THE LITERARY DIGEST’S CANVASS
The cry has gone up from time to time since the passage of the Volstead
Act that the country at large wanted--nay, had demanded, Prohibition.
_The Literary Digest_, hearing and noting these reiterations, decided
to investigate the feeling of the land. They would have a referendum of
the people through a straw vote; and they would get, in that way, at
the truth.
Many of us were not at all sure of the sentiment in communities like
the Far and Middle West. We knew that the South, for reasons best
known to itself, had favored large arid territories; but the East had
remained insistently wet. Therefore, it was a big surprise, when the
_Literary Digest’s_ returns began to come in, to discover that in
many sections a reverse feeling flourished from that which had been
anticipated. It must have proved a shock to the Anti-Saloon League, in
its smug complacency, to learn that many citizens, like a man I met in
Omaha, declared that he was greatly in favor of Prohibition--until we
got it.
Indeed, many feel just like that. Conditions are certainly intolerable
wherever I have been. Drunkenness may have disappeared from the
sidewalks, but it has taken to the taxicab; and though the corner
saloon has gone (I hope forever) the hip-flask has taken its place, on
the south-east corner of many an individual.
So much had been said and written of the feeling of the country, that
the _Digest_ (the editor-in-chief is a Prohibitionist, if I am not
mistaken) went right to the heart of the thing, in no uncertain manner.
Much discussion had taken place as to the temper of the people, and
there seemed no way of arriving at the truth.
Ten million blanks were sent out, to every kind of voter. The Bonus
for Soldiers and Sailors was more or less tied up with Prohibition.
Therefore it was deemed wise to try to get the popular sentiment on
both questions at the same time.
The questionnaire, in the form of a ballot, was as follows:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
: Secret Ballot on Prohibition and Soldiers’ Bonus :
: No Signature--No Condition--No Obligation :
: Mark and Mail at Once :
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
_PROHIBITION:_ (Put a cross (x) in the square only
opposite the policy you favor)
A. Do you favor the continuance and +---+
strict enforcement of the Eighteenth | |
Amendment and Volstead Law? +---+
B. Do you favor a modification of the +---+
Volstead Law to permit light wines | |
and beers? +---+
C. Do you favor a repeal of the +---+
Prohibition Amendment? | |
+---+
Mark (X) in ONE
Square Only
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
SOLDIERS’ BONUS: (Put a cross (x) in the square)
_Yes_ _No_
Do you favor a Federal Bonus for all +---+ +---+
American Soldiers and Sailors who | | | |
wore the Uniform during the World +---+ +---+
War?
It is important to Mark and Return This Ballot Immediately.
Every precaution was taken to obviate dishonesty; but I suppose as
there never was an election without trouble at the polls--it would be
expecting too much of human beings to believe otherwise--so in this
solicitation there may have been a few duplicate votes to swell the
general average, one way or the other. Yet the _Digest_ had confidence
in the returns; and through their canvass of the various States we have
come to see that there are not only “wets” and “drys,” but a third
enormous party of what we might call “moists.” By this term is meant
the people who wish a modification of the Volstead Act, permitting the
sale of light wines and beer. Indeed, this party predominated in the
final returns.
The Anti-Saloon League has scorned the _Digest’s_ figures; yet one has
a feeling that if the showing had been in favor of a strict observance
and upholding of the present Prohibition law, a different attitude
might have been observed on its part. It is but human, after all, to
wish the tide to turn in the direction one has spiritedly advocated.
Even the “moists” must have been surprised at their own brilliant
showing.
It was in July, 1922, that the first reports were made; and the
_Digest_ was amazed when the ballots of the first hundred thousand
poured in.
Those in favor of a strict enforcement numbered 32,445.
Those in favor of a modification numbered 39,665.
Those in favor of a repeal of the Prohibition Amendment numbered 22,547.
As to the Soldiers’ Bonus, the vote was almost even. Yes, 46,609. No,
47,469.
“Dampness seems to predominate,” the _Digest_ said. “The most startling
fact revealed by this first tally is that the early voters are against
the continuance and enforcement of the present Prohibition law by the
proportion of nearly two to one. On the other hand, the voters show
themselves in favor of the Prohibition Amendment, or, in other words,
in favor of some sort of a Prohibition law, by the even larger ratio of
72,000 to 22,500.”
The editors were exceedingly fair in their appraisement of conditions.
They stated that “In Kansas, the votes run 111 for strict enforcement,
34 for modification and 14 for repeal of the Amendment. Thus the
Prohibitionists, it is seen, outnumber the combined ‘moists’ and ‘wets’
by almost three to one, a situation that is duplicated in no other
State. Since this early vote was tabulated, a large number of returns
have come in for Kansas and, even though we may be anticipating next
week’s report of votes, it may be mentioned that this large vote is a
striking verification of the conditions indicated by the small vote
shown here. Kansas is for Prohibition, by approximately three to one.
It is a significant fact, also, that this State has tried a dry régime
for a number of years, and knows better than most others how it works.”
But here again no thinking man, it seems to me, has a right to find
fault with a State which wishes earnestly to go dry. Local option is
sensible and reasonable; a certain territory could fence itself in,
as it were, guarding itself from a menace, making all the strict laws
it desired to protect its people from what it considered a tremendous
evil. But it has no right to inflict its statutes upon its friendly
neighbors, any more than the United States has a right to restrict
drinking on the ocean, forbidding foreign vessels to enter our ports
with cargoes of sealed spirits.
It is interesting to note how the various States voted in this
preliminary canvass.
_DETAILED TABULATION OF THE FIRST RETURNS ON PROHIBITION_
NEW ENGLAND _For_ _For_ _For_
STATES _Enforcement_ _Modification_ _Repeal_
1--MAINE 24 17 17
2--N. H. 16 13 3
3--VT. 16 6 6
4--MASS. 4,242 4,862 2,805
5--R. I. 7 14 17
6--CONN. 34 39 20
------- ------- -------
TOTAL VOTES 4,339 4,951 2,868
MIDDLE ATLANTIC STATES
1--N. Y. 6,169 9,315 4,966
2--N. J. 29 45 27
3--PENN. 8,307 9,139 6,573
------- ------- -------
TOTAL VOTES 14,505 18,499 11,566
EAST NORTH CENTRAL STATES
1--OHIO 829 716 250
2--IND. 152 73 33
3--ILL. 9,312 12,012 6,621
4--MICH. 125 84 36
5--WISC. 75 69 22
------- ------- -------
TOTAL VOTES 10,493 12,954 6,962
WEST NORTH CENTRAL STATES
1--MINN. 89 82 17
2--IOWA 113 88 23
3--MO. 100 67 33
4--N. DAK. 16 17 1
5--S. DAK. 21 9 2
6--NEBR. 72 44 19
7--KANS. 111 34 14
------- ------- -------
TOTAL VOTES 522 341 109
SOUTH ATLANTIC STATES
1--DEL. 6 4 3
2--MD. 15 27 36
3--D. C. 14 27 8
4--VA. 28 27 9
5--W. VA. 18 20 4
6--N. CAR. 32 14 7
7--S. CAR. 10 11 4
8--GA. 24 27 12
9--FLA. 11 4 8
------- ------- -------
TOTAL VOTES 158 161 91
EAST SOUTH CENTRAL STATES
1--KY. 27 25 28
2--TENN. 42 17 10
3--ALA. 23 19 5
4--MISS. 13 11 5
------- ------- -------
TOTAL VOTES 105 72 48
WEST SOUTH CENTRAL STATES
1--ARK. 15 12 1
2--LA. 12 13 3
3--OKLA. 43 29 7
4--TEXAS 116 62 21
------- ------- -------
TOTAL VOTES 186 116 32
MOUNTAIN STATES
1--MONT. 11 16 8
2--IDAHO 9 13 5
3--WYO. 2 5 --
4--COLO. 31 30 11
5--N. MEX. 5 5 1
6--ARIZ. 8 3 --
7--UTAH 8 16 6
8--NEV. 1 1 1
------- ------- -------
TOTAL VOTES 75 89 32
PACIFIC STATES
1--WASH. 830 951 247
2--OREG. 28 22 6
3--CALIF. 1,204 1,509 585
------- ------- -------
TOTAL VOTES 2,062 2,482 839
------- ------- -------
GRAND TOTAL 32,445 39,665 22,547
After the first and second polls had been taken by the _Digest_,--that
is, after 200,000 votes had been classified,--the editors asked for an
expression of opinion from William H. Anderson, State Superintendent of
the Anti-Saloon League of New York and President of the Allied Citizens
of America. He admitted the honesty, good faith and fairness of the
canvass, but deemed it “unwise.” And he went on to say:
“There is a clear and fundamental distinction between taking a
poll on a question which is yet to be decided and taking a poll
on a question which has been decided. In the latter case the
issue inevitably presented to many minds is whether the law which
represents the decision shall be enforced.”
There are millions of citizens who look upon the Eighteenth Amendment
as cause for a grievance; and the First Amendment states very clearly
“the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances.”
Surely it is no breach of the peace to ask for an expression from
voters concerning a matter so serious as Prohibition, on which they
never voted. How else could a clear comprehension be gained of the
wishes of the people, save through the press in a country so vast as
ours? Naturally, there would be resentment in the dry camp at any
attempt to repeal the Eighteenth Amendment; but I hope there are no
Americans who would honestly favor a supine obedience to a law which
is abhorrent to such a number of us. Intolerance is not a worthy
sentiment. It is a healthy sign when people disagree. The clash of
minds leads to larger prospects of final understanding; and if it is
found in the end that Prohibition is ardently wanted by the majority,
we shall continue to have Prohibition, with, I trust, a perfect
carrying out of the law. The _Digest’s_ desire to learn the truth is an
admirable one. The advocates of Mr. Volstead have nothing to fear from
it. If they are right, and people like myself are wrong, then right
will prevail. Meanwhile, nothing is gained by cantankerously bidding us
behave ourselves, and bow to the inevitable. This is but an added form
of Prohibition which only serves to stir up enmities, to create further
discords, and muddle matters even more. Your honest opinion and mine
are quite as valuable to the country as that of Mr. Volstead and Mr.
Anderson.
And so the _Literary Digest_ evidently thought. For it continued to
publish returns as they came flooding into the editorial office.
Innumerable letters accompanied the votes. People from all sections of
the country “spoke out in meeting,” advocating Government control of
the liquor traffic. From Omaha and New Jersey this advice came, and
from practically every State of the Union. The people were being heard
from.
The second hundred-thousand voted as follows:
For strict enforcement 76,597
For modification 85,151
For repeal 45,646
A poll was taken in many factories where both men and women are
employed. In the Edison works in New Jersey, the poll was taken under
the supervision of Charles A. Edison, “who saw to it that the ballots
were distributed one to each worker. They were marked secretly,
and deposited by the individual workers in sealed ballot boxes,
later opened by representatives of the _Digest_. The result shows a
proportion of slightly more than twenty to one against the continuation
and enforcement of the present liquor laws.” This is the vote:
For enforcement 93
For modification 976
For repeal 966
A careful poll of the establishment of Parke, Davis & Company,
manufacturing chemists, of Detroit, revealed the following results:
For enforcement 218
For modification 1,081
For repeal 211
Combining these two polls, the attitude of the workers in two
representative factories would be summarized as follows:
For enforcement 311
For modification 2,059
For repeal 1,177
In connection with factories and labor, one inevitably thinks of Samuel
Gompers. The _Digest_ asked him for an expression of opinion, wishing
to get all sides of all subjects, and he sent this strong statement:
“In addition to the vile and poisonous substitution for whiskey so
largely consumed, and in addition to the increased drug habit since
Prohibition, Prohibition has made a nation of grouches. It has taken
the joy out of the American people, as can be attested by almost every
social gathering. The whole scheme is unwarrantable interference with
the personal freedom of the people, and increases discontent and
resentment in the knowledge that those who have it, have it. I firmly
believe that a modification of the Volstead Act so that beer and light
wines may be manufactured and sold under proper regulations would solve
the whole question rationally and helpfully.”
The discontent of the worker is something to be considered--even
by fanatics who would rule us by force, and seek to restrain too
thoroughly man’s natural appetites. One must take into account the
wishes of that vast army who do the drudgery of the world; and it
does not require an immense amount of imagination to understand what
the years may bring. If there is an apparent stolid indifference now
in the realms of labor, the _Digest’s_ poll would seem to contradict
any such belief. That the workingman is beginning to realize that a
distinct form of class legislation has taken place there can be no
doubt. I think the authorities would never dare to encroach upon a
laborer’s rights in the matter of home brew. Yet they must be aware
that, deprived of his only club, the corner saloon, the workingman who
still desires a glass of beer occasionally is methodically producing
it. Against the law? To the devil with the law, says the hard-working
day laborer, when the rich disobey it every hour of their lives.
Another factory, which employs women, was also canvassed. This was
the establishment of the Campbell’s Soup Company in New Jersey.
Approximately 30 per cent of the workers polled were women; yet the
vote is against the present laws by a proportion of 9 to 1. This is how
the voting ran:
For enforcement 162
For modification 720
For repeal 750
But the final figures are the most interesting of all. A summary
of 922,383 ballots revealed this result, which must have proved
disheartening to the Anti-Saloon League:
_SUMMARY OF 922,383 BALLOTS ON PROHIBITION_
_For Enforcement_ _For Modification_ _For Repeal_
Main Poll 306,255--(38.5%) 325,549--(41.1%) 164,453--(20.4%)
Women’s Poll 48,485--(44.5%) 39,914--(36.7%) 20,448--(18.8%)
Factory Polls 1,453--( 8.4%) 10,871--(62.1%) 4,955--(29.5%)
---------------- ---------------- ----------------
TOTALS 356,193--(38.6%) 376,334--(40.8%) 189,856--(20.6%)
Is it necessary for anyone to say anything further about the temper of
the country? Facts are facts.
To repeat what my friend in Omaha said:
“Prohibition was all right--until we got it!”