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?

 

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. 

Barley in the 1970s

The great thing about the 1970s is that I've lots of data. And that I can remember the period. That helps a lot.

Much of the information I'm looking at I was totally unaware of at the time. Like how the hops and barley industries were faring. Not too badly, it turns out.

Barley cultivation was much less volatile than that of hops. Probably because only a relatively small percentage of the total amount was used in brewing.

Over the period covered by the table, there was a very small decrease in the area cultivated. But this doesn’t really tell the full story. The long-term trend – starting in 1939 – was of an increase area. Peaking in 1966, at around six times the 1939 value.

The small decline in area cultivated was more than offset by the increase in yield. With production generally still on the rise.

Imports were more up and down, with the highpoint in 1971/72. That is slightly deceptive, as, for most of the 1960s, imports were at a much lower level, averaging around 200,000 tonnes.

Exports of barley were so inconsistent that there’s no real discernible pattern. They rage from almost nothing in 1969/70 and 1971/72 to around 20% of the drop in 1977/78. 

Barley UK production and imports 1969 - 1980
Crop Year August/July	Area Hectares (000)	Production Tonnes (000)	Yield Tonnes per hectare	Average Price £ per tonne	Imports Tonnes (000)	Exports Tonnes (000)
1969/70	2,413	8,664	3.6	21.44	956	12
1970/71	2,243	8,529	3.4	28.41	1,050	171
1971/72	2,288	8,558	3.7	24.3	1.052	10
1972/73	2,288	9,244	4	31.58	503	111
1973/74	2,267	9,007	4	52.21	726	244
1974/75	2,214	9,133	4.1	58.16	486	445
1975/76	2,345	8,511	3.6	65.14	534	847
1976/77	2,182	7,648	3.6	83.19	967	125
1977/78	2,400	10,531	4.4	78.85	421	2,078
1978/79	2,348	9,848	4.2	85.17	352	986
1979/80	2,343	9,559	4.4	93.42	231	1,113
1980/81	2,341	10,364	4.4
Source:
“The Brewers' Society Statistical Handbook 1980” page 25.

 

Barley 1880 - 1914

Britain had become dependent on the import of foreign grain. Approximately a third of the barley consumed was imported. The price of barley was falling right up until the outbreak of WW I.

The types of barley grown fell into three groups:

Barley types
Latin name	type
Hordeum hexastichum	six-row barley
Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum distichum	two-row barley
Hordeum zeocriton
Hordeum coeleste	naked barley
Hordeum nudum
Source:
"The Brewing Industry" by Julian L. Baker, 1905, page 14.

Large quantities of foreign barley were imported into Britain for malting. California and the Mediterranean were the main sources of cheaper malt. Top-quality, very pale malt, was made from barley imported from central Europe, usually Bohemia, Moravia or the Saale district. The latter were mostly used in the best Pale Ales, such as Bass.

Mediterranean barley, often given the generic name of Smyrna, was extremely popular because of its price and adaptability. It was widely used in Light Pale Ales, though not the poshest examples. According to Barnard, beers benefitted from its use:

“all beers are cleaner, sounder and more brilliant when a portion of Smyrna malt is blended with the heavier English grain.”

In addition, Smyrna malt was the most economical available.

Home production and imports of barley 1880 - 1914
			Average Price per Cwt.
Year	Acreage	Estimated Produce Cwts.	s.	d.	Imports Cwts.	Import %	Total cwts.
1880	2,695,000	19,315,629	9	3	11,705,290	37.73%	31,020,919
1885	2,446,868	38,268,586	8	5	15,366,160	28.65%	53,634,746
1890	2,300,994	36,068,538	8	0	16,677,988	31.62%	52,746,526
1895	2,346,367	38,268,586	6	2	28,618,867	42.79%	66,887,453
1900	2,172,129	30,600,842	7	0	17,189,358	35.97%	47,790,200
1904	2,002,854	27,881,018	6	3	27,173,455	49.36%	55,054,473
1905	1,872,305	29,019,446	6	10	21,458,960	42.51%	50,478,406
1906	1,931,651	30,124,861	6	9	19,934,500	39.82%	50,059,361
1907	1,885,359	29,951,882	7	0	19,627,620	39.59%	49,579,502
1908	1,824,410	27,486,114	7	3	18,137,200	39.75%	45,623,314
1909	1,829,933	30,778,907	7	6	21,556,470	41.19%	52,335,377
1910	1,899,130	28,144,864	6	6	18,281,500	39.38%	46,426,364
1911	1,756,000	25,000,000	-	-	-		-
1914	1,871,166	32,262,712	7	7	16,944,422	34.43%	49,207,134
Sources:
Brewers' Almanack 1912, page 158.
Brewers' Almanack 1922, page 118.
Brewers' Almanack 1955, page 66.

Dutch barley supply

It's Sunday and I'm a bit pushed for time. I'm writing this between putting the roast in the oven and peeling the spuds. There won't be any time after dinner. That's earmarked for dozing in front of the telly with an Abt or two. Hence the slightly cheaty post.

I've found yet another treasure trove of information about Dutch brewing during WW II. I won't say stumbled across because I was pretty sure it was in the archives and I specifically went looking for it. It's the minutes of the committee meetings of the CBK, the Dutch brewers' organisation. It will take me weeks to trawl through it.

It's left with with a dilemma. Should I include it all in "Blitzkrieg!"? What was intended as just a page or two. Now its more than 20 pages and 9,000 words. Making the book a bit lopsided. I'm now considering spinning it off into another book. If only so I can finally publish "Blitzkrieg!". Which, other than the Dutch stuff, is finished. Let me know what you think.

Finally arriving at today's topic, When Germany invaded Poland, the Dutch government banned the malting of barley. They proposed releasing barley for malting, but only on a week by week basis, which seems pretty inefficient.

These are the rules for distribution proposed by the C.B.K. I'm struggling to find out what the N.A.C., N.M.C. and B.I.C.. It doesn't help that N.A.C. is a Dutch professional football team. If you know what any of these organisations was, let me know.

"VII. DISTRIBUTION OF BARLEY AND MALT.
As a preliminary principle for the distribution scheme for barley and malt, the following is concluded:

a. the N.A.C. buy the barley,
b. the C.B.K. buy the barley from the N.A.C., as much as possible at once for the whole year's requirements,
o. the price, varying with the quality, depends on the target price, the cleaning costs, etc.,
d. the quality is determined by the Nacobrew,
e. if necessary, storage is provided elsewhere than at dealers, malthouses and/or breweries,
f. supervision of the batches during storage is carried out centrally,
g. it is desirable that the N.M.C. release the barley for malting not from week to week but from month to month,
h. all barley is malted for hire, except what breweries turn into malt for themselves,
i. in order to obtain the cooperation of the malthouses for the system, breweries will only malt for hire after the commercial malthouses have obtained orders to their full capacity,
j. about this plan and about the charge for malting (for which f.2.50 per 100 K.G. is mentioned) consultations will be held with the malthouses,
k. the C.B.K. will with the involvement of the B.I.C. allocate to each brewery its share proportionally, taking into account as far as possible a brewery's preference for barley from a particular grower or trader or malt from a particular malthouse,
1. The basis for allocation is the beer excise duty paid by each brewery or the raw materials processed by each in 1938, the figures of which are submitted to the B.I.C. are known the difference is in the beer export, for which about 10% of the total deposited raw material is needed; the government wants to maintain exports for as long as possible and, moreover, it prefers to work with the B I.C.; for these reasons it is considered desirable to make distribution in proportion to the quantity of raw material deposited by each brewery in 1938,
m. should a brewery wish for less than its share, it remains liable for the greater amount; if wanted in this regard they will be informed before the assignment,
n. with the purchase of the NAC, payment will have to be made directly by the CBK, which must therefore receive the payments from the breweries in advance (if necessary, this includes financing by a malthouse in some cases); in addition to the price, the payment will also include the cost of malting, freight, insurance etc.,
o. consultation will be held with the Nacobrouw about the quality determination; the Nacobrouw, which has already declared itself to abstain from commercial activities, will have a meeting at the office of the Government Commissioner for Agriculture,
p. a proposal will be made to the N.A.C. and the N.M.C., who have requested it."
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 13th September 1939, held at the Amsterdamse Stadsarchief, document number Document 31121-1, pages 414 - 415.

Barley, hops and foreign investments

 We're still in Holland, I'm afraid. Just like me.

A few snippits from Heineken's first public annual report, in 1939. Nothing so boring as the numbers. Pretty boring to most, but still not as boring as numbers. (Which happens to the title of my worst-selling book.)

Starting with some luke-warm optimism:

"If we had to state in our previous report that although the downward trend in beer sales had come to an end, it was impossible to speak of a significant increase, this year too there has been no improvement.

Due to the warm weather during August and during the festivities on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of HM the Queen, both last months of our financial year are a favorable exception and we were able to finish the year with a small increase in turnover."
Algemeen Handelsblad 11-01-1939, page 13.

If only they'd known what lat just around the corner. Starting with a couple of really good years when sales increased considerably. Followed by some really shit ones. I'm guessing these are the words of the chairman. Though the newspaper doesn't mention either that or that person's name.

The next bit was the most useful for me.

"The prices of malting barley and malt were noticeably higher this year than in the previous year, even if they were still at a low level. Owing to the favorable weather prevailing in various barley-producing regions of our country during the harvest season, the quality of the 1938 Dutch malting barley harvest is satisfactory and a quantity of the national crop will be used to brew by us in the coming year, greater than in any preceding year.

There was little change in the prices of hops. It remains to be seen to what extent the annexation of a large part of the hop-producing regions of Czechoslovakia by Germany will lead to an increase in hop prices."
Algemeen Handelsblad 11-01-1939, page 13.

It seems as if Holland only got its act together just in time for WW II. They'd have been well and truly buggered if they hadn't. Importing barley wasn't a possibility once Holland was occupied.

Before the war they did appear to be using Czech hops. At least if Peter Symons interpretation of Heineken's records is correct. (It's great that anyone can take a look at them.) And from an area in the Sudetenland.

Not sure why I've included the last one. Except that it's an intersection I know well.

"The renovation of our office building in Amsterdam will probably be completed in the first half of 1939. Apart from the alteration which will have to be made within a few years in the old buildings at Ferdinand Bolstraat and Stadhouderskade in Amsterdam, no major rebuilding or renovations are to be expected in the foreseeable future."

I bet that second set of renovations never happened. At least were delayed many years.

Quite surprising was the number of pies Heineken had their fingers in.
 

"Foreign interests.
Our interests in breweries abroad currently concern:

Brasserie Leopold S.A. in Brussels;
Colonial Breweries "Cobra" in Amsterdam;
Malayan Breweries Ltd. in Singapore;
Heineken's Dutch East Indies Brewery Mij. in Surabaya.

The colonial brewery "Cobra" itself again owns important participations in the SA dea Bières Bomonti & Pyramides in Cairo; Crown Brewery in Alexandria; Malayan Breweries Ltd. in Singapore; Heineken's Ned.-Indische Bierbrouwerij Mij. in Soerabaja; Société Internationale de Brasserie "Interbra" in Brussels, the latter having major interests in the Brasserie Union Messine in Metz and Brasserie de Léopoldville in Léopoldville (Congo).

Apart from the participation in these breweries, where we are directly involved in the management—albeit not everywhere to the same degree—we have less significant interests in a few other breweries abroad. The development of all these companies is satisfactory."
Algemeen Handelsblad 11-01-1939, page 13.

 Looking at these interests, all the entries in Heineken's Gravity Book for Far Eastern beers make a lot more sense. Especially the analyses of beers from Malaya and Singapore. Maybe one day I'll be arsed enough to suck the data into a spreadsheet and share it with you. There are loads for beer brewed in Surabaya, where Heineken's own brewery in what is now Indonesia was located.

Brewery Profits

Here's a real shock - breweries were doing well during the war. Who would have thought it?

Barclay Perkins were doing nicely, at least according to the newspaper.

"Brewery Profits
Annual reports now being issued by various brewery companies confirm market views that the industry is thriving. Brewery stocks and shares have been extensively bought in markets for some time and the section is maintaining a good tone while other industrials are inclined to slip back. A report for the year to March 31 last is issued by Barclay Perkins & Company, the London brewery, which has already announced a 6 per cent. Ordinary dividend for the year against 5 per cent for 1942 and 3.5% per cent for 1941. The profit last year was £125,002, after making provision for depreciation, Government taxation, Debenture interest and providing for deferred repairs. A comparative figure for the previous year was £116,739. The tax provision was £231,448 against £230,007 while deferred repairs received £100,000 against £60,000. After providing for dividend and again transferring £30,000 for contingency, the carry forward is £105,109 against £104,360 brought in. The chairman, Lt-Col. Robert W. Barclay, states that brewing materials during The year were costly but the maximum price for  barley was controlled, which prevented the abnormal prices paid in the previous year. He adds that nearly everything purchased for the brewing and distribution of beer was at a high price. Despite this, the past year was more normal than some since 1939. Difficulty was experienced in keeping plant and machinery in an efficient state, particularly bottling machinery, owing to the difficulty of obtaining spare parts. The balance-sheet shows stocks of beer, malt hops, &c, at £612,016, against £387,035 the previous year. The increase is due to higher duties and a reflection is seen in the cash position at £199,026, against £208,450. The £1 Ordinary stand at 28s 9d."
The Scotsman - Friday 13 August 1943, page 2.

A net profit of £125,002 might sound impressive, but in 1939 the figure was £317,788. So why did the newspaper say how well they were doing?

Here are the fixed prices for barley which was mentioned in the article.

Controlled prices for barley
Year	Price on Farm	Merchants' Comm.
1942	140/-	2/6d. limit 5/-
1943	110/-	2/6d. limit 5/-
1944	100/-	2/- limit 5/-
1945	100/-	2/- limit 5/-
1946	101-	2/- limit 4/-
1947	105/10d.	2/6d. limit 5/-
1948	120/-	2/6d. limit 5/-
Source:
Brewing notebook A-H held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/1/711/1.

 

 

Barley Varieties after WW II

Barley is divided into two main types: two-row and six-row. Tow-row barley was grown in the UK, Australia, Turkey and Chile. While six-row was grown in California, Australia, Morocco, Smyrna and Chile.

Before WW II, British brewers were convinced that you couldn’t brew good beer from exclusively UK two-row malt and that you need a percentage of six-row. Made from barley grown either in Chile or California. According to Jeffery this was because:

“Due to the sunnier and more equable climates of these countries as compared with the British climate these barleys were more uniform in quality and this was of distinct advantage to the maltster. Further, the coarser husk of the six-rowed varieties tended to give a better filtration in the mash tun and to prevent those filtration troubles caused by the too-close packing of the undissolved parts of the malt (known to the brewer as grains'), which form the medium through which the solution containing the extractable materials is filtered off”
"Brewing Theory and Practice" by E. J. Jeffery, 1956, page 129.

In the mid-1950s, British two-rowed barleys could be divided into two main groups:; the Goldthorpe and Chevallier types. By crossing Goldthorpe and Chevallier various new barley varieties were developed in the early 20th century. The most successful of these were Plumage-Archer, Spratt-Archer and Standwell. By the mid-1950’s, Standwell had mostly disappeared but large quantities of Plumage-Archer and Spratt-Archer were still being grown. Though in 1955 just over half the malting barley grown in the UK was Proctor, an even newer variety. 

New varieties were being developed, mostly by cross-breeding English varieties with Scandinavian ones. The latter gave better yields and were more disease-resistant, but didn’t have such good malting characteristics as English barley. By crossing, breeders were able to combine the good features of both.

Here are some of the new barley types developed in the early 1950s:

Proctor: Plumage-Archer and Kenia.
Pioneer: Spratt-Archer and a Scandinavian variety.
Carlsberg: Archer variety. 

The above is an extract from Arusterity!, my book on brewing in the immediate aftermath of WW II.
 Buy this wonderful book.

Malt and barley in London in 1889

Some quick statistics. Fairly random ones, but ones that do tell us a story. It's amazing what a few numbers can tell you. In this case about barley and malt in UK brewing.

I often find myself saying things like "Californian malt" or "Chilean malt" when talking about UK beer. But it's untrue and misleading. I really should say "malt made from Californian barley". Because, whatever the origin of the barley it was made from, the malt used in UK beer was always manufactured in the UK. The quantity of malt imported was tiny. And probably exclusively lager malt.

The numbers I'm going to show you confirm this. For while there was a considerable amount of foreign barley being imported into London, there was zero foreign malt. Obviously, not all the imported barley was going to end up being turned into malt. And even the malt made from it wasn't necessarily all used in beer - considerable quantities were used in distilling. But it's still significant that three-quarters of the barley coming into London was foreign.

I'm slightly surprised that Scottish malt was turning up in the capital. Scotland ran a deficit in malting barley and malt with England. Importing both finished malt and malting barley.

Here are the numbers.

ARRIVALS OF MALT IN LONDON.
	English.	Scotch	Irish.	Foreign.	Total.
	qrs.	qrs.	qrs.	qrs.	qrs.
Week ending Nov. 1	22,382	1,241	-	-	23,623
,,          ,,       ,,      8	16,671	717	-	-	17,388
Total for the fortnight	39,053	1,958	-	-	41,011
Source:
"The Brewers' Guardian 1889", 1889, page 365.

ARRIVALS OF BARLEY IN LONDON.
	English.	Scotch	Irish.	Foreign.	Total.
	qrs.	qrs.	qrs.	qrs.	qrs.
Week ending Nov. 1	2,400	1,506	150	18,597	22,653
,,          ,,       ,,      8	2,796	1,152	490	9,603	14,041
Total for the fortnight	5,196	2,658	640	28,200	36,694
Source:
"The Brewers' Guardian 1889", 1889, page 365.

The 1952 barley crop (part five)

Almost done with the 1952 barley crop. Almost.

It seems to have been a good year for barley in some countries:

“A record grain crop is reported from Denmark, the barley yield amounts to 2,125,000 tons as against 1,767,000 in 1951.

The crop in Syria was 350,000 tons compared with only 154,700 tons in 1951.

In the United States the final estimate of the 1952 barley crop is 227,000,000 bushels as against 254,300,000 in 1951.

Canada's yield of barley in 1952 was 274,074 bushels compared with 234,000 in 1951.”
"Brewer's Guardian 1953", 1953, February page 14.

Syria, Canada and the USA had at one time all exported large quantities of barley to the UK. Though imports had pretty much ground to nothing during and after the war. 200,000-odd bushels seems a very small crop for Canada. Assuming a bushel of barley to be 50 lbs, that’s only 122,000 cwt. Or bugger all. I’m struggling to believe the crop could be so small. Especially if you look at the table below and see that they exported millions of cwt. To the UK before the war.

I thought I’d take a look at barley imports before, during and after WW II. They make for interesting reading.

15. IMPORTED BARLEY
(Authority: Trade and Navigation Accounts)
Year ended 31st August	Australia	Canada	Russia	Iraq	U.S.A.	Chile	Other Countries	Total
	cwt.	cwt.	cwt.	cwt.	cwt.	cwt.	cwt.	cwt.
1936	892,615	2,692,238	6,759,583	2,399,712	3,543,889	331,342	3,098,862	19,618,141
1937	670,199	626,657	322,304	5,270,584	2,031,655	671,605	8,399,527	17,992,531
1938	1,688,126	5,874,209	2,179,080	3,340,149	3,329,499	342,029	3,647,156	20,400,248
1939	835,126	4,707,322	3,141,703	3,783,659	2,461,117	356,867	2,629,013	17,914,870
1940*								9,146,255
1941*		66,688		664,150			540,050	1,276,772
1942*					34			34
1943*								—
1944*								—
1945*		Other Common-wealth Countries				Argentine Republic		2,036,552
1946*					1	2,194,875	227	2,195,103
1947	191,960					907,563	240	1,099,763
1948	972,814			60		6,064,507	5,508,353	12,545,734
1949	1,293,517					1,674,111	6,174,600	9,142,228
1950	2,068,450		9,366,235	2,286,108	Morocco		4,844,975	18,565,768
1951	2,137,957	74,845	6,037,568	3,153,702	3,393,373		2,207,419	17,001,865
1952	2,952,005	3,239,322	10,428,526	3,752,089	801.347		1,541,926	22,715,214
1953	2,985,396	8,183,753	3,170,909	4,940,632	164,919		8,983,320	28,428,829
1954	2,374,714	8,196,281	713,766	1,886,652	259,988	2,226,233	4,796,646	20,454,290
* Figures of imports from individual countries for the year 1940 are not available; the figures given for 1941-40 are for years ended 31st December. The quantity of barley imported for malting since the early months of 1940 is negligible.
Source:
1955 Brewers' Almanack, page 67.

Before we go any further, I’d like to point something out. These figures aren’t just for malting barley. Which might explain the large quantities from Russia. I’ve never seen malt identified as being from Russian barley. Pre-WW II you see the USA, Chile, Australia and the Middle East mentioned in brewing logs, but nowhere else that I can remember.

You can see from the table how imports completely dried up during the war. And some countries never regained their market in the UK. Most notably the USA. Which had been one of the main sources of barley for British brewing for the first half of the century.

Not sure I understand this:

“It is reported from Scotland that more land is being sown under wheat and this, it is thought, will lead to a reduction in the acreage under barley which might tend to a better price for malting samples next season. This remains to be seen, as there is a lot to come out of the stack yet which could easily be against next season harvest with dire effect. There is little improvement in the price for barley to date, and with the quantity still remaining to be threshed, plus the limited demand for malting barley there seems small hope of prices rising. On the contrary it is feared that much of it will have to be cashed in at feeding rates towards the end of the season.”
"Brewer's Guardian 1953", 1953, February page 14.

Why would malting barley be cheaper if less barley were planted? Surely it should be the other way around?

I’ll end with the price of different types of malt in 1953:

“Current Prices for New Season Malts

Pale ale	208s. to 214s.
Mild ale	192s. to 199s.
Black	179s. to 182s.
Brown	171s. to 174s.
Crystal	164s. to 166s.

Per quarter, delivered to brewery.”
"Brewer's Guardian 1953", 1953, February page 14.

The only surprise for in the prices is that crystal malt is the cheapest. I would have expected black or brown malt. As the malt was roasted anyway, it was usually made from inferior barley.

That’s us done with barley in the early 1950’s. What next, I wonder?