The correct answer is: Only II and III follow.
The statement says that without the active cooperation between the proprietor and the employees, the mill cannot remain a profitable concern for long. This does not mean that the mill should be closed down. It is possible that the mill can remain profitable if the proprietor and the employees cooperate with each other.
Course of action I is not a logical consequence of the statement. The statement does not say that the mill is not profitable at present. It is possible that the mill is profitable at present, but it will not remain profitable in the long run if the proprietor and the employees do not cooperate with each other.
Course of action II is a logical consequence of the statement. The statement says that without the active cooperation between the proprietor and the employees, the mill cannot remain a profitable concern for long. This means that the mill can remain profitable if the proprietor and the employees cooperate with each other. Therefore, the workers should be asked to cooperate with the owners.
Course of action III is also a logical consequence of the statement. The statement says that without the active cooperation between the proprietor and the employees, the mill cannot remain a profitable concern for long. This means that the mill can remain profitable if the proprietor and the employees cooperate with each other. Therefore, the owners should be asked to cooperate with the employees.
Therefore, only courses of action II and III follow.