Evening star., 1930-12-07


not mean, obviously. that political ex-
pediency is the best standpoint. It does
not mean, necessarily, that political ex-
pediency will govern the future treat
ment of prohibition by either party. 1t
is possible that the question will be set
tled-so far as it will ever be settled
by one party or the other taking a
course that is bold and firm. 1t may
be settled (again, so far as it can be
settled at all in any permanent senSe)
by one party or the other arriving at
a course which is the fruit of wise COM
promise between extreme points of view.
In short, the future course of one or
both parties on prohibition may be de-
termined by something more elevated
than party expediency. When the pres
ent article deals with the subject from
the point of view of political expediency
alone, it does so merely for the sake OF
simplicity. The consideration of proht-
bition wholly in terms Of party strategy,
as here attempted, can be looked upon,
If the reader chooses, as stunt"
November Election Results.
Consider first the Republicans. I'M
agine them to be attempting to chart a
future course about prohibition. I'M
agine them doing so with the principal
or exclusive object of avoiding defeat
In future elections. Finally, conceive
that the only data they have to guide
them, or at least the only thing they
use to guide them, is past experience
with prohibition as an issue. BY past
experience" is meant the results Of the
recent November election.
The Republican who sets himself to
this task will find himself facing a
bleak prospect. Consider what hap
pened in the November election to Re-
publicans running in elections in which
prohibition was main issue:
In New York the Republican candi-
date for Governor (and the Republican
party organization as wen) went all the
way over to the wet position. This way
of putting it is subject to some slight
qualification, but it is not material.
And the Republican candidate for Gov
ernor of New York, having gone all the
way over to the wet position, was given
the worst beating ever administered to
any Republican who ever ran for Gov
ernor of that state.
Mrs. McCOrmick's Race.
That was experience No. l. Turn now
to another variety of attitude on prohi-
bition and the result thereof.
In Illinois Ruth Mccormick went,
one may say, half way over to the wet
position She had been a dry. Qnci-
denteally, she had been dry by convic-
ton. and probably Is YETI In the prt-
mary election within the Republican
party Mrs. Mccormick ran as a dry.
Then, between the primary which she
had won and the election which she
hoped to win, she made the halfway
switch. There was to be In Illinois a
State referendum on prohibition. Mrs.
Mccormick announced that in her atti-
tude in the Senate, If elected thereto,
she would be guided by the outcome Of
the referendum. That may be described
as, roughly, a step halfway in the wet
direction.
Mrs. Mccormick went halfway wet,
adopted the middle courSe-and suf-
fered the worst defeat ever administered
to any Republican candidate for the
Senate in nlinois-the worst defeat, in
deed. ever administered to any Repub-
ncan candidate for any State ONCE in
Illinois.
That was experience No. 2, lesson No.
3. Consider now the third
In Massachusetts, William NJ Butler
was dry and Republican. He wished
to return to the United States Senate.
where once he served. He announced
himself as candidate. and in so an
nounctng he stood pat" as a dry He
ran as a dry-and he received almost
the worst beating ever administered to
any Republican candidate for the Sen
ate in Massachusetts. His defeat was
not as bad as the one suffered by the
Illinois Republican who went halfway
wet. or the one suffered by the New
York Republican who went all the way
wet. But it was pretty bad
There, in those three cases, are about
all the variations of position on prohi-
bition that 1t is possible to take. Re-
publicans in different States took all
Chree-and in all three cases were de-
1eated. If you were a Republican poll
ticlan and If you were trying to figure
out what stand on prohibition it is best
TO take and If you were trying to settle
the matter solely on the basis of party
expediency-in that series Of Ifs" what
would you conclude?
What is said above as to each Of the
elections named is of course, very much
abbreviated. As to each there were
issues besides prohibition and some
other conditions affecting the outcome.
think, however. that any politician or
observer would say that in all three
cases the attitude Of the candidate on
prohibition was a determining infiu-
ence. In short, it is safe to assume
that any politician would concede that
what Is above said about the elections
IN three large States is at least tenable.
Hastings an Exception.
There was just one other election, in
very small State, from which a Re-
publican, trying to chart his partys
future course on prohibition, might get
some comfort and some light. In the
tiny state Of Delaware a Republican
and dry, Daniel o. Hastings, ran for
reelection as United States Senator
He ran as a dry-he stood pat" And
he won. He won against an opponent
who was Democratic and wet. II there
Is any other State in which a Republi-
can dry ran for as high an of1ce as
Senator or Governor against a Demo-
cratic wet and succeeded in winning
Lhe writer of this article cannot recall
tie case.
Clearly this result in little Delaware
may have some meaning. Delaware Is
the home State Of the very wet chair
man Of the Democratic National Com
n1ittee, John j. Raskob. 1t is the State
Of the du Pont family, members OF
which are the leading figures in the
kSRpSsStlon Opposed to Prohibition In
snort. Delaware would seem to be q
State in which it should be dificult fol
a Republican dry to win. Nevertheless
this Republican dry, Senator Hastings
did win. One would suspect that Re-
publican leaders and dry Republican
candidates for ONCE in future elections
would look into this Delaware fight anc
try to find out from Senator Hastings
Just how he did 1t.
The exception Of little Delaware Is
however. almost immaterial to what
here set down. The broad conclusion
subject to not very much qualification
Is that the lessons of the recent elec.
tion in three large and important Statei
seem to close all the three possible
doors to success for the Republicans al
respects taking one attitude or another
about prohibition.
Somebody will cite, as an exception
New Jersey and Dwight Morrow. It
frlle that Dwight MnrroW ran for Sena.