260 Journal op the Department op Agriculture. 



in \\liicli a man lias to accept the price offered by the buyer," and yet 

 tliere is no liusiness like agriculture which responds to success better 

 when orf^anized. At the same time, however, co-operation is not a 

 panacea for all ills. If one examines the history of co-oj)eration 

 in any country one will find that it is a touch of necessity that has 

 broug-ht farmers together to work and, if necessary, to fig-ht in unison. 



Agriculture may have been poor as in the case of Denmark. 

 Up till the year 1864 Denmark was a country of large-scale cultiva- 

 tion, depending mainly on the export of grain for its foreign trade. 

 In that year, however, as the result of an unsuccessful war with 

 Prussia, the Danes lost the large mainland Province of Schleswig- 

 Holstein, and found themselves confronted by a tariff barrier which 

 effectually cut them off' from their German markets in which they had 

 been accustomed to sell the greater part of their produce. Farmers 

 everywhere were in distress, and the position was rendered worse by a 

 banking crisis. The Danish farmers were not slow in changing their 

 mode of farming and successfully supplying the English market with 

 poultry, eggs, bacon, and butter. This result has been achieved 

 almost entirely by means of the co-operative system. The Danes 

 early grasped the fact that the chief factor in establishing produce on 

 the market is uniformity both of quality and, as far as possible, of 

 quantity. They realized also that such nniformity could not be 

 brought about by individual farmers working withoiit organization. 



It was the " gombeen man " or midleman who was the cause of 

 agricultural co-operation in Ireland. The middleman with other 

 business interests very naturally tries to make a profit at either end of 

 his bargain. The middleman serves a most useful purpose where the 

 two factors of supply and demand cannot oth.erwise be brought into 

 touch with one anotiier, otherwise his presence is Imrdensome and 

 inimical to the community. 



Organization is not merely an effective weapon for defence 

 against profiteering and waste; it is an extremely iiseful aid to 

 business in circumventing waste of time, and failure to produce at 

 (heapest rates in best quality, and in quantities which command a 

 market. To quote Mr. Hockaday again, " For the marketing of perish- 

 able products an organization is al).tolufe]y iicressari/, for the many 

 questions arising in community shipping (i.e. transport) of such 

 products can only be handled satisfactorily through an organization." 



Dr. J. A. Hyan, a recognized authority in the United States on 

 questions of social economy, to which he has devoted much study, 

 writes : " Co-operation is a golden mean between individualism and 

 socialism. It includes all the good features of both. On the one 

 hand it demands and develops individual initiative and self-reliance, 

 makes the rewards of the individual depend upon his own efforts and 

 efficiency, and gives him full ownership of specific pieces of property. 

 On the other hand, it compels him to submerge much of the selfishness 

 and indifference to the Avelfare of his fellows, which characterizes our 

 individual economy. It embraces all the good that is claimed' for 

 socialism, because it induces men to consider and to work earnestly 

 for the common good, eliminates much of the waste of competitive 

 industry, rediu'es and redistributes the burdens of profits and interests, 

 and puis tlie workers in control of capital and industry. At the same 

 time it avoids the evils of an industrial despotism, or bureaucratic 



