Details of Sculptor

Surname

Pitts

Alternative Surname

First Name

William

Initial of Surname

P

Year of Birth/Baptism

1789

Flourished

Year of Death

1840

Biographical Details

He was born in London on 9 November 1789 into a family of London silversmiths who specialised in small-scale tableware, larger épergnes and, during the Regency period, rococo-style candelabra. This background is significant since Pitts was to maintain a profile as both a silver-chaser and a sculptor throughout his career. Indeed, evidence suggests that it was not until 1818 that he ceased to be described simply as a silver-chaser, when an insurance document for 24 York Row in Kennington, south London, described him a modeller and chaser (Guildhall Lib MS 11936/437).
In 1806 Pitts was apprenticed to his father, also William, and he entered the Royal Academy Schools in 1811 before his apprenticeship was completed. Despite an early marriage, at the age of 18, and the rapid arrival of children, Pitts was clearly able to devote enough energy to his studies to win the Society of Arts gold Isis medal for a model in 1812 (29). Yet in his early career it is clear that the chasing in silver of works by other sculptors remained his dominant occupation, perhaps because it gave him a steady income. Notable commissions at this time included Thomas Stothard’s Wellington Shield, of 1814, and John Flaxman’s Shield of Achilles of 1818: in the latter work Pitts is said to have undertaken some of the modelling of the figures, a claim that coincides with his change of job description.
Between 1823 and 1840 he was a regular exhibitor at the Royal Academy and British Institution exhibitions, showing work ranging from drawings to bas-reliefs, and portrait busts to ideal pieces. He continued work as a silver-chaser, but also produced paintings and modelled his own designs for tableware in both precious metals and ceramics. In the late 1820s and early 1830s he was awarded several commissions for decorative sculpture at Buckingham Palace (18, 20, 21) and carved a relief of St Martin and the Beggar for the vestry-room pediment of St Martin-in-the-Fields (19). In 1839 he entered the competition for a monument to Lord Nelson in Trafalgar Square, producing a design described by the Art Union as ‘a boldly arranged group, deserving of applause, although wanting of fitness and expression of purpose’ (AU, March 1839, 18) (13). He was not successful.
Pitts was also commissioned to produce a number of church monuments, including one to Frederick, 2nd Baron Boston and his wife, which has a relief depicting a group of kneeling mourners with an angel floating above them (8). The Ricardo monument in Hardenhuish is on a much grander scale (1). David Ricardo, a self-made millionaire, economist and MP for the rotten borough of Portalington in Ireland, paid £2,000 for this monument which comprises four full-length free-standing classical figures in mourning. They are covered by a simple four-columned square structure in a neo-classical style that compliments well the austere neoclassicism of the Georgian church it stands beside. The work is imposing, though there appears to have been some deception in its production. Pitts was commissioned and paid to produce the four figures in marble but during the monument’s restoration in the 1870s they were found ‘to be made of composition’ (Wait 1977, 258).
Despite his relative success, Pitts suffered long-term financial problems. In 1831 he was forced to write to the Lords of the Treasury to request that the balance of £550 be paid for his work at Buckingham Palace, claiming that without it ‘I and my family will be ruined’ (PRO T. 1/3489 in Gunnis 1968, 307). His problems came to a head on 6 April 1840 when worries over money led Pitts to take a fatal overdose of laudanum. This was doubly unfortunate as he was on the verge of securing a valuable contract to act as modeller for the London jewellers Mortimer and Hunt, which would probably have brought financial security. There is no doubt that Pitts was admired by many of the leading sculptors of the day, with the Gentleman's Magazine singling out Flaxman, Chantrey and Westmacott amongst his strongest supporters. His obituary states that ‘in subjects of pure classical taste he stood unrivalled and his talents were highly appreciated’ (GM, 1840, i, 661). Pitts left his widow, daughter Mary and the infant Frederick destitute and Chantrey helped organise a relief fund to save them from starvation. His elder sons, Thomas, William and Joseph Pitts had all been employed as assistants in his studio.
Michael Paraskos
Literary References: AU, 1839, 18; AU 1840, 101; GM, 1840, i, 661; The Times, 21 April 1840, 6; DNB, XLV, 1896, 388 (Cust); Graves VI, 1905-6, 159; Jones 1934, 248-50; Gunnis 1968, 307-8; Pyke 1973, 111; Wait 1977, 258; Penny 1977(1) 11-13; Penny 1992, 64f; ODNB (McConnell)
Archival References: GPC; RG/JP, 6, 1117-9