UK Imports of Hops 1889-98

As I've told you many times, the UK imported a shitload of hops in the second half of the 19th century. Here are some numbers to confirm that.

We'll kick off by looking at how many hops were being used by UK brewers, how many were home-grown and how many imported.

You can see that domestic production of hops varied enormously - from 280,000 cwts to 637,000 hops. Which, as consumption of hops averaged 623,000 a year, was clearly insufficient for the needs of UK brewers. Hence the need for large volumes of imports. Running at an average of 184,000 cwts. Or around 30% of the hops used.

Next, we'll look at the source of those hops.

You'll see that the vast majority came from just five countries: the USA, Germany, Belgium, Holland and France. With small quantities coming from all other countries. The principal suppliers being the USA and Belgium. I'm surprised that Holland was supplying so many hops. Well, any at all. As Holland isn't exactly renowned for hop cultivation. Incredible that it was providing more than Germany.

In most years covered in the table, more than 50% of UK imports came from the USA. Peaking at 70% in 1895. Given what I've seen in brewing records, that comes as no surprise. Though, for the same reason, it was shocking how few came from Germany. Perhaps my thinking has been distorted by all the time I've spent looking at William Younger records recently. They seemed to have a liking for German hops.

And that's it. This is the last post of more than two dozen that I've queued up to cover my trip to Australia with Andrew. Hopefully, I haven't broken anything while there. 

Consumption of Hops in the United Kingdom
	Area.	Production.	Net Imports of following Year.	Consumption.	Proportion of Foreign to Total Supply.
	Acres.	Cwts.	Cwta.	Cwts.	Per cent.
1888	58,490	281,291	181,343	462,634	39.20%
1889	57,724	497,811	175,584	673,345	26.10%
1890	53,961	283,629	185,526	469,165	39.50%
1891	56,142	436,716	170,834	613,550	28.80%
1592	56,259	413,259	185,716	598,975	31.00%
1893	57,564	414,929	168,316	583,245	28.90%
1894	59,535	636,846	204,087	840,933	24.30%
1895	58,940	553,206	193,738	747,134	25.90%
1896	54,217	453,188	148,610	601,848	24.70%
1897	50,863	411,086	223,747	634,833	35.20%
Average	56,370	438,215	184,350	622,565	29.60%
Source:
The Brewers' Journal vol. 36 1900, February 15th 1900, page 127.

 

Imports of Hops 1889-98 (cwts)
Year	USA	Germany	Belgium	Holland	France	All other Countries.	total	% from US
1889	77,529	20,492	38,858	47,463	14,401	641	199,384	38.88%
1890	73,448	25,129	40,498	38,527	10,383	2,043	190,028	38.65%
1891	80,226	17,199	42,637	35,355	15,893	3,956	195,266	41.09%
1592	80,829	11,691	39,044	38,384	12,206	5,353	187,507	43.11%
1893	141,819	3,785	37,351	15.214	2,481	3.742	185,455	76.47%
1894	109,731	12,053	33,622	26,164	5,980	1,606	189,156	58.01%
1895	153,046	15,400	25,411	19,564	2,816	874	217,111	70.49%
1896	135,822	13,011	32,984	19,912	3,996	1,316	207,041	65.60%
1897	84,905	15,881	36,787	20,667	5,160	755	164,155	51.72%
1898	101,535	8,280	30,151	9,169	1,644	3,357	154,136	65.87%
Source:
The Brewers' Journal vol. 36 1900, February 15th 1900, page 127.

 

 

The Outlook for Hops

Throughout the war brewers worried where their hops would be coming from. Emergency stocks which many brewers sensibly had, helper ease the situation in the first year or two. But when these had been used up, UK brewers were 100% dependent on the local hop harvest.

Unfortunately, the UK crop fell short of brewers' needs.

"The Outlook for Hops
With the picking of the 1943 crop nearing its conclusion, there seems to be a general feeling that the quantity available will not be less than last year, and may show a slight increase. However this may be, the fact remains that last year’s crop fell far short of a full year’s requirements of the brewing industry, and it is quite certain that this year it will also fall substantially short of that desirable target. Consequently brewers cannot expect to receive the full quantity of their contracts, which again will have to be scaled down by a percentage which cannot be determined until the total number of pockets available has been ascertained. It is clear, therefore, that the average brewery, which to-day has enough hops to last until about the end of the present year, will receive only enough of the 1943 crop to carry on until perhaps early November next year. There is no reason to hope that the supply will improve next season, and by the autumn of 1945 the position will, indeed, become serious. There may be cases where a greater reduction than the present 20% as compared with pre-war hop rates is practicable, and indeed some few breweries have been able to show a greater reduction, but breweries by and large are finding that a reduction in the neighbourhood of 20% is about the limit to which they can go without danger to the stability of their beers."
The Brewing Trade Review, October 1943, page 306.

A 20% reduction in hopping rate already had some brewers struggling. If you remember, there was a minimum hopping level of 1 lb per standard barrel, under which they were not compelled to fall. Though some did voluntarily. Some brewers, such as William Younger, had been under that minimum rate before war erupted.

Even if shipping were available for the importation of hops, where would you find them? Pre-war, Germany, Bohemia or the USA would have been the obvious choices. But the first two were in enemy hands and the last was experiencing a shortage of its own.

"There is the prospect in view, therefore, that before the end of next year shortage of hops will bring about an enforced curtailment in the quantity of beer brewed unless some means can be found of easing the position. That means can only consist in bringing in from overseas additional supplies of hops in some form. There has continued to be some quantity of hop oil imported, but it is quite infinitesimal, and although useful in maintaining flavour it is doubtful whether it is of much assistance from the point of view of preservative value, and it is from the point of view of preservative value that the brewer is most anxiously watching the hop position. There is a world shortage of hops. For five seasons the supply from the Continent has been cut off, and America, which normally exports a large quantity annually, is now herself short of hops. Other countries, such as South Africa and New Zealand and Canada, which grow hops do not do so on a scale which would admit of any exportable surplus, in fact in at least two of the three they are not self-supporting. Nevertheless, America is the only possible source from which it may be hoped to obtain some relief of the position. Hops as such are bulky and occupy too much shipping space to leave any likelihood that this space can be spared at the present time, but there is some, hope that it may prove possible to bring over a quantity in concentrated form. Brewers have been given an opportunity of bespeaking a share in this supply if it can be obtained, and if the necessary permission is accorded to import it."
The Brewing Trade Review, October 1943, page 306.

 That's the first I've heard of a shortage of hops in the USA during WW II. I wonder what caused it? With exports impossible, I would have rather expected a glut.

The collapse of brewing in Nazi territory at the end of the war meant that there were plenty of Bohemian hops available for export as soon as the war ended. And they turm up it lost of UK brewing records in the late 1940s

Experimental hops

You might have noticed that I've been using a lot of material from The Brewing Trade Review recently. There are good reasons why.

I'm still researching my WW II book. The restrictions placed on brewing continue to elude me. I'd hoped that The Brewing Trade Review would detail them One of the reasons I scanned and OCR'd the whole of the bugger.

And because I've scanned and OCR'd the whole of the bugger, I'm going to use as much of it as I can. Otherwise I'd just have wasted my time. Not that time wasting is such a problem, now I'm unemployed. I've plenty of time to waste. Like on transcribing every single William Younger beer from every photograph I have of their wartime brewing books. Even though every iteration is mostly identical.

Someone did comment on an earlier post mentioning new hop varieties wanting more details. So here are some more details

"Next comes the question of whether to plant carefully selected Fuggles or one, or more, of the new varieties which have been produced at Wye and East Malling under the auspices of Professor E. S. Salmon. Mr. Gascoyne, like many other growers, is in favour of selecting the best strains of Fuggles (and Goldings) now in the country so as to improve the general standard rather than endeavour to breed hops with American characteristics. Some Fuggle hop growers do, every season, mark the weak setts, scrap them and replant with stronger ones, and have thereby succeeded over a period of years in producing fine, prize-winning hops which make as good a beer as can be desired. As regards the new varieties, Professor Salmon, Messrs. F. H. Beard and R. G. Hatton contribute a paper to the same number of the Institute’s Journal on the merits of the new varieties. They give a summary of each hop’s origin, cultural characteristics, general qualities and practical trials in brewing, and make a strong case in favour of most of them. What may by some brewers be considered a weakness in their argument is that they rely mainly on the high alpha-resin as the chief indication of quality. There are two points to be considered in connection with this. First, do we really want a very high alpha-resin, for it has more than once been found in comparative trials that a good hop with about 7% of alpha-resin produced a beer that would not go bad just as well as the beer brewed with a new variety having about 11%. Secondly, the opinion has grown strongly of late that the alpha-resin is not the only constituent of the hop which has a preservative value. If this should prove to be the case has the new variety an equal (or better) amount of this substance. However, we hope to see those, hops grown on a large scale and used on normal commercial lines some day."
The Brewing Trade Review, March 1943, pages 72 - 74.

Why were they trying to breed hops with American characteristics? Because they'd been using American hops for nigh on 100 years and had become accustomed to them. I'm guessing for the high alpha acid content. 

Which would explain the emphasis on alpha acid content. Love the discussion on whether high alpha acid = good quality. Equally relevant today.

The next snippet is more specific.

"New Hop Varieties
The new varieties of hops raised by Professor Salmon which may now be said to be established are Brewer’s Gold, Bullion Hop, Quality Hop, Fillpocket and Brewer’s Favourite. These are rich in preservative value as measured by the percentage of alpha-resin and their brewing quality has been proved. They are, however, late varieties, and Professor Salmon has now brought forward three new mid-season varieties (Jour. Inst. Brew., 1943, p. 178, from an article published at Ashford in January) which he calls “Brewer’s Stand-by.” “Malling Mid-Season” and “College Cluster.” These were all raised at Wye and then propagated at the East Malling Station. With regard to disease, they are all unharmed by the mosaic disease, but are “carriers” of it, so must not be planted near susceptible varieties, such as Goldings ; they may, however, be planted near Fuggles as these are also carriers and therefore immune. These new varieties also have shown very fair resistance to downy mildew under routine conditions of spike removal and spraying with Bordeaux mixture. As regards Brewer’s Stand-by opinion on flavour has differed a little, C. G. Tosswill finding a mild American aroma, but J. S. Ford saying he. is unable to detect it and giving an all-round good opinion of the hop. It has a high alpha-resin average and is a good cropper. Malling mid-season also had a curious mild American aroma according to C. G. Tosswill, and “ aroma mild something like Oregon ; not unpleasant,” according to the judges of the Institutes’ Hop Committee, but in brewing trials with it no American flavour was imparted to the beer. We believe all practical brewing experiments have tended to show that a slight American flavour in a hop means nothing against it in respect of its brewing quality. As regards the third variety, College Cluster (a happy name), it is a shade lower in alpha-resin than the other two but is a larger cropper. It has large cones, even larger than a Fuggle, and the upper short laterals have densely clustered cones; the bine has a limited growth so that 12 ft. wire instead of 14 ft. may be used and this facilitates washing and spraying. In the excellent photographs of these three varieties, the College Cluster looks most attractive."
The Brewing Trade Review, September 1943, page 275.

A couple of recognisable names there. And some not so recognisable ones. Fillpocket and Brewer’s Stand-by are my faves. I wonder what happened to them? A reminder that most new hop varieties don't stick around very long.

What did they mean by "American aroma"? Saying they were " not unpleasant" isn't exactly high praise.

Greene King worries about hops

Company annual reports can be an unexpected source of information. And I don't mean the dull financial stuff.

This one from Greene King contains many traditional elements. Such as moaning about the level of taxation on beer. Which had been a feature, well, since annual reports started.

This being wartime, there were some very specific, conflict-related complaints. In particular, relating the problem of being dependent on domestically-grown hops, of which there weren't enough.

Have a read and then I'll get back to the subject of hops.

"Greene, King & Sons.— The fifty-sixth ordinary general v meeting was held at Bury St. Edmunds on 26th June. In moving the adoption of the report and accounts the Managing Director, Mr. E. L. D. Lake, said : I beg to move the adoption of the Report and Balance Sheet, but before doing so I have to tell you that the Chairman has sent the following message, which explains itself:—

“Owing to the fact that the Annual General Meeting can only be of a purely formal nature, and as no travelling ought to be undertaken unless it is absolutely necessary, I ask the meeting to excuse my attendance this year.

“I cannot, however, let the occasion pass without once more placing on record my appreciation and that of the Board, of the good services of the management, staff and all employed by the firm during the past year. We realise that they have had to carry on during very strenuous and difficult times, and that they have once again proved their efficiency, and their loyalty to the firm.”

Under present conditions, I have very little, to add. In the 1942 Budget the beer duty was increased by approximately 48s. per barrel, and again by 24s. in 1943. These additions make all comparisons useless.

We still have to rely on home-grown materials, and we hope that both barley and hops will be a good crop this year. The position with regard to hops will soon become serious, as every year we, as a trade, consume more than we grow, and stocks are getting exhausted.

We shall continue to carry on to the best of our ability but conditions are not easy. Of our original staff of 400 we have lost 250 to the Forces, of whom I regret to have to report that five have given their lives in the service of their country.

We can only hope that hostilities will finish sooner than at one time seemed possible, and that we shall be able to welcome back all the other original members of our staff who are now serving with the Forces."
The Brewing Trade Review, July 1943, page 234. 

I just happen to have photos of Greene King's brewing records for 1943. (If you're wondering why I've published no recipes, it's because of an NDA I signed.) And guess what I found? Oregon hops in beers brewed in June 1943. So not completely dependent on UK-grown hops, then.

It's not the first time I've come across Oregon hops around this point in the war. A small quantity of the 1942 harvest seems to have slipped in.

Though they would be the last US hops to reach the UK until after war's end.

Hop imports 1938 - 1949
Year ended 31st March	Hops
	Cwt.
1938	45,336
1939	44,056
1940	2,024
1941	11,055
1942	171
1943	3,254
1944	134
1945	30
1946	563
1947	26,928
1948	7,766
1949	174
Source:
1955 Brewers' Almanack, page 64.

Hop Production in the United States in the 1890s

Some interesting numbers about hop production in the USA totay.

I realise that the West Coast's domination of the industry was later than I thought. According to the figures below, just over half of USA's hops were grown in New York in 1889.

"Hop Production in the United States.
The information promised by the President of the Board of Agriculture to Colonel Brookfield, M.P., in replying to his question in the House of Commons a few days ago, appears in the current number of the Oficial Journal.

The most recent oflicial report says that the aggregate production of hops in 17 States in 1889 was 39,171,270 lbs, grown upon 50,212 acres. The area and production of the five principal States were as under:—

States.	Acres.	Lbs.
New York	36,670	20,063,029
Washington	5,113	8,313,280
California	3974	6,547,338
Oregon	3,130	3,613,726
Wisconsin	967	428,547

In 1890 the total yield was 36,372,854 lbs, the average yield per acre being, in California, 1,648 lbs., in Washington 1,626 lbs., in Oregon 1,155 lbs, in New York 547 lbs., in Wisconsin 443 lbs, and in the whole of the United States 780 lbs.

The more modern details are unoificial, but they are accepted as authentic, being supplied to the department by the annual review of The Californian Fruit Grower. From this source we learn that the growth of hops in California showed considerable increase during the following years, the production being as under:—

Year.	Bales.	Year.	Bales.
1890	28,000	1893	51,000
1891	36,000	1894	67,500
1892	39,000	1895	52,000

The same authority, also quoted in the journal of the Board, gives the following figures of acreage and production of the Pacific Coast, US, for two years, viz.:-

	1894		1895
	Acres.	Bales.	Acres.	Bales.
California	8,600	67,500	8,500	52,000
Washington	10,000	49,000	5,700	28,800
Oregon	15,000	63,000	16,500	99,500

The figures given for 1895 fairly represent the present. position in the Pacific States. Owing to the unprofitable trade of the subsequent period there has been no enlargement of the area under crops, nor has any material decrease taken place. The above returns therefore furnish an emphatic reply to the complacency of certain English planters, who flatter themselves with the assumption that the competition of Californian hops has been “knocked out," and need no longer be reckoned with seriously. The acreage on the Pacific Coast has been expanded in six years from 12,217 to 30,070 acres, while the production has grown from 102,635 bales to 180,300 bales in the same period. As the acreage and production of the Eastern States have not been reduced to any important extent, and as the local consumption has practically remained stationary, it follows that outside markets must be sought for the surplusage."
"The Brewers' Journal, 1898", page 298.

Looking at the yield per acre, it's pretty obvious why the industry was headed west. The yield in Oregon was double that of New York, and in California and Washington it was three times as high.

I've added percentages to the figures for 1889 to make them a bit clearer.

States.	Acres.	Lbs.	Acres.	Lbs.
New York	36,670	20,063,029	73.55%	51.49%
Washington	5,113	8,313,280	10.26%	21.33%
California	3,974	6,547,338	7.97%	16.80%
Oregon	3,130	3,613,726	6.28%	9.27%
Wisconsin	967	428,547	1.94%	1.10%
Total	49,854	38,965,920

What would the figures for today look like? I'd guess Washington would come out on top.

Up until WW I, the UK would continue to import serious quantities of American hops.

The London hop market in May 1898

Another little interlude. This time looking at the prices for various types of hops.

The table below is dead handy as it gives any idea of how much the various types of hops were valued by British brewers. Though much of what it tells me I alreadt knew. For example, that East Kent Goldings were the most prized. And that Belgian hops were cheap. Interesting to see that Alsace hops were some of the better liked continental hops.

You may be wondering why there are three columns for each year. They're the price of the differeng grades of hops, obviously working up from lowest to highest.

"Hops.—There is scarcely any feature of interest to observe in this market, which, since our monthly report of the 14th ultimo, has been very quiet, and business has been on a much contracted scale. Speculation, it is almost needless to say, has been entirely dormant, and as most of the brewers are fairly well stocked with hops, the demand from the trade has been confined to the making up of odd parcels and the completion of unfulfilled orders. English descriptions, wherever and whenever they can be procured, have been much preferred to other kinds, but owing to the absence of a proper assortment, few purchases of importance have taken place, and no fresh advance having been established, present rates remain the same as those of a month ago. All the best "yearlings ” have either disappeared or been worked off, as practically none are left to bear a quotation, and nothing is now to be had above £3 10s. per cwt. An inquiry has existed for Continental hops, and good qualities have realised firm prices ; but California growths have been less generally sought after, and their outturn and condition not being thoroughly satisfactory, this, with their comparative abundance, has induced holders to submit to rather lower terms, say £2 5s. to £5, for common to the finer grades. American hops, however, exhibit no alteration, and this day’s general currency in the Borough, as approved by the merchants there, rules as follows :-—

Hop prices in London May 1898
	1898			1897			1996
	£ s.	£ s.	£ s.	£ s.	£ s.	£ s.	£ s.	£ s.	£ s.
East Kent Goldings 1897’s	4 15	5 10	7 0	2 0	3 0	4 10	1 15	2 16	4 10
Mid-Kents ,,	4 16	6 0	5 15	2 0	2 16	3 15	1 10	2 5	3 15
W. of Kent ,,	4 10	5 0	5 12	1 10	2 5	3 0	1 0	1 10	2 16
Sussex ,,	4 10	4 15	5 0	1 15	2 5	2 10	1 0	1 10	2 10
Worcesters ,,	4 5	4 10	5 0	1 10	2 10	3 0	1 0	2 0	3 10
Farnhams ,,	4 10	4 15	5 12	2 0	2 10	6 15	1 0	2 0	3 10
Country Do. ,,	4 10	4 15	5 10	2 0	2 10	3 10	1 0	2 0	3 10
Yearlings 1896's	2 5	3 10	-	0 10	2 0	—	-	0 10	1 0
Old Olds	1 0	1 10	—	0 5	0 10	—	0 5	0 10	—
Bavarians 1897's	4 0	4 10	5 10	1 18	2 5	3 10	1 10	2 0	2 10
Belgians ,,	2 2	2 10	3 3	1 5	2 0	-	1 10	2 0	—
Alsace ,,	—	4 4	4 15	1 12	2 0	3 10	1 0	2 5	—
Bohemia ,,	none.			none.			none.
Burgundy ,,	4 4	4 10	4 15	1 15	2 0	2 16	1 10	2 5	2 10
American ,,	3 0	4 0	5 10	-	2 14	3 15	—	2 0	2 16
Californian ,,	2 5	3 10	5 0	—	3 0	3 15	1 0	1 10	2 10
Foreign Old Olds	0 10	0 15	-	0 5	0 10	-	0 5	0 10	-
Source:
"The Brewers' Journal, 1898", page 391.

Messrs. Tuchmann and Low, 11, Southwark Street, London, S.E., report as follows on the English and Foreign Hop market :— “Since Easter we have a better inquiry and more business doing. Good useful copper hops have been in request, and as the stock of those remaining unsold is small holders continue firm in their demand as to price. Continental hops are without much alteration in value. Pacific Coast hops the last few weeks have been receiving more attention, and some business has been done in these, the cheap prices at which the lower qualities were, being offered having stimulated business.”

Messrs. Bloch Brothers, of Nuremberg. write us on the 10th inst. as follows :—"Our market continues unchanged. Stocks are exceedingly reduced, and the volume of business is necessarily quite small; prices remain firm on the same basis as last month. The new hop plant is doing well so far, but, of course, it is too early to attach any importance to this fact.”
"The Brewers' Journal, 1898", page 391.

Of the foreign hops, only Bavarian and Burgundy commanded close to the same price as English hops. It's just a shame that there were no Bohemian hops. I suspect they would have been rivalling English hops in terms of price.

The difference between the price of American and Californian hops is fascinating. I'm pretty sure the former are hops grown on the East Coast, mainly in New York state.

Old olds, if you're wondering, are hops more than two years old.

Hop economics

We're back with our Hampshire Farnhams farmer, Mr. Harris.

The more details I see of the financial side of his hop growing, the more I wonder why he bothered with them. It looks as if he almost always made a loss.

"3429. Chairman.] Do you generally send your hops to the Weyhill market? -Generally, I have sent them to the London market occasionally.

3430. Are hops grown in your district generally sent to the Weyhill fair? — The hops grown in our district are generally sent to Weyhill.

3431. Do those grown in the Isle of Wight go there ? —That is in our district.

3432. Sir Edward Dering.] Do you think that the price of the white bine hops, with the best description of farming, does not amount to as much as that of the Kent Goldings? —I do not know. I have been told that the Goldings will fetch more money than the best Farnham hops; that I have been told for a fact.

3433. Chairman.] What is the rent of hop land in your neighbourhood? — I should think from 40s. to £4, or £5 an acre. I put my own at 40s. compared with the rest of my land.

3434. Mr. Bass.] Are you speaking of the country district exclusively? —Exclusively; I do not know the rent of any other lands.

3435. Are there any lands set at £4 10s. an acre in the country district? —Not less. I should say that it would be worth that, supposing the whole land to be in hops; I should not think it is separately let at that. I am taking Binstead, and some of those districts upon the marl land, where they grow large crops, and good. They grow three or four times as much as I can.

3436. Sir Edward Dering.] You do not know of any instances of that? —I do not. Generally speaking, the farmers of our neighbourhood all occupy it with other land, as well as hop land, and it is all let together.

3437. Chairman.] What is the extraordinary tithe rentcharge ? —It is 10s. in my parish; 13s. 4d. in several of the neighbouring parishes.

3438. Have you none higher than that? —I do not know of any higher.

3439. Is hop growing considered a less profitable business than other kinds of farming in your neighbourhood? —I have never found it so profitable; I have found it the reverse, I think.

3440. Is that your experience, when there is a good crop? —It is not a profitable business at all.

3441. Is that the general opinion of the farmers? —I think not. I think, in the best hop districts, that they grow them at an advantage.

3442. Chairman.] Do you consider your land as some of the best hop growing land? —I do not.

3443. Mr. Bass.] Do you consider it some of the worst? —As far as regards hops I do.

3444. Then your land is not an average specimen of the growth of the country? —Not in quantity, and probably not in quality. The quality I think is not equal to some Farnham hops.

3445. Chairman.] How long does a hop garden last in your district? —I have some that have been in hops this 40 years or thereabouts.

3446. Do you know of any that have been in existence longer than that? —Yes, no doubt there are lands which have been in hops longer than that in our neighbourhood. The principal land that I have, has been in hops from 8 to 11 years.

3447. To what circumstance then do you attribute the fact, that hop growing has not been a profitable business, except with men who have particularly good land? —We do not grow a quantity sufficient, according to the prices, to pay our expenses.

3448. Do those who occupy the best lands grow larger crops? —Yes, they do undoubtedly grow larger crops.

3449. How much do they grow on the best lands? —It depends upon the year. I have heard of as much as 25 cwt. being grown to the acre ; but I can not answer for that; I only have it by hearsay; a ton to the acre is sometimes grown.

3450. From your own experience, how much have you grown an acre? —I have grown 18 cwt. an acre.

3451. Mr. Bass.] How much do you grow? — Something about four or five cwt.; I do not like to say I always do. I think that the year before last I was particularly lucky in my crop; but upon the average of years I have farmed my hops in a different way to which I have farmed lately, for I have neglected it very much before.

3452. Chairman.] Do you consider that it is only because you cannot grow such large crops as your neighbours that hop growing has not been a profitable business to you ?— I do not consider that; I cannot consider that it will be profitable to anyone at the price that hops have sold at last year. I know many hops that sold at from 60s. to 70s. generally, and the expense of bringing them to market, the drying and picking, and the duty, amounts to 50s.

3453. Do you think that it would be a benefit to the farmers if there were no Excise duty upon hops? —Yes, I do."
Report from the Select Committee on Hop Duties, 1857, pages 180 - 181.

He seems a very odd  person to have selected to give evidence. He didn't grow very many hops and he didn't seem committed to them as a crop.

It's clear that the famers in Mr. Harris's district only grew hops on a small percentage of their land. Presumably it was just a sideline, rather than their main crop.

How good a yield was four to five cwt. per acre? Not great, it seems, based on these figures:

UK Acres of hops a yield per acre by district 1848
	acres	cwt	yield per acre
Kent	26,063.00	216,325	8.30
Sussex	11,592.25	119,716	10.33
Worcester	7,915.50	30,872	3.90
Farnham	2,898.00	24,007	8.28
Essex	342.00	2,011	5.88
North Clays	361.75	2,194	6.07
rest of Britain	60.50	296	4.89
Total	49,233.00	395,421	8.03
Source:
"An Historical Account of the Malt Trade and Laws" by William Ford, London, 1849, page 229
Notes:
Weight of hops calculated for duty paid, based on a rate of 19s 7.5d per cwt.

to put that in an international context, here are the numbers for US hop-growing regions from a few decades later:

Acreage, yield, and value of hops in the United States in 1890.
States.	Acres.	cwt.	cwt. per acre
New York	35,552	159,475.2	4.49
Washington	5,282	79,309.3	15.02
California	3,796	51,044.5	13.45
Oregon	3,223	34,029.6	10.56
Wisconsin	871	4,107.9	4.72
Other States	238	1,253.6	5.27
Total	48,962	329,220.0	6.72
Source:
"Hop Culture in California" by Daniel Flint, 1900, Government Printing Office Washington, page 24.

I'm surpised to see that the yield per acre was, on average, higher in the UK than in the USA. Though even the worst West Coast region, Oregon, was more productive that the best in the UK, Kent. However, 25 cwt. per acre, which Mr. Harris claimed was possible, seems like a bit much.

Strange that the total area of hops being grown in the two countries is almost identical. Though the figures are a few decades apart.

The report of the committee would have a huge impact on the US hop industry. Because the committee was considering the repeal of two sets of hop dutes. The first and most obvious one was the excise tax on hops. The second was the import duty.  The committee was considering free trade in hops and that's what eventually happened in 1862.