CO-OPERATIV E important and growing movements roughly similar to those above described, but, on the whole, less Foreign identified with the working classes, and less countries. cotoured fiy their social and economic ideals. The most prominent fact since 1877 is the great growth of agricultural co-operation from small dimensions, till it amounts to a great force almost everywhere, and in some countries to a revolution j notably in Denmark, where almost every village is an example of varied co-operation, dealing with butter, eggs, bacon, stock, bee-keeping, or fruit-growing, or with the supply of household or farm requisites, to the great enrichment of the country. Cooperative dairies first appeared in Denmark in 1882; in 1900 they numbered 1052, dealt with four-fifths of all the milk of the country, and produced butter worth£7,000,000. Co-operative bacon factories began in 1887, and in 1900 dealt with six-tenths of all the pigs ; and so on. Agricultural co-operation is now the strongest branch of the movement in France, and its backbone are the agricultural syndicates or associations. These, though they began only in 1883, numbered 1500 in 1895, and now probably number 2500, with 700,000 to 800,000 members. They are not technically co-operative societies, but rather trade unions, and they have certain political and professional aims j but they do an immense amount of co-operative work, especially in associated buying, and they spread the spirit of association everywhere, and promote many strictly co-operative societies. Everywhere the main features of this agricultural movement, alike in France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Holland, or in Canada, Hew Zealand, and the United States, are similar to those we have seen in Ireland and Denmark; it is supplementary to individual cultivation ; hardly ever does it appear as associations for cultivating in common, and, speaking generally, it has no very ideal aims, but seeks chiefly to give the farmer a better profit: especially it brings within reach of the peasant many of the advantages of large farming. In England there are a number of farms worked by stores, and several large associations for the supply of farm requisites, but the typical agricultural co-operation, based on the small village societies and federations of such societies, has been almost unknown. An attempt is, however, being made to promote such a movement on the lines which have been successful in Ireland. As part of agricultural co-operation we may reckon the development of an entirely new type of credit co-operation. The Schultze-Delitzsch credit societies are primRaiffeisen arfiy town institutions, and while they have mul^anks tiplied and grown great, and sometimes grown an
- 1 capitalistic, many thousands of country folk have
learnt to bless the little Baiffeisen loan banks. Such a bank is an association of neighbours uniting to borrow a sum of money, in order to lend it out as cheaply as possible in small sums to such of themselves as need loans. It also receives savings deposits, which often produce a large part or even all the capital the society needs to lend. Usually a few of the members are persons of rather more means than the others, and join to help their neighbours by increasing the society’s credit. These have no special privilege, but by common consent they usually take a leading part. In the true Raiffeisen bank the liability of each member is unlimited, but limited liability has been introduced in some of its modifications. The society confines its operations strictly to a small area, say a parish, where every one knows every one. Each borrower must specify the purpose for which he wants a loan, say to buy a cow or drain a field, or pay off a moneylender, and this is rigorously inquired into. Any member, however poor, can obtain a loan for a profitable approved purpose, and no one, however rich, can obtain one on any other terms.
SOCIETIES
231
Practically all the members see that the money is applied as agreed, and while the loans are often made for long periods—a year or two, or several, so as to repay themselves out of the profit—power is reserved to call them in at short notice if misapplied. Ho bills, mortgages, or other securities are taken, except a note of hand, with sometimes one or two sureties. There are two committees, one to lend and do the work of the society, and the other to supervise the first. While the directors of the SchultzeDelitzsch societies get commission on the business done, there is no remuneration for services in the Raiffeisen societies except that the accountant gets a small salary. There are no shares, or only shares of a very small value, and practically nothing is paid on them as interest or dividend. These Raiffeisen banks boast that neither member nor creditor has ever lost a penny by them, and while this is denied, it seems at least near the truth. Their credit is so good that they can obtain money at very low rates, and as their expenses are trifling they can re-lend to their members at very little more. In Germany they usually lend at about 5 per cent. Only men of good character can obtain membership, and thus, besides spreading prosperity, these societies have everywhere been great promoters of sobriety and good conduct. They exist solely for the sake of the members as borrowers, and make no profit, except a little for reserve, whereas the Schultze-Delitzsch Bank works for profit, and puts first the interest of the members as small capitalists and lenders. The Raiffeisen banks have a purely mutual character, free from any element of capitalism; it is even alleged that the members can never divide out the reserve ; if they fall short of the co-operativo ideal it is in the matter of self-help, seeing that the presence of some richer members is necessary, or at least very desirable. . In self-help the Schulze-Delitzsch system is specially strong. Raiffeisen founded the first such bank in 1849, just before Schultze-Delitzsch founded his first; the second in 1854. The third began in 1862, and so on. Not till 1880 did they begin really to spread. Though co-operative credit societies are split up into innumerable groups, insisting on various minor modifications, and making various compromises between the two systems, these two types really include them all. They have spread from Germany into almost all European countries, even at last to Ireland and England, besides America and Asia. In Germany there were in March 1901, out of a total of 19,557 co-operative societies, 12,140 credit associations, and these lent out in 1900 more than £120,000,000. In Italy, Austria, and Hungary they are also strong. In 1896 it was estimated that £150,000,000 a year must be very well within the total amount lent by money co-operation on the Continent of Europe: £190,000,000 may be estimated for 1900. Of this total only a small percentage represents loans by banks of the Raiffeisen type, which, though very numerous, often lend only a few hundred pounds each in the year. While English and some other forms of co-operation have always repudiated State help, and probably rightly so far as their own work is concerned, it is very state noticeable that in the modern development of actio„. agriculture the action of the State and of local authorities has played a great part in performing or assisting functions which neither voluntary association nor individual enterprise could well perform alone; in providing technical education, expert advisers, exhibitions and prizes; in distributing information in all forms; in finding out markets, controlling railway rates, subsidizing steamboats, and even grading, branding, warehousing, and freezing produce, and maintaining trade agents abroad. These things have of course not been done for co-operative societies alone, but for agriculture in general; but cooperation has benefited, and much has been done expressly to encourage the formation of associations of cultivators, and provincial and national federations of such associations; and government departments of agriculture are. found acting through such bodies, and with their advice and assistance. Indeed, harm has sometimes been done by subsidizing and forcing co-operative societies, whether for political motives or merely from mistaken policy. Experience shows that governments can do a very great deal, at least for agricultural co-operation, but only on condition that they encourage and do not undermine self-help and
