Theodore Roosevelt

Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson both made their mark on United States history as presidents. One president was a wild, violent “Rough Rider” who was also insecure. The other was a deeply religious, sentimental traditionalist who stood firmly on his ground. Both presidents made changes in American life, whether it be business or social. By examining domestic policies of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, one can see that although they differed greatly, both were effective presidents.

Theodore Roosevelt was a sickly child. His father helped him train to overcome his debilitation, and set him on his way to be a “Rough Rider. Woodrow Wilson”s father was a Presbyterian minister, and his mother a daughter of one; they instilled a stolid set of morals that Woodrow Wilson carried with him his whole life. Both presidents came from socially secure backgrounds that gave them distinguishing characteristics. Both presidents, however, dramatically changed their public view to support the ideals of the common man in America. Theodore Roosevelt started off his presidency say that he “shall go slow” in the process of investigating large corporations. He was insecure, afraid that some of his policies upset the corporations.

However, as his terms went on, the president gained a reputation for being a Progressive. According to Hofstadter, “[Reform] was meant to heal only the most conspicuous sores on the body politic. ” Roosevelt wrote that he did not know what, if anything, should be done about trusts. The main reason he distrusted and despised bigness in business was because he was a “big politician facing a strong rival in the business of achieving power. ” Roosevelt proposed reforms and blasted dishonesty in business with “the showiest language that had ever been used in the White House.

His use of language caused the public image of him to be a reformer and it contributed real weight to that side. However, Roosevelt did do his share of trust busting. A brilliant stroke of publicity was the prosecution of the Northern Securities Company. A gigantic railroad monopoly in the Northwest was organized, and Roosevelt had practically no choice but to prosecute; the public branded him the reputation of being a major reformer. Woodrow Wilson was the president of Princeton University. He gained large support, and was approached by Boss Jim Smith and his associates to run for New Jersey governor.

Wilson accepted and decided he could cooperate with them on righteous terms. Progressives started to complain almost immediately. The Hoboken Observer wrote against Wilson, saying that he was “induced to enter the race by a combination of the very elements which the Progressives are fighting . . . and these elements have assumed charge of his candidacy. ” He responded by changing to please the people. It had been necessary to please the capitalists and the bosses to get a foothold in politics, but now it seemed that he must enter the governorship “with absolutely no pledges of any kind. “

Wilson became a spokesman for the common man. When the people had expressed preference for a man running for the Senate, Wilson opposed the Bosses by endorsing the man the people wanted instead of the man that would have won. Wilson did not let his private obligations override his public ones. He believed in principles over personality, and the man became increasingly stronger as a reformer. Endorsement of the progressive creed by Wilson created a break with his original sponsor when running for president, and a complete change in his support followed after he dumped Harvey and befriended Bryan.

For both of these presidents, these events show that not only did they change their public image, they also gained popularity by being ambiguous in their speeches and actions; the ambiguity only furthered their popularity. Morals was also a large factor in the two presidencies. The role in which Roosevelt imagined himself was that of a moralist. He told Lincoln Steffens that the real need in American public life was “the fundamental fight for morality. ” Roosevelt told Ray Stannard Baker that although economic issues would become increasingly important, his “problems are moral problems, and [his] teaching has been plain morality.

Woodrow Wilson, the son of the minister and the minister”s daughter, ate, drank and slept morals. The solution to controlling business must be found in a movement of moral regeneration, according to him. Punishment should fall on individuals and not on whole corporations. In one of Wilson”s most frequently used metaphors, the maleficent corporation official was the irresponsible driver of the corporate automobile. He said, “One really responsible man in jail . . . would be worth more than one thousand corporations mulcted in fines.

This contradicts with Roosevelt, who wanted to punish whole corporations, but the same message upholds; morals are the root of the solution, and the main objective is to regulate business by keeping them under the State. Both Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were effective presidents. Theodore Roosevelt persecuted the Northern Securities Company, launching a trust-busting crusade, and he became the first president to intervene in a labor-management dispute when the anthracite coal miners struck.

The Hepburn Act strengthened the authority of the Interstate Commerce Commission over railroads, and an employer”s liability law were put into action. Woodrow Wilson ‘s administration produced a huge number of achievements. A downward tariff revision was secured, the public controlled the nation”s banking and credit system under the Federal Reserve Act, and farmers were pleased with the Federal Farm Loan Act and the Warehousing Act.

The Clayton Act implemented the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and the Federal Trade Commission was created to enjoin what Wilson had called “illicit competition. ” An eight-hour day for railroad workers in interstate commerce, a child-labor act, and a compensation law for Civil Service workers were all created under the Wilson administration. So although Roosevelt and Wilson differed, there effectiveness is clearly present while comparing their domestic policies as presidents.

The idea of Progressivism came with the belief that society was capable of improvement and that continued growth and advancement were the destiny of this great nation. The muckrakers were among the first people to promote this new and profound nationalistic spirit. Many were persuasive and crusading journalists who began to direct public attention and discretion toward the political, social, and economic injustices of the US during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

They strove to expose scandal and corruption to the American public. Ellen Fitzpatrick”s Muckraking: Three Landmark Articles, presents famous articles by Lincoln Steffens, Ida Tarbell, and Ray Stannard Baker which appeared in the January, 1903 edition of McClure”s Magazine. The articles examine political corruption, the emergence and behavior of giant corporations, and labor racketeering in industrial America. The article by Lincoln Steffens mostly focused on the problems and examples of corruption, as well as the challenge of reform.

Steffens began to develop a somewhat paradoxical view of good and evil in city politics at a young age (Fitzpatrick, 20). This frame of mind led to his views in the article, The Shame of Minneapolis. The intertwined processes of urbanization, industrialization and immigration meant that American cites mushroomed in the late nineteenth century. “The city” became an increasingly complex organism, which required sanitation, water, building codes, zoning regulations, policing. But as the city administration expanded, so did opportunities to misuse government power.

Throughout, the Progressive period calls for electoral reform and/or increased “efficiency” and “scientific management” in municipal affairs were paired with revelations of corruption in municipal politics and policing. Steffens agreed with these reforms all along as well as political thieve! Tarbell is using an historical example to illustrate the use of trusts and holding companies by entrepreneurs seeking monopoly control of various industrial sectors in the United States with her article, The Oil War of 1872.

As Tarbell hints in this article, despite the failure of the South Improvement Company, John D. Rockefeller eventually succeeded in dominating the petroleum industry through the Standard Oil Company. Rockefeller pioneered the “trust” form of organization when he founded the Standard Oil Trust in 1879. Standard Oil became, along with Andrew Carnegie”s U. S. Steel, the most notorious of the powerful “trusts,” a term that came to be applied to all large industrial combinations whether or not they followed the formal “trust” model of investing.

Rockefeller eventually built the largest private fortune in the United States and became perhaps the prototypical Gilded Age “robber baron,” reviled for his ruthless business practices. The federal government successful! ly prosecuted Standard Oil for monopolistic practices in 1906, and the trust was forced to disband. In a sense, this was the exact outcome Ida Tarbell was aiming for in writing this article. “She presented the “facts” of the oil scandal as she had come to understand them, believing that an objective account would best serve the evidence” (Fitzpatrick, 27).

Many wondered, however, if Tarbell was prejudice toward big business. Nevertheless, Tarbell most likely just believed in fair play, taught to her by her father who was one of the men who resisted the Southern Improvement Company. Ray Stannard Baker”s article, The Right to Work, relates to the 1902 anthracite coal strike in Pennsylvania that lasted over five months. The miners wanted the mine owners to recognize their new union, the United Mine Workers of America but the owners refused to bargain with the UMW. The miners were also looking for a 10-20% increase in wages and an eight-hour work.

As the winter of 1902-03 approached, President Roosevelt ordered the mine owners and UMW president to the White House to negotiate. When the mine owners still refused to compromise, Roosevelt told the owners that if they did not agree to arbitration, he would send 10,000 federal troops to seize their property and get the mines working. Previously, federal troops had only been called in to support the management side in labor disputes. The very surprised mine owners agreed to arbitration and the miners eventually went back to work with a10% increase and a nine-hour day.

Although he enjoyed a public reputation as a ! “trust buster” fighting powerful capitalists on behalf of less affluent Americans, Roosevelt was not in favor of getting rid of the trusts and large corporations. He believed that large-scale capitalism brought prosperity and efficiency to the American economy. The job of the federal government was to police or regulate big business to stop the worst misuses of power. The mine owners, in Roosevelt”s view, were abusing their power and they were threatening the well-being of Americans who needed coal to heat their homes.

Roosevelt”s handling of the coal strike was very popular with ordinary Americans, Baker in particular. Conclusively, these articles give the reader a broad understanding of the nature of “Progressivism. ” Each of the issues presented in the three articles points out particular flaws of American society in the early 1900s. They are brought forward to the public in a manner such that people will realize these flaws and strive to change them, “progress” forward, and improve the nation.

As a result, the muckrakers including Steffens, Tarbell, and Baker, played a big part in Progressivism. In my opinion, the Progressives approached these attempted social reforms just right. They were not too radical or too conservative. This is evident in how much society changed in that period for the better, and the condition of our society today for that matter. If people such as the muckrakers had not attempted to reform the nation, who knows where it would be today. They must have done something right so I would conclude that they achieved their goals just right.

President Theodore Roosevelt Proclamation and First Inaugural Address: The Use of Ethos and Pathos Lisa Weber ENG 530. 020 Dr. Mollick December 5, 2012 Inaugural addresses usually follow a farewell address given by the outgoing President. In the book Presidents Creating Presidency: Deeds Done in Words, Campbell and Jamieson’s chapter on “Farewell Addresses” explain that “[a] farewell address is an anticipatory ritual; the address is delivered days, sometimes weeks, before an outgoing president “lays down” the office, an event that does not occur until a successor is sworn in” (308).

This was not the case for Theodore Roosevelt for there was no pending farewell speeches planned. Vice-President Roosevelt became president after the unexpected assassination of President William McKinley on September 14, 1901. In Campbell and Jamieson’s chapter on “Special Addresses: The Speeches of Ascendant Vice Presidents,” they state that in history there have been only nine times where a vice president moved up to president (57). Eight of these incidents involved a president being assassinated and one involved impeachment.

Campbell and Jamieson also acknowledge that “[t]he death of any person creates the need for a unique form of symbolic response: the eulogy” and that “need for a eulogy even more urgent” (57). They affirm that “[t]he community is threatened because it has lost its leader; the citizenry needs reassurance that communal institutions will survive” (57). The unexpected death of McKinley left Roosevelt with the responsibility of comforting the nation. Roosevelt was able to reassure the citizens through the process of his First Proclamation.

This proclamation could be seen as his first inaugural address to the nation, with the second official inaugural address coming on March 4, 1905. In this paper we will be looking at two different appeals, pathos and ethos, being used in two totally different addresses. In order to comprehend the use of these rhetorical approaches we need to look at some important information behind the man Theodore Roosevelt. Theodore Roosevelt was a man of many words as well as ideals. He was a well educated man; more than some of the presidents before him and those who came after him.

While attending college his first year studies consisted of: Classical Literature, Greek (Plato), Latin (Cicero, Horace), German Language studies, Mathematics, Physics, and Chemistry. In his sophomore year he studied Rhetoric, History, while taking the following electives: German IV, German V, French IV, Natural History III and Natural History VIII. The junior year brought him to studying six themes in English, Philosophy with elective courses in German VIII, Italian I, Philosophy VI, Natural History I, and Natural History III.

Roosevelt’s last year consisted of classes in the four forensic themes in English, Italian II, Political Economy II, Natural History IV, and Natural History VI. With all these courses any person could see how strongly educated Roosevelt was and how knowledgeable he was in all areas of academia. With his classes in English and Rhetoric he became eloquent with his linguistics allowing him to compose his own speeches and books. In Speeches of the American Presidents, Janet Podell and Steven Anzovin believed that Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and Thomas Jefferson were naturally gifted in writing (355).

They assert that Roosevelt saw himself as a “professional man of letters, and his total output of words, which numbers in the tens of millions, dwarfs that of any other president” (355). Through research, many individuals believe that Roosevelt was the main author of all his speeches. Podell and Anzovin believe that Roosevelt had been known to have “dictate[d] them in outline form” and that he used his “confidants such as Henry Cabot Lodge” to look at his speeches and other messages before presenting them (355).

In Politics as Performance Art: The Body English of Theodore Roosevelt, H. W. Brands states that “[h]e wore out the stenographers dictating letters, and he wore out clerks reading his messages to Congress” and he continues with informing the reader in parentheses that “his first message, drafted before McKinley was cold in the grave, weighed in at twenty thousand words” (121). In the biographical material that Podell and Anzovin have compiled they inform the reader that Roosevelt was once a Sunday school teacher and saw the political platform as a “bully pulpit” (356).

They also express that Roosevelt’s tendency in speaking and writing resembles that of a Protestant preacher, as he stresses the importance of walking “towards the paths of righteousness and virtue” (356). Many people did not like the manner to which Roosevelt would present his speeches because he would be seen as being very loud in volume. While walking back and forth he can be seen waving his speech around like a maniac man screeching his voice in tones that were unbearable to some listening.

Podell and Anzovin describes William Roscoe Thayer observations to the manner of which Roosevelt dramatized his speeches; that some of the “listeners were fascinated by “his gestures, the way in which his pent-up thoughts seemed almost to strangle him before he could utter them, his smile showing the white rows of teeth, his fist clenched to strike an invisible adversary” (356). Theodore Roosevelt loved the attention and enjoyed the art of oratory for he looked for many opportunities to speak in public, especially on issues that he was passionate about.

For Roosevelt, speechmaking was a means to “educate the public and to inspire it” (356). One of Roosevelt’s closest friends, Henry Cabot Lodge gives credit to Roosevelt’s dominance “over his listeners to the “force of conviction” with which he preached his vision of the just society” (356). Henry Cabot Lodge describes and esteems Roosevelt in his article “Why Theodore Roosevelt Should Be Elected President” when he reminds the public of all of Roosevelt’s accomplishments when he says “[h]e has carried on the policies of his predecessor; he has been loyal to Republican principles” (329).

He continues his list of accomplishments when he states that Roosevelt “has fearlessly enforced the laws in regards to trusts. His prompt and courageous action has given us the Panama Canal. He has raised the prestige of the Monroe Doctrine to a higher point than ever before and brought the great nations of the earth to the Hague Tribunal, a signal service to the cause of peace” (329). Cabot wanted the citizen’s to remember all the good that Roosevelt had accomplished since taking the helm.

In Roosevelt’s speech “The Strenuous Life,” he believed that a man’s character and America’s character was what set us apart from others. He stated in this speech that he “wish to preach not the doctrine of ignoble ease but the doctrine of the strenuous life; the life of toil and effort; of labor and strife, to preach that highest form of success which comes not to the man who desires mere easy peace but to the man who does not shrink from danger, from hardship, or from bitter toil, and who out of these wins the splendid ultimate triumph” (357).

Roosevelt was one to utilize vocabulary enabling people to remember what he stood for and what his vision was for every man; for with these words he became a man of magnetism. In Images in Words: Presidential Rhetoric, Charisma, and Greatness, four authors (Cynthia Emrich, Holly Brower, Jack Feldman and Howard Garland) analyzed “two sets of U. S. presidents’ speeches to determine whether their propensities to convey images in words were linked to perceptions of their charisma and greatness” (527).

As a result of this study they came to the conclusion that the presidents’ who in their inaugural addresses used more image-based language were deemed greater in the area of charisma. They also found that the presidents’ that used these image-based words in their speeches were considered and graded higher in the area of “charisma and greatness” (527). As a result of these findings, the four authors decided that with the proper approach and verbiage any leader would be able to convey his/her vision with verbal/visual illustrations.

The verbal and visual imagery would help the listeners paint a picture in their minds to help them remember what was the subject matter was and was more apt to commit it to memory. In this article, Emrich, Brower, Feldman and Garland believe that “leaders who use words that evoke pictures, sounds, smells, tastes, and other sensations tap more directly into followers’ life experiences than do leaders who use words that appeal solely to followers’ intellect” (529).

This study also looked at the other side of the spectrum where leaders used concept-based rhetoric and as a result “both charisma and greatness failed to reach significance” (549). Taking all this into consideration, Roosevelt knew what he was doing in each of his speeches and how he could reach his audience. With proper preparation, Roosevelt crafted some of the most monumental speeches and phrases that history will always remember. Roosevelt took careful consideration as to the mode and manner of his language that he would use to be able to comfort and console a grieving nation.

In Theodore Roosevelt’s “unofficial” inaugural address, which was really his First Presidential Proclamation, he took all the necessary precautions to soothe the pain and grief of the nation’s mourners through his words. On the Theodore Roosevelt Center website it displays the statement that Roosevelt made in Ansley Wilcox’s library. Ansley Wilcox was a close friend of Roosevelt and was a prominent lawyer. He also worked closely together with him as well as New York State Governor Grover Cleveland. Vice President Roosevelt was sworn in (without a Bible) as President of the United States in a non-traditional manner.

The unexpected death of McKinley affected many; for the loss brought a sense of uncertainty in the national affairs. It was Roosevelt’s job to convince the nation that he was worthy of fulfilling the duties of William McKinley. In Andrew Carnegie’s introduction for Roosevelt’s book “The Roosevelt Policy” he believes that “[t]he man of destiny comes to nations, as we know, just when he is most needed” (ix). Carnegie believes that the untimely death of McKinley was ordained in a sense. In Roosevelt’s statement that was printed in the Buffalo Sunday Times he stated: I shall take the oath at once in accord with the request of you members of the Cabinet, and in this hour of our deep and terrible national bereavement I wish to state that it shall be my aim to continue absolutely unbroken the policy of President McKinley for the peace, the prosperity and the honor of our beloved country. ” It is here that we see a man who is grieving with the nation, but also realizing that he had to assure the nation that President McKinley’s work and vision would continue. When Roosevelt was sworn in he had a very private ceremony with little attention.

He did not want the funeral as well as the swearing into office to become a circus of journalists. He only allowed McKinley’s cabinet, Ansley Wilcox and several other advisors. With the pressure of crafting a eulogy style proclamation with the use of pathos, Roosevelt allowed others to help him in the process for reassurance. In this proclamation he would try to reach out and make the situation personal to all when he stated “[t]he President of the United States has been struck down—a crime committed not only against the chief magistrate, but against every law abiding and liberty-loving citizen” (Buffalo Sunday Times).

In the second part of his proclamation, Roosevelt elaborates on the goodness of William McKinley and what he stood for as a human, as a citizen and as a Christian who would “remain a precious heritage of our people” (Buffalo Sunday Times). After he sings the praises of McKinley, Roosevelt joins in with grief and with sorrow by stating “[i]t is meet that we as a nation express our abiding and reverence for his life, our deep sorrow over his untimely death” (Buffalo Sunday Times).

The proclamation comes in the last portion of the entire eulogy when he when he commits September 19th as a day of “mourning and prayer” and encourages people to go to their own personal place worship in honor, respect and love of the untimely death of President McKinley. These spoken words are different than those that were spoken at Roosevelt’s second (first as an elected president) Inaugural address. On Saturday March 4, 1905, Theodore Roosevelt gave his very first Inaugural Address as an elected President of the United States. This was not the same style of address that he had given six months after William McKinley was assassinated.

Many doubted Roosevelt and several left their positions under his command; so the election of 1905 was crucial for Roosevelt to continue his plan. Roosevelt’s character, morals had a major role in him getting elected in 1905. Roosevelt lived out what he preached about in regards to having just morals and an upright character within society. People respected him and knew that he was genuine and forthright in everything he accomplished and believed. In the book “The Roosevelt Policy” there is an Introduction section where Andrew Carnegie informs the reader the positives of Theodore Roosevelt.

Carnegie compares the critics of Lincoln to those of Roosevelt where they judge them on their mannerisms and traditions. He continues to acknowledge some of Roosevelt’s attributes when he states “we accept Roosevelt for what he is and would not have him different—an able, courageous, honest, democratic man of the people acting himself out just as the spirit leads him without one particle of pretense” (ix). we read Roosevelt’s Inaugural Address where he illustrates that he was thankful, humble, responsible, reliable, blessed by the “Giver of Good,” sincere, generous, and friendly (245).

He believes that Roosevelt’s “finest qualities shine resplendent in his relations with his principal colleagues around him” for these qualities involve Roosevelt’s loyalty to his close friends who have become “first friends and after that colleagues” (xx). One of Theodore Roosevelt’s goals as President according to Carnegie is “to develop in the average man of affairs a keener sense of personal and official responsibility than ever existed before” (xv). When we delve into the actual Inaugural Address itself we can see through the eyes of Roosevelt a great nation, a nation striving to live with all humility and dignity.

Roosevelt states that he believes that “[w]e have become a great Nation, forced by the fact of its greatness into relations with the other nations of the earth; and we must behave as beseems a people with such responsibilities” and that “our attitude must be one of cordial and sincere friendship” (246). Here we see that Roosevelt is making it all personal and including the citizens as part of that greatness. The need to show with our actions and not just with our words is the premise of desiring the acquisition of others goodwill by demonstrating a “spirit of just and generous recognition of all their right” (246).

One of the greatest statements from the Inaugural Address involves the expectancy of within and without our nation and Roosevelt believes that “[m]uch has been given us, and much will rightfully be expected from us. We have duties to others and duties to ourselves; and we cab shirk from neither. We have become a great nation, forced by the fact of its greatness into relations with the other nations of the earth, and we must behave as beseems a people with such responsibilities” (246). Roosevelt wanted to enforce the positives of the importance of being a nation of character.

Throughout Roosevelt’s address he talks about responsibility, and the importance of having “high traits of character as that people which seeks to govern its affairs aright through the freely expressed will of the freemen who compose it” (248). He was also an advocate to leaving a proud heritage within the personal family and as well as the nation. Roosevelt thought about the future and the future of his children, and our children today. He wanted to be able to give them the hope that all our past, present and future presidents will want to give.

In Politics as Performance Art: The Body English of Theodore Roosevelt, H. W. Brands conveys his insight by stating that Roosevelt had an “enormous ego” and that “he simply loved the limelight” (121). Theodore had to prove himself and to the nation after McKinley was assassinated because he was considered “the foe of the bosses” and that “it was a necessity” (121). In David Greenberg’s “Beyond the Bully Pulpit” one area that Roosevelt remained faithful to was his faith in God for he “saw political questions as spiritual ones: His advocacy of social improvement was high-minded and hortatory” (25).

Roosevelt understood that the problems and issues the country was facing was unlike the ones of his predecessors and acknowledges that fact when he states in his address that “though the tasks set before us differ from the tasks set before our fathers who founded and preserved this Republic, the spirit in which these tasks must be undertaken and these problems faced, if our duty is to be well done, remains essentially unchanged” (248). He continues by stating that we need to uphold the highest character for it is with this character that we can continue in “self-government” (248).

He believes that in order to maintain our freedom we need to continually demonstrate “not merely in crisis, but in everyday affairs of life, the qualities of practical intelligence, of courage, of hardihood, and endurance, and above all the power of devotion to a lofty ideal, which made great the men who founded this Republic in the days of Washington, which made great the men who preserved this Republic in the days of Abraham Lincoln” (248). Throughout this research many influential people recognized Theodore Roosevelt’s giftedness in writing and in oratory.

He knew how to reach individuals and make them feel as if they were part of the solution and that they mattered to him. Theodore Roosevelt’s First Inaugural Address was unlike majority of our Presidents, past and present. There was no farewell address from a reigning president but instead there was a eulogy. The transition from Vice President to President was abrupt even though they all tried to make the transition smoothly. Roosevelt knew that his words and deeds were going to either make him or break him.

One area that stayed consistent throughout his life was his character for that was strong and did not waiver. He was a trusted man and a man of his word who wanted the best for the nation in such a trying time period. Theodore Roosevelt has become a role model for many people and has been one who people will remember for years to come. Works Cited Brands H. W. Politics as Performance Art: The Body English of Theodore Roosevelt. eBook Collection. EBSCO. Web. 29 Nov 2012. Campbell, Karlyn. , Jamieson, Kathleen. Presidents Creating the Presidency: Deeds Done in Words.

Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2008. Print. Emrich, Cynthia G. , Holly H. Brower, Jack M. Feldman and Howard Garland. “Images in Words: Presidential Rhetoric, Charisma and Greatness. ” Administrative Science Quarterly 46. 3 (2001): 527-557. JSTOR. 22 Oct 2012 http://www. jstor. org/search Gelderman, Carol. “All the Presidents’ Words. ” The Wilson Quarterly (1976- ) 19. 2 (1995): 68-79. JSTOR. 22 Oct 2012 http://www. jstor. org/search Greenberg, David. “Beyond the Bully Pulpit. ” The Wilson Quarterly 35. 3 (2011): 22-29. JSTOR. 22 Oct 2012 http://www. jstor. org/search

Lodge, Henry Cabot. “Why Theodore Roosevelt Should Be Elected President. ” The North American Review 179. 574 (1904): 321-330. JSTOR. 22 Oct 2012 http://www. jstor. org/search “President’s Proclamation. ” Buffalo Sunday Time, New York, 15 Sept. 1901. Web. 11 Nov. 2012. http://www. theodorerooseveltcenter. org/research/digital-library/record Podell, Janet. , Anzovin, Steven. Speeches of the American Presidents. eBook Collection. EBSCO. Web. 29 Nov 2012. Roosevelt, Theodore. The Roosevelt Policy. New York, NY, The Current Literature Publishing Co. , 1908. Google Web. 29 Nov 2012.

Prohibition in USA in the 1900’s The prohibition was brought on by the strong temperance movement happening in America in the early 1900’s. These groups were devout Christians who vowed to be sober as they saw the affect alcohol had on families. But the members of this movement campaigned for everyone to give up alcohol. The arguments of the Temperance groups were so strong that they eventually convinced state governments to prohibit the sale and produce of alcohol in their state.

Politicians backed this movement as it secured them votes in the rural areas, and by 1916, the sale and production of alcohol had been banned in 21 states. USA’s entry into the war strengthened this movement, as drinkers were being labelled as ‘Unpatriotic cowards’ for not entering into the war. The fact that Germany supplied most of the countries alcohol also helped the movement, as Germany was seen as the enemy. Despite the great efforts made by the government, the sale and production if alcohol didn’t entirely cease.

People all over the US started making their own alcohol, these were called ‘bootleggers’ People also set up illegal bars selling black market alcohol and providing entertainment, these were referred to as ‘Speakeasies’ and made a fortune. Over the 13 years that the prohibition lasted, over 37,000 illegal distilleries, or ‘stills’ were shut down, and nearly 23 million gallons of illegally produced or imported alcohol was seized. But even after all that it is said that only a fraction was discovered, although it is Impossible to know for certain.

Temperance groups had been around for many years, but their quest for a dry country wasn’t prominent until the early 1900s. These groups were strong in rural areas of the US, but after America’s entry into the First World War in 1917, this movement was strengthened. America’s deep sense on patriotism previously weakened the temperance movement, as citizens were proud of who they were and all enjoyed a good drink. But when the war was over, and Germany was distinguished as the enemy, patriots were unwilling to support their economy by buying their alcohol, which greatly helped the movement as most of the US’ alcohol was supplied by Germany.

With majority of the country on their side, the temperance movement grew stronger and by 1917 they had enough states on their side to propose the eighteenth amendment, which ‘prohibited the manufacture, sale or transportation or intoxicating liquors’ and in January of 1920 it became a law, known as the Volstead Act. The prohibition was not for everyone, and although a lot of Americans agreed with the movement, there were plenty who did not.

People began to see there was potentially a lot of money in this, and began to set up illegal bars selling illegally made alcohol. A lot of these people were immigrants, who were poorly educated but also ruthless and clever. The government enforced the prohibition by implementing ‘prohibition agents’ who discovered and arrested offenders. But despite the work of these agents, who were poorly paid and had a large area to cover, it became apparent that it was practically impossible to effectively enforce prohibition in the cities.

Many speakeasies thrived as bootleggers took advantage of the underpaid officers, and bribed them to keep quiet. Many people made a vast fortune through the movement, one of the most well-known being Al Capone, who made an estimated 2 billion dollars throughout the 13 years of prohibition. Al Capone was a well-known gang leader, and was renowned for his ruthlessness. His criminal activities were not exactly ‘quiet’ but it was virtually impossible to convict him as he had such a strong control over the police.

In 1929 Capone and his gang dressed up as police and murdered 7 members of an opposing gang, which is now known as the ‘St. Valentine’s day massacre’. It was at this point where it became apparent that things had gotten out of hand, and some say it was this event which essentially led to the end of the prohibition. At about the same time, there was a massive crash in the American stock market. People were losing jobs and the economy was crumbling. By this stage the police were corrupt, the country was lawless and the gangsters were rich and powerful.

To make matter worse, by 1930 a great depression had set in and arguments were raised that if the ban on liquor was raised, it would create more jobs, the gangsters would have less power and less money, and it would open resources which were dispensed to the agents in charge of the unrealistic task of enforcing prohibition. These ideas were frowned upon by many, but the country was in need of change. In 1932, the democrat Franklin D Roosevelt was elected president, and by 1933 the eighteenth amendment was revoked.

It was said by many that the prohibition was a complete failure, as from day one it was an immense struggle to enforce the law, and people continued to drink despite it, which resulted in huge profits for the people illegally producing and selling alcohol. Many people also think that the prohibition was a contributing factor to the great depression, and impacted the country in a negative way. American culture was greatly changed by the movement, as police became more corrupt than the offenders they were allegedly trying to imprison, and gangsters were controlling the cities which put the country into a state of constant fear.

Crime and violence rates rose greatly, the government lost a lot of money from alcohol taxes and the country struggled to support itself without the income which alcohol used to provide. It wasn’t until the St Valentines Massacre that people realised how out of control the whole situation was, and it is referred to as a ‘turning point’ as it is thought that this event made the government see that the prohibition was causing more trouble than it was fixing. In conclusion, the prohibition really did not achieve what it set out to do, stop people from drinking and create a more civilised country, in fact, it did quite the opposite.