Garton's sugar (part two)

More about Garton's super-duper new type of brewing sugar, dextrine-dextro-laevulose. It just rolls off the tongue, doesn't it?

We'll kick off with an explanation of its properties.

Now my Invention consists in the employment in brewing of what I term dextrine-dextro-laevulose, or dextro-saccharum, containing a substantial proportion of dextrine with any desired proportion of fermentable sugar, and which will therefore impart a less sweet and also a fuller drinking character to the beer without the necessity of departing from the methods ordinarily practised of mashing the malt and boiling the wort. The dextrine-dextrose and the invert sugar of which the said dextrine-dextro-laevulose is composed are either blended together in the process of brewing, or, as I prefer, blended at any stage of their manufacture after neutralization, so as to constitute a merchantable article, the manufacture of which forms part of my Invention.
Letters patent, 27th March 1876, N° 1311, page 2.

Basically, you didn't have to mess around changing your mashing scheme when using this type of sugar. As the unfermentable dextrine would maintain the body. You could add the deextrine and invert sugar separately, but Garton's product was simpler to use.

Now, it describes how to make this amazing product.

I conduct the manufacture of the dextrine-dextro-laevulose in two separate processes. First, I convert amylaceous substances (preferably rice) in the manner herein-after explained, whereby I obtain as much dextrine as possible. I then invert cane sugar, using acid in both cases, and after neutralizing each I blend the two together in the required proportions at any subsequent stage of the manufacture, or in the process of brewing, as already mentioned.

For converting the rice I at first employ heat and acid in the usual way, but afterwards maintain the heat so long only as any traces of starch remain, and I neutralize the solution when two equivalents of dextrine and one equivalent of sugar are formed, so as to produce as nearly as practicable a solution containing 67 per cent. of dextrine and 33 per cent. of sugar, calculated upon the dry extract. In inverting the cane sugar the well known method by the aid of dilute sulphuric acid is adopted.
Letters patent, 27th March 1876, N° 1311, page 2.

The two elements were produced separately. The dextrine was made first from unmalted grains and then mixed with invert sugar. With the proportions two-thirds dextrine to one third invert.

The rival product of dextrine-maltose is now described.

I am aware that it has been proposed to manufacture and employ in brewing as a substitute for malt a substance called “dextrine-maltose,” which is said to be composed of about 33 per cent. of ordinary dextrine and 67 per cent. of maltose (containing a further quantity of dextrine soluble in alcohol), being a compound body supposed to possess the same constituents as obtained from malt by an ordinary mashing process; but the substance which I employ differs essentially from the so-called dextrine-maltose, and the processes I adopt are quite distinct. The dextrine-maltose is obtained by carrying the conversion far beyond the point at which I stop to avoid any further transformation of dextrine into glucose, and I supply the required extra amount of fermentable sugar by a separately prepared invert sugar, as herein-before explained.
Letters patent, 27th March 1876, N° 1311, page 2.

Basically, I think Mr. Garton is saying how his product is better than silly old dextrine-maltose.

How was the wonder product used?

I vary the proportions of inert sugar to suit the brewing of different kinds of beer, preferring to use a sufficient quantity of the dextrine-dextrose to give at least 10 per cent, of dextrine.

In some cases, more particularly for low quality beers and porter, instead of manufacturing dextrine-dextro-laevulose, as herein-before described, I use dextrine prepared by torrefaction in the usual way, taking care that it is quite free from starch, and I employ it in combination with a suitable proportion of invert sugar, the two being blended together in the course of manufacture or in the process of brewing.
Letters patent, 27th March 1876, N° 1311, page 2.

So about 10% of the sugar should be dextrine. Meaning you'd need to use a fair bit of standard invert along with the dextrine-dextro-laevulose.
 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1897 Fremlin BA L

The London variant was the strongest of the various BAs. Exactly what you would expect. The most heavily hopped, too. Also, predictable.

Only three elements to the grist: pale malt, No. 2 invert and dextro-maltose. The base malt being half from Californian and half from English barley. Bit boring, aren’t they, these Fremlin recipes?

Just two types of copper hops, both English from the 1897 harvest. With half added in the middle of the boil.

This looks like a semi-Stock Pale Ale to me with a couple of months of secondary conditioning. 

1897 Fremlin BA L
pale malt	8.00 lb	74.42%
No. 2 invert sugar	2.75 lb	25.58%
Fuggles 120 mins	1.33 oz
Goldings 90 mins	2.67 oz
Goldings 60 mins	1.33 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.00 oz
OG	1055
FG	1015.5
ABV	5.23
Apparent attenuation	71.82%
IBU	67
SRM	10.5
Mash at	149º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	58º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1099 Whitbread ale

 

Garton's sugar (part one)

Many thanks to Eric from Butcher's Tears for sending me a Garton's patent. Which explains what the sugar was used by Boddington and described simply as "Garton".

The patent kicks off with some general discussion about the sugar used in brewing.

William Garton, of the Town and County of Southampton, Brewer. “Improvements in Brewing, and the Preparation of a Material to be Employed THEREIN."

It has been usual for some time past to employ as a substitute for a portion of the malt used in the brewing of beer a prepared sugar known in the trade as saccharum.

This saccharum is chiefly manufactured from cane sugar by the well known processes of inverting with an acid at certain temperatures; but in consequence of its highly vinous and fermentable character, and the absence of dextrine, the malt used in conjunction with it has to be manipulated in such a way as to retain a larger proportion of dextrine than is usually left by the ordinary methods of brewing, and difficulties arise in effecting this result in some breweries, and the beer produced has in some cases too sweet a flavour, and in others it attenuates too freely.
Letters patent, 27th March 1876, N° 1311, page 1.

It's good to have confirmed that saccharum was invert sugar. As well as the method of its manufacture using acid.

There was also a second method using the starch from grains.

The article is also manufactured partly from amylaceous substances and partly from cane sugar by a combined process, that is, acid is employed to convert the starch to dextrine-dextrose, when the temperature is reduced and cane sugar added to the acid solution, and as it is necessary to defer the neutralization for several hours to insure a proper inversion of the cane sugar, a further conversion of the rice product takes place and the dextrine cannot be kept intact, consequently this combined process only supplies an inappreciable amount of dextrine to the dextrose and invert sugar produced, therefore almost the same results as those above named are caused.
Letters patent, 27th March 1876, N° 1311, page 1.

Invert was sometimes combined with straight glucose.

Sometimes ordinary glucose is mixed with invert sugar in brewing, but owing to the small quantity of dextrine it contains the objection before referred to is not overcome, and although the mixture gives a heavier final gravity to the beer this is due to the presence of inert bodies, which impart an undesirable bitter flavor.
Letters patent, 27th March 1876, N° 1311, page 1.

Next time we'll discuss dextrine-dextro-laevulose. Won't that be fun?
 

Boddington boiling and fermentation in 1901

A couple of processes now. Boiling and fermentation.

Starting with boiling. Interestingly, most of the beers only had a single wort.  Which was definitely not typical. You would usually only see that in two circumstances. First, at breweries where the brew length was short. Second, when a batch size was very small.

The boil lengths are sort of middling at mostly two hours plus. About 1.5 hours is the minimum you would see around this time. In this case, the boils are probably a bit longer as there’s only one wort. And some of the boil would be to concentrate the last runnings.

Very consistent is how I would describe the pitching temperatures. Which only vary by 0.5º F. 60º Fis pretty much a standard pitching temperature. Though for stronger beers you would expect it to be a little lower.

There’s nothing odd about the maximum temperatures, which are all around 70º F. Generally, a little higher for the stronger beers. As you would expect.

Around a week for primary fermentation was fairly typical. Some brewers did manage to run their weaker beers through in four or five days.

Boddington boiling and fermentation in 1901
Beer	Style	boil time (hours)		Pitch temp	max. fermen-tation temp	length of fermen-tation (days)
TA	Table Ale	1.83		60º F	68º F	5
X	Mild	2		60º F	68º F	7
XX	Mild	2	2.17	60º F	69º F	7
XXX	Mild	2.5	2.25	60.5º F	69º F	7
XXXX	Mild	2.33		60.5º F	70º F	7
AK	Pale Ale	2.08		60º F	69º F	7
IPA	IPA	2.25		60º F	69º F	7
S	Stout	2.25		60º F	69º F	7
DS	Stout	2.25		60º F	70º F	7
BB	Strong Ale	2.75		60º F	72º F	7
Source:
Boddington brewing record held at Manchester Central Library, document number M693/405/125.

 

Boddington hops in 1901

Hops to finish. Quite a lot of different types. But not very many details, sadly.

About half the beers had four types of hops. Three English and one Californian. The other half had five types. The extra type also being English.

The only beer for which I have details of the hops’ vintage is TA. Which was brewed in 1902. And a majority of the hops are on the old side. As Boddington had pretty much the same hops in all their beers, using old hops wasn’t exclusive to TA, Meaning the other beers in the table probably also contained hops of varying ages. 

Boddington hops in 1901
Beer	Style	hop 1	hop 2	hop 3	hop 4	hop 5
TA	Table Ale	English 1898	English 1899	English 1900	English 1901	Californian 1900
X	Mild	English	English	English	Californian
XX	Mild	English	English	English	English	Californian
XXX	Mild	English	English	English	Californian
XXXX	Mild	English	English	English	English	Californian
AK	Pale Ale	English	English	English	Californian
IPA	IPA	English	English	English	English	Californian
S	Stout	English	English	English	Californian
DS	Stout	English	English	English	English	Californian
BB	Strong Ale	English	English	English	Californian
Source:
Boddington brewing record held at Manchester Central Library, document number M693/405/125.

 

Let's Brew - 1897 Fremlin BA C

Looking very similar to BB is the country version of BA. It has the same gravity, and identical hopping. Only the grist is slightly different. Though it is the same as the standard version of BA.

Which is pale malt, flaked barley and No. 2 invert sugar. Nothing very exciting there. And very much like most of their other Pale Ales.

Loads of different types of hops again. Six in total, all English, from the 1896 and 1897.

I don’t expect that this was aged for more than a couple of weeks. 

1897 Fremlin BA C
pale malt	6.75 lb	71.05%
flaked barley	0.50 lb	5.26%
No. 2 invert sugar	2.25 lb	23.68%
Fuggles 135 mins	0.875 oz
Goldings 105 mins	1.75 oz
Goldings 75 mins	0.875 oz
Goldings dry hops	0.50 oz
OG	1048
FG	1013
ABV	4.63
Apparent attenuation	72.92%
IBU	52
SRM	9
Mash at	150º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	135 minutes
pitching temp	60º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1099 Whitbread ale

 

Boddington grists in 1901

Time to look at what went into these beers. Which, it turns out, wasn’t a whole lot.

Only two types of malt were employed: pale and black. That’s pretty minimal. Especially as only three beers – the two Stouts and the Strong Ale – contained black malt. And, even in those, the quantity is pretty small. There’s not really anything else to say about the malts.

Similarly, there were just two types of sugar: Garton and invert. Both of which are pretty vague descriptions. And pretty similar, as Garton was a producer of invert. I did wonder if they were different names for the same thing. Until I came across beers that included both.

In general, the malt content is very high. Over 90% in most cases. And there are no adjuncts of any type. Which, as you’ve probably noticed, wasn’t very typical. By 1900, most breweries had taken advantage of the opportunity to use unmalted grains given by the 1880 Free Mash Tun Act.

Boddington grists in 1901
Beer	Style	pale malt	black malt	Garton	invert	total sugar
TA	Table Ale	91.30%		8.70%		8.70%
X	Mild	92.86%		7.14%		7.14%
XX	Mild	91.58%		8.42%		8.42%
XXX	Mild	88.89%			11.11%	11.11%
XXXX	Mild	93.75%			6.25%	6.25%
AK	Pale Ale	90.70%			9.30%	9.30%
IPA	IPA	91.84%			8.16%	8.16%
S	Stout	86.98%	1.97%	5.52%	5.52%	11.05%
DS	Stout	85.86%	1.42%	9.54%	3.18%	12.72%
BB	Strong Ale	91.13%	0.19%		8.68%	8.68%
Source:
Boddington brewing record held at Manchester Central Library, document number M693/405/125.

 

Boddington beers in 1901

Let’s take a look at the beers Boddington was brewing at the turn of the 20th century.

There were ten of them, in all. Ranging from Table Ale to Strong Ale.

Beginning at the bottom, the Table Ale has a pretty decent gravity for the style at just a little short of 1040º. And a very decent rate of attenuation leaves it well over 4% ABV. It wasn’t brewed in huge quantities and I’m guessing was mostly aimed at the home trade rather than pubs.

Moving on, we come to a whole clutch of Mild Ales. A full set, from X through to XXXX. Something which was becoming less common, as many brewers concentrated on just one or two examples of the style. Despite its continued huge popularity.

X, the weakest of the set is a bit weaker than an equivalent London beer, which would have had an OG of around 1050º. About the same as Boddington’s XX. While XXX and XXXX are stronger than any London-brewed Mild of the period.

The attenuation of all the Mild Ales is a little on the low side. I assume that this was deliberate, in order to leave some body and residual sweetness.

A hopping rate of around 5.75 lbs per quarter (336 lbs) of malt is a bit lower than in London. But not much. And still enough to leave a decent amount of bitterness.

There were only two Pale Ales. Fewer than found in may Southern breweries. Especially those in Kent. Where Fremlin produced no fewer than eight.

The AK looks about bang on for the style. Though Manchester was quite a long way north for the type. Here, it seems to be playing the role of Ordinary Bitter. Despite being brewed in smaller quantities than the stronger IPA.

As you would expect, the hopping rate is greater than in the Mild Ales, at 8 lbs per quarter of malt. Not crazy heavy for a Pale Ale of the time.

Now we come to the only one of these beers that still exists: IPA. Because this is the beer that we all know as Boddington’s Bitter. Even in the 1980s, the brewhouse name was still IP.

It’s a bit too weak to be a full-strength Stock Pale Ale. And I doubt that it received much in the way of ageing. At almost 10 lbs of hops per quarter, it’s the most heavily hopped of Boddington’s beers.

What can I say about the two Stouts? Well, the weaker of the two looks very much like a London Porter. To be honest, I’m surprised that Boddington produced two Stouts.  I imagine the weaker one was probably sold in bottles as Nourishing Stout, or something similar.

The hopping of both Stouts is pretty low. Very similar to the Mild Ales. While in London, Black Beers were hopped at around 8 lbs per quarter.

Finally, we have BB, the Strong Ale. Though, very confusingly, a few years later the name BB would be used for a Mild Ale. It’s a decent strength and reasonably heavily hopped. It wouldn’t surprise if it was aged a year or more before sale.
 

Boddington beers in 1901
Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl
TA	Table Ale	1038	1006	4.23	84.21%	5.83	0.86
X	Mild	1045.5	1012.0	4.43	73.63%	5.62	1.03
XX	Mild	1051.5	1014	4.96	72.82%	5.67	1.18
XXX	Mild	1059	1018	5.42	69.49%	5.66	1.33
XXXX	Mild	1068	1022	6.09	67.65%	5.91	1.66
AK	Pale Ale	1046	1012	4.50	73.91%	8.00	1.50
IPA	IPA	1054	1015	5.16	72.22%	9.71	2.10
S	Stout	1051	1015	4.76	70.59%	5.50	1.16
DS	Stout	1067.5	1023	5.89	65.93%	5.38	1.56
BB	Strong Ale	1086	1030	7.41	65.12%	8.42	2.63
Source:
Boddington brewing record held at Manchester Central Library, document number M693/405/125.

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1897 Fremlin BA

Moving to the next strength category we find BA. Which, in the 1897 price list, is described as “No. 3 Bitter Ale”. 

The recipe isn’t quite the same as BB’s. As the cane sugar is replaced by No. 2 invert. Along with a smaller amount of dextro-maltose. For which I’ve substituted more No. 2 invert. Two types of base malt, one from Californian and one from English barley.

Four types of copper hops and another four of dry hops. English, from the 1896 and 1897 harvests.

I’m really unsure as to whether this was aged or not. I suspect not. I think that honour was reserved for the London subvariant.

1897 Fremlin BA
pale malt	7.25 lb	69.05%
flaked barley	1.00 lb	9.52%
No. 2 invert sugar	2.25 lb	21.43%
Fuggles 105 mins	1.25 oz
Goldings 60 mins	1.25 oz
Goldings 30 mins	1.25 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.00 oz
OG	1052
FG	1015
ABV	4.89
Apparent attenuation	71.15%
IBU	46
SRM	9
Mash at	150º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	105 minutes
pitching temp	58º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1099 Whitbread ale

 

 

Goal achieved!

400 posts in 2025! 

Yeaah! Meaningless goal, whacked into the back of an empty net. While the opposition has a fag break after their 36th goal. In the first half.

I'm not sure why I started posting every day. Over-excitement. Or some sort of label. Pretty sure I'd have acquired one of those, were I a child today.

Going to just keep on. For no other reason than that I'm afraid to stop.

A happy moment of 2025:

 

 

Fremlin copper hops in 1897

Hops. Fremlin used loads of them. Pretty much all of them English.

Every beer contained at least two types of hops. Except for the Pilsener, which had just the one. I’m not 100% certain of the type. I think it says “Veleke”. I’m guessing that it was some type of Czech hop,

Most beers have a combination 1896 and 1897 season hops. All pretty fresh, considering all these brews took place in October 1897. The exceptions were the London versions of BA, BB and PA, which only had hops from the 1897 harvest, A sure sign that these were posh, expensive beers.

Sadly, with the exception of a couple of instances, there’s no indication of the English region from which the hops came. In those few cases, it’s always Worcester. Leading mw to believe that the others are mostly from Kent. It was, after all, the region that produced the most hops. And was where Fremlin was located. 

Fremlin copper hops in 1897
Beer	Style	hop 1	hop 2	hop 3	hop 4	hop 5	hop 6
X	Mild	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1897
H	Pale Ale	Eng. 1897	Eng. 1897	Wor. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1897
BA	Pale Ale	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1897	Wor. 1897
BA C	Pale Ale	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1897
BA L	Pale Ale	Eng. 1897	Eng. 1897
BB	Pale Ale	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1897
BB L	Pale Ale	Eng. 1897	Eng. 1897
PA	Pale Ale	Eng. 1897	Eng. 1897	Wor. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896
PA L	Pale Ale	Eng. 1897	Eng. 1897
IPA	IPA	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1897	Eng. 1897
Pilsener	Pilsener	Veleke? 1896
P	Porter	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1897
Cooper	Porter	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1897
DS	Stout	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1896	Eng. 1897
Source:
Fremlin brewing record held at the Kent Archives, document number U3555/2/F/Bx2/1/22.

 

7th December 1914 Thomas Usher X, PA and PA 60/- mashing scheme

Finally, we come to mashing. Always one of my favourite bits to interpret in brewing records. Not really. They’re a right pain in the bum. As how the details are recorded is very inconsistent.  And often the most important bits – like initial heat – are omitted.

Let’s see what Usher were up to with their mashing in 1914.

It’s a very Scottish method, with just a single mash followed by multiple sparges. While in England about the simplest a mash got was an initial infusion, followed by and underlet, finished off with a couple of sparges. Though some brewers were still performing multiple mashes.

Compared to 1894, there’s an extra sparge. Which is at the surprisingly low temperature of 155º F. I can’t remember ever seeing a sparge below 160º F. 

7th December 1914 Thomas usher X, PA and PA 60/-
action	strike heat	mash heat	tap heat
mash	157º F	150.5º F	149º F
sparge 1	170º F	155º F	158º F
sparge 2	165º F	160º F	158º F
sparge 3	155º F	153º F	159º F
Source:
Thomas Usher brewing record held at the Scottish Brewing Archives, document number TU/6/1/5.

 

Bottling Guinness in the 1960s

Another Guinness bottling controversy. This time about the use of corks. Which Guinness wanted to phase out in favour of crown corks. 

The brilliant thing about this video is that it shows hand bottling at the pub. The beer is in wooden hogsheads, which is filled in bottles and then corked. 

 It's wonderful to see just how the bottling process worked.

 

 

Guinness in crockery bottles

 Here's a reminder of when Guinness was bottled by publicans. In this case, using corked crockery bottles.

 

 At one time, this was how most Guinness was bottled in Ireland. In the pub where it would be sold. This was one of the main reasons Guinness Extra Stout remained bottle conditioned. Publican bottlers didn't have the equipment to artificially carbonate.

Anyone know when publicans stopped bottling in Ireland? 

 

 

Thomas Usher boiling and fermentation in 1914

Time for boiling. Which was quite different for the different types of beer.

The shortest boil times were for the “Br” Shilling Ales. Where the first wort was boiled for just 90 minutes and the second for 150 minutes. Nothing particularly unusual for the 19th century. And far short of boiling the first wort down to syrup, as some would have you believe. 

The Mild Shilling Ales, in the other hand, had a single 120-minute boil. The reason for the single boil was that these beers were produced in relatively small quantities and only one wort was produced.

The Pale Ales all had three boils, mostly of 105, 135 and 165 minutes. With the last boil so long presumably to concentrate the wort. The one exception was PA 60/-, where each of the boils was 15 minutes shorter. For whatever reason.

Longest boils were reserved for the Stouts. Where the single boil was 180 minutes. Why so long? Possibly to darken the wort.

Fermentation temperatures now. Pitching temperatures are remarkably consistent at 60º F for every beer. Usually, you would expect the pitching temperature would be lower for higher gravity beers.

There’s a bit more variation in maximum temperatures. But still only 3º F, between 66º F and 69º F.  With, logically enough, the lowest temperatures for the weakest beer.

One general comment. The maximum temperatures are quite low. In London, they were generally over 70º F. 

Thomas Usher boiling and fermentation in 1914
Beer	Style	boil time (hours)			Pitch temp	max. fermen-tation temp
40/- Br	Ale	1.5	2.5		60º F	66º F
50/- Br	Ale	1.5	2.5		60º F	67º F
60/- Br	Ale	1.5	2.5		60º F	67º F
44/- MA	Mild	2			60º F	68º F
50/- MA	Mild	2			60º F	67º F
60/- MA	Mild	2			60º F	68º F
80/- MA	Mild	2			60º F	67º F
100/- MA	Mild	2			60º F	69º F
X	Pale Ale	1.75	2.25	2.75	60º F	69º F
X 60/-	Pale Ale	1.75	2.25	2.75	60º F	68º F
IP	IPA	1.75	2.25	2.75	60º F	68º F
40/- PA	Pale Ale	1.75	2.25	2.75	60º F	68º F
PA	Pale Ale	1.75	2.25	2.75	60º F	69º F
PA 60/-	Pale Ale	1.5	2	2.5	60º F	69º F
48/-	Stout	3			60º F	69º F
54/-	Stout	3			60º F	69º F
XP	Strong Ale	2	2.25	2.75	60º F	68º F
	Average	1.93	2.30	2.71	60º F	68º F
Source:
Thomas Usher brewing record held at the Scottish Brewing Archives, document number TU/6/1/5.