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

    15,794 in 1929, however this is not enough information because this could also mean a number of other things such as more stills were being made so more were bound to be found. We need to know how many stills there were all together to be able to tell if the prohibition agents were being successful or not.

  1. Prohibition Sources Coursework

    We can in turn infer from this that they weren't motivated and passionate about the banning of alcohol as otherwise the low pay would have been irrelevant. Many enforces were unable or unwilling to resist the corruption and bribery as gangsters made such high profits from law breaking and had excessive funds to bribe officials.

  2. History depth study coursework-USA 1919-1945.

    Source J is written by a police officer, who would come second in line for a bribe. From my background knowledge, I know that Chicago was one place where there were a lot of gangs who sold illegal alcohol and many officers were bribed.

  1. 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.

  2. How far do these two accounts agree about Prohibition?

    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

  1. 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...'

  2. Prohibition Sources Questions

    Most people believed the people who did risk going to speakeasies were living on a knife edge, but source C does not proove that as those in the speakeasies were drinking alcahol like their was no tommorow. Some may argue to a certain extent that the source wich has no

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