‘Please give this matter your immediate attention:’ the complexity of brewing in Minnesota and Wisconsin - 1933 - 1952
Doug Hoverson
Introduction The neighboring states of Minnesota and Wisconsin entered Prohibition in 1920 When legal beer went on sale just after with mixed enthusiasm. Both were known midnight on 7 April 1933, the stagnant for their politics of social reform in which American economy witnessed a welcome temperance legislation played a leading surge of commerce. Changing technolo- role. Congressman Andrew Volstead, gy, proliferating laws and regulations, author of the National Prohibition Act, developing tastes and simple business was a resident of Granite Falls, concerns created challenges for each of Minnesota. Wisconsin governor and US the more than seven hundred breweries senator Robert M La Follette Sr is recog- that emerged in the US after Prohibition. nized as one of the most important Because of the inconsistent availability reform politicians in history. On the other of records, a study combining the neigh- hand, the two states had been settled by boring states Minnesota and Wisconsin immigrants with beer drinking traditions: provides a more complete view of the Germans, Czechs, Irish and others. challenges facing breweries of all sizes - Milwaukee had become synonymous challenges that any modern brewer with lager beer decades before would recognize. The period ending in Prohibition, but both states had dozens of 1952 provides a useful limit since it was medium and large breweries in the cities when wartime shortages were ending but and scores of small breweries dotting the before national multi-plant expansion countryside. The brewing industries of began in earnest and before television the two states followed parallel courses advertising began to shape public per- emerging from Prohibition, and most dif- ceptions of leading brands. ferences were circumstances encountered by individual breweries rather than state- wide business or economic conditions.
Both states had extensive brewing *This article has undergone peer review. industries prior to Prohibition. Minnesota,
Brewery History Number 141 67 while not among the national leaders, While it is not within the scope of this had approximately sixty breweries prior article to discuss the weaknesses of the to Prohibition, including regional powers Volstead Act from 1920 - 1933, there Hamm and Schmidt of St Paul and were factors that created a more Minneapolis Brewing Co. By contrast, receptive climate for the return of family Wisconsin, while not much bigger in breweries in Wisconsin than in population and smaller in area, had Minnesota. The Wisconsin legislature approximately 130 firms including Pabst dragged its feet on passing state prohi- and Schlitz - which were among the bition legislation, and the widely-shared most famous in the world. The small and German cultural heritage provided agents medium-sized breweries in the two states with a significant disincentive to enforce had similar rates of closure or conversion an unpopular law. Extensive surveys of to other business.1 The three biggest local newspapers in both states suggest Milwaukee breweries, Pabst, Schlitz, and that Minnesotans tended to make and Blatz, had significantly greater resources sell distilled spirits rather than beer, but to draw on in their conversion - Schlitz Wisconsin residents continued to make went so far as to build an all-new beer despite the much lower percentage chocolate factory.2 of alcohol than hard liquor. Dozens of
Figure 1. Many breweries in Wisconsin and Minnesota drew on images of the outdoor life to sell their beer. The U-Permit number on the label was used only in the first three years after Prohibition. After 1936, brewers were forbidden to use the permit wording because it might give the impression the government had approved the brewery or the beer.
68 Journal of the Brewery History Society breweries continued to make real beer generally prepairing [sic] our brewery for during Prohibition, and while some were the anticipated return of brewed beer. The closed, other violators were given light return, however, was quicker than we penalties. JL Erickson of the Monitor expected, we were caught short, and are Brewery in La Crosse, Wisconsin was unable to supply the demand for the new given a fine instead of jail time for making malt drink.5 strong beer, because the judge ruled that the strong beer was ‘due more to The George Walter Brewing Co. of carelessness than to any attempt to Appleton, Wisconsin, published an ad violate the law’.3 Even when breweries which attempted to convert their delay were closed, so-called ‘wildcat’ breweries into virtue: sprang up both in cities and rural areas. One such brewery in La Crosse was With but a limited time elapsing between located in an elaborate tunnel system the passage of the beer bill and the time under the house of ‘an attractive 35- when beer may actually be sold, we decided year old woman.’ The brewery was not a not to rush production at the risk of small homebrewing operation, but a disappointing our patrons.6 large plant with an ice machine, four fer- mentation vats of 450 gallons each and Minneapolis Brewing Co made similar a bottle-capping machine.4 claims:
We have not hurried: Time has been taken Preparing the way so that our beer will attain a quality of mellow taste satisfaction which every experienced After Franklin D Roosevelt won the pres- user instantly recognizes.7 idential election in 1932 on a platform that included repeal of Prohibition, many While those firms that had active near brewers began to prepare for the day beer lines had minimal retooling to when beer would be legal. Those who undertake, breweries that had been had continued to make near beer during mothballed or converted to other uses Prohibition were best able to convert became scenes of frantic activity. This quickly to regular beer. Some brewers flurry of building was most welcome to appear to have underestimated the tradesmen unemployed during the speed with which the necessary legisla- depression. In Ripon, Wisconsin: tion would pass through Congress and the state legislatures. Otto's Brewery in a large crew of men are employed ... , and Mantorville, Minnesota lamented: many trades are represented in the work. Electricians are re-wiring the place, boilers Since the election last fall we have been and tanks are being reconditioned, and the making repairs, improvements and bottling apparatus is being brought up to
Brewery History Number 141 69 Figure 2. Blatz was one of several breweries that continued to make near beer throughout Prohibition, and was able to resume production of beer in short order. The pre-Prohibition practice of brewing lagers in the styles of particular German brewing capitals diminished considerably during the mid-20th century.
date. An addition to the present bottling plant employed connecting a power line to the is to be built later.8 brewery, which apparently did not have electricity prior to Prohibition.10 Other A few miles to the northeast, in Chilton, breweries needed to install all new equipment, or at least claimed they did The ice house of the Calumet Brewing Co. in articles and advertisements. here was in the process of being remodeled for the manufacture of legal beer. The upper As much interest as there was in job story of the building was being removed and creation, brewers continued to remind the lower part renovated for early use. The the public of the amber nectar soon to brewery proper was being overhauled and arrive. The Milwaukee Journal reported the interior whitewashed, painted and on 26 March 1933 that Blatz Brewing varnished. Five carpenters were busy on Co had become the first in Milwaukee to the job.9 start bottling its beer and was filling 600,000 bottles each day. On the same In some cases, the improvements were page, the Journal carried a press release even more fundamental. In the small thinly disguised as an interview with village of Arcadia, Wisconsin, a crew was Gustave Pabst Jr touting the virtues of
70 Journal of the Brewery History Society steel beer kegs. Breweries needed to planned to broadcast the arrival of a prepare citizens for this innovation plane carrying Blatz beer from Milwaukee because traditional coopers were so via a microphone placed outside the stu- prevalent in Wisconsin. Indeed, an dio.13 amendment was offered to the bill legal- izing beer which would have outlawed Breathless promotion was hardly need- metal kegs in Wisconsin (it was ultimate- ed. Crowds numbering in the thousands ly defeated). Though much less popular gathered outside nine Minnesota and in Minnesota, wooden kegs were still twenty-seven Wisconsin breweries. used by Wisconsin breweries for several Brewery personnel were allowed to load decades and the last traditional cooper- brewery trucks and rail cars before mid- age remained open until 1966.11 night in anticipation of the great moment. At 12:01, factory whistles blew, bands played, and shouts arose from the New Beer's Day assembled throngs. Traffic moved only through careful management of cars The excitement surrounding the return of and trucks that had arrived many hours legal beer bordered on frenzy. The earlier from all points of the compass. In Sheboygan (WI) Press enthused: Sheboygan, an observer spotted vehicles ‘Independence day without the firecrack- from Wisconsin, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, ers! Armistice day with the return of beer Missouri, and Michigan. Except for the instead of soldiers!’ The brewers fed the largest Milwaukee firms, the breweries media hype. Alvin Gluek, superintendent themselves had few delivery vehicles. of his family's brewery in Minneapolis, The Peter Bub Brewery in Winona, dramatically announced that Minnesota, had planned to make deliv- eries, but decided that brewery personnel police protection will be necessary if the would be better employed loading pri- lame and the halt are not to be trampled vate cars and trucks. To make up this underfoot, and fenders and running boards of deficit, every restaurant, tavern or house- family cars are not to be squeezed and hold that could sent a vehicle to ensure bumped.12 they got some of the first available beer.14
Radio stations, still experimenting with The competition for the first keg or case live journalism, offered a variety of pro- was often heated. In Stevens Point, grams. WTMJ of Milwaukee planned Wisconsin, the leading hotel sent a car to several hours of coverage, including the local brewery five hours in advance, interviews with brewery personnel, only to have a man from a country tavern accounts of the entire delivery process, escape with the first keg of Point Special. and the arrival of the first keg at Mader's Two mixed cases of Milwaukee beer restaurant. In Sheboygan, WHBL were taken to the airport, put on a waiting
Brewery History Number 141 71 plane and flown to the nation's capital, their drinking vessels in the previous four- where they were presented to President teen years). However, other ads showed Roosevelt. Deliveries in central Wisconsin the changing world that the brewers were made more dramatic by a storm were re-entering. An ad touting Phillips which coated roads with snow and ice. 66 gasoline signaled how much the However, the snowbanks allowed those automobile had changed transportation who had somehow purloined a bottle of since 1920, and another offering home beer from a passing case a chance to refrigerators by General Electric showed chill the beer quickly before welcoming its brewers that the importance of home return.15 consumption would increase in the years after Prohibition. Government officials Some Wisconsin cities delayed their for- joined in the celebration and the analy- mal celebration, either because the local sis. Wisconsin governor Albert G brewery wasn't ready yet or as in Schmedeman reassured those who Oshkosh, where the event was sched- feared the return of beer would decrease uled for the day after Easter ‘because of milk consumption and hurt dairy farmers: a desire not to interrupt the observance of the Lenten season’.16 Strangely, the ... we are encouraged by the knowledge that city council of New Ulm, Minnesota, the cheese has always been the boon companion cultural center of that state's Germans, of beer and the demand for Wisconsin failed to pass an ordinance in time so that cheese ... will see a marked increase ... city's taverns were not allowed to serve fresh beer until weeks later. Milwaukee officials estimated that the return of brewing would increase rev- enues from use of city water by more Jobs, revenue, and other benefits than $50,000 per year.17
Those whose jobs depended on brewing For the most part, the euphoria over eco- and related industries were even more nomic stimulus was well founded. enthusiastic about the return of beer than Brewery Age estimated that $10 million the consumers. In a special section of the in excise taxes had been collected in the Milwaukee Journal, a wide variety of first few days of legal sales.18 Over the businesses congratulated the city on the next few years, more than 40,000 people return of beer. Some ads celebrated tra- found employment in the nation's brew- ditional ties to beer: the Northern Pacific eries, and many thousands more were Railway welcomed back beer and the employed supplying the breweries or sell- business it would bring the company, ing their products. Many of the suppliers another ad offered customers Jack Sprat represented the most important industries brand Pickled Pigs' Feet packed in beer of Minnesota and Wisconsin. In Duluth, steins (just in case they had disposed of Minnesota, the Herald predicted that
72 Journal of the Brewery History Society Co of Manitowoc, Wisconsin, built what was to become the largest single malting facility in the world at Shakopee, Minnesota.21
Products, places, people
The spectacle of the early days of legal beer, with its celebrations and seemingly unquenchable demand for any and all beer, masked the underlying difficulties facing businesses trying to earn a steady profit. Beer had been gone for thirteen years, and American society had Figure 3. This Blatz coaster (pub mat) from changed, along with drinking tastes. 1935 rejoiced in the added prosperity that the brewing industry shared with other Beer was returning during the worst eco- businesses. This coaster makes a distinction nomic crises in the nation's history - between the re-legalization of beer, which which affected everything from financing occurred on 7 April 1933, and the repeal of to labor to demand for the product itself. Prohibition, which covered all forms of alcohol and did not occur until 5 December 1933. The vast majority of breweries after Prohibition were companies that had been in business beforehand, and with a Demand for wooden boxes by the brewers very few exceptions were family firms will give work to more than eighty men at the that still bore the founder's name and [Zenith] box factory, ... and will afford in which stock was still closely held by revenue to some 1,000 other persons in the his descendants. They had survived Arrowhead through the purchase of logs.19 Prohibition in part because they had little debt and were able to keep enough Farmers, who in general had suffered cash flowing to pay the bills. Most return- from the Great Depression longer than ing breweries had developed a following industries, benefited as well. Newspaper in their home region and were able, at articles and advertisements from malting least at first, to trade on this loyalty after companies advised farmers which vari- reopening. Leinenkugel in Chippewa eties of barley to plant (Wisconsin Falls, Wisconsin, Walter in nearby Eau No.38, Oderbrucker, and Velvet were Claire, and Minneapolis Brewing recommended for both states).20 Malting Company were able to recover most of companies ramped up production and their market despite not being ready on prepared to expand. In 1937, Rahr Malting New Beer's Day.
Brewery History Number 141 73 Figure 4. Two Rivers Beverage Co. is an example of a small brewery (less than 25,000 barrels) that produced an ale to reach a market not already saturated by local lager brews. This label was intended for the 7 oz. bottle.
Most returning breweries regained their The release of bock beer each spring loyal customers by bringing back favorite was always a highlight of the beer year, old brands, but deciding what type of and was frequently a cause for parades beer to make was not always self-evi- and other celebrations. With the loss of dent. Lager was the clear favorite in tied house saloons through post- Minnesota and Wisconsin, but a few Prohibition regulations, brewers raced large breweries, notably Pabst and each other to get their bock in the taverns Minneapolis Brewing Co, also included and restaurants, most of whom were an ale in their portfolios. A few smaller not willing to commit more than one breweries experimented with ale styles draught line to a seasonal specialty. This as a way of filling a gap in the market, but was especially true in small cities with demand was weak. The new Mayville, multiple breweries, such as New Ulm Wisconsin brewery hired a Swedish where the rivalry between August Schell brewmaster from Chicago who proposed Brewing Co and Hauenstein Brewing Co to make Swedish style porter and to mar- was jovial but intense. The American ket it in Chicago but this venture was Brewers Association proposed a uniform unsuccessful.22 date for bock release, often 17 March,
74 Journal of the Brewery History Society and encouraged its members to cooper- Mayville, a number of townsmen ‘agreed ate ‘providing all other associations and that [the mill] should be converted into a members of the brewing industry will do brewery, because Mayville is entitled to likewise.’ Despite these efforts, some a suds manufacturing plant’.24 In some brewers complained that their rivals were villages, like Arcadia and Fountain City, releasing bock early and getting an unfair Wisconsin, the brewery had a public tap advantage.23 where the locals could draw themselves a foaming mug of fresh beer. Arcadia Many Wisconsin communities seemed to Brewing ran afoul of Wisconsin officials believe that a local brewery was an when it was found that 14% of their out- essential public service, rather than sim- put was being dispensed free of taxation ply a traditional ethnic business. This in this way. Even in the much larger city went well beyond the cliché: 'every little of Superior, the Northern Brewing town had a brewery.' In the village of Company had ‘no bar but [we] let each
Figure 5. Nearly every brewery of any size produced a Bock beer, a stronger, dark lager. Many smaller breweries used a stock label - one that could be adapted to any brewery simply by overprinting their name on the label.
Brewery History Number 141 75 person help themselves to a reasonable operate as the Schatz-Brau Brewery Co. quantity’.25 While a few of the Minnesota The Melrose Beacon praised breweries provided similar service, there does not seem to have been a similar the biggest building project in the state sense of cultural need - breweries were outside the big cities since President more of a business transaction. When Roosevelt took command and opined: 'This Minneapolis investors sought in 1938 to Nation asks for action … our primary task is reopen the brewery in Mantorville, to put people to work’.28 Minnesota, they noted that they could ‘see no reason why the local brewery However, when the plant finally opened, should not be a real asset to the com- it was as a food processing business, not munity’ and spoke of its economic a brewery. potential.26 Even for some breweries that went into This perception that every town could production, the debt incurred in building support a brewery - encouraged by the or remodeling was difficult to overcome initial success of legal beer - led new and they encountered financial trouble investors to seek profits by reopening a almost immediately. Only seven months defunct brewery or building all-new after opening, Otto's Brewery of plants. Investors even sought to open Mantorville went into receivership, with new companies in three municipalities 111 claims presented against the firm in Minnesota and four in Wisconsin that for a total of $410,000. Prominent among had never before hosted a brewery. Only the creditors were a number of building those in Denmark and Westfield, firms who had been contracted to Wisconsin went into production, and they upgrade the plant.30 only survived thirteen and nine years, respectively.27 Locating a new brewing The newly reopened breweries faced company in a neighborhood with several immediate shortages, in particular of bot- generations of brewing tradition was no tles and kegs. In the rush to obtain kegs, guarantee of success. The small city of brewers incurred greater transportation Durand, Wisconsin had supported brew- expense. Some cooperages did not dry eries since 1863. However, when a group their wood thoroughly in the hurry to meet of Minneapolis businessmen sought to the demand, making the kegs heavier, expand and reopen the brewery, they and the German kegs imported to fill the spent thousands of dollars upgrading the gap were of heavier workmanship to plant and increasing its capacity to begin with. The American Brewers' 45,000 barrels but never started produc- Association launched a program to have tion.28 In Melrose, Minnesota, where a brewers report the lower actual weight brewery was established in 1882, of their cooperage in an attempt to fore- investors built a completely new facility to stall a freight rate increase in 1937.31
76 Journal of the Brewery History Society There was no shortage of labor for the able at a large brewery. Most of these breweries. Because the specter of jobs did not require previous experience Prohibition remained until after World and so were eagerly sought as entry- War II, breweries were careful to stress level jobs. In a large brewery, most their contributions to the community. The positions offered opportunities for pro- most important, given the catastrophic motion so the majority of year-round unemployment during the Great employees expected to make a career Depression, was the number of jobs cre- out of their work in the brewery. A union ated directly and indirectly by the history published in 1968 listed almost resumption of business. The Mantorville 150 employees that had been with either Express reported with pleasure that Hamm or Schmidt for more than 30 Otto's Brewery ‘now gives employment to years, and several dozen who had been 17 people but in a short while, direct hired prior to repeal.34 employment will be given to about 50, all of whom will be required to live in the Small breweries sometimes had trouble village’. Mankato Brewing Co, a larger retaining brewmasters and other key per- concern with a capacity of around 100,000 sonnel. The Wisconsin city columns in barrels, required about 50 workers the Winona (MN) Republican-Herald including office staff and driver/salesmen. chronicled the movements of Arcadia Plans in late 1933 called for the brewery Brewing Company's brewers: Peter and packaging workers to be divided Kronschnabl left for Germantown, into four six-hour shifts, in accordance Wisconsin; Joseph Hartel came to with the codes set for the industry by Arcadia from Jackson, Michigan but soon Roosevelt's National Recovery left for Eulberg Brewing Company in Administration.32 While the NRA codes Portage, Wisconsin. Ernest Maier arrived generally favored large firms over small from Chicago and resigned a year later, ones, even small brewing companies Albin Bill went from Arcadia to Reedsburg, adopted the semi-voluntary codes, most- Wisconsin, and Harold Hoover went to an ly to show their willingness to cooperate unnamed brewery in Milwaukee. Even and to forestall moves to reinstate prohi- bookkeeper Irene Brandt left to take a bition.33 job in Milwaukee.35
The major Twin Cities breweries Working conditions in the breweries were employed several hundred men each and considered ‘as ideal as the work will the biggest Milwaukee breweries had allow.’ The breweries were ‘clean, well payrolls numbering in the thousands. A ventilated and well lighted.’ Hazards were list of brewery job descriptions compiled considered ‘negligible,’ in comparison to in the late 1930s (using two St Paul many other industries.36 Working condi- breweries as the model) described more tions for many were improved further than three dozen distinct positions avail- by union membership. St Paul's bottlers
Brewery History Number 141 77 earned wages of $25.50 per week in 1933 and received a raise to $27 the next year - excellent wages during the depres- sion. Wages rose steadily through the 1930s and bottlers earned $35 per week on the eve of World War II. Brewers, whose positions required more skill and training, earned $3 more per week than bottlers.37 Driver/Salesmen were repre- sented by a different union for many years and firemen (operating the boiler or malt kiln, not putting out fires) by yet another.
The brewery workforce was not diverse by modern standards. With the exception of a few office workers, the work force was exclusively male. While some women were employed in bottling prior to Prohibition, social norms during the Depression reserved most jobs for the male breadwinner of the family. In addi- tion, brewery workers were usually of German descent or from other nations with a brewing heritage. Many employees were hired based on recommendation from friends or neighbors, creating a largely closed society. The breweries in the Twin Cities had no African-American Figure 6. For more than a century, brewers employees, a situation which upset some have spent as much time advertising the packaging of the beer as the beer itself. The members of that community. In 1935, Keglined can promoted in this 1936 ad was Cecil Newman, editor of the Minneapolis the product of the American Can Co., It high- Spokesman, led an eleven-month boycott lights the fact that the lining was the key of the Twin Cities breweries. In editorials development that made canned beer possible. and cartoons, he wondered how the com- panies could expect ‘Negro porters and waiters’ to recommend the local beer when the breweries hired no ‘colored’ help.38 to take advantage of technological improvements, especially in packaging, A large brewery with healthy cash flow and than was a small brewery with limited strong credit was also in a better position access to capital. The single most impor-
78 Journal of the Brewery History Society tant advance in the years after legaliza- tion proposed by politicians who did not tion was the introduction of canned beer. understand the brewing industry or First introduced by the G Krueger process. In addition to the attempted ban Brewing Co of Newark, New Jersey in on steel kegs in Wisconsin, an assembly- 1935, the can was quickly adopted by man who was concerned that ‘brewers’ large and mid-sized breweries in chemists might find a way to avoid use Minnesota and Wisconsin - Premier- of barley and thereby take away the Pabst was the second brewer to market farmers' interest in beer’ proposed a beer in cans. Rival can manufacturers requirement that all beer have at least offered different styles of can: the flat top, 66% barley malt. Luckily for those brew- which could be filled faster and saved ers catering to American tastes for beer space but required new equipment, and with substantial amounts of corn or rice, the so-called ‘cone top,’ which could be the amendment was defeated by one filled on existing bottling lines. In addition, vote. In 1937, a representative from Iowa cone tops could be opened with bottle proposed a bill in Congress that would openers that customers already owned, have imposed an extra tax of 50 cents whereas flat tops required new tools per gallon on any beer made with agri- (the so-called ‘church key’ opener) and cultural commodities not grown in the instructions. Both varieties claimed United States. Such a bill would have advantages over bottled beer. Cans were made it nearly impossible to maintain more durable, chilled faster, weighed less the consistency of brands made with and as a one-way container did not imported hops, but the American require storage and return of empties. Brewers' Association believed (rightly) While some breweries such as Schlitz that it was unlikely to become law.40 chose the cone-top for its virtues, many others did so to avoid expensive The largest breweries, such as Pabst, upgrades to their plants. Pabst and Schlitz, and Miller, had their own legal Hamm were two of the very few brew- departments that handled tax and compli- eries that started with flat tops and ance issues and were available to deal never used any form of cone top (even with problems encountered by their Krueger experimented with cone top distributors and customers as well. varieties after starting with flat tops).39 Minneapolis Brewing Co hired a lawyer in Washington, DC to represent them before government bodies.41 Smaller Please submit in triplicate brewers were able to depend on industry organizations like the American Brewers' Brewing companies devoted countless Association for legal advice. The ABA hours to interpreting and complying with services ranged from keeping brewers laws and regulations. Large and small up to date on recent government actions breweries alike were affected by legisla- to providing specific help to a brewery
Brewery History Number 141 79 seeking approval of a label or a process politicians preferred raising such ‘sin’ change. taxes rather than politically unpopular income or sales taxes. Policymakers Guidance from the ABA was critical for recognized the importance of the over- smaller brewers trying to negotiate the lapping alcohol taxes to all governments programs of Roosevelt's New Deal which as well as the entrenched nature of marked the largest expansion of gov- local interests and grudgingly conceded ernment activity in American history. All that these taxes could not be stream- businesses with eight or more employees lined.43 were required to participate in the new Social Security pension scheme and to All units of government clung to their file all the necessary paperwork with ability to tax alcohol because of the the relevant agencies to demonstrate regulatory functions the tax and its compliance. In these and other similar administration served. States that sought cases, the ABA sent monthly circulars to to discourage alcohol often raised taxes its members explaining the new regula- to high levels - especially if there were no tions.42 breweries in the state and the tax would be borne largely by parties who could not The American federal system, with its vote on the policy. States such as web of concurrent powers shared by Minnesota and Wisconsin with both state and federal governments, created strong temperance traditions and vibrant many of the greatest headaches for brewing industries had to set a careful brewers of all sizes. Alexander Hamilton balance that would not regulate firms out was concerned about the problems of of business and dry up their revenue allowing taxing and regulatory authority stream.44 State excise tax rates changed to be shared by multiple overlapping frequently and varied widely - in 1948 jurisdictions before the nation was even amounts ranged from 62 cents per barrel established. Even government officials in Missouri to $10 in Louisiana. ruefully admitted that ‘a nation-wide business must constantly keep its lawyer Even more problematic for producers on one side and its accountant on the was the variability in the each state's other.’ Prior to repeal, states had not method of collection. At first, most states imposed excise taxes on alcohol - leav- used a system of case and keg stamps, ing this revenue source to the federal but within a few years about a dozen government. But with the federal govern- switched to a system of special crown ment, forty-eight states and more than caps and can lids to indicate the tax had 175,000 smaller government units all been paid.45 Because the states using seeking to fund essential operations tax paid crowns and lids were primarily in during a national crisis, alcohol taxes the southeastern part of the US, the became tempting targets. Moreover, burden of purchasing these items and
80 Journal of the Brewery History Society exports to distant territories - Duluth Brewing and Malting sent beer to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (which also had such a requirement). Even the sophisticated bottle houses of the giant brewers had all they could do to keep up with the changing requirements. Not only did the tax rate change every few years, rendering older crowns void, but several states, such as Kansas, required the package size to be indicated on the crowns. To make matters worse, Minnesota (as well as several other states) required crowns of different colors for 3.2% beer and ‘strong’ beer.46 As a consequence, a brewery might need as many as 40 different crowns to ship a flagship brand like Schlitz throughout the country - not to mention a similar number for each premium and ‘popular price’ brand.47
Both Minnesota and Wisconsin required Figure 7. National brewers had to adapt their stamps on all bulk beer packages and bottling procedures to satisfy taxation policies each brewer had to purchase stamps in in different states. The simplest method was advance from the appropriate state to include the state's name on the crown, as agency. For smaller or cash-strapped with the Schlitz crown from Oklahoma. Breweries selling in Pennsylvania firms this requirement sometimes restrict- incorporated the keystone symbol into the ed their ability to do business at all. The design. Virginia required the use of the state Semrad-Pusch Brewing Co. of Highland, outline and the amount of the tax. A few Wisconsin apparently could not afford to states like North Carolina required that their state seal be incorporated into the crown. buy stamps more than a day in advance and was inconvenienced by the late arrival each day of the only train allowed to carry certified mail.48 The Old Lager keeping them straight in the bottle house Brewing Company of Milwaukee, a small fell primarily on a few large brewers: brewery in a city of giants, avoided this Blatz, Miller, Pabst and Schlitz in problem by buying stamps in lots large Wisconsin and Hamm in Minnesota. A enough to avoid multiple shipments each few smaller brewers made occasional week, but had to borrow from their bank
Brewery History Number 141 81 to do so. The brewery then placed the half barrels one day than the number of stamps at the bank as collateral for the federal stamps used - ‘This led us to note, and withdrew them as needed.49 believe that there was juggling going on.’ Even the smallest refund amount Two months earlier, Calumet was found appeared to be important to the brewers using federal stamps but not state stamps (and the Beverage Tax Division). The for some barrels. Since the company was Kurth Company of Columbus, Wisconsin shipping to Minnesota as well as selling sought a 50 cent refund from the BTD in the local market, ‘it is evident that for redundant postal insurance. The Tax either state, Minnesota or Wisconsin, has Division noted that simply writing ‘we been defrauded of its revenue.’ The have our own insurance’ on the form was brewery claimed that the confusion not enough, and declined to give a refund stemmed from shipments to Des Moines, since Iowa, which had different requirements.52 Even a seemingly trivial mistake required the only way we can give you a refund is for submitting several forms. In 1939 the the writer to pay this out of his own pocket. Whitewater Brewing Co of Whitewater, No doubt the Kurth company can better afford Wisconsin lost five stamps, apparently to stand this 50-cent charge than anyone because they became stuck inside a working in this office.50 wet envelope and were inadvertently discarded. The company had to submit A brewery that could not afford stamps forms to account for the loss and sepa- was ultimately unable to conduct busi- rate forms to get replacement stamps so ness. The Oconomowoc Brewing Company the beer could be sold.53 Breweries could was reduced to begging the BTD to send not transfer stamps between themselves them $49.10 worth of stamps without without prior approval and were repri- payment so they could sell enough beer manded by the BTD for lending each to make payments on previous stamp other stamps to cover a temporary short- orders. Despite a corporate reorganiza- age.54 tion and other measures, the brewery was forced to close down at the end of The burden of placing the stamp on the 1936 (though it would reopen as the keg or case fell to the brewer or contract- Binzel Brewing Co. and continue through ed bottler. Penalties were severe for 1942).51 improper processing of stamps. The retailer was required to mutilate or Every single stamp had to be accounted ‘scratch’ the stamps after the beer was for, or else the brewery was subject to sold so the brewer could not reuse them charges of tax evasion. In 1934, the and avoid taxation. In the event the Calumet Brewing Co of Chilton, retailer forgot, the delivery driver was Wisconsin was discovered by state and obligated to do so, if the driver failed, the federal inspectors to have sold 40 more brewery needed to mutilate the stamps
82 Journal of the Brewery History Society as soon as the packages arrived on reason for any objection to this practice on brewery property. Any party caught with the part of your office, but we want to clearly empty kegs or cases with unscratched know what sort of dumping will be required.58 stamps was subject to a heavy fine - as much as $100 per barrel or package - In some cases, the brewer faced the and possible imprisonment for up to a dilemma of being responsible for proper year. Payment of the federal fine had to be stamps, but not knowing where the accompanied by Form 656 in triplicate.55 beer would ultimately be sold. According to the BTD, beer sold to a distributor in As state and federal tax law evolved, Wisconsin was ‘presumed to have come breweries were allowed to seek refunds to rest in this state and is taxable’.59 for beer that could not be sold due to However, there seemed to be no end of spoilage, but this required another set of potential loopholes. La Crosse Breweries forms and procedures. Credit would be wished to ship beer to a bottler in Rice given for stamps pulled from leaky kegs, Lake, Wisconsin, and wondered if they but only if the beer was dumped in the could ship the beer with only the federal presence of a federal or state agent, and stamps on the kegs, since the bottler only if the appropriate stamp refund affi- would be responsible for state case davit form for ‘spoiled and unsaleable stamps. The same brewery had earlier [sic] beer’ was submitted.56 The Internal enquired if they needed state beer Revenue Service considered large stamps for beer sold at the US Army's amounts of spoiled beer suspicious, and Camp McCoy or at Civilian Conservation required a full explanation if more than a Corps camps in Wisconsin (they did). A few barrels went bad each month. In trickier problem was posed by the Kurth March 1941, Stevens Point Beverage Company of Columbus, Wisconsin, Company had to absorb the financial which was concerned because an losses of multiple batches of beer that inspector had informed them that they could not be sold because of an off fla- had to send separate trucks to a dis- vor and faced the further indignity of tributor who had warehouses in Beloit, having to explain what went wrong to Wisconsin and just across the border in the IRS.57 Brewers coped with these South Beloit, Illinois. The BTD ruled they regulations as well as possible - some- could send both shipments in one truck times with creativity. Miller Brewing Co as long as certain safeguards were fol- inquired of the BTD whether it was pos- lowed.60 sible to dump the beer so it Interstate transportation raised additional goes back into our brewing premises for questions of jurisdiction and taxation. whatever treatment, blending or While state enforcement agencies typi- reconditioning we feel it may need to put it in cally cooperated, lawmakers had no sim- shape for resale? ... We can perceive of no ilar incentives and a greater desire to
Brewery History Number 141 83 exert their own power, so brewers faced the hundreds of questions put to either new sets of rules and rates the moment the BTD or the IRS surveyed for this they crossed state lines.61 Wisconsin article, most were answered by the next was connected to Michigan by ferries business day. This does not mean the across Lake Michigan, and breweries in answer was always what the brewery port cities had questions about applicable wanted to hear. In 1937, the Stevens laws. Riverview Brewing Company of Point Beverage Company was installing Manitowoc questioned the BTD about new bottling equipment and needed beer sold on car ferries or other boats someplace to store bottled beer. They crossing the lake. The BTD responded asked permission to use a nearby brew- that the jurisdiction of the state extended ery garage for temporary storage, but the halfway out into the lake, and therefore IRS informed ‘Point’ they could only do Wisconsin stamps must be affixed within this if they had the property replatted so that range (as well as on any boats the garage was part of the bottling house docked in the state or on the state's rivers property instead of the brewery proper. or inlets).62 Interstate train travel posed Since the beer was perishable the com- similar problems. The Pullman Company pany had no time to spare for real estate did not sell beer on its trains in technicalities.65 Wisconsin, partly because of the tax itself, but also because they did not want In general, state agencies seemed more to stop just to load beer and finally willing to work with the brewers than the because the trains were in the state federal government. It may have been very late at night and were unlikely to sell because of the shorter chain of com- a lot of beer anyway.63 However, some mand, or because the state government breweries were reluctant to lose the had more incentive to keep breweries potentially lucrative railroad market. operating profitably and maintain their Kingsbury Breweries asked the BTD for local revenue source. When the Walter advice on the question and was told to Bros. Brewing Company of Menasha, send stamped beer to Chicago to be Wisconsin wanted to know if one of their loaded on the trains there - which could drivers could park his truck of beer then be served when the train crossed overnight in a locked garage without the the state line. The BTD later informed company having to designate it as a Miller Brewing Co. that it could not send warehouse and get a specific permit, stamps to their Chicago warehouse to be they were allowed to do so without any pasted on whatever beer was to be hesitation.66 In another situation, the tiny loaded on trains.64 Hillsboro Brewing Company was allowed to establish a warehouse in La Crosse To be fair to the government agencies, and store beer there with no state stamps they were at least efficient and respond- until they knew whether it was to be sold ed to questions or problems quickly. Of in Minnesota or Wisconsin.67
84 Journal of the Brewery History Society The laws passed by federal and state federal agents. In other cases they were governments to prevent breweries from able to make a ruling themselves. The gaining undue influence over individual Premier-Pabst Company posed a hypo- retail establishments proved particularly thetical case (so they claimed) in which a tricky for brewers to negotiate. Most of driver provided the extra service of tap- these strictly regulated the dollar value of ping a keg for the tavern keeper's wife merchandise or service that a brewery who was alone in the establishment. AJ could provide to a retail store, restaurant Palmer, director of the BTD replied: or tavern--in some cases prohibiting it completely. These were partially intended To assist as a matter of accommodation to to protect impoverished local breweries tap a keg of beer was not in our opinion to be from national breweries which had more covered. ... We certainly would expect such money to lavish on their customers. service from your driver to be extended to a While the BTD was powerless to act in tavern keeper's wife. We trust that chivalry some cases they referred brewers who has not become extinct to such an extent that felt themselves the victims of unfair com- the laws of our state would prohibit services petition to the local district attorney or to of that kind to the female sex.68
Figure 8. For a few years, brewers made numerous health claims for their products. These were hailed on a variety of different advertising pieces as well as on the label itself. Such claims were gradually banned over several years in the late 1930s.
Brewery History Number 141 85 Sometimes the agencies would provide Breweries such as Minneapolis Brewing additional services to the brewers beyond Company that serviced the entire law enforcement. Premier-Pabst sought Midwest had their work cut out keeping to market their Pabstonic malt extract in up with the maze of conflicting regula- Peru, but needed a letter from a state tions. Minneapolis Brewing had to authority to the Peruvian government change the name of its Golden Grain certifying the safety of the product. AJ Belt brand because some states pro- Palmer, was happy to oblige the compa- hibited the use of the word ‘Golden.’ A ny.69 chart drawn in 1938 showed sixty dif- ferent labels used in 14 states from Illinois to Idaho. Both Kansas City, Being labeled Missouri and Kansas City, Kansas had different regulations from the states in While many states, including Wisconsin, which they lay. Breweries sometimes lost adopted the federal label standards sales when distributors requested beer contained in Regulation 7 for local use, and the company did not have appropri- many others, including Minnesota, did ate labels on hand. not. Among other things, Regulation 7 specifically prohibited any strength Large shipping breweries typically claims on beer labels. While the list ordered labels in lots of hundreds of changed throughout the period, the for- millions at a time and had to hope that bidden words and phrases included no rules were changed before they ran ‘strong,’ ‘full strength,’ ‘extra strength,’ out. At one point in 1935, Minneapolis ‘full old-time alcoholic strength,’ ‘tonic,’ Brewing Co had 160 million labels on ‘healthy,’ ‘vitamins,’ ‘non-fattening,’ ‘stim- hand that needed to be exhausted by the ulating,’ and many others, but with the end of the year. A letter on behalf of all proviso ‘except where required by law’.70 state brewers by the Minnesota Brewers One of those places was Minnesota, Association to the state of South Dakota which required the word ‘strong’ on any regarding a proposed change captured beer of 5% or greater alcohol by vol- the frustration: ume. Nebraska and North Dakota required the alcohol content printed on It is sincerely hoped that these legends were their labels, but Nebraska required held out merely as suggested forms ... alcohol by weight and North Dakota because expression in such form would make alcohol by volume. In addition, North South Dakota another state requiring Dakota did not accept the commonly alcoholic content to expressed in a form used ‘does not exceed [a given percent]’ different from that used in any other state. wording, and required a precise meas- urement - which could not vary by more The confusion and the expense in a brewery than .2%.71 bottle house is [sic] indescribable where so
86 Journal of the Brewery History Society many different varieties of labels must be easier for brewers to follow, but the states used for the different states. Some of the jealously guarded their prerogatives to breweries are now obliged to use 32 different regulate and tax alcohol. A number of labels and it is almost impossible to prevent brewers tried to streamline the process mistakes and errors in the bottle houses of by using different neck labels in different breweries which supply a number of states. states, but that only solved the problems of the accountants - not of the bottle Since the federal government regulations house employees responsible for operat- normally took precedence over any con- ing the label machines.72 flicting state regulations, the situation with beer labels was most unusual. A single Meeting federal requirements meant national standard would have been much following some seemingly arbitrary, if not
Figure 9. Small tab knobs such as these were the standard for two decades after Prohibition. The KoolerKeg versions were designed for use on a special type of keg which was used mostly in the northeastern states.
Brewery History Number 141 87 Figure 10. Most brewers offered their beer in 1/2 gallon ‘picnic’ bottles. This beer was not pasteurized and was intended to be consumed in one session. Picnic bottles were especially popular during World War II because they afforded savings both on bottles and crowns.
silly, standards. Minneapolis Brewing had Protecting all parties to change a proposed label because at that time Section 8 of the labeling regu- While seemingly absurd, the various lations required that a 24 oz. package requirements were intended to protect must be labeled as ¾ quart. Alcohol con- the brewers from unfair competition as tent could not appear in print larger than well as to protect public from fraud. 6 pt. face capitals, unless local regula- During the 1930s the states adopted tions required otherwise. Even the color their own requirements for labeling tap of a label could fall afoul of federal regu- handles in retail establishments. In lators. Minneapolis Brewing had its label Wisconsin, each tap needed to have a for Minnehaha Ale rejected because sign on or near the tap indicating the there was not enough contrast between manufacturer and type of beer that was the lettering and the background.73 visible for a distance of ten feet.
88 Journal of the Brewery History Society Riverview Brewing Company complained Ruder Brewing Co of Wausau, Wisconsin that the requirement was causing them appealed to the BTD for protection considerable trouble and expense. Many against a ‘foreign’ brewery that was tavern keepers objected to the signs coercing their distributors into dropping because they apparently got in the way of Mathie-Ruder beer and handling the business, and ‘the customers take them foreign beer exclusively.77 The biggest off the bar as souvenirs, and, in some problems were with breweries from places we have had to replace them a Illinois. Chicago was the headquarters for half dozen times.’ If only one beer was several of the most prominent bootleg- served at an establishment, it was ging gangs during Prohibition and it was acceptable to have a sign behind the bar alleged that many breweries in Illinois declaring that beer was sold exclusively, and several in Wisconsin were under but it was not legal to have a sign, as the direct or indirect mob control. The end of Storck Brewing Company of Slinger dis- Prohibition did not end mob involvement covered, to have a sign that read ‘Storck with beer - on the second day of legal Beer, taps 1, 2, and 3.’ Riverview also beer a truck carrying 400 cases of Pabst sought an amnesty for their tavern own- was hijacked en route to Chicago.78 The ers who would be operating without BTD sent numerous reprimands to the signs, but the BTD could not guarantee Prima Brewing Co and Manhattan that state or local officials would not Brewing Co, both of Chicago. In addition assess fines.74 The Division held that the to frequent mishandling of stamps, Prima law did reduce substitution of cheaper was charged with using labels without beers for more expensive brands, which sufficient identification of the brewery apparently occurred with some frequen- name and location for several brands, cy.75 In one case, the Oshkosh Brewing including the ironically named Pride of Co. appealed to the BTD for assistance Wisconsin.79 The Wisconsin Brewing Co because local taverns were pulling other, of Kenosha, located near the Illinois supposedly inferior beers under Oshkosh border, was investigated for illegally tap signs. The company was reluctant transferring Wisconsin tax stamps to the to take the matter to the local district Manhattan Brewing Co, which then laun- attorney ‘because if we did, we probably dered them to other Chicago breweries. would be black-listed by the tavern-keep- The element of danger present in work- ers' association’.76 ing for the BTD in this era is suggested by the considerable correspondence with In addition to helping with local ques- Smith & Wesson about maintenance of tions, the state agencies also gave the the Division's firearms.80 breweries leverage against out-of-state breweries (often called ‘foreign’ even if Problems with regulations affected all located in the US) that were using unfair breweries more or less equally. The giant or deceptive trade practices. The Mathie- shipping breweries had more rules to
Brewery History Number 141 89 follow, but had more resources and per- sonnel to insure compliance. Apart from cash flow concerns, there is no evidence that excise payments or regulations were the decisive factor in the failure of any brewery during the 1930s.
A world at war
It is possible that breweries were in better shape for the rigors of wartime regulation than many other businesses since they were already used to documenting every purchase, sale, and action. Nonetheless, many new restrictions were placed on breweries (and all other businesses) in the name of the war effort. Nearly every- thing from grain to labels to space in rail cars was in short supply. As millions of Figure 11. The distribution of national brands men were mobilized into the armed to America's armed forces during the war is forces, labor became scarce as well. credited with increasing their popularity at the Imported hops from Germany were no expense of local brands. longer available, so brewers had to adjust their recipes or, in the case of Pabst's recently-launched Andeker, to discontinue brands altogether.81 Tinplate Brewers were concerned about the was reserved for military uses, so offering return of Prohibition in the name of the canned beer for civilian use was discon- war effort, and dry forces did indeed tinued for the duration of the war. Of seize the moment and attempt to limit course, one of the military uses was to sales on and around military posts. provide 3.2% beer for armed services However, most military leaders were personnel - each brewery was required against this move and claimed that 3.2% to supply 15% of its output to the govern- beer was critical for morale. Dry advo- ment. Cans which were to be shipped cates ended up on the wrong side of into combat zones were painted olive public opinion when they inaccurately drab instead of their usual bright colors blamed drunken sailors for the disaster so they would not glint in the light and at Pearl Harbor and sounded too much give away the location of troops or their like the Axis leaders who blamed bases. American decadence for the war.82 The
90 Journal of the Brewery History Society breweries reinforced their position as While some brewery employees were good citizens by contributing to scrap considered essential to the war effort metal drives, providing beer for fundrais- and exempt from service, many others ing events, and supporting the war effort were called into active duty. One of the through contributions and tax payments. few who was able to follow his civilian The Minnesota breweries sponsored a career in the Army was Frank E Mathes series of newspaper advertisements of Minneapolis Brewing Co, who was part declaring that the revenue from each of a special unit that reconditioned dam- day's excise taxes was enough to pur- aged breweries in liberated territories chase either ten fighter planes, four B-17 and prepared them to produce beer for bombers, nineteen tanks, or four PT the occupation forces.85 Breweries of all boats. The ads also encouraged the sizes pointed with pride to their former civilian population to maintain a stable employees serving on the front lines home life, invite friends over, and to and joined in the sorrow when an sustain their morale in difficult times.83 employee made the ultimate sacrifice. Many vacancies were filled by women. While they did not have to give up pro- Instead of being relegated to the bottle duction, the brewers and their employees made numerous sacrifices in all aspects of business. Vehicles and fuel were diverted to the war effort, and business were informed of the latest changes in rationing and other measures by monthly bulletins from the Office of Price Administration. When the Stevens Point Beverage Company sought to replace a worn out 1933 delivery truck (that had been driven 313,000 miles already), they were denied on the grounds that it has not been shown ... that the service for which the new vehicle is requested is necessary to the war effort or to the maintenance of essential civilian economy. Figure 12. America's brewers incorporated the V symbol in their advertisements to help Workers were encouraged to carpool, support morale on the home front. The reverse design was a more traditional and each business was required to advertising image - an attractive young submit a monthly ‘car occupancy report’ woman, though dressed here in a military to the Office of Price Administration.84 uniform.
Brewery History Number 141 91 house as they were before Prohibition, some held highly skilled positions and often took their husbands' places. Nationally, more than 7,000 members of the brewery workers union were in the armed forces, and more than 200 were killed in action.86
The essential raw materials for beer were limited as well. In order to divert more malt to the production of industrial alcohol, small brewers could not exceed their 1942 malt usage in 1943 and large brewers had to make a 7% cut. At the same time, brewers were expected to Figure 13. Stite was the first of many so- increase production in order to meet the called ‘malt liquors’ which were notable mostly for their strength rather than for their government contracts and to relieve the taste. In the current market they are seldom nationwide beer shortage. The War available on draft and typically packaged in Production Board made clear the govern- 16 oz. cans or 40 oz. bottles. ment position in early 1942, by declaring ‘Experience in other countries has indi- cated that [beer and wine] have a value in sustaining morale both to civilians curtailment of malt’.88 Some of the new and to the armed forces,’ and estab- formulas were unmemorable, but Gluek lished that about two-thirds of the 1941 Brewing Company of Minneapolis devel- barrelage should be produced for civilian oped a more successful brew that the consumption (in addition to the govern- company patented and marketed as ment purchases) despite the short- Stite - considered the first-ever malt ages.87 liquor. Stite's higher alcohol content helped mask the taste of the adjuncts, The restrictions on malt forced brewers but also created greater intoxication. to experiment with other grains in an After the war Stite became known as attempt to keep production up while still Green Lightning or Green Death, named creating a palatable beer. The substitute for its signature green can and its ability brewing materials included the common to cause a hangover.89 adjuncts yellow corn, unmalted barley and wheat, but also ranged as far as Equally frustrating to shipping brewers oats, rye, mandioca (cassava) and even were the transportation restrictions. In potatoes. All of these ‘filled the gap the spring of 1943, rail shipments of beer between the demand for beer and the were limited to less than the previous
92 Journal of the Brewery History Society year's amount, yet in the same announce- to expand in the post-war world, many of ment brewers were urged to try to gain the smaller breweries either closed dur- transport savings without depriving any ing the war because of shortages or were region of the country of beer. A few mortally wounded and would be forced to months later, brewers were urged to shut down within a few years after the make additional conservation plans, and war ended. During the war, government at the same time to find ways to meet the purchasing agents found it easier to deal nationwide beer shortage. As the WFA with large companies in all industries noted, ‘Many brewers have already with- wherever possible, and despite some drawn from distant markets and are efforts to spread the orders around, small pushing sales in areas nearer their plants firms were often left out.92 While Schmidt in order to save transportation’.90 Twin and Hamm had contracts for hundreds of City brewers such as Schmidt, Hamm thousands of cases per month, their and Grain Belt, G Heileman of La Crosse, much smaller neighbor Yoerg Brewing Co and the Milwaukee giants were hit espe- had no contract. The Alexandria Brewing cially hard since they were among the Co was forced to close in 1943 because major suppliers of some of the most of wartime shortages, especially of bottle sparsely populated areas of the country. caps. The Schutz & Hilgers Jordan Brewery was purchased in 1946 by the At the end of the war, the brewing industry Arizona Brewing Co, not for its brewery took several years to return to normal. but for its grain allocation and other Material restrictions were lifted only gradu- inputs.93 When the US went to war again ally: canned beer was not available for in Korea, grain, metal, fuel and trans- civilian purchase until the spring of 1947; portation restrictions were re-imposed, grain restrictions were lifted just in time to the excise tax was raised to $9 per barrel be re-imposed for the Korean War. Just and struggling breweries were again over a year after being idled by a strike, the forced to the wall. The Fergus Falls three St Paul breweries were again forced Brewing Co and the Goodhue County to shut down, this time for three weeks Brewing Co (which was on its third name because of a coal shortage.91 Many of the in four years) both ceased to exist during wartime changes became permanent parts the Korean War. More than one third of of the American beer scene: cardboard Minnesota's 25 breweries that opened in cases replaced wood, cans and one-way the years after Prohibition closed within bottles continued to push out returnable twenty years: four closed before the start bottles and draught beer, and the lighter, of World War II, two closed during it, and thinner beers of wartime remained even three more before the armistice in Korea. after malt restrictions were lifted. The story was much the same in While some of the larger breweries in Wisconsin, though there were many Minnesota emerged from the war ready more breweries to begin with. From a
Brewery History Number 141 93 Figure 14. Mankato Brewing Co of Minnesota and Two Rivers Beverage Co were two of several breweries around the country that participated in the Brewers' Best program. This was an attempt to create a nationally- recognized brand for small brewers that would allow them to take advantage of cheaper, mass-produced advertising pieces. The brand was available for about a decade after World War II, but never met the expectations of its proponents.
high water mark of 88 in March 1936, 22 National figures show a rapid decline closed by the end of 1941 - six of which in the number of breweries from a high had been founded after Prohibition. over 750 in the mid-1930s to less than However, of the ten breweries that closed 500 by 1943. Many of these were busi- for good during World War II, the nesses conceived with more optimism youngest was the Binzel Brewing than resources. But if a brewery made Company of Oconomowoc, which had it past the early business shocks of been founded in 1868. Another fifteen World War II it was likely to survive until closed prior to 1953, leaving the state the 1950s. However, in the 1950s a sub- with roughly forty brewing companies, stantial consolidation of the industry half of which were producing less than occurred, which nearly halved the num- 25,000 barrels. ber of firms to 240 by 1958. In the ten
94 Journal of the Brewery History Society years to that point average net profits patron watching the ball game to order dropped from 7% to 1%. Brewers could another beer. Other observers believed no longer rely on loyal taverns to guaran- that television advertising fit well with the tee the home market and an adequate general advertising approach of the cash flow. The battle would have to be breweries and with the shift of beer con- won by territorial expansion.94 sumption to the home.96 Spending on television spots by brewers was non-exis- By 1952, restrictions caused by wartime tent at the end of World War II, but by shortages were at an end. The Korean 1951 it had exceeded $5.2 million and its War era marked two significant changes rate of expansion would only increase. In in the industry. The first was the wide- less than a decade the percentage of spread adoption of the multiple brewery money spent on print advertising shrunk model by industry leaders. Tested by dramatically and television (and to a less- Falstaff Brewing Company of St Louis er extent, radio) spots came to dominate and Pabst in the 1930s and 1940s, the the overall industry expenditures. floodgates were opened in 1953 when However, this change was not spread Anheuser-Busch, Falstaff, Hamm, Pabst, evenly through-out the industry. Network and Schlitz all bought or built breweries in television and radio were expensive, and California. Advances in brewing chem- only worthwhile for a handful of the istry made it possible to brew the same largest national shipping brewers. beer in multiple plants without detectable Regional brewers continued to advertise variation (and the loss of consumer more heavily in newspapers and other acceptance due to inconsistency).95 local sources.
The second factor in consolidation was Local pride provided small family brew- the increasing importance of television eries with a living for decades after advertising. Television ads had the similar firms had gone out of business potential to combine the strong visual elsewhere in the country. The tavern cul- effects of a large newspaper ad with ture allowed small brewers, including radio's spoken text or jingles. TV also some like Fred Beyrer of Chaska, added attractive moving pictures to the Minnesota, who never bottled or canned mix - views of the brewing process, scenes his beer, to retain a market where efficien- of swiftly flowing streams of brewing cy and advertising were less important. water, or the irresistible image of a glass The battle for distant markets waged by being filled from a tap, bottle or can. Early the five largest brewers to gain market television ads were not an art form, but share generally did little direct harm in beer commercials would help to change this era to these small breweries that that. Some industry analysts saw TV ads filled a cultural niche.97 The enthusiasm of as a moving, talking point-of-sale promo- Wisconsin and Minnesota residents for tion - just the thing to convince the bar local beer lasted well past New Beer's Day.
Brewery History Number 141 95 Note brewing company. 3. Winona (MN) Republican-Herald. 31 The author would like to thank two October 1923, p.1. anonymous referees for constructive 4. Winona Republican-Herald. 9 April 1932, comments on this article, and Richard T p.3; 12 April 1932, p.3. Thomson of Lapp, Libra, Thomson, Stoebner 5. Mantorville (MN) Express. 30 March & Pusch for guidance and research 1933, no page given, in Mantorville Brewery assistance on legal topics. Portions of this folder at Dodge County Historical Society, article have been adapted from Hoverson, D. Mantorville. (2007) Land of Amber Waters: The History of 6. Appleton (WI) Post-Crescent. 6 April Brewing in Minnesota. Minneapolis: 1933, p.7. University of Minnesota Press. 7. Montgomery (MN) Messenger. 29 September 1933, p.2. 8. Ripon Press. 30 March 1933, p.1 (2nd References section). 9. Chilton Times-Journal. 30 March 1933, 1. These numbers are derived from Van p.1. Wieren, D. (1995) American Breweries II. 10. Winona Republican-Herald. 6 July 1934, West Point, PA: East Coast Breweriana p.12. Association, from the author's own research 11. Milwaukee Journal. 26 March 1933, p.1; for Hoverson, D. (2007) Land of Amber Stevens Point Daily Journal. 8 April 1933, p.1; Waters: The History of Brewing in Minnesota. Hess, G. (2008) lecture, 19 June. Gary Hess Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, is a grandson of Frank J. Hess, last president and for his forthcoming book on the of the cooperage in Madison. breweries of Wisconsin. Giving precise 12. Sheboygan Press. 7 April 1933, p.1; figures for the number of breweries remaining Amundson, R.C. (1988-89) ‘Listen to the on the eve of Prohibition is nearly impossible. Bottle Say “Gluek, Gluek, Gluek.”’ Hennepin Many of the breweries listed as going out of History. Winter, p.6. business in 1920 in fact closed down 13. Milwaukee Journal. 6 April 1933, p.10; anywhere from a few months to three years Sheboygan Press. 6 April 1933, p.2. earlier, but the information was not provided 14. Sheboygan Press. 7 April 1933, p.1; to industry publications such as Western Winona Republican-Herald. 6 April 1933, p.1. Brewer nor was it published in local Regarding the number of breweries open on newspapers. The opening of a business was New Beers' Day, the nine Minnesota generally given more publicity than its breweries is a definite number, but the closing. Wisconsin number is unclear. 27 breweries 2. Anon (1922) The Gate to Eline's. had permits in time, and the West Bend News Milwaukee: Eline's, Inc., passim. Eline was a of 12 April 1933 claimed that ‘Twenty-seven phonetic spelling of Uihlein, the family of breweries are busy at the present time Schlitz descendents who controlled the turning out their product,’ but your author has
96 Journal of the Brewery History Society not been able to confirm six of the breweries 27. Van Wieren, D. (1995) op. cit. pp.163- at this date due to lack of coverage in local 178, 388-423 for listings of breweries in each newspapers. In his definitive study Brewed in state, including those that acquired permits America, Stanley Baron stated that ‘some 31 after 1932 but did not produce. brewers’ were back in operation by June 28. Winona (MN) Republican-Herald. 31 1933, but this number was reached on the August 1933, p.1. first day in Minnesota and Wisconsin alone. 29. Melrose (MN) Beacon. 5 October 1934, 15. Stevens Point Daily Journal. 7 April p.1; 19 October 1933, p.1; Minneapolis Star. 1933, p.1. The beer sent to the president was 2 April 1972, p.13B. forwarded to the National Press Club. 30. Mantorville (MN) Express. 1 November 16. Daily Northwestern. Oshkosh, WI, 7 1934, no page given, in Mantorville Brewery April 1933, p.4. folder at Dodge County Historical Society, 17. Milwaukee Journal. 7 April 1933 Mantorville. supplement pp.1-16; 22 March 1933, p.1. 31. American Brewers' Association circular 18. Milwaukee Journal. 9 April 1933, p.3. (5 April 1937) SPB Records, Box 1, Folder- 19. Duluth Herald. 4 April 1933, p.7. American Brewers' Association 1935-1936, 20. St. Cloud Times Daily. 1 April 1933, p.8; UWSP. Sheboygan Press. 7 April 1933, p.19. 32. Mankato Free Press. 22 September 21. http://www.rahr.com/index.geni?mode 1933, p.9. =content&id=177, download of 26 August 33. Blackford, M. (1991) A History of Small 2010. Business in America. New York: Twayne 22. Benter, M.D. (2004) Roll Out the Publishers, p.69. Barrels: Brewers of Eastern Dodge County, 34. Anon (1968) ‘History of Local 343 of the Wisconsin, 1850-1961. Self published, International Union of United Brewery, Flour, pp.122-25. Cereal, Soft Drink and Distillery Workers of 23. American Brewers' Association circular, America.’ St. Paul: Privately published, pp.31- 5 January 1936, Stevens Point Beverage Co. 42. Records, 1927-1979, (hereafter SPB 35. Winona Republican-Herald. 23 June Records), Box 1, Folder-American Brewers' 1935, p.14; 6 May 1936, p.11; 3 April 1937, Association 1935-1936, University of p.12; 26 June 1937, p.10; 29 October 1938, Wisconsin Stevens Point (UWSP); Ted Marti, p.12; 24 January 1941, p.12; 16 April 1939, August Schell Brewing Co., interview with p.14; 21 March 1941, p.14. author (8 July 2005). 36. Anon (1939) Local Job Descriptions for 24. Mayville News. 5 April 1933, no page Two Establishments in the Malt Liquor given, in Benter, M.D. (2004) op. cit. p.115. Manufacturing Industry. Preliminary Job 25. L.E. McKinnon to Robert K. Henry (State Study No. 5-113, Works Progress Treasurer) 14 March 1935, BTD: Box 3, Administration and Minnesota Deparment of Folder 17, WHS. Education. St. Paul: United States 26. Mantorville (MN) Express. 10 November Employment Center, pp.2-6. 1938, p.1. 37. Anon (1968) ‘Historical Facts of Interest
Brewery History Number 141 97 About our Union.’ St. Paul: Local 343, Council of State Governments, p.2; Elliot privately published, pp.1-4. Brownlee, W. (1996) Federal Taxation in 38. Holmquist, J.D. (ed.) (1981) They America. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Choose Minnesota: A Survey of the State's Press, pp.32-33. Ethnic Groups. St. Paul: Minnesota Historical 45. Brewers Almanac 1949, New York: Society Press, p.84; Minneapolis Spokesman. United States Brewers Foundation, 1949, various issues of April, May & June 1935. pp.85-87. 39. Anon (2001) Beer Can Collectors of 46. Vetter, J. (2009) ‘United States Tax America, United States Beer Cans: the Crowns,’ CrownCappers' Exchange. v. 60 Standard Reference of Flat Tops and Cone June, pp.20-21; CCSI Online CrownCap Tops. Fenton, MO: BCCA, pp.8-13. Database
98 Journal of the Brewery History Society May 1934; Calumet Brewing Co. to W.L. 61. Gemmill, K.W. ‘The Importance of Wollin, 21 July 1934, all in BTD, Box 1, Intergovernmental Tax Relations,’ Federal- Folder 14, WHS. State-Local Tax Correlation, p.9; Pierce, D.L. 53. Robert Schuster to BTD, 23 May 1939, ‘Federal-State Tax Conflicts Can be in BTD, Box 17, Folder 28, WHS. Minimized, ibid. p.150. 54. John W. Roach to Wausau Brewing Co., 62. Riverview Brewing Company to Robert 28 May 1940, BTD, Box 17, Folder 24, WHS. K. Henry, 21 November 1935: BTD, Box 4, 55. Correspondence, various dates in 1936, Folder 7, WHS. between BTD and Marshfield Brewing Co., 63. Pullman Company correspondence with BTD, Box 3, Folder 4, WHS; E.C. Yellowley to BTD, various dates: BTD, Box 4, Folder 3, Stevens Point Beverage Co., 2 June 1937, in WHS. SPB Records, Box 5, Folder 2 (Internal 64. O.H. Senglaub to Robert K. Henry, 11 Revenue Service 1935-1947), UWSP. April 1934; BTD, Box 2, Folder 17, WHS; 56. Correspondence between BTD and Miller Brewing Co. to BTD, 15 February 1936, Leinenkugel Brewing Co., various dates in BTD Correspondence, Box 3, Folder 11. 1934, BTD, Box 2, Folder 21, WHS. WHS. 57. During February and March the wastage 65. Correspondence between Yellowley and was due to repeated filtering to remove off C.L. Korfman, various dates in November and flavors, in August the loss was due to the December 1937: SPBC Records, Box 5, deterioration of a rubber hose in the bottling Folder 2, UWSP. house which gave the beer a rubbery taste. 66. W. H. Pierce to Robert K. Henry, 6 Affidavit, 29 March 1941; Yellowley to September 1935, BTD, Box 5, Folder 4, Stevens Point Beverage Company, 27 March WHS. 1941; Stevens Point Beverage Company to 67. Correspondence between E.E. Yellowley, 20 August 1941, all in SPBC Machovec and Robert K. Henry, 30 October Records, Box 5, Folder 2, UWSP. 1936 and 4 November 1936: Box 2, Folder 58. Miller Brewing Co. to BTD, 10 July 13, WHS. 1935: BTD, Box 3, Folder 11, WHS. (The 68. C.H. Pfeiffer to Robert K. Henry, 7 April answer to this query was not in the files. 1936; Henry to Pfeiffer, 15 April 1936, BTD, While the BTD may not have had reason to Box 3, Folder 4, WHS; A.J. Palmer to R.C. object, consumers may have.) Zimmerman, 3 March 1936, BTD, Box 4, 59. W.L. Wollin to La Crosse Brewing Co. 2 Folder 3, WHS. The company better known July 1934: BTD, Box 2, Folder 20, WHS. simply as Pabst Brewing Co. was called Underlining is in original. Premier-Pabst from 1933-1938 as a result of 60. Correspondence between BTD and La a merger with Premier Malt Products Crosse Breweries, various dates in 1935 and Company of Peoria, Illinois. 1936; A. Kurth to A.J. Palmer, 9 August 1934: 69. S.A. Zweibel to R.C. Zimmerman, 24 in BTD, Box 2, folders 20 and 19, WHS. September 1936, A.J. Palmer to Zweibel, 25 Camp McCoy was renamed Fort McCoy in September 1936, BTD, Box 4, Folder 3, 1974. WHS.
Brewery History Number 141 99 70. John W. Roach to Arcadia Brewing 1936, BTD, Box 3, Folder 4, WHS. Company, 3 February 1941, BTD, Box 17, 78. Skilnik, B. (1999) The History of Beer Folder 56; American Brewers' Association and Brewing in Chicago: 1833-1978. St. Paul, Circular, 15 June 1937, SPBC Records, Box MN: Pogo Press, pp.121-201, passim.; 1, Folder ABA 1936-37, UWSP. In the Milwaukee Journal. 9 April 1933, p.1. revisions of 11 June 1937, the Federal 79. BTD Correspondence with Prima Alcohol Administration dropped its objections Brewing Company, many dates, BTD, Box 4, to the use of ‘refreshing,’ ‘digestible,’ and Folder 3, WHS. ‘wholesome.’ 80. BTD to Wisconsin Brewing Co., various 71. Grain Belt Breweries, Inc. Records dates, BTD, Box 5, Folder 14, WHS; BTD (hereafter Grain Belt Records), Box 14, correspondence with Smith & Wesson, Folder 3, various documents from 1935-1939, various dates, BTD, Box 4, folder 14, WHS. Minnesota Historical Society. Minneapolis 81. Cochran, T.D. (1948) The Pabst Brewing Brewing Company changed its name to Grain Company: The History of an American Belt Breweries, Inc. in 1967. Business. New York: New York University 72. Grain Belt Records, Box 14, Folders 3 & Press, p.390. 5, MHS. Bottle house employees at a number 82. Baron, S. (1962) Brewed in America. of Minnesota and Wisconsin breweries have Boston: Little, Brown and Company, reprinted claimed that very few if any mistakes were by BeerBooks.com, Cleveland, OH, (2006), made so that beer with incorrect labels or pp.332-34; Barr, A. (1999) Drink: A Social crowns was being packaged and sent to the History of America. New York: Carroll & Graf, wrong state. p.335. 73. Grain Belt Records, Box 14, Folders 3 & 83. Alexandria (MN) Citizen News. 12 6, MHS. March 1942, p.3; 21 May 1942, pp.1 & 3; 19 74. A.J. Palmer to Menominee-Marinette November 1942, p.7; 14 January 1943, p.8; (Michigan) Brewing Co., 7 October 1935, 25 March 1943, p.8. BTD Correspondence, Box 3, Folder 7, WHS; 84. Application (12 June 1945); Office of Correspondence between Riverview Brewing Defense Transportation to Stevens Point Company and BTD, 21 November and 22 Beverage Company (20 June 1945); Car November 1935, BTD, Box 4, Folder 7, WHS; Occupancy Report (9 February 1945), in BTD correspondence with Storck Brewing SPBC Records, Box 5, Folder ‘Office of Price Company, various dates in 1935, BTD, Box 4, Administration, 1943; 1944-47,’ UWSP. A Folder 20, WHS. replacement vehicle was eventually approved 75. BTD Correspondence with Modern a week after V-J Day. Brewery, 27 November 1936 and 2 85. Brewers Digest. March 1945, p.59; April December 1936: BTD, Box 3, Folder 12, 1945, p.33; July 1945, p.60. WHS. 86. Brewers Digest. August 1945, p.33 and 76. E.S. Horn to Robert K. Henry, 14 March 41. 1936, BTD, Box 3, Folder 20, WHS. 87. ‘Notes on Estimates of Minimum Civilian 77. C.H. Pfeiffer to Robert K. Henry, 7 April Consumer Requirements,’ New York Times.
100 Journal of the Brewery History Society 21 February 1942, p.24. Almanac, and the author's research in 88. Brewers Digest. October 1946, p.29. primary sources. Unfortunately, due to the 89. Winship, K. (2000) ‘Three Millennia of methods and timing of data collection, the Beer Styles,’ All About Beer. 21:1 March, records do not always agree. The author is in p.31; Amundson, R.C. (1988-89) op. cit. p.7; the process of finding precise opening and Index to Patents and Trademarks closing dates for each Wisconsin brewery. (Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark The closing years for Minnesota companies Office, 1943 & 1944). American brewers have been verified in local and national generally define Malt Liquor as a high sources. alcohol, low quality lager beer. Confusingly, 95. Baron, S. (1962) op. cit. pp.339-343. some states, including Minnesota, applied the 96. Vintage TV Beer Commercials: 100 term to any strong beer, and the term was Beer Commercials of the 1950s & 60s. also used by governments to apply to any Schnitzelbank Press, 1995 (video / dvd). fermented malt beverage. 97. Baldwin, W.O. (1966) Historical 90. New York Times. 5 May 1943, p.33; 12 Geography of the Brewing Industry: Focus on September 1943, p.S11. Wisconsin. Champaign, IL: University of 91. Brewers' Digest. June 1946, p.32. Illinois Ph.D. dissertation, pp.168-183; 92. Blackford, M. (1991) A History of Small McGahan, A.M. ( 1991) ‘The Emergence of Business in America. New York: Twanye the National Brewing Oligopoly: Competition Publishers, p.74. in the American Market, 1933-1958, Business 93. Busse, K. (2002) ‘The “Missing Years” of History Review. 65 Summer, pp.229-284 Jordan Beer," American Breweriana Journal. passim, especially pp.267-281. The author July-August, pp.21-23. agrees with McGahan's conclusion and much 94. These numbers are drawn from a variety of the analysis concerning the top five of sources, including Baron, Van Wieren, brewers, but claims that the analysis does not Waterstreet, circulars of the American hold for the industry as a whole, and Brewers' Association found in Stevens Point respectfully disagrees with a number of the Beverage Company records, Brewers premises and interpretations of data.
Brewery History Number 141 101