Wine and the wine industry share a fascinating history – yes – as an award winning Boutique wine grower and producer, we may have a bias towards sharing information about “All Things Wine”, never-the-less we are fascinated by the origin and history of wine as a beverage.
Surely you’ve heard heard of the term “brix” in the context of wine referring to the sugar levels in wine grapes. Have you heard of the term “Bricks” of wine? We’re not talking masonry building elements, but a colorful and effective Prohibition era product offering to wine consumers…
In American history, nothing has had the overall impact on the Wine Industry as the 1920’s Prohibition movement. The politics and alliances that were formed to implement the 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution on January 16th, 1919, and later its repeal in 1933 by the 21st Amendment, is quite the read for students of U.S. wine history.
The fallout from backroom deals that were cut to implement the repeal of Prohibition are still with us today. If you live outside California – have you ever attempted to order your favorite wine from a special winery you visited on a wine tasting vacation – only to to find you could be prosecuted for a felony (in some states) by having wine shipped to your home ???
U.S. wine history details the origin of the maddeningly complicated alcohol and wine distribution and sales laws we live with daily – just visit the Family Winemakers of California or Free The Grapes organization’s websites for legal interstate wine shipping maps and you can see the problem.
Recently, a leading wine industry PR professional Tom Wark posted a series of excellent articles on threats to your consumer rights in the form of legislation targeting your already limited direct-to-consumer shipping rights – your only true freedom of choice in the wines you buy today.
I encourage to read all of Tom’s well written and informative posts on his Fermentation Blog – but here is a link to a recent and excellent article articulating the consumer hostile legislation on Capitol Hill being pushed by the alcohol distribution industry. If you are into consumer rights, and specifically your choices in wine consumption please read his posts.
BTW this blog site has a nice tribute to the late Juanita Swedenburg – wine lovers benefiting from direct shipping, must thank her for her successful U.S. Supreme Court case defending wine shipping regulations.
As an award winning Boutique winery, quality wine is understandably one of our top passions. As with any career field, the wine industry has many areas of specific and unique knowledge, and specialized terms and processes – just as in medicine, art, and the sciences – actually we’ve been known to say winemaking is a carefully orchestrated blend of science and art.
Below article is shared from the Napa Valley Register’s Traces of History series – an excellent source of wine industry information specific to California’s world-renowned wine regions.
Please enjoy the Napa Valley Register’s
Traces of History
Prohibition in Wine Country
By Kelsey Burnham, Special to the Register | Posted: Sunday, April 18, 2010
In the 13 years it was in effect, the 18th Amendment to the Constitution could have killed the wine industry in the Napa Valley. Instead of collapsing under the pressure of the new law, a few industrious business people decided to make the best of the hand they were dealt and found loopholes in the law.
On Jan. 16, 1920, the amendment went into effect. America banned the production, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors.
Prohibition grew out of the temperance movement, which had been around since the inception of the country and was born of the puritan values of some of the first settlers.
As the movement gathered steam proponents used both religious and scientific reasons to back the ban, and prohibition became a signature cause of politically active women of the era.
In October 1919 the amendment, along with a companion piece of legislation known as the Volstead Act — named for the conservative senator from Minnesota who championed the cause — was approved in Congress. Prohibition was set to take effect at the beginning of the new year.
In the months between the passing of the act and its instatement, some vineyard owners tore out their vines and replaced them with orchards. Others, however, recognized the continuing marketability of grapes, since the sale and transport of fresh or dried grapes was not banned under the new amendment — although the law explicitly stated that if the shipper knew that the final buyer was going to use the grapes for making wine then both buyer and seller could be charged with conspiracy.
Nonetheless, growers were confident that grapes to be used in wine would pass through the hands of a sufficient number of wholesalers and buyers that charges would be difficult to raise or prove. The sale of Napa County grapes proved to be an incredibly lucrative endeavor during Prohibition, reaching buyers as far away as New York.
Dried grapes were marketed in a different manner. Beringer Vineyards, for example, sold what were called raisin cakes for use in the making of grape juice.
Distributors and retailers warned consumers not to let the juice ferment, but in reality they were drawing attention to the wine-making potential of the cakes. For example, these representatives told consumers not to let the juice sit aside in a jug for 21 days, because that would cause fermentation to occur, and that using a cork was unnecessary for non-alcoholic beverages. Each brick was also sold with a warning label that stated that the juice could ferment into wine.
Another loophole allowed production of sacramental wines if the winery could get a permit through the government. One of the wineries that took advantage of this was Beaulieu Vineyard. Founder Georges de Latour was a practicing Catholic and a friend of the archbishop of San Francisco. He used this connection to his advantage and secured an exclusive deal to sell wine to all the priests in the diocese. Other wineries established similar deals with rabbis.
With the amount and types of wine that the priests and rabbis were buying it is probable that they were acting as bootleggers for their congregations, and their titles effectively shielded them from prosecution.
Bootlegging was the common but less-than-legal way to keep wineries open and making money. The Volstead Act allowed individuals to buy a household permit to have 200 gallons of wine a year for personal use. Some permit holders would make wine, drive it to Sausalito and ferry it over into the bars of San Francisco. They would also bottle new wine and switch it out with bottles in their cellars, which were locked and routinely inspected by the government to make sure bottles did not go missing.
These pathways around Prohibition allowed a select few businesses to boom in the days that looked dire for both vineyards and wineries. In fact, between 1920 and 1933, grape production actually increased and the savvy business people who figured out how to work the system became exceedingly wealthy. In an era when the economy of the Napa Valley could have been severely crippled, it survived and many thrived.
Burnham is a Napa County Historical Society intern. Research for this article was conducted at the Napa County Historical Society, in the historic Goodman Library Building. The society is open Tuesday-Saturday from 12-4 p.m. and the Society’s Research Library is open Tuesday-Thursday, 12-4 p.m. The society houses an extensive research library, changing exhibition space and presents a variety of programs and events. The Society is a non-profit 501 (c) 3 organization. For more information or become a member visit www.napahistory.org or call 224-1739.
Fair Use Notice
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains both original and copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, health, business, wine and wine industry issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. If you are the copyright holder and feel that this use does not fit under the clause mentioned above, then please let us know and we will remove this from our site. Please consider that your material is cited or hyperlinked to you URL improving your site’s search engine rankings and your Internet presence. We appreciate link backs for this same reason. Thank you.