How far do these two accounts agree about Prohibition?

Authors Avatar

Prohibition

How far do these two accounts agree about Prohibition?

        The two accounts agree that there are campaigns (mainly by women) to ban alcohol. Source A says “influence of the Anti-saloon league at a time when large numbers of men were absent in the armed forces”. Source B says, “ The Women’s Christian Temperance Union had joined in a crusade against one of the great evils of the times-alcoholism”. They also agree that there should be a ban on grains for alcoholic purposes. Source A says “ the wartime concern for preserving grain for food” and source B says, “ban the use of grain for either distilling or brewing”. They both agree that alcoholism was morally wrong. Source A says “the moral fervour inspired by the “ War to make the world safe for democracy” and Source B says “ a great evil of the time” (referring to alcoholism). The last thing they agree on is that it caused criminal activity. “It created the greatest criminal boom in American history, and perhaps in all modern history”. Source B says, “By 1928 there were more than 30,000 speakeasies in New York”.                Although both sources agree with each other they also disagree in many ways. An example of this is that although both of them want a ban on grain use for alcoholic purposes; Source A wants grain to be used for food while Source B does not specify any ideas. Source A mentions that even before Prohibition that there was already a ban on alcohol in 23 states. Source A also express’ feelings against German-Americans who were the dominant race in beer production. Source B does not say that there was an Anti-German atmosphere in America at the time. Source B acknowledges that Prohibition was used as a business but Source A fails to do this.                                                        Overall the two sources agree with each other in many ways but also disagree in many ways. I feel the agreements are slightly higher then the disagreements so they do agree to quite an extent.

Were the artists of these two posters for or against Prohibition?

        This picture shows a man handing all of his week’s wages over to a bartender. In the smaller picture a women is crying and the child opposite her is looking into an empty bowl. The writing above them says, “The saloon is well named “The poor mans club” – its keeps its members and their families always poor. This source is telling us that alcoholism makes families poor and keeps them poor. The slogan for the ‘club’ is “The most expensive the world to belong to” meaning that drinking is an expensive habit and drains the family income. This source tells us that while the man uses his weekly wages for a drink his family stay hungry.                                                                                Source D shows a little boy and girl standing outside a saloon waiting for their father. The slogan underneath says, “ Daddy’s in there, and our clothes and shoes and food are in there too and they’ll never come out”. This means that their father is using the money that could be spent on shoes, clothes and food on alcohol. Source D supports prohibition and is trying to show that drunk parents cannot provide for their children. It is also shows that alcohol affects the man’s economic and social standing and he spends the money that is needed for basic needs on alcohol. Both of these sources are propaganda posters against alcoholism and were designed to show the effects alcohol has on a person’s family life and how it affects them economically.  

Join now!

Which of these two sources is the more reliable as evidence about Prohibition?

        The contents of Source E are supported by other sources making it reliable. An example of this is increased drinking “alcohol became more attractive”(Steven Waugh) and indeed there was an increase in criminal activity. Many people did openly ignore Prohibition. “ The law was ignored”. John D. Rockefellar wrote the letter, he was a wealthy industrialist. This source is a reliable one because it was a personal letter, which would contain his true thoughts, and he would have no reason to lie. It would also ...

This is a preview of the whole essay