Dead Reckoning Mhoba – South Africa

Around 12 months ago….that was the last time that I felt compelled to put pen to paper (fingers to keyboard) in any serious way. Whilst I was never prolific, I was relatively regular….and whilst this won’t necessarily see a full time return, the fact that this is happening is for me, personally, a good sign.

Anyhow, what are we looking at today. It’s a Mhoba! But this one is South Africa via Australia.

Mhoba are a producer that I have written about previously, in particular I wrote a long form piece that I view as one of the first and most detailed on the history and production methods of Robert and the distillery. You can find that by clicking here…..and just a little search on the page will reveal some other reviews of the range in general.

This bottling however is from a “relative” newcomer to the independent bottling scene, Dead Reckoning. This is the brainchild and life force behind Justin Boseley….Sailor turned Independent Rum bottler. There was an interesting insight into Justin over at 88bamboo and you’ll find that here.

Dead Reckoning Mhoba – South Africa – 56% abv – 0 g/l additives

What we have here is a young Mhoba offering matured in South Africa for a couple of years in an ex South African Red Wine barrel (Vrede En Lust). This was then shipped over to Adelaide in an IBC where Justin put it into an first fill, level three char ex Makers Mark barrel for an additional 5 months of “dry ageing”. That 5 months in the hot and dry Australian sun where in summer the humidity is around 5% and the temperatures can rise to 47 degrees Celsius saw the abv increase by approximately 4 to 5%….that is it would seem, dry ageing and it saw an Angels share of 21%.

Now lets get into it

Tasting Notes

Nose: A real freshness to the liquid in the glass accompanied by a hint of that Mhoba plastic note. A beautiful sharp and sour note of tart red berries accompanies white chocolate shavings and dried cranberries. There is some of that familiar Mhoba grassy sugarcane and ester driven profile. Fruity acidity, hints of ripe tropical fruits. Development in the glass moves from the fresher, cane and fruit driven notes and grows in depth with the barrels coming to the fore. Mild tannic notes and barrel spice. Musky wet wood mixes with drier, more pencil shaving driven notes. It’s all so well integrated and the level of depth and development certainly belies its age. Creamy white chocolate and cranberry cookies. That sourness is certainly a welcome facet to the experience. It sits astride that line between a well aged agricole and a quality high ester Jamaican.

Mouth: Wow. Initial sips definitely do not bring the nose to the palate straight away. A little difficult to sift through to start with. Balance isn’t there immediately. Tingling the tip of your tongue are those tart dried cranberries, crisp apple and acidic tropical fruits. This becomes almost creamy with such an oily mouthfeel. Banoffee pie. Caramel. Chewy meringue. Sweet grain whisky. Yes there are those tart red fruit notes in there, but it becomes wonderfully drying on the mid palate. It is far more barrel driven than the nose would have you believe…..almost old Enmore like. Musky, wood and old library books. Pepper. Still allowing those tart notes to hit the side of your tongue though. Sticks of celery and peanut butter. A relatively short finish to this one but I’m not annoyed by that. Creeping dryness and hints of powdery cocoa.

In conclusion: The differing barrels have definitely had their influence on the distillate whilst also allowing the Mhoba character to shine through, that said…..I’d struggle to think on something that would be able to stunt that Mhoba character. All in all, really lovely stuff and a great bottling for Dead Reckoning to have in their arsenal.

4 / 5

© Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog 2023. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material, both written and photographic without the express and written permission from this blog/sites author and owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

SMWS R11.5 Flaming Rum Bananas

Back into it with my first visit to a SMWS bottling from Jamaica. This one is from Worthy Park……the name could almost be a giveaway. There really isn’t too much that I can tell you about Worthy Park that I have not covered elsewhere. So a little click here……or here might assist. 

What I CAN tell you is that they’ve been producing some excellent Rum since the distillery was re-opened in 2005 and at the recent UK Rumfest in London, I got to try a couple of new under the counter bottles. 

The first was a 17 year old Rum. This would’ve been from one of their early 2005 distillations on that lovely big Forsyths double retort. It was the WPL marque and was bottled at 54.72%. It really was everything that you’d want it to be. 

The second was unaged cane juice distillate. The marque was WPE-CJN and it was bottled at 50.29%. I’m not sure that I have the correct superlatives to describe this. It’s both wildly expressive and vibrant whilst also being an absolutely huge Rum. I’m told by those that have visited Worthy Park that smelling it in the glass captures the very essence of walking around the distillery. One day. I can only hope. 

I’m very hopeful that both will see a release at some point. 

Anyhow…….onto the bottle in question. 

SMWS R11.5 Flaming Rum Bananas – 66.1% – 0 g/l additives 

Distilled on May 1st 2010, this bottling was matured in a refill ex bourbon barrel and bottled at 7 years of age. My assumption is that the majority of that time was spent in the cooler European climate. An outturn of 273 bottles, this weighs in at a hefty 66.1%. I’d also suggest that this is a WPL marque. Now I usually take the naming convention with a pinch of salt…….but Worthy Park does equate to Bananas in my mind. 

Tasting Notes 

Nose: A little uptight initially from the pour. This one needs a decent chunk of time to open up a little. Buttery vanilla slices. Coconut mochi. A little hint of the vegetal pings in and then swiftly disappears. We get some of the familiar and “classic” Worthy Park profile. Beautiful black breakfast tea. Bananas aplenty. Overripe and baked into a banana bread…..a brown sugar sprinkling on top and maybe some baked in chocolate chips. Dried banana chips covered in milk chocolate. A touch of barrel spice. Not as forthcoming as a lot of the distillery bottling’s that I’ve tried. 

Mouth: Now we’re talking. THIS is what I was hoping to find more of on the nose. It really is in full on classic Worthy Park attack. Remarkably drinkable given the 66 degrees of alcohol that it’s packing but my word it is silky, all encompassing and it fully envelopes your tongue. Banana. Banana. Banana. Almost Tempus Fugit Creme de Banane with its chocolate and banana bread. This carries good depth. Bannofee pie with with ginger biscuit base. Chocolate coated banana and coconut chips. Spice bun. Sweet milky tea. A hint of Maltesers. The mid palate ushers in spicy black and Szechuan peppercorns. Mace. Cinnamon. Fragrant allspice. Fresh ginger root. Plenty borrowed from the barrel. The finish is a full presentation of what preceded it with perhaps the addition of a slice of spice bun drizzled with molasses. That banana remains ever present though.

In conclusion: A little disjointed from nose to palate if I’m being honest. The nose would be a solid 2/5 but the expressiveness of the palate and its classic nature when given time really lifts the experience. It’s not up to the standard of some of the distillery bottling’s, or even some of the other independent bottling’s such as from the Thompson Brother’s, though that one in particular carries more age. Not a classic. It doesn’t give fully to what we know that Worthy Park can give, it feels too restrained on the nose. It remains pretty solid though.

© Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog 2022. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material, both written and photographic without the express and written permission from this blog/sites author and owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Saint Aubin History Collection Cuvée Grande Réserve

Le Domaine de Saint Aubin has existed as a Plantation since 1819 and it takes its name from original owner Pierre de St. Aubin. It is located south of Rivière des Anguilles on the South coast of Mauritius. It’s operation as a sugar growing plantation has continued unabated since it’s inception yet Rhum production came later. How much later I do not know. The plantations location gives rise to a microclimate whose balance of rain and sunshine pairs with the volcanic soil to create ideal conditions for cultivating sugarcane. 

The sugarcane, once harvested is immediately transported to the mill where it is pressed to extract the juice. The first press is known as ‘fangourin’ locally and it is this that is used to undergo immediate fermentation. They also employ both batch and continuous methods of distillation. 

To be honest, that is about as much information as I can find about the place……so we’ll swiftly move onto the liquid in the bottle. 

Saint Aubin History Collection Cuvée Grande Réserve – 40% abv – 3.9 g/l additives 

To quote the available information: 

With the “History Collection” series, the distillery of Saint Aubin pays tribute to the historical facts that shaped Mauritius. 

Limited to 5218 bottles, our Cuvée Grande Réserve commemorates the bicentenary of the conquest of “L’Isle de France” which took place between the 29th November and the 2nd December 1810 in the north of Mauritius. 

A few months following the Battle of Grand Port, England had gathered an expeditionary force commanded by Sir John Abercomby. They landed in Cap Malheureux and soon dominated the French forces of the Governor Decaen which were low in number. Following the Treaty of Paris in 1814, Isle de France was given to England and got its name Ile de Maurice, or Mauritius back. 

The rear bottle label states 7 years old, which would tally with the indicated 2007 Harvest and 2014 release dates noted on the box. But I have read that there are elements of 10 year old batch distilled Rhum in the blend which according to Lance over at The Lone Caner is 30% batch and 70% continuous. Maturation took place in a combination of both ex-bourbon and French oak casks. 

Let’s see what this one offers up.

Tasting Notes

Nose: Upon initial pour, the single most prominent aroma that comes to the fore is that of a synthetic caramel…..the like of which can be found atop a cheap supermarket creme caramel. I’ll be honest, it takes some shaking. So we power through. An excess of vanilla is broken by ripe red fruits……raspberries, plums and a wealth of hedgerow berries. Red berry packet microwave porridge with a sprinkling of brown sugar. Soft red liquorice. Walnuts and maple syrup. Spiced caramel. There’s a back end of wet wood that still carries that synthetic caramel and maybe the merest hint of chocolate milkshake.

Mouth: The illusion of a robust, oily mouthfeel soon slides off the edge of the tongue to display a complete transition from the nose. Synthetic caramel that brings unpleasant bitterness. Heaps of red berry compote. Dried cranberries. Sweet porridge. Maple syrup on buttery pastry. Icing sugar. Caramel spiked with pre-grated nutmeg and cinnamon powder. Heaps of vanilla. The barrel is disappointingly missing for something that has spent a decent amount of time in French oak and it only shows via a little spice. The finish is of a medium length and brings some of that red liquorice along with a touch of fennel like anise. Caramel bitterness at the death.

In conclusion: It all just feels very muted. Like it wants stretch it’s legs. It wants to have a little more power in the delivery. It wants to to live up to what we know that Mauritius can produce. It wants to be reflective of its surroundings. But it’s sadly bound by the decisions made post process rather than being defined by the process itself and it turns a what could’ve been into a what is certainly not. Its not particularly sweet, the additions have not been used to do that. It’s dull, muted, synthetic and perhaps the most awful thing that a Rum could be, bland. The addition of caramel at such levels that it clearly holds back the olfactory experience whilst making its presence known via synthetic bitterness on the palate coupled with what I’d hazard a guess is a fruit maceration executed with all the subtlety of a brick to the face were two of the worst decisions made in the creation of this product. I’d even be hard pressed to identify it as a cane juice product, which is a crime in itself. A lesson to all that even at this stage, we can all be duped into buying a poor product and proof further that label clarity is required. Unless you enjoy dull, muted, easy going offerings from some of the big South American players, steer clear. Mauritius can (and should) do so much better. The remains of the bottle are free to a good home.

1 / 5

© Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog 2022. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material, both written and photographic without the express and written permission from this blog/sites author and owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Holmes Cay Mhoba 2017

My interest and appreciation of the output from Mhoba should be apparent to anyone that has visited this site previously. I have a few multi bottling reviews (here and here)and one very large reference piece charting the origins of Mhoba Rum and it’s founder, Robert Greaves here. Robert is a man that I have a great deal of time and respect for. Not only does he produce great Rum, he’s also an extremely humble, open, honest and likeable man. So imagine my delight when I found out that another person that I also consider to be thoroughly decent was bottling a Mhoba product. That person is Eric Kaye and along with his partner in crime (and wife), Maura Gedid, they are independent bottlers Holmes Cay. 

Holmes Cay have grown slowly but surely since my first encounter with Eric and their products back at Rumfest in 2019. Their mantra is “No Additives. No Adulteration. Just Rum”……and it is one that I fully support and can get on board with. Spanning Australia, Barbados, Belize, Fiji, Guyana, Jamaica, Mauritius, South Africa and Trinidad, they’ve not been too shy to encourage exploration beyond the Caribbean. Sadly, they’re also unavailable here in the UK outside of Rum auction websites and that is a real shame. 

How therefore have I come to acquire this bottling. That is all thanks to a coffee and a ham & cheese toastie at the Starbucks around the corner from Crewe railway station in October last year. Eric had been in Liverpool exploring the delights of the Main Rum warehouse and uncovering some new treats to bottle. Eric had kindly agreed to meet me in a stop off on his way down to London. I duly collected him from the station and we seconded to the sterile wasteland that is a Starbucks in a railway town on a weekday mid morning. I took some samples of quite coveted bottles for Eric to try and he kindly gave this bottle in return…..and a pretty cool hat too.  I also got to try a couple of samples, straight from a plastic Starbucks cup, of some insanely good upcoming bottling’s. Even then, they shone through their dire, drab surroundings and provided a brief journey to another place, if only for a second. 

So enough talk of trains, hats and sterile coffee shop environs, let’s move into the Rum. 

Holmes Cay Mhoba 2017 4 Years Old – 59% abv – 0g/l additives

As the name would suggest, this is a Mhoba bottling distilled in 2017 and bottled in 2021. It was bottled at its barrel strength of 59% abv and drawn from an ex-South African Whisky barrel (number 49). The barrel was one of a batch obtained from the James Sedgewick Distillery in Wellington, South Africa. Sedgewick’s produce Bain’s Cape Mountain Whisky which is a Grain Whisky (can be made from any grain including unmalted Barley, Wheat, Corn & Rye) and Three Ships which is a Single Malt Whisky (Malted Barley). That parcel of barrels contained both malt and grain whisky barrels, all barrels were old and therefore very well used, and Robert being Robert, he refurbished around 2 in 10 barrels by removing material and re-toasting. Due to the losses to evaporation (the temperatures are at Caribbean levels but with greater fluctuation of highs and lows) the casks were consolidated, therefore it is likely that any releases from the 2017 ex-South African Whisky barrels may have seen time in both ex-malt and ex-grain whisky barrels. 

Tasting Notes

Nose: We often say that distilleries have a signature aroma, honed from their techniques crafted and perfected over a number of years, Robert has definitely achieved that in a short space of time with Mhoba. It’s like a unique blend of high ester Jamaican output, unaged agricole from the French West Indies, the heavier and massively appealing (to me) pot still side of cane juice and the glue-y output from Fiji. But that amalgamation is quintessentially Mhoba. 

Vibrant, bright, ester laden sugarcane juice. Light acetone. Plastic. Model glue. Lingering fuel aromas on your hand following filling up the tank. Earthy notes of turmeric, saffron, ginger root and freshly foraged mushrooms creep in. Layers of complexity keep building and revealing themselves as the glass sits. A fruitier side reveals itself with sticky caramelised pineapple, pineapple upside down cake, manuka honey. Imagine oily lemon and lime rind covered in powdered sugar. White wine. A really unshakable candyfloss note. Wafts of chocolate coated raisins, toffee pennies. Complex and rewarding……and more unnervingly, approachable.

Mouth: Initially there is an unmistakable and prominent liquorice root……those little wooden sticks that rewarded constant chewing with earthy, rooty, bitter and occasionally sweet liquorice. Robust, oily and possessing plenty of grip on the palate. As you sit and take repeated sips that sweetness grows with toffee pennies, pineapple cubes and tinned pineapple juice. Beautifully controlled acidity. Citrus oil. Sticky and almost damp muscovado sugar being added to a spiced fruitcake mix. Liquorice. Honey on toast. Sugared almonds. A drying and spiced mid palate which is where the barrel influence first shows itself, and it brings white pepper, ginger juice, baking spices. The finish is a touch shorter than I would’ve liked but it builds towards it on the preceding sips to leave that drying sweet, bitter and woody liquorice root, sugared almonds, peaches and maybe a hint of coffee at the death. 

In conclusion: This rum is on the lighter side of the Mhoba output. Way less wood influence than their usual offerings and it feels more approachable for it, but don’t let that make you believe that it is lacking in any way. Quite the opposite. It is complex, rewarding and shows great development from nose to palate and into the finish. Robert has again produced an exemplary distillate and Eric has been smart enough to snap it up and bottle it. A perfect match. 

4.5 / 5

© Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog 2022. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material, both written and photographic without the express and written permission from this blog/sites author and owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Hampden 12 Year Old 2009 Jamaica – Quarterdeck (Duncan Taylor)

Well this almost feels new again…..its been a quite a while since I last wrote anything and personally I was unsure that I’d ever write again. But here we are…..like a bear that has been hibernating for a good few winters, it was time to awaken and reacquaint myself with my surroundings.

The Rum being assessed today is from a distillery steeped in history, a distillery that still utilises techniques long forgotten by a large bulk of the modern Rum making world. We are of course talking about Hampden. Sculptors of magically pungent and often breathtaking Rum using raw materials, surrounding environment and a vast wealth of Rum making knowledge dating back to the 1700’s as their medium of choice.

I have previously written about Hampden Estate, both distillery bottlings and independent bottlings and by clicking here, you can see a few of those posts. I was also meant to visit the distillery in early 2020….but a certain issue know globally as the Covid-19 pandemic put pay to that. Needless to say, Hampden Estate produce some stunning Rum at various ester levels……these include:

OWH (Outram W. Hussey) – Ester level of 40-80 g/hlAA
LFCH (Lawrence Francis Close Hussey) – Ester level of 85-120 g/hlAA
LROK (Light Rum Owen Kelly) – Ester level of 200-400 g/hlAA
HLCF (Hampden Light Continental Flavoured) – Ester Level of 500-700 g/hlAA
<>H (Often called Diamond H) – Ester level of 900-1000 g/hlAA
HGML (Hampden George MacFarquhar Lawson) – Ester level of 1000-1100 g/hlAA
C<>H (Often called C Diamond H) – Ester level of 1300-1400 g/hlAA
DOK (Dermot Owen Kelly-Lawson) – Ester level of 1500-1600 g/hlAA

To achieve some of their truly high ester releases, they also utilise something known as the Cousins Process. Named after the legendary ‘Island Chemist’, H H Cousins, this high ether process was introduced at Hampden Estate by Charles Allan in 1905. This technique was able to show that the “flavour” of Jamaican Rum was not solely the result of alcoholic fermentation by yeast, but by acidic fermentation by bacteria. The Cousins Process essentially utilises a series of steps to turn the fatty acid ester precursors from past distillations into a concentrated liquid that can be used to create some amazingly high ester Rums. Of course, Hampden Estate also utilise Muck (a horrific concoction of acids that create a bacterial dynamite for secondary fermentation to unlock other esters and volatiles) and Dunder (stillage from previous distillations retained and added to future fermentations). Quite an arsenal of tools at their disposal and the skills involved in their creation and deployment cannot be underestimated.

Hampden 12 Year Old 2009 Jamaica – Quarterdeck (Duncan Taylor) – 50.8% abv – 0g/l additives

I was first alerted to this Rum by Eric March, a member of the UK Rum Club facebook group that I run with the prolific Rum Blogger, The Fat Rum Pirate. He contacted me asking if I knew any information on the marque of the Rum as the bottle gives nothing away aside from a date barreled of 30.06.2009, a date bottled of 17.02.2022, indication that it is cask number 27 that had an outturn of 335 bottles and a 12 year age statement. I suggested that running back to other bottles that I have tried in the past, this may be a mythical DOK marque. Eric duly purchased the bottle and upon tasting, being the high ester Rum Geek that he is, agreed with my suggestion of DOK. We still however, have no official confirmation as the bottler doesn’t have the information. Eric was kind enough to send me a sample of the Rum along with one of the excellent Neisson Profil 105 and a crazy Savanna HERR. As soon as I poured the sample, I knew that I needed to pick a bottle up. It had both familiar, and unfamiliar qualities and I was aware that I’d wanted to spend more time with the Rum.

Tasting Notes

Nose: There’s certainly no mistaking this pour for anything dull and uninteresting……I’m pretty sure that my neighbours can smell it through the walls. Hugely bright, pungent estery acidity pours from the glass. Layer upon layer of inviting tropical fruit sweetness. A trilogy of Pineapple….charred and caramelised with tip-top cream, freshly cut and touching the fermenting fizz of over ripeness, a huge paper bag of pineapple cube sweets. Dried sweet Mango and Papaya pieces. Stinging pear drop acetone and a touch of tropical fruit vinegar. Someone using waxy furniture polish in another room and then blending fiery fresh ginger root with cloves. Walkers Old Fashioned Hazelnut and Caramel slabs. This DOK has a little more to it though…..there’s an underlying and for me quite unmistakable tart blackcurrant and sticky liquorice facet to the rum…..it genuinely does feel like someone liquidised a bag of sweets and poured it into the barrel. Even two hours after pouring, real development is still happening on the nose with more subtlety felt in the form of tomato plants in the garden on a sunny day and some faint appearance of fresh herbs. 

Palate: The first striking thing about this Rum on the palate is the insane mouthfeel, it’s big, oily and chewy. Sweet and also Bitter too. That liquorice and blackcurrant comes across almost instantly as soon as your tastebuds have stopped dancing around your mouth with the sheer intensity of the liquid. A “soapy” note around the side of the tongue……almost like a pine shower gel. Bright, acidic, estery fruit as on the nose. Sweet sweet caramelised pineapple. Fragrant Banana chips and sticky, chewy soft liquorice bring the sweetness with the creeping bitterness of a good dark chocolate and the tart berries. The mid palate brings Fennel seeds. Celery salt. White pepper. Salty salami. Olive brine. The lightest appearance of drying oak spice. The biggest problem with DOK is trying to stop it just evaporating on your tongue into nothingness. The oiliness of this bottling however helps it linger for more than a couple of heartbeats and brings something that most DOK bottlings that I’ve experienced seem to lack……a finish. This is the sum of its parts with caramelised almost burnt pineapple, the merest hint of barrel spice (white pepper and clove) and nutty toffee morphing into those liquorice and blackcurrant sweets with just a hint of menthol, resinous pine and drying barrel influence. 

In conclusion: It’s a great bottling. I’m struggling to find any faults, off notes or flaws. Even the abv feels right. They’ve done a great job with this bottling as it gives in waves and lasts as an experience for much longer than others of its ilk. For me not a daily drinker, but its certainly not some unapproachable brute either…..age has refined it and knocked the aggressive chip off its shoulder to create a well rounded, if still pungent and loud experience.

4.5 / 5

© Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog 2022. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material, both written and photographic without the express and written permission from this blog/sites author and owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Yeast in Rum (or S. Pombe Revisited)

Following on from the three part collected article titled “Aeneas Coffey, John Dore and Foursquare”, Richard Seale posted an in depth look at “Yeast in Rum” in a 6 part series on his personal page, with his agreement I have again collated them into one single reference article below.

Yeast in Rum (or S. Pombe Revisited)

Part One – Yeast History

Back in October/November 2019, I created a quite a stir with some comments and a very brief post challenging some of the myths being created around the novel sacred cow that is S. Pombe yeast. At Foursquare we carry out natural fermentations (which contain S. Pombe) and having made some ‘high ester’ rums last year, it seems a good moment to make a further comment giving more details on the work of Jamaican chemists Percival H Greg, Charles Allan and S. F. Ashby.

A Little History:

Yeast cells were among the first microbes seen in early microscopes and some of the earliest observations concluded it was produced by fermentation rather than the agent of fermentation. In 1755, Dr. Johnson is his famous dictionary defined ‘yest’ as ‘the foam spume, or flower of beer in fermentation’. See also his cross reference with the definition of ‘barm’.

Lavoisier (1789) investigated wine fermentation by qualitative methods and could not find a role for yeast in the reaction that produced alcohol. However, by this time scientists believed yeast (or ferment as it was called) played a role in starting the process. Berzelius called this catalysis. German Scientist Theodor Schwann identified yeast as a living organism and call it ‘zukerpilz’ – the sugar fungus (or sugar mushroom). His colleague Franz Meyen that provided the modern latin name in 1838 – saccharomyces cerevisiae – literally ‘beer sugar-fungus’ for the species of yeast in common use today (through the use of thousands of strains of the species). Pasteur also supported the idea that fermentation was a biological process, that is a process by living organisms.

Famed German biologist Justus Von Liebig disagreed with this ‘vitalist’ theory arguing that alcoholic fermentation was a purely chemical process – no living organisms were involved – and this led of one of the most famous disputes in Science. Liebig believed the yeast was kind of nitrogenous organic compound which decomposed the sugar and a product was deposited described as an insoluble ferment. This ferment could be used as ‘ferment’ in another sugar solution. Pasteur would eventually settle the debate through a set of brilliant experiments.

Ultimately neither scientist was entirely correct or entirely wrong. Eduard Buchner obtained pure samples of the fluid inside the yeast cell and discovered that the fluid could ferment a sugar solution despite the fact the yeast cell was obviously dead. He realised that fermentation reactions were a chemical process inside the yeast cell by what we know today as collection of enzymes. So alcoholic fermentation is after all a bio-chemical process. Buchner would publish his work in 1897 for which he would be awarded the Nobel Prize.

Pasteur’s work would extend to improving wine making. He observed that soured wine was caused by the presence of lactic acid. He further observed that sour wine contained not only oval yeast cells but small rod shaped bacteria. While alcoholic fermentation occurred via yeast, lactic acid fermentation occurred via bacteria. Pasteur developed the process of heating the wine to a specific temperature for a short time to kill the bacteria a process we know today as ‘pasteurisation’ which would eventually find widespread use in the beer, milk and juice industries.

Danish mycologist Emile Christian Hansen, working at the Carlsberg Laboratory would take yeast understanding a step further. Pasteur had not fully solved the problem of brewing cloudy and off tasting beer despite pitching bacteria free yeast cultures. Pasteur had seen yeast as homogeneous cells, Hansen was the first to isolate different strains/species of saccharomyces yeasts. He discovered that certain strains were directly responsible for the cloudy beer and so by isolating and selecting particular strains for the brewery the problem of cloudy and sour beer could be solved. So now it was necessary to not only eliminate bacteria from beer fermentation but also so called ‘wild yeasts’.

The work of Liebig, Pasteur and Hansen are important to understanding the work of two giants of the Jamaica Rum industry – the planter and distiller Leonard Wray and the chemist Percival H Greg which we will consider in Part two.

 

Part Two – Wray and Greg

Leonard Wray (family to the more familiar J Wray) published his famous treatise in 1848 and his understanding of fermentation was based on the work of Liebig.

For Wray, the nitrogenous matter that would initiate fermentation was already contained in the raw material and so no yeast (or ferment) needed to be added:

“it is seen that molasses and skimmings each contain sugar, gluten, and water; so that fermentation will occur spontaneously in them without the intervention of any foreign substance, such as yeast”

As Lavoisier had quantitatively demonstrated before him, Wray stated the elements of the yeast (the glutenous or albuminous matter) “take no appreciable part in the transposition of the elements of the sugar ; for in the products resulting from the action, we find no component part of this substance”

For Wray, as Lavoisier, the yeast had no part of the final product, for Wray “the peculiar flavour of rum is generally understood to proceed from the resinous, aromatic gum (or essential oil), contained in the rind of the cane”.

Wray relayed an anecdote which marvelously echoes today:

“It is not more than a few days ago, that I was asked by a person why yeast was not used by our sugar planters as ferment instead of dunder ; intimating in very significant terms, that he considered all the West India distillers a very choice pack of fools. Now, this person says that he has been for a long while manager of one of the largest distilleries in the world. He has written a pamphlet on distillation, with a view to enlighten the minds of all distillers, and no doubt fancies himself possessed of all possible knowledge of the subject. And yet this person, who is a clever man, and no doubt very competent to instruct English distillers, does not know what dunder is, or what is its use in the fermentation of wash.”

Wray in his seminal work put his erudite view in the strongest terms, “no foreign agent — such as yeast — is necessary. Nay, further, that such is extremely undesirable ; as it would change altogether the character of the fermentation” (my emphasis).

Wray’s understanding of fermentation was not precisely correct but in practical terms, he was not wrong. Moreover, he was prescient. Everything needed for fermentation was indeed there, no ‘foreign agent’ was needed but the rise of pitched yeast with isolated, sterile yeast strains would forever change the fundamental character of rum fermentation not just in Jamaica but in every rum producing country. Today, just a handful of rum distilleries operate under Wray’s philosophy, almost all of them in Jamaica, most notably the Hampden and Long Pond Estates in Trelawny.

The first serious challenge to this approach would come from Percival H. Greg. Greg was the first chemist to isolate individual strains of yeast as found in Jamaica distilleries. Greg was strongly influenced by the work of Emile Hansen and travelled to Copenhagen to work at the Carlsberg laboratory under the supervision of Hansen’s colleague, Prof. Alfred Jorgensen. At the Carlsberg Lab, he conducted a series of experiments on molasses and dunder sent over from Jamaica. Greg became convinced of the merits of isolating, selecting and pitching a strain of yeast as was now becoming practice in breweries and distilleries around the world. Writing in ‘The Sugar Cane’ in 1893, Greg advocated:

“Not only must we do away with spontaneous fermentation by using a ‘pitching’ yeast, as brewers term it, i.e. adding some previously prepared yeast to set our vats in fermentation at once, but I strongly recommend the selection and cultivation of a suitable type of yeast in a state of absolute purity”

Greg was not alone in his ideas. Pairault (1903) and Kayser (1913) also suggested that starter culture yeasts for rum production should be selected. Both Pairault (1903) and Kayser (1913) recognized that bacteria were also endemic to rum but in their view they negatively impacted on production efficiency and quality. Fahrasmane (2002) reported that “after 1918, some distillers in the French West Indies who wanted to increase the alcoholic yield decided to put into practice the advice of Pairault and Kayser on pure fermentations. Although the result was an increase in yields, the quality of these products evidently fell because of their increased chemical neutrality”.

The star of the show of the strains tested by Greg in Copenhagen was a fission yeast, aka Schizzosaccharomyces Pombe (S. Pombe) which he dubbed No. 18. It is this earliest work in yeast selection that still resonates today in those who believe this type of yeast to be the holy grail in the search for the best Jamaica rum. Following Pasteur and Hansen, Greg at this time saw bacteria as only a source of potential disaster.

Enter Charles Allan who took entirely the opposite view. We will examine that in Part three.

 

Part Three – Allan and Ashby

In 1903, the Jamaica Board of Agriculture decided to hire a specialist Fermentation chemist as well as to set up a sugar laboratory, a fermentation laboratory and an experimental distillery with a 50 gallon still with a “telescopic head” and detachable retorts. The purpose was to study rum making with a view to improving yields, quality and studying the types of yeast involved. Charles Allan would be given a three year contract for the role under the supervision of legendary ‘Island Chemist’, H H Cousins. In 1905, it was Allan who supervised the implementation of Cousins High Ether Process at a specially built plant at Hampden Estate. A process still in use today.

Allan was able to show that the “flavour” of Jamaican rum was not the result of alcoholic fermentation by yeasts but due to acidic fermentations by bacteria.

“The point I wish to emphasize at present is that the value of rum depends mainly on the secondary products [the congeners] it contains. I will show you by means of experiments in the laboratory that cane juice or molasses fermented by yeasts alone produce but very little of the secondary products. These, therefore, must be formed by other organisms, chiefly bacteria which swarm in the washes of Jamaican distilleries”

Allan contrasted the modern approach of breweries of his era with the approach needed by the Jamaican distiller to make the best rum.

“In the most up-to-date breweries now not only are all bacteria excluded but yeast which has been carefully cultivated from selected seed are only used. The effect of this on the article produced was to alter to an appreciable extent its flavour but it ensured its stability in character and in a short time the newly acquired flavour got to be appreciated. In the case of Jamaica rum however we have an article of a very different nature to deal with. The flavour is of a very pronounced character and is one of its chief assets. The flavour of beer is very delicate and is produced by the yeast itself whereas I am of title opinion that the yeasts contribute but a small amount of the flavour of rum”

Allan’s successor at the Jamaica Government Laboratory was S. F. Ashby. Ashby had also studied yeasts at Copenhagen and was the Bacteriologist at famous Rothamsted Experimental Station in the UK before arriving in Jamaica in November of 1905.

He set about to explore further the contribution of yeast to Jamaica rum. He set up ten experiments with sterile washes seeded with strains of the fabled S. Pombe, selected due to the earlier work of Greg. The results were a disaster.

“The rum could hardly be called by that name, and it showed the same character for all ten yeasts; in no case was any characteristic flavour produced”.

Ashby continued with another series of experiments where acid was added to the otherwise sterile washes seeded again with S. Pombe.

“The conclusion to be drawn from these experiments is that, whereas none of the fission yeast isolated from the estate washes was able to produce flavour on its own account, the top yeast owing to its slower fermentation admitted a greater amount of chemical ether production in a wash originally high in volatile acids. The latter result is in accordance with distillers’ experience as they consider that a wash showing a strong fatty head due to the top fermenting fission yeast yields the best flavoured rum.”

Ashby set up further experiments again with added acids but this time observing the behaviour of each species of yeast (S. Cerevisiae and S. Pombe) with each type of acid (acetic, lactic, butyric) these being the common acids in distillery washes (produced primarily by bacteria).

“The ability of the budding type [S. Cervisiae] to multiply and ferment more rapidly from the outset in the weaker acid liquors, like cane juice washes and fresh skimmings, explains why this is the only kind found in such liquor the acidity of which is generally under 0.5%. In the usual estate washes containing dunder, molasses, acid skimmings, and frequently specially added acid, [this would be known as ‘flavour’ made in a muck pit or trash cistern ] the budding yeast [S. Cerevisiae] is largely suppressed, but the more slowly developing and very acid resistant fission type [S. Pombe] takes possession, and is practically the only form found in washes the acidity of which is 1.0% and over”.

Ashby demonstrated in experimental work that the remarkable qualities of S. Pombe are not in its ability to produce flavour of its own account but its ability to make alcohol in washes that are set up to make the characteristic flavour of high ester Jamaica Rum. Its slow rate of fermentation is also particularly important in allowing these characteristic flavours to be developed rather than rapidly consuming the available nutrients and producing the sterilising alcohol which would retard their development.

After his contact was concluded, Ashby would continue to have an illustrious career, he would also work in Trinidad before culminating his career as the mycologist at the Imperial Mycology Institute located at the Royal Botanic Gardens in Kew.

In fact Greg too in his work had also demonstrated that S. Pombe was no panacea – a simple trial of No. 18 in the absence of dunder produced no flavour. In his final paper on Rum aroma published in 1895, Greg concluded:

“If one may be allowed to theorize a little, there seems sufficient grounds for concluding, from the results which I have up to now attained, that though the aroma of rum is in the first instance derived from the soil, that this influence is chiefly potential not actual; that it is latent , dormant , and only brought into existence during the process of manufacture”.

Greg was back to Wray even before the arrival of Allan and Ashby.

So what does yeast contribute? We look at that in Part four.

 

Part Four – Yeast Flavour

Yeast is a bit of sacred cow itself in distilling, not least of all the current fad of S. Pombe. The primary mission in this series of posts is to explain the role of yeast in the context of traditional Jamaica high ester rum, not to diminish its broader importance. The role of yeast in any spirit category is wholly dependent on the culture in which that spirit is made. Yeasts and bacteria are the organisms directly responsible to creating flavour in alcoholic fermentations. Allan summarised well the challenge of striking the balance between the two:

“In making rum the first consideration is to produce alcohol. This can be done by encouraging the development of yeasts but in so doing you are discouraging the growth of bacteria and again if you encourage the development of bacteria you are setting up conditions which are against the interests of the yeasts. You must choose a middle course and it is just here where our greatest difficulty arises.”

Fortunately yeast does not only make alcohol but flavour congeners are produced as by products of yeast metabolism. These include higher alcohols (propanol, amyl alcohol etc), acids (acetic, lactic etc) esters (ethyl acetate), acetaldehyde and diacetyl. Further esters are formed by combining the produced acids with alcohol. Nykanan and Suomalainen (1983) listed 400 flavour metabolites of yeast fermentation. Of course only the volatile ones that pass over into the distilled spirit would be relevant for rum or whisky.

Yeasts are not a typical fungus in that their spores do not migrate by air currents. They are thought to be carried in the stomachs of insects. Recent research in Belgium – Christiaens et al 2014 – showed that fruit flies could use the aromatic odour produced by yeast to find fruit. The yeast helps the fruit fly find the fruit and the fruit fly helps the yeast move around. In short, fruit flies defecate yeast, and yeasts defecate alcohol (and some nice smelling bits).

Yeast autolysis is the degradation (by its own enzymes) of the cell wall and its contents following the death of the yeast cell. Yeast death is not a function of age but of how many times the cell has reproduced. This autolysate or ‘yeast extract’ notwithstanding its foremost importance to making marmite plays an important role in flavour development in fermented wines and spirits. Autolysis is strongly influenced by acidity and ethanol both of which are abundant at the end of fermentation. Several flavour compounds are released during autolysis including fatty acids (which will make esters and aldehydes) and heavy esters (e.g iso amyl caproate), terpenes (thought to be the constituent of what famed Puerto Rican chemist Arroyo called ‘rum oil’) and higher alcohols such as iso amyl alcohol.

Yeast autolysis is a very important part of the champagne method where the where the wine is kept in contact with the yeast autolysate in the bottle. It is also known as the ‘sur-lie’ method for making white burgundy. The autolysate is also a source of nutrients for bacteria. Greg, in one of his caveats for using yeast No. 18 advised it was important that the ‘dead wash’ sit for a couple of days before distillation. Ashby noted that S. Pombe produced far more autolysate than S. Cerevisiae. This is because of the double wall thickness of the fission yeast. This extra biomass is mainly polysaccharides. It does not contribute to flavour in distilled spirits save for providing nutrients to bacteria.

So just how did Jamaicans strike the balance described by Allan. That is for part five.

(pictured – A schematic overview of the main metabolic routes inside the yeast cell contributing to the synthesis of higher alcohols and esters when inserted in the fermenting medium)

 

Part Five – Striking the Balance

The addition of dunder (and its analogs of sour mash in bourbon or backset in whisky) as practised by all rum makers in the West Indies from the 17th century was precisely to set the balance described by Allan. By adding the acidic dunder at the outset, the acidity of the wash was increased to bring it into a zone that was still tolerable for yeast but inhibitory to bacteria. Favouring yeast was paramount because making alcohol is paramount. No point having bacteria produced flavour if they have gobbled up all the sugar and there is little or no alcohol. Many distillers today still adjust acidity in their pitched yeast fermentations by the addition of sulphuric or other acids.

Jamaica (and to a limited extent Barbados) would dimensionalize the molasses/juice/water formula of Wray by the addition of soured juice skimmings and something literally called ‘flavour’. Flavour was produced by a sort of parallel bacterial ferment using cane materials in a ‘trash cistern’ or ‘muck pit’. Each high ester rum making estate developed their own formula and method for ‘flavour’.

It is this use of soured juice and ‘flavour’ that tips the pendulum of aroma development in Jamaica Rum to bacteria over yeast, not that we wish to understate the importance of their symbiotic relationship. The creation and addition of ‘flavour’ in the Jamaican high ester rum making is the cultural equivalent of a bourbon distiller selecting and pitching their own favoured yeast strain. For wine and beer, yeast is king. In Scotch whisky, they do not boil the wort as in beer but rather heat it to 64C for a short time and so some bacteria is inevitably present during fermentation. With the early dominance of pitched yeast, the bacteria, chiefly lactic acid producing bacteria makes its presence felt at the end of fermentation – no role required for S. Pombe. Yeast autolysis would provide the nutrient requirements for the lactic bacteria. Late lactic bacteria is now widely considered to have a positive contribution to the flavour of the whisky (Geddes and Rifkin 1989). So in Scotch whisky, yeast is still king but the pendulum is swung a little in the direction of bacteria.

Today nearly every beer, wine or spirit including much of the rum in Jamaica is now made by pitching selected yeast strains, the practice outlined by Hansen in the late 19th century. The yeasts used are mostly of the saccharomyces type particularly the species saccharomyces cerevisiae for which there are literally thousands of strains. Saccharomyces types have such broad application because it fits the needs of the distiller so well. It is very efficient producing rapid fermentations, dominant (killer strains release a toxin to kill wild yeasts), tolerant of high alcohol content and by species/strain selection it reliably produces the desired flavour.

The yeasts used in whisky industry are mostly S. cerevisiae although various secondary species have been used. Lager yeast is S. pastorianus, ale yeasts include S. cerevisiae and apparently some S.bayanus strains. The wine industry mostly use S. cerevisiae and/or S. bayanus. Some wine makers and craft brewers use non saccharomyces types including Kloeckera, Saccharomycodes, Schizosaccharomyces, Hansenula, Candida, Pichia and Torulopsis. The use of non saccharomyces types is more practical in brewing because they can use a sterile wort. Trying to use non Saccharomyces types in rum is impractical as wild Saccharomyces strains will quickly dominate. Peynaud & Sudrand (1986), Haraldson and Rosen (1984) and Fahrasmane et al (1986) all found that Schizisaccaromyces strains in pure culture produced very few congeners.

In the past, Schizosaccharomyces yeasts were often detected in wines suffering from organoleptic faults through the appearance of sulfidric acid (hydrogen sulphide), acetic acid, acetaldehyde, acetoin and ethyl acetate. Most of these would not necessarily be a fault in rum making. Further research with highly selected strains of S. Pombe showed much better results (for wine) but their attraction for wine making was more related to the ability of this yeast to degrade malic acid rather than any remarkable aromatic profile. It should be noted that Ashby reported the existence of a ‘fruit ether’ yeast of the budding type, that is to say it was not S. Pombe.

It has been suggested in some circles that S. Pombe needs to be “reintroduced” into rum making. It is a ridiculous statement, it never left. S. Pombe plays its usual role at Hampden estate as it has done for over 250 years and S. Pombe can be found wherever rum is made. Several early studies identified S. Pombe in molasses and juice in rum distilleries in the Caribbean. More recently Fahrasmane (1988) found S. Pombe prevalent in Haitain distilleries. Bonilla-Salinas et al (1995) found S. Pombe in Mexican distilleries and Green (2015) found significant counts of S. Pombe yeasts in molasses at Bundaberg in Australia. You can find S. Pombe in our fermentations at Foursquare where their role varies depending on the rum to be produced.

The revised interest and circulation of the papers of Greg, Allan, Ashby et al by bloggers, enthusiasts, distillers and writers is absolutely to be applauded. I cant praise these efforts enough. That this 100 year old work still serves as inspiration to younger craft distillers is a joy to observe. My caution is not to take the work in isolation and consider it hand in hand with later work and the practical operations of West Indian Rum today that has built on and added to that knowledge. That such is not readily available via google should not detract from its value. As Wray warned, do not take the West Indian distillers for a ‘pack of fools’.

We do not need to reintroduce S. Pombe to rum, what we need to do is protect the traditional way in which it is used.

We will consider that in part six.

 

Part Six – The Jamaica GI

The core of traditional Jamaica rum making is the art of using simply sugar cane derivatives, spontaneous fermentation and batch distillation. Distillers were able to improve and innovate without ever breaking these fundamental core principles. In 1893, the year Greg published his first paper, 148 Jamaica distilleries operated this way. By 1948 there were just 25. Today just one distillery owner exclusively practices these methods. Pitched yeast and continuous distillation have changed Jamaica Rum (and Barbados Rum) forever as warned by Wray and J C Nolan (special commissioner to the UK for Jamaica rum) respectively. These two horses have bolted. There is no putting them back. But we can stop here and forever protect these methods.

In 2016, the Jamaican distilleries by unanimous agreement restricted the addition of fermentation agents ( those foreign agents of Wray! ) to yeast and only to yeast of the saccharomyces types. There was no restriction on native yeasts and bacteria proceeding in their normal spontaneous and natural way. How could they? Forced Sterilisation? One-third of the shares in a single Jamaica distillery changed hands in 2017 and since then, that pernicious shareholder has sought to discredit the GI as registered – most wickedly by mischaracterising the GI restriction as “narrowing to one genus of yeast we are wiping out hundreds of years of history of rum making”. Willful ignorance or just ignorance, I let my hopefully now better informed readers be the judge.

The distillery has now demanded through their team of lawyers that the Jamaica IP office unilaterally rewrite the GI to their personal specifications despite the protests of the remaining three distillers. One of my Jamaican colleagues, very high in the industry there, called this “insidious re-colonialization, putting his own selfish needs ahead of the industry and in contravention of the spirit of the GI.” I call someone who acquires a minority interest in a Jamaica distillery in 2017 and who then demands the GI be rewritten to their unilateral specification a megalomaniac.

Among the demanded changes, all designed to render the GI nugatory, is a demand to add other fermenting agents including bacteria. So pitched yeast and now pitched bacteria. A kind of rapid, cheaper ersatz Jamaica rum to be made and sold under a cloud of trite, hyperbolic marketing clichés. Pitched yeast and pitched bacteria take us further away from the true terroir of Jamaica Rum.

I suspect part of the motivation to rewrite the GI is the delusion based on the once again trendy advocation of Greg that magical Jamaica Rum will produced by simply pitching S. Pombe. It takes a high level of Dunning-Kruger type stupidity to think you are going to “innovate” Jamaica Rum by simply changing the brand of added yeast. You need to take West Indian distillers for a ‘pack of fools’ to believe this.

I will let Maggie Campbell, artisan distiller, yeast guru and esteemed colleague have the last word:

“It is wise to remember this is the life’s work and lived experience of these GI supporting Jamaican producers, they are not unwise or foolish, rather they are guardians of their culture and community. No one needs to benevolently jump in and fight to save Jamaican rum from itself, they are protecting it just fine themselves and the GI laws are set up to do just that”.
“If you do not want to participate in the community standards and cultural practices then you do not also get to demand instant access to leverage that community’s and culture’s hard won reputation for excellence.”

 

Again, huge thanks to Richard for allowing me to collate and reproduce the information here

© Steven James, Rum Diaries Blog and Richard Seale. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material, both written and photographic without the express and written permission from this blog/sites author and owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Steven James, Richard Seale and Rum Diaries Blog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Aeneas Coffey, John Dore and Foursquare

Richard Seale recently posted a very informative and interesting series of articles surrounding Continuous and Batch Distillation on his personal page, with his agreement I have collated them into one single reference article below.

Aeneas Coffey, John Dore and Foursquare

Part One – The Continuous Still

Aeneas Coffey was not the first to invent the continuous still, nor was it the first continuous still to be used in Scotch Whisky however between 1834 and the 1876, seventeen newly installed Coffey stills would be making whisky in Scotland. It proved the foundation for the development of blended scotch whisky (developed around 1860), arguably the most successful spirit category of them all. How did it all happen? What follows is really only a brief overview of a history that is both very complex and very profound.

The late 18th century through the mid 19th century saw remarkable developments in spirit distillation. A drive to increase proof, efficiency and throughput underpinned these developments. We are focusing on the British, Irish and European developments as this directly impacted the West Indies but the American story is also very complex and worth your time.

Early stills by Adam (1801), Pistorius (1817) and Corty (1818) and several others too numerous to detail were essentially modifications of the simple batch (pot) still to add fractionation to simple distillation. In London at the Belmont Distillery in Vauxhall Jean-Jaques Saint Marc patented a batch (pot) still with a rectifying head in 1824. While used by Saint Marc for potato spirit, this concept would be a forerunner of the carter-head and the ‘Lomond’ still at Loch Lomond distillery. A notable step (see the post script) but still in the realm of discontinuous (ie batch) distillation.

The first genuine continuous still was patented by Jean-Baptiste Cellier-Blumenthal in 1813. In 1828 Robert Stein, a member of the Stein-Haig distilling family would also patent a continuous still and this would be the first licensed continuous still used in Scotland at Cameronbridge in 1830. Coffey would first patent his continuous still in 1830 and it bore remarkable similarity to the Cellier-Blumenthal still.

Aeneas Coffey had been an Irish Inspector of Excise until his retirement in 1824. During his work as an excise officer he invented the Spirit Safe an early insight to his genius. Purportedly of French birth he may have had contact with the work of Cellier-Blumenthal. It was also thought he was familiar with another early continuous still of Cork distiller Anthony Perrier patented in 1822 as well as the continuous still of Robert Stein. Coffey’s Father, Andrew Coffey was the engineer in charge of the waterworks for the Dublin Corporation and reputed to be quite ingenious. He may have also had an influence on Coffey’s engineering skills. Coffey’s first still was at Dock Distillery in Dublin and licensed in 1832. This distillery was not successful and the business was soon changed to one of still manufacture. The first Coffey still in Scotland was at Grange in 1834.

Coffey proved not to be successful in Ireland. Kerr (1946) humorously reflected:

“between good advertising and the effeminate palates of the English, which were not robust enough to appreciate really good whisky like the Irish, this type of whisky [blended] captured the English market and still holds it to an undeserved extent”.

The reasons were likely more nuanced. The early Coffey stills used iron pipes which gave the whisky an unpleasant flavour no doubt contributing to the early failure. Ireland did not license small distillers and legal Irish whisky was dominated by large stills. We suspect this would have played a role in making Coffey’s continuous still less attractive by comparison. Big pot stills would have good throughput if not the fuel efficiency of the continuous still. Ironically, it was Coffey in his role as Excise Office who suppressed the small illicit distillers. In 1810, he was left for dead having been attacked with a bayonet during the ‘poitin wars’. A reward for the capture of his attackers was unsuccessful, excise officers then as now were less than popular.

In 1835, the firm Aeneas Coffey and Sons was established in Bromley in the UK. His failure in Ireland contrasted by early success in Scotland (Inverkeithing and Bonnington had soon followed Grange) and potential sales of his still to rectifiers and gin distillers probably prompted the move. In 1840, Aeneas Coffey Jr established the first patent distillery in London at Lewisham which ended in rather unfortunate circumstances. The Secretary arranged for a large release of spirits from bond and presented the cheque for excise duty at a Directors meeting which did not contain the payee’s name. The secretary filled in his own name, cashed the cheque and was never seen again. The distillery went bankrupt and the Coffeys once again continued on as still makers.

The success of the Coffey still was really due to the evolution of the original design which had been little more than an improved Cellier-Blumenthal still. By 1840, the Coffey still would have copper piping, copper plates (trays) perforated with bubble caps and the still was split into two columns – analyzer (or stripping) column and the rectifying column. This separation of stripping and rectifying would be the foundation of nearly every spirit still in operation today. The use of perforated copper plates (trays) would be a marked improvement on the Stein continuous still which did not have contacting plates and the wash needed to be misted to ensure good liquid / vapour mixing. Even the Haig family would install a Coffey still.

The Cellier-Blumenthal still would also be improved by French Engineer and Dutch Sugar Trader Armand Savalle and by French Pharmacist Louis-Charles Derosne. Savalle and Cellier-Blumenthal were collaborators. Cellier-Blumenthal would sell his patent to Derosne who improved it and filed his own patent while Savalle continued to work independently. Savalle stills can be found today in Demerara and the French Islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe.

While some un-malted grains had been used by highland single malt distillers the advent of the continuous still precipitated the split where highland batch stills were solely single malt with the cheaper un-malted grains going to the lowland continuous Coffey stills. This more economic and more available ‘grain whisky’ in the hands of entrepreneurs like John Dewar, James Chivas and William Teacher was the foundation of the enormous success that Scotch Whisky is today. Some luck played a role as well. In 1863, there was the phylloxera in France which had affected most of Europe by 1879. Blended Scotch filled the void for the well to do English created by shortages of claret and brandy.

The influence of raw materiel on the acceptance and adoption of the continuous still should not be underestimated. We see the same in rum. Demerara was the first to develop vacuum pan sugar – the famed Demerara sugar – but the corollary of that is vacuum pan molasses lower in value to muscovado molasses and Demerara was the first of the anglophone producers to adopt the continuous still. In Martinique, early restructuring of the sugar industry into central factories (and thereby pan sugar) in the mid 19th century is the pre-cursor to the city based (Saint Pierre) production of Rhum Industrial with pan molasses.
In Barbados the rum industry collapses after 1870, due to taxation and economic malaise. By the 1890s, the only estates still making rum are using lower value pan molasses as the famous ‘Barbados Molasses’ (made either as the prime product of the estate or secondary to muscovado sugar) is too valuable to be converted into Barbados rum (which is only sold locally at this time). Barbados would see its first continuous still using pan molasses in 1893 to fill the void as muscovado estates went out of rum production. By the 1920s centralisation of sugar factories (producing pan molasses) would be well underway and two more continuous stills would follow – one at Mount Gay and another in Bridgetown.

For Jamaica by contrast, rum was the primary product for many estates as it was more valuable than Jamaica Sugar. Rum in Jamaica was made from cane juice (Appleton) or ‘first boil’ molasses. Jamaica would not adopt the continuous still until the 1960s.

Notwithstanding the success of still sales to Scotland, the business of still making slowed by the late 1860s and in 1872, Philip Coffey, son of Aeneas would transfer the business to his long time foreman John Dore. Aeneas’s grandson, Aeneas H Coffey would act as consultant to John Dore for many years. By 1887, business would revive and Barnard’s – ‘The Whisky Distilleries of the United Kingdom’ – published that year reported Coffey Stills in all major Scotch Whisky distilleries.

John Dore & Co Ltd would continue as successors to Aeneas Coffey, still operating from Bromley and supply Coffey Stills to the West Indies including to Jamaica, Barbados, Guyana, St Vincent, St Lucia and Grenada. Coffey stills and their derivative designs would be also be sold by Scottish still makers such as Blairs and McMillans including to rum distillers in the West Indies. Following the general demise of British manufacturing, Blairs would cease operation in 1977 and John Dore would cease operating in the early 1990s although the trade mark was sold and has been used subsequently on stills built by other copper works. McMillans continues operations till this day although now it exclusively builds pot stills.

Post Script:
The addition of rectification in 1824 to a batch (pot) still before the development of the continuous (column) is notable. In fact as early as 1813, Florentine Baglioni added a column section to a batch still for grappa. Unfortunately, it did not work well with the ‘vinnacia’.

Today terms such as ‘hybrid still’ are a source of confusion. There is no such thing as a hybrid still. The dichotomy is not pot still v column still but batch still v continuous still. All still designs fall into one of the latter two categories. The addition of fractionation or enhanced rectification to a batch still is still a batch still. The simple batch still relies solely on the lyne arm for rectification. Enhancing this effect does not change the fundamental nature of the still.

A batch still will produce a changing output over time (colloquially the heads, then hearts, then tails) from a single charge (batch) that itself changes as it is distilled. A continuous still produces an unchanged output that varies by position (not by time) on an unchanging charge that is fed continuously. Heads, hearts, tails are drawn off simultaneously from different positions. This is the fundamental distinction between the two processes which also explains why the two can never make the identical spirit.

Early column shaped stills (e.g. the columnar Pistorius still) should not be confused with a column or continuous still, it was a batch still and the Savalle or Cellier Blumental stills are not fitted with “a pot still” just because they had a pot shaped base/kettle – there were in fact continuous (or column) stills.

Part Two – The Batch Still

The myriad of still patents developed between the late 18th and mid 19th century is extraordinary and the few mentioned in part one does not do it remotely justice. This work, applied to simple batch distillation led to the development of the continuous still and the distillation world never looked back.

Curiously, the extensive developments on batch distillation had little impact on the batch (pot) stills of Scotland, Ireland and Cognac and they continue to employ simple batch distillation, either double or triple to make whisky and cognac today. To see advanced batch distillation in the 19th and 20th century, one must travel to the West Indies and observe rum distillation.

It is often claimed that the double retort still used in West Indies is an “Adam’s still”. No explanation is ever offered as to why the English colonies would have purchased a French still (of which only three were made) at the height of the Napoleonic wars (let alone been able to import it). As mentioned in part one, Edouard Adam (1801) made an improvement to the simple still. He did so by adding fractionation to the batch still via a series of egg shaped vessels. Adam’s work was based on the work of Professor Laurent Solimani and the two would go on to jointly patent further improvements. There is no denying the similarly in principle to a pot still with multiple retorts but how the West Indies came to use the double retort is rather more nuanced and much more likely from a parallel bit of work of Joseph Corty.

In 1818, Joseph Corty developed a double “compound” still with the second still containing external cooling (similar to that of Pistorius). DT Shears & Sons of Bristol would acquire this design and these double stills proved to be of “such repute” that Shears would supply “numbers of them for the colonies, but particularly Demerara” – Wray (1848). Double stills of varying designs could also found in the West Indies, some notable examples include one at the Londonderry Estate in Dominica (built at the copper works in Barbados) and of course the one at Port Mourant still in operation today. These double stills are the forerunner of the pot/double retort in common use today in Barbados, Jamaica, Guyana, St Lucia, Grenada among others. Early retort stills carried external cooling heads, no doubt the influence of the original Corty Still.

Leonard Wray (family to the perhaps better known J Wray) in his seminal work – The Practical Sugar Planter (1848) – wrote:

“But of all the arrangements, I have never known any to surpass the common still and double retorts”

This was no idle boast, Wray had extensive experience including of the Stills of Cellier-Blumenthal, Laugier (another type of double still) and Coffey.

At this time double stills, single retort stills and double retort stills were all in use and each of these types were supplied by Shears of Bristol. Improvements would continue – attached is a single retort of Blairs, produced around the turn of the century with the open cooling head replaced by a modern condenser. Rectification heads would be added to retort stills in Barbados and Guyana but notably not Jamaica. You can find a rectification head on the Port Mourant double still in Guyana.

While there is little evolution in the simple batch (pot) stills of Scotland, Ireland or Cognac on the scale of that in the West Indies, there are some common improvements that have been adopted.
In 1802, Charles Wyatt patented the application of steam “tubes” to distillation instead of direct fired stills which avoids the burning the wash on the bottom of the still. Today almost all stills in Scotland are steam heated but even here the West Indians were the more progressive. The steam used in the Coffey stills was thought to destroy the esters and it would not be until 1887 before Glenfiddich installed a still with steam coils. Famed Jamaican chemist HH Cousins carried out research in Jamaica on the use of steam and found it superior. This resulted in a quicker widespread adoption in Jamaica of the steam coil over Scotland. The Americans would also be quicker to adopt steam distillation over direct fire. Famously today cognac must be distilled by direct fire.

“I am convinced from the results obtained at Shrewsbury estate in Westmoreland, that all home trade rums could with advantage be distilled in stills heated by a steam coil. Burnt rum should then be unknown. The fetish of the ‘direct fire’ that still lingers in the minds of Scotch whiskey distillers has no basis at all where Jamaica rum is concerned, since any excessive firing results in a most serious injury to the spirit produced”

H H Cousins, West Indian Bulletin, 1907

The earliest stills cooled the vapour by passing it through a simple worm (or coil). Originally this was solely atmospheric cooling but in 1771, German Chemist Wiegel invented the worm tub where the worm is placed in a tub into which cold water is continuously pumped. In 1825, William Grimble invented the shell and tube condenser which replaced the worm tub for cooling the distilled vapour. Barnard’s encyclopedic work on Scottish distilleries in 1887 shows they were widely in use by then. Today just a small minority of Scottish distillers use a worm tub and most rum producers in Anglophone Caribbean use shell and tube condensers. The shell and tube condenser proved superior because it cools the vapour markedly more slowly and this in turn has a significant impact on the copper’s catalytic effect in removing undesirable sulphur compounds from the spirit. As vigorous molasses fermentations tend to produce more sulphury components over other washes, the popularity and rapid adoption of the shell and tube condenser in rum is of little surprise.

Visiting the region you can see the culmination of this history with double retort stills (some with rectification heads) dominating the rum producers of the Anglophone Caribbean.

Part Three – Foursquare

The myriad of still designs from past is overwhelming. Nostalgia makes us believe there is something better that has been lost to time whereas the reality is that much of what was discarded was inferior to how we distill today. Innovations that did not deliver did not last. Evolutions that worked became the norm. Different spirit cultures evolved though the different routes that worked for them and the progressive rum distillation techniques may not have delivered for Scotch what they delivered for Rum.

By examining this brief overview of the evolution of distillation, everyone can better grasp what we do at Foursquare and why.

Our twin column continuous still is based on that design principle of separation of the analyser and the rectifier first developed by Coffey in the 1830s. Likewise it produces a spirit that complements rather than competes with the spirit produced by our batch still. However, unlike the classic Coffey still the still operates under vacuum pressure. Instead of our wash boiling at a little over 100°C, our wash boils at just about 80°C with the consequent marked improvement in spirit quality. The high suspended solid content of a molasses wash make this technological advance all the more rewarding.

Our two batch stills are the classic pot/double retort design as used throughout the West Indies from Grenada to Jamaica. A design developed in the first half of the 19th century, “unsurpassed” in the words of Wray. Our retorts feature cooling heads, a feature first developed by Pistorius (1817) and Corty(1818) and popular in the West Indies in the stills built by Shears. It was Simon Dore, great grandson of John Dore who suggested to us that we revive the use of cooling heads on retorts.

Apprenticed to John Dore were the Carter brothers who developed the Carter-Head, an evolution of the rectification heads found on Shear’s double still and Saint Marc Still of 1824. Loch Lomond operates similar rectification heads today. At Foursquare, we have our own evolution of the Carter-Head on both of our stills. We have incorporated in these heads the use of ‘nano copper’ surfaces. This was developed by the CREA Research Centre (University of Siena) in collaboration with Green Engineering. The practical effect of these copper surfaces is to improve the catalytic effect of the copper. In this way, the thermodynamic process is unchanged but the chemical effect is improved. That is to say, one nano copper tray has the catalytic effect of six trays but the rectification power of a single tray.

Our older batch still has steam coils but our new batch still features a twin system of steam coil and bain-marie. A bain-marie is a steam or water jacketed still developed in the 16th century but mainly used by alchemists. Today, several craft distillers use small stills heated via a bain-marie. The twin system provides the most consistent and even way of heating a batch still. A smoky flavour is a natural component of a peated whisky but a smoky flavour in rum is just bad distillation.

We also use the shell and tube condenser on our batch stills for its superiority over the older worm tube vapour cooling system. Sulphury, metallic, “petrolly” rums are not our style.
As a homage to all that that has been learned and incorporated from the past, the man door on our new batch (pot) still is from an actual cast as used by John Dore & Co Ltd.

There is another innovation on our latest batch still, probably the most ambitious of all. But we will wait till its proved in the field before revealing.

Big thanks to Richard for agreeing to allow me to collate this information….Stay tuned for the Six Part collected article “Yeast In Rum (or S. Pombe Revisited)”

© Steven James, Rum Diaries Blog and Richard Seale. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material, both written and photographic without the express and written permission from this blog/sites author and owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Steven James, Richard Seale and Rum Diaries Blog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Rummieclub Overproof Rum


A newcomer to the crowded marketplace has been the recently opened Rummieclub, which is Amsterdam’s newly opened rum distillery. The Rummieclub distillery is the brainchild of two people, Judith de Bie and Martijn Gerrits.

I first met Judith at the UK Rumfest in 2019 and I have been waiting eagerly for their first bottling…..but it wasn’t that easy to get to that point.

Their decision to start a rum distillery around four years ago led to one major event……it meant that they had to sell their home and move to the Bijlmer. Judith gave up her job at the City of Amsterdam and started working part-time to research all things Rum to make the dream a reality. After a few locations didn’t work out, they found a building in the east side of Amsterdam in Diemen. They decided to start a crowdfunding campaign, selling their first rum bottles to close the small financial gap that enabled them to buy their equipment. As the rental agreement had already been signed, they were obviously elated that the crowdfunding was successful. Then the wait started, the build process had a lot of delays and took far longer than anticipated. Almost a year later , and with their living room full of equipment and barrels they finally got the keys in December 2019.

Since then they have been distilling non-stop, filling barrels, honing their skills, experimenting with differing yeast strains, including some that have been homegrown.

Their website has a wealth of information and can be found here.

It includes crazy levels of detail for the processes behind their products….some of which I will utilise below.

As small and honest rum producers, Rummieclub want to be open about their production process. The rum category is one where the rules and processes differ by region and brand. Because of this, rum can be very diverse. This diversity has a downside, as a customer you don’t always know what you are buying. Rummieclub would like to be known as one of the producers that gives all the pieces of the puzzle about their rum production so that you are fully aware of what you are buying. All of this brings us onto one of their inaugural releases…..Rummieclub Overproof.

Rummieclub Overproof – 58% abv – 0g/l additives


Just look at that label! It has no bearing on the bottle contents but I am very impressed by its vibrancy.

Rummieclub Overproof undergoes an non temperature controlled 10 day fermentation in an open topped vessel. The organic molasses sourced from Paraguay was slowly added to the ferment over several days. Commercial yeast (Saccharomyces Cervisiae) was used for this initial batch. The resultant +/-8% abv wash is then distilled to 85% abv in their 500 litre Istill. An Istill affords Rummieclub a lot of control to make all of the choices that they want to make, and it can produce an array of differing distillates. It has a stainless steel boiler with a direct heater in the boiler. Rummieclub use copper waffles to extract some undesired compounds. On top of the boiler there is a packed column with a robot that opens and closes thecolumn as thay desire. It has numerous temperature probes and different valves for the heads, hearts and tails cuts, which they make based on temperature and taste. They chose this apparatus because it’s energy efficient and gives them the control and options that they were looking for.

Following distillation, the Rum is reduced using water that has been through a reverse osmosis filter to 58%. From here it has a resting period of around two months. 130 bottles of the Overproof were produced for Batch #1 and I am bottle #69 (Dudes!). Each release will see a different local street artist design the label utilising the Rummieclub colours. The label for this release was designed by Munir de Vries and it represents his vision of animals getting drunk on overripe fruits.

Just ahead of my notes, I wanted to give a little information on the level of experimentation going on at Rummieclub…..As mentioned earlier, they are experimenting with homegrown yeast and the next batch of Overproof will utilise their own yeast taken from raspberries. I asked if this would bring differing fruity notes or whether it was all about how the yeast does its job. Apparently the raspberry yeast gives an almost rotten fruit or papaya flavour. The homegrown yeast works differently to commercial dry yeast and gives different results, they are also a lot less consistent with occasionally way lower yields. Experimentation is also taking place with yeast from blueberries and mint from the garden, but the raspberry yeast is giving the best results so far. There is also a desire to experiment with dunder in the next Overproof.

With all of that said, what is it like?


Tasting Notes

Nose: Initially a light fruity vapour driven nose which warps into warm, buttered malt loaf and malted milk biscuits. Its also leaning on the creamy, almost yoghurt-y side. As it develops it becomes fruity with the sharpness of cranberries and there merest hint of caramelised pineapple. Spice, pepper and ginger grows as does the aroma of warm, almost melting plastic.

Mouth: The palate is spice led during the early exchanges with lots of black pepper and ginger juice which seem to morph into raisins, which brings some sweetness. It has one hell of a mouthfeel, very oily and chewy due to the lack of chill filtration. Molasses shows up and brings a beautiful sweet and bitter interplay that just sings. Burning car tires and warming molasses round things out with a hint of salty liquorice at the back end and maybe the merest hint of Horlicks and Maltesers.

In conclusion: Amazing to think that this is their first release such is the quality of the Rum. Its not just towing the line of the glut of unaged output from new distilleries of late. They’re not messing around. It has a unique profile that shows how they want to pursue their own direction….and their level of experimentation has me really excited to see what they can do moving forwards. I for one cannot wait to see what comes next from their unaged output, let alone their aged stuff. Makes a tasty daiquiri too. Outstanding effort!

4 / 5

© Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog 2020. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material, both written and photographic without the express and written permission from this blog/sites author and owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The UK Rum Club x SBS Release

As a few readers may be aware, I am one of the Founders and Admins of The UK Rum Club which is a Facebook Group with around 2600 members. We focus on pure rums over spiced, flavoured or doctored products

Along with our first release due out in the next month or so which is a Chairman’s Reserve bottling in conjunction with Royal Mile Whiskies, we have recently announced a collaboration with S.B.S Single Barrel Selection

An important announcement was made on the Facebook Group and a small extract is contained below:

We are extremely happy announce that in collaboration with S.B.S and Skylark Spirits, The UK Rum Club will have a pre-Christmas charity release!

With that in mind, to allow members of The UK Rum Club to experience the wilder and geekier side of Jamaican Rum and to expand their horizons, the collaboration with S.B.S has come to fruition

We are releasing the SBS x The UK Rum Club High Ester Jamaican Rum collection of 4 200ml bottles and whats more, your purchase will benefit charity

The pack will contain 4 individual 200ml bottles, each containing high ester Rum from a different Jamaican distillery.

They will be unaged and will all be bottled at 57% abv.

You will have the chance to experience:

Worthy Park – WPE – ester level of 600-800 g/hlaa

Hampden – DOK – ester level of 1500-1600 g/hlaa

Long Pond – STC^E – ester level of 550-700 g/hlaa

New Yarmouth – NYE-WK – ester level of 1500-1600 g/hlaa

Each pack of 4 bottles will be in its own presentation box and will be a limited run of 125 units priced at £99.99 plus postage

What is perhaps most important though is that 10% of each box, thats £10 of your purchase, will be split between two charities that are in need of funding, and that have a direct connection to Steven (Rum Diaries Blog) and Wes (The Fat Rum Pirate)

The charity that we here at Rum Diaries Blog has chosen is MyAware – Fighting Myasthenia Together

The charity that Wes over at The Fat Rum Pirate has chosen is CHUF – Childrens Heart Unit Foundation

Click the link to join the UK Rum Club, to read why we have chosen these charities and if you would like to, sign up to purchase a pack and help charity in the process The UK Rum Club Facebook group link

Your support really would be appreciated

© Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog 2020. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material, both written and photographic without the express and written permission from this blog/sites author and owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

European Rum and Cocktail Online Festival 2020

*Press Release*

EUROPEAN RUM & COCKTAIL ONLINE FESTIVAL 2020

www.rumcask.com/onlinerumfestival

On Saturday 8th of August, RumCask brings you the European rum and cocktail online festival, a virtual voyage into the delicious world of rum, taking festival goers on a journey to meet some of the leading rum producers from around the globe.

As part of the festival guests will learn how to create 4 rum cocktails live from international cocktail bars, sample over 25 unique tots of rum and listen to distillers and brand owners share stories and insights into how they make their incredible products.

This is a one-off experience to enjoy from the comfort of home, whilst long-haul travel is currently restricted, tasting the true spirit of Trinidad, Barbados, Bermuda, Martinique and Guadeloupe. Distilleries to be showcased include Foursquare, Trinidad Distillers Ltd and Damoiseau.

The live cocktail sessions will start at Duke of Tokyo (Amsterdam) and Dirty Dick (Paris) then end at Montanya (Colorado, USA) and El Del Frente (Havana, Cuba).

The festival is the brainchild of rum aficionados, Indy Anand, Jaz Anand and Chet Ladwa of RumCask with over 15 years’ experience in the rum industry between them, this is a celebration of all the elements of rum culture that they love.

Each ticket entitles people to a bespoke festival pack containing rum tasters, a festival booklet and cocktail recipes to shake up live, guided by the bartenders.

Tickets are £60 each, on sale HERE and must be purchased by Wednesday 29th July in order to send out the festival packs in time. The festival is only available to people living in Europe due to time-zone restrictions and postage.

If you use the discount code UKRUMCLUB you can save £5 on the price of your ticket too!

The European Rum & Cocktail Online Festival

  • Saturday 8th of August 2020
  • 12:00 – 20:00 (BST) hosted on the Zoom video platform
  • The festival starts with greeting everyone for a welcome cocktail session live from the Duke of Tokyo cocktail bar in Amsterdam
  • Guests can then select a series of ‘rooms’ to join to learn about the different rums
  • There is an hour’s break for lunch at 1pm
  • Three rooms will run each hour for people to access at their leisure
  • There will be 30 minute breaks after each hour session to relax and refresh
  • All video sessions will be recorded for people to re-watch (or if they missed it) after the event

The Festival pack includes:

  • 25 samples of unique rums (20mls of each)
  • All of the non-perishable ingredients to make the four cocktails
  • A booklet with information on all of the rums to be sampled, instructions on how to make the cocktails and full info about the event
  • The booklet will be the official festival guide and a great reference point for people to use throughout the day (and beyond) for key information on the brands, talks, cocktails and bars.

Cocktail bars to be visited:

Duke of Tokyo – Amsterdam, Netherlands. Making the Tun-Up Punch with William George Rum

Inspired by the buzzing back streets of Tokyo’s coolest neighbourhoods, Duke of Tokyo is a Karaoke bar and cocktail bar featuring Japanese flavours, cocktails, Sake and spirits.

Montanya – Colorado, USA. Making the The American Junglebird with Damoiseau Arrangés Mango & Passion Fruit

Montanya Distillers has been elevating rum for over a decade, distilling and serving artisan cocktails at nearly 9,000 feet above sea level in the heart of the Colorado Rockies.

Dirty Dick – Paris, France. Making the Mango & Passion Fruit Bellini with Montanya Oro rum

Not far from the Moulin Rouge cabaret club lies an unexpected bar – a temple to all things tiki, created by Californian Scott Schuder. Serving an ever-changing selection of tiki cocktails both old and new.

El Del Frente – Havana, Cuba. Making the Cuban Spiced Mojito with Black Tears Cuban Spiced rum

El Del Frente is in the heart of Havana’s young and vibrant café bar culture, and the cocktail list is impressive and wonderfully eccentric. The vibe is relaxed it’s a perfect place to sit and loose a few hours of your life, leaving with a smile on your face.

*End*

Having attended their European Rum Festival it looks set to be a cracking day of events, and having had a brief insight into the Rums and further plans for the day, it’ll be one that you’d be foolish to miss!

© Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog 2020. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material, both written and photographic without the express and written permission from this blog/sites author and owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Steven James and Rum Diaries Blog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.