Prohibition Comparison

Below is a clipping from the Missouri Republican written on January 12, 1873. It describes Gov. Palmer’s view on prohibition in the United States, specifically Illinois, during that time period.

Gov. Palmer opposes the idea of prohibition and argues that prohibition is not only a criminal act, but that prohibition will not be effective if enforced. Furthermore, Gov. Palmer actually hints that intoxication should be considered more of a health concern or even a disease, rather than a crime. Those that suffer from drunkenness and alcoholism should be given “retreat” in Gov. Palmer’s opinion, rather than the ban of alcohol in its entirety.

However, this aligns with the views of the early temperance reformers. These reformers were more focused on rehabilitation rather than legitimate prohibition. Later, these reformers would be more likely to support the policy changes on alcohol.

These policy changes that would eventually be passed directly impacted the German population in the United States, and Missouri was no exception. Missouri was one of the largest producers of wine and beer and these industries were impacted significantly. German-Americans were a large portion of the wine and beer brewers in the US, so these ideas were bound to impact these people directly.

From early temperance reformers like Gov. Palmer to prohibition policy changes, the brewing industry suffered and therefore the German-American wellbeing. It was the anti-German ideology during World War I that would finally push prohibition from conversation to legitimate policy.

In the newspaper article from 1873, Gov. Palmer, and his views on prohibition in the Midwest, is a good representation of the beginning of the end of the alcohol production industry, as well as the start of German-American suffering.