Evening star., 1932-03-15
The Wet-Dry Vote.

| nc StlOWuONA III JlAC I1OAssC Va 3bCP
resentatives on a proposal for the re-
submission Of the eighteenth amend
! ment has been had. 1t revealed the
drys. the opposition to resubmission
| to be the stronger. But at the same
time it disclosed the fact that increas-
, ing sentiment in this country against
national prohibition has cut into the
dry strength materially. The vote on
the resubmission proposal stood 227
against and 1877 for it, a margin of only
40 votes. BY change of 81 of these
votes from the dry side to the wet the
proposal would have had majority.
With national campaign Immediately
ahead. the drys and the vets will exert
every effort to have nominated and
elected members of Congress who will
vote in accordance with their wishes.
The vote in the House yesterday was
upon a motion to discharge the House
Judiciary Committee from further con-
sideration Of the Linthicum-Beck reso-
luton proposing to amend the eight
zenith amendment by restoring control
Of liquor trafic to those States which
desired it. Had the motion carried the
result would have been to bring before
the House for consideration the resolu-
ton itself. To adopt that resolution
requires two-thirds vote of both the
House and the Senate, and then the
proposed constitutional amendment
must be ratified by three-fourths of the
States, either by constitutional conven-
tions or by State Legislatures. Majority
votes only in the constitutional conven-
tions and in the State Legislatures are
sufficient to ratify.
So, despite the inroads made by the
vets in their campaign for resubmis-
sion and repeal of the eighteenth
amendment as 1t now stands, the situa-
ton still appears materially to favor
the drys. DR.. F. Scott Mcbride, gen.
eral superintendent Of the Anti-Saloon
League, pointed this out in statement
following the vote in the House. Not
only, he said, are the vets far short
Of the necessary two-thirds vote in the
House for resubmission, but the House
vote is the least Of three hurdles which
the vets face, the other two being the
necessary two-thirds vote in the Sen
ate and ratification by three-fourths
of the State Legislatures.
Members of Congress, however, un-
less they hail from districts either
strongly wet or strongly dry, are Won
dering what will be the effect on their
political future of the votes they cast
yesterday. Already the wet and dry
organizations have issued their threats,
some Of them veiled and some not
veiled at all. DR.. McBrides statement,
for example, carries a clear implication
that the members OF the House who
voted for resubmission are to be sub
iected to the dry lash. On the other
hand, the Association Against the Pro-
hibition Amendment Is ready, as its Of
f1cers frankly admit. to campaign
against each dry member of the House
The path Of a member seeking re-elec-
tion in a close district, where wet and
dry sentiments are rather equally d.
vided, is not strewn with roses this
year.
The majority of the wet votes cast in
the House yesterday came from the
Republican side of the chamber, which
can scarcely fail TO impress the dry
organizations as well as the Republican
leaders. While the Democrats cast
80 votes for resubmission, the Repub-
licans cast 81. The total Republican
strength in the House is 214. Yet the
Republican party has been held to be
the great defender Of prohibition. But
when the roll was called, ia Demo-
Gratis voted against resubmission, as
compared to liz Republicans and l
Farmer-Laborite. Only S Republican
members of the House were unaccount-
ed for in the roll call.