THE LIBRARY OF THE

UNIVERSITY OF

NORTH CAROLINA

AT CHAPEL HILL

THE COLLECTION OF
NORTH CAROLINIANA

C705

E12

4-6 & index

1978-80

UNIVERSITY OF N.C. AT CHAPEL HILL

00034012229

FOR USE ONLY IN
40RTH CAROLINA COLLEC

EARLY SOUTHER1
DECORATIVE ARTS

November, 1978

Volume IV, Number 2

The Museum of Early Southern

Decorative Arts

* #

MESDA ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS

Benefactor *

Patron $500 and up

Sustaining $200 to $499

Contributing $100 to $199

Corporate or Foundation $100 and up

Active $ 25 to $ 99

Joint $ 20

Individual $ 15***

* Persons who contribute valuable antiquities are considered Benefactors of
MESDA. Once named a Benefactor, a person remains such for life and
enjoys all the privileges of a Member of MESDA.

**A contribution of $100.00 or more entitles the member to bring guests to
the museum free of charge.

***Non-profit Institutions may subscribe to the Journal only, receiving two
issues per annum at the rate of $5.00.

Overseas members please add $5.00 for airmail postage.

PRIVILEGES

Members of the Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts receive
the Journal twice yearly in May and November. Other privileges include
advance notification of the classes and programs and lectures offered by the
Museum, an Annual Member's Weekend with reports from the MESDA
Research staff, a 10% discount on bookstore purchases, and free admission
to the Museum.

The Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts is owned and operated by Old Salem,
Inc., the non-profit corporation that is responsible for the restoration and operation of
Old Salem, Moravian Congregation Town founded in 1766. MESDA is an educational
institution with the established purpose of collecting, preserving, documenting and
researching representative examples of southern decorative arts and craftsmanship for
the period 1600s to 1820. The Museum exhibits its collection for public interest and study.

For further information please write to MESDA, Drawer F. Salem Station, Winston-
Salem, North Carolina 27108. Telephone (919) 722-6148.

JOURNAL

of

EARLY SOUTHERN
DECORATIVE ARTS

November, 1978

Volume IV, Number 2

Published twice yearly in

May and November by

The Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts

EDITORIAL COMMITTEE

Dorothy Welker, Chairman
Frances Griffin
Bradford Rauschenberg

Copyright© 1978 Old Salem, Inc.
Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27108

Printed by Hall Printing Company
High Point, North Carolina

Contents

William Little,

Cabinetmaker of North Carolina

Frank L. Horton

William John Coffee,

Sculptor-Painter — His Southern Experience 26

Bradford L. Rauschenberg

Henry Benbridge:

Portraits in Small from Norfolk 5 1

Carolyn J. Weekley

Donations to MESDA, April 1977 to October 1978 65

Gen Hornngton

Rockingham

NORTH
\ CAROLINA

\
\

SOUTH

CAROLINA

\

Figure 1. Map locating Sneedsborough, William Little's first borne, and
the Jones Creek area, his second home, together with other locations
where he is known to have had patrons for his cabinet shop.

William Little, Cabinetmaker of J\[orth Carolina

Frank L. Horton

Thomas ais {says} you have some of the nisest
furneter in your House ever he did see.

The furniture made by William Little in the lower pied-
mont of North Carolina presents a pure English tradition of
design and construction not readily found in areas so far from
the coastal centers of cabinetmaking to the east. While English
design characteristics can be seen elsewhere in the piedmont,
they are usually mixed with German traits handed down from
the middle Atlantic states by immigration through the Valley
of Virginia. William Little did not follow the tide of im-
migration from Pennsylvania, but rather moved inland from
the coast, and brought his interpretation of his north England
background, tempered with his experiences in Norfolk and
Charleston on the eastern seaboard.

William Little was the fourth child of John and Jane
(Phillips) Little of Carlisle, northwest England. It is probable,
knowing his birth date of May 10, 1775,' that he was ap-
prenticed during his fourteenth year, 1789, to a Mr. Graham
of "Bighead,"2 and that he left his apprenticeship upon reaching
his majority on May 10, 1796. It is unknown where he was
employed first as a journeyman cabinetmaker. He may have
remained with Mr. Graham, but he may have worked at
Cargo, a small town just north of Carlisle and just below the
Scottish border, as hinted in a letter from his brother-in-law
many years later.3

It is uncertain what conditions brought about the im-
migration of William Little to America. He bade farewell
to his brother John and sailed from Shields, across England
from Carlisle, in late July, 1798." For nine pounds William
had purchased steerage passage on the Europe, bound for
Norfolk, Virginia.5

There must have been delays in the sailing around the
coast of England. The Norfolk Herald, October 6, 1798, re-
ported "The brig Europe, capt. Kennan, arrived this morning
in 7 weeks from Newcastle Upon-Tyne; the [news]papers
brought by her are only to 1st August." The same newspaper
reported, on November 22nd, that the Europe had cleared
the Norfolk port for Jamaica, presumably leaving William
Little working as a journeyman cabinetmaker in a shop in
that Virginia port.

The personal Bible of Judith Steel Stanback Dockery, a
granddaughter of William Little, has the notation: "William
Little landed in Charleston, S. C, Tuesday, May 14, 1799."
The date is interesting in being so specific. Two Charleston
newspapers, the South-Carolina Gazette and the City Gazette
and Daily Advertiser, published the next day, report only one
vessel as arriving from Norfolk on May 14th, the schooner
Sally, Captain Drummon, five days out of Norfolk.

Little must have left Norfolk without a definite job offer
in Charleston. The first letter known to have been received in
that city was addressed to "Mr. William Little, Cabinetmaker /
Charlestown South Carolina America / to be put into the
South Carolina Coffee House."6 Employment was soon found,
however, in the shop of John Watson, cabinetmaker and uphol-
sterer, in King Street, where he received a letter in care of
this artisan/

Watson apparently ran an extensive shop at 21 King
Street. An earlier advertisement indicates that he kept a stock
on hand of "Dining Tables, Card do.; Breakfast do.; Secretary
and [with] Wardrobe; Wardrobes and Secretaries; Bason
Stands; Chests of Drawers; a few dozen of handsome Drawing
and Chamber Room Chairs and Sofas," and that he would
make up "Mattrasses, Curtains, Venetian Blinds, Carpets, Pa-
vilions" on the shortest notice. He also carried "a handsome
Assortment of plain Paper Hangings, with handsome Borders
to suit," with "Papering done in a neat manner."' Working
experiences in both Norfolk and Charleston were probably of

great value to journeyman William Little, especially in teaching
him the ways of business in America as compared with his
earlier life in north England.

Little's stay in Charleston was for only a few months, for
he wrote his cousin, William Gillesby of Charleston, from
some unknown place on January 31, 1800, and Gillesby an-
swered, in April of that year, addressing Little in Sneedsborough,
North Carolina.' (Fig. 1).

William kept his kin in England well informed of his
planned moves, this time to the new town of Sneedsborough,
in Anson County, a town planned to be at the headwaters of
navigation of the Pee Dee River to the Atlantic at Georgetown.
Those plans were not realized. A lone crumbling chimney and
a few grave markers now mark the site of this once thriving
community.

That William Little prospered in Sneedsborough there
can be no doubt. The furniture he made survives to tell us
that he was a competent cabinetmaker, well versed in the
latest styles, and willing to accommodate his customers with
furniture to suit their tastes and pocketbook. While all of his
attributable furniture is of the same Federal style, it varies in
decoration to indicate a wide range of prices charged. His
construction methods are consistently good. His dovetailing,
blocking, and joining are consistent enough to indicate that
he had a tight control over his shop's production if, in-
deed, there were other workmen involved. Unfortunately,
Anson County court records of this period are missing; we
have no recorded evidence of apprentices Little might have
trained.

It is apparent that William Little came to America with
some financial backing, for in the few months that he spent
on the coast he could not, as a journeyman cabinetmaker, have
accumulated any wealth. And yet we know that he arrived in
Sneedsborough with a black slave, whom he had purchased in
Charleston.10 It is presumed that he also arrived with a full
chest of tools and enough money to set up shop, probably in
rented quarters. His first purchase of land in Sneedsborough was
for $140 cash, January 23, 1802, for lots 69, 70, 71, and
72, bought from William Johnson, and bound by West,
Market, and Meeting Streets." This was the location of his
home and probably his shop. He did not purchase other lots
until 1812."

The earliest documentary evidence of his production of
furniture is a bill to Robert Troy, November 29, 1802, a
copy of which Little kept,' for

1 Chest of Drawes [£]10. 0.0

2 half round Dining Tables 9. 0.0
Jointing 2 tables to Ditto 0.10.0
1 Chamber Table 6. 0.0

Little's trade extended over a wide area but was con-
centrated along the Pee Dee River. We know of a secretary
with bookcase ( Fig. 7 ) purchased by Josiah J. Evans, an
attorney-at-law in Society Hill, South Carolina. His trade with
Robert J. Steele of Cheraw, South Carolina, is documented in
an interesting letter, which reflects on the methods of payment
of accounts during the early nineteenth century piedmont:

Sir Janr 25th 1803

I have sent by the bearer Joseph Tarburton 8 Bags
of Cotten I wish to send you as much cotten and
flower as will pay off the Charlestown debt

Wday I have sent you Some plank youl Measure
it and give me Cr[edit] for What you think it is
worth youl send by the bearer J. Tarburton the fur-
nature and Enquire who hath any of the Jamica bread
[breed] of Hogs and send me a Sow pig or a Boare
or both. . . .

Ah Lad they tell me you have got a Letter fra England
What sa they, are they Weal and What is the news.

II be down in a few Weeks and you can tell me the news

R. J. Steele'4

William married Robert J. Steele's daughter Elizabeth on
December 18, 1806.'s A hint of the home they made in
Sneedsborough is reflected in a letter to William from his
brother George, in which he noted that he had received a
letter from their brother Thomas, recently immigrated to
America, "when he landed at Charlestown. . . . Thomas ais
[says] you have some of the nisest furneter in your House
ever he did see."'6

We do not know how long William Little continued in
the cabinetmaking business. There is perhaps an indication
of his growing interest in agriculture as early as 1808, when
he made a trip to Kentucky, perhaps to apprise himself of
the conditions there for starting a farm. More definite word
of this agricultural interest is expressed in late 1815, when
brother Thomas wrote brother George that William was
thinking of becoming a farmer. William continued, however,
to receive letters at Sneedsborough, but a letter from George
in early 1819 congratulates him on his "very good crop last
year," and for Elizabeth and William's "Six beautiful white
headed Children."'7

More tangible evidence of his farming interest is the
purchase of farmland in the Jones Creek area of Anson County,
the site of his future home, in October, 1817. '8 He must have
established a home there by February, 1818, when he sold
his Sneedsborough lots 69, 70, 71, and 72 to Thomas Crawford
for $500, "including the house and improvements whereas
the said William Little lately lived." For this price he included
his lots 12, 28, 44, and 60, and Little had sold lots 143 and
144 to Samuel Knox a year earlier."

The Little farm, which was not far south of Wadesboro,
became the center of William Little's agricultural life, though
he owned other farmlands elsewhere in Anson County. This
was to be his last home, and it was here that he and Elizabeth
were buried. This second house still stands today deserted to
the elements and covered with kudzu vines, the family grave-
yard to one side, broken and desolate.

Today one views with wonder the little one-story T-shaped
frame dwelling and has difficulty understanding that William
Little died there, August 30, 1848, possessed of 112 slaves, a
mill, a tanyard in Wadesboro, and stock holdings in banks in
both of the Carolinas. His will, dated April 27, 1847, leaves a
bequest of several slaves to each of eleven children and his wife
Elizabeth. Over twenty-six tracts or parcels of land in various
parts of Anson County are mentioned.20

William Little's furniture was first recorded in 1955,*'
with two examples illustrated, a tea table ( Fig. 8 ) and a
secretary with bookcase ( Fig. 6 ) of the Federal period. A
third example, a desk of the Chippendale style, is not now
thought to have been made by Little; the style and con-
struction in no way relates to the later Federal examples.

Further, it is believed by this writer that William Little was
too well versed in the neoclassical taste and style of construction
to have made the desk.

Figure 2.

The secretary with bookcase ( Fig. 2 ) is believed to be
one of Little's earliest productions in Sneedsborough. The use
of straight bracket feet under a molded base, in combination
with a molded top separating the lower and upper sections,
reminds us of the turn-of-the-century case pieces fashionable

Figure 2a. Detail showing open dovetailed joint at cornice.

Figure 2. Secretary with bookcase, attributed to William Little, walnut
with poplar drawer frames, yellow pine elsewhere, brasses replace
original knobs. 90 inches high, 46 inches wide, 21 7/s inches deep.
Private collection. MESDA research file 2587.

Figure 3. Chest of drawers, attributed to Charleston, South Carolina,
c. 1800, mahogany with white pine interior. 34Vs inches high, 421/2
inches wide, 23 V2 inches deep. Charleston Museum, Manigault House.
MESDA research file 8043.

in Charleston when Little was employed there in 1799 (Fig. 3).
The Little example and the Charleston example are both con-
structed in the same fashion; i.e., the top is fastened with
screws through stiles which are, in turn, dovetailed to the
case sides, and the feet are set with vertical blocks under an
extension of the base molding — a typical early Federal style
of construction. The foot pattern of the two pieces is remarkably
close. The Little example is, however, not one of his more
expensively constructed case pieces, making use of native
walnut and with a minimum of inlaid stringing. One also
notes the open dovetail joint at the cornice ends, this usually
covered with vertically grained veneer in his more elaborate
cabinets ( Fig. 2a ) .

8

Figure 4. Chest of drawers, attributed to William Little, mahogany and
mahogany veneer with poplar drawer frames, yellow pine elsewhere,
original brasses. 37 inches high, 43 V2 inches wide, 21 Vs inches deep.
Private collection. MESDA research file 8322.

Figure 4a.
Detail of straight bracket foot.

Figure 4b.
Detail of foot blocking.

Figure 5. Corner cupboard, attributed to William Little, descended in
the Pegues family of South Carolina just below Sneedsborough, walnut
with poplar interior. 106 inches high, 45-5/16 inches across face,
6 inch returns. Private collection. MESDA research file 8800.

10

Of William Little's case pieces, the next in date order, if
we are to consider the molded base as a dating tool, would
be a chest of drawers ( Fig. 4 ) and a corner cupboard ( Fig. 5 ) .
While the chest case frame is constructed in the same manner
as the secretary ( Fig. 2 ) , the top is not molded and is now
in a more acceptable Federal style. The use of mahogany in
this example, and many others attributed to William Little, is
unique to our experience in studying piedmont Carolina furni-
ture. The trouble of obtaining this imported wood must have

f

vmmmsummmfmumm'm iy#iwk

Figure 5 a. Detail of inlay in cornice.

11

Figure 6. Secretary with bookcase, attributed to William Little,
descended in the Thomas Little family, mahogany and mahogany
veneer with yellow pine interior. 96V4 inches high, 41 V2 inches wide,
22Vh inches deep. Private collection. MESDA research file 2581.

12

given Little a competitive edge over his contemporaries but
added considerably to the cost of his furniture. The corner
cupboard, of walnut, also with molded base, has a more
fashionable cornice than heretofore seen. This form of cornice
was, by the time William left England, in common use in
the more urban centers of cabinetmaking, and he would
certainly have seen examples in Norfolk and Charleston.
Thomas Shearer's drawing of this form of cornice, drawn in
1788, first appeared as plate three in The Cabinet-Makers'
London Book of Prices, published in 1793.

Three key case pieces should be considered next. The
secretary with bookcase ( Fig. 6 ) descended from Thomas,

Figure 6a. Interior of secretary.

Figure 6b. Details, top of cornice in Figure 6, bottom of cornice in
Figure 7.

13

Figure 7. Secretary with bookcase, signed William Little, descended
from Josiah J. Evans, Society Hill, South Carolina, mahogany and
mahogany veneer, walnut secretary interior, with some poplar drawer
parts, yellow pine elsewhere in interior, brasses replaced. 943/s inches
high, 49 5A inches wide, 22Ys inches deep. Private collection. MESDA
research file 8803.

14

William Little's brother, who, we will remember, came to
South Carolina in late 1806. A second example (Fig. 7)
descended from Josiah J. Evans, of Society Hill, South Carolina.
It is marked in pencil with William Little's signature on the
bottom of an interior drawer (Fig. 7a) and compares favorably
with Little's signature on a letter written many years later.22
(Fig. 7b). It is the only known example to bear William

Figure la. Drawer bottom, with penciled signature of William Little
and other writings, including the letters F preceding William and Little.
The signature was written on a board which was subsequently cham-
fered off for a drawer bottom.

StS /^i

Figure lb. Signature of William Little on letter to a nephew, No-
vember 28, 1845.

15

Little's signature. The author has been unable to examine a
third secretary with bookcase which has descended in William's
side of the Little family and which, he was informed, was of
the same form as the Thomas Little and Josiah J. Evans
examples.

With the exception of the continued use of the straight
bracket foot, these two examples have now been updated
completely to the Federal style. They are without a base mold-
ing. A splayed "French" foot would have been a more acceptable
pattern, but one which Little never seems to have used. Both
examples together make extensive use of mahogany, and
design characteristics such as the pattern of the straight bracket
foot, removable cornice, unusual keyhole inlay, and the three-
plinth cornice are seen in other examples. Case construction
techniques of these two key examples ( Figs. 6,7) match those
of all other case pieces, and the drawer construction ties in
with the three tables and all case pieces included in this study.

Two other examples attributed to William Little have
descended in his family. A cherry tea table ( Fig. 8 ) is the

Figure 8. Tea table, attributed to and descended from William Little,
cherry, with poplar drawer frame, vertical square glueblocks and
inner frame, yellow pine drawer bottom and drawer supports, oak
outer or gate frame. 29 V4 inches high, 287/s inches long, 19 Vs inches
wide closed, 36V4 inches wide open. Private collection. MESDA
research file 1605.

16

Figure 9. Sideboard, attributed to William Little, walnut with poplar
drawer frames, yellow pine elseivhere, brasses replace original knobs.
The right double drawer is fitted as a cellaret. 38 V2 inches high,
63 Vs inches long, 24Vs inches deep. Private collection. MESDA
research file 8806.

only example known to us of that wood. The table, and a
sideboard not descending in the Little family ( Fig. 9 ) , represent
an interesting departure from the inlay of the other Little-
attributed case pieces and tables. The stringing extends from
the top to the bottom of the legs, omitting a cuff band at the
foot, and interrupted by the horizontal stringing at the case
base. This is a less expensive method of stringing. While the
decoration quality is of a less complicated manner, the con-
struction of the two examples matches those of all the other
Little-attributed and signed examples. Both the tea table and
the sideboard have the important keyhole inlay "signature" of
William Little (Fig. 9a).

The other William Little family example is a unique
mahogany tray (Fig. 10) with laminated bent-wood gallery
grooved into the tray's molded edge. We know of no other
southern example of this form. The tray is also important
in introducing an unusual inlay (Fig. 10a) which is related
to other designs in two tables ( Figs. 11, 12).

The card table ( Fig. 11), of mahogany, descended from
General Henry William Harrington, the owner of a planta-
tion just across the Pee Dee River and north of Sneedsborough.

17

Figure 9a. Sideboard keyhole inlay.

Figure 10. Tray, attributed to and descended from William Little,
mahogany. lVs inches high, 30 V4 inches long, 1716 inches wide.
The gallery is laminated of three pieces. Private Collection. MESDA
research file 8808.

X

*~a.-±-

Zf J&

Figure 10a. Detail of tray inlay.

18

Figure 11. Card table, attributed to William Little, descended from
General Henry William Harrington, a close neighbor across the Pee
Dee River fro?n Sneedsborough, mahogany and mahogany veneer, with
yellow pine interior, oak gate frame. 29Vs inches high, 36 inches long,
177/8 inches deep closed. Private collection. MESDA research file 2736.

The inlaid four-petal design in the top of the legs relates well
with that of the tray, while the use of mahogany and the
construction relate the card table to the tea table (Fig. 12).
The construction of the tea table is identical, in both drawer
and frame, to the William Little descended example ( Fig. 8 ) .
In summary, one should keep all of the design, inlay, and
construction features in mind when attributing furniture to the
shop of William Little. Woods include the frequent use of
mahogany, rarely found in piedmont furniture. Other primary
woods so far found are walnut, cherry and a light wood inlay.
Woods found in secondary positions are predominantly yellow
pine, with poplar used with some frequency as drawer frames,
an occasional case back or inside frame of a table. Oak seems
to be the only wood used for the gate frames of tables.

19

Figure 12. Tea table, attributed to William Little, mahogany and
mahogany veneer with poplar drawer frame and inner table frame,
yellow pine drawer bottom and drawer front core, oak gate frame.
MESDA collection, loan from James G. Hanes, III. MESDA research
file 2618.

Construction features include feet with vertical grained
square blocks, these usually shaped at base to conform to the
foot face, and with abutting triangular horizontal blocks
often shaped to conform to the upper foot face. The whole
foot structure is set under an extension of the base molding.
In the later pieces, without base molding, the inlaid base band
is used to face the extension under the case. (Fig. 4b).

20

Drawer bottoms are the common paneled-in form, the
bottom grain running parallel to the drawer front and, in
large case drawers, a strip glueblocking at the ends, this
with saw cuts to permit the drawer bottom to expand and
contract. An unusual feature of William Little's construction
is the use of yellow pine behind veneered surfaces such as
drawer fronts. Yellow pine is stubborn in its expansion, con-
traction, and warping movements and cannot be controlled
by the veneered front as readily as a softer wood such as
white pine or poplar. Little's veneered drawer fronts have the
grain parallel to the core and have survived in good order.

Bookcase backs have vertical boards. One or two of
these have molded edges and are set forward of the others,
giving a panelled effect to the back. Tops of case pieces such
as chests of drawers are attached with screws through two
stiles which are, in turn, dovetailed to the case sides. Little
employed dustboards extending about nine inches between
the drawers.

Design features include the straight bracket foot so far
found on all of Little's case furniture (Fig. 4a). These feet
may be set under an extended base molding, presumably in
the earlier examples, or under a flush banding of inlay in
later pieces. Little's three-plinth cornice, while common to
urban coastal furniture, is a rare feature in the piedmont.
Secretary interiors have drawers arranged over the pigeonholes,
and the brackets are of the constant shape of two ogee curves
peaking at the center, with fillet and ovolo terminals (Fig. 6a).

The most common inlay stringing is, of course, a single
line, but Little frequently used a triple band of two light lines
sandwiching a dark wood. The striped inlay was seldom used
(Fig. 10a). His most distinctive inlay, however, was his
lobed keyhole escutcheon (Fig. 9a), and the four-petal orna-
ment within a rectangular block at the top of table legs
(Fig. 12a). This four-petal ornament, it will be noted, has
the vertical petals elongated, and should not be confused
with other similar inlays on tables found in Virginia as well
as the Carolinas.

Pendants of one-piece bellflowers are found on table legs,
and these have the center petal only slightly longer than
the flanking petals, separated with dots, and with an elongated
device at the base (Figs. 12a, 13). The seven-point variegated
star on the Harrington card table ( Fig. 1 1 ) and the oval

21

Figure 12a (Left). Inlay detail.

Figure 13. Inlay detail, tea table. Private collection. MESDA research
file 6420.

22

patera with flower on the Pegues corner cupboard (Fig. 5a)
are rare and cannot yet be said to be typical of Little's work.
His inlays are unadorned with shading or scratched decoration.

When Little employed a cuff inlay at the foot of a leg it
is usually rather low in proportion to the foot or the remainder
of the leg. This may partially account for the stubby look to
the proportions of the tapered leg, but actually it should also be
noted that the taper is less than usual for the period.

William Little brought a fresh breeze of English tradition
into the furniture making of piedmont Carolina. His success
as a cabinetmaker dominated the market for locally made
cabinetware for a radius of at least twenty-five miles of Sneeds-
borough. No other group of so many examples can be at-
tributed to another shop in that area. And yet his skill and
success as a cabinetmaker were only stepping-stones to a
greater financial success in agriculture. The pattern of the
artisan turning to agriculture was not uncommon in both urban
and rural societies of the South — its vestiges remain as an
economic strength in the piedmont South today.

Mr. Horton is Senior Research Fellow at the Museum of
Early Southern Decorative Arts.

NOTES

1. Virginia Home, "Genealogy of the Little Family of Anson and
Richmond Counties," The Littles of Carlisle (undated), unnum-
bered pages.

2. O. McRae Covington, The Littles of Carlisle (undated), un-
numbered pages, letter, George Little, Marlsgate, England, to
William Little, "Cabinetmaker / Sneedsborough Anson County /
North Carolina America," July 13, 1805, received November, 1805.

3. Ibid., letter, James and Mary Todd (sister to William), Malsburg
near Carlisle, to William Little, March 10, 1827, received August 5,
1827, in which James reminds William of the "Delightfull Days
when you lived at Cargo."

4. Ibid., letter, John Little (brother of William), Rountree, Cumber-
land County, England, to William Little, August 10, 1828, received
October 26, 1828, in which John writes "it is a long time now
since you sailed from sherlds for America the last time I saw you
it is just Thirty years since July the 24th Last past. . . ."

23

5. Ibid., receipt, Robert Roberson, agent for William Johnston,
merchant of Norfolk, Virginia, New Castle-on-Tyne, to William
Little, July 26, 1798. New Castle-on-Tyne is just up the river
from South Shields.

6. Ibid., letter, Ann Gillesby (cousin of William), London, December
23, 1799.

7. Milby E. Burton, Charleston Furniture 1700-1825 (1955), p. 102.

8. City Gazette & The Daily Advertiser, Charleston, South Carolina,
August 22, 1796, p. 2.

9. Covington, op.cit., letter, William Gillesby, Charleston, to William
Little, Sneedsborough, N.C., April 12, 1800, in which he writes:
"I only reed thy two Letters — one of them dated Jan 31st the
other March 7th they both informing me thou was settled."

10. Ibid., letter, George Little, Marlsgate, England, to William Little,
July 13, 1805, received November 1805, in which he asks "What
use do you make of that Neger that you Bought at Charlestown."

11. Anson County, N.C, Deed Book H-2, p. 285.

12. Anson County, N.C, Deed Book 0, p. 70, deed, July 13, 1812, John
King to William Little, for $27, lots numbers 12, 28, 44, 60, except
those parts extending across Huckleberry Creek. Little also owned,
as recorded at Deed Book S, p. 82, lots numbers 143 and 144 on
southwest corner of Cabarrus and Grove Streets. This deed is one in
which Little sold the lots 143 and 144 to Samuel Knox for $100,
January 23, 1817.

13. Covington, op.cit., account memo, November 29, 1802, crossed
out, probably to indicate that the account was paid. Robert Troy was
a trustee of the Wadesborough Academy, chartered in 1802, and a
member of the state House of Commons for Anson County.

14. Ibid., letter, Robert J. Steel, Cheraw, S.C., to William Little, Sneeds-
borough, January 25, 1803- The Steel family was also from the
Carlisle area of England. There is mention in a letter, George Little,
Marlsgate, England, to William Little, January 18, 1806, received
April 18, 1806, that "Mr. Steals Mother is very well in hilth but
turning an old woman but holds well out. Thomas [Little, brother
of William] will leve hir 2 or 3 Guineas acording to Mr. Steals
request. . . ."

15. Home, op.cit., unnumbered page.

16. Covington, op.cit., letter, George Little, Marlsgate, England, to
William Little, Sneedsborough, February 26, 1807. Thomas Little
had immigrated to America, landing in Charleston in late 1806.

17. Ibid., letter, George Little, Marlsgate, England, to William Little,
"Cabinetmaker, Sneedsborough," June 28, 1810; and letter George
Little, Brampton Townfoot, England, to William Little, Sneeds-

24

borough, December 14, 1815, received May 7, 1816; and letter,
George Little, Brampton Townfoot to William Little, Sneeds-
borough, March 30, 1819, received June 30, 1819.

18. Anson County, N.C., Deed Book S, p. 82, October 29, 1817,
deed from Shadrack Denson to William Little, for $500, 200
acres on Morris Branch of Jones Creek; p. 193, November 1,
1817, deed from Alexander McRae to William Little, for $1,100,
land in two tracts of 147 and 581/? acres on north side of south
prong of Jones Creek; and p. 201, November 1, 1817, deed from
Charles Vivion to William Little, for $1,300, three tracts of 250
acres on south prong of Jones Creek, 183 acres on Morris Branch
of Jones Creek, and 9 acres on waters of Jones Creek, for total
of 442 acres purchased from Vivion. Other purchases followed that
year as well as in 1821, 1823, 1827, 1828, and 1829, all on
Jones Creek.

19- Ibid., p. 421, February 11, 1818, which deed to Thomas Crawford
indicates that lots 69, 70, 71, and 72 (the homeplace lots) were
adjacent, at the southwest corner, to lots 12, 23, 44, and 60. P. 82,
January 23, 1817, deed from William Little to Samuel Knox, for
$100, lots 143 and 144. There is a Chippendale style desk and
bookcase known to be inscribed on an interior drawer "Samuel
Knox, his hand May 16th 1799," and which descended in the
Knox family of Anson County. No proof is known that Knox
was a cabinetmaker.

20. Anson County, N.C, Will Book B, pp. 237-243, will dated
April 27, 1847, proved in October court, 1848.

21. Florence Q. Stanback, "A North Carolina cabinetmaker, 1775-
1848," Antiques, June 1955, pp. 506-507.

22. Covington, op.cit., letter, William Little, Wadesborough, N.C, to
nephew, November 28, 1845.

25

William John Coffee, Sculptor'Painter:

His Southern Experience

Bradford L. Rauschenberg

. . . A Sculptor lately from England and
really able in his art.

At the beginning of the nineteenth century the desire
for portrait sculpture had been firmly established in the South.
In 1770 Charleston, South Carolina had been graced with
Wilton's replica of William Pitt,' and in 1773 Richard Hay-
ward's Lord Botetourt had arrived in Williamsburg, Virginia.2
Houdon received a commission from the Virginia legislature
in 1781 for a bust of Lafayette, and in 1784 he was commis-
sioned to sculpt the full length figure of George Washington.3
By the close of the eighteenth century sculpture still glorified
only public heroes and was affordable to the few. The largest
private collection of sculpture in the South was probably
at. Thomas Jefferson's Monticello near Charlottesville, Virginia.
It was through Jefferson that William John Coffee, a little
known sculptor, was encouraged to come to Virginia. His art
produced sculptures of heroes as well as of lesser known
figures in southern society.

William John Coffee was born in the Lambeth area of
London about 1774. In his youth he was employed at Coade's
Artificial Stone Manufactory in Lambeth as a chore boy and
kilnman. In 1793 or 1794 he moved to Derby to work at
the Derby Porcelain Factory. It was here that Coffee was first

26

acknowledged in the records as a repairer-modeller by being
paid per figure or per day.4 In 1795 his wages were raised
to reflect his accomplishments. Work sometimes attributed to
Coffee was often actually by his fellow worker J. J. Spangler/
It was at this time, however, that Spangler left Derby, and
Coffee soon followed. The newly opened pottery of Sir Nigel
Gresley at Church Gresley, Burton on Trent, Staffordshire,
attracted Coffee for employment.6 After only a year, however,
he returned to the Derby Porcelain Factory for two years of
work. In 1798 he left to establish his own factory with
William Duesbury, a relative of Duesbury, the Derby pro-
prietor, in London. Duesbury soon returned to the Derby
Porcelain Factory, leaving Coffee to continue producing china,
terra cotta ornaments, and figurines/

The Royal Academy of Arts in London exhibited Coffee's
models of animals in 1808, 1811, and 1816 (Figs. 1,1a).
In 1801 his address was 32 Stanhope Street, London, but in
1808 no address was given, and by 1810 he was back in
Derby, where he was identified as a modeller and sculptor.8

The Derby Mercury of June 2, 1814, contained evidence
of another of Coffee's artistic talents.

Figure 1. Dog figure, Derby (?), biscuit porcelain, modelled by
William John Coffee. Private collection.

27

Figure la. Detail of signature on left rear top.

ILLUMINATION

Mr. Coffee

(Having just returned from London)

Respectfully begs leave to offer his services to the
Ladies and Gentlemen of Derby etc. in the preparation
of transparent Paintings for the approaching illumina-
tions. He has prepared a variety of Allegorical and
Patriotic Designs for the occasion which with specimens
of their execution may be inspected at his home in
the Friar Gate.

N.B. Two apprentices wanted; Boys from the country
will be preferred, with whom a small premium will
be expected.

Derby May 17, 1814'

Exhibiting for the last time in London in 1816, Coffee
entered "a portrait of a sitter [setter?], the property of
M. Allam, esq. of Derby; Terra-cotta."'0 At this point he
evidently saw America as a land of opportunity and sailed
for New York.

In 1817 the American Academy of the Fine Arts in New
York exhibited several examples of Coffee's work: ' 'Infant
Morpheus', four dogs, a cow, sheep," and a new side of his
talents, "Two paintings of dead game."1 ' Coffee was in New
York in May, 1817, but probably not established with a
residence, as he was not listed in New York City directories
until 1819-ia Thus one could assume that the 1817 exhibition
was of examples produced in England.

28

Figure 2. Map showing location of Albemarle and Orange Counties
of Virginia, with detail locating homes represented by busts extant or
where they were commissioned.

a. Monticello

b. Mount Warren

c. Estouteville

d. Enniscorthy

e. Montpelier

The scale is approximately fifteen miles between a and b. The map is a
detail of A Map of the Internal Improvements of Virginia, published
by C. Crozet, 1848.

29

In his diary, DeWitt Clinton (1769-1828), governor of
New York, recorded May 12, 1817 "sat at the [illegible] for
Coffee the Sculpter." Seven days later he entered: "Sat 5th
time to Sculpter." There is now a bust, 30 inches high and of
plaster, in the New York Historical Society of Clinton attributed
to Coffee.' The Clinton diary was the first mention of Coffee's
working in America.

By mid-to-late 1817 Coffee contacted Thomas Jefferson,
either from New York or Richmond, Virginia, and by March
4, 1818, he had visited Monticello in Albemarle County
(a, Fig. 2), secured a commission for busts, and returned to
New York. There undoubtedly had been much socializing at
Monticello, for further in Coffee's letter he informed Jefferson
that he would again be visiting for "Two or three days and
will have two glasses of good wine every day after dinner.
. . ."' ' Coffee arrived later in April and probably delivered
the completed busts of Thomas Jefferson, his daughter Mrs.
Thomas Mann Randolph (nee Martha Jefferson), and grand-
daughter, Ellen. An entry in Jefferson's account book on April
14th notes "that on the 12th inst. I omitted to enter my
draught on James Leitch [a local factor] for 105 D[ollars]
in favr of Mr. Coffee a sculpter. This is to pay for the
originals of 3 busts, to wit, Mrs. Randolph, Ellen's and
mine. I bespoke of him 12 copies of Mrs. R's @ 5 D. each
and one of Mr. Madison's, if he makes it." None of these
busts are known today.15

Conjecture is that during the fall of 1817 Coffee actually
"took" or sculptured the three busts in terra cotta at Monticello.
Coffee then took the bisque busts to his studio in New York,
where they were fired to around 800 °F.'6 The transportation
of unfired or "leather-hard" terra cotta was made easy by the
fineness of the clay used. Coffee probably brought his own
clay in powder form to Virginia. Mixing the clay to his
desired consistency, he would then cut away clay to form
the bust. When complete it would be removed from the stand
or platform, the base finished and freed of excess clay. The
column would be hollowed to allow moisture to escape, thus
reducing the chance of cracking during firing ( Fig. 8b ) . The
bust would then be air dried and packed for shipment to
New York via Richmond.

In his New York studio Coffee would make a mold of
plaster of paris around the lightly oiled unfired terra cotta

30

bust. Plaster busts were then cast from the mold. A com-
parison made between the terra cotta and plaster busts of
the same subjects revealed that the terra cotta measured only
one-fourth inch smaller than the plaster examples.

After drying, the plaster busts were tooled and the column
hollowed (Fig. 9b), and the exterior painted. Several of the
plaster busts found have been white, with subsequent coats
of plaster over the peeling original white coat.'7

With this as the probable method of Coffee's bust pro-
duction, an understanding of the mobility of his "models"
can today be more easily accepted.

In April, 1818, Jefferson wrote a letter of introduction for
Coffee to James Madison at Montpelier in Orange County,
Virginia (e, Fig. 2) :

Mr. Coffee the bearer of this letter is a Sculptor lately
from England, and really able in his art. he makes
busts in plaister or terra cotta he came from Richmond
to take you[r] bust and mine and gives less trouble
than any artist painter or sculptor I have ever sub-
mitted myself to. . . .

Jefferson concludes the letter: "I join him therefore in sollick-
ing your indulging him and your friends in setting for him."1

Evidently the introduction was convincing, for on July
14, 1818, Coffee submitted a bill of $105 to Madison "for the
modelling of three Busts viz One of himself [James Madison],
one of Mrs. Madison and one of Mr. Todd."19

While at Monticello Coffee was the subject of a May 18
letter from Jefferson to John Adams in which he wrote that
"there is now here a Mr. Coffee, a sculptor and Englishman,
who has just taken my bust. . . . He is a fine artist. He takes
them about half the size of life in plaster."' There is no
evidence that Adams ever engaged Coffee.

By September 18, 1818, Coffee was back in New York
residing on Greenwich Street. He wrote Jefferson regarding
some implements he had left in Virginia while employed by
Jefferson, Madison, and perhaps others.2' Regarding the same
inquiry, Coffee wrote again that month about some crates or
"boxes containing my Laboures [terra cotta busts or 'models']"
and asked Jefferson to send them to him in New York.22

31

Coffee wrote Jefferson from New York the following
January proposing that he had "a great desire to model a
small whole length statue of Mr. Jefferson two feet 6 in hight.
On my own account for subscription at 30 Dollars per statue
to be in White Plaster . . ." and further to "model and
compleat in white Plaster a full life size statue of Mr. J. to be
executed from a small model taken from the life. The work to
be executed in this City or in London." Coffee suggested
that this full length statue should be placed in the rotunda,
then under construction at the University of Virginia. The
statue, he proposed, could be financed by subscription of fifty
names in Virginia, at a cost of $400. Apparently no one else
was as encouraged as Coffee, for nothing else of these proposals
is known.

In December, 1819, Coffee wrote Jefferson informing him of
the shipment of "the models in Terra Cotta" and stressed
that they be opened only at Monticello.24 This, no doubt,
would be the three original terra cotta busts, now fired and
finished. Coffee wrote further in January "informing you
[Jefferson] that I have at last finished my labours with regard
to those models in terra Cotta which your taste in the Fine
Arts has done me the Honour to patronize. . . ." Though
this shipment was made in December, delivery was probably
not until late February or March, as we find an entry in
Jefferson's Journal, March 18, 1820, for "pd Wm. J. Coffee
for busts 65 D[ollars]. ante Apr. 4-18."" The "ante Apr.
4-18" refers to the earlier payment of $105 for the three
original terra cotta busts, and now Jefferson was paying $65
for the twelve copies of Mrs. Randolph's and one copy of
Madison's bust which he had also ordered.

That the Madison bust was made is further attested by a
note dated Monticello, May 3, 1820, in which Coffee called
Madison's attention to his "small accnt. which I shall be much
favored by receiving in a few days when I shall call on my
way home [to New York]." The visit to Montpelier was
apparently made, and on May 25 th Coffee recorded payment
of $50.75 "being in full for models [terra cotta] and busts
[plaster] made for" the Madisons." None of the Madison
busts are known today.

William Coffee's January letter also asked Jefferson to
notify his grandchildren, "Mr. [Thomas Jefferson] Randolph
and Mrs. Bankhead [nee Anne Cary Randolph] as to the tenor

32

of the letter . . .," and he further noted that "In one of the
Cases are two Busts of Mr. Jefferson Randolph one of which
I have the pleasure of requesting Mrs. Randolph's accept-

ance.

Figure 3. Terra cotta bust, 1818-19, of Mrs. Charles Bankhead (nee
Anne Cary Randolph), of Collie, Albemarle County, Virginia, a grand-
daughter of Jefferson. 12V2 inches high, 8V4 inches wide. Thomas
Jefferson Memorial Foundation. MESDA research file S-8611.

Figure 3a. Left profile.

It is apparent from this that when Coffee visited Virginia
in April, 1818, busts were taken of Thomas Jefferson's grand-
children, with the exception of Ellen, whose bust had been
taken on Coffee's first visit in late 1817. Of these busts taken
in 1818, and perhaps the nature of Coffee's "Laboures" of
the September 26, 1818, letter, only those of Mrs. Charles
Bankhead (Figs. 3, 3a) and Miss Cornelia Jefferson Randolph
(Figs. 4, 4a), both in terra cotta, survive.

33

Figure 4. Terra cotta bust, 1818-19, of Miss Cornelia Jefferson
Randolph, daughter of Martha Jefferson and Thomas Mann Randolph
of Tuckahoe. As a child she lived at Monticello, later at Edgehill.
13 V2 inches high, 8V4 inches wide. Private collection. MESDA re-
search file S-8564.

Figure 4a. Left profile.

Jefferson probably introduced Coffee to other friends,
and they were encouraged to commission busts. A few examples
survive, and that of Mrs. Wilson Cary Nicholas (Figs. 5,5a),
the wife of the Governor of Virginia, is closely associated with
Jefferson. Their daughter, Jane Nicholas, married Thomas
Jefferson Randolph, grandson of Jefferson. The Nicholas home,
Mount Warren, stood just south of Charlottesville, west of
Scottsville and on the James River (b, Fig. 2).

Four busts of the Coles family survive :2< John Coles III30
( Fig. 6 ) of Estouteville (c, Fig. 2 ) , Mrs. John Coles II3' ( Fig. 7 )
of Enniscorthy (d, Fig. 2), Isaac A. Coles32 (Figs. 8, 8a, 8b),
who was Thomas Jefferson's secretary and who lived with
his brother Walter Coles (Figs. 9, 9a, 9b), at Enniscorthy.

Jefferson also wrote a letter of introduction for Coffee to
Thomas Cooper,33 a friend later invited to become professor

34

'

Figure 5. Terra cotta bust, 1818-19, of Mrs. Wilson Cary Nicholas
(nee Margaret Smith), of Mount Warren, Albermarle County, Virginia.
127/s inches high, 814 inches wide. Private collection. MESDA re-
search file S-8565.

Figure 3a. Detail of head.

of chemistry at the University of Virginia, a position which,
because of politics, Cooper declined. We do not know of a
bust of this subject. Cooper later became the president of the
South Carolina College. 4

One other southern venture into portrait sculpture was
made by William Coffee in the spring of 1821 when he sought
commissions in Charleston, South Carolina. A letter from
the South Carolina sculptor John S. Cogdell to the artist
Samuel F. B. Morse, April 14, 1821, discussed Coffee's presenta-
tion to the South Carolina Academy of Fine Arts of "Two
Casts One of Genl. C.C. [Charles Cotesworth] (Fig. 10), the
other of GL. T [Thomas] Pinckney ( Fig. 1 1 ) and a Medallion
of Mr. Poinsetti. . . .'" The medallion is unknown today;
it represented Joel R. Poinsetti (1779-1851), a commercial
agent to South America, a scientist and a politician of Charles-
ton.

35

Figure 6. Terra cotta bust, 1818-19, of John Coles III, of Estouteville,
Albemarle County, Virginia. 13V4 inches high, 8V4 inches wide.
Private collection. MESDA research file S-8582.

Figure 6a. Left profile.

When Cogdell visited Coffee working in Charleston he
was informed that the Academy there would be sent a bust of
Thomas Jefferson.36

Although Coffee succeeded in having the Pinckneys and
Mr. Poinsetti sit for their portraits, his success in Charleston
was less than desired. He solicited Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
to recommend him to others, and Pinckney's answer revealed
that "the taste for the Fine Arts has not yet made so much
progress among us as I could wish; for I have spoken to
several of our Men of Influence to sit to you for their Busts,
but they all refuse. . . ."" ' Coffee was back in New York by
November 7, 1821, and this ended, as far as we now know,
his work as a portrait sculptor in the South.

36

Figure 7. Terra cotta bust, 1818-19, of Mrs. John Coles II (Rebecca
Elizabeth Tucker), of Enniscorthy, Albemarle County, Virginia. lV/s
inches high, IV4 inches wide. Private collection. MESDA research
file S-8625.

Coffee did not, however, relinquish his valuable contact
with Thomas Jefferson. It has been noted earlier that he
exhibited oil paintings upon his first coming to America. He
utilized this talent in soliciting of Jefferson a commission to
clean and revarnish, at a reduced price of three dollars a day
for an estimated fifty days, Jefferson's paintings.38 He again
requested this employment upon his return from Charleston
but was again put off with the word that anything done to the
Monticello paintings would have to be done there in Virginia.
Coffee, of course, invited himself to visit if Jefferson would
pay the travel expenses.39 Jefferson finally accepted the visit
for the winter to have his paintings cleaned.40

Another earlier hint of Coffee's activity in painting was
made in a letter about a "case of paintings" Coffee was having

37

sent to New York by way of Richmond.4' These could have
been paintings to be repaired and cleaned or works of his own.

Still another facet of William Coffee's skill was revealed
in connection with his visits to Monticello. As early as Sep-
tember, 1820, Coffee wrote Jefferson that the "ornaments for
Bedford House, as well as the ornaments for the University
..." would be shipped by the end of September. At this date
Coffee was in Newark, New Jersey, to escape the heat and
"stinking Pestilential City."42 Poplar Forest, or "Bedford
House," was Jefferson's retreat in Bedford County, Virginia.43
Coffee was evidently engaged in contract work to make orna-
ments for architectural elements both inside and outside Poplar
Forest and the university then being built.

This architectural work was still progressing two years
later when Coffee visited Jefferson during the winter of 1821-

Figure 8. Terra cotta bust, 1818-19, of Isaac A. Coles, of Enniscorthy,
Albemarle County, Virginia. 15 Vi inches high, 8^/4 inches wide. Private
collection. MESDA research file S-8583-

38

Figure 8a. Left profile.
Figure 8b. Rear view.

22. Coffee arrived on December 31 and was still at Monticello
in February, as Jefferson revealed in a letter to Mr. Brocken-
brough, the first proctor of the university; Coffee was to visit
the university so "that he may see for what [price] he can do
the ornaments in the frises in some of the best room."'

The result of this visit was revealed in a letter to Jefferson
from Coffee in New York, June 25, 1822. Evidently the job
of casting ornaments was underpriced to the university, as
Coffee was asking $200 more. He was having lead ornaments
cast at a New York foundry, and each ornament required
special treatment. The work for the Bedford house was still
progressing. The ornaments were to be for "two rooms at
Bedford one as in the North [illegible] Portico at Monticello
the other as in your dining room in which case it would be
the human bust alone in one entablature and in the other

39

Figure 9. Plaster bust, 1818-19, of Walter (?) Coles, of Enniscorthy,
Albemarle County, Virginia. 13V4 inches high, 9 inches wide. Private
collection. MESDA research file S-8580.

Figure 9a. Left profile.

Figure 9b. Rear view.

40

Figure 10 (left). Plaster bust, 1821, of General Charles Cotesworth
Pinckney, Charleston, South Carolina. 24 inches high. Present location
unknown. Photo courtesy of Gibbes Art Gallery, Charleston, by per-
mission of College of Charleston.

Figure 11. Plaster bust, 1821, of General Thomas Pinckney, Charleston,
South Carolina. Unknown dimensions. Present location unknown. Photo
courtesy of Gibbes Art Gallery, Charleston, by permission of College
of Charleston.

entablature alternately an ox scull and Pateras as in Galledeos
Dorce."**

Jefferson's July 10 answer discussed the ornaments at the
pavilion of the university and also noted that "in my middle
room at Poplar Forest, I mean to mix the faces and ox-sculls
a fancy which I can indulge in my own use, altho in a public
work I feel bound to follow authority [design books] strictly."'

In January, 1823, Coffee wrote Jefferson informing him
that "on the 15 th of last month I shipped in good order and
in duble cases the whole of your ornaments for Bedford
House. . . ." There was also news that all of the "Enrichments
for the University, . . . are contained in the same vessel called
the Schooner Rising States." He concluded the letter with a
detailed discussion of how best to apply the ornaments and

41

later billed Jefferson with $99.27 for the shipment for Poplar
Hall.47

The work for the university continued over a period of
years. In March, 1823, Coffee wrote of his trial of "burnt clay"
ornaments for the rotunda in place of lead which he supplied
for the Bedford house,48 and correspondence from March to
May indicated a strained relationship developed between the
two men over matters of cost and snipping. As late as 1825,
however, when plans were being made to open the university,
Coffee was still corresponding with Jefferson and Brocken-
brough about ornaments. Suffice to say, much of Coffee's
ornamental work at Monticello and the university survived to
tell of Jefferson's taste and of Coffee's talents.49

In January, 1824, Jefferson approached his friend to ask
if he knew of a good "drawing master in the military or land-
scape line for the University. . . ."i0 Coffee was quick to reply
and asked Jefferson to inquire at the university about a position
for him to teach painting. He wrote that he intended a fall
visit to Virginia for "the purpose of painting Portraits," and
that he was "middlingly acquainted ... to ornament the
walls of houses in General. I also intend to give instruction in
the art of Painting to those Ladies and Gentlemen that may
have a taste that way. . . .'" Evidently nothing materialized
concerning this, for September found Coffee still in New York
inquiring about his being commissioned to "paint in oil a
Picture of the University as a Landscape which would make a
good Picture." Further, he suggested a subscription for prints
from the paintings." Again, his proposal fell on deaf ears.
Coffee was listed as a portrait painter of "Carmine [Street] N.
Bedford" in New York City from 1824 to 1827;" since it was
for such a long period, he must have had some competency in
that form of art.

Coffee still clung to the idea of teaching at the University
of Virginia, however, and his letter to Jefferson in December,
1825, told of his desires and talents:

Honbl Sir

Seeing in one of the Prints of the day a strange
account of a very strange adventure you of late un-
fortunately have undergone with a strange man [John
H. Browere] calling him self a sculptor, because he

42

has had the persumption to try to make five Busts of
some distinguished Gentlemen — as if like fair Paint-
ing, making Busts constituted the necessary requisite
for a great artist. But this man, this Sign Painter,
ought to have known as he has been in Italy, that
moulding a living mans face is not the way to obtain a
good characteristick likeness [as] . . . the feature [s]
alter under the operation and then recourse must be
had to Nature to corect those errors. But this is not my
business, wat I presume to trouble you with is in
consequence of an Idea that has grown out of the
same advertisement.

That you intend to unite the University an artist
in the Landscape line, you have some knowledge of my
poor abilitys as an artist still you have not seen the
whole extent of my powers that way. by a preponderat-
ing part, of my trifling knowledge as an artist, or in
fact have I even been able in this country to show them,
they have sleept in Peace, . . . now Sir you will perceive
in an instant that I mean to ask of you whether my
service would be thought sufficient to enable me by
teaching the arts to enable me to obtain about 300
dollars per year.

I paint Landscape and Portraits tolerable well,
[illegible] still lifes [illegible] very well and as to
modeling and cuting Busts in Marble I have had great
Practice in and have the power of Modeling the figure.
The animal and Every kind of ornament with Ease
and Pleasure.

I hope you will Pardon me for saying so much of
my self. I assure you I feel ashamed but I thought it
necessary on this occasion to enable you to favour me
with your good opinion on this point should your time
and condecension permit you.

Honbl Sir

You know I am

truly your obt sert
W. J. Coffee54

This evidently was the last correspondence between Jeffer-
son and Coffee, for on July 4, 1826, the Virginia patron of

43

the arts died, and so did Coffee's valuable Virginia contact
and friend.

William John Coffee continued his career in the northern
cities of New York, Albany and Newark, and here remain a
few examples of his sculpture work." Of these, several are
signed and are the only such American works known. None
of his oil paintings have been identified, though he often
spoke of them, and oils were exhibited from time to time.
He died, probably at Albany, c. 1846," ending the life of
one of the first sculptors to work in the South. His work
ranks well among others of his period and can be enjoyed
today through the few surviving examples.

Mr. Rauschenberg is Research Fellow at the Museum of
Early Southern Decorative Arts.

NOTES

1. Wayne Craven, Sculpture in America (New York: Thomas Y.
Crowell Co., 1968), pp. 47-49, Fig. 2.1. Joseph Wilton (1722-
1803) sculptured a marble William Pitt, Earl of Chatham for
New York. A replica was ordered by the House of Commons in
South Carolina and arrived before the New York sculpture. This
may be seen today in Washington Park in Charleston, South
Carolina.

2. Ibid., pp. 49-50, Fig. 2.2.

3- Ibid., pp. 51-52, Fig. 2.3. See also H. H. Arnason, Sculpture by
Houdon (Worcester: Worcester Art Museum, 1964), pp. 81-91.

4. Franklin A. Barrett and Arthur L. Thorpe, Derby Porcelain, 1750-
1848 (London: Faber and Faber, 1971), pp. 50-52, 86. Also see
Timothy Clifford, "Derby Biscuit," English Ceramic Circle (Chat-
ham: W & J. Mackay & Co, Ltd., 1969), Vol. 7, part 2, pp. Ill, 116.

5. Timothy Clifford, "J. J. Spangler, a virtuoso Swiss modeller at
Derby," The Connoisseur (London: the National Magazine Com-
pany, Ltd, June 1978), Vol. 198, No. 196, pp. 147-155.

6. F. Brayshaw Gilhespy, "Joseph Lygo's Letters to Derby," The
English Ceramic Circle (London: William Clowes and Sons, 1955),
Vol. 3, part 4, p. 208. Also the Derby Public Library, Derby,
England, has relevant letters, two of which are dated January 4 & 6,
1795, between William Duesbury, proprietor of the Derby Porcelain
Factory, and William Coffee, and which reveal the circumstances
of Coffees leaving. Other letters are in the Derby Public Library

44

collection, dated June and December, 1794, between Duesbury
and Joseph Lygo, the London agent for Derby, and Charles King,
a manager of the factory, about the poor quality of Coffee's work.

7. Barrett and Thorp, op. cit,, p. 86.

8. Personal communication with Mr. David Fraser, Keeper of Art,
Derby City Council Museums and Art Gallery, Derby, England,
May 2, 1978.

9. Ibid. Celebrations of peace were started June 14, 1814.

10. Ibid.

11. George C. Groce and David H. Wallace, The New York Historical
Society's Dictionary of Artists in A?nerica (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1957), p. 135. Also George C. Groce, "William
John Coffee, Long Lost Sculptor," American Collector (New York:
Collector's Publishing Co., 1946), May, pp. 14-15.

12. Anna Wells Rutledge, "William John Coffee as a Portrait Sculptor,"
Gazette des Beaux- Arts (New York: Wildenstein, 1945), Vol. 28,
November, pp. 297-312.

13. The New York Historical Society, Catalogue of American Portraits
in the New York Historical Society (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1974), Vol. 1, p. 147, pictures the Clinton bust; David
McNeely Stauffer, American Engravers upon Copper and Steel
(New York: the Grolier Club, 1907), Part II, p. 99, No. 569,
pictures a small circular engraving inscribed "W.J.Coffee feet / A.B.
Durand sc. / Printed by Win. Neal, NY."

14. Library of Congress Microfilm records M817, Thomas Jefferson
Miscellanies #5290 DLC, Manuscripts Department, University of
Virginia Library, Charlottesville, Virginia, letter, March 4, 1818.
Hereafter referred to as 5290 DLC.

15. Ibid., Jefferson's Account Book. A plaster bust of Jefferson, often
attributed to Coffee, is by Peter Cardell, an Italian who cast plaster
busts from modellings. See William Dunlap, A History of the Rise
and Progress of the Arts of Design in the United States (New York:
Dover Publications, Inc., 1969), Vol. II, part 2, p. 468. Cardell
evidently destroyed his original terra cotta model and made a
plaster "master" which he called "the plaster original." See Alfred
L. Bush, "The Life Portraits of Thomas Jefferson," Jefferson and the
Arts: an Extended Vieiv (Washington: National Gallery of Art,
1976), pp. 88-91.

16. Personal communication with Dr. Bernard M. Watney, Hamstead,
London, England, July 3, 1978, regarding firing temperature of
terra cotta. He relates that a brick kiln would be high enough
temperature for terra cotta, but not a bake oven.

17. Telephone conversation with Mr. Gardner Gidley, Clemmons,
North Carolina, a practicing terra cotta sculptor, August 31, 1978.

45

18. 5290 DLC, op. tit., letter, April 11, 1818. Evidently Coffee came
originally to Virginia to take the busts of Jefferson and Madison.

19- Conover Hunt-Jones, Dolly and the "great little Madison," (Wash-
ington: American Institute of Architects Foundation, 1977), p. 83.
The "Mr. Todd" is John Payne Todd, born 1792. He was Dolly
Payne Todd's son by her previous marriage to John Todd.

20. Alfred L. Bush, "The Life Portraits of Thomas Jefferson," Jefferson
and the Arts: An Extended Vieiv (Washington: National Gallery of
Art, 1976), p. 86.

21. Rutledge, op.cit., p. 299, lists Coffee as only in the New York City
directories from 1819. Groce, op.cit,, p. 15 cites letter regarding
implements.

22. 5290 DLC, op.cit., letter, September 26, 1818.

23. Ibid., letter, January 25, 1819-

24. Ibid., letter, December 19, 1819. Here Coffee is using the term
"model" to mean the unfired terra cotta. Apparently he interchanges
the term.

25. Ibid., letter, January 5, 1820.

26. Ibid., Thomas Jefferson, Journal.

27. Hunt-Jones, op.cit., p. 83.

28. Ibid., Figure 76, pictures a Coffee attributed bust identified as Nelly
Conway Madison (1732-1829). The bust descended in the Coles
family and is believed to be of Mrs. John Coles II, figure 7 of
this article.

29- William Coles, The Coles Family of Virginia (New York: privately
printed, 1931) is the standard reference for this family.

30. Fillmore Norfieet, Saint-Memin in Virginia: Portraits and Bio-
graphies (Richmond: The Dietz Press, 1942), pp. 71, 156-157,
pictures a profile of John Coles, III, and gives biographical
material.

31. Hunt-Jones, op.cit., p. 83, pictures the terra cotta bust of this
subject, misidentified as Nelly Conway Madison. Both this bust
and a plaster duplicate descended in the Coles family.

32. Norfleet, op.cit., pp. 101, 157, pictures a profile of Isaac A. Coles,
and gives biographical material.

33- 5290 DLC, op.cit., letter, March 24, 1820.

34. Francis Butler Simkins, A History of the South (New York: Alfred
A. Knopf, 1961), p. 160. South Carolina College is now the
University of South Carolina.

35. Rutledge, op.cit., p. 301.

46

36. Ibid.

37. Marvin R. Zahniser, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (Chapel Hill:
The University of North Carolina Press, 1967), p. 276, letter,
October 23, 1821.

38. 5290 DLC, op.cit., letter, March 16, 1820.

39. Ibid., letter, November 7, 1821.

40. Ibid., letter, November 22, 1821. In addition, confirmation from
Mr. Charles L. Granquist, Assistant Director, Thomas Jefferson
Memorial Foundation, August 29, 1978, confirming that Coffee
was paid $100, March 25, 1822, for "repairing" the paintings.

41. Ibid., letter, September 1, 1820.

42. Ibid., letter, September 8, 1820.

43. Lucille McWane Watson, "Thomas Jefferson's other home," An-
tiques (New York: Straight Enterprises, Inc., 1957), Vol. LXXI,
No. 4, pp. 342-346.

44. 5290 DLC, op.cit., letter, February 8, 1822.

45. Ibid., letter, June 25, 1822. The term Galledeos Dorce is probably
a design source although it is not listed in William Banter O'Neal,
Jefferson's Fine Arts Library (Charlottesville: University Press of
Virginia, 1976). The term could be an incorrect spelling or a mis-
quotation by Coffee. However, O'Neal, p. 24, book 5, Plate V
should be compared with Coffee's description. This plate is from
Henry Aldrich, The Elements of Civil Architecture (Oxford:
W. Baxter, 1818), 2nd edition.

46. 5290 DLC, op.cit., letter, July 10, 1822.

47. Ibid., letters, January 3, 1823, and February 14, 1823.

48. Ibid., letter, March 22, 1823.

49- O'Neal, op.cit., Plates XXVII, XXXIX, and XXXI.

50. 5290 DLC, op.cit., letter, January 2, 1824.

51. Ibid., letter, January 11, 1824.

52. Ibid., letter, September 11, 1824.

53. Groce, op.cit., p. 19.

54. 5290 DLC, op.cit., letter, December 1, 1825. For Bowers see Bush,
op.cit., pp. 95-98.

55. Groce, op.cit., and Rutledge, op.cit., give good details of Coffee's
northern career.

56. Groce and Wallace, op.cit., p. 135.

47

Appreciation for assistance in preparing this article extended to:

Mr. Douglas W. Tanner, Field Archivist, Manuscripts Depart-
ment, Alderman Library, University of Virginia, Charlottesville;

Mr. Charles L. Granquist, Assistant Director, Thomas Jefferson
Memorial Foundation, Charlottesville;

Dr. Wayne Craven, Art History Department, University of
Delaware, Newark;

Miss Mary C. Black, The New York Historical Society, New
York;

Dr. Bernard Watney, London, England;

Mr. John Mallet, Department of Ceramics, Victoria and Albert
Museum, London, England;

Mr. Timothy Clifford, Director, City Art Gallery, Manchester,
England;

Mr. David Eraser, Keeper of Art, Derby Museums and Art

Gallery, Derby, England;

Miss Ann W. Dibble, Museum of Early Southern Decorative
Arts, Field Researcher, Charleston, South Carolina;

Miss Corrine S. P ell e grin, Registrar, Virginia Historic Land-
marks Commission, Richmond, Virginia;

Miss Caroline Weekley, Curator of Decorative Arts, Virginia
Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond, Virginia;

Mr. John C. Larson, Assistant to the Director of Restoration,
Old Salem, Incorporated, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

48

/.

r

We are pleased to record here an interesting jug found
after Bradford L. Rauschenberg's article " B. DuVal & Co/
Richmond': a Newly Discovered Pottery" was published in
the May, 1978, Journal. The cobalt decorated saltglazed stone-
ware jug (below) is impressed to indicate that it was made by
John Peter Schermerhorn, the potter believed to have brought
New York potting traditions to Richmond through his em-
ployment in the Benjamin DuVal pottery. Schermerhorn is
listed in the 1820 census of manufacturers as a potter in
Henrico County, and an advertisement the same year locates
the pottery at "Port Mayo, near Rockets." Height 12 inches,
width 9 inches. Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts,
a gift of Mr. Lindsay C. Grigsby.

49

■:|. W- ■::':;';, '■ -

1 wfe^WB

it ^i

Kf^fl

i I /J hm ■

UJ

Figure 1. Mr. and Mrs. William Bos well Lamb and their Daughter,
Martha Anne, circa 1803. Oil on canvas, 30x23 inches. The Museum
of Early Southern Decorative Arts, loaned by Mr. and Mrs. Alban
K. Barrus. MESDA research file S-7271.

50

Henry Benbridge: Portraits in Small from J\[orfol\

Carolyn J. Weekley

Several months ago the writer was invited to examine a
small group portrait identified as the Lamb family of Norfolk,
Virginia ( Fig. 1 ) . The painting was impressive in its charm
and quality as well as in its peculiar familiarity. The poses
of the three subjects, the classical settings, and the less obvious
misunderstandings of anatomical drawing suggested the work
of Henry Benbridge. Since then, a similar portrait in small
by the same hand (Fig. 2) has come to the author's attention.
This group likeness, of another important Norfolk family,
passed through Lindsay descendants to very recent years.
These two family group paintings are the only examples of
their kind known for Norfolk during the first decade of the
nineteenth century. They are also the first to be attributed to
Benbridge's Norfolk period.'

Neither of these portraits is signed, which is not especially
disturbing when one realizes that there are only a few portraits
by Benbridge that do bear valid signatures. The attribution of
works to him therefore relies heavily on an awareness of his
painting style and circumstantial evidence of time and place,
and the possibility of an artist-sitter encounter. These con-
siderations are critical in the attribution of the two Norfolk
portraits to Benbridge.

The most complete account of Henry Benbridge's life and
work, published in 1971, was written by Robert G. Stewart
of the National Portrait Gallery.2 This important research

51

Figure 2. Mr. and Mrs. Francis Stubbs Taylor, their Daughter Sarah and
Another Unidentified Taylor Child, circa 1803-6. Oil on canvas, 30x23
inches. The Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts, gift of Mr.
and Mrs. ]ames W. Douglas. MESDA research file S-7272.

effort documents that Benbridge was born in 1743 in Philadel-
phia, that he began painting as early as 1758, that he studied
abroad, and that he returned to Pennsylvania in 1770. He
married Esther Sage in 1772 and settled in Charleston, South
Carolina the same year. He continued to work there intermittent-
ly through part of the 1790s. His only child, a son named after

52

him, was born in December, 1772. His wife Esther (often
called Hetty) probably died sometime before May 1, 1773.
He never remarried. He moved to Norfolk, Virginia sometime
between 1790 and 1801, and he was buried in Philadelphia
in January of 1812.

Benbridge was among the few American-born artists of
his day who could afford to study abroad in England and
Italy. In Italy he met Thomas Patch (1725-1782), an English
artist noted for his caricatures and conversation pieces, both
in oil and engraved. As Stewart points out in his essay,
Benbridge was clearly influenced by this man's work, although
the extent of that influence deserves further explanation.
Benbridge adopted the format of small figure sizes, and
occasionally the heads of his sitters are exaggerated in size,
as they are in caricature drawing. However, Benbridge's intent
was always to paint strong likenesses rather than stylized
versions of his sitters.3

In addition to the artist's two Norfolk paintings, at least
thirteen portraits in small have survived which are either
signed by or attributed to Benbridge.4 The provenances of
these and other documentation indicate that the artist executed
works of this size from the time he was in Rome (1765) to
his late years in Norfolk.

It is difficult without recorded references to know why
and precisely when Henry Benbridge took up residence in
Norfolk after having spent most of his career in Charleston.
The last record of him in Charleston is the 1790 directory,
which lists him at 30 Broad Street. The next directory, 1794,
does not list Benbridge.5 Presumably he moved to Virginia
sometime after the 1790 directory and before his meeting
with the artist Thomas Sully. However, two particularly curious
and inexplicable references to the artist's Virginia associations
appeared before 1790, in 1784 Charleston newspapers. One
of these notices stated that Henry Benbridge, Esq. had "arrived
from Philadelphia, but last from Virginia."' The implications
here are puzzling but clearly suggest that the artist had spent
more than a casual two or three days in Virginia. Perhaps he
was in Norfolk, Virginia's leading seaport at this time and a
city which could have supported an artist of Benbridge's caliber.
While all of this remains conjecture, it must be pointed out
that a 1780s painting trip to Virginia by Benbridge would
clarify the date and the attribution of a double portrait by

53

Figure 3. The Gatling Children, pre- 17 '90. Oil on canvas, 40x33 inches.
Private collection.

him of two North Carolina sitters — the Gatling children
( Fig. 3 ) . The subjects were from Hertford County, which
borders on the southeastern Virginia state line.

Beyond the vague 1784 newspaper references, there are
no records or surviving paintings to indicate other visits by
the artist to Virginia prior to 1799. According to Stewart,
1799 was the year Thomas Sully met Benbridge in Norfolk.
Stewart's source for this information is William Dunlap's
well known History of the Rise and Progress of the Arts of
Design in the United States, first published in 1834.8 The

54

reliance on this single reference from Dunlap is risky and in
all probability it is incorrect. To understand this, one must
carefully weigh in chronological order all of Dunlap's existing
notes on this meeting, part of which were first recorded
in his diary.

In 1833, Dunlap visited Sully in Philadelphia and after-
wards made notes of their conversation in his diary which
reads, in part:

It was at Norfolk that Sully knew Bembridge. He has
a book of engravings bot. after his death in Phila.
with his autograph.

It is important that in this first record of information
from Sully to Dunlap there is no date reference. A year later
Dunlap makes two conflicting statements regarding their meet-
ing in his History. Obviously, he had confused the actual date
of Sully's arrival in Norfolk with the date of Sully's first
encounter with Benbridge — two very distinct happenings.

In his essay on "Bembridge" he writes:
In the year 1799, Mr. Thomas Sully, then a youth,
found Mr. Bembridge settled in high estimation in
Norfolk, Virginia. His works excited Sully to attempt
oil-painting, and to introduce himself to the veteran
painter, Sully sat to him for his picture, and was "well
repaid," as he has said, "by his useful and kind
instruction."'0

Later on, in Dunlap's essay on Sully, there is a statement
which is probably truthful as regards their date of meeting.
A brief summary of Dunlap's narrative preceding this quotation
is necessary for the reader to fully understand its implications.
Thomas Sully grew up in Charleston, South Carolina and was
apprenticed during the mid 1790s to Jean Zolbius Belzons,
miniature artist and his brother-in-law. Thomas's older brother,
Lawrence, was working in Norfolk and Richmond as a miniatur-
ist during these years. In 1799 young Sully and Belzons had
a rather serious disagreement and Thomas departed from
Charleston at the mercy of a sea captain whose vessel was
bound for Norfolk. Upon his arrival there his brother, Law-
rence, paid the passage due and secured his transportation to

55

Richmond, where Lawrence and his family lived. All of this
transpired in 1799. Dunlap continues this narration with
the following:

In the year 1801, Mr. Lawrence Sully removed his
family to Norfolk, and of course Thomas went with
him. At this time, the younger brother was the better
artist, and the main support of the household. But not
content with ivory and water-colours, and stimulated
by the sight of some portraits and other pictures by
Mr. Henry Bembridge, who was then exercising his
pencil in the Borough, Tom determined to try oil, and
made his preparations accordingly. . . . Tom tried
portraits from life, of a small size, in imitation of
Mr. Bembridge."

It seems logical from all the data available that 1801
is the correct date of the Benbridge-Sully meeting. Further,
it is unlikely that the young, destitute Sully arriving briefly in
Norfolk in 1799 would have had either the funds or the
initiative to engage a portrait sitting when his priorities were
to reach his brother in Richmond as quickly as possible.

The 1801 meeting date does not preclude the possibility
that Benbridge had settled in Norfolk a year or perhaps two
years earlier. References to a Henry Benbridge in Norfolk
begin as early as 1800. Most of these are difficult to interpret
because the artist's son, also named Henry (called Harry),
moved to Norfolk circa 1800.'2 However confusing the dis-
tinctions are in these records, it is significant that father and
son can be documented in the same locale at the same time.
This has particular relevance since Harry was an only child
and Hetty, the artist's wife, had died many years earlier.

In 1800 a Henry Benbridge purchased one share of the
cost of building the Presbyterian Church in Norfolk. It is
unclear as to whether this was the father or the son. In either
case, the evidence of a connection between the Benbridge
family and other subscribers to the church is significant. There
were less than 150 subscribers and purchasers of pews for
this project and among the others were Francis Stubbs Taylor
and William Boswell Lamb.'3

Genealogical research of the Lamb family of Norfolk
strongly suggests that William B. Lamb, his wife Margaret

56

Stuart, and their first child, Martha Anne, are the subjects of
the painting shown in figure one.'4 In a similar manner,
Francis S. Taylor, his wife Ann Lindsay, their daughter Sarah,
and an unidentified younger child are the most likely subjects
of Benbridge's painting illustrated in figure two.'5 Both paint-
ings were executed some time between 1803 and 1806.

Other possible social and business encounters between
these families and the Benbridges exist. For instance, Harry
Benbridge operated the well-known Norfolk Hotel on Main
Street from October, 1804 through the early months of 1806.'6
William B. Lamb also had an office on Main Street during a
portion of these years.'7

The date range of these portraits, 1803-1806, is based
on the ages of the sitters and their dress fashions, and
coincides with the probable period of the artist's activity in
Norfolk. The artist was definitely in Norfolk in 1801, when
Sully saw him. He was there in 1803 when he placed the
following notice in the Norfolk Herald:

DOCTOR J. K. READ,
SIR,

I have upwards of twenty years been afflicted with
an obstinate and distressing Asthma, and violent cough,
which has frequently brought me to the brink of the
grave. — I have made many applications to the first in
medical repute, and have tried almost every Medicine
which has been recommended as serviceable in this
complaint. I have at times found relief from Church's
Drops, but such relief was temporary only. — I was
induced last summer, during a very severe paroxism, to
try your Balsamic Cough Elixer, and to my great
satisfaction, found such relief after taking two bottles,
that I was determined to perservere in its use. By the
use of this Medicine alone, the paroxisms are entirely
removed, and the Cough so slight and trivial, as to be
wholly disregarded. My appetite has returned, I have
regained my flesh and spirits, and am now able to pursue
my business without interruption.

Wishing those who labour under the same distress-
ing complaint, to derive equal benefit, I have thought it

57

right to inform you of the advantages I have received,
from the use of your valuable Medicine, and you have
my permission to make what use you please of this letter.

Your friend, &c.

(Signed)

HENRY BENBRIDGE, Sen.18

Figure 4. Detail of Figure 2, head of Francis S. Taylor.

58

There are no other specific references to the artist in
Norfolk after this date, but it is thought that he continued
to stay with or near his son, whose advertisements continued
to appear in local newspapers until April 19th, 1806. By 1810,
Harry had moved to Baltimore." The father may have followed
him there, going later to Philadelphia where Dunlap says
he died.

Both of the Norfolk paintings show a variety of stylistic
similarities to other works by Benbridge. The figures have
unusually well-formed and delineated mouths, with rather heavy
shadows below their lower lips ( Fig. 4 ) . The subjects' eyes
and brows are also given form by dark shading, a treatment
which is very characteristic of Benbridge's style. The artist was
never successful at drawing hands, and in his small portraits
these features are usually ill-defined and too small, with thin
pointed fingers. This kind of handling is seen in both the
Lamb and the Taylor portraits and compares favorably with
sitters' hands in the portrait of John Saltar and his family

(Fig. 5).

Other aspects of the Saltar portrait relate particularly to
the Taylor painting. The heads of Mrs. Saltar and Mr. Taylor
are strikingly similar in pose and size, and in the drawing of
the eyes, nose, and mouth. The resemblance here is so close
that one could almost imagine a blood relationship between
the two sitters.

Benbridge often tilted the heads of his sitters towards the
center of the picture in order to balance and unify his group
compositions. This is seen not only with Mrs. Saltar, but also
with the child sitting at her feet. The same technique was
employed in both the Taylor and Lamb likenesses, particularly
with the children. The standing poses of the men in the
Norfolk portraits compare closely with that of Jacob Shubrick
(Fig. 6), painted sometime after 1778 by Benbridge in
Charleston.

While the costumes of the Taylor and Lamb families are
typical of their time, the artist's treatment here is not as
careful or detailed as it is in his earlier work. This is probably
due as much to a style change in dress fabrics as it was to
the artist's declining ability in old age. The landscape and
architectural settings in both Norfolk works are also devoid
of crisp detailing in the foreground. However, the scumbled,
ill-defined foliage of the trees and the scraggy tree trunks seen

59

Figure 5. The John Saltar Family, pre-1790. Oil on canvas, 30x25
inches. Collection of Mrs. Katherine Hellman. Photograph courtesy of
the Frick Art Reference Library.

in the Taylor portrait are similar to background features in
any number of his paintings from 1765 throughout the years
of his professional career in America.

It is difficult to comment specifically on color and color
relationships between these Virginia paintings and earlier
examples by the artist. The costumes in these late works are,
by the very nature of their period, dull when compared to
the exuberant satins and damasks worn by Benbridge's Charles-

60

ton and Philadelphia clientele. Flesh tones, however, seem to
compare closely. The light source in both Virginia portraits
comes from the upper left, which appears to have been the
artist's preference throughout his career. The left sides of the
sitters' faces are placed in considerable shadow, particularly
below the cheek bones. This, again, is a characteristic element
of many of his earlier paintings.

As stated earlier, the attribution of the Taylor and Lamb
portraits relies entirely on circumstancial evidence and their
content of certain style characteristics associated with Ben-
bridge's work. There is no question that this artist was in
Norfolk at the time, and was equipped and was willing to
engage sitters. No other artists working in this format are
known to have visited Norfolk during these years, except the
aspiring Sully whose earliest work could not approach the
sophistication of these likenesses.

A number of stylistic similarities and parallels have been
pointed out here. However, there are minor dissimilarities
which may raise questions in the viewer's mind. In considering
these, one must be careful to weigh the changes in dress fashions
and taste that occurred at the turn of the century. These changes
ultimately influenced pictorial representations such as portraits.
This occurrence is further complicated by the sparsity of
documented 1790s paintings by Benbridge. It is therefore
difficult to assess totally and offer comparisons of his style
when the continuity of his work is broken by a ten-year gap.
In all fairness, the writer must admit that this has been an
especially worrisome element in preparing this article. Yet the
writer must conclude that there are sufficient similarities and
nuances of basic technique that strongly indicate a Benbridge
attribution. The evidence, though incomplete at this time,
offers us two unique Virginia portraits executed by Benbridge
in the last years of his life.

Miss Weekley, formerly Curator of the Museum of Early
Southern Decorative Arts, is currently Curator of Decorative
Arts at the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond, Virginia.

61

Figure 6. Jacob Sbubrick, pre-1790. Oil on canvas, 30^x25 inches.
Collection of the Society of the Cincinnati-Anderson House Museum,
Gift of W. B. Sbubrick Clymer. Photograph courtesy of the Society
of the Cincinnati.

62

NOTES

1. Robert G. Stewart, Henry Benbridge (1743-1812): American
Portrait Painter, (City of Washington: National Portrait Gallery,
1971), pp. 21, 28, catalogue entries 7, 8.

2. Ibid.

3. Ibid, p. 60.

4. Ibid. pp. 60-66, 86-88.

5. Jacob Milligan, The Charleston Directory (T. B. Bowen, 1790) and
Jacob Milligan, The Charleston Directory (W. P. Young, Septem-
ber 1794).

6. Stewart, op.cit., p. 20.

7. Ibid, pp. 34-35, catalogue entry 21.

8. Ibid, pp. 21-22; William Dunlap, History of the Rise and Progress
of the Arts of Design In the United States, (New York: George
P. Scott and Co., 1834), Vol. I, p. 143.

9. William Dunlap, Diary of William Dunlap (1766-1839), (New
York: The New York Historical Society, 1930), p. 691-

10. Dunlap, History of the Rise and Progress, Vol. I, p. 143.

11. Ibid., Vol. II, pp. 104-107.

12. Stewart, Henry Benbridge, pp. 19, 21.

13. Edward W. James, Lower Norfolk Antiquary. (New York: Peter
Smith, 1895), p. 66.

14. William Boswell Lamb, son of Col. Richard Lamb and Clarrissa
Boswell, married Margaret Stuart sometime before March, 1801.
Their daughter, Martha Anne, was born January 12, 1802. William
Boswell Lamb was active in Norfolk politics, serving as an alder-
man for the Borough of Norfolk from 1803 to 1810, as a director
of the Virginia Branch Bank in 1806, and as President of the
Virginia Bank from 1815 to 1827. He served in a number of
governmental posts, including Mayor of Norfolk in 1810, 1812,
1814, part of 1816, and briefly in 1823. He died in 1852. Informa-
tion for the above gleaned from Norfolk City Marriage Bonds
( 1797-1850), the 1806 Norfolk Directory, pp. 21, 36, 40, the 1810
and 1820 Census Records for Virginia, and William S. Forrest,
Historical and Descriptive Sketches of Norfolk and Vicinity,
(Philadelphia: Lindsay and Blakeston, 1853), p. 286. The author
is grateful to Ms. Pam McLellan Geddy, Valentine Museum for
compiling this material.

15. This portrait has a long documented history of ownership by
Lindsay family descendants. In fact, it has traditionally been called

63

the Lindsay portrait. Originally, the subjects were identified as
Col. William Lindsay (died 1838) his wife Mary Anne Newton,
with two of their children. Col. Lindsay and Miss Newton did not
marry until 1808. Their first child, William Reuben Lindsay, was
born the next year, and their second child, Virginia Lindsay, could
not have been born before 1810. Judging from the age of the
children in the portrait, the painting would have to date circa 1812
if the subjects represented are the Col. William Lindsay family.
It is the author's opinion that the date is too late for the style
of dress, and more importantly, it does not coincide with Ben-
bridge's years of activity in Norfolk. Genealogical research reveals
that there is only one likely Lindsay associated family which coin-
cides with this time framework, specifically, Francis S. Taylor, who
married Ann Lindsay (sister of Col. William Lindsay) on October
11, 1797. The records are not clear as to the birth dates and names
of their children. It is known that one daughter, Sarah, married in
1819- This suggests that she was born circa 1800 and may be the
oldest child in the portrait. There is also some question as to
Francis Taylor's occupation and role in Norfolk. The Virginia
Argus for 6 February 1805 lists him as a clerk for the bank of
Norfolk. In 1814 the Norfolk Gazette & Public Ledger carried
his advertisement for a female academy. Information for this entry
gleaned from the 1810 and 1820 Census Records for Virginia,
Norfolk City Directories for 1801 and 1806, and Norfolk City
Marriage Bonds (1797-1850). Also, see Edward L. Lomax, Geneal-
ogy of the Virginia Family of Lomax, (Chicago: Rand McNally &
Co., 1973), pp. 39-40; Margaret Isabella Lindsay, The Lindsays of
America, (Albany: Joel Munsells Sons Pub., 1889), pp. 233-237;
the Norfolk Weekly Journal; and Country Intelligencer for October
11, 1793, p. 8. The author is grateful to Ms. Pam McLellan Geddy,
Valentine Museum, and Mr. Christian Kolbe for compiling this
material.

16. The Norfolk Gazette and Public k Ledger, Norfolk, October 9, 1804,
p. 3.

17. Rev. W. H. T. Squires, "Norfolk in By-Gone Days," Norfolk
Ledger-Dispatch, June 13, 1940.

18. The Norfolk Herald, Norfolk, February 5, 1803, p. 3.
19- Stewart, Henry Benbridge, p. 21.

64

Donations to MESDA

FROM MAY 1977 TO OCTOBER 1978

MESDA COLLECTIONS

Acquisition Number

2889 Delft Bottle. Gift of Mrs. G. Wilson Douglas, Sr.

2936 Brass and Iron Shovel and Tongs Set. Gift of Mr. and Mrs.

Vincent C. Schwerin.

2938 Portrait of Mr. and Mrs. Francis Stubbs Taylor and Daugh-
ters, by Henry Benbridge. Gift of Mr. and Mrs. James
W. Douglas.

2939 Baltimore, Federal Card Table. Gift of Mrs. Thomas H.
Cordle, in memory of Ethel and Archie Blankinship.

2941 Masonic Floorcloth. Gift of Mr. G. Wilson Douglas, Jr.

Purchase Fund.

2944 Crewel Needlework. Gift of Dr. and Mrs. Frank Albright.

2950 Stoneware Jar. Gift of Mrs. Robert Hopper.

2955 Needlework Picture. Gift of Miss Mary White Beckwith.

2956 Porcelain Cup and Saucer. Gift of Mrs. Charles R. Brown.

2964 Stoneware Crock. Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Byron J. Banks.

2972 Creamware transfer-printed Plaque of Washington. Gift

of Mr. G. Wilson Douglas, Jr.

2980 Henry Will Account Book and Index. Gift of Mrs. Francis

B. Stewart.

2994 Woven Bedcover. Gift of Miss M. C. Parker.

2995 Plaster Overmantel Plaque of an Eagle. Gift of Mr. Charles
D. Ficken.

2998 German Bible of 1749 and Chinese Export Porcelain Cups

and Saucers. Gift of Mrs. Francis B. Stewart.

3011 Appliqued Quilt and Overshot Coverlet. Gift of Mr. and
Mrs. Fred Crebbin III.

3012 Embroidered Bedspread. Gift of Mrs. Harold Vogler.
3017 Embroidered Bedcover. Gift of Mrs. M. Chisholm Wallace.

3019 Stoneware Crock. Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Lindsay Grigsby.

3023 Appliqued Quilt. Gift of the Estate of Miss Elizabeth Allen

Watson.

3030 Kettle Rack. Gift of Mr. Robert Simms.

Two Box Locks and a Norfolk Latch. Gift of Mr. G.
Wilson Douglas, Jr.

65

DONORS OF CONSERVATION,
BUILDING, AND OPERATING FUNDS

Mr. and Mrs. Frederick G. Bannerot, Jr.

Mr. Carl Barnes

Bocock Stroud Company

Mrs. Charles R. Brown

Mr. and Mrs. Albert L. Butler, Jr.

Mr. and Mrs. John deBraganza

Mr. and Mrs. Donald E. Corbett

Mr. G. Wilson Douglas, Jr.

Mrs. G. Wilson Douglas, Sr.

Douglas Battery Manufacturing Company

Mrs. Archer B. Glenn

Mrs. Bahnson Gray

Mr. Bernard Gray

Mr. Thomas A. Gray

Mr. and Mrs. Eldridge C. Hanes

Mr. and Mrs. F. Borden Hanes, Jr.

Mr. and Mrs. Gordon Hanes

Mr. and Mrs. James G. Hanes, III

Mr. and Mrs. Miles C. Horton

Mr. and Mrs. George M. Kaufman

Mr. and Mrs. John W. Neal

Miss Grizzelle M. Norfleet

Mr. and Mrs. Bradford L. Rauschenberg

Shepherd-Lambeth, Incorporated

Dr. and Mrs. George E. Waynick, Jr.

Western Electric Company

Mrs. John C Whitaker, Jr.

Mr. and Mrs. William T. Wilson, Jr.

66

DONATIONS TO THE MESDA LIBRARY

Mrs. Selma Caston

Mrs. Anna Cooper

Mr. Gordon Crumpler

Miss Ann Dibble

Mr. G. Wilson Douglas, Jr.

Mrs. Robert E. Gant

Mr. R. Philip Hanes, Jr.

Mrs. Miles C. Horton, Jr.

Mrs. James T Igoe

Mr. Luther S. Lashmit

Mr. Edgar deN. Mayhew

Mrs. A. Hewson Michie

Mrs. Christine Minter-Dowd

Mrs. William L. Putney, Jr.

Mrs. Nancy S. Reynolds

Mrs. Will H. Theus

Mrs. J. Marshall Watkins

Dr. and Mrs. George E. Waynick, Jr.

Mr. George Wright

67

Back issues of The Journal
are available.

Photographs in this issue by Bradford L. Rauschenberg, the
Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts, except where
noted.

MUSEUM OF EARLY SOUTHERN DECORATIVE ARTS

Thomas A. Gray, Director

Frank L. HORTON, Senior Research Fellow

Bradford L. Rauschenberg, Research Fellow

MRS. Sally Gant, Educational Coordinator

Mrs. William L. Putney, Jr., Associate in Education

Ms. Bryding Adams, Acting Registrar

Mrs. Shelby Hill, Secretary/ 'Receptionist

FIELD RESEARCHERS

Miss Ann Dibble
Box 1230

Charleston, South Carolina 29402

Miss Mary Witten Neal
In transit to the
western Maryland area

Miss Deborah Lee Miller
822 True Street
Columbia, South Carolina 29209

Miss Jane Webb Smith
Route 1, Box 162 A
Easton, Maryland 21601

Field representatives are in the process

of moving into

the Maryland area.