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

Was Prohibition bound to Fail

Extracts from this document...


History Coursework Was Prohibition bound to Fail? A) These two accounts agree with Prohibition to a certain extent. Both sources agree that campaigns should be run against alcohol. Source A- "The influence of the anti- saloon league." This campaign agrees with prohibition, they wanted saloons to be banned because they believed that it was a bad influence and encouraged people to waste their money and once people had too much to drink the campaign thought that they caused crime. It launched a strong propaganda campaign and put pressure on politicians to support the cause. Source B- "The women's Christian Temperance Union." This campaign was a very religious one. They were against alcohol because they believed that drinking was bad and should not be done. Both the sources agree that the use of grain is being wasted on alcohol so it should be banned. Source A- "Preserving grain for food." Source B- "Congress to ban the use of grain." Both the sources believe that the use of grain being used to make alcohol will have to stop. Both sources agree that alcohol caused criminal activity. This was a reason why they wanted to introduce Prohibition. Source A- "No earlier law produced such widespread crime." This is very ironic because they wanted to stop the amount of crime by getting rid of alcohol but instead the opposite happened and caused more criminal activity. Source B- "Dutch Shulz and Al Capone had turned the avoidance of prohibition into big violent business." Prohibition caused a big increase in gangsters, which means more crime and trouble. ...read more.


This means that prohibition has just been introduced and he doesn't know the outcome of it or how the public will support it. In conclusion I fell that the source that is the more reliable as evidence about prohibition is source E. This is because Rockefeller has lived through the period of prohibition and knows everything that has happened. There's more information in source E about prohibition than source F. Also Kramer in source F is biased and not believable, where as Rockefeller is a good man and very reliable. D) Source G shows a table of illegal stills seized and gallons of spirits seized between 1921, 1925 and 1929. During this period of time the federal government agents were trying to enforce prohibition. By looking at the table both illegal stills seized and gallons of spirits seized the numbers increased over the years, which is showing us that prohibition was succeeding. However this is not very reliable because the numbers may have been fixed, because if the federal agents can make it look as if prohibition is succeeding they will get credit and the public may start to support the law. I also know that the numbers in the table have been boosted up because the same table is in the Steven Waugh history book, and it shows the gallons of distilled spirits seized at the period of 1925 and 1929 to be ten million under. Also from the Steven Waugh history book it says, "......take control by bribing local policemen." This means that the federal agents weren't doing their job and enforcing prohibition, so how would the numbers go up if they don't do their job. ...read more.


The drinking habits of the American people were a further reason why prohibition was bound to fail. There was a massive demand for drink which did not go away, despite the law. This is shown in Source G in the statistic showing the vast quantity of illegal spirits seized; for which there was obviously a massive demand. At the time the supporters for prohibition were campaigning for it's introduction in 1917, people in America were generally poorer. This is also shown in Sources C and D. Prohibition should have therefore enabled people to be better off financially and so be in favour of it. These sources along with source B show that it was not inevitable at the time prohibition was introduced, that it would fail. There was much evidence to show that there was public support. However, in the 1920's when Prohibition was introduced there was a booming economy and most people were in employment and were well off, and wanted to celebrate and spend their money on drink also. As a result, people forgot about the problems of drink as described in sources B, C and D. In conclusion I believe that the majority of sources do support the view that the failure of prohibition was inevitable. Those who introduced Prohibition failed to anticipate the extent of public opinion against it and also the rise in crime which people realised was much worse than drinking. Everything that they wanted to prevent by introducing Prohibition actually happened. However, it is unlikely that they would have anticipated the Police failing to act appropriately. Had the police been less corrupt then possibly prohibition could have succeeded. ?? ?? ?? ?? Anthony Michaelides 11M Ms Stoker ...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?

    Personnel of the Coast Guard increased a hundred and eighty-eight percent during the nineteen twenties, and its budget increased more than five hundred percent between nineteen fifteen and nineteen thirty-two. So it created employment, but the people employed where also bribed by gangsters.

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

    working class men, also the business men claiming prohibition would increase the productivity of their workers were talking about working class men. This suggests that many people did not take into consideration the effects prohibition would have on the upper and middle classes; this could go onto explain why opposition

  1. Why was prohibition introduced

    By 1929 "one in five Americans owned a car". In 1929 Ford's factory was able to produce a car "every minute". It was soon apparent that production was outstripping demand especially in 1929. The soft drink "Coca Cola" also saw a sharp rise in demand .This was due to the

  2. The USA: Was prohibition bound to fail?

    speakeasies in New York during prohibition than there were saloons before prohibition. There was also a great deal of crime going on during the period of prohibition. Rockefeller's statement is also backed up by sources A and B, both of which state specifically that prohibition was ineffective at decreasing alcohol consumption, and that crime prospered during the prohibition era.

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

    Both sides of the story need to be known to understand everything. Do All The Sources Support The View That Failure Of Prohibition Was Inevitable? Throughout my studies of prohibition I have come across many sources, all with different views and opinions.

  2. Was prohibition bound to fail?

    However, the Depression may have made it impossible to make Prohibition work any longer, as it piled a lot more pressure onto an economy already lacking the funds gained from the alcohol business. Furthermore, the fact that that a large proportion of the public were for Prohibition, even up until


    Looking firstly at source E, I read through it and noticed that all what this man has said is all true about prohibition for example "drinking has generally increased" and he comments on all the lawbreaking and increasing of illegal drink bars also this passage was dated after the prohibition

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

    Many smaller gangs tried to imitate this, but nothing was as good as "the real McCoy". These larger, more organised gangs crushed smaller bootleggers and smugglers and put them out of business. Although there was a high risk in doing this, many gangsters and criminals were able to control governments, local councils and police through bribery.

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