2O 



appear that the Chinese carried on their ceramic trade almost entirely as an art, and not as a 

 means merely to make money; it would seem that the manufacturers vied with each other in 

 the production of the various shapes of their works, as well as the colours they required, the 

 ingredients used, as well as the mixing them, probably being a secret. 



We may suppose each new design originated at one of the manufactories, and after a 

 sufficient quantity of a pattern (probably one set) was completed, no more were made, and 

 the mould would be destroyed on purpose to preserve its rarity. Even in a set of ware, one 

 designer, or more, would partly colour one piece, and then each would do the same work on 

 another, to make them match to a certain extent, instead, however, of one being a copy of the other, 

 there is generally some difference which makes each piece an original work of art. How 

 different things seem to be done in the present day ; probably if a ton of any recent work 

 was required, it could and would be produced ; but, so far as original taste is concerned, what 

 must we think? 



There is the greatest difference in what should be considered articles for use, and those 

 for ornament; for instance, if you have one only, or a pair of objects of very beautifully executed 

 design, in texture as well as quality, even if on a plate or plates, these should be used as orna- 

 ments; but if you have a set, this should be used, certainly as decoration at a festive board only, 

 but not as ornaments collectively. The very repetition of a similar pattern, though on an article 

 of different shape, spoils the effect, and points out to an educated eye that if made as a 

 dinner or tea set, it should be used as such and such only, however valuable each article may 

 be, and however fine the production of each one may be ; one specimen shows, or two at most 



