Hop economics

We're back with our Hampshire Farnhams farmer, Mr. Harris.

The more details I see of the financial side of his hop growing, the more I wonder why he bothered with them. It looks as if he almost always made a loss.

"3429. Chairman.] Do you generally send your hops to the Weyhill market? -Generally, I have sent them to the London market occasionally.

3430. Are hops grown in your district generally sent to the Weyhill fair? — The hops grown in our district are generally sent to Weyhill.

3431. Do those grown in the Isle of Wight go there ? —That is in our district.

3432. Sir Edward Dering.] Do you think that the price of the white bine hops, with the best description of farming, does not amount to as much as that of the Kent Goldings? —I do not know. I have been told that the Goldings will fetch more money than the best Farnham hops; that I have been told for a fact.

3433. Chairman.] What is the rent of hop land in your neighbourhood? — I should think from 40s. to £4, or £5 an acre. I put my own at 40s. compared with the rest of my land.

3434. Mr. Bass.] Are you speaking of the country district exclusively? —Exclusively; I do not know the rent of any other lands.

3435. Are there any lands set at £4 10s. an acre in the country district? —Not less. I should say that it would be worth that, supposing the whole land to be in hops; I should not think it is separately let at that. I am taking Binstead, and some of those districts upon the marl land, where they grow large crops, and good. They grow three or four times as much as I can.

3436. Sir Edward Dering.] You do not know of any instances of that? —I do not. Generally speaking, the farmers of our neighbourhood all occupy it with other land, as well as hop land, and it is all let together.

3437. Chairman.] What is the extraordinary tithe rentcharge ? —It is 10s. in my parish; 13s. 4d. in several of the neighbouring parishes.

3438. Have you none higher than that? —I do not know of any higher.

3439. Is hop growing considered a less profitable business than other kinds of farming in your neighbourhood? —I have never found it so profitable; I have found it the reverse, I think.

3440. Is that your experience, when there is a good crop? —It is not a profitable business at all.

3441. Is that the general opinion of the farmers? —I think not. I think, in the best hop districts, that they grow them at an advantage.

3442. Chairman.] Do you consider your land as some of the best hop growing land? —I do not.

3443. Mr. Bass.] Do you consider it some of the worst? —As far as regards hops I do.

3444. Then your land is not an average specimen of the growth of the country? —Not in quantity, and probably not in quality. The quality I think is not equal to some Farnham hops.

3445. Chairman.] How long does a hop garden last in your district? —I have some that have been in hops this 40 years or thereabouts.

3446. Do you know of any that have been in existence longer than that? —Yes, no doubt there are lands which have been in hops longer than that in our neighbourhood. The principal land that I have, has been in hops from 8 to 11 years.

3447. To what circumstance then do you attribute the fact, that hop growing has not been a profitable business, except with men who have particularly good land? —We do not grow a quantity sufficient, according to the prices, to pay our expenses.

3448. Do those who occupy the best lands grow larger crops? —Yes, they do undoubtedly grow larger crops.

3449. How much do they grow on the best lands? —It depends upon the year. I have heard of as much as 25 cwt. being grown to the acre ; but I can not answer for that; I only have it by hearsay; a ton to the acre is sometimes grown.

3450. From your own experience, how much have you grown an acre? —I have grown 18 cwt. an acre.

3451. Mr. Bass.] How much do you grow? — Something about four or five cwt.; I do not like to say I always do. I think that the year before last I was particularly lucky in my crop; but upon the average of years I have farmed my hops in a different way to which I have farmed lately, for I have neglected it very much before.

3452. Chairman.] Do you consider that it is only because you cannot grow such large crops as your neighbours that hop growing has not been a profitable business to you ?— I do not consider that; I cannot consider that it will be profitable to anyone at the price that hops have sold at last year. I know many hops that sold at from 60s. to 70s. generally, and the expense of bringing them to market, the drying and picking, and the duty, amounts to 50s.

3453. Do you think that it would be a benefit to the farmers if there were no Excise duty upon hops? —Yes, I do."
Report from the Select Committee on Hop Duties, 1857, pages 180 - 181.

He seems a very odd  person to have selected to give evidence. He didn't grow very many hops and he didn't seem committed to them as a crop.

It's clear that the famers in Mr. Harris's district only grew hops on a small percentage of their land. Presumably it was just a sideline, rather than their main crop.

How good a yield was four to five cwt. per acre? Not great, it seems, based on these figures:

UK Acres of hops a yield per acre by district 1848
	acres	cwt	yield per acre
Kent	26,063.00	216,325	8.30
Sussex	11,592.25	119,716	10.33
Worcester	7,915.50	30,872	3.90
Farnham	2,898.00	24,007	8.28
Essex	342.00	2,011	5.88
North Clays	361.75	2,194	6.07
rest of Britain	60.50	296	4.89
Total	49,233.00	395,421	8.03
Source:
"An Historical Account of the Malt Trade and Laws" by William Ford, London, 1849, page 229
Notes:
Weight of hops calculated for duty paid, based on a rate of 19s 7.5d per cwt.

to put that in an international context, here are the numbers for US hop-growing regions from a few decades later:

Acreage, yield, and value of hops in the United States in 1890.
States.	Acres.	cwt.	cwt. per acre
New York	35,552	159,475.2	4.49
Washington	5,282	79,309.3	15.02
California	3,796	51,044.5	13.45
Oregon	3,223	34,029.6	10.56
Wisconsin	871	4,107.9	4.72
Other States	238	1,253.6	5.27
Total	48,962	329,220.0	6.72
Source:
"Hop Culture in California" by Daniel Flint, 1900, Government Printing Office Washington, page 24.

I'm surpised to see that the yield per acre was, on average, higher in the UK than in the USA. Though even the worst West Coast region, Oregon, was more productive that the best in the UK, Kent. However, 25 cwt. per acre, which Mr. Harris claimed was possible, seems like a bit much.

Strange that the total area of hops being grown in the two countries is almost identical. Though the figures are a few decades apart.

The report of the committee would have a huge impact on the US hop industry. Because the committee was considering the repeal of two sets of hop dutes. The first and most obvious one was the excise tax on hops. The second was the import duty.  The committee was considering free trade in hops and that's what eventually happened in 1862.

When American hops moved west

I knew that the US hop industry was initially centred on the East Coast, mostly in New York State. Then later mostly on the West Coast. But when did it move?

Luckily, I’ve come across some numbers that answer the question. God, I love numbers. Sometimes I think they’re my only true friends.

The last year when more than 50% of the US hop crop came from New York State was 1892. The percentages I’ve calculated myself.

Estimated hop production of the United States, 1889–1899.
Crop.	Pacific coast		New York		Total
	Bales	%	Bales	%	Bales
1889	106,157	48.78%	111,461	51.22%	217,618
1890	105,619	51.56%	99,229	48.44%	204,848
1891	94,000	45.19%	114,000	54.81%	208,000
1892	105,000	47.09%	118,000	52.91%	223,000
1893	143,000	53.36%	125,000	46.64%	268,000
1894	179,500	56.18%	140,000	43.82%	319,500
1895	180,300	62.11%	110,000	37.89%	290,300
1896	103,000	57.87%	75,000	42.13%	178,000
1897	152,000	66.96%	75,000	33.04%	227,000
1898	151,950	70.04%	65,000	29.96%	216,950
1899	182,000	75.83%	58,000	24.17%	240,000
Total 11 years	1,502,526	57.92%	1,090,690	42.04%	2,594,216
Source:
"Hop Culture in California" by Daniel Flint, 1900, Government Printing Office Washington, page 25.

There’s the when taken care of. What about the why? The same pamphlet has some more detailed numbers by state and they seem to provide the answer.

I’d always assumed it was because of disease on the East Coast. But there’s another reason that leaps out from these numbers:

Acreage, yield, and value of hops in the United States in 1889.
States.	Acres.	Bales.	Value.	bales per acre	price per bale
New York	36,670	111,461	$2,210,137	3.04	$19.83
Washington	5,113	46,185	841,206	9.03	$18.21
California	3,974	36,374	605,842	9.15	$16.66
Oregon	3,130	20,076	322,700	6.41	$16.07
Wisconsin	967	2,381	51,983	2.46	$21.83
Other States	358	1,141	27,829	3.19	$24.39
Total	50,212	217,618	4,059,697	4.33	$18.66
Source:
"Hop Culture in California" by Daniel Flint, 1900, Government Printing Office Washington, page 24.

The two rightmost columns are my own calculations from the other numbers. A bale was 180 lbs, in case you’re wondering. The bales per acre is what tells a story. The yield on the West Coast was way higher than in New York. Though someone must have liked the New York hops as the price per bale is higher.

The numbers for 1890 are similar, except the price of hops was much higher.

Acreage, yield, and value of hops in the United States in 1890.
States.	Acres.	Bales.	Value.	bales per acre	price per bale
New York	35,552	99,229	$6,068,163	2.79	$61.15
Washington	5,282	49,348	2,284,955	9.34	$46.30
California	3,796	31,761	1,521,847	8.37	$47.92
Oregon	3,223	21,174	1,047,224	6.57	$49.46
Wisconsin	871	2,556	142,198	2.93	$55.63
Other States	238	780	41,037	3.28	$52.61
Total	48,962	204,848	11,105,424	4.18	$54.21
Source:
"Hop Culture in California" by Daniel Flint, 1900, Government Printing Office Washington, page 24.

I don’t quite understand why the price of hops had trebled when the total produced wasn’t that much less. 

Chicha

I loved my time in Chile last year. Met loads of cool people including Juan Diego Vásquez of Cervecería Barbarian who gave me a bottle of chicha.

Barbarian Chicha Tumare, 6.1% ABV

Pale yeallow. Quite a spicy aroma, like a Weissbier. but slightly tart. No trace of hops.

"That's really sweet. Don't you think that's really sweet. Sort of has a sourness to it, too."

"I think that's sourness, not sweetness."

"How strong is it?" Looks at the label. "6.1%. and 4 IBUs. They should really increase the typeface on this."

Me: "I really hate searching for the ABV and then discovering it's in a tiny font. I don't want to piss around with stuff under 8%."

"What do you think the acidity is from? Acetic acid?"

"No. From lactic acid bacteria."

"I'm more into neutral beer."

"What's the pH . dad?"

"Did you know that Carslberg first developed the pH scale?"

"Yes, dad. You've told me that before. Don't dodge the question."

"No, idea. Not that low. Nowhere near as sour Gose or Berliner Weisse at 3 and a bit."

"That's pretty acidic dad. Not sour. That's a taste thing."

"It is called a sour ale apparently. Sort of makes sense that it's sour."

"You're writing it all down you bastard."

"Obviously. How else could I write a blogpost every day? I need this filler shit."

"Lexxie - say something crazy"

"I don't know. I'm going out."

"You're getting dead boring, Lexxie."


"Are you sure you don't want to try the Chicha, Dolores"

"Urgh. That's horrible."

"Lexxie: "Sour isn't it? And sweet."

Let's Brew - 1943 Shepherd Neame AK

Here’s what I would call a minimum gravity beer. No matter how low the gravity of a beer, you always paid a minimum of what qwas due on an OG of 1027º. You almost never see a beer weaker than that, just because it made no economic sense.

There had been a change in the grist since the start of the war. An enforced one, I believe. Flaked barley was pushed by the government as a replacement adjunct for flaked maize. Or, in the case of brewers like Shepherd Neame that hadn’t used adjuncts before the war, some of the malt.

How can I make this beer sound nice? It’s very low OG, highly attenuated and very lightly hopped. It’s also very pale. Doesn’t sound that inspiring, does it? But I suppose drinkers were just happy to get any beer during the war. It wasn’t unusual for pubs to run out of beer. This would have been better than nothing. Just about. You weren’t going to get very pissed, though.

All I know about the hops is that they were from the 1939, 1941 and 1942 harvests. Though only 16 lbs. of the 112 lbs. of hops were from the receent season. The rest were fairly evenly split bewtween 1939 and 1941.

It's been a while since I published an AK recipe. I reckon if I keep plugging away I might eventually get it recognised as an official style.

1943 Shepherd Neame AK
pale malt	5.75 lb	91.41%
flaked barley	0.50 lb	7.95%
malt extract	0.04 lb	0.64%
Fuggles 120 mins	0.25 oz
Goldings 60 mins	0.25 oz
Goldings 30 mins	0.25 oz
Goldings dry hops	0.13 oz
OG	1027
FG	1005
ABV	2.91
Apparent attenuation	81.48%
IBU	11
SRM	3
Mash at	153º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	62º F
Yeast	a Southern English Ale yeast

Hop consumption and beer production in 1882

Numbers. numbers, numbers. It's been a while since I did a totally number-based post. As usual, it's something I tripped over while searching for something else.

I was trying to find out what varieties of hops were grown on the West Coast of the USA around 1900. Someone helfully pointed me at a couple of books on the internet. One of which had some lovely numbers. About beer production and hop consumption.

I realised that there was some interesting information that could be derived from these statistcs. The original table only contains the first four columns. I've calculated the others myself. What I find of particular interest is how many hops were being consumed in the UK.

600,000 zentners (a zentner is 50 kg) were consumed in the UK. Slightly more than in the whole rest of Europe. Even though the UK produced approximaately half a s much beer as the continent. The explanation is simple: British beer was for more heavily hopped: 0.76 kg. per hl. as opposed to 0.39 kg.

Everywhere else in Europe, hopping rates were much lower. Even the place with the highest, Bavaria, was way behind the UK with only 0.46 kg. per hl. Surprisingly, the only country to come close is the USA, at 0.70 kg per hl. Though perhaps that shouldn't be such a shock as considerable quantities of British-style beers were still being brewed in the USA.

Hop consumption and beer production in 1882
Countries	Hop Consump-tion. Centner.	Annual Beer Production. Hectoliter.	Annual Beer Consumption. Per Capita.	kg. hops per hl.	% of total hops consumed	% total beer production
North Germany	150,000	21,136,000	61	0.35	10.81%	16.47%
Bavaria	112,000	12,153,000	426	0.46	8.07%	9.47%
Austria- Hungary	98,000	12,212,000	30	0.40	7.06%	9.52%
Belgium	65,000	7,866,000	154	0.41	4.68%	6.13%
France	53,000	7,125,000	24	0.37	3.82%	5.55%
Wurtemberg	31,000	4,197,000	212	0.37	2.23%	3.27%
Russia	25,000	2,863,000	4	0.44	1.80%	2.23%
Netherlands	10,000	1,452,000	40	0.34	0.72%	1.13%
Denmark	9,000	1,140,000	60	0.39	0.65%	0.89%
Baden	8,000	1,086,000	67	0.37	0.58%	0.85%
Sweden	7,000	930,000	21	0.38	0.50%	0.72%
Alsace-Lorraine	6,000	789,000	48	0.38	0.43%	0.61%
Norway	5,000	615,000	28	0.41	0.36%	0.48%
Switzerland	5,000	724,000	30	0.35	0.36%	0.56%
Other States	4,000	533,000	1	0.38	0.29%	0.42%
Continent	588,000	74,821,000		0.39	42.36%	58.30%
England	600,000	39,250,000	118	0.76	43.23%	30.58%
Europe	1,188,000	114,071,000		0.52	85.59%	88.89%
America	200,000	14,261,000	19	0.70	14.41%	11.11%
total	1,388,000	128,332,000		0.54	100.00%
Source:
"Hop Culture in the United States" by E. Meeker, 188w, E. Meeker & Co., page 135.

A reminder

That I released a dead good recipe book last year. A sort of expansion pack for my Home Brewer's Guide to Vintage Beer.

Several of the recipes are ones which were cut from that book for space reasons. But there are also a couple of hundred other historic recipes. That's all it is, really: a whole load of recipes. Though it's rather wider in scope, taking in foreign beers such as continental Lagers, and US Ales. There are 39 Lager reciples and 17 North American. Where else can you find stuff like that?

Get your copy today.

http://www.lulu.com/shop/ronald-pattinson/lets-brew/paperback/product-23289812.html

Constructive Action in Carlisle

In addition to repressive measure such as Sunday closing and "spirit-less Saturdays, there was also an attempt to implement constructive measures that would help stop the workers getting too pissed.

Some of them actually sound quite sensible. It sonds rather like the Gothenburg system:

"B. Constructive Action
The constructive policy, under Direct Control, comprised—

1. Provision for the sale of food.
2. Structural improvements to licensed promises.
3. the beginnings of a scheme of "counter-attractions" to drink.
4. Provision for the holding of Trade Union meetings elsewhere than on licensed premises.

1. Provision for the Sale of Food.—The vast inrush of a new labouring population was the immediate justification for an extension of facilities for the supply of meals. There was, in addition, the consideration that alcoholic liquor taken with food is less inebriating than when taken alone, a fact with a direct bearing on the question of industrial efficiency. The cafes and restaurants of Carlisle had been established to cater for the wants of residents and visitors in pre-war days, and the public-houses in general were drinkshops only. Presumably another type of building, and provision for the service of meals on a larger scale, were required in the changed conditions of the city."
"The Control of the Drink Trade" by Longmans, Green & Co., London, 1919, page 214.

This was eminently sensible. With large numbers of single men living in lodgings, there must have been quite a demand for meals.

Back in the 1970's, when I started visiting pubs, most really where just drinkshops. It was rare to find any food other than a cheese roll, crisps and pickled eggs. I can't remember a single Leeds pub that I drank in selling hot food.

The situation is very different today, with a large percentage of pubs serving meals. Though the change wasn't from any moral motive, but purely on economic grounds. There wasn't enough money from selling drink to survive. Pubs neede to broaden their offering or close.

"The Board's first step was the opening of the Gretna Tavern on July 12, 1916. This was the old Post Office adapted to a new purpose. It is in the centre of the city and near the railway station. The hall or room where public postal business was transacted became a bar; here beer and wines were sold, but not spirits. The former sorting office is now a restaurant, seating about 180 persons. The kitchens are between the two halls. The restaurant is airy and light, and decorated in a cheerful fashion. Breakfasts were served from 7.30 a.m., and suppers up to 9 p.m.; the Tavern was open between these hours for the sale of food. Liquor was obtainable only from 12 to 2.30 p.m., and from 6 to 9.30 p.m. For the year ending September, 1918, 62 per cent, of the total takings were for food and non-alcoholic refreshment (excluding mineral waters). A visit was paid to the "Gretna" on May 18, 1917, by Their Majesties the King and Queen, who expressed themselves highly interested and gratified that provision had been made in this way for the munition workers resident in and visiting the city."
"The Control of the Drink Trade" by Longmans, Green & Co., London, 1919, pages 214 - 215.

That sounds uncannily like a Wetherspoons, opening early to sell breakfasts. And the fact it was converted from a post office. I find it fascinating that as well as closing pubs, they opened new ones.

It seems to have since undergone a revers Wetherspoons by becoming a bank.

"The London Tavern is in the London Road, an artisan neighbourhood, manufacturing and residential. the building when the Board purchased it was the home of the South End Unionist Club. The Club was transformed into an industrial cafe, similar to, but on a smaller scale than, the "Gretna." The bar is on the ground floor, the restaurant on the first floor. There are large works near at hand, and the London Tavern was established to cater for those of the employees who do not go home for meals."
"The Control of the Drink Trade" by Longmans, Green & Co., London, 1919, page 215.

Again, very sensible providing somewhere for workers to have their dinner.

"In the spring of 1917, arrangements were made for the sale of food in a number of Carlisle public-houses, in addition to the Gretna and London Taverns. the usual hours appointed for the sale of food and non-intoxicants were from 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. on week-days, and from 12 to 2 p.m. and 7 to 9 p.m. on Sundays. To encourage the sale of food, of tea, coffee and cocoa, and of non-intoxicating light beers, in what would otherwise have been solely drinkshops, the Board offered a liberal commission. In the Standard Agreement with their managers the followingclause is included: "The manager shall at all reasonable times supply to customers good and well-prepared food either hot or cold according to demand, and non-intoxicating drinks. As an incentive to managers to encourage the sale of food and such drinks as meat extracts, tea, coffee, cocoa, and fruit syrups, a commission equal to 75 per cent, of the gross profits arising from such sales will be paid to the manager. A commission equal to 25 per cent, of the gross profits arising from the sale of aerated waters and beer substitutes (including light beer which does not contain more than 2 per cent. of proof spirit) will also be paid to the manager. For the purpose of this clause the term "gross profits" shall mean the excess of the selling price of such food and drinks over the purchase price thereof."
"The Control of the Drink Trade" by Longmans, Green & Co., London, 1919, page 215 - 216.

Encouraging publicans to sell more food and soft drinks was a key part of the Gothenburg system. 2% proof spirit is 3.5% ABV, which by 1918 was about the strongest beer that you could find. Happy days for the mangers then, with virtually all beer sales rewarded.

There were also changes at railway stations:

"At Longtown and Annan refreshment-rooms were temporarily provided for the labourers engaged in the erection of the National Factory.   Here no liquor was sold or supplied. Beginning with the winter of 1916-17, coffee carts were placed at the two entrances to the Carlisle station, between midnight and 7 a.m., for the convenience of National Factory workers arriving and leaving by night and early morning trains. In October, 1917, similar facilities were provided outside Mossband station."
"The Control of the Drink Trade" by Longmans, Green & Co., London, 1919, page 216.

Though on a cold morning you'd probably want a nip of rum in your coffee. I guess you had to provide that yourself.

let's Brew Wednesday - 1901 Boddington's IPA

Welcome back Kristen. I’d been sitting on this for a while. I can’t remember why. Maybe it will come back to me.

IPA was Boddington’s top-range Pale Ale. And the direct ancestor of post-WW II Boddington’s Bitter. Though it did undergo a few changes over the years. Such as quite a big drop in gravity.

In 1901, Boddington only brewed two Pale Ales, this beer and an AK. The latter had a classic gravity for the style of 1046º. Their range was completed by four Mild Ales, X, XX, XXX and XXXX, one Strong Ale and a Single and Double Stout. Which is a pretty classic late-19th-century set.

The grist is very simple: just pale malt and invert sugar. The malt being a mix of English and Californian. The invert, well, it could be any type. Though No. 1 is probably the best guess for a beer of this type.

With 10 lbs. of hops per quarter of malt, this was easily their most heavily-hopped beer. The Milds were hopped at about 5.5 lbs. per quarter of malt, the Strong Ale and AK at 8 lbs. per quarter.

There’s not really much else to say about this beer. It’s very straightforward, which is typical of the period. I’m slightly surprised that there’s no flaked maize. Most brewers at the time used 10-15% in their grists.




Time to pass you over to Kristen . . .

Kristen’s Version:
Notes: Really neat eye opener for this one laddies. Such a pale beer well back at the turn of the 20th. Solidly hopped, a bit rounder on the end than ones we’d see today but all and all something that would fit into pretty much any beer bar in the world these days.

Malt: Two pale malts. A bit grainy from the US malt but nonetheless, pick two nice ones. Or a solid one….even if its just all American, Belgian, whatever. Just not pils. For the invert, there is so little in this, and its pale, just swap white sugar for it, you won’t tell the difference. 

Hops: I would mention the 5 different hops they used in this beer except they did the same for every beer they seemed to produce. A blend of the same hops, where there doesn’t seem to be rhyme or reason as to how they are broken down. Just split up for whatever reason. That said, you can really use anything for this. Anything at all as it will sing with the malt. There was no indication of any sort of dry hopping but to me, I think you have to. At least 0.5lb/bbl (4g/L) minimum…frankly, this is the type of beer that could take a giant thumping in the hop back but, then it wouldn’t be this recipe, which is what we are talking about.

Yeast: Pick something that doesn’t attenuation so well and I’d under pitch a touch to to keep her a bit more round on the end. London III really would go swimmingly with this beer. Stay away from anything really minerally I’d say…or weird.

Cask: Standard procedure:
1) let the beer ferment until finished and then give it another day or so. For me right around 5-7 days.
2) Rack the beer to your vessel of choice (firkin, polypin, cornie, whatever).
3) Add primings at ~3.5g/L
4) Add prepared isinglass at 1ml/L
5) ONLY add dry hops at 0.25g/l – 1g/L.
6) Bung it up and roll it around to mix. Condition at 55F or so for 4-5 days and its ready to go. Spile/vent. Tap. Settle. Serve at 55F.

Maximum price of a reputed pint

It seems that the confusion about reputed pints was unwarranted. Because the Procurator-Fiscal was talking out of his bottom when he said that the maximum prices were fixed on imperial measures.

I’ve just gone back and had a look at the regulations as laid out in the Food Supply Manual. And, while it’s true that for draught beer, only imperial measures are specified, that isn’t true for bottles beer. The schedule includes half reputed pint, reputed pint and reputed quart measures.

I don’t quite see how they could be unaware of this in Scotland, as the reputed measures had presumably been included specifically for them.

Scottish drinkers weren’t so keen on the reputed pint, as this letter to an Aberdeen newspaper demonstrates:

“Stout at 10d per "Reputed" Pint.
Sir,- It has taken the Food Controller with his invincible and indisputable power, all his time to keep "even" with that "double-dy'd villain," "the profiteer"; and it would now seem as if the Liquor Controller were having the worst of it with the drink profiteer. This, too, in relation to bottled stout — chiefly.

In pre-war days a so-called "bottle" stout was sold by Mr "Bung" at 4d. It was alleged then — it is still alleged - that you purchased a pint of stout; The consumer, of course, does nothing of the kind. He is victimised every time by a bottle, known in Scotland only, as a "reputed " pint. Its reputation is of the vilest type, for it is no measure any kind. Draught stout, when it can had, id sold by imperial stamped measure: so, too, are spirits various depressing strengths. Why, then, shouldn't bottled stout and beers be put in the same category?

But what one desires to find out more particularly is why stout should go up in price by leaps and bounds the way has done! At present it is selling in public-houses at 10d per "reputed." pint. It jumped from 8d to 10d in a week's time. There seems be "profiteering" and "profiteering", but this licks even fish profits into a cocked hat! Will some one in the "trade " explain? —Yours, etc.,
Bottled Stout,
Aberdeen, 21st May, 1918.”
Aberdeen Evening Express - Wednesday 22 May 1918, page 4.

These are the controlled prices from early 1919:

Maximum prices of beer in the public bar and for off consumption
beer of a gravity	draught	half reputed pint	half imperial pint	reputed pint	imperial pint	reputed quart	imperial quart
under 1023º	3d	2.5d	3d	5d	6d	7d	9d
1023º - 1029º	4d	3d	3.5d	5.5d	6.5d	9d	11d
1029º - 1035º	5d	3.5d	4d	6d	7d	11d	1s 1d
1035º - 1042º	6d	4.5d	5d	7d	8d	1s 1d	1s 3d
1042º - 1050º	7d	5.5d	6d	9d	10d	1s 3d	1s 5d
over 1050º	8d	6.5d	7d	11d	1s	1s 5d	1s 7d
Source:
"Food Supply Manual May 1919", HM Stationary Office, 1919, page 18.

Should I stop buying this beer?

I've always has a soft spot for Brouerij 't Ij. At one time, they were one of the few breweries making interesting beer in the whole of the country. For a while, it was the only brewery in Amsterdam. Now it's just the oldest.

I've drunk their beer regularly all the thirty years that I've lived in Amsterdam. And their labels are good, too. Distinctive, and with an underlying design theme.

You've probably spotted the underlying egg theme. Ij sounds like "ei", the Dutch word for egg. Fun, slightly quirky labels. I really like them.

But when they introduced an IPA, they went with something very different in style.

I don't feel very comfortable with the image. It's also a pretty crap design and doesn't fit with the packaging of any of their other beers.

I've no idea why they came up with this label. It put me off trying the beer at first. Unfortunately. I quite like it. Should I keep buying it? Are my continuing purchases encouragement to keep the current design?

Closing pubs in Carlisle

In the old days, pubs rarely closed because they had no custom. They were forced to close, by local authorities determined to reduce the number of licensed premises.

Closing pubs was seen by some as a way of reducing remptation, by the more fanatical as a way of eventually closing them all. So it's no surprise that reducing the number of licences was one of the tactics they used in Carlisle.

"Purchase area — excluding the Maryport extension1 — four breweries, 207 "on" licences,2 and 20 "off" licences. Up to the end of 1918, of the total of 227 "on" or "off" licences, 104 had been suppressed as redundant or undesirable. In Carlisle, also, the "off" sale of spirits was withdrawn from a number of houses which were not dislicensed. That apart, the sale of liquor ceased entirely in 45 per cent, of the total number of licensed premises in the area.

Take Carlisle alone. In the ten years, from 1905 to 1915, eighteen licences were suppressed. The Board, under State Purchase conditions, speedily made a net clearance of fifty in the city.3 The houses closed were mainly those in back streets or in the narrow courts characteristic of the ancient part of the city, structurally unsuitable and difficult for the police to supervise properly. the simple act of closing houses of this type was a definite contribution to public order.

All "grocers' licences" were abolished. Mixed trading in groceries and intoxicants was stopped throughout the area. There were eight "grocers' licences" in Gretna-without-the-Township and ten in Carlisle District. Of those in Gretna-without-the-Township, seven were discontinued, and in the eighth instance the sale of groceries was abandoned. Of those in Carlisle, seven were discontinued; in the other three instances the sale of groceries was given up.

The concentration of business also made it possible to close two of the four Carlisle breweries.4

2. Further Restrictions on the Sale of Spirits.-—(1) At the request of the Gretna authorities the Board stopped the sale of spirits at Longtown and a few village public-houses near the Factory. The Longtown prohibition took effect in mid-December, 1916, and remained in force until the autumn of 1917.



1 The Maryport extension is excluded from these statistics because the process of transfer from private to public ownership was incomplete at the time of publication.

2 At the close of 1918 there were four licensed proportion in Carlisle which had not boon acquired by the Board, viz. the County Hotel, the Crown and Mitre Hotel, the Red Lion, and the Silver Grill.

3 the actual number of licences suppressed by the Board in Carlisle itself, from July, 1916 to October, 1918, was 53. New licences were given to the Gretna Tavern and the London Tavern; and the Station Refreshment Rooms, which were formerly worked under the County Hotel licence, received a separate licence.

4 These four were the Carlisle Old Brewery, the Carlisle New Brewery, Iredale's, and the Queen's. The two latter were closed.
"The Control of the Drink Trade" by Longmans, Green & Co., London, 1919, page 209 - 210.

Only one of the breweries really remained open, the Old Brewery. The New Brewery was just a bottling plant.

Fascinating which licensed premises weren't purchased. Two presumably nice hotels, what sounds like a posh restaurant and just one that sounds like a pub. Just done a quick search and it seems there was a Red Lion Hotel in Carlisle. Which is a currently a listed building, so I'm guessing it was pretty posh. Looks to me like they only went for the working-class places.

Let's Brew -1940 Shepherd Neame AK

AK, I know what that is: a Light Bitter. So this definitely is a Pale Ale, albeit a fairly watery one.

Appearing around 1850, AK was once brewed by dozens, if not hundreds of breweries. It was a great innovation, being one of the first Running Pale Ales. In the first half of the 19th century, Pale Ales were always brewed as Stock Ales, being matured for many months before sale. AK was lighter, both in body and strength and was sold no more than a couple of weeks after it was brewed.

Remember me mentioning that it was odd that BB, supposedly a Pale Ale, contained sugar? Well, not always. This AK was parti-gyled with BB, but the recipe contains no sugar. It’s all very confusing.

What’s the difference between the AK and LDA, other than half a gravity point? There’s a pretty obvious one. LDA was bottled, while AK was draught. And the AK, not having No. 3 invert, is a good bit paler.

1940 Shepherd Neame AK
pale malt	7.00 lb	99.01%
malt extract	0.07 lb	0.99%
Fuggles 120 mins	0.50 oz
Goldings 60 mins	0.50 oz
Goldings 30 mins	0.25 oz
OG	1030.5
FG	1005
ABV	3.37
Apparent attenuation	83.61%
IBU	19
SRM	3
Mash at	151º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	62º F
Yeast	a Southern English Ale yeast