Washington sentinel., 1898-04-02
Prohibition in Alaska.

The bill making further proVi-
sion for a civil government for
Alaska was taken up in the Senate
last Wednesday. The pending
amendment when the bill was last
under consideration was one
offered by Mr., Perkins (Rep.,
CALI, requiring the payment OF
high licenses in Alaska, and an
amendment to it offered by Mr..
Hansbrough, prohibiting the man.
ufacture or sale of liquors there.
Mr.. Hansbrough said that high
license provision was simply GER
tificate of partnership between the
Government and the saloon keep
ers and that the people did not de-
sire the Government to engage in
such an enterprise.
Mr.. Carter (Rep., MONTY, in
charge OF the bill, favored the
amendment, although he SAID the
committee had not formally acted
upon it. In spite of the law pro-
hibiting the sale Of liquors in
Alaska, the liquor traffic was now.
and had been continually, in oper-
alton. The question was not one
of a sentimental character, but ofa
practical character. Twenty years
of experience had demonstrated
the total inability of the Govern
ment to enforce the prohibtory
law in Alaska. The nature Of the
climate and the character OF the en-
terprises prosecuted there seemed
TO prohibit fair trial there OF the
prohibition scheme.
Mr.. Perkins argued that the
amendment which be had offered
was in the interest OF temperance,
good morals, good citizenship, and
good government. The prohibi-
tory law could not be enforced in
Alaska without the presence OF an
army. II the Government wanted
to commence the reform advocated
by the Senator from North Dakota,
this Capital City was the place for
it. The Government not only sold
internal revenue licenses in Wash.
ington, but it took half oil the
money which the saloon men paid
to the city for their licenses.
Mr. Gallinger (Rep.. N H. ques-
toned the latter statement. but
Mr.. Perkins justified it by showing
that one-half Of the revenue OF the
District went to pay its expendi-
lures.
Mr.. Perkins sent to the clerk
and had read a report from the
Governor Of Alaska showing the
unpopularity OF enforcing the pro-
hibItion law and how its effect was
only demoralizing. He recon-
mended its repeal, and the substi-
tuition of high license law. Mr..
Perkins wound up his argument
by saying that as the Government
had made an ignominious failure
in the attempt to prohibit the sale
Of liquor in Alaska, it was the part
OF wisdom to see if by a high
license law the traffic could not be
controlled.
Mr.. Gallinger. in the interest Of
the advocates Of prohibition,
argued against Mr.. Perkins's
amendment. He gave notice that
he would move to recommit the
bill for the purpose of giving the
churches, the Sabbath schools and
the good people generally an op-
portunity to be heard through
their representatives, and to pre-
sent to the committee their side OF
the controversy, and show why
the amendment should not be in
corporated into law.
Mr. Wilson (Rep., Wash. ad.
vocated Mr.. Perkins's amendment,
declaring at the same time that he
had never tasted any Intoxicating
liquors.
Mr.. Gallinger then made the
motion to recommit the bill,
whereupon Mr.. Perkins withdrew
his amendment. The bill was then
passed, and the Senate, after a
short executive session, adjourned.