“Drys will Desert Smith in Droves"

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 499, 31 October 1928, Page 9

“Drys will Desert Smith in Droves"

PROHIBITION ISSUE COULD NOT CHANGE LAW (United P.A.—By Telegraph — Copyright* (Australian and N.Z. Press Association J NEW YORK, Monday. Prohibition as an issue in the Presidential campaign seemed to have exhausted the possibility of new aspects under the full exposition given by the Democrat candidate, Mr. Al Smith, of his views. However, a chance statement by Mr. Smith in repfy to an assertion by the former Secretary of State, Mr. C. E. Hughes, that it was a sham battle, has disclosed a further factor. It is claimed that, in spite of Mr. Smith's anti-prohibition views, as President he could not produce any change in the basic law or Constitution. This was believed to have salved the consciences of those members of the Democrat Party who, noiwithstanding their leanings toward prohibition, still supported Mr. Smith. The candidate, in answering Mr. Hughes, declared that the President can do much toward furthering the repeal of the movement, and that if he is elected he intends to do so. Observers declare that the “dry” Democrats will now desert Mr. Smith in droves. Nevertheless, he does not seem to be much frightened at this prospect. He spoke at Baltimore this evening and intensified his arguments against prohibition. Mr. Smith denounced the AntiSaloon League, which withdrew ita support from Senator Norris for supporting Mr. Smith. He said he could think of no greater force for evil than that organisation, which threatened disaster to public statesmen who do not submit to its dictation. Continuing, Mr. Smith said: “The Volstead law is not an article of religious faith. You cannot make a new sin by law. It was not inscribed on the tablets of stone which were handed down by Moses. To drink is no sin.” Observers cannot agree whether Mr. Smith was wise or unwise politically, but the more cautious commentators point to several important facts. The total vote cast at the election in 1924 was 29,000,000. It is now estimated that the rolls for the coming election may contain between 43,000,000 and 45,000,000 names. In New York State, for instance, there is a 25 per cent, increase in enrolments. WHAT WOMEN MAY DO On the basis of these figures it is estimated that 35,000,000 persons may vote. The augmented electorate is not only due to the natural increase in population. The new voters are principally women, and this “silent vote” puzzles everyone. It may produce the surprise of the election and sweep aside every present surface indication that the trend of public sentiment is for the Republican candidate, Mr. Herbert Hoover. There is a surprising feature in a statement made by Mr. Hubert Work, Secretary of the Interior, that the Republicans will be victorious in the wheat and maize States and in 10 constituencies west of the Mississippi. But he fails to mention North Dakota, South Dakota, Missouri and Wisconsin. This pointed omission of the four States, two of which gave the Progressives strong support in 1924, seems an amazing admission that the Democrats have entrenched themselves there. Moreover, New York State, with its 45 important electoral votes and Democrat cities and its Republican agricultural areas, is considered a doubtful State. So are Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode island and New Jersey, which normally are Republican. These great Eastern seaboard States, with their crowded urban centres, seem to find a great appeal in Mr. Smith’s policy. It is in the foregoing facts that the seed of the unexpected may be sprouting. This leads careful observers to refrain from dogmatism as regards the results of the coming election.