Commonly known as palm wine, toddy is made from the fermentation of sap extracted from the inflorescence of the coconut tree and typically has an alcoholic content between 5 and 8 percent. Toddy has long been associated with the Tamil community in Singapore and Malaysia since colonial times. It was a popular drink among lower-class Indian workers in Singapore until the mid-1950s. However, various factors such as social reforms, government regulations, and modernisation gradually pushed toddy and its negative impact out of public life by the end of the 1970s. However, after four decades, an imported bottled variety of toddy is now available in Singapore as part of the numerous other alcoholic beverages on sale.
In the early days, toddy sap was collected twice daily and distributed to various toddy shops across the island. In the 1920s, toddy in Singapore was as inexpensive as five cents a mug. This easy accessibility to toddy subsequently contributed to social issues since excessive consumption of toddy often led to fights and indecent behaviour at and near the toddy shops. Complaints also arose about Indian labourers spending a significant portion of their daily earnings on toddy.
As a result of the complaints, efforts to curb toddy-related alcoholism began concurrently from both the community and the colonial government. Indian community leaders even sought the assistance of E V Ramasamy Naicker, also known as Periyar, during his visit to Malaya and Singapore in 1929. Periyar was the leader of the Self-Respect movement in India. His influence prompted a broader reformist agenda focused on promoting self-respect among Tamil labourers in Malaya, which in turn led to progressive organisations such as the Tamils Reform Association and the Tamils Representative Council actively campaigning against toddy consumption.
In 1930, colonial government policies were introduced to gradually reduce the number of toddy shops and restrict their operating hours. Subsequently, due to concerns over the quality of toddy provided by contractors, the government began to phase out all privately licensed toddy shops, leaving only government-operated shops in place. This effectively allowed the British colonial administration to monopolise the toddy trade in Singapore. Between 1930 and 1939, the number of toddy shops decreased significantly, from 25 privately licensed stalls to just 10 government-controlled outlets. However, during the Japanese Occupation from 1942 to 1945, toddy consumption extended beyond the Indian community, partly due to the belief that fresh toddy could cure beriberi, a prevalent disease in Singapore at the time. This also led to a segment of the population becoming habitual toddy drinkers.
Despite the addiction, in the early 1950s, the daily sale of toddy dropped from around 500 gallons before the war to about 100 gallons after the war, primarily due to the declining Indian labour class population. By 1951, the number of toddy shops had dwindled to just five, which were located at Rochor Canal Road, Saint George's Road, Newton Circus, Ord Road, and Tanjong Pagar. The Ord Bridge was once referred to as ‘toddy bridge’ among the Tamil community.
Despite some economic benefits, maintaining law and order around toddy shops posed significant challenges. This led the government to reassess its policies and practices regarding the sale of toddy. Throughout the 1950s, concerns about effective policing of government-run toddy shops grew, prompting calls for modernisation. The situation worsened in the mid-1950s with the emergence of a black market controlled by Indian and Chinese gangs. These groups intercepted the toddy before official sales and sold adulterated versions of the drink at private dens or near authorised toddy shops. Illicit toddy became readily available in areas such as Raffles Quay, Colombo Court and other busy streets in the city.
The toddy supply chain was concentrated only among a few contractors and Indian tappers. In 1957, the Singapore Toddy Tappers Union was established. With Singapore gaining full internal self-governance in 1959, contractors faced stricter regulations, including hefty penalties for failing to meet toddy supply and quality requirements.
By 1967, two years after Singapore's independence, Govindasamy Sathasivam was the only contractor left to supply toddy to the remaining four government-run toddy shops. The supply of toddy was further affected by urban development projects, which necessitated the acquisition of lands with coconut trees. By the 1970s, the price of toddy had risen to 50 cents per mug, and by 1976, the last four toddy shops in Singapore only served approximately 2,500 customers daily. Meanwhile, in 1968, Yeo Hiap Seng Ltd, a beverage company, attempted to introduce canned versions of toddy targeting customers who preferred not to visit toddy shops. Despite the initial success, this venture failed within a year.
Amidst the declining demand for toddy, the Singapore Toddy Tappers' Union advocated for improved wages and working conditions. In addition, local reluctance to pursue toddy tapping as a career led to the hiring of tappers from Malaysia. With mounting pressures from toddy tappers, the rapid disappearance of coconut trees and tightening customs restrictions, Sathasivam foresaw that toddy production would cease by 1982. The toddy situation, however, reached an unexpected climax on 6 November 1979, when 38 out of his 46 tappers resigned due to salary and Central Provident Fund contributions issues. Subsequently, all toddy shops were shut down the following day, and the government announced a cessation of issuing new permits for toddy sales. Two weeks later, on November 24, 1979, a letter appeared in The Straits Times from 'Toddy Drinkers of Singapore’ pleading for the reinstatement of toddy supply, citing benefits for the lower-income group. Despite these pleas, toddy did not return to Singapore for the next 40 years.
Since 2022, a company called HighDrate Pte Ltd, founded by two Tamils, Sharaveen Prasath and Hemapriya, has claimed to be the “only importer of coconut toddy in Singapore” with a mission “to provide the highest quality and 100% natural coconut toddy to our customers in Singapore, while promoting sustainable agriculture and supporting local farmers in Southeast Asia.” HighDrate’s version of toddy, sourced from Melaka, has 2.2 percent alcohol. Bottled toddy is now available for sale online and in several minimarts throughout the island. Additionally, some Indian restaurants have begun offering toddy as part of the range of alcoholic beverages available to their customers.
For more information
Salifian Sulaiman. “Ta-ta Toddy: The Disappearance of Toddy in Singapore in the 1970s,” in Folio, edited by James Warren, 87-99. Singapore: University Scholars Programme, National University of Singapore, 2020.
Alagirisamy, Darinee. “Toddy, Race, and Urban Space in Colonial Singapore, 1900–59.” Modern Asian Studies 53, no. 5 (September 2019): 1675–1699. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X1700083X.
“Toddy Pubs For Singapore?,” Sunday Standard, August 12, 1951, 3. (From Newspaper SG)
“Drunker Brawling Near Toddy Shop Scares Children,” The Singapore Free Press, 12 June 1954, 7. (From Newspaper SG)
“Gangsters move in on toddy shops,” The Straits Times, 5 March 1956, 7. (From Newspaper SG)
“Now its yam seng with canned toddy,” The Straits Times, 28 January 1968, 5. (From Newspaper SG)
“Toddy shops fight a losing battle,” New Nation, 16 June 1971, 16. (From Newspaper SG)
“Toddy can run dry in five years, he says,” New Nation, 1 November 1977, 2. (From Newspaper SG)
“Toddy days are over,” The Straits Times, 28 November 1979, 10. (From Newspaper SG)
Singaravelu, Sakti. “The toddy entrepreneur,” Tabla!, 1 May 2025. https://www.tamilmurasu.com.sg/tabla/singapore/toddy-entrepreneur.
தமிழில் வாசிக்க
Return to home page
About the Encyclopedia
The information in this article is valid as of August 2025 and correct as far as we are able to ascertain from our sources. It is not intended to be an exhaustive or complete history of the subject. If you have any feedback on this article, please submit here.
The information on this page and any images that appear here may be used for private research and study purposes only. They may not be copied, altered or amended in any way without first gaining the permission of the copyright holder.
| BETA |