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

Prohibition. Source A believes that it was "the influence of the Anti-saloon league" and source B believes that prohibition was "led by the league". Both sources are of the opinion that prohibition led to an increase in crime. This is shown in source A, "

Extracts from this document...


How Far Do These Two Accounts Agree About Prohibition? Both of the two sources agree about prohibition. Source A believes that it was "the influence of the Anti-saloon league" and source B believes that prohibition was "led by the league". Both sources are of the opinion that prohibition led to an increase in crime. This is shown in source A, "it created the greatest criminal boom in American history" and it is implied in source B "gangsters like Dutch Schulz and Al Capone had turned the avoidance of prohibition into big, violent business". Also, they both agree that most of the American public are craving for alcohol and want a constant supply of it. Source A tells us that prohibition goes "against the daily customs, habits and desires of so many Americans" and source B talks about Al Capone plans to "Supply a public demand". The two sources disagree on the causes that started prohibition. Source A gives the idea that the law was passed because of negative feelings towards German-Americans (they were important for brewing). And also the "most important" reason was to "make the world safe for democracy". Source B gives the impression that the law was passed in an attempt to overcome "one of the greatest evils of all time - alcoholism". ...read more.


However, source F is also somewhat reliable because it gives facts that aren't clouded by opinions. Do these two sources prove that prohibition was successful? Source G looks like prohibition was successful because the increase in still and spirits seized can show the prohibition agents as getting better at their jobs. Also, it can give the feeling that the more alcohol seized, the less alcohol available for the public. This is because the amount of stills seized increased from 9, 746 in 1921 to 15, 794 in 1929, and the gallons of spirits seized increased from 414, 000 in 1921 to 11, 860, 000 in 1929. Source H shows a general increase in the amount of arrests for drinking-related offences. In particular the amount of drunk increased from 14, 313 in 1920 to 51, 361 just five years later. This can give the impression that prohibition was unsuccessful because once again it could show that prohibition officers are getting better at their jobs. However, this is unlikely. It would be more reasonable to assume that the increase shows a obvious disrespect for the prohibition law. It also shows that during prohibition - more people are drinking more than they were before. ...read more.


The government lost a huge source of tax income - and if the government loses money, it is likely that the source of money loss is going to be terminated. Prohibition had a chance of success for several reasons. Saloons were referred to people as rundown, dark, gloomy hangouts for absent fathers and husbands. This is proved in source A where saloons were a "bad influence" and also in the cartoon in source D where a mother and a child look at the saloon where their absent father is. Another reason it may have succeeded was the "war time concern for preserving grain for good"; if all Americans had felt this was important then maybe prohibition would have lasted longer. Source C also gives the impression that prohibition would succeed as saloons are too expensive for most to keep going to "the poor man's club - the most expensive in the world to belong to." In conclusion, I feel that although it was more likely that prohibition would fail; there was always a chance of success. The widespread support in the early 1920's proved successful until the even more widespread crime took over and supplied alcohol to America. I feel the inevitability of failure compared with success is 4-1; 80% chance of failure. This is because the laws will never work without the support of the majority of the people affected by them. ...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. Source D shows a report from the Jarrow Public Health Committee, published in 1933. ...

    This led to workers no longer being needed. People became unemployed and therefore earned no money. The Jarrow Crusade was a march organised by the people of the town from Jarrow to London. The object was to attract attention to the plight of the town.

  2. Source A and Source B struggle to agree on the causes of prohibition. I ...

    Both posters involve money and the way men wasted the money on alcohol. Source C has two parts to it. The first part pictures a man buying some alcohol from a saloon. He is handing the bar tender a bag marked, 'Weeks Wages.'

  1. There are many contributing factors to why prohibition was introduced on 16 January 1920. ...

    This is also something that is a lot different after prohibition was introduced. Police and local officials where highly respected people that never broke the law, but now prohibition had been passed they where becoming as bad as the criminals.

  2. Prohibition Sources Coursework.

    policeman in source J is telling the truth, it can help to make his source seem more reliable. f) There are many different types of sources to consider here. I think some do hold the view that the failure of Prohibition was inevitable whilst others do not.

  1. Free essay

    Three sources on Prohibition. Source C is a German cartoon, commenting on prohibition.

    in source C because it shows what a lousy job the trained people were doing and that anybody could do that job. Source E which is a table which shows arrests for drinking offences in Philadelphia 1920-25 also supports Source C as crimes due to drinking have increased from being

  2. Prohibition. Sources A and B are from the same time period, the 1970s. This ...

    Source F was written when John F. Kramer, the first prohibition commissioner was speaking in publish in 1920; just after it started. His job was to enforce the law. This immediately suggests the source will be biased as his job is to enforce prohibition so he will express thing in the favour of prohibition.

  1. Study sources C and D Were the artists of these two posters for ...

    In conclusion, both of the artists are for prohibition and want men to stop drinking by emotionally blackmailing them. Also from the beginning of prohibition, the WCTU has been for prohibition. C) Study sources E and F Which of these sources is more reliable as evidence about Prohibition?

  2. How far was the League of Nations a success in the 1920(TM)s?

    Some evidence: Greece withdrew from Bulgaria in 1925 on the league's orders as she could not afford a full-scale war. Another thing that meant the League of Nations could succeed easily was that there was a peaceful universal atmosphere because of all the of work that was being done by the other organisations and some other agencies.

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