Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1936-04-30

columns a year or more ago that the
campaign of 1885
6redR IN would bring forth
Party Lines some of the most
amazing oddities in
political alignments that this country
had ever known. It was apparent,
even during the battle for ballots in
1892, that gigantic shake-up In the
voting alignment Of citizens was in the
making. These things are now being
demonstrated and more proof of the
changing times seems just around the
corner.
We all have seen how such outstand-
ing figures as former Gov. Alfred E.
Smith Of New York, the Democratic
Presidential nominee in 1928, have bold
iy f1outed President Roosevelt and his
New Deal theories and we have wit
messed such vitriolic outbursts as those
by former Senator James A. Reed, that
old-line Missouri Democrat, and we
have watched with interest the hauling
and filling by Jeffersonian Democrats
who find New Deal fantasies to be
bitter pill to swallow. Lately, there
has come another most interesting stu
alton respecting partisan alignment.
Although the action received much
less attention than I believe 1t de-
serves, the determination of the Vir-
ginia Republicans in their recent con-
vention at Roanoke to refrain from
placing Republican candidate in the
field against Senator Carter Glass
constitutes, to my mind, one of the
most extraordinary twists ever to take
place under our two party system.
That convention, acting utterly without
precedent took the position that it was
better to leave the field clear for the
election Of the veteran senator than to
precipitate political battle by naming
a Republican candidate.
The reason for the action of the Vir-
GINA Republicans is quite clear in one
way. They felt that Carter Glass, al
though lifelong Democrat who has
carried on his share of bombardment
Of Republican principles and policies,
could do the country more good from
their standpoint than could be attained
by placing a Republican candidate
against him without chance of success.
To state this premise in another way:
Carter Glass does not swallow the
New Deal as whole and when he
finds Objectionable features in the
Roosevelt program, he is independent
enough and has the strength of char
acter to voice his feelings. Doing this
as member of the majority party in
the senate necessarily has more weight
than all of the criticism of the New
Deal that could be voiced by a Re-
publican-if one could be elected in
Virginia-and the Virginia convention
chose course which it believed would
best serve the nation as a whole.
But it is the circumstance of a
party convention refusing to engage in
battle that interests me most. Under
such circumstances, the old idea of
party loyalty becomes not only illogical
but ridiculous. Instead of call to
battle, we see what amounts to call
for support of theoretical opponent.
Of course, in the opinion of many,
Carter Glass is the outstanding ex-
ponent of conservative thought in the
Democratic party and if he speaks for
conservative thought in the Democratic
party he is almost speaking for con-
servative thought in the Republican
party. 1t is easy to see, therefore, why
the Virginia Republicans adopted the
course they did but where does that
leave party loyalty? What does it
mean as to the future alignment Of
political thought?
The course followed by the Virginia
Republicans is not more strange than
the action of Presi-
Tn tne dent Roosevelt him.
Other Hand self who has Endorsed
Senator Hiram John
SON of California and Senator George
Norris Of Nebraska, with almost boy
lsh enthusiasm. Senator johnson and
Senator Norris have not been regarded
No regular Renuhlicans hnt thov hova