The Daily Alaska empire., 1932-03-21
NATIONAL REFERENDUM.

The declaration of Gov. White of Ohio, classified as a dry Democrat in favor of submitting the Eighteenth Amendment to referendum will count strongly with those who propose that both Demo- crats and Republicans in their National Conventions eliminate Prohibition a party issue by declaring for resubmission of the Eighteenth Amendment to State conventions in which the delegates would be elected as vets or drys. The manner in which both Democrats and Republicans in Congress are work ing together as vets drys the case may be, suggested this of settlement It showed that Prohibition is losing it's status partisan issue, though in the North Democrats are probably more generally wet than Republicans. Now Gov White, dry, has declared that the drys cannot in justice decline to accept challenge to meet the issue in a referendum.
 One of the strongest arguments that have been set forth in favor of the bipartisan agreement for National referendum is in this editorial from the New York Herald Tribune, wet:
 The elimination of the highly controversial Prohibition issue from the coming national campaign would clearly be blessing for the whole country. It would enable the parties and the electorate to concentrate upon the vital economic ssues-more important than for many years. These could then be sidered upon their merits. wholly aside from the troublesome question as to what should be done with the Eighteenth Amendment. On this proposition there is no room for disagreement between the vets and the drys.
 There is a simple method by which this result be achieved Let both the Re- publican and the Democratic parties declare in their platforms not for repeal reten- tion, but for submission of the question by Congress to constitutional conventions in the various States. There could then be dispute this fall Decision would be post poned until the issue came before Congress. Neither in that body in the national convention would any dry have to violate honest convictions in order to approve submitting the question to the people for new verdict The real fight would over the election of dry or wet delegates to the various State conventions. That would be a referendum in which no other con- alterations would have to be taken into account in the voting. What reasonable objections can there be to this typically fair, conclusive and American way of set ting question?
 As is known, there is serious ment foot among prominent Republican leaders to have this sort of a referendum plank adopted by the national convention. Unless the President, out of deference per- haps to the professional drys should in- sist upon a dry declaration or, what would be worse, repetition of the evasion of 1928 there excellent prospects for the adoption of the proposed plan.
 Since 1928 wet sentiment in the party has grown to impressive proportions Some State conventions definitely on record for a change. They cannot well retreat from their positions without stultification. Many other States will elect wet delegates. To stife them would be unwise The New Jersey leaders, for instance already have decided to name delegates who will be for the nomination of President Hoover and at the same time for a plank satisfactorily to the voters in their State who insist that they have chance to register their wet opinions.
 The President has given no indication that he is displeased with this effort. Under all the circumstances it would certainly seem fair, wise and proper for him at least to maintain the attitude of neutrality and to let @the convention decide"
 Should the Republicans adopt the pro- posed plank it would be natural to expect the vets and the drys in the Democratic convention to agree on a similar declara-