IRISH GLASS--CORK AND WATERFORD
The history of the manufacture of glass in Ireland is very obscure, and
the dates of its various periods difficult to fix. Hence it is well-nigh
impossible to place before the reader any reliable data in the way of
photographs of pieces that can be guaranteed authentic both as regards
place of origin and date.
Yet numerous specimens do exist, including drinking glasses of all
shapes and sizes, as well as fruit dishes, epergnes, sweetmeat glasses,
decanters, and salt-cellars, which are undoubtedly Irish in their
origin, and which are generally known as “Waterford” glass.
As far as can be determined, glass-making in various forms, enamelling,
and even mosaic work and cameos, were carried on in Ireland as early as
the beginning of the eighth century.
The finest examples of the earliest period are to be found in the Royal
Irish Antiquities
[Illustration: FIG. 29.--NAILSEA JUG AND MUG.]
Collection, which includes the famous Ardagh Chalice, the Tara Brooch,
the Cross of Cong, and the Crozier of Clonmacnoise, as well as other
well-known and interesting exhibits. At any rate, experts are agreed
that even at this early date the art of enamelling on glass was
practised in Ireland, being probably introduced by the Phœnicians who,
in turn, had acquired the art from Ancient Egypt. In support of this
belief is the fact that a large piece of red enamelled glass was found
in the Rath of Caílchon on Tara Hill; but it is equally clear that the
art of glass-making, if introduced at the time mentioned, speedily fell
into desuetude, for there is no mention of any manufacture of glass
between the ninth and the seventeenth centuries, nor are there to be
found any specimens which may be attributed to this period. There are,
further, no traces of the manufacture even of window glass of the
commonest description.
In the seventeenth century, however, there were many interesting
squabbles with regard to glass-making patents and their infringement,
and there are records of petitions to the King concerning them; but from
the Patent Roll of King James I. it appears that little was done.
Still, we have it on record that permission was given to import glass in
1675, and it is suggested that craftsmen in Ireland attempted to imitate
the work of Continental glass-workers, and various sums of money were
granted by the Universities and others interested, to assist them in so
doing. Some progress undoubtedly was made, for it is clear that by the
eighteenth century factories were in existence and glass was being
actually made in Dublin, Waterford, Cork, Belfast, and Londonderry.
Some examples of early Waterford glass are, as far as shape and size go,
replicas of glasses made in England at about the same period, but the
reason for the almost immediate popularity of the Irish glass was its
perfection of colour. A fine specimen which recently came under my
notice is a preserve jar with cover (Fig. 30), about 18 inches in
height, handsomely cut and shaped, with a square base and a fine spiked
cover. It is undoubtedly one of the finest examples of early Waterford
glass which it has been my privilege to inspect.
Genuine Waterford glass is characterised by a peculiar bluish tint in
its body--due, it is generally recognised, to the presence of lead--but
[Illustration: OLD WATERFORD GLASS WATER JUGS. 18th-19th CENTURY.
FIG. 30.]
attributed by some to some peculiar quality of the flint employed, which
was obtained from pits in the vicinity. Personally, I lean to the former
hypothesis. Cork glass, on the other hand, is distinguishable by a pale
yellow or amber tint--in all probability the result of the presence of
iron. These tones are characteristic, for though the colouring of glass
has been brought by modern workers to a fine art, yet no one has
succeeded in exactly reproducing them so that, to the expert eye, the
genuine old Irish glass is unmistakable.
About the year 1753 the Dublin Society offered a premium for the
establishment of a glass factory in County Cork. There seems, however,
to have been some reluctance in taking advantage of the offer, for it
was not until 1782 that the first glass factory was established there.
Then Atwell Hayes, Thomas Burnett and Francis Richard Rowe demanded
assistance from Parliament in carrying on the industry. They proposed to
erect two houses, one for bottles and one for window glass and, from
their advertisements appearing shortly after in the Irish papers,
offering to sell glass at their manufactory, and guaranteeing
satisfaction, it would appear that their venture met with considerable
success.
From 1780 onward Cork exported a good deal of glass. In the year 1801
alone, the considerable number of 111,000 drinking glasses was sent to
America, Portugal, and various other places abroad, while in the next
year there is record of 6129 dozen bottles and 40,000 drinking glasses
being shipped abroad, which indicates a considerable output.
The trouble involved in founding such an industry in those days must
have been considerable. In this case, two years were taken up in
procuring the necessary concessions, but the industry, once started,
took firm root, and the advertisements appearing in the Press--in
particular, _The Hibernian Chronicle_ (May 1784) and _The Cork New
Evening Post_ (1792), copies of which are preserved in the Museum of
Dublin Antiquities, indicate what progress it was making and,
incidentally, possess a curious interest from their quaint wording and
setting forth.
The following is an example:--
“With choicest glass from Waterford,
Decanters, Rummers, Draws, and Masons,
Flutes, Hob-nobs, Crofts, and Finger Basins,
[Illustration: OLD WATERFORD BOWLS. 18th-19th CENTURY.]
[Illustration: OLD ENGLISH AND IRISH CELERY BOWLS.]
FIG. 31.
Proof Bottles, Goblets, Cans, and Wines,
Punch Juggs, Liqueurs, and Gardevins,
Salts, Mustards, Salads, Butter keelers,
And all that’s sold by other dealers.
Engraved or cut in newest taste,
Or plain--whichever pleases best.
Lustres repaired or Polished bright,
And broken glasses matched at sight.
Hall globes of every size and shape,
Or old ones hung and mounted cheap.”
In style, as we have already said, Waterford glass closely approximates
to Old English of the Georgian period. If anything, however, the cutting
was deeper, the angles and spikes being often so sharp as to make it
dangerous to grasp the pieces tightly.
Numerous table services of glass of this period exist, as well as
decanters, punch bowls, and dishes. All are deeply cut, the chief
designs being the hobnail and diamond patterns. Sometimes we find fluted
stems and finely cut spiked or striped sides. The majority of the larger
pieces, such as the punch and salad bowls, had square feet or bases
which, while possibly adding to their stability, certainly enhanced the
beauty of their appearance. The salad bowl shown on the left of Fig. 31
is an excellent example: the collar or turn-over at the rim is
remarkable for its depth and also for its superb cutting. The bowl on
the right is a remarkable specimen of very uncommon type. It is oval in
shape--a shape not easily blown even at the present time--and has facet
cutting upon the outside as well as a particularly fine cut scalloped
edging. The base, too, is in admirable keeping with the rest of the
design.
Fig. 32 is another particularly fine piece of Waterford glass, worthy of
note as an example of hobnail cutting, as well as for the depth of its
collar and its general effectiveness.
The celery bowls shown in Fig. 31 are also admirable specimens. That on
the left is waisted and is “strawberry” cut. The centre one is an
example of fine fluted and diamond cutting, with a square base and domed
foot, and the one on the right has a collar and is flat cut on the
middle of the bowl.
Oval or oblong dishes for fruit or sweetmeats were often made with
fan-shaped rims and sides, high in the centre, then sloping downwards,
to rise again to an equal height at the ends. Old Irish cut-glass
salt-cellars are greatly sought after nowadays for the dinner-table, and
have,
[Illustration: OLD WATERFORD CENTREPIECE, WITH A DOUBLE COLLAR AND DOME
FOOT.]
[Illustration: A PAIR OF OLD WATERFORD PRESERVE JARS, COVERS AND STANDS.
FIG. 32.]
with collectors, almost completely ousted the old Georgian silver
“salts.” They were often exquisite in design and shape, some being
miniature models of the large punch bowls or sweetmeat glasses. The
illustration (Fig. 14) is of an imitation pair in Old Sheffield stands.
The water jugs also are of exceptional interest. They were usually
shaped on a fine and graceful model, and are heavily cut into step or
deep-ringed incisions generally with massive ornamentations of leaves or
panel cuttings round the neck, and diamond cuttings and flat fluting at
the base. So eager, indeed, were certain of the designers to ensure that
no part of the jug should be without its ornamentation, that they went
so far as to adorn the handles with deep cutting _inside_, and placed a
huge, deeply cut star on the outside bottom. Weighty substance and
wealth of ornament are thus characteristic of Waterford glass, although
it is, of course, impossible to say that all Irish glass displaying
these qualities came from the Waterford houses.
The jugs illustrated in Fig. 30 are among the finest specimens in
existence, and are from the Dublin Museum Collection. A careful
inspection will reveal most of the characteristics to which we have
referred. The figure on the left is the type most familiar nowadays; the
neck is step cut, the body is “strawberry,” and the base is flat fluted.
The centre piece is a jug of the earliest shape, and is curiously cut. A
band of strawberry cutting round the widest part of the body is flanked
top and bottom by bands of leaf cutting; the lip seems so
disproportionately large as to give the piece an almost top-heavy
appearance. The handle, too, is abnormally large, and is incised on the
inside. Its interest is rather more historical than artistic. The third,
on the right, is a fine example of flat cutting, the rim being scalloped
and the handle deeply scored with “niches,” besides being lavishly
ornamented. The base is curious in that it is domed--a very unusual form
for a jug.
Many of the Waterford pieces, especially the preserve jars with
turn-over collars, were made with covers to protect the upper rim. These
are very attractive pieces, and are found in all shapes and sizes. The
smaller ones, both with and without collars, are exceedingly pretty and
not difficult to acquire.
The four shown in Fig. 33 give an excellent idea of what to expect. Each
is distinct, both
[Illustration: IRISH BOWLS.]
[Illustration: SPECIMENS OF IRISH PRESERVE JARS AND COVERS. 18th-19th
CENTURY.
FIG. 33.]
as regards design and ornamentation. It will be interesting for the
reader to compare them and discover the characteristic features of each.
The decanters which came into vogue in the eighteenth century display
the same general character and are very similar in type to the English
decanters of the same date. Three of them are shown in Fig. 34, and it
may be of service to compare them with the four shown in Fig. 14. The
stopper of the central one is of the button type, those of the other two
being of the more common “mushroom” variety.
The beautiful pair shown in Fig. 35 deserve a word of special mention.
One feature is the lavish use of step cutting round the neck and
shoulders, and another the strawberry empanelment on the body. The fine
diamond cutting and fluting of the stoppers are also worthy of notice.
Drinking glasses, as we have said, were produced in large numbers. They
are generally of two types, the one barrel or bowl shaped after the
fashion of our English rummers, the other straight-sided glasses on
stems. The specimens shown in Fig. 12 give some idea of their general
style as well as of the variety of ornament employed.
It may be well to point out here, for the benefit of those who desire to
acquire specimens of Waterford glass, some of the many differences which
may be detected between the genuine article and its modern imitation.
To begin with a simple example--the prettily shaped wine glasses of the
period with air-threaded or twisted stems are generally reproduced
accurately enough, but the twist or thread in the old glass has a
pronounced milky appearance as compared with the dead white of the
modern reproduction. The twist also is not so regular and even, and the
feet are larger and apparently slightly clumsier in the authentic
specimens. Numerous connoisseurs attach importance to the centre of the
foot, which is usually rough and uneven in the old glass. Another test
frequently relied upon by collectors is the fact of the foot being
turned over--a fashion which, it is said, was followed only with the
earliest specimens. While, however, this may provide corroborative
evidence, I should be sorry to rely upon it as a sole test.
Probably the best criterion of all is the colour. It has, as I have
already noted, a dull bluish tinge readily recognisable when the
specimen is
[Illustration: OLD CORK GLASS DECANTERS (EARLY 18th CENTURY).]
[Illustration: OLD WATERFORD DECANTERS (18th--19th CENTURY).
FIG. 34.]
held up to the light. The better kinds, too, have almost invariably a
large and deep-cut star on the bottom.
Cork glass is rarer than Waterford--a result due to the fact that the
Cork factories were in existence only for a comparatively short time.
The pieces, too, are slighter, less heavy, and by no means so deeply
cut. It is much frailer in appearance and, at the first glance, less
attractive; but its great beauty is a charming delicacy both of colour
and form which grows upon one’s taste. The wine glasses in particular
would at once appeal to a connoisseur from this point of view alone. The
three decanters shown in Fig. 34 need only be compared with the
Waterford decanters shown elsewhere for the lack of heavy cutting to be
immediately noticed. The centre one is interesting as being a
commemoration piece probably made in the year when the Cork Yeomanry was
formed.
Irish glass was not unfrequently profusely engraved and gilt. The
gilding was done during manufacture, the gold being burnt in by the aid
of borax. In existing specimens much of the gilding has been worn off,
so that only traces remain. In cases where it has disappeared entirely
a careful scrutiny will show pits and roughnesses, indicating where the
decoration formerly stood. Sometimes the places can even be discerned by
the touch. Dutch, German, and Austrian reproductions have from time to
time flooded the market to be sold to the unwary collector as veritable
specimens of Irish art. But these on examination are found to be, as a
rule, so coarse and unfinished in their execution that the fraud is
obvious. The gilding, in particular, is far inferior to the work of the
old craftsmen, who were guided solely by the artist’s desire for
perfection, irrespective of toil or cost.
Now and again specimens of Irish moulded glass crop up. These are
chiefly pint and half-pint beer glasses with fluted sides and somewhat
sparse engraving. The moulded glass is, of course, easily detected since
the edges of the fluting are rounded and blunt. The pieces themselves
are usually absurdly light if intended for Cork glass, or clumsily heavy
if they are intended to pass for the Waterford variety.
A large field, therefore, opens to the average collector of Irish glass.
It is wonderfully fine and not too difficult to obtain. Many collectors
[Illustration: 18th CENTURY CUT GLASS WATERFORD DECANTERS.]
[Illustration: 18th CENTURY FINGER BOWL.
FIG. 35.]
too, in their desire to acquire only the earliest specimens, overlook
the cut glass altogether as too modern. In spite of this Irish cut glass
is now more valuable and far more sought after than any other. After
exhaustive inquiries I am satisfied that in Ireland, England, France,
and the United States specimens of genuine Irish glass are still to be
found, often in the most unlikely places--the property of persons who
could not be expected to know their value and of others who ought to but
do not.
A little personal experience may be worth repeating here. I was in a
small, dilapidated general shop near the London Docks; the shopkeeper,
fancying he detected in me a possible victim, drew my attention to a
pair of celery glasses and began to descant upon their age, the
difference between them and Cork or Bristol glass, and so on. After I
had examined them carefully and satisfied myself that they were
genuine--they were about 10 in. high with a very thin herring-bone
cutting upon their flat-cut sides--I asked the price, which was absurdly
high; then, disclosing my identity, I asked what he would say if I told
him they were not genuine but only reproductions. To my utter
astonishment, he exclaimed that he “must have been done.” The
price--“if they were any use to me”--dropped considerably. Then I told
him they were genuine, and sent a friend of mine, who is a collector, to
purchase them, but not without the man endeavouring to obtain a price
which was not only far above what he had asked me but considerably above
the real value of the articles.
I record this episode for the benefit of my readers who may be tempted
to depend upon the seller’s opinion for a guarantee of the genuineness
of their “finds.” Speaking generally, the ordinary shopkeeper’s
knowledge is of the most superficial type and should never be relied
upon, while, of course, his interest lies entirely in one direction.
Research fails to throw much light upon the glass factory of
Londonderry, nor is it easy to find pieces bearing indisputable proof of
their origin. But it is a fact that in 1820 one John Moore transformed a
sugar establishment in that city into a glass factory and, with his son,
carried on the manufacture until 1825. Then a prohibitive duty stopped
it. It is possible that only the black ale bottles were manufactured
there. As for the glass exported from Londonderry to America, it is
difficult to determine whether it was manufactured in that city or
merely exported thence. The latter is the more probable, since by the
Act of 1746 a duty of 9s. 4d. was imposed on every cwt. of material used
in making Crown plate, flint, and white glass in Ireland, as against a
duty of 2s. 4d. per cwt. in England, from which it will appear that
Ireland in those days had no great incentive to manufacture glass in
opposition to England.
It is almost impossible to obtain authentic examples of the work of
individual Irish factories. Nor can one state with any degree of
certainty that a certain pattern, cutting, or style is identified with
any one factory or another. Both the Waterford and Cork glass firms came
from England, and brought with them English workmen. Hence it is pretty
certain that the designs and styles adopted by them were replicas of
those utilised in England, and not peculiar to Ireland or copies of
ancient Irish relics. So, too, with the ornamentation.
Possibly some of the earliest Waterford glass was gilt, for in 1784 one
John Grohl obtained a concession for this purpose. A native of Saxony,
he probably brought with him the secret of his art, for the
“disclosure” of which he and a certain John Hand were rewarded by the
Dublin Society. The finest diamond cutting, strawberry cutting, and flat
fluting were done at Waterford; but pieces were not always cut at their
place of manufacture. Thus we hear of a Waterford dish going to Cork for
ornamentation with the characteristic designs of the factories there.
The cutters, too, had often to decorate their pieces to the purchaser’s
taste.
There seems to have been little coloured glass made in Ireland, although
specimens are not unfrequently offered for sale. The writer was offered
recently, on the Continent, some “Old Irish glass” of perfect
colouring--deep blue, red, and yellow, with fine heavy cutting--but the
lightness of the pieces proved them modern, probably from some Dutch
factory.
* * * * *
In concluding this chapter a word may be given to Scottish glass, which
is very like Irish in texture, although its existence is commonly
ignored by collectors and writers alike. As an industry glass-making
was, of course, of little importance in Scotland, but it is interesting
to learn that in the reign of James VI., John Maria dell’ Aqua of
Venice was appointed Master of the Glass-Works in Scotland. The famous
liqueur glass shaped like the flower of the thistle was probably from a
Bohemian original. It is heavily cut, with an acorn bottom upon a round
stem, and reproductions can be seen in almost every shop window that
displays glass. Early examples are difficult to obtain and their
genuineness equally difficult to guarantee. It is assumed that many of
the Jacobite glasses were manufactured in the Scottish factories.
Secrecy being absolutely essential, it is hardly necessary to state that
no authentic records of production are to be found.
The courtesy of the authorities of the Dublin Museum has enabled me to
add another, and, from a collector’s point of view, a most interesting,
section on the subject of Irish glass.
The museum possesses one of the finest collections of Old Irish glass in
existence, many pieces from which are reproduced in the illustrations to
this chapter. These illustrations are of pieces as nearly perfect as it
is possible to obtain, and are therefore useful in enabling the
collector to form a standard as regards this particular form of glass.
The three decanters illustrated in Fig. 34 are undoubtedly Cork glass.
Apart from the fact that the centre one bears an inscription, “Success
to Cork Yeomen,” which seems to indicate that it was made about the time
the Irish Brigade was being raised--early in the nineteenth century--it
bears all the distinctive characteristics of the Cork factories.
The drinking glasses (Fig. 12) are also undoubtedly Irish, of about the
same period, and probably came from Waterford. The reader should
carefully note the cutting of the two end pieces; they are of totally
different types, each being perfect in its own style. That on the left
has the hobnail cutting common in England about the time when the Irish
factories were first established. It was probably imitated from an
English model or made by one of the English craftsmen who were largely
responsible for the introduction of glass manufacture into Ireland.
The end glass on the right-hand side is an excellent example of the
grace, beauty, and simplicity associated with the best Waterford pieces;
its flat-cut sides are characteristic of its place of origin. I have
occasionally seen similar specimens in London, and they have always
appealed to me as the most perfect examples of the Irish drinking glass
of the eighteenth century. The other two specimens are of the same type
as the English rummers or punch glasses; they are prettily engraved, and
make an effective contrast to the other glasses of the same period.
Irish cut-glass decanters and stoppers, such as the specimens
illustrated in Fig. 34, are not difficult to find nowadays if one is
expert enough and careful enough to avoid the many imitations that
exist. High prices are demanded for genuine pieces in which the cutting
and colour are good, and which satisfy the tests by which the
connoisseur judges the antiquity of his finds.
The centre decanter has a finger-fluted base, and the length of the neck
makes it an unusual specimen. Possibly the idea was to enable it to be
more easily grasped and held when full; but the design is undoubtedly
graceful, and this is one point which the amateur collector should never
ignore when seeking to make a worthy collection. It is well to bear in
mind both artistic merit and intrinsic worth.
Two other fine early specimens of Waterford glass are illustrated in
Fig. 31. The “collared” or turn-over flower bowl is a fine example of
eighteenth-century work. The cutting, it will be seen, is entirely
different from that of the piece on the right; for whereas the latter is
entirely flat cut, with the exception of its finely scalloped edges in
the former, the whole design is finished in the “fluted” style. In both,
as in most pieces of the kind and period, the “dome” or hollow foot is
found.
The large glass dish on a stand on the other side is almost unique. Such
pieces are very difficult to find in their entirety; indeed, the only
other existing, to my knowledge, is in the Marquis of Bute’s collection.
Perfect specimens are hardly obtainable now except when a fine
collection is dispersed at the death of its owner. Even then, as all
such notable pieces are well known to collectors, the competition for
them is very keen, and the private buyer, unless his purse is of the
“bottomless” kind, is hardly likely to obtain them. Occasionally one
may, by happy accident, come across a really fine piece in some
unexpected quarter, but such chances are few and far between. Moreover,
there is always between the finder and his find the spectre of the fake
merchant, whose wont it is to plant his most seductive wares in
out-of-the-way places, so as to give them a fictitious appearance of
genuineness. No important piece should ever be purchased without an
inquiry into its history. It ought to be possible in every such case to
discover sufficient as to its origin and former ownership to place its
_bona fides_ beyond doubt; if not, it is best to let the apparent
bargain go.
I remember, not many years ago, waiting upon a lady in a very ordinary
house in a London suburb. She had replied to an advertisement in which I
had offered to purchase old glass. A glance was sufficient to show me
that her collection contained nothing likely to appeal to my taste. Yet
I did have a find; for she had, in addition to what I saw at first, two
dishes somewhat similar in shape to a large fruit dish, but with the
cipher C.R. cut upon each (Fig. 36). These were actually made and
presented to Queen Charlotte on a visit which Her Majesty paid to some
glass-works during a tour in Ireland. Their authenticity was guaranteed
by a letter from an old tutor of the Queen relating the circumstances
and handing down the pieces as a relic. The owner asked £15 for them.
Needless to say, they changed hands, only to do so again shortly after,
and this time at the enhanced and respectable figure of fifty-five
guineas. In spite of their beauty and their apparent air of genuine
antiquity, I should have hesitated to purchase them but for the
additional evidence afforded by the letter. One cannot be too careful.
The sweetmeat glasses (Fig. 11) are particularly fine of their kind.
Each has its individuality: the one has an opal-twisted stem with a
“dome” foot and a finely cut edge, whilst the other displays some
exquisite cutting both on the upper part and the base. These, again, are
uncommon pieces, not to be met with every day nor easily procured when
met. Still, they make a more frequent appearance at sales than the
larger pieces. A more ordinary variety is not so high and has flat sides
and cutting. A genuine specimen, though, is not to be despised, but the
type is one very freely imitated.
Some fine celery bowls of the same period are worthy of note. They are
excellent specimens of the art of glass-cutting both as regards design
and finish, and they are somewhat rare. As much as seven or eight
guineas was recently asked in the West End of London for a
[Illustration: FIG. 36--SPECIMENS OF IRISH GLASS.]
plain example with a slight herring-bone cutting. It was certainly
genuine, but was hardly a supreme specimen of the decorative cutter’s
art. The price, however, will give some idea of what would be asked for
such superb specimens as those reproduced in the photograph.
The Old Irish water jugs shown in Fig. 30 are of the earliest type. That
on the left is the pattern most often seen and most generally copied; in
fact, during the Early Victorian era most jugs were of this design. It,
however, originated in the Irish factories.
The centre piece, as well as the jug on the right, are both rare;
possibly the style was not often repeated. Certainly the tremendous
handle placed upon the centre one gives it a most clumsy appearance,
while, in regard to the one on the right, one cannot help feeling there
is something wanting at the base. They were improved upon towards the
middle of the nineteenth century, when smaller handles and firmer bases
were added to the design.
It is curious to note how in this kind of glass the strawberry, or flat,
square style of cutting, prevails. Traces of it appear upon almost every
article, so that it was evidently a favourite form of decoration, and
was possibly regarded as a relief from the flat, scalloped, or slip
cutting then in vogue.
On the plate (Fig. 33) there are examples of sugar basins or bowls, in
which the cutting is of the same kind, save that the specimen on the
right is “flat” cut, with cut steps. This variety is particularly rare,
and consequently highly prized among collectors. They are usually of
stout, heavy glass, the cutting being very deep and the edges of the
“flats” sharp. These traits will, of course, not help the collector to
discriminate between the veritable antique and its modern replica. But
it should be borne in mind that the modern is invariably more brilliant,
has a whitish look, and is “cleaner” in every detail than the real glass
of this period.
It may be mentioned that the centre bowl, although particularly
attractive, is by no means so rare as other specimens figured in this
chapter. Indeed, pieces of this character and design are frequently to
be procured. Still, a genuine piece is well worth the collector’s
attention.
The same plate (Fig. 33) illustrates some rare pickle or jam jars,
displaying among them all the principal cuttings then in vogue. The end
one on the right is the only exception, having an engraved
ornamentation. These specimens are frequently copied, but originals are
still to be obtained.
The Cork houses, the product of which was finer and slighter than other
Irish glass, turned out a great quantity of these. Prices run from six
guineas upwards. They are copied in great number in Holland, often in
small sizes and with flat cutting, so that care must be taken in
choosing. Unfortunately the distinctive features--design, colour, and
shape--all readily lend themselves to reproduction and, with increasing
skill in imitation, make it exceedingly difficult to determine between
the true and the false.