Also: The 1875 burning whiskey flood in Dublin. Supposedly, no one died of the flood or fire itself. However, multiple people died from drinking the whiskey, which was also full of horse manure at that point because the latter was used to contain the flood.
Visualisation of the molasses flood at [1] and description of the physics at [2]. TL;DR: the cold January temperatures increased the viscosity of the molasses and it behaved like quicksand for the people who were trapped in it.
Such a weird piece of history, and exactly what I thought of too after reading this headline.
I wanted to check out the site when I visited Boston a couple years ago. For anyone who is considering the same, a small memorial plaque is the only thing there to see, and it is at about knee height in a low wall. I walked right past it several times while searching, before finally spotting it.
After all the beer was mopped up, the company that owned the brewery did just fine. It "received a waiver from the British Parliament for excise taxes it had already paid on the thousands of barrels of beer it lost," writes History.com–meaning it didn't have to pay taxes on the equivalent amount of beer when it brewed in future. Jurors declared the beer flood an "unavoidable act of God," writes Tingle. Those whose houses were destroyed and whose loved ones were lost received nothing from the government or the company.
> Jurors declared the beer flood an "unavoidable act of God," writes Tingle.
I'd really like to see the transcript of that trial. I'd like to know how the owners of the brewery and their lawyer spun things so as to escape all culpability.
An accident is an accident, of course - I doubt they meant this to happen. But there must have been some laxity in inspection of the vats, or some kind of problem in the construction and/or materials (which wouldn't fall on the brewery, most likely, but on the construction/engineering firm they used to construct the vats).
Probably it was something like the latter - but given that they didn't have anything like accident forensics or any way to really examine the issue, "act of god" it was (in theory it could have been done, to an extent, with the tech of the day - but it wasn't likely it was thought of; such things wouldn't become regular until later in the century).
And PR flacks had yet to fully develop the art of blaming third-party contractors whose primary function is to serve as a legal cutout, leaving god to take more heat is customary than today.
Its the doctors final statement, that the drowned one, had not only his stomache, but also his lungs full of the stolen beer- that revealed the drowned mother of four to be a horrible drunkard and morally lower creature. Thus it should be stated, that the family (which smells like drunkards too, your honor) can grant itself lucky to not recive a fine for the private vices on a public tsunami.
I rest my case.
PS: The whisky must have tasted like the city, of burning wood, horse menure and burning sock.
> "there must have been some laxity in inspection of the vats, or some kind of problem in the construction and/or materials (which wouldn't fall on the brewery, most likely, but on the construction/engineering firm they used to construct the vats)."
Well they probably didn't have sufficient construction/engineering knowledge back then to make such a determination of negligence anyway. Conceivably, the vat could have been constructed according to the standard for that time.
Jurors declared the beer flood an "unavoidable act of God," writes Tingle. Those whose houses were destroyed and whose loved ones were lost received nothing from the government or the company.
Completely unrelatedly and much less tragically, I recall a story from my uncle about the 'great wapanucka train wreck of 65 or maybe it was 66' whereby several freight cars of beer were derailed, spilling their freight into the surrounding fields.
Apparently, or so the story goes anyway, some of the more resourceful people who heard of the incident drove up to the scene that night, filling entire pickup trucks and cars with cans of beer, and most of the nearby university he was attending was drunk for a week.
26 comments
[ 0.18 ms ] story [ 334 ms ] threadhttps://comeheretome.com/2014/04/09/the-1875-liberties-whisk...
[1] http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/664929/?sc=dwhn
[2] https://www.newscientist.com/article/2114116-incredible-phys...
I wanted to check out the site when I visited Boston a couple years ago. For anyone who is considering the same, a small memorial plaque is the only thing there to see, and it is at about knee height in a low wall. I walked right past it several times while searching, before finally spotting it.
After all the beer was mopped up, the company that owned the brewery did just fine. It "received a waiver from the British Parliament for excise taxes it had already paid on the thousands of barrels of beer it lost," writes History.com–meaning it didn't have to pay taxes on the equivalent amount of beer when it brewed in future. Jurors declared the beer flood an "unavoidable act of God," writes Tingle. Those whose houses were destroyed and whose loved ones were lost received nothing from the government or the company.
All is fair in beer and spillages.
I'd really like to see the transcript of that trial. I'd like to know how the owners of the brewery and their lawyer spun things so as to escape all culpability.
An accident is an accident, of course - I doubt they meant this to happen. But there must have been some laxity in inspection of the vats, or some kind of problem in the construction and/or materials (which wouldn't fall on the brewery, most likely, but on the construction/engineering firm they used to construct the vats).
Probably it was something like the latter - but given that they didn't have anything like accident forensics or any way to really examine the issue, "act of god" it was (in theory it could have been done, to an extent, with the tech of the day - but it wasn't likely it was thought of; such things wouldn't become regular until later in the century).
This predates the era of locking your employees in during their shift.
PS: The whisky must have tasted like the city, of burning wood, horse menure and burning sock.
Hey I pay good money for lagavulin.
Well they probably didn't have sufficient construction/engineering knowledge back then to make such a determination of negligence anyway. Conceivably, the vat could have been constructed according to the standard for that time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Molasses_Flood
Apparently, or so the story goes anyway, some of the more resourceful people who heard of the incident drove up to the scene that night, filling entire pickup trucks and cars with cans of beer, and most of the nearby university he was attending was drunk for a week.
https://www.facebook.com/FarmCreek/photos/a.425132817617510....