The case of State v. Potokar, ante, p. 460, 15 N. W. (2d) 158, and this case were argued together. In the Potokar Case the defendant attacked the constitutionality of sec. 66.05 (10) (hm), Stats., which fixes closing hours of Class B malt-beverage licensed premises, and in this case the defendant Reidel attacks the constitutionality of sec. 176.06, fixing closing hours of Class B intoxicating-liquor licensed premises.

The questions involved in this case were fully considered and determined in the case of State v. Potokar. For the reasons stated in that case the order sustaining the demurrer must be reversed.

By the Court. — Order sustaining the demurrer is reversed.