282 THE FARMER AS A COOPERATOR 



made possible only by the spirit of fraternity which is 

 cultivated in the lodges. But life insurance itself is essentially 

 altruistic, and even in these societies it is the expectation of 

 benefit to one's immediate family, and not the welfare of 

 mankind, which holds the lodges together. And mankind is 

 benefited just the same, as it will also be by successful 

 cooperation among all classes. 



Of course I do not belittle the influence of the fraternal 

 spirit, which naturalh^ grows up among those associated for a 

 common purpose, nor would I fail to make use of it, as the 

 British cooperative stores and the life-insurance societies do, 

 but I think that the avowed motive of all business action 

 should be the economic advantage of those concerned in it. It 

 may properly be promoted, and helped through its infancy, by 

 unremunerated work contributed from altruistic motives, but 

 a cooperative enterprise when once established should be run 

 on business principles. Its directors may, and usually will, 

 contribute their time, except in very large societies, but 

 beyond that the society should expect no gifts. When the 

 sense of mutual advantage will not hold the members of a 

 society together, it is usually an indication that they have not 

 yet been suffi.ciently disciplined by disastrous competition. 

 They need a few seasons more and should have it. When 

 they have been reduced to the necessary distress they will 

 cooperate. Until that time they can not, so far as my observa- 

 tion goes, be held together by their love of other people. It 

 would be well if they could, but they can not. The logical 

 end of cooperation is the formation of an effective trust. 

 Whatever stops short of tliat is by so much the less effective. 

 The same economic pressure which resulted in the formation 

 of the Sugar Trust also resulted in the fornnition of the 

 llaisin Trust of the California raisin-growers, which h:is been 

 in existence for a year as I write, and mny or may not be 

 permanent. The motives of those who united in it were 

 identical with those who united in the Sugar Trust. A much 

 larger number of individuals were concerned, and tliey were 

 enduring a far greater degree of suff'ering than is likely to 

 befall a body of ca])italists or manufacturers, but it seems to 



