Stitzel-Weller Time Line

There's a lot of history and 'lore' behind bourbon so discuss both here.

Moderators: Brewer, brendaj

Re: Stitzel-Weller Time Line

Unread postby EllenJ » Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:16 pm

I know I'm a little late to the party, but I was looking at Linn's great photos and thought I ought to add a couple cents worth.

The Stitzel-Weller-produced brands should also include David Nicholson, sold in Missouri. Unlike most contract bottlings, there was no attempt to make it seem as though it was made in St. Louis. In fact, the label clearly states not only that it was Kentucky bourbon distilled at DSP-KY-16, but that it was the Old Fitzgerald Distillery. The label does, of course, also state that it was bottled by David Nicholson Distillery Co. DSP-MO-16. Earlier examples (1960s) indicate the distillery as Peter Hauptmann, also in St. Louis, but without a DSP#.

So, is the DSP# a coincidence? I know that name-only "distilleries" have long been the case for bottling non-bonded bourbon, which doesn't require identification of a DSP#, but the ones I'm familiar with were not out-of-state. Mrs. Boone, over at Heaven Hill, told us of how they would scribble the name of the distillery du jour on a piece of cardboard and hang it over the bottling line. For that day (or portion thereof), that WAS the name of the distillery, at least as far as meeting the requirements of the code was concerned. But could "DSP-MO-16", registered in Missouri, actually be located in Shively, Kentucky? Or was the bourbon tanked and shipped out to a bottling plant in St. Louis. For that matter, if it was shipped there for bottling, might that have been the same facility that David Sherman (now Luxco) uses?

Also, Mike, I'm pretty sure that David Nicholson still exists. Do you know whether that contract went to Heaven Hill with Old Fitzgerald or to Buffalo Trace with Weller? Or did Luxor take it along with Rebel Yell (which would suggest HH)?

And for the folks tuning in who are just beginning to try to understand where all these fabled brands originated, imagine how much fun just this one little ownership scramble (i.e. Diageo's Stitzel-Weller brands) will make tracing their origins fifty or so years from now. Now then, what was that you wanted to know about Old Mister Boston? :lol:

On another topic, which Chuck brought up, I thought the distilleries licensed to distill medicinal whiskey were doing so all through Prohibition; they didn't need to obtain special permission to start up. I believe A.Ph.Stitzel was among them. There were also licenses issued to distribute distilled spirits (to doctors, pharmacists, and bakers), and Weller & Sons possessed one of those. Where Weller differed from most other distributors, though, was that instead of purchasing existing product (the dreaded "medicinal whiskey" of legend, some of which had been rotting in barrels since before the World War) they bought their whiskey directly from a current distiller, Stitzel, as Chuck pointed out. I'm not sure if they bought new whiskey and aged it themselves or simply had access to good 4-year-old whiskey that Stitzel aged in their own warehouses. Either way, it made for a higher-quality product. Perhaps Mike knows if W.L. Weller & Sons already owned bonded warehouses in Shively before the merger and whether that influenced the choice of where to build the new Old Fitzgerald distillery?
Attachments
label - 1980s - front .jpg
label - 1980s - front .jpg (41.23 KiB) Viewed 1081 times
label - 1980s  - rear.jpg
label - 1980s - rear.jpg (65.08 KiB) Viewed 1081 times
=JOHN=
(the "Jaye" part of "L 'n' J dot com")
http://www.ellenjaye.com
User avatar
EllenJ
Registered User
 
Posts: 866
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Ohio-occupied Northern Kentucky (Cincinnati)

Re: Stitzel-Weller Time Line

Unread postby cowdery » Mon Dec 07, 2009 8:22 pm

The medicinal whiskey licenses were licenses to sell, not make. Mike will likely have the dates handy, but the feds didn't grant the licensees permission to distill until well into prohibition, when stocks began to dwindle. They were allowed to make so much per year every year thereafter. Stitzel happened to be the first to fire up its stills and because it had everything working, I believe it made the allotment for some of the other license holders. All of the license holders were consolidation warehouses in urban centers, which made their supervision easier.
- Chuck Cowdery

Author of Bourbon, Straight
User avatar
cowdery
Registered User
 
Posts: 1586
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 1:07 pm
Location: Chicago

Re:

Unread postby shoshani » Tue May 26, 2015 11:08 pm

cowdery wrote:Mike is correct that the conclusion that Fitzgerald was the "government man" at Old Judge is mine. He may have been at a bonded warehouse at another location, but why would Herbst have a bonded warehouse at a location other than at his sole Kentucky distillery? However, Sam Cecil's statement (undoubtedly from Whit Coyte) that Fitzgerald went on to be the "superintendent" of a distillery in Hammond, Indiana, which is in my neck of the woods (i.e., Chicago), puts him nearer to Milwaukee (where Herbst was based) than to Frankfort, Kentucky. So maybe he wasn't at Old Judge.


And now, so many years after this post was made. I discovered something.

We're all chasing John E. Fitzgerald the Internal Revenue gauger, who was indicted with two other gaugers, a government storekeeper, and four rectifiers on conspiracy to defraud the government in January, 1876 in Milwaukee.

But then there's John E. Fitzgerald the distiller, superintendent of the Hammond Distilling Company in Chicago for a good many years.

They aren't the same John E. Fitzgerald; the latter was born in 1865, making him ten years old at the time the former was engaged in larceny (but not involving spirits themselves, only receipts.)

Reference for the newfound distiller Fitzgerald: https://books.google.com/books?id=8BIUA ... &q&f=false

Edit: the above link is to a 1917 publication; Fitzgerald had been involved with the distillery since it opened in 1901, and was the son-in-law of the distillery's owner. A Brooklyn Daily Eagle article from Dec 15, 1901 mentions that Fitzgerald had been involved in distilling for some 20 years (putting him at about 15-16, not an unusual age for labor back then. I don't have a link for that, though, only an OCR dump.

I'm sure there is more clarity to be gained slowly. I just thought I'd break this latest on the board here.
shoshani
Registered User
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 10:51 am

Previous

Return to Bourbon Lore

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests