[70] This letter, which was reprinted in the _Coventry Co-operative Record_ of January, 1880, was written, some time in August, 1879, to Mr. George Jacob Holyoake, who had sent Mr. Ruskin his "History of Co-operation: its Literature and its Advocates," 2 vols. London and Manchester, 1875-7. [From "The Daily News," June 19, 1880.] _ON CO-OPERATION._ BRANTWOOD, CONISTON, LANCASHIRE, _April_ 12, 1880. DEAR MR. HOLYOAKE: I am very glad that you are safe back in England, and am not a little grateful for your kind reference to me while in America, and for your letter about Sheffield Museum.[71] But let me pray for another interpretation of my former letter than mere Utopianism. The one calamity which I perceive or dread for an Englishman is his becoming a rascal, and co-operation among rascals--if it were possible--would bring a curse. Every year sees our workmen more eager to do bad work and rob their customers on the sly. All political movement among such animals I call essentially fermentation and putrefaction--not co-operation. Ever affectionately yours, J. RUSKIN. FOOTNOTES: [71] The "kind reference to Mr. Ruskin while in America" alludes to a public speech made by Mr. Holyoake during his stay in that country. The "letter about Sheffield Museum," was one in high praise of it, written by Mr. Holyoake to the editor of the _Sheffield Independent_, in which paper it was printed (March 8, 1880). MISCELLANEOUS LETTERS. I. THE MANAGEMENT OF RAILWAYS. II. SERVANTS AND HOUSES. III. ROMAN INUNDATIONS. IV. EDUCATION, FOR RICH AND POOR. V. WOMEN: THEIR WORK AND THEIR DRESS. VI. LITERARY CRITICISM. MISCELLANEOUS LETTERS. I. THE MANAGEMENT OF RAILWAYS. IS ENGLAND BIG ENOUGH? 1868. THE OWNERSHIP OF RAILWAYS. 1868. RAILWAY ECONOMY. 1868. OUR RAILWAY SYSTEM. 1865. RAILWAY SAFETY. 1870. I. THE MANAGEMENT OF RAILWAYS. [From "The Daily Telegraph," July 31, 1868.] _IS ENGLAND BIG ENOUGH?_ _To the Editor of "The Daily Telegraph."_ SIR: You terminate to-day a discussion which seems to have been greatly interesting to your readers, by telling them the "broad fact, that England is no longer big enough for her inhabitants."[72] Might you not, in the leisure of the recess, open with advantage a discussion likely to be no less interesting, and much more useful--namely, how big England may be made for economical inhabitants, and how little she may be made for wasteful ones? Might you not invite letters on this quite radical and essential question--how money is truly made, and how it is truly lost, not by one person or another, but by the whole nation?