[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-322586-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-322586-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","association-against-the-prohibition-amendment-prohibition-pro-and-con-the-case-against-prohibition","Association Against the Prohibition Amendment - Prohibition Pro and Con - THE CASE AGAINST PROHIBITION","","Association Against the Prohibition Amendment documents a joint debate over federal Prohibition, focusing on arguments presented in “The Case Against Prohibition.” The text argues that imposing a rigid nationwide rule violates majority opinion and is ethically, constitutionally, and practically unworkable. It cites enforcement and production statistics, rising arrests and court burdens, and health impacts including increased deaths from acute alcoholism. It also challenges claims of social and economic benefits by highlighting prisoner growth and the financial costs of enforcement and lost government revenue.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/association-against-the-prohibition-amendment-prohibition-pro-and-con-the-case-against-prohibition/322586/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/association-against-the-prohibition-amendment-prohibition-pro-and-con-the-case-against-prohibition/322586.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Noah","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-26","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",10,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What main claim does “The Case Against Prohibition” make about federal Prohibition?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Federal Prohibition is argued to be an unworkable nationwide imposition rejected by a majority, likely to fail without broad local unanimity.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What evidence does the document use to show enforcement failure?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"It cites official records indicating illicit liquor production surpassing enforcement efforts, including seizures of distilling equipment and liquor, and growth in arrests and court cases under the Volstead Act.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How does the document address health and social consequences of Prohibition?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"It claims deaths from acute alcoholism rose sharply during Prohibition and that arrests for drunkenness approached or neared pre-Prohibition levels in many communities.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},322586,1790480757,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,120,123,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":125},"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},8796095462418,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/80000253c1241d02b47?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1778826106357471780","97-84076-13  \n# Association Against theProhibition Amendment\n\nProhibition pro and con  \nWashington,D.C.  \n## COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIESPRESERVATION DIVISION\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET  \nORIGINAL MATERIAL AS FILMED-EXISTING BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD  \nRESTRICTIONS ON USE:Reproductions may not be made without permission from Columbia UniversltyLibraries.             \n## TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA\n\nFILM SIZE:          5mmREDUCTION RATIO:      9:1  \nIMAGE PLACEMENT:IA  \nIIB  \nINITIALS:                    PB、ue  \nDATE FILMED:91191                      \nTBACKING\\#:                                                                                                 2385   \n## PROHIBITION PRO AND CON\n\nJOINT DEBATE  \n926)21.ceA√3工  \nBetween  \nRepresentatives of the Association Againstthe Prohibition Amendment and theAnti-Saloon League of America  \nPrepared for the Newspapers Represented byThe Newspaper Information Service,Washington,D.C.  \n## Part I\n\nTHE CASE AGAINST PROHIBITIONMain Argument  \nBy HENRY H.CURRAN  \nPresident of the.Association Against theProhibition Amendmen  \nFederal prohibition seeks to impose on allthe people a rigid rule which only a minoritywill accept.This fundamental error makesit utterly unworkable.In nine years of pro-hibition in the United States,the availablerecords show its increasing failure to achieveeither temperance or any other of the bene-ficial ends its sponsors said they sought.Onthe other hand,the evils bred by it are griev-ous and are still growing.  \nTrue to the prediction of Chief JusticeTaft in 1918,prohibition was adopted\"against the views and practices of a majorityof the people in many of the large cities andin one-fourth or less of the States.\"As heforesaw,the liquor business has gone \"out ofthe hands of the law-abiding members of thecommunity\"and been \"transferred to thequasi-criminal class.\"Ethically,actually andconstitutionally,Federal prohibition was cer-tain to fail.It has failed.No such intimateand unreasonable dictation of personal waysof life can ever succeed unless supported by alocal and nearly unanimous opinion.To ex-pect success for such an enslavement of 120millions of diverse people,through Federalconstitutional edict,is to court the impos-sible.  \nWe have space here only for a brief resuméof the workings of prohibition during itsnine-year trial.A careful consideration ofthese points will convince fair-minded Ameri-cans that prohibition never has worked andnever will.  \nFrom the Prohibition Unit,official reportsclearly indicate that the illicit liquor industryhas outstripped all efforts of enforcement.Conservative estimates based on.the Depart-  \nment of Agriculture's reports and reliabletrade statistics show that our vineyards arenow producing a greater amount of wine thanwas ever consumed before prohibition.In1920,15,416 pieces of distilling apparatuswere seized;last year 261,611 pieces wereseized.In 1920,153,735 gallons of liquorwere seized;in 1928,32,401,330.Arrestsfor violation of the Volstead Act have grownfrom 34,175 in 1921 to 75,307 in 1928.The Federal courts staggered under 77,799prohibition violation cases last year,thoughonly 21,297 were handled in 1921.Over136,000 persons have been convicted of liquorlaw violations in the last three years,while  \n46,617 cases in addition have been droppedwithout trial.Only this \"bargain-day\"pro-cedure,and the fact that 90 per cent of thecases tried are pleas of guilty,serve to keepcourt calendars fairly clear.  \nIntemperance is shown to have followedthe rapid growth of the illicit liquor trade.Through the first seven years of prohibitionthe death rate from acute alcoholism through-out the country rose 300 per cent.Thepresent rate has almost reached the pre-warlevel.There is significance in the figurestabulated by the Moderation League,show-ing that in 388 communities,arrests fordrunkenness have almost doubled from thefirst to the last year of prohibition.Evenallowing for increasing population it is fairto say that arrests for drunkennes","cbCaijmk7MrWYD9C","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaijmk7MrWYD9C","pdf",677433,14,"English","# Prohibition Pro and Con\n## Columbia University Libraries Preservation Division\n## Technical Microform Data\n## Prohibition Pro and Con - Joint Debate\n## Part I: The Case Against Prohibition\n### Main Argument","[{\"question\":\"What main claim does “The Case Against Prohibition” make about federal Prohibition?\",\"answer\":\"Federal Prohibition is argued to be an unworkable nationwide imposition rejected by a majority, likely to fail without broad local unanimity.\"},{\"question\":\"What evidence does the document use to show enforcement failure?\",\"answer\":\"It cites official records indicating illicit liquor production surpassing enforcement efforts, including seizures of distilling equipment and liquor, and growth in arrests and court cases under the Volstead Act.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the document address health and social consequences of Prohibition?\",\"answer\":\"It claims deaths from acute alcoholism rose sharply during Prohibition and that arrests for drunkenness approached or neared pre-Prohibition levels in many communities.\"}]","Association Against the Prohibition Amendment - Prohibition Pro and Con - THE CASE AGAINST PROHIBITION | PDF",1789963071,35]