I think that the answer lies in where we put our attention in terms of action. Bill wants to do something. If Jack prohibits Bill, then it feels like Jack is performing the main action. Jack is prohibiting, he might even be enforcing. If so, then, Jack is preventing (a prohibition feels closer to "prevention" than "forbidding" does). The fact that Bill wants to do a thing becomes secondary to Jack's prohibition. So Jack is keeping Bill from doing something. Jack is prohibiting Bill "from" doing something. If Jack forbids Bill to do something then Jack is (arguably) being more passive. This sounds (to me) a lot less like Jack is enforcing anything, and more like Jack is depending on Bill to have the self-control to obey him. Bill still wants to do the thing, but Bill is forbidden "to do" the thing. Similarly "to" is used in "Jack persuaded Bill to <do something>". We're focusing more on the thing that Bill wants "to" do. I don't know whether this explains it very well. :D