Los Angeles daily herald., 1889-06-23
Opinions ON California
wines.

The HERALD some time ago referred
to the somewhat presumptuous opinions
expressed by MIR. G. 81. Mumm, of
champagne renown, who, without any
opportunity of forming an intelli-
gent notion about either the soils
or other characteristics of Califor-
MIA, announced that this coun.
try could make no genuine cham
payne. Mr.. Mumm expressed these
opinions at long range, having just
landed in New York. He is probably
not aware of every distinctive character
istic of California soil and climate. Ac-
cording to the route be shall select, it
will require from thirty-ive hundred to
four thousand miles to bring him in con-
nection with the soil OF California,
as he has ostentatiously avoided
the Southern routes. When he
gets here he will strike a State
whose coast line is quite seven hundred
miles in length, and whose varied con-
stituents of soil would involve the mem
bers of a numerous scientific college
years in the analysis. Yet Mr.. G. H.
Mumm, from the very moment Of his
arrivail on the Atlantic seaboard, knows
every possible chemical constituent OF
the soils OF the Pacific Coast. If Mumm
were not seller OF French champagnes,
under his own brands, he would have
demonstrated himself to be an ass. AS
he particularly desires to retain Califor-
MIA as contributor to the revenues in
yolyed in the continued sale Of his own
headache producing champagnes, he is
not an ass, but an empiric. Without
knowing what he is talking about, he
desires to diseredit California product
which does not claim to have at
tanned the utmost possible excellence,
but which has much less of the
stomach disorganizing and headache
producing properties than the brands
which De Barry, his agent, permits to be
| sold under the G. H. Mumm labels in
this country.
On the 18th OF June regular meeting
was held in Platt's Hall, San Francisco
of the California Grape Growers and
| Wine Makers Association. During itt
progress Mr.. Arpad Haraszthy tool
occasion to refer to Mr. Mumm's aein
inc declarations, telegraphed from New
York. We take the following from the
Chronicles report of the meeting:
While on the subject OF champagne
Mr.. Haraszthy referred to the interview
with G. H. Mumm, recently published
in which Mr.. Mumm stated that no gooC
champagnes could be made in this coun
try because our soil does not possess the
necessary factors, the principal one o
which was said by Mr.. Mumm to bt
chalk. Mr.. Haraszthy dissected Mr.
Mumm's statements, and showed con
clusively that Mr.. Mumm, in the words
of the speaker, did not know what he wal
talking about. So gross were the mis-
statements of Mr.. Mumm. Mr.. Harnszthy
said he considered him merely a figure
head who left all his business to peasants
and cellar-men. In the interview
Mumm stated that in California cham
payne and Madeira were grown in the
same vineyard on the same hillside
"Whoever told Mumm that filled him vi
to the CROP" said the speaker. Mr.
Haraszthy said he felt called upon, NO
only in his own interests but in those o
all the winemakers he dealt with, to de-
fend. as far as he could, the posi- blitiel
and the continued possibilities of cham
pagne-making in California.
AS making champagne is as yet no
specially of Los Angeles county we dc
not deem it necessary to reproduce the
| open letter which Mr.. Haraszthy pro
ceded to address to Mr.. Mumm. Tha
gentleman, from La Belle France, who il
both commercially and patriotically in
terested in maintaining his own egotisti
cal opinions, will doubtless fine
all he can attend to in rebuttinl
the postulates of his Califor
mia opponent, who, by the way
put in years in the champagne vine
yards and wineries at Epernay, ant
other champagne wine centers of France
before he adventured upon making
champagne in California. We hearth,
hope that Mr.. G. H. Mumm and Mr.
Arpad Haraszthy may meet in the Cali
fornia vineyards. Such an epcounte
would be, in the line Of viticulture, tina
meeting of Greek with Greek which one,
ornamented the arena of war.
| |