TRANSACTIONS OF SECTION F, 605 
tion. This is what Great Britain through its wholesale organisations in 
Manchester and Glasgow has done; and this is precisely what other nations are 
in process of doing. Great Britain took the lead, because it was the first to 
possess, as the result of the industrial revolution, a distinct working-class, which 
proceeded to organise itself as wage-earners in a trade-union and as wage-spenders 
in a co-operative store. 
‘Three problems at present confront the stores in Great Britain :— 
(1) The relation between the stores and the land. 
In Denmark and Switzerland, the peasant proprietors in addition to their 
productive associations have also their own retail and wholesale stores. In Great 
Britain the farmers are only just beginning to co-operate for production, and the 
agricultural labourers are almost totally unorganised. Is it desirable that the 
stores should own productive establishments on the land? The erection of 
creameries in Ireland by the two British wholesales has been resisted on the 
ground that it obstructs co-operation among the resident farmers as producers. 
Further, is it probable that the inhabitants of the land, whether farmers or 
labourers, will become in large numbers members of the stores, most of which are 
recruited from the towns? This is partially realised in some districts of England, 
where the farmers and labourers sell their produce to the store and take provisions 
in exchange. 
(2) The relations between the retail stores and the wholesale. 
In Great Britain the hold of the wholesale on the stores has tightened with 
the growth of the movement. By what means, therefore, can the strength of 
unified organisation be retained without a sacrifice of that democratic freshness 
which marked the self-sprung and self-directed work of the early pioneers ? 
(3) The attitude of the store-movement towards Socialism. 
If the stores mingle in politics, they may degenerate into mere party instru- 
ments. If on the other hand they confine themselves to strictly business opera- 
tions, there is greater danger of their becoming a working-class aristocracy, 
looking askance at their poorer and more undisciplined brethren. How far will 
this ever-growing army of organised co-operators, comprising already the élite of 
the working classes, be able to win the lower strata of working men and women 
without modifying that strict neutrality in politics and religion which has 
hitherto distinguished the store-movement in Great Britain ? 
2. Co-operative Production from the Labour Co-partnership Standpoint. 
By Amos Many. 
The principles of labour co-partnership in production are, briefly, that every 
worker should have the opportunity of becoming a partner in the concern in which 
he is employed, and should share in the development, control, and direction of 
the business. In the co-operative movement there are two schools of thought, 
represented by the English Co-operative Wholesale Society, called the Federal 
system, on the one hand, and the Labour Co-partnership Association on the 
other. In the former system co-operative distribution societies join together to 
produce the articles they need. In their workshop employees occupy the same 
position as they do in any ordinary workshop. The results of such trading 
are given back in dividends to the shareholding societies. The worker, as a 
worker, has no share in the profits or responsibilities, as is the case in what 
are called independent productive societies. These are composed of sharehold- 
ing societies and individuals; every worker is allowed—and in some instances 
obliged—to become a shareholder in the society; a fixed portion of the profits is 
paid to the workers, and they share in the responsibility and control of the 
business by voting for the committee of management, and in many cases have 
seats upon the directorate. The author claimed that this latter system comes 
