Barclay's London Lager

War. I just keep finding new ways it's influenced British brewing. Sometimes very subtly. This one is particularly subtle.

Barclay Perkins were the first of the large London brewers to take a plunge into the Lager pool. Fittingly, it was Lager that helped to keep the brewery afloat in the 1950's. In 1956 Lager was their biggest seller, accounting for 20% of sales*. Very unusual for the time. And when most of their Park Street brewery was closed in 1969, the Lager brewery remained open for several more years.

"The interesting announcement is made by Messrs. Barclay, Perkins & Co., Ltd., that they have taken a new departure in brewing a lager beer termed "Barclay's London Lager." We understand that the firm have experimented over a number of years with this type of beer before feeling themselves in a position to attach their name to the new product. The most up-to-date plant is being installed, and the services of the world's acknowledged experts have been commanded. Apart from the delay occasioned in completion of the plant, attributable largely to the industrial unrest of the last few months, it was anticipated that the beer would be ready at the beginning of the present summer. As it is, the output of a temporary installation has been exported to all parts Of the globe, and its reception has we understand, boon remarkably gratifying. English brewers, on the whole, are prone to look askance at lager beer. They believe that the climate and public taste are against it. They are not unmindful, also, of the fact that large sums of money have unprofitably been sunk in like enterprises. On the other hand, it must he recognised that some two-thirds of the total world-consumption of beer is of the lager or bottom-fermentation type. We are, indeed, the only large beer-drinking country that exclusively produces top-fermentation beers. Another factor is that Germany and Austria, who ranked predominant before the war as exporters of lager beer, have lost their markets, and America — third on the pre-war list of exporters of this article — is to-day prohibited from manufacture. Anything which can be done to increase our beer exports is a work of national utility, and the enterprise upon which Messrs. Barclay, Perkins & Co., Ltd., are embarking will he watched with keen interest by the whole of the trade. Quite apart from the export trade, in which they have always specialised, the firm are determined to give to the people of London an opportunity of tasting draught lager beer under the ideal conditions of its being brought directly from the brewery to the cellars of the retailer. Doubtless they do not imagine that any large trade in this type of beer can at present be looked for from the working classes. The potentiality of trade lies with the middle and upper classes, and with that floating population from the ends of the earth which the Metropolis always embraces."
Brewers' Journal 1921, Page 275.

I have evidence of some of those experiments in Lager brewing. Barclay Perkins had a small brewhouse that they used for the less fashionable beers. On March 10th 1915 they brewed there something with the lovely name of Experimental Lager (Dark)**. It had an OG of 1052º and was made using a decoction mash. Two days later they brewed it again, but this time with an infusion mash. They must have enjoyed playing around with the decoction method because in April 1915 they used it to brew an experimental X Ale. Decocted Mild - what a crazy idea.

"large sums of money have unprofitably been sunk in like enterprises" who could they mean? Allsopp, perhaps. This could be one of the reasons British brewers were so late to adopt bottom fermentation. It required a large capital outlay and there was no guarantee than the investment would prove worthwhile in the long run. The happy time for British brewing ended with the outbreak of WW I. Increased taxation and falling consumption had knocked much of the profit out of the industry. Who would want to take such a gamble as building a new Lager brewery when money was tight?

It's odd to read that Barclay Perkins specialised in the export trade. Because I've come across precious little evidence of it, save for the odd mention of Barclay's Stout in Australia. It certainly looks as if it was matters of beer trade that prompted their foray into bottom fermentation. The date of that experiment - 1915 - is significant. During WW I when the normal suppliers of Lager to Britain - Germany and Austria - were no longer able to deliver. The vast majority of British beer imports up until 1914 were Lager from these two countries. As they  were out of the game, it created an opportunity for Barclay Perkins. One they seem to have embraced whole-heartedly. Once the war was over, there was a second opportunity: exports. With the three biggest exporters of Lager incapacitated for various reasons, it was a good time to enter the market. Would they have been so keen on Lager without the war? Probably not.

You have to smile at the part about there being no market for Lager amongst the working classes. How wrong that claim has proved to be.

The choice of name is also revealing and I believe influenced by the war. Barclay's London Lager. Not a fake Germanic name as you might expect, but something clearly and proudly British. The war had provoked a great deal of anti-German sentiment and no-one wanted a German name. Even the royal family changed their surname.

Here's a second article with some details of those early London Lagers:

"BARCLAY'S LAGER BEER.

The Lancet of the 17th ult., reporting on two samples of Messrs. Barclay, Perkins and Co's Lager Beer, "Light" and "Dark" respectively, states that, when analysed, the following results were obtained ;—

	(1) "Light."	(2) "Lager de Luxe."
Original gravity	1052°	1057°
Present gravity	1010.3°	1017.4°
Alcohol by volume (per cent	5.37	5.1
Proof spirit (per cent.)	9.35	8.9
Extractives (per cent.)	4.66	6.35
Acidity as acetic acid (per cent.)	0.09	0.11
Colour (Lovibond 1 in. cell)	6°	47°

"Both these beers, which are stronger than the continental lagers," remarks our contemporary, "were brilliant, in excellent condition, and contained no sediment. They possess the true lager characteristics, are most palatable and refreshing beverages, and have evidently been brewed with the greatest care and skill. Messrs. Barclay are to be congratulated on their enterprise in placing a true "lager" on the market, the more so as such beers are held in great esteem by beer-drinkers with a "refined" palate who can appreciate a sound and wholesome beverage brewed by a method hitherto but little exploited in this country. Medical men have every confidence in recommending these beers as they are fully fermented and matured.""
Brewers' Journal 1922, page 291.

The strength is weird. At a time British beer averaged around 4% ABV, they chose to brew their Lagers not only stronger than that, but stronger than Continental versions. No sediment? Can't be a real beer then.







* Document ACC/2305/1/675 held at the London Metropolitan Archives
** Brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/1/605/1.

Brewing in 1920's Belgium

Much of Belgium was smashed up during WW I. Including many breweries. Others had their copper vessels looted by the Germans. The 1920's were a period of great reconstruction for the Belgian brewing industry.

Luckily a British brewer was on hand to record the efforts of the Belgians to get back on their brewing feet:

"CORRESPONDENCE.
To the Editor of The Brewers' Journal.
Brewing in Belgium.
Dear Sir,—Perhaps a short account of a brewer's "holiday" may interest some of your readers. Being in Ostend the idea arose to take a run round the neighbouring country and see how the brewers of the district were rebuilding their concerns. Dixmude, which remained in memory as one of the most shattered towns of Flanders, seemed a suitable place to make a start, and as the town was entered there appeared a new building, just now perhaps the most notable achievement of reconstruction in a place whose monuments —church and town hall—are merely heaps of ruins. This turned out to be a brewery, and inside was a model of compactness—a little mash-tun of about six quarters capacity commanding a vessel of the Wooldridge system of about 50 barrels, served by a Worthington pump and ejector to produce the vacuum, and alongside a fermenting room with two squares lined with white glazed tiles. Just the system it would appear to suit these small concerns who wish to re-erect a brewery in as small space as possible and with the greatest economy of building, and, as was later proved at a similar brewery in Ostend, capable of turning out most excellent light-top fermentation beers of 1035 deg. gravity or pale ales of 1065 deg. and stouts of 1070 deg.

Little breweries restarted on their old systems did not interest so much, but gave rise to a certain amount of amusement. One produced a beer—which by its slight acidity pleased its clientele—with a yeast that would not ferment unless pitched at 86 deg. Fahr., and no wonder. It consisted of quite as many bacteria and wild yeast as of the more desirable species. This had recently been pointed out to the owner, who thereupon tried a change, and pitched as usual at 86 deg. Fahr. in his wort receiver, running down direct into trade casks to ferment, when to his great alarm the yeast refused to come out through the bung hole, but settled to the bottom. This change from a true top to bottom habit through change of pitching temperature was most interesting to the enquiring visitor, but not to the suffering brewer, although the beer was good. He, like the great majority of his confreres, had no idea of fermentation temperatures in cask and the niceties of his art left him cold ; but why worry when trade was good?

Passing on, the glorious town of Bruges was reached, and here just beside the ramparts a stately old Flemish structure gave not the slightest hint that many of the brewers of the neighbourhood had combined, and in it, erected a plant to produce in co-operation the beer they needed. But such was the case, and inside was a Nathan plant complete seven fermenting vessels of about 120 barrels each with a yeast vessel, all of steel, varnished inside, with double jackets for the brine cooling and concrete outer structure—a plant fitted with the latest devices and capable of about 20,000 barrels a year, constituting a monument of enterprise. Refrigeration was conducted in a room supplied with filtered air and connected with the new Nathan device for settling the worts before running to fermenting vessel, and the writer noticed all needful plant for collecting the C02 for use or liquefying it for sale. Although this brewery had only been running for a fortnight, a delightful glass of cold filtered beer was presented and the decision made to go and taste some more at a cafe in the town. It was bottom fermentation beer produced and finished in ten days from mashing, bright and sparkling, but hardly with the flavour of true lager. But that would not seem to matter in a country that drinks top fermentation beers so largely.

Thus in a delightful run of fifty miles, examples of the two types of breweries which are arising to take the place of those destroyed in war were visited — the one a type of what should be the aim of the little brewer who wishes economically to set himself up again, and the other an example of what co-operation can achieve. Which will prove the more suitable to the country and the more profitable to the owners is a point yet to be decided.

Many corporations of brewers are now being formed, as may be instanced by the prospectuses just issued by eight brewers of Ypres who, with the remaining dozen or so brewers of that town, intend to erect a brewery with an output of about 30,000 barrels a year to take the place of the 20 or so little breweries that used to exist there.

At present it is not known what system this "Brasserie centrale yproise, Société Co-operative" will adopt. But, probably, it will be a top fermentation brewery as are all the smaller concerns.

Yours faithfully,
A London Brewer.
Ostend,
July 2nd, 1921."
Brewers Journal 1921, page 296.

Belgium had a crazy number of breweries before WW I. More than 3,000. Many of those never re-opened, for a variety of reasons. Smashed up buildings, lost equipment, lack of cash, death of the brewer. Others decided to group together and rebuild cooperatively.

Let's start with that brewery in Dixmude. A six-quarter plant is tiny. Enough to brew about 25 barrels at a time. It probably produced no more than a couple of thousand barrels a year. I can visualise the brewery quite well. There are loads of little 1920's breweries in Belgium and I've seen a fair few.

I'm glad the author told us something about the beers brewed in the small Ostend brewery. It's an interesting range, all top-fermenting, of course. Belgium wasn't always a country of strong beers. The further you go back in time, the weaker the average strength gets. A bit like the UK in reverse. So while they brewed a Pale Ale and Stout of reasonable gravity, I'd put money on the light 1035 beer being by far the biggest seller of the three.

The brewer pitching at 86º F is a fascinating example of the primitive nature of some Belgian brewing. Fermenting in trade casks is very 18th century. I'm sure no British brewery was using the technique in the 1920's. I wonder what the beer was? One of the less sour Belgian types, I guess. Sounds like he had an interesting pitching yeast, with all the bacteria and wild yeast. Very, er, Belgian.

The brewery in Bruges sounds much more modern. But, producing 20,000 barrels a year, still pretty small by British standards of the period. In 1914 there were 280 breweries in the UK producing between 20,000 and 100,000 barrels*. It seems to have been brewing a pseudo-Pils. Ten days from mashing to sale? That's a joke for a bottom-fermented beer. I'm not surprised that it didn't have a proper Lager flavour.

There's lots of good stuff on continental brewing in the Brewers' Journal. I'm just OCRing a long article on Scandinavia. Then there's a whole series of articles on Lager brewing. That would keep me going for weeks.




* 1928 Brewers' Almanack, page 118.

The Pattison's Syndicate

I told you I'd be coming to the shadowy syndicate trying to take over the Pattisons business. We'll be getting to them in a minute. First some lighter news - the personal bankruptcy of Robert Paterson Pattison (crazy name, crazy guy).

"THE Estates of ROBERT PATERSON PATTISON, sometimes called ROBERT PATTISON, Distiller and Wine Merchant. Leith, were Sequestrated on the 9th day of March 1899, by the Court of Session.

The first Deliverance is dated the 9th day of March 1899.

The Meeting to elect a Trustee and Commissioners is to be held at twelve o'clock noon, on Saturday the 18th day of March 1899, within Dowell's Rooms, No. 18 George Street, Edinburgh.

A Composition may be offered at this Meeting ; and to entitle Creditors to the first Dividend, their oaths and grounds of debt must be lodged on or before the 10th day of July 1899.

The Sequestration has been remitted to the Sheriff of the Lothians and Peebles at Edinburgh.

All future Advertisements relating to this Sequestration will be published in the Edinburgh Gazette alone.
DAVIDSON & SYME, W.S.,
28 Charlotte Square, Edinburgh, Agents."
THE EDINBURGH GAZETTE, MARCH 10, 1899, page 267.

Short and to the point, eh?

What I don't quite get is how, despite being bankrupt, there was still a trade in Pattison's shares. OK, they weren't going for anything like the £10 they had originally cost. Knowing what I do, I'd have snatched the hand off anyone who offered me a couple of quid a throw for them. Read this and things may become a little clearer:

"PATTISON'S WHISKY FAILURE.
NEW SCHEME.
Considerable interest has been excited, during the course of the past week by what may be called a boom in the preference shares of Pattison's, Limited. Since the 6th March, when the preference shares stood at 14s, the price has steadily gone up. This week the top quotation at which business was done is 48s 6d, and at present they stand a few shillings under that figure. The explanation of this boom. is the rumour of a proposed reconstruction scheme which a London syndicate is said to have initiated. The scheme is understood to take the form of a new company, with a capital of £400,000, which it is said is already underwritten. In consideration of the purchase of the entire business the syndicate propose to pay the secured creditors in full, to give the unsecured creditors 13s 4d in the £, and to allot to the shareholders £6 5s of scrip in the new concern for every £10 shares held at present. The liquidators will require the consent of the Court before any scheme of this kind could be adopted, and while it is stated that a number of wealthy men are interested in it, the scheme is received with some hesitation in commercial circles."
Belfast News-Letter - Wednesday 15 March 1899, page 8.

With the syndicate proposing to give more than 6 quid in new shares for each old £10 share, there was a potential profit if you could pick up the old ones cheaply enough. Of course, that only applied if the syndicate's bid were successful. 

But the price of Pattison's shares jumped up and down on rumours of the syndicate's progress. The court asked it to jump through a few hoops to prove it was serious. When they were reluctant to jump, investors got jittery:

"GLASGOW STOCK EXCHANGE.
EXCITEMENT IN PATTISONS.
WHY THEY FELL AND WHY THEY RALLIED.
Glasgow, Wednesday Evening. Pattisons Preference shares furnished a sensation at the opening to-day, business being done down to 16s, as against 47s. The reason set forth was that the syndicate, which was asked by the Court to lodge £50,000 as a guarantee of good faith, had failed to do so, and had offered only half that amount. Everybody was a seller, Edinburgh quoting even as low as 13s 9d. However, the price rapidly rallied to 28s 3d, and closed at 23s 3d. It would, therefore, look as if the necessary money will be forthcoming to push on the reconstruction. London got some of the shares to-day."
Dundee Courier - Thursday 23 March 1899, page 2.

Just see how the price bounced back up again after the syndicate paid in the £50,000:

"PATTISON'S BUSINESS.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SYNDICATE.
Mr. James Craig, chartered accountant, on behalf of the London syndicate who propose acquiring the business of Pattison's Limited, lodged in the Bank of Scotland yesterday afternoon, in the names of the liquidators and himself, the £50,000 stipulated by Lord Darling as necessary that he might give the liquidators authority to allow the syndicate to examine the books of the firm. On Tuesday the syndicate offered £25,000, but the Judge declined permission at this figure. It is understood that, as the result of this new development, the negotiations for the acquisition of the business will be continued."
Leeds Mercury - Thursday 23 March 1899, page 7.

That good news saw the price of the shares rise on the very last day they could be traded:

"Pattison Preference shares, which, by the way, have been to-day deleted from the Stock Exchange Official Share List, have changed hands from 38s to 42s 6d, closing about the latter quotation. The books of the Company will be closed finally on the 15th prox,, and all dealings now will be settled for special settlement, which has been fixed for the 10th prox."
Dundee Courier - Tuesday 28 March 1899, page 2.

Clearly there were many willing to take a punt on the success of the syndicate. Remember they were offering £6 5s worth of new shares for each old £10 share. So if you could pick up one of the latter for £2, there was more than £4 profit. A pretty good return. But only if the syndicate were successful. If they weren't, the shares were likely to be worthless.

We'll be finding out soon if they were. Successful, that is.

A grand waste of time

Petty bureaucrats. Everyone loves them. This is a great example of paying way too much attention to tiny details.

"Charge Against an Ilkeston Brewer.—
At Ilkeston Petty Sessions yesterday, before the Mayor (Ald. F. Sudbury) and Mr. J. Orchard, Fredk. Lebeter, landlord of the Gladstone Inn, Ilkeston was summoned by Mr. Fox, supervisor of excise' for making a false entry in his brewing book od the 27th February, by stating that the quantity of sugar he intended using in the was 7 lb., when the quantity used was actually 11 lb.—-Mr. A. E. Hopkins was for the defence, and made an application for an adjournment, on the ground that he had not had sufficient time to secure the services of a public analyst on defendant's behalf. He had written to the Board of Inland Revenue asking them to consent to an adjournment, but they had declined to do so. The Bench decided to go on with the case. Mr. Hopkins then raised a technical objection to the Bench trying the case, contending that they had uo jurisdiction in such a case.—After a long legal argument, the Bench disallowed Mr. Hopkins's objection, informing him that he had his remedy in an appeal.—William Thomas Hay, an officer of Inland Revenue, said the book produced was delivered to defendant by witness last September. On the 28th February last he went to defendant's premises to gauge and take samples of the grains and of the sugar used. He also took samples of the malt the same morning, and in the evening he took samples of the worts collected. He identified the samples produced as those taken by him. He forwarded them to Somerset House the same evening.—Cross-examined : He had not previously taken samples from defendant's premises. He did not tell defendant he was going to take samples. He took the malt first, and took it home before he sealed it up. He told defendant what he was going to do with it. He went to defendant's at 12 o'clock, but found defendant had already mixed the sugar with the wort. He told him he should not keep more sugar in the house than he required for a brewing, unless he kept it in a separate room. Defendant fetched him a sample of the sugar. The addition of 4 lb. of sugar would defraud the Revenue of a fraction over 5d. He knew defendant's relative (George Knighton), who was also in the brewing trade, but he had not received quite such good results as defendant from tbe same quantity of malt and sugar.—James Cameron, analyst at the laboratory, Somerset House, said he had had 25 years' experience. He received the samples produced on the 3rd March, all securely sealed. Witness then gave the result of his analysis of the samples, which tended to show that more sugar had been used than the quantity stated.—This was the case for the prosecution.—Mr. Hopkins, for the defence, pointed out that defendant had produced similar results from subsequent brewings since the date ot the alleged offence, and it was unreasonable to suppose that he would go on repeating the offence, when he was fully aware that the authorities were paying special attention to him. Defendant was in the habit of sending for 7 lb. of sugar from a particular shop every week, and when the witness Hay wished for a sample of sugar defendant had to send his boy to the shop for a single pound, as he had none in the house.—George Lebeter, son of defendant, said his father sent him to the Star Tea Company for a pound of sugar on the 28th February. He brought the sugar, and his father gave it to Mr. Hay.—George D. Knighton said he was a brewer, and was brother-in law to defendant. Witness gave the result of his own brewings, showing that he had produced proportionate results to defendant. The Excise had taken samples from his brewing as often as twice in three weeks, and he had invited the excise officers to remain during the whole of tbe brewing.—Alfred White, manager to the Star Tea Company at Ilkeston, said he was in the habit of selling defendant sugar for brewing in quantities of 7 lb. If an odd pound was sent for it might be of a different quality to the 7 lb. Defendant in the first instance bought 1 cwt. of sugar at the latter end of last year.—The Bench, after consulting together, said there was so much doubt in the case that they had decided to dismiss the charge."
Nottingham Evening Post - Friday 30 May 1890, page 3.
http://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0000321/18900530/029/0003

Let's get this straight. The defendant was accused of having used 11 lbs of sugar instaed of 7 lbs in a brew. "The addition of 4 lb. of sugar would defraud the Revenue of a fraction over 5d." That's about 2p in modern money. Or, to put better into context, a pint of beer cost 2d a pint in the 1890's. So Mr. Lebeter had (allegedly) cheated the revenue out of two and a hlf pints of beer. A real master criminal.

You have to wonder whether the excise man had it in for the brewinmg relatives Lebeter and Knighton. He seems to have put a great deal of effort into trying to catch them out. And he still didn't find any real proof. They just guessed for analysis of the wiort that he might have used more sugar. Given the tiny amount he's supposed to have used too much, it's quite possible that he just got a particularly good extract.

The whole circus of a trial must have cost considerably more than 5d. And the case was thrown out for lack of evidence. What a total waste of time and money.

Let's brew Wednesday - 1987 Boddington's ELM

Boddie's brewing logs are a bit dull. 90% Bitter, 10% Mild, eff all else. But there's the occasional weird beer hidden amongst them. Like ELM.

I was excited when I spotted it. As it's clearly another Mild. But what on earth could the EL stand for? My first guess was Extra Light Mild. Then I noticed the colour. It's darker than the standard Boddie's Mild. Funnily enough, it was Kristen who came up with what I believe may be the right answer: East Lancashire Mild.

As soon as he mentioned it, my brain started ticking away. I was sure I could remember a Mild that was specially brewed for Blackpool. This is another of the times I've been grateful for my obsessive nature. Obsessive about collecting beer details. That's why I went through half a dozen editions of the Good Beer Guide ripping out beer gravities. It's proved dead handy. I quick search in my spreadsheet and the answer was spat out: Blackpool Best Mild from Bass's Tadcaster brewery. Brew Ten with added caramel. Sounds lovely.

Why Boddie's should suddenly start brewing this beer, I've no idea. Unless, of course, they'd been brewing it for a long time and then phased it out. Could be that, too. All I know is that it doesn't crop up often in the brewing records.







On that vague note, let's go to Kristen . . . . . .

Kristen’s Version:

Notes: See the Oldham mild (2012.5.9) and Boddies mild (2012.5.16) for notes. Same for all these babies.

England, which is a thirsty country

National stereotypes work both ways. If the English think the Scots are a bunch of pissheads, the opposite is also true. As this little text proves. It also proves that the English drink far more beer than the Scots or Irish. At least in 1833.

"STATISTICS OF BREWING IN SCOTLAND.
There were 216 brewers In Scotland lest year, of whom 33 are In the Edinburgh Collection. Argyll has only 1 ! There are 17,070 licensed victuallers in Scotland, which is one for every 123 persons, young and old, In the country; and though grocers who sell beer are evidently included with innkeepers, the proportion is still very great. England, which is a thirsty country, rejoices in 58,800 victuallers, and 30,900 "persons licensed for the general sale of beer," making an aggregate of 81,700 retailers of beer, which is one for every 170 souls. England has 1,753 brewers, of whom 108 are In London. Of the retailers of beer, 37,000, or nearly one-half, brew their own beer. In Scotland, only 318 out of 17,070, or one in 57, brew their own beer.

In Scotland, 990,000 bushels of malt were used for brewing ia all the sixteen Collections, of which one-tenth is was used by the licensed victuallers ; 432,000 bushels were used in the Edinburgh Collection ; 62 bushels served the two Collections of Argyll, north and south, containing 100,000 souls!

In England, 25,800,000 bushels of malt were consumed In the manufacture of beer, 13,800,000 by the brewers, and 12,000,000 by the victuallers or other retailers.

In Scotland, the malt brewed is at the rate of 4 10ths of a bushel for each person; in England it is 1.75 bushels. Ireland consumed 1,540,000 bushels of malt in her breweries, which is about 2-10ths of a bushel for each person. Of brewed liquor, one Englishman drinks as much as four Scotsmen, or nine Irishmen.

In 1831, there were 928,000 bushels of malt used for brewing in Scotland, of which 834,000 were by the brewers; the rest by victuallers. In 1830, the Scots brewers consumed 740,000 ; but the paper from which this is taken does not mention the victuallers. The increase in the quantity of malt used by the brewers since 1830, seems to have been about one fifth.- Scotsman. "
Morning Chronicle - Thursday 02 May 1833, page 3.

You can probably guess what dre me about this piece. All those handy numbers. And not just for the whole of Scotland, also for Edinburgh.

The numbers tell us that the brewing industry was on a larger scale in Edinburgh than elsewhere in Scotland. While only 33 out of 216 brewers were in the Edinburgh region (15%), 432,000 out of 990,000 bushels of malt were used there (44%). It also gives an idea of the quantity of beer being brewed in Edinburgh. Assuming approximately 2 bushels of malt to a barrel of beer, that comes to 216,000 barrels. That's an average of about 6,500 barrels each.  Which is still pretty small scale compared to London.

You can see that this was a period when a large proportion of beer was still brewed by publicans rather than commercial breweries. Though rather more so in England than in Scotland: 37,000 to just 318. In the next couple of decades publican brewing would decline considerably, but there remained thousands. In Scotland they became pretty much extinct.

Including licensed grocers in the figures for publicans isn't as odd as it may sound. There was a tradition of drinking on the premises in grocers. One that would prove difficult to stamp out even when the laws were changed to prohibit it later in the century.

One Englishman drinks as much as 4 Scotsmen or nine Irishmen? That's definitely no longer true. Unless I happen to be that Englishman.

Beer production 1900 - 1927

Bailey (of Boak and Bailey) has helpfully transformed one of my dull accumulations of numbers into a prettty chart. It's much easier to see the trends in this pictorial form.

I've just noticed that the English line looks rather like the side view of a trench. How appropriate, given the trough represents the war years.

One note. They didn't stop brewing in Ireland in 1922. That's just the year the southern counties became independent.

Drunkenness in Scotland 1913 - 1919

The Scots have a reputation as a bunch of pissheads. Is there any statistical proof? Or is it a terrible slur on their national character?

Not sure I have a proper answer to that. What I can say with some certainty is that during WW I they became a more sober bunch. Not necessarily voluntarily. Here are the figures:

Drunkenness in Scotland.—Mr. Galbraith asked the Secretary for Scotland what was the number of proceedings for drunkenness in Scotland during the calendar year 1913 to 1920, inclusive, distinguishing between proceedings against men and women ?

Mr. Munro: The figures for the year 1920 are not yet available, but the number of proceedings for offences involving drunkenness (exclusive of offences for breach of the peace) for the other years mentioned is as follows :—

Year.	Men.	Women.	Total.
1913	38,443	11,773	50,216
1914	39,306	11,859	51,165
1915	36,438	11,739	48,177
1916	24,388	8,713	33,101
1917	14,922	5,568	20,490
1918	9,168	2,395	11,503
1919	17,722	4,250	21,072

Brewers' Journal 1921, Page 106.

I often talk of contextualisation. This is a perfect opportunity to indulge in a little.

One of the things that talk the wind out of the sails of prohibitionists was the obvious decrease in drunkenness after WW I. A major contributing factor was the fall in strength of beer. That and an economic depression that left many working class families with little cash.

Using the same rhetoric as before the war, the prohibitionists arguments became increasingly out of step with reality. Having failed to achieve their dream of total prohibition, they struggled to keep momentum behind their campaign. Disappointing results in the Scottish local veto polls didn't help. The temperance movement began to fizzle out between the wars. WW II, when the government didn't just ignore their calls for restrictions on alcohol but firmly told them to shut up, just about finished it off.

Is it possible to see a correlation between the strength and quantity of beer brewed in Scotland and the number of convictions for drunkenness? Let's give it a try. To get an absolute figure for the amount of alcohol in the beer, I'm using standard barrels.

Drunkenness in Scotland
Year.	Total.	1913 = 100	standard barrels brewed in Scotland	1913 = 100
1913	50,216	100	1,844,109	100
1914	51,165	101.9	1,983,489	107.6
1915	48,177	95.9	1,739,819	94.3
1916	33,101	65.9	1,619,119	87.8
1917	20,490	40.8	1,425,067	77.3
1918	11,503	22.9	762,264	41.3
1919	21,072	42.0	717,424	38.9
Sources:
Brewers' Journal 1921, page 246.
Brewers' Journal 1921, Page 106.

Looks to me like there's a connection between the number of standard barrels of beer brewed and the number of convictions for drunkenness.

Well there's something WW I achieved: reducing the number of drunks rolling around the street.

Trouble at Messrs. Arrol & Sons, Limited, Brewery, Alloa (part 2)

We're finally returning to the rest of the article* outlined the filth and grime at Arrol's brewery in Alloa. It doesn't make pleasant reading. I'm glad I didn't have to drink in one of their pubs. The chances of getting uninfected beer sound slightly less than zero.

You'll see that they all refer either to equipment that wasn't properly cleaned or failings in the cleaning process. The report was prepared in 1916. recent enough for there to be no excuse for the poor hygiene. Though it's possible that the situation might have been exacerbated by skilled workers being away in the armed forces.

"RACKING MACHINE - 'On taking this machine apart at centre large joint, I found it in a most filthy condition and smelling very acid.'

SUGAR PRIMING PLANT - 'The old wooden vessel at present in use is in a decayed porous condition; also two old wooden collecting vessels. Your Brewer is making arrangements with Excise to dissolve his priming sugar in new steam dissolving vessel situated in copper house, and only requires three small copper-lined collecting vessels with connections. These should be got without delay.'

SUGAR PRIMING - 'This should be made fresh - say every two or three days, and 20 ozs. of Bi-Sulphite of Lime added to every 2 cwts. Of Sugar dissolved, especially in hot weather, as sugar solutions are very apt to go bad. It is also desirable to rinse casks with Bi-Sulphite of Lime before filling with sugar solution.'

CASK WASHING SHED - 'This is in a very bad state with broken flag stones beneath, leaking pipes overhead, and too small for the work to be done.

CASK SIGHTING AND PASSING - 'All casks should be sighted at tap hole with ordinary torch, and if dry, should be put to one side for unheading and hand scrubbing, and the wet or fresh casks put forward for steaming. When dry they should be passed by mirror lamp, and if any yeasty rings are observed around the bunghole the casks should be unheaded and scrubbed by hand.'

CASK YARD - 'Too small for present accumulation of empty casks. These casks require washing, otherwise many of them will go bad lying in the sun.

CLEANSING TANK At present there is no tank in which pipes, plates, cocks, etc.. etc., can be boiled, and I have instructed your Engineer to fit up an old lank lying in Brewery and pointed out by him. This should be finished without delay.'

COLOURING OF BEERS - 'There has been difficulty with some of your customers about colours, and I have now given your Brewer a proper and safe system to work upon.'

FLUSHING OF CELLARS - 'There should be a larger cold water pipe taken into cellars with hose connected so that at least twice weekly a thorough flushing down could be given, as the stench and dirt meantime is very bad indeed.'

BAD BEER - 'There is unfortunately a good quantity of this lying in cellars, and there will be more to come in. This beer is both acid and smelling badly. I think the only thing to do is to get a special indulgence from the Excise and pump the beer up into one of the old condemned fermenting vessels, well away from fermenting wort. The beer can then be sampled and measured by Excise and got rid of as quickly as possible, as it is only spoiling the casks meantime.'"

You get the impression that nothing in the brewery was properly clean. Rotting wooden vessels are really just an invitation to infection. Preparing the sugar primings unhygienically would have ruined all the beer as it was racked. Though, having heard of the state of the rest of the brewery, it had probably already been infected several times over by that time. Hang on, the racking machine was filthy, too. Add one to the number of times beer was infected.

On the other hand, it's good to learn that Arrol's primed casks with sugar. I know English brewers usually did. While Irish brewers primed with partially fermented wort. How widespread were sugar primings in Scotland?


It also sounds as if they weren't keeping their casks clean. Another recipe for disaster. There wasn't enough space to store the casks properly, the building where they were cleaned was dirty and the casks weren't properly checked for cleanliness. You couldn't have done much more wrong if you tried.

And to top it all off, the cellars were dirty and smelly and full of off beer. Why were they hanging on to it? Simple. Because they'd already paid the duty. That's why the report suggests getting the Excise men in to sample it: so that they could get the duty refunded.

Scottish brewers loved colouring their beers differently for different markets. How did that practice start, why and when? It's definitely different from English practice. English brewers did sometimes fiddle with the colour (Barclay Perkins with their Milds, for example) but this was nothing like the several different-coloured versions of each beer that the Scots had. I'm beginning to think that the practice was very widespread.


Next we'll see Mr. Heslop's recommendations for sorting the problems out.









* Journal of the Scottish Brewing Archive Vol. 3, 2001, pages 31 - 36.

Pattisons go into liquidation

It was inevitable that Pattisons would be declared bankrupt. But would they jump or be pushed into liquidation?

Remember all those fancy buildings they had erected? It seems that they hadn't actually paid for them. And the builders wanted their money:

"THE AFFAIRS OF PATTISONS, LIMITED.
An Edinburgh correspondent telegraphed on Saturday last-In the Court of Session an intimation was ordered of two petitions presented to the First Division for the winding up of Patisons, Ltd., under the supervision of the Court. One is at the instance of Mr. James Kinnear, builder and contractor, of Leith; and the other at that of Messrs. Redpath, Brown, & Co., iron merchants, of Edinburgh. Mr. James Kinnear is a creditor to the extent of £1,852 16s, representing the balance of an account due in connection with the erection of new bonded stores in Breadalbane Street, Leith. Messrs. Redpath, Brown, & Co. explain that they are creditors to the extent of £1,189 19s 6d. as the balance of an account for ironwork. The petitioners say that the company is insolvent and unable to pay its debts, and should be wound up by the Court. They suggest that Mr. J. Hamilton Buchanan, of Edinburgh, should be appointed liquidator. The other petition is presented by Mr. John Martin, builder and contractor, Edinburgh, and Mr. P. L. Henderson, architect, Edinburgh. The former is a creditor to the amount of £2,412 16s 4d, and the latter for the sum of £1,042 9s. They ask for a judicial winding up of the company, and suggest that either Mr. Francis Moore, C.A., Edinburgh, or Mr. R. C. Millar, C.A., Edinburgh, should be appointed liquidator."
Belfast News-Letter - Monday 16 January 1899, page 8.

That only adds up to around £6,500 owed by Pattisons. Peanuts compared to the tens of thousands of pounds of shortfall in their accounts. The company, however, would be too quick for them. On 19th January they called a meeting of shareholders and proposed a voluntary liquidation. Note how it's Robert who does all the talking:

"PATTISONS LIMITED.
SHAREHOLDERS' MEETING.
An extraordinary general meeting of the shareholders of Pattisons Limited was held in Queen-street Hall, Edinburgh, yesterday afternoon. Mr. Robert Pattison, chairman of directors, presided, and there was an attendance of about eighty. The directors present were Messrs. Robert and Walter Pattison, the other two members of the board being absent.

At the opening of the proceedings the Chairman said - It falls upon me, as chairman of the directors, to preside at this meeting, and it is with the utmost regret that I do so. There has been circulated, along with the notice calling this meeting, a printed report of the proceedings at a meeting of creditors held on the 6th inst., which report gives pretty full information concerning the company's affairs. Our company carried on business to a large extent on credit, but the directors did not think the credit was of undue amount. It was, however, such an amount that when one of the creditors demanded repayment we could not pay. Every one knows that when he borrows money he is largely within the power of those who lend it, but I never expected to realise in my own person the adage that the borrower is a servant to the lender. I thought I was rich, but now I am penniless. Being unable upon demand to meet our liabilities, the leading creditors met, and called in Mr. Tait and Mr. Murray, the one an accountant in Edinburgh, the other an accountant in Glasgow, and instructed them, with our assent, to make an investigation of our affairs. The business having thus, as it were, being taken out of the directors hands, it is scarcely for me to go into details. The right course is, I think. for me to call upon the accountants to give you such further explanation as may appear to them necessary, and I accordingly beg now to do so.

Mr. Murray, accountant, Glasgow, said it had been suggested that in the preparation of the statement by Mr. Tait and himself there had been considerable delay, and that certain creditors had been benefited by their securities maturing. That had not been the case, and they made no apology for the delay. The creditors had suggested three well-known gentlemen of very considerable experience in the trade to act as a committee along with three to be appointed at that meeting. It would be the business of that committee to consider whether a scheme of reconstruction was possible. If it was possible or practicable, it would be submitted to them in due course.

Mr. Lees asked, as some time had elapsed since the preparation of the balance-sheet, if any material change had taken place in values.

Mr. Murray said, No.

Mr. Tait, chartered accountant, said that, following upon the procedure at a meeting of creditors, it was decided to go into voluntary liquidation, under the supervision of the Court. Surely, then, it was a little ungracious on the pact of certain creditors to present a petition to the Court for official winding up? (Applause.) There was not a single creditor he had heard of, with the exception of the gentlemen who had presented the petitions, who was not quite satisfied with what had been proposed. Any scheme of reconstruction would receive the careful consideration of the liquidators and the advising committee.

An opportunity to ask questions was then given, but no questions were asked. The Chairman then moved the following resolution:- "That it has been proved to the satisfaction of this meeting that the company cannot, by reason of its liabilities, continue its business, and that it is advisable to wind up the same, and accordingly that the company be wound up voluntarily."

Mr. Walter Pattison seconded, and the resolution was aged to, nem. con.

The Chairman further moved, "That John Scott Tait, chartered accountant, Edinburgh, and Robert Alex. Murray, chartered accountant, Glasgow, be appointed liquidators for the purpose of the winding up, and that each of them may act separately and exercise every power which, by the Companies Act, 1862, and Acts amending and extending the same, is conferred on liquidators."

Mr. Walter Pattison seconded.

. . . . . . . . .

The Chairman further moved as follows:-"That the liquidators be instructed to take the necessary steps for having the liquidation placed under the supervision of the Court of Session, and that a committee of Shareholders and creditors be appointed to advise with the liquidators, the members of such committee to be entitled to remuneration for their services out of the liquidation assets."

Mr. Wright seconded, and the motion was also agreed to.

Mr. John Blair said that the three gentlemen who were named by the creditors were Mr. Jas. Ainslie, Mr. R. S. Grey, and Mr. Arthur Sanderson, and the gentlemen who it was suggested should represent the shareholders on the committee were Mr. Thos. Aitken, Mr. Jas. Wright, and Mr. R. Robertson.

In reply to a shareholder, it was stated that Mr. Aitken and his wife held fifty shares each, Mr. Wright twenty shares, and Mr. Robertson two hundred.

The nominations were approved of.

Mr. Todd Lees expressed the hope that the liquidators and the committee would earnestly consider the question of reconstruction. It was to the advantage of all concerned that there should be reconstruction. If there was a final wind-up he did not suppose the creditors would get more, and probably not as much as under reconstruction, which would probably enable them to get full payment, and the shareholders, both ordinary and preference, would come in pro rata for their interest in the concern. Therefore, he hoped that it would be taken into serious consideration by the liquidators that a large company like that, involving so much money, really ought not to be allowed to go down. (Applause.)

Mr. Tait asked the gentlemen who had been appointed members of committee to wait, so that they might have a meeting and consider some sort of way out of the difficulty.

The meeting then terminated, having lasted forty minutes. "
Leeds Mercury - Friday 20 January 1899, page 7.

Robert Pattison was still in denial. Despite the hole in his company's finances having been confirmed by the accountant's report, he remained incapable of seeing that he had done anything wrong. He ran the business using borrowed money but "did not think the credit was of undue amount". As they couldn't pay it back, clearly they had borrowed too much.

"I thought I was rich, but now I am penniless." That was part of the problem. If Robert Pattison hadn't thought himself rich, maybe he wouldn't have wasted so much money on lavish buildings, extravagant publicity stunts and advertising.

The six-man committee appointed at the meeting was to play the key role in the next phase of the catastrophe: the attempt to reconstruct the business as a going concern. The hope was that creditors would see more of their money back if the firm continued to trade rather than the assets being auctioned off.

So often in this crisis hope and optimism triumphed over good sense. All we'll see when I look at the trading that went on in Pattison's shares after the company went into liquidation. Investors just couldn't believe that the money was gone.

Too large to be allowed to fail. Where have we heard that one recently? It might have been something connected to banks. Coincidentally, it was the banks involved in this case that were really in control of events.

Scottish beer exports 1850 - 1914

It's another case where the title says it all. Not that I have much else to write. A headful of words isn't the reason for writing this.

The real reason is a pretty dull one. I'm worried about losing these figures in the sea of numbers. Once you lose track of figures, finding them again is like looking for a lifeboat bobbing about in a great expanse of ocean. Luck and patience are your only hope.

Here are the numbers:

Scottish beer exports 1850 - 1914 (barrels)
Year	1850	1870	1880	1885	1900	1914
Scotland	21,000	52,000	48,000	65,000	123,000	167,000
UK	135,888	471,684	412,192		510,845
% Scotland	15%	11%	12%		24%
Sources:
Statistics of British commerce by Braithwaite Poole, 1852, page 6
Brewers' Almanack 1928, p. 115
A History of the Brewing Industry in Scotland by Ian Donnachie, 1998, page 152.

Not much to say except: look at those boom years after 1885. What's interesting is that Scottish beer production peaked in 1900, but exports continued to increase right up until WW I. Which means that exports must have been increasingly important to Scottish brewers.

It's a shame I don't have a matching set of UK exports. Because it looks as if Scotland lagged behind England in exports until 1889, then made a quick spurt at the end of the 19th century to pass England. At least in percentage terms. Scotland would have to wait until the 1920's to overtake England in absolute numbers.

A word of warning about the figures. It's not clear whether those after 1880 are standard or bulk barrels. Except for the UK 1900 figure. That's definitely standard barrels. There shouldn't be too much difference between standard and bulk barrels in this period, as average gravity was close to 1055º.

Stout Brewing in the 1920's

Browsing old Brewers' Journals is a dangerous occupation. I keep finding more fascinating titbits. Often not of the kind I'd been looking for. Searching for Scottish stuff I stumbled on something on Stout. Too good to ignore, so here it is.

In the 1920's Porter and Stout was less important to London brewers than it had been for nearly 200 years. As you can tell from the introduction, younger brewers needed to be reminded of London's role as a centre of black beer production.

"Stout Brewing.

Although in the space of an "Occasional Note" it is not possible to deal very extensively with all the details of stout brewing, nevertheless we may give a Abort and concise series of hints which may prove useful to some of our younger readers. London happens to be a great porter and stout brewing centre, partly  due  to the soft type of water supply available. And the brewers of the metropolis have been no less famous for their black beers than have their confreres of Burton been noted for their sound pale ales. One variety of the article corresponds to an entire malt beverage, whilst an alternative carries various proportions and descriptions of sugar. The composition of the grist also varies very considerably. It was formerly the practice to make up a black beer grist from a mixture of pale, amber and brown malts, but now the Irish method of employing only pale and black (roasted or patent) malt very frequently obtains. Mixtures are still used, however, and below  are given several grists  made up of different proportions of pale and coloured malts:

Pale.	Amber.	Brown.	Black.
80%	-	12%	8%
69%	-	25%	6%
83%	-	-	17%
89%	-	-	11%
45%	25%	25%	5%
60%	-	40%	—
86.5%	12.5%	-	1%

When a very luscious drinking article is desired special sugars are used in the copper, and for priming the finished beer. With reference to the brewing itself, the mashing liquor for a stout brewing should always be boiled, ordinary salt being employed as the saline constituent to the extent of three-quarters of a pound per quarter, the material being intermixed with the mash, as this is being made. The mashing process in the majority of cases embraces a very moderate mash mixture initial of 148 deg. Fahr., quickly raised by underlets and sparging. In connection with fermentation, the attenuation is generally carried down to nearly a quarter of the original gravity of the collected wort. Home brewers fine the beer in bulk and rack a comparatively bright fluid, whereby they are able to employ a liberal quantity of special priming sugar and unfermented wort in the cask.

For Irish  stouts a somewhat different system is in vogue. In the preparation of these beers the black malt used is much less black than that commonly employed in England. The roasting is not carried further than suffices to produce a rich chocolate brown. The Irish brewers commonly use but two kinds of malt, the so-called "black" and "pale," the former, however, being really dark brown, and the latter frequently "pale" only by comparison, in fact it is often so highly dried as to be practically amber. Such malts are finely crushed separately, and used in the proportions of about 23 pounds of black to the quarter of pale for porter, and with a less proportion of black, say 20 pounds for stout. Where the pale malt is of the  highly dried character referred to, the wort produced, even with prolonged mashing, is sufficiently dextrinous to leave enough body in the beer after fermentation, whilst with a view to securing good condition, it is the custom to add to porter and stout, intended for the home trade, a small proportion of strong wort and old beer, at the time of racking. The strong wort, of a gravity of about 1080 deg., and free from yeast, is used in the proportion of about two and a half gallons to a hogshead, two gallons to a barrel, and one and a half gallons to a kilderkin; old beer is added at the rate of about two gallons per barrel. Kept a day or two in store, before going out, the result of this "worting," or "freshing" as it is sometimes called, is to bring the porter or stout into good condition, which, with fair draught, lasts to the end. The use of wort, in this way, though perhaps rather more troublesome than priming with sugar, solution, has distinct advantages where black beer is concerned, for wort being more favourable to yeast production than sugar alone, the result is better condition, whilst at the same time greater fulness is secured.
Brewers' Journal 1928, page 32."

Let's look at those grists first. A large number of different combinations of malts were used when brewing Stout. I've loads of examples from London. Not one matches the grists given in the articles. That doesn't have any examples of pale, amber, brown and black being used together, while I do. And, to make things more complicated, some used other types of mat than those four. Barclay Perkins tended to use MA (mild ale) malt and SA malt instead of pale. and a few breweries threw in some crystal. Take a look:

London Porter and Stout grists in the 1920's
Date	Year	Brewer	Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Attenuation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl
11th Apr	1929	Barclay Perkins	BBS Ex	Stout	1079.5	1028.0	6.81	64.78%	15.00	5.00
21st Jan	1929	Barclay Perkins	BS	Stout	1053.8	1020.0	4.46	62.79%	6.00	1.26
7th Jul	1928	Barclay Perkins	BS Exp	Stout	1071.6	1022.0	6.56	69.27%	14.00	4.29
9th Jul	1928	Barclay Perkins	IBS	Stout	1060.8	1020.0	5.40	67.12%	9.00	2.24
4th Oct	1928	Barclay Perkins	IBS Ex	Stout	1102.6	1039.0	8.41	61.98%	14.19	6.62
4th Oct	1928	Barclay Perkins	TT	Porter	1027.4	1009.0	2.43	67.15%	14.19	0.70
13th Feb	1924	Camden	S	Stout	1045.4	1012.2	4.40	73.17%	6.70	1.29
14th Nov	1922	Courage	Porter	Porter	1032.69	1008.86	3.15	72.88%	7.11	5.83
14th Nov	1922	Courage	Stout	Stout	1043.77	1011.63	4.25	73.42%	7.11	1.91
2nd Feb	1928	Whitbread	ES	Stout	1054.8	1019.0	4.73	65.32%	9.19	2.14
2nd Feb	1928	Whitbread	LOS	Stout	1054.8	1019.0	4.73	65.32%	9.19	2.14
27th Apr	1928	Whitbread	LS	Stout	1055.8	1020.0	4.73	64.15%	9.20	2.12
2nd Feb	1928	Whitbread	P	Porter	1028.3	1008.0	2.68	71.71%	9.19	1.10
27th Apr	1928	Whitbread	S	Stout	1055.8	1020.0	4.73	64.15%	9.20	2.12

Date	Year	Brewer	Beer	Style	pale malt	brown malt	black malt	amber malt	choc. Malt	crystal malt	MA malt	SA malt	roast barley
11th Apr	1929	Barclay Perkins	BBS Ex	Stout	37.20%	9.93%	9.10%	17.51%				26.26%
21st Jan	1929	Barclay Perkins	BS	Stout		4.85%		12.82%		9.62%	44.88%	16.03%	11.81%
7th Jul	1928	Barclay Perkins	BS Exp	Stout		8.23%	9.05%	17.41%				65.31%
9th Jul	1928	Barclay Perkins	IBS	Stout		13.54%		16.11%			28.65%	32.23%	9.47%
4th Oct	1928	Barclay Perkins	IBS Ex	Stout		14.66%	7.79%	14.54%				63.01%
4th Oct	1928	Barclay Perkins	TT	Porter		14.72%	7.36%	14.61%				63.30%
13th Feb	1924	Camden	S	Stout	86.39%		3.73%			9.87%
14th Nov	1922	Courage	Porter	Porter	84.11%	6.11%	9.78%
14th Nov	1922	Courage	Stout	Stout	84.11%	6.11%	9.78%
2nd Feb	1928	Whitbread	ES	Stout	82.20%	7.66%			10.13%
2nd Feb	1928	Whitbread	LOS	Stout	82.20%	7.66%			10.13%
27th Apr	1928	Whitbread	LS	Stout	82.20%	7.66%			10.13%
2nd Feb	1928	Whitbread	P	Porter	82.20%	7.66%			10.13%
27th Apr	1928	Whitbread	S	Stout	82.20%	7.66%			10.13%
Sources:
Courage brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/08/253
Barclay Perkins brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/1/614
Camden brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/9/5
Whitbread brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/09/121

A couple of notes. All these beers contained sugar, too. The percentages are for the malts only. I've assumed a quarter of black and brown malt to weigh 254 pounds, all other malts 336 pounds.

The stuff about salt confirms what I've seen in some brewing records. But the timing of the addition wasn't exactly the same. Barclay Perkins added 2 oz. per barrel to the mash, but also another 3 oz. per barrel in the copper. That's the equivalent of 4 and 6 oz. per quarter, so 10 oz in all. Which is slightly less than the 12 oz suggested in the article.

I found the description of Irish malts particularly intriguing. I already knew that Irish black malt was different from the English version, being not as dark and charred. But I hadn't realised that the pale malt was much darker. It sounds like the elusive "high-dried" malt. Something I've been trying to pin down for years.

I'm grateful that there are some more specific details about the Irish practice of "worting". It confirms that it's basically a form of priming, but with wort instead of a sugar solution. Two gallons per 36 gallon barrel is about 5.5%. Which means each barrel was 5.5% old beer, 5.5% wort and 89% fresh beer. Now wouldn't that be an exciting experiment for you homebrewers? Worting a Stout the Irish way.

One thing that doesn't get a mention is Barclay Perkins technique of boiling a couple of bushels of black with the wort in the copper. I've still never seen this mentioned in any technical literature. Was it unique to Barclay Perkins?