Prohibition-era prescription for whiskey. |
The Prohibition movement was largely a religious movement, spearheaded by Protestant Christians. There were medical authorities on both sides. While Prohibitionist doctors said whiskey was poison, other doctors said it was a useful tonic that they often recommended to their patients.
So strong was the pro-whiskey position among doctors that an exception was written into the Prohibition law. Within certain limitations, doctors were permitted to write prescriptions for whiskey which patients had filled at a pharmacy just like any other medicine. Today, while most doctors are not hostile to alcohol, and many scientists say moderate consumption is healthier than abstinence, officially whiskey has no medicinal value. That wasn't the case a century ago.
Ten medicinal licenses were authorized but only six entities applied for and received them. They were Brown-Forman, Glenmore (now part of Diageo), Frankfort Distilleries (Four Roses now), Schenley (also part of Diageo), American Medicinal Spirits (AMS, which became National Distillers, now part of Beam) and A. Ph. Stitzel Distillery (predecessor to Stitzel-Weller, also now Diageo).
Of the six, Brown-Forman is the only company that still exists, with the founding Brown family still at its helm.
Brown-Forman had been a distiller before 1920 and had its own whiskey to sell medicinally. So did the others except AMS. It had been formed after Prohibition began as a consolidation warehouse in Louisville, which the government mandated because it was so hard to secure whiskey stored in rural warehouses. The license AMS had came via one of the companies it bought to get whiskey stocks, Pennsylvania's Old Overholt. Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, who gave out the licenses, gave that one to himself as the owner of Old Overholt.
A medicinal license entitled you to sell whiskey made before Prohibition went into effect, which you could legally buy from the whiskey's producer. The license did not entitle you to distill until 1929, when the government allowed three million gallons of spirit per year to be produced by the medicinal license holders. A. Ph. Stitzel, by then under the control of Pappy Van Winkle, was the first distillery to take advantage of that opportunity. Since Prohibition was repealed four years later, little if any of that post-1929 distillate was sold until after repeal, but it gave Stitzel and others a nice head start.
The whiskey sold during Prohibition 'for medicinal purposes only' was very standardized. It always came in a one-pint bottle, in a box of either cardboard or metal.
While whiskey bottled before 1920 is very rare, Prohibition medicinal whiskey is surprisingly common. A bottle of it is a nice historical artifact but little else. The whiskey inside is generally awful.
UPDATE: (3/15/23) Something I have learned subsequent to this posting is that at least some of the six had consolidation warehouses at multiple locations. Schenley was using its distilleries in Frankfort, Kentucky, and Lawrenceburg-Greendale, Indiana. AMS was mostly in Louisville but they also had whiskey at the Pogue Distillery in Maysville, Kentucky. I imagine some, maybe all, of the others had multiple locations too, I'm just not sure where, but consolidation didn't mean all in one warehouse at one location. It is entirely possible the Overholt whiskey stayed in Pennsylvania under the control of AMS, for example.
"It always came in a one-pint bottle, in a box of either cardboard or metal."
ReplyDeleteSo Chuck, is the modern custom of cardboard or metal packaging a legacy (partly or whole) of prohibition "purity"?
Not really. For most of the post-Prohibition era, gift boxes were common in the run-up to Christmas. Most of your modern boxes seem based on scotch packaging. Most of the medicinal boxes were pretty flimsy, except for the tins, and there has never been anything quite like them, before or since.
ReplyDeleteAh... interesting, thanks for responding.
ReplyDeleteAwful or no, I'd love to have that sensory reference on palate for recall when sampling different brands and releases. I can only imagine. These are the articles that keep me reading the site daily, Chuck. Cheers.
ReplyDeleteWhat medical condition was bourbon prescribed to treat?
ReplyDeleteFrom the Rose Melnick Medical Museum: "Alcohol was prescribed for a variety of ailments including anemia, high blood pressure, heart disease, typhoid, pneumonia, and tuberculosis. Physicians believed it stimulated digestion, conserved tissue, was helpful for the heart, and increased energy."
ReplyDeleteDidn't Buffalo Trace have a license during Prohibition? They say they did on the tour.
ReplyDeleteBuffalo Trace traces it's roots back to Frankfort Distillery.
DeleteBuffalo Trace Distillery is a distillery in Frankfort, Kentucky, United States, owned by the Sazerac Company. It has historically been known by several names, including the George T. Stagg Distillery and the Old Fashioned Copper (O.F.C.) Distillery. Its namesake bourbon brand, Buffalo Trace Kentucky Straight Bourbon whiskey, was introduced in August 1999. The company claims the distillery is the oldest continuously-operating distillery in the United States.
Buffalo Trace had no connection to Frankfort Distillery.
DeleteWhat is now Buffalo Trace was then part of Schenley, so yes.
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of the "tamperproof" boxes that the Frankfort juice came in was to dissuade rogue rebottlers from passing off their hooch as the real thing. No box = not bona fide. This includes Four Roses, Paul Jones, and Broad Ripple. I am fascinated by prohibition whiskey and I would have to argue that some of the bourbons from that era actually hold up pretty well such as the AMS Special Old Reserve, which, like you said, is pretty easy to come by. Definitely a crapshoot leaning towards over oaked.
ReplyDeleteI have learned so much from your work. Thank you.
Scott
www.whiskeybent.net
Based on some offline comments I've received, some clarification might be in order. I was connecting the licenses to the companies that held them. Another approach would be to look at the distilleries. Brown Forman, for example, still exists as a company, but the distillery they had before and during Prohibition is long gone. With Stitzel both the company and distillery are gone. For Glenmore, the company is gone and so is the distillery, but the site of that distillery is still an active production facility, owned by Sazerac, which has bottling and maturation there. Sazerac also owns Buffalo Trace, which was Schenley's medicinal whiskey facility. Frankfort, which owned Four Roses then, had its distillery at Forks of the Elkorn, where Beam has a big maturation and bottling facility today.
ReplyDeleteGreat article Chuck. I have a chance to grab a Meadville Straight Rye Whiskey by Frankfort Distillery Inc that was made in 1930 and bottled in 1934. I am not able to find much at all on this label. Do you know anything about it and whether it falls into the "generally awful" category?? Tempted to grab it but not if the whiskey is terrible. Thanks
ReplyDeleteAny experience with Meadville Straight Rye Whiskey made by Frankfort Distillery? I have a chance to grab a bottle from 1930/1934 but your comments about most being generally awful gives me pause. Don't really want to just look at it and would prefer to enjoy (if thats even possible here). I have not really been able to find anything on this label on the net. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteI don't know anything specific about that label but it probably wouldn't matter. Maybe someone else who has a bottle will comment, but there's really only one way to know how it tastes and you know what that is.
ReplyDeleteAt least as a post-Prohibition distillate, you don't have to worry about it being mishandled and tasting too woody. More likely it will taste too young. Spend $12 on a bottle of 36-mo Old Overholt and you'll have something pretty similar.
ReplyDeleteHi Chuck,
ReplyDeleteI found this nice article while trying to learn about a prohibition bottle that my family has had for forty years. The bottle is full (less a little evaporation?), with the government seal, and in the box which is a bit tattered.
It is Old Thompson Whiskey
by H.S. Barton Distillery in Owensboro, KY
Made 1916
Bottled 1926
The label is listed with:
"For medicinal purposes only"
"Bottled in Bond Under the supervision of the US Government"
I don't see H.S. Barton listed above, but I'm not a bottle expert. Can you tell me what I have here?
Thanks
Dave
Medicinal whiskey was typically bottled under the name of the distillery that made it originally. Of the six above, this was probably Glenmore, as they were the one operating out of Owensboro.
ReplyDeleteChuck, I am curious as to why only 6 of the 10 licences where claimed?
ReplyDeleteThe odds that you could make a viable business out of it seemed pretty long at the time.
ReplyDeleteI've been trying to get some info on a bottle my dad has. It's an Old Overholt Rye, Bottled in Bond 100 proof made in 1916 and bottled in 1930 according to the seal. My grandmother took the bottle from her brother's bar in Baltimore in the 30's and my 86 yo dad has had it for years. It's in good shape and never opened. It has a Maryland Tax stamp. The odd thing is that it's not a pint size, it's a quart bottle
ReplyDeleteBlack Falls, do you have any pics?
ReplyDeleteStitzel Weller Distillery is still operating in the original location that Pappy Van Winkle once roamed. It now houses the Bulleit Bourbon Experience and Blade & Bow and is owned by Diageo. The distillery temporarily shut its doors during 90's but still housed bourbon in the warehouses. After Diageo purchased it, Stitzel Weller reopened and began producing again. It now houses a small craft distillery and the warehouses plus visitor center and tours.
ReplyDeleteAnother interesting tid bit about Stitzel Weller is the head security guard on site today was one of only 3 people working on site during the shut down. He was there to guard the warehouses. He is also a great friend of Tom Bulleit, the namesake and creator of the current Bulleit Bourbon.
ReplyDeleteWas Old Overholt granted a permit?
ReplyDeleteHello Chuck,
ReplyDeleteI think you can add The Large Distillery to the list. I have a bottle that was made in the spring of 1921 and bottled in the spring of 1931. The label on the back says "Tax paid at the Non-Beverage rate" For medical purposes only.
A friend produced an unopened quart bottle of Old McBrayer, distilled in Baltimore by AMS in 1917 and rebottled in 1933 by National Distillers in Louisville , “Aged 16 Years”. Still had Fed stamp as well as one from State of Ohio.
ReplyDeleteWhat about small, rural distillers? I'm doing research for a book on the historic grist mills of West Virginia and there's one that apparently had a government license to produce liquor in Pendleton County, which was then transported by horse and wagon to Harrisonburg.
ReplyDeleteHow could I find out more and confirm this story?
Hello Mr. Cowdery....
ReplyDeleteI realize I'm making a comment on a blog post from the past but I've been curious about a couple of things regarding the medicinal spirits permitting process during national prohibition. My searches led me here. I'm hoping you might be able to help me out or at least point me in the right direction.
First: I often read the government offered 10 permits for distilleries to sell existing stocks of spirits during prohibition but that only six distilleries applied. I'd love to find the substantiating documentation for this and the application process. I did come across a publication called "Regulations 60," published by the Office of Internal Revenue in 1920, which seems to be the paperwork required for the permit but nothing else.
Second: in your blog you write:
A medicinal license entitled you to sell whiskey made before Prohibition went into effect, which you could legally buy from the whiskey's producer. The license did not entitle you to distill until 1929, when the government allowed three million gallons of spirit per year to be produced by the medicinal license holders.
Does this mean that the 1929 allowance was already planned for in the permitting process or was that only granted/permitted later as a separate bit of rule making. Either way, I would love to locate the document which enabled this, the so-called '100 day holiday.'
Thanks in advance for whatever information you can share!
Michael
I've always understood the 'distilling holiday' to have been a reaction to both declining medicinal stocks and recognition that repeal was likely imminent. So much about Prohibition enforcement seems haphazard and improvised, I don't think they ever 'planned' anything, let alone a future replenishment of medical stocks.
ReplyDeleteChuck: I re-read the relevant section of 'Regulations 60' multiple times now and clearly whatever was done in 1929 was not planned for. And I definitely agree, terrible planning with a lot of ham-handed improvisation, i.e. 'What were they thinking!').
ReplyDeleteI'm still keen to track down whatever document/communication the Office of Internal Revenue (as it was called then) sent to the licenses distilleries to enable the holiday. I'm sure it's out there somewhere---I don't imagine they just called everyone on the phone. ;->
Michael
Re-reading my words from seven years ago, it strikes that the exception I mentioned for AMS, that they were not a pre-pro distiller but were formed after Prohibition began, also applies to Schenley. In both cases, some folks with industry experience saw an opportunity and began to accumulate assets. Schenley was in Cincinnati, AMS was in Louisville. That's the only difference.
ReplyDeleteChuck - Where was the George T. Stagg in all of this? Buffalo Trace (then Stagg) was granted a license also but I don't see them on your list. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteWhatever was done at Stagg/BT during Prohibition was done under the auspices of Schenley, which ultimately bought the distillery, which it owned until Ferdie Falk et. al. bought it in the 1980s.
ReplyDelete