The San Francisco call., 1897-02-17

traders Society at the time the tariff was
iast ADJUSTED. He expressed himself In
laVor OF reciprocity, though it might be
well to define the kind of reciprocity they
wanted. But he did not see any harm III
Chicago trying to extend the market for
canned goods to European countries.
To-day they could not export one gallon
OF spirits 10 France because there they
had two tariffs-a high one applied to the
world generally, ana O low one applied 10
those countries which treated them we'll.
suppose Congress was asked to empower
the Government to add so per cent to
every item in the tariff and % per cent on
the free list tc the country which did not
place the United States on the footing OF
the most favored nation? Then France
/ nj lght be expected to extend TO us the
privilege We do not now enjoy.
Mr.. Jacoby asserted that California only
accepted the 3O-cent duty as compro-
mise. The convention was not opposing
general reciprocity, but merely wine re-
ciprocity, nor did he see why they should
be sacrificed upon an altar of Illinois
canned goods.
AT Mr.. Morgan's suggestion several OF
tne Wlnemakers present spoke on the
question. Z. G. Rossi said that the large
majority of winemakers desired an in
crease In the tariff. He informed the con-
venflon that he was able to state authori-
tatlvely that California wines could not
realize high price because Bordeiaise sold
In New York at 55 and so cents gallon
ana certain prejudice existed IN Its
favor. In the face of these conditions,
short crop here calculated to raise the
price OF native wines or 10 cents gallon,
would lmm ediately bring them into COM
petition with Spanish and Italian wines.
Mr.. Patton expressed similar sentiments
on behalf OF Sonoma County. Mr.. Crabbe
called attention to the manufacture OF
spurious wines in Eastern vineyards, and
added that if the 50-cent duty were re-
stored 1t would be necessary TO have
pure National wine law in order to derive
any great benefit from it.
Mr.. Rossi said that the only reason why
artificial wines were not consumed in
greater quantities was because people
were able to discriminate between them
ana the purer varieties, but that wines
could be manufactured with sugar at half
the price OF those manufactured with
grapes here, and that man anufacturers using
sugar would certainly make more when
the duty was 90 cents than now when 1t
was 30. But under duty OF 80 cents the
higher class wines would be better pro-
tected and the cheaper varieties would be
regulated by competition. In Italy the
law proposed TO include the wines manu-
featured with raisins as belonging to the
artltcia category.
.
indignation by affirming that the wine tar
III question was decided at the time OF the
last election and that many wine-makers
on the Democratic side of the house voted
for Mckinley Tor that reason. To reverse
that decision and declare that they wished
matters to remain as they were would be
ridiculous. Mr.. Bundschu held that far
greater issues were involved and ,reverting
to the subject under discussion, advised the
trade, while holding fast to W hat 1t already
had, to ask for more
He moved therefore that in view of the
fact that California wines are seriously
suffering under the present tariff reguIa-
tlons the committee be instructed to
earnestly advocate judicious increase in
the present schedule of our wine tariff.
This was carried with the understanding
that the committee consist OF five men,
bers, who will be named by the chairman
in the course of few days.
The secretary before the convention ad-
iourned explained the bill recently intro
duced into Congress by Evans of Louis
vile on the subject of bottling in bond.
The bill provides that any distiller with
certificate of twenty bushels capacity OF
grain shall have the right to bottle his
wbiskies in bond practically under the
same regulations as those Inder which
whiskies are now bottled in Canada.
The regulations respecting brandy will
be drawn up by the Commissioner OF In
ternal Revenue. This law does not pro-
vide for the blending of different ages,
and the distiller can only reduce in proof,
without adding color, nor can the product
OF two distilleries be bottled. A vain-at-
tempt was made year ago by Mr.. Evans
TO get the privilege of blending altered.
The convention, however, did not act
on the foregoing, and adjourned sine die.