Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-04-13
SPIRIT OF DRY LAW
OPPOSED TO SALE
OF "JUICE" FOR WINE
CONTINUED From First Page.)

|
changes in the law to Clarity the situa-
! ton.
MIR. Lusk, for the Crusaders, in his
| queries to Col. Woodcock recalled that
the Wickersham Commission found lin
consistent provisions" in the law con-
| corning homemade wine.
| Fruit Industries, Ltd, which, we are
informed, Is assisted by Government
subsidy in excess of $500 900 through
| the Federal Farm Board wrote Mr..
LllSk, has just established sales Office
! at seventeenth and H streets northwest.
! two blocks from the White House for
| the sale of grape juice concentrates and
| kegs especially adapted for the purpose
| OF home wine making.
/ In order that the citizens may know
what they may properly do within the
law, we ask you to state whether the
sale OF this product is legal and If SO,
whether it is also legal to sell kegs for
the purpose OF making wine which will
develop greater alcoholic content
/ than is permitted by the VoIstead act.
The keg has been treated as a part of
| the apparatus for making liquor and
the press has reported many raids in
which kegs were seized which had been
offered for sale.
THE report of the Wickersham Com
mission points out inconsistent pro-
visions in the national prohibition law
which, while forbidding the home
manufacture of beer, permits at least
by Interpretation the home manufac-
ture Of wine (Sec. 29). The commission
recommended legislation to correct this
inconsistency.
"As responsible head of the bureau
charged with the enforcement of the
national prohibition law, we wish to
know whether you agree with the COM
mission as to the present inconsistent
cleS OF the law and, if so, whether YOU
intend to recommend to Congress a re-
vision of the law to make it consistent
with itself? That is, do yon intend to
recommend that the home manufacture
OF beer be made legal or the home
manufacture OF wine be made Illegal?
"One further question-Do YOU be-
leve that the sale of a product on the
expectation that it viii develop IL to
20 per cent of alcohol is in keeping
with the spirit of the eighteenth amend
ment?
In his reply Col woodcock referred
| to the question: You asked me first
whether the advertisement and sale OF
grape Juice concentrates and kegs by
Fruit Industries, Ltd, is unlawful,
i am sure" continued the prohibi-
ton director, that you are entirely IA
mil1ar with sections 18, rs and 30 of
the national prohibition act. If these
articles are advertised and sold with
an intent that they be used in the
manufacture of beverage which is IN
toxicating in fact, then such advertise
ment and sale are unlawful. I am sure
that you, as lawyer, will appreciate
the practical difficulty of the proof of
such unlawful intent. We have prose-
cutions against somewhat similar en-
terpriseS under way in Los Angeles,
Calf, and Kansas City, Mo. Such
prosecutions will be made whenever the
evidence of such unlawful intent is
available to convince petit jury be-
yond a reasonable doubt.
You asked me secondly whether I
agree with the Wickersham Commits
sion's report wherein it points out al
legged inconsistent provisions in the ma
tional prohibition law respecting the
manufacture of beer in the home and
the manufacture of wine in the home
There is no saving exception in the ma
tional prohibition act in this respect
as to homemade wine. The saving ex-
ception is as to Notwithstanding fruit
juices and cider. have no comment to
makee upon the law, my duty being to
enforce 1t as Congress enacts it. have
no intention of recommending to Con-
gress any change in the law in any
respect.
You finally ask me If I believe that
the sale of q product on the expecta-
ton that it will develop II to 20 per
cent of alcohol is in keeping with the
spirit of the eighteenth amendment
do not"
Mr.. Llsk had written previously to !
Attorney General Mitchell, asking SINH !
lar questions He received from Assistant |
Attorney General YoungquiSt, in charge /
of prohibition, an answer explaining |
that 'in view of the fact that legal |
opinions may be given only to the
President and to the heads of depart /
ments of the Government it is not |
proper that any opinion be given you
by this department. nor would it be |
appropriate to discuss with you any
possible recommendations to Congress" /
MIR. Lusk then wrote to Director /
Woodcock, and received his reply.
Col. Woodcock's replies to Mr. Lusk |
are entirely in line with his previous
discussion of the whole problem of
fruit juices and homemade wine. When |
fruit industries first began placing its
product on the market the prohibit
ton director was closely quizzed regard
ing his policy on the matter. He ex-
planned the law regarding the situation,
and frankly admitted the difficulties in
enforcement Contrary to much popular
opinion and report. however. Col.
Woodcock never said that it was lawful
to make intoxicating wine in the home.
His letter to Mr.. LuSk, made public to-
day further outlined his policies in
greater detail, and was the subject of
much interest and discussion |