The patron of husbandry. (Columbus, Miss.) 1875-1883, 1882-03-11
The Anti-MOnopOIy League.

We have received several interest
ing documents from the Secretary of
theNational Anti Monopoly League
AN organization thatsis attrac ting
considerable attention and doing
much good-which we will publish
in our columns from time to time.
We think the more intelligent and
independent farmers of the country
will be disposed to give the Anti
Monopoly League at least respect
full hearing. In letter to us, the
Secretary of the National League,
Henry Nichols, Esq, gives this
statement of the character and pur-
poses Of the organization:
''Our purpose, as you know, is to
unite good men of all parties in a
we'll arranged effort to protect the
industries and rights of the public
I from the dangerous aggressions of
organized monopolies. The masses
a being rapidly enslaved by mo-
nopolistic combinations, which, by
using enormous wealth, together
with franchises and privileges OBJ
tanned, in many cases through cor
ruption and misrepresentation, are
subsidizing and controlling the
ballot-box, the Legislative hall, the
bench, the bar, the press, and some
times the pulpit To check this ten
dency, and remove the trouble in a
peaceable way, will'doubtless be a
difficult task; but we must enter
upon and accomplish it as speedily
as possible"
This is the way the League oper-
ates at elections:
THE INFLUENCE OF ANTI-MoNoP-
The monopoly papers in both
parties attribute the defeat of Mr..
Stanford in the 18th Senate District
New York, to party dissensions.
We place before you the following
facts from which you can draw
your own conclusions. The Anti
Monopoly League has been quietly
organizing throughout the State.
When the election consequent upon
the death of Senator Wagner was
announced, we turned our attention
to that district. Within a month
II branch leagues were formed
| there, more than one hundred thou
sand documents distributed, and a
district which had been repeatedly
debauched with money and which
was lookedtupon as one''of the surest
republican districts in the State
went largely democratic. WHY? AS
soon as it was announced that the
republicans had nominated mo-
nopoly candidate in the person of
Mr.. Stanford, a man who, in 1866,
voted for the increased fare bill on
the New York Central Railroad
and in 1868 for the Consolidation
| Stockwatering Bill each league was
invited to send delegates to an Anti
Monopoly Conference to be held al
Schenectady on the same day as the
| Democratic Convention, February
| 18th. The democrats were notified
that if they nominated man who
was sound on this question, he
would receive Anti Monopoly sup
port. They did so. Mr.. Baucus
signifed his approval of the princi-
pies of the Anti-M onopoly League
was endorsed by the Anti-Monopo-
ly Conference and all the Leagues
| in that district held meetings and
| did their best to elect him. Indeed
they made the only active canvass
that was made; the Democrats had
been beaten in this district so often
by monopoly money that they were
discouraged and apathetic. The
result is not, however, more surpris
ing than that in the 9Th Senatorial
District last fall. When it became
| evident that unless the Anti Mo.
nopoly League put candidate in
the field, Senator Hogan, with the
regular democratic nomination, and
no republican candidate in the field
would have a walk over, Mr. Boyd
was nominated by the Anti Monop
oily League, received the endorse
ment of Tammany and Irving Halls
and notwithstanding Mr.. Hogan re-
ceived the republican support in the
district in consequence of their
punching Mr.. Hogan's tickets, the
large majority of $500 by which he
was elected last time was wiped out
and Mr.. Boyd was elected. Is not
this indicative of the strength of the
Autobiography sentiment and OF
the necessity of both parties putting
forward candidates who will pro-
! tect tie public interest against the