MEETING HELD AT THE MIDLAND HOTEL, MANCHESTER,
ON THURSDAY, MAY 2nd, 1907
Mr. A. L. Lees in the Chair.
The following paper was read and discussed:—
by Lawrence Briant
Every brewer who produces black beer uses some form of coloured malt. It is true that of late years caramel has in some districts partially superseded these, but even the most enthusiastic advocate of caramel will hardly claim to produce a satisfactory black beer without, at least, some proportion of coloured malt. And whilst much has been written and said of pale malts, comparatively little attention appears to have been paid to the small yet quite important matter of the character of coloured malt. Ever since black beers have been produced, coloured malts have been made and used. Indeed the name “Patent Malt,” which is still often applied to black malt, is derived from the fact that consequent upon the passing of an Act of Parliament (Roasted Maltsters Act, 1842) over 60 years ago, a license or patent was required for its manufacture. The coloured malts employed are respectively black, brown, amber, and crystal.
Brown and amber malts have of late years fallen somewhat into disfavour, black being relied upon for colour, crystal for flavour. There is, however, latterly a tendency to employ an increased proportion of brown and amber malt, and without doubt such malt if really well made gives a characteristic flavour not possessed by either black or crystal. It is, indeed, by a skilful blending of the several types of colourod malt that some of the most successful black beers are produced. It is true that in such grists the total proportion of the coloured malts will often be large and the cost price of the beer as a consequence high, but the result of the adoption of such grists generally fully justifies the expenditure.
Black malt is made from partially germinated grain, the usual practice being to allow it to germinate for 5—8 days on the floor. It is, of course, not so important to give care in attention to germinating temperatures as with pale malts, yet there seems to be a general consensus of opinion that uniformity of growth is a matter of considorable importance. Ford (Mailing and Brewing, p. 69) long ago said that “Corn perfectly malted will not give out so much of colour or of so standing a colour as that merely partially malted,” and this statement appears to be confirmed in the experience of present day malt roasters. Mr. Montagu Baird, who has very wide experience on this matter, tells me that in his opinion there is no doubt that partially malted grain has an actual advantage in intensity of colour over that which has been completely grown up, but he adds that it is important that the grain is uniformly malted and this means good sound barley. Want of uniformity in malting produces irregularity of roasting, with the result that some corns are burnt before others are completely roasted. The correct degree of roasting is a difficult matter to determine and is necessarily left to the discretion of the man in charge of the operation, who judges by the practical indication of the odour, the colour of the smoke and the appearance of the grain, when the caramelisation process has proceeded sufficiently far. If the roasting is arrested too early the tintorial value of the malt is low. If, on the other hand, it is pushed too far, carbonisation as distinct from caramelisation occurs, and the grain is reduced to a mass of charcoal devoid of either colouring or flavouring value. (note – The presence of actual insoluble carbon may be observed in a good many black malts. I find that some years ago I had a sample of black malt pass through my hands, which yielded no less than 30 per cent, of that substance. It will often amount to 10 per cent, or 15 per cent, in carelessly roasted malts.) In a material so made it is unreasonable to expect absolute uniformity of flavour and colour, but it is only fair to say that in view of the uncertainty of the operation and the difficulty of subjecting it to anything like systematic control, the general character of black malt is satisfactorily uniform. No system of working with thermometers has hitherto proved practicable. Indeed it is difficult to say to what temperature it is necessary to expose malt in order to caramelise it satisfactorily. Some experiments which I conducted some years ago in order to arrive at definite figures on this point were abortive, as under the conditions of the operation no reliable records of temperatures seemed to be possible.
The tintorial value of a black malt will, as a rule, lie between 1000 and 1500° expressed on a 10-per-cent. solution of the malt, read in a 1-inch cell, using 52° series of glasses in a Lovibond tintometer. Any result under 1000° must be regarded as low, and in purchasing black malt it would be quite reasonable to name this figure as a minimum. I have occasionally met with black malts giving so low a tintorial value as 600°. With such malt it is quite obvious that for colouring purposes double the usual quantity of malt would have to be employed, a matter which would involve considerable expense.
In most cases the colour yielded by black malt is practically the same whether the ground material is extracted by itself or whether it is mashed with malt. Thus, in 20 samples lately received from brewery clients—including samples from all the best known manufacturers—the average colour when extracted alone was 1350′, compared with a colour of 1380° when mashed with malt. It matters little, therefore, in point of colour which method of extraction is adopted. In one case, however, a very curious difference was observed, simple extraction giving a colour of only 560°, compared with 990° yielded when mashed with malt. This sample was, however, very steely and was unsatisfactory also in flavour, so that it could not be regarded as in any sense normal, and the fact remains that with an average black malt there is no noticeable difference in colour whether mashed by itself or with malt.
As the price of black beer grains is less than of those from pale malt,—the difference being 6d. a quarter in London, but considerably greater in some districts,—many brewers mash their black malts by themselves or mixed with about an equal weight of pale malt, a special small mash-tun being devoted to this purpose This practice has the advantage of enabling the bulk of the grains to be sold as pale, realising therefore the maximum price, the black grains themselves then selling at about two-thirds of the ordinary price. There is a good deal of difference of opinion on the advantage of this practice. Some brewers, whose views are to be respected, insist that there is a loss of flavour unless the black malt is actually mashed with the bulk of the grist. Others maintain that there is no such advantage, and that only a depreciation in the selling price of the grains results. The practice of adding a portion of the black malt to the copper (in that case generally specially finely ground) is quite common. Indeed, there are breweries where the whole is added at that stage, though this, I think, only occurs where caramel is also used. There is certainly a considerable roughness of flavour, amounting almost to bitterness, resulting from the use of any large quantity of black malt in the copper. Though this may in some cases be no objection,—indeed, I know of one or two where it is actually an advantage,—it is in others quite the reverse. The fact is that in this matter much depends upon the particular character of the stout required for a district. In some districts a dry flavour is desired, in others the maximum of softness, and it is in the production of this beer almost more than any other that the brewer has to study the idiosyncrasies of his local trade.
There is some difference in the extract which is yielded by black malt when mashed by itself or when mashed with malt. This is naturally the case, since black malt is almost invariably non-diastasic, yet there may remain a proportion of practically unaltered starch which would not enter into solution when extracted by itself. A series of samples gave an average extract of 72·5 lb. per 336 lb. when extracted with water alone, as against 77 lb. when extracted in conjunction with malt.
The extracts above given are those yielded by 336 1b. of black malt, but this material is generally sold by bulk, rarely by weight. The actual weight per quarter of black malt varies more than probably most brewers suspect, unless they have taken the trouble to weigh their deliveries. I have seen weights recorded as low as 215 lb., and as high as 290 lb. There may thus be very wide discrepancies in the actual weight of material which the brewer purchases, yet the proportion of black malt, being as a rule so small, brewers have hitherto paid little attention to the matter. On the basis of an average weight of 270 lb., black malt gives a laboratory extract of about 60 lb., but in the brewery this figure could hardly be expected to be realised; an extract value of 50 lb. a quarter is probably a more correct allowance.
It is necessary to point out that there is much irregularity possible in the laboratory determination of the extract of u black malt when mashing it with—as is generally the practice—a large proportion of pale malt. Not only is any variation in the extract yielded by the pale malt thrown upon the figure yielded by the black, but much depends upon the character of the pale malt used. It is not sufficient that a malt of a definite diastatic activity be employed, for tenderness has also a considerable influence. In fact the same disturbing conditions exist to which attention has been drawn by Julian L. Baker in the case of the estimation of the extract yielded by flaked materials (Brewers’ Journal, March 15, 1905); and I therefore suggest the application of the method of analysis, which I have already suggested for flakes, to the determination of the extract yielded by black malt also (this Journal, 1905, 11, 395). The process works with ease.
Of late years a large amount of roasted barley has been used by brewers, the attraction being the somewhat lower price of this material. It must be remembered, however, that this difference is partly only apparent, for as a rule the weight of a quarter of roasted barley is less than that of roasted malt. Thus it may be as little as 215 lb., and is seldom higher than 250 lb., and this difference in weight absorbs a good deal of the margin in price. The extract yielded per 336 lb. is perhaps a little lower and the colour slightly less, but the differences in these respects are but small. The flavour of roasted barley is often surprisingly good, and though perhaps not quite so rich us that of roasted malt, there is in many cases not very much to choose between the two. A strong objection which has been urged against the employment of roasted barley is that the colour which it gives is not permanent. There is certainly a very general opinion that this is so, but though often reiterated, and indeed stated as an established fact in handbooks on brewing, I have not yet met with direct experimental proof to support such a contention. Indeed, the more I have looked into the matter and have seen roasted barley gradually replace roasted malt in many breweries, the more I have doubted the cogency of the arguments brought forward in favour of the superiority of the tintorial permanency of the extract from black malt. In order to settle the matter for myself, I have conducted some experiments as under:—
A wort was obtained by mashing 90 per cent, of pale malt, and 10 per cent, roasted barley or malt. In such experiment an initial mash heat of 148o was obtained, raised by means of an underlet to 158° after 20 minutes’ stand, with a total dilution of mash of two barrels per quarter. After a stand of two hours from the finish of mashing, the wort was drawn off and sparged in the usual way, boiled with hops at the rate of 5 lb. per quarter, and collected at a gravity of 1060, the two experimental brews being fermented side by side. The attenuations at completion of primary fermentation were as follows:—
The beer, after racking, was stored under varying conditions for eight weeks and the attenuations noted at the end of that time. The following were the results :—
There was thus no difference in the final attenuation of the two brews. The colours of the worts before and after fermentation and on storage under differing conditions were determined on a 10-per-cent. solution of the wort, the figures being calculated back to the original wort. The following are the results:—
The general results of the above experiments go to prove the permanency of the colour given by either material, and, as ascertained by 52 series of glasses, no loss of colour has occurred in either case during fermentation or storage in bottle for a month, though it is curious that some alteration in the character of the colour has occurred, as indicated by the use of yellow, red, and blue glasses.
These figures do not give support to the statement, which has so frequently been made, that the colour derived from roasted barley is fugitive, and practical experiments on the large scale corroborate this. Let me quote one example out of several showing this:—A firm of brewers who, on account of the economy to be effected, were proposing to use roasted barley in place of black malt, conducted a number of trial brews, alternating the use of roasted malt and barley. (No caramel was used in these brews.) The following are the results:
These figures corroborate those already given. It may, therefore, I think, be fairly claimed that so far as permanency of colour, there is little or nothing to choose between roasted malt and rousted barley if of good quality.
I should like, however, to add a further experiment on the same point, the result of which is to show that there are cases in which the colour from roasted barley does undoubtedly fade more rapidly than that from malted grain. In this case, however, the beer was stored in vat for 10—12 months, and the organisms which are always introduced into such beer from the vat itself may have played an important part in the decolorisation process which undoubtedly resulted. The following are the figures:—
It should be mentioned that the vats were filled in each case by three consecutive brewings, and the colours given are the average of those brewings. It is quite clear in this case that there is a distinct loss of colour occurring during storage, and that this loss is considerably greater when using roasted barley. Undoubtedly the flavour of the stout produced from roasted malt was the better. Some brown malt was used in both vats, but as the class of malt and the proportion employed was the same in each case, the influence of this may be neglected.
On the question of difference in flavour, it is my opinion that for a weak running black beer, especially where, as is so often the case, such a beer is heavily primed, there is no considerable advantage in the use of roasted malt over roasted barley. But in higher class beers, especially where brewed for keeping purposes, there is an undoubted superiority of flavour arising from the use of roasted malt, and in such cases the extra expense is, I think, well warranted. This, in particular, applies to vatted and export stouts.
Of brown and amber malt I need say but little. These are used for flavour rather than colour, and the products of different manufacturers vary considerably in both respects. Such malts enter, however, into the composition of some of the best blonds of black beer grists. The irregularity in their character, which was at one time very marked, is now partially remedied, and there are now on the market excellent samples of both types of material, and the increased reliability lately observable will, no doubt, do much to restore confidence in, and extend the use of, these materials. I have met with some samples of brown malt which fade considerably on storage, but others, and the better made, appear to possess substantially the same permanency of colour as black malt. In any case, the colour question is a minor one, as any colour which they may give is generally swamped by the much greater tintorial value of the black malt with which they are used.
Crystallised malt differs from the preceding varieties, inasmuch as it is frequently used, not only in black but in mild beers, in which it is useful as giving a rich nutty flavour. I consider it extremely valuable as a constituent of mild beer grist, where the colour of that beer will permit its use. In some cases from 2—5 per cent, of crystal malt is employed with great advantage, and I think the expense is warranted. It is, I believe, the practice of some manufacturers to use a sugar solution in the preparation of this malt, but perfectly good material may be made without it, and I see no advantage in its employment; indeed, I think I have seen just as good malt made without sugar as with it. The weight of crystal malt is, as a rule, 250—280 lb. a quarter. There is a considerable difference between the extract yielded when mashed alone and when mashed with pale malt. When extracted alone, the yield averages about 50 lb.; when mashed with malt, it may be as high as 80 lb., these extracts being calculated as the weight of 336 lb. This is a matter of no importance in practice, as crystal malt is always used in the mash-tun with pale malt. The actual extract given by crystal malt on natural weight in mash-tun practice is probably about 50 1b. The colour of a 10 per-cent. solution examined in a 1-inch cell varies from 100°—250°. I think a minimum colour of 125° would be a fair basis for purchase.
In all these coloured malts there is much difference in tenderness to be observed as well as in evenness of roasting. It is only necessary to place a sample in a barley cutter to see the irregularity of any sample. In the cheap malts of this class very serious defects of this character may sometimes be noted, but if made from good grain, evenly malted, very considerable regularity is obtainable. It is to be noted that it has been found quite impossible to produce satisfactory crystal material, except from malted grain. All efforts to produce this from barley have hitherto been futile.
In speaking of the permanency of colour produced by malt, I do not overlook the fact that there is in certain cases a very definite loss of colour occurring in black and, indeed, other beers on storage. This is, I believe, often due to bacterial infection, for it has been long ago observed by many that infected beers are very liable to become pale on storage. Some of this decrease of colour may be due to increase of the acid reaction of the beer, but that bacteria do, apart from their influence upon acidity, actually decolorise beer is, I think, quite clearly established. The same remark applies to some types of wild yeast infection, and, though with less force, to particular types of actual brewing yeast. There are yeasts in certain breweries which have a very marked decolorising influence upon worts into which they are introduced. Such yeasts are generally of very attenuative type. Indeed, they often have characteristics which seem to indicate a tendency to revert to the original type of wild yeast from which, no doubt, all culture yeasts have been in the first instance derived. These types are, however, very unusual, and the ordinary pitching yeast of a well-regulated brewery removes but little colour from the beer, either during primary or secondary fermentation.
It may be suggested that, whilst under ordinary conditions there might be no difference in loss of colour observable between roasted and black malt, in the presence of a sulphite either in mash-tun or cask, differences would be shown not otherwise observable. Sulphites are not frequently used in black beer, but in order to clear up this point I have made experiments with the use of sulphite, both in mash-tun and finished beer, with roasted barley and malt, and as the result I fail to find any difference in loss of colour when using the two classes of material.
In connection with flavour—that most important matter to which no analytical tests can be applied—it is hardly necessary for me to emphasise the importance of using freshly-roasted malts. The aroma quickly disappears on storage, particularly if the malt becomes slack, and almost all coloured malts rapidly absorb moisture. There seems to be the same advantage in using freshly-roasted malts, as we find in our households in using freshly-roasted coffee. It is true that the volatile aroma must, to a large extent, be dissipated during boiling in the copper, but I do not think this is completely so, and believe that there is a distinctly better flavour observable in the wort and beer when a freshly-roasted malt is used.
The use of slack roasted material has by some been regarded as a source of ropiness in black beers. We all know that under certain conditions these beers are particularly liable to ropiness in cask and more especially in bottle, but I have never yet been able to connect such a defect with the employment of slack black malt. It is generally, in my experience, due to quite other causes.
In conclusion, I think we may well apply more regularly to coloured malts some such system of control as is now general with pale samples, and so secure uniformity in character of material which, already attained in the best makes, is as yet by no means universal. Many a brewer, who buys his pale malt by analysis, never thinks of applying the same test to his coloured malts, trusting to appearance and flavour alone when judging of the quality of his deliveries. I recognise that flavour is a most important consideration, but the same, remark applies also to pale malts. In addition to providing material with a satisfactory flavour, it is not unreasonable to ask the maltster to supply material guaranteeing a minimum of colour, if not of extract.
In inquiring into the actual weights of coloured malt delivered into breweries, I have been struck with the great variation that exists. Pale malt is almost invariably bought, made up to Imperial weight of 336 lb. per quarter. With coloured malt the weight per quarter may be anywhere between 210 and 290 lb. I suggest that it would lie more satisfactory if the practice were introduced of buying and selling these malts made up to a given weight, say, of 252 lb. (9 stones) per quarter, (this weight is already general in Ireland) and I suggest that in addition to satisfying requirements of flavour, a minimum colouring power should be insisted upon and made a condition of purchase. The following colours would, I think, be quite fair :—
these values being arrived at on a 10 per-cent. solution of the material extracted with hot water, and read in a 1-inch cell in a Lovibond tintometer with 52 series of glasses. It is not possible to apply similar colour tests to brown and amber malts, as the degree of roasting of these materials varies very greatly.
Mr. Montagu Baird said he wished it had been possible for him to have had an advance copy of the paper, as then he would have been better able to deal with the many points raised, and possibly to have added a little to what Mr. Briant had said on certain matters. Mr. Briant referred to the uniformity of growth in pale malt intended for roasting, and this was certainly necessary, to obtain an evenly roasted malt; in fact, to give the best results, malt should be made especially for the purpose. It was quite erroneous to think, as many did, that indifferent malt was good enough for roasting. Irregularity in growth made it impossible to produce a uniformly roasted sample, from the fact that unmalted corns required longer exposure to heat, and, in doing so, malted corns were liable to be over-roasted or burnt. Unsound grain, especially when heated corns were present, produced a most irregular result, or what was known in the trade as “piebald” malt. A better colour was obtainable from an under-grown malt of uniform germination, of, say, 7 or 8 days’ flooring, than from malts fully grown for 12 days. This was found to be the case after the repeal of the restrictions on malt roasting in 1880, and became known as the “short-process” system. In view of Mr. Briant’s paper, he (Mr. Baird) had obtained from his firm’s laboratory some details as to extracts, and found that the average of a series of roasted malts gave an extract of 81·8 lb. per 336 lb. It might also interest them to know that the average of roasted barleys gave an extract of 81·6 lb.—practically the same. There was, however, a distinct ratio between extract and colour, the colour of the roasted malt being in all cases very much higher than that of the roasted barley, when extracts were about the same. When high extract was desired, there was a material falling off in colour. As to the use of roasted malt against roasted barley, this, after all, was a matter of taste, and was governed by the requirements of a particular district. In Ireland, roasted barley was used with advantage, as, in his opinion, it gave a drier flavour, but he considered that roasted malt was best suited to the requirements of English stouts. He quite agreed that it was most essential that malt freshly roasted should be used. He knew some brewers who ground the roasted material as soon as they received it, and it was then stored in sacks, using it as required. It kept better its flavor and condition in this form, as less air could pass through it than when stored in a whole condition.
Mr. Briant thanked Mr. Baird for his observations, and said he was glad to have the corroboration of so experienced a roaster. He was particularly pleased to have Mr. Baird’s confirmation as to the importance of uniformity of growth. Mr. Baird’s figures as to extract and colour seemed—as far as he was able to calculate them back to his standard—to corroborate almost exactly his (Mr. Briant’s) own conclusions. He was glad that Mr. Baird reminded them that in Ireland black malt was bought by weight. In Ireland, too, pale malt was bought by weight long before this method of purchasing was adopted in this country. His (the lecturer’s) contention was that it would be more satisfactory if coloured malts were bought by weight in the future. They must not, however, buy merely by weight, but by weight and colour.
Mr. T. Hyde, referring to the difference in flavour between roasted malt and barley, said, from his experience, he could bear out Mr. Briant’s observations—that a much better flavour was obtained from roasted malt than from roasted barley. He would like to put this question to Mr. Briant: In a brew of stout or porter in which a large percentage of black malt was used, and not much caramel, what was the cause—assuming there was a healthy fermentation—of the barm running to liquor? He did not remember having heard of or read a paper dealing with this particular subject. One seemed to have more difficulty in getting a solid outcrop of yeast from a brew of stout if a heavy percentage of black malt was used. The outcrop from a stout or porter fermentation, however, was a good, clean yeast, and in a healthy condition. Many brewers, when they got a good outcrop, sent it through their ale fermentations. It would be interesting to know if what he had referred to was caused in the mash-tun. Was something produced which in some way killed the yeast and caused it to liquefy?
Mr. Briant replied that he could not say that his general experience quite corroborated that of Mr. Hyde as to the effort of black malt upon fermentations. He gathered from Mr. Hyde that the yeast he produced from his black beer fermentations did not keep well.
Mr. Hyde : It liquefies.
Mr. Briant said that if the fermentation heats were allowed to run very high the yeast would probably show an early tendency to liquefy. If, on the other hand, fermentation temperatures were kept fairly low, he saw no reason why, provided good materials were used, the yeast should prove more unsatisfactory in keeping quality than that from a mild or bitter beer. In many breweries very low class material, including raw sugars, was used in black beers, and in such cases it would be unreasonable to expect to obtain a strong yeast. It was a fact, however, that not a few brewers preferred to use occasionally a change of yeast from a black beer, their experience being that a very strong yeast was often thus obtained.
The Chairman, alluding to Mr. Briant’s remarks in his paper that, in London, brewers got practically the same price for porter grains as for ale grains, said his experience was that in the Manchester district it was with the greatest difficulty they could get anyone to take the porter grains away at certain periods of the year. The question suggested itself: Was there anything at all deleterious in these grains?
Mr. Briant said he could not understand why there should be any serious difficulty in disposing of porter grains. There was not the same difficulty in London, nor in the Midlands, though it seemed to him a little harder to dispose of them in the North of England. Whether it was that the farther north they went and the less black grains were liked he did not know. There were agreed prices for grains throughout London, namely, 3s. 6d. per quarter for pale grains, and 3s. for black grains in winter, and in summer 2s. and 1s. 6d. respectively. There was not much pasture land about London, and this, no doubt, governed the prices of grains, for a large quantity of milk was wanted daily for London’s large population. Probably the same remark applied to Manchester.
The Chairman remarked that they were very close to the agricultural county of Cheshire. When he referred to the difficulty of getting rid of porter grains, he alluded, of course, to his experience up to 3 or 4 years ago at his own brewery; but since then all their grains .had been taken away by one firm under contract.
Mr. A. Taylor asked if Mr. Briant considered that black malt had a conditioning effect in stouts or in pale beers, and if he would recommend black malt for colouring purposes in preference to caramel? He had frequently noticed a heavy sediment in black beers, and he supposed this was attributable to the use of caramel—caramel which, unfortunately, had been overburnt and had thrown out a heavy deposit of carbon, which meant a serious loss in colour. He agreed with what had been said regarding the fading of colour through the influence of sulphites, and he had also noticed that a weak yeast (which, perhaps, would be more correctly termed “wild” yeast) had a marked effect in this respect.
Mr. Briant said he thought the superior condition of the black beer was largely due to the fact that it was left at such a high final gravity. If black beer were attenuated down to one-fourth or one-fifth, he did not think it would condition much more quickly than light beer. He did not find, for instance, that the Irish black beers naturally conditioned abnormally quickly, but this was because of the special system there adopted. The violent condition of Irish porter in Dublin and more especially in the south was due to very heavy worting. As to Mr. Taylor’s question, whether the colour of beer should be imparted by caramel or black malt, this depended largely upon the flavour of the beer required. Caramel gave a flavour of its own, and black malt imparted quite a different flavour. Personally, he utterly disliked a highly-caramelised beer. He knew, however, that beer drinkers in some districts liked it. He did not think they got the same stability from caramel as they did from black malt.
The Chairman, in complimenting Mr. Briant on his paper, mentioned incidentally that the Committee of the Section were endeavouring to arrange for a picnic, as it was thought this would be an excellent means of keeping members more or less in touch with one another during the summer months. If the proposal went forward, he hoped the Committee would be well supported in their effort to provide a means of promoting the social enjoyment of members.
Mr. J. G. Wells proposed the thanks of the Meeting to Mr. Briant for his paper, which he said had been much appreciated by those present. Mr. Briant had ably dealt with a question which, to him (Mr. Wells), had always been a point of difficulty, namely, the comparative advantages of rousted malt and roasted barley, and he was pleased to find that Mr. Briant’s experiments had tended, on the whole, to confirm his own views. He personally had a strong preference in favour of roasted malt, and the figures Mr. Briant bad given rather hacked up that preference, though they did not support it to the extent he had expected as regarded extract and colour. He was, however, inclined to question Mr. Briant’s figures as to colour. His experience was that more colour was obtained from roasted malt than roasted barley. As to flavour, he had no doubt roasted malt did give a distinctly better flavour than roasted barley, and Mr. Briant’s paper supported that opinion. With regard to the mode of purchasing black and coloured malts, he saw no reason why they should not buy them by weight. Why buy one class of malt by weight and another by measure? By purchasing by weight, they could compare the extracts on reliable lines, whereas if black and coloured malts were bought by measure, they did not know what weight they would receive, as the weights of deliveries varied considerably. An extract of 77 per 336 lb., he should say, was rather low for a good class of black malt. He should say an extract of 80 would be nearer the mark. Mr. Wells concluded by supporting Mr. Briant in the view that colouring black beers by malt was much to be preferred to colouring by caramel.
Mr. Turner seconded the motion, which was carried with acclamation.
In acknowledgment, Mr. Briant said Mr. Wells’ remarks in the main supported what he had contended in his paper.