I feel that these two sources agree on some things but not on others. For example they both agree on the Anti-saloon league being one of the many reasons for the introduction of prohibition, they both agree prohibition caused more organised crime, they agree that there was a demand for alcohol. But they disagree on what was the main cause of prohibition and the German-American connection.
So it is difficult to say how far they agree with each other. But I would say that they agree on the outcome of prohibition but not the cause for it.
2.) In my opinion source C is for prohibition. The caption below ‘slaves of the saloon’. This refers to the regulars customers who use there weekly wage on alcohol, they are addicted. They always come back to the saloon. This way they always spend their wage on getting drunk so they might be living in poverty conditions.
The man buying alcohol is using his weekly wage to buy alcohol; whilst he is doing this in the inset picture it appears that his wife is distraught he is buying alcohol the caption next to her ‘The saloon is well named the poor mans club it keeps its members and there families poor.’ The baby in the picture in my opinion is put in the picture on purpose to get the reader to think that it is appalling that a child can be brought up in such a bad environment. The woman in the inset picture could give another impression to other people. She might be crying for a different reason than being poor, she could be abused by her husband when he is drunk.
In the picture the barman has his till left open this could be seen as that he is not telling customers when they have had enough to drink. Also he is represented as chubby and jolly man; he is seen as taking money at other peoples misery.
Source D in my opinion is in favour of prohibition because it shows an image of a mother and her son outside a saloon waiting for the father. They are waiting because the father is having a drink in the saloon. This is shown for prohibition because the father should be spending time with his family. Also the caption at the bottom ‘And our shoes and stockings and food are in the saloon too, and they’ll never come out.’
This means that the father is using there money to pay for his addiction rather than pay for food or clothes which is in a poverty state so the message from this picture is that alcohol makes people live in a poverty state.
3.) I feel that source E is more reliable because based on the fact that it came 12 years later than source F so they can reflect on what has happened in the previous time. But source F is trying to predict what is going to happen in the future for example ‘Law will be obeyed in cities, large and small, and in villages.’
This is one of the reasons that source E is more reliable. I also think that source E is more reliable because it is taken from the point of someone not in senior authority. John D. Rockefeller is a wealthy industrialist and doesn’t have a biased opinion. But source F is from the opinion of John. F Kramer who was a Prohibition commissioner. This statement might not even be his own opinion, if he had said he was going to fail then he would be jeopardising his job.
Source E explains ‘When prohibition was introduced, I hoped that it would be widely supported by public opinion’ this means he wanted prohibition to succeed so this suggests he isn’t bias.
Another reason that I think source F is not reliable is that in the caption of the source F ‘John F Kramer, the first prohibition commissioner’
The word ‘first’ means that someone must have succeeded him in the role of prohibition commissioner. This suggests he failed in his task to stop illegal alcohol sales, this could mean the statement isn’t reliable.
Source E is the most reliable source out of the two.
4.) source G shows that more alcohol was coming into the country every year. Or the other reason for the figures of illegal alcohol to go up is that the police were seizing more alcohol each year. This points to prohibition not working but the police just getting better at their job.
Source h shows that the amount of people getting caught rose year on year. In the same case as source G the police could be just catching more people year on year.
But both sources put together show that prohibition was unsuccessful because more alcohol was getting into the country and the rate of people drunk went up.
Source B agrees with prohibition failing ‘By 1928 there were more than 30,000 ‘speakeasies’ in New York’. This proves that drinking went up the longer prohibition went on.
Source E also agrees with the figures ‘Instead, drinking has generally increased; the speakeasy has replaced the saloon’. This source from John .D Rockefeller jnr was taken after prohibition and so this evidence reflects that prohibition was unsuccessful.
5.) Source I proves that Source J is telling the truth because in the cartoon the enforcers of the prohibition law are taking backhanders (bribes) from the people supplying the illegal alcohol. This proves that it is generally known that senior officers are corrupt. Source J agrees with this by saying ‘It was a conspiracy and my superior officers were involved in it.’ So the officers in Chicago according to Source J were corrupt.
The title of the cartoon ‘National gesture’ is backing up source J by saying the corruption doesn’t just happen in one place but all over America. So it could be happening in Chicago. Source J agrees with this by saying ‘He handed me an envelope, I took it and he was gone. I opened it and there was $75 in it’
The policeman in the source took the envelope but he doesn’t say what he did with it. In my opinion he took it for himself. So Source I agrees with Source J that it is the ‘National gesture’.
Source J says ‘The bottle was there and you were supposed to drink.’ This partially agrees with Source I although I have no evidence most of the senior officers liked a drink. So in my view they agree.
But you could not properly trust source J because it is a cartoon and might not be telling the truth it could be trying to persuade you this is the truth because it is a cartoon.
I think that source I can back up what the policeman in many ways. For example they all took bribes even the lowly ranked policeman, they all wanted to drink alcohol occasionally and no-one would report a thing. From all the evidence I feel that Source I proves Source J to a point that you can get a very good idea of the corruption in the police force.
6. Source A supports that prohibition was a failure. ‘But whatever the causes of prohibition, there can be little doubt about its consequences. It created the greatest criminal boom in American history, and perhaps in all modern day history. No earlier law produced such widespread crime. For no earlier law had gone against all the daily customs, habits, and desires of so many Americans.’
This shows that prohibition failed, and it caused more problems than it solved. The problems that it created was organised crime. I feel that source A shows that prohibition was failure.
Source B supports that prohibition was a failure.’ The first prohibition commissioner had no doubts that he would stamp out the evils of drink. To help him, 1500 prohibition agents were appointed. By 1928 there were more than 30,000 ‘speakeasies’ in New York.’
This shows that prohibition failed, because speakeasies (illegal bars) were appearing everywhere and the police could not stop alcohol being illegally sold.
Sources C and D are both taken from before prohibition was introduced, so they can’t say whether prohibition was a success.
Source E strongly agrees that prohibition was a failure. Although he states that prohibition was a good idea and he fully supported it.
‘Instead, drinking has generally increased; the speakeasy has replaced the saloon; a vast army of lawbreakers has appeared; many of our best citizens have openly ignored prohibition.’
This strongly states that prohibition failed he says that people just ignored the law; he also says that instead of drinking falling it increased. This definitely agrees that prohibition was a failure.
Source F which is taken from John F. Kramer the first prohibition commissioner is taken at the very start of prohibition, so he can’t have a point on the failure of prohibition.
Source G and H show the figures of alcohol selling and consumption. They show that the amount of selling and consumption increased the longer prohibition went on. This could point to two things people were obeying the law at the start or the federal officers got better at catching people. If the obeying law at the start is correct this is the only thing that says prohibition succeeded at one point, but even with it succeeding at one point prohibition was still a failure.
Source I shows that people enforcing the law were corrupt. The cartoon suggests that people like judges, politicians, police officers, clerks, party officials and prohibition agents were taking backhanders (bribes). This supports that prohibition was a failure. But you cannot rely upon this source because it is a cartoon and could be trying to persuade you this is happening.
Source J shows that prohibition was a failure. ‘He handed me an envelope, I took it and he was gone. I opened it and there was $75.’
This shows that police officers took bribes to ignore people selling alcohol and drinking. This shows that prohibition officers were not doing there job and letting people drink. This supports that prohibition was a failure.
Through all the sources only one piece of evidence has half shown prohibition was a success. But every other source has strongly stated it was a failure. If prohibition had been a success it would not have been brought to an end. I feel all the sources and my knowledge point strongly towards prohibition being a failure.
