How far does Source I prove that the policeman in Source J is telling the truth Essay Example

How far does Source I prove that the policeman in Source J is telling the truth Essay Example How far does Source I prove that the policeman in Source J is telling the truth Essay How far does Source I prove that the policeman in Source J is telling the truth Essay Essay Topic: History Source I is a cartoon image from the time of Prohibition. It is illustrating the artists opinion, which is that America (Chicago) was corrupt. The hand gestures from different people including a clerk, a city official, a magistrate, a politician, a policeman, and a Prohibition agent are to show that many different levels of Americas people were relying on gangster payroles. Source J quotes a policeman who is also talking about Americas corruption, when he says that his superior officers were also, as well as himself, involved in the acceptance of bribes. One of the people shown to be ready to accept bribes in Source I is a policeman, and Source J is a policeman who talks about accepting bribes. In this way, Source I is agreeing with Source J; but this is not proof that the policeman in Source J is telling the truth as it is a matter of opinion and not fact. It is important to note the fact that the policeman in Source J is obviously not the most reliable of people, as he is in the wrong, according to what he says, and so he is likely to be lying in order to defend himself. Source A can be used to back up the idea that the police were reluctant to enforce Prohibition to their full ability: No earlier law produced such widespread crime. If the police had been enforcing Prohibition properly (and perhaps not choosing to ignore some drinkers as they sympathised with them, as undoubtedly some of the police drank alcohol themselves), then there wouldnt have been such a crime problem. Source I is likely to be strongly exaggerated as it is propaganda which sends out the message that everyone was corrupt. It was very unlikely that everyone was corrupt. However, it must contain elements of truth, otherwise people wouldnt have been able to relate to it. Source I is titled The National Gesture, which means that everybody was accepting bribes, but this was not necessarily true. The level of corruption is shown to be very strong, and the message is that Prohibition was failing. Source B is in agreement with this, where is says there were more than 30, 000 speakeasies in New York. Speakeasies were illegal places to drink, and so this is agreeing with Source Is message that Prohibition was failing. One way in which Source I is in disagreement with Source J is that Source I shows the policeman to be ready and waiting for a bribe to come along, whereas the policeman in Source J is saying that although he was given a bribe, he didnt ask for it and it was forced on him. However, this could be interpreted differently. The policeman in Source J may well be lying, and he may have really accepted the bribe and not been forced into having it. If so, then Source I could actually be backing this up and saying that the police accepted bribes, but only behind their backs in secret because they dont want anybody to know if this is true, like the policeman in Source J. In conclusion, Source I can only agree with Source J, it cannot actually prove that the policeman is telling the truth as it is only a cartoon and does not give proof of anything it is not statistics, photographic evidence or a witness account. It is also a fact that one source can never actually prove another to be true.