important doubtful State of Indiana, the Fort Wayne JournalGazette finds Mr. McAdoo's heavy vote "all the more significant in that he not only polls the greatest number of first-choice votes, but the greatest number of second and third. When the leader in a convention is also the second choice of a majority of the delegates who prefer another as first choice, his chances for the nomination are exceptionally good." This fact also appeals strongly to the Pittsburgh Sun, which thinks it worth noting that in THE DIGEST's poll of Democratic leaders McAdoo leads in 35 of the 48 States, and in the other States he loses chiefly to favorite sons

That Mr. McAdoo is not only leading, but deserves to lead, seems to be a sentiment widely shared among Democrats. In Florida the Jacksonville Journal believes he is "the choice of the rank and file of Democratic voters," and the Gainesville Sun thinks he will be "a shrewd and capable leader." The Mobile Register in Alabama and the Paducah News- Democrat in Kentucky agree that Mr. McAdoo would unite the various factions in the party. In the Middle West the Charleston (Ill.) Courier calls him "the logical candidate," the La Porte (Ind.) Argus considers him "closer to the Democratic heart than any other man in the councils of the party." Farther west the Ardmore (Okla.) Daily Ardmoreite finds Mr. McAdoo the ideal Democratic nominee: "He is progressive, in sympathy with the farmer and labor elements, a man of unusual vision, and a vital part of the old Wilson Administration whose works are regaining favor daily."

To the Arizona Gazette (Phoenix), the most widely circulated Democratic daily in the State, Mr. McAdoo seems the logical candidate, while in California, where Mr. McAdoo now resides, the Bakersfield Californian urges the point that he "is more feared by the opposition than is any other possible nominee." On the other hand, there are Democratic editors who admit the present strength of McAdoo and regret it. It seems, for instance, to the El Paso Times that the professional politicians quoted in THE DIGEST poll care more about catering to the local "vote" than about selecting the best candidate. Yet their partiality must "be accepted as evidence of the fact that for the present, at least, it is the field against McAdoo," and

"Thus it is up to the field. By finding and combining upon its strongest, sanest and most intelligently progressive candidate, the field can beat Mr. McAdoo. By beating him it can save the Democratic party from the danger of nominating the candidate who would be weakest at election time and who, should he

by a wild chance be elected, would be more likely to discredit the Democratic party in office than any other Presidential aspirant except Henry Ford."

And speaking of Ford, it should be noted that in THE DIGEST'S poll of Democratic leaders, Ford ran second to McAdoo. In the Collier's Weekly houseto-house canvass of its subscribers, regardless of party affiliations, Ford finally led with 88,865 votes; President Harding was second with 51,755, and McAdoo third with 19,401. Here again it is Ford and McAdoo, and several Democratic editors welcome this, believing that with either man as candidate the party would have a real "man of action" as its leader. The strength of the Ford movement is obvious and has been recently discust at great length in our columns. A typical pro-Ford statement comes from the editor of the Democratic Texarkanian of Texarkana, Arkansas.

"There is everywhere a marvelous sentiment for Ford. Not as a statesman, but as a business genius, with sincerity and honesty that challenges public confidence. Political inefficiency and extravagance in administration have almost stifled business and industry. The people are almost persuaded to try a purely business administration for once. Ford solves great problems, has the faculty of choosing capable associates, and there is faith that he would do so in public affairs if in the Presidential chair. But all this is but a symptom of the unrest due to a political breakdown, and should be a warning to both dominant parties."

Collier's believes that its vote "represents a genuine crosssection of American political opinion." It also believes that "Henry Ford has become the issue in American politics, whether he becomes a candidate for President or not." It comments:

"It seems probable now that one-third of the voters of America

want Ford for President. But how about the two-thirds? For all we know, they may be unanimously, first, last, and all the time, opposed to Ford. Then, again, perhaps the one-third voted for Ford, not because they think he is the only possible candidate, but because they are utterly disgusted with the political way of doing things and want America to be governed by a great industrial mind.

"If the politicians could know this, their distress might be relieved. They might find an industrial genius who would satisfy the Ford crowd and not arouse so much opposition as the name of Ford arouses."

Oscar W. Underwood, senior Senator from Alabama, received the third highest number of votes in THE DIGEST's recent canvass. Newspaper comment on this poll reveals wide-spread Underwood sentiment in the South, as represented by the editorial utterances of newspapers in North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, Texas, Florida and Louisiana. The Pensacola News characterizes Underwood as "a man that is trusted throughout the country."

Upon his return from Europe recently the Alabama Senator made a statement regarding American foreign policy, and his friends in the party, according to the New York Herald, "say it places him prominently before the country as a Presidential possibility with a definite and positive American policy to aid Europe as one of the chief planks in his platform." Senator Underwood sees "more causes for war existing in Europe to-day than in January, 1914." For this state of affairs he holds the American Government in part responsible, saying:

"Our nation can do more than any other great country to-day to establish permanent peace, but we have done nothing and are doing nothing to aid the peace of Europe. We seem to be standing in respect to the affairs of Europe without a policy, without courage of conviction, without anything that goes to make a man a man, or a government a government. We seem to be just observing and drifting. Never in all our history as a nation have we occupied a more negative position in the affairs of Europe than we do to-day. We continue to drift down-stream and the roar of the cataract can be heard ahead.

"We might have been far on the highway to permanent peace and restored business and industrial conditions if we had thrown the predominating force of our great potential powers in favor of a permanent, stabilizing and upbuilding program for the rehabilitation of Europe. The question that now confronts us is whether we shall continue a do-nothing policy."

Senator Underwood takes issue with President Harding in declaring:

**There is nothing in an International Court that can solve or direct the difficulties and dangerous economic and financial problems that are paralyzing the onward progress of business develop ment in Europe. It is a wise and progressive policy that is needed and not the laggard motion of a court of law."

"Undoubtedly the most penetrating and statesmanlike report that has been brought back from Europe in recent months by visiting public men," is the characterization of this utterance by the Birmingham Age-Herald (Dem.) in the Senator's own State. Another Alabama daily, the Montgomery Advertiser (Dem.), sees a clear-cut campaign issue presented:

"Harding favors the palliative represented in the vague remedy of a world's court. Underwood and the Democratic party stands for an unmistakable and clear-cut policy of joining the League of Nations."

On the other hand, several Republican and independent papers find the pronouncement all too vague, and in this view the Democratic New York World, Baltimore Sun, Brooklyn Eagle,

RALSTON

AL SMITH

AT THE DEMOCRATIC RINGSIDE

-McCutcheon in the Chicago Tribune.

"No man can please entirely both the wets and the drys, but a Senator who, as Mr. Underwood did, opposed Prohibition, and yet stands well in an undeniably dry section, occupies a strategic position. He is slightly moist."

We are frequently reminded that the Democratic Convention is still a year in the future and that prominence in the early straw votes does not necessarily mean ballots in the final convention roll-call. In fact, on the eve of the Convention another straw vote might show Democratic sentiment veering toward others than the three leaders now being so widely discust. For instance, there is Governor Alfred E. Smith of New York, whom National Committeeman Mack, of New York, offers as New York's favorito son, who will stand "for the modification or liberalization of the Volstead Law." To the Washington Star (Ind.) it seems hat Senator Ralston of Indiana is an extremely probable compromise candidate in the event of a convention deadlock. Another favorite son is Senator Carter Glass of Virginia, whose character and ability are highly praised by the Roanoke World-News and Staunton Leader in his own State. Finally-tho the press discussion of possible candidates might be carried on almost indefinitely-we note the Cleveland Times and Commercial (Ind.) remarking that Ohio is not without a candidate, that James M. Cox is just as available as he was three years ago, that any Democrat would have been beaten, and that the Cox strength in Ohio has not vanished.

MR. HARDING FORESHADOWS HIS 1924

Tthe

PLATFORM

HE FOUNDATIONS of the Republican platform for the 1924 campaign, political observers very generally agree, were laid by President Harding in the series of speeches that punctuated his journey to Alaska. One correspondent even goes so far as to predict the party slogan, which he says will be "Hold steady; don't rock the boat." For, explains David Lawrence in a dispatch to the Democratic New York Evening World, "this epitomizes all of his speeches on the Western trip." "Mr. Harding's whole platform," he says further, "is this: If the American people will be patient, the much-sought-after normalcy will come sooner by a continuation of the present Administration than by a change in leadership." Mr. Lawrence, who accompanied the Presidential party, is convinced that nothing short of a "political earthquake" can now prevent Mr. Harding's renomination. Still another correspondent who shared the journey, Mr. Carter Field, reports in the Republican New York Tribune that "the President has virtually outlined the planks in the next Republican platform and bid defiance to the Democrats, or any third party which may arise, to take opposing positions."

Turning to the editorial columns of our daily press, we find this opinion widely reflected. The Philadelphia Public Ledger (Ind.) thinks his renomination is "a foregone conclusion" and his platform "as good as written." Says The Ledger further:

"In his speeches at St. Louis, Kansas City, Hutchinson, Denver, Cheyenne and Salt Lake City, Mr. Harding has dealt most definitely, even meticulously, with matters that will come before the Platform Committee. There will be no getting away from these speeches, whether or not Mr. Harding reaches for that second 'cup of coffee.' As may be instanced:

"The World Court (at St. Louis): America will enter the World Court under such reservations as the Senate thinks wise. The Court should be further divorced from the League. The League issue is 'as dead as slavery.' Here is the compromise plank on international affairs.

"Railroads (at Kansas City): Legislation to divide rail systems into regional groups. Nationalization would be disastrous. No immediate lowering of freight rates. The authority of the Railroad Labor Board should be increased.

help promised, but not specified. The farmer should be patient. This outlines the farm plank.

"Prohibition (at Denver): Eighteenth Amendment will not be repealed nor the Volstead Law weakened. Federal Government will enforce the law if States fail. The issue is to be whether the 'laws of the land can be and will be' enforced. That is the extra-dry plank for a dry Republican party.

"Coal (at Cheyenne): Sweeping laws to deal with the digging, the hauling and the distribution of coal. Regulation but not the 'paralysis' of nationalization.

"Taxation (at Salt Lake City): Taxes have been halved; the per capita rate cut from $53.78 in 1920 to $26.90. Instead of an estimated $832,000,000 deficit there is a surplus of $310,000,000. War debt lessened by $3,000,000,000 and to be cut $500,000,000 yearly. Great is the Budget System. This will be the citadel and strong fortress of 1924's platform."

Other editors discern still other possible planks in his speeches, among them being:

The organization of consumers into cooperative groups to "shorten the bridge between producer and consumer," and to reduce the toll.

A new conservation policy for the West that will bring our natural resources more speedily into use, but will avoid "the distribution of imperial estates to enterprising gentlemen whose only claim is that they would like to own them."

A get-together policy for capital and labor. Labor not to be deflated, and industry not to be nationalized. No "open shop" plank.

Continuance of the selective immigration policy.

In case of another war, to draft the nation's wealth as well as the nation's manhood.

In these speeches, reports a correspondent of the Democratic New York Times, Mr. Harding has asserted himself as "the real as well as the titular leader of his party."

The independent New York Journal of Commerce discovers that the position of "Mr. Harding's faction of the Republican party" toward the major issues now before the country is "conservative in principle and compromise in practise." It says:

"He opposes government ownership of railroads and coalmines, but would make concessions in wages and rates. He favors development of natural resources, but protests against 'exploitation.' He wants economy in government management, but is ready to yield to the chief demands of the farm bloc.

"There is every reason to believe that the platform tentatively outlined by the President is about as close a picture of his true views as he can give. President Harding's political opponents must decide whether to surpass him in conservatism or to take

the opposite side of current issues and to fight the battle on a radical platform. As to which course of action the Democratic party will choose, there is as yet no positive indication."

"The President's speeches, when read in connection with the record of his Administration, become unanswerable arguments for the electorates' support," avers the Washington Post, a paper which is said to have close affiliations with the White House. "While it was not as the head of a political expedition that Mr. Harding traversed the West, or as an assuming dictator bent on making the people swallow his views, it is inevitable that his trip should have great political effect," adds The Post; and it goes on to say:

"The President found the West warm to him-and he has left it warmer.

"Through all his addresses, the Executive showed himself the champion of the public interest as distinguished from special interests. That was the burden of his utterances on agricultural conditions and on transportation. And in speaking of those subjects, he outlined a constructive program that merits the people's confidence."

"President Harding states his formula. The people and the national convention can take it or leave it," says the Republican Minneapolis Tribune. Nor can he be accused of lack of courage in his Western speeches, notes the Topeka Capital (Rep.), in which we read:

"Politicians tried to persuade him to side-step such questions as the World Court and railroad consolidations. At St. Louis, metropolis of the State whose Governor wired him that 500,000 Republicans denounced the World Court, he made a powerful speech for it."

Democratic papers are naturally less enthusiastic; thus the New York World sees in the President's speeches little more than "a series of yearnings." "My soul yearns for peace' was the first, spoken in Missouri; and from that point Mr. Harding has yearned his way westward to the coast":

"At St. Louis, Mr. Harding yearned for world peace, but he proposed a form of self-perpetuation for the World Court which was certain to defeat his yearnings. At Kansas City, he yearned

for agriculture had been pushed through over his protest by the farm bloc. So when, at Idaho Falls, he yearned over the plight of the city consumer, his yearning was as usual unaccompanied by a plan for relief."

The Dallas News (Dem.) tells Mr. Harding that "Congress can do no better for the farmer than tear down those tariff barriers which keep his customers out of our market." The Birmingham News (Dem.) finds his speeches "lacking in punch," but excuses him on the ground that he "is much in the situation of a lawyer with a bad case to defend, and he is doing the best he can." And in the independent New York Evening Post we find the complaint that Mr. Harding, while speaking forcibly in defense of his party's record, lacked the spirit of leadership when he discust the World Court, an issue which he had made peculiarly his own:

"The issues were ready-made for him by his party. Despite the farm bloc, a very important body of Republican opinion is behind the transportation act. Despite the farm bloc, again, a very important body of Republican opinion is with the President in believing that the farmer must pass through an unavoidable period of readjustment. And on the subject of Prohibition, of course, the overwhelming mass of Republican sentiment is with him.

"Precisely on the one issue that represents his personal contribution to party debate and policy, Mr. Harding showed himself the weakest. He brought the World Court to the front by his . dramatic proposals to the Senate last winter. He made it the subject of his opening address at St. Louis. He discust the World Court in impromptu speeches before minor Western audiences. But the fervor of his emotion on the subject of the World Court will not atone for the fatal abnegation of leadership in that opening speech at St. Louis. It is not leadership to plead for a cause and to confess at the same time that you have no definite plan in mind. It is not leadership to throw over a definite plan already before the country and to put nothing in its place. "In behalf of what may be described as the party record, Mr. Harding has spoken out forcibly. In behalf of the particular issue to which he was personally committed-the one issue on which the country was waiting to see him seize the initiative and give the word of command-he failed to assert himself as leader."