CHAPTER XII.

CONCLUSION.

In the foregoing pages it has been impossible to give a hundredth part

of the evidence that lies ready at hand in this matter of the use and

effects of beer, but we have endeavored, by careful selection, to

present such as must have weight with all readers. Nothing has been

stated as a fact which cannot be amply corroborated, and no inference

drawn that did not seem to be fully warranted by the premises. It has

been shown that beer is wholesome, and so mildly alcoholic as to make

drunkenness from its use very uncommon. A man who drinks in order to

become intoxicated, can, no doubt, accomplish his purpose with beer;

but such men are almost unknown where beer is the common beverage.

This abnormal impulse usually comes only in consequence of a course of

ardent spirits.

The evidence as to the cure of intemperance by the introduction of a

free use of beer is especially important, and one of the most striking

instances of such success is to be found in the case of Denmark, to

which we desire again to call special attention. This is the central

point of the whole question. Heartily desiring the progress of genuine

temperance, and fully believing that all efforts in the direction of

prohibition are false in theory and injurious in practice, that they

do not prevent intemperance and do produce many other evils, we hold

that the safe and only course is to popularize the use of beer, and

cannot doubt that government would do well to foster its manufacture

in every practicable way, and that taxation on the product should

be abolished, or at least made very light. Such a course would not

merely secure the very end which has been unsuccessfully attempted by

prohibitory laws, but it would do much more. It would diminish the poor

rates, save the money spent in prosecutions, which, after all, do no

real good, and incidentally improve the whole business condition. Some

refreshing, stimulating drink the people will have, and legislators

should seek to guide the instinct, not eradicate it. Men of the highest

scientific authority have again and again pronounced beer to be not

merely harmless, but beneficial. Experience in the countries where it

is most used develops the same result, and the readiness with which it

is adopted in place of ardent spirits, whenever it is of good quality

and low price, shows how easily the experiment of temperance on this

basis can be tried. Even advocates of total abstinence must admit

that beer is better than whisky. The fact that it adds greatly to the

enjoyment of a people must not be ignored. Here in America we are apt

to forget all but the work-a-day part of life, but the demand for

recreation exists and must be gratified in some way, and almost always

recreation is social, and is made more enjoyable and cheerful by some

mild stimulant. It refreshes and enlivens, and so contributes directly

to the social happiness that is the object sought.

It is to be hoped that legislators in general will soon learn to take

broader views than seem generally to have prevailed in the past.

Statesmanship is not bounded by the views of one or the other party

and is affected by no popular clamor. It does not enact a law because

it is loudly demanded by a certain set of persons, especially if these

persons have a hobby to ride, no matter how earnestly they may believe

in it. A statesman will see for instance in this temperance question,

that the stay of drunkenness must be through a social change. Legal

prohibition can do little while all the other conditions of the problem

remain unchanged. Something must be given for what is forbidden. If

beer is encouraged ardent spirits can be driven out, and when this idea

is once thoroughly understood and put in practice we shall have the

temperance era, so long expected and so ardently desired.

There is another subject which we approach with some reluctance,

knowing that however carefully our words may be weighed, there is

a large number of estimable individuals throughout the country and

particularly in the Eastern states, to whom they will probably give

offense. We allude to what is called the Sunday question, and the topic

is treated here because in this country beer drinking is, in the common

mind, intimately associated with the German Americans and their custom

of spending part of Sunday in recreation in a beer garden. The fact

that they do so has been more than once used as an argument against

them and against the use of beer, as if there were any real connection

between the character of the drink and such a custom on the part of its

greatest consumers even supposing the custom to be actually harmful or

immoral. As such a feeling exists, however, it seems worth while to

call attention to the fact that what is known as the New England Sunday

is not an essential part of Christianity as so many honestly suppose,

but something that in comparison with Christianity is new and local. We

need hardly say that in the early days of the church it was distinctly

taught that the time of the Jewish sabbath was past and for several

hundred years this view was generally held. Notice the following

passages from the New Testament:

“The law and the prophets were until John. * * Old things are passed

away; behold all things are become new. * * Brethren ye have been

called unto liberty; only use not that liberty for an occasion to the

flesh, but by love serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in

one word, even in this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. * *

Love worketh no ill to his neighbor.

“If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is

perfected in us. * * For love is of God; and every one that loveth is

born of God and knoweth God. He that loveth not, knoweth not God; for

God is love. * * But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and

walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that

darkness hath blinded his eyes.

“A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another. * *

Love is the fulfilling of the law.”

Jesus himself taught the disregard of the sabbath as a day of ceasing

from labor or recreation and are we to suppose that both his teaching

and practice had no meaning?

Paul says, “One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth

every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. Let

no man therefore judge you in respect of a holy day or of the new moon

or of the sabbath days.”

The first legal enactment requiring an observance of Sunday as a

Sabbath, was foisted upon the Christian world A. D. 321, by Constantine

the Great—a heartless tyrant who had caused seven members of his family

to be put to death in cold blood, that he might attain political

and religious supremacy! He embraced Christianity because the Pagan

priests and pontiffs could not grant him absolution, and would not

fraternize with such a murderous monster! Hence he became the father

of the so-called Sunday laws. Even Constantine’s decree did not

interdict recreation nor the tillage of the soil. In general, through

the Christian world, the day was a holiday, such as it now is on the

continent of Europe. There the hours of service in the churches fall,

usually, in the morning, and are strictly observed while the rest of

the day is universally given to enjoyment. Let those, however, who are

accustomed to cry out at the notion of a continental Sunday, remember

that they are themselves the innovators, and let them, too, examine the

following passages from the writings of men whose names must command

respect, and not one of whom would speak in such a matter without

mature consideration:

“It will be plainly seen that Jesus did decidedly and avowedly

VIOLATE THE SABBATH. The dogma of the assembly of divines at

Westminster, that the observance of the Sabbath is a part of the

moral law, is to me utterly unintelligible.”—Archbishop Whately.

“As for the seventh day, that has gone to its grave with the signs

and shadows of the Old Testament. Its imposition by law leads to

blood and stoning to death those who do but gather sticks thereon; a

thing which no way becomes the gospel.”—Bunyan.

“The law of the Sabbath being thus repealed, that no particular day

of worship has been appointed in its place is evident.”—Milton.

“They who think that by the authority of the Church, the observance

of the Lord’s day was appointed instead of the Sabbath, as if

necessary, are greatly deceived.—Melancthon.

* * “And truly we see what such a doctrine has profited; for those

who adopt it far exceed the Jews in a gross, carnal and superstitious

observance of the Sabbath.”—John Calvin.

“As regards the Sabbath or Sunday, there is no necessity for

keeping it; but if we do it ought not to be on account of Moses’s

commandment, but because nature teaches us from time to time to

take a day of rest. * * If anywhere the day is made holy for the

mere day’s sake, then I order you to work on it, to ride on it, to

dance on it, to do anything that will reprove this encroachment on

Christian spirit and liberty.”—Martin Luther.

“These things refute those who suppose that the first day of the

week (that is, the Lord’s day), was substituted in place of the

Sabbath, for no mention is made of such a thing by Christ or his

Apostles.”—Grotius.

Tyndale the martyr, Erasmus, Paley, McNight and a host of other

Christian authorities, were and are of the same opinion regarding

Sabbath observance. England and America stand practically alone in

retaining so much of the Jewish Sabbath. Here is a letter from Benjamin

Franklin to Jared Ingersoll of New Haven, Conn., which bears directly

on the subject and may be read with both interest and profit by those

who concern themselves in Sunday laws.[22]

[22] The original is in the possession of the New Haven Colony

Historical Society.

[Illustration: WILLIAM PENN,

The Quaker Brewer, and Founder of Pennsylvania, 1644-1718. (See page

26.)]

PHILADELPHIA, December 11, 1762.

“I should be glad to know what it is that distinguishes Connecticut

Religion from common Religion:—communicate, if you please, some of

these particulars that you think will amuse me as a virtuoso. When I

traveled in Flanders I thought of your excessively strict observation

of Sunday; and that a man could hardly travel on that day among

you upon this lawful occasion, without Hazard of Punishment, while

where I was every one traveled, if he pleased, or diverted himself

in any other way; and in the afternoon both high and low went to

the Play or the Opera, where there was plenty of Singing, Fiddling

and Dancing. I looked around for God’s Judgments, but saw no signs

of them. The Cities were well built and full of Inhabitants, the

Markets filled with Plenty, the People well favored and well clothed;

the Fields well tilled; the Cattle fat and strong; the Fences,

Houses and Windows all in Repair; and no _Old Tenor_ anywhere in the

Country;—which would almost make one suspect that the Deity is not so

angry at that offense as a New England Justice.”

B. FRANKLIN.

A correspondent of the New York _Staats-Zeitung_[23] writes as follows:

“The Emperor of Germany has made a contribution to the discussion of

the Sunday question, that is very much to the point. It is an address

to the Prussian Synod, which had recently objected to the holding of

a review on Sunday, and reads thus: ‘He who instituted the Sabbath

has declared that the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the

Sabbath. The puritanic and Calvinistic conception of the Sabbath as a

day of penance and repentance, has always been foreign to the feeling

and taste of the German people.’”

[23] New York _Staats-Zeitung_, Nov. 1, 1879.

These words of the Emperor will receive the hearty assent of every

German-American, and preachers and pietists may as well understand

that Germans in America will struggle as long for their free Sunday

as Germans in their old home have for a free German Rhine. They have

conquered back the “sacred stream” and something more into the bargain,

and we here shall have no less success in securing a free, cheerful

Sunday, if we remain united and true to our principles.

England formerly held the same views that then and since have prevailed

on the continent, but gradually the liberty of the day was restricted

and its character wholly changed. We have lately met with an excellent

summary of the course of legislation that produced this result. It

marks clearly the various stages of the restrictive process and we

cannot do better than reproduce it here for the benefit of readers to

whom it may prove novel.

“Prior to the statute of 1676, any act done on Sunday, except in

proceedings of courts, was of the same binding force as if performed on

any other day. Parliament sat on that day, for in the reign of Edward

I., in 1278 and 1305, three statutes were made on Sunday. Nor did the

first restraining laws make any distinction between Sundays and other

holy days. Thus the statute of 28 Edward III., Cap. 14, in 1357, says:

“Shewing of wools (_i. e._, by merchants) shall be made at the staple

every day in the week except the Sunday and solemn feasts of the year.”

No further enactment was made touching the matter in question for

nearly 100 years; but in 1448 was passed the act of 27 Henry VI., Cap.

5, entitled, “Certain days wherein fairs and markets ought not to be

kept,” which sets forth that “The King hath ordained that all manner

of fairs and markets in said principal feasts (of Ascension, Corpus

Christi, Assumption, and All Saints) and Sundays and Good Friday shall

clearly cease from all shewing of any goods or merchandises (necessary

victuals only except);” but in recognition of the fact that there had

previously been no such restriction, it is provided that “Nevertheless,

of his special grace (the King) granted to them power which of old time

had no day to hold their fair or market, but only upon the festival

days aforesaid, to hold the same authority and strength of his old

grant within three days next before said feasts or next after.”

The act of 4, Edward IV., Cap. 7, in 1464, seems to have been

occasioned by some special irritation from the dishonesty of

leather-dressers and shoemakers; for, after sundry stringent provisions

applying to them generally, it is provided that “No person, cordwainer

or cobbler, within the City of London * * * upon any Sunday in the

year, or in the feasts of the Nativity or Ascension of our Lord, or

in the feast of Corpus Christi, shall sell, or command, or do to be

sold, any shoes, huseaus, or galoches, or upon the Sunday, or any of

said feasts, shall set or put upon the feet or legs of any person, any

shoes, huseaus, or galoches.” This statute was repealed in 1522, but

re-enacted, in part, in 1604.

In 1552 was passed “An act for keeping holy days and feasting days”

(5 and 6 Edw. IV., Cap. 2), the preamble of which is an instructive

example of the pains taken by all Christians, Catholic and Protestant,

prior to the seventeenth century, to deny that Sunday or any other holy

or feast day, possessed of itself any sacredness or any higher claim

to observance than that of convenience for the purpose of uniformity

in worship. It ran thus: “For as much as at all times men be not

so mindful to laud and praise God * * * as their bounden duty doth

require; therefore, to call men to remembrance of their duty and help

their infirmity, it hath been wholesomely provided that there shall

be some certain times and days appointed wherein the Christian should

cease from all kinds of labors; * * * neither is it to be thought

that there is any certain time or definite number of days prescribed

in Holy Scripture, but that the appointment, both of time and also of

the number of the days, is left by the authority of God’s word to the

liberty of Christ’s Church to be determined and assigned orderly in

every country by the discretion of the rulers and ministers thereof,

as they shall judge most expedient for the true setting forth of God’s

glory and the edification of their people; be it therefore enacted,

that all the days hereafter mentioned (to wit: Sundays, the Feast of

the Circumcision, and twenty-two other feast days that are named, and

Mondays and Tuesdays in Easter Week and Whitsun Week) shall be kept

and commanded to be kept holy days, and none other.” It was further

provided, “That it shall be lawful to every husbandman, laborer,

fisherman, * * * upon the holy days aforesaid, in harvest, or at any

other time of the year when necessity shall require, to labor, ride,

fish, or work any kind of work at their free wills and pleasure.” This

Protestant law was repealed the next year by the Catholic government

of Mary, and restored in 1604, in the first year of James I. It is

strikingly similiar to the decree of Constantine the Great, made in

the year 321: “Let all Judges and people of the town rest, and all the

various trades be suspended, on the venerable day of the sun. Those who

live in the country, however, may freely and without fault attend to

the cultivation of their fields * * * lest, with the loss of favorable

opportunity, the commodities offered by Divine Providence should be

destroyed.”

In 1558 (1 Eliz., Cap. 2, Sec. 14,) was passed the first law requiring

attendance upon public worship “upon every Sunday, and other days

ordained and used to be kept as holy days,” upon pain of church censure

and a fine of twelvepence.

The English Puritans of the time of James I., were the first to impose

the name and character of the Jewish Sabbath upon the first day of the

week, and those who came to America brought the name and the idea with

them. To that seventeenth-century influence, and not to any scriptural

or ecclesiastical teaching of any earlier time, are we indebted for

sermons on Sunday observance. The doctrine held on that subject by most

evangelical Christians is not yet three hundred years old.

In 1625 was passed a law (1 Car. I., Cap. 1,) that “There should be no

meeting, assemblies, or concourse of people out of their own parishes

on the Lord’s day, for any sports or pastimes whatsoever; nor any

bear-baiting, bull-baiting, interludes, common plays, or other unlawful

exercises or pastimes used by any persons within their own parishes.”

“_This statute_,” says Blackstone, “_does not prohibit, but rather

impliedly allows any innocent recreation or amusement within their

respective parishes, even on the Lord’s day, after Divine service is

over;_” _and, in point of fact, both Charles I. and his father before

him issued proclamations encouraging such amusements after Divine

service._

In 1676 was enacted the well known “Lord’s Day act,” of 29 Car. II.,

Cap. 7, which prohibits generally all work, labor, and business on

Sunday, except works of necessity and charity, and which, with more or

less modification, forms the basis of all Sunday laws now extant in the

United States. Exceptions to this law in favor of hackney coachmen,

fishwomen, and chairmen, were enacted in 1694, 1699, and 1710, and a

clause prohibiting bird hunting was subsequently added, but it remained

in substance until alterations and repeals of English laws ceased to

have any force in this country.”

As an historical matter the question is not very abstruse and the truth

is well enough known to scholars everywhere; should there not then be

charity for honest convictions?

In many cases the practice for years has been tolerably liberal while

all the time the old and stringent puritanical Sunday laws of 1702 were

retained on the statute books liable to be enforced whenever a minority

should choose to demand their revival.

[Illustration: Belmont Avenue Brewery,

NEWARK, N. J.,

GOTTFRIED KRUEGER, PROPRIETOR.

_For historical sketch, see Appendix C, page 183._]

Such cases have recently been seen in many places in this and other

states, but particularly so in Newark, N. J., where the enforcement

of such an old act forbidding the sale of beer and other beverages

on Sunday caused a reaction of unexpected violence, and very

characteristic of the profound change that has already taken place in

the popular conception of the day. The circumstances in brief were as

follows: A considerable number of prohibitionists had organized under

the name of the Law and Order Association for the purpose of enforcing

the Sunday law and preventing the licensing of bar rooms. Numerous

prosecutions were made and carried through to conviction under the old

state law after having failed in the city police courts. Thereupon the

Citizens’ Protective Association was formed and in September, 1879,

a demonstration was made by a great procession, and the adoption of

resolutions calling for a repeal of the law which, after lying idle so

long, had suddenly been revived to the great injury of an established

business, and with manifest injustice to a large number of peaceable

citizens who conceived their rights to be interfered with, inasmuch as

a law long inoperative must practically be regarded as a dead letter

and ignored by those who, if they had supposed it to possess vital

power, would have removed from its jurisdiction or taken pains never

to come within it. The procession numbered ten or twelve thousand and

great enthusiasm was displayed, not only in the ranks, but by residents

all along the line of march. The matter was evidently one which took a

deep hold on the feelings of the community and none the less because of

a common feeling that they had been unfairly treated by the appeal to a

law not in harmony with the spirit of the times or of abstract justice.

A crowd is very apt to be wrong and it is easy to stir up the people,

but here the crowd had more reason on its side than it was itself

aware of, reason founded on history, and making the law that had been

enforced an unwarrantable attack on personal liberty. They felt that

it was so, though few probably would have been able to give a clear

explanation of the feeling or trace its justification by the facts.

As for enthusiasm, we are told that it needed no stimulus and can

easily believe it to have been so, for aside from the more abstract and

philosophical justice of their complaint, there was the immediate smart

felt by men who lose the day of recreation to which they have looked

forward all the week, or find that they are to suffer a pecuniary loss

and that their occupation is not only checked but stigmatized. The

matter made a great excitement and called out many bitter paragraphs on

both sides, but chiefly among the more narrow-minded and pharisaical

of so-called religious press. We have no space or disposition to go

into the details of their criticism, even for the sake of illustrating

how far misrepresentation and innuendo may be made to stand in place

of careful statement and sound argument. The case has been spoken of

because it is in some sense typical, because it represents the course

of public thought and feeling, and the change which even within two or

three generations has come over the rigid enactments of puritan early

settlers. These puritans did much good but it was all tempered and

shadowed by an austere severity that has no merit in itself and that

crushes out much the better part of life and obscures many a truth that

in itself is clear as noonday. The mind of the people has changed. It

is time that the law should be changed also. The _Christian Union_ has

said, “The sooner the issue is made in Chicago between a whole sabbath

and none at all, the sooner the Christian element in the community

will win the victory it will deserve. Half a sabbath is hardly worth

fighting for.” We say that the best rule for observing the day is that

which gives the greatest amount of harmless freedom and enjoyment to

the greatest number, each according to his own judgment and conscience.

Our foreign element is very large and has its own beliefs and

traditions, as dear and as implicitly held as those of any one whose

training and practice have been after the strictest sabbatarian pattern.

We have attempted here no argument, but simply given some cardinal

facts, and now leave the matter in the hope that those who dissent will

at least respect honest utterance and not allow their objections on

this one point to prejudice them against our discussion of the value of

malt beverages as aids to genuine temperance and useful friends to man.

We close as we began, with the words which seem to us to indicate the

only practical road to real temperance, and record again our motto

BEER AGAINST WHISKY.

APPENDIX A.

TOTAL PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION OF BEER IN VARIOUS

COUNTRIES AND CITIES.

The tables here given have been prepared with great care after a

thorough examination and comparison of authorities. The discrepancies

and errors discovered in various published statements of a similar

nature have made the task a difficult one, but it is believed that the

present results will be found substantially accurate. Table A gives

a list of the chief beer producing countries, with the population of

each, its annual product in hectoliters and gallons, the number of its

breweries and the production per head of population. The countries

are arranged in the order of product _per capita_. Table B gives the

same countries arranged in the order of total production, and for

convenience of reference repeats the product _per capita_.

TABLE A.

| Population.

| | Production In Hectoliters. [24]

| | | Production In gallons.

| | | | Number of

| | | | Breweries.

| | | | |Production

| | | | |per head of

| | | | |population.

Bavaria, 5,022,390 12,422,272 329,110,208 6,240 65.5

Wurtemberg, 1,881,505 3,480,795 92,241,067 2,604 49.0

Belgium, 5,336,185 7,942,000 210,463,000 2,500 39.4

Great Britain

and Ireland, 31,628,338 47,000,000 1,245,500,000 26,214 39.0

Baden, 1,507,177 1,297,893 34,394,164 22.8

Denmark, 1,940,000 38,800,000 20.0

Saxony, 2,760,586 52,520,480 19.0

Holland, 3,865,456 2,078,000 55,067,000 560 14.2

Prussia 25,742,404 257,630,403 10,480 10.0

_proper_,

[25]

United States, 38,558,371 10,848,446 336,301,826 2,830 8.7

Switzerland, 2,759,854 890,000 23,585,000 400 8.5

Austro-Hungary, 36,373,000 11,323,444 300,071,266 2,353 8.3

Norway, 1,806,900 420,000 11,130,000 34 6.1

Sweden, 4,484,542 1,000,000 26,500,000 94 5.9

France, 36,905,788 7,370,000 195,305,000 3,110 4.4

Trieste and

Dalmatia, 522,800 52,575 1,393,237 3 2.6

Russia

_proper_, 65,504,659 3,040,000 80,560,000 520 1.2

German

Principalities,

not above

enumerated, 5,813,296 119,670,460 940 20.5

[24] Hectoliter—26½ gallons wine measure.

[25] Barrels.

TABLE B.

PRODUCTION. GAL. PER HEAD.

Great Britain and Ireland, 1,245,500,000 39.0

United States, 336,301,826 8.7

Bavaria, 329,190,208 65.5

Austro-Hungary, 300,017,266 8.3

Prussia _proper_, 257,630,403 10.0

Belgium, 210,463,000 39.4

France, 195,305,000 4.4

Wurtemberg, 92,241,067 49.0

Russia _proper_, 80,560,000 1.2

Holland, 55,067,000 14.2

Saxony, 52,520,480 19.0

Denmark, 38,800,000 20.0

Baden, 34,394,164 22.8

Sweden, 26,500,000 5.9

Switzerland, 23,585,000 8.5

Norway, 11,130,000 6.1

Trieste and Dalmatia, 1,393,237 2.6

German Principalities, not above

enumerated, 119,670,460 20.5

It will be seen from the above table that Germany, exclusive of German

Austria, brews the enormous quantity of 885,646,782 gallons of beer,

or about 20.7 to each individual in a population of 42,727,360. Most

of this is consumed at home, and great quantities are imported from

Christiana, Norway, and Copenhagen, Denmark, while ale and porter are

largely brought from England.

It is worthy of notice that Bavaria, which has been known for centuries

as the cradle of men of arts and sciences, stands at the head of the

list of beer producing countries. With a population of only about

five millions, it brews three hundred and twenty-nine million gallons

or 65.5 gallons to every individual; and next in rank is the little

kingdom of Wurtemberg, the native state of the great Schiller. Munich,

the capital of Bavaria is especially celebrated for the long array of

men of arts, letters and science who have either been born there or

adopted it as a residence. But it is, at the same time, the greatest

beer-drinking city in the world. It produced in the year 1876 no less

than 1,198,951 hectoliters = 31,772,201 gallons, and its actual home

consumption in that year was 956,455 hectoliters = 25,346,057 gallons,

which, in a population of 198,000, gives 128 gallons a year for every

individual, costing in all $6,216,955, or about $31 per head. The

amount paid for beer is less by $1,363,800 than the amount paid for

house rent. In the years 1877 and 1878 the amount paid for beer fell

off, but for the current year (1879) it will, according to statistics

thus far received, be larger than ever before. The taxes for the

municipal government and city taxes are less than a tenth of the amount

expended for beer—and yet there is not a more orderly and well behaved

city in the world than this same Munich. All this is indirect evidence

of great importance as to the social and intellectual effect that may

be expected to follow a free and even a very large use of beer.

Vienna stands in a similar category though it offers a less striking

illustration of the case than Munich does. It has, however, one brewer

whose operations are extensive enough to deserve special mention. This

is the well-known Anton Dreher, whose business, begun at Schwechat

in 1836, now comprises large establishments in four Austrian cities,

with an annual product of 500,000 barrels, paying a government tax of

$750,000.00 or more. The business employs combined water and steam

engines of 100 horse power, 400 brewers, 200 teamsters and common

laborers, 150 horses, and no less than 250 draught oxen.

Karlsruhe, the capital of Baden is also an important brewing city. Its

product is 4,884,350 gallons, and of this amount something over one

million gallons is contributed by the Albert Printz brewery alone.

It is, however, useless to attempt any mention of the cities or

districts that are distinguished for the quantity or quality of their

beer. We can only say that they are very numerous, and add that their

character is such as to corroborate all that has been said in this book

touching the beneficial effects of a free use of beer in the community.

APPENDIX B.

ANALYSES OF BEERS.

The following analyses will be found of interest to every student of

the beer question.[26] The first is from Professor Mulder’s work on

beer.

[26] Additional analyses may be found in the body of the book, pages

97, 98 and 99.

I.—BAVARIAN BEERS. Specific Water Carbonic Extract Alcohol Year

weight Acid

at 16°

Young winter beer of 1018 870.83 1.40 58.74 38.6 1849

Munich,

“ “ “ 1019 879.13 1.60 60.16 32.8 1853

“ “ Augsburg, 1013 883.30 1.80 45.30 38.9 1854

“ “ Bayreuth, 1013 866.90 1.80 53.60 42.8 1854

“ “ Landshut, 1018 880.50 1.80 57.40 33.5 1854

“ “ Anspach, 1015 889.40 1.80 51.60 32.2 1854

Lager (summer) beer 1011 880.50 1.60 39.40 43.5 1846

of the brewery of the

Court of Munich,

“ “ “ “ of Degelmayer, 1022 867.20 1.30 66.40 36.5 1853

“ “ “ ““ of the Court, 1018 870.80 1.80 51.00 42.5 1852

“ “ (young) 1028 851.94 1.40 77.20 88.8 1850

“ “ of June, 1852, 1017 872.22 1.80 53.18 40.7 1852

“ “ (10 months old) 1012 854.20 1.50 50.10 51.7 1853

of the Franciscan

Convent,

Specific Water Carbonic Extract Alcohol Year

weight Acid

at 16°

Strong beer of 1026 825.00 1.80 77.70 52.4 1853

Zacherl’s brewery,

Salvator beer of “ “ 1034 820.80 1.60 94.50 46.0 1853

Bock beer 1027 830.55 1.70 92.07 42.2 1852

Ale of 1022 769.40 1.80 84.40 77.5 1850

Sedelmaier’s

brewery,

II.—FOREIGN BEERS.

Bottom-yeast beer of 1016 869.40 1.80 46.90 48.4 1844

Wauka (Prague)

Upper “ Pstross “ 1017 867,20 1.50 50.70 44.6 1844

“ “ Pchowitz, near 1013 881.90 1.60 47.70 38.5 1844

Prague,

“ “ Pstross, 1016 876.30 1.80 50.40 39.9 1844

“ “ Berlin, 1014 855.50 1.90 51.80 49.9 1851

“ “ Magdeburg, 1016 884.70 1.80 50.40 35.3 1853

Porter of Barclay & 1017 840.20 1.60 60.20 53.7 1852

Perkins, of London,

Scottish ale of 1030 730.50 1.50 109.40 84.7 1851

Edinburg, two years old,

Lambick of Brussels, 1004 862.50 2.00 34.12 55.4 1841

Faro beer of “ 1004 879.16 2.00 29.58 49.1 1841

Barley beer of “ 1006 868.05 1.90 38.39 50.4 1841

Mum of Brunswick, 1231 511.68 1.60 476.40 3.6 1854

ACCORDING TO CH. MENE.

Kind Brewery Name of Specific Alcohol Residue of Ash Nitrogen

of Firm. Beer. weight. evaporation per

Barley. per liter. cent.

S. B. Detalle & Ord. 1.0100 3.6 50.120 1.920 0.785

Cie. Ham. brown

(Somme) beer,

S. B. Detalle & Ord. 0.9973 4.4 48.000 1.080 ——

Cie. Ham. pale

(Somme) beer,

S. B. Detalle & Workmen’s 1.0106 4.5 57.120 1.520 0.722

Cie. Ham. beer,

(Somme)

S. B. Detalle & Ladies’ 1.0103 4.0 48.600 1.600 0.760

Cie. Ham. beer,

(Somme)

S. B. Lux & Co., Light 1.0106 3.8 42.480 1.800 0.620

Paris, beer

(Seine)

S. B. Schmidt & Young 1.0225 4.3 51.400 2.600 0.770

Co., Paris, bock,

S. B. Schmidt & Store 1.0182 4.4 57.210 2.400 0.800

Co., Paris, beer,

W. B. Watteblest Ord. 1.0050 4.5 39.440 1.280 ——

(Vernelles) brown

Pas de beer,

Calais,

W. B. Watteblest Ord. 1.0078 4.5 35.800 1.440 0.710

(Vernelles) pale

Pas de beer,

Calais,

W. B. Meesemaeker Barley 1.0130 5.5 73.120 3.700 0.840

(Dunkerque) wine,

Nord,

W. B. Meesemaeker Pale ale, 1.0127 5.2 68.960 1.200 ——

(Dunkerque)

Nord,

W. B. Pollet, Export 1.0080 4.5 48.160 1.195 0.750

Courtrai beer,

(Belgium)

W. B. Hauthyssen, Ord. 1.0115 4.7 51.105 1.310 0.715

Haunut brown

(Liege) beer,

S. B.—Summer Barley. W. B.—Winter Barley.

ACCORDING TO HEYDLOFF.

Alcohol. Extract.

Beer of Nuremberg, 3.8 6.2

“ Erlangen, 3.8 6.0

“ Bamberg, 4.1 5.8

“ Erfurth, of Treitsokle, 3.7 5.5

“ “ of Schlegel, 4.1 6.5

“ “ of John, 3.7 6.0

“ “ of Buchner, 4.2 6.5

English porter, 5.1 9.2

Composition of some Swedish beers:

----Percentage of----

Extract. Alcohol. Water.

Porter of Stockholm, 6.6 6.0 87.4

Porter of Goteborg, (Carnezie & Co.) 5.4 6.8 88.8

Strong beer of Neumiller’s brewery in Stockholm, 12.4 4.6 83.0

Swedish beer of Beijnoff (Upsala) 8.9 3.0 88.1

“ Hillberg “ 8.2 2.6 89.2

Beer of the Bavarian brewery in Upsala, 6.4 4.7 88.9

Bavarian beer of the Munich brewery in Stockholm, 7.4 4.0 83.6

Erlanger beer, 6.2 4.7 89.1

Bavarian beer of Oerebeo, 5.5 4.1 90.4

Export beer of Stockholm, 5.2 4.8 90.0

Svagdricke (small beer) of Beijnoff (Upsala), 3.2 2.1 94.7

Svagdricke (small beer) of Hillberg, 3.3 2.2 94.5

ACCORDING TO C. HIMLEY.

Extract of Phosphoric

Names of the Beers. Malt. Alcohol. Acid. Water.

Double beer of Copenhagen, 13.68 2.16 0.065 84.16

(Orp) Salvator, 8.20 4.10 0.084 87.70

Waldschlosschen 5.50 3.84 0.088 89.66

(Erich) Erlanger beer, 6.22 3.95 0.074 89.83

Berliner Actienbier, 6.20 3.44 0.068 90.36

(Betz) Eckernforder, 6.10 3.05 0.062 90.85

Schluter, 6.09 3.60 0.074 90.31

Scheibel, 6.00 3.12 0.064 90.88

Erlanger, 5.70 3.57 9.070 90.73

(Erich) Erlanger ale, 5.62 3.04 0.076 91.34

Hoff’s malt extract, 5.60 3.04 0.075 91.36

(Eger & Co.) Christiana, 5.54 3.77 0.088 90.69

(Henniger) Erlanger, 5.50 2.60 0.072 91.90

Dreiss, 5.40 3.10 0.060 91.50

Orp, 5.00 3.25 0.056 91.75

ACCORDING TO HEKMEYER.

Alcohol Acetic Lactic Carbonic Extract. Ash. Albumen.

in Acid. Acid. Acid.

100

volumes.

1—_Beers of

Utrecht._

Old Brown (uit 3.8 0.035 0.32 0.073 3.36 0.34 0.41

den boog),

Young pale, 4.1 0.008 0.25 0.103 2.86 0.25

(uit den boog),

Lambick, (uit 5.4 0.016 0.35 0.159 3.49 0.36

den boog),

Lambick, (uit 4.6 0.120 0.40 0.090 1.79 0.21

den kraus),

Table beer (uit 4.4 0.044 0.16 0.163 3.40 3.41

den aker),

2—_Other Dutch

Beers._

Princessen-bier, 4.0 0.060 0.17 0.090 2.60 0.21 0.46

Heumens-bier, 4.2 0.012 0.27 0.135 2.79 0.28

Bosch-bier (W. 5.2 0.044 0.42 0.010 4.83 0.38

Van Heeren),

ACCORDING TO LACAMBRE.

—Alcohol— —Extract—

Young Old Young Old

Beer. Beer. Beer. Beer.

London ale, 7 8 6.5 5

Hamburg ale, 5.5 6 6 5

London ale, (common,) 4 5 5 4

Porter, 5 6 7 6

London porter, (common,) 3 4 5 4

Munich, Salvator, 5 6 12 10

Bock, 3.5 4 9 7

Bavarian beer, (common,) 3 4 6.5 4.5

Brussels, Lambick 4.5 6 5.5 3.5

“ Faro, 2.5 4 5 3

Diest Guide beer, 3.5 6 8 5.5

Peeterman, of Lou vain, 3.5 5 8 5.5

White beer, 2.25 3.25 5 3.5

Double Ujtzet of Ghent, 3.25 4.5 5 4

Single “ “ 2.75 3.5 4 3

Barley beer of Antwerp, 3 3.5 4.5 3

Strong beer of Strasburg, 4 4.5 4 3.5

Strong beer of Lille, 4 5 4 3

White beer of Paris, 3.5 4 8 5

ACCORDING TO G. MONIER.

NAMES OF THE BEER. DEXTRINE, GLUCOSE. SUBSTANCES, SALTS.

ALBUMINOID ETC.

ALCOHOL.

(in

volumes.)

Cubic Grammes. Grammes. Grammes.

cntms.

Beer of France (Nord), 40.00 7.03 31.77 1.60

Beer of France (Nord), 32.50 4.80 31.00 2.10

Beer of France (Nord), 36.00 6.60 33.10 2.20

Pale ale (Burton), 60.50 8.25 39.35 2.80

Pale ale (Burton), 55.00 8.30 40.10 2.65

Munich beer, 56.25 15.10 58.40 2.52

Munich beer, 56.50 16.20 56.45 2.40

Amsterdam beer, 53.75 13.55 51.50 2.20

Paris beer (called 47.00 16.30 45.00 2.65

Strasburg beer),

Paris beer (called 45.00 14.35 51.30 2.05

Strasburg beer),

Paris beer (called 47.50 11.60 43.40 2.00

Strasburg beer),

Vienna beer, 52.50 11.00 55.30 2.30

ACCORDING TO WACKENRODER.

Alcohol. Extract. Albumen. Ash.

Beer of Lichtenhain, 3.2 4.5 0.05 0.2

Beer of Ilmenau, 3.1 7.1 0.08 0.2

Beer of Jena (called of 3.0 6.1 0.05 0.2

Erlangen),

Beer of Weimar (called 2.8 6.3 0.03 0.2

of Bamberg),

Beer of Oberweimar, 2.6 7.3 0.02 0.3

Double beer of Jena, 2.1 7.2 0.03 0.2

BERLIN BEER—27 SAMPLES.

Alcohol, 4.74 per cent.

Extract, 4.94 “ “

Malt sugar, 3.78 “ “

BERLIN WHITE BEER.

Alcohol, 1.48 per cent.

Extract, 3.65 “ “

Ash, 0.12 “ “

Original gravity, 7.94 “ “

NASSAU BEER.

Alcohol, 3.737 per cent.

Free carbonic acid, 0.285 “ “

Extract, 6.035 “ “

Phosphoric acid, 0.072 “ “

BEER OF HANOVER.

Max. Min. Mean.

Specific gravity at 17.5°, 1.0353 1.0115 1.0165

Water } { In beer } 91.61 85.37 89.64

Alcohol } { freed from } per cent., 5.05 0.72 4.01

Extract } { carbonic acid } 13.91 4.43 6.34

Ash, 0.28 0.19 0.24

Phosphoric acid in ash, 0.093 0.024 0.069

Original gravity of wort, 17.37 12.33 14.36

APPENDIX C.

ILLUSTRATIONS AND DESCRIPTIONS OF BREWERIES.

The brewery of modern times is very different from anything conceived

of one or two hundred years ago. Not merely its extent but all its

appliances are characteristic of this busy, progressive age, that knows

how to plant money in extensive outfits and supervision, in order that

it may yield a greater return, just as seeds put in rich earth and

carefully tended during growth give larger harvests of better quality

than were ever looked for in the old hap-hazard, starving plan. We

cannot mention one in fifty of those who deserve notice. Think, for

instance, of the great brewery of M. T. Bass, at Burton on Trent,

which produces about one million barrels a year; or those of Anton

Dreher, turning out five hundred thousand barrels, and see if it is

possible to attain such results except by modern processes and modern

business energy. No house in the United States has yet reached so

great a product, but more than one is on the direct way, and it is

not only possible but probable that within fifty years the largest

establishments and the finest beer will be found in this country. In

the multitude of those who fairly deserve mention it seems almost

invidious to select a few, but it has seemed best to give a brief

account of some that, in one way or another, may be regarded as typical

exponents of this department of American industry. Those mentioned are

not always the largest or best known, but they represent different

parts of the country and together form a tolerable epitome of the

whole brewing business, with its larger and smaller breweries, old and

new establishments, and various ways of procedure, the common feature

being that all endeavor to produce a thoroughly good article, and trust

to the merit of the product for success rather than to any temporary

advantages that may be gained by cheapening their brew at the expense

of its flavor or wholesomeness. This is the noticeable fact in the

brewing trade at the present time.

HISTORICAL SKETCH OF HON. FREDERICK LAUER OF READING, PA.

The brewery of Mr. Frederick Lauer of Reading, Pa., is not only among

the oldest in the country, but has remained from the beginning in the

hands of the Lauer family. It was established in 1823 at Womelsdorf, a

few miles from Reading, by the father of the present proprietor, who

had just arrived from Germany. In 1826 it was removed to Reading, and

the business started on the same spot where it is now carried on. The

elder Lauer was an indefatigable worker, and is said at this time to

have taken no more than two or three hours regular sleep a day. In 1835

his son Frederick succeeded to the sole proprietorship of the brewery,

and its progress from this time was very rapid. For several years ale

and porter had been brewed, but no lager beer was made in the country

until 1842. In the year 1844 Mr. Lauer began to brew lager beer, and

was thus one of the pioneers in this industry; and since that time ale,

lager beer and porter have been produced constantly. The brewery is a

model of neatness and convenience, perfect in every appointment and

the special pride and pet of its owner, who would much rather lose a

year’s profits than tolerate dirt or disorder or the production of a

poor beer. Mr. Lauer has not, however, been constantly occupied with

his private business. For at least thirty years he has been one of

the prominent men of the city of Reading; has held various important

public positions, political and otherwise, and has done great service

in securing equable legislation in matters affecting the brewing

trade. A man of quick perception and untiring energy, he has again and

again accomplished alone, or nearly alone, things that were considered

almost impossible, and from whose attempt his associates recoiled. An

instance in point is thus described in a recently published sketch of

his life: “The way the tax was saved was as follows: Shortly before the

adjournment of Congress, he (Mr. Lauer) received a letter apprising him

that the Committee on Ways and Means were about advising an increase.

He immediately telegraphed to the nearest members of the Brewers’

Committee to join him at Washington. They had an interview with the

Committee of Ways and Means, but the Committee refused to make any

modification in the bill, as it had already passed the first reading in

the House. There were ten members of the Brewers’ Committee, nine of

whom, after the interview, agreed to allow the fifty cents increase and

make no further exertion in the matter. Mr. Lauer, the tenth, was not

satisfied; and, after gaining the consent of the Committee, he called

on a number of members of the House, and urged upon them the ruinous

consequences to the brewing business which would follow the passage of

the bill as reported. The same day, February 11, 1865, the bill came up

in Committee of the Whole, when the desired modification was made by a

vote of seventy-three to sixty-eight, and the following week the bill

came up for final passage, when the bill, as modified, was passed by a

majority of four. The members from Kentucky who had voted against the

modification in the first place, voted for the bill when it came up on

the third reading, they having been influenced through the exertions of

Mr. Lauer. Immediately after its passage, Thad. Stevens, chairman on

the Ways and Means, jumped up and exclaimed, ‘That d—d Lauer did it.’”

This is only one of many instances in which Mr. Lauer’s efforts have

been of the greatest value to brewers at large and incidentally to the

whole country. He was the first president of the United States Brewers’

Association, and has more than once been able in time of scarcity to

secure such shipments of malt or hops from foreign countries as to

relieve the distress and materially reduce the inflated price of these

articles.

THE JOSEPH SCHLITZ BREWING CO., MILWAUKEE, WIS.

In the year 1849 Mr. August Krug built a small brewery at Milwaukee on

Chestnut street, between 4th and 5th streets, and the year after he

added vaults of a capacity of 150 barrels, situated on the corner of

3d and Walnut streets. His sale was about 250 barrels. From this small

beginning there developed one of the largest breweries in the country.

Mr. Krug died in 1856, and Mr. Joseph Schlitz who had come to Milwaukee

during the previous year took the management of the business which

at first increased only moderately although managed with skill and

energy. In the year 1865 the sales were 4,400 barrels. Five years

later he began the erection of the present brewery on the corner of 3d

and Walnut streets, the same place where the original vaults had been

situated. The greater part of the present buildings were completed

within two years, and the sales for 1871 amounted to 12,283 barrels.

The period of rapid development had now been reached, and the advance

up to the present time has been remarkable as may be seen from the

following table of the yearly sales, beginning with the year 1870.

1870, Barrels, 8,707

1871, “ 12,283

1872, “ 30,868

1873, “ 49,623

1874, “ 69,624

1875, “ 74,813

1876, “ 71,017

1877, “ 79,538

1878, “ 82,068

1879, “ ending April, 110,832

In 1874 the business was made into a stock company under the title

“Joseph Schlitz Brewing Company,” with Mr. Schlitz as president, the

secretary and superintendent being respectively, Mr. August Uihlein and

Mr. Henry Uihlein. Being thus partially relieved of the immediate cares

of business Mr. Schlitz in the following year sailed for Germany to

visit his native home of Mayence. The vessel was the Schiller, which,

as all readers must remember, was wrecked on the Scilly Islands, May 7,

1875, and Mr. Schlitz was one of the many victims of that disaster. In

these circumstances the company organization was probably a fortunate

circumstance for the business. The death of a sole proprietor or even

a sole nominal proprietor is apt to derange a business, no matter how

capable the successor may be, and this difficulty is almost avoided

in the case of an established company. The present management is as

follows:

President, Henry Uihlein; secretary, August Uihlein; superintendent,

Alfred Uihlein. The brewery in its present form occupies two whole

squares, and still larger accommodations may be needed at no distant

day. There is a new ice-house 100 × 124 feet, four stories high, and

with a twenty-four foot basement. The cellars have a capacity of 25,000

barrels; the whole storage capacity is 70,000 barrels, and the brewery

is already fitted for the production of 200,000 barrels a year. There

is a large coopering establishment and the gathering of ice alone

occupies 300 men and 90 teams for about twenty days every year. The

beer is sent all over the United States and to Brazil, Central America

and Mexico, in both barrels and bottles. About one million bottles were

sold in 1877, and in the succeeding year the amount was more than two

millions. The bottling department alone occupies a building 46 × 150

feet, with basement, and fitted with all conveniences for the work.

The analysis of this beer gives the following result for the percentage

of alcohol: ordinary lager beer 4.5 volumetrically, and 5.6 by weight.

The bottled lager beer shows as a result of four analyses within six

months, six per cent. of alcohol volumetrically, and 4.8 by weight.

This is certainly an excellent showing, and calculated to enhance the

reputation of any brewery.

THE BREWERY OF MR. GOTTFRIED KRUEGER, NEWARK, N. J.

The brewery now owned by Mr. Gottfried Krueger was founded in 1851 by

Louis Adam and J. Braun, the latter of whom died before the buildings

were completed. Mr. Adam at once formed a partnership with John Laible

under the firm name of Laible & Adam, and pushed the work so well that

within the year brewing was commenced, and a sale of 1,200 barrels for

the first twelve months secured.

The property then consisted of six city lots, a small frame house

partly used as a saloon, a one-story frame brewery thirty feet square,

a stable for two horses and vaults for 500 barrels of beer. The brewing

capacity was about twenty barrels.

In 1852 Mr. Gottfried Krueger, the present proprietor, came to this

country, and being a relative of Mr. Laible entered the brewery as an

apprentice. Here he remained until Messrs. Laible and Adam dissolved

partnership in 1855, Mr. Laible building a new brewery and Mr. Adam

continuing the old business. Mr. Krueger accompanied Mr. Laible and

became foreman in the establishment where he remained until 1865

when in conjunction with Mr. Gottlieb Hill he bought the old brewery

of Louis Adam and commenced business under the firm name of Hill &

Krueger. During the interval a new brewery had been added and a new

stable for six horses, while the sale had increased to 4,000 barrels

and the brewing capacity to fifty barrels. This advance, however, was

destined to be greatly surpassed by that made under the new management.

The first step was the building of two new vaults of a capacity of

5,000 barrels. This together with numerous minor improvements was

accomplished during the first year, and within the same time the sale

of beer was doubled. The years next succeeding saw a rapid development.

In 1866 the firm built a new three-story brick malt and store-house; in

1876 a large building for fermenting rooms; in 1868 stables for twenty

horses; in 1869 an ice-house of 4,000 barrels capacity, and also vaults

for 2,000 barrels. The result fully justified these preparations for an

enlarged business for the sale increased steadily year by year and in

1875 amounted to 25,000 barrels.

At this time Mr. Hill was compelled by the state of his health to

retire from business, and on the 16th of February, 1875, Mr. Krueger

became the sole owner of the property which then covered the entire

block. Adding in 1878 a model office building and in 1879 new stables

for forty-five horses, he has now one of the finest breweries in the

State. The sale for the current year will be over 40,000 barrels.

In explanation of the cut we may add that the malt and brew-houses

are situated on Belmont avenue, the office and stables on West Kinney

street, the ice-house on Charlton street, and the yards etc., on

Montgomery street.

Every one connected with the establishment, from Mr. Krueger down,

is thoroughly fit for his duties and zealous in their discharge. The

management is by the proprietor himself, ably seconded by Mr. Theodore

C. W. Eggerking who has been long and successfully connected with the

business.

APPENDIX D.

LIST OF BREWERS WITH PRODUCT FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS, 1878 AND 1879.

ALSO, PRODUCT BY STATES.

There is some difference of opinion as to the propriety of publishing

such information as the annual product of the various breweries in

the country, and it therefore seems proper to explain why it has been

decided to give the figures in these pages, and how the information has

been obtained.

For some time the particulars were furnished to certain parties in

Chicago and New York, by a clerk in the Internal Revenue Department

at Washington. In this there was probably an injustice, for what is

demanded by the law cannot be withheld by the brewer, and both analogy

and general reasoning indicate that this forced information should

be considered as confidential, and not exposed to the comment of

indifferent persons or business rivals.

This view of the case is the one now held by the Department, as appears

from the following correspondence:

_Official._

FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.

(Copy.)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, D. C.,

September 15, 1879.

HENRY H. RUETER, ESQ.,

_President United States Brewers’ Association_.

SIR: Your attention is called to an article in the _Brewers’ Gazette_

of August 15, ultimo, headed, “Thrown Together; A Comparative View

of the so-called Brewers’ Returns,” in which are embraced copies of

letters from this office in relation to lists of reports of sales of

fermented liquors for the years 1878 and 1879, as published by the

_Western Brewer_ and A. E. Tovey.

Please inform me whether the brewers of the United States desire

that such tabulated statements be prepared by this Bureau as therein

stated for publication.

Very respectfully,

(Signed) GREEN B. RAUM,

_Commissioner_.

REPLY OF THE PRESIDENT OF BREWERS’ ASSOCIATION.

(Copy.)

UNITED STATES BREWERS’ ASSOCIATION,

BOSTON, September 25, 1879.

GEN. GREEN B. RAUM,

_Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Washington, D. C._

SIR: In reply to your esteemed letter of the 15th inst., referring to

the preparation and publication of tabulated statements of brewers’

sales, and asking if, in my opinion, the brewers of the United States

desire that such tabulated statements be prepared by the Internal

Revenue Bureau—I beg to state, that I have no data which would enable

me to answer your question definitely. Many brewers, undoubtedly,

feel indifferent in the matter; some may favor the publication, and

others are opposed to it. They argue that there is no parallel case

in any other branch of trade; that individual business affairs should

not be thus made public; that the publication of individual sales

leads to undue competition; and that these lists are a bone of bitter

contention between the publishers.

If the inquiry has been addressed to me with reference to the future

action of the Department, I beg leave to suggest that the brewers’

wishes can be best ascertained at their next yearly meeting, in June,

and I would respectfully ask you to delay action in the matter till

then.

I am, sir, most respectfully yours,

HENRY H. RUETER.

ANSWER TO ABOVE FROM INTERNAL REVENUE DEPARTMENT.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

WASHINGTON, September 29, 1879.

HENRY H. RUETER, ESQ.

_President United States Brewers’ Association, Boston, Mass._

SIR: Acknowledging the receipt of yours of the 25th instant, in

reply to office letter of the 15th instant calling attention to an

article published in the _Brewers’ Gazette_ relative to errors in

reports of sales of fermented liquors for the years 1878 and 1879,

as published by the _Western Brewer_ and A. E. Tovey, and inquiring

if such publications were considered desirable by the brewers of the

United States, I have to say that I fully concur in your opinion

that, while some may favor the publication of such statistics, others

would object thereto, and would argue that there is no parallel case

in any other branch of trade; and that individual business affairs

should not thus be made public; that such publications lead to

undue competition; and that they become a bone of bitter contention

between publishers. For this reason, I have decided to prohibit the

furnishing of such lists hereafter to any and all parties.

Respectfully,

R. E. ROGERS.

_Acting Commissioner._

On the other hand, while it is certain that many brewers are glad to

have their product extensively stated, it is at least probable that

very few have any real objection. In order to test the question we sent

a printed form of inquiry, as to production, to all the brewers in

the country. A large majority furnished the desired information, and

as many others doubtless failed to answer simply through negligence

or indifference, it seemed certain that the number of objectors

was so small that this list might be published with propriety and

to the satisfaction of far the larger part of those interested. It

is to be noticed that this is a very different thing from printing

enforced statements, without a shadow of authority from the brewers

themselves. In this book the figures are generally furnished by the

brewers and for this very purpose. Where no reply has been received,

the product has been stated according to the best testimony that could

be obtained, and the total result is certainly more accurate than

any yet published. This is not because the government returns were

incorrect, but because of carelessness in transcription, or errors

of the types, or both. Whatever the cause, so many errors have been

discovered in the so-called official lists of those who obtained their

information through Washington, as to greatly impair the value of

those tables, and create much dissatisfaction among those who find

an erroneous impression of their business thus disseminated through

the country. Without claiming that our own are absolutely free from

error, we are prepared to maintain their substantial correctness and

their superiority to any yet offered to the public. The product here

shown is greater than that stated earlier in this book. The returns

on which that statement was made seem to have been incomplete at the

time of publication, unless the fault lies in the transfer of figures

or in the footings, a kind of defect from which few public documents

of a statistical character are wholly free. The number of breweries

here given is less than the former statement, owing to the omission

of a considerable number of the smaller establishments, concerning

which no satisfactory information could be obtained, and the further

omission of those whose owners were known to object to a publication

of their business. The total product of all so left out is known to be

inconsiderable, though it cannot be exactly ascertained.

Those most apt to find fault with a public statement of the amount of

their business are the smaller brewers, who sometimes fear that their

business will suffer if it is known that they dispose of less beer

than some rival. To such it may be said that a good business need not

be a large one. There are plenty of men in the country who work on a

comparatively small scale, and yet would not be induced to extend their

operations. They make enough, as it is, to satisfy their wants, and

they are not loaded down by the cares that attend a struggle to sell

as much as possible. They fear no injury because their sale is not so

large as that of some one else, and they are perfectly in the right, as

experience shows. Still again, there are many small breweries to-day,

that will be great fifteen or twenty years from now. We have shown in

Appendix C something of the possibilities of sudden development in this

business, and with the increasing taste for beer these opportunities

will be better than ever. It is not against a brewery that it is small.

Its product may be of the first quality, and it may be small simply

because the owner does not care to have it large.

Other considerations might be adduced, but it seems as if enough had

been said to justify the printing of statistics prepared as are those

here furnished, especially as they must be interesting to every one

who makes a study of the beer question and wants as much and as varied

information as he can obtain.

SUMMARY

OF THE BEER PRODUCT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE YEARS 1878 AND 1879,

WITH THE INCREASE OR DECREASE DURING THE SECOND OF THESE YEARS.

Name No. of No. of No. of Decrease Increase

of State Breweries Barrels Barrels

sold from sold from

May 1, May 1,

1877-8. 1878-9.

Alabama, 1 184 74 110

Arkansas, 1 110 72 38

Arizona, 7 713 720 7

California, 195 379,373 385,839 6,466

Colorado, 29 23,901 23,464 437

Connecticut, 19 53,528 51,988 1,540

Dakota, 14 4,616 4,531 85

Delaware, 3 7,841 9,563 1,722

District 10 27,506 29,126 1,620

Columbia,

Georgia, 1 7,330 7,710 380

Idaho, 12 936 1,484 548

Illinois, 115 579,888 608,627 28,739

Indiana, 76 182,448 191,729 9,281

Iowa, 136 186,176 169,030 17,146

Kansas, 34 20,995 24,709 3,714

Kentucky, 36 127,771 143,753 15,982

Louisiana, 10 36,352 47,407 11,055

Maine, 1 7,031 7 7,024

Maryland, 63 208,228 205,042 3,186

Massachusetts, 39 711,166 663,978 47,188

Michigan, 140 203,043 212,231 9,188

Minnesota, 114 101,916 113,529 11,613

Missouri, 72 547,590 582,372 34,782

Montana, 22 4,677 5,516 839

Nebraska, 27 27,100 29,270 2,170

Nevada, 35 12,116 13,969 1,853

New Hampshire, 5 127,07 116,888 10,183

New Jersey, 57 502,54 519,864 17,290

New Mexico, 2 110 180 70

New York, 365 3,556,678 3,980,716 424,038

North 1 4 4

Carolina,

Ohio, 186 968,332 965,480 2,852

Oregon, 39 13,362 16,159 2,797

Pennsylvania, 317 1,041,486 1,034,082 7,404

Rhode Island, 8 25,210 27,831 2,621

South 2 778 372 406

Carolina,

Tennessee, 4 6,980 7,107 127

Texas, 37 10,050 7,718 2,332

Utah, 20 9,490 11,476 1,986

Vermont, 1 285 173 112

Virginia, 3 10,694 15,694 5,000

Wash. 20 7,965 7,231 734

Territory,

West Virginia, 10 23,086 23,906 1,036

Wisconsin, 226 508,553 585,068 76,515

Wyoming

Territory, 8 4,060 4,505 445

----- ---------- ---------- ------- -------

2,520 10,279,299 10,848,194 100,777 671,888

LIST OF BREWERS IN THE UNITED STATES, WITH THE PRODUCT FOR

THE YEARS ENDING MAY, 1878, AND MAY, 1879.

ARKANSAS.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Fort Smith, Freiseis, Joseph, 110 72

ARIZONA.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Alexandria, Minger, Jos. 54 50

Florence, Will, P. & Co., 60 60

Globe City, Medler, Fred & Co., 41 49

Prescott, Raible, John, 225 269

“ Rodenberg, J. N., 250 211

Rio Verde, Horn, Wm., 37 34

Tucson, Levin, Alex., 46 47

--- ---

Number of Breweries, 7. 713 720

CALIFORNIA.

No. of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Adin, Jonas & Bofinger, ---- ----

Alameda, Alameda Brewery, 817 487

Altaville, Becker, John, 350 350

Anaheim, Conrad, Fred, 145 158

“ Goodale, I, 357 281

Auburn, Grohs, Frederick, 1,060 1,020

Benicia, Rueger, John, 622 697

Benton, Partzwick Brewery, 116 87

Bishop Creek, Munzinger, Philippay & Co., 57 189

Boca, Boca Brewing Company, 9,717 11,035

Bodie, Frankenberger & Davidson, ---- 198

“ Carion, A. A., ---- ----

Boonebar, Ganser, Benj., ---- ----

Camp Star Brewery, 30 61

Independence,

Castroville, Lauck, George, 284 404

Cherokee, Bader, Chs., 139 144

Chico, Croissant, Chs., 448 563

Chollas Doblin, C., 140 150

Valley,

Cloverdale, Schaeffer & Auker, 48 159

Colusa, Kammerer, G. & Co., 800 884

Columbia, Bixel, Joseph, 174 185

Crescent City, Mayhoffer, Joseph, 59 81

Davisville, Faber, Wm., 74 77

Dixon, Sieber & Oberholzer, 622 586

Downieville, Bosch, F., 300 321

“ Nessler, L., 275 282

Dutch Flat, Mitchell, Wm., 320 365

Etna, Küppler, Chs., 336 394

Eureka, Harper, I., 148 126

“ Huck & McAllenan, 210 273

Folsom, Yaeger, Peter, 320 419

Forest Hill, Andres, Joseph, 112 114

Fort Bidwell, Fulger, M., 102 159

Fresno, Erpelding, J. L., ---- 48

Garrote, Garrote Brewery, 125 149

Germantown, Miller, A. & Co., 162 300

Gilroy, Herold, Adam, 742 718

Grass Valley, Benkelman, D., 666 699

“ Frank, John, 162 183

“ Fritz, Chs., 465 398

“ Hodge, Thomas & Co., 944 10,085

Greenwood, Muhlback, Nancy, ---- 35

Gaudalupe, Togninva, Tomasine, 32 87

Havilah, Neff, Bernhard, 34 87

Haywards, Lyon’s Brewery, 483 502

“ Booken & Herman, 1,198 1,587

Healdsburg, Müller, Carl, 170 180

Hormitos, Lessmann, Henry, 81 61

Hollister, Narcoe, Henry, 300 366

Hot Springs, Fantz, Edw., 661 678

Independence, Fernbach, Jo., 138 139

Ione City, Raab, C., 314 380

Iowa Hill, Schmidt, John, 100 87

Jackson, Beiser & Schroeder, 241 435

Kernville, Cook, Wm, 220 109

“ Wroesch, R. R., 149 137

Knight’s Dolling, Victor, 221 263

Ferry,

Lakeport, Smith, R. O., 170 188

Livermore, Livermore Brewery, 215 261

Lone Pine, Lubken, John, 115 74

“ Munzinger & Dodge, 155 35

Los Angeles, New York Brewery, 2,479 2,075

“ Philadelphia Brewery, ---- 1,430

“ U. S. Brewery, ---- 236

“ Schwarz, Louis, ---- ----

Lower Lake, Mather & Linck, 330 380

Mariposa, Weiler, John, 124 115

Marysville, Lieber, Gottlieb, 725 756

Mayfield, Ducker & Company, 950 1,056

Mendocino, Larowskia, J. C., ---- 93

Merced, Heinerath & Gossner, 239 290

Middletown, Munz and Scott, 180 318

Modesta, Lorensen & Peterson, 454 531

“ Braun, M., 141 260

Mokelumne Disbrow & Co., 224 192

Hill,

“ Mokelumne Hill Brewery, 452 382

Monitor, Scossa, John, ---- ----

Napa, Pfeiffer, Philip, 251 328

Nevada City, Blasauf, Mary, 186 157

“ Dreyfuss, L. W., 833 702

“ Fogeli, Casper, 142 163

“ Weiss, Emile, 385 422

North Weiss, Valentine, 39 57

Bloomfield,

“ Hieronimus, S., ---- 105

North San Koch, G. W., 356 427

Juan,

Oakland, Welscher & Westermann, 2,600 3,670

“ Kramm & Dieves, 7,385 9,000

“ Bredhoff & Co., 4,124 4,600

Oleta, Schroder, Henry, 459 376

Oroville, Schneider, Wm., 456 439

Pajaro, Dulla & Werner, 136 249

Petaluma, Robinson, Geo. & Co., 818 531

“ Michelie & Griess, 613 666

Pine Grove, Sass, C. D. F., 232 234

Placerville, Collins, Fred, 408 424

“ Zeiss, Jacob, 300 281

Point Arenas, Schlachter, John, 181 105

Quincy, Schlatter, Wm., 954 94

Red Bluff, Bofinger, W. F., 602 563

Redwood City, Eureka Brewery, 572 576

“ Hadler, C., 896 1,077

“ Kriess, M., ---- 418

Sacket’s Gulf, Wolf, John, 720 20

Sacramento, Borchers & Schwartz, 2,416 2,504

“ Gruhler, E. & C., 2,885 2,675

“ Kerth & Nicolaus, 3,812 4,242

“ Knauer, F. C., 3,020 2,995

“ Scheld, P., 2,040 2,164

“ Ochs, M., 1,763 2,163

Salinas, Lurz & Menke, 324 478

San Andreas, Bloom, John, 124 96

San Anderson, John, 499 424

Bernardino,

San Buena Hartman, Fredolin, 140 237

Ventura,

San Diego, Dobler, C., 49 155

“ Walter, Otto, 147 200

San Albany Brewery, Everett St.,

Francisco, Hagerman, F. & Co., props., 13,815 13,000

“ Albrecht, James, 623 Braman 880

St., ----

“ Bauer, John, 120 Fillmore St. ---- 617

“ Buss & Hensler, 209 Treat ---- 800

Ave.,

“ Bavaria Brewery, Vallejo and

Green Sts. 3,335 3,297

“ Bay Brewery, 612, 614 and

616 7th St., Lumann, G.,

proprietor, 6,244 1,750

“ Broadway Brewery, 637

Broadway, Adams, Jacob, 5,225 4,045

prop.,

“ Burnell, J. H. & Bro., Ninth

Avenue, 142 400

“ Chicago Brewery, 1420 to

1434 Pine St., Aherns, H. &

Co., proprietors, 22,088 20,261

“ Christ, John, 25th St., 90 80

“ Empire Brewery, Chestnut

St., Harold, John, 19,535 17,014

proprietor,

“ Enterprise Brewery, 2019

Folsom St., Hildebrant &

Co., proprietors, 4,190 4,300

“ Eureka Brewery, 235 First

St., Schweitzer & Bro.,

proprietors, 7,154 6,800

“ Golden City Brewery, 1431

Pacific St., Buckle, Geo.,

proprietor, 1,610 1,500

“ Golden Gate Brewery, 713

Greenwich Chas., proprietor,

St., Metzler, 4,675 4,969

“ Hayes Valley Brewery, 612

Grove St., Wahlmuth & Co.,

proprietors, 2,901 3,000

“ Hensler & Fredericks. ---- ----

“ Hibernia Brewery, Howard

St., Nunan, M., proprietor, 17,250 19,546

“ Humbold Brewery, 1839

Mission St., Noethig & Turk,

proprietors, 6,784 8,000

“ Jackson Brewery, Mission

St., Frederick, Wm. A., 7,522 8,008

proprietor,

“ Kirby, Thos. J., 528½ Noe ---- ----

St.,

“ Lafayette Brewery, 725 Green

St., Grogan & Austell,

proprietors, 5,462 5,649

“ Marks Brewery, Tehama St.,

Marks, Samuel, proprietor, 498 312

“ Mason’s Brewery, 527

Chestnut St., Mason, John, 9,625 8,000

proprietor,

“ National Brewery, Fulton

and Webster Sts., Gluck &

Hansen, proprietors, 13,270 13,200

“ New York Brewery, Shotwell

St., Kirby, L. J., 2,457 508

proprietor,

“ North Beach Brewery, Powell

and Chestnut Sts., Schwarz,

Jos., proprietor, 426 360

“ Pacific Brewery, 271 Tehama

St., Fortmann & Co.,

proprietors, 12,668 9,947

“ Philadelphia Brewery, 240

Second St., Wieland, John,

proprietor, 43,407 44,276

“ Railroad Brewery, Valencia,

between 15th and 16th Sts.,

Schuster, Fred., proprietor, 1,647 1,300

“ Schultz & Geitner, 26th St., ---- 1,400

“ South San Francisco Brewery,

R. R. Ave. and 14th St.,

Hoelscher, A. &. Co.,

proprietors, 2,192 2,200

“ South San Francisco Stock

Brewing Co., 2118 Powell St.,

10,420 8,900

“ Swan Brewing Co., 15th and

Dolores Sts., 971 481

“ Swiss Brewery, 414 and 416

Dupont St., 765 498

“ Union Brewery, Hess & Co.,

proprietors, 7,020 5,800

“ U. S. Brewery, Franklin and

McAllister Sts., 15,477 13,300

“ Washington Brew’y, 723

Lombard St., 17,326 16,321

“ Wilmot Brewing Co., 324

Green St. 250 100

“ Willows Brewery, Fauss, O. &

Co., proprietors, cor. 19th

and Mission Sts., 6,501 7,600

San Jose, Eagle Brewery, 3,983 4,052

“ Herman A., 191 159

“ Krumbs Brewery, 938 859

“ San Jose Brewery, 1,343 1,864

“ Schramm & Schnabel, 8,372 10,034

San Juan, Bentler & Beck, 162 96

San Leandro, Columbia Brewery, 181 239

“ Rantzan, T. H., 181 102

San Luis Lindenmeyer, Julius, 295 122

Obispo,

“ Hauser & Williamson, ---- ----

San Rafael, Bagen & Goerl. 1,374 1,559

Santa Barbara, Mueller, H. & Bro., 110 144

Santa Clara, Santa Clara Brewery, 284 480

Santa Cruz, Bausch, Henry, 793 625

Santa Rosa, Metzger & Haltinner, 1,029 1,146

Shasta, Behrle & Litsch 358 379

Sonora, Baccigalapi, Louis, 297 179

“ Bauman, John, 640 571

South Vallejo, Deminger, Fred, 1,706 2,534

Stockton, Boemer & Wirth, 515 612

“ Neistrath, Eliz., 505 716

“ Rothenbush, D., 384 819

Sutter Creek, Rabolt, L. 661 759

Sutterville, Theilen, N., 1,168 1,081

Truckee, Grazer & Stoll, 245 234

“ Menk, Paul, 76 52

Ten-Mile Franz & Bader, ---- 5

River,

Ukiah, Wurtenburg, S., 338 259

Vallejo, Widenmann & Rothenburg, 1,722 1,706

“ Smith, P. & J., 250 1,097

Vallecito, Vallecito Brewery, 129 113

Visalia, Mooney’s Brewery, 594 581

“ Empire Brewery, ---- 33

Volcano, Griesbach, Geo. 40 28

Watsonville, Kuhlitz, C., 72 118

“ Palmtag, Christian, 1,495 1,721

Weaverville, Meckel, J., ---- 34

Woodland, Schuerley & Miller, 1,458 1,206

“ Wirt, Geo. L., 200 180

Yreka, Yeters, Chas. 297 305

“ Junker, Chas., 311 298

Yuba City, Klempp, Fred., 270 305

------- -------

Number of Breweries, 189. 379,373 385,839

COLORADO.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Black Hawk, Haubrick, Sam’l, 791 580

Boulder City, Weisenhorn & Voegte, 1,410 945

Central City, Lehmkul, Wm., 890 1,175

“ Richards & Wickett, 777 190

“ Staum, Chr., 903 ----

Colorado City, El Paso Co. Brewing Co., 222 723

Del Norte, Bingle & Co., 170 300

Denver, Denver Brewing Co. 5,858 ----

“ Colorado Brewing Co., ---- 59

“ Bendleburg, Geo., 40 60

“ Melsheimer, Max, ---- 1,290

“ Oppenlander, G. F., 1,423 1,472

“ Zang, Philip, 6,110 8,408

Fair Play, Summer, Leonard, 229 344

Georgetown, Summer, John & Bro. 694 670

Golden, Schueler & Coos, 2,857 3,004

Granite, Mesch & Gerter, 11 155

Idaho Springs, Ullrich, Fred, 106 99

Lake City, Fisher & Co, 50 182

“ Hirt, Chas., 135 203

Leadville, Fuernstein. C., ---- 210

“ Leadville Brewery, ---- 300

“ Gau, Elizabeth J., ---- 632

Malta, Sponagel, V. H., ---- 300

Ouray, Geiger, D., ---- 80

Pueblo, Merz, Elias, 850 1,062

Rosita, Townsend, T. D., 95 153

Silver Plume, Boche, Otto, ---- ----

Trinidad, Schneider, Henry, 280 868

------ ------

Number of Breweries, 29. 23,901 23,464

CONNECTICUT.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Bridgeport, Eckart Bros., 2,599 2,120

“ Kutscher, Louis, 164 162

“ Klaus, Fred, 3,200 3,584

“ Knoedler, Christian, 66 86

“ Loehr, C., 1,687 2,588

“ Stoehr, C., 1,687 2,588

“ Winter, Albert, 4,170 3,362

Hartford, Herold Capitol Brewing Co., 2,058 2,339

“ Shannon & McCann, 5,547 6,151

“ Sichler, George, 2,243 2,400

Middletown, Hopke & Wilkins, Jr., 689 1,870

New Haven, Bassermann, Geo. A., 4,564 3,902

“ Fresenius, Ph., 8,716 8,080

“ Hull, Wm. & Son, 9,454 7,430

“ Nicholas, Chas., 321 233

“ Yastron, Rich., 22 18

Rockville, Link, Erhardt, 1,018 784

Thompsonville, Matthewson, John, 4,967 3,791

Waterbury, Hellman & Kipp, 356 500

------ ------

Number of Breweries, 19. 53,528 51,988

DAKOTA.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Bismarck, Walker, J. E., 684 502

“ Walters & Kalberer, 714 404

Central City, Rosenkranz & Werner, ---- 264

Custar City, Parks, Robert, ---- ----

Deadwood, Downer & Co., 12 120

“ Nishwitz, Wm., ---- 25

“ Rodebank & Nielson, ---- ----

“ Schuchardt, A., ---- ----

Fargo, Brokorsch, Jos. W., ---- 90

Fort Totten, Brenner, E. W., 339 365

Lead City, Jentes, Hall, ---- 19

Sioux Falls, Knott, G. A. & Co., 371 1,023

Yankton, Forester John, 1,621 885

“ Roptenscher & Co., 875 834

------ ------

Number of Breweries, 14. 4,616 4,531

DELAWARE.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Wilmington, Hartman & Fehrenbach, 3,871 4,700

“ Specht, Carl, 90 308

“ Stoeckle, Jos., 3,880 4,555

------ ------

Number of Breweries, 3. 7,841 9,563

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Georgetown, Duetz, Catherine, 38 and 40 792 661

Green St.,

Washington, Adt. F. J., bet. 13th and

14th Sts., E. and D. and S. 2,569 1,960

E.,

“ Albert, John, cor. 25th and

F. N. W., 686 597

“ Cook, John G., 45 N St., N. 264 364

W.,

“ Dickson, Chris., 719 4 1-2 1,373 1,309

St.,

“ Henrich, Christian, 1229

20th St., N. W., 7,400 10,711

“ Juenemann, Geo., 400 E St.,

N. W., 11,341 11,151

“ Kernwein, George, No. 124 N

St., N. W., 203 261

“ Roth, Jacob, 318 First St., 2,258 1,674

N. W.,

“ Zanner, Wm., 526 4 1-2 St., 620 438

S. W.,

------ ------

Number of Breweries, 10. 27,506 29,126

GEORGIA.

No. of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Atlanta, Atlanta City Brewing Co., W.

H. Tuller, President, 7,330 7,710

IDAHO.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Atlanta, Wilmer & Motlow, 6 240

Boise City, Broadbeck, John,

“ Lemp, John, 329 492

Bonanza City, Hepburn, John & Co.,

Challis, Albiez, Frederick,

Idaho City, Haug, Nicolas, 160 198

Jordan Creek, Frank & Gundorf,

Lewiston, Weisgerber Bros., 307 380

Pioneer City, Stadtmiller, Jos., 45 58

Placerville, Kohny, Chas., 25 11

Salmon City, Spahn, Michael, 31 45

Silver City, Summercamp, W. F., 33 60

------ ------

Number of Breweries, 12. 936 1,484

ILLINOIS.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Alton, Jehle & Peters, 3,183 3,995

Aurora, Knell, John,

“ McInhill, J. V., 651

Beardstown, Rink, Anton, 1,645 1,284

Belleville, Hartman Bros., 11,951 13,452

“ Stoegle, Fidel, 4,300 4,022

Belvidere, Waldeck, J., 307 77

Blue Island, Bauer, Henry, 238 116

“ Metz & Schwachow, 2,199 680

Bloomington, Meyer & Wochner, 4,968 5,169

Bowmanville, Volmer, W., 1,006 1,004

Canton, Koebel, L., 182 144

Carlinville, Deibel, G. P. & Bro., 1,244 1,188

Chicago, Bartholomae & Leicht Brewing

Co., 688 to 706 Sedgwick St., 28,293 31,245

“ Bartholomae & Roesing, 335 W.

12th St., 12,939 10,648

“ Brand, M. & Co., Elston Ave.

and River St., 6,173 34,419

“ Busch & Brand Brewery Co., 29

and 31 Cedar St., (May and

June, 1878), 29,941 5,070

“ Chicago Union Brewing Co.,

27th St. and Johnson Ave., 6,379 4,283

“ Devereaux, J., 432 N. State 250 138

St.,

“ Downer & Bernis Brewing Co.,

91 S. Park Ave., 56,770 66,878

“ Fortune Bros., 138 to 144 W.

Van Buren St., 12,222 13,555

“ Funk, Ernst, 44 Willow St., 362 180

“ Gillen, Schmidt & Co., 416

25th St., 256 462

“ Gottfried, M., 166 Archer 19,595 16,831

Ave.,

“ Hoerber, Jno. L., 220 and 222

W. 12th St., 1,912 2,125

“ Jerusalem, Jos., 307 Rush St., 342 476

“ Keeley Brewing Co., 28th St.,

near Cottage Grove Ave., 6,499 8,766

“ Schmidt & Glade, 9 to 35

Grant Place, 21,128 26,534

“ Schoenhofen, Peter, 34 to 50

Seward St., 36,014 41,447

“ Seipp, Conrad Brewing Co.,

foot of 27th St., 103,787 108,347

“ Seiben, Michael, 335 and 337

Larrabee St., 2,942 3,182

“ Wagner, Ludwig, 942 N. Clark

St., 388 446

“ Walther, Frank, 408 Paulina

St., (March and April, 1879), ---- 517

Columbia, Monroe Brewery., 1,173 1,384

Danville, Stein, John, 1,861 1,587

Decatur, Harpstrite & Schlanderman, 4,147 3,076

DeKalb, Corkings, Thos., 1,013 797

Dixon, Clears, Jas. B., 510 435

“ Plein, Nicholas, 977 1,475

East St. Louis, Heim, F. & Bro., 11,380 14,020

Edwardsville, Mick, Henry, 1,026 564

Elgin, Althen, Casper, 1,350 962

Fayetteville, Luers, P. & F., 474 ----

Freeburg, Meyer, Aug., 675 313

Freeport, Baier & Seyfarth, 2,134 1,954

“ Milner, Jos. & Bros., 358 539

Galena, Hony & Metzger, 456 488

“ Heller & Haser, 831 628

“ Meller, Math., 1,550 2,066

“ Speier, Rudolph, 783 476

Geneseo, Gasser, Geo. & Co., 2,718 2,453

Harvard, Huebner, John, 630 536

Havana, Dehm & Mack, 1,590 1,192

Highland, Schott, Martin J., 3,023 3,855

Jacksonville, Rick, H. & Sons, 2,144 1,177

Joliet, Eder, Henry, 4,544 4,608

“ Porter, Edwin, 7,494 7,467

“ Sehring, Fred., 4,143 4,258

Kankakee, Radeke, F. K., Brewing Co., 2089 1,779

Kewanee, Lee, Frederick, 590 560

Knoxville, Krotter, John, 363 130

Lacon, Hochstrasser & Co., 936 652

La Salle, Eliei, L. & Co., 13,184 12,225

Lebanon, Hammel, Jacob, 3,772 3,717

Limestone, Keller, Geo., 60 70

Lincoln, Mueller, P. & Son, 1401 ----

Mascoutah, Eisele & Koehler, 1,887 1,232

McHenry, Bailey, G., 697 710

Mendota, Henning, Christian, 5,715 5,457

Morris, Bauman & Hahl, 204 318

“ Gabhard, Lewis, 1,611 1,701

Mt. Carroll, Medlar, Chas., 114 114

Mt. Vernon, Wetzel & Fuchs, ---- ----

Murphysboro, Broeg, Conrad, 565 272

Naperville, Stenger, John, 4,939 2,640

Nauvoo, Schenk, G. T. 441 288

New Athens, New Athens Brewery, 1,023 698

Northville, Rentlinger, Richard, ---- 141

Ottawa, Rabenstein, C., 3,278 2,857

“ White, Alfred, 1,441 1,594

Pecatonica, Berridge, Wm., 251 256

Pekin, Winkel, Aug., 2,186 2,221

Peoria, Bitz, Conrad, 171 296

“ Gipps & Co., 9,526 11,019

“ Weber, Aug., 2,503 921

Peru, Peru Beer Co., 3,446 3,743

“ Union Beer Co., 2,778 2,705

Quincy, Eber Bros., 1,556 1,386

“ Dick & Bros., 12,926 15,600

“ Koerner, M., 19 85

“ Luther, J., 483 2,100

“ Ruff Bros. & Co., 3,793 4,775

Rockford, Fisher & Wahl, 473 336

“ Kauffman, Aug., 398 493

“ Peacock, Jonathan, 982 846

Rock Island, Huber, Ignatz, 6,758 7,308

“ King, J. A. & Co., 2,826 2,856

“ Wagner, Geo., 10,205 9,937

Savannah, Keller, Jos., 1,200 1,194

Sigel, Wiedmeier, D. & Co., 42 7

Silver Creek, Haegeli & Roth, 345 897

Spring Bay, Eichhorn, Peter, 630 610

Springfield, Reisch & Bros., 8,758 9,358

Sterling, Decker, J. & Co., 737 510

“ Hermann, Chas., 315 1,129

Thornton, Bielfeldt, J. S., 932 1,105

Trenton Bassler, Paul, 1,110 850

Warsaw, Popel, Martin, 58 160

“ Schott & Son, 1,073 877

Washington, Roth, John, ---- 14

Waukegan, Besley’s Waukegan Brewing

Company, 4,596 4,081

West Western Brewing Co., 10,019 11,618

Belleville,

Wheeling, Periolat Bros. & Co., 1,875 1,889

Wilmington, Markert & Co., 2,844 3,512

Woodstock, Arnold, Zimmer & Co., 4,031 3,336

------- -------

Number of Breweries, 115. 579,888 608,627

INDIANA.

No. of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Aurora, Crescent Brewing Co., 29,037 30,731

Bowling Green, Stucki, Fred, 420 188

Bremen, Wolff, Hugo, 471 277

Cambridge, Straub, Cleophas, 418 366

“ Ingerman, Henry, 477 390

Cannelton, Huber, Jacob, 300 373

Centre, Weckerie, J., 1,300 ----

Columbia City, Schaffer, H., 986 1086

Columbus, Schreiber, Aug., 720 434

Connersville, Billan, Valentine, 190 405

Covington, Miller, Joseph, 958 1,290

Crawfordsville, Muth, Jacob, 1,285 676

Crown Point, Korn & Suckfield, 828 515

Decatur, Rolver, Anna, 218 280

Evansville, Cook & Rice, 15,738 17,158

“ Ulhner & Hoerz, 1,522 6,119

Ferdinand, Ruhkamp, Henry, Jr., 665 775

Fort Wayne, Centlivre, C. L., 2,245 3,715

“ Horning, L. J., ---- 41

“ Linker, Hey & Co., 1,310 1,616

“ Lutz & Co., 3,436 3,327

German Pauli, A., 145 ----

Township,

Harmony, Bauer, John, 40 ----

Harrison, Klant, Reinhold, 385 180

“ Krodle, Jno. B., 453 378

Huntington, Boos, Jacob, 901 889

“ Herrberg, J. & A., 202 106

Indianapolis, Balz & Co., 1,452 ----

“ Lieber, P. & Co., 12,000 15,000

“ Maus, C., 5,233 7,037

“ Koehler & Co., 300 344

“ Schmidt, Mrs. C. F., 22,640 25,288

Jeffersonville, Lang Henry, 533 429

Kendallville, Paul, H. C. 1,164 1,068

La Fayette, Newman & Bohrer, 5,537 4,872

“ Thieme & Wagner, 5,076 6,524

La Porte, Puissant, Jno. B., 1,555 880

Lawrenceburgh, Gamer, J. B., 3,988 2,542

Lawrenceville, Ritze, Anton, 368 343

Logansport, Mutschler, Jno., 2,097 1,044

Madison, Belser & Co., 1,808 ----

“ Greiner, Jno., 2,202 2,522

“ Weber, Peter, 5,104 5,040

Michigan City, Zorn, Philip, 2,592 3,300

Mishawaka, Kaume, A., 3,595 3,642

Muncie, Garst, A. J., ---- 100

“ Alvery, Ch., ---- ----

Napoleon, Morbach, Nicholas, 175 280

New Albany, Buchheit, Barbara, 3,045 3,535

“ Nadorff, Frank, 105 492

“ Reising, Paul, 3,900 3,211

New Alsace, Meyer, Martin, 248 192

“ Zix, Michael, 210 190

Newburg, Brizins, Chas., & Co., 489 378

North Vernon, Schierling, John, 169 156

Oldenberg, Roell, B., 988 805

Perry, Hartmetz, John, 667 620

Peru, Cole, J. O., 5,312 4,729

Plymouth, Weckerle, J., 1,031 928

Richmond, Martischang, Joseph, 170 197

“ Minck, Enril, 215 217

Rochester, Metzler, John B., 437 218

Seymour, Dammrich, Martin, 396 250

“ Kaufman, J. D., 279 288

South Bend, Muessel Bros., 1,811 2,129

St. Leon, Biscoff, L., 20 36

St. Peters, Busold, John A., 195 240

Suhman, Schneider, P., Jr., ---- 400

Tell City, Becker, Chas., 480 430

“ Voelke, Fred, 765 776

Terre Haute, Mayer, Anton, 10,043 11,753

“ Wheat, N. S., 351 271

Troy, Thaeny, John, 595 745

Valparaiso, Hiller Geo., 798 468

Vincennes, Hack & Simon, 3,969 5,919

Wabash, Rettig & Alber, 1,310 1,126

------- -------

Number of Breweries, 76. 182,448 191,729

IOWA.

No. of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Afton, Heine, John, 277 64

Anamosa, Rick, M. F., 572 208

Atlantic, Fisher, Ernest, 219 1,370

Auburn, Bilger, Katherine, 885 540

Avoca, Kampf, Jacob, 1,300 1,250

Bellevue, Neustatdt, H., 814 892

Belle Plaine, Michel, Mathias, 1,258 1,258

Boone, Herman, J. M., 2,482 2,017

Boonsboro, Zimbelman, L. & Co., 2,583 3,090

Bridgeport, Walz, Bernhart, 321 408

Brown’s Brown, Henry, 174 147

Station,

Buffalo, Barthberger, John, ---- ----

“ Hoffbauer, Hugo, 374 282

“ Kantz, Theo., 366 286

Burlington, Bosch Bros., 2,124 ----

“ Bosch, John, Geo., & Co., 2,778 2,255

“ Heil, Casper, 1,808 ----

“ Rothenberger, P. P., 1,670 1,091

“ Werthmueller & Ende, 2,500 2,441

Cascade, May, Francis, 947 757

Cedar Falls, Lund, Hans N., 597 ----

“ Pfeiffer, H. & Bro., 412 547

Cedar Rapids, Magnus, C., 5,932 6,915

“ Williams, Geo. & Co., 6,237 6,166

Charles City, Andre, Gertrude, 2,514 1,678

Clarinda, Peterson, B. A., 495 368

Clinton, Lauer & Allen, 1,032 1,417

Concord, Sandler, A. Jr., 10 ----

Council Bluffs, Geise, Conrad, 6,006 5,740

County of Iowa, Amana Society, 1,731 1,813

Creston, Bolig, P., 118 ----

“ Bolig & Co. ---- ----

Davenport, Frahm, M., 6,006 6,107

“ Koehler & Lange, 6,609 7,563

“ Lage, J. & Co., 4,052 3,779

“ Lehrkind, J. & Co., 2,676 3,012

“ Noth, G. & Sons, 2,125 ----

Decorah, Addicken, Mrs. G., 1,890 1,872

“ Klein, Jos., 1,395 924

Des Moines, Aulmann & Schuster, 1,646 2,185

“ Kinsley, Joseph, 341 362

“ Mattes, Alois, 3,325 2,169

“ Mattes & Jung, 1,224 1,314

De Witt, Yegge, V., 1,234 1,234

Dorchester, Tacke, Jos., 321 183

Dubuque, Glab, Adam, 3,483 ----

“ Heeb, A., 8,327 8,072

“ Meuser & Co., 3,288 3,437

“ Peaslee & Co., 3,497 940

“ Peir, John, ---- 1,410

“ Tschirgi, & Schwind, 4,171 4,348

Dyersville, Esch & Bros., 1,198 1,432

Elgin, Shorie & Lehman, 604 532

Elkader, Schmidt, J. B. & Bro., 1,644 1,145

Fairfield, Toeller & Suess, 795 482

Fayette, Moser, Martin, 119 ----

Fort Dodge, Koll, Jno., 882 ----

“ Schmidt, D., 802 ----

Fort Madison, Burster, Anton, 558 476

Schlapp, Henry, 1,584 1,316

Franklin Best, William, 134 150

Center,

Garnavillo, Schumacher, H., 611 663

Grand Meadow, Koering, Jos., 1,051 736

Guttenburg, Hassfield, Wm., 55 60

“ Jungk, Aug., 1,146 1,050

“ Roth, John, 144 352

“ Walter, Rudolph, 100 ----

Hamburg, Nies, Philip, 1,984 2,095

Independence, Seeland, Cris., 429 489

“ Wengert, John, 1,235 1,608

Iowa City, Dostal, Jno. P., 3,999 3,301

“ Englert & Rittenmeyer, 1,398 1,052

“ Hotz, Simon, 2,945 2,452

Iowa Falls, Althen, John, 166 ----

Jefferson, Roth, Peter, 400 ----

Keokuk, Anschutez, F. W., 703 580

“ Leisy, Mrs. M. 2,425 2,239

“ Pechstein & Nagel, 973 949

Lansing, Haas, Jacob, 1,907 1,373

Lemars, Diamond, Herbut A., 58 ----

“ Maning, L. H. & Co., ---- 45

Lyons, Tritschler & Tiesse, 3,414 3,187

Marengo, Knepper, T. C., 420 480

Marion, Schneider Bros., 3,588 3,916

Marshall, Roth, Peter, 276 ----

Marshalltown, Bowman Bros., 2,224 3,018

“ Vogel, Geo., 42 265

Mason City, Brohm & McDevitt, 210 385

Maquoketa, Dostal & Hoffmann, 1,713 1,782

McGregor, Hagensick, J. L., 939 773

Montrose, Spring, Martin, 169 62

Mt. Carmel, Gram, A. L., ---- ----

Muscatine, Dold, Chas. J. Brewing Co., 1,980 2,120

“ Dorn, Jacob, 204 108

“ Eegerman, Mary, 995 1,025

“ Schaefe, John, 1,800 ----

“ Witteman, A., 2,117 1,580

New Hampton, Gross, A. A. 1,050 1,050

New Vienna, Baeumle & Ferring, 754 1,238

Nodaway, Auun & Peterson, 495 ----

Nora Springs, Festel, Florian, 112 120

Osage, Pierce, R. H., 770 600

Osceola, Jacobs, Chas., 370 480

Oskaloosa, Blatner & Newbrand, 975 728

Ottumwa, Hausman & Bauer, 2,379 2,398

“ Hoffman, B., 2,756 3,398

“ Schaefer & Hoffmann, ---- ----

“ The Wm. Kranner Brewing Co., 2,320 4,351

Pella, Blattner & Herbig, 372 419

Postville, Koenig, Jos., 1,051 ----

Red Oak, Stroh, Charles, 960 550

Rockford, Marke, S., 942 1,042

Sevastopool, Munzinger, G., 1,250 1,275

Shell Rock, Scully, Jas., 287 97

Sherrill’s Haberkon, Geo., 140 ----

Mound,

Sioux City, Franz & Co., 2,148 3,120

“ Selzer, R. 1,512 1,522

Spillville, Nockles, Frank, 911 945

“ Schwela & Glasbrenner, ---- 288

Stacyville, Huxhold, J. H. C., 201 150

Strawberry Kleinlein, John, 921 858

Point,

Stuart, Eber, John, 742 1,114

Tama City, Matthews, A., 516 780

Vail, Smutney, A., 220 200

Vinton, Biebesheimer, H. 168 312

Washington, Jugenheimer, Wm. & Co., 1,360 920

“ Zahm, H., 410 377

Waterloo, Goldstein & Rainer, 806 840

Waukon, Mauch, George, 308 270

Waverly, Foselman, Peter, 1,632 1,671

“ Tabor, S. A., 43 66

Webster City, Ramharter, A., 477 639

West Mitchell, Fey, John, 1,375 1,144

West Point, Lampe, Bernard, 159 ----

“ Troup, Fritz, ---- ----

Wilton, Miller, Philip F., 923 890

Winterset, Schroeder, Morris, 75 ----

------- -------

Number of Breweries, 136. 169,030 186,176

KANSAS.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Atchison, Young, Frank, 752 328

“ Zibold & Haegelin, 2,079 2,700

Beloit, Pupka & Eberle, 30 214

Carr Creek, Marsch, Peter, Jr., 44 78

Cawker City, Schaaf, Jos., 208 126

Chanute, Hartman Bros., 300 80

Elinwood, Hess, John, 286 576

Emporia, Macke, F. H. & Co., 400 349

Eudora, Bartusch, Robert, 101 61

Fort Scott, Schultz & Co., 2,040 2,640

Hanover, Jockers, Charles, 128 119

Highland, Weidemaier, Peter, 66 57

Independence, Hebrank & Truman, 504 253

Iola, Schindler, R., 125 120

Junction City, Cammert, Helmon, ---- 100

“ Frzaskowsky, L. W., 215 257

Kinsley, Kinsler, J., 39 44

Kirwin, Strebel, John, 100 200

Lawrence, Walruff, John, 1,96 3,491

Leavenworth, Becker & Link, 1,532 5,329

“ Brandon & Kirmeyer Brewing Co., 4,403 3,774

“ Kunz, Charles, 889 ----

“ Peipe, G., 347 274

Leroy, Schmidt, Albert, 303 209

Manhattan, Alten, Chas., 186 70

Marysville, Kalenborn, P. C., 365 483

Ogden, Weichselbaum, Theo., 494 ----

Paola, Hausman, C., 283 292

Salina, Mugler, Peter, 266 552

Topeka, Alfeman & Elsner, 143 233

“ Herboldsheimer, A. 521 281

“ Moeser, Philip, 1,463 901

Wichita, Wiegand, A., & Co., 418 450

Wyandotte, Hafner, Anna, ---- 60

------ ------

Number of Breweries, 34. 20,995 24,709

KENTUCKY.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Alexandria, Meister, August, 1,169 790

Covington, Geisbauer, L., 8,629 9,345

“ Lang, Chas., & Co., 8,708 7,986

“ Ruh & Meyer, 4,258 5,248

“ Steinrude, J. H., 7,446 8,651

Frankfort, Luscher, S., 2,265 2,829

Henderson, Reutlinger & Eisfelder, 2,061 2,500

Jefferson City, Antsch & Metzner, ---- ----

Louisville, Bauer, Elizabeth, ---- 1,759

“ Bott, Sebastian, 1,070 1,317

“ Christ, M., 2,280 2,475

“ Dierson, A. F., & Co., ---- ----

“ Fehr, Frank, 17,189 22,131

“ Gebhard, Julius, 2,383 357

“ Hartmetz, Charles, 1,925 1,885

“ Huber, Henry, 1,211 1,559

“ Knipers, G., 790 1,437

“ Laux, Peter, 1,065 1,560

“ Loeser, Adam, 2,259 2,668

“ Nadorff, Henry, 725 1,337

“ Sauffer & Brands, ---- ----

“ Schanzeubecker, J., 140 181

“ Senn, M., & Bro., 2,558 4,381

“ Steurer. J., 422 484

“ Stein, J. & Co., ---- 1,026

“ Senn & Ackerman, 2,610 7,800

“ Templeton, A., 4,734 1,890

“ Weber & Schillinger, 19,170 25,011

“ Walter, Eva, Mrs., 4,203 4,310

“ Walter & Kittinger, ---- 40

“ Zeller, John, 7,650 5,870

Maysville, Jaeger, Jacob, 162 152

Newport, Deppe & Co., 4,607 ----

“ Schussler & Butcher, 4,607 6,393

“ Wiedemann, Geo., 11,085 9,973

Owensboro, Breidenbach, A., 387 404

------- -------

Number of Breweries, 36. 127,771 143,753

LOUISIANA.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

New Iberia, Erath, Aug., 579 783

New Orleans, Armbruster, Mrs. W., 537 Chartres

St., 1,934 2,422

“ Auer, Geo., 540 Tchoupitoulas 8,136 9,259

St.,

“ Bassemeier, Henry, 1010 New Levee

St., 2,367 3,055

“ Blaise, Peter, 5 Prieur St., 3,973 6,775

“ Erath, E., 282 Villeré St., 5,192 6,400

“ Lusse, Henry, 478 Chartres St., ---- 1,968

“ Soule, Mrs. S. P., 112 & 113

Peter St., 2,514 3,006

“ Sturcken, H. F., 82, 84 & 86

Marais St., 6,156 7,066

“ Weckerling, J. J., Magazine &

Delerd Sts., 5,481 6,673

------ ------

Number of Breweries, 10. 36,352 47,407

MARYLAND.

No. of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Baltimore, Bauernschmidt, Jno., 803 W. Pratt 3,573 3,778

St.,

“ Bauernschmidt, Jno., foot of

Ridgley St., 12,017 10,037

“ Bauernschmidt, G., Belair Ave., 10,761 10,923

“ Beck, Thos., & Son, W. Baltimore

St., 4,209 3,875

“ Beck, Henry, 153 East Fayette St., 113 92

“ Beck, Aug., Frederick Road, 7,706 6,935

“ Beh, Jno. G., corner 3d and

Lancaster Sts., 2,083 2,311

“ Berger, Bernard, 197 2,113

“ Berger, Jno. M., 317 S. Bond St., 188 2,987

“ Berger, John M. 360 S. Caroline

St., 188 115

“ Brehm, George, 12,656 11,836

“ Butterfield & Co., 113 Hanover

St., 2,390 1,463

“ Clauss, Jos., cor. Cross &

Covington Sts., 428 ----

“ Dukehart, Thos. M., Holiday St.,

5,925 4,750

“ Eigenbrot Henry, 28 & 30 Wilkens

St., 3,936 3,195

“ Extel, N., 360 Pa. Ave., 174 ----

“ Hecht, Miller & Co., 9,149 9,297

“ Helldorfer, S., cor., Clinton &

Lancaster Sts., 5,358 5,063

“ Hertlein, G. C., Belair Road, 1,406 1,102

“ Hœnervogt, Elizabeth, Eastern

Ave., 3,370 3,533

“ Kemper, Wm., corner 2d and

O’Donnell Sts., 2,799 2,565

“ Kohles, John, 36 S. Wolf St., 264 208

“ Miller, R., 373 Biddle St., ---- 36

“ Mueller, John, 394 Pa. Ave., 673 732

“ Mueller, Val., 48 Burke St., ---- ----

“ Muth, Louis, Belair Ave., 7,741 6,694

“ Rost, Sophia, Blair Ave., 10,009 8,864

“ Schlaffer, Franz, Belair Road, 3,701 3,640

“ Schreier, Jos., Belair Ave., 7,198 6,664

“ Schultheiss, John, Garrison’s

Lane, 2,504 1,994

“ Schultheiss & Bros., 183 ----

“ Schierlitz, Jacob, 413 W.

Baltimore St., 270 208

“ Seeger, Jacob, 1053 W. Pratt St., 10,005 7,362

“ Sommerfield & Co., 7 Calverton

Road, 6,063 5,193

“ Stab, Lina, 74 Burke St., 497 424

“ Strauss, H. S., Bro. & Bell,

Hartford Road, 10,620 12,950

“ Thau & Muhlhauser, ---- ----

“ Von der Horst, J. H., Belair Ave.,

16,298 18,309

“ Weber, Fred, Hartford Road, 3,254 2,310

“ Werner & Honig, 370 Penn. Ave., 1,135 1,258

“ Wiessuer, Jno. F., Belair Ave., 12,673 14,799

“ Wunder, Fred, cor. McDonnell and

3d Ave., Canton, 5,899 5,275

Barton, Kolberg & Co., 500 ----

Canton, Gunther & Gehl, cor. 3d and

McDonald, 3,901 6,851

“ Schneider, Fritz, 2,500 2,696

“ Trost, Jno., O’Donnell St., 4,459 3,973

Carroll P. O., Stiefel, Ed. W., 4,253 3,568

Carrollton, Knecht, John, 20 83

Cumberland, Fesemneier, C., 279 500

“ Himmler, Geo., 591 500

“ Leonard, Wm., ---- 500

“ Ritter, Paul, 665 500

“ Stucklauser, Gus., 700 500

Frederick, Hauser, Paul, 205 497

“ Lipps, J. G., 392 457

Frostburg, Mayer, John, 240 264

Hagerstown, Heimel, Justus, 172 149

“ Schuster, Robert, 150 145

“ Wagner, Wm., 236 229

“ Witzenbacher, Wm., 115 126

Lonaconing, Fredericks & Hanekamp, 581 ----

“ Honig, C., 564 500

Mt. Savage, Henckel, H., 92 114

------- -------

Number of Breweries, 63. 208,228 205,042

MASSACHUSETTS.

Number of barrels sold.

1878. 1879.

Bedford, Walter, Fred A., ---- ----

Boston, Boston Beer Co., 249 Second St.,

87,377 77,232

“ Burkhardt, G. F., 45,500 39,382

“ Burton Brewing Co., 29,189 24,028

“ Cook, Isaac & Co., 11,358 10,059

“ Decker, Conrad, 5,878 6,748

“ Engle, S. & Co.,[27] ---- ----

“ Habich, Edward, 30,486 30,853

“ Haffenreffer & Co., 14,480 16,327

“ Houghton, A. J. & Co., 45,736 32,474

“ Hunt, W. P., ---- ----

“ Jones, Cook & Co., 34,693 31,914

“ Kenney, James, 13,161 13,663

“ Kenney & Ballou, 9,167 9,706

“ Kenney, N., 10,600 5,707

“ Lang & King, [28]3,420 9,822

“ Parsons & Co., 8,112 [29]4,530

“ Pfaff, H. & J., 26,860 34,862

“ Roessle, John, 41,000 42,827

“ Rueter & Alley, 60,156 40,509

“ Smith & Engle, [30]3,160 19,174

“ Suffolk Brewing Co., 39,409 44,055

“ Van Nostrand & Co., 42,828 37,912

Chicopee, Chicopee Brewery, ---- ----

Fall River, Healy, Thos., Jr., 166 ----

“ Hurst, J. H., 2,228 4,625

“ Ogden, Henry, 134 130

Lawrence, Evans & Co., 2,907 3,087

“ Stanley & Co., 26,035 28,184

Newburyport, Whitmore, W. H., Jr., 5,119 ----

Pittsfield, Gimlich, White & Co., 5,699 4,371

Salem, Walter, F. A., & Co., 2,459 1,794

Springfield, Kalmbach & Geisel, 5,093 6,407

“ Shaw, Wallace, 5,813 4,405

“ Springfield Brewery, 1,069 1,511

Willimansett, Brierly, Wm., 1,543 ----

Worcester, Hines, N., 783 1,933

“ McNamara, John, 375 285

“ Webster, Esther A., 1,716 ----

------- -------

Number of Breweries, 39. 711,166 [31]663,978

[27] Leased Houghton & Co.’s Ale Brewery and commenced brewing ale,

April, 1879.

[28] Lang & King, 4 mos.

[29] Parsons & Co., 10 mos.

[30] Smith & Engle, 3 mos.

[31] The Ale Brewers enlarged their barrels during the year, from 27

to 31½ gals. If 15 per cent. is allowed for enlargement, the number of

gallons of Ale sold this year will be equal to last year’s sales.

MICHIGAN.