The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1889-03-05
THE RULE OF THE RINGS.

-
Wherever a representative of the
people has distinguished himself as an
opponent of railroad combinations,
trusts or other aggregations of capital
his career has been cut off. Some
striking examples in various parts of
the country.
at is a singular fact" said a we'll
known Western correspondent, that
nearly every man in the present Con-
gress who stood up for the rights of
the people against monopolies, trusts,
railroad influences and corrupt syndi-
Gates and combinations, has been
struck down in the house of his
friends, while the men who stood by
corporate interests have mostly been
returned. This is a sad commentary
upon the gratitude of the people, but
it is the truth: How can public men
be expected to sacraice themselves If
the very persons for whom the sacrl-
fee is made do not stand by them ?
The example of Isdor Raynor is a
notable one. He championed the
cause of the people; introduced the
first bill that was offered in Congress
against trusts; fought the monopoly
of the Reading Railroad and the
Western Union Telegraph, and was
recognized in Congress as the un-
finching opponent of the moneyed
rings that are depredating upon the
people. His district sends a Repubi-
can in his place. In Minnesota Judge
Thomas Wilson, one of the ablest men
in Congress, and Judge John l.. Nc
Donald, of the same State, recognized
anti-monopolists, have both been de-
feated. In Michigan, Melbourne 81.
Ford, Timothy E. Tarsney and Spen-
Ger o. Fisher, all of them outspoken
opponents of Western railroad rings,
have not been returned.
In Iowa Gen. Weaver and Albert
III. Anderson, who have fought mo-
nopoly at every step in Congress, have
shared the same fate the railroads
made an open fight against them and
in New Hampshire Luther F. Nc
Kinney was beaten by the same In
huence. In Missouri John O'Neill
and Martin Clardy were defeated IN
strong Democratic districts. In Con
necticut Robert Vance was the victim
of large manufacturing monopolies
located in his district. In Massachu-
sets John E. Russell, who SO ably
fought tariff monopoly, does not come
back. In California Thomas Thomp-
SON was beaten by the Wine and Fruit
Trusts of California, and in Wiscon-
sin Henry Smith, who defeated the
homestead settlers bill against the
Pacific Railroad rings, has been beaten,
and SO on pretty well through the list.
This is not a very edifying spectacle.
But it is safe to say that these men,
Judging from the calitre and determ
nation that have distinguished them
in the present Congress, will not per-
NIT a temporary reverse to discourage !
them in the great and laudable work
that they have undertaken, but, on
the contrary, they will be heard of in
the very neal future. Monopoly and
corruption have scored a momentary
triumph, in most cases selecting I'M
known men as their candidates and
making a still hunt against the repre-
~sentatives of the people, but the time
will come when the people will wake
up to the situation. Not n of the
gentlemen mentioned proposes to con
test their seat, as there is very little
prospect that a Republican majority,
controlled by corporate and mOnODOly
influences would permit any of them
to be seated, although, in nearly every
case their defeat was brought about by
corruption and fraud.-E9chonge.