Merchandise

Did you realise I had merchandise? No, I didn't think so.

For reasons I won't go into, I've be spurred to add some more stuff. DDR-label-based, obviously.

I think I'll get one of these myself.

Berlin Vollbier Hell Coffee Mug
by Kilderkin

Magdeburg Dunkler Bock Coffee Mug
by Kilderkin

A lovely one from the town where I was married:

Eisenach Hell Coffee Mug
by Kilderkin

And one for a beer style specific to East Germany:

Pretsch Doppel Caramell Coffee Mug
by Kilderkin

Donhauser Malzbier Coffee Mug
by Kilderkin

Buy the whole set and be the envy of your friends!

Let's Brew - 1939 Whitbread London Stout

There was some variation in the draught beer classes of London beers. Especially when it came to Stout.

For while some breweries had an 8d draught Stout with an OG of over 1050º, others brewed it as a 7d a pint beer, with a gravity of 1047-1048º. Whitbread belonged to the latter group.

For a brewer who had been brewing Porter since the 18th century, London Stout was a surprisingly recent product. It was first brewed just before WW I, in 1910. It immediately become Whitbread’s second most popular beer, only outsold by their Mild, X Ale.

As with their Porter, chocolate malt has been substituted for black malt. No surprise there, as London Stout was parti-gyled with Porter. At least for the moment. Porter wasn’t going to be around for much longer. Not sure why Whitbread moved over to chocolate malt. Their London rivals stuck with either black malt or roasted barley.

The tiny percentage of oats are there so Whitbread could legally sell some of this as Oatmeal Stout. Legally, if not morally, they were in the clear. All a bit of a con really, though. I wonder if anyone ever tried blind tasting the standard Stout and Oatmeal Stout? And did they cost the same?

The hops were the same, obviously, as the Porter with which it was parti-gyled: Mid-Kents from the 1936, 1937 and 1938 crops; Polish from 1938 and “Old Continentals”. A truly cosmopolitan bunch.

1939 Whitbread London Stout
pale malt	7.50 lb	71.98%
brown malt	0.75 lb	7.20%
chocolate malt	0.75 lb	7.20%
flaked oats	0.09 lb	0.86%
No. 3 invert sugar	1.00 lb	9.60%
caramel 1000 SRM	0.33 lb	3.17%
Hallertau 75 mins	0.50 oz
Fuggles 75 mins	0.75 oz
Goldings 30 mins	1.25 oz
OG	1047
FG	1015.5
ABV	4.17
Apparent attenuation	67.02%
IBU	31
SRM	39
Mash at	149º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	75 minutes
pitching temp	62º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1099 Whitbread Ale

The Screw Stopper problem

During WW II, such a little thing as a screw stopper could impact the ability to produce bottled beer. The shortage of them worsened as the war progressed. On 17th August 1943, Barclay Perkins sent this letter to all their tenants:

“re: Screw Stoppers for Pints and Quarts
The shortage of Screw Stoppers is now becoming acute. If we cannot "get back" the number of Stoppers we send out there must inevitably be a further reduction in the output of Bottled Beer. Will you therefore, please give us your help and endeavour to see that as many Stoppers as possible are returned to us with the empty bottles as quickly as can be managed.

Should you have any surplus Stoppers please telephone Hop 7171 and notify our Order Office. Arrangements will then be made for collection.”
Barclay Perkins Circular Letters held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/01/521/1.

That letter doesn’t seem to have helped much, because just a few months later, on 17th April 1944, there was a further correspondence from the brewery:

“re: SCREW STOPPERS
You may remember that I wrote to you on August 17th, 1943, pointing out that the shortage of Screw Stoppers was then becoming acute. The position is now more serious than it was then, and owing to the fact that we are unable to replace Stoppers which are lost or not returned to us, it may become necessary to make a cut in the supplies of Screw Stoppered Bottled Beers, to as much as 30% of the normal quota if we cannot get back more Stoppers from our customers.

Will you please give us your help as you did before and make every endeavour to see that Bottles are returned to us with Stoppers, and if you have any surplus of Stoppers on your premises kindly telephone our Order Office HOP 7171 and arrangements will be made for them to be collected.”
Barclay Perkins Circular Letters held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/01/521/1.

Why were new screw stoppers unobtainable? I assume because they contained rubber, which was needed for war purposes. Crown corks required none, being constructed of metal and cork.

Brewery profits

Alan McLeod (of a Good Beer Blog) emailed me at the weekend. Would I like to contribute to #MoneyMakerMarch? The concept didn't seem that clear to me. Something about breweries making bucketloads of cash. After an email exchange the concept was no clearer. But I'm not going to let a little detail like lack of comprehension stop me.

WW I was a weird time for brewers. I initially assumed that must have been really bad for them. What with the slashing of pub opening times, restrictions on the amount they could brew, restrictions on the strength they could brew at and controls on the price of beer. Surely this must have impacted their profits severely? Not at all, as it turns out. The war was the financial saviour of many breweries.

The decade before WW I had been a difficult one. The Liberal government had used increased licence duties for pubs and breweries to partially finance social programmes, such as an old age pension.

The increased licence fees suppressed pub prices, which left many breweries overcapitalised as the value of their assets shrank dramatically. Several brewery companies revalued their shares at 10% of their original value.

Massively increased licence fees for breweries, who were charged according to the size of their output, decreased margins at a time when it was difficult to raise the price of beer. Few breweries were doing well in 1914. But the war helped turn that around.

Whitbread is a good example. Despite doing relatively well compared to many of their peers, they weren’t exactly raking money in.

Whitbread Brewery profits and dividends 1912 - 1925
Year	net profit	brought in	carried forward	dividend Ordinary shares	barrels brewed	net profit per barrel
1912	£17,491	£15,828	£12,054	0.5%	988,981	£0.02
1913	£125,792	£12,054	£46,653	1%	901,807	£0.14
1914	£51,256	£46,653	£46,419	0.5%	900,636	£0.06
1915	£72,997	£46,420	£53,649	2%	762,438	£0.10
1916	£45,078	£53,649	£79,379	2%	777,127	£0.06
1917	£198,349	£79,379	£92,404	7%	578,502	£0.34
1918	£204,806	£92,404	£123,057	7%	413,112	£0.50
1919	£232,866	£123,057	£165,136	7%	565,624	£0.41
1920	£242,432	£160,138	£213,124	10%
1921	£209,520	£213,125	£257,639	7%	675,647	£0.31
1922	£226,270	£257,639	£289,580	10%	576,118	£0.39
1923	£222,749	£289,580	£319,531	10%	505,097	£0.44
1924	£217,277	£319,532	£342,489	10%	551,616	£0.39
1925	£246,499	£342,489	£394,076	10%	527,977	£0.47
Sources:
Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer - Monday 05 August 1912, page 10.
Manchester Courier and Lancashire General Advertiser - Friday 01 August 1913, page 5.
Manchester Courier and Lancashire General Advertiser - Friday 31 July 1914, page 4.
Dundee Courier - Friday 06 August 1915, page 2.
Birmingham Daily Post - Friday 04 August 1916, page 7.
Birmingham Daily Post - Saturday 04 August 1917, page 6.
Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer - Tuesday 06 August 1918, page 7.
Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer - Monday 11 August 1919, page 11.
Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer - Saturday 07 August 1920, page 17.
Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer - Saturday 06 August 1921, page 15.
Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer - Saturday 05 August 1922, page 15.
Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer - Saturday 04 August 1923, page 15.
Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer - Thursday 07 August 1924, page 13.
Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer - Friday 07 August 1925, page 15.

In 1912, Whitbread made a mere £17,491 net profit. Given that they brewed just shy of a million barrels that year, it works out to a feeble 4.5d per barrel. Ironically, when their output shrank considerably in 1917, their profits increased considerably from under £50,000 to around £200,000. The profit per barrel shot up even more, to 82d per barrel. Whitbread brewed only around half of their 1914 output in 1917 and 1918, but made for times as much net profit.

At the same time, the dividend paid out on Ordinary shares increased from 2% to 7%. Clearly Whitbread was doing well. It’s ironic that, exactly when restrictions on brewing started to be ever more severe, breweries started making much more money.

The profits brewers were making led to them being denounced as profiteers in some quarters, notably temperance campaigners.


Most of the text in the post is extracted from Armistice!, my definitive book on brewing in the UK during WW I.  Buy this wonderful book.

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1939 Barclay Perkins XX (Light)

It's getting close to springtime and what does that mean? Mild, obviously.  And what better than not just any old Mild, but a Barclay Perkins Mild? Especially as it comes with two colour options.

Strongest of Barclay Perkins Mild Ales was XX. As with X this came in two variations, Light and Dark.

The beers were identical, just that one was coloured darker at racking time through the use of caramel. If you want to convert this recipe to the darker version, just add enough caramel to get the colour up to around 22 SRM.

All of Barclay Perkins Milds had the same basic recipe as they were all parti-gyled with each other. The parti-gyle produced beers at three strengths which were primed and coloured to produce two variants at each strength.

The gravity in the recipe is allowing for the primings added at racking time which raised the effective OG by 2º.

In November 1940, Barclay Perkins rationalised their Milds, dropping the dark version of XX and the pale version of X. They continued to brew, however, Milds at three different strengths.

1939 Barclay Perkins XX (Light)
pale malt	2.00 lb	20.88%
mild malt	3.50 lb	36.53%
crystal malt 60 L	0.50 lb	5.22%
amber malt	0.50 lb	5.22%
flaked maize	1.75 lb	18.27%
No. 3 invert sugar	1.25 lb	13.05%
caramel 1000 SRM	0.08 lb	0.84%
Fuggles 150 mins	0.75 oz
Fuggles 60 mins	0.50 oz
Fuggles 30 mins	0.50 oz
OG	1045
FG	1015
ABV	3.97
Apparent attenuation	66.67%
IBU	23
SRM	16
Mash at	146º F
After underlet	154º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	150 minutes
pitching temp	61º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1099 Whitbread ale

Mashing in 19th-century Scotland

Here's an extract on mashing in the mid-19th century from my wonderful book on Scottish brewing:

http://www.lulu.com/shop/ronald-pattinson/scotland-vol-2/paperback/product-23090497.html 


Mashing
In the first half of the 19th century Scottish mashing schemes were, in general , much simpler than in England, with sparging playing big role.

In the 1840’s, William Younger essentially mashed all their beers exactly the same way, except for Table Beer which was sparged somewhat cooler. This is a typical mashing scheme of Younger’s:

William Younger 1847 80/- Ale mashing scheme
strike heat	178º F
time mashed	20 minutes
time stood	2 hours
1st sparge heat	184º F
2nd sparge heat	180º F
1st tap heat	148º F
2nd tap heat	145º F
3rd tap heat	155º F
Source:
William Younger brewing record held at the Scottish Brewing Archive, document number WY/6/1/2/3.

Note that the sparging temperatures are on the high side. The strike heat varied a little depending on the time of year. The example above is from a cool month. In the summer the strike heat was a couple of degrees cooler.

Compare the above with a mashing scheme for a London Mild Ale:

Barclay Perkins 1845 X Ale mashing scheme
Mash	strike heat	tap heat
1	165º F
2	186º F	146.5º F
3	194º F	148º F
S	156º F	155º F
Source:
Barclay Perkins brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives document number ACC/2305/01/551.

Even though the mashing method is quite different, with two quite hot mashes following the initial infusion rather than a sparge, the tap heats are very similar. The tap heat being the temperature of the wort as it is drawn off from the mash tun.

Let’s take a look at one of the other types of beer being brewed in Scotland at the time, Stout.

William Younger 1851 BS Porter mashing scheme
strike heat	175º F
time mashed	20 minutes
time stood	2 hours
1st sparge heat	188º F
2nd sparge heat	188º F
1st tap heat	146º F
2nd tap heat	143º F
3rd tap heat	130º F
Source:
William Younger brewing record held at the Scottish Brewing Archive, document number WY/6/1/2/3.

Here’s the scheme of a typical London Porter:

Barclay Perkins 1848 Porter mashing scheme
Mash	strike heat	tap heat
1	158º F	146.5º F
2	178º F	161.5º F
3 S	158º F	157º F
Source:
Barclay Perkins brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives document number ACC/2305/01/540.

You can see that the London system of mashing Porter was different for the system used for Ale, with two mashes followed by a single sparge. The sparge temperature is much cooler than for William Younger. Although the first and second worts had similar temperatures to at William Younger, the heat of the middle wort is very different.

There much less variation in the schemes employed by Younger for Ales and Stout than there was at Barclay Perkins. Younger mashed all their beers in a pretty similar way. In London, Ale and Porter brewing were handled quite separately, often even in separate brew houses.

Reply to a temperance twat

Another newspaper extract filed under Temperance Twats. Though this time its's a response to terperance twaddle rather than the temperamce twaddle itself.

It was a rection to a temperance twat going on about "wasting food" gain. Not recognising the food value of beer was a typical temperance trick. It's obviously total bollocks, as anyone lucky enough to boast a beer gut will attest.

It's in the form of two letters to the editor reacyting to a twattish motion passed by local Methodists.

"BEER AND RATIONING
Reply to Councillor Halfpenny and Lichfield Methodists
To the Editor of the "Mercury"
Sir,—In your edition of Friday, September 12th 1941, a resolution was unanimously passed by the Methodists' September meeting calling the attention of the Government to the "wasting of food for alcoholic drink." This resolution was moved by Councillor Halfpenny. May I, with all the respect at my command, address thsse observations to Mr. Halfpenny as a member of the Methodist Church and not as a councillor.

I am sorry, Mr. Halfpenny, that you did not give some careful thought to the statement you gave and published in the Press. Men of thought and experience read the "Lichfield Mercury," and as a citizen of Lichneid and an ex-Service man of 1914-18 and 1939-41, I must reply to you. or. If I failed to do so the "very stones would cry out." Your resolution is very vague and covers a wide field; the point I wish to raise  with you is mainly the production of beer.

You say that land suitable for growing cereals and fruit is used for hops. Have you ever thought, or even inquired, if hops were not grown in Kent, what could be grown? Each county in Great Britain is suitable for various crops, viz.: Lincolnshire, carrots snd potatoes; Worcester, apples and plums; Devon, cider apples; Scotland, rye and barley. Grapes willl not grow in the Highlands, nor figs in Scandinavia. So what would you grow in Kent?

The Minister of Food has arranged that an extra quota of beer be allowed to ail industrial workers and in a lot of cases an extension of hours is allowed to that workers coming off evening shifts can have their pint of beer.

The Cabinet is unanimous in agreeing to maintain the output of beer for the workers. Surely, Mr. Halfpenny, you do not propose short-circuiting the brains and wisdom of the Cabinet by your superseding doctrine.

You say Parliament has imposed on us many restrictions and caused us to alter many well-established and cherished habits; then why are you pressing for the rationing of beer? Can you substantiate your statement that we are "wasting food for alcoholic drink"? Can you give the amount of sugar used in all breweries? Are you SURE sugar is used? is there not an acute shortage of the famous by-product from alcohol known as vinegar, and other by-products? How many tons of fertilisers are produced by the breweries? These long-shot statements are all very nice for the prople who do not think, you can't fool ail the people all the time.

Now, Mr. Halfpenny, I come to the last part of your resolution. A systematic poll taken of the population (including children) showed that 50 per cent, were abstainers. Mr. Halfpenny! Where was this poll taken? Who was the governing authority? Who were the presiding officers? Does your statement represent true figures, or was this poll taken at a Methodist Sunday school? If so, 50 per cent is very high. My dear Mr. Halfpenny, don't you think that a statement about an imaginary poll is very misleading and mischievous? Is it not bordering on careless talk (Emergency Powers Act)? Is it not almost equal to the present procedure of the Nazis? No — please give official figures in future.

Would a party of yours, say twenty men, change places with our steel workers, miners, munition workers or agricultural workers, and keep up their weekly, monthly and yearly output; on a pint or two of tea? I think not. So please refrain from calling a pull from a pewter, "Britain's bulwark," a luxury.
S. H. GISBY.
9, Shortbutts Lane,
Lichfield Mercury - Friday 19 September 1941, page 7. Lichfield."

To be fair, the writer of the letter was wrong about the use of sugar in brewing. It was most certainly used aall through the war, though the percentage was lower than it had been in peacetime.But the poll saying 50% of people were total abstainers is clearly total bollocks. I'd be surprised if it had been more than 10%.

The second letter makes a very valid point about the amount of income beer generated for the government.

"BEER AND TAXATION
To the Editor of the "Mercury"
Sir,—After reading the report of the quarterly meeting of the Methodists held at Lichfield last week, we begin to
wonder why some of these gentry do not take some work of national importance instead of wasting their time talking such drivel.

Firstly, the Government realises that from the brewing industry they find one of their best sources of income. The tax paid on beer (nearly sixpence on every pint) is returnable with a fat interest, as is War Loan. Si every beer-drinker is contributing directly to the war effort with every pint he drinks.

Secondly, every person who is unfortunate enough to have to soil his hands with manual labour realises that the energy used up by such work is in a measure replaced by the feeding value of beer.

Then, of course, the brewing industry and its dependent trades is the source of livelihood to a big section of the populace. But to deprive people of their means of subsistence is perhaps a duty of the Methodist Church, because you have to remember that there is still a very big percentage of unemployed in the country.

The Government very rightly has turned a deaf ear to the vapourings of such people, who pounce on a national emergency to try and enforce their views on a bigger percentage of the population than what they represent
ONE OF THE TRADE.
Lichfield.
September 16th, 1941"
Lichfield Mercury - Friday 19 September 1941, page 7.

In 1941, the yield from beer tax was £133,450,205. By 1945 it was £278,876,870. Money the Government could ill-afford to lose during wartime. Using tax on beer to fince war is an old tradition in the UK, going all the way back to the English Civil War.

Let's Brew 1941 Fullers PA (Special)

Following on from yesterday's post about odd over-strength versions of Fuller PA, here's a recipe for one of them. A tiny parti-gyle of PA that was way stronger than the normal version of the beer. You have to go back to the 1890s, when it was still called IPA, to find a version as strong as this.

Which begs the question: who was it brewed for? It seems to be a one-off and there were only 9.75 barrels of it, in a total parti-gyle of over 500 barrels. Was it brewed for a special event? For a specific customer? Who knows? It is intriguing.

It is about when Fullers dropped all their pre-war Pale Ales – PA, XK and AK – and replaced them with a new low-gravity beer called PA No. 2. Perhaps this was brewed to mourn the passing of full-strength Pale Ale.

There are some other odd features to this brew. Like the lack of any adjunct – it’s just malt and sugar. Which definitely how Fullers brewed. Their beers always contained some sort of adjunct. Pre-war it was flaked maize, during the war mostly flaked barley. The modest amount of sugar employed means that the grist is over 95% malt. Very odd in a wartime beer.

The hops were, of course, all English, most from the 1940 harvest, but also with 20% from 1938. 1940 English hops are a bit of a rarity, a third of the crop having been destroyed in a single air raid in September of that year.

1941 Fullers PA (Special)
pale malt	12.25 lb	96.88%
No. 2 invert sugar	0.25 lb	1.98%
glucose	0.125 lb	0.99%
caramel 1000 SRM	0.02 lb	0.16%
Fuggles 90 min	1.50 oz
Goldings 30 min	1.50 oz
Goldings dry hops	0.75 oz
OG	1056.5
FG	1017.5
ABV	5.16
Apparent attenuation	69.03%
IBU	36
SRM	7
Mash at	147º F
After underlet	150º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	61º F
Yeast	WLP002 English Ale

Busy day

I've dropped down to working 80%. Giving me every Friday off. When I'm not gallivanting off wasting money, as Dolores puts it, Friday is my day for research.

No, not going on a day-long pub crawl. Attractive as that sounds. The dull sort of research. Stuff that entails endless peering at scribbly handwriting and often blurry photographs. Like this:

Extracting information from photographs of brewing records. Only slightluy more fun than taking the photos in the first place. Which is torture. Imagine standing, slightly hunched, over mouldy old books for five hours, taking a photo every 5 seconds. I'm amazed I can still stand up straight.

My backlog of brewing record photos is enormous. Not sure of the number. Probably best not to think about it. Targetted processing is my current approach. Transcribe the ones I need for my current book.The others can wait until later.

Fullers records were today's task. 1944/1945. I've loads of them. Mostly because the photgraphed that particular brewing book on three different visits. Unlike when I was collecting the set of Whitbread records from the London Metropolitan Archives, I didn't always take a list of what I'd already collected when I visited Fullers. 145 photos I have of that log.

There's little variation in the recipes. And the gravities are the same all the way through. The vintage of the hops change, and there's sometimes this stuff called Hopulon. Lots of duplication, really. Why transcribe them all? Because I'm some sort of labellable compulsive, obviously.

When I spotted a couple of oddities, I felt vindicated. Things I only captured because I had seemingly superfluous data. Two parti-gyled brews of PA.

Why did they stand out so much? Because they are so much stronger than the brews around them.

The one from 9th September 1941 had an OG of 1056º, when the standard version was 1046.3º. That from 20th July 1944 was 1045.5, the normal version parti-gyled with it, 1034.5º.

Having quite a few photos from both years, I can be pretty sure these weren't regular brews. And they also aren't mentioned at the top left of the record, where all the beers in the parti-gyle are listed (in the box where P 71 is above). Both were also batches of 9.75 barrels. Though that could just be determined by the size of available fermenting vessels.

Who were these beers meant for? The tiny volumes are reminiscent of Fullers pre-war strong Burton Ale, OBE. But that was brewed more frequently. These beers look like one-offs.

An insight, I hope, into the white-knuckle ride that beer historianism is. I'm going for a lie-down now. Too much excitement for one day. Dolores - is my cocoa ready yet?

Whitbread PA grists 1939 - 1945

Whitbread’s grists were a little simpler than those of Barclay Perkins. In terms of malts, it was very similar, with base pale or PA malt plus crystal malt. Unlike Barclay Perkins, Whitbread had already included crystal malt in the grist before the outbreak of war. Unusually, they had started employing crystal malt in PA in 1928. That’s much earlier than most breweries.

Most of the time there was only one sugar, No. 1 invert. The exception was in 1940, when they briefly used something called DM in addition. No idea what it was, other than that it was a proprietary sugar. At the start of the was sugar made up 15% of the grist, but after a year that fell to 9-11%. Presumably this was dictated by the amount of sugar they were allocated by the government.

Before the war, Whitbread employed no unmalted adjuncts, just malt and sugar. That changed during the war due to government demands. The type of adjunct used was also determined by the government. Mostly it was in the form of flaked barley, except in 1943 when there had been a bumper oats crop and the government directed some of the surplus for brewing. Not being great fans of adjuncts, Whitbread dropped flaked barley in autumn 1946, probably as soon as it was able to.

Like Barclay Perkins, Whitbread employed English hops, mostly from Kent, but also ones from Worcester and Sussex. They were usually from two or three different years. This wasn’t a result of the war but something they had practiced during the interwar years. As those from older harvests had been kept in a cold store, they would have retained most of their alpha acid.

Just before the end of the war some Oregon hops pop up. Presumably the shipping situation had improved sufficiently for imports of hops to resume.

There was little variation in the colour of PA. It was usually 25-26, which is about what you would expect for a beer of this type.

Whitbread PA grists 1939 - 1945
Date	Year	OG	pale malt	PA malt	crystal malt	no. 1 sugar	DM sugar
27th Sep	1939	1048.2	24.06%	56.15%	4.81%	14.97%
23rd Apr	1940	1047.2	14.44%	65.78%	4.81%	14.97%
14th Aug	1940	1043.1	14.33%	64.04%	5.90%	11.24%	4.49%
6th Feb	1941	1042.9	14.59%	69.73%	4.86%	10.81%
30th Jan	1942	1040.0		76.65%	3.30%	10.99%
29th May	1942	1038.6		76.24%	4.97%	8.84%
3rd Apr	1943	1038.5	4.97%	67.96%	4.97%	8.84%
22nd Feb	1944	1039.1		72.47%	6.74%	8.99%
4th Apr	1945	1039.4		66.57%	8.43%	12.36%
Sources:
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/01/107, LMA/4453/D/01/108, LMA/4453/D/01/109, LMA/4453/D/01/110, LMA/4453/D/01/111 and LMA/4453/D/01/112.

Whitbread PA adjuncts 1939 - 1945
Date	Year	OG	flaked barley	barley meal	flaked rye	flaked oat
27th Sep	1939	1048.2
23rd Apr	1940	1047.2
14th Aug	1940	1043.1
6th Feb	1941	1042.9
30th Jan	1942	1040.0	9.07%
29th May	1942	1038.6	5.80%	0.83%	3.31%
3rd Apr	1943	1038.5				13.26%
22nd Feb	1944	1039.1	11.80%
4th Apr	1945	1039.4	12.64%
Sources:
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/01/107, LMA/4453/D/01/108, LMA/4453/D/01/109, LMA/4453/D/01/110, LMA/4453/D/01/111 and LMA/4453/D/01/112.

Whitbread PA hops 1939 - 1945
Date	Year	OG	hops	colour
27th Sep	1939	1048.2	Worcester (1938), MK (1937 CS), EK (1937 CS), Sussex (1936 CS)	22
23rd Apr	1940	1047.2	MK (1937 CS, 1938 CS, 1939) and EK (1938 CS)	26.5
14th Aug	1940	1043.1	MK (1937 CS, 1938 CS), EK (1938 CS, 1939)	25
6th Feb	1941	1042.9	MK (1937 CS, 1939), EK(1940)	26
30th Jan	1942	1040.0	MK (1938 CS, 1941), EK (1938 CS, 1939 CS), Worcester (1940), samples	22.5
29th May	1942	1038.6	MK (1941), EK (1939 CS, 1941)	26
3rd Apr	1943	1038.5	MK (1941, 1942), Kent (1941), samples (1941)	26
22nd Feb	1944	1039.1	MK (1942, 1943), EK (1941)	25
4th Apr	1945	1039.4	MK (1942, 1943, 1944), Oregon (1942)	26
Sources:
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/01/107, LMA/4453/D/01/108, LMA/4453/D/01/109, LMA/4453/D/01/110, LMA/4453/D/01/111 and LMA/4453/D/01/112.