THE NATIONAL NURSERYMAN 
265 
CO-OPEI{ATION vs COMPETITION 
By John II. Dayton, Painesville, Ohio. 
Bead at the Cleveland Convention, June S^lh, 1014. 
That old adage “competition is tlie life of trade” like 
many other accepted sayings of “ye olden times” based 
on part truth, when the world was younger, and almost 
every man trying at least, in a business way, to build his 
own fortunes up by pulling down that of his neighbor, 
should he consigned to the ash ])ile. To believe that 
any one, who will ohsene the tendencies of today, note 
the failures and successes, take into consideration not 
only the markets, gains and losses of today, or this par¬ 
ticular season, but size up, as well as possible, for a per- 
John II. Dayton, Sec.-Treas. of the Storrs <& Harrison Co. 
If any one failed to enjoy the excursion to the S. & II. 
Co., it was not the fault of “John.” He gave every 
one the “glad hand” and a hearty welcome. 
iod of time the advances of any successful, general line of 
trade or manufacturer, will agree, that it is not competi¬ 
tion, but co-operation, that is at the foundation of any 
true or moral gain. That no manufacturer of today, unless 
he has a controlled specialty, can expect to make the high¬ 
est per cent, of profit, or run his business with efficiency 
and intelligence, without team work with his competitors. 
No man working by himself or for himself, with the 
idea of pushing his products, only, and by all means open 
to fair and possibly unfair competiion, injuring the trade 
of his rivals, can ever hope for that knowledge of busi¬ 
ness problems and trade tendencies, that is absolutely ne¬ 
cessary for the best results. lie can never work to the 
best advantage, until he is in touch, with the best minds 
and methods in his industry, and is willing to co-opcu'ate 
in giving as well as taking. 
We nurserymen of toilay, ought to have intelligence 
;ind initiative enough to place our busiiu'ss along sidii of 
the highest grade of manufacturing enterprises instead 
ol being classed, as we usually ar(‘, as jiossibly one de¬ 
gree higher in a business way, than the farm(‘r, when 
that term is used to denoti; an unorganizc'd, competitive, 
selfish, every man for himself class of agriculturists. 
I do not want to [lose as a critic, and know that my 
judgment of opinion is of little value com})ared to that of 
many present here, hut I do believe, that frank, free dis¬ 
cussion of all matters jiertaining to our industry, at our 
national, sectional and state conventions, and through the 
columns of our trade journals, being as free to give our 
own methods, ideas and succi'sses, as w(‘ are to critiidsc 
those of our neighbors, will lu'lp evi'ii the Ix'st, broadest 
and most capable among us. 
Eor instance, what about th(‘ bullcliiis, surplus lists. 
(‘Ic., that Hood our mails evmy busy si'asoii, with [uices 
soiiK'times changing with (W(*ry issu(‘? Is lhei-(‘ a man 
in the trade that knows oik' day, not whai slock is worth, 
but what it will b(‘ offeriHl for the m'xl ? Is then* not 
some inherent value in our stock, sonu' basic pric(‘ on 
leading varieties and grades that may b(‘ (‘stablished in 
some way, and in some way adhennl to? If plums are 
\\oi'th .‘f^lOO.OO per M. the 1st of March, are they not worth 
that the 15th of April? Why should w(‘ he trying to sell 
Downing (looseberries at .j^GO.OO and -fTO.OO on above 
dates? Are we not proving to oursiHves and to our cus¬ 
tomers, and to the world in general, that riNillv our main 
idea of a selling organization is to cut our competitors’ 
prices? 
Do we not know that it is impossihh' in our business to 
plant and bud for seasons, oiu* to many yi'ars ahead, to 
exactly hit the market, and that w(‘ must grow some sur¬ 
plus stock, and figure on it, as one of the costs of running 
our business, and instead of the holy honor some of us 
seem to have of a brush pile, recognize it as just as neces¬ 
sary and legitimate an item of expense, as cultivating, for 
instance. 
Does our frantic offerings of surplus during the sjiring 
season, at lower and still lower })rices, add a single tree to 
the plantings of that season, elevate our business in any 
way, or in fact accomplish one single result, except that 
we some times beat our neighbor out of an order, and our¬ 
selves out of obtaining fair and reasonal)le prices for 
what we do sell. Again, most of us wholesale growers, 
at this and other Conventions, and during the coming sea¬ 
son, will be selling stock to customers in car lots, to be 
delivered this fall, for next spring’s .sales. Is it fair com¬ 
petition to issue lists next s])ring of the surplus .stock we 
have carried over, and offer to our customers in small 
quantities at as low, or lower ])rices than we received for 
large lots? Is it not true, that the surplus lists are lead¬ 
ing to as great a development of want lists, and that the 
trade is afraid to buy, unable to form any idea of what 
prices may be, and so send out lists of wants for every 
little lot wanted, expecting to, and receiving cut rates on 
every, such list? Is it not true that by this competition, we 
are not only putting the wholesale trade where they insist 
on lower than printed prices, but that we who issue retail 
