25% off my Lulu books

until the end of 18th August with this code:

TWODAY14

It's an even better deal than the last one. I doubt you'll get a better - take the plunge and buy Porter! or Numbers!

Barclay Perkins Bookstore

Offline in Newark

I've been offline for a few days while visiting my brother. His is one of the three remaining houses in Europe without an internet connection.

It was interesting to watch my kids cope. Of course, having smart phones, they weren't as offline as me. The three drillion TV channels my brother receives went some way to mitigate the lack of wifi.

"Why is Dutch television so crap?" Lexie asked me.

"Because the government hate us." Though really it's UPC's fault.

The net-free days taught me something: that I waste a lot of time pissing around on the web to no great purpose. Following idiotic forum discussions. And don't get me started on social media. Mostly just time-occupying bollocks. It was relaxing to read a newspaper and watch TV with the kids instead. And visit the odd pub, let's not forget that. Not much point in going to Britian if you're not going to down a few pints.

Now I only visit once a year, the changes to Newark are all that more obvious. Some are incomprehensible. Like the axing of all buses after 6 PM. Or the ten houses they're managing to cram onto the car park of the former Turks Head. Others pretty neutral: the arrival of a Pound Pub or the Crown and Mitre becoming the Flying Circus. Even ggo ones, like the Horse and Gears reopening as a Blue Monkey pub.

Best is that now both kids are over fifteen, I can take them into pretty much any pub during the day. Makes my life easier and means there are options other than Wetherspoons. Not that there's anything wrong with Wetherspoons. It's just nice to have more options.

An afternoon pub-crawling around Nottingham highlighted the change in the British beer scene. Or more accurately Britain's pub scene. BEcause it's there thingts have changed the most. The pubs we hit made this very obvious. But I'll be writing about that in more detail later. Here's something to ponder. The best beer I had the whole trip was served in the most old-fashioned pub.

Best of all, it was dead easy to avoid that craft keg shit and drink proper, low-carbonated, full-flavoured cask beer. And cask beer of all sorts. Despite what the more doctrinaire and destructive end of the crafterati might hope, cask beer is holding its own. Even in the modern, trendy sorts of places. Lots of handpulls and plenty of beer in decent nick.

Away from the pub there was lots to drink. Henry, a schoolfriend who plans on opening a brewery, brought me a crate of various homebrewed beers. Pretty well all from historic recipes of mine. Good stuff, though I couldn't manage to get through it all.

Anyway, I'll be boring the kecks off you for a few days with my holiday tales of little import. Then it'll be back to the numbers.

Wenlock Porter quality 1922 - 1923

We're very nearly done. Just Whitbread to go after this. When did I start this series? It seems like several lifetimes ago.

In keeping with tradition, I'll start with some random shit about the brewery. It's an example of how the same news can be interpreted very differently. First, the pessimistic view:

"WENLOCK'S LOW EARNINGS.
A sharp decline in profits was experienced during the past year by the Wenlock Brewery Co., but earnings are still ample for the maintenance of the dividend reserve allocation and the carry forward. Net profit totals £109,343, as compared with £122,047 last year, and the ordinary dividend is again to be 17.5 per cent. Reserves again receive £50,000, and the carry forward is from £118,266 to £126,359."
Derby Daily Telegraph - Monday 09 December 1929, page 9.

Now it's the turn of the optimist:

"Good Brewery Share.
A big expansion has taken place in the business of the Wenlock Brewery Company in recent years. 1918 a capital bonus of 10 per cent, in War Bonds was distributed, and in the following year shareholders received a capital bonus of 25 per cent, in Ordinary shares. A dividend of 10 per cent., tax free, was paid down to 1926. For 1927 the rate was raised to 15 per cent., and for the past two years the distribution has been 17.5 per cent., tax free. In respect of the year to October 31 last net profit amounted to £109,344. The earnings on the £250,000 of Ordinary capital in issue were over 40 per cent. In each of the past five years £50,000 has been allocated to reserves, which now total £475,000. As the company's assets stand at £1,734,425. compared with share and debenture capital of £674,890, its great financial strength is apparent. The Ordinary £1 shares at 80s are an attractive investment."
Dundee Courier - Friday 18 July 1930, page 2.

I side with the optimist. Earnings were only down 10% compared to 1928. Considering what a disastrous year 1929 was for the world economy, I don't think they were doing badly at all. Wenlock performed pretty well all through the 1920's, with reasonable profits and good dividends. Take a look at an overview:

Wenlock Brewery profits and dividends 1920 - 1929
Year	net profit	brought in	carried forward	dividend Ordinary shares	to reserve
1920	£46,882	£16,569	£14,382	10%
1921				10%
1922				10%
1923	£62,365		£36,478	10%	£15,000
1924	£72,105	£36,478	£51,083	10%	£25,000
1925	£84,198	£51,083	£52,731	10%	£50,000
1926	£112,986	£52,731	£83,267	10%	£50,000
1927	£119,201	£83,267	£97,469	15%	£50,000
1928	£122,047	£97,469	£118,266	17.5%	£50,000
1929	£109,343	£118,266	£126,359	17.5%	£50,000
Sources:
Gloucester Citizen - Wednesday 22 December 1920, page 6.
Aberdeen Journal - Wednesday 10 December 1924, page 11.
Dundee Courier - Wednesday 10 December 1924, page 2.
Aberdeen Journal - Tuesday 08 December 1925, page 11.
Western Daily Press - Wednesday 08 December 1926, page 10.
Aberdeen Journal - Wednesday 07 December 1927, page 10.
Dundee Courier - Thursday 06 December 1928, page 2.
Dundee Courier - Friday 18 July 1930, page 2.

Now we're done with the boring financial stuff, let's get on with the main business: looking at dodgy Porter. Though first I'll tediously review Wenlock's performance so far. Their Mild performed well, finishing third of seventeen and averaging 1.17. A mid table seventh of fourteen was all their Burton could manage, though it did still average 1. So far their Pale Ale has been the most disappointing, coming ninth of fifteen and averaging just 0.09.

Wenlock's Porter is one of the weakest, averaging less than 3% ABV. The rate of attenuation is also poor, several points below the average. But none of that tells us much about the Porter's quality.

The big question now is: how dodgy is their Porter?

Wenlock Porter quality 1922 - 1923
Year	Beer	FG	OG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	Flavour	score	Price
1922	Porter	1015.6	1034.1	2.38	54.25%	fair	1	6d
1922	Porter	1007.6	1033.6	3.37	77.38%	quite sour	-2	6d
1922	Porter	1008.5	1035	3.44	75.71%	v poor	-2	6d
1922	Porter	1010	1034.5	3.17	71.01%	v poor	-2	6d
1923	Porter	1015.2	1035.2	2.58	56.82%	fair	1	6d
1923	Porter	1011.4	1033.9	2.91	66.37%	good	2	6d
1923	Porter	1011	1033	2.84	66.67%	poor	-1	5d
1923	Porter	1011	1034.5	3.04	68.12%	thin	-2	6d
1923	Porter	1011.8	1034.8	2.97	66.09%	v fair	2	6d
Average		1011.3	1034.3	2.97	66.94%		-0.33
Source:
Whitbread Gravity book held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/02/001

Pretty dodgy. Less than half the samples - four of nine - get a positive score. And there are 4 scores of -2. On the upside, two examples scored +2. The scores average out to a disappointing -0.33.

My advice to time travellers is my favourite: drink Mild! (In Wenlock pubs.)

Change in Beer production in the German customs area 1872 - 1881

If the title didn't put you off, all I can say is: you're my perfect reader.

I'd planned pointing out all sorts of clever stuff. Then I thought: you're not stupid. You can see it for yourself. Why should I condescendingly lead you by the hand?

Change in Beer production in the German customs area 1872 - 1881
Year	Reichssteuergebiet		Bayern		Württemberg
	hl	% change	hl	% change	hl	% change
1872	16,102,179		10,905,836		4,197,274
1873	19,654,903	22.06%	11,256,208	3.21%	3,995,056	-4.82%
1874	20,494,914	4.27%	12,079,760	7.32%	3,596,144	-9.99%
1875	21,358,228	4.21%	12,084,910	0.04%	3,662,418	1.84%
1876	20,873,379	-2.27%	12,347,153	2.17%	3,879,006	5.91%
1877/78	20,360,491	-2.46%	12,205,377	-1.15%	3,801,519	-2.00%
1878/79	20,371,925	0.06%	12,122,483	-0.68%	3,067,305	-19.31%
1879/80	19,984,613	-1.90%	12,152,532	0.25%	3,172,634	3.43%
1880/81	21,136,031	5.76%	11,821,915	-2.72%	3,396,292	7.05%
1881/1882	19,244,000	-8.95%	11,826,000	0.03%	3,396,000	-0.01%
change 1872 - 1882		19.51%		8.44%		-19.09%
1885/86	22,105,000	14.87%	12,655,000	7.01%	2,879,000	-15.22%
1890/91	29,374,000	32.88%	14,427,000	14.00%	3,508,000	21.85%
1891/92	29,695,000	1.09%	14,490,000	0.44%	3,454,000	-1.54%
change 1882 - 1892		54.31%		22.53%		1.71%
1892/93	30,186,000	1.65%	15,104,000	4.24%	3,749,000	8.54%
1893/94	31,290,000	3.66%	15,025,000	-0.52%	3,478,000	-7.23%
1894/95	30,916,000	-1.20%	15,186,000	1.07%	3,493,000	0.43%
1895/96	34,337,000	11.07%	16,034,000	5.58%	3,885,000	11.22%
1896/97	34,904,000	1.65%	16,206,000	1.07%	3,796,000	-2.29%
1897/98	37,707,000	8.03%	16,982,000	4.79%	4,100,000	8.01%
1898/99	38,465,000	2.01%	17,455,000	2.79%	4,069,000	-0.76%
1899/1900	39,320,000	2.22%	17,739,000	1.63%	4,128,000	1.45%
change 1892 - 1900		32.41%		22.42%		19.51%
change 1882 - 1900		104.32%		50.00%		21.55%
change 1872 - 1900		144.19%		62.66%		-1.65%
Source:
Jahresbericht über die Leistungen der chemischen Technologie 1882, 1883, page 871.
https://archive.org/stream/jahresberichtbe02gottgoog#page/n900/mode/2up

Change in Beer production in the German customs area 1872 - 1881
Year	Baden		Alsace-Lorraine		Total
	hl	% change	hl	% change	hl	% change
1872	926,957		812,454		32,944,700
1873	1,094,634	18.09%	987,752	21.58%	36,988,553	12.27%
1874	1,133,865	3.58%	889,191	-9.98%	38,193,874	3.26%
1875	1,066,661	-5.93%	763,313	-14.16%	38,935,530	1.94%
1876	1,050,841	-1.48%	706,694	-7.42%	38,857,073	-0.20%
1877/78	1,098,500	4.54%	803,136	13.65%	38,269,023	-1.51%
1878/79	1,085,020	-1.23%	787,905	-1.90%	37,434,638	-2.18%
1879/80	1,085,655	0.06%	788,542	0.08%	37,183,976	-0.67%
1880/81	1,155,450	6.43%	982,659	24.62%	38,492,347	3.52%
1881/1882	1,155,000	-0.04%	932,000	-5.16%	36,663,000	-4.75%
change 1872 - 1882		24.60%		14.71%		11.29%
1885/86	1,244,000	7.71%	691,000	-25.86%	39,822,000	8.62%
1890/91	1,679,000	34.97%	837,000	21.13%	49,925,000	25.37%
1891/92	1,643,000	-2.14%	875,000	4.54%	50,268,000	0.69%
change 1882 - 1892		42.25%		-6.12%		37.11%
1892/93	1,714,000	4.32%	912,000	4.23%	51,795,000	3.04%
1893/94	1,710,000	-0.23%	907,000	-0.55%	52,528,000	1.42%
1894/95	1,728,000	1.05%	869,000	-4.19%	52,311,000	-0.41%
1895/96	1,914,000	10.76%	997,000	14.73%	57,299,000	9.54%
1896/97	2,192,000	14.52%	937,000	-6.02%	48,169,000	-15.93%
1897/98	2,741,000	25.05%	964,000	2.88%	62,649,000	30.06%
1898/99	2,947,000	7.52%	1,058,000	9.75%	64,164,000	2.42%
1899/1900	3,095,000	5.02%	1,128,000	6.62%	65,621,000	2.27%
change 1892 - 1900		88.37%		28.91%		30.54%
change 1882 - 1900		167.97%		21.03%		78.98%
change 1872 - 1900		233.89%		38.84%		99.19%
Source:
Jahresbericht über die Leistungen der chemischen Technologie 1882, 1883, page 871.
https://archive.org/stream/jahresberichtbe02gottgoog#page/n900/mode/2up

Must be pretty obvious what's important. Don't disappoint me by asking questions.

OK, I'll tell you a bit. In the whole Empire beer production almost exactly dubbled between 1882 1872 and 1900. But the vast majority of that growthcame after 1882. But that growth was very unevenly distributed. The Reichssteuergebiet was a  big winner with growth 45 points above the average for the Empire.

Biggest loser was Württemberg, where output actually fell. While neighbouring Baden saw massive growth, especially after 1890 and was clsoing in on Württemberg. Bayern also lost ground, with growth 36 points below average.

My conclusions? A shift in the focus of German brewing from the South to the North. But also a period of general quite rapid growth of beer output.

Austrian beer output by º Balling in 1888 (part three)

I realise I've been ever more number-obsessed than usual recently. Must be the warm weather.

We're looking at a final set of three Austro-Hungarian provinces: Galicia, Silesia and Hungary and Siebenbergen, Funnily enough, these are also contiguous territories, amking up the bulk of the northeast of the Empire. But very different from each other in many ways. Galicia was predominantly Polish and Ukrainian speaking, Silesia was a mix of Germans and Czechs, while in Hungary and Siebenbergen Hungarian, Roumanian and Slovak were spoken, with odd clumps of German speakers scattered around.

So it shouldn't come as a shock that the gravity of the beer these provinces brewed was also diverse. But first some general comments. The three provinces combined produced 1,505,278 hl of beer, or 11.5% of the total for the Empire. Pretty pathetic when you realsie that between them they were home to 23.7 of the 40 million people living in the Empire in 1888. That's about 70%.

This table shows just how pathetically small beer output was per head. Apart from tiny Silesia:

Beer output per head of population in 1888
Province	population	beer output	litres/head
Hungary	16,781,800	490,831	2.92
Galicia	6,370,800	708,373	11.12
Silesia	590,500	306,074	51.83
Empire	40,066,600	13,142,429	32.80
Source:
http://www.populstat.info/

Here's the proper table:

Austrian Beer output by º Balling in 1888 (hl)
º Balling	Galicia	%	Silesia	%	Hungary and Siebenbergen	%	Total	%
6	0		0		0		2,233	0.02%
7	0		0		0		54	0.000%
8	0		0		0		0	0.00%
9	40,856	5.77%	3,517	1.15%	108	0.02%	278,431	2.12%
10	262,745	37.09%	81,168	26.52%	31,698	6.46%	7,226,651	54.99%
11	240,066	33.89%	172,436	56.34%	36,259	7.39%	1,924,339	14.64%
12	147,901	20.88%	35,162	11.49%	143,647	29.27%	2,126,679	16.18%
13	13,191	1.86%	12,723	4.16%	228,490	46.55%	1,173,621	8.93%
14	627	0.09%	362	0.12%	56,419	11.49%	254,212	1.93%
15	524	0.07%	66	0.02%	3,014	0.61%	148,318	1.13%
16	405	0.06%	460	0.15%	196	0.04%	4,973	0.04%
17	1,197	0.17%	0		0		1,497	0.01%
18	189	0.027%	180	0.059%	0		441	0.003%
19	0		0		0		200	0.002%
20	624	0.09%	0		0		732	0.01%
22	48	0.01%	0		0		48	0.00%
total	708,373	5.39%	306,074	2.33%	490,831	3.73%	13,142,429
active breweries	174	8.96%	44	2.27%	88	4.53%	1942
inactive breweries	6	2.07%	9	3.10%	30	10.34%	290
average output per brewery	4,071		6,956		5,578		6,767

Starting with Galicia, here 10º is the most popular strength accounting for 37% of production. 11º follows closely on 34%, then 12º on 21%. In Silesia 11º is first with a 56% share, followed by 10º on 27% and 12º on 11%. Hungary is the oddest looking, with 13º having a 47% share, 12º 29% and 14º on 11%. Unsurprisingly, Silesia shows similar preferences to Bohemia and Moravia, provinces which share a modern country, the Czech Republic, with it. Not sure what to make of Galicia. Hungary just liked stronger beer.

Here's the final table, grouping the gravities together to match (approximately) Schankbier, Lagerbier, Märzen/Export and Bock.

º Balling	Galicia	%	Silesia	%	Hungary and Siebenbergen	%
6 to 10	303,601	42.86%	84,685	27.67%	31,806	6.48%
11 to 12	387,967	54.77%	207,598	67.83%	179,906	36.65%
13 to 15	14,342	2.02%	13,151	4.30%	287,923	58.66%
16 to 22	2,463	0.348%	640	0.21%	196	0.04%

What does it tell us? That Galicia produced a large percentage of the Empire's Bock. Otherwise they liked Schankbier and Lagerbier. It was a similar story in Silesia, with 95% of output in those two classes, but with a somewhat larger preference for the latter than Galicia. Whereas in Hungary Märzen/Export was far and away the most popular with Lagerbier a long way behind.

I'm still not quite done with my Austro-Hungarian number-wrangling. Bet you're glad to hear that.