PROHIBITION ISSUE

Evening Star, Issue 21130, 16 June 1932, Page 9

PROHIBITION ISSUE

AMERICAN REPUBLICANS DIVIDED PROCEEDINGS AT PRESIDENTIAL CONVENTION Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright. CHICAGO, June 15. (Received June 16, at 9.25 a.m.) The Republicans foregathered at the convention stadium for about an hour and demonstrated twenty minutes for Mr Hoover. They then adjourned until after dinner to-night. The adjournment was made necessary by the Resolutions Committee’s failure to reach a final agreement on the wording of the Prohibition plank. It is hoped that an agreement will be reached before tonight, or the issue will take the open floor. The “ wet ” forces promise an exciting fight should this be done, but there is some reason to believe that any pugnaciousness will be promptly “ steam rollered.”

The demonstration for Mr Hoover, of whom there is not even a single picture hung in the huge hall, bore at its inception all the signs of a preconceived performance carefully managed, but it gained spontaneity as time went on. Governor Rolph (a Californian delegate) led the march of the States, even Wisconsin joining.

There are no Radical group conventions this year, the La Follette and Brookhart’s followers being defeated for the control of their State delegations. Meantime the Resolutions Committee has been without sleep for thirtysix hours. It is clear that its labours must end to-night.

A DIFFICULT PROBLEM

The wrangle over the Prohibition issue at the Republican Party Convention is partly due to a desire to anticipate the Democratic decision on the matter, and leave the rival party with nothing to put before the m the way of an election plank on the question. But even more, the strife is due to a real split among the RepubliFo'r some time past there has been discussion of the possible adoption of at least a plank pledging a referendum on the issue, and, while some party members would like to go still further, it seems to be conceded that promise of a referendum is all that is politically wise, and the utmost that the Democrats themselves will concede. Inis despite the fact that Messrs Al. Smith and John J. Raskob are seeking to make the Democratic Party an out-and-out repeal organisation, contending that the issue is as important economically as any other issue, and is also the most vital of all. The recent victory of a Wet Democrat over a Dry Republican in the Fifth New Jersey District had great effect in the Republican ranks. This elfect was not confined to the Prohibition issue, for the Democrat had based his campaign on the failure of the Hoover Administration, and the result of the vote made that Administration realise that some major step was needed ot retain public support. Republican hopes of Hoover’s re-election now centre around his attitude towards the Prohibition issue. The tremendous unpopularity of Hoover’s Dry stand in the great Wet and indispensable Eastern and Middle Western States has convinced party managers that this attitude must be changed. The regular Republicans have shown an embarrassing habit of choosing nninstructed delegates to the Convention. These delegations-—in New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey will be pro-Hoover, because there is no one else for them to support. But they are likely to prove troublesome at the Convention, and to stand out for draati; changes in campaign policy. The Convention, of course, is one cog in the machine created by American partypolitics for the purpose of winning an election, and it will seek to trim its policy to the public desires as it conceives them. The States which have not chosen to instruct their delegations have thus revealed unmistakeable distaste for a dry leader, and that significant move foreshadows a change in the platform plank on Prohibition. Recent reports from the Dnited States indicate that the pressure on Mr Hoover has been redoubled in the direction of placing a referendum plank in his platform. While the Dry Republicans have been declaring that “ a way will bo found ” to prevent the wets from making trouble, thy have apparently not been really hopeful. Should the unexpected happen, and the Democrats pick a candidate who is for straight-out repeal, though his platform will not go that far, it is probable that it will be sufficient to send the Prohibition vote to Mr Hoover. One thing certain, however, is that Mr Hoover himself will not be driven to an expression of opinion on the issue.