1 Ava., 1899.] QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. * 157 
and Mr. Swayne’s paper, I am fully in accord with it. If farmers will join 
together in a system of co-operation, they will better themselves to a very 
considerable extent. Even in the purchase of implements farmers will save 
themselves considerable expense by availing themselves of the benefits of 
the principle. 
Mr. E. Denman (Mackay): The expression cheap money is, I think, a mis- 
nomer. What the farmer wants is reliable money. The difference between 5 
and 8 per cent. never broke a farmer. If he has had it for a stated period, and 
one or two bad crops overtake him, he is not in danger of being called upon for 
principal and interest. The mills that have been closed have not been shut up 
through cheap money or through want of money—in fact, some of them 
belong to very rich men. Few farmers can undertake drainage, owing 
to its expense and the number of years over which its work extends. 
In England, some 50 years ago, the Government advanced something 
like 4,000,000 sterling for drainage purposes, and two years ago all 
of it had been repaid, with the exception of some £9,000, which shows 
that the Government had been able to render very necessary aid without 
loss to itself. As an instance of the advantages of reliable money, I may 
instance the case of the central mills. What would have been the position of 
these if they had borrowed from a private bank? After the two or three bad 
seasons, the money would have been ealled in. During the bad seasons, how- 
ever, the Government made the payments of interest and redemption easier, and 
so the crisis was tided over. 4 
Mr. J. Hupson (Rosewood): In the central mills you had cheap money as 
well as reliable. 
Mr. E. Denman: If you can get the two, so much the better. 
Mr. C. Arrnow (Brisbane): Mr. Swayne said farmers were the most 
complaining of mortals. Perhaps they are, and perhaps they have a good deal 
to complain of. As he stated, they have, up to within the last few years, been 
the least looked after by the Governments of the day. He also said they were 
the most important, and I believe it is allowed throughout the world that the 
producers from the land are the most important part of the community. One 
would naturally expect that they were, therefore, most entitled to be looked 
after. Mr. Pott spoke against cheap money, because men would be borrowing 
too much, but I think, however, the Government could be trusted to see that 
this did not occur. Mr. Denman said we wanted more reliable money, but I 
think if both were put together—7.e., cheap and reliable—we would come very 
close to the point at which we are all aiming. Mr. Peek referred to local 
co-operation, and Dr. Thomatis to general. Perhaps no doubt there is good in 
both, but I think we ought not to try too much at first. We all remember the 
fabled frog who burst himself in his efforts to reach the dimensions of the bull, . 
and we must be careful that our efforts at co-operation have not the same fate. 
I was associated with the co-operative venture Mr. Fischer mentioned, and in 
it we had many difficulties to contend against. We had human nature to deal 
with, as well as a shortness of capital. We had neighbours, standing out of the 
co-operation, who went behind our backs and took the markets we had 
discovered. It was a failure because we had not sufficient capital, and because 
those who would be benefited by the co-operation would not stand by it. We 
must not, however, take failures as an infallible criterion. Most of the. banks 
failed, Governments have failed, and storekeepers are doing the same every year, 
but failure does not mean that such-and-such a thing cannot be done. It only 
means that ithas not been done in theright way. Co-operation can succeedif carried. 
outin the right way, if the people pull together and manage it well, like any other 
successful institution. The next question is, Can monetary help be given? I 
think it can. Can it be got from the farmers or those who live in the district 
where it is wanted? Ido not think it can be obtained in that way, because 
those who would join a society would be those who would expect to benefit. 
Hence they cannot pay and get the benefit, too. Though people in farming 
districts do sometimes lend money to their neighbours, as often as not they 
