THE PRINCETON CONVENTION.

313

in not being consulted in the matter, and resolved to hold a meeting on the subject, not with any intention of supplanting Judge Lawrence (whom the originators of the Convention intended to nominate), but with the object of showing that the people were determined to be consulted on questions affecting their interests. Unfortunately, between the calling and the meeting of the Convention, Judge Lawrence, in accepting the nomination, expressed himself in contemptuous terms about the power of the people. This put the farmers on their mettle. They considered themselves as much entitled to be represented as any other class, and determined to run a candidate of their own. Such was the origin of the Princeton Convention.

THE PRINCETON CONVENTION.

This meeting ventilated farmers' grievances fully, and unanimously passed the following resolutions:

Resolved, That the provisions of the Constitution of 1870, of the State of Illinois, in regard to railroads, are, equally with the other provisions of the Constitution, the supreme law of the State, and our Legislature should provide the necessary legislation to execute such provisions, and our courts should sustain and adopt the same.

Resolved, That the charters of the railroads in this State are not contracts in the sense that they are paramount to the Constitution and laws of this State, and that the provisions of the Constitution of the State in regard to railroads, and necessary legislation to enforce the same, are not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States.

Resolved, That the railroads in this State are public highways, and their operators common carriers, and the General Assembly, as required by the Constitution of this State, should pass laws establishing reasonable maximum rates of charge for the transportation of passengers and freight on the different railroads in this State, and should also pass laws to correct abuses and to define and prevent extortion in the rate of freight and passenger tariffs on such roads;

and such legislation should be sustained and enforced by the judiciary of the State.

Resolved, That we will support no man for office who is not in accordance with the sentiments of these resolutions; and that we recommend to the anti-monopolists of this State to nominate such candidates for Supreme and Circuit Judges as are pledged to sustain the Constitution and laws of this State in accordance therewith.

tion Man.

The Convention, with great unanimity, then nominated Hon. Alfred M. Craig, of Knox County, as candidate for the Supreme Judgeship. No pledge was required from Judge Craig, and no questions were asked in respect to his opinions on any subject. His record as a member of the Convention which framed the present Constitution of Illinois was such as to satisfy his supporters that

their own.

A Princeton Conven- his sentiments were in harmony with He was known to be an able and accomplished lawyer, though not possessing the profound legal knowledge of his opponent.

In nearly all the judicial districts, farmers' candidates were put in nomination for the vacant offices, and in those. cases in which there was any opposition there was a degree of bitterness shown which would have been better in place in a partisan political contest.

THE RESULT AT THE POLLS.

In nearly every circuit, where the farmers nominated a candidate, they were successful, and the exceptional cases were uniformly in sections where their organization had not been fully perfected.

THE RESULT AT THE POLLS.

315

The grand, central point, attracting universal attention, was, of course, the Fifth District, where the LawrenceCraig contest was going on. There the opposition to the farmers' candidate was powerful, united, and determined. Judge Lawrence had the support of all the legal talent of the State. Some of the leading journals espoused his cause, and in his own county every local interest that could possibly be brought to bear was arrayed against his opponent. On the other hand, however, he had to contend with the active, relentless animosity of the Chicago Journal, the editor of which, a short time previously, he had fined for contempt of court. The State Farmers' Association did not take an active part in the contest, some of its officers not sympathizing with the opposition to Judge Lawrence. Yet the farmers voted together manfully, and Craig was elected by a majority of about 3,000.

THE RESULT OF THE ELECTION MISCONSTRUED.

This judicial contest attracted much attention, particularly in the East, where, up to this time, the Farmers' Movement had been reckoned of small account. The Eastern journals, misinformed of the true state of the case, stigmatized it as an attempt to pack the judiciary in favor of a class; declared that the judges were pledged beforehand to decide cases regardless of the law; that it was to punish Judge Lawrence for conscientiously deciding a case in favor of a railroad that Judge Craig was elected; that it was an outrage which ought to be denounced every-where, etc.

The utmost that can be alleged against Judge Craig is, that he accepted a nomination from a convention which had made a certain declaration of principles, but which will all bear examination, and to which no one can reasonably ob

ject. Judge Craig gave no pledge whatever, and the wording of the resolutions of the Princeton Convention merely expressed the resolution of the farmers to support only candidates who would decide cases in strict accordance with the law and the Constitution of the State.

Still, it was an understood thing with the farmers of Illinois that, in the judicial contest, the battle between

monopolies and the people had begun in earnest. They were anxious to know, at the mouth of a judiciary unbiased and above suspicion, whether the railway acts of the State were unconstitutional or not. If there were barriers by reason of which an honest judge could not confirm existing laws, they wanted to know it in order that the State Constitution might be amended. If necessary, they even looked forward to initiating a movement for amending the Constitution of the United States.

CHAPTER XXVII.

THE AMERICAN CHEAP TRANSPORTATION ASSO

CIATION.

THE GRAIN GROWERS" TRANSPORTATION AND LOAN ASSOCIATION,

Subsequent to the first convention at Bloomington, Illinois, there was a meeting held in New York City, at which was formed the "Grain Growers' Transportation and Loan Association," a grand co-operative scheme, whose capital was placed at $10,000,000, in 200,000 shares of $50 each. It was organized under the laws of the State of New York, with a numerous Board of Trustees, as follows: E. R. Shankland, President Iowa Agricultural Society; John Scott, Ex-Lieutenant-Governor, S. B. Dumont, and John Grinnell, all of Iowa; O. P. Whitcomb, Wm. L. Ames, and Charles A. Wheaton, respectively, President, member of Executive Committee, and Treasurer of the State Agricultural Society of Minnesota; B. R. Hinckley, President, and Wm. R. Taylor, member of the Executive Committee, Wisconsin Agricultural Society; Edward Pier, of Wisconsin; Henry C. Wheeler, Commissioner of Statistics Illinois Farmers' Convention; Aaron T. Bates, and Carlos Glazier, of Illinois; Samuel Edwards, President Illinois Horticultural Society, and Samuel P. Adams, Michigan.

It was thought that farmers would subscribe liberally,