British beer legislation 1802 - 1899

I tripped over this useful summary of the legislation around beer during the 19th century while wandering blindly in the darkened cellars of my book collection. I'd cut it out and keep it, if I were you. Bound to come in handy during some bitter argument.

This isn't a direct quote, just my paraphrasing of the original text.


Summary of Legislation

1st May 1802 - 20th June 1811
No materials other than malt, hops and water allowed.

26th June 1811 - 5th July 1817
Porter brewers were allowed to use a solution of burnt brown sugar to colour Porter only.

6th July 1817
The burnt colouring solution was forbidden and only malt, hops and water were allowed. Brewers, retailers and dealers of beer were not allowed to possess sugar nor certain specified drugs and adulterants.

11th October 1827
The rules from 6th July 1817 also applied to Ireland.

16th July 1830
Beer duties abolished. Brewers prohibited from having raw or unmalted grain on their premises.

18th June 1842
The use of roasted or black malt in brewing first recognised in law.  Strict rules on the manufacture, sale and storage of black malt were introduced. There was further legislation on this topic in 1856 and 1857. All these were repealed in 1880. 

23rd February 1847
The use of sugar (but not molasses or other types of sugar on which the full duties had not been paid) allowed in the brewing of beer and in the preparation of colouring material for beer.

6th July 1851
A duty of 1s 4d per cwt. introduced on sugar used in brewing.

10th July 1854
Duty on sugar used in brewing raised to 6s 6d per cwt.

1855
Duty on sugar used in brewing reduced to 3s 9d per cwt.

5th July 1856 - 15th April 1864
Collection of duty on sugar used in brewing held in abeyance.

16th April 1864
A duty of 3s 4d per cwt. imposed on sugar used in brewing.

30th April 1867
Duty on sugar used in brewing raised to 3s 6d per cwt.

12th April 1870
Duty on sugar used in brewing raised to 7s 6d per cwt.

8th May 1873
Duty on sugar used in brewing raised to 9s 6d per cwt.

30th April 1874
Duty on sugar used in brewing raised to 11s 6d per cwt.

30th September 1880
Duty on sugar used in brewing repealed.

31st July 1865 - 30th April 1874
Brewers prohibited from using a mixture of glucose and treacle.

30th April 1874
The definition of sugar extended to mean any description of sugar, including any saccharine substance or syrup manufactured from any material from which sugar can be manufactured. The use of sugar to make beer colouring also allowed.

14th August 1855 - 30th September 1880
Storage of unmalted grain in a brewery prohibited except for: grain in a malt house; oats or beans for horse food kept in a specific place. Malt only to be crushed by metal rollers with smooth surfaces which were not fluted.

11th October 1862 - 30th September 1880
Brewers of spruce or black beer exempted from new rates of license duty on brewers provided that they used no hops or yeast in making them.

16th September 1862
Duties on hops repealed. Prohibition on hop substitutes removed, also the restrictions on importing extracts, essences and other preparations of hops. This was only extended to Ireland on 25th July 1864.

1st October 1880
"Free mash tun " Act. Duty imposed at 6s 3d per standard barrel of 1057º. All restriction on ingredients removed except those on drugs and harmful substances.

16th May 1888
The use of "saccharin" (a product of coal tar) prohibited.

16th April 1889
A standard barrel changed to 1055º.

17th April 1894
Duty per standard barrel raised to 6s 9d.

1st October 1896
Rice, flaked maize and other similar products, which had been classified as malt or corn with regard to their wort-producing powers reclassified as "sugar".

Source: "Report and minutes of evidence Departmental Committee on Beer Materials", 1899, page 382.

That was fun. Se how most of it was designed either to collect tax or to stop people avoiding tax.

The "Report and minutes of evidence Departmental Committee on Beer Materials" is a great source of information, especially statistics. There are several appendices stuffed full of plump, juicy numbers. I had to tear myself away.

A tale of two bars

Boston (and its surrounding towns) is a fun place. With plenty of drinking opportunities, both large and small. I'll be looking at exactly that today: one large and one small bar. Two very different places, demonstrating the diversity of Boston pubs. But ones which evoked very differing emotions in me.

Quantity or quality. Though it isn't always a simple choice between the two. It can be much more nuanced. And, let's be honest, there's a difference between quantity and true choice. We'll be getting back to that later.

First I'll introduce you to the pubs. Yard House and Deep Ellum.

Yard House is very new. It had only been open a few days when I dropped by last week. It's part of a national chain of beer bars. No, not like Wetherspoons. Much more American than that. Yard House is a barn of a place, offering 180 tap beers and seating for 700. Yes, you read that right, 180 taps. And that's just the start. They've the capacity for even more. It's hard to see where they'll put the new ones, the back of the bar - the usual place for taps in American beer places - already bristles with a continuous line of handles, like soldiers on parade presenting arms.

The beers selection has been well thought out. Mostly beers with a liquid* reputation. The type of beers that moisten the underwear of geeks the world over. Bold, brassy beers that left their subtlety in the cloakroom on their way in.

Its location - close to Fenway Park - is crammed with loud, crowded bars. Big brash bars, seemingly shouting to attract stray passing drinkers. Yard House is the largest and one of the loudest. Understated it isn't. But who, apart from the commercially suicidal, would open a low-key bar in a high-key spot?

Deep Ellum is a long way from Yard House, philosphically if not physically. Nestling in a row of modest brick-fronted shops on a busy main road, in the suburb of Allston. You could fit the whole pub behind the bar of Yard House. The long bar running the length of one wall and the carved bar back give it the pubby feel I love.

I've a recurring complaint when drinking in the USA. Why isn't there anything below 7% ABV? St. Bernardus Abt is my regular tipple, so I'm no stranger to strong beers. But I like my sessions long. And my legs to stay functional. It's a rule of mine: remain capable of standing up and walking out unaided. Sometimes you need to drink without consequences.

Deep Ellum's beer selection is far smaller than Yard House. Smaller probably than the choice in many of Britain's new wave of thwug** bars. Small but perfectly formed. Just 26 taps, including one beer engine.

I've a recurring complaint when drinking in Britain. Why is there nothing but Bitter between 3.8% and 4.2% ABV? I like a little more variety in style and strength. When I was in Deep Ellum on Sunday, 10 of their 26 draught beers were 5% ABV or less. Three were under 4% ABV. The others filled all the slots up to 10% ABV. Now there's real choice. The same with the styles: a German Pilsner, a German Kellerbier, Smoked Lager, Rye Ale, Rye Lager, Hefeweissen, Bitter, Brown Ale, Lambic, Tripel, Golden Ale, Saison, Stout, Imperial IPA, Witbier, Amber Ale, Belgian Pale Ale, three standard IPA's, and what I would call a mid-Atlantic Pale Ale.

Drinking in Yard House was a challenge. First finding a seat. Then getting served. And finally having a conversation. What with the music and the braying hordes, shouting was the only way to communicate. Really not my scene, man. I like a seat and a chat. Oh, and light. So I can read a book or a newspaper.

Dann and Martha had to rush to the brewery on Sunday. I was on my own. Where to go? I didn't hesitate for a second. It had to be Deep Ellum. I couldn't think of a better place to while away a lazy Sunday afternoon. I squeezed in at the end of the bar. It was busy, but not deafening. And plenty of light to read my book (The Local, if you're interested). The hours flew by. Aided by generous quantities of Pretty Things 1838 X Ale. Which was drinking wonderfully, drawn from a cooled cask on the bar. I couldn't have held out 10 minutes in Yard House.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying Yard House is the work of the devil. I'm sure plenty have a great time in there. Just not me. I like my pubs intimate and individual. Where the hand of the landlord is visible, even when he isn't physically around. Deep Ellum is very much Max's place. And long may it stay so.




* I know the standard adjective is solid, but I refuse to use that word to refer to something that is irrefutably liquid.

** I also refuse to use the C-word.




Deep Ellum
477 Cambridge Street,
Allston,
MA 02135.
Tel: +1 617-787-2337
http://www.deepellum-boston.com/


Yard House
126 Brookline Avenue
Boston,
MA 02215
Tel: 617-236-4083
http://www.yardhouse.com/MA/boston-restaurant/

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1913 William Younger No. 3

Sorry for the interruption in Let's Brew instalments. A variety of factors, too dull to mention here, were responsible. But I can guarantee you that there will be at least two Wednesdays in a row with recipes. Even better than that, with William Younger recipes.

No. 3 is a funny beast. I can remember it being described as a dark Bitter in the 1970's. I suppose that's no worse than mistaking its 19th-century incarnation for a Pale Ale, which some have. Burton, however odd that sounds for a beer brewed in Scotland, seems the best way to describe it. It shares many features with London KK and, when sold in London, filled the same slot on the bar. Of course, you could just call it a Scotch Ale, however confusing that phrase might be. Though, as you can see in the image to the right, that was what Younger themselves described it as.

Then there's the character of the beer itself. I wish I could tell you what colour the finished version of this beer had. I suspect several different ones, based on my experiences with other Scottish brewers. My guess would be that it was coloured up with caramel several ways to meet the expectations of different markets. But, until I track down a document with colouring details, that's just speculation.

Sometime between 1898 and 1912 there were radical changes made to No. 3's character. The gravity was knocked down a bit, from 1076º to 1067º, but that wasn't the biggest change. That was in the hopping, which dropped from 3 pounds per barrel to just over 1 pound. That's such a drastic change that I wish I had logs for some of the intervening years. I can't believe the drop happened all in one go. It would have been too drastic a change.

New versions of No. 3 also appeared in the same period. The enigmatic No. 3a, which retained a gravity of over 1070º. No. 3 Sc (presumably meaning Scotch or Scottish) which appears to be exactly the same as the standard version. Finally No. 3 btg, the bottling version, which was a touch higher in gravity, 1070º, and the most heavily hopped at 1.75 lbs per barrel.

Weirdly, in the 1930's the hopping rate went up again, even though the gravity had fallen a good bit more. Anyone who drank No. 3 over 30 years would have experienced some very different beers in his glass.






That's me done for now, and here comes Kristen with the recipe . . . . . . .









Kristen’s Version:

So we are moving a bit more forward in time. Up to the turn of the century. Both of these next logs were included in the 1909 book. Each is slightly different as I learn more I make sure and update calculations and such. They are only a bit off though. The big thing you’ll notice about both of these is the amount of adjuncts.

They used grits, which I would personally use instead of flaked maize as the character is quite different. However you’ll have to cook them up first to use them. Its not that much effort really. Just treat them as you would when you are cooking up polenta (www.lmgtfy.com). Then add them to your mash. Take into account the temperature they bring over being hot or cold. The second bit is the use of caramel. Use it as you wish.

The hops were pretty much 100% Cluster however feel free to play around with these as you see fit. Goldings always do a great job. Bullion work pretty nicely as did Challenger. This ferments pretty cool so take note and make sure the yeast doesn’t drop out.

England vs Scotland, part 3g: early 1850's Porter

The beer styles are coming thick and fast now. We're now at Porter. You may have noticed that I'm working my way through in alphabetic order. Guessing what will come next shouldn't be too hard.

I'll start with a few words of explanation about how I've selected that data. London brewers made a variety of Porters in this period. Most of which had no equivalent at William Younger. Keeping Porter, Export Porter, Export India, Bottling Keeping. As beers that were meant to last a long time before consumption, they were naturally more heavily hopped than standard running Porter. Younger's BS wasn't aged and it wasn't brewed for export. Comparing it with Export or Keeping Porter would be like comparing apples and persimmons. Consequently, I've only included London Running Porters.

I can see a similar to phenomenon to that in action with Pale Ale. Porter being an alien style, Younger appear to have copied London brewing practice. There are several points of dissimilarity with the other beers in their range: pitching temperature, length of boil and attenuation all jump right out.

Here's the table:

England vs Scotland early 1850's Porter
Date	Year	Brewer	Beer	OG	FG	ABV	App. Attenuation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)	Pitch temp	max. fer-ment-ation temp	length of fer-ment-ation (days)
27th Aug	1852	Whitbread	P	1056.0	1019.4	4.84	65.35%	10.41	2.88	1.5	1.5	2		64
7th Jul	1854	Whitbread	P	1056.0	1017.5	5.09	68.81%	11.24	2.75	1.5	1.5	2		64
11th Sep	1852	Whitbread	P	1060.9	1017.2	5.79	71.82%	11.55	3.03	1.5	1.5	3		64
24th Jan	1850	Whitbread	P	1061.2	1019.4	5.53	68.33%	12.50	3.26	1.5	2	2	2	64
20th Aug	1853	Whitbread	P	1062.0	1020.8	5.46	66.52%	12.69	3.41	1.5	1.5	2		64
14th Sep	1850	Whitbread	P	1062.3	1017.2	5.97	72.44%	10.58	2.78	1.5	2	2		64
2nd Jan	1851	Whitbread	P	1062.3	1017.2	5.97	72.44%	10.21	2.67	1.5	2	2	2	64
5th Jul	1853	Whitbread	P	1062.6	1018.3	5.86	70.80%	11.32	3.06	1.5	1.5	2		64
18th Sep	1850	Whitbread	P	1062.9	1016.6	6.12	73.57%	11.17	2.90	1.5	2	2		64
31st Jul	1852	Whitbread	P	1062.9	1017.7	5.97	71.81%	11.14	2.95	1.5	1.5	2		64
1st Sep	1851	Whitbread	P	1063.2	1019.4	5.79	69.30%	11.15	3.14	1.5	1.5	2		64
18th Aug	1852	Whitbread	P	1063.2	1017.7	6.01	71.93%	11.22	3.25	1.5	1.5	2		64
8th Sep	1851	Whitbread	P	1063.4	1018.3	5.97	71.18%	11.19	3.13	1.5	1.5	2		64
11th Sep	1850	Whitbread	P	1063.7	1016.9	6.19	73.48%	11.84	3.08	1.5	2	2	2	64
9th Dec	1852	Whitbread	P	1064.0	1018.0	6.08	71.86%	10.18	2.93	1.5	1.5	2		64
9th Nov	1852	Whitbread	P	1064.0				10.08	2.84	1.5	1.5	2		64
16th Aug	1851	Whitbread	P	1064.5	1021.9	5.64	66.09%	11.19	3.12	1.5	1.5	2		64
1st Jul	1850	Truman	Runner	1065.1	1019.7	6.01	69.79%	10.8	2.71					66.5		7
11th Aug	1851	Whitbread	P	1065.1	1020.8	5.86	68.09%	11.11	3.55	1.5	1.5	2		64
20th Sep	1850	Whitbread	P	1065.9	1020.8	5.97	68.49%	11.84	3.09	1.5	2	2	2	64
Average				1062.6	1018.7	5.80	70.43%	11.17	3.03	1.5	1.7	2.1	2.0	64.1		7.0
3rd Nov	1851	Younger, Wm.	BS	1056	1015	5.42	73.21%	23.87	2.86	2.25				63	72	5
11th Oct	1851	Younger, Wm.	BS	1057	1017	5.29	70.18%	21.75	3.08	2.25				64	73	5
28th Feb	1852	Younger, Wm.	BS	1057	1018	5.16	68.42%	23.87	2.93	2.25				64	72	6
15th Nov	1851	Younger, Wm.	BS	1060	1022	5.03	63.33%	23.46	2.61	2.25				63	72	5
22nd Nov	1851	Younger, Wm.	BS	1060	1021	5.16	65.00%	25.26	2.93	2.5				64	73	5
29th Nov	1851	Younger, Wm.	BS	1060	1024	4.76	60.00%	27.37	3.17	2.25				64	71	5
Average				1058.3	1019.5	5.14	68.57%	24.26	2.93	2.29				63.7	72.2	5.2
difference				-4.2	0.8	-0.66	2.47%	13.09	-0.10	0.79	-1.7	-2.1	-2.0	-0.5	72.2	-1.8
Sources:
William Younger brewing records document numbers WY/6/1/2/3 and WY/6/1/2/5 held at the Scottish Brewing Archive
Whitbread brewing records document numbers LMA/4453/D/09/043, LMA/4453/D/09/044, LMA/4453/D/09/045, LMA/4453/D/09/046, LMA/4453/D/09/047 and LMA/4453/D/09/048 held at the London Metropolitan Archives
Truman brewing record document number B/THB/C/052 held at the London Metropolitan Archives

Let's start pulling apart the stitching with hopping rates. It doesn't take an expert to see that there's bugger all difference in the hopping rate per barrel. All the beers, English and Scottish, have about 3 lbs per barrel. In the early 1850's Younger's Porter was hopped at the same rate as equivalent London beers.

Boiling times are more tricky. Because of the different number of worts. London Porters were blended from 3 or 4 worts, which were all boiled for different lengths of time, getting longer as the wort got weaker. Younger's Porter had a single wort. A direct comparison isn't possible. What is clear is that Younger boiled their Porter for much longer than their Ales. About twice as long, to be precise. It looks like they are trying to imitate the long boils of London brewers. What can I say? In the early 1850's Younger's Porter had a longer boil of the first wort than equivalent London beers.

Thankfully, pitching temperatures are dead easy. Almost every beer, English or Scottish, was pitched at 63º or 64º F. I can see no difference. Unfortunately, I don't have the maximum fermentation temperatures for any of the London Porters. But the pitching temperature and max. temperature of Younger's Porters are considerably higher than of their Ales. The pitching temperatures are a good 6º to 8º F warmer. As the temperature didn't rise as much during fermentation, the difference in the maximum temperature is smaller, 4º to 5º F warmer. It again looks as Younger deliberately copied London practice. In the early 1850's Younger's Porter was pitched at the same temperature as equivalent London beers.

Younger's Porter was a the low end of gravity range covered by the London beers. The average OG was a full 4 points lower. Though the average FG was a touch higher. Surprisingly that's not really reflected in the attenuation, which is only a little lower. There's not much that can be said, except: in the early 1850's Younger's Porter had about the same level of attenuation as equivalent London beers.

I think the results are very clear: Younger's Porter was very similar to the Porters brewed in London. There was one enormous difference. The amount brewed per batch. Younger's brew length was just 40-odd barrels. The London ones between 600 and 1,000 barrels.