GENUINE OR IMITATION WHISKY?

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1749, 13 September 1905, Page 70

GENUINE OR IMITATION WHISKY?

REPORT BY THE WEST AUSTRALWHAT THE ANALYSES DISCLOSE.

WHAT THE ANALYSIS DISCLOSE

MISCONCEPTIONS REGARDING “FUSEL OlL.’'

The half-yearly report of the chief inspector of liquors (Mr J. B. Durham) which at as laid on the table of the Legislative Assembly •on August 16th, contains matter of great interest to consumers of spirits. .

“On inspecting the various hotels,” Mr Durham says, “I was surprised to find (in my opinion, and afterwards confirmed by the Government analyst) the inferior quality of whisky in bottles of the most prominent brandy in comparison to what it was whcm. I was ’inspecting under the Act some five years ago. I at once purchased from a merchant eight bottles of the most popular brands pf whisky, and two of Hennessy’s brandy (one and three star), and gave them to the Government analyst, asking him to make a general analysis of same, and especially to find out if the spirits contained therein were true whiskies and brandies, or a blend of silent spirit. JJy the analysis it will be seen that 50 per cent, of the whiskies are not true whiskies, whilst two of them are nothing more than patent or silent spirit, flavoured. and coloured. Silent or patent spirit is made from either corn, molasses, rice, or potatoes, etc. (which are devoid of all the essential, characteristics of whisky) in a patent still, and produced at about one-third the cost of true malt whisky. This silent spirit is so highly rectified that most of the higher alcohols are abtracted from them. This process seems to make .the Bilent spirit MORE INJURIOUS THAN TRUE WHISKIES.

“I .received a letter from a gentleman in the country stating that the local publican was selling whisky that drove the men mad who drank it. I inspected his liquors, and found he was selling the whisky marked No. 3 on the anar lyst’s report. On investigating another similar complaint. I found the hotelkeeper selling mostly No. 6. The effect was the same in both cases, and the liquor was (vide analyst’s report) silent spirit, yet brands that the public drink freely. I would suggest tbat distillers be compelled to put on the labels attached to their whisky bottles—(a) Whether a pure malt whisky. (b) Whether a blend of silent and malt soirit. (c) Whether a spirit all silent and flavoured. “I think the consumer has a right to have some guarantee as to the nature dr origin of the alcohol that is supplied to him, otherwise he might a® well buy common rectified, spirit as pay full price on an article with a misleading descrip-

tion. Competition is now so keen that distillers are compelled to blend with silent spirit so as to cheapen the article on sale.

“During my inspection I have come in contact with a number of persons holding licenses that have no knowledge of spirits whatever, and are far more likely to

POISON PEOPLE THROUGH SHEER IGNORANCE

than they are to wilfully do so. I have seen three licensees selling rum thirty over-proof, and several whisky at proof, and when I drew their attention to it they said:-—‘We sell our spirit as we get it from the merchant, and do not touch it.’ One man was proud of having brandy 45 under proof. He said the low strength was a sure sign of age and quality—he is now -,a poorer and wiser man. Several of the hotels in Perth and in the country are a credit to any State, but there are others whose bars are in a filthy condition. During the last six months I have made 430 inspections, and have taken 51 samples. . There is still a great deal to- he done, and I intend before the year is out to try and stop other breaches of the Act. It is pleasing to- find that the reputable hotelkeepers are always glad to assist me, and show anything I ask to see, and it is very evident that in the oast they have been blamed for selling bad spirits when the blame should have been on the distiller.” OPINION 0(F THE ANALYST. Below are given the results of the analysis of the ten samples referred to by Mr Durham. The Government analyst (Mr Mann) remarks: —“The inferences given in the last column are to be taken as approximate only. For instance, the presence of tannin may be due to storage in wood, or may be due to colouring matters purposely added. Again, some blended spirits containing both patent and genuine malt- spirit will closely approximate in composition a spirit made from malt alone, and while conclusions could be readily drawn in the cases of 3 and 7. for instance, some of those of intermediate character are not so readily classified.” Results of analyses:—No. I.—Glenoran No. 10, Old; Highland Malt Whisky (the Ord Distillery Co., Ross-shire). —Total secondary products, 285.38 grammes per 100 litres of absolute alcohol; colouring, caramel and tannin; reference as to probable nature of spirit, chiefly, if not entirely, genuine malt whisky. No. 2.—Dawson’s Old Scotch Whisky. —Secondary products. 255.27 ; caramel; blended patent and new' malt spirit—a good proportion of latter. No. 3.—. House of Lords Old Scotch Whisky (J. G. Gowrie and Co., Glas-gow).—-Secondary products, 185.34; cars mel; chiefly patent spirit, artificially coloured. No. 4.—James Watson and Co.’s Old Blend-ed Glenlivet Whisky, Dundee. — Secondary products, 295.52 ; caramel and tannin. Same as No. 1.

No. s.—Daniel Craxvford’s Finest Very Old Scotch Whisky (81, Queen street, Glasgow).—Secondary products, 255.89; caramel and tannin; blended spirit, probably stored in wood. No. 6.—Alndrew Usher’s Special Reserve Old-Vatted l Glenlivet Whisky (Edinburgh). products, 183.93; caramel and tannin. Same as No. 3. No. 7. —Strathmill Choicest Old Highland Scotch Whisky (bottled by W. and A. Gilbey).—Secondary products, 418.68; caramel and tannin; genuine matured malt whisky. No. B.—John Walker and Son’s Old Highland Whisky (Kilmarnock).—Secondary products, 474.08; .caramel and unidentified. Genuine malt whisky; probably not as mature as No. 7. Nos 9 and 10.—Jas. Hennessy and Co.’s Cognac (1 star and 3 star). —Secondary products, 465.06 and 537.16 respectively; caramel and unidentified; genuine brandies. On. March 28, prior to completing the analysis, the Government analyst wrote to the chief inspector of liquors the following memorandum on the utility of chemical examination of spirits:— The examination of the spirits may embrace —(a) The determination of deleterious or fraudulent ingredients added to the spirit; (b) the determination of the nature of the spirits.

As regards (a), beyond the determination of added! water there is little if anything to he done, the direct and deliberate sophistication of spirits by noxious ingredients being now practically unknown.

As regards (b), there is more to be said. In spite of all that can he said by technical men who have made the subject a special study, the “man in the street” still believes that much of the spirit on the market contains harmful ingredients of great potency. This belief is founded principally on DIFFEIREOTOK of taste in various brands, which may be more or less unpalatable. A man’s stomach being npset by this unpalatable taste, he concludes that the effect is due to some noxious ingredient, which, for want of a better name, he calls “fusel oil.” _ Now, these differences of taste are due principally to the cource of the spirit. Any substance containing starch or sugar can. by fermintation he made to produce alcohol, but the names of the notable

spirits in common use were, until recent years, confined! to spirits derived from certain definite sources, thus— Whisky used to mean a spirit derived from malted' grain. Brandy, a liquor prepared from grapes.

Rum, spirit obtained from molasses and other product of the sugar-cane. Alcohol obtained by distillation from these particular sources contains slight traces of various substances characteristic of .its source, and which give to it its peculiar approved flavour. Particularly is this so when the spirits are distilled in a “pot still.” If, however, the distillation takes place in a “patent still,” a much greater rectification results, these characteristic ingredients are arrested, and pure alcohol is obtained, which is always the same, from whatever source it may he derived. Instead of using the iftaterials above described for the preparation of spirits, it has of late years become a common practice to utilise other and CHEAPER SOURCES OF ALCOHOL, viz., damaged grain, maize, potatoes, beet, etc., the use of the patent stills enabling manufacturers to prepare from these just as pure alcohol as froiruather sources. Pure alcohol prepared from a patent still is what is commonly known as “white” or “silent spirit.” In comparing the spirit obtained from a pot still with this silent spirit, it is found that the former contains certain compounds, found simultaneously, called Higher Alcohols (the -.“fusel oil” of tradition), Ether Aldehydes, etc., which are almost entirely absent, or present only in a slight degree, in the silent spirit. Silent spirit does not, therefore, contain more “fusel oil” than whisky, as is popularly supposed, but considerably less, and its unpalatable and even nauseous taste is simply due to the absence of the substances mentioned above, and which in whisky serve as flavouring agents. And when suoli silent spirit is made up into whisky, the manufactui-er blends with it certain flavouring materials which are intended to stimulate the taste of true whisky. WHAT IS WHISKY' ? Thus, while the word whisky meant originally a liquor prepared in a pot still from malt, this definition no longer holds good. There is no legal definition of the term, and common practice has long since swept away its original meaning. Chemists have for some time been devoting a considerable amount- of thought and work to this subject, and the general conclusion arrived at so far is that the ethers, higher, alcohols, etc., in whisky, so far from being deleterious, are highly desirable, .as giving it its particular flavour and bouquet, and that silent spirit, so far from containing more impurities than whisky, owes its nauseous taste to the absence of those by-products. An old whisky matured contains a notable quantity of those higher alcohols which used to be classed as “fusel oil,” and derives its flavour from the presence of such byproducts. It will thus be seen how far popular ideas are astray from the truth. Chemists are also agreed that these by-products are NOT OF THAT MALIGNANT CHARACTER generally supposed. Nevertheless, new spirits are considered more deleterious than old matured spirits, but This ingredients which cause the effect have yet to be identified. And chemists are universally agreed that no stanards can be laid down as to the amount of “impurities” or “by-products” which should be permitted in potable spirits, since their physiological effects are not' sufficiently vouched for. I have for some time held the view that it is impossible at present to say that a whisky containing a notable proportion of “fusil' oil” is harmful, and when prosecutions were some three years ago being instituted here by a local board of health for selling such* spirits, I found many brands of whisky upon the market containing quantities of “fusel oil” much above the standard which it was sought by the board to establish, and I therefore considered that these proceedings should not have been taken. Certain correspondence took place between myself and Dr Thorpe, principal of the Government Laboratory in London, and my opinion was confirmed by this high authority. After quoting this authority at length, Mr Mann cotinues:— “You will thus understand my opinion, which is almost universally supported by all authorities, that the

CHEMICAL EXAMINATION OF * LIQUORS

for so-called injurious ingredients (‘fusel oil’ and the like) is simply useless. No case could be won in the courts on such evidence as would he procurable. The analysis of liquors can, however, be of use in another way. A careful estimation by the by-products already referred to will in many oases enable a judgment to be given as to whether a liquor is a whisky (i.e., a malt spirit distilled in a pot still) or whether it is made from silent spirit artificially flavoured and coloured. There is no legal definition of whisky which excludes these mixtures, however, and there is no evidence to show that such mixtures are harmful. Thus we are apparently at a standstill, as far as immediate orao-

tical results are -concerned. Still, I think that the analysis of spirits along these lines will be of advantage for several reasons. “1. The analysis of spirits is attracting a good deal of attention, an<l we do not know when more definite results may he obtainable. It will be well, therefore, to keep abreast of progress being made elsewhere. “2. If a definite classification of spirits becomes possible the Health Act might provide for the publication of the analysis. This would be a very effective bar to the of spirits which, though not harmful, are a cheap delusion and constitute a fraud on the public.”—Perth “Mornincr Herald.”