Great Falls tribune., 1922-04-26

y
salaries were out all over the country
and many people laid off. Thousands
of people who the previous year drew
salaries high enough to make then
subject to the income tax, in 1921
both by raising the alcoholic con.
tent permitted by the law, and cut.
ting out or changing some Of its
more drastic features, so that light
wines and light beers may be
classed as not Intoxicating" and
lawfully made, transported and
sold, under the eighteenth amend
ment.
The prohibitionists are Of course
nearly solidly lined up against any
change in the law because they
claim that the attempt to change it
is merely stalking horse behind
which the anti-prohibitionists seek
to make the eighteenth amendment
of no force and effect through easy
violation Of its prohibitions.
While as 4 general rule, particu-
larly in the eastern states, the dem.
ocratic party is fairly we'll lined ur
against the Volstead enforcement
act and the republican party for it,
yet as we said before there are nu
merous exceptions on both sides
and so far the question has not be-
come party issue in any authori-
tative way. However, a statewide
organization is being formed to car.
ry this question into the congress.
sional election next fall. In some
states they have already succeeded
in their purpose, notably in New
York. New Jersey, and some other
eastern states. The recent congres.
sional special election in the thirty
seventh New York congressional
district turned largely on this ques-
tion, though there were other is
sues, we are told. It is a strong
republican district and at the pre-.
ceding election gave the republican
candidate about 10000 majority. In
the special election few days ago
the republican candidate endorsed
the Volstead act and the democratic
candidate assaulted it. The repub-
lican was elected by about three
thousand majority. The supporters
of the Volstead enforcement law
are not very enthusiastic over their
victory. but the organ of the anti
Volstead crowd claim it as vic
tory. "The Minute Man," which
claims to speak for them, thus
comments on the facts:
There is no escaping the signifi-
canoe Of recent events in the polit-
ical field. On April II a special
election to fill vacancy was held
in the thirty-seventh New York
congress district, where in 1920 the
republican candidate had a major
ity Of 2e,75O. This was reduced to
3,o87 with about so per cent Of the
vote cast, indicating a net decrease
in majority Of approximately four
fifths.
"The reason for this huge loss
was that the democratic candidate
former Judge Frank L. Irvine
made opposition to the Volstead act
the chief plank in his platform
while his republican opponent
Lewis Henry, upheld that statute
and prohibition. Otherwise Judge
Irvine had every political factor
against him. He was against the
bonus, SO the soldier organization:
were hostile: his party machinery
had been disrupted by the smashing
defeat Of two years ago and could
give little aid; Mr.. Henry had the
full force of the Washington ad.
back of him. But the
attack upon prohibition told the
tale. Not only did Judge Irvine
carry one Of the counties in the
district-Chemung-but he also
swept ever city, despite the fact
that each of these municipalities
had voted out the saloon in the pre-
prohibition days. Elmira gave him
1859 plurality; Corning, 625; Hor-
nell, 35o; Ithaca, z6s. Had It not
been for the overwhelming rural
Judge Irvine would un-
doubtedly have been elected to con.
gress.