532 



SCIENCE, 



[Vol. VIII,, No. 301 



note that probably two-thirds were aided by co- 

 operative building and loan associations. Dr. 

 Shaw attributes this remarkable success to co-op- 

 eration ; for, so far as he is aware, no cooper out- 

 side of the co-operative shops has similarly pros- 

 pered. 



The history of the other six co-operative barrel 

 companies given in this chapter is in the main 

 similar to that first noted. 



From the experience of these companies. Dr. 

 Shaw concludes that they are superior in stability 

 to the non-co-operative shops ; that co-operators 

 as proprietors and capitalists have a manifest ad- 

 vantage in competition, for, if necessary, they 

 can dispense with profits upon capital, and rely 

 for support upon their wages as workingmen. 



The lessons learned from the experience of these 

 coopers can be applied in other branches of co- 

 operation, especially where piece-work is possible, 

 or w^here labor has greater relative importance 

 than capital in production. 



The account of the Co-operative agricultural 

 colony, established near Minneapolis in April, 

 1886, contains many valuable suggestions ; and, if 

 this colony meets with the success indicated by 

 present prospects, it will doubtless lead to the 

 establishment of other co-operative colonies. A 

 co-operative agricultural colony is apt to suggest 

 the idea of a communistic body like the Shakers ; 

 and to correct this notion Dr. Shaw thus distin- 

 guishes them: "Communism and co-operation 

 are antipodal in principle. Communism denies 

 the right of private property. Co-operation pro- 

 poses to enable the destitute to acquire private 

 property. Communism usually asserts control 

 over family relations, and it sacrifices personal 

 liberty. Co-operation adds to the liberty of the 

 individual because it enables him to ' pay the price 

 of his industrial freedom ; ' and, as I have shown 

 in the case of the coopers, it supplies the condi- 

 tions that are most favorable to the family insti- 

 tution." 



In giving an account of co-operative profit-shar- 

 ing in the Pillsbury mills, he says, "From the 

 employers' stand-point, I have Mr. Pillsbm-y's as- 

 surance that it pays.'' It brings about pleasant 

 relations between employer and employee, and 

 works to mutual advantage. The system is not, 

 however, without its inconveniences and petty 

 annoyances. 



The Minneapolis co-operative mercantile com- 

 pany was established by the co-operative coopers 

 in 1885, and its success has been very satisfactory. 

 There is no reason why this form of co-operation 

 which has proved so advantageous to working- 

 men in England should not have like results in 

 this country. 



In addition to those co-operative industries 

 mentioned above, Minneapolis has a co-operative 

 laundry, a co-operative painters' association, co- 

 operative building associations, and other co-op- 

 erative enterprises whose forms of organization 

 are admirably sketched in this monograph. 



Dr. Shaw attributes the fresh impulse now be- 

 ing manifested among workingmen to join in co- 

 operative effort chiefly to the growth and activity 

 of the knights of labor. 



Co-operation is not prescribed as a panacea for 

 all the present ills of labor. The author rec- 

 ognizes that there must be improvement along 

 many lines, but holds that within certain limits 

 co-operation has not only immediate applicability,, 

 but also great remedial virtue. The moral effects 

 are reckoned its highest success. It makes men 

 provident, temperate, and self-reliant. Co-opera- 

 tion is not a religion, and calls for no renuncia- 

 tions. It is merely a question of business advan- 

 tage, and those engaged in it would not hesitate to 

 give up the system if their condition would be 

 bettered thereby. 



This contribution to the labor literature of the 

 day will doubtless be widely read, and lead to 

 good results. 



PARIS LETTER. 



The very sad and unexpected news of Paul 

 Bert's death reached us yesterday, exciting much 

 surprise, as it was scarcely known that he was ill. 

 As a politician, M. Bert was a man of passionately 

 strong opinions ; and his anti-clerical efforts, 

 which soon became an anti-religious warfare, 

 made him many bitter enemies. As to his work 

 in Tonquin, it can hardly be appreciated, as it had. 

 only begun. As a scientist, M. Bert had already 

 been virtually dead many years. He had almost 

 entirely given up work of a physiological nature, 

 his attention being given altogether to politics. I 

 have had the pleasure of meeting M. Bert two or 

 three times in his laboratory, and of listening to 

 some of his conversations with his assistants, while 

 he wras discussing newr experiments and exjjlain- 

 ing the methods that ought to be followed ; and, 

 as he spoke, new ideas appeared to be constantly 

 coming. With a trained and intelligent corps of 

 assistants, he would have done great work. His 

 head was ever full of new ideas, of ingenious 

 methods, but he required assistants to catch the 

 ideas as they came, and to work according to his 

 directions. 



At a recent meeting of the Academy of sciences, 

 M. Pasteur read an interesting paper on the prog- 

 ress of anti-hydrophobic inoculation. Up to the 

 31st of October, 2,490 persons had been treated at 



