I think both source A and B agree and disagree about prohibition, both sources agree that Anti-Saloon League promoted prohibition, but they do not totally agree about the causes and consequences of prohibition.
- Source C and D are two posters in favour of prohibition, and it would be an effective Anti-Saloon League propaganda.
Source C shows a man spending his whole weeks wages on alcohol and supports prohibition by considering the members of the club as slaves “SLAVES OF THE SALOON”. The inset picture shows that the man’s family suffers from hunger and poverty. His wife and children are waiting for him and by the time he leaves the club he won’t be having any money. “The Saloon is well named the poor man’s club it always keeps its members and their family always poor”
I think source D is very effective, because it shows two innocent children waiting for their father to come out of the saloon. “Daddy’s in there…” I think that the cartoon of two children with ripped off clothes is effective propaganda because everyone feels sympathy for children.
Source D also says that people are spending more money to buy alcohol, which could be used to feed and cloth children. “Our shoes and stockings and food are in the saloon too and they will never come out”
I think both source C and D are very supportive towards prohibition because they involve family feelings and shows that the innocent children are victims at the end, and they get no food, no shoes and no clothes, because their father has spent all the money on alcohol, so they have to live in poverty a miserable life.
c) Source E is the word of a wealthy industrialist who wanted prohibition to succeed “I hoped that it would be widely supported” but he finds out the failure of prohibition and is shocked that prohibition has instead increased the drinking of alcohol, the number of speakeasies and the number of lawbreakers. “Respect for law has been greatly lessened”. Source E also tells us that the crime has increased to a level never seen before “the crime has increased” Therefore as we know that source E explains the fact that the prohibition has failed and it has increased the crime so it can be reliable as evidence about prohibition
Source F is spoken by prohibition commissioner and it explains that Prohibition will be enforced where it is not obeyed “it will be enforced”. And I think that it only explains the law to people “the law says” source F doesn’t say anything about the success of Prohibition and it explains no evidence in accordance to Prohibition, it only tells us they will enforce Prohibition, so therefore it cannot be seen as a reliable evidence about Prohibition.
d) Sources G and H shows that the prohibition was not successful. They are also inaccurate; source H does not show the statistics of all America.
Source G shows an increase in the number of arrests and in the amount of alcohol seized. This shows that there were more crimes. The Federal Government was struggling hard because there was more alcohol to seize. The statistics in Source G shows that in 1921, 9,746 illegal stills were seized by the Federal Government, which increased to 15,794 in 1929. Gallons of spirits seized by government increased from 414,000 in 1921 to 11,860,000 1929.
So if more illegal stills are seized it means that more are produced. The main aim of introducing Prohibition was to reduce the production of alcohol on large scale, but Source G shows that the production of alcohol has rather increased and more and more illegal stills and gallons of spirit were seized.
Therefore Source G proves that Prohibition was not successful as it shows an increase in illegal stills and gallons of spirit seized which means increase in production. The statistics in Source H shows an increase in the numbers of arrests for drinking related offences in 1920-25. It shows that the introduction of Prohibition has increased number of drunken people from 14,313 in 1902 to 51,361 in 1925. This shows that prohibition was not successful. Source H also proves that the number of drunk drivers have risen from 0 in 1920 to 820 in 1925. But from source H we can also see that drunk and disorderly conduct was brought down from 6097 in 1920 to 5522 in 1925.
The statistics shows that since the introduction of the Prohibition the rate of crime had increased rapidly. Overall these statistics show inaccurate results, and sources seem unreliable, because it does not tell us about the last few years of Prohibition and source H shows only shows the statistics of “Philadelphia” so we don’t get any information about the rest of the corruption around America. The corruption during the time of Prohibition also hides the full story. Therefore both sources prove that Prohibition was unsuccessful.
e) Source I shows that most of the senior government officials like prohibition agents, police officers were playing double role, they were not loyal to their government even though they were government officials.
Source J gives the story of a policeman who was not able to enforce the law on prohibition because his senior officials were involved in a conspiracy. “It was a conspiracy and many superior officers were involved in it.”
Source I supports source J, and according to source J a policeman could not do anything because of his superior officers. “If you tried to enforce the law they’d put you in a post where there was nothing but weeds.” Therefore source I supports source J because it shows that many of the government officials were not doing their jobs with loyalty.
In conclusion I think source I supports source J, because the government senior officials were not loyal and did not gave in the right orders, as a result there was nothing that an ordinary policeman could do.
f) Some of the sources support the view that the failure of prohibition was inevitable while some do not.
The main reasons for introduction of Prohibition were “the bad influence of saloon”, “the wartime concern for preserving grain for food” and “feelings against the German-Americans who were important in brewing and distilling”, all these made prohibition successful. The Women’s Christian Temperance Union also had a good influence in promoting the Prohibition “Women’s Christian Temperance Union had joined in a crusade against alcoholism”(source B). Prohibition was also introduced for moral reasons.
On the other hand the failure of prohibition was inevitable, because it led to instability throughout America. “Prohibition created the greatest criminal boom in American history and perhaps in all modern history”. Law on prohibition was introduced to decrease the level of crime, but with the introduction of prohibition the level of crime has increased “no earlier law produced such widespread crime”. The law on prohibition was not backed by many Americans because alcohol played a very important role in the lives of so many Americans “for no earlier law had gone against the daily customs, habits and desires of so many Americans”.
People used to spend their whole weeks wages on alcohol, and the members of the club were considered as slaves “SLAVES OF THE SALOON”. Many families used to suffer from hunger and poverty “The Saloon is well named the poor man’s club it always keeps its members and their family always poor”. People were spending more money to buy alcohol, which could be used to feed and cloth children. “Our shoes and stockings and food are in the saloon too and they will never come out”.
Sources prove that Pprohibition was a failure because it has increased the drinking of alcohol, the number of speakeasies and the number of lawbreakers. “Respect for law has been greatly lessened” and “speakeasies had replaced the saloon” This shows that Prohibition created instability in America.
But some sources portrays that the failure of Prohibition was not inevitable. The Prohibition Commissioner, John F.Kramer puts forward the law, and expects it to work and he wants to enforce the law “it will be enforced”.
After the introduction of Prohibition there was an increase in the number of arrests and in the amount of alcohol seized. This shows that there were more crimes committed. In 1921, 9,746 illegal stills were seized by the Government, which increased to 15,794 in 1929. Gallons of spirits seized by government increased from 414,000 in 1921 to 11,860,000 1929. This shows that Government was struggling hard to enforce Prohibition. This shows that the production of alcohol has rather increased and more and more illegal stills and gallons of spirit were seized. Prohibition has also increased the number of drunken people from 14,313 in 1902 to 51,361 in 1925.This clearly shows that Prohibition was bound to fail.
The positive point is that due to the introduction of Prohibition drunk and disorderly conduct was brought down from 6097 in 1920 to 5522 in 1925 and we don’t get any information about the rest of the corruption around America.
While other sources proves that the failure of Prohibition was inevitable because many senior government officials like prohibition agents, police officers were playing double role, they were not loyal to their government even though they were government officials. Many Government officials were involved in a conspiracy. “It was a conspiracy and many superior officers were involved in it.”
Many officers could not do anything because of their superior officers. “If you tried to enforce the law they’d put you in a post where there was nothing but weeds.” Therefore, because the government senior officials were not loyal Prohibition was un successful.
In conclusion I think that a great majority of the sources proves that the failure of Prohibition was inevitable
