Prohibition in the United States

===Bootlegging and hoarding old supplies===
[[File:Policeman and wrecked car and cases of moonshine.jpg|thumb|A policeman with wrecked automobile and confiscated [[moonshine]], 1922]]
As early as 1925, journalist [[H. L. Mencken]] believed that Prohibition was not working.<ref>{{cite book | author=Sylvia Engdahl | title =Amendments XVIII and XXI: Prohibition and Repeal | publisher =Greenhaven | year =2009 }}</ref> Historian [[David Oshinsky]], summarizing the work of [[Daniel Okrent]], wrote that "Prohibition worked best when directed at its primary target: the working-class poor."<ref>{{cite journal | author=[[David Oshinsky]] | title=Temperance to Excess (review of ''Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition'') | journal=The New York Times | date=May 13, 2010 | url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/books/review/Oshinsky-t.html | access-date=August 20, 2020 | archive-date=January 26, 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210126153021/http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/books/review/Oshinsky-t.html | url-status=live }}</ref> Historian [[Lizabeth Cohen]] writes: "A rich family could have a cellar-full of liquor and get by, it seemed, but if a poor family had one bottle of home-brew, there would be trouble."<ref name="Cohen, Lizabeth">{{cite book|last=Cohen|first=Lizabeth|title=Making a New Deal: Industrial Workers in Chicago, 1919–1939|year=1991|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Chicago|isbn=978-0-521-42838-5|page=255|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DWGfrXesoqUC&pg=PA255|access-date=October 17, 2015|archive-date=January 20, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230120200133/https://books.google.com/books?id=DWGfrXesoqUC&pg=PA255|url-status=live}}</ref> Working-class people were inflamed by the fact that their employers could dip into a private cache while they, the employees, could not.<ref>Davis, ''Jews And Booze: Becoming American In The Age Of Prohibition'', p. 189.</ref> Within a week after Prohibition went into effect, small portable stills were on sale throughout the country.<ref>{{cite book|title=The Great Illusion: An Informal History of Prohibition|last=Asbury|first=Herbert|publisher=Greenwood Press|year=1968|location=New York}}</ref>

Before the Eighteenth Amendment went into effect in January 1920, many of the upper classes stockpiled alcohol for legal home consumption after Prohibition began. They bought the inventories of liquor retailers and wholesalers, emptying out their warehouses, saloons, and club storerooms. President [[Woodrow Wilson]] moved his own supply of alcoholic beverages to his Washington residence after his term of office ended. His successor, [[Warren G. Harding]], relocated his own large supply into the White House.<ref>{{cite book|author=Garrett Peck|title=Prohibition in Washington, D.C.: How Dry We Weren't|year=2011|publisher=The History Press|location=Charleston, SC|isbn=978-1-60949-236-6|pages=42–45}}</ref><ref>Davis, ''Jews And Booze: Becoming American In The Age Of Prohibition'', p. 145.</ref>
[[File:5 Prohibition Disposal(9) (cropped).jpg|thumb|left|Removal of liquor during Prohibition]]

After the Eighteenth Amendment became law, [[rum-running|bootlegging]] became widespread. In the first six months of 1920, the federal government opened 7,291 cases for Volstead Act violations.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Bauer|first1=Bryce T.|title=Gentlemen Bootleggers|publisher=Chicago Review Press Incorporated|page=73}}</ref> In the first complete fiscal year of 1921, the number of cases violating the Volstead Act jumped to 29,114 violations and would rise dramatically over the next thirteen years.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Bauer|first1=Bryce T.|title=Gentlemen Bootleggers|publisher=Chicago Review Press Incorporated}}</ref>

Grape juice was not restricted by Prohibition, even though if it was allowed to sit for sixty days it would ferment and turn to wine with a twelve percent alcohol content. Many people took advantage of this as grape juice output quadrupled during the Prohibition era.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Repealing National Prohibition|last=Kyvig|first=David E.|publisher=The University of Chicago Press|year=1979|location=Chicago, IL|pages=20–21}}</ref>

To prevent bootleggers from using industrial [[ethyl alcohol]] to produce illegal beverages, the federal government ordered the [[Denatured alcohol|denaturation of industrial alcohols]], meaning they must include additives to make them unpalatable or poisonous. In response, bootleggers hired chemists who successfully removed the additives from the alcohol to make it drinkable. As a response, the Treasury Department required manufacturers to add more deadly poisons, including the particularly deadly combination known as [[methyl alcohol]]: 4 parts methanol, 2.25 parts [[pyridine]] base, and 0.5 parts [[benzene]] per 100 parts ethyl alcohol.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The Poisoners Handbook|last=Blum|first=Deborah|publisher=Penguin Books|year=2012|isbn=978-0-14-311882-4|location=New York, New York|pages=Ch. 2}}</ref> New York City medical examiners prominently opposed these policies because of the danger to human life. As many as 10,000 people died from drinking denatured alcohol before Prohibition ended.<ref name=Blum>{{cite web | author=Deborah Blum | title=The Chemist's War: The Little-told Story of how the U.S. Government Poisoned Alcohol During Prohibition with Deadly Consequences | work=Slate | date=February 19, 2010 | url=http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2010/02/the_chemists_war.1.html | access-date=November 7, 2013 | archive-date=October 29, 2013 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131029220240/http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2010/02/the_chemists_war.1.html | url-status=live }}</ref> New York City medical examiner [[Charles Norris (medical examiner)|Charles Norris]] believed the government took responsibility for murder when they knew the poison was not deterring consumption and they continued to poison industrial alcohol (which would be used in drinking alcohol) anyway. Norris remarked: "The government knows it is not stopping drinking by putting poison in alcohol ... [Y]et it continues its poisoning processes, heedless of the fact that people determined to drink are daily absorbing that poison. Knowing this to be true, the United States government must be charged with the moral responsibility for the deaths that poisoned liquor causes, although it cannot be held legally responsible."<ref name=Blum/>
[[File:1933-11 Industry Booms After Repeal of Prohibition.ogv|thumb|A 1933 newsreel about the end of Prohibition]]

Another lethal substance that was often substituted for alcohol was [[Sterno]], a fuel commonly known as "canned heat". Forcing the substance through a makeshift filter, such as a handkerchief, created a rough liquor substitute; however, the result was poisonous, though not often lethal.<ref name="Lusk, Rufus S 1932">{{cite journal | author =Rufus S. Lusk | title =The Drinking Habit  | journal =Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science | volume =163 | pages =46–52 | date=September 1932 | doi=10.1177/000271623216300106| s2cid =144265638 }}</ref>
[[File:Orange County Sheriff's deputies dumping illegal booze, Santa Ana, 3-31-1932.jpg|thumb|left|Orange County, California, sheriff's deputies dumping illegal alcohol, 1932]]

Making alcohol at home was common among some families with wet sympathies during Prohibition. Stores sold grape concentrate with warning labels that listed the steps that should be avoided to prevent the juice from fermenting into wine. Some drugstores sold "medical wine" with around a 22% alcohol content. In order to justify the sale, the wine was given a medicinal taste.<ref name="Lusk, Rufus S 1932"/> Home-distilled hard liquor was called [[bathtub gin]] in northern cities, and [[moonshine]] in rural areas of [[Virginia]], [[Kentucky]], [[North Carolina]], [[South Carolina]], [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]], [[West Virginia]] and [[Tennessee]]. [[Homebrewing]] good hard liquor was easier than brewing good beer.<ref name="Lusk, Rufus S 1932"/> Since selling privately distilled alcohol was illegal and bypassed government taxation, law enforcement officers relentlessly pursued manufacturers.<ref name="Communications, Aug 1998">{{cite journal | first=Scott |last=Oldham | title =NASCAR Turns 50 | journal =Popular Mechanics | date=August 1998 }}</ref> In response, bootleggers modified their cars and trucks by enhancing the engines and suspensions to make faster vehicles that, they assumed, would improve their chances of outrunning and escaping agents of the [[Bureau of Prohibition]], commonly called "revenue agents" or "revenuers". These cars became known as "moonshine runners" or {{"'}}shine runners".<ref>"NASCAR, an Overview – Part 1". Suite101.com. Google. Web. November 22, 2009.</ref> Shops with wet sympathies were also known to participate in the underground liquor market, by loading their stocks with ingredients for liquors, including [[bénédictine]], [[vermouth]], scotch mash, and even [[ethyl alcohol]]; anyone could purchase these ingredients legally.<ref>{{cite journal | author =Joseph K. Willing | title =The Profession of Bootlegging | journal =Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science | volume =125 | pages =40–48 | date=May 1926 | doi=10.1177/000271622612500106| s2cid =144956561 }}</ref>

In October 1930, just two weeks before the congressional midterm elections, bootlegger [[George Cassiday]]—"the man in the green hat"—came forward and told members of Congress how he had bootlegged for ten years. One of the few bootleggers ever to tell his story, Cassiday wrote five front-page articles for ''[[The Washington Post]]'', in which he estimated that 80% of congressmen and senators drank. The Democrats in the North were mostly wets, and in the [[1932 United States presidential election|1932 election]], they made major gains. The wets argued that Prohibition was not stopping crime, and was actually causing the creation of large-scale, well-funded, and well-armed criminal syndicates. As Prohibition became increasingly unpopular, especially in urban areas, its repeal was eagerly anticipated.<ref>Peck, ''Prohibition in Washington, D.C.: How Dry We Weren't'', pp. 125–133.</ref>  Wets had the organization and the initiative.  They pushed the argument that states and localities needed the tax money.  President Herbert Hoover proposed a new constitutional amendment that was vague on particulars and satisfied neither side. Franklin Roosevelt's Democratic platform promised repeal of the 18th Amendment.<ref>"Prohibition After the 1932 Elections" [https://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1932081100 ''CQ Researcher''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210125235219/http://library.cqpress.com/CQResearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1932081100 |date=January 25, 2021 }}</ref><ref>Herbert Brucker, "How Long, O Prohibition?" ''The North American Review'', 234#4 (1932), pp. 347–357. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/25114102 online] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220421205555/https://www.jstor.org/stable/25114102 |date=April 21, 2022 }}</ref>

When Prohibition was repealed in 1933, many bootleggers and suppliers with wet sympathies simply moved into the legitimate liquor business. Some crime syndicates moved their efforts into expanding their protection rackets to cover legal liquor sales and other business areas.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Behr|first1=Edward|title=Prohibition Thirteen Years that Changed America|date=1996|publisher=Arcade Publishing|location=New York|isbn=978-1-55970-394-9|pages=240–242}}</ref>