Evening star., 1937-04-11
OPPOSES FORCING
OF CO-0PERATWES
Roosevelt Commission Cites
Advice of European Au-
thoritieS.
By the Associateo,Press.

luton by Johann Conrad BeisSel, .
Seventh-Day Adventist
In 1892, after a quarrel with his
church, he gathered his bunker fol-
lowers from Philadelphia and vicinity
and colonized Ephrata in Lancaster
County, Pa.
Beissel's colony was known as the
Order Of the Solitary. Property was
held in common and the colonists
operated farms, -four mill and q
paper mill. Their printing plant WIS
the finest in the Colonies.
The Ephrata colonists were highly
educated. Peter Miller, the second
prior of the order, at the request Of
Congress, translated the Declaration
OF Independence into seven languages.
There were some 800 members Of
the colony at the time of its peak
prosperity. The decline came after
the death of Beissel.
The basis of the organization was
not economic, but spiritual The
colony was built around the leader
ship of one man and the motive was
a monastic life, not the collective
marketing Of goods or the elimination
OF the middle man" in the purchase
of goods.
!, In short, the colony was built from
the top down.
Caution Urged in Report.
A caution against such a structural
method is found in the recent report
of the commission sent by President
Roosevelt to Europe to study the de-
velopment of cooperative enterprise.
The members of the commission sepa-
'rately used their study to comment
upon the development in the United
States.
! One of these members, Charles E.
Stuart, the New York engineer who
IVES executive vice president of the
Export Import Bank in the first
Roosevelt administration, had this to
say about the organization of CO.
operatives:
Consumer co-operativeS could un-
doubtedly be brought into existence
here in large numbers by departing
from the European principles of
building from the ground up, slow
growth and no government aid High
pressure promoters, direct Govern
ment encouragement and financial
assistance and tax exemptions would
rouse wide interest in the movement
end gain many adherents.
But if the data which the in
quiry gathered in Europe is Of any
value as a guide, such forced or
ganizations could not have an en-
during, successful existence because
their membership could not, under
such methods attain the state of mind
that is essential for sound co-opera-
ton, and their chief object in par
ticipating would be based on their
desire to secure the benefits of special
privilege
without exception, the European
authorities on consumer cooperation
strongly advise against the forced
growth Of cooperative organizations
They favor sympathetic
attitude on the part OF the govern
ment, the supplying Of information,
advice and counsel when It Is re-
quested and extensions OF credit on q
par with those extended to private
business; but they oppose special gov
ernment favors and ofncial propa-
gandizing."
Members Of Commission.
The members OF the commission,
beside Stuart, were Jacob Baker, as
sistant administrator Of the W. P. A.;
Leland Olds, secretary OF the New
York Power Authority; Clifford v.
Gregory, editor Of Prairie Farmer;
Robin Hood OF the National Co.
operative Council, and Emily Cau-
thorn Bates
With the presentation of its report
10 the President, the commission sep
arately made three recommendations
with particular reference to consumer
aco-opeTat1ves:
- /. That there be made q survey OF
consumer and service co-operatives in
the United States, using as far as
possible the assistance and records Of
the Farm Credit Administration, the |
Bureau Of Labor Statistics and other
governmental agencies to determine
(a) the number, membership, classes
of business, costs and volume of busi-
ness done by these organizations;
(b) the major social and economic
effects OF cooperation here, and
(c) the conditions under which Good
erat1ves develop.
z. That An agency be established or
designated to give information, re-
Search and advisory service to con-
sumers' co-operatives; this to be
directly linked up with all of the Gov
ivo nho1 ~
consumers.
3. That steps be taken to assure con-
sumner co-operatives credit parity.
81 The commission did not make any
Recommendations that consumer CO.
operatives should receive subsidies or
special advantages Of any kind.
q The report mainly concerns con-
slmer co-operatives.
a Accomplishments Listed,
&. In this field, digest Of the report
prepared by the domestic distribution
department Of the Chamber of Com
nnerce Of the United States sets forth
the following accomplishments for
consumer co-operatives in Europe:
- /. A reduction in costs of retailing |
with advantages accruing 20 the con- |
srmer, thus making possible more |
saving and higher standards of liv- |
ing, and contributing to economic |
stability.
2. Promotion of thrift: increasing
economic security OF members Of con-
sumner co-operatives.
a 8. Education in intelligent buying,
family budgeting and general eco
monies.
= 4. Better citizenship, the result Of
widely-difused ownership Of an i'm
portant democratic business enterprise. |
= S. Effective control Of monopoly by
cooperative competition.
6. Comparatively high labor stand
ards.
The report comments ct length On |
A1oti A. 1aa$r