# data[].attributes.headline
#6- SOME INTERESTING FACTS ABOUT PROHIBITION

# data[].attributes.subject
#6- SOME INTERESTING FACTS ABOUT PROHIBITION

# data[].attributes.body
A few more facts about this social experiment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
1. Prohibition had been tried before.

In the early 19th century, religious revivalists and early teetotaler groups like the American Temperance Society campaigned relentlessly against what they viewed as a nationwide scourge of drunkenness. The activists scored a major victory in 1851, when the Maine legislature passed a statewide prohibition on selling alcohol. A dozen other states soon instituted "Maine Laws" of their own, only to repeal them a few years later after widespread opposition and riots from grog-loving citizens (Kansas later instituted a separate ban in 1881). Calls for a "dry" America continued into the 1910s, when deep-pocketed and politically connected groups such as the Anti-Saloon League and the Women's Christian Temperance Union gained widespread support for anti-alcohol legislation on Capitol Hill.

2. World War I helped turn the nation in favor of Prohibition.

Prohibition was all but sealed by the time the United States entered World War I in 1917, but the conflict served as one of the last nails in the coffin of legalized alcohol. Dry advocates argued that the barley used in brewing beer could be made into bread to feed American soldiers and war-ravaged Europeans, and they succeeded in winning wartime bans on strong drink. Anti-alcohol crusaders were often fueled by xenophobia, and the war allowed them to paint America's largely German brewing industry as a threat. "We have German enemies in this country, too," one temperance politician argued. "And the worst of all our German enemies, the most treacherous, the most menacing, are Pabst, Schlitz, Blatz and Miller."

3. It wasn't illegal to drink alcohol during Prohibition.

The 18th Amendment only forbade the "manufacture, sale and transportation of intoxicating liquors"-not their consumption. By law, any wine, beer or spirits Americans had stashed away in January 1920 were theirs to keep and enjoy in the privacy of their homes. For most, this amounted to only a few bottles, but some affluent drinkers built cavernous wine cellars and even bought out whole liquor store inventories to ensure they had healthy stockpiles of legal hooch.

4. Some states refused to enforce Prohibition.

Along with creating an army of federal agents, the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act stipulated that individual states should enforce Prohibition within their own borders. Governors resented the added strain on their public coffers, however, and many neglected to appropriate any money toward policing the alcohol ban. Maryland never even enacted an enforcement code, and eventually earned a reputation as one of the most stubbornly anti-Prohibition states in the Union. New York followed suit and repealed its measures in 1923, and other states grew increasingly lackadaisical as the decade wore on. "National prohibition went into legal effect upward of six years ago," Maryland Senator William Cabell Bruce told Congress in the mid-1920s, "but it can be truly said that, except to a highly qualified extent, it has never gone into practical effect at all."

5. Drug stores continued selling alcohol as "medicine."

The Volstead Act included a few interesting exceptions to the ban on distributing alcohol. Sacramental wine was still permitted for religious purposes (the number of questionable rabbis and priests soon skyrocketed), and drug stores were allowed to sell "medicinal whiskey" to treat everything from toothaches to the flu. With a physician's prescription, "patients" could legally buy a pint of hard liquor every ten days. This pharmaceutical booze often came with seemingly laughable doctor's orders such as "Take three ounces every hour for stimulant until stimulated." Many speakeasies eventually operated under the guise of being pharmacies, and legitimate chains flourished. According to Prohibition historian Daniel Okrent, windfalls from legal alcohol sales helped the drug store chain Walgreens grow from around 20 locations to more than 500 during the 1920s.

6. Winemakers and brewers found creative ways to stay afloat.

While many small distilleries and breweries continued to operate in secret during Prohibition, the rest had to either shut their doors or find new uses for their factories. Yuengling and Anheuser Busch both refitted their breweries to make ice cream, while Coors doubled down on the production of pottery and ceramics. Others produced "near beer"-legal brew that contained less than 0.5 percent alcohol. The lion's share of brewers kept the lights on by peddling malt syrup, a legally dubious extract that could be easily made into beer by adding water and yeast and allowing time for fermentation. Winemakers followed a similar route by selling chunks of grape concentrate called "wine bricks."

7. Thousands died from drinking tainted liquor.

Enterprising bootleggers produced millions of gallons of "bathtub gin" and rotgut moonshine during Prohibition. This illicit hooch had a famously foul taste, and those desperate enough to drink it also ran the risk of being struck blind or even poisoned. The most deadly tinctures contained industrial alcohol originally made for use in fuels and medical supplies. The federal government had required companies to denature industrial alcohol to make it undrinkable as early as 1906, but during Prohibition it ordered them to add quinine, methyl alcohol and other toxic chemicals as a further deterrent. Coupled with the other low-quality products on offer from bootleggers, this tainted booze may have killed more than 10,000 people before the repeal of the 18th Amendment.

8. The Great Depression helped fuel calls for a repeal.

By the late 1920s, Americans were spending more money than ever on black market booze. New York City boasted more than 30,000 speakeasies, and Detroit's alcohol trade was second only to the auto industry in its contribution to the economy. With the country bogged down by the Great Depression, anti-Prohibition activists argued that potential savings and tax revenue from alcohol were too precious to ignore. The public agreed. After Franklin D. Roosevelt called for a repeal during the 1932 presidential campaign, he won the election in a landslide. Prohibition was dead a year later, when a majority of states ratified the 21st Amendment repealing the 18th. In New Orleans, the decision was honored with 20 minutes of celebratory cannon fire. Roosevelt supposedly marked the occasion by downing a dirty martini.

9. Drinking decreased during Prohibition.

The "Roaring Twenties" and the Prohibition era are often associated with unchecked use and abuse of alcohol, yet the statistics tell a different tale. According to a study conducted by M.I.T. and Boston University economists in the early 1990s, alcohol consumption actually fell by as much as 70 percent during the early years of the "noble experiment." The levels jumped significantly in the late-1920s as support for the law waned, but they remained 30 percent lower than their pre-Prohibition levels for several years after the passage of the 21st Amendment.

10. It continues in some parts of the country to this day.

Even after the repeal of Prohibition, some states maintained a ban on alcohol within their own borders. Kansas and Oklahoma remained dry until 1948 and 1959, respectively, and Mississippi remained alcohol free until 1966-a full 33 years after the passage of the 21st Amendment. To this day, 10 states still contain counties where alcohol sales are prohibited outright.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
10 Things You Should Know About Prohibition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the early 19th century, religious revivalists and early teetotaler groups like the American Temperance Society campaigned relentlessly against what they viewed as a nationwide scourge of drunkenness. The activists scored a major victory in 1851, when the Maine legislature passed a statewide prohibition on selling alcohol.

# data[].attributes.headline
#3.5- THE ISSUE OF FEDERAL LAND OWNERSHIP- for use in class

# data[].attributes.subject
#3.5- THE ISSUE OF FEDERAL LAND OWNERSHIP- for use in class

# data[].attributes.body
A look at the issue of government land ownership from both sides. Decide for yourself which one makes more sense, but at the same time consider if where you live impacts how you think.

ASSIGNMENT #3.5

As you read make a list of the points each writer is making about the issues:

- forests/nature
- the building of the Hetchy Dam

# data[].attributes.body
Follow the directions above. This will be a quiz grade.

# data[].attributes.body
A look at what is and isn't accurate in the movie. You can decide for yourself if the differences between real life and Hollywood are important or not.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
SIMILARITIES

The film Iron Jawed Angels is mostly accurate. The film goes in chronological order of what happened in history. The filmmakers did a great job of portraying the historic events. From the parade, to the White House Picketing, to the women's imprisonment, the historical timeline of the movie was pretty accurate with some small deviations here and there. The costumes were pretty close to being accurate. Alice Paul's and Lucy Burn's outfits were pretty identical to what the women suffragists wore back in the day. Long, draping skirts, coats, and big flamboyant hats. For example, Inez Milholland is portrayed on the white horse, looking powerful and majestic while opening the suffrage parade. The costuming is very similar to the pictures we have of her. The other women's outfits in the parade was extremely accurate as well. They asked women with a college degree to wear their gowns, and in the movie, you see women like Alice Paul wear a graduation gown.

The White House Picketing and the Imprisonment were also scenes in the movie that were depicted quite well. In history, the women picketed for close to a year, and the movie does a good job of letting the audience know the changing of seasons. The movie does a fine job of depicting the women picketing in silence. Although the scene when Alice Paul is outraged while in front of the White House is fictional, for the most part, the movie depicts the women as silent and peaceful which is extremely accurate to history. Alice Paul and the women suffragists silently, and peacefully picketed the White House and there was never any shouting or rioting. Another similarity during the White House Picketing scenes, is the signs. The signs are exact to what the signs donned in real life.

The imprisonment was shown very accurate as well. The conditions in which the women were living in were almost exact to the quotes Alice Paul stated about the prison. There were times in prison (the majority of the time) when Alice and Lucy were extremely ill, and this is true. Alice and Lucy stated after their release, just how sick they were while staying in the jail. The details like the beds and worms in the food were exactly what Alice described. Even though it doesn't exactly say just how many times Alice Paul was force fed, it eludes to her being force fed over and over. The movie did a fantastic job at depicting the women in prison.

A small yet significant similarity is during the scene when Congress is voting for women's suffrage. During that time, congressmen in favor of women's suffrage would wear a yellow rose on their jackets while congressmen against women's suffrage would wear a red rose. In the scene when Harry Burn was voting for or against the 19th Amendment, he finally sways in favor of women's suffrage and votes "yes" to the amendment. After he did so, a congressman handed him a yellow rose to put on his jacket.

The film depicts these women as strong women who fought for a cause. That is exactly who these women were. They were women who wanted their rights. The real women of the women's suffrage were a little radical, and the movie depicts this well. The filmmakers even go far enough to show the viewers, Alice Paul being force fed. It is gruesome, but this was something that really happened. The movie does a wonderful job at depicting these women. You can feel Alice Paul and Lucy Burn's vigor and passion for the cause, it is practically radiating through the television. From the reading and research conducted, these women were portrayed frighteningly well. We feel that the film is depicted pretty accurately. It is a good representation of the women suffrage movement.

HUNGER STIKE

The hunger strike was probably the most significant and jaw-dropping scenes in Iron Jawed Angels. Yet affecting, and poignant, the movie did not frame the reason the women (most importantly, Alice Paul) were on the hunger strike in the first place. The movie depicts Alice Paul and the other women going on a hunger strike because they were mad about their imprisonment in general and they weren't going to yield until their point was reached towards the government. But in reality, Alice Paul went on the hunger strike because she was dissatisfied with the way she and her fellow inmates were being treated. Alice discovered the suffragists were being treated more poorly than the 17 murderers who were in the prison. She discovered they were eating more poorly, given less air and exercise, and were provided sheets and blankets that have never been washed. Alice demanded she and her fellow suffragists would be treated in better conditions and she took her stance by a hunger strike.

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F50E16F8395B11738DDDAE0894D9415B878DF1D3

MEN'S INVOLVEMENT

In the movie, it depicted men as strictly the enemy. There were no positive characters seen in the movie that were in support of women's rights, until the very end when Woodrow Wilson talks to congress about passing the 19 th Amendment, and when Harry Burn decided to vote in favor of the 19 th amendment. In reality, this is completely false. There were thousands of men in favor of women's suffrage throughout history. Many political figures were involved in the progress of women's equity. Even in the Women's Suffrage Parade, there was a section dedicated completely to the men who wanted to march a long with the women. Even further, in that point in history, men were the only figures in congress, so there were men who had to vote for the amendment to pass in the first place. Men had a significant role in women's suffrage.

http://www.nwhm.org/online-exhibits/rightsforwomen/menforsuffrage.html

19 th AMENDMENT

The movie makes it seem as if the 19 th Amendment was passed almost directly after Alice and the women suffragists were released from jail. This is simply not true. It took a year after the women were released for the amendment to actually pass. Although a small difference, it is still not historically accurate to the actual women suffragist timeline.

http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=63

NO FICTIONAL CHARACTERS

Along with a lot of other historic movies, there were fictional characters added to Iron Jawed Angels. These characters were added as representations of larger groups of people. For example Emily Leighton was a representation for all mothers who were involved in the suffragist movement. Along with Emily Leighton, Senator Leighton was a representation of how most senators felt about women's suffrage at this time. Ben Weissman was also a fictional character added to the movie. He was Alice Paul's love interest and as far as history facts go, there is no evidence that Alice Paul ever had a romantic interest during the time of the Women's Suffrage Parade, or when she was held in prison.

ALICE PAUL DID NOT ORGANIZE PARADE

The movie depicts Alice Paul completely organizing the Women's Suffrage Parade in Washington D.C., but this is not true. Alice hired a couple of women to organize the parade. The woman who was the leader of the parade, and the main organizer of the event was Mrs. Richard Coke Burelson. Even though Alice was involved in the creation of the parade, she wasn't the sole woman who did all of the work for it. Alice did however; raise the funds for the parade.

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2001704301/

ROMANCE

In the film Iron Jawed Angels, a troubled love story is told between Alice Paul and Ben Weissman. Ben Weissman, working as a political cartoonist for the Washington Post, was placed in the film for the romantic element. This romance, nor any romance, ever took place during Alice Paul's life. Alice Paul never married. She committed herself to her work and her cause. She lived with her sister Helen in 1941 then moved in with her closest friend, Elsie Hill, who was also an activist. She then lived alone in nursing facilities until she suffered from a stroke in 1974, then in 1977 died of heart failure at 92 years old.

www.lkwdpl.org/wihohio/paul/ali.htm

THE JAILS

There were two prominent woman's suffrage groups during the suffrage campaign. The National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) and the National Woman's Party (NWP). In the beginning of the film it is depicted that Alice and Lucy are apart of the NAWSA. This is factually correct. However, the film never makes mention that Alice and Lucy started the NWP. The film implies that they are going head to head with Carrie Chapman Catt and the NAWSA. As a viewer of the film I assume that Alice and Lucy are still apart of the NAWSA, but they are taking a smaller group of women and taking a more radical approach to woman's suffrage. In reality, the women start a whole different group. This is happening in the film, but it wasn't clear. In the article "Suffragists Storm Over Washington D.C. in 1917." Suffragists Storm Over Washington D.C. in 1917, it clearly states the split. "In March 1917, Alice Paul's organization joined an allied western group to form the National Woman's Party, and Paul, overwhelminglyelected chairwoman, became nationally prominent."
Http://www.historynet.com/nineteenth-amendment. History.net, n.d. Web.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SIMILARITIES The film Iron Jawed Angels is mostly accurate. The film goes in chronological order of what happened in history. The filmmakers did a great job of portraying the historic events. From the parade, to the White House Picketing, to the women's imprisonment, the historical timeline of the movie was pretty accurate with some small deviations here and there.

# data[].attributes.headline
1.5- WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT- will be done in class

# data[].attributes.subject
1.5- WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT- will be done in class

# data[].attributes.body
ASSIGNMENT 1.5

You will be given one of the issues above. Follow the directions in the document to the right to research how different people feel these issues should be dealt with.

# data[].attributes.body
Psst... what's the password? A look at illegal drinking in the 1920's.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History Brief: Speakeasies (Roaring Twenties)

# data[].attributes.body
Some inventive ways to hide your hooch.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Prohibition Era | Clever Ways Booze Was Hidden

# data[].attributes.body
Drug use in our society today is a problem. In some ways, however, it was an even worse problem in the past. Alcohol is a drug and it's use and abuse has a long history going back thousands of years. Prohibition was a reaction to these problems. Get rid of the drug, get rid of the problem. Seems to make sense. Politicians were coerced into voting for it or risk losing their next election, and the temperance movement had the money and resources to make them lose. Sometimes, though, the solution can create an even bigger problem. Such was the case with Prohibition.

ASSIGNMENT #5

Read and watch the information to the right. I originally was going to quiz you on this but changed my mind. Watch the videos and do the readings. There will be very specific questions about this topic on your test on Friday 11/18.

It's best to do them in the order I listed them, but I won't know if you don't so you decide.

# data[].attributes.body
We've all seen the Godfather movie(if you haven't you should, it's a classic), but the idea of organized crime is a mix or old-school Italy and the 1920's. Without Prohibition we would never have gotten Don Corleone... so I guess that's a good thing, right?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The term "organized crime" didn't really exist in the United States before Prohibition. Criminal gangs had run amok in American cities since the late 19th-century, but they were mostly bands of street thugs running small-time extortion and loansharking rackets in predominantly ethnic Italian, Jewish, Irish and Polish neighborhoods.

In fact, before the passing of the 18th Amendment in 1919 and the nationwide ban that went into effect in January 1920 on the sale or importation of "intoxicating liquor," it wasn't the mobsters who ran the most organized criminal schemes in America, but corrupt political "bosses," explains Howard Abadinsky, a criminal justice professor at St. John's University and author of Organized Crime.

"The gangs were thugs in the employ of the political machines," says Abadinsky, intimidating opposition candidates and funneling votes to the boss. In return, the politicians and police chiefs would turn a blind eye to illegal gambling and prostitution rings.
READ MORE: Al Capone
But the underworld power dynamics shifted dramatically with the onset of Prohibition and the overnight outlawing of every bottle of beer, glass of wine and shot of booze in America. With legitimate bars and breweries out of business, someone had to step in to fuel the substantial thirst of the Roaring Twenties. And no one was better equipped than the mobsters.

Mobsters Hired Lawyers

The key to running a successful bootlegging operation, Abadinsky explains, was a paramilitary organization. At first, the street gangs didn't know a thing about business, but they knew how to handle a gun and how to intimidate the competition. They could protect illegal breweries and rum-running operations from rival gangs, provide security for speakeasies and pay off any nosey cops or politicians to look the other way.

It wasn't long before the mobsters were raking in absurd amounts of money and it was bosses and cops who were taking the orders. As the money kept pouring it, these formerly small-time street thugs had to get smart. They had to hire lawyers and accountants to launder the millions in ill-gotten cash piling up each month. They had to start thinking about strategic partnerships with other gangs and shipping logistics and real estate investment.

"They had to become businessmen," says Abadinsky. "And that gave rise to what we now call organized crime."

Before Prohibition, criminal gangs were local menaces, running protection rackets on neighborhood businesses and dabbling in vice entrepreneurship. But the overwhelming business opportunity of illegal booze changed everything. For one thing, sourcing and distributing alcohol is an interstate and even international enterprise. Mobsters couldn't work in isolation if they wanted to keep the liquor flowing and maximize profits.

"Suddenly gang leaders are making deals with each other," says Abadinsky, forging mutual protection pacts across state and international borders, and across ethnic lines, to ensure that shipments of illegal alcohol poured freely into the big cities.

"These are very violent people who are used to solving problems by killing them, but eventually they sit down and say, 'We'll guarantee peace in your area if you guarantee peace in our area.' That's called syndicated crime, this cooperation between criminal groups," says Abadinsky. "In the absence of Prohibition, we wouldn't have had the kind of syndicated criminality that occurred. Prohibition was the catalyst."

Turf Wars Turn Deadly

In the 1920s, Charles "Lucky" Luciano was famous for bringing together some of New York's biggest Italian and Jewish mobsters to dominate the city's bootlegging business. In Chicago, Johnny Torrio kept a fragile peace between his Italian-run bootlegging operation in the city's South Side and the Irish and Polish gangs working the North Side. But it didn't last. By the time Torrio's protege Al Capone took over, it was an all-out turf war. In the infamous St. Valentine's Day Massacre of 1929, Capone's men dressed as police officers and gunned down seven of the rival gang's henchmen.
READ MORE: See the St. Valentine's Day Massacre of 1929 in Color
Some of the biggest and most lucrative Prohibition-era bootlegging operations imported illegal booze from Canada via the Great Lakes. Underworld profiteer Arnold Rothstein, famous for fixing the 1919 World Series, ran shipments of alcohol through Lake Ontario, over to the Hudson River and down into the thousands of speakeasies of New York City. And the Mayfield Road Gang in Cleveland became famous for its rum-running speedboats criss-crossing Lake Erie.

Kingpins Made Millions Each Year

The demand for illegal beer, wine and liquor was so great during the Prohibition that mob kingpins like Capone were pulling in as much as $100 million a year in the mid-1920s ($1.4 billion in 2018) and spending a half million dollars a month in bribes to police, politicians and federal investigators.

Making money was easy, says Abadinsky. The hard part was figuring out what to do with all the cash. Money laundering was another way in which organized crime was forced to get far more organized. When gambling was legalized in Nevada in 1931, loads of Prohibition-era mob money was funneled into the new casinos and hotels. Underworld accountants like Meyer Lansky wired money to brokers in Switzerland who would cover the mobster's tracks and reinvest the cash in legitimate business. Others, like Capone, weren't as savvy and got sent up river on tax evasion charges.

When Prohibition was finally repealed in 1933, the cash grab was over, but the sophisticated black-market business schemes and money-laundering tactics of organized crime were here to stay. The biggest gangs shifted their operations away from alcohol and into secondary businesses like drugs, gambling and prostitution. They also profited greatly from the Great Depression.

"The gangs had cash in a cash-starved economy," says Abadinsky. "If you wanted to set up a legitimate business, have to go to organized crime. Loansharking becomes a major industry."

In hindsight, it's clear that Prohibition, a national temperance campaign aimed at reforming America's worst tendencies, that gave birth to one of the nation's worst criminal traditions.
READ MORE: The Night Prohibition Ended

Fact Check

We strive for accuracy and fairness. But if you see something that doesn't look right, click here to contact us! HISTORY reviews and updates its content regularly to ensure it is complete and accurate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Prohibition Put the 'Organized' in Organized Crime | HISTORY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Before the 18th amendment made alcohol into a high-demand illegal item, criminal gangs in the United States were mostly small and local.

# data[].attributes.body
It was expected to make the United States a better place, but there is evidence to the contrary.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Unintended Consequences | Prohibition | Ken Burns | PBS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The story of the rise, rule, and fall of prohibition and the entire era it encompassed. Full film now streaming.

# data[].attributes.body
An overview of where the idea to outlaw alcohol came from. Read the article and watch the 3 short clips from the MUCH longer documentary on the subject.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The ASL, under the shrewd and ruthless leadership of Wayne Wheeler, became the most successful single issue lobbying organization in American history, willing to form alliances with any and all constituencies that shared its sole goal: a constitutional amendment that would ban the manufacture, sale and transportation of alcohol. They united with Democrats and Republicans, Progressives, Populists, and suffragists, the Ku Klux Klan and the NAACP, the International Workers of the World, and many of America's most powerful industrialists including Henry Ford, John D. Rockefeller, Jr., and Andrew Carnegie - all of whom lent support to the ASL's increasingly effective campaign.

With the ratification of the income tax amendment in 1913, and the federal government no longer dependent on liquor taxes to fund its operations, the ASL moved into high gear. As anti-German fervor rose to a near frenzy with the American entry into the First World War, ASL propaganda effectively connected beer and brewers with Germans and treason in the public mind. Most politicians dared not defy the ASL and in 1917 the 18th amendment sailed through both houses of Congress; it was ratified by the states in just 13 months.

At 12:01 A.M. on January 17, 1920, the amendment went into effect and Prohibitionists rejoiced that at long last, America had become officially, and (they hoped) irrevocably, dry. But just a few minutes later, six masked bandits with pistols emptied two freight cars full of whiskey from a rail yard in Chicago, another gang stole four casks of grain alcohol from a government bonded warehouse, and still another hijacked a truck carrying whiskey.

Americans were about to discover that making Prohibition the law of the land had been one thing; enforcing it would be another.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Prohibition | Ken Burns | PBS | Roots of Prohibition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The story of the rise, rule, and fall of prohibition and the entire era it encompassed. Learn more about the temperance movement and more on this page.

# data[].attributes.body
Alcohol was outlawed in the US for about 12 years, but why? Not a simple question to answer.

# data[].attributes.body
I put it here just in case, but you will have a paper copy to write on during the showing of the movie.

# data[].attributes.body
Women could vote in some places and not in others. That changed with the 19th Amendment to the Constitution. The path to its passage was not easy and there was a great deal of opposition, but through the dedication of a small number of people change finally came.

ASSIGNMENT #4- will watch in class

We will be watching the movie "Iron Jawed Angels" in class. You are responsible for answering the questions on the sheet to the  right.

# data[].attributes.headline
YOU GET A VOTE! YOU GET A VOTE! YOU GET A VOTE! (say it like Oprah Winfrey)

# data[].attributes.subject
YOU GET A VOTE! YOU GET A VOTE! YOU GET A VOTE! (say it like Oprah Winfrey)

# data[].attributes.headline
NOT ALL WOMEN AGREED ON THE RIGHT TO VOTE

# data[].attributes.subject
NOT ALL WOMEN AGREED ON THE RIGHT TO VOTE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Battle for the Ballot

Warning: This graphic requires JavaScript. Please enable JavaScript for the best experience.

Susan B. Anthony stood on a stage in Upstate New York, asking a crowd to support the suffragist cause, when someone in the audience asked a question: Do women actually want the right to vote?

Her answer was hardly unequivocal.

"They do not oppose it," Anthony replied vaguely.

She had little reason to believe otherwise, as recounted in Susan Goodier's book, " No Votes for Women: The New York State Anti-Suffrage Movement." It was 1893, and suffragists were traveling across New York to build support ahead of a constitutional convention, when lawmakers would decide if the word "male" should be removed from the wording of the state constitution. Until then, most of the opposition to women's suffrage had been dominated by men.

But as the suffragists would soon learn, women would play a crucial role in attempting to prevent women from gaining the right to vote. As the suffragist movement gained momentum, women mobilized committees, circulated petitions, and created associations to oppose women's suffrage in New York and Massachusetts. Thousands of women would eventually join their fight.

"They said, 'We've got to do something,'" Goodier said, "or else we're going to be stuck with the vote.'"

Their efforts would ultimately fail with the ratification of the 19th Amendment in August 1920. But the anti-suffragist women would become a nationwide force that would influence later generations of conservative women. And today, a century after women gained the right to vote, echoes of their message remain.

Granting women the right to vote, the anti-suffragists argued, would lead to a disruption of the family unit, of a woman's role as a wife and mother, and of what they considered a privileged place in society - themes that would parallel those of Phyllis Schlafly, the conservative activist who would successfully campaign against the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s.

But their reasons for opposing suffrage were often more complex, focusing on the idea that women already had their own form of power. Many of the women in the anti-suffrage movement felt that the political system was a corrupt space, and if women joined it, they would inevitably become just as corrupt as the men, said Anya Jabour, a history professor at the University of Montana.

They felt women could better achieve their aims through influencing others - particularly their husbands and sons - using their supposed moral superiority to persuade men to do what they wanted.

"The argument was if they traded that for raw political power, they would lose female influence, and that would be a bad trade," Jabour said.

The National Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage, founded in 1911, distributed a pamphlet explaining why women shouldn't be allowed to vote:

"Because it means competition of women with men instead of co-operation. Because 80% of the women eligible to vote are married and can only double or annul their husbands' votes. ... Because in some States more voting women than voting men will place the government under petticoat rule."

The pamphlet then offered a few tips to housewives, among them: "You do not need a ballot to clean out your sink spout. ... Control of the temper makes a happier home than control of elections."

Leaders in the movement distributed postcards illustrating the gender role reversals they feared would happen if women became enfranchised. Images showed men holding grocery baskets, pushing baby strollers and washing clothes. Others suggested that if women began doing the work of men, they would become uglier, less feminine, less desirable to men.

"They were quite successful in demonizing suffragists and feminists and depicting them as being un-attractive man-haters," Jabour said, drawing comparisons with modern-day attacks on feminists.

Others argued that women couldn't possibly get involved with politics while also caring for their children and their home. One postcard, titled " Hugging a Delusion," showed an image of a woman sulking while cradling a ballot like a baby. Another showed a woman trying to juggle a baby, a pan, a broom and a paper with the word "suffrage." "Can she do it?" the cartoon read.

The New York State Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage distributed this cartoon by Laura Foster. (Collection of the Massachusetts Historical Society)

Suffragists were forced to counter these arguments by making the case that yes, "women will still do everything that they're supposed to do in the women's sphere, but also vote," Jabour said.

"I think we're still dealing with exactly these messages," said Allison Lange, an associate professor of history at the Wentworth Institute of Technology. "Even a century later, women's rights activists, female leaders are still faced with exactly the same criticism."

But understanding their arguments requires understanding who these women were. Since many in the anti-suffrage movement were ideologically opposed to women being public figures, they often identified themselves only using their husbands' names or issuing statements on behalf of an organization, rather than an individual, Jabour said.

The anti-suffragist women generally came from elite, White families on the East Coast, and tended to be married to, or related to, men in politics or law. But they were also often influential leaders in social activism and philanthropy. In many ways, anti-suffragist women were similar in status to suffragist leaders, Goodier said. "They would move in a lot of the same circles."

One of the most famous anti-suffragists, Annie Nathan Meyer, was a writer, philanthropist and founder of New York City's first liberal arts college for women, Barnard College. Her sister, Maud Nathan, publicly supported women's suffrage. Ida Tarbell, who is credited with pioneering what is today known as investigative journalism, publicly opposed women's suffrage, arguing that a woman's place is in the home and not in the man's world - even though her groundbreaking career was an exception to that rule.

Many anti-suffragists were White women with powerful positions. Journalist Ida Tarbell's career ran counter to her arguments about women's roles. (Harris & Ewing/Library of Congress)

One of the most important anti-suffragist activists was Josephine Jewell Dodge, a founder and president of the National Association Opposed to Woman Suffrage. She came from a wealthy and influential New England family; her father, Marshall Jewell, served as a governor of Connecticut and U.S. postmaster general. Dodge was also an early leader in the movement to establish day-care centers for working and immigrant mothers in New York City.

But she considered suffrage unnecessary, given that state legislatures had already passed laws protecting certain civil rights for women.

"The suffrage disturbance is, in plain words, a sex disturbance ... just as the impulse of some other women to take up foolish fancies and unnecessary movements is the result of that uneasiness and straining after artificial happiness and unnatural enjoyment which indicates an unsettled and an unsatisfactory state of mind," she wrote in a newspaper article in 1913.

Dodge's great-granddaughter, Andrea Dodge, grew up knowing about Josephine Jewell Dodge as a family matriarch and icon. But it wasn't until she was in graduate school, pursuing her master's in early-childhood education, that she learned about Jewell Dodge's role in both the day-care movement and the anti-suffrage movement, she said in an interview.

"I turned to my professor and said, 'That's my great-grandmother in this book,' " Andrea Dodge said. When she later saw a headline about her position on the woman's right to vote, Andrea Dodge was initially ashamed and disappointed. But as she read on, she grew to understand her great-grandmother's position, she said.

"It's very clear that she wasn't degrading or demeaning of women," Andrea Dodge said. "It was that women were so important to bringing up moral children that they needed to be doing it full time, and needed to be strong and educated and that was going to keep the backbone of society strong."

But while her great-grandmother led a campaign that sought to keep women as mothers and homemakers, Andrea Dodge chose not to have children. She focused on her career instead, working as a teacher in the Head Start program and ultimately working her way to a job as a federal auditor for the program.

"I think that the issues she brought up in contesting the issue of women voting, and what it represented," Andrea Dodge said, "I don't think we have ever resolved that. We live with it."

Anti-suffrage leaders spread their message to 1,200 people as part of a tour on the Hudson River in May 1913. (Library of Congress)

Once women were granted the right to vote, many anti-suffragist leaders faced a dilemma over what to do next, said Sunu Kodumthara, associate professor of history at Southwestern Oklahoma State University. After New York state passed a suffrage amendment, a New York Times article in September 1919 captured the contradicting messages in the office of the national anti-suffrage association.

On one wall, a sign read: "Politics are bad for women and women are bad for politics." On the other side of the room was a sign urging members to register to vote.

Across the country, many anti-suffragists had resolved to use their newly granted voting power to push for their conservative views, Kodumthara said.

In fact, just two years after Oklahoma granted women the right to vote, the vice president of the state's anti-suffrage association, Alice Robertson, decided to run for office. She became the first woman from Oklahoma elected to Congress.

About this story

Illustrations by Bárbara Malagoli for The Washington Post. Editing by Lynda Robinson. Art direction by Amanda Soto. Design and development by Madison Walls. Design editing by Suzette Moyer. Copy editing by Anne Kenderdine. Photo editing and research by Mark Miller.

Samantha Schmidt is a reporter covering gender and family issues.
The long struggle for suffrage

Read more stories that explore how women fought for and won the right to vote 100 years ago

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Thousands of women fought against the right to vote. Their reasons still resonate today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As the suffragist movement gained momentum, women mobilized to oppose the 19th Amendment. The anti-suffragists became a nationwide force that would influence later generations of conservative women.

# data[].attributes.body
Do you trust businesses to make the best decision for you or for their bottom line? Teddy Roosevelt knew the answer to that question over 100 years ago. Remember, this was a time when the west was still pretty empty and big business had few limits or regulations. TR looked to keep large areas of our country safe from development, thus allowing future generations to enjoy the trees and the squirrels and the fish and the canyons and the.... well, you get the picture.

ASSIGNMENT #3

1. Read and watch about TR and explain how he was a Progressive. You will need to know what the Square Deal was specifically.(I put the teddy bear thing in there because it's a cool story)
2. Read the opposing viewpoint to the creation of national parks by the federal government. Do you think they have a valid point?

# data[].attributes.body
Read this to find out how Teddy Roosevelt helped to make American football safer and how he, just maybe, saved it for all of you. Football fans around the country are cheering.... except for Jets fans, they're just waiting for their team to fall apart again.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At the turn of the 20th century, America's football gridirons were killing fields. The college game drew tens of thousands of spectators and rivaled professional baseball in fan appeal, but football in the early 1900s was lethally brutal-a grinding, bruising sport in which the forward pass was illegal and brute strength was required to move the ball. Players locked arms in mass formations and used their helmetless heads as battering rams. Gang tackles routinely buried ball carriers underneath a ton and a half of tangled humanity.

With little protective equipment, players sustained gruesome injuries-wrenched spinal cords, crushed skulls and broken ribs that pierced their hearts. The Chicago Tribune reported that in 1904 alone, there were 18 football deaths and 159 serious injuries, mostly among prep school players. Obituaries of young pigskin players ran on a nearly weekly basis during the football season. The carnage appalled America. Newspaper editorials called on colleges and high schools to banish football outright. "The once athletic sport has degenerated into a contest that for brutality is little better than the gladiatorial combats in the arena in ancient Rome," opined the Beaumont Express. The sport reached such a crisis that one of its biggest boosters- President Theodore Roosevelt -got involved.

Although his nearsightedness kept him off the Harvard varsity squad, Roosevelt was a vocal exponent of football's contribution to the "strenuous life," both on and off the field. As New York City police commissioner, he helped revive the annual Harvard-Yale football series after it had been canceled for two years following the violent 1894 clash that was deemed "the bloodbath at Hampden Park." His belief that the football field was a proving ground for the battlefield was validated by the performance of his fellow Rough Riders who were former football standouts. "In life, as in a football game," he wrote, "the principle to follow is: Hit the line hard; don't foul and don't shirk, but hit the line hard!" In 1903, the president told an audience, "I believe in rough games and in rough, manly sports. I do not feel any particular sympathy for the person who gets battered about a good deal so long as it is not fatal."
READ MORE: How Teddy Roosevelt Crafted an Image of American Manliness
Football, however, was fatal, and even Roosevelt acknowledged it required reform if it was to be saved. With his son Theodore Jr. now playing for the Harvard freshman team, he had a paternal interest in reforming the game as well. Fresh from negotiating an end to the Russo-Japanese War, Roosevelt sought to end violence on the football field as well as the battlefield. Using his "big stick," the First Fan summoned the head coaches and representatives of the premier collegiate powers-Harvard, Yale and Princeton-to the White House on October 9, 1905. Roosevelt urged them to curb excessive violence and set an example of fair play for the rest of the country. The schools released a statement condemning brutality and pledging to keep the game clean.

Roosevelt soon discovered that brokering peace in the Far East may have been an easier proposition than getting an American sport to clean up its act. Fatalities and injuries mounted during the 1905 season. In the freshman tilt against Yale, the president's son was bruised and his nose broken-deliberately, according to some accounts. The following week, the Harvard varsity nearly walked off the field while playing against Yale after their captain was leveled by an illegal hit on a fair catch that left his nose broken and bloodied. The same afternoon, Union College halfback Harold Moore died of a cerebral hemorrhage after being kicked in the head while attempting to tackle a New York University runner. It was a grim end to a savage season. In what the Chicago Tribune referred to as a "death harvest," the 1905 football season resulted in 19 player deaths and 137 serious injuries. A Cincinnati Commercial Tribune cartoon depicted the Grim Reaper on a goalpost surveying a twisted mass of fallen players.

Following the season, Stanford and California switched to rugby while Columbia, Northwestern and Duke dropped football. Harvard president Charles Eliot, who considered football "more brutalizing than prizefighting, cockfighting or bullfighting," warned that Harvard could be next, a move that would be a crushing blow to the college game and the Harvard alum in the Oval Office. Roosevelt wrote in a letter to a friend that he would not let Eliot "emasculate football," and that he hoped to "minimize the danger" without football having to be played "on too ladylike a basis." Roosevelt again used his bully pulpit. He urged the Harvard coach and other leading football authorities to push for radical rule changes, and he invited other school leaders to the White House in the offseason.

READ MORE: Teddy Roosevelt Got Sued for Libel. He Said He 'Enjoyed' the Trial

An intercollegiate conference, which would become the forerunner of the NCAA, approved radical rule changes for the 1906 season. They legalized the forward pass, abolished the dangerous mass formations, created a neutral zone between offense and defense and doubled the first-down distance to 10 yards, to be gained in three downs. The rule changes didn't eliminate football's dangers, but fatalities declined-to 11 per year in both 1906 and 1907-while injuries fell sharply. A spike in fatalities in 1909 led to another round of reforms that further eased restrictions on the forward pass and formed the foundation of the modern sport.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At the turn of the 20th century, America's football gridirons were killing fields. The college game drew tens of thousands of spectators and rivaled professional baseball in fan appeal, but football in the early 1900s was lethally brutal-a grinding, bruising sport in which the forward pass was illegal and brute strength was required to move the ball.

# data[].attributes.body
Hey government!! Get out of my life!! Sound familiar today? It also would have sounded familiar over 100 years ago...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You probably like parks. You assume everyone feels that way. You are wrong.

As the National Park Service prepares for next summer's centennial, I've been thinking about the people on the wrong side of national park history. A recent tweet from Danielle Brigida, who works for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, shows that such objectors were intense and taken seriously in their time.

Proof that we've come a long way. Here's a 1920 ad campaign that didn't want to save Malheur Lake. pic.twitter.com/I6kYMg9D7X

- Danielle Brigida (@starfocus) October 13, 2015

This image sent me rummaging through old newspapers. In 1908, President Theodore Roosevelt established Oregon's Lake Malheur Reservation, dedicating about 100,000 acres of (allegedly) unclaimed government land to the preservation and breeding of native birds. American birds were in crisis. Milliners, in search of feathers for the fancy hats of the time, had nearly wiped out several species, including snowy egrets and roseate spoonbills. Headwear was such an important part of turn-of-the-century etiquette that there were instruction books on how to properly tip one's hat, written at a level of detail reminiscent of the Japanese bowing tradition.

Lake Malheur Reservation specifically protected the formerly abundant great egret, which was a prime target for hatmakers. Earlier that year, conservationist William L. Finley had surveyed the area and found only two egrets during a full month of searching. Finley also interviewed a plume hunter who reported making as much as $500 per day (more than $12,000 in today's dollars) selling the wading birds he shot. The same hunter boasted of plundering bird populations all the way to Mexico, exterminating entire egret colonies across the West. Finley's report inspired Roosevelt to set the land aside for the bird's benefit.

It worked for a while, but problems arose by 1920 (perhaps not surprisingly- malheur is French for "woe" or "misfortune"). As Oregon farmers drained water from the Silvies and Blitzen rivers, which feed into Lake Malheur, the lake was drying up and becoming alkaline. So a bunch of Oregonians came up with an idea: Why not just drain the lake and the surrounding wetlands entirely, then sell the land to farmers? To make the idea more palatable to the public, the proceeds from the sale would be earmarked for schools, hence the "babies before birds" motif in the advertisement above.

The ad's complaint about mosquitoes seems trifling to a modern reader, but malaria was a major problem at the time. It was one of several imported diseases that together reduced Oregon's indigenous population by 80 percent by the end of the Civil War in 1865. In 1920 the disease was still killing 58 out of 100,000 Americans annually-the approximate malarial death rate in modern-day Rwanda.

A political and legal battle ensued over Lake Malheur. The state gave voters the option to officially cede management of the area to the federal government. Angry Oregonians wrote letters to newspaper editors opposing the ballot measure, complaining that selling the land would bring value "far above any anticipated benefits that could possibly be derived from a bird reserve." In a piece titled "Birds and Babies," one writer noted that those pesky birds were stealing grain from local farmers. The ballot measure was defeated.

The U.S. government still wanted the land and fought a lengthy legal battle with Oregon. The state contended that the feds had more or less stolen the lake because Uncle Sam never really held title to the reserve in the first place. In 1935, the Supreme Court finally settled the issue, ruling that the land belonged to the federal government. The reserve was legitimate and the federal government had the authority to protect the wetlands from destruction. Take that, babies.

This story is, admittedly, a relic. But it's an important one, because it encapsulates most of the arguments people continue to make against parkland. Opponents claim the land could be made more economically productive. They say wildlands are a detriment to society and do not help the average citizen. And they argue-somewhat bizarrely-that our children will one day thank us for not making parks.

Before establishing Yellowstone as a national park in 1872, for example, Congress demanded hard evidence that the land could not be used for farming, ranching, or housing. After its establishment, opponents still wanted to transfer management to a private company that would administer it in a less elitist and "imperial" manner. Before Glacier National Park was created in 1910, opponents cut the proposed area by two-thirds to allow mining and ranching. Similar concerns shrank the size of Grand Canyon National Park. (William Randolph Hearst also won a prohibition on structures that would impair the view from one of his houses.) Indeed, according to University of Montana historian H. Duane Hampton, two-thirds of existing national parks faced significant opposition.

The arguments continue. Last year, fishermen insisted that a proposed marine national monument was a waste of perfectly good tuna. Opponents of a massive Nevada national monument argued that President Obama was putting landscapes before our children's safety (sound familiar?), because the Air Force needed the airspace for exercises.

No matter how good an idea is, there are always people who are against it. Pope Paul V declared Galileo's ideas about the solar system heretical and told him to drop all that Copernican stuff. Of Darwin's theory of evolution, William Jennings Bryan wrote that "no one has ever been able to trace one single species to another." I'm sure there were people who warned against combining peanut butter and chocolate. I guess America's best idea can't escape the same fate, even after more than a century of making people ( and their babies) happy.

onEarth provides reporting and analysis about environmental science, policy, and culture. All opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the policies or positions of NRDC. Learn more or follow us on and .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The People Who Opposed America's Best Idea

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You probably like parks. You assume everyone feels that way. You are wrong. As the National Park Service prepares for next summer's centennial, I've been thinking about the people on the wrong side of national park history. A recent tweet from Danielle Brigida, who works for the U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
So he loved nature and wanted to save it... so he could go hunting? In some ways that is true, but he truly believed in keeping the beauty of our nature out of the hands of those looking to make a profit.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How This Photo of Theodore Roosevelt in Hunting Gear Helped Jump-Start the American Conservation Movement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
That he looks ready to kill something is no affectation; Roosevelt was a gung-ho hunter all his life

# data[].attributes.headline
AMERICAS CONSERVATION PRESIDENT- TEDDY ROOSEVELT

# data[].attributes.subject
AMERICAS CONSERVATION PRESIDENT- TEDDY ROOSEVELT

# data[].attributes.body
Can you be both an avid hunter AND a conservationist? If you're Teddy Roosevelt at the turn of the 20th century the answer is a resounding YES!!!

# data[].attributes.body
Some if this we covered in the last unit, but it all overlaps and bleeds together so no worries.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Progressive Era: Politics, Women, and Reform

# data[].attributes.body
Details on his Progressive actions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Progressive Era: Teddy Roosevelt (The Square Deal)

# data[].attributes.body
If you've ever had a teddy bear you actually were holding a piece of US history. Here is the story behind this iconic toy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What's in a name? More than you may realize! Come join Ranger Alyssa who will share the intriguing history behind the name "Teddy Bear." You may not see your stuffed bear in quite the same light again!

# data[].attributes.body
The US is a country based on the idea of building business and making a profit, but that doesn't mean that the common, everyday people must suffer for these things to happen.

# data[].attributes.body
Imagine a world where people on both sides of the political spectrum could agree on something. Sounds impossible, right? WRONG!! As the US entered the 1900 changes were being being made in all areas of society from politics to business and beyond and it was the leaders of BOTH political parties who were involved in making it happen.

ASSIGNMENT #2

Read the article above and watch the short video to the right. As you read and watch, make a list of the areas Progressives were looking to change for the betterment of all people, not just those with money and power.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Progressivism sweeps the nation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The turn of the 20th century was a time of progressive reforms in the United States.

# data[].attributes.body
Each question is meant to focus on the larger issue. You will be responsible for these questions.

ASSIGNMENT #1

There are 3 lessons in this chapter. For each lesson I will ask you to answer a single question that is meant to summarize the main points. Your answers should be a long paragraph.

Lesson 1
Define the term Progressive and list the areas in which they wanted to make positive changes.
Lesson 2
How did Roosevelt attempt to regulate big business and save the environment?
Lesson 3
What reforms were put in place by Wilson after he won the presidency in 1912?

Please remember, these lessons(sections) are relatively short and I am not asking you to do all of the questions at the end of each one. You will be responsible for the answer to these questions on your next test so answer them fully now and you won't have to go back and do it again later. You will be doing this for every chapter.

# data[].attributes.body
Change is coming, and thank goodness. Power to the people!!

I still think the Scorpions said it best in their 1990 hit song "The Winds of Change"(the song was about the fall of communism, but it still applies). Click above to see what Mr. Clearwaters was listening to 30+ years ago.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Scorpions - Wind Of Change (Official Music Video)