Exercises
Wine in American
Life
by
Matt Miller
The
availability of cheap, plentiful whiskey was one key to the
extensive use of spirituous liquor by so many Americans in
the early nineteenth century; another key was the American
diet. There were a number of ways in which the habits of eating
and drinking at that time encouraged Americans to drink whiskey.
But that preference was also related to larger social questions.
Dietary habits, as Claude Levi-Strauss has pointed out, are
good indicators of a culture's popular attitudes and social
structure. Thus, an examination of the role of whiskey in
the American diet in the early nineteenth century will both
inform us about the use of whiskey in everyday life and broaden
our understanding of the inner workings of American society
in those years.
To understand the great popularity of whiskey
we have to consider, among other things, the shortcomings
of other available beverages. To begin with, neither Americans
nor Europeans of the period tended to indulge in refreshing
glasses of water. This was not so much the consequence of
an aversion to that healthful beverage as that the available
water was seldom clear, sparkling, or appetizing. The citizens
of St. Louis, for example, had to let water from the Mississippi
River stand before they could drink it, and the sediment often
filled one-quarter of the container. Further downstream, at
Natchez, the river water was too muddy to be drunk even after
it had settled. Instead, people drank rainwater, which they
collected in roof cisterns. During frequent droughts, however,
the cisterns were empty. Rural areas often lacked good water
because deep wells were expensive and difficult to build,
while the water from shallow wells was usually cloudy. The
purest water came from clear, free-flowing springs, but these
were not always conveniently located. Although Kentucky and
Tennessee had abundant low-lying springs, pioneers who feared
swamp fevers or Indian attacks preferred to build their cabins
on high ground. As a result, water had to be carried uphill
in a bucket, as at Lincoln's birthplace at Hodgenville, Kentucky.
Toting water lessened the frontiersman's enthusiasm for drinking
it. So did the cold of winter, for then, recalled one pioneer,
water had to be thawed.
Water supplies were no better in the nation's
largest and wealthiest cities. Washingtonians, for example,
long had to depend upon water from private wells because of
a deep-seated opposition to higher taxes to pay the cost of
digging public wells. During the 1820s the capital city's
only piped water was from a privately owned spring that supplied
two blocks along Pennsylvania Avenue. Cincinnati was no better
off. There, according to a concerned Dr. Daniel Drake, most
people drank "often impure" water drawn in barrels from the
frequently low and muddy Ohio. To escape beclouded river water,
wealthy citizens dug their own wells, which provided an ill-tasting
drink "slightly impregnated with iron, and salts." New
York City was worse, for Manhattan's shallow, brackish wells
made it certain that the drinker of water would not only quench
his thirst but also be given "physic." It was this
latter effect, perhaps, that caused New Yorkers to avoid drinking
water and earned them a reputation for preferring other sorts
of beverages. One resident who was asked whether the city's
water was potable replied, "Really, I cannot pretend to say,
as I never tasted water there that was not mixed with some
kind of liquor." Conditions were so bad that New Yorkers adopted
a plan to dam the Croton River and transport its water forty
miles to the city. As soon as the aqueduct opened in 1842,
residents began to switch from spirits to water. Two
years later, on the 4th of July, teetotaling Mayor James Harper
shrewdly countered traditional holiday dram-drinking by setting
up in the city hall park a large basin of iced Croton water.
It was only after the improvement of public water supplies
that temperance zealots embraced the idea of ‘Cold Water'
as a substitute for alcohol.
During the first third of the century water
was often condemned on the ground that it lacked food value
and did not aid digestion. Indeed, many people believed water
unfit for human consumption. As one American said, "It's very
good for navigation." Others thought water to be lowly and
common; it was the drink of pigs, cows, and horses. Or, as
Benjamin Franklin put it, if God had intended man to drink
water, he would not have made him with an elbow capable of
raising a wine glass. There were also those who thought that
water could be lethal, especially if drunk in hot weather.
English
immigrant Joseph Pickering, for example, so feared the effect
of drinking water on scorching days that he resolved the drink
only a concoction of water and rye whiskey, a beverage he
believed to be less dangerous. Nor was Pickering
alone in refusing to drink this insidious liquid. From Virginia,
Elijah Fletcher assured his father in Vermont, "I shall not
injure my health in drinking water. I have not drank a tumbler
full since here. We always have a boll
of toddy made for dinner... " In the same spirit, John Randolph
warned his son, "I see by the papers, eight deaths in one
week from cold water, in Philadelphia alone." Randolph himself
was unlikely to fall victim to water drinking, for he used
none in mixing his favorite mint juleps.
While water was eschewed, many Americans drank
milk—when they could get it. Sometimes milk was excellent,
cheap, and plentiful; at other times, especially on the frontier,
it was not available or its price was as high as 12C a quart,
more than whiskey. Costs were erratic and supplies spotty
because each locality depended upon its own production. Bulk
and lack of refrigeration made both transportation and storage
difficult. During the winter poor fodder insured that the
supply of milk was small, and in all seasons the needs of
children often forced adults to forego this drink. Even when
milk was plentiful, many did not drink it for fear of the
fatal "milk sickness". This illness, which killed Abraham
Lincoln's mother, was caused by a poison transmitted through
milk from cows that had grazed on the wild jimson weed. Those
who believed that it was better not to risk getting the milk
sickness turned to safer beverages, such as whiskey.
Americans also rejected tea, which was relatively
expensive. During the 1820s, a cup of tea cost more than a
mixed drink made with whiskey. As much as half the price of
tea represented import duties, which had been set high because
tea was imported from the British colony of India, carried
in British ships, and drunk by the rich. Although tea's unpopularity
was usually attributed to its high price, its popularity remained
low even after temperance advocates succeeded in getting the
impost halved. In 1832 annual consumption continued to average
less than a pound—250 cups—per person. Even when its price
was low, most Americans considered tea to be an alien
"foreign luxury". To drink it was unpatriotic. While popular in anglophilic
New England, imported teas were so disliked in the rest of
the country that New Yorkers substituted glasses of wine at
society "tea parties", and westerners, who disdained imports,
brewed their own sassafras, spicewood, mint, and wild root
teas. Frontiersmen believed teas to be insipid "slops" fit
only for the sick and those who, like British Lords, were
incapable of bodily labor. So rare was tea on the frontier
that its proper method of preparation was not always known.
Thus, when one English traveler presented an innkeeper's wife
with a pound of tea and asked her to brew a cup, she obliged
by boiling the entire amount and serving the leaves in their
liquid as a kind of soup.
Although tea was expensive, it cost less per
cup than coffee, and before 1825 tea outsold coffee. At 25C
a pound, the annual per capita consumption of coffee was less
than two pounds or 100 cups. Imported coffee was then such
a luxury that many Americans drank unappetizing homemade substitutes
concocted from rye grain, peas, brown bread, or burned toast.
Although coffee was imported, it did not share the scorn heaped
upon tea. Perhaps coffee was more acceptable because it was
imported from Latin America. Nor had there ever been a Boston
Coffee Party. During the late 1820s, therefore, when the price
of coffee fell to 15C a pound, imports rose, and consumption
increased correspondingly. This development delighted those
temperance reformers who wanted coffee to replace distilled
spirits, and in 1830 they succeeded in persuading Congress
to remove the duty on coffee. The price soon dropped to 10C
a pound, a rate that brought the price of a cup of coffee
down to the price of a glass of whiskey punch and pushed coffee
sales ahead of tea to five pounds per person. By 1833 coffee
had ceased to be a luxury and, according to the Baltimore
American, entered "largely into the daily consumption
of almost every family, rich and poor," prominent "among the
necessaries of life." But in the first third of the century
it had been too expensive to compete with whiskey.
Having found coffee, tea, milk, and water
unacceptable for one reason or another, some Americans turned
to fermented drinks, such as wine. Although its high price
of $1 a gallon, often four times that of whiskey, limited
annual per capita consumption of wine to less than a fifth
of a gallon, its preference by the wealthy and their attempts
to promote its use gave it a social importance out of proportion
to its small sales. Many upper class opponents of distilled
spirits favored wine because they believed it to be free of
alcohol, the chemical that a number of physicians and scientists
regarded as a poison. While the presence of alcohol in distilled
beverages had long been recognized, early nineteenth-century
wine drinkers noted with satisfaction that no experimenter
had found that compound in a fermented beverage. It
was an unpleasant surprise when chemist William Brande succeeded
in measuring the amount of alcohol in fermented drinks and
not only proved that wine contained a higher percentage of
alcohol than hard cider or beer, but also showed that the
favorite American wine, Madeira, was more than 20 percent
alcohol. After 1820, as temperance organizations
disseminated Brande's findings, the number of wine advocates
declined, although a few, such as Dr. S. H. Dickson of South
Carolina, insisted that the alcohol in wine was rendered harmless
by its incorporation into the wine.
Early wine connoisseurs included such men
as Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, and John Marshall. At
the executive mansion during Jefferson's presidency, diners
enjoyed round after round of fine, light French wines, and
at Monticello the Sage himself customarily drank three glasses
of wine each day, a task facilitated by a dumbwaiter that
carried wine bottles from the cellar to Jefferson's dining
room. Another wine fancier was Jefferson's political rival
Aaron Burr, who maintained New York's most impressive cellar.
It was at a Burr dinner that Andrew Jackson was introduced
to the subtleties and pleasures of the grape. He subsequently
stocked the Hermitage in Tennessee with a selection that led
to its reputation as the wine center of the West. Vinous drink,
however, had no greater devotee than Chief Justice John Marshall.
At the boarding house in Washington where the Supreme Court
justices lived, the boarders permitted wine only in wet weather,
for the sake of their health. Upon occasion, the chief justice
would command Justice Story to check the window to see if
it were raining. When informed that the sun shone brightly,
Marshall would observe, "All
the better; for our jurisdiction extends over so large a territory
that the doctrine of chances makes it certain that it must
be raining somewhere." The chief justice, observed
Story, had been "brought up upon Federalism and Madeira, and
he [was] not the man to outgrow his early prejudices."
During the first quarter of the century, among
society's upper classes, wine was central to the male dinner
party. Wine provided both a chief topic of discussion and
an excuse for late hours, which were spent sampling new and
exotic varieties. A well-to-do Maine landowner, Robert Gardiner,
has left a picture of one such party held in New York in 1803.
"After the cloth was removed and the bottle had passed once
around," he wrote, "Mr. Hammond asked what was the duty of
the guests when the host opened for them a bottle of very
choice wine." A voice replied, "To see the bottom of it."
The servants then presented the party with a gallon bottle. "This,
gentlemen," said the host, "is very fine old wine,
the best I have, and as I open it for you, I expect you will
finish it." Gardiner was forced, as a matter of propriety,
to drink until he left the party with his head reeling. While
the custom of holding these lengthy gentlemen's dinners gradually
faded, it did not disappear before mid-century. As late as
1836 New York socialite Philip Hone, who often hosted such
dinners, noted with satisfaction that his well-stocked cellar
contained 672 gallons of Madeira and sherry.
Although wealthy wine drinkers continued to
indulge their palates, the Revolution's patriotic and democratic
ideals had put these Americans on the defensive. Nearly all
the wine Americans drank was imported, largely from Madeira,
and to continue to purchase dutied, foreign beverages both
worsened the American balance of payments and cast doubts
upon the patriotism of the purchasers. Then, too, continuing
to drink a refreshment priced beyond the means of the average
citizen was considered elitist and undemocratic. On the other
hand, few devotees of wine were willing to forego their beverage.
To resolve these conflicts, wine drinkers promoted the planting
of American vineyards in the hope that the United States could
produce a cheap, native wine. Men such as Thomas Jefferson,
John Calhoun, and Henry Clay experimented with grapes on their
own land, encouraged others to do so, and invited European
vintners to immigrate to America to establish vineyards. During
the 1820s vintner's guides proliferated, and numerous periodicals
printed recipes for making wine. Journalist Hezekiah Niles,
one of the leaders of this movement, prophesied that in time
the United States would produce all its own wine.
(2 391 words)
Text
|