Mencken opens the fifth series of Prejudices by examining the failure of the campaign against birth control propaganda, noting that church and state combine to suppress it yet the birth rate continues to fall. He observes that the decline is steepest among the educated and law-abiding classes, a pattern he parallels with Prohibition: professional criminals are often teetotalers, while scofflaws abound among the respectable. This contrast between official morality and actual behavior sets the tone for the collection.

Moral Causes and Their Ironies

In the opening section, Mencken dissects four moral causes: birth control, Comstockery, capital punishment, and war. His method is to highlight the gap between stated aims and practical outcomes. For birth control, he notes that despite threats of penal servitude and hell-fire, the movement progresses because the very classes that enforce the law are the ones ignoring it. He extends this to Prohibition, where the majority of professional criminals are teetotalers, but the good citizens who demand enforcement are often scofflaws. The irony is that the law-abiding are the most law-breaking in this regard.

Mencken's tone is sardonic, his evidence drawn from observable social patterns rather than abstract principle. He does not argue for or against the causes themselves but exposes the hypocrisy of their proponents. The essay on Comstockery, though not excerpted in full, likely continues this pattern of contrasting moral rhetoric with human behavior.

Mississippi's Literary Pretensions

In a later section, Mencken turns to literary criticism, focusing on the work of Harris Dickson, whom he calls the Mississippi Balzac, and his biography of John Sharp Williams, the Mississippi Gladstone. Mencken dismisses the book as 'puerile, blowsy stuff' and 'mush,' noting that it portrays Williams as a third-rate politician, 'professionally bucolic and as hollow as a jug.' He contrasts this with Williams's reputation in Washington as an intellectual, a myth sustained by his having studied at Heidelberg.

Mencken then recounts an anecdote from Dickson's book: at Heidelberg, Williams challenged a Prussian to a duel, choosing pistols over sabers to avoid facial scars. The Prussian fired prematurely and addressed Williams as 'Freiherr Williams.' Williams fired into a snowbank. This story, Mencken implies, reveals more about Williams's character than any claim to intellectual depth. The critique is not just of one book but of a regional literary culture that inflates mediocrity.

The Critic's Method: Specificity and Sarcasm

Throughout the collection, Mencken's critical method relies on concrete, often absurd details to undermine reputations. He does not argue abstractly but presents a telling fact or quotation and lets the reader draw the conclusion. For example, he notes that Williams's Heidelberg chapter begins with a couplet: 'In Germany 'twas very clear / He'd leave the rapiers for beer.' The doggerel itself is evidence of the book's quality. Similarly, he observes that Williams's main business in Germany was 'putting the abominable Prussian Junker in their place,' a phrase that deflates the heroic narrative.

Mencken also uses contrast: the same Washington correspondents who called Williams an intellectual later compared the 'preposterous Coolidge with Pericles.' The juxtaposition is damning. His sarcasm is precise, targeting not just individuals but the systems that produce and celebrate them. The reader is left to infer the broader implications for American culture and criticism.

Mencken's Prejudices, Fifth Series rewards readers who attend to his specific examples and ironic juxtapositions. Rather than seeking a unified argument, one should watch for the recurring pattern: a claim of moral or intellectual superiority undercut by a concrete, often ridiculous, detail. The essays are best read as performances of critical demolition, each a case study in how to puncture pretension with evidence.