The source of prohibition is the Anglo-American Church. She supported, zealously promoted the prohibition movement. Accordingly, the Church and her servants play an important role in this battle. If there is a probability anywhere that this matter will come to a vote, then, first of all, the Anglo-American Churches and sects work hard in their churches and circles for prohibition. Their chief weapons are special prohibition Church-services, prayer-meetings in Churches, on the streets, and public places, singing of hymns and ringing of Church-belle. But they do not pray for the support of Heaven for their cause...this they take for granted...rather do they pray to have their enemies confused and scattered and to have the rebellions repent and turn to prohibition. They know no difference between being a prohibitionist or a good Church member.

They take it as a matter of course that they are the only true and good Christians, and that only true Christians of their own kind can be true and good human beings. Although they themselves can not believe it, they act as if they were convinced about it, and try to prove it to others.

They pretend that they not only own true Christianity, but that they are the elect apostles, and the possessors of all virtues, all humanitarian and moral sentiments, and noble characteristics. To judge by their pretensions, they think themselves so pure, noble and strong, that they need not care for their own salvation, but only for the salvation of others. Apparently they desire to help others only, and to rescue them from the power of the demon alcohol. If they are asked what they understand by "others," they usually reply-"Decent people know how to control themselves, but the ordinary people, the day-workers, particularly the poor and unfortunate need our help, our guidance and supervision."

The aim of the Prohibitionists in the East, in Chicago, and the West, is directed apparently, to ward the poor and the unfortunate. No doubt, it was the aim of the prohibitionists at Auburn, Washington, near Seattle to help the poor and needy, to raise them to a higher moral level, and to make them happy because of prohibition. The prohibition question came to a vote last Tuesday at this place, and it is reported that the "wet" and the "dry" fought a bitter battle.

Unquestionable, there were the usual preachings and prayer-meetings, but in their great zeal for their cause they went even farther. A telegram of the Associated Press reports from Seattle: "The prohibitionists seemed to gain until toward afternoon, when a change took place. In their despair they appealed to the Assistant-Coroner Mr. Connell, who is a strong prohibitionist. Mr. Connell went at once to his undertaking establishment, where two corpses lay, victims of alcoholism. He out the corpses in a sitting position in their caskets and displayed them at his snow-windows. At the heads of corpses he placed a snow-card with these words: 'He died of drink'." The "drys" called the attention of the passing voters to this demonstration.

"Connell, being questioned last night replied: 'This is no desecration of the corpses. Those men had no friends, and it was fitting to let their dead bodies serve for a good purpose.'"

Auburn voted "wet". It is, of course, difficult to know to what extent this matter of the corpses of these poor devils, assisted in the fight for or against prohibition. It is certain that no decent person, after seeing this, could have voted for prohibition. Undoubtedly, many who had voted "dry" were ashamed a afterwards to be in such company. The two corpses served a good 4purpose. This horrible display brutally exposed the spirit of the prohibition and their defenders. If there was something still lacking to make it plain and distinctive, the zealous prohibitionist Connell supplied what was missing by declaring that this display was in no wise a desecration, since both of these men had no friends.

Of course, the prohibitionists will try to shake off the overzealous Connell and to consider him as a deplorable exception. But he is no exception. The fact, that his fellow-prohibitionists called attention to this horrible display, makes it obvious.

He is a fanatic and a hypocrit, just as all zealous prohibitionists are, more or less. Some may be more fanatical , and others more hypocritical than fanatical. A considerable portion of votes for prohibition came from people who believed to be in good company, and being deceived by the pretensions of the prohibitionists. This illusion should gradually disappear, because the prohibitionists expose themselves more and more.