Although he described himself personally as "dry" on the issue of Prohibition (in favor of keeping alcohol production and consumption illegal), Tuttle favored repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment and argued that individual states, not the federal government, should be free to regulate alcohol as they saw fit. He hoped to campaign on an anticorruption platform, but his opposition to federal prohibition drew fierce criticism from rural Drys. Deciding that he was not sufficiently in favor of Prohibition, the Drys fielded a third party candidate.Newspaper article, State Drys Move to Name Candidate; Charles H. Tuttle Consults the Oracle, New York Times, September 26, 1930Newspaper article, New York Drys Will Put Third Party In Field, Meriden Daily Journal, September 27, 1930Newspaper article, Tuttle Won't Sign a State Dry Law Like Volstead Act; In Reply to Roosevelt, He Pledges Dry Enforcement Under Nuisance Statute, New York Times, October 3, 1930Newspaper article, Baumes Shuns Stand of Tuttle on Repeal; Says He Will Back Running Mate Fully, But Is Not Ready to Give His Prohibition Views, New York Times, October 4, 1930Newspaper article, Drys to Nominate Dr. Carroll Today, New York Times, October 7, 1930Newspaper column, Why I cannot support Mr. Tuttle, by S.E. Nicholson, The Canaseraga Times, October 16, 1930
