Each for All: A History of the Co-operative Movement in English Canada, 1900-1945 9780773595576

Table of contents :
Cover
Copyright
The Carleton Library
Contents
Foreword
Acknowledgements
INTRODUCTION: The Movement and Its Institutions
1. The Establishment of the Movement, 1900-1914
2. The State of the Movement, 1900-1914
3. The Possibilities Are Perceived, 1914-1919
4. New Directions, 1920-1924
5. The First Era of Prosperity, 1925-1929
6. The State of the Movement, 1914-1929
7. Crises, 1930-1934
8. Positive Responses to Adversity, 1935-1939
9. The State of the Movement—The Thirties
10. The Second Era of Prosperity
11. The State of the Movement, 1945
Notes
Bibliography
Index

Citation preview

Each For All: A History of the Co-operative Movement in English Canada, 1900-1945 IAN M acPH E R SO N

T H E C A R L E T O N L I B R A R Y N O . 116

Published by M acm illan o f C an ad a in association with the Institute o f C an ad ian Studies, C arleton U niversity

C opyright © Ian M acPherson 1979 All rights reserved —no p art o f this book m ay be reproduced in any form w ith o u t perm ission in w riting from the p u b lish er except by a review er w ho w ishes to quote b rief passages in connection w ith a review w ritten for inclusion in a m agazine or new spaper.

Canadian C ataloguing in Publication Data M acPherson, Ian, 1939E ach for all (The C arleton library; no. 116) B ibliography: p. Includes index. ISBN 0-7705-1771-4 pa. 1. C o o p e ra tio n —C a n a d a —H istory. 2. C ooperative societies—C a n a d a —H istory. I. Title. II. Series. HD3448.M 33

334' .0971

C79-094286-0

Printed in C an ad a for The M acm illan C om pan y o f C an a d a L im ited 70 B ond S tre e t, T o ro n to O n ta rio M 5B 1X3

The Carleton Library

A series o f C anadian reprints, original works, and new collections o f source m aterial relating to C anada, issued u n d er the editorial supervision o f the Institute o f C an a d ia n Studies o f C arleton U niversity, O ttaw a.

Director of the Institute S. F. Wise

General Editor M ichael G narow ski

Executive Editor Virgil D. D u ff (M acm illan o f C anada)

Editorial Board M arilyn J. B arber ( H istory) D ennis Forcese (Sociology) David B. K night (Geography) Steven L angdon ( Econom ics) M aureen M olot (P olitical Science) J. G eorge N euspiel (Law ) D erek G . Sm ith (A nthropology)

Publications Editor Jam es H. M arsh

Each f o r A II a n d A II f o r Each

A widely used slogan in the E n g lish -C an ad ian C o-o p erativ e M ovem ent, 1900-1945

Contents

Foreword ix Acknow ledgem ents

x ii

INTRODUCTION T he M ovem ent an d Its Institutions 1 T he E stablishm ent o f the M ovem ent, 1900-1914 8 2 T he State o f the M ovem ent. 1900-1914 34 3 T he Possibilities Are Perceived, 1914-1919 49 4 New D irections. 1920-1924 67 5 T he First Era o f Prosperity, 1925-1929 86 6 T he State o f the M ovem ent. 1914-1929 106 7 Crises, 1930-1934 118 8 Positive R esponses to A dversity, 1935-1939 150 9 T he State o f the M o v em en t—T h e T hirties 179 10 T he Second Era o f Prosperity 191 11 T he State o f the M ovem ent, 1945 211

N otes 216 Bibliography Index 250

237

Foreword

This study is intended to provide an in tro d u cto ry survey o f the ex tent and nature o f the E ng lish -C an ad ian co -operative m o v em ent betw een 1900 and 1945. It does n o t atte m p t to describe th e p e rfo rm an ce o f each E nglish-C anadian co-operative in th at p erio d ; th a t task has been begun in such m eticulous com p ilatio n s as the one recently com p leted by Jack T revena.* Instead, the p u rp o se here is to o u tlin e the m ajo r trends o f the m ovem ent an d to indicate w hat relationships th ere have been am ong the various kinds o f co -operative activity. In the process, parallels are sought w ith m ovem ents elsew here, especially those w hich have h ad a direct im pact on English C an ad a. T he general om ission o f F re n ch -C an a d ia n co-operative experience is in som e ways regretted, especially since the m o v em en t am o n g fran ­ cophone people today is so well d eveloped in Q uebec, N ew B runs­ wick, O ntario, and parts o f the P rairie provinces. Q u eb ec’s caissepopulaire m ovem ent has becom e, in fact, a m odel for co-operative developm ent throughout the w orld, one o f those rem a rk ab le C a n a ­ dian accom plishm ents in ad eq u a tely acknow ledged at hom e. N ev erth e ­ less, it is the au th o r’s b elie f th at the F ren ch - an d E n g lish -C an ad ian m ovem ents can be conveniently sep a ra te d in historical trea tm e n ts o f the 1900-1945 period. F o r reasons o u tlin ed in the follow ing pages, the two m ovem ents, after initial close co llab o ratio n , chose d ifferen t routes m ore for convenience th an from anim osity. Yet, w hile the ro u tes w ere different, the reasons for travelling an d the m eth o d s o f conveyance seem to have had m uch in com m on. In fact, it is the a u th o r’s b elief that beneath the history o f the two m ovem ents lay som e rem ark ab le parallels. But the elab o ratio n o f this th em e m ust aw ait the com p letio n o f the analyses o f the F ren c h -C a n ad ian experience at p resen t being p repared in Q uebec and o th er provinces. Finally, this study is concerned as m uch with a “ m o v em en t” as with its institutions. T he a u th o r believes th at, because E n g lish-C an ad ian *J. Trevena, Prairie Co-operation (Saskatoon: Federated Co-operative. 1976).

X

FOREWORD

co-operators have insisted upo n th eir ow n m eth o d s o f in co rp o ratio n , have established their ow n jo u rn a ls, have co m m u n icated w ith each oth er and, m ost im portantly, have accepted th a t they b elo n g to a m ovem ent, then a m ovem ent has existed and, in fact, does still exist. A m ovem ent, though, does no t m ean u niform ity. In d eed , to be alive, it m ust be som ething o f the opposite. T hus, at the expense o f details som e readers m ight have fo u n d useful, this study surveys the E nglishC an ad ian co-operative m ov em en t searching for its m ain characteris­ tics: its successes, its failures, its m yths, and its idiosyncrasies.

Acknowledgments

There are many kinds of co-operation. There is the organized co­ operative movement with its defined ideology; there are co-operative institutions operating within elaborate, identifiable legal systems; and there is the informal co-operation of individuals involved in mutual interests. This study is about the co-operative movement and its insti­ tutions, and in itself it is a product of generously given co-operation. The author is responsible for the failings on these pages, but he is deeply indebted to scores of individuals who gave him much more assistance than he had any right to expect. The late Professor D. G. G. Kerr directed the dissertation out of which this study has grown; his wise counsel, encouragement, and assistance will always be deeply appreciated. Dr. A. F. Laidlaw, long a leader of the English-Canadian co-operative movement, has gener­ ously provided sound advice and constructive criticism on numerous occasions. Similarly, Breen Melvin, Terry Phalen, Leonard Harman, Pauline Dunne, Tom Read, and Gilles Menard, all associated at one time or other with the Co-operative Union of Canada, have been unfailingly helpful during the long germination of this project. Between 1972 and 1976 the author was given the opportunity to interview over one hundred co-operators from all parts of English Canada. Copies of these interviews will be placed in the National Library of Canada where we hope they will be of use to other students of the Canadian movement. The author would like to ac­ knowledge his debt to these individuals, especially those who, like J. B. Brown, W. Burgess, L. L. Lloyd, H. L. Fowler, and B. N. Amason, were interviewed more than once. Their perceptions have added greatly to this effort. In common with many Canadian writers, the author is indebted to the Canadian government for making possible the interviews men­ tioned above and some further research in Great Britain. Similarly, he is grateful to the universities of Winnipeg and Victoria for funds that, in addition to making possible trips to various archives, co-operatives, xi

xii

Aeknowledgments

and libraries, also carried the typing of this manuscript through its various stages. In other ways, he is indebted to Professor G. A. Friesen of the University of Manitoba, Mr. Henry Dyck, and members of the His­ tory Department of the University of Winnipeg for having patiently tolerated the enthusiasms this study aroused. Similarly, he wishes to acknowledge the much-appreciated assistance and criticisms given to him by Professor B. C. Bickerton and James Marsh of the Carleton Library Series. Finally, he owes most to Elizabeth MacPherson for her patience throughout the development of this project.

IN TR O D U C T IO N

The Movement and Its Institutions I f yo u be guided by nothing better than mere com m ercial considerations, then co-operation m ust prove a delusion a n d a snare, a n d the services and sacrifices o f those who laboured in the p a st m ust have been given and rendered in vain. R. F lem ing “Presidential A ddress,” Co-operative Union Congress, Great Britain, 1914.

Many reform movements flourished in Canada during the early years of the twentieth century. In part, these reform movements, such as prohibition, trade unionism, feminism, the social gospel, agrarianism, urban reform, and educational progressivism, were stirred by the opti­ mism typical of the period. In those deceptively uncomplicated days, many Canadians thought that extensive reform was attainable; a few even believed the New Jerusalem was imminent. This general confi­ dence in the future was based on the major accomplishments of the recent past and present, changes like the Industrial Revolution, the advance of agriculture, the emergence of political democracy, and the sudden transformation of villages into cities. It was also related to the development of Canadian nationalism. Still unaware of how sobering the realities of the twentieth century would be, many Canadians in the early 1900s were enraptured by the glorious future their nation appar­ ently possessed. For them, Canada was no less than the last and best chance for the perfecting of North Atlantic civilization, a civilization that would be profoundly affected by the reforming spirit of the modem age. Just as importantly, the reform movements were born of need. The social costs of past and present growth had been high, and regardless of how the country was perceived—by region, by class, by national groupings, by occupations, even by religion —there were distressing inequalities. Housing was frequently inadequate, not only in large urban centres but in rural areas and on the lumbering and mining frontiers as well. Provisions for the elderly, the insane, the orphaned, and the poor varied immensely and were rarely sufficient. The trades union movement had few numbers and limited stability, meaning that most labourers were defenceless in the marketplace. Similarly, in the

1

2

EACH FOR ALL

countryside, many farmers struggled against rising costs, difficulties in marketing, and shortages in labour. There were, in short, behind the outward prosperity of the late Victorian and Edwardian years, suffi­ cient economic and social grievances to give momentum to the reform causes that appeared. One of the reform movements that developed amid the optimism and need was the co-operative movement. Like most of the others, it was and remains difficult to define precisely. It attracted support from the other movements, its interests were diverse, and it did not have a clear, national spokesman. Co-operative organizations, however, did have unique characteristics that made them different from traditional capitalist businesses and made them similar to co-operatives in other parts of the world. By 1900, there were at least four of these charac­ teristics, with perhaps the most important being “one man, one vote”. This characteristic was vital because it was the main co-operative response to the traditional capitalist emphasis on the pre-eminence of invested capital. For co-operators, the daily impact of the economic order was more important than politics; they therefore argued that it was as essential to insist on the development of economic democracy in the twentieth century as it had been to develop political democracy in the nineteenth century. This perspective also prompted acceptance of two other characteristic rules: an insistence on neutrality in reli­ gious, racial, and political matters; and an acceptance of the idea that investments should receive a low, fixed return rather than speculative profit. Finally, co-operatives accepted the idea that surplus earnings should be distributed on the basis of participation; that is, members should be rewarded in proportion to how they used their organiza­ tions, not how much they invested in them. There were other characteristics that were important but less uni­ versally accepted. One of these was the encouragement of co-opera­ tive development through educational programs. Some co-operatives allocated a fixed amount or a percentage of their surpluses to this activity. Co-ops varied considerably, however, in what they meant by “education” : for some, it meant encouraging members to patronize their co-operatives; for others, it meant the promotion of all kinds of co-operative action; for still others, it meant a general kind of adult education program; and, for a few, it meant all of these. Usually tied to this concern for education was the desire to create larger regional, national, and international federations of co-operatives. These federa­ tions, which were formed for educational as well as economic pur­ poses, were beginning to become important at the turn of the century,

Movement and Its Institutions

3

and some Canadian co-operators were staunch supporters of them. Finally, many co-operatives advocated a cash-only basis for their activities. Attempting to conform to this characteristic caused consid­ erable debate in the early years in Canada because many co-ops served farmers and miners who always needed money and sometimes desperately. By searching for these characteristics, generally if inaccurately called the Rochdale principles,1 it is possible to decide on the degree to which specific organizations can be considered co-operative. Such judgments, however, do not by themselves lead to a satisfactory sum­ mary of the total co-operative movement, because any movement is always more than its institutions. Just as the Canadian socialist move­ ment has been more than the CCF, NDP, and Communist parties; just as the social gospel movement has been more than its sectarian mani­ festations and independent organizations; so the co-operative move­ ment amounts to far more than its institutional forms. Unfortunately, trying to understand the movement by seeing how it both influenced and superseded its institutions creates a confusing picture. Nor is the picture purely a Canadian one. National boundaries were not barriers to co-operative development, and the English-Canadian movement has always reflected trends in the wider international movement.2 In the early twentieth century, the influence from abroad confused more than it clarified because in those years the international movement was featured by an uncertainty over basic goals, an uncertainty caused by rapid, diverse growth and by intense ideological debate. The co-operative movement first asserted itself seriously in Great Britain and Continental Europe during the middle of the nineteenth century. While it ultimately developed positive goals in the form of various editions of the co-operative commonwealth concept, it was essentially a reaction to the economic and social problems confronting urban workers and small farmers. As industrialization and urbaniza­ tion altered European civilization, as technological advances and the development of large-scale farming undermined traditional European agriculture, many people were left victimized and rootless in societies they did not understand. Some of them, after failing to improve their lot or that of their communities, turned to co-operative enterprise. In doing so, they were assisted by numerous, mostly middle-class leaders motivated by religious convictions, general reform sympathies, and fear of more radical movements. The result was the emergence, be­ tween 1840 and 1900, o f a series of co-operative movements based on

4

EACH FOR ALL

local, regional, national, and sometimes international needs. All major European countries developed significant movements, though national movements varied because of the types of co-operatives involved, the differing political environments in each country, and the nature of the leadership each movement produced. The most dynamic European movement—and certainly the most successful in broadcasting its own particular philosophies—was the British movement. Its history, in some ways, went back to Robert Owen who, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, presented in his utopian experiments a vision of a co-operative commonwealth. Out of Owen’s work emerged a host of co-operative experiments throughout the century. The most prominent of these were fashioned by Dr. William King and the Rochdale pioneers, and their work, in turn, became the main sources for British co-operative thought in the last half of the nineteenth century. After 1860, the British movement grew rapidly and, by 1900 was the world’s most powerful national co-operative movement. It was also in many respects the world’s narrowest movement, though it had not started that way. The Owenite tradition and the original Rochdale movement began with broad objectives, but these were gradually jettisoned, as interest in co-operative farming, labour co-partnerships, and “credit unionism” declined or was discouraged.3 Consequently, by the end of the century, the dominant British theorists—T. W. Mercer, the Christian socialists, and the Webbs—had accepted the view that the fully co-operative society could be developed most easily by encouraging the growth of consumer co-operation. Everyone was a consumer, according to their arguments, and, therefore, everyone should naturally have an interest in organizing efficient and inexpen­ sive distribution systems. Stores, moreover, were convenient centres for demonstrating both how group action could produce benefits and how ordinary people could learn business methods. And, as a final point in their favour, stores were attractive because they would lead naturally to store-owned wholesales, which could undertake manufac­ turing activities and even extensive farming. Stores, in short, could be the fundamental organizations in an economically reformed and so­ cially restructured society that was based on the equitable distribution of life’s necessities and luxuries. Because of its emphasis on consumer co-operatives, the main stream of the British movement never experimented seriously with the type of co-operative banks that flourished in several European coun­ tries, notably Germany and Italy. Hence, the British—with a few

Movement and Its Institutions

5

notable exceptions such as Henry Wolff, one of the most successful publicists for European co-operative banking—perceived very belat­ edly how the co-operative movement could meet the chronic needs of the rural and urban poor.4 Similarly, after a few attempts at labour co-partnerships and a major debate in the 1880s, British co-operators generally ignored the labour co-partnership concept then developing on the Continent.5 This lack of sympathy for co-partnerships made it difficult for the British to work closely with many European cooperators, especially the more socialist co-operators of France and Belgium. At the same time, and most importantly for North America, the leaders of the British consumer movement discouraged agricul­ tural producer co-operatives. A few of these had appeared in Great Britain during the late nineteenth century (and Horace Plunkett’s efforts on their behalf in Ireland became a notable achievement)6 but, generally, the dominant wing of the British movement feared the monopolizing tendencies of producer co-operatives and thus became antagonistic to them. Instead, the British leadership preferred that wholesales enter into farming as well as manufacturing; these activi­ ties, along with the supply function, were to be controlled democrati­ cally by consumers organized in the co-operative stores that owned the wholesales. On the European Continent, the national co-operative movements stressed other types of co-operatives and somewhat different philoso­ phies. In Germany there were two powerful banking (or, in North American terms, credit union) movements: one, the more conservative Schulze-Delitsch system, had developed to meet the particular needs of lower-middle-class, urban residents, especially small businessmen; the other, the Raiffeisen system, heavily influenced by religious ideal­ ism, had been organized to meet the needs of generally poorer farm­ ers and workers.7 In addition, there was a strong consumer movement with its own central purchasing agencies and, unlike its British coun­ terpart, a strong attachment to agrarian producer co-operatives.8 In France, there was a powerful workers’ co-partnership and profit-shar­ ing movement by 1900 that was closely tied to French socialism. Because of this association, French co-operators generally took a broad approach to the movement and emphasized tolerance of all types of co-operative activity. The growing consumer movement,9 for example, was dominanted intellectually by Charles Gide, whose con­ sumer theory of co-operation was far broader than those of the main British leaders.10 In Italy, there was a banking movement organized by Luigi Luzzati and a growing consumer movement centred mostly

6

EACH FOR ALL

in the northern industrial cities. In Scandinavia, nearly all kinds of co­ ops were flourishing by 1900, with the agricultural producer societies being especially important.11 Denmark, in particular, had developed an extensive producer movement as a part of its bacon and dairy industries, and news of its successes spread rapidly to the rest of Europe and especially to North America.12 Elsewhere, in Belgium, Poland, Switzerland, Russia, Spain, and the Austro-Hungarian Em­ pire, there were also significant movements, notably in the credit and marketing fields but embracing other types of co-operative action as well.13 With such a range of co-operative activity, with so many classes and interests involved, it was understandable that Continental European and British co-operators were incapable of producing a synthesized movement by 1900. The characteristics associated with the Rochdale experiment, but extended to many forms of economic activity, pro­ vided rules by which co-operative societies could function; but they were also very adaptable and could be utilized by all classes, all shades of political opinion and all nations. Thus, by the early twen­ tieth century, the international movement possessed only a superficial gloss of unity over a discordant mass of competing factions and differently directed movements. There was an international organiza­ tion, the International Co-operation Alliance, which tried to represent these various elements, but essentially it was dominated, until at least the 1920s, by the consumer movements of Britain and France. While personal animosities and national loyalties were fundamental to the debates that divided the international co-operative movement, other issues were just as important. Notable among these were the relationship to socialism, the harmonizing of producer and consumer interests, the dilemmas posed by pacifism and militarism, and the uncertainties as to how the international movement could be best advanced. The turmoil caused by the resulting debates naturally made it difficult for North Americans to reach a clear understanding of the ultimate purposes of the European co-operative movements. Instead, they were forced to study the aspects of the European movements that most interested them, adapt them to local circumstances, and produce their own hybrid forms of co-operation. The uncertainties and ambiguities of the European movement were not clarified by North American co-operators who followed European models during the early 1900s. Nor were the confusions speedily eradicated there­ after in either Europe or North America. Ideological tensions, if any­ thing, grew in the twentieth century as co-operatives were rocked by

Movement and Its Institutions

7

the “new” ideologies of communism and fascism. Similarly, differ­ ences between kinds of co-operatives did not subside as consumer, credit, and producer societies grew rapidly, in the process developing their own institutions, vested interests and strongly held viewpoints. Forging international unity among co-operatives and developing a coherent co-operative philosophy would require generations, and they certainly were not evident when Canadians began seriously to organ­ ize co-operatives in the first years of this century.

CH A PTER ONE

The Establishment of the Movement, 1900-1914 The long winter evenings will soon be at hand, and they are the ideal time fo r the fa rm er to spend in th in kin g out new schem es f o r the benefit o f his fa m ily and the com m unity. L e t him m a ke a study o f co-operation and when he is seized o f its advantages let him proceed to p u t them into effect. The spirit o f co-operation is in the air a n d is rapidly spreading throughout the west. Western C anadians have bow ed to corporation rule nearly ever since the country was settled. The tim e fo r em ancipation has come and there will need to be som e able leaders to head the campaign. Co-operation is the only possible avenue o f com plete em anicipation [s/c] and the sooner the fa rm ers settle them selves toward perfect co-operation the sooner will they begin to secure a fa ir reward f o r their toil. Grain Growers’ Guide, Septem ber 22, 1909, p. 13. Our ambition. . . is to get Co-operators fir s t and Co-operative stores will follow in due course. O ur progress is not dependent upon the num ber o f stores and the economic success realized in these pioneer days. The fu tu re o f the M ovem ent in Canada depends upon the exte n t to which we can convert the people to our great social religion. The Canadian Co-operator, October 1910, p. 4.

The English-Canadian movement became firmly established between 1900 and 1914, but that development was based on numerous preced­ ents.1 Throughout the nineteenth century—indeed, some would in­ clude the end of the eighteenth century—co-operative institutions of several varieties came and, for the most part, went. Their failures disappointed and discouraged many, but lessons were learned that were well applied during the twentieth century. The point is that conditions before 1900 were not suitable for the extensive develop­ ment of co-operatives: knowledge of co-operative experiments else­ where was limited, co-operative techniques had not been perceived as useful weapons for regional protest, and co-operative ideology had not been embraced by significant urban groups. In contrast, during the first fourteen years of this century, co­ operatives were built amid suitable economic and social conditions, and a genuine movement, with economic stability and a degree of 8

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

9

ideological maturity, was able to develop. As a movement, however, it shared the divisive characteristics of European movements and did not develop a sense of unity for many years thereafter. In fact, all it did develop in its early years was an understanding of the main principles of co-operative action and a broad consensus about the movement’s purposes. The struggle to survive, the uncertainties about new forms of co-operative activity, and the diversities fundamental to Canada itself were too overpowering to permit much more. I

The first co-ops to achieve stability in English Canada in the years after 1900 were farmers’ marketing and purchasing societies. They were built on pressing need and the precedents of the previous cen­ tury. In the 1870s the Patrons of Husbandry, or the Grange as it was more popularly called, had come to Canada from the United States.2 Rapidly, perhaps too rapidly, it gained a large following in Ontario and smaller though important groups of supporters in Quebec, the Maritimes, and Manitoba. Concerned about bad economic conditions in rural Canada, and aware of farming co-operatives in Europe, the Grange developed an extensive economic program, including the creation of insurance, trust, and salt companies and a co-operatively owned wholesale. Some of these organizations achieved considerable, brief success before disappearing either prior to or during the Grange’s collapse in the early 1890s.3 They were, nevertheless, impor­ tant for later co-operative development because they foreshadowed the agrarian marketing and supply societies that emerged in the early twentieth century.4 As the Grange faded (but did not die) in the 1890s, another tempo­ rarily powerful farmers’ organization, the Patrons of Industry, swept northward. Like the Grange, it encouraged several economic organi­ zations, with the most important being the Farmers’ Binder Twine Company. Located in Brantford, this company was formed in 1892 and was ultimately owned by over 8,000 farmers scattered across Canada.5 Though not a co-operative in its method of organization, the company was very successful until 1912 when it collapsed, ironically enough (for a farmer-owned company) because the tariff on American twine was lifted. Nevertheless, for twenty years the company com­ peted strongly on the Canadian market, and, according to its own publicity, reduced the cost of twine to the farmer by twenty-five to fifty per cent.6 This success was important, not only for the immediate

10

EACH FOR ALL

benefits it brought to farmers, but also because it helped Canadian farmers organize more permanent, orthodox co-operatives in the early twentieth century. In addition to supporting these initiatives by the nineteenth centu­ ry’s most powerful farm organizations, English-Canadian farmers also developed numerous independent, co-operatively oriented enterprises. From at least the 1830s, for example, farmers had been organizing mutual insurance companies. These organizations were usually founded on co-operative principles of one man, one vote; the distribu­ tion of surpluses on the basis of participation; and the dominance of member-owners. Mutuals were not, however, operated with a strong co-operative commitment—most are not, even in the 1970s—and for that reason they seldom contributed directly to the development of other co-operatives. Rather, their significance for the general develop­ ment of co-operatives lies more in how well they demonstrated the determination of farmers to control their own local economies. Almost inevitably successful, they became, for twentieth-century enthusiasts, an example of what aroused local action could accomplish. There were also co-operative creameries.7 Started in Ontario, Quebec, and the Maritimes during the 1870s and 1880s, these organi­ zations were patterned after the creameries established during the late nineteenth century in Denmark and the United States.8 In Canada, they were partly farmer reactions to the growth of large dairies, and partly attempts to sell directly to the large urban markets opened by more sophisticated technology and improved transportation systems. As new roads were built, as railway construction permitted access to markets far afield, farmers hoped their own creameries would allow them to sell directly to their urban customers. In developing these organizations, the farmers had considerable help from provincial and federal governments who slowly, reluctantly, were beginning to recog­ nize their responsibilities for helping organize better marketing sys­ tems. By 1900, there were over 1,200 creameries scattered across Canada. Most of them were located in Ontario and Quebec,9 but they were also beginning to appear on the Prairies, developed because of the encouragement of federal and provincial civil servants and because of the agitation of settlers from Central Canada. As early as 1887, in fact, the Manitoba government had passed enabling legislation largely to allow settlers from Ontario to build their own co-operative crea­ meries.10 In the territories, governments were encouraging creameries from the 1890s onward,11 and between 1907 and 1911 these efforts

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

11

were consolidated to produce a stable movement in Saskatchewan.12 Though co-operative creameries were at first as aloof from the broad co-operative movement as the Mutuals, they became important in the early twentieth century both as symbols of co-operative success and as institutions providing important services. The development of these early co-operatives, and of many that followed, was steeped in rural traditions of neighbourliness and mu­ tual aid. It is over-simplifying to suggest that the co-operative institu­ tions of the early twentieth century were mere elaborations of the bam-raising bees of the settlement period, although that view was certainly popular among the early crusaders of co-operative action.13 Nevertheless, the settlement period in all Canadian regions was made easier by spontaneous co-operation, a natural banding together to overcome problems. When better transportation systems, in the way of roads and vehicles, and better communication methods, in the form of the regional press, appeared during the early 1900s, this traditional mutual aid was expanded into concepts of regional and class co­ operation. The elements of this transformation are subtle, but they were as natural to farmers, especially pioneering farmers, as the rug­ ged individualism more commonly emphasized by observers of rural life.14 II

The nineteenth-century experiments in co-operation and the elabora­ tion of the mutual-aid concept produced powerful institutions during the early 1900s. Farmers in all regions participated in this develop­ ment, but it was the Prairie grain growers who first made co-operative action work on a large scale. It was only natural that they should. The grain growers were in the unusual position of having demonstrable power in an entire region; of having generally a shared experience of immigrating, homesteading, and struggle; of dealing with a relatively few crops; and of having easily delineated groups apparently exploit­ ing them. Railway building, immigration, technical improvements, and “scientific agriculture”, by 1895 caused a boom that greatly en­ couraged the western farmer. The charges imposed by bankers, grain merchants, implement manufacturers, and storekeepers, and the costs inflicted by the tariff frustrated and ultimately enraged him. Proof of his rage can be seen in the organizations he created. The agrarian unrest of the previous forty years had produced significant but transitory organizations; the anger of 1900-14 spawned organiza-

12

EACH FOR ALL

tions that in slightly altered form still thrive on the Prairies, and that have contributed substantially to the growth of lasting organizations in other regions as well. First to appear were the grain growers’ associa­ tions, educational institutions organized in the Northwest Territories in 1901 and in Manitoba in 1903. Shortly after the new provinces were created in 1905, the Territorial Grain Growers split into Sas­ katchewan and Alberta associations, the former maintaining its dis­ tinctive identity until 1926, the latter uniting in 1909 with the Society of Equity to form the United Farmers of Alberta.15 More than most earlier organizations, which had tended to be educational and uplift­ ing in the traditional Victorian way, these new provincial organiza­ tions were openly organized to protest the power of railroads, bankers, and grain merchants. They were frankly economic in their main inter­ ests (even though they did develop significant social programs), and they were preoccupied with improving the position of the farmer in the grain-marketing system. They retained this pragmatic orientation during succeeding decades despite the emergence of the occasional idealist enraptured by utopian visions. It was inevitable, then, that the educational organizations would sponsor direct political action and economic organization. The politi­ cal efforts of the Patrons of Industry during the 1890s were something of a watershed in this respect, since that movement displayed enough power to shake the Manitoba government and nudge its federal coun­ terpart. In fact, it was James Douglas, an Independent Liberal m p with Patron of Industry support, who led the farmers to one of their first major political victories—the initial reform of the storage, grad­ ing, and car-spotting systems. Though improvements, these reforms, set out in the Manitoba Grain Act of 1900, were insufficient to provide order in the expansionary years that followed, and they did not appreciably affect the marketing system. Consequently, the farm­ ers turned in 1905 and 1906 to the reform of the marketing system, a reform that was fraught with controversy and destined to be a struggle for decades, not just years. The weapon they adopted in the early years, and for many years afterward, was economic action through co­ operative marketing; the institution they initially built was the Grain Growers’ Grain Company.16 The new company was a natural exten­ sion of earlier movements, an easily promoted alternative whose un­ derlying organizational principles were already well-understood. The company was, in fact, a remarkable example of spontaneous grass­ roots activity, though a leadership group soon emerged to direct its early development and ultimate financial success.

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

13

The leadership was particularly effective, even when one acknowl­ edges the natural momentum the company immediately possessed. Easily the most colourful of the leaders was E. A. Partridge, an Ontario native whose white mane, piercing eyes, and booming voice were well-known to farmers’ meetings in the G G G organizational pe­ riod. A student of Ruskinian socialism and knowledgeable about Eu­ ropean co-operative movements,17 Partridge provided both dynamic leadership and a consistent ideological viewpoint. He played essen­ tially a prophet’s role, but a vital one until 1912 when he began his two-decade-long revolt against the dominance of the company by pragmatic, generally liberal rather than socialist leaders: men like Roderick McKenzie, John Kennedy, and Thomas Crerar. As liberals, rather than socialists or co-operative purists, these more moderate men were committed to the defence of the family farm and the organization of farmers to protest specific grievances; they were not interested in a rapid restructuring of existing society. Ultimately, Par­ tridge and the stream of socialist agrarians he represented found it difficult to tolerate such cautious men and therein was exemplified one of the classic divisions in the Canadian co-operative movement. But Partridge’s Ruskinian socialism was not the only or the most important critique of the way in which the G G G developed, even in its earliest years. The company paid a price in gaining a place within the grain-marketing system as a member of the Winnipeg Grain Ex­ change. Originally organized in keeping with the customary co-opera­ tive principles of voting rights and patronage dividends, the company was forced by the grain merchants to jettison the dividend and to distribute surpluses on the basis of capital. Those retreats from princi­ ple, even though forced, were never accepted meekly by members with strong co-operative backgrounds.18 The criticisms of leadership that resulted were further fed by the position the company seemed to assume within a few years: successful to the point of smugness, in­ creasingly more sympathetic to the existing marketing system, and continuously dominated by moderate pragmatists, the G G G became unpopular to a steadily growing number of farmers. Nevertheless, early in the century, the Grain Growers’ Grain Company attracted the support of thousands of moderate farmers throughout the Prairies, many of whom remained loyal despite the economic adversity, the persistent criticisms, and the new marketing organizations that ulti­ mately appeared. The growth of the G G G , especially up to 1914, was remarkable. Between 1907 and 1912 its shareholders increased from 1,800 to over

14

EACH FOR ALL

27,000, and its annual handle in the grain trade mushroomed from 2,340,000 bushels to nearly 28,000,000 bushels.19 In 1908 the company started to publish the Grain Growers’ Guide, a journal that quickly became the major voice of organized farmers on the Prairies:20 it reached most rural homes in the region and its message, strongly agrarian and co-operative in outlook, was well conveyed by the au­ thors and cartoonists it employed. In 1912 the company further ex­ panded its holdings by securing a terminal at Fort William and by entering into the elevator business on a large scale, especially in Manitoba. In the same year, the company began supplying farmers with feeds and other supplies, extending the service to machinery in 1914.21 The supply business soon became, in fact, a major aspect of the company’s business; by 1914 it totalled $3,000,000, much of it sold through buying clubs organized by hundreds of the company’s lo­ cals.22 The Grain Growers’ Grain Company was planned as an inter­ provincial marketing agency based on a high degree of class solidar­ ity. This regionally united approach, however, was soon undermined by the provincial loyalties of farmers and the ambitions of provincial politicians. The main focus of contention was the construction of grain elevators. An expensive operation, beyond the capacity of most com­ munities, the construction of elevator facilities required the participa­ tion of either large commercial organizations or governments. Despite its rapid growth, the G G G could not meet the demands of the elevator business before 1914, meaning that governments had to become in­ volved in new construction. In Manitoba, a harried Roblin govern­ ment prematurely agreed to government ownership of a large number of elevators in 1909. Within three years, this project had faltered, because of inadequate leadership, unsatisfactory farmer support, and increasing criticism by the G G G . In 1912, this unfortunate experiment ended when the provincial government leased its elevators to the GGG.

In Saskatchewan, the quest for sufficient elevators developed along different lines. There, the farmers were an organized, powerful politi­ cal force, and they pressured the provincial government to enter the elevator business. The executive of the Saskatchewan Grain Growers’ Association became particularly aggressive, and some of its leaders became important forces in the provincial government. The most notable leader was Charles A. Dunning, a British immigrant who ultimately became manager of the Saskatchewan Co-operative Eleva­ tor Company when it was established in 1911. The Co-op, as it was

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

15

popularly called, hardened bonds between the leaders of the organ­ ized farmers and the provincial Liberal Party, bonds originally formed in 1905 when W. R. Motherwell and George Langley had joined the government.23 This alliance, which remained fast until at least the early twenties, meant that the Co-op, though technically independent, relied heavily upon government funds specifically and the government connection generally.24 Though theoretically neutral in politics, the Co-op was thus deeply entwined in the political processes of the province,25 and for that reason always remained suspect to socialists and co-operative purists. Alberta farmers were forced onto yet a different path. In 1910 the United Farmers of Alberta established a committee to investigate alternative elevator schemes, including those emerging in the other Prairie provinces. The committee was not impressed by complete government control as practised in Manitoba, but it was attracted by the system developed by Saskatchewan Co-op. Its report recom­ mended that the government provide low-interest loans so that an independent co-operative could be founded to market grains and other commodities. As in the case of Saskatchewan, the farmers in each locality would be expected to raise the initial fifteen per cent of the capital needed. This plan was speedily adopted by a majority of the UFA executive and by the Alberta government.26 The Alberta Co­ operative Elevator Company that resulted, however, was not as close to government circles as its Saskatchewan counterpart, meaning that funds were more difficult to find. Thus, the Alberta co-operators were forced to seek aid from the Grain Growers’ Grain Company, the only other major source of loans then available. Inevitably, this develop­ ment meant that the two organizations were drawn together into an alliance and ultimately a merger. All three organizations, the Grain Growers, Saskatchewan Co-op, and Alberta Co-operative Elevators, prospered in the years before 1915. Collectively, they owned over four hundred elevators, had the support of the organized farmers of the Prairies, and represented a potentially immense political force. They were a testimony to both the class consciousness of the agrarian societies of the West and the growth of a widespread interest in the possibilities of co-operative action. This rapid development by the grain growers’ organizations led dairy farmers to reassess their co-operatives and other farmers to explore the potential of co-operative action. The dairy co-operatives already in existence moved slowly toward integration, notably in Sas­

16

EACH FOR ALL

katchewan, and there was a continuous though only moderately suc­ cessful effort to create new co-operative dairies. Prairie livestock and poultry producers began to investigate co-operative marketing as well, but, again, with only limited success.27 Local associations of various farmers’ organizations did profitably market their members’ livestock and poultry, but their experiments were not large enough to affect seriously the industries involved.28 In Alberta during 1910 and 1911 the UFA attempted to organize hog marketing on a co-operative basis with government assistance, but had limited immediate success. It was difficult for the province’s hog producers to conceptualize the market­ ing system on a broad scale, and few were willing to risk their liveli­ hood for a scheme in many ways untested.29 Finally, though, in 1914, Alberta Co-op Elevators did open a marketing program on the Cal­ gary livestock market. A straight commission system, this program successfully marketed hogs, cattle, and sheep. Most of the livestock marketed through Alberta Co-op was gathered by local co-operative marketing associations, for the most part developed within UFA lo­ cals.30 Despite this slow progress by other kinds of producers, there was little doubt that “co-operation” had seized the imagination of Prairie farmers before 1914. The three grain-marketing co-ops had demon­ strated the possibilities of co-operative action, while farmers in other commodities were not alienated despite the slow progress their organi­ zations had achieved. Because of the widespread belief in mutual aid, the successes of some Canadian co-ops and the prosperous precedents in several North Atlantic countries, Prairie producers had glimpsed the potential that their movement possessed. Ill

Developments on the Prairies naturally encouraged farming groups in other Canadian regions to turn to the organized co-operative move­ ment. There were positive and negative reasons for this growing gen­ eral interest in the Maritimes, Ontario, and British Columbia. On the one hand, urbanization was opening up new markets, that could be profitably tapped by producers with dependable, quality-controlled commodities; on the other, and paradoxically enough, many pre­ viously stable agricultural areas were in decline, the victims of compe­ tition from other regions, the exodus of their youth, and the uneco­ nomic size of their farms. Caught in this pull and push, many farmers, especially those influenced by opinion makers in departments of agri­ culture and agricultural colleges, turned to co-operative techniques.

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

17

Nowhere were these patterns better dem onstrated than in the M ari­ times where many rural areas had been in a state o f near-crisis since the 1880s. Rural depopulation was the first m ajor problem for these areas, especially those in Nova Scotia where the eastern counties (excluding Cape Breton) declined from 89,110 in 1881 to 77,764 in 1911.31 Antigonish County, in fact, once am ong the province’s more prosperous agricultural counties, gained in those years the unenviable record o f becoming C anada’s fastest-declining county. The second major problem was a faulty m arketing system: the marketing o f most commodities in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries relied heavily upon individualized and uncertain m arketing m ethods or upon complicated patterns o f jobbing and wholesaling. The third was the decline of the old sense of well-being created by self-sufficiency and isolation: as the city spread to the country, disenchantm ent set in, and those who wanted to preserve rural ways o f life were forced to undertake determined educational and economic programs. While Maritime farmers had started, through dairies and mutuals, to combat these problems by the use o f co-operative action in the nineteenth century,32 they began their serious involvement with or­ ganized co-operation at the same time that the G G G was developing. Starting in 1906, the Annapolis apple growers began to organize their co-operative marketing organizations.33 Five years later, they formed the United Fruit Growers, a co-operative that soon became the m ajor m arketing organization in the Valley.34 In the same year, 1911, a representative of the Dominion D epartm ent o f Agriculture, T. A. Benson, helped organize the Prince Edward Island Co-operative Egg and Poultry Association; it soon became the m ajor m arketing organi­ zation for those commodities on the Island. Benson’s involvement was indicative of an increased interest by federal and provincial governments in both co-operation and m arket­ ing. By 1914, all three M aritime provinces had co-operative legisla­ tion. Starting in the same year the federal government, through its Agricultural Instruction Act, helped finance increased activities by the provincial agricultural departm ents. Fieldm en were appointed throughout the region, and some o f these men were interested in co­ operation. The best known o f these was F ather Hugh M acPherson, a brilliant, ebullient priest from Antigonish County.35 M acPherson was particularly effective because he brought to his task two im portant connections: he taught at St. Francis Xavier College, whose teachers were increasingly preoccupied with socio-economic problems, and he was well known at T ruro’s agricultural college, an institution then becoming interested in encouraging co-operative action. Unlike the

18

EACH FOR ALL

Prairies, in fact, the M aritimes developed a co-operative m ovem ent that relied, even in the early years, as much on governm ent officials and college teachers as on farm leaders. This reliance was both a symptom and a cause of the weakness that long characterized the region’s agrarian co-ops. Southern Ontario was somewhat different. A region where serious farming had been widely practised for a century, it had m any prosper­ ous areas where farmers using m odem agricultural methods had read­ ily available markets. But rural depopulation was perplexing in both prosperous and marginal agricultural areas, and rural life was ob­ viously threatened by extensive urbanization.36 Alarm over these problems mounted in the early twentieth century, stim ulated by need and articulated by a very effective leadership. The leadership was capable in part because it was well-educated: the rural prosperity of the late nineteenth century had allowed considerable num bers o f farm youth to study longer than their parents at the O ntario Agricultural College and at various universities. And, for those who had not gained much advanced education, there were am ple opportunities to learn about agronomy, public affairs, and the co-operative m ovem ent through farmers’ organizations and an effective agrarian press.37 It was not until the advent of cinema, mass-circulation daily newspapers, professional entertainment, the library movement, and the develop­ ment of the large multi-purpose schools—all developments associated with the early twentieth century—that the more prosperous rural areas dramatically fell behind urban centres culturally and intellectually. The Ontario farmers, especially their leaders—men like W. C. Good, E. C. Drury, and W. A. Amos—were also aware o f the devel­ opments on the Prairies. Many O ntarians had visited the western provinces, and all the farm leaders had neighbours or relatives who had moved westward before or just as the century opened. These informal ties were further cemented by the extensive circulation of the Grain Growers’ Guide and by the developm ent o f the C anadian Coun­ cil o f Agriculture. The Council, organized in 1909 and 1910, was the result o f the work o f Drury, Good, Partridge, and Roderick Mc­ Kenzie. It was the first successful effort at forming a truly national farm organization for educational and lobbying activities. Among its numerous programs, the Council urged the adoption o f co-operative methods, and it devoted some o f its publication and research budgets to the furtherance o f co-operative organizations across the country. At the same time, the regular meetings o f the Council provided oppor­ tunities for Ontario farmers to learn about co-operative developments farther west.

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

19

It is understandable then that southern O ntario farmers increased their co-operative activities between 1900 and 1914. Cream eries and mutuals, building on their nineteenth-century experience, expanded steadily in num ber and size during the period.38 Three pork packing co-operatives were begun, though only one, in St. Thomas, proved to be successful. Apple-packing and selling associations appeared throughout the main fruit-growing regions, mostly because small or­ chard men were trying to break into the growing American and western markets. In 1906 eleven o f these organizations (out of approx­ imately twenty-five then in operation) met in Toronto and formed the Ontario Co-operative Fruit G rowers’ Association.39 The success of this association, as well as that o f num erous independent fruit-shipping co-operatives, encouraged other types o f co-operative marketing. In 1909 the honey producers organized a prem ature m arketing co-opera­ tive, as did the tobacco growers in 1914.40 And, in that same period, as in other English-Canadian regions, num erous egg circles were de­ veloped on a local basis, mostly by farm women attem pting to make more money from the hens they traditionally cared for. The main co-operative developed by O ntario farmers during the period, however, was the United Farm ers’ Co-operative.41 Along with its sister institution, the United Farm ers o f O ntario,42 it was developed in hopes o f unifying Ontario farmers. As the century opened, the province’s farmers were divided institutionally into locals of the Do­ minion Grange, various government-sponsored clubs, and special-pur­ pose co-operatives organized for insurance, dairying, and fruit m arket­ ing. These divisions obviously weakened the farm ers’ impact and prompted a few leaders to seek a stronger voice through the new organizations. According to their plans, the UFO would serve as an educational and lobbying organization charged with elevating “ rural people to a higher plane o f citizenship”,43 while the United Farm ers’ Co-op would serve as a retailing and wholesaling agency for all kinds of O ntario farmers. Five farmers, W. C. Good, J. J. Morrison, Anson G roh, J. Z. Frazer, and E. C. Drury, carried out the organization o f the two institutions.44 Knowing little about co-operative thought when they undertook the projects in 1913 and 1914, they called upon G '■rge Keen, the secretary o f the recently-formed Co-operative Union of Canada. Keen lived in Brantford and was a close friend o f W. C. Good. After gaining advice from the Agricultural O rganization So­ ciety in England, Keen served as the group’s co-operative expert and temporary secretary during the incorporation proceedings. K een’s ad­ vice was particularly valuable because the farm leaders could not rely

20

EACH FOR ALL

upon the advice proffered by an O ntario governm ent unfam iliar with farmer-supply and marketing co-operatives. The main problem they faced was to establish a way in which the societies owning the co­ operative could fairly control it. After considerable discussion, and with Keen’s reluctant acquiescence, a compromise system was worked out: the co-op would be owned by m em ber associations, each with one vote; surpluses would be distributed on the basis o f patronage; and interest on capital would be limited, but at a relatively high level. These provisions were suspect for two reasons: leading co-operators in the international movement at that time preferred to have feder­ ated societies (societies owned by m em ber co-operatives) controlled by voting based on participation; and, generally, the relatively high inter­ est on capital (seven per cent) was thought to be too high. But, even more significantly, some idealistic co-operators, such as George Keen, looked suspiciously at some o f the early UF Co-op leaders, notably J. J. Morrison. From the beginning, Morrison envisioned the new co­ operative as a broadly based but centralized organization with head­ quarters in Toronto. Concerned about economies o f scale, and anx­ ious to attract superior management, Morrison and the more prag­ matic Ontario farmers were im patient with local societies and opposed to granting them much autonomy. In contrast, such idealists as George Keen and W. C. G ood believed in strong local societies which would give directions to their servant, the central organization. This struggle between local co-operatives and the central society opened first in Ontario; it would soon be a feature o f other, especially agrarian, co-operatives as well. The issue was vital because it brought into conflict two o f the prime goals of co-operatives before 1914 and later: the improvement of local economies and the benefits o f pooled activities. Co-ops, especially the rural ones, were determ ined efforts by local groups to resolve their own economic and social problems. Just as significantly, they were attem pts to benefit from the union o f resources, attempts that logically led to the integration o f m em ber organizations. There were no easy solutions to the centralist-local tensions thus produced. They would perplex the co-operatives o f En­ glish Canada for generations thereafter, and it is not surprising that Ontario farmers failed to foresee all the problem s when they organ­ ized the UF Co-op. In British Columbia, the agrarian co-operative m ovem ent took a different turn. In that province there were two main sources for agricultural co-operation: the dairy farmers, especially those in the Fraser Valley area, and the fruit growers, notably those in the O kana­

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

21

gan Valley. Both groups initiated co-operative m arketing systems in the 1890s, in hopes of exploiting expanding markets in V ancouver and the mining towns o f the Kootenays. The provincial D epartm ent of Agriculture, until the years o f the twentieth century, strongly encour­ aged co-operative marketing, particularly am ong dairy producers. It did so because of the determ ination o f J. R. Anderson, the d epart­ ment’s first deputy minister. Anderson, from O ntario, impressed by the co-operative enthusiasm o f the federal departm ent’s J. W. Robertson and Professor J. A. Ruddick, attem pted to duplicate Cen­ tral C anada’s strong support for co-operative dairies. Through his efforts, acts were passed in 1894 and 1895 allowing for the organiza­ tion o f dairy co-operatives. By 1914 more than twenty had developed, and a dozen had achieved stability. The development o f co-operatives am ong fruit growers relied less upon government initiative. In 1894 the Kelowna Shippers’ U nion was formed to cater to the market in the Kootenays and ultimately on the Prairies. It opened warehouses in Kelowna and Slocan, but they flourished for only a few years. It was followed by other farmerowned, partly co-operative institutions sponsored by the B.C. Fruit Growers’ Association, but these too had difficulty achieving stability. The problems were manifold: com petition from the U nited States, wildly fluctuating m arket prices, inadequate m anagem ent, limited capital, and, perhaps most significantly, fiercely independent produc­ ers. It would be decades before B.C. fruit growers would develop the capacity and the discipline to organize their own co-operative m arket­ ing system.45 The development o f farmers’ co-operatives in B.C. was also hin­ dered by the pre-eminence of the Farm ers’ Institutes. The Institutes patterned after those in Ontario, were developed from 1897 onward with considerable government assistance. Although technically inter­ ested in co-operative marketing, the Institutes were conservative in outlook and tended to concentrate more on “scientific agriculture” and social or cultural issues. Thus, B.C. farmers were not agitated to the same extent as their Prairie or O ntario brethren by the agrarian radicalism o f the early twentieth century. In a general way, they would retain that more conservative bent until at least the 1970s. IV

In contrast to the power quickly developed and greater power prom ­ ised by most agrarian co-operatives, the consum er societies o f the

22

EACH FOR ALL

1900 to 1914 period were weak and decentralized. As with most forms of co-operative activity in Canada, they had their nineteenth-century antecedents. Probably the first store in C anada was opened in Stellarton, a mining community in Pictou County, Nova Scotia, during 1861. It survived numerous hardships until forced to close during economic­ ally difficult times in 1915. At least ten other stores were opened in the mining districts o f Nova Scotia during the last forty years of the nineteenth century.46 Similarly, in mining com munities in British Co­ lumbia and Alberta, co-operative stores appeared briefly in the 1880s and 1890s, only to disappear almost as quickly. And, as in many American cities, stores were organized in the m anufacturing areas of the larger cities, in Halifax, Montrdal, W innipeg, and Toronto, during the 1860s and again in the 1880s, though all o f these had short life and minimal impact.47 During the early twentieth century new stores appeared all across Canada, and they generally resembled one o f three types. The first kind, obvious continuations o f the nineteenth-century experience and closely tied to trades unionism, appeared in the mining com munities o f both coasts. In the East, stores were developed in such coal-mining areas as Dominion, Glace Bay, Sydney, and Sydney Mines between 1902 and 1905. The Sydney Mines store, formed after a fire had destroyed a co-operative that had existed for over forty years, was a particularly im portant one. Dom inated by newly arrived British m in­ ers with strong co-operative backgrounds, it prospered and soon be­ came the largest consumer society in N orth America. F arth er west, between 1906 and 1914, societies appeared in Alberta and British Columbia among the miners o f such com munities as Colem an, M er­ ritt, Nanaimo, Ladysmith, Michel, Natal, and Hillcrest. All o f the western stores were small, retailing a maximum trade o f $100,000 each per year,48 and most were reactions to existing retail systems, espe­ cially company stores or exploitive independent merchants. The second kind of store was an offshoot o f the producer co­ operative movement. The G G G , the United Farm ers’ Co-op o f O ntario and the other m arketing organizations early developed supply depart­ ments to meet the most im portant special needs o f their members. Typically, they purchased binder twine, fertilizers, insecticides, and machinery for their members and distributed them through buying clubs or independently organized co-operative stores.49 There were some three hundred buying clubs and at least forty stores developed on the Prairies between 1906 and 1914.50 The most am bitious of the rural consumer programs was launched in 1907 by the Society o f Equity in Alberta. Against the advice o f its central organization in the

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

23

United States, the society opened several all-purpose co-operatives. Its leaders should have been less headstrong; prem aturely organized, ineptly run, their program disintegrated within a year.51 Elsewhere, in Ontario the m ulti-purpose co-operatives encouraged by the United Farmers’ Co-operative often naturally developed into stores, and this tendency was apparent even during the organization’s form ation pe­ riod. All this activity in most o f rural English C anada, indicates that by 1914 farmers were deeply interested in the co-operative purchasing of supplies and consumer goods: the main question was not w hether this interest would continue; rather, it was w hether it would be devel­ oped on the basis of local control or centralized direction. The third kind of store was found in m anufacturing sections of larger towns and cities scattered across C anada. New W estminster, Broadview,52 Winnipeg, Windsor, G uelph, Brantford, Toronto, Brockville, Ottawa, Magog, and Halifax were only a few o f the centres that developed stores before 1914. Most o f these stores began as reactions to inflation, especially in the years 1904-07 when food costs annually rose between fifteen and twenty per cent.53 Trades unionism itself was a further source o f enthusiasm. Earlier, in the nineteenth century, the Knights o f Labor had supported co-operative activity, including la­ bour co-partnerships,54 and this general support was m aintained in the twentieth century by the Trades and Labor Congress. Each year, the TLC endorsed co-operative action, and undoubtedly these endorse­ ments contributed to the development o f the stores that appeared. Unfortunately, as far as the m ovem ent was concerned, each o f the three varieties of stores had particular individual problem s, while they all faced common difficulties. The ‘stores in m ining districts possessed the most unusual individual problems. Mining com m unities between 1900 and 1914 had uneven economic histories because o f lengthy strikes, depleted collieries, and changing markets; prosperity was fleet­ ing at best; security was practically unknown. Stores could seldom survive the periodic depressions that seemed inevitable and in fact were often among the first institutions to be affected. One o f the main reasons for their vulnerability was that they frequently encountered intense pressures from their memberships for credit during periods of general economic adversity. Thus, whenever caught in depressions or long strikes, most were forced to extend credit to the breaking point and consequently went bankrupt. In better times, only a few were able to build up large reserves because almost inevitably, surpluses were distributed to the understandably acquisitive memberships, leav­ ing too little for necessary reserve funds.55 While more frequently successful, the independent stores in rural

24

EACH FOR ALL

areas were troubled most by inadequate understanding o f co-opera­ tive principles. They tended to be afterthoughts o f men and women who had organized marketing co-operatives, m eaning that several were initiated without sufficient planning. A few were uneconomic from the start, being formerly private stores sold by independent retailers to unsuspecting com munity groups. Buying out private m er­ chants could work, as had been dem onstrated by the Right R elation­ ship League in M innesota and the Dakotas, but to be successful, each project had to be carefully investigated and cautiously developed. Moreover, the entire program had to be undertaken in several com­ munities simultaneously so as to offset local problem s and to take advantage o f economies of scale. Unfortunately, perhaps, this ap­ proach was never seriously tried in C anada.36 Instead, Canadian farmers took over existing stores on a local basis and often for hu­ m anitarian reasons. Thus, when a retailer grew old and wished to retire or when he faced apparently tem porary problems, he could sometimes prevail on his farm er customers to buy him out. The willingness of farmers to do so suggests that relationships between store owners and their customers were frequently good, a situation which also helps to explain generally why more stores did not de­ velop.57 While organized like stores in mining and rural com munities, con­ sumer societies in the industrial areas had more difficulties in attract­ ing loyal and affluent memberships. W orking conditions were better than in the mining towns, escape into the middle class was apparently more frequent, a variety of employers was available, and com petition between retailers seemed to keep prices down. The Trades and La­ bour Councils became the usual organizing m edia in towns where struggling co-operatives did emerge. The organizers almost invariably were British immigrants who also played prom inent roles in the trades unions o f the time.58 But, despite the best efforts o f these organizers, most o f the stores developed between 1906 and 1914 disappeared quickly. One o f the main reasons for this was that C anadian trades unionists did not seriously embrace stores as an im portant defender o f their interests. In G reat Britain and some parts o f C ontinental Europe, trades unionists had become loyal supporters o f consum er co-ops because they believed that it was as essential to have some control over how their money was spent as it was to influence how much money they received. This idea never gained wide acceptance in Canada, where trades unionists relied almost exclusively upon unions and political parties to defend their interests.

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

25

In addition to the problem s peculiar to each type o f store, there were difficulties that were common to them all. One o f these was developing good management. According to traditional co-operative theory, the board o f directors was elected by the m em bership to supervise the store or stores in a general way. The board was expected to set policies on credit, pricing, and expansion and to educate the members so that they would support the store on a day-to-day basis, to supervise the staff, to carry out board policies, and to expand the movement. Co-operatives, in short, placed strong dem ands upon boards and managers from both business and m ovem ent standpoints. It was especially difficult in the early years to find m anagers who would accept these pressures, largely because they could usually find more lucrative employment in the developing chain stores. G ood managers, too, usually resented the activities o f overly zealous board members. W henever boards were constantly active, when board m em ­ bers were shouldering the responsibility o f store operation, it was generally a sign that the store was in difficulty; they possessed either weak management, an overly-active board, or an impossible com peti­ tive situation. The failure to master the difficult relationship between board and management also stemmed partly from an inadequate understanding of the retail trade by board members. In contrast, directors o f m arket­ ing co-operatives seldom had serious problem s in com prehending the main elements o f the business they supervised: they and their m em ­ bers understood the business from the beginning, and efficient, sym­ pathetic managers, usually former farmers, could be hired away from competitors. Promoters o f stores, on the other hand, seldom knew much about their work. For most o f them, balance sheets were mys­ teries, inventories a bothersom e nuisance, and price-setting a guessing game. Indeed, to survive most stores needed continuous advice, not only in the organizational period but also in the periods o f adversity that inevitably occurred. U nfortunately, finding such advice was not easy, either in the 1900-14 period or afterward. v Consumers’ societies had only two possible sources for advice—gov­ ernment departments and other co-operative organizations. Provincial governments were forced to take an interest before 1914 because they were required to incorporate co-operatives either through general acts or through special legislation.59 Frequently, such incorporating legisla­

26

EACH FOR ALL

tion included a provision that each co-operative subm it annually a detailed summary o f its financial position. In time, these summ aries would be useful enough in providing inform ation on w hat expense ratios and reserve-fund levels were appropriate. In time, too, civil servants charged with collecting these statistics would become effec­ tive analysts o f co-operative businesses and useful advisors to their boards. More importantly, though, co-operatives wanting outside ad­ vice were forced (in the best co-operative tradition) to turn to the development of their own system. The institution that benefited most from this development was the Co-operative U nion of C anada. The Union was organized in 1909. In origin, it was entirely the work o f co-operators interested in the consum er movement. From at least late 1908, leaders o f stores in Brantford, G uelph, and H amilton had been exchanging notes not only am ong themselves but also with counterparts in Dominion, Glace Bay, and Sydney, Nova Scotia. They were interested in sharing experiences and, more im portantly, in working together to promote the passage o f suitable national legisla­ tion for co-operative organizations. The most active o f these leaders and the man who provided most o f the impetus for the U nion’s formation was George Keen, president o f the Brantford society. Bom in Stoke-on-Trent, England, in 1869, Keen had migrated to C anada in 1904. In 1906 he had joined with a group consisting mainly o f other British immigrants to form the Brantford society.60 He became presi­ dent in 1909 and rem ained involved with it until its brief career ended, undermined by continual squabbling, in 1912. Another figure who contributed substantially to the CUC’s early development was Samuel Carter, an English im m igrant who had been bom in 1859 and had migrated to N orth America in the 1870s. After working in the American cotton industry for a few years, he had moved to G uelph in 1880, where he had opened a knitting mill. By 1890, he had become the owner o f the Royal K nitting Mills Com ­ pany,61 and early in the twentieth century he had become active in a num ber of community causes. One o f these was a local co-operative store, the W orkingman’s Co-operative Association o f G uelph, and Carter had become its president by 1909. Keen and Carter were the main instigators o f a meeting held in Hamilton on March 6, 1909, for the purpose o f creating the Co­ operative Union. They were joined by representatives from the H am ­ ilton Co-operative concern, notably J. P. W helan, its president, and V. C. Clowes, its secretary. Three Maritime representatives, their train delayed by snow storms, did not arrive in H am ilton until the day after

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

27

the founding convention. At the meeting, the Co-operative U nion of Canada was formed, Carter as president, Keen as secretary, Clowes as treasurer, and the following as vice-presidents: J. P. W helan, A. W. McMullen, manager o f the store in D ominion, N ova Scotia, and R. H. Coats, a statistician in the federal D epartm ent o f Labour. The Union, however, then and for many years thereafter, had little apparent strength. It was divided between two regions and had no prom inent national leaders. It was poorly financed and was ignored by the main agrarian co-operatives. Nevertheless, the Union did have an im pact even in the years before 1914. It did so primarily because of the devotion o f George Keen. A medium-sized man, always imm aculately dressed, with a perfectly trimmed goatee, Keen was a devoted enthusiast o f the co­ operative movement. A devout liberal catholic, he saw in the co­ operative movement the solution to many of the w orld’s problem s. He had not worked out this approach, oddly enough, when he was in England but had come to it as a result o f joining reform circles in Brantford. While active in those circles, he had read widely in the writings o f late-nineteenth-century co-operative theorists, notably Holyoake whose books he studied thoroughly for over thirty years. He also was a compulsive letter writer who corresponded with co-operative leaders elsewhere, especially those with sim ilar attitudes living in G reat Britain. Keen’s approach to the co-operative m ovem ent exemplified what Charles Gide, the French co-operative theorist, called “ mystic co­ operation”. Gide, who studied the movement during the late nine­ teenth and early twentieth centuries, found a variety o f motivation, from marxism to philanthropy, evident am ong co-operative support­ ers. He identified mystic co-operators as one o f the more im portant varieties, arguing they were distinct because they believed the move­ ment by itself could reform the world. Specifically, he described mys­ tic co-operators in the following way: they believe that each co-operative society which obeys the laws that it has made for itself constitutes a little world organized in conformity with justice and social benefit, and that it is sufficient to let it develop spontaneously, either by growth or imitation, to realize in the more or less distant future the best of all possible worlds.62

Keen accepted this approach as did a surprisingly large num ber of Canadian co-operators. On an imm ediate level, he and they were preoccupied by the ancient quest for “ the just price” and “production

28

EACH FOR ALL

for use” . They envisioned a society where the possession o f capital would be of little importance; goods would be distributed at cost and where “conspicuous consum ption” would be elim inated. They were also convinced that laissez-faire economics and Social Darwinism were completely false in stressing the competitive ethic. According to them, man was naturally co-operative but had been betrayed by corrupt leadership, faulty education, and indulgent individualism. They saw co-operatives—especially stores—as the ideal place to de­ velop what Keen called “associative intelligence”, a capacity to sink oneself in a large group and a recognition that only join t efforts could develop the world’s resources for the benefit of all. Keen’s devotion to these ideas deepened as the years went by, but it was already well established even in 1909. Co-operative ideology or “co-operatism”, as he liked to call it, became for him a “social reli­ gion”. Concerned about immorality in the business world, he believed co-operatives could allow individuals to practise their religious beliefs in their economic activities. And, though he em phasized the store as the heart of his co-operative reform program, his long-range dream was for the building o f the co-operative com monwealth. His dream was suggested in a speech he gave in 1911: Modem Co-operation . . . had its genesis in the theory of Robert Owen that man was the creature of his environment, that the sin, misery, poverty and crime in the world were mainly attributable to his unfortunate social sur­ roundings, and that, by the promotion of righteousness in our social and economic relationship, the environment, both morally and materially, would be so improved that poverty and crime would disappear from our midst.63

Keen popularized this w ider message, this mixture o f Owenism, Fabianism, and social gospel, through the Co-operative U nion’s jo u r­ nal, The Canadian Co-operator. The Co-operator featured an occasion­ ally biting social criticism, descriptions o f co-operative developments overseas, and reports from C anadian co-operators. Perhaps the most practical purpose served by the journal was the exchange o f inform a­ tion between CUC affiliates. The num ber o f affiliates never exceeded fifteen before 1914, and, isolated as they were, this exchange was valuable. The affiliates were particularly affected by the recession o f 1913-14, when six o f them were forced to close their doors. New societies joined, however, and they kept the Union alive. They also made possible the survival o f The Canadian Co-operator, an im portant consideration because it continued to develop as the foremost voice for a united English-Canadian movement.

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

29

The early adversity produced still other benefits. Failures can pro­ vide lessons, and Keen learned as various U nion affiliates stum bled and fell. In fact, almost from the beginning he could pick out the more common problems and advise on these to the affiliates that remained or later developed. In the process, he began to provide the advisory services needed by all new co-operatives. Thus, he explained how balance sheets should be filled out and read; how m anagers should try to train employees; how directors should devise and use monthly sales figures; how sales-to-reserve and revenue-to-cost ratios should be generated; and how sales-per-m an-hour should be tab u ­ lated. It was necessary, troublesome, and thankless work, but it un­ doubtedly helped stronger stores to survive. It also brought Keen and the Union into close contact with num erous stores all across the country and helped to generate a sense o f m ovem ent am ong the supporters of those stores. VI

Publication o f The Canadian Co-operator and the developm ent of advisory services helped the Union fulfil its educational and leader­ ship roles. The other im portant task the founders envisaged for the CUC was pressuring the federal governm ent to pass legislation govern­ ing the incorporation o f co-operatives. This task was largely a reaction to initiatives already taken by co-operative sympathizers in Ottawa. Easily the most im portant lobbyist was Alphonse Desjardins, then the official reporter o f debates for the House o f Commons. Desjardins was a remarkably capable co-operative enthusiast who, by 1909, had already established an extensive caisse populaire or credit union movement in Quebec. His interests went beyond banking, however, and he envisioned the developm ent o f a com prehensive co-operative movement. To build this dream, he began, as early as 1905, to lobby for a general enabling act for co-operatives. He found support among a few members o f Parliament and, consequently, from 1906 to 1914, Parliament considered a variety o f co-operative measures. It was in response to the first o f these considerations that the CUC undertook its lobbying role. Desjardins’ interest in co-operative banking was first stim ulated in 1898, during a parliam entary debate on the failure o f finance com pa­ nies and banks to meet fairly or adequately the credit needs o f the working classes. The companies, he had found out, frequently charged usurious interest rates, and the banks were ordinarily not interested in

30

EACH FOR ALL

the small personal-loans field. As he delved into the credit problem s that resulted from these circumstances, Desjardins becam e increas­ ingly alarmed. Naturally concerned about rural Qudbec because o f his own background and its poverty, he came to believe that FrenchCanadian farmers were held back largely by a lack o f capital. Once seized o f the problem, he determ ined to solve it and began a study of European co-operative banks, especially the parish-based system or­ ganized by Luigi Luzzatti in Italy. He corresponded with Luzzatti and others,64 and, using their advice and his own judgm ent, built up his own system. In 1900 Desjardins organized his first people’s bank or caisse popu­ la te at L6vis across the St. Lawrence River from Quebec City. It was very much like Luzzatti’s banks: one m em ber-one vote, lim ited return on capital, loans normally on the basis o f character not property, and the use o f the parish as an organizing bond o f association. Unlike most o f his European counterparts, however, Desjardins insisted on limited liability, a principle he wisely recognized was essential to success in North America. Between 1900 and 1909 D esjardins helped organize over one hundred caisses mostly in rural Quebec. The suc­ cess they achieved was impressive, and suddenly, Qudbecois who previously could not borrow money now could borrow funds to rede­ velop their farms or to improve their homes. At the same time, Desjardins believed that the caisses were having a salutary moral impact by encouraging thrift and by rew arding “good” character through linking credit to an individual’s reputation. The success o f the caisses soon attracted attention both inside and outside Qudbec.65 Because o f his position in Ottawa, Desjardins had ample opportunity to describe his people’s banks to members of Par­ liament, civil servants, and even the social elite. He particularly im­ pressed F. D. Monk, a M ontreal Conservative with broad social interests.66 Monk, like Desjardins a liberal Catholic in social thought, was alarmed by the growth o f class divisions in the early twentieth century. He quickly came to believe that co-operation could am elio­ rate these divisions by distributing wealth fairly and by bringing various classes together in jo in t projects. W ith prom ptings from Des­ jardins, he became the most persistent supporter o f proposed co­ operative bills between 1908 and 1911. There were other supporters o f co-operatives in Ottawa as well. The most prestigious was Earl Grey, the G overnor G eneral. An enthusiast for numerous causes, Grey was a particularly strong advocate o f co­ operative action. In the 1880s and 1890s he had encouraged co-ops on

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

31

his estates, notably stores and a housing society organized by William Maxwell, the prom inent British co-operative leader. D uring the early 1890s he had helped organize the International Co-operative Alliance, and he was its first president from 1895 to 1917.67 While in Canada, Grey continued his work on behalf o f co-operatives, prom oting them in public addresses, arranging tours by British co-operative leaders, and even joining the caisse populaire de Ldvis. At the same time he encouraged his acquaintances to study co-operatives, including M ack­ enzie King who had already been impressed by co-operatives during a youthful sojourn in Britain. King consequently supported co-opera­ tives, albeit in his typically cautious way, seeing them as a promising way to help reduce class antagonisms. The activities of the O ttawa enthusiasts soon had their effect, and Parliament began to explore the co-operative movement in 1906. In that year, Monk introduced a bill providing for the federal incorpora­ tion o f co-operative banks. Because it came up late in the session, the bill was considered only briefly, and so Monk introduced another bill in the autum n of the same year. The new bill would have m ade possible the incorporation o f all kinds o f co-operatives, and thus it attracted considerable debate. As few parliam entarians had any knowledge o f co-operatives, the House decided to appoint a special committee to explore the movement and recommend appropriate leg­ islation. The House also probably decided to appoint a com mittee because o f the activities o f the Retail M erchants’ Association. The r m a , which was made up largely o f small retailers already alarm ed by the growth o f mail-order companies, seized upon the chance to fight the weaker, poorly organized co-operative movement. Thus r m a exec­ utives and members lobbied hard against the bill with both Wilfrid Laurier and Rodolphe Lemieux, the M inister o f Labour.68 They sent letters to the two men warning them that co-ops had destroyed the retail trade o f Edinburgh and that the promises o f co-operative enthu­ siasts were delusions. Specifically, they charged that co-operatives could be used to cheat workers; that co-operative m ethods offered false hopes to the working classes; and that co-op stores would further undermine the already beleaguered independent merchants. They even raised direct political threats. In March 1907, when an election was obviously in the ofTing, W. Moyer, the r m a ’s O ntario treasurer, warned: As [the bill] is a direct blow at the retail merchants they are naturally opposed to it, and with the influence they have all over the country, its

32

EACH FOR ALL

passage through the House would mean certain defeat to the Government at the next election.69

The committee met through the winter o f 1906-07 and subm itted its findings on April 11, 1907. The report included testimony from eleven witnesses. Desjardins, Monk, Lord Grey, and Mackenzie King made the strongest appeals on behalf o f co-operatives while E. M. Trowern and J. A. Beaudry o f the Retail M erchants’ Association outlined the arguments against them. The committee decided firmly on behalf o f co-operatives, endorsing the movement as a useful pacifier o f social unrest and particularly emphasizing the practical value o f co-operative banking.70 The report, though, was not completed early enough to permit the introduction o f legislation in the 1906-07 session, and Monk had to wait for the next session before he could introduce a private bill to permit the incorporation o f all kinds of co-operatives. The bill unanimously passed a rather disinterested House o f C om ­ mons early in 1908. It moved on to meet a storm in the Senate where the RMA launched a major campaign and sent “ a great m ob o f retail­ ers from Toronto, Montreal, and other places” to state their case to the politicians.71 It was the largest delegation to O ttawa to that time. In fact, it was so large that the Senate cham ber had to be used, after the day’s session, to allow the merchants to meet with Laurier and members of the Cabinet. In addition to the political pressure obviously suggested by the merchants’ march, the r m a effectively raised the question o f jurisdic­ tion. Monk and the supporters o f the bill believed that federal incor­ poration was legitimate for three reasons: because co-operatives were concerned with banking, a federal responsibility; because they would be uniform in organizational m ethod if they were regulated by federal departments; and because they would soon assume national and not just provincial or regional im portance.72 The opposition consisted mostly of provincial rights advocates in the Senate, and it was sup­ ported by submissions from provincial governments. In brief, this side argued that provinces had authority over the incorporation o f com pa­ nies with provincial objects, and (quite inaccurately) that many prov­ inces were already meeting co-operative needs.73 Stayed by the arguments o f the provincial rights advocates and influenced by the frantic appeals o f the r m a , the banking committee o f the Senate, asked to review the bill after second reading, rejected it outright. When the bill came up for third reading, a lively debate ensued in which all the arguments were again put. But the bill, after

Establishment o f Movement, 1900-1914

33

unanimous support in the House and two favourable readings in the Senate, was defeated nineteen votes to eighteen. The RMA had been so strong, and the “red-herring” o f provincial rights so convenient, that senators preferred to leave the m atter in provincial hands. This defeat in 1908 was a disaster for proponents o f federal legisla­ tion. F. D. Monk tried to have bills passed again in 1909, 1910, and 1911, but without effect. Even A rthur M eighen failed when he tried to secure legislation for co-operative banking in 1913. The Liberal and Conservative parties were indifferent to the movement, the r m a con­ tinued its effective lobbying,74 and not even the com bined forces o f the caisses populaires, the Prairie grain growers, and the consum er co­ operatives could gain action.75 As a result, none o f the bills intro­ duced between 1908 and 1914 passed the House o f Com mons and in fact, none achieved more than the most perfunctory consideration.76 Until 1972, the developm ent o f co-operatives in both English and French Canada would be, w hether co-operators liked it or not, in the hands o f provincial, not federal, civil servants. There would be no easy creation of an integrated national movement.

C H A PTER TWO

The State of the Movement, 1900-1914 Co-operation is a religion pure a n d simple. I t is som ething which all yo u r senses recognize and long f o r in proportion to the good there is in you. G rain G ro w ers’ G u id e, October 18, 1911, p. 20. There can be no question that the w orld’s econom ic fu tu re depends upon co-operative effort o f som e kind. The old, wasteful, com petitive system has had its day. H ardly a m onth goes by w ithout som e m erger o f trade interests being effected to exploit the m a n y in the interests o f the few . The tendency to effect econom ics in production and distribution by a merger o f interests is sound in principle, but vicious in the prevailing m ethod o f operation. The only alternatives are either the socialization o f the interests, o f the whole people, o f the production a n d distribution o f wealth, a dem and f o r which the com bines and trusts are feed in g , or the voluntary organization o f the p eo p le ’s labour and resources under the well-tried and well-proven principles o f the Co-operative M ovem ent. T h e C an a d ian C o -o p erato r, N ovem ber 1910, pp. 15-16.

T he failure to secure federal legislation a n d to unite federally should not in retrospect d etract from the successes achieved by the E nglishC anadian co-operative m ov em en t betw een 1900 and 1914. Pow erful institutions had em erged am o n g farm ers, som e stores w ere p rospering, and there was considerable interest th ro u g h o u t E nglish C a n a d a . M ore im portantly, by 1914, the m o v em en t had d eveloped its basic p attern s. T he challenge, then an d for m an y years afterw ard , w as to b uild upo n these foundations an d to develop an in teg rated m o v em en t th at tra n ­ scended its econom ic, social, geographic, in stitu tio n al, an d perso n ality differences. T he E nglish-C anadian m ovem ent by 1914 w as ch aracterized by a set o f com m on purposes, w ith the m ost im p o rtan t bein g a d e te rm in a ­ tion to help supporters o f co-operatives raise th eir sta n d a rd s o f living. M ore than selfishness was involved, how ever, since co -o p erato rs hoped to help the im poverished C an a d ian s fo u n d in every region even in the best o f the L au rier years: on the Prairies w hen the w h eat econom y staggered, in the in d u strial tow ns w hen u n em p lo y m en t o r 34

State o f Movement, 1900-1914

35

inflation reduced living stan d ard s, in the a g rarian areas o f C en tral and M aritim e C an ad a w hen rural d e p o p u la tio n a n d o u tside c o m p eti­ tion created poverty, an d in c o m p an y tow ns w hen low w ages and com pany stores produced in ad e q u a te food an d in ferio r housing. Such poverty, co-operators believed, was w idespread in C a n ad a, b u t it could be elim inated through develo p in g co-operative m eth o d s o f o p ­ erating business and social institutions. T hese m eth o d s, essentially adaptations o f the R ochdale rules, w ere ap p licab le to n early every kind o f activity an d h ad been w ell-tested in the co -o p erativ e m ove­ m ents o f oth er countries. C o-operators placed great faith in their system because they be­ lieved it could help society end ex ploitation o f lab o u rers an d farm ers by business and banking interests. By red u cin g the pow er o f capital and by elevating roles for consum ers, lab o u rers, and farm ers, cooperators believed they could en d p ro fiteerin g w hile p ro d u cin g goods more cheaply and distrib u tin g them m ore efficiently. C o -o p erato rs further believed th at th eir m ore ethical m ethods, based on n atu ral rights and individual involvem ent, w ere d estined to overcom e the selfcentred ways o f the bankers, businessm en, an d specu lato rs favoured by the existing econom ic system . W eak en ed by th eir ow n sinful ways, the baneful exploiters (so the co -o p erato rs believed) w ould u ltim ately be reform ed or rem oved by the aroused v irtue o f the la b o u rin g and farm ing classes. Strongly influenced by this conviction o f m o ral superiority, C a n a ­ dian co-operators im p arted a strong sense o f ethical p u rp o se to their organizations. T hey believed, in fact, th a t co -o p eratio n was vital in the essentially m oral struggles they saw in the w orld a ro u n d them . In particular, they hoped co -o p eratio n w ould help overcom e the se p a ra ­ tion o f religion from business life, the decline o f the fam ily as an institution, the alienation o f m an from n atu re, an d the dw in d lin g sense o f com m unity. In their desire to offset these th reats to the m o ral order an d to present a new holistic view o f m an, the co -o p erato rs were influenced by the cresting social gospel, in b oth its P ro testan t and C atholic m anifestations. T hey w ere also influ en ced by a co­ operative concern for m oral q uestions th at w ent back to such n in e­ teenth-century leaders as R o b ert O w en, E dw ard V an sittart N eale, J. G. H olyoake, and F rederick R aiffeisen. T o som e extent, the m ore m orally co ncerned E n g lish -C an ad ian cooperators were also influenced by A lphonse D esjardins. D esjard in s’ religious m otivation was well know n and w as d e m o n strated in the m em bership provisions he im posed w hen develo p in g caisses popu-

36

EACH FOR ALL

laires. H e insisted, for exam ple, th a t each sh a re h o ld e r be considered “ p u nctual in his p ay m en ts”, “so b e r” , “o f good h ab its” , “ in d u strio u s” , and “scrupulously ho n est” .1 Sim ilarly, E. A. P artridge, p e rh ap s the crucial figure in the em ergence o f the grain grow ers’ o rganizations, believed that co-operatio n was the m ain w eapon an enlig h ten ed p o p u ­ lation could em ploy against “ the financial b u ccan n eers” to bring ab o u t “ an industrial m illen n iu m ” .2 G eo rg e K een o f the C o-o p erativ e U nion had the sam e view o f co-operatives and in 1912 w rote: The fundamental principle as well as the supreme objective of genuine cooperators, from the days of Robert Owen until now, has been the physical, mental and moral improvement of man, the noblest work of God.3 This m oralistic purpose o f the co -o p erato rs n atu rally co m pelled them to direct considerable though u n rew ard ed concern tow ard th at m agnifier o f hu m an vice an d frailty, the em erg en t in d u strial city. M ackenzie K ing4 and F. D. M o n k 5 both conceived o f co -o p eratio n as an ideal solution to the class dissensions a n d social d islocation eviden t in C anad ian cities. But it was G eo rg e K een an d S am uel C a rte r who provided the m ost com plete d escription o f how the m o v em en t could cure the country’s u rb an ills. A side from p ro m o tin g stores to raise the living standards o f the w orking classes, C a rte r an d K een recom ­ m ended co-operative institutions, such as la b o u r co -p artn e rsh ip s and co-operative housing projects, especially designed for u rb a n c o n d i­ tions.6 C arter was particu larly im pressed by la b o u r c o -p artn ersh ip s (or businesses essentially controlled by the w orkers), and he tried unsuc­ cessfully to establish one in G u e lp h d u rin g 1910.7 G eo rg e K een, equally im pressed, spoke a b o u t them freq u en tly to la b o u r groups throughout Southern O ntario. T ypically, his m essage was as follows: Labour co-partnership is the one remedy for industrial war. It is the only principle which on an equitable basis harmonizes completely and effectually, the conflicting interests of labor and capital. It is the one method o f produc­ tion which makes strikes virtually impossible, for no man is anxious to strike against himself and jeopardize the integrity of his own capital in the process. 8

Sim ilarly, the two C U C leaders ad v o cated co-operative h o u sin g b e ­ cause they believed it gave the ten an ts control over th eir ow n hom e and, to a considerable extent, th eir ow n n eig h b o u rh o o d s. T hey glim psed this vision o f co-operative housing d ev elo p m en ts a fter listen­ ing in 1910 to H enry V ivian, a British p arlia m e n ta ria n an d co-operative leader invited to C a n a d a by Earl G rey. V ivian p articu larly im ­

State o f Movement, 1900-1914

37

pressed C arter an d K een by his e x u b e ra n t descrip tio n s o f the E aling housing developm ent, a co-operative v en tu re he h ad helped organize near L ondon. T hat project, w hich h ad started in 1903, b o asted low m ortgage paym ents o f $6 to $10 p e r m o n th ; w ide, p aved streets; com plete playgrounds; m eeting room s; an extensive library; an d a billiard room .9 A rguing th a t this m odel could be utilized for new housing developm ents in C an ad a, K een and C a rte r m ad e it a p a rt o f the co-operative m etropolises they envisioned em erging in the n ear future. In G eorge K een ’s words: The ideal Canadian city is a well thought-out and systematically developed scheme of co-partnership houses, occupied by workers engaged in labor co­ partnership factories, buying their merchandise from their own Co-operative store. Then the age of the exploiter will disappear and the reign of a happy, contented and cultured people will begin.10 But, while a few co-operato rs d eveloped u rb a n perspectives, m ost were prim arily concerned with pro tectin g and d ev elo p in g b oth sm all com m unities and the countryside. U ltim ately, m ost co -o p erato rs b e­ lieved, salvation w ould com e from outside, n o t from w ithin, the large urban centres. T hus it was m ost im p o rtan t th a t h in te rla n d areas be defended in p rep aratio n for the u ltim ate reform cam p aig n ag ain st the evils o f the developing in dustrial city. A grarian co -o p erato rs w ere particularly com m itted to the use o f co -o p eratio n in regions being drained o f their vitality by the large u rb an centres. T he strongest elem ent in the appeal o f the grain grow ers, for exam ple, w as the notion that the pooled strength o f the farm ers w ould be ab le to offset the collective pow er o f the econom ic-political lead ersh ip in such centres as T oronto an d W in n ip eg .11 Sim ilarly, the U n ited F a rm ers o f O ntario m ovem ent was firm ly attach ed to the id ea th at co -o p eratio n could save the rural society from its u rb a n th re a ts.12 A nd, finally, the sam e concept can be discerned in the w ork o f F a th e r H ugh M ac­ Pherson, one o f the m ain forces b eh in d the early ag rarian co -o p era­ tives o f eastern N ova S cotia.13 Even the non-agrarian co-o p erato rs w ere significantly m o tiv ated by the defensive purpose o f the early co-operatives. T h e early-tw entiethcentury urban co-operators, for exam ple, fo u n d th eir m ost sy m p a­ thetic listeners in the tow ns a n d sm all cities m ost exploited by the larger financial, distribution, an d ind u strial centres. C o -o p erativ es in the m ining towns o f British C olum bia, A lberta, a n d especially N ova Scotia were built on a desire to p ro tect local citizens from b oth the “ financial buccaneers” o f the m ajo r cities an d th eir local rep re se n ta­

38

EACH FOR ALL

tives, the m ine com pany officials.14 Sim ilarly, the co-operatives in such industrial tow ns as B rantford, G u elp h , H am ilto n , an d V alleyfield were built in part on resen tm e n t o f retailing an d w holesaling d o m in a ­ tion by T oronto and M ontreal. T h e adv ertisin g cam p aig n s o f the H am ilton and B rantford stores, for exam ple, w ere obviously directed against the T oronto m ail-o rd er co m p an ies,15 a n d all the societies affil­ iated w ith the C o-operative U n io n w ere strongly opp o sed to the im ­ personal large stores associated w ith the m a jo r cities.16 This em phasis on p rotecting local co m m u n ities led m an y co-operatives o f the pre-w ar years to u n d ertak e social o r cu ltu ral activities. M any consum er and m ark etin g societies h ad w o m en ’s guilds which undertook educational work an d did c o m m u n ity service. T h e grain growers were particu larly co n cern ed ab o u t “ cu ltu ral u p lift” and through the Guide op erated libraries, en co u rag ed read in g clubs, and prom oted activities for youth. In O n tario , the ag rarian s o rganized a separate institution, the U n ited F arm ers o f O n tario , to carry on ra th e r successfully the sam e kind o f activities. In N ova Scotia, m ost co­ operatives had enrich m en t program s, w ith the British C an a d ian in Sydney M ines being particularly devoted to sp o n so rin g varied social activities. In 1908 it began ho ld in g an n u a l picnics and, in later years, it funded a town band, a town choir, a th eatrical group (w hich p u t on som e co-operative plays, a few w ritten locally), an d a literary society. It also subsidized special events, such as the o n e d escribed by its m anager in 1912: we are having a Monster Gala Day on Monday, July 1 ... we expect 2000 Children in our Procession and each child who walks in the Procession will receive a Festival Packet made up by the C[o-operative]. W[hoIesale]. S o ­ ciety]. containing an assortment of Candies. We have also imported a num­ ber of Old Country Games namely Aunt Sally, Cocoa Nut Shies, Houpla, Love in a Tub, Football Game Etc. We have also 2 Pelaw Competitions one for Boys and one for Girls. The Prizes being given by the C.w.s. The Boys clean 1 Pair of Shoes The Girls clean '/« doz. Spoons The Mayor of our Town is the Judge of the Boot Competition___17 Such social activities m ight a p p e a r ra th e r trivial and rem ote in an age o f centralized, professionalized am u sem en ts. At the turn o f the century they were not; in fact, they w ere im p o rta n t p arts o f co­ operative efforts to m aintain the vitality o f sm aller com m unities. D e­ voted to the notion th at m an m ust strive to co n tro l the forces th at control him, m any co-operators stressed social an d cu ltu ral initiatives

Slate o f Movement, 1900-1914

39

alm ost as m uch as econom ic p rogram s. B uffeted by m an y o f the com plexities o f the tw entieth cen tu ry a n d relatively successful d e fe n d ­ ers o f the h interland, m ost co-operatives w ere alw ays so m eth in g m ore than m ere econom ic institutions. I

A quest for a better stan d a rd o f living, a d esire to elevate the m oral tone o f society, an attem p t to reform existing cities, an d an effo rt to protect local com m unities from m etro p o litan influences, therefore, were the m ost com m on pu rp o ses w ithin th e C an a d ia n co -o p erativ e m ovem ent o f the 1900 to 1914 perio d . B eneath those p u rp o ses w ere several widely, though n o t universally, accepted principles: th a t the com m on m an was capable o f g re a t tasks, th a t ed u catio n w as basic to social change, that the com petitive ethic was w rong, th at trad itio n al political activity rarely p ro d u ced basic reform , an d th a t it was possible to reform the w orld through en lig h ten ed econom ic action. T he conviction th a t the “ co m m o n m a n ” could reform th e w orld w ent back in co-operative circles to R o b ert O w en ’s b e lie f th a t m an was conditioned by his en v iro n m en t. Im p ro ve a m a n ’s su rro u n d in g s, give him an o p p o rtu n ity to dev elo p him self, so th e arg u m en t w ent, and he w ould alm ost inevitably becom e a b e tte r m an. W hile o nly a few, such as G eorge K een, w ere conscious o f this a rg u m e n t’s O w enite origins, all sectors o f the C an a d ia n m o v em en t accepted it instinctively in interpreting their roles w ithin C a n a d ia n so ciety .18 T h ey d id so because so m any C an ad ian s h ad been exposed to the sam e n o tio n in either the labour o r the ag rarian m ovem ents. T h e radical la b o u r press o f the late nineteenth century h ad p o p u larized the n otion, som e o f the new spapers even linking it w ith the co-operative m o v e m e n t.19 Sim i­ larly, the agrarian m ovem ent h ad long revered th e h o n est y e o m a n as the basis o f its reform efforts. F ro m W illiam Lyon M ackenzie, through the G range and the P atrons o f In dustry, to the C a n ad ia n Council o f A griculture, the leaders o f the C a n a d ia n co u n try sid e had always rom anticized an d extolled the virtues o f the o rd in ary farm er. Thus co-operators h ad little difficulty in g aining su p p o rt for th eir own argum ents on b e h a lf o f the etern ally victim ized b u t poten tially refo rm ­ ist com m on m an. T o prove the possibilities o f th eir m ovem ent, the C a n a d ia n cooperators pointed to alread y p ro sp ero u s co-operatives in C an a d a , the U nited States, and E urope. W ithin C an ad a , by 1914, they w ere a llu d ­ ing to several prosperous and pro m isin g m ovem ents. T h e grain grow ­ ers’ co-operatives h ad had few p ro b lem s. T h e d airy an d w ool societies

40

EACH FOR ALL

scattered across the country h ad overcom e m ost o f their early difficu l­ ties. T he caisses p opulaires o f Q ueb ec h ad an unb lem ish ed record, and even the store m ov em en t boasted efficient o rganizations in such centres as Sydney M ines an d G u elp h . Sim ilarly, outside o f C an ad a, the co-operators found successful exam ples w ith w hich to bu ttress their argum ents. T he R ight R elatio n sh ip L eague, for exam p le, w as a successful agrarian m ovem ent, em ploying som e co -o p erativ e tech ­ niques in the U nited States. A nd, in N ew Y ork a n d C hicago, large co­ operative stores and co-operative houses w ere flourishing. E ven m ore com m only, co-operators fo u n d it very useful to p o p u larize the E u ro ­ pean m ovem ents. C an ad ian ag rarians, for exam ple, w ere especially interested in the agricultural co-operatives o f D e n m ark an d N ew Z e a­ land. C o-operative credit enthusiasts w ere im pressed by th eir Italian, G erm an, and Belgian co u n terp arts. AH w ere in trig u ed by the e x p a n d ­ ing British m ovem ent.20 In fact, w hen view ed in tern atio n ally , in those halcyon days before the w ar, co-o p eratio n seem ed to be the tech­ nique that w ould develop m an: Till the war drum throbbed no longer and the battle flags were furled In the Parliament of Man the Federation of the world.21 In reform ing the w orld th rough the co m m o n m an, co -o p erato rs stressed the im portance o f extensive ed u catio n p rogram s. T h e R och­ dale pioneers, the m ost practically successful o f the early British cooperators, had continuously and em p h atically stressed e d u catio n al ac­ tivities as a m ajor part o f th eir ap p ro ach . Sim ilarly, C a n a d ia n cooperators, m any o f w hom ad m ired the R o ch d ale trad itio n , e m p h a ­ sized the need for education. T h e C o -o p erativ e U nion itself was one m anifestation o f the interest since its m ajo r pu rp o se w as to teach C anadians about the philosophy and m eth o d s o f c o -o p eratio n . W ithin the agrarian, caisse p opulaire, an d store m ovem ents, ed u ca tio n a l ac­ tivities were u n d ertaken through the p u b licatio n o f p eriodicals, the sponsoring o f cultural events, an d the d istrib u tio n o f special co -o p e ra­ tive literature. In fact, ag rarian co -o p erato rs reg ard ed e d u catio n as the essential first step to concerted action, the first p riority for co-operative leadership. But, regardless o f the tech n iq u e or em phasis, the educational program s were all based on the b e lie f th at the o rd in ary m an, w hen exposed to the tru th , w ould act acco rd in g to the best interests o f him self and all society. T he em phasis on education, follow ing so logically from the co m m it­

State o f Movement, 1900-1914

41

m ent to the com m on m an, was also related to the co -o p erativ e convic­ tion th at com petition was evil. T h e C a n a d ia n c o -o p erato rs w ere p art o f a general nineteenth- an d tw en tieth -cen tu ry reactio n against in d u l­ gent individualism , classical econom ic theory, and Social D arw inism . They shared, adm ittedly on a less in tellectual level, the revulsion with the com petitive ethic so obvious in the w ritings o f Jo h n R uskin, H enry G eorge, P etr K ropotkin, an d C harles G id e. T hey inherited , too, traditions from n in eteen th -cen tu ry u to p ian ism , m u tu a l-a id p ro ­ gram s and self-help societies.22 In short, C a n a d ia n c o -o p erato rs were part o f a w orld-w ide interest in co -operative tech n iq u es at the tu rn o f the century, a part o f a w idespread a ttem p t to escape the com petitive philosophy so evident in previous decades. C onvinced that co m petition as a prev ailin g ethic w as w rong, cooperators detested the abuses o f trad itio n al capitalism . T h ey were opposed to business organized by capitalists for sp ecu latio n on land, production, o r distribution. Instead, they ad v o cated an eco n o m ic sys­ tem in which w orkers, consum ers, a n d p ro d u cers w ould decide, on an egalitarian basis, how to control and o p erate services, an d how to ap portion excess funds. In short, they envisioned an o rd e r in which consum ers an d w orkers w ould each have a voice at least eq u al to that o f m anagem ent, and each o f the three w ould be m ore p o w erfu l than capital. Efficiency m ight be sacrificed on occasion by such changes, but service at cost, consum er do m in an ce, p ro d u ce r influence, and equitable w orking conditions w ould eventually be g ained. N o r w ould people in authority be paid excessively high salaries. In the early years at least, C an ad ian co-operatives, follow ing British a n d E u ro p e a n p re­ cedents, paid their leaders low salaries in co m p ariso n to th e ir cap ital­ ist counterparts. A ccording to the tenets o f the p u rest co-operators, ability received its true rew ards in service n o t salary .23 Paradoxically enough, the co -o p erato rs b u ttressed th eir attack on the com petitive ethic by their study o f large businesses. T h e late nineteenth and early tw entieth centuries w itnessed n u m ero u s a m a l­ gam ations and price-setting agreem ents betw een large business o rg an ­ izations. T hese arran g em en ts h ad greatly ben efited those involved and therefore were used by co -o p erato rs as exam ples o f how w orking together could benefit all co n cern ed .24 O bviously, so the co -o p erato rs argued, wise businessm en were not follow ing th e ir ow n laissez-faire rhetoric and were susceptible to the idea o f jo in in g forces w hen it was im m ediately profitable. T h e only p roblem w as th a t b usinessm en did not envision a wide enough base for contro llin g th eir org an izatio n s. In particular, very few o f them th o u g h t ab o u t estab lish in g eq u itab le

42

EACH FOR ALL

arrangem ents w ith their w orkers, an d even few er th o u g h t o f involving their custom ers form ally in key decisions. N evertheless, the w illingness o f businessm en to unite an d to p ro sp er to g eth er was lo oked u p o n as an im portant indication th at the fu tu re w ould be ch aracterized by co­ operative approaches an d n o t by rugged individualism . In establishing the new w orld order, m an y c o -o p erato rs did n o t place m uch faith in political activity. In p art, they did n o t because they distrusted the existing p olitical process, especially a fte r they view ed the results o f the 1911 federal election. M ore fu n d am en tally , m any co-operators sp u m e d p olitical activities because th ey th o u g h t politicians m erely reacted to u n d erly in g social a n d econom ic realities. If one w anted to change society, then o n e h ad to a lte r basic social attitudes, and th at could only be d o n e by ed u ca tio n a l p ro g ram s an d group activities ordinarily u n re late d to politics. T hus, even betw een 1900 and 1914, m ost co-operatives w ere in a political sense strictly neutral. Sim ilarly, only a few co -o perato rs p artic ip a ted in p rovincial o r federal politics, though m an y w ere involved in n o n p a rtisa n m u n ici­ pal politics.25 By and large, it seem s, m ost co -o p erato rs sub scrib ed to the view o f politics p o p u larized by G eo rg e K een in 1910 an d a fte r­ ward: Human greed cannot, at present anyway, be eliminated altogether and there is always the danger of some self-seeking and capable individual exploiting the other members of the community. That indeed is the one objection I have to political socialism. Individuals could obtain political power equal to that of capitalists and use it for the same purpose by organizing the great mass of ignorance. The Co-operative movement being voluntary can only succeed to the extent it can raise the average intelligence of the other people to the end that they will keep their leaders subject to the interests of the people.26 As K een im plied, co -o p eratism ’s d istrust o f state action d ifferen ­ tiated it from socialism . Both ideologies w ere collectivist in a p p ro ach ; both opposed capitalism , at least in its m ost dev elo ped form s; an d both advocated the principles o f p ro d u ctio n fo r use a n d fair tre a tm en t for labour. T hough in the short term the tw o w ere n o t in co m p a tib le ,27 their approaches were quite d ifferen t and they d id n o t coalesce. M o re­ over, from a practical view point, socialism , even if its a d h e re n ts could be convinced o f co-operatism ’s value, was a d o u b tfu l ally b efo re 1914. T hough certainly strong in m an y cities an d in som e ru ra l districts, its num erical strength, even if fully attracted , w ould n o t co m p en sate for the conservative co-op erato rs w ho w ould be alien ated . As a result,

State o f Movement, 1900-1914

43

both m ovem ents generally p roceeded alo n g se p arate p ath s in the early years o f the century, and, by the tw enties, w hen som e socialists be­ cam e very interested, they found m ost C an a d ia n co -o p erato rs je a l­ ously protective o f their political n eutrality. T his sep aratism , in re tro ­ spect, was ironic because m any u n in fo rm ed C a n a d ia n s th o u g h t the two m ovem ents were closely intertw ined an d th a t no tio n d efinitely restricted developm ent o f the co -operative cau se.28 There was one o th er w ay in w hich p u re co-o p eratism differed from at least the m ore extrem e b ran d s o f socialism . C o -o p erato rs recog­ nized the existence o f a class struggle, b u t u ltim ately they could not see how it could be eradicated a d eq u ately by rev o lu tio n ary action. R ather, they postulated th at social change h ad to begin in econom ic institutions, and they w anted only the chance to show the su p erio rity o f collective approaches over com petitive techniques. C o -o p eratio n , then, unlike at least m ore radical socialism , h ad no con cep t o f a b ru p t revolutionary change, no faith in extensive pro g ram s in itiated by even the best-m otivated governm ents. In short, in its p u rest form , co -o p eratism was a gradualist reform m o v em en t th at asked for n o th in g m ore than an opportunity to prove its w o rth .29 Or, in G eo rg e H o ly o ak e’s oft-quoted words: Co-operation supplements political economy by organising the fair distribu­ tion of wealth. It touches no man’s fortune; it seeks no plunder, it causes no disturbance in society, it gives no trouble to statesmen, it enters into no secret associations. It contemplates no violence, it subverts no order, it envies no dignity, it asks no favor, it keeps no terms with the idle, and it will break no faith with the industrious: it means self-help, self-dependence, and such share of the common competence as labour shall earn or thought can win, and this it intends to have.30 II

Thus, the C anad ian m ovem ent in the 1900 to 1914 p erio d im posed definite purposes on its o rganizations, an d b eh in d those p u rp o ses there rested a reasonably w ell-developed set o f principles. Y et, w hile it is clear that both the purposes and the ideology h ad an im pact, it is equally clear that there was not, by the end o f the perio d , a n y th in g like an integrated m ovem ent. C o nnections betw een the various types o f co-operatives, even connections betw een societies interested in the sam e kind o f econom ic activity, w ere tenuous; co-operatives were unable to influence significantly the federal g o v ern m en t d espite their com paratively large m em berships; and the co-operative a p p ro ach was

44

EACH FOR ALL

frequently absorbed w ithin such o th e r m o v em en ts as regionalism , agrarianism , and, infreq u en tly , socialism . In short, co-operatism had an im pact, b u t th at im pact was rarely a p a rt o f the n atio n al aw areness o f m ost C anadians. T he weakness o f co-operatism as a n atio n al, organized m o v em en t was dem onstrated by the ineffectuality o f the C o -o p erativ e U n io n betw een 1909 an d 1914. T h e executives o f the U n io n co rresp o n d ed with leaders o f all the m ajo r co-operative dev elo p m en ts, but, w ith the exception o f the store m ovem ent, they h ad little im pact. A lways sh o rt o f funds, the U nion relied u p o n the v o lu n tary services o f its execu­ tives until 1918, and it did n o t gain a d e q u a te fin an cin g from C a n a ­ dian co-operators until the late tw enties. W ith an office in B rantford, the U nion was also rem ote from the m o v em en t’s strongest segm ents, located in the Prairie provinces, Q uebec, an d N ova Scotia. Even the U nion’s m ost successful u n d ertak in g , the p u b licatio n o f The Canadian Co-operator, was not as w idely recognized as it deserved to be. In part, the c u c ’s w eakness was the resu lt o f errors an d biases on the p art o f its leaders. As E nglishm en im pressed by th e British store m ovem ent, Sam uel C arter a n d G eorge K een did n o t know m uch about other parts o f the m ovem ent, n o tab ly p ro d u c e r an d b a n k in g co­ operatives.31 C onvinced o f the necessity o f m ak in g co n su m ers co m ­ pletely dom inant, they did n o t study sufficiently the p ro b lem s c o n ­ fronting the country’s p rim aiy p ro d u cers a n d creditless poor. Even m ore im portantly, they h ad in d ifferen t success in d evelo p in g c o -o p er­ ative stores, partly because o f th eir ow n conservative business policies, but mostly because the retail trad e w as very com petitive and very risky during the early tw entieth century. T h e store m o v em en t, th e re ­ fore, except for one b rief ex p erim en t in N ova Scotia d u rin g 1912, could not develop a co-operative w holesale, m ean in g th a t the stores had no readily available source o f cred it d u rin g d ifficult tim es. T h u s the U nion, isolated in O n tario , was m ost closely id en tified with the least successful w ing o f the C an a d ia n m ovem ent. T his id entification with m arginal success and freq u en t failure was an im p ed im en t that was not overcom e until the late tw enties. But the w eaknesses o f the U n io n ’s executive only p artly explain its inability to forge a strong n atio n al m ovem ent. K een, C arter, an d th eir associates were reasonable m en ultim ately sy m p ath etic to all co -o p er­ ative causes. If they had been pushed, they w ould have ad ju sted to the dem ands o f the b ro ad e r m ovem ent, ju s t as som e o f them an d th eir successors did after 1925. T he p o in t was th a t C a n a d ia n co -o p erato rs were locally o r regionally o rien ted a n d did not d e m a n d a strong

State o f Movement, 1900-1914

45

national m ovem ent betw een 1900 a n d 1914. U n d o u b ted ly , the failure to secure federal legislation helps to explain this provincialism . C o n ­ ceivably, a national act req u irin g federal e n fo rcem en t w ould have encouraged unity and forced the U n ion into a m ore d y n am ic role. W ithout it, the E ng lish-C an ad ian m o v em en t d ev elo p e d prov in cial o r at most regional orientation s th at in them selves restricted the d e v elo p ­ m ent o f national co-operative unity. T he caisse populaire m ovem ent was the m ost obvious ex am p le o f regional diversity creating disunity. U ntil ab o u t 1912, D esjard in s and E nglish-C anadian co-operato rs w orked closely to g eth er in the q u est for federal legislation. W hen th at effort failed a n d w hen F ren ch C anadian nationalists and R om an C ath o lic clerics becam e m o re active in the caisses populaires, a g u lf em erg ed th at has never been co m ­ pletely bridged. T he g u lf was not entirely the co n sequence o f F renchC anadian nationalism . Few E nglish-speaking co -o p erato rs could speak French (or even tried), for ex am ple, an d the U n io n did not translate its publications d u rin g the early years. In fact, the g u lf becam e so great that m ost English C an a d ia n s fo u n d o u t a b o u t credit unions from A m ericans w ho in turn h ad been in tro d u ced to th em by A lphonse D esjardins. Even m ore ironically, follow ing the divergence which began ab o u t 1912, the U nion co rresp o n d ed m ore w ith a host o f E nglish-C anadian m issionaries active in C hinese co-operatives th a n it did with F rench-C anadian co-operators. But the F rench C an ad ian s w ere only the m ost obvious o f the p ro ­ vincial o r regional isolationists in the early tw en tieth century. Cooperators in British C olum bia, for ex am ple, were w eak co n trib u to rs to the U nion’s developm ent (and, by im plication, to the n atio n al m o v e­ m ent). M ost B.C. co-operators believed they w ere d ev elo p in g e d u c a ­ tional and jo in t econom ic p rogram s su itab le to th e ir ow n m em b ers and environm ent. T hus, ra th e r typically, the secretary o f a struggling society in Rossland w rote d u rin g 1909: Perhaps our methods would not be acceptable in the East, nor Eastern methods be acceptable here. For the present at any rate we prefer to paddle our own canoe.32 Sim ilarly, until K een started tou rin g the Prairies d u rin g the tw enties, western co-operators contrib u ted few funds to the U n io n ’s d ev elo p ­ m ent. A nd, finally, w hile the N ova Scotian societies w ere th e m ost generous supporters o f the c u c , even they quickly en d ed th eir su p p o rt during tim es o f adversity. D u rin g the 1913 recession, for exam ple, the M aritim e C o-operative B oard, m ade up o f the C ape B reton societies,

46

EACH FOR ALL

notified the union th at it w ould n o t send m ore m o n ey “ tow ard the forw arding o f the m ovem ent in u p p e r [s/e] C a n a d a ” .33 In difficult times M aritim e co-operators, like their colleagues elsew here, o p ted to defend w hat their ow n co-operatives h ad alw ays p ro tected best: the viability o f their own local institutions. T he strengths o f such regional and class an tag o n ism s suggests yet an o th er and perhaps m ore basic reason for the lack o f form al unity in the early tw entieth century. E n g lish -C an ad ian co -o p erato rs h ad d iffer­ ent fundam ental reasons fo r su p p o rtin g the m ovem ent. W hile b ro ad categorizations o f these differences are d ifficult an d in m ost indiv id u al cases arbitrary, they are nevertheless necessary b efore o n e can a p p re ­ ciate the com plexities o f the E n g lish -C an ad ian m o v em en t. T h ere were, broadly speaking, three kinds o f co -operative enthusiasts, w ho differed in their acceptance o f the p urposes a n d assu m p tio n s o f the m ovem ent. First, there were those w ho believed th a t co -o p eratio n could undertake the com plete refo rm atio n o f society, p e rh a p s in the process uniting with broadly sim ilar religious an d political reform m ovem ents. Second, there w ere those w ho saw the m o v em en t as essentially a corrective to abuses a p p a re n t in the existing society. T hird, there were those w ho saw it, alm ost exclusively in som e in ­ stances, as an aid to specific occu p atio n al g roups or classes. T he advocates o f co-o p eratio n as a total reform m o v em en t can be grouped together by a com m on tendency to take “ the larg er view ” , in short, by a propensity to accept all the m ain ideas o f co -o p eratio n outlined above. T hey tried to perceive society as an org an ic w hole and thought that co-operative techniques w ere ideal for estab lish in g a new social and econom ic order. T h o u g h these “ u to p ian co -o p era to rs” 34 were a relatively hom ogeneous group up to 1914, they w ere divided over the question o f political association. M an y o f the Utopians, such as E. A. P artridge an d the leadership o f such u rb a n co-operatives as those in New W estm inster an d G lace Bay, saw co-operatives as a partn er with trades unionism a n d socialist political p arties in a th re e­ pronged crusade for the socialization o f existing society.35 As a result, these co-operators sought to forge links betw een the three m ovem ents. In contrast, the “co-op idealists” or “ m ystic co -o p erato rs” w ho em ­ phasized the potential o f co -operative action by itself—m en like G eorge K een and oth er British im m igrants o f the pre-1914 p e rio d — were becom ing disench an ted w ith political and even trad e -u n io n ac­ tivity. This disenchan tm en t w ould grow fo r the next tw o decades, badly underm ining the poten tial strength o f the Utopians. C o-operators w ho saw th eir organ izatio n s essentially as correctives

State o f Movement, 1900-1914

47

to the existing system w ere u n d o u b ted ly the m ajo rity group. M ack en ­ zie K ing, Lord G rey, F. D. M onk, an d A lphonse D esjard ins w ere the m ost p rom inent supporters o f this a p p ro ach . M ore im p o rtan tly , though, so too w ere the bulk o f the farm ers in E nglish C an ad a, especially such leadership figures as C. A. D u n n in g , T. A. C rerar, and W. R. M otherw ell. F o r such people, co-operatives w ere desirable because they assisted the legitim ately dissatisfied by e n co u rag in g selfhelp, individual responsibility, an d g ro u p loyalty. M oreover, th ey saw co-operative institutions as useful m edium s fo r resolving the in d u strial unrest and rural-urban tensions th at preo ccu p ied social th in k ers at the turn o f the century. But, in b alance, they n ev er conceived o f co­ operatives as ends in them selves o r as the p rin cip al m eans for restruc­ turing society. F o r them co -o peratio n was p rim arily a m eth o d to protect the legitim ate rights o f p eople on the fam ily farm o r d e p e n d ­ ent upon a weekly wage. The third group, the occu p atio n al co-o p erato rs, was ra th e r sm all before the war, but it was m ore significant d u rin g an d im m ed iately after that conflict. T o som e extent, o rganizers o f c o n su m er c o -o p era­ tives am ong trades unionists reflected this a p p ro a ch , b u t the m ajo r exam ples were active in the p ro d u ce r co-operatives. T h e w ool-grow ­ ing, honey, dairy, and tobacco co-ops, along w ith the ru ral m utuals, were especially im p o rtan t in this reg ard . C om m only, th eir leaders saw co-operatives as essentially assistants to the farm ers w ho ow ned them and not as elem ents o f a w ider m ovem ent. T h e sam e k ind o f attitu d e can be detected w ithin the larg er m ark etin g associations as well. H enry Wise W ood, J. J. M orrison, b o th o f w hom w ere develo p in g their group theories o f society d u rin g this p erio d , an d the n o n -g rain grow ing western farm ers w ere the m ost easily id en tifiab le before 1914. D uring the Progressive era and in the perio d o f diversification in the late twenties, they w ould becom e especially significant. Finally, in assessing the reasons fo r the lack o f integ ratio n w ithin the national m ovem ent, attacks by o p p o n en ts m ust be considered. Few co-operative institutions w ent un ch allen g ed betw een 1900 an d 1914. Potentially, the co-operatives could h arm too m any p eo p le and C anadians were too individualistic to allow co-operatives to develop unopposed and uncriticized. T h e G rain G ro w ers’ G rain C o m p an y , for exam ple, encountered m any difficulties before it was accepted on the W innipeg G rain E xchange. Indeed, in the process, it u ltim ately h ad to jettison a considerable portion o f its co-operative co m m itm en t. Sim i­ larly, the lobbying o f the Retail M erch an ts’ A ssociation w as crucially im portant in the ultim ate d efeat o f attem p ts by co -o p erato rs to gain

48

EACH FOR ALL

federal legislation. A nd, n o t u n im p o rtan tly , m an y co -o p erativ e stores betw een 1900 and 1914 w ere boycotted p artly o r totally by o rth o d o x w holesale attem pts to restrict the d ev elo p m en t o f co -o p erativ es.36 F o r a m ovem ent struggling to gain acceptance, these instances o f o rg an ­ ized opposition were no t only sig n ifican t—in the case o f som e co­ operatives, they m eant the difference betw een surviving an d dying. Ill

T hus the early tw entieth-century co -operative m o v em en t was diffused and poorly integrated. Its institutions h ad em erged largely for local or, at most, regional reasons. T h e grain grow ers, o th e r farm ers, isolated consum er groups, the caisse p o p u la ire su p p o rters, an d in d ep e n d e n t idealists were aroused for specific, im m ed iate reasons and , conse­ quently, were reasonably effective in creatin g successful co -operative businesses. T hey w ere hard -p ressed in doin g so, how ever, a n d did not have m uch surplus energy o r resources to d ev o te to a natio n ally organized m ovem ent. N o r did they have readily accessible netw orks through which to w age n atio n al cam paigns. In fact, they seldom thought pragm atically in n atio n al term s, an d th eir co-operatives were strongly based on sectional sentim ents an d h in terlan d attitu d es. As a result, the strengths o f co-operative institutions w ere the w eaknesses o f the m ovem ent’s natio n al am bitions. O nly w hen the reg io n al m o v e­ m ents gained stability an d confidence w ould the n atio n al m o v em en t develop pow erful n atio n al institutions. T h a t process was a long tim e unfolding: the CUC w ould not gain significant influence am o n g large num bers o f co-operatives until the 1940s a n d a gen eral fed eral co­ operative act w ould not be passed until 1972. C o -o rd in a tin g h in te r­ land grievance and strength, a n d using th at resu ltan t p o w er in O ttaw a w ould require decades o f effort, the h eat o f n u m ero u s battles, an d the determ ined effort o f m an y people. T h e m o v em en t was estab lish ed by 1914 and its m ain p attern s h ad been set, b u t its fu tu re was fa r from certain.

CHA PTER T H REE

The Possibilities Are Perceived, 1914-1919 The co-operative wave is causing a general aw akening a n d we have come at last to realize that the controlling interests have h a d a fr e e and easy ride on the fa rm er's back long enough. We are fin d in g out also some o f the evils o f the credit system a n d o f the necessary cost placed upon the consum er by the cum bersom e system o f distribution in the West. Co-operation is teaching us econom y a n d th r ift—to be business farm ers and not m erely tillers o f the soil. Letter to the Editor, H. W. Ketcheson, manager, Davidson Co-operative Society, T h e G rain G row ers’ G uide, A pril 12, 1916, p. 42.

The First W orld W ar p ro fo u n d ly altered C an a d ia n life by forcing the nation to confront seriously m ost o f the p ro b lem s typical o f the tw en­ tieth century. R apid ind u strializatio n , extensive u rb an izatio n , in d u s­ trial unrest, intensive resource develo p m en t, centralized econom ic power, and regional disparities w ere all stim u lated by the d e m an d s o f the w ar effort. Inevitably, these changes m ark ed ly affected the co­ operative m ovem ent, causing som e co-operatives to forge rap id ly ahead, others to stagnate, still oth ers to decline, an d a few to cease operation. As m uch as by th eir ow n in tern al circum stances, co-operatives have been buffeted by th e e n v iro n m en t; a n d the w ar years, a time o f extensive social an d econom ic change, m ark ed ly influenced the course o f co-operative d ev elo p m en t in English C an ad a. As far as C an ad ian agriculture was concerned, the w ar m ost o b ­ viously affected the Prairie grain econom y. C ertainly, th at econom y had been im p o rtan t in the past, partly because o f the sales it had generated and partly because it was a vital m ark et for cen tral C a n a ­ dian industries. But the w ar, by raising grains to the statu s o f strategic m aterials, gave w estern producers a degree o f p o w er they h ad never before possessed. F o r one o f the first tim es in th eir history, Prairie farm ers were not concerned over w here th e w h eat w ould be sold o r w hether it would fetch a good price. T h e exclusion o f R ussia from the Allied m arkets shortly after w ar broke out, the d isru p tio n s in the E uropean w heat econom ies, an d the preferen ce C a n a d a gained as an ally, placed the Prairie grain econom y in an env iab le position. F o rtu n ­ 49

50

EACH FOR ALL

ately, that econom y could seize the o p p o rtu n ities because the grain crops o f the w ar years were good overall, 1915 in fact p ro d u c in g a crop record that lasted until 1952.' T he three m arketing co-operatives w ere am o n g the m ain b en efac­ tors o f the resultant prosperity, an d , by 1915, they w ere m ark etin g over a third o f the Prairie crops.2 T his success, com ing closely after the failure o f the hastily devised M an ito b a g o v ern m en t elev a to r schem e, seem ed to d em o n strate conclusively the su p erio rity o f co­ operatively ow ned elevator system s. M ore responsive th an state ow n­ ership, m ore easily controlled th an capitalist grain com panies, the co­ ops prospered and rapidly gained the confidence o f the ru ral co m ­ m unities. At the sam e time, the creatio n o f the B oard o f G ra in S u p er­ visors in 1918 elim inated hedging an d sp ecu latio n on the W innipeg G rain Exchange, and proved to m any farm ers the ad v an ta g es o f centralized selling o f grain crops. T h e result w as th at th ro u g h o u t the w ar years and im m ediately afterw ard , the b u o y an t m ark etin g co-ops were riding a wave o f prosperity an d looking for ways to ex p an d . T he most natural k in d o f d ev elo p m en t for the co-operatives was expansion o f the grain-elevator business. T h e G ra in G ro w ers’ G rain C om pany had en tered this business in 1912 w hen it h ad leased the elevators operated unsuccessfully by the M an ito b a g o v ern m en t for two years; in 1913 it built its first elev ato r an d by 1916 it h ad sixty in operation, divided a b o u t equally betw een M an ito b a an d S ask atch e­ w an.3 T he Saskatchew an C o-operative E lev ato r C o m p an y started to build elevators in the sam e y ear an d , by 1916, given d irect financial aid and credit guarantees by the p rovincial g o v ern m en t, it h ad over 190 elevators in o p eratio n .4 T h e A lberta F a rm e rs’ C o -o p erativ e E leva­ tor C om pany, organized in 1913, h ad stro n g financial back in g from the provincial governm ent b u t d id n o t have a g u ara n te e d line o f credit; consequently, the A lberta farm ers h ad to tu rn to the G rain G row ers for “seed” capital as they n eed ed it. T h ey w ere n o t d isa p ­ pointed, and the W innipeg-based com pany g u a ra n te e d w hat w ere for the period som e very large loans (u p to $328,000 at one p o in t).5 As a result o f this su p p o rt an d the enthusiasm e n g en d ered by the U n ited Farm ers o f A lberta, the A lberta c o m p an y con stru cted o ver one hundred elevators in its first three years.6 But even this im pressive total o f elevators did n o t m eet the a p p a r­ ent dem and. T he b u m p e r crop o f 1915, the high prices for w heat brought about by the war, the p ro m p tin g s o f the fed eral gov ern m en t, and the incessant dem an d s o f farm ers led the co-o p erativ es to expand at every opportunity. Inevitably, this expansionist sentim en t led to som e com petition betw een the three o rganizations, m ainly because the

Possibilities Perceived, 1914-1919

51

GGG, which had received a federal c h a rte r th ro u g h special legislation in 1911, operated in all three provinces. In A lb erta the co m petitive situation betw een the M an ito b a-b a sed a n d the prov in cial elev a to r co­ operative was less serious because the UGG lo an ed m oney to the A lberta F arm ers’ C o-op in 1914 a n d 1915. In S ask atch ew an th e situ a­ tion was different because the p rovincial o rg an izatio n was so pow erful and ind ep en d en t. It catered to the largest p ro d u c e r m ark etin g -g ro u p on the Prairies; it ow ned a p ro fitab le com m ission business in W in n i­ peg; and it had a particu larly aggressive, co m p ete n t leadership. In ­ deed, because o f this strength it could afford to look d isd ain fu lly at any talk o f m erger. D espite the S askatchew an aloofness, w hich was ev id en t from the beginning, the UGG, especially its p resident, T. A. C rerar, p u sh ed h ard for integration. D uring 1914 an d 1915 the possibilities w ere discussed at annual m eetings o f the three co-operatives a n d a t n u m ero u s m e e t­ ings am ong their officials. But S askatchew an co -o p erato rs rem ain ed unconvinced. In all o f the schem es th a t w ere p u t forw ard, th eir eleva­ tor com pany was going to lose p o w er an d prestige, an d it was very difficult for them to reduce v oluntarily the position th eir o rg an izatio n had so quickly achieved.7 A lberta co-operators, o f course, w ere d iffer­ ent. Still concerned ab o u t sources o f funds a n d alread y intricately involved w ith the GGG, they b ecam e u ltim ately the strongest a d v o ­ cates o f unification.8 In 1916, picking up the initiative the GGG h ad in som e discouragem ent let slide, they p ro m o ted the fo rm atio n o f the U nited G rain G row ers. T he new com pany, am alg am a tin g the GGG and the A lberta F arm ers’ C o-operative, was form ed in 1917. Im m ed i­ ately successful, it was a m ajo r force in the grain econom y. In a d d i­ tion to its 300 elevators an d a m ajo r com m ission business in W in n i­ peg, it also ow ned term in al elevators in F o rt W illiam a n d N ew W est­ m inster, a flourishing export com pany, a p rin tin g p la n t in W innipeg, a tim ber lim it in British C olum bia, three large w holesale w arehouses, 184 coal sheds, and over 200 local w arehouses.9 Sim ilarly, by 1917, the S askatchew an C o -o p erativ e E levators had grown to include 230 elevators an d an active tra d in g d e p a rtm e n t w holesaling $1,500,000 w orth o f g o o d s.10 T h e diversification d e m o n ­ strated in the grow th o f the two organizations in d icated a n o th e r m ain initiative o f the Prairie m ark etin g co-operatives d u rin g the w ar years: the securing o f farm er supplies at the ch eap est possible price. T he pursuit o f this goal was a n atu ral d ev elo p m en t w ithin the Prairie agrarian and co-operative m ovem ents. T he grain co-operatives had em erged from the successful drive to ensure fairness in the d istrib u ­ tion o f railw ay services at the turn o f the century. Initially, they had

52

EACH FOR ALL

been prim arily concerned a b o u t three m ain objectives: the refo rm a­ tion if not abolition o f the W in n ip eg G rain E xchange; the n arro w in g o f m argins betw een producers an d consum ers; an d the gen eral im ­ provem ent o f m arketin g services for farm ers. In evitably, the next area to attract attention was the im p ro v em en t o f the fa rm e r’s position as a consum er. In exploring the consum ption businesses, the co-o p erativ es tu rn ed first to the m ajor farm supply n eed s o f th eir m em bers. T h u s they b u ilt coal sheds in w hich could be sto red the carlo ad s o f coal ord ered by groups o f farm ers and, occasionally, th eir n eig h b o u rs in n earb y towns. Next, they constructed w arehouses for the storage o f carlo ad s o f binder twine, farm im plem ents, flour, feeds, an d , increasingly, p e tro ­ leum products. By 1917, this business h ad m u sh ro o m ed to nearly 3,000 carloads a y ear fo r the UGG an d a fu rth e r 1,500 (som e o rd ered through the UGG) for the Saskatchew an C o-op. In ad d itio n , the two com panies were experim en tin g w ith the catalo g u e sales o f co n su m er goods, the UGG produ cin g a p articu larly large, attractive, an d well circulated catalogue th a t com peted effectively w ith th e efforts o f the eastern m ail-order com panies. T he expansion into the farm er supply business, w hich soon in ­ cluded such general consum er item s as apples, flour, a n d coal, created a n um ber o f difficulties. It was, for exam ple, o n e o f the m ore c o n te n ­ tious issues betw een the UGG an d the S askatchew an lead ersh ip groups mostly because o f com petition fo r the sam e m ark et in S askatchew ­ a n .11 In fact, d u rin g the abo rtiv e plans for u n io n d u rin g 1915 an d 1916, the question o f how to u n ite the tw o flo u rish in g su p p ly d e p a rt­ m ents had proved to be a m ain stu m b lin g block. T h e d e v elo p m en t o f the supply d epartm ents also co m p eted w ith the n u m ero u s neo p h y te co-operative stores scattered across the P rairie re g io n .12 At stake in this controversy w ere two views as to how co-operative b u y in g should be developed. O n the one side, the large m ark etin g societies e m p h a ­ sized massive centralized buying; on the o th er, advocates o f tra d i­ tional stores supported localized co ntrol an d in d e p e n d e n t societies.13 These significant differences o f ap p ro ach w ere b orn o f the inevitable tensions betw een consum er an d p ro d u ce r co -operatives; they w ere fundam ental to the dev elo p m en t o f the in te rn a tio n a l m ovem ent, and im portant in the E nglish-C anadian m o v em en t even into the 1970s. I

D ifferences betw een ag rarian m ark etin g an d co-operative stores had assum ed im portance in G re a t Britain d u rin g the early tw entieth cen-

Possibilities Perceived, 1914-1919

53

tury. D espite the efforts o f such in d iv id u als as V a n sittart N eale, H eniy W olff, and E. O. G reen in g , the leaders o f the B ritish m o v e­ m ent by th at tim e had becom e increasingly suspicious o f m ark etin g co-operatives.14 Like m ost E u ro p ean co-op leaders, the B ritish le a d e r­ ship saw agrarian m arketin g societies as w o u ld -b e m o n o p o lies in te r­ ested entirely in gaining as m uch as possible fo r p ro d u cers. In 1910, with a few allies from co n tin en tal E urope, th e British leaders p ro d d e d the International C o-operative A lliance to p ro claim th a t c o n su m er co­ operation was su p erio r to all o th e r kinds o f co -o p erativ e activity. A ccording to the proclam atio n , a d o p ted at the A lliance C ongress in H am burg, consum er co-operatives m ost fairly rew ard ed the la b o u re r for his w ork and assured the m ost eq u itab le d istrib u tio n o f goods and services. By im plication, then, p ro d u c e r m a rk e tin g ,15 as well as co­ operative banking, housing, a n d w orkshops, w ere less useful, less pure. T he C anadian consum er m o v em en t never su p p o rte d this ra th e r extrem e view o f producer co-o p eratio n . N evertheless, until at least the m id-twenties, several im p o rta n t individuals, n o tab ly the leaders o f the Cape Breton stores, G eorge K een, a n d som e P rairie co n su m er leaders, did share the view point to som e extent. C o n seq u en tly , the stores and producer groups in C ape Breton w ere estranged from each o ther. T he C o-operative U nion hesitated to becom e involved w ith p ro d u c e r so­ cieties, and the Prairie m o v em en t d eveloped a series o f tensions. T he issue becam e m ore com plicated th an in E u ro p e, though, b ecause it becam e entw ined w ith tw o other, related d ebates: th e arg u m en ts over centralized versus local control an d th e contro v ersial e x p erim en tatio n s with chain-store operations. At issue in all three o f these d eb ate s was the au to n o m o u s position o f the individual consum er societies. In p art, th eir p ro u d in d e p en ­ dence em anated from a desire by local leaders to p ro tect th eir personal status; in part, it was derived from the co-operative em p h asis on selfhelp. M any stores, in fact, had becom e places w here n e ig h b o u rs could organize their own affairs, im prove th e ir econom ic position, an d es­ cape econom ic bondage to outside businessm en. In ad d itio n , as suc­ cesses were achieved, m any co -o p erato rs fo u n d them selves devo tin g large am ounts o f tim e to their store; indeed, so m uch tim e th at the store becam e the p ro ud est accom plishm ent o f th e ir pub lic lives. Sm all w onder, then, that stores becam e for m any co -o p erato rs sym bols o f econom ic dem ocracy which m ust be forever free o f the w him s o f “ big” m anagers in R egina, W innipeg, T o ro n to , a n d M ontreal. G iven this trad ition o f in d ep en d en ce, th e-sto res inevitab ly b ecam e focal points for those w ho w ere ig nored o r p u sh ed aside as the big

54

EACH FOR ALL

m arketing co-operatives developed. Som e o f these p eo p le w ere u to ­ pian socialists whose descent from influence was' sym bolized by P ar­ tridge’s d ep artu re from the G rain G row ers in 1912. M ore w ere co­ operative Utopians steeped in the co n su m er philo so p h ies o f the E u ro ­ pean m ovem ent. M ost w ere people w ho w an ted to co ntro l th eir own retail outlets even at the expense o f the large m ark e tin g co-o p erativ es they otherw ise supported. T he bias against the large m ark etin g org an izatio n s a n d large-scale distribution systems had its m ost concrete d e m o n stratio n in A lberta during 1919. In F ebru ary o f th a t year, rep resen tativ es from eight consum er co-operatives m et in V ulcan to search for w ays to buy supplies m ore ad v anta g eo u sly .16 Previously, these societies h a d all purchased from the Supply D ep a rtm en t o f the U n ited G ra in G row ers, but they were beginning to o rd e r from o th e r w holesalers as well. T he representatives in V ulcan w anted to use the m ark etin g co-operatives as m uch as possible, bu t “ there w as n o t a deleg ate p resen t w ho w ould attem pt to m aintain th at the UGG h ad as yet show n itself cap ab le o f satisfactorily serving as the ultim ate buying agency o f th e retail co­ operatives o f this Province” . 17 As a result, the eight societies re p re ­ sented a t the m eeting, along w ith three u n ab le to send delegates, organized the C o-operative U nion o f A lb erta to ad v an ce th e ir in ter­ ests. A nother m eeting o f the A lberta U nion, held in C algary a m o n th later, saw the surfacing o f even m ore a n tip ath y tow ard the UGG. T he leading spokesm an o f the anti-UGG sen tim en ts was Percy W oodbridge, an E nglish-trained co-operator, w ho h ad been secretary o f the U nited Farm ers o f A lberta. W oodbridge h ad left the UFA in 1918 partly because o f ill-health an d career stag n atio n , b u t m ostly because he opposed that institution’s grow ing centralist ten d en c ie s.18 H e b e ­ lieved that the sam e ph en o m en o n was o b servable in th e UGG w here pragm atic co-operators, strong businessm en th a t they w ere, had gained suprem acy. T hu s at V ulcan a n d C algary, W o o d b rid g e an d the m ajority o f co-operators p resent strongly criticized the UGG fo r its “m anaging” o f local groups, its unw illingness (in th e ir view) to declare dividends, its acceptance o f the existing m ark etin g systems, its grow ­ ing bureaucracy, and its co n tin u al com petition w ith local societies through its supply d epartm en t. T h e m eeting even w ent so far, a p p a r­ ently with som e delight, as to refuse a request fo r affiliation from the UGG on the grounds th at it w asn’t true co-operative. A larm ed by this critical o u tb u rst a n d anxious to u nite the P rairie m ovem ent, the UGG tried to im prove its services to co n su m er groups. The W innipeg-based com pany had never been opp o sed to co n su m er

Possibilities Perceived, 1914-1919

55

co-operation; in fact, it h ad en co u rag ed b u y in g clubs o r b u lk -p u rchase groups seeing in them good business fo r its supply d e p a rtm e n t and, potentially, the nuclei fo r full-fledged co -o p erativ e sto re s.19 H ence, in April 1919, the co m p an y p ro p o sed a p lan d ev elo p e d logi­ cally from this approach : the UGG w ould b uild stores w h erev er d e ­ m and was strong enough, financing m uch o f the cost th ro u g h the sale o f UGG stock in the com m unities concerned. T h e stores w ould be operated on a p atro n ag e-refu n d system , a n d th ey w ould be to som e extent controlled locally. T he final au th o rity , how ever, w ould rest with the com pany, and it was this featu re w hich caused the A lb ertan s to reject the plan.20 F or the suspicious A lb ertan consum ers, this schem e sm acked o f the sam e type o f cen tral co ntrol an d b u re a u c ratic d o m in a ­ tion that, in their view, had g enerally characterized the U G G ’s activi­ ties. T he em ergence o f this “ch ain -sto re” ap p ro ach to co -o p erativ e stores by the UGG was not unique to N o rth A m erican co-operative circles in the early years o f this cen tu ry .21 It was p a rticu larly p o p u la r am o n g farm ers w ho had glim psed, th rough th eir ed u catio n al and m ark etin g organizations, the possibilities o f large-scale endeav o u rs. T h e first m ajor efforts in the west, the Society o f E q u ity ’s efforts in 1907 and 1908 and the F arm ers’ C o-operative C o m p an y , h ad d isap p e a re d by 1914, but the tantalizing prom ises h ad not been erad icated . In 1915, another chain-store venture, the N a tio n al R ailw ay A ssociation, a p o ­ tentially huge co-op was o rganized am o n g railw ay w orkers, but it soon disappeared.22 T he best-know n exam ple an d the m ain stim u lan t, though, lay in the U nited States. T h e R ig h t R elatio n sh ip League, active in M innesota, O hio, M ichigan, and the D akotas, had been in the “co-operative store business” since 1900. G en erally , the L eague purchased deteriorating, privately ow ned stores, recap italized them on a co-operative basis am ong local citizens, especially farm ers, an d then provided strong direction from the central office in M inneapolis. T he schem e was particularly successful before 1914 w hen som e 150 stores ow ned by 16,000 m em bers had been o rg an ized .23 T h at success, though reversed seriously by the econom ic fluctuations o f the w ar years, becam e well know n in Prairie farm circles and, in fact, in trigued two generations o f farm leaders.24 Thus during the w ar years it was clear th a t the P rairie farm ers were searching for a suitable way to e n ter the store business. Each o f the two broadly different te ch n iq u es—cen tralized supply houses ow ned by producers and in d ep en d e n t local co-operatives o p erated by consum ers —offered both positive and negative features. C h oosing betw een the two o r finding a way to utilize the good featu res o f both was not

56

EACH FOR ALL

resolved by 1919. Indeed, it w ould rem ain a basic questio n in all the English-C anadian m ovem ents for several decades. II

O utside the Prairies, the U nited F a rm e rs’ C o -o p erativ e in O n tario , was the largest farm er o rganization to show an in terest in chain -sto re co-operation. Interest in the “ big a p p ro a c h ” , in fact, could be seen in the first few years o f the c om p an y ’s life. G eo rg e K een h ad been a prom inent advisor at the o rg an izatio n ’s form atio n , an d , strongly su p ­ ported by his close friend, W. C. G o o d , he h ad been responsible for the early em phasis on local au to n o m y .25 C onsequently, in the original plan, the local co-operatives had the decisive influence in the ce n tral’s developm ent, and, on a local level, m em b er in volvem ent w as stressed. Partly because o f these em phases, b u t m ostly because o f the difficult econom ic situation in 1914 an d 1915, th e co -o p erativ e did n o t achieve satisfactory results. It grew slowly, its savings to m em b ers w ere m in i­ mal, and it was plagued by w idespread m em b ersh ip dissatisfaction. By 1916, the leaders o f the co m p an y w ere e x am in in g new m echanism s, blam ing the original local em phasis for the difficulties. T he resultant search for an altern ativ e m eth o d o f org an izatio n opened a serious rift in the O n tario farm ers’ m ov em en t. T h e local autonom ists, som e o f them , like G o o d a n d K een, co -o p erativ e Utopi­ ans, soon found them selves on the defensive. A m assed ag ain st them was a m ajority o f the m em bership led by R. W. E. B urnaby an d J. J. M orrison. T he dispute betw een the two sides g ath ered m o m en tu m in 1918 and especially 1919 as the O n tario ag rarian m o v em en t ex p an d ed rapidly am id the general u nrest a t the end o f the w ar. T h e issue was p rom inent w hen the officers w ere bein g elected at the a n n u a l m e et­ ings o f those years, and was resolved (fo r the tim e being) w hen the expansionist B urnaby was elected p resid en t in 1919.26 In te rp re tin g his election, probably correctly, as a m an d ate for grow th, B urnaby sought an expansionist m an ag e r and fo u n d one in T. P. Loblaw . U nder B urnaby an d L oblaw (w ho soon left to start his ow n highly successful chain-store system ) the UF C o-op m oved aw ay from a federated structure in w hich local societies co n tro lled the cen tral o r­ ganization. Instead, it started to stress d irect m em b ersh ip by in d iv id ­ ual farm ers who left general m an a g e m e n t o f local outlets in the han d s o f the central executive. U n d er this new system , m em b ers w ould have lim ited direct control over the m anagers, b u t could th eoretically exer­ cise a decisive influence over the co m p an y at a n n u al m eetings. F o rtu ­ itously gaining influence at a tim e o f m ajo r grow th for the UF C o-op

Possibilities Perceived, 1914-1919

57

and its sister organization, the U n ited F arm ers o f O n tario , the e x p a n ­ sionists were able to claim significant im m ed iate success. By the end o f 1919, in fact, the UF C o-op h ad n early 10,000 m em b ers a n d seem ed to be on the verge o f a m ajo r retailin g as well as m ark e tin g b rea k ­ through in O ntario.27 T he sam e pattern was discernible in the M aritim es. In 1916 the U nited F arm ers’ C o-operative, based on the su p p o rt o f the o rganized agrarian m ovem ents in N ew Brunsw ick an d N ova Scotia, w as form ed. The autonom ists w ere never as im p o rta n t as in O n tario , an d they found them selves alm ost im m ediately in a sm all m in o rity as farm ers were caught in the headiness o f a sud d en ly ex p an d in g m ovem ent. Thus, as capital becam e available d u rin g the c o m p a n y ’s first four years, tw enty-five stores w ere o p en ed in N ew B runsw ick a n d a n o th e r six in N ova Scotia.28 F o r a while, the M aritim e U n ited F arm ers, as it soon was called, flourished u n d er cen tral directio n . A new type o f co­ operative store, linked to m ark etin g societies a n d d ifferen t from the highly autonom ist E uro p ean stores, b ecam e p ro m in en t in C a n ad a . T he tendency tow ard large-scale organ izatio n , as seen in the UGG, the U nited F arm ers’ C o-operative an d the M aritim es U n ited F arm ers, was a natural developm en t for essentially a g rarian o rganizations. Farm ers were prim arily co ncerned a b o u t im proving th eir con tro l over the m arketing system and th erefo re n atu rally th o u g h t in large term s. There were only m od erate gains to be m ad e from co n tro llin g localized m arketing o f specific com m odities. R egional co n tro l, how ever, could significantly im prove the farm ers’ position, an d thus m ost o f the agrarian leadership opted for ra th e r d aring, in novative, large-scale schemes. T hey w ere also sw ept up in the b urst o f o ccu p atio n al co n ­ sciousness that sw ept C a n ad ian ag ricu ltu re in the first tw enty-five years o f this century. T he agrarian p re ss—The Farmers S u n , The Grain Growers' Guide, The U nited Farmers G uide,29 The F am ily H erald, Farm and Dairy, to m ention only a few jo u rn a ls —en co u rag ed this conscious­ ness, seeing in it the salvation o f rural life. T h e C a n a d ia n C o uncil o f A griculture, organized in 1909 an d 1910, suggested th a t farm ers were overcom ing narrow sectionalism an d in stitutionalism and w ere devel­ oping a pow erful body th a t could speak on all issues. In m any ways, the thrust tow ard extensive o rganization as co n su m ers w as an in ev ita­ ble extension o f such integration an d group action. T he experiences o f the w ar years, too, en co u rag ed farm ers in their m ilitancy and optim ism . In ad d itio n to p ro v id in g p rosperity in the form o f expanding m arkets, those years h ad also d e m o n strate d the social evils so evident in u rb an centres. T he 1916 F arm ers P latform o f

58

EACH FOR ALL

the C anadian C ouncil o f A griculture sym bolized the political p ro g ram that em erged from this m ixture o f ag rarian dissatisfaction a n d o p ti­ mistic reform ism .30 In the long ru n p e rh ap s m ore im p o rta n t th an politics, it was co-operative org an izatio n th a t b ecam e fu n d a m e n ta l to the agrarian m ovem ent. This d ev elo p m en t explains th e grow th o f grain co-operatives, the push into aggressive retailing, an d the en c o u r­ agem ent o f new kinds o f co-operative action. T h e ru ral societies were on the m arch, and the d ev elo p m en t o f co-operatives w as one o f their m ain w eapons. Ill

The m ajor new area for co-operative m ark etin g dev elo p ed by farm ers during the w ar was the sale o f livestock. In 1914 the A lb erta C o­ operative Elevator C om pany started a livestock d e p a rtm e n t follow ed two years later by a sim ilar d e p a rtm e n t in the G ra in G ro w ers’ G ra in Com pany. In 1917, these two d ep artm en ts w ere un ited w hen the UGG was form ed, and the com bined d e p a rtm e n t w as soon m ark e tin g a n ­ nually in excess o f 3,000 carloads o f cattle.31 U n til 1923 (w hen p o oling was introduced) this d e p artm e n t fu n ctio n ed m u ch like any o th e r live­ stock buyer, operating on com m ission an d b u y in g an d selling a t the going rate for individual farm ers. N evertheless, the d e p a rtm e n t was a part o f a farm ers’ organization, one th a t w ould be chan g ed if neces­ sary by its ow ner-m em bers at th eir a n n u a l m eetings. T here were o th er exam ples o f co -operative action am o n g P rairie livestock producers. Som etim es in loose c o n n ectio n w ith th e UGG o p ­ eration, m ore often com pletely in d e p e n d e n t, a b o u t forty co -operative shipping organizations were estab lish ed in A lb erta an d S askatchew an during the w ar years.32 O w ned directly by th e p ro d u cers involved, most o f these associations b a rg ain ed w ith an y o f the com m ission agencies, especially those o p eratin g on the C alg ary m arket. A lm ost invariably successful, m ost o f these associations soon ex p a n d e d their activities to include the pu rch ase o f such supplies as hay, coarse grain, and fencing in bulk quantities. In tu rn , this practice en co u rag ed the organization o f the hay producers, an d by 1918 h ay grow ers’ associa­ tions were well established, m any o f them selling directly to livestock associations.33 A nother rather rem ark ab le livestock m ark etin g co -o p erativ e o rg an ­ ized during the w ar years was the C a n ad ia n C o -o p erativ e W ool G row ers’ Ltd. It was established in 1918, w hen seventeen w oolgrow ers’ m arketing associations scattered across C a n a d a cam e to g eth er to form the country’s first n atio n al m ark etin g co -o p erativ e.34 T his devel-

Possibilities Perceived’ 1914-1919

59

o pm ent ow ed m uch to the w ork o f rep resen tativ es o f the D o m inion and provincial d ep artm e n ts o f ag riculture. B eginning in the early tw entieth century, these d ep a rtm e n ts started to take a g reater interest in m arketing.35 T his was especially true a fte r 1911 w hen a federal Royal Com m ission on the sheep in d u stry re co m m en d ed co-operative m arketing after it had investigated sh ee p -m a rk e tin g p ro ced u res in C anada, the U nited States, an d G re a t B ritain. C o n seq u en tly , in 1914, the federal A gricultural Instru ction Act h elp ed finance ed u c a tio n a l and prom otional activities by fin an cin g fieldm en, p u b licatio n s, and various projects. Som e o f the fieldm en, especially in the M aritim es, becam e im p o rtan t co-operative leaders, m ost n o tab ly F a th e r H ugh M acPherson w ho played an im p o rta n t role in the fo rm atio n o f the W ool G row ers. In sim ilar ways, federal officials h elp ed o th e r kinds o f p ro d u cers sell their produce co-operatively. In Prince E d w ard Island, T. A. Benson, w hose w ork actually started b efore the w ar, greatly assisted in the form ation o f the P.E.I. C o -o p erativ e Egg a n d P oultry A ssociation in 1914. A nd, ju s t after the w ar, A. B. M acD o n ald in N ova Scotia an d J. K. K ing in N ew Brunsw ick, b o th em ployees o f the D o m in ion Livestock Branch, did m uch to encourage the d ev elo p m en t o f co­ operative livestock-shipping clubs. In tim e, these clubs w ould serve as the nucleus for organized co -operative m ark e tin g in the M aritim es. D airy farm ers also began to ex p erim en t extensively w ith co -o p e ra ­ tive m arketing betw een 1914 an d 1919. T h ey did so because w artim e dem ands, the pasteu rizatio n o f m ilk, a n d im p ro v em en t in tra n sp o rta ­ tion created large, d ep en d ab le m ilksheds a ro u n d all o f the m ajo r cities. M ost o f these developm ents w orked to th e b en efit o f privately ow ned dairies, but, in a few instances, co-o p erativ ely o p e ra te d p ro ­ gram s gained early influence. M o n tre al-a re a p ro d u cers, for ex am ple, som e o f w hom w ere English C a n a d ia n , h a d sta rte d to o rganize as early as 1900. E xperiencing co n sid erab le success d u rin g the w ar years, these dairym en organized the M o n treal M ilk P ro d u cers’ C o -o p erativ e A gricultural A ssociation in 1919, a n d this o rg an izatio n p ro tected their interests adequately up to the early th irties.36 In O n ta rio a n d the M aritim es, num erous new cream eries em erged, all struggling to co n ­ trol one or other o f the large m ilksheds th a t h ad su d d en ly em erged. T he m ost im p o rtan t developm ents in co -o p erativ e d airying, how ­ ever, were in W estern C an ad a. In M an ito b a eig h teen new cream eries were organized, for the m ost p a rt in F re n c h -C a n a d ia n an d M en n o n ite areas in the south o f the province. In S askatchew an, the g o v ern m en t played an aggressive role in help in g to am a lg a m a te tw enty cream eries

60

EACH FOR ALL

into Saskatchew an C o-operative C ream eries in 1917. In A lb erta, after a burst o f grow th betw een 1912 a n d 1915, co-operative d airies found it difficult to com pete w ith p rivately ow ned dairies, tho ug h they did rem ain financially secure.37 In British C o lu m b ia the m ost im p o rta n t developm ent was the creation o f the F raser V alley M ilk P roducers: organized in 1916, it soon h ad over eight h u n d red m em bers, an d , by the tw enties, it h ad becom e the d o m in a n t facto r in the d airy industry o f the N ew W estm in ste r-V a n c o u v e r a rea.38 All o f these activities in ag ricu ltu ral circles d u rin g a n d ju s t a fter the w ar indicate ju s t how w ell-established co-o p erativ e m eth o d s h ad b e­ com e in rural English C an a d a .39 W hile it is true th at sim ilar p a tte rn s could be found in the U nited States d u rin g th e sam e p erio d , it is nevertheless also true th a t the E n g lish -C an ad ian farm ers w ere forging their ow n kind o f m ovem ent. P ragm atic a n d successful, the m ovem ent extended into nearly every kind o f farm activity, and increasingly differed from eith er trad itio n al capitalism o r th eoretical socialism . It was also characterized by an aggressive co nfidence relatively u n co m ­ m on in intern atio n al co -operative circles, a w illingness to experim ent, a n d to heed som e o f the lessons o f the E u ro p ean co-operative m ove­ m ents.

IV

In contrast, the in d ep en d e n t E n g lish -C an ad ian stores w ere n early a l­ ways struggling and m an y o f them were p ro n e to disaster. E xcept for the societies affiliated with the CUC (varying from fifteen to thirty in the w ar years), these stores w ere isolated from each o th e r an d subject to num erous problem s: changing local econom ic conditions, bo ard factionalism , m em ber apathy, inexperienced m an ag em en t, th o rn y credit questions, o r ideological conflicts. Because o f these problem s, the consum er m ovem ent was w eak in all regions, an d c o n su m er lead ­ ers, like G eorge K een and W. C. Stew art, the m an ag e r o f the Sydney M ines store, had lonely, difficult roles to play. T he years 1914 and 1915 w ere p articu larly h a rd for c o n su m er socie­ ties. Several stores closed in those years, in clu d in g eight o f the tw entythree societies that had form ed the m em b ersh ip o f the C o -o p erativ e U nion in 1913. Plagued by all the pro b lem s typical o f the co nsu m er m ovem ent, these stores were particu larly affected by the d epression that, despite the war, lasted into 1916. T h e d epression h u rt, no t only because it reduced the purch asin g pow er o f m em bers, b u t also b e­ cause it harm ed the trades unio n m ovem ent. T ra d e s un io n locals had

Possibilities Perceived, 1914-1919

61

been the organizing nuclei for m ost stores in in d u stria l tow ns; their deterioration, part o f a general decline o f trades unionism in 1914 and 1915,40 contributed significantly to the collapse o f several stores. These stores w ould not soon reap p ear. The w ar itself also seriously u n d erm in ed the stores. P rior to 1914. British im m igrants had played a vital role in m an y o f the stores, and, like so m any o f their com patriots, they usually enlisted as soon as w ar broke out. T hey left behind stores b ereft o f lead ersh ip a n d w eakened in m em bership. Two m anagers at least enlisted from the c u c affili­ ates, and num erous directors found th eir way in to the arm y an d navy. T he w ar also affected co-operatives in o th e r ways. C onscription, a g ita ­ tion for better wages, and struggles to im prove w orking co n d itio n s all aroused co-operators, w ho sought to respond to them as well as m eet their norm al co-operative responsibilities. G eorge Law son o f V alleyfield, one o f the pillars o f the local society, voiced this p ro b lem w hen he wrote: I do not know which way to turn to get clear of work to do. For example last week I had Co-op Monday and Tuesday, Union Wednesday and Friday and was compelled to be absent from two others, a Sunday School Teachers Meeting and Boy Scout Meeting. 1 have been compelled to tendered [j/c] my resignation as Treasurer and Teacher in our Sunday School because I am beginning to realize that my family deserves to have some of my time.41 A m ong the isolated factors causing the decline o f in d iv id u al socie­ ties, the m ining accident largely responsible for the closing o f the Hillcrest co-operative in A lb erta was the m ost tragic. E arly in July 1914, 189 m iners were killed in an explosion in the co m m u n ity ’s m ain mine. T he disaster decim ated the tow n’s p o p u la tio n an d u ltim ately destroyed the co-op. As one m em b er w rote: w e. .. have lost forty-five to fifty members or Shareholders, Including the President, G. Pounder, Committee[men] T. Turner, W. Turner. F. Moorhouse, and J. McKinnon, and I believe it has also cleared out all the Officials of the Orange Order, the Masonic Order, and quite a few Oddfel­ lows, all members of the School Board and also all the Male members of the Methodist Church with the exception of Mr. L ong___42 T he H illcrest society never recovered from this disaster. T h e loss o f experienced leadership was a serious blow no t easily overcom e in a town deficient in m anpow er. M oreover, the m ine was n o t reo p en ed im m ediately, m eaning th at there was greatly reduced p u rch asin g pow er and insufficient currency available for the store. T hese factors,

62

EACH FOR ALL

along with strikes in 1915, forced the closing o f the store d esp ite the best efforts o f several local co -operative enthusiasts. Less disastrous in h u m a n term s b u t m ore serious for d e v elo p in g co­ ops in English C an a d a were the failures in the m in in g districts o f C ape Breton. T he societies in Sydney, D o m in io n , an d Inverness col­ lapsed, spelling the end o f efforts to create a w holesale an d a M ari­ times section o f the C o-o p erativ e U nion. T h e sam e factors th a t g en er­ ally caused the failure o f o th e r societies w ere op erativ e in the M ari­ times, only with greater intensity. T he dep ressio n b eg in n in g in 1913, for exam ple, particularly affected the tow ns serving the coal fields until the end o f 1915. As late as the a u tu m n o f 1914, a n d despite the war, for exam ple, steel p lants in the area w ere closed dow n, im posing severe hardships upon the struggling co-operatives estab lish ed by the m iners. Stores w ere req u ired to extend excessive cred it to m in ers’ fam ilies on relief; w holesales in tim e becam e relu ctan t to extend credit to the societies; and, at the w orst possible tim e, rifts d eveloped on the boards o f directors a n d betw een b o ard s an d the m anagers. W ith few reserves to fall back u pon and w ith relatively w eak m em b er loyalty, the three societies could n o t su rm o u n t the d ifficulties o f the early w ar years. T he only relatively large M aritim es co n su m er society to p ro sp er in the difficult years was the British C an a d ia n in Sydney M ines. T o a large extent, the reason for this society’s success (d e m o n strated by its ability to retail nearly $300,000 in the p o o r y e a r o f 1915)43 was the loyalty o f its m em bers to the British co -operative philosophy. T hroughout its history the British C an a d ia n stressed the im p o rtan ce o f education by sponsoring n u m ero u s pu b lic concerts, m em b ersh ip drives, and com m unity activities. It m ain tain ed a strong reserve fund, refused to extend credit beyond its m eans, and generally developed strong bookkeeping m ethods. It becam e, for Sydney M ines an d som e o f the other nearby tow ns in C ap e B reton, a source o f strength for m iners caught in the do w n tu rn o f the N ova Scotian m in in g industry. In O ntario there was a sim ilar society in G u e lp h . O rganized am o n g trades unionists, it was heavily d e p e n d e n t upon the m an ag erial skills o f its president, Sam uel C arter. It grew steadily d u rin g the w ar years, its m em bership increasing to 740 an d its gross sales to $ 185,000.44 Elsewhere in the early w ar years the co n su m er m o v em en t in u rb an O ntario was in difficulty. T h e society in B rantford, d esp ite the efforts o f G eorge Keen, was confro n ted by con tin u al problem s, the result o f factionalism , an indifferent m em bership, an d a bad store location. In Peterborough and Brockville two societies, both started w ith o u t a d ­

Possibilities Perceived, 1914-1919

63

equate preparation, failed, their early p ro b lem s a u g m en ted by the distrust and opposition o f w holesalers. A nd in O ttaw a, a p articu larly prom ising store, started am ong civil servants, failed in 1915 largely because o f factionalism .45 F arth er west, the consum er m o v em en t on the Prairies w as co n ­ fronted by nearly as difficult times. T h e in d e p e n d e n t societies in the m ajor cities, such as W innipeg, w ere b u ffeted by the u n certain eco­ nom ic conditions, b u t the co-ops serving m ixed ru ral an d u rb a n p o p u ­ lations grew steadily if unspectacularly. By 1920 they n u m b e re d over 300 with nearly 19,000 m em bers. T h ey varied greatly in size and operation, som e being open for business a few half-days a w eek an d depending largely on v o lu n teer lab o u r; others k eep in g the ho u rs tra ­ ditional with private stores in th eir com m unities. T h ey v aried, too, in the nature o f their business, som e b eing essentially farm er-su p p ly co­ ops with lim ited grocery an d m eat sections; others bein g o rd in ary grocery stores unw illing to co m pete w ith the local agent o f the large m arketing co-operative. T he sam e p atterns w ere evident in British C o lu m b ia d u rin g the early w ar years. T here w ere a b o u t thirty exclusively c o n su m er socie­ ties in operation betw een 1914 an d 1918, b u t they w ere scattered throughout southern British C o lu m b ia; tw o-thirds o f them w ere in the agricultural com m unities, w hile the rem ain d e r w ere located in m ining towns. T he rural consum er co-ops, usually dev elo p ed by farm ers also involved in m arketing co-operatives, w ere stab le b u t slow -grow ing. The m ining co-operatives w ere evenly divided b etw een the K o o ten ay District and V ancouver Island, an d th eir exp erien ce flu ctu ated like that o f the stores in the m ining districts o f A lb erta an d C ape B reton. As for the larger u rban areas, co-operatives w ere established in N ew W estm inster, Victoria, and V ancouver, only to be forced in to b a n k ­ ruptcy by the econom ic difficulties o f the w ar years. In the y e a r after the w ar, ten consum er societies w ere dev elo p ed , b u t m ost o f them disappeared quickly, the victim s o f the econom ic dep ressio n o f the early tw enties.46 v Tow ards the end o f the F irst W orld W ar in terest in c o n su m er co­ operation picked up m om en tu m across C an ad a. T h e reasons fo r this new enthusiasm are clear. T h ro u g h o u t the w ar th ere was w idespread dissatisfaction over inflation, dissatisfaction e m b ittered by the p ro fit­ eering exposed in m an u factu rin g industries. T h e resu ltan t o utrage aided co-operators in p rom o tin g the co n su m er m ovem ent. T h e success

64

EACH FOR ALL

they initially achieved in tu rn h elp ed th eir co -operatives, as did fre­ q u en t reference to the British m o v em en t in the C a n a d ia n press. In the latter regard, the British co-operatives saved th eir ow n m em b ers d i­ rectly (and the consum ing p u b lic indirectly) large am o u n ts o f m oney because o f their fair p rice-setting policies. T his acco m p lish m en t, p a r­ ticularly w elcom e in a tim e o f high costs for scarce goods, w as w idely reported in C an ad a by co -operative p eriodicals an d by som e new sp a­ pers, such as the Toronto D aily Star. T he consum er m ovem ent was also h elp ed by an increasing interest am ong trades unionists. T ow ard th e end o f the w ar, th ere w as a rapid grow th in trades u n io n ism —in 1919 alone un io n m em b ersh ip rose over fifty per cent to reach a total o f 378,00047—a n d m an y o f the union enthusiasts w ere sym p ath etic to the m ov em ent. T h ere w ere, however, som e differing m otivations b eh in d this in terest: som e trad es unionists, like Jim m y Sim pson in T o ro n to , w ere attrac te d by the broad co-operative ideology; others, like m arxist lead ers in m ore ra d i­ cal m ining groups, saw it as a useful ally in the struggle against capitalism . T he differences betw een these two types o f enth u siasts were com paratively m uted at w ar’s end a n d w ould re m a in so for a few years; the im p o rta n t p o in t was th at the trad es unio n in terest was general and genuine, a possible base for extensive grow th in co n su m er co-operation. G iven the lab o u r m o v em en t’s interest, the general co n cern over consum er topics in the natio n a t large, an d the d ram atic grow th o f the farm ers’ m ovem ent, it was n atu ral th a t the leaders o f the C o -o p erativ e U nion becam e optim istic. It seem ed indeed, as if the U n io n , h ard pressed since its form ation, m ight finally be able to gain a d e q u a te funding. F o r ten years, th ough m any co -o p erato rs h ad ad m ired G eorge K een,48 few co-operative societies h ad su p p o rte d the U n io n financially. Partly, this lack o f su p p o rt was because m any a g rarian co­ op leaders were unim pressed by the U n io n ; a fte r all, m an y o f th eir organizations alm ost overnight h ad becom e m ajo r in stitu tio n s w hereas the U nion, o p erating on a ridiculously sm all b udget, h ad been located in a spare room o f the K een h ousehold in out-o f-th e-w ay B rantford. Partly, it had been caused by bias: K een was an E nglishm an devoted to the ideas o f the British m ovem ent, b oth factors th a t won few friends in pragm atic C an a d ian co -operative circles. A nd, p artly , it was K een’s stubbom ess: deeply suspicious o f in stan t co -o p eratio n , he al­ ways was opposed to big beginnings, fearin g th a t they w ould m ean sudden collapse; he was also, in the British c o n su m er trad itio n , a p p re ­ hensive about agriculture co-operatives, susp ectin g them o f bein g in ­ cipient trusts am ong prim ary producers.

Possibilities Perceived, 1914-1919

65

But, with the eu p h o ria o f the post-w ar days, an d w ith the e m e r­ gence o f several idealists am ong farm lea d e rs—m en like W. C. G o o d , E. C. D rury, and W illiam Irv in e —the cuc b egan to look at fa rm e r co­ operatives less critically. A t the sam e tim e, K een an d C a rte r th o u g h t they perceived in the u rb an an d trad es un io n reform ism a great breakthrough sim ilar to th a t w hich the British la b o u r m o v em en t had provided the co-operative store d u rin g the late n in e te en th century. C onsequently, early in 1918, w hen K een su d d en ly b ecam e u n e m ­ ployed, the U nion executive d ecided to hire him as a p aid secretary and ch ief organizer. A t the tim e, the n u m b e r o f affiliates, som e twenty-five (m ost o f them sm all an d recen tly -fo rm ed societies) w ould not have justified this action; b u t the n u m b e r o f en q u iries from trad es union locals and consum er groups a p p aren tly did. F ro m late 1917 through the next two years, in fact, the U n io n w as in u n d a te d with requests for inform ation on stores, for advice on practical problem s, and for encouragem ent in tim es o f trial. T h e reo rg an izatio n o f the cuc was a gam ble based on the possibilities im plied by these letters o f enquiry; even m ore, it was a reflection o f the faith in co-operative endeavour espoused by G eorge K een, th en a forty nin e-y ear-o ld fam ­ ily m an w ho chose a risky jo b w hen he could have h ad a m o re secure, better-paying position in the trad itio n al business w orld. T he jo b soon consum ed all o f K een ’s time. In 1918 a n d 1919, he began his travels to various C an ad ia n regions, visiting the M aritim es twice and N o rth ern O n tario once. H e crisscrossed so u th ern O n tario trying to keep alive the struggling o ld e r societies an d to place the new er organizations “ on the right lines” . M ost im p o rtan tly , his co rre­ spondence becam e volum inous, as he k ept in close touch w ith all societies—even those th at did not a ffiliate—th a t he h eard ab o u t. O ne o f his m ain tasks was to g a th e r statistics from affiliates so th at he could develop ratios on leakage, sales p e r m an -h o u r, reserve funds, and dividends. At the sam e time, he tried w ith som e success to in ter­ est m anagers and boards in the exchange o f in fo rm atio n ; he a t­ tem pted to stan d ard ize bo o k k eep in g m ethods; an d he o u tlin ed m etic­ ulously the responsibilities o f m em bers, boards, executives an d m an ­ agers. His advice alw ays stressed cau tio u s dev elo p m en t, living w ithin one’s incom e, and enco u rag em en t o f e d u catio n al program s. H e also tried to involve w om en in co-operatives bu t w ith o u t m uch success. He organized w om en’s guilds locally, provincially, an d n ationally, bu t he had little help. T h ere was certainly p ro fo u n d fem inist u n rest in the period, b ut it did not con trib u te significantly to the d ev elo p m en t o f the consum er co-operative m o v em en t.49 K een nevertheless achieved som e success from his efforts in 1918

66

EACH FOR ALL

and 1919. He bro u g h t the U n io n m em b ersh ip to thirty societies, an d his advice helped both affiliates a n d non -affiliates to achieve som e stability. T here was no p a rticu lar regional p a tte rn to the co-operatives he helped start or, fo r th at m atter, to the co-operatives th a t began w ithout his aid. Every region p ro d u ced a significant n u m b e r o f stores, and they were to be found in all kinds o f villages, tow ns, a n d cities. N ot counting the stores associated with th e m ark etin g co-operatives, at least nineteen were o p en ed in British C o lu m b ia, o ver one h u n d red in the Prairie provinces, tw enty in O ntario, an d th irteen in the M ari­ times.50 K een h ad contact w ith the m ajority o f these an d w as closely involved with m ore than a third o f them . In fact, he b u ilt his re p u ta ­ tion largely on these contacts. A n honest, self-denying m an , a p e n e ­ trating student o f the n in eteen th -cen tu ry co-operative theorists, and, increasingly, a person w ith co nsiderable practical ex perience, he was becom ing the pre-em in en t au th o rity on co-operative stores in English C anada. N evertheless, and despite K een ’s successes at the en d o f the war, the co-operative m ovem ent in total was still m ore pro m ise th an ac­ com plishm ent. D ram atic accom plishm ents h ad been achieved in som e m arketing areas and there w ere im pressive beginnings in o th e r farm ­ ing co-operative activities. Y et, even in grain m ark etin g , the m ost successful field o f endeavour, the co-o p erato rs were far from the type o f pow er they w anted : o rganized m ark etin g h ad n o t been p e rm a ­ nently assured, and farm ers’ incom es were still b u ffeted by speculative trading. As for the stores, w ith a few notable exceptions, they w ere all on weak foundations. M uch h ad been d o n e, b u t m uch m ore was possible and, in fact, w ould be u n d e rtak e n d u rin g the early tw enties.

CHA PTER FOU R

New Directions, 1920-1924 You have enough brains in Saskatchew an to solve any question under the sun, y o u have enough m oney, enough weight, enough farm ers, enough organization here—what y o u need is U N I T Y ! You cannot get unity by having one group swallow up another group! Your c h ie f need today is co-operative m arketing; but even behind that y o u r real need is such a spirit o f harmony, such a spirit o f bigness, that y o u w ill a ll start to work together to solve the problem that cannot be solved unless y o u do work together. I ask yo u to approach it in that spirit. Aaron Sapiro, as quoted in S. W. Yates, T he Saskatchew an W heat Pool, Its O rigin. O rg an izatio n an d ^Progress 1924-1925, ed. A. S. M orton (Saskatoon, 1927), p. 77.

CARSTA1RS RALLY SONG

by Mrs. J. H. R etelsd o rf One fo r all, and all fo r one, L et this our m otto be, In union there is strength ” That will lead to victory, Our standard we unfurl, A n d show our true democracy Come, jo in the Carstairs local. C horus A w ake! A w ake! and hear the clarion call, Arise! A rise! Be steadfast one and all. Obey the order, fa ll in line A n d rally to the cause. Come, jo in the Carstairs local. The need is very great indeed. A n d tim e is fleetin g fast. The m ill will never grind With the water that is past. Our aim is fo r the betterm ent O f all hum anity. Come, jo in the Carstairs local. (To be sung to “M arching through G eorgia”) G rain G row ers' G uide, M ay II, 1921, p. 35. 67

EACH FOR ALL

68

In 1919 George Keen wrote, ... the future of the co-operative movement in Canada was never so promis­ ing as it is at the present time. Throughout the Dominion there has been great activity among farmers along co-operative lines for some years past, and the same is steadily increasing in volume, but usually they lack interest in the principles of the movement or regard it as little more than a valuable means of securing personal or class advantage. Organised labour is now taking similar interest therein, appreciating that, without organisation as consumers, organisation as wagearners is of little value to them. The trades unions are materially assisting in the organisation of societies and as the outlook on life of their members is less individualistic than that of the landowning and self-employing farmers, a more comprehensive appreciation of, as well as deeper attachment to the principles of the movement may be expected.1 A lthough too harsh on the fa n n ers a n d too o ptim istic a b o u t the trades unionists, K een was ju stified in his optim ism b ecause o f the unprecedented grow th he saw everyw here in the E n g lish -C an ad ian m ovem ent. T here w ere two m ain kinds o f grow th in the years b e ­ tween 1919 an d 1924: the agricultural co-operatives increasingly c o n ­ trolled the prices at w hich th eir com m odities w ere sold, an d the consum er m ovem ent, though fa r less successful, w ent th ro u g h one o f its periodic bursts o f d evelopm ent. It w as also a p erio d w hen C a n a ­ dian co-operators drew closer together, partly because o f the efforts o f the C o-operative U nion o f C an ad a, m ostly because co -o p erato rs in ­ creasingly recognized th eir com m unality. It w as, in short, a perio d o f rem arkable and, for the m ost p art, successful grow th for the EnglishC anadian m ovem ent. It m ay be, in fact, th a t the co -o p erativ e m o v e­ m ent gained m ore p erm a n e n t strength th an any o th e r p ro te st m o v e­ m ent in the generally reform ist p eriod o f 1919-24. I

As in the past, the farm ers’ co-operatives m ad e the m ost im pressive gains, both in term s o f financial grow th an d innovative activities. A nd, again, as previously, the co-operatives am o n g the grain grow ers c o n ­ tinued to attract the m ost atten tio n . G rain grow ers as a gro u p d e e p ­ ened their interest in co-operative m arketing, first because o f the successful role already played by the U G G and the S askatchew an C o ­ op, and, second, because o f the o p p o rtu n ities for fu tu re grow th gleaned during the w ar years. T he two old co m p an ies w ere im p o rta n t to the growers for the crucial econom ic position they h ad assum ed. In

New Directions, 1920-1924

69

addition to affecting the prices o f the goods grain farm ers an d , in­ creasingly, livestock producers h ad to sell, they w ere also im p o rtan t regulators o f the prices ch arg ed for essential farm supplies. At the sam e time, the war, because o f the em ergence o f centralized selling u n der the W heat Board, suggested g reater possibilities for the fu tu re. Such success and such poten tial, though, did not m ean the two old com panies escaped criticism . Indeed, it was q u ite the reverse; as the com panies prospered, they fo u n d them selves the focus for increasing com plaints from m any o f the farm ers they served. O n e aspect o f the em erging critique was the charge th at they w ere insufficiently “ co­ operative” in organization o r attitu d e. H ardly a new charge, this idea gained m om entum in the early tw enties sim ply because the essential attributes o f the m ovem ent were b e tte r u n d ersto o d th an ever before. Ironically, the Grain Growers' Guide h ad helped dev elo p th at u n d e r­ standing, in p art because it had given such p ublicity to the A m erican efforts at co-operative m arketing. T hose efforts, significantly in flu ­ enced by E uropean co-operatives, but, even m ore, p rag m atic reactions to circum stances, had reached im pressive p ro p o rtio n s by 1920. W h e r­ ever one looked in the U nited States, d airy m en , grain grow ers, live­ stock producers, cotton grow ers, tobacco grow ers, fruit p roducers, and vegetable m arketers had all begun im p o rta n t co-operative in stitu ­ tions.2 M oreover, the A m erican co-operatives w ere generally in k e ep ­ ing with conventional “ R o ch d ale” principles, thus en co u ragin g C a n a ­ dian co-operators in their R och d ale-in flu en ced criticism s o f the U G G and Saskatchew an Co-op. But even m ore, the experiences o f A m erican co-o p erativ es e n c o u r­ aged dissatisfied farm co-op erato rs in C a n ad a by raising in a new way the issue o f com m odity control. M ost o f the early large A m erican m arketing societies had started, like th eir co u n terp a rts to the north, with the m ain objective o f im p ro v in g the m echanism s o f m arketing. T heir original concerns had lain prim arily w ith reducing the role o f m iddlem en, w ith reform ing tran sp o rtatio n system s, w ith im p ro v in g farm incom es, and with articu latin g p ro d u ce r ideas b efore g o v ern ­ m ents and public bodies. Like th eir C an a d ia n c o u n terp arts, they w ere frequently successful in achieving these ra th e r lim ited objectives. But. increasingly, such successes were taken for g ran ted , an d the d e m a n d s o f farm ers changed as their experience in jo in t m ark etin g grew . As the years w ent by, m ore and m ore A m erican farm ers believed they h ad to control entirely how their com m odities w ere sold. O nly in th a t w ay could they avoid such abuses as b ad g rad in g m eth o d s o r com m o d ity d um ping. O nce aroused by these u n fair practices, m any A m erican

70

EACH FOR ALL

producers started to develop system s fo r im p ro v in g stan d ard s, for selling at o ptim um times, a n d fo r d istrib u tin g charges eq u itab ly am ong all p articip atin g producers. T he value o f this “ p la n n e d ” m eth o d o f selling c o m m o d ities—the m ost im p o rtan t feature o f w h at becam e called “ o rderly m ark e tin g ” 3— was dem onstrated vividly before the F irst W orld W ar by the C alifo r­ nia F ruit G row ers’ E xchange.4 T h e E xchange, m ad e fam o u s by its “Sunkist” brand, provided its m em b ers w ith u p -to -d a te m ark eting inform ation as a m eans o f avoiding a “g lu t” on the m ark et. Ju st as im portantly, through concerted advertising, strict atte n tio n to g rad in g practices, and a strong m em b er-ed u catio n p ro g ram , it rap id ly in flu ­ enced the m arketing o f citrus fruits. By 1920 the success o f the C ali­ fornia Exchange had been b ro ad cast th ro u g h o u t N o rth A m erica by its own publicity efforts and by the n u m ero u s accounts o f it featu red in the agrarian press. Im itative p rojects resu lted alm ost instan tan eo u sly as grain grow er, dairy pro d u cer, and o th e r speciality co-operatives patterned their program s after th eir E xchange, an d th e b ro a d interest o f farm ers in all aspects o f con tro lled m ark etin g grew rapidly. C an ad ian interest in the E xchange and its im itators em erged as early as 1910,5 but it picked up m o m en tu m in 1919 an d 1920. C a n ad ian s read about them in such A m erican perio d icals as th e A m erican C o­ operative Journal, from 1911 on w ard the m ost p ro m in e n t spokesm an for A m erican co-operative m ark etin g . T h ey also read a b o u t the A m er­ ican experim ents in the Grain G rowers’ Guide, w hich, startin g in 1919, regularly sent reporters so u th w ard to rep o rt on the rap id ly ch ang in g A m erican m ovem ent. A nd, as im p o rtan t as any o th er m ean s o f co m ­ m unication, C an ad ian s had n u m ero u s fo rm al an d in fo rm al contacts with A m erican farm ers. T he executives o f reg io n al o r local as well as national farm ers’ associations on both sides o f the b o rd e r m et fre­ quently from the end o f the w ar onw ard. Inevitably, they discussed at length the co-operative m ark etin g pro g ram s th en fu n d am en ta lly a lte r­ ing A m erican agriculture. P erhaps the po in t in the A m erican m o v em en t th at m ost im pressed C anadian observers was the a m o u n t o f cen tralizatio n in the system started by the C alifornia F ru it G ro w ers’ E xchange. T h e E xchange was a federation in w hich the locals an d the district executives h ad signifi­ cant responsibilities, b u t the p o w er o f th e cen tral org an izatio n s was stronger than th a t possessed by centrals o f o th e r m ark etin g o rg an iza­ tions. T hus m any o f the im itato rs em p h asized stro ng cen tral o rg an iza­ tions that w ould regulate the en tire m ark etin g process as m uch as

New Directions, 1920-1924

71

possible. T his was particularly the case w hen th e p o o lin g p rin c ip le — then the ultim ate in farm er-o p erated co ntrolled m a rk e tin g —becam e w idespread in A m erican m ark etin g co-operatives. T he origins o f the pooling tech niq u e are n early as difficult to ferret out as are those o f the co-operative m ovem ent itself. In the U n ited States and apparently in C a n ad a som e o f the d airy co-operatives in the late nineteenth centu ry o p erated on w hat b ecam e know n as the pool m ethod.6 T he fruit-m ark etin g co-operatives o rganized in both countries before the w ar h ad sim ilar features, as did som e o f the fruitm arketing societies in E urope. But, w h atev er the com plex roots o f the m ovem ent, pooling as a principle h ad d eveloped specific ch aracteris­ tics that, by 1920, greatly interested m any farm ers. Briefly, p o o lin g m eant that all producers o f a single com m o d ity w ould b an d to g eth er in one central organization which w ould be responsible for the m a r­ keting o f that com m odity. T he central o rganization w ould be o rg a n ­ ized on a non-stock, n o n -p ro fit system o f co n tro l by m em b ers; it would be concerned ab o u t all phases o f m ark etin g an d w ould u n d e r­ take extensive educational and in fo rm atio n al p ro g ram s for its m em ­ bers. All m em bers w ould agree to m ark et all they p ro d u ced in the com m odity involved for a fixed perio d o f years (u su ally five o r seven). The price returned to the m em b er w ould vary according to the q uality o f com m odity produced. T he retu rn w ould be d istrib u ted annually, usually through three paym ents from the cen tral to the grow er. A nx­ ious to place the m axim um retu rn in the h an d s o f grow ers as soon as possible, m ost pools paid o u t high initial p aym ents, follow ed by m o d ­ est interim and final paym ents. It w as a sim ple y et effective system that served farm ers well as long as pool executives w ere o p eratin g in a stable m arket that p erm itted reaso n ab le ev alu a tio n s o f w hat p ay ­ m ents, especially w hat initial an d interim p aym ents, should be m ad e. T he C anadian grain grow ers tu rn ed to “ord erly m ark e tin g ” in g en ­ eral and the pooling principle in p artic u la r as a w ay to m ain ta in the prosperity they had enjoyed d u rin g the w ar. T h e re is little d o u b t, though, that, for m ost farm ers, it was a second choice, the first bein g a continuation o f the govern m en t m ark etin g system em ployed d u rin g the later w ar years. H ence, betw een 1919 an d 1921, m any farm ers looked m ore to governm en t than to co -operative action as the m ain solution to their problem s. It was a fruitless search. A fter the w ar, the K ing governm ent (and som e farm leaders) w ere d o m in ate d by a desire to return to “ business as u su al” . C onsequently, the ap p eals o f the line com panies and grain m erch an ts for an o p e n -m a rk et system

72

EACH FOR ALL

with future m arkets an d hedging o p eratio n s fo u n d receptive ears in O ttaw a, thereby u n d erm in in g the farm er arg u m en ts fo r go v ern m en t control. As the failure to gain a co n tin u atio n o f g o v ern m en t-co n tro lled grain m arketing becam e ap p aren t, the m ovem ent tow ard pooled m ark etin g gained m om entum . U n fo rtu n ately for the u nity o f the co -operative m ovem ent, though, it was difficult to find a p o o lin g system acceptable to the diverse segm ents o f the C an a d ia n grain grow ers. T h e leadership o f the old com panies, m en like T. A. C rerar, H. W. W ood, C. A. D unning, and J. R. M artin, recognized the ap p eal o f the pooling system, and they struggled to ad ju st to it. C onsequently, betw een 1919 and 1921 the old generation o f leaders, alo n g w ith the org an izatio n s they represented (including the C an a d ia n C ouncil o f A g ricu ltu re )7 struggled to devise an acceptable pooling system . T h ey w ere n o t suc­ cessful. Institutional jealousies, p ersonal rivalries, difficult o rg an iza­ tional details, and political u n d ercu rren ts p resen ted too m an y o b sta­ cles.8 T he result was that m ost o f the old lead e rsh ip lost the initiative in the pooling m ovem ent; thenceforth, they w ere ra th e r p a th etic fig­ ures trying to recapture control o f large g ro u p s o f p eo p le th a t alm ost overnight were going in a differen t direction. T he “young tu rk s” who grasped leadership roles in the pooling m ovem ent during the early tw enties w ere a diverse lot. S om e, like E. A. Partridge and P. P. W oodbridge, w ere h ard ly y o u n g th o u g h their ideas were enthusiastically received by y o u th fu l audiences. O thers, especially those in the F arm e rs’ U n io n o f C a n a d a, organized in Sas­ katchew an during 1921, drew heavily from the m o re radical A m erican farm ers’ m ovem ent and, to som e extent, th e British socialist trad itio n . T he F arm ers’ U nion, in p articu lar, b ecam e a significant spokesm an for price control by farm ers. D isgusted by the in ability o f the old com panies to achieve this goal and assisted by w idely circulated though unproved allegations o f co rru p tio n in the U G G , the U nion stim ulated a pow erful an d im aginatively organized drive tow ard com ­ plete farm er control over the m ark etin g system . In A lberta, a som e­ w hat different force was a p p a re n t in the en th u siasm s o f ag rarian m ilitants given precedence by the su b m erg ed Society o f E q u ity and direction by a responsive, if p ragm atic, lead ersh ip . As a g ro u p , the A lberta pool leadership was m ore conservative than th eir c o u n terp arts in the oth er Prairie provinces, b u t they w ere no less d eterm in ed and initially they were m ore successful. T he agitation for the pooled m ark etin g o f grains becam e irrevers­ ible in 1923 and 1924. T h ree factors accounted for the rem ark ab le

New Directions, 1920-1924

73

organizational outbursts o f those years, the first bein g the in ab ility o f the Progressive m ovem ent to provide a d e q u a te pro tectio n for the farm ers’ interests. M any farm ers, follow ing the political d isru p tio n s o f the w ar period, had placed great hopes in th eir ow n political m ove­ ment, but by 1923, and despite the co n tin u in g success o f the UFA, a growing percentage w ere becom ing d ispirited in the face o f the d isin ­ tegration o f the O ntario and natio n al m ovem ents. Secondly, the 1922 and 1923 crops, both sold in o p en m arkets, w ere n early disastrous. T he average price o f No. 1 N o rth e rn w heat, basis F o rt W illiam , plum m eted to $1.08 in 1923, a cata stro p h ic d ro p from the 1920 high o f $2.51.9 T he return o f “d o llar a b u sh el” w h eat could n o t have com e at a worse tim e: the cost o f farm ers’ supplies w ere increasing steadily, debts built up d u ring m ore pro sp ero u s periods w ere com ing d u e , and world m arkets w ere declining in the m idst o f a gen eral depression. Finally, A aron Sapiro, the sp e llb in d in g p ro p o n e n t o f co-operative action in the U nited States, sw ept through the W est, an a rd e n t cata­ lyst for the pooling crusade. H e was, in F ra n k U n d e rh ill’s w ords, “one o f the greatest evangelists the w est had ever seen ” . 10 A native o f Chicago, Sapiro h ad been involved in co-operatives in C alifornia since 1911. H e had beco m e a stro n g ad vocate o f farm ers’ pooling their produce on a single-com m odity basis an d selling through a pow erful central o rganization. In som e ways, he m ay even have originated the id e a .11 H e p layed an im p o rta n t role in the d evel­ opm ent o f the Sun M aid R aisin C o-operative, the C alifo rn ia F ru it G row ers’ Exchange, and the O regon G ro w ers’ C o -o p erativ e. T h ro u g h ­ out the early twenties, his m ain c o n trib u tio n to the m o v em en t w as a series o f tours in which, through flurries o f splen d id o rato ry , he preached the value to producers o f large-scale co-operative selling developed on as wide a geographic base as possible. F u n d a m e n ta lly , he advocated intense loyalty am ong producers, careful tim ing for the sale o f com m odities, and iro n -b o u n d contracts w ith p rod u cers over a five-year period. Sapiro was not a co -operative u to p ian ; rath er, he was a pragm atic m arketing advisor attem p tin g to establish th rough com bination a strong position for producers. T hus, he did not stress that farm ers were a sep arate g roup, an d he believed that the bankers, local businessm en, and railw ays long resented by farm ers, could be effective, even necessary allies. T his ap p ro ach , th ough successful, was regarded suspiciously by m any u to p ian co -o p erato rs w ho resented involvem ent by individuals they regarded as exploiters: for them , the farm ers’ natural allies were the trades unionists and the o rganized consum ers.

74

EACH FOR ALL

S apiro m ade his m ost im p o rtan t C an ad ia n tours in 1923 an d 1924. O riginally invited n orth by B.C. dairy m en in the fo rm er year, he was brought to A lberta to speak to grain grow ers by the Calgary H erald; from there he w ent to S askatchew an. Since the kernel o f his thou g h t was already w ell-know n, Sapiro said little th a t w as new. It was m ore how he spoke than w hat he said. His enth u siasm , his capacity to think positively, and his m agnetic personality w ere ju s t the catalysts re­ quired in an already w ell-prepared e n v iro n m en t. S ap iro ’s m essage particularly aided critics o f the old com panies, m en w ho h ad attacked the tim idity o f the old leadership, and w ho w ere looking for an opportunity to seize the initiative. T hey w ere so forceful, in fact, that only a few o f the old veterans, like the wily H enry W ise W ood, were able to m aintain their prom in en ce in the rev o lu tio n ary chan g es that eventuated. A lm ost to a m an, the pool leaders w ere indiv idu als new to power, m en who found them selves suddenly, bew ilderingly, in charge o f a m am m oth econom ic and social p rogram . T he pools’ success d ep en d ed upo n control over p ro d u c tio n ; the m ore control the m ore the success th a t could be achieved. Follow ing A m erican precedents, the Prairie pools w ere based on the assu m p tio n that sixty per cent o f the com m o d ity concerned w ould have to be controlled before a pool could d eterm in e m ark etin g price. Less than that percentage, it was believed, w ould allow the o p en m ark et to rem ain dom inant. G ain in g sixty p er cent signup, how ever, w as an im m ense task am ong traditionally in d e p e n d e n t farm ers. In d eed , only A lberta, because o f an earlier start and the po w er o f the U F A , was able to sign up enough farm ers to start business w ith the 1923 crop. T he drives in the o th er two P rairie provinces req u ired an ex tra y ear to com plete, partly because they started later a n d partly because they were w orking am ong m ore divided ag rarian m ovem ents. T he creation o f the pools seriously divided the p ro d u ce r c o -o p era­ tive m ovem ent on the Prairies, b u t it was n o t a co m p lete b reak . T h e U G G , for exam ple, provided im p o rtan t financing and elev a to r services for the pools in the form ative years, an d there w ere p ersistent, reaso n ­ ably am icable if unsuccessful n egotiations on am alg am atio n afte r the pools were form ed. N evertheless, from 1924 o n w ard there w ould be two producer co-operative m ovem ents on th e Prairies, two m ovem ents that com peted with each o th er and to g eth er lost a sp len d id o p p o rtu ­ nity to dom inate the C a n ad ian grain trade. II

The revolutionary acceptance o f pooling by grain grow ers was w atched carefully by farm ers m ark etin g o th e r com m odities. D airy

New Directions, 1920-/924

75

farm ers, am ong the m ost trou b led groups in C a n a d ia n agricu ltu re during the tw entieth century, w ere p articu larly in terested. In A lberta and British C olum bia several d airy -farm in g g ro u p s stu d ied the p o o l­ ing principles in the early tw enties, an d those activities p ro d u ced new initiatives then and especially later in the d ecad e. A t Alix, A lb erta, for exam ple, N . A. L arson, a D anish im m ig ran t, in tro d u ced a profitsharing system based partly on p o olin g ideas in 1922. A y e a r later, farm ers in southern A lberta, organized in the H u x le y -G ra n g e r D airy ­ m en’s Association, established th eir ow n d airies a t E ln o ra an d C al­ gary.12 In Saskatchew an the province-w ide cream ery co-operative showed interest in the pooling concept, as did several in d e p e n d e n ts in M anitoba. In O ntario, the U nited F arm e rs’ C o -o p erativ e o rganized the U nited D airym en’s C o -operative in 1920. S tru ctu red on a po oling basis, this co-op pooled cheese from a n u m b e r o f m ostly farm erowned cheese factories an d sold directly to ex p o rters; by 1924 it was selling over 125,000 boxes o f cheese. In the M aritim es, the p o oling principle had less im pact: m ost o f the farm er-o w n ed cream eries had started before 1914, and they retain ed th e ir orig in al c h aracter throughout the early twenties. T he pooling m ovem ent, how ever, did not com p letely sw eep C a n a ­ dian agriculture, and traditio n al co-operatives co n tin u ed to thrive. Egg and poultry co-operatives were b ecom ing co m m o n p lace, usually serv­ ing localized m arkets. Livestock sh ip p in g clubs, th a t sh ip p ed anyth in g from hogs in N ova Scotia to p rim e cattle on the Prairies an d horses in A lberta, had becom e a significant p a rt o f the ru ral econom y. A nd, throughout the country, co-operatives, legally o rg an ized o r inform ally operated, had been developed to supply farm hom es w ith beef, to build com m unity halls, to construct curling rinks, and to provide m edical services. T here seem ed to be no lim it to the w ays in w hich co­ operative techniques could be applied. C oping with grow th an d enthusiasm , in fact, becam e o n e o f the main problem s for co-operative leaders. T h e difficulties caused the UGG and Saskatchew an C o-op by the grow th o f the pools in p art exem plified that p h enom en o n . So too did the p ro test th at ch allenged the leaders o f the U nited F a rm ers’ C o-op in O n tario . T h a t o rg an iza­ tion, sw ept up by the em ergence o f the Progressive m o v em en t, found itself caught up in m om entum th at at first en co u rag ed such e x p a n ­ sionists as R. W. E. B urnaby. A dvocates o f slow grow th based on the local autonom y o f constitu en t societies (m en like W. C. G o o d ) con se­ quently lost influence. By 1920, the UF C o-op h ad 20,000 m em bers while its sister organization, the U n ited F a rm ers o f O n tario , had 60,000.13 W ith such a large m em b ersh ip to draw upon, the UF C o-op

76

EACH FOR ALL

opened new services, in clu d in g a Live Stock B ranch, an Egg and Poultry D epartm ent, a Seed D ep artm en t, a F ru it D ep a rtm e n t, and a subsidiary w holesale. It even attem p ted to m ove into tow ns an d cities, offering “participation certificates” ra th e r th an m em bersh ip s to n o n ­ farm ers. Im m ediately successful in som e areas, this m ove h ad the unfortunate result o f offering com p etitio n to in d e p e n d e n t c o -o p era­ tives in B rantford, B ridgeburg, P eterb o ro u g h , a n d K ingston. T he bubble started to d e fla te —if it d id n ’t b u rs t—in 1921. T. P. Loblaw, who had helped m asterm in d the expansion, h ad left in early 1920, and, finding com p eten t m en to o p erate the com plex o rg an iza­ tion he had helped construct w as not easy .14 W ith so m an y d e p a rt­ m ents, the UF C o-op h ad becom e a difficult in stitution to o p erate well in the best o f times; and by 1921, tim es w ere n o t the best. T h e steadily w orsening depression cou p led w ith declin in g en th u siasm for the agrarian m ovem ent proved to be disastrous. M uch like the politi­ cal w ing o f the O n tario farm ers’ m ovem ent, the C o-op disin teg rated in 1922 and 1923. In the fo rm er y e a r it began to close stores; in the latter it suffered losses o f nearly $200,000.'5 T he rapid decline o f the UF C o-op was serious for the en tire m ove­ m ent in Southern O ntario. D u rin g the p erio d o f its rap id grow th, its m om entum had adversely affected the d ev elo p m en t o f societies in sm all towns and cities th ro u g h o u t the region. In d eed , by 1921 it was the province’s m ost im p o rtan t co n su m er as well as m ark etin g co­ operative, and its decline was, th erefore, significant in the history o f the O ntario m ovem ent. A m ong o th er effects, the co m p a n y ’s decline gave co-operation a bad n am e th ro u g h o u t the province. A nd, as G eorge K een p u t it, Every store described as a “Co-operative” which is closed . . . does us more injury than all the efforts which are made by organizations or persons selfishly interested in obstructing co-operative development.16 M uch the sam e could be said for the efforts o f M aritim e farm ers. Som ew hat later and slow er than th eir O n tario c o u n terp arts, the M aritimers had built their own relatively extensive co-operative supply organization. In 1916 the U n ited F a rm ers’ C o -o p erativ e C o m p an y o f New Brunswick had been form ed, with h ead office in W oodstock and, later, M oncton. By 1920 this co -operative h ad o p en ed tw enty-five stores in New Brunswick and six in N ova Scotia, m ost o f them having been opened im m ediately after the war. But, as w ith the UF C o-op, the M aritim e U nited Farm ers, as it was know n a fter 1920, soon encountered adversity because o f overextension o f resources, in tern al

New Directions, 1920-1924

77

divisions, the depression, and effective c o m p etitio n . In 1922 co ntrol over the stores was decentralized as the debts o f th e cen tral body increased, but the changes cam e too late. By the m id d le o f the decade all but a few stores had d isap p eared , an d only th ree survived to play im portant roles in later co-operative dev elo p m en t. In m any ways, the UF C o-op an d MUF, up to 1924, w ere necessary experim ents, beginning efforts in co -o p eratio n by the farm ers o f O n ­ tario and the M aritim es. It w ould be m isleading, how ever, to dw ell too long on the setbacks. It is m ore en lig h ten in g and accu rate to see the problem s and crises o f the early tw enties as results o f the in sa tia ­ ble experim entation by farm ers w ith all kinds o f co-operative activity. C onsidering the difficulties involved in un itin g highly individualistic farmers, in fashioning practical organizations o u t o f rural diversity, and in operating com plex business w ith inexperienced m em berships, it is rem arkable that so m any co-operatives m an ag ed to survive. Ill

T he outburst in co-operative activity by farm ers was, o f course, in tri­ cately associated w ith the Progressive m ovem ent. Progressivism was ultim ately a series o f political, religious, social, an d econom ic im pulses that pulled its supporters in several directions. Its incoherence and inability to find a stable consensus rap id ly destroyed its involv em en t in the politics o f the D om inion an d o f m ost o f the provinces. In contrast, the econom ic activism o f the Progressive m o v em en t did not fade; am ong farm ers it stim ulated pow erful drives for increased gov­ ernm ent regulation o f m arketing and, ju s t as im p o rtan tly , for co­ operative action. In fact, in retrospect, the Progressive era, fa r from being the brief, curious eru p tion its political history seem s to im ply it was, was o f vital im portan ce in d efin in g the w ay in which the rural hinterlands would try to relate to th eir m etro p o litan centres, especially in econom ic m atters. T he ultim ate em phasis upon econom ics n atu rally e m an a ted from norm al self-interest, but it w ould be incorrect an d u n fair to assum e that the dom inance o f econom ics m e a n t th at w id er reform interests necessarily declined. T he p o in t is th at m ost o f the ag rarian m o v em en t and the related co-operative m ovem ent recognized in the failures o f Progressive political action that only lim ited social objectives were im m ediately attainable. O r, p u t a n o th e r way, m any co -o p erato rs, a l­ ready exposed to the m ovem en t’s apolitical trad itio n s, had th eir su sp i­ cions reinforced by the Progressive experience. Inevitably, these cooperators becam e m ore a lo o f from political activity, especially at the

78

E A C H F O R A LL

federal level, d u rin g and after the early tw enties. N ev er again w ould co-operative institutions be as sym pathetic to a political m o v em en t as they were to the farm er and lab o u r o u tb u rst th at occurred at the end o f the First W orld W ar. N evertheless, while Progressivism blossom ed, it was difficult to know w here it started and w here the co -o p erativ e m o v em en t ended. M ost o f the issues raised by P rogressivism —political reform , econom ic inequality, group action, ed u catio n al uplifting, attacks on privilege, m oral regen eratio n —h ad been integral co m p o n en ts o f co-operative thought for decades. T he two m ovem ents sh ared co m m o n fears, n o ta ­ bly o f industrializatio n an d u rb an izatio n , c o rru p tio n an d d ep e rso n al­ ization, and they p o stu lated the sam e kinds o f solutions, g reater d e­ m ocratization and b etter edu catio n . T h e carryover in lead ersh ip fig­ ures from one m ovem ent to the o th e r was im pressive en o u g h : T. A. C rerar, E. C. D rury, J. E. B row nlee, W. C. G o o d , A gnes M acphail, J. J. M orrison, to m ention only a few. But it was even m ore im pressive at the grassroots level. T he U n ited F arm ers o f O n tario , for exam ple, form ed the U nited F arm ers’ C o -o p erativ e. Sim ilarly, in M an ito b a, the co-operative m ovem ent becam e im p o rtan t fo r both the consistently reform ing groups and for the occasional refo rm in g p ro g ram s o f Jo h n B racken’s governm ents. In S askatchew an, the ties w ere d e ep e r an d m ore com plex. O n the one h an d , the “ progressive” liberalism o f M otherw ell and D u n n in g was based on co-operatives w hile, on the o th er hand, the developing a g rarian socialism placed g reat em phasis on co-operative effort. A nd, finally, in A lberta, the association be­ tween Progressivism an d co-operative action w as basic to the em erg ­ ence o f the U nited F arm ers o f A lberta. M any in the E nglish -C an ad ian m o v em en t em b raced Progressivism because they had been searching fo r a satisfying political h o m e since 1911. M ost co-operators from earlier in the century h ad been liberals o f one shade o r an o th e r and, often, relu ctan t su p p o rters o f the L iberal party. They had been attracted by th at p a rty ’s su p p o rt for free trade, anti-trust legislation, C a n ad ian nationalism , an d p ro claim ed concern for the “ little m an ” . T he u ltim ately cau tio u s L au rie r regim e, the strength o f conservatism in the party, an d the d efeat in 1911, how ever, alienated m any co-operators. Still others, especially those w ith em o­ tional ties to G reat Britain, w ere an tag o n ized by the p a rty ’s stand on conscription. T hus, w hen the Progressive political m o v em en t u n ­ folded, it found num ero u s co -o p erato rs w ho were search in g fo r a political hom e. M any o f them jo in e d reluctantly, how ever, seeing in it one last effort to do w hat the L iberal p arty h a d failed to u n d e rta k e .17

New Directions, 1920-1924

79

T he generation o f leadership in the co-operatives at the tim e o f the Progressive o u tb u rst—the C rerars, D unnings, M otherw ells, a n d W oods —becam e pow erful figures at the provincial level; a few b u ilt on th at base and developed federal careers. In the process, they p ro p elled the co-operatives they led into covert political action, a d ev elo p m en t that inevitably produced conflict at local and a n n u a l m eetings. In fact, much o f the opposition to the UGG a n d the S askatchew an C o-op during the early tw enties was rooted in dissatisfaction over the p o liti­ cal activities o f their leaderships. M ost o f the op p o sitio n cam e from left-wing groups in these organizations, m en an d w om en w ho d isa­ greed with their leaders as m uch o ver th e ir politics as econom ic m atters. R ath er curiously, then, at the sam e tim e th at the o ld er leaders were gaining prom inence in federal political life, som e found th eir pow er bases fast eroding. T he p roblem was that the leaders h ad created “ political” m ovem ents they could not control. U ltim ately, the m em ­ berships o f the farm co-ops had diverse political sy m p ath ies and gathering behind the Progressive b a n n e r had been a tem po rary p h e­ nom enon. T hus, w hen federal Progressivism faltered, the unity broke dow n, especially w hen so m any federal leaders proved to be no m ore than dissatisfied L iberals. Thus, though co-operatives served as su p erb stepping stones for m any asp iran t politicians up to 1923, they were poor political pow er bases thereafter. Significantly, too, after th at y ear the o verw helm ing m ajority o f co­ operatives kept m eticulously a lo o f from partisan politics, m ean in g that later generations did not p roduce C rerars. M otherw ells, a n d D u n ­ nings. T he only “ political” interest com m on to co-operatives th e re ­ after was the quest for acceptable inco rp o ratio n an d inspection legis­ lation. This m eant continual contact with g o vernm ents at the p ro v in ­ cial level, but that contact was alm ost inevitably n o n -p artisan . T he efforts o f co-op leaders on the Prairies in these areas w ere m ore successful than those o f their colleagues elsew h ere—especially in g ain ­ ing reasonably acceptable leg islatio n —b u t even they norm ally resisted, after the early twenties, playing aggressive political roles. The turn from politics, o f course, was sanctified by trad itio n al co­ operative theory. Political neutrality, in the sense o f being a lo o f from political activity o f all kinds, had been, in fact, a p ro m in en t th em e in the international m ovem ent since the n in eteen th century. It h ad been particularly com m on in ag rarian societies, p e rh ap s because o f the traditional divisive political anim osities ingrained in rural areas o f E urope and N orth A m erica. But, p erh ap s now here else did political

80

E A C H F O R A LL

neutrality becom e so deeply en tren ch ed as in the C a n ad ia n c o -o p era­ tive m ovem ent; and, certainly, in few o th e r co u n tries did c o -o p era­ tives cut them selves o ff so com pletely from g o v ern m en t aid, be it m oral o r financial. IV

W hile the farm er co-operatives enjoyed grow th and d a b b le d in p o li­ tics, the consum er m ovem ent m ad e considerable progress. Everyw here in English C anada betw een 1920 an d 1924, there was an in terest in consum er co-operation. This grow th m e a n t th at the C o -op erativ e U nion o f C an ad a was sw am ped by requests for advice an d assistance. T he groups appeared everyw here—in m ining tow ns in the East, N orthern O ntario, o r the w est coast, in rural m u n icip alities on the Prairies, in the m ajor cities, even on the reserves for C a n a d ia n In d i­ ans. An estim ated one h u n d red an d fifty c o n su m er co-operatives were form ed and m any m ore buying clubs w ere started , especially on the Prairies. O ne feature o f this new activity was the inv o lv em en t o f trades unions, though th at involvem ent was tran sito ry ; a n o th e r was the m ore perm anent p articip atio n o f im m ig ran t groups, n o tab ly G e r­ m ans, U krainians, Finns, Poles, E nglishm en, a n d Scots. It w as a c h a ­ otic period in the history o f E n g lish -C an ad ian consum ers co-operation, a period o f brigh t b eginning that quickly faded into d isa p p o in t­ ing collapse. T he recession th at sw ept C a n a d a in 1922 a n d 1923 was a p rincipal cause o f the ultim ate d isap p o in tm en t. S everal o f the new co-operaUves h ad started on low capitalization, expecting th at ex p an d in g m em bership and sales w ould provide resources. A few h ad d eveloped large inventories as quickly as possible, a n ticip atin g th a t d e m a n d for their services w ould ease storage and financing p ro b lem s. T hese dream s were dashed by the u n em p lo y m en t an d reduced incom es th at accom panied the recession. A nd to these p ro b lem s w ere ad d e d all the old ones: inadeq uate m an ag e m en t, p o o r e d u catio n al pro g ram s, m e m ­ ber indifference, and effective co m petition. In m any ways, the m ost tragic failures from the m o v e m e n t’s view ­ point occurred in Southern O n tario . In 1919 th ere w ere stro n g socie­ ties in G uelph, G alt, D undas, an d B rantford. Even m ore im p o rtan tly , there were prom ising new co-operatives in W indsor, L o n d o n , Bridgeburg, W oodstock, S tratford, and H am ilton. As these new societies developed, the C o-operative U nion reacted by creatin g an O rg an iza­ tion D epartm ent m ade up o f G eo rg e K een a n d the m ore ex perienced m anagers. It also stim ulated talks ab o u t creatin g a w holesale and

New Directions, 1920-1924

81

helped form an O ntario section o f the C o-o p erativ e U nion, all in hopes o f providing the stability new societies so freq u en tly n eeded. All these m easures proved to be in vain, and w h at h ad ap p e a re d so prom ising in 1919 was a co-operative w asteland by 1922. In addition to the problem s com m on to c o n su m er co-operatives elsewhere, the Southern O n tario co-ops w ere faced by a series o f special difficulties. T he ch ain-store system , for exam ple, developed m ore rapidly in that region than others, m aking it very difficult for co-operatives to com pete. M oreover, according to G eorge K een and others who tried to organize stores in the region, it was very difficult to kindle the requisite com m unity spirit. T he old elites o f the tow ns and cities were custom arily opposed to co-ops, w hile new p rofessional and business elites w ere preoccupied by their careers and the eco­ nomic expansion o f the period. T h e m ore active w orking m en, m o re ­ over. were usually most interested in “ b read an d b u tte r” trades u n io n ­ ism, while the poor w ere disorganized and disinterested. It was also difficult to appeal on the basis o f local interest, effective as th at appeal was elsewhere, because som ehow m ost S o u th ern O n ta rio co m ­ m unities believed they w ould share a d eq u ately in the expansion o f the day. In their view, grow th was n o t an enem y: it was an ultim ate benefactor. T he result was that the m ov em en t d id not p ro sp er in Southern O ntario, and its ideology w as not accepted by the people who dom inated the m ajor m etro p o litan centres. T he disappointm ents in S outhern O n ta rio began to be registered in 1921 w hen societies in W indsor (two), G eorgetow n, S tratfo rd , N iag ara Falls, and G an an o q u e folded. In the next two years, at least a n o th e r dozen closed their d o o rs,18 leaving co n su m er co -o p eratio n n early d o r­ m ant except for a h andfu l o f societies: two in G u elp h (one serving tow nspeople, the oth er students) an d a few w ithin the UF C o-op system. As the stores folded, the U n io n , especially G eorge K een, struggled fiercely to save them . N ev er a w ealthy and seldom a p ro s­ perous m an, K een contrib u ted all he had to the m ovem ent, and in 1923, after several U nion affiliates had closed, he fo u n d h im self over $1,000 (or one year) behind in his salary. T he failures in Southern O n tario accounted for only a p a rt o f the decline in the U nion’s revenues. T h ere w ere pro b lem s in o th e r regions as well. In the M aritim es the strong m ov em en t that had em erged in industrial C ape Breton found itself cau g h t in two cruel dilem m as d uring the early twenties. A few societies in that area (n o tab ly Sydney and G lace Bay) were already in difficulty w hen the decade op en ed , and so their problem s were not d ifferen t from those e n co u n tered

82

EACH FOR ALL

elsewhere. But the British C a n a d ia n C o -o p erativ e in S ydney M ines, the most prosperous co n su m er society in N o rth A m erica, fo u n d the difficulties o f neighbouring co-operatives so m ew h at em barrassing. Inevitably, as nearby stores flo u n d ered , th eir m em b ersh ip requested that the British C anad ian ab so rb them . U n fo rtu n a te ly for th e C ape Breton m ovem ent, the Sydney M ines store, usually for business reasons, could not in all cases do so. T h e result was th at, th ough the British C an ad ian h a d o p en ed n ine branches by 1924, it h ad gained a reputatio n for aloofness an d even heartlessness w hen c o n fro n ted by the failure o f nearby societies. But the difficulty in choosing betw een possible associates w as not the m ost perplexing p roblem th a t co n fro n ted the Sydney M ines co­ operative. A far m ore difficult choice lay in d ecid ing how it should react to the industrial unrest in the local m ines, u n rest th a t in tensified in 1922. O n the one hand, the British C an ad ia n a n d th e sm aller surviving societies favoured the cause o f the m iners w ho ow ned them , and thus they relaxed rules on m em b er credit, pro v id ed free m eals for children, and collected co n trib u tio n s from o th e r C a n a d ia n co -o p s.19 But, on the o th er han d , the co-operative leaders, especially those in the British C an ad ian , had som e sym pathy w ith the m in e m anagers and very little for the m ore radical strike leaders, n o tab ly J. B. M acL achlan.20 Because o f this position an d , indeed, th eir g eneral distrust o f strikes as a m ajo r econom ic w eapon, the co-op leaders left them selves vulnerable to criticism by som e strikers. T hus, it was not surprising that, though generally left alone d u rin g violent p eriods in the strikes, stores were occasionally d am ag ed d u rin g the w orst o f those outbursts. In balance, how ever, the criticism an d hostility o f som e strikers was m ore th an offset by the good will o f the m any w ho appreciated the contrib u tio n s the stores did in fact m ake. M oreover, m ost m iners, it seem s, ultim ately accepted the a rg u m en t th at the first responsibility o f co-operatives h ad to be to th eir ow n survival. T he stores had an obligation to co n trib u te w h atev er su rp lu s funds they had to the strike effort, b u t at all tim es they h ad to m a in tain ad eq u a te reserves to ensure their ow n co n tin u atio n . T here is no question, though, that the controversies raised by the strikes, along with the related econom ic depression, b ad ly affected the C ape Breton m ovem ent. Societies in Sydney, G lace Bay, a n d D o m in ­ ion failed o r were forced into am alg am atio n w ith the British C a n a ­ dian. T he enthusiasm o f the m iners, m oreover, was d iv erted to trad es unionism alone, especially d u rin g the strike w hen m ore exciting issues than the sale o f groceries held the stage. T hus, w hile the British

New Directions, 1920-1924

83

C anadian m anaged to hold its ow n econom ically d espite the turm oil, the m ovem ent itself did not prosper. Sim ilarly, in N o rth ern O ntario, a p rom ising co n su m er m o v em en t was seriously u n d erm in ed by the econom ic adversities o f the early twenties. At the end o f the w ar four societies w ere o rganized in N o rth Bay, C obalt, S udbury, an d C oniston. T hey w ere all started u n d e r U nion auspices and, along with scattered o ld e r societies in sm all com m unities throughout the region seem ed to o ffer co n sid erab le p o ­ tential. O ne after another, though, the four m ajo r co-operatives failed, the victims o f insufficient capitalization, poorly train ed m an ag e m en t, and inad equate leadership. By 1922 they w ere all gone an d , though new societies would soon be o rganized because o f co n su m er unrest, ethnic consciousness, and political activism , a pro m isin g m ov em en t had suddenly collapsed. T he consum er m ovem en t on the Prairies w as n o t as seriously af­ fected as the m ovem ents fu rth e r east, b u t the results w ere bad enough. T he n u m b er o f know n societies in the region actu ally in­ creased betw een 1920 an d 1924 from 482 to 6 1 1,21 b u t the n u m b ers are m isleading because nu m ero u s societies th a t failed w ere alm ost im m ediately replaced. A feature o f the new societies (and o f som e o f the surviving older ones) was the significant role p layed by British im m igrants. L loydm inster, D avidson, K illam , Y oung, M elfort, and W etaskiwin, to m ention only a few, w ere strongly influ en ced by Brit­ ish traditions because o f the n atu re o f their lead ersh ip or m em b ersh ip . R ather significantly, these societies played an increasingly im p o rta n t role in the early tw enties, and w hen they did, the British connection was significant because it en co u rag ed the co n su m er co-ops to resist dom ination by the agrarian m ark etin g co-operatives. Indiv id u als schooled in, o r aw are of, the B ritish experience w ere susceptible to the “consum er theory o f co -o p eratio n ” an d less a ttracted to the ag rarian class consciousness eviden t in p ro d u c e r groups. In M ay an d Ju n e 1923, som e thirty societies in A lberta, m an y o f them influenced by British im m ig ran ts active on b o ard s o f directors, held a series o f m eetings to investigate the d ev elo p m en t o f jo in t projects. T o som e extent, these m eetings w ere c o n tin u atio n s o f the unrest seen in consum er societies tow ard the en d o f the w ar, b u t they were also based on a desire to im itate the British w holesale system . Inevitably, the A lberta group, in considering closer co -o p eratio n b e ­ tween them selves as well as the possible d ev elo p m en t o f a w holesale, began to look m ore closely at the C o -o p erativ e U nion. C o n tacts were m ade with Saskatchew an co-operatives and, as a result, G eo rg e K een

84

EA CH FO R ALL

was invited to tour Saskatchew an an d A lb erta d u rin g the su m m e r o f 1923. His tour was a lim ited success in A lberta, b u t he scored a m ajo r trium ph in Saskatchew an. T h e differin g resu lt was largely caused by the reaction o f the personnel w ithin the C o -o p eratio n a n d M arkets Branch o f Saskatchew an’s D e p a rtm e n t o f A griculture. T h e th en acting com m issioner o f this branch was W. W ald ro n , an E nglish co -o p e ra to r trained in the “ O ld L a n d ” . W ald ro n took the sam e view o f the m ovem ent as did G eorge K een, an d the tw o m en fo rm ed a close friendship in 1923, a friendship th at was to rem ain stro n g for tw enty years. Partly because o f W aldron, m ostly because his services were useful, K een returned to S askatchew an the follow ing su m m er an d every oth er sum m er until the 1940s w hen the w ar and ill h ealth ended his m issionary crusades. K een’s advent and W ald ro n ’s p ro m in en ce w ere im p o rta n t for the Saskatchew an m ovem ent. Both m en w ere fam iliar w ith co-operative experience elsewhere and, in 1924, the tw o co llab o rated on a new provincial co-operative act that, w hen passed in 1925, becam e a m odel for the rest o f C anada. K een also played an im p o rtan t, th o u g h cer­ tainly not d o m inant role, in h elp in g W ald ro n forge w hat w as, for the time, a strong co-operative b ran ch in the p rovincial g o v ern m en t. In addition to W aldron, there was an acco u n tan t, th ree sten o g rap h ers, and several p art-tim e specialists in d ifferen t form s o f co -o p eratio n . As im portant as the size w as the th ru st o f the b ran ch . A long w ith som e o f the leaders o f the consu m er societies an d m ark e tin g organ izatio n s, it was com m itted to developing a un ited m o v em en t in S askatchew an, one that involved all kinds o f co-operatives. In 1924, u n d e r W a ld ro n ’s leadership, a C o-operativ e L eague o f S askatchew an was form ed. W orking closely w ith th e C o-o p erativ e U nion o f C a n ad a, the L eague, its successors, an d the branch itself w ere responsible fo r d ev elo p in g a high degree o f co-ord in atio n in S askatchew an, m ore so th an in any o th er province. F u rth er west, in British C olu m b ia, the c o n su m er m o v em en t g en er­ ally m ade steady progress. M ost o f the societies w ere located in the m ining districts, with p articu larly stable societies being located in Fem ie, Revelstoke, and N atal. N o n e o f the societies w as very large, few reaching the $100,000-per-annum level, b u t to g eth er th e tw entyseven societies know n to be active in the p rovince possessed som e potential. In April 1922, twelve o f these societies m et in P enticton to plan the form ation o f a provincial section o f the C o -o p erativ e U nion and to explore the possibility o f develo p in g a w holesale. It w as som e­ w hat prem ature. Som e societies e n co u n te red econom ic p ro b lem s soon

New Directions, 1920-1924

85

after the m eeting; political and eth n ic differences p lag u ed the co-ops in m ining towns; the societies on the island w ere far rem o v ed from those on the m ainland; and relations betw een co n su m er g roups in the O kanagan and those in m ining a n d railw ay tow ns w ere not p a rtic u ­ larly close. N evertheless, the co n su m er m o v em en t survived the d iffi­ cult years, 1922 and 1923, w ith relatively few failures an d an a p p a re n t grow ing wish to im prove co -ordination. By the end o f 1924, in fact, it could be arg u ed th a t the co-operative m ovem ent in English C an a d a had fo u n d new resources a fte r a p e r­ plexing two o r three-year period. T h e first new resource was the co n ­ cept o f pooling w hich, though it adversely affected the o ld e r m ark e t­ ing co-operatives, h ad a galvanizing effect th ro u g h o u t ag ra ria n co­ operative circles. T he second new resource w as the p rovincial system o f organizing co-operative action, the system p io n eered in S ask atch e­ wan so successfully by the provincial g o v ern m en t and co-operative leaders. T he third was the grow ing im p act o f the C o -o p erativ e U nion. T hough it had lost heavily in prestige an d fu n d s in S o u th ern O n tario , the U nion had established im p o rta n t contacts elsew here an d w as be­ ginning the incredibly com plex task o f draw in g to g eth er the EnglishC anadian m ovem ent. A nd finally, though p erh a p s m ost im p o rtan tly o f all, co-operative techniques, d esp ite all the setbacks co-operatives had incurred, had becom e accepted by m any as im p o rta n t w ays in which the living conditions o f g reat n u m b ers o f p eo p le could be significantly im proved.

CH A PTER FIVE

The First Era of Prosperity, 1925-1929 In its essence, Co-operation is not an econom ic system or device, but a M ovement, by m eans o f m u tu a l self-help, seekin g to improve the quality o f m ankind. It has the capacity, it is true, to provide a better living, and to improve the environm ent o f the people, but to the end that opportuni­ ties m ay thereby be provided f o r the living o f better lives. M an surely has as m uch right as a pla n t to an environm ent best su ited to the cultivation o f the qualities inherent in h im , George K een, T he C a n a d ia n C o -o p erato r, M arch 1928, p. 5.

T he late 1920s w ere generally pro sp ero u s years for C an ad ian s. N ew m odes o f transportatio n , auto m o b iles a n d trucks as well as the rail­ roads, were transform ing econom ic relationships, an d the grow th o f retail chain stores was hasten in g the d ev elo p m en t o f m o d e m co n su m ­ erism. T he stable m arkets d eveloped in the grow ing cities an d across international bo u n d ary lines b ro u g h t p ro sp erity to m an y C a n ad ia n farm ers. This affluence, though, did no t in d u ce com p lacen cy am o n g E nglish-C anadian co-operators. In fact, these “g o o d ” y ears becam e a challenging period w hen the d ream s o f the e a rlie r h a rd tim es could be realized. T he result was a p erio d o f frantic grow th, in ten se d eb ates over objectives and m ethods, and, m ost im p o rtan tly , rap id m atu ra tio n for the m ovem ent. T he m ost dram atic co-operative d ev elo p m en t d u rin g the late tw en­ ties in C anada, perh ap s in the in tern a tio n a l m o v em en t, was the grow th o f the Prairie w h eat pools. D u rin g those years th eir h an d le o f the grain trade increased from 34 m illion to n early 244 m illion b u sh ­ els.1 Late in 1924 the three provincial pools h ad estab lish ed a C en tra l Selling Agency (or, m ore form ally, the C an a d ia n C o -o p erativ e W h eat Producers) in W innipeg to m ark et th eir m em b e rs’ grain. W ith re m a rk ­ able despatch, the Agency o p en ed offices in the m a jo r C an a d ia n ports as well as N ew Y ork an d established m ark etin g agencies in fifteen im porting countries. It also u n d erto o k a variety o f related activities: research on flour and baking, publicity aim ed at e x p lain in g th e pools to the general public, an d the o p eratio n o f an em ployee b o n d in g an d general insurance subsid iary .2 A lm ost overnight, it seem ed, the m a r­ keting o f C anadian grain h ad d eveloped a new dim en sio n , one th a t 86

First Era o f Prosperity, 1925-1929

87

altered the role o f the p ro d u cer in the m ark etp lace a n d p ro v id ed new opportunities for the in tern atio n al co-operative m ovem ent. T he developm ent o f the C en tral Selling A gency suggests how the thrust o f co-operative m ark etin g in the 1920s differed from th a t o f the pre-1914 period. T he em phasis in the early p erio d h ad been upon im proving the services needed by the grain grow er: b etter elevators in b etter locations, im proved e d u catio n al and advisory services, a n d a regulatory role in the o p en -m ark e t system . In co n trast, the pools represented an effort by farm ers to influence if n o t co n tro l the entire g rain-m arketing system from the p o in t w here grain w as collected from the producers to w here it was delivered to the m iller. In fact, th rough the developm ent o f flour mills an d the stren g th en in g o f ties w ith co­ operative w holesalers overseas, the pools even ex p erim en ted w ith ex­ tending control all the way to the consum ers. It was a b old concept, one that had the twin aim s o f e lim in atin g m id d lem en an d o f stabiliz­ ing prices for grain grow ers th ro u g h o u t the crop year. It was also a controversial concept, one th a t could affect n o t only all grain p ro d u c­ ers but also, p erhaps, the o rd in ary citizen eating his daily b read . In th eir drive to d o m in ate the grain industry, the po o lin g leaders were not w illing to leave u n affected the o ld er co-o p erativ e o rg an iza­ tions. T he two co-operative groupings, afte r all, could n o t be co m ­ pletely separated. T he UGG an d the S askatchew an C o-op w ere as deeply rooted as the pools them selves in P rairie ag ra ria n life, a n d any a ttem pt to alter m arketing practices h ad to take them in to account. Both o f the older co-operatives, m oreover, h ad been associated w ith the developing pooling m ovem ent, the UGG bein g especially in terested in a partnership w ith the em erging pools. U n fo rtu n a te ly fo r th e total m ovem ent, the UGG’s initial efforts fo r am alg a m a tio n w ere reb u ffed by both M anitoba and S askatchew an leaders. A side from perso n ality conflicts—an d they w ere im p o rta n t e n o u g h —the rejection o f UGG o f­ fers was based upon genuine differences o f o p in io n o ver the fu tu re o f the open-m arket system. As the tw enties progressed, the UGG lea d e r­ ship steadily deepened its co m m itm en t to the classical lib eral position o f giving farm ers choice in the m ark etin g o f grain. It d id n o t accept the denunciations o f futures trad in g a n d h ed g in g th a t ch aracterized the pooling m ovem ent, and increasingly it refused to engage in harsh criticisms o f the private traders. T h u s it found itself o u t o f sy m path y with m ost o f the leaders w ho d o m in ate d the o rg an izatio n al drives o f the pools. T he UGG was able to w ithstand the se p aratio n from the pooling m ovem ent—and the criticism s o f pool le a d e rs—because it h ad b u ilt up

88

EACH F O R ALL

a loyal follow ing am o n g w estern farm ers an d b ecause it h ad dev el­ oped sufficient reserves to survive the difficu lt early tw enties. In p a r­ ticular, even though m any o f its m em b ers believed th at th e pools w ere prom ising new ventures, enough stayed w ith th e co m p an y to ensure its prosperity. T h ere were p ro b lem s though. In M an ito b a especially the organizers o f the provincial p ool w ere given to severe criticism o f the UGG, and attacked the o ld e r co m p an y no t o nly fo r its p osition on the open-m arket question b u t also for its failure (u n til 1925) to utilize a patronage dividend system. Because o f the d eep e n in g an im osities caused by these attacks, the co-operative m ark e tin g o f grain in M an i­ toba suffered from serious divisions th at p articu larly affected the d e ­ velopm ent o f a rationalized elev ato r system fo r th e p rovince. T h ere was less o f a problem fo r th e UGG in A lb erta w here relatio n s betw een the two co-operative m ark etin g groups re m ain ed q u ite am icab le: in fact, a m erger betw een the UGG and A lb erta pool w as n early a r­ ranged, the project falling a p a rt only because o f a last-m in u te in ab il­ ity to decide w ho the m an ag e r o f the united o rg an izatio n sh o u ld be. In Saskatchew an, how ever, the UGG was only m arg in ally involved. T he m ost established co -operative co m p an y th ere w as the S ask atch e­ w an Co-op. Saskatchew an was d ifferen t becau se o f the roles played by the two m ain agricultural o rganizations, the gen erally m o d erate Saskatchew an G rain G ro w ers’ A ssociation a n d the m o re radical F arm ers’ U nion. U n d e r the g u id an ce o f L. P. M cN am ee an d L. C. Brouillette, the U nion had been a d riving force b eh in d th e p o oling m ovem ent o f 1923 and 1924. It was also a h arsh critic o f the S ask atch ­ ew an Co-op. T he attack was based on three charges: th a t the C o-op was too willing to accept the existing m ark etin g system ; th a t it h ad failed to develop a p atro n ag e div id en d system ; an d th a t its b o ard o f directors had becom e a lo o f from the m em b ersh ip . T h ese criticism s prom pted the FUC to insist th at the C o-op am alg am ate w ith the pool. This dem and was initially rejected by the C o -o p ’s b o a rd ,3 b u t it was too strong for the b oard to escape p ressure so easily. W ithin the C o ­ op m ovem ent, the drive tow ard am alg am atio n w as led by A. J. McPhail and oth er m oderate spokesm en. T hese m o d erates, strongly su p ­ ported by radicals, lobbied fo r m erg er th ro u g h o u t late 1924 an d 1925. Indeed, it was a rare m eeting o f locals o f the s g g a o r the C o-op in that period that did not com e o u t in fav o u r o f a m alg am atio n . D espite these dem on stratio n s o f m e m b e r a ttitu d es, the S ask atch e­ w an C o-op board refused to negotiate w ith the pool, an d , in fact, its president, J. A. M aharg, publicly d en o u n ced any possibility o f am a l­ gam ation. H e fought a losing b attle: the w heat pool delegates a u th o r­

First Era o f Prosperity, 1925-1929

89

ized an offer to purchase at their 1925 a n n u a l m eetin g ; the F a rm e rs’ U nion continued pressing for a m erger; an d g rad u ally , reluctantly, the m em ber o f the SGGA becam e convinced th at a m erg er was inevitable. W ith such a groundsw ell beh in d it, the m ove tow ard u n itin g the C o ­ op and the pool was unstoppable. At the C o -o p ’s 1925 a n n u a l m ee t­ ing, the executive was re p u d ia te d —in effect, forced to resign —an d a m otion authorizing am alg am atio n discussions w as carried. It w as a chaotic, fiery m eeting, b u t one th at forged a u n ited g rain -m a rk etin g co-operative for Saskatchew an. T he enthusiasm em erging from the drive to u n ite the two m ark etin g organizations greatly encouraged a g eneral u n ificatio n o f S ask atch e­ wan farm ing groups. Shortly a fter the pool p u rch ased th e C o -o p ’s elevator system in 1925, the lead ersh ip o f the F a rm e rs’ U n io n an d some m ore reform ist m em bers o f the SGGA began to p ush for the am algam ation o f the two ed u catio n al and lo b b y in g organizations. T aking advantage o f the m om en tu m en g en d ered by the drive for a united pool and using the charism a o f the retu rn e d A aron Sapiro, the unionists were able to arran g e th at u n ification in 1926. T h e new organization was called the U nited F arm ers o f C a n a d a (Saskatchew an Section), and its creation, along w ith the rap id grow th o f the pool, gave the province the m ost in teg rated co-operative a n d a g rarian m ovem ents in the country. T he significance o f this in teg ratio n w ould not be ap p aren t until the 1930s w hen the u n ited m ovem ents w ould m ake Saskatchew an C a n a d a ’s “ B anner C o -o p erativ e Province” . T he m ost im p o rtan t im m ediate effect o f th e u n ity drives, how ever, lay in the stim ulus they gave to m ore m ilitan t S askatchew an farm ers. T he u f c (SS), while it contained farm ers o f all ideological persuasions, was, in its early years, heavily in fluenced by socialists o f various kinds. T he unity process exh ilarated the left w ing as, parad o x ically enough, did the reap p earan ce o f A aron Sapiro. T h o u g h far from a radical him self, Sapiro was one o f the strongest advocates o f o ccu p a­ tional unity in all the N o rth A m erican co-operative m ovem ents. He saw, quite correctly, that in stitutional rivalries w ere am o n g the g re a t­ est obstacles to the co-operative and ag rarian causes, and he p lead e d for organizational unity w hen he tou red S askatchew an in 1926. D u r­ ing the follow ing year, on yet a n o th e r tour, he exten d ed th a t message to w hat he believed was its n atu ral conclusion: the com pulsory pool, w hereby all grain w ould be m ark eted th rough o n e o rg an izatio n . It was a conclusion w elcom ed by the left-w ing o f the a g rarian m o v em en t who saw in it a way for farm ers to gain com plete co n tro l over m a rk e t­ ing policies. Led by L. C , B rouillette a n d m em b ers o f the UFC (SS)

90

EACH FO R ALL

executive, the drive for com pulsory p o oling becam e a cru sad e th at sw ept m uch o f the province betw een 1927 an d 1931. From a co-operative view point, the 100 p e r cen t pool id ea posed a fundam ental question. This question, alw ays involved in co-operative activity, was the extent to w hich co-operatives should rely u p o n gov­ ernm ent services for direction an d su p p o rt. U n d e r the 100 p e r cent pool proposal the Saskatchew an g o v ern m en t w ould have com plete control because it w ould be asked to form a co m p u lso ry pool w h en­ ever 75 p er cent o f the pro v in ce’s farm ers su p p o rted the proposal. M any co-operators opposed this m eth o d o f m ark etin g , som e because o f liberal econom ic views an d oth ers because o f a d ev o tio n to co­ operative voluntaryism . F o r m en strongly in flu en ced by the in te rn a ­ tional co-operative m ovem ent, indiv id u als like A. J. M cP hail and most o f the consum er leaders, th e use o f com p u lsio n w o u ld destroy spontaneous involvem ent a n d gro u p consensus, two fu n d am e n tal a t­ tributes o f healthy co-operative activity. E ven m ore, co-op idealists argued, com pulsion w ould lead, co n trary to w h at the “ o n e h u n d re d p er centers” believed, to g o v ern m en t d o m in atio n . G o v ern m e n ts w ould not, could not, rem ain a lo o f from a m ark etin g stru ctu re d eveloped fo r the province’s m ost im p o rta n t p ro d u ct an d co n tain in g a pow erful, dissatisfied pressure group. T o p reten d th a t such g o v ern m en t involve­ m en t could be avoided was naive and w rong: “ a m ost fantastic an d silly id ea” , was how M cP hail p u t it. T he battle over com pulsory p o o lin g raged d u rin g 1928 a n d 1929. A hard-fought struggle, it nevertheless d isplayed less p e rso n al an im u s than did the unity cam paigns o f 1925 a n d 1926. M ost o f the m en involved in the struggle w orked to g eth er in e ith e r the UFC (SS) o r the pool, respected each other, a n d w ere anxious to m ain ta in w orking relationships. U p to the early thirties, th erefo re, th e struggle over com pulsion resem bled an intense, p ro tracted d e b a te , the resu lt o f which was essentially a draw . T h e advocates o f co m p u lso ry p o o lin g won a close vote at the 1928 UFC ( s s ) a n n u al m eetin g an d lost an o th e r over prom oting com pulsory p o o lin g at a sem i-an n u a l m eetin g o f the w heat pool in 1929. T h e strength o f the co m p u lsio n forces at the pool gathering, how ever, forced the alarm ed pool lead ersh ip to organize a serious cam paign against the 100 p er cent pool pro p o sal. T his c am ­ paign had both negative an d positive consequences. N egatively, it consum ed the p ool’s h u m an resources and interfered w ith the drive to sign m em bers to second Five-year contracts. Positively, it h elp ed fa rm ­ ers clarify their concept o f the essential n atu re o f the co-operative m ovem ent. This clarification took place in A lb erta a n d M an ito b a as

First Era o f Prosperity, 1925-1929

91

well as in Saskatchew an. T h ough nev er as in terested in co m p u lsio n as their Saskatchew an brethren , the farm ers o f the o th e r two provinces were nevertheless fascinated by the issues raised in the d isp u te; in thinking ab o u t them , they too w ere forced to com e to term s w ith the essential purposes o f the m ovem ents they w ere b uilding. To a significant degree, the co-operative press co n trib u te d to the intense interest in the com pulsory pool d eb ate . T h e Grain G rowers' Guide (after 1928, The C ountry Guide) follow ed the struggle closely, though its continuous opposition to com pulsory p o o lin g colo u red its coverage som ew hat. The Western Producer (form erly The Progressive) gave even m ore detailed coverage. The Producer was technically in d e ­ pendent o f the pool until 1930, b u t it was d eep ly involved in the pooling m ovem ent from 1923 onw ard. As far as the 100 p e r cent pool was concerned, The Producer was a re m ark ab le reflection o f the in d e ­ cision in the ranks o f Saskatchew an farm ers. D u rin g 1927 an d 1928, its editors supported com pulsion th ough they gave e q u a l space to the other side o f the argum ent. In 1929, follow ing the agonizingly d e b a te d rejection o f com pulsory pooling at the pool a n n u a l m eeting, it re­ versed its stand. It did not change, how ever, its p ractice o f giving fair space to both sides o f the deb ate. B ecause o f this vacillation, even m ore because o f the intensity o f the d e b ate th at raged on its pages, The Producer becam e in the late tw enties the liveliest farm jo u rn a l on the Prairies. In the process, because th e n atu re o f c o -o p eratio n was d ebated so intensely, it becam e a m ajo r focus fo r co -operative thought. C onsequently, like m any farm ers in S askatchew an, The Prod­ ucer h ad developed by 1930 a clear, com p ellin g philo so p h y o f c o o p e r­ ation, one th a t w ould p rom o te co n sid erab le co -o p erativ e action in the dust bow l o f the D epression. II

W hile the battles for unity and com pulsory m ark e tin g raged, there was an o th er m ajor co-operative d ev elo p m en t on the P rairies: the grow th o f an extensive con su m er co -operative m ovem ent. A fter m ore than a decade o f experim en tatio n , n u m ero u s stores h ad achieved stability. T hey varied considerably in n u m b e r d u rin g the p erio d as new ones w ere form ed an d old ones a m alg am ated o r closed, b u t there was a hard core o f ab o u t ninety w ell-established societies, th e m ajority in Saskatchew an. T h at n u m b er is m islead in g though, since th ere w ere also several hu n d red buying clubs, three h u n d re d in S askatchew an alone, and a large n u m b er o f new, u n in co rp o rated stores. T h e new stores w ere particularly prom ising. M ost had well developed co m m u ­

92

EA CH FOR ALL

nity ties through w heat pool com m ittees, church affiliations, o r ethnic associations. M ost w ere also secure financially because o f the p ro sp e r­ ity o f the later tw enties. As the new societies em erged, they d em a n d e d im proved advisory services from eith er o ld er societies o r the su d d en ly p o p u lar C o-operative U nion. T h ey also so u g h t assistance from the co­ operative branch o f the provincial D e p a rtm e n t o f A griculture. T his search for advice, far from a sign o f w eakness, was a testim ony to the m ore sophisticated u n d erstan d in g o f the p ro b lem s involved in b u ild ­ ing a consum er m ovem ent. As the consum er groups stabilized an d in m an y instances p ro s­ pered, they inevitably began to co n sid er w holesaling activities. T h e British precedent was particu larly im p o rta n t in this regard, prim arily because so m any im m ig ran t British co -o p erato rs had becom e active in Prairie stores. A generation o f British leadership, in fact, em erged, one encouraged by G eorge K een, sustained by W. W ald ro n o f the Sas­ katchew an governm ent, an d fired by the successes o f the British m ovem ent. Perhaps the m ost im p o rta n t co n trib u tio n o f this g e n e ra ­ tion was the insistence th at co n su m er co -o p eratio n , especially w hole­ saling program s, m ust be in d e p e n d e n t o f the p ro d u c e r societies. C ooperators w ith British b ackgrounds jealo u sly g u ard ed the au to n o m y o f developing w holesale activities because, like m ost o f their co -operative countrym en, they believed th a t the co n su m er m ust co n tro l the m a r­ ketplace. P roducer groups m ig h t co -o p erate to g eth er fo r th eir ow n ben efit—and p erhaps for the b en efit o f the en tire m o v e m e n t—b u t ultim ately they h ad to be regulated by en lig h ten ed co n su m er interest. T he issue o f consum er versus p ro d u ce r co -o p eratio n h a d been seen earlier, notably d u rin g the A lb erta co n su m er society revolt against the UGG in 1918 and 1919, b u t it surfaced m uch m ore seriously in the late twenties. T he w ide-ranging reorg an izatio n o f the p ro d u c e r a n d farm m ovem ents in Saskatchew an p articu larly h ighlighted the issue by rais­ ing generally the question o f how farm ers could best gain th eir su p ­ plies and household goods. T h e first im pulse o f the p ro d u c e r o rg an i­ zations and even som e ag rarian ed u catio n al in stitu tio n s h ad been to establish supply dep artm en ts to m eet the m ost im p o rta n t co n su m er needs o f the w estern farm er. T hese d e p a rtm en ts had quickly m ad e substantial surpluses by co n cen tratin g on a few p ro fitab le lines, like petroleum products an d b in d er tw ine, th at could be b o u g h t w holesale in large quantities at cheap prices. U n fo rtu n ately , as they h ad p ro s­ pered, they had tended to com pete w ith local stores trying to m eet the sam e needs and attem p tin g to p ro sp e r p rim arily on the sam e lines. T he struggle betw een the two kinds o f co-operatives beg an to in te n ­

First Era o f Prosperity, 1925-1929

93

sify in 1925 w hen som e o f the co nsu m er o rg an izatio n s b a n d e d to­ gether to form the Saskatchew an C o -o p erativ e L eague. P ro m p ted by the provincial governm en t’s co-operative b ran ch , the L eague b eg an to attack the w holesaling activities o f the m ark etin g societies. U n til m id1926 the cam paign was lodged against the S askatchew an G ra in G ro w ­ ers. A fter that point it was directed tow ard the U n ited F arm e rs o f C anada (Saskatchew an Section), the new in stitu tio n fo rm ed by the SGGA and F arm ers’ U nion. T h e cam p a ig n co n cen trated u p o n the encroachm ent on retail co-op business by the SGGA an d la te r th e UFC. In 1926, for exam ple, the u f c sen t salesm en th ro u g h o u t th e co u n try ­ side and frequently underso ld th e local co-op stores. In the sam e year, it also distributed a m ost effective glossy catalo g u e th a t attracted considerable business from the local societies. P rotesting these p ra c­ tices was difficult for the sm all distrib u tiv e co-ops because th e ir m em ­ berships included SGGA or UFC m em b ers an d b ecause they freq u en tly used the T rad in g D ep artm en t as a w ho lesaler them selves.4 Y et, in the final analysis, conflict w as in evitable because it w as an u n h e a lth y situation that created unnecessary tensions b etw een tw o p arts o f the m ovem ent th at could not live in isolation from each other. Starting in 1926 the S askatchew an societies, u n d e r the lead e rsh ip o f H. W. K etcheson o f the D avidson co-operative a n d w ith the advice o f G eorge K een, began system atically to attack th e Supply D e p a rtm e n t at nearly every UFC m eeting.5 T h e m ain o p p o n e n ts they en co u n te re d were farm ers in the SGGA w ing o f th e UFC, m en w ho h ad invested personally in the D ep artm e n t an d w ho w an ted to use w holesaling activities as a way o f attractin g new m em b ers to the o rg an izatio n . All told, K etcheson and his allies n eed ed tw o years befo re th e ir claim for consum er society involvem ent w as accepted by the UFC. Even then, w hen the w holesale was finally created , the societies w ere n o t placed in a d o m inant position. R ath er, they w ere g ran ted three rep re se n ta ­ tives on a nine-m em ber board, the sam e n u m b e r as the d e b e n tu re holders o f the old S upply D e p a rtm e n t and the sam e as the UFC as a collective body. In an im perfect w orld, it w-as the m in im u m accep tab le com prom ise. T he w holesales created in M an ito b a an d A lberta d u rin g 1928 also had difficult relations w ith o ld e r farm institutions. T h e M an ito b a w holesale, m ade up o f in d e p en d e n t societies a n d locals from various producer pool organizations, was b u ilt to a significant e x ten t upon dissatisfaction with the U nited G ra in G ro w ers.6 It is a m easu re o f th at dissatisfaction that the M an ito b a society p ro sp ered q u ite rap id ly d u r­ ing the late twenties. T he A lberta w holesale, th o u g h d ev elo p e d partly

94

EA C H F O R ALL

by the UFA, did not quickly establish a satisfactory relatio n sh ip w ith that organization. In fact, the w holesale lan g u ish ed fo r y ears in p a rt because the UFA refused to end co m p etitio n in its m ost lu crative item s, notably binder tw ine an d p etro leu m products. T h e result w as th at the A lberta w holesale began u n d er m ost difficult circum stances and did not achieve stability for over a d ecad e .7 Interm ingled with the disputes betw een the p ro d u c e r org an izatio n s and the consum er societies was a n o th e r divisive issue, the position o f the U nited G rain G row ers. T h e w h eat pools, th ough critical o f the UGG during their form ative perio d , by the late tw enties h a d reach ed an understanding w ith the o ld e r co m p an y .8 T h e co n su m er societies were not so quickly pacified, an d they fo u n d an o u tle t fo r th eir anim osity w ithin the C o -operative U n io n o f C an ad a. T h e issue reached a clim ax at the 1929 U n io n C ongress in W innipeg, w here several consum er societies, m ostly from S askatchew an, o p e n e d a cam ­ paign to expel the UGG from th e U nion. In p art, the cam p a ig n e m a­ nated from the subm erged hostility tow ard the co m p an y th a t h ad appeared periodically since the U G G ’s fo rm atio n .9 In part, it was a n a tu ­ ral next step for consum er societies trying to overcom e the co m p eti­ tion o f the grain co-operatives. T h e lead e r o f the cam p a ig n w as H. W. K etcheson, who had left the D avidson co-operative in 1929 to b ecom e m anager o f the new Saskatchew an w holesale. K etch eso n h a d led the battle against the old UFC T ra d in g D ep artm e n t, and, fo r him , the battle against the UGG was m erely a co n tin u atio n o f the sam e stru g ­ gle.10 At stake for him was the coal, tw ine, an d p etro leu m m ark ets o f the Prairies, m arkets o f increasing im p o rtan ce as the tw enties drew to a close. A t stake too was the q u estio n o f the n a tu re o f co -o p eratio n . K etcheson, echoing criticism s m ad e since a t least 1912, sincerely b e­ lieved that the UGG h ad “ no right to be co n n ected w ith o u r m ove­ m ent”, " and he foun d su p p o rters in all three P rairie p ro v in ces.12 Indeed, by the tim e the C ongress started , he h a d g ained th e su p p o rt o f m ost o f the affiliated w estern o rganizations. T he issue surfaced u n pleasantly at W in n ip eg w hen the UGG leaders, having offered to host a d in n er for the delegates, w ere shocked to find that only a few w ould “ eat at th eir tab le” . T h en , at a C ongress session on July 10, 1929, K etcheson in tro d u ced a resolution calling for the expulsion o f the U nited G rain G ro w ers b ecause it was n o t a tru e co­ operative. Before a vote could be taken, T. A. C rerar, the UGG p resi­ dent, rose to an n ounce the regretful w ith d raw al o f his com p an y . H e could see little value in the UGG rem ain in g in an o rg an izatio n c o n ta in ­ ing so m any m em bers antagonistic to it. N evertheless, he pled g ed his

First Era o f Prosperity, 1925-1929

95

com pany’s interest in the U n io n a n d w hat it stood for; above all, he paid tribute to the work o f W. C. G o o d an d G eo rg e K een, e x o n erat­ ing them from any p a rt in the in cid en ts lead in g to his co m p a n y ’s w ithdraw al.13 Ill

This exodus o f the UGG from the U nion, ostensibly because o f the producer-consum er split, was a p arad o x ical d ev elo p m en t. W hen viewed in a w ider perspective, the P rairie co-operative m o v em en t was m oving steadily in the late tw enties tow ard estab lish in g sy m p ath etic bonds betw een the p ro d u c e r a n d co n su m er groups. T h e evidence o f this developm ent abounds, n o t only in the difficu lt b u t successful birth o f the wholesales but, even m o re significantly, in the m o ral support reciprocated betw een im p o rta n t segm ents in the tw o m ove­ m ents. Increasingly, on the pages o f The Western Producer, in the w orkings o f the provincial d e p artm en ts supervising co-operatives, in the activities o f reform -m in d ed farm ers, a n d in the grow ing involve­ m ent o f the C o-op U n io n o f C a n ad a, the b ro a d ap p ro ac h to co­ operation was gaining acceptance. T h ere was, too, a grow ing respect betw een the two Prairie m ovem ents. T h e p ro d u c e r groups, o f course, dw arfed the stores, b u t the la tte r w ere p ro d u cin g strong lead ers will­ ing an d able to defend the interests o f th eir in stitu tio n s. T h e ir capacity to do so gained the grudging respect o f p ro d u c e r co-op leaders, w ho consequently saw a p o ten tial role fo r the co n su m er m ovem ent. C onsum er co-operators best d e m o n strated th e ir usefulness to the producer leadership by taking it on them selves to d e fen d th e p o oling principle to E u ropean co-operators. Q uite n atu rally , the E u ro p ean s had w atched closely the N o rth A m erican p ro d u c e r m ovem ent. E u ro ­ pean farm ers, already using som e p arts o f the p o o lin g a p p ro ach n a tu ­ rally applauded, b u t E u ro p ean consum ers, ala rm e d by the rapid growth o f the various pools, saw th em as in cip ien t com bines m odelled on the practices o f N o rth A m erican big business. O f all these co n ­ sum er groups the Scottish co-o p erato rs was the m ost im p o rtan t. Because o f their preference fo r good b read m a d e from h a rd w heat, Scottish consum ers had long taken a special in terest in the C an a d ia n N orthw est. T h eir co-operative w holesale, S co tlan d ’s largest baker, h ad recognized this interest as early as 1905 an d h ad o p en ed a W in n ip eg depot to ensure an ad eq u a te supply and d ep en d a b le g rad e o f w estern w heat. E xporting through fu rth e r co m p an y agencies in M o n treal and New York, the office b uilt up a p ro fitab le trad e th a t led the com pany to purchase tw enty large-line elevators an d a term in al elev a to r at F ort

96

EA CH FOR ALL

W illiam . In 1916, it h ad even e n tered (with the aid o f the E nglish co­ operative w holesale) into large-scale farm ing, b u y in g ten th o u san d acres o f good land n ear H ughton, S askatchew an, the first in stalm ent, it was believed, on a w estern w heat em pire. T his ex p erim en t in a b sen ­ tee landholding an d large-scale farm ing did no t w ork ou t, b u t its dem ise in the early tw enties only intensified the concern o f Scottish co-operators about their supply o f w heat. W hen the pooling m ovem ent sw ept the w est betw een 1923 an d 1926, som e Scottish co-o p erato rs believed th a t th eir interests were seriously threatened. T o som e ex ten t influ en ced by adverse ex p eri­ ences with dairy pools in S cotland, w holesale leaders feared th at m arket dom ination by the w h eat pools w ould m ean a rap id escalation in grain prices. T h eir concern was u n d ersta n d a b le : by 1926 they were purchasing betw een 300,000 a n d 400,000 bushels each m o n th from Prairie growers. T he m ost co ncerned Scottish co -o p e ra to r w as W illiam G allacher, one o f the se w s directors, a m an w ho was u n sy m p ath etic and often outrightly opposed to the pools. H e was especially p e r­ turbed about the em ergence o f th e In tern a tio n a l W h eat P ool m o v e­ m ent in 1927-28, a m o v em en t he saw as a p o ten tial in tern a tio n a l cartel. G allacher displayed scan t sy m p ath y fo r the p ro b lem s o f w est­ ern producers and, follow ing tours o f the Prairies in 1926 an d 1927, he voiced his reservations at b o ard m eetings, on the pages o f The Scottish Co-operator, an d at several co -operative g atherings. A rousing fears o f expensive bread , he soon aw akened a co n sid erab le outcry. W hile significant opposition to G a lla c h e r’s views em erged in Scot­ la n d ,14 the most im p o rtan t refutations, n atu rally enough, cam e from C anada. T he C entral Selling A gency p ro tested v eh em en tly against G allacher’s charges, w ith A lex an d er M cPhail becom ing p articu larly active. But the m ost im p o rta n t defense o f the pools cam e from the British idealists found w ithin the C an a d ia n co n su m er m ovem ent. G eorge K een, for exam ple, w ho h ad originally been as suspicious o f the pools as G allacher, becam e a fter 1926 o n e o f their m ost im p o rta n t defenders in the British co-operative p ress.15 In the articles an d letters he published in the British jo u rn a ls, K een ad m itte d th at the pools did not m eet all the dem an d s o f the R ochdale principles. N evertheless, he also stressed th at the pools, like the earlier g rain -m a rk etin g c o -o p era­ tives, were w ell-m eaning attem p ts to attack co -operatively com plex, fu n d am en tal problem s. He plead ed , therefore, fo r a p erio d o f grace to see if the pools’ leadership could overcom e the p o ten tial pro b lem s o f centralized direction and m em b er apathy. In his view, these problem s m ight be surm ounted if pool leaders m ad e a conscious effort to

First Era o f Prosperity, 1925-1929

97

stim ulate grass-roots particip atio n . H e p articu larly em p h asized the use m ade by the pools o f postcard ballots, low in terest rates, p atro n ag e dividends, and service at cost. T h e pools m ig h t lack som e o f the social im pact desirable in co-operatives, b u t they at least d eserved a chance. T he debate peaked in Scotland d u rin g late 1927. T h e follow ing sum m er H enry J. M ay, secretary o f the In te rn a tio n a l C o -o p erativ e Alliance, along with representatives o f the two m ain B ritish w h o le­ sales, m ade an extended to u r o f the Prairies. M ay, w ho h ad alread y exchanged num erous letters w ith K een, h ad been b ro u g h t up w ithin the British m ovem ent, b u t his experiences w ithin the i c a h ad m ad e him sym pathetic to various kinds o f co-operative activity. T h e d eleg a­ tion, with M ay’s conciliatory ap p ro ach to p ro d u c er co -o p eratio n being particularly im p o rtan t, gradually b egan to view the pools less criti­ cally. Its m em bers w ere im pressed by the idealism a n d co-operative know ledge displayed at pool g atherings they a tten d ed , a n d they w ere convinced th a t the grow ing C o -operative U n io n could h elp bring producer a n d consum er groups together. M ay, in fact, was so im ­ pressed by the CUC th at he reco m m en d ed th a t the heavily-B ritishbacked ICA d o n ate $500—the first g ran t-in -aid ever m ad e by the i c a — to the C an ad ian U nion. Even m ore, w hen he retu rn ed , he w rote, a general defence o f the pools, a defence th a t essentially rep eated G eorge K een ’s argum ents. T he im portant point, though, is n o t th at British fears a b o u t the w heat pools were p la c a te d —they w ere ill-fo u n d ed in an y event. R ather, the issue assum ed im p o rtan ce because o f th e im p act it had upon the C anadian m ovem ent. Because o f M ay ’s in terest in th e CUC, the pools becam e m ore interested in th at org an izatio n an d the con­ sum er m ovem ent generally. T hey w elcom ed the su p p o rt they had received from K een (and several P rairie co n su m er leaders), a n d they were less willing to dism iss the co-op store as a p u n y palliativ e for consum er grievance. C onsequently, the drive for p rovincial integ ratio n received a strong boost, and, in p articu lar, m an y farm leaders becam e m ore sym pathetic to the dev elo p m en t o f w holesales. U ltim ately, this change in attitude helped w holesales gain p o rtio n s o f the farm supply trade, m eaning that strong er w holesales u ltim ately w ere built. IV

T he changing attitudes o f the w h eat pools, how ever, did n o t m ean that a co-ordinated co-operative m ov em en t d ev elo p ed im m ed iately on the Prairies. Even the w heat pools, though far m ore sy m p ath etic th an o th er p ro d u cer pools, varied greatly in th eir attitu d es tow ard co-

98

E A CH F O R ALL

operative stores: the M an ito b a p ool was the m ost involved w ith the local stores, follow ed by Saskatchew an, an d q u ite far b eh in d , by A lberta. All that h ad em erged, in fact, w as a new sense o f respect for the stores by the pools an d a grow ing w illingness to co m m u n icate with the consum er m ovem ent. F ew leaders o f the p ro d u c e r co-operatives were m otivated by m ore th a n a desire to m axim ize the fa rm e r’s pow er in the m arketp lace, a desire th a t fo r m ost w ere practical n o t ideological. A nd, beyond the w h eat pools, in the o th e r com m odity p ro d u cer organizations, p rag m atic co -o p erato rs w ere even m ore so­ lidly entren ched. A m ong the o ld e r org an izatio n s established before the twenties, most o f the leadership a n d m e m b ersh ip w ere p reo ccu p ied with internal problem s an d challenges. T h e S ask atch ew an C o -o p erative C ream eries, for exam ple, en co u n te red severe p ro b lem s in 1923 because o f a fall in prices, p o o r m an ag e m en t, an d a n injudicious expansion encouraged by g overnm ent. In 1927 a m erg er w ith a p ri­ vate cream ery was arranged, a m erg er w hich did n o t resolve the problem s and w hich fu rth er w eakened m e m b er co n tro l o ver the co­ operative.16 Sim ilarly, the UGG’s livestock m ark e tin g d e p a rtm e n t w as staggered by uncertain m arkets a n d the rise o f new co-o p erativ e o r­ ganizations.17 T he new organizations w ere fo u n d in n early every k in d o f farm activity on the Prairies. T h ro u g h o u t the west, fo r ex am p le, the dairy industry was being tran sfo rm ed by pool m ark etin g . In S askatchew an the D airy Pool (form ally, the D airy C o -o p erativ e M ark etin g A ssocia­ tion) was organized at Saskatoon th o u g h it soon ex ten d e d its co ntrol to include the N o rth B attleford a n d Prince A lb ert m ilk sh ed s.18 In A lberta pools w ere organized b etw een 1924 a n d 1929, in the sou th ern , central, an d n o rth ern parts o f th e province. T h ey soon took over num erous sm all cream eries, en tered aggressively into th e b u tte r b usi­ ness an d secured a m ajo r p o rtio n o f th e p ro v in ce’s grow ing u rb a n m ark ets.19 In M anitob a, M an ito b a C o -o p erativ e D airies, w hich h ad been organized in 1920, e x p an d ed steadily d u rin g the late tw enties, a n d in 1927 o p en ed a b ran ch in B ran d o n .20 T he other kinds o f m ark etin g co-operatives to m ak e significant progress during the late tw enties w ere livestock pools a n d egg a n d poultry pools. In 1926 the S askatchew an Livestock P ool w as estab ­ lished, partly with gov ern m en t assistance, follow ed a y e a r la te r by the M anitoba Livestock Pool. In 1927, these tw o org an izatio n s, a lo n g w ith som e in d ep en d en t co-operative sh ip p in g clubs in A lb erta, fo rm ed the C anadian Livestock C o-operative (W estern), a cen tral selling o rg an i­ zation for the three P rairie provinces. In the sam e years, w ith th e aid

First Era o f Prosperity, 1925-1929

99

o f the provincial governm ents an d th rough th e initiative o f w o m en ’s auxiliaries o f the farm er o rganizations, egg a n d p o u ltry pools were form ed in the three provinces. T h e largest o f these w as the S ask atch e­ wan C o-operative Egg a n d Poultry Pool, estab lish ed in 1926.21 Along with these m arketin g co-operatives, the ru ral Prairies w it­ nessed the developm ent o f m any o th e r kinds o f co -o p erativ e activity. T he advent o f the relatively inexpensive tracto r d u rin g the 1920s, for exam ple, had produced a need fo r p etro leu m p ro d u cts at reaso n ab le prices. T he increasing sophistication o f m ach in ery h ad also p ro d u ced a dem and for a range o f oils and grease previously n o t n eeded. All o f these factors had in turn en co u rag ed large p etro le u m com panies, especially from the U nited States, to en ter the P rairie m arket. P etro ­ leum distribution system s becam e cen tralized, costs rose, an d farm ers becam e inevitably interested in controlling at least p a rt o f the p e tro ­ leum industry. T hus, d u rin g the late tw enties, n u m ero u s o il-p u rch a s­ ing co-operatives ap p eared , p articu larly in M a n ito b a . P attern ed in part after A m erican precedents, they w ere sign ifican t m an ifestatio n s o f agrarian dissatisfaction w ith the m ark et system .22 O th e r initiatives to ap p ear during the late tw enties in clu d ed h u n d re d s o f b e e f rings,23 cold-storage plants,24 vegetable m ark etin g co -o p erativ es,25 an d m ed i­ cal co-operatives.26 All told, it w as a ra th e r re m a rk a b le co n tin u atio n o f the experim entation th a t had started earlier in the d ecade. v T he new grow th n atu rally p ro d u ced strain s in the n a tio n a l m ovem ent, the m ost im p o rtan t o f these resulting from the regional diversities o f English C anada. T he Prairies, w ith th eir pow erful p ro d u c e r co -o p e ra­ tives, their grow ing consum er groups, th eir h esitan t steps tow ard co­ ordination, and their aggressive lead ersh ip possessed the m ost devel­ oped regional m ovem ent. E lsew here, th ere w ere w eak er reg io n al co­ operative groupings, w hich possessed som e stro n g in stitu tio n s but were beset by com plex pro b lem s a n d u n d erly in g divisions. T h ey w ere fragm ented w ithin them selves, an d they w ere n o t significantly asso­ ciated with each other. T h e m ost m ean in g fu l co m m u n icatio n s am ong E nglish-C anadian co-operators cam e th rough th e h a p h a z a rd d istrib u ­ tion o f such jo u rn als as The Guide and The Western Producer, and through the earnest activities o f the C o -o p erativ e U nion. T h e last nam ed was increasingly im p o rtan t. G eo rg e K een an d W. C. G o o d were at the height o f th eir pow ers, a n d The Canadian Co-operator was having a dem onstrable effect. T h e U n io n ’s to leran t d efin itio n o f co­ operation was attracting support, a n d K een ’s cap ab ility as a c o -o p era­

100

EA CH FOR ALL

tive spokesm an was gaining respect. N evertheless, the U n io n ’s p ow er was m ore m oral than concrete, the press’s influence m ore h a p h a z a rd than pervasive, and the co-operative m o vem ent, on a n a tio n a l level, m ore potential than accom plished fact. O f all E nglish-C anadian m ovem ents o utside the Prairies, th a t in the M aritim es was the m ost forceful. P art o f its d ynam ism em a n a te d directly and indirectly from the success o f som e o f its early co -o p e ra­ tives. M ost o f the m arketing co-operatives established a t the tu rn o f the century am ong apple grow ers and wool p ro d u cers h ad progressed steadily; the m utual insurance co m panies w ere stab le in fluences in often-depressed rural econom ies; and the co n su m er m o v em ent in C ape Breton, especially the British C a n a d ia n society, h ad becom e w ell-established. All o f these elem ents h ad also b ecom e so m ew h at insular, though each for d ifferen t reasons: the p ro d u c e r g roups b e ­ cause o f their pre-occupation w ith m arketing, th e m u tu als because o f their absorption o f general insurance business attitu d es, a n d th e c o n ­ sum er societies because o f their devotion to g ra d u a l d ev elo p m en t. T h e dynam ism , therefore, cam e p rim arily from St. F rancis X avier U n iv er­ sity, an d notably from three o f its sta ff m em bers, F a th e r Jim m y T om pkins, F ath er M oses C oady, an d A. B. M acD o n ald . F o r a n u m ­ ber o f reasons—anger over depressed local co nditions, a lib eral C a th o ­ lic reform tradition, a fear o f com m unism , an d an u n u su a l b le n d in g o f talen ts—these three m en tu rn ed to co -operative action fo r co m m u ­ nity d ev elopm ent d u rin g the tw enties, especially the late tw enties. E arlier in the decade the th ree m ain leaders, and th eir associates (such as F ath er H ugh M acP herson) were m ost directly concerned a bout the farm ers o f eastern N ova Scotia. In 1924, p rim arily th ro u g h the efforts o f T om pkins, a R u ral C o n feren ce fo r the diocese o f A nti­ gonish was begun. H eld an n u ally th ereafter, it b ro u g h t to g eth er teac h ­ ers and students, clergym an a n d laity, rural theorists a n d practising farm ers. In addition to the w id e-ranging discussions fe a tu re d at its sessions, the conference raised funds for ru ral stu d en ts a n d p ro v id ed a m eeting place for the region’s co-operative leaders. In 1928 som e o f these leaders began to p lan for a m ore p e rm a n e n t o rg an izatio n , and they organized a cam paign for funds th at raised $100,000. T his in itia­ tive in turn prom pted the governors o f St. F rancis X av ier U niversity to authorize creation o f an extension d ep a rtm e n t. In the sam e year, Jim m y T om pkins and others successfully agitated for a R oyal C o m ­ mission to investigate the M aritim es fisheries. C oady, o n e o f the ex­ perts called before th at co m m ittee, suggested a pro g ram o f ad u lt education and co-operative action for the fisherm en. O ne y e a r la te r he

First Era o f Prosperity, 1925-1929

101

was hired by the federal g o v ern m en t to help o rganize the fisherm en o f the M aritim es and the M agdalen Islands.27 T h e grassroots aw ak en ­ ing o f the fisherm en and farm ers o f eastern N ova Scotia h ad begun. M aritim e farm ers, though, like those elsew here, follow ed th eir own particular path. H ence, w hile d ev elo p in g ties w ith A ntigonish and organizing a few stores, farm ers w ere so in h ib ited by the failu res a fter the w ar that they concentrated overw helm ingly on m ark etin g co -o p er­ atives. In 1927 they fou n d ed the M aritim e C o -o p erativ e Livestock Board by bringing tog eth er eighty-six farm ers’ clubs scattered throughout the three M aritim e provinces. In less th a n six m o n th s the new organization had sold nearly $400,000 w orth o f livestock. In the sam e year, the C o-operative P oultry an d Egg E xchange w as form ed by uniting earlier co-operative m ark etin g schem es in N ew Brunsw ick and N ova Scotia.28 In tim e, both o rg an izatio n s w ould b ecom e in­ volved significantly in m eeting the farm -su p p ly needs o f th e ir m e m ­ bership, in the process developing as im p o rtan t in stitu tio n s in the region’s rural econom y. D uring the late tw enties, though, the farm e rs’, fish erm en ’s, and consum ers’ m ovem ents w ere essentially sep arate. In d eed , th ere was little reason for them to be in teg rated : each h ad beg u n as reactions to specific problem s; each had d ifferen t constituencies to serve; a n d each had its own p articular set o f difficulties. T h e w orkers from A ntigonish had started to provide som e stim ulus fo r all aspects o f the M aritim es m ovem ent, b u t not until the thirties w ould they be able to force the pace o f integration. It was, in short, a prom ising, spirited, an d divided m ovem ent in the M aritim es d u rin g the late tw enties, b u t o n e th a t was solidly based on definite needs in local com m unities. VI

In Southern O ntario, N o rth ern O n tario , an d British C o lu m b ia co­ operative m ovem ents w ere featu red by sim ilar divisions. T h ey were not blessed by correspond in g strengths. T h e m ost im p o rta n t d e v elo p ­ m ent in Southern O n tario was the final d isin teg ratio n o f the u rb an consum er m ovem ent. N u m ero u s stores h ad com e a n d gone since the turn o f the century. O nly one, located in G u e lp h , h ad re m ain ed a successful exam ple o f w hat co n su m er co -o p eratio n could do to aid the consum er, but even it fad ed aw ay in the late tw enties. T h ere were m any im m ediate causes for the G u elp h sto re’s su d d e n collapse. N ew grocery stores offered pow erful com p etitio n , the w eak en in g o f the local labour m ovem ent u n d erm in ed sup p o rt, an d far too m uch re­ sponsibility was cast upon Sam uel C a rte r the sto re’s p re sid en t.29 But,

102

EACH FOR ALL

in a w ider sense, G u elp h failed because, like the o th e r stores, it was confronted by nearly insolvable problem s. U ndoubtedly, the m ost im p o rta n t g en eral reason for the collapse o f the co-operative stores was rap id changes in the m ain m eth o d s o f retailing. T he traditional, in d e p e n d e n t retail store, o p e ratin g on high inventories, wide m argins, an d fam ily lab o u r, d eclined m ark ed ly d u r­ ing the depression o f the early tw enties. O v er 5,500 o f them w ere forced to close as they found it im possible to co m p ete w ith the new chain stores. A fter 1925 an d until 1930, the ch ain s m a d e very rapid progress, and, in the latter year, they acco u n ted fo r m o re th an ten p er cent o f all stores in C a n ad a .30 M ore im p o rtan tly , the ch ain stores expanded m ost rapidly in the u rb a n areas o f C en tra l C a n a d a .31 Such chains as R ed an d W hite a n d L oblaw s w ere b eco m in g fo rm id ab ly efficient as they learned the advan tag es o f m ass b u ying and ce n tra l­ ized direction. In contrast, m ost co-operatives, by em p h asizin g local control, w ere fundam en tally opp o sed to the new d ev elo p in g d istrib u ­ tive system s and to th eir b u reau cratic tendencies. Instead o f seeking new ways to integrate, m ost co -o p erato rs stood fo r nearly abso lu te local control over all types o f co -operative activity. T h e ideal m ig h t have been noble, but, in a steadily m ore co m p lex society, increasingly m ore difficult. In this struggle against the chains, the stores su ffered from th e inexperience o f their b oards an d freq u en tly th e ir m anagers. M ost o f the founders o f co-operative stores h ad little fo rm al ed u catio n . F ew knew little about balance sheets a n d few er still knew how to keep statistical records on day -to -d ay op eratio n s. T h ere was a persisten t problem , too, in defining a p p ro p ria te roles fo r b o ard s an d m a n a g e ­ m ent. In the traditional theories o f the co -o p erativ e m ovem ent, b o ard s w ere to set general policy and to supervise the m an ag er, leaving dayto-day operations to em ployees. In practice, the distin ctio n was often difficult to m ake. In som e instances, p erso n n el p ro b lem s forced d irect involvem ent in the stores by the b o ard . In others, b o ard m em bers, m any holding an office for the first tim e in th eir lives, tried to dom inate all aspects o f the sto re’s activities, leaving an em ascu lated role for m anagers. T he stores, m oreover, h a d difficulty a ttractin g an d holding good m anagers sim ply because th e grow ing ch ain stores p aid capable em ployees well and regularly. T h e result w as th a t m an y o f the best em ployees in co-operatives u ltim ately w ere sed u ced aw ay by the com petition. But perhaps the m ost im p o rta n t reason fo r the failures in u rb an S outhern O n tario was th at the co n su m er m o v em en t did n o t a p p e a r to

First Era o f Prosperity, 1925-1929

103

resolve any pressing needs. As a m ovem ent, it w as on the p erip h e ry o f num erous social and econom ic issues, such as co n su m e r d issatisfac­ tion, adult education, m etro p o litan grow th, a n d lo w er class u n rest; bu t its gradualist approach attracted only a few su p p o rters. O th e r m e th ­ ods, entering politics or aiding trades unionism , a p p e a re d to be m ore effective ways to protest, an d they attracted m ost in d iv id u als dissatis­ fied with the existing society. A nd, p erh ap s m o st fu n d a m e n ta lly , a great m any Southern O n tarian s w ere satisfied w ith th eir lot. N o w ealthy patron ap peared to fund co-operative d e v e lo p m en t an d , even am ong w orking people, there w as m ore p re o ccu p atio n w ith try in g to benefit from the existing social-econom ic system s th a n w ith c h an g in g them . T he co-operative m ov em en t fo u n d little su sten an ce in C a n a d a ’s econom ic heartland. Instead, it fo u n d its stren g th in the v ario u s kinds o f regional and econom ic groupings w hich p ro tested the grow ing dom inance o f that heartlan d . This h interland characteristic was well d e m o n stra te d in the farm in g and m ining centres o f N o rth ern O n tario . T h ree m ain factors explain why so m any co-operatives d eveloped in O n ta rio n o rth a n d w est o f N orth Bay during the late tw enties. In th e first place, the d istrib u tio n o f consum er goods in those areas w as expensive a n d easily subjected to predatory exploitation. In m any o f the tow ns, co m p a n y stores and general m erchants m onopolized trad e an d m a d e m o re pro fits than seem ed just. Secondly, group consciousness w as a stro n g force in the m ining towns, and, in the institu tio n o f the UFO, a m o n g farm ers. C o­ operation, how ever tenuously, was associated w ith these m ovem ents, and it naturally p rospered as they did. F inally, th e v ario u s im m ig ran t com m unities in the n o rth —the U k rain ian s, the G e rm a n s, the F in n ish —found them selves adrift in an alien society in terested only in th eir labour. Recognizing this, they soon b a n d e d to g e th e r fo r p ro tectio n and com fort, often finding in c o -o p eratio n som e o f th e econom ic advantage and status they desired. By 1929 there were three stable societies a m o n g n o rth e rn farm ers. Englehart had been developed d u rin g the m ost d y n am ic days o f the U nited F arm ers’ C o-operative in the early 1920s. By the en d o f the decade it h ad becom e w ell-established as b o th a p u rc h a sin g and m arketing co-operative. W a ld h o f h ad started as a sm all p a rt-tim e operation in 1913; by 1926 its business volum e h ad reach ed a p o in t w here full-tim e operation in new prem ises was ju stified . A p articu larly active society, the W a ld h o f co -operative was essentially a m an ife sta ­ tion o f the G erm an com m unity from which it w as derived, an a tte m p t to help a sm all collectivity build a b etter w ay o f life.32 C h arlto n .

104

EA CH F O R ALL

organized in d ep en d en tly in 1920, was less w ell-established th an the others, but by 1926 even it h ad reach ed a p o in t w hen it could en te r into full-tim e o peration . T he m ost im pressive co-operatives in N o rth e rn O n ta rio by 1929, however, were found in the in d u strial an d m in in g tow ns. T h e stron g ­ est society was the W orkers’ C o -o p erativ e o f N ew O n ta rio estab lish ed in T im m ins during 1926. S u p p o rted strongly by F in n ish an d U k ra in ­ ian w orkers, m ost o f them also active in th e affairs o f the C o m m u n ist party, the W orkers’ co-op m ad e d ra m a tic econom ic progress. In its first six m onths, for exam ple, it o p en ed a delivery service fo r co n su m ­ ers in nearby tow ns, started a b ran ch in S outh P o rcu p in e,33 an d sold over $200,000 w orth o f goods.34 O th e r societies, so m ew h at less suc­ cessful, w ere also organized, essentially am o n g im m ig ran t groups, in Port A rthur, S udbury, N ipigon, an d F o rt Francis. T he ethnic, linguistic, and political overtones o f the new societies o f the N orthern O ntario tow ns te n d ed to isolate them w ithin the C a n a ­ dian m ovem ent. T he C o-o p erativ e U nio n , fo r exam p le, reacted fa­ vourably but hesitantly tow ard th em because o f th eir p olitical o rie n ta ­ tion. G eorge K een, w ho h ad seen co m m u n ist co -o p erato rs b ecom e the focus o f a schism in the A m erican co-operative m o v em en t, w as c o n ­ cerned th at the sam e pro b lem n o t bedevil the C a n ad ia n U n io n .35 In 1927, he lobbied through a CUC C ongress a rule change th a t w ould outlaw all specifically political discussions at fu tu re congresses. E lse­ where, o th er co-operators show ed little in terest in, an d som e hostility tow ard, the com m unist co-operatives. T hus, the u rb an m o v em en t in N orthern O ntario was forced to go its ow n w ay d u rin g the late tw en­ ties. It was nevertheless a pow erful m ovem ent, one th a t w ould p ro sp er until the thirties w hen the D epression a n d in tern al q u arrels am ong com m unists w ould divide a n d n early destroy it. In British C olum bia the m o v em en t was also largely a reflection o f hinterland grievance. T h e best organized, m ost efficient co-operatives were to be found in the fruit-raising areas o f the p rovince, especially the O kanagan Valley. By the m id d le o f the d ecad e, betw een 80 an d 90 p er cent o f the province’s fruit was bein g m ark eted co -operatively.36 T he fruit grow ers’ co-operatives w ere, how ever, p a rticu larly isola­ tionist in attitude, and the m ajority o f the fruit grow ers w ere d raw n to co-operatives entirely for their econom ic benefits. So too w ere m ost o f the farm ers who ow ned the flourishing F ra se r V alley M ilk Producers and the new O kanagan Valley C o -o p erativ e C ream ery. O th e r new co­ operative agencies, w ith sim ilar outlooks, ap p e ared in the last few years o f the decade to m ark et eggs, poultry, vegetables, and grain.

First Era o f Prosperit y, 1925-1929

105

Because o f a problem in securing m em b er loyalty in all these o rg an i­ zations, the province’s producers d em a n d e d closer g o v ernm en t reg u la­ tion d u ring 1926 and especially 1927. T h e g o v ern m en t resp o n d ed , and in 1928 established m ark etin g b o ard s sim ilar to those alread y o rg an ­ ized in South A frica and A ustralia.37 It was a m odel th at w ould be widely im itated in succeeding years. T he B.C. consum er m ovem ent, p e rh ap s m o re th an any o th e r p ro ­ vincial m ovem ent, suffered from in tern al divisions. By the m id d le o f the decade there were fo u r m ain co n su m er o r farm -su p p ly groupings: the struggling sm all societies in V ancouver an d V ictoria; the F raser Valley farm co-operatives; the O k an ag an su p p ly d epots; an d the stores in the m ining tow ns o f the K ooten ay s an d V an co u v er Island. T he co-operatives serving the farm ers an d a few in the m in in g towns, especially those in N atal an d R evelstoke, w ere p ro sp ero u s; the o thers were hard-pressed to survive. T he divisions in British C o lu m b ia w ere caused in p a rt by the p ro v ­ ince’s geographic diversity. But g eography in itself does n o t su ffi­ ciently explain the d ep th o f the divisions. T h e class consciousness and isolationist attitudes o f the farm ers po sed significant obstacles. So too did ethnic differences. T h e co-operatives in m in in g co m m u n ities w ere heavily dom inated by im m ig ran ts—Scots, U k rain ian s, E nglishm en, Finns, and Italian s—w ho had little in co m m o n w ith the established farm ers o f the valleys. So too did v ariatio n s in politics. M an y o f the urban co-operators w ere social dem o crats; a few in the cities an d in fishing com m unities w ere m arxists; an d the m ajo rity o f farm ers w ere liberal. Seldom could the p rovince’s co -o p erato rs m eet to g eth er w ith ­ out the “red herrings” an d the significant differen ces associated with these political differences becom ing ev id en t.38 In short, in British C olum bia could be seen the strengths a n d w eaknesses o f the h in te r­ land dim ensions o f the C a n ad ian co-operative m ovem ent. O n the one hand, this sectionalism fed the dissatisfaction on w hich co-operative action could be based; on the o ther, the d isco rd an t philo so p h ies and fractious natu re o f h in terlan d life m ad e am alg a m a tio n desp erately difficult.

CH A PTER SIX

The State of the Movement, 1914-1929 We are told that the fish erm a n is L A Z Y . B u t is it not ignorance (and its first born—exploitation) that produce laziness? The ignorant or e x ­ ploited man struggles an d fin d s no advance in his condition fr o m y e a r to year. The less the result fr o m his work, the less w ill he like doing i t — which m eans laziness. The m ore his ignorance or the m ore the exp lo ita ­ tion to which he is subjected the less is the result o f his w ork because the less productive it becomes. Today the very hum blest k in d o f work m ust fa i l unless it has k n o w l­ edge and ideas in it—and here I include organization. W ithout these work is only slavery. . . . L et the modern w orkm an but learn about indus­ try, adding the m in d to the body in it, a n d then his brute strength, hitherto without m in d in its slavery, has new eyes p u t into it, a n d even som ething o f a soul. . . . Then his work itse lf becom es an education a n d a delight, with a m oral centre o f gravity in itself, and our m an goes forw ard in his norm al strength abreast with the world that has so fa r trampled over his unnecessary a n d abnorm al weakness. J. J. T om pkins to G. Keen, Septem ber 18, 1929 CUC, vol. 50, 1929 PZ: file “t ”.

By the late 1920s, the E n g lish -C an ad ian co -o p erativ e m o v em en t h ad reached a stage o f extensive even p erp lex in g grow th. W ith in less th an thirty years, through the efforts o f two g en eratio n s, it h ad p erm e ate d sectors o f C anadian agriculture, p e n etra ted the regional consciousness o f m any C anadians and touched the lives o f th o u san d s. I f anything, it had grow n too fast and its su p p o rters rep resen ted a b ew ild erin g d iv er­ sity o f backgrounds, philosophies, and objectives. T h e divisions th a t had appeared earlier in the cen tu ry rem ain ed , th o u g h in b alan ce, they did not detract from the m o v em en t’s d ev elo p m en t. In fact, the d ivi­ sions am ong pragm atic co-operators, gro u p advocates, an d Utopians kept the m ovem ent alert to issues an d aw are o f altern ativ e avenues for developm ent. Between 1914 an d 1929, a t least, the d isp u tes that raged h ad generally beneficial results, belying an a ssu m p tio n often found in co-operative circles th a t placid m em b ersh ip s are an in d ica­ tion o f “good tim es” . T he pragm atic o r liberal co -o p erato rs w ere th e largest id en tifiab le 106

State o f Movement, 1914-1929

107

group w ithin the E nglish -C an ad ian m ovem ent. T hey w ere the b ack ­ bone o f such older organizations as th e U n ited G ra in G ro w ers, and they, by the end o f the tw enties, w ere d o m in a n t in the new co­ operatives built on the pooling idea. As before th e F irst W orld W ar, the pragm atists had som e sy m pathy for w ider reform issues, a n d their journals, notably the Grain Growers’ Guide, gen erally su p p o rte d such reform causes as tem perance, fem inism , an d electoral reform . T hey were not, how ever, u to p ian in th eir objectives. U n co n v inced th a t the existing econom ic, social, an d political system s w ere evil, they did not regard co-operatives as harb in g ers o f a new society. R ath er, th ey saw them as valuable econom ic organ izatio n s th at could be well used by m any kinds o f people. H ence, as a group, the p rag m atists w ere p artic­ ularly concerned ab o u t the econom ic p erfo rm an ce o f their o rg an iza­ tions; w ithout a strong econom ic base, they reaso n ed , social reform s were im possible. Inevitably, this p reo ccu p atio n w ith business m ean t that m ajor co-operatives d u rin g the tw enties steadily b ecam e m ore lim ited in th eir objectives and increasingly m ore circu m sp ect in em ­ bracing a plethora o f causes. T his m ove to p racticality was su p p o rted by the occupational co-operators. T h e follow ers o f H en ry W ise W ood in the W est and J. J. M orrison in the E ast w ere generally strong supporters o f co-operative action, b u t only in so far as it w ould h elp the agrarian cause. C oncerned ab o u t increasing the p o w er o f the co u n try ­ side, they believed th a t co-operatives should be highly cen tralized, efficient, purposeful, and rural. T hey w ere n o t p a rticu larly in terested in the consum er m ovem ent, an d they w ere certain ly u n sy m p ath etic to the “consum er theory o f co -o p eratio n ” . T hus, the o c cu p atio n al cooperators ten d ed to ignore, even m ore th an the pragm atists, the n a­ scent d ev elopm ent o f con su m er co-ops, and w ere single-m in d ed ly in­ terested in b uilding a m ulti-p u rp o se ru ral co -o p erativ e system u n d e r the direction o f the m ain societies. N aturally enough, the U topians o pp o sed the a p p ro ach es o f b o th the pragm atic an d occupational co-operators. In total, the social d em o ­ crats, marxists, and co-operative purists rem ain ed sm all b u t th eir in ­ fluence, extending from th eir d eep co m m itm en t, grew d u rin g the late twenties. T hey were particu larly im p o rta n t as w orkers for the p o o lin g idea and as supporters o f the co n su m er societies. T h e social d em o crats were strongest in Saskatchew an, th ough th ro u g h in d iv id u als as N o r­ m an Priestley, W illiam Irvine, an d m o d erate u rb a n social d em ocrats, they h ad strength in A lberta a n d M an ito b a as well. M arxist co -o p e ra­ tors were even few er in n u m b er, m ost o f th em bein g lo cated in m ining towns, w estern ind u strial com m unities, a n d B.C. fishing vil­

108

EA CH FO R ALL

lages. C o-operative purists, stirred by d ream s o f the C o -o p erativ e C om m onw ealth, were scattered across the country, associated w ith the C o-operative U nion o f C an a d a an d co m m itted to a p ow erful role for consum er societies. As a gro u p the th ree kinds o f Utopians w ere n o t united, b u t they nevertheless m an ag e d to exert co n sid erab le influence w ithin som e co-operatives an d , m ore p ro fo u n d ly , across the m ove­ m ent as a whole. T he ability o f Utopians to gain an d retain influence h elp s to explain how the E nglish-C anadian m o v em en t differed from o th e r n atio n al m ovem ents. Elsew here, p articu larly in A u stralia, N ew Z ea lan d , an d the U nited States, p rod u cer-co n su m er dichotom ies h ad p ro d u c ed seri­ ously fragm ented m ovem ents. In C an ad a, w hile sim ilar tensions could be found, the com paratively g reater role o f the Utopians m ean t a correspondingly strong er effort tow ard unity. C o -o p erato rs in Sas­ katchew an, o f course, were the m ost co m m itted to forging a united m ovem ent, and, as could be expected, they w ere the ones m ost in flu­ enced by utopian ideas. In M an ito b a, the pool an d the w holesale becam e a focus for the Utopians, an d they ad vocated prov in cial unity, insofar as that unity could be achieved w ith o u t the UGG. T h e p o o l’s journal, The Scoop Shovel, ed ited by Jo h n T. H ull, a co-operative idealist in outlook, was a p ersisten t p ro p o n e n t o f g re a ter u n ity an d an enthusiast for all types o f co-operative action. In A lberta, the left w ing o f the UFA, especially N o rm an Priestly, a d o p ted the sam e course b u t with less success because o f the co m m an d in g position o f the o ccu p a­ tional co-operators. Elsew here, W. C. G o o d ch am p io n ed the co-operative idealist cause with som e success am ong O n tario farm ers, as did the m en from A ntigonish am o n g the M aritim e farm ers. O nly in B.C. was the utopian cause weak, isolated as it w as am o n g a few o f the consum er and fishing groups. T he drive tow ard unity, though, focused on provincial or, in som e instances, regional institutions. T h e E n g lish -C an ad ian m o v em en t was still lacking a strong natio n al aw areness. C learly, one reason for this provincial/regional decentralization was the u n eq u a l d ev elo p m en t o f the four m ajor E nglish-speaking regions. T h e Prairies h ad so clearly surpassed the M aritim es, O ntario, an d British C o lu m b ia th a t d e v elo p ­ m ent on the basis o f p artn ersh ip was im possible. F ro m the Prairie view point, the struggling societies elsew here w ere insignificant though com m endable, w hile the o th e r regions view ed the P rairie co-operatives with a m ixture o f respect an d en v y .1 O nly in the thirties, w hen co-operators began m eeting m ore freq u en tly at in ter-reg io n al o r n a ­ tional gatherings, w ould these barriers begin to disin teg rate. O nly then

State o f Movement. 1914-1929

109

would such nation al organizations as th e C o -o p erativ e U nio n be able to play the role long anticip ated for them . T he em phasis on provincial or regional in stitu tio n s was also a result o f the m ovem ent’s grow ing o p position to the co u n try ’s m ain u rb a n centres. T he bias against the econom ic, political, a n d social d o m i­ nance o f the big cities h ad alw ays b een evident, b u t d ev elo p m en ts betw een 1914 and 1929 intensified these feelings. T h e w ar, follow ed by the consum erism o f the tw enties, h ad rap id ly increased the p o w er o f the m etropolitan centres, leaving residents o f sm all tow ns an d ru ral areas econom ically and socially far b eh in d th eir u rb an co u n terp arts. T he grow th o f the big urb an dailies, m any o f them carry in g their u rban-oriented perspectives into the country, an d the d ev elo p m en t o f the radio m arked fu rth er invasions o f the rural com m unities. A t the sam e time, the traditional rural a n tip ath ies to ban k s and im p le m e n t m anufacturers were d eepen ed by the co n tin u in g p ro b lem s o f in a d e ­ quate credit facilities an d ap p aren tly ex o rb itan t e q u ip m e n t costs. T he co-operatives were carriers o f these attitu d es, p artly because they a b ­ sorbed them from associated m ovem ents in N o rth A m erica, p artly because they were ingrained in the E u ro p ean co-operative trad itio n s brought across the A tlantic. T he an ti-m e tro p o lita n bias was also e n ­ couraged by the w eaknesses o f the general m o v em en t in S ou th ern O ntario. T here, the difficulties o f the co n su m er an d m ark etin g m ove­ m ents seem ed to prove th a t that region’s in h a b itan ts w ere excessively individualistic, uncooperative and, in d eed , fit villains for the m ove­ m ent’s rhetoric. T he result was a rein fo rcem en t o f the local and regional loyalties already fu n d am en tal to the rise o f m ost co -operative organizations. I

T he im pressive size o f som e co -operative in stitutions, the creative tensions betw een pragm atic, occupational, and u to p ian co-operators, and the drive for regional unity w ere the m ost im p o rta n t ch arac te ris­ tics o f the m ovem ent at the end o f the tw-enties. T h ere w ere three other characteristics that suggest the diffuse role played by the m ove­ m ent in English C anada. Each o f these ch aracteristics—involv em en t in com m unity education, identification w ith ethnic consciousness, id mingling with the social gospel tra d itio n —are d ifficult to d elin eate bu t significant nevertheless in u n d erstan d in g the b re a d th o f co-operative support. Between 1914 and 1929 the em phasis on ed u catio n was best d e m o n ­ strated by the co-operative press.2 G en erally speaking, such jo u rn a ls

110

EACH FO R ALL

as T he Grain Growers’ Guide an d The Western Producer tried to becom e vehicles for rural dev elo p m en t in the b ro ad est sense o f the term . T he most persistent ed u catio n al services they p erfo rm ed was in providing advisory colum ns for each o f the m an y types o f farm p ro ­ ducers they served. Even the jo u rn a ls con cern ed p rim arily w ith the grain econom y devoted co nsiderable space to such o th e r kinds o f farm ing as stock-raising, dairying, and m ark et g ard en in g .3 T h e advice they proffered w ent beyond m ark etin g in fo rm atio n a n d in clu d ed d is­ cussions on all aspects o f the farm econom y. T h ey g ain ed this advice not only from m ore successful, m ore “scientific” C a n a d ia n farm ers but also from all kinds o f agricultural o rganizations in C a n a d a an d abroad. Behind all this advice rested a desire to in tro d u ce farm ers to “ business m ethods” —generally the m ain ten an ce o f records, th e utiliza­ tion o f the services offered by the d ep a rtm e n ts o f agriculture, an d the careful selection o f stock o r crops. In total, then, by en co u rag in g farm ers and their wives to study practical subjects related to th eir econom ic activities, the co-operative press becam e a sign ifican t ed u c a ­ tor o f the agrarian com m unities. In prom oting business m ethods, the co -o p erativ e press tried alm ost as hard to involve farm w om en as it did th e ir m enfolk. It did so because it recognized th at farm w om en p lay ed crucial roles in m any farm s in m aking decisions a b o u t crops o r livestock; in lo o k in g a fter som e aspects o f the farm ’s op eratio n s; an d , especially in k eep in g the business records. T he m ain em phasis, as fa r as w om en w ere co n ­ cerned, how ever, lay in teach in g them how to beco m e b e tte r h o m e­ m akers. W om en’s pages, dev o ted to activities o f the w o m en ’s guilds developed by m ost co-operatives, form ed im p o rta n t featu res o f the co­ operative press. E m phasis w as placed on n u tritio n (a subject th a t attracted increasing atten tio n th ro u g h o u t the tw enties), on theo ries o f child developm ent, an d on leisure activities. A t the sam e tim e, the press was concerned ab o u t develo p in g the capacity o f w om en to p lay m ore decisive roles in society. R ecognizing th a t m an y w om en, espe­ cially farm w om en, were relu ctan t to p articip ate in p u b lic m eetings because o f inexperience an d tim idity, the co-operative press m ad e special efforts to teach w om en p arlia m en ta ry pro ced u res, m eth o d s o f preparing speeches, an d techniques o f organization. It w as also sym ­ pathetic to the rise o f w om en leaders, and such figures as N ellie M cClung, Francis M arion B e y n o n / A gnes M acphail, a n d Irene Parlby were frequently featu red as sym bols o f the p o ten tial o f w o m ­ en’s m ovem ents. T he jo u rn als w ere also, fo r the m ost p art, consistent in prom oting w hat they regarded as an accep tab le role fo r w om en in

State o f Movement, 1914-1929

111

co-operative organizations. A ppeals fo r the election o f w om en to boards o f consum er societies were p articu larly co m m o n as w ere c o n ­ stant proddings that w om en m ake them selves m o re available for of­ fice-holding generally. T h e jo u rn a ls, how ever, did n o t adv o cate th at w om en should play im p o rta n t roles on the b o ard s o f the m ajo r m a r­ keting organizations, a pro p o sal occasionally suggested by som e fem ­ inists o f the time. T he em phasis on h om em ak in g fo r w om en w as associated w ith a desire to broaden the horizons o f the en tire ru ral fam ily. In C en tra l and Eastern C anada the late n in eteen th an d early tw en tieth cen tu ries had w itnessed the steady exodus o f y o u n g p eo p le from the farm s, while the m ore recently developed P rairie region h ad not achieved the family stability desired by its leadership. In an effo rt to keep y o u th on the farm and to m ake farm life m ore fulfilling, the co -o p erativ e press helped sponsor a variety o f e d u catio n al an d social activities fo r y o u th . Pages for “young co-o p erato rs” w ere the c h ie f m ed iu m th o u g h both the Guide and Producer also organized study sessions w hich featu red am ong o th er topics, exam in atio n s o f the co -o p erativ e m ovem ent. Eventually, these efforts tended to m ingle w ith 4 - h clubs an d o th e r youth activities that w ere ultim ately in d e p e n d e n t o f the co -o p erativ e m ovem ent. In addition to these generally ed u catio n al features, the co -o p erativ e press in troduced the lendin g library to m any ru ral in h ab itan ts. M ost o f the jo u rn a ls o p erated extensive libraries for th e ir m em b er-p atro n s, a practice intended to help rural citizens becom e as w ell read as u rb an dwellers w ere alleged to be. T he books d istrib u ted h ad a ru ral flavour, were generally “serious” in purpose, an d h ad a stro n g co -o p erativ e com ponent. A nother “ed u catio n al” feature o f the co-o p erativ e press w as an em phasis on international affairs. In its gen eral coverage o f w orld developm ents, the press provided b rie f analyses o f cu rre n t events in C anada and overseas as well as ed ito rials on how co-o p erativ e m e th ­ ods m ight help resolve co ntem p o rary problem s. W hile it is difficult to sum m arize the approach o f several jo u rn a ls over fifteen years, the agrarian co-operative press generally attem p ted to w arn its readers about w hat it considered to be an ti-d em o cratic dev elo p m en ts. It was particularly concerned a b o u t excessive n ationalism , m ilitarism , im p e ri­ alism, international cartels, and ap ath e tic citizens. T o offset these threats it cham pioned w hat it considered to be the d em o cratic causes, notably disarm am ent, pacifism , free trade, and, o f course, co -o p eration. Broadly speaking, the co-operative press co n clu d ed from the

112

EA CH FO R ALL

cataclysm o f the F irst W orld W ar th a t the fu tu re d e m a n d e d m ore involvem ent by m ore p eople in th e political, social, a n d econom ic activities o f their countries. B efore th at co u ld take place, though, an inform ed citizenry was essential an d the press, th erefo re, h ad a p artic ­ ularly im p o rtan t role as an “elev atin g ” m ed iu m . T he sam e concern for u p liftin g th e c o m m u n ity can be seen in the co-operative jo u rn a ls pu b lish ed by co n su m er co-operatives. In a d d i­ tion to the w idely-distributed Canadian Co-operator, this gro u p o f periodicals included a n u m b e r o f b u lletins p u b lish ed by local socie­ ties. T hough necessarily m ore lim ited in the tasks they co u ld p erform and m ore specifically concerned w ith co n su m er issues, these p u b lica­ tions h ad the sam e b ro ad sy m p ath ies as th eir ag rarian co u n terp arts. Indeed, m any o f them b ecam e d istrib u to rs o f in fo rm atio n on g eneral educational activities in the co m m u n ities they served, activities so m e­ times associated directly w ith co-operatives, m ore o ften w ith o th e r com m unity organizations. T h e association w ith the W o rk ers’ E d u ca­ tion A ssociation th a t em erged in so u th ern O n ta rio d u rin g the tw enties was particularly close, as was the relatio n sh ip w ith th e e d u catio n al activities o f the T rad es a n d L a b o u r C ouncils in various cities.5 T here w ere th ree m ain reasons why these b ro ad ed u c a tio n a l p ro ­ gram s found a n atu ral reception in co-operative circles. In the first place, the co-operative m ovem ents o f G re a t B ritain, D en m a rk , and the U nited S tates—the three m ost im p o rta n t p reced en ts for English C a n a d a —had long been involved in ed u ca tio n a l activities. R o b ert O w en’s theories placed g reat em phasis on m ass ed u catio n an d the W orkers’ E ducation A ssociation was deeply en tw ined w ith the British m ovem ent in the early tw entieth century. Sim ilarly, in D en m ark , the Folk Schools th a t attracted so m uch atten tio n in the tw enties w ere intricately associated w ith th e co-operatives. A nd, in the U n ited States, several universities an d the fed eral D e p artm en t o f A griculture had blended ru ral ed u catio n activities a n d co-operatives in p o te n t rural developm ent program s. T h ese p reced en ts w ere keenly stu d ied by C an ad ian observers. In the second place, co-operatives h ad all experi­ enced difficulties in developing because o f the p o o r ed u catio n al b ack ­ ground o f m ost o f their m em bers. T he so b erin g experience o f trying to explain an n u al reports to u n in itiated m em b ers convinced m any co­ op leaders th at practical ed u catio n al activities w ere absolutely essen­ tial before co-operative institu tio n s could p rosper. Lastly, b u t signifi­ cantly, by the 1920s C an ad ian s generally had becom e aw are o f the w idespread need for m ore e d u catio n al services. T his need, based on econom ic an d social forces th a t were difficult to ignore, em erged

State o f Movement, 1914-1929

113

strongly at the sam e tim e the co -operative m o v em en t w as b u rstin g upon the various regions—they coalesced, reinforced each o th er, and redounded to the benefit o f both. II T he spread o f ethnic consciousness in C a n a d a b etw een 1914 a n d 1929 was an o th er developm en t th at n atu rally had ram ificatio n s w ithin the co-operative m ovem ent. M ost o f the n a tio n al g roupings th a t arrived in C an ad a after 1895 cam e from co untries w ith well d eveloped co­ operative m ovem ents. T h e m ost p ro m in en t, o f course, w ere the E n ­ glish an d Scottish co-operators fu n d am en tally im p o rta n t to the pre1914 period. T hey retained th eir significance b etw een 1914 an d 1929, especially in C ape Breton and S askatchew an, b u t th eir p a tte rn o f ethnic consciousness in co-operative action w as d u p licated an d even surpassed by oth er groups. T he F inns were p erh ap s the m ost d eterm in ed eth n ic gro u p to em ­ bark on co-operative activities d u rin g an d a fter the F irst W orld W ar. C om ing to C an ad a in the w ake o f the 1905 F in n ish R evolution, they had tended to settle in places sim ilar to th eir h o m elan d . T hus, on the shield, notably in T im m in s and the L ak eh ead , in the fishing co m m u ­ nities o f the west coast an d the Prairies, and in the m ining tow ns o f the Rockies, significant Finn ish colonies h ad dev elo p ed , colonies large enough and stable enough to start co-operatives d u rin g th e p o st-w ar years. T he developm ent was a n atu ral carry -o v er from F in la n d w here farm ers and labourers had developed extensive co-o p erativ e o rg an iza­ tions d u rin g the late nineteen th century. All told, the C an ad ian F inns d eveloped a p articu larly im pressive range o f co-operative organizations. In the m in in g an d lu m b erin g towns, they established co-operatively o p erated hostels, recreatio n al institutions, stores, bakeries, ed u catio n al program s, and re sta u ran ts.6 In 1928, at Sointula on M axw ell Island, British C o lu m b ia, they estab ­ lished one o f the first fishing co-operatives in C a n ad a . T his co -o p era­ tive was part o f a nearly totally co -operative co m m u n ity th a t m ade Sointula sim ilar to the nin eteen th -cen tu ry efforts o f the O w enites. T he left-w ing political sym pathies o f the F innish co-o p erativ es m ade them natural associates fo r the reform w ing o f U k ra in ia n im m i­ grants. T he two national groupings, draw n to the sam e regions, fre­ quently w orked together in their co -operative activities, if no t w ithin the sam e organizations then in bulk p u rch asin g a n d social p rogram s. T he m ost significant union o f forces took place in the late tw enties in Port A rthur, Tim m ins, F o rt W illiam , a n d a n u m b e r o f sm aller tow ns

114

E A C H F O R A LL

on the C an ad ian shield. W hile the m ain force b eh in d th a t coalition was politics—notably a d eterm in ed effort to ex p an d co m m u n ism —an im portant underlying factor was a sim ilar experience fo r b o th groups in trying to m ake the difficult ad ju stm en t to C a n ad ia n life. In addition to the left-w ing U k rain ian s, th ere w ere m an y co n serv a­ tive or apolitical U krain ian s w ho tu rn ed to co -o p erativ e action, espe­ cially in the late tw enties. In p art, this d e v elo p m en t w as the resu lt o f experience with co-operatives in the U k rain e p rio r to im m ig ratio n , and, in part, it was the result o f agitatio n by non U k ra in ia n co­ operative enthusiasts. T he w h eat pools, n o tab ly the S askatchew an pool, m ade special efforts am o n g the U k rain ian s as w ell as o th er groups, and these efforts a ttracted m any new recruits. M an y pool locals, for exam ple, were led by im m igrants from the 1895-1913 p e ­ riod, with U krainians being particu larly evident. In fact, th o u g h few o f the E uropean im m igrants achieved status a t th e top o f the cen tral organizations, they were crucial to the success at th e grass-roots level. In the process, it can be argued, the in v o lv em en t o f the im m ig ran ts contributed significantly to red u cin g ethnic tensions in the W est d u r­ ing the twenties and thirties.7 T here were o th er im p o rtan t g ro u p s o f eth n ic o r n atio n ally based co­ operatives. T he G erm a n com m unities on the shield a n d in the P rai­ ries, especially the M ennonites, tu rn ed to stores, p etro leu m supply depots, equipm ent purchasing groups, an d m ark etin g societies in the twenties. In the sam e period, the D o u k h o b o u rs, especially the q u ies­ cent m ajority o f them , em braced co -operative o rg an izatio n s fo r th eir com m unal econom ic activities.8 So too did Icelandic farm ers and fisherm en on the w estern m argins o f L ake W innipeg. A m ong all these groups, the ethnic ties were vital an d the in stitu tio n s th a t resu lted had, as a m ain purpose, the p rotection o f the econom ic o r cu ltu ral position o f the group involved. T he language o f business w as usually the language o f the ethnic group; the stores cate red to the food p refer­ ences o f the im m igrants; and, the associated recreatio n al a n d e d u ca­ tional activities, em phasized the dancing, m usic, an d lite ratu re o f the ethnic group. At the sam e time, co-operatives also served as ways in w hich ethnic groups could relate to C an a d ia n society generally. In v o lv em en t in m arketing societies bro u g h t farm organizers o f o th e r b ack g ro u n d s to the ethnic com m unities. Sim ilarly, the stores usually jo in e d w ith o th er co-operatives, including those w ith ethnically diverse m em berships, in w holesaling ventures. A nd, for b oth m ark etin g societies a n d co n su m er stores the desire to grow led m any “ e th n ic” co -o p erato rs to study

State o f Movement, 1914-1929

115

m ore carefully the business m ethods o f the g en eral co m m u n ity . T hus, though co-operatives could protect eth n ic solidarity in one sense, they also encouraged the p en etratio n o f the m ore successful business and organizational ideas from the outside m ajo rita ria n societies. N evertheless, the ultim ate tendency o f co-operatives to h elp break down ethnic solidarity was m ore ironic than in ten tio n al. A side from econom ic m otivation, “eth n ic” co-operators, from British an d U k ra in ­ ian to F inns and M ennonites, were d raw n to the m o v em ent b ecause it offered them protection an d ad v an cem en t in b o th cu ltu ral a n d social terms. C onsequently, for m any C an ad ian s, co-operatives h ad ex tra ­ neous purposes th at m ade them fa r m ore th an m erely p ro fitab le institutions for the sale and p u rch ase o f goods an d services.9 Ill

In addition to cultural purposes, som e co-operatives sponsored by e th ­ nic m inorities also ch am p io n ed religious causes. M any co-operatives am ong M ennonites and D o u k h o b o u rs, fo r ex am ple, w ere really n a tu ­ ral extensions o f the co m m u n ity ’s religious beliefs. T h ey h ad been organized in fact as such, th eir organizers, w h e th e r from w ithin or w ithout the collectivities, arguing th a t co-operatives w ere m erely legal expressions o f the spontan eo u s c o m m u n ity co -o p eratio n alread y b eing practised. Even m any conservative M en n o n ite a n d D o u k h o b o u rs ac­ cepted these argum ents, though in the m ost conservative areas som e suspicion rem ained ab o u t socialist u n d ercu rren ts in the w id er co­ operative m ovem ent. T he association w ith religious beliefs was also ev id en t in co -o p e ra ­ tives w ithout a particularly strong eth n ic b a se .10 T h e P ro testan t Social G ospel, though declining an d diffused in the late tw enties, h a d alw ays show n a predilection for co-operative enterprise. Salem B land, the m ajor C an ad ian theorist o f the m o vem ent, su p p o rted co-operatives as an im p o rtan t vehicle for social reform . T h e c o m m u n ity w orkers stim u ­ lated by him and the Social G ospel, generally, n o tab ly J. S. W oodsw orth, W illiam Ivens, A. E. Sm ith, an d W illiam Irvine, w ere equally enthusiastic, and m ost o f them started co-operatives at o n e tim e or another. M ore generally, they w ere frequently fo u n d on the b o ard s o f co-operatives, especially provisional boards for co-operatives in the process o f form ation. T hese m en w ere p articu larly useful for o rg an iz­ ing enthusiasts, like G eorge K een o f the C o-o p erativ e U nion, because they im m ediately gave the co-operatives they assisted an a u ra o f respectability w ithin the com m unity. Beyond the clergym en an d across the m o v em en t m any co-op le a d ­

116

E A C H F O R A LL

ers, though laym en, had strong religious beliefs an d church connec­ tions. Sam uel C arter, W. C. G o o d , Jam es S p eak m an , H en ry Wise W ood, G eorge C hipm an , and W illiam Irvine are exam ples o f co­ operative leaders w ho played im p o rta n t roles in P ro testan t c h u rc h e s." W hile the leaders at least ten d ed to be associated w ith the Social G ospel or reform w ing o f P rotestantism , there is som e evidence th at the co-operative m ovem ent ap p ealed to fu n d am e n ta list C h n stia n s as well. In the religiously-conservative areas o f A lberta, fo r exam ple, co­ operatives prospered an d w ere seen as the econom ic arm o f C h ristia n ­ ity. Specifically, som e conservative C hristians view ed co-operatives as attem pts to introduce the principles p reach ed on S u n d ay into the activities o f the w ork-day week. T he m ovem ent had no less o f an association w ith E nglish-speaking R om an C atholics, especially those influenced by liberal C atholicism . T he involvem ent o f priests in the m ovem ents o f Belgium , F ran ce, and Italy was w ell-known, and there was som e aw areness o f the role o f priests in F rench C anad a. G eorge K een, a d ev o u t C atholic, h elp ed to m ake know n the ch u rc h ’s role elsew here, though he specifically d is­ avow ed the chu rch ’s negative m otivation o f d eveloping co-operatives as a m eans o f com batting com m unism . Even m ore im p o rtan tly , the ac­ tivism o f the priests at A ntigonish m ad e the C an ad ia n church m ore aw are o f the possibilities o f co-operative action, th ough th a t involve­ m ent becam e best know n d u rin g the thirties. T h e m o tiv atio n o f such m en as T om pkins and C oady was com plex, b u t th ere is no d o u b t th at am ong their reasons for su p p o rtin g co -operative action was the b elief that it was a particularly C hristian form o f enterprise. T he religious backgro u n d o f m any o f the m ost active co-o p erato rs gave the m ovem ent a m essianic flavour evid en t from th e early days o f the century b u t particularly obvious by the late tw enties. T h e m ain effects o f that religious d im ension w ere, first, to stren gth en the co m ­ m itm ent o f m any individual co-operative m em bers an d , second, to enhance the sense o f m ov em en t w ithin the co-operatives. Buying at the local store or suppo rtin g the p ro d u c e r societies becam e so m eth in g like a religious experience fo r m an y m em bers, and the loyalty th at resulted was im p o rtan t in h elping m any co-operatives survive difficult times. Sim ilarly, the sense o f m ovem ent en co u rag ed by the religious convictions o f m any co-operators, w hile occasionally in tro d u c in g w hat som e w ould call extraneous issues, served to keep differin g factions talking together. O ften draw ing u pon the d u b io u s analogy o f the creation o f the U nited C hurch, religiously based co -o p erato rs co n ­ stantly pleaded that the larg er cause sh o u ld m ake in d iv id u als an d

State o f Movement, 1914-1929

117

societies transcend their narrow p reo ccu p atio n s fo r the sake o f the com m on good. It was an ap p eal th a t seem s to have h ad an effect, notably in the latter years o f the tw enties. IV

T he ideological debates, regional im balances, eth n ic affiliation, reli­ gious involvem ent w ere evidence th a t E n g lish -C an ad ian co -o p erato rs were suffering from an identity crisis by the late tw enties. T h ey m a in ­ tained their com m itm ent to the basic organ izin g p rin cip les o f the m ovem ent, but they n atu rally h ad difficulty fin d in g an ideological focus for all their activities. T his im precision, in fact, w ould n ev er be clarified—at least not before 1945—an d p erh ap s it was ridiculous to have attem p ted to do so. F o r w h atev er reasons, a large n u m b e r o f C anadians h ad com e to su p p o rt co -operative institu tio n s, w ere g e n er­ ally tolerant o f the m ixed m otivation o f th eir colleagues, a n d accepted the value o f m utual aid. It was, th erefo re, an a m o rp h o u s yet p ow erful m ovem ent—a m ixture o f ideologies, regional loyalties, an d p ra g m a ­ tism —that turned from the g eneral pro sp erity o f th e late tw enties to grapple w ith the im m ense challenges o f the G re a t D epression.

CH A PTER SEVEN

Crises, 1930-1934 The co-operative com monwealth, which is the ultim ate goal o f co-opera­ tors, we suggest, is an econom ic a n d social system under which all the activities in which the people are engaged will be carried out with the object o f the m u tu a l benefit o f all the people. In the co-operative com m onwealth every activity connected with the production and distribution o f goods—agriculture, m ining, m an u fa ctu r­ ing, transportation, wholesaling and retailing, ban kin g a n d insurance ( i f banking and insurance do not becom e unnecessary)—w ill be carried on not fo r the profit o f any individual or group, but fo r the benefit o f all. The inventor, the scientist, the engineer and the organizer, will use their talents not to m ake m oney fo r them selves or f o r the shareholders o f a corporation, but fo r the advantage o f all m ankind. A n d so in every sphere o f life. A ll the activities in which people engage, econom ic and social, educational and recreational, literary a n d artistic, w ill be organ­ ized in such a way that all the people w ill contribute according to their ability and share according to their needs. Under these conditions, selfishness, in a sense o f a desire to enjoy advantages at the expense o f others, will have no place, a n d the individ­ ual will realize that he can prom ote his own welfare only by pro m o tin g that o f the com m unity as a whole. Under these conditions there w ould be no poverty, except as a result o f fam in e; no wars, no crime, but instead a world o f peace and good will. T h e Scoop Shovel, A p ril 1931, p. 12.

T he co-operative m ovem ent was not th e least o f the m an y causes stim ulated by the G re a t D epression. As the econom y faltered an d as new avenues for econom ic d ev elo p m en t w ere sought, m o re C an a d ian s investigated closely all kinds o f co-operative action. T h ere w ere sev­ eral reasons why they did so. M ost co-ops could be b eg u n w ith little investm ent; m any could be o p erated on largely v o lu n tary lab o u r; an d all were based on a desire for com m u n ity self-help, a d esire w idely shared during the “dirty th irties” . T h e stu d y o f co-operatives was also popular, especially in ad u lt ed u catio n circles, because it possessed a reasonably extensive literatu re, a host o f practical ap p licatio n s, a n d a sufficiently large n u m b e r o f interested, in fo rm ed leaders. T h ere had been periods before w hen g roups o f English C an a d ian s h a d d e m o n ­ strated an intense interest in the co -operative m o v em en t. N ev er before

118

Crises, 1930-1934

119

had so many shown as much concern as did the diverse groups o f the 1930s. At the same time, and for much the same reasons, the provincial and regional loyalties already well established in the English-Canadian movement were deepened by the Depression. Naturally, areas believing themselves exploited by other regions doubly resent their grievances, real or imagined, in times o f intense adversity. Thus, the hinterland regions, in which co-operatives flourished best, became more restless as the thirties progressed, and this restlessness inevitably aided the movement’s growth. At the same time, within regions or alternatively within provinces, integration picked up m om entum , and the thrust toward joint ventures by co-operative institutions benefited. In the process, powerful movements, notably on the Prairies and in the Maritimes, reached maturity. Soon wielding considerable power, these generally successful institutions in an unsuccessful era rapidly caught the imagination o f widening circles of Canadians. In an age in which “belonging to a movement” was fashionable, even customary, the regional co-operative movements were as im portant as any o f the political, social, or religious movements better rem em bered by more people forty years later. I

All Canadian regions suffered during the Depression, but in none were the hardships more evident than the Prairies. The disillusioning abruptness with which the generally prosperous late twenties ended, the rapid decline o f the grain trade, the cruel coincidence o f drought, and the residue of past injustices created an environm ent which would scar the Prairie consciousness for generations. In its wake, the on­ slaught o f the Depression staggered existing Prairie co-operatives, though ultimately it strengthened the resolve o f their supporters and their leadership groups. Consistent support was given to already es­ tablished co-ops, and there was a widespread effort by many groups to use co-operative methods to meet marketing, consum ption, m anu­ facturing, welfare, entertainm ent, and credit needs. Several new co­ operative experiments were begun in the worst years o f the D epres­ sion on the Prairies, curious manifestations o f optimism and determ i­ nation in an age when it was easier to be discouraged, resentful, and resigned. The main co-operatives to stumble, o f course, were the wheat pools. During the late twenties, buoyed up by their own m om entum and sharing the confidence o f the wider business communities, the pools

120

EACH FOR ALL

had expanded at every opportunity and had assumed a model of perpetual growth. In 1929, like so many others, the pools—leaders and members—were caught short. In the case o f the pools the error was made, based on reasonable predictions derived from past experiences, to grant an initial paym ent of $1.00 for each bushel o f wheat. W heat, number one N orthern, basis Fort William, still brought $1.78 at that time, surely a sufficient margin given the fluctuations norm al to most marketing years. Unfortunately, such was not the case. Prices started to tumble late in the sum m er o f 1929 and continued to do so through 1930. By the end o f the 1929-30 crop year, the pools found that the total of their initial paym ent was $23,000,000 too much, an am ount that forced the pools to borrow extensively. The pools might have withstood this temporary fall below the $1.00 level even for a full year, but they could not survive a prolonged crisis that stretched over two crop years. In 1930, again faced by the problem o f selecting a reasonable initial paym ent level in a widely fluctuating market, the directorates chose the price o f seventy cents.1 Once again, their guess proved to be too high, and by late 1930 the pools were in a serious crisis. The crisis in the pools had very broad implications. As m arketing agencies for better than 50 per cent o f the Prairie wheat crop and significant percentages of other grains as well, the pools were vitally im portant to the Prairies and, indeed, the entire nation. Farm ers (and their creditors) depended heavily, often entirely, upon the pool pay­ ments. Banks and other financial institutions that had extended large loans to the pools were forced, almost daily it seems, to wait anxiously while the pools scrambled to find the funds with which to meet their obligations.2 Governments, provincial and federal, were equally con­ cerned since the pools had become a vital aspect o f the national economy; in fact, they were the largest business grouping in Canada in terms of dollars. Thus, as the pools staggered, there was little doubt that some form o f assistance would be forthcoming. The only real question was what the cost would be for that assistance. As it worked out, the price for governm ent support was the dism an­ tling o f the pools’ international marketing system. By 1930, like the United Grain Growers before them, the pools had become reasonably placated participants in the existing m arketing system. They were still regarded suspiciously by many individuals in the private grain trade, and periodic controversies still occurred, but the antipathy o f the m id­ twenties had abated significantly. The pools had even become reluc­ tant participants in the futures markets and in a degree o f market

Crises, 1930-1934

121

manipulation, practices they originally and to some extent continu­ ously deplored. Nevertheless, they still had distinctive qualities about them, not least of which were their method o f paym ent and their efforts to involve members in a part o f the m anagem ent process. The pools were also different because, within a single operation, they controlled much of the grain they sold from the farm ers’ fields to the bakers’, if not the consumers’, doors. An imaginative effort at inter­ continental trading, the pools were boastfully proud of the success they had achieved in reducing the num ber of middlem en between the producer and the consumer. The success o f the pool system, though, was resented and frequently seen as a hollow victory because it had stimulated hostile reactions by overseas millers. This reaction in turn, it was alleged, had made it difficult to sell Canadian wheat especially in G reat Britain. The private grain trade was particularly insistent on this point, and it was able to dem onstrate its arguments, at least to R. B. Bennett. As economic problems for the pools mounted, the directors o f the three provincial organizations turned, in the first instance, to their respective provincial governments. In January 1930, as banks became nervous about the credit they had extended to the pools, the pool leadership gained credit guarantees from the provincial governments. Eight months later, as their financial crises worsened, the pools were forced to turn to the federal government and its prim e minister, R. B. Bennett. Bennett was well prepared because he had been a close observer o f the grain economy for several years. In fact, while he was a Calgary lawyer, he had often served clients in the private grain trade and he had had at one time a financial interest in the Alberta Pacific G rain Company. He was not, however, unsym pathetic to the pools, and he had even lent his support to pool sign-up campaigns in 1923 and 1924. Thus, he responded favourably to the pools’ appeals for assistance when they arrived in 1931. Nevertheless, he did insist, as part of the price for assistance from the federal government, that John I. McFarland, an old personal friend and a widely respected private grain-trade leader, become m anager o f Canadian W heat Producers, the selling agency for the three pools. McFarland, a strong personality, was in effect given stewardship over the sale o f grain collected by the pools. His first act was to close the overseas sales agencies o f the Central Selling Agency, an act that was applauded by the private grain trade but resented by the pools. McFarland then launched his campaign to sell the pools’ wheat. He did so largely as an independent individual. For a while there was an

122

EACH FO R ALL

attempt to maintain the appearances of consultation with the board o f the Central Selling Agency, but it soon became obvious that there was little meaningful dialogue between him and the board members. Basi­ cally, M cFarland was an appointee of the federal government, given wide-ranging power by Bennett, and not required to work closely with the pool leadership. His role was to m aintain as much stability as possible in the grain trade through a fifty-cent m inim um price for a bushel of wheat. Insofar as that served the needs o f the Prairie farm ­ ers, his five years o f unpaid service as general m anager were valuable, even essential, for the pools and their members. After M cFarland’s appointm ent, the pools were som ew hat em ascu­ lated. Their effort to control the grain trade from the farm ers’ fields to the consumers’ tables had suffered a serious setback. Recognizing the extent o f this reversal, the pool leadership devoted little time to trying to recover lost influence; instead, between 1930 and 1935, they at­ tempted to promote the creation o f a government m arketing agency like the one used during the First World War. They did so because many farmers had never lost their conviction that a national govern­ ment board was essential for stability on the Prairies, and because they were impressed by the increasing role o f governm ent in several new American marketing systems. Thus, the annual reports o f the central agency, along with those o f the three pools between 1931 and 1935, repeatedly urged a compulsory national board. In the sam e years, the representatives o f the four organizations lobbied for such a board before government representatives and various committees and commissions. In 1935, these efforts were partly rew arded when the federal government created a voluntary w heat board. The persistent advocacy o f a wheat board indicates that the m ajor­ ity o f grain growers did not believe co-operative methods could alone solve their marketing problems. There were several reasons why this was so. There were always, for example, enough farmers opposed to co-operative marketing to make it impossible for co-operatives to dominate the marketing system. In addition, the grain-m arketing sys­ tem affected far more than the grain growers themselves and involved railways, banks, and governments to a considerable extent. Thus, the only way to bring stability to the grain economy seemed to be through intricate direction o f all the related economic institutions, planning apparently best carried out through a national board responsible for all the grain crops. Generally, too, the Prairie farmers were increas­ ingly aware o f the international wheat situation, largely because o f the experience o f the pools between 1924 and 1931. In particular, that experience had dem onstrated the need for strong governm ental assist-

122A

Above The traditional founding date for the consumer movement was the estab­ lishment o f a store by the Rochdale Equitable Pioneers' Society on December 21. 1844. This picture shows the surviving original members in 1865. C ourtesy: Federated Co-operatives. Below The automobile made it possible fo r farm /co-operative organizers in the early twentieth century to reach large numbers o f farmers. This picture, probably taken in the autumn o f 1909. shows SGGA organizers in Moose Jaw. The driver is F W. Green; beside him is E. N. Hopkins; behind Green (in a hard hat) is Harry Dorrell; E. A. Partridge is wearing the soft hat. C ourtesy: Saskatchewan A r­ chives, Regina (#A 375).

122B

J2 2 C

^

alberta

farm ers

COOPERATIVE E L E V A T O R C o. lim ited

LOCAL NO 2 3 albert»-pacifig GRAIN GO LTt

Above Grain elevators, Barons, Alberta, 1913. C ourtesy: Glenbow Foundation, N A -2059-27. Below Original pile o f Saskatchewan Wheat Pool Contracts, 1924. C ourtesy Saskatchewan Archives, Regina.

VHEATPOOL

122D

Above Manitoba I'ool representatives preparing to canvass northwestern M ani­ toba. C ourtesy: Manitoba Department o f Co-operatives. Below 14 Duke St.. fo r many years the Head Office o f United Farmers' Co­ operative and related organizations. C ourtesy: United Co-operatives o f Ontario.

The Davidson Co-operative was one o f the most successful co-operatives in Saskatchewan. This photograph shows the store c. 1920. Courtesy: Saskatchewan Archives, Regina.

to to

~n

H £ i D 0 .u 4 R T E R S

„ K

I

p>X»HO

;

‘

I

.» .II .L r Mu ^QOfffiT'ON r W JhEF

MANITOBA t - u v r

wholesale

LIMIIL

.

.'gtf SjWJtS J' !:5* •

YO*5 0 « - ‘ n

1

W» . H %

ST R E N G T H

; N&GfiAifc •-V ¥ M W i whea; pool

'

^

'U N I T Y I S "-UNITY oo

POOL COUNTRY flivaTOffS IS 0 P £ R A 7 /O N

>

■

.*

.

•■'-S» * ■*. ■—

Co-operative publicity tents at local fair in 1928. C ourtesy: Manitoba Department o f Co-operatives.

122G

122H

i! t ' Credit I iiioii Centiill. the 1940s. C o u rtesy : B.C. t r a i n u

Crises, 1930-1934

123

ance in international grain m arketing. H ow b e tte r to insure th a t assist­ ance than to have a nationally o rganized b o ard in teg rated in to the federal governm ent’s trad in g dep artm en ts? Finally, like o th e r ag rarian co-operators, pool suppo rters in C a n ad a w ere becom ing convinced that the ideal m arketing m echanism w as a g o v ern m en t bo ard for each com m odity, albeit a b oard in w hich p ro d u cer co-operatives w ould have a p red o m in an t influence. G iven this attitude am ong m any o f th eir num b ers, the pools w ere in som e ways not seriously w eakened w hen the fed eral g o v ern m en t as­ sum ed control o f grain m ark etin g system s. In essence, the pools had become, like the U nited G rain G row ers, elev a to r system s th at p rided them selves on their responsiveness to the needs o f their m em berships. At the end o f the 1930-31 crop y ear the three p rovincial pools liq u i­ dated delivery contracts, su b stitu tin g a vo lu n tary co n tract for the old five-year system . T hey concentrated, again like the U G G , upon im p ro v ­ ing their elevator system , a vital enough exercise, since the UGG and the pools, by the early thirties, ow ned 9 term inals and 1,500 co untry elevators.3 T hey also concen trated u p o n paying back to the federal and provincial governm ents the $22,000,000 they ow ed w hen M c­ F arland took over in 1930. T his la tte r task in fact p reo ccu p ied the pool directors and m any m em bers until it was successfully co m p leted ahead o f original schedules in 1949. II

The pattern o f determ ined survival, even grow th, am id the adversities o f the D epression was still m ore vividly a p p a re n t w ithin the Prairie consum er m ovem ent. By 1930, th ere were ap p ro x im ately three hundred w ell-developed stores in the region an d at least fo u r h u n d re d buying clubs. T he crucial elem ents, though, w ere the w holesales begun in the optim ism o f the late tw enties. T h ey w ere the first steps tow ards the developm ent o f in tegrated co-operative m ovem ents, and their survival was essential if past gains w ere to be co n so lid ated and future progress assured. U pon th eir officers (an d to som e extent upon those o f the C o-operative U nion o f C an ad a) fell the vital task o f advising m anagers and boards o f d irectors d u rin g difficult periods. U pon their resources were the greatest pressures ap p lied w hen local societies encountered financial shortages. A nd, finally, upon them fell the m ain responsibilities for w orking tow ard con so lid ated provincial m ovem ents; in the final analysis, they h ad the m ost to gain by w ork­ ing with the producer organizations, an d they knew the m ost a b o u t the needs o f the local consum er groups.

124

EA CH FO R ALL

T he largest o f the three p rovincial w holesales was the S askatchew an society which surprisingly m ain tain ed a business o f b etw een $325,000 and $400,000 in the early years o f the D ep ressio n .4 U n d e r the g u id ­ ance o f H. W. K etcheson, it successfully w eath ered o rg an izatio n al problem s betw een 1928 an d 1930 w hen it ab so rb ed the U n ite d F a rm ­ ers o f C an ad a’s T rad in g D e p artm e n t.5 In the early thirties it co n cen ­ trated upon oil and twine, basically because K etcheson h ad enjoyed considerable success w ith these pro d u cts w hen he was m a n a g e r o f the D avidson co-op. Serving a loyal m em b ersh ip o f b etw een tw enty-five and thirty societies, it had som e security for its leaders an d sufficient capital for lim ited expansion a n d ed u catio n al activities. M ost im p o r­ tantly, it soon diverted considerable resources to e n co u rag in g the unification o f the Saskatchew an m ovem ent. It consistently p ro m o ted this cause with the u fc the livestock pool, the d airy pool, a n d the egg and poultry pool b u t achieved significant success only w ith the w h eat pool.6 Indeed, together, the w heat pool an d the w holesale sponsored m any co-operative program s, the m ost im p o rta n t o f them b eing co­ operative conferences and “ schools” at the U niversity o f S askatche­ w an.7 T he M anitoba w holesale, serving a base o f w eaker c o n su m er socie­ ties, encountered m ore problem s th an its S askatchew an co u n te rp a rt; nevertheless, despite the problem s, it m an ag ed to survive the w orst o f the D epression. Its problem s w ere c o m p o u n d ed by som e p o o r b usi­ ness transactions in 1928 and 1929, notab ly the p u rch ase o f an ineffi­ cient and outm oded p rin tin g p lan t, and these co n tin u ed to d rain resources in the early thirties. In 1930, th e w holesale grossed $333,000.® In 1931, it declined, b u t recovered in 1932 to n e a r the 1930 figure, before dro p p in g drastically in 1933 to below $200,000. In 1934, like the Saskatchew an w holesale, it started a steady m arch to p ro sp e r­ ity. T he key figure for the M an ito b a w holesale in these y ears was its president, W. H. Popple, a dyn am ic in d iv id u al w ith u to p ian c o -o p era­ tive convictions. U n d er his direction, the w holesale p rim arily served buying clubs organized through the U n ited F arm ers o f M an ito b a. U nlike K etcheson, w ho was assisted by a stro n g un ificatio n drive from stable, organized consum er groups, P opple was co n fro n ted by isolated stores and a preoccupied, though pow erful ag rarian m o v em en t. H e and the wholesale, therefore, h ad a m ore d ifficult struggle b oth in surviving the depression and, ultim ately, in h elp in g to forge a m ove­ m en t th a t united producers a n d consum ers. T he A lberta w holesale was in an even m ore ten u o u s position. It suffered from the sam e problem s as the M an ito b a w holesale and, in

Crises, 1930-1934

125

addition, it faced a difficult political situation. In M a n ito b a a n d Sas­ katchew an the m ajor co-operatives w ere not the preserve o f any p a r­ ticular faction; indeed, co-o p erato rs in the provinces em b raced all varieties o f political persuasions, an d b o ard s o f d irectors no rm ally possessed individuals p ro m in en t in L iberal, socialist, an d C onservative parties. T he consum er m ovem ents in the tw o eastern P rairie p ro v ­ inces, m oreover, h ad strong su p p o rters w ithin all im p o rta n t co-operatives and, in addition, excellent su p p o rt from a g ro u p o f co m m itted civil servants. In A lberta, these co n d itio n s d id n o t apply. U n til its sudden political collapse in 1935, the UFA d o m in a ted the ag raria n and co-operative m ovem ents, an d its d isinterested a ttitu d e tow ard the Al­ berta w holesale becam e a vital factor. This attitude w ithin the UFA w as ra th e r curious because, w hen the wholesale was being form ed d u rin g the late tw enties, the UFA h ad been one o f its supporters. U n fo rtu n ately its in terest soon w an ed after the w holesale m ade a m istake in 1929 by unw isely p u rch asin g large quantities o f lum ber; that erro r for y ears a fterw ard w ould rem ain a burdensom e, highly visible inventory. T his e rro r p a rticu larly alarm ed N orm an Priestly, the secretary o f the UFA. A w are o f the failu re o f m any co-operative stores in the past, he h ad n ev er been convinced o f the business capacity o f organized co n su m er groups. T h e lu m b e r deal re-inforced these uncertainties w ith the result th a t the UFA d id not assist the w holesale to any ex tent a fter 1929. T h a t d ev elo p m en t was serious because it m ean t th at the UFA cen tral executive w ould not encourage its locals to buy from the w holesale,9 w ould not facilitate w holesale business am o n g locals, an d w ould not invest any m oney in the w holesale’s operations. C on seq u en tly , the w holesale was forced to find its ow n way w ithout an easily gained sh are o f the farm ers’ m arket, the m arket fu n d am en tal to the success o f its S askatchew an and M anitoba counterparts. T he last serious attem p t to enlist u f a su p p o rt took p lace in 1931 and early 1932. In those years W illiam Irvine, aid ed by lead ers o f the K illam and E gerton co-operatives, so u g h t to have the UFA o rd e r m ost o f its m ain lines from the w holesale. Irvine an d his associates believed that the only way farm ers could am ass p o w er d u rin g the D epression was through the organization o f th eir p u rch asin g pow er. In th e ir view, the chaotic m arketing p attern s o f th e D epression h ad em ascu lated such econom ic pow er as farm ers h a d gained, leaving them only w ith purchasing pow er as a lever in the m ark etp lace. Irvine fu rth e r ho p ed the co-ordination o f UFA-consumer p ro g ram s w ould stim u late an e q ­ uitable b arter system w hereby the farm ers, th ro u g h an all-em b racin g

126

E A C H F O R A LL

co-operative organization, could readily exchange th e ir p ro d u ce for supplies. He envisioned, in tim e, the em ergence o f no less th an a C o­ operative C om m onw ealth, self-sustaining an d v irtually a u to n o m o u s.10 Irvine’s approach was defeated by the co m b in ed efforts o f N o rm a n Priestly and G eorge Johnson, a UFA m em b er o f the prov in cial legisla­ ture. T hese m en argued th at the in creasing d o m in an ce o f oil c o m p a ­ nies and m ajor retail outlets m ad e it im p erativ e for farm ers to e n ter som e parts o f the distributive business quickly. In th e ir view, the w holesale could not m eet these im m ed iate needs because o f its te n d ­ ency to em phasize g rad u al an d local d e v e lo p m e n t.11 Priestly, w ho becam e a p rom inent CCF leader, believed in the necessity o f m uch m ore rapid change th an did th e co-operative priests. F o r him , co n ­ sum er societies w ere o f only m arg in al utility in an econom y increas­ ingly dom inated by large businesses.12 H is arg u m ents, plus the fact that supplying farm er needs w as an ideal w ay to adv an ce the UFA cause, convinced the UFA leadership, an d the o rg an izatio n tu rn ed away from the w holesale. As it did so, the UFA h elp ed to seal the w holesale’s fate. In 1932, afte r m o n th s o f v irtually su sp en d ed activity, it was closed. T he closure o f the A lberta w holesale, though, was the only m ajo r setback suffered by the Prairie co n su m er m o v em en t d u rin g th e th ir­ ties. T rue, a few in d ep e n d e n t stores w ere closed, m ostly because o f difficulties over credit extended to m em bers, b u t the re m a rk a b le fact was th a t the consum er m ov em en t w eath ered the adversity w ith few er reverses than m ight have been expected. D espite the ag o n izin g p res­ sures caused by m em b er d em a n d fo r credit, shortages o f supplies, lack o f cash flow, and reduced d em an d , the established stores h ad the inestim able benefits o f increased m e m b e r in terest an d loyalty. As long as significant segm ents o f the co m m u n ity w ere w illing to p atro n ize locally ow ned stores faithfully a n d be p a tie n t w ith sh o rtag es and reduced services, then survival, even grow th, w as possible. T h e stores were also aided by th e closure o f m any co m p etito rs a n d by the retrenchm ent o f m ost large ch ain stores. T h e ru ral Prairies, in fact, w ere not attractive retail m ark etin g areas d u rin g the D epression for any except the co-operative enthusiasts. T he stores were also assisted d u rin g the early thirties by th eir involvem ent, in M an ito b a an d S askatchew an a t least, w ith petro leu m products. T he advent o f large-scale m ech an ized farm ing, startin g d u r­ ing the prosperous late-tw enties w hen m any farm ers could invest in new m achinery, created new d em a n d . At first, a few co-op stores and num erous oil co-ops (especially in M an ito b a an d S askatchew an) were

Crises, 1930-1934

129

producers and consum ers, betw een large co-operatives and sm all ones —but to an extent surpassed in tern atio n ally only by the S can d in avian movem ents, the Prairie m ovem ents m ain tain ed co m m u n icatio n s be­ tween its various groups and could even p ro d u ce sig n ifican t jo in t projects. It was a m ovem ent with two d ecades o f experience b e h in d it, a com m itted m em bership, a series o f diverse initiatives, an d a solid foundation in social and econom ic realities. It was easily the m ost significant aspect o f the total E n g lish -C an ad ian m ovem ent. IV

Like its Prairie cou n terp art, the M aritim es co-operative m o v em en t dem onstrated a rem arkable resilience an d co n sid erab le grow th d u rin g the early thirties. W ithin the co n su m er m o v em en t the B ritish C a n a ­ dian society, still reputedly the largest co n su m er co -o p erativ e in N o rth A m erica, retained its d om in an t, in d e p e n d e n t position. A t the en d o f 1929, it was a strong organization th a t in th irty -th ree years h ad sold over $17,000,000 w orth o f goods; h ad p aid m ore th an $150,000 in ter­ est on capital; and had distrib u ted over $1,750,000 in p atro n a g e divi­ d ends.15 N or had it forgotten its w ider social pu rp o ses. Its ed u catio n al com m ittee was still particu larly active and m a in tain ed the trad itio n s o f sponsoring entertainm ents, p ro m o tin g study groups, an d h elping trades union activities. A typical co m b in ed ed u c a tio n a l an d e n te rta in ­ m ent m eeting was held in D ecem b er 1930, at Sydney M ines. M ayor Dwyers o f Sydney M ines gave an address on “ M o d ern M achinery A pplied to Present-D ay C o n d itio n s” , an d he w as follow ed by a m usi­ cal program m e rendered by the C o-o p erativ e O rch estra an d C o-operative Choir. The evening was closed by m em bers o f the W o m en ’s G uild who served “ delicious refreshm ents, inclu d in g tea d irectly from the p lantations o f the English an d Scottish C o-o p erativ e W holesale S o cieties.. . ” 16 Because o f its British background, the British C a n a d ia n believed in buying as m any co-operatively p ro d u ced supplies as possible. T h u s, in 1930, it jo in ed the Scottish C o-o p erativ e W holesale in an effort to extend the strong trading ties already d ev elo p ed w ith the E nglish cw s. Similarly, at the 1930 C ongress o f the C o -o p erativ e U n io n o f C an a d a the British C an ad ian ’s m anager, W. C. Stew art, im p lo red the d ele­ gates to buy m ore from the British o rganizations, arg u in g th a t close ties w ould benefit the m ovem ents in b oth c o u n trie s.17 H e follow ed his own advice: during 1931, the N ova Scotian society p u rch ased nearly fifteen thousand dollars w orth o f goods from th e two British w hole­ sales, nearly h alf o f it in the form o f c w s te a .18 T his drive fo r close

130

E A C H F O R A LL

collaboration betw een the two natio n al m ovem ents w as p articu larly appreciated by G eorge K een, w ho had also long sought to b ring the two m ovem ents closer together. As the D epression d eep en ed in eastern N ova Scotia, the British C anadian was inevitably affected, b u t n o t as badly as m ight be ex­ pected. Each year from 1930 to 1933 inclusive, its gross sales declined in excess o f $200,000, and by the latter y ear the a n n u a l sales were dow n to $910,000.19 T hese declines, how ever, d id not u n d e rm in e the society to any serious extent. In fact, the society’s co n tin u in g ability to pay a m uch-appreciated div id en d o f betw een eight an d ten p er cent despite the D epression was seen as p ro o f o f its so u nd m an ag e m en t and financial stability. Q u arterly and a n n u al m eetings, held at all five branches o f the society, co n tin u ed to be w ell-atten d ed an d ch a ra c ter­ ized by serious, relatively u n em o tio n al discussion. In d eed , the m ost com m on com plaint o f the British C an a d ia n b o ard m em b ers a b o u t the m eetings was that they lasted until too late at n ig h t.20 In the final analysis, the D epression was as m uch o f an asset as a liability for the large society based in Sydney M ines. In 1934 the British C a n a d ia n ’s a n n u al trad e b egan to im prove again and once m ore totalled over a m illion dollars. Its position w as in m any ways unique. It h ad n early thirty years o f experience b eh in d it, possessed a stable if overly cau tio u s m an ag e m en t, and served a p artic­ ularly loyal m em bership. It also h ad excellent connections w ith w hole­ salers, undertook m any w holesaling activities itself, an d co u ld g en er­ ally operate in a secure, in d e p e n d e n t m an n er. As such, it was a tantalizing success sym bol fo r co-operative enth u siasts in the M ari­ times. It was also, because o f its d evotion to g ra d u a l d e v elo p m en t in the British tradition a n d its n atu ra l p reo ccu p atio n s w ith its ow n p ro b ­ lem, a frustrating institution relu ctan t to lead an ex p an sion ist p ro ­ gram .21 M ost o f the expansionists w ere w ithin the A ntigonish m ovem ent. T he m isery inflicted th ro u g h o u t the M aritim es by th e D epression served as a strong catalyst for the already co n cern ed activists asso­ ciated with St. F rancis X avier U niversity. F a th e rs Jim m y T o m p k ins and Moses C oady both concluded th at the econom ic collapse o f the early thirties proved the b an k ru p tcy o f the existing o rd er, and they feared that radicalism w ould grow in stren g th at the cost o f the historical values o f the Ju d eo -C h ristian trad itio n . Seeing in c o -o p era­ tive action a m ethod for refo rm in g society w ithin th at trad itio n w hile at the sam e tim e m eeting im m ed iate h u m a n needs, the tw o priests increased the involvem ent o f th eir university in co -o p erativ e action. In

Crises, 1930-1934

131

1930, following the successful early efforts o f C o ad y a n d T o m p k in s am ong fisherm en an d farm ers, the ad m in istrato rs o f St. F ran cis X a­ vier U niversity agreed to establish an E xtension D ep artm en t. U nlike those in m ost N orth A m erican universities, the d e p a rtm e n t sponsored a general ad u lt ed u catio n pro g ram orien ted tow ard econom ic and especially co-operative action. C oady becam e the directo r o f the E xtension D e p a rtm e n t an d A. B. M acD onald, a form er teacher an d ag ricu ltu ral rep resen tativ e, becam e its secretary. T om pkins, a ra th e r con ten tio us figure w ith little in terest in adm inistrative detail, rem ain ed active as an in tellectu al le ad e r and house critic for the d ep artm en t. T h e expansion o f the A ntigonish program during the early thirties was rem ark ab le. Each y e a r th e m en associated with the D ep a rtm e n t addressed betw een tw o a n d three hundred m eetings w ith com bined audiences o f betw een fou rteen hundred an d three thousan d people. T h e basic in stru m e n t they dev el­ oped for their com m unity pro g ram w as the study club, an a d a p ta tio n o f the institution used w idely in the co-operative a n d a d u lt ed u catio n program s o f D enm ark an d Sw eden. T h e study clu b idea w as essen­ tially very sim ple. Between ten an d tw enty indiv id u als from the sam e com m unity w ould be g ath ered to g eth er to discuss co m m u n ity a n d a single com m on p roblem w ould be isolated for study and jo in t action. Local leadership w ould be cultiv ated , and with the use o f the re­ sources o f the E xtension D ep a rtm en t, co-operatives w ould be form ed. G enerally, the study clubs w ere d eveloped w ith a specific set o f goals in m ind, notably practical ed u ca d o n al activities an d d irect econom ic action. By 1934 there w ere 952 clubs, o rganized fo r a w ide variety o f purposes, all over eastern N ova Scotia. T he A ntigonish m ovem en t grew rap id ly d u rin g the early thirties, m ainly because it could m eet, in p a rt a t least, several social and econom ic needs felt by m any p eo p le th ro u g h o u t the M aritim es. Its role as an adult ed u cato r was p articu larly sign ifican t since p ublic education was lim ited, as, indeed, it was in m an y o th e r p arts o f C anada. T here were no p ublic lib raries in eastern N ova Scotia, for exam ple, and m any m en and w om en in b oth ru ral a n d in d u strial areas possessed only a few years o f form al ed u catio n . A nd, even for the few w ho com pleted elem en tary school, there w ere severely re­ stricted educational opportunities, high schools b ein g expensive and seldom close to hom e. T hese deficiencies an d the grow ing N o rth A m erican stress on educatio n pro v id ed a fertile e n v iro n m en t in w hich the sfx Extension D ep artm en t could thrive. T he d ep artm en t also ow ed m uch to the clergym en o f eastern N ova

132

EACH FO R ALL

Scotia, southeastern N ew Brunsw ick, and Prince E dw ard Island. A num ber o f papal encyclicals an d p ro n o u n cem en ts as well as th e lib ­ eral wing o f C atholicism had sanctio n ed co-operative activity since the 1890s.22 Indeed, the A ntigonish program was p a rt o f a g lobal p h e ­ nom enon, though it was exceptional in its am b itio u s a tte m p t at total com m unity developm ent. Its n ear m illenariansim , its obvious accept­ ability, and its coterie o f d y nam ic leaders m ad e it attractive to m any M aritim e clergym en. T h u s C oady, M acD o n ald , an d T o m p k in s, w o rk ­ ing through local priests, had im m ed iate access to m any com m unities. They found som e acceptance am ong P ro testan t clergym en as well. T he m ost im portant o f these w as J. D. N elson M acd on ald , a Presby­ terian m inister, one w ho braved the religious prejudices o f the day to becom e a fieldw orker w ith the C atholics at A n tig o n ish .23 Civil servants, especially those in N ova S cotia’s D e p a rtm e n t o f A griculture, also provided essential aid to the d e p a rtm en t. Interested in co-operative m arketin g since the late n in eteen th century, the d e ­ p artm en t becam e directly involved w hen the U n ited M aritim e F ish er­ men was created. A ntigonish h ad played th e m ajo r role in creatin g that organization, b u t afterw ard the g o v ern m en t had to b ecom e the m ain advisory body: possessing a n e a r m o n o p o ly on m ark e tin g ex p er­ tise, it alone could provide the p ractical advice th at was needed. Sim ilarly and usually in the b ackground, ag ricu ltu ral rep resen tativ es played im portant roles in helping the SFX E xtension D e p a rtm e n t m eet the needs o f farm ing groups. It was, in fact an ideal arra n g e m e n t for both the university an d g o v ern m en t d e p artm en ts: the university gained invaluable technical assistance and the d e p a rtm e n t co u ld serve a steadily-grow ing segm ent o f the p o p u latio n w ith o u t attra ctin g u n ­ w anted publicity.24 But perhaps the m ost im p o rta n t reason why the A ntigonish m ove­ m ent was able to have a significant, im m ediate, im p act w as its p ro m o ­ tion o f credit unions. T h e field w orkers for the E xtension D e p a rtm e n t encouraged all kinds o f co-o p erativ es—stores, housing, fishing, fa rm ­ ing, processing—but n one h ad the ap p eal o f the cred it u n io n . T h e reasons for that appeal are obvious. Even in tim es w hen w ork was generally available, low w age-earners in the M aritim es h a d difficulty securing credit and, in the m idst o f the D epression, they h ad virtually no opportunity at all. T u rn in g to cred it u n io n s to m eet this n eed, the A ntigonish leaders sought o u t A m erican ra th e r than Q udbec p rece­ dents. G iven the historic ties betw een the M aritim es and N ew E ngland, ties strengthened w hen unem ployed M aritim ers sought jo b s in the “ Boston states”, this dev elo p m en t was n atu ral enough. S tartin g from a

Crises, 1930-1934

133

New E ngland base, the A m erican cred it u n io n m o v em en t, u n d e r the leadership o f A. E. F ilene and R oy B ergengren, h ad grow n rapidly during the twenties. T he m ain organ izin g m ed iu m fo r the A m erican m ovem ent was the C redit U n io n N atio n a l E xtension B ureau, w hich had concentrated in the tw enties u p o n p re p a rin g a d e q u a te legislation for credit unions in num ero u s states. T old a b o u t these activities by the C o-operative U nion o f C an ad a, C oady and T o m p k in s re q u e sted Ber­ gengren to prepare legislation fo r p resen tatio n to th e N o v a Scotian governm ent. He did so, an d the legislation he in large p a rt p re p a re d was m ade into law in A pril 1932. T he N ova Scotian act was the th ird o f its k in d to be passed in C anada. T he other tw o acts h ad b een passed in O n ta rio a n d Q uebec, but only the Q uebec act h ad been used extensively. T h e N o v a Scotia act was thought to be the m ost progressive in the D o m in io n d u rin g the thirties. It perm itted any seven citizens living in a w ell-d efin ed neighbourhood o r b o u n d to g eth er by o ccu p atio n o r in stitu tio n to organize and operate a credit u n ion. It also estab lish ed a system o f com m ittees to supervise loans so as to reduce risk as m u ch as possible, and it perm itted credit unions to u n d ertak e an extensive ran g e o f activities approxim ating those o ffered by m ost b a n k s.25 C re d it u n io n s differed from banks, though, in th a t they w ere m e a n t to serve essen­ tially low -incom e people by em ph asizin g h ab its o f thrift, elem e n ta ry econom ic practices, and group responsibility. W ith in a few m o n th s o f the legislation being passed, fo u r cred it u n io n s h ad been estab lish ed in N ova Scotia. T hey w ere located at B road C ove, Inverness, R eserve Mines, and Sydney, the first th ree bein g co m m u n ity u n io n s o p en to all, the last being an in d u strial o rg an izatio n o f gas, electric, and streetcar w orkers. T hereafter, cred it u nionism grew quickly a n d by the end o f 1935 there w ere 29 o f them in N ova S co tia.26 S oon, the idea, publicized by the A ntigonish lead ers an d th e ir A m erican associates, would spread to the o th er E nglish-speaking p rovinces as well. Along with developing cred it unions, the E xtension D e p a rtm e n t encouraged oth er kinds o f co-operatives. A m ong fish erm en it stressed creation o f new m arketin g societies, especially fo r lobsters. A m ong farm ers, it prom oted co-operatives to d evelop u rb a n m ark ets notab ly those in the industrial centres o f C ap e B reton. T h e m ost im p o rta n t o f the farm co-operatives was the C ap e B reton Islan d P roducers, form ed in 1931, largely through the efforts o f M oses C oad y . T his o rg an izatio n had a short life (it ceased o p eratio n s in th e m id -th irties), b u t it was im portant as the necessary first serious a tte m p t at u n itin g the farm ers o f eastern N ova Scotia in a co -operative m ark etin g p ro g ram .

134

EA CH F O R ALL

F o r the m ost p art in d e p e n d e n t o f the A ntigonish m o v em en t an d the older consum er societies o f C ape B reton, the farm ers o f the A n n ap o lis Valley, N ew Brunswick, and Prince E dw ard Island h ad dev elo p ed o r were developing their ow n co-operative in stitu tio n s. T h e U n ited F ru it C om panies, though struggling successfully to p e n e tra te th e vital B rit­ ish apple m arket, had becom e the p re d o m in a n t m ark etin g o rg a n iz a ­ tion o f the valley, and it had becom e the m ajo r su p p lie r o f chem icals and equipm ent for its m em b er-co n tro lled locals.27 In Prince E dw ard Island the poultry industry h ad been organized, partly w ith the aid o f the federal D ep artm e n t o f A griculture. A nd, finally, o p e ra tin g throu ghout the region, the wool producers, organized tow ard th e end o f the F irst W orld W ar, w ithstood the d eclining p ro d u ctio n p ro b lem s o f the D epression an d generally co n tin u ed to serve its m em bers w ell.28 T here were significant ties betw een the A ntigonish m o v em en t and m ost o f these m arketin g societies. Indiv id u als from A ntigonish o r associated through the church connections, fo r ex am ple, h ad often relied on the existing co-operatives w h en ev er they tried to organize new ones. In 1930, the E xtension D e p a rtm e n t d ee p en ed its involve­ m ent by calling a special m eetin g o f existing societies at P o rt H aw kesbury to consider the bulk p u rch ase o f farm su p p lies for the farm ers o f eastern N ova Scotia. T h e m eetin g a p p o in ted a special co m m ittee, w ith A. B. M acD onald as secretary, to pu rch ase in b ulk q u a n titie s fo r the societies involved. T h e D e p a rtm en t also p lay ed a role, th o u g h cer­ tainly not equivalent to th a t o f the farm lead ers involved, in the creation o f C an adian Livestock C o-operatives (M aritim es) in 1929. This m arketing organization, p arallellin g d ev elo p m en ts on the P rai­ ries, was an am algam ation o f five livestock-m arketing societies an d soon becam e a significant force in the rural eco n o m y .29 A nd yet, despite its w idespread in volvem ent in ru ral d ev elo p m en t, the A ntigonish m ovem en t did n o t d o m in ate the ag ricu ltu ral societies in the early thirties, an d certainly not later. As w ith m a rk e tin g and supply societies in o th e r regions, the ag rarian o rg an izatio n s in the M aritim es were generally isolated a n d preo ccu p ied by th eir ow n p ro b ­ lems. T hus, they were relu ctan t to su p p o rt extensive d e v elo p m en t work even though som e individuals w ithin them , like W . H. M cE w en, m anager o f CLC, them selves h ad b ro ad co-o p erativ e sym pathies. T he A ntigonish m ovem ent nevertheless m ain ta in ed its goal o f a united, cohesive M aritim es m ovem ent. It tried to do so by d ev elo p in g training program s th at w ould b ring to g eth er b oth old an d new leaders o f the regional m ovem ent. In 1933 the E xtension D e p a rtm e n t e stab ­

Crises, 1930-1934

135

lished a school for the training o f m anagers an d directors o f co­ operative institutions. T he school, w hich o p e ra ted d u rin g the w inter m onths, concentrated upon practical subjects, such as arithm etic, p u b ­ lic speaking, and English, b u t it also focused on such theoretical subjects as civics and the principles o f co -o p eratio n .30 T h e instructors were draw n from the m ore successful co-operatives, for exam ple, W. C. Stew art from the British C a n ad ian an d W. H. M cE w en from the CLC (M aritim es); and from outside the region, n o tab ly G eo rg e K een from the C o-operative U nion in B rantford. T he school h ad a significant im pact. B ringing to g eth er co-operative people from the consum er, fishing, an d farm in g m ovem ents, it p re ­ pared the way for the d ev elo p m en t o f m ore u n ified p ro g ram s la ter in the decade and durin g the forties. M ost o f the stu d en ts w ho atten d ed th e,sch o o l later becam e involved in the new societies th a t subse­ quently em erged, societies for selling lobster or salm on, for buying different kinds o f supplies, or, even, for o p e ra tin g a coal m in e.31 It served the cause o f unity, too, by becom ing the seed b ed for the M aritim e C o-operative C ouncil, a loosely stru ctu red ed u catio n al o r­ ganization developed as a spokesm an fo r the regional m ovem ent. A nother accom plishm ent derived at least p artly from the school was a concerted effort to im prove co-operative law in N o v a Scotia. U n d e r the existing system, each distributive society was in co rp o rated u n d e r special ch arter w ithout ad eq u ate supervision. A t the 1934 school the leaders launched a strong cam paign fo r a new co -o p erativ e act and instructed G eorge K een to p re p are a b rie f on the subject. K een p repared his b rie f later th a t year, an d it was used to good ad v an ta g e by A. B. M acD onald, w ho secured the n eed ed chan g es in the p ro v in ­ cial legal system .32 E arly in 1936, the N ova Scotian g o v ern m en t a p ­ pointed R. J. M acSw een as In sp ecto r o f C o-operatives to m ak e sure that only organizations developed according to the R o ch d ale p rin ci­ ples called them selves co-operatives.33 T he statu to ry reform a n d his ap p o in tm en t m ade N ova Scotia alm ost a rival to S askatchew an in the e n couragem en t it gave to co -operative d evelopm ent. Finally, the school facilitated the slow in teg ratio n o f regional w holesale activities. In 1934, representatives o f CLC (M aritim es), C ape B reton Island Producers’ C o-operative, an d various sm all b u y in g clubs m et together while the school was being con d u cted . F o r th e first tim e the organization o f a m ulti-p u rp o se p ro d u c e r an d co n su m er w holesale was seriously discussed. A few m o n th s later, the SFX-sponsored C en ­ tral Purchasing C om m ittee turn ed its w ork over to the CLC, thereby giving the M oncton-based co-operative clea r co n tro l o f the w holesal­

136

EACH FO R ALL

ing field. In Ju n e 1935, CLC rep resentatives m et at M arg aree with officials from the U nited M aritim es F ish erm en , the British C an ad ian , and the Pictou U nited F arm ers to plan for th e co n so lid atio n o f N ova Scotian co-operative w holesaling activities. A co m m ittee w as a p ­ pointed to investigate the m atter, an d it rep o rted at a n o th e r m eetin g at Port T u p p er in the sam e m o n th . In h ib ited by the cau tio n o f the British C an ad ian ’s executive, the com m ittee reco m m en d ed slow dev el­ o pm ent until all m ajo r societies in the p rovince could be relied u pon to participate. T h e com m ittee p o in ted out, how ever, th at co-operatives in the eastern p art o f the province w ere a n n u ally p u rch asin g m ore than three m illion dollars o f supplies, en o u g h to w arra n t c o n tin u in g study o f w holesaling consolidation; enough, too, to p ro v e th a t by the m id-thirties the M aritim es m o v em en t h ad becom e firm ly established.

v It was difficult to believe th a t the m o v em en t w as as well established in O ntario d u ring the thirties. T h e tw o “ h in te rla n d ” co-operative m ovem ents in th a t p ro v in ce—am o n g farm ers in so u th ern O n ta rio an d industrial w orkers in n o rth ern co m m u n ities—w ere b oth b ad ly w eak ­ ened by internal difficulties, w hile the u rb a n co n su m er g ro u p s were still unable to develop loyal m em berships. T h e U n ited F a rm e rs’ C o ­ operative rem ained the d o m in a n t co -operative, though in com parison to the early tw enties it was sadly reduced. In d eed , by 1931 its a n n u al sales were only $7,000,000, a cataclysm ic d ro p from the $13,000,000 usual a decade earlier. S ym ptom atic o f the decline was th e collapse o f the U nited F arm ers o f O ntario : from 61,000 m em b ers in 1921 this educational body had fallen to less th an 7,000 in the early D epression years. As the two organizations declined, a revolt began a m o n g d issat­ isfied m em bers o f the co-ops generally those w ho criticized them fo r their faulty u n d erstan d in g o f co -operative principles. T his gro u p in ­ cluded som e old-tim ers, like W. C. G o o d a n d G eo rg e K een, b u t it also included som e forceful y o u n g er leaders, n o tab ly A gnes M acphail, R alph Staples, and H. H. H an n am . T h e first sign th at the reform side was grow ing ap p eared in 1930 w hen J. J. M orrison, long a su p p o rte r o f top-dow n co-operation, ad m itted th a t the earlier ex p ansio n ist p ro ­ gram s had been based on false prem ises. T his adm ission w as p a rtic u ­ larly im portant for the reform ers in the O n tario ag rarian m ovem ent. An enigm atic figure b u t one d evoted to the ag ra rian cause an d deeply respected in the O ntario countryside, M orrison h ad been the m ost im portant defender o f the original expan sio n ist p ro g ram .34

Crises, 1930-1934

137

In 1931 the reform cause picked up m o m en tu m . In Ja n u a ry 1931, the UFO sponsored a “ C o-o p erativ e S chool” at W oodstock featu rin g Agnes M acphail (then a vice-president o f the C o -o p erativ e U nion), G eorge K een, H. H. H an n am , an d the recently converted J. J. M o rri­ son. It was a m arkedly successful school attrac tin g fo u r h u n d red , mostly young, farm ers—som e three h u n d re d m o re th an h ad been expected. C onsiderable enthusiasm for the co -o p erativ e m o v em en t was engendered, enthusiasm carried o ver to a su b se q u en t co n ference assem bled in T oronto by the UFO in S e p tem b er o f the sam e y e a r.35 C alled to seek ways to rejuvenate the organized a g rarian m o v em en t in the province, this m eetin g attracted som e eighty farm lead ers and spokesm en. T he T o ro n to g ath erin g a d o p ted a gen eral p ro g ram o f reform , including u n em p lo y m en t relief, heavy incom e tax atio n , re­ duced interest on farm loans, a n d austerity in g o v ern m en t spending. In addition, and m ore im p o rtan tly fo r the co-operative m o v em en t, it em phasized the developm en t o f co-operatives as a p rin cip al m ean s o f com bating the co u n try ’s ills. All the m ajo r kinds o f co -o p e ra tiv e s— consum er, banking, and m a rk e tin g —w ere stressed in this m ore specific program , though it was th o u g h t th a t all could be in teg rated in to a general p attern o f developm ent. P erh ap s m ost significantly, in view o f the past centralizing tendencies o f the O n tario a g rarian m ovem ent, the m eeting further stipu lated th a t fu tu re co -o p erativ e d ev elo p m en t should be based on stro n g local societies, n o t u p o n a d o m in eerin g central bureaucracy. T he program s developed at the T o ro n to m eetin g becam e UFO p o l­ icy a t its 1931 an n u al m eeting. T o im p lem en t them as quickly as possible and to prep are the UFO fo r a m ore d y n am ic role, the sam e m eeting appointed a reconstruction com m ittee to suggest an y changes needed in the organ izatio n ’s basic structure. D o m in a ted by such re­ form ers as H. H. H an n am a n d W . C. G o o d , th e co m m ittee advocated increased pow er for the local associations, a re c o m m en d atio n th a t was im m ediately contested. T h ere h ad alw ays b een a stro n g prag m atic w ing in the farm ers’ m ovem ent, o n e th a t view ed c o n tem p tu o u sly the broad co-operative appro ach . Before 1932, w hen G ra h a m Spry an d Alan P launt took over The Farm ers' Su n , th a t jo u rn a l h ad often reflected the m ore pragm atic w ing. Its view was p erh a p s best su m m a­ rized and most logically p resented in a 1930 ed ito rial: The enthusiasm of those who claim for the co-operative movement a mo­ nopoly of Divine approval ought to be curbed. The so-called competitive system fails sadly at times but it cannot be condemned outright as a special

138

E A C H F O R A LL

contrivance of the devil and all his works___ There are some who talk glibly of eliminating the profit motive as though the co-operative system operates anywhere on a non-profit basis. If it be possible to determine the basic principle of the co-operative system, we should say it is not the eliminating of profits to the pockets of patrons rather than to the pockets of a favoured few. Outside of that, it is doubtful whether there is any other principle that is common to the co-operative movement at large___ The best that can be said of the co-operative system is that it is a common sense method of doing business, that, with proper understanding of its scope and limitations, may be applied in certain fields of industry and commerce with considerable success. To claim more than that for it at this stage is illadvised and illogical.36 As the D epression w orsened, the p rag m atic lead e rsh ip lost the p ro s­ perous environm ent th a t h ad ju stifie d th eir p osition in th e p ast. T hus, w hen the reconstruction com m ittee rep o rted in late 1932, the p ra g m a ­ tists were in a p o o r position to o ppose the co m m itte e ’s ideas. Briefly, the C om m ittee called fo r the exchange o f existing v oting sh ares for preference shares bearin g a fixed an d reaso n ab le rate o f interest. All voting shares in the fu tu re w ould be held by affiliated societies w ho would be entitled to p u rchase one fiv e-d o llar sh are for each o f its m em bers. Each society w ould be entitled to send d eleg ates in p ro p o r­ tion to its n u m b er o f m em bers to the a n n u a l m eeting o f th e new organization. T hese provisions, it w as hop ed , w ould p ro d u ce a true co-operative w holesale dem ocratically co n tro lled by th e p eo p le it served. Specifically, they w ould u n d erm in e the position o f investorm em bers and en hance the p o w er o f p artic ip a tin g m em b ers. T hey would also tend to increase the p o ten tial p o w er o f local societies within the organization by allow ing them to gain influence as their m em berships grew, a d ev elo p m en t th a t u ltim ately could w eaken the influence o f the T o ro n to executive.37 T he first reaction against these p roposals b ro k e ou t a t the 1932 annual m eeting o f the U FO . It was led by J. G . W hitm o re, o n e o f the com pany’s directors, an d by G o rd o n W aldron, the co m p a n y ’s solici­ tor. W hitm ore savagely an d p ersonally attack ed th e com m ittee, accus­ ing them o f prep arin g a shallow rep o rt, o f h av in g lim ited inv estm en t in the com pany, and o f having su b m itted excessive expense ac­ counts.38 W aldron, for his p art, view ed the co m m ittee’s re p o rt as an attem pted “steal” o f auth o rity by a “ gang o f a d v e n tu re rs” .39 As the argum ent becam e b itter an d as W . C. G o o d ’s integrity was ch al­ lenged, Agnes M acphail, with h er re m ark ab le gift o f o rato ry , cam e

Crises, 1930-1934

139

angrily to the defence o f the co m m ittee. A long w ith tw o visitors, W illiam Irvine an d R o b ert G a rd in e r, she sw ayed the co n v en tio n in favour o f the report in principle an d for the im m ed iate dism issal o f G ordon W aldron. It was the first m ajo r victory o f th e refo rm in g cause. T he victory proved to be transitory. D u rin g 1933, the UF C o-op leadership, alarm ed by the divisions created at th e 1932 m eeting, tried to subdue d ebate and to p o stp o n e decision on the reo rg an izatio n schem e. At the sam e tim e, the forces o f p rag m atism , led by J. G . W hitm ore, proposed th eir ow n schem e, w hereby th e UF C o -o p w ould becom e an ordinary capitalist entity w ith o u t an y preten ses to w ard co­ operative developm ent. T his p roposal, alth o u g h rejected by m ost m em bers, effectively stalem ated the discussion, because it once again m ade the executive w ary o f pressing the co -o p erativ e refo rm m e a ­ sures. In the m iddle o f the D epression, the UF C o -o p could n o t afford to antagonize a large n u m b e r o f its su p p o rte rs.40 T h e m ove to m ake the O ntario agrarian m o v em en t m ore co-operative h ad reach ed a point o f suspended an im atio n .41 N evertheless, despite this slow -dow n, significant changes h ad tak en place w ithin the UFO m ovem ent. T h e accep tan ce o f the p rin cip les o f reform by the m ajority o f d elegates at th e 1932 m eetin g a n d the general support o f the m ajority o f th e directo rs in d icated th e slow alteration o f the O n tario m o vem ent. T he su p p o rt o f m an y o f the strongest leaders, including J. J. M orrison, A gnes M acp h ail, H. H. H annam , an d W. C. G o o d , a n d the in creasin g sy m p ath y o f the younger leaders, such as L eo n ard H a rm an , R a lp h Staples, an d the “ Y oung C an ad a” m ovem en t generally, m e a n t th a t the reform m ove­ m ent w ould not die though tem p o rarily stym ied. In d eed , the UFO h ad becom e once m ore a focus for co -operative enthusiasm s. A m o n g o th er consequents, this revival b ro u g h t the d e v elo p m en t o f closer ties w ith the CUC42 and w ith o th e r co-operative institu tio n s, such as th e C red it U nion N ational A ssociation a n d C o -o p erativ e L eague o f the U n ited States.43 At the 1934 C o-operative U n io n C ongress, h eld in T o ro n to p artly to encourage closer connections w ith th e O n tario a g rarian m ovem ent, the U nited F arm ers played a conspicuous p art. H . H . H a n n a m , then UFO general secretary, was a fre q u en t p a rtic ip a n t at the C ongress itself, and especially at a special O n tario C o n feren ce im m ed iately after the Congress. In his speech to the la tte r m eeting, en titled “ W hen is a C o-operative R eally a C o-o p erativ e?” , he d e m o n stra te d a co m m it­ m ent to a nearly u to p ian a p p ro a c h .44 H e arg u ed th a t the C a n a d ia n

140

EA CH F O R ALL

co-operative m ovem ent in the past h ad been too co m m itted to p ro d u ­ cer co-operation, and he called for an im itatio n o f the D an ish m ove­ m ent in which the consum er and p ro d u c e r m o v em en ts h ad co m p le­ m ented each other. H e called on C an ad ia n farm ers to be in terested in consum er co-operatives because, as sm all businessm en p u rch asin g large quantities o f supplies, they h ad as m uch a t stake as u rb a n w ageeam ers. He also called on u rb an co -o p erato rs to be sy m p ath etic to producer societies because, in the long run, they w ould en su re orderly m arketing and the elim in atio n o f high charges by m id d lem en . H e concluded his speech by com m enting, .. . I would say that in attempting to decide when a co-operative is really a co-operative a simple rule would be this: When we attempt to supply our wants and attain good living by climbing on the backs o f our brothers, this is the way of competition. But when we join hands with our brothers—no matter what their class, creed, nationality, race or color—and together help each other to supply our wants and attain good living, that is the way of co­ operation.45 In 1935 the U nited F arm ers an d the CUC cam e closer to g eth er because J. G . W hitm ore was n o t re-elected to the fo rm er’s b o ard o f directors. His d ep artu re left the b o ard d o m in ated , alb eit tim idly, by the reform ers.46 T he refo rm -o rien ted b o ard did e n te r into extensive educational activities involving several co -o p erativ e org an izatio n s, and it gave the co-operative U nion considerable publicity, for exam ple, in its w eekly radio prog ram s b ro ad cast over a T o ro n to statio n .47 T he alliance was cem ented in A ugust 1936, w hen the UFO, the ed u catio n al wing o f the agrarian m ovem ent, jo in e d the CUC. G eo rg e K een was able to accept this n o n-econom ic o rg an izatio n w ith o u t difficulty, a precedent having been set for the affiliation o f a g rarian ed u catio n al organizations by the U nited F arm ers o f C a n a d a (S askatchew an Sec­ tion).48 T he UF C o-op also called on the CUC to help revitalize m an y o f its locals w hich had becom e m o rib u n d d u rin g th e d ifficult days o f the D epression. T he C o-o p ’s executive h o p ed th a t the U n io n ’s expertise would help the locals revive by en co u rag in g m em b e r co n tro l and increased educational activities. As O n tario ag ricu lture struggled to escape the stagnation o f the early thirties, the possibilities fo r the w holesaling o f agricultural needs becam e increasingly a p p a re n t, and the UF C o-op h oped th a t this d ev elo p m en t m ig h t h elp reverse a decade o f econom ic decline.

Crises, 1930-1934

14]

VI

T he rejuvenation o f the U n ited F a rm ers C o -o p erativ e w as p a rt o f a reaw akening o f co-operative en th u siasm s in O n ta rio d u rin g the early thirties. T he disastrous ex perim ents earlier in th e cen tu ry w ere reced ­ ing in the com m unal m em ory, a n d the d ifficulties created by the D epression, as elsew here, stim u lated an in terest in the m o v em en t. A num ber o f rural co-operatives in d ep e n d e n t o f the UF C o-op, though frequently using th at o rgan izatio n ’s w holesaling services, w ere begun. T he m ost dynam ic o f these was the F a rm e r’s C o -o p erativ e C o m p an y started in D undalk, G rey C ounty, in 1931. P ro m o ted by A gnes M acphail, H. H. H annam , G eorge K een, an d the local rep resen tativ e o f the D om inion D e p artm en t o f A griculture, it w as active in b o th the m arketing and farm -supply fields. As its p u rch asin g business grew , it united with nearby co-operatives in D u rh am , F lesh erto n , O rangeville, and D undalk, to form th e O n tario C o -o p erativ e W h olesale Society. This organization, developed alo n g lines suggested by G eo rg e K een, was a traditional w holesale ow ned by the m e m b e r societies a n d re­ sponsible to them ; it becam e, therefore, a w arn in g to the UF C o-op that reform was necessary o r co -o p erativ ely-m in d ed farm ers w ould develop their ow n new institutions. In urb an O ntario a sim ilar renew ed in terest w as discernible d u rin g the early thirties, though its im p act p roved to be fa r less p e rm an e n t. Buying clubs em erged in W indsor, L ondon, a n d O ttaw a an d at least three consum er groups ap p eared in T o ro n to . T h e first T o ro n to o rg a n i­ zations, the T oronto an d D istrict W holesale Society, o p erate d two stores in the city betw een 1930 a n d 1932. A fter its dem ise in the latter year, its m em bers, m ostly w om en, co n tin u ed to o p e ra te a bu y in g club, the T oronto R ochdale C o-operative Society, u ntil the late thirties. A nother buying club, the U n ited C o -o p erativ e Society o f O n tario em erged in the east end o f the city d u rin g 1932; a y e ar la te r it becam e a fully fledged store a n d chan g ed its n am e to th e E ast T o ro n to C o­ operative. T he third group was the C o -o p erativ e P u rchasers’ Society, a buying club form ed in 1933. In th a t sam e y ear, the th ree T o ro n to groups jo intly organized the T o ro n to a n d D istrict C o -o p erativ e C o u n ­ cil, a prom otional organization th a t e n co u rag ed new b u yin g clubs and began its ow n w holesaling activities. T he C ouncil was prim arily a m an ifestatio n o f co n su m er d issatisfac­ tion during the D epression. So too was the C o m m u n ity C o -op erativ e D airy w hich began o peratio n s in 1932. T his society resu lted from a speech m ade by G eorge K een in N ew m ark et in O cto b e r 1931. In his

142

E A C H F O R A LL

talk, K een had dep lo red w hat he con sid ered to be an excessive m a r­ gin betw een w hat a p ro d u c e r received an d a co n su m er p aid for milk. He d em onstrated th at co -operative dairies could greatly lessen the spread betw een producers and consum ers, using as exam ples the co­ operative dairies in W aukegan, Illinois, a n d in Sydney M ines, N ova Scotia, the latter being o p erated by the British C a n a d ia n C o -o p erative. W. C. G ood stressed the sam e them e at a later m eetin g o f consum ers in T o ronto , an d it was re p eated by som e C o-op U n io n supporters at yet an o th e r com m u n ity g ath erin g in Ja n u a ry 1932. T he result o f all these m eetings was th a t two com m ittees w ere struck to organize and to in corp o rate a co n su m ers’ d airy .49 In co n trast to the oth er T o ro n to groups, which consisted m ostly o f housew ives an d la ­ bourers, the dairy w as p ro m o ted by law yers, a fo rm er executive o f a private dairy, the secretary o f the T o ro n to D istrict L ab o u r C ouncil, a m anufacturer, and an au th o r-le c tu re r.50 All told, it seem ed like a prom ising ven ture based on a clea r need an d d eveloped by capable leaders. T he m ost unusual co -operative group th a t em erged in T o ro n to during the early thirties was the C a n a d ia n F u n d for the E stab lish m en t o f Integrally C o-operative A ssociations o f P roducers (R o b e rt O w en Foundation). T his organization d eveloped because o f the enthusiasm s o f academ ics, notably H enri Lassere, an in tern atio n ally know n Swiss co-operator, teaching at V ictoria C ollege. H e w as en co u rag ed in his activities by o th er academ ics, such as J. G. Perold, E. J. U rwick, E.A. Havelock, and G . Jackson, all teachers at the U niversity o f T oro n to . T he F o u n d atio n ’s original p u rp o se w as to enco u rag e p ro d u c e rs’ co­ operative enterprises o p erated so as to en su re in d u strial harm o n y betw een em ployers and em ployees. F ollow ing a p a tte rn estab lish ed by a sim ilarly m otivated A m erican organ izatio n , the C o lu m b ia C o n su m er C om pany o f Indianapolis, the F o u n d a tio n established a trustee fund to encourage specific projects.51 U nfortunately, the co n su m er groups, the dairy, and the R o b ert Owen F o u n d atio n all en co u n te red severe p ro b lem s in 1934 an d 1935. T he consum er groups, at first guided by the cau tio u s lead ersh ip o f the CUC, grew im p atien t w ith the slow progress they w ere able to achieve. At the 1934 CUC C ongress, held in th at city, they pressed for the rapid developm ent o f a provincial collective b u ying schem e to serve p artic u ­ larly the needs o f u rb an co-operatives. All o f the O n tario societies reacted favourably to this suggestion, h o p in g th at it w ould provide cheaper goods an d g rea te r stability.52 Som e o f the N o rth e rn O n tario societies were particularly interested in the idea because o f difficulties

Crises, 1930-1934

143

they had h ad in finding a d eq u ate w holesaling services. T h e T im m in s co-operative was the m ost im p o rta n t o f these, the p olitical divisions that h ad disturbed it d u rin g the p reced in g d ecad e h aving su b sid ed considerably. T he m ain drive for a w holesale, how ever, cam e from th e in creas­ ingly im p atien t T oronto co-operators. In p a rt th eir d e te rm in a tio n stem m ed from dissatisfaction w ith the cau tio u s C U C . In p a rt it cam e from alarm over the O n tario g o v ern m en t’s desire to reo rg an ize the dairy industry, a m ove th at was p articu larly im p o rta n t becau se it would affect the co-operative d airies th at h ad started to a p p e a r. At stake w ere not only the new org an izatio n in T o ro n to , b u t also two others, one operated by the T im m in s society a n d a n o th e r recently begun by a farm er-consum er gro u p in H am ilto n . T h e la tte r concern, organized initially in 1932 by m ilk drivers c au g h t in a b itte r strike, had expanded rapidly w ith the aid o f H u m p h rey M itchell, th e L iberal M P. In 1933, despite a severe price w ar w ith o th e r dairies, it had extended a two p er cent d ividend to its p atro n s and a two p e r cent bonus to its producers.53 T hese allo tm en ts alarm e d c o m p etin g dairies in the H am ilton area w ho co m p lain ed to the recently estab lish ed M ilk Board set up to stabilize the d airy industry. T h e b o ard supervised a com pulsory program w hereby w hole-m ilk p ro d u cers an d th e dairies annually negotiated m utually satisfactory w holesale an d retail prices. W hile restricting com petition, p e rh ap s to the d isad v an tag e o f the consum er, this system did seem to p lace m ilk p ro d u cers in a m ore secure position.54 T he policies o f the H am ilton C ream e ries cre a ted a p ro b lem because its dividend could be interp reted as a red u ctio n in the sta n d a rd prices established by the M ilk Board. T his “ red u c tio n ” w as m ad e possible because, unlike its com petitors, the cream ery sp e n t little on ad v ertis­ ing and paid a low, fixed interest on capital. O therw ise, its expenses were about the sam e, if not higher: for ex am ple, it p aid the p rev ailin g prices for its raw milk an d it p aid its em ployees slightly m ore than union rates.55 In this o ne instance, at least, the co -o p erativ e a p p ro ach had w orked well in a central C a n a d ia n city a n d h ad aro u sed th e fears o f its com petitors. T he Milk Board p rohib ited the use o f p atro n a g e d iv id en d s by dairies, but it quickly foun d o u t th at it did n o t legally have the p ow er to do so. T he H enry governm ent, how ever, rap id ly p ro v id ed th e b o ard with the necessary pow er, an d the L iberal o p p o sitio n —soon to be elected to office u n d er M itch H e p b u rn —did n o t protest. T h u s, at the 1934 O ntario conference the p ro b lem o f th e M ilk B oard a n d the

144

E A C H F O R A LL

unsym pathetic attitu d e o f the p rovincial p arties w ere the subjects o f considerable discussion. T he conference, em p h asizin g th a t the co­ operative position m ust be m ad e know n, ap p o in te d a co m m ittee to present th at position forcefully. T h e m ak e-u p o f the co m m ittee was significant in that it d em o n strated the ex ten t to w hich th e p rovincial co-operatives w ere w illing to w ork together. A long w ith K een an d G ood o f the C o-operative U n io n an d W. A. A m os, p resid en t o f the UF Co-op, the com m ittee in cluded four leaders o f the H am ilton C o ­ operative C ream eries, n otably S am u el Law rence, m l a , an d H u m p h rey M itchell.56 T he com m ittee launched a stro n g cam p aig n to change the M ilk B oard’s position. It ap p ealed fo r p o p u la r su p p o rt th rou g h th e daily press, and it m et w ith as m any O n tario p olitical leaders as possible. Basically it argued th a t governm ents in o th er countries, in clu d in g gov­ ernm ents generally unsy m p ath etic to co-operatives, had generally ex­ cluded them from price-fixing regulations. T h e co m m ittee n ev erth e­ less h ad little im pact, partly because the g o v ern m en t a n ticip ated d iffi­ culties in regulating p atro n ag e dividends, an d partly becau se it was influenced by som e farm ers w ho w ere heavy investors in private dairies. A nd, at least in the C o -o p erativ e U n io n ’s view, the M ilk Board was strongly influenced by the big ch ain dairies, such as Bor­ den’s, w ho were anxious to p rev en t the d ev elo p m en t o f co -operative com petitors. T he failure to change the m in d o f the M ilk B oard n o t only d o o m ed the slowly developing C o m m u n ity C o-o p erativ e D airy in T o ro n to ; it also triggered a revolt w ithin th e struggling O n ta rio co n su m er m ove­ m ent. Led by form er officials o f the T o ro n to D airy an d o f the U n ited C o-operative Society, a group o f d isg ru n tled co -o p erato rs fo rm ed the Provincial A dvisory C ouncil on C o -o p eratio n in early 1935. C h arg in g that the m oderate, doctrin aire CUC h a d n o t been aggressive enough, the C ouncil tried to assum e the roles o f advisor an d p ro p a g an d ist long played by the n ation al organization. T h e revolt failed, b u t before doing so it had badly divided the co n su m er m o v em en t in T o ro n to , a m ovem ent that initially h ad show n co n sid erab le p ro m ise.57 At about the sam e time, the g randiose pro g ram o f the R o b ert O wen F oundation began to d isintegrate. In 1932 it h ad started its first labour co-partnership, an o v eralls-m an u factu rin g factory called “W ork-T ogs” .58 W ith o ver $15,000 in start-u p capital (all o f it from H enri Lassere’s private funds), the co m p an y started prom isingly enough.59 It had also seem ed to be practically o rganized: u n d e r the original plan, the w orkers w ould g rad u ally gain co ntrol as they gained

Crises, 1930-1934

145

experience w orking w ith each other. In time, it was h oped, they w ould have com plete control as they gained experience w orking w ith each other. In tim e, it was hoped , they w ould have com plete co ntrol an d be able to pay back all the m oney originally invested by the F o u n d a ­ tion.60 T his em phasis on slow d ev elo p m en t was necessary, the o rg an ­ izers believed, because m ost C a n a d ian w orkers did n o t have “suffi­ cient co-operative spirit and intelligence” to d irect th eir ow n affairs p roperly.61 E ventually, too, it was hoped, the w orkers w ould see the universality o f the co-operative system an d w ould start com m u nal societies like those sponsored in the n in eteen th cen tu ry by R obert O w en.62 T he factory o p erated for less th an a year. A lthough the D epression was certainly a m ajor cause for its failure, the m o re im p o rta n t factors were p o or business policies follow ed by the co m p a n y ’s leaders. As a business, the com pany h ad a very co m plicated fin an cial stru ctu re. It lacked experienced leadership, an d failed to w atch accounts receiva­ ble. It had a high w age scale in a w age-depressed industry, an d it never developed a strong b o ard o f directors. W ithin a few m onths, thousands o f dollars h ad been lost, an d the co m p an y was forced to close. T he best o f intentions an d ad eq u a te fin an cin g w ere n o t enough to insure success. W ith the closing o f W ork-Togs, the R o b ert O w en F o u n d a tio n ra p ­ idly lost m om entum . In a way, it sym bolized th e m o v em en t in T o ­ ronto. A lm ost as quickly as it h ad ap p ea re d , the b u rst o f enthusiasm bom o f the D epression in the city h ad disin teg rated . T h e p eo p le and the projects m ay have been w orthy, b u t th e co n d itio n s w ere no t suitable. As in the earlier years o f the century, the co -o p erativ e m o v e­ m ent could not find a place in the C a n a d ia n h eartla n d . V II

T he econom ic pressures experienced by T o ro n to consum ers w ere also felt by th eir counterparts in V ancouver. T h e first m ajo r co -operative form ed in V ancouver in response to these pressures w as the C om m on G ood o r CG C o-operative. It was form ed in 1932, largely th ro u g h the efforts o f D. G. M acdonald, form erly an o rg an izer w ith the U n ited F arm ers o f British C olum bia. A co m b in atio n co n su m er society an d w orkers co-partnership, it o p en ed stores in V an co u v er an d N ew W est­ m inster, as well as a h om e centre an d m a rk et-g ard en in g business in the V ancouver area. T he em ployees w orking for the C o m m o n G o o d were paid a basic w age plus a p ercentage o f w h atev er surpluses w ere annually produced. T his m ethod o f o rg an izatio n w as p artly based on

146

EA CH FO R ALL

a theoretical co m m itm en t to w orker involvem ent; even m ore, it was an effort to find as m any jo b s as possible fo r som e o f the m any unem ployed w orkers on the west coast. T he second m ajo r u rb an co n su m er co-operative organized in V an ­ couver during the thirties was “ P lenty-for-A ll” . It was largely the w ork o f com m itted m em bers o f the CCF, follow ing th at p a rty ’s co n sid erab le success in the 1933 provincial election. C o n cern ed a b o u t high food costs and w anting to activate consum ers, several CCF leaders, in c lu d ­ ing A ngus and G race M clnnes, Lyle T elfo rd , a n d T. C. D earlove, turned to p rom oting co-operative projects. T elfo rd , an enigm atic broadcaster, enthusiast for n u m ero u s causes, o rg an izer o f CCF clubs and ultim ately m ay o r o f V ancouver, becam e p articu larly active. H e popularized the co-operative m ov em en t th ro u g h his rad io program s, even though he p rob ab ly w as n o t too certain w h at th e m o v em en t actually stood for, and, in the process, he b ecam e the d y n am ic force behind “ Plenty-for-A ll” . T hough frequently called a co -operative, this new org an izatio n , which em erged in 1934, ca n n o t really be classified as such. It was a private com pany w hich p rovided a sm all w areh o u sin g service th at concentrated on a lim ited stock o f goods. It p u rch ased supplies in bulk, packaged them u n d e r a P lenty-for-A ll label, a n d sold them to stores and buying clubs in the V ancouver area. M an y p riv ate grocers, recognizing the im m ediate p o ten tial o f such a system , stocked the com pany’s goods and, w ith T elfo rd ’s help, p ro m o te d th em e n th u siasti­ cally. R eferring to itself m isleadingly as a co -o p erativ e system , the com pany flourished, m aking a su rp lu s from tw o sources: the royalties it charged groups organized u n d e r the c o m p a n y ’s n a m e, a n d the m ark-up it charged on goods sold directly to in d e p e n d e n t sto rek eep ­ ers. T he surpluses, and they w ere fo r a w hile su b stan tial, p aid for T elford’s radio program , h elp ed sta rt la b o u r co -p artn ersh ip s, an d as­ sisted in the developm en t o f co-operative stores.62 T e lfo rd ’s p ro g ram s were p aid for regularly; the o th e r two projects w ere poorly fu n d ed even in the best o f tim es. Plenty-for-A ll typified the sem i-co-operatives th a t em erged because o f the aroused interests o f u rb an social dem ocrats. M uch o f the im p e­ tus for the T oronto co-operatives cam e from th e sam e k in d o f peo p le; so too did m ost o f the dynam ism b e h in d a series o f sm all c o -o p era­ tives in M ontreal.63 T h e basic p ro b lem fo r this type o f store was th at it did not fit easily into the p attern s o f d e v elo p m en t c o n tem p lated by existing co-operatives. Plenty-for-A ll, for ex am p le, scorned the g ra d ­ ualist techniques advocated by the C o m m o n G o o d co-operative, an d

Crises, 1930-1934

147

cared little th at its early successes b ad ly u n d e rm in e d the efforts o f the slightly older, m ore orthodox, co-operative. P lenty-for-A ll even com ­ peted effectively w ith the prestige item s on the C o m m o n G o o d ’s shelves, the “ fam ous” c w s tea o f the British w holesales; by p u rch asin g large consignm ents o f tea from in d e p e n d e n t trad ers an d m ark etin g it u nder its ow n nam e, it successfully u n d erso ld c w s tea sh ip p ed directly from co-operatively-ow ned tea g ard en s in C eylon.64 T he social dem ocratic-conventional co-operative d ich o to m y badly split the consum er m ovem en t in V ancouver as it did sim ilar m o v e­ m ents in the eastern cities. T h e consequences fo r the B ritish C o lu m ­ bian m ovem ent, how ever, w ere p articu larly significant, since a strong m ovem ent in the province’s m ain m etro p o lis m ig h t have p u lled to­ gether the developing co -operative en th u siasm s fo u n d elsew here am ong the province’s m iners, fisherm en, a n d farm ers. T h ere w ere, despite the depression, stable co-operative stores in N atal, R evelstoke, and A rm strong. T o g eth er they rep resen ted an a n n u a l trad e o f be­ tween $250,000 an d $300,000. In 1933 they w ere jo in e d by R ossland C o-operative T rad in g Society, a u n iq u e co -operative, at least in N o rth A m erica. It was organized, w ith the aid o f the C o -o p erativ e U n io n o f C anada, to m eet the tran sp o rtatio n n eed s o f m iners living in R ossland but w orking in T rail. By po oling th eir resources, th e m iners w ere able to purchase ten cars and to o p en th eir ow n service statio n thereb y providing them selves w ith ch eap tran sp o rta tio n to and from their work.65 T hese pockets o f co -operative en th u siasm in the m o u n tain s, however, could m eet only local needs; by them selves, they could not develop into the larger econom ic enterprises th a t w ould give signifi­ cant influence to the provincial co-operative m ovem ent. T he m ost dynam ic p a rt o f the B.C. m o v em en t in the early thirties was found in the coastal fishing villages. In 1927 F in n ish fish erm en in Sointula, building on co-operative trad itio n s c arried from th eir h o m e­ land, had developed a successful store. In 1929, they estab lish ed w hat was probably the first fishing co-operative on th e C a n a d ia n w est coast as a m eans o f escaping total d o m in an ce by the ca n n in g co m p an ies.66 This organization, called the B.C. F ish e rm e n ’s C o -o p erativ e, h ad co n ­ siderable success until adverse conditions, in tern a l bickering, and ju d g m en t errors forced its closing in 1932. Before that, though, the B.C. F isherm an’s encouraged the d ev elo p m en t o f an in d e p e n d e n t fisherm en’s co-operative in Prince R u p ert. C arefu lly o rg an ized with the aid o f the CUC, and w ith a lim ited m em b ersh ip body, Prince R upert F ish erm en ’s C o-operative was an alm ost im m ed iate success.67 So too was the K y u q u o t T raw lers’ C o -o p erativ e started in 1930 on

148

EA CH FO R ALL

northw est V ancouver Island.68 Both o f these new co -operatives, w hile prim arily interested in m ark etin g th eir fish, also o p e n e d successful stores. D ynam ic and resourceful, they becam e pow erful forces in th eir own com m unities, and they w ould u ltim ately play a m a jo r role in the fishing industries. But, like the stores, they could n o t serve as the focus o f an integrated provincial m ovem ent. In 1930, the m ost stable, ex perienced aspect o f the B.C. m o v em en t was located in the O k an ag an an d F raser R iver valleys. In 1927 the O kanagan fruit grow ers h ad pressured the p rovincial g o v ern m e n t into passing the Produce M ark etin g Act. U n d e r th a t act, each p ro d u c er would contribute to an equ alizatio n fu n d an d w ould agree to pricesetting by a com m ittee m ad e up o f g o v ern m en t ap p o in tee s and grow er representatives.69 O ne y ear later, the d airy co-operatives in the F raser Valley, led by the F raser V alley M ilk P roducers, lobbied through the legislature an act establishing a d airy m ark etin g b oard. Both o f these experim ents in g o vern m en t-reg u lated , co -o p erativ e m a r­ keting w ere in o p eratio n by the m iddle o f 1930. T he move tow ard g overnm ent supervision p ro d u ced co n sid erab le controversy. Som e in d ep en d e n t p ro d u cers looked u p o n the co m p leted program as subsidization o f the inefficient; m id d lem en w ere alarm ed by the province-w ide o rganization o f pro d u cers; an d co n su m ers w ere concerned that food prices m ight be in creased .70 T h o u g h it first a p ­ peared as if the fruit grow ers an d m ilk p ro d u cers w ould be able to overcom e this opposition, the d eep en in g d epression m ad e it m ore difficult to placate the consum ers an d all the pro d u cers. In 1931, an in d ep en d e n t fruit grow er, en co u rag ed by o th e r o p p o n en ts to the d e ­ velopm ent o f a b oard , carried his p ro test to the S u p rem e C o u rt. T h e court, reversing previous decisions o f B.C. courts, declared th e 1927 P roduce M ark eting Act ultra vires because it affected sh ip m en ts o f fruit outside the province.71 D esperately b u t unsuccessfully, the dairy producers reacted to this setback for the fruit grow ers an d a ttem p ted to am en d their act an d forestall a sim ilar fate. N evertheless, in 1932 a case against the D airy Products Sales A d ju stm en t Act w as tak en to the Judicial C om m ittee o f the Privy C ouncil. T here, th e act was declared ultra vires since the p ay m en t system devised in it a p p ro x i­ m ated a form o f taxatio n that was beyond the p o w er o f the provincial governm ent to im pose.72 T he judicial decisions threw the tw o farm in g g roups in to d isarray. The co-operatives, believing th a t govern m en t-su p erv ised m ark etin g through co-operative o rganization was the m ost p re fe ra b le system , had throw n all their efforts into p ro m o tin g it. W h en they failed they

Crises, 1930-1934

149

were faced with the task o f reb u ild in g institu tio n s h a n d ic a p p e d by an aroused opposition an d deb ilitated by ja u n d ic e d m em b ersh ip s. F aced by such adversity, the co-operatives w ere n atu rally preo ccu p ied an d little interested in creating a cohesive provincial m ovem ent. C o n tin u ­ ing their experiences o f the tw enties, -B.C. co -o p erato rs w ere well established b u t isolated an d fragm ented. VIII

Despite these adversities and serious setbacks in B.C. a n d elsew here, the E nglish-C anadian co-operative m o v em en t h ad w eath ered the p er­ plexing early years o f the D epression w ith su rp risin g resiliency. T he difficulties encountered by the w h eat pools h a d been disastrous, bu t those organizations h ad been too successful an d too im p o rta n t to disappear. Sim ilarly, o th er m ark etin g o rg an izatio n s h ad been forced to retrench, and the stores h ad been forced to p o stp o n e expansion, but, in nearly all cases, they h a d show n resourcefulness an d strength. It was in the sudden cessation o f grow th ra th e r th an in ban k ru p tcies, in fact, th at the D epression h ad its m ost negative effects. O n the positive side, the adversity o f the early D epression created a m ore m ilitant sense o f m ovem ent, especially in th e M aritim es a n d on the Prairies. M ore co-operatives becam e co n cern ed a b o u t ed u catin g their m em berships and the general public. M ore co -o p erato rs b ecam e convinced th at their m ethods did form so m eth in g d ifferen t from c ap i­ talism and m ost form s o f socialism . M ore jo in t efforts w ere u n d e r­ taken by co-operative institutions an d co -operatively m in d ed in d iv id u ­ als. And, quite significantly, m ore kinds o f co-operatives beg an to ap p ear as increasingly larger n u m b ers o f C an ad ia n s becam e interested in the m ovem ent’s possibilities. T h e decade o f the thirties n atu rally focused attentio n on econom ic issues in a w ay the am o rp h o u s q uality o f the reform m ovem ents in the tw enties h ad not done. T hus, the English-C anadian m ovem ent gained new m o m e n tu m at a tim e w hen som e o f its institutions w ere faltering. T he co ncrete results o f these gains w ould be show n in the last h a lf o f the decad e, an d , especially, in the forties.

CH A PTER EIG H T

Positive Responses to Adversity, 1935-1939 Onward all y e brothers M arching toward the goal When Co-operation Enters every soul. Competition never can “Gainst this fo rce w ithstand We are pressing forw ard To the Brotherhood o f Man. Onward then y e people Join our happy throngs Help Co-operation R ight the m any wrongs. Onward fellow workers Toward a brighter day When the M aster's teachings W ill have had their sway. M an with man shall ever then Live in H arm ony “Each fo r all, and all f o r each ” In practice, then will be. Onward then y e people Join our happy throngs Help Co-operation R ight the m any wrongs

—

W ritten by Mrs. R. M cD onald, H am ilton, To be sung to the tune o f ' ‘O nward Christian Sold iers” T he C an ad ian C o-operato r, J u ly 1938, p. 28.

N o t all C an ad ian regions escaped at the sam e tim e from the d esp o n ­ dency o f the G re a t D epression. N o r was the low p o in t necessarily in the early thirties; for som e areas, in fact, the years betw een 1936 and 1939 were the w orst o f all. A nd, fo r som e, the thirties w ere m erely a continuation o f w hat the tw enties h ad been. W h en faced by such hardships, C anadians h ad only tw o altern ativ es: they co u ld resign them selves to an im poverished fate, o r they could resolve to change the econom ic o rd er in society. P erhaps because m any w ere really 150

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

151

“ new p o o r”, and thus no t cau g h t in the vicious cycle o f several generations o f poverty, the n um b ers o f C an a d ia n s in terested in such reform grew rapidly d u rin g the late thirties. T h e grow th o f new p o liti­ cal parties was one m anifestatio n o f th e grow ing reform spirit; so too were the grow th o f trades unionism a n d the m o u n tin g pressures fo r a w elfare state. As m uch as any o f these, though, the co-operative m o v em en t grew because so m any C an ad ian s w ere fru strated w ith th e ir lot. T h e m ost rem arkable m anifestation o f grow th w ithin the m o v em en t was the decline o f divisions th at had long ch aracterized C a n a d ia n co-operative developm ent. M ore than ever before, old b arriers disin teg rated , v en er­ able rivalries subsided, and a new sense o f m o v em en t prev ailed . M ili­ tant young m en and w om en a p p ea re d in all co -o p erativ e circles, and they were in m any instances en th u sed a b o u t the possibilities o f co­ operatives w orking together. T h e grow th was p a rticu larly a p p a re n t in rural areas w here the collapse o f social a n d econom ic in stitu tio n s forced m any people to think a b o u t d ev elo p in g a ran g e o f new co­ operatives. O ut o f this renew ed vig o u r em erged n u m ero u s initiatives for form ing electric co-ops, health centres, recreatio n al co-ops, in su r­ ance co-ops, and farm m ach in ery co-ops. M ost o f th e new o rg an iza­ tions were developed by a sm all n u m b e r o f enthusiasts, a ch a racteris­ tic that helped to build ties betw een the in stitu tio n s th a t w ere form ed. M eanw hile, in the tro u b led cities new co -o p erativ e initiatives w ere begun, though because o f w eaker bases they d id n o t achieve th e sam e success as their rural cou n terp arts. N evertheless, th e grow ing u rb an enthusiasm linked w ith the surging ru ral interest m e a n t th at the E n­ glish-C anadian m ovem ent took on new d ynam ism an d new d irection in the late thirties. I As in the past, the P rairie co -operative m o v em en t m ad e the g reatest progress. T he w heat pools, for exam ple, a fter th e setbacks e a rlie r in the decade, m ade a rem ark ab le recovery. F o llow ing the a p p o in tm e n t o f J. I. M cFarland, they no longer w ere directly involved in the sale o f w heat, and they becam e essentially g rain -elev ato r businesses. T hus, like the U nited G rain G row ers, they b ecam e service in stitu tio n s com ­ peting on the basis o f cost, m em b er control, an d elev ato r service. T he m ajor problem the pools possessed in these areas, it seem s, lay in m aintaining som e u nprofitab le elevators. T h e en th u siasm o f the 1920s had encouraged the pools, both leaders an d m em bers, to build eleva­ tors in m arginal ag ricultu ral areas. By the 1930s these elevators had

152

EACH FOR ALL

becom e severe drains on the com panies, an d it w ould be several years before the systems could be rationalized. T he m ost d ram atic d ev elo p m en t o f the d ecad e in the w h eat econ­ om y was the creation o f the C an a d ia n W h eat B oard in 1935. T h e C onservative governm en t o f R. B. B ennett h ad started o u t in 1930 as a strong su p p o rter o f the W innipeg G rain E xchange; certain ly M c­ Farland, w hen he was ap p o in ted , w as anxious to p ro tect th a t in stitu ­ tion. G radually, though, O ttaw a lost p atien ce w ith the E xchange. Both M cFarland and B ennett cam e to believe th a t the p riv ate trad e ad opted an overly selfish attitu d e in d ifficult tim es d u rin g 1933 and 1934. T he issue crystallized w hen M cF a rlan d atte m p te d to stabilize the m arket in 1934 by h o ld in g back surpluses a n d by reco m m en d in g reduced acreages for succeeding crop y e ars.1 W hen the p riv ate trade rebelled at these initiatives, the g o v ern m en t started to change its view o f the m arket system. F inally, in 1935, am id the B ennett g o v e rn m e n t’s late legislative packages, a bill was in tro d u ced to establish a W h eat Board. T he act, though it did not w in seats for B ennett in the su b se­ q u en t election, was p o p u la r am o n g farm ers a n d especially those in the pools. F o r m any old er farm ers, in fact, it m ark ed the successful term i­ nation o f fifteen years o f effort. Inevitably, the vitally im p o rta n t W h eat B oard b ecam e em b ro iled in politics. T he B oard originally w as a C onservative p ro ject d eveloped at least partly in hopes o f gaining votes in the W est d u rin g th e 1935 election. F or this reason a n d because m an y w estern L ib erals su p ­ ported the open m ark et in p rinciple, the B oard m et d e term in e d o p p o ­ sition. T he forem ost critic o f the B oard w as J. L. R alston w ho received considerable advice from T. A. C re ra r an d J. R. M u rray , a fo rm er em ployee o f the U nited G rain G row ers. W h en the L iberals w on the election o f 1935, M cF arlan d a n d his associates were rep laced by M urray an d a new slate o f com m issioners. T h e resu ltin g anim osities prom pted the governm ent to a p p o in t a R oyal C om m ission u n d e r Justice W. F. A. T urg eo n to investigate the en tire grain trad e . T h e com m ission was unsym pathetic to the fa rm e r su p p o rt fo r the B oard and recom m ended in its 1938 R ep o rt a retu rn to the o p e n -m a rk e t system. T he resultant d e b ate stirred by this re co m m en d atio n w ould not term inate for several years. At first, it ap p eared as if an ti-b o ard forces, using the T u rg eo n report, w ould win an easy victory. P ersistent farm er pressure, how ­ ever, m ade it very difficult to rem ove th e B oard. T h e U n ite d G rain G row ers and the pools strongly d efen d ed the b o ard as did th e w estern prem iers. Late in 1938 Jo h n Bracken, p rem ier o f M an ito b a, organized

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

153

an interprovincial conference in W innipeg to m arshal su p p o rt for the board, especially in view o f the g lu tted m ark et situ atio n . T h e first o f the im portant w estern Liberals to criticize the g o v ern m en t w as W. R. M otherw ell, b u t he was soon follow ed by m ost ran k -an d -file Prairie Liberals. U ltim ately, all o f this ag itatio n m ad e it im possible fo r the Liberals to destroy the B oard as m an y Party leaders h ad originally intended to d o .2 T he p o in t was th a t the P rairie a g rarian a n d co­ operative organizations h a d becom e too big to be ignored, the Board too im p o rtan t to be discontinued. T he gradually solidifying position o f the W h eat B oard c o n trib u ted to the grow ing sense o f w ell-being to be fo u n d in the P rairie co­ operative m ovem ent d u rin g the late 1930s. F in an c ia l p ro b lem s re­ m ained, o f course, and they w ere p articu larly acute in the dust-bow l areas in 1938; but, generally, the reg io n ’s co-operatives took on new life as the decade cam e to a close. T h e increased vitality w as espe­ cially evident in the educatio n al pro g ram s u n d e rtak en by the P rairie co-operatives. Saskatchew an was the lead e r in this field o f activities, in part because o f the aggressive activities o f u to p ian co -o p erato rs. In 1936 the province’s m ain co-operatives form ed a section in the C o­ operative U nion o f C an ad a, an d it soon b ecam e an im p o rta n t catalyst in expanding the m ovem ent. T h o u g h su p p o rted by all elem ents o f the provincial governm ent, the section relied heavily u p o n tw o o rg an iza­ tions, the co-operative branch o f the p rovincial g o v ern m en t a n d the Saskatchew an W heat Pool. T h e pool, its activities reduced by its w ithdraw al from m arketing activities in 1930, h ad su rp lu s energy and m anpow er to devote to co-operative causes. In p articu lar, it h ad its fieldm en, a force o f enthusiastic an d w ell-eq u ip p ed m en to d ev o te to the co-operative cause: eq u ip p ed w ith cars, m o tio n -p ictu re projectors, portable screens, films, and an asso rtm en t o f literatu re, the fieldm en becam e essentially co-operative organizers in the late th irties.3 At the sam e time, the section u n d erto o k o th e r kinds o f ed u catio n al activities. In 1937 it p rom pted the U niversity o f S askatchew an to hire W. B. Francis, a R egina law yer, to teach a course on co -o p eratio n . In the sam e year, the section b egan to sp o n so r sh o rt a n n o u n cem en ts and addresses on co-operation over local rad io stations. W hile it is d ifficult to estim ate the im pact o f these activities, they u n d o u b te d ly d id help the m ovem ent consolidate its position an d develop new initiatives. T he grow th is suggested by g o v ern m en t statistics: by 1937, th ere were 301 trading organizations, 130 co m m u n ity hall societies, 14 co m b in a ­ tion trading and com m unity halls, 20 co m m u n ity p astu re associations, and one reservoir project.4

154

EACH FOR ALL

On the practical side, the section w as p rim arily co n cern ed w ith expanding the w holesale. In 1936 the w holesale sold $530,000 w orth o f m erchandise,5 but it was still u n d erta k in g a bro k erag e business and was not conducting a w arehousing o p eratio n on any scale. W areh o u s­ ing required a large volum e o f trad e to be feasible, a n d the section devoted m uch o f its tim e to dev elo p the n eed ed volu m e o f business from its m em bers. In retu rn , the w holesale a b d ica ted som e o f its educational and advisory activities, h an d in g th em o ver to the section. This unburd en in g also allow ed the w holesale to co n cen trate on g ain ­ ing the support o f co-operatives n o t yet using its services. R ather quickly, these efforts g ained results. Betw een 1935 a n d 1939 the w holesale’s an n u al tu rn o v er increased from $440,000 to a b o u t $1,500,000.6 T he grow ing co nsu m er m o v em en t w as one source for this expansion, but the m ost im p o rta n t in g red ien t was the m oral an d m onetary su p p o rt given by the p ro d u c e r co -o p erativ es.7 Since 1933 the w holesale and the pools h ad been co -o p eratin g in the p u rch ase o f bulk supplies, notably b in d er tw ine p u rch ased from B ritish m an u fa c­ turers an d petroleum a n d coal p u rch ased locally. B uilding on this relationship was difficult because o f vested interests on b o th sides, b u t as the w holesale displayed its stren g th an d as the pools refrain ed from attem pting com plete d o m in atio n , a satisfactory relatio n sh ip em erged. By the late thirties, pool leaders, both p rovincial an d local, w ere nearly all sym pathetic to co n su m er co -o p eratio n , an d they recognized the value o f having the w holesale supply m ost farm -su p p ly item s.8 T he grow ing bonds betw een the various aspects o f the m o v em en t served Saskatchew an co-o p erato rs well w hen general p ro sp erity re­ turned in 1939. In ad d itio n to th e grow th experienced by th e w h o le­ sale the tu rn -aro u n d was also d em o n strated by the im p ro v in g position o f the producer pools.9 T he w h eat pool h ad a su rp lu s o f $860,000 in its o perations in 1939 in com parison to a deficit o f $69,000 in 1938,10 while the Livestock Pool increased its sales by $515,000 to nearly $3,200,000." T hus, w hen the w ar started , all kinds o f co-operatives were pushing rapidly forw ard, ju s t in tim e to take m ax im u m a d v an ­ tage o f the 1939 w h eat crop, the best h arvest in ten years. T h e resultant prosperity, w hich co n tin u ed th ro u g h o u t the w ar years, be­ cam e the stabilizing factor b eh in d the extensive co-o p erativ e d ev elo p ­ m ent o f the 1940s. W ith the return o f prosperity, the S askatchew an m o v em en t b egan to en ter new fields. In 1939, fo r exam ple, the w holesale p u rch ased a flour mill at O utlook, S askatchew an, so th a t it could b e tte r m eet the needs o f the societies it served. C ap ab le o f p ro d u cin g 500 bags o f

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

155

flour and 200 bags o f feed a day, this m ill was the largest co u n try mill in W estern C anada. A fter the m ill was o p eratin g , the w holesale helped each society construct storage facilities so th a t custom ers could secure flour w henever they w anted a n d not have to o rd e r their su p ­ plies, as in the past, on a on ce-a-y ear b asis.12 W ith this v en tu re, the Saskatchew an co-operators h ad en tered into m an u factu rin g , a p a rt o f their business which w ould becom e increasingly im p o rta n t in later years.13 T he prosperity o f late 1938 a n d all o f 1939 greatly assisted the developm ent o f the Saskatchew an section. F ollow ing its creatio n , the section had been forced to lim it its activities because b ad crops had m eant little surplus capital in the countryside. Indeed, the section, in 1937 and 1938, was hard-pressed to u n d e rta k e even its lim ited service objectives, let alone initiate new projects to h elp the p rovincial m ove­ m ent. T he resulting frustratio n p ro d u ced a series o f changes w hen the section m et as p art o f the a n n u al m eetings o f the S askatchew an C o­ operative T rading A ssociation, held in R egina on Ju n e 27-28, 1939.14 Led by R obert M cK ay, the m an ag e r o f the S askatchew an w holesale, the section decided to establish a m ore p e rm a n e n t stru ctu re w ith a full-tim e secretary, office assistance, a n d an a d e q u a te bu d g et. A fter som e m inor changes in the C o-operative U n io n ’s rules an d an ag ree­ m ent w hereby the section an d the n atio n al office w ould sh are fees raised in the province, the section b ecam e form ally o rganized th rough a series o f m otions on Ju n e 29 a t a U n io n C ongress in W in n ip e g .15 Thus, the Saskatchew an co-operative m o v em en t em erged o u t o f the thirties w ell-organized, effectively led, a d eq u ately financed, a n d co n fi­ dently optim istic. It h ad a surfeit o f o rganizations, b u t th ere was co­ operation betw een m ost o f them , a n d th e co n su m e r-p ro d u c er conflict was m inim al. Y oung, com p eten t executives w ere scattered th ro u g h o u t the province’s co-operative o rganizations, an d they w ould p lay a vital role in the n ational m ovem en t d u rin g the forties a n d fifties. S ask atch ­ ewan co-operators h ad seen the m erit o f co -o rd in atio n b efo re th eir colleagues elsewhere, h ad w orked h a rd e r for it, a n d h ad p ro d u c e d a stronger m ovem ent because o f it. II

D eveloping a strong provincial section in A lb erta w as a m ore difficult process. An A lberta section o f th e C o -o p erativ e U n io n h a d been established, but it h ad few o f the assets o f its S askatchew an c o u n ter­ part. F o r exam ple, it did n o t have a t its co m m a n d th e fieldm en o f the A lberta w heat pool. Section o rganizers w ere n o t im pressed by the

156

E A C H F O R A LL

fieldm en,16 and in turn the w h eat pool retain ed its suspicions a b o u t organizers o f co-operative stores. Sim ilarly, the w holesale w as in a difficult position because it too w as estran g ed from the p ro d u cer organizations. In contrast to S askatchew an, the A lb erta Pool, the UGG, and UFA retained com plete co n tro l over farm er supplies even in areas w here consum er societies existed. T his situ atio n seriously u n d erm in ed the w holesale’s activities an d forced it to rely on the lim ited co n su m er needs o f its m em ber societies.17 In a sense, th erefo re, A lb erta co n ­ sum er co-operators w ere struggling d u rin g the thirties w ith the sam e problem s their Saskatchew an b re th re n h ad e n co u n te red a d ecad e e a r­ lier. O perating u n d er these difficult conditions, the A lb erta section m ad e slow progress. N evertheless, in late 1935, it began to m uster, w ith som e urgency, w hat strength it could. T h e reason w as a grow ing concern ab o u t the intentions o f b o th the UFA an d the A lb erta Social C redit m ovem ent. In an effort to co u n teract Social C re d it’s econom ic program , the UFA, in 1936, ad o p te d a p latfo rm em p h asizin g co-operative developm ent. It chose this course because it believed th a t the Social C redit econom ic pro g ram w ould soon prove im possible a n d that an alternative set o f econom ic proposals w ould be able to attract the su p p o rt o f A lbertan v o ters.18 T hus, the UFA increased its efforts to organize petroleum an d b u lk-com m odity locals, in the process step ­ ping up its co m petition w ith co n su m er societies. At the sam e tim e, the recently elected Social C red it g o v ern m en t started to look confusedly at co-o p eratio n . D u rin g th eir early, u n cer­ tain m onths in office, the Social C rediters a p p e a re d to be th in k in g o f starting large-scale co-operative un d ertak in g s. A b erh a rt h im self looked into uniting his p arty ’s econom ic efforts w ith the w holesale, b ut rejected the idea because o f the la tte r’s-fin a n c ia l d ifficu lties.19 A berhart and his p arty then considered o rg an izin g a province-w ide “ co-operative” society u n d e r the co ntrol o f existing retailers a n d in ter­ ested consum ers. Essentially a reaction against eastern w holesalers, this plan envisioned the estab lish m en t o f a p rovincial w holesaling agency at L ethbridge. T h e w holesale w ould serve all varieties o f retail outlets which w ould be organized efficiently so th a t each tow n w ould have the m inim um n u m b er o f grocery, h ard w are, a n d d ru g stores needed to serve its pop u latio n . By this p lan , th e Social C red it m ove­ m ent sought to protect the m erchants, pro v id e for som e co n su m er control, elim inate dependence u p o n the eastern w holesalers, a n d m in i­ mize the cost o f distrib u tin g co n su m er goods.20 O ne possible subsidiary idea to this p lan was d ev elo p in g a trad in g

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

157

relationship with the British co-o p erativ e w holesales. G eo rg e K een was partly responsible for this idea, as he ad v an ced it first in July 1936, d u rin g an interview with L ucien M aynard, a p ro m in en t m em ­ ber o f the Social C redit g o v ern m en t.21 M ay n ard seized upo n K e e n ’s idea, seeing in it a chance to establish a b a rte r system w hereby A lberta agricultural goods could be ex changed fo r articles m a n u fa c ­ tured by the British w holesales. M ay n ard contacted a visiting d eleg a­ tion o f Scottish w holesale directors an d invited them to m e et w ith the prem ier. T he m eeting was a disaster: A b erh a rt becam e ill an d could not attend, his representative w ould n o t talk a b o u t reciprocal trade, was rath er rude, an d told the directors, “ W e d o n ’t w ant y o u r g o o d s— we w ant to m an u factu re for ourselves.” 22 T he sam e am bivalent, b ew ildering ap p ro ach characterized th e So­ cial C red it attitudes tow ard the m o v em en t generally. O n the one hand, a governm ent m em b er could state th at “ . . . it was the p u rpose o f Social C redit to give d ividends an d th at co -o perato rs w ere w orking in harm ony with Social C red it p rin cip les” .23 O n the o ther, som e So­ cial C redit spokesm en believed th a t co -o p eratio n , especially the Brit­ ish w holesales, w ere tools o f the “ S o cialist-C o m m u n ist-F in an ce-R in g T rades U nion-C artel” w orld p lo t.24 T he uncertainty ab o u t Social C red it in ten tio n s drove m em b ers o f the A lberta section into action. T h ey realized th a t if they d id not move quickly then parts o f th eir m o v em en t w ould be eith er destroyed o r absorbed by Social C redit. T h u s in late 1936 the section em b ark ed upon an am bitious ed ucatio n al p ro g ram to m ak e its position b etter know n th ro u g h o u t the province. It sp onsored rad io pro g ram s featu r­ ing speeches w ritten by leading co -o p erato rs inclu d in g J. P. W arbasse, H enry J. M ay, and G eorg e K een .25 It also u n d e rto o k to lobby, with considerable effectiveness, against p rojected g o v ern m en t a ttem p ts to set price-fixing codes. T hese attem p ts, responses to the 1935 F ed eral Price S preads C om m ission, tried to protect sm all retailers from the “ loss lead ers” used so effectively by chain -sto re co m p etito rs.26 Be­ cause o f the section’s lobbying, E. C. M anning, given responsibility for elim inatin g “ loss lead ers”, m ad e certain th a t co-operatives were not adversely affected.27 As the Social C redit g ov ern m en t beg an to stabilize itself, m uch o f its possible threat to co-operation d isap p eared . T h e p lan to organize the retail trade w ithin a m e rch an t-co n su m er “ co -o p erativ e” was d ropped, though it did pro d u ce the A lb erta C o -o p erativ e C o n su m er and M arketers Ltd., a m ixed w holesale-retail en terp rise linked to the Social C redit League. T h e a c c m avow edly no n -p o litical, w as d o m i­

158

EACH FOR ALL

nated by traditional retailers, b u t its decisions w ere in flu en ced by consum er representatives. Its b o ard was m ad e up o f seven retailers and a governm ent official, w hile its stockholders w ere n early all co n ­ sum ers. T he ACCM w as not, how ever, given extensive p o w er by the governm ent, and it h ad to co m p ete w ith o th e r retail o rganizations. It had som e success in establishing locals, n o tab ly in areas th a t strongly supported the Social C red it m ovem ent, b u t it n ever b ecam e the allpow erful institution once fearfully a n ticip ated by A lb erta co-operators. In fact, the election o f the Social C red it g o v ern m en t ultim ately benefited the A lberta m ovem ent considerably. O ne o f th e greatest obstacles to sound co-operative d ev elo p m en t in the province h ad been the absence o f a strong g o v ern m en t official gen u in ely in terested in consum er co-operation. T h ere h ad been, since the 1920s, a S upervisor o f C o-operative Activities, b u t the m en h o ld in g th a t office h ad never show n as broad interests in the m o v em en t as h ad th eir M a n ito b a and Saskatchew an counterparts. K e en ’s itineraries, fo r ex am ple, h ad never been financed o r organized by the A lb erta gov ern m en t, a n d n o ex ten ­ sive educational program s h ad ever been lau n ch e d . In stead , the offi­ cial was usually too preoccupied w ith supervising q u asi-co -o p erativ e organizations and p ro d u cer groups to take m uch in terest in co n su m er co-operation.28 Shortly after the Social C red it assu m p tio n o f p o w er this situ atio n was altered. In late 1936 the g o v ern m en t a p p o in ted A. H. C hristensen as the Supervisor o f C o-operative Activities. C h risten sen w as a D ane with eleven years’ experience in the D anish m o vem ent, m ost o f it w ith the D anish Bacon C o -o p erativ e.29 W hile p rim arily in terested in p ro ­ ducer co-operation, he was, u nlike his predecessors, also interested in the consum er m ovem en t.30 Slowly and laboriously, he m anaged to provide som e consistent lead ersh ip for the A lberta m o v em en t even though he had alw ays to co n ten d with the deep divisions in the province am ong consu m er co-operators. Social C red it su p p o rters, and producer co-operators. O ne o f the C hristensen ’s first tasks was the w riting o f a new p ro v in ­ cial co-operative act. T he act in force w hen he arrived (a 1913 act am ended m any tim es) was vague, inefficient, an d , from the co-operative view point, unsound. It did not, for ex am ple, specify how the surpluses o f a co-operative v en tu re should be used, th ereb y p erm ittin g som e A lberta societies to return surpluses to m em b ers on th e basis o f capital and not on the basis o f p atro n ag e.31 In d raw in g up the new act, C hristensen relied heavily u pon the advice o f the CUC.32 G eorge K een prepared a rough d raft o f the new bill, based u pon a sim ilar act

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

159

he h ad helped draw up for S askatchew an in 1935, an d su b m itte d it to the deputy m inister o f the D e p artm e n t o f T rad e s a n d Industries. T his rough draft, slightly m odified by C hristensen, b ecam e A lb e rta ’s new co-operative act. It had the follow ing m ain features: stro n g p ro tectio n for co-operation against fra u d u le n t practices by p ro m o ters; the elim i­ nation o f proxy voting; the fo rb id d in g o f d o n a tio n s to political p a r­ ties; the insistence that sm all societies avoid e x ten d in g credit; a n d the provision th at surpluses be d istrib u ted according to p a tro n a g e .33 C hristensen tried very h ard b u t unsuccessfully to m ak e the various aspects o f the m ovem ent co-o p erate closely w ith each o ther. H e tried, for exam ple, to associate the UFA w ith o th e r organ izatio n s interested in co-operation,34 b u t the UFA w ent its ow n w ay w ithin the A lb erta C o-operative Council, a politically active in stitu tio n d o m in ate d by N. F. Priestly. C hristensen also tried to u n ite o rth o d o x co -o p erato rs w ith the A lberta C o-operative C onsum ers an d M ark eters, b u t his efforts were thw arted by co-operative purists in A lb erta w ho w ou ld n o t ac­ cept the retailer-dom inated ACCM as a true co -o p erativ e.35 N e v e rth e ­ less, C hristensen’s efforts w ere o f som e significance in th a t they were the first attem pts by the A lberta g o v ern m en t to follow the lead o f M anitoba and Saskatchew an in stim u latin g the creatio n o f an in te­ grated m ovem ent; in tim e, they w ould h elp to u n ite the rem ark a b ly individualistic A lberta co-operators. From the consum er co-operative view point, how ever, the crucial organization was still the w holesale. In 1936 it co n tin u ed to struggle u nder the part-tim e direction o f W illiam H alsall, th e m a n a g e r o f the K illam society. A ccording to the b ro a d co -o p erativ e a p p ro ac h , so evident in Saskatchew an, the w holesale was vital as th e m ain su p ­ p o rter o f the provincial section. It could p lay th a t role b ecau se it could provide m ost o f the fu n d s th a t w ere n e ed ed ; it c o u ld supply advice by experienced an d practical m en ; an d it could stim u late the developm ent o f education al program s. A t first glance, the w holesale, whose sales in 1936 totalled a m ere $30,000,36 seem ed to be a long way from playing th a t role. A nd yet, in retrospect, its overall positio n was basically sound: there w ere very few deb ts d esp ite the difficulties o f the early thirties; it h ad successfully avo id ed d o m in a tio n by eith er the UFA o r the Social C red it m o v em en t; an d it still h a d th e su p p o rt o f som e strong societies in K illam , H a n n a , E d m o n to n , W etaskiw in, and Edgerton. A t the 1937 m eetin g o f the A lb erta section, it w as given strong m oral su p p o rt by the prov in cial g o v ern m en t an d , w ith the interest in co-operation stim ulated by the D epression, was read y for a period o f rapid expansion.37 D uring 1937 and 1938 plans w ere laid for th e e stab lish m en t o f a

160

EA CH FO R ALL

m ore com plete w holesale structure. By early 1938 the refo rm a tio n was com plete. T he “new ” w holesale consisted o f thirty-five societies, each o f which contracted to o rd er all th eir sup p lies th rough the w hole­ sale.38 T he societies fu rth er p la n n e d to raise $3,500 in cap ital and to open a new head office in E d m o n to n u n d e r the m a n a g e m e n t o f D avid Sm eaton, a m an w ith m any y ears’ experience as a p u rch asin g agent for both co-operative m anagers an d p riv ate trad e rs.39 W ith Sm eaton’s careful m an ag e m en t a n d the assured m ark ets o f the m em ber co-operatives, the w holesale grew quickly. In 1938 it distributed over $250,000 w orth o f m e rch an d ise,40 a rem ark a b le in­ crease from the $20,000 to $40,000 cu sto m ary in the p revious four years. In 1939, it contin u ed to p ro sp er, an d its sales d o u b lin g those o f the previous y ear to reach nearly $575,000.41 Like the S askatchew an wholesale, the A lberta society was no lo n g er insignificant, an d it could com m and som e respect w ithin the provincial m ovem ent. T he grow th o f the A lberta cw s, how ever, did n o t im m ed iately give increased pow er and prestige to the A lb erta section; m ost o f the leaders o f the A lberta affiliates w ere too ca u g h t up in the expansion o f 1938 and 1939 to be able to give m uch atten tio n to its activities. O thers, notably H alsall o f K illam a n d R asm usson o f W etaskiw in, could not provide the leadership they h ad in the p ast because o f ill h ealth. C hristensen was sym pathetic an d m ight have p lay ed the role A rnason did in Saskatchew an, b u t he was d eeply involved in th e A lb erta C o ­ operative Council, the basically p ro d u cer-o rien te d ed u ca tio n a l in stitu ­ tion dom inated by the UFA a n d the pools. T h e section, therefore, continued to exist, b u t it did n o t p ro sp er as th e S askatchew an section did in 1939. T he divisions, p artly political, p artly trad itio n al, w ere too strong to allow a united A lb erta m o v em en t to em erge in the thirties, though m ore success w as to be achieved in the forties. ill A sim ilarly lopsided b u t aggressive m o v em en t d eveloped in M an ito b a during the late thirties. T he w holesale, g u ided by W . F. Popple, continued to pro sp er by serving the p etro leu m , b in d e r tw ine, an d general supply needs o f M an ito b a farm ers: its gross sales m arch ed steadily forw ard from $320,000 in 193542 to over $600,000 in 1939.43 It had the assistance o f a sy m pathetic g o v ern m en t agency, the M an ito b a C o-operative Prom otion B oard led by J. W. W ard , an d it h ad som e support from the m ajo r ag rarian p ro d u c e r o rg an izatio n s. B ut the w holesale continued to lack a strong co n su m er m o v em en t an d could not develop along the lines o f a tra d itio n a l co -o p erativ e w holesale.

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

161

Indeed, m ost o f the consum er societies it served w ere really w holesale locals organized as buying clubs. T h e re w ere tw enty-five o f these locals, m ost located in the so u th ern an d so u th w estern p arts o f the province.44 In addition, th ere w ere a variety o f farm ers’ org an izatio n s —som e indep endent, som e associated w ith o n e o r o th e r o f the pool organizations, and som e affiliated w ith the U n ited F a rm e rs o f M a n i­ to b a —th at were also served by the w holesale. In essence, therefore, the M anitoba w holesale in the thirties was little m ore th an a co m m is­ sion agent. L eaders o f the w holesale, how ever, recognized m an y o f the defi­ ciencies in their m ovem en t an d tried several w ays to o vercom e them in the late thirties. Popple, in p articu lar, tried to p o p u larize th e total co-operative m ovem ent a n d p h ilo so p h y th ro u g h o u t M an ito b a . At every an n u al m eeting o f the w holesale he suggested th a t all locals should affiliate w ith the CUC, an ticip atin g th a t the U n io n could p ro ­ vide the educational services n eed ed to forge a stro n g p rovincial m ovem ent. H e also recom m en d ed th a t interested g roups in M an ito b a form study clubs u n d er the gu id an ce o f the U n io n ’s B ran tfo rd of­ fice.45 By 1937 this repeated m essage b egan to have an effect: in that year societies in A ltona, C artw right, an d M into, all in the so u th ern p art o f the province, affiliated w ith the U n io n .46 A nother project sponsored by the w holesale an d by the C o -o p e ra ­ tive Prom otion Branch was an a n n u a l m eetin g o f M an ito b a co -o p era­ tive societies. Popple, w ho was also th e c u c v ice-p resid ent fo r M an i­ toba, norm ally called the m eetin g to coincide w ith G eo rg e K e en ’s annual w estern itinerary. K een usually gave one o r two addresses on various aspects o f the m ovem ent at the m eetin g w ith his favourite them e being the necessity for co -operative ed u catio n . F o llow ing the conference, K een w ould visit a few farm ers’ societies an d th en travel on to Saskatchew an. H is M an ito b a efforts w ere n o t as effective as his Saskatchew an tours, b u t they did p o p u larize co-o p erativ e ideology throughout the province. T h e m eetin g ’s conveners, th rough the C o ­ operative P rom otion Board, also used co n sid erab le c u c in fo rm atio n in the study groups they en co u rag ed th ro u g h o u t th e p rovince. T he annual m eeting, in short, was an in fo rm al p rovincial section w orking for integration w ithin M anitoba. In 1938 the w holesale w ithdrew its su p p o rt from these a n n u a l c o n ­ ferences, leaving the Prom otion B oard as the single sponsor. Because o f the controversial role played by the w holesale in the p ast, this developm ent actually m ad e it easier to arran g e m ore effective c o n fe r­ ences thereafter. T he 1938 conference, fo r exam ple, w as an im pressive

162

EACH FO R ALL

affair: it was held in the legislative buildings, w as addressed by the prem ier, was given considerable atten tio n by the p ro d u c e r pools, was well publicized, and was atten d ed by d elegates from o th e r provinces. At the conference, considerable tim e was d evoted to qu estio n s o f education. Local societies rep o rted upon e d u catio n al p ro g ram s that had proved successful, new film s on the m o v em en t w ere show n, and G eorge K een outlined the best techniques in organ izin g a study club. T he em phasis on education a t the 1938 conference, p ro m p ted m any agricultural organizations in the province to co -o rd in ate th eir e d u ca­ tional activities. In Ju n e, 1939, seven h u n d re d delegates from the U nited F arm ers o f M anitoba, the UGG, the M an ito b a P oultry Pool, the w holesale, the livestock pool, pool elevators, and the vegetable pool m et to form the M an ito b a F ed e ra tio n o f A g riculture.48 T his new organization was charged w ith all the e d u catio n al activities am o n g farm ers w ithin the province. T h e n atio n al C o -o p erativ e U n io n had som e voice in this organization th rough its p articip atin g affiliates and through the prestige o f G eorge K een, a n d the F ed eratio n conse­ quently becam e an im p o rtan t p ro m o te r o f the co-o p erativ e cause. This new agrarian educational organization, interested in c o -o p era­ tion an d m arginally associated w ith the c u c , accurately reflected the nature o f the M anitob a m ovem ent. In A lberta, an d especially in Saskatchew an, strong co n su m er societies h ad in fluenced th eir respec­ tive provincial m ovem ents an d h ad m ain tain ed som e stren g th for the w ider co-operative view point. In M an ito b a, there w ere no really strong societies, and the m ovem ent, despite the goodw ill o f som e agrarian leaders, tended to ignore the bro ad a p p ro ach an d to retain a distinctly vocational outlook. M anitoba, in short, was d ifferen t from S askatchew an an d m ore like A lberta in that utopian co-o p erato rs had little im pact. P erh ap s one reason for this difference was th a t very few British c o -o p era to r im m i­ grants o f the 1906-14 p eriod seem to have settled in M an ito b a; m ost o f them , apparently, had gone on to S askatchew an an d A lberta w here they had a decided im pact betw een 1920 a n d 1939. T h e re w ere also fewer sm all towns in M anitoba th at could p rovide the en v iro n m e n t in which co-operative stores could best thrive. Instead, there was the large city o f W innipeg, a few tow ns, several sm all villages, an d a n u m b er o f elevator points. T o thrive co n su m er co -o p eratio n had to p rosper in W innipeg, a d ev elo p m en t th a t did not take place until m any years after 1939. C o-operation m et the sam e obstacles in W innipeg th a t it had m et, was m eeting, and w ould m eet in o th e r large C a n a d ia n cities. D ev elo p ­ ing a sense o f com m unity was n o t easy; the com p etitio n was efficient;

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

163

the labour m ovem ent was indifferent; class divisions did no t p rovide the right kinds o f incentives; and m an ag e rial skills w ere difficu lt to find. M oreover, the d em ograp hic n a tu re o f M an ito b a m ad e the split betw een country and city m ore serious th an elsew here. In A lberta and Saskatchew an the m ovem ent was not seriously b o th ere d by d iffer­ ences betw een farm ers an d labourers. N o t so in M an ito b a, w here labourers w ithin the C o-operative m o v em en t w ere poorly o rganized an d farm ers w ere som ew hat resentful o f W in n ip eg ’s d o m in an ce. C o­ operative societies that em erged in W innipeg d u rin g the late thirties, for exam ple, had little im pact on the a n n u a l m eetings o f the w hole­ sale, and they did not take p a rt in the conso lid atio n o f co-operative activities th a t took place in 1939.49 W ithin W innipeg there w ere tw o m a jo r sources o f co-operative interest: the ethno-political m ovem ents o f the N o rth E nd an d the reform ing, “ religious” enthusiasm s o f m o d erate “ A n glo-S axon” social­ ism. From the form er sprang the W o rk ers’ an d F a rm e rs’ C o -operative A ssociation m ade up m ostly o f U k rain ian s. It em erg ed in the early thirties o u t o f the U krainian F a rm e r-L a b o u r T em p le, an d it ap p lied for affiliation with the CUC in 1938. A fter consulting w ith T im m in s U krainians w ho knew som eth in g a b o u t the W in n ip eg situ atio n . K een regretfully rejected the applicatio n because o f alleged d o m in a tio n by com m unists.50 In 1936, from m ore m o d erate low er- an d m iddle-class circles, there em erged a n u m b e r o f study groups loosely affiliated in the W innipeg and D istrict C o-o p erativ e E ducation A ssociation. It was m ade up o f religious leaders, c C F e rs an d trad es unionists g enerally interested in the British m odel o f co-o p eratio n . In 1938 these groups am algam ated to form the R ed R iver C o-operative. In tim e, this co­ operative w ould becom e a stro n g h o ld for co n su m er co -o p eratio n in the province, but, until then, the p ro d u cers w ould overw helm ingly dom inate the field. IV

By 1939 therefore each o f the m ovem ents in the three P rairie p ro v ­ inces had its distinctive features. S askatchew an had the m ost com ­ plete m ovem ent and, in view o f its unity, pow er, an d resourcefulness, deserved the sobriquet o f “ O u r C o-o p erativ e P rovince” often b e ­ stowed upon it. T he A lberta m ovem ent, though h a u n te d by political affiliations and narrow outlooks, was nevertheless grow ing and stru g ­ gling tow ards unity. M anitoba sh ared in the prosperity, b u t the u rb an areas had not yet been broached, and, u ntil they w ere, the m o v em en t w ould be restricted in outlook a n d capabilities. Thus, as the thirties w ore on, P rairie co -o p erato rs w ere b u ild in g

164

E A C H F O R A LL

large institutions and w ere b eginning to co -o rd in ate efforts in the interests o f greater econom y a n d efficiency. P erh ap s the m ost im p o r­ tant dem onstration o f this d ev elo p m en t later in the d ecad e was the continuing grow th o f the w holesales. By 1939 the sales o f the three wholesales were exceeding $3,000,000 an n ually , enough to create sig­ nificant savings for their m em bers and to begin d ev elo p in g in te rp ro v ­ incial contacts. G eorge K een was so m eth in g o f a cataly st in e n co u rag ­ ing this type o f jo in t action. H e stressed the possibilities, in fact, in nearly all o f his w estern tours d u rin g the thirties. F inally, on N o v em ­ ber 15, 1938, representatives o f the P rairie w holesales m et in S aska­ toon to consider pooling orders, selling u n d e r a “ C o -o p ” b ran d nam e, purchasing from oth er n atio n al m ovem ents, and c reatin g an in te r­ provincial w holesale. A com m ittee, consisting o f the leadin g execu­ tives in the three organizations, was ap p o in ted to investigate these m atters thoroughly. T he co m m ittee m ad e a fav o u rable rep o rt on the possibilities, and a fu rth er m eetin g o f represen tativ es from the three societies was held in W innipeg in M arch 1940. At th at m eeting, it was decided to form Interprovincial C o -operatives L im ited, a regional co­ operative for the three provincial w holesales.51 In this d ev elo p m en t, perhaps m ore than any other, could be seen signs th a t the P rairie co­ operative m ovem ent was finally b eginning to escape the bonds o f parochialism . A nother indication o f b ro ad en in g perspectives w as the em ergence o f interest in new form s o f co-operative effort. D u rin g the last five years o f the thirties, the m ost im p o rtan t o f these was the cred it union. M ost o f the early info rm atio n a b o u t credit unions a p p a re n tly cam e to the Prairies from the M aritim es. A rticles a b o u t the eastern credit unions began ap p earin g in the P rairie co-operative press in 1935. G eorge K een popularized the d evelopm ents in the M aritim es d u rin g his annual tours; and, m ost im po rtan tly , visits by M oses C oady in 1936 and 1938 stim ulated considerable activity. T h ere w as a co n sid er­ able irony in this invasion o f credit u n io n ideas from the “ F a r E ast” . C redit unions had actually been b ro u g h t w estw ard by F rench C a n a d i­ ans in the 1920s, bu t they had developed in isolation in som e w estern francophone com m unities. It is a reflection o f the d ep th o f w estern linguistic-religious divisions th a t their d ev elo p m en t h ad gone g e n er­ ally unrecognized by an glophones and others. In any event, the cred it-u n io n m ovem ent, once know n in the g en ­ eral Prairie society, spread very rapidly d u rin g the late thirties. T he m ajor reason for its grow th was the crip p lin g need for cred it am ong farm ers and u rban w orkers. In the face o f the D epression, the b an k s

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

165

cut their Prairie operations drastically, an d they alm o st totally ceased their already lim ited involvem ent in the sm all-loans field. C red it unions, based on either occup ation al bonds o r co m m u n ity cohesive­ ness helped to fill the vacu u m .52 T h e result was th at all three o f the Prairie provinces developed strong cred it union m ovem ents d u rin g the late thirties. By 1939 Saskatchew an h ad 32 credit unions w ith 3,000 m em bers; A lberta had 19 with 1,100 m em bers; and M an ito b a h ad 28 with 1,900 m em bers.53 M any were sm all; a few w ere large. M any op erated on a p art-tim e basis; a few w ere o pen for the n o rm al work week. T hey w ere located alm ost everyw here, from a spare room in som eone’s house, to the basem en t o f a factory o r at the back o f a pool ag ent’s offices. But, how ever they w ere o p erated an d w herever they were, credit unions seem ed to thrive beyond w hat anyone could have predicted. Because o f the spontaneity with w hich they grew , cred it unions were featured by a rem ark ab le diversity o f b o o k k eep in g m ethods. Since this disorder th reaten ed disaster, the prov in cial g o v ern m en t speedily developed strong statistics-keeping an d advisory services to help credit unions and m ain tain stability. In ad d itio n , m an y credit unions turned for advice to the A m erican cen tral cred it unio n o rg an i­ zation, C redit U nion N atio n al A ssociation, o r CUNA as it was m ore popularly called. Both o f these sources pro v id ed good advice and significantly helped the rapidly grow ing cred it u n io n s to discipline them selves despite the pressures o f grow th an d the liabilities o f inex­ perience. A nother traditional area o f grievance th a t co -o p erato rs tu rn ed to m ore system atically d u ring the thirties w as insurance. Som e in su ran ce needs, o f course, had already been m et co-operatively: the m u tu als still continued to protect m any farm s as they had in the past an d both the UGG and pools m aintain ed insurance su bsidiaries for th e ir ow n internal requirem ents. T he o th e r in su ran ce needs o f the region, how ­ ever, had been generally provided by C en tral C an a d ia n and foreign insurance com panies, com pan ies th at h ad been view ed suspiciously by som e westerners. T he suspicion tu rn ed to an g er in the thirties w hen the traditional “outside” insurers cancelled m any policies fo r n o n ­ paym ent. Inevitably, these cancellations m ean t th a t m an y deceased “ pioneers” w ere buried at public expense an d left b eh in d im p o v er­ ished families. T he resultant an g er gave an e m o tio n al d im en sio n to a fundam ental reason for form ing new co-operative in su ran ce o rg an iza­ tions: the desire to develop org an izatio n s th at w ould invest in co­ operatives. A standard com p lain t against b oth the trad itio n al c o m p a ­

166

EACH FO R ALL

nies and the m utuals h ad been th a t they h a d failed to do so. T h e only solution, it seem ed, was to d u plicate E u ro p e an an d A m erican p rec e d ­ ents and to build institutions th a t w ould. In 1934, because o f these considerations, the A n n u al M eetin g o f the Saskatchew an W heat Pool ap p o in te d a co m m ittee to explore the field o f life insurance.54 T he com m ittee rep o rted in 1935 a n d reco m m en d ed the developm ent o f a life-insurance pro g ram . Pool leaders su b se­ quently developed a p lan for a life com pany fo r the 1936 m eeting, b u t it could not be im plem ented because o f a sh ortage o f funds. In 1939, as conditions started to im prove, S askatchew an co -o perato rs began to develop their b ro ad e r insurance p rogram w hen w h eat-pool m en in the Saskatoon area organized a b en ev o len t society, the G o o d N e ig h b o u r M utual Benefit A ssociation. O ne y e ar later, in Ju n e 1940, at the annual m eeting o f the S askatchew an C onference o f C o-o p erativ e T rading Associations, plans fo r the C o-operative M u tu al B enefit Asso­ ciation were introduced. S u p p o rted strongly by leaders o f the W h eat Pool, C o-op R efineries, Saskatchew an C o-op W holesale, a n d th e Sas­ katchew an Section o f the C o-operative U n io n o f C a n a d a , C o -o p M u ­ tual, was developed to provide a d ea th benefit to m em b ers o f all Saskatchew an co-operatives. It was based on a p lan devised by W. J. H ansen o f the C o-operative an d M arkets B ranch in the p rovincial D epartm ent o f A griculture an d provided for the im m ed iate p ay m en t o f $400 to the fam ily o f a deceased m em ber. A ffiliation, w hich was restricted to m em bers o f co-operative o rganizations, was very in ex p en ­ sive—a five-dollar adm ission fee a n d an a n n u a l assessm ent on all m em bers o f not m ore th an one d o llar fo r each m e m b e r w ho had died that year.55 It was a sim ple system th at m et som e o f the needs o f Prairie farm ers and labourers. It was not, how ever, an answ er to the investm ent needs o f the grow ing co-operatives, w hich could be m et only later w hen p erm an en t prosperity re tu rn ed to the Prairie eco n ­ omy. Finally, am ong the new initiatives w hose origins belong in the th ir­ ties, there was a grow ing desire to attack co-operatively the farm m achinery problem s trad itio n al to the W est. T hese problem s, a p p a r­ ent since the nineteen th century, becam e m ore com plex with the gradually greater use o f the tracto r d u rin g the 1920s an d 1930s. In 1936 an d 1937, responding to persistent com p lain ts from farm ers, the federal governm ent ap p o in ted two com m ittees to investigate the im ­ plem ents business. Both found th at price increases d u rin g the p rec e d ­ ing years had been unnecessarily high. In 1939, the S askatchew an legislature ap p o in ted a n o th e r com m ittee w hich agreed w ith the fed ­

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

167

eral reports and fu rth er reco m m en d ed the d e v elo p m en t o f a farm equipm ent co-operative. T he reco m m en d atio n w as en d o rsed by the Saskatchew an co-operative w holesale, a n d in late 1939 a series o f m eetings enlisted the su p p o rt o f farm p eople across the Prairies. In that sam e year, the w holesale b egan to im p o rt a few tractors from N ational C o-operatives, a co-operatively ow ned m a n u fa c tu re r in the U nited States. U ltim ately, this initiativ e p ro d u ced the fo rm atio n o f C anadian C o-operative Im plem ents in 1940. W ith the developm ent o f these new initiatives an d w ith the e m e r­ gence o f a significant degree o f co -o p eratio n a m o n g its o rganizations, the Prairie co-operative m o v em en t h ad becom e re m ark ab ly diverse and pow erful. T he strength cam e from its practical success, w hich in turn was rooted in the Prairie reg io n ’s sense o f grievance. T h e choice for activities in the th irties—m arketing, co n su m p tio n , b anking, in su r­ ance, and im plem ents—w ere largely d eterm in ed by how the region historically had viewed extern al exploitation. In d eed , the legacy o f past and contem porary injustices h u n g heavily over the P rairie m o v e­ ment. v A fter the Prairies, the E n g lish -C an ad ian region w ith the strongest sense o f m ovem ent was the M aritim es. T h e m o v em en t in the e a ste rn ­ most provinces entered the last years o f the D epression w ith co n sid er­ able enthusiasm because o f the grow th ex p erien ced d u rin g the early thirties. D elegation after delegation o f co -o p erato rs from o th e r c o u n ­ tries toured eastern N ova Scotia from 1935 o n w ard , and the co­ operative accom plishm ents o f the M aritim es becam e well publicized. T he C redit U nion N ation al A ssociation sent m any o f these d eleg a­ tions and, even m ore im portantly, gave extensive publicity, especially to the A ntigonish m ovem ent. So too did M arguis C hild, w hose book on N ova Scotian co-operatives stirred som e local controversy b u t nevertheless reached a w ide in te rn a tio n a l audience. G iven the grow th and the publicity, it is u n d e rsta n d ab le th a t m any M aritim e co-operators took co n sid erab le p rid e in th e ir acco m p lish ­ ments. At the 1937 C ongress o f th e C o -o p erativ e U n io n o f C an ad a, held in M ontreal, A. S. M cIntyre m ad e a speech w hich typified the confident expansionism o f the regional m o vem ent. M cIntyre, a fieldm an for the SFX E xtension D ep artm en t, o u tlin ed , in an e lo q u en t address, the study group idea as it h ad been d eveloped in eastern N ova Scotia and show ed how it h ad p ro d u ced a w ide variety o f co­ operative enterprise. N atu rally , he stressed the valu e o f the credit-

168

EACH FOR ALL

union m ovem ent which, by 1936, h ad grow n, in N ova Scotia alone, to 106 unions organized in one o f CUNA’s provincial leagues. H e also em phasized the dev elo p m en t o f fishing an d lo bster co-operatives which had allow ed at least som e o f the M aritim e fisherm en to escape the “econom ic feudalism ” long their u n h a p p y lot. In his view, the producer, credit, and co n su m er m ovem ents w ere m ak in g re m ark ab le progress in the M aritim es a n d w ould soon coalesce to have an even greater im pact. Because o f M cIntyre’s persuasiveness, the C ongress agreed to his suggestions that N ova Scotia form a provincial section like the one that had been developed in S askatchew an. U n fo rtu n ately for the M ar­ itim e m ovem ent, the creation o f the section was p rem a tu re : too m uch distrust and isolationism existed in the M aritim es to p erm it the d ev el­ opm ent o f a strong section at th a t tim e. T h e sam e factors u n d erm in ed efforts to develop a regional w holesaling capacity. T hese failures, how ever, did not h in d e r co-operative d ev elo p m en t as m uch as m ight have been expected. T h e A ntigonish m ovem ent, o f course, was the m ain reason for the co n tin u in g grow th. M oses C oady, Jim m y T om pkins, A. B. M acD o n ald , an d n u m ero u s oth ers, w ere h av ­ ing their greatest im pact an d w ere b ecom ing w ell-know n an d deeply respected throughout the M aritim es. T h ey fo u n d a receptive aud ien ce because, during the D epression, the trad itio n al exodus o f y o u n g m en and w om en from the region h ad slow ed dow n significantly. F o r the first tim e in fifty years, the M aritim es w ere keep in g m any o f its m ost capable youth, and the y o u n g w ho stayed w ere p articu larly receptive to the m oderate reform ism o f the A ntigonish m ovem ent. T he A ntigonish enthusiasts stim u lated a rem a rk a b le ran g e o f activi­ ties. By 1938 the E xtension D e p a rtm e n t w as sp o n so rin g o ver 1,100 study groups w ith a m em b ersh ip o f 10,000. By the sam e year, it had helped organize tw enty-nine co n su m er co-operatives, seventeen c a n ­ neries, five fish plants, co -operative m edical p rogram s, co-operative saw mills, and a co-operative p asteu riz in g p la n t.56 It h ad also facili­ tated the developm ent o f C a n a d a ’s first co-operative h o u sin g ven tu re in Reserve M ines durin g 1937. A cting on advice from A ntigonish, the C o-operative U nion o f C an a d a , an d co-operative h o u sin g officials from N ew Y ork, the D e p artm e n t helped ten fam ilies b uild th eir ow n houses according to their ow n needs. W ith g o v ern m en t assistance, the fam ilies each purchased a lot on a tw enty-tw o acre site n ea r R eserve Mines, a site they later called T om pkinsville. By b u y ing collectively and by pooling their lab o u r, they built houses v alu ed at $2,000 for $1,350. T hey w ere also com p arativ ely attractiv e houses, co m p lete w ith hedges, underground pow er lines, a c o m m u n ity b u ild in g for livestock

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

169

and a playground.57 Im m ediately successfully, the T om p k in sv ille p ro ­ ject sparked num erous o th e r sim ilar projects th a t su b seq u en tly co n ­ structed thousands o f sim ilar hom es in succeeding decades. G iven these successes, the A ntigonish m o v em en t an d its co -op erative projects soon becam e well publicized th ro u g h o u t C an ad a . A t the heart o f this publicity was M oses C oady, a saintly th o u g h forceful figure w hose physical presence an d search in g in tellect d o m in ate d most m eetings he attended . F rom 1936 o nw ard he gave n u m ero u s lecture tours through O ntario, the Prairies, an d British C o lu m b ia. Almost inevitably, his trips stim u lated new co-o p erativ e v en tu res and revived enthusiasm am ong d iscouraged co-operators. Sim ilarly, A. B. M acD onald, w ho becam e basically th e “ m a n a g e r” o f the m o v em en t as the thirties progressed, visited m an y areas across C a n a d a a n d d i­ rectly aided the d evelopm en t o f several co-operatives. T h ere w ere also m any less w ell-know n figures in the A ntigonish m o v em en t w ho m ad e direct contributions to co-operatives elsew here in C a n a d a: F a th e r Jam es Boyle assisted in the d ev elo p m en t o f cred it u n io n s in S ask atch ­ ewan; J. D. N. M acD onald, A. S. M cIntyre, an d , especially, N o rm a n M acK enzie significantly helped the B.C. m ovem ent; a n d several in d i­ viduals w ere sent on a sh o rt-term basis to N ew Brunsw ick, Prince Edw ard Island, and N ew fo u n d lan d .58 A lm ost as soon as the E xtension D ep artm en t h ad becom e well estab lish ed as the focus o f a regional self-help m ovem ent, it fou n d itself draw n into n atio n al, even in te rn a ­ tional roles.59 W hile the A ntigonish m o v em en t was flourishing, o th e r aspects o f the regional co-operative m o v em en t w ere also d eveloping. T h e British C anadian, after a period o f slight decline, started to e x p an d a n d by 1939 achieved once again the level o f $1,000,000 in a n n u a l sales.60 R elations betw een the British C a n a d ia n an d the A ntigonish m o v e­ m ent, however, rem ained strain ed essentially because o f the la tte r’s devotion to gradual developm ent. T h e differen ce betw een th e two groups can be seen in their co n trastin g ap p ro ach es to ex p a n d in g the consum er m ovem ent. T he British C a n ad ia n believed in g rad u ally d e­ veloping branch stores, a practice th at h ad becom e com m on in G re a t Britain. T he A ntigonish m ovem ent, instead, p referred develo p in g new societies basically from its study-club p ro g ram .61 T h e result was a period o f distrust betw een the two g ro u p s o f co-o p erato rs, distru st som etim es em bittered by h id d en b u t felt religious tensions.62 N e v e r­ theless, the consum er m ovem ent, despite the tensions betw een Sydney M ines and A ntigonish, m ad e significant progress d u rin g the late th ir­ ties. In 1936, because o f the grow th o f co n su m er co -operatives, the

170

E A C H F O R A LL

Extension D epartm en t explored the possibility o f d e v elo p in g a re­ gional wholesale. F ind in g an en co u rag in g response to this initiative, the D epartm ent organized a m eetin g at Ju d iq u e in A ugust 1937 w here fifty store leaders, m ostly from eastern N ova Scotia, d ecided a w hole­ sale was practicable. O p eratin g w ithout the help o f the British C a n a ­ dian, which already acted as its ow n w holesale, the in d e p e n d e n t co­ operatives requested th at CLC (M aritim es) o p en w holesale services in Sydney. U nfortunately, the arran g em en ts m ad e for this new venture did not provide for a clear line o f au th o rity largely because o f m u tu al suspicions betw een the local C ape B reton stores an d the M oncton m anagem ent. It w ould be several years before this basic p roblem would be w orked out. N evertheless, the m ere fact th a t a w holesale could be contem plated an d constructed in the m idst o f a D epression attests to the enthusiasm s o f the region’s co n su m er co-o p erato rs. T he producer co-operatives en co u n te red d ifferen t kinds o f problem s in the late thirties. T h e U n ited M aritim es F ish erm en stim u lated the construction o f canneries (by 1939 th ere w ere 36 o f them in the M aritim es), and it did aid in the m ark etin g o f lobsters and fish, especially in the N ew E ngland area. T h e over-all fisheries problem s, however, sym bolized by the foreign traw lers fishing n e arb y w aters, proved to be too great to be overcom e w ith o u t co n tin u o u s, d e te r­ m ined governm ent support. Sim ilarly, the fru it m ark etin g co -o p era­ tives o f the A nnapolis Valley e n c o u n te red co n sid erab le difficulty d u r­ ing the decade, partly because o f a disastrous slum p in the ap p le m arket, partly because o f a grow ing d isen ch an tm en t w ith the existing m anagem ent.63 It was also, o f course, badly affected by a c o n tin u in g problem o f gaining secure access to the British m arket. N evertheless, despite the setbacks in all aspects o f the M aritim es m ovem ent, it is clear th at considerable stability h ad been achieved. The successes in eastern N ova Scotia an d the pow erful role o f the A ntigonish enthusiasts ad eq u ately d em o n strated the cap ab ilities o f the m ovem ent. T h ere were also o th e r positive develo p m en ts. In N ew Brunswick and Prince E dw ard Island, for exam ple, the provincial governm ents started to becom e involved an d h ad passed the necessary general co-operative acts. In ad d itio n , th ro u g h th eir d ep a rtm en ts o f agriculture, the two g o vernm ents h ad stim u lated the fo rm atio n o f independent p ro d u cer a n d co n su m er co-operatives an d , especially, credit unions. A nd, finally, in Prince E dw ard Island, a replica o f the Antigonish m ovem ent was created aro u n d St. D u n sta n ’s U niversity. Indeed, by the late thirties, th at university’s ad u lt ed u catio n service had helped organize 338 study clubs, circu latin g libraries, rad io p ro ­ gram s, 24 credit unions, 12 b u ying clubs, an d 2 stores.64

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

171

These new thrusts, plus the vibrancy o f the A ntigonish m ovem ent, the stability o f the British C an ad ian a n d the survival o f the p ro d u c e r co-ops despite severe adversity, m ean t that the M aritim es m ov em en t in total m ade substantial progress d u rin g the late thirties. In a ra th e r bleak econom ic environm ent, it was one o f the few attractive and prom ising developm ents. VI

T here was little o f the sam e sense o f d irection w ithin the O n tario m ovem ent. Instead, there was a series o f initiatives, old an d new , that taken together represented considerable activity b u t little cohesion. D uring the late thirties yet m ore g roups o f en th u siasts a p p e a re d in T oronto. O ne o f these was m ad e up o f university stu d en ts w ho form ed the Students’ C o-operative R esidence in 1937 an d 1938, partly to provide inexpensive housing a n d p artly to h elp new stu d en ts adjust to university life.65 E lsew here in the city, several co n su m er co-operatives were begun especially am o n g im m ig ran t g ro u p s.66 T h e m ost prom inent o f these was the E glinton C o-o p erativ e o rganized in early 1937. It was strongly influenced by N . Roy C lifton, an en th u siastic young co-operative ed u cato r who p ro m p ted the society to sp o n so r num erous study clubs an d p ublic m eetings. Beyond T o ro n to , espe­ cially in industrial areas, sm all co n su m er societies ap p e a re d in A u ro ra, H am ilton, N iagara Falls, M ilton, and P eterb o ro u g h . N o n e o f these new societies was large,67 b u t they did in dicate a p ersisten t in terest in the developm ent o f co-operative action. But O ntario co-operators were concerned ab o u t m ore th an w hat they ate; they were also p ertu rb e d ab o u t w hat they saw. In p articu lar, they resented the invasion o f local th eatres by “ triv ial” A m erican films. As a result, m any o f them h elp ed form co-o p erativ e film clubs in several O ntario towns, clubs th at w ould sp o n so r E u ro p ean and “educational” A m erican films. T he best know n org an izin g m ed iu m for these clubs was the N atio n al Film Society o f C an a d a , w hich em erged in 1935. By 1937, the Society h ad clubs in eig h t cities an d cooperators were involved in all o f th em .68 A side from this organ izatio n , there were several in d ep en d en t film clubs o rganized at least in p art am ong co-operators in T im m ins, H am ilto n , T o ro n to , an d various Sas­ katchew an com m unities. The film club in T im m in s was p a rt o f a p articu larly bro ad e d u c a ­ tional program organized by the city’s co -o p erato rs through their society.69 In 1938, the tow n’s co-op hired N. Roy C lifton o f the Eglinton society as educatio n al director, and, w ithin m o n th s, he had organized an institute for co-operative studies, a w o rk er’s ed u catio n

172

E A C H F O R A LL

branch, a library, a series o f pu b lic en tertain m en ts, and a w eekly radio broadcast. He co n tin u ed to provide leadership for m ost o f these activities until he jo in e d the arm ed forces on the o u tb re a k o f the Second W orld W ar. C lifton’s use o f the radio in T im m in s coincided w ith the discovery o f that m edium by co-operators th ro u g h o u t C an ad a. It had been used before, notably by the p ro d u cer an d co n su m er societies on the P rai­ ries, but not on the extensive scale th at dev elo p ed in O n ta rio d u rin g the late thirties. T he CBC, for exam ple, d evoted several p u b lic affairs program s to the m ovem ent, cu lm in atin g in a special eight-w eek series prepared in 1939 and broadcast in early 1940.70 Y et a n o th e r series o f broadcasts, with probably as m uch im pact, w as a w eekly series on co­ operation broadcast over w c f l , the “voice o f la b o u r” in C hicago. Because the station had one o f the strongest tran sm itters on the continent, this series, p rep ared by G eorge K een, w as h eard on the Prairies and th roughou t S ou th ern O ntario. T he most im portant radio broadcasts for listeners in S o u th ern O n ­ tario, however, were those sponsored by the U n ited F arm ers. B road­ cast over CFRB, T oronto, these series m ark ed a m ore aggressive o u t­ look in the farm ers’ organization a n d was p a rt o f an effo rt on its p art to unite the total O ntario m ovem ent. T his effo rt was jo y fu lly received by G eorge K een and the C o-operative U nio n . T h e tw o o rganizations, therefore, drew strongly together, the m erging p attern cu lm in atin g in W. C. G ood becom ing vice-president o f the UF C o-op in 1937. In fact, the C o-op annual m eetings o f th at y ear well d em o n strated the u n fo ld ­ ing alliance. As G eorge K een h appily co m m en ted : The gatherings this year were the most co-operative in character of our long experience. In past years the discussions have been predominantly conducted on an occupational and commercial basis, with little evidence being shown of real co-operative understanding or interest. On this occasion the keynote of the discussions was Co-operation in its true sense, and for which consider­ able enthusiasm was displayed. It was clear that many who participated had a good understanding of our philosophy and its aims.71 C loser connections betw een the c u c an d the farm ers’ m o v em en t were also encouraged by P. M. D ew an, a fo rm er co-op m anager, w ho becam e M inister o f A griculture for O n tario in 1937. S hortly after his appointm ent, D ew an m et with G o o d an d K een to discuss the pro v in ­ cial m ovem ent. Follow ing the m eeting, he an n o u n ced to a T o ro n to Liberal gathering th at the province was on the verge o f extensive co­ operative developm ent and th a t the g o v ern m en t w ould have to a p ­ point a m an to be responsible for it.72

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

173

T hrough out 1938 the O n tario gov ern m en t becam e m ore involved in the provincial m ovem ent. In S ep tem b er, for exam ple, it sponsored a three-day conference on the m ovem ent at G u elp h . It was a tten d ed by 320 delegates, and it featu red speeches by G eorge K een, W. C. G o o d , and A. B. M acD o n ald .73 In N ov em b er. D ew an atten d e d the a n n u a l m eetings o f the U nited F arm ers o f O n tario an d the U nited F a rm e rs’ C o-operative. T here, he again p ledged his su p p o rt to the m ovem ent, and announced the d evelo p m en t o f special sh o rt courses on co -o p e ra ­ tion to be taught by county agricultural representatives. He en d ed his speech on a touch that cam e close to a u to p ian perspective: . . . we must not forget to study Co-operative principles. They are of value far beyond their cold monetary value. They are of great social and educational value for urban as well as for rural people.74 Most o f the benefits from the draw in g to g eth er o f the O n tario governm ent and the m ovem en t occurred som e years later. A few w ere im m ediate. In 1939, w ith G eorge K ee n ’s help, the g o v ern m en t passed new credit-union legislation.75 In the early 1940s, again w ith K e e n ’s help, the governm ent reform ed existing g eneral co-operative legisla­ tion and helped create a g o v ern m en t d e p a rtm e n t to supervise co­ operative activities. L ooked at in the context o f several years o f d ev el­ opm ent, these changes w ere fu n d a m e n ta l in u ltim ately stabilizing the province’s agrarian and cred it unio n m ovem ents. U n doubtedly the m ain d ev elo p m en t o f the later thirties in O n tario , though, was the resurgence o f the U n ited F arm e rs’ C o -operative. J. J. M orrison, the guiding force in the rap id rise an d g rad u al d ecline o f the organization, resigned as secretary -treasu rer in 1935. H e was re­ placed in both the UF C o-op an d the u f o by H. H. H a n n a m , a dynam ic young farm er w ho h ad been p ro m in e n t in the a g ra ria n /c o operative m ovem ent since 1928. In a d d itio n to b eing a convinced p ro p o n en t o f the solidarity o f the farm ers’ m ovem ent, H an n am was a determ in ed spokesm an for all kinds o f co -operative activities in both rural and u rb an areas. H e played a vital role in the d ev elo p m en t o f the O ntario C h am b er o f A griculture in 1936, an d in the fo rm atio n o f the C an ad ian C h am b er in 1936.76 In b oth institutions and in his w ork with the UF C o-op he advocated a b ro ad a p p ro ach to co -operative action. His talks over CFRB,77 his w ritings,78 his editorship o f The R ural Co-operator (the UF C o -o p ’s periodical), an d his freq u en t p ublic speeches w ere usually steeped in co -operative theory, especially theory derived from the D anish m ovem ent. Seeing little necessary co m p eti­ tion betw een producers an d consum ers, he was convinced th at co­ operative techniques could do m ore th an m erely im prove sta n d a rd s o f

174

EACH FOR ALL

living; they could also b reak dow n anim osities betw een various groups in society. H an n am ’s m ost rem ark ab le accom plishm ents in the thirties w ere to spearhead the revival o f the UFO an d to reorganize the UF C o-op. W ithin the UFO, H annam , aid ed greatly by y o u n g farm ers in the N ew C anada m ovem ent, sparked the d ev elo p m en t o f study clubs th ro u g h ­ out the O ntario countryside. In d eed , by a careful use o f p am p h lets and a grow ing use o f radio, he h elp ed the UFO becom e so m eth in g like the lively organization it had been in the early tw enties. W ithin the UF Co-op, H annam quietly arran g ed in 1937 fo r a change in the c o m p a­ ny’s by-laws to allow local co-operatives to play a m o re significant role in the com pany’s affairs. T h o u g h n o t going as fa r on th e road to a traditional co-operative w holesale as purists like G eo rg e K een w ould have liked, this change greatly en co u rag ed the inv o lv em en t o f form erly independent co-operatives. U nder H an n am ’s initiative, too, the UF C o-op o p en ed up contacts with the A m erican co-operative m ovem ent. In 1937 the O n tario co m ­ pany sent representatives to the a n n u a l m eetin g o f the C o -o p erativ e League o f the U nited States o f A m erica. U ltim ately, this in itative led to involvem ent with N atio n al C o-operatives, an A m erican central buying agency and m an u factu rer for regional co -o p erativ es.79 T h e UF C o-op jo in ed N ational in 1938 a n d soon d istrib u ted th a t o rg an iza­ tion’s “C o-op” tractor and a w ide range o f electric ap p lian ces also sold u n d er a “ C o-op” b ran d nam e. At the end o f the decad e, too, it jo in ed with A m erican co-ops to p u rchase farm supplies, no tab ly E u ro ­ pean potash. T his southern o rien tatio n was an im p o rta n t d ev elo p m en t within the E nglish-C anadian m o v em en t in the thirties, o n e o f the factors that helped set the O n tario m o v em en t a p a rt from its co u n te r­ parts in the Prairies, the M aritim es, and B ritish C olu m b ia. T he developing ties with A m erican co-operatives, how ever, w h at­ ever their consequences, w ere indicative o f the resurgence o f the O ntario m ovem ent. T he grow th o f UF C o-op, the revival o f the UFO, the grow ing bonds betw een the u f C o-op a n d the c u c , and the aw akening interest o f g o vernm ent officials m ea n t th at the w orst years o f division and decline had passed. VII

As in oth er parts o f C an ad a, the m o v em en t fo u n d it d ifficult to develop within an urb an setting on the w est coast. T h e co-operatives that had em erged in V ancouver early in the thirties started th eir agonizing decline in 1936 w ith the d eep en in g o f disp u tes betw een the

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

175

C om m on G ood C o-operative a n d the o th e r co -o p erativ es begun largely am ong social dem ocrats. T h e essence o f the d isp u te was w hether V ancouver should have o n e co-operative, as D. G . M a c d o n ­ ald o f the C om m on G o o d w ished, o r w h eth er it sh o u ld have several, as his o p ponents preferred. T he argum ent paralysed the V an co u v er m o v em en t from 1936 to 1938 and inevitably involved the C o -o p erativ e U n io n o f C an a d a . G eorge K een, in fact, received n u m ero u s long a n d co m p licated letters from both sides o f the d eb ate , an d he w as u ltim ately forced to take sides. H e did so reluctantly because, as in the case o f disp u tes in o th e r urban centres, he hoped th a t the w arrin g factions w ould be ab le to resolve their ow n disputes. K een also hesitated becau se he cou ld n o t decide how consum er co-ops could best be o rg an ized in large u rb a n areas. O n the one hand, he recognized th a t o n e society co n tro llin g several branches could cu t costs th ro u g h cen tralizin g b o o kkeeping, adm inistration, and stock-ordering. O n the o th er h a n d , he recognized that co-operatives w ith large ad m in istrativ e stru ctu res tended to be conservative in o pening new branches, im p erso n al in th e ir tre a tm en t o f custom ers, and bureaucratic in th e ir o p eratio n s.80 W hen the CG C o-op en tered into acu te financial difficulties in the spring o f 1937, K een decided to su p p o rt its critics. H e did so because he w anted to help them develop a V an co u v er C o -o p erativ e C ouncil w hich w ould sponsor study groups a n d b u y in g clubs th ro u g h o u t the city. U ltim ately, he envisioned the C ouncil p ro m o tin g a new w ave o f co-operative stores.81 H e th o u g h t this d e v elo p m en t necessary, p artly because o f the C om m on G o o d ’s problem s, b u t m ostly because o f a disaster at “ Plenty-for-A ll” . In Ja n u a ry , 1937, a p a ck e r fo r th a t re­ puted co-operative had m istakenly placed b ak in g so d a labels on cans o f rat poison; subsequently, an u n fo rtu n a te w o m an ate som e cake m ade from the m istakenly packaged poison and d ie d .82 T h e resu ltan t furor sealed the fate o f all the co-operative or sem i-co -o p erativ e in itia ­ tives from the early thirties, an d led K een to believe th a t a com pletely new start was necessary. K een’s intervention cam e too late. T h e b urst o f en th u siasm had been dissipated in the struggle betw een th e various g roups an d in the Plenty-for-A ll catastrophe. F ollow ing his su p p o rt for local o rg an iza­ tions, the c w s C o-operative, w ith o u t CG C o-op affiliation o p en ed in Victoria. At the sam e tim e, the C ouncil, in d e p e n d e n t o f the c w s C o ­ op and the C om m on G oo d , becam e q u ite active u n d e r the lead ersh ip o f D. C. D earlove and A. B. T ro tter, th o u g h it did no t m ake a serious effort to guide groups beyond the b u y in g club stage. M ostly, it c o n ­

176

E A C H F O R A LL

centrated upon m eetings, addressed by w ell-know n C an ad ian s, such as K ing G o rd o n o f the F ellow ship for a C h ristian Social O rder, and visiting British co-operative leaders. It also pu b lish ed stu d y club litera­ ture an d a w eekly new sletter, co nducted canvasses, an d organized a m aze o f com m ittees. It seem s, how ever, to have attra c ted only the already converted, and it h ad little real im pact. In short, the u rb an m ovem ent in B.C. had becom e stag n an t an d fru strated ; in all p ro b a ­ bility it w ould have disin teg rated com pletely except for the reju v en a­ tion it received from farm in g an d fishing co-operatives in the last years o f the decade. T he most dynam ic leaders in the B.C. m o v em en t d u rin g the late thirties were the fisherm en. By 1937, they h ad three so cieties—Prince R upert, K yuquot, and N o rth Island T ro lle rs—an d they w ere an n u ally m arketing through these societies over a m illion d o llars’ w orth o f fish. As they prospered, the fisherm en began to investigate o th e r kinds o f co-operation. T hey had a n atu ral base since they had been o p e ra tin g stores since the early thirties. T hey h ad n o t d evoted m uch th o u g h t to them before, how ever, sim ply because o rg an izin g th eir fish -m ark etin g program had been difficult enough. By the late thirties, with th eir m arketing program going well, they w ere read y to look at o th e r kinds o f co-operative action. T he fisherm en looked first at co -operative w holesaling a n d alm ost coincidentally at cred it unions. In 1937 they began to discuss am o n g them selves the possibilities o f these form s o f co -o p eratio n , and, in 1938, they sought info rm atio n from co -o p erato rs in V anco u v er a n d the interior. G eorge D olsen o f the N o rth Island T railers was the first representative sent by the fisherm en to V ancouver, an d he m ad e a speech to the V ancouver C o-o p erativ e C o uncil on Ja n u a ry 18, 1938, that m ade a vivid im pression. U sing slides he h ad m ad e o f the fishing co-operatives, he d em o n strated the possibilities o f the m o v em en t to a rath er frustrated group o f people and h elped rek in d le en th u siasm for new co-operative projects.83 In F eb ru ary , o th e r rep resen tativ es o f the fishing co-ops m et with the C ouncil a n d asked it to b ecom e the lobbyist for the B.C. m o v em en t.84 Shortly afterw ard , the reju v en ated Council, aided by the C o-op U n io n o f C a n a d a an d the C red it U n io n N ational Association, quickly drew up a cred it un io n act a n d su b m it­ ted it to British C olum bia legislators.85 It also lobbied successfully for the ap p o in tm en t o f an official to en courage the d ev elo p m en t o f credit unions and study clubs. T h e m an chosen by the g o v ern m en t was N orm an M cK enzie from St. Francis X avier, and he reacted with rem arkable despatch. S uddenly, unexpectedly, and p rim arily because o f the fisherm en, the m ovem ent had taken on new life.

Positive Responses, 1935-1939

177

This reaw akening led R o b ert W ood o f the A rm stro n g society to call a m eeting in V ancouver on M ay 8, 1938, to co n sid er the d ev elo p m en t o f a wholesale. W ood’s action, w hich was also p artly in im itatio n o f Prairie developm ents, elicited an en co u rag in g response from th e fish­ erm en, the m iners, the V ancouver co-operators, a n d the farm ers from the F raser Valley. A fter three days o f d elib eratio n , a w holesale was form ed, though one caterin g largely to the needs o f the fisherm en. D espite the optim ism su rro u n d in g these develo p m en ts, n e ith e r the credit-union m ovem ent nor the w holesale had an easy tim e becom ing stabilized. T he credit unions, for ex am ple, soon re q u ired stro n g p ro ­ vincial leadership, a need w hich the n atio n al C o -o p erativ e U n io n could not provide. A fter considering K e e n ’s suggestion th a t the B.C. m ovem ent spark a C an a d ia n c red it-u n io n o rg an izatio n , the B.C. C redit U nion A ssociation, form ed in M ay 1939, d ecid ed to jo in w ith the A m erican C redit U nion N atio n al A ssociation. T h e decision caused intense debate, and the British C o lu m b ian m o v em en t in late 1939 an d for the m ost o f 1940 was deeply divided over the questio n o f A m eri­ can dom ination.86 U ltim ately, how ever, the pow er an d the ab ility o f C U N A becam e too hard to resist. T he wholesale, trying to serve w idely d ifferen t g roups and lacking connections, sim ilarly m ade slow progress in the early years. Like the V ancouver Council, it was p lagued by political d ifferences a n d badly ham pered by the failure o f the co n su m er m o v em en t in the V an co u v er area. It becam e a supplier to the w eaker British C o lu m b ian h in terla n d and, until the m id-forties, could not secure any o f the lucrative V an ­ couver m arket. T he w holesale also suffered because it could n o t find established custom ers in the farm ing areas o f the province. W h ate v er fragile unity had been gained by the fruit grow ers an d milk p ro d u cers w as p ro ­ foundly shaken not only by the D epression b u t also by flu ctu atin g governm ent support. Both farm in g g roups had tu rn e d ho p efu lly to the idea o f m arketing boards in the tw enties. T he id ea h ad h ad initially prom ising results in provincial and federal m ark etin g legislation in the late twenties an d m id-thirties. U n fo rtu n ately from the farm ers’ view ­ point, though, these pieces o f legislation w ere delcared ultra vires in the late thirties. T he thorny q uestion o f com pulsion versus v o lu n ta ry ­ ism nevertheless rem ained, an d to it w ere a d d ed the p ro b lem s o f discouraged co-operatives, like the F raser V alley M ilk Producers, w ho had placed such hopes on the m ark etin g -b o ard a p p ro ach . T he d esp air side o f the econom ic cycle h ad retu rn ed w ith a v en geance to the B.C. p roducers’ m ovem ent.87 All told then, the B.C. m ovem ent rep resen ted rem ark ab le new

178

E A C H F O R A LL

grow th in fisherm en’s groups, a new in terest by g o v ern m en t officials, difficulties in consum er co-operatives, and d esp o n d en cy am o n g the farm ers. T he divisions resulting from these variations m ean t th at B.C. m ade the least progress o f all E n g lish -C an ad ian regions in m oving tow ard integrated co-operative en deavours. But, even in B.C., the legacy o f the D epression w ould help to stim ulate, as in o th e r p ro v ­ inces, a drive to overcom e in stitutional b arriers and a desire to form an integrated m ovem ent. L ooked at in large perspective, the agonies o f the thirties were an im p o rtan t stim ulus for the grow th o f the forties and fifties.

C H A PT E R N IN E

The State of the Movement—The Thirties Economic cooperation is im plicit in the idea o f education. We look upon education as the m eans o f enabling m an to live a f u l l life in a fr e e society. We are th a n kfu l fo r the achievem ents in education in the past, but the best that it has done was to cater to the sm art fe w who were able to take fu l l advantage o f it. We sh o u ld n ’t be too happy about this situation. It is legitimate f o r us to hope that we m a y evolve a system which will bring life to all the people. In other words, we hope that in the fu tu re we will do som ething m ore than fr e e the sm a ll m inority o f the intellectually bright people. We should be able to bring all the people along the road o f progress. In the econom ic field , this cannot be done in the old way. I t can be done by either socialism or cooperation, a n d cooperation offers a way o f doing it that is in harm ony with the best traditions o f the past. I t w ould seem to be the natural evolution o f a fr e e society. M. M . Coady, undated, quoted in A. F. Laidlaw, T he M an from M argaree ( Toronto, 1972), p. 98.

It is com m onplace to suggest th at C a n a d a w as p ro fo u n d ly affected by the G reat D epression. F o r m ore than thirty y ears after 1939 any m arked dow nturn in the econom y w ould reaw aken recollections o f the “dirty thirties” . A nd, until the 1970s, m em ories o f the D epression would help justify the drive tow ard a “ m a n ag e d ” econom y a n d the w elfare state. T he political parties th at em erged in the thirties d id not d isappear quickly, based as they w ere on fru strated am b itio n s, m ili­ tant sectionalism , and ideological co m m itm en t. In fact, the D epression gave a sharper focus to the protests o f the thirties, a focus th a t contrasted rem arkably to the confused, m ainstream reform ism o f the twenties. T h at p a tte rn —o f h eightened co m m itm en t, o f m ore d e te r­ m ined p u rp o se—was particu larly true o f the co-o p erativ e m o v em en t, one o f the d ecade’s m ost im p o rtan t reform causes. This sharpened, reform ing edge w ithin the m o v em en t p ro fo u n d ly affected co-operative organizations. Like m an y o th e r institu tio n s, co­ operatives tend to go through a d y nam ic o rg an izatio n al p h ase u n d e r the direction o f charism atic individuals. As the in itial b u rst o f en th u si­ asm subsides—and if prosperity is ac h iev ed —they tend to b ecom e subdued by the pressures o f day -to -d ay op eratio n s, the em ergence o f

179

180

E A CH FOR ALL

m anagerial groups, an d the narro w in g o f objectives. T h a t tren d could be seen in the U n ited G rain G row ers, the w h eat pools, o th e r m a rk et­ ing organizations, and the m ore successful co n su m er societies. T h e D epression had the effect o f arrestin g th at d e v elo p m en t in m any co­ operatives and o f injecting new vitality th a t w ould sp ark expansion and grow th in co-operative circles for several decad es in to the fu tu re .1 W hile the invigoration o f the m o v em en t d u rin g the thirties was reflected in a variety o f ways, the most significant was the break d o w n o f institutional isolation. In all p arts o f C a n a d a , b u t especially in the M aritim es and the Prairies, sm all coteries o f in d iv id u als beg an to recognize the value o f co-operatives w orking tog eth er. U n d e rsta n d in g the indefinite potential o f co -operative tech n iq u es, these sm all g roups form ed in each province e ith e r a co -operative section o r council d e ­ voted to uniting the m o vem en t.2 In tim e, too, these cen tral o rg an iza­ tions w ould help create a b ew ildering array o f new co-operatives; in fact, so varied an array th a t th e E n g lish -C an ad ian m o v em en t w ould becom e possibly the m ost diverse in the w orld. I

T he surge w ithin the m o v em en t also m e a n t a g reater co m m itm en t to adult education. T he A ntigonish m ovem ent, o f course, d eservedly has received considerable atten tio n as a focus for a d u lt ed u catio n in the th irties:3 its study groups, its sh o rt courses, its fieldw orkers, its im p res­ sive accom plishm ents, an d its effective publicists gave it a global reputation that persists to this day. In C an ad a , the A ntigonish m o v e­ m ent profoundly affected m an y co-operatives alth o u g h it should not be considered as the only m ajo r thrust tow ard ad u lt e d u catio n a m o n g E nglish-C anadian co-operators. In fact, the A ntigonish tech n iq u es were so widely im itated sim ply because they w ere so easily an d inex­ pensively adap ted to already d eveloped e d u catio n al cam p a ig n s in m any co-operatives. F ieldw orkers for th e w h eat pools an d in d iv id u al enthusiasts for co-operative action had long used in fo rm ally the basic idea o f the study club. M ore fu n d am en tally , m any c o -o p erato rs had already adopted the general assum ption th at extensive ad u lt ed u catio n was a necessary precu rso r to so u n d co-operative action. In this sense, the A ntigonish m ovem ent was n o t so m uch inno v ativ e in tech n iq u e or principle; rather, it fo u n d o rg an izatio n al tech n iq u es th rough w hich the potentialities o f tried m eth o d s could be fully realized. T h u s, in retrospect, the m ain d ev elo p m en t in co -o p erativ e e d u c a tio n a l services during the thirties was th a t p reviously-developed system s w ere p e r­ fected and elaborated upo n ; in tim e, they w ould revitalize the m o v e­ m ent’s institutions.

State o f M ovement— Thirties

181

In its cam paigns to educate the w id er society, the E n g lish -C an ad ian m ovem ent relied heavily upo n its press. W ith the exception o f T h e Guide, which tended to becom e a fam ily farm m agazine, the m a jo r co­ operative publications d eep en ed th e ir co m m itm en t to co -op erativ e principles. O f all these jo u rn a ls, The Western Producer b ecam e the most pow erful voice for co-operative action on th e Prairies. By 1939 it had 105,000 readers, plus a wide read ersh ip m ad e up o f those w ho borrow ed copies from neighbours. The Producer featu red articles on all aspects o f the co-operative m o v em en t; co n stan tly stressed how co­ operatives could solve the pro b lem s o f depressed areas; a n d c o n tin u ­ ously prodded all groups to form m any kinds o f co -operatives. It also featured special sections fo r w om en an d for y o u n g peo p le, b o th o f which em phasized co-operative them es. T h e “ Y o u n g C o -o p e ra to rs’” section was particularly successful p e rh ap s because it consisted largely o f letters, stories, and poem s co n trib u ted by teenagers an d child ren them selves. T he youn g co-o p erato rs w ere organized into clu b s based on geographic regions, each club h aving a p resid en t an d a c o -o rd in a ­ tor for the “Y oung C o-o p erato rs’ P age” . T h e clubs w ere also involved in special co-op “schools” run th ro u g h o u t the p rovince d u rin g the sum m er m onths. All these activities w ere well received an d h elp to explain the w idespread u n d erstan d in g o f co -o p eratio n to be fo u n d on the Prairies in the forties an d fifties. T here w ere oth er jo u rn a ls on the P rairies th at served the m o v em en t well during the D epression. In M an ito b a The Scoop Shovel, w hich had started publication in 1924, was forced to cease o p e ratio n w hen the M anitoba pool w ent in to b an k ru p tcy in 1931. It was rep laced im m ediately, how ever, by The M anitoba Co-operator w hich w as sp o n ­ sored by the M anitoba C o -operative C ouncil. Jo h n T. H ull w as the editor o f both jo u rn als an d his stro n g co-operative en th u siasm s w ere to be seen continuously in editorials a n d rep o rts. C o n tro l by the council, too, m ean t th at the w holesale b ecam e a stro n g su p p o rte r o f The Co-operator a d evelo p m en t w hich increased th a t jo u r n a l’s c o m ­ m itm ent to the b ro ad er co -operative m o v em en t. In A lb erta, The UFA, though less concerned ab o u t all aspects o f co -o p eratio n th an th e o th e r two m ajor jo u rn als, did d eep en its su p p o rt o f p ro d u c e r co -o p eratio n and by the end o f the decade d em o n strate d its in terest in cred it unions. All told, the Prairie m o v em en t w as well served by fo u r m a jo r jo u rn als by the end o f the decade. In the M aritim es and O n tario there w ere two sim ilarly successful journals. In 1940 The M aritim e Co-operator started p u b licatio n , suc­ ceeding the St. FX E xtension D e p a rtm e n t’s B ulletin as the jo u rn a l o f the A ntigonish m ovem ent. The Co-operator, reflecting th e b ro ad in ter­

182

E A C H F O R A LL

ests o f the D e p artm en t’s p ersonnel, soon becam e the m ost in te rn a tio n ­ ally o riented o f the C a n ad ian jo u rn a ls, featu rin g rep o rts on m any aspects o f the m ovem ent in N o rth A m erica an d E urope. In O n tario , the U nited F arm ers’ m ovem ent took o ver The N ew C om m onw ealth (form erly The W eekly S u n an d previously The Farm ers' S u n ) in 1936. U nder the leadership o f H. H. H an n am , The R u ra l Co-operator, as the new venture was called, becam e an enthusiastic p ro p o n e n t o f a bro ad co-operative ap proach. F inally, in O n tario , b u t serving the n atio n al m ovem ent, The Canadian Co-operator co n tin u ed to p ro v id e a p h ilo ­ sophical perspective th at h ad a co n sid erab le follow ing, especially in the rank and file o f consum er societies.4 This range o f jo u rn als, along w ith the a d a p ta tio n o f study club techniques and fieldm en services in the pools, d em o n stra te the interest o f the E nglish-C anadian co-operative m o v em en t in ad u lt edu catio n . So too did G eorge K een ’s involvem ent in the W o rk ers’ E d u catio n al Association. T he p a re n t w e a in G re a t B ritain h ad been closely en ­ twined with the British co -operative m ovem ent, A lbert M an sb rid g e, the w e a ’ s founder having been an em ployee o f the E nglish co-operative wholesale. M ansbridge h ad b ro u g h t the w e a to C a n a d a in 1917 w hen he gave a series o f talks in several C a n a d ia n cities. D u rin g the 1920s, several w e a branches w ere established, largely in O n ta rio and often because o f the efforts o f co-operative lead e rs.5 In the 1930s, w ith the aid o f universities, the w e a m ovem ent grew rapidly, especially in O ntario. G eorge K een played an im p o rta n t role in this d ev elo p m en t, and he was, for 1931 and 1932, O n tario vice-president; in 1933 he was president. Sim ilarly, at the local level, w e a s included m any in d iv id u ­ als w ho were also active in co-operatives. T his conn ectio n rem ain ed im portant for both co-ops and the w e a until the forties w hen ad u lt education tended to becom e the preserve o f university extension d e ­ partm ents. II

In addition to supportin g a d u lt edu catio n , the surge o f the E nglishC anadian m ovem ent created an increased role for the C o -o p erativ e U nion o f C anada. T he grow th o f provincial sections w as one in d ica­ tion o f this developm ent; an even m ore im p o rta n t d em o n stratio n was the increasing significance o f the U n io n ’s an n u a l congresses. C u sto m ­ arily held in a Prairie tow n o r city, the congresses increasingly b ro u g h t together leaders from ail types o f co-operatives. Inevitably, these m eetings contributed su bstantially to the d e v elo p m en t o f jo in t p ro ­ jects, both econom ic and educatio n al, an d to a m atu rin g o f th e m o v e­

State o f M ovement— Thirties

183

m ent, econom ically an d ideologically. D u rin g the later thirties, the congresses served in p artic u la r to stim u late the o rg an izatio n o f cred it unions an d the exam inatio n o f the farm -m ach in ery question. Increas­ ingly, it seem s, the U nion was b ecom ing a forum for even the m ost pow erful co-operative associations. W. C. G ood and G eorge K een, the two m ost im p o rta n t U n io n figures, found them selves playing so m ew h at d ifferen t roles as the decade ended. T he increasing w illingness o f m ark e tin g co-operatives to exam ine the total m ovem en t a n d the co n so lid atio n o f ag ricu ltu ral organizations naturally gave new o p p o rtu n itie s to W. C. G o o d . A ctive in both the farm ers’ and the co -operative m o v em en ts for o v er forty years and highly respected by even the y o u n g p eo p le in b o th m o v e­ m ents, G ood played an im p o rtan t p a rt in startin g to b reak dow n long­ standing institutional barriers d u rin g the later thirties. In con trast, G eorge K een found h im self w elcom ed in m ore co-o p erativ e g a th e r­ ings but, ironically, increasingly serving as a respected, if often ig­ nored, eld er statesm an. K een’s role becam e rath e r hollow p artly b ecause o f his ad v an cin g years (he was seventy in 1939) a n d p artly because the p ro d u c e r socie­ ties, despite their grow ing interest in the CUC, did not take him seriously. But p erhaps m ost im p o rtan tly , K een lost influence because he was a p art o f the declining British im pact on the C a n a d ia n m o v e­ ment. F o r thirty years K een had been the lead in g elem en t in an attem pt to apply to C an ad a the collected w isdom o f the British m o v e­ ment. H e had been aided in this effort by n u m ero u s British im m i­ grants w ho h ad com e, like him self, in the years b efore 1914. M any o f these associates retired o r died as the thirties progressed, thereb y slowly reducing the close contacts he h ad dev elo p ed betw een 1909 and 1930. This developm ent, along w ith the failure o f efforts to link econom ically the British w holesales and C an ad ia n co n su m er g ro u p s,6 m eant that K een, that im m aculate V ictorian, becam e increasingly anachronistic. In m any ways and ra th e r sadly, the U nion an d the m ovem ent were grow ing beyond him . T here was one area, though, in w hich K een ’s w ork earned c o n tin u ­ ing respect from his fellow co-operators: he was an acknow ledged expert in the difficult area o f relations betw een co -o p erativ es an d governm ents. T his expertise becam e p articu larly v alu ab le in the 1930s because the grow ing im po rtan ce o f co-operatives d e m an d e d a d e q u a te legislation for their incorp o ratio n a n d supervision. Every E nglishspeaking province in C an a d a a m en d e d its co-operative acts d u rin g the decade, w hile all those that form erly did not have cred it union legisla­

184

E A C H F O R A LL

tion passed such laws d u rin g the last h a lf o f the thirties. In nearly every instance K een played an im p o rta n t role in these enactm ents, helping to insure a degree o f unifo rm ity in legislative fo u n d atio n s across the country, uniform ity th at w ould facilitate the d ev elo p m en t o f interprovincial projects by co-operatives in the forties an d fifties. K een also played a significant p art in d efin in g g o v ern m en t policies in the vital field o f taxing co-operatives. T his questio n h ad first em erged in C an ad a as in o th e r N o rth A tlantic co untries, d u rin g the First W orld W ar. T he frantic search for revenue by g o vernm ents during that conflict natu rally focused atten tio n on the tax atio n p riv i­ leges extended to surpluses pro d u ced by co-operatives. T h e size o f these surpluses, annually am o u n tin g to several h u n d re d s o f th o u san d s o f dollars by the end o f the w ar, also stim u lated g o v ern m en t’s in ter­ est; it was easy to ignore stores having sm all surpluses, b u t it was difficult to leave nearly u n to u ch ed the large am o u n ts m ark etin g co­ ops saved their m em bers. T his grow ing in terest by succeeding federal governm ents led inevitably to a decades-long controversy th at cu lm i­ nated finally in the ap p o in tm e n t o f a R oyal C om m ission on the topic in the early forties. G eorge K een and the C o-operative U n io n played p ro m in en t roles in the taxation debate. K een, in fact, becam e an im p o rta n t d e fe n d e r o f the co-operative view point as early as 1917 w hen the first incom e taxes were im posed. U sing the sam e a rg u m en ts as British c o -o p era­ tors, K een argued th a t surpluses were savings retu rn ed to m em b ers and not profits subject to taxation. T h e g o v ern m en t accepted this argum ent in p a rt and agreed not to tax at the source m oney retu rn ed to m em bers as patron ag e dividends. It d id n o t agree, how ever, th at m oney kept for reserves should escape taxation. K een p ro tested this decision vehem ently, b u t to no avail: the g o v ern m en t w as a d a m a n t and the p art o f the m ov em en t K een could su m m o n to protest had little political clout. N or could K een gain the su p p o rt o f the p ro d u c e r co-operatives: they rem ained a lo o f because they believed it m ore effective to a p ­ proach governm ent an d the courts by them selves. T his in d ividualistic approach did not w ork for som e though it did for others. In 1929, for exam ple, the F raser V alley M ilk P roducers a p p ealed a taxatio n case to the Suprem e C ourt. T he co u rt decided th at the d airy w ould have to pay taxes because it retu rn ed surpluses on sh are capital like any o th e r business. T he po in t not accepted here was th at the f v m p w as d ifferen t because its share capital stru ctu re reflected the p articip atio n o f in d i­ viduals. In contrast, in 1930, the co u rt accepted th a t the surpluses

State o f Movement—Thirties

185

returned to m em bers by the S askatchew an W h eat Pool w ere not taxable at source. Significantly, the court, in this instance held th a t it was its pooling structure an d not its co -o p erativ e m eth o d o f o rg an iza­ tion that exem pted the com pany. In essence, the c o u rt reg ard ed pools as collecting agencies for their m em bers, in stitu tio n s th a t re tu rn e d “ borrow ed” funds as they w ere no lo n g er req u ired . T h e effect o f these decisions was profou nd because it forced m an y co-operatives o rg an ­ ized before the 1920s, notably d airies an d the U n ited G rain G row ers, to pay taxes that co-operatives o rganized on a p o o lin g basis could avoid.7 T he uncertainties and tensions p ro d u ced by these two so m ew h at contradictory decisions led co -operative officials, inclu d in g m em b ers o f the C o-operative U nio n executive, to organize a special m eetin g with m em bers o f the federal C ab in et in D ecem b er 1929. T h ey fo u n d a receptive audience. N o t only w ere ca b in e t m em b ers co n cern ed a b o u t m aintaining w estern su p p o rt in the fo rth co m in g federal election, they were also strongly influenced by C. A. D u nning, the finance m in ister who retained his sym pathy for the w estern co -o p erativ e m ov em en t. T he following sum m er, shortly before the federal election, D u n n in g introduced an am en d m en t to the Incom e W ar T ax Act. T h e a m e n d ­ m ent, w orked out in haste an d w ith insufficient c o n su ltatio n w ith co­ operative leaders, attem p ted to ex em p t from tax atio n the su rp lu ses o f co-operatives returned to m em bers. Specifically, the am e n d m e n t, a d d ­ ing Section 4 (p) to the act, pro v id ed th at p ro d u c e r co-operatives would be exem pt if they w ere “ u n d e r an o b lig a tio n ” to m a rk et the produce o r buy supplies for th eir m em b ers at cost. R ecognizing the problem s raised by n o n -m em b er business, the section fu rth e r pro v id ed that co-operatives w ould not have to p ay taxes if less than tw enty per cent o f th eir business was w ith u naffiliated custom ers. The am en dm ent m et the w ishes o f m ost p ro d u c e r pools relatively well, but it only confused the general tax atio n p ictu re for m ost o th e r co-operatives. It did not d efine precisely the n a tu re o f co-o p erativ es; it failed to specify the position o f co n su m er societies; it did n o t discuss the taxation responsibilities o f co-operatives o rganized by co-operatives; and it was so vague th at it could be a d m in istered variously to different co-operatives. T h e “co -o p erativ e” m ost aroused by a p p a r­ ently unjust interpretation s o f the a m en d m e n t w as the U n ited G ra in Grow ers. T he UGG had never been sy m p ath etic to the struggle by co­ operatives for tax exem ptions, b u t as pro sp erity re tu rn e d in the late thirties it found itself paying co nsiderably m ore fed eral incom e tax than its co-operative com petitors. T h a t situ atio n n atu rally p ro d u c ed a

186

E A C H F O R A LL

deep sense o f injustice am o n g U G G m an ag ers an d su p p o rters. T h e resultant dissatisfaction was reflected on the pages o f The C ountry Guide and in the public p ro n o u n cem en ts o f U G G officials.8 In the m idst o f these u n certain ties the C U C d efen d ed the cause o f the consum er societies and p lead e d for the unity o f the C a n a d ian m ovem ent to press for a co h eren t, fair g o v ern m en t policy on the taxation o f co-operatives. G eo rg e K een, in p artic u la r, w rote re p e a t­ edly on the subject to both co-operative a n d g o v ern m en t officials; his efforts would b ear fruit d u rin g the 1940s w hen the C a n a d ia n m ove­ m ent, for the first tim e, form ed a generally u n ited fro n t to plead its case before the R oyal C om m ission on the T ax atio n o f C o -operatives. Ill In addition to the practical q uestions o f legislative and tax atio n rela­ tions with governm ents, co -o p erato rs w ere, in the thirties, increasingly preoccupied by philosophical q uestions o ver the a p p ro p ria te role for governm ents in co-operative action. N a tu rally enough, d e b a te s over this issue kept alive the now historic divisions betw een class (o r occu­ pational) co-operators, p ragm atists, an d Utopians. T he o ccu p atio n al co-operators found them selves in retreat p artly because o f the d e p a r­ ture o f such pow erful figures as H en ry W ise W ood and J. J. M orrison but m ostly because th e ir solutions seem ed in a p p ro p ria te in the D e­ pression. T he dream o f un itin g the co u ntryside in a m oral reju v en a­ tion o f the nation through g ro u p g o v ern m en t seem ed fa rth e r away than ever and, in the face o f the d eclining p o w er o f the countryside, increasingly inadequate for the refo rm atio n o f C an a d ian life. N o t even the C an ad ian C h a m b e r o f A griculture, form ed in 1935, show ed as m uch sam e m ilitant ag rarianism and dev o tio n to the “ ru ral m y th ” as did the farm ers’ m ovem ents earlier in the century. M any o f the pow erful figures beh in d the C h a m b e r, m en such as H . H. H a n n am , were interested in b ro ad reform s, b u t, increasingly, the n atio n al C a n a ­ dian agrarian m ovem en t was becom ing m ore interested in lob b y ing than crusading, m ore concerned a b o u t the p ractical th an th e idealistic. The burst o f strong ag rarian m illen arian ism h ad v irtually ru n its course; and with its decline w ent o n e strong im pulse w ithin the C a n a ­ dian reform tradition. T he utopian co-operators g enerally becam e m uch m ore p ro m in en t in the thirties. T he division betw een the th ree kinds o f U topians—the dem ocratic socialists, the co -operative purists, an d the m arx ists—how ­ ever, also becam e m ore p ro n o u n ced as the d ecad e ad v an ced . T he dem ocratic socialists w ere m ost effective in S askatchew an. Several

State o f Movement—Thirties

187

w heat pool fieldm en (significantly, only a few b o ard m em b ers or m anagem ent personnel) w ere strong social d em ocrats, a rd e n t su p p o rt­ ers o f the CCF, and com m itted advocates o f co -operative actio n.9 Sim ilarly, m any, though certainly n o t all, o f the fieldm en o f the A ntigonish m ovem ent w orking in the Sydney area w ere m o tivated by a com plex m ixture o f m o d erate socialism an d co -operative p hiloso­ p h y .10 In u rb an C anada, n o tab ly V ancouver, W innipeg, T o ro n to , and M ontreal, social dem ocrats were enthu siastic su p p o rters o f co-operation though in nearly eveiy instance, they w ere in a d e q u a te as practical businessm en. C onsequently, the o rg an izatio n s they fo u n d ed w ere nearly alw ays im m ediate casualties, the victim s o f in tern al quarrels, determ ined com petition, fickle m em berships, an d m an ag erial in co m ­ p e te n c e ." N evertheless, in balance, the social d em o crats w ere im p o r­ tant to the m ovem ent in the thirties because o f the o rg an izatio n al enthusiasm s they co n trib u ted . A lm ost inevitably, too, social d em ocrats were loyal m em bers o f co-operatives, even co-ops w hich w ere com ­ pletely apolitical o r d o m in ated by individuals o f d ifferent political convictions. C o-operative purists becam e m ore significant as the thirties p ro g ­ ressed. Two jo u rn als, The Western Producer a n d The Canadian Cooperator, can be readily associated w ith th at view point, a n d a third, The M anitoba Co-operator, was only slightly less com m itted. All these journals referred constantly to a vaguely d efin ed co -o p erativ e co m ­ m onw ealth, and they all en co u rag ed n u m ero u s form s o f co-operatives. P erhaps m ost im portantly, the three jo u rn a ls consistently arg u ed th at the co-operative ideology was distinct from cap italism and socialism . These viewpoints, and those o f n u m ero u s in d iv id u als given to co­ operative utopianism , foun d a receptive au d ien ce d u rin g the adversity o f the D epression. F o r m any C an ad ia n s in th a t crisis perio d, tra d i­ tional capitalism was the cause o f the econom ic d o w n tu rn an d h ad to be reform ed. F o r them , co -operatism offered a plau sib le altern ativ e that did not create the antagonism s im plicit in m ost varieties o f social­ ism. M arxist co-operators becam e less p ro m in e n t an d less sign ifican t in the m ovem ent during the thirties. T h e co-operatives they started d u r­ ing the preceding decade in n o rth ern O n tario an d on the w est coast declined sharply in the D epression. T h ey left b eh in d only a few m arxist-oriented co-operatives in N o rth ern O n ta rio an d a few new societies, notably in W innipeg a n d E d m o n to n . M arxists lost in terest partly because they w ere m ore co n cern ed a b o u t trad es unionism and the struggles o f the C om m u n ist p arty . T hey also grew increasingly

188

EACH FOR ALL

scornful o f the C an ad ian m ovem ent, seeing it as essentially a b o u r­ geois phenom en on inad eq u a tely aw are o f the significance o f class conflict.12 Thus, m arxists, w ho w ere in any event n eu tralized in the m ajor co-operatives in w hich they w ere involved, w ere a declining force in the thirties, a curious co n trast to th eir grow ing stren g th in trades unionist circles. Pragm atic co-operators increased in n u m b ers and significance d u r­ ing the decade. T he m ark etin g co-operatives an d the n ascen t creditunion m ovem ent w ere usually d o m in ated by liberal an d conservative m en and w om en; their general m em berships, too, seldom show ed utopian convictions. M ost co-o p erato rs in C a n a d a d u rin g the thirties expected lim ited, definite benefits from th eir co -o p erativ e associa­ tions; they w ere not convinced th a t co-operative ideology w ould be­ come the ethos for a new, m ore ju s t society. T h e D epression, though, aroused the d eterm inatio n o f m an y C a n a d ia n s to use co-operative action as one way to im prove th eir sta n d a rd s o f living. As w ages dropped and jo b s disap p eared , prag m atists becam e d e te rm in e d to use co-operatives to undertak e tasks indiv id u al en terp rise o r g o v ern m en t action would not o r could not attem p t."In ad d itio n to e x p an d in g old co-operatives and helping to create new ones, the en th u siasm s and broadened views o f p ragm atists h ad one o th e r m ajo r effect: they encouraged co-operatives to co -o rd in ate th e ir activities m ore closely. T hroughout the decade, as a result, co-operatives organized provincial associations, gave m ore su p p o rt to the CUC, lau n ch ed jo in t ed u ca­ tional projects, invested in each other, an d d efen d ed th e ir co m m o n interests before governm ents. G iven the variety o f ideological co m m itm en ts involved in u n d e rta k ­ ing these jo in t projects, it is rem ark ab le th a t divisions over politics did not significantly d isru p t m ost co -operative institutions. All the larger co-operatives rem ained strictly in d ep e n d e n t o f political p arties, and, unlike the pattern earlier in the century, few co-operative leaders w ere know n for their partisan politics; in co n trast to the C rerars, M o th e r­ wells, and D unnings o f the 1900-29 period, n o t one o f the new leaders o f the thirties subsequently assum ed a m ajo r political role. U n d o u b t­ edly, the m ain reason for this lack o f p olitical in v o lv em en t was the general acceptance o f the w isdom o f enforcing strictly the “ R o c h d a le ” rule o f political neutrality. C o-operative purists w ere p articu larly in ­ strum ental in insisting upon co-operatives follow ing this m axim . F o r the m ost part, this m ea n t rem in d in g social d em o crats th a t the m ove­ m ent was not a varian t o f socialism b u t w as in stead so m eth in g d iffer­ ent. It also m ean t th at m any staunch co -o p erato rs w ith collectivist

State o f Movement—Thirties

189

outlooks rem ained a lo o f from the c c f or C o m m u n ist p arties. T he most dram atic, if now forgotten, in stance o f this split o ccurred at the 1933 R egina m eeting o f the CCF, the m eetin g w hich drew up the party’s m anifesto. D ism ayed partly because the m anifesto did not endorse co-operation strongly enough, W. C. G o o d drew up his own manifesto, advocating co-operatist views; his efforts w ere fo r n aught, and his proposals w ere passed over w ith little d iscu ssio n .13 T h a t fate was not untypical: co-operative purists constantly reiterated the d iffer­ ences betw een socialism a n d co-operatism , b u t they w ere nev er taken seriously by either socialist or, ironically, stro n g free-en terp rise advo­ cates. A cceptance o f political n eutrality did not m ean , how ever, th at ei­ ther the co-operative institutions o r the co-operative m o v em en t avoided contentious political issues. T h ey persisted in d e n o u n cin g the tariff structure, the ban k in g system , the retail trades, the regional im balance, and the com m on ex ploitation they believed deeply h arm ed the nation. T hey advanced a critique o f C a n a d ia n society, a critique steeped in historical attitu d es and fashioned by a body o f co-operative thought that, on an in tern atio n al level, h ad m atu red for n early a century. T he resulting em phases on econom ic action and a d u lt e d u ca­ tion were not necessarily less effective th an political involvem ent; but they were certainly less con ten tio us an d m ore g ra d u al in h aving their effect. IV

O ne “political” area th a t did attract increasing atten tio n , how ever, was international relations. As m em b ers o f an in tern a tio n a l m o v em en t that still dream ed o f spark in g a global refo rm atio n , m an y C a n a d ia n co-operators had a deep interest in attem p ts to preserve peace an d to encourage dem ocracy th ro u g h o u t the w orld. M any h ad been involved in the League o f N ations Society in the tw en ties,14 a n d m an y h ad also supported pacifism in the sam e d e c a d e .15 G en erally , co -o p erato rs in­ terested in international affairs d ep lo red the d ev elo p m en t o f intense nationalism , m ilitarism , an d conservatism in the 1930s. T h ey co n trib ­ uted spontaneously to the su p p o rt o f the rep u b lican side in the S p a n ­ ish Civil W ar, and they d o n ated funds a n d supplies to h elp cooperators fleeing from fascism. Som e thirty co -o p erato rs, in fact, were brought to C anad a through these fun d s and m an y m ore w ere h elped to m ake the transition as refugees in G re a t B ritain. Increasing preoccupation with the w orsening E u ro p ean situ atio n is evident in the jo u rn a ls and co rresp o n d en ce o f those w ho led the

190

EACH FOR ALL

m ovem ent in the late thirties. G eorge K een alw ays believed th at the best test o f dem ocracy in any co u n try was the state o f its co-operative m ovem ent. As he and others lo o k ed across the A tlantic at E u ro p e an d even across the Pacific at Ja p a n they h ad cause for a larm . In G e r­ m any an d Italy, H itler an d M ussolini h ad d estroyed th e ir c o u n tiy ’s co-operative m ovem ents; in S pain the victory o f F ra n c o h ad virtually doom ed w hat had been a flourishing m o v em en t; a n d in J a p a n a num ber o f co-operative leaders w ere im p riso n ed in the late thirties. T he im pulse tow ard d em ocratic life, reflected n o t only in political in stitu tio n s but also in co-operative en terp rise, seem ed to be ch al­ lenged and seriously th reaten ed . T h e resu ltan t sense o f d a n g e r was o f som e im portance to E n g lish -C an ad ian co-o p erato rs; along w ith the evident needs o f the D epression a n d the grow ing aw areness o f the value o f jo in t action, it helped stim ulate the sense o f m o v em en t th at was, for E nglish-C anadian co-operators, the m ost significant legacy o f the thirties.

CHAPTER TEN

The Second Era of Prosperity The building o f a better world is not m erely the reconstruction o f the economic order, essential though that be; it is the creation o f opportu­ nity fo r the achievement o f all cultural values and the en joym ent o f them. In an ugly world, as George B ernard S haw has said, even a millionaire can only get ugliness; the world envisaged by the co-operator is one in which everybody will have the opportunity to enjoy beauty. A n d that again is the heart and essence o f democracy, o f all that we really mean when we say that we are fig h tin g today f o r the preservation o f democracy. Every m an and woman who helps to get going in his locality co-operative enterprise, who helps to obtain m em bers f o r existin g co­ operative societies, and who takes an active interest in the prom otion o f the co-operative idea, is helping the world along not only to an era o f economic justice, but to a world f u l l o f the jo y o u s things o f life. Editorial, T he W estern Producer, June 13, 1940, p. 6. L e t’s all be co-operative, L e t’s all lead the way, L e t’s all work fo r the com m on good In a Christian way. “Each fo r all and all fo r each ”, L et our m otto be, Let us tackle our work, Our duty not shirk, L e t’s co-operate. Tune— “L e t’s all S in g like the Birdies S in g ” Written by Mrs. Thos. Bourke, L a Fleche, A Ita.

Like m ost English C anadians, co-o p erato rs su p p o rte d stro n g n atio n al involvem ent in the Second W orld W ar. In fact, they m ay have been m ore enthusiastic than m ost iden tifiab le groups in the country, sim ply because they had been read in g for so long a b o u t persecu tio n s o f cooperators in G erm any an d Italy .1 T hus, w hen w ar bro k e ou t, m any E nglish-C anadian co-operators, like th e ir p redecessors in 1914, h as­ tened to enlist in the arm ed forces. Sim ilarly, the m o v em en t they

191

192

EACH FOR ALL

supported called for an all-o u t w ar effort, a total m obilization o f m anpow er and the full utilization o f econom ic capacity. T h e m ove­ m ent, how ever, as m uch for strategical as o th e r reasons, believed it essential that the n atio n ’s capacity to p ro d u ce ag ricu ltu ral goods, esp e­ cially food, should not be curtailed. T h e feared p reced en t for this concern, o f course, was the F irst W orld W ar, w hen the B orden gov­ ern m en t had d rain ed the rural areas o f th eir m an p o w er in o rd er to m eet the short-term needs o f the E u ro p ean b attlefields. As it turned out. the problem s o f the earlier conflict did n o t retu rn w ith the sam e intensity, partly because the m an p o w er req u irem en ts on the farm s in 1939-45 were far less than those o f 1914-18. As w ar fever developed in C an ad a, it had an a m b iv a le n t effect upon the m ovem ent. O n the one h an d , m an y co -o p erato rs becam e totally subm erged in the w ar effo rt and this led them to d iv ert their co-operatives into a range o f w ar activities. T h e w ar seem ed so m uch m ore im portant th at initiatives begun in the thirties w ere p u t aside, not to be taken up again until the 1950s. Even The Western Producer and The Canadian Co-operator, long p illars o f co -o p erativ e idealism , becam e preoccupied with the conflict an d ignored co-o p erativ e issues and developm ents. Sim ilarly, local societies becam e c a u g h t up in the w ar and devoted considerable energies to clo th in g drives, soldier needs, and refugee funds,2 w hile larger societies m ad e significant m ajor contributions to the w ar effo rt.3 A nd, th ro u g h o u t m ost o f the m ovem ent’s organizations, V ictoiy Bonds becam e p o p u la r am ong m em bers increasingly anxious to w age total w ar ag ain st fascism .4 O n the other h an d , the w ar effort, fo r a t least som e co -o p erato rs, becam e intricately associated w ith the co -o p erativ e cause. In a larger sense, the co-operative m ov em en t h ad dev elo p ed as a d em o cratic response to the industrialism , u rb an izatio n , an d mass politics o f the m odem age. Inevitably, then, co -o p erato rs w ere a ttracted by the rh e t­ oric and the reality o f the dem o cratic cause in the Second W orld W ar. In their terms, the estab lish m en t o f political d em ocracy h ad to be secured before the struggle fo r econom ic d em ocracy could be p u rsued . I

In addition to raising these new perspectives w ithin the m ovem ent, the w ar created ex p an d ed business o p p o rtu n ities for co -o p erativ e in ­ stitutions. These new o p p o rtu n ities w ere n o t in all cases easily grasped. O rganizing the grain trade, for exam p le, p roved to be d iffi­ cult in the Second W orld W ar, in som e ways as d ifficult as in the F irst W orld W ar. T he m ain p roblem early in the w ar was relatin g an n u al

Second Era o f Prosperity

193

production to actual needs. T he closing o f E u ro p e a n m ark ets by the w ar was accom panied by large grain surpluses an d , fo r a w hile, this m eant that supply exceeded d em an d . T h e fu tu re, tho u g h , was u n clea r and unpredictable. Faced by such uncertainty, the fed eral g o v ern m en t had to act to control the grain econom y, an iro n ic an d unw elcom e developm ent for the m an y L iberal lead ers w ho h ad been trying to get the governm ent out o f the grain trad e since 1935. C o n seq u en tly , an d despite the protests o f Prairie farm ers an d th eir co -o p erativ e in stitu ­ tions, the governm ent intro d u ced a q u o ta system in 1940, follow ed by an acreage-reduction prog ram in 1941. F inally, in 1943, the g o v ern ­ m ent closed the w heat futures m a rk e t on the W in n ip eg E xchange and m ade the W heat B oard responsible fo r m ark etin g all w estern w heat sold.5 These last-m entioned actions, w hich w ere en d o rsed by the m a r­ keting co-operatives, stabilized th e w h eat econom y alo n g lines sim ilar to the situation in the F irst W orld W ar. U n d e r such co n d itio n s the grain-m arketing co-operatives thrived. As a result, the U nited G rain G ro w ers an d the w h eat pools w ere in strong positions by 1945. T he UGG, serving 35,000 m em b ers, ow ned 530 country elevators; op erated term in al elevators in P ort A rth u r, Vancouver, and V ictoria; sold large q u an tities o f farm ers’ supplies; distributed The C ountry Guide to 185,000 hom es; a n d h ad its ow n insurance subsidiary.6 By the sam e y ear, the S askatchew an pool, serv­ ing 100,000 farm ers, ow ned 1,129 co u n try elevators; o p erated four term inals at the L akehead; h ad its ow n construction c o m p an y ; ow ned the M odem Press w hich pu b lish ed The Western P roducer; o p erate d the C o-operative Livestock Producers as a su b sid iary ; sp o n so red ex­ tensive educational program s; an d was engaged in a host o f co­ operative projects.7 T he A lberta pool, serving 56,000 farm ers, o p e r­ ated 440 country elevators; co ntrolled two term inals in V an co u v er and one in F o rt W illiam ; issued its ow n w eekly, The B u d g et; an d was closely tied to the o th e r p ro d u cer co-operatives in A lb e rta .8 T h e M an ­ itoba pool, with 21,000 m em bers in 180 co untry locals, ow ned three term inals in F ort W illiam an d P ort A rth u r; pu b lish ed The Scoop Shovel', sponsored several ed u catio n al activities; ow ned a seeds d e­ p artm en t; and o p erated a gro u p life-insurance pro g ram for its m em ­ bers.9 All told, by the end o f the w ar the co-operatives had assets o f over $20,000,000; w ere m ark etin g 46 p e r cen t o f the P rairie grain crops; w ere selling each y ear o ver $250,000,000 in g rain; an d were returning annually in dividends to th eir m em bers over five m illions o f dollars. Collectively, they had com e to rep resen t an im m ense eco­ nom ic an d social force in Prairie societies.

194

EACH FOR ALL

M ost o f the o th er Prairie m ark etin g co-operatives also m ad e co m ­ parable progress d u rin g the war. T h e P rairie livestock p ro d u cers experienced particularly good years after the difficult tim es they had know n during the 1930s. T hey w ere helped im m ensely by the dev el­ opm ent o f d ependable m arkets in the w ar years and by the ad v en t o f better governm ent regulation o f the m ark etin g process. T h e h e art o f the Prairie livestock co-ops was fo u n d in the local associations w hich together form ed provincial pools. T h e pools in turn m ark e te d th ro u g h a central selling agency, the C an a d ia n Livestock C o -o p erativ es (W est­ ern) Ltd., w hich had stockyards in St. B o n iface.10 By the end o f 1945 this integrated system , boosted by w ar-tim e d em a n d , w as m ark etin g over $30,000,000 w orth o f livestock, m ostly cattle and hogs. In a d d i­ tion, there were m ore than 120 in d ep e n d e n t livestock-m arketing co­ ops scattered across the Prairies, 70 in A lb erta alone, selling w h erev er the m arket was strongest. P erh ap s the m ost u n u su al in d e p e n d e n t was the H orse C o-operative M ark etin g A ssociation w ith sheds in Swift C urrent and E dm onton. It started in 1945, largely in response to an o rd er from the Belgian g overnm ent for 10,000 tons o f pickled horse m eat.11 T he intense d em an d for dairy p roducts and rapid u rb an izatio n d u r­ ing the w ar years also benefited the P rairie co-operative dairies. In A lberta d u ring 1944, the N o rth e rn A lberta D airy Pool p urchased eighteen sm all cream eries from B urns & C o m p an y , a n d these a d d i­ tions brought its an n u al sales to m ore th an $3,500,000.12 Sim ilarly, the C entral A lberta an d Southern A lb erta Pools p ro sp ered , h av in g in the early forties their best y ear since the tw en ties.13 In S askatchew an, the D airy C o-operative M ark etin g A ssociation (o r S ask atch ew an M ilk Pool) enlarged its control over the S askatoon, Prince A lb ert, an d M elfort milk sheds by pu rch asin g eight local cream eries; by 1945, it had 12,000 m em bers an d an a n n u al su rplus o f $1,000,000.'4 F a rth e r south, the Saskatchew an C o-operative C ream eries m ad e steady p ro ­ gress, so m uch so th a t in 1943 it was able to finance a retu rn to m em ber control after twelve years of, in effect, g o v ern m en t o w n er­ sh ip .15 In M anitoba, M an ito b a C o-operative D airies p u rch ased plan ts in B randon, E lkhom , a n d M iniota in 1945, th ereb y brin g in g the n u m ­ ber o f plants it ow ned to sev en .16 In ad d itio n , especially am o n g F ranco-M anitobans, there w ere over a dozen new cheese factories established, m ostly close to the W innipeg m arket. Perhaps the m ost rem ark ab le expansion on the Prairies d u rin g the w ar years, how ever, occurred w ithin the c red it-u n io n m o v em en t. By 1946, there were one h u n d red a n d eighty-six cred it u n io n s in A l­

Second Era o f Prosperity

195

b erta,17 one hundred and seventy-four in S askatchew an, and ninetyseven in M an ito b a.18 All told, they served o ver 60,000 m em b ers and had com bined assets o f over $2,500,000. C red it union federations, form ed in Saskatchew an in 1938 an d M an ito b a in 1943,19 w ere very active by 1945, providing edu cation al an d b o n d in g services fo r th eir m em ber credit unions. In 1941, the first credit union central in E n­ glish C an ad a, the S askatchew an C o -o p erativ e C red it Society, was es­ tablished. Its m ain functions in the early years w ere to collect surplus funds from m em ber societies an d to m ake loans to cred it unions needing tem porary assistance. In 1944 the C red it Society jo in e d the C learing H ouse system a n d thus b ecam e ab le to provide ch eq u in g services for the negotiable in stru m en ts o f its m e m b e r societies. T hese activities soon becam e essential elem ents in the grow th o f the p ro v in ­ cial credit-union m ovem ent. T h ey also c o n trib u ted greatly to the p ro ­ vincial co-operatives generally since the C red it Society quickly b e ­ cam e a m ajor financial resource for all S askatchew an co-ops.20 The return o f prosperity to the Prairies sim ilarly aid ed the co n ­ sum er m ovem ent in the early forties. A n u m b e r o f new stores were organized early in the w ar years and again in 1945. In the interval, however, expansion was im possible because g o v ern m en t regulations allowed only necessary businesses to begin construction, a restriction that prevented the develo p m en t o f new stores o r the expansion o f old ones.21 This halt on expansion, fru stratin g because o f the strain placed on old facilities, nevertheless had its com p en satio n s. As surpluses accum ulated, for exam ple, m any societies p u t aside fu n d s in an tic ip a ­ tion o f future expansion, and, w hen the w ar en d ed , these fu n d s m ad e possible the rem arkable grow th th a t follow ed. T h e m o rato riu m on construction, m oreover, m ean t th a t plan s fo r grow th w ere carefully laid and not hastily em braced. In the later forties, this m ore leisurely incubation w ould help produce a m o re system atically d eveloped con­ sum er m ovem ent. As the stores prospered, so did their w holesales. T h e A lberta w h o le­ sale, whose central offices were m oved from K illam to E d m o n to n as the w ar began, rem ained essentially an o rd erin g service for m ost o f the war, though it did e n ter into the m an u fa ctu re o f livestock an d poultry feed in 1939.22 By 1945, its sales w ere ap p ro a c h in g $2,000,000 and its m em bership included 140 societies. In 1944 it p urchased w holesaling facilities in E d m o n to n a n d began to deliver goods to its northern A lberta m em bers.23 T h e M an ito b a w holesale, serving over 100 societies, was selling over $2,500,000 an n u ally by 1945. m ost o f it through new w holesale sheds p u rch ased in W innipeg. In a d d itio n , it

196

EA CH FOR ALL

was o p erating successful feed an d oil plants, an d was accu m u latin g an n u al surpluses o f $200,000.24 T h e S askatchew an w holesale, for m any years the m ost im p o rta n t co -operative co n su m er org an izatio n in English C anada, m ade even m ore rem ark ab le progress in the w ar years. In 1939 it began to sell a “c o -o p ” b ran d tracto r im p o rted from the U nited States, and a y ear later it pu rch ased a su b stan tial interest in a com pany m ining coal at D ru m h e lle r.25 In 1942 the w holesale entered the feed m an u factu rin g business, a n d in 1943 it purchased larger prem ises in Sask ato o n .26 Finally, 1944 saw its m ost significant expansion, as it added a dry goods d e p a rtm e n t to its grocery d e p a rt­ m ent, started a plan n ed pro g ram o f assistance for ex p an d in g stores, bought com plete ow nership o f the D ru m h eller coal m ine, an d am a l­ gam ated with C o-operative R efineries to form F ed e ra ted C o -o p eratives. By w ar’s end, this new o rganization h ad a n n u a l sales o f over $6,500,000.27 All told, the three P rairie w holesales h ad achieved the stability necessary for b uilding a strong regional co n su m er m ovem ent. As in the past, the w holesales in the early forties w ere m ore than service institutions for their m em bers; they w ere also vital p ro p o n en ts o f co-operative unity. U to p ian co-o p erato rs w ere especially active in the wholesales, and thus the a n n u a l m eetings o f th e three Prairie organizations were characterized by discussions o f all aspects o f the movem ent. T he w holesales, too, served as o rganizing nuclei fo r new projects. In 1938, they had started an in terp ro v in cial co m m ittee to purchase supplies in bulk for the Prairie m o vem ent. In 1940, they form alized this organization by establishing In terp ro v in cial C o -o p eratives as their collective buying agency. T h ey w ere soon jo in e d by B.C. Co-op W holesale, the U nited F a rm e rs’ C o -operative, a n d C an a d ian Livestock C o-operative (M aritim es). By 1946, IPCO, ru n since 1940 on a part-tim e basis by the Prairie w holesales, h ad ad v an ced to the p o in t w here a separate office an d in d ep e n d e n t m a n a g e m en t w ere b ecom ing necessary.28 In addition to this develo p in g project, the S askatchew an and A lberta w holesales jo in e d w ith the U nited F a rm e rs’ C o-o p erativ e and N ational C o-operatives o f the U nited States to pu rch ase a $250,000 red shingle mill at S andy Bay on V ancouver Islan d .29 Such jo in t projects by the w holesales w ould becom e com m o n p lace after 1945. The grow th o f pooled buying by the w holesales coincided w ith the further developm ent o f two o th e r initatives th a t h ad b egun in the thirties: the creation o f C a n ad ian C o-o p erative Im p lem en ts and Cooperators Life Insurance C om pany. S p e a rh ead ed by H. L. Fow ler, J. B. M unro, and J. B. Brown, CCIL was o rganized u n d e r fed eral ch a rter

Second Era o f Prosperity

197

in 1940. C apital for the new o rganization was fo u n d d u rin g 1941 and 1942 w hen 50,000 farm ers subscribed betw een $10 a n d $20 each in the district locals o f the new co-operative. U n ab le to start o p eratio n s because o f w ar-tim e restrictions, CCIL did n o t actu ally open its doors until 1944. In the intervening years, how ever, the new co-operative invested in N ational F arm M achinery C o -o p erativ e in Shelbyville, Indiana, a farm er-ow ned com pany th a t m an u fa ctu re d som e farm equipm ent and p urchased larger q u an tities from th e m a jo r suppliers. In late 1944 CCIL purchased a p la n t in W in n ip eg an d enlisted m oral and financial aid from P rairie g o v ern m en ts a n d co -o p erativ es.30 U nder the leadership o f its newly elected presid en t, J. B. B row n, CCIL used the p lan t for assem blying w agons, harrow s, a n d farm trucks, and it entered into a contract w ith C o ck sh u tt for the p u rch ase o f tractors bearing a “co-op” label.31 T he creation o f C o-op Life took p lace at a b o u t the sam e tim e. C o­ op M utual Benefit, from the tim e o f its creatio n in 1940, h ad grow n rapidly and, by 1945, h ad over 7,000 m em bers. In early 1944 th e m en active in M u tu al B enefit, m any o f th em having h ad a long interest in co-operative insurance, pro p o sed a m ore extensive p ro g ram . In Ju ly o f that year, H. A. C rofford, a pool field m an , p re p a re d a p ro p o sal fo r a co-operative insurance co m p an y an d p resen ted it to the b o a rd o f the Saskatchew an W heat Pool.32 C ro ffo rd ’s p ro p o sal w as strongly su p ­ ported by two pool directors, A. F. S proule an d T o m B obier, a n d the pool’s solicitor, R. H. M illiken, all m en possessing co n sid erab le in flu ­ ence w ith the board. O n Ja n u a ry 12, 1945, S p ro u le, w ho w as also a director o f M utual B enefit, rep o rted to the pool b o a rd th a t th at o rg a n ­ ization was sym pathetic to the d ev elo p m en t o f a co -o p erativ e lifeinsurance program . Two' weeks later, the p ool b o ard ap p ro v ed a $25,000 contribution to a new life-insurance co m p an y , the m o n ey to be used to provide the necessary d eposit w ith the p rovincial D e p a rt­ m ent o f Insurance. O n M ay 15, 1945, the new co m p an y , an im p o rta n t step in building a co-operative financial sector, was c re ate d .33 In most o f these expansionary pro g ram s o f the early forties, Sas­ katchew an co-operators played lead in g roles. T h e ir p re-em in en ce was natural because o f the considerable size an d diversity o f the p rovincial m ovem ent. By 1941, there w ere over eight h u n d re d societies in Sas­ katchew an, a d oubling o f the n u m b er in existence in 1935. T h e range o f activities u ndertaken by these societies was rem ark a b le ; in ad d itio n to m arketing, consum ing, insurance, an d savings pro g ram s, the p ro v ­ ince’s co-operators op erated arenas, co m m u n ity halls, m edical ser­ vices, transportation facilities, sto ck -b reed in g services, seed cleaning

198

EACH FOR ALL

plants, an d co-operative farm s. N early every n eed , it seem s, elicited a co-operative response from com m u n ity groups, the larg er established co-ops, and the provincial g overnm ent. T h e increase in g o v ern m en t activity was attested to by the creatio n o f the D e p artm en t o f C o ­ operatives shortly after the CCF victory in 1944. T he d ev elo p m e n t o f the new departm ent, w ith B. N. A rnason as d ep u ty -m in ister, h ad long been prom oted by utop ian co-operators, b u t it w as generally su p ­ ported by all o f the province’s co-o p erato rs regardless o f th e ir m otiva­ tion. A nother feature o f the S askatchew an m o v em en t in the w ar years was the increasing role played by w om en. F ew w om en (in fact, a p p a r­ ently few er than in the tw enties) played roles on the b o ard s o f the m ajor m arketing organizations, w ith the single exception o f the Sas­ katchew an Egg and Poultry Pool.34 T h ey did, how ever, p lay m ore im portant roles in the stores an d , especially, in the w o m en ’s guilds associated for the m ost p a rt w ith the stores. O ff and on since 1910 there had been w om en’s guilds in the C a n a d ia n co n su m er m ovem ent, m ost o f them organized in keep in g with British precedence. G eorge K een and the CUC had striven unsuccessfully since at least 1910 to im plant the guild app ro ach . N o t until 1935, how ever, did guilds be­ com e w ell-established an d then prim arily in S ask atch ew an .35 By 1945 there were thirty in the province an d in th at y e a r they cam e to g eth er to form the Saskatchew an C o -o p erativ e W o m e n ’s G u ild .36 Locally, the guild m em bers o f this org an izatio n o p e ra te d rest room s in the stores, prepared consum er advisory services, cam p a ig n ed for m em ­ bers, m ade suggestions to the b o ard o f directors, an d u n d e rto o k co m ­ m unity projects. Provincially, the cen tral G u ild p rep a re d ed u catio n al program s, m ade represen tatio n s to the governm ents, a n d p ro d d e d the larger co-operatives. T h e provincial G u ild , in fact, a tte m p te d to follow the lead o f the British w om en’s guilds an d becom e the conscience o f the Saskatchew an m ovem ent; th ough only p artly successful, its efforts did help retain a m ovem ent psychology in S askatchew an an d , indeed, across the Prairies. T hus the w ar years w itnessed a m atu rin g on the Prairies o f co­ operative im pulses th a t h ad b egun in the tw enties an d thirties. In all three provinces, but especially in S askatchew an, a new g en eratio n had em erged to assum e leadership. In the tw enties, the m a tu rin g o f a n ­ other generation caught up in the p o oling p an a ce a h ad badly dis­ rupted the m ovem ent an d its institutions as they then existed. In the forties the disruptions were m inim al: the legacy o f the thirties, the grow ing securities o f established traditions, a n d the challenge o f the

Second Era o f Prosperity

199

w ar itself ensured an orderly tran sfer to y o u n g er m en .37 T he stren g th o f the E nglish-C anadian m ovem ent h ad been fo u n d on the w estern plains, and the confidence gained from past successes m ad e the new projects o f the forties and later possible. II

In the M aritim es d u ring the early forties the m o v em en t e x p an d ed significantly if not as spectacularly as on the Prairies. As in the past, the m ost p ro m in en t elem en t rem ain ed the A ntigonish m ovem ent, centred in the Extension D ep artm e n t o f St. F ran cis X avier U niversity. Moses Coady, though sixty years old in 1942, was at the h eight o f his power. His philosophy o f co-operative action h ad m atu red to the point w here he had gained a n ational, even in te rn a tio n a l re p u ta tio n .38 T he forties, in fact, w ould see C o ad y ’s m ax im u m im p a ct39 an d , in retrospect, the Extension D ep a rtm en t's as well. In a d d itio n to C oady, A. B. M acD onald, “ am bitious, practical, and w ith a rare genius for organization”,40 had becom e the focus for m ost o f the m ajo r efforts to prom ote a cohesive M aritim es m ovem ent. As the m ain strategist an d office m anager o f the D ep artm en t, M acD o n ald supervised, u ntil his departure from A ntigonish in 1944, an aggressive field s ta ff th at in ­ cluded both m en and w om en. T he field w ork o f all these in dividuals, spread over a thousand study clubs, co n tin u ed to rep resen t a fo rm id a­ ble exercise in co-operation an d ad u lt edu cation . T he study club technique, how ever, h ad reach ed its in itial n a tu ra l limits. T he return o f prosperity a n d the g reater availability o f the autom obile m ade various am usem ents available to m o re peo p le. T h e boom ing w ar-tim e econom y created nearly full e m p lo y m en t in the m ining districts and thereby reduced the econom ic p ro b lem s o f the thirties. A nd, finally, the increasing availability o f radio an d cinem a reduced old enthusiasm s for kitchen m eetings; som ehow Jack Benny and L u x Radio Theatre seem ed to be m ore exciting th an a discussion o f the R ochdale p rinciples.41 Partly because these pro b lem s w ere p e r­ ceived, mostly because o f the m o m en tu m em an a tin g o u t o f the th ir­ ties, the Extension D ep artm e n t a ttem p ted to find new form s o f e d u c a­ tional program s in the early forties. In 1939, the D e p artm en t starte d to publish The M aritim e Co-operator, a lively little jo u rn a l th a t p ro ­ m oted all kinds o f co-operative action th ro u g h o u t the region. T h e D epartm ent also published nu m ero u s p am p h lets on special topics an d increased its lending-library p rogram . In 1943 the D e p a rtm e n t started to use radio station c j f x in A ntigonish for b ro ad castin g rad io courses, the first o f w hich was The Labour S ch o o l o f the A ir, directed by Rev.

200

EA CH FOR ALL

Joseph A. M acD onald. In tim e, this effort w ould lead to two o th e r series, Life in These M aritim es an d The P eople’s School. O f all its activities, though, the A ntigonish m o v em en t co n cen trated most on trying to co-o rd in ate M aritim e co-operatives in an extensive educational program . C oady, in p articu lar, w as greatly im pressed by the Swedish m odel o f integ rating e d u catio n al and econom ic program s. He hoped that this kind o f ap p ro ach w ould m ean th a t the ideological com m itm ent o f the m ovem en t w ould rem ain stro ng an d w ould not disintegrate as it ap p eared to have d o n e in the British m o v em en t.42 T hus, in 1939, the D ep a rtm en t fostered the creatio n o f the N ova Scotia C o-operative E ducational C ouncil. It w as m ad e up o f re p re­ sentatives from the m ajo r co-ops and the D e p a rtm e n t,43 w ith the funding being provided by a m odest levy on the su rp lu ses o f the m em ber co-ops. M ost im po rtan tly , the m an ag ers o f the co-ops w ere involved, a stratagem developed by C o ad y an d M acD o n ald in hopes o f securing a continuin g interest. T he co-operative that m ost closely su p p o rte d the A ntigonish in itia ­ tives was C an ad ian Livestock C o-operatives (M aritim es) w hich b e­ cam e M aritim e C o-operative Services in 1945. Its su p p o rt for A n ti­ gonish cam e partly out o f a sense o f o b ligation to the fieldm en w ho had assisted the com p an y ’s early d ev elo p m en t; m ostly it cam e be­ cause the co-operative’s m an ag em en t, n o tab ly the gen eral m an ag er, W. H. M cEwen, w as d eterm in ed to p ro m o te a cohesive yet diverse m ovem ent in the region. M cEw en, m oreover, felt, w ith som e ju stific a ­ tion, that he had a strong en ou g h o rg an izatio n to p ro v id e the neces­ sary leadership. By 1945, thanks to w ar-tim e expansion, c l c (M a ri­ times) had a volum e o f $3,000,000 m ade up o f $1,170,000 in livestock sales and $1,700,000 in w holesaling activities.44 T he c l c (M aritim es) did have difficulties, how ever, in resp o n d in g rapidly enough to the p a rticu lar needs o f the co n su m er co-operatives. C om m unications betw een M oncton an d eastern N ova Scotia seem to have been particularly difficult an d , in fact, caused the creatio n o f two new wholesales. T he first o f these, chronologically, was E astern C o­ operative Services, organized at A ntigonish by basically farm ers’ co­ ops in 1939. D uring the w ar it ex p an d ed rapidly, especially serving the dairy industry, though in view o f its location, it rem ain ed rem a rk ­ ably isolated. T he second new w holesale was the C ap e Breton C o ­ operative Services organized by co n su m er societies in 1942 an d 1943. It developed because several local co-ops w ere dissatisfied w ith the CLC branch office opened in Sydney d u rin g 1938. All told, these two new societies, despite retain in g som e ties w ith CLC, rep resen ted rev er­

Second Era o f Prosperity

201

sals for those w ho w ished to see an in teg rated m o v em en t in th e region. N evertheless, and m ore im p o rtan tly , they did attest to the growth being achieved. The consum er m ovem ent flourished in the w ar years, a d e v e lo p ­ m ent that helps explain why there w ere tensions at the w holesale level. T he pre-em inent con su m er society rem ain ed the British C a n a ­ dian with its eight branches an d o ver $1,500,000 a n n u a l trade. As in the past, this success, and its ability to be its ow n w holesale, m ea n t that it developed all its own p rogram s a n d was isolated from A n tig o n ­ ish. T here were an o th er forty, m ostly sm all societies in C ape B reton, and a handful scattered th ro u g h o u t the p ro v in ce.45 In N ew B runs­ wick, there w ere tw enty-seven stores served by CLC, m ostly in fran co ­ phone com m unities; by 1945, they had a volum e o f $1,560,000.46 In Prince Edw ard Island, there w ere at least six stores w ith a total trad e in excess o f $400,000. T he grow th d u rin g the w ar, th erefo re, was im pressive but it retained the frag m en ted c h a ra c te r th at h ad long plagued the M aritim es m ovem ent. The sam e isolationist tendencies could be perceived in the two m ajor producer co-operatives, U n ited M aritim e F ish erm en an d U nited F ruit C om panies. UMF m ad e significant progress d u rin g the w ar and in 1944 the cen tral sold o ver $1,400,000 for its seventy m em ber societies in N ova Scotia an d N ew Brunsw ick. T he m ost im ­ p ortant m arket for u m f lay in N ew E ngland w here it an n u ally sold lobsters w orth $400,000 and m ackerel w orth $1 10,000.47 T he im proved econom ic situation suggested by these results did not m ean, how ever, that the problem s o f the fisheries h ad been resolved. Incom es in the fishing villages were still low, and little surplus capital was available in the fishing co-ops for expansion o f the m ovem ent. T he U nited F ruit C om panies, also in a difficult co m petitive situ a ­ tion, found prosperity in the w ar-tim e econom y. W ith the o u tb re a k o f w ar the federal governm ent established a cen tral pool for apples u nder the W ar M easures Act. T his pro g ram red u ced m uch o f the m arketing chaos that h ad developed in the A nnap o lis V alley in d u stry during the late tw enties and had lasted th rough the thirties. U n d er this system the C om panies w ere able to m ark et th e ir usual a n n u a l crop o f 1,600,000 barrels w ith little difficulty an d w ith ad e q u a te re­ turn. T he future rem ained uncertain, how ever, because o f the co m p e ­ tition in C an ad a and the drastically red u ced B ritish m ark et. T he m ajor hope for the industry lay in d ev elo p in g ap p le-p ro cessin g p lants, an expensive u ndertaking req u irin g close co -o rd in atio n o f diverse groups and sustained lobbying with g o v ern m en t d e p a rtm e n ts.48 G iven

202

E A C H F O R A LL

such pre-occupations, it is not surprising that U nited F ru it C o m p an ies rem ained inw ard-looking and a lo o f from o th e r o rganizations. Finally, in the diverse b u t grow ing M aritim es m ovem ent, credit unionism had becom e a m ajo r force. By 1945 there w ere o ver 400 credit unions in the three provinces, with 70,000 m em bers and $4,250,000 in assets. Since th eir inception the region’s credit unions had loaned their m em bers over $13,000,000 w ith very few loans h av ­ ing been d e f a u lte d /9 As in the o th e r E n g lish -C an ad ian provinces, credit-union leaders in each o f the M aritim e provinces had organized provincial L eagues associated w ith CUNA in the U nited States. T he N ova Scotian League, organized in 1938, was p articu larly close to the CUNA leadership, largely because A. B. M acD onald an d J. D. N elson M acD onald greatly ap p reciated the aid given to the early N ova Sco­ tian credit unions by A m erican leaders. T h e im plications o f these ties for C anadian nationalism w ere b ecom ing evident by 1945,50 but they were not significant enough to detract from the grow th th at had becom e so evident. These diverse M aritim es efforts in consum er, m arketing, and credit co-operation suggest the ex tent to w hich the m o v em en t had p e r­ m eated the region’s consciousness. By 1945, co -o p erato rs in the three eastern-m ost provinces h ad organized significant institutions th at were playing increasingly im p o rtan t roles, locally, regionally, an d even n a ­ tionally. They had also p ro d u ced one o f the m ost creative elem ents within the C an ad ian m ovem ent (the A ntigonish m ov em en t), an d in Moses C oady they possessed p erh ap s the m ost p ro fo u n d C a n a d ia n cooperator. But the M aritim es had also p ro d u ced a m o v em en t th at had m any different organizations and m any d ifferen t purposes. In short, the coherent philosophy o f the m en from A ntigonish sh o u ld not be taken to m ean that M aritim e co -o p erato rs as a gro u p w ere a un ited and harm onious w hole. T hey w ere, in general, m en w ho had created successful organizations and then were, for a w hile at least, e n tra p p ed by those sam e organizations. Ill

In O ntario and British C olu m b ia, as in the o th er areas o f English C anada, the w ar years b ro u g h t increased prosperity. T h e im proving econom ic situation was p erh ap s best reflected in O n ta rio in the im ­ proved position o f U nited F a rm e rs’ C o-operative. By the end o f the w ar years this com plex o rg anization had an a n n u al trad e o f over $20,000,000. M ost o f the increased business was in farm supply, and the growth m eant that the o rganization had to be diversified and

Second Era o f Prosperity

203

departm entalized. In 1941 the co m p an y p u rch ased a fertilizer p la n t to the west o f T oronto to ensure a secure supply for its grow ing fertilizer m arket. T he follow ing year it invested in C o-op U niversal M ilkers o f W aukeska, W isconsin, to ensure a su p p ly o f reliab le m ilking m a ­ chines, and in 1943 it purchased C o -o p U n iv ersal’s assem bly an d d istribution p lan t in P eterborough. In 1944, the c o m p an y in a u g u rate d its C o-op Prem ix Food P lant to help m eet the feed needs o f its custom er-m em bers. A nd in 1945, UF C o -o p estab lish ed th eir po u ltry processing plants at P eterborough, C ayuga, an d R enfrew . In ad d itio n , the com pany operated seven cream eries, a supply service for electrical farm equipm ent, and an ed u catio n al pro g ram for its m em b ers.51 A considerable am o u n t o f grow th ex p erien ced by UF C o-op resulted from the im pact o f Farm Radio Forum . T his M o n d ay -n ig h t radio program , organized aro u n d discussion groups in several h u n d red C a­ nadian hom es, was p articu larly effective in O n tario . H arald H an n a m played an im p o rtan t role in d ev elo p in g this CBC series an d p artly through his efforts the Forum p aid co n sid erab le atte n tio n to th e co­ operative m ovem ent. C onsequently, a b o u t a h u n d re d co-operatives directly attributive to the b roadcasts em erged d u rin g the early forties in O ntario alone. M ost o f these new societies ultim ately fo u n d th eir way into the UF C o-op and there they played an im p o rta n t p a rt in the expansion th at took place from 1942 to the end o f the d ecade. W hile the UF C o-op was grow ing, it w as also u n d erg o in g a g rad u al structural transform ation. Begun in the 1930s by H. H. H a n n am a n d a m ixture o f old and you n g reform ers, the drive c o n tin u ed to co n v ert ow nership o f the com pany from m em b ersh ip co n tro l by in d iv id u al farm ers to the m ore custom ary ow nership by m em b e r societies. It was a long and difficult process bu t, by 1944, the m ajo rity o f those a tte n d ­ ing an n u al m eetings w ere delegates from affiliated co-o p erativ es or farm ers’ buying clubs. T his process w ould n o t be co m p leted until 1949, but it was an im p o rta n t d ev elo p m en t o f the w ar years b ecause it allowed interested O n tario co -o p erato rs to becom e m ean in g fu lly in­ volved in the com pany through a deleg ate system . H an n am ’s astute, orderly a lteratio n o f the U n ited F a rm e rs’ C o ­ operative also m arked his arrival as a m ajo r figure in the C a n a d ia n agrarian an d co-operative m ovem ents. S im u ltan eo u sly w ith his w ork in O ntario, he was playing an im p o rtan t role in the C a n a d ia n C h a m ­ ber o f C om m erce (after 1940, the C a n a d ia n C ou n cil o f A griculture). F orm ed in 1935, the C h a m b e r h a d rem ain ed focused alm ost exclu­ sively on farm issues. U n d e r G eorge C o o te’s lead e rh ip an d , to an extent, that o f H. B. C ow an, the C h a m b e r c o n cen trated on lo b b y in g

204

EACH FO R ALL

with the governm ent and on a futile atte m p t to b ring back the m a r­ keting board legislation o f 1934. As H a n n a m ’s in flu en ce becam e greater, how ever, m ore atten tio n was d evoted to co-operative m a rk e t­ ing. In 1943 and 1944, this sym p ath etic em phasis on the m o v em en t w ould greatly help the C o-operative U n io n o f C a n ad a . T he other m ain con cen tratio n o f co-operative stren g th in O n ta rio in the early forties was credit unionism . In 1940 the en a b lin g legislation for cred it unions was significantly im proved, an d a flurry o f o rg an iza­ tional activities resulted. By 1945 there w ere 220 cred it unions in the province. T w o-thirds o f them becam e m em b ers o f the O n ta rio C red it U nion League w hich was form ed in 1941. T h e tie w ith c u n a , form ed by the creation o f the League, m e an t th a t m ost o f the in su ran ce needs o f the credit unions were m et by CUNA M u tu al. T his co m p an y , how ­ ever, could not m eet all the needs o f co-operatives for o th e r kinds o f insurance notably in the e m p lo y ee-b o n d in g an d a n im al-tra n sit fields. Seeing these needs, leaders in the O n tario c red it-u n io n m ovem ent, with the help o f UF C o-op officials, organized C o -o p erato rs’ F idelity and G u aran tee A ssociation in 1945. In tim e, this o rg an izatio n w ould becom e C o-operators’ Insurance A ssociation, a m u lti-lin e in su ran ce com pany with head office in G u elp h . T here were, all told, by 1945, ab o u t 850 co-o p erativ es and credit unions in O ntario.52 As in the past, the w eakest elem en t in the p ro v in ­ cial m ovem ent was the urb an co n su m er m ovem ent. T h e largest u rb an society was C onsum ers’ C o-o p erativ e in T im m ins, w hich had five stores and an an n u a l trade o f $500,000.53 M ost o f the larg er tow ns and cities o f N orthern O n tario h ad stores as well, b u t the v olum e o f these societies was too sm all to p erm it such co -o rd in atio n o f effort. In Southern O ntario, the several sm all societies w ere little m ore than buying clubs, in fact so insigificant that they w ere ignored by U nited F arm ers’ C o-operative. C redit unionism aside, therefore, the O n ta rio m o v em en t had essen­ tially an agrarian base in 1945. T h e p ro v in ce’s farm ers in UF C o-op, m utual fire-insurance com panies, telep h o n e co m p an ies, an d in d e ­ pendent m arketing co-ops, like the H oney P roducers, C o -o p erativ e Packers, and C an ad ian C o-o p erativ e W ool G row ers, w ere reso u rce­ fully using co-operative techniques. But, for the m ost p art, they w ere pragm atic co-operators with little sense o f m ovem ent. W ith o u t signifi­ cant strength in urban O n tario , the provincial m o v em en t w ould re­ m ain largely a vehicle for the o rganization o f p ro d u cers in a consum ption-oriented econom y. In British C olum bia, the m o v em en t in the early forties h ad both its

Second Era o f Prosperity

205

successes and failures. A ccording to g o v ern m en t records there w ere, in 1945, sixty-five pro du cer societies (th irty -th ree in th e fru it ind u stry ), thirty-nine consum er societies (o f w hich th irteen sold feed, fuel, an d lum ber only), and nineteen service co-operatives (seven o f them tra n s­ portation co-ops).54 In addition, there w ere over 120 credit unions, with m em bership ap p ro ach in g 15,000 a n d assets exceeding $740,000.55 N early all o f the credit unions and co-operatives ex p erien ced p ro sp e r­ ous years during the early 1940s, a significant im p ro v em en t on the difficult times o f the thirties. The fisherm en’s co-operatives, cap italizin g on th e stro n g w ar-tim e dem and, m ade perhaps the m ost re m ark ab le econom ic progress o f any B.C. grouping. T he m ost expansionist o f the fishing societies was Prince R upert F ish erm an ’s C o -operative. In 1939 it am a lg a m a ted w ith N orth Island T railers’ C o-operative a n d started six years o f c o n tin u ­ ous expansion. In 1941 the en larged co-op en tered the fish liver oil industry, an aspect o f its business th at soon grossed $240,000 a n n u ally . In 1945, it constructed a $150,000 ice-m aking p la n t for h a lib u t fish er­ men w ho had jo in ed the co-op in the p reced in g year. A nd, finally, am id this grow th, the Prince R u p ert society o p erate d an extensive educational program , fostered an in d e p e n d e n t co n su m er society for tow nspeople, developed a credit union, an d even ran successful c a n d i­ dates in m unicipal elections.56 Similarly, the K yuquot T ra ilers’ C o -o p erativ e on V an co u v er Island expanded rapidly because o f the w ar-tim e d e m a n d fo r fish pro d u cts. By the end o f the w ar it was o p eratin g fo u r packers, h ad estab lish ed a flourishing credit union, h ad organized an ed u catio n al p ro g ram u n d er D. G. M acD onald, and was o p eratin g th e m ost m o d ern store on the west coast o f the island. Its total business o p eratio n by 1945 w as w orth $778,300, o r about h a lf that o f the Prince R u p e rt C o -o p erativ e.57 The success o f these o ld er societies sparked co n sid erab le in terest am ong unorganized fisherm en. In 1942 the M assett C o -o p erativ e A s­ sociation was form ed by natives and w hites to lease a n d o p e ra te razo r clam beaches on the Q ueen C h arlo tte Islands. M ostly because o f the efforts o f the m em bers, partly because o f the aid o f o th e r fishing co­ ops, this sm all society achieved stability by 1945.58 In 1942, also, the U nited F isherm en’s C o-operative began o p eratio n , th o u g h it h ad been organized two years earlier. U n ited F ish erm en ’s was th e first serious attem pt since the 1920s to organize fisherm en living in the V an co u v er area. It had a troub led history d u rin g the w ar y ears caused by d ifficu l­ ties in securing a suitable location in V ancouver, p ro b lem s in d e v elo p ­ ing a contract system for its m em bers, a n d com p licatio n s in devising

206

EA CH FO R ALL

an acceptable m em bership system . N evertheless, by 1945, it was m a r­ keting over $300,000 w orth o f fish an n u ally , h ad a fish-oil p la n t in V ancouver, and had entered the fresh fish m arket. T he two new an d the two o ld e r co-operatives, alo n g w ith one oth er, the B.C. Cod F ish erm en ’s C o-op, w hich h ad been fo rm ed in 1939, represented considerable econom ic stren g th by the m id d le o f the w ar years. In N ovem ber 1943 representatives o f these five o rg an izatio n s m et with officials o f the B.C. C o-op W h olesale an d the E xtension D epartm ent o f the U niversity o f British C o lu m b ia to explore the possibilities o f jo in t activities. S tarting w ith p lan s for an ed u catio n al program , the representatives d ecided to form a cen tral o rg an izatio n , the F isherm en’s C o-operative F ed eratio n . D u rin g 1944 an d 1945 this new institution m oved slowly tow ard m ark etin g the fish o f all m em b er groups and tow ard centralized ow nership o f fish plants. Both o f these initiatives w ere difficult to carry out, but, by the la tte r year, the federation’s office was o p en ed u n d er Jo h n D ean , form erly gen eral m anager o f the Prince R u p ert C o-operative. T he oth er w ing o f the B.C. m o v em en t th a t m ad e su b stan tial p ro ­ gress in the 1940s was the c red it-u n io n m ovem ent. In 1939 and 1940 the issue o f w h eth er to jo in the CUNA o r to form an in d ep e n d e n t C an ad ian body was deeply divisive. In M ay 1940, how ever, delegates from thirty-one credit unions an d study clubs d ecid ed to jo in CUNA and, one m onth later, the British C o lu m b ia C red it U n io n L eague was form ed.59 Once this decision was m ade, m ost o f the cred it u n ion s in the province jo in ed the L eague; in fact, by 1945, 121 o f the 127 o perating credit unions h ad becom e m em b ers.60 T h e L eague was instrum ental in revising the existing cred it-u n io n legislation, an d , in 1944 it stim ulated the creation o f B.C. C en tral C red it U n io n . A c en ­ tral depository and a source o f funds for cred it unions, th e C en tral was im p o rtan t afterw ard in b u ild in g a pow erful c red it-u n io n m o v e­ m ent in the province. Sim ilarly, o u t in the country, the ag rarian p ro d u c e r m o v em en t sta ­ bilized during the early forties. T h e F raser V alley M ilk P roducers, in particular, consolidated its position as the p re -em in en t d airy in the N ew W estm inster and V ancouver m arkets. By 1945 this co-o p erativ e had over 5,000 pro d u cer m em bers, assets o f $1,230,000 an d to tal annual sales in excess o f $4,200,000. T h e grow th in d icated in these statistics m eant th a t the society’s facilities w ere being used to full capacity, and a m ajo r expansion p rogram was beco m ing necessary.61 T he fruit-grow ing industry in the O k an ag an ex p erien ced sim ilar growth, the 1944 crop being the largest in its history.62 By 1945 co­

Second Era o f Prosperity

207

operatives were m arketing tw o-thirds o f the valley’s fru it crops; m an y were involved in canning o perations; an d n early all w ere assu red o f stability because o f govern m en t reg u latio n o f the in d u stry in w ar-tim e. T he B.C. consum er m ov em en t was the one seg m en t o f the p ro v in ­ cial m ovem ent that did n o t p ro sp er d u rin g the early forties. C o n su m e r co-operatives rem ained w eak in V ancouver, a n d they w ere declining, except for the A rm strong society, in the in terio r. F aced by this u n ­ happy picture, the w holesale, established in 1939, h ad difficulties surviving.63 T he fisheries co-operatives were stro n g su p p o rte rs o f the wholesale but, aside from a few co n su m er item s, even they usually ordered their high-volum e specialty goods d irect from m an u fa c tu re rs or w holesalers. As for the ag rarian o rganizations, they generally showed little interest in the w holesale an d p re ferred to m ak e th eir own arrangem ents w ith suppliers. The uncertainties o f the consum er m o vem ent, how ever, w ere u n ty p ­ ical o f the B.C. m ovem ent generally in 1945. A fter a d ecad e o f severe difficulties, the older p ro d u cer societies w ere in secure positions, an d their prosperity, w hen tied to the grow ing c red it-u n io n m ov em en t, represented considerable co-operative p o ten tial on the west coast. T h e position o f the B.C. m ovem ent, an d the O n tario m ov em en t, in fact, seem ed w eak only because o f th e rem ark ab le grow th a n d dy n am ism o f the m ovem ents in the Prairies and the M aritim es. IV

T he w ar-tim e grow th typically ex perienced by C a n a d ia n co-operatives was soon noticed by the w ider C an a d ia n society. As the co-ops grew, their traditional co m p etito rs—as well as tax officials in O tta w a —b e ­ cam e m uch m ore concerned a b o u t the tax position th at had been gained in 1929 and 1930. T hus, early in the w ar years, a cam p a ig n began within the grain trad e and, to som e extent, am o n g insurance com panies, to have the go v ern m en t investigate the en tire q u estio n o f the taxation o f co-operatives. T hese trad itio n al o p p o n e n ts o f the co­ operative m ovem ent w ere jo in e d som ew hat u n co m fo rtab ly by the U nited G rain G row ers w ho resented, u n d erstan d ab ly , n o t h aving the sam e taxation benefits as the pools. T o som e exten t, too, the e m e r­ gence o f this cam paign in C a n a d a was associated w ith a sim ilar cam paign in the U nited States. T h ere, the N a tio n a l T ax E qu ality Association em erged in 1941 to lead a pro g ram o f p am p h leteerin g , radio talks, and new spaper advertising against co-operative tax b e n e ­ fits.64 As the w ar years grew longer an d as pressures on tax d ollars m ounted, this anti-co-operative cam p aig n gained m o m en tu m in C a n ­

208

EACH FOR ALL

ada and naturally found it easy to enlist su p p o rters, especially in O ttaw a. T he issue started to fester d u rin g 1941 w hen a team o f au d ito rs was sent to R egina to investigate the p o o l’s tax -declaring practices. A lm ost two years later, the go v ern m en t advised the pool th at the co m p an y ’s patronage dividend could n o t be ded u cted before incom e tax was calculated. T he pool v ehem ently rejected this ruling an d initiated court proceedings.65 M eanw hile, the g o v ern m en t had also challenged deductions m ade for interest on m em b er capital and allocations to reserves by som e sm all M an ito b a co -operatives.66 Petitions w ere circu ­ lated in these co-operatives pro testin g the g o v e rn m e n t’s challenges, but to no avail. All told, the g o v ern m en t seem ed to have changed significantly its interpre tatio n s o f the taxation reg u latio n s ad o p ted in 1930. Because o f these changes an d the resu ltan t protest by co-operators, the taxation question becam e increasingly com plicated. Finally, in 1944, after m eetings betw een gov ern m en t and co-operative officials had failed to resolve the issues, J. L. Ilsley, the M inister o f F in an ce, decided that a royal com m ission was necessary. A p p o in ted in N o v em ­ ber 1944, the com m ission was chaired by Ju d g e E. M. W. M cD ougall o f the C ourt o f K ing’s Bench, Q uebec. B. N . A rnason, was, in effect, the nom inee o f the co-operative m ovem ent to the com m ission, w hile J. J. V aughan o f T oro n to was rep resen tativ e o f the a p p ro ach o f the contrary-m inded C an ad ian C h a m b e r o f C o m m erce.67 T h e com m is­ sion travelled across C an ad a betw een Ja n u a ry and M ay 1945, and surveyed British an d A m erican p recedents d u rin g the follow ing su m ­ mer. T he ap p ointm ent o f the com m ission had a p ro fo u n d effect upon the E nglish-C anadian m ovem ent. As the crisis over taxation began to loom , m any co-operators began to look seriously at creatin g a strong national organization. In p articu lar, ag rarian co-o p erativ es found them selves essentially unprotected, the C a n a d ia n C ouncil o f A gricul­ ture not being an ap p ro p ria te institution for d efen d in g the tax in te r­ ests o f co-operatives. At the sam e tim e, the b u rst o f pro sp erity th at began in 1939 convinced m any co -o p erato rs th at in teg ratio n o f efforts could produce rem arkable results. Inevitably, the tw o con sid eratio n s o f taxes and grow th focused atten tio n upon the C o -o p erativ e U nion o f C an ad a, an institution long given insufficient atten tio n . Inevitably, too, the Saskatchew an and N ova Scotian m ovem ents pro d u ced the strongest initiatives for m aking the CUC a truly n atio n al sp o k esm an for the entire E nglish-C anadian m ovem ent. In 1943, in the m idst o f these

Second Era o f Prosperity

209

changing attitudes, A. B. M acD o n ald was h ired to reo rganize and revitalize the CUC. M acD onald did his jo b well and, by the 1944 W in n ip eg C ongress o f the CUC, he had prep ared proposals for restru ctu rin g the organ izatio n . Briefly, M acD onald called for the fo rm atio n o f p rovincial unions which, along with regional o r n atio n al co-o p erativ es w ould form the CUC. He also called for b etter fin an cin g o f the n atio n al o rg an izatio n so it could place executives in O ttaw a an d give them the funds n eed ed to protect and develop the m ovem ent and its institutions. M acD o n ald and his supporters easily carried the C ongress an d , in 1944 a n d 1945, all the E nglish-C anadian provinces created th e ir ow n provincial unions. Inevitably, the reorganization o f the c u c b ecam e en tw in ed w ith the drive to defend co-operatives before the R oyal C om m ission. In effect the sam e personnel presided over the two initiatives, w ith A. B. M acD onald, W. C. G ood, H. L. Fow ler, G eorge K een, B. N. A rnason, R. H. M illiken, W. B. Francis, J. H. W esson, a n d W. J. P ark er play in g particularly im portant roles. T hus, w hen the com m ission m ad e its odyssey across C anada, it en co u n tered a rem ark ab ly w ell-organized m ovem ent, considering the diversity o f interests an d org an izatio n s involved. O n a national level, the CUC attem p te d to c o -o rd in ate su b ­ missions to the com m ission so as to rem ove m uch o f the rep etitio n , while, on a provincial level, the provincial u n io n s tried to ensure presentations from a cross-section o f their m em bers. All told, it was a rem arkable u ndertaking considering the w eak contacts th a t h ad p re ­ viously typified relations am ong m ost co-operatives. Perhaps because o f the effective way co-operatives p resen ted over 125 briefs to the com m ission, its rep o rt was generally fav o u rab le to the m ovem ent and its institutions. Briefly, the re p o rt reco m m en d ed that dividends paid out by a co -operative w ithin six m o n th s o f its annual m eeting should be d ed uctib le (as w ould be discounts o ffered sim ilarly by a jo in t stock com pany to its custom ers); th at in terest paid on m em bers’ investm ent w ould be d ed u ctib le; an d th at new co-operatives would be exem pt from p ay in g taxes for th ree years. T hese rec­ om m endations were accepted by the g o v ern m en t w hich also ad d ed one significant change: dividends could not reduce taxable incom e to the greatest o f 3 p er cent o f the em ployed capital, the p ro fit from n o n-m em ber business o r the aggregate o f u n allo cated reserves. A n u m b er o f co-operatives opposed this u n u su al m eth o d o f calculating taxes, but, since so few w ere directly involved, the p ro test lost m o m en ­ tum quickly.

210

E A C H F O R A LL

The reorganization o f the CUC an d the generally successful defence o f the co-operative cause before the tax a u th o rites b ro u g h t to the fore m any o f the young m en w ho h ad m atu red in the thirties an d early forties. A. B. M acD onald becam e secretary o f the c u c , rep lacin g G eorge Keen, and R alph Staples becam e p resid en t, su cceeding W. C. G ood. M ost o f the staffed p rovincial u n ions w ere led by m en an d w om en in their thirties and forties, w hile the cred it un io n m o v em en t was alm ost inevitably led by p eo p le o f the sam e age. H av in g lived through the D epression an d the w ar, these new leaders co m b in ed an aw areness o f poverty w ith a h ope for a b e tte r w orld. T o a rem a rk ab le degree, this blend o f pragm atism an d idealism reflected well the strengths and the n atu re o f the E n g lish -C an ad ian m ovem ent.

CHAPTER ELEVEN

The State of the Movement, 1945 The growth o f Co-operation in Canada has been slow, but n o t­ withstanding num erous fa ilu res it has been steady a n d substantial. Slow growth and failure m ay largely be attributed to an im perfect interpreta­ tion o f the real significance o f the M ovem ent. M a n y organizations which have adopted the econom ic principles o f the Rochdale Pioneers have been and are parochial in their interest a n d their outlook. Their isolation has been due to the fa c t that they have fa ile d to realize that C o­ operation is basically a philosophy o f life, and that co-operative business undertakings are m erely econom ic expressions o f it. Steadily, however, co-operative isolationism is disappearing, a n d today there is a m uch better appreciation o f the true significance o f the M ovem ent as well as devotion to its philosophy. G. Keen, “The H istory o f the Co-operative M ovem ent in Canada,” CUC, vol. 112, 1943 NR: File “O ”.

T he growth achieved by the end o f 1945 indicates how d eeply the co­ operative m ovem ent had entered the consciousness o f C an ad ian s. T he faltering precedents o f the n in eteen th cen tu ry aside, this grow th had been the result o f less th an fifty years o f effort. Such rap id an d diverse evolution was unusual, p erh a p s u n p reced en ted , in in te rn a ­ tional co-operative circles. Indeed, it was a rem a rk ab le develo p m en t, though one poorly publicized at hom e. O bviously, the causes for this grow th w ere com plex and can n o t, even with the passage o f the intervening decades, be easily assessed. T he m ost pervasive factor, however, was a feeling o f exploitation, a feeling w hich co m p elled C anadians in steadily grow ing n u m b ers to em b race co-operative ac­ tion. N ot surprisingly, therefore, the Prairies and the M aritim es, both o f which entered the tw entieth cen tu ry b earin g historic senses o f grievance, were the m ain centres o f co -operative d ev elo p m en t. R a th e r surprisingly, though, the m ovem ents in the two regions had leap t the barriers o f C entral C an ad a to assist an d to learn from each other. From their profitable, though som etim es q u arrelso m e, in te rre la­ tionships, the first strong m anifestations o f a n a tio n al m o v em en t had started to em erge. It is a reflection o f C an ad ian regionalism , how ever, th a t the stro n g ­ holds o f the m ovem ent w ere not located in the cities o f e ith e r the 211

212

EACH FO R ALL

M aritim es or the Prairies. R ath er, they w ere to be fo u n d am o n g the prim ary producers on the land, in the m ines, or on the sea. U n d o u b t­ edly, for farm ers, m iners, an d fisherm en, co-operatives b ecam e effi­ cient and profitable ways in w hich they could bargain w ith the m id ­ dlem en from w hom they b o ug h t an d to w hom they sold. As the nation moved aw ay from localized econom ies, o rg an izatio n was neces­ sary so that individual p ro d u cers and consum ers could to g eth er p ro ­ tect their interests w hen d ealin g with large, often rem o te businesses. Just as m ergers o f com panies, the d e v elo p m en t o f trades unionism , and the institutionalization o f professions em erged from protective im pulses am ong pow erful g roups in so ciety ,1 so the d ev elo p m en t o f co-operatives represented the grow ing desire o f h in terla n d g roups to defend their interests. Farm ers w ere the m ost successful p rim ary p ro d u cers to use co­ operative action to protect th eir interests, especially on the Prairies. T he m ain reason why th at region ex perienced such grow th was the way in w hich it h ad been o p en ed betw een 1880 an d 1930. T he im ­ m ense revolution in agriculture seen in those years in the W est d ra ­ m atically raised the question o f how the a n n u a l crops should be brought fairly and efficiently to m arkets. U n fettered by trad itio n s an d aroused by the difficulties o f the settlem en t process, P rairie farm ers turned naturally an d enthusiastically to co-operatives as a m ean s o f avoiding exploitation. T h eir successes, derived from sp o n tan eo u s group consciousness and diverse precedence, p ro v id ed d ra m a tic ex am ­ ples for farm ers th ro u g h o u t English C a n ad a. In an u neven struggle against the m etropolitan pow er brokers, the p rim ary p ro d u cers o f the h interland found co-operation one o f th eir m ost effective protectors. In the sam e vein, co-operatives rep resen ted a w ay o f c o m b attin g depersonalizing forces in society. C onspicuously p ro u d o f the sense o f involvem ent their organizations could offer, co -o p erato rs believed their m ethods w ere an altern ativ e to those characteristic o f big b u si­ ness, big governm ent, an d big unions. T his b elief was especially evi­ dent in co-operatives developed by religious o r ethnic groups, p eo p le fearing the erosion o f th eir in d ividuality an d cu ltu re in an h o m o g en iz­ ing age. Thus, nearly all co-operatives stressed m em b ersh ip involve­ m ent in decision m aking, the m eeting o f gen eral c o m m u n ity needs, and the encouragem ent o f local initiative. In a w orld o f increasingly centralized econom ic, political, and social pow er, an d in societies w here individual involvem ent often seem ed irrelevant, this em phasis on m eaningful p articip atio n fo u n d w idespread appeal. To see co-operatives as essentially negative institu tio n s, how ever,

Slate o f Movement, 1945

213

would be inaccurate. T he defensive ethos o f the in stitu tio n s should not obscure the crusading spirit o f the m ov em en t. F a ith in the co m ­ mon m an, a com m itm ent to ed u catio n fo r social change, an aversion to the com petitive ethic, a distrust o f trad itio n al political activities, and a faith in the p o ten tial pow er o f econom ic action rem ain ed pow erful even in m any large co-operatives in 1945. U to p ian co -o p e ra­ tors, in their m any hues, were prim arily responsible fo r k eep in g alive the dream s o f a better, m ore co -operative, w orld. H elp ed by the crises o f the depression and the challenges o f the g reat w ars, the Utopians were allowed to play contin u in g m ajo r roles, roles fa r g reater than their num bers w ould indicate. T hus, in co m p ariso n w ith m any o th e r national m ovem ents, the E n g lish -C an ad ian m o v em en t m ain tain ed its altruism rem arkably well through u n d e rta k in g jo in t projects, by e n ­ couraging educational cam paigns, and by sp o n so rin g new activities. N evertheless, even by 1945 a n u m b er o f p ro b lem s w ere b e g in n in g to appear, and they w ould becom e m o re significant in succeeding decades. M ost o f the prob lem s w ere the result o f grow th. As co­ operative institutions grew larger, they inevitably faced the im m ense problem o f m aintaining m eaningful m em b ersh ip in volvem ent. T o som e extent, the unrest with the G ra in G ro w ers’ G ra in C o m p an y during the F irst W orld W ar had reflected this difficulty; so too h ad the restless searching for co-operative projects by p ool fieldm en in the 1930s. But none o f the early experiences ap p ro ac h ed the im m en sity o f the problem s th a t w ould a p p e a r sh ortly a fter 1945. T h e pools, fo r exam ple, by th at date h ad g ained m em b ersh ip s in th e tens o f th o u ­ sands. They w ere also increasingly co n tro lled by new farm ers, the sons o f those who h ad built the organ izatio n s tw enty years earlier. In ev ita­ bly, the sons w ere not, could not be, as com m itted as their fathers. Inevitably, too, the pools them selves h ad changed. T hey h ad never been sim ple organizations, b u t the grow ing sophistication o f the grain econom y m ade them even m ore com plex to o p erate. Sim ilarly, the grow th o f m any o th er co-operatives m ad e it d ifficult to keep them responsive an d responsible: m em bers m eeting to g eth er for two o r three hours p erhaps every three m onths could seldom u n d e rsta n d the intricacies o f the enterprises they ow ned. Increasingly, m an ag e m en t, especially in larger co-operatives, was b ecom ing m ore pow erful, thereby m aking the role o f even the m ost effective a m a teu r co-operators difficult, often ep hem eral. T he m ain p ro b lem raised by ex p a n ­ sion, in fact, was the definition o f the lim its o f reaso n ab le involvem ent by m em bers in decision m aking. In m an y ways, co-operatives w ere being faced, and w ould increasingly be faced, by the challenge o f

214

E A C H F O R A LL

them selves w ithstanding m any o f the im personal in stitu tio n al c h a ra c ­ teristics they had long decried in o th e r o rganizations. At the sam e tim e, the end o f w ar ushered in over two d ecades o f general prosperity for m any o f the m ore h e av ily -p o p u lated regions o f C anada. T he “hungry thirties” w ere not rep eated , an d the in te rn a ­ tional security afforded by A m erican pow er and the U n ited N atio n s quelled the fears o f m any o f those co -o p erato rs co n cern ed a b o u t international affairs. M em ories o f the difficulties o f earlier d ecades ensured m em ber loyalty on the p art o f those w ho rem em b ered , b u t the lack o f fu rth er crises m ad e it difficult to enlist m an y new su p p o rt­ ers. A dult education program s, long valu ab le in recru itin g new cooperators, declined in effectiveness o r w ere taken over by pu b lic educational institutions w ith ou t co-operative leanings. T h e cu m u lativ e result o f all these factors w ould be the decline in im p act o f the Utopians: w ithout an atm o sp h ere o f crisis o r u n certain ty , they could be ignored by the p ragm atic m en (an d few w om en) w ho n orm ally dom inated the m ajo r co-operatives. On another front, the co-operative m o v em en t w as faced finally an d resolutely by u rb an C anada. W ith o ver sixty p e r cen t o f C an a d ia n s living in the m ajor cities, w ith ru ral y o u th steadily bein g draw n in greater num bers to u rb an o p p o rtu n ities, a p e rm a n e n t p osition as d e ­ fender o f the traditio n al h in terlan d s w ould m ean a d eclining hege­ m ony. T he p roblem rem ain ed , how ever, as to how to enco u rag e co­ operative developm ent in the large cities: trad es u nionism c o n tin u ed to be only m arginally interested; the gen eral p ro sp erity reinforced econom ic individualism ; the m obility o f u rb a n dw ellers u n d e rm in e d existing senses o f place an d co m m unity; an d the m em o ry rem ain ed o f past co-operative failures in the u rb an centres. F o r the m ost part, an d with the exceptions o f g eneral insurance an d cred it unionism , the E nglish-C anadian co-operative m o v em en t h ad reach ed its orig in al n atural lim its by 1945. T h ereafter, an d fo r several years, expansion would have to concentrate on d eveloping co-operative p ro g ram s to com plem ent the activities o f co-ops alread y serving h in te rlan d areas. This continuing atta c h m e n t to the h in terlan d s w as a p p ro p ria te , if unfortunate, since it was in keep in g w ith th e experience o f the first h a lf o f the tw entieth century. R egional tensions, ru ral grievance, co n ­ sum er unrest, and dissatisfaction am ong p rim ary p ro d u c ers w ere all consequences o f the cen tralized way in w hich the n a tio n a n d its econom y h ad been developed. P ow erful u n d erc u rre n ts in the n a tio n al life, they w ere the essential in itial forces b eh in d o rg an ized co -o p era­ tion. It is, in fact, a reflection o f th eir p o w er th a t th e co -o p erativ e

State o f Movement, 1945

215

m ovem ent an d its organizations h a d b ecom e such sign ifican t forces. Quietly, but w ith rem arkab le rapidity, co -o p erativ e tech n iq u es had becom e a m ajor defen d er o f the h in te rlan d s betw een 1900 a n d 1945.

Notes

NOTES TO IN T R O D U C T IO N (pp. 1-7) 1. Numerous controversies surround the basic concepts of the founders of the Rochdale Equitable Pioneers’ Society in 1844. Briefly, the arguments rage over how original they were, how idealistic were their long-range aims, and how closely they followed the canons later ascribed to them. In an important sense, though, the arguments were irrelevant between 1900 and 1945, at least in non-Frenchspeaking Canada: the rules described in the above were generally accepted as the Rochdale rules by the overwhelming majority of co-operative enthusiasts. For discussions of some of the controversies surrounding the Rochdale rules, see Paul Lambert,

Studies in the Social Philosophy of Co-operation (Brussels, 1963) pp. 6190, and articles by P. Hibberd and P. Lambert in the periodical, Annals of

Public and Co-operative Economy (1968). For brief outlines of the society’s history see The Rochdale

Equitable Pioneers' Society (Manchester, 1967), A. Bonner, British Co-operation (Manchester, 1970), pp. 41-58 and G. D. H. Cole, A Century of Co-operation (Manchester, 1944). 2. There is no adequate single survey of the international co-operative movement. One of the first efforts at providing such a survey was Margaret Digby’s The World Co-operative Movement (London, 1944), now quite naturally in need o f updating. Insights into some of the movement’s tensions can be gained by reading W. P. Watkins, The International Co­ operative Alliance, 1893-1970 (London, 1970), The Co-operative Bulletin (after 216

1928, The Review of International Co­ operation), Reports o f International Co­ operative Congress, International Co­ operation, and H. J. May, The International Co-operative Alliance (London, 1927). In addition, the numerous studies of the Horace Plunkett Foundation for Co-operative Studies are invaluable. So too are the various editions of C. R. Fay’s Co­

operation at Home and Abroad. 3. In the late nineteenth century, in fact, there were some strong British spokesmen for all forms of co­ operation. See H. W. WolfT, People’s

Banks, A Record of Social and Economic Success (London, 1893); H. W. WolfT, Co-operative Banking: its Principles and Practice (London, 1907); A. Williams, Co-partnership and Profit-sharing (London, 1913); and The Canadian Co-operator (January 1913), pp. 13-14. Unfortunately, they addressed diminishing audiences within the British movement. 4. Sec P. N. Backstrom, Christian

Socialism in Victorian Britain (London, 1974). The British, of course, did start a co-operative bank, but it was tied to the wholesale and was not directly owned by its user-members as were the smaller co-operative banks on the European Continent. 5. Perhaps the most useful source for understanding the debates that divided the co-operative movements before 1914 is the i c a Bulletin. Some of the disputes have been discussed in M. Digby, Producers and Consumers (London, 1928), and J. Davis, Contemporary Social Movements (New York, 1930).

Notes 6. See M. Digby, Horace Plunkett (Oxford, 1949). 7. Sec H. W. Wolff, People’s Banks and Co-operative Banking; D. S. Tucker, The Evolution of People’s Banks (New York, 1922); and M. T. Herrick, Rural Credit: Land and Co-operative (New York, 1914). There is also a good brief analysis in J. C. Moody and G. C. Fite, The Credit Union Movement,

Origins and Development, 1875-1970 (Lincoln, 1971), pp. 1-25. 8. In 1908, Germany possessed 16,092 credit societies (2,200,000 members), 3,480 agricultural producer societies (271,000 members), and 747 co­ operative purchasing societies (140,000 members), ic a , Bulletin, October 31, 1908, p. 5. 9. As of January 1, 1910, France had 2,627 consumer co-operatives with an annual trade of over £9,000,000. ic a . Bulletin, January 14, 1911, p. 21. 10. Charles Gide’s best-known work on consumer co-operation (at least in English-speaking parts of the world) was Consumer’s Co-operative Societies (New York, 1922). 11. Sweden had over three hundred stores b y 1907, i c a , Bulletin, August 8, 1908, p. 7. 12. The Danish co-operative movement was discussed frequently in such Canadian journals as The Grain Growers’ Guide. In fact, it was surpassed only by the British and American movements. 13. Belgium, by 1908, had over 540 rural banks. ( i c a . Bulletin, May 30, 1908. p. 1) and 160 stores (Ibid.. April 1908, p. 5). Poland, by 1908, had over 680 stores, ic a . Bulletin, December 5, 1912, p. 4. Switzerland, by 1907, had over 7,000 co-operative societies, i c a . Bulletin, April, 1908, p. 5. Russia, by 1910, possessed 13,500 co­ operative societies including over 6,000 credit societies, 4,200 stores, 1,400 agricultural co-op societies, and 1,100 dairies. Spain possessed, by 1908, over 180 stores with 29,000 members, i c a . Bulletin, August 8, 1908, p. 6. Austria, by 1914, had over 19,000 co­ operative societies, 11,900 being credit societies, the remainder primarily

217

marketing and consumer co­ operatives. H. W. Wolff, People’s Banks, p. 160. NOTES T Q .C H A PT ER O N E (pp. 8-33) 1. A more correct term than “EnglishCanadian co-operative movement” would be “the co-operative movement among non-French-speaking Canadians”. In the name of prosaic if not poetic licence, the author has chosen to use the former. He does so with all the anguish peculiar to Canadian “ w a s p s ” today. 2. Sec the Grain Growers’ Guide (henceforth the Guide) December 6, 1911, p. 20, for a brief outline of the history of the Grange’s co-operative activities. 3. See L. A. Wood, A History of Farmers’ Movements in Canada (Toronto, 1975), pp. 78-79. 4. See W. C. Good, Farmer Citizen, My

Fifty Years in the Canadian Farmers’ Movement (Toronto, 1958), pp. 65-66. 5. The Canadian Co-operator, Vol. 1, no.

6. 7.

8.

9.

1 (June 1904), p. 7. This journal published briefly in Whitby by W. Cotton, later of Cotton's Weekly, should not be confused with The Canadian Co-operator published between 1909 and 1946 by George Keen of the Co-operative Union of Canada. Unfortunately only a few issues of the earlier Co-operator remain; it seems to have been a particularly impressive journal. Ibid. One other kind of co-operative marketing organization that emerged during the late nineteenth century was the fruit producers’ selling agency. Niagara producers, for example, were beginning to organize as early as 1878. See brief of the Ontario Co-operative Union, Royal Commission on Co­ operatives, 1945, Vol. v ii , p. 2385. See J. A. Ruddick, “The Development of the Dairy Industry in Canada”, The Dairy Industry in Canada, ed. H. A. Innis (Toronto, 1937) pp. 48-56. See E. A. Haslett, “Factors in the Growth and Decline of the Cheese Industry in Ontario, 1864-1924”, unpublished p h d Thesis, University of Toronto, 1969.

E A C H F O R A LL

218

10. J. Trevena, Prairie Co-operation (Saskatoon: Federated Co-operatives), p. 69. For an account of the impact of the creameries background, see author’s interview, W. Burgess, August 14, 1976. 11. The Guide, March 9, 1910, p. 30. 12. Ibid., December 6, 1911, p. 52. 13. For example, see L. L. Lloyd,

Memories of a Co-operative Statesman (Saskatoon, undated), p. p.l 1ff. and interviews, J. B. Brown, H. L. Fowler, and B. N. Amason, 1973-74. 14. For a more academic treatment of the theme of spontaneous co-operative activity among farmers, see J. W. Bennett and S. B. Kohl, “Characterological, Strategic, and Institutional Interpretations of Prairie Settlement”, ed., A. Rasporich,

Western Canada, Past and Present (Calgary, 1975). 15. Henceforth the Saskatchewan Grain Growers’ Association will be frequently abbreviated to s g g a , the United Farmers of Alberta to u f a , and the Manitoba Grain Growers’ Association to the m g g a . 16. Hereafter referred to as the g g g (after 1917, the u g g ) . 17. For a fuller discussion of Partridge’s socialism, sec C. Berger, “A Canadian Utopia: The Co-operative Commonwealth of E. A. Partridge” ed., S. Clarkson, Visions 2020 (Edmonton, 1970); J. Hamilton “E.A. Partridge”, unpublished research paper, Trent University, 1971; and R. Hedlin, “Edmund A. Partridge”

Transactions of the Historical and Scientific Society o f Manitoba, 1960. 18. See the Guide during late 1910 for a series of letters and columns devoted to the issue of making the Grain Growers’ Grain Company truly co­ operative. Such letters were common until 1915 when the Guide editor, George Chipman, effectively terminated the debate within the g g g by refusing to publish further letters. 19. R. D. Colquette, The First Fifty Years,

A History o f the United Grain Growers (Winnipeg, 1957), p. 67. 20. By 1920 the Guide was reaching a minimum of a third of the Prairie farm homes. F. J. K. Griezic, “The Honourable Thomas Alexander

Crerar: The Political Career of a Western Liberal Progressive in the 1920’s”, ed., S. Trofimenkoff, The Twenties in Western Canada (Ottawa, 1972), p. 115. See also, I. MacPhcrson, “George Chipman and the Institutionalization of a Reform Movement”, Transactions of the

Historical and Literary Society of Manitoba, 1976. 21. Colquette, The First Fifty Years, p. 67. 22. In 1913, there were three hundred locals buying collectively. The Guide, March 19, 1913, p. 9. For statistics on sales of the supply department, see Annual Reports, Grain Growers’ Grain Company. 23. See J. W. G. Brennan, ‘T h e Public Career of Charles Avery Dunning in Saskatchewan”, unpublished m a thesis, University of Saskatchewan, Regina, 1968; L.D.E. Courville, “The Saskatchewan Progressives”, unpublished m a thesis, University of Saskatchewan, Regina, 1971; and the latter’s “The Conservatism of Saskatchewan Progressives”, Historical Papers, Canadian Historical Association, 1974, for valuable summaries of the forces at work in creating and building “Sask. Co-op”. 24. The company, as developed in 1910 and 1911, was authorized to construct or acquire initial elevators as well as to buy and sell grain. Locals were required to supply only 15 per cent of the capital needed, the remainder coming from Iow-interest government loans. 25. See D. E. Smith, Prairie Liberalism,

The Liberal Party in Saskatchewan (Toronto, 1975). 26. Two u f a executive members resigned over the plan seeing in it the creation of an octopus that would strangle the grain growers’ movement. See W. A. McIntosh, “The United Farmers of Alberta, 1909-1920”, unpublished m a thesis. University of Alberta, pp. 61ff. For more complete summaries of the development of Aiberta Co-operative Elevator Company see this thesis and L. D. Nesbitt, Tides in the West. 27. See the Guide, February 25, 1914, pp. 11#

28. There was also an attempt in Saskatchewan to form a packing and cold storage co-operative. See the

219

Notes Guide April 15, 1914, p. 17, as well as succeeding issues for the fate of this project. Briefly, inadequate funding and marketing problems proved too difficult for the project to succeed. 29. See the “Alberta Section” of the Guide throughout 1910 and 1911 for the effort to enlist the support of the hog producers. 30. See the Guide. May 19, 1915, p. 7. 31. W. Kontak and S. J. Mackinnon, A Survey of Agriculture in Eastern Nova Scotia, 1871-1956 (Antigonish, 1958), p. 1. 32. R. J. MacSween, A History of the Nova

Scotian Co-operative Movement,

33. 34.

35.

36.

37.

unpublished manuscript in author’s possession, section on “Co-operative Creameries”. A copy of this manuscript is also located in the Sydney Public Library. See the Guide, April 26, 1911, p. 12. Annual Report, 1916, Secretary for Agriculture, Province of Nova Scotia, p. 173. MacPherson was a forerunner of the later, well-publicized Antigonish movement. He was conversant in five languages, taught, at one time or another, nearly every subject on the curriculum of St. Francis Xavier College, and operated the college’s nearby farm. Mount Cameron. He was also very much “a man of the soil” whose knowledge of agronomy, generous aid to farmers, and wry sense of humour made him an important voice in Nova Scotian agriculture from 1910 to the 1950s. See A. F. Laidlaw, Campus and Community (Montreal, 1961). Among the readily available writings on the Ontario rural problem, the following are especially useful: John MacDougall, Rural Life in Canada (Toronto, 1973); W. C. Good, Farmer Citizen (Toronto, 1958); E. C. Drury, Farmer Premier (Toronto, 1966); D. Lawr, “The Development of Agricultural Education in Ontario, 1870-1910” (unpublished p h d thesis. University of Toronto, 1972); and M. H. Staples, The Challenge of Agriculture (Toronto, 1921). See D. Lawr, “The Development o f Agricultural Education in Ontario, 1870-1910”, p h d thesis. University o f Toronto, 1969.

38. For a valuable survey of the rise and decline of co-operative cheese factories see E. A. Haslett, “Factors in the Growth and Decline of the Cheese Industry in Ontario, 1864-1924”, unpublished p h d thesis. University of Toronto, 1969. 39. Sec the Guide, February 9, 1910, p. 23 and May 4, 1910, p. 7, and The Labour Gazette. September 1906, p. 287. By 1909 there were at least thirty-five of these apple-marketing co-operatives in Southern Ontario. The Guide, July 1909, p. 19. 40. In addition, there were several highlylocalized co-operative marketing ventures in different commodities in Ontario between 1900 and 1914. Potato fanners in Penetanguisheine, bean growers in Kent and tomato producers in Essex, for example, tried to duplicate the experience of dairy producers and fruit growers. See the Guide, January 1909. p. 26 and June 1909, p. 21. 41. Henceforth, generally referred to as the u f Co-op. 42. Henceforth, generally referred to as the u f o . 43. M. H. Staples, The Challenge o f

Agriculture, The Story o f the

u fo

(Toronto, 1921), p. 43. 44. Morrison, Frazer, Good, and Drury were responsible for planning the early stages of the u f o and u f Co-op. These men formulated the original plans in a room of Toronto’s Kirby House (a strange place for the four since three of them were strong temperance advocates) during 1913. All remained active, and they were joined by Anson Groh later in the year. 45. For summaries of the B.C. agrarian movements in these years, see M. A. Ormsby, “Agricultural Development in British Columbia”, Agricultural History, 1945, pp. 11-20; F. M. Buckland, “The Beginning of Co­ operative Marketing”, Okanagan Historical Society, 1951, pp. 148-179; and, especially, J. Wardrop, “Farmers’ Organizations in British Columbia. 1889-1914”, unpublished paper in possession of the author. 46. “Co-operation in Canada", undated memorandum. The Co-operative Union of Canada Papers, Public Archives of Canada, Vol. 12. 1913 m y :

E A C H F O R A LL

220

file “u". Henceforth, all footnote references to these papers will be abbreviated to cuc. 47. Most of these stores were organized at least in part by British emigrants. Reports on them appeared frequently in The Co-operator, the major publication of the English movement. 48. The best record of these societies is to be found in the cuc papers in the Public Archives. 49. Prior to 1914 there were some efforts at creating multi-unit co-operative purchasing societies. Two at least deserve mention: the Alberta branch of the Society of Equity which prematurely organized an extensive group-purchasing wholesale system in 1907 and 1908 (see W. A. Mackintosh, “The United Farmers of Alberta, 1909-1920”, Alberta, 1971, pp. 31-32); and the Farmers Co-operative Company, a multibranch organization based on Broadview (see J. F. C. Wright, Prairie Progress (Saskatoon, 1956), pp. 39-42) and ( Saskatchewan History, 1952). Both of these organizations were based on hopes of rapidly capturing large amounts of the Prairie farm supply business. They lacked the business experience, widespread farmer support, and financial backing to do so and thus soon failed. 50. See the Guide between 1910 and 1914 and cuc, volume 6-8 for numerous letters on the Prairie societies. Another important co-operative consumer activity that began before 1914 and continued long afterward was the beef ring, whereby fifteen to twenty farmers would co-operate together to create a . continuous supply of fresh beef during the summer months. For a detailed outline of how these rings worked in this period see the Guide. February 22, 1911. p. 8. 51. See W. A. Mackintosh, “The United Farmers of Alberta, 1909-1920”, pp. 31-33. 52. For a fuller account of the Broadview Society, see J. H. Archer, “The Saskatchewan Purchasing Society”, Saskatchewan History. 1952, pp. 55-65. 53. Canadian Annual Review, 1907, pp. 5960 and 1910, pp. 198-201. 54. For example, locals of the Knights of

Labor had organized briefly a co­ operatively run newspaper, L'Artisan in 1888 during a strike in Quebec. In 1882, a shoe factory had been started by workers in Papineau. Perhaps more importantly, the Knights generally had endorsed co-operative stores at their annual meetings repeatedly in the nineteenth century; this traditional annual statement of support was carried on by the t l c in the twentieth century. See correspondence between W. L. Mackenzie King, J. C. Watt and E. Little, Department of Labour Records, Vol. 39, Public Archives of Canada. 55. See the author’s The Search For the

Commonwealth: The Co-operative Union of Canada. 1909-1939 p h d

56.

57.

58. 59.

60.

61. 62. 63.

64.

thesis, University of Western Ontario, 1970, chapters three and four, for examinations of stores failing for these reasons. Nevertheless this method of starting stores was supported by several Canadian co-operative leaders, notably E. A. Partridge. See the Guide, June 15, 1910, p. 3. Concern for the local retailers surfaced early in the agrarian co-operative movement, especially in the more conservative leadership. For examples of this concern see the Guide, February 3, 1915 and March issues, 1915, for letters defending the merchants. Interviews, A. Scobie, Winnipeg, July 1969. The provinces with reasonably effective co-operative legislation before 1914 were Quebec, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. Prospectus, Brantford Co-operative Society, 1908, George Keen Papers, Public Archives of Canada, vol. 3, file “Brantford Co-op. 1908”. Henceforth, all references to these papers will be abbreviated to k p . The Canadian Co-operator, JanuaryMarch, 1914, p. 22. C. Gide, Consumers’ Co-operative Societies (New York: 1912), p. 62. The Canadian Co-operator, March, 1911, p. 3. Henceforth footnote references to this journal will be abbreviated to cc. Henry Woolfs book. People’s Banks,

Notes A Record of Social and Economic Success (London: P. S. King & Son,

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

1896) was the standard reference book on co-operative banking. It went through four editions by 19 19. The caisses populaires received extensive coverage in the Grain Growers' Guide. Desjardins annually wrote an account of them and several Prairie commentalOrs referred 10 them in discussions of rural credit needs. The agrarian leadership, however, the Dunnings, Motherwells, a nd Crerars, were sympathetic but did not see caisses popularies o r credit unions as realistic solutions to the credit needs of the farmer. Convinced of the necessity of big programs to resolve big problems, they peferred governmentoperated credit schemes. See, in particular, Monk's speech on behalf of co-operation during the 1906-07 session. Debates, House of Commons, 1906.{)7, vol. I, pp. 89-90. See W. P. Walkins, The International Co-operative Alliance, pp. 26-45. For example, see leuers from W. Moyer, J. Eadie, E. M. Trowern and various members of the RMA in the Laurier Papers, Public Archives of Canada, vols. 455, 458, and 46 I. W. Moyer lO W. Laurier, March 15, 1907. Laurier Papers. vol. 455, p. 122495. See Government of Canada, Reports

of the Special Commillee of the House of Commons to Whom was Referred Bill No. 2, an Act respecting Industrial and Co-operative Societies (Ottawa: King's Printer, 1907), pp. IV-V. 71. F. A. Acland to W.L.M . King. The William Lyon Mackenzie King Papers, Public Archives of Canada, vol. 7, p. 6927. 72. Sec Debates, House of Commons, 1906, p. 1852, and Debates, Senate of Canada, pp. 1574- 1596. 73. Ibid. 74. In March, 1910, when one of Monk's bills was being considered. an RMA delegation of some five hundred retailers descended upon Ottawa. The Grain Growers' Guide (March 9, 1910, p. 3) claimed that this was the largest delegation ever to invade Parliament Hill. Perhaps the idea of a farmers' march, used so effectively by farmers

221 later in the year, was germinated by this protest by retailers. 75. The Grain Growers did try. See the Guide, February 25, 19 14. Most Prairie co-operators, however, it seems, were satisfied 10 leave the mauer under provincial jurisdiction where their power was ofien immense. 76. The continuing effort to gain legislation had, from the co-operative viewpoint, the positive effect of publicizing the movement; it had the more important negative effect of encouraging store enthusiasts, especially on the Prairies, to postpone formal incorporation. See the Guide, 1910 and 1911, several issues, reports from l.o cal unions and associations in Alberta and Saskatchewan. NOTES TO C HAPTER TWO (pp . 34-38) I. House of Commons, Reports of the

Special Committee .. . Co-operative Societies, p. 23. 2. E A. Partridge, "Shall we cooperate to secure legitimate value for our wheat? -Experience is the great teacher. Knowledge is power. Unity is strength", unpublished memorandum. United Growers' Library, Winnipeg. March I, 1905, p. I. 3. cc, November, 1912. 4. See House of Commons, Reports of the

Special Committee . .. Co-operative Societies, pp. 79-80 and p. 88. See also R. M. Dawson, Wil/iam Lyon Mackenzie King, A Political Biography. 1874-1923 (Toronto, 1958), p. 89. 5. See Debates, House of Commons, 1906, vol. I, pp. 1841-52 and 1906-07, vol. I, pp. 89-90. 6. Many co-operators strongly endorsed the municipal ownership of public utilities, a program long supported by European co-operalOrs as a logical extension of their movement. Samuel Carter, George Keen, members of the grain growers' organizations and some eaisse populaire leaders all favoured municipally-owned utilities. 7. WiUiam Lyon Mackenzie King was also a strong supporter of the labour co-partnership principle (though he never went so far as to suggest complete worker control). See House of Commons, Reports of the Special

EAC H FO R ALL

222 Commillee . . . Co-Qperotive Societies, 8. 9. 10. 11.

12.

pp. 791T. See also his book I ndusrry and Humanity (foronto, 1919). cc, J anuary 1911, pp. 9-10. cc, January 19 13, pp. 13-14. cc, November 1910, p. 5. For example, see J. W. Ward, "Cooperation for Western Fanners," the Grain Growers' Guide D ecember 6, 1911, p. 10 and "The Power o f the West", ibid., August 17, 1910, p. 5. See M. H. Staples, The Challenge of

Agriculture, The Story of the

UFO

(foronto, 192 1), p . 69fT. 13. See The Casket, October 7, 1920. p . 12 and P. M. Campbell, Compassio11 on the Multitude, pp. 71T. 14. For example, see George Keen's reminiscences of the co-operative in Fernie and Natal. B.C.. in his letter to A. S. Trotter, May 15, 1945, cue, vol. 114, 1934n: file "A. S. Trotter". See also G. Keen to H. MitcheU, December 21, 19 14. Ibid., vol. 13, 1914AM: file "M" and R. G. Bain, "Consumers' Co-operative in Nova Scotia", unpublished manuscript in the ftles of the British Canadian Cooperative, Sydney Mines, Nova Scotia. 15. See copies of advertising in cue, vol. 203: "Mise. Correspondence 19091919". 16. The agrarian co-operators on the Prairies were more sympathetic to the chain store idea, and various schemes were put forth in the 1900-1914 period, most of them patterned after the stores of the Right Relationship League in the United States. None of these schemes achieved any significant success. In Ontario. there was always a large contin gent within the U FO movement that favoured the development of a chain of fanners' stores. Until 1919, however, this faction was always out-argued by the supporters of the locally-owned, locally-perative retail system to independent retailers was frequently debated. See the Grain Growers' Guide, February and March issues. 1915, for a series of letters on th.is issue. 14. The best study of diminishing perspectives in the British movement is P. N. Backstrom's Christian Socialism

and Co-6puation in Victorian England, though aspects of the story are also to be found in A. Bonner, British Co· operation and W. P. Watkins, The

International Co-operative Alliance, /895-1970. 15. For a summary of this conference see W. P. Watkins, The lnternDiional Cooperative Alliance, 1895-1970, pp. 8385. See also Congress Report. The issue is far from dormant even yet. The British consumer movement still expresses concern over producer monopoly. See the Co-operative Union's "Agricultural Marlceting Policy Statement", 1952, and "Cooperative Policy on the Agricultural Maneting Act", 1958. 16. Minutes of Meeting, February 6, 19 19. cue, vol. 22, 1919AK: lile "A". 17. P. P. Woodbridge to Geo rge Keen, April 19, 1919. cue, vol. 23, 1919LY: lile"w". 18. The public reason for Wood bridge's depanure was ill health, and, indeed, he had sustained a near nervous breakdown in 1916. See Grain Growus' Guide, March 4. 19 18, p. 29. But ill health was not the only and probably not the major reason for his resignation. He had become disenchanted with the bureaucracy of the marketing societies. disillusioned by the abrasive "politics" of the farmer leadership groups. and genuinely anxious about maintaining grass roots involvement See P. P. Woodbridge to George Keen, April 19. 1919. cue, vol. 23, 1919LY: lile "w". On the other side, the farm leadership in Albena and elsewhere had not found Woodbridge an amenable employee. See George O!ipman toT. A. Crerar, undated, George Chipman Papers, Ja nuaryMarch, 1918. Douglas Library. Queen's University.

225

Notes 19. See the Grain Growers' Guide throughout 1910 and 1911 for the start of the Grain Growers' Grain Company's campaign on behalf of buying clubs. The campaign persisted until the late thirties. 20. See Minutes of Meeting of Alberta societies, February 6, 1919. cue, vol. 22, 1919AJC ftle " A"; P. P. Woodbridge to George Keen, April 19, 1919. cue, vol. 23, 1919Lv: ftle "w"; and. P. P. Woodbridge to W. C. Good, February 16, 1921. W. C. Good Papers, Public Archives of Canada, vol. v, "Correspondence, 1917M - 19221"'. 21. See J. G. Knapp, The Rise of American Co-operative Enterprise, 1620·1920, pp. 396 ff. 22. See Co-operative News, June 7, 1913 for a description of the National Railway Association. 23. See correspondence, cue, vol. 7, 1911AL: file "c", vol. 11 , 1913AL: fil e "c", and vol. 18, 1917At: file "o". 24. N. 0 . Nelson's broad approach to cooperation also attracted considerable interest. See the Grain Growers' Guide, May 8, 1912, p. 8. 25. See M. H. S!aples The Challenge of Agriculwre: The Story of the UFO (Toronto, 1921), pp. 81-96; correspondence between Good. Keen and Anson Groh, cue, vol. 17, 1916AW: me "o"; and w. C. Good, Farmer Citizen, pp. 100-108. To some extent, the argument over localized and centralized methods of organization was a continuation of earlier debates. See R. Harin, Some Historical Perspectives on Canadian Agrarian Political: The Ontario Origins of Agrarian Criticism of Canadian Industrial Society (Toronto, 1973) and S. E. D. Shortt "Social Change and Political Crisis in Rural Onlario: the Patrons of Industry, 1889-1896" in D. Swainson (ed.), 0/iver Mowat's Ontario (Toronto, 1972) pp. 211-235. 26. See Good, Farmer Citizen, p. 103 ff. 27. S!aples, The Challenge of Agriculture, pp. 87-90. 28. P. M. Campbell, Compassion on the Multitude, p. 58. 29. The United Farmers' Guide was published briefly in 1920 by the farmers organizations of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. Financial

assistance and editorial advice was provided by tbe United Grain Growers' see the George Chipman Papers, Douglas Library, Queen's University, for the years 19 19 and

1920. 30. For fuller considerations of the political aspect of the fanners' revolt between 1916 and 1929 see W. L. Morton, The Progressive Party in Canada (Toronto, 1950); Paul Sharp, The Agrarian Revolt in Western Canada (Mioneapolis, 1948); G . E. Panting. "A Study of the United Farmers of Manitoba to 1928", unpublished MA thesis, University of Manitoba, 1954; and A A MacKenzie " The Rise and Fall of the FarmerLabour Party in Nova Scotia", unpublished MA thesis, Dalhousie University, 1970. For further sources, see F. J. K. Griezic's "Suggestions for Further Readings" in L. A. Wood, A History of Fanners' Movements in · Canada (Toronto, 1975). For an excellent survey of the impact of the war on the Prairie farmer, see J. A. Thompson, Harvest of War: The Prairie West, 1914-1918 (Toronto,

1978). 31. The Grain Growers' Guide, October 16, 1918, p. 21. For descriptions of apparently typical associations see Ibid. for April and May, 1916. 33. Ibid., May 15, 1918, p. 23. 34. Ibid., February 20, 19 18, p. 22. 35. Saskatchewan officials became probably the most active in promoting improved marketing; certainly, they became the most involved in assisting perative marketing. In 1914, the provincial government created a eooperative Organization Branch in the Department of Agriculture. Led initially by W. W. Thomson, a Manitoban, it soon became a dynamic force in the province's co-operative circles. In conjunction with other branches o f the department, it played particularly important roles in tbe province's dairying, beef and poultry industries. 36. Submission, Royal Commission on Cooperatives, vol. tx, pp. 3052-3055. 37. The Grain Growers' Guide, November 28, 1917, p. 9 ff. 38. Submission, Fraser Valley Milk

226 Producers, Royal Commission on Cooperatives, vol. I, p. 165. 39. ln add ition to the types of cooperatives already discussed there were numerous o ther kinds of cooperatives to be discerned among Canadian farmers. Co-operative pastures, community halls, egg circles, seed companies and medical plans could all be found before 1920 within Canadian agrarian circles. There was even an attempt a t co-operatively building an entire community, the British Columbia Co-operative Soldier Community near Courtney. See The Grain Growers' Guide, July 5, 1919, p. 7. 40. See C. Lipton, The Trade Union Movement in Canada, (Montreal, 1968), pp. 1-68. 41. G. Lawson to G. Keen, 15 December 1915. cue, vol. 15, 1915AM: file "t". 42. J . Peel to George Keen, 6 July 1914. OJC, vol. 13, 1914AM: file " H". 43. The Canadian Co-operator, February, 1917, pp. 17-18. 44. Ibid., July, 19 19, pp. 8-9. 45. See rue, vol. 14, 19 14NY: ftle "o", and CUC, vol. 16, 1915NY: file "o". 46. W. J. Bonavia, "Co-operation in British Columbia". cue. vol. 32. 1924AG: file "s". 47. C. Lipton, The Trade Union Movement, p. 185. 48. In 1914 the Grain Growers' Grain Company would have hired him except for austerities caused by the depression; he had played prominent roles in the creation of the United Farmers' Co-op and the beekeepers' co-operative in Ontario, and he wrote repeatedly for the agrarian press. 49. Keen advocated both women's guilds and men's and women's guilds. He believed, in the British tradition, that guilds were useful for co-operative education and fo r community activities in which co-ops should be interested, such as charity drives, drama. musical evenings, and debating societies. He did not believe, however, that guilds were the only ways in which women should become involved in cooperatives. More to the point, he advocated the election of women to boards of directors; the p~oble m was that he could not fi nd women who would run for office.

EACH FOR ALL

50. These statistics are based upon references to new stores collected from diverse sources by the author. Any accurate, fmal number is impossible since no systematic comprehensive records were maintained until the 1920s. NOTES TO CHA PTER FOU R (pp. 67-85) I. George Keen, "C