Evening star., 1932-06-26
by WILLIAM HARD.

CHICAGO, June 25.-The Repubn-
| cans having had two fights at their
convention, the Democrats are going tc
have five at theirs. That's a superiority
of three, anyway.
The Republican fights were on the
adoption of a prohibition plank ano
on the nomination of Vice President
( The Democratic bouts will be as fol-
lows:
A. Shall the two-thirds rule fol-
nominating a Democratic candidate fol
the presidency be replaced by ma
jority rule? And, if so, at what stage
| in the proceedings?
B. Shall Jouett Shouse of Kansas and
of Washington, D. c., or shall Thomas
j. Walsh of Montana and of Washing
ton, D. c., be permanent chairman oi
, the convention?
c. Shall the Democratic party de-
! clare merely in favor of constitutional
opportunity for the repeal of the eight
eenth amendment or also in favor OF
the social desirability Of the repeal?
D. Shall Roosevelt or Smith or Gar
ner or Byrd or Ritchie or Reed OF
Murray or Traylor or White or Lewis
or one of the dark horses" (Cox. Baker
Bulkley, Young) be nominated fol
President?
E. Who in the world-zor country
shall be nominated for Vice President?
There may be also other struggles
but they will be devised as the conven-
ton goes along. 1t is sometimes be-
lieyed that the bitter words at Demo
cratic conventions are responsible fol
the frequent subsequent defeats of the
Democratic party at the polls. The
truth of this analysis of the matter
may be doubted The words against
Herbert Hoover at the Republican con-
vention of 1928 were as bitter as any
ever uttered at any Democratic gath
ering. Hoover, nevertheless, was elected
by a vote that indicated that the hurl-
ers of the bitter words remained Re-
publicans. The chief cause OF Demo-
cratic defeats is simply that regular
Democrats are fewer than regular Re-
publicans and have to make more con-
verts in order to win.
x X $*
Bout one in the approaching Demo
cratic convention-the bout regarding
the two-thirds rule-is dictated both by
! the hopes and by the fears of the ad-
| herents of Roosevelt. The RooSeveltian'
have been playing a bandwagon game
They have been claiming delegates ir
focks and predicting victory by O'Clock
( in the morning on the day of the battle
They have built up a psychology oi
easy and quick triumph. They feal
| accordingly that their soldiers may get
discouraged and may begin to fall away
| If the triumph does not rapidly even
tuate, as scheduled. They look with
foreboding at the tedious trench war.
| fare necessary in order to carry thell
candidate to success under the historic
rule requiring the acquisition of two
thirds of the delegate votes.
They accordingly are willing to incul
the enmitieS which may result from al
effort to change the rule requiring two
thirds to new rule requiring only
majority for nominations. The enmitie:
will spring from the fact that certain
number of delegates not hostile Il
Roosevelt personally will be distressed
by the thought that the ancient leis
urely habits of the party are to b'
changed into a system OF so-callec
"steam-roller action" not on any fore
seen general principle but for the In
stant advantage of a given candidate
The hostility which may thus aris'
| the Rooseveltians are willing to fac'
because they have a suspicion that theI
must win promptly or not at all.
x X X
Bout two-regarding the permanent
chairmanship-sprin from a similal
state of mind. The RooSeveltians wtsf
to take no chances. They hesitate tc
put the permanent gavel of the con-
vention into the hands of Jouett Shouse
who is not Of their faction. It is un'
deniably true that they at one time II
effect committed themselves to Mr.
Shouse for the permanent chairman
ship post. They now exercise tneh
right to change their views. ina
change will expose them to furthel
enmities in the convention. A certain
number of delegates possessed OF nj
personal hatred of Roosevelt are feeling
| that Mr.. Shouse has not been treatee
with entire fairness. Some sympathy
I is aroused in their breasts. From them
the cry Of "dictatorial tactics" begins
to be heard The Rooseveltians lister
to the cry with composure. They are
! willing to offend some delegates in ordel
! to insure themselves a rapid result, ano
! they expect that whatever hard feelings
are produced will be dissipated before
next November
Bout three-on the nature OF tn'
| prohibition plank Of the party-Wll De
Velop the main point OF distinction thE
year between Republican and Demo
cratic principles. In the Republican
| convention there was a strong sentiment
to the effect that the liquor traffic Is
national problem, requiring some meas
ure of national cognizance and control
In the Democratic convention that SEN
timent is not strong but feeble. MOS
Democratic delegates who so far have
graced Chicago with their presence arr
| eloquent defenders of the idea that tnt
personal habits of citizens are matters
| to be controlled not from Washington
D. c., but from the capitals OF thS
States.
That is, they defend that idea If they
are vets, and there are enough vets II
| the convention to force some action II
the general direction of their philosophy
The drys in the convention will not dC
combat with any vigor against the pro
posal for congressional submission OF
| constitutional amendment for Fedora
prohibition repeal They will earnestl!
Go combat against any declaration Z
the effect that the States, through thei
Legislatures or conventions, ought Il
ratify such a repeal.
| \
The drys point out that declaration
to that effect would be condemnation