A Flash in the Pan The Brief Existence of the Anti-Monopoly Party Spencer Weber Waller * Joshua Fink ** While antitrust began in the United States as part of the politics of the nineteenth century populist movement, it has become in modern times a highly specialized conversation among experts that has lost much of its political punch and, indeed the attention or interest of the general public. 1 However, the political impact of antitrust and its role in presidential politics lasted well into the twentieth century. The 1912 presidential campaign between Woodrow Wilson, William Howard Taft, and Theodore Roosevelt included a vigorous debate about the need for increased antitrust enforcement and legislative change to the Sherman Act and the recently judicially declared rule of reason. Following World War II through the 1970s, the platforms of both parties contained fulsome praise for antitrust. 2 From today s vantage point, this public political role and prominence for antitrust seems somewhat quaint. This brief essay seeks to recover a bit of that old time political fervor and highlight a time now buried in the mists of history when concerns over corporate power were so intense that they led to the creation of their own political party - the Anti-Monopoly Party, and a presidential campaign focused on this issue. Towards the end of the nineteenth century the populist movement lead to the * Professor and Director, Institute for Consumer Antitrust Studies, Loyola University Chicago School of Law. ** Class of 2003, Loyola University Chicago School of Law. 1 See Richard Hofstadler, Whatever Happened to the Antitrust Movement, in THE PARANOID STYLE IN AMERICAN POLITICS AND OTHER ESSAYS (1955); Gary Minda, Antitrust at Century s End, 48 SMU L. Rev. 1749, 1759 (1995). 2 See generally III NATIONAL PARTY PLATFORMS (1978).
creation of several national political parties comprised mostly of farmers and debtors. 3 Out of this movement sprung the Anti-Monopoly Party and its better-known brother the Greenback Party. Both rose in reaction to post Civil War depression known as the Panic of 1873. 4 The Greenback Party enjoyed a great deal more of the national spotlight than the Anti-Monopoly Party. The Greenbacks organized earlier, officially in 1874 at the first national convention, and ran a presidential candidate in the next three elections while electing several congressmen during this time, either on straight Greenback tickets or as a fusion with Democrats. 5 The Anti-Monopoly Party, on the other hand, did not organize until 1884 and had only a brief, unsuccessful existence. 6 They held their first and only national convention in Chicago on May 14, 1884. In attendance were delegates from previously organized Anti- Monopoly Parties or Leagues from several states including New York 7, California 8, and Iowa 9 and several states and territories that did not have officially organized parties. 10 The turnout was not impressive and totaled only 130 delegates from 17 states and territories. 11 The Anti-Monopolists, like the Greenbacks, were a party formed due to economic duress and labor hardship. The farmers that made up the party felt that they were at the mercy of big business and were desperate to gain any relief. Most oppressive they felt were the railroads, banks, and the telegraph. The Anti-Monopolists saw the power of these industries going almost entirely unchecked. Fewer and fewer, yet increasingly 3 See generally LAW RENCE GOODWYN, THE POPULIST MOVEMENT (1978); WILLIAM B. HESSELTINE, THIRD PARTY MOVEMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES (1962). 4 KRUSCHKE, EARL R., ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THIRD PARTIES IN THE UNITED STATES, 37, 71 (1991). 5 POLITICAL PARTIES & ELECTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, 271-75 ( L. Sandy Musial, ed. 1991). 6 Id. at 179-181. 7 BOLD BEN BUTLER, Chicago Daily Tribune, May 15, 1884 at 7. 8 See Internet at http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~mkduggan/railroad.html. (Last viewed at 9/20/01). 9 HAYNES, FRED E., THIRD PARTY MOVEMENTS SINCE THE CIVIL WAR, 67-88, (1966). 10 BOLD BEN BUTLER, supra note 9at 7. 11 BOLD BEN BUTLER, supra note 9at 7. 2
larger companies were controlling these three powerful industries. As the companies grew so did their economic and political power, which was being used to oppress the farmers that relied heavily on these industries. 12 The Platform This desperate situation helped shaped the platform that the national convention adopted in 1884. The platform outlined the parties ten major planks including: 1) demanding justice of both labor and capital by protecting the rights of all instead of the privileges of the few; 2) controlling corporations by law; 3) calling for the reduction of the national debt; 4) creating just laws to protect the equality of all citizens; 5) demanding that Congress control and regulate transportation, banking, and communication industries; 6) establishing a bureau of labor statistics, the use of arbitration to settle disputes between industry and labor, an eight-hour work day, and the importation of foreign labor under contract be made illegal; 7) passing an effective Inter-State Commerce bill; 8) electing U.S. Senators by a direct vote of the people, enacting a graduated income tax, and a low tariff; 9) ending grants of public land to corporations; and 10) denouncing discrimination against agriculture. 13 The platform claimed that the great instruments of commerce (railroad, banks, and telegraph) were mercilessly controlled by giant monopolies and that this had a crushing effect on labor and prevented competition. The platform further stated that these monopolies have inflicted countless wrongs upon the toiling millions. The Anti- Monopolists held that the tariff at the time was one that heavily favored these monopolies and that it should be reformed into one that was in the interest of labor. Land grants that 12 POLITICAL PARTIES & ELECTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, supra note 7 at 179. 13 PORTER, KIRK H. AND DONALD BRUCE JOHNSON, NATIONAL PARTY PLATFORMS 1840-1964, 64 (1966). 3
had been given to corporations only served to help feed the monopolies and therefore the grants should only be given to settlers. In the end the platform called for the overthrow of monopoly in every shape when and wherever found. 14 In addition to drafting a platform the delegates at the national convention nominated a presidential ticket for the 1884 election. A total of 130 delegates voted on three nominees. The turnout was disappointing and the very monopolies the delegates had gathered to confront were blamed in part for not giving the Anti-Monopolists the same rates as those given to delegates of other parties. 15 General Benjamin F. Butler received 122 of the 130 votes cast and won the nomination handily despite not attending the convention. 16 Gen. Benjamin F. Butler Benjamin F. Butler was born in New Hampshire in 1818 and graduated from Waterville College. A lawyer by trade, he developed a lucrative practice in Massachusetts specializing in criminal defense. 17 Butler began his long political career prior to the Civil War serving two terms in the Massachusetts state legislature as a Democrat, where he made a name for himself as being sympathetic to the poor. 18 As a Democrat, he was a good friend of Jefferson Davis 19, but at the outbreak of the Civil War gave his support to the Union. 20 Butler volunteered for the war and as brigadier general of the Massachusetts militia won acclaim for leading the capture of Baltimore from confederate forces, prompting President Lincoln to promote Butler to the rank of major 14 Id at 64. 15 BOLD BEN BUTLER, supra note 9 at 7. 16 BOLD BEN BUTLER, supra note 9 at 7. 17 See Internet at http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/usasbutlerb.htm (Last viewed at 9/20/01). 18 Id. 19 SEITZ, DON C., THE ALSO RANS ; GREAT MEN WHO MISSED MAKING THE PRESIDENTIAL GOAL, at 313 (1928). 20 Internet, supra note 19. 4
general in the Union army. 21 Overall, Butler s military career had moments of great success and others of total failure as a leader. One his greatest contributions to the war involved runaway slaves. Butler refused to return runaway slaves to their owners stating that because the South had seceded they were a foreign nation and the slaves were therefore considered contraband of war and Union property. 22 Butler later held the city of New Orleans and was given the nickname the Beast for his harsh treatment of the Confederates. At one point he hanged a man for tearing down a United States flag, and later declared that women of the city that showed disrespect to Union soldiers would be treated the same as prostitutes. 23 Like his military career, Butler s post Civil War political career was filled with highs and lows. According to one account, Lincoln had wanted Butler to join him as the vice-presidential nomination for the election of 1864 and sent an aide to ask Butler about joining the campaign. Butler declined, joking that he would only accept if the president promised to die within three months of inauguration. 24 After the war Butler returned to a life of politics, this time as a Republican. He was elected to the 40 th Congress and associated himself with the Radical Republicans. Butler served from 1867 to 1875 and from 1877 to 1879. He was an outspoken critic of President Andrew Johnson and was a key figure in his impeachment trial. During his career Butler ran several unsuccessful campaigns for the governor of Massachusetts as a Republican. In 1882 he finally won the seat as a joint Democratic-Greenback candidate. 25 Presidential Campaign of 1884 21 Internet, supra note 19. 22 POLITICAL PARTIES & ELECTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, supra note 7 at 631. 23 SEITZ, supra note 21 298-319. 24 Internet, supra note 19. 25 See Internet at http://elections.harpweek.com/2biographies/bio-1884-full.asp?uniqueid=3&year=1884 (Last viewed 9/20/01). 5
Butler did not attend the Anti-Monopoly National Convention that nominated him as their presidential candidate. Later the same month, the Greenback National Convention nominated the same presidential ticket. Butler, however, was once again a member of the Democratic Party and was a delegate at the Democratic National Convention. Butler was a key figure at the Convention fighting to add planks favoring currency inflation and a protective tariff to the platform, 26 but left the party after Democrats nominated Grover Cleveland. It was only then, some three months after being nominated, that he accepted the nominations of the Anti-Monopoly Party and the Greenback Party. 27 The campaign led by Butler in 1884 was, by most accounts, uninspired and not surprisingly led to only 177,000 popular votes, less than 2%, and zero electoral votes. Butler attempted to fuse his platform with the weaker of the two parties depending on what state he was in. Butler s plan, by his own account, was a fusion of the greenback party and the Democrats in the Western States and in New Jersey and New York. 28 The fusion failed virtually everywhere and overall little support was given to Butler. The campaign of 1884 sealed the fate of the Anti-Monopoly Party. Very little has been written about the Anti-Monopolists as though they were almost swallowed up by the presence of the Greenback Party and the unorthodox campaign of Benjamin Butler. The insignificance of the party in the 1884 election can be easily demonstrated by Butler s own words. In his autobiography, which carries on for over 1,000 pages, there is no mention of his nomination and campaign as an Anti-Monopolist. 29 Also telling is that political historians have given very little account to Butler s campaign in 1884. Don C. Seitz, in his work on great men who missed making the presidential goal makes no 26 SEITZ, supra note 21 at 318. 27 HAYNES, supra note 11 at 149. 28 BUTLER, BENJAMIN F., BUTLER S BOOK, at 983 (1892). 29 Id. at 981-984. 6
mention of the Butler the Anti-Monopoly candidate and barely mentions Butler s participation in the 1884 campaign in his chapter dedicated to the Beast. 30 Despite the insignificance of the Anti-Monopoly Party in the 1884 election, several of their planks were eventually adopted by the mainstream political bodies and put into action and the politics of the time led to the eventual introduction of the legislation that became the Sherman Act. For this alone, we owe the Anti-Monopoly a debt of gratitude and an obligation to remember that antitrust is not just a specialized area of legal practice but has a long and proud tradition as a vital part of American politics and even presidential campaigns. 30 SEITZ, supra note 21 at 318. 7