Berliner Weisse project

One thing I'm never short of is ideas. And enthusisam, or mindless optimism as you might call it.

A nice little Berliner Weisse project is jumping around my head, bouncing of cushions making lights light up and bells ring. All I need to do is fool a brewer into brewing for me. Sorry, select a partner brewer.

Are you a professional brewed who likes sour beer and a challenge? Then get in touch and see if this project is for you.

Take California

Listening to the Propellerheads to get in the mood to write this.

Just back from my California trip. It was many things. Most of them fun, some a bit disappointing. But I met lots of old friends, talked endlessly about beer and other shit.

And met some dead cool new people, visited a new country, observed beards and tattoos, missed out on eating in Japantown and Chinatown in San Francisco, eat oysters in Baja California, bought my son Mezcal in Aladin's cave, rode a commuter train, filled my camera's memory card in Toronado, drank a Heineken recipe brewed by Stone, had my first beer in a bar named Amsterdam, dodged breakfast (mostly), grazed on a barbecue doggy bag for days, photographed more buildings than people, snapped more kettles the faces, spent more on taxis than food, scribbled thoughts at the bar, paid more for orange juice than the accompanying breakfast, stayed in Victorian hotels, drank lots of cask, photographed pints in sexy poses, saw more trams, drank Californian Mild, watched fragments of random baseball games, an England team win a game, took enough photos to recall what the fuck I did, almost failed to find my own event.

Sat back and took a breath.

Was reminded of the Berlin wall, rode in circles around Tijuana, drank in brewery made of containers overlooking the Pacific, tasted the mint in its garden, navigated by a roundabout Moctezuma, had my best meal in years, noted continued barrel fever, was bemused by pricing, remembered to pronounce it Plyny (and why it deserves the hype), learned to dodge San Francisco's slopes, drank Californian Mild in multiple  pubs, walked a beach whose name I can't remember after midnight, grabbed surreptitious snaps in pubs, overheard someone describe taking his dad to a gay bar, learned of reverse commuting, spotted PCC cars in service, discussed the physical act of writing, gave most of my change to a sad looking man, forgot tram photos no longer excite the kids, saw street signs in Japanese, streets without street signs, pagodas, a drug free zone, cracked roads, brightly painted houses, stained glass banker's chique, the homeless piled desolately on pavements, ate tacos from a food cart. Appreciated Americana.

And drank some rather nice beer.

That's the highlights. Now I think about it, that's pretty much covered my trip. Magic. It'll save both me and you lots of pain.

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1952 Strong Black Bess Stout

It’s another of my recipes this week. I realise they aren’t as detailed as Kristen’s, but he hasn’t sent one in a while and I reckon one of my crappy recipes is better than none at all.

What style is this exactly? The style Nazis would struggle to pin it down. Too weak for a Dry Stout, not sweet enough for a Sweet Stout. And definitely not any Stout with American or Imperial in the name. Personally, I’d call it a post-WW II English Stout.

There are quite a few Stouts with similar specs from just after WW II. A gravity in the high 1030’s or low 1040’s, 70-80% apparent attenuation and always only sold in bottled format. But as the 1950’s progressed, many began to evolve into something much sweeter and lower in ABV.

Black Bess was no exception. By 1960 its OG had fallen to 1035º, but it’s FG had risen to 1015º, leaving it a puny 2.5% ABV. Not really very Stout at all. I can only assume that this change was in reaction to drinkers’ expectations. Popular Milk Stouts like Mackeson must have led them to assume English Stout was sweet and weak. Ironically, it was the beginning of the 1950’s that Guinness went in the opposite direction, upping its attenuation for 75% to 85%. 

A few of this drier type of English Stout did cling on, for example that from Home Ales in Nottingham. A beer I’m ashamed to say I never tried, though I spent many happy hours in Home Ales pubs in various Midlands towns.

This beer has two base malts, of which two thirds was mild malt, the other third pale malt. It’s common to see this in beers of the 1950’s, especially darker ones. I assume mild malt was chosen for reasons of economy. And in a Stout, how much can you taste the base malt anyway? Unlike Pale Ales, where the malt needs to shine.

There’s no brown malt, just black and crystal. While London brewers kept faith with brown malt until the bitter end, many regional brewers had already ditched it in the 19th century.

I’ll confess to having simplified the sugars used. No.3 invert does appear in the original, but there’s also an array of proprietary sugars: Dutton’s CP, Durax, CWA and the enigmatic Am. The exact composition of that lot is anyone’s guess. A combination of No. 2 and No. 3 probably is the closest approximation you’ll get. Oh, and some caramel, too. Without it you won’t get a dark enough colour.

That’s me done, so over to me . . . . .

1952 Strong Black Bess Stout
mild malt	3.00 lb	46.15%
black malt	0.50 lb	7.69%
crystal malt 40 L	0.50 lb	7.69%
pale malt	0.50 lb	7.69%
no. 3 sugar	1.50 lb	23.08%
no. 2 sugar	0.50 lb	7.69%
Fuggles 90 min	0.75 oz
Fuggles 60 min	0.75 oz
OG	1036.6
FG	1010.5
ABV	3.45
Apparent attenuation	71.31%
IBU	23
SRM	40
Mash at	154º F
Sparge at	175º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	61º F
Yeast	WLP007 Dry English Ale

Brewing in the 1950’s – foreign barley (part two)

Let’s see, where was I with this series? Getting distracted and ending up writing about something else. Back to the main thread. Barley in the 1950’s.

We’re looking at foreign barley, starting with the most popular, Californian.

“Other foreign malting barleys were usually of the six-rowed type. Although, in general, they are not at present available here, some details are given of their characteristics.

Foreign Malts, Six-rowed
Californian
Of malt made from the six-rowed type of barley there is not a very wide selection. Prior to the war pride of place would undoubtedly be given to Californian, which formed the bulk of the barley selected . . . by brewers to replace our more sunless malt and to make good some of its defects. This preference was not at all surprising since considerable care was taken in the preparation of Californian barley. The malt prepared from it was graded into three definite standards, Superior to No. 1, No. 1 Standard, Californian.”
"Brewing Theory and Practice" by E. J. Jeffery, 1956, page 131.

Doesn't that make you want to whip out your wozzle and give it a toggle? (Maybe better not.) About the different grades of malt from Californian barley. I’ve seen No.1 (and No. 2, for that matter) malts, but the only ones I could find quickly looking in some brewing records were PA (pale ale) or MA (mild ale) malt made from English barley. I’m pretty sure I have seen No.1 Californian somewhere. But I can’t be arsed to look through several thousand brewing records.

Californian barley was certainly popular with London brewers. In the 1930’s it was 20-30% of the malt in most of Barclay Perkins beers. Same over at Whitbread. One a sign it was considered high quality: there’s more of it in Pale Ales than in Mild Ales. As much as 33%. While Milds had no more than 20%.

Now I think about it, the absence of American barley and hops is one of the biggest difference between British beer from before and after WW II. It's a bit like all the GI's buggering off back home.

Here’s some more detail about the posher types:

“The first grade was made from plump and well-grown grains, bright in appearance and nicely graded. It was free from half-grown corns. It was tender to the bite, and, if well malted, had a nice biscuit flavour. Its diastatic capacity was usually high, so that it was suitable to blend to restore a deficiency of that power in some English malt. No. 1 Standard had not the boldness nor the brightness of the first-named sample, and usually had a darkish and somewhat flinty appearance. It was tougher to bite, with occasional hard ends. Nevertheless, the corns were generally satisfactory, and the sample formed a useful brewing material.”
"Brewing Theory and Practice" by E. J. Jeffery, 1956, page 131.

"Biscuit flavour" is what I usually associate with malt from British barley. Sounds like they considered the best Californian close in quality to British. High praise, indeed.

Now the rubbish stuff:

“The last-named grade was a mixture of good, poor and indifferent corns, rather uneven in size and development, many of a flinty nature. It gave a low extract compared with the other samples, somewhere in the region of 86, or even 85. It was used more for drainage purposes in the mash tun than for its actual brewing value. Californian barleys, when specially malted to develop to the utmost their high diastatic capacity, were largely used in the preparation of 'diastatic malt syrups'.”
"Brewing Theory and Practice" by E. J. Jeffery, 1956, page 131.

To put that extract figure into context, good-quality pale malt had an extract in the mid 90’s. They’re talking here in brewers’ pounds per quarter, in case you’re wondering.

They’ve reminded me of another difference between pre- and post-war brewing: diastatic malt extract or syrup. Much more common after the war. Perhaps to compensate for using all British malt with its lower diastatic power. And a stack of sugar, naturally.

Malt from the rest of the world next time.

Ind Coope bottled Pale Ales 1948 - 1960

I warned you I’d be taking a look at Ind Coope’s beers. As Double Diamond has already been mentioned, Pale Ales seem a good place to start.

It’s nice to have so many analyses of Double Diamond. And that also tells me something else: if Whitbread were so interested in it, it must have been a serious player. With a gravity in the high 1040’s, it was definitely in the class of premium Pale Ale. The sort of slot Whitbread White Shield, Bass Red Triangle and Truman’s Ben Truman fell into.

It’s interesting that the gravity went up a few points in 1950, possibly in response to a tax cut that year (from 218s 4d to 198s 5d per standard barrel). Tax went up and down a little in the 1950’s, but hovered around 200s per standard barrel. How odd then that at the same time as there was a fairly substantial cut in tax in 1960 (from 200s 9d to 157s 11d), the gravity of Double Diamond was slashed, but the price remained about the same.

If you look at the price compared to OG, you can also see that they were charging a premium for Double Diamond. It varies between 0.57 and 0.78d per gravity point, while sparkling Ale is mostly 0.50 to 0.57d. As it was heavily advertised, I guess that’s what you’d expect.

Moving on, it looks like Sparkling Ale was renamed Light Ale in the mid-1950’s. I suspect this reflects common usage. There were a variety of names for this type of beer before WW II: Dinner Ale, Light Dinner Ale, Light Sparkling Ale and many more. My guess is that the punters simply asked for Light Ale, no matter what the brewery whose pub they were in stuck on the label. At around 3% ABV, it’s pretty typical of a 1950’s Light Ale.

Ind Coope bottled Pale Ales 1948 - 1960
Date	Beer	Style	Price per pint d	Acidity	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	colour
1952	Coronet Pale Ale	Pale Ale	22	0.05	1035.6	1008.6	3.50	75.84%	22  B
1948	Double Diamond	Pale Ale	26	0.05	1045.2	1009.4	4.48	79.20%	18 B
1950	Double Diamond	Pale Ale		0.06	1045.2	1011.2	4.42	75.22%	21 B
1950	Double Diamond	Pale Ale		0.05	1047.9	1012.3	4.62	74.32%	19.5 B
1950	Double Diamond	Pale Ale	29	0.05	1048.3	1010.9	4.86	77.43%	21 B
1951	Double Diamond	Pale Ale	29	0.06	1047.7	1010	4.91	79.04%	25
1953	Double Diamond	Pale Ale	33	0.05	1048.7	1009.7	5.08	80.08%	23.5
1955	Double Diamond	Pale Ale	32	0.04	1048.5	1012.7	4.65	73.81%	19
1956	Double Diamond	Pale Ale	34	0.04	1048.3	1012.7	4.62	73.71%	20
1956	Double Diamond	Pale Ale	34	0.04	1047.9	1014.1	4.38	70.56%	19
1959	Double Diamond	Pale Ale	32	0.04	1047.5	1011.9	4.62	74.95%	20
1960	Double Diamond	Pale Ale	30	0.04	1038.4	1012.4	3.36	67.71%	18
1950	John Bull Ale	Pale Ale		0.05	1042.5	1012.2	3.93	71.29%	40 + 13
1954	John Bull Ale	Pale Ale	30	0.04	1048.1	1014.8	4.31	69.23%	115
1956	Light Ale	Pale Ale	20	0.04	1031	1010.5	2.65	66.13%	22
1959	Light Ale	Pale Ale	20	0.02	1031.5	1009.8	2.81	68.89%	20
1950	Sparkling Ale	Pale Ale		0.06	1029.7	1007	2.94	76.43%	24 B
1950	Sparkling Ale	Pale Ale	15	0.06	1029.7	1007.4	2.89	75.08%	25 B
1950	Sparkling Ale	Pale Ale	18	0.03	1033.3	1007.7	3.32	76.88%	22 B
1951	Sparkling Ale	Pale Ale	18	0.05	1032.1	1008	3.12	75.08%	25.5
1951	Sparkling Ale	Pale Ale	18	0.05	1032.6	1007.6	3.24	76.69%	21
1954	Sparkling Ale	Pale Ale	24	0.04	1030.5	1008.5	2.85	72.13%	26
Source:
Whitbread Gravity book held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/02/002.

Coronet Pale Ale I take to be a bottled version of their ordinary Bitter. Whether from the Burton or Romford brewery, I’m not sure. Double Diamond, obviously, was from Burton.

Looking at the numbers, I wonder if I’ve got John Bull classified correctly. It’s quite a dark brown in colour, darker than most Milds. Was it really Double Diamond coloured up with caramel? Brewers loved doing that sort of thing.

I’ll be finishing off Ind Coope’s bottled beers next time. Before moving on to the draught beers.

Brewing in the 1950’s – foreign barley

The 1950’s – dontcha just love them? I’m sick to the bottom of my considerable stomach of them. But when did a little thing like nausea make me stop?

Never, is the answer. Grab a theme by the throat, throttle it until near dead, give it a cup of tea, then start throttling anew. That’s been my way. Distracting shiny things and inexplicable amnesia excluded.

I’m making final preparations for my next US trip as I write. Though when you read this I’ll be about to return. You do realise I don’t write my posts on the day they appear? Today’s June 2nd. If nothing changes in the meantime, this will pop up on the blog on June 14th.

Rod back own. For. Insisting on a post every day is – I’ll let Dolores speak here – “That’s stupid, Ronald. Why do you do that? It’s just extra work. Only post a couple of times a week.”

She has a point, though I‘d never admit it.

“Write some posts that don’t take so much work.”

Now there’s advice I might heed.

If all has gone to plan, you’ll be reading this on the final day of my California, er, thingy. Tour, pub crawl, waste of money (Dolores’s opinion there). On the other hand, I could be in a ditch. More likely a gutter.

“Other foreign malting barleys were usually of the six-rowed type. Although, in general, they are not at present available here, some details are given of their characteristics.

Foreign Malts, Six-rowed
Californian
Of malt made from the six-rowed type of barley there is not a very wide selection. Prior to the war pride of place would undoubtedly be given to Californian, which formed the bulk of the barley selected . . . .” "Brewing Theory and Practice" by E. J. Jeffery, 1956, page 131.

Let’s stop there.

See you in two weeks. Or now, as it will be for you. But for me it’s 2nd June 2015, 20:57.

Ind Coope and Allsopp

I hope you’re enjoying my series on breweries in the 1950’s. Because I’m not about to stop. You don’t want to know how much of this type of material I have.

Let’s see what this chairman has to say. How long will it take before he starts complaining about the government?

“IND COOPE & ALLSOPP
THE 37th annual general meeting of The company was held on 16th December, In London, Col. the Rt. Hon. Lord Court hope, P.C, M.C. (the chairman), presiding.

The following is an extract from the chairman's circulated statement:—

Though the Budget provided some relief in reduction of duty partly at the expense of the brewers, the sales decline which I anticipated in my last statement and continued notwithstanding a steadying influence exorcised by the exceptional Warm summer. All connected with the brewing industry must view with concern this continued fall in sales; and this is mainly due to the public grudging the price for the comparatively low strength beers dictated by Excise duty of a very high order. It is further well to bear in mind that the national output of beer at its present level is one not very different from that of the years immediately before the war and is only untamed by a state of full employment. Any falling away from this state must tend to reduce demand, to a level lower than that that has confronted the industry for many years; add to this the Uncertainty of the effect of devaluation on purchasing power over the country as a whole and we cannot escape the confusion that the industry may be confirmed with an exceptionally difficult period.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", page 89.

That’s some class whingeing right off the bat. Nice use of the verb dictate. No sign of resentment there. Surely the fall in sales was mostly due to the government cutting the amount of beer that could be brewed? Or maybe Ind Coope were doing so badly, that they couldn’t even fill their quota.

Just as well everyone had a job. Otherwise they'd be in excrement alley without a change of trousers.

Ind Coope Allsopp was formed when the Romford and Burton breweries merges in 1934. Both had gone into receivership a few years before WW I and forged a marriage of convenience after difficult years. Later, both were part of Bib Sixer Allied Breweries. Ind Coope’s Romford brewery closed in 1992.*

The chairman still hasn’t stopped complaining. If he goes on much longer, I’ll run out of synonyms.

“While our profits have fallen sharply from the artificial level resulting from the combination of the forces of inflation and reduction in strength of beers consequent on limitation of the use of materials, they are still at a level near to that of 1939 with an approximately similar barrelage. This being so it is an appropriate moment to consider to what extent charges on our profits now reflect the effect of inflation. Also - a very important aspect—the extent to which we are already carrying the increased cost of the improved conditions of service of both staff and workpeople prevailing in the more progressive business communities in the country. As to the latter, I have made reference in previous years and need only confirm that there is a comprehensive system of pensions, sickness benefits and welfare arrangements covering all classes of employees. On the former point it is briefly correct to say that depreciation is running at twice the 1939 figure and repairs at three times that figure. In addition, our appropriations to reserve taken together with the provision for replacement of properties are approaching twice those of the years, immediately before the war. You will observe that I have so far spoken with reference to the parent company and I would add that the accounts of the various subsidiaries in the group reflect the adoption of group policy on similar lines so that the group total provision for replacement and appropriation to reserves and increased carry forward amounts to the substantial sum of £401,197.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", page 89.

That’s a great excuse for falling profits. Profits at the 1939 level is a crap performance. The price of beer had more than doubled between 1939 and 1950. I bet he didn’t call it an “artificial level” of profit in the year it happened.

We already treat our workers well, so eff off government. I think that’s what he means.

At least Double Diamond was doing well:

“While we have suffered and are suffering our share in the reduced sales of the industry there are very encouraging factors in the sharply increasing demand for our Double Diamond in particular and for bottled beers in general. The extent to which the latter are appreciated by the public is borne out by a sharp increase in our bottled beer sales and profits; our policy of modernising our plant seems to be bearing good fruit. You will see that our cash and investments are substantially down on last year. This is largely due to the carrying; out of the deferred repair programme which we judge two-thirds completed, and to capital expenditure in the brewery, bottling stores and makings designed to produce economies in production particularly in manpower and fuel. In addition, substantial sums have been spent on converting limited licences to full licences, replacing worn-out furniture in hotels and licensed houses and purchases of a limited number of trade investments and properties when opportunities have occurred at attractive prices. Increasing cash is also continually being absorbed in stocks, and in particular in bottles and cases required for our increasing bottled beer trade. While much remains to be done to complete our programme in the breweries we are satisfied that our present cash resources should be sufficient for the purpose and for the limited expenditure on our properties now permitted by government policy. The extent to which further cash may be needed to finance rebuilding and reconstruction to which we are committed by local authorities and justices when government policy permits is difficult to forecast and must await appreciation when the time arrives.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", pages 89 - 90.

The growth in bottled sales could also be due to the crap quality of their draught beer. When most sales were in tied pubs, brewers had pretty much a captive market. I can imagine situations where deliberately sabotaging your draught beer so more of the punters would drink pricier bottled.

It would worry me as an investor that the company had just about enough money to cover the fuck all the government would let them spend on doing up their pubs. And that pub furniture was considered a substantial capital investment.

Double Diamond. I remember that from keg pumps spitting stuff I never drank. Though the cask version, Burton Ale was rather pleasant. Used to drink it in the Rose and Crown in Baldo.

You want to know more about Double Diamond, don’t you? Go on. Admit it. "A Double Diamond works wonders - so drink one today" was their slogan. You couldn't say that nowadays. I can still remember the jingle. The power of advertising: I can remember the tune and slogan, was never even vaguely tempted to try the beer.

Analyses of DD next time. And some more of their beers.




* “Century of British Brewers plus” by Norman Barber, 2005, page 34.

Barclay Perkins water treatment in 1920

Fun, fun, fun. Look for it elsewhere. I'm still discussing water chemistry.

Cask beer in the 1950’s – the humble bung

Remember my insanely-detailed series of posts about cask beer in the 1950’s? Well I’m back with more, having found an insanely-detailed article about shives and spiles.

They’re pieces of equipment 100% specific to cask beer. The only even vaguely similar beer, Bayerischer Anstich, handles venting differently. Often they use a brass tap in the equivalent of the bung hole, turning it on when they need to let air into the cask.

“THE HUMBLE BUNG
By D. M. Edmonds
A shive, we are inclined I to assume, is just a bung. So it is; but it is also a piece of wood which remains in contact with the beer from racking till the time of tapping. Thin is quite long enough for an undesirable flavour to be imparted to the beer, or for a considerable amount of beer to be lost through leakage. The condition in which draught beer reaches the customer is very largely dependent on the choice and proper use of shives and hard (tight) and soft (porous) spiles.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", page 117.

It’s a good point about the shive being in contact with the beer all the time it’s in the cask. That in itself limits the materials it can be made from. We learned earlier of the importance of the proper use of spiles.

Here’s something about the physical requirements of a shive:

“What then are the properties which a good shive mast have, and, which will determine the choice of timber for its manufacture? In the first place it must be soft, to avoid undue wear on bushes and bung-staves. It must, for obvious reasons, be tasteless, odourless and non-porous, and there must be no leakage through the side grain. In addition it should break "short," in order to allow of easy knocking away of the centre portion for spiling, but it should not be too brittle.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", page 117.

See? It needs to be soft so you can bang it in without damaging other bits of the barrel and forms a good seal. Also you don’t want it adding any flavour to the beer.

And which wood makes the perfect shive?

“The material which most nearly fulfils all the above conditions is the heart- wood of the Appalachian poplar, known in the trade as canary-wood, or American bung-poplar. Unfortunately this has been unobtainable in this country in recent years, though a little is now being allocated for the use of the brewing trade. The best substitute for bung-poplar is Finnish birch, and this is the wood of which most good quality shives are being made here to-day. It is slightly harder and more brittle than canary-wood, but imparts no flavour to the beer, and is perfectly; satisfactory in all other ways.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", page 117.

Unlike with barrels, an American wood was perfect. But obviously the war would have messed up the supply of that. And I can’t imagine wood from Finland was available in the war years, either. Especially as Finland was on the wrong side for much of it.

What about British wood? Was any of that suitable? Sort of.

“Home-grown hard-woods, such as sycamore or beech, are sometimes used. The former is satisfactory, though inclined to be knotty and slightly porous. It is, however, very difficult to obtain in sufficient quantities. Beech is too hard, and is subject, to "dote." This is a fungus, causing decay, which is recognisable by black and cream-coloured vein-like markings in the timber affected. It causes porousness, but is not otherwise a serious defect, as any harmful bacteria associated with it will be destroyed in the kilning process described below.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", pages 117 - 118.

Sycamore was knotty, porous and there wasn’t enough of it. Far from perfect, then. Beech was likely to be infected and was so hard it would eventually damage your barrels. That sound even less suitable.

Next time we’ll look at how shives were made.

Benskin’s beers 1944 - 1960

Here, as promised, are Benskin’s beers for the immediate post-war years.

It looks like pretty much a full set of their beers, which is nice. There’s a reason for that. Watford being just outside London, it was on Whitbread’s patch. So a competitor, and quite a large one as they had 600-odd pubs. They were bound to have attracted Whitbread’s attention.

Let’s start with the strongest, Colne Spring Ale. Notice something strange about it? A really high degree of attenuation for a beer of its strength. That screams one thing at me: Brettanomyces. It’s hard to see how you could get the FG so low without Brettanomyces playing a part. As you can see, it wasn’t cheap at 5 shillings a pint. Then again, it was four times the strength of their weaker beers.

What else is there? A bog-standard looking Brown Ale. It looks very much like a bottled version of the X Ale. And look there – the IPA is one of the weakest beers. Looks very much in the Southern, low-gravity styles. Light Sparkling Ale seems to have had its name chopped down to just Light Ale in the mid-1950’s. Around 3% ABV is what you’d expect it to be.

The Stout is an interesting one. It looks like a Scottish one, with attenuation below 50%. You can see that the OG fell and the FG rose as the 1950’s progressed. Sweet and barely alcoholic. A bit like me, really.

Not sure what the beer for the Belgian market was. I can’t read the name. Maybe it’s a Scotch Ale. No, a bit weak for that. Pale Ale, maybe. Why have a Jubilee Beer in 1953? Surely it should be a Coronation Beer?

Moving on to the draught beers, they look, well, normal. I’ve seen weaker ones in the 1950’s.

That’s all for Benskin’s for now.

Benskin bottled beers 1944 - 1960
Year	Beer	Style	Price	Acidity	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	colour
1953	Colne Spring Ale	Barley Wine	60	0.05	1090.7	1008.2	10.95	90.96%	1 + 8
1955	Colne Spring Ale	Barley Wine	60	0.08	1091.8	1011.1	10.69	87.91%	75
1960	Colne Spring Ale	Barley Wine		0.04	1092.2	1007.6	11.25	91.76%	68
1951	Nut Brown Ale	Brown Ale	16	0.06	1032.9	1008.1	3.22	75.38%	11 + 40
1951	India Pale Ale	IPA	20	0.07	1029.3	1006.3	2.98	78.50%	20 B
1944	Bitter Ale	Pale Ale		0.06	1027.6	1008.1	2.52	70.65%	22 B
1956	Light Ale	Pale Ale	19	0.04	1031.4	1009.8	2.79	68.79%	25
1946	Light Sparkling Ale	Pale Ale	13	0.04	1028.9	1004.9	3.12	83.04%	20.5 B
1947	Light Sparkling Ale	Pale Ale	12.5	0.08	1029.4	1008.7	2.68	70.41%	18.5
1947	Light Sparkling Ale	Pale Ale	16	0.08	1029.6	1007	2.93	76.35%	20.5
1951	Light Sparkling Ale	Pale Ale	16	0.08	1032.6	1008.1	3.18	75.15%	18 B
1951	Brown Stout	Stout	20	0.06	1039.2	1013.6	3.31	65.31%	1 + 18
1953	Brown Stout	Stout	21	0.07	1036.6	1014.2	2.89	61.20%	1 + 11.5
1953	Brown Stout	Stout	21	0.04	1037.6	1018.3	2.48	51.33%	275
1955	Double Stout	Stout	24	0.04	1036.2	1018.6	2.26	48.62%	250
1955	Double Stout	Stout	22	0.02	1036.1	1018.3	2.29	49.31%	275
1950	???? Ale Bottled in Belgium	Strong Ale		0.09	1060.3	1011.3	6.40	81.26%	18 B
1953	Jubilee Beer	Strong Ale	30	0.06	1054	1017.7	4.70	67.22%	14.5 + 40
Source:
Whitbread Gravity book held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/02/002.

Benskin draught beers 1952 - 1953
Year	Beer	Style	Price	OG	colour
1953	X	Mild	13	1031.5	84
1952	Pale Ale	Pale Ale	18	1039	23
1953	Pale Ale	Pale Ale	16	1037.2	18
Source:
Truman Gravity Book held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number B/THB/C/252

Requisitioned Hotels

More of the restrictions and government interference that breweries – and other businesses – had to put up with.

I wonder why the government had requisitioned hotels?

“Requisitioned Hotels
Sir Ian Fraser (Lonsdale, Cons.) asked the Minister of Works how many of the 94 hotels held by his department on 30th September last does he propose to release in time for conversion to normal use in next year's summer holiday season.

Mr. Key: The number of hotels held by my department on 30th September last was 64. Approximately 12 will have been released in time for conversion to normal use by next Summer; of these seven have been released since September.

Sir Ian Fraser: With regard to the remaining 52, in view of the uneconomic) cost of building hotels, and the dollar-earning capacity of this industry, will the right hon. gentleman study each case to see whether he cannot expedite release?

Mr. Key: Yes, and our desire is to release them as soon as possible.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", page 80.

Note the obsession with dollars again. Though who would they be earning dollars from? Surely not Americans.

This might explain a little why hotels were requisitioned:

“REQUISITIONED HOTELS
Ilfracombe Council's Action The General Purposes Committee of Ilfracombe Council on Tuesday decided to ask Brig. C. H. M. Peto, D.5S.0., M.P., to press the War Departments again for the release of Council properties (except the Ilfracombe Hotel) occupied by them in Ilfracombe. Mr. H. Knill said that at Torquay the hotels were being de-requisitioned in time for next season. The Clerk (Mr. R. H. Stevens) said the de-requisitioning at Torquay was due to the fact that the properties had been occupied by the Canadian Air Force, which was returning to Canada.”
North Devon Journal - Thursday 10 January 1946, page 7.

I see the Canadians hadn’t been in any rush to get home.

A very large number of premises were requisitioned – literally thousands:

“REQUISITIONED HOTELS- BIG RELEASE
In the Commons, Mr. Tomlinson. Minister of Works, told Col. Weatley (Con.), that over 3,500 hotels, hoarding houses and restaurants had been derequisitioned since January 1. 1945. Those still retained would be released as quickly as possible.”
Lincolnshire Echo - Tuesday 29 October 1946, page 1.

In some cases, things were getting worse:

“Building Work (Exemption Limits)
Mr. Key (Minister of Works) made the following statement: I have made an order under Defence Regulation 56A reducing from £1,000 to £500 the amount which may be spent without licence on individual properties in the categories of industrial and agricultural building in the 12 months from 1st July, 1949, to 30th June, 1950; the corresponding amount for office buildings, storage buildings and educational buildings is reduced from £1,000 to £100. The new limits will take effect from 1st February next so that work started under the previous limit but costing more than the new limit will not require a licence if it is finished  before 1st February; otherwise an application for a licence should be made in good time before that date.

The order makes no change in the £100 exemption limit for the remaining classes of building.

Captain Crookshank (Gainsborough, Cons.): Can the right hon. Gentleman say what the estimated reduction of capital investment will be as a result of this?

Mr. Key : No, I cannot, but what it does do is to bring this business more under control so that we can keep it in relation to the other things for which we have to give licences.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", pages 80 - 81.

There was a big shortage of building materials. That’s why you needed a licence for large building projects. You can understand now why breweries hadn’t been able to modernise their premises. It must have been very frustrating if you had both the need for work and the cash to carry it out.

Benskin’s Watford Brewery (part two)

We’re back with the report of the chairman of Benskin’s. He wasn’t a happy man.

Here’s some grade A whingeing about the government sticking its nose into his business:

“In July of this year the Licensing Act, 1949, became law, but the Government has not yet enforced all its provisions. These relate mainly to the sale of intoxicants in New Towns, of which there are five in the area of the company's operations. In some of these towns the company is the principal owner of licensed properties and if the Government takes over these houses serious loss of trade may ensue to the company. The Home Secretary announced in Parliament that, subject to advice, he is prepared to allow private enterprise in our trade to compete side by side with State controlled houses. Tills, however, appears to be dependent upon the advice of committees to be set up in Now Towns called New Towns Advisory Committees. It would appear to be only common justice that in view of the interests of the brewing trade and owners of the licensed houses the industry should have representation on such committees. Even from the point of view of the interests of the consumers, and the public at large, it should be obvious that some such representation is desirable if only to give advice on the most efficient, economical and prudent way of building and conducting licensed premises. I think even the most ardent planner would acknowledge that our long years of experience must have some value in this matter.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", page 86.

I’d never heard of the government thinking about taking over the pubs in New Towns. The Big Daddy of them all, Milton Keynes was only 35 miles away and presumably within their trading area. I assume the others were Stevenage, Crawley, Hemel Hempstead, Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield.

They wouldn’t want to lose their pubs in these towns as they were probably some of the largest and most modern in their estate. And profitable. If you see how close many of the New Towns are to Watford – and how close together – Benskin’s faced the possibility of big no go areas around their brewery. I guess he did have a point.

The chairman really didn’t like the idea of government-controlled pubs:

“There is a distinct tendency on the part of municipal corporations and such like bodies to enter into our trade and, in fact, the Government has inserted clauses in now Bills, such as the Housing Bill and the Bill before Parliament dealing with park land and open spaces, encouraging local authorities and empowering them to take this action. It would seem to be very unfair for these bodies to compete with private industry which maintains them by paying rates and taxes.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", page 86.

With all the discussion about the relationship between pub companies and their tenants, this sounds quite topical:

“The relations between brewers and their licensed tenants have been reviewed during the year and brought into line with present day conceptions. For instance, years ago a tenant was subject to three months' notice, and this was considered to be reasonable, but our licensees are now entitled to 12 months' notice except in circumstances of default and they are entitled to be supplied with wines and spirits at ruling current market prices.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", page 86.

Bastards. Having security of tenure and a right to be supplied at the normal price. Pure socialism.

Fancy a look at Benskin’s beers? Yeah, ‘course you do. We’ll do that next.

State management

If there’s one thing that brewers hated, it was government interference in their trade. Especially the pub trade.

A tied estate was an essential element in the brewery’s trade. That’s where the vast majority of their beer was sold. Except for Guinness and, to a lesser extent, Bass. The idea of state management – the government effectively nationalising pubs – scared the shit out of them.

It had happened before. During WW I the government nationalised the beer trade in a couple of key munitions manufacturing areas. In some areas, such as Enfield Lock, the scheme ended soon after the war:

"LIQUOR TRAFFIC (STATE MANAGEMENT, ENFIELD LOCK).
HC Deb 18 April 1923 vol 162 cc2093-4W
Mr. C. ROBERTS asked the Home Secretary whether houses in the Enfield Lock State management district, in which intoxicating liquor has been sold under his authorisation, are now being disposed of; and whether applicants for a licence in respect of these premises will he required to take out a new justices' licence?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN All the properties formerly owned by the State in the Enfield Lock State Management District have now been disposed of. In two of the five licensed premises acquired by the Central Control Board (Liquor Traffic) in 1916, the sale of intoxicating liquor was discontinued by the latter Department, and these premises have been sold as unlicensed premises. The three other premises, where the sale of intoxicating liquor had been continued by the State, have been sold as licensed premises, and, as I understand, no question of applications for new licences has arisen."
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/written_answers/1923/apr/18/liquor-traffic-state-management-enfield

But in Carlisle, where the local brewery and all the pubs were nationalised, state control continued until 1974.

That’s why breweries saw the Licensing Bill as such a threat. This is the chairman of Ansell’s:

“The Licensing Bill.—During the year we have seen the Licensing Bill fight its way on to the Statute Book to the resentment both of our licensees and our customers. Part I of the Licensing Act, as it now is, provides for the State management of the licensed trade in all new towns.

Fortunately, the spontaneous opposition of the trade and the public had its effect on the Government and resulted in important modifications of the original Bill.

The fact remains, however, that the Government has obtained wide powers which, with the growth of new towns, constitutes a serious encroachment on the freedom of our industry. It will be necessary for us to watch with great vigilance any attempts at infiltration, whether by State management or municipalisation, and to resist unwarranted attacks designed to damage the structure of the industry or to limit our freedom to develop on the lines which have been so effective in the past.

It has always been your company's policy, and, indeed, that of the trade, to give its loyal support to whatever Government is in power. That will always be so. But if any Government at any time introduces legislation prejudicial to your company's interests then your company, in line with the rest of the trade, will seek to protect itself as best it may. We have no political colour as a trade. We serve the public; we support the Government of the day; but we are bound to protect our own interests.”
"Brewing Trade Review, 1950", page 84.

The brewers didn’t have anything to fear. Because the Labour government which had come up with the proposals lost power the following year.