The term of President Henderson of Co-opolis had expired the year before and I had been selected to succeed him both as President of the Association and Governor of Idaho. I had also completed the latter part of 1910 my work referred to by Charlie Woodberry. Whatever may be said of the book, it was a success from the outset. It was adopted as a text-book in all the co-operative schools in Idaho, Washington, Oregon, Utah, California, Colorado, Nebraska and the two Dakotas, and in many other states and territories, and was read extensively by the more intelligent of the general public. Most economic works were, up to the time “Co-operative Economy” made its appearance, devoted to analysis and explanation of the competitive system. My work discussed Co-operation as it was and as it ought to be. In our schools such a work was needed, as co-operation was the chief study pursued in conjunction with all useful branches. I suppose it must be admitted that this work gives me more satisfaction at this time than anything I have ever done, because, although the Publishing department was successful under my administration, it was not due to my sole efforts. “Co-operative Economy” was my own thought and was produced outside of the work which the Association assigned me. “Mr. Braden,” said Charlie, “I would be glad to ask you a few questions about co-operation and the Co-opolitan Association if you would kindly answer them. I have a general idea of the system, but its features are not clear to my mind. If I could get in a nutshell a few truths—or what you claim to be truths—I believe I could read your books with much more interest.” “Ask me any question you please, Charlie. If I cannot answer them your sister there will,” I replied. “Charlie and I have already had some correspondence and talks on the subject,” said Caroline. “He does not think the system attractive.” “I will not say it is not attractive,” returned Charlie, shaking his head. “I simply say it is not attractive as I understand it. Now, take, for instance, the feature which makes the Association own everything. That is very distasteful to me. Nobody can ever own his own home, even.” “Well, Charlie,” said I, “that is the way you have been educated. If you had been taught to believe that personal ownership of property was a burden, and had a tendency to diminish your personal security, you would view the case in a different light. Think a minute. Take a Mongolian when an infant, transfer him to London, rear him as a Christian and an Englishman and he will despise the system and religion of China. But take an English baby and let him be reared in Pekin as a Chinaman and he will doubtless hold London and Christianity in abhorrence. “We talk of the peculiarities of the Chinese mind, and doubtless there are many which have been formed by the education and environments of centuries of time; but the Chinese education is more responsible for the Chinese mind than nature is.