Let's Brew - 1894 Cannon KKK

Strongest of Cannon’s range was KKK. Not that it’s all that strong by 19th-century standards.

My guess is that this was considered an Old Ale or Stock Ale. Not 100% sure about that. Though their parent company, Tomson & Wooton, called their KKK a Stock Ale.

No surprises in the recipe. Which has just a single type of malt, described as “Scotch”. Interesting, given how far Kent, where the brewery was located, is from Scotland.

A single type of hops, too. East Kent from the 1893 harvest. Pretty fresh, given that this beer was brewed in January. The hopping rate is a little lower than in XXX. Which isn’t what I would have expected. Though the dry-hopping is heavier.

As I believe this was a Stock Ale, it’s logical that it would have been aged. Probably for at least twelve months.
 

1894 Cannon KKK
pale malt	14.50 lb	100.00%
Goldings 90 min	2.00 oz
Goldings 30 min	2.00 oz
Goldings dry hops	0.50 oz
OG	1062
FG	1015.5
ABV	6.15
Apparent attenuation	75.00%
IBU	46
SRM	5
Mash at	150º F
Sparge at	163º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	59º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1099 Whitbread ale

 

 

London called

And I answered. Well, I went there, at least. Along with Dolores, on our traditional December trip.

No blow by blow account this time. Just a few photos and observations.

Staring with the really important stuff. Most expensive pint? 7 quid forty for a pint of Landlord in the Marquis Cornwallis. Fuck me. That's as bad as Amsterdam. It was a pretty good pint, mind.

Most annoying? Two pubs where there were handpumps with their clips thew right way around, but none of the beers actually on. This happened at the Rocket on Euston Road and the Nags Head on Camden High Street.

I was struck by how much Landlord there is in London. Even our hotel stocked it. (At just 4.95 a pint and in surprisingly good condition.)  Which is good news, as it's a beer that's up to Dolores's high standards. She's quite fussy when it comes to beer. More so than me. Traditional cask Bitter is her thing. London Pride being her favourite. Though she's more than happy to drink Landlord. She wasn't as impressed with Shepherd Neame Masterbrew. Thin, in her opinion. She switched to cider.

Most of the cask was in decent condition. Other than a couple of pints in the Euston Flyer. Where both my ESB and Hophead were past their best. Though not vinegar.

All the pubs we visited seemed to have plenty of custom, even in the afternoon. We were in central London, though. Mostly in pretty touristy bits. I'm sure that it's not typical of the country as a whole. Or even all of London.

Everything seemed a good bit more expensive than last year. Which I suppose is to be expected.

And what of breakfasts? I hear you ask. A proper full English every morning. Fried eggs, bacon, tomatoes, toast, tea and orange juice. The perfect start to the day.

I got to eat a pie, too. With mushy peas.

To complete our seasonal bliss, we attended a one-man performance of A Christmas Carol in the Charles Dickens house. Very impressive. 

Fremlin beer output in October 1897

My trip to Maidstone provided me with so much material. As I'm sure you're starting to realise. Here's a reminder that it's useful to photograph pretty much anything you find in a brewing record. Even if it looks like a bookmark.

There’s a sheet of paper in the last page for October in the brewing log, listing all sorts of monthly totals. Including how much of each beer was brewed. This makes it clear how much of a Pale Ale brewery Fremlin was.

The two weakest Pale Ales, H and BB, accounted for over 50% of their output. And the eight Pale Ales and one IPA were 93% of production. The biggest seller of the other beers, Porter, amounted to only 3% of the beer Fremlin brewed. 

Most of the beers produced were blended at racking time. Not just with primings to condition the beer in the cask, but also a small quantity of vatted Stock Ale. I assume that this was to add some aged character. It’s interesting that even X, the Mild Ale, had some of this aged beer blended in.

The proportion of vatted beer added was between 1% and 2%. Over all beers, averaging 1.76%.

There could have been few breweries in the country where Pale Ale so dominated output. Even specialist brewers in Burton produced a higher proportion of other styles. I wonder why Fremlin ended up concentrating so much on Pale Ales?
 

Fremlin beer output in October 1897
	beer	primings	vat	Total	%
H	3,049.5	85.25	57	3,185.75	30.94%
BB	2,329	79.75	43	2,451.75	23.81%
BA C	1,325	46.25	36	1,407.25	13.67%
BA	655	20.25	8.5	683.75	6.64%
PA C	1,165.5	39.75	17	1,222.25	11.87%
IPA	43.5			43.5	0.42%
X	169.5	7	9	185.5	1.80%
P	301	-		301	2.92%
Cooper	73.5			73.5	0.71%
DS	83.5	3.25	19	105.75	1.03%
BB L	371.75	3		374.75	3.64%
BA L	73			73	0.71%
PA L	137.25			137.25	1.33%
Pilsener	46.5			46.5	0.45%
Victoria		5		5	0.05%
total	9,823.5	289.5	183.5	10,296.5
Source:
Fremlin brewing record held at the Kent Archives, document number U3555/2/F/Bx2/1/22.

 

 

Let[s Brew Wedenesday - 1885 W.E. & J. Rigden Special Ale

The recipe writing has been going well. I've now over 400 for "Free!", by upcoming book. If I can keep up this pace, I may have all the recipes polished off by the end of the year. 

Next up strength-wise of Rigden’s Bitters is the rather oddly-named Special Ale. Not sure what makes this “special”. It’s just a mid-strength Pale Ale.

There’s rather more malt in the grist, as there’s no flaked maize. Though there is a higher percentage of sugar than in AK. And that sugar leads to quite a dark colour for the finished beer. Not quite as dark as Mild Beer, but on the way there.

Two types of hops were used. Both English, though I only have details of one: Sussex from the 1884 harvest. The other is just another squiggle.

The very heavy rate of dry-hopping leads me to believe that this was probably a semi-stock beer. Aged for three months or so before sale. 

1885 W.E. & J. Rigden Special Ale
pale malt	8.00 lb	74.42%
No. 2 invert sugar	2.75 lb	25.58%
Fuggles 120 mins	2.75 oz
Goldings 30 mins	2.75 oz
Goldings dry hops	2.25 oz
OG	1055
FG	1011.5
ABV	5.75
Apparent attenuation	79.09%
IBU	64
SRM	10.5
Mash at	150º F
Sparge at	180º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	59º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1099 Whitbread ale

 

Fremlin beers in 1897

One of the larger breweries in Kent, Fremlin produced an impressive range of beers. Fourteen of them in all, mostly Pale Ales.

There were eight of them in total, plus an IPA. With gravities from 1040º to 1069º. Which is a pretty decent spread. Though, rather oddly, three different beers were 1048º. You can see why they described themselves as a Pale Ale brewery in their advertisements. 

Weakest of the set was the rather enigmatically named H. Which looks like some sort of Light Bitter. There’s a bit of a jump then to BB at 1048º. Which came in two variations, BB and BB L. The latter, presumably, being a version for the London market, which was significantly more heavily hopped.

Next was BA at 1052º. Which came in three variations. BA C (I’m guessing country) at the lower gravity of 1048º and looks very much like BB. And BA L (London) with a higher gravity of 1055º, along with heavier hopping.

Next, we come to PA at 1058º. Which also had a London variant at 1061º. And, finally, there’s IPA at 1069º, which is very much at the top end of strength for the style.

There’s just a single Mild Ale, X, with a fairly typical gravity of 1051º. Which mainly differs from the Pale Ales in having a lower hopping rate of just over 6 lbs per quarter (336 lbs) of malt. Compared to 7.5 to 10 lbs for the Pale Ales.

A whole three Black Beers were produced: Porter, Cooper and Double Stout. It’s odd to see Cooper being brewed. It was usually just a blend of Porter and Stout. It’s particularly odd, given it’s only 1º higher in gravity than the Porter.

We now come to the oddest beer of the bunch: Pilsener. In the 1890s, Lager was usually only brewed by specialists, with a special brewhouse dedicated to it. Fremlin was well ahead of the game and had already started brewing their Pilsener in the 1880s. 

Fremlin beers in 1897
Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl
X	Mild	1051	1014.4	4.84	71.76%	6.32	1.45
H	Pale Ale	1040	1006.6	4.41	83.38%	7.57	1.26
BA	Pale Ale	1052	1013.3	5.12	74.43%	7.75	1.69
BA C	Pale Ale	1048	1009.4	5.10	80.38%	7.37	1.51
BA L	Pale Ale	1055	1015.5	5.22	71.80%	10.00	2.47
BB	Pale Ale	1048	1010.8	4.92	77.49%	7.26	1.52
BB L	Pale Ale	1048	1010.5	4.96	78.07%	9.33	2.09
PA	Pale Ale	1058	1015.5	5.62	73.26%	7.89	1.97
PA L	Pale Ale	1061	1016.9	5.83	72.30%	9.89	2.73
IPA	IPA	1069	1018.3	6.71	73.50%	8.00	3.49
Pilsener	Pilsener	1047				6.00	1.30
P	Porter	1052	1015.0	4.90	71.23%	6.45	1.37
Cooper	Porter	1053	1017.7	4.67	66.55%	5.41	1.36
DS	Stout	1071	1017.7	7.05	75.03%	7.48	2.76
Source:
Fremlin brewing record held at the Kent Archives, document number U3555/2/F/Bx2/1/22.

 

 

J. C. Jacobsen talking barley and holidays

Even more from J. C. Jacobsen's letter of 14th April 1869.

He's now writing about Scottish barley.

This is the barley that he asked his son to send from Scotland.

I have received today a letter with a bill of lading from Matthew & Theilmann for 40 quarters of barley, which have arrived and will hopefully be loaded tomorrow.- Before I close this letter tomorrow afternoon, I will tell you what I think of the barley. It will be hammered into shape the day after tomorrow and will be malted as slowly as possible with all care and then hidden away in one of the small chambers until the autumn I will not know the price until the next letter. 

From later on in the letter, here's what he thought of the Scottish barley.

At this moment the first load of Scottish barley arrived, weighing 118 # [pound sign] Dutch, equivalent to 12 L.. 5 #[pound sign] Danish per Tdr, which is a good weight. The color is not as light as on your sample No1, but I do not attach any further importance to it, as the quality is extremely good.

He seemed pretty impressed with it. Though UK malting barley was generally considered pretty high quality.

There follows some personal stuff. Which seems to relate to a planned visit of Jacobsen senior amd his wife to the UK.

Now we could probably expect your friend Halkjer to come home soon. You have asked him to visit us, haven't you? Is he going home to Copenhagen right now? Will Stegmann come here before June? In that case, ask him to visit us. He naturally knows nothing about the planned trip? - Your mother has at the same time talked about visiting Jutland in the summer; yes, she even mentioned yesterday that she wanted to visit Hanne Gade in Christiania. Fortunately, she knows nothing and will not know anything until 14 days before I see that I can get ready. I should perhaps not talk about it until 8 days before the trip, as we could easily be ready to travel by that time. But I am afraid that it will inadvertently slip out of me prematurely, as I have difficulty in keeping it hidden from everyone who daily occupies my thoughts more and more. 

Clearly, Jacobsen senior was keeping the trip as a surprise for his wife. Which is quite sweet.

I would like to brush up on my English a little, but I have not been able to get much time for it yet, as I do not want to interrupt my French exercises and in any case have to run the English ones in secret. But it will go well and I trust that you can at least be my interpreter. When you have practice conversing with prima donnas, you must by all means become proficient in the language! How is your stammering in England? Miss Pfeil replied the other day, when your mother asked her about it, that there was some stammering in your pronunciation last year when you visited her in Paris. I have had much pleasure in her development. She has displayed an uncommon talent as a dramatic artist, both in "The Jewess" and now recently in "The Huguenots," and she has a, by our standards, magnificent voice with a pleasant sound and great mastery over its expressive use. She has also won much recognition from the public, although her pronunciation of the consonants still leaves much to be desired, but she has a serious will to correct the deficiencies. 

Who was Miss Pfeil? She seems to have been an actress of some sort. What was her connection with the Jacobsens? I wonder how bad Jacobsen junior's stammering was?

 

J. C. Jacobsen talking mashing

More from J. C. Jacobsen's letter of 14th April 1869.

Jacobsen senior was keen on finding out more about mashing in the UK and the composition of the worts it generated.

Kogsbølle, as often as he has time to spare, is busy with analyses of the ratio between sugar and gum in the wort. I would be very happy to carry out these analyses with wort of Scotch ale and Burton ale, in order to learn the result of the English mashing and malting in this respect. I suppose that the wort had to be allowed to come here with a suitable addition of alcohol to prevent spoilage along the way, but I will have to discuss that with Kogsbølle. Have I asked you whether you have tried the first wort that runs in the Younger kettle with iodine? Since the temperature is so low during the mashing, one might imagine that there was some unaltered starch in the wort at the beginning.

Kogsbølle, I assume, worked at Carlsberg. I guess you'd have to add quite a bit of alcohol to wort to preserve long enough to get from Edinburgh to Copenhagen. Otherwise, it would inevitably start to ferment, either with yeast or something else. Would it still be possible to analyse the wort ignoring the alcohol? Would the alcohol change the wort at all?

I find the comments about a low mashing temperature at William Younger a bit strange. The temperatures look totally normal to me. Looking at brews from August 1868, these are the temperatures.

Strike heat: 170º F
1st falling heat: 150º F
1st sparge: 190º F
2nd sparge: 185º F
2nd falling heat: 156º F
3rd falling heat: 166º F

The first falling heat is the temperature of the wort after mashing and standing for two hours. Meaning that the initial mashing heat was higher than 150º. Which seems totally normal to me. And I'm sure sufficiently high to convert all the starch after two hours. What sort of mashing temperature was Jacobsen senior expecting.

Let's take a look at what Jacobsen junior did when he returned to Copenhagen and had his own brewery. This was a brew in 1871.

Strike heat: 70º C (158º F)
1st sparge: 80º C (176º F)

That doesn't look any hotter than the mashing at Younger.

Not quite sure what he means here.

It is strange that in England so little or no importance is attached to letting the hop wort stand on the trays and clear itself, for although you get a complete clarification of the hot wort in the hop vat, you still get a not inconsiderable sediment when it cools, which the English run into the fermentation vat. - I do not like this.

By "tray" does he mean cooler? Because I thought that this is exactly why UK breweries kept their coolers even after installing baudelot coolers. On account of the "cooler sludge" that fell out. 
 

Let's Brew - 1893 Cannon X

Like some other brewers in Kent, Cannon only brewed one Mild Ale. In this case, with the logical designation X.

This beer is a great demonstration of how much the timing of Mild becoming darker varied. At the nearby W.E. & J. Rigden brewery Mild was already semi-dark in 1884. Here, Mild is still pale a decade later.

There really is nothing to the grist. Well, as near to nothing as you can get. A single type of pale malt. Leaving a pretty pale colour.

The rate of attenuation isn’t great. It must have had a fairly full body with that finishing gravity of 1016º. Which I assume was deliberate. As it was pretty much exactly the same for every batch of X.

Equal amounts of two types of hops, Californian and East Kent, both from the 1891 harvest.

To complicate matters, six barrels of KK were mixed with the 50 barrels of X at racking time. 

1893 Cannon X
pale malt	11.50 lb	100.00%
Cluster 90 min	1.25 oz
Goldings 30 min	1.25 oz
OG	1050
FG	1016
ABV	4.50
Apparent attenuation	68.00%
IBU	38
SRM	4.5
Mash at	153º F
Sparge at	165º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	58º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1099 Whitbread ale

 

Cannon (Ramsgate) ingredients in 1893-1894

Time to look at the grists. This bit is going to be easy. As all of Cannon’s beers only contained base malt. Usually, this was pale malt. Though sometimes AK had 50% pale malt and 50% mild malt.

The hops are slightly more complicated. Though not that much. 

The two cheapest beers, T and X, used a combination of East Kent and Californian hops, Both from the 1891 harvest. That is, a couple of years old. The use of older hops isn’t particularly unusual. Neither of these beers were dry-hopped.

The more expensive XXX and KKK only had a single type of copper hop. East Kent hops, in these cases from the most recent season. Again, pretty normal. Dry hops were fresh Worcesters.

Similar hopping was used in the two Pale Ales. Though, this time there were two types of copper hops: East Kent from 1892 and Worcester from 1893. The latter were also used as the dry hops. 

Cannon (Ramsgate) hops in 1893-1894
Beer	Style	hop 1	hop 2	dry hops
T	Table	EK 1891	Californian 1891
X	Mild	EK 1891	Californian 1891
XXX	Mild	EK 1892		Wor 1893
KKK	Old Ale	EK 1893		Wor 1893
AK 10d	Pale Ale	EK 1892	Wor 1893	Wor 1893
KK	Pale Ale	EK 1892	Wor 1893	Wor 1893
Source:
Cannon Brewery (Ramsgate) brewing record held at the Kent Archives, document number R/U7/B6.

 

 

Cannon (Ramsgate) beers in 1893-1894

Looking at the range of the Cannon Brewery, it seems quite odd. Because there’s no Porter or Stout. There is an explanation. In 1878, Cannon was taken over by Tomson & Wooton. Who did brew a Porter. I assume they just provided whatever Black Beer Cannon required.

Other than that, Cannon’s range of six beers looks reasonably complete. A table Beer, two Mild Ales, two Pale Ales and an Old Ale. At least, that’s what I think KKK was. Not totally sure about that.

Just like at their parent company, the gravity range was pretty narrow: 1048º to 1062º. (Thar’s ignoring the tiny quantities of Table.) 

The Milds might look impressively strong by modern standards. But they were weedy compared to those brewed in London. In 1884, Whitbread X was 1062º, stronger than Cannon XXX.  Though London beers did tend to be stronger than those brewed elsewhere in the UK.

The hopping rate of X is also lower than in London. Where Whitbread X received 8 to 9 lbs per quarter (336 lbs) of malt.  XXX, however, is at about that level.

KKK is the strongest beer of the set. But, at 1062º, not particularly strong for the day. Oddly, its hopping rate was lower than for XXX. Which isn’t what you would expect. It was the most heavily dry-hopped of their beers, though.

The AK is a little on the weak side for the style: they were usually 1045º to 1050º. But, as the name indicates, it was sold cheaply. Just 10d per gallon. Whereas the usual price was 12d per gallon.

KK is the most heavily hopped beer. Which makes sense as it’s the strongest Pale Ale. It doesn’t look quite strong enough or heavily hopped enough to be a Stock Pale Ale. My guess would be that it’s semi-stock. 

Cannon (Ramsgate) beers in 1893-1894
Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl	dry hops (oz / barrel)
T	Table	1026.6				6.00	0.64	0.00
X	Mild	1048.4	1009.4	5.16	80.54%	6.00	1.10	0.00
XXX	Mild	1060.6	1013.9	6.19	77.16%	8.94	2.17	2.00
KKK	Old Ale	1062.1	1015.5	6.16	75.02%	8.00	1.94	4.00
AK 10d	Pale Ale	1042.7	1013.3	3.89	68.87%	7.00	1.23	2.00
KK	Pale Ale	1058.9	1008.3	6.70	85.90%	10.00	2.35	2.00
Source:
Cannon Brewery (Ramsgate) brewing record held at the Kent Archives, document number R/U7/B6.

 

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1893 Cannon XXX

The Cannon brewery of Maidstone, in case you're wondering. One of the breweries whose records I snapped on my recent trip to, er, Maidstone. 

 Unlike many other rivals in Kent, Cannon brewed multiple Milds. Though they slipped XX and jumped straight to XXX.

The difference in gravity – 11º - probably justifies that jump. While a decent level of attenuation leaves it well over 6% ABV. Mild, indeed.

Quite a boring grist as it’s all malt. Just base malt. Though there were two types. Described as “Queen St,” and “Cannon:”, presumably referring to the maltster.

Only a single type of hops: East Kent from the 1892 harvest. Reasonably fresh and relatively expensive. Of a notably higher quality than those in X.

Would have been drunk within a few weeks of racking. I think. Unless this was an Old Ale. It is quite heavily hopped.

1893 Cannon XXX
pale malt	14.25 lb	100.00%
Goldings 90 min	2.25 oz
Goldings 30 min	2.25 oz
Goldings dry hops	0.25 oz
OG	1061
FG	1014
ABV	6.22
Apparent attenuation	77.05%
IBU	52
SRM	5
Mash at	152º F
Sparge at	162º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	58º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1099 Whitbread ale

 

J. C. Jacobsen writes about mash efficiency

In this, Jacobsen senior asks his son to make some calculations as to the efficiency of mashing at William Younger.

14 April 1869.
Dear Carl!
It interests me greatly to see that you are busy with the investigation of the extract quantity of the malt in England and that you can have the malt for a brew weighed (by the way, I am very surprised that this does not always take place at Younger. Are they in Burton equally accurate?) From the quantity of the wort I assume that you can have the exact measure stated in the fermentation vessel, for the measure in the kettle is not sufficiently accurate.- It is quite a long time since I have made accurate observations on the ratio between malt and extract, but at that time I found the result to be in the closest agreement with Balling's statement, according to which in practice one can calculate about 56% of the weight of the malt; i.e. When you measure the wort in the fermentation tank after the cooling, calculate the specific gravity of the wort according to the percentage strength (of which you will find a table at Balling) and multiply the weight of the wort thus calculated by the percentage strength. Since the specific gravity of the water (62 Danish #(pound signs) per cubic foot) is given by the highest degree of density of the water at 4 R [5º C], a reduction should actually be made for the difference between the specific gravity of the water at 4 R [5º C] and at 14 R [17.5º C], which is the temperature at which both Balling's and Kaiser's saccharometers are adjusted, but I have not previously taken this reduction into account. When I now, one of the first days, repeat the examination with all possible accuracy, I will also take the aforementioned reduction into account. It will then be seen, when we compare the yield in Edinburgh and at Carlsberg, whether the English method of mashing delivers an equally large yield as the Bavarian, which I do not quite believe. However, it must be taken into account that the English malt of good Scottish barley is certainly more floury than the Danish and should therefore give a greater yield even of equal weight. Nous verrons!

The bit about weighing the malt is interesting. It sounds like Younger were using volume quarters. Which wouldn't necessarily weigh 336 lbs. Meaning that the brewing record wouldn't necessarily record the exact weight of malt used. Just the volume.

56% of the weight of the malt seems like an awfully high figure. 90 lbs of extract per quarter of malt is about the best you could expect. Which is only around 26% of the weight of the malt. Am I missing something?'

By Bavarian method, I assume that he means a triple decoction. I, too, would love to know how the efficiency of the two methods of mashing compares. Though the superior quality of UK malt might have muddied the comparison. AS Jacobsen himself remarks.

With me, as you know, a part of the last sparge goes into the next mashing as mash water, but since this is repeated in an equal amount throughout the entire cycle of all mashings, it has no influence on the result. I assume the same is the case with Younger. 

That sounds like a return wort to me. Not sure if Younger did that or not, as it isn't mentioned in the brewing records. But it was fairly standard practice. The big London brewers certainly did it.

I would not advise you to concern yourself with microscopic examinations at the present time. They require, first of all, long preparation and practice just to be able to see correctly, and would also require a longer study of the later investigations of Pasteur and others, which are partly found scattered in various Annals, etc. - If you do not have a microscope at your disposal like mine, which magnifies with perfect clarity 1500 times, linearly, you would not be able to see anything with certainty. I have been busy with other things for some time, but I now have various samples ready, which I am going to analyze microscopically. 

1869 was quite an early date for having a microscope in a brewery. I seem to recall that Whitbread only invested in one in the 1870s. And they were ahead of the game in the UK. 1500 times magnification sounds pretty impressive. And must have been an expensive instrument.

 

Even more from J. C. Jacobsen

More from J. C. Jacobsen's letter of 22nd March 1869. this time discussing mashing and malting.

It is not my opinion, however, that you should interrupt the regular presentation of the process at Younger, which you have today begun unless there was something very strange to mention anticipando.- The small mashing machines interest me very much but I have not easily detached myself from the idea that a continued processing of the mashing in the vessel must contribute to the formation of sugars penetrating better into the interior of the small grains, of which the crushed malt partly consists. Incidentally, is the malt not crushed into flour much by the arrangement of the rolling mill, that one roller alone is driven around and the other is dragged along by the friction? and is not the malt grist heated up greatly thereby? Does the wort run off easily and clearly?

Not sure what he means by a small mashing machine. I initially though of a Steel's masher. But that wasn't something that continued after the water and grains entered the mash tun.

I doubt very much that the malt was crushed to flour. That isn't how UK brewers wanted the malt to be in the mash tun.

As for the arrangement of the mash vats in a room by themselves, and the boilers in another, this is very commendable when the boilers are to be open; but with me, where the boilers are closed steam-tight, it is not necessary. And since I have this year put a cover over the hop-strainer - which can be easily raised by a counterweight - there is no steam to be seen in my brewery and it can be kept as white and clean as a living room. You know that both my boilers are now heated by steam in an envelope with only 5-6 (pound signs) pressure per square inch. Do they not use steam boiling in England? I am extremely satisfied with it and think that my beer on the whole approaches very closely to Vienna beer when it has the proper age.

It was fairly common to have the mash tuns and kettles in different rooms in UK breweries. Well, at least the larger ones. Why was Jacobsen so against steam in his brewery? And yes, many brewers did use steam for boiling.

Finally today, barley and malting.

I would like to make a soak (Støb) or two of the best Scottish barley; if it is not too late. Do you think that you could buy 40 or 80 quarters of this barley (according to your sample no. 1) from Theilmann or Stegmann and send it here by steamer at the beginning of April, then you are welcome to make this deal. If it cannot be done now, it can also be postponed until the autumn. I have received a beautiful sample of barley from Proprietor Hvidt near Slagelse, with whom I spoke the other day about Scottish barley. I will buy a couple of soaks (Støb) from him and will send you a sample of the barley so that you can show your Scottish brewers beautiful Danish barley. It is not as round, tender, as the Scottish and far from the heaviest barley that I have received this year. But even my heaviest barley of 118-120 pounds of Dutch has not had the tender form as the Scottish - probably Chevalier barley and there are a few grains in it that have become shell-ripened by the sun. Hvidt said, by the way, that there were only a few places on Zealand by the coast and on the smaller islands where the heavy, Scottish barley could retain its character. Further inland, as with him, it changed immediately and became more long-like.-

It sounds like Jacobsen is quite impressed with Scottish barley. It's worth noting that, at this time, William Younger used large quantities of "foreign" barley in addition to Scottish. The brewing records don't specify exactly where this foreign barley came from. Most likely origins were Chile, California and the Middle East. 

J.C Jacobsen discusses IPA

A special treat today. With a discussion with the Burton method of brewing IPA.

Starting with something about the weird way IPA was aged.

Monday Evening 22 March 1869
Dear Carl!
I still cannot get over my astonishment at your strange statement in your previous letter about the way in which the ale is stored in small casks in the open air, exposed to all changes of temperature. I had seen from your previous letters that Younger had no deep storage cellars, but I assumed that this was due to the fact that they were not equipped to brew ale of any importance for export. But that the world-famous and excellent Pale Ale and India Ale from Bass in Burton are treated so nonchalantly - I had no idea of ​​that, and that such a thing can be done is beyond my understanding, for it contradicts everything I have experienced and read about the tendency of wine-like drinks to spoil. There must necessarily be something special that protects this miraculous ale; but what is it?

I'm with Jacobsen senior on this one. Bass Pale Ale was racked into hogsheads, which were then stcked in the brewery yard, open to the elements. I was reluctant to believe this at first, Thinking someone had just misinterpreted empty casks being store in the yard. It's only after I found multiple reputable sources that I believed it.

What was protecting IPA? I think it was Brettanomyces. Which was slowly eating up any remaining sugars. This is also what protected IPA during its long voyage to India. During the year spent in the brewery yard Brettanomyces would have consumed pretty much all remaining sugars. Leaving nothing for anything nasty to eat.

Jacobsen senior then asks some very relevant questions.

Has ale for export to the Indians always been treated in this way? And wasn't Export Ale formerly much stronger than now and, like the strong wines, Port and Madeira, somewhat protected? - Don't you think that at some stage sulphuric acid is added in a very different form? -I have recently read somewhere a note on the use of sulphuric lime as a preservative for beer and wine, but I have never had any confidence in the innumerable recipes for preservatives, etc. and therefore have hitherto neglected this last one.- But now I can't help but think about it and I have let Kogsbølle - who is just as astonished as I am - order a portion of sulphuric lime, with which we would make a few small experiments this spring and test its effect in the following months until next year.- - But all foreign additions are strictly prohibited in England and where beer production is so enormous, the smallest dose of additive would have to amount to a quantum, the acquisition and use of which could not possibly be concealed from the workers and therefore not be kept secret. Be careful, though! - Especially after the main fermentation is over; in the clarification tanks and by the bottling from there into the storage barrels, and by the addition of "dry hops" to these. How are the storage barrels treated to extract the taste of the oak? and how is the bottling of export ale into bottles and kegs? - Are you sure that it is all kinds of ale - also export ale - that in Burton is lying in the open air. By the way, I also do not understand why the ale is allowed to be stored in such small barrels; it is, however, extremely inconvenient and increases the influence of heat. How can carbon dioxide be kept in the beer? - Is not sugar added when bottling for sale to make the beer sparkling? etc, etc, etc.

I wish I knew the answers. When and why did they start ageing IPA in the brewery yard? It seems such a counterintuitive process. And did any other brewers in Burton do the same? It sounds as if it was a general process rather than something limited to just Bass.

I'm pretty well 100% sure than Bass wasn't adding any type of preservative. Heavy hopping and Brettanomyces were enough to protect the beer from infection.

Of course, the storage casks didn't need to be treated as they were made of Memel oak, which wouldn't have imparted any oak flavour.

Why was the beer aged in Hogsheads? Because that was what it was going to be shipped in. Either to UK bottlers or onto ships for export. CO2 wasn't kept in the beer. It was even deliberately flattened before being loaded onto ships. It was given conditioning by a secondary conditioning after bottling. For which, as Jacobsen guesses, sugar was added at bottling time. It would have to be as there was nothing feermentable left in the beer when it arrived in India.

And, yes, both domestic and export IPA was stored out in the yard.