1880-1914 Adjuncts arrive
Free Mash Tun Act
A highly significant
piece of legislation was adopted in 1880: the so-called Free Mash Tun Act. It
introduced a new method of taxing beer and removed restrictions on ingredients.
The 1830 Beer Act had
repealed all excise duty on beer. Instead, the raw materials needed to brew
beer were taxed instead. In 1880 the malt and hop tax were replaced with excise
duty on beer, based on the original gravity of the wort. This duty was payable
at the end of the month.
As soon as the wort
had run into the fermenting tun, it was checked by an Excise Officer to
determine its volume and gravity. This was the basis on which beer duty was
calculated. An allowance of 6% was made by the Excise for losses during
fermentation. At the end of each month a calculation was made to convert the
total amount of beer brewed into its equivalent in standard barrels. Should the
yield have been fewer than 4 standard barrels per quarter, then the duty was
levied on the materials used, rather than the number of standard barrels
produced. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter
J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 528-529.)
For Excise purposes, a
quarter of malt was deemed to be 336 pounds. The following amounts of other
fermentables were considered by the Excise to be the equivalent of a quarter of
malt:
cane sugar 224 lbs
glucose or invert
sugar 256 lbs
flaked maize or rice
256 lbs
No. 1 syrup 272 lbs
No. 2 syrup 328 lbs
(Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 529.)
Breweries were now
able to use a whole range of adjuncts, such as maize, rice and unmalted barley.
This was the final nail in the coffin for private brewers, whose last advantage
over commercial brewers had been the ability to use whatever ingredients they
chose. As duty was paid on the wort, there was a big financial; disincentive to
age beer for long periods. The tax already having been paid, it meant huge
amounts of capital were tied up in maturing beer. Fashion had already been
moving away from the "aged" taste in beer (derived from the action of
brettanomyces). The decline in production of vatted Stock Ales and Stouts was
further accelerated by this change in the law.
Not all drinkers were
so keen on brewers being given a free rein to use what they liked in their
beer. In 1886 an organisation called The Pure Beer Movement was Formed in Kent
to campaign for restrictions on the ingredients used in brewing. Originally
based in the Southeast, the group expanded its activities to cover the whole of
the country at the end of the year. "As a general principle, the average
Briton believes in malt and hops as a sheet anchor of the Constitution, and a
million scientific statements to the contrary would not convince him that good
beer can be brewed in any but an orthodox way." (Source: DNW June 10th
1886.)
A Pure Beer Bill was
introduced to parliament in 1886. It would have compelled wholesalers and
retailers of beer that contained anything other than malted barley and hops to
display a prominent sign saying what else was in it. Sounds fair enough to me,
and way ahead of its time. Of course, it didn't pass and never became law.
(Source: News of the World, May 23rd 1886.)
Beer production fell
between 1900 and 1910, partly in response to a tax increase in 1901 to help
fund the Boer War. It began to rise again from 1911 until the outbreak of WW I.
Average gravity fell by about 2º between 1900 and 1914. That would turn out to
be insignificant compared to the massive changes in beer strengths wrought by
the two world wars.
British brewing overview
1880 - 1914
|
|||||
Production (barrels)
|
Production (hl)
|
Duty per standard barrel
|
Average OG
|
Net excise receipts
(pounds)
|
|
1880
|
30,742,649
|
50,312,190
|
6s 3d
|
||
1881
|
27,352,361
|
44,763,780
|
6s 3d
|
3,482,271
|
|
1882
|
6s 3d
|
8,530,819
|
|||
1883
|
6s 3d
|
8,400,368
|
|||
1884
|
6s 3d
|
8,488,169
|
|||
1885
|
27,986,493
|
45,801,575
|
6s 3d
|
8,544,749
|
|
1890
|
30,808,315
|
50,419,656
|
6s 3d
|
9,410,426
|
|
1895
|
34,404,287
|
56,304,680
|
6s 3d
|
10,494,329
|
|
1900
|
37,105,042
|
60,724,628
|
6s 9d
|
1054.93
|
12,345,150
|
1901
|
7s 9d
|
||||
1902
|
7s 9d
|
13,718,438
|
|||
1903
|
7s 9d
|
||||
1905
|
35,415,523
|
57,959,628
|
7s 9d
|
1053.23
|
13,101,459
|
1910
|
34,299,914
|
56,133,867
|
7s 9d
|
1053.2
|
12,531,620
|
1911
|
34,923,000
|
57,153,585
|
7s 9d
|
1053
|
|
1912
|
36,476,000
|
59,695,163
|
7s 9d
|
1052.7
|
|
1913
|
36,296,000
|
59,400,582
|
7s 9d
|
1052.6
|
13,200,343
|
1914
|
37,558,767
|
61,467,176
|
7s 9d
|
1052.8
|
13,622,971
|
Source:
|
|||||
Brewers' Almanack 1928,
p. 110
|
|||||
Organisation of the Industry
Surprisingly, even the
largest breweries, such as Whitbread, Barclay Perkins and Truman, operated as
partnerships up until almost the end of the 19th century. Starting around 1880,
most were transformed into limited companies. The capital generated by share
issues was used to buy public houses. Legislation to limit the number of on
licences, or even reduce them, prompted breweries to start buying pubs to
secure outlets.
The table below shows
the decline in public houses between 1880 and 1914:
Number of pubs 1875 -
1914
|
|
pub and beerhouse
licences
|
|
1875
|
112,978
|
1880
|
119,229
|
1881
|
106,941
|
1885
|
105,100
|
1890
|
103,813
|
1900
|
101,370
|
1901
|
101,940
|
1905
|
99,606
|
1910
|
93,192
|
1911
|
91,247
|
1913
|
88,768
|
1914
|
87,960
|
Source:
|
|
Brewers' Almanack 1928
|
|
Given that during the
same period the British population rose from 35 to 46 million, the fall in the
number of pubs is even more dramatic.
As a result of
breweries frantic buying, the price of pubs in London rocketed. A pub in
Hackney that had cost £9,500 in 1892, was sold for £23,000 in 1897. Another
that in 1895 cost £20,000 was resold in 1897 for £32,000. When you consider
that a pint of beer cost 2d at the time, these are incredible sums.
Small wonder that some
breweries, such as Allsopp, ended up in financial difficulties through
overpaying for pubs. According to Mr. Reeve, manager of the Truman Brewery,
talking in 1897, a pub paid the brewery, on average, £50 for spirits and £100
for beer a month. That's £1,800 a year. At that rate it would take decades to
earn back the £20,000 or £30,000 the pub cost to buy.
Pubs became so
valuable that some people began to trade in buying and selling them. Not always
in a very honest way. One trick was to deliberately order more beer than they
could sell and to just pour most of it down the drain. The brewery would be
impressed with the amount of beer shifted and when the trickster offered to
sell it to them would snatch his hands off.
"During the last 35 years houses have gone up enormously in value.
It began by the loan of one million made to the Cannon Brewery by Mr.
McCalmont. With this money the brewery set to tie houses. The brewers looked on
without minding until they found that their trade was being
touched and affected irrecoverably. Then they set to work to buy also.
Prices went up with a run. Then came the Death Duties act and increased
difficulties about the subdivision of property held by partners jointly for the
purposes of taxation. So that brewers found themselves at the same time wanting
more money and a simpler method of recognizing their own personal property.
They turned their businesses into Companies in consequence.
Mr. Bramham gave as an example a public house in the parish of St.
John´s Hackney. In 1892 this house with a lease of 49 years at a rental of £105
per annum was bought for £9500.
In 1895 £8,700 was stated to Mr. Bramham as the price that had been paid
for it.
This year 1897. It has been resold for £23,000.
Another house he mentioned as being sold in 1895 for £20,000 and resold
this year for £32,000 in addition to which the buyer paid £4,000 in its
redecoration and internal alteration. These are only two out of many instances
Mr Bramham could give."
*Mr. Bramham, Surveyor and Valuer to the Assessment Committee of the
Hackney Union*
5th October (1897)
/Mr. Bramham. Surveyor and Valuer to the Assessment Committee of the
Hackney Union. 115 Bow Road on an introduction from Mr. Young a member of the
above committee./
http://booth.lse.ac.uk/notebooks/b347/jpg/221.html
"The price of houses has gone up enormously. Only yesterday a man
came to him - a speculator who had bought three "untied" Public
Houses and had paid £300,000 for them. One of them being a good deal more
valuable than either of the others. There is a great deal of speculation. Men
buy houses without any intention of keeping them, do them up, then resell them.
They have thought for many years that top prices had been reached but they
still move upwards. (Noel Buxton said that at present prices they did just pay.
The lowest price for a beerhouse in London would be £500 "but anything
worth as little as that would not be worth it at all".)"
Interview with Mr. Reeve, manager of Truman, Hanbury and Buxton's
Brewery, Brick Lane, 22 October [1897] (Booth B348, pp62-69)
http://booth.lse.ac.uk/notebooks/b348/jpg/62.html
"The profit on spirit is more than on beer but beer is always the
more important item. In not one per cent of their houses is a larger sum paid for
spirit than for beer. In a fair house the payment to the brewer per month would
be £50 for spirit and £100 for beer."
Interview with Mr. Reeve, manager of Truman, Hanbury and Buxton's
Brewery, Brick Lane, 22 October [1897] (Booth B348, pp62-69)
http://booth.lse.ac.uk/notebooks/b348/jpg/62.html
"The prices that are being paid for public houses now is
astounding. Carter knows local men who have taken to dealing them to their own profit.
They buy up small licensed places, they buy in a great stock of beer, much more
than they can sell, a great deal of it they let drain away into the sewers.
Then they come to the brewers and ask them to buy their houses pointing out the
immense amount of beer they have disposed of. The brewers are only too glad,
they have themselves just turned into limited liability companies, they have an
immense capital behind them and they bid amongst themselves with the money of
their shareholders for the possession of licensed houses. A new license is very
difficult to get so that it is very important to get hold of houses that are
already licensed."
Interview with Inspector Carter
B346 pp100-107
http://booth.lse.ac.uk/notebooks/b346/jpg/101.html
"The test of the worth of a house is the amount of beer and spirits
sold. lately the prices of houses has been so high that men with local knowledge
have made it their business to buy houses "work them up" and then
sell them to the Brewers or anyone else who will buy them. There is one
"Dyke" who is known for this in the district. He it was who first had
the house mentioned above at the corner of Forest Road and Queen´s Road. Then
he sold it to a local newsvendor. The newsvendor has just broken and the house
has been resold for between £6,000 and £7,000. The bankrupt has returned to his
newspapers. There was no reason for the newsvendor failing, he was a local man
and knew the neighbourhood. There is some knavery in working up a house, but
Flanagan did not know in what it consisted. Carter in Poplar spoke once or
twice of men pouring away beer into the drains in order to shew a large
consumption. The greater the consumption the greater the capital value of the
house."
*Talk with Inspector Flanagan*
Sep 21 1897
/General police questions with regard to the Dalston subdivsion of the J
Division. Talk with Inspector Flanagan at the Dalston police Station,
Dalston Lane./
Booth B347, pp163-185
http://booth.lse.ac.uk/notebooks/b347/jpg/163.html
"Charrington´s is about the best beer in the neighbourhood. But a
great deal of filthy stuff is sold. The Brewers put in as managers men to whom they
have advanced large sums. These men must make money. To make money they must
adulterate. If they don´t, they lose and the brewers foreclose. Some firms are
very hard. Perhaps the worst are Brewers at the corner of the Bow Road just
before you come to the Stratford Bridge; their name is Smith & Garrett and
the beer they sell is bad. Taylor Walker in Limehouse used to be large brewers
and do a great Indian trade as well as own the houses in Limehouse. But the
India trade has failed them and trade has left Limehouse so they are in a bad
way now compared to former years."
Interview with Inspector Carter
B346 pp100-107
http://booth.lse.ac.uk/notebooks/b346/jpg/101.html
Decline in publican brewers
The overwhelming
number of brewers in the 19th century were publican brewers, or, as they would
be called today, brewpubs. Though already by the middle of the century the
majority of beer was being produced in increasingly large commercial breweries,
publican brewers were still a significant factor in British brewing. That was
to change after 1870, when their numbers went into steep decline. It was part
of a general trend towards a concentration of beer production.
Number of breweries by
output (barrels per year)
|
||||||||||
<1 span="">
|
publican brewers
|
1,000 - 10,000
|
10,000 - 20,000
|
20,000 - 100,000
|
100,000 - 500,000
|
>500,000
|
<10 span="">
|
>10,000
|
Total
|
|
1870
|
26,506
|
-
|
1,809
|
210
|
128
|
23
|
3
|
28,315
|
364
|
28,679
|
1875
|
22,138
|
-
|
1,864
|
260
|
194
|
25
|
4
|
24,002
|
483
|
24,485
|
1879
|
17,542
|
-
|
1,863
|
301
|
217
|
27
|
3
|
19,405
|
548
|
19,953
|
1880
|
16,770
|
-
|
1,768
|
272
|
203
|
23
|
4
|
18,538
|
502
|
19,040
|
1881
|
14,948
|
14,479
|
1,677
|
275
|
183
|
24
|
3
|
16,625
|
485
|
17,110
|
1885
|
12,608
|
-
|
1,537
|
270
|
187
|
27
|
4
|
14,145
|
488
|
14,633
|
1890
|
9,986
|
-
|
1,447
|
274
|
255
|
34
|
4
|
11,433
|
567
|
12,000
|
1895
|
7,213
|
-
|
1,162
|
267
|
256
|
34
|
5
|
8,375
|
562
|
8,937
|
1900
|
4,759
|
-
|
910
|
262
|
308
|
42
|
9
|
5,669
|
621
|
6,290
|
1905
|
3,787
|
-
|
832
|
232
|
280
|
40
|
9
|
4,619
|
561
|
5,180
|
1912
|
2,868
|
2,663
|
673
|
205
|
266
|
43
|
7
|
3,541
|
521
|
4,062
|
1913
|
2,700
|
2,502
|
615
|
210
|
271
|
42
|
8
|
3,315
|
531
|
3,846
|
1914
|
2,536
|
2,357
|
580
|
197
|
280
|
46
|
8
|
3,116
|
531
|
3,647
|
Source:
|
||||||||||
1928 Brewers' Almanack,
page 118.
|
||||||||||
Between 1880 and 1914,
the number of breweries producing fewer than 10,000 barrels a year fell from
18,538 to 3,116. Over the same period, the number of those brewing more than
10,000 barrels slightly increased, from 502 to 531. The largest decline was
amongst the smallest brewers, those brewing fewer than 1,000 barrels, the
overwhelming majority of which were publican brewers. Of the 14,479 publican
brewers in 1881, only 2,357 remained in 1914.
Bottled Beer
There was a massive
surge in the popularity of bottled beers at the beginning of the 20th century.
It was partly fuelled by changes in technology which allowed the production of
bright, artificially-carbonated bottled beers.
Whitbread Draught and Bottled sales 1901 – 1919
|
|||||||
total draught
|
Bottling
|
Burton
|
|||||
Year
|
barrels
|
%
|
barrels
|
%
|
barrels
|
%
|
Total
|
1901
|
538,097
|
73.63%
|
188,525
|
25.80%
|
4,153
|
0.57%
|
730,775
|
1902
|
546,043
|
72.92%
|
198,812
|
26.55%
|
3,975
|
0.53%
|
748,830
|
1903
|
552,383
|
71.00%
|
221,651
|
28.49%
|
3,998
|
0.51%
|
778,032
|
1904
|
546,402
|
69.40%
|
237,522
|
30.17%
|
3,379
|
0.43%
|
787,303
|
1905
|
538,584
|
67.67%
|
254,373
|
31.96%
|
2,983
|
0.37%
|
795,940
|
1906
|
526,766
|
64.32%
|
289,898
|
35.40%
|
2,361
|
0.29%
|
819,025
|
1907
|
513,881
|
61.49%
|
320,140
|
38.30%
|
1,749
|
0.21%
|
835,770
|
1908
|
477,470
|
58.97%
|
330,767
|
40.85%
|
1,459
|
0.18%
|
809,696
|
1909
|
456,638
|
56.14%
|
355,212
|
43.67%
|
1,481
|
0.18%
|
813,331
|
1910
|
446,477
|
55.72%
|
353,534
|
44.12%
|
1,325
|
0.17%
|
801,336
|
1911
|
459,908
|
53.81%
|
392,899
|
45.97%
|
1,564
|
0.18%
|
854,371
|
1912
|
464,539
|
49.95%
|
463,938
|
49.88%
|
1,548
|
0.17%
|
930,025
|
1913
|
436,095
|
51.17%
|
414,661
|
48.66%
|
1,415
|
0.17%
|
852,171
|
1914
|
418,402
|
49.38%
|
427,455
|
50.45%
|
1,415
|
0.17%
|
847,272
|
1915
|
374,682
|
51.79%
|
347,489
|
48.03%
|
1,253
|
0.17%
|
723,424
|
1916
|
359,215
|
48.44%
|
381,397
|
51.43%
|
980
|
0.13%
|
741,592
|
1917
|
281,549
|
50.15%
|
278,976
|
49.69%
|
924
|
0.16%
|
561,449
|
1918
|
246,665
|
63.10%
|
143,902
|
36.81%
|
367
|
0.09%
|
390,934
|
1919
|
369,845
|
69.08%
|
165,000
|
30.82%
|
527
|
0.10%
|
535,372
|
Source:
|
|||||||
Whitbread archive document number LMA/4453/D/02/16
|
|||||||
Note:
|
|||||||
Year ending July
|
|||||||
The proportion of
Whitbread sales which were bottled doubled over the years 1901 to 1914, rising
from a quarter to a half. The war knocked this back down to close to its 1901
level, but in the 1920's it soon rose back to around 50%.
Brewing materials
Sugar, malt, maize.
Non-British barley and hops. Is this when crystal malt appears? I'm sure this
is where the first mentions of SA malt and chocolate malt. Oat malt, too. No.
1, 2, 3 and 4 sugar.
Yeast
Pitching yeast was
collected from fermenting beer. Worts of medium gravity, 1050 - 1055º, were
considered the most suitable source of yeast. In London, yeast from Porter was
much used. Yeast that rose to form a head during the early part of the
fermentation was discarded, as it contained many impurities such as tannins
from the hops and proteins. That skimmed of in the middle of the fermentation
was considered best.(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing"
by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 531.) This is borne out by
the Fuller's brewing logs from 1910. They show yeast being collected at
approximately half way through the primary fermentation, that is after between
2 or 3 days in a process lasting for or 5 days.
Yeast that had been
used several times in strong worts was liable to become sluggish. While yeast
from very heavily hopped beers was coated in hop resin and less effective.
(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 532-533.)
Harvested yeast had
most of the wort drained off it and was stored into shallow yeast tanks until
it was needed. These were fitted with attemperators to keep the yeast cool.
Yeast was never kept more than 7 days, in warm weather not more than 4.
(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes
& Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 531.)
Sykes & Ling
recommended that brewers regularly look at their yeast under the microscope to
check for signs of dead cells the presence of bacteria. Yeast which contained
either was unsuitable for pitching. (Source: "Principles & Practice of
Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 531-532.)
If yeast began to
degenerate and become ineffectual, it was replaced. Such degeneration was
either the result of poor hygiene or lack of vital nutrients for the yeast in
the wort. New yeast was acquired from another brewery, preferably one worts
brewed from pure malt. It was also imporatant that the source brewery used the
same system of fermentation (cleansing, skimming or stone square). While stone
square yeasts could, with rousing, be made to work in breweries using other
systems, the reverse was not true. (Source: "Principles & Practice of
Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 533.)
Of course, the need to
change yeast could be avoided if a yeast propagation system, like Hansen's (of
Carlsberg), was employed. This guaranteed a supply of the original yeast.
(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes
& Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 534.)
!!!!!! says there were
limitations with this system - check pages 386-388 !!!!!!!!
Brettanomyces
Stock Ale was a strong
Beer which was matured for many months or years and then blended with young
beers or ales to give them the aged flavour. It was called Stock because a
stock of it was kept in the brewery. It was rarely sold just by itself (I've
only found a product called Stock Ale or Beer a couple of times in old brewery
price lists).
The "aged"
taste, as was discoverd when it was isolated in 1903 by the Dane Niels Hjelte
Claussen (who worked at the Carlsberg brewery in Copenhagen), came from the
action of Brettanomyces. Experiments in Britain the early 1900's showed that
when a finished pasteurised beer was innoculated with Brettanomyces it acquired
the typical aged taste within 10 to 14 days. The application of this technique
would have made the production of Stock Beers much quicker and more reliable.
Except that the demand for such beers had all but evaporated by the start of
the 20th century.
Pure Yeast Cultures
In "Brewing
Science and Practice: Volume II Brewing Processes" (H. Lloyd Hind, London,
1940, pages 800-802) there's another interesting passage about Hansens work
with single-cell yeast strains. It discusses experiments at the Worthington
brewery in Burton in the 1880's brewing beer with pure strains. The conclusion
was that pure strains did not produce better than mixed strains and in fact had
some disadvanatges during secondary fermentation, such as conditioning more
slowly in the cask and producing beers which did not age well. It was not
recommened for use in beers that were to be kept more than 6 weeks after
racking. It says that at the time (1940) only a handful of British brewers used
pure strains.
Malt
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.
Barley production and
imports (pounds)
|
||||||||
average price per quarter
|
||||||||
year
|
acreage
|
UK output
|
UK %
|
s.
|
d.
|
imports
|
import %
|
total
|
1880
|
2,695,000
|
2,163,350,400
|
62.27%
|
33
|
1
|
1,310,992,480
|
37.73%
|
3,474,342,880
|
1890
|
2,300,994
|
4,039,676,000
|
68.38%
|
28
|
8
|
1,867,934,656
|
31.62%
|
5,907,610,656
|
1900
|
2,172,129
|
3,427,294,400
|
64.03%
|
24
|
11
|
1,925,208,096
|
35.97%
|
5,352,502,496
|
1910
|
1,899,130
|
3,152,224,800
|
60.62%
|
23
|
3
|
2,047,528,000
|
39.38%
|
5,199,752,800
|
1915
|
1,524,316
|
2,344,897,600
|
63.01%
|
37
|
2
|
1,376,668,720
|
36.99%
|
3,721,566,320
|
Source:
|
||||||||
1928 Brewers' Almanack,
page 119.
|
||||||||
Types of malt
These are the
different types of malt that were manufactured in Britain around 1900:
White malt. Made from the very best and palest malt and
dried at a low temperature. This type of malt was no longer made very often.
Pale malt. Also manufactured from top-quality barley but
dried at a higher temperature than white malt.
High-dried malt. Kilned at a much higher temperature than pale
malt and sometimes made from lower-quality barley.
Amber malt. Similar to high-dried, but kilned at a higher
temperature. Sometimes wood was added to the furnace at the end of the process.
Imperial malt. Was manufactured in a similar way to amber
malt, but at the very end of the process oak or beech wood was added to the
furnace to raise the temperature from 240 to 270º F.
Crystal malt. Dried in a rotating wire cylinder at a very
high temperature.
Brown malt. Not left on the withering floor as long as
other malt and spread in the drying kiln no more than 1.5 inches (37.5 mm)
thick. Initially the heat was moderate, but when all the moisture in the malt
was gone, the heat was suddenly increased by adding oak or beech wood to the
fire. The sudden heat caused the grains to swell by 25%. The smoke from the
wood gave the finished malt a smoky flavour.
Black malt. Roasted like coffee and often made from
inferior quality malt, though use of a better quality malt produced a better
end result. The final colour was not black, but a chocolate brown. Because it
was readily absorbed water, it didn't store well.
(Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 469.)
The deliberate
addition of wood to create smoke and to allowing it to come into contact with
the malt is very different from 18th century practice, where every attempt was
made to prevent this happening. Though with the much reduced proportion of
brown malt being used in Porter and Stout - a maximum of 20% - the smoky effect
would have been much less than in a beer made from 100% brown malt.
Based on the
descriptions of their manufacture imperial and sometimes amber malt would have
also had a degree of smokiness.
Either coke or
anthracite was used as fuel for the drying kiln. The fumes from the fire passed
over the malt, flavouring it. Most brewers believed that this was beneficial
and gave the finished malt a better flavour.
(Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 465-466.)
The presence of
diastase in older forms of brown malt is explained by the way it was produced.
Diastase is much more sensitive to heat when moist. By first removing all the
moisture from the malt at a low temperature, the diastase was not damaged as
much by the finishing high heat.
Other coloured malts
were produced in a very different way. To get the desired aroma in the malt, it
needed to be heated to 160º F while it still had a moisture content of between
12 and 15%. If the moisture content was below 7 or 8%, the aromas would not be
formed and all.
(Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 463-464.)
The yield from one
quarter of malt was between 75 and 98 pounds of extract.
(Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 475.)
Malt analyses
|
||||
Black.
|
Brown.
|
Amber.
|
Crystal.
|
|
Extract per quarter (336
lbs. )
|
57.75
|
57.12
|
84.33
|
58.26
|
„ per cent. .
|
44.3
|
44.04
|
65.02
|
45.07
|
Acidity of wort
|
0.29
|
0.23
|
0.19
|
0.17
|
Total proteids or
albuminoids
|
6.11
|
7.13
|
7.62
|
8.71
|
Soluble
|
3.99
|
4.81
|
5.69
|
5.88
|
Insoluble ,, ,,
|
3.99
|
4.81
|
5.69
|
5.88
|
Mineral matter or ash
|
0.32
|
0.29
|
1.2
|
0.76
|
Moisture
|
5.37
|
6.23
|
4.14
|
2.12
|
Source:
|
||||
The Brewers Analyst, by
R. Douglas Bailey, 1907, page 234
|
||||
"Weight-—The
weight of pale malt from British barley varies from 38 to 44 lbs. per bushel,
and more highly dried and foreign varieties proportionately less. The heavier
the malt, provided it possesses the other necessary qualities, the more the
extract obtainable. Care should be exercised, however, to see that the malt
does not derive this quality from imperfectly vegetated or steely corns, which
are naturally heavier than those of a friable nature.
Extract.—The
laboratory extract of malt depends largely upon the system of grinding—whether
coarse or ground to powder. By means of the Seek mill (fig. 70, p. 196) a
standard system may be employed and comparisons the better understood. By
grinding in the Seek mill set at 25°, any average pale British malt gives a
laboratory extract of from 93 to 96 Ibs. per standard quarter. Mild ale malts
should show from 90 to 94 lbs., and foreign grain according to its character.
Fine samples of Californian in exceptional cases may show up to 92 lbs., but 86
to 90 is more usual. Smyrnas’ are a little lower; Tripolis', Tunisians' and the
like from 83 to 85; and Ouchacks’ from 83 to 91, the former being more usual
owing to the difficulty of getting such material thoroughly modified."
"The Brewers
Analyst", by R. Douglas Bailey, 1907, p301.
"Colour Malts.
Amber. Crystal. Brown and Black.
Amber malt, like
crystal and brown, is employed by brewers chiefly to impart flavour to beers,
black malt being used mainly for the purpose of imparting colour.
In the manufacture of
amber malt the green malt is taken from the floor at the withering stage, and is
loaded on the kilu at a depth of about 4 inches. The fuel used at the early
stages of drying is the same as in ordinary malting; but when the malt is
hand-dry, the heat is augmented and very dry beech-wood is thrown upon the
fire, the products of combustion imparting the desired flavour.
Very high-dried amber
malts give a certain viscosity to beers produced by their aid. Thausing states
this to be due to the existence of parapeptones in the malt, which give both
colour and viscosity.
Crystal, brown, and
black malts are manufactured by taking malt at the withering stage, earlier
than when manufacturing amber, and roasting in a perforated cylinder enclosed
in a cast- iron casing and which can be freely turned.
A low coke fire is
employed, and during heating the malt is cautiously and slowly turned.
As the steam passes
off, the fire is made up and the heat increased. In 30 minutes a fine rich
aroma is evolved from the malt. Having imparted the desired colour and flavour,
the malt is then removed from the cylinder and placed on a floor to mellow and
cool.
If brown malt is
desired, the heating is continued, and in 5 or 10 minutes a good brown or
chocolate colour is imparted ; whilst if black malt is wanted, the heating is
further continued, and in 40 minutes or so the operation for this class of malt
is complete.
Brown and black malts
are sometimes finished off with a glaze. This is performed by sprinkling the
grain with a sugar solution a few minutes before finishing off: the glaze so
imparted darkens the colour of the husk.
In place of sugar
solution, glycerine, either alone or with water or steam, is sometimes employed
for the same purpose, it being claimed for this mode of treatment that the
malt, unlike other varieties, is free from acrid or bitter flavour, and that it
possesses a higher colouring power.
Weight.—The weight per
bushel of black malt varies a good deal according to the quality ; the average
medium-priced material weighs about 31 to 32 lbs. per bushel, but very high
qualities are frequently as much as 36 and even 37 Ibs. per bushel. But these
must not be confounded with roasted barleys, which also weigh high.
Brown and crystal
malts weigh from 31 to 33 lbs., and amber from 38 to 40 lbs. per bushel.
Extract.—The lbs. per quarter extract obtainable from black malts varies from
50 for low quality up to 70 for high-class material. Brown and crystal malts,
under usual conditions of grinding, give from 55 to 60 lbs. in each case. But
the fineness of the grinding has a marked effect on the extract with respect to
crystal malt especially, and if it be ground as fine as possible, the extract
will go as high as 75 lbs. or more. There are somewhat different opinions as to
what constitutes an amber malt, some brewers expecting much more severe curing
than others ; and the extent of the curing affects the extract. As a general
average the extract of amber is about 84 to 85 lbs. per standard quarter.
Moisture.—Colour malts are highly hygroscopic or deliquescent, and upon arrival
at the brewery will usually be found to contain at least 3 per cent. of
moisture, and upon storage for a few weeks the moisture percentage will run up
to 5 or even more. It is inadvisable, from this fact alone, to keep any large
stock ; in fact the majority of brewers generally purchase only in small
quantities as and when required.
Colour.—There is no standard method for ascertaining the colour value or
tintorial power of these so-called colour malts, but on strictly commercial
lines it is perhaps advisable to express colour results in degrees of tint of a
solution of 1 lb. gravity in a 1 inch cell examined by Lovibond°s tintometer,
and compare this with the price of 1 lb. of extract. On the other hand, it is
of importance to the brewer to know what colour these malts in definite proportion
will add to his worts, and in such instances it is best to approximately
average brewery conditions in obtaining a solution. Hence it is best to mash
such proportions of the colour malts as are used in practice with pale material
of known tint, and note the increase in colour due to the colour malts. For
purposes of comparison, however, a 0.01 per cent. solution, examined by the
tintometer as described in Part VI., is valuable."
"The Brewers
Analyst", by R. Douglas Bailey, 1907, p310-311.
Maize
Before 1880, the use
of maize had been illegal. It soon became a common ingredient, usually in the
form of flaked maize. Not only was it cheaper than malt, the extract, at around
105 lbs per quarter, was 25% better, too. (Source: "Principles & Practice
of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 511.) Both
Barclay Perkins and Truman's started using maize around 1900.
Rice
Flaked rice was
sometimes used, presumably because of its price. Barcaly Perkins used rice in
their Bitters in the 1890's, but by 1910 had changed over to maize.
This rather odd notice
from the British medical Journal in praise of rice appeared in a newspaper in
1886:
"We directed
attention some time since to the growing use of Rice Malt in the brewing of
Beer. We have since had occasion to examine the whole question with care - from its dietetic as well as its chemical
aspects - and the results are of practical interest from both points of view.
We entertain no doubts that the use of Rice Malt is a distinct advantage in
brewing, and is a really useful application of the art. We have examined a
series of samples of Beer brewed by some of the most eminent firms in and out
of the metropolis, from Rice Malt. We have found them in every respect of good
quality, and, from their analysis, as well as from examination of the whole
process, it is clear that the use of Malted Rice is an important element in the
production of Beer, and that it produces Beer which contains a smaller
proportion of uncompletely changed ferment, and that such Beer would therefore
keep sound longer than Beer brewed by other methods." (Source DNW May 29th
1886)
Adjunct analyses
|
||||||
Granulated.
|
Flaked.
|
|||||
Maize.
|
Bice.
|
Maize.
|
Rice.
|
Unprepared Raw Maize
Grits.
|
Unprepared Raw Rice.
|
|
Oil. ...
|
0.96
|
0.76
|
0.97
|
0.29
|
3.25
|
0.21
|
Extract per quarter (336
lbs. )
|
98.44
|
102.48
|
98.78
|
108.2
|
99.5
|
106
|
, , per cent.
|
75.9
|
79.01
|
76.16
|
79.53
|
||
Total proteids or
albuminoids
|
9.2
|
8.74
|
9.5
|
8.53
|
9
|
7.73
|
Soluble ,, „
|
0.62
|
0.41
|
0.34
|
0.28
|
0.5
|
0.33
|
Insoluble „ ,,
|
8.58
|
7.33
|
9.2
|
8.25
|
8.5
|
7.4
|
Mineral matter or ash
|
0.3
|
0.26
|
0.44
|
0.32
|
2.2
|
1.54
|
Moisture ....
|
10.72
|
7.83
|
6.3
|
7.43
|
8.7
|
10.92
|
Source:
|
||||||
The Brewers Analyst, by
R. Douglas Bailey, 1907, pages 233-234
|
||||||
Sugar
It was not unusual for
brewers to use 10-15% sugar. Unlike raw grain, it was seen as a perfectly
acceptable malt substitute without any disadvantages. (Source: "Principles
& Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907,
page 519.)
Looking at Whitbread's
beers from 1910, it appears that sugar was being used to lighten the body of
their Bitters:
Beer
|
OG
|
FG
|
sugar
|
X
|
1052.6
|
1011
|
10%
|
PA
|
1060.9
|
1017
|
20.24%
|
IPA
|
1051.3
|
1013
|
21.26%
|
How else would you
explain an expensive beer like PA having twice as much sugar in the grist as
the bog-standard, and cheap, X Ale?
Malting techniques
After centuries of
being consrtucted in essentially the same way, malt houses were beginning to
change. The traditional method was to spread malt thinly upon the floor and to
pass cool air over it to start germination. The barley needed to be regularly
turned, a very labour intensive process.
Around 1880 a new
mechanical method called drum pneumatic malting was developed. Instead of being
spread on the floor, barley was placed in a slowly rotating drum through which
cold, moist air circulated. The new method had the advantages of taking up far
less space, being less labour-intensive and allowing the maltster to more
accurately control the temperature of the germinating barley.
As usual with new
developments, not everyone was convinced it produced as good results. Many
brewers and maltsters were convinced of the superiority of floor-malted grain.
Come to think of it, many still are, more than a century later.
(Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 456-461.)
Hops
The acreage given over
to growing hops was in decline, dropping around 50% between 1880 and 1914.
Considerable quantities of hops were imported, amounting to between 30 and 40%
of the total used. Harvests were still very variable, as was the price.
Hop production and
imports (cwt)
|
||||||||
year
|
Acreage
|
UK production
|
yield per acre
|
Average price of English hops
|
net imports of foreign
hops
|
exports of British hops
|
||
£
|
s
|
d
|
||||||
1880
|
66,698
|
440,000
|
6.6
|
4
|
6
|
0
|
195,987
|
7,218
|
1890
|
53,961
|
283,629
|
5.26
|
10
|
9
|
4
|
181,698
|
6,164
|
1900
|
51,308
|
347,894
|
6.78
|
5
|
18
|
8
|
198,494
|
14,999
|
1910
|
32,886
|
302,675
|
9.2
|
5
|
6
|
6
|
172,032
|
8.927
|
1915
|
34,744
|
254,101
|
7.31
|
6
|
7
|
0
|
199,347
|
8,288
|
Source:
|
||||||||
1928 Brewers' Almanack,
page 119
|
||||||||
The USA became a major
supplier of hops to the UK in the 1890's. They were grown mostly either on the
West Coast or New York State.
US hop crop by state (in
bales of approx 200 pounds)
|
||||
State
|
1900
|
1901
|
||
bales
|
pounds
|
bales
|
pounds
|
|
New York
|
79,000
|
15,800,000
|
76,500
|
15,300,000
|
Oregon
|
80,000
|
16,000,000
|
60,000
|
12,000,000
|
California
|
35,000
|
7,000,000
|
50,000
|
10,000,000
|
Washington
|
30,000
|
6,000,000
|
26,000
|
5,200,000
|
Wisconsin & Idaho
|
2,500
|
500,000
|
2,500
|
500,000
|
Total
|
226,500
|
45,300,000
|
215,000
|
43,000,000
|
Source:
|
||||
“100 Years of Brewing”,
1903, page 613
|
||||
Britain imported a
considerable proportion of the of the US hop crop in the late 19th century, as
the table below shows:
American hop exports to
the UK (in pounds)
|
|||
Year
|
US Exports
|
net UK imports
|
% from USA
|
1890
|
7,011,423
|
20,350,176
|
34.45%
|
1891
|
8,449,377
|
20,778,912
|
40.66%
|
1892
|
12,319,556
|
19,805,408
|
62.20%
|
1893
|
11,008,378
|
20,800,192
|
52.92%
|
1894
|
16,602,918
|
18,851,392
|
88.07%
|
1895
|
16,693,742
|
22,857,744
|
73.03%
|
1896
|
15,702,064
|
21,698,656
|
72.36%
|
1897
|
9,913,152
|
16,649,920
|
59.54%
|
1898
|
15,809,457
|
25,059,664
|
63.09%
|
1899
|
18,964,836
|
18,830,560
|
100.71%
|
1900
|
11,111,598
|
22,231,328
|
49.98%
|
1901
|
13,670,725
|
15,826,384
|
86.38%
|
Sources:
|
|||
“1928 Brewers' Almanck”
page 119
|
|||
“100 Years of Brewing”,
1903, pages 613 and 656
|
|||
In 1901, about 30% of
the total US production of hops was exported to the UK. The USA was the source
of the majority of hop imports to the UK between 1890 and 1901.
Chemicals
A variety of chemicals
were sometimes added in the mash tun or to the beer itself at the time of
racking. Their purpose was usually to cover up some fault in the brewing
process, such as an infection. As they also had an adverse effect on yeast,
secondary conditioning was poor and the beer treated with them often flat.
(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes
& Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 541.)
Some of the chemicals
used were: calcium sulphate, sodium sulphate, salicylic acid, potassium
metabisulphate and formalin (a solution of fomaldahyde). All were anitseptics which
were, rather more appropriately, used to disinfect brewing equipment. Fluorides
were also used for this purpose, as were sodium hypochloride and caustic soda.
Equipment which had been treated with them was thoroughly rinsed with cold
water. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J.
Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 542.)
Brewing techniques
Layout of a tower brewery
This was the period of
the tower brewery, a design which had developed during the course of the 19th
century. The concept was to organise the layout in such a way so that the raw
materials started at the top of the building and moved downwards in each
successive stage in the brewing process by gravity rather than mechanical
means. It also gave the brewery the smallest possible footprint, important in
restricted city centre sites. The main disadvantage was that it was difficult
to expand without major rebuilding. (Source: "Principles & Practice of
Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 480-481.)
Increasingly,
breweries were purpose-built rather than being converted from buildings erected
for other uses. There were architects that specialised in the design of
breweries. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter
J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 482.) Many of these sturdy and
sometimes elegant structures still survive, though not all are still in use as
breweries. My home town, Newark-on-Trent, has two such tower breweries from the
late 19th century. One is now flats, the other shops.
Cold-liquor tank. A rectangular tank, made from cast-iron plates
or sometimes wood, which was placed at the very top of the building. It
supplied water for brewing and sometimes also for the attemperators, though it
was better to use water directly from the well for the latter as it was
generally cooler. When just used for brewing water, it needed to have a
capacity of 2.5 barrels per quarter of malt used in a brew. When used for
attemperator water too, it needed to be double that size. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 482.)
Hot-liquor tank. A covered, cast-iron tank which was either
rectangular or circular in shape. It was placed above the mash tun, for which
it provided hot water. It was encased in wood or some other insulating material
to prevent heat loss. The capacity was large enough to hold all the water for a
brew, or about 6 barrels per quarter of malt used. Heating was effected by a
variety of methods: injecting steam directly into the water through perforated
pipes, by passing steam through a copper coil or by means of a high-pressure
heater. The latter was a closed cylinder though which two inch diameter tubes
passed. The space between the tubes and the cylinder was filled with
high-pressure steam. A thermometer was fitted to the tank ith its bulb in the
water and the scale protruding outside so it could be easily read. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 482-483.)
Malt-mill. This consisted of a pair of smooth iron or steel rollers which rotated
in the opposite direction. The distance between the rollers could be very
precisely controlled by means of screws. The idea was to crack the malt but not
crush it into dust. The rollers were sometimes grooved. They were powered by a
steam engine, via pullies and belts. The rollers were fed by a hopper in the
shape of an inverted pyramid suspended above them. (Source: "Principles
& Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907,
pages 483-484.)
Grist case. Crushed malt was held in the grist case. This was usually directly
below the mill and above the mash tun. When located away from the mill, the
crushed malt was moved either by means of a Jacob's ladder or a screw. The
upper part was sqaure and the lower part in the form of an inverted pyramid. It
was made from either smooth, well-seasoned wood or painted iron. A slide at the
apex of the pyramid was opened to allow the grist to fall into the mash tun
below. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J.
Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 484-486.)
Mash tun. Cylindrical in shape, these were made from a variety of materials such
as wood, iron, copper, or wood lined with copper. Wooden tuns were tapered
slightly at the top so the hoops could be hammered down to tighten the staves.
Iron tuns were cylindrical and lagged with wood for insulation. Thick wooden
covers were fitted to keep in the heat during mashing. A false bottom, made of
copper, iron or gun-metal, was placed between 1.5 and 2 inches above the real
bottom. For ease of removal, it was made in pie-shaped sections called
"plates". The plates were either perforated or slotted. The holes
were between an eighth and a sixteenth of an inch in diameter, spaced an inch
apart. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J.
Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 486-487.)
Underback. A large open tank situated below the mash tun. The wort was run from
the mash tun into the underback, from where it was pumped to the copper. It was
important to prevent the wort from cooling so the underback was fitted with a
steam coil. The wort was kept for as short a period as possible as, until it
had been heated to 190º F in the copper, diastatic activity continued. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 521-522.)
Mashing machines. There were two types of mashing machine:
internal and external. Their purpose was to mix grain and water in the mash tun
without the need for manual intervention. The rake mashing machine, an internal
type, was invented by Matterface in 1807. A series of iron rakes rotated around
a central axis, stirring the grain. It was quite a complicated piece of
machinery with lots of moving parts. The first external mashing machine was
invented by Steel in 1853 and devices of this type are still called Steel's
mashers. It consisted of a screw encased in a closed metal cylinder. Water and
grain pass through the cylinder on their way into the mash tun and are mixed together
by the turning action of the screw. The cylinder was between 3 and 6 feet in
length and 9 and 22 inches in diameter. The flow of grain and water could be
regulated to get the perfect mix. It was powered by a steam engine via belts
and a pulley. The great of this type of machine was speed - 200 quarters of
malt could be mashed in just 20 minutes. There were various other patented
mashing machines, but Steel's and the rake masher were by far the most common.
(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes
& Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 487-488.)
Underlet. This was a pipe leading from the hot-liquor tank to the bottom of the
mash tun. Through it, hot water could be introduced to the mash tun from
beneath the false bottom. Such hot water was called "piece liquor".
(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes
& Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 489.) It could be used either to adjust the
temperature in the mash tun or to perform a simple step mash.
Steam coil. Another method of heating the mash was a copper coil placed beneath the
false bottom through which steam was passed. Sometimes the coil was perforated
so that stem could be introduced directly to the mash. Its use was similar to
the underlet. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by
Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 489.)
Steam plough. Fitted to the bottom of the rake shaft, this consisted of pair of
hollow, plough-shaped vessels through which either hot or cold water could be
added to the mash. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by
Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 489.)
Sparger. This consisted of two or three perforated tubes called "Sparge
arms" which rotated around a central axis. A cylindrical, copper reservoir
placed at its centre which was connected via a pipe to the hot-liquor tank.
Through the sparger, hot water could be sprinkled over the goods. The holes
were all placed along one side of the arms so the the water escaping through
them would cause the arms to rotate. (Source: "Principles & Practice
of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 489-490.)
Copper. There were two types of copper: fire copper and steam copper. A
fire-copper was heated directly by a furnace placed beneath it. A steam copper
was, as the name suggests, heated by steam. (Source: "Principles &
Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page
496.)
Fire-copper. I'll quote from Sykes and Ling here, as they describe the two main
varieties of this type of copper so succinctly. The most common type was a
"bench copper". "The lower portion is in the shape of an
ordinary pan; at about half-way up it suddenly widens out a few inches, to form
what is termed "the bench". From this the copper is continued up with
parallel sides. The flues which surround the copper are only carried as far as
the bench; consequently the portion above the bench, not being heated, has, to
some extent, a cooling action on the wort, which tends to prevent boiling
over." (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter
J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 497.) "The dome-copper is, as
its name implies, covered in with a dome, round which there is a sort of tray,
which has an outlet into the body of the copper. At the summit of the dome is a
large opening, to which is attached a wide tube 1.5 to 2 feet in length. When
the copper is boiling, the communication is left open between the tray and the
copper, and through this the wort, as it boils out at the wide tube, after
pouring over the sides of the dome and falling into the tray, finds its way
back into the interior of the copper. When the wort has finished boiling and
the heat is slackened, the plug fixed in its place, and a second batch of wort
may be placed in the tray, which will be heated to some extent before being
allowed to pass into the copper." (Source: "Principles & Practice
of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 497.)
Steam-copper. These were cylindrical in shape with a domed bottom. Another cast-iron
dome was fitted around the bottom, leaving a gap of about 3 or 4 inches into
which high-pressure steam was pumped. It had several advantages over a fire
copper. The heat could more easily be raised or lowered and it was more
economical on fuel. Not being in direct contact with the furnace, it could be
heated before the wort was added which consequently could be more quickly
brought to the boil. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing"
by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 498.)
Hop-back. This was a wooden or iron container, through which the wort passed on
its way from the copper to the cooler,
provided with a perforated false bottom to hold back the hops. Some were
circular in shape and fitted with a device similar to a sparger through which
hot water passed to wash out any wort retained by the hops. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 499.)
Cooler. This was a large but shallow vessel made of wood, iron or copper into
which the wort passed after leaving the hop-back. It was located in a room with
louvred window to allow air from the outside to pass over it. The initial
cooling of the wort took place here. By this time most breweries also had
refrigerators which finished off the cooling process. The wort was not usually
allowed to cool below 140ºF in the cooler for fear of infection. In addition to
cooling, it also served to remove impurities from the wort, which settled to
the bottom as a sludge. The cooler also served the purpose of hot aeration,
that is the exposure of the hot wort to air. This helped the later clarity of
the wort. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter
J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 499-500.)
Refrigerator. This was a type of metal heat exchanger which finished the cooling of
the wort down to pitching temperature. Cold water was passed through a series
of horizontal copper tubes over which the wort flowed in a thin layer and was
collected in a trough at the bottom. From the trough the wort was fed through a
pipe directly into the fermenting vessel. There were several variations on this
basic design, though all worked on the same principle. In breweries with an ice
machine, refrigerated brine was used in place of water. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 500-501.)
Fermenting vessels. There was much variation, both in materials
used and method of construction, in the vessels used for fermenting wort. The
most commonly used materials were wood, stone and slate. The vessels needed to
have smooth surfaces which could be easily cleaned and which would not be
damaged by the boiling water used in the cleaning process. The two basic types
were "rounds" and "squares", named after their shape. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 501.)
Rounds, much like
barrels, were made of oak staves held together with iron hoops. Squares were
made of wooden planks held together with iron bolts. The wood used was oak,
American cedar or, most commonly, fir. Both were open-topped. Wort was filled
to within two or three feet of the top, the rest being left for the head of
yeast. A hole 30 inches square was cut just above the level of the wort to
allow access to the inside. This was closed with boards when the tun was in
use. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J.
Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 501-502.)
Yorkshire stone squares. These were traditionally constructed of slabs
of hard stone, but increasingly slate was being used. The slabs were held
together with iron bolts and cement was used to make the joints watertight.
They had double walls and the space between was filled with water which acted
as an attemperator. Slate versions usually had single walls and were fitted
with a standard attemperator. Above the main chamber was a second stone vessel,
called the "yeast trough", which was 24 to 30 inches deep. In the
centre of its bottom a circular "manhole" 18 inches in diameter was
cut. Around the hole was a collar of stone 5 inches high onto which a lid, also
of stone, fitted. In one corner, a pipe (called the "organ-pipe) ran from
the yeast trough down to just a few inches above the bottom of the lower
vessel. In another corner was a shorter pipe, which did not extend into the
lower chamber, used to remove yeast from the upper trough at the end of
fermentation. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by
Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 502-503.)
During fermentation,
the manhole was left open to allow yeast to rise up and be trapped in the upper
chamber. The organ pipe was used to let wort in the upper chamber back into the
lower chamber. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by
Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 537.)
Loose pieces. These were casks used for cleansing. Usually
puncheons holding around four barrels, they were placed on troughs called
stillions in which the yeast escaping from the bunghole was caught. To stop the
yeast just running down the side of the cask, a conical tin pipe was fitted
into the bunghole. Another tin pipe stuck out from this at a right angle which
was long enough the extend past the side of the cask. The yeast was expelled
through the horizontal pipe, while the cask could be refilled through the vertical
pipe. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J.
Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 504-505.)
Pontos. These were used in some London breweries for cleansing. After a short
initial fermentation in rounds or squares, the wort was tranferred in pontos,
barrels holding between four and six barrels. Here fermentation continued, with
yeast forcing its way out through an opening in the head and into a slate
gutter. This was going out of fashion and being replaced by the dropping
system. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J.
Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 505.)
Burton Unions. This was a more sophisticated version of the loose pieces system of
cleansing. Casks with a capacity of about four barrels were permanently fixed onto
a wooden stand. A curved pipe called a "swan's neck" was fitted into
the bung hole. Yeast was forced up through the pipe and into a long wooden
trough (called the "yeast trough") which ran between two parallel
rows of casks. At one end of the yeast trough was another vessel called the
"feed trough". This was connected via pipes to a hole in the head of
each cask and was used to keep them filled with beer. A tap at the bottom of
the cask, opposite the bunghole, was used to remove the finished beer. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 505.) This system was still being used by Bass until
the 1980's. Marston's is the only remaining British brewery that ferments in
unions.
Racking square. Beer wasn't usually racked into trade casks
directly from the fermenters but first transferred to another tank called a
racking square. Often they were very large in size, containing the equivalent
of two complete brews. They were constructed of either slate or wood. Taps were
placed a few inches above the bottom of the tank. Rubber hoses, with a metal
nozzle at one end, were connected to the taps and used to fill casks. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 508.)
Attemperator. The temperature of wort in fermenting vessels was controlled by an
apparatus called an attemperator. It was a a series of tubes through which cold
water was passed. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by
Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 506.)
Rouser. Yeast was mixed into the wort by a simple device called a rouser. This
was a flat piece of wood with a hole in the middle attached to a handle.
(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes
& Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 508.)
Aerator. These were used to aerate wort in the fermenting vessel. The simplest
type of aerator was a weighted wooden cask with the heads removed and several
holes in its sides. It was lowered into the wort on a rope and then quickly
pulled out again. Powered devices included a pump which could draw wort from
the bottom of the tun and spray it out above the surface. Operated in reverse,
it could pump air directly into the wort. (Source: "Principles &
Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page
508.)
Other vessels. Wort or syrup used for priming casks and
caramel used for for colouring had to be kept in a special vessels, where the
volume and gravity could be checked by excise officers. This was a legal
requirement. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by
Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 501.)
Casks. Trade casks were made of oak staves held together with iron hoops. The
wood mostly came from the Baltic. Unlike on the continent, they were not lined
with pitch so beer came into direct contact with the wood. Sometimes the wood
become so badly infected with bacteria that they had to be discarded. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 508-509.) That wood wasn't the perfect material for
the storage of beer was already apparent: "Probably in the future some
material which does not take up impurities so readily as wood will be employed
in the construction of brewery cask, such as steel lined with tin, or wood with
a lining of some indifferent metal." (Source: "Principles &
Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page
509.)
Mashing
In well-equipped
breweries, water for mashing was heated in the hot-liquor back. Usual practice was
to boil the water the evening before before brewing for 15 minutes. It cooled
overnight and needed to be reheated to get to the correct mashing temperature.
Boiling ensured that the water was sterile. Most water contained chalk, which
precipitated out when boiled, taking with it any organic matter in the water to
the bottom of the back. To stop this getting into the mash, the opening through
which the water was drawn off was always a few inches above the bottom.
(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes
& Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 512.)
If the water was
hardened with gypsum or other salts, it was added while the water was being
boiled. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J.
Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 512.)
The mash tun was
warmed with hot water or steam before mashing started. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 515.)
The initial
temperature, that is the temperature of the mash after the grain had been mixed
together, varied depending on the variety of malt being used and the type of
beer required. Initial heats varied between 145º F and 145º F. The striking
heat, that is the temperature of the water before it was mixed with the malt,
was determined by taking into account a number of factors, such as the
temperature of the malt and the volume of water per quarter of malt. Brewing
manuals contained tables to allow brewers to easily calculate the necessary
striking heat. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by
Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 513.)
"Beers intended
for storage are, as a rule, brewed from pale malts. These are mashed at a somewhat
higher degree of temperature than high-dried malts, for we require, in this
class of beers, a fairly large quantity of those dextrins which ferment very
slowly, and which, since they provide for a long, slow, continued fermentation,
keep the ale (through the period of its storage) charged with gas. High-dried
malts are mashed at a somewhat lower temperature, since the beers produced from
them are quickly consumed, and here we require a wort which contains large
quantities and of those maltodextrins which give fulness and sweetness to the
beer. Between these two types of beer, which may be seen as extremes, there are
many other intermediate ones that are brewed to suit the particular wants of
different neighbourhoods." (Source: "Principles & Practice of
Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 513.)
As most malt contained
more than enough diastase, a temperature high enough to destroy some of it was
used. If all the diastase remained active, too much maltose would be produced,
resulting in a thin-bodied beer. (Source: "Principles & Practice of
Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 513.)
Despite all the
theory, experience still played a big part. "A delicate appreciation of
the right initial heat to be employed with different malts to produce different
beers of the required character is only to be obtained by actual experience and
is one of those things for which hard and fast rules cannot be laid down."
(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes
& Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 513.)
If the mash tun was
fitted with a Steel's masher, hot water, at the correct striking heat, was run
through it into the mash tun until it just covered the false bottom. Then grist
and water were put through the masher which mixed them together and pushed them
into the tun. Brewers learnt to be able judge if the proportions were right by
observing consistency of the stream as it tumbled into the tun. If it were not
quite right, the flow of grain and water could be adjusted accordingly. The
Steel's masher was very efficient as it heated the grain uniformly. Which is
doubtless one of the reasons it is still in use today. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 515.)
If the tun had an
internal rake masher, the procedure was somewhat different. First a little more
water than actually required for the mash, at a slightly higher temperature
than the striking heat, was run into the mash tun. When the tun had warmed up,
the taps were opened to flush the spend pipes. If the water were still too hot,
the masher was switched on and after a few revolutions it would have cooled to
the right temperature. The tun was closed and the grain dropped quickly into
the water. The rakes were kept turning as the malt waas being added at a little
less than on revolution per minute. After all the malt had been added, the
rakes were kept turning for a further 15 minutes until the grain and water had
mixed to an even constituency. The disadvantage of this method was that not all
the grain was heated to the same temperature, as it was with an external masher.
(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes
& Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 515.)
The total amount of
water needed to brew a beer of a certain gravity was calculated taking into
account the water that would be absorbed by the malt (28 to 30 gallons per
quarter) and the hops (53 gallons per 100 pounds) and would be lost through
evaporation during the boil, cooling and fermentation (around 30%). (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 513.) The amount of water used in the mash was
between 1.5 and 2.5 barrels per quarter of malt. As the total amount of water
was constant, the thicker the mash, the more water could be used when sparging.
A thick mash and generous sparge was the best way of getting the greatest
extract from the grain. (Source: "Principles & Practice of
Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 515.)
After the mash had
stood for about 15 minutes, more water, at a temperature 10º to 12º F higher
than the striking heat, was added via the underlet. If the tun had a rake
masher, this was given 4 revolutions to mix the new water evenly through the
mash. In tuns with an external masher, the water was added very slowly so that
it could gradually spread through the mash. (Source: "Principles &
Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page
516.)
There were two reasons
for raising the temperature of the mash: to produce a greater proportion of
higher maltodextrins; to compensate for poor quality malt. When doing the
former, the temperature of the mash was raised to 158º F or more in order to
check diastatic activity. The time standing was also usually reduced to just an
hour. When compensating for poor malt, the initial heat was very low - 140º to
145º F. After half an hour, the temperature of the mash was gradually raised to
155º F and then left to stand until all the starch had been converted. The mash
could be heated either by adding extra water through the underlet or by the use
of a heating device within the mash tune, such as a steam coil. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 517.)
The mash was left to
stand until all the starch had been converted. Samples of wort were taken at
regular intervals and tested with iodine. As soon as no starch was detected,
the taps were opened and the wort run off.
(Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J.
Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 516.)
Some breweries still
performed a second mash. Around half the brew length was drawn from the first
mash and sparge, then a further 1.5 barrels of water per quarter were added to
the grains in the mash tun. It was left to stand for 1.5 hours, after which the
wort was drawn off and a second sparge performed. While some brewers though
this method gave a better yield, many considered it a waste of time. In rare
cases, even a third mash was performed. (Source: "Principles &
Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page
516.)
Whitbread, Barclay
Perkins, Truman and Fullers were all performing underlet mashes by the 1890's.
They continued to mash in much the same way until after WW II.
There's a good example
in the Fuller's 1910 brewing log of a mash heated by means of the underlet.
March 14th 1910 Fuller's AK
Ingredients: 27 qtrs
pale malt, 2 qtrs flaked maize, 7 qtrs sugar
65 barrels water @
164º F; initial heat 150º F; mashed 1 hour, stood 25 minutes
15 barrels via
underlet @ 175º F; raised temperature of mash to 155º F; stood 80 minutes
sparged with 114
barrels of water at 168º F and 165º F
Using 2.25 barrels of
water per quarter of grain, this was a relatively thin mash.
The mashing scheme was
quite different for their darker beers:
August 10th 1910 Fuller's Brown Stout and
Porter
Ingredients: 35.5 qtrs
pale malt, 7 qtrs brown malt, 3.5 qtrs black malt, 2 qtrs flaked maize, 24 qtrs
sugar
103 barrels water @
155º F; initial heat 146º F; mashed 1 hour, stood 20 minutes
15 barrels via
underlet @ 175º F; raised temperature of mash to 150º F; stood 100 minutes
sparged with 199
barrels of water at 170º F and 180º F
The initial heat was
4º F lower than for the AK and the mash was left to stand for 20 minutes
longer. The temperature of the sparging water was, however, a good it higher.
Hot grist mashing
This was a method
patented by Charles Clinch. Hot air raised the temperature of the grain to just
below the initial heat. It was mixed with water at the same heat which, due to
the chemical reaction of the starch with water, raised the temperature to the
correct level. The mash was left to stand for no longer than one hour. This
method supposedly produced very clear dextrinous worts. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 517-518.)
Limited decoction mashing
This was a combination
of an infusion mash and a decoction mash. The mash started much as a standard
infusion, using two barrels of water to a quarter of malt and with an inital
heat of 155º F. After standing for an hour, half a barrel of wort per quarter
was run off into another vessel (I would guess the underback). The remainder of
the mash was heated with steam to around 212º F and kept at this temperature
for 15 minutes. The rakes were switched on and the goods sparged with cold
water until the temperature had dropped to 160º F. The wort drawn off earlier
was put back in the mash tun and, if necessary, heated to get the temperature
back to 160º F. The mash was stood for another 20 to 30 minutes and the wort
then drawn off. This method gave a slightly better extract, especially with
poorly-modified malt. It was also possible to use up to 25% raw grain with
problems. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter
J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 518.)
Mashing with raw grain
Before 1880, the use
of raw grain had been illegal in commercial breweries, though some authors had
advocated its use amongst domestic brewers.
One method of using
raw grain originated in the USA, where grists could consist of 50% raw maize.
Maize grits were gelatinised in a "converter" by heating them with a
small amount of ground malt to 200º F and keeping them at that temperature for
30 minutes. They were then allowed to cool. The malt was mashed in the standard
way and after standing for 60 to 90 minutes the gelatinised maize was added to
it. It stood only a very short time before the wort was drawn off, as the
gelatinised maize was converted very quickly. Malt made from coarse-skinned
barley was used to help filtration in the tun. The malt was dried at a very low
temperature to boost its diastatic power. Some British breweries made limited
use of this technique. (Source: "Principles & Practice of
Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 518.)
In Britain it was more
common to use raw grains which had already been gelatinised, such as flaked
maize, flaked rice or flaked barley. Torrefied maize and torrefied barley were
also employed. None of these necessitated a change in the mashing scheme.
Between 10 and 20% of the grist could be made up of such material. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 518-519.)
In 1900, Barclay
Perkins Bitters - PA and XLK - both contained about 10% rice, the darker beers
none. By 1910, they had switched to maize, though still only for their pale
beers. In 1910 Fuller's grists had between 3 and 6% "flake". Which
type of flake isn't specified, though it is clearly some form of unmalted
grain, either rice, maize or barley. Whitbread, on the other hand, used no raw
grains.
The reason for using
raw grain was economy. "From practical experience one of the authors (A.R.
Ling) is unable to recommend unqualifyingly the use of any form of raw grain,
prepared or otherwise, as these invariably contain, besides starch, a greater
or smaller amount of substances which tend to impair the flavour and stability
of the beer. Among these may be mentioned albuminoid bodies which cause
turbidity and instability, pentosans which may give rise to thinness and bad flavour,
and oil, which, besides imparting an objectionable flavour, exercises a
prejudicial effect on the head-retaining properties of the beer. Raw grain
cannot be regarded as a malt substitute in the same sense as sugar, the service
of which is generally admitted. In the case of the very best beers, any form of
raw grain is best omitted altogether, and the authors are inclined to place a
limit at which these materials may be used for any description of beer without
prejudicing its quality at 10 per cent. of the total grist calculated on the
extract yielded." (Source: "Principles & Practice of
Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 519.) That's
pretty clear: don't use raw grain if you want your beer to be any good.
Sparging
After the taps had
been opened to run off the first wort, sparging began. To get the greatest
possible extract, it was important to distribute the sparging water evenly over
the surface of the grain. The temperature was kept low enough that the diastase
was not totally disabled. A temperature of 170 to 175º F was recommended for
the first half to three quarter barrels of water per quarter of malt. The water
was gradually reduced in temperature until at the end of the process it was a
maximum of 160º F. Sparging was best conducted slowly, taking around 4 hours to
complete. (Source: "Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter
J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 520.)
There were two
approaches to sparging. In the first, the sparge water was added at the same
rate as the wort was drawn off, keeping the level of liquid in the tun constant
throughout the process. This was recommended for low-gravity beers. (Source:
"Principles & Practice of Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes &
Arthur R. Ling, 1907, page 520.)
In the second, sparging
was interrupted a number of times to allow all of the wort to run off.
Sometimes as much wort as possible would be drawn off, replaced by water via
both the sparger and the underlet and the rakes turned a couple of revolution.
This method was often necessary for strong beers, where a large quantity of
concentrated wort was required. (Source: "Principles & Practice of
Brewing" by Walter J. Sykes & Arthur R. Ling, 1907, pages 520-521.)
The wort collected at
the end of sparging, if it had been performed correctly, had a gravity of
between 1004º and 1006º.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment