Arizona republican., 1915-01-23
Californias Liquor Cooe

The movement of the liquor traflc to reform it. self has become leading pronounced in Cali forria It has been advocated elsewhere especially hv the brewing and wine producing interests for the last two three years, since it was seen that the model license" movement unavaiing to arrest tide of prohibition Yet these interests yet willing to cut loose entirely from the general liquor traffic. But the wine-sroveTs and brewers of California now see that they can save themselves only by general divorcement from the sprituous liquor industry and by the most rigid reg ulation of the saloons
 Accordingly, a bill has been Introduced into the California legislature An act for the suppression of incompetence and the regulation of the liquor traffic. to be known the liquor code of Califor- na.' The features of the proposed code are:
 Placing control liquor business the hands O officials and taking such control en- tirey out of the hands Of city and county authori- ties
 Distinction between licenses for sale of malt and lnous liquors and licenses for sale of spirituous liquors, with the intention of encouraging the of the lighter beverages.
 Fixing scale Of license fees to rule for all parts of the
 Liquor licenses be permanent during good be- havior of holders of such licenses
 Issuing of licenses in accordance with ratio of population.
 Creation of compensation fund to be distributed among saloons arbitrarily retired by enforcement of provisions of this law.
 Permitting saloons to be opened Sunda4s only between the hours of pm. and 6 pm.
 Forbiddng the sale of liquor to persons of noto- riously incorporate habits
 If some such action had been taken three four years ago he Drnhibtion sentiment in California would never have attained the strength it developed in the late campaign. Perhaps a majority at least, considerable part of the vote for prohibition there by and who would have pre- ferred thorough regulation but the varous branches of the traffic bndy opposed any Interference with privilege which they could could be taken away from them readily had been granted them.s
 The brewers and the makers stood the distlers too long, not because they owed them any thing, but because false notion the saying that in union there is strength. For years the dstillers have hestaed to let the brewers go by the board It made comparatively little difference to the dis tiers how far under the old methods the prohib- ton area was extended Sprituous liquors of smaller bulk than beer and wine easily intro duced into dry territory. and were more easily oealed and dispensed. It used be the boast of the dislers that the consumption of their products had increased within the prohibition area. The less beer, the whisky consumed.
 We recall that in the earlier prohibition cam paigns in Arizona. though the large brewers con tribued literally to campaign funds, the distilling interests generally did not But, with the rnent of the Webb Kenyon law and the newer form of the state prohibition enactmens, it is as diff ficult to introduce sprituous malt liquors sistance evasion of the laws has become almost hopeless.
 The brewers and the wine makers longer combating public sentiment, but arc eudeavoring to pacate it. To do that, they recog- nze that there must be a complete separation from the distilling element. In many quarters it is be- lieved that the only thing that will preserve the traffic in a milder form is complete divorcement from the saloon, involving the necessity of procur- ing other means of distribution.