Bottling in 1901 - Artificial Gas Bottling

Hurrah! We've got to the final method of bottling in 1901. That's not taken long, has it? Don't rejoice too quickly - we're only about a third of the way through the article.

The method we've got to now - force carbonation, basically - is the method that was most widespread in the 20th century. Though with some modification, principally in the form of pasteurisation. But let's not get ahead of ourselves.

"Bottling Process No. III.—Artificial Gas Bottling.

This process has only been introduced into this country a few years, but it is now very largely practised, especially in breweries, and it has, I am glad to say, to a very great extent replaced the forced bottling which was rapidly bringing bottled ale into disrepute. Any well-brewed ale, not carrying too much readily fermentable matter at rack, may be bottled by this process, and since the introduction of efficient filters the question of time is almost eliminated; thus I have seen beer straight from the rack, pumped through the filter, bottled off under a fair head of gas, and the bottle drawn for use at once. This, however, is not to be recommended, as such beers invariably taste flavourless and are wanting in character."
Journal of the Federated Institutes of Brewing, Volume 7, Issue 2, March-April 1901, page 196.

This was a very much shorter process than the other methods. Essentially, the beer was bottled immediately at the end of primary fermentation, i.e. racking time. Note that it was only filtered, not pasteurised. Knowing that they didn't sterile filter at the time, that means there was live yeast present in the bottle. Which explains the next passage:

"Storage wonderfully improves artificially gassed ales, and if the beer has been allowed to mature prior to bottling, and a sufficient gas pressure has been used at bottling, very nice beers may be produced, although they never really attain the flavour and character of true bottled ales unless they are kept a sufficient time to enable natural bottle fermentation to set in, and produce the extra gas pressure and modify the composition of the beer in the bottle, in which case they practically become true bottled ales as described under Process I. A very large amount of lager beer is bottled in this way; but it is specially brewed for the purpose, and no doubt if, as seems probable, the convenience of the method leads to its being more generally adopted in this country, the brewer will more especially modify his process of manufacture and produce a beer which will give the public satisfaction when bottled with carbonic acid gas produced by a separate process."
Journal of the Federated Institutes of Brewing, Volume 7, Issue 2, March-April 1901, pages 196 - 197.

If I read that correctly, if left, beer bottled this way would eventually start to bottle condition and become soemthing akin to a "true bottled ale". So presumably this must have created a sediment in the beer. Very strange. I imagine most beer never got to that stage, having been consumed soon after bottling. Clarity of the beer and the speed of getting it into the trade must have been the main reasons for using this method.

The method was later modified to include pasteurisation which ensured that the beer would remain bright and free of sediment. All the yeast having been killed, there was no way a bottle fermentation could kick in. Based on period advertisemnts and the names given to such bottled beers Sparkling Ale, All-Bright Ale, Crystal Ale - lack of sediment was a popular attribute with the public.

"In America, one of the special requirements in bottled ale, in fact in all ale, is that it shall carry a very dense, creamy head, and this is secured, to a great extent, by bottling in the cold under excessive pressure.

I have seen a sample of Burton strong ale so bottled in New York and returned to this country, and I cannot but admit that when drawn it was superior to any ale of similar quality that I had previously tasted.

At present, however, the English consumer appears to be satisfied with the moderate amount of gas which ordinary bottling produces, and so long as that gas is thoroughly taken into solution in the ale and not simply held in suspension, it leaves very little to be desired."
Journal of the Federated Institutes of Brewing, Volume 7, Issue 2, March-April 1901, page 197.

I've just unearthed more articles that describe in greater detail the North American system of brewing and bottling. They confirm the American public's demand for a thick head on Ale. And not just bottled Ale, draught Ale, too. You should see the method used to ensure a high concentration of CO2 in cask beer. Sounds pretty scary to me.

We'll be looking at that sometime in the near future, when I've finished squeezing out the final drops of interest from this article. In other words: still lots more bottling fun to come.

Grätzer/Grodziskie analyses

Nothing very long today. It really is just a couple of analyses of Grätzer and nothing else.

Thanks to Marcus Schmitz for going to the trouble to transcribe these from a handwritten laboratory manual of 1936 by a former Engelhardt-Brauerei Brewmaster.

What's particularly pleasing is that there are examples from both Poland and Germany. In fact, the examples are from all the breweries brewing Grätzer/Grodziskie after WW I. Which was one in Poland and two in Berlin.

Unfortunately, there was no measurement of the level of acidity. Probably the detail that I would most have liked to see. I really want to kill the myth of Grätzer/Grodziskie being a sour beer once and for all. Though I fear I may already be too late. Once a piece of shit information gets out there, it's repeated endlessly until the end of time. Or at least that's what it feels like. I suspect I'm going to be arguing about this one for decades.

I was slightly disappointed, having read that 7.9º Plato was the standard gravity for Grätzer/Grodziskie, to discover that two of the samples were lower than that. The Hochschulbrauereiversion was bang on 7.9º Plato, but Vereinigte Grätzer Bierbrauerei's was only 7.36º Plato and Monopolbräu's only 7.03º Plato. Due to the reasonably high level of attenuation, all come out close to 3% ABV.

I'd love to know how that colour measurement relates to any scale I can understand. As it is, the colour numbers only tell me one thing: that the Hochschulbrauerei version was darker than the other two.

Grätzer in 1936
Year	Brewer	country	Beer	Style	OG	FG	Colour	ABV	Apparent attenuation
1936	Vereinigte Grätzer Bierbrauerei	Poland	Echt Grätzer Bier	Grätzer	1029.1	1007.7	0.45	2.77	73.56%
1936	Hochschulbrauerei Berlin	Germany	Hochschl. Grätzer	Grätzer	1031.3	1006.8	0.9	3.13	78.40%
1936	Monopolbräu Berlin	Germany	Mon. Grätzer Rauchb.	Grätzer	1027.7	1005.7	0.45	2.84	79.60%
Source:
handwritten laboratory manual by a former Engelhardt-Brauerei Brewmaster

I told you I was going to be brief today. Not worry, I've got a real monster of a post coming up. I'd wondered what the maximum size of a post might be. I think I've found out.

Bottling in 1901 - Forced Bottling

We're moving on, in our look at early 20th-century bottling, to the second method employed: forced bottling.

It's basically a shortcut version of proper bottle-conditioning which misses out the lengthy - and costly - secondary fermentation in cask before bottling. You could argue that this is the way most modern bottle-conditioned beer is produced.

"Bottling Process No. II — Forced Bottling.

The large increase in the "tied-house" trade has no doubt been the cause of so many brewers taking up the bottling business, and together with an apparently growing dislike to the flavour of old matured ale, has led to the introduction of this method of bottling. In this process, comparatively new ale containing an appreciable quantity of fermentable matter is artificially clarified by the addition of finings, quickly bottled off, and the bottles stored in a forcing store at a temperature of from 65° F. to 70° F.

Secondary fermentation rapidly sets in, and the bottles are put in the trade for immediate use.

If consumed within a moderate time, say a week or ten days, the beer will pour out practically bright and in good condition, but it will have none of the best characteristics of true bottled ale, and if kept too long "fret" usually results and the beer becomes thick, depositing an excessive amount of yeast."
Journal of the Federated Institutes of Brewing, Volume 7, Issue 2, March-April 1901, page 195.

You may be asking yourselves why an increase in the tied house system would encourage more brewers to bottle. Simple: brewers had a financial interest in supplying their tied houses with as many products as possible, especially beer. They wouldn't want third-party bottlers to get the bottled beer trade in their pubs. A corollary of this was how Guinness and Bass kept their bottled products in the tied houses of other breweries. They let the brewer do the bottling and so get some of the profit.

This in fact sounds like the risky way of bottle-conditioning at home: guessing when there is enough fermentable material left to condition the beer but not enough to turn the bottles into grenades. I always plumped for the safer method: wait until primary fermentation has stopped and prime the bottles with sugar to give the yeast something to condition the bottles. Though if there's Brettanomyces in the beer even this method isn't completely safe, as it will consume sugars the Saccharomyces hadn't been able to digest.

Conditioning in a warm room after bottling is still carried out by some brewers, for example Moortgat with Duvel. That gets a couple of weeks warm conditioning before shipping.

It's clear that the author wasn't overly impressed with the beer produced this method of bottling.

"The flavour of such beers is very variable and frequently far from pleasant, but it is a most convenient and economical process when it is known exactly how much bottled ale will be required for immediate use and it is supplied only in proportion to the requirement. Almost any ale may he bottled in this way, and some of the very light mild ales brewed with a large proportion of materials other than malt, such as a judicious blend of flaked maize and invert sugar, turn out highly satisfactory, although they never have the true bottled ale flavour."
Journal of the Federated Institutes of Brewing, Volume 7, Issue 2, March-April 1901, pages 195 - 196.

What does he mean by "the true bottled ale flavour"? Is it the aged flavour produced by a Brettanomyces secondary conditioning?

I'm not sure that I agree with what he says next:

"Summer brewing being comparatively a modern custom, more especially in Burton, is more variable than winter brewing, and it is the bottling of summer-brewed ales that has given much trouble to the bottler, and led to a considerable modification of the usual brewing process and the production of ales of better quality.

Of late years brewers have, in some cases, so altered their process that pale ales can be bottled within a week or so of racking, and these ales, having an extremely small amount of fermentable matter left in them, and that not of a readily fermentable kind, do not enter into a too violent fermentation in bottle, so that when properly matured in the bottles they give great satisfaction. I have found beers of this kind mature very rapidly, and even within six weeks from rack develop a very high quality, but on the other hand these beers were undoubtedly more prone to deteriorate when kept for long time."
Journal of the Federated Institutes of Brewing, Volume 7, Issue 2, March-April 1901, page 196.

The evidence I've seen in the form of brewing records suggest that, in London at least, summer brewing was standard right at the beginning of the 19th century. Though I know that beers meant for keeping tended to be brewed in the cooler months. I've not seen many brewing records from Burton, but Truman were brewing in June, July and August 1877 at their brewery in the town.

The quote ends with what sounds like a description of a type of bottled running Pale Ale. It's a shame Lott doesn't tell us how the brewing process had been changed to remove most of the fermentable material by racking time. That would obviously do away with the need for a long secondary conditioning. Had they changed mashing techniques to produce a more fermentable wort? Or perhaps they had increased the proportion of sugar in the grist. Maybe a combination of the two. There would have been a big incentive to come up with such a process. By cutting 6 months or a year off the process of producing a bottled Pale ale, brewers would save a considerable amount of money. Remember that they had already paid the tax on the beer before it started secondary conditioning.

Next time we'll be looking at the slightly creepily-named artificial gas bottling method.

Bottled beers in the 1980's

Here's a weird paradox. I have more details about British bottled beer from the 1940's and 1950's than I do from the 1980's and 1990's. I blame CAMRA.

Because with cask beers, there's no problem. They've been documented by the Good Beer Guide since the 1970's. But only cask and bottle-conditioned beers. Which leaves all other forms of bottled beer and keg beer pretty much undocumented. Bit of a bummer for someone like me who's interested in every form of beer. At least from an academic point of view.

So I was delighted when Bailey (of Boak & Bailey) passed on some scans of a 1986 What's Brewing article about bottled beer. One that had lots of lovely gravities included.

It doesn't look that short a list, until you realise that for some styles, for example Stout, it's pretty much complete. Buy which I mean it includes most of the Stouts then brewed in Britain. Apart from Guinness and Courage Russian Stout. I have details for those two elsewhere.

Unfortunately, there weren't any Light Ales listed, which is a bit annoying. It's a style I'd like to trace through to its current virtual extinction. I can't think of many that are still brewed. Courage Light Ale is and maybe Harvey's still make one. How many others are there still?

Brown Ale is another former bottled favourite on its last legs. Well, apart from Newcastle Brown. Even Whitbread's Forest Brown has now gone. I'd be surprised if there were still half a dozen of the weaker type of Brown Ale still knocking around.

Strong Ales and strong Pale Ales were probably the bottled types doing best in the 1980's. Again, my division of them into Strong Ale, Old Ale and Barley Wine is pretty arbitrary. I could just as easily have classified them all simply as Strong Ale.

Bottled beers in the 1980's
Year	Brewer	Beer	Style	OG
1986	Sam Smith	Golden Strong	Barley Wine	1100
1981	Lorimer	Barley Wine	Barley Wine	1074
1986	Adnams	Tally Ho	Barley Wine	1075
1986	Young	Old Nick	Barley Wine	1084
1986	Whitbread	Forest Brown	Brown Ale	1032
1986	Mann	Brown Ale	Brown Ale	1034
1986	Bass (Runcorn)	M & B Sam Brown	Brown Ale	1035
1986	Home Ales	Home Brewed	Brown Ale	1036
1986	Hardy & Hanson	Special Brown	Brown Ale	1036
1986	Scottish & Newcastle	Newcastle Brown Ale	Brown Ale	1045
1986	Vaux	Double Maxim	Brown Ale	1044
1986	Sam Smith	Strong Brown Ale	Brown Ale	1045
1986	Adnam	Fisherman Brown	Brown Ale	1042
1986	Northern Clubs	Federation Strong Brown Ale	Brown Ale	1047
1986	Home Ales	Robin Hood IPA	IPA	1045
1986	King & Barnes	Old XXXX	Old Ale	1046
1986	Banks	Imperial Old Ale	Old Ale	1096
1986	Robinson	Old Tom	Old Ale	1080
1986	Gale	Prize Old Ale	Old Ale	1095
1986	Greene King	Strong Suffolk	Old Ale	1056
1986	Greene King	5X	Old Ale	1106
1986	Young	Ramrod	Pale Ale	1046
1986	Shepherd Neame	Abbey	Pale Ale	1045
1986	Ridley	Old Bob	Pale Ale	1050
1986	Courage	Bulldog Pale Ale	Pale Ale	1068
1986	Adnam	Broadside	Pale Ale	1068
1986	Eldridge Pope	Royal Oak	Pale Ale	1048
1986	Gale	Strong Pale Ale	Pale Ale	1062
1986	Wadworth	Old Timer	Pale Ale	1051
1986	Timothy Taylor	Landlord	Pale Ale	1044
1986	Young	Strong Export	Pale Ale	1062
1986	Sam Smith	Taddy Porter	Porter	1051
1986	Whitbread	Mackeson	Stout	1042
1986	Sam Smith	Nourishing Sweet Stout	Stout	1042
1986	Sam Smith	Strong Stout	Stout	1050
1986	Hardy & Hanson	Blackamoor Stout	Stout	1044
1986	Timothy Taylor	Black Bess	Stout	1043
1986	Morrell	Malt Stout	Stout	1042
1986	Shipstone	Ship Stout	Stout	1042
1986	Courage	Velvet	Stout	1041
1986	Watney	Cream Label	Stout	1038
1986	Younger	Sweet Stout	Stout	1032
1986	Tennent	Sweetheart Stout	Stout	1035
1986	Randall (Guernsey)	Bobby Stout	Stout	1046
1986	Guernsey Brewery	Milk Stout	Stout	1042
1986	Ann Street Brewery	Mary Ann Stout	Stout	1038
1986	Belhaven	Sweet Stout	Stout	1033
1986	Brain	Extra Stout	Stout	1043
1986	Gale	Nourishing Stout	Stout	1034
1986	Greenall Whitley	Red Rose	Stout	1040
1986	Hardy & Hanson	Blackamoor Stout	Stout	1044
1986	Harvey	Sussex Sweet Stout	Stout	1032
1986	Holt	Brown Stout	Stout	1040
1986	Home Ales	Stout	Stout	1037
1986	King & Barnes	JK	Stout	1033
1986	Lees	Archer Stout	Stout	1042
1986	Morrell	Malt Stout	Stout	1042
1986	Palmer	Extra Stout	Stout	1032
1986	Sam Smith	Sweet Stout	Stout	1042
1986	Timothy Taylor	Black Bess	Stout	1044
1986	Sam Smith	Nourishing Stout	Stout	1050
1986	Sam Smith	Oatmeal Stout	Stout	1051
1986	Sam Smith	Imperial Stout	Stout	1073
1981	Elgood	Malt Stout	Stout	1031
1981	Greene King	Farm Stout	Stout	1035
1981	Robinson	Unicorn Stout	Stout	1038
1981	Devenish	S. West Stout	Stout	1040
1981	Marston	Mello Stout	Stout	1043
1986	Greene King	St. Edmund Ale	Strong Ale	1060
1986	St. Austell	Smuggler's Ale	Strong Ale	1070
1986	St. Austell	Prince's Ale	Strong Ale	1100
1986	Davenport	Top Brew de Luxe	Strong Ale	1074
1986	Davenport	Top Brew Original	Strong Ale	1071
1986	Morrell	College Ale	Strong Ale	1073
1986	Lees	Moonraker	Strong Ale	1074
1986	Holt	Sixex	Strong Ale	1064
1986	Higson	Stingo	Strong Ale	1078
1986	Harvey	Elizabethan Ale	Strong Ale	1090
1986	Harvey	Christmas Ale	Strong Ale	1090
1986	Eldridge Pope	Hardy Ale	Strong Ale	1125
1981	Paine	EG	Strong Ale	1047
1981	McMullen	Mitre	Strong Ale	1058
1981	Devenish	Crabber's Nip	Strong Ale	1066
1981	Greene King	Audit Ale	Strong Ale	1078
1986	Hoskins & Oldfield	Christmas Noggin	Strong Ale	1100
1986	Hall & Woodhouse	Stingo	Strong Ale	1075
1986	Watney	Stingo	Strong Ale	1076
1986	Broughton	Old Jock	Strong Ale	1070
1986	Godson	Stock Ale	Strong Ale	1086
Sources:
GBG 1987
What's Brewing November 1986, page 7.

Bottling in 1901: maturation after bottling

What a week it's been. I've stubbed my toe twice on important discoveries. I think I might have cracked my big toe, they were so weighty

The first I didn't notice when I first read the article. It's just an innocuous little entry in a table. But it's confirmed a suspicion I've held for a while, but haven't been able to find any evidence to back up. What is it I've discovered? That SA malt stands for "Strong Ale" malt.

Having seen how SA malt was used - almost exclusively in Strong Ales - had made guessing the meaning a bit of a no-brainer. But it's still nice to have confirmation. What's really got me excited, it is finding some detail about the characteristics of SA malt. You can see it in this table:

Table I.
A. Malts.
	Pale ale.	Mild ale.	Strong ale.
Easily fermentable matter.	60.5	64	57
Difficultly „ „ .	16.5	16	17
Unfermentable „ .	23	20	26
B. Bottled Pale Ales.
	At bottling.	6 weeks old.	12 months old.
Fermented solids	60 = 77% of F.S.	65.0 = 80% of F.S.	69 = 87% of F.S.
Fermentable residue	18 = 45% of R.	13.5 = 39% of R.	10 = 32% of R.
Unfermentable „	22 = 55% of R.	21.5 = 61% of R.	21 = 68% of R.
C. Bottled Strong Ales.
	At bottling.	6 months old.	2 years old.
Fermented solids	55 = 73% of F.S.	60 = 79% of F.S.	62 = 80% of F.S.
Fermentable residue	20 = 44% of R.	16 = 40% of R.	15 = 40% of R.
Unfermentable „	25 = 56% of R.	24 = 60% of R.	23 = 60% of R.

F.S. = Fermentable solids. R. = Unfermented residue.
Journal of the Federated Institutes of Brewing, Volume 7, Issue 2, March-April 1901, page 194.

OK, the information is pretty limited. But it does tell us that SA malt contained more unfermentable material than mild ale malt or pale ale malt. That explains the high finishing gravities of KK and KKK then. K Ales often used SA malt as their base malt. What would be the modern equivalent, I wonder?

I was very surprised to see that mild ale malt contained more fermentable material than pale ale malt. I would have expected it to be the other way around.

The rest of the table is also damn interesting, because it highlights the different maturation periods of Pale Ale and Strong Ale.

"Table I places side by side analyses of pale and strong ales made at different periods: the gradual alteration in composition is very marked.

The time required to produce first-class bottled strong ale is in all cases very much more than for pale ales, and beers vary very much in this respect, but in the first place a strong ale should remain in the brewery cellar for not less than six months, and after removing to the bottling store will probably take a month or six weeks to get into fit condition for bottling. After bottling it may take fully six months more to properly condition, and care must be taken that the corks do not get dry.

It is, I am sorry to say, quite a rare thing to see a bottle of strong ale in perfect condition, and I think if more care were taken in this respect there would be a much greater demand for this, the finest product of the brewery.

As the best bottling stout is usually vatted and it is not required to be brilliant, the conditions of bottling are somewhat different, but I do not propose discussing this question."
Journal of the Federated Institutes of Brewing, Volume 7, Issue 2, March-April 1901, page 195.

I've explained before the lengthy process of producing a Stock Pale Ale, one which could take more than 12 months. It seems that it took even longer to make a properly-matured Strong Ale. The article seems to say that 12 months is the minimum time required to produce such a beer. Something which it sounds like most breweries couldn't be bothered or couldn't afford to do.

The analyses after different periods of ageing are fascinating. You can see that a considerable amount of fermentation went on after bottling and continued for a very long time. We can see just how much by doing a few calculations.

Assuming that the first number for fermented solids is the real attenuation, it's easy enough to work out how the gravity fell after bottling. For Pale Ale, I've assumed the classic 1065º gravity. For the Strong Ale I've been more specific, taking the OG from Whitbread and Barclay Perkins KKK of the period, both of which had an OG of 1087º. The first FG, 1027º, is very close to the racking gravity of Barclay Perkins KKK, which was 1026.3º.

Here are the results in a nice compact table:

	OG	FG	ABV	Apparent attenuation	real attenuation
Pale Ale at bottling	1065	1016.5	6.32	74.62%	60.14%
Pale Ale 6 weeks after bottling	1065	1013	6.79	80.00%	64.70%
Pale Ale 6 months after bottling	1065	1010	7.21	84.62%	68.63%
Strong Ale at Bottling	1087	1027	7.81	68.97%	55.07%
Strong Ale 6 months after bottling	1087	1022	8.50	74.71%	59.93%
Strong Ale 2 years after bottling	1087	1020	8.78	77.01%	61.89%

You can see that after bottling, the ABV of both beers rose by almost 1%.

This helps me understand much better the analyses of 19th century Pale Ale where the apparent attenuation is well over 80%. At racking time, it might well have been no more than 75%. It's a new insight into the long process of producing truly bottle-conditioned beers.

The fall in the unfermentable residue of the Strong Ale I can only attribute to one cause: the action of something other than Saccharomyces, probably Brettanomyces. Not really a surprise in a beer that had been left a long time maturing in wood.

I don't know whether you'll be delighted or driven to despair when I tell you that I've barely scratched the surface of this article yet.

Bottled beer in the 1850's

Exeter and Plymouth Gazette, Saturday 06 June 1857, page 5.

I enjoyed our little look at bottled beer of the 1840's that I thought I'd extend the series. It saves me the trouble of doing any proper research or exerting any other effort. As I keep telling you, I'm a lazy bastard at heart.

Again, I've arbitrarily assigned styles to the beers. Not that there are many unclear ones in this set. About the only decision I had to make was to assign Strong Ale to the Burton Ales.

I'll mention now a difficulty that bottled beer presents when trying to guess the strength of a beer. With draught beers it's a piece of piss to work out relative strength. That's because the measures are known. A barrel is 36 gallons, a kilderkin is 18 gallons, etc. The capacity in gallons is often also specifically mentioned in advertisements. No such luck with bottles. Sometimes no size is indicated. Others it says "large" or "small". Even when it says "pint" or "quart" there's uncertainty. Because often that doesn't mean an imperial pint or quart but a "reputed" pint or quart. These were two-thirds of the imperial measure, or 378.85 ml and 757.7 ml, respectively.

In some entries in the table below, it can't possibly be an imperial pint. For example the Barnstaple Porter. 1s 9d for a dozen pints is 1.75d. per pint, which is below the draught price of 2d. per pint. That must be a reputed pint.

Do you see the biggest change in this list? Lower-gravity Pale Ales have appeared. Beers that definitely aren't IPA's and are considerably weaker. Or at least considerably cheaper. For example, Ind Coope's AKK Ale. The draught version cost 1s 2d per gallon, which implies a gravity of 1050-1055º. You can see that a quart of it (probably a reputed quart) cost the same as an imperial pint of Allsopp's IPA.

Alnwick Mercury, Monday 01 March 1858, page 1.

Note that there are still several examples of bottled Mild and Porter, though the latter is considerably outnumbered by bottled Stouts. As we progress through the decades of the 19th century you'll see how these become progressively rarer, with bottled Porter disappearing entirely. You can clearly see the most popular bottled styles emerging: IPA, Pale Ale, Stout and Strong Ale. Undoubtedly helped along by the most hyped beers of the day: Bass and Allsopp IPA, Guinness Extra Stout and Bass and Allsopp Strong Burton Ales.

I almost forgot the sad little Table Ale. A the advertisement was in a Northumberland newspaper, it's almost certainly of Scottish origin.

You know the score. I've still four decades of the 19th century to go. More to follow.

Bottled beers in the 1850's
Brewery	Place	year	beer	style	price per dozen	size	source
Wm. Younger	Edinburgh	1852	Edinburgh Ale	Edinburgh Ale	4s	pint	Medical times and gazette, Volume 5, 1852, page 155
Wm. Younger	Edinburgh	1852	Edinburgh Ale	Edinburgh Ale	4s 6d	pint	Medical times and gazette, Volume 5, 1852, page 155
Unknown	Edinburgh	1855	Edinburgh Ale	Edinburgh Ale	6s		"Food and its adulterations" by Arthur Hill Hassall, 1855, page 52.
Allsopp	Burton	1853	Pale Ale	IPA	5s	Imperial pint	"The lancet 1853, vol. 2", 1853, page 258
Allsopp	Burton	1855	East India Pale Ale	IPA	5s		"Food and its adulterations" by Arthur Hill Hassall, 1855, page 52.
Bass	Burton	1858	Pale India Ale	IPA	7s	quart	Alnwick Mercury - Monday 01 March 1858, page 1
Allsopp	Burton	1853	Mild Ale	Mild Ale	5s 6d	Imperial pint	"The lancet 1853, vol. 2", 1853, page 258
Barnstaple brewery	Barnstaple	1853	XX Ale	Mild Ale	3s	quart	North Devon Journal - Thursday 14 April 1853, page 1.
Barnstaple brewery	Barnstaple	1853	XX Ale	Mild Ale	1s 9d	pint	North Devon Journal - Thursday 14 April 1853, page 1.
Barnstaple brewery	Barnstaple	1853	XXXX Ale	Mild Ale	4s 3d	quart	North Devon Journal - Thursday 14 April 1853, page 1.
Barnstaple brewery	Barnstaple	1853	XXXX Ale	Mild Ale	2s 4d	pint	North Devon Journal - Thursday 14 April 1853, page 1.
Unknown	Unknown	1858	Fine Mild XX Ale	Mild Ale	5s 6d	quart	Alnwick Mercury - Monday 01 March 1858, page 1
Wm. Younger	Edinburgh	1852	Pale Ale	Pale Ale	3s	pint	Medical times and gazette, Volume 5, 1852, page 155
John Lovibond	Greenwich	1852	Bitter Ale	Pale Ale	2s 6d	pint	"W. Archdeacon's Greenwich & Woolwich directory for 1852" page 2
Barnstaple brewery	Barnstaple	1853	Pale Ale	Pale Ale	4s 3d	quart	North Devon Journal - Thursday 14 April 1853, page 1.
Barnstaple brewery	Barnstaple	1853	Pale Ale	Pale Ale	2s 4d	pint	North Devon Journal - Thursday 14 April 1853, page 1.
Ind Coope	Romford	1857	AKK Ale	Pale Ale	5s	quart	Exeter and Plymouth Gazette - Saturday 06 June 1857, page 5.
Ind Coope	Romford	1857	AKK Ale	Pale Ale	2s 9d	pint	Exeter and Plymouth Gazette - Saturday 06 June 1857, page 5.
Unknown	Unknown	1858	Fine Pale Ale	Pale Ale	5s 6d	quart	Alnwick Mercury - Monday 01 March 1858, page 1
Barnstaple brewery	Barnstaple	1853	Porter	Porter	3s	quart	North Devon Journal - Thursday 14 April 1853, page 1.
Barnstaple brewery	Barnstaple	1853	Porter	Porter	1s 9d	pint	North Devon Journal - Thursday 14 April 1853, page 1.
Unknown	London	1858	Best London Porter	Porter	4s 6d	quart	Alnwick Mercury - Monday 01 March 1858, page 1
Wm. Younger	Edinburgh	1852	Stout	Stout	2s	pint	Medical times and gazette, Volume 5, 1852, page 155
Wm. Younger	Edinburgh	1852	Stout	Stout	3s	pint	Medical times and gazette, Volume 5, 1852, page 155
John Lovibond	Greenwich	1852	Double Stout	Stout	2s 6d	pint	"W. Archdeacon's Greenwich & Woolwich directory for 1852" page 2
Barnstaple brewery	Barnstaple	1853	Treble Stout	Stout	4s 3d	quart	North Devon Journal - Thursday 14 April 1853, page 1.
Barnstaple brewery	Barnstaple	1853	Treble Stout	Stout	2s 4d	pint	North Devon Journal - Thursday 14 April 1853, page 1.
Guinness	Dublin	1854	Extra Stout	Stout	3s 6d		Durham Directory & Almanack, 1854
Calvert & Co.	London	1855	Double Stout	Stout	5s		"Food and its adulterations" by Arthur Hill Hassall, 1855, page 52.
Guinness	Dublin	1857	Extra Stout	Stout	4s		Durham Directory & Almanack, 1857
Guinness	Dublin	1858	Dublin Stout	Stout	6s 6d	quart	Alnwick Mercury - Monday 01 March 1858, page 1
Unknown	London	1858	Best London Stout	Stout	5s 6d	quart	Alnwick Mercury - Monday 01 March 1858, page 1
Allsopp	Burton	1853	Strong (Old Burton) Ale	Strong Ale	6s 6d	Imperial pint	"The lancet 1853, vol. 2", 1853, page 258
Unknown	Burton	1855	Burton Ale	Strong Ale	6s		"Food and its adulterations" by Arthur Hill Hassall, 1855, page 52.
Unknown	Burton	1855	Burton Ale Extra Quality	Strong Ale	7s		"Food and its adulterations" by Arthur Hill Hassall, 1855, page 52.
Unknown	Unknown	1858	Table Ale	Table Ale	3s 6d	quart	Alnwick Mercury - Monday 01 March 1858, page 1