The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1882-03-02
WINE CULTURE.
A FARMER WHO MANUFAC-
TURES WINE, FROM GRAPES
RAISED BX HIMSELF,
CANNOT RETAIL 1T
nv THE DRINK.
That Is the way the Attorney Gem
eral Decides the Question.


question has been decided, months ago,
the opinion of the attorney general has
never been published. We give the
whole subject matter in its entirety.
The Express says
In Wednesdays issue of the Express
we stated that Mr.. ArtZt was about to
give up the manufacture of Texas wine,
aud go into SINE more profitable pur-
suit Yesterday morning reporter of
the Express called on Mr.. Artzt, for the
purpose of finding the reasons that in
duced him to take so sudden and unex-
pected decision.
R.-What success have you had as a
wine manufacturer during the past five
years, Mr.. ArGztg
Any trade is steadily increasing,
and now many poor people who had
formerly very poor opinion of, and in
some cases a prejudice for, any wine
manufactured in Texas, are my best
patrons. Strangers who visit the city
and taste this wine can hardly believe
that the Texas mustang grape can be
made into so rich and palatable wine,
and all express themselves as well salts
fed with climate and soil so well
adapted for wine culture. But there is
one great drawback, and that is the rea-
son ] am going to quit the business
as soon as have disposed of
my sock. Last summer l in
quired of one of our representa-
tives personally, if, as a manufacturer, l
could sell my wine as before the legisla-
ture altered the law Texas wine was
exempt from license), and he told me to
make and sell as much as could, for the
new law did not effect the manufacture,
but only applied to the dealer, and on
these grounds made much more wine
than formerly. A few weeks ago our
comptroller came out with the decision
that farmer who makes his own wine
and sells it has to pay the same license
$4,000 as retail dealer in spirituous
liquors. Now, instead of encourag-
ing home industry and enterprise,
which, by perseverance and hard
work would at last succeed, in
stead of causing the utilization of mil
lion bushels of grapes a year, the pro-
ducts of which could be MADE "a great
article of export, we are taxed $500 a
year-$5OO a year more than the license
ON imported beer. But this is not all
A week ago l received letter from
friends IN Eggharbor, New Jersey, whose
intention was to 90 extensively INFO wine
manufacturing in this state, they being
experienced wine-growers but on re-
ceiving the published decision of the
comptroller in copy of the Express,
they have abandoned their intention OF
coming to Texas, and have directed their
attention to state where no such mar
row-minded laws ext t. These are the
reasons that obige me TO give up my
present business and go into something
else as soon as | can sell my stock.
The Ideas set forth above by the party
interviewed have been entertained by
others to such an extent that the comp
troller of the state has been written TO
several times relative TO the matter.
Among those who have addressed the
comptroller upon this subject is Honor
able G. l.. WurZbach, of San Antonio,
representative in the legislature from
Bexar county. To Mr.. Wurzbach's
letter, Comptroller Brown made the fol-
lowing reply:
CoNIPTRoLLER's OFFICE,
AUSTIN, TEXAS, JAN, 4, 1882.
Honorable C. L. wurzbach, San Antonio, Texas
SIR:-In reply to yours of the twenty
fourth ultmO, enclosed please find eX-
tract from the official opinion of Attor-
ney General McLeary, rs to whether
farmer who manufactures wines can sell
the same by the drink without first hav-
ing taken out state license therefor.
Respectfully,
w. NJ Brown, Comptroller.
Following is the opinion of the at
torney general, in full
ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE,
AUSTIN, Nov. 81, 1881.
Hon. W. NJ. Brown, Comptroller.
DEAR SIR: In reply to yours of the
eighteenth instant, in which yon request
my opinion as to whether a farmer who
wines may sell the same
by the drink without first having taken
out a state license therefor, l will say
that in my opinion he cannot.
l am aware that under the advice of
my predecessor, Hon. Geo. Mccormick,
your department has held that man
ufacturer of wines from grapes grown
on his own farm, may sell such wines
in unbroken packages, without the pay
ment of a liquor dealers license. for the
reason that the wine may be said to be
a farm product, in the hands of the pro-
Queer but l do not think this doctrine
can, or should be extended to wines sold
by the drink, because there would be
no way to prohibit the sale to min
ers, students or habitual drunkards,
as provided by section 4, chapter
10l, acts of 1881. Moreover, when a
farmer who has manufactured wines I'M
dertakes to sell them by the drink, his
house is liable to become a disorderly
house, and to be frequented by persons
whom the law does not permit to enter
such places with ut suhjecting the owner
of the house to the payment of damages,
secured by his bond.
Where wines are sold by the drink, the
time of the dealer would become en-
crossed with such sales, and his occupa-
ton as farmer would soon be exchanged
for that of retail liquor dealer.
For these reasons think that license
should be required to be taken out before
alcoholic drinks of any kind can be sold
by the drink. Very respectfully,
j. H. MCLEARY, Attorney General.