Fun with Labels: YOUR STATE HERE Crown Club

If you saw a bottle of Kentucky Crown Club whiskey on the shelf, complete with a picture of a racehorse, you probably wouldn't guess that it was Canadian blended whiskey, but lo and behold, Houston based Mexcor, Inc. has been approved for a label for just such a whiskey.  

And suppose you wanted a whiskey from your native Arkansas, Florida or Colorado.  Well, you're in luck, because Mexcor is planning to produce Canadian Whiskeys named for pretty much every state (though the Dakotas get just one between them). 

But lest you think this is just some bulk whiskey operation cynically cashing in on state pride, the back label for Tennessee Crown Club explains that the whiskey was crafted to "reflect and highlight the rich heritage of the great state of Tennessee" and that it "embodies the treasures that the majestic state of Tennessee possesses." Similarly, the label for South Carolina Crown Club reports that it was crafted to "reflect and highlight the rich heritage of the great state of South Carolina" and that it "embodies the treasures that the majestic state of South Carolina possesses."

Think of how much work Mexcor must have done to come up with a different whiskey that embodies the treasures of each of our majestic states.  This was clearly a massive undertaking in which skilled tasters had to contemplate questions like, "Does this Canadian blend more accurately embody the treasures of the majestic state of Connecticut or does it reflect and highlight the rich heritage of the great state of Indiana?"  Kudos to the great team at Mexcor that found these unique whiskeys.

Oh, and Jersyites take notice, the bottle for Jersey Crown Club makes no reference to the Garden State being either majestic or having a rich heritage.  I guess even Mexcor has its limits.

State Whiskey Law: Kentucky & California

Whiskey is mostly regulated by the federal government, but some states have their own whiskey regulations.  A few weeks ago, I wrote about the passage of a Tennessee state bill defining Tennessee Whiskey.  That bill has since been signed into law and will regulate how Tennessee companies can use the term "Tennessee Whiskey." 

Kentucky also has a law on the books regulating the use of its name on whiskey labels.  For years I had heard about a special rule in Kentucky but had never seen it or had anyone provide a citation, so when some folks swore to me that it existed, I went searching for it.  Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) section 244.370  requires that to use the name Kentucky on a whiskey label (as in "Kentucky Bourbon" or "Kentucky Whiskey") the whiskey must have been aged in oak for at least one year in Kentucky.  If it's not aged a year, the company can still bottle it, but they can't use the name "Kentucky" or even say that it was made there except in the name and address of the distiller.  The only exception to the aging requirement is for corn whiskey.

Of course, this doesn't really have much practical application these days, since most Kentucky whiskey is sold as straight whiskey, which means it is required to be aged for at least two years.


California has its own laws defining whiskey.  California Business & Professions Code section  25175 makes it a misdemeanor to sell any product labeled at whiskey that has not been aged for three years in charred oak barrels.  There are exceptions for corn whiskey, spirit whiskey and Scotch.  Unlike the regulations in Kentucky and Tennessee which cover activity and label information not regulated by the federal government, the California law directly contradicts the federal regulations, which do not provide any age requirement for non-straight whiskeys.  In fact, even many straight whiskeys, which have a two year age requirement, would not be permitted to be called "whiskey" under the California law.  State laws that conflict with federal laws are preempted by virtue of the Constitutional Supremacy Clause, though preemption is a rather complex issue with many nuances. (See also, Chuck Cowdery's post on this law from a few years ago).

Given the plethora of young whiskey on California shelves as well as the lack of any case law interpreting this provision, I can only assume it is not being enforced. 


There may well be other state laws regulating whiskey which exist alongside or even conflict with federal regulations.  If you know of any others, let me know.

Pastry Love at Cooks County

This Beverly Boulevard farm to table operation opened last year.  I stopped by for brunch on a Saturday, and the pastries alone were worth the trip.  The pastry basket isn't actually a basket; it's a tray, but the day I went it came with a fresh jelly doughnut, a blueberry muffin, a cheese biscuit and a ginger scone.  These were all excellent, but the scone impressed me the most.  Never have I had a scone that was so flaky, so melt in the mouth delicious.  The doughnut was slightly larger than a golf ball and stuffed with a thick, nicely tart strawberry rhubarb jam.

The baked goods also shined as part of the breakfast entrees.  The baked pancake is a unique and delicious beast, a puffy pancake with crisp edges and a light and fluffy center emphasizing the "cake" in pancake.

The house made bagel was delicious, though a bit hard on the outside, but the smoked trout it was served with was bland.

Overall, the sweet outshined the savory, but most everything was good.  I went back for lunch, and definitely enjoyed it, but nothing was quite as great as their various brunch pastries.

Cook's County
8009 Beverly Blvd. 
Los Angeles, CA 90048

(323) 653-8009

Dusty Thursday: David Nicholson 1843 (circa 1955)

This was an old Stitzel-Weller brand bottled for the Peter Hauptmann Co. in St. Louis that I haven't been able to find too much about.  I'm hoping some of our bourbon experts can shed some light on it in the comments.  This one is a 1955 bottling. The brand is now a sourced bourbon owned by Luxco.

David Nicholson 1843, BIB, 100 Proof

The nose has honey, floral notes and some citrus.  The palate is rich with vanilla bean, butterscotch and some oak.  The finish returns to some of the floral notes.

This is actually far better than I expected it would be with some real complexity.  I've had a number of Stitzel-Weller bottom shelfers that weren't great.  This is really good stuff and more akin to some of the better Old Fitzgeralds I've had.

Balvenie 12 Single Barrel

Up until about a year ago, I pretty much ignored the existence of Balvenie.  Some of their malts were fine, but I'd never had anything that bowled me over.  Then last year, they blew one out of the ballpark with the Tun 1401.  Given that success, I was pretty excited to taste their newest whiskey, a 12 year old single barrel aged in first fill bourbon casks.

Balvenie 12 year old Single Barrel First Fill, 47.8% abv, Cask 12694  ($70)

The nose is a fruit bomb with pears and fruit cocktail.  The palate is fruity and malty in equal parts.  The finish is mostly malty with some cereal and cocoa.

This one is bright and fruity.  It's not overly complex but is nicely drinkable, a good edition to the Balvenie lineup and a perfect lighter whiskey for those hot summer months (along with Bladnoch).  Keep in mind, as a single barrel release, barrels may vary.

 

Meat Heaven: Chi Spacca

It sort of seems like a no-brainer that the new Batali/Silverton/Bastianich project let by Chad Colby focusing on meats would be amazing, but it is. Located in what is fast becoming a Mozza mini-mall, Chi Spacca is a small space with amazing meat.

Charcuterie plates are beyond cliche these days, but Chi Spacca's sampler is extraordinary.  There's copa, one of the best specks I've ever had, two salumis with gloriously large chunks of fat and, my favorite, two country style pates.  One pate was pork with pistachios wrapped in bacon.  It was smoky and ham-like.  The other was a pork liver and kidney pate that was unctuous and livery.  This was fantastic stuff.

But the tour de force on the menu I ordered was the beef and marrow pie.  A small, but very deep pie of braised beef with a marrow  bone stuck in the middle.  The braised beef in this pie was black as night with a syrupy thick jus.  It was the best of braised meat and soaked beautifully into the flaky, perfectly done pie crust.  Eat some of the marrow by itself on bread, but then spread some on the beef and pastry to get an ultra-rich bite.  (You may need to use the back end of the spoon to get all of the marrow out.) 

There are lots of great things on this menu, including huge steaks and pork chops, that would have been better for a larger crowd, but don't miss that pie.

The wine program was also impressive.  Rather than offering bottles, wine is offered from a limited selection by the glass or carafe.  Alternatively, they offer three levels of wine pairings, selected to match your particular meal (even though it isn't a tasting menu).  We ordered the cheapest one ($25 per person) and were delighted with the diverse choices, which included a sparkling red and a sour beer among the four selections.

If you're a meat lover, this should go on your must-try list.

Chi Spacca
6610 Melrose Ave.
Los Angeles, CA  90036
(323) 297-1133

Dusty Thursday: Hill and Hill Bourbon (1976)

In terms of dusty whiskey, Los Angeles is pretty much shopped out.  It's been a long time since I found a good, old bottle on the shelf.  Even the dusties I left behind are long gone.  These days, I'm pleased to find even a bourbon with a mediocre reputation if it's from the old days, and so there's this.

Hill and Hill was a lower end National Distillers label that is no longer around.  This bottle is a half pint circa 1976 that I picked up in the San Gabriel Valley.  It cost me all of $4.

Hill and Hill Bourbon,  4 years old, 80 proof (40% abv)

The nose is pretty decent with some brandy like sweetness and some solid rye spice.  It actually smells like it has some age on it.  The palate is also nice and spicy with some wood notes and a nice sweet, caramel note at the end.  The finish retains that sweetness and again gives some brandy type notes.

I expected this to be terrible, and it's actually quite good.  Despite the age statement, this tastes much older than four years; it has that rich, caramel flavor that I've seen in older bourbons from the '70s.  I'm guessing this one is a glut whiskey, filled with older stocks that the distilleries didn't know what to do with back when bourbon supplies far outstripped demand.  It just goes to show, you shouldn't make assumptions based on the label.  I could drink this stuff all night, and that's what I call four dollars well spent.