CO-OPERATIVE VENTURES 227
the outset that a number of radical leaders who were sympathetic
with the Arbeiterbund rejected Weitling's proposals for a new
system of currency. Josef L. Stiger, editor of the Cleveland Kommunist and founder of a reading room in that city which charged
an admission fee of one cent a day, conducted a voluminous cor
respondence with Weitling in which he deplored the latter's un
due emphasis on the Tauschbank. On the other hand, in a letter
from Poughkeepsie, where eighteen members had contributed
their dollars to the bank, the writer advised Weitling to pay less
attention to communism, "for it frightens people" and was at best
a very distant goal, and to concentrate on a campaign in Die
Republik der Arbeiter gradually to win people's confidence for
a bank of exchange.Money actually saved from the dues of members of the local
Gemeinde for purposes of a bank was generally diverted to more
social and convivial objectives and was quickly spent. In the sum
mer of 1851, for example, the New York association lent over
half its accumulations for a bank to a group in Newark, New
Jersey, who were building a workers' hall. By 1851, many mem
bers of the Arbeiterbund refused to contribute additional dollars
for a bank until their co-operatives produced an adequate cash
surplus. People generally were loath to part with lodge funds or
the savings of their local mutual-benefit society for a nebulous
investment in a central bank of exchange.
The main obstacle to currency reform, however, was the wide
spread interest in co-operatives. Weitling had favored workers'
co-operative associations for a long time and had helped to de
velop them in France and Switzerland, but he knew that if they
succeeded they were likely to prove a disruptive force and result
in decentralization of his movement and emphasis on local achieve
ments, instead of on the closely knit unity which he regarded as
essential in the labor movement. Weitling wanted banks first and
co-operatives second. The workers ignored his advice, preferring
to put their hard-earned cash into the more tangible assets of stores
and shops in their own localities. The more the co-operatives sue-