1 Maz., 1898.] QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. 171 
Co-operation. 
Trrar the farmers, dairymen, graziers, and all who derive their livelihood from 
the land are benefited by co-operation has been clearly demonstrated. When 
produce has to pass through many hands before reaching the consumer, it 
must be evident that a portion of the possible profit must go to those inter- 
mediary agents who act for both producer and consumer. What we wish to 
emphasise is, that the whole profit may remain in the producers’ hands by 
their working together for the common benefit. We strongly advise farmers 
to read the following paper read by Mr. G. Monks at a meeting of the Forest 
Range Branch of the South Australian Bureau of Agriculture, and published 
in the February number of the Journal of Agriculture. We reproduce the 
paper here in the hope that it will clear up any doubts which some may yet 
entertain as to the advantages to be derived from co-operation :— 
_ The first question to be answered is, What is co-operation? The 
answer is, The unity of individuals to work together for the common good. It 
is at once a selfish and yet a very unselfish system—selfish, because it betters 
the condition of the individual; unselfish, because each individual helps by 
this means to better the condition of his fellows. How does it better such 
condition? By or on account of its being the means of better prices being 
realised, and better and more markets opened up for produce than can be done 
under any other system. By the present cut-throat system, or non-system, 
everyone is struggling to get rid of his produce, entering at once into direct 
competition with his neighbour. The result is that he not only injures his 
fellow, but, whilst doing so, succeeds in cutting his own throat. 
Co-operation means the abolition of individual competition as far as the 
marketing is concerned. We shall still have competition, but it will be reduced 
to a minimum, as it will then only be between large companies. 
The question is asked in some quarters, “‘ What shall be done with pro- 
duce in times of glut?” The answer to that is, “There willbe no gluts. If 
eyery consumer gets what he or she wants, they can take all that is now 
produced and a great deal more.”’ 
Under the present style of distribution, the produce having to pass 
through so many hands, all requiring rofits, one-half or more than one-half 
of the consumers cannot afford to purchase on account of high prices, and, ay 
a consequence, they are compelled to go without. 
Under a co-operative system, producers and consumers are brought 
together. ‘There is a bond established between them at once. he producer, 
whilst receiving more for his produce, is in a position to supply the consumer: 
at a much lower rate, thereby increasing the purchasing power of the buyer 
almost, if not quite, twofold. : 
Now, the question arises—How can a co-operative system be organised. 
and worked ? In the first place, the consumers should have the whole thing 
in their own hands, so as to secure the whole profits accruing therefrom. A 
meeting should be held to see if such a society is required, and also if the 
producers are willing to work together for such aims and objects. These 
questions being answered in the affirmative, a committee of five should be 
chosen to work the matter up and float it into a co-operative company; such 
committee to be allowed, as compensation for such services, 5 per cent. upon 
