The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 21,1889. THE FARMERS' CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1972, 21 November 1889, Page 2

The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 21,1889. THE FARMERS' CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION.

Mb Joshua Page was in great form at last Saturday's meeting of the Farmers Co-Operative Association. He was as full of wise saws and proverbs as Sancho Panza, and as aggressive as Mr Page usually is. "We think, however, that he would have done better if he had not referred to the Hon. Mr McLean in the way he did. To say that the honorable gentleman's place was " in a back shed cleaning some one's boots," was not at all nice, especially as the same thing may be said of many others in this colony. There are so many men in high positions in this colony who never had a grandfather, that good taste ought to dictate to any on© the wisdom of eschewing such references as Mr Page made to the Hon. George McLean. Mr Page appears to have been very angry on last Saturday. He

lashed around him, regardless of whom he was hitting, and amongst the objects of his animadversions was this paper. To be sure he mentioned no name, but as this paper was the only one which had the courage to criticise the actions of the society we presume we may as well wear the cap which obviously has been made to fit us. In this matter Mr Page was ungenerous. He knows full well that we wrote in favor of the society before it was ever formed; he knows that on many 'occasions since we have referred in favorable terms to it, and that we have always been well disposed towards it. For this he has never given us credit, nor has he ever noticed it, but because we happened to disagree with the way it went to work last harvest, Mr Page is angry. " The evil that men do lives after them, the good is often interred with their bones." And so it has been with us in this matter. Now what is it we did that called forth the wrath and indignation of Mr Page? Simply this. Last grain season we pointed out that the Farmers', Co-operative Association had on a previous occasion chartered vessels to take squatters' wool to London, and asked why was it that it did not charter vessels to take farmers grain to Sydney before the Californian wheat reached there ? No doubt this was a very awkward way of putting the question at the time, but as we profess to look after the interests of farmers we were perfectly justified in making the inquiry. At any rate it so happened that in a week or two afterwards our suggestion was adopted, but it was too late, the Californian wheat had arnvad and prices went down. In our opinion if the association had gone to work properly last season it would have done more good to the farmers of this district than it did. Now this is the only fault we have ever found with the association. We are of opinion that instead of selling penny whistles and sticks of tobacco, the society ought to attend to more important matters. We have always tried to show that if it established a bank, and procured cheap money for farmers, it would do more good than it will in the way it is carried on, The honest fact is those who " rule the roost" there do not want to borrow money themselves and have very little sympathy with those who do. Never since the society was established have we' said one word to cast any doubt on its stability as a financial institution, or to do it any injury whatsoever, but we hold the opinion that its retail business is retarding the growth of the towns, and that in the end it will result in having an injurious effect on the farmers themselves. The larger the town is the greater is the demand for butter and eggs and other farm produce. If the Farmers Co-operative Association continues to grow as it has been growing lately, its store will in the course of time be the only one m South Canterbury, it will employ fifteen or twenty hands, and farmers will have to find a market elsewhere' for their butter and eggs, This is all we have to say against the Farmers Co-operative Society; but we quite agree with Mr Page that anything we may say cannot hurt it. Co-operation, as Mr Page has said, is undoubtedly the coming power, and if Mr Page would read a little book called " Cooperative Commonwealth,'' he would learn from it that it is nothing more nor less than the forerunner of Socialism. The Farmers' Co-operative Association, of which he is so proud, is really and truly the nucleus of a Socialistic institution. Co-operation will grow until whole nations are one huge co-operative society ; neither we nor any one else can prevent it. It is an outcome of an evolutionary development which is taking place. On one side moneyed men are forming syndicates to secure monopolies; on the other side the people are forming co-operative societies to fight fchem. Between the two, in the near future, a fierce struggle for supremacy will take place, but co-operation will eventually win, Holding these views, can we be suspected of being antagonistic to co-operation ? Most undoubtedly we are not; we are in entire sympathy with it, but we hold that the Farmers' Co-operative Association is fighting the wrong cbss of poople. It is fighting the struggling shopkeepers, instead of the money-rings, the mortgagees, and the 10 per cent, gentry generally, and herein lies our objection > to it. However, we feel that it will not take our advice, so probably the best thing we can do is to let it alone. Mr Page made also a dash into politics, but delicacy forbids us t© follow him. Coming from the local dry-nurse of the party he condemned so vigorously, his utterances were really most amusing. We have to compliment the farmers on the prosperity of their institution. Whether or not they could have done better in other ways, it must be said they have done well in the way they have adopted, and certainly we must admit that that faet weighs heavily against all our arguments.