• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Do these sources support the view that the failure of Prohibition was inevitable?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

f) Study all the sources Do these sources support the view that the failure of Prohibition was inevitable? In 1920, Prohibition came into effect across the United States. The making, selling and transporting of alcohol were banned. Thousands of illegal stills and millions of gallons of wine and spirits were destroyed. Prohibition also however led to vast increases in crime. In 1933, prohibition was brought to an end nationally although a few states still continued with their own ban on alcohol. However, was the failure of prohibition inevitable? Could it have succeeded? There are sources that suggest that Prohibition could have succeeded. Source A was written 40 years after the end of Prohibition and therefore the author will have access to a wide range of evidence as to whether Prohibition could have succeeded and why it failed. It is also from an American history book and so should be reliable. It says that "by 1917, twenty-three states had already introduced a ban on alcohol." Before Prohibition had even been introduce nationally, half the states had already introduced a ban on alcohol showing that there was enthusiasm towards Prohibition, source A also talks about the "wartime concern for preserving grain for food" and this was "at a time when large numbers of men were absent in the armed forces." Due to the fact that there was a war going on in 1917, the time was right for Prohibition to be introduced, however it wasn't until 1920 that prohibition was introduced and by that time the war had ended and there was no need to preserve grain for food. ...read more.

Middle

The final source that suggests that prohibition may have succeeded is source F, source F was a speech made by John F. Kramer in 1920, before prohibition when Kramer would have been full of hope. Kramer was the first prohibition commissioner; his job was to enforce prohibition. Kramer says "the law will be obeyed" and that "it will be enforced" the language used in this speech shows his commitment and with someone like Kramer in charge it could have worked, there was a whole commission set up to try and enforce prohibition. However this source is not reliable due to the fact that Kramer would have been bias towards his own abilities with no consideration that it might not work. Kramer is determined but 1500 agents is not enough to enforce prohibition across the whole of America, the border between America and Canada is 30,000km long and since alcohol was legal in Canada, it was impossible to enforce prohibition and stoop people smuggling alcohol from Canada. The population of America was also over 100 million and so 1500 agents was defiantly not enough to enforce Prohibition across America. The anti-saloon league had an impact on the introduction of prohibition, Rockefeller had donated $350,000 to the anti-saloon league before 1920 and $75,000 every year after that. However this wasn't enough as the best citizens still ignored the ban on alcohol. Although the war gained support for prohibition, by the time it was introduces, in 1920 the war was over and all the public support that had been gained was lost. ...read more.

Conclusion

In conclusion it is clear that the failure of prohibition was inevitable. Although there are reasons to suggest it might have worked they leave out one important factor. This was that the majority of people wanted to drink and as Sources C and D all too well show alcohol is addictive. America was hooked. Sources A to J combine together to show reason s why prohibition was doomed from the start. Firstly and most importantly too many people wanted to drink. The speakeasies replaced the saloons and by 1933 there were 200,000 known speakeasies in America. The work of gangsters meant that alcohol was readily available and with a population of over 100 million Americans there were not enough agents to enforce such a law. Finally the corruption of the prohibition enforcers meant that most people were allowed to get away with breaking the law and those that were caught were rarely prosecuted. No good ever came from prohibition and by 1933 all that America was left with were high levels of crime, little respect for the law and a population littered with criminals. Sources A to J definitely support the view that the failure of prohibition was inevitable and can be summed up in one quote written in 1922 by the American novelist Sinclair Lewis: 'course, I believe in it in principle, but I don't propose to have anybody telling me what to think and do. No American'll ever stand for that'. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE USA 1919-1941 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE USA 1919-1941 essays

  1. Why did prohibition fail? - Gangsters, Widespread illegal drinking, lack of support, impossibility of ...

    This was because of the types of alcohol sold, where no one knew quite what they were getting. In fact much of this alcohol was industrial alcohol, unfit for consumption which caused blistered lips and "It stoned you into...a violent brawling, broad-chasing insanity."

  2. Why was prohibition introduced

    President Hoover described Prohibition as "a great social and economic experiment, noble in motive and far reaching in purpose".

  1. To what extent was organised crime the main factor that led to the failure ...

    It is unlikely that as many US citizens would have drunk if they had known for certain that they would be imprisoned or would have to face a hefty fine that they knew they couldn't afford, but for as long as they knew they could get away with it they would carry on breaking the law.

  2. History depth study coursework-USA 1919-1945.

    The last part of the sentence is again a common point in the sources, talking about crime which increased. If the people live in a country where violence is part of a daily life, it is unlikely they will want to keep the law that is bringing it and so will want it to end.

  1. USA and the Prohibiton law - 1920

    So many Americans were For Prohibition because of all the propaganda about how evil and negative alcohol is, and how it is the reason that so many families are broken apart and why so many families are very poor. The law was passed to ensure that no more alcohol was

  2. Does the evidence of source C support the evidence of sources A and B ...

    In 1932 it states that 6,793 people out of the town's workforce were unemployed. The whole town's workforce was 9,700. This shows that 1932 was a time of extreme unemployment in Jarrow. In source C people are wearing casual clothes so they are definitely not working, or employed.

  1. History - Prohibition

    Therefore they both talk about the evils of drinking and the damaging effects on the family, alcohol has. (c) Sources E and F All sources have an element of truth in them and they are all useful to a historian studying a particular period in time.

  2. Prohibition was doomed a failure from the start - agree or disagree

    on one side of the story and is only the word of the saloon keeper. The fact that source 8 is from the year 1908 and prohibition started in 1919 suggests to me that source 8 is not related to prohibition at all and cannot be used to justify the drinking habits of the people who drank during prohibition.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work