Brit. J. industr. Med., 1963, 20, 169.

THE SUCCESSFUL PREVENTION OF LEAD POISONINGIN THE GLAZING OF EARTHENWARE IN THE NORTH

STAFFORDSHIRE POTTERIES*BY

A. MEIKLEJOHN

From the Department of Industrial Health, University of Glasgow

(RECEIVED FOR PUBLICATION FEBRUARY 15, 1963)

In 1572 an extensive epidemic of disease characterized by severe abdominal colic, later identified aslead poisoning, occurred in France in the province of Poitou. Citois named the disease colicaPictonum, that is the colic of the Pictones, the ancient Celtic tribe who inhabited the area. There-after the term was used generically for lead poisoning, otherwise plumbism or saturnism. Theorigin of the poisoning was traced to the practice of vintners who sophisticated sour acid wines withlead oxide. This adulteration restored the sweetness of the wine by the formation of sugar of lead,lead acetate. Similar outbreaks of poisoning were traced to the same fraudulent practice in the wine-growing districts of Germany and Spain. The preparation and storage of food and drink in con-tainers of pewter and lead glazed earthenware resulted in accidental contamination of the substances,the consumption ofwhich caused acute and chronic plumbism. Among the most frequently lead-con-taminated liquors was Devonshire cyder, hence Devonshire colic. Occupational lead poisoning wasdescribed among lead miners and smelters in the mid-sixteenth century. Thereafter the disease wasobserved in a wide variety of trades and processes. The subject was comprehensively reviewed byTanquerel des Planches in 1839.Among the workmen frequently affected were dippers in the pottery industry where lead oxide and

lead carbonate were constituents of the glaze. The disease appeared as a serious problem amongdippers and their assistants in North Staffordshire, the centre of the manufacture of earthenware andchina in Great Britain. The manifestations of the disease included colic, convulsions, paralysis oflimbs, blindness, and general emaciation. Female lead workers suffered excessively from abortionsand miscarriages and many of their infants died of fits. The situation became so serious that theGovernment were compelled to enquire into the problem through a succession of Commissions.Meantime the manufacturers experimented to discover methods of glazing their products withoutlead or with lead in the relatively harmless fritted state of low solubility lead glazes. The progress ofthe investigations and remedial measures are followed in detail leading to the final conquest of leadpoisoning among dippers and their assistants.

Evidence is the life of Truth, and method the life of dis- medical science towards the prevention of disease.course; the former being requisite to convince the Under- He was, it appears from his writings, deeply dis-standing; the latter to facilitate the searches of it. turbed "by the vast amount of protracted malaise

W. Charleton (1675) and suffering, disablement, or lessened capacity forindustrial work, and often too, of slow but eventuallyDr. Gavln Milroy's purposein founding these fatal sickness, in almost every region of the world,

annual lectures, inaugurated in 1888, was to promote due to the multiform class of the cachexiae". Thesethrough succeeding lecturers the advancement of diseases, he observed, resulted in a depraved state of

the whole or part of the body and were characterized*The Milroy Lecture delivered at the Royal College of Physicians, by anaemia and asthenia.

London, February 4, 1963. by anaemia and asthenia.169

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from

BRITISH JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

Plumbism or lead poisoning and potters' asthmaor silicosis are two varieties of the cachexiae whichhave afflicted workers in the pottery industry ofNorth Staffordshire, the Potteries, almost since itsestablishment there nearly 300 years ago. Genera-tions of local surgeons and physicians, factoryinspectors, Certifying Surgeons, practical potters andscientists have progressively added to the knowledgeof the origin, prevalence, and social consequences ofthese maladies among the local population. Therebythey have assisted towards the control of leadpoisoning and silicosis in the industry generally andtheir prevention in particular occupations andprocesses. The purpose of these lectures is to unfoldthe story of two conquests and thus salute the highendeavours and achievements of dedicated men andwomen.

History of Lead Poisoning

Few diseases known to medicine have been sowidely studied and described as lead poisoning.During the 400 years between 1500 and 1900 it wasendemic, often epidemic, in countries throughout theworld. The starting point of precise knowledge ofthe disease may be fixed about 1572, the year inwhich according to Citois (Lat. Citesius, 1616), leadpoisoning occurred as an epidemic in France in theprovince of Poitou. The characteristic symptom wassevere persistent abdominal pain, so Citois namedthe disease colica Pictonum, that is the colic of thePictones, the ancient Celtic tribe, who then inhabitedPoitou. In time the term was applied generically tolead poisoning, otherwise saturnism or plumbism.The epidemic was due to drinking wine adulteratedwith litharge (lead oxide), which it was the custom ofvintners to add to harsh sour wines to counteracttheir acidity and so improve their sweetness by theformation of sugar of lead (lead acetate). In 1675 anaccount of this practice was given by Dr. WalterCharleton, president of the College of Physiciansfrom 1689 to 1692, in a pamphlet entitled TheVarious Sicknesses of Wines and their RespectiveRemedies at this Day Commonly Used. Dr. RiceCharleton, who was elected physician to the BathGeneral Hospital in 1757, in An Inquiry into theEfficacy ofBath Waters in Palsies (1774) recorded anincident in which six persons simultaneously"became paralytic by drinking cyder brought to themat harvest work, in a new earthen pitcher, the inside ofwhich was glazed." The effects were attributed tothe solution of the lead in the glaze by the acidliquor. Devonshire colic (Huxham, 1752) attractedthe attention of Dr. (later Sir George) Baker (1767),the distinguished president of the College ofPhysicians from 1785 to 1795. He too observed

similar accidental outbreaks of lead poisoningamong harvest workers. From close clinical obser-vation and wide knowledge Baker concluded that theDevonshire colic was similar to colica Pictonum inFrance, Hiittenkatze in Germany and Entrepado inSpain, all of which had been associated withadulteration of local wines.Wedgwood, the celebrated Staffordshire potter, on

July 21, 1773, in a letter to his partner Bentleymentioned that Dr. Percival of Manchester, then arecognized authority on lead poisoning, had,following a series of chemical experiments, recorded(Percival, 1788) that "vessels glazed with lead areimproper for the preserving of acid fruits andpickles". Simultaneously Wedgwood learned that aDr. Gouldson of Liverpool had published a pamphletmaking the same assertions.

(I have frequently cited this reference withoutbeing able to trace the original. On this occasion thelibrarian at The Liverpool Medical Institution,unable to find it under Gouldson, noted that theyear 1773 corresponded with the publication of anEssay on the Liverpool Spa Waters to which wasadded an appendix On the Accidental Use ofLead byThomas Houlston, M.D.)

In this Houlston describes how the keeping ofmilk, buttermilk, sweetmeats, syrups, and evenmoist sugar in earthenware vessels glazed with leadinduced symptoms of lead poisoning. Wedgwood'simmediate reaction to these reports was "I will try tomake a glaze without lead, and if I succeed willcertainly advertise it". An allied source of accidentallead poisoning occurred in the preparation ofmedicaments by apothecaries. Lewis (quoted byBaker, 1785) remarked that "vinegar by a boilingheat may corrode so much of the vitrified lead as toreceive from it noxious qualities". Furthermore,from the earliest times therapeutic virtues have beenascribed to saturnine medicines and external appli-cations such as Goulard's lotion, but it did notescape notice that symptoms and signs of leadpoisoning appeared as side effects. Indeed, it wasthrough the administration of lead oxide in thetreatment of cases of haematemesis and haemoptysisat St. Thomas's Hospital, London, between 1834 and1840 that Burton (1839-1840) discovered the "blueline" on the gums, which diagnostic sign has sincebeen associated with his name.Contemporaneous with these accounts of lead

poisoning due to fraudulent practices, accidentalcontamination and medical treatment, physiciansreported the occurrence of the disease among work-men exposed in their employment to lead particles,effluvia, and emanations. In the mid-sixteenthcentury Agricola (1556) and Paracelsus (1567)described the disease in miners and smelters of lead

170

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from

THE CONTROL OF LEAD POISONING IN THE POITER Y INDUSTR Y

ore. Stockhausen (1656) a century later extended thepicture by his account of Huittenkatze among leadminers and others at Goslar in Germany. Ramazzini(1705) was familiar with lead poisoning, a form ofwhat he calls the metallic plagues among tradesmen.Chapter 5 of De Morbis Artificum Diatriba isdevoted to the diseases of potters, De FigulorumMorbis. In this he describes how potters glazedtheir ware with calcined lead and so "received bymouth and nostrils and all the pores of the body, allthe virulent parts of the lead ... and were thereuponseized with heavy disorders". During the eighteenthcentury the Charity Hospital in Paris became cele-brated for its treatment of lead colic and so attracteda wide range of cases of diverse occurrence. It was aroutine practice to enter the trade and employmentof each patient in the hospital register. This enabledGardane (1768, quoted by Baker, 1786) to analyseby occupation the cases for the years 1755 to 1767.Painters, plumbers, and potters, it emerged, werethe main tradesmen affected. Seventy years laterTanquerel des Planches made a special study of thedisease at the same hospital. Between the years 1830and 1838 he investigated 1,213 cases of lead colic.These provided the material for his classic treatise onthe disease (Tanquerel des Planches, 1839). Thecases included "54 manufacturers of earthernpottery and 7 manufacturers of china ware".The clinical manifestations of the disease, acute

and chronic, were widely known. These comprisedcolic, the "Dry Belly Ache" (Hunter, 1808), palsiesand convulsions, which were associated with awasting of the whole substance of the body andanaemia, that is cachexia. Descriptions of patientsby early physicians are dominated by what is calledthe saturnine facies. Grisolle, in his inaugural thesis,Paris, 1844, wrote (I translate):"The workmen (lead workers) are not long before they

become pale and begin to grow thin. Their cheeksbecome sunken and the skin, particularly of the face,assumes a yellowish tinge, which is characteristic and inno wise resembles the yellow colour of jaundice. All thetissues lose colour, the blood is pale and diminished inamount."

The Making of PotteryThe making of pottery on the potter's wheel is one

of the earliest domestic arts. In the Apocrypha(Ecclesiasticus, C. 38, 30), written in Greek between200 and 300 B.C., we read:"He (the potter) will fashion the clay with his arm,And will bend its strength in front of his feet;He will apply his heart to finish the glazing;And he will be wakeful to make clean the furnace."

XpZUlaua (chrisma), here translated glazing, literallymeans to complete the smearing as with oil.

Plot (1686) in The Natural History of Staffordshiredescribed the use of lead ores in the glazing ofearthenware as carried out in that age:

"After the vessels are painted, they lead them with thatsort of lead ore they call smithum, which is the smallestore of all, beaten into dust, finely sifted and strewed uponthem, which gives them the gloss."Deposits of galena, lead sulphide, occurred locally.Following this dusting, the ware was fired in the oven.At a later period the glaze was prepared in liquidform and applied either by washing the pieces withthe glaze or applying it with a brush. From thesemethods it was a natural development to dip theware. At first this was done in the natural clay statebut in 1750 Enoch Booth, a manufacturer of Tun-stall, fired his ware and then dipped the "biscuit" inthe fluid glaze. It appears that a little later in com-pounding glazes manufacturers began to use litharge,lead oxide, and white lead, lead carbonate. Thedeleterious effects of lead were observed amongdippers and their assistants. Controversy arose asto the relative dangers of the different materials; thedippers considered that litharge was more hurtfulthan white lead. Josiah Wedgwood II, while admit-ting the hazards of dipping in lead glaze of eitherkind, called attention to the fact that some manu-facturers added arsenic and so aggravated thepernicious effects.Under the Health and Morals of Apprentices Act,

1802, Parliament for the first time sought to regulatethe conditions of labour of children in cotton millsand factories. This legislation in due course led to aninvestigation of the "State of the Children Employedin the Manufactures of the United Kingdom". ASelect Committee took evidence on this subject inpottery manufacture in 1816. Josiah Wedgwood II,who gave evidence, was asked, "Do you think anypart of your business is unwholesome ?" He replied,"There is a part of the business which is unwhole-some: it is that part of the business that is connectedwith the applyingtheglazeupon the surface ofthewarecalled Dipping; ... that glaze is composed in part ofwhite lead, and like other businesses in which work-men have to do with lead, they are, if careless in theirmethod of living, and dirty, very subject to disease."

Reference has already been made to the observa-tions of Charleton, Baker, Percival, Houlston, andothers in the solution of lead glazes by acids withconsequent danger to consumers of various articlesof food and drink stored in glazed earthen pots.Wedgwood's reaction was to prepare a glaze withoutlead. In 1822 the Royal Society of Arts awarded thelarge gold medal, the prize for that session, to J.Meigh, Esq. of Shelton, Staffordshire, for a paper on"Glaze for vessels of common red earthenware notprejudicial to health of those who make use of them".

171

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from

BRITISH JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

The formula reveals that it was compounded withblack manganese and contained no lead. Subse-quent records of lead poisoning among dippers provethat Meigh's glaze was not generally adopted.

Government Inquiries and ReportsThe first authoritative account of labour con-

ditions in the pottery industry is contained in theSecond Report of the Children's EmploymentCommission published in 1843. The Commissionersappointed Dr. Samuel Scriven to investigate andreport on the Employment of Children and YoungPersons in the District of the North StaffordshirePotteries and on the Actual State, Conditions andTreatment of Such Children and Young Persons.Dr. Scriven found abundant evidence of ill-healthamong dippers and their assistants. This is his des-cription of work in the dipping house:-

"There are one or two adults with their attendant boys,whose business it is to bring the ware in its rough, or, inthe phraseology of the potter, in its biscuit state, from thewarehouse or painting room to the tub. By constanthandling, the fingers become so smooth and delicate thatthey sometimes bleed, and thereby render the process ofabsorption more certain and rapid. The dipping itself,performed by the man, is momentary and when com-pleted, the article is passed on to the boys for shelving anddrying."

The Commissioners amplified this by explaining that"the fluid in which the article is dipped contains,among other ingredients, a considerable quantity oflead and in some cases arsenic". Scriven remarkedthat the dippers appeared dull and cadaverous andsuffered from "paralysis, colica Pictonum, and a hostof other nervous diseases, all in their exaggeratedforms". Mr. J. B. Davies, surgeon, in his evidenceexpressed the opinion that glazes might be made freefrom white lead or other poisonous ingredients,while a fellow practitioner, Mr. Robert Garner,believed that the occurrence of lead poisoning couldbe diminished by better ventilation, cleanliness, andwashing before meals. That the employers recog-nized the risks of working in the lead is reflected inthe fact that boys employed as dippers' assistantswere more highly paid than others "as an equivalentfor the risk they run"; in modern parlance, dangermoney. In retrospect it is now possible to discernthat the whole future struggle, extending over 100years, against lead poisoning in potteries was fore-shadowed in this report.

In the course of inquiries during 1860 into theexcessive mortality from lung diseases in the Potter-ies districts of Stoke-on-Trent and Wolstanton,Greenhow (1861) recorded that dippers were exposedto the danger of lead poisoning, which, he observed,

was manifested in them by "the characteristic blueline on the gums, by painters' colic and by paralysis".

Parliament appointed another Children's Employ-ment Commission in 1862. The report (1863)disclosed that there were 180 earthenware and chinafactories in North Staffordshire, employing 30,000operatives, of whom 6,500 were classified as youngpersons and 4,500 as children under 13 years of age.Mr. F. D. Longe, assistant commissioner, who madethe investigations, largely confirmed the findingsmade by Scriven 20 years earlier. However, he was ofthe opinion that the glaze was less dangerous thanformerly and concluded that "there is good reason tohope that even lead may be dispensed with, withoutrendering the glaze less efficient or more costly".

Following the Report of the Commission (1863)Parliament passed the Factory Acts Extension Act,1864, in which earthenware works were, for the firsttime, brought within factory legislation. As it willemerge that young persons were specially vulnerableto lead, it is noteworthy that in 1864 the minimumage for employment of children in factories was 8years and this was not raised to 10 until 1876.Provisions made under the Act of 1864 includedperiodical lime washing of premises, admission offresh air, and limitation of the hours of labour ofchildren, young persons, and women. The Act alsointroduced a class of special rules for "compellingthe observance of the conditions necessary to insurethe required degree of cleanliness and ventilation",and, what was probably most important of all,inspection by Factory Inspectors.

Thereafter there was no significant comment until1875 when in the Supplement on OccupationalMortality in the Thirty-fifth Annual Report of theRegistrar General, Farr recorded that: "The earthen-ware manufacture is one of the unhealthiest trades inthe country." The causes were poison (lead) anddust (flint and clay).Meantime the ravages of lead poisoning in the

manufacture of white lead attracted public attention.The situation was grave and demanded promptremedial measures. In 1878 children and youngpersons were excluded from this manufacture.Under the Factories (Prevention of Lead Poisoning)Act, 1883, standards were prescribed for ventilation,the provision of washing and lavatory accommoda-tion and messrooms, and personal protection byspecial clothing and respirators. Gradually over thefollowing years prevention was advanced throughspecial rules. A new code of Special Rules for WhiteLead Works was introduced as from May 13, 1892.This rule is of particular interest:

"They (the occupiers of factories) shall arrange for aweekly visit by a doctor, who shall examine every worker

172

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from

THE CONTROL OF LEAD POISONING IN THE POTTERY INDUSTRY

individually and who shall enter the result of eachexamination in the proper register."

This legislation provided a prototype for dealing withother lead industries. All these developments hadincreasingly added to the responsibilities of theInspector of Factories in the inspection and super-vision of factory workers.At the request of the Chief Inspector, Mr. Cramp,

Superintending Inspector of Factories for NorthStaffordshire, in November, 1892, reviewed thecurrent situation in the earthenware and chinafactories. He reported that where lead was used inglazing, lead poisoning was prevalent but localphysicians had impressed on him that great improve-ment had taken place over the past 30 years, due, intheir opinion, to the Factory Acts. Mr. Crampnoted that "some manufacturers used glazes withoutlead; others "fritted" it before use thereby renderingit (probably) insoluble".

Terminology of Lead Glazes

At this point it is necessary to digress to explainbriefly the nomenclature of lead glazes. These are oftwo kinds, "raw" and "fritted" lead. Raw lead glazeis composed of silicious matter, i.e. flint, stone, clay,etc., borax combined with silica, etc., and lead eitherin the form of carbonate or oxide. To obtain a leadfrit a certain portion of the silicious matter ismelted, that is fused, with the lead. The resultingcompound, which resembles glass, is a silicate oflead, the particular form depending on the propor-tions of lead and silicious matter fused together. Theother ingredients, i.e. the rest of the silicious matterand the borax, are combined with silica to form aboro-silicate. The two frits, after pulverizing, aremixed together with a little added clay to form thefinal glaze mixture. The effect of melting the leadwith silicious matter practically amounts to fixing itin such a manner that it is less liable to the action ofacids, which it meets in passing through the humanbody, and largely reduces the likelihood of its absorp-tion into the blood. If the frit is properly compound-ed to bi-silicate form, all but a small amount of thelead is rendered insoluble, and glazes so made arecalled "low solubility" glazes. The finished glazegenerally contains from 12 to 22 %, sometimes more,of lead calculated as lead oxide, but after fritting withsufficient silicious materials only from 2 to 5% of thelead remains soluble in dilute hydrochloric acid0-25 %, the equivalent of the acidity of gastric juices.

Leadless, it should be noted, is used in twodistinct connotations. The first is the literal sense,without lead; the second is the legal sense in which"leadless" means "a glaze which does not contain

more than one per cent of its dry weight of a leadcompound calculated as lead monoxide" whentested in the prescribed manner.To return to Cramp, he recommended that the

manufacture of earthenware and china shouldstatutorily be certified as "injurious to health". Hedrafted a suggested code of Special Rules, which, hebelieved, would raise all factories to the level of thebest and interfere very little, if any, with what weremodel potteries. This marked the launching of theattack, which just over 50 years later in 1944, was toachieve the conquest of lead poisoning amongdippers and associated workers.

The Campaign against Lead

On December 24, 1892, the Home Secretary certi-fied the manufacture of earthenware as a dangeroustrade within the meaning of section 8 of the Factoryand Workshops Act, 1891. Meantime the Repre-sentative Committee of the Operative Potters and theManufacturers had been examining the proposedDraft Rules. The operatives in their commentsaffirmed the dangers of lead poisoning and submittedthat no raw lead should be used in any glaze forearthenware and china. The manufacturers rejectedthis and relied on fritted lead. Therefrom the oppos-ing forces and the contentious matters emerged. TheHome Secretary followed the established pattern byappointing a Committee "to enquire into the con-ditions under which the manufacture of pottery iscarried on, with the object of diminishing any provedill-effects on the health of the workpeople". Withinthree months the Committee presented their report(Report of Potteries Committee, 1893, H.M.S.O.,London, C. 7240) and made recommendationsincluding a code of Special Rules. These, amendedto meet certain objections, became the Special Rules,1894.

Inevitably questions almost immediately aroseabout the effectiveness of the Rules. Mr. J. H.Walmsley, H.M. Inspector of Factories for thePottery District, reviewed (H.M. Chief Inspector ofFactories Report for the year 1895, H.M.S.O.,London, 1896, C. 8067) their operation for the first12 months. In his preamble he rightly emphasizedthat the period under review was too short to produceany noticeable improvement in the health of workers.Local physicians, however, had advised him that newcases of plumbism were much less frequent thanformerly and such cases as did occur were not sosevere. The operatives, he commented, were antago-nistic and unco-operative because they regarded theRules as "a hardship forced upon them by the Fac-tory department, to which the masters had beenprivy". The manufacturers, in turn, protested that

173

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from

BRITISH JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

the disease in nine cases out of 10 was due to theworkmen's careless, dirty, slovenly habits and that"efficient washing of the hands with hot water andsoap was the best preventative". There was oneencouraging fact, namely, that practical trials ofvarious fritted glazes were being advanced.The right of Parliament to legislate for the regula-

tion of dangerous trades had been established; con-current discussions of the problems had revealed anincreasing need for more and better statistics ofsickness and deaths attributable to occupationaldiseases. On the recommendation of the Associationof Certifying Surgeons and the Committee on FactoryStatistics (H.M. Chief Inspector of Factories Reportfor the year 1895) lead poisoning was made com-pulsorily notifiable to the Chief Inspector of Factor-ies by medical practitioners and manufacturers asfrom January 1, 1896. Meantime in the Supplementto the Fifty-fifth Annual Report of the RegistrarGeneral (1895) Dr. Tatham had embodied a mass ofstatistical information on the influence of occupa-tions upon health. The analyses were based on themortality returns of males for the three years 1890 to1892, calculated on the census figures for 1891. Indealing with deaths from lead poisoning, Tathammade this very significant observation:-

"The mortality directly (italics inserted) attributed toplumbism gives an imperfect measure of the injury result-ing from the absorption of lead into the system."

He continues in reference to a table which he hadmade:

"It at once becomes evident that exposure to the risk oflead poisoning is associated with increased liability todisorders of the urinary and nervous systems. Thesefigures leave us no room for doubt that the deaths whichare definitely certified as due to plumbism constitute buta small proportion of the deaths really due to poisoningby lead among workers who are exposed to its influence."

With regard to plumbism among earthenwareworkers the mortality figures for disease of thenervous and urinary systems exceeded the standardfor occupied males by 54 and 50% respectively. ButTatham himself, as critics quickly observed, did notavoid statistical pitfalls. For example the analysiswas restricted to males only, age 15 and over, where-as it was known that deaths from lead poisoning hadoccurred in females and in young persons of 14 in thepottery industry.During 1896, the first year of notification, 1,030

cases of lead poisoning were reported. Of these, 432occurred in china and earthenware manufacture inthe United Kingdom; North Staffordshire accountedfor 351 cases among about 4,700 lead workers.

At the request of the Chief Inspector (AnnualReport of the Chief Inspector of Factories for theyear 1897; H.M.S.O., London) during 1897 MissPaterson and Miss Deane, Inspectors of Factories,followed up 404 notified cases. These derived from132 factories employing 3,040 persons in lead pro-cesses. The diagnosis was confirmed by the Certify-ing Surgeon in all but 23 cases. The inspectorsreported many distressing cases including youngpersons, who, after comparatively short periods ofemployment in lead processes, died of convulsions.Men and women, they found, had been renderedblind, and the poison had pernicious effects on theblood-forming organs and, in women, on thereproductive functions.

In the compact Potteries population of 250,000persons, 400 cases of lead poisoning annually among5,000 employed in lead processes could not escapepublic notice, especially as these included manytragic cases involving paralysis, convulsions, andblindness. The noxious effects on women wereparticularly disturbing, namely, frequent miscarriageand still births, and even when babies were born alivemany died soon after from fits. Other eventsfocused attention on the problem. In 1898 Dr.Dowling Prendergast, senior physician at the NorthStaffordshire Infirmary, comprehensively reviewedthe subject in a book entitled The Potter and LeadPoisoning. Another matter, which later was to havean important influence, was the first Workmen'sCompensation Act, 1897, which came into effect onJuly 1, 1898. This Act covered accidents only.

Crisis- 1898

That lead poisoning affectedworkers in glazing pro-cesses in the manufacture of earthenware and chinawas not disputed, but the extent and seriousness ofthe problem engendered considerable controversy.Following compulsory notification of the disease in1896, the subject had tended to become impersonaland increasingly an assessment and discussion ofpublished figures. But in and around the Potteriesthere were many people who believed that the realfacts were individuals, paralysed and blinded; mosttragic of all were the afflicted women and theirinfants. In Hanley, the centre of the six Potterytowns (Figure)-Arnold Bennett considered that fivewas more euphonius-there existed at that time abody, The Women's Trade Union League, of which aMiss Gertrude Tuckwell was the very able and activesecretary. On April 3, 1898, the League organized ameeting at the Hanley Labour Church, whichresulted in the formation of the Reform Committeeand marked the beginning of a popular agitationwhich was to be maintained for the next 15 years.

174

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from

THE CONTROL OF LEAD POISONING IN THE POTTERY INDUSTRY

The object of the promoters was to direct attentionto the evils of lead poisoning with a view to certaindefinite reforms. Among the points made at theinaugural meeting were that both employers andworkers were blameworthy; that the mischief wasnot inevitable but was distinctly preventable; andthat the paramount need was to attain the use ofleadless glazes and meantime to restrict the employ-ment of women and children in lead processes. Thecampaign, as events showed, was highly emotionalin its approach and, it was alleged, was based on afew tragic cases. This notwithstanding, the Leagueclaimed to have a register of 100 acute cases andappealed for funds to enable the committee to assistthese patients. To publicize the facts, to winsupporters and funds, meetings were arrangedthroughout the country, and a vigorous campaignwas maintained through national and local news-papers. Various devices were adopted to dramatizethe situation. Thus patients were sent to hospitals asfar apart as London and Newcastle-upon-Tyne, andHouses of Rest were established at Llanfairfechan,Matlock, and Wolverhampton. One effort whichinvoked criticism was a travelling exhibition of tinycachectic babies which had been born to motherssuffering from the effects of lead. Relative to this, aspecial correspondent of The Times wrote (October 8,1898):

"The influence of lead in causing abortion is well-known to the women, who are in the habit of secondingthe chances of poisoning at the factory by resorting to thechemist's shop."

A Hanley chemist had told him of purchases ofdiachylon (oxide of lead) in lumps of a pennyworthor two at a time.Many notables, including the Duchess of Suther-

land of Trentham Hall, Lord Hugh Cecil, CanonGore, and Mrs. Asquith, actively supported the causeat public meetings and by arranging At Homes. TheDuchess of Sutherland never failed to plead thatpeople should follow her example and use only lead-less glazed pottery. In support of this, exhibitions ofsuch ware were arranged in connexion with meetingsto demonstrate its high quality. On July 28, 1898, inanswer to a question in the House, the HomeSecretary announced that:-

"Her Majesty's Office of Works have issued a regula-tion that all articles for domestic use supplied undercontract for the Public Department, the Houses ofParliament, and such of the Royal Palaces as are undertheir charge shall be made with leadless glaze."

This is an effective sanction still applied by theGovernment and Local Authorities in similarcircumstances. In the House of Commons thecampaign was ably led by Sir Charles Dilke, memberfor the Forest of Dean. He was supported by Mr.Burn, member for Battersea, whose sympathyderived from his experience of phosphorus poisoningin the manufacture of lucifer matches in the East Endof London. Mr. Coghill, the local member ofParliament for Stoke-on-Trent, was pro-employer,and in the debate in the House he refuted the ideathat the cases were largely due to lead poisoningstating that, in his opinion, they were really cases ofarsenical poisoning from drinking contaminatedbeer.

In response to the public outcry the manufacturersclaimed that they were 20 years in advance of publicopinion and far ahead of the Government andscientists in their efforts to combat the disease. Somefirms, it was asserted, had been fritting lead since1850 and experiments and practical trials were con-stantly proceeding to discover satisfactory leadlessglazes for -all types of ware. They deplored thegeneral indifference of the workers to the dangers oflead and argued that "their apathy was the greatestobstacle the reform committee had encountered".That the Government were disturbed by the situa-

tion was soon proved by a rapid succession ofmeasures. On May 7, 1898, little more than a monthafter the commencement of the public agitation, theHome Secretary invited Professor T. E. Thorpe,Principal of the Government Laboratory, andProfessor Thomas Oliver, physician to The RoyalInfirmary, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, to carry out aninquiry in accordance with the following terms ofreference:

THE POTTERIES-NORTH STAFFORDSHIRE

ARNOLD BENNETT'S FIVE TOWNS

MANCHESTER(LANCASHIRE) *

- O' ' , *SHEFFIELD(YORKSHIRE)

CREWE TUNSTALL(CHESHIRE) * , t BURSLEMWOLSTANTON HANLEY

NEWCASTLE under, CYME STOKE on TRENT- LONGTON

*DERBYUTTOXETE R

* STAFFORD

175

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from

BRITISH JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

"It is admitted that in the manufacture of earthenwareand china the workpeople incur grave danger of leadpoisoning, owing to the use of glazes and pigments con-taining large proportions of lead; and the Secretary ofState desires to ascertain:-

1. How far the danger may be diminished or removedby substituting for the carbonate of lead ordinarily used,either one or other less soluble compound of lead, e.g. (a)silicate, (b) "leadless" glaze.

2. How far any substitutes found to be harmless or lessdangerous than the carbonate lend themselves to thevaried practical requirements of the manufacture;

3. What other preventive measures can be adopted."

Almost immediately thereafter the Home Secretaryreceived a deputation from the Potteries. Mr.Emery, president of the North Staffordshire TradesCouncil, asked that "the victims of lead poisoningshould be included in the Workmen's CompensationAct, 1897". He submitted that if this were done hebelieved that in six months' time lead poisoningwould be a thing of the past. This, he asserted, hadbeen the experience in Germany where the manu-facturers had reacted quickly to save their pockets.The regular announcement, often through ques-

tions in Parliament, of statistics of notified cases andfatalities became a constant source of harassment tothe Home Secretary. The figures were criticized asinadequate, so creating a false impression of thefacts. As always, one group argued that theyexaggerated the problem, while others responded,with equal confidence, that they diminished it. TheChief Inspector of Factories, Dr. Arthur Whitelegge,realized the compelling need to ensure, so far aspossible, the reliability of the statistics. Accordinglyhe addressed a circular letter to H.M. Coroners,emphasizing the importance of holding an inquest inall suspected fatal cases and of permitting the attend-ance of the Certifying Surgeon and a medical experton behalf of the employers and workmen to bepresent at the post-mortem examination. Likewise allnotified cases and the overall problem pointed to theneed for expert official investigation and supervision.This was met on July 26, 1898, by the appointment ofDr. Thomas Morison Legge as first Medical Inspec-tor of Factories. As subsequent events proved, thisappointment was almost visionary for Legge's con-tribution to the control and prevention of leadpoisoning proved not only national but international.

Concurrently it became apparent that the SpecialRules of 1894 had fulfilled their purpose as a pilotmeasure and so they were amended in May, 1898,and for some manufacturers, who objected, in thefollowing October. The main changes were theexclusion of persons under the age of 15 years fromwork in the dipping house or dippers' drying room

and monthly examinations by the Certifying Surgeonof all women and young persons in named depart-ments and processes. These examinations includedpower of suspension and prohibition of re-employ-ment in any of the places or processes named.Increased importance was attached to exhaustventilation thus: "In the process of ware cleaningafter the dipper exhaust fans shall be used, orarrangements made for the dust to fall into water."Despite all these progressive measures Sir CharlesDilke accused the Home Secretary of "makingexperiment ground for delay".

In the interval Thorpe carried out extensivelaboratory experiments and trials on glazes, and heand Oliver studied the practices of pottery manu-facturers in other countries. On February 21, 1899,just nine months after appointment, their Reports onthe Use of Lead in the Manufacture of Pottery werepublished. They accepted the evidence of the 1893Committee that a serious incidence of lead poisoningexisted in the manufacture of earthenware and china.Although acknowledging that some individualmanufacturers had substituted fritted for raw leadand had experimented with leadless glazes, theyconcluded that no concerted action had been takenby the trade as a whole. They concluded:-

"We have no doubt whatsoever that leadless glazes ofsufficient brilliancy, covering power and durability, andadapted to all kinds of table, domestic and sanitary ware,are now within the reach of manufacturers."

In extension of this they added:-1. Many products can be glazed without lead;2. Where lead cannot be dispensed with then

fritted lead as a double silicate should be used.The Report was duly referred to the manufacturers

for comment. In a signed statement in reply theyemphasized the commercial disaster which wouldovertake the earthenware and china industries if leadwere prohibited. There was no dispute that certaincommon wares could be glazed without lead but theadvantages of lead were the high quality, competitivegoods which it produced and the wide margin oferror it permitted during production, therebyreducing to a minimum the quantity of spoiled ware.The manufacturers, however, agreed to abandon theuse of raw lead and to frit all lead in glazes, but theyprotested altogether against any reduction of thetotal permitted lead content. Thereupon in August,1900, the Secretary of State issued draft amendedSpecial Rules giving effect and adhering to the find-ings of Thorpe and Oliver. The draft, when sent tothe manufacturers, was accompanied by an explana-tory letter in which the main facts were reviewed. Inthis the Home Secretary stressed that the use of

176

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from

THE CONTROL OF LEAD POISONING IN THE POTTER Y INDUSTR Y

fritted glazes, which he proposed, could not be basedon the amount of lead in the fritt, but on the solu-bility of the lead. He further commented that theRules represented good practice developed and al-ready followed by leading manufacturers. Withreference to lead the principal alterations were com-prised in the following Rules (summarized):-

1. All lead for use in specified processes to befritted;

2. Lead to be in insoluble form to such a degree thatwhen tested in the prescribed method it did not yieldmore than 2% of its dry weight of a soluble leadcompound calculated as lead monoxide; ...

4. No woman, young person or child to be employ-ed in the preparation or manufacture of fritts, glazesor colours; ...

6. Monthly examinations of lead workers extendedto all persons; power of suspension by CertifyingSurgeon.The manufacturers supported the Rules generally.

They objected in toto to the 2% limit of solubility butwere agreeable to accepting a standard not exceeding5 %. In accordance with the Factory and WorkshopsActs of 1891 and 1895 they insisted on arbitration onthe disputed matters. The operatives on their sidesignified opposition to the monthly examinations solong as lead poisoning was not covered by the Work-men's Compensation Act. The employers also resist-ed suspension on the grounds that it would deprivethem of skilled labour, while suspended men wouldhave difficulty in obtaining alternative suitable em-ployment without loss of wages.

Arbitration proceedings, with Lord James ofHereford as umpire, commenced at Stoke-on-Trenton November 7, 1901. In the preliminary statementsit was emphasized that both the Home Office and theemployers were anxious to mitigate and, if possible,abolish the evil of lead poisoning in the industry. Onbehalf of the Home Office Miss Anderson, Inspectorof Factories, presented evidence on the currentprevalence and manifestations of the disease in thevarious occupations. The employers criticized thestatistics, which they asserted were the source ofmischievous representation and exaggeration, asshown by the sentimental outcries of philanthropicpersons. The critical issue was the standard ofsolubility of lead fixed at 2%. The Home Officerelied on the testimony of Professor Thorpe. Expertson behalf of the manufacturers argued that Thorpe'sexperiments, no matter how successful in laboratorytrials, did not prove that they could be applied on amanufacturing scale. The need, it was underlined,was to make practical trials with various fritts in thefactories under ordinary conditions of bulk produc-tion. The employers asserted that the method ofglazing must be practicable, reliable under a wide

variety of conditions, and produce durable qualitygoods at prices competitive against foreign manu-facturers. Finally they believe the Special Rules of1894 and 1898 had greatly diminished the cases innumber and severity and so "there was no need forfurther interference". On the fifth day of the pro-ceedings, before many of the witnesses had beencalled, Lord James, after consultation with Counsel,suddenly terminated the hearing and adjourned con-sideration of the disputed Rules for 18 months andthereafter if necessary. This abrupt ending waswidely interpreted as a public rebuff to the HomeOffice for initiating precipitate legislation in advanceof what was warranted by the current state of know-ledge. The Evening Standard spoke of the Humilia-tion of the Home Office; The Times and ManchesterGuardian supported the employers, but The Lancetdeplored the turn of events, commenting "We viewthe decision with the deepest dismay; it is prematureand dangerous".

In his closing address, Lord James made severalvery cogent comments, for example:

"The interests of employers may be personal, profitmay be theirs-but at the same time interference withtrade, which is a trade of the country, and which affectsour community as a whole, should not take place if it canbe avoided."

And again:

"It is not only the duty of the State to protect workmenagainst damage to health and life but also it is not less aduty to see that industries are not crippled or endangeredby excessive restriction."

As to the difficulties of small firms in complying forfinancial and other reasons he was unequivocal in hisstatement that "they will have to overcome thedifficulties, they employ human beings". But theemployers did not go scot-free for it was agreed thatmanufacturers who continued to use lead in any formwould enter into a voluntary scheme of mutualinsurance to provide compensation for the disease.This was the genesis of workmen's compensation forindustrial diseases as opposed to accidents in GreatBritain; it was already in operation in Germany.The adjournment signalled an upsurge in the spate

of lectures, exhibitions, newspaper articles, andcorrespondence, all propaganda for the variousviewpoints. Miss Tuckwell and her committee didnot abate their emotional appeals nor their incite-ment to boycott all lead glazed pottery.The arbitration under Lord James was resumed in

June, 1903, and completed expeditiously. Theumpire's final award included compulsory compen-sation for lead poisoning contracted in work inpotteries; extension of the monthly medical examina-

177

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from

BRITISH JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

tions to adult male lead workers and, most significantof all, the adoption of 5% as the level of lead solu-bility. The award was immediately translated intothe Special Rules of 1903 with effect from February 1,1904. Then on July 1, 1907, the Workmen's Com-pensation Act, 1906, came into force providing forthe payment of compensation to all persons (andtheir dependants) who contracted lead poisoningarising out of and in the course of their employment.This was the last legislation change, especially affect-ing potteries, prior to the appointment of the HatchCommittee in May, 1908. It is of interest to remarkin passing that almost the final shot in the popularcampaign was fired by Mr. George Bernard Shaw atCaxton Hall, Westminster, on June 29, 1906, in alecture entitled "Poisoning the Proletariat". Shawurged that remedy of the evil could only be achievedthrough effective legislation and concluded, "Thosewho live in the guilty society, cannot help beingguilty themselves". The lecture was supported by anexhibition of leadless glazed ware.

Progressive advance against industrial disease, if itis to be maintained, demands constant vigilance andregular appraisal of results,and this, as has emerged,was a noteworthy feature of the Government'sattack on lead poisoning in potteries. On May 12,1908, the Home Secretary appointed yet anotherDepartmental Committee on Lead etc. . . . inPotteries under the chairmanship of Ernest F. G.Hatch, Esq. The membership of the Committeereflected what might be regarded as gamesmanshipon the part of the Home Secretary in that it includedMr. William Burton, a manufacturer and the leadingprotagonist of the manufacturers, and MissTuckwell, the champion of the women and childrenin the public agitation.The Committee were invited "To consider the

dangers attendant to the use of lead in the variousbranches of the manufacture of china and earthen-ware and in the processes incidental thereto, in-cluding the making of transfers, and to report howfar these can be obviated or lessened:By improving appliances and methods; orBy conducting any of these processes in separate

rooms; orBy limitation of the use of lead; orBy substitution of harmless lead compounds for

raw lead; orBy substitution of other materials for lead; orBy controlling the employment of susceptible

persons in lead processes; orBy precautions for detection of lead poisoning in

the earlier stages, or otherwise, and how far suchprecautionary measures are reasonably practicablegenerally with regard to the several branches of thesaid manufacture".

These terms of reference, it will be observed, werecomprehensive and admirably framed to reflectcurrent accumulated knowledge and experience,practical, scientific, and medical.The Report was presented to the Home Secretary in

June, 1910. In the course of their deliberationsextending over two years, the Committee heardconsiderable evidence, most of it a repetition of thatgiven to previous Committees but brought up todate. The members also visited 26 potteries repre-sentative of the various branches of manufacture. Itemerged that the industry had been steadily expand-ing so that in 1907 it comprised 550 factories,employing 63,000 workers of whom only 6,865 wereengaged in processes involving contact with lead.Cases of lead poisoning, many fatal, were veryprevalent. In the five years 1904 to 1908 in potterymanufacture throughout Great Britain 517 caseswere confirmed by Certifying Surgeons. The caseswere very unevenly distributed as shown by theanalysis that five patteries contributed 75 cases, 17contributed 119, and 151 contributed 323; theremaining 377 factories contributed none. Despitethe heavy costs of insuring against compensation andthe fees for monthly examinations the Committeefound that of 481 factories no less than 377 (78%)preferred to incur the expense rather than give up theprivilege of using lead in the glaze without restrictionto 5% solubility level. Professor Thorpe (now SirEdward), who again gave evidence, adhered to hisopinions and conclusions reported in 1899. As to theclinical aspects, Dr. Legge gave evidence on aninvestigation of 497 cases occurring between 1903and 1907. Of these, 217 were males and of these 42cases (19-3 %) were classified as severe; 280 werefemales of whom 35 (12-5 %) were severe. "Severe"cases were defined as those showing (1) markedparalysis, such as total wrist drop; and (2) encephalo-pathic conditions, such as convulsions; opticneuritis, that is, loss of sight, temporary or complete;and mental affections. Dr. G. Reid, Medical Officerof Health for Stoke-on-Trent and a member of theCommittee, made special enquiries into the specificeffects of lead on women. He confirmed that therewas a significant excess of miscarriages amongfemale lead workers as compared with artisanmothers not exposed to lead. In this matter it is ofinterest that some local medical practitioners(Shufflebotham, 1901) were of opinion that thisexcess occurred where the father was a lead workerand the mother had never been employed in leadprocesses.The Committee in their Report recognized that

the danger to the workers of handling lead was realand could cause poisoning or general deterioration inhealth. While acknowledging that leadless and low

178

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from

THE CONTROL OF LEAD POISONING IN THE POTTERY INDUSTRY

solubility glazes might be unsuitable for certainclasses of ware, there were many types for which, intheir opinion, they were satisfactory. They recom-mended increased regulation of the employment ofwomen and young persons, and a shorter workingweek which in the case of dippers should not exceed48 hours. They also advised the supply of milk ormilk cocoa at the employer's expense. Furthermorethey emphasized the necessity of minimizing thedanger and suggested that every inducement andencouragement should be given to manufacturersboth to persevere with their experiments in search ofsatisfactory leadless and low solubility glazes, and tointroduce them whenever possible. Miss Tuckwell,although supporting the precautions recommendedby the other members, dissented and did not sign theReport. In a supplementary memorandum she citedfigures showing that the disease was considerablymore serious in prevalence and noxious effectsamong women than in men. She adhered adamantlyto her public campaign for leadless glazes. Finallythe Committee proposed a code of Regulations(note not Rules) embodying their recommendations.The broad distinction between Rules and Regula-tions is that the former are mainly concerned in out-lining general principles by which the health ofoperatives might be safeguarded. Regulations, onthe other hand, prescribe in detail specific measuresgoverning manufacturing processes, environmentalconditions, and general conditions of labour.

After the usual deliberations between all partiesconcerned the recommendations of the Hatch Com-mittee led to the enactment of the Regulations for theManufacture and Decoration of Pottery datedJanuary 2, 1913. The Regulations restricted theemployment of women and young persons andchildren in various lead processes and occupations.The initial and periodical medical examinations(involving permanent suspension) at monthly inter-vals were applied to all persons in prescribedprocesses. The examinations were to be made by the"Surgeon" who was defined not as the CertifyingSurgeon but as the Certifying Factory Surgeon. Thesections on protective clothing, proper storagefacilities for outdoor garments, and the eating offood in messrooms were merely a development ofthose in previous Rules. The following provisionwas new:

"A supply of milk or cocoa made with milk, shall beprovided for all women and young persons in scheduledprocesses who commence work before 9 a.m. Not lessthan half a pint shall be provided for each such worker atthe expense of the occupier."

The provisions for suppression of dust in lead pro-

cesses were considerably extended, reflecting Legge'sevidence and creed which he later enunciated in theaxiom (Legge, 1934):

"Practically all industrial lead poisoning is due to theinhalation of dust and fumes; and if you stop theirinhalation you will stop the poisoning."

In a book (Burton, 1913) compiled for the guid-ance of manufacturers on the new Regulations,William Burton, a member of the Hatch Committee,referred to "the revolution that had taken place inmedical opinion during the last ten years as to theexact way in which pottery workers were liable toabsorb lead compounds into their system; originallyskin absorption, then ingestion and now absorptionthrough the lungs". I wonder how three centuries ofclassic writers on lead poisoning, including Citois,Paracelsus, Ramazzini, Baker, Gardane, and Tan-querel, would have learned of these progressivediscoveries.The Pottery Regulations, 1913, duly came into

force but the 1914-1918 war and the consequentdisorganization of the industry prevented closescrutiny of their operation. It was not until 1940 thatthey became the subject of a Special Report by theChief Inspector of Factories. In that year there wereonly four cases of lead poisoning. The ChiefInspector commented that "this happy position hadonly been achieved by unremitting vigilance andcould only be maintained by meticulous observationof the Regulations". This task had been assumed andmaintained by the National Council of the PotteryIndustry, the first Joint Industrial Council, which wasestablished in Stoke-on-Trent in January, 1918. TheCouncil comprised equal representation of theemployers' and operatives' organizations, who wereassisted in the various committees by co-optedexperts. As an index of the trend of the use of lead inglazes, it appears that during 1940 151 samples ofglaze were taken by the Inspector of Factories and insix only was the lead content in excess of 5 %.

In a story of this kind it has often been tempting toquote pages of figures and tables. The evidence ofthe Committees of Inquiry and the Annual Reportsof the Chief Inspector of Factories and Workshopsare crammed full of such data. But, as is still thecase, the statistics, including those officially prepared,are often incomplete and not uniformly presentedfrom year to year. In this way they invite queries andcriticism and can be adapted to support any caseeither directly or by default. Ultimately, however,the broad trend emerges. Whatever the variationover the previous 100 years, the undisputed fact isthat in 1944 there was not a single case of leadpoisoning reported to the Chief Inspector in or in

179

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from

BRITISH JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

connexion with glazing processes in china andearthenware manufacture in North Staffordshire.The gradual advance through Inquiries, SpecialRules and Regulations had achieved the objective.

Victory-1947

The Pottery (Health) Special Regulations, 1947,signalled the success and assured that there would beno retreat. As from October 7, 1948 (1949 in the case

of tiles) it was enacted that "no glaze which is not a

leadless glaze or a low solubility glaze shall be used ina factory to which these Regulations apply in themanufacture of pottery and glazed tiles". Lowsolubility was defined at the 5% level. The wideraspects ofprevention were consolidated in the Pottery(Health and Welfare) Special Regulations, 1950.Not a single case of lead poisoning in glazing

processes in potteries was recorded by H.M. ChiefInspector of Factories in 1944, and since then therehave only been four cases (Table). Some recentstudies by the Medical Inspectorate of Factories,using blood examinations, among glost placersshowed no evidence of any lead absorption in theseworkers (Biden-Steele, personal communication).The story is ended and in conclusion I submit for

your meditation these words of Francis Bacon(1605):

"It is the true office of history to represent theevents, together with the counsels, and to leave the

TABLENOTIFIED CASES OF LEAD POISONING IN CHINA AND

EARTHENWARE MANUFACTURE IN NORTHSTAFFORDSHIRE 1899-1961

Col. 1 Col. 2

Quinquennia Fatal CasesTotal Cases (included in Col. 1)

1899-1903 573 221904-1908 445 281909-1913 325 421914-1918 91 201919-1923 177 491924-1928 166 521929-1933 74 391934-1938 86 261939-1943 17 51944-1948 1 11949-1953 3 11954-1958 0 01959-1963 0 0

Source: H.M. Inspector of Factories, Stoke-on-Trent

observations and conclusions therefrom to the libertyand faculty of every man's judgment."(Proficience and Advancement ofLearning, Book 1).

REFERENCES

Agricola, G. (1556). De Re Metallica. Basel.Baker, G. (1767). An Essav Concerning the Cause of the Endemical

Colic of Devonshire. London.(1785). Medical Transactions of College of Physicians, 3, 427.

-(1786). Medical Transactions ofCollege ofPhysicians. 2, (2nd ed.),443.

Burton, H. (1839-1840). Lancet, 1, 485, 661.Burton, W. (1913). An Analysis of the Regulations Governing the

Manufacture of Pottery in the British Isles. Manchester.Charleton, R. (1774). An Inquiry into the Efficacy of Bath Waters in

Palsies. Second tract in Three Tracts on Bath Water. Bath.Charleton, W. (1675). The Mysterie of Vintners of a Brief Discourse

concerning The Various Sicknesses of Wines and TheirRespective Remedies, at This Day Commonly Used. London.

Citois, Francois (1616). De Novo et Populari apud Pictones DoloreColioco Biolioso Diatriba. British Museum 11676 22(2).

Gardane (1768). See Baker, G. (1786).Greenhow, E. H. (1861). See Third Report of the Medical Officer of

the Privy Council, 1860, London, 1861.Grisolle, A. (1844). Traite Elementaire et Pratique de Pathologie Interne.

Paris.Houlston, T. (1773). Essays on the Liverpool Spa Water. Liverpool.Hunter, J. (1808). Observations on the Diseases of the Army in Jamaica,

3rd ed. London.Huxham, J. (1752). Opusculum De Morbo Colico Damnoniensi.

London. (Available Glasgow University Library G16-L1).Legge, T. M. (1934). Industrial Maladies. London.Meiklejohn, A. (1954). Brit. J. industr. Med., 11, 40.Paracelsus, T. (1567). Von der Bergsucht. Dilingen.Percival, T. (1788). Essays Medical, Philosophical and Experimental.

Warrington.Plot, R. (1686). The Natural History of Staffordshire. Oxford.Prendergast, W. D. (1898). The Potter and Lead Poisoning. London.Ramazzini, B. (1705). A Treatise of the Diseases of Tradesmen (in

English) London.Shufflebotham, F. (1901). Lancet, 2, 1109.Stockhausen, S. (1656). Libellus de Lythargyrii fumo noxio mortifico

ejusque metallico frequentiori Hutten Katze oder Hutten Rauchvulgo dicto. Goslar.

Tanquerel des Planches (1839). Traite' des Maladies de Plomb ouSaturnines. Paris.

Reports

Children's Employment Commission (1843). Second Report of theCommissioners Trades and Manufactures. London, H.M.S.O.

Third Report of the Medical Officer of the Privy Council (1860).London, 1861.

Children's Employment Commission (1862). First Report of theCommissioners with Appendix. London, H.M.S.O., 1863.

Manufacture of China and Earthenware (1893). Report on TheConditions ofLabour in Potteries, The Injurious Effects Upon theHealth of the Workpeople, and the Proposed Remedies. London,H.M.S.O.

Thorpe, T. E. and Oliver, T. (1899). Report on the Employment ofCompounds of Lead in the Manufactutre of Pottery. London,H.M.S.O.

Report of the Departmental Committee on Lead, Dust and OtherCauses in the Manufacture of Earthenware and China withAppendices and Minutes of Evidence. (1910). London,H.M.S.O. Cd. 5219, 5278 and 5385.

Annual Reports ofH.M. Chief Inspector of Factories and Workshops.(1892 continued). London, H.M.S.O.

Special Report of the Chief Inspector of Factories in the Regulationsfor the Pottery Industry for the year 1940 (1941). London,H.M.S.O.

.Farr, W. (1875). Supplement to the Thirty-fifth Annual Report of theRegistrar General. London, H.M.S.O. (C.-l 155-I)

180

on July 14, 2020 by guest. Protected by copyright.

http://oem.bm

j.com/

Br J Ind M

ed: first published as 10.1136/oem.20.3.169 on 1 July 1963. D

ownloaded from