WORKING CREDIT FOR FARMERS. 231 



capacity." That assists individuals in difficulties. It 

 does nothing for Agriculture. It helps the wealthy. It 

 could not possibly benefit that large host of coming small 

 holders of whom we are now thinking. It shuts out all 

 the financially weak men- — a very large number— whom 

 in Germany Raiffeisen made it his particular aim to help 

 on their legs, others imitating him elsewhere. And even 

 for financially stronger men it does not represent the ever- 

 ready, ever-available, easy, matter-of-course credit which 

 merchants and manufacturers trade upon and of which 

 farmers stand in no less urgent need. It makes wealth 

 tYie foundation of credit, not its prize. In spite of the credit 

 given to substantial men who happen to be farmers, in the 

 United States — after looking into the specifically agricul- 

 tural business done by the Bank of France — millions and 

 millions — Mr. Myron Herrick, a banker himself, and at 

 that time United States Ambassador at Paris, had to say 

 to himself : " We possess nothing like it." Here were not 

 overdrafts merely, such as Mr. Leroy Lewis's Committee 

 of the Central Chamber of Agriculture has contended that 

 co-operative credit consists of. Here was agricultural 

 " paper " in millions, down to drafts for five francs, which 

 came in and went out as regularly and as currently as 

 bills of exchange at a commercial bill-broker's. And French 

 Agriculture feels the benefit. 



The excuse sometimes put forward, that we possess suffi- 

 cient credit for our agricultural requirements, will not stand 

 the test of examination. 



Unquestionally there is a certain amount of contrariety 

 to the ways of Co-operative Credit in the nature and the 

 long engrained habits of our farmers. We have a Cappa- 

 docian for our patron saint, and with his guardianship we 

 seem to have accepted also his Cappadocian skin, which 

 does not readily take in new " wrinkles." Sir Horace 

 Plunkett puts it in a different way when comparing our 

 English slow-coaches (in this matter) with his more quickly 

 moving Irishmen, who have adopted the new practice 

 promptly and successfully. Irishmen, so he says, are quicker 

 to receive a message in one ear ; but the trouble is that it 



