The sun., 1919-08-08
WINE FIRM STARTS
FIGHT ON DRY LAW
Suit Filed in U. s. Court Here
Attacking Measure as I'm
constitutional.

Suit was begun yesterday in the Fed
eral District Court in behalf Of the wine
making industry, which seeks to sci
aside the war prohibition law as uncon-
stltutional. The bill of complaint repre-
sents the first attack on the law by vine
yard and wine interests. Among the
averments is one that the law threatens
to confiscate physical property of wine
growers and manufacturers in this coun-
try worth s125, 200, 900 and throw out OF
employment 10000 persons who receive
$4S,00o,000 eac year in wages.
The plaintiffs are Sylvester Scatena,
William H. Lawson and A. Julius Pc
relli-Minetti, copartners. The suit is d.
rected against Francis @. Caffey, United
States Attorney, and William II. Ed
wards. Collector of Internal Revenue for
tho Second District of New York. Sam
uel Seabury is counsel for the plaintiffs.
Accompanying the bill Is an order. re-
turnable August ~, requiring the de.
PENDANTS to appear and show cause why
they should not be enjoined from en-
forcing the war prohibition bill.
New Issues Arc Raised.
The complaint attacks the constitu-
tionality OF the law on issues raised in
connection with the unsuccessful effort
in behalf OF the brewers of beer to set It
aside. The statute is alleged to be un-
constitutional because 1t threatens to
confiscate property without due process
OF law and because II was enacted as
a war emergency measure at a time
when the war In all respects save tech
meal relations was over.
1t Is understood that the bill will
serve to raise issues that have not hith-
erto figured in litigation of this kind.
What these Issues are could not be
learned yesterday at the office of Mr..
Seabury. 1t Is thought unlikely that
litigation that is bound to be expensive
would be entered into without new is
sues subsequent to the failure of the
brewers suits in the Federal district
court AID in the United States Circuit
Court of Appeals.
Scatena, Lawson & PerellL the firm
name, have a vineyard in California
worth $4,000, three wineries in that
State worth 100000 and a New York
office at 1856 Greene street. They sold
wine worth more than $1,5o0,000 last
year and paid more than $250,000 In
Federal taxes
Export Trade Improbable.
An affidavit of Perelli-Minetti is at
tacned 10 the Order TO snow cause. he
lives in Healdsburg, Cal, and has been
manufacturing and selling wine in the
United States for twenty years He as
serts that the law ruins the wine indus
try because there is not practical value
to the provision permitting the manu-
facture of wine for export. Wine can
not be profitably exported, he asserts,
because 1T can be manufactured cheaper
in foreign countries than here.
The affidavit contains a detailed dis
cussion of the situation at the time
when the food stimulation bill to which
the war prohibition measure is attached
was enacted November 81, 1918, ten
days after the armistice had been signed.
The law prohibits the manufacture of
wine, except fer sacramental purposes
and export after July /. 1919. The
plaintiffs say that at the close of busi-
ness June 80 they had in stock 100000.
gallons of marketable and salable wine
worth about $550,000.