• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

The Hudepohl Brewing Company of Cincinnati, Ohio: a case study in regional brewery prosperity and decline Timothy J Holian Introduction Unfortunately the work would remain largely unaccomplished: within two years On the occasion of the 100th anniversary the brewery would be sold to a local rival, of the Hudepohl Brewing Company in the Schoenling Brewing Company, ultimate- 1985, then-executive vice president and ly to be shut down and dismantled as general manager Bob Pohl noted the another casualty in the ongoing consoli- strengths of the firm that enabled it to dation of the American brewing industry celebrate the milestone. Among the during the post-Prohibition era. virtues of the brewery were ‘quality prod- ucts,’ ‘hard working and loyal employees,’ A closer examination of Hudepohl busi- and ‘a special bond between the whole- ness practices over its last half-century salers who handle our products and the reveals a representative portrait of the retailers who sell our products,’ the hall- successes and failures of regional brew- marks of a community-minded enterprise ing enterprises nationwide during the which led Pohl to stress that ‘Hudepohl period, from the rise of the firm from the has always been a good local brewer ashes of Prohibition to sustained and with a good reputation.’ Yet at the same growing local sales success; through a time Pohl acknowledged the challenges period of stagnation and gradual decline that stood in its path, most notably that in the face of a loss of consumer loyalty and increasing competitive pressures the market is changing every day, and we from larger, more financially secure have to adjust to it. We realize that we cannot regional and national brewers; to closure compete head-on with the large national as the ultimate acknowledgment of an brewers on a national scale. We must go inability to remain profitable and hold around them. … We are well on our way to market presence into an uncertain future. accomplishing our goals, but there is still The trend did not discriminate between plenty of work to do.1 the size of the brewery and its location. A plethora of small towns gave ample evi- dence of the shift: during the 1970s and 1980s alone the casualty list in the battle- * This article has undergone peer review. ground northern states encompassed 12 Journal of the Brewery History Society Figure 1. A Hudepohl tin advertising sign celebrates the repeal of Prohibition (‘Something to Blow About’), 1933. (author's collection) several dozen once-successful firms Goebel), and Chicago (Meister Brau, within a thousand-mile range from Canadian Ace, Atlas, Schoenhofen Allentown, Pennsylvania (Horlacher) and Edelweiss); within southern markets Dunkirk, New York (Koch) to Houghton, (Jackson in New Orleans, Pearl and Lone Michigan (Bosch) and Eau Claire, Star in San Antonio); as well as along Wisconsin (Walter). Large cities were no the West Coast (Rainier in Seattle, Blitz- less susceptible to the pattern over time, Weinhard in Portland). All across the as demonstrated by prominent breweries United States, the era of the traditional along the East Coast in Greater New local and regional brewery gradually York (Schaefer, Piel, Rheingold, drew to a close.2 Ballantine), Philadelphia (C Schmidt, Ortlieb, Gretz, Esslinger), and Baltimore (Gunther, National); in Upper Midwest The return of an old friend bastions including Minneapolis (Grain Belt, Gluek), St. Paul (Hamm, Schmidt), The end of Prohibition on 7 April 1933 Milwaukee (Gettelman, Independent was met with wild enthusiasm by a public Milwaukee), Detroit (Stroh, Pfeiffer, which had been forced to do without legal Brewery History Number 141 13 alcoholic beverages for the previous 14 production among its roughly two-dozen years. While many consumers simply local competitors, growing from approxi- were glad to have beer from whatever mately 25,000 barrels manufactured in producers might supply it, considerable 1886 to 40,000 barrels at the onset of the anticipation concerned the state of brew- 1890s, and an estimated 68,800 barrels ers that had been successful in their by the end of the 1896 fiscal year.3 But markets in the years before dry legisla- despite the impressive growth registered tion. Established in Cincinnati in 1885 by by Hudepohl & Kotte during its formative Ludwig Hudepohl II and George Kotte, years, the brewery still stood deeply in the Hudepohl & Kotte Buckeye Brewery - the shadows of its most prominent area formally organized in corporate form as rivals, most notably Christian Moerlein the Hudepohl Brewing Company in (300,000 barrels produced in 1896), February 1900 - became a well-estab- Windisch-Muhlhauser (140,000), and lished name in its home market and John Hauck (120,000). nearby environs over the next 35 years, carving out a steady trade with its As it turned out, the arrival of Prohibition Golden Jubilee, Buckeye, Dortmunder, in Cincinnati in May 1919 paved the way and Hudepohl brands. The firm quickly for later success for Hudepohl, at the positioned itself among the top third in expense of larger firms either forced to Figure 2. A Hudepohl & Kotte Buckeye Brewery advertisement of the late nineteenth century. (author's collection) 14 Journal of the Brewery History Society March 1927, when the final 46,500 gal- lons of malt beverage were dumped unceremoniously down the city sewer system in advance of closure.4 In con- trast, Hudepohl managed to survive the dry years by manufacturing not only near beer, but also vichy water, sundry soft drinks, and a ‘Dutch Cocktail’ made of real beer mixed with ginger ale. The latter product was discontinued sometime around 1928, along with its own near beer manufacture, in favor of taking on local distribution of a non-alcoholic brew from the Falls City Ice & Beverage Company (after Prohibition the Falls City Brewing Company) of Louisville, Kentucky.5 The active state of the busi- ness made it possible for Hudepohl to Figure 3. Cases of Hudepohl Pure Lager retool its production quickly with the Beer come down the bottling line in the late 1930s. (author's collection) advent of repeal, such that by October 1933 it was one of seven Cincinnati breweries producing beer for the thirsty close during the dry years or unwilling masses. Like many brewers across the to attempt to ride out the storm. Despite country, Hudepohl was forced to hastily its status as the unquestioned leader update and modernize, in ways such as among area breweries, Christian the purchase of a new condenser and Moerlein made only a perfunctory effort water cooler to improve the efficiency of to market two near beers - Moer-lo and the physical plant, given the progression Chrismo - before announcing on 1 June of technology during the dry years and 1919 the decision to cease business and the relative obsolescence of much of the divest itself of brewery property and brewery's equipment as a result of the equipment. Windisch-Muhlhauser likewise hiatus. Hudepohl also was one of the produced a near beer, Lion Beverage, as earliest brewers to demonstrate an well as a root beer, and marketed malt awareness of a pending consumer shift extract and hops for enterprising home away from draft brews in favor of pack- brewers, before lackluster sales forced aged beer: in early 1933 it spent the firm to end operations in 1922. John $130,000 in part to install a new bottling Hauck managed to hold on slightly unit, including a modern soaker and pas- longer, manufacturing near beer and soft teurizer as well as filling, capping, and drinks at its Dayton Street facility until labeling machinery designed to handle Brewery History Number 141 15 Figure 4. Hudepohl Pure Lager Beer quart Figure 5. A Hudepohl Chevy Ale label, bottle label, circa late 1930s. (author's circa early 1940s. (author's collection) collection) what was foreseen as an increasing name recognition, develop new brands, trade in bottled beer.6 Along the same and establish vital distribution networks, lines, the company adopted cans for all existing strengths for Hudepohl. Aided packaging beer relatively soon after their by the fact that regional and national introduction in 1935, and during the late rivals were only a minor presence in the 1930s and early 1940s the firm produced local trade, the result was an early period its flagship brand, Hudepohl Pure Lager of prosperity that made the company the Beer, and a companion brew, its top-fer- leading producer among Cincinnati mented Chevy Ale, in ‘J’ spout cone top brewers during the critical reestablish- and Crowntainer cans manufactured by ment phase of the industry. One signal of Crown Cork & Seal of Philadelphia. newfound success, as well as a clear indicator of the company's desire to Modernization and a lack of strong rivals become the dominant local brewer, was gave Hudepohl a leg up on its early local the acquisition in 1934 of the former post-Prohibition competition. Returning Lackman Brewery at Sixth and Stone breweries such as Vienna, Jackson, and Streets. The buildings had not witnessed Foss-Schneider were saddled with small, beer production since the onset of inefficient, mostly landlocked plants and Prohibition, but their use by the Niser showed little serious potential for growth Company, a local ice cream manufactur- and expansion. New brewers such as er, ensured that much of the needed Red Top (utilizing the former Hauck equipment had been well-maintained in plant), Burger (in the Windisch- the meantime. Combined with its existing Muhlhauser facility), and Schoenling (a plant along East McMicken Avenue, in startup operation) needed time to garner the old German district known as Over 16 Journal of the Brewery History Society inferior alternative adjuncts, such as potatoes and lower-grade corn, Hudepohl opted for reduced output but better beer, unwilling to risk its good name for short- term gain.

Load more

  42

Copy Link