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

History depth study coursework-USA 1919-1945.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

History Depth Study Coursework-USA 1919-1945 (a) The amount of evidence of Prohibition can be greatened over time and as these two sources were written well after the end of Prohibition, there may be some parts that agree, but they could also be interpretations. Sources A and B agree on many of there points, but the first line of Source A shows that it may disagree as it differs with Source B about the causes of Prohibition, but it does agree in the sense it says that pressure from the lobby groups such as Anti-Saloon League had an influence. This is pointed out in Source A where they say "influence of the Anti-Saloon League" and source B "A nation-wide campaign, led by the Anti-Saloon League". The two sources agree about Prohibition being a "moral fervour" As it is put in source A and "evils of the times" as it is put in source B. These show the thoughts from the women and the groups. Although source B does say that it is a moral crusade, it does not mention about the German connection with brewing that is made in source A, but taking this into consideration, we do see that both agree that women played a big part in bringing in Prohibition. In source A this is shown by the "large numbers of men were absent in the Armed forces" and in source B, where it mention "Women's Christian Temperance Union" and the "Anti-Saloon League", which were made up by a lot of women. Source A talks about "the wartime concern for preserving grain for food" which is echoed in source B where it said that the Anti-Saloon league "Brought pressure to bear on Congress to ban the use of grain for either distilling or brewing". The two source also agree with the fact that crime went up because of public demand for liquor, which is the "greatest criminal boom in American history" in source A and in source B shows it to have ...read more.

Middle

The problem also with these statistics is that we do not have a percentage the gallons and stills seized so for all the reader knows, the agents could have seized the same percentage and so they would not have accomplished much in their job. These make the statistics unreliable, though they do show a trend that the stills and gallons seized did increase. Source H shows the amount of drunks, drunk and disorderly conduct and drunk drivers. These are again in the format of statistics, which are not given in the percentage of that year, but rather the amount, so they can be taken as unreliable. Although this is true, we also need to see that there was an increase in the amount of drunks, even if it is the same percentage and they have increased by an incredible amount. Even the first year has a great amount of people who are drunk which shows that many people did not actually care about Prohibition. This is also only the amount in the city of Philadelphia, so this is not coverage of the whole country. Also it is an industrial city so it would differ from the more agricultural side of the country which were the people to put forward the idea and were more likely to enforce it in a greater way. The statistics do show a steady increase in the amount of drunks, but drunk and disorderly conduct seems to have decreased below its starting point in 1925 which shows that possibly less people were behaving disorderly as the amount of drunks still increased. It is unsure of the disorderly conduct increased, or if the drunks increased, so this could be seen as unreliable. The amount of drunk drivers also increased, from 0 in 1920 to 820 in 1925. The reader nay be unsure about this as many people did not own a car at the period and it was in the 20's that there was an increase in the consumer buying of cars, so the amount of drunk drivers would have increased according to the amount of drivers there were around. ...read more.

Conclusion

It does not say that it was going to happen and so it is difficult to categorise these sources. In conclusion, the failure of Prohibition was inevitable but the sources did not say blatantly that it was gong to happen. It told us the consequence of enforcing the law and the inference showed that the failure of Prohibition was a failure. Source a and B were modern sources, picking upon information from other textbooks so it gives a more wider view of it and it shows that it was inevitable because of all the discomfort it was causing. Sources C and D were from before Prohibition, but Source e was written by an industrialist which showed the changing of opinions and what he felt were reasons for why Prohibition had failed its aim. Source F was written right at the start of Prohibition and so was not that much use. Sources G and H also showed reasons that contributed to Prohibition failing its aim as well. Sources I and J both show the corruption that would also add to the failure of Prohibition. Five of the sources support the view that the failure was inevitable and two show the corruption, but the majority do follow that the failure of Prohibition was inevitable. The sources that show the other side of the augment are few and were written at the beginning of Prohibition and so are not true views of the people. Also many of these sources are taken from city areas rather than rural, so the feelings there, where Prohibition started are not shown. The 18th Amendment was written to stop people from drinking alcohol. Women thought it was right as there husbands did not spend their money and industrialists thought it to be good as their workers would work more efficiently. They believed in it but many people ignored it and managed to corrupt the system, destroying the law and causing the greatest boom in crime. These helped to end Prohibition. Ambareen Naqvi 11K 1 Assignment 1 Candidate Number: 3108 ...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. To what extent was organised crime the main factor that led to the failure ...

    One in twelve agents was dismissed for corruption as many accepted bribes, as their jobs were so badly paid. There were so many dishonest agents that the honest ones became famous, one of the most famous being Izzy Einstein. He did not accept bribes and often fooled speakeasy owners with elaborate disguises and clever contraptions.

  2. GCSE History Coursework Assignment B - Was the New Deal a Success?

    Just like source E this source shows a negative view of FDR. It tells us that FDR is a conman, in endless confusion with what he should be doing, and that America is still not healed, no matter how many New Deal remedies FDR comes up with.

  1. Prohibition was a disaster waiting to happen How far do you agree? I ...

    The promise of alcohol ban to the people gave people relief and they were convinced that this would lead to America as a country and all of its members improving.

  2. American Prohibition

    prohibition by showing the poor conditions of the family's while drinking was legal. 3.) Sources E and F are a letter and a speech from different periods in time. Source E is a letter written in 1932 by John d. Rockefeller the time when prohibition has dramatically failing in America.

  1. The USA: Was prohibition bound to fail?

    numbers of men were absent in the armed forces" and finally "the moral fervour inspired by the war" - when the war ended, grain no longer needed to be preserved, German-Americans were confronted with far fewer prejudices, therefore decreasing the association of alcohol with "evil", and American men of age

  2. American History Coursework

    Although at first this would imply that these industrial companies would lose even more money, this actually helped them revitalise their failing stature - it gave the lower class workers more money to spend. This meant that the consumer goods which previously were not affordable enough for this lower-class segment

  1. Prohibition: Which of these two sources is more reliable as evidence against prohibition?

    not taking away money from people, it is still wrong and so none of it will be tolerated. However, this is where the similarities end and the reliability of the source begins to decline. Source F was a speech given in 1920.

  2. To What extent was Prohibtion doomed to fail from its inception?

    Most, if not all, evidence suggests that prohibition was infact doomed to fail from its inception, there is very little to show that prohibition would have worked, apart from the statements made by the politicians and supporters of prohibition, claiming it would.

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