Let's Brew - 1885 William Younger No. 1

Strongest of the numbered Ales was, logically enough, No. 1. Though it wasn’t the strongest beer Younger produced. That honour lay with 160/-.

No. 1 is roughly equivalent to 140/- in terms of strength. And the grist is quite similar. So what was the difference between the two? The hopping rate. 120/- was hopped at 8.5 lbs per quarter (336 lbs) of malt, No. 1 at 12.5 lbs. To me, that’s an indication that No. 1 was intended to be aged longer.

The grist is much like that of No. 2. Base malt and dextro-maltose. Though with only two types of malt. There may have been some caramel added to darken the colour.

Rather more complicated hopping: Kent from the 1884 and 1885 harvests, American from 1884 and 1885, and Californian from 1884. Quite a lot of hops, too. Leaving it with over 100 IBU (calculated).

Long ageing for this big boy. Between 18 and 24 months, is my guess. 

1885 William Younger No. 1
pale malt	21.00 lb	90.32%
No. 2 invert	2.25 lb	9.68%
Cluster 120 min	4.50 oz
Fuggles 60 min	4.50 oz
Fuggles 30 min	4.50 oz
Goldings dry hops	2.00 oz
OG	1108
FG	1035
ABV	9.66
Apparent attenuation	67.59%
IBU	133
SRM	12
Mash at	155º F
Sparge at	163º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	56.5º F
Yeast	WLP028 Edinburgh Ale

 

Exhibit of Foreign and Colonial Beers (part ten)

Still not finished giving this poor dog a good kicking. Got to get the last bit of fun out of it.

It's interesting that the beers today are listed under Victoria. Which would have been correct a few years earlier. But this is after Confederation and should really be listed as Australia.

The beers are all either Pale Ale or Stout.

Australian samples
Exhibitors	Country	Samples	Style
Shamrock Brewing and Malting Company	Australia	Pilot B and Bitter Ale	Pale Ale
Shamrock Brewing and Malting Company	Australia	Extra Pale Ale Special	Pale Ale
Shamrock Brewing and Malting Company	Australia	Extra Brown Stout	Stout
Shamrock Brewing and Malting Company	Australia	Extra Malt Stout	Stout
Bux Brewing Company, Melbourne	Australia	Non-Alcoholic Ale	Ale
Coghlan and Tulloch, Limited, Ballarat	Australia	Pale Ale	Pale Ale
Coghlan and Tulloch, Limited, Ballarat	Australia	Bitter Beer	Pale Ale
Carlton Brewery, Limited	Australia	Extra Stout	Stout
Carlton Brewery, Limited	Australia	All Malt Ale Bitter	Pale Ale
Carlton Brewery, Limited	Australia	Carlton Ale	Ale
Carlton Brewery, Limited	Australia	XXX. Pale Ale	Pale Ale
G. H. Bennett, Melbourne	Australia	Non-Intoxicating Ale.	Pale Ale
McCracken’s City Brewery, Limited, Melbourne	Australia	Australian Bitter Ale	Pale Ale
McCracken’s City Brewery, Limited, Melbourne	Australia	A K. Light Ale	Pale Ale
McCracken’s City Brewery, Limited, Melbourne	Australia	Extra Stout, Khaki Brand	Stout
Source:
The Brewers' Journal vol. 38 1902, November 15th 1902, page 672 - 674.

We'll start with the Pale Ales.

Victoria.— Among the brands described as bitter ale, the first place must be given to the “All Malt Ale Bitter” of the Carlton Brewery Company, Limited. It drank clean with a pleasant palate, though a little thin; it had a clean white top. It is awarded three marks. The Australian bitter ale of McCracken’s Brewery, Melbourne, is also awarded three marks. It was of a character which should sell anywhere if in condition and brilliant.

Several brands of ale of a paler type were tasted, and of these the extra pale ale of the Shamrock Brewery and Malting Company was the best. Although it had a green wood flavour, probably due to cask timber, it was a very fair beer, and is awarded three marks. The A.K. light ale of McCracken's Brewery, Melbourne, was of good condition, but has a pronounced green wood flavour. It is awarded two marks. The Carlton ale and the XXXX pale ale, both of the Carlton Brewery, Limited, are each awarded two marks.
The Brewers' Journal vol. 38 1902, November 15th 1902, page 672 - 674.

It's a shame that the classic Carlton beer Vic Bitter wasn't included in the samples. Were they already brewing it in 1902? Odd that the the “All Malt Ale Bitter” drank thin. You'd expect an all-malt beer to be full-bodied. At this point, I think Carlton was 100% top-fermenting. Though it can be difficult yo tell in Australia, as terms like Bitter continued to be used after breweries switched to bottom-fermentation.

What most grabbed my attention was McCracken's AK. It's the first AK I've come across from outside the UK. It demonstrates just how common the term was at one point. I wonder if there any others brewed in Australia?

Among the stouts the extra malt stout of the Shamrock Brewing and Malting Company was of fair quality and in good condition. It is awarded three marks. The extra stout of the Carlton Brewery, Limited, had a somewhat rough taste. It is awarded two marks. The extra stout, Khaki brand, of Messrs. McCracken’s Brewery, Melbourne, had good condition, but lacked character. It is awarded two marks.

The non-intoxicating ale of Mr. G. H. Bennett, Melbourne, was good of its kind, and is awarded three marks. The non-alcoholic ale of the Bax Brewery Company, Melbourne, was devoid of hop flavour and too sweet. It is awarded two marks.
The Brewers' Journal vol. 38 1902, November 15th 1902, page 672 - 674.

I drank quite a bit of Carlton's Stout when I lived in Melbourne. Though that was branded Abbotsford. It was OK. Not a patch on Cooper's Stout. Fucking like Westvleteren compared to Carlton Lagers. Which were totally undrinkable.

Interesting that there were a couple of NABLABs anongst the samples.  Not non-alcoholic, as I suspect that the non-intoxicating Ale was simply a low-alcohol beer.
 

UK Beer exports to Europe in 1898

As part of my research for my current book, "Free!", I came across some wonderful figures for UK beer exports. Wonderful, in that they are more detailed than usual, listing every single country/territory that beer was exported to. 

There are quite a few surprises. Though the country which took in the most beer from the UK isn't: Belgium. Which has a long tradition of importing British beer.

Numbers 2 and 3 are more unexpected, due to their tiny size: Malta and Gibraltar. I'm guessing the beer was mostly being drunk by military personnel. 
Which I don't think was the case in numbers four and five: the Channel Islands and Germany. I'm guessing that the beer going to the Channel Islands was from the big English brands. Stuff like Bass. Probably the same to Germany, too. Bass got everywhere.

The only other countries taking more than 1,000 barrels a year, were France and Holland. Which have in common, I suppose, being relatively close geographically to the UK.

I would have expected the share of Scotland to be higher than 8%. As they were big exporters. Especially how little went to Belgium, where Scotch Ale was popular. I know the Scottish share to total exports was higher. It mist have been going elsewhere in the world. We'll find out exactly where in a later post.

If you're wondering where Ireland is in these figures, there's a note that says:

Included in the above total for the United Kingdom are the exports from Ireland comprising 22 barrels to Germany and Holland, valued at £47, and 3,202 barrels to the United States, valued at £21/100.
The Brewers' Journal vol. 35 1899, June 15th 1899, page 344. 

UK Beer exports to Europe in 1898
Destination	From England.		From Scotland.		From the U.K.
	Quantity.	Declared Value.	Quantity.	Declared Value.	Quantity.	Declared Value.
	Barrels	£	Barrels	£	Barrels	£
Russia	876	3,152	3	8	878	3,160
Sweden	84	416	37	96	121	512
Norway	106	311	-	-	106	311
Denmark	370	1,204	2	6	372	1,209
Germany	12,970	42,965	112	395	13,098	43,395
Holland	4,513	13,737	16	67	4,535	13,816
Belgium	37,770	116,051	2,188	7,031	39,958	123,085
Channel Islands	17,731	41,706	-	-	17,731	41,706
France	7,469	21,991	8	25	7,477	22,016
Portugal, Azores, and Madeira	393	1,272	54	238	417	1,510
Spain and Canaries	770	2,547	189	789	969	3,336
Gibraltar	19,322	56,396	16	57	19,338	56,452
Italy	141	539	1	5	142	544
Malta	25,698	79,823	8,489	24,649	34,187	104,472
Greece	12	59	-	-	12	59
Roumania	1	8	-	-	1	8
Turkey, European	208	747	-	-	209	747
Total	128,434	382,924	11,115	33,366	139,551	416,338
Source:
The Brewers' Journal vol. 35 1899, June 15th 1899, page 344.
Note:
Year ending 30th September 1898.

 

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1885 William Younger No. 2

A much rarer beast was No. 2. This is the only example I have from the 1885-1886 Abbey Brewery brewing book. I think it was discontinued soon after.

No surprises in the grist. It’s just base malt and dextro-maltose. Not sure if that’s available at all. I’ve substituted No. 2 invert. The dextro-maltose implies that this was a beer intended for ageing.

As usual with Younger, there were quite a few different hops. American from the 1884 and 1885 harvests, along with Kent from 1884 and Württemberg from 1885. 

Getting back to ageing, I reckon a minimum of twelve months. More likely 18 months plus. Which would have lowered the FG considerably. Raising the ABV to nigh on 10%.

1885 William Younger No. 2
pale malt	17.75 lb	89.87%
No. 2 invert	2.00 lb	10.13%
Cluster 120 min	3.00 oz
Hallertau 60 min	4.00 oz
Fuggles 30 min	3.00 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.50 oz
OG	1092
FG	1027
ABV	8.60
Apparent attenuation	70.65%
IBU	108
SRM	11
Mash at	152º F
Sparge at	163º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	57º F
Yeast	WLP028 Edinburgh Ale

 

 

Exhibit of Foreign and Colonial Beers (part nine)

Just in case you were wondering, these were the jurors:

The jurors consisted of Messrs. J. Grimble Groves, M.P., Salford (chairman, Groves and Whitnall, Limited), Chairman; W. Crockford (head brewer, Charrington and Co., Limited, of Mile End); Robert Hutton (head brewer, Samuel Allsopp and Co., Limited, of Burton-on-Trent); Arthur R. Ling, F.I.C., F.C.S. (consulting chemist, editor of The Journal of the Federated Institutes of Brewing), &c.
The Brewers' Journal vol. 38 1902, November 15th 1902, page 672 - 674.

That looks like a pretty distinguished bunch. You've got the head brewers of two pretty renowned brewers, Charrington and Allsopp. Plus Arthur Ling, a distinguished brewing scientist. Grinble Groves is a great name. Almost as good as Cosmo Bonsor.

It's the turn of Canada today.

Canadian samples
Exhibitors	Country	Samples	Style
Alex Keith, Halifax	Canada	India Pale Ale	IPA
J. H. R. Molson and Bros., Montreal	Canada	XXX Porter	Porter
J. H. R. Molson and Bros., Montreal	Canada	Export Ale	Pale Ale
Cosgrave Brewery Company, Toronto	Canada	Pale Ale	Pale Ale
Cosgrave Brewery Company, Toronto	Canada	XXX Porter	Porter
Port Hope Brewing and Malting Company, Ontario	Canada	Fine Ale (Blue Star)	Pale Ale
Eaton Bros., Limited, Owen Sound	Canada	XXX Stout (Dublin)	Stout
Eaton Bros., Limited, Owen Sound	Canada	Golden Ale	Pale Ale
Halifax Breweries, Limited	Canada	Extra Stout	Stout
Halifax Breweries, Limited	Canada	Ale	Pale Ale
Copland Brewing Company, Toronto	Canada	Extra Stout	Stout
Copland Brewing Company, Toronto	Canada	India Ale	IPA
Simeon Jones, Limited, New Brunswick	Canada	India Pale Ale	IPA
Radnor Water Company, Montreal, Quebec	Canada	Radnor Mineral Water	Water
Source:
The Brewers' Journal vol. 38 1902, November 15th 1902, page 672 - 674.

Porter/Stout and Pale Ale/IPA. So, much like India. No-one was brewing Mild Ale. Sadly.

Canada.— Among the first group of ales (top fermentation) the best sample shown from Canada was the India ale (pale) of the Copland Brewery Company, Toronto. It was in good condition, and bright. It is awarded three marks. Second on the list must be placed the export ale of Messrs. J. H. R. Molson, Brothers, Montreal. It is awarded two marks. It was a very fair beer.

Among the second group, the ale of Messrs. Howard and Co., Halifax, was bright though flat, and had a rough flavour. It is awarded two marks. The "pale ale ” of the Cosgrave Brewery Company, Toronto, had also a rough flavour and was not bright. It is awarded two marks. The "fine ale” (Blue Star) of the Port Hope Brewing and Malting Company, Ontario, was slightly acid. It is awarded one mark.

The best Canadian stout shown was the extra stout of Messrs. Howard, Halifax; it was of good general quality, excellent condition, and carried a satisfactory head. It is awarded three marks. The XXX stout (Dublin) of Messrs. Eaton Brothers, Limited, Owen Sound, might be described as very fair. It is awarded two marks.

Of two brands of porter the XXX porter of the Cosgrave Brewery Company, Toronto, was the better. It was slightly acid, but of good character. It is awarded three marks. The XXX porter of Messrs. J. H. R. Molson and Brothers, Montreal, was satisfactory as regards condition, but drank thin. It is awarded two marks.
The Brewers' Journal vol. 38 1902, November 15th 1902, page 672 - 674.

I think the jury was trying to be polite. The Canadian beers sound, er, a bit rough. And many of them sound like they have obvious faults. I'm surprised at the marks given to some.
 

Exhibit of Foreign and Colonial Beers (part eight)

I'm still having a good chew of this article. And will spit out the odd post, to the disgust of everyone, doubtless.

I'm particularly interested in the beers from India. As it gives some indication of the local competition British brewers faced in the Indian market.

Indian samples
Exhibitors	Country	Samples	Style
E. Dyer and Co., Lucknow	India	Pale Ale No. 1	Pale Ale
E. Dyer and Co., Lucknow	India	Pale Ale No. 2	Pale Ale
E. Dyer and Co., Lucknow	India	Pale Ale No. 3	Pale Ale
E. Dyer and Co., Lucknow	India	XX. Stout No. 1	Stout
E. Dyer and Co., Lucknow	India	XX. Stout No. 2	Stout
E. Dyer and Co., Lucknow	India	XX. Stout No. 3	Stout
E. Dyer and Co., Solan	India	India Pale Ale.	IPA
E. Dyer and Co., Solan	India	Stout	Stout
Meakin and Co, Kasanli	India	XXX Stout	Stout
Meakin and Co, Kasanli	India	Pale Ale	Pale Ale
Source:
The Brewers' Journal vol. 38 1902, November 15th 1902, page 672 - 674.

In the traidition of the random use of the term IPA, two of the Indian brewers simply called their beers Pale Ales. Despite having an excellent claim to the prefix India. While the other did plump for IPA. Note that there are as many examples of Stout as Pale Ale.

India.— Among the samples of ale (top fermentation) the India pale ale of Messrs. E. Dyer and Co., Solan, was decidedly the best. It was a brilliant full-drinking beer, and is awarded three marks. Next in order of merit, though decidedly inferior to the last brand, should be mentioned the pale ale No. 3, of Messrs. E. Dyer and Co., Lucknow. It is awarded two marks.

The XX stout, No. 3, of Messrs. E. Dyer and Co., Lucknow, is awarded three marks as the best brand exhibited from India, while the XXX stout of Messrs. Meaking and Co., Kasanli, is also given three marks; the sample tested was not quite so good as that of the first-mentioned brand.
The Brewers' Journal vol. 38 1902, November 15th 1902, page 672 - 674.

I would have guessed that the numbered beers from Dyer of Lucknow were in descending order of strength, in the manner of Bass. But with the No. 3 of both the Pale Ales and Stouts scoring well, I suspect that it's the other way around. With No. 3 the strongest.

It seems that they were quite good at making Stout in India. With two of the three top scores going to Stouts.

We now switch continents to Africa.

Egyptian samples
Exhibitors	Country	Samples	Style
Brasserie des Pyramides	Egypt	Pilsen (non-Pasteurised)	Pils
Brasserie des Pyramides	Egypt	Pilsen (Pasteurised)	Pils
Brasserie des Pyramides	Egypt	Munich (non-Pasteurised)	Münchener
Brasserie des Pyramides	Egypt	Munich (Pasteurised)	Münchener
Source:
The Brewers' Journal vol. 38 1902, November 15th 1902, page 672 - 674.

Egypt— These samples arrived too late for the Exhibition. The non-Pasteurised Pilsen of the Brasserie des Pyramides was a very fair beer in good condition. It is awarded three marks. The Pasteurised beer of the same brand is awarded two marks. The flavour was injured by the Pasteurising. Two samples of Munich beer (Pasteurised and non-Pasteurised) from the same brewery were also tested. The Pasteurised beer is awarded two marks. It was a fair beer, brilliant, and in good condition, but rather sweet. The sample of non-Pasteurised beer of the same brand was not so good.
The Brewers' Journal vol. 38 1902, November 15th 1902, page 672 - 674.

Can you imagine what a nightmare it must have been to coordinate the arrival of all these samples from around the world? The Japanese and Australian beers would have been months in transit. I assume that it was partly arranged by telegram. Probably a bit too early for it to be all by telephone. How we take instant communication for granted now.

Interesting that the unpasteurised Pils was good, while the unpasteurised Munich was crap. Was it a difference in the age of the samples, perhaps? Or maybe their bottling was a bit hit and miss.

 

William Younger beers in 1884 and 1885

Younger's Abbey Brewery in the 1890s.

I've spent a good bit of the last two weeks extracting information from William Younger's brewing records. Records that I'd been too lazy to go through properly. Until now. Information that I need for "Free!", the book I'm currently working on.

Going through the records for both the Abbey and Holyrood breweries, it became clear how different the beers they brewed were. Holyrood stuck to mostly Pale Ales, along with occasional brews of Strong Ales. And a few brews of Pils. The Abbey Brewery, while it mostly brewed Shilling Ales, Stout and Mild Ales, made pretty much every beer in their range. Other than Pils.

At Holyrood, XP was far and away the most-brewed beer, accounting for well over half of the brews. With most of the rest being XXP.

At Abbey, things were far more diverse, with no one beer dominating. The most frquently brewed were X, 50/-, 60/- and the Stouts S1 and S2. Note the huge range of gravities brewed, from 1031º to 1115º. Few English breweries could have matched that. Nor the 24 different beers brewed at Abbey.

Interested in learning more about these beers? I can stretch out the material to several more posts, if I can be bothered.

William Younger (Holyrood) beers in 1884
Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl	dry hops (oz / barrel)
S XP	IPA	1055	1014	5.42	74.55%	10.33	2.46	9.90
XP	IPA	1056	1015	5.42	73.21%	8.08	2.76	8.84
XXP	IPA	1062	1015	6.22	75.81%	9.31	3.46	9.44
XXX	Mild	1063	1021	5.56	66.67%	5.45	1.25	4.54
XXXX	Mild	1080	1025	7.28	68.75%	9.07	3.24	11.28
XXXX / 3	Mild	1101	1022	10.45	78.22%	8.38	4.37	17.80
Ext	Pale Ale	1061	1014	6.22	77.05%	15.71	4.35	14.92
S Ext	Pale Ale	1068	1021	6.22	69.12%	15.71	4.68	14.98
PX	Pils	1054	1020	4.50	62.96%	5.82	1.14	0.00
1	Strong Ale	1100	1038	8.20	62.00%	11.08	5.54	14.70
3	Strong Ale	1077	1027	6.61	64.94%	8.57	2.87	9.39
Source:
William Younger brewing record held at the Scottish Brewing Archive, document number WY/6/1/3/11.

 

William Younger (Abbey) beers in 1885
Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl	dry hops (oz / barrel)
T	Table Beer	1031	1008	3.04	74.19%	6.36	0.78	3.95
50/-	Ale	1037	1011	3.44	70.27%	5.45	0.85	3.69
S 50/-	Ale	1042	1018	3.18	57.14%	3.85	0.45	0.00
B 50/-	Ale	1044	1016	3.70	63.64%	3.85	0.85	3.61
H 60/-	Ale	1041	1014	3.57	65.85%	6.43	1.14	5.67
60/-	Ale	1052	1023	3.84	55.77%	5.00	1.06	0.00
80/-	Ale	1063	1025	5.03	60.32%	5.24	1.39	0.00
100/-	Ale	1075	1036	5.16	52.00%	8.00	1.85	0.00
120/-	Ale	1087	1034	7.01	60.92%	6.23	2.67	0.00
140/-	Ale	1101	1043	7.67	57.43%	8.44	4.61	0.00
160/-	Ale	1115	1050	8.60	56.52%	8.44	5.25	0.00
X	Mild	1048	1012	4.76	75.00%	5.29	1.11	3.36
XX	Mild	1056	1016	5.29	71.43%	6.19	1.48	3.82
XXX	Mild	1071	1024	6.22	66.20%	7.69	2.45	4.71
XXXX	Stock Ale	1079	1020	7.81	74.68%	7.42	2.97	9.91
P	Pale Ale	1047	1009	5.03	80.85%	8.82	1.73	3.14
XP	IPA	1054	1013	5.42	75.93%	11.50	2.84	9.28
XP Scotch	Pale Ale	1055	1016	5.16	70.91%	11.00	2.72	9.48
DBS	Stout	1073	1025	6.35	65.75%	15.86	5.51	11.50
S1	Stout	1074	1034	5.29	54.05%	1.43	0.45	0.00
S2	Stout	1065	1028	4.89	56.92%	1.60	0.39	0.00
1	Strong Ale	1106	1035	9.39	66.98%	12.05	6.39	15.04
2	Strong Ale	1091	1030	8.07	67.03%	9.76	4.80	11.42
3	Strong Ale	1081	1029	6.88	64.20%	9.12	3.46	9.12
3 pale	Strong Ale	1077	1024	7.01	68.83%	9.33	3.37	9.25
Source:
William Younger brewing record held at the Scottish Brewing Archive, document number WY/6/1/2/31.