The Daily Alaska empire., 1936-07-14
THE NEW LIQUOR REGULATION

Considerable comment has been created in some sections of the Territory over the closing regulation which is scheduled to go into effect liquor sales Under the rule sale of liquor which. includes beer and wine will be permitted between the hours of a. m and a m. To clarify the question which some have raised to whether the Board of Liquor Control meant beer and wine 1t might be well to quote paragraph of the liquor act amendment passed by the last Legislature It reads Whenever the term intoxicating liquor is used in this Act it shall be deemed to include all sprituous, Vinous malt oher fermened distilled liquor intended for human con- sumption and containing more than per cent alcohol by volume"
 The action comes the Board has pointed out as the result of complaints from parts the Territory which appear to represent majority senti ment The merit of the rule is a matter of opinion but opinion is worthwhile which does not look al the whole picture.
 It cannot be looked that the 1883 Legislature put the entire liquor problem in the hands of the Board of Liquor Control which includes the Cover nor, Attorney General Treasurer Auditor and the Highway Engineer The last Legislature made con- siderable noise about the liquor issue and finally wound up by leaving the situation virtually the same as before, with the addition of local option clause and setting up $3O0OO for enforcement.
 But the fact remains that the law reads "It shall be the duty of the Board of Liquor Contro to prescribe rules and regulations to govern the facture, barter, sale and possession of intoxicating liquors in the Territory to prescribe the quaifica tions of those who engaged in the manufacture barter sale and possession of intoxicating liquors ii the Territory of Alaska to prescribe license fees and excise taxes therefore"
 The Board a fair-minded body of men, has handled trying problem in admirable style theil action is compared with the furore raised in virtually every State in the Union It has been lenient anc unbiased. general satisfaction in administration was universally expressed, and, as matter of fact still is. The pile of favorable reaction contained 1T messages to the Board from cities and communitie throughout the Territory bears mute evidence tc that The Board has consistently left the matter O. regulation in cities primarily up to the cities, where of course, it belongs local problems differ. How ever complaints have arisen from communities out side incorporated cities well in them. There ha been nsistent demand for closing g-hour regulation The Board could not very well, in fairness put clos
 ing regulations in effect in outside city districts anC not apply the same to those inside. Thus the nev regulation is territorial-wide.
 Most cities previously have adopted closing regu lations at their volition They will not be ef fected by the new rule Outside districts whicl apparently wanted the further regulation have il There isn't anything very alarming about the whol situation. It appears to to be of thos majority opinions which happens to become effectv tomorrow. If 1t does not continue to meet wlt majority approval, thousands of laws and regua tions have experienced before it can be changed b the majority sentiment It is entitled to a fai hearing. If doesn't work junk it. The 18th amend