National Affairs: Simply Remove the Bung

Long have U. S. citizens been peddled kegs of California and New York grape juice, destined to become wine in the citizens’ homes. These were semi-bootleg sales, unnoticed by the Prohibition Bureau. There was no advertising, only a door-to-door canvass. But last week in Milwaukee there appeared large billboard and full-page newspaper advertisements for a grape concentrate called “Vine-Glo.”Beside thin-stemmed glasses of ruby and amber liquids were the words: “You can’t buy it from peddlers. Not on sale at any store. Never served in any restaurant-BUT YOU CAN HAVE IT DEPENDABLY AND LEGALLY FOR USE IN YOUR OWN HOME.

“The problem is solved at last. Yours again . . . always legal . . . (by the distinct provisions of Section 29 of the Prohibition Act*). . . . Absolute satisfaction or your money back. . . . Eight varieties: PORT, MUSCATEL. TOKAY. VIRGINIA DARE, CLARET. SAUTERNE, BURGUNDY, RIESLING. Five gallon keg: $14.75-Ten gallon keg: $24.50.”

This was a long-heralded campaign begun by Fruit Industries, Inc., an association of California grapemen backed in their effort to dispose of a bumper crop by a $1,300,000 loan from the Federal Farm Board (TIME, Oct. 20). At once Prohibition Director Amos Walter Wright Woodcock was besieged with queries. Previously he had said: “Wine may be made in the home for use in the home.” Then, when that remark received wide publicity, he had said: “It is all a question of intent. . . .”Following that, his men had obtained the indictment of nine California grapemen for advertising that “fine old wine” could be made from their product. Last week both Director Woodcock and his superior, Attorney General Mitchell, shied off all queries as to what they would do about Fruit Industries’ advertising, which officials of the company and the company’s attorney, onetime Assistant Attorney General in charge of Prohibition Mabel Walker Willebrandt. maintain is within the law.

One Fruit Industries’ official said: “After hiring Mrs. Willebrandt. [the company] picked out New Haven for trial of sales experiment. This was turned down by Washington. They then picked Cleveland. This was also turned down by Washington, and they were told to put on the opening campaign in Milwaukee.” Upon this statement also Director Woodcock declined last week to comment.

“Vine-Glo” is obviously intended to turn into wine. But the method of turning it (simply remove the bung) is not mentioned on billboards or in the newspapers. At no place in Fruit Industries’ advertising does the word “wine” appear. Also, while the advertising says, “There is only one way to get it,” and directs prospective purchasers to some 200 druggists and 100 grocers in Milwaukee (agents who do not carry the kegs, simply take orders), the advertising does not describe the servicing and bottling performed by the grapemen themselves when the wine has matured at the end of 90 days. Thus the advertising reveals no intent to make an alcoholic product. Pending word or action from the Department of Justice, observers could only conclude that the carefully engineered introduction of “Vine-Glo” constituted a marvelous Modification of Prohibition without any statute having been changed.

Ralph Merritt, one of the grapemen, last week declared: “We believe this program … is of material assistance to the Government in enforcing Prohibition.” Charles Collins Teague, a member of the Farm Beard, agreed. Dramatic color was lent their view when many a newspaper, particularly in California, reported that Alphonse (“Scarface Al”) Capone, No. i U. S. gangster, had issued a threat of death to any Chicago druggist or grocer who accepted a Fruit Industries agency. The Los Angeles Examiner said Capone was incognito in its city, presumably to discuss his new competition at its source. Chicago is the next market Fruit Industries contemplates entering.

* “The penalties . . . against manufacture of liquor without a permit shall not apply to a person for manufacturing non-intoxicatins: cider and fruit juices exclusively for use in his home.”