yo AGRICULTURE OF MAINE. 



For general principles nothing can be better than the history 

 of distributive cooperation in Great Britain. 



I emphasize the importance of reading cooperative history 

 for the reason that not all the Canadian apple selling associa- 

 tions have been successful. A careful study of the causes of 

 their failure will show that in every case there has been a viola- 

 tion of some of the principles that are now regarded by those 

 who have studied the subject, as fundamental to cooperation. 



Perhaps the greatest mistake which fruit growers have made 

 in reference to cooperation is to regard it as an isolated move- 

 ment for the purpose of securing them a few dollars more than 

 they would otherwise obtain. In its broader outlook coopera- 

 tion is a friendly society or a benefit association. European 

 cooperators have recognized this and have taken for their motto, 

 "Each for all, and all for each." Taking this view, cooperation 

 implies not only getting something that you did not have before, 

 but also giving something or helping some one whom you could 

 not otherwise help, and the giving or helping end is quite as 

 important as the receiving end. 



The prevailing system of marketing is founded upon com- 

 petition, the practical motto of which is, "Every man for him- 

 self." The natural result of this is that a few individuals 

 receive most of the prizes. C. R. Fay in Cooperation at Home 

 and Abroad defines a cooperative society as "An association 

 for the purpose of joint trading originating among the weak 

 and conducted always in an unselfish spirit, on such terms that 

 all who are prepared to assume the duties of membership may 

 share in its rewards in proportion to the degree in which they 

 make use of their association." 



The late Chief of the Fruit Division of Canada, A. McMeil, 

 Esq., said : — "It will be necessary, in the course of what follows, 

 to point out some of the evils of the ordinary competitive sys- 

 tem in connection with the apple industry, and in doing so it 

 must be definitely understood that individual growers and buy- 

 ers cannot be held altogether responsible for the disabilities 

 under which the apple industry undoubtedly labors. It is the 

 system under which they are working that is most at fault. It 

 oflfers at every turn incentives to untruthfulness and misrepre- 

 sentation. It places in the hands of unscrupulous growers and 

 unscrupulous buyers an effective instrument of fraud and ren- 



