Time: Wed May 28 17:19:54 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA29830; Wed, 28 May 1997 14:48:39 -0700 (MST) by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA09476; Wed, 28 May 1997 14:48:32 -0700 (MST) Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 17:07:59 -0700 To: (Recipient list suppressed) From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: PRO ESSAY #2 (fwd) <snip> > >Alcohol Prohibition; How the Eighteenth Amendment came into being. > >Colonial America drank prodigious amounts of alcohol in all forms. There >was not much notice, however, of social problems related to drinking until >the early 1830s witnessed the appearance of a temperance movement, rooted >primarily in rural fundamentalist Christian churches. At some point, the >goal of that movement shifted from voluntary temperance to enforced >prohibition and the first of three great waves of state prohibition laws >were passed starting in 1846. Several of those laws were eventually thrown >out by state courts, others repealed by newly elected legislators. >Following the Civil War, a second wave of enthusiasm for prohibition saw >formation of the Prohibition Party in 1869, the WCTU in 1870 and a spate of >new state laws. At about the time that this second wave was receding, an >important event, creation of the Anti Saloon League in Oberlin Ohio in 1893 >gave the sponsoring churches a national political organization with a >permanent staff to supply profesional direction to the movement. Twenty >years later, key members of that staff would redirect the efforts of a >resurgent prohibition movement toward a Constitutional Amendment, and in >the ensuing six years, aided by a European war, lead it to a stunning >political victory; passage of the Eighteenth Amendment. > > >In the twenty year interval between its founding and the decision, made at >its "Jubilee Convention" in Columbus, Ohio in November 1913, the >professionals of the Anti-Saloon league had learned many valuable lessons. >Some were negative; as with the difficulties in enforcing prohibition laws >in a dry state with wet neighbors. Some were positive; as in the effective >application of pressure to politicians of both parties in the new game of >single-issue politics (in which they were pioneers). Their decision, made >on the basis of these lessons, was to strike for national prohibition via >Constitutional Amendment. > >Without going into too much detail, the various state prohibition laws that >had been passed and repealed over the years had pointed up difficulties >inherent in state-based prohibition: each state law would vary, some states >were "bone" dry, others permitted beer and/or wine. Some states allowed >varying degrees of importation by their citizens for personal use; others >did not. Then there was always trafficking from bordering wet states. >Rather than give prohibition advocates pause about the enforcability of >prohibition laws in general, that phenomenon merely convinced them that a >uniform national law was the solution to the problem. Thus, this simplistic >confidence that a properly worded statute can reform human nature was as >evident then as it is today. > >The other experience that convinced leaders of the Anti Saloon League to go >for an Amendment rather than a law passed by Congress was the fact that >prohibition laws had been repealed in several states a few years after >their passage. It was believed that because a Constitutional Amendment was >so difficult to achieve, it would be impregnable, thereby making >prohibition of alcohol our permanent national policy. > >The role played by the First World War in successful passage of the >Eighteenth Amendment has been well documented by many historians. The >Amendment went into effect on January 16, 1920 amid concessions from most >astute political observers of the time that its repeal was nearly >unthinkable. The confidence of its sponsors was unbounded; they were sure >it would profoundly redirect society towards righteousness and productivity >and that the cost of enforcement would be minimal- Wayne Wheeler, chief >architect of the political triumph of the Amendment estimated an annual >enforcement budget at 5 million to begin with, with a subsequent decline as >the "bad apples" were driven out of business! > >We now know, that far from rendering Prohibition invulnerable as policy, >the passage of the Eighteenth Amendment rendered it uniquely susecptible to >total repudiation by a single devastating event, passage of Repeal. Not >only did it happen; it happened swiftly, in a mere thirteen years. Just as >Prohibition probably required the assistance of the Great War for its >passage. Repeal probably wouldn't have occurred without the Great >Depression. So devastating and complete was the repudiation of Prohibition >that its underlying idea: prohibition of alcohol is reasonable policy; an >idea which had persisted for well over a century, was completely laid to >rest, perhaps forever. > >That consideration alone renders the ascendancy of drug prohibition in the >sixty years following Repeal all the more incongruous. >Tom O'Connell > <snip> ======================================================================== Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S. : Counselor at Law, federal witness email: [address in tool bar] : Eudora Pro 3.0.1 on Intel 586 CPU web site: http://www.supremelaw.com : library & law school registration ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this ========================================================================
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail