ADHS Archives

June 1995

ADHS@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"James D. Ivy" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Alcohol and Temperance History Group <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 26 Jun 1995 15:55:46 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)
I was pleased to read Richard Hamm's piece on prohibitionists and
violence, and would like to hear more.  I'm working on a dissertation on
the early prohibition campaigns in Texas and have run across quite a few
references to violence against prohibition advocates.
 
In fact, I working on a chapter[article?] now entitled "'The Blood of the
Mighty Dead Has Stained Me!': Eggs and Honor in the 1887 Texas
Prohibition Campaign," concering an event in which a number of
prohibition speakers were egged during a rally.  It is my sense that
violence against prohibitionists was perceived to be important at the
time.  Both prohibitionists and 'antis' expressed concern for the safety
of prohibitionists (perhaps with different motives).  Moreover (in
response to Joseph Lunders question) it appears that indeed "the murders
facilitated the movement's mobilzation narratives," or as one Texas
prohibitionist pointed out, "a cause with martyrs never fails."
 
Two other quick points:
(1) It seems to me that it would be pretty easy to distinguish between
bootleg- and prohibition-related violence.  If prohibitionists were
agitating in wet areas for the suppression of legal liquor, why would
bootleggers wish them harm?  It is the providers and consumers of legal
liquor who are most likely to suffer from prohibition.  I will defer to
Richard Hamm on issues regarding bootlegging, though.
 
(2) Roderick Dhu Gambrell's status as a temperance martyr was disputed by
the anti-prohibitionists.  They said he was murdered because of his
intemperate [sorry] editorials.  The pros had an interesting, southern
response:  If his killer was indeed a man of aggreived honor, he would
have approached Gambrell and challenged him.  Instead, Gambrell was
ambushed by several individuals and not given an opportunity to defend
himself.  Therefore he was killed for his prohibitionist stance.
 
I'm looking for a forum for my paper.  Might not some of us put together
a panel on this stuff?
 
James Ivy
Ph.D. candidate, History of American Civilization, Harvard;
occasional Teaching Associate, University of Texas at San Antonio
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2