Consumption of wine, beer and spirits in 1899

Got a new cast on my arm this morning. And they told me that I've broken a small bone in my hand, too. No big deal, as the same cast will take care of both. My typing ability is still limited. And I'm feeling a bit of a lazy git. More random statistics, then.

This time it's the consumption of various alcoholic drinks. Looking at the same six countries again. The total consumption figure really doesn't tell us much, as the countries vary massively in population. It's the per head figures that tell a story.

For example, that the French really liked their wine. 112 litres each is a fuck of a lot. That's a third of a litre a day. Or getting on for a half bottle. Such a figure is only possible if most of the population drinks every day. Which is, indeed, what people did in France. Drinking wine with meals, every day.

The UK falls far short of that. For the simple reason that most people didn't drink wine at all. That being the preserve of the better off. I would have expected Germany to score higher, though. Given that parts of the South are wine country. You can see that in the wine production figures. Bavaria, Baden and Württemberg were big producers. But those did make much more combined than number one wine state. Alsace Lorraine, the bit they'd just nicked from France.*

Rather surprisingly, Australians drank more wine than Germans. Well short of French levels, mind. I suppose they did make a lot. And they were a bunch of pissheads. The big question is: why weren't the French-speakers in Canada drinking wine? Because it was all imported?

The UK proudly heads the beer consumption table. 22 litres ahead of the Germans. And way head of the USA in third place. Pretty disappointing showing from the Aussies in fourth place. You'd expect all that sun to give them a thirst.**

The French are out in front again when it comes to spirits. Closely followed by the Germans. Particularly those in the North. Production of spirits was even more skewed than for wine. 82% was distilled in Prussia.*** It was a big state, but that's still a huge percentage.

I wouldn't have bet on the UK out-drinking the USA in the case of spirits. And what was it with Canada? They're bottom in every single category.

All I can add is: well done France. Do try to drink a little more beer, though.

Consumption of wine, beer and spirits in 1899
	Wine		Beer		Spirits
	Consumption	Per head	Consumption	Per head	Consumption	Per head
Country	hl	litres	hl	litres	hl	litres
United Kingdom	752,045	1.86	58,301,086	145.02	1,870,634	4.68
France	42,750,129	112.01	9,607,153	25.00	3,598,432	9.41
Germany	1,887,226	3.50	66,313,957	123.20	4,590,551	8.41
United States	778,821	1.05	44,106,974	59.10	3,085,825	4.18
Australian Colonies	205,525	4.77	2,082,113	48.19	148,609	3.45
Canada	20,230	0.36	858,876	16.37	152,746	2.95
Source:
The Brewers' Journal vol. 36 1900, February 15th 1900, page 205.

The original figures were in gallons. I thought hectolitres and litres are a bit more useful for most people.



* The Brewers' Journal vol. 36 1900, February 15th 1900, page 206.
** It rained every one of the twenty days I was in Australia this summer.
*** The Brewers' Journal vol. 36 1900, February 15th 1900, page 206. 

Home production vs imports of wine, beer and spirits in 1899

My arm is still broken and in plaster. Hence some more random statistics. Still have to post every day, no matter what the state of my limbs.

Let's start with wine. Two countries in the table imported all of their wine: the UK and Canada. A situation that I know is no longer true. Especially in the case of Canada. Honestly, I'm shocked that it produced no wine in the 19th century. Especially with all the French speakers.

Canada's lack of wine production is particularly surprising given how high domestic production was in the USA. Higher even than in France. Not such a shock is how few imports there were in Australia. Which has a good climate for viticulture. And is a fuck of a long way from most other wine-producing regions.

Moving on to beer, where imports were fairly insignificant in every one of the countries listed. Just 0.1% in the case of the UK. Only Canada and Australia imported significant quantities. Beer being a pretty bulky commodity, it does make sense that it wouldn't be moved around that much. Though those imports into Australia had come quite a distance. As the vast majority came from the UK.

Finally, spirits. Where Germany, France and the USA imported bugger all. I'm slightly surprised at the low level of imports in the last of those. I thought the USA imported quite a lot of Irish whiskey and Scotch.

Spirit imports were highest in Australia. I'm guessing that most were coming from the UK. What was made in Australia? Rum? Canada, number 2 importer, I assume was bringing in whisky from the UK and whiskey from Ireland and the USA. 

Home production vs imports of wine, beer and spirits in 1899
	Percentage of Wine		Percentage of Beer		Percentage of Spirits
Country	Imported	Home-Made	Imported	Home-Made	Imported	Home-Made
United Kingdom	100	-	0.1	99.9	20	80
France	20	80	1.2	98.8	7.5	92.5
Germany	37.8	62.2	0.8	99.2	2.1	97.9
United States	15	85	0.2	99.8	1.2	98.8
Australian Colonies	6	94	8	92	79	21
Canada	100	-	8	92	38.6	61.4
Source:
The Brewers' Journal vol. 36 1900, February 15th 1900, page 205.

 

 

Booze restrictions in Carlisle

Action was taken soon after the influx of construction workers to Carlisle.

The main features being a restriction in the hours of sale of alcohol, particularly of spirits.

"A delegation of the Board met the local authorities in conference, and without delay a drink-restriction Order was made for the Western Border Area. This came into force on November 22, 1915. It applied, on the English side of the Border, to the counties of Cumberland and Westmorland and adjoining parts of Northumberland and Lancashire; on the Scottish side of the Border, to the counties of Kirkcudbright and Dumfries and neighbouring parishes in the county of Roxburgh. The Order placed the Board's customary scheme of restriction on this wide territory: the hours for the sale of drink were reduced to 5.5 daily for "on" and 4.5 for "off" trade; the "off" sale of spirits was limited to 2.5 hours per day, from Mondays to Fridays, with no "off" sale at all at the week-end; the "flask habit" condemned by the fixing of the reputed quart as the smallest quantity of spirits to be sold for "off" consumption; at railway refreshment rooms the "off" sale of spirits altogether forbidden; treating, credit-sales of liquor and the "long pull" prohibited; regulations against hawking were included; dilution of spirits permitted; and the bona fide traveller's privilege to buy liquor in closing hours cancelled. All these restrictions applied alike to registered clubs and licensed premises. Further, Carlisle and the parts of Cumberland adjacent to Scotland—where Sunday Closing was the law—were placed under complete Sunday Closing, so as to prevent an exodus in quest of drink from the Scottish to the English side of the Border on Sundays.

It should be emphasised that all these regulations were imposed by the Board within a few weeks of the first influx of labour. Critics of the State Purchase scheme have implied that the life of the district was allowed to drift into wild disorder. The fact is that if a policy of restriction would of itself have met the need, no disorder would have arisen; for the placing of restrictions on the area swiftly followed the first incoming of the navvies. It was the inadequacy of the Board's ordinary Plan of Control to meet the extraordinary local situation which impelled the Board to employ another method of grappling with a problem of unique acuteness and complexity."
"The Control of the Drink Trade" by Longmans, Green & Co., London, 1919, pages 201 - 202.

Some of the rules sound very Systembolaget. Like having to off sales of spirits at the weekend. Pretty sure they once had a minimum quantity rule for spirits in Sweden, too. I'm sure the Board would have been horrified by Germany today, where small bottles of spirits are often on the impulse shelves next to the tills and railway station kiosks sell all sizes of spirit bottles day and night.

But this was insufficient to quell the disorder, so even stricter measures were introduced:

"A. Further Restrictive Action
Over and above the normal restrictions of the Board, recounted a few pages back, the following restraints were placed on the liquor traffic throughout the State Purchase area—

1. Redundant and undesirable licences were suppressed; tlus included the suppression of all "grocers' licences."
2. Further restrictions were placed on the sale of spirits, viz.—

(1) Temporary Prohibition of the sale of spirits in houses near the National Factory.
(2) Institution of the "spirit-less Saturday."
(3) Reduction of the number of houses selling spirits for "off" consumption.
(4) Mixed drinking—i.e., the custom of drinking beer and spirits mixed — was checked.

3. The "on" sale of liquor to young persons under eighteen was forbidden, excepting the sale of beer served with a meal.
4. The display of liquor-advertisements on the fronts of licensed premises ceased.
5. Complete Sunday Closing was extended with each extension of the State Purchase area in Cumberland."

"The Control of the Drink Trade" by Longmans, Green & Co., London, 1919, page 208.

What fun Satuday nights in Carlisle must have been.

By grocer's licences they mean shops that sold both food and alcohol. The supermarkets would love it if that was reintroduced.

In a way, it's all pretty logical, trying to limit spirit drinking. That was always likely to cause the most problems. Labourers probably weren't used to earning enough to regularly drinks spirits.

The restrictions on external advertisements has a dramatic effect Here's one Carlisle pub before:

and after:

and today, when it's known as Gallagher's Irish Bar

Interesting that it's still basically retained the State Control look. Though there was a fracas in 2014 that sounds very late 1915, with workers from outside the area causing trouble.


Gallaghers Irish Bar
10 St Nicholas St,
Carlisle CA1 2EE, UK
Tel: +44 1228 597799

Restrictions on wine and spirits in WW I

It wasn’t just beer that had to endure the interference of the Food Controller. Other drinks had similar problems.

I’ve just been moving my books into my new study. For the first time in years my books are reasonably well sorted and accessible. It’s reminded me of many books I’d forgotten I had. One being the snappily titled British Food Control.

Someone asked me the other day about spirits during WW II and I realised that, while I knew loads about what happened with beer during the wars, I was much sketchier on other alcoholic drinks.

“Under the Output of Beer Restriction Acts, described in detail in an earlier chapter, a small reduction, estimated to save 150,000 tons of imported material in each year, had been effected. The tightening of this very mild restriction had been one of the measures contemplated by the Board of Trade officials in November 1916; in a memorandum submitted to the new Food Controller in the last days of that year, it was pointed out that while in this country brewing was allowed up to 70 per cent. and more of the pre-war level, the corresponding percentage in Northern Germany had just been reduced From 35 to 25, of which 14 was required for the Army. Proposals for a further reduction of brewing were made to the War Cabinet by Lord Devonport in January, but not till the end of March was a definite order ready for issue. On 29th March 1917 the Food Controller made the first of the Intoxicating Liquor (Output and Delivery) Orders, by which, as from 1st April, each brewer's production was reduced to 28 per cent, of his pre-war number or 33.33 per cent. of his 1915-16 number of standard barrels, plus an uncertain addition for military canteens; to avoid turning the public from beer to stronger liquors, the issues of wine and spirits from bond were at the same time limited to 50 per cent, of the 1916 issue.”
Beveridge, Sir William H. (1928), Control of cereals in British Food Control, Humphry Milord, London, pp 100 - 101.

April 1917 was when the really strict restrictions on brewing kicked in. It’s clear something similar happened with wine and spirits, with the amount available being cut to 50% of the 1916 figure.

There had already been massive restrictions on distilling, but not to conserve food:

“The distilling of fresh spirit without a permit by the Minister of Munitions had been prohibited by a Defence of the Realm Regulation; the Minister of Munitions, however, was interested in the production of acetone rather than in the conservation of food, and pot stills which were not suited for making acetone had been permitted to continue distilling. These permits were now, at the instance of the Food Controller, withdrawn, and the distilling of raw spirits was stopped entirely.”
Beveridge, Sir William H. (1928), Control of cereals in British Food Control, Humphry Milord, London, pp 101.

Acetone was used in the production of cordite, which was a propellant for shells and bullets. Obviously pretty important during WW I. So it seems that there had been limited distilling in the early war years and none after April 1917.

Later in 1917 the restrictions of beer production were loosened, but on wine they were removed altogether:

“The restrictions on the issue of wine from bond were also relaxed; issues being allowed at double the 1916 rate by an order of 28th November and being allowed without limit by an order of 3rd June 1918. The restrictions on spirits remained, the line taken by the Government being that people might change from beer to spirits and should not be encouraged to do so by being able to get spirits easily. Those who could afford to drink wine should be encouraged to do so and leave beer for the poorer consumers.”
Beveridge, Sir William H. (1928), Control of cereals in British Food Control, Humphry Milord, London, pp 102.

Odd, isn’t it, how there were no restrictions on the drink of the better off, wine? Especially as wine was all imported, unlike beer.

It seems that people did notice the special treatment given to wine:

“In conserving cereals the Ministry of Food found itself dragged Into the thickest of the temperance controversy. Hardly any other subject produced for Mr. Clynes so thorny a crop of questions in Parliament, or called for more agility in picking his way between those who pressed him in vain to regard all brewing as an avoidable waste of food-stuffs, and those who demanded more beer for munitions workers or for agricultural labourers at harvest time, or for the general public at all times. Reduction in the output of beer meant not infrequently that supplies in particular houses became exhausted and, when replenished, were drunk up again in a few days by patrons eager not to miss their share. Fixing of the retail price of beer without control of the wholesale price led to complaints that the publican could not get a sufficient margin on which to live. The different and varying treatment of spirits and of wine had to be justified again and again.”
Beveridge, Sir William H. (1928), Control of cereals in British Food Control, Humphry Milord, London, pp 103.

It must have been fun trying to find a pub with beer. At least they’d probably have wine. If you could afford it.

Consuption (3)

Life's full of coincidences. The latest edition of Brauwelt arrived today and guess what it contained? Details of the consumption of alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks in Germany. As I doubt many of you subscribe to Brauwelt, I thought I would share the information with you.



You should bear in mind that the spirits figure are bulk and not converted to the equivalent amount of 100% alcohol like the UK figures. To compare like with like the German figures need to be divided by 3.

Let's make a comparison with the UK (for the year 2002).

Beer: UK 100.6 litres; Germany 121.9
Wine: UK 19.6 litres, Germany 24.2
Spirits: UK 1.7 litres, Germany 1.9 (adjusted as mentioned above)

See, the British aren't quite as big a bunch of drunks as everyone assumes. I am surprised how close the figures for wine consumption are. I would have guessed a much bigger lead for Germany, a major wine producer.

Thoughts on consumption

No, this post isn't going to be about TB. I think I owe you some comment on the table of consumption of alcoholic beverages in the UK I posted yesterday. I spent the whole day assembling it and had no time left over for analysis.

Beer
I'm not going to get into the Standard and Bulk barrel thing too much. Suffice it to say that average gravity before 1914 was around 1053, so there is little difference between Standard and Bulk barrel figures. (The Standard barrel was based on an OG of 1055). For the period where I don't have the Bulk barrel numbers, we can assume they are not significantly different from the Bulk barrel numbers.

Now I've got that dull introduction out of the way we can progress further.

Over the 150 year period covered, beer consumption varies between a low of 75 litres per capita in 1959 and a high of 146 in 1900. Mostly it's hovered between 90 and 120 litres. That's remarkably stable, considering the social and political upheavals that occurred. What does this tell us? The British have always rather liked beer. Now isn't that a surprise?

When it comes to other drinks, they've been far more fickle.

Spirits
Let's first take a look at spirits. High 3.06 litres in 1900, low 0.44 litres in 1949. The high is 7 times greater than the low, whereas for beer it was less than double. Consumption of spirits has gone up, it's gone down, but it's pretty much back to the level of 1914.

Wine
Wine has taken a simpler course: high 19.6 litres in 2002, low 0.41 litres in 1945. The high is a massive 48 times greater than the low. And except for a small blip during WW II (I guess not much French or Italian wine was imported in the 1940s) has risen almost continually in the 20th century.

Cider
For me, the biggest surprise is cider. Sadly I have no figures for before 1962. Like wine, the only way has been up: high 10.3 in 1999, low 1.6 in 1962. The high is 6.5 times greater than the low, but the period covered is only 40 years. I would never have guessed that. I can't say that I had noticed a huge jump in cider sales. I must have been asleep, or, more likely, just not paying attention.

Consumption (2)

On second thoughts, I'll just link to an html page rather than struggle with a large table:

Consumption of alcoholic drinks in the UK 1852 - 2002.

There are details of the consumption per head of beer, wine, spirits and for some years cider, too.

I haven't got time to explain more now. The kids have started fighting again and tea is almost ready. Have a look through yourselves and see if you can spot anything interesting.