The price of malt in WW I

I'm sure the tempting title will have suckered many of you into reading this. But this post isn't just about the price of malt in WW I. There's also stuff about the price of barley.

It wasn't just tax that put up the price of beer in WW I. The price brewers had to pay for their raw materials also skyrocketed. In the space of two and a half years the price of malt more than doubled:

The price of malt (shillings)
	English	Foreign	Indian	Californian
July 1914	40 - 44	37 - 39
December 1914	41 - 45	40 - 42
August 1915	50 - 55	48 - 60
November 1915	65 - 70	58 - 60
August 1916	74 - 78	70 - 72
December 1916	88 - 92		80	90 - 95
Source:
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 23, Issue 3, May-June 1917, pages 182-184.

And it got worse.

A world without inflation - difficult to imagine, isn't it? Yet up until WW I, that was the case in Britain. Which meant they could easily compare the price of barley over 100 years.

"It may interest you to know that we have here the average prices of Scotch barley for the last 100 years, as fixed by the Fiars Court, and during the 100 years—1815 to 1914—the highest price in any year during that long period was in the year 1818, and the price of barley then only reached 54s. 11d. per quarter, so that it is interesting to learn that in this present season — 1916-1917 — we have been on a level of prices fully 20s. per quarter more than the highest price known for over 100 years. There are only a very few years in which the price during the past 100 years has exceeded 40s., and 1873 was the last date on which it did exceed 40s., being in that year 42s. 1d. The previous occasion was in 1860, when the price was 40s. 5d., and before that we have to go back to 1850, when it was 40s. 6d., and then again to 1846, when it was 41s. 4d., and from that to the year 1824, when it was 41s."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 23, Issue 3, May-June 1917, page 181.

Let's move on to a specific example. Courage's records handily give the prices for raw materials and tax. At least from 1917 they do. That year they did something quite unusual - drastically changed the format of their records. The information added was almost all to do with costs. No doubt the war and the ever-rising prices it caused were behind the change.

Here's what I've harvested from Courage's records:

Courage malt prices 1917 - 1919
date	pale	pale	Californian	crystal	brown	black	maize	No.3 invert	glucose
January 1917	67/6	65/6	60/-	69/-	51/6	65/-	62/-	69/-
April 1917	74/-	70/-		76/6	69/-	75/-	68/-	80/-
June 1917	67/6	65/6		76/6	69/-	75/-		80/-
October 1917	86/-	91/-		86/6	69/-	87/-		90/-
January 1918	87/-			86/6	83/-	90/-		94/-
May 1918	90/-	92/-		86/6	83/-	90/-		108/-
July 1918	95/6	97/-		86/6	85/-	97/-			151/-
November 1918	95/6	96/-		88/-	84/6	92/-			150/-
June 1919	93/-	101/6		90/-	86/6	94/-	75/-	123/-
September 1919	95/-	100/-		86/-	82/6	94/-	80/-	123/-
Source:
Courage brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers ACC/2305/8/249 and ACC/2305/8/250
Notes:
The price of glucose and No. 3 invert is for 224 lbs.
The price of the malts and maize is per quarter of 336 lbs.

You can see that between 1917 and 1919 the price of pale malt rose by about 50%. The increase in coloured malts was rather less, except for brown malt. The lag between the prices here and those in the previous table is to be expected. Brewers didn't buy malt the day before they used it.

No. 3 invert disappears from the records in 1918, presumably because it was unavailable. The cost of sugar rose even more than that of malt. In 1917 a quarter of No. 3 was about the same price as malt, but by 1919 was about 20% higher. Proof - if any were needed - that brewers didn't just use sugar because it was cheap.

While I was looking at the records, it seemed a good idea to calculate the costs per barrel of X Ale:

The cost of Courage X Ale 1917 - 1919
date	cost raw materials per barrel	tax per barrel X	cost per barrel X	OG of X	price per gravity point
January 1917	£0.69	£0.99	£1.68	1045.9	£0.021
April 1917	£0.72	£1.02	£1.75	1045.9	£0.022
June 1917	£0.67	£0.92	£1.59	1041.7	£0.022
October 1917	£0.69	£0.80	£1.50	1034.8	£0.023
January 1918	£0.72	£0.79	£1.51	1034.8	£0.023
May 1918	£0.55	£1.09	£1.64	1023.9	£0.046
July 1918	£0.54	£0.96	£1.50	1022.2	£0.043
November 1918	£0.54	£0.92	£1.46	1021.1	£0.044
June 1919	£0.58	£1.50	£2.08	1023.6	£0.063
September 1919	£0.98	£2.45	£3.43	1040.0	£0.086
Source:
Courage brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers ACC/2305/8/249 and ACC/2305/8/250
Note:
Cost of X is the cost of the raw materials plus the tax.

I included the OG because otherwise the numbers wouldn't make much sense. The cost of a barrel fell in late 1917, but only because the gravity was reduced. Note that the cost per gravity point shot up in 1918 and continued to rise after the war's end.

Japanese beer in Britain

Casual racism. It's a constant problem when rummaging around in history's basement. I hope I don't need to point out that I don't condone this sort of thing. But neither am I going to censore the past for the sake of modern sensibilities.

I'm not sure what to make of this little article about a flood of Japanese beer about to wash over Britain:

"A Small Jap, Please."
Brewers in this country are not alarmed by the prospect, referied to in the Board of Trade Gazette, of competition with Japanese beer. Although we are told that this beverage "being imported in considerable quantities," members of prominent firms here say they had never even seen it. "What with the duty and other expenses to the Japanese brewer," said Director of one company, "it not a commercial proposition. There is hardly any foreign beer this country now. Even Dutch lager has almost disappeared." It looks therefore, as if it will be a long time before Britishers are heard asking for small Jap, please.
Evening Telegraph - Friday 10 September 1920, page 4.

The quantity of beer being importted at the time was indeed tiny:

British beer imports (standard barrels)
1918	1920	1922	1923	1924
16	590	4,033	7,017	1,392,576
Sources:
Brewers' Almanack 1955, p. 51
Brewers' Almanack 1928, p. 115

The big jump in 1924 was a technical matter. That's the first year the Republic of Ireland Irish Free State was included as a foreign country. The vast majority of those million-odd barrels was Guinness.

Japanese brewers had taken advantage of the disruption to international trade caused by WW I. Before the war, the Dutch East Indies had been supplied with beer from Holland and Denmark. The chaos caused to international shipping left Dutch breweries desperately short of raw materials and unable to export sfaely. The same was presumably true of Denmark. So the Dutch East Indies turned to Japan for supplies:

"Military beer.
Since no beer is supplied from the Netherlands for the military Societies, the War Department intends to import Japanese beer. Statements of the quantities required have already been requested."
Het nieuws van den dag voor Nederlandsch-Indië, 29-05-1917, page 2. (My translation.)

Het nieuws van den dag voor Nederlandsch-Indië, 20-02-1915.

Men's Total Gloom Movement

I'd join an organisation called that. I wonder if it ever got off the ground?

Wondering what I'm talking about? Try reading the text below. It should help explain. It sounds a bit like a forerunner of CAMRA.

"Letters to the Editor
Beer-Garden Idea Supported
Sir,- May I be allowed to congratulate the Rector of Cheltenham on his supporting the establishment of continental-type beer-garden in Cheltenham.

The views put forward by the members of the N.B.W.T.A.U.* that the scheme would prove disastrous in giving additional allure to the consumption of intoxicants and cause the downfall of youth are, I suggest, both narrow and absurd.

The only disaster likely to arise would be caused by our climate's being most unsuitable for beer drinking out of doors.

In France, where normal times all types of drinks are obtainable at any time, and open-air cafés abound, I have only once seen a Frenchman drunk.

This, I suggest, is because drinking is done openly, and parents and children all go to cafés and eat and drink sensibly together.

There is no need for father to slip off for a quick-one on his own, or for youngsters to drink in places where they would not wish their mothers to accompany them.
CHURCHGOER.


Comfort and Less Beer
Sir,— I read with interest Canon J. B. Goodliffe's suggestion that the Montpellier garden might be used in the summer months as an open-air cafe, where refreshments of all kinds could be served, including music as well as beer.

The very word "beer" is enough. The members of the N.B.W.T.A.U. are appalled at such a plan, which would make drinking beer more "alluring!" Surely if they know anything about the subject they would realise what every publican knows i.e., that the more comfort he provides the less his clients drink.

A German and his family would sit all the evening in a beer-garden over two pints lager, listening to good music , and enjoying the open air.

I am thinking of founding M.T.G.M.—-Men's Total Gloom Movement. We shall meet at 8 p.m. in a very gloomy cellar each evening, the only seats being full barrels of beer for each member in order to lift the gloom.
S. L. GRIFFITHS,
22, Montpellier Walk,
Cheltenham.
Gloucestershire Echo - Thursday 19 December 1946, page 3."

"no need for father to slip off for a quick-one on his own" - how often that's been true when I've been with the family in the UK. And this "or for youngsters to drink in places where they would not wish their mothers to accompany them" sounds like all the Wetherspoon's I've dragged them into.

"I have only once seen a Frenchman drunk" not met my mate Stephane then. I've seen him pissed more than once. Associating with the British must have perverted his naturally temperate French ways.

Which all leads on to the important question: do you drink less the more comfortable you are? I', not sure it applies to me. I try to chug my beeer down at the same fast pace now matter what the environment. Though I will confess that a cool, shady beer garden can relax me so much I slacking the pace. What do you reckon?

I wasn't joking when I said that I'd join up for the Men's Total Gloom Movement. Sitting around in a beer cellar sounds like my type of fun. Though I would want to kick off a little earlier than 8 P.M. You'd want enough time for a proper session.





* National British Women's Total Abstinence Union - don't they sound like a barrel of laughs?

Casks in WW II (part two)

We're back with casks in WW II. I had a little too much information for a single post.

Some breweries had the foresight to buy in staves before the outbreak of war. Though, in Whitbread's case at least, they ended up as firewood:

"For many years the policy in Whitbreads cooperage was to do their own repairs, and not to buy now casks from outside. Some 20 years ago machinery was put in for making casks, and since then in addition to doing repairs all new casks have been made, only occasionally an odd 50 or 100 being bought. Considerable quantities of staves were purchased and stored in and about the cooperage-side of the brewery. The threat of war encouraged buying generously and the outbreak of war found the firm stocked with plenty of staves, both Memel and English.

. . .

A large proportion of our stock of stoves went up in flames, and most of the cooperage machinery was ruined as the result of one night's attack by enemy action which caused still greater difficulties."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 48, Issue 2, 1942, page 79.

Here's an example about how moves made to economise elsewhere had an impact on the number of barrels a brewery required:

"In the early days of the war a change over from two deliveries a week to one to each public house was made to economise in petrol. The result was an immediate offset upon the stocks of casks, and instead of having ample casks for all times of the year (excepting possibly the Christmas Bank Holiday), it was found that barely sufficient casks wore available to satisfy racking requirements, and at Bank Holiday time there was an acute shortage."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 48, Issue 2, 1942, page 79.

It makes sense - if you double the size of deliveries you're obviously going to need more casks. 

Casks in WW II

In the days when barrels were still made of wood, a supply of oak for building and maintaining them was essential.

English oak was in short supply and since the 19th century most of the wood used in making casks had been imported:

"While the question of new casks and a supply of timber for repairs may not be a very difficult problem at the moment it is likely to assume large proportions if the trade remains normal and is not subjected to much restriction. The timber found to be most suitable for brewing industry comes from Russia and Poland, being shipped from the Baltic ports, but this source was cut off as soon as war broke out and brewers will be obliged to look elsewhere for their supplies. English oak has proved to be eminently suitable and is considered to be even superior to Russian oak, but unfortunately the available supplies are far too small to satisfy the demand.

During the last war supplies came from the United States and Canada, but although this oak proved quite suitable for cask making trouble was experienced when it was put into use. The principal objection was the rather unpleasant flavour it imparted to the beer, which the usual methods employed in the cooperage for treating now casks before they are put into use, failed to eliminate."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 46, Issue 4, August 1940, page 277.

This is another piece of evidence that suggests British casks were still unlined, unlike casks on the Continent, as beer came into direct contact with the wood. From evidence such as this, I've come to the conclusion that British casks were never regularly lined.

English oak was also too expensive:

"He [Mr. L. C. Thompson] had had a few excellent casks made recently of English oak, but the cost was about double the present cost of Memel."
Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 46, Issue 4, August 1940, page 279.

What was it that caused American oak to taint beer? I'll leave that to Prof Groom:

"Prof. Groom found that the tainting of beer was not due to fungi or bacteria acting in the wood or gaining access to the beer through the wood, but was caused by the entry into the beer of some natural constituent extracted from the wood. The conclusions drawn from the examination of a number of samples was that wood may be unsatisfactory because it is an inappropriate species, was felled at the wrong season, or that it consisted of heart wood that was too young.

. . .

The best quality of American white oak was found to give the most satisfactory results, and while very little difficulty appears to have been experienced where the casks were used for quick trade, the flavour invariably made its appearance if the beer remained in the casks for more than 10 days. These researches must have drawn attention to the variability of American oak for cask-making, and it is probable that future supplies may show an improvement in consequence." Journal of the Institute of Brewing Volume 46, Issue 4, August 1940, pages 277 - 278.

So it was the wood itself, rather than anything nasty lurking in it. If beer would pick up a taint from the best American oak in as little as ten days, how on earth could the cask have had any internal lining? The life of British brewers would have been much simpler had they lined their casks. Then they could have used any old oak, as long as it was strong enough.

British hop imports in the 20th century

It's one of those special treat days. Where, as a reward for being good, I give you a bug, fat, juicy table. Several tables, in fact

The tables in question have details of the hops grown, imported, exported and used in the UK from 1857 to 1954. So almost 100 years' worth of hoppy fun.

One of the drums I particularly like to bang is about Britain's dependence on foreign hops in the second half of the 19th century. You can see it clearly in the table. Between 1870 and 1900 Britain imported 100,00-200,000 cwts. of hops each year and accounting for probably about a third of the hops used.

I'd expected that. What I hadn't foreseen was how steeply imports fell off after WW I. By 1924 they were at about half the level of  1900. By the 1930's, hop imports had halved again, averaging about 37,000 cwts. a year 1930 to 1938. That's quite a turnaround.

WW II basically brought imports to a halt, and though there was a small boom in 1946, after 1949 the quantities imported were minimal.

This table shows how the use of foreign hops declined:

Percentage of imported hops used
year	% of hops used in UK	year	% of hops used in UK	year	% of hops used in UK	year	% of hops used in UK
1920	100.34%	1930	15.93%	1940	5.84%	1950	0.12%
1921	54.35%	1931	22.91%	1941	0.01%	1951	0.27%
1922	38.80%	1932	6.71%	1942	1.28%	1952	0.22%
1923	3.46%	1933	19.21%	1943	0.08%	1953	0.47%
1924	24.72%	1934	12.08%	1944	0.00%	1954	1.41%
1925	25.41%	1935	13.62%	1945	0.25%
1926	10.38%	1936	11.80%	1946	13.43%
1927	29.31%	1937	14.54%	1947	3.33%
1928	20.66%	1938	15.80%	1948	1.96%
1929	20.24%	1939	2.95%	1949	0.39%
Sources:
Brewers' Almanack 1955, page 63.
1971 Brewers'Almanack, page 54
1928 Brewers' Almanack, page 119

The reason for the fall in imports can be explained very simply: the gravity drop caused by WW I. The weaker beer produced after the war required fewer hops. As the level of UK production had remained relatively unchanged, for the first time in many decades Britain was almost self-sufficent in hops.

It's interesting that, despite all the upheavals of two world wars, British hop production was relatively stable between 1890 and 1850. As this table demonstrates:

Average annual UK hop production
years	cwt.
1890	283,629
1900	347,894
1910	302,675
1920 - 1929	302,241
1930 - 1939	235,930
1946 - 1947	284,797
Sources:
1928 Brewers' Almanack, page 119
Brewers' Almanack 1955, page 63.

The main table also shows the volatility of the price of hops. The price could change by 100% or more from one season to the next. For example, 1928 to 1929, 1932 to 1934 and 1933 to 1934.

Hop exports increased significantly after WW I, but nmuch of this is explained by Irish independence. After 1923 hops shipped to the Republic of Ireland Irish Free State were counetd as exports. In the years 1923 to 1925 this acoounts for most of the hops exported.
 

Hops: home production and imports 1857 - 1954
Year ended 31st Dec.	Acreage	Estimated Produce	Yield per acre	Average Price of English Hops per Season, Sept. to Dec.	Imports: Less Re-Exports	Exports: British Hops	Consumption Years ended 30th Sept. following
		Cwts.	Cwts.	£ s. d.	Cwts.	Cwts.	Cwts.
1857	50,974	426,049	8.35	4 2 8	18,711
1860	46,271	99,667	2.15	17 5 0	68,918
1870	60,594	700,000	11.55	3 7 8	127,853	3,365
1880	66,698	440,000	6.60	4 6 0	195,987	7,218
1890	53,961	283,629	5.26	10 9 4	181,698	6,164
1900	51,308	347,894	6.78	5 18 8	198,494	14,999
1910	32,886	302,675	9.20	5 6 6	172,032	8,927
1914	33,661	507,258	13.84	4 3 9	83,690	9972	450,231
1915	34,744	254,101	7.31	6 7 0	199,347	8,288
1916	31,352	307,856	9.82	6 14 0	146,150	10,765	263,386
1917	16,946	225,763	13.32	8 15 0	8,530	12,796
1918	15,666	130,491	8.3	18 15 0	259	6,923	503,140
1919	16,745	187,795	11.21	20 5 0	154,091	2,606
1920	21,002	281,042	13.4	19 10 0	455,799	3,672	454,258
1921	25,133	224,172	8.9	19 10 0	216,571	2,200	398,506
1922	26,452	301,000	11.4	12 0 0	127,539	2,818	328,688
1923	24,893	229,000	9.2	14 10 0	12,111	22,051	350,428
1924	25,897	444,000	17.1	10 5 0	89,632	44,316	362,554
1925	26,256	355,000	13.5	10 15 0	90,305	44,541	355,376
1926	25,599	332,000	13	11 5 0	35,040	78,574	337,721
1927	23,004	255,000	11.1	12 10 0	96,917	54,630	330,662
1928	23,805	242,100	10.2	11 16 0	66,183	17,651	320,315
1929	23,986	359,100	15	5 0 0	62,208	13,192	307,289
1930	19,997	253,000	12.6	4 15 0	44,199	22,302	277,406
1931	19,628	169,000	8.7	7 5 0	50,303	22,388	219,587
1932	16,531	188,000	11.4	9 15 0	14,952	19,264	222,868
1933	16,895	210,000	12.8	16 10 0	44,829	20,298	233,419
1934	18,037	259,000	14.4	9 0 0	30,046	13,382	248,744
1935	18,251	248,300	13.6	9 0 0	35,186	16,223	258,300
1936	18,317	252,000	13.7	9 0 0	31,953	19,987	270,692
1937	18,093	235,000	13	9 0 0	40,406	16,130	277,846
1938	18,460	257,000	13.9	9 0 0	45,287	12,580	286,716
1939	18,812	288,000	15.3	9 10 0	7,840	16,050	265,512
1940	18,592	270,500	14.5	12 0 0	14,675	26,830	251,354
1941	18,158	262,800	14.5	15 0 0	31	17,209	223,007
1942	18,420	261,900	14.2	17 10 0	2,963	30,673	231,689
1943	19,131	285,200	14.9	18 0 0	198	24,941	243,900
1944	19,603	253,900	13	20 0 0	--	26,525	244,822
1945	19,957	282,900	14.1	21 0 0	574	32,337	226,197
1946	21,163	257,451	13.4	22 10 0	29,243	35,056	217,759
1947	22,142	289,908	13.2	23 10 0	7,716	31,661	231,470
1948	22,787	273,584	12	25 15 0	4,561	29,135	233,168
1949	22,196	250,406	11.3	26 10 0	900	42,301	232,979
1950	22,198	368,313	16.6	21 0 0	269	84,027	229,106
1951	22,460	321,824	14.3	26 0 0	626	107,738	228,512
1952	22,279	282,349	12.7	28 3 0	502	76,620	225,569
1953	21,932	272,593	12.3	27 10 0	1,015	64,762	216,841
1954	20,760	246,748	11.9	29 0 0	3,075	51,323	217,716
Sources:
Brewers' Almanack 1955, page 63.
1928 Brewers' Almanack, page 119, 1971 Brewers'Almanack, page 54