Evening star., 1928-10-28
Hoover May Win by Nose or by
Landslide, Smith by Narrow Margin

Catholicism. The first Is in effect a
seeking of political solidarity against
Catholics. The second is in effect a
seeking of political solidarity by Catho-
lies. Donovan sees these evils as twin
evils and calls upon his fellow Catho-
lies to repudiate both Of them with
equal fervor. He will be followed in
this course by other Catholics Of
distinction.
Gov Smith will indubitably poll the
overwhelming mass of Catholics; but
the advertisements of "The Calvert
Associates" have given to the Hoover
Catholics an occasion and an oppor-
tunity to increase their numbers, per-
hapS quite considerably, through charg-
ing Smiths managers with inJuring the
1t across the bloody sands of the polit-
ical arena In the face of an unlocking
country which is dominantIy Protestant
They argue that If all Catholics allow
themselves to be bounded by the Klux-
ers and Shepherded by THE Calvert
Associates" into voting for Smith, they
will find themselves segregated among
their Protestant neighbors and ulti-
mately condemned to the political
impotence of marked and mistruSted
minority. This argument is not prov
ing to be irresistible, but it is proving
to have weight.
The final result accordingly of the
new play by the Democrats toward
stresSing the religious issue Is problem
atical The same comment must be
made upon the new play by the Repub-
licans in stressing the issue of Govern
ment in business.
Mr. Hoover's closely and solidly
reasoned New York speech against
state Socialism" was a smashing hit,
and 1t got him dazzingly to first base
among the industrial forces of the
country, but it also came perilouSly near
to getting his party thrown out at
second base-temporarily, at least
among the "Socialistic" McNary-
Haugenites of the agricultural North
west. Reports came rolling into Wash
ington, through loyal and alarmed
Republican channels, to the effect that
the New York speech, with its emphatic
wholesale Reputation of Government
ownership and operation. was being
taken in the Northwest as total aban-
donment of the relief of the farmer
Che inevitable consequence is that
Hoover'S st. Louis speech to be deliv-
.
ing critical event of the campaign.
Smith has now used up all the big
shells in his ammunition dump. He
has battered new holes into the pop
ularity OF the eighteenth amendment.
He has shot the doctrine of "a tariff
for revenue only" into its grave and
has thus demolished certain part of
the business fear OF a Democratic ad-
ministration. He has at the same time
commended himself-by his water
power policy and his farm policy and
by his general -mindedIiess toward
adventures in economics-to the atten-
tive regard of the element called tech
nically Progressive" He has made
John J. Raskob and George w. Norris
happy on the same Seat-Or, at any
rate, on two seats on the same wagon.
That one fact is SUFFICIENT tribute
to the consummate art which Gov.
Smith has shown In what Is virtually
the creating Of new political party
in the United States.
- **
Mr.. Hoover, on the other hand, has
audaciouSly, and with immense strategic
skill, set up liberalism" as the an
tagonist to current "progreSsivism In
his New York speech he portrayed the
negative side of "liberalism"-its re-
coil from the intrusion of Government
into the actual operation of any COM
mercial business. He still has a shot
in mis- locker. At st. Louis he will un-
doubtedly portray the positive side of
liberalism" He will portray what in
his opinion a liberal" administration,
without itself operating any business,
can do to facilitate the marketing Of
farm products and to erect agriculture
into a genuinely competent industry.
In this oratorical task Hoover may
draw heavily upon his experiences In
bringing assistance TO the manufacture
ing and commercial industries as
Secretary of Commerce. The question
remains Can he sufficiently prove his
liberalism" to meaE not only freedom
hut also action?
That is the accumulated key-question
OF this campaign. and 1t may turn the
balanced lock Of its outcome one way
or the other.
(Copyright, 1929