Beer In Ads #1864: Facts Versus Fallacies #55


Monday’s ad is another one for the Pennsylvania State Brewers Association, from 1915, No. 55 in series they did from 1915-17 called “Facts Versus Fallacies.” I have no idea how many were done but some of the them are numbered into low triple digits, suggesting there were a lot of them, all in an effort to stop Prohibition from happening and win over support for beer. This ad, marked “55,” and is again about Maine and especially how Massachusetts is accused of supplying alcohol to them, demonstrating more evidence that the local option — which is really a “local prohibition” — cannot work and should be abandoned. And that’s from people within the Anti-Saloon League at one of their own meetings, causing some amount of embarrassment to the prohibitionist position.

Facts-v-Fallacies-55-1915-MA-ME

Beer In Ads #1863: Facts Versus Fallacies #54


Sunday’s ad is another one for the Pennsylvania State Brewers Association, from 1915, No. 54 in series they did from 1915-17 called “Facts Versus Fallacies.” I have no idea how many were done but some of the them are numbered into low triple digits, suggesting there were a lot of them, all in an effort to stop Prohibition from happening and win over support for beer. This ad, marked “54,” and is about how Maine has fared with their 50-year prohibition, which began in 1846. Apparently, a prohibitionist group complained to the sitting governor that he should enforce the law, but he responded that he did not have the authority to do so, that only the legislature could do something, and that they had even impeached several sheriffs for not doing their jobs, only to have their replacements do even less to stop prohibition. So it would appear that Maine’s efforts at stopping people from drinking was an abject failure, and yet still prohibitionists continued agitating for a national ban on alcohol, knowing full well it was unlikely to do any good whatsoever.

Facts-v-Fallacies-54-1915

Beer In Ads #1862: Facts Versus Fallacies #50


Saturday’s ad is another one for the Pennsylvania State Brewers Association, from 1915, No. 50 in series they did from 1915-17 called “Facts Versus Fallacies.” I have no idea how many were done but some of the them are numbered into low triple digits, suggesting there were a lot of them, all in an effort to stop Prohibition from happening and win over support for beer. This ad, marked “50,” and in this one the message is simple. Pass legislation for a prohibition and thousands will lose their jobs, entire industries will be decimated, governments will lose large sums of tax revenue and, after all that, it won’t even stop people from drinking alcohol. So yeah, that sounds like a good idea, doesn’t it?

Facts-v-Fallacies-50-1915

Beer In Ads #1861: Facts Versus Fallacies #49


Friday’s ad is another one for the Pennsylvania State Brewers Association, from 1915, No. 49 in series they did from 1915-17 called “Facts Versus Fallacies.” I have no idea how many were done but some of the them are numbered into low triple digits, suggesting there were a lot of them, all in an effort to stop Prohibition from happening and win over support for beer. This ad, marked “49,” and this is another weird one, equating workmen’s compensation cases, which at the time was new law, to drinking. One of the prohibitionist’s arguments was that drinking in the workplace was a dangerous problem, but statistics show that in federal workmen’s comp cases only one involved intoxication, and that one was thrown out. Statistics from other states show similar results, with very few cases involving alcohol, taking the wind out of the propaganda sails for prohibition.

Facts-v-Fallacies-49-1915

Beer In Ads #1860: Facts Versus Fallacies #48


Thursday’s ad is another one for the Pennsylvania State Brewers Association, from 1915, No. 48 in series they did from 1915-17 called “Facts Versus Fallacies.” I have no idea how many were done but some of the them are numbered into low triple digits, suggesting there were a lot of them, all in an effort to stop Prohibition from happening and win over support for beer. This ad, marked “48,” and this is another weird one, equating personal wealth with whether or not a state is wet or dry. Statistics at the time suggested that in wet states, people’s personal per capita wealth was much greater than people in dry states. I’m not sure about the causation question, or other factors, but it’s certainly an interesting strategy.

Facts-v-Fallacies-48-1915

Beer In Ads #1859: Facts Versus Fallacies #47


Wednesday’s ad is another one for the Pennsylvania State Brewers Association, from 1915, No. 47 in series they did from 1915-17 called “Facts Versus Fallacies.” I have no idea how many were done but some of the them are numbered into low triple digits, suggesting there were a lot of them, all in an effort to stop Prohibition from happening and win over support for beer. This ad, marked “47,” and details the failed efforts of a prohibition in neighboring Ohio. They quote several prominent citizens in Ohio, including a former U.S. president. Their conclusion. “The fallacy of Prohibition is best shown by the fact that whenever tried it has proven a failure, because it is neither just nor practical.”

Facts-v-Fallacies-47-1915

Beer In Ads #1858: Facts Versus Fallacies #42


Tuesday’s ad is another one for the Pennsylvania State Brewers Association, from 1915, No. 42 in series they did from 1915-17 called “Facts Versus Fallacies.” I have no idea how many were done but some of the them are numbered into low triple digits, suggesting there were a lot of them, all in an effort to stop Prohibition from happening and win over support for beer. This ad, marked “42,” and is an interesting tactic. It’s simply a reprint of a letter from a federal judge, D.E. Bryant, explaining why in his opinion the local option is a terrible idea and will not work. But here’s my favorite paragraph.

My experience is that prohibitory laws do not prohibit; that they do no good, but to the contrary they are extremely hurtful. There is but one answer to this, and it is that you cannot legislate successfully upon what men regard as a matter of taste. When legislation trenches upon taste the citizen will violate the law with impunity, and in so doing he does not regard himself as a criminal.

Sounds to me like he knew what he was talking about, as that’s pretty much exactly what happened during prohibition.

Facts-v-Fallacies-42-1915

Beer In Ads #1857: Facts Versus Fallacies #31

Monday’s ad is another one for the Pennsylvania State Brewers Association, from 1915, No. 31 in series they did from 1915-17 called “Facts Versus Fallacies.” I have no idea how many were done but some of the them are numbered into low triple digits, suggesting there were a lot of them, all in an effort to stop Prohibition from happening and win over support for beer. This ad, marked “31,” and again discusses the Brooks High License Law (no relation) and the fallacy of the local option where counties can choose to ban alcohol, even if the rest of the state doesn’t. It’s what became known, after prohibition ended, as dry counties and wet ones, a system that was as bad then as it is today.

Facts-v-Fallacies-31-1915

Beer In Ads #1856: Facts Versus Fallacies #28


Sunday’s ad is another one for the Pennsylvania State Brewers Association, from 1915, No. 28 in series they did from 1915-17 called “Facts Versus Fallacies.” I have no idea how many were done but some of the them are numbered into low triple digits, suggesting there were a lot of them, all in an effort to stop Prohibition from happening and win over support for beer. This ad, marked “28,” and discusses the Brooks High License Law (no relation) and in general how highly regulated the alcohol industry was even in 1915, and that it is the most “fortified in the law,” as one Congressman put it.

Facts-v-Fallacies-28-1915

Beer In Ads #1855: Facts Versus Fallacies #19


Saturday’s ad is another one for the Pennsylvania State Brewers Association, from 1915, No. 19 in series they did from 1915-17 called “Facts Versus Fallacies.” I have no idea how many were done but some of the them are numbered into low triple digits, suggesting there were a lot of them, all in an effort to stop Prohibition from happening and win over support for beer. This ad, marked “19,” and is the earliest one I’ve found so far. The ad talks about the evidence that already existed proving that the enforcement of a prohibition would be impossible. Looking back to 1885 and up the previous thirty years, in southern states where alcohol had been made illegal, the number of illegal distilleries had nearly tripled from when it was legal. Not to mention, the loss of revenue and the additional government expenses for enforcement.

Facts-v-Fallacies-19-1915