Saturday press. [volume] (Honolulu, H.I.) 1880-1885, 1882-05-27
Wine Adulteration.
HoYoLULU, Nav 20. l9Sl

Honolulu, May 20, 1882.
EDITOR PREss:-In addition to the drugs
and books which purchased in California,
for making wines, brandies and other
liquors, / have other valuable testimony
which | think should be laid before the peo-
pie of these beautiful islands.
At st. Helena, in the Napa valley Of Cal
ifornia, learned that the Wine Growers
Association had recently expelled some of
their members for adulterating their wines
and brandies. While walking along the
road, Just outside the village of st. Helena,
l saw an open gate loading into the yard
of wine cellar. Passing through this
gate, and finding the door of the wine eel.
lar open, ] entered it, and finding it without
an occupant / searched the establishment
from bottom to top-including, as well, the
distillery--for drugs. was rewarded by
finding large wooden box half filed with
pulverized sulphur, bottle of tincture of
tanin, a bottle of creosote, bottle of wine
essence, with the appliances for using this
and other drugs.
This wine cellar and distillery was owned
by a man who had been most active in ex-
polling others from the Association for
adulteration of liquors.
As a further proof of the almost univer-
sal practice of adulterating wines and
brandies in California, / enclose copy of
the San Francisco Daily Chronicle, April
30, 1882, containing an article on this sub.
jsct. The Chronicle, you will please re-
member, has always taken the side of the
liquor traffic. Very truly yours,
ELI JOHNSON.
Following is the article-
"In the face of all inducements to adul-
terate wine, the purity of our wines has
been our great boast and pride, and in it
lay their only superiority to European
brands.
In France, Germany and England we
have always been given credit for their
quality, and great future for the wine in.
dustry has been prophesied for us as long
a. we kept our wines pure; but this future
is now threatened, and it will not only re-
quire the indignant protest of all our citi-
zens, but the law must DO invoked to pro.
tect the vino industry from the incubus OF
adulteration.
One wine maker in Napa county has
openly used glucose in the manutaciure OF
,cine (?) in spite Of vigorous and mos
commendable protest on the part of the st
Helena Viticultural Club; another has ex
psrimented with it, and is reported to hav,
said that if wine SO made would sell, h,
would make it, and yet another vnicul
turist is said to be on the fence. A larg,
wine buyer is said to have examined glu
cossd wines and that they found favor il
his sight and undoubtedly from pecuni
ary-though dishonest--point of view, glu
cose has many attractions.
by tho use Of glucose, the product of |
vineyard may DO increased threeiold (Pitio
claims iivefold) at comparatively small
cost of the land ana, in fact, OF all the op
oratious in yiniculture, from tho clearin.
Of the land 10 the malsng Of the wine, ma,
bs avoided. So tits evident that pure win,
cannot compete with wine thus adultcrated
whom both arc sold to the consumer a
pure. Still another maker and well know
authority on yiticulture, in Napa county
openly advocates, and SO probably uses, DIR
Calls method of increasing largely tn
quantity Of wine from a given measure o
grapes, aud insists that, as water and suga
are naturally constituents Of grape juice
the addition of these artiicially does no
form adulteration, aud correctly assert
thai cane sugar is as wholesome as the nat
urd sugar Of the grape. Granted bu
pure cane sugar is toohgh priced and win