I’m quite a fan of English snuffs, Fribourg & Treyer being my favorite. But I always see in reviews of their snuffs people saying “ohh their not the same as they use to be” I see it over and over no matter what the blend may be, people seem to say that while the versions made now are very good, they are not the same as their now defunct relatives. My question is does anyone have any old tins of F&T that they would like to sell or give samples of? I’m curious to see what the differences in the old Bordeaux or Princes Special or whatever may truly be. I mean the recipes were sold to Wilsons of Sharrow so I can’t imagine they would change anything about these blends, right?
Look on ebay. Sometimes the old ones turn up. I got an old Morlaix recently. I haven’t tried it yet though.
Did Fribourg & Treyer actually operate their own snuff mill, or was it manufactured under contract by someone else?
Fribourg&Treyer was a snuff blender and got their tobacco base from snuff mills, Samuel Gawith was one them and Wilsons of Sharrow as well, probably others too.
According to the F&T lit I read from brochures it sounds like they used some really high end oils and perfumes. That makes a huge diffrence. A high quality oil will smell so much diffrent then a standard quality oil.
“I mean the recipes were sold to Wilsons of Sharrow so I can’t imagine they would change anything about these blends, right? “ One might think so, but no. The Haymarket establishment was supplied with tobacco sourced chiefly from Malawi, Canada, the USA and Cuba, which when blended was strong and very distinctive. Like pipe tobaccos the distinction lay in the blending of various types of leaf and stalk. The tobacco these days seems to be sourced entirely from Zimbabwe. J & H Wilson of Westbrook Mill, Sheffield (and finally Wilson’s of Sharrow after Westbrook was closed by Imperial, who also closed down the historical Haymarket shop) bought the recipes and distribution rights. These were passed in turn to Wilsons of Sharrow, but they are under no obligation to follow those blends and recipes to the letter. The snuffs now made in Sheffield are created to appeal to younger people to expand sales, and no claim has ever been made by Sharrow (as far as I’m aware) that they are or were ever intended to be faithful reproductions. What hasn’t changed (except for the squat version) is that tall distinctive tin. The so-called Paris varieties for which F&T were renowned were much coarser, less floral and a pungent reek of tobacco upon opening was the first sensation. Some of the snuffs are similar - but are not the same. Even so, the difficulty you or anyone else has in buying genuine vintage Fribourg & Treyer is knowing for certain whether it was made by the original and independent blenders or under the auspices of J&H Wilsons or by Wilsons of Sharrow. Absence of a health warning on the tin is no guarantee of authenticity.
So the only way to be certain is if it were to be dated from the 70s or earlier right? I think that’s pretty lousy that Wilson’s diverts from the original recipes to make them more appealing to a younger snuff generation. If anything they should embrace that heritage and come out with a Santa Domingo “Original” or something that follows the old recipe to the “T” and that includes pure Havana Cuban tobacco. I wouldn’t care if it cost twice as much for a 25g tin, to taste a blend from the 1720’s would be magical.
If they used Cuban tobacco, they could not export it to the US.
I have never tried the old F&T blends, but I for one love the Wilsons versions. In fact, their line up has no weak ones for me. Intoxicating, yet dignified. More of the same please Wilsons, plus a few of the traditional pure tobacco ones to appeal to those who remember the original ones. I do find it odd that the US can import Zimbabwe tobacco, yet not Cuban. The Cold War is over isn’t it?
“The Cold War is over isn’t it?” Yes but just like any law, once it’s on the books it’s hard to remove. Trade embargoes might be lifted in the next 5 years though http://havanajournal.com/politics/entry/timeline-of-end-of-us-cuba-trade-and-travel-embargo/
“So the only way to be certain is if it were to be dated from the 70s or earlier right?” There are no dates on tins. The miniature sampler tins are all pre 1982, which assuming they have not been re-filled will be authentic. “I think that’s pretty lousy that Wilson’s diverts from the original recipes to make them more appealing to a younger snuff generation.” Wilson’s are a business and provide snuffs that sell. Fribourg & Treyer’s sales dwindled in the face of trendier snuffs. If they had continued to be viable as a business venture then Imperial (who had taken over F&T and J&H Wilsons) presumably would not have closed the establishment down. “If anything they should embrace that heritage and come out with a Santa Domingo “Original” or something that follows the old recipe to the “T” and that includes pure Havana Cuban tobacco. I wouldn’t care if it cost twice as much for a 25g tin, to taste a blend from the 1720’s would be magical.” It would be magical indeed and I would pay triple the cost and more. However, except possibly for the rappees no snuff by Fribourg & Treyer went anywhere near that far back in time. Old Paris and Princes are probably the oldest snuffs in the current range, dating from regency days. Santo Domingo might be similar to Domingo mentioned in the book by George Evans. On the other hand the circa 1960s booklet by Alfred Bryant refers to it as a “modern product“ inspired by Old Havana Snuff. The oldest snuff (according to my research) to be manufactured continuously under the same name and recipe by the same company to the present day is Samuel Gawith’s Original Kendal Brown, which dates to 1792.
@PhilipS: Very interesting info. Thanks. I’m not trying to argue, but isn’t the oldest continuously manufactured, (allegedly) unchanged snuff actually W.E. Garrett? Their trademark goes back to 1780, and Garrett snuff presumably existed before the trademark came into being.
@PhillipS When I mentioned Santo Domingo I was only using that as an example because it’s one that we can without a doubt agree no longer contains the ingredients of the original recipe i.e. Havana tobacco. When I said 1720’s I was only providing the historical date in which F&T was founded, I didn’t mean to imply that blends such as Bordeaux or Santo Domingo were from the 1720’s. I understand the economic stand point when it comes to Wilson’s choice in updating the snuffs and it makes perfect sense, only an idiot wouldn’t change his products as his consumers changed. I guess it’s all wishful thinking. If Wilson’s of Sharrow has some old F&T recipes of snuffs like Rape de Lyon, Curacoa, St. Vincent or any others it would just be wonderful if they made a small batch of them!
That’s an idea. Small batch speciality snuffs that cost more but have higher end ingredients. Kind of like cigars. I guess it’s not marketable at this moment, in as much as if you’re going to buy high end tobacco or such why not put it into something like cigars that has more gaurantee for profit. Just a pipe dream I’ve had for a while.
p.s. I think that a lot of the reciepe changes for the f and t snuffs has more too do with cost then up dating. For instance the type of Rose attar that was used in Macouba is insanely expensive compared to rose oil and sandalwood oil. Just my assumption though which is barely based in fact or reason.
Ermtony once said that WoS was open to the idea of reviving old recipes, even as limited edtions. Perhaps we as snuffhouse could commision a batch.
that would be awesome
This should be put on the ISTA’s agenda forthwith.
“The oldest snuff (according to my research) to be manufactured continuously under the same name and recipe by the same company to the present day is Samuel Gawith’s Original Kendal Brown, which dates to 1792.” Wouldn’t Bernard beat this ? They’ve been in business since 1733 and on their website they claim that at least Cardinal and Pariser date back to the beginning of the company.
My Pariser has 1850 written on it. Granted this is Pariser No. 2. I presume Pariser No. 1 is no longer made. tweaking recipes is what these guys do, though.