In May 2021, we were asked to give an online lecture to the British & Irish Furniture Makers Online (BIFMO) and the Furniture History Society (FHS).

The history of campaign furniture, the different types of makers and those who used it along with its eventual demise are all discussed and well illustrated. Sean is introduced by Adriana Turpin of BIFMO and, following the lecture, questions are taken from the audience. 

Click on this link to watch the lecture:

TAKE UP YOUR BED & WALK

LAPADA Leaders Webinar

 We were recently asked to take part in a live LAPADA Leaders Webinar to discuss campaign furniture.

The title of the talk was Toys For The Boys (and Girls). Tim Bent of Bentleys and Alan Hatchwell of Hatchell Antiques also took part and talked about the luxury luggage makers and aeronautical and industrial design antiques respectively.

If you would like to watch the three of us discussing our passion for the antiques we deal in with Freya Simms of LAPADA, you can do so on the LAPADA You Tube channel by clicking on the image below.

Thomas Butler - The Grandfather of Campaign Furniture Makers?

Thomas Butler can perhaps be considered the ‘Grandfather’ of campaign furniture makers. Certainly all of the other cabinet makers who worked in or around Catherine Street in the early 19th century had, at some stage, been linked to him and went on to make very similar pieces to those of Butler.

Butler is recorded as first starting in partnership with Edward Johnson at 146 Strand, which is opposite Catherine Street, sometime before 1787. Johnson had previously taken out insurance at 14 Catherine Street in 1784 and it may be that Butler was in his employment before they became partners with the plan that he would eventually take over the business. This would tie in with Johnson and Butler dissolving their partnership in March 1787, the stock auctioned by Christies and it seems Johnson stopping work as cabinet maker. The move to 146 Strand for a brief period may be explained by a line in the notice of the partnership’s dissolution, which also states the business was formerly of Catherine Street. The notice says all demands on the business can be made to Butler at the Strand until the Catherine Street address is rebuilt. It’s possible that 14 Catherine Street had been damaged by fire or simply that the property was being altered.

After running his own business for a short time, up to 1791, Butler joined in partnership with John Heppel at 14 Catherine Street. When the partnership was dissolved, Heppel moved out and set up in business as a cabinet maker at 55 Oxford Street.

Although he had previously made a variety of furniture with both Johnson and Heppel, Butler now concentrated his business on the manufacture of sofa and chair beds and described his premises, in adverts, as an Upholstery & Bedding Warehouse.

Chair Bed by Thomas Butler

There was a great interest in metamorphic furniture at the end of the 18th century and a sofa or chair that could be quickly converted to a bed no doubt proved popular. Four poster beds that could be easily set up and taken down were soon added to Butler’s range. By the turn of 1800 he had gone back to also manufacturing other cabinet work and supplied the Prince of Wales with two elegant mahogany Writing Tables in 1802. 

Extended as a bed

It is easy to see how making metamorphic furniture progressed to campaign furniture and the Napoleonic Wars would have further increased the demand. A broadsheet advert of 1806 shows that Butler was producing Portable Chairs, Imperial Dining Tables, Escretoires and both Chair and Sofa Beds. These items were aimed at both the military and the domestic markets with designs also available in the Egyptian, Etruscan, Greek and Chinese manner. It was also possible for customers to provide their own timber.

Butler made the most of suggesting that he was the originator of a number of the designs of his furniture although this is a very grey area. It was not uncommon at the time for cabinet makers to use the word patent to describe their furniture even if they hadn’t actually taken a patent out. It was a means of elevating the design and suggesting it was protected. Butler is not listed as having taken out any patents of his own and it is known that he used his Catherine Street neighbour Thomas Waldron’s 1785 patent for a bed that could be assembled without the use of screws or nuts and bolts. Morgan & Sanders, who started as Butlers foreman and clerk before they set up in rivalry, also later claimed that they were the originators of some of his designs whilst working for him. It will probably never be known how many of Butler’s designs were original to him, conceived by others in his workshops or taken from other cabinet makers.  

Four Poster Bed dissassembled

Thomas Butler was also a non-conformist minister at Charlton, near Hitchin and perhaps it was this secondary occupation that led him to retire and then return Catherine Street twice. In late 1800, he sold his business to Thomas Oxenham much to the chagrin of Morgan & Sanders, who believed it had been promised to them. They quickly set up as neighbours and competitors to Oxenham at Nos. 16 & 17 Catherine Street. The intense competition between Butler and Morgan & Sanders, led by the latter, was played out in the press over the next 10 years with each issuing adverts attacking the other.

Oxenham, originally a mangle maker in Oxford Street, didn’t last long. In 1802 Butler had taken the business back and continued for another 8 years. In 1804 he took out insurance on properties behind Catherine Street at 4 to 7 Helmet Court and Pegasus Yard, Savoy. This suggests that business was good, and he expanded. In 1810 he retired once more, this time selling the business to Edward Argles. Argles was a Cabinet Maker and Upholsterer from Maidstone, Kent and probably saw the move to London as a good opportunity to grow his business. Unfortunately, it didn’t work out for him and he was declared bankrupt in June 1813.

Once more Butler returned and set up again at 13 and 14 Catherine Street. He only lasted a year, perhaps because he had lost too many key employees. His son in law, John Steains, who had been with him since 1793, took the opportunity when Argles moved in, to set up in business with George Pryor and John Mackenzie who had also been employed by Butler. They established themselves at Brydges Street, which ran on north from Catherine Street. In July 1814, Butler retired for the final time and his stock was auctioned over 3 days. Morgan & Sanders later advertised that they had taken over a considerable part of Butler’s premises, as one final jab at their former employer.

A small Imperial Table.

Although Johnson and Waldron were fore runners to Butler in Catherine Street and Morgan & Sanders are perhaps the most recognised name of the two today, Butler’s influence on campaign furniture should not be under estimated. He capitalised on the interest in metamorphic furniture and the demand for campaign furniture. In doing so, he also paved the way for the other businesses to profit from the same markets. We group Butler, Morgan & Sanders, Oxenham, Argles, Steains, Pryor & Mackenzie and John Durham as the Catherine Street makers not just because of their location. They all produced very similar pieces, working to a number of the same designs which were first popularised by Butler. So much so that it can be difficult to determine which of them made one of the recognised designs without a maker’s label.

Recognition is due to Nicholas Brawer and Elizabeth Heyer for their seperate research on Thomas Butler and Morgan & Sanders.

More can be read about the some of the other Catherine Street makers on our website at the below links:

Edward Argles

John Durham

Morgan & Sanders

                                                                                                                           By Sean Clarke

A Rare & Unusual Georgian Campaign Table.

A Rare & Unusual Georgian  Campaign Table.

When you first see this late 18th century table you may not think it is "campaign" or that unusual. Maybe the first clue to it not being what it appears would be that the top is made from two pieces of timber.
 Once seeing this you next thought might be " The top is from a card table. That can't be right." You decide to have a closer look and see what its all about.

     So what do we notice from this photo:
        1. The top is hinged but not folding upwards like a card or table but        downwards. Most odd.
        2. The timber to the top and side rails is a dense Cuban mahogany.
        3. Unusually, the legs with their boxwood stringing are made of a lighter possibly Honduras mahogany.                    Can this table be right ?

Lets have a look underneath and see whats going on.

Interesting. We have 8 iron hinged fixings that are connecting the top to the base section. Lets undo these and see what happens.

Undoing the hinge fittings has allowed the top to be removed and further iron fittings allow the legs to be removed from the frieze rails. So we have a table that completely dis-mantles.

So, what can we deduce from this?
     From the style of the square tapered legs with the boxwood stringing this table would date to around 1790. We know that at this period in the second half of 18th century cabinet makers were experimenting with different designs to make furniture that could be dis-mantled to make it portable.
       At this period the campaign furniture would look like its domestic equivalent and would usually be made by cabinet makers rather than makers who specialised in travel furniture. Some of the known  furniture designers  of the time included some portable furniture in their design books but there were not, that we have discovered, that many designs available for their subscribers. 

 For this reason we occasionally come across furniture which we believe were bespoke made for a client and possibly one off  pieces. I believe that to be the case with this table.
      Two last details that should be mentioned are that all the fitting are iron as opposed to brass which is unusual. Possibly, even blacksmith made that leads me to believe that the table is more likely than not made by a provincial cabinet maker. Secondly, why did the maker not put hinges to the top section the other way around to allow the top to close and protect the polished surface as opposed to this way that means it will not close flat as the iron hinges are in the way?

By Simon Clarke.

Maynard & Co. A lesser known Campaign Furniture Maker.

 

Maynard & Co.

Military and General Outfitters and Agents.
27 , Poultry, Next to Mansion House.


Maynard & Co. are not one of the first names you would think of when considering makers of campaign furniture.  Though in business for almost 80 years , from 1814 to 1893, not many pieces by them have have surfaced. However, they were one of a number of companies who developed a business that could offer every assistance to the traveller to the East from booking their passage and selecting their cabin to supplying their portable furniture. 

We have come across a couple of chests by the maker both quite different which may back up the theory that they have bought in some of their stock and with the one below having features that are not seen in the other fairly standard types of construction found on chests made by other makers.

Mahogany campaign chest circa 1831.

The above chest has quite distinct handles and has an unusual bolt mechanism for holding the top and bottom in place. 

As time progresses I am sure more will come to light on this interesting company and will be recorded online on our makers file for Maynard & Co.

Simon Clarke.

The Victorian Army’s Cabinet Maker of Choice.

Ross and Co. of Dublin were one of the most important makers of campaign furniture in the Victorian era and justifiably, their name still stands out as a leader in their field, today.

With the rapid growth of the British Empire in the 19^th century, came the increased movement of administrators, colonists and of course the Army and Navy. It was not uncommon for an officer to have what would now be considered a ridiculous amount of luggage. This is perhaps best explained by a diary entry dated 1813 by Lieutenant – Colonel William Tomkinson who noted why he equipped himself with 600 lbs of personal baggage while on duty in Spain during the Peninsular war: ‘[My equipment] may appear a large fit-out for a person going on service, but experience taught us that campaign after campaign was not to be got through without the things I have stated; and the more an officer makes himself comfortable, the better will he do his duty, as well as secure his own health, and the comfort of those belonging to him. It does not follow, that because we attempt the best in every situation that we cannot face the worst. The poorer the country the greater must be your baggage, from the length of time you are obliged to march without obtaining a fresh supply.’

James Ross Murphy and Patrick Murphy capitalized on the demand for portable furniture that accompanied this increased movement of people with the formation of their company E. Ross on Ellis Quay. Although examples of domestic furniture by Ross are known the vast majority of their output was designed to quickly fold or pack down for ease of travel.

The company’s exact start date is unknown but the first record of Ross is 1821 when they are listed in the directories as being located at 6 Ellis Quay. They remained on the quay throughout their history although their address is listed in the Dublin Directories at various combinations of the numbers between 5 to 11 and they are known to have also later had a factory at 35 Tighe Street (now named Benburb Street). These two locations were of course ideally located for the many officers stationed at Collins Barracks and this no doubt was a benefit to the business; a fact also picked up on by John Ireland, their neighbour and an Army Clothier, who was located at 11 Ellis Quay in 1850.

Ross stand out from the many other campaign furniture makers of the period for a number of reasons but perhaps the most important is their originality in design. As can be seen from the adverts of the London makers of the day, such as Hill & Millard, J W Allen and Day & Son they were all making fairly similar campaign pieces. Their adverts would typically show a two part chest of drawers, a washstand, folding bed and a Douro pattern chair. There would be the odd item that was specific to a particular maker but generally by the mid 19^th century there were standard pieces that most officers would require and which they could easily find from a number of makers. Apart from their most basic chest of drawers, which followed the traditional design, most items manufactured by Ross differed greatly to that by other makers. A number of their chests would have a clever, folding superstructure or an unusual combination of drawers, their washstands wouldn’t have the normal brass standards adopted by the other makers but have turned columns and their Easy Chairs would put comfort at a premium.

Much of Ross’s work can be considered typical of the William IV and Victorian periods in its use of the fashionable design features of the day. This would of course have given their cabinet making greater appeal than that which was purely utilitarian; an important factor to their customers who would mostly have been well heeled gentleman officers with an eye for the stylish. It also means that much of it is not obviously made for campaign until close inspection. A good example of this is the Desk Chair below, that breaks down into eight pieces for travel.

The majority of campaign furniture was commissioned or retailed as individual pieces but Ross very cleverly gave the option of buying a suite of furniture. Such a suite would have a combination of a short set of Dining Chairs, an Easy Chair, a Couch, a Center Table and a Chiffonier or Sideboard which broke down to become the packing case. On the inside door of the cabinet furniture would be a label, giving packing instructions. The packing case cabinets were often adorned with carved decoration and moulding, which again was unusual for campaign furniture that mostly considered flat surfaces and square edges to be a pre-requisite. However, when it came to packing the cabinet, the moulding would be removed and the carved show wood protected with a bolt on panel so no sacrifice was made for the added decoration.

Perhaps the most famous such suite is that made for Captain Simner of the 76^th Regiment and his wife, Francis Mary Bolton, as a wedding present on March the 27^th, 1863. It was made from walnut taken from the family estate at Bective, in Ireland and travelled with the Captain and his wife to Madras, Burma and Secunderabad over a 12 year period. They may well have considered it their best wedding present, as it must have given great comfort in the very different climate of the Far East. Ross’s concessions to embellishment with the carving probably also gave a reminder of the Europe that they had left behind and so a feeling of a little luxury in a harder environment.

We are fortunate that Ross labeled most of their work with either a painted stencil, or small ivory or brass plaque, giving their current address at Ellis Quay. That which is not labeled was probably from a suite, where other items would have the Ross mark. However it is usually relatively easy to recognize Ross campaign furniture from its other traits. The use of walnut was common for Ross, perhaps because they recognized its revival in popularity under the Victorians, which again, would give an added selling point. Yet it was untypical of most campaign furniture makers who generally preferred mahogany or teak.

Ross’s numbering, for ease of assembly, of the individual parts that make up a piece of their furniture is also unique. Most campaign furniture makers used a simple system, often using Roman numerals but always starting, naturally, with the number one. Furniture by Ross is often given a two digit number or sometimes a letter and number depending on the item and Roman numerals are not noted as having been used. An example of such numbering is the set of four Balloon Back Chairs, illustrated, where the numbers range from 62 and 63 on the first chair to 70 and 71 on the second, 74 and 75 on the third and 92 and 93 on the fourth. Although at first this seemingly random system of numbering doesn’t seem to make sense it was probably logical for a factory that may have been making several pieces of the same item of furniture at the same time. Added to this Ross were probably selling their wares to members of the same regiments and their numbering system may well have saved future confusion amongst brother officers.

Ross prospered through out the 19^th century and by 1864 their reputation was sealed by the approval of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales. By 1882 even the Army were recommending them, something only done on occasion. The Report of the Kabul Committee on Equipment (Calcutta) stated ‘…. the committee now consider it to be necessary for the comfort of an officer, that he should have a bed, and they find that the pattern…made by Ross of Dublin is the most suitable. It weighs under 20lbs.

The success Ross and Co. of Dublin enjoyed throughout the 19^th century can be put down to a number of factors, the most obvious being that they were very good cabinet makers. This quality of work coupled with their ingenuity of design, which was quite distinctive from their contemporaries, and attention to the popular styles of the day proved a winning combination. However, Ross also had other factors working in their favour to create a strong customer base. Not only were a large percentage of the British Army’s officers Irish but Ross were clever enough to position themselves close to one of the biggest barracks in Europe. The barracks were garrisoned by an Army that had spread itself across the world and whose mostly landed officers could afford the best, wished to travel in style and to have all the comforts of home when they arrived at their destination.

By 1909 there is no listing for Ross in the directories and their last address of 8,9 & 10 Ellis Quay is listed as vacant, surrounded by tenements. Their demise is due to the same factors that affected other campaign makers, which put simply is that they were right for their time and their time was over. The world and how war was conducted had changed significantly by the beginning of the 20^th century. The Boers, with their speed of movement and good use of the ambush had taught the British Army a sharp lesson. Arnold-Forster, the Secretary of State for War perhaps recognized that things had to change when in 1903 he said ‘The British Army is a social institution prepared for every emergency except that of war.’  Domestic use had also tailed off, there weren’t as many colonists as in past generations and those that were heading off to make a new life knew that their destination was now far better set up to furnish them than in their ancestor’s days. The emergence of the motorcar also meant people could travel far quicker and so did not need to take as much with them for the comfort of a long journey. Although there was still a demand for both military and civilian travel furniture the cake had become much smaller. Added to this Ross probably suffered from the same effect that many independent retailers also do today, the popularity of the supermarket. The end of the 19^th century saw the spectacular rise of The Army and Navy Store, a shop where everything could be bought from a travelling shaving brush to a tent. Whether you were looking to buy your groceries or a billiard table The Army and Navy Store could ship it to you in most parts of the world.

There is still much to be learnt about Ross of Dublin and it is a regret that there are inconsistencies in their directory listings and so few records of the company other than their furniture that survive. The discovery of a trade catalogue would shed more light on their full range of goods and offer other invaluable information. However, they have left a passion amongst collectors for their camp equipage, much of which travelled the globe when it was first made and is still doing so as it is eagerly sort.

by Sean Clarke and Nicholas Brawer

This article was first published in ‘Ireland’s Antiques & Period Properties’ magazine, Vol. 1 No. 3,

Summer / Autumn 2004.

The Douro Chair

The Douro Chair was made by the majority of London campaign furniture makers during the 19th century, with W. Day & Son, J.W. Allen, Hill & Millard and The Army & Navy Store all illustrating it in their adverts. Also W. Smee & Sons of London illustrated a Douro Chair with a foot rest in 1850. The chair was named after the Douro River in Spain and Portugal, a place well known to the British troops fighting during the Peninsular War of 1808 to 1814. Who first designed and produced the Douro first and exactly when we are yet to find out.

My Barrack Room, Landguard Fort

This pencil drawing with watercolour was drawn by Lieutenant Edward Hovell Thurlow of the Royal Artillery and he titles it to the bottom centre of the picture. He has also noted in the left corner ‘Done in Bed, Nov. 27th 1856’ and initialed it. To the left is a Douro Chair with a sword leaning against it.

The 'Douro' was obviously a popular chair with these different makers producing them over such a long period of time. As with so may pieces of campaign furniture they were made with their own packing cases and as we have seen with other pieces the makers decided to make these cases have a secondary use as a piece of furniture by providing legs which when screwed in turned the case into a table or desk.

The painting below shows another barrack room with a square backed Douro. It is attributed to Lieutenant Edward Hungerford Delavel Elers Napier, circa 1835 and is entitled "My barrack room at Belfast" signed with initials, dated and inscribed, 'E.N./Belfast.del 1835' . This is the earliest depiction of the Douro we have which makes it interesting as it gives us a date that we know they were being made from.

My barrack room at Belfast 

The makers Hill & Millard made a model of Douro chair which conforms to the standard model of chair put with a brass rod to the top upright which would allow the top cushion to be attached stopping it from sliding down. The model below having the makers name stenciled to the canvas seat below the cushion.  

In stock at the moment we have a good example by J.W. Allen. ( below) the name being stenciled on the inside of the door of the packing case. As you can see J.W. Allen favoured the shaped back. As with most of the others we have seen the chair is made of Satin-birch  ( we did once have a model made of oak unfortunately with out a makers name.) and has the typical leather straps that allow the back to be reclined. We have had a model which had wooden arms with leather at the ends to allow for reclining. Sadly, this one also was missing a makers name.

J.W. Allen Douro Chair

As far as campaign furniture goes the Douro is a design classic which would complete any antique campaign furniture collection.

By Simon Clarke