The Birmingham age-herald., 1908-08-28
From the Boston Globe.

From the Boston Globe.
 IN American politics none of the minor parties has enjoyed so long life A as the prohibition party. For more than 35 years a prohibition national ticket has been in the field at every presidential election.
 Although in 1872 the prohibition can didate for President boiled only about $500 votes, the party made its nomi- nations again four years later, and its candidate received in round numbers $500 votes. In 1880, however, even Neal Dow, celebrated leader in the success ful prohibition movement in his own state of Maine, obtained as the candi date for President only 10,905 votes.
 Nothing daunted by this apparent want of progress in a period of four years the prohibitionists in 1884 put forward ex-Governor John P. St. John of Kansas, a prohibition state, as their standard bearer, who boiled the as tonishing vote of 151, ,S09. Four years later the prohibition candidate received nearly 900 votes but the vote in 1892 showed only the slight increase represented by a total of 264,1 ,133.
 Tn 1896 the vote showed a falling off of almost exactly one-half, and it has not since reached the figures of 1s years ago.
 There has been an impression that the prohibition vote in the national election this year will show surprising strength. The leaders of the party ap- near to be confident that the prohibi- ton candidate will draw large numbers of votes from both of the major parties because of the unsettled state of parti- san lines.
 The prohibition party made its first great gain in 1884, when party lines were considerably broken, and suffered it's most notable loss in 1896, when the presidential contest was the fiercest be- tween the republican and democratic candidates.
 As fl third party the prohibitionists have seen rivals rise and fall. The Greenback party in 1880 boiled over BOT. 900. lost about two-thirds of this in 1884 and disappeared in 1888, the year in which the union labor party boiled nearly 150,o00 votes. The peo- ples party in 1892, with James B. Weaver. who had led the groonbackers 12 years before, boiled over 100000, and was the only third party candidate since 1860 to win any electoral votes. Four years ago the socialist candidate, Eugene V. Debs, polled over 100000 votes. and this year he is again the nominee.
 The prediction of increased strength in the national prohibition movement this year is based on the remarkable gains that local prohibition has made in a large number of states. At the beginning of the year there were six proh ibition states in the Union, Maine, Georgia, North Dakota, Kansas Okla homa and Alabama. In all but eight states some form of local option has prevailed, and in nearly all these local option states the dry territory has been steadily increasing In the past 10 years
 In a large number of southern and western states the prohibition move ment has had extraordinary activity and success in recent years, and some of these states are practically "dry." But whereas formerly the prohibition movement found its first organized support in states the political compiex- ion of which was strongly republican many of the states which have recently adopted proh are strongly demo" cratic in political sentiment, and the two prohibition states of Maine and Georgia afford a striking contrast in their politics.
 The prohibition party has not chosen it's candidates for President, save in two elections, with much aparent ref erence to the prohibition sentiment in the states from which these candidates came. In 1880 Neal Dow of Maine. anil in 1884 John P. St. John of Kansas were nominated.
 It is interesting to note the extent to which the national prohibition candi-