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

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

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

History Coursework - (c) Koral Jackson 10R Study Sources E and F. Which of these two sources is the more reliable as evidence about Prohibition? Source E is more reliable than Source F in many ways. Source E is from 1932, just before Prohibition was ending, and Source F is from 1920 which is much earlier, just as Prohibition was being introduced. Immediately it is obvious that Source E is more reliable in this way, as the person who wrote the letter was likely to have been around through the whole of Prohibition and had seen what had happened, whereas the Prohibition Commissioner speaking in 1920 had not yet seen any of what Source E talks about. Source E is from a letter written by a wealthy industrialist. There is no obvious reason why he would lie about Prohibition in this letter, as there is nothing included in it ...read more.

Middle

Source A says that "[Prohibition] created the greatest criminal boom in American history", which is in agreement with Source E where is says "a vast army of lawbreakers has appeared... and crime has increased to a level never seen before". Source B also agrees with Source E where is says "By 1928 there were more than 30,000 'speakeasies' in New York", which backs up Source E where it says "the speakeasy has replaced the saloon". Sources G and H, which are factual statistics, also back up Source E. Source G can be seen in two different ways, but one of these is that the number of illegal stills were increasing over time, and so were the amounts of alcohol produced. This supports Source E where is says "drinking has generally increased;... ...read more.

Conclusion

The man speaking in Source F is only saying what he thinks will happen, as Prohibition was only just beginning and he had not yet seen what the writer of Source E discussed. He couldn't know anything for sure, and therefore there are no facts at all included in the source, which immediately makes it unreliable. However, this source does show that there were people involved in the reinforcement of Prohibition who were detirmined to make it work, and so it is proving that in fact not everybody was against Prohibition. Some of the other sources suggest that there was nobody willing to give it a go. In conclusion, I can say with no doubt at all that Source E is far more reliable than Source F. The main reason is of course that Source E can be backed up by facts and other sources, and Source F cannot. ...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. Prohibition Sources Coursework.

    The children shown on this poster clearly do need help. If the father continues to go to the saloon on a regular basis, he will undoubtedly become unhealthy and less likely to work, as he may be too drunk or hung over.

  2. Was Prohibition bound to fail? - source related study.

    Considering the reliability of the sources, the reliability of sources C, D and F can be questioned. Sources C and D were both created by the Anti- Saloon League and therefore are from an opinionated perspective, as I know the Anti-Saloon League were pro-Prohibition and were known for their pro-Prohibition campaigning.

  1. How far do these two accounts agree about prohibition?

    So I believe that source E is a much more reliable source of information about prohibition because it was written by an industrialist, who would have had a more neutral view of prohibition than Kramer who would have had

  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. c) Study Sources E and F Which of these two sources is the more ...

    Throughout the 1920s and 30s, Gangsters like Al Capone, turned Prohibition into an escalating violence and lawlessness in the USA. Illegal bars and stills were very common, and liquor was smuggled from Canada or manufactured illegally in America. In 1929-30, there were 130 gangland murders for which no-one was arrested.

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

    The messages that are expressed by the Women's Christian Temperance Union and the Anti- saloon league all strongly agree with the source. 'One of the great evils of the time - alcoholism'...'The Women's Christian Temperance Union had joined in a crusade...'

  1. Does the evidence of source C support the evidence of sources A and B ...

    I went without a meal on Sunday in order to feed the children''. This is hinting that they have no money, as they can't even afford to buy enough food. If they often go without a meal on Sunday they are likely to be unemployed.

  2. History - Prohibition

    showing the number of arrests for drink - related offences', from 1920 to 1925. This source shows that in 1920, there were no arrests made for drunk drivers. By 1925, however, this had increased to 820 arrests. This shows a vast increase in the number of people being arrested for drink driving.

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