodwill. By 1829, the address of William Day was given as 17 Gate Street, Lincoln's Inn Fields, and although it undoubtedly expanded through the years, it remained in Gate Street until it was taken over by Vincent Brooks in 1867. From some time in or before 1833, the firm was frequently referred to as 'Day and Haghe' due to the popularity of the work that Louis Haghe, the Belgian draughtsman and watercolourist, did for William Day. It is not certain whether this was an official nomenclature or not. However, it would appear that the firm had already become quite prosperous under the leadership of William Day because when he died in 1845, he was able to leave 30,000 pounds to his son, William junior, who carried on the business. The firm's name changed to Day and Son as a consequence of this event, and remained as such until it ran into financial difficulties in 1867 and was acquired by Vincent Brooks. Brooks himself had set up as a printer around 1843, but apparently did not produce any lithographs until the early 1850s. He bought the name and goodwill of Day and Son in 1867 but probably not much of the large quantity of Day's property which was sold by Hodgson at seven different auctions between December l865 and November 1873. Brooks's firm then became known as 'Vincent Brooks, Day and Son' and was continued after his death in 1885 by his son, F. Vincent Brooks.
There seems to be very little evidence concerning how the firm was run. In particular, information about the daily management and production of Day and Son is scarce; there are few details of the exact size of the establishment such as the number of employees, the kind and quantity of steam presses and other materials they used, and their rate of production of prints during any given time. As far as technical education for printers, and division of labour were concerned, conditions in the firm were presumably not unlike those in other firms at the time; their unusually large size must be kept in mind in relation to these issues. Before presenting a summary of the evidence that has been found about the daily affairs of Day and Son, however, it will be helpful to establish some idea of the firm's stature, again, through evidence of contemporary comment; from the 1850s there is no doubt that Day and Son were highly regarded in their profession by many parties. This is a useful background against which the information about the firm's daily work can be examined, and can perhaps provide at least a rough framework for future comparisons of Day and Son and other, mostly smaller firms. The firm of William Day, and later Day and Son, achieved a special prominence in the lithographic trade in England. Although this is difficult to assess in relation to other firms doing lithographic work during this period, from 1824 to 1867, there are many indications that Day and Son had become in some ways the most successful and at least one of the most progressive firms of its kind, especially during the later decades of its existence. There are many references to the firm's prominence in contemporary sources. William Simpson (1823-1899), who joined Day and Son as a lithographic draughtsman in 1851 and continued to work for them until their liquidation in 1867, clearly expresses his opinion of their position in his autobiography. He wrote that when he began to look for employment in London in 1851:
'... I knew that Day and Son were the principle lithographers in London, more particularly for artistic work, so I settled to apply to them first.'
After Simpson got a job with Day and Son and began to learn how the firm was organised, he wrote, 'In Day's everything was so different, and theirs being the first house in London for pictorial lithography, a high style was the rule.'(13) Simpson also explains that Day and Son created a special fund for the artists connected with the firm to draw from as they pleased:
'... the artists drew money as they required it -- it was like a bank to us. Some of us had a balance to our names, and when my Indian work was finished, I had a large balance. The place was so well-established, so good and respectable, we all considered it as safe as the Bank of England.'
There are also numerous indications of the firm's stature in contemporary literature such as the Art Journal and the Printing Times and Lithographer during these years. For example, in 1856, following an enthusiastic review in the Art Journal of some recently-issued prints by Day and Son, there is this conclusion:
'Day and Son still maintains the high position it has long held as the producers of artistic work of the best character; many of them got up at a vast expense, entailing a large amount of capital, and manifesting much energy and enterprise on the part of the publishers.'
Another indication of both the good quality work the firm produced, and their position in relation to other firms in this respect, is the fact that they were awarded one of only four 'prize medals' for their display of colour lithography at the Great Exhibition of 1851. The other three medals were given to M.N. Hanhart, Hullmandel Walton, and Owen Jones, and an honourable mention was awarded to T. Underwood. Several of the prints Day and Son exhibited were listed in the official catalogue of the exhibition. These included:
Specimens of tinted and coloured lithography, or chromo-lithography.
The Destruction of Jerusalem, and other works, by Louis Haghe.
Tinted views of the Britannia bridge, by George Hawkins.
A subject after Chalon, by Edmund Walker.
Plates by Francis Bedford, after drawings by Matthew Digby Wyatt, being illustrations of metalwork, etc.
The Reports By the Juries about the exhibitions of these colour printers were enthusiastic but vague, and provide little additional information about the displays.
William Day also enjoyed the patronage of the Royal Family as 'Lithographers to the King'. In 1837, the firm of Day and Haghe, as it was then sometimes called, apparently had requested a grant of the Royal Warrant from the newly enthroned Queen Victoria, and were in the same year granted the Warrant as 'Lithographers to Queen Victoria and to the Queen Dowager, Queen Adelaide'. This was confirmed in a letter from St. James's Palace on 29 July 1837:
'Gentlemen,
I beg to acknowledge the Receipt of your Petition of the 11th June and am honoured with the Queen's Command to acquaint you that Her Majesty has graciously signified her consent that you should be appointed lithographers to Her Majesty's Household.
I have the honour to be
Your obed. humblest
H. Wheatley'
Royal Warrants of Appointment were granted at discretion to those firms who supplied goods or services over a length of time to the Sovereign or to other members of the Royal Family. Application for the grant was made by the firm who desired it to the appropriate department of the Royal Household. Day and Haghe, and later Day and Son, were not the only lithographers to enjoy this honour between 1824 and 1867, however, as several other firms also received a Royal Warrant during these years.
Another indication of the interest taken by the Royal Family in lithography, and particularly the firm of Day and Son, was that in 1856 the Prince of Wales and Prince Alfred paid a visit to the works in Gate Street. The firm's premises had been enlarged around this time, and the visit probably marked the completion of the new work. The visit naturally received public attention, and a wood-engraving of the event appeared in the Illustrated London News shortly afterwards.
Another well-known person who dealt with the firm on at least two occasions, was Florence Nightingale. There is a collection of her correspondence in the British Library, which contains one letter from her to Day and Son, and one from the firm to her.(20) The letter from the firm to Miss Nightingale is dated 7 January 1863 and is written on stationery with the firm's letterhead. It reads:
'Day and Son Lithographers and Chromolithographers to the Queen
Steel and Copper Plate and Letter Press Printers, Gate Street, Lincolns Inn Fields -- Messrs. Day and Son present compliments to Miss Nightingale and beg to thank her for the cheque for Mr. Bedford's Photographs of the Prince of Wales tour. Messrs. Day and Son will be happy to send Miss Nightingale duplicates of the Scutari views and also to send the entire series for her inspection which they will do on Saturday, and should Miss Nightingale select any single photograph Messrs. Day and Son will gladly make an exception.'
There is no mention of lithography in either of the letters, and no further details are given concerning the subject of the correspondence. Bedford's photographs must refer to those that illustrated a book published by Day and Son in 1863 in four volumes, entitled The Holy Land, Forty-Eight Photographic Pictures made by Francis Bedford for HRH The Prince of Wales during the Tour in the East, in which, by Command, He Accompanied His Royal Highness. Miss Nightingale's letter to Day and Son, dated 6 February 1863, seems to deal with the same topic.
Although it is clear that Day and Son held a prominent position in their profession from at least the 1850s, there seems to be very little information available concerning exactly how the firm was run. There is evidence, however, that Day and Son employed quite a few draughtsmen as early as the mid 1830s and 1840s. Louis Haghe (1806-85), highly regarded as both an original and reproductive lithographer, worked for William Day, later Day and Son, from around 1825 until 1852 at which time he decided to devote himself to painting. He did much work in tinted lithography for the firm especially during the 1830s and 1840s, and due to his talent and senior position may have been in charge of other draughtsmen during these years, many of whom seem to have worked exclusively for Day and Son. These included his younger brother Charles Haghe, George Hawkins, Edmund Walker, Robert Carrick, Andrew and Thomas Picken, and Edmund Morin. The names of these men are found on many of the firm's prints during this period. Since Haghe's work was well-thought of, his association with the firm during its early years probably contributed to Day and Son's growth and success.
William Simpson, who began to work for Day and Son as a lithographic draughtsman in 1851, a year before Haghe left the firm, provides a few details about other draughtsmen who worked for the firm in his autobiography. He explains that Day and Son employed many specialist draughtsmen for lithographic work and he names several of them: T.G. Dutton who drew ships, Lynch and Vinter who drew portraits, Needham who did trees and landscapes, and William Butler who did architectural subjects. Only a firm of substantial means could afford to employ a selective team such as this, and Day and Son were undoubtedly among the few lithographic firms at the time who did have such means. In relation to the work of these lithographic artists, Simpson stresses that when he joined Day and Son in 1851, lithography 'was art and good art'. He explains that at that time, a good deal of pictorial work such as book illustrations, pictures of new churches and public buildings, portraits of well-known personalities, and illustrations of public events were reproduced as lithographic prints after drawings by competent artists such as the ones noted above. He goes on to say that such subjects in later years were reproduced as wood-engravings, and photographs and they often appeared in illustrated papers rather than in volumes of lithographs. Simpson also notes that there existed at this time, a tendency among lithographers to become artists or painters. This was something, he adds, that did not often later happen to engravers of copper or wood. He explains in his autobiography published in 1903:
'The startling thing is that it -- pictorial work -- was a class of work which came into existence, lasted only about a quarter of a century, and has entirely vanished. Lithography is still carried on, but it is limited to such things as an auctioneer's view of an estate, or a window show-bill, few of which show any pictorial qualities. When I came to London it was art and good art. This will be understood when I mention the tendency among lithographers -- such as Louis Haghe, Harding, Carrick, and many others -- to become artists or painters, just as many of the draftsmen on wood now do. As a rule engravers, whether on copper, steel or wood never became artists, or I should say painters, because the work was mechanical, and merely copying. But in lithography, at least in the class of subjects I had to do, we had to work out rough material into pictures, and it is the same with drawing on wood. If a man has any stuff in him it finds development. It is from work like this that such artists as Sir John Gilbert, George Thomas, Herkomer, and Gregory, as well as others, have started.'
Simpson does not discuss any of the circumstances surrounding this decline in the popularity of lithography for pictorial work either generally in the trade, or in the firm of Day and Son.
Simpson also provides some information about the salary paid by Day and Son for lithographic draughtsmen. When he joined the firm in 1851 as a draughtsman with some experience from a previous job, he received two pounds a week. Simpson records that within a few months this was doubled, and ultimately it was raised to eight pounds a week. Of course, Simpson's work for the firm soon became very popular so it is probable that he commanded a higher salary than other draughtsmen due to this. Information about the salaries for apprentices paid by Day and Son can be found in an account of the work of another employee of the firm, Frederick Goulding. In 1857, Goulding was apprenticed to Day and Son as a copperplate and lithographic printer, and his pay during the first year of this seven year period was six shillings a week; during the second, third, and fourth years, he received one half of his earnings (not specified), and during the remaining three years of the apprenticeship he received two-thirds of his earnings (again not specified). It is not known how this compared to the wages received by apprentices working at other firms during these years.
Some material about the physical details of the firm's premises has been found although many of the most important questions concerning it remain unanswered. A colourful description of a tour through the premises can be found in an article written in 1852 by Augustus Sala, which appeared in Household Words. The article, entitled Stone Pictures, includes some comment on the events surrounding Senefelder's discovery, an account of the process itself, and a description of the work and premises of one lithographic house -- almost certainly that of Day and Son. Sala's account is valuable because it is one of the few contemporary descriptions of the place, or indeed of the premises of any lithographic house during the nineteenth century. These passages have been excerpted, in parts, from his longer article about lithography:
'... Let us step into Great Queen Street, Lincoln's Inn Fields, and have a peep at a large lithographic establishment. Up a court, shady and secluded ... is the door leading to the workrooms of the establishment we want. Staggering before us in the sunshine, is an individual of Herculean build, bearing on his back a ponderous stone, the weight of which is sufficient to crush three ordinary men, but which only makes him bend and sway a little as he turns the corners. A swing-door admits us into a large vestibule, cumbered throughout with stones of all sorts and sizes. These are the raw material for stone pictures, just arrived from the banks of the Danube, from Turkey, and from India, where, in the Deccan, lithographic stones are plentiful. The Atlas, bearing the big stone on his back, brings us to the grinding room. Here, over large troughs of water, the stones are ground, grained, and polished for the different styles of lithography in which the drawings they are to bear on their surface are to be executed. They have been sawn to a proper size and thickness abroad, and are now tested with a straight-edge, to secure their being unerringly level. For graining and polishing, two stones are placed face to face, and water, mixed with silver-sand, being sprinkled between them, are rubbed together -- the upper stone being moved in a circular direction -- till a proper grain is given ... we ascend, through room after room, where busy presses are at work. We are struck by the prodigious number of stones, not only being printed from, but which are piled in every corner, and ranged on shelves and in racks from floor up to ceiling ... The studio is a large lofty room, with plenty of windows; for you want no concentrated rays of light here, as is required for painting pictures, but plenty of light everywhere. All round the walls are ranged stout wooden tables on which, generally supported in slanting positions, are the stones. Here are a score of artists occupied in the production of almost every variety of stone picture ... When the chalk-drawing is quite finished, the stone is placed in the cradle of a "lift", and sent down stairs to a room on the level with the grinding and graining department to be etched. It is laid in an oblong trough; and nitric acid, very much diluted, is poured over it. The drawing is then carefully washed with rain-water, and is now ready for "gumming in" and "rolling up"; and is, for that purpose, carried to the press-room. Three stories of the establishment I have endeavoured to describe are devoted to presswork, and may hold, perhaps, twenty presses each. The presses differ from ordinary printing-presses; insomuch as a scraper, a thin piece of hard wood, bevelled off at the edges, scrapes over the whole surface of the stone plate as it passes beneath the lever; thus giving a double pressure ...' |
|
|
