Rainier black-out cones from pre-Tahoe dig

[Bob L]

As you may have seen on FB, Andy and I dug some oddball Rainier cones with black-outs on the side panel during our pre-Tahoe digging excursion. Photos are below. After studying the black-out areas carefully with all angles of viewing and light, here is what I have figured out. I can read the words in the left-hand portion of the upper black-out panel. They are:

Withdrawn ……
Revenue ……
(space)
Alcohol......

So the upper black-out is covering a Withdrawn Free statement as well as an alcohol content. Is this can known to exist as Withdrawn Free?? The lower black-out line is covering the Permit number. Not sure what to make of that. Why would the permit number need to be blacked out? The IRTP statement is out of place and looks to have been added in to take the place of the WF statement that is blacked-out above. Date on the bottom is 6-4-38.

Any body have this can? Anybody have the WF can without the black-out covering it?
.

[Leon]

From what I know the Permit #'s were pretty much gone, not in use anymore by 1938. Maybe they were using old stock that no longer needed the permit#? Nice find. LEON.

[Conehead]

As you may have seen on FB, Andy and I dug some oddball Rainier cones with black-outs on the side panel during our pre-Tahoe digging excursion. Photos are below. After studying the black-out areas carefully with all angles of viewing and light, here is what I have figured out. I can read the words in the left-hand portion of the upper black-out panel. They are:

Withdrawn ……
Revenue ……
(space)
Alcohol......

So the upper black-out is covering a Withdrawn Free statement as well as an alcohol content. Is this can known to exist as Withdrawn Free?? The lower black-out line is covering the Permit number. Not sure what to make of that. Why would the permit number need to be blacked out? The IRTP statement is out of place and looks to have been added in to take the place of the WF statement that is blacked-out above. Date on the bottom is 6-4-38.

Any body have this can? Anybody have the WF can without the black-out covering it?

Great cans guys!

I personally have never seen one to verify it, but it is on my composite, (at least I think it is).

My composite is an evolution from the original Wolpe list. The Lewindowski's were continuing Fred's work when they got out of the hobby. They got me copies of their work and this can is on that list. The way it was listed was "Tax Paid & Permit" blacked out, but it was listed as IRTP. I never quite understood that so I assumed it was a mistake and was never able to confirm it's existence. Somebody back in the day must have told them about this can or something very similar to it. Your cans having "WF and the alcohol statement" blacked out makes much more sense, especially with "IRTP" added below.

To answer your questions.

-I am not aware of this cans existence without the black out, though I would not be surprised if there is one out there.

-There is a LP Rainier Old Stock Ale WF with I believe and alcohol statement of "Alcoholic Content Not Over 6% by weight Nor 7.45% by Volume", it also has a permit no. shown. Could there be an example of this can with blacked out WF out there?

-My composite also shows a LP Rainier Natural Malt WF, with and alcohol statement of "Alcoholic Content Not Over 4% by weight Nor 5% by volume". I haven't been able to confirm this cans existence though.

Leon's explanation of the Permit No. blacked out seems to make sense. If they are already blacking out "WF and the alcohol statement" why not go ahead and black out the permit no. if it was no longer necessary.

Jim

[Cap-Sealed]

Great job Bob & Andy. They came all the way out from STL and killed it! And then hung out with us for a few daysat the South Lake Tahoe show. I'm glad they popped a few pits and hung out a the the lake with us....

[ThreeRing]

The short-lived Federal Alcohol Administration (1935-1940) issued an FAA Directive in late 1936 or early 1937. The Directive instructed brewers to remove U Permit numbers from their labeling and provided brewers several months to comply. Major redesign of beer can labels occurred during 1937 and 1938 to comply with this Directive and with a similar FAA Directive that limited the surface area on a can that information about the can company may occupy. Additionally, this second Directive required that can company information be set apart from other information on the label and that it be enclosed within a box or lines. The change in design of cans in this time period is significant in complying with these directives.
In the case of the Rainier cones, one may speculate that existing sheets included the U permit number. Perhaps there were too many ordered or that anticipated beer exportation did not materialize. In this case the can company overprinted the sheets so they could be used domestically.
I have copies of these Directives - somewhere. Must search the attic to find them.

[canman65]

Those are really cool! Nice finds guys! Great work..

[Conehead]

The short-lived Federal Alcohol Administration (1935-1940) issued an FAA Directive in late 1936 or early 1937. The Directive instructed brewers to remove U Permit numbers from their labeling and provided brewers several months to comply. Major redesign of beer can labels occurred during 1937 and 1938 to comply with this Directive and with a similar FAA Directive that limited the surface area on a can that information about the can company may occupy. Additionally, this second Directive required that can company information be set apart from other information on the label and that it be enclosed within a box or lines. The change in design of cans in this time period is significant in complying with these directives.
In the case of the Rainier cones, one may speculate that existing sheets included the U permit number. Perhaps there were too many ordered or that anticipated beer exportation did not materialize. In this case the can company overprinted the sheets so they could be used domestically.
I have copies of these Directives - somewhere. Must search the attic to find them.

Great information. Thanks Charlie!

[rusteditor]

Great info Charlie. While all of my Natural Malt variations, from 1935 and 1936, have the permit number, none of the Genuine Lager variations, dating from as early as April 1938 (THANK YOU Rainier for date stamping your cans!) - except one. The underlined 3.2% version, date stamped 6-11-38, does include the permit. If I remember correctly from when I got that can in Portland from Dan S., the underlined version was specifically for Utah or Colorado (can't remember which). So if it was a Federal mandate, and there are Genuine Lager versions before and after my 3.2%, what's up with that? Did Rainier have these cans ready to go before the required change, and just didn't bother to black them out? Curious...

Phil

[Matt Menghini]

Ah, but there is more to the story. Yes, the underlined version with 3.2% has the permit number. But I also have an earlier Genuine Lager with no alcohol statement dated April 3, 1937 which has the permit number. Matt

[Matt Menghini]

Here's some photos.

[Bob L]

Note the patent code 32-1-D or 32-1-E. I believe this is also a chronological progression.

[rusteditor]

I hadn't thought about the plant codes and dates. I know that is a thing with Blatz, Milwaukee Club and Schlitz cones (Continental's plant No. 52). There are also midwest cones that a single letter following the plant number (e.g. plant 64 or 73). Of course I couldn't resist another look at my Rainier Special Export Genuine Lager cones. Here's what I have:
Cap-Sealed panel, PATENTS APPLIED FOR below Cap-Sealed, no alcohol content, 4-30-38 date stamp, 32-1D
Cap-Sealed panel, PATENTS APPLIED FOR above Cap-Sealed, no alcohol content, 3-4-39 date stamp, 32-1D
Cap-Sealed panel, PATENTS APPLIED FOR above Cap-Sealed, Alc Content 3.2% By Weight, date stamp 6-11-38, 32-1C
Cap-Sealed panel PATENTS APPLIED FOR above Cap-Sealed, Alc Content NO 4% By Weight, <can't read date stamp>, 32-1A
No Cap-Sealed panel, PATS APPLIED FOR under Permit No., Al Content 3.2% By Weight (underlined), date stamp 6-11-38, 32-<can't read>

Not very conclusive. Will have to look at my Milwaukee Club and Schlitz cones as well...

[Conehead]

Will have to look at my Milwaukee Club and Schlitz cones as well...

Hey Phil,

Make sure you compare with this list I created. Maybe you didn't see the Schlitz Brewing Alphabet Soup thread when I started it?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=43915&p=376221&hili ... et#p376221

Jim

[rusteditor]

Thanks Jim! It is probably something I meant to print at the time but missed doing so. More variations to be on the lookout for at Canvention. Especially for the two Rainiers in this thread.

I'm sure you'll hit me with more "did you know about xx variations?" in ABQ. Vegas has set the over/under at 10. LOL

Phil

[Longopener]

Note the patent code 32-1-D or 32-1-E. I believe this is also a chronological progression.

I'm thinking the "D" in this case may mean "domestic" (without an alcohol statement) and the "E" for "Export

[Cap-Sealed]

Dale dug a rough one of these about 10 years ago. I gave it to my brother back then, and he just upgraded from Andy. Phil Stayman got Dan's at ABQ CanV.