Dry-law debate : Clarence Darrow vs. Wayne B. Wheeler

A lively 1927 public debate examines whether Prohibition protects society or damages the public welfare. One speaker argues that personal liberty must include the freedom to decide what to eat and drink, warning that laws imposed by intolerance and moral certainty can create a rigid, coercive society. His opening case connects the prohibition question with broader concerns about individual rights, free thought, and the dangers of allowing one group to govern everyone’s private choices.

His opponent defends obedience to the law, maintaining that citizens who oppose Prohibition should seek its repeal through lawful means rather than encourage defiance. The exchange captures a sharply divided America, where questions of temperance, constitutional authority, morality, and civil disobedience were being argued in public halls and private lives alike. Presented in the direct, energetic style of an audience debate, this compact volume offers a revealing look at one of the era’s most contentious political and social conflicts.